Players we should have kept or traded for...

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from SFBostonFan. Show SFBostonFan's posts

    Players we should have kept or traded for...

    Monday morning QB I know but I'd been happy to keep Beltre(ave .295) & let Youk go & also V.Martinez(ave.303) & not suffered with iffy catchers past couple of years. If we didn't get Gonzo, Martinez could have played first too. I live in SF bay area and switched among 3 games last night. First loved Spurs thrashing Lakers-I share a 50%-50% hate for them and the Yankees !!! Giants beat Phils and don't I wish the Sox had their pitching staff. A's beat Angels and our old friend Josh Reddick got 3 hits(ya I know we need Bailey so had to trade). Even Coco Crisp who got the winning hit would have been a good keep. Mike Napoli, lifetime .263 not fantastic but he kills us always and can play first base would have been a good pickup. Heck, I'd have loved to have kept Johnny Damon all the way from 2004. He went to Yankees & got another ring...might have got it with us. Went to Detroit & Tampa & I'd picked him up for a resign, old or not. Based on performance to date, would have been nice to have passed on Carl Crawford ! Dice K & John Lackey...who could have known ??? OK, I'm rambling, Mea Culpa !!!
     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    Everybody knows I wanted Iggy as our starting SS since last season, but I still think we should have traded him if we weren't going to play him.

    I was also for trading Salty this winter, while his stock was higher than when we got him. Lava can not be any worse behind the plate, and he is way better offensively.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Thesemenarecowards. Show Thesemenarecowards's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    I had a thread about this a while back.  In hindsight, although some said it at the time, keeping Beltre and either trading Youk or keeping Youk at first (meaning no Agone in 2011) seems to make a lot of sense now.  They could've traded Youk after 2011 and made a push for Prince or Pujols or maybe still ended up with Agone.

    It is funny to think now that one of the main reasons for not signing Beltre were durability concerns but yet we kept Youk, who can't seem to stay healthy.  Beltre is built like a Free Safety but the Red Sox thought the guy built like a Pro Bowler was the safer play.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from MikeNagy stilleatsworms. Show MikeNagy stilleatsworms's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    Don't forget that Ruth guy while you're at it.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    In Response to Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...:
    [QUOTE]I had a thread about this a while back.  In hindsight, although some said it at the time, keeping Beltre and either trading Youk or keeping Youk at first (meaning no Agone in 2011) seems to make a lot of sense now.  They could've traded Youk after 2011 and made a push for Prince or Pujols or maybe still ended up with Agone. It is funny to think now that one of the main reasons for not signing Beltre were durability concerns but yet we kept Youk, who can't seem to stay healthy.  Beltre is built like a Free Safety but the Red Sox thought the guy built like a Pro Bowler was the safer play.
    Posted by Thesemenarecowards[/QUOTE]

    I liked the AGon deal, because I wasn't high on Kelly or Rizzo. At the time, I mentioned that the one bad thing about the deal was that it forced Youk to end his contract at 3B, where he was more likely to get hurt. Plus our defense would have been much better. A Beltre at 3B and Youk at 1b corner combination would have been real nice, but the Beltre deal was too long. Let's revisit the choice 4-6 years from now.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from harv53. Show harv53's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    The Red sox need to trade Bill James and quit trying to play moneyball, it's not working.
    Players are more than stats.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimedfred. Show jimedfred's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    Bernie Carbo ! Cecil Cooper. Jeff Bagwell. Brady Anderson and Curt Schilling. Justin Masterson and Nick Hagadone.

    And I don't think we can consider Victor Martinez a full time catcher again, last year or in the future.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    They were following many ideas of "Moneyball" back in '04 and '07.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from harv53. Show harv53's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    In Response to Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...:
    [QUOTE]They were following many ideas of "Moneyball" back in '04 and '07.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]


    Yes they were, and yes, they were successful. But it can only work with the right "chemistry" or make up, of players. Those teams were like a machine with all parts running smoothly and in sync, they were a family. I just don't see that with the guys we have. Too many individuals IMO.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Thesemenarecowards. Show Thesemenarecowards's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    In Response to Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Players we should have kept or traded for... : I liked the AGon deal, because I wasn't high on Kelly or Rizzo. At the time, I mentioned that the one bad thing about the deal was that it forced Youk to end his contract at 3B, where he was more likely to get hurt. Plus our defense would have been much better. A Beltre at 3B and Youk at 1b corner combination would have been real nice, but the Beltre deal was too long. Let's revisit the choice 4-6 years from now.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Beltre deal was a lot shorter than the Crawford deal. 

    I'm not anti-Agon but Agon was a classic Theo infatuation move.  He filled a need the Red Sox didn't really have.  Agone, Fielder and Pujols were all going to hit FA, so it isn't like the Red Sox had rush to give up prospects for a 1B, when 1 year later their were potentially 3 elite ones about to hit the market. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    In Response to Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Players we should have kept or traded for... : Yes they were, and yes, they were successful. But it can only work with the right "chemistry" or make up, of players. Those teams were like a machine with all parts running smoothly and in sync, they were a family. I just don't see that with the guys we have. Too many individuals IMO.
    Posted by harv53[/QUOTE]

    I think you're focusing too much on the moneyball aspect. If you listen to everybody involved, the statistical analysis is only part of what they use. THey also reley on traditional scouting methods.

    The problem is that every time there is a bad signing or trade, fans focus on that aspect. There are just as many trades and signings done now as there were in the 90s, 80s, 70s, 60s, etc.

    In fact, you could argue that the Sox should have paid more attention to the moneyball in the Crawford signing, at least in regard to OBP and working counts. 

    The fact is there is no guarantee with trades or signings no matter how you go about it.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Thesemenarecowards. Show Thesemenarecowards's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    In Response to Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...:
    [QUOTE]They were following many ideas of "Moneyball" back in '04 and '07.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Moneyball looks a lot smarter when you have 30 million dollars of Manny and Papi in the middle of the order, hitting 80 HR and driving in 250 runs..
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    In Response to Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...:
    [QUOTE]The Red sox need to trade Bill James and quit trying to play moneyball, it's not working. Players are more than stats.
    Posted by harv53[/QUOTE]
    The sabremetric types were enamored with Adrian Beltre ... perhaps the Red Sox needed to pay more attention to those stats.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Thesemenarecowards. Show Thesemenarecowards's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    In Response to Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Players we should have kept or traded for... : The sabremetric types were enamored with Adrian Beltre ... perhaps the Red Sox needed to pay more attention to those stats.
    Posted by hill55[/QUOTE]

    This is true but Youk has long been a sabremetric poster boy.  I don't need to be a sabremetric expert to know that Beltre is built like a more durable ballplayer than Youk.

    I think another thing to take into account when discussing the 'Moneyball' approach is that 8-10 years ago it was novel, not everyone was doing it, now every team is more than aware of the advance stats, sabremetric philosophy and thinking that may have given the Red Sox an edge 8 years ago.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    In Response to Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Players we should have kept or traded for... : This is true but Youk has long been a sabremetric poster boy.  I don't need to be a sabremetric expert to know that Beltre is built like a more durable ballplayer than Youk. I think another thing to take into account when discussing the 'Moneyball' approach is that 8-10 years ago it was novel, not everyone was doing it, now every team is more than aware of the advance stats, sabremetric philosophy and thinking that may have given the Red Sox an edge 8 years ago.
    Posted by Thesemenarecowards[/QUOTE]

    Of course it's worth noting that last year, Beltre played in 124 games, just four more than Youk's 120 games.

    From 2009 to 2011, Beltre played in 389 games, Youk played in 358 games, not a huge difference, and had injurie problems in two of the three years. We'll see how he lasts this year.

    If Youk is done and Middlebrooks turns out to be ready, then it might have even been a smarter move to keep Youk because now the Sox will be younger at third base and not tied down to a big contract.






     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from lasitter. Show lasitter's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    In Response to Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...:
    [QUOTE]I was also for trading Salty this winter, while his stock was higher than when we got him. Lava can not be any worse behind the plate, and he is way better offensively.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]
    I second that emotion. Both Shop and Lava have lots more mobility behind the plate, and their arms are more than adequate. I don't think Salty will ever be able to run the defense as well Tek did in his better years.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Thesemenarecowards. Show Thesemenarecowards's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    In Response to Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Players we should have kept or traded for... : Of course it's worth noting that last year, Beltre played in 124 games, just four more than Youk's 120 games. From 2009 to 2011, Beltre played in 389 games, Youk played in 358 games, not a huge difference, and had injurie problems in two of the three years.
    Posted by royf19[/QUOTE]

    Their production last year was not similar though.  Beltre was 30+ 100+, Youk wasn't close to that. 
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    In Response to Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...:
    [QUOTE]The Detroit Tigers could get an unexpected jolt of offense for their late-season playoff push in the form of sidelined designated hitter Victor Martinez . Originally scheduled to have two surgeries on his left knee and miss the entire 2012 season, Martinez may not need the second procedure after all. As a result, he could be back with the Tigers as early as August, according to head athletic trainer Kevin Rand
    Posted by Calzone65[/QUOTE]

    Scary thought!

    Cabrera
    Fielder
    VMART

    that's a 3-4-5!

    All star catcher, solid players like Boesch, Raburn, Peralta...

    Verlander

    If our season turns around, great, if it doesn't , I dont think we were good enough to beat the Tigers anyways.

    Worst case scenario (and believe me, im not giving up): we get to watch the tigers spank the yanks in the playoffs.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    I would have kept all 3 (Youk, Beltre, Gonzo) and put Youk in RF.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from seannybboi. Show seannybboi's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    I miss VMart.  If Theo was gonna sign CC with that money, why didn't he just extent VMart... He could have played Catcher and DH against lefties if Papi struggled.  I also miss JBay at RF.. He could have been our long-term RF if he sayed with us.  Wrong choice going to the Mets.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    VMart can and will not be a FT catcher for the length of the contract he wanted and got. We had a DH, so Theo saw it as a choice between Papi and VMart with VMart having the advantage of being a PT catcher. 

    I was not for re-signing VMart due to his age and the length of the contract he wanted, but when he signed for "so little", I was a bit shocked. I'd have been Ok with VMart-Youk-Beltre (No AGon). They all could have DH'd about 25%-30% of the time without Papi, but with Papi, I don't see it happening, unless... 

    Papi: DH 150 gms
    Youk: 1B 130/ 3B 10
    Beltre: 3B 150
    VMart: C 110/1B 30/DH 10

    (VMart and Youk slide into DH after Papi walks)
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    In Response to Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Players we should have kept or traded for... : Their production last year was not similar though.  Beltre was 30+ 100+, Youk wasn't close to that. 
    Posted by Thesemenarecowards[/QUOTE]

    Beltre had a better year, although Youk did have 80 RBIs, which is very respectable for 120 games.

    The bigger point was Beltre did get hurt for the second time in three years so it's reasonable to question if he'll stay healthy too.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Thomasmtom. Show Thomasmtom's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    Not trying to put a negative spin on the above, but not signing Crawford was the do over I wish the Red sox had. Without that big contract the Sox would have had the financial resources to sign (or trade for) both a starting pitcher and a serviceable outfielder.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Players we should have kept or traded for...

    Since 1970 we should have kept:

    • Sparky Lyle
    • Rick Burleson
    • Fisk
    • John Tudor
    • Mo Vaughn
    • VMart

    Interestingly enough Burleson, Vaughn, and VMart suffered serious injuries not long after their departures from Boston; two of them essentially had their careers ended by these injuries.

    Hindsight does not apply.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share