http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/02/transaction-retrospection-the-bailey-reddick-trade.html
Now, did we really need to see this MLBTR?
Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/26/2013 3:29 PM EST
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/02/transaction-retrospection-the-bailey-reddick-trade.html
Now, did we really need to see this MLBTR?
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/26/2013 3:34 PM EST
I am happy to see Josh Reddick to well in Oakland. He also won a Gold Glove in 2012.
I remember seeing Reddick throw a pie at Billy Beane's face after the A's swept the Rangers and won the AL West. If I threw a pie at my employer, then he would not only fire me, but also not sponsor my visa. LOL
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/26/2013 3:39 PM EST
In response to Ice-Cream's comment:
I am happy to see Josh Reddick to well in Oakland. He also won a Gold Glove in 2012.
I remember seeing Reddick throw a pie at Billy Beane's face after the A's swept the Rangers and won the AL West. If I threw a pie at my employer, then he would not only fire me, but also not sponsor my visa. LOL
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/26/2013 4:02 PM EST
I see this as one of the many shock waves of the ill-fated Bard-to-the-rotation experiment. Imagine if Bard stayed in the bullpen (either as the new closer or setup man to Papelbon...who I think in hindsight we may decide it would have been worth it to pay):
-Most obviously, Bard stays in a relief role, where he belongs and where he had excelled before;
-Instead of becoming a 5-plus ERA closer and spending the season fuming, Aceves probably wins a rotation spot out of spring training; he's happier, and we finally get to see what he can do as a starter. Certainly he couldn't do any worse than Bard did;
-The Bailey trade never has to happen. Reddick gets a ton of playing time in the OF in 2012, and we never have to sign Victorino. Plus, I don't know what Miles Head will turn into, but he looks like a better 1B option for the future than any we have readily available right now.
I have a feeling that's just scratching the surface.
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/26/2013 4:22 PM EST
I always liked Reddick and thought he had some big hits in 2011 for the Sox. One big hit was a game winning hit off of Mariano Rivera in Boston. He fell off a little in September but so did the whole team. Bailey is an injury prone reliever and truer to form was injured again last year for 90 percent of the season. Sweeney never could hit for power and truer to form last year did not. He is a defensive replacement at best who should be around major league minimum salary.
I wish Reddick luck and am sorry that they made this deal. This is not a great deal for Young Ben Cherrington at all.
This post has been removed.
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/26/2013 4:50 PM EST
Josh Reddick is not Babe Ruth or even Jeff Bagwell. No need to panic over this.
Most likely we had another Phil Plantier trade. Lost a good player, but hardly crippling.
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/26/2013 5:21 PM EST
I disagree that "losing" Reddick is a consequence of the Bard-starter experiment. First, the Sox pen lost a good arm when Paps left so even with Bard staying in the BP they were likely to pull the trigger on a trade for either a closer or proven setup man. I don't see a reason to believe they would have passed on the Bailey trade as a way to help fill the void Paps left. Second, I never had the impression the Sox were that high on Reddick. He is streaky and lacks plate discipline and we know how much the FO likes OBP.
It was always about Kalish :(
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/26/2013 7:01 PM EST
Thnings like this happen from time to time. I don't worry about it. However Kalish was a risk then as he is now... Reddick showed he could play at a certain level while he was here. Bad trade but wihtout hindsight I did not give it much thought at the time.
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/26/2013 8:18 PM EST
I'm more upset about the David Murphy (and Gabbard) for Gagne deal.
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/26/2013 8:46 PM EST
In response to moonslav59's comment:
I'm more upset about the David Murphy (and Gabbard) for Gagne deal.
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/26/2013 9:20 PM EST
In response to Ice-Cream's comment:
In response to moonslav59's comment:
I'm more upset about the David Murphy (and Gabbard) for Gagne deal.
...............and the Red Sox still won the World Series despite a very very very very very horrible Gagne. LOL
True enough, but D Murph has had about a .350 OBP and 18 Hrs per 620 PAs with TX.
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/26/2013 9:29 PM EST
True moonslav59. :)
Another trade I did not like was the Red Sox trading Bronson Arroyo for Wily Mo Pena. So much for "You can never have enough pitching." LOL
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/26/2013 9:52 PM EST
In response to Ice-Cream's comment:
True moonslav59. :)
Another trade I did not like was the Red Sox trading Bronson Arroyo for Wily Mo Pena. So much for "You can never have enough pitching." LOL
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/26/2013 10:22 PM EST
In response to moonslav59's comment:
I'm more upset about the David Murphy (and Gabbard) for Gagne deal.
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/26/2013 10:28 PM EST
Arroyo for Pena is the one that I liked the least. At the time, I liked the Gabbard and Murphy for Gagne trade, as I thought the Sox were getting a shut down pitcher for a 4th OFer who was never going to get a chance in Boston (and I still believe he would not have amounted to much if he had continued to play for Boston) and Gabbard (who I liked, but recognized he was not likely to ever have any impact on a team's pitching staff).
Reddick for Bailey still has to play out...which was the final message in the MLBTR column.
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/26/2013 10:32 PM EST
In response to jasko2248's comment:
In response to moonslav59's comment:
I'm more upset about the David Murphy (and Gabbard) for Gagne deal.
David Murphy has made a nice career for himself. From what I heard, everybody in the Sox organization thought the world of him as a person, as he has always been a class act on and off the field, and they included him in that deal to give him an opportunity somewhere (you could call it a favor.) The Sox had just signed Drew to a 5 year deal, Manny was in left and Ellsbury was the future in center. They obviously had Crisp as well. It didn't look like he would ever get an opportunity in Boston, so they moved him. It's actually not as uncommon as most people would think.
Hindsight is always 20/20.
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/26/2013 11:04 PM EST
In response to parhunter55's comment:
Arroyo for Pena is the one that I liked the least. At the time, I liked the Gabbard and Murphy for Gagne trade, as I thought the Sox were getting a shut down pitcher for a 4th OFer who was never going to get a chance in Boston (and I still believe he would not have amounted to much if he had continued to play for Boston) and Gabbard (who I liked, but recognized he was not likely to ever have any impact on a team's pitching staff).
Reddick for Bailey still has to play out...which was the final message in the MLBTR column.
I thought ''Transaction Retrospection:'' was a interesting idea
but was disappointed they didn't focus on a trade from 2 or 3 yrs ago
granderson trade would of been more interesting
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/27/2013 12:27 AM EST
In response to notin's comment:
Josh Reddick is not Babe Ruth or even Jeff Bagwell. No need to panic over this.
Most likely we had another Phil Plantier trade. Lost a good player, but hardly crippling.
Phil Plantier won a gold glove.
Huh. Don't remember that
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/27/2013 12:44 AM EST
Yeah, Plantier never won a GG, but he did hit 34 HRs his first year with SD (and 100 RBIs).
He ended up with 91 HRs in 2166 PAs or about 24 per 575 PAs (.243 BA/.332 OBP).
He was basically a one year wonder, and that may be what Josh turns out to be.
Plantier Career: (2166) .243 91 292 0 GG
Reddick Career: (1076) .244 42 122 1 GG
per 162 games:
Plantier .243 24 78 (.332 OBP/.439 SLG/.770 OPS)
Reddick .244 23 66 (.300 OBP/.445 SLG/.745 OPS)
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/27/2013 12:53 AM EST
Murphy would have been a great value and fit for the Red Sox, over all those years he's been gone Gagne was smelly barge garbage, on a team that wan't broke and didn't need to make this embarrassing move just for the sake of making a trade deadline move.
Red Sox management would do better if it spit into the wind.
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/27/2013 12:57 AM EST
I wonder if Yankee fans whine and cry about the Pineda trade the same way certain sox fans whine and cry about the Reddick trade..
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/27/2013 12:59 AM EST
In response to moonslav59's comment:
I'm more upset about the David Murphy (and Gabbard) for Gagne deal.
I'll take the World Series, thank you (and no thanks to Gagne, of course), and not complain about what could have been.
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/27/2013 1:11 AM EST
In response to parhunter55's comment:
Arroyo for Pena is the one that I liked the least. At the time, I liked the Gabbard and Murphy for Gagne trade, as I thought the Sox were getting a shut down pitcher for a 4th OFer who was never going to get a chance in Boston (and I still believe he would not have amounted to much if he had continued to play for Boston) and Gabbard (who I liked, but recognized he was not likely to ever have any impact on a team's pitching staff).
Reddick for Bailey still has to play out...which was the final message in the MLBTR column.
Re: Reopening old wounds
posted at 2/27/2013 1:12 AM EST
It is funny how some continue to defend this trade in an effort to support Cherington. You can still support Ben while admitting that this was a mistake. Everyone in baseball knows that it was. And , comparing Reddick to Plantier is absurd. Reddick is a far better ball player than Plantier was. Let's get real. You can defend Ben C without trying to diminish Reddick. Let's try to be a little more objective here.