Sorry, but I don't like it

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

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    We have increased our stock of starting pitchers and therefore improved our chances in the playoffs this year.  We traded away a piece who the organization does not feel has a place here as a starter.  So any conversation about how "bad" this trade was starts with what Deal Charrington could have made to trade for a pitcher of Peavys caliber AT THE DEADLINE and pay less????? What precedent do we have? Examples?



    You'll never get a serious response to this from any of the real whiners.  It would take some thought and research, two tasks that are unpleasant for them. 

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    We have increased our stock of starting pitchers and therefore improved our chances in the playoffs this year.  We traded away a piece who the organization does not feel has a place here as a starter.  So any conversation about how "bad" this trade was starts with what Deal Charrington could have made to trade for a pitcher of Peavys caliber AT THE DEADLINE and pay less????? What precedent do we have? Examples?

     



    You'll never get a serious response to this from any of the real whiners.  It would take some thought and research, two tasks that are unpleasant for them. 

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    for SHAME Hugh. who do you think you are using logic to make a point?

    don't you know it's the time for RABBLE!?

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

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    In response to mef429's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    We have increased our stock of starting pitchers and therefore improved our chances in the playoffs this year.  We traded away a piece who the organization does not feel has a place here as a starter.  So any conversation about how "bad" this trade was starts with what Deal Charrington could have made to trade for a pitcher of Peavys caliber AT THE DEADLINE and pay less????? What precedent do we have? Examples?

     

     



    You'll never get a serious response to this from any of the real whiners.  It would take some thought and research, two tasks that are unpleasant for them. 

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    for SHAMEHugh. who do you think you are using logic to make a point?

     

    don't you know it's the time for RABBLE!?

    [/QUOTE]

    Best post ever 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from eggplants. Show eggplants's posts

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

                                              Hugh, Reddick's doing O.K. He played 9 inn. last night. went 0-1 with (3) walks. His team is in first place in the ALW. That race is not over yet but if Texas loses Cruz it will make life easier for the A's going forward for the next two months. How's Kalish and Bailey? think they might be able to help the RS this year. As far as  southpaw 777's comments, he was posturing to me about how smart he was, that he forgot more about baseball than I know, my reply  was basically he wasn't as smart as he thought he was based on how he posted. My problem was that I missed Villareal completely. I didn't pick it up until late last night at anMLB web site. This throws the arguement in the Peavy direction if he can help us now and in the next two months. If he stays in AAA or doesn't make an appearance from here on out it won't matter If I missed him because his value is of no consequence for the rest of this season. I think Iggy could have gotten the bunt down last night in the 9th inning in case you might have been wondering

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

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    Yes Lets not forget Villareal, he can throw 100 MPH.  Late inning potential .

    Pretty much we get a young cost controlled late inning potential reliver + a good pitcher for 1.3 years and a chance to win this year; for a young cost controlled starter.

    The basis of our disagreement is what our value on Iggy is.  

    In terms of Reddick he did hit 31 home runs last year but he also put up a .242/.305/.463 which dipped down to a .215/.256/.391 in the second half with 12 HR.  If he was on a first division team making a playoff run....he would have been replaced with that line.  He's batting .213/.299/.342 with 5HR and 37 RBI's  I gurantee you if Bailey was healhty he would be adding more value to the team.  But at the end of the day a player on the field is more valuable than a guy who can't get on the field. But not all of us can have medicals on professional sports players.  The only thing Reddick has going is his glove, which is good but if you are playing an corner outfield position you really need to hit.  

    In terms of Southpaw posturing to you (and my point applies to myself and probably almost everyone on this board) I've always had a problem with this "he's not smart about baseball based on his reply"  I think this way all the time about posters and I do my best to refrain from saying anything on that.  Maybe this is just a personal preference thing but I think the conversation in here would be better if people focused on susbstance and not statements.  Again I think this applies to EVERYONE in here.  

    Maybe Iggy would have got that bunt down last night.  But would he have gone 2 for 2 with a BB, a run scored, and 3 RBI's????? Then again maybe Iggy doesn't get that bunt down. 

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    So, some of really hate this trade and some of us really love it.

    I choose to be civil and allow those who love it to have a right to their opinion, as they should.

    But, those of us who hate it have that right too.

    I will be man enough to admit I am wrong if Peavy goes better than 6-4 and helps the Sox do more than reach playoffs , but they need to actually do more than "reach" the playoffs to make this a "good" deal.

    I will also be here demanding apologies from all of those who got sarcastic and insulting to those who are of the opinion that this deal is more treading water....something this organization has become good at since 2007.

    I believe , as others here do, that Peavy is being made out to be an impact player when he is not. He is , at best , a #3 starter at this point. A 6 inning pitcher who will further tax the shaky , injury-riddled bullpen.

    Anyone look at another gaffe this organization made recently?

    Check out Mark Melancon stats vs. Hanrahan.

    "All the president is, is a glorified public relations man who spends his time flattering, kissing and kicking people to get them to do what they are supposed to do anyway." - Harry S. Truman

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

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    As far as I'm concerned the infield in 1 year from now should be

    3B.  Middlebrooks or Cechhini

    SS. Xander Bogaerts

    2B  Dustin Pedroia

    1B FA

    unless Iggy could play at first base (spoiler...he can't and never will) he was expendable.  

    Iggy can play SS better than anyone else in MLB.

    Bogaerts, Middlebrooks or Cecchini can play 1B.

    It's not that hard to envision this set-up.

     

     

    Now what was this teams largest concern going down the stretch....pitching.

    Lester - inconsistent lately but shows better results with rest.

    Lackey - having one of his best seasons but he also hasn't pitched a full season healthy in over two years

    Buchholz - does he come back a dominant ace? Just ok? Or not at all?

    Dempster - pitched well for a back of the rotation starter but do you really want to rely on this guy in the playoffs?

    Doubront - never pitched over 161 innings in his career. Only at 117 now but will easily be in unknown territory come playoff time.

    Workman - never pitched over 131 innings in his life, over 121 now.  Going down the stretch he may be better suited in shorter stints out of the pen (scouts think his stuff plays up better there anyways)

    All of our pitchers would benefit from having Iggy at SS, so in a sense, Iggy helped all our pitchers, but I get your point. Peavy's addition greatly helps our staff, especially when playoff time comes and he is one of our 4 starters.

     

    There is a question mark on almost every starter.  Infield depth was a surplus, sox probably had 3  MLB short stops.  Pitching was needed, and will be needed in the playoffs therefore trading for it was the logical decision.  Philly wanted Bogaerts for Lee....Ben C laughed and hung up the phone. 

    Glad he did. I was actually surprised Peavy didn't cost us Ranaudo, Owens, Barnes or Cecchini.

     

    So you traded away a surplus for a deficit.  There is injury risk, I'd assume the Sox have seen his medicals and are comfortable with the risk.  Maybe Peavy gets injured tomorrow and doesn't pitch again, but maybe Buchholz doesn't come back and peavy pitches how he normally does when healthy; like a #1#2

    We seemingly have a surplus of prospects at SS/3B, but with an opening coming up at 1b after this year, and so many unproven players (Boggy/Cecchi) and questionable players (Middy/Iggy) having 4 guys fighting for 3 slots in 2014 (SS, 3B and 1B) seems like it was neither a surplus or deficit. (Of course, we do have Carp and nava to play 1B, and may sign a FA as well.)

     

    We have increased our stock of starting pitchers and therefore improved our chances in the playoffs this year.  We traded away a piece who the organization does not feel has a place here as a starter.  So any conversation about how "bad" this trade was starts with what Deal Charrington could have made to trade for a pitcher of Peavys caliber AT THE DEADLINE and pay less????? What precedent do we have? Examples?

    Peavy certainly seemed to be the lowest cost solid pitcher on the market.

    What this argument seems to be boiling down to is two-fold:

    1) Some here feel Iggy is really no more than a utility IF'er. Ben seems to feel this way as well. He signed Drew. He sent the hot Iggy back to AAA, and now he traded him with nobody better to play 3B than Holt or Snyder. I'm sure Ben made up his mind on Boggy over Iggy at SS in 2014, so the deal makes total sense once that supposition is established.

    2) Is Peavy a #2/3 type starter or a #4/5 type and will he remain healthy? If healthy, I think he might be our #2 starter behind Buchholz. He is certainly better than Dempster and the Lester of the last 2 years. Doubront may hit a wall at any moment as well, and could probably use some rest, so he will be strong come playoff time. Lackey may need ashort breather here and there as well.

    We can disagree with Ben about whether Iggy is or will be good enough to be a FT SS. We can disagree with Ben about the future of Boggy (SS) and Cecchini/Middlebrooks (3B) vs Iggy/Boggy (SS) and Boggy/Cecchini/Middlebrooks (3B) as being a smaller minus than the gain at pitching with Peavy. But, the fact remains, Ben just did not see Iggy as our starting fulltime SS of the future. I think he saw him more as a utility IF'er and late inning defensive replacement player. In this light, the trade makes perfect sense. 

    I also think that Iggy's attitude issue after being sent to AAA may have played into this decision. Ben seems to really care about team chemistry, and I'm sure he was not pleased by Iggy's actions.

    Sox4ever

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

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    Maybe Iggy would have got that bunt down last night.  But would he have gone 2 for 2 with a BB, a run scored, and 3 RBI's????? Then again maybe Iggy doesn't get that bunt down

    We would not have been bunting had Drew not driven in 3 runs up to that point. (Of course the whole game would have changed had that happened.)

    I did like the great play Holt made at 3b last night.

    Sox4ever

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

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    Anyone look at another gaffe this organization made recently? 

    Check out Mark Melancon stats vs. Hanrahan.

     

    Cue the "he couldn't do that under the pressure of Boston" rants, and how that trade benefited our longterm outlook.

    Sox4ever

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Anyone look at another gaffe this organization made recently? 

    Check out Mark Melancon stats vs. Hanrahan.

     

    Cue the "he couldn't do that under the pressure of Boston" rants, and how that trade benefited our longterm outlook.

    Sox4ever



    It should be noted that keeping Iggy also did not improve our long term outlook. It would have merely maintained the status quo-and reduced our playoff chances this year.

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

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Anyone look at another gaffe this organization made recently? 

    Check out Mark Melancon stats vs. Hanrahan.

     

    Cue the "he couldn't do that under the pressure of Boston" rants, and how that trade benefited our longterm outlook.

    Sox4ever

     



    It should be noted that keeping Iggy also did not improve our long term outlook. It would have merely maintained the status quo

    True.

    -and reduced our playoff chances this year.

    True, assuming Peavy stays healthy and pitches better than Workman would have (or Dempster when Buch returns), and the net gain is more than the net loss of Iggy vs Holt/Snyder and more of Drew (vs RHPs and LHPs instead of just RHPs).

     

    [/QUOTE]


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

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    One our biggest weaknesses this year has been vs LHPs.

    Drew is one of our worst hitters vs LHPs this year, and he has not been very good over his career.

    Drew vs LHPs:

    2013:   .170/.235/.341/.576

    2012:   .198/.260/.302/.563

    Career: .235/.293/.394/.687

    By losing Iggy, we should compare Iggy vs Drew vs LHPs and Iggy vs Holt/Snyder vs RHPs, as this was probably the trade off. (Note: Iggy may have been "rested" vs several RH'd starters as the season progressed.)

     FYI (note: small sample sizes)

    Iggy career vs LHPs: .306/.359/.407/.766 (118 PAs)

    Iggy career vs RHPs: .266/.318/.326/.644 (202 PAs)

    Perhaps the slumping Iggy would not have outhit Drew vs LHPs down the stretch, but it is something to consider.

     

    Sox4ever

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    Moon I got nothing against that response other than Bogaerts can play 1st base.  I just think that waters down his value so so much.  1st baseman are usually players who can hit but moved to the corner due to inferior defense.  A guy who can bat .300 and hit 30 HR is more valuable at every position over 1B.  Generally speaking I think the Sox front office is more comfortable signing hitters than pitchers so I think they will just go out and sign someone like they did with Naps this year.  I wouldn't mind guys like Carp/Nava there but they are platoon players and can we really afford another platoon position on the 25?  Long term a good hitter might move off the position...if WMB reemerge next year I can see Cecchini getting slid in but if his power develops the sox might like his arm in the outfield.  

    If all these guys are still in the sox organization in 3 years it will be VERY interesting to see who is where.  Cecchini, Bogaerts, WMB.  

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

     

    Anyone look at another gaffe this organization made recently? 

    Check out Mark Melancon stats vs. Hanrahan.

     

    Cue the "he couldn't do that under the pressure of Boston" rants, and how that trade benefited our longterm outlook.

    Sox4ever

     

     



    It should be noted that keeping Iggy also did not improve our long term outlook. It would have merely maintained the status quo

     

    True.

    -and reduced our playoff chances this year.

    True, assuming Peavy stays healthy and pitches better than Workman would have (or Dempster when Buch returns), and the net gain is more than the net loss of Iggy vs Holt/Snyder and more of Drew (vs RHPs and LHPs instead of just RHPs).

     IF Peavey stays healthy then acquiring him has two benefits: first, we get a SP who is more than likely better than either Lester or Dempster and second, it allows Workman, who has been very effective, to go to the overworked bullpen and help out there (again, assuming he continues to be effective). The trade also netted a RP who is a flamethrower and could add additonal benefit in the future. All this for the loss of an extra part, albeit a talented fielder. Overall it makes sense to me-and I by no means support anything our GM does because he "knows better than we do".




     




     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    In response to jackbu's comment:


    They also did not bring back Adrian Beltre for the same reason.  It is always tough to see young talent get traded for someone who most likely will not be a Red Sox for long.  



    Are you actually comparing not re-signing Beltre to this trade? 

     

     

     
  18. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    Moon I got nothing against that response other than Bogaerts can play 1st base.  I just think that waters down his value so so much.  1st baseman are usually players who can hit but moved to the corner due to inferior defense.  A guy who can bat .300 and hit 30 HR is more valuable at every position over 1B.  

    I get the positional value of a great hitting SS. Not many other teams get great offense from the SS position, so if we can hang even at big O positions like 1B, then we have the edge.

    I guess a lot depends on just how well Boggy fields at SS. Maybe I am being overly pessimistic on that front, but whenever you read scouting reports mention a SS changing positions, it's a polite way of saying he will not be a plus fielder. Virtually every report I read on Boggy mentions him changing positions.

    I am not sure who is the better fielder at 3B out of Boggy, Cecchini and Middlebrooks, but if we still had Iggy, I think we'd be looking at moving the worst of the 3 being moved to 1B, and the second worst getting some time in at 1B as well.

    Also, MLB is not what it used to be. The 3B position is not a big offensive position anymore, in fact this year's league OPS at 3B is only .713 (.672 at SS). Since 2011, the positional OPS has been:  SS 684, 685 & 672 /  3B 705, 738 & 713  /  1B 778, 767, 766.

     

    Generally speaking I think the Sox front office is more comfortable signing hitters than pitchers so I think they will just go out and sign someone like they did with Naps this year.  I wouldn't mind guys like Carp/Nava there but they are platoon players and can we really afford another platoon position on the 25?  Long term a good hitter might move off the position...if WMB reemerge next year I can see Cecchini getting slid in but if his power develops the sox might like his arm in the outfield.  

    I'm not sure about any of these guys moving to the OF. I personally think Middlebrooks would go to 1B, and Boggy would be best at 3B, but I get the positional value boost of having a big bat at SS, as long as not much is lost on defense.

     

    If all these guys are still in the sox organization in 3 years it will be VERY interesting to see who is where.  Cecchini, Bogaerts, WMB.  

    I'm a huge Cecchini guy and think Boggy is the real deal as well. I'm not sure about Middy, but my guess is at most, only 2 of these 3 will make it bigtime.

    Sox4ever

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    But we don't have Iggy in the system, I was an Iggy guy too.  I'm a bigger Bogaerts to though and if he can't stick at SS I really think he could be good enough in left or 3B to not move to 1st.  Normally a SS is the most athletic player on a team; between arm and agility.  Most major league SS have the ability to play above average defense at other positions if they can learn it and everything I've learned about Bogaerts leaves me to believe it he outgrows SS he will slide to third or left just fine.

     

    Im a big Cecchini guy too.  I hope his power develops; I don't think he has 30 HR power but I think he can be a 15-20 guy with high avg and high OBP seasons.  Im not sure he sticks at 3rd but I also think he h as the smarts to play everywhere.  He's Supposedly a huge baseball nerd, loves the game, reminds many of Pedey.  I almost envision him as a Ben Zoberist type; a guy who can give you above average offense and average defense at multiple positions. 

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

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    But we don't have Iggy in the system, I was an Iggy guy too.  I'm a bigger Bogaerts to though and if he can't stick at SS I really think he could be good enough in left or 3B to not move to 1st.  Normally a SS is the most athletic player on a team; between arm and agility.  Most major league SS have the ability to play above average defense at other positions if they can learn it and everything I've learned about Bogaerts leaves me to believe it he outgrows SS he will slide to third or left just fine.

     

    Im a big Cecchini guy too.  I hope his power develops; I don't think he has 30 HR power but I think he can be a 15-20 guy with high avg and high OBP seasons.  Im not sure he sticks at 3rd but I also think he h as the smarts to play everywhere.  He's Supposedly a huge baseball nerd, loves the game, reminds many of Pedey.  I almost envision him as a Ben Zoberist type; a guy who can give you above average offense and average defense at multiple positions. 

    The problem is that if Boggy turns out to be a much better 3Bman than SS, we don't have any SSs in the system that is close to ML ready. We will continue the SS merry-go-round.

    I'm not as concerned with Cecchini's apparent lack of power for a corner IF'er as long as his OBP stays high and his speed on the basepaths creates another area of offensive gain not normally seen at those positions. The kid has a 415 minor league OBP and 84 SBs/ 16 CS in 251 games. That's about 60 per season. Although he only has 14 HRs in 1088 PAs, he does have 88 2B+3Bs. That gives him close to 55 XBHs per season. This may improve as he fills out.

     




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

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

                                       Hugh,   Bad news, Iggy just went yard.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    In response to eggplants' comment:

     

                                              Hugh, Reddick's doing O.K. He played 9 inn. last night. went 0-1 with (3) walks. His team is in first place in the ALW. That race is not over yet but if Texas loses Cruz it will make life easier for the A's going forward for the next two months. How's Kalish and Bailey? think they might be able to help the RS this year. As far as  southpaw 777's comments, he was posturing to me about how smart he was, that he forgot more about baseball than I know, my reply  was basically he wasn't as smart as he thought he was based on how he posted. My problem was that I missed Villareal completely. I didn't pick it up until late last night at anMLB web site. This throws the arguement in the Peavy direction if he can help us now and in the next two months. If he stays in AAA or doesn't make an appearance from here on out it won't matter If I missed him because his value is of no consequence for the rest of this season. I think Iggy could have gotten the bunt down last night in the 9th inning in case you might have been wondering

     




    Your a good poster eggplants. Our back and forth went too far and I want to apologize for some comments I made.

    I still like the trade though...Wink
     

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    In response to eggplants' comment:

                                       Hugh,   Bad news, Iggy just went yard.



    And Peavy is pitching a nice game

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Sorry, but I don't like it

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    In response to eggplants' comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

                                       Hugh,   Bad news, Iggy just went yard.

     



    And Peavy is pitching a nice game

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Peavy looks real good.

    except for the Goldschmit HR, hes been lights out.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share