Re: Sorry, but I don't like it
posted at 8/3/2013 2:17 PM EDT
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
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.