SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Should the Red Sox trade Dustin Pedroia?
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 28, 2015 13:54:34 GMT -5
Meh. They have Yunel Escobar slated to play second, and besides 2014, he's always been a plus defender who can be a league-average-ish hitter. Steamer foresees a 2.1 WAR in 2015, so while Pedroia would be a massive upgrade, they don't "need" a second baseman. Also, we're talking a guy in Pedroia who's going to be a 4 to 7 WAR player for us (while being a team leader and all that good stuff) -- So I wouldn't say it's "too bad" that we may not be able to dump him as he gets paid the $/WAR equivalent of a ~2 WAR player. Mookie is amazing and all, but Pedroia doesn't have to be moved for him to flourish. Our team is best with both of them on it, unless we miraculously come across a trade opportunity for an ace with more than 2 years of team control left. Like Gio Gonzalez? (If he was available) You really think the Sox would trade Dustin Pedroia for Gio Gonzalez? Really? Man I wish this thread would die. Dustin Pedroia is not being traded anytime soon. Why is this so hard for people to accept? There are very, very few players that spend their career with one team. It looks pretty apparent that Pedroia will be that rare player. I guess if this were 1978 or 1979 we'd get the annual when are the Sox going to trade Yaz threads? I mean Yaz is pushing 40, isn't what he once was, they can improve the team if they deal him, blah, blah, blah.... Or better yet it's 1959...we should deal Ted Williams. Don't know if he'll bounce back. He's a defensive liability in LF. Can't be counted on to have a lot of plate appearances for 1960..... Not saying Pedroia is Yaz or Ted obviously but it's quite obvious the FO has no plans to trade him anytime soon. I'd say spend more time pondering where Allen Craig goes because he's the player most likely to be dealt in spring training.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Jan 28, 2015 14:38:30 GMT -5
You really think the Sox would trade Dustin Pedroia for Gio Gonzalez? Really? Man I wish this thread would die. Dustin Pedroia is not being traded anytime soon. Why is this so hard for people to accept? There are very, very few players that spend their career with one team. It looks pretty apparent that Pedroia will be that rare player. I guess if this were 1978 or 1979 we'd get the annual when are the Sox going to trade Yaz threads? I mean Yaz is pushing 40, isn't what he once was, they can improve the team if they deal him, blah, blah, blah.... Or better yet it's 1959...we should deal Ted Williams. Don't know if he'll bounce back. He's a defensive liability in LF. Can't be counted on to have a lot of plate appearances for 1960..... Not saying Pedroia is Yaz or Ted obviously but it's quite obvious the FO has no plans to trade him anytime soon. I'd say spend more time pondering where Allen Craig goes because he's the player most likely to be dealt in spring training. I think it's more likely to be Nava or Victorino
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 28, 2015 16:37:03 GMT -5
You really think the Sox would trade Dustin Pedroia for Gio Gonzalez? Really? Man I wish this thread would die. Dustin Pedroia is not being traded anytime soon. Why is this so hard for people to accept? There are very, very few players that spend their career with one team. It looks pretty apparent that Pedroia will be that rare player. I guess if this were 1978 or 1979 we'd get the annual when are the Sox going to trade Yaz threads? I mean Yaz is pushing 40, isn't what he once was, they can improve the team if they deal him, blah, blah, blah.... Or better yet it's 1959...we should deal Ted Williams. Don't know if he'll bounce back. He's a defensive liability in LF. Can't be counted on to have a lot of plate appearances for 1960..... Not saying Pedroia is Yaz or Ted obviously but it's quite obvious the FO has no plans to trade him anytime soon. I'd say spend more time pondering where Allen Craig goes because he's the player most likely to be dealt in spring training. I think it's more likely to be Nava or Victorino They're certainly possibilities, although I would think Victorino would have more value to the Sox and the Sox wouldn't mind shedding Craig's salary, particularly if he doesn't play every day. At this point, unless Napoli or Ortiz is injured, there wouldn't be a lot of playing time for Allen Craig.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Jan 29, 2015 14:55:58 GMT -5
They're certainly possibilities, although I would think Victorino would have more value to the Sox and the Sox wouldn't mind shedding Craig's salary, particularly if he doesn't play every day. At this point, unless Napoli or Ortiz is injured, there wouldn't be a lot of playing time for Allen Craig. I think Craig stays because he is the future replacement for Napoli and/or Ortiz
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Jul 22, 2015 22:00:50 GMT -5
It's nice to see Pedey break his 0 for 20 streak after coming back from yet another injury. Even Tony Massarotti mentioned Dustin as a possible trade piece for the Sox the other day. A year and a half ago I mentioned, on SOSH, that it would be wise to trade Dustin because the Sox were clearly rebuilding and a small player whose on the wrong side of 30 who plays balls out with an injury history was likely to continue that trend. I was ridiculed for saying the Sox were rebuilding and to claim Dustin was injury prone or to suggest I could predict it would happen again. Well I was clearly writing to a ship of fools. All three things have come to pass and that is not even a debateable point any more, clearly they all have. Rebuttals from many a fanboy made pointless claims such as, 'he is the face of the franchise' (actually it's Ortiz)....and.to that I say so what? Franchise players are traded all the time.That is not even a point it's a fanboy excuse, a reason to cling to your binkey. If the Sox are rebuilding and clearly they are and were,then why not trade a player whose reputation exceeds his actual value and is likely to decrease in the coming years? It's better to get rid of a player a year to early than a year to late. By the time the team is likely to contend again Dustin clearly would be at the point of diminishing returns, the smart and obvious move was to trade him when you could. I still have not heard 1 decent answer to counter that, not one.. not even close. Hell over on SOSH they are still drinking the Inglesias/Peavy trade kool-aid. I was told he would never hit .250 by the masses. However if you broke down his monthly stats and when he got hurt in the minors they were clear signs that he would and could hit.I was told that's cherry picking. Also his very low strike out rate indicated he was the type of player who could exceed his minor league numbers and I was ridiculed for that, well the ship of fools are all trying to drink the ocean of kool-aid still by saying we won the WS that year so that proves the trade was right. That is the most foolish rational I ever heard especially considering how bad Peavy pitched for us. By the way, Winning a World Series does not automatically mean that any moves made that season were right, although the number of people that believe that to be true frightens me, it's illogical and is a litmus test for those that don't understand cause and effect. And as well as Bogaerts has improved at SS this season, picture an infield of Bogaerts at 3B, Inglesias at SS and Betts at 2B, with gold glove contender Kole Calhoun (a player I suggested the Sox trade Pedey for, as they had Howie Kendricks in the last yr. of his deal last yr.) in RF with JBJ in CF. The Sox easily could have afforded to keep Lester and/or sign another top pitcher with so many pre-arbitration starting positional players. Panda never would have been signed either nor would have Masterson. Buchholz, Miley and Porcello would have been the 3,4 & 5 pitchers instead of the pre-season #1,2 & 3 which would have also lessened the Sox perceived need to extend Porcello's deal before he proved himself here. Finally before anyone thinks I'm using hindsite for the 20/20 vision here I know there is a few sosh'ers here who can't debate I made these claims, and a few more along time ago, all which have come to pass. Am I tooting my own own horn.. damn right. I was told by nearly everyone I was wrong, foolish etc, and yet time proved just the opposite that the masses resided in Jonestown.
|
|
|
Post by arzjake on Jul 22, 2015 23:07:47 GMT -5
The problem is not pedroia.
The problem is no pitching!
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Jul 23, 2015 5:20:40 GMT -5
The problem is not pedroia. The problem is no pitching! And you don't see any kind of possible connection here? Pedroia is clearly not the Pedroia everyone clings to. He is not. The team clearly has issues. Then it's logical to take a declining player whose perception appears to be better than actually is. In the very least explore trading him to see what's available. By the time this team is a serious contender again he clearly will not be a main cog, therefore use him and any other asset you have that may speed up that process. That's very basic.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 23, 2015 5:50:00 GMT -5
By the time the team is likely to contend again Worth noting that the Red Sox have the fifth highest rest of season projected winning percentage per Fangraphs and tied for fifth highest rest of season projected winning percentage per Baseball Prospectus. If the team is a playoff contender in 2016 (or even if it just wants to be), the rationale for trading Pedroia weakens significantly. Despite what is likely a flukily bad defensive season, he's third on the team in WAR.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,790
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Jul 23, 2015 7:07:04 GMT -5
Pedroia is still a cheap 4 WAR+ player. Unless you're getting someone very good in return (for us a young TOR starter like Gray), I see no point in trading/packaging him. And I don't see that happening.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 23, 2015 11:13:49 GMT -5
I don't know how much this would actually play into the decision of whether or not to trade Pedroia (I don't think they should regardless of this), but I think signing a player to an extremely team-friendly extension where he probably left at least $30mil on the table and then trading him 2 years down the road sends a horrible message. If I were a free agent and saw that and the way the Lester negotiations went down, I'd be a lot less interested in Boston
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Jul 23, 2015 11:23:59 GMT -5
I don't know how much this would actually play into the decision of whether or not to trade Pedroia (I don't think they should regardless of this), but I think signing a player to an extremely team-friendly extension where he probably left at least $30mil on the table and then trading him 2 years down the road sends a horrible message. If I were a free agent and saw that and the way the Lester negotiations went down, I'd be a lot less interested in Boston I don't see this as a real concern to free agents, who are not taking below-market deals to play in Boston. It is more of a concern with signing their own guys, such as Betts/Bogaerts, etc. I think they should gauge Pedroia's market value in the offseason. A smart ownership trying to win championships and maximize value would do so (and they would gauge Ortiz's market value right now). Just because it would be great for them to retire as Red Sox icons in a Red Sox uniform doesn't mean it is the best move for the franchise on the field.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 23, 2015 12:19:25 GMT -5
A single 2 week DL stint doesn't reinforce the idea that Pedroia is injury prone. It wasn't caused by being wreckless, he just slipped over a base while running. Could happen to anyone.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Jul 23, 2015 12:34:44 GMT -5
Pedroia is still a cheap 4 WAR+ player. Unless you're getting someone very good in return (for us a young TOR starter like Gray), I see no point in trading/packaging him. And I don't see that happening. I take back one thing I've said, that there has not been any decent rebuttals. Nomar, you may be right and a few others have said the same as you have here. That said, it HAS to be explored as you would any guy on the team. What if for example the Sox packaged Owens and Pedrioa for an ace and a under 21 YO prospect in the mid to lower levels?
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,790
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Jul 23, 2015 12:38:54 GMT -5
Pedroia is still a cheap 4 WAR+ player. Unless you're getting someone very good in return (for us a young TOR starter like Gray), I see no point in trading/packaging him. And I don't see that happening. I take back one thing I've said, that there has not been any decent rebuttals. Nomar, you may be right and a few others have said the same as you have here. That said, it HAS to be explored as you would any guy on the team. What if for example the Sox packaged Owens and Pedrioa for an ace and a under 21 YO prospect in the mid to lower levels? I'm all for due diligence, although I think that with Pedroia that may belong more in the offseason than midseason.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 23, 2015 12:41:39 GMT -5
I don't know how much this would actually play into the decision of whether or not to trade Pedroia (I don't think they should regardless of this), but I think signing a player to an extremely team-friendly extension where he probably left at least $30mil on the table and then trading him 2 years down the road sends a horrible message. If I were a free agent and saw that and the way the Lester negotiations went down, I'd be a lot less interested in Boston I don't see this as a real concern to free agents, who are not taking below-market deals to play in Boston. It is more of a concern with signing their own guys, such as Betts/Bogaerts, etc. Either way, I think it has to be considered. And I think it also speaks to how the front office/ownership treats players, which would still concern me as a free agent. I don't think it's sensible to say absolutely not to trading Pedroia, cause he's a year or two short of 10-5 rights and you never know when his power might disappear again, but I'd be against it without a really big return
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Jul 23, 2015 12:43:10 GMT -5
I don't know how much this would actually play into the decision of whether or not to trade Pedroia (I don't think they should regardless of this), but I think signing a player to an extremely team-friendly extension where he probably left at least $30mil on the table and then trading him 2 years down the road sends a horrible message. If I were a free agent and saw that and the way the Lester negotiations went down, I'd be a lot less interested in Boston Many fans like to believe this however it is not the case. If a team makes an attractive offer the players will come. Name me one franchise with this so called horrible message label. You are offering an excuse not a reason or at least not a reason that can be substantiated in any way.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 23, 2015 12:45:49 GMT -5
I don't know how much this would actually play into the decision of whether or not to trade Pedroia (I don't think they should regardless of this), but I think signing a player to an extremely team-friendly extension where he probably left at least $30mil on the table and then trading him 2 years down the road sends a horrible message. If I were a free agent and saw that and the way the Lester negotiations went down, I'd be a lot less interested in Boston Many fans like to believe this however it is not the case. If a team makes an attractive offer the players will come. Name me one franchise with this so called horrible message label. You are offering an excuse not a reason or at least not a reason that can be substantiated in any way. Marlins.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jul 23, 2015 12:52:31 GMT -5
Just checking, but does anybody here really think that Dustin Pedroia getting traded at any point soon has even a 0.0001% chance of happening in reality? If at all once his 10-5 rights kick in?
I'm kind of amazed that there is six pages of talk about a theoretical trade that has virtually no chance of happening.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Jul 23, 2015 12:56:37 GMT -5
Many fans like to believe this however it is not the case. If a team makes an attractive offer the players will come. Name me one franchise with this so called horrible message label. You are offering an excuse not a reason or at least not a reason that can be substantiated in any way. Marlins. What? Ask Stanton about that, who just signed the largest contract ever in MLB history.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 23, 2015 13:01:43 GMT -5
Pedroia is still a cheap 4 WAR+ player. Unless you're getting someone very good in return (for us a young TOR starter like Gray), I see no point in trading/packaging him. And I don't see that happening. I take back one thing I've said, that there has not been any decent rebuttals. Nomar, you may be right and a few others have said the same as you have here. That said, it HAS to be explored as you would any guy on the team. What if for example the Sox packaged Owens and Pedrioa for an ace and a under 21 YO prospect in the mid to lower levels? A team would have to be close to or already contending with a hole at 2b. So what contending or almost contending team is going to give up an ace? It's not realistic.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 23, 2015 13:05:00 GMT -5
What? Ask Stanton about that, who just signed the largest contract ever in MLB history. Exactly, the Marlins had to give him the biggest contract in professional sports history to stay. That's what we want to avoid. Pedroia signed that extension months before Cano hit free agency and got $240 million, knowing that he could have signed a deal that was probably close to what Cano got if he'd waited. Do you see anyone else doing that if the Sox ship him off 2 years later? I don't. It's not a reason that would make me say no to dealing Pedey by itself, but given that the whole idea of looking to ship off a good, comparatively cheap middle infielder who's signed for another 5(?) years seems pretty dumb to me anyway, I'd say it's another reason to keep him, unless someone makes a completely irrationally good offer
|
|
|
Post by m1keyboots on Jul 23, 2015 13:29:38 GMT -5
The problem is not pedroia. The problem is no pitching! And you don't see any kind of possible connection here? Pedroia is clearly not the Pedroia everyone clings to. He is not. The team clearly has issues. Then it's logical to take a declining player whose perception appears to be better than actually is. In the very least explore trading him to see what's available. By the time this team is a serious contender again he clearly will not be a main cog, therefore use him and any other asset you have that may speed up that process. That's very basic. before his hammy his offense was bounced back. Not bouncing back. It was back, and save for a few dumb errors early he's been pretty stellar on d for the most part. There is no decline there. He may not run as much. But he is past his "decline" of last year already.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,790
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Jul 23, 2015 13:31:28 GMT -5
I think that if we traded Pedroia to a contender after being the worst team in the division two straight seasons, people wouldn't really be bothered by it.
|
|
|
Post by m1keyboots on Jul 23, 2015 13:31:50 GMT -5
Just checking, but does anybody here really think that Dustin Pedroia getting traded at any point soon has even a 0.0001% chance of happening in reality? If at all once his 10-5 rights kick in? I'm kind of amazed that there is six pages of talk about a theoretical trade that has virtually no chance of happening. This times 100 for a dozen reasonable reasons, that anyone who follows the sox and pedroia and knows what type of player he is and character with his contract etc etc etc
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Jul 23, 2015 13:36:53 GMT -5
Just checking, but does anybody here really think that Dustin Pedroia getting traded at any point soon has even a 0.0001% chance of happening in reality? If at all once his 10-5 rights kick in? I'm kind of amazed that there is six pages of talk about a theoretical trade that has virtually no chance of happening. The only reason to ask pedroia to waive his no trade clause is because he has value and we might be able to get a top 20 pitching prospect for him from a contender that needs second base help.
|
|
|