|
Post by jdb on Dec 22, 2012 9:32:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Dec 22, 2012 10:08:54 GMT -5
OK, To put it into more concrete terms, I'd be unhappy to see the Red Sox trade Iglesias to solidify the bullpen when the starting rotation need help. I agree. If Cherrington is OK with overpaying for short term deals, for mediocre talent then he should be willing to open the prospect vault all the way for a young quality starting pitcher.
|
|
|
Post by bigpapismangosalsa on Dec 22, 2012 10:14:44 GMT -5
My biggest problem in trading something of long term value, such as Iglesias, for Hanrahan is not in the player himself, but in the idea behind it.
I think that a lot of us agree that with some regression to the mean and continued improvement from our young players (Buchholz, Lester, Napoli, Victorino, Ellsbury, Pedroia, Bailey, Melancon, Middlebrooks, Tazawaa, and Doubront, respectively) the Sox could be competitive for the final playoff spot(s), but this is not a serious contender for a title. As such, I would be against virtually any trade this off-season where we deal something that could be an asset on the 2014-2020 teams for something that is likely only to be an asset this year or for the next two without realistically replacing that value to future teams, as Hanrahan would be.
This isn't simply against Hanrahan, but is why I would have been against a move of a valuable long term piece for a name like Morales - just to mention a name that has been dealt who in a vacuum is a "good fit" relative to the RedSox holes.
However, if this move is paired with another bigger deal contingent upon us being able to move Bailey (lets say Bailey and Ellsbury for Danny Hultzen and Smoak or something), then it makes far more sense to me based on where the RedSox are than in isolation.
|
|
|
Post by dcri on Dec 22, 2012 10:40:58 GMT -5
The fact the Sox are even discussing this deal is more evidence of how bad their deal for Bailey was. Let's hope they don't do something equally bad. If they have a problem with Bailey, this is not the answer.
|
|
|
Post by remember04 on Dec 22, 2012 11:56:02 GMT -5
OK, doesn't this... ... contradict the reasoning here: If relievers are inherently risky because of the small performance samples, then how does it not follow that any construction of said bullpen is also still inherently risky/ variable, even if it looks strong on paper? Would not the logical approach to bullpen building be to constantly try to improve the quality of the arms in the 'pen so you're working with a broader base to talent? It's not like it's even a bad thing if everyone plays up to or exceeds their expected level... On the Sox this is not an issue since the money won't break the bank. All that matters is what they give up in return (and let's face it, the Sox haven't sent anyone they'd miss to the Pirates in awhile). I don't see it as a direct contradiction. There is certainly an inherent risk in building a bullpen as you described. However, as I see it, the best way to limit that risk is to ignore small sample variations, put some emphasis on durability, and (as you said) build a broad base of talent. If all else were equal, I'd prefer to have Hanrahan over Bailey, even though Bailey has the superior pure stuff. My point (which I perhaps didn't explain very well, so your criticism is fair) isn't that the Red Sox shouldn't try to improve their bullpen. It's that the Red Sox have already done a fairly good job with their current bullpen construction, doing pretty much exactly what you said. They've built a broad base of talent, with Bailey, Uehara, Tazawa, Morales, Miller, Breslow, Melancon, and possibly Aceves at the major league level, with Wilson, Mortensen, Carpenter waiting in the wings. The marginal cost of making an improvement -- which might, because of the variance associated with relief pitcher, not turn into a short-term improvement at all -- would be better spent on one of the clear weaknesses of the team. To put it into more concrete terms, I'd be unhappy to see the Red Sox trade Iglesias to solidify the bullpen when the starting rotation and outfield need help. It seems odd to me that we talk about the bullpen depth and Bard never even gets mentioned. I agree with it but it still seems odd to me. I agree about starting rotation being the real need. The only way I support an Iglesias trade for Hanrahan is if it somehow leads up to a trade with the Tigers for preferably Porcello but Smyly would work too. Closer is there only real need so unless they're really low on Porcello right now we'd need other pieces involved and Iglesias for Hanrahan straight up is way too steep for me.
|
|
|
Post by jioh on Dec 22, 2012 12:10:37 GMT -5
Pirates interested in Iglesias, White Sox looking for LHH, Reds looking for LHRP. Time to turn our roster problems into some assets.
|
|
|
Post by sdiaz1 on Dec 22, 2012 12:49:18 GMT -5
I get that people really want to see a LHH of the bench, but how is a first basemen with a carreer WRC+ 112 and negative defense all that much better than either Jerry Sands or Mauro Gomez? Is a season worth of a pinch hitter worth trading away 6 years of a guy with an 80 glove? We should be able to find guys simmilar to Jones. He is a completely fungible asset.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Dec 22, 2012 13:23:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Dec 22, 2012 13:52:02 GMT -5
If it's Iglesias for Hanranhan straight up...it is stupid.
If it is a bigger deal, then I have no problem with it.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Dec 22, 2012 14:00:16 GMT -5
Jon Heyman @jonheymancbs #redsox still talking to #pirates about hanrahan. likely be for multiple players. jose iglesias not in current offerings
|
|
|
Post by remember04 on Dec 22, 2012 14:02:12 GMT -5
Jon Heyman @jonheymancbs #redsox still talking to #pirates about hanrahan. likely be for multiple players. jose iglesias not in current offerings hmmm, time to worry?
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Dec 22, 2012 14:02:44 GMT -5
Jon Heyman @jonheymancbs #redsox still talking to #pirates about hanrahan. likely be for multiple players. jose iglesias not in current offerings
RT @jimbowdenespnxm: Red Sox are not going to include: Bogaerts, Barnes, Bradley, Webster, De La Rosa in a Hanrahan type deal
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Dec 22, 2012 14:03:25 GMT -5
Guessing Aceves+ or ++
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Dec 22, 2012 14:04:23 GMT -5
Lol thanks Jim Bowden....we weren't going to include any of our top 5 prospects for a reliever who is on the decline and has 1 year left.
What an idiot.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Dec 22, 2012 14:05:25 GMT -5
Geez, you think Harrington is stupid enough to take Melancon with Aceves?
|
|
|
Post by mjammz on Dec 22, 2012 14:15:06 GMT -5
I'm guessing it's going to be at least two people off the 40 man roster and a prospect. I'll guess Alex Wilson, an OF and maybe Workman or Cecchini.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Dec 22, 2012 14:15:39 GMT -5
Geez, you think Harrington is stupid enough to take Melancon with Aceves? Melancon is a good buy low candidate with several years of control.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Dec 22, 2012 14:16:14 GMT -5
JIM BOWDEN @jimbowdenespnxm Source involved in trade talks with Pirates-Red Sox "just not close enough yet" to give names
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Dec 22, 2012 14:17:08 GMT -5
If Cherrington includes Brentz....well then he deserves all the criticism he is going to get.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Dec 22, 2012 14:18:00 GMT -5
I'm guessing it's going to be at least two people off the 40 man roster and a prospect. I'll guess Alex Wilson, an OF and maybe Workman or Cecchini. For one year of Hanrahan at $6-7M?! Lest we forget, Uehara is better at a lower salary with no acquisition cost.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Dec 22, 2012 14:41:12 GMT -5
Tim Britton @tbritton_Projo Hanrahan trade has to be about 40-man consolidation. Makes most sense if multiple relievers included going to Pittsburgh, I think.
DKnobler @dknobler Pirates need to free up money to do other things. That's one reason they really want to move Hanrahan.
|
|
|
Post by pbgallag on Dec 22, 2012 14:53:09 GMT -5
Terrible move if they give up anything more than Aceves.
Trading for a guy because he has "closer experience" is something Jim Bowden would do. I expect better from Cherington. Hanrahan would get torched in the AL East if he doesn't dramatically improve his walk and HR rates.
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Dec 22, 2012 15:02:49 GMT -5
Trading for a reliever is the last thing I would want this team to do, but I think you all are seriously underestimating Joel Hanrahan. Take out his name and I'd think you all were talking about friggin Curtis Leskanic or something.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Dec 22, 2012 15:06:46 GMT -5
You mean Curtis Leskanic, member of the World Series Champion Boston Red Sox, winner of ALCS Game 4?
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Dec 22, 2012 15:08:09 GMT -5
You mean Curtis Leskanic, member of the World Series Champion Boston Red Sox, winner of ALCS Game 6? Don't get me wrong I love the guy. Fine, lemme change that to Eric Gagne post-Red Sox trade.
|
|