Boras and Drew

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    Still a lot of misunderstanding about the iglesias trade it seems.  The trade was neither about Iglesias for Peavy nor about Iglesias vs. Drew.  The context for the move was Xander Boegarts.

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    S5, please tell me Jose Iglesias is your son, then I "might" be able to understand your passion for the guy.  The trade will be a "disaster" long term?!  I appreciate a guy who can play defense as much as the next fan, but there isn't a GM in baseball who would trade the Red Sox current SS (Xander Boegarts) for 9 Jose Iglesiases.  This Sox Front Office values their prospects like gold, so there might just be some red flags with Iglesias.  If he goes on to have a similar career as Omar Vizquel or Ozzie Smith (obviously unlikely), then I still wouldn't call the trade a "disaster."  The trade was the right move at the time, the Sox won it all, and I don't know of anyone in baseball who has criticized the Sox for making that deal.  

    [/QUOTE]

    We have to wait for the "longterm" to judge it longterm. It's premature to say the trade was a longterm disaster.

    I get the argument about not knowing or thinking Peavy helped us win the ring.

    I undertsand why we made the deal with Buch questionable, and Dempster and Doubront nearing their limits, but I still think we'd have been better off with Iggy. It will always be hard to compare what ifs, even 4-6 years down the road. We'll never know what might have happened had we kept Iggy. Would we have still traded for another starter and lost a player that turns out better than Iggy? Would we be looking to trade Middy this winter, so we could go with Iggy at SS and Bogey at 3B? What would we get for Middy? 

    It's nearly impossible to know what that deal would have done or not done.

    [/QUOTE]

    Time will tell, but a couple of things to consider.  John Farrell is a great guy, but he's also a "no nonsense" type, which is why it's no secret he wants Drew back.  Give him a guy at SS who is going to make all the plays he should (Drew) over a guy who may or may not try to do much and butcher the routine play every now & again (Iglesias).  

    I am pretty certain that Farrell would choose Iggy's defense over Drew's. 

    BTW, Iggy made only 1 error at SS for the Sox last year- a throwing error.

     

    There are people in baseball who feel Iglesias has concentration lapses, which isn't all that unusual with his exceptional talent.  Peavy was rotation insurance, as you mentioned, but it was also a signal to the other 24 guys that said, "We think you can win."  Some people think that doesn't mean much, but some others might disagree...

    At the time of the trade, I was pretty upset, but I understaood why the trade was made. As it turned out, we might have won without Peavy, but it was nice to not have to use Dempster as a starter in the playoffs, and Buch's return helped lessen the hindisght value of Peavy.

    I would like to still have Iggy at SS for 2014, especially at a small fraction of what Drew might cost, but I also like having Peavy as our 3/4 starter now.

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to illinoisredsox's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Iglesias played quite a bit at third base.  If you truly believe that Drew is a better defensive shortstop than Iglesias, so be it.  I don't see it. Not even close.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

     

    Okay, here are Iglesias' numbers at shortstop only (to compare apples to apples) while with Boston (to eliminate the effect of the pitching staffs):

     

    Iglesias:

     

    Assists/Inning: .292

     

    Put Outs/Inning: .142

     

    Chances/Inning: .438

     

    DPs/Inning: .071

     

     

     

    Drew:

     

    Assists/Inning: .303

     

    Put Outs/Inning: .161

     

    Chances/Inning: .472

     

    DPs/Inning: .075

     

    Iglesias played 240 innings at short for the Red Sox, Drew 1093 1/3. To repeat, the above numbers only reflect what Iglesias did at ss for Boston, no 3B or 2B numbers are included..

     

    Advantage Drew in all categories, although DPs is basically a wash.

     

    Is Iglesias more spectacular? No doubt. But Drew makes all the plays required and he makes them well.

    And for the record, I am not in favor of resigning Drew.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    It's not "apples to apples" when Iggy had only 240 innings at SS for the Sox last year.

    If you want to use the small sample size numbers, why not value the fact that Iggy made a higher percentage of plays on balls hit into his zone than Drew did.

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

     



    It's not "apples to apples" when Iggy had only 240 innings at SS for the Sox last year.

    If you want to use the small sample size numbers, why not value the fact that Iggy made a higher percentage of plays on balls hit into his zone than Drew did.

    [/QUOTE]


    I agree there are other measures that better reflect the two players respective defensive capabilities.  I was only putting actual numbers to what Joe Breidey had posted.

    It was apple to apples in the sense that dgalehouse thought the numbers included Iglesias' time at 3B, which they did not. That was my only point.  

     

    The problem with some of the people in this thread (not you) is they are treating Drew's D as if he were the shortstop equivalent of Dick Stuart while Iglesias is Ozzie Smith.  Iglesias has more range and will make more plays, yes.  For many, they can't get past his surname.  Bottom line is Drew played a very good shortstop for the Red Sox last year; he filled his role as a one-year bridge to Bogaerts very well, which was the plan. 

        

     

     

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    Final thoughts:  There is no need to kill Drew. He did a pretty good job overall for the team in 2013. Iglesias is a better defensive shortstop. That really should not be up for dispute. Bogaerts is a dynamic player. He could develop into a superstar. Time will determine the wisdom of the Iglesias for Peavy trade. We are the World Champs. In my opinion, neither Drew nor Peavy were essential in that achievement.  Obviously, others see it differently. 

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Final thoughts:  There is no need to kill Drew. He did a pretty good job overall for the team in 2013. Iglesias is a better defensive shortstop. That really should not be up for dispute. Bogaerts is a dynamic player. He could develop into a superstar. Time will determine the wisdom of the Iglesias for Peavy trade. We are the World Champs. In my opinion, neither Drew nor Peavy were essential in that achievement.  Obviously, others see it differently. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Sorry.

    Drew was better than "pretty good" this year.

    He was MUCH better than pretty good, defensively, in the playoffs.

    You ignoring the numbers doesn't make your opinion "final".

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Final thoughts:  There is no need to kill Drew. He did a pretty good job overall for the team in 2013. Iglesias is a better defensive shortstop. That really should not be up for dispute. Bogaerts is a dynamic player. He could develop into a superstar. Time will determine the wisdom of the Iglesias for Peavy trade. We are the World Champs. In my opinion, neither Drew nor Peavy were essential in that achievement.  Obviously, others see it differently. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Sorry.

    Drew was better than "pretty good" this year.

    He was MUCH better than pretty good, defensively, in the playoffs.

    You ignoring the numbers doesn't make your opinion "final".

    [/QUOTE]

    By my saying final thoughts, I am saying that I have no interest in continuing this debate. It does not make my opinion " final". I don't know how you get that interpretation. I do think that " pretty good " is a fair evaluation of Drew's season, all things considered. 

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Final thoughts:  There is no need to kill Drew. He did a pretty good job overall for the team in 2013. Iglesias is a better defensive shortstop. That really should not be up for dispute. Bogaerts is a dynamic player. He could develop into a superstar. Time will determine the wisdom of the Iglesias for Peavy trade. We are the World Champs. In my opinion, neither Drew nor Peavy were essential in that achievement.  Obviously, others see it differently. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Sorry.

    Drew was better than "pretty good" this year.

    He was MUCH better than pretty good, defensively, in the playoffs.

    You ignoring the numbers doesn't make your opinion "final".

    [/QUOTE]

    By my saying final thoughts, I am saying that I have no interest in continuing this debate. It does not make my opinion " final". I don't know how you get that interpretation. I do think that " pretty good " is a fair evaluation of Drew's season, all things considered. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Come on now.

    We both know that isn't true...

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from jgallag1. Show jgallag1's posts

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to S5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't get the rationale of saying that the trade was worth it because we won the WS.  That rationale says that since we don't know what would have happened if we hadn't made the trade and we won the WS it MUST have been a good trade. 

    The fact is that the FO blundered into it being a "good trade" because of Iggys error, but for the longer term this trade was a disaster. 

    [/QUOTE]


    I completely understand the rationale. It's the same thing we say about the 2007 WS. They would not have won that ring if they didn't have Beckett and Lowell (who if you remember was basically forced upon the Sox as a dead weight contract). I can completely understand people who think the current team would be better off having Hanley Ramirez and Anibal Sanchez in the fold. One is a bonafide star, and the other was your under the radar ERA leader for the AL. However, you wouldn't have a ring from 2007, and I'd be willing to bet you wouldn't have a ring this year if it weren't for Peavy.


    I'll take the two Sox rings over Iggy, Hanley and Anibal (although they are all very good players).

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to illinoisredsox's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    It's not "apples to apples" when Iggy had only 240 innings at SS for the Sox last year.

     

    If you want to use the small sample size numbers, why not value the fact that Iggy made a higher percentage of plays on balls hit into his zone than Drew did.

    [/QUOTE]


    I agree there are other measures that better reflect the two players respective defensive capabilities.  I was only putting actual numbers to what Joe Breidey had posted.

    It was apple to apples in the sense that dgalehouse thought the numbers included Iglesias' time at 3B, which they did not. That was my only point.  

     

    The problem with some of the people in this thread (not you) is they are treating Drew's D as if he were the shortstop equivalent of Dick Stuart while Iglesias is Ozzie Smith.  Iglesias has more range and will make more plays, yes.  For many, they can't get past his surname.  Bottom line is Drew played a very good shortstop for the Red Sox last year; he filled his role as a one-year bridge to Bogaerts very well, which was the plan. 

        

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, Drew did a very good job defensively and offensively.

    I'm not expecting much defense from Bogey this year, but hopefully he can match or better Drew's offense.

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    I think posters are leaving out the elephant in the room in regard to Iggy. The Tigers complained about Iggy's flashy plays, and felt he was showboating. This is the very description I gave about him when he was here. IMO when you have a player like that on your team, it's not about making the plays, it's about how you're viewed making the plays. He seems to make even routine plays seem difficult. While you have to be talented enough to do that, it probably costs you when you don't make the play.

    Bottom line? IMO he's not a team player, he's all about Iggy. The team he was traded to wasn't happy with him, and his plays did cost them games. I wonder if the same was true with the Red Sox although they decided to trade him rather than discuss it and lose his "value" in a trade.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Boras and Drew

    To those of you who, up to this point, have been dead-set against re-signing Drew: do recent reports of his willingness to play other positions besides shortstop sway your opinion at all?

    If Drew would agree to come back on a cheap deal to be a kind of infield super-sub, would you be interested?

    (For my part, I still probably wouldn't...we already have Herrera, and I'd like the draft pick. But it does change the equation a little bit.)

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Kingface12. Show Kingface12's posts

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I think posters are leaving out the elephant in the room in regard to Iggy. The Tigers complained about Iggy's flashy plays, and felt he was showboating. This is the very description I gave about him when he was here. IMO when you have a player like that on your team, it's not about making the plays, it's about how you're viewed making the plays. He seems to make even routine plays seem difficult. While you have to be talented enough to do that, it probably costs you when you don't make the play.

    Bottom line? IMO he's not a team player, he's all about Iggy. The team he was traded to wasn't happy with him, and his plays did cost them games. I wonder if the same was true with the Red Sox although they decided to trade him rather than discuss it and lose his "value" in a trade.

    [/QUOTE]


    While I was never a huge fan of Iggy and was all for the trade.....I never saw anything out of Detroit that said "The Tigers complained about Iggy's flashy plays, and felt he was showboating.".....

    Can you provide us a link that supports that claim?

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I think posters are leaving out the elephant in the room in regard to Iggy. The Tigers complained about Iggy's flashy plays, and felt he was showboating. This is the very description I gave about him when he was here. IMO when you have a player like that on your team, it's not about making the plays, it's about how you're viewed making the plays. He seems to make even routine plays seem difficult. While you have to be talented enough to do that, it probably costs you when you don't make the play.

    Bottom line? IMO he's not a team player, he's all about Iggy. The team he was traded to wasn't happy with him, and his plays did cost them games. I wonder if the same was true with the Red Sox although they decided to trade him rather than discuss it and lose his "value" in a trade.

    [/QUOTE]

    Bottom line: Iggy makes way more plays than the average SS. If he botches a few more easy plays (not proven), it is a far less amount than the number of "extra plays" he makes.

    I do recall some comment about being overly flashy by someone in the Detroit organization, but they let Peralta go, and I'm sure they would not take Peavy back for Iggy right now.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Bottom line: Iggy makes way more plays than the average SS. If he botches a few more easy plays (not proven), it is a far less amount than the number of "extra plays" he makes.

    I do recall some comment about being overly flashy by someone in the Detroit organization, but they let Peralta go, and I'm sure they would not take Peavy back for Iggy right now.

    [/QUOTE]

    And for good reason; he played for the White Sox last year.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from fizsh. Show fizsh's posts

    Re: Boras and Drew

    I am starting this post without looking at the numbers.  Strat-o-matic (as those who have seen some of my posts know is a hobby of mine) will come out with the 2013 season next month.  They came out with the ratings on Tuesday. 

    Drew   2e10  means very good range, few errors

    Iglesias 1e8  means excellent range, even fewer errors.  Is also rate 2e14 at 3B

    The range ratings run from 1-4 with a rare 5 every once in a while (usually a player playing out of position.)  They are a combination of stats and scouting profiles.  The error ratings are usually straight calculations based on playing 162 games 9 innings per game.  However they may make some tweaks. 

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to S5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't get the rationale of saying that the trade was worth it because we won the WS.  That rationale says that since we don't know what would have happened if we hadn't made the trade and we won the WS it MUST have been a good trade. 

    The fact is that the FO blundered into it being a "good trade" because of Iggys error, but for the longer term this trade was a disaster. 

    [/QUOTE]

    S5, please tell me Jose Iglesias is your son, then I "might" be able to understand your passion for the guy.  The trade will be a "disaster" long term?!  I appreciate a guy who can play defense as much as the next fan, but there isn't a GM in baseball who would trade the Red Sox current SS (Xander Boegarts) for 9 Jose Iglesiases.  This Sox Front Office values their prospects like gold, so there might just be some red flags with Iglesias.  If he goes on to have a similar career as Omar Vizquel or Ozzie Smith (obviously unlikely), then I still wouldn't call the trade a "disaster."  The trade was the right move at the time, the Sox won it all, and I don't know of anyone in baseball who has criticized the Sox for making that deal.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Believe it or not, my passion for Iglesias isn't as great as my passion for the Red Sox.  I said back in mid-summer that I'd watch this season go down the tubes before I'd trade any of the Sox top six prospects - and that included Iggy. 

    As an aside here, I believe the team gave up too much to get too little of something they didn't need.  The general consensus was that the team needed bullpen help but instead they gave up a valuable player of the future to get a mediocre starting pitcher with a good pedigree when they could have given up lesser prospects to fill the BP need.

    But I digress...

    For me the issue never was Drew vs. Iggy at SS.  I was and am happy with what Drew gave the team both in the regular season and the post-season.  However, Drew's contract expired at the end of 2013 and Iggy was the natural replacement, with Bogarts and Middy battling it out for 3B in 2014.  The loser of that battle would either go to 1b or the OF...or get traded.  For the remainder of 2013 Iggy was the UIF.

    The issue was never Bogarts vs. Iggy at SS either.  I like Bogarts bat as much as I like Iggy's glove and we could have had both. 

    The real issue for me came to 2014 and beyond.  I saw a real possibility of a dynasty much like the Yankees built with Jeter, Posada and Bernie Williams as the kingpins of it (did I leave anyone out?) only with Iggy, Bogarts and JBJ, and possibly Middlebrooks. 

    Instead of that as of today we're unsure of who the SS and 3B are going to be going into 2014, AND we have a rookie CF who has yet to prove himself offensively.  IMHO that's too many question marks for a defending WS champion.   

    IMHO by the 2016 season we're going to be looking back on this trade and thinking of it as being in the same vein as Bagwell/Anderson.  And the only thing we'll be able to say is, "Well, we won the WS 2013, so it must have been worth it". 

    And I now defer to DGalehouse's post about the blue shirt and $20. 

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to S5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to S5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't get the rationale of saying that the trade was worth it because we won the WS.  That rationale says that since we don't know what would have happened if we hadn't made the trade and we won the WS it MUST have been a good trade. 

    The fact is that the FO blundered into it being a "good trade" because of Iggys error, but for the longer term this trade was a disaster. 

    [/QUOTE]

    S5, please tell me Jose Iglesias is your son, then I "might" be able to understand your passion for the guy.  The trade will be a "disaster" long term?!  I appreciate a guy who can play defense as much as the next fan, but there isn't a GM in baseball who would trade the Red Sox current SS (Xander Boegarts) for 9 Jose Iglesiases.  This Sox Front Office values their prospects like gold, so there might just be some red flags with Iglesias.  If he goes on to have a similar career as Omar Vizquel or Ozzie Smith (obviously unlikely), then I still wouldn't call the trade a "disaster."  The trade was the right move at the time, the Sox won it all, and I don't know of anyone in baseball who has criticized the Sox for making that deal.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Believe it or not, my passion for Iglesias isn't as great as my passion for the Red Sox.  I said back in mid-summer that I'd watch this season go down the tubes before I'd trade any of the Sox top six prospects - and that included Iggy. 

    As an aside here, I believe the team gave up too much to get too little of something they didn't need.  The general consensus was that the team needed bullpen help but instead they gave up a valuable player of the future to get a mediocre starting pitcher with a good pedigree when they could have given up lesser prospects to fill the BP need.

    But I digress...

    For me the issue never was Drew vs. Iggy at SS.  I was and am happy with what Drew gave the team both in the regular season and the post-season.  However, Drew's contract expired at the end of 2013 and Iggy was the natural replacement, with Bogarts and Middy battling it out for 3B in 2014.  The loser of that battle would either go to 1b or the OF...or get traded.  For the remainder of 2013 Iggy was the UIF.

    The issue was never Bogarts vs. Iggy at SS either.  I like Bogarts bat as much as I like Iggy's glove and we could have had both. 

    The real issue for me came to 2014 and beyond.  I saw a real possibility of a dynasty much like the Yankees built with Jeter, Posada and Bernie Williams as the kingpins of it (did I leave anyone out?) only with Iggy, Bogarts and JBJ, and possibly Middlebrooks. 

    Instead of that as of today we're unsure of who the SS and 3B are going to be going into 2014, AND we have a rookie CF who has yet to prove himself offensively.  IMHO that's too many question marks for a defending WS champion.   

    IMHO by the 2016 season we're going to be looking back on this trade and thinking of it as being in the same vein as Bagwell/Anderson.  And the only thing we'll be able to say is, "Well, we won the WS 2013, so it must have been worth it". 

    And I now defer to DGalehouse's post about the blue shirt and $20. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    So, on one hand, the Sox could've had a dynasty with Iggy, Bogaerts, JBJ.

    But, because Iggy is gone, JBJ in now an unproven rookie?

    I don't see how Iggy's absence changes JBJs status.

    I'm sorry, but if the loss of one slick-fielding SS is going to keep a team from going deep inot the playoffs, year after year, then that team wasn't built properly in the first place.

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I still think he signs with the Mets or Yankees. The Yankees could really use him but they now have 4-5 other guys waiting in the wings just in case. The Arod situation getting cleared up helped a lot.

    [/QUOTE]


    You'd think since the Mets only have to give up, what, a 3rd rounder(?) to get a sure fire MLB shortstop that they would do it.  A lot of the other potential suitors would have to surrender a 1st. 

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to S5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Instead of that as of today we're unsure of who the SS and 3B are going to be going into 2014

    [/QUOTE]

    You and I may be unsure of this, but I think Cherington has a much clearer picture of it.

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to S5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jasko2248's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to S5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't get the rationale of saying that the trade was worth it because we won the WS.  That rationale says that since we don't know what would have happened if we hadn't made the trade and we won the WS it MUST have been a good trade. 

    The fact is that the FO blundered into it being a "good trade" because of Iggys error, but for the longer term this trade was a disaster. 

    [/QUOTE]

    S5, please tell me Jose Iglesias is your son, then I "might" be able to understand your passion for the guy.  The trade will be a "disaster" long term?!  I appreciate a guy who can play defense as much as the next fan, but there isn't a GM in baseball who would trade the Red Sox current SS (Xander Boegarts) for 9 Jose Iglesiases.  This Sox Front Office values their prospects like gold, so there might just be some red flags with Iglesias.  If he goes on to have a similar career as Omar Vizquel or Ozzie Smith (obviously unlikely), then I still wouldn't call the trade a "disaster."  The trade was the right move at the time, the Sox won it all, and I don't know of anyone in baseball who has criticized the Sox for making that deal.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Believe it or not, my passion for Iglesias isn't as great as my passion for the Red Sox.  I said back in mid-summer that I'd watch this season go down the tubes before I'd trade any of the Sox top six prospects - and that included Iggy. 

    As an aside here, I believe the team gave up too much to get too little of something they didn't need.  The general consensus was that the team needed bullpen help but instead they gave up a valuable player of the future to get a mediocre starting pitcher with a good pedigree when they could have given up lesser prospects to fill the BP need.

    But I digress...

    For me the issue never was Drew vs. Iggy at SS.  I was and am happy with what Drew gave the team both in the regular season and the post-season.  However, Drew's contract expired at the end of 2013 and Iggy was the natural replacement, with Bogarts and Middy battling it out for 3B in 2014.  The loser of that battle would either go to 1b or the OF...or get traded.  For the remainder of 2013 Iggy was the UIF.

    The issue was never Bogarts vs. Iggy at SS either.  I like Bogarts bat as much as I like Iggy's glove and we could have had both. 

    The real issue for me came to 2014 and beyond.  I saw a real possibility of a dynasty much like the Yankees built with Jeter, Posada and Bernie Williams as the kingpins of it (did I leave anyone out?) only with Iggy, Bogarts and JBJ, and possibly Middlebrooks. 

    Instead of that as of today we're unsure of who the SS and 3B are going to be going into 2014, AND we have a rookie CF who has yet to prove himself offensively.  IMHO that's too many question marks for a defending WS champion.   

    IMHO by the 2016 season we're going to be looking back on this trade and thinking of it as being in the same vein as Bagwell/Anderson.  And the only thing we'll be able to say is, "Well, we won the WS 2013, so it must have been worth it". 

    And I now defer to DGalehouse's post about the blue shirt and $20. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    So, on one hand, the Sox could've had a dynasty with Iggy, Bogaerts, JBJ.

    But, because Iggy is gone, JBJ in now an unproven rookie?

    I don't see how Iggy's absence changes JBJs status.

    I'm sorry, but if the loss of one slick-fielding SS is going to keep a team from going deep inot the playoffs, year after year, then that team wasn't built properly in the first place.

    [/QUOTE]

    Nope, JBJ is what he is regardless of what anyone else anywhere is doing. He's an unproven rookie.

    Being a "strong up the middle" guy I'm not at all comfortable with two of them up the middle.  I'd rather have one unproven rookie up the middle than two.  Which is why at this time I'm all for signing Drew and letting Bogarts and Middy battle it out for 3B.  The same argument can be made for this that was made for letting Iggy go.  We've still got Chicchini and Marrero coming up to fill a left side of the IF spot in a year or two if need be.

    One cannot overstate the importance of defense.  Having a SS who made one critical error may be what kept the Tigers out of the WS. 

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    Frankly, I think Iglesias' glove has been fetishized a bit.  Yes, beautiful (I don't use that term lightly) hands, footwork, coordination.  Nice range (not amazing, just nice).  Good arm.  Not great, good.  I get the desire for a great shortstop.  Its the best, and arguably most crucial, position in baseball.  It is a joy to watch someone who is so deft at it.

    Much of what makes the game interesting, and what we argue endlessly over on this board, is that, despite the metrics and diagnostic tools that have developed around the game, there is still much mystery and and so many angles to the prisms of performance.

    In this respect, I don't see him through the side of the prism that others do.  I see a developing defensive whiz.  But not the second coming of Ozzie Smith.  I get the sense that, with all the hype around the kid, many people made up their mind about his SS-Godliness long before they ever saw him actually play.  From what I have seen, I think he is really good defensively.  But that prowess did not blind me from the fact that stephen Drew played a really nice SS last year.  From my subjective standpoint, I am not sure I have ever seen a smoother, more intuitive doubleplay combo in Sox unis than Drew and Pedey.  And he made some real clutch plays in the post season (and, converesely, young Iglesias made some decidedly uncluth plays).  And FWIW, though I haven't seen him play much SS, Boegarts played a pretty nice 3B, an unfamiliar position for him.  Gotta think the nice reflexes, good hands, and cannon carry over to SS too if that is where the Sox are going.  

    I don't discount the importance of a great shortstop, but in observation, I just think Iglesias has been overvalued by many.

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Frankly, I think Iglesias' glove has been fetishized a bit.  Yes, beautiful (I don't use that term lightly) hands, footwork, coordination.  Nice range (not amazing, just nice).  Good arm.  Not great, good.  I get the desire for a great shortstop.  Its the best, and arguably most crucial, position in baseball.  It is a joy to watch someone who is so deft at it.

    Much of what makes the game interesting, and what we argue endlessly over on this board, is that, despite the metrics and diagnostic tools that have developed around the game, there is still much mystery and and so many angles to the prisms of performance.

    In this respect, I don't see him through the side of the prism that others do.  I see a developing defensive whiz.  But not the second coming of Ozzie Smith.  I get the sense that, with all the hype around the kid, many people made up their mind about his SS-Godliness long before they ever saw him actually play.  From what I have seen, I think he is really good defensively.  But that prowess did not blind me from the fact that stephen Drew played a really nice SS last year.  From my subjective standpoint, I am not sure I have ever seen a smoother, more intuitive doubleplay combo in Sox unis than Drew and Pedey.  And he made some real clutch plays in the post season (and, converesely, young Iglesias made some decidedly uncluth plays).  And FWIW, though I haven't seen him play much SS, Boegarts played a pretty nice 3B, an unfamiliar position for him.  Gotta think the nice reflexes, good hands, and cannon carry over to SS too if that is where the Sox are going.  

    I don't discount the importance of a great shortstop, but in observation, I just think Iglesias has been overvalued by many.

     

    [/QUOTE]
    Ya know... in spite of being one of Iggy's biggest supporters, I agree with this post.  He may not be the next coming of Ozzie Smith - but on the other hand he might be too. Sooner or later someone will be and why not him?  He has all the tools.  But even being mentioned in the same breath as Ozzie says a lot about him.

    If he were currently on the Red Sox he'd be the best defensive SS on the team, and I'd want to be darn sure he's NOT the next Ozzie before I'd have traded him.  Given the fact that the FO knew they were going to need a SS next year I see that trade as being shortsighted.

     

     

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Frankly, I think Iglesias' glove has been fetishized a bit.  Yes, beautiful (I don't use that term lightly) hands, footwork, coordination.  Nice range (not amazing, just nice).  Good arm.  Not great, good.  I get the desire for a great shortstop.  Its the best, and arguably most crucial, position in baseball.  It is a joy to watch someone who is so deft at it.

    Much of what makes the game interesting, and what we argue endlessly over on this board, is that, despite the metrics and diagnostic tools that have developed around the game, there is still much mystery and and so many angles to the prisms of performance.

    In this respect, I don't see him through the side of the prism that others do.  I see a developing defensive whiz.  But not the second coming of Ozzie Smith.  I get the sense that, with all the hype around the kid, many people made up their mind about his SS-Godliness long before they ever saw him actually play.  From what I have seen, I think he is really good defensively.  But that prowess did not blind me from the fact that stephen Drew played a really nice SS last year.  From my subjective standpoint, I am not sure I have ever seen a smoother, more intuitive doubleplay combo in Sox unis than Drew and Pedey.  And he made some real clutch plays in the post season (and, converesely, young Iglesias made some decidedly uncluth plays).  And FWIW, though I haven't seen him play much SS, Boegarts played a pretty nice 3B, an unfamiliar position for him.  Gotta think the nice reflexes, good hands, and cannon carry over to SS too if that is where the Sox are going.  

    I don't discount the importance of a great shortstop, but in observation, I just think Iglesias has been overvalued by many.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I trusted the scouts' observations before I ever saw him play.

    Once I saw him play, I realized they were not wrong.

    Iggy is a fantastic defensive SS... maybe not Ozzie... yet.

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Frankly, I think Iglesias' glove has been fetishized a bit.  Yes, beautiful (I don't use that term lightly) hands, footwork, coordination.  Nice range (not amazing, just nice).  Good arm.  Not great, good.  I get the desire for a great shortstop.  Its the best, and arguably most crucial, position in baseball.  It is a joy to watch someone who is so deft at it.

    Much of what makes the game interesting, and what we argue endlessly over on this board, is that, despite the metrics and diagnostic tools that have developed around the game, there is still much mystery and and so many angles to the prisms of performance.

    In this respect, I don't see him through the side of the prism that others do.  I see a developing defensive whiz.  But not the second coming of Ozzie Smith.  I get the sense that, with all the hype around the kid, many people made up their mind about his SS-Godliness long before they ever saw him actually play.  From what I have seen, I think he is really good defensively.  But that prowess did not blind me from the fact that stephen Drew played a really nice SS last year.  From my subjective standpoint, I am not sure I have ever seen a smoother, more intuitive doubleplay combo in Sox unis than Drew and Pedey.  And he made some real clutch plays in the post season (and, converesely, young Iglesias made some decidedly uncluth plays).  And FWIW, though I haven't seen him play much SS, Boegarts played a pretty nice 3B, an unfamiliar position for him.  Gotta think the nice reflexes, good hands, and cannon carry over to SS too if that is where the Sox are going.  

    I don't discount the importance of a great shortstop, but in observation, I just think Iglesias has been overvalued by many.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I trusted the scouts' observations before I ever saw him play.

    Once I saw him play, I realized they were not wrong.

    Iggy is a fantastic defensive SS... maybe not Ozzie... yet.

    [/QUOTE]

    Fair enough.  When scouts' observations are so effusive and across-the-board-rave, I can take heed (with the skeptical-caveat that even the most astute scouts cannot have total accuracy in predicting success at the mlb level).  But taking at face value the gospel of the scouts, this is actually what made me ok with parting ways with Ozzie Smithglesias: The scouts raved about his glove.  But the scouts raved waaaaaay more about the potential for star impact at the next level of one Xander Boegarts.

     

Share