Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hetchinspete's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Funny thing is, softy called Butler a bum last winter.

    Now a bum for a bum is "delusional".

    Clown Strong!

    [/QUOTE]

    Moon, 

    Dempster may not be a great pitcher but he does not deserve to be called a bum any more than you or any other reasonable poster on BDC. Pardon me but shame on you !!

    Hetch

    [/QUOTE]

    I did not call Dempster a bum, softy did. He also called Butler a bum last winter. I was double quoting softy.

     

    (Note:  I do not think Dempster is a bum. I think he has value, but to me that value would be greater to another team as a 5th starter than to us as a 6th starter, so I do think we should try to trade him.)

    [/QUOTE]

    Apologies Moon but you stated a "bum for a bum" which sounds like it's coming from you, not the Great Soft One. 

    Cheers, 

    Hetch

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In his column that appeared this Sunday under the headline of "The curious and uninformed coveting of Mark Trumbo needs to stop," the Globe's Chad Finn wrote: "I mean, I heard one radio host say this week that the Red Sox should offer the Angels Middlebrooks and lefthander Felix Doubront for Trumbo. Said it seriously, too ..."

    Finn failed to mention that his colleague, the Globe's Nick Cafardo, had suggested the possibility of that precise trade in Cafardo's column the previous Sunday.

    http://www.boston.com/sports/touching_all_the_bases/2013/11/sunday_mail_mark_trumbo.html

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/cafardo-on-trumbo-ethier-kemp-arroyo-red-sox.html



    Middlebrooks is effectively Trumbo (or at least very similiar).  However he plays a more premium defensive position and has more years of team control.  The ideal that we should give him up PLUS a starting pitcher makes me cringe.  Fortunately I'am fairly confident that the Sox would never even consider that in a thousand years. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Your knowledge on the minor league system is second to none around here Hugh.....but I really fail to see what evedence that WMB is the same as Trumbo.  If anything we HOPE that WMB can turn out like Trumbo but the jury is still out there....by quite a bit.  Why not trade him for the 'real thing' and get rid of a spare part in Dempster?

    [/QUOTE]

    King, 

    Over the two combined seasons WMB has had his stats are remarkably close if not almost exactly  the same as Trumbo's 162 game yearly average. I assume WMB still has an upside to improve with good coaching while Trumbo is Trumbo and will stay the same. Why trade an apple for an identical apple. It makes little sense. If you're hard up to get rid of Dempster I'm sure someone may take him for a draft pick.     

    Hetch

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In his column that appeared this Sunday under the headline of "The curious and uninformed coveting of Mark Trumbo needs to stop," the Globe's Chad Finn wrote: "I mean, I heard one radio host say this week that the Red Sox should offer the Angels Middlebrooks and lefthander Felix Doubront for Trumbo. Said it seriously, too ..."

    Finn failed to mention that his colleague, the Globe's Nick Cafardo, had suggested the possibility of that precise trade in Cafardo's column the previous Sunday.

    http://www.boston.com/sports/touching_all_the_bases/2013/11/sunday_mail_mark_trumbo.html

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/cafardo-on-trumbo-ethier-kemp-arroyo-red-sox.html

    [/QUOTE]

    Middlebrooks is effectively Trumbo (or at least very similiar).  However he plays a more premium defensive position and has more years of team control.  The ideal that we should give him up PLUS a starting pitcher makes me cringe.  Fortunately I'am fairly confident that the Sox would never even consider that in a thousand years. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Your knowledge on the minor league system is second to none around here Hugh.....but I really fail to see what evedence that WMB is the same as Trumbo.  If anything we HOPE that WMB can turn out like Trumbo but the jury is still out there....by quite a bit.  Why not trade him for the 'real thing' and get rid of a spare part in Dempster?

    [/QUOTE]

    WMB's first 162 game numbers are almost completely identical to Trumbo's career 162 game average, if anything you could make the argument that WMB will be a better player than Trumbo with any growth.  Throw in the fact that 3Bman are more valuable than 1Bman and he will be cheaper with more years of team control and I'm really not liking the idea of trading for Trumbo.   

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    As much as I don't like the idea, a trade of Middlebrooks and Doubront fot Trumbo and Conger (or Iannetta) does seem somewhat realistic...

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    In response to Hetchinspete's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In his column that appeared this Sunday under the headline of "The curious and uninformed coveting of Mark Trumbo needs to stop," the Globe's Chad Finn wrote: "I mean, I heard one radio host say this week that the Red Sox should offer the Angels Middlebrooks and lefthander Felix Doubront for Trumbo. Said it seriously, too ..."

    Finn failed to mention that his colleague, the Globe's Nick Cafardo, had suggested the possibility of that precise trade in Cafardo's column the previous Sunday.

    http://www.boston.com/sports/touching_all_the_bases/2013/11/sunday_mail_mark_trumbo.html

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/cafardo-on-trumbo-ethier-kemp-arroyo-red-sox.html

    [/QUOTE]

    Middlebrooks is effectively Trumbo (or at least very similiar).  However he plays a more premium defensive position and has more years of team control.  The ideal that we should give him up PLUS a starting pitcher makes me cringe.  Fortunately I'am fairly confident that the Sox would never even consider that in a thousand years. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Your knowledge on the minor league system is second to none around here Hugh.....but I really fail to see what evedence that WMB is the same as Trumbo.  If anything we HOPE that WMB can turn out like Trumbo but the jury is still out there....by quite a bit.  Why not trade him for the 'real thing' and get rid of a spare part in Dempster?

    [/QUOTE]

    King, 

    Over the two combined seasons WMB has had his stats are remarkably close if not almost exactly  the same as Trumbo's 162 yearly average. I assume WMB  still has an upside to improve with good coaching while Trumbo is Trumbo and will stay the same. Why trade an apple for an identical apple. It makes little sense. If you're hard up to get rid of Dempster I'm sure someone may take him for a draft pick.     

    Hetch

    [/QUOTE]


    I understand where you're coming from and trust me....I WOULD LOVE for WMB to emerge as our everyday third baseman as I am actually a fan of his and have been since I saw him play for the Sea Dogs.  I just see too many inconsistencies in his game, both at the plate and in the field.  I am looking at the bigger picture I guess and would rather the Sox move Boggy to 3B, re-sign Drew and either re-sign Napps or trade for Trumbo.  With the Sox maybe sticking with Boggy at SS, maybe re-signing Salty and losing Ells....that leaves the middle pretty weak defensively.

    As for Dempster....I'm not hard to be rid of him.  I think we are strong starting pitching wise and trading Dempster or Peavy in a bigger trade for something big in return is not a bad thing.

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In his column that appeared this Sunday under the headline of "The curious and uninformed coveting of Mark Trumbo needs to stop," the Globe's Chad Finn wrote: "I mean, I heard one radio host say this week that the Red Sox should offer the Angels Middlebrooks and lefthander Felix Doubront for Trumbo. Said it seriously, too ..."

    Finn failed to mention that his colleague, the Globe's Nick Cafardo, had suggested the possibility of that precise trade in Cafardo's column the previous Sunday.

    http://www.boston.com/sports/touching_all_the_bases/2013/11/sunday_mail_mark_trumbo.html

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/cafardo-on-trumbo-ethier-kemp-arroyo-red-sox.html

    [/QUOTE]

    Middlebrooks is effectively Trumbo (or at least very similiar).  However he plays a more premium defensive position and has more years of team control.  The ideal that we should give him up PLUS a starting pitcher makes me cringe.  Fortunately I'am fairly confident that the Sox would never even consider that in a thousand years. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Your knowledge on the minor league system is second to none around here Hugh.....but I really fail to see what evedence that WMB is the same as Trumbo.  If anything we HOPE that WMB can turn out like Trumbo but the jury is still out there....by quite a bit.  Why not trade him for the 'real thing' and get rid of a spare part in Dempster?

    [/QUOTE]

    WMB's first 162 game numbers are almost completely identical to Trumbo's career 162 game average, if anything you could make the argument that WMB will be a better player than Trumbo with any growth.  Throw in the fact that 3Bman are more valuable than 1Bman and he will be cheaper with more years of team control and I'm really not liking the idea of trading for Trumbo.   

    [/QUOTE]


    I appreciate where you're coming from but can you really go by 162 game averages?  WMB has not been able to prove anything over the long haul of one season yet.  He was VERY up and down both seasons and thus far has not proven that he can keep it up for the whole season.  To me that is very telling.  Trumbo has been healthy and has stayed solid and consistent for multiple seasons in a row....not parts of seasons.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    Mark Trumbo is a poor man's Mark Reynolds because Trumbo walks so infrequently. Here are their career stats:

    MR 3947 PA, .233/.329/.464/.793

    MT 1853 PA, .250/.299/.469/.768

    Will Middlebrooks may be a poor man's Mark Reynolds as well for the same reason.

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In his column that appeared this Sunday under the headline of "The curious and uninformed coveting of Mark Trumbo needs to stop," the Globe's Chad Finn wrote: "I mean, I heard one radio host say this week that the Red Sox should offer the Angels Middlebrooks and lefthander Felix Doubront for Trumbo. Said it seriously, too ..."

    Finn failed to mention that his colleague, the Globe's Nick Cafardo, had suggested the possibility of that precise trade in Cafardo's column the previous Sunday.

    http://www.boston.com/sports/touching_all_the_bases/2013/11/sunday_mail_mark_trumbo.html

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/cafardo-on-trumbo-ethier-kemp-arroyo-red-sox.html

    [/QUOTE]

    Middlebrooks is effectively Trumbo (or at least very similiar).  However he plays a more premium defensive position and has more years of team control.  The ideal that we should give him up PLUS a starting pitcher makes me cringe.  Fortunately I'am fairly confident that the Sox would never even consider that in a thousand years. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Your knowledge on the minor league system is second to none around here Hugh.....but I really fail to see what evedence that WMB is the same as Trumbo.  If anything we HOPE that WMB can turn out like Trumbo but the jury is still out there....by quite a bit.  Why not trade him for the 'real thing' and get rid of a spare part in Dempster?

    [/QUOTE]

    WMB's first 162 game numbers are almost completely identical to Trumbo's career 162 game average, if anything you could make the argument that WMB will be a better player than Trumbo with any growth.  Throw in the fact that 3Bman are more valuable than 1Bman and he will be cheaper with more years of team control and I'm really not liking the idea of trading for Trumbo.   

    [/QUOTE]


    I appreciate where you're coming from but can you really go by 162 game averages?  WMB has not been able to prove anything over the long haul of one season yet.  He was VERY up and down both seasons and thus far has not proven that he can keep it up for the whole season.  To me that is very telling.  Trumbo has been healthy and has stayed solid and consistent for multiple seasons in a row....not parts of seasons.

    [/QUOTE]

    yes you can go by 162 game averages because that is a pretty nice sample size, as you are weighing out their career in it's entirety.  Trumbo hasn't deviated much from those averages as well so that is pretty much what he is going to give you.  So unless WMB's first 162 games in the big leagues are his absolute best and it's all down hill from here he will very likely be just as good as Trumbo and perhaps even better as he is more athletic.

    and he's cheaper.  Effectively I see them as the same player, so why trade for the same guy who will cost more when that money could be used to reinvest elsewhere?

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In his column that appeared this Sunday under the headline of "The curious and uninformed coveting of Mark Trumbo needs to stop," the Globe's Chad Finn wrote: "I mean, I heard one radio host say this week that the Red Sox should offer the Angels Middlebrooks and lefthander Felix Doubront for Trumbo. Said it seriously, too ..."

    Finn failed to mention that his colleague, the Globe's Nick Cafardo, had suggested the possibility of that precise trade in Cafardo's column the previous Sunday.

    http://www.boston.com/sports/touching_all_the_bases/2013/11/sunday_mail_mark_trumbo.html

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/cafardo-on-trumbo-ethier-kemp-arroyo-red-sox.html

    [/QUOTE]

    Middlebrooks is effectively Trumbo (or at least very similiar).  However he plays a more premium defensive position and has more years of team control.  The ideal that we should give him up PLUS a starting pitcher makes me cringe.  Fortunately I'am fairly confident that the Sox would never even consider that in a thousand years. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Your knowledge on the minor league system is second to none around here Hugh.....but I really fail to see what evedence that WMB is the same as Trumbo.  If anything we HOPE that WMB can turn out like Trumbo but the jury is still out there....by quite a bit.  Why not trade him for the 'real thing' and get rid of a spare part in Dempster?

    [/QUOTE]

    WMB's first 162 game numbers are almost completely identical to Trumbo's career 162 game average, if anything you could make the argument that WMB will be a better player than Trumbo with any growth.  Throw in the fact that 3Bman are more valuable than 1Bman and he will be cheaper with more years of team control and I'm really not liking the idea of trading for Trumbo.   

    [/QUOTE]


    I appreciate where you're coming from but can you really go by 162 game averages?  WMB has not been able to prove anything over the long haul of one season yet.  He was VERY up and down both seasons and thus far has not proven that he can keep it up for the whole season.  To me that is very telling.  Trumbo has been healthy and has stayed solid and consistent for multiple seasons in a row....not parts of seasons.

    [/QUOTE]


    Would not do this trade. Middlebrooks is a younger Trumbo, Trumbo actually was a 3rd baseman in minors also. Middlebrooks under team control for 2 more yrs than Trumbo. Lets not forget Middlebrooks coming off wrist injury, usually takes a full yr before a hitter fully comes back. Anyone remember when some thought Papi was finished following his wrist injury. Lets find out if Middlebrooks can get back to that player he was in 2012 before breaking wrist before we talk about shipping him out. Trumbo has proven what type of hitter he is, Middlebrooks might have a higher ceiling.

     

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    Trumbo has terrible Clutch stats, and has a career .175 avg. in Fenway. 18 games.

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In his column that appeared this Sunday under the headline of "The curious and uninformed coveting of Mark Trumbo needs to stop," the Globe's Chad Finn wrote: "I mean, I heard one radio host say this week that the Red Sox should offer the Angels Middlebrooks and lefthander Felix Doubront for Trumbo. Said it seriously, too ..."

    Finn failed to mention that his colleague, the Globe's Nick Cafardo, had suggested the possibility of that precise trade in Cafardo's column the previous Sunday.

    http://www.boston.com/sports/touching_all_the_bases/2013/11/sunday_mail_mark_trumbo.html

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/cafardo-on-trumbo-ethier-kemp-arroyo-red-sox.html

    [/QUOTE]

    Middlebrooks is effectively Trumbo (or at least very similiar).  However he plays a more premium defensive position and has more years of team control.  The ideal that we should give him up PLUS a starting pitcher makes me cringe.  Fortunately I'am fairly confident that the Sox would never even consider that in a thousand years. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Your knowledge on the minor league system is second to none around here Hugh.....but I really fail to see what evedence that WMB is the same as Trumbo.  If anything we HOPE that WMB can turn out like Trumbo but the jury is still out there....by quite a bit.  Why not trade him for the 'real thing' and get rid of a spare part in Dempster?

    [/QUOTE]

    WMB's first 162 game numbers are almost completely identical to Trumbo's career 162 game average, if anything you could make the argument that WMB will be a better player than Trumbo with any growth.  Throw in the fact that 3Bman are more valuable than 1Bman and he will be cheaper with more years of team control and I'm really not liking the idea of trading for Trumbo.   

    [/QUOTE]


    I appreciate where you're coming from but can you really go by 162 game averages?  WMB has not been able to prove anything over the long haul of one season yet.  He was VERY up and down both seasons and thus far has not proven that he can keep it up for the whole season.  To me that is very telling.  Trumbo has been healthy and has stayed solid and consistent for multiple seasons in a row....not parts of seasons.

    [/QUOTE]

    yes you can go by 162 game averages because that is a pretty nice sample size, as you are weighing out their career in it's entirety.  Trumbo hasn't deviated much from those averages as well so that is pretty much what he is going to give you.  So unless WMB's first 162 games in the big leagues are his absolute best and it's all down hill from here he will very likely be just as good as Trumbo and perhaps even better as he is more athletic.

    and he's cheaper.  Effectively I see them as the same player, so why trade for the same guy who will cost more when that money could be used to reinvest elsewhere?

    [/QUOTE]


    I hear where you're coming from Hugh.  Like I said earlier thugh...I really would like to see Boggy at 3b Drew at SS and Napps or Trumbo at 1B.  To me it keeps the defense strong and reliable up the middle which as we saw this post season...is VERY important.....this includes the Catcher position and CF.  Many say that WMB can make the switch to 1B but I'm not sure now is the time to experimant with this.

    I would not be sad AT ALL so I'm with you on that one.  I just get nervous with our up the middle defense.

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In his column that appeared this Sunday under the headline of "The curious and uninformed coveting of Mark Trumbo needs to stop," the Globe's Chad Finn wrote: "I mean, I heard one radio host say this week that the Red Sox should offer the Angels Middlebrooks and lefthander Felix Doubront for Trumbo. Said it seriously, too ..."

    Finn failed to mention that his colleague, the Globe's Nick Cafardo, had suggested the possibility of that precise trade in Cafardo's column the previous Sunday.

    http://www.boston.com/sports/touching_all_the_bases/2013/11/sunday_mail_mark_trumbo.html

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/cafardo-on-trumbo-ethier-kemp-arroyo-red-sox.html

    [/QUOTE]

    Middlebrooks is effectively Trumbo (or at least very similiar).  However he plays a more premium defensive position and has more years of team control.  The ideal that we should give him up PLUS a starting pitcher makes me cringe.  Fortunately I'am fairly confident that the Sox would never even consider that in a thousand years. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Your knowledge on the minor league system is second to none around here Hugh.....but I really fail to see what evedence that WMB is the same as Trumbo.  If anything we HOPE that WMB can turn out like Trumbo but the jury is still out there....by quite a bit.  Why not trade him for the 'real thing' and get rid of a spare part in Dempster?

    [/QUOTE]

    WMB's first 162 game numbers are almost completely identical to Trumbo's career 162 game average, if anything you could make the argument that WMB will be a better player than Trumbo with any growth.  Throw in the fact that 3Bman are more valuable than 1Bman and he will be cheaper with more years of team control and I'm really not liking the idea of trading for Trumbo.   

    [/QUOTE]


    I appreciate where you're coming from but can you really go by 162 game averages?  WMB has not been able to prove anything over the long haul of one season yet.  He was VERY up and down both seasons and thus far has not proven that he can keep it up for the whole season.  To me that is very telling.  Trumbo has been healthy and has stayed solid and consistent for multiple seasons in a row....not parts of seasons.

    [/QUOTE]

    yes you can go by 162 game averages because that is a pretty nice sample size, as you are weighing out their career in it's entirety.  Trumbo hasn't deviated much from those averages as well so that is pretty much what he is going to give you.  So unless WMB's first 162 games in the big leagues are his absolute best and it's all down hill from here he will very likely be just as good as Trumbo and perhaps even better as he is more athletic.

    and he's cheaper.  Effectively I see them as the same player, so why trade for the same guy who will cost more when that money could be used to reinvest elsewhere?

    [/QUOTE]


    I hear where you're coming from Hugh.  Like I said earlier thugh...I really would like to see Boggy at 3b Drew at SS and Napps or Trumbo at 1B.  To me it keeps the defense strong and reliable up the middle which as we saw this post season...is VERY important.....this includes the Catcher position and CF.  Many say that WMB can make the switch to 1B but I'm not sure now is the time to experimant with this.

    I would not be sad AT ALL so I'm with you on that one.  I just get nervous with our up the middle defense.

    [/QUOTE]

    Why? we have a gold glover at 2nd base and Xander Bogaerts has definitely proved that he can handle SS....and I think he will get better there as well.  People only assume he will move to 3B but for all we know he could round up from an average defender to a plus defender and man the position for at least 10 years.  Theres a lot of youth and athleticism in a WMB and Bogaerts left side, and with Pedey at second I'd be willing to bet on that infield.  I like Drew, but I'd bet on Bogaerts over Drew for the next 5-6 years.  Bogaerts has a good solid 10 years of youth on him Drews better days could be behind him.  

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    Also for all this talk about Bogaerts moving over to third people forget that Bogaerts played much better at SS than he did at 3B this year.  He had good range and was solid at SS, he looked a little off and slower at 3B. 

    I know it's SSS but his defensive metrics seem to suggest just that. 

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In his column that appeared this Sunday under the headline of "The curious and uninformed coveting of Mark Trumbo needs to stop," the Globe's Chad Finn wrote: "I mean, I heard one radio host say this week that the Red Sox should offer the Angels Middlebrooks and lefthander Felix Doubront for Trumbo. Said it seriously, too ..."

    Finn failed to mention that his colleague, the Globe's Nick Cafardo, had suggested the possibility of that precise trade in Cafardo's column the previous Sunday.

    http://www.boston.com/sports/touching_all_the_bases/2013/11/sunday_mail_mark_trumbo.html

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/cafardo-on-trumbo-ethier-kemp-arroyo-red-sox.html

    [/QUOTE]

    Middlebrooks is effectively Trumbo (or at least very similiar).  However he plays a more premium defensive position and has more years of team control.  The ideal that we should give him up PLUS a starting pitcher makes me cringe.  Fortunately I'am fairly confident that the Sox would never even consider that in a thousand years. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Your knowledge on the minor league system is second to none around here Hugh.....but I really fail to see what evedence that WMB is the same as Trumbo.  If anything we HOPE that WMB can turn out like Trumbo but the jury is still out there....by quite a bit.  Why not trade him for the 'real thing' and get rid of a spare part in Dempster?

    [/QUOTE]

    WMB's first 162 game numbers are almost completely identical to Trumbo's career 162 game average, if anything you could make the argument that WMB will be a better player than Trumbo with any growth.  Throw in the fact that 3Bman are more valuable than 1Bman and he will be cheaper with more years of team control and I'm really not liking the idea of trading for Trumbo.   

    [/QUOTE]


    I appreciate where you're coming from but can you really go by 162 game averages?  WMB has not been able to prove anything over the long haul of one season yet.  He was VERY up and down both seasons and thus far has not proven that he can keep it up for the whole season.  To me that is very telling.  Trumbo has been healthy and has stayed solid and consistent for multiple seasons in a row....not parts of seasons.

    [/QUOTE]

    yes you can go by 162 game averages because that is a pretty nice sample size, as you are weighing out their career in it's entirety.  Trumbo hasn't deviated much from those averages as well so that is pretty much what he is going to give you.  So unless WMB's first 162 games in the big leagues are his absolute best and it's all down hill from here he will very likely be just as good as Trumbo and perhaps even better as he is more athletic.

    and he's cheaper.  Effectively I see them as the same player, so why trade for the same guy who will cost more when that money could be used to reinvest elsewhere?

    [/QUOTE]


    I hear where you're coming from Hugh.  Like I said earlier thugh...I really would like to see Boggy at 3b Drew at SS and Napps or Trumbo at 1B.  To me it keeps the defense strong and reliable up the middle which as we saw this post season...is VERY important.....this includes the Catcher position and CF.  Many say that WMB can make the switch to 1B but I'm not sure now is the time to experimant with this.

    I would not be sad AT ALL so I'm with you on that one.  I just get nervous with our up the middle defense.

    [/QUOTE]

    Why? we have a gold glover at 2nd base and Xander Bogaerts has definitely proved that he can handle SS....and I think he will get better there as well.  People only assume he will move to 3B but for all we know he could round up from an average defender to a plus defender and man the position for at least 10 years.  Theres a lot of youth and athleticism in a WMB and Bogaerts left side, and with Pedey at second I'd be willing to bet on that infield.  I like Drew, but I'd bet on Bogaerts over Drew for the next 5-6 years.  Bogaerts has a good solid 10 years of youth on him Drews better days could be behind him.  

    [/QUOTE]


    Ehhhhh......I don't know.  A lot of scouts have said that Boggy will eventually 'outgrow' the SS position and from what we all saw this season....above average play at that position can be KEY.  A lot of plays that Drew made this post season I really do not think Boggy could make.

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    The smart move is grabbing the Draft Pick. Thanks Drew for your contributions, but its time for Bogaerts.
    I hope Ben keeps this approach, sign Free Agents that dont have QO, but have the potential to turn their career around in Fenway. Let them walk, grab Picks.

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In his column that appeared this Sunday under the headline of "The curious and uninformed coveting of Mark Trumbo needs to stop," the Globe's Chad Finn wrote: "I mean, I heard one radio host say this week that the Red Sox should offer the Angels Middlebrooks and lefthander Felix Doubront for Trumbo. Said it seriously, too ..."

    Finn failed to mention that his colleague, the Globe's Nick Cafardo, had suggested the possibility of that precise trade in Cafardo's column the previous Sunday.

    http://www.boston.com/sports/touching_all_the_bases/2013/11/sunday_mail_mark_trumbo.html

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/cafardo-on-trumbo-ethier-kemp-arroyo-red-sox.html

    [/QUOTE]

    Middlebrooks is effectively Trumbo (or at least very similiar).  However he plays a more premium defensive position and has more years of team control.  The ideal that we should give him up PLUS a starting pitcher makes me cringe.  Fortunately I'am fairly confident that the Sox would never even consider that in a thousand years. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Your knowledge on the minor league system is second to none around here Hugh.....but I really fail to see what evedence that WMB is the same as Trumbo.  If anything we HOPE that WMB can turn out like Trumbo but the jury is still out there....by quite a bit.  Why not trade him for the 'real thing' and get rid of a spare part in Dempster?

    [/QUOTE]

    WMB's first 162 game numbers are almost completely identical to Trumbo's career 162 game average, if anything you could make the argument that WMB will be a better player than Trumbo with any growth.  Throw in the fact that 3Bman are more valuable than 1Bman and he will be cheaper with more years of team control and I'm really not liking the idea of trading for Trumbo.   

    [/QUOTE]


    I appreciate where you're coming from but can you really go by 162 game averages?  WMB has not been able to prove anything over the long haul of one season yet.  He was VERY up and down both seasons and thus far has not proven that he can keep it up for the whole season.  To me that is very telling.  Trumbo has been healthy and has stayed solid and consistent for multiple seasons in a row....not parts of seasons.

    [/QUOTE]

    yes you can go by 162 game averages because that is a pretty nice sample size, as you are weighing out their career in it's entirety.  Trumbo hasn't deviated much from those averages as well so that is pretty much what he is going to give you.  So unless WMB's first 162 games in the big leagues are his absolute best and it's all down hill from here he will very likely be just as good as Trumbo and perhaps even better as he is more athletic.

    and he's cheaper.  Effectively I see them as the same player, so why trade for the same guy who will cost more when that money could be used to reinvest elsewhere?

    [/QUOTE]


    I hear where you're coming from Hugh.  Like I said earlier thugh...I really would like to see Boggy at 3b Drew at SS and Napps or Trumbo at 1B.  To me it keeps the defense strong and reliable up the middle which as we saw this post season...is VERY important.....this includes the Catcher position and CF.  Many say that WMB can make the switch to 1B but I'm not sure now is the time to experimant with this.

    I would not be sad AT ALL so I'm with you on that one.  I just get nervous with our up the middle defense.

    [/QUOTE]

    Why? we have a gold glover at 2nd base and Xander Bogaerts has definitely proved that he can handle SS....and I think he will get better there as well.  People only assume he will move to 3B but for all we know he could round up from an average defender to a plus defender and man the position for at least 10 years.  Theres a lot of youth and athleticism in a WMB and Bogaerts left side, and with Pedey at second I'd be willing to bet on that infield.  I like Drew, but I'd bet on Bogaerts over Drew for the next 5-6 years.  Bogaerts has a good solid 10 years of youth on him Drews better days could be behind him.  

    [/QUOTE]


    Ehhhhh......I don't know.  A lot of scouts have said that Boggy will eventually 'outgrow' the SS position and from what we all saw this season....above average play at that position can be KEY.  A lot of plays that Drew made this post season I really do not think Boggy could make.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes but scouts are just assuming he will outgrow the position because they assume he will lose some atheticism as he grows.  I don't think he will grow that much more, he is young and looks like he will fill out a little bit but he's already a big boy.  Scouts assume he will lose athleticism as he grows but there are plenty of large and above average SS out there and Bogaerts very well could be himself.  I think the "drew made plays Bogaerts wouldn't" is a little unfair, because if we have a player preference it's too easy to assume that without any way of ever really knowing.

    But yes I'll concede that "right now" Drew is a better defender, but Bogaerts is an elite bat and an average defender.  If a guy can give you average defense and elite offense, you don't move them.

    Also remember this, Drew is entering the age where he can lose a step any year now.  Drew 30-35 won't be 25-30 Drew.  Meanwhile Bogaerts will play all of next year at his age 21 season.  Often players are rushed to the majors because either their bat or their glove is ready but not the other (see Jose Iglesias).  I think Bogaerts has almost been the anti Iglesias.  Elite Offense that can play in the big leagues but a glove that is still developing.  I think he is starting to round into a plus defender and while I don't think he will win any gold gloves I think he will play above average defense at SS for at least some time.  With his bat....you don't move Bogaerts if he can give you average defense.

    We can have an entire left side of the infield for less than 1 million dollars in Bogaerts and WMB and I THINK it will be a very good and above average one too.

    I don't think about planning on moving Bogaerts until he actually outplays the position because he is much more valuable as a SS. 

     

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to HailToTheKing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In his column that appeared this Sunday under the headline of "The curious and uninformed coveting of Mark Trumbo needs to stop," the Globe's Chad Finn wrote: "I mean, I heard one radio host say this week that the Red Sox should offer the Angels Middlebrooks and lefthander Felix Doubront for Trumbo. Said it seriously, too ..."

    Finn failed to mention that his colleague, the Globe's Nick Cafardo, had suggested the possibility of that precise trade in Cafardo's column the previous Sunday.

    http://www.boston.com/sports/touching_all_the_bases/2013/11/sunday_mail_mark_trumbo.html

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/cafardo-on-trumbo-ethier-kemp-arroyo-red-sox.html

    [/QUOTE]

    Middlebrooks is effectively Trumbo (or at least very similiar).  However he plays a more premium defensive position and has more years of team control.  The ideal that we should give him up PLUS a starting pitcher makes me cringe.  Fortunately I'am fairly confident that the Sox would never even consider that in a thousand years. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Your knowledge on the minor league system is second to none around here Hugh.....but I really fail to see what evedence that WMB is the same as Trumbo.  If anything we HOPE that WMB can turn out like Trumbo but the jury is still out there....by quite a bit.  Why not trade him for the 'real thing' and get rid of a spare part in Dempster?

    [/QUOTE]

    WMB's first 162 game numbers are almost completely identical to Trumbo's career 162 game average, if anything you could make the argument that WMB will be a better player than Trumbo with any growth.  Throw in the fact that 3Bman are more valuable than 1Bman and he will be cheaper with more years of team control and I'm really not liking the idea of trading for Trumbo.   

    [/QUOTE]


    I appreciate where you're coming from but can you really go by 162 game averages?  WMB has not been able to prove anything over the long haul of one season yet.  He was VERY up and down both seasons and thus far has not proven that he can keep it up for the whole season.  To me that is very telling.  Trumbo has been healthy and has stayed solid and consistent for multiple seasons in a row....not parts of seasons.

    [/QUOTE]

    yes you can go by 162 game averages because that is a pretty nice sample size, as you are weighing out their career in it's entirety.  Trumbo hasn't deviated much from those averages as well so that is pretty much what he is going to give you.  So unless WMB's first 162 games in the big leagues are his absolute best and it's all down hill from here he will very likely be just as good as Trumbo and perhaps even better as he is more athletic.

    and he's cheaper.  Effectively I see them as the same player, so why trade for the same guy who will cost more when that money could be used to reinvest elsewhere?

    [/QUOTE]


    I hear where you're coming from Hugh.  Like I said earlier thugh...I really would like to see Boggy at 3b Drew at SS and Napps or Trumbo at 1B.  To me it keeps the defense strong and reliable up the middle which as we saw this post season...is VERY important.....this includes the Catcher position and CF.  Many say that WMB can make the switch to 1B but I'm not sure now is the time to experimant with this.

    I would not be sad AT ALL so I'm with you on that one.  I just get nervous with our up the middle defense.

    [/QUOTE]

    Why? we have a gold glover at 2nd base and Xander Bogaerts has definitely proved that he can handle SS....and I think he will get better there as well.  People only assume he will move to 3B but for all we know he could round up from an average defender to a plus defender and man the position for at least 10 years.  Theres a lot of youth and athleticism in a WMB and Bogaerts left side, and with Pedey at second I'd be willing to bet on that infield.  I like Drew, but I'd bet on Bogaerts over Drew for the next 5-6 years.  Bogaerts has a good solid 10 years of youth on him Drews better days could be behind him.  

    [/QUOTE]


    Ehhhhh......I don't know.  A lot of scouts have said that Boggy will eventually 'outgrow' the SS position and from what we all saw this season....above average play at that position can be KEY.  A lot of plays that Drew made this post season I really do not think Boggy could make.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes but scouts are just assuming he will outgrow the position because they assume he will lose some atheticism as he grows.  I don't think he will grow that much more, he is young and looks like he will fill out a little bit but he's already a big boy.  Scouts assume he will lose athleticism as he grows but there are plenty of large and above average SS out there and Bogaerts very well could be himself.  I think the "drew made plays Bogaerts wouldn't" is a little unfair, because if we have a player preference it's too easy to assume that without any way of ever really knowing.

    But yes I'll concede that "right now" Drew is a better defender, but Bogaerts is an elite bat and an average defender.  If a guy can give you average defense and elite offense, you don't move them.

    Also remember this, Drew is entering the age where he can lose a step any year now.  Drew 30-35 won't be 25-30 Drew.  Meanwhile Bogaerts will play all of next year at his age 21 season.  Often players are rushed to the majors because either their bat or their glove is ready but not the other (see Jose Iglesias).  I think Bogaerts has almost been the anti Iglesias.  Elite Offense that can play in the big leagues but a glove that is still developing.  I think he is starting to round into a plus defender and while I don't think he will win any gold gloves I think he will play above average defense at SS for at least some time.  With his bat....you don't move Bogaerts if he can give you average defense.

    We can have an entire left side of the infield for less than 1 million dollars in Bogaerts and WMB and I THINK it will be a very good and above average one too.

    I don't think about planning on moving Bogaerts until he actually outplays the position because he is much more valuable as a SS. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Excellent post Hugh.  I agree that the idea of having a left side of the IF for $1mil is pretty sweet!  I am not for having Drew for more than 3 years...which I really do not think get's it done since if a team is going to forfeit their draft pick they will want their money worth in terms of years with a bit of a smaller annual salary. 

    It's funny....I have seen Boggy play at AA at least 15 times and he always seemed a bit awkward at SS.  His footwork was 'off' if you know what I mean.  When he made the move to 3b he just seemed a lot more natural there.  He moved a lot better and it seemed to work better for his range.  In all honesty I wonder if he will play SS for this year just to keep 'that seat warm' for a bit.  Again....I am FAR from a scout, I just watch a lot of baseball and go by what I observe. 

    You know what the best part of this though??  If this is the Sox biggest issue......what a GREAT 'issue' to have!

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    If the Angels trade Trumbo, then they will want quality starting pitching in return.  

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    ... as reportedly speculated in this morning's column from the Globe's Nick Cafardo:

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/cafardo-on-trumbo-ethier-kemp-arroyo-red-sox.html

    Because of his low on-base percentage, Mark Trumbo would be a poor replacement for Mike Napoli.

    Will Middlebrooks' ceiling might be Trumbo, so the proposed trade could be enticing to the Angels, who need pitching and who could use Felix Doubront to replace lefthander Jason Vargas in the rotation.

    Thoughts?

    [/QUOTE]

    So Cafardo is thinking both WMB and Doubront, and no one in here would give either one for Trumbo.  Cool.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    ... as reportedly speculated in this morning's column from the Globe's Nick Cafardo:

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/cafardo-on-trumbo-ethier-kemp-arroyo-red-sox.html

    Because of his low on-base percentage, Mark Trumbo would be a poor replacement for Mike Napoli.

    Will Middlebrooks' ceiling might be Trumbo, so the proposed trade could be enticing to the Angels, who need pitching and who could use Felix Doubront to replace lefthander Jason Vargas in the rotation.

    Thoughts?

    [/QUOTE]

    So Cafardo is thinking both WMB and Doubront, and no one in here would give either one for Trumbo.  Cool.

    [/QUOTE]

    He didn't necessarily say both of them together in the article, Joe.  He pretty much threw a couple of names out there.  Cafardo is well connected, but at the end of the day, he has to sell newspapers, and coming up with a few ridiculous trade proposals every now and again gets people talking.  

     

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    In response to Hetchinspete's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Hetchinspete's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Funny thing is, softy called Butler a bum last winter.

    Now a bum for a bum is "delusional".

    Clown Strong!

    [/QUOTE]

    Moon, 

    Dempster may not be a great pitcher but he does not deserve to be called a bum any more than you or any other reasonable poster on BDC. Pardon me but shame on you !!

    Hetch

    [/QUOTE]

    I did not call Dempster a bum, softy did. He also called Butler a bum last winter. I was double quoting softy.

     

    (Note:  I do not think Dempster is a bum. I think he has value, but to me that value would be greater to another team as a 5th starter than to us as a 6th starter, so I do think we should try to trade him.)

    [/QUOTE]

    Apologies Moon but you stated a "bum for a bum" which sounds like it's coming from you, not the Great Soft One. 

    Cheers, 

    Hetch

    [/QUOTE]

    No apology needed.

    It's been a long running dialogue with the clown over several threads.

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    ... as reportedly speculated in this morning's column from the Globe's Nick Cafardo:

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/cafardo-on-trumbo-ethier-kemp-arroyo-red-sox.html

    Because of his low on-base percentage, Mark Trumbo would be a poor replacement for Mike Napoli.

    Will Middlebrooks' ceiling might be Trumbo, so the proposed trade could be enticing to the Angels, who need pitching and who could use Felix Doubront to replace lefthander Jason Vargas in the rotation.

    Thoughts?

    [/QUOTE]


    It would be an awful trade.

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Also for all this talk about Bogaerts moving over to third people forget that Bogaerts played much better at SS than he did at 3B this year.  He had good range and was solid at SS, he looked a little off and slower at 3B. 

    I know it's SSS but his defensive metrics seem to suggest just that. 

    [/QUOTE]

    They didn't give Bogey much time to learn 3B in AAA as I suggested as long ago as last spring. He got 31 chances at 3B in Pawtucket in 2013. 3B can and should not be learned overnight. The foot work is different. The throwing angle is often different as well.

    My guess is if he works out at 3B this winter and plays exclusively there in ST 2014, he'll be as good at 3B then as he is at SS right now, or at least close enough.

    I don't see Bogey as becoming any better than an average fielding SS. I know I have a bias towards great fielding SS, but it seems to me like getting a cheap defensive whiz SS, and moving Bogey to 3B would allow us to use Middy with Carp at 1B and save a ton of cash, or trade Middy for a catcher or CF (maybe as part of a package deal).

     

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Also for all this talk about Bogaerts moving over to third people forget that Bogaerts played much better at SS than he did at 3B this year.  He had good range and was solid at SS, he looked a little off and slower at 3B. 

    I know it's SSS but his defensive metrics seem to suggest just that. 

    [/QUOTE]

    They didn't give Bogey much time to learn 3B in AAA as I suggested as long ago as last spring. He got 31 chances at 3B in Pawtucket in 2013. 3B can and should not be learned overnight. The foot work is different. The throwing angle is often different as well.

    My guess is if he works out at 3B this winter and plays exclusively there in ST 2014, he'll be as good at 3B then as he is at SS right now, or at least close enough.

    I don't see Bogey as becoming any better than an average fielding SS. I know I have a bias towards great fielding SS, but it seems to me like getting a cheap defensive whiz SS, and moving Bogey to 3B would allow us to use Middy with Carp at 1B and save a ton of cash, or trade Middy for a catcher or CF (maybe as part of a package deal).

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree that with some experience Bogaerts could become a good third baseman but I feel a talent such as Bogaerts plays where he will play best. 

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

    Re: Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo ...

    Yes but scouts are just assuming he will outgrow the position because they assume he will lose some atheticism as he grows.  I don't think he will grow that much more, he is young and looks like he will fill out a little bit but he's already a big boy.  Scouts assume he will lose athleticism as he grows but there are plenty of large and above average SS out there and Bogaerts very well could be himself.  I think the "drew made plays Bogaerts wouldn't" is a little unfair, because if we have a player preference it's too easy to assume that without any way of ever really knowing.

    Almost every scouting report I have ever read on Bogey mentions 3b being his possible landing spot. I trust their eyes and skills more than small sample size observations.

     

    But yes I'll concede that "right now" Drew is a better defender, but Bogaerts is an elite bat and an average defender.  If a guy can give you average defense and elite offense, you don't move them.

    You do if he can be an elite offensive 3Bman and a plus fielding 3Bman within a year. Plus-plus is better than plus-average.

     

    Also remember this, Drew is entering the age where he can lose a step any year now.  Drew 30-35 won't be 25-30 Drew.  Meanwhile Bogaerts will play all of next year at his age 21 season.  Often players are rushed to the majors because either their bat or their glove is ready but not the other (see Jose Iglesias).  I think Bogaerts has almost been the anti Iglesias.  Elite Offense that can play in the big leagues but a glove that is still developing.  I think he is starting to round into a plus defender and while I don't think he will win any gold gloves I think he will play above average defense at SS for at least some time.  With his bat....you don't move Bogaerts if he can give you average defense.'

    I'm not sure he ever gets plus at SS on defense. There are a lot of really good fielding MLB SSs today. For him to become the 14th best defensive SS, I feel he needs to improve a lot.

     

    We can have an entire left side of the infield for less than 1 million dollars in Bogaerts and WMB and I THINK it will be a very good and above average one too.

    I don't think about planning on moving Bogaerts until he actually outplays the position because he is much more valuable as a SS. 

    I get the offensive plus at SS brings to a club. When comparing Bogey's possible offense to the league average, we could see a huge disparity, however, MLB is not what it was "back in the day".

    3B is no longer a big offensive position. This year, the league average 3B OPS was .715. The league average SS OPs was .675. While the 40 point differential is significant, it's not what it used to be. If Bogey can quickly give us a plus .800 OPS, that would be a huge differential over most team's 3Bmen, especially our own team .692 3B number in 2013 that was bossted by Iggy and Bogey.

    To me, the fielding at SS is essential. Drew proved it during the playoffs.

     

Share