Re: That Trade for Peavy looks real good!
posted at 10/17/2013 1:01 AM EDT
In response to notin's comment:
To be fair S%, you earned any derision you received with your crazy conspiracy theories and refusal to read anything else anyone wrote, because it was much more complicated than simply assigning an opinion to them.
If you have not figured it out yet, maybe part of the reason the Sox wanted to go all in on this year when they saw they had a chance is that the core of this team is not controlled for much longer. Ellsbury is gone after this year. Ortiz probably after the next. Think keeping Iglesias at short, Middlebrooks at 1B, Bogaerts at 3B and Bradley in CF has a chance to win anything any time in the immediate future?
If you'd like to have a legitimate conversation about it and respect what I say as NOT being "off the wall" and might actually have some merit, I can do that.
Here's what I think:
I think keeping Iggy for a SS anchored the infield both talent-wise AND financially. It wasn't that many months ago that we were talking about the merits of keeping a stellar defensive SS who would hit ~.240 and it wasn't that bad an idea.
I think Bogarts may be as well suited to play 3B as he is to play SS but since Iggy is a superior SS keeping Iggy at SS was the smarter thing to do.
I think Middlebrooks can play 1B because I also believe that if a player can play 3B well he can also play the other corner IF position, probably better since 1B is lower on the defensive spectrum than is 3B.
Keeping that IF allows the Red Sox a much better chance to sign Ellsbury because there will be money available due to the "cheap" IF. Signing Ells should be the first priority not because of his defensive skills but because he makes the offense go. It's not necessary for me to document what he does as a leadoff hitter so I won't.
Since the trade the Sox are left with either signing a FA SS (Drew?) for more money than Iggy would have gotten or turning that position over to someone totally untested. However, the Sox would have kept Bogart's offense by having him at 3B.
My first priority in the off season would have been to sign Ellsbury and Salty using some of the money not being given to the FA SS. This would have givien the team an "up the middle" of Salty, Iggy, Pedroia, and Ellsbury. Should they have failed to sign Ellsbury the middle would still be better off with JBJ in CF and Iggy at SS than it would with JBJ in CF and Bogarts at SS.
Offensively the team would have lost Napoli's power. Whatever Drew brings to the table would have been offset by Bogarts and in fact IMO Bogarts would be an offensive upgrade over Drew. That upgrade over Drew combined with whatever Iggy brings both offensively and defensively would bring the team to being nearly (?) as good as they were this year. Whether they would be better or worse with this in 2014 would be dependent on what everyone actually DOES, and that's the way it is every year. But it would have been an awfully good framework to start with.
To answer your question of whether I think this IF (with JBJ in CF) would win anything in the near future, I think the question mark there would have been whether JBJ learns to hit. Which is why I would have gone after Ellsbury. I don't see a significant decline in 2014 from 2013 WITH Ellsbury but I DO see a decline if JBJ is there.
We then would have the luxury of having two IF'ers in the minors to use (if they're good enough) in case this plan didn't pan out, and if the plan DID plan out those two are good trade bait.
I will admit that my "conspiracy theory" was a bit 'out there' but at the time I was trying to rationalize what happened and it was the best I could come up with.
If you'd like to respond to this respectfully, please do. If you can't respond respectfully, please don't respond.