The Amazing Jose Iglesias

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

    Re: The Amazing Jose Iglesias

    Lot of the comments here are just what I expect from RS fans as long as Jose makes plays like that there will be threads like this lamenting the trade. Even if Jose only hits 200 and makes a handful of similar plays the RS fans will complain. RS fans have been doing it for over 90 years so it is not going to stop now.

    Even if Peavey wins the final game of every playoff the next two years if Jose plays 16 yrs and makes plays the RS fans will complain about the trade.and always will be.

    It is the way it is in BOSTON

    LOVE my  Red Sox, Bs, Cs, Pats and enjoy the ride every year. 

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from bt33. Show bt33's posts

    Re: The Amazing Jose Iglesias

    For years the sox have been unable to find a quality shortstop. Over the past decade they've thrown money at free agents, tried stop-gap guys, and it has remained an issue. Just think about all the names - Garciaparra; Reese; Cabrera; Lugo; Rentaria; Gonzales (twice); Lowerie; Scutaro; Green; Cora; Drew... Finally, they develop a guy in their system - Jose Iglesias, who is, by most accounts, one of the elite fielding players at the position and he finally demonstrates that he can hit a little at the MLB level and they trade him away for an aging starter. The question isn't that the sox needed an additional quality starting pitcher - of course they did - every contending and non-contending team does. There are only so many guys in the league teams would feel comfortable trotting out in the world series and peavy qualifies. Was it worth the cost of giving up your starting shortstop for the next 15 years? I say it wasn't. Bogaerts seems like he's built like a third baseman. You could always switch Middlebrooks to first if it turns out he can actually hit major league pitching. Personally, would have rather the team use one or two of their pitching prospects (webster/de la rossa/ranaudo/ workman) to try to acquire a starter. I'm not saying this would have gotten it done - just think the price of Iglesias was too high to pay. Personally, was fine with him hittting .240/.250 and it seems like he's demonstrated he can at least do that. I'm all for going for it when you have the chance, but not at the expense of the future of the team. This move will haunt this franchise. 

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

    Re: The Amazing Jose Iglesias

    In response to bt33's comment:

    For years the sox have been unable to find a quality shortstop. Over the past decade they've thrown money at free agents, tried stop-gap guys, and it has remained an issue. Just think about all the names - Garciaparra; Reese; Cabrera; Lugo; Rentaria; Gonzales (twice); Lowerie; Scutaro; Green; Cora; Drew... Finally, they develop a guy in their system - Jose Iglesias, who is, by most accounts, one of the elite fielding players at the position and he finally demonstrates that he can hit a little at the MLB level and they trade him away for an aging starter. The question isn't that the sox needed an additional quality starting pitcher - of course they did - every contending and non-contending team does. There are only so many guys in the league teams would feel comfortable trotting out in the world series and peavy qualifies. Was it worth the cost of giving up your starting shortstop for the next 15 years? I say it wasn't. Bogaerts seems like he's built like a third baseman. You could always switch Middlebrooks to first if it turns out he can actually hit major league pitching. Personally, would have rather the team use one or two of their pitching prospects (webster/de la rossa/ranaudo/ workman) to try to acquire a starter. I'm not saying this would have gotten it done - just think the price of Iglesias was too high to pay. Personally, was fine with him hittting .240/.250 and it seems like he's demonstrated he can at least do that. I'm all for going for it when you have the chance, but not at the expense of the future of the team. This move will haunt this franchise. 



    Amen.

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

    Re: The Amazing Jose Iglesias

    Even if we had kept Iggy, he might have been forced to a utility role next year anyways, so I'm not sure of the word "haunts" aplies here.

    As everyone knows, I have been a huge Iggy supporter for years. I hated to see him traded, but I just don't think he ever would have been give the Ft SS job outright. Not with Boggy around.

    Also, although Peavy does not have great numbers this year, he has top 30 numbers from 2012 to 2013 combined, and he was not a two month rental. I don't consider Iggy a utility IF'er, but that's what we really traded away, since that is what he was and would have been here in Boston.

    Sox4ever

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

    Re: The Amazing Jose Iglesias

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    Don't get me wrong I loved Iggy....watching his glove work was like baseball porn.

     

    But I thnk people are really going to like this guy.

     

    http://www.milb.com/multimedia/vpp.jsp?content_id=29698619&sid=milb




     

    Line of the day, Hugh. LOL

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

    Re: The Amazing Jose Iglesias

    In response to bt33's comment:

    For years the sox have been unable to find a quality shortstop. Over the past decade they've thrown money at free agents, tried stop-gap guys, and it has remained an issue. Just think about all the names - Garciaparra; Reese; Cabrera; Lugo; Rentaria; Gonzales (twice); Lowerie; Scutaro; Green; Cora; Drew...  



    Well, they won a World Series with Cabrera and they won one with Lugo.  So that kind of nullifies your whole point.  The facts suggest that the revolving door at the position doesn't really matter.

     

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

    Re: The Amazing Jose Iglesias

    Everyone keeps saying how much Iglesias is worth it "even if he only hits .250."  Some of his more generous fans even go as low as.220.

    What if he only hits .180?  Or .150?  Is he still worth it?

     

    History suggests those numbers are not out of the realm of possibilty.  Both are better than he hit in 2012...

     

    “Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me. Anything can happen, child. Anything can be.”

    -Shel Silverstein

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The Amazing Jose Iglesias

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to bt33's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Well, they won a World Series with Cabrera and they won one with Lugo.  So that kind of nullifies your whole point.  The facts suggest that the revolving door at the position doesn't really matter.



    This has to be one of the most specious arguments I've ever seen.

    (specious:  adj., 1) apparently true or right but lacking in real merit, not genuine.  2) deceptively attractive)

     

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

    Re: The Amazing Jose Iglesias

    In response to S5's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to bt33's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Well, they won a World Series with Cabrera and they won one with Lugo.  So that kind of nullifies your whole point.  The facts suggest that the revolving door at the position doesn't really matter.

     



    This has to be one of the most specious arguments I've ever seen.

     

    (specious:  adj., 1) apparently true or right but lacking in real merit, not genuine.  2) deceptively attractive)

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The flip side is that there is also no counteraegument that long term stability at shortstop (or any position) is imperative to a team's success.

     

    Sox fans drastically overblow the "revolving door" situation at shortstop. And almost always do so as "evidence" of poor scouting or player knowledge.  That they have only signed one shortstop to a long term deal (Lugo) shows that they know these players and what they are getting in to...

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: The Amazing Jose Iglesias

    In response to JimfromFlorida's comment:

    Lot of the comments here are just what I expect from RS fans as long as Jose makes plays like that there will be threads like this lamenting the trade. Even if Jose only hits 200 and makes a handful of similar plays the RS fans will complain. RS fans have been doing it for over 90 years so it is not going to stop now.

    Even if Peavey wins the final game of every playoff the next two years if Jose plays 16 yrs and makes plays the RS fans will complain about the trade.and always will be.

    It is the way it is in BOSTON

    LOVE my  Red Sox, Bs, Cs, Pats and enjoy the ride every year. 

    Your right Jim, I see this thread going on for the next 10-15+ years !!!!


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

    Re: The Amazing Jose Iglesias

    In response to S5's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to bt33's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Well, they won a World Series with Cabrera and they won one with Lugo.  So that kind of nullifies your whole point.  The facts suggest that the revolving door at the position doesn't really matter.

     



    This has to be one of the most specious arguments I've ever seen.

    (specious:  adj., 1) apparently true or right but lacking in real merit, not genuine.  2) deceptively attractive)

    [/QUOTE]

    Whoa, that's a strong statement. 

    Where is your counter-argument?

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

    Re: The Amazing Jose Iglesias

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to S5's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to bt33's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Well, they won a World Series with Cabrera and they won one with Lugo.  So that kind of nullifies your whole point.  The facts suggest that the revolving door at the position doesn't really matter.

     

     



    This has to be one of the most specious arguments I've ever seen.

     

    (specious:  adj., 1) apparently true or right but lacking in real merit, not genuine.  2) deceptively attractive)

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Whoa, that's a strong statement. 

     

    Where is your counter-argument?

    [/QUOTE]


    I'm not sure what's worse, his calling your statement specious.

    Or, his insinuation that you wouldn't know what the word means. Wink

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

    Re: The Amazing Jose Iglesias

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to S5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to bt33's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Well, they won a World Series with Cabrera and they won one with Lugo.  So that kind of nullifies your whole point.  The facts suggest that the revolving door at the position doesn't really matter.

     

     



    This has to be one of the most specious arguments I've ever seen.

     

    (specious:  adj., 1) apparently true or right but lacking in real merit, not genuine.  2) deceptively attractive)

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Whoa, that's a strong statement. 

     

    Where is your counter-argument?

    [/QUOTE]

    Because it can be said about ANY situation.  It can be said that since a team has won a WS championship without a 20 game winner a team doen't need a 20 game winner.  The same with an established closer, the same with a batting champion, the same with a GG winner at any position, the same with just about anything.  The fact remains that the more of those things you have the better your chances of winning a championship. 

    The fact that the Sox have won without established GG SS proves only that it can be done, but it's not justifcation for not having one if it's possible to.   

     
  17. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The Amazing Jose Iglesias

    In response to notin's comment:

    Everyone keeps saying how much Iglesias is worth it "even if he only hits .250."  Some of his more generous fans even go as low as.220.

    What if he only hits .180?  Or .150?  Is he still worth it?

     History suggests those numbers are not out of the realm of possibilty.  Both are better than he hit in 2012...

    No, he wouldn't still be worth it, and that's why the FO signed Drew this offseason.  It's hard to say at exactly what point his defense overcomes his lack of offense.   He no doubt will save a lot of runs defensively, but not as many as some have claimed. 

    As someone else pointed out, his low OBP and lack of power are more of a concern than his BA.  He is one that could very well have a BA of .250, and have an OBP and SLG of .270 or .280 .   There was a span of 18 games this year where he batted .167/.167/.167 - no walks, no extra base hits.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The Amazing Jose Iglesias

    In response to S5's comment:

    Because it can be said about ANY situation. It can be said that since a team has won a WS championship without a 20 game winner a team doen't need a 20 game winner. The same with an established closer, the same with a batting champion, the same with a GG winner at any position, the same with just about anything. The fact remains that the more of those things you have the better your chances of winning a championship.

    The fact that the Sox have won without established GG SS proves only that it can be done, but it's not justifcation for not having one if it's possible to.

    But there also isn't justification for keeping a GG SS, just because it's possible to, if it sacrifices another area of the team.

    Obviously, all other things being equal, if you have a simple choice of having a GG SS versus not having one, you take the GG SS. If you have the simple choice of having a Cy Young pitcher versus not having one, you take the Cy Young pitcher.

    We all know that no decision is as simple as that. It's about finding the balance within one's budget that gives you the best short and long term outlooks.

    Not even factoring Peavy into the equation, it seems that the FO may have opted in favor of the more balanced SS in Bogaerts over the GG SS for the future anyway.

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: The Amazing Jose Iglesias

    In response to BurritoT-'s comment:

    lack of offense? He is 23!!!!! wtf! Honestly.

    Burrito-T,  I see that you are in a good mood today ??


     
  23. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The Amazing Jose Iglesias

    In response to BurritoT-'s comment:

    Give me a break. U clowns acting like you know anything. What a joke. U should never trade an Iggy at 23, he was developing at the MLB level unlike 90% of the other top prospects in MLB. The Sox rushed him!  FACT!~




    I think someone needs a time out....

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

    Re: The Amazing Jose Iglesias

    All I know is the RS gave up on Iggy last winter when they brought in Drew.  Up until then he was the apparent started for this season.  The Sox decided that he wasn't going to be big league material because of his hitting.

    So it will be interesting to see how he does over the next year or so.  If the Sox were wrong, I'd say it will be one of their costlier and more embarrassing mistakes.  Costly because they would have him cheap for a few years, rather than paying a Drew equivalent $9 or so mill.  Embarrassing because of their well decumented inability to evaluate and or retain shortstops.

     

Share