why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

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

    Re: why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrotterNixon's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    AGon left a big hole that is still a big hole. With his contract, to take on bums with massive contracts like Crawford and Beckett, it just shows how high a value the Dodgers placed on him.

    AGon should have been retained, and Beckett should have been traded on his own. Crawford should have been traded sometime during or shortly after the 2013 season. Cherry's incompetent and sold at rock bottom and bought at top dollar.

    [/QUOTE]

    Trotter, this post is proof that you're only here to play the contrarian.  How would the Red Sox would have made out in those separate trades of Beckett and Crawford, two 'bums with massive contracts'?  And what about the precipitous drop in AGon's OBP and SLG this year?

    Also, you may have missed this news flash, but Cherry's involvement in this transaction was limited.  

    [/QUOTE]

    This is the part of the trade that the casual fans miss, like Trotter and the OP.

    It wasn't just Beckett and CC's contracts that were problematic, it was Gonzo.  His K/W has declined three straight years.  The decline from SD was unavoidable, but his decline with Boston to 81/31, and 29/11 with LA, is huge.  I like Gonzo, and he might well return to form, but for $21M at age 30+, I no longer like the contract.

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

    Re: why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

    I disagree. Most sox fans and probably sox brass would have loved to be able to keep Gonzo.  Like Zac said he was the piece the Dodgers wanted and that's what allowed them to dump the other two contracts.  It is a big contract, but he's as close to worth it as any large contract out there.  Having him would make the work needed in the off season much less.  Take a closer look at the ks to walks. Ks stayed about the same.  Like you said decrease in walks going from SD to Bos was unavoidable.  The further decline from 2011 to 2012 was because Gonzo was having an off year and Papi was hitting behind him and was having one of the best seasons in the league.

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

    Re: why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

    In response to TrotterNixon's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    AGon left a big hole that is still a big hole. With his contract, to take on bums with massive contracts like Crawford and Beckett, it just shows how high a value the Dodgers placed on him.

    AGon should have been retained, and Beckett should have been traded on his own. Crawford should have been traded sometime during or shortly after the 2013 season. Cherry's incompetent and sold at rock bottom and bought at top dollar.

    [/QUOTE]

    A. Cherry didn't buy anyone involved in this conversation at top dollar.  That would be your boy Theo Epstein.

    B.  Dodgers bought at absolute top dollar, taking 2 albatross contracts just to get their man.  So, how is it that he sold at rock bottom if the team he sold to bought at top dollar?

    C.  Who in their right minds were going to trade for Carl Crawford shortly after the 2013 season?

     

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

    I missed him in the first half of the 2012 season. There are rumors he played for the Red Sox but I have yet to verify them.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

    Some players don't show that burning fire to win (J.D. Drew, Agon) and others do (Youk, Pedey, Trot Nixon).  Without debating that, it seems like most fans in NE prefer the latter.  Losing Agon was well worth it to get rid of those contracts.  This is a huge opportunity for the RS to rebuild.

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

    Re: why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

    In response to TrotterNixon's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    A. Cherry didn't buy anyone involved in this conversation at top dollar.  That would be your boy Theo Epstein.

    InEpstein is your boy. Cherry bought and tried to sell the FA top dollar of a player deal you applauded after the signing.

    B.  Dodgers bought at absolute top dollar, taking 2 albatross contracts just to get their man.  So, how is it that he sold at rock bottom if the team he sold to bought at top dollar?

    Follow along,. The Red Sox already paid almost 40 million for Crawbust. The Dodgers didn't buy at top dollar. Buckett had already indolently sucked nearly half of his extension from the Red Sox. The Dodgers didn't buy him at top dollar.

    C.  Who in their right minds were going to trade for Carl Crawford shortly after the 2013 season?

     Wrong question. Who in their right minds was going to buy Carl Crawford for 142 million, two years ago?

    After 2013, you will see who would have traded for Carl Crawford, as opposed to trading him while he's de facto temporarily disabled.

    I take it you think this was a great move by Cherry, which is what his office has been spinning it as. He needs to work on spinning the labor performance for 2012.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I do not look at the move as 'great'.  I am not happy at all to lose Adrian Gonzalez.  But I do look at it as a unique opportunity.  I look at it much less as some great move by Cherrington and more like a really awesome stupid move by the Dodgers, who have now traded places with the Red Sox as Team With the Most Resources Who Buries Themselves Alive With Those Resources.

    And, though I appreciate you penchant for redirection, and agree with you about some folks (including myself, who at the time was too giddy with the embarassment of riches to see how Crawford was going to bury us) being out of their mind in signing CC 2 years ago, the question still stands.  Even after a healthy Crawford year (questionable), who is going to pick up the back end of his exorbitant contract?  No one.  Smart move was to package him with Gonzo and let him be the Dodgers problem.

    And, regardless of how much of his extension he 'indolently sucked' from the Red Sox, the Dodgers still picked up the rest of it, not peanuts by any stretch of the imagination, for him to indolently suck from them.  The Red Sox absolutely sold at top dollar.

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

    Re: why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

    In response to greenwellforpresident's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I disagree. Most sox fans and probably sox brass would have loved to be able to keep Gonzo.  Like Zac said he was the piece the Dodgers wanted and that's what allowed them to dump the other two contracts.  It is a big contract, but he's as close to worth it as any large contract out there.  Having him would make the work needed in the off season much less.  Take a closer look at the ks to walks. Ks stayed about the same.  Like you said decrease in walks going from SD to Bos was unavoidable.  The further decline from 2011 to 2012 was because Gonzo was having an off year and Papi was hitting behind him and was having one of the best seasons in the league.

    [/QUOTE]

    There are shades of grey there.

    1-My thinking on FAs is that, even with good contracts, the value is heavily front-loaded simply because the talent declines.  On almost every FA, if you could trade him away halfway through his contract, you'd inevitably be better off.  This is only one season in, but the decline was a little more precipitious.

    2-If the decline in walks is because of Papi, then Gonzo's hitting stats should be better.  It almost certainly means they are throwing him more hittable pitches.

    3-IRT having an off-year, do we know it was an off-year, or a natural age-related decline?  My issue with the Pujols contract wasn't just the ridiculous amount of years, it was the fact that the Angels pretended as if 2011 never took place.  Their salary assumptions almost had to include the fact that Pujols was a 1.000 OPS hitter, not the .906 that he was, and that the .906 had to be an unrepeatable abberation.  But at his age, there is no way the LAA should be making that assumption.  It could be true, but there is a very substantial possibility that Pujols was starting his end of career decline.

    This is the same with Gonzo.  It was probably just an off year, and his decline probably won't start for another 2 years.  But there is a decidedly non-zero chance that his best days are behind him.  I think, by a fair margin, that the down-side risk of a continued decline outweighs Gonzo out-producing his $22M salary.

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

    Re: why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

    In response to SpacemanEephus's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrotterNixon's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    A. Cherry didn't buy anyone involved in this conversation at top dollar.  That would be your boy Theo Epstein.

    InEpstein is your boy. Cherry bought and tried to sell the FA top dollar of a player deal you applauded after the signing.

    B.  Dodgers bought at absolute top dollar, taking 2 albatross contracts just to get their man.  So, how is it that he sold at rock bottom if the team he sold to bought at top dollar?

    Follow along,. The Red Sox already paid almost 40 million for Crawbust. The Dodgers didn't buy at top dollar. Buckett had already indolently sucked nearly half of his extension from the Red Sox. The Dodgers didn't buy him at top dollar.

    C.  Who in their right minds were going to trade for Carl Crawford shortly after the 2013 season?

     Wrong question. Who in their right minds was going to buy Carl Crawford for 142 million, two years ago?

    After 2013, you will see who would have traded for Carl Crawford, as opposed to trading him while he's de facto temporarily disabled.

    I take it you think this was a great move by Cherry, which is what his office has been spinning it as. He needs to work on spinning the labor performance for 2012.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I do not look at the move as 'great'.  I am not happy at all to lose Adrian Gonzalez.  But I do look at it as a unique opportunity.  I look at it much less as some great move by Cherrington and more like a really awesome stupid move by the Dodgers, who have now traded places with the Red Sox as Team With the Most Resources Who Buries Themselves Alive With Those Resources.

    And, though I appreciate you penchant for redirection, and agree with you about some folks (including myself, who at the time was too giddy with the embarassment of riches to see how Crawford was going to bury us) being out of their mind in signing CC 2 years ago, the question still stands.  Even after a healthy Crawford year (questionable), who is going to pick up the back end of his exorbitant contract?  No one.  Smart move was to package him with Gonzo and let him be the Dodgers problem.

    And, regardless of how much of his extension he 'indolently sucked' from the Red Sox, the Dodgers still picked up the rest of it, not peanuts by any stretch of the imagination, for him to indolently suck from them.  The Red Sox absolutely sold at top dollar.

    [/QUOTE]


    I think the trade was a no-brainer, despite the loss of Gonzalez, who seemed like a fish out of water here.  I also think that a healthy Crawford is going to have some very productive years in L.A. as well. This trade could should be win/win for all, at least for the next few years...

     
  13. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

    In response to TrotterNixon's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I missed him in the first half of the 2012 season. There are rumors he played for the Red Sox but I have yet to verify them.

    Were you in your normal drunken stupor during 2012?

    In 2012, Agon followed up his 2011 gold glove and silver slugger season with a down season where he hit just .300 and had a low OBP of just .343 and had just 86 RBI's in 123 games for the 2012 Red Sox. He was replaced by someone rumored to be a man named Loney.

    I missed Ellsbury for the entire 2012 season. There are rumors that he played for the Red Sox in 2012, but they have all been proven false.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I don't drink.

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

    Re: why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

    In response to TrotterNixon's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    It wasn't just Beckett and CC's contracts that were problematic, it was Gonzo.  His K/W has declined three straight years.  The decline from SD was unavoidable, but his decline with Boston to 81/31, and 29/11 with LA, is huge.  I like Gonzo, and he might well return to form, but for $21M at age 30+, I no longer like the contract.

    Nice spin attempt. In reality, you have no long term plan for 1st base except maybe to resign Youk.

    How do you like paying nearly 10 million for a guy who hardly played in 2012, and was terrible when he did play? Do you like "the contract" of a FA who turns 30 for the first year of that contract? Or do you like trading that problematic cost?

     What casual fans like Joe don't get is how hard it is to find 1st base defense and hitting talent like AGon.

    Joe, please provide the details of your 2013 and next 5 year plan for the Red Sox at first base. Since Rizzo is gone in the trade that brought AGon, who is your man?

    What casual fans like Joe don't get is that when you create a hole in a middle of the lineup position like 1st base you have to have a specific plan. Casual fans like Joe are just cheerleader fantasy fans of whoever the current GM is.

    [/QUOTE]

    1-You need to be specific.  I am an educated man, but I don't all the details behind all the FAs who turned 30 in the first year of their contract.

    a-Is the hypothetical player a pitcher or hitting?  Pitchers have a later timeline.

    b-Is it a one year contract or a ten year contract?

    c-Seriously, do you expect me to be able to accurately assess a contract, without knowing the name of the player, his position, his salary, or the duration?

    2-IRT paying nearly $10M for another unnamed player, it depends on who the player is.  Are you referring to Tulowitski who was hurt most of last year, and is getting paid $10M in 2013?  If so, yes, I am comfortable.

    3-I would target, in no particular order, Ike Davis, depending on the prospects, and Youkilis, VMart, and Morneau as shorter term solutions.  In VMart and Morneau's cae, depending on how much salary relief they came with.  I'd also see how much Napoli is asking for.

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

    Re: why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

    That said, Gonzalez is a very productive player, but to me, there was always something missing, and I can't put my finger on it. 

    [/QUOTE]


    HINT: He wasn't 'clutch'.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

    In response to TrotterNixon's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Even after a healthy Crawford year (questionable), who is going to pick up the back end of his exorbitant contract?  No one.  Smart move was to package him with Gonzo and let him be the Dodgers problem.

    And, regardless of how much of his extension he 'indolently sucked' from the Red Sox, the Dodgers still picked up the rest of it, not peanuts by any stretch of the imagination, for him to indolently suck from them.  The Red Sox absolutely sold at top dollar.

    Wrong. If Crawford has a 2013 season that is close to his career median average, his trade market value would have gone from dead asset to an asset with independent stand alone trade value.

    Smart move was to keep AGon. Smart move was not to sign Beckett to early extension. Smart move, after early extension mistake, was to package Beckett with other expendable cheap players like Aviles and expendable depth chart blocked farm prospects. Smart move was to trade Ellsbury et al for J. Upton over this winter and take almost a sure bet of Crawford having a 2013 season where he plays about 140 games in 2013, and then packaging Crawford with about 4 yeary payments of about 5M in cash and expendable cheap players like Aviles and expendable depth chart blocked farm prospect to set the table for the Red Sox OF long term:

    J. Upton LF (Upton's value is to hit with fresh legs, not play RF in Fenway)

    Bradley, Jr. CF (Primary purpose is run prevention)

    Brentz or Bogearts and Kalish RF  (The incompetent Red Sox middle management doesn't understand that platooning is the correct way to man RF in Fenway. They need to develop it on the farm to where they have strong fielding and strong one-way splits, so they don't have to chase old Cody Ross free agent types)

    The Red Sox should put an end to their endless pipe dream of a slugging SS, which has been totally incompetent approach for a long time, and move Bogearts to the OF. This is the same outfit that paid market for Crawford and brought in Renteria. They are incompetent.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Crawford having a year close to his 'career median averages' (whatever those are, someday I hope you will give us the mathematical secrets) is a big assumption.  But, even if he manages to return to form, I am hard pressed to think he has much value at his $$, on the wrong side of 30.  

     

     

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

    Re: why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

    Trotter trying to tell us the Dodgers trade was a stupid move is his most absurd position yet. 

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

    Re: why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

    If AGon was a FA right now, would you offer him $107M/6 right now?

    13-16: $21M annually, 17-18:$21.5M annually

    To me, it's a tough call. We have the budget room, but I'm not sure if it would be a slam-dunk good budget move when weighed against the combinations of other players we could get for that money (filling 2-4 high need areas).

     
  21. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    1-My thinking on FAs is that, even with good contracts, the value is heavily front-loaded simply because the talent declines. 

    3-IRT having an off-year, do we know it was an off-year, or a natural age-related decline?  My issue with the Pujols contract wasn't just the ridiculous amount of years, it was the fact that the Angels pretended as if 2011 never took place.  Their salary assumptions almost had to include the fact that Pujols was a 1.000 OPS hitter, not the .906 that he was, and that the .906 had to be an unrepeatable abberation.  But at his age, there is no way the LAA should be making that assumption.  It could be true, but there is a very substantial possibility that Pujols was starting his end of career decline.

    This is the same with Gonzo.  It was probably just an off year, and his decline probably won't start for another 2 years.  But there is a decidedly non-zero chance that his best days are behind him.  I think, by a fair margin, that the down-side risk of a continued decline outweighs Gonzo out-producing his $22M salary.

    [/QUOTE]

    This is definitely the main factor.  I think it was an off year and Gonzo's best years may still be ahead of him.

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

    Re: why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

    Wrong. If Crawford has a 2013 season that is close to his career median average, his trade market value would have gone from dead asset to an asset with independent stand alone trade value.

    So you've come full circle.  You use to think it was a terrible contract, but even after two years of weak output, and elbow surgery, you think he now has stand-alone value?  even if he has an average year in 2013, he will still have $82.5M/4 left for years 32-36.  If you're correct, and he has stand-alone value for the worst part of his contract, then I assume he must've been a very good signing.

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

    Re: why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

    In response to TrotterNixon's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I would target, in no particular order, Ike Davis, depending on the prospects, and Youkilis, VMart, and Morneau as shorter term solutions.  In VMart and Morneau's cae, depending on how much salary relief they came with.  I'd also see how much Napoli is asking for.

    Youkilis as a 1st base solution is absurd, don't you think?

    Why bother on Ike Davis (not my idea of a long term Red Sox 1st baseman)  when the Tigers will trade farm scraps for VMart? Why ask for salary relief for VMart's last 2 years, when the Red Sox could easily just take the contract and pay farm scraps and then, because VMart is such a gifted all around hitter who can DH/Catch/1B, easily be traded if a better option comes along for the long term?

    Morneau isn't the value that VMart is, don't you think? I doubt the Twins will offer any cash if they trade him, but it would need to be a lot given his contract and profile which would be a lot of dead weight if he later needs to be moved.

    I agree, if VMart can't be obtained for farm scraps and taking all of his 2 years of salary, Napoli and a 2 year market base offer is the right move. If there is a 3 year marekt for Napoli then the Red Sox should pass.

    On catcher, I think the market is such that the Red Sox best value move is to go with Lavarway as the primary catcher and Salty as the backup. If they acquire VMart or Napoi they will create game management advantages that would help them win more games in 2013.

    Salty cannot be the full-time catcher with his butcher fielding. He can be an adequate backup where he is best suited anyway. He lacks the focus and agility to play any MLB position full time, and he can't hit well enough to DH full-time.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Vmart isn't going anywhere.  The Tigers are letting Delmon Young walk because they expect Vmart to DH next year. 

     

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

    Re: why does nobody miss adrian gonzalez

    In response to TrotterNixon's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I would target, in no particular order, Ike Davis, depending on the prospects, and Youkilis, VMart, and Morneau as shorter term solutions.  In VMart and Morneau's cae, depending on how much salary relief they came with.  I'd also see how much Napoli is asking for.

    Youkilis as a 1st base solution is absurd, don't you think?

    Why bother on Ike Davis (not my idea of a long term Red Sox 1st baseman)  when the Tigers will trade farm scraps for VMart? Why ask for salary relief for VMart's last 2 years, when the Red Sox could easily just take the contract and pay farm scraps and then, because VMart is such a gifted all around hitter who can DH/Catch/1B, easily be traded if a better option comes along for the long term?

    Morneau isn't the value that VMart is, don't you think? I doubt the Twins will offer any cash if they trade him, but it would need to be a lot given his contract and profile which would be a lot of dead weight if he later needs to be moved.

    I agree, if VMart can't be obtained for farm scraps and taking all of his 2 years of salary, Napoli and a 2 year market base offer is the right move. If there is a 3 year marekt for Napoli then the Red Sox should pass.

    On catcher, I think the market is such that the Red Sox best value move is to go with Lavarway as the primary catcher and Salty as the backup. If they acquire VMart or Napoi they will create game management advantages that would help them win more games in 2013.

    Salty cannot be the full-time catcher with his butcher fielding. He can be an adequate backup where he is best suited anyway. He lacks the focus and agility to play any MLB position full time, and he can't hit well enough to DH full-time.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    1-Youk is not absurd.  He is risky.  I actually like him more for CL, where an absence of a month wouldn't make that much difference.  I like him as a straight value play, but we'd need someone that could handle 1st for a month or 6 weeks.

    2-On Davis, it all depends on his cost v the alternatives.

    3-On VMart, if we weren't willing to pay $52M/4 for VMart to catch parttime, why would we want to pay $26M/2, now that he is two years older, more injury-prone, and not even guaranteed to come back full-strength?  The Tigers gambled and lost, and now have to pay.  He's a nice fit, particualrly as a SH, but I'd be careful of projecting him as 1B/C/DH.  In the past two seasons, he has 52 IPs catching, and 219 IPs at 1st.

    4-On Morneau, I'm a sucker for one-year make-good deals.  I doubt MN will have much interest in retaining him for anything but goodwill value.  He can probably still get us ~ .800 OPS with 20 HRs.  And plays well enough to have a none-zero chance of being worthy of a qualifying offer after 2013.

    5-On Salty, his CERA is indeed worrisome.  So I wouldn't necessarily think in terms of either/or Napoli or VMart.  If I got one, I would still pursue the other.  Neither one is that expensive that it shuts us down if we acquire both.  Between 1B, catcher, and DH, they'll be ABs to go around.  If we did sign both, I'd put out feelers on both Lav and Salty to see what the interest is.

    FWIW, nice post.

     

Share