YES!!! - Beckett traded to Boston - Done Deal per Gammons!!! - Page 5

Mark Guest · 11-22-2005, 11:53 PM

I personally don't think Lowell will reach the levels he was at, as his decline started with the steroid talk. Get my drift?

darkhorse · 11-23-2005, 12:09 AM

Giambi says no.

Mark Guest · 11-23-2005, 12:35 AM

I'm also starting to buy into the theory that the Marlins never intended on dealing Beckett to the Rangers, but only to play off the media to get Boston to move Ramirez and Sanchez.

darkhorse · 11-23-2005, 12:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Guest

I'm also starting to buy into the theory that the Marlins never intended on dealing Beckett to the Rangers, but only to play off the media to get Boston to move Ramirez and Sanchez.

The party that got played in this deal was Florida.

Mark Guest · 11-23-2005, 01:07 AM

Do you think Boston would've moved Ramirez for Blalock, since that is who Florida coveted. Then kept Danks and didn't have to pay any of Lowells salary?

QuestGAV · 11-23-2005, 01:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Guest

Do you think Boston would've moved Ramirez for Blalock, since that is who Florida coveted. Then kept Danks and didn't have to pay any of Lowells salary?

Boston would have traded Ramirez to Texas for Blalock in about 3 seconds. Why would Texas do it unless it helped them land Beckett?

Mark Guest · 11-23-2005, 01:54 AM

No, why wouldn't Florida make the trade with Texas, then deal Blalock to Boston for Ramirez and another prospect?

QuestGAV · 11-23-2005, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Guest

No, why wouldn't Florida make the trade with Texas, then deal Blalock to Boston for Ramirez and another prospect?

Maybe they felt Ramirez + Sanchez was > Ramirez + Danks + 2nd/3rd tier prospect.

draven085 · 11-23-2005, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuestGAV

Boston would have traded Ramirez to Texas for Blalock in about 3 seconds. Why would Texas do it unless it helped them land Beckett?

Why the hell would the Red Sox trade Ramirez for a guy who had a 94 OPS+ last year and has a career OPS of 692 away from Arlington? Even without Saint Theo what's left of the front office isn't that dumb.

QuestGAV · 11-23-2005, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by draven085

Why the hell would the Red Sox trade Ramirez for a guy who had a 94 OPS+ last year and has a career OPS of 692 away from Arlington? Even without Saint Theo what's left of the front office isn't that dumb.

Blalock is a stud. He hit better in MLB last year than Ramirez did at AA. You can't judge a guy by the worst year of his career when everything else has been solid.

draven085 · 11-23-2005, 08:12 AM

A 692 career OPS away from one of the best hitter's parks in the league isn't exactly what I'd call studly. His best OPS away from home the past three years was a 782 mark in '04, a figure that was only 2% better than the 2004 AL OPS of .766. It looks to me like Blalock is a creation of the Ballpark at Arlington, or whatever the hell that place is called now. Han Ram could probably match that level of production right now and do it while playing good defense at shortstop. When you factor in that Blalock has actually regressed offensively the last two years and I don't see why anyone in their right mind would make that trade.

jaxmagicman · 11-23-2005, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by draven085

A 692 career OPS away from one of the best hitter's parks in the league isn't exactly what I'd call studly. His best OPS away from home the past three years was a 782 mark in '04, a figure that was only 2% better than the 2004 AL OPS of .766. It looks to me like Blalock is a creation of the Ballpark at Arlington, or whatever the hell that place is called now. Han Ram could probably match that level of production right now and do it while playing good defense at shortstop. When you factor in that Blalock has actually regressed offensively the last two years and I don't see why anyone in their right mind would make that trade.

Or why anyone would think the Marlins got hosed. This trade helped both teams.

QuestGAV · 11-23-2005, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by draven085

A 692 career OPS away from one of the best hitter's parks in the league isn't exactly what I'd call studly. His best OPS away from home the past three years was a 782 mark in '04, a figure that was only 2% better than the 2004 AL OPS of .766. It looks to me like Blalock is a creation of the Ballpark at Arlington, or whatever the hell that place is called now. Han Ram could probably match that level of production right now and do it while playing good defense at shortstop. When you factor in that Blalock has actually regressed offensively the last two years and I don't see why anyone in their right mind would make that trade.

Because he put up an EQA of .279 at 22 while playing third base in the major leagues? Before you keep feeding me the Arlington garbage, EQA accounts for park. While he was doing that at 22 "Han Ram" was having an inferior year at AA. If you want to talk about offensive regression, let's talk about Hanley Ramirez. One of these guys has been and should continue to be productive at the major league level. One of these guys hasn't proved he can consistently hit AA pitching.

draven085 · 11-23-2005, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuestGAV

Because he put up an EQA of .279 at 22 while playing third base in the major leagues? Before you keep feeding me the Arlington garbage, EQA accounts for park. While he was doing that at 22 "Han Ram" was having an inferior year at AA. If you want to talk about offensive regression, let's talk about Hanley Ramirez. One of these guys has been and should continue to be productive at the major league level. One of these guys hasn't proved he can consistently hit AA pitching.

So you're willing to ignore the .251 EQA he put up last season and the fact that for his career he's a below average hitter away from Arlington? Maybe his awful '05 was a fluke and he'll straighten it out but I see no reason why the Sox would deal a B+ prospect like Han-Ram for Blalock when they could obviously get a lot more value for him.

QuestGAV · 11-23-2005, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by draven085

So you're willing to ignore the .251 EQA he put up last season and the fact that for his career he's a below average hitter away from Arlington? Maybe his awful '05 was a fluke and he'll straighten it out but I see no reason why the Sox would deal a B+ prospect like Han-Ram for Blalock when they could obviously get a lot more value for him.

I'm not willing to ignore it, but in the context of comparing him to a player who also regressed at AA I'm going to go with the guy who has proven himself at the major league level. I'm not sure why you can't grasp the fact that "Han Ram" is massively overrated at this point.

QuestGAV · 11-23-2005, 09:29 AM

Would you rather have Hank Blalock manning the hot corner at Fenway next year or Kevin Youkilis?

draven085 · 11-23-2005, 09:34 AM

I agree that Han-Ram is massively overrated. I also happen to think that Blalock is massively overrated, as evidenced by your referring to him as "studly". I'm sure that a number of baseball executives are probably still high on Han-Ram and are willing to pay more than he's actually worth to acquire his services. To continue with your condescending tone, how hard is it to understand that a player's trade value is determined by a lot more than his statistics? In my experience a player's perceived value often has very little to do with his actual value. In the case of prospects it's ultimately impossible to know what their actual value is anyway. All I'm saying is that for what Han-Ram's perceived value is around MLB I think the Sox can do (and already did) a lot better than trading him for a very high-risk Hank Blalock.

QuestGAV · 11-23-2005, 09:37 AM

Wouldn't Blalock's perceived value be pretty damn high as well by your own logic? I guess I also don't see Blalock's value as having dove off a cliff as you do. It would be one thing if he were 34 and regressed, but at 24 I'm willing to bet he can get back to where he was and then some.

draven085 · 11-23-2005, 09:47 AM

Probably, though I would assume that Saber-savvy Sox front office would see through the Arlington effect. If Blalock had ever shown the ability to be anything better than an average hitter on the road I might expect more from him. Until recently I never realized just how extreme his splits are.

Dark Horse · 11-23-2005, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkhorse

1. Outsider? I thought you were a native.

We don't get much Ranger talk on the sports talk down here in Houston. Just Cowboys. And i don't follow the AL closely. With this trade talk i'll probably pay a little more attention to their games when they're on, assuming Blalock stays with the team. Then i can form my own opinion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkhorse

2. Beckett's main problem seems to be blisters, which seems to be less of a problem with each passing year. He had some problems with his shoulder this season, IIRC, but the Marlins shut him down and he'd have to pass a physical anyway, to complete the deal. Beckett's workload at the major league level has not been steep at all. I haven't a clue what might have ailed Lowell this year. He'd been a fooking stud the previous two years and a fine player during the course of his career. Blalock has yet to reach those heights, and there are questions now if he ever will.

Like i said, i don't follow the AL closely. i just remember Blalock hitting that big home run in the first "This Time It Counts Game" and him being a part of the best (or best hitting) infield in baseball. And when i look at his numbers, they dropped off slightly, but overall they weren't that bad. Heck, i'd take that five more years; even if he didn't get any better.

When a player falls off as much as Lowell did that would worry me. And, at his age, there's a bigger chance that he won't bounce back.

And i don't know if Beckett can be the man, like he would've had to be in Texas. Didn't he fall apart down the stretch last season while the Marlins were in the wild card chase? Anyway, he'll do better in Boston, where they have other starters to take the heat off him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkhorse

4. ???

You know. Dark Horse addressing darkhorse.

11-22-2005, 11:53 PM	#81
Mark Guest Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 258	I personally don't think Lowell will reach the levels he was at, as his decline started with the steroid talk. Get my drift? __________________ Hickory Baseball League - Baltimore Orioles (WS Champs) Cooperstown Diamond Legends - Detroit Tigers (0-0) Smallball coming soon

11-23-2005, 12:09 AM	#82
darkhorse Hall Of Famer Join Date: May 2002 Location: fort worth, tx Posts: 10,850	Giambi says no. Attached Images __________________ "The Human Torch was denied a bank loan."

11-23-2005, 12:35 AM	#83
Mark Guest Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 258	I'm also starting to buy into the theory that the Marlins never intended on dealing Beckett to the Rangers, but only to play off the media to get Boston to move Ramirez and Sanchez. __________________ Hickory Baseball League - Baltimore Orioles (WS Champs) Cooperstown Diamond Legends - Detroit Tigers (0-0) Smallball coming soon

11-23-2005, 01:07 AM	#85
Mark Guest Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 258	Do you think Boston would've moved Ramirez for Blalock, since that is who Florida coveted. Then kept Danks and didn't have to pay any of Lowells salary? __________________ Hickory Baseball League - Baltimore Orioles (WS Champs) Cooperstown Diamond Legends - Detroit Tigers (0-0) Smallball coming soon

11-23-2005, 01:54 AM	#87
Mark Guest Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 258	No, why wouldn't Florida make the trade with Texas, then deal Blalock to Boston for Ramirez and another prospect? __________________ Hickory Baseball League - Baltimore Orioles (WS Champs) Cooperstown Diamond Legends - Detroit Tigers (0-0) Smallball coming soon

11-23-2005, 08:12 AM	#91
draven085 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: New Jersey Posts: 2,074	A 692 career OPS away from one of the best hitter's parks in the league isn't exactly what I'd call studly. His best OPS away from home the past three years was a 782 mark in '04, a figure that was only 2% better than the 2004 AL OPS of .766. It looks to me like Blalock is a creation of the Ballpark at Arlington, or whatever the hell that place is called now. Han Ram could probably match that level of production right now and do it while playing good defense at shortstop. When you factor in that Blalock has actually regressed offensively the last two years and I don't see why anyone in their right mind would make that trade.

11-23-2005, 09:29 AM	#96
QuestGAV Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 2,010	Would you rather have Hank Blalock manning the hot corner at Fenway next year or Kevin Youkilis?

11-23-2005, 09:34 AM	#97
draven085 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: New Jersey Posts: 2,074	I agree that Han-Ram is massively overrated. I also happen to think that Blalock is massively overrated, as evidenced by your referring to him as "studly". I'm sure that a number of baseball executives are probably still high on Han-Ram and are willing to pay more than he's actually worth to acquire his services. To continue with your condescending tone, how hard is it to understand that a player's trade value is determined by a lot more than his statistics? In my experience a player's perceived value often has very little to do with his actual value. In the case of prospects it's ultimately impossible to know what their actual value is anyway. All I'm saying is that for what Han-Ram's perceived value is around MLB I think the Sox can do (and already did) a lot better than trading him for a very high-risk Hank Blalock.

11-23-2005, 09:37 AM	#98
QuestGAV Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 2,010	Wouldn't Blalock's perceived value be pretty damn high as well by your own logic? I guess I also don't see Blalock's value as having dove off a cliff as you do. It would be one thing if he were 34 and regressed, but at 24 I'm willing to bet he can get back to where he was and then some.

11-23-2005, 09:47 AM	#99
draven085 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: New Jersey Posts: 2,074	Probably, though I would assume that Saber-savvy Sox front office would see through the Arlington effect. If Blalock had ever shown the ability to be anything better than an average hitter on the road I might expect more from him. Until recently I never realized just how extreme his splits are.