Let's not forget that Plan A for the Red Sox in 2014 was Drew at SS and Bogaerts (I assume) at 3rd. Otherwise they would not have put the QO on the table.
This is Plan A. Four months late.
This is Plan A. Four months late.
Stephen Drew said:THE MAGIC IS BACK! WINNING STREAK STARTS TONIGHT!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zu6RGcVVrxY
Andrew said:Didn't WMB coin "Boston Strong"? He was the first person I saw tweet it.
Then again, that might make some of you hate him even more.
Offtopic I know...but according to NESN it was some guy from Cleveland:75 Red Hats said:Yes, and it touched on in the Band of Bearded Brothers DVD
I hope whatever happens the conversation starts with, "we've decided to keep Holt up as the utility guy"brandonchristensen said:What does this mean for Herrerror?
geoduck no quahog said:Let's not forget that Plan A for the Red Sox in 2014 was Drew at SS and Bogaerts (I assume) at 3rd. Otherwise they would not have put the QO on the table.
This is Plan A. Four months late.
agreed...the lectures on "why Drew is not coming through that door" makes for some comedic readingHoplite said:In all seriousness, I think this makes us a significantly better team on both sides of the ball. It might be one of Cherington's better moves, even without the irony of the lectures from "long time Red Sox fans" who really "understand the front office" and know how Drew wouldn't be coming back.
Pretty sure that was a joke.Sampo Gida said:
Come on. There was no chance Drew was accepting a QO and the Red Sox knew that. He was not Plan A.
Sampo Gida said:
Come on. There was no chance Drew was accepting a QO and the Red Sox knew that. He was not Plan A.
I'm in lockstep with you on this move. Irritates me, probably irrationally so. Nothing personal, Stephen.Red(s)HawksFan said:For one, I'm bothered by giving up on Bogaerts at SS so soon. For another, I'm bothered that this move just validates the bleating of morons like Nick Cafardo.
To be honest, I'm not sure which one bothers me more right now.
It IS irrational. This makes the team better. Who give's a shit about Cafardo and others?Dick Pole Upside said:I'm in lockstep with you on this move. Irritates me, probably irrationally so. Nothing personal, Stephen.
Curt S Loew said:It IS irrational. This makes the team better. Who give's a shit about Cafardo and others?
According to the McAdams summary, that's virtually impossible.PaulinMyrBch said:I hope whatever happens the conversation starts with, "we've decided to keep Holt up as the utility guy"
Not a joke. Why assume Drew would pass on the offer? If you make the offer, you need to assume a scenario of acceptance (14M is a lot of money to turn down)Sampo Gida said:Come on. There was no chance Drew was accepting a QO and the Red Sox knew that. He was not Plan A.
I apologize.Sampo Gida said:
Come on. There was no chance Drew was accepting a QO and the Red Sox knew that. He was not Plan A.
DanoooME said:I know a lot of people are pooh-poohing the effect of losing 4 months of development at SS for X, but it's something to worry about. SS is the 2nd most difficult position on the field defensively (behind catcher). There are a lot of things that need to be learned to play the position competently. Losing that time is going to be a setback to his development at that position no matter what. A lot of people seem to be convinced this is going to be a significant improvement. By the time Drew is ready, 1/3rd of the season will be gone. Are the Sox really going to gain enough to make the whole deal worth it? If he hits like last year, sure. I'm really on the fence about this because I really believe in X as a SS in the long term. I just hope it doesn't derail him or the Sox get the idea that he should stay at 3B because he'd be much more valuable overall as a SS long term.
Getting Drew may help short term and I hope he does now that the deal is done. But if Drew comes out of the gate hitting like WMB, then what? I can't wait to see that thread.
As MakMan previously pointed out, this still doesn't fix the 60 to 80% of the rotation that's performing below expectations (depending on how you feel about Lackey's performance), which to me is as just as big a problem.
At least this deal will make some really happy here.
How dare you deny me faux message-board outrage. Think of the children. And by children I mean Xander, who is, apparently still learning SS. In the majors. For...er...the World Champion Boston Red Sox.Hoplite said:Other than the posters who are embarrassed over the lectures they gave about how they were real fans because they undrestood that Drew was never returning, I don't see why anyone would be upset over this deal. Is Drew a better defensive shortstop than Bogaerts? Check. Is Drew a better offensive player than Middlebrooks or Brock Holt? Check. Does this move cost us any draft pick compensation? Nope. Is any of this surprising? Of course not.
Agreed on all fronts, especially the first part: a lot of people who were insistent that bringing back Drew was ridiculous, and a well-run organization like the Sox would never do it, have some crow to eat.Hoplite said:Other than the posters who are embarrassed over the lectures they gave about how they were real fans because they undrestood that Drew was never returning, I don't see why anyone would be upset over this deal. Is Drew a better defensive shortstop than Bogaerts? Check. Is Drew a better offensive player than Middlebrooks or Brock Holt? Check. Does this move cost us any draft pick compensation? Nope. Is any of this surprising? Of course not.
Hoplite said:Other than the posters who are embarrassed over the lectures they gave about how they were real fans because they undrestood that Drew was never returning, I don't see why anyone would be upset over this deal. Is Drew a better defensive shortstop than Bogaerts? Check. Is Drew a better offensive player than Middlebrooks or Brock Holt? Check. Does this move cost us any draft pick compensation? Nope. Is any of this surprising? Of course not.
Saints Rest said:I also can see that this move opens up the possibility that the UI spot no longer needs to be taken by someone who can play SS. This maybe means that Mookie might have an opening here soon after the ASB, if he shows that he can play a serviceable 3B (as well as the ability to hit AAA pitching).
Mea culpa's aren't big around here.Hoplite said:My introduction to SOSH was essentially posters telling me how I didn't know what I was talking about for suggesting we'd have a use for Drew and that we shouldn't count of Middlebroks. This page caputures most of it:
http://sonsofsamhorn.net/topic/79282-drew-v-20/page-14
Dan to Theo to Ben said:this is a referendum on WMB not Bogaerts.
benhogan said:Mea culpa's aren't big around here.
Just be glad that he is coming through our door and not Yankee Stadium.
Byrdbrain said:If the Sox need to or choose to DL Doubront that makes the roster moves much simpler and keeps them from having to play a position player short for a couple of days and maybe bringing up Cechini before they want to.
DL Doubront
Activate Drew
Start Waiver process(wait 48 hours)
Option Drew
Activate replacement pitcher(Webster, Workman whoever)
From upthread here is a description of what would need to be done without a Doubie DL.
http://www.csnne.com/boston-red-sox/getting-drew-back-red-sox-lineup-will-be-complicated
John Henry didn't spend $170 million to let a developing black hole at 3B torpedo the season. Ben logically decided that acquiring a third baseman who would provide anything close to Drew's value would be prohibitively expensive in prospect cost. It became obvious that they weren't getting a draft pick for Drew.Smiling Joe Hesketh said:43 games. They gave X 43 games at short. And all parties admitted he was getting better in the field, even Nick Cafardo. So you've got a young player working hard to get himself established at short, all while still contributing offensively, and you pull the plug at 43 games. It simply doesn't make any sense. And now the kid is crushed and his confidence shaken, all for a move that has zero long term benefit.
If WMB is the real issue here, then perhaps the Sox could have gone out and picked up a third baseman, instead of dicking around with their most promising young player. They set a course over the offseason with Xat short and then abandoned it before Memorial Day. That's reminiscent of the 2012 team and not that of last year's World Champions. Have some courage in your convictions, for crissakes.
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:43 games. They gave X 43 games at short. And all parties admitted he was getting better in the field, even Nick Cafardo. So you've got a young player working hard to get himself established at short, all while still contributing offensively, and you pull the plug at 43 games. It simply doesn't make any sense. And now the kid is crushed and his confidence shaken, all for a move that has zero long term benefit.
If WMB is the real issue here, then perhaps the Sox could have gone out and picked up a third baseman, instead of dicking around with their most promising young player. They set a course over the offseason with Xat short and then abandoned it before Memorial Day. That's reminiscent of the 2012 team and not that of last year's World Champions. Have some courage in your convictions, for crissakes.
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:And now the kid is crushed and his confidence shaken, all for a move that has zero long term benefit.
Plympton91 said:John Henry didn't spend $170 million to let a developing black hole at 3B torpedo the season. Ben logically decided that acquiring a third baseman who would provide anything close to Drew's value would be prohibitively expensive in prospect cost. It became obvious that they weren't getting a draft pick for Drew.
The organization is bigger than any one player. This decision was a no brainer. It should have happened the first time Middlebrooks went on the DL.
If there's a black hole at 3B, common sense would dictate they go get a third baseman.Plympton91 said:John Henry didn't spend $170 million to let a developing black hole at 3B torpedo the season. Ben logically decided that acquiring a third baseman who would provide anything close to Drew's value would be prohibitively expensive in prospect cost. It became obvious that they weren't getting a draft pick for Drew.
The organization is bigger than any one player. This decision was a no brainer. It should have happened the first time Middlebrooks went on the DL.
His quotes in the Globe today indicate that he's bitterly disappointed and deeply let down.Cumberland Blues said:
Really? This kid who by all accounts has off the charts make-up is going to be crushed by a move that makes the team better? Good grief.
And not every move has to have a longterm benefit - the next four and a half months count too. This does no longterm harm and helps the current squad. I am dumbfounded by all the panty wringing in this thread.
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:His quotes in the Globe today indicate that he's bitterly disappointed and deeply let down.
This is the problem though - there isn't one. It's common wisdom that a shortstop who can hit is the most valuable commodity in the infield, but 3b is a wasteland right now. Xander's wOBA is 7th among qualified shortstops but would be 5th among qualified 3b (Yes Wright and Longoria are struggling, but even if they hit at normal levels then Xander would be...7th). Last year a .341 wOBA would have placed 3rd among qualified SS and 7th among 3b, but one of those 3b is Cabrera and the other is Beltre who is getting up there.Smiling Joe Hesketh said:If there's a black hole at 3B, common sense would dictate they go get a third baseman.
The organixation is indeed bigger than one player. Long term, this organization would be better with X developing into a full time SS. Chasing short term gains and pissing away a chance to get their best prospect established is short sighted and stupid. You're essentially taking the Cora position in2007. It was wrong then and it's wrong now.
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:His quotes in the Globe today indicate that he's bitterly disappointed and deeply let down.
"They said they felt we're a better team with him (on the roster)," said Bogaerts, "so I guess that's why they went and got him. My heart is always at shortstop, but they felt they were a better team with him, so that's why they went out and got him. I was just (starting to) feel so good over there but they made a decision to bring him in."
Bogaerts put in countless hours at short during spring training, working with infield instructor Brian Butterfield and the news that he was losing the spot was tough to take.
"I don't know what to say on that one,'' he said. "I worked so hard at being there and just now, I started feeling comfortable out there. But they did what they had to do."
After making four errors in the first 43 games, Bogaerts made two errors at short in the span of five innings and wouldn't deny that the events of Tuesday contributed to his struggles.
"Tonight was a tough one,'' he acknowledged. "A lot going on. There was a lot going on today. I don't want to make no excuses, but it was definitely a tough day today.''
JFS7 said:sorry---dont know where else to put this gammo comment from today,while writing about drew:
The “Idiots” that ended the 86 year drought in 2004 turned against Terry Francona in 2005 when he didn’t name some of them to the All-Star Team, and it’s really hard to turn against Francona.
anyone else heard this before?