We improved our rotation for a (very likeable) spare part Rey Ordonez type living the definite small sample size outlier part of his offensive career.
Peavy didn't step up and dominate crucial games for us as we might have hoped, but made us stronger and deeper in a core area and as a result helped us win a world series. The net 2013 impact may have been small, but it certainly is positive in my mind.
It also opened up space for X, creating a situation of addition by subtraction, since I think it would have taken a painfully big slump by another player for X to get any playing time during a race with a steady veteran trusting manager.
Even with 2013 behind us, I would rather have Peavy than Iggy right now. We are close to letting Drew walk to let X play, and I don't think there is any way Iggy would be realistically projected to have more total value than X in 2014 and beyond. When we deal Dempster for some useful return and Peavy has a solid year in the middle of the rotation, I think his value will be clearer, and I expect that to happen. If we instead deal Peavy we can evaluate how his return compares to Iggy, and if we don't deal a starter we are clearly putting rotation depth ahead of some other areas which probably has a reason.
In terms of really being upside surprised by either, I think it is more likely that Peavy has a rebound year at age 33 (he was 5.2 WAR in 2012 after a so-so three years before that) than Iggy learning to hit enough to justify wanting him to play ahead of X and WMB or Drew.
Good trade the day it was made, and one I am happy with in the offseason after.
Edit: Disclaimer - I used to watch a lot of "Good Peavy" in person in 2006-2007, so my evaluation of him is likely stuck in the past and a little rosier than it should be, but I think the conclusions stand, and I think that it isn't completely unreasonable to expect a 33 year old pitcher to perform like his 31 year old year even if not his 26 year old year.
Peavy didn't step up and dominate crucial games for us as we might have hoped, but made us stronger and deeper in a core area and as a result helped us win a world series. The net 2013 impact may have been small, but it certainly is positive in my mind.
It also opened up space for X, creating a situation of addition by subtraction, since I think it would have taken a painfully big slump by another player for X to get any playing time during a race with a steady veteran trusting manager.
Even with 2013 behind us, I would rather have Peavy than Iggy right now. We are close to letting Drew walk to let X play, and I don't think there is any way Iggy would be realistically projected to have more total value than X in 2014 and beyond. When we deal Dempster for some useful return and Peavy has a solid year in the middle of the rotation, I think his value will be clearer, and I expect that to happen. If we instead deal Peavy we can evaluate how his return compares to Iggy, and if we don't deal a starter we are clearly putting rotation depth ahead of some other areas which probably has a reason.
In terms of really being upside surprised by either, I think it is more likely that Peavy has a rebound year at age 33 (he was 5.2 WAR in 2012 after a so-so three years before that) than Iggy learning to hit enough to justify wanting him to play ahead of X and WMB or Drew.
Good trade the day it was made, and one I am happy with in the offseason after.
Edit: Disclaimer - I used to watch a lot of "Good Peavy" in person in 2006-2007, so my evaluation of him is likely stuck in the past and a little rosier than it should be, but I think the conclusions stand, and I think that it isn't completely unreasonable to expect a 33 year old pitcher to perform like his 31 year old year even if not his 26 year old year.