Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Red Sox acquire Victor Martinez for Masterson/Hagadone/Bryan Price


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
291 replies to this topic

#51 Toe Nash

  • 3010 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:23 PM

QUOTE (Smiling Joe Hesketh @ Jul 31 2009, 02:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Why do folks think it would be an awful trade? Buchholz is 25, not 22; there's a pretty good chance he never pans out the way his ceaseless hype foretold. And it's very possible VMart will become the catcher for the Sox over the next few years, not just a 1Bman.

Talk to me.

-Buchholz is in the rotation now, so Wake had better be healthy / no one else had better get hurt or it's Bowden / Masterson time.
-If VMart is the catcher of the next few years why not just sign him as a FA instead of giving up a huge chip for him.
-What do you do with PT with Tek / LaRoche / Youk / Ortiz?
-Most people are pretty confident Clay will be good. For four more years after this one.

#52 HomeBrew1901


  • Has Season 1 of "Manimal" on Blu Ray


  • 8332 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:23 PM

QUOTE (Rudy Pemberton @ Jul 31 2009, 02:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Nothing, it was sarcasm. People are drooling over Buchholz as if he's the next Homer Bailey.
My mistake, a lot of prospect F'rs.

#53 FelixMantilla


  • reincarnated mr hate


  • 8576 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:23 PM

QUOTE (Rudy Pemberton @ Jul 31 2009, 02:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If true, than I guess Buchholz wears an Indians hat into the Hall of Fame.



#54 Carmine Hose

  • 3483 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:23 PM

QUOTE
2009, Games played:

C - 52
1B - 47
DH - 2


Thanks for making my point. 51% of the time as a C. Not enough.

#55 yecul


  • appreciates irony very much


  • 14245 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:23 PM

QUOTE (Smiling Joe Hesketh @ Jul 31 2009, 02:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Why do folks think it would be an awful trade? Buchholz is 25, not 22; there's a pretty good chance he never pans out the way his ceaseless hype foretold. And it's very possible VMart will become the catcher for the Sox over the next few years, not just a 1Bman.

Talk to me.


All along Buchholz has been said to be the centerpiece in a potential trade for Martinez, Halladay, or Gonzalez.

While we may be down on him it is clear that he is a valuable trade piece.

Boston would not be getting full value or even full perceived value.

#56 Foulkey Reese


  • foulkiavelli


  • 20062 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:23 PM

QUOTE (glennhoffmania @ Jul 31 2009, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Because Victor is hardly young, not cost controlled long term, not a good catcher, not a good enough hitter to be the everyday 1B, and seems to be on the decline. Buchholz may not pan out, but other teams seem to value him pretty highly right now, so it seems like you could get more for him.

What the fuck are you talking about?



#57 Quintanariffic

  • 4407 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:24 PM

QUOTE (DieHardSoxFan1 @ Jul 31 2009, 01:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I'm in this boat. The Sox aren't going to fleece every trade partner, and Buchholz hasn't shown the ability to pitch with sustained effectiveness at the big league level.

The prospect brigade is out in spades.

That's not the point. Whether he pans out or not, his value today is what matters. Is losing the rest of Buchholz career (or, more specifically, the current perceived value of same) worth the upgrade from a Lowell/Laroche platoon to Martinez?

#58 Kevin Youkulele


  • wishes Claude Makelele was a Red Sox


  • 1603 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:24 PM

QUOTE (HomeBrew1901 @ Jul 31 2009, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
ESPN just reported no names have been mentioned only speculation, calm down folks.

So ESPN essentially threw their own guy, Gammo, under the bus? That was fast.

#59 HomeBrew1901


  • Has Season 1 of "Manimal" on Blu Ray


  • 8332 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:24 PM

QUOTE (CrackpotTheory @ Jul 31 2009, 02:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Do you not get sarcasm? Like, at all?

Hard to tell sometimes, you've seen other peoples posts here, some people really are ready to induct him.

#60 The_Powa_of_Seiji_Ozawa

  • 4122 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:24 PM

QUOTE (DaughtersofDougMirabelli @ Jul 31 2009, 02:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Do they plan on using Victor Martinez at C more than 50% of the time? The only way this trade is even close to alright is if they still see VMart as a full time C, and I just don't see that.

Exactly. Trading Clay for Martinez as one of the top offensive catchers in baseball is an acceptable deal. Trading Clay for Martinez as a combo 1B/DH who catches once a week is an awful deal. It's all on whether Tito has the balls/common sense to bench Varitek, and I don't see that happening.

#61 HomeBrew1901


  • Has Season 1 of "Manimal" on Blu Ray


  • 8332 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:24 PM

QUOTE (CrackpotTheory @ Jul 31 2009, 02:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Do you not get sarcasm? Like, at all?

Hard to tell sometimes, you've seen other peoples posts here, some people really are ready to induct him.

#62 Guest_Corsi Combover_*

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:25 PM

QUOTE
2:21 p.m.: A baseball source told the Globe's Tony Massarotti that the Red Sox and Indians are close to a deal for Martinez. It is unclear at this point which players the Red Sox are trading. The deal was first reported by USA Today's Bob Nightengale.
http://www.boston.co...umor_cen_1.html

#63 fuzzy_one

  • 273 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:25 PM

Heyman has posted to SI that his "sources confirm," but he also hedges by saying VMart "seems" headed to Boston.

#64 Sprowl


  • mikey lowell of the sandbox


  • 20631 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:25 PM

QUOTE (P'tucket, rhymes with... @ Jul 31 2009, 11:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
A "close-to-majors" guy per Sherman could mean Bowden is the centerpiece. I can't believe Theo would move Buch for Martinez.

This is what I'm thinking too. Even if the management has a dim view of Buchholz's prospects, I have to think that his TradeValue would exceed Martinez. Buchholz is actually in the majors; Bowden is reasonably close.

Acquiring Martinez probably means disposing of Kottaras, which in turn reduces the likelihood the Wakefield will make it back this season -- a herniated disk with a bone fragment is serious for any pitcher, let alone one well over 40 years old. That leaves a starting rotation of Beckett-Lester-Smoltz-Penny-Matsuzaka... probably not playoff-worthy.

#65 Gambler7

  • 3065 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:25 PM

QUOTE
The Indians' exact return is not known, but the Red Sox did not include either right-hander Clay Buchholz nor right-hander Daniel Bard in the deal, according to a source.

http://msn.foxsports...b/story/9875596

#66 ngruz25


  • Bibby


  • 9554 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:25 PM

QUOTE (Kevin Youkulele @ Jul 31 2009, 02:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
So ESPN essentially threw their own guy, Gammo, under the bus? That was fast.

Gammons didn't report anything, Merloni reported a text he got from Gammons. Who the hell knows what the text said.

#67 Mystic Merlin


  • SoSH Member


  • 21394 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:25 PM

QUOTE (Carmine Hose @ Jul 31 2009, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Thanks for making my point. 51% of the time as a C. Not enough.


What's wrong with having him split time between C and 1B?

#68 BoSoxFink


  • Stripes


  • 4750 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:26 PM

QUOTE (Smiling Joe Hesketh @ Jul 31 2009, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Point 1: VMart can do one thing those other guys can't: catch. I suspect, given the infantile infatuation the Sox FO has with versatility, that his ability to catch and play 1B while hitting pretty well held a major appeal for them.

Point 2: Day ain't over yet.


Martinez is 30 years old and we all know catchers have the propensity to fade out quickly especially defensively. Add on to that the fact that Martinez is not a great defensive catcher to begin with, then I don't believe it is a huge deal that he can play catcher for us. If he was in the 25-28 age range, then I would agree with you. I just can't see the Sox giving up Buchholz in this deal. Please don't let it be true.

#69 HomeBrew1901


  • Has Season 1 of "Manimal" on Blu Ray


  • 8332 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:26 PM

QUOTE (Kevin Youkulele @ Jul 31 2009, 02:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
So ESPN essentially threw their own guy, Gammo, under the bus? That was fast.

Well technically the rumor is that Gammons texted Merloni.

#70 5belongstoGeorge


  • Left Coast


  • PipPipPip
  • 8013 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:26 PM

Not seeing 'Tek stand up 15 seconds before a high fastball crosses the plate is worth almost any price.

#71 4 6 3 DP

  • 1270 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:26 PM

I'd tend to think an asset like VMart is a pretty damned valuable one given how few catchers of his ability are available in baseball. Assuming they can re-sign him (obvious big if) they've eliminated the need for a catcher most likely for the next 5 years as Varitek retires. He's played a lot of 1B because the Indians have Shoppach and he's likely playing 125-135 games at C for Boston over the next many years again assuming a re-signing.

Not arguing the haul we give up for him, to me this is a needed acquisition for this team, especially if they're ever again going to try and put out the relentless 1-9 offenses of the 2003-4 timeframe. I think the comments here significantly underestimate the value of a plus offensive catcher and trying to acquire one with VMart's offensive abilities.

#72 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28120 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:26 PM

Well, then it seems like they probably gave up Masterson or Bowden.

#73 Smiling Joe Hesketh


  • now batting steve sal hiney. the leftfielder, hiney


  • 25410 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:26 PM

QUOTE (Gambler7 @ Jul 31 2009, 02:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Good. Calm the fluck down, people.

#74 MartyBarrettMVP

  • 2149 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:26 PM

QUOTE (Gambler7 @ Jul 31 2009, 02:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>


If this is the case, and I sure hope it is, smells like Bowden to me.

#75 czar


  • fanboy


  • 3573 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:27 PM

QUOTE (Smiling Joe Hesketh @ Jul 31 2009, 01:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Why do folks think it would be an awful trade? Buchholz is 25, not 22; there's a pretty good chance he never pans out the way his ceaseless hype foretold. And it's very possible VMart will become the catcher for the Sox over the next few years, not just a 1Bman.

Talk to me.


Even if you don't think Buchholz will pan out to at least be a mid-rotation guy (a cost-controlled #3 would carry immense value in any event), you have to reason that he could have been spun (or packaged) for someone with A) more short-term benefit (i.e., Halladay) or B) more long-term benefit (someone of Gonzalez ilk). Trade value.

This isn't even a debate over whether Buchholz will ever achieve ace status; it (the rumor-- if true) would appear to me to be a mismanagement of resources, all the while condemning the Sox to rely on a 3/4/5 or Wakefield/Smoltz/Penny from here on out-- while ALSO leaving only Lester, Beckett, and Daisuke as the only major league caliber starters (I am not counting Wakefield and refuse to count Masterson/Bowden at this time) under contract for next season.

The more I think about it, the more I really hope it's Bowden and not Buchholz.

EDIT: And it seems the Rosenthal report implies it.

Edited by czar, 31 July 2009 - 01:28 PM.


#76 SeanBerry


  • poopdragon


  • 3226 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:27 PM

QUOTE (Smiling Joe Hesketh @ Jul 31 2009, 02:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Why do folks think it would be an awful trade? Buchholz is 25, not 22; there's a pretty good chance he never pans out the way his ceaseless hype foretold. And it's very possible VMart will become the catcher for the Sox over the next few years, not just a 1Bman.

Talk to me.


If this is the deal, it's awful.

1. Victor Martinez is 30 and a shitty catcher. He's not the backstop on the future. He's someone 1B/DH of the future but his days behind the plate are very limited.
2. Buchholz may never be great but that's not the point. The point is maximizing the trade value. Losing Buchholz upsets me far more because he's a valuable trade chip.
3. What does Martinez do for us? Where does he fit with this team? Is he an upgrade anywhere? If so, is it worth Buchholz?

I don't see it.



#77 amarshal2

  • 2610 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:27 PM

QUOTE (Gambler7 @ Jul 31 2009, 02:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Interesting. I think the Sox lose a 1:1 deal with Buchholz but win with Bowden. Can't wait for details...

#78 BoSoxFink


  • Stripes


  • 4750 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:27 PM

QUOTE (Gambler7 @ Jul 31 2009, 02:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>


If true then the deal becomes a good one. The only thing that would make it a bad deal is the fact if either of these guys are included. I would actually like the deal if there is no Buchholz/Bard involved.

#79 Stuart Scott's Lazy Eye


  • Sad Sack


  • 1655 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:27 PM

QUOTE (Rudy Pemberton @ Jul 31 2009, 02:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If true, than I guess Buchholz wears an Indians hat into the Hall of Fame.


You expect Buchholz to have 20 win seasons every year until he retires immediately after he joins the Indians? Do you expect the Indians to become some sort of dynasty within the next 15 years, with Clay leading the way?

I hope for your own sanity that you're joking.

#80 Fishercat


  • Svelte and sexy!


  • 4392 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:27 PM

If it's Bowden + Another Piece, or Masterson + Another Piece, then this suddenly goes from horrible to pretty good, at least for me.

#81 Carmine Hose

  • 3483 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:27 PM

QUOTE
What's wrong with having him split time between C and 1B?


It affects the value of what you should give up for him. Even Joe Mauer's value would be lessened if he didn't catch anymore.

#82 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28120 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:28 PM

LaRoche to the Mets?

Hopefully we get Cora back, this place would fucking explode.

#83 Quintanariffic

  • 4407 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:28 PM

QUOTE (MartyBarrettMVP @ Jul 31 2009, 01:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If this is the case, and I sure hope it is, smells like Bowden to me.

FWIW, Bowden's last three starts have been very good for the Pawsox and his velocity is back on the FB.

#84 fuzzy_one

  • 273 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:28 PM

QUOTE (MartyBarrettMVP @ Jul 31 2009, 02:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If this is the case, and I sure hope it is, smells like Bowden to me.

Agreed.

If so, which teams might be in the market for LaRoche?

#85 Robinson Checo

  • 2457 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:28 PM

How does V Mart project to hit at Fenway? Lots of folks talked about A Gonzlaez hitting well if he was at fenway, but not much about Martinez. I wanted A Gonzalez, but I think this may work. Buchholz looks timid on the mound and Eck was right to rip on him last game for nibbling. I get the cost controlled part of it, but I think the Sox are still deep enough in pitching prospects they can make a move like this and be ok.

#86 Mystic Merlin


  • SoSH Member


  • 21394 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:29 PM

QUOTE (Carmine Hose @ Jul 31 2009, 02:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
It affects the value of what you should give up for him. Even Joe Mauer's value would be lessened if he didn't catch anymore.


Well, if he was catching 80-90% of the time, he would not be available or would require a Halladay/A-Gon-type package.

#87 HomeBrew1901


  • Has Season 1 of "Manimal" on Blu Ray


  • 8332 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:29 PM

QUOTE (Quintanariffic @ Jul 31 2009, 02:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
FWIW, Bowden's last three starts have been very good for the Pawsox and his velocity is back on the FB.

Awww shit, you mean we can't get Martinez for a bucket of balls? It's going to cost the Sox something of value.

#88 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28120 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:29 PM

QUOTE
Buchholz may never be great but that's not the point. The point is maximizing the trade value. Losing Buchholz upsets me far more because he's a valuable trade chip.


So, what are teams willing to give up for him? I trust that Theo has a better idea of his value than us, and he's not even rumored to be in this deal.

#89 BoSoxFink


  • Stripes


  • 4750 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:29 PM

QUOTE (Fishercat @ Jul 31 2009, 02:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If it's Bowden + Another Piece, or Masterson + Another Piece, then this suddenly goes from horrible to pretty good, at least for me.


Also if Buchholz wasn't involved in the deal as someone stated earlier, there is still a possibilty at least, that Halladay could still wind up in Boston. I don't think it will happen but there would still be that slight chance.

#90 Joe D Reid

  • 2596 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:29 PM

QUOTE (Rudy Pemberton @ Jul 31 2009, 02:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well, then it seems like they probably gave up Masterson or Bowden.

Or both, which would still be just fine by me. VMart/Tek is a solid C tandem over the next season and change, and serves as a hedge against the declines of both Tek and Lowell because of VMart's positional flexibility.

Of course, it would have been cooler if the Sox had just not signed Lowell and Tek to multi-year deals to begin with, but that's spilt milk at this point.

#91 Quintanariffic

  • 4407 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:29 PM

QUOTE (Fishercat @ Jul 31 2009, 01:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If it's Bowden + Another Piece, or Masterson + Another Piece, then this suddenly goes from horrible to pretty good, at least for me.

Agreed. Would love to know what the other piece is though. Where is the Indians system thin?

Since you can't have enough pitching my guess is something like Pimentel.

#92 Stuart Scott's Lazy Eye


  • Sad Sack


  • 1655 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:30 PM

QUOTE
1:27pm: FOX now says Clay Buchholz and Daniel Bard are not in this deal.


http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

#93 Gash Prex

  • 1108 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:31 PM

the fox sports article indicates that

QUOTE
The Indians' exact return is not known, but the Red Sox did not include either right-hander Clay Buchholz nor right-hander Daniel Bard in the deal, according to a source.


http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/9876546...s'-Martinez

#94 CrackpotTheory

  • Pip
  • 836 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:31 PM

QUOTE (Kevin Youkulele @ Jul 31 2009, 02:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
So ESPN essentially threw their own guy, Gammo, under the bus? That was fast.


Where is Gammons saying it's Buchholz? All we say was a post here saying he told Merloni deal is almost done. Did Merloni say Buchholz, because I don't see it anywhere else?

#95 mikeford


  • woolwich!


  • 16980 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:31 PM

WEEI via Fox Sports: Buchholz and Bard NOT in the Vmart deal

#96 Joshv02

  • 1411 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:31 PM

QUOTE
Hearing Nick Hagadone is big part of package Red Sox are sending to Tribe for V-Mart. 2007 sandwich pick for Boston #mlbtrades

http://twitter.com/J...atus/3055596186

#97 Smiling Joe Hesketh


  • now batting steve sal hiney. the leftfielder, hiney


  • 25410 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:31 PM

QUOTE (mikeford @ Jul 31 2009, 02:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
WEEI via Fox Sports: Buchholz and Bard NOT in the Vmart deal

I'm gonna go get the papers, get the papers.

This sure points to a Bowden/Masterson type of deal, I'd think.

#98 SoxScout


  • Maalox Territory


  • 30161 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:32 PM

JonathanMayoB3: Hearing Nick Hagadone is big part of package Red Sox are sending to Tribe for V-Mart.

#99 Carmine Hose

  • 3483 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:32 PM

Fine with Hagadone going after the TJ

#100 fuzzy_one

  • 273 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 01:32 PM

If it's Bowden + Hagadone, what do people think? I just know the basics on Hagadone. How's he recovering from TJ?