Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Red Sox get A-Rod

  1. #1
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Ludlow, MA
    Posts
    3,547
    At first I was drooling over this prospect, but now I'm not so sure. Boston would be losing BOTH Manny and Nomar in this deal and that is the heart of the order (the most prolific in the history of the game this season. They would also be spending a lot of $$$$. Theo has no part in this move and that also worries me. There can be no doubting the guy's skill and talent as a GM. Boston would need to get a LF and they still need a 2B. Would they not be creating a bigger hole with this trade?

    What do you guys feel about it?

  2. #2
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    4,530
    Look at it this way(and I'm a Yankee fan)-you get as good as a SS as there has ever been and you get rid on Manny-addition by subtraction. Face it-Nomah ain't what he used to be. Good pitching in the postsesaon gets him out(like Soriano, by the way). And as much as I hate saying it, Epstein will find some cheap nontender outfielder who can actually play LF and get some solid production.

    And the Yankees will win-AGAIN.

  3. #3
    Maxman
    Guest
    Scottish:
    AROD is far and away a much better player then Nomar. But you are right they are losing 2 bats and replacing them with one.

    PROS
    -They get rid of Manny and his negative clubhouse presence.
    -No more Nomar choking in next years post season.
    -Boston would now have the best player in baseball in their lineup

    Cons
    -Offense never ever wins championships
    -Getting rid of Nomar who seemed destined to be a career Red Sox just seems wrong. He was the heart and soul of the team not that long ago.
    -This trade would cripple them payroll wise. They will have zero room to move over the next few years.

    This seems like a Steve Phillips move. The kind of trade you make when you are playing fantasy baseball. I understand that they need to get rid of Ramirez but with salaries coming down how bad is that AROD deal going to seem in a few years?

  4. #4
    And A-Rod's contract still has 7 more seasons to go. It will severly restrict whichever team deals for him. Texas knows that they aren't ever getting back equal value, but they can't compete with that contract around their necks. Boston will find out the same thing.

  5. #5
    Maxman
    Guest
    Originally posted by mbn007@Dec 8 2003, 01:35 PM
    And A-Rod's contract still has 7 more seasons to go. It will severly restrict whichever team deals for him. Texas knows that they aren't ever getting back equal value, but they can't compete with that contract around their necks. Boston will find out the same thing.
    True. Plus Boston's problem wasn't scoring runs last year. Their lineup was pretty good as it was. Not that Nomar's wedding is out of the way I am sure he will get 2 or 3 hits next postseason.

  6. #6
    Originally posted by Maxman+Dec 8 2003, 03:33 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Maxman @ Dec 8 2003, 03:33 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--mbn007@Dec 8 2003, 01:35 PM
    And A-Rod&#39;s contract still has 7 more seasons to go. It will severly restrict whichever team deals for him. Texas knows that they aren&#39;t ever getting back equal value, but they can&#39;t compete with that contract around their necks. Boston will find out the same thing.
    True. Plus Boston&#39;s problem wasn&#39;t scoring runs last year. Their lineup was pretty good as it was. Not that Nomar&#39;s wedding is out of the way I am sure he will get 2 or 3 hits next postseason. [/b][/quote]
    Here&#39;s another point to consider. Does adding A-Rod and his 180 million over the next 7 years, equal the production of Manny and Nomar, who will cost some 175 million over the next 5 seasons (assuming a 5 year 15 million per season for Nomar)? It seems to me that the Sox would be spending almost the same amount of &#036;&#036;&#036; for A-Rod, yet he isn&#39;t equal to the offensive production of Manny and Nomar combined.

    Gets real interesting. Now, do the Sox approach Pedro and offer an extension, so he won&#39;t sulk, especially since Schilling just received one? Seems to me the Sox are the big spenders this off-season.

  7. #7
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Nomar makes 11-13 per, Manny makes 20 per. ARod makes 25 per. The Sox would be around 6 to 8 million per year in the black after this deal, and if the three-team deal goes down, they&#39;d end up with Glaus, enabling them to move Bill Mueller to second base.

    They&#39;d still need a left-fielder, but could probably get one like Reggie Sanders or something.

    I don&#39;t know what is happening with Foulke.

    .

  8. #8
    Originally posted by jets5ever@Dec 10 2003, 09:21 AM
    Nomar makes 11-13 per, Manny makes 20 per. ARod makes 25 per. The Sox would be around 6 to 8 million per year in the black after this deal, and if the three-team deal goes down, they&#39;d end up with Glaus, enabling them to move Bill Mueller to second base.

    They&#39;d still need a left-fielder, but could probably get one like Reggie Sanders or something.

    I don&#39;t know what is happening with Foulke.

    .
    Actually, A-Rods contract is an escalator type. He will be in the 28 million range from here on out. The first few seasons were much lower average per. Adding Glaus, who seems to be a bit injury prone, and is well paid, won&#39;t be any bargain for the Sox.

    Foulke is expected to decide between the Sox and A&#39;s by the meetings next week. Both offers are similar. It basically comes down to whether he is an East Coast guy, or a Left Coast guy.

    Mueller at 2B may be a recipe for disaster in the field. Not that Walker was any great shakes there though.

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Agreed about Glaus.

    Mueller is very good defensively. I think people over analysze and over specialize things way too much. A good defensive third basemen is going to be a good defensive second basemen. It&#39;s all baseball.

    But I don&#39;t even think Walker was that bad defensively, I think the Sox should keep him.

    I don&#39;t understand the need for Foulke...yeah, he&#39;s a lot better than Williamson, but Williamson is good enough and the Sox could use that money elsewhere.

  10. #10
    Originally posted by jets5ever@Dec 10 2003, 12:22 PM
    Agreed about Glaus.

    Mueller is very good defensively. I think people over analysze and over specialize things way too much. A good defensive third basemen is going to be a good defensive second basemen. It&#39;s all baseball.

    But I don&#39;t even think Walker was that bad defensively, I think the Sox should keep him.

    I don&#39;t understand the need for Foulke...yeah, he&#39;s a lot better than Williamson, but Williamson is good enough and the Sox could use that money elsewhere.
    Maybe Williamson is asking for a ton of &#036;&#036;&#036;&#036;&#036;&#036;&#036;&#036 ;, and the Sox feel that Foulke is a better buy at the price.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us