What we can trade Julio Lugo for RIGHT NOW
by lone1c on Apr 28, 2009 10:32 PM EDT
Email
PrintSeeing how Lugo has returned to glorious midseason form in just three innings tonight, I'd like to offer Theo Epstein and the rest of the front office some advice on what Lugo's current value in a trade would be worth:
- One bat, after being used in a broken-bat pop-up.
- A scuffed-up baseball that your dog chewed the other day.
- That half-finished carton of milk that's been sitting in your fridge for the last two months.
- The cash value on one coupon from Sunday's paper.
- Britney Spears's vows of lifelong fidelity.
- A case of food poisoning.
- Bad fanfic.
- A hangnail.
- That Brian Austin Green collectible plate your cousin Maureen has been holding on to for all these years.
- The trade-in value of Carl Edwards's car after the Talladega race this past weekend.
Feel free to add your own suggestions for what we could trade Lugo for below.
Update: Now that E6's three-run error has snapped our eleven-game win streak, I offer another eleven things which I would trade straight up for dear ol' Julio right now:
- A free case of syphilis.
- Suddenly Susan, The Complete Second Season on DVD
- The styrofoam inserts in a computer box.
- A discarded hair from
Youk'sEllsbury's beard. - A shot of benzene-laced Everclear.
- A shot of actual dirty water from the Charles.
- The lint from my dryer.
- A ball of used tinfoil.
- The last piece of chewing gum Tito spat out tonight.
- A used toilet bowl brush.
- One at-bat from Nick Green or Jed Lowrie.
73 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Lugo's error didn't lose the game
J-Lo’s did. Lowell’s error didn’t help either. The Sox weren’t going to win 130 straight games. Lighten up.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
It's a 7-4 game
Without the error. That’s a big difference. We don’t necessarily even have Lopez pitching if Penny gets out of the inning at that point.
And as for lightening up, with respect to Lugo, I believe that this is me being generous to Lugo. I’m normally a very rational person. However, my hatred and loathing of Lugo’s continued presence on this team exceeds even my hatred of the Yankees and Rays right now.
Lugo isn't a very good player
But it’s silly to make him a scapegoat, especially since the other option is Nick Green has been a below-average player over his career. As for Lugo’s error, you can’t assume the DP. Also, Lowell’s error cost a run.
Lugo gave the Sox the lead, a lead Saito surrendered. Saito has been shaky. How about scapegoating him? At this point, I’m not even sure I want to see Paps try to protect a 1-run lead. He hasn’t looked good lately.
The Sox lost last night because of Penny, Saito, and J-Lo. The first was awful. The second didn’t hold the lead. And the third dropped an easy feed from Youk, allowing the winning run to score.
To hate Lugo more than the MFY or Rays is irrational. I’m not a Lugo supporter. But the scapegoating of Lugo borders on insane. What about Mike Lowell’s 7 DPs in 81 PAs? Ellsbury flat out sucks right now, with the bat. Jacoby, our lead-off hitter, has a .308 OBP and insists on swinging for the fences. Those efforts will yield maybe 7 HR and end countless innings. Over his last 7 games (the ones that include a big HR and steal of home), Ellsbury hit .273 AVG/.292 OBP (forget his SLG). Also, Ellsbury has hit into 4 DPs already. In terms of importance to the team, Ellsbury’s shortcomings are far greater than Lugo’s. Yet Taco gets a pass. Lugo had a .355 OBP last year. Maybe he should lead-off and Ellsbury should hit last.
Look, I wanted Lowrie to be the everyday SS. That isn’t going to happen anytime soon. Lugo and Green will platoon for a while. Then, Lugo will start. Over his career, Lugo has been better than Green. Sox fans have to stop acting like every bad thing that happens to the team is because of Lugo. Hey, the won the WS in 2007 with him as the starting SS. They lost last year when he was hurt. As long as the Sox are healthy, they’ll be fine with Lugo at SS.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Apr 29, 2009 9:36 AM EDT up reply actions
+100000
I totally agree. And agree about Ellsbury. He is useful as a defensive CF, but he is an absolute offensive nightmare. That has a chance to really hurt the team much more than anything Julio Lugo does. Does anyone doubt that Ellsbury will have the lowest OBP on the team by year’s end? And he is leading off? Right now Ells has a 685 OPS. To put that in perspective the average major league player is significanly above that. That is a travesty. But, hey, he is cute and stole home, right?
Errors happen
What, you expected the Sox to go the entire season without committing any errors?
Lugo’s error contributed to the loss, but it’s not the cause. You’re so caught up in your loathing of Lugo that you’re just giving a pass to Lopez’s inexcusable error, Penny’s pitching worthy of a salary roughly equal to his name, Lowell’s error, GIDPs from Lowell and Pedroia, and the team’s 11 LOB. That’s not you being generous, that’s you showing your bias.
I seriously doubt we’d ever see you rant like this over a beloved player. Say, a slugger who has gone through an eighth of the season hitting like a minor leaguer and has yet to hit even a single home run. Whose VORP thus far is negative. Who hits third in the lineup.
You're right
I am biased. And I freely admitted that—-my hatred is not rational. I know that he was the SS on the 2007 squad, but all I can see when Lugo is on the field or at the plate is an enormous pile of unproductive Sox dollars where a SS should be.
As for Ortiz, that’s a whole other story. I am absolutely TERRIFIED that he’s not going to bounce back. More than I’m concerned over anybody else’s struggles right now—-including Beckett, Lester, Dice-K, Ellsbury, and Papelbon. But you’re right, I’m not as likely to rant about Ortiz. I will be concerned and dismayed and disappointed and alarmed, but I will probably not ever evince the same unrighteous fury or lasting anger at Ortiz.
It’s not rational. But I reserve the right to blow my top at times.
(And I’m not giving a pass to Lowell or Lopez or Penny. Especially not Penny—-he needs to shape up or look for a new home real quick now. However, other than the pitching, I believe an error that leads to a 3-run homer in the next at-bat is a much bigger concern than 1-run errors.)
Draw me the line...
…from an error in one at bat to a home run in the next. Did Lugo commit the error, then threaten the pitcher’s family if he didn’t groove one for the next batter? Or are you saying that Penny is so immature that he decided to give up a home run in retaliation for Lugo committing an error, which is something all shortstops do more than any other fielder on their teams?
You’re not just irrational. You’re way off in left field.
I was sloppy.
I should know better than to post in a hurry.
What I had in my head was that an error that leads to three runs is more costly than an error that leads to one run. Somehow, that didn’t make it from my brain to my fingers.
But it's not all his fault that the error led to three runs
You’re still making the faulty assumption — based on your own admitted bias — that his error was the proximate cause of the three runs. But you’re ignoring that the pitcher’s job is to get batters out, regardless of the crappy defense behind him. Lugo didn’t serve up a homer on a silver platter, Penny did. That makes it more Penny’s fault than Lugo’s.
So if Lugo made the play (assuming a DP) no runs score. With the error there is a man on first and second with one out (correct me if I’m wrong about the situation). Using TangoTiger’s run expectancy matrix, the latter situation has a run expectancy of .971 runs. Assuming context neutrality, we can say Lugo cost them about one run.
There are errors and then there are
team depression causing errors and events. A player who cannot catch a perfect toss to his glove in a crucial situation causes more than just the problems caused by that error. It depresses the fans and other players so rallies and comebacks are less likely, and puts real doubt into the minds of everyone with open eyes that the team is balanced and a winner.
BTW, the same is true for pitchers who get hit around like they were throwing little league caliber pitches. That is why I came down so hard on Wakefield for what happened to him at the end of last year.
by NG on Apr 30, 2009 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions
But the Sox did come back...
so the Lugo error must not have been a “team depression causing error.” Or did the Lugo error cause the Lopez error? Actually, there also might have been a “team depression event” that caused the Lugo error. And I wonder what caused that error, hmmmm… Baseball is more complicated than I thought.
Sarcasm aside, I agree that all baseball plays are not independent events. However, I do not think that this is because certain plays depress players to the point that they play worse. There are usually concrete side effects of a bad play. For instance, the Lugo error obviously caused more runs, but also forced Penny to throw more pitches and then tax the bullpen more and maybe Lopez would not have even been in the game. But do those effects make the Lugo error a worse play than other errors? I don’t believe so, but I know many people do, so whatever.
What you either choose to not see or can't see is that
THE History of such events add up! It is like the formation of scar tissue, and it stays! Lugo is a constant wound that has lasting physical and emotional BAD effects!
by NG on May 1, 2009 6:33 AM EDT up reply actions
Lugo has a history if only you watch the games.
It adds up to many clutch errors and poor hitting in clutch situations. Last year he must have ended more rallies with hitting into DPs and striking out than any player other than Varitek that I can remember. I watched all the games, so don’t tell me different. He is a giant momentum sucker. At least Varitek can play his field position fairly well.
I often think that Lugo sucks as much momentum out of the Sox through his bad fielding in clutch situation as he does with his poor clutch hitting! Any sox fan defending Lugo is satisfied, IMHO, with less than mediocrity! I am not!
by NG on Apr 29, 2009 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions
You watch, but you don't see.
You are right about one thing, Lugo is mediocre. No one is saying otherwise. But your other characterizations are faulty. It is a perfect example of how sports fans let emotions and not reason guide what they “see” (as in, “I see Jeter making some fancy plays, he is a good fielder”). Lugo is close to average in the field. His “clutch” hitting as defined by how he hits in a high-leverage situation compared to his average, is…average. And it is true that DPs by definition are rally-killers. In that regard, we all remember Mike Lowells big hits (like his nice 3 run bomb against the Yankees this weekend), but Lowell has grounded into an amazing 7 DPs this year in roughly 80 plate appearences. This means that nearly 9% of the time Lowell has been at bat this year, the result has been a DP. By contrast, even Lugo last year (his worst in this regard) had a 50% lower GDP rate. BTW I am not criticizing Lowell, who has hit well this year, but it does illustrate how deceptive “watching” can be. I am glad that the people who run this team see beyond this, otherwise we could end up with a team like the Mets or worse for our money.
I blame Lugo for global warming!
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Apr 29, 2009 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions
I see that and I raise you
I blame Lugo for this.
I love a Rick-roll as much as the next guy.
But I’m not convinced it’s a raise over The Haiming.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
If Lowell kept up hitting into DPs
with virtually no other redeeming factors, it would not take long before fans (and hopefully management) would be on his case. The reality is that Lowell does not have such a history, and he has many other clutch redeeming factors now and in the past. I most assuredly cannot say that about Julio Lugo. If he, Lugo, outright wins one game a year for the team, I would be surprised. Now in how many games has he killed, I mean outright killed, potential rallies??
There is a saying that you can lie with statistics, and another saying that even if you cannot describe something, you know it when you see it. Lugo is crap, and I know it because I have seen it or at least the results of what he brings about.
Do you want a championship team this year or not?? If so, Lugo must not be playing regularly as a starter, and you can take that to the bank! Last night was a real turn around in the momentum for the Sox and not in a good way. What was the main difference last night in the line-up over the last 12 nights?? Take that stat and study it!
by NG on Apr 29, 2009 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions
I see now!
RNSexile is correct. Lugo did cause the stock market crash. Here is how:
First NG says
Do you want a championship team this year or not?? If so, Lugo must not be playing regularly as a starter, and you can take that to the bank!
Then people follow this advice, not realizing that, in fact, the Sox actually did win a championship with Lugo in the lineup every day. They “take it to the bank” and we are left with toxic assets. So…Lugo did cause the stock market crast.
Looking back ignores
changes in a players abilities and motivations. You cannot have that team again, as if Lugo even helped that much. Deal with the obvious major problems that Lugo has now if you ever want to win again THIS YEAR.
by NG on Apr 29, 2009 8:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Lugo sucks, we know it.
But what other options are there? We have already been burned twice by overpaying for mediocre (to terrible) shortstops. There are only a few shortstops in the entire league that are average MLB hitters. If you have a cost-effective solution I would be all for it.
Verdict still out on Wake for even this year,
but his end is surely in site.
by NG on Apr 30, 2009 9:37 AM EDT up reply actions
If you ran this team
we already would be -3 in wins. Wake has actually been the only Sox pitcher to go past 6 more than once this year (3 times), is averaging 7.25 innings, and has been by far the Sox best starter. Our starters have put stress on the pen due to early exits, which can, over time, have a lingering effect on the team. Yet you rant your crap without understanding anything. Do you want me to pull up all of your past “release Wakefield” posts? I know I should not even respond, but it gets so annoying sometimes. Wakefield has, literally, already earned his salary this year (see his current fangraphs value). You don’t seem to understand that there is a rational way to build a team by looking at past performance and from that gauging future performance. It works, at least a hell of a lot more that your seat-of-the pants wrong headed “intuition.” That is why the temas that are successful are run by looking at these things, and the teams that are not successful are run by (smarter versions of) your approach.
IF Wake keeps up the current level of performance,
then he has indeed had an epiphany to a younger version of Wake. If so, I would concur with you post. However, in the heat of a pennant race last year (WHEN IT REALLY COUNTS), he could barely pitch any better than a little leaguer, which strongly suggested to me that he was through. Again, maybe he has had a revival of his strength and youthful abilities, but I am not quite ready to give into that yet. I have of the freedom to think like this even if you don’t seem to! Either way at his age, Wake is certainly nearing the end of his usefulness, and that must be part of the daily evaluation of him and part of the future planning equation.
I know why
you say what you do, it is just that it is wrong 90% of the time. Of course Wake will not pitch like this the rest of the season, no one on the Sox will. That is not the point. The point is that despite his lack of utility in the postseason, and despite the times when he gets rocked, he is an inexpensive and useful pitcher for the team. And, by the way, he is a knuckleball pitcher, so your worries about age are somewhat unfounded. He was basically the same pitcher the last few years that he has always been.
Jesus... do people know what passes for a SS these days?
Look around the league! Lugo is a decent option!!
Look at these starting SS’s: Bartlett (Hot start but he sucks), Cesar Izturis, Marco Scutaro, Elvis Andrus, Erick Aybar, Orlando Cabrera (He sucks now), Alexei Ramirez (3% walk rate and s**** defense), Mike Aviles, Adam Everett, Yuniesky Betancourt…
Look, if all the AL teams got together and were picking shortstops pickup basketball style, Lugo is one of the first guys taken. There just arent many good shortstops out there. Be glad we dont have awful Cesar Izturis signed to a multi-year deal.
Especially since he's the backup
Lowrie is our starting shortstop. And while he may not be a superstar, the numbers he put up with a fractured wrist last year suggest he’s going to be well above league average when he’s healthy.
Look I get it
I don’t want to use Lugo as a scapegoat for last nights game. He deserves some of the responsibility but certainly not all of it or most of it. The point of the matter is, I just don’t like him. Yes he has some value, it is not even close to what he is being paid, but I don’t care. I am just sick of seeing him in the middle of our infield and at the bottom of our lineup. I have decided to create a list of people I would rather see as our everyday shortstop rather then Lugo.
Jed Lowrie
Nick Green
Angel Chavez
Ivan Ochoa
Iggy Suarez
All of these players are red sox owned all of which probably don’t have the “tools” Lugo has but I don’t care anymore. Lugo has had his shot, give someone else the playing time.
Those guys all suck, other than Lowrie
and he’s hurt
by alskor on Apr 29, 2009 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
+1
yes indeed. The problem is, as drabidea says, people “just don’t like” Lugo. That would be true of all those other guys too if they played enough.
I wouldn’t say green sucks. Last time I checked since being inserted he is hitting somewhere right around .298. At worst playing him versus Lugo at this point would be a wash, at best its a marked improvement. His knee is still not 100% which may impact his range (last night he displayed his Jeter like range twice in two plays missing a grounder to the left and the line drive to the right). We could have renamed the Mendoza line after him last season and the errors do not help. He is also horrifically overpaid and while I know Theo loves him some Lugo, and in Theo we trust, the facts are the facts. He is a below average shortstop. Just b/c there are other below average shortstops in the league (and in our system) doesn’t make him more valuable.
I didn’t want my first post to be bashing one of our players but ya win some you lose some! Greetings all – love the site!
We are not normal. We are legends.
by NittanyAlum02 on Apr 29, 2009 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions
No, Green sucks
He’s been playing over his head. It’s only a matter of time before he returns to normal.
But you know what? He’s the third shortstop on this team. It’s ok if he sucks!
Welcome to OTM, but I must disagree. The fact that there are other below average shortstops in the league does matter. Very few MLB players have the ability to play SS; even fewer have the ability to hit at all and play SS. Positional scarcity is very, very important when evaluating a player. Of the 17 AL SS’s who got 250 PA’s last year, only 3 were above average MLB hitters. Teams don’t play these guys for fun. They play them because there is no one better available. We can all hope Lowrie becomes better than league average, but chances are he will not, and will be very similar to Julio Lugo with the bat.
Hmmm...
So youre saying Green doesnt suck because he’s hitting .292 48 ABs into the season? His career line is .244/.312/.354. Thats eye bleedingly bad. He’s 30 years old. I guess its not impossible he took a HUGE step forward with the bat in his age 30 season… Ah the hell with it. I was going to write something condescending but Ill just say it – It is 100% impossible. He sucks.
Hey, Lugo is batting .667/.750/.667 so far! I guess he’ll be getting your All Star vote?
wow…nice to meet you condescending. You feel better? My point, which you missed while no doubt contemplating your witty retort, is that we were playing well with Green at short and he was having a success thus far. Wasn’t trying to crown him short stop of the year. And frankly, I don’t care if he is a career .112 hitter if he is hitting .350 this year and they win I’d play him. He makes what, a tenth of what we pay Lugo? If that. Same production, less money, god I am so stupid. Thank you for setting me straight.
BTlove – As for the positional scarcity argument I have to go back to money. Lugo is paid a lot of it. So my question then I guess is why overpay for a position that underachieves as a class? The signing was a bad move, it isn’t a better move because other peoples short stops also suck was my point. To a degree, the Sox have almost unlimited capital to bring in quality at every position. You win some you lose some I get it, for every Jason Bay, Mike Lowell we have to survive a JD Drew contract. I know they have tried since the departure of Nomar, Renteria, Cabrera, etc., but we just can’t seem to find a good fit at short. I’m with you in that I hope Lowrie develops into a solid shortstop and even an average hitter.
We are not normal. We are legends.
by NittanyAlum02 on Apr 30, 2009 9:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Not sure if the salary aspect is relevant.
We’re not getting out from under Lugo’s contract at this point, IMO.
I will back you up on Lugo’s D. We can put up with his errors so long as he flashes some range, but he was pretty much immobile last night. His knee is obviously not back yet, and if we throw him out there he’s not going to improve. I’d say let Green keep starting most games and let Lugo get healthy.
Welcome.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
The Lugo contract was obviously a bad move,
but at this point we have to consider it a sunk cost. It really should not have any impact on future moves. If right now I had the choice of starting Nick Green and paying him the league minimum or starting Lugo and paying him $9mil, I would take Green because he is cheaper. But that is not the choice. Lugo is a better hitter and at least equivalent fielder (unless he is still slowed from the injury), so you play Lugo.
Also, the reason that you pay a SS more (even though they all suck) is actually because they all suck. If a commodity is more scarce (a MLB SS) then it is more expensive. Supply and demand.
I see your point about it being a sunk cost. that makes sense. Its not like we don’t get to pay him just b/c he’s not playing.
As for scarcity, though, I think that argument works if there are only so many shortstops to go around and certainly would explain why you pay a good shortstop more (b/c they are actually scarce), but not so much why you over pay Lugo (a dime a dozen below avg. middle infielder). I guess it comes down to whether you think Lugo is overpaid as a shortstop or just as a player. But I follow you.
We are not normal. We are legends.
by NittanyAlum02 on May 1, 2009 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Obviously Julio Lugo is overpaid. Ever since signing the contract, he has been a much worse player. In 2004 and 2005 he was worth 4 and 4.7 wins above replacement. That is really, really good. Since being on the Sox he has been worth .8 WAR two years in a row. That is terrible. So the Red Sox did not think they were getting a mediocre middle infielder. They thought they were getting a very good middle infielder. Guys that play like Lugo did from 2003-2006 are not a dime a dozen. They are rare. That is why they gave him so much money. Obviously a mistake.
+1
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on May 1, 2009 6:24 PM EDT up reply actions
The fact he's hitting .350 means jack
He’s been lucky. He’s overwhelmingly likely to go back down to his norms. It has nothing to do with the team playing well.
I am simply more of a results based person…the fact he’s hitting .350 can’t be meangingless, it means he’s hitting .350.
If, (and I would agree with you on this point) probably more accurately, when, he starts hitting .198 again then sit him down. Until then, I would prefer to ride his luck as long as it lasts. That’s all that I was saying.
We are not normal. We are legends.
by NittanyAlum02 on May 1, 2009 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Reply fail
I rec’d alskor’s reply to drabidea.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Apr 29, 2009 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Lugo, Buch, and Jones to Florida for Hanley.
Right now.
Well, I'll appreciate for you to keep my zingers outta your mouth!
And since you can’t really blame Lugo’s hitting for the loss last night — and it’s pretty clear the whole premise here was that Lugo’s error cost us the game — we’d deserve it. Because while Hanley is a great hitter, he sucks as a shortstop. He’s really more of a toreador than a fielder.
He's a great shortstop.
His problem is that he’s TOO good. He gets to balls way out of his zone and then rifles the ball so that it can’t be caught.
Q: What do you say about a shortstop who throws the ball away?
A: He sucks!
BTW, check the archives here. I seem to recall an awful lot of people here arguing that Lugo was a good shortstop when he played for Tampa and would be a huge upgrade over Renteria. And I seem to recall being one of the few to argue he was a sieve.
in fairness just allowing Manny to field the ground balls in left would have been as effective as Renteria!
We are not normal. We are legends.
by NittanyAlum02 on Apr 30, 2009 9:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Its not clear yet that Hanley sucks. His UZR/150 are: -6, -20, -.6 in 2006-2008. So in 2006 he was below average but not terrible, in 2007 he was terrible, and in 2008 he was average. I think 2007 is the obvious outlier. So he is probably just a little bit below average. Not bad for one of the best hitters in MLB.
Empty the farm.
Just get a shortstop.
Well, I'll appreciate for you to keep my zingers outta your mouth!
There are plenty of good SS in baseball too:
Raphael Furcal
Edgar Rentereia(Hes on a bad contract but he is still way above average)
Troy Tulowitzki
Stephen Drew
Michael Young(Again terrible contract and way overrated D but still a good player)
Ryan Theriot
Jack Wilson
JJ Hardy(Way underrated)
Alexei Ramirez
Jose Reyes
Jimmy Rollins
Christian Guzman
Yunel Escobar
Hanley Ramirez
That hardly paints a pciture of a lack of good SS in MLB…especially considering the age of most of them.
The Red Sox could put together a trade for more than half of them should they want to without even having to give up very much…it seems weird to me that such a good front office wouldnt be looking at some of these players as options.
Young's a 3B now.
Ramirez is supposed to be a 2B.
But, yes, there are options. It’s ridiculous that Theo is sticking with Lugo.
BTW my young friend,
I believe we will pretty well find out tonight the likely outcome of our Wakefield wager. I suspect Wake will be batted around badly and likely to be a candidate for removal from the game by the third inning, so I would not be working on “my” new logo just yet. However given the existing atmosphere of the last few days, if Wake can shut this very good Rays team down tonight, then you probably should start working on the /my new logo!
by NG on May 2, 2009 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions
Okay, lets take a look at how good these guys really are:
Your list by 2008 season OPS:
Raphael Furcal: 1.012 (but he was hurt most of the year) 2007 OPS: .687
Edgar Rentereia: .699
Troy Tulowitzki: .732
Stephen Drew: .836
Michael Young: .741 (but can’t play SS anymore)
Ryan Theriot: .745
Jack Wilson: .659
JJ Hardy(Way underrated): .821
Alexei Ramirez: .792
Jose Reyes: .833
Jimmy Rollins: .786
Christian Guzman: .786
Yunel Escobar: .766
Hanley Ramirez: .940
Julio Lugo: .685
So looking at your list, Lugo is obviously one of the worst (but since you listed the 14 best, puts Lugo right in the middle of the league). But not by too much. Of the guys you listed, only 7 had an OPS above .750. How much should the Sox give up to get a guy with an OPS of .750 when they have a guy that will most likely have an OPS right around .700? And a 24 year old you put up a .739 OPS his rookie season with a broken hand? Not to mention that most of these guys are unattainable. Do you realize what the Sox would have to give up for Stephen Drew or Tulowitzki? It would probably start with Lars, Bowden and Buch. That probably would not get it done. So we should have went out and signed Furcal to a long term deal? One year removed from a year just as shitty as Lugo’s? Or Christian Guzman? I think Hardy is the most attainable, and if Lowrie continues to be hurt, we might go get him.
Why would we trade anything?
Lowrie is young, cheap and will be a 750-800 OPS guy and is a decent fielder. The “get this/that now” attitude, giving up on good prospects to make such trades is a losing strategy (it is what Detroit has done to clear out their system). It might make sense if we didnt have any option, but Lowrie is a decent option.
Detroit should be thrown in jail for that trade.
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
by sox-inda-south on May 3, 2009 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Hey I'm just throwing this out there as a joke:
Lugo for Willis!!!!!!!!
On Da Hop!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
- Will Bryce Harper start the season with the Nationals?
- Mitch Mustain puts football behind him, signs reported rookie deal with White Sox
- Robinson Cano and Denzel Washington face off in Jay Leno’s Yankees trivia contest
- Shane Victorino lands role on ‘Hawaii Five-0′
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
