What have we learned in the last 15 hours or so?

  • When "Rob Bradford" posts from a Twitter account that he's never used before, delivering a scoop in which the Sox acquire one of the most sought-after pitchers of the deadline for seemingly nothing, it might not be Rob Bradford.
  • The Sox didn't offer Buchholz, Bowden and Westmoreland, per se, to Toronto, but they did offer Buchholz, one of Bowden/Masterson/Anderson and lesser prospects, Gordon Edes said in a revision to his earlier report, one which the Sox and Jays both denied.
  • Buchholz is no longer untouchable, but Daniel Bard and Casey Kelly are.
  • The Sox remain most focused on offense, despite their offer for Halladay, according to Jon Heyman. 

I suspect that we will learn more in the next 15 hours, yet still know exactly the same thing: Nothing.

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • I have thought the Sox aren’t high on Buchholz for a while now, given their off-season strategy. For whatever reason, they’re down on him even as he’s their third best pitcher right now with the potential to be a #1. This is where I’d worry as an SF because these sorts of opinions can lead a team to discard a guy who might be immature but still has a lot of potential. Sometimes teams are right (Yankees and Tabata) but sometimes they’re very wrong (Sox and Hanley).

    Rob July 29, 2009, 10:24 am
  • I don’t think the Sox were wrong about Hanley at all. They didn’t trade him because they were down on him. They traded him because that’s what it took to get Beckett – which has worked out quite nicely.

    rootbeerfloat July 29, 2009, 10:28 am
  • Sigh, why do people keep bringing up the Hanley thing?
    We got not only Beckett, but Lowell as well. Lowell has been a key part of this team for 3+ years. Beckett has been our ace. We don’t win in 2007 without either of them, let alone both.
    It would rock to still have Hanley on the team. I still dream that someday he will be traded back to us. But most Sox fans will tell you that they’re happy with the way things worked out. Florida would probably say the same thing. Very rarely do trades work out for both teams, but that’s exactly what happened here.

    Atheose July 29, 2009, 10:36 am
  • Then again, they probably win in 2008 with Hanley and without Beckett and Lowell. But, that’s an unknown.

    AndrewYF July 29, 2009, 10:39 am
  • From the lessons Ive learned I am now doubting if this is actually “Paul-SF” posting here…proof?

    sam-YF July 29, 2009, 10:45 am
  • Haha, Sam. You’re reading a blog on the Internet. “Buyer” beware.

    Paul SF July 29, 2009, 10:52 am
  • Sorry, I didn’t mean to touch the third rail. I thought the Sox were down on Hanley for nebulous reasons. I’m not sure where I learned that, but I could certainly be mistaken.
    As a stats guy, I think Hanley’s worth is self-evident. It would anchor a potential dynasty.
    To get back closer to the topic, why do the Sox seem willing to move Buchholz given the holes in their rotation?

    Rob July 29, 2009, 10:54 am
  • I think the Sox are only offering Buchholz for Halladay because they don’t expect Toronto to accept it (the deal isn’t a “premium” over what the Phillies are offering for Toronto to decide to trade him within the division).
    I think they’re working hard to make sure that if they send Buchholz for a hitter, they get a pitcher back. We’ll see how that goes, I guess.

    Paul SF July 29, 2009, 11:07 am
  • And apparently the Jays have turned down the offer, according to this morning’s Herald — or at least they’ve turned down AN offer from the Red Sox.

    Paul SF July 29, 2009, 11:08 am
  • Again Rob, nobody is saying that Hanley isn’t awesome He is. But considering what the Sox have gotten out of Lowell/Beckett, we’ll certainly call it a wash for now.
    If Hanley continues to OPS+ 145 every season until he’s 40, then my view will certainly change. But as of right now, both sides are extremely pleased.

    Atheose July 29, 2009, 11:15 am
  • Btw Paul, your analysis of last night’s sac bunt deserves its own thread. Awesome stuff.

    Atheose July 29, 2009, 11:16 am
  • What have we learned in the last 15 hours or so?
    That Terry Francona has something against Daniel Bard. Or he likes to lose games – take your pick.

    Brad July 29, 2009, 11:34 am
  • I have learned that no matter how many times you click refresh at MLB Trade Rumors, Jarrod Washburn is still not a Yankee.

    John - YF July 29, 2009, 11:41 am
  • John, do you want Washburn on the Yanks. He’s been great this year, but I worry about a flyball pitcher in the new Yankee Stadium.

    Nick-YF July 29, 2009, 11:50 am
  • I want “A” pitcher and it seems that Washburn is the best available sadly enough. I don’t want Doug Davis, Garland, etc…I also don’t want to empty the farm. So if I had to choose, I’d take Washburn. He’s better than Brandon Arroyo, Aaron Harang, etc…I also want Heath Bell, but it seems like the Padres want a King’s Ransom for Mr. Bell.

    John - YF July 29, 2009, 11:54 am
  • Washburn would be fine if the Yankees don’t have to give up anyone too significant. But why shouldn’t they? Washburn has been one of the best pitchers in the AL this season.

    AndrewYF July 29, 2009, 11:56 am
  • my bold prediction is that the Halladay sweepstakes ends up being a battle between the Sox and Yanks.

    Nick-YF July 29, 2009, 11:56 am
  • List of players I wouldn’t give up for Jarrod Washburn:
    Ivan Nova probably wouldn’t get it done, so I think it’s safe to say there won’t be a deal. Or at least, there won’t be a deal I will like.

    AndrewYF July 29, 2009, 11:58 am
  • 7-player deal between Pirates and Mariners. Seattle gets Jack Wilson and Ian Snell, and the Pirates get Jeff Clement and a bunch of other people.

    Atheose July 29, 2009, 1:12 pm
  • Cliff Lee and Ben Francisco dealt to the Phillies for what seems to be a pittance. Knapp, Carrasco, Donald and Marson. They still have Brown, Taylor and Drabek!
    What a seemingly terrible trade for Cleveland. That poor fanbase.

    AndrewYF July 29, 2009, 1:53 pm
  • I don’t see it that way…Carasco will be very good and Marson has a chance to be very good. Decent haul.
    Here’s my question: Is VMart on the way out??? The Indians now have Santana and Marson two highly regarded catching prospects. Just a curious move.

    John -YF July 29, 2009, 2:03 pm
  • Considering that, John, I say the Sox’ chances of landing VMart just went up.

    Atheose July 29, 2009, 2:14 pm
  • Ricciardi’s insane trade demands just cost him the No. 1 bidder for Roy Halladay’s services. Think the next offer from the Sox will be better than the one Ricciardi just turned down? I doubt it.

    Paul SF July 29, 2009, 2:19 pm
  • I’m not sure what the Sox think of Buchholz, but if they don’t like him, they’ve sure done a great job of making it seem like they do. I’m not worried about another Hanley Ramirez situation–and I say that knowing that I would do that deal again in a heartbeat–with Buchholz. Buchholz won’t be as good as Hanley, and Halladay is an even better pitcher than Beckett is.
    As a follow up to some of the discussion about Halladay we had yesterday, and to look at the possibility of trading Buchholz in a Halladay deal, I have added another analysis to my blog that looks at the aging pattern of the two players:
    Anyway, thought I’d pass it on.

    Jason July 29, 2009, 3:05 pm