I'm fully aware why the Red Sox made their trade with the Dodgers. Financially it's a slam dunk deal for the Sox owners (Will they be lowering ticket prices though?) and theoretically it gives baseball ops much more flexibility moving forward. The prospects Boston got aren't bad, but basically this deal came down to freeing Sox ownership of Carl Crawford's contract (You could have done a separate trade of just Beckett to the Dodgers). So while "on paper" this trade is being considered a big win for the Red Sox, we shall see if that translates on the field.
Will the Sox just spend the savings on a couple new players and then be stuck trying to move their contracts a couple years from now? Or will the Sox owners just pocket the savings? Would be nice if their was a plan. I would save use the savings in the draft, but new CBA rules prevent that. One thing that is clear is that the Sox won't be able to easily find another star in his prime to replace Adrian Gonzalez. When was the last time the Sox traded as good a player as Gonzalez is (in his prime)? Manny was at the end of his career. Nomar was past his prime. Clemens, Pedro, Vaughn, Fisk all left as free agents. So Fred Lynn maybe?
I feel like Gonzo was underrated in Boston and it serves as another giant fail on Boston's mainstream baseball media. He wasn't enough of a "dirt dog" I guess in their opinion. And one thing about Boston's baseball media is if you aren't getting good press from them, then you better expect to get bad press.
So in the end, while the Sox are being lauded for the trade, we ended up with less for Gonzo then the prospects we traded for him (and the draft pick we surrendered for signing Crawford). I understand the trade, but it's strange what constitutes for a grand slam win of a trade nowadays. We'll miss Gonzalez. I expect to him to be an MVP candidate for the Dodgers the next few years. I'm sure he won't miss the Boston media.
JR 8/27/2012 11:34:00 AM Tweet