May 24, 2013
And here's the full roster.
Now availableHardball Times Baseball Annual 2013, with 300 pages of great content. It's also available on Amazon and Kindle. Read more about it here.
Or you can search by:
THT E-bookThird Base: The Crossroads is THT's e-book, available for $3.99 from the Kindle store. The good news is that anyone can read a Kindle book, even on a PC. So enjoy the best from THT in a new format.
our CafePress store. We've got baseball caps, t-shirts, coffee mugs and even wall clocks with the classy THT logo prominently displayed. Also, check out the THT Bookstore. Please support your favorite baseball site by purchasing something today.
All content on this site (including text, graphs, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Following are the one hundred most recent articles for the category Transactions .
05/24/2013: And That Happenedby Craig Calcaterra
05/24/2013: Rick Anderson and pitching to contactby Scott Strandberg
05/24/2013: Fantasy Waiver Wire: Week 8, Vol. IIIby Karl de Vries
05/23/2013: It is inexcusable to release Jon Rauchby Pat Andriola
05/23/2013: The daily grind: 5-23-13by Brad Johnson
05/23/2013: And That Happenedby Craig Calcaterra
05/23/2013: Strength of schedule: Adjusting pitcher valuesby Moe Koltun
05/23/2013: Visualization: Handedness through historyby Dan Lependorf
05/23/2013: The Roto Grotto: targeted z-scoresby Scott Spratt
05/22/2013: The daily grind: 5-22-13by Brad Johnson
05/22/2013: And That Happenedby Craig Calcaterra
05/22/2013: Fantasy Waiver Wire: Week 8, Vol. IIby Jack Weiland
05/22/2013: The hardest thingby Derek Ambrosino
05/22/2013: 20th anniversary: Blue Jays mascot ejectedby Chris Jaffe
05/22/2013: Currently historic: A plethora of new stuffby Jason Linden
05/22/2013: BOB: Owners’ meeting updateby Brian Borawski
05/21/2013: And That Happenedby Craig Calcaterra
05/21/2013: The daily grind: 5-21-13by Brad Johnson
05/21/2013: 50th anniversary: Jim Maloney: a star is bornby Chris Jaffe
05/21/2013: Diamonds in the rough: starting pitchersby Noah Woodward
05/21/2013: Profar could be on a Cingrani-esque scheduleby Jeff Moore
05/21/2013: Is 5/125 the new 5/55?by Greg Simons
05/21/2013: The Verdict: keep your trade secrets to yourselfby Michael Stein
05/21/2013: THT Awardsby John Barten
05/20/2013: Closer watchby Karl de Vries
05/20/2013: The daily grind: 5-20-13by Brad Johnson
05/20/2013: And That Happenedby Craig Calcaterra
05/20/2013: The Hot Seatby Scott Strandberg
05/20/2013: AL Central: state of the divisionby Chris Jaffe
05/20/2013: Fantasy Waiver Wire: Week 8, Vol. 1by Karl de Vries
05/20/2013: Louisville slugging in 2013by Frank Jackson
05/20/2013: 5,000 days since Eric Milton’s no-hitterby Chris Jaffe
05/17/2013: The daily grind: 5-17-13by Brad Johnson
05/17/2013: And That Happenedby Craig Calcaterra
05/17/2013: Gems without whiffsby James Gentile
05/17/2013: 40th anniversary: Bobby Valentine breaks his legby Chris Jaffe
05/17/2013: Strength of schedule: Adjusting hitter valuesby Moe Koltun
05/17/2013: Fantasy Waiver Wire: Week 7, Vol. IIIby Jack Weiland
05/17/2013: Card Corner: 1973 Topps: Mike Andrewsby Bruce Markusen
05/16/2013: The daily grind: 5-16-13by Brad Johnson
05/16/2013: And That Happenedby Craig Calcaterra
05/16/2013: How Scott Kazmir got his groove backby Kyle Boddy
05/16/2013: Three more for eternityby Don Malcolm
05/16/2013: Not exactly definitiveby Don Malcolm
05/16/2013: The all-decade team: the ‘40sby Richard Barbieri
05/16/2013: Of Uggs and Ugglaby Derek Ambrosino
05/15/2013: The daily grind: 5-15-13by Brad Johnson
05/15/2013: And That Happenedby Craig Calcaterra
05/15/2013: Running hot and coldby Shane Tourtellotte
05/15/2013: The Phillies should retool but not rebootby Brad Johnson
05/15/2013: Fantasy Waiver Wire: Week 7, Vol. IIby Karl de Vries
05/15/2013: Currently historic: 300 strikeouts?by Jason Linden
05/15/2013: Mike Moustakas’ holeby Noah Woodward
05/15/2013: BOB: How bad is the Marlins’ attendance?by Brian Borawski
05/14/2013: And That Happenedby Craig Calcaterra
05/14/2013: The daily grind: 5-14-13by Brad Johnson
05/14/2013: How much do hot/cold starts matter?by Greg Simons
05/14/2013: 25th anniversary: The Jose Oquendo Gameby Chris Jaffe
05/14/2013: Jonathan Schoop and the value of role playersby Jeff Moore
05/14/2013: THT Awardsby John Barten
05/13/2013: The daily grind: 5-13-13by Brad Johnson
05/13/2013: And That Happenedby Craig Calcaterra
05/13/2013: 30th anniversary: Reggie’s 2,000th Kby Chris Jaffe
05/13/2013: NL Central division update: May editionby Jason Linden
05/13/2013: Fantasy Waiver Wire: Week 7, Vol. Iby Jack Weiland
05/13/2013: Last remaining teammatesby Chris Jaffe
05/13/2013: The Hot Seatby Scott Strandberg
05/12/2013: The curious case of Vernon Wellsby Matt Filippi
05/12/2013: 60th anniversary: Whitey Ford’s near no-hitterby Chris Jaffe
05/10/2013: The daily grind: 5-10-13by Brad Johnson
05/10/2013: And That Happenedby Craig Calcaterra
05/10/2013: Cooperstown Confidential: What really happened with Fritz Ostermueller and Jackie Robinsonby Bruce Markusen
05/10/2013: Fantasy Waiver Wire: Week 6, Vol. IIIby Karl de Vries
05/10/2013: Still life, after allby Azure Texan
05/09/2013: Oh Dustyby Pat Andriola
05/09/2013: And That Happenedby Craig Calcaterra
05/09/2013: 40th anniversary: back-to-back first homersby Chris Jaffe
05/09/2013: The Roto Grotto: rates versus opportunitiesby Scott Spratt
05/09/2013: Swing rates: the John Farrell effectby Moe Koltun
05/09/2013: Winning, TWTW, and the purpose of baseballby Matt Hunter
05/08/2013: And That Happenedby Craig Calcaterra
05/08/2013: The daily grind: 5-8-13by Brad Johnson
05/08/2013: Fantasy Waiver Wire: Week 6, Vol. IIby Jack Weiland
05/08/2013: What nobody is talking aboutby Greg Simons
05/08/2013: Currently historic: A truly rare achievementby Jason Linden
05/08/2013: Craig Anderson’s greatest dayby Frank Jackson
05/08/2013: BOB: Stadium updatesby Brian Borawski
05/07/2013: And That Happenedby Craig Calcaterra
05/07/2013: The daily grind: 5-7-13by Brad Johnson
05/07/2013: Fun with minor league leader boardsby Jeff Moore
05/07/2013: 90th anniversary: Casey Stengel goes bonkersby Chris Jaffe
05/07/2013: THT Awardsby John Barten
05/07/2013: A.J. Ellis: hardly swinging, hardly missingby Noah Woodward
05/07/2013: Baseball Press: a fantasy secret weaponby Jack Weiland
<< Click here to return to the category list.
September 14, 2012
Lasting impressions: Reviewing the Beckett-Hanley tradeSo often, and of course in our Twitter-infused, must-have-it-now sports world, we want to know immediately what will be the impact of things like big trades. Who won the Josh Beckett-Adrian Gonzalez-Carl Crawford to Los Angeles fiasco of a trade? You couldn't listen to sports-talk radio the next day without being inundated with that question, and 25 different answers from 25 different talking heads.*
*Of course, if you're listening to sports-talk radio, you're kind of asking for that type of punishment, aren't you?
We obviously don't know who will end up winning that trade. Heck, it's still hard to tell who won the first big Beckett trade.
But with Beckett and Hanley Ramirez (the main player he was traded for the first time) coming full circle and ending up as teammates out on the left coast, it seemed like a good time to look back and check out the trickle-down effects from that deal that are still being felt.
The original deal was Beckett, Mike Lowell and Guillermo Mota heading from Florida to Boston for shortstop prospect Ramirez, young pitcher Anibal Sanchez and minor leaguers Harvey Garvey and Jesus Delgado. It took place during the offseason before the 2006 season.
Beckett was in the last year of team control and about to hit free agency for the first time after the 2006 season, but during July of that year, the Red Sox signed him to a three-year extension. This wasn't a given for the Red Sox when they made the trade, but the likelihood of them being able to come to a deal with Beckett had to have been pretty good for them to give up their top prospect in Ramirez and an arm like Sanchez's.
The deal worked out well for both sides.* Ramirez went on to post a 32.5 WAR over six-plus years before being sent to Los Angeles this season in a deal that was more about his moping than his abilities, while Sanchez earned the Marlins 13.4 wins above replacement during roughly the same time period before leaving this season in a separate deal.
On the Red Sox side, Beckett turned in a WAR of 26.8 and they also got an unexpected 10.4 WAR out of Lowell, who was basically considered a salary dump by the Marlins.
From a strictly numerical standpoint, the Marlins won the WAR*, but no one has ever put a numerical value on winning a World Series, expect maybe the team owners who made a ton of money off the impending Red Sox dynasty that came with winning their second title in four years. Beckett and Lowell were key contributors on a World Series winning team, so that has to be worth the difference in WAR right? The Red Sox gave up a lot in Ramirez, but was it not worth a championship? You won't find too many people in Boston who regret that deal.
*sorry, I couldn't help myself
But the trade can't be fully evaluated based on just those four players. The Red Sox have turned Beckett into more prospects, as have the Marlins with both Ramirez and Sanchez.
Beckett was sent to Los Angeles last month, along with Gonzalez, Crawford and Nick Punto in a deal that returned James Loney, Ivan DeJesus Jr., Allen Webster and eventually Rubby de la Rosa and Jerry Sands, once they are able to be named later. Beckett wasn't the main draw for the Dodgers in that deal, but he's not chopped liver either, so he gets at least a little credit for part of the Red Sox return.
Soon after Boston acquired Mota, and before he ever suited up for the Sox, he was flipped to Cleveland, along with prospect Andy Marte, catcher Kelly Shoppach and minor leaguer Randy Newsome for Coco Crisp, Josh Bard and David Riske. Marte was probably the main part of that deal for Cleveland, but Crisp became a seven win player during his time with the Red Sox before being flipped to the Royals for reliever Ramon Ramirez. Ramirez was later traded to the Giants for minor leaguer Daniel Turpen, who never made it to the majors, but Ramirez was worth a half-win for the Red Sox during his time with the team. That's an additional 7.5 wins for the Sox, for which at least a portion of the credit goes to the Beckett trade.
On the Marlins side, most of their action came this season. After their all-in approach crashed and burned, the Marlins began to sell their players for parts, and the grumpy Ramirez was among the first to be put on the block.
After six-plus years of Ramirez, the Marlins turned him and reliever Randy Choate into pitching prospect Nathan Eovaldi and Scott McGough. The book is still wide open on their contributions to the Marlins. The same goes for the three prospects the Marlins got back for Anibal Sanchez: Jacob Turner, Rob Brantly and Brian Flynn.
So what's the tally in the end?
The Red Sox got six mostly strong years from Beckett, a few good years from Lowell, some solid pay from Crisp, and whatever Webster, de la Rosa and Sands turn into in exchange for Ramirez, Sanchez, Marte (Crisp deal, who turned into nothing) and a couple of good seasons from Shoppach. Oh, and they got a World Series ring out of it, too.
The Marlins got six mostly good years of Ramirez, a few good years from Sanchez, and whatever Turner, Brantly, Flynn and Eovaldi turn into in exchange for one more year of Beckett (who wouldn't have re-signed in Florida) and Lowell, whose contract they couldn't afford anyway.
We still don't know who won the trade, which wasn't the exercise here anyway. Six years later, the Marlins have only a collection of prospects to show for their deals, but that could be better than what the Red Sox have left. The Red Sox, however, have the jewelry to claim a victory.
I'm going to do this exercise once a week with a major trade from some time in the last decade, not in an attempt to determine a winner and loser (although if there is an obvious one, I'll point it out), but rather to look at the dominoes that continue to fall today from the trades we remember from years back.
Posted by: Jeff Moore
January 12, 2012
On Ryan Madson: Parsing Boras’ commentsPhiladelphia general manager Ruben Amaro, Jr. and super-agent Scott Boras are having a skirmish of words regarding the Phillies' non-signing of closer Ryan Madson. Boras seems to be saying the Phillies reneged on their offer of $44 million over four years, while Amaro says, "there never was an agreement."
Obviously, since Madson is now a Cincinnati Red, Amaro is correct that there never was an agreement—at least not one so formal that it led to a signed contract. However, there may have been a verbal agreement, a handshake deal, a nod-and-wink, nudge-nudge, say-no-more pact that simply needed to be put to paper and submitted to Major League Baseball's offices for confirmation.
Or there may not have been. If we read exactly what Boras said, it becomes clear that he did not say that he and the Phillies had agreed to a four-year, $44 million contract.
Boras first stated, "We never rejected any offer from Philadelphia at four years and $44 million. We advised Philadelphia that we would agree to such a proposal." He followed that comment up with, "We agreed to a four-year, $44 million offer, and Philadelphia decided to sign someone else."
Let's take a look at the first sentence. While he and Madson never rejected the contract in dispute, Boras didn't say the Phillies made such an offer. You can't reject an offer that isn't made, so Boras may not be lying. Also, "never rejected" is not the same as "accepted."
His second sentence says they would have taken such a deal. Hey, so would I, but no one made me such an offer and, again, maybe the Phillies didn't make one to Boras for Madson's services.
The last sentence uses "we" vaguely. Which "we" agreed to the four-year, $44 million contract he mentions? It could be that "we" is Boras and Madson. Perhaps those two men decided between themselves that such an offer would be acceptable. Good for them, but if the Phillies never tendered such a deal, there was nothing for Boras to accept.
Scott Boras obviously is a phenomenally successful agent. He has made his clients billions of dollars and himself a nice cut of those salaries. He produces gold-lettered, platinum-laced, diamond-encrusted binders to demonstrate how clients such as Alex Rodriguez and Prince Fielder are the greatest athletes in the history of the universe and should be paid like minor deities. Boras does his job extraordinarily well.
But his success does not come from blunt directness. It comes from deception, obfuscation and borderline flat-out lying. Boras knows where that borderline is, and he has no fear of going up to it and nudging his toes right up against that line. It's what he gets paid so well to do.
Posted by: Greg Simons
October 27, 2011
Farrell situation a win-win for the Blue JaysWith much talk in the last three days regarding the possibility of John Farrell moving from the Toronto Blue Jays to the Boston Red Sox, the issue of Farrell's situation with the Jays seems to have slanted altogether.
If I recall, it was only a matter of weeks ago that there was a sect of Blue Jays fans and pundits that didn't seem to care much for Farrell's status with the team, even going as far as suggesting that the Jays should hire the recently unemployed Terry Francona to manage the team and in turn demote Farrell to pitching coach.
Now that there are rumors of the inverse occurring and Farrell perhaps moving over to the Red Sox, these same people are up in arms, ruing the potential loss of one of the game's bright young managers. The Blue Jays announced forcefully that they will not let an employee under contract to break it for a lateral move to another team. Farrell just completed the first year of a three-year contract.
Well, which is it? Does it really matter if Farrell takes off to the Sox? My inclination is to say no, absolutely not.
Click for more...
Posted by: Chris Lund
September 16, 2011
Revisiting the Napoli-Wells three-way tradeAfter Rangers catcher/first baseman Mike Napoli collected two more hits to raise his average to .312, it brought me back to what turned out to be a relatively lopsided three-way trade.
The original purpose of the deal was for Toronto to get rid of Vernon Wells' contract, sending him to the Angels for Napoli and Juan Rivera, who was later designated for assignment and shipped to the Dodgers. With J.P. Arencibia seen as their future at catcher, the Blue Jays sent Napoli to the Rangers for Frank Francisco, who turned out to be the Jays' closer for a decent stretch this season.
I thought it would be a good idea to revisit the players in this trade, which was really two separate deals, with a nifty comparison graphic.
PA Slash Line HR RBI R WAR Mike Napoli, Rangers 392 .312/.411/.613 26 67 67 5.0 Vernon Wells, Angels 478 .218/.251/.399 21 56 56 -0.3 Juan Rivera, TOR/LAD 473 .260/.321/.381 9 62 40 0.7
Innings Record/ERA/SV WHIP K/9 WAR Frank Francisco, Blue Jays 47.2 1-4, 3.78, 15 1.36 9.44 0.7
Despite Wells having $86 million left on his contract at the time of the trade and Anaheim being left to start a light-hitting, defensive-minded catcher in Jeff Mathis, the Angels decided it would be best to acquire Wells and deal the power-hitting Napoli, coming off a 26-home run season, to the Blue Jays. Having led baseball in team home runs the season before, it was understandable that Toronto would trade Napoli to Texas for some relief help.
But the clear, obvious winners in the trade were the Rangers. Napoli has given them yet another power-hitting addition to their scary-potent offense, while Wells has proven that he will be a past-his-prime toxic contract for the Angels for years to come. Who would have thought that trading Napoli to Toronto would have drastically changed the landscape of the AL West race?
Posted by: Shlomo Sprung
August 23, 2011
The Rockies claim WandyAfter failing to deal Wandy Rodriguez during the trade deadline, the Astros decided to put their 32-year-old left hander on waivers to see what kind of last-minute deal could be struck. The Rockies pulled his name, and now the two sides have 48 hours to come to an agreement.
The Rockies made a big splash by trading Ubaldo Jimenez in the much-discussed deadline deal last month. The team is looking to test its crop of young pitchers in 2012 but is expected to be in the market for an established starter this coming offseason.
If they acquire Rodriguez, the 2012 Rockies rotation would include two left handers in him and Jorge de la Rosa along with Jhoulys Chacin and Juan Nicasio. Colorado still has enough talent to be formidable next season, but the pitching staff will have question marks as de la Rosa and Nicasio return from serious injuries.
Rodriguez will not add a lot of payroll next season as he is due $10 million in 2012 and $13 million in 2013. His contract was scheduled to have a club option attached for another $13 million, but if he is traded it becomes a player option.
Rodriguez doesn’t give up a high frequency of fly balls, with an average around 35 percent, and should be a good fit with the Rockies in that category. This season he has been plagued by a poor defense in Houston that has registered a -5.0 team UZR/150 as well as a DRS of -32.
In comparison, the Rockies have performed substantially better, with a team UZR/150 of -0.9 and a DRS of 19. Next season, the Rockies are expected to have new additions at the corners as the team isn’t expected to pick up Todd Helton’s $23 million club option.
During this trade season, Astros GM Ed Wade has been busy. Both the Red Sox and Yankees were interested in acquiring Rodriguez, but a price was never close to being reached. The Astros will be looking to add more prospects, and with Rodriguez’s contract still considered “team friendly,” one should expect a few high-profile names to be mentioned.
Posted by: Vince Caramela
Click here for more THT Notes.