July 29, 2005

Thankfully, Our GM Is Not A Moron

A proposed three-team deal involving the Boston Red Sox, New York Mets and Tampa Bay Devil Rays "hit a roadblock" Friday night, according to a baseball official familiar with the discussions.

The deal proposed would have sent unhappy Boston slugger Manny Ramirez and Tampa Bay closer Danys Baez to the Mets, with the Red Sox acquiring outfielder/designated hitter Aubrey Huff and outfielder Mike Cameron, and the Devil Rays getting two prospects apiece from the Mets and Red Sox. ...

A source said the Red Sox felt they could not go ahead with trading Ramirez and two prime prospects -- reportedly catcher Kelly Shoppach and right-hander Anibal Sanchez -- if all they were receiving was New York's Cameron and Tampa Bay's Huff. So they went back to the Mets "for more pieces," the source reported. At that point, the Mets "squashed the whole thing" and talks broke off.
So, Huff and Cameron for Manny, Sanchez and Shoppach?!? You have got to be kidding me. ... "More pieces"? Pedro?

Other info from SoSHer PedroKsBambino:
McAdam says on the post-game he was told that FIVE teams in on Manny. 2 AL, 2 NL, plus the three-way deal with the Mets and DRays. Says the 3-way deal is the least likely of the possible deals. McAdam guesses that the White Sox are one, didn't name any others.


mouse said...

I would lose a lot of faith in Theo if he agreed to that deal. Not only are Huff and Cameron a poor substitute for Manny's power, but to give up Shoppach and Sanchez at the same time? No way! That has a red light all over it.

Kill that deal, Theo. It's better to deal with a (presumably) unhappy Manny than get screwed that badly.

Kyle said...

What are Fenway fans thinking? Booing Manny in all 3 of his AB's??

That is absolutely terrible. He has done nothing but put up huge, huge numbers all season.

Red Sox Nation should be ashamed.

peter n said...

AMEN!!! Not enough for Manny. 4 guys--Theo is NOT a dummy. Boy, if that trade happened(past tense cuz it won't), rue the day. As for booing Manny, good for them! He dogged it when we needed him. They won't boo today-it's a one game thing. But he did pull a Nomar and stay on his ass on the bench when the team needed him.

redsock said...

AL Ranking

4th in slugging
7th in OPS
5th in extra base hits
8th in total bases
1st in home runs
1st in RBI
9th in runs created

Oh yeah ... World Series MVP

No baseball player gives 100% all time time. In every game I watch, I see players on both sides jog down the line to first (I yell at my TV every time I see Jeter do it) and no one says boo.

I feel safe in calling a lot of those booers -- not all of them, but most -- a bunch of idiotic, sports-radio-listening lemmings.

Anonymous said...

Throw in Youkilis and ask for Mets David Wright, and it's a good deal.

Andrew said...

Not to mention, in my favorite part about all this - that slow jog to first that everyone's so mad about?

He was safe.

L-girl said...

What are Fenway fans thinking? Booing Manny in all 3 of his AB's?? . . . Red Sox Nation should be ashamed.

I agree. I was disgusted. Too much talk radio, people turn into sheeple.

Jack Marshall said...

I'm PROUD of the fans who booed Manny. While Boston columnists implied that most Fenway fans were too unsophisticated to care about things like team play, hustle and professionalism and would just care about "numbers" ...kind of like 95% of the people who gather on this blog...the fans proved them wrong. They told Manny that great hitter or not, when the manager says "We need you" during a pennant race, you play unless you're injured or sick, and maybe even then. Ramon Vasquez, limping around at short when the Sox had nobody else, showed that he understood this, like Damon, Schilling, Mueller and most of the team. Manny needs to be told, not that he'll listen.

The fans told Manny that asking to be traded after they have loyally cheered and stood by him and paid his huge contract was an insult to the city, the team, and them, which it was.
They told him, in short, that he was being a selfish jerk, and all the grand slams in the world won't make that "okay."
Good for them.
And Ortiz's argument, well-meaning as it is, doesn't wash. "How dare they boo Manny after all he's done?" Please. How dare Manny say he doesn't like the way fans treat him in Boston after all these years? And he wants privacy...in NEW YORK??


Andrew said...


And here I thought the goal of a baseball team was to win games rather than provide civics lessons. I've been rooting for the wrong thing all this time.

Devine said...

Jack Marshall: ah yes, Damon and Mueller the super-teammates that have really shown us what it means to be a team player...and have played in exactly as many or fewer games than Manny this year. Francona didn't seem too fussed by all this. Why are you? And is there any proof Manny didn't need that day off? What if he understands his own body and its needs better than we do? What if he understands his own team's needs better than we do? I'm willing to say, right now, that I'm upset with Manny for his behavior concerning that ONE GAME. It did seem prima donna-ish. But I reserve at least a little judgment in case there's more to it I don't know or understand.


Jeez Louise, I care about hustle and professionalism and blah blah blah, but really, you talk about "numbers" like they're a secondary consideration. "Numbers" IS BASEBALL. Ask Theo frickin' Epstein. Is he unsophisticated? Frankly, Manny could do a lot short of pissing directly onto an old lady wearing a Red Sox cap, and I'd be happy to have him around for his "numbers". 28 HR, 92 RBI...how many fewer games do the Red Sox win without Manny in the lineup? You can point straight at the White Sox one where he hit the game-winning home run in the ninth. I'm willing to bet (though I don't remember) that at least one of his three grand slams made all the difference in a ball game.

My question is: is management really addressing Manny's privacy issues in attempting a trade with New York? Is that fair, given the reason Manny desires the trade?

I think he probably will be traded next year. I'd be a bit surprised, though not bowled over, if it happened this year. By next year, the years/amount on his contract will have dwindled enough to make trades profitable and reasonable. Not that I know anything about this...it just seems more and more likely he'll be traded the more the value on his current contract decreases.

Jack Marshall said...

Divine: The Sox have had "numbers" many, many years when they haven't won a thing. You need numbers and a team that cares about winning and knows how to do it. To say numbers are all that matter in baseball wouldn't get agreement from Theo or anyone else in baseball management. Do you really think "numbers" alone were behind the Nomar trade? He had become a negative force in the dugout.

Your excuses for Manny's refusal to play are lame, lame, lame. SURE he needs a day off. All the regulars need a day off. Hell,I need a day off...but I've got responsibilities and obligations to others, and I'm not even being payed 8 figures to meet them. That's why they call it "a job."

Jack Marshall said...

Redsock: Oh, please...when argument fails, play the race card. How juvenile. You want more racial diversity in my two groups: Fine. Black centerfielder who "got it": Willy Mays. White centerfielder who didn't: Mickey Mantle. White centerfielder who did: Joe Dimaggio.
White leftfielder who didn't: Ted Williams. Black leftfielder who didn't: Jim Rice. Black Yankee greats who do: Jeter, Williams. White Yankee great who didn't: Babe Ruth.

And Yaz loafed until he was about 24, then HE LEARNED. That was my point.

To clarify what should have been obvious first time around: yes, an employee's value is based on a balance of pluses and minuses, and thus an averege worker will get sacked for relatively minor infractions because he or she can be replaced with someone just as good who beheves better. BUT...the same misconduct, bad attitude or bad work habits are more damaging and thus greater negatives when they are done by an employee who is more vital to the organization...a star.. and more visible and influencial. Thus they desrve more criticism for it, and the true impact of their conduct has to be evaluated in that light...by who is doing it, and its consequential impact.
And that IS how the world works.

Devine said...


So a team that's full of .240 hitters who are all raring to go is teh awesome? Ah, of course not, they need numbers and to know how to win. Sort of like Manny Ramirez knows how to be the World Series MVP, you mean?

DID I FRICKIN' SAY that numbers are all that matter? You'll never hear me say that. I love the human, team-oriented aspect of baseball. It's what makes it worth watching.

The Nomar trade was partly about his attitude, I'd say. Mainly, I'd guess it was about defense and speed. Those have a few numbers associated with them too. I seriously doubt there's been a trade in the history of the game that didn't have something to do with numbers. Maybe a few dozen that were more concentrated on team spirit and such, but the Nomar trade was certainly not exclusively about that. Theo said after that trade something along the lines of, "We are better equipped to win the World Series now." That may have had a bit to do with attitude, but that certainly was not all of it and probably not most of it. Numbers (I believe) are probably like 80% of winning, with attitude, intangibles, etc. around 20%. It stands to reason that you can't win with a team that has a bad ERA or batting average.

Also, did you consider that Manny agreed to play when he had a scheduled day off when the game was against the White Sox but stuck with his day off when they played the Devil Rays? Would you rather he had switched those around? Or should he have waited until they played a really terrible team? What team is that if not the Devil Rays? The Royals?

But you still can't say you KNOW Manny should have played that day (though I myself AGREE WITH YOU that he should have unless there's something I don't know). What if his hamstring would have exploded and put him out for two weeks? The team won without him; forget it. Your logic is lame, lame, lame.

L-girl said...

Jack Marshall: you still don't get it.

This was never about your opinion of various players through history. The question wasn't, Jack Marshall, can you name players of both light and dark skin tones, some of whom (you feel) "got it" and others you feel didn't?

Likewise, in response to snide remarks you made elsewhere (re David Duke rally, I believe), no one called the Boston sports media or fans hardcore racists.

The issue Redsock and others are talking about was, and remains, this.

Players with the very similar talent, attitudes and demeanors are often treated differently by fans and media. Some players are given more slack, their strengths highlighted and weaknesses ignored or given short shrift. Others are given very little slack, their weaknesses - though similar or comparable to other players' weaknesses - harped upon and exaggerated.

Some of us believe that the differences in treatment stem from subconscious but deeply held assumptions about people of various ethnicities. The fans and media who draw the distinctions may be (and often are) unaware that they make these assumptions, and so easily discard the notion that race has anything to do with it. Many people have objectively documented and quantified this phenomenon.

Your lists of players is interesting, but irrelevant. However, Mickey Mantle is an interesting one to name. He's on your list of "didn't get it", but as we know, he was never treated as anything but heroic by the media in his playing days. That would be more to the point, not your personal assessment of Mantle now.

Andrew said...

The solution is clear. We must tade Manny for David Eckstein, with a local priest to be named later.

Jck, here's what I'd like you to do. Please list, in order, all of Manny Ramirez' supposed infractions. One by one. Then look at your list, and think about whether anyone who isn't a stringent moral absolutist would care. And then consider the fact that Manny is a baseball player, rather than a social worker. Then get back to me.

redsock said...

JM's approach to the core of this discussion is like when you were a child and you tried putting the ends of two magnets together and they always veered off and could never touch.

And Andrew, that is no fair. The Glob already gave us a list of these crimes against humanity, including:

May 10, 2002: Breaks finger sliding headfirst into Seattle catcher.

Imagine the nerve of that lazy, selfish Manny! Getting injured!! Why, you'd never see any of the gritty, grimy, gamers on the Red Sox getting hurt. Get him gone!

Anonymous said...

Not to mention the times ths year alone hen he's been so lazy that he tried to take second on a single and got thrown out.

Andrew said...

That last was me, I hit Enter without the name in there.

I hope I haven't disrespected your blog, I assure you that I 'get it'.

L-girl said...

The solution is clear. We must trade Manny for David Eckstein, with a local priest to be named later.

LOL! Andrew, you are smart and funny - and you live in Toronto! Look for us at the Skydome/Rogers Centre on 9/13, our first game as Canadian residents.