Yea he's been in Charlotte. There was a mistake with that press release, he was not released.

 

OK thanks for clearing that up

I agree with you. I keep reading how below average Reed has been, but they have lost 3 games in his save situations. The Sox have already lost 6 games leading in the 9th. That is 3 games right there. Plus, everyone talks about Lindstrom and Jones being out made everyone else worse. Wouldn't that mean not replacing Reed made everyone else worse?

 

Try not to take it too personally. It is just stubborn people who got too excited about some decent numbers put up in Reno and they don't want to admit they were wrong. Hahn made some great moves in the offseason. The Reed trade wasn't one of them.

 

Even if Matt Davidson never plays a single game for the White Sox, that still can't be considered a bad trade. As a rebuilding team that is not contending, you can get a top 100 prospect for a mediocre closer? You make that trade every single time.

Seems like an odd choice over Guerra, at the least.

 

He's no special talent, but I remember looking over the Charlotte roster before his callup and thinking he was the only possible addition

You are either kidding or retarded.

Even if Matt Davidson never plays a single game for the White Sox, that still can't be considered a bad trade. As a rebuilding team that is not contending, you can get a top 100 prospect for a mediocre closer? You make that trade every single time.

 

So not true. Only the idea of the trade is good.

 

If you get a AAA or AAAA player for a cost-controlled closer coming off a 40 save season, you've made a bad trade, and missed a real opportunity.

Edited August 4, 201411 yr by Stan Bahnsen

The Reed/Davidson trade was a good decision.

 

Not every good decision becomes a good trade. That's baseball.

The Reed/Davidson trade was a good decision.

 

Not every good decision becomes a good trade. That's baseball.

Yup, people love ripping the trade in hindsight, but no one knew Conor Gillaspie would be this good. At the time getting a top 100 prospect that played 3B for an average at best closer was the right move. Our organization was preparing to retool with a small chance of winning in 2014 and had nothing in our system to help us anytime soon at the position. While I agree with Dick Allen that some posters hyped up his Reno stats way too much, he's still an incredibly talented prospect and had to the ability to be an above average contributor at a major position of need for us. The trade was a no-brainer regardless if Davidson develops or not.

Everyone is a genius in hindsight.

The Reed/Davidson trade was a good decision.

 

Not every good decision becomes a good trade. That's baseball.

 

This is a reasonable point and therefore has no place on this board.

 

Maybe try some baseless, constant complaining.

This is a reasonable point and therefore has no place on this board.

 

Maybe try some baseless, constant complaining.

I wish I was taller.

Well....if Hahn knew before the season:

 

1) Gillaspie was going to be in the Top 10 for AL hitting and at least not terrible on defense (his 2nd error today was attributable mostly to the rain/play conditions as the ball slipped out of his hand)

 

2) Jones and Lindstrom would get injured

 

3) Abreu would be THIS good

 

 

He probably would have approached the bullpen situation a bit different. But hindsight is always 20/20.

 

In that case, we wouldn't have signed Downs/Paulino and would have gone after Scott Kazmir, Josh Beckett, Tim Hudson, Phil Hughes, etc.

 

 

We could also have kept Thome in 2010 and also not signed Dunn coming into 2011, etc., etc.

Reed would obviously help this bullpen, but was far from a priority for us when we traded him. I have a feeling the horrible Arizona team probably would just assume not have traded a promising prospect for a meh closer as well.

 

An extreme flyball closer was always going to be a recipe for disaster here. The book isn't closed on Davidson yet.

 

It is also very easy to overstate the importance of bullpen upgrades

4-5 days ago I made a simple, one sentence, non-combative statement saying that Sox trading Addison Reed didn't help the bullpen, or if he were still here it would be better, or something like that, and I was promptly villified by 3-4 posters, 2 of whom are mods, basically insinuating that I don't know what I'm talking about, calling me a troll and that our bullpen is fine without him, even telling us what the Sox bullpen ERA is vs Reed's ERA, etc. etc. as if his 26 saves are irrelevant to the discussion, or words to that effect. The fact is the Sox bullpen imploded this weekend, and Reed had a scoreless inning today with 3 K's, not that that makes any difference. I still say Reed would have helped this team this year. A lot.

 

Just stop.

 

If you can get a potential 30 homer 3B with six years of control for a closer who is going into his arb years you make the deal, every, single time.

 

And you can also stop pretending like Addison Reed has put up some special season, because he has been a very bad closer this year, no matter what is save total is.

Yeah. I like Addy. But he's not that good. Not bad...but not good.

So not true. Only the idea of the trade is good.

 

If you get a AAA or AAAA player for a cost-controlled closer coming off a 40 save season, you've made a bad trade, and missed a real opportunity.

 

This falls into the category of bizarre semantic argument for the purpose of argument.

 

If the idea of the trade was good, then the decision to make the trade was a good one. So if the wording that you choose to use to categorize such a scenario is:

-good decision

-bad trade

 

That's fine for you. But what's the point of arguing adjectives?

I wish I was taller.

Nobody is getting my Seinfeld/Ziggy reference?

 

Geez...

Nobody is getting my Seinfeld/Ziggy reference?

 

Geez...

 

My place is a sty

My place is a sty

I like the cut of your gib.

 

 

 

 

what's a gib?

Any chance it is Chien-Ming Wang?

 

I realize he's a starter, but there had to be a reason they brought him on at Charlotte.

You are either kidding or retarded.

Not really necessary. And I don't think that post was far off either, Thompson had barely gotten his feet wet.

 

Not really necessary. And I don't think that post was far off either, Thompson had barely gotten his feet wet.

Really? It should have been Guerra?

 

Ok. This was a totally fair and reasonable comment.

Wonder if they get reallly aggresive and call up Jarrett Casey who has been fantastic at 3 different levels so far. Only 7 innings in AAA though.

 

On the year he has a 1.59 ERA with a BAA of .189. Only 2 HRs given up in 56 innings....Kind of a nobody his previous 4 years.

Wonder if they get reallly aggresive and call up Jarrett Casey who has been fantastic at 3 different levels so far. Only 7 innings in AAA though.

 

On the year he has a 1.59 ERA with a BAA of .189. Only 2 HRs given up in 56 innings....Kind of a nobody his previous 4 years.

 

Sounds good to me. Bring it

Yup, people love ripping the trade in hindsight, but no one knew Conor Gillaspie would be this good. At the time getting a top 100 prospect that played 3B for an average at best closer was the right move. Our organization was preparing to retool with a small chance of winning in 2014 and had nothing in our system to help us anytime soon at the position. While I agree with Dick Allen that some posters hyped up his Reno stats way too much, he's still an incredibly talented prospect and had to the ability to be an above average contributor at a major position of need for us. The trade was a no-brainer regardless if Davidson develops or not.

No hindsight here. On the original thread announcing the trade, I said I didn't like it (day after the trade cuz I wanted to think about it before posting). As I posted elsewhere, I called a couple of pals in Phoenix who follow the Dbacks and asked them about it, and they said the team did not like Davidson after a significant cup of coffee, blah blah blah. I was quickly criticized, and I don't know if anyone else here agreed with me or not. Now some do.

No hindsight here. On the original thread announcing the trade, I said I didn't like it (day after the trade cuz I wanted to think about it before posting). As I posted elsewhere, I called a couple of pals in Phoenix who follow the Dbacks and asked them about it, and they said the team did not like Davidson after a significant cup of coffee, blah blah blah. I was quickly criticized, and I don't know if anyone else here agreed with me or not. Now some do.

Congrats. You are a smarter person than Rick Hahn.

Edited August 4, 201411 yr by Pale Sox

No hindsight here. On the original thread announcing the trade, I said I didn't like it (day after the trade cuz I wanted to think about it before posting). As I posted elsewhere, I called a couple of pals in Phoenix who follow the Dbacks and asked them about it, and they said the team did not like Davidson after a significant cup of coffee, blah blah blah. I was quickly criticized, and I don't know if anyone else here agreed with me or not. Now some do.

 

FWIW I still disagree with you.