[Cambridge]

So, Theo and the Cubs have traded for Anthony Rizzo. What they sent to the Padres in exchange was, by no means, an especially valuable asset. Could -- and should -- Cherington the Sox topped the Cubs offer and reacquired Rizzo?

Yes, Gonzalez is entrenched at first base, and Ortiz at DH, but talent is talent and you always find room to play talent -- if not immediately, at least over the long term.

[Hail Cesar]

I'd say no unless they were planning to flip him elsewhere. You're right that there's nothing wrong with having a boatload of talent, but, the same thing can be said for the Padres. Why didn't the Padres decide to put Alonso in the outfield and keep Rizzo at first? Sure, Rizzo would be a nice "blue chip", but what's the point in obtaining a player if you really don't have any use for him?

[rominer]

If it's that easy, then sure.

But the Red Sox and Cubs are teams with two very different sets of offseason goals. Pursuing Rizzo makes more sense for a Cubs team that is trying to blow up its existing mess and accelerate the rebuilding process. Not as much for a Red Sox team trying to patch a few holes and looking for ways to cover for $30 million worth of Tommy John surgery in the rotation.

If the Sox want Rizzo back, there's always the unresolved issue of compensation for Theo Epstein's early departure...

[Hail Cesar]

rominer, on 06 January 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

If the Sox want Rizzo back, there's always the unresolved issue of compensation for Theo Epstein's early departure...

I'm beginning to think that the "compensation" will end up being a gorilla suit with three used condoms suck in the crotch area.

[Kid T]

Sure it would be nice to have more talent in the organization, but the Sox would presumably have to give up some talent in exchange for Rizzo. It's not as if Cashner is a throwaway piece. I don't know who would have been the Red Sox minor league equivalent. I can't imagine the Padres willing to take Dubront, Bowden, or even Andrew Miller over what the Cubs offered.

And as you point out, it's not an organizational need and I don't think the Sox are necessarily overflowing with talent at any position - with the possible exception of 3B with Middlebrooks, Cecchini, Vitek, and Bogaerts (but it seems the FO still views Bogaerts as a SS and not a 3B yet). If the Sox were to deal some of their minor league depth at 3B, I would think they'd be more likely to add depth at a position of need in the system.

[Cambridge]

Nearly a year later, it goes without saying that Rizzo would look nice in a Red Sox uniform. Would such a deal have been possible last winter? Hard to say, but his value is certainly higher now than it was then.

[Mike LansWho]

Cambridge, on 17 November 2012 - 10:04 PM, said:

Nearly a year later, it goes without saying that Rizzo would look nice in a Red Sox uniform. Would such a deal have been possible last winter? Hard to say, but his value is certainly higher now than it was then.

Not only would the Red Sox have a great young option at 1B, but they'd probably also have a guy that in the past three seasons has won 3 gold gloves and 3 top-20 AL MVP finishes including a 3rd place finish for 2012. Trading for Adrian Gonzalez made sense at the time but it's easily one of the worst moves under Theo.

[24Red Sox]

Mike LansWho, on 18 November 2012 - 11:01 AM, said:

Not only would the Red Sox have a great young option at 1B, but they'd probably also have a guy that in the past three seasons has won 3 gold gloves and 3 top-20 AL MVP finishes including a 3rd place finish for 2012. Trading for Adrian Gonzalez made sense at the time but it's easily one of the worst moves under Theo.

That depends on how RDLR and Webster turn out to find out if that statement is true or not.

[Mike LansWho]

24Red Sox, on 18 November 2012 - 02:18 PM, said:

That depends on how RDLR and Webster turn out to find out if that statement is true or not.

This is true. Don't forget Jerry Sands. Don't ever forget Jerry Sands.

[Hail Cesar]

Mike LansWho, on 18 November 2012 - 06:42 PM, said:

This is true. Don't forget Jerry Sands. Don't ever forget Jerry Sands.

I am going to laugh so hard when Jerry Sands ends up playing a solid first base and touts an OPS of .875. I might even shart.

(Granted, I don't think either of those things will happen for Sands, but, if it does, I think MLW will be required to buy a Jerry Sands jersey)

[Mike LansWho]

Hail Cesar, on 19 November 2012 - 09:38 AM, said:

I am going to laugh so hard when Jerry Sands ends up playing a solid first base and touts an OPS of .875. I might even shart.

(Granted, I don't think either of those things will happen for Sands, but, if it does, I think MLW will be required to buy a Jerry Sands jersey)

Believe me, I make jokes but I would love for Sands to be an everyday contributor. If Sands can crack an .850 OPS with 400+ plate appearances in 2013 with the Boston Red Sox then I will consider buying his jersey. I don't even care how well he plays defensively.

[MrNewEngland]

Defense is over rated. Put Ortiz at SS next year and we'll have the best hitting SS in the game.

[Hail Cesar]

MrNewEngland, on 19 November 2012 - 10:07 AM, said:

Defense is over rated. Put Ortiz at SS next year and we'll have the best hitting SS in the game.

True. While we're at it, we might as well switch to "Austrialian style" baseball and have the batter run to 3rd base rather than 1st. It will make things easier on Ortiz.

[Mike LansWho]

MrNewEngland, on 19 November 2012 - 10:07 AM, said:

Defense is over rated. Put Ortiz at SS next year and we'll have the best hitting SS in the game.

In reality defense at 1B is over rated. It certainly isn't nearly as important as defense up the middle (C, 2B, SS, and CF). If you don't have to make up for other infield position deficiencies then you can put just about anyone who can scoop a ball out of the dirt at 1B. When you have Chuck Knoblauch at 2B, Nomar Garciaparra at SS and Hanley Ramirez at 3B then you might want to invest in a "solid defensive first baseman".

There is a chapter on this in the MLW version of The Fielding Bible.

[The Ghost of Ned Martin]

Mike LansWho, on 19 November 2012 - 11:11 AM, said:

In reality defense at 1B is over rated. It certainly isn't nearly as important as defense up the middle (C, 2B, SS, and CF). If you don't have to make up for other infield position deficiencies then you can put just about anyone who can scoop a ball out of the dirt at 1B. When you have Chuck Knoblauch at 2B, Nomar Garciaparra at SS and Hanley Ramirez at 3B then you might want to invest in a "solid defensive first baseman".

There is a chapter on this in the MLW version of The Fielding Bible.

Anyone who thinks defense is overrated takes it up the ass.

Fact.

[Mike LansWho]

The Ghost of Ned Martin, on 19 November 2012 - 09:23 PM, said:

Anyone who thinks defense is overrated takes it up the ass.

Fact.

Good thing that's not me. I think defense at 1B is overrated.

Besides, your mom doesn't think that defense is overrated. Must not be a fact after all.

[MrNewEngland]

The Ghost of Ned Martin, on 19 November 2012 - 09:23 PM, said:

Anyone who thinks defense is overrated takes it up the ass.

Fact.

MrNewEngland, on 19 November 2012 - 10:07 AM, said:

Defense is over rated.

::gasp::

[Mike LansWho]

MrNewEngland, on 20 November 2012 - 07:37 AM, said:

::gasp::

You think that defense is "over rated" while GoNM is suggesting that people take it up the ass who think it is "overrated". You're safe.

[Hail Cesar]

MrNewEngland, on 20 November 2012 - 07:37 AM, said:

::gasp::

Are you really that surprised?

[MrNewEngland]

Mike LansWho, on 20 November 2012 - 08:52 AM, said:

You think that defense is "over rated" while GoNM is suggesting that people take it up the ass who think it is "overrated". You're safe.

I'm glad you noticed that. I didn't want to take it in the ass.