When hearing of teams giving up prospects you always hear people saying that they should not give up Player "X" because he "could be the next (insert HOF player here)". But the team is giving up the player for a once in a lifetime talent like say Santana or a player at the top of their game like Sabathia. I always look at it that I would rather have a prvoen player over a "potential" guy. Look at the history of players that are "for sure HOF" when coming into the league...JD Drew, Gregg Jefferies, Jason Isrighausen, Bill Pulsipher...the list goes on and on!
2007-12-06 02:52:43 · 7 answers · asked by bdough15 6 in Sports ➔ Baseball
I think it's because in baseball, especially this time of year, hope springs eternal. Of course, that all changes in the dog days of August.
A few reasons they should forget potential:
1. A bird in hand is worth 2 (or 3 or 4) in the bush. I wonder how many minor leaguers really "make it". especially at the Santana level. I feel bad for the teams who can't make this commitment. How can they win consistently in the age of free agency?
2. Some teams want to win "now". I think the way the Sox are built, with Ramirez, Lowell and Papi's age, they are smart to go for a now player. They can afford it as well. I think the yankees are built this way with Mo, Posada, Matsui, Abreu and ARod, too.
3. Compared to all the FA's this year, other than arguably ARod, who could have more impact?
4. How long can you really lock up these developing guys for anyway. They will not commit long term when they see what others are getting. Ellsbury just signed with Boras!
I think the Tigers, Red Sox and Yankees all understand this, and fortunately for them they have the $$ to act.
2007-12-06 03:57:46 · answer #1 · answered by rob 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Given the limited exposure of Ellsbury, one player from the past that springs to mind is Bob "Hurricane" Hazle. It's a good reason to take a young, proven player over potential.
Look him up, folks. The Sox wouldn't be making a mistake putting Ellsbury in a deal for Santana. History favors the Santana types.
2007-12-06 04:18:14 · answer #2 · answered by llk51 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Free agency has a lot to do with it. I wouldn't think of trading Santana for Ellsbury in a million years in a neutral setting. But throw in the fact that Santana will be gone in 12 months tops, while Ellsbury would be under the Twins control for at least 6 years, then you start to see why this is part of the equation.
2007-12-06 03:18:41 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Fans think with their hearts instead of their mind. Jacoby Ellsbury or whatever his name his, at his best he will never be close to the player Johan Santana is, plus pitching is way harder to replace then an outfielder. Epstein knows this but GM's just play hard ball with each other. They hold their cards like they don't want people to know what they got while pretending they don't want to release them, but underneathe Epstein is just dying to make this trade. He will be laughing if he can get Santana for Lester and Ellsbury and some other noob.
2007-12-06 07:37:00 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
JD Drew and Daniel Bard hardly all and assorted out of purple Sox u . s . has accompanied Bard. He only got here up this year, and has large ability. He can attain one hundred+ MPH. In 26 innings this year, he leads the purple Sox in WHIP, has a 2.40 two era, and 32 strikeouts. Drew is likewise underrated. His SO/BB ratio is one million.28, while the league's is one million.ninety 8. He grounds into an exceptionally small variety of double performs (only 8% this year, 7% for occupation whilst in GIDP concern). He can nevertheless thieve 5 bases a year, and final year he had 19 homeruns. This year he's on %. to smack over 20. His occupation OBP is .390, between the main suitable in the league. despite if a .244 usual this year, his OBP continues to be .369. He hits a fabulous variety of triples for a innovations-blowing fielder (has 26 triples considering the fact that 2004).
2016-10-10 09:41:09 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Free Agency is always two-fold in the sense that certain teams will pick up proven or veteran players to bolster their already contending line-up. On the other side of the coin, teams will take "potential" players or top prospects in the hopes of benefiting a rebuilding project.
A lot of times, owners, GM's, and even agents will use the word "potential" to drive up the value of a top prospect in the deal.
2007-12-06 03:08:45 · answer #6 · answered by no1nyyfan55 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I Have No Clue.
2007-12-06 05:07:48 · answer #7 · answered by bored 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋