Looking Back: Marlins and Red Sox trade (2005)

[RocketsDWM]

The dark horse in this trade is Anibal. Does he become the "ace" pitcher people were expecting (shown by the no hitter) or is he simply an average, middle of the rotation starter? If he did become the "ace", does that sway anyones opinion?

Here are a couple more opinions:

From Baseball Musings:

I still wonder if the Ramriez trade was the right move for Boston. Beckett's had one great year. Lowell's been terrific, but would Youkilis at third have been so bad? Hanley is likely to be smacking the ball around long after Lowell's career is over. Given the results in Boston, no Red Sox fan is going to complain I can imagine a Boston roster with Ramirez being just as potent and possibly a bit less expensive.

From Tony Maz at the Boston Herald:

Let’s make something clear here: At the moment, nobody in Boston regrets the deal that bought Beckett and Lowell to Boston. Nobody. The Sox would not have won the 2007 World Series without either of those players, and they probably would not be in position to win another now. Beckett and Lowell are under Sox control through 2010, and the former, at age 28, already has established himself as the preeminent big-game pitcher in the major leagues.

And yet, as one major league evaluator recently noted, the Red Sox wouldn’t be in their current plight with Manny Ramirez if young Hanley Ramirez were playing shortstop instead of Julio Lugo [stats]. The Sox could let Manny go and simply replace one Ramirez with another in the batting order, maintaining the kind of 1-2 punch in the middle of their lineup (assuming the health of David Ortiz [stats]) that has been the foundation for their success since the middle of the 2003 season.

Let’s say it again: Nobody is suggesting that the acquisitions of Beckett and Lowell were a bad decision. But purely from the Red Sox’ long-term perspective, the implications of not having Hanley Ramirez in the middle of their lineup may just now be starting to resonate.

The point?

Because of the team’s continued success, most Sox followers have yet to understand what the Sox truly gave up in the deal.

Of course, this is precisely why Red Sox general manager Theo Epstein lobbied against the trade in 2005, during those months when Epstein was on sabbatical in the wake of his resignation. It is why owner John Henry similarly suggested the Sox should just sign A.J. Burnett and keep Hanley. Both Epstein and Henry have an appreciation and affection for good young talent -- who doesn’t? -- and both have an understanding that trading away the wrong player could have an impact for a decade, if not longer.

Tony especially has some great points.

Edit: The link to the rest of Tony's story....http://news.bostonherald.com/sports/baseball/red_sox/view/2008_07_20_Hard_to_find_a_fit_in_change_of_Sox/

Story written on July 20, 2008.

[Bloody Sox]

Either a tie or Sox win IMO. Hanley is a singular talent, no question there. But there is a reason it is called a "prospect." Tons of them go on to greatness, but many more do not. Beckett was already a known pitching commodity, and the trade sealed the series for them. I don't think its a mistake, you have to give to get sometimes. The trade directly led to a Series win, whereas Florida hasn't won anything yet because of it.

I think this is a poor way to evaluate, in this case. It's not as if Hanley has hampered Florida's ability to win -- he's arguably been the best Shortstop in the league since they got him. Both clubs here got exactly what they needed to accomplish their goals; it's just that the Red Sox were primed to make a World Series run while Florida was in their firesale mode after having won theirs. I don't think there's a better player Florida could've gotten in this trade, so it's hard to declare them the loser (even if it's slight) in any capacity. This is one of those deals where all parties involved can give each other a giant high-five.

I agree with this 100%.

[Yoda]

Looks pretty even right now. Beckett and Lowell clearly helped the Sox right away while Hanley is one of, if not the best young player in the game today. Anibal looks like he is coming back and FLA is competitive so I think this is one of those rare blockbusters that turn out good for both teams.

[soty]

I had no problem with it then and I still dont. Both teams got what they want and needed. Yes the SS has been an issue for the Sox these past few years, but they needed pitching more. I would think that Theo knew what he was giving up in Hanley, but you have to give something to get something. You are not going to get an ace SP like Beckett for a mid level prospect(s). You have to give up one of your big boys to get a deal like that done. So we gave Hanley, Sanchez and Delgado. The only guy their that is a loss to us is Hanley. Sanchez has been hurt a lot (basically a non factor other than his no hitter) and I have no idea who Delgado is. Mota is obviously nothing special or still with us for that matter, but Beckett and Lowell are two huge pieces to our team. Without those 2 we would have never won the World Series last year. With that said if I had to choose I a winner I would say it has to be the Sox. Yes they have an absolute stud in Hanley Ramirez, but they gave us a CY Young caliber SP and a Gold Glove/WS MVP.

[MashinSpuds]

As with everyone else, I agree this trade worked very well for both sides. The revolving door at SS is the result of Sox management's fickle opinions, for they had capable starters in Cabrera and Gonzalez before settling on the bigger names of Renteria and then Lugo. Hanley would be great but might've been somewhat of an afterthought if the assumed proven commodities of Renteria and Lugo panned out in Boston. Too bad they didn't, and so our discussion today.

[RocketsDWM]

As an interesting note in the article I posted above, Theo and Henry were against the trade. Imagine an infield consisting of Youk, Dustin, Hanley and perhaps Lowrie at third. That would allow the Sox to let go of Manny at the end of the season and put even more money into the rotation, with the likes of Ben Sheets and CC Sabathia being available. But then you do not have a true ace as Dice-K and Burnett would be considered number 2 type pitchers.

Not saying I would trade in the World Series, but it is an interesting "What if" scenario.

[WyldStallyn]

As with everyone else, I agree this trade worked very well for both sides. The revolving door at SS is the result of Sox management's fickle opinions, for they had capable starters in Cabrera and Gonzalez before settling on the bigger names of Renteria and then Lugo. Hanley would be great but might've been somewhat of an afterthought if the assumed proven commodities of Renteria and Lugo panned out in Boston. Too bad they didn't, and so our discussion today.

maybe lowrie will be the one to stabilize the position

course, the sox will still be stuck with lugo for the next 2 years @9mill per

[great gretzky]

Either a tie or Sox win IMO. Hanley is a singular talent, no question there. But there is a reason it is called a "prospect." Tons of them go on to greatness, but many more do not. Beckett was already a known pitching commodity, and the trade sealed the series for them. I don't think its a mistake, you have to give to get sometimes. The trade directly led to a Series win, whereas Florida hasn't won anything yet because of it.

I think this is a poor way to evaluate, in this case. It's not as if Hanley has hampered Florida's ability to win -- he's arguably been the best Shortstop in the league since they got him. Both clubs here got exactly what they needed to accomplish their goals; it's just that the Red Sox were primed to make a World Series run while Florida was in their firesale mode after having won theirs. I don't think there's a better player Florida could've gotten in this trade, so it's hard to declare them the loser (even if it's slight) in any capacity. This is one of those deals where all parties involved can give each other a giant high-five.

This is why I said "tie or win to the Red Sox. I think it was probably a win-win. That being said, the ultimate goal is to win the World Series, not have a firesale. And Hanley hasn't hurt the cause (wasn't implying it did), but the Sox have registered a win, the Florida Marlins haven't. Granted the aims are different, so I would be inclined to give it a tie. But I really don't see how it could be perceived the Sox lost it, because through the trade, they achieved the only goal that ultimately matters. The Marlins got a singular talent who will serve them well for a long time. But like I said, the object in my minds isn't scoring the talent per se, its securing the talent that ultimately leads to a WS win. But different people can disagree.

[thedude]

How much is one world series worth? Would you trade the best player on your team for one one world series? The Red Sox do not win the world series last year without Beckett (they lose the ALCS), it is that simple. So is Hanley worth one WS? I say he is. BTW the Hanley was not going to be the Red Sox SS of the future because of his subpar defense. They wanted him to play centerfield in the majors. (BTW he has been an error machine at short.) So he would not have solved the Red Sox short stop problems.

[great gretzky]

I think almost any player is worth the championship -- there are no guarantees going forward. I find it really hard to criticize a trade that leads to a world series. I could see if the Sox won the WS despite those two, but the pieces they got were integral to the win.

I know its a joke of a comparison, but you see the differing philosophies on this in keeper league discussions. At some point you have to let go of your future potential to seize the reins now, and that's fine.