Gordon Edes on evaluating the past (and predicting the future)

May 6th, 2007 → 9:13 am @ // 3 Comments

I’m in Boston this weekend (for an engagement party — my own, actually — which is why I’m going to need to split in a second), which gives me a chance to read the paper copy of the Globe with my morning cereal. I was very happy to see an article by Gordon Edes that looked at last year’s trades in the context of what’s been going on recently. It’s rare that you get this kind of retrospective look at recent history when there don’t seem to be clear cut answers, and rarer still when there’s a re-examination of moves that engendered criticism when they occurred (or soon afterwards). (I’m not holding my breath waiting for Shaughnessy to re-visit this statement: “Is anybody rethinking that Johnny Damon decision now? On a day when Coco Crisp was rested, Damon continued his Bang Bang tour through Boston…”)

As Gordo points out, things look a lot differently now than they did at various points last year: to take the most obvious example, Anibal Sanchez has just been shipped to AAA, and Josh Beckett looks like the pitcher everyone hoped he’d be. The one thing I would have liked to see: an acknowledgment that it’ll be many years still before we can fully appreciate the pros and cons of these deals…just as it won’t be until the end of next season before we’ll know whether it was a good idea for the Mets to offer Pedo four guaranteed years.


Post Categories: Gordon Edes & Sports Reporters & Trades

3 Comments → “Gordon Edes on evaluating the past (and predicting the future)”


  1. David Haglund

    10 years ago

    I have to disagree with regard to Pedro and the Mets. When Pedro arrived in Flushing, the Mets were relevant again: fans got excited for his starts, the team improved, and the team has built on that excitement to the point where they could overtake the Yankees in the hearts of bandwagoners throughout the tri-state area if the Yankees continue to disappoint. Pedro had a lot to do with that. So even if he doesn’t end up representing a great value when you divide that 52 million by, say, his total Win Shares as a Met, he’ll still have been a good investment for them. (Which doesn’t mean he would have been a good investment for the Sox. I think that situation probably worked out for the best for everyone involved.)

    Reply

  2. HFXBOB

    10 years ago

    Another timely & interesting piece by Mr. Edes, I thought. Seth, you’re right of course that it will be years before we can fully evaluate these deals. But honestly who can think like that on a day to day basis, especially when you have a major case of Bagwellophobia like me and other Sox fans. Last year it was semi-nightmarish at times watching what Arroyo, H. Ramirez, Sanchez, Bard and Meredith were doing. Now part of my daily baseball routine includes poring through the boxscores of other teams to see how the ex-Sox made out. And I have to admit, though I’m not proud of it, that I was very relieved to see Meredith have a couple of rough outings after being flat-out perfect through the month of April. I guess the bottom line is, Theo and company are playing a high-stakes game where you’re going to have big wins and big losses over the short haul and all that counts is how many championships you produce over the long haul. And believe me there’s nobody I’d rather have at the wheel than Theo. Even if I still believe Cabrera would look pretty good out there at shortstop…

    Reply

  3. amos

    10 years ago

    Hey, congratulations!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: