RED SOX TRADE with REDS

RED SOX TRADE with REDS

Post by Ron Birnba » Sat, 11 Jul 1992 00:31:36


-----------

 The Red Sox just (11:30 am in Boston) announced this trade with the Reds:

 Sox send:

 Tom Bolton

 Reds send:

 Billy Hatcher

  Reds get more pitching - Sox get a centerfielder. Sounds decent for both
  teams.

-Ron

 
 
 

RED SOX TRADE with REDS

Post by Steve Ada » Sat, 11 Jul 1992 01:47:29

Quote:

>-----------
> The Red Sox just (11:30 am in Boston) announced this trade with the Reds:
> Sox send:
> Tom Bolton
> Reds send:
> Billy Hatcher

>  Reds get more pitching - Sox get a centerfielder. Sounds decent for both
>  teams.

Jose Rijo gets his wish fulfilled...just the other day he said they should
go out and get a pitcher...since he thought it was a bad idea to put a
rookie into the rotation...given Tom Browning's injury.

 -Steve
--
 The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
                        -------------------

     Steve Adams                              Fax:   (312) 329-3558

 
 
 

RED SOX TRADE with REDS

Post by Daniel T. McV » Sat, 11 Jul 1992 03:16:15

Quote:

> -----------

>  The Red Sox just (11:30 am in Boston) announced this trade with the Reds:

>  Sox send:

>  Tom Bolton

>  Reds send:

>  Billy Hatcher

>   Reds get more pitching - Sox get a centerfielder. Sounds decent for both
>   teams.

On a personal note, Bolton was a good pitcher. And again, Hatcher stinks to
high heaven. He's been a bench warmer, and now he just might replace Marshall
as the next Sox Grumbler.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Wisdom was not at the top of the graduate-school,
                mountain but there in thesandpile at Sunday School.

 
 
 

RED SOX TRADE with REDS

Post by David Allis » Sat, 11 Jul 1992 01:57:15

Quote:

>-----------

> The Red Sox just (11:30 am in Boston) announced this trade with the Reds:

> Sox send:

> Tom Bolton

> Reds send:

> Billy Hatcher

>  Reds get more pitching - Sox get a centerfielder. Sounds decent for both
>  teams.

>-Ron

Could someone post some stats for Hatcher (Both this year and over his
Career)?  Thanks.

                             Dave Allison

 
 
 

RED SOX TRADE with REDS

Post by Edward [Ted] Fisch » Sat, 11 Jul 1992 03:24:34


Quote:

>On a personal note, Bolton was a good pitcher. And again, Hatcher stinks to
>high heaven. He's been a bench warmer, and now he just might replace Marshall
>as the next Sox Grumbler.

Bolton was *what*?????  I'm happy to see him gone.  I'd only be
happier if they could get something for Young.  (I liked the sounds of
Young for O'Brien, as long as the Sox don't have to add *too* much
more...)

Bolton has allowed 32 hits and 14 BB in 26 IP.  This is good?  Lefties
are batting .344 against him.  Righties are hitting only .273.
Overall, batters are hitting .294 off of him with a .384 OBP!!!!!  Wow.
If only the Red Sox had *anybody* who could hit like that!

Oh, you must have meant Bolton was good *last* year.  Right?
Lessee...  Last year opponents smoked him for 187 baserunners in 110
innings.  Toss in *16* HR.  In 110 IP.  A .308 batting average, .378
OBP, and .485 SLG.  Bolton is NOT good.  Bolton is at *best* adequate.

Or maybe you meant that except for the last two years, Bolton has been
good?  Career 4.54 ERA...  386 H in 339 IP with 149 BB coming into this
year!!!

Shit, he wasn't even a particularly good pitcher in 1990!

Anybody who thinks that Bolton is better than Hatcher has their head
up their ass (and that includes the Cincinnati GM).  Hatcher is an
average fourth OF.  Bolton sucks septic tanks!

Thank God he's gone!
-Valentine
--

 
 
 

RED SOX TRADE with REDS

Post by James Camer » Sat, 11 Jul 1992 03:07:53

  Ron>  The Red Sox just (11:30 am in Boston) announced this trade
  Ron> with the Reds:

  Ron>  Sox send:
  Ron>  Tom Bolton

  Ron>  Reds send:
  Ron>  Billy Hatcher
  Ron>  
  Ron>   Reds get more pitching - Sox get a centerfielder. Sounds
  Ron> decent for both teams.

  Ron> -Ron

I don't mind too much losing Tom Bolton, but what did we get in
return?  Is he going to do any better than say Bob Zupic?  Anyone have
any numbers on the guy?

Thanks!

--

    System Manager, Signal Processing and Interpretation Lab.  Boston, Mass  
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"But to risk we must, for the greatest hazard in life is to risk nothing.  For
the man or woman who risks nothing, has nothing, does nothing, is nothing."
        (Quote from the eulogy for the late Christa McAuliffe.)

 
 
 

RED SOX TRADE with REDS

Post by Eric Sieferm » Sat, 11 Jul 1992 05:28:35


Quote:

>Bolton was *what*?????  I'm happy to see him gone.  I'd only be
>happier if they could get something for Young.  (I liked the sounds of
>Young for O'Brien, as long as the Sox don't have to add *too* much
>more...)

NONONONO!!!!  We've already had to put up with Matt Young
TWO TIMES already.   Enough is enough!  

Quote:

>Bolton has allowed 32 hits and 14 BB in 26 IP.  This is good?  Lefties
>are batting .344 against him.  Righties are hitting only .273.
>Overall, batters are hitting .294 off of him with a .384 OBP!!!!!  Wow.
>If only the Red Sox had *anybody* who could hit like that!

This would have made Bolton about the second best pitcher on
the Mariner's staff.  And we would have given you a lot more
than Hatcher for him.

The Mariner's GM, Woody Woodward, has been saying for the entire
season that there aren't any players available for trades.
And everyone else keeps making trades.  Hmmm...

Anyway, Woodward said yesterday that the only untouchable players
on the M's are Ken Griffey, Jr. and Edgar Martinez.
I'm not sure who would want any of the others, but we
remain hopeful.

--

| U. of W., M.C.I.S.        |    (206) 685-3104                     |

 
 
 

RED SOX TRADE with REDS

Post by Daniel T. McV » Tue, 14 Jul 1992 06:10:22


Quote:

>>On a personal note, Bolton was a good pitcher. And again, Hatcher stinks to
>>high heaven. He's been a bench warmer, and now he just might replace Marshall
>>as the next Sox Grumbler.

> Bolton was *what*?????  I'm happy to see him gone.  I'd only be
> happier if they could get something for Young.  (I liked the sounds of
> Young for O'Brien, as long as the Sox don't have to add *too* much
> more...)

 yeah, you're one of those critical fans whose philosphy is if this guy pitches
better than, say, Darwin, then he's a goodie.

Quote:
> Bolton has allowed 32 hits and 14 BB in 26 IP.  This is good?  Lefties
> are batting .344 against him.  Righties are hitting only .273.
> Overall, batters are hitting .294 off of him with a .384 OBP!!!!!  Wow.
> If only the Red Sox had *anybody* who could hit like that!

So? What has Hatcher done the last few years? He's been bench-warmin' and
I think Bolton has a few more years than Hatcher is worth. People like
Hatcher go for a dime a dozen.

Quote:
> Oh, you must have meant Bolton was good *last* year.  Right?
> Lessee...  Last year opponents smoked him for 187 baserunners in 110
> innings.  Toss in *16* HR.  In 110 IP.  A .308 batting average, .378
> OBP, and .485 SLG.  Bolton is NOT good.  Bolton is at *best* adequate.

Adequate enough if they'd only let him pitch some more. All they used him in
was for cleaning up after some pitcher who screwed up and got blown out.

Quote:
> Or maybe you meant that except for the last two years, Bolton has been
> good?  Career 4.54 ERA...  386 H in 339 IP with 149 BB coming into this
> year!!!

I'd say his average was better than some of the pitchers that are roaming
the AL looking for some decent place to work out their kinks.

Quote:
> Shit, he wasn't even a particularly good pitcher in 1990!

Well, true, but he pitched better than you could. Wouldn't he?

Quote:
> Anybody who thinks that Bolton is better than Hatcher has their head
> up their ass (and that includes the Cincinnati GM).  Hatcher is an
> average fourth OF.  Bolton sucks septic tanks!

Better he sucks septic tanks than sucking the wad off a dead carcass of a
raccoon like Young.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Wisdom was not at the top of the graduate-school,
                mountain but there in thesandpile at Sunday School.

 
 
 

RED SOX TRADE with REDS

Post by Edward [Ted] Fisch » Tue, 14 Jul 1992 11:28:00


Quote:

> yeah, you're one of those critical fans whose philosphy is if this
>guy pitches better than, say, Darwin, then he's a goodie.

Huh?  You make absolutely no sense here.  I admit that Bolton has
pitched better than Darwin this year.  But that hardly makes him a
good pitcher!  In fact, Bolton is a *bad* pitcher and not likely to
ever do any better!  Which is why I am so glad that the Sox got
*anything* for him.

Quote:
>So? What has Hatcher done the last few years? He's been bench-warmin' and
>I think Bolton has a few more years than Hatcher is worth. People like
>Hatcher go for a dime a dozen.

Bullshit.  Unmitigated baloney.  Back up statements like the above.
Please.  What has Hatcher done the last few years?  Certainly not
*that* much bench warming.  He has had 450 PA or more every year since
1986.  In 1990 and 1991, Hatcher hit a comined .320/.370.  Which isn't
great, but it isn't entirely useless either.

Bolton has a few more years than Hatcher, you say.  Why?  Hatcher is
31, born on 10/04/60, and has a relatively healthy history.  Bolton is
30, born on 05/06/62, has a long history of arm problems due to his
trick delivery.

Quote:
>> Oh, you must have meant Bolton was good *last* year.  Right?
>> Lessee...  Last year opponents smoked him for 187 baserunners in 110
>> innings.  Toss in *16* HR.  In 110 IP.  A .308 batting average, .378
>> OBP, and .485 SLG.  Bolton is NOT good.  Bolton is at *best* adequate.

>Adequate enough if they'd only let him pitch some more. All they used him in
>was for cleaning up after some pitcher who screwed up and got blown out.

Get your facts straight.  Please!  *19* of his 25 appearances last
year were starts.  He was horrible.  He wasn't even adequate.
Admittedly he has been pitching mop-up this year.  But isn't that
what you generally do with pitchers who repeatedly pitch their way
out of the rotation?

Quote:
>I'd say his average was better than some of the pitchers that are roaming
>the AL looking for some decent place to work out their kinks.

Perhaps.  And that is why the Sox were able to get Hatcher for him.

Quote:
>> Shit, he wasn't even a particularly good pitcher in 1990!

>Well, true, but he pitched better than you could. Wouldn't he?

I'm sure he does.  My fastball tops off at about 49 MPH.  But
that hardly makes him an effective major league pitcher, does it?

You seem to think Bolton has been effective.  I suggest you review the
evidence.  Look back to his 19 starts last year (with a 5+ ERA).
Consider the large numbers of hits he has allowed in relief this year.
Bolton is a better pitcher than I am, as you point out, but not by
enough to justify the waste of a roster space.  And that goes double
for Matt Young!  (And I wouldn't be *so* hurt to see Darwin go either,
though he at least is *occasionally* effective.)

-Valentine
--

 
 
 

RED SOX TRADE with REDS

Post by Daniel T. McV » Wed, 15 Jul 1992 00:54:24


Quote:

> Huh?  You make absolutely no sense here.  I admit that Bolton has
> pitched better than Darwin this year.  But that hardly makes him a
> good pitcher!  In fact, Bolton is a *bad* pitcher and not likely to
> ever do any better!  Which is why I am so glad that the Sox got
> *anything* for him.

I'll let you have the icing on the cake here. People who are stubborn-minded
are generally the people I dont want to argue with. It's like telling Quayle
to get some work done. He never does it.

Quote:
> Bullshit.  Unmitigated baloney.  Back up statements like the above.
> Please.  What has Hatcher done the last few years?  Certainly not
> *that* much bench warming.  He has had 450 PA or more every year since
> 1986.  In 1990 and 1991, Hatcher hit a comined .320/.370.  Which isn't
> great, but it isn't entirely useless either.

I wonder if there is an rule here on offensive language? If so, I'd like
to know the limitations. Hatcher is pretty much an overrated player in
my book. I seriously doubt his effectiveness in defense, but he's been
ripping the ball in his first couple of starts. I just hope he isnt a flash
in the pan, or I'll be laughing my ass all the way to Heaven on your load
of unbelievable horse-carping.

Quote:
> Bolton has a few more years than Hatcher, you say.  Why?  Hatcher is
> 31, born on 10/04/60, and has a relatively healthy history.  Bolton is
> 30, born on 05/06/62, has a long history of arm problems due to his
> trick delivery.

 And the fact is, Hatcher is injury-prone, I believe, but my facts on him
aren't as long-winded as yours.

Quote:
> Get your facts straight.  Please!  *19* of his 25 appearances last
> year were starts.  He was horrible.  He wasn't even adequate.
> Admittedly he has been pitching mop-up this year.  But isn't that
> what you generally do with pitchers who repeatedly pitch their way
> out of the rotation?

Why couldnt they just dump Clark? Bolton is worth more for his contract
than Clark ever was on his contract.

Quote:
> Perhaps.  And that is why the Sox were able to get Hatcher for him.

>>> Shit, he wasn't even a particularly good pitcher in 1990!

>>Well, true, but he pitched better than you could. Wouldn't he?

> I'm sure he does.  My fastball tops off at about 49 MPH.  But
> that hardly makes him an effective major league pitcher, does it?

> You seem to think Bolton has been effective.  I suggest you review the
> evidence.  Look back to his 19 starts last year (with a 5+ ERA).
> Consider the large numbers of hits he has allowed in relief this year.
> Bolton is a better pitcher than I am, as you point out, but not by
> enough to justify the waste of a roster space.  And that goes double
> for Matt Young!  (And I wouldn't be *so* hurt to see Darwin go either,
> though he at least is *occasionally* effective.

I think I missed a line here. I should have said they shudda used him in
middle-relief. But I'm gonna loosen the grip on this. I do not want a
flamewar. I've heard you're always on the lookout for flames.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Wisdom was not at the top of the graduate-school,
                mountain but there in thesandpile at Sunday School.

 
 
 

RED SOX TRADE with REDS

Post by Roberto R Molina » Wed, 15 Jul 1992 00:27:50

Quote:

> And the fact is, Hatcher is injury-prone, I believe, but my facts on him
>aren't as long-winded as yours.

  Not as long winded?  Looks more like non-existent, I see numbers to back up
  Valentine's assesment that Bolton and Hatcher are relatively close in
  age but I see none to back up you claim that Hatcher is injury prone.

Quote:
>Why couldnt they just dump Clark? Bolton is worth more for his contract
>than Clark ever was on his contract.

  How do you arrive at this?  Maybe you should look at Clark's numbers over
  the second half last year.  Bolton has *never* performed as well as Clark
  did in the second half last year (and I hope the second half this year too).
  Bolton has done *nothing* for the last 2 years.  

Quote:
>>>Well, true, but he pitched better than you could. Wouldn't he?

  And what does this have to do with the Bolton/Hatcher trade?

  bert
  -diehard sox fan (red that is)

 
 
 

RED SOX TRADE with REDS

Post by Joe Lun » Wed, 15 Jul 1992 00:40:17




|>  
|> > Huh?  You make absolutely no sense here.  I admit that Bolton has
|> > pitched better than Darwin this year.  But that hardly makes him a
|> > good pitcher!  In fact, Bolton is a *bad* pitcher and not likely to
|> > ever do any better!  Which is why I am so glad that the Sox got
|> > *anything* for him.
|>
|> I'll let you have the icing on the cake here. People who are stubborn-minded
|> are generally the people I dont want to argue with. It's like telling Quayle
|> to get some work done. He never does it.

Hey!  What's this argument all about?  We were lucky to get anything for Bolton,
let alone Billy Hatcher.

This so-called argument will be settled within a few weeks when Bolton starts
pissing off all of you Reds fans.

|> I wonder if there is an rule here on offensive language? If so, I'd like
|> to know the limitations. Hatcher is pretty much an overrated player in
|> my book. I seriously doubt his effectiveness in defense, but he's been
|> ripping the ball in his first couple of starts. I just hope he isnt a flash
|> in the pan, or I'll be laughing my ass all the way to Heaven on your load
|> of unbelievable horse-carping.

Can I use this in my .sig file?

|>  
|> > Bolton has a few more years than Hatcher, you say.  Why?  Hatcher is
|> > 31, born on 10/04/60, and has a relatively healthy history.  Bolton is
|> > 30, born on 05/06/62, has a long history of arm problems due to his
|> > trick delivery.
|>
|>  And the fact is, Hatcher is injury-prone, I believe, but my facts on him
|> aren't as long-winded as yours.
|>  
|> > Get your facts straight.  Please!  *19* of his 25 appearances last
|> > year were starts.  He was horrible.  He wasn't even adequate.
|> > Admittedly he has been pitching mop-up this year.  But isn't that
|> > what you generally do with pitchers who repeatedly pitch their way
|> > out of the rotation?

...and Bolton has been given *plenty* of chances in his 3-4 year career with the
BoSox.

|>
|> Why couldnt they just dump Clark? Bolton is worth more for his contract
|> than Clark ever was on his contract.

That goes without saying.  The need, however is for hitting, not pitching for
the Red Sox this year (oddly enough)  They've tried to dump Clark's contract
several times, but there are no takers.

Is this a die hard Tom Bolton fan or what?  I've never heard him defended so
vigorously.  I was willing to give the guy the benefit of the doubt in his first
couple of years, but he's had plenty of chances to prove himself with Boston.

This trade was a good one.  Even Minnie Minoso could help the Red Sox
offensively this year, so the Hatcher acquisition is a pretty good one.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Joe Lundy           Encore Computer Corporation, 6901 W. Sunrise Blvd.    |

| "Wake up and smell the peanuts" - Hy Oxman, Ft. Lauderdale Yankees vendor |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

RED SOX TRADE with REDS

Post by Ted Fra » Wed, 15 Jul 1992 07:52:08


Quote:

>> Get your facts straight.  Please!  *19* of his 25 appearances last
>> year were starts.  He was horrible.  He wasn't even adequate.
>> Admittedly he has been pitching mop-up this year.  But isn't that
>> what you generally do with pitchers who repeatedly pitch their way
>> out of the rotation?

>Why couldnt they just dump Clark? Bolton is worth more for his contract
>than Clark ever was on his contract.

For that matter, why not dump the whole team, and bring up the PawSox
and pay them all minimum wage?  Heck, they'd still win fifty or sixty
games, and then they'd get the most bang for the buck by your criteria.

Clark was only the second-best offensive player the Sox had last year
(third-best if you count Plantier, who only played a third of a season).
From 1988 to 1990 he'd averaged 26 HR, 72 R, and 83 RBI.
In 1991, he gave the Sox........28 HR, 75 R, and 87 RBI.  How was Clark
a letdown?  Looks like they got just about precisely what they could expect
from a 35-year old.
--
                      ....................................

                      the university of chicago law school
                      suffering  from  bozeman's  syndrome

 
 
 

RED SOX TRADE with REDS

Post by Daniel T. McV » Wed, 15 Jul 1992 12:13:08

Quote:



>>> Get your facts straight.  Please!  *19* of his 25 appearances last
>>> year were starts.  He was horrible.  He wasn't even adequate.
>>> Admittedly he has been pitching mop-up this year.  But isn't that
>>> what you generally do with pitchers who repeatedly pitch their way
>>> out of the rotation?

>>Why couldnt they just dump Clark? Bolton is worth more for his contract
>>than Clark ever was on his contract.

> For that matter, why not dump the whole team, and bring up the PawSox
> and pay them all minimum wage?  Heck, they'd still win fifty or sixty
> games, and then they'd get the most bang for the buck by your criteria.

> Clark was only the second-best offensive player the Sox had last year
> (third-best if you count Plantier, who only played a third of a season).
> From 1988 to 1990 he'd averaged 26 HR, 72 R, and 83 RBI.
> In 1991, he gave the Sox........28 HR, 75 R, and 87 RBI.  How was Clark
> a letdown?  Looks like they got just about precisely what they could expect
> from a 35-year old.

[some boring horsecakes deleted]

Hmm, I believe my facts were based on this year, dude. try again.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Wisdom was not at the top of the graduate-school,
                mountain but there in thesandpile at Sunday School.

 
 
 

RED SOX TRADE with REDS

Post by David DeMe » Wed, 15 Jul 1992 12:35:31


Quote:


>>>Why couldnt they just dump Clark? Bolton is worth more for his contract
>>>than Clark ever was on his contract.

              ^^^^^^^^

...

Quote:
>> Clark was only the second-best offensive player the Sox had last year
...
>> In 1991, he gave the Sox........28 HR, 75 R, and 87 RBI.  How was Clark
>> a letdown?  Looks like they got just about precisely what they could expect
>> from a 35-year old.
>Hmm, I believe my facts were based on this year, dude. try again.

You might consider saying what you mean.  The above doesn't look like
it's referring to this year only.  Not that I particularly disagree with
you.

--


UC San Diego                                    ...!ucsd!cs!demers
La Jolla, CA 92093-0114 (619) 534-0688, or -8187, FAX: (619) 534-7029