Thread: Do the Red Sox still do the Beckett trade if they know what Hanley Ramirez would be?
View Single Post
Old 07-25-2009, 11:49 AM   #13
Jeritron
Get a poke on
 
Jeritron's Avatar
 
Posts: 35,234
Jeritron makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jeritron makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jeritron makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jeritron makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jeritron makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jeritron makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jeritron makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jeritron makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jeritron makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jeritron makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jeritron makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jeritron makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Jeritron makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
I gave it some though and I voted yes because....



Nothing's guarunteed. Even if Hanley was as good in Boston as he is in Florida, that doesn't guaruntee team success. It just means theres an amazing hitter in the lineup. We see lots of teams with players of his caliber go without winning. There's no way to tell how the whole team chemistry and success would have worked out.

As far as what actually happened goes, it worked out. I can't dwell on might have beens. I think it's basically a fact that without that deal they wouldn't have won the world series that year.
Lowell was incredible, and the world series MVP.
Beckett had a monster season, and an even more epic postseason. They let us come back from 3-1 against the Indians.

Also, Beckett was robbed out of a Cy Young that year. No way should Sabathia had won.

Obviously the postseason doesn't factor on the voting, but watching Beckett dominate the Indians and Sabathia fall apart against the Red Sox made it even more obvious.
Jeritron is offline