Posted by Chaz Scoggins
It was one of the most unpopular trades in Red Sox history at the time it was made. But time has shown that it was also one of the best.
Red Sox fans were up in arms when the Red Sox dealt Nomar Garciaparra to the Cubs at the trading deadline in 2004, part of a three-cornered deal that brought shortstop Orlando Cabrera and first baseman Doug Mientkiewicz to Boston. Garciaparra had won two batting titles for the Red Sox and was a .323 lifetime hitter. He had posted a slugging percentage above .500 and hit at least 21 homers and 37 doubles in each of his full seasons with the Sox. He had scored 100 or more runs six times, and four times he had driven in more than a 100. He had just missed another 100-RBI season in 1997 when he knocked in 98 while batting leadoff the entire season. That earned him AL Rookie of the Year honors.
The Red Sox had tried to sign him to a five-year, $60-million contract before the 2004 season. But Garciaparra balked, and the Red Sox feared they were going to lose him to free agency after the season. He had also started breaking down physically, and his defense was vastly overrated. With the club in its third straight month of mediocre ball, the decision was made to deal Garciaparra and tighten up the infield defense. We all know what happened. The Red Sox went on to win the World Series for the first time in 86 years.
At the time of the deal, it looked as if Garciaparra was headed for Cooperstown someday. Right now he’s a marginal candidate, at best. He has continued to be dogged by injuries, first with the Cubs and now the Dodgers. Since being traded, Nomar’s batting average is .292. He has posted a .500 slugging percentage once, has neither driven in 100 runs nor scored 100 runs in any season, and has hit 20 homers just once. Last year he hit only seven homers and had a weak .371 slugging percentage for the Dodgers. Nomar, now 34, is injured again. He was hit on the wrist by a pitch in training camp, and it’s not known when he’ll play again.
I have often said that if Fred Lynn had played his entire career in Boston, he would have been a Hall of Famer. But I don’t think that’s true of Nomar. Physically, despite his enormous talent, I don’t think he had the stamina and the ability to stay healthy and put up the kind of numbers that would have earned him a plaque in Cooperstown someday.
It was unpopular at the time, but hindsight has shown us that trading Garciaparra when the Red Sox did was the right thing to do. Had Nomar accepted the contract offer that spring, however, Red Sox history might have been very, very different. And probably not for the better.
Comments (7)
I seem to remember a writer on this blog, who shall remain nameless, being one of those who complained that the Sox organization was too cheap to re-sign their players. As is his usual stance with local organizations. Albeit that was while he was a sportcaster before he wrote on this blog. ;-)
Posted by T2 | March 13, 2008 9:13 AM
Posted on March 13, 2008 09:13
the sportscaster in question loved the Nomar trade because he was a fantasy geek and actually knew what kind of players Cabrera and Roberts were, while most of Kool-aid nation had never heard of him.
Now, if you want to revisit whether Pedro, Lowe and Damon were smart no signings while Clement, Wells and Drew were (won't even bring up Coco), we can ask Chaz his opinions on those again.
Posted by Teddy P. | March 13, 2008 1:55 PM
Posted on March 13, 2008 13:55
In my opinion, none of the "no signings" examples earned the money they got. Not only that, the Sox still went on to win another championship in the process.
Posted by T2 | March 14, 2008 9:21 AM
Posted on March 14, 2008 09:21
And yet strangely enough, they earned the money more than the trio the Sox brought aboard. Perhaps with a proven winner like Lowe starting Game 1 against the White Sox instead of "run for cover" Clement, the 2005 playoffs might have had a different outcome and another World Series title or two would might have been in the books.
Seeing as Wells and Clement contributed nothing to the 2007 title, and Drew's contributions prior to Game 6 against Cleveland were invisible, I think crediting them for winning the Series is a bit of a stretch.
Posted by Teddy P. | March 14, 2008 6:41 PM
Posted on March 14, 2008 18:41
What? What has Pedro earned thus far? Are the Yankees happy they still have Damon on their payroll?
You have your disapointments in Wells and Clement. Wells however was a one year contract. Drew is a much better hitter that he showed in his 1st season. And Lowe is a walking time bomb but otherwise proved his worth in the playoffs. Coco was a good fast ball hitter and was tearing the cover off the ball until he broke his wrist and perhaps lost some bat speed ala Nomar. But a better defensive player than Damon, albeit with comparable arms.
You simply can't blame the Sox for not signing players who are on the downside of their careers to long term, over-priced contracts no matter how you slice and dice it.
Posted by T2 | March 16, 2008 2:38 PM
Posted on March 16, 2008 14:38
Lowe has waaaaaaaay outperformed Clement since their new contracts were signed. And I'll still argue that Damon has outperformed Drew.
As for your comment about not signing players on the downside of their careers to long term, overpriced contracts, I'd agree with you wholeheartedly. Expect, isn't that the very definition of Drew's 5-year $70-million dollar deal?
Would you rather have the 4-years and 56-million remaining on Drew's deal or the 2-years 28-million on Damon's?
And for the love of God, stop picking on my binky Pedro, would ya!
Posted by Teddy P. | March 16, 2008 3:03 PM
Posted on March 16, 2008 15:03
Drew had a bad year and the Sox have an out clause if he gets injured. And, he's not as old as Pedro and Damon were when they signed for 4 years.
As Pedro stated on his way out, he gets no respect!
Posted by T2 | March 17, 2008 4:21 PM
Posted on March 17, 2008 16:21