Decision Review: Reed for Davidson

[shysocks]

One day after an assessment of the Eaton/Santiago swap, SSS does the same for Reed/Davidson.

Would the White Sox do it again? They'd definitely deal Reed again, because his value was going to take a hit even with a better season. He's set to to make quite a bit of money during his first arbitration year thanks to his 101 saves over three years. It doesn't matter that his ERA is mediocre -- that save total will likely push his salary from near the league minimum to something around $4 million, so he could be as overpaid next season as he was underpaid entering this year.

 

I just imagine they'd try another prospect. The extent of Davidson's failures surprised, but the root causes didn't.

Let's just put all future discussion of that trade in one thread and see if it can reach 50,000 posts.

[southsider2k5]

It seems like I have read all of those things before somewhere...

[LDF]

 

ok, i will play.

 

for me, this was and still is a horrible trade. not for keeping

reed, but the rtn of davidson. even if davidson rebounds, the

sox overpaid.

[Eminor3rd]

Maybe people will just ignore this thread. Maybe?

[greg775]

I'll keep it short: I don't think you should trade a guy if there's absolutely no one to replace him. Reed was a suitable closer. I happen to think he was a good 25-year-old closer (40 saves in 2013), many say he was average to bad in spite of his save totals. The same people say Hahn had a replacement in Nate Jones, who got hurt. I feel about Jones the way many feel about Reed, that he was never the answer.

 

The guy the Sox got for Reed (Davidson) doesn't bother me near as much as we traded a guy who was not effectively replaced. I think the Sox reached 2 over .500 at one point after a good amount of games this past season despite having no bullpen. My contention is not having a closer and other bullpen pieces finally was the reason this team got buried back into oblivion.

 

Yes, I'd feel a lot different about the trade if Nate Jones replaced Reed and been lights out with 30-50 saves. In actuality, nobody replaced Reed. As far as Davidson, he appears to be a huge bust, but some insist he had to be devastated after not getting the job in spring training and it sent him into a season-long tailspin. Maybe he'll make the team next spring training and be the answer at third for 10-15 years to come. We shall see.

I am not a Reed hater, though. Even though many on here say he sucks, I like his save totals. So what if he has some shaky saves. So does Greg Holland of the Royals. He puts guys on base in many of his saves but usually gets the save.

 

So far I'd say Arizona won the trade; that could change if Davidson turns into a good to great hitter/fielder.

[Eminor3rd]

I'll keep it short: I don't think you should trade a guy if there's absolutely no one to replace him. Reed was a suitable closer. I happen to think he was a good 25-year-old closer (40 saves in 2013), many say he was average to bad in spite of his save totals. The same people say Hahn had a replacement in Nate Jones, who got hurt. I feel about Jones the way many feel about Reed, that he was never the answer.

 

The guy the Sox got for Reed (Davidson) doesn't bother me near as much as we traded a guy who was not effectively replaced. I think the Sox reached 2 over .500 at one point after a good amount of games this past season despite having no bullpen. My contention is not having a closer and other bullpen pieces finally was the reason this team got buried back into oblivion.

 

Yes, I'd feel a lot different about the trade if Nate Jones replaced Reed and been lights out with 30-50 saves. In actuality, nobody replaced Reed. As far as Davidson, he appears to be a huge bust, but some insist he had to be devastated after not getting the job in spring training and it sent him into a season-long tailspin. Maybe he'll make the team next spring training and be the answer at third for 10-15 years to come. We shall see.

I am not a Reed hater, though. Even though many on here say he sucks, I like his save totals. So what if he has some shaky saves. So does Greg Holland of the Royals. He puts guys on base in many of his saves but usually gets the save.

 

So far I'd say Arizona won the trade; that could change if Davidson turns into a good to great hitter/fielder.

 

This is the most reasonable post you've ever made, greg. Kudos.

[southsider2k5]

I'll keep it short: I don't think you should trade a guy if there's absolutely no one to replace him. Reed was a suitable closer. I happen to think he was a good 25-year-old closer (40 saves in 2013), many say he was average to bad in spite of his save totals. The same people say Hahn had a replacement in Nate Jones, who got hurt. I feel about Jones the way many feel about Reed, that he was never the answer.

 

The guy the Sox got for Reed (Davidson) doesn't bother me near as much as we traded a guy who was not effectively replaced. I think the Sox reached 2 over .500 at one point after a good amount of games this past season despite having no bullpen. My contention is not having a closer and other bullpen pieces finally was the reason this team got buried back into oblivion.

 

Yes, I'd feel a lot different about the trade if Nate Jones replaced Reed and been lights out with 30-50 saves. In actuality, nobody replaced Reed. As far as Davidson, he appears to be a huge bust, but some insist he had to be devastated after not getting the job in spring training and it sent him into a season-long tailspin. Maybe he'll make the team next spring training and be the answer at third for 10-15 years to come. We shall see.

I am not a Reed hater, though. Even though many on here say he sucks, I like his save totals. So what if he has some shaky saves. So does Greg Holland of the Royals. He puts guys on base in many of his saves but usually gets the save.

 

So far I'd say Arizona won the trade; that could change if Davidson turns into a good to great hitter/fielder.

 

 

[starts slow clap]

 

 

[BlackSox13]

I liked the trade at the time, but now not so much. Davidson is only 23 so there's still hope but for now, AZ got the better end of the deal no doubt.

[elrockinMT]

Hindsight is 20/20. Too early to give up on Davidson

[Chisoxfn]

I think this has been beaten to death here on Soxtalk. To sum it up, I don't know that anyone thinks Davidson is a prospect anymore (Maybe 2 people). I don't think anyone thinks Reed is a great closer. Logically I think the majority felt that it made sense to trade Reed for a 3B prospect, problem was the Sox didn't target the right 3B prospect. I think there are some, a smaller percentage but not a minimal number, who thought they should have kept Reed given he was still cost effective and still solid and while he may not have been a great closer, could still have been a valuable member.

 

In hindsight, while you can argue the theory behind the trade, I don't think anyone can really argue the results. At this point, Reed has more trade value then Davidson. We can debate Reed's value but we've already done that to death as we have Davidson and the trade so my vote is for the time being to let this argument die. Its ran its path here at Soxtalk.

[witesoxfan]

I think this has been beaten to death here on Soxtalk. To sum it up, I don't know that anyone thinks Davidson is a prospect anymore (Maybe 2 people). I don't think anyone thinks Reed is a great closer. Logically I think the majority felt that it made sense to trade Reed for a 3B prospect, problem was the Sox didn't target the right 3B prospect. I think there are some, a smaller percentage but not a minimal number, who thought they should have kept Reed given he was still cost effective and still solid and while he may not have been a great closer, could still have been a valuable member.

 

In hindsight, while you can argue the theory behind the trade, I don't think anyone can really argue the results. At this point, Reed has more trade value then Davidson. We can debate Reed's value but we've already done that to death as we have Davidson and the trade so my vote is for the time being to let this argument die. Its ran its path here at Soxtalk.

 

http://www.chicagonow.com/future-sox/2014/...dseason-top-25/

 

Ummmmmmm, we kinda disagree with that.

[Jerksticks]

ok, i will play.

 

for me, this was and still is a horrible trade. not for keeping

reed, but the rtn of davidson. even if davidson rebounds, the

sox overpaid.

For every sox fan this is a horrible trade at the moment because our return has yet to produce. If Davidson becomes a stud I don't see how you'll be able to say we overpaid. As for now, yes, Sox lost. It ain't over yet my man.

[Chisoxfn]

http://www.chicagonow.com/future-sox/2014/...dseason-top-25/

 

Ummmmmmm, we kinda disagree with that.

Haha - That was in early August when he had a little run of productivity. I'd put the odds of him making it on the pretty low end. Plus I recall in all of the discussions pretty much every one of us throwing up at the notion with Davidson.

[witesoxfan]

Haha - That was in early August when he had a little run of productivity. I'd put the odds of him making it on the pretty low end. Plus I recall in all of the discussions pretty much every one of us throwing up at the notion with Davidson.

 

I still consider him a prospect in the sense that he's got quite a bit of talent, but you need to see some kind of sign this year to even consider him a possibility moving forward. I look at Davidson right now as I did Hawkins in 2013, but there's less time for him to turn it around.

[SCCWS]

I'll keep it short: I don't think you should trade a guy if there's absolutely no one to replace him. Reed was a suitable closer. I happen to think he was a good 25-year-old closer (40 saves in 2013), many say he was average to bad in spite of his save totals. The same people say Hahn had a replacement in Nate Jones, who got hurt. I feel about Jones the way many feel about Reed, that he was never the answer.

 

The guy the Sox got for Reed (Davidson) doesn't bother me near as much as we traded a guy who was not effectively replaced. I think the Sox reached 2 over .500 at one point after a good amount of games this past season despite having no bullpen. My contention is not having a closer and other bullpen pieces finally was the reason this team got buried back into oblivion.

 

Yes, I'd feel a lot different about the trade if Nate Jones replaced Reed and been lights out with 30-50 saves. In actuality, nobody replaced Reed. As far as Davidson, he appears to be a huge bust, but some insist he had to be devastated after not getting the job in spring training and it sent him into a season-long tailspin. Maybe he'll make the team next spring training and be the answer at third for 10-15 years to come. We shall see.

I am not a Reed hater, though. Even though many on here say he sucks, I like his save totals. So what if he has some shaky saves. So does Greg Holland of the Royals. He puts guys on base in many of his saves but usually gets the save.

 

So far I'd say Arizona won the trade; that could change if Davidson turns into a good to great hitter/fielder.

 

[SCCWS]

I'll keep it short: I don't think you should trade a guy if there's absolutely no one to replace him. Reed was a suitable closer. I happen to think he was a good 25-year-old closer (40 saves in 2013), many say he was average to bad in spite of his save totals. The same people say Hahn had a replacement in Nate Jones, who got hurt. I feel about Jones the way many feel about Reed, that he was never the answer.

 

The guy the Sox got for Reed (Davidson) doesn't bother me near as much as we traded a guy who was not effectively replaced. I think the Sox reached 2 over .500 at one point after a good amount of games this past season despite having no bullpen. My contention is not having a closer and other bullpen pieces finally was the reason this team got buried back into oblivion.

 

Yes, I'd feel a lot different about the trade if Nate Jones replaced Reed and been lights out with 30-50 saves. In actuality, nobody replaced Reed. As far as Davidson, he appears to be a huge bust, but some insist he had to be devastated after not getting the job in spring training and it sent him into a season-long tailspin. Maybe he'll make the team next spring training and be the answer at third for 10-15 years to come. We shall see.

I am not a Reed hater, though. Even though many on here say he sucks, I like his save totals. So what if he has some shaky saves. So does Greg Holland of the Royals. He puts guys on base in many of his saves but usually gets the save.

 

So far I'd say Arizona won the trade; that could change if Davidson turns into a good to great hitter/fielder.

 

Greg: A couple of thoughts

 

1. If Hahn felt the Sox were far from ready to compete, I can see trading a young( average) closer for a good 3B prospect. But I felt Reed was better than average and Davidson was maybe a better than average prospect. Usually you get a premium back when trading pitching and the Sox did not

2. If Davidson's major decline was caused by being devastated as some have said, I would say that is a big concern. If he ever arrives in the majors and has a slump the Sox will need to keep him away from bridges and tall buildings.

3. Maybe Jones was the heir apparent. But too many posters on this site just assume that anyone can close. Besides "stuff" which Jones may have there is also the mental approach. Until a set-up guy can demonstrate the ability to close games he is not a closer. Matt Thornton and Daniel Bard are two examples that come to mind quickly.

Edited October 14, 2014 by SCCWS

[BlackSox13]

Oh good grief. Davidson at 23 has one bad season in the minors and he's no longer a prospect? That's just silly.

 

Now if Davidson tanks again at Charlotte in 2015, then I can see saying he's not a prospect but for now, he absolutely IS a prospect.

[Eminor3rd]

Oh good grief. Davidson at 23 has one bad season in the minors and he's no longer a prospect? That's just silly.

 

Now if Davidson tanks again at Charlotte in 2015, then I can see saying he's not a prospect but for now, he absolutely IS a prospect.

 

This. His value is substantially lower than it was when we acquired him, but saying he isn't a "prospect" is way too strong.

[hogan873]

I'll keep it short: I don't think you should trade a guy if there's absolutely no one to replace him. Reed was a suitable closer. I happen to think he was a good 25-year-old closer (40 saves in 2013), many say he was average to bad in spite of his save totals. The same people say Hahn had a replacement in Nate Jones, who got hurt. I feel about Jones the way many feel about Reed, that he was never the answer.

 

The guy the Sox got for Reed (Davidson) doesn't bother me near as much as we traded a guy who was not effectively replaced. I think the Sox reached 2 over .500 at one point after a good amount of games this past season despite having no bullpen. My contention is not having a closer and other bullpen pieces finally was the reason this team got buried back into oblivion.

 

Yes, I'd feel a lot different about the trade if Nate Jones replaced Reed and been lights out with 30-50 saves. In actuality, nobody replaced Reed. As far as Davidson, he appears to be a huge bust, but some insist he had to be devastated after not getting the job in spring training and it sent him into a season-long tailspin. Maybe he'll make the team next spring training and be the answer at third for 10-15 years to come. We shall see.

I am not a Reed hater, though. Even though many on here say he sucks, I like his save totals. So what if he has some shaky saves. So does Greg Holland of the Royals. He puts guys on base in many of his saves but usually gets the save.

 

So far I'd say Arizona won the trade; that could change if Davidson turns into a good to great hitter/fielder.

Excellent, non-emotional post, Greg.

 

And I think you summed it up well in saying that if Davidson turns it around and becomes the guy the Sox hope he'll be the trade will look a lot different. Also, you are right when you say that many thought Jones would be a suitable replacement.

[Chisoxfn]

I still consider him a prospect in the sense that he's got quite a bit of talent, but you need to see some kind of sign this year to even consider him a possibility moving forward. I look at Davidson right now as I did Hawkins in 2013, but there's less time for him to turn it around.

One was playing his first full season in A ball and extremely young. The other was in AAA. Guys don't regularly have those type of numbers in AAA and regain their form. I'd have more faith if there was some sort of underlying issue and Sox had some form of track record at helping hitters with his issues. I agree he has some tools but he's lousy defensively, strikes out a lot and does not appear to be capable of hitting for much of an average, nor does he appear to be much of a OBP guy. In general, I find it extremely unlikely that he will provide anything but negative value.

[LDF]

One was playing his first full season in A ball and extremely young. The other was in AAA. Guys don't regularly have those type of numbers in AAA and regain their form. I'd have more faith if there was some sort of underlying issue and Sox had some form of track record at helping hitters with his issues. I agree he has some tools but he's lousy defensively, strikes out a lot and does not appear to be capable of hitting for much of an average, nor does he appear to be much of a OBP guy. In general, I find it extremely unlikely that he will provide anything but negative value.

 

the type of hitter, power hitter that Davidson is, is the kind of power hitters that was sought

after. low avg hitter, high strike out, but will hit many hrs.

Edited October 15, 2014 by LDF

[venom4789]

Currently it looks like the dbacks won this trade but only time will tell. Reed wasnt going to be our closer of the future and we were getting a very good prospect back. If offered a similar trade this year i would roll the dice on that also. I think the reason some people get upset about this trade is because of how terrible our bullpen was, then if you go and look at the save column for reed your obviously going to get more upset.

[iamshack]

One was playing his first full season in A ball and extremely young. The other was in AAA. Guys don't regularly have those type of numbers in AAA and regain their form. I'd have more faith if there was some sort of underlying issue and Sox had some form of track record at helping hitters with his issues. I agree he has some tools but he's lousy defensively, strikes out a lot and does not appear to be capable of hitting for much of an average, nor does he appear to be much of a OBP guy. In general, I find it extremely unlikely that he will provide anything but negative value.

He did put together some good at bats in MLB in 2013, albeit in limited action.

 

I think it's fair at his age to still hold out a little hope, although I think most are inclined to agree with you.

[LDF]

the type of hitter, power hitter that Davidson is, is the kind of power hitters that was sought

after. low avg hitter, high strike out, but will hit many hrs.

 

on the flipside, his stats coming from the PCL was much better.

 

so here is the real question, which Davidson are the sox going to see in spring

the 1 that did well in PCL or the 1 that bomb with the sox minor league?

[Downtown518]

Is Matt Davidson Destined to be a Bust?