SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
To Whom Should the Red Sox Make a Qualifying Offer?
|
Post by amfox1 on Jul 24, 2013 11:52:40 GMT -5
Even though we have his replacement ready, I'd like to keep Ellsbury for the right price. A future lineup with him and Bradley is fine with me. And what is the right price? Bourn got 4/$48 last year. Kemp got 8/$160 a year ago. Ellsbury is probably looking at 5-6 years and $15-$18mm per year on the open market and there won't be a hometown discount. I wouldn't re-sign him for that. Is that the "right price" for you?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 24, 2013 12:04:51 GMT -5
Ellsbury=Crawford
no thanks. It would wind up being a disaster.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,986
|
Post by jimoh on Jul 24, 2013 12:33:27 GMT -5
Ellsbury=Crawford no thanks. It would wind up being a disaster. Ellsbury is much better than Crawford. If Crawford had been a highish OBP CF who thrived in Boston and was only getting $14M a year, instead of a lowish OBP LF who couldn't take the Boston pressure and was being paid 50% more than that, there would have been no need to trade him. I think letting Ellsbury go is probably the right move, but also that there will be a dropoff in offense in our CF-leadoff guy for a year or two.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 24, 2013 12:53:29 GMT -5
Ellsbury=Crawford no thanks. It would wind up being a disaster. Ellsbury is much better than Crawford. If Crawford had been a highish OBP CF who thrived in Boston and was only getting $14M a year, instead of a lowish OBP LF who couldn't take the Boston pressure and was being paid 50% more than that, there would have been no need to trade him. I think letting Ellsbury go is probably the right move, but also that there will be a dropoff in offense in our CF-leadoff guy for a year or two. Ellsbury's career OBP is 15 points higher than Crawford's when we signed him. Yeah Ells is worth more as a CF, but Crawford was way more durable at that point. I just see too many similarities and don't think Ellsbury will come close to earning his next contract even if it's way less than Crawford's (unless the Yankees get out of Arod's deal)
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 24, 2013 14:04:10 GMT -5
Even though we have his replacement ready, I'd like to keep Ellsbury for the right price. A future lineup with him and Bradley is fine with me. And what is the right price? Bourn got 4/$48 last year. Kemp got 8/$160 a year ago. Ellsbury is probably looking at 5-6 years and $15-$18mm per year on the open market and there won't be a hometown discount. I wouldn't re-sign him for that. Is that the "right price" for you? I dunno, I'm with him on the idea in theory, even if it's a bit impracticable and perhaps unwise in practice. Nothing would fall in an Ellsbury-JBJ-Victorino outfield. Problem is you'd probably need to make sure you've got some boppers elsewhere to have that as your outfield (although it's not like Manny is in LF right now either). As for "Ellsbury is Crawford", let's compare: Crawford after 2010: .297/.337/.444, 409 SB career hitter in 9 seasons, entering age 29 season, .303/.350/.462, 240 SB prior five seasons, GG LF Ellsbury right now: .298/.352/.439, 226 SB career hitter in 7 seasons, entering age 30 season, .299/.354/.448, 167 SB prior five seasons, GG CF Admittedly, a better comparison than I'd have expected. Crawford's career numbers had been dragged down by his first two seasons. However, (and I know some will not like adding this part) there is something to be said for the fact that many at the time even said that Boston was just an awful fit for Crawford (who has been better in LA). I'd consider at something like 5/75, but that's not going to get it done. I also don't necessarily think he's getting Kemp's deal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2013 14:11:35 GMT -5
If you were going to sign an outfielder, wouldn't Choo make more sense?
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,986
|
Post by jimoh on Jul 24, 2013 14:18:46 GMT -5
If you were going to sign an outfielder, wouldn't Choo make more sense? That would be great, esp. since he might well find playing RF again more comfortable.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Jul 24, 2013 14:51:13 GMT -5
My problem with Ells, is that he's the better fit in LF than JBJ. And other than 2011, he has shown very little power. With Ells and Victorino in the corner OF slots (not to mention JBJ in CF), that's a paucity of power from the outfield. HR's aren't everything, but guys with some power would be nice.
I'm not THAT opposed to keeping him. But I don't see him signing a deal that I would feel good about.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2013 14:55:27 GMT -5
If you were going to sign an outfielder, wouldn't Choo make more sense? That would be great, esp. since he might well find playing RF again more comfortable. I would imagine that he'd play LF.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 24, 2013 17:49:17 GMT -5
I would go for Ellsbury for 5/75 or 80. In the past the Yankees would have topped that. I am not sure they will, now, unless they get A-Rod off their payroll. I don't think he is worth more than that, and I don't think there are many teams, if any that would go much higher than that. But, if he finishes strong, and does well in the post-season, things definitely could change.
If the Sox had an OF of Ells/JBJ/Victorino, then they really will need another big bat somewhere.
|
|
taftreign
Veteran
Posts: 1,151
Member is Online
|
Post by taftreign on Jul 31, 2013 10:13:04 GMT -5
Ellsbury is the only lock IMO for a qualifying offer. Napoli is 2nd most likely if he at least continues with the power. Salty may be on the team out of need but more likely the team would sign him to a much lower $ contract than risk the likelihood he accepts. Drew is only here if the team feels Bogaerts isn't ready to handle SS or need him at 3B. A little along the lines of the Machado/Hardy situation although I'd take Hardy over Drew.
Anyway the reason I wanted to post was that 2013 may have some intrigue but I was thinking after the Peavy trade, assuming no player or vesting options kick in, that the 2014 qualifying offers will be crazier. Not only to you have Big Papi up after the 14 season but most of the pitching staff in Lester, Peavy, Lackey, and Dempster all of whom could see a qualifying offer if not previously extended. Then you have Thorton, Uehara, Gomes, Ross, Bailey, Morales and Miller who I don't expect would come close to sniffing an offer. But with the first 5 players mentioned it will be worth watching how it plays out.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 31, 2013 11:28:48 GMT -5
I think Drew is a lock now that Iglesias is gone. If he signed (don't think he would), he's insurance if one of WMB and Xander struggles, and they could still trade him anyway. If he goes elsewhere, they'd still need some kind of insurance at 3b and SS. Can't see the Sox counting on the kids to be full time players. Don't think Cecchini will be contributing until the end of 14 or 15.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Jul 31, 2013 12:51:54 GMT -5
I think Drew is a lock now that Iglesias is gone. If he signed (don't think he would), he's insurance if one of WMB and Xander struggles, and they could still trade him anyway. If he goes elsewhere, they'd still need some kind of insurance at 3b and SS. Can't see the Sox counting on the kids to be full time players. Don't think Cecchini will be contributing until the end of 14 or 15. Agreed, I actually thought there was a good chance he would get the QO before the trade of Jose. I don't see a big downside to offering it to him.
|
|
|
Post by orcoaster on Aug 2, 2013 11:29:21 GMT -5
I think Drew is a lock now that Iglesias is gone. If he signed (don't think he would), he's insurance if one of WMB and Xander struggles, and they could still trade him anyway. If he goes elsewhere, they'd still need some kind of insurance at 3b and SS. Can't see the Sox counting on the kids to be full time players. Don't think Cecchini will be contributing until the end of 14 or 15. Agreed, I actually thought there was a good chance he would get the QO before the trade of Jose. I don't see a big downside to offering it to him. Yes, you have to think Drew is a lock. Bogaerts is the 2014 starting shortstop, if not in April certainly by June. Drew will not want any part of a one year deal spent watching the Rookie of the Year play his position. With a strong finish Drew will have value elsewhere which he can parlay into a long term deal. He will not accept a QO here.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Aug 4, 2013 17:00:44 GMT -5
I'd have to think right now that all four will get a QO.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Aug 4, 2013 18:25:10 GMT -5
Wow. I only see a QO for Ellsbury with the possibility of Drew getting hot through the end of the year and possibly getting one. I can't imagine any scenario for Napoli getting one and Salty has got to come down to earth at some point.
I read recently that Salty is missing more hittable fastballs than Napoli even. But the BAPIP is carrying him still.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Aug 4, 2013 18:47:19 GMT -5
I'd have to think right now that all four will get a QO. I agree with this, but for Napoli and Salty especially I think it will come right down to the wire. Player (Zips Projected fWAR, Est. Value) Ellsbury (5.0, $26.25M) Napoli (2.9, $15.225M) Drew (2.5, $13.125M) Saltalamacchia (2.6, $13.65M) Drew and Salty's age will really come into play. I don't see any reason they can't get three years. (I used $5.25M/fWAR - not sure if someone has a better number.)
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Aug 4, 2013 19:14:02 GMT -5
I thought a month ago just Ellsbury and no other discussions. Now still Ellsbury. This one no brainer he is top outfielder on market. He makes those outfield plays look like popups. I think National League to maximize his skills.
If its the Cubs that would suck. Now Salty I am starting to think about him and being a catcher ,young and big kid who has pop. He learned under Varitek and Tuck. You know the Sox philosiphy which is less years more money. So I could picture them offering knowing this kid wants long term security. Remember he went thru a lot with the Rangers. I say no to the other 2 but with Drew if he can keep the offense going and he has the playoffs platform , The Sox need to be careful on that one but they could parlay that. No to Napoli still no.
|
|
|
Post by xxdamgoodxx on Aug 4, 2013 20:35:38 GMT -5
Don't think that Nap gets a QO. He's not that much better than most of the free agent 1st basemen like Morneau, Loney, or Morales so I doubt that a team will sacrifice a pick for him.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Aug 4, 2013 20:48:47 GMT -5
Remember - the first and most important questions the Red Sox need to ask is: "If we offer player X a qualifying offer, will he accept it?"
If the answer is "No", then you offer the QO. Period. Team context, value, and fit don't matter.
If the answer is "Yes" or "Maybe" then there are other things to consider. But if the player isn't going to accept it - which I think is the case with Drew at least - then it doesn't really matter.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Aug 4, 2013 20:57:24 GMT -5
Remember - the first and most important questions the Red Sox need to ask is: "If we offer player X a qualifying offer, will he accept it?" If the answer is "No", then you offer the QO. Period. Team context, value, and fit don't matter. If the answer is "Yes" or "Maybe" then there are other things to consider. But if the player isn't going to accept it - which I think is the case with Drew at least - then it doesn't really matter. didn't the Yankees offer him more money to play 3rd this year than we did but he wanted to play as the starting shortstop? I seem to remember him saying that in an article anyway.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Aug 4, 2013 21:15:33 GMT -5
You have to consider the implications of declining a QO to the player and his agent. If it's an Ellsbury, no problem; there will be bidders out there. But for a Drew or Napoli, declining the QO could put them in a limbo where potential bidders will be turned off by the draft choice implications
This could cause them to grab the one year 13m deal to avoid that uncertainty.
|
|
|
Post by xxdamgoodxx on Aug 4, 2013 21:24:02 GMT -5
Remember - the first and most important questions the Red Sox need to ask is: "If we offer player X a qualifying offer, will he accept it?" If the answer is "No", then you offer the QO. Period. Team context, value, and fit don't matter. If the answer is "Yes" or "Maybe" then there are other things to consider. But if the player isn't going to accept it - which I think is the case with Drew at least - then it doesn't really matter. When you ask "Is player X going to accept the QO?" you have to consider the market because the player will accept the OQ if the market dictates that the player with the QO won't get signed by another team if he declines. This is the case of Napoli because he is in a wish-wash of 1st basemen and he is just one of a bunch that will produce at the same level. He would be foolish not to accept a QO because he would not get signed by anyone because he is a marginal upgrade over a free agent that does not cost a 1st round pick (I hope that made sense). Ells and Drew are the only Sox free agents that have established themselves at the top of the class and will be signed by another team regardless of their first-round-pick-baggage so they are the only ones who would decline the QO and therefore the only ones getting QOs. EDIT: Drew is not a great player, but he is in a terrible class of FAs and will be paid as one of the top SS in that class.
|
|
|
Post by zacchro on Aug 4, 2013 21:47:40 GMT -5
I'd go with all four
Ells-obviously (As a side note, I'd love to keep Ellsbury at something similar to the 4/$48 that Bourn got. That might not be realistic when dealing with Boras, though
Drew-he probably wouldn't accept it, and if he did, Xander could play 3B. (If WMB is doing well, there would be a bit of a logjam. But we could always trade Drew)
Napoli-I think that Napoli is underrated here. He strikes out a lot, sure, but he's also leading the majors in pitches/PA, something that bodes well for the red sox team. (To be fair, P/PA is related to strikeouts, but strikeouts aren't really much worse than any other out.)
Salty-Unless we can trade for a catcher like Mauer, I'm not comfortable with a Lavarnway/Vasquez stopgap until Swihart is ready, which could be years.
|
|
|
Post by mainesox on Aug 4, 2013 22:02:26 GMT -5
I'd go with all four Ells-obviously (As a side note, I'd love to keep Ellsbury at something similar to the 4/$48 that Bourn got. That might not be realistic when dealing with Boras, though Drew-he probably wouldn't accept it, and if he did, Xander could play 3B. (If WMB is doing well, there would be a bit of a logjam. But we could always trade Drew) Napoli-I think that Napoli is underrated here. He strikes out a lot, sure, but he's also leading the majors in pitches/PA, something that bodes well for the red sox team. (To be fair, P/PA is related to strikeouts, but strikeouts aren't really much worse than any other out.) Salty-Unless we can trade for a catcher like Mauer, I'm not comfortable with a Lavarnway/Vasquez stopgap until Swihart is ready, which could be years. The statement I highlight I think gets overlooked a lot when talking about who to give QOs to; any of those guys would be very tradeable on a one year deal, particularly if we ate some of the money, and you'd possibly even get more value for them than the draft pick you'd get if they declined the QO.
|
|
|