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.
Trade for Cole Hamels
|
Post by jdb on Sept 20, 2014 9:11:15 GMT -5
Thinking out loud here. Would anyone take on Papelbons contract to lessen a potential prospect package for Hammels?
|
|
|
Post by greenmonsterwhalers on Sept 20, 2014 16:38:35 GMT -5
Good question. Cliff Lee and Carlos Ruiz might be candidates too.
Papelbon would probably want to close though. Would you be willing to move Koji to the eighth inning or would you make Papelbon agree to pitch the eighth? I think Koji might be willing to pitch the eighth but he's been so great in the ninth it would be tough to bring in anybody behind him.
Cliff Lee is an interesting possibility. He costs a lot but depending on how much the Red Sox are willing to spend and how much it would lessen the prospect package it could be an intriguing possibility. Lester-Hamels-Lee-Buchholz? Sounds good to me.
Ruiz would be interesting because he would be a veteran guy to help Vazquez develop. It wouldn't reduce the prospect package a lot, but I think there would be value to having a veteran like him work with Vazquez (and Swihart during Spring Training). I think he would have to be willing to be the backup though. Maybe a 100-60 split could work. It's true he could potentially block Swihart but Blake might get traded, and Ruiz's contract isn't that big so we could eat a chunk of it in a future trade.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan95 on Oct 5, 2014 15:06:56 GMT -5
Let me propose a trade that most of you will scoff at just by the way it looks but hear me out. Red Sox receive: Cole Hamels Ryan Howard Phillies recieve: Anthony Ranaudo Allen Webster Sean Coyle Bryce Brentz (Possibly some lower level prospects) Most people would probably write this trade off just by looking at it but hear me out. What are the Sox's strengths and weaknesses this offseason. They have money and prospects and they need left-handed hitterss and pitching. This trade works in both of these categories. I read an article that said the Phillies were looking to GIVE Ryan Howard away to any American League team. We could take on Howard and that would save us from having to give up any of our top prospects. When Ryan Howard enters the deal, Bogaerts, Betts, Swihart, Owens, Devers, Rodriguez, and Margot all come off the board. And for those who think that Howard's deal is horrible, it's really not that bad. It's for two more years and $50 mil. A left-handed, power-hitting firstbase men who could mash as a sixth hitter in our line-up next year is more than possible for a team like the Red Sox. And we get our ace for the next couple of years in Hamels. Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by xanderbogaerts2 on Oct 5, 2014 16:26:50 GMT -5
Let me propose a trade that most of you will scoff at just by the way it looks but hear me out. Red Sox receive: Cole Hamels Ryan Howard Phillies recieve: Anthony Ranaudo Allen Webster Sean Coyle Bryce Brentz (Possibly some lower level prospects) Most people would probably write this trade off just by looking at it but hear me out. What are the Sox's strengths and weaknesses this offseason. They have money and prospects and they need left-handed hitterss and pitching. This trade works in both of these categories. I read an article that said the Phillies were looking to GIVE Ryan Howard away to any American League team. We could take on Howard and that would save us from having to give up any of our top prospects. When Ryan Howard enters the deal, Bogaerts, Betts, Swihart, Owens, Devers, Rodriguez, and Margot all come off the board. And for those who think that Howard's deal is horrible, it's really not that bad. It's for two more years and $50 mil. A left-handed, power-hitting firstbase men who could mash as a sixth hitter in our line-up next year is more than possible for a team like the Red Sox. And we get our ace for the next couple of years in Hamels. Thoughts? Howard has really no fit on this club. Even with Howard, RAJ is playing MLB 14 The Show over in philly so he would still want at least 2 of the "ones that come of the board"
|
|
|
Post by sdiaz1 on Oct 5, 2014 18:26:42 GMT -5
Ryan Howard has been worth negative WAR over the past three seasons and he is owed 60 million over two years (his 2017 option has a 10 million dollar buyout).
The reason why Hamels is an attractive option is that he costs only slightly more than 22 million a season for the next 5 years. Adding Howard to that negates all the appeal as his effective cost would now be over 32 million a year. We would be better of just signing Scherzer and keeping the prospects to trade for a third basemen.
Now if we could get the Phillies to add Maikel Franco to that deal, I would gladly take Howard's contract and send them something like Ranaudo, Barnes, Cechhini, Coyle. But I can't imagine Amaro doing that as it would be completely unproductive.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 5, 2014 21:26:24 GMT -5
Let me propose a trade that most of you will scoff at just by the way it looks but hear me out. Red Sox receive: Cole Hamels Ryan Howard Phillies recieve: Anthony Ranaudo Allen Webster Sean Coyle Bryce Brentz (Possibly some lower level prospects) Most people would probably write this trade off just by looking at it but hear me out. What are the Sox's strengths and weaknesses this offseason. They have money and prospects and they need left-handed hitterss and pitching. This trade works in both of these categories. I read an article that said the Phillies were looking to GIVE Ryan Howard away to any American League team. We could take on Howard and that would save us from having to give up any of our top prospects. When Ryan Howard enters the deal, Bogaerts, Betts, Swihart, Owens, Devers, Rodriguez, and Margot all come off the board. And for those who think that Howard's deal is horrible, it's really not that bad. It's for two more years and $50 mil. A left-handed, power-hitting firstbase men who could mash as a sixth hitter in our line-up next year is more than possible for a team like the Red Sox. And we get our ace for the next couple of years in Hamels. Thoughts? Howard has really no fit on this club. Even with Howard, RAJ is playing MLB 14 The Show over in philly so he would still want at least 2 of the "ones that come of the board" So your solution to how the Sox can give the Phillies players that they wouldn't mind giving up for Hamels would be take back Howard's contract? Wouldn't it be much cheaper to simply sign Lester and keep Howard off of the roster? Honestly, you have to figure that any deal for Hamels would realistically wind up being one of Owens or Rodriguez, Swihart or Betts, and Barnes or Ranaudo or Webster (most likely Barnes)? I would guess that it would be Rodriguez, Barnes, and Swihart, and a fourth piece like Coyle that would get the Sox Hamels.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Oct 6, 2014 8:56:49 GMT -5
Hamels is a trade I would want to stay far away from. The added value of him over Lester is basically in terms of long term risk, I.E. Hamels will be committed to 2-4 years less than Lester. That to me isn't worth the amount of prospects we would have to give up for him. I'd rather take my risks in the open market, with the thought that players like Betts, Owens, Swihart, would be putting up 2+ War in the seasons Lester is due for decline/injury.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,790
|
Post by nomar on Oct 6, 2014 13:04:07 GMT -5
Hamels is a trade I would want to stay far away from. The added value of him over Lester is basically in terms of long term risk, I.E. Hamels will be committed to 2-4 years less than Lester. That to me isn't worth the amount of prospects we would have to give up for him. I'd rather take my risks in the open market, with the thought that players like Betts, Owens, Swihart, would be putting up 2+ War in the seasons Lester is due for decline/injury. I actually don't think he'd get as much as you think in trade.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Oct 6, 2014 15:43:04 GMT -5
Thinking conservatively, i figure it would cost at least 2 of Swihart, Betts, Owens, or Rodriguez. 1 position player 1 pitcher in my guess. I also think it takes 2 more pieces. I said this in the Donaldson thread, but you have to wonder what team's like the Yankees or Rangers would be willing to give up for Hamels also when deciding what he is worth. It really doesn't matter what WAR says or what precedents of similar trades are out there, end of the day Phillies would take the best offer on the table, even if ours was a fair offer.
RAJ wanted Severino or Judge for Byrd. Hamels would not be traded cheaply just to rebuild. He is just about the only guy on the Phillies roster they don't have to trade.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,790
|
Post by nomar on Oct 6, 2014 16:16:48 GMT -5
RAJ would never get them for Byrd though. He wouldn't have even gotten Tyler Austin.
I think if he finally pulls the trigger and rebuilds like he should have been doing for the last 4 years, RAJ is going to have to get realistic. If he doesn't, oh well. No way would BC give up 2 of those guys, or Betts period. Why would you give up someone who projects as a 4-6 WAR player with more years of control making minimal a salary?
Personally I doubt we trade for Hamels. I don't see the two sides agreeing. I bet they'll ask for the moon and we'll offer something like JBJ and Webster, and the two sides will never meet unless Amaro gets pressured into a stupid decision.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Oct 6, 2014 18:43:47 GMT -5
I don't see the need to trade for Hamels. There are many quality alternatives requiring the loss of no prospects. This in itself should reduce the price of acquisition but not enough to pull the trigger. For me I target Lester this offseason in addition to a mid tier option who hopefully has no QO and follow it up with Jordan Zimmerman the next offseason if he reaches FA. Two years after that I hope we have the opportunity to land Otani. Fill in the blanks with the likes of Kelly, De La Rosa, Barnes, Owens, Rodriguez or Johnson.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 6, 2014 20:52:35 GMT -5
Philly must be desperate for trading partners. On so many of their guys. Rollins, Lee, Papelbon, Ruiz, Howard...(3-4 more guys here ). They are going to want to do 2 and 3 person deals similar to what we did in the Punto trade. Good luck with that given their situation. They probably don't even want to trade Hamels unless it is a salary dump for another guy involved. A Beckett and, oh by the way, take this Lowell guy please also...
So if a deal is going to happen we better drive a hard bargain because they are desperate. There probably are some opportunities for a team like the Redsox though who may well be able to carry some excess salary in exchange for such a Hamels deal. A Papelbon and Hamels deal or a Ruiz and Hamels deal. Or maybe a Papelbon, Hamels and Ruiz deal....
In such a scenario we may not have to give up much in return. Most teams wouldn't want Ruiz or Papelbon even if all we did was pick up their contract. Maybe a Coyle, Owens, Johnson, lottery pick gets it done for all three even. A strong case could be made that even that is too much but we could at least use all three players.
Who knows, maybe it wouldn't even take that much prospect talent. It would seem that Phily would covet both Johnson and Owens and Coyle is a local kid with some potential.
I think Hamels is better than Lester and there is a good chance he will be worth a pick when he is done with that contract.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 7, 2014 7:08:05 GMT -5
Amaro isn't going to do anything other than giving old players $10 million buyouts when they're 37. We're probably not getting Hamels unless he's fired in the next year.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,790
|
Post by nomar on Oct 7, 2014 9:55:45 GMT -5
Also I view his contract/control not as a positive. Contracts are always backloaded, so you're making the most money usually at you lowest point performance wise. You could easily argue that a young guy that's a year away from free agency is just as valuable.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 25, 2014 18:01:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Oct 26, 2014 22:41:01 GMT -5
If the goal is to win in 2015, I have no problem trading a bunch of our minor league pitchers for a hamels or darvish or sale or Ross.
If our goal is to suck or be mediocre while we wait for the youngsters to work out the growing pains of a leap from Pawtucket to boston, then I say keep the youngsters .
Bogey, betts and swihart are my only untouchables.
For hamels I am willing to send the phillies a package of Owens, ranaudo, De la rosa and Margot.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 27, 2014 0:27:04 GMT -5
"A bunch of our minor league pitchers" isn't enough to get them.
Typically, if you have no problem with a trade, chances are the other team will have a problem.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 27, 2014 7:31:19 GMT -5
"A bunch of our minor league pitchers" isn't enough to get them. Typically, if you have no problem with a trade, chances are the other team will have a problem. This is a little harsh. You have to evaluate each trade proposal on its merits, and this one has a lot more chance of being enough than you're giving it credit for. A package of Owens, De La Rosa, Margot, and Ranaudo is a pretty hefty one, and if I were the Red Sox front office, I would hesitate before giving it up for a pitcher who is legitimately more affordable than Lester/Scherzer but not by much. Remember, assuming that Hamels requires his 2019 option to be picked up as part of a trade (he has 20-team no-trade protection that he has to waive), he's due 5/$110m going forward ($24m AAV first four years, $14m last year). That's roughly one year and $30-40m or so less than what I expect Lester to get, so if you're the Red Sox and you think they're roughly comparable players, you'd only be willing to give up $30-40m worth of prospect value. That package may well be more than that, not to mention the fact that this front office appears more willing to incur financial costs than prospect ones.
|
|
|
Post by suttree on Oct 27, 2014 9:05:25 GMT -5
With all the different analytics available these days, I'm curious why I have never seen a metric for evaluating trades. Using expected value you could construct a very rough comparison. There would be plenty of argument about hypothetical risks, and the dollar value of wins in the future, but the metric could at least help inform the debate.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Oct 27, 2014 9:38:29 GMT -5
With all the different analytics available these days, I'm curious why I have never seen a metric for evaluating trades. Using expected value you could construct a very rough comparison. There would be plenty of argument about hypothetical risks, and the dollar value of wins in the future, but the metric could at least help inform the debate. Well, you have WAR to compare player value. But trades depend so much on the context. What is each team's situation (record, areas of need, areas of surplus, etc.)? I see no way a that a metric can encapsulate all the relevant criteria.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Oct 27, 2014 13:06:02 GMT -5
Yeah I would believe that when I see it. A rebuilding team doesn't go out and sign Jerome Williams and Grady Sizemore in October. It waits until good upside bargains are available on the waiver wire to fill those roles, and/or signs players to minor league deals.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 27, 2014 22:56:57 GMT -5
"A bunch of our minor league pitchers" isn't enough to get them. Typically, if you have no problem with a trade, chances are the other team will have a problem. This is a little harsh. You have to evaluate each trade proposal on its merits, and this one has a lot more chance of being enough than you're giving it credit for. A package of Owens, De La Rosa, Margot, and Ranaudo is a pretty hefty one, and if I were the Red Sox front office, I would hesitate before giving it up for a pitcher who is legitimately more affordable than Lester/Scherzer but not by much. Remember, assuming that Hamels requires his 2019 option to be picked up as part of a trade (he has 20-team no-trade protection that he has to waive), he's due 5/$110m going forward ($24m AAV first four years, $14m last year). That's roughly one year and $30-40m or so less than what I expect Lester to get, so if you're the Red Sox and you think they're roughly comparable players, you'd only be willing to give up $30-40m worth of prospect value. That package may well be more than that, not to mention the fact that this front office appears more willing to incur financial costs than prospect ones. I was responding to the first sentence of the post. Admittedly didn't even read the whole thing. My bad on that.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,970
|
Post by jimoh on Oct 29, 2014 5:41:28 GMT -5
A friend writes from Philadelphia:
"Ok, so our boards are full of the Hamels-Boston trade talk, but a couple of people are claiming Sox management has cooled on Bogaerts. Really? Any talk like that among your people?"
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 29, 2014 7:33:21 GMT -5
A friend writes from Philadelphia: "Ok, so our boards are full of the Hamels-Boston trade talk, but a couple of people are claiming Sox management has cooled on Bogaerts. Really? Any talk like that among your people?" lol, yeah. They better demand Betts and Swihart too.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Oct 29, 2014 9:42:55 GMT -5
A friend writes from Philadelphia: "Ok, so our boards are full of the Hamels-Boston trade talk, but a couple of people are claiming Sox management has cooled on Bogaerts. Really? Any talk like that among your people?" Well they probably have cooled on Boegarts not that, that means anything. For me, I thought he was a generational talent before, and I don't think that anymore. He's likely moved from untradable to mostly untradable.
|
|
|