ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,912
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 24, 2014 14:18:47 GMT -5
Note that the club may well defer this decision until ST, but that would mean trimming an extra player over the winter -- either Butler or a reliever (Britton, Wilson, or Hembree), or both if the Cespedes trade involves only two players off the 40-man.
The first three guys project to fill one of two open spots on the bench. I think we all know the pros and cons: Nava has value but is the sole LHH, Victorino could be anywhere from great to useless and has no trade value, Craig will probably bounce back and be decent to good and is signed for a few years, but has no trade value at present.
Holt could be dealt, and Ramirez could back up SS and 3B while Betts backs up 2B. That would allow the team to keep all three of the candidates for the two obvious spots. Since you'd be selling high on Holt, and he's not that much better a defender at SS and 3B than Hanley, this is actually an interesting idea.
Napoli could be dealt, with Nava / Craig platooning at 1B, or Ramirez playing 1B and Victorino / Nava / Craig sharing an outfield spot and two bench spots.
Betts could be dealt, with Victorino, Nava, and Craig sharing RF.
Bogaerts could be dealth, with Ramirez playing SS, or Pedroia could be dealt, with Betts playing 2B; in either case, once again you have a Victorino / Nava / Craig platoon in the OF.
Ortiz could be dealt, in which case Ramirez would probably see the most time at DH.
Since this is not an easy decision, you can vote for your top two choices, if you're torn.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 24, 2014 14:21:26 GMT -5
Aw, who picked Holt? We could go with 4 outfielders because of him.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Nov 24, 2014 14:30:05 GMT -5
Seems to me with the ego's on these guys and a quote from Shane about as far as he is concerned he is still the starting RF'er that he might have a little attitude about being benched for Betts if that happens. I think that is enough concern added to the injury risk on him for me to send him to the trade market. He had one great year for us and even if we discount him by 3-5 million he was still worth his time here for that great year. If his physical shows him in good enough health to date he might be good enough to bring back a pair of high risk non 40 man guys.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Nov 24, 2014 14:37:12 GMT -5
I think it doesn't much matter what the Sox get for Craig or Victorino, so long as they get them off the payroll. Neither one has a role with the Sox next year. I don't think the Sox will deal any of the others, but I do think a number of prospects are likely to go.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Nov 24, 2014 14:39:47 GMT -5
If Sandoval & Ramirez are both signed I can see moving on from Cespedes, Napoli & Victorino all of whom are on 1yr deals and 2 of which can be extended qualifying offers.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,912
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 24, 2014 14:42:42 GMT -5
I think it doesn't much matter what the Sox get for Craig or Victorino, so long as they get them off the payroll. Neither one has a role with the Sox next year. I don't think the Sox will deal any of the others, but I do think a number of prospects are likely to go. There's no planet on which a healthy Shane Victorino is not a better right fielder than Rusney Castillo. The best lineup you can assemble from the current roster has an OF of Hanley, Mookie, and Shane, with Castillo getting a lot of PT, mostly in RF.
|
|
|
Post by kmann on Nov 24, 2014 15:25:14 GMT -5
But what about the scouting reports that say Castillo is Victorino in his prime?
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 24, 2014 15:26:26 GMT -5
There is technically no reason why they can't go with Victorino-Hanley-betts in the outfield with Castillo-nava and Craig on the bench. Hanley and Betts can cover the backup infield spots.
Will it happen? Probably not but it could be done.
|
|
|
Post by Jonathan Singer on Nov 24, 2014 15:28:45 GMT -5
Dumping Craig and Victorino should be top priorities to get rid of.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Nov 24, 2014 15:33:25 GMT -5
I think it doesn't much matter what the Sox get for Craig or Victorino, so long as they get them off the payroll. Neither one has a role with the Sox next year. I don't think the Sox will deal any of the others, but I do think a number of prospects are likely to go. There's no planet on which a healthy Shane Victorino is not a better right fielder than Rusney Castillo. The best lineup you can assemble from the current roster has an OF of Hanley, Mookie, and Shane, with Castillo getting a lot of PT, mostly in RF. Unfortunately that is the issue. I'm surprised trading Napoli isn't getting more steam. I believe he has the most value and think he could actually bring us back a #2 starter. I think the Red Sox would be foolish not to considering it. Especially with Craig, Nava and now potentially Hanley on the roster all of whole could play 1B.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Nov 24, 2014 15:36:06 GMT -5
I picked Napoli. I dont think anyone touches Vic at his salary and a Nava/Craig platoon at 1B can get the job done and if Craig rebounds he could outhit Napoli. I don't know if you could package both Cespedes and Nap together and get that main chip for Hamels or you could separate them out and get a #2 for one and a prospect for the other to offset the lost draft picks.
|
|
|
Post by kmann on Nov 24, 2014 15:42:05 GMT -5
What if we have to eat salary AND get little to no return for Craig or Victorino, would we hold on to them and hope they can establish some trade value in Spring Training or early next season? Then what? We start Betts in AAA? Trade Napoli? If we start the season with Betts in AAA and a Craig/Nava platoon at 1B, then IMO the Hanley signing does not make sense.
|
|
|
Post by redsox1534 on Nov 24, 2014 16:09:55 GMT -5
I cant wait to see who we trade for. I hope we sign Lester. Then make a play for Latos, Cueto, Hamels, Samarjada, or younger guys like Wheeler, Harvery, Syndagaard, T Walker.
|
|
|
Post by greenmonsterwhalers on Nov 24, 2014 16:34:03 GMT -5
What about trading Rusney Castillo in addition to Cespedes? He has substantial value as he's in his prime, is under team control for six more years, and isn't especially expensive. The return for Cespedes and Castillo combined (possibly in a three-way deal) should be enough to get us a #2 starter and maybe a decent reliever too.
LF- Ramirez CF- Betts RF- Nava/Victorino platoon Victorino also gives Betts a day off once in a while. Craig backs up Hanley/Napoli/Papi. Holt backs up Pedroia/Xander/Panda.
Note: Does anybody know if there's a rule that prohibits us from trading Castillo so soon after signing him?
|
|
|
Post by mannofsteele on Nov 24, 2014 16:42:15 GMT -5
Definitely the obvious here in Allen Craig and Shane Victorino.
|
|
|
Post by down225 on Nov 24, 2014 17:03:54 GMT -5
Good luck trying to find a trading partner for either Victorino and/or Craig to take on their salaries and risk factor. First player I would trade is Napoli, then Cespedes, or both, straight up for the best starter you can get. Even if it's for only one year.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 24, 2014 17:04:49 GMT -5
Good luck trying to find a trading partner for either Victorino and/or Craig to take on their salaries and risk factor. First player I would trade is Napoli, then Cespedes, or both, straight up for the best starter you can get. Even if it's for only one year. Good luck finding a team who wants Napoli and has so much pitching they can afford to give a good one up and compete.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Nov 24, 2014 17:29:35 GMT -5
He should, right? And yet it would somehow feel weird to see a trade with Nava as a headliner. Pretty sure the number of GMs in baseball that value Nava's skills appropriately is less than 30.
|
|
|
Post by down225 on Nov 24, 2014 17:40:26 GMT -5
Btw, according to one source (Cot's, I think), Craig still has an option year left. Give him as much AAA time as needed, if needed. At least he wouldn't be taking up a roster spot.
|
|
|
Post by down225 on Nov 24, 2014 17:55:32 GMT -5
Good luck trying to find a trading partner for either Victorino and/or Craig to take on their salaries and risk factor. First player I would trade is Napoli, then Cespedes, or both, straight up for the best starter you can get. Even if it's for only one year. Good luck finding a team who wants Napoli and has so much pitching they can afford to give a good one up and compete. You're twisting my words up. I didn't say good. Maybe a decent 4th or 5th. The point is to free up salary to get that "good" starter, and/or get equal value in return.
|
|
|
Post by bentossaurus on Nov 24, 2014 17:59:01 GMT -5
Where can I choose Sandoval?
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Nov 24, 2014 18:53:35 GMT -5
Aw, who picked Holt? We could go with 4 outfielders because of him. I picked Holt cause we could sell high... and # of outfielders doesn't seem to be a problem. In some ways, HanRam has nearly as much super-sub upside.
|
|
|
Post by greenmonsterwhalers on Nov 24, 2014 19:05:13 GMT -5
The poll should be adjusted to include Castillo. I'm not saying he should be the one traded, but he should be a consideration depending on how much we could get for him.
|
|
|
Post by youngbillrussell on Nov 24, 2014 19:10:32 GMT -5
Nava stays as a 4th OF. Brock Holt also stays as UTLI and 5th OF.
The issue to me become either Victorino or Craig need to go. I'd prefer both to be gone but the most likely scenario is one stays and hopefully rebuilds their career.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,704
|
Post by nomar on Nov 24, 2014 19:43:25 GMT -5
Victorino is the easy choice for me.
I could see reason to keep Craig as a backup 1B/OF because if his bat comes back he can slide into Napoli's spot next year or even at the deadline if we need to swap Napoli for a pitcher.
|
|