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.
Poll: Who Else Would You Deal In Addition to Cespedes?
|
Post by mgoetze on Nov 26, 2014 13:20:52 GMT -5
What Would Bill Do?
In a way, Pedroia makes the most sense. Moving Mookie to 2B both maximizes his value and alleviates the outfield jam. And Pedroia may or may not be able to halt his decline, but he is past his peak, there is no doubt about it. It would be the ultimate Belichick move.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 26, 2014 14:04:57 GMT -5
What Would Bill Do? In a way, Pedroia makes the most sense. Moving Mookie to 2B both maximizes his value and alleviates the outfield jam. And Pedroia may or may not be able to halt his decline, but he is past his peak, there is no doubt about it. It would be the ultimate Belichick move. MLB isn't the NFL. We don't have to trade Logan Mankins so we can keep Tom Brady on the team next season. Belichik wouldn't trade Pedroia.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Nov 26, 2014 15:10:36 GMT -5
What Would Bill Do? In a way, Pedroia makes the most sense. Moving Mookie to 2B both maximizes his value and alleviates the outfield jam. And Pedroia may or may not be able to halt his decline, but he is past his peak, there is no doubt about it. It would be the ultimate Belichick move. MLB isn't the NFL. We don't have to trade Logan Mankins so we can keep Tom Brady on the team next season. Belichik wouldn't trade Pedroia. Oh, absolutely. We can just sign Lester and Scherzer - problem solved! For some inexplicable reason, John Henry doesn't want to write that check (and Bob Kraft probably wouldn't either), so actually we are in a bit of an NFL-like situation after all. BB recognized that Mankins to Stork wouldn't be a big downgrade but Wright was a big upgrade on Hoomanawanui - and the downgrade from Pedroia to whichever outfielder would take Betts' spot, given our depth, is probably also much smaller than the upgrade from Allen Webster to whatever pitcher you could get for Pedroia.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,881
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 26, 2014 16:44:26 GMT -5
What Would Bill Do? In a way, Pedroia makes the most sense. Moving Mookie to 2B both maximizes his value and alleviates the outfield jam. And Pedroia may or may not be able to halt his decline, but he is past his peak, there is no doubt about it. It would be the ultimate Belichick move. When you have wealth of excess talent in an organization, and a crapload of money to spend, you pretty much cease worrying about value as a primary motivator. You are trying to assemble the best possible team. Value only enters into the equation as a secondary condition when choosing among players of comparable talent. You are proposing that the best way to make a very good team even better would be to trade away the second best 2B in MLB in order to make room, in the starting lineup, for a RF platoon of Shane Victorino, Daniel Nava, and Allen Craig, which in another year will be Nava, Craig, and Garin Cecchini or Bryce Brentz, while at the same time committing to Rusney Castillo as your CF (which becomes relevant if in fact you sign Justin Heyward in a year). Do I have to say any more? But I will, anyway. Trading Pedroia and moving Betts to 2B makes your lineup better only if you have a RF in the fold who is as good as Dustin Pedroia, less the amount of value Mookie loses moving from 2B to RF, and a CF in the fold who is good as Pedroia, less the amount of value Mookie loses moving from 2B to CF. Based on Steamer projections, it's a move that makes sense only if you have Trout, McCutchen, or Carlos Gomez in CF, and Stanton, Bautista, Puig, or Heyward in RF. Do we? And (to return to the original point), are we so shy of resources or short of cash that we need to weaken the lineup in order to strengthen the pitching?
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Nov 26, 2014 16:52:56 GMT -5
If the Sox trade Pedroia they will never sign another player with a hometown discount.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,881
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 26, 2014 16:57:00 GMT -5
The downgrade from Pedroia to whichever outfielder would take Betts' spot, given our depth, is probably much smaller than the upgrade from Allen Webster to whatever pitcher you could get for Pedroia. Except it wouldn't be Allen Webster. It would be Rubby de la Rosa, and by late in the year, the best option among him, Wright, Webster, Owens, Rodriguez, Barnes and Johnson. Or (and this is the crucial thing you're missing) whomever you could get at the deadline or next winter for a package of any number of those plus some combination of Swihart or Vazquez, Bradley, Cecchini, WMB, Marrero, Coyle, and even Margot, Chavis, and Devers. If the vast majority of those guys wash out and end up with little trade value, and a year from now you have a weakness in the rotation and no other good way too fill it, then it might make great sense to trade Pedroia. But the thing to do right now is keep your best players and see what you've got on the farm.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Nov 26, 2014 17:16:46 GMT -5
Shane Victorino produced more WAR than Dustin Pedroia as recently as ... 2013. Admittedly, it's not something you or I should reasonably project to happen. But it's possible. Obviously you need to believe in a couple of things to make this move: 1. Castillo is an above-average CFer 2. Betts will indeed be a great hitter 3. Betts' defense at 2B is excellent (maximizing the loss of playing him in the OF instead) 4. Nava and Victorino will bounce back to 2013 levels or at least close OK, that's probably asking too much (personally I am especially skeptical about point 1.) But the point is ... And (to return to the original point), are we so shy of resources or short of cash that we need to weaken the lineup in order to strengthen the pitching? ...that Pedroia can fetch you pitchers that mere cash or the combination of lesser resources can't. You can get James Shields on the FA market. But you can't get a Jose Fernandez type pitcher on the FA market.
|
|
|
Post by bigpapismangosalsa on Nov 26, 2014 17:51:48 GMT -5
Interesting thread. I chose Victorino and Craig. While I realize that would be selling low on them, I made those choices because I think it fits most within the context of what else the team has. I would more approach Napoli with the idea of adding another two years to his deal at similar money, and if he doesn't want that, I'd look to POTENTIALLY trade him as well, depending on the return of course.
At this point, I fully admit I'm a bit terrified that we end up trading one of Bogaerts or Betts, and the return being not nearly enough to justify what we're giving up. I understand that it's irrational to trade your starting short stop or right fielder with 5 or more years of control each, but I can see it happening if we don't sign Lester. I certainly hope that this is completely wrong, but I just don't see them going through with putting Hanley in LF. Hope to be wrong.
This is, I'm sure obvious, but in order I'd look to first trade Cespedes, then 40 man pitchers on the AAA / MLB cusp (Ranaudo, Barnes, Wright, Escobar). Victorino would be next. I didn't see him on there, but I'd also strongly consider trading Buccholz depending on other pitchers you could acquire in a trade.
Short of Chris Sale, and Darvish there is literally no pitcher that I've seen even speculated on this site or by a valid source as available that I'd trade Betts or Bogaerts for without the 72hour window and below market extension.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,881
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 27, 2014 12:36:32 GMT -5
Shane Victorino produced more WAR than Dustin Pedroia as recently as ... 2013. Admittedly, it's not something you or I should reasonably project to happen. But it's possible. Obviously you need to believe in a couple of things to make this move: 1. Castillo is an above-average CFer 2. Betts will indeed be a great hitter 3. Betts' defense at 2B is excellent (maximizing the loss of playing him in the OF instead) 4. Nava and Victorino will bounce back to 2013 levels or at least close OK, that's probably asking too much (personally I am especially skeptical about point 1.) But the point is ... And (to return to the original point), are we so shy of resources or short of cash that we need to weaken the lineup in order to strengthen the pitching? ...that Pedroia can fetch you pitchers that mere cash or the combination of lesser resources can't. You can get James Shields on the FA market. But you can't get a Jose Fernandez type pitcher on the FA market. And my BIG point is that, in all likelihood, there's no pitcher that Pedroia could fetch you that you couldn't get for Swihart, Chavis or Devers, the best or second best of Owens / Rodriguez / etc. (about ten candidates here), and various combinations of Bradley, Cecchini, Marrero, Coyle, etc., that fit the other team's needs. And that's just for starters. As I mentioned in another thread, you have enough talent to do a 3-team trade and land someone as good as Sale. So there's no need to trade Pedroia, who is one of the three best players at his position in baseball, signed for a great contract, from all reports an astonishingly good clubhouse guy in terms of leading by example and optimism in the face of difficulty (the key psychological quality that separated the 2004 from 2011 teams, IMO), and the face of the franchise.
|
|
|