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.
|
Post by texs31 on Nov 14, 2012 17:30:43 GMT -5
The problem I have is that plan still requires positive answers to real questions at the positions you don't resolve with those moves. What if Lester/Buchhoz continue to stink it up? What if Ortiz can't stay in the lineup? What if Middlebrooks goes the way of other rookies who had stellar debuts (exceeding expectations) and then revert to much less than that. What if we still can't come up with a closer (Aceves crazy, Bailey injured, Bard damaged goods)? What about Ellsbury again not being able to put together a complete season, let alone an MVP-Caliber one?
And it's not like these are outlandish possibilities. They are all very real. And now we're still somewhere between bad and mediocore but now we have fewer current prospects and fewer draft picks for future building.
I think there are just too many questions to be answered this year for us to try and throw a bunch of money and prospects around.
I'm okay with taking a year to see what we really have. I'll be okay with mediocrity (or worse) for another year if it helps us get back to where we were previously.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 14, 2012 17:33:24 GMT -5
I'd hate to see the Sox empty the cupboards for a shot at winning 87 games. . Now I have to ask....what is with the 87 win number you've been pushing for like, a year? Good question. It does seem like I have a fascination with that number. Maybe my mind always comes back to an 87-75 team being on the cusp of contention but falling short? Other than that, I cannot think of a reason. When I was younger I'd always pick the Sox 85-77 because they'd usually finish within 4 games of that figure. During the good days of the Theo Epstein era, I'd pick the Sox to go 95-67 since they hit that record 4 times and won 93, 96 and 98 in other years. Honestly, I don't expect the Sox to win 85 or 87 games. I expect about 75 wins (87 losses - hah!). Ah, let's see what the team will look like. I'm not demanding anything this year except a feeling at the end of the season that the team is moving in the right direction.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 14, 2012 17:38:08 GMT -5
beasleyrockah - You completely miss my point. No sense going any further with you on this topic. You are telling multiple posters that we don't understand your point, yet you aren't offering clarification. Maybe you aren't expressing it clearly? I have no interest in going further on this topic, just something for you to keep in mind in future posts.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 14, 2012 17:40:58 GMT -5
Considering the new CBA is MUCH more complicated than what you consider "Unacceptable". The rules are different. Ben Cherington has a lot more to think about than a GM of 5 years ago. If the Yanks are concerned or worried about the $179 figure for 2014, there is every reason for our GM to do the same. Stupid decisions NOW will KILL us later. You don't just throw stupid money after stupid money. The free agent class this year does not have a Manny Ramirez. I wish it did. What is happening for the Red Sox is very unique. Just re-loading with THESE players will not take care of the situation. We need to be smart. We do not need to go crazy and over-spend. I'm sorry that is unacceptable. You are completely missing my point and trying to read something into my post that is not there. Let see if I can get you to understand. I don't care how or for what reason the landscape has changed in which the Boston Red Sox have to do Business or Compete in. I expect them to be able to have plans and contingencies in place to still be able to put a team on the field that is expected to compete for a Division Title. I don't care how much more complicated the CBA or the Rules are compared to 5yrs ago. And I don't care how Unique the situation is this year. I expect the Team not to be stupid & I expect The Team To Be Competitive. I expect the Projected Opening Day Roster to Compete for The Division Title Every Year. This is a Big Market Team & they should NEVER be in a position where they have to take a step back or have a "Bridge Year" to GET BACK to being competitive. That is unacceptable. This is not based on reality. Alot of money doesn't always equal alot of win. Alot of money usually equals bad contracts as the contract wears on. I can't begin to figure out why you think emptying out the farm system for Prince Fielder, a future DH, is a good idea. You can plan until the cows come home, but if you have $75 million of your payroll sitting on the DL, what are you going to do - spend another $75 million? You need to have a farm system, but the more you rely on free agency, which is investing in a stock that trends downward, the more you do harm to your system. Spending money stupidly will usually result in what the 2012 Red Sox were. Sometimes the right free agent isn't out there. Stupidly signing anybody just to fill the bill is a good way to get in big trouble (see John Lackey). The Sox finished high in the standings quite often (and as a result picked lower in the draft), while the Rays have been reaping the benefits (as now are the Nats) of stinking up the joint and getting the early drafts (elite talent) of the first round. These things can add up over the years. If you think the Sox are always should win 95 games, you are in for a big disappointment. The trick for the Sox is if they have a down year or two is to build a team that can sustain eight great seasons to make up for it. Every team stinks for awhile - even the Yankees who were terrible from 1989 - 1992 - and this period allowed them to draft Jeter, Rivera, Pettite, Posada, Williams - and it has impacted that team to this day. Sometimes in the long-run stinking up the joint for a year or two or three can be beneficial if you build the team the right way.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Nov 14, 2012 17:41:50 GMT -5
I think it's 2014 or 2015. Just can't see it happen in 2013.
Nothing wrong with fans wanting to win every year. Fan is short for fanatic. But I think going all out this year would be a mistake.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Nov 14, 2012 18:28:43 GMT -5
You are completely missing my point and trying to read something into my post that is not there. Let see if I can get you to understand. I don't care how or for what reason the landscape has changed in which the Boston Red Sox have to do Business or Compete in. I expect them to be able to have plans and contingencies in place to still be able to put a team on the field that is expected to compete for a Division Title. I don't care how much more complicated the CBA or the Rules are compared to 5yrs ago. And I don't care how Unique the situation is this year. I expect the Team not to be stupid & I expect The Team To Be Competitive. I expect the Projected Opening Day Roster to Compete for The Division Title Every Year. This is a Big Market Team & they should NEVER be in a position where they have to take a step back or have a "Bridge Year" to GET BACK to being competitive. That is unacceptable. I don't think anyone is missing your point. You want the team to be competitive each and every year. You want the team not to be stupid. You are entitled to want those things as a fan. Unfortunately, most of us live in reality where a team cannot just click its shiny red baseball cleats and instantly become a contender. Moreover, most of us want to play internet GM and try to ascertain for ourselves the "right" way to build the team for sustained competitiveness. My suggestion to the thread is that we move on from dmaineah's comments (which are his opinion and he is entitled to them) and continue to discuss the timing for the Red Sox to achieve what we hope will be a period of sustained competitiveness.
|
|
|
Post by buffs4444 on Nov 14, 2012 20:30:41 GMT -5
2013
And yes, it's completely possible without sacrificing much, if any, of the farm prospects. Without getting too in-depth, you have 4 spots to fill (SP, 1B, OF, OF) and if those 4 spots are filled with enough talent to complement the existing core, you're a contender. Greinke fills out a rotation that will be the best in the AL; Napoli moves between C/1B/DH depending on matchup and fits Fenway and this team like a glove; and LoMo appears on the outs of the fire sale in Miami and oozes untapped potential. Hell, take a flier on Jason Bay to hedge your bets on the OF and see if he's got anything left after his stint in Queens.
The only spot that may require talent from the minors appears to be that of an impact OF bat. I'd love to pencil in Upton for that spot, but that depends on cost. There are other names on the trade market, some reported and some not. Not sure this team would commit the long term resources to sign Hamilton, or that I'd be comfortable with the reported cost, so the trade route seems most likely for that last spot. But in the end, regardless of whether these players or some other similar or higher level of talent fills the gaps, this team can contend next year without disturbing the long-term course of the franchise and also without overly inflating the payroll.
|
|
|
Post by SlugLife on Nov 14, 2012 21:11:39 GMT -5
dmaineah, are you the collective id of this entire region's sports psyche?
You must be. Otherwise, what you are saying makes very little sense.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Nov 14, 2012 21:26:38 GMT -5
2013 And yes, it's completely possible without sacrificing much, if any, of the farm prospects. Without getting too in-depth, you have 4 spots to fill (SP, 1B, OF, OF) and if those 4 spots are filled with enough talent to complement the existing core, you're a contender. Greinke fills out a rotation that will be the best in the AL; Napoli moves between C/1B/DH depending on matchup and fits Fenway and this team like a glove; and LoMo appears on the outs of the fire sale in Miami and oozes untapped potential. Hell, take a flier on Jason Bay to hedge your bets on the OF and see if he's got anything left after his stint in Queens. The only spot that may require talent from the minors appears to be that of an impact OF bat. I'd love to pencil in Upton for that spot, but that depends on cost. There are other names on the trade market, some reported and some not. Not sure this team would commit the long term resources to sign Hamilton, or that I'd be comfortable with the reported cost, so the trade route seems most likely for that last spot. But in the end, regardless of whether these players or some other similar or higher level of talent fills the gaps, this team can contend next year without disturbing the long-term course of the franchise and also without overly inflating the payroll. buffs I admire your bravado and defiance of reality (and demaineah's on another thread) so much that I hesitate to say anything to the contrary. But, in 2012 the Sox ERA was 27th in MLB at 4.70 despite a pretty good bullpen. If they had been just a bit weaker at 4.79, they would have been 29th and next to last. Greinke does not magically transform them to a top 5 or even top 10 team ERA even if his anxiety issues, well documented, have been overcome. Jason Bay is a poor risk unless the dollars are minuscule....place this one in the category of wishin n' hopin for a miracle. Maybe Farrell and Nieves can metamorphose Lester into a strike-thrower with a re-discovered cutter, maybe Lackey, with re-built arm, can blow by the opposition, perhaps Bard can re-discover his fastball and control...Doubront, Aceves, Melancon, Bailey, Kalish, Lavarnway, Iglesias, maybe....maybe...maybe... But, those are a hell of a lot of maybes...no? And, doesn't this put us into the category of 'everyteam'? I am very interested and excited about what I expect will be mammoth changes over the next two years. In that regard, I would not be surprised to see Lester & Bard traded while they have value. In sum. I believe that the Sox as we know them, will cease to exist two years hence.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Nov 14, 2012 21:45:02 GMT -5
I highly doubt Lester is traded before Farrell gets a chance to work with him again. And why is it such a stretch that he reverts back to the solid #2 starter John Lester than he continues as the lost Lester of 2011?
If Lester returns to form and Buch stays healthy/ Greinke would make a huge difference. His anxiety issues are overblown at this point and well under control (although I highly doubt we outbid the Angels).
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Nov 14, 2012 22:08:58 GMT -5
Jon Lester, at his best, has never been a highly consistent strike-thrower or a consistent innings-eater. Just a fact.
He was best when he had that downward inside cutter that fooled RH batters into swinging over it. Last year that cutter was MIA. Maybe with Farrell and others it can be re-discovered. He is not a No. 1 in any case. He throws too many pitches game after game.
If I could trade him for a guy with potential to achieve his stats or better, I would do it.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Nov 14, 2012 22:17:08 GMT -5
That's you. You think Farrell will, though? I don't think so. And he's a #2 - I never said a #1.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 14, 2012 22:47:43 GMT -5
If the Red Sox sign Napoli and Swisher, they will likely have a top 3 offense. Even if you sub in a Ross/Sweeney (or Kalish) platoon for Swisher, it's still a top-tier offense with above-average bats at almost every position, few hitters in the decline phase of their careers, and decent depth and upside in the upper minors. If Iglesias is the starter at SS, the defense should feature Gold Glove-caliber guys at the up-the-middle positions and the bullpen should be very good. They just need the pitching to be league-average or better to get in the range of 89 wins and a Wild Card spot. I think it's very possible that a combination of one good free agent signing/trade, bounce-backs from the veterans, a step forward from Doubront, and/or the emergence of a wild card (Morales? De La Rosa? Webster/Barnes?) gets them very close. I also think it's a misnomer to start with the notion that this is a 69-win team. First of all, by BP's Pythagorean wins, the team should have won closer to 76 wins last year ( link). Second, just getting Middlebrooks and Ortiz back from injuries should push that mark closer to 80 wins. You don't think having competent players replace 40+ games of Loney/Gomez at 1B and Nava/Podsednik in LF along with slightly improved pitching can add ten or so more wins and get this team in the playoffs? Yes, the Blue Jays will be better, but the Yankees and Orioles will almost certainly be worse. Once you're in the playoffs, anything can happen. I don't expect the 2013 Red Sox to be a juggernaut, by any stretch of the imagination. But with just a few key signings that make sense both in 2013 and beyond, they should at least be in the Wild Card race into August. It makes no sense to trade key prospects for one-year rentals or to go for broke on free agents this year and waste their hard-earned payroll flexibility immediately, but it also makes no sense to completely punt the 2013 season at this juncture in the offseason.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 14, 2012 22:55:51 GMT -5
2013 Greinke fills out a rotation that will be the best in the AL. What rotation are you talking about? And if it's the Red Sox rotation why in the world are you talking about Greinke? The Sox are not going to sign Zack Greinke. He's going to get a deal around 7 years $160 million and it won't be from Boston. I would suspect the Angels are going to re-sign him. Otherwise, if your fantasy came true, I'd echo what Sarasoxer said. If you want to fantasize I would say wait until King Felix becomes a free agent and throw a bunch of money his way and then take the rest of your money and throw it to Giancarlo Stanton when he becomes a free agent. In both cases, I doubt that when the player gets traded before his contract runs out that he'll re-up with his new team. I suspect it would work like it did with Sabathia where Cleveland dealt him to Milwaukee who rented him until he signed for his big bucks in NY. If I'm the Sox, those are the two players I wait to spend the big money on. Hernandez and Stanton would complement an up-and-coming low payroll team very nicely.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 15, 2012 0:25:09 GMT -5
Buffs, where do you draw the line cost wise for Greinke? Or do you not care (genuine question..just curious)? I'm all for adding elite talent, I just don't see how you can base an offseason plan around signing a guy when you know the bidding might get to a point where it would be poor value. If he's available for your/Red Sox value, then great...but you need a contingency plan if that fails. From all accounts the Angels are beyond determined to sign him, they are in win now mode, and might be willing to offer a silly contract.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxprospects on Nov 15, 2012 1:00:01 GMT -5
Just speculating here but isn't Liverpool an absolute disaster this year, and in danger of relegation after a ton of money spent? Didn't the Boston Globe sell their shares in the team. Didn't Henry just shut down his trading firm for outside clients. Didn't we just move a bunch of expensive contracts just recently. Isn't it possible that these things are all related? Is a company or an investment advisor ever going to say they are poor or in the least bit financially distressed? Of course not. We may be really looking to rebuild folks. The conventional way, or in some way similar. I don't see us hauling out the checkbook like they have done in the past. We have been spoiled. I see us still spending but not like before or probably anywhere near the luxury tax limit for a while. Maybe even 3-4 years.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Nov 15, 2012 8:35:14 GMT -5
If you want to fantasize I would say wait until King Felix becomes a free agent and throw a bunch of money his way and then take the rest of your money and throw it to Giancarlo Stanton when he becomes a free agent. You could throw Bryce Harper into that mix too. I like the general idea though. Two good reasons to spend big in free agency: 1. An absolute drop-dead, no question superstar talent is available. Manny Ramirez, CC Sabathia, etc. I'm a Greinke fan but realistically if you're counting on the guy to be more than a #2, you're investing tens/hundreds of millions on what you hope will happen, not what's likely to happen. That's no way to build a team. 2. Your team is ready to contend right now and a free agent addresses a specific need. If the Red Sox won 93 games last year with a crappy rotation, then yeah, overpay for Greinke. It might be a problem down the road, but flags fly forever, etc. This does not describe the Red Sox in any way shape fashion or form. The thing you absolutely don't want to do is expend a bunch of resources on players that don't put the team over the top. Lets say the Red Sox go out and spend a bunch of money on Hamilton, Greinke, and trade Matt Barnes for Elvis Andrus. Now let's say that Lester continues to regress despite the presence of Farrell, Buchholz continues to randomly suck for half a season at a time, Greinke is a 3.75 ERA guy in the ALE, and David Ortiz finally falls off the cliff of old age. Then they're right back to where they are now, except they're down a Barnes, down $35m a year in salary room, Ben Cherrington is looking for a new job, and we're all sad. I know we all want the team to contend now as well as in the long term. But you can't have your cake and eat it too. There's certain advantages a team has when it takes a long-term approach as opposed to a short-term approach, regardless of their market size or anything else. And the team is bad enough right now that it doesn't make sense to risk that long term future for short term gains. This team needs a plan to win 95 games and there's no reasonable plan for doing that in 2013.
|
|
|
Post by buffs4444 on Nov 15, 2012 9:00:40 GMT -5
Buffs, where do you draw the line cost wise for Greinke? Or do you not care (genuine question..just curious)? I'm all for adding elite talent, I just don't see how you can base an offseason plan around signing a guy when you know the bidding might get to a point where it would be poor value. If he's available for your/Red Sox value, then great...but you need a contingency plan if that fails. From all accounts the Angels are beyond determined to sign him, they are in win now mode, and might be willing to offer a silly contract. Market value. Currently that is somewhere between Matt Cain and Cole Hamels money. If the numbers go above that, then the market changes the timeline from 2013 to 2014. That's how important Greinke should be to this club. Cain and Hamels themselves are proof, top of the rotation starters just do not hit the free agent market anymore. In the next two free agent classes, the only pitcher that is comparable to Greinke is Lincecum next year, and I'm pretty confident he's already picking out real estate in his home state of Washington. With his consistency the past 5 years as one of the best pitchers in the game, this should be a slam dunk at those numbers. And there's nothing unreasonable about those numbers, again, they merely represent market value for a top of the rotation starter, which Greinke's number prove him to be. Lester - Greinke - Buchholz - Lackey - Morales/Doubront 2013/14 additions: De La Rosa, Webster 2014/15 additions: Barnes, Ranaudo That's a deep & talented staff at the top levels of the organization that can carry this team deep into Octobers (plural)..... EDIT: FROM LAW: for those who aren't fans of Law, he's still a better evaluator of talent than almost everyone on this board.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Nov 15, 2012 9:12:53 GMT -5
If you want to fantasize I would say wait until King Felix becomes a free agent and throw a bunch of money his way and then take the rest of your money and throw it to Giancarlo Stanton when he becomes a free agent. You could throw Bryce Harper into that mix too. I like the general idea though. Two good reasons to spend big in free agency: 1. An absolute drop-dead, no question superstar talent is available. Manny Ramirez, CC Sabathia, etc. I'm a Greinke fan but realistically if you're counting on the guy to be more than a #2, you're investing tens/hundreds of millions on what you hope will happen, not what's likely to happen. That's no way to build a team. 2. Your team is ready to contend right now and a free agent addresses a specific need. If the Red Sox won 93 games last year with a crappy rotation, then yeah, overpay for Greinke. It might be a problem down the road, but flags fly forever, etc. This does not describe the Red Sox in any way shape fashion or form. The thing you absolutely don't want to do is expend a bunch of resources on players that don't put the team over the top. Lets say the Red Sox go out and spend a bunch of money on Hamilton, Greinke, and trade Matt Barnes for Elvis Andrus. Now let's say that Lester continues to regress despite the presence of Farrell, Buchholz continues to randomly suck for half a season at a time, Greinke is a 3.75 ERA guy in the ALE, and David Ortiz finally falls off the cliff of old age. Then they're right back to where they are now, except they're down a Barnes, down $35m a year in salary room, Ben Cherrington is looking for a new job, and we're all sad. I know we all want the team to contend now as well as in the long term. But you can't have your cake and eat it too. There's certain advantages a team has when it takes a long-term approach as opposed to a short-term approach, regardless of their market size or anything else. And the team is bad enough right now that it doesn't make sense to risk that long term future for short term gains. This team needs a plan to win 95 games and there's no reasonable plan for doing that in 2013. That's a reasonable approach, fenway. Theo is taking the position in Chicago that it could take five years to get the club back on a competitive footing. And they don't have the number and the quality of prospects that the Sox do. But Cubbie fans have not had a winner in, like, generations, so they're probably more patient than we. The Jays probably built a pennant winning team with the Buck trade. But if it doesn't put them over the top in 2013, they have problems. The centerpiece of that trade, Johnson will be a FA at season's end. And they'll look forward to paying Reyes over 20m in his declining years. AA surrendered three of his top seven prospects for his haul, so he has a lot of catching up to do to build his prospect base going forward.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Nov 15, 2012 9:37:08 GMT -5
I also think it's a misnomer to start with the notion that this is a 69-win team. First of all, by BP's Pythagorean wins, the team should have won closer to 76 wins last year ( link). Second, just getting Middlebrooks and Ortiz back from injuries should push that mark closer to 80 wins. You don't think having competent players replace 40+ games of Loney/Gomez at 1B and Nava/Podsednik in LF along with slightly improved pitching can add ten or so more wins and get this team in the playoffs? Yes, the Blue Jays will be better, but the Yankees and Orioles will almost certainly be worse. Once you're in the playoffs, anything can happen. I don't expect the 2013 Red Sox to be a juggernaut, by any stretch of the imagination. But with just a few key signings that make sense both in 2013 and beyond, they should at least be in the Wild Card race into August. It makes no sense to trade key prospects for one-year rentals or to go for broke on free agents this year and waste their hard-earned payroll flexibility immediately, but it also makes no sense to completely punt the 2013 season at this juncture in the offseason. I agree with this. Im not one that thinks we were as bad as our record last year. We can tweak the team without trading many if any prospects and be competitive. Sign Napoli for 1B, sign a SP and either sign or trade for a corner OF and let the other spot play out. Sands, Kalish, Nava and Brentz could get a look and I think at the very least we can get a platoon out of them.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 15, 2012 9:57:05 GMT -5
Market value. Currently that is somewhere between Matt Cain and Cole Hamels money. From 2010-2012 Matt Cain: 661.1 IP, 123 ERA+, 10.6 fWAR Cole Hamels: 640.0 IP, 134 ERA+, 15.7 fWAR Zack Greinke: 604.0 IP, 106 ERA+, 4.7 fWAR
|
|
badfishnbc
Veteran
Doing you all a favor and leaving through the gate in right field since 2012.
Posts: 417
|
Post by badfishnbc on Nov 15, 2012 10:28:47 GMT -5
My thoughts on 2013 - this is the year to make mistakes. The Blue Jays may have bailed us out of the expectation that we're competitive for the division immediately, so we can swing at some pitches outside the strikezone in 2013, and see if we make contact.
This is the year to see if Lackey can bring anything to the table, just as much as Iglesias and Kalish. We'll likely see some growing pains from Middlebrooks in his second season, but let him take his lumps for a full 162.
Injuries will likely allow a trial from some of the kids like Bradley and Brentz - seriously, if we keep Ellsbury, does anyone expect him to play 150+ games? So we'll gain some insight on what they offer moving forward for the short and long terms.
The best part is that for the first time in years, expectations are so low that we have an opportunity to really enjoy a season where we might get surprised and fall in love with a plucky band of overachievers. Can't say I'd turn that down, especially knowing that we're still well-positioned for 2014 and beyond.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Nov 15, 2012 10:33:29 GMT -5
Injuries will likely allow a trial from some of the kids like Bradley and Brentz I'd rather not start those arb clocks. Kalish, Sands, and Nava to some extent are the OF who need at-bats to blossom - or not blossom. Bradley & Brentz can get their at AAA. Some even suggest Kalish get his at AAA.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,826
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Nov 15, 2012 11:12:07 GMT -5
My thoughts on 2013 - this is the year to make mistakes. The Blue Jays may have bailed us out of the expectation that we're competitive for the division immediately, so we can swing at some pitches outside the strikezone in 2013, and see if we make contact. This is the year to see if Lackey can bring anything to the table, just as much as Iglesias and Kalish. We'll likely see some growing pains from Middlebrooks in his second season, but let him take his lumps for a full 162. Injuries will likely allow a trial from some of the kids like Bradley and Brentz - seriously, if we keep Ellsbury, does anyone expect him to play 150+ games? So we'll gain some insight on what they offer moving forward for the short and long terms. The best part is that for the first time in years, expectations are so low that we have an opportunity to really enjoy a season where we might get surprised and fall in love with a plucky band of overachievers. Can't say I'd turn that down, especially knowing that we're still well-positioned for 2014 and beyond. Excellent! I couldn't have said it better. It actually will be very "freeing" to just watch this team and not worry so much about the standings. Really excited about seeing some of these guys start their MLB careers. As I said earlier, it is a rare opportunity.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Nov 15, 2012 11:13:26 GMT -5
2013 Greinke fills out a rotation that will be the best in the AL. What rotation are you talking about? And if it's the Red Sox rotation why in the world are you talking about Greinke? The Sox are not going to sign Zack Greinke. He's going to get a deal around 7 years $160 million and it won't be from Boston. I would suspect the Angels are going to re-sign him. Otherwise, if your fantasy came true, I'd echo what Sarasoxer said. If you want to fantasize I would say wait until King Felix becomes a free agent and throw a bunch of money his way and then take the rest of your money and throw it to Giancarlo Stanton when he becomes a free agent. In both cases, I doubt that when the player gets traded before his contract runs out that he'll re-up with his new team. I suspect it would work like it did with Sabathia where Cleveland dealt him to Milwaukee who rented him until he signed for his big bucks in NY. [b ]If I'm the Sox, those are the two players I wait to spend the big money on. Hernandez and Stanton would complement an up-and-coming low payroll team very nicely. [/b] Xactly. Let's not blow the wad on a patch job. Wouldn't it be nice to have the financial means to get guys who have great, wart-less, real difference making talent?? The way teams now spend, how many would have the drachmas to go toe to toe with us? In the interim, I'm all for Napoli and re-signing Ross. We need a better home record and those guys could give us a Monster tattoo job. Altho I don't want to give up a draft pick for Swisher (especially to the MFYs), I would do it for a shorter term deal (2-3 years). I'm not sure that he would accept that tho. Russell Martin's acquisition could make both Lavarnway & Salty expendable. A Ross & Martin tandem might save more runs by helping to lower an atrocious team ERA than Salty & Lavarnway potentially could produce. Lastly, I'd love to take a flyer on Soria.
|
|
|