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.
2015 Red Sox Trade Deadline Strategy
|
Post by carmenfanzone on Jul 20, 2015 21:41:45 GMT -5
So the Red Sox say they want cost controlled pitching. The Mets are fighting for their division lead and desperately need hitting. Is there a chance for a trade there? I am thinking Zack Wheeler. Since he is out for the year, trading him does not hurt the Mets bid for the playoffs this year. I know there is risk in taking a pitcher who will be coming off arm surgery, but how else are the Red Sox going to get cost controlled starting pitching?
Unfortunately, I don't know if the Sox have the hitting the Mets would be interested in. Would they take Sandoval for Wheeler? We could use Holt at third until we found someone else. But I wouldn't want Sandoval if I were the Mets. So I think it would have to be a combination of players to possibly help the Mets in several areas. I think they are interested in a shortstop. I do not think Marerro has shown enough as a hitter to interest the Mets, but what about Hernandez? He hit real well in AA and has started well in AAA. Granted it would be a gamble for the Mets to play a shortstop who has only a few at bats at AAA in the middle of a pennant race, but how much worse than the guy they are using now could he be? The Mets back up outfielders have done poorly. Would they be interested in one of De Aza or Nava and one of Victorino or Castillo as potential upgrades? So Hernandez, De Aza or Nava, and Victorino or Castillo for Wheeler.
I am not sure that is enough , but I would sure be asking the Mets what it would take. Getting Wheeler wouldn't solve all the Red Sox issues, but it would be one more option to help the rotation.
|
|
|
Post by dridiot on Jul 20, 2015 21:55:51 GMT -5
I think tawaza has value. We could get a decent prospect for him. I don't trade Tazawa unless I got a blowout offer, or if I don't think we can contend next year. Him and Koji are the only good relievers on the Red Sox with positive WAR. I'd trade Koji for a good enough offer because with the shed salary for next year we could probably buy up some decent relievers, and he'll be 41 next year. Edit: those are FanGraph's numbers, BR tells a different story. At any rate, according to BR, Tazawa has been worth 1.1 WAR, Koji 0.5, Layne 0.5, Ross 0.3 and Breslow 0.2.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jul 20, 2015 22:46:20 GMT -5
So the Red Sox say they want cost controlled pitching. The Mets are fighting for their division lead and desperately need hitting. Is there a chance for a trade there? I am thinking Zack Wheeler. Since he is out for the year, trading him does not hurt the Mets bid for the playoffs this year. I know there is risk in taking a pitcher who will be coming off arm surgery, but how else are the Red Sox going to get cost controlled starting pitching? Unfortunately, I don't know if the Sox have the hitting the Mets would be interested in. Would they take Sandoval for Wheeler? We could use Holt at third until we found someone else. But I wouldn't want Sandoval if I were the Mets. So I think it would have to be a combination of players to possibly help the Mets in several areas. I think they are interested in a shortstop. I do not think Marerro has shown enough as a hitter to interest the Mets, but what about Hernandez? He hit real well in AA and has started well in AAA. Granted it would be a gamble for the Mets to play a shortstop who has only a few at bats at AAA in the middle of a pennant race, but how much worse than the guy they are using now could he be? The Mets back up outfielders have done poorly. Would they be interested in one of De Aza or Nava and one of Victorino or Castillo as potential upgrades? So Hernandez, De Aza or Nava, and Victorino or Castillo for Wheeler. I am not sure that is enough , but I would sure be asking the Mets what it would take. Getting Wheeler wouldn't solve all the Red Sox issues, but it would be one more option to help the rotation. God I would be so happy if the Mets took Hanley or Sandoval for literally any starting pitcher on their roster, but alas it'll never happen.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Jul 20, 2015 23:06:11 GMT -5
So the Red Sox say they want cost controlled pitching. The Mets are fighting for their division lead and desperately need hitting. Is there a chance for a trade there? I am thinking Zack Wheeler. Since he is out for the year, trading him does not hurt the Mets bid for the playoffs this year. I know there is risk in taking a pitcher who will be coming off arm surgery, but how else are the Red Sox going to get cost controlled starting pitching? Unfortunately, I don't know if the Sox have the hitting the Mets would be interested in. Would they take Sandoval for Wheeler? We could use Holt at third until we found someone else. But I wouldn't want Sandoval if I were the Mets. So I think it would have to be a combination of players to possibly help the Mets in several areas. I think they are interested in a shortstop. I do not think Marerro has shown enough as a hitter to interest the Mets, but what about Hernandez? He hit real well in AA and has started well in AAA. Granted it would be a gamble for the Mets to play a shortstop who has only a few at bats at AAA in the middle of a pennant race, but how much worse than the guy they are using now could he be? The Mets back up outfielders have done poorly. Would they be interested in one of De Aza or Nava and one of Victorino or Castillo as potential upgrades? So Hernandez, De Aza or Nava, and Victorino or Castillo for Wheeler. I am not sure that is enough , but I would sure be asking the Mets what it would take. Getting Wheeler wouldn't solve all the Red Sox issues, but it would be one more option to help the rotation. Mets won't take on big contracts. You won't want to hear this, but my guess is that the Mets would be most interested in Holt and would likely offer prospects
|
|
|
Post by arzjake on Jul 20, 2015 23:13:21 GMT -5
I said it once I'll say it again, call LA, Sandoval and Koji for Etheir ?
Dodgers will make a move..
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 21, 2015 5:47:58 GMT -5
I said it once I'll say it again, call LA, Sandoval and Koji for Etheir ? Dodgers will make a move.. The Dodgers have too many 3B as it is (Turner, Guerrero, Olivera) and don't want another.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jul 21, 2015 7:14:24 GMT -5
Uehara + Tazawa for Giolito. Wishful thinking.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Jul 21, 2015 10:57:32 GMT -5
Lots of wishful thinking in this thread (it's the place for it, right?).
Here are my thoughts:
1. Put up the "For Sale" sign. Looks as if it will be a buyers market, though, especially if DET pulls the plug.
2. My sale priorities:
A. Victorino - get someone, anyone to assume the remaining $4+mm and open up RF for JBJ. I'm not looking for any prospect return.
B. Uehara - he's wasted on this team and he's a tradeable commodity. He'll save the team $3mm this year and $9mm next year. Get back a B+ prospect, if possible. I'd also be listening on Ogando and Tazawa but trading Koji is my first pitching priority.
C. Holt - his value will likely never be higher as a 27YO controlled player. Lots of potential playoff teams (PIT, NYM for two) need a guy like this and he could bring back real value. Ben has to maximize these opportunities.
D. Napoli/Breslow/Masterson - these are likely August deals; first, see if anyone claims them through waivers (and if they do, let them go), otherwise, try to get some, any salary relief from trading them. Prospect return is not the point here either. The Red Sox need to save approx. $10mm to get under the luxury tax threshold. Trading Victorino and Uehara would save about $7mm, so the goal is $3mm of salary relief from these three.
E. Buchholz - he's not likely to be traded during this season, but if healthy I would also put him through waivers in August and see if a deal can be struck with the claiming team (I assume he will be claimed).
F. De Aza - he doesn't cost much and he doesn't have a lot of value, so it's not likely to matter but I'd look to trade him sooner than later, if only to clear more spots in the outfield. A better prospect than Joe Gunkel would be the goal.
G. Anyone else - I'm listening on everyone but Rodriguez, Betts, Swihart and Bogaerts. Yes, that means Porcello, Pedroia, Ortiz, Ramirez and Sandoval. I'll worry about the no-trade clauses later.
I'm not buying until the offseason, unless the price is right; there's no reason to reach now for value since the season is (again) a washout and there will be more buying opportunities in the offseason.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Jul 21, 2015 11:00:13 GMT -5
“@jaysonst: Asked an exec of a team interested in Johnny Cueto if they saw anything to be alarmed about in his start Sunday. He said: "Yes. Everything."”
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Jul 21, 2015 11:18:15 GMT -5
Good write up AmFox.
Someone like De Aza could be paired with Holt if KC wants a cheap option to replace Gordon. I'm still waiting on the compensation picks to be assigned and hope some of the bigger starter pitchers are traded so we wouldn't lose a pick if we sign one. I was also thinking Buch could be an Aug trade.
How far would you be willing to go to trade Sandaval? Any contracts match up? Would he and Shields be a wash? Melvin Upton? If Cincy wanted to get out of Votto long term bad enough would you trade Panda for Votto? 8 years and just under $200 million but he's going to hit and get on base. Maybe something like the Fielder- Kinsler trade where Detroit is paying $30 million over the last 5 years.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Jul 21, 2015 11:26:55 GMT -5
Oh mets
“@jcrasnick: A MLB exec on #Mets: "They want a middle of the order OF bat who isn't going to cost anything -- in terms of dollars or players.''”
|
|
|
Post by Costigan on Jul 21, 2015 11:32:36 GMT -5
I think that a Holt and Victorino (or De Aza) deal to the Mets would be something that could match up very well. Holt could play third and provide relief all over the diamond and Victorino could be a welcome platoon for Granderson. Mayberry hasn't done anything as a backup outfielder for them and Cuddyer is likely headed back to the DL, so you'd have to imagine they would have some interest in Shane.
As JDB mentions KC could be an interested party for Holt and Pittsburgh could be now that Mercer is out for 6 weeks.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jul 21, 2015 11:43:21 GMT -5
I basically agree with Amfox on the trade deadline strategy. I'd insert a letter probably right above Buch for Castillo. I think for 2016 I'd be willing to live or die with Betts/Bradley as the CF/RF, and I'd be somewhat relieved to get his salary back while having 2 similar-ish players pre-arbitration.
I do like the idea of packaging Uehara and Tazawa together. I realize this rarely happens, and maybe it's just salesmanship on my side, but I think it would make sense for buying clubs to include real value. They are two consistently top 20 relievers over the last three years, in any way you cut the data. They both have another year of team control, and they would turn any bullpen that has a late inning reliever from an average one to a great one. High end relievers value jumps up a notch once you get into the postseason also. Even the Royals with their stacked bullpen would happily find a spot in their bullpen for Tazawa with his current contract (although not give up prospect value for him). One downside to this strategy, is that there seems to be plenty of relief options on the trade market, devaluing value on our side.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jul 21, 2015 11:46:14 GMT -5
Oh mets “@jcrasnick: A MLB exec on #Mets: "They want a middle of the order OF bat who isn't going to cost anything -- in terms of dollars or players.''” Mets have seemed to be pretty reluctant the last couple of years to make any big moves, regarding external signings or trading for MLB talent. Or maybe it is that they are content to develop from within.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,921
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Jul 21, 2015 11:53:40 GMT -5
I wish they were willing to eat Victorino's remaining salary. We need to get under the luxury tax threshold IMO, because we aren't going to be able to do anything this winter if we don't.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Jul 21, 2015 12:14:59 GMT -5
Oh mets “@jcrasnick: A MLB exec on #Mets: "They want a middle of the order OF bat who isn't going to cost anything -- in terms of dollars or players.''” Mets have seemed to be pretty reluctant the last couple of years to make any big moves, regarding external signings or trading for MLB talent. Or maybe it is that they are content to develop from within. I am very familiar with the Mets situation and the quote is absolutely reflective of the Wilpons' thinking. It is all about money with them, which is why a Holt for a prospect such as Michael Fulmer or (gasp) Gavin Cecchini could work.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Jul 21, 2015 12:50:17 GMT -5
Someone like De Aza could be paired with Holt if KC wants a cheap option to replace Gordon. I'm still waiting on the compensation picks to be assigned and hope some of the bigger starter pitchers are traded so we wouldn't lose a pick if we sign one. I was also thinking Buch could be an Aug trade. How far would you be willing to go to trade Sandaval? Any contracts match up? Would he and Shields be a wash? Melvin Upton? If Cincy wanted to get out of Votto long term bad enough would you trade Panda for Votto? 8 years and just under $200 million but he's going to hit and get on base. Maybe something like the Fielder- Kinsler trade where Detroit is paying $30 million over the last 5 years. I could see a De Aza/Holt trade to the Mets for Fulmer or Cecchini and a low-level prospect or to KC for Finnegan or Manaea (don't think KC would do Manaea, though) and a low-level prospect. I simply don't see Sandoval (or Hanley) being traded at this time. I think you have to give him the offseason to reset and see how he bounces back in 2016. If by this time next year, it is clear that there's no value in Sandoval, then you consider it but not before.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 21, 2015 13:43:04 GMT -5
I would totally buy on Finnegan right now. Three months ago, if you'd have suggested Holt for Finnegan, the response would've been "hahahaha, that's insane!" I know that a lot can change in three months, but you have to think a correction is coming for both players. Also, Finnegan getting bounced around like he has probably isn't doing any favors. His postseason last year really made for some unrealistic expectations. He's a 2014 draftee, meeting resistance in the major leagues shouldn't be seen as a negative yet.
|
|
|
Post by arzjake on Jul 21, 2015 14:09:52 GMT -5
I said it once I'll say it again, call LA, Sandoval and Koji for Etheir ? Dodgers will make a move.. The Dodgers have too many 3B as it is (Turner, Guerrero, Olivera) and don't want another. All those guys play multiple positions and suck! LOL I am a firm believer that the Ownership group pushed for Sandoval due to NESN. Time again for Ben to mop up for the Brass
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jul 21, 2015 14:14:20 GMT -5
Mets have seemed to be pretty reluctant the last couple of years to make any big moves, regarding external signings or trading for MLB talent. Or maybe it is that they are content to develop from within. I am very familiar with the Mets situation and the quote is absolutely reflective of the Wilpons' thinking. It is all about money with them, which is why a Holt for a prospect such as Michael Fulmer or (gasp) Gavin Cecchini could work. I don't know much about these players, but from what I dug up it seems like an underwhelming return. Both of them were rated as 45 FV prospects by MLB.COM and Fangraphs, but I believe these are preseason rankings. I think both saw their value rise since, and Cecchinni was on Sickles midseason 75 list at 69. But still, it sounds like Cecchinni's ceiling is the equivalent of what Holt is now, with more bat and less defense. While I agree we should try to sell high on Holt, I wouldn't move him for one of those guys.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jul 21, 2015 14:19:48 GMT -5
The Dodgers have too many 3B as it is (Turner, Guerrero, Olivera) and don't want another. All those guys play multiple positions and suck! LOL Instead they would prefer a player who plays one position, is owed $75.4M, and sucks... I am a firm believer that the Ownership group pushed for Sandoval due to NESN. Time again for Ben to mop up for the Brass Boy have we been over this before. If you already read what was previously written about this subject, I doubt very much I could change your opinion. There is more evidence that aliens inhabit area 51 than there is supporting your belief.
|
|
|
Post by arzjake on Jul 21, 2015 14:21:29 GMT -5
Good write up AmFox. Someone like De Aza could be paired with Holt if KC wants a cheap option to replace Gordon. I'm still waiting on the compensation picks to be assigned and hope some of the bigger starter pitchers are traded so we wouldn't lose a pick if we sign one. I was also thinking Buch could be an Aug trade. How far would you be willing to go to trade Sandaval? Any contracts match up? Would he and Shields be a wash? Melvin Upton? If Cincy wanted to get out of Votto long term bad enough would you trade Panda for Votto? 8 years and just under $200 million but he's going to hit and get on base. Maybe something like the Fielder- Kinsler trade where Detroit is paying $30 million over the last 5 years. And everyone thinks the Panda deal is an albatross until you look at the Votto deal. No way brother, age 31. M.Upton is not a good offensive player the OBPCT is a joke for a player owed 30 mill. Shields would be interesting if you did not already commit to Porcello
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 21, 2015 14:22:24 GMT -5
The Dodgers have too many 3B as it is (Turner, Guerrero, Olivera) and don't want another. All those guys play multiple positions and suck! LOL I am a firm believer that the Ownership group pushed for Sandoval due to NESN. Time again for Ben to mop up for the Brass Can't tell how serious you're being, but Turner's been hitting in the 3-hole for them and they have some pretty good hitters, and Guerrero has some serious power if nothing else. And really? Due to NESN? Not because they thought he'd be a good player? Nobody gives a damn if Sandoval is "the Panda" when the team sucks, so unless they actually thought he would play well (as his track record suggested he would) then what purpose would it serve?
|
|
|
Post by arzjake on Jul 21, 2015 14:28:14 GMT -5
All those guys play multiple positions and suck! LOL Instead they would prefer a player who plays one position, is owed $75.4M, and sucks... I am a firm believer that the Ownership group pushed for Sandoval due to NESN. Time again for Ben to mop up for the Brass Boy have we been over this before. If you already read what was previously written about this subject, I doubt very much I could change your opinion. There is more evidence that aliens inhabit area 51 than there is supporting your belief. If you think NESN ratings or television revenue are not factored in on high profile player signings, you keep drinking the kool aid. Of course it is. To what percentage we'll never know. Read Francona's book about Werner, or have we gone over that before as well? 75 million in BB money not to factor in a big market club is peanuts. Sandoval has value.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 21, 2015 14:34:49 GMT -5
You really think people are watching NESN now because of Sandoval? I bet a lot more people would be watching if they won more. I bet that was the strategy.
Also, the team admitted that the "need sexy players" strategy was completely wrong. They needed a 3B who wasn't named Middlebrooks and signed the best one on the free agent market.
|
|
|