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 telson13 on Dec 13, 2016 23:32:15 GMT -5
Well, not exactly. He was just coming off a solid high-A offensive season and was considered a guy with some moderate offensive upside and solid if unspectacular defense. I guess maybe overall value-wise, but probably a wider ceiling-floor range. I think Elias could bring *someone* marginally valuable back, maybe a Diaz-like arm in rookie ball. SD has zero MLB-caliber starters, so... Wild speculation here but there's pretty much zero chance DD will deal with San Diego. So far, it looks like they are being blackballed. Also, the year before Boston got Hernandez as the PTBNL, he was a Cubs low teens ranked prospect in what was a strong system. Yeah, that was meant to be tongue-in-cheek. I don't see many teams interested in helping SD out of their hole. As for Hernandez, that was my point, even if I didn't convey it that clearly. He'd have been an 8-10 guy in many systems (or top-5 in the Angels'!) projecting as pretty much what he's been: a useful utility player who could be a 2nd-division starter. So I think Elias can bring back a similarly valuable player. I think Hernandez at that time had more value than Marrero now simply in that Marrero, now, is pretty clearly a AAAA player. But for teams with an MLB-now depth need, Marrero might be the preferable guy. I hope the Sox look for upside over experience/MLB proximity if/when they trade Elias.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 13, 2016 23:36:52 GMT -5
And as for ERod, I have no clue as to why anyone would want to trade him. He's still extremely young, has been essentially a #3-caliber guy (and a 2 when healthy), and he costs very little. He's also going to be undervalued based on his injury last year and limited experience. Plus, although I think Owens/Johnson will both be at least serviceable MLB pitchers at some point, I wouldn't create mores holes in the rotation with the hopes that either will do so this year.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,962
|
Post by jimoh on Dec 14, 2016 6:38:09 GMT -5
And as for ERod, I have no clue as to why anyone would want to trade him. He's still extremely young, has been essentially a #3-caliber guy (and a 2 when healthy), and he costs very little. He's also going to be undervalued based on his injury last year and limited experience. Plus, although I think Owens/Johnson will both be at least serviceable MLB pitchers at some point, I wouldn't create mores holes in the rotation with the hopes that either will do so this year. I don't mean to pick on this post in general, which is nuanced and fine, but two things I don't understand about most discussions of trades: 1) Most people think deciding to trade a guy is like deciding what old shirts to give to the thrift shop: you only give away things that you have no use for. Thus many posts say "I wouldn't trade X; he doesn't stink." But you're not giving guys away, you're exchanging them for something you might get more use out of. 2) People seem to think that other team will always overvalue superficial factors that might seem to reduce a player's value, but (allegedly) do not really reduce his value. This might have been true long ago, but don't other teams have good people who are as smart as people on this site? Don't they have tremendous access to information?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 14, 2016 6:50:43 GMT -5
Wild speculation here but there's pretty much zero chance DD will deal with San Diego. So far, it looks like they are being blackballed. Also, the year before Boston got Hernandez as the PTBNL, he was a Cubs low teens ranked prospect in what was a strong system. Yeah, that was meant to be tongue-in-cheek. I don't see many teams interested in helping SD out of their hole. As for Hernandez, that was my point, even if I didn't convey it that clearly. He'd have been an 8-10 guy in many systems (or top-5 in the Angels'!) projecting as pretty much what he's been: a useful utility player who could be a 2nd-division starter. So I think Elias can bring back a similarly valuable player. I think Hernandez at that time had more value than Marrero now simply in that Marrero, now, is pretty clearly a AAAA player. But for teams with an MLB-now depth need, Marrero might be the preferable guy. I hope the Sox look for upside over experience/MLB proximity if/when they trade Elias. I'm willing to make an avatar bet with anyone that Elias will be DFA'd before he's traded for anyone.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Dec 14, 2016 10:06:36 GMT -5
Marco Hernandez at the time was about as highly regarded as Deven Marrero is now, so that lines up. Well, not exactly. He was just coming off a solid high-A offensive season and was considered a guy with some moderate offensive upside and solid if unspectacular defense. I guess maybe overall value-wise, but probably a wider ceiling-floor range. I think Elias could bring *someone* marginally valuable back, maybe a Diaz-like arm in rookie ball. SD has zero MLB-caliber starters, so... If we do have all our starters is ST it's going to feel like we're the only grocery store in an apocalypse. At least a few teams out of 29 will need a starter or 2. I also don't have a problem dealing with SD as long as we can get someone we can use & give an Elias in return.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 14, 2016 12:03:43 GMT -5
I think we'd all be stunned, or at least surprised, if the trio of E-Rod, Pomeranz, and Buccholz were still on the roster come opening day. One or two of them will almost certainly be moved for prospects or guys under team control at the MLB minimum. The Sox will likely have $ to spend on an in-season acquisition if need be and still probably be able to get under $195 I wouldn't be either of these things if a trade wasn't made prior to the season. You don't give guys away just to give them away. Are we going to trade Buchholz to free up his salary so we can maybe make an in season addition to the team? An addition like that, often is used on the pitching staff so why not just have Clay in the bullpen where he can likely excel even late innings then be stretched out if you really need a starter? Would I deal him if we could get really good pitching prospects back? Sure would. Would I deal him to dump his salary? Not before the season started. You can do that mid season if you need to.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 14, 2016 12:42:11 GMT -5
I'm willing to make an avatar bet with anyone that Elias will be DFA'd before he's traded for anyone. It's not really worth an avatar bet because it's probably not a 50/50 thing and because my lack of avatar isn't worth gambling on Roenis Elias. But there's at least something like a 25% chance a team likes Elias and would trade a Grade C prospect in order to jump a bunch of other teams who have higher waiver claims. Nobody's saying he's awesome, just that there's a lot of precedence for guys in a similar situation getting traded. Again, it's hard to overstate how value-less Felix Doubront was when they dumped him. He was like Elias and adding bitching about moving to the bullpen.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 14, 2016 14:05:41 GMT -5
I'm willing to make an avatar bet with anyone that Elias will be DFA'd before he's traded for anyone. It's not really worth an avatar bet because it's probably not a 50/50 thing and because my lack of avatar isn't worth gambling on Roenis Elias. But there's at least something like a 25% chance a team likes Elias and would trade a Grade C prospect in order to jump a bunch of other teams who have higher waiver claims. Nobody's saying he's awesome, just that there's a lot of precedence for guys in a similar situation getting traded. Again, it's hard to overstate how value-less Felix Doubront was when they dumped him. He was like Elias and adding bitching about moving to the bullpen. That's pretty much exactly my stance, down to the avatar.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 14, 2016 14:22:26 GMT -5
And as for ERod, I have no clue as to why anyone would want to trade him. He's still extremely young, has been essentially a #3-caliber guy (and a 2 when healthy), and he costs very little. He's also going to be undervalued based on his injury last year and limited experience. Plus, although I think Owens/Johnson will both be at least serviceable MLB pitchers at some point, I wouldn't create mores holes in the rotation with the hopes that either will do so this year. I don't mean to pick on this post in general, which is nuanced and fine, but two things I don't understand about most discussions of trades: 1) Most people think deciding to trade a guy is like deciding what old shirts to give to the thrift shop: you only give away things that you have no use for. Thus many posts say "I wouldn't trade X; he doesn't stink." But you're not giving guys away, you're exchanging them for something you might get more use out of. 2) People seem to think that other team will always overvalue superficial factors that might seem to reduce a player's value, but (allegedly) do not really reduce his value. This might have been true long ago, but don't other teams have good people who are as smart as people on this site? Don't they have tremendous access to information? 1) I agree that, in many cases, this is true. In Rodriguez's case, I think he's exactly what the team needs (young, cost-controlled starter with significant upside who's shown long stretches of dominance). To me, it only makes sense to create holes if you are getting more value in another hole, or you have a (potentially) superior internal option. 2) I'm not sure what other people think, but you're probably not off. In those cases where something like an injury has happened, I'm sure the "risk" may be (relatively) similarly assessed analytically (since the data are what they are), but the scouting aspect may vary wildly. And the result (the risk a team is willing to take on, and what they'll offer) probably is still pretty variable. That likely limits market, which in turn, limits return and negotiating power. I do think, in general, that trade proposals on this site tend to undervalue Sox players and overvalue return, but not across the board. A quick look at the Sale thread pre-trade shows this effect, for example.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 14, 2016 14:24:28 GMT -5
I'd go back to Marlins and offer Buchholz, Elias and pay like 4-5 million of Clays salary if we could get that good young pitcher DD wanted.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 14, 2016 14:26:55 GMT -5
If the only thing preventing Buchholz-for-Castillo from the Marlins end was some combination of Roenis Elias and $4 million the deal would've been done in about 20 minutes.
Seriously, imagine this being the exchange:
Dombrowski: We really like Castillo and are looking to trade a starter. Would you do Buchholz-for-Castillo straight up? Hill: What? No. Go away. Dombrowski: We'll throw in Roenis Elias and pay $4 million of Buchholz's salary... Hill: Now we're talkin!
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 14, 2016 16:09:19 GMT -5
If the only thing preventing Buchholz-for-Castillo from the Marlins end was some combination of Roenis Elias and $4 million the deal would've been done in about 20 minutes. Seriously, imagine this being the exchange: Dombrowski: We really like Castillo and are looking to trade a starter. Would you do Buchholz-for-Castillo straight up? Hill: What? No. Go away. Dombrowski: We'll throw in Roenis Elias and pay $4 million of Buchholz's salary... Hill: Now we're talkin! I'd rip any trade that the Red Sox made for a player with no options when there's a good chance that you can't carry him on the 25 man roster. Elias pretty much moves into the group of Josh Rutledge type of players, one who will bounce around after getting DFA'd over and over again.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,911
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 14, 2016 16:49:19 GMT -5
If the only thing preventing Buchholz-for-Castillo from the Marlins end was some combination of Roenis Elias and $4 million the deal would've been done in about 20 minutes. Seriously, imagine this being the exchange: Dombrowski: We really like Castillo and are looking to trade a starter. Would you do Buchholz-for-Castillo straight up? Hill: What? No. Go away. Dombrowski: We'll throw in Roenis Elias and pay $4 million of Buchholz's salary... Hill: Now we're talkin! I'd rip any trade that the Red Sox made for a player with no options when there's a good chance that you can't carry him on the 25 man roster. Elias pretty much moves into the group of Josh Rutledge type of players, one who will bounce around after getting DFA'd over and over again. Not necessarily. His track record before 2016 was good, and if he can return to that form he'll hold down a spot in an MLB rotation. If he looks good in ST, it's likely that they deal him to a team that can put him right into their rotation, in return for an interesting mid-level prospect, someone who would slot in about 15 in our current system. He then has a shot at staying in MLB. If he doesn't look good, he's very likely to pass through waivers and add rotation depth at Pawtucket. And then he has a chance to pitch himself into the situation just described.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 14, 2016 18:26:12 GMT -5
If the only thing preventing Buchholz-for-Castillo from the Marlins end was some combination of Roenis Elias and $4 million the deal would've been done in about 20 minutes. Seriously, imagine this being the exchange: Dombrowski: We really like Castillo and are looking to trade a starter. Would you do Buchholz-for-Castillo straight up? Hill: What? No. Go away. Dombrowski: We'll throw in Roenis Elias and pay $4 million of Buchholz's salary... Hill: Now we're talkin! From what I've heard they are more in the call around and see what we can get mode. I'm just assuming they might not have had follow up talks yet. In this market I can see DD playing hardball for a bit seeing if a team will bite. Pay all or most of his salary and send us a good prospect. Then if that doesn't happen doing what must be done to move Buchholz if that's the guy he thinks needs to go. You've said it yourself DD like simple trades. A straight one for one is a very simple trade. Seems to be what he's trying to do with Buchholz. When I hear about a guy like Castillo coming back in a Buchholz trade, I'm hoping something can make that happen. I just want to see DD get someone to overpay us, like he's been doing in some past trades.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 15, 2016 11:01:15 GMT -5
I'd rip any trade that the Red Sox made for a player with no options when there's a good chance that you can't carry him on the 25 man roster. Elias pretty much moves into the group of Josh Rutledge type of players, one who will bounce around after getting DFA'd over and over again. Not necessarily. His track record before 2016 was good, and if he can return to that form he'll hold down a spot in an MLB rotation. If he looks good in ST, it's likely that they deal him to a team that can put him right into their rotation, in return for an interesting mid-level prospect, someone who would slot in about 15 in our current system. He then has a shot at staying in MLB. If he doesn't look good, he's very likely to pass through waivers and add rotation depth at Pawtucket. And then he has a chance to pitch himself into the situation just described. Agreed. And looking at the Marlins bullpen at least, if not their rotation, it's hard to say that they don't have room for Elias. I really don't get why people (or maybe it's just jimed - no disrespect meant if that's the case) are acting like Elias wasn't a serviceable MLB pitcher for two years in Seattle.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 15, 2016 12:38:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Dec 15, 2016 13:39:03 GMT -5
I'd rip any trade that the Red Sox made for a player with no options when there's a good chance that you can't carry him on the 25 man roster. Elias pretty much moves into the group of Josh Rutledge type of players, one who will bounce around after getting DFA'd over and over again. Not necessarily. His track record before 2016 was good, and if he can return to that form he'll hold down a spot in an MLB rotation. If he looks good in ST, it's likely that they deal him to a team that can put him right into their rotation, in return for an interesting mid-level prospect, someone who would slot in about 15 in our current system. He then has a shot at staying in MLB. If he doesn't look good, he's very likely to pass through waivers and add rotation depth at Pawtucket. And then he has a chance to pitch himself into the situation just described. Didn't he pitch very well in Winter ball?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 15, 2016 16:34:16 GMT -5
Not necessarily. His track record before 2016 was good, and if he can return to that form he'll hold down a spot in an MLB rotation. If he looks good in ST, it's likely that they deal him to a team that can put him right into their rotation, in return for an interesting mid-level prospect, someone who would slot in about 15 in our current system. He then has a shot at staying in MLB. If he doesn't look good, he's very likely to pass through waivers and add rotation depth at Pawtucket. And then he has a chance to pitch himself into the situation just described. Agreed. And looking at the Marlins bullpen at least, if not their rotation, it's hard to say that they don't have room for Elias. I really don't get why people (or maybe it's just jimed - no disrespect meant if that's the case) are acting like Elias wasn't a serviceable MLB pitcher for two years in Seattle. It's just me. He was fine for 2 years, but he was better in 2014, regressed in 2015 and awful in 2016. Hard to think of any scenario where some team thinks he's enough of a sure thing to keep on the 25 man roster in 2017 and not want to risk him not falling to them when he goes on waivers to be willing to give up anything of value.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Mar 17, 2017 7:44:17 GMT -5
I don't know where the article is, but Farrell has been quoted in saying that Eduardo's slider has improved sighting the "shape" of the pitch this spring.
I saw him throw it this spring training and I actually agree with him. His slider looks like it could be a plus pitch now. He got a couple of swings and misses on it. It looks like it has more depth to it from the naked eye.
His development of the third pitch (the slider) is what's going to keep all our hopes alive of seeing him develop into a top of the rotation starter.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 17, 2017 10:49:45 GMT -5
Agreed. And looking at the Marlins bullpen at least, if not their rotation, it's hard to say that they don't have room for Elias. I really don't get why people (or maybe it's just jimed - no disrespect meant if that's the case) are acting like Elias wasn't a serviceable MLB pitcher for two years in Seattle. It's just me. He was fine for 2 years, but he was better in 2014, regressed in 2015 and awful in 2016. Hard to think of any scenario where some team thinks he's enough of a sure thing to keep on the 25 man roster in 2017 and not want to risk him not falling to them when he goes on waivers to be willing to give up anything of value. Elias has an option, why would he go on waivers ? That makes him all the more valuable. I wouldn't want you to lose the great Yaz pic.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 17, 2017 11:42:46 GMT -5
It's just me. He was fine for 2 years, but he was better in 2014, regressed in 2015 and awful in 2016. Hard to think of any scenario where some team thinks he's enough of a sure thing to keep on the 25 man roster in 2017 and not want to risk him not falling to them when he goes on waivers to be willing to give up anything of value. Elias has an option, why would he go on waivers ? That makes him all the more valuable. I wouldn't want you to lose the great Yaz pic. I was under the impression that he was out of options when all of that discussion was going on.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 17, 2017 22:05:32 GMT -5
Elias has an option, why would he go on waivers ? That makes him all the more valuable. I wouldn't want you to lose the great Yaz pic. I was under the impression that he was out of options when all of that discussion was going on. It was the other way around, we (meaning SP) had him as out of options until Brisox pointed out that he still had an option. After the option gurus researched it, it was changed to 1 option remaining (here, I'm sure the Sox knew).
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Oct 17, 2017 14:48:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Oct 17, 2017 15:01:54 GMT -5
Obviously a huge factor now heading into FA.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 17, 2017 17:16:38 GMT -5
*sigh*
|
|
|