|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on May 6, 2022 9:37:51 GMT -5
If you look at the fangraphs write up on Lee. Yes the hit tool is 40 but he also has a lot of power. He needs to shorten up his swing for sure since he strikes out a lot. He has a better shot to make an actual impact in the majors than Winckowski. You're more or less putting out there a best case scenario with a fringe pitching prospect that is more projectable as a long reliever if things break decent. I like the player but not for Benny. Right now Lee currently projects to make no impact in the majors and winckowski will at least be a reliever, so no he absolutely does not have a better shot at making an actual impact in the majors than winckowski does “Fringe pitching prospect” lol. He’s #12 in the system, I guess those below him have no shot at all if they aren’t better than the fringe prospect. If we're looking at rankings on say fangraphs Lee is projected as a 45 to Winckowskis 40. So yes by those numbers he is a fringe prospect. But then again Lee isn't much better. The return was underwhelming. But lets see what happens this year. Wouldn't be the first time someone took a jump.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,227
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on May 6, 2022 9:38:42 GMT -5
Right now Lee currently projects to make no impact in the majors and winckowski will at least be a reliever, so no he absolutely does not have a better shot at making an actual impact in the majors than winckowski does “Fringe pitching prospect” lol. He’s #12 in the system, I guess those below him have no shot at all if they aren’t better than the fringe prospect. If we're looking at rankings on say fangraphs Lee is projected as a 45 to Winckowskis 40. So yes by those numbers he is a fringe prospect. But then again Lee isn't much better. The return was underwhelming. But lets see what happens this year. Wouldn't be the first time someone took a jump. Where’s he ranked here, on the website that specializes in exclusively Red Sox prospects? He’s Ahead of a lot of guys who I doubt you’d describe as fringy This reminds me of when ppl told me winckowski wouldn’t be protected from the Rule 5. It’s crazy talk. Anyway I apologize for hijacking the discussion in this thread. That’s my B, I realized I got this wildly off topic
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on May 6, 2022 9:42:31 GMT -5
We can agree to disagree. We're talking about a potential platoon outfielder vs a reliever. The fact we are debating about this shows that the main piece in the trade was not worth Benny. Regardless of it being Winckowski or Lee. I love how you give Khalil Lee his absolute best possible outcome while calling Winckowski a fringe prospect (#12 in the system lol) and a reliever lol And again if Winckowski is a backend starter the trade is a W. You can agree to disagree if you’d like but 6 years of a SP in this league is the most valuable commodity you can have. Certainly beats 2 years of an average corner OF with limited pop I'm not sure how you aren't doing the same with Winckowski. You're assuming he's going to be a stable back end starter for 6 years. There have also been plenty of top 10 prospects who have flamed out so calling #12 fringe is acceptable if its true. Which for right now it is.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on May 6, 2022 9:42:52 GMT -5
Rather having Lee over Winckowski at this point is an insane take. His hit tool is like a 40 if I’m being generous. He’s got zero shot at sticking if it doesn’t improve. It’s the exact opposite of a carrying tool, it’s an anchor tool. He’s striking out ~40 % of the time this year after being 30% last year in AAA and 72% of the time in the majors Winckowski looks like a back end starter. If he becomes a member of the rotation the deal is a W Not really. He's more projectable and has a sky high ceiling. Will he get there? Who the hell knows. If Winckowski becomes a back end starter with 6 years of control the Benny deal is still a terrible trade. You need multiple hits at this point to make it worth it. Basically Winckowski and Freddy Valdez have to become MLB regulars in order for it to make sense. His hit tool makes him projected to be anywhere from solid player to worthless. Was just a ridiculous trade to make. This is bananas. Benintendi was an utterly replaceable league average outfielder. In fact, they did replace him perfectly well with a $3 million free agent. In what world is it a "terrible trade" to give up two years of Benintendi for 6 cost-controlled years of a backend starter?
And plus, you're acting like Franchy isn't about to explode into a .900 OPS hitter...
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,227
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on May 6, 2022 9:44:42 GMT -5
I love how you give Khalil Lee his absolute best possible outcome while calling Winckowski a fringe prospect (#12 in the system lol) and a reliever lol And again if Winckowski is a backend starter the trade is a W. You can agree to disagree if you’d like but 6 years of a SP in this league is the most valuable commodity you can have. Certainly beats 2 years of an average corner OF with limited pop I'm not sure how you aren't doing the same with Winckowski. You're assuming he's going to be a stable back end starter for 6 years. There have also been plenty of top 10 prospects who have flamed out so calling #12 fringe is acceptable if its true. Which for right now it is. Cedanne Rafaela- fringe prospect Is that something you believe? (Btw I bet he has a better chance of being an established big leaguer than Khalil Lee) I also did not assume that of winckowski. I even mentioned a couple posts ago he is at the very least going to be a reliever
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on May 6, 2022 9:50:07 GMT -5
I'm not sure how you aren't doing the same with Winckowski. You're assuming he's going to be a stable back end starter for 6 years. There have also been plenty of top 10 prospects who have flamed out so calling #12 fringe is acceptable if its true. Which for right now it is. Cedanne Rafaela- fringe prospect Is that something you believe? (Btw I bet he has a better chance of being an established big leaguer than Khalil Lee) Rafaela is going to be higher on the next one. That I'm pretty sure of. Hes also 21 years old so this is usually the time when they take that next step. Would you consider Downs a fringe prospect? Crawford? McDonough? I would.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,227
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on May 6, 2022 9:51:23 GMT -5
Cedanne Rafaela- fringe prospect Is that something you believe? (Btw I bet he has a better chance of being an established big leaguer than Khalil Lee) Rafaela is going to be higher on the next one. That I'm pretty sure of. Hes also 21 years old so this is usually the time when they take that next step. Would you consider Downs a fringe prospect? Crawford? McDonough? I would. I absolutely wouldn’t consider Downs a fringe prospect, especially the way he’s hitting now.
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on May 6, 2022 9:52:19 GMT -5
Not really. He's more projectable and has a sky high ceiling. Will he get there? Who the hell knows. If Winckowski becomes a back end starter with 6 years of control the Benny deal is still a terrible trade. You need multiple hits at this point to make it worth it. Basically Winckowski and Freddy Valdez have to become MLB regulars in order for it to make sense. His hit tool makes him projected to be anywhere from solid player to worthless. Was just a ridiculous trade to make. This is bananas. Benintendi was an utterly replaceable league average outfielder. In fact, they did replace him perfectly well with a $3 million free agent. In what world is it a "terrible trade" to give up two years of Benintendi for 6 cost-controlled years of a backend starter?
And plus, you're acting like Franchy isn't about to explode into a .900 OPS hitter...
Because penciling Winckowski in as a cost controlled starter is bananas homerism at its finest. Sure it could happen but its more likely than not going to play out that way. Franchy I know you're joking about lol. He's awful.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,227
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on May 6, 2022 9:53:55 GMT -5
This is bananas. Benintendi was an utterly replaceable league average outfielder. In fact, they did replace him perfectly well with a $3 million free agent. In what world is it a "terrible trade" to give up two years of Benintendi for 6 cost-controlled years of a backend starter?
And plus, you're acting like Franchy isn't about to explode into a .900 OPS hitter...
Because penciling Winckowski in as a cost controlled starter is bananas homerism at its finest. Sure it could happen but its more likely than not going to play out that way. Franchy I know you're joking about lol. He's awful. Pssst nobody is doing that, i am just saying he’s better than Khalil Lee and that if he does become a starter that’s more valuable than 2 years of an average outfielder. Stop putting words in my mouth.
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on May 6, 2022 9:54:39 GMT -5
Rafaela is going to be higher on the next one. That I'm pretty sure of. Hes also 21 years old so this is usually the time when they take that next step. Would you consider Downs a fringe prospect? Crawford? McDonough? I would. I absolutely wouldn’t consider Downs a fringe prospect, especially the way he’s hitting now. No ones stock dropped further last year and he regressed pretty bad. We all want this team to succeed but we have to acknowledge missteps in the building of this club and the future of it. Its tough to write off players 23-26 years old thus we're sitting here talking about hypotheticals.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,227
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on May 6, 2022 9:56:07 GMT -5
I absolutely wouldn’t consider Downs a fringe prospect, especially the way he’s hitting now. No ones stock dropped further last year and he regressed pretty bad. We all want this team to succeed but we have to acknowledge missteps in the building of this club and the future of it. Its tough to write off players 23-26 years old thus we're sitting here talking about hypotheticals. He’s a 23 YO SS with a good glove OPSing .838 and he’s the fringe guy, not your 24 YO OF OPSing .478 and striking out 40% of the time lol. Got it
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on May 6, 2022 9:56:32 GMT -5
Because penciling Winckowski in as a cost controlled starter is bananas homerism at its finest. Sure it could happen but its more likely than not going to play out that way. Franchy I know you're joking about lol. He's awful. Pssst nobody is doing that, i am just saying he’s better than Khalil Lee and that if he does become a starter that’s more valuable than 2 years of an average outfielder. Stop putting words in my mouth. IF he does become a starter then sure. But I'm just not sure how likely that is.
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on May 6, 2022 9:57:28 GMT -5
No ones stock dropped further last year and he regressed pretty bad. We all want this team to succeed but we have to acknowledge missteps in the building of this club and the future of it. Its tough to write off players 23-26 years old thus we're sitting here talking about hypotheticals. He’s a 23 YO SS with a good glove OPSing .830 and he’s the fringe guy, not your 24 YO OF OPSing .478 and striking out 40% of the time lol. Got it I also said Lees best outcome was a platoon outfielder...never said that about Downs best outcome. Like you said to me, stop putting words in my mouth. I said I would have preferred Lee due to his ceiling over Winckowski. Thats an opinion. Not necessarily a wrong one or right one. Its an opinion. Would I rather have Lees best outcome than Downs? Absolutely not. Downs best outcome is a regular INF in the majors. But right now yeah he's fringe because his stock dropped like a stone. Hence is why he's 16.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on May 6, 2022 9:57:51 GMT -5
How is this about extensions, again?
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on May 6, 2022 10:00:18 GMT -5
This is bananas. Benintendi was an utterly replaceable league average outfielder. In fact, they did replace him perfectly well with a $3 million free agent. In what world is it a "terrible trade" to give up two years of Benintendi for 6 cost-controlled years of a backend starter?
And plus, you're acting like Franchy isn't about to explode into a .900 OPS hitter...
Because penciling Winckowski in as a cost controlled starter is bananas homerism at its finest. Sure it could happen but its more likely than not going to play out that way. Franchy I know you're joking about lol. He's awful. You are the one who said that the trade would be terrible in the event that Winckowski reaches his ceiling as a backend starter. If you're acknowledging that you were wrong to say that, then okay.
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on May 6, 2022 10:02:59 GMT -5
Because penciling Winckowski in as a cost controlled starter is bananas homerism at its finest. Sure it could happen but its more likely than not going to play out that way. Franchy I know you're joking about lol. He's awful. You are the one who said that the trade would be terrible in the event that Winckowski reaches his ceiling as a backend starter. If you're acknowledging that you were wrong to say that, then okay. Let me clarify. If he reaches the majors and is a productive starter for 6 years then yes the trade is fine. The whole point is figuring out where he's likely to place. If you're debating a bullpen piece vs a platoon outfielder as the headline of the deal then its a bad trade. If Lee goes off and becomes a major league starting outfielder or if Winckowski is a backend starter it changes the variables and dynamics of the discussion. I feel like Lee is more likely to be a 4th outfielder in the majors than Winckowski does in sticking in a major league rotation.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on May 6, 2022 10:03:19 GMT -5
Francisco Lindor is one year younger than Bogaerts. He is on the first year of a 10-year, $341m contract.
Bogaerts is currently producing at least as well or better than Lindor (and well out-producing Correa) and when Xander ages, he will have the bat to play 3B or LF, which Lindor will not have.
So do you think Bogie's agent is going to consider one year less than Lindor (through the same age 38 season) and $41m less a "bonkers" request? I sure don't think he will. (I'd compare him to Correa's long-term deal but nobody wanted to touch that idea with a 10' pole.)
It's incredible to me how low many Sox fans view Bogaerts, a homegrown guy who has done nothing but produce ever since he stepped foot on American soil and who is already in his third year of an incredibly team-friendly deal that he fought his agent to sign. As if that wasn't enough, he is a team leader and one of the few true gentleman in the game (how do Lindor or Correa score on that front?).
But sure, let's low-ball him again and see how easy it is to replace him.
Correa seems to have a reputation as a nice guy and good teammate? Honestly, I can really never remember why I'm supposed to think he's a jerk...
Anyway, IMO Lindor is overpaid and Correa is underpaid and I would love to keep Bogaerts and if it were up to me I'd give him 6/170 or something - I don't think that would be a low ball offer - but a 9 year deal covers ages 30-38, and paying $33 million/year for a guy in his late 30s has 'albatross' written all over it.
And I am on the record saying that the Red Sox should offer to sign Bogaerts to the exact same terms Boras got for his superstar client Correa. I don't see how he could say no to that.
I think Correa is a jerk because of the way he reacted to the Astros cheating scandal blowing up -- by lashing out at the media (and by extension the fans) for asking him to even pretend to be accountable or contrite for his actions. It's the exact opposite of how AC has handled it, and for a good reason: AC was actually punished and wanted a second chance; Correa was not punished and knew he would get paid either way and chose to go macho and petulant. Correa's getting paid short-term but his DGAF attitude is what has kept him from getting a Lindor or Tatis Jr. deal. You pay a guy that much for that long and he's the de facto face of your franchise and no one wants him as the face of their franchise. The exact opposite of Xander, as well.
I agree that it makes better economic sense to offer Xander a Correa/Twins deal (maybe without an opt-out every year) -- I was screaming for Chaim to give Scherzer or Verlander something along the same lines -- but I'm also willing to pay him some sort of 'face of the franchise' premium because he's a rare breed in that regard. That doesn't mean I'm eager to offer him 9/$300m -- I set the poll numbers at what I thought would be market rate, not at what I would be willing to pay guys. I didn't vote yes for every guy.
At some point, virtually every long-term deal for a star becomes an albatross. So, you have a choice if you're Chaim: you either go full Tampa-on-the-Charles and never pay anyone or you choose your albatross contracts carefully. If I'm making the offers, I'd want the albatrosses to go to high-character guys and to guys with durable tools. Mookie's value is dependent on speed and athleticism and his contract will be an albatross for many years as injuries and age catch up to him. Xander and Raffy carry heavy duty hit tools that should age better, even if they have to move down the defensive spectrum (Albert Pujols and Miggy Cabrera are cautionary tales but they were paid through age 41 and 40, respectively). I would take my chances keeping them in red stirrups for a long time.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 6, 2022 10:04:52 GMT -5
Please move on from the Benintendi trade rehashing. Future posts on that topic will be deleted.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on May 6, 2022 10:43:32 GMT -5
Eovaldi is starting to feel like a tough choice: sinking big money/length into him is a huge risk, but he also feels increasingly indispensable. I suspect unless they wildly overpay he’ll test the market… and then likely get wildly overpaid. But, man, losing him will be a bear. I mean, truthfully, I think next year they have one trustworthy starter, Whitlock. They can likely fill out a few slots with Wacha-types, and if they get lucky Sale has something left… and we can hope Houck reaches his potential… but oof. I’d love to have Nate to count on. Last time around, Nate reportedly only accepted offers from Boston, where he had just become a folk hero, and Houston, his home town. Why should it be so different this time around? I think he'll listen more widely, given that it's likely his last shot at (more) big money, but I think he's a prime candidate for a(n) (adopted) hometown discount (in spring training he spoke about how he bought a house in Weston and how much he and his wife love living in Boston).
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on May 6, 2022 10:50:02 GMT -5
Eovaldi is starting to feel like a tough choice: sinking big money/length into him is a huge risk, but he also feels increasingly indispensable. I suspect unless they wildly overpay he’ll test the market… and then likely get wildly overpaid. But, man, losing him will be a bear. I mean, truthfully, I think next year they have one trustworthy starter, Whitlock. They can likely fill out a few slots with Wacha-types, and if they get lucky Sale has something left… and we can hope Houck reaches his potential… but oof. I’d love to have Nate to count on. Last time around, Nate reportedly only accepted offers from Boston, where he had just become a folk hero, and Houston, his home town. Why should it be so different this time around? I think he'll listen more widely, given that it's likely his last shot at (more) big money, but I think he's a prime candidate for a(n) (adopted) hometown discount (in spring training he spoke about how he bought a house in Weston and how much he and his wife love living in Boston). I'd like him back but I doubt Bloom gives him the term or money close to what he can get on the market. Its going to need to be a steep discount. Then again I flamed the guy for picking Wacha and Hill over Erod and so far thats working well. So he'll probably replace Nate with a guy on a 1 year deal or perhaps Paxton is that replacement already...they do have that option on him.
|
|
|
Post by bosoxnation on May 6, 2022 11:46:56 GMT -5
This poll makes me sick. Only 7 of us think X should be resigned. Vazquez with 11 votes, Eovaldi with 20. X with 7!!!! i’m happy i’m one of the 7 because at the end of the day we’re going to have so much available money slightly over paying for our home grown superstar who has been insanely consistent and took a team friendly deal while being in the top 15 in MVP like every year the last 5 years and our best hitter so far this season. It’s a no brainer. You pay for expected future performance (not the past)! What position will X play. His range at SS is decreasing and if he is unwilling to change positions….. If X wants to get paid, he needs to play where the guy with the checkbook asks him to play! If you think for 1 second he isn’t going to get paid somewhere else you’re not being honest with yourself. He’s by far the most consistent hitter on on this team and losing JD and not paying this man is going to make our offense even worse if that’s possible. 4 years 90 million is what we offered him. I would spit on Blooms face, who I absolutely trust if I was him as the face of the franchise. Maybe if he’s offered 30+ mill a year like he deserves he will be willing to change positions. I’ve watched almost every game this year and his defense isn’t keeping us from winning i’ll tell you that right now.
|
|
|
Post by prospectlove on May 7, 2022 11:05:42 GMT -5
At this point how do you seriously not do the following:
Trade Xander at deadline for atleast 1 player who can add to your system or team next year.
Trade euvaldi Trade Vasquez ( or play another catcher) Trade jd Enter off season with idea you will either sign devers by Nov or trade him by December
This team is horrible with a capital H
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on May 7, 2022 18:09:01 GMT -5
Getting to the point I'd pay xandy whatever he wants at 6-8 years. We all know he's going to have to move off ss but he's such a good hitter I think his bat would play anywhere. It's early and yes Devers defense looks like it's improving but his bat so far hasn't to what I'd expected. I don't want to lose Devers but he aint worth 300 mil in my mind. 8 years 240 mil is what I'd offer. If he doesn't take it then I'd deal him. They have plenty of flexibility with the payroll and can still field a good team paying xandy and Devers 60-70 mil a year and if they lose one or both I really don't see anyone on the team right now who can be part of the next core. Bloom needs to get serious about negotiating with the two of them.
|
|
|
Post by redsox43 on May 7, 2022 19:03:16 GMT -5
At this point how do you seriously not do the following: Trade Xander at deadline for atleast 1 player who can add to your system or team next year. Trade euvaldi Trade Vasquez ( or play another catcher) Trade jd Enter off season with idea you will either sign devers by Nov or trade him by December This team is horrible with a capital H If you know you can't sign Devers (or you think he's not worth what he wants), the time to trade Devers is in July (or before). The Sox probably know what they want to do with Devers at this point.
|
|
|
Post by redsox43 on May 16, 2022 2:58:58 GMT -5
It is fair to question who you CAN extend versus who you can't. Xander is asking for a fair deal, if you read between the lines that could mean a number of things. (I think) he's willing to work with the organization to see what that means and has seemingly a attachment to the Sox (obviously 2X Red Sox champ). Devers has told everyone that he knows how much he's worth. He has also told everyone he doesn't want to be compared to anyone against his position. He knows what he should get in a open market. This is a mercenary kind of approach (imo). I think it's completely fair to kind of assume Xander is more (extendable, if that's a word).
|
|