|
Post by tjb21 on May 23, 2013 13:51:29 GMT -5
I can't possibly see the Sox not offering the 1 year qualifying offer to him. Even if he doesn't improve much this year it's still worth a shot next year. I also think that some team will be willing to give him big $ even off a down year. It ALWAYS happens, and usually guys who have had nowhere near a peak year like Ellsbury had get multi year $10M+ AAV deals This past offseason was very different than last year. Look how hard it was for Michael Bourn to get a contract this past offseason, and Bourn has been far more consistent player than Ellsbury. I were the Red Sox, and Ellsbury does not turn things around, I would not offer him the qualifying offer. I don't understand this logic. Please explain.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on May 15, 2013 15:21:06 GMT -5
Mid-2000'sAll-StarJonathan Papelbon Jon Lester Anibal Sanchez Hanley Ramirez Dustin Pedroia Jacoby Ellsbury Key Major LeaguerManny Delcarmen Kelly Shoppach Daniel Murphy Jed Lowrie Clay Buchholz Buchholz was an All Star in 2010 by the way and will be this year. The Sox had a great farm system in the early '80s and in the mid 2000's. This led to winning years and a WS trophy. With this current core of good prospects now, assuming most of them will reach their potential, and assuming none of them great traded (I really hope NONE are traded. I like young and great teams), they Sox could be that young and great team in two or three years. You hear talk about great young teams (Current Nationals, 2008 Rays, '95 Indians, etc.) and think of how great it would be if the Sox could be that young great team consistently making the playoffs on a low payroll, because of all the guys on rookie contracts. This could be the future lineup: CF Bradley RF Victorino/ Kalish 2B Pedroia SS Bogaerts DH Lavarnway 3B Middlebrooks LF Brentz 1B Shaw C Vazquez Cecchini, Almanzar, Swihart, and Marrero are looming. Cecchini is one of the Sox's best prospect and he could be a starting position player too, I just don't know exactly where to put him because of WMB. and rotation: LHP Lester RHP Buchholz RHP Barnes RHP Ranaudo RHP Webster LHP Owens Closer RDLR Workman, Johnson, Britton, and Kukuk are looming Thats basically 6 Starters who could be number 1-3 starters. Maybe no back-end starters. The Sox could have a GREAT young team in a few years, and then can only be accomplished by letting them develop in their system instead of unloading half of them to rent a player for two months. I'm all for a young team, not sure about everyone else, but that could be a WS team. It will just take 2-3 years of patience. Plus, Ellsbury and Salty can be unloaded for more good prospects and the Sox have the #7 pick this year. Dodgers want him too?
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on May 14, 2013 15:27:05 GMT -5
Good for Lavarnway.
And my eyes get a day off from seeing Salty slandered constantly. But seriously.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on May 1, 2013 14:42:40 GMT -5
I can't remember the farm ever having this many solid starting pitching prospects, or even as many solid prospects in general. It would be interesting to see what orgs like BP and BA think at the end of the year. I would think top 5 at minimum if trends continue. We have often lacked that top tier Profars type guy but we have some players approaching that level it would seem.Players? Like plural? I guess I don't see the Red Sox having more than 1 guy (Xander) who's close to the level Profar is at. Who are the other guys in your opinion that are approaching his (top 5 prospect in baseball) level?
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on May 1, 2013 9:51:54 GMT -5
I'll go 35.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Apr 8, 2013 9:39:06 GMT -5
I was never a fan of giving 9 million to a broken down Stephen Drew and would have sunk or swim to see what I had with Iglesias with little expectations for this club. This team could have spent 9 million more efficiently than on Drew even if it was for one year. That would leave you one injury away from Pedro Ciriaco being a full time player with no viable backup. Jmei already mentioned Iglesias's issues staying healthy so far and shortstop is a position which sees a lot of injuries. I wanted Drew from the beginning of the offseason, I thought it would be for around $7m but the team was in the position to overspend... it's not like they can reallocate their extra money on the draft and international free agents. Acquiring depth at a position that's extremely scarce isn't the worst thing. The Ortiz contract was more inefficient, even if it was a lifetime achievement deal. I think these 2 points are exactly right. Iglesias really hadn't earned the right to be the starting SS before this season, and getting Drew on a 1 year deal for that money was a good move all around (even if he struggles to fully regain his pre-injury form). Where else would the Red Sox spend the $9 more effectively?
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Apr 5, 2013 14:12:21 GMT -5
Cant wait to see how Doubront and Lackey start the season. My thoughts exactly.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Apr 1, 2013 14:09:07 GMT -5
Am I wrong or is Saltalamacchia awful at receiving the ball? His left arm looks like a wet noodle. He makes every pitch look like a ball. I really hope they use Ross more than your typical backup. The Sox will be facing lots of lefties in the AL East and Ross should get the call for the majority of them I hope. Think you'll get your wish.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Mar 11, 2013 13:13:45 GMT -5
I had to laugh at the headline. Depth at dh? Isn't every bench player depth at dh? They should be treated that way. Once Papi hangs em up. I hope we don't even sign a full-time dh. Build a good bench and just move guys there as needed; matchups, nagging injury/rest, day game after night game for veterans, etc. It'd be nice if we could get Ortiz-esque production out of every guy on the bench. I think an organization's approach to managing the DH position is highly dependent on who you have. I would think you'd like any of the guys who have won the Edgar Martinez Award in your DH spot, but as an organization you may not have that guy on your roster. If post-Ortiz, whenever that might be, I'm fine with your approach until we get another masher that will give you production over 600+ at bats. This.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Mar 4, 2013 15:29:58 GMT -5
Hey, I can actually hit the "page 1 2 3 etc" links now because they're more than three pixels across. That alone justifies the upgrade. Thanks Mike/guys. I don't know if I'm missing something, but I don't see a place to go forward to the next page, or skip to a page at the bottom of the screen. I have to scroll up to the top to go forward.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Feb 25, 2013 10:17:22 GMT -5
87. Zach Lee, RHP, Dodgers
Seems like we got the right guy in the trade.
Webster's stock going up, Lee's stock coming down a bit.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Feb 19, 2013 15:42:07 GMT -5
4 top 50 prospects is legit, very excited about that.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Feb 19, 2013 15:22:44 GMT -5
In terms of talent, yes. I would do that trade all day long. I hate Jordan's contract though, he's a good player, but his contract isn't good at all. If the Celtics were to get a 1st round pick back (very unlikely), I would do it. It's not a horrible trade by any means for Boston, I think it's probably close to a "fair" trade, but I wouldn't call it 100% from my POV.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Jan 24, 2013 9:50:25 GMT -5
I'd figure KC should be able to win the central (or a wildcard) with Lester and Shields in the rotation Wait, you're serious?
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Jan 23, 2013 16:45:56 GMT -5
Short Answer: I don't think the #5 starter has the power to tell the manager that the first baseman is going to be the catcher. Longer Answer: If Napoli is going to be a once-a-week catcher, having him catch Lackey makes some sense, as they already have a relationship. That's especially true when facing a lefty, because a lineup with both Napoli and Gomez in it is probably optimal. But if Napoli isn't going to catch, then Lackey's feelings on the subject really won't mean very much. I'm assuming you're talking about this happening ONLY during interleague and on the road games, because if it's not that situation, Napoli could just play 1st and Gomes could play RF.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Jan 22, 2013 10:32:27 GMT -5
The references to Duke and Theo were in the original, that opened the door to the comparison. Honest opinion he's basically treading water; hasn't been bad, hasn't been great. May have just been a poor choice of words in the original, but no, BC hasn't done anything praise worthy, and that includes the talent purge to the Dodgers. Come on, this is just a silly comment.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Jan 21, 2013 14:15:59 GMT -5
It is my hope that both Napoli and Drew have MONSTER years and we decide to roll the dice on giving them a QO, and if they turn it down we win........and if they were so damn good and they accept, we have them around for another year if necessary. Now for Napoli, he would have to put up some pretty fancy numbers to get a QO........like 30+ homers, 90+ RBI's, an OPS of well over 800, and be adequate at 1st. For Drew, he would have to get close to the range he had defensively, play at least 145 games, collect 50+ extra base hits, and be a consistent force offensively. Either player could do something like this. Will they? Probably not, but if they do, our offense will be well above average.If they do, we may pick up a couple of nice early picks! Even if neither of them have monster years, the Red Sox' offense should still be well above average.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Jan 18, 2013 10:59:24 GMT -5
He might be a nice stopgap until somebody steps forward as the Sox 1b of the future (Shaw?). quote] Are people really banking on Travis Shaw to be the long term answer when this is the scouting report: "Ceiling of an average regular on a second division team." Honest question to those who know more about Shaw (and scouting) than I do. I don't think that sounds promising as an everyday starter for the Boston Red Sox.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Jan 15, 2013 14:59:28 GMT -5
We are on Uptons no trade list, not going to happen. Normally, not always, players will put teams on their "no-trade list", because they either really don't want to play there or they can force a big time payday by a big market club. I think Boston is on his no-trade list because Upton knows he could get a huge payday the second he got traded to a team like Boston. Someone with more baseball smarts than me (most of you) can correct me if I'm wrong.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Jan 7, 2013 15:53:03 GMT -5
He shouldn't be a reliever until he actually fails as a starter. This and only this.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Jan 3, 2013 10:36:47 GMT -5
This seems like it could be a quality signing if it's to a minor league contract. I'm not Javier's biggest fan, but he has been pretty good and durable throughout his career. No idea if he would still be able to get hitters out, but as a minor league depth option, I would definitely be all over this.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Dec 20, 2012 13:56:21 GMT -5
There is something wrong with Napoli, otherwise the red sox would have made it official already. Morales had a good year versus right handed pitching. He should be fully recovered from that freak injury. I believe that if Morales would not been injured Pujols or Hamilton would not be necessary. Morales would be established as a great hitter. But now he's available for a trade and if costs the red sox any one of the Brentz/Cecchini/Swihart/Owens tier then so be it. Worse case scenario is we get a good year from Morales he is too expensive to keep and we get a high draft pick as compensation. By the way what was Napoli’s batting avg. last year? I'm trying to figure out why you're picking this stat alone, to judge a player.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Dec 20, 2012 10:14:06 GMT -5
Hanrahan really doesn't add anything to this team. Agreed.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Dec 17, 2012 11:31:46 GMT -5
Dempster is not what I would have liked to see. I don't hate it, but I don't think he makes the team better. He is just another experienced MLB player along the lines of all the other signings. I think Sanchez @ 5/80 by Detroit is a great deal & that the Red Sox should have topped it with something like 5/82.5 with a team option for a 6th year for ages 28 - 32 (33) & if it took guaranteeing the 6th year to sign him, they should of. Dempster doesn't make Boston a better team? Sorry, but I disagree that Boston had better options than RD. You are entitled to your opinion on Sanchez, but the contract you're talking about is pretty far out there.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Dec 17, 2012 10:48:14 GMT -5
Really pleased with this signing and I think Drew fits perfectly into this off-season's philosophy. He is an upgrade over Jose right now, and only signing a 1 year deal makes it a no brainer for me.
This is my favorite move so far.
|
|