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.
First 10 Games After the Break...
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Jul 16, 2013 16:37:32 GMT -5
This. I also think whatever package they offer for Garza, if it includes a Ranaudo or Webster or RDLR then you present the same package - more or less to KC - for Shields and see how they react. Can't hurt to ask. And realistically, none of Owens, Ranaudo, Barnes, Webster, or RDLR project to be more than a #3 starter at this point. Not that a #3 is anything to sneeze at, but would you give up two of those and another non top 10 guy for 1 1/3 years of James Shields? Or do they dangle Doubront and, one of the above thinking that Doubront is at his zenith and KC will never get that much in a draft choice after 2014? Will be interesting to watch. I'd probably do it for Shields but not for Garza. 1)I think Shields is better and 2) because you get a season and a half plus probably a draft pick which with Garza you can't. BTW I don't see KC even contemplating trading Shields. They are 6 games under .500 and will probably try to make a run at that to justify trading Wil Myers if not this year at least give a go next year and asses at the 2014 deadline.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jul 16, 2013 16:51:40 GMT -5
This. I also think whatever package they offer for Garza, if it includes a Ranaudo or Webster or RDLR then you present the same package - more or less to KC - for Shields and see how they react. Can't hurt to ask. And realistically, none of Owens, Ranaudo, Barnes, Webster, or RDLR project to be more than a #3 starter at this point. Not that a #3 is anything to sneeze at, but would you give up two of those and another non top 10 guy for 1 1/3 years of James Shields? Or do they dangle Doubront and, one of the above thinking that Doubront is at his zenith and KC will never get that much in a draft choice after 2014? Will be interesting to watch. I'd probably do it for Shields but not for Garza. 1)I think Shields is better and 2) because you get a season and a half plus probably a draft pick which with Garza you can't. BTW I don't see KC even contemplating trading Shields. They are 6 games under .500 and will probably try to make a run at that to justify trading Wil Myers if not this year at least give a go next year and asses at the 2014 deadline. Agree with this in theory, but you'll never get more for Shields than you will at the deadline - esp with Sox, Texas, and several other teams in the mix. Barring a 10 game winning streak out of the gate, KC is out of it. They rolled the dice but Hosmer and Moustakas didn't bounce back and the rest of their team is middling right now.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Jul 16, 2013 16:56:10 GMT -5
BTW I don't see KC even contemplating trading Shields. They are 6 games under .500 and will probably try to make a run at that to justify trading Wil Myers if not this year at least give a go next year and asses at the 2014 deadline. Still time for stuff to happen... for instance Jonah Keri of Grantland suggests that the Lincecum might become available: I think KC will also be playing a few more games before the deadline...
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Jul 16, 2013 17:14:51 GMT -5
Still time for stuff to happen... for instance Jonah Keri of Grantland suggests that the Lincecum might become available: I think KC will also be playing a few more games before the deadline... Yes but thats two totally different situations. San Francisco is coming off wining a WS after winning another not so long ago (2 of the last 3 I believe) while KC just made a bid to contend in god knows how many years by trading one of their most exciting young players who plays the same position of one the worst major league regulars who the FO has taken a ton of heat for apparently being in 'love' with. There is a ton of heat on them to at least finish above .500 soon enough. If they are going to contemplate it then I would guess the return has to be substantial, can't lose that trade, what ever they feel that is. Agree with this in theory, but you'll never get more for Shields than you will at the deadline - esp with Sox, Texas, and several other teams in the mix. Barring a 10 game winning streak out of the gate, KC is out of it. They rolled the dice but Hosmer and Moustakas didn't bounce back and the rest of their team is middling right now. I definitely agree that it makes sense for them to explore it but there is other stuff that will influence there decision like I talked about above, there is a ton of pressure on their FO after that trade and other baseball decisions they have made recently. I could see them entertaining something that would help them right away, perhaps Doubront, but my thinking is that I don't think they want to be seen as they are "rebuilding" again even though thats probably what they should do.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jul 16, 2013 17:46:18 GMT -5
Speaking of which, seat's gotta feel a little hot in Toronto right now, too don't you think. Another team that went for it and has come up snake eyes so far.
Boy would I love to see Joey Bats in a Boston uni on Aug 1. Then again, I'd like to see Kate Upton in a Boston uni standing by my grill flipping some barbecue on Aug 1, too, but I doubt that'll happen either since I'm not talking to her til she gives me back that $20 she owes me.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jul 16, 2013 19:44:53 GMT -5
Agree with this in theory, but you'll never get more for Shields than you will at the deadline - esp with Sox, Texas, and several other teams in the mix. Barring a 10 game winning streak out of the gate, KC is out of it. They rolled the dice but Hosmer and Moustakas didn't bounce back and the rest of their team is middling right now. You're assuming that Dayton Moore can do math. I'm not sure why.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Jul 16, 2013 21:09:59 GMT -5
Speaking of which, seat's gotta feel a little hot in Toronto right now, too don't you think. Another team that went for it and has come up snake eyes so far. Boy would I love to see Joey Bats in a Boston uni on Aug 1. Then again, I'd like to see Kate Upton in a Boston uni standing by my grill flipping some barbecue on Aug 1, too, but I doubt that'll happen either since I'm not talking to her til she gives me back that $20 she owes me. I'd like to see Kate Upton in my room, with no uniform..... On the Jays yes they probably feeling the pressure up there but they probably would trade secondary guys on the team not the core member.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 17, 2013 13:21:05 GMT -5
For a year + of Shields, yea I think of moving a package including a top 10 guy or two, but this is the team that just gave up Will Meyers for Shields, so while it doesn't hurt to ask, you're taking a real long shot. Justify it however you want, but they will and should want a ton for Shields. Think Bogaerts/Bradley/GC as starters.
I wouldn't trade any top 10 guys for Garza. He just doesn't increase the odds enough for me this year. I'm all for stockpiling the young core - yes some won't work out, but that's more an argument for keeping them than trading them. Yes, if you could pick which ones would flame out and trade them before they did then do that, but you can't. Hence a high number of good prospects flaming out.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jul 17, 2013 13:55:08 GMT -5
For a year + of Shields, yea I think of moving a package including a top 10 guy or two, but this is the team that just gave up Will Meyers for Shields, so while it doesn't hurt to ask, you're taking a real long shot. Justify it however you want, but they will and should want a ton for Shields. Think Bogaerts/Bradley/GC as starters. I wouldn't trade any top 10 guys for Garza. He just doesn't increase the odds enough for me this year. I'm all for stockpiling the young core - yes some won't work out, but that's more an argument for keeping them than trading them. Yes, if you could pick which ones would flame out and trade them before they did then do that, but you can't. Hence a high number of good prospects flaming out. Well since this is a first 10 games thread I will say that I would love James Shields starting for the Sox in two of those first 10 games. And math skills or not, if Ben Offered Doubront and one of Barnes/Owens/Webster/RDLR/Ranaudo for Shields I think Moore'd have to think long and hard.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,826
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Jul 17, 2013 14:40:56 GMT -5
For a year + of Shields, yea I think of moving a package including a top 10 guy or two, but this is the team that just gave up Will Meyers for Shields, so while it doesn't hurt to ask, you're taking a real long shot. Justify it however you want, but they will and should want a ton for Shields. Think Bogaerts/Bradley/GC as starters. I wouldn't trade any top 10 guys for Garza. He just doesn't increase the odds enough for me this year. I'm all for stockpiling the young core - yes some won't work out, but that's more an argument for keeping them than trading them. Yes, if you could pick which ones would flame out and trade them before they did then do that, but you can't. Hence a high number of good prospects flaming out. Well since this is a first 10 games thread I will say that I would love James Shields starting for the Sox in two of those first 10 games. And math skills or not, if Ben Offered Doubront and one of Barnes/Owens/Webster/RDLR/Ranaudo for Shields I think Moore'd have to think long and hard. I believe Moore would do that trade, but I think that is actually too much the way Doubront is pitching and his age. I feel Doubront, Almanzar, and Alex Wilson is enough.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 17, 2013 15:03:00 GMT -5
Agree with you Steve. I really think Shields would be a solid addition, but the upgrade to him from Doubront isn't worth a top-10 prospect, since it really doesn't solve the lack of starting depth.
I also think Moore will feel compelled to hold onto Shields, because, for all the joking about Moore not understanding how to count, it really does often seem like he doesn't understand sunk cost. Since he already sunk the Wil Myers package into getting Shields, he's probably going to keep him.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jul 17, 2013 15:10:00 GMT -5
I also think Moore will feel compelled to hold onto Shields, because, for all the joking about Moore not understanding how to count, it really does often seem like he doesn't understand sunk cost. Since he already sunk the Wil Myers package into getting Shields, he's probably going to keep him. I don't think it's even about that. It's about him wanting to keep his job, and the one way he's going to do that is winning next year. And it's basically impossible to construct a trade that helps KC next year while sending Shields away from the team.
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Jul 17, 2013 19:44:27 GMT -5
Personally I rather the Sox promote internally then make any deals that gut the system.
I love hearing about the surging Rays who just played the Astros 7x, Twins 4x, White Sox 3x , I would hope the team would be surging after playing those teams.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Jul 20, 2013 10:17:05 GMT -5
With Workman moved back into the pen, who will start the 2nd game vs. the Rays? I'm guessing Steven Wright was the plan all along.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 20, 2013 10:25:54 GMT -5
If I remember correctly, I think Workman will pitch that game unless he is used in relief first.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Jul 20, 2013 10:54:02 GMT -5
Well, we'll have to see how Workman gets used, but apparently he was already warming up behind Breslow yesterday. Seems to me he is basically #4 on the relief pitcher depth chart at this point (though Farrell apparently likes Thornton better than I do...)
|
|
|