|
Post by jdb on Oct 10, 2013 10:50:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 15, 2013 14:25:12 GMT -5
I don't mean to be overly terse, but if the Sox are going to spend $100M+ on a center fielder, I'd prefer they spend it keeping the guy they've got. Also, Kemp really shouldn't be playing center even when he's healthy. And if they can't keep Ellsbury, I'd rather Bradley. People were getting really snarky in September at the idea that Jackie Bradley would be better than Jacoby Ellsbury, even though people never really argued that - just that Bradley would be the better value and that he's on the way up while Ellsbury is likely to regress as he ages. But there's a solid chance that Bradley is better than Kemp in 2014, never mind 2019.
|
|
|
Post by SlugLife on Oct 19, 2013 11:45:02 GMT -5
I don't think anything about Gammons's post nor jdb's post implies that Matt Kemp would replace Jackie Bradley in center field. In fact, it seems pretty clear to me that if Ben Cherington acquired Matt Kemp it would be to play left field for the Red Sox in 2014 rather than center field, given Kemp's injury history, the scouting consensus that Kemp is not a great center fielder anyway, and Bradley's readiness as a plus defensive center fielder.
In that light, I think passing on Ellsbury and his 7 or 8 year deal, collecting a draft pick, and buying low on Matt Kemp sounds pretty astute. The Dodgers need help in the back end of their rotation; unloading Dempster and perhaps some B or C prospects should be enough to get it done if the Sox pick up the tab on Kemp's salary.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Oct 19, 2013 13:44:20 GMT -5
Massive contract for a declining star? What could go wrong?
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 19, 2013 13:59:58 GMT -5
They're not really buying low when he's owed $128 million.
|
|
|
Post by xxdamgoodxx on Oct 19, 2013 14:15:41 GMT -5
Would you trade a near-MVP who put together back-to-back-to-back-to-back years of 155+ games played for Dempster and some B or C guys? The Dodgers have 4 starting outfielders (2 which are making 20m+) and logic says that they would try to move one of them, but when he's right, Kemp is the best of them all. Remember that even with the contracts of Crawford and Beckett, the Dodgers still had to give RDLR and Webster to get Gonzalez. I am not against the idea of having Kemp in Boston, but that deal won't get done unless you add at least one top-5 guy because the Dodgers aren't going to give up someone that talented, even with a fat contract, for a borderline #5 making 12.5m and a few future bench players/fringe-average starters. Hell, for an injury-prone #3/#4 we had to give up Iglesias. Keep in mind that we have Bradley, Vic, the .300 hitter Nava, the near-.300 hitter Carp, and Gomes in next years outfield and Hassan as the first to be called up, which is pretty good without Kemp's addition. If we were to get Kemp without giving up our entire system or decimating the chemistry of our team, I would be very excited.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Oct 21, 2013 18:33:48 GMT -5
Looks like he had ankle surgery today too. Again my original post was just to bring it to everyone's attention since we were following him down the stretch. They have a crowded OF that we should keep an eye on during the hot stove although I don't mind Nava/Gomes. www.latimes.com/sports/dodgersnow/la-sp-dn-matt-kemp-surgery-20131021,0,2696304.story#axzz2iOkv1YZb day.
|
|
|
Post by boomer on Oct 21, 2013 19:41:11 GMT -5
They would do better off trading from their upper minors depth of starting pitching prospects for Joc Pederson. Only Henry Owens ought to be off limits as a trade chip for him IMO.
|
|
|
Post by boomer on Oct 21, 2013 20:15:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 22, 2013 5:59:54 GMT -5
boomer, I'm confused - what exactly is wrong with Jackie Bradley?
|
|
brisox
Rookie
SoxProspects Veteran
Posts: 87
|
Post by brisox on Nov 8, 2013 13:36:57 GMT -5
I personally think Kemp would be a great addition if the Shoulder shows signs of improvement. Kemp gives you the entire package when health and in Fenway may be a 40-40 guy. His contract is a beast but it all depends on what they want in return such as Middlebrooks since they have nobody at 3rd and how much of the contract they will eat.
I also like Ethier as an option as he can play RF and Center and it gives Bradley more time which I believe he needs considering his struggles with MLB pitching.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Nov 8, 2013 14:01:01 GMT -5
I also like Ethier as an option as he can play RF and Center and it gives Bradley more time which I believe he needs considering his struggles with MLB pitching. You don't want Ethier - not with that contract. He's a strict platoon player (if used correctly - he's seriously horrible vs. LHP's), and him playing center this past season was a joke. They had two far superior defenders in Crawford and Puig who they wanted to keep in their more natural positions. Truth is, Ethier is a pretty mediocre defensive outfielder, and his GG award a couple years back was nothing more than a typical reflection of the joke that the award is. Ethier in RF at Fenway would be marginally better than Nava, at best. He'll be 32 next season and coming off ankle issues. If he's with the Sox in a productive role, it'd be platooning in LF, but Nava's presence (and far more cost-effective contract) make Ethier seem pretty incompatible with the Sox.
|
|
|
Post by bmitchsox on Nov 12, 2013 11:45:07 GMT -5
I love the idea of Kemp only if the Dodgers eat some salary. Maybe we take 90 of the 128, thats only 15 a year, which isn't terrible. Play him in LF and have Nava ready to take his job back if injuries arise. I could see the dodgers eating some of the salary if we gave them a few decent prospects.. i'd say Betts, Britton, Butler, Johnson and Hassan.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Nov 22, 2013 14:10:46 GMT -5
How much of a prospect package does it take to get Kemp as well? Wonder if Boston would add Peavy or Dempster to the deal to offset some of Kemp's compensation vs straight cash coming back giving the Dodgers another starter behind Kershaw and Greinke and hopefully one less prospect heading West. Kemp is only 29 but his injuries are a concern. Without his injuries however he would never be available on the market. He does offer positional flexibility and was all but a 40/40 (non-repeatable) player as recent as 2011 before injury.
How do you suspect his bat would play in Fenway vs the Ravine? I find Kemp very interesting. It would be nice to have around 21.5 mil coming back to offset approximately the last year of his contract and leaving the deal at 6 year and 17.75 mil per. Of course the more LA takes on financially the more Boston has to include.
What would you put as the parameters to a trade? Money, prospects etc . .?
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Nov 22, 2013 15:25:13 GMT -5
If the Rangers got Prince and 30 million for Kinsler and his 62 million contract I think the Dodgers would have to kick in more. Maybe take Dempster and his 13.25 off our hands as well as 30+ Miilion. I think anyone going from hitting in LA to Fenway would see a boost. Not to mention NL west road parks are big in SD and I think SF is pitcher friendly too.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Nov 22, 2013 15:40:24 GMT -5
If the Rangers got Prince and 30 million for Kinsler and his 62 million contract I think the Dodgers would have to kick in more. Maybe take Dempster and his 13.25 off our hands as well as 30+ Miilion. I think anyone going from hitting in LA to Fenway would see a boost. Not to mention NL west road parks are big in SD and I think SF is pitcher friendly too. My thoughts also. I wonder how much though. Very very limited sample in Fenway. In the West he did have Colorado and Arizona to offset some of the SD, SF away games though.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Nov 22, 2013 16:54:42 GMT -5
In rethinking the Kemp salary I don't see Ben willing to pay more for Kemp than he could pay to resign Ellsbury. If you can get Jacoby for 6 and 115 then you would be starting with no less a discount than 13 mil and considering the cost of picks or players to get him vs zero cost for Jacoby except one less supplemental the discount grows. Thinking in these terms I'd add an additional 25 mil and set the over/under around 38 mil. This is in line with your thinking bmitchsox. Now if LA will take Dempster and his salary as part of the return that number likely decreases as it should also reduce the other prospect/player return. I would expect Ben to mention his Ellsbury option in discussions to show a very viable alternate option.
|
|
|
Post by mainesox on Nov 22, 2013 16:58:11 GMT -5
In rethinking the Kemp salary I don't see Ben willing to pay more for Kemp than he could pay to resign Ellsbury. If you can get Jacoby for 6 and 115 then you would be starting with no less a discount than 13 mil and considering the cost of picks or players to get him vs zero cost for Jacoby except one less supplemental the discount grows. Thinking in these terms I'd add an additional 25 mil and set the over/under around 38 mil. This is in line with your thinking bmitchsox. Now if LA will take Dempster and his salary as part of the return that number likely decreases as it should also reduce the other prospect/player return. I would expect Ben to mention his Ellsbury option in discussions to show a very viable alternate option. I'm not sure it's quite that simple. Ellsbury is a year older than Kemp, and looking for 7 years (whereas Kemp is only signed for 6), plus Kemp is a much better fit for the composition of this team.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Nov 22, 2013 17:51:22 GMT -5
I would agree Kemp is a better player at his peak and fully healthy. I agree he would be a better roster fit playing LF with Bradley JR in CF. I think you can argue though that Kemp is more of an injury concern at this point then Ellsbury. Additionally LA has an overload in the OF and should be motivated to move one. Doesn't mean they will "give" him away but it should close any gap. No?
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Nov 22, 2013 18:13:03 GMT -5
It could just be other teams looking at their surplus of OF and saying "Gee, I think I'd like that one".
The dodgers probably want to move Ethier more.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 22, 2013 19:05:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Nov 22, 2013 19:38:39 GMT -5
There's definitely a risk but Ells will almost certainly beat Kemps current 6/128 and that's not including the Dodgers kicking in money and maybe taking Dempster off the books.
When exactly did Kemp start to suffer these injuries? He was raking through 36 games that makes you think he could have repeated 2011. .355/.444/.719 12 HRs. Then he missed 6 weeks was that the shoulder? You have to be worried about an Agon like loss of power after shoulder surgery but if he rebounds close to 2011- first of 2012 he's a top 10-15 player.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Nov 22, 2013 23:08:07 GMT -5
Kemp is tempting but the smart move is to cut through it all and acquire Joc Pederson. Unless LA moves two of Kemp, Either, Crawford, and Puig he's stuck for at least another 4 seasons. A prospect for prospect trade from depth? Perhaps a major league piece such as 1 of our starters (Doubront, Lackey, Peavy) or WMB. Other smaller parts or cash would be in consideration for balance in such a move as would potentially adding a free agent such as Drew in the WMB scenario. I'd be more confident not adding a player with a large contract with the potential to be a burden than the risk of a prospect flopping even if it means losing a valuable piece to obtain him.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 22, 2013 23:10:17 GMT -5
LAD would have to be tempted to get a 3b like WMB for Joc
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Nov 22, 2013 23:27:29 GMT -5
Agreed. It's hard to let go of WMB because his potential is still promising and the power is hypnotizing. But Pederson brings power of his own and would fit nicely in LF and offer versatility as a CF. Resigning Drew even on an extra year and a few extra $ overall improves the teams defense IMO. Signing Drew may temporarily block Cecchini at 3b as Bogaerts would slide over. Unless your of the mind to move Bogaerts to another position by 2016 but I would bet Drew will still have trade value at that time. This would allow the team to bring Cecchini up late in 2015 and use a rotation similar to this season with Drew/Bogaerts/WMB. Bogaets slides to SS when Drew is out and Garin plays 3B. You also now open trade options involving one or more of Gomes, Nava and Carp.
|
|