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.
Potential free agent catcher acquisitions
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 6, 2013 16:03:48 GMT -5
I think they're going to give Butler a shot at making the team out of spring training. Let's not forget Lavarnaway, either, although I think there's a high likelihood he gets moved. It would not surprise me at all to see them carry 3 catcher types next year. Yes, I think Ross and Butler are two of those guys, but I have no idea who the third one is. I doubt the team does either, at least till the all the off-season options play out. I'd like to see the Sox get Lavarnaway some work at 1B. He's shown enough hitting ability in stretches to keep around, and being able to come in at both positions makes him valuable enough to keep on the roster, IMO. He's not really agile enough to play there. That's part of why it's catcher or bust for him.
|
|
|
Post by redsox1534 on Nov 6, 2013 18:16:29 GMT -5
McCann offers to many concerns with his health to get what he will get and that concerns me. Id stay away big time even tho i like him.
Salty on a short afforadable deal is welcome back. But some one will give him more years and money then us.
Ruiz is my favorite option. He can call a great game, he is a good defensive catcher, very well liked around baseball from what I understand and offers solid offense still and a price tag that wont hurt. There may be more interest in him then I thought around baseball but id still an he may get more years and money then id like to give him, 2 years and 16 is what id offer.
Trade. Why isnt any one talking about this option? Mybe because we have Lavarnway, and two good catching prospects in the minors but this may end up were we go. Some guys I like and could be available and wouldnt cost to much with upside are Yasmani Grandal, Devin Mesoraco, Derrick Norris, Hank Conger, some of those guys especially Mesoraco and mybe Conger are unlikely to get moved but if you ask me but id say they are poteniel options. Angels need SP we have some of that. Wilson Ramos could be had but I doubt the Nats want to move him. Jon Jaso wouldnt cost much if the A's were willing to deal him. Jason Castro is young and afforadable for the Stros but they are rebuilding and need SP and more bodies. Love to get him and id be willing to give some value for him. Jonathan Lucroy would be another verteran option who could cost some talent but at the end of the day might be worth it. I dont see any of these guys costing to much to get if they were made available.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 6, 2013 18:47:20 GMT -5
Well, that's the thing, isn't it. The Sox are, for better or for worse, in the midst of a transition period. This means that they'll have to break some new guys in sooner or later. Looking closer at Butler, he's 27, so even though he's a "rookie," he's an older, presumably more mature guy, so I won't be as reluctant to plug him in as I would a 21-year-old. Plus, if this year is any indication, he wouldn't have to handle the pressure situations, because Ross can do it. The only downside I see is that you're rolling the dice that he won't be a noticeable drop off from Salty. So, maybe he's not the best available option, but I would certainly add him to the list as #4. Butler's ceiling is probably a major league backup. Butler/Ross isn't a viable MLB tandem just as much as Lavarnway/Ross isn't. As for the age thing, I'm not sure that has much to do with anything. If anything, it means he doesn't have much development remaining. Sorry, not trying to pick on you in particular.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,015
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 6, 2013 20:23:53 GMT -5
The more I think about the upcoming 40-man roster crunch (which I'll summarize in a moment), the more sense I think it makes to trade Butler, selling high, to a team that needs another option as an MLB backup catcher (if not coming out of ST, by mid-year).
After we non-tender Bailey and add Ranaudo, Cecchini, and Brentz we'll be at 38. Add a C, 1B, backup MI, and RHR, and trade Peavy or Demspter (or Morales) and you're at 41. Oops! (If they re-sign Ellsbury, double oops.)
You could DFA Villareal, but as I mentioned earlier, he's precisely the sort of wild-card upside guy you should be looking to pick up, which is presumably why they already did so. You could DFA Kalish, but giving up on him now that he might possibly be healthy seems wasteful. You could DFA Holt, but a backup MI with options left is very useful. You could deal Morales, but keeping him at least into ST adds depth at the major league level that you might be glad you had.
The one place on this 41-man roster where there's a talent logjam is Pawtucket C. While in theory Lavarnway could be the primary DH and catch a little, if you trade a catcher, then you have a 4-way OF/DH rotation with Hassan, Kalish, Brentz and Castellanos, and/or you've opened up a roster spot to fill with an interesting ml free agent (maybe even Berry, if he clears waivers).
So trading Butler or Lavarnway would make the most sense, and I'd much rather sell high on Butler than low on Lavarnway; there's a decent chance that Butler is the latest manifestation of Veteran Minor League Catcher Phony Breakout Season Syndrome (q.v. Dusty Brown).
Having Saltalamacchia, Ross / Vazquez, Lavarnway would clearly be an upgrade to Salty, Ross / Lavarnway, Butler, so you could hardly bitch that we would be leaving ourselves with insufficient depth.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 6, 2013 20:58:00 GMT -5
Castellanos cleared waivers before Boston traded for him so don't be surprised if he's DFA here as well.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Nov 6, 2013 21:20:58 GMT -5
2 schools on that. Large market way and the small market way. Ross and either Butler/Lavarnway would probably still be better than what the Rays had last season in Loboton and Molina. Molina, the fair defender who couldn't hit and loboton almost a fair hitter who couldn't field. Imagine TB would be happy with either of Butler/Lavarnway right now on their 25 man roster for the 2014 season.
Boston, being the large market team isn't going to stand pat and going to throw money at someone, whether or not it helps the situation.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Nov 7, 2013 1:15:37 GMT -5
If its not Salty, who performed much better as a LHH vs RHP, then I would suspect the team would prefer a LHH catcher like McCann who hits well vs RHP's. Ross as a RHH catcher performs best against LHP so a catcher who can handle RHPs seems to be a prerequisite. Ruiz although a RHH does have fairly even splits. My gut feel is the team is going to try to get McCann on a 4 yr deal with elevated AAV. Within two years he will be splitting catching duties with Vazquez or Swihart and be playing much more DH if he is signed. Remember when 3 and 39 seemed like an extreme overpay for Victorino to many last offseason. Think 4 and 72 mil for McCann. Doesn't seem to be the popular opinion but he is an upgrade from the existing situation behind the plate and the team has both potential future openings at 1B and DH to offset any physical decline on defense behind the plate if it should occur or if the young prospects force a move. Ruiz isn't a bad alternative but with the interest from Philly and Colorado plus likely others he probably ends up with 8 mil per or so anyway and at 5 years older than McCann a longer deal for McCann doesn't seem illogical. McCann also offers a better option for Big Papi protection then Salty or Napoli who strike out at least twice as often per ab then McCann. David Ross should have ample input on McCann with his experience as a catching tandem in Atlanta. Unless McCann is an awful clubhouse guy who can upset the team culture I still believe he is the best option. I just don't want to see a 6 year deal. I could see a team/player option or buyout offer attached to a 5th year as a palatable max.
|
|
|
Post by docman on Nov 7, 2013 8:43:40 GMT -5
Well, that's the thing, isn't it. The Sox are, for better or for worse, in the midst of a transition period. This means that they'll have to break some new guys in sooner or later. Looking closer at Butler, he's 27, so even though he's a "rookie," he's an older, presumably more mature guy, so I won't be as reluctant to plug him in as I would a 21-year-old. Plus, if this year is any indication, he wouldn't have to handle the pressure situations, because Ross can do it. The only downside I see is that you're rolling the dice that he won't be a noticeable drop off from Salty. So, maybe he's not the best available option, but I would certainly add him to the list as #4. Butler's ceiling is probably a major league backup. Butler/Ross isn't a viable MLB tandem just as much as Lavarnway/Ross isn't. As for the age thing, I'm not sure that has much to do with anything. If anything, it means he doesn't have much development remaining. Sorry, not trying to pick on you in particular. Thanks. To start, though, there's only so much information one can fit in a single paragraph. I'm not thinking of Butler as the catcher "of the future." My main point is that I think that the Sox could live with a Butler/Ross combination for one year, if none of the first 3 free agents work out (thus, #4 on the list). Now, to a point of yours in another thread, you have Swihart as your predicted #1 prospect for mid-2014. So...do you think the Sox trade Vazquez, or keep him around as insurance?
|
|
|
Post by bsout2 on Nov 7, 2013 9:06:48 GMT -5
I need a little help, is McCann's defense that good? His offensive numbers have been up and down. If the Red Sox had the chance to sign 2006-2008 Brian McCann, I would love it. But the last two years have been roughly equivalent to Salty offensively. What am I missing?
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Nov 7, 2013 9:20:18 GMT -5
I need a little help, is McCann's defense that good? His offensive numbers have been up and down. If the Red Sox had the chance to sign 2006-2008 Brian McCann, I would love it. But the last two years have been roughly equivalent to Salty offensively. What am I missing? Over 1000 games already behind the plate, 8800 innings, numbers slipping the last couple of years and he's going to get a 4y contract at the very least and probably 5. most likely salary averaging 13-15m AAV on all that wear and tear.
|
|
|
Post by nexus on Nov 7, 2013 9:37:14 GMT -5
I need a little help, is McCann's defense that good? His offensive numbers have been up and down. If the Red Sox had the chance to sign 2006-2008 Brian McCann, I would love it. But the last two years have been roughly equivalent to Salty offensively. What am I missing? The only 'down' year, by his standards, was 2012 when he was playing through a shoulder injury that ultimately required offseason surgery. He came back this year and put together a season reminiscent to 2009-2011. McCann tends to (understandably) wear down as the season progresses. He would definitely benefit playing in the AL. He's a career .288/.364/.491 1st half hitter. The slash drops to .264/.334/.454 in the 2nd half. He's always been one of the best at framing pitches and represents a sizable improvement over Salty in that regard. To me, it's not even close once you understand what each brings to the table.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 7, 2013 9:43:32 GMT -5
I need a little help, is McCann's defense that good? His offensive numbers have been up and down. If the Red Sox had the chance to sign 2006-2008 Brian McCann, I would love it. But the last two years have been roughly equivalent to Salty offensively. What am I missing? McCann's CS% have always been pretty mediocre-to-bad, but he has a reputation for being a pretty good game-caller (he presided over some pretty good Atlanta rotations, for instance), an excellent pitch-blocker, and a decent pitch-framer (decent summation here). He's struggled the last two years, but that's in large part to being injured (he had labrum surgery on his right shoulder last offseason) and a well below-average BABIP that is likely to regress positively.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 7, 2013 10:38:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 7, 2013 12:02:25 GMT -5
Castellanos cleared waivers before Boston traded for him so don't be surprised if he's DFA here as well. If he had cleared waivers he wouldn't be on the 40-man. He was never placed on waivers, to my knowledge.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 7, 2013 12:21:30 GMT -5
He was DFA by LA on the 17th and traded to Boston on the 23rd. He had to have cleared waivers. Once a player is DFA and clears doesn't the team have a window to trade him? If not traded the player can either accept the assignment or become a free agent.
The Dodgers claimed a player from the Mets and had to clear a spot on the 40.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Nov 7, 2013 12:26:34 GMT -5
Weren't there some Nick Hundley SD rumors out there when Ross was out? After hearing Farrell talk about the C situation and the fact Salty was beat out by Ross in the WS I think we might go defensive first here. Farrell also said last week they view C as a tandem position so I hope that rules out given McCann a five year deal.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Nov 7, 2013 12:53:39 GMT -5
Farrell also said last week they view C as a tandem position so I hope that rules out given McCann a five year deal. On the other hand, limiting McCann's workload a bit and getting him time at 1B/DH might help him stay healthy and productive as he gets older.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 7, 2013 12:57:00 GMT -5
He was DFA by LA on the 17th and traded to Boston on the 23rd. He had to have cleared waivers. Once a player is DFA and clears doesn't the team have a window to trade him? If not traded the player can either accept the assignment or become a free agent. The Dodgers claimed a player from the Mets and had to clear a spot on the 40. The Dodgers wouldn't have even had to put him on waivers until the 24th.
|
|
|
Post by docman on Nov 7, 2013 13:03:14 GMT -5
Weren't there some Nick Hundley SD rumors out there when Ross was out? After hearing Farrell talk about the C situation and the fact Salty was beat out by Ross in the WS I think we might go defensive first here. Farrell also said last week they view C as a tandem position so I hope that rules out given McCann a five year deal. I can see McCann's allure given his power numbers, but I wouldn't want to go for five with him either. I'd sooner sign a guy for two-years, tops, even if it means settling for a lesser bat.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Nov 7, 2013 13:40:02 GMT -5
I like A J Pierzynski on a one year deal.
Don't want Salty for a longer than 1 year deal. I would have offered the QO and over paid for a year waiting on the in house options , but I don't like his game.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 7, 2013 14:12:11 GMT -5
He was DFA by LA on the 17th and traded to Boston on the 23rd. He had to have cleared waivers. Once a player is DFA and clears doesn't the team have a window to trade him? If not traded the player can either accept the assignment or become a free agent. The Dodgers claimed a player from the Mets and had to clear a spot on the 40. The Dodgers wouldn't have even had to put him on waivers until the 24th. Got it thanks. I had read previously that he had cleared waivers, which was clearly not right and I certainly wasn't fully aware of the nuances of DFA, which now i'll never forget. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Designated_for_assignmentDesignated for assignment is a contractual term used in Major League Baseball. A player who is designated for assignment is immediately removed from the team's 40-man roster, after which the team must either: [1]return the player to the 40-man roster within 10 days from the date of designation, or make one of the following contractual moves: 1.Place the player on waivers (which can only be done within the first 7 days of the 10-day period) 2.Trade the player 3.Release the player 4.Outright the player from the 40-man roster into the Minor Leagues
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Nov 7, 2013 14:25:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 7, 2013 14:28:16 GMT -5
I wouldn't care about Pierzynski being a horse's ass if he was good at baseball. I held my nose and rooted for Curt Schilling for five years, after all. The problem with Pierzynski is he's bad at baseball, too.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Nov 7, 2013 14:32:18 GMT -5
I wouldn't care about Pierzynski being a horse's ass if he was good at baseball. I held my nose and rooted for Curt Schilling for five years, after all. The problem with Pierzynski is he's bad at baseball, too. Not sure I'd want him around guys like Britton, Webster who seem to be easily rattled.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 7, 2013 14:35:48 GMT -5
I wouldn't care about Pierzynski being a horse's ass if he was good at baseball. I held my nose and rooted for Curt Schilling for five years, after all. The problem with Pierzynski is he's bad at baseball, too. The difference is, teammates seemed to actually like Schilling even if outsiders didn't. Not so sure same can be said for AJ... I'm sure not all teammates liked 38, but I don't think you can class the two together. I'd like Ruiz behind the plate
|
|
|