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.
There is surely a big trade coming
|
Post by colombianrsox on Dec 7, 2013 2:31:53 GMT -5
Every postseason we have one or two surprises from the FO. Those come from trades coming from out of the blue. A trade that is "expected" or "heard of" never pans out. With that starting pitching redundance as well as bullpen, there is surely a trade coming on for another big bat to upgrade over Ells. Morales, Wilson, Miller, and who knows, maybe Britton and RDLR are candidates for that trade.. There are also too many catchers in the 40-man. Scouts know, but I do not see a clear path for Allen Webster. He's had his opportunities..
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Dec 7, 2013 3:12:09 GMT -5
So many people have mention that a trade is coming, including me, that I think we have jinxed it. Thats my explanation when it doesn't happen.If it happens I'll say I was the only one who saw it coming.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 7, 2013 5:53:14 GMT -5
I will confirm that we were the only ones who saw it coming.
I would find it difficult to believe Miller isn't in the pen next year and you can also add Villareal to that list.
I know I am going to get hammered for pointing this out but John Lackey's contract would be incredibly appealing to a mid market team with playoff aspirations.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Dec 7, 2013 6:14:35 GMT -5
Every postseason we have one or two surprises from the FO. Those come from trades coming from out of the blue. A trade that is "expected" or "heard of" never pans out. With that starting pitching redundance as well as bullpen, there is surely a trade coming on for another big bat to upgrade over Ells. Morales, Wilson, Miller, and who knows, maybe Britton and RDLR are candidates for that trade.. There are also too many catchers in the 40-man. Scouts know, but I do not see a clear path for Allen Webster. He's had his opportunities.. You could argue that by June two of the young arms are in the rotation with the age and history of Peavy, Dempster and Buck. I do agree that Lackey and Nava"s contracts are very appealing, but their talent is also a reason to keep them. I actually hope Nava gets like a four or five year make due contract. His circumstances are so unique and his talent and attitude make it well deserved.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,926
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 7, 2013 6:25:11 GMT -5
It looks like the team is done, except for obtaining a backup SS and clearing two roster spots. But folks are correct that this FO has a history of surprising us with under-the-radar major moves.
So, what might such a trade look like? What sorts of trades might make any kind of sense?
Without considering the long-term, tax limit considerations (there are always counter-balancing moves that can be made), or whether it makes sense for the other team (if it doesn't, think 3-team trade), here are ways to make the 2014 club better.
-- Daniel Nava for a better OF, e.g. Jose Bautista. Far and away the likeliest. Alternate version: it's Mike Carp who goes, and Nava takes his place as first bat off the bench, but I think Nava has more trade value and Carp more secret (known only to us) upside, so that seems much less likely.
-- John Lackey or Jake Peavy for David Price, Max Scherzer, or the surprising equivalent. I'm not sure we want three LHP in the rotation (see below re Doubront), and of course the Rays would be reluctant to deal within the division, so I actually think Scherzer or "the surprising equivalent" is more likely (although I have no idea who the latter might be).
-- Will Middlebrooks for a superior 3B who would either be a short-term rental (e.g., Chase Headley), or a longer-term solution because Cecchini had been dealt in one of the above two trades. I've wondered whether it would be Billy Beane-like to sell high on Josh Donaldson.
-- Jackie Bradley for a better CF, a list which probably reduces to Colby Rasmus (in his walk year) and Carlos Gomez. Certainly the least likely.
Perhaps the only guy whose exclusion from this list needs justifying is Felix Doubront. I just love his upside. To put it another way, including Felix Doubront in a deal to get David Price is just as much a no-brainer as including Jon Lester to get Johan Santana was six years ago. But if you want to add his name to Lackey and Peavy as a guy we might deal to get an ace or #2, feel free.
And here's a list of folks we would include in a deal without hesitating, some of whom admittedly aren't worth much. Beyond the top 14 prospects, I've just singled out guys we might actively be looking to move because they're part of a surplus in the system at that level, or are already obviously blocked.
-- Anthony Ranaudo, Allen Webster, Matt Barnes, or Rubby De La Rosa. The starting pitching prospect depth in AAA is great, but absolutely a luxury. Trading one guy would actually clear a logjam and allow De La Rosa or Drake Britton some developmental innings as a starter. In fact, there are scenarios where you trade two and still have plenty of young pitching depth.
-- Mookie Betts (or Sean Coyle). Are you selling high on Betts or not? If you wait a year and he puts up similar numbers, he'll be that much more valuable, an elite prospect and a potential centerpiece for any big trade. If he returns to earth big-time (a la Brandon Moss in 2005), you've lost an opportunity.
And I add Sean Coyle here, who would otherwise appear much further down on the list, because if you do trade Betts, Coyle becomes a keeper. But right now they are either set to share PT at 2B in Portland, or Coyle will need to repeat high-A unnecessarily. He'd be a nice little sweetener / last piece in a deal.
-- Jake Peavy or Franklin Morales. I regard Peavy as expendable because I think the odds of getting a matching performance from Brandon Workman et al are very good (but he is the one guy you might reasonably argue shouldn't be on here). With one year left before FA at what looks like a fair price, he'd definitely have some value to a contender with thin pitching. And anyone who trades for him will dream he has a big enough year to warrant giving him a QO. He doesn't have a lot of value (you'd never be able to get a player like that young Tigers' SS, for instance), but neither is it negligible.
Morales also is a year from FA, and could provide a lot more bang-for-buck if used as a starter. There will be smart GMs from non-contending teams looking to deal for him, with the hope of spinning him to a contender at the deadline for significantly more than they paid. And for intermediate teams -- teams that may or may not contend, and are looking for one of those everything-goes-right seasons to become surprise contenders, he'd be very attractive.
You don't have enough depth to deal them both, because you're expecting to trade Ryan Dempster as well. However, if you think Dempster is a keeper as long man and 6th starter, then both of these guys could be dealt (and I think that's a defensible option).
--Deven Marrero. Unless they're wrong about Bogaerts' ability to stay at SS, he'll never play an inning here. There are scouts who feel that his bat is better than his numbers, and his defense gives him a high floor.
-- Bryce Brentz. You don't really need three OF in AAA that are MLB-ready and on the 40-man roster, and in Alex Hassan they have a very similar and probably better player, who is underrated because he lacks a power tool, while Brentz is the opposite.
-- Ryan Lavarnway or Dan Butler. There's a good argument that you absolutely want to deal one, so that the other can get enough PT at catcher. I know I'm in the minority that wants to deal Butler and try to resurrect Lavarnway's bat (he'd DH whenever not behind the plate). The Orioles, Rangers, White Sox, and Rockies have no catcher on their 40-man roster who looks to be at AAA next year, and you always want a catcher you can send up and down at will. There are probably other such teams; I didn't check to see if guys who looked ticketed for AAA were out of options (and I did this survey before non-tenders).
-- Alex Wilson. He still looks like a solid guy for the soggy crust of an MLB bullpen, but there are so many better arms at Pawtucket that he's unlikely to be very useful. Drake Britton belongs on the next list, guys you'd rather not trade but would never be a holdup to a deal, if the other team really wanted him. There's a good chance he pitches useful innings for us this year because of injuries, but his contribution doesn't project to be more than 0.5 WAR. (If you make too many of these seemingly inconsequential moves, you have screwed yourself. So they are done with caution.)
The one other guy on that list I'll mention is Manny Margot; you'd rather not deal him because of the chance that he becomes a better CF option than Bradley, but if he were the tipping point in a big deal, away he goes.
(I don't know why the OP included Andrew Miller as surplus; he's a key part of what looks like a dominant bullpen.)
|
|
|
Post by colombianrsox on Dec 7, 2013 10:10:36 GMT -5
We can sell high on some. Sooner or later, probably next summer, there will be a crunch. Furthermore, who is leaving the 40-man for Napoli?. There is a trade coming. 2 from the 40-man or more to open room for trade and Napoli.
Do we have enough LH relievers? And hey.. We NEED that bat..
And with so many prospects, we shouldn't bite on Choo. A trade is needed.
|
|
|
Post by semperfisox on Dec 7, 2013 13:36:55 GMT -5
I still drool at the thought of Stanton hitting at Fenway. Make him available Miami!!
|
|
|
Post by colombianrsox on Dec 7, 2013 15:22:02 GMT -5
Meanwhile, o e guy should be DFAed or traded to make room for Napoli. Lava or Butler?
|
|
|
Post by soxfan94 on Dec 7, 2013 15:33:16 GMT -5
Would Workman Morales and Dempster get it done for Kemp? Maybe a prospect in there
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Dec 7, 2013 15:36:39 GMT -5
Would Workman Morales and Dempster get it done for Kemp? Maybe a prospect in there They laugh and hangup the phone
|
|
|
Post by soxfan94 on Dec 7, 2013 15:44:31 GMT -5
Would Workman Morales and Dempster get it done for Kemp? Maybe a prospect in there They laugh and hangup the phone Peavy Morales and Workman
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,656
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 7, 2013 17:11:52 GMT -5
They laugh and hangup the phone Peavy Morales and Workman You think that really gets it done? Honestly, unless something falls into Ben's lap, the Red Sox are probably done. They're near their spending limit. They don't have any glaring holes. They have six starters and between Workman, Webster, Ranaudo, and Barnes have options in their minor league system. They downgraded catching and CF for 2014, but at some point the Sox need to get Jackie Bradley experience. Now is the time. If he falters, the Sox could always get a stop gap in a deal in July, but for now there's no reason to think that he won't be a decent option. Same with Xander at SS and WMB at 3b. If Will doesn't improve, the Sox could always deal for a stopgap 3b or SS (assuming Xander is doing fine) and wait for Cecchini to be ready in 2015. The only obvious place to upgrade would be LF, and frankly, LF production in 2013 was very good and cost effective. Nava and Gomes are a very good platoon. I don't see the Dodgers giving away Kemp and I don't see the Sox wanting to deplete their minor leagues for Kemp or anybody else. They're not going to clear out their farm system for Stanton, unless they got some long-term commitment from him which is unlikely, and even then I'm not sure they'd do it. They're probably done. They need help on the left side of the infield and I suspect that's a complementary utility man. Their biggest need was bullpen depth and they filled those needs beautifully with Mujica and Badenhop. The farm system is still very much intact. The Red Sox don't need to really do anything right now. See what their needs are by July 31st and adjust accordingly. The Red Sox, even without Ellsbury and Salty, are in very good shape organizationally.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Dec 7, 2013 17:51:17 GMT -5
I think we're done to with major additions. If BC gets overwhelmed for Peavy or Lackey that's fine but I think we just dump Dempster. We could honestly go into spring training with all six.
|
|
|
Post by greenmonster on Dec 7, 2013 19:30:06 GMT -5
ericmvan: great post, enjoyed reading that. Who are the most likely trade candidates with respect to major league options? Obviously if the likes of Villareal, Wilson, etc are out of options, and are a long shot to make the bullpen anyway, it would be logical to move them in a trade. Of course on the flip side, they might be less appealing to the other team.
|
|
|
Post by ralphsox on Dec 7, 2013 20:18:02 GMT -5
Remind me again why the dodgers would want another starter?
They've got Kershaw, Grenkie, and Ryu. Just signed Haren. And then three guys (two injured, but I think healed by SP?) Beckett, Billingsley and Capuano. Peavy may be an upgrade over those guys, but I'm not sure Dempster is. Plus adding a 5th would leave them out of the Tanaka and/or Price running....
|
|
|
Post by bmitchsox on Dec 7, 2013 21:10:41 GMT -5
I still drool at the thought of Stanton hitting at Fenway. Make him available Miami!! Same! I think at the deadline, Jennings smartens up and realizes Stanton won't be re-signing, and gets pressured to move him. I think we'd have a great shot at getting him. I'd offer Lackey (or Owens if need be), WMB, Webster, Britton, Brentz, Lavarnway for Stanton, Cishek. Their rotation gets stronger with Lackey and Webster, who both know Salty. WMB takes over at third, Brentz is a decent backup OF with some pop, and britton could turn into a set up man in the near future. We then have Vic/Pedroia/Stanton/Ortiz/Napoli/Bogaerts/Uribe or Infante/AJ/Bradley. Then Cecchini and Vazquez take over in '15. Hopefully Jennings pulls something off.
|
|
dav
New Member
Posts: 1
|
Post by dav on Dec 7, 2013 21:31:50 GMT -5
would lackey, nava, and one of Barnes/ranaudo/Owens get it done for price? does that make too much sense?
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,656
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 7, 2013 21:39:18 GMT -5
I still drool at the thought of Stanton hitting at Fenway. Make him available Miami!! Same! I think at the deadline, Jennings smartens up and realizes Stanton won't be re-signing, and gets pressured to move him. I think we'd have a great shot at getting him. I'd offer Lackey (or Owens if need be), WMB, Webster, Britton, Brentz, Lavarnway for Stanton, Cishek. Their rotation gets stronger with Lackey and Webster, who both know Salty. WMB takes over at third, Brentz is a decent backup OF with some pop, and britton could turn into a set up man in the near future. We then have Vic/Pedroia/Stanton/Ortiz/Napoli/Bogaerts/Uribe or Infante/AJ/Bradley. Then Cecchini and Vazquez take over in '15. Hopefully Jennings pulls something off. No way the Sox would get Stanton without Cecchini being involved. The Marlins like Cecchini and already inquired about him according to Gammons, and the Sox turned them down.
|
|
|
Post by soxrok27 on Dec 7, 2013 22:44:14 GMT -5
Same! I think at the deadline, Jennings smartens up and realizes Stanton won't be re-signing, and gets pressured to move him. I think we'd have a great shot at getting him. I'd offer Lackey (or Owens if need be), WMB, Webster, Britton, Brentz, Lavarnway for Stanton, Cishek. Their rotation gets stronger with Lackey and Webster, who both know Salty. WMB takes over at third, Brentz is a decent backup OF with some pop, and britton could turn into a set up man in the near future. We then have Vic/Pedroia/Stanton/Ortiz/Napoli/Bogaerts/Uribe or Infante/AJ/Bradley. Then Cecchini and Vazquez take over in '15. Hopefully Jennings pulls something off. No way the Sox would get Stanton without Cecchini being involved. The Marlins like Cecchini and already inquired about him according to Gammons, and the Sox turned them down. I hadn't heard anything about the Marlins having serious interest in Cecchini. If that's the case and they were willing to consider him a major piece of a package for Stanton I say go for it.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,656
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 7, 2013 23:00:52 GMT -5
No way the Sox would get Stanton without Cecchini being involved. The Marlins like Cecchini and already inquired about him according to Gammons, and the Sox turned them down. I hadn't heard anything about the Marlins having serious interest in Cecchini. If that's the case and they were willing to consider him a major piece of a package for Stanton I say go for it. I think a lot of people would, but I must confess that I'm a big believer in Cecchini. I think the guy will challenge for a batting title, have a .400 OBP, which is also a rare commodity in a time where .318 was the average OBP, and I do believe he'll hit for power. I think he'll hit 15 - 20 homers per year. And it would cost a lot more than Cecchini. Henry Owens would be involved for sure and I'm sure Swihart might be another name, and there would be others (like Betts who I would give up), too I sure. Stanton would come be a very costly acquisition talent wise and the Sox might have only 3 seasons with him. Not sure I'd want the Sox to deplete their minor league system. Honestly, I'd prefer the Sox to get their payroll pretty low with the youngsters coming up and then go full blast for Stanton when he becomes a free agent. As I see it the biggest thing the Sox lack in the minors is a bopper at 1b and in RF.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 7, 2013 23:05:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 7, 2013 23:09:30 GMT -5
If you want to build a multi-year powerhouse team with a blockbuster trade right now:
Cargo & Tulo for Nava & Middlebrooks and half our farm system. Both are signed to reasonable contracts.
This trade would likely be a three teamer because we would then need to dump some salary from our starters. Those starters could be traded for prospects which would go to the Rockies, lessening the farm system drain.
|
|
|
Post by bmitchsox on Dec 8, 2013 3:39:15 GMT -5
Same! I think at the deadline, Jennings smartens up and realizes Stanton won't be re-signing, and gets pressured to move him. I think we'd have a great shot at getting him. I'd offer Lackey (or Owens if need be), WMB, Webster, Britton, Brentz, Lavarnway for Stanton, Cishek. Their rotation gets stronger with Lackey and Webster, who both know Salty. WMB takes over at third, Brentz is a decent backup OF with some pop, and britton could turn into a set up man in the near future. We then have Vic/Pedroia/Stanton/Ortiz/Napoli/Bogaerts/Uribe or Infante/AJ/Bradley. Then Cecchini and Vazquez take over in '15. Hopefully Jennings pulls something off. No way the Sox would get Stanton without Cecchini being involved. The Marlins like Cecchini and already inquired about him according to Gammons, and the Sox turned them down. Huh, didn't hear that, but i'm glad they turned it down. Cecchini and Swihart are hopefully/probably off-limits. I think Cecch will consistently hit .300+, with a very high OBP and around 20 hr's. I'd like to think he turns out to be as good as Stanton, so I wouldn't let him go. The sox could definitely get GS if they dangle atleast WMB, Owens, Webster or Betts. Jennings loves Brooks, and Owens was lights out.
|
|
|
Post by bmitchsox on Dec 8, 2013 4:02:36 GMT -5
If you want to build a multi-year powerhouse team with a blockbuster trade right now: Cargo & Tulo for Nava & Middlebrooks and half our farm system. Both are signed to reasonable contracts. This trade would likely be a three teamer because we would then need to dump some salary from our starters. Those starters could be traded for prospects which would go to the Rockies, lessening the farm system drain. Tulo has 7 yrs @130m left, which isn't great/not terrible, so I'd like to see them do this if the prospects were reasonable for the money. Maybe Owens, Nava, Middlebrooks, Webster, Betts, Britton, Margot, Lavarnway. Then we trade Peavy's salary to another team, and they ship a decent prospect or two to Col. I actually think thats pretty fair for both sides. CarGo/Pedroia/Tulo/Ortiz/Napoli/Bogaerts/Victorino/AJ/Bradley. Lester/Lackey/Bucholz/Doubront/Workman or Barnes Solid lineup right there! Col might want more, but I wouldn't completely deplete the system for them, and I know Ben wouldn't. If we can get them and keep Cecchini, Swihart and Ranaudo, I'd be happy.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 8, 2013 4:51:29 GMT -5
Tulo also has a budget option year tacked on and cargo has 4 years remaining. Max salary for both is $20m.
We could also ship off some of our excess bullpen guys to other teams like Morales (who should fetch a decent prospect), Wilson who isn't likely to crack our pen unless there are problems and Villerrica who might be undervalued by us because of his injury history but was a very servicable 6th inning righty.
|
|
|