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.
|
Post by jmei on Aug 21, 2015 17:03:46 GMT -5
Joe Kelly is not projected to get a starting rotation spot next year. It's more the difference between whatever pitcher you can get for Betts (and I don't think you'd be able to get deGrom for Betts in a one-for-one) and someone like Owens or Johnson. And ditto on the idea that they can replace the LF with someone better than De Aza/Shaw/Holt. I'm not saying they definitely should trade him. I just think it wouldn't hurt as much as people might think. There are plenty of #1 type pitchers out there we could get for Mookie straight up I think. I do think they're more likely to go the 4 for 1 route though. Right, but you'd have to spend money/trade chips to get a better fourth outfielder, which means it's not a one-to-one trade anymore. I'm not saying Betts is untradable, but you have to get a ton of both short-term and long-term value back if you're trading him, and those kinds of trades are always the toughest ones to finalize.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Aug 21, 2015 17:06:02 GMT -5
As to Sandoval:
As LHB - 287/336/438/774 (357PA) As RHB - 089/136/107/243 (59PA)
As LHB vs. LHP - 294/324/338/662 (71PA) As LHB vs. RHP - 285/339/464/803 (286PA)
If he stays as a LHB, it is reasonable to expect Sandoval's numbers to be closer to his historical 2-3 WAR, especially if he is benched against some tough lefties.
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan on Aug 21, 2015 17:26:37 GMT -5
Hey, I got an idea... We need an ace...sign Price. Then we won't have to gut our farm. Or is that not in "the spirit" of this thread? Trading players who project to never start for you is not "gutting the farm." The point of having a tremendous farm system is to trade the excess talent, no matter how good, to get talent that fills holes. We are in a position to trade Margot because we have two great outfielders and two great prospects, ETA mid-2017, to fill the third spot. Does Margot have more value to us as 4th outfielder, or as the centerpiece of Billy Beane's next great A's team? If you believe in Vazquez (and I've been pounding that drum for two or three years), then you have Swihart, Margot, Guerra, and Marrero all blocked by (at present) better players. That's mind-boggling. That can turn Wade Miley into almost any pitcher in baseball. And those guys have very little value to you.Or you could trade Bradley and/or Bogaerts two years from now when both have massive value. Given that we don't really know how long it will take for Vasquez to recover, the only blocked prospect on that list is Marrero.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Aug 21, 2015 19:34:15 GMT -5
Since this appears to be more than a prospect list, I would add the following: A. Wright/Johnson/Owens all belong high up on this list, perhaps as 1B, 1C and 1D with Miley. B. If you are discussing the integration of Benintendi in 2017, you would have to consider adding Hanley to the list. If Hanley stays in the outfield next year, you would have to consider adding Pedroia to the list. One of them is expendible because of Betts. C. Marrero needs to be on this list somewhere. I would take Chavis off the list. Either Devers will shift to 1B or Chavis will shift into a corner OF spot at higher levels, if necessary. I'd wager on the latter over the former, if forced to choose one over the other. So, my list would look like this. 1. Hanley or Pedroia - this is the biggest decision DD is going to make in the next three months. Personally, I read the tea leaves as DD offloading Hanley now and Pedroia next trade deadline, but we'll have to see. Betts shifts into the spot of the one who is traded and JBJ takes over CF. 2. One or two of Miley/Johnson/Owens/Wright - DD will want to clear two rotation spots, one for a FA stud and one for a SP arriving via trade to add to Porcello, Rodriguez and Buchholz. 3. Margot - our most expendible prospect 4. Guerra - sell high 5. Swihart or Vazquez 6. Marrero - not sure he has much value, but he'll have none if he's not traded. Expendible because of Holt/M.Hernandez. Depth SP - one of Johnson/Owens/Wright, Buttrey, Ball, Kopech, Espinoza RP - Barnes, Light OF - Benintendi, Longhi (1B/COF) IF - Moncada, Devers, Travis, Chavis (3B/COF) Pedroia won't be traded. He has a NTC, and is on a below market contract and is still a very good player. Trading him would be stupid.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Aug 21, 2015 19:45:07 GMT -5
The Red Sox are paying Dustin Pedroia to play second base until 2021. His bat won't play anywhere else. He is far more valuable to the RS than to any other team therefore he has next to no trade value. You don't salary dump the face of the franchise and you certainly don't bench him (See Ortiz, David). Dustin plays 2B until 2021. In 2022 Mookie Betts turns 30 years old. It's more likely the next RS second baseman played last season in junior high, than it is Betts follows Pedroia. When Dustin has been unavailable, Mookie hasn't even been suggested as an emergency option. Hanley has played third, but no breath of returning Betts to the infield. The RS don't even want to move Betts out of CF for a clearly superior defensive player. For better or worse, the RS view Betts as a CF and clearly not as an infielder. Consequently, he's an imperfect fit for the developing roster. I'd look to move Pedroia this offseason. You may think he is the face of the team but I certainly don't and feel that he is an overrated leader on this team. This is the type of player DD should be looking to move now before his contract becomes untradeable as he gets older. We all agree Hanley can not play left field next season. Some are suggesting we move hanley to third, which I think is a bad idea. Some suggest moving Hanley to first base, which again, I think is a really bad idea. The best place for Hanley might just be second base. Unfortunately we have pedroia there and he has a non-trade clause. In addition after the uttey trade, there are three teams still looking for a second baseman. I know there are a ton of pedroia homers on this board, but pedroia has value and there is a need for him out there. (Provided he waives the no trade clause)
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Aug 21, 2015 20:13:48 GMT -5
I'd look to move Pedroia this offseason. You may think he is the face of the team but I certainly don't and feel that he is an overrated leader on this team. This is the type of player DD should be looking to move now before his contract becomes untradeable as he gets older. Some suggest moving Hanley to first base, which again, I think is a really bad idea. The best place for Hanley might just be second base. I'm thinking he might be able to be one of their bullpen arms next years. I mean, he has a good arm. And when it's his turn in the order in inter-league games in NL parks, he'd be a great weapon as a pitcher hitting.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Aug 21, 2015 20:23:32 GMT -5
There are people actually legitimating suggesting we trade Betts and Bogaerts (different people)?
That's absurd. No doubt about it. I'd trade out top 10 prospects before I'd trade either of those guys (not that that is reasonable or something I'd advocate doing, but just emphasizing how much I value those two.
|
|
|
Post by redsox1534 on Aug 21, 2015 21:09:19 GMT -5
We need a top of rotation arm. Let's say we sign price or cueto. Price/cueto porcello bucholz Miley Rodriguez owens johnson make up the candidates with wright in contention. That's the best option mybe cause we loose no prospects or picks. But we have to move some one or two guys. Porcello an the 3 top young lefties aren't moving any were in this scenario. Miley is logical choice an bucholz as well. If we have to trade for a sp well one lefty of the trio is gone more then likely. Which leaves room for one of bucholz or Miley to stay.
Miley Bucholz Margot Swihart/Vazquez Pablo Castillo Jbj Marrero Guerra
That's a great list of talent we should be able to land a star sp and or hitter. My in tial I stint is to.ask the Cubs for Schwarber who isn't a long term catcher imo he's a 1b. We get a middle of order bat cubs get a stud hitter who is much better overall catcher. Mybe we add light like a sp or jbj. Cubs don't need bryant Russell solar Rizzoli baez Schwarber Castro in the middle of a lineup or beginning there's room to move some one or a couple players. Swihart not improves the catcher postion defensively but gives them a guy who athletic an can hit do the little things needed.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Aug 21, 2015 21:17:45 GMT -5
Anyone who wants to trade Pedroia is some kind of soulless robot. He signed a team-friendly contract, and there's still every reason to think he'll be worth the value of the contract. It would be an act of baleful disloyalty to trade him. Plus he's worth more to the Sox than any other team. Aaaaand... he's still a really good player! The whole point of this thread is to figure out the expendable pieces - not get rid of the guys who offer positive value for next season.
That last point goes for Betts, by the way. I get the logic that some people are arguing for, but please step back for a moment: he is leading the team's position players in WAR. As a 22-year-old. With 5 years of control left. You're worried about squandering JBJ? He can still be really, really great as a RFer. Remember how much defensive value Victorino had in RF? JBJ will have more. Swihart makes the most sense as a chip to get a young ace; throw in Margot and I think you'd be close.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Aug 21, 2015 21:29:21 GMT -5
Hey, I got an idea... We need an ace...sign Price. Then we won't have to gut our farm. Or is that not in "the spirit" of this thread? Trading players who project to never start for you is not "gutting the farm." The point of having a tremendous farm system is to trade the excess talent, no matter how good, to get talent that fills holes. We are in a position to trade Margot because we have two great outfielders and two great prospects, ETA mid-2017, to fill the third spot. Does Margot have more value to us as 4th outfielder, or as the centerpiece of Billy Beane's next great A's team? If you believe in Vazquez (and I've been pounding that drum for two or three years), then you have Swihart, Margot, Guerra, and Marrero all blocked by (at present) better players. That's mind-boggling. That can turn Wade Miley into almost any pitcher in baseball. And those guys have very little value to you.We have players who are showing right now they belong. We have a bunch of prospects who some day might be major leaguers. If it were me Swihart, Betts, JBJ, E-Rod, Bogaerts and even Owens are untouchables. Castillo? I'd be open to trading him.
As far as Swihart vs. Vasquez is concerned I am not sold on Vasquez...yet. Yes he is better defensively but he will be coming off major elbow surgery and has a more limited ceiling with the bat. Even in your opening post in this thread you admitted that Swihart will probably be a better player in 2-3 years than Vasquez will be. If we trade Swihart and Vasquez has a setback we have very little depth right now in the organization at C.
In the minors right now Benintendi, Moncada and Espinoza are the only untouchables. Other than that I think anyone could be dealt.
For me the intriguing question is Shaw. Is he for real or is this some kind of Sam Horn-esque mirage? I would be open to selling high on him right now as part of a package for the right pitcher. The kids are showing they can hit. Our problem is pitching, both starters and the pen. Sign Price, trade for another front line starter...which can be done without having to trade any of the players I have mentioned above ^^^ and do a better job picking up some FA relief pitchers in the offseason.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,888
|
Post by nomar on Aug 21, 2015 21:33:12 GMT -5
No manager is going to pay much for Shaw. I'm just going to enjoy the ride and hole he can settle into a 110 wRC+ bat who gives us a legit backup option off the bench.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Aug 21, 2015 21:34:59 GMT -5
Anyone who wants to trade Pedroia is some kind of soulless robot. He signed a team-friendly contract, and there's still every reason to think he'll be worth the value of the contract. It would be an act of baleful disloyalty to trade him. Plus he's worth more to the Sox than any other team. Aaaaand... he's still a really good player! The whole point of this thread is to figure out the expendable pieces - not get rid of the guys who offer positive value for next season. I am a fan of the team and have been for 40 years, but I can see that trading Pedroia may be one of the better ways to improve the team in the long-run. Two of our best prospects - Betts and Moncada - play the position, and Pedroia could be on the precipice of an extended decline. He's coming to that age (just turned 32) and his running has already slowed (7 SB in his last 210 G) and he cannot stay on the field. He's been a great player and I love to root for him, but I'm not going to blindly Captain-ize him (a la Jeter), especially when he has 6 years and $84 million left on his contract. 2015 will be DP's first season below 2 WAR; who's to say it will be his last? To say that it would be baleful disloyalty is ridiculous. Pedroia signed the contract. If he has a full NTC, then this discussion is moot. If not, he allowed himself a window to get traded until his full 10-and-5 rights kick in next August. So, at the risk of being a soulless robot who wants to see the team win consistently, I believe that DD has an obligation to explore DP's trade value. Doesn't mean he'll be traded but he wouldn't be doing his job otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Aug 21, 2015 21:41:19 GMT -5
No manager is going to pay much for Shaw. I'm just going to enjoy the ride and hole he can settle into a 110 wRC+ bat who gives us a legit backup option off the bench. Agreed. I had said as part of a package (with maybe a (but not all of) Devers, Barnes, Ball, Chavis, etc) to get the starter we need. I still think there is a possibility that Shaw is for real and is just a late bloomer. And would love to have him as a lefty bat off the bench next season, or even give him a shot to be the starting 1B. But if we were ever going to sell high on him now is the time to do it, but he would just be part of a larger package.
|
|
|
Post by soxrock on Aug 21, 2015 21:43:06 GMT -5
I prefer Johnson over Owens so Owens Travis Shaw Miley Tazawa Pablo Any prospect in the minors except Moncada
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,888
|
Post by nomar on Aug 21, 2015 21:44:57 GMT -5
Anyone who wants to trade Pedroia is some kind of soulless robot. He signed a team-friendly contract, and there's still every reason to think he'll be worth the value of the contract. It would be an act of baleful disloyalty to trade him. Plus he's worth more to the Sox than any other team. Aaaaand... he's still a really good player! The whole point of this thread is to figure out the expendable pieces - not get rid of the guys who offer positive value for next season. I am a fan of the team and have been for 40 years, but I can see that trading Pedroia may be one of the better ways to improve the team in the long-run. Two of our best prospects - Betts and Moncada - play the position, and Pedroia could be on the precipice of an extended decline. He's coming to that age (just turned 32) and his running has already slowed (7 SB in his last 210 G) and he cannot stay on the field. He's been a great player and I love to root for him, but I'm not going to blindly Captain-ize him (a la Jeter), especially when he has 6 years and $84 million left on his contract. 2015 will be DP's first season below 2 WAR; who's to say it will be his last? To say that it would be baleful disloyalty is ridiculous. Pedroia signed the contract. If he has a full NTC, then this discussion is moot. If not, he allowed himself a window to get traded until his full 10-and-5 rights kick in next August. So, at the risk of being a soulless robot who wants to see the team win consistently, I believe that DD has an obligation to explore DP's trade value. Doesn't mean he'll be traded but he wouldn't be doing his job otherwise. The only teams interested in Pedroia would be contenders, Sox fans will always love him, and people will always remember him as a Red Sox player. Nothing wrong with playing for multiple teams. Sometime you have to know when to make a change even if it is emotionally challenging. In this case, it makes a ton of sense IMO.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 21, 2015 22:12:25 GMT -5
Talk of trading Betts just turns my mind to jello. Unflavored jello.
We all agree that Hanley should not be in the OF next year, which leaves us with two great dirt-cheap OFers in Betts, who is 22 and already the team's best player, and Bradley, and one pretty decent, relatively inexpensive one in Castillo.
So if you trade Betts, now you need to obtain an OF, who will certainly be less good or more expensive, and very likely, both. Maybe a lot of both.
Meanwhile, the guy you want to trade Betts for can be obtained for the players that most of are talking about -- Margot, Guerra, Marrero, and maybe Swihart to a rebuilding or thin team in a swap of Miley for someone much better -- or he can be signed as a FA.
Do I need to say more?
Unflavored, warm, jello.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 21, 2015 22:14:35 GMT -5
Meanwhile, the guy you want to trade Betts for can be obtained for the players that most of are talking about -- Margot, Guerra, Marrero, and maybe Swihart to a rebuilding or thin team in a swap of Miley for someone much better -- or he can be signed as a FA. I'm skeptical of this. Two dimes and a nickle don't make a quarter, and there are certain pitchers out there who will only be available for a quarter (and are younger/better than the options on the free agent market).
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Aug 21, 2015 22:32:46 GMT -5
I'm also skeptical that effectively acting as big buyers of a cost controlled elite SP as a 5th place team is the right way to go. We have a lot of holes other than pitching and we may need to be patient here.
I get signing a free agent SP if ownership is on board but trading someone like Betts or Bogaerts or even Swihart is so stupid when that is exactly what a rebuilding team like us needs. Good young catcher/SS are so hard to find and it kind of amazes me people think he is expendable. Maybe trade guys like that a year or a year and a half before free agency but not now. They may need to dump Sandoval and stash Hanley somewhere until he can comp back as a DH too.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,888
|
Post by nomar on Aug 21, 2015 22:32:39 GMT -5
Meanwhile, the guy you want to trade Betts for can be obtained for the players that most of are talking about -- Margot, Guerra, Marrero, and maybe Swihart to a rebuilding or thin team in a swap of Miley for someone much better -- or he can be signed as a FA. I'm skeptical of this. Two dimes and a nickle don't make a quarter, and there are certain pitchers out there who will only be available for a quarter (and are younger/better than the options on the free agent market). There are "quarters" out there that can be traded for with guys like Margot, Owens, Johnson and Guerra. So there's no reason to trade a 22 year old who will be a 4+ WAR player without coming near his offensive peak. Were taking Mookie for granted. He could be a top 10 player in the sport as soon as next year.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 21, 2015 22:43:19 GMT -5
Meanwhile, the guy you want to trade Betts for can be obtained for the players that most of are talking about -- Margot, Guerra, Marrero, and maybe Swihart to a rebuilding or thin team in a swap of Miley for someone much better -- or he can be signed as a FA. I'm skeptical of this. Two dimes and a nickle don't make a quarter, and there are certain pitchers out there who will only be available for a quarter (and are younger/better than the options on the free agent market). Of course there are teams that would only trade their young, cost-controlled starter for a single comparable impact player. But we're talking about multiple targets. Probably half the guys you'd be interested in pitch for either bad or financially constrained teams. I'm resisting the temptation to construct the list. I'm also thinking in terms of a 3-team trade. For instance, if you decided you wanted Syndergaard, you'd try to trade some of the chips for a young, MLB ready OFer who seems blocked, who can then be combined with some of the others. And if that specific scenario cannot be made to work, the point is that a creative trader can put together a package that turns our excess value into the sort of pitcher we want, provided there are enough viable targets. And it seems to me that there are.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Aug 21, 2015 22:43:43 GMT -5
That, and the fact that acting like a big time buyer when you're a 70 win team is just dangerous and could seriously set this franchise back for years.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Aug 21, 2015 22:51:29 GMT -5
Or how bout this as a plan?
Sign Price and Greinke to anchor the front of the rotation and put together a strong package of veterans and prospects to get Goldschimdt? No having to give up Betts, Swihart, E-Rod, JBJ or Owens because we have enough depth in the organization to not have to give any of them up. I am trying to imagine a JBJ-Betts-Benintendi OF in a few years...and the thought of it is borderline scary.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 21, 2015 22:58:23 GMT -5
So, my list would look like this. 2. One or two of Miley/Johnson/Owens/Wright - DD will want to clear two rotation spots, one for a FA stud and one for a SP arriving via trade to add to Porcello, Rodriguez and Buchholz. If DDo wants to acquire two pitchers, one via trade and one via FA, then you would indeed trade either Johnson or Owens, ideally the former. But I really, really hope they do not acquire two frontline pitchers. There are two or three reasons why (the first two are related). 1) The marginal upgrade of the FA pitcher, as he begins his decline years, over the best of Owens, Wright, or Johnson (or the second best, when Buchholz is hurt) can't possibly be worth the money. 2) One of Theo's best rules (and one he violated massively for 2011) was "try to avoid the temptation to build an uberteam." At a certain point, the money you pay to make the team better does not make you significantly likelier to make the post-season or win the WS. If you've got an excellent team, they're going to make the post-season unless disaster strikes, and the extra guy you paid $$$ to turn the excellent team into an apparent "team for the ages" isn't going to help. And the post-season itself is too much of a crapshoot. The only thing that building an uberteam does is give you less flexibility to deal with unexpected adversity later. 3) If there is a FA pitcher they really like, they'd probably be better off bundling some or all of the talent we're talking about with a heavily subsidized Hanley and grabbing a great 1B. Make the idea of gambling that Hanley can play 1B adequately and return to his 130 wRC+ hitting ways irresistible to someone else, rather than taking the gamble ourselves.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,888
|
Post by nomar on Aug 21, 2015 23:01:06 GMT -5
Or how bout this as a plan? Sign Price and Greinke to anchor the front of the rotation and put together a strong package of veterans and prospects to get Goldschimdt? No having to give up Betts, Swihart, E-Rod, JBJ or Owens because we have enough depth in the organization to not have to give any of them up. I am trying to imagine a JBJ-Betts-Benintendi OF in a few years...and the thought of it is borderline scary. Goldschmidt is one of the few guys out there that you'd have to give up Betts or Bogaerts for IMO. The only outside shot otherwise would be Swihart plus a lot more because they're incredibly thin at C. I don't think they're interested in trading him anyway.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Aug 21, 2015 23:10:48 GMT -5
Or how bout this as a plan? Sign Price and Greinke to anchor the front of the rotation and put together a strong package of veterans and prospects to get Goldschimdt? No having to give up Betts, Swihart, E-Rod, JBJ or Owens because we have enough depth in the organization to not have to give any of them up. I am trying to imagine a JBJ-Betts-Benintendi OF in a few years...and the thought of it is borderline scary. Goldschmidt is one of the few guys out there that you'd have to give up Betts or Bogaerts for IMO. The only outside shot otherwise would be Swihart plus a lot more because they're incredibly thin at C. I don't think they're interested in trading him anyway. I'd be willing to give up Bogaerts if it was in return for Goldy. Especially knowing who X's agent is. That is one of the few cases I'd be willing to part with him. Marrero would be a good enough place holder until Guerra is ready. But not Bogaerts and Swihart though...in fact I am completely against moving Swihart until there is more certainty about Vasquez's recovery.
|
|
|