|
Post by despo19 on Jul 31, 2017 9:44:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Jul 31, 2017 9:45:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Jul 31, 2017 9:45:26 GMT -5
|
|
atzar
Veteran
Posts: 1,817
|
Post by atzar on Jul 31, 2017 9:45:59 GMT -5
Ouch. They included Callahan? That stings a little. Eh. I'm not going to lose sleep over a guy who projects as a middle relief arm.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jul 31, 2017 9:46:39 GMT -5
Man, that is a lot for a rental. Maybe the Sox are just higher on the pitchers they just drafted as releievers.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Jul 31, 2017 9:46:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jul 31, 2017 9:47:35 GMT -5
Ouch. They included Callahan? That stings a little. Eh. I'm not going to lose sleep over a guy who projects as a middle relief arm. Callahan has potential as a high upside arm for the backend of a bullpen.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Jul 31, 2017 9:47:45 GMT -5
Meh, okay with it. These aren't guys I'm going to lose sleep over.
|
|
|
Post by DesignatedKyle on Jul 31, 2017 9:47:55 GMT -5
I like it.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Jul 31, 2017 9:48:07 GMT -5
Nothing too worrisome there.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,403
|
Post by radiohix on Jul 31, 2017 9:48:13 GMT -5
I'm cool with it. Reed is awesome and I prefer Buttrey to Callahan so whatever.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 31, 2017 9:50:09 GMT -5
Okay, initial take: Callahan being the best piece to get Reed is fine - giving up quantity instead of quality is the tradeoff here. On the other hand, it's yet ANOTHER three-for-one trade for a reliever. I'd have been a lot happier with this if they could've gotten this done with a weaker second piece than Nogosek, or if it had just been the top two.
EDIT: This is a good trade for the Mets.
|
|
|
Post by alex710707 on Jul 31, 2017 9:50:10 GMT -5
Love this wonderful deal.
|
|
|
Post by The Town Sports Cards on Jul 31, 2017 9:50:24 GMT -5
2 MLB potential middle relievers (in a system with Maddox, Taylor, Buttrey, Martin, etc) and a lottery ticket is pretty decent for Reed. I'm not upset over it as we have plenty of bullpen depth and Bautista is a big question mark and rule 5 eligible i think this offseason
|
|
atzar
Veteran
Posts: 1,817
|
Post by atzar on Jul 31, 2017 9:50:35 GMT -5
This is fine. Good addition without giving up anything important.
Hope Reed can bolt down the eighth inning for us.
|
|
|
Post by kingofthetrill on Jul 31, 2017 9:51:14 GMT -5
I mean SP ranking wise, we gave up our 20th, 25th, and 47th prospects (in what probably isn't a great system currently). I'm fine with it. I would have liked to see Bruce come with him, but we got an important playoff piece without touching the top 17-20 prospects.
|
|
|
Post by jackiebradleyjrjr on Jul 31, 2017 9:52:26 GMT -5
I don't like it. I rather keep as many assets as possible for a potential trade for a big bat over the offseason. And I'm pretty high on Callahan. But it's not a ridiculous overpay (it is an overpay though but that's what you get for making late July trades). It's fine and I am coming in from the ledge now.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Jul 31, 2017 9:53:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by despo19 on Jul 31, 2017 9:56:18 GMT -5
Realistically, with Groome, Houck, Mata, Lakins, Scherff, and Thompson projected as starters and Beeks and Shawaryn projected as relievers all above Callahan, it's not a massive loss to the system by any means. Typically at least 2-3 of those young starters will eventually be converted to relievers much like Matt Barnes. Houck has the stuff to be a much better reliever than Callahan probably ever could have been
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Jul 31, 2017 9:59:40 GMT -5
These are guys that had to be added to the 40 man this offseason, correct? I'm fine just wish we could have done it a week ago.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 31, 2017 10:00:36 GMT -5
Bautista and Callahan need to be added, yes. Callahan almost certainly will be and I wouldn't be surprised if he gets a September call by the Mets. Nogosek was a 2016 draftee so he doesn't need to be added for a couple years.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 31, 2017 10:01:24 GMT -5
They didn't need another RHR, but sometimes strengthening a strength isn't a bad move. That Reed can close should Kimbrel get hurt is, I think, a major plus and rationale. I like Callahan, but it'll be a bit of a surprise if he can be a 8th inning guy.
Presumably Scott will go down to make room (but see below). It's going to be hard finding room for two LHR until September. You have to figure that Smith doesn't come back until 9/1, either.
Kimbrel Reed Barnes Kelly (R specialist) Abad (L specialist)
That gives you a strong 7th through 9th even on days when one of the top three guys is unavailable.
Now the question is whether you deal Hembree (who probably has some trade value for a contender with a thin pen and farm system) or Boyer (who would have a lot less) so you don't have to send Workman down when Kelly comes off the DL. But they may want to stash Workman in AAA as an 8th guy to cover the inevitable injuries.
Best part of the deal may be that it increases the odds of Fister being DFA'd.
|
|
|
Post by pedroiaesque on Jul 31, 2017 10:06:07 GMT -5
Feels like a modest overpay, but it's not gonna break us. Typical Dombrowski to me. Spent more than was probably necessary to get what he wanted.
I'm just hoping they picked up the Addison Reed who has been pitching for the Mets the last couple seasons and not the guy who used to pitch for the White Sox and D-Backs.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jul 31, 2017 10:07:48 GMT -5
Yeah either Fister is DFA'd after today or Noe Ramirez is DFA'd to make room on the 40 man roster imo. Robbie Scott sent down if Noe is DFA'd, like Eric mentioned.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Jul 31, 2017 10:08:52 GMT -5
I look at trading Bautista the way I looked at Espinosa: great arms that aren't close are worth selling for arms that are here. Callahan wasn't going to be on the team this year, is Rule 5 (with other similar arms). Nogosek might end up being a decent reliever, but, well, might.
The other question to me is, does this trade hurt the Sox making an impact trade now or in the next year? I don't think so. They kept any centerpiece, and they have other secondary pieces (Buttrey types) they could package in a similar way.
|
|