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.
2020 Vision: Position Players
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 18, 2019 13:34:59 GMT -5
Yeah, I actually thought about that after I posted. I like Inciarte as a JBJ replacement. And I like Anderson, although not as much as May or Patiño. I probably dismissed it too quickly as a 2-player deal, because it’s probably a fairly sensible one. My main concern is that I really think the Sox need to get more long-term upside back if they’re going to go through trading Mookie and all that entails. Anderson is more a high-likelihood 3/4 than May or Patiño, who both have TOR upside. And while Inciarte is a solid CF, he had significant injury issues last year, and he’s basically a passable starter, not a “good” one. Anderson isn’t MLB-ready (he might be mid-season), so if I’m the Sox I’d need to get back another pitcher who could step right in. Even so, they’d be hard-pressed to make up the 7 WAR they’ll lose from Mookie. Getting 7 wins from one guy is like having two 4.5-win players. I really think they need to go all upside and rebuild the farm if they move Mookie. He provides SO much value over an average player, I think contention, while possible, is a huge longshot in his absence. I’d prefer they get a 20-40 range guy, a back-100, and a couple low-level lottery tickets with no MLB players coming back. Don’t get me wrong...they might *have* to move him (or risk getting just the draft pick), and I doubt it gets much better than the SD or Cincy deals, but I’d prefer they go as low-cost, high-upside as possible and then re-sign him next winter, when the prospects they got back and their own cohort in AA/AAA have a year more experience, and they can potentially cut more fat with low-cost replacements, and ideally sign one high-end FA. It sucks that they can’t go after Cole. He is a rare talent. Same for Rendon. Both of those guys are difference-makers. Rendon’s played 2b, too...imagine moving him back there, what the offense would be like. And pairing Cole with Sale...wow. Good stuff, Telson. Honestly I didn't know a ton about either player and was projecting maybe a bit too much optimism. I'm still hopeful of an extension which would put all this to rest. Your idea of going all upside is interesting, and likely right, but for the team would be quite risky to execute. Could be a PR nightmare for the ages if no headliner returns and the prospects, as they sometimes do, never amount to much. I think a trade is a PR nightmare regardless; the risk of going prospect-only is, I think, more justifiable in retrospect than something akin to the Lackey trade. TBH, as much as I want Mookie to be a Red Sox lifer, the best possible outcome is a desperation overpay by LA (or SD...imagine Gore+Edwards lol?!; I’m not at all enthusiastic about Atl) and the return players playing well enough to cement MLB roles such that the Sox can shave more salary and then re-up with Mookie next winter. The one positive I see in all of this is the Nationals’ run. Atl and LA especially have got to feel SO close; and SD has got to have seen their progress this past year, Tatis jr and Paddack and a likely Machado rebound, and LA’s perceived vulnerability...and thinking that they could be next year’s Nats facsimile. I think there’s a rather reasonable chance of a bidding war. On the other side, if the Sox trade Mookie, they might as well hard reset. That means selling off pieces like Workman and Barnes, maybe Taylor...all of whom could have substantial value, especially at the deadline. If I’m Boston and I trade Mookie...I look to trade Price, Eovaldi, a bunch of relievers, and maybe one of the utility guys, and roll youth for the year. Then, re-sign Mookie and take a shot in 2021.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,911
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 2, 2019 11:34:27 GMT -5
Casually informed plan, details to follow ...
Trade JDM after he opts in (or if he opts out); re-sign Mitch Moreland as DH.
Sign Logan Morrison as 1B. (Yes, he plays 1B and Moreland, a better defender, is the DH. But Mitch hits great off the bench and Morrison doesn't appear to be able to do it at all.)
Trade JBJ and trade for Jake Marisnick or Michael A. Taylor. (How strange is is that there are just two RH-hitting 4th OFers in their walk year who would be about a 1+-win downgrade from JBJ while earning much less in arb, and they just played against each other in the WS?)
You've now (I hope) saved enough money to re-sign Holt on a team-friendly deal, plus sign a 5th starter.
Betts Benintendi Bogaerts Devers Moreland Vazquez Morrison Marisnick Holt
That's plenty good enough to contend.
The bench is new cheap C, Hernandez, Chavis, and a 4th OFer. I like former Mets #3 prospect Carlos Puella, who has kicked around but has always had great tools (except for chasing and missing outside the zone) and can handle the RF and CF defense. However, a LHB who doesn't share his big weakness with Chavis and Marco would probably be a better fit.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 3, 2019 10:40:29 GMT -5
Could be completely wrong, but I have this weird feeling that SD goes hard after Strasburg (and a fair chance he signs, heading home). If they DID get Strasburg, I think it **really** boosts the chances they take a shot at getting Mookie for the year and really aggressively try to accelerate their timeline. Adding those two might reasonably swing them by 10 wins. Granted, that puts them only at 80 all things equal, but with their HUGE stable of young players, full seasons from Paddack and Tatis Jr, the ability to add big talent in-season, and that their 70-win season this year was quite likely an underperformance...I could see them winning 90 games or more, especially with those two under wraps and maybe a couple mid-level signings or trades to shore up their most glaring holes. Similarly, I think if Cincy were to lure a pitcher in the Wheeler-or-better level, they could easily be tempted to take a shot on Mookie and “go for it.” That’s a good division, but without any one commanding team. Upgrade 2-3 wins with Wheeler or Ryu (or more, if they got one of the big two), and 5-6 with Mookie, and they’re immediate serious contenders. They only won 75, but their run diff was an 80-win season. They could easily be the class of that division with those two moves and several minor moves for depth, especially if Votto bounces back a little. And the Dodgers, if they lose Ryu, could say “what the hell?” because, as people have noted, organizationally they’ve really gotta wanna break through. The prospect cost might be high for one year, but it’s also only one year, so for any of these teams it’s not really a cost issue.
I keep coming back to wanting Mookie to be a Sox lifer, but arguably the best thing organizationally long-term is swinging a great deal this winter, getting a 60 FV guy back, plus extra, (best possible deal is probably Mookie-Workman to LA, since it’s a big OF upgrade and a significant low-cost BP upgrade), and then charge hard to re-sign Mookie next winter. If the Sox actually could get Verdugo-May back, they’re probably only losing 2-3 wins, if Verdugo is a 4-win player in ‘20 and May can put up 2 WAR (vs <1 for Porcello). They could still contend, especially since not having Mookie’s $30M means they could seek out some high-upside cheap pillow deals or short-term upgrades (Kendrick?). Hell, I’d even lay if out to Mookie and say, “we’re gonna bring you back to an even better team, and we’ll pay you what you’re worth.”
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Nov 3, 2019 11:07:26 GMT -5
I keep coming back to wanting Mookie to be a Sox lifer, but arguably the best thing organizationally long-term is swinging a great deal this winter, getting a 60 FV guy back, plus extra, (best possible deal is probably Mookie-Workman to LA, since it’s a big OF upgrade and a significant low-cost BP upgrade), and then charge hard to re-sign Mookie next winter. If the Sox actually could get Verdugo-May back, they’re probably only losing 2-3 wins, if Verdugo is a 4-win player in ‘20 and May can put up 2 WAR (vs <1 for Porcello). They could still contend, especially since not having Mookie’s $30M means they could seek out some high-upside cheap pillow deals or short-term upgrades (Kendrick?). Hell, I’d even lay if out to Mookie and say, “we’re gonna bring you back to an even better team, and we’ll pay you what you’re worth.” This would make some kind of sense if the Dodgers window was closing and they were in desperate need for regular season wins in 2020. But it isn't, and they're not. And for all the "they have to go for it" talk, ok... well they can like sign Gerrit Cole and just keep their young controlled four win outfielder. In fact, they can do anything. Why they need to make an extremely costly trade for Mookie Betts specifically is a question that remains unanswered.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Nov 3, 2019 21:21:02 GMT -5
Casually informed plan, details to follow ... Trade JDM after he opts in (or if he opts out); re-sign Mitch Moreland as DH.
Sign Logan Morrison as 1B. (Yes, he plays 1B and Moreland, a better defender, is the DH. But Mitch hits great off the bench and Morrison doesn't appear to be able to do it at all.) Trade JBJ and trade for Jake Marisnick or Michael A. Taylor. (How strange is is that there are just two RH-hitting 4th OFers in their walk year who would be about a 1+-win downgrade from JBJ while earning much less in arb, and they just played against each other in the WS?) You've now (I hope) saved enough money to re-sign Holt on a team-friendly deal, plus sign a 5th starter. Betts Benintendi Bogaerts Devers Moreland Vazquez Morrison Marisnick Holt
That's plenty good enough to contend.
The bench is new cheap C, Hernandez, Chavis, and a 4th OFer. I like former Mets #3 prospect Carlos Puella, who has kicked around but has always had great tools (except for chasing and missing outside the zone) and can handle the RF and CF defense. However, a LHB who doesn't share his big weakness with Chavis and Marco would probably be a better fit.
That line-up looks like a significant drop after Devers, if not a cliff. Moreland played 124 games in 2018, 91 in 2019. How confident are we that he can get back to at least 120 games? Vazquez just had a career year. Do we believe he repeats that? Marisnick has a lifetime K rate of 30% and an OPB of .280. Yuk. Logan Morrison played 29 games in 2019 and 95 in 2018 and his numbers have been heading deep south for two years. Double yuk.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 3, 2019 22:07:17 GMT -5
Casually informed plan, details to follow ... Trade JDM after he opts in (or if he opts out); re-sign Mitch Moreland as DH.
Sign Logan Morrison as 1B. (Yes, he plays 1B and Moreland, a better defender, is the DH. But Mitch hits great off the bench and Morrison doesn't appear to be able to do it at all.) Trade JBJ and trade for Jake Marisnick or Michael A. Taylor. (How strange is is that there are just two RH-hitting 4th OFers in their walk year who would be about a 1+-win downgrade from JBJ while earning much less in arb, and they just played against each other in the WS?) You've now (I hope) saved enough money to re-sign Holt on a team-friendly deal, plus sign a 5th starter. Betts Benintendi Bogaerts Devers Moreland Vazquez Morrison Marisnick Holt
That's plenty good enough to contend.
The bench is new cheap C, Hernandez, Chavis, and a 4th OFer. I like former Mets #3 prospect Carlos Puella, who has kicked around but has always had great tools (except for chasing and missing outside the zone) and can handle the RF and CF defense. However, a LHB who doesn't share his big weakness with Chavis and Marco would probably be a better fit.
That line-up looks like a significant drop after Devers, if not a cliff. Moreland played 124 games in 2018, 91 in 2019. How confident are we that he can get back to at least 120 games? Vazquez just had a career year. Do we believe he repeats that? Marisnick has a lifetime K rate of 30% and an OPB of .280. Yuk. Logan Morrison played 29 games in 2019 and 95 in 2018 and his numbers have been heading deep south for two years. Double yuk. Yeah, that's a lineup I hope they don't go into 2020 with. That lineup will have them competing for fourth place. And for the reasons you stated.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 4, 2019 3:15:25 GMT -5
I keep coming back to wanting Mookie to be a Sox lifer, but arguably the best thing organizationally long-term is swinging a great deal this winter, getting a 60 FV guy back, plus extra, (best possible deal is probably Mookie-Workman to LA, since it’s a big OF upgrade and a significant low-cost BP upgrade), and then charge hard to re-sign Mookie next winter. If the Sox actually could get Verdugo-May back, they’re probably only losing 2-3 wins, if Verdugo is a 4-win player in ‘20 and May can put up 2 WAR (vs <1 for Porcello). They could still contend, especially since not having Mookie’s $30M means they could seek out some high-upside cheap pillow deals or short-term upgrades (Kendrick?). Hell, I’d even lay if out to Mookie and say, “we’re gonna bring you back to an even better team, and we’ll pay you what you’re worth.” This would make some kind of sense if the Dodgers window was closing and they were in desperate need for regular season wins in 2020. But it isn't, and they're not. And for all the "they have to go for it" talk, ok... well they can like sign Gerrit Cole and just keep their young controlled four win outfielder. In fact, they can do anything. Why they need to make an extremely costly trade for Mookie Betts specifically is a question that remains unanswered. I’ve said before I think it’s highly unlikely. The only rationale would be they’re dealing from depth and aren’t saddled with a huge long-term deal. It’s a one-year shot for them with an uber-team. But I agree, they have so many options Mookie is probably way down the list. There IS a huge difference between paying Mookie $30M for one year and Cole $250M for 8. Personally, I disagree with the “Dodgers should go for it,” because it’s an uber-build, which is really unnecessary, and their issue is postseason (spend those $ on BP depth, for one) not regular season. I’m speaking of what makes sense from a Sox perspective, not what I think is a likely outcome (I doubt anyone will be willing to pay what it would take to make it worth the Sox’s while). For it to be worth trading Mookie, someone would have to go Torres-for-Chapman style. It *could* happen, and if they got an offer like that they kinda have to take it. But I’d say it’s around 5-10% that the Sox trade Mookie AND get back what they’d need to to make not miserable.
|
|
|