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.
Red Sox Trade Hunter Renfroe to the Brewers
|
Post by manfred on Dec 15, 2021 13:12:02 GMT -5
Disaster obviously oversells it. And in isolation, it really probably doesn’t move the needle enormously one way or the other. But if a FO leans heavily into taking a slight loss now to accumulate prospects, cumulatively, it diminishes short term prospects. Mookie, Beni, Renfroe… all trades that were short/medium losses talent-wise. Even Moreland, who would have helped last year. I’m not saying a) the idea was bad; or b) *case by case* there wasn’t a rationale. I think, though, some of us would like to see more balance of short and long game. As people say, they were two wins from the WS last year… so get those wins! And not literally 1/2 WAR here, half there… if you need 2, shoot for 5. They were 2 wins from the series… and 1 game from not making the playoffs. You lose a little, you could be going home early. Just like they lost nothing by trading Benintendi and improved his position by spending $3M for Renfroe, they will do the same thing this year by trading Renfroe and spending money with a lot more prospects. There is no 'slight loss now' by making these trades. Again… technically Beni had a higher WAR than Renfroe, even before you subtract Franchy. That was a mathematical loss. I’m not relitigating… I’m explaining why I (probably others) are not as enthusiastic about these trades. It would be nice to have a few more trades like Schwarber… prospect for big addition.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 15, 2021 13:16:54 GMT -5
Just like they lost nothing by trading Benintendi and improved his position by spending $3M for Renfroe, they will do the same thing this year by trading Renfroe and spending money with a lot more prospects. There is no 'slight loss now' by making these trades. Again… technically Beni had a higher WAR than Renfroe, even before you subtract Franchy. That was a mathematical loss. I’m not relitigating… I’m explaining why I (probably others) are not as enthusiastic about these trades. It would be nice to have a few more trades like Schwarber… prospect for big addition. And Benintendi hit .103 in 2020 and cost $2M more than Renfroe, which was then spent on someone else.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Dec 15, 2021 13:41:42 GMT -5
Just like they lost nothing by trading Benintendi and improved his position by spending $3M for Renfroe, they will do the same thing this year by trading Renfroe and spending money with a lot more prospects. There is no 'slight loss now' by making these trades. Again… technically Beni had a higher WAR than Renfroe, even before you subtract Franchy. That was a mathematical loss. I’m not relitigating… I’m explaining why I (probably others) are not as enthusiastic about these trades. It would be nice to have a few more trades like Schwarber… prospect for big addition. Your two favorite things are watching home-grown players and trading prospects for established players, but your least favorite thing is adding the prospect depth that is necessary to make those things possible.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 15, 2021 14:00:36 GMT -5
Again… technically Beni had a higher WAR than Renfroe, even before you subtract Franchy. That was a mathematical loss. I’m not relitigating… I’m explaining why I (probably others) are not as enthusiastic about these trades. It would be nice to have a few more trades like Schwarber… prospect for big addition. Your two favorite things are watching home-grown players and trading prospects for established players, but your least favorite thing is adding the prospect depth that is necessary to make those things possible. Nope. I said balance. I’d like to see a balance. I’d like them to get certainty from some of these additions rather than wait for them to move down the rankings. I’d be psyched to see some of the mid-level guys sent off for middle relievers etc. Just an example.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Dec 15, 2021 14:12:39 GMT -5
Disaster obviously oversells it. And in isolation, it really probably doesnât move the needle enormously one way or the other. But if a FO leans heavily into taking a slight loss now to accumulate prospects, cumulatively, it diminishes short term prospects. Mookie, Beni, Renfroe⦠all trades that were short/medium losses talent-wise. Even Moreland, who would have helped last year. Iâm not saying a) the idea was bad; or b) *case by case* there wasnât a rationale. I think, though, some of us would like to see more balance of short and long game. As people say, they were two wins from the WS last year⦠so get those wins! And not literally 1/2 WAR here, half there⦠if you need 2, shoot for 5. They were 2 wins from the series⦠and 1 game from not making the playoffs. You lose a little, you could be going home early. Weren't you just suggesting the difference between Kiké and JBJ wouldn't have made a difference to their season, despite the huge difference in WAR and production? I know you said JBJ would've had his typical year if he stayed in Boston, but even still that would've been clearly inferior to what Kiké did. Now you're citing the minuscule difference between Renfroe and Benny as a loss, when the CF switch was clearly much more significant. Moreland was also replacement level (or below according to Fangraphs) last year, so now we're assuming he would've been valuable too if he stuck around? Let me ask: if we're to believe all the players who Bloom sold before their performances declined would've had career average years if they simply stayed, shouldn't we also assume Benintendi's bounce back year wouldn't have happened if he stuck around? To be clear, I don't buy any of those narratives, I think it's only fair to judge players on what they actually did, not what they could've done if they played for another team.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 15, 2021 14:24:12 GMT -5
Disaster obviously oversells it. And in isolation, it really probably doesnât move the needle enormously one way or the other. But if a FO leans heavily into taking a slight loss now to accumulate prospects, cumulatively, it diminishes short term prospects. Mookie, Beni, Renfroe⦠all trades that were short/medium losses talent-wise. Even Moreland, who would have helped last year. Iâm not saying a) the idea was bad; or b) *case by case* there wasnât a rationale. I think, though, some of us would like to see more balance of short and long game. As people say, they were two wins from the WS last year⦠so get those wins! And not literally 1/2 WAR here, half there⦠if you need 2, shoot for 5. They were 2 wins from the series⦠and 1 game from not making the playoffs. You lose a little, you could be going home early. Weren't you just suggesting the difference between Kiké and JBJ wouldn't have made a difference to their season, despite the huge difference in WAR and production? I know you said JBJ would've had his typical year if he stayed in Boston, but even still that would've been clearly inferior to what Kiké did. Now you're citing the minuscule difference between Renfroe and Benny as a loss, when the CF switch was clearly much more significant. Moreland was also replacement level (or below according to Fangraphs) last year, so now we're assuming he would've been valuable too if he stuck around? Let me ask: if we're to believe all the players who Bloom sold before their performances declined would've had career average years if they simply stayed, shouldn't we also assume Benintendi's bounce back year wouldn't have happened if he stuck around? To be clear, I don't buy any of those narratives, I think it's only fair to judge players on what they actually did, not what they could've done if they played for another team. Last thing on this, because I don’t care — I am merely trying to explain why getting another haul of guys with possible upside doesn’t thrill me the way it does others. I was fine with letting JBJ walk. In place of that money, they could sign Kiké and Renfroe. I didn’t like signing Renfroe, and I was wrong. Now, those moves did *not* force a Beni trade. You could have a) had Beni and Renfroe split time and/or b) had Kiké at 2b with a Beni, Verdugo, Renfroe OF. That is a better team than what they fielded — Franchy, Marwin, the 2b rotation, etc. Again, we can argue individual moves all day, but my main point is: when we accumulate prospects, there are three possible outcomes. A few will play for the Sox. Many will never make it. And some *could* get traded. My hope is they make a few more moves in column three with guys before it is clear they are heading for column two. Dombrowski may gave emptied the system, but he also chose very well who to sell and who to hold.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 15, 2021 14:29:44 GMT -5
If you keep Benintendi and don't sign Gonzalez, you are clearly a better team right? No negative Cordero, no negative Gonzalez and you'd get a big boast with Benintendi. It was a downgrade talent wise for prospects that hopefully help you long-term. I see the Renfroe trade as very similar, keeping Renfroe and signing another guy will be cheaper givin Bradley's salary and likely produces you more bwar.
I base trades in two phases, when they are made and the final results. In my book Renfroe and another signing, with the extra 10 million in cash, plus 5 million in luxury space will get you more bwar for the team than Bradley. That's supported by projections at both Baseball Refrence and Fangraphs. The only way you can't see this as a down grade this year is if you believe Bradley will out produce Renfroe and ten million dollars and signing another guy. So it's all about that cost versus the prospects we got. I'd give it a C right now because I don't think they got enough and I see Binelas as a risky level 45 prospect. Like I said day one that doesn't mean it can't workout. I can see a similar comp to Dalbec and if that happens it's a good trade long-term. Now say he got another 45 grade prospect added in, one much closer to the bigs that's less risky. I'd greatly improve my grade when he made it and the outcomes wouldn't matter. I think Groome was a darn good pick no matter what happens, it was worth the risk given his upside. You take a Yorke much higher than anyone has him, the outcome matters more. The GM will deserve much more credit also. Like Danny Ainge valuing Tatum #1 when no other team did or him valuing Brown much higher than everyone else. It was risky, if he was wrong he'd take a ton of criticism and because he was right he gets a ton of praise.
Everyone talks about the Dodgers, yet if you want to be them it's not just adding in prospect in large numbers. It's about those Kemp trades that net you Downs and Gray that are top 100 guys a year latter. You can only use so many depth and up and down players, the real heavy value is the guys that are better.
To give another example take the Betts trade, I liked that. Still a little surprised he couldn't get one of there many pitchers. Yet no matter what happens that was a good solid trade. Yet I say that because of how I valued the players we got back. A good young proven OF, a high upside middle infielder who people talk about maybe playing CF, and a bat first catcher that can play many different positions.
Take the Workman and Hembree trade, that was great no matter what happens in my book. The Moreland trade was more so so given how on fire he was. Not horrible by any means, yet it certainly makes you wonder what else was out there. Nevermind them needing to be moved to the 40 man roster so soon was a big part of that trade. At the same time these trades didn't hurt your season or add long-term payroll, so that's a big plus.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Dec 15, 2021 15:07:54 GMT -5
Your two favorite things are watching home-grown players and trading prospects for established players, but your least favorite thing is adding the prospect depth that is necessary to make those things possible. Nope. I said balance. I’d like to see a balance. I’d like them to get certainty from some of these additions rather than wait for them to move down the rankings. I’d be psyched to see some of the mid-level guys sent off for middle relievers etc. Just an example. In some sense everyone wants "balance"; we all just have different definitions of it. But if you are "psyched" to convert prospect depth into middle relievers, the most marginal role on a major league roster, I think you're pretty far toward one end of the spectrum.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 15, 2021 15:17:12 GMT -5
Nope. I said balance. I’d like to see a balance. I’d like them to get certainty from some of these additions rather than wait for them to move down the rankings. I’d be psyched to see some of the mid-level guys sent off for middle relievers etc. Just an example. In some sense everyone wants "balance"; we all just have different definitions of it. But if you are "psyched" to convert prospect depth into middle relievers, the most marginal role on a major league roster, I think you're pretty far toward one end of the spectrum. You want to hold on to Hudson Potts? Or get even a tiny bit for him?
|
|
ematz1423
Veteran
Posts: 5,384
Member is Online
|
Post by ematz1423 on Dec 15, 2021 15:19:51 GMT -5
In some sense everyone wants "balance"; we all just have different definitions of it. But if you are "psyched" to convert prospect depth into middle relievers, the most marginal role on a major league roster, I think you're pretty far toward one end of the spectrum. You want to hold on to Hudson Potts? Or get even a tiny bit for him? I mean there's also a third option of having guys like Potts as a sweetener in a sense for a bigger deal than middle relievers.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 15, 2021 15:23:13 GMT -5
You want to hold on to Hudson Potts? Or get even a tiny bit for him? I mean there's also a third option of having guys like Potts as a sweetener in a sense for a bigger deal than middle relievers. I’d love that too. *Anything* but watching guys go from 17 to 28 to 48 to Korea or whatever.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Dec 15, 2021 15:27:41 GMT -5
In some sense everyone wants "balance"; we all just have different definitions of it. But if you are "psyched" to convert prospect depth into middle relievers, the most marginal role on a major league roster, I think you're pretty far toward one end of the spectrum. You want to hold on to Hudson Potts? Or get even a tiny bit for him? Why sure, if the Nats are willing to talk Juan Soto for Potts, I'd be willing to hear them out.
I'd trade anyone if the price is right. But let's ground this in reality. Bloom has traded Aldo for Schwarber, Scherff for Robles, and Chavis for... that other guy whose name I forget. It's not like he never trades prospects. But he also tries to add them when he can, which as near as I can tell is something you never want to do unless the team is out of contention at the trade deadline.
Ideally, yes, Bloom would only add prospects that were destined to pan out 100% of the time. But you appreciate the unreasonableness of this demand, right?
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 15, 2021 15:36:01 GMT -5
You want to hold on to Hudson Potts? Or get even a tiny bit for him? Why sure, if the Nats are willing to talk Juan Soto for Potts, I'd be willing to hear them out.
I'd trade anyone if the price is right. But let's ground this in reality. Bloom has traded Aldo for Schwarber, Scherff for Robles, and Chavis for... that other guy whose name I forget. It's not like he never trades prospects. But he also tries to add them when he can, which as near as I can tell is something you never want to do unless the team is out of contention at the trade deadline.
Ideally, yes, Bloom would only add prospects that were destined to pan out 100% of the time. But you appreciate the unreasonableness of this demand, right?
Last post on this: *most* of them won’t pan out, so I suspect we could go through the top-40 and say these ~25 are a good bet to be worth more now in a trade than later in our system. A mistake will likely be made here or there… a Tatis-sized error? Not with our system above A ball, no. It is still early in The Plan (tm). We’ll see.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Dec 15, 2021 15:46:45 GMT -5
If you keep Benintendi and don't sign Gonzalez, you are clearly a better team right? No negative Cordero, no negative Gonzalez and you'd get a big boast with Benintendi. It was a downgrade talent wise for prospects that hopefully help you long-term. I see the Renfroe trade as very similar, keeping Renfroe and signing another guy will be cheaper givin Bradley's salary and likely produces you more bwar. I base trades in two phases, when they are made and the final results. In my book Renfroe and another signing, with the extra 10 million in cash, plus 5 million in luxury space will get you more bwar for the team than Bradley. That's supported by projections at both Baseball Refrence and Fangraphs. The only way you can't see this as a down grade this year is if you believe Bradley will out produce Renfroe and ten million dollars and signing another guy. So it's all about that cost versus the prospects we got. I'd give it a C right now because I don't think they got enough and I see Binelas as a risky level 45 prospect. Like I said day one that doesn't mean it can't workout. I can see a similar comp to Dalbec and if that happens it's a good trade long-term. Now say he got another 45 grade prospect added in, one much closer to the bigs that's less risky. I'd greatly improve my grade when he made it and the outcomes wouldn't matter. I think Groome was a darn good pick no matter what happens, it was worth the risk given his upside. You take a Yorke much higher than anyone has him, the outcome matters more. The GM will deserve much more credit also. Like Danny Ainge valuing Tatum #1 when no other team did or him valuing Brown much higher than everyone else. It was risky, if he was wrong he'd take a ton of criticism and because he was right he gets a ton of praise. Everyone talks about the Dodgers, yet if you want to be them it's not just adding in prospect in large numbers. It's about those Kemp trades that net you Downs and Gray that are top 100 guys a year latter. You can only use so many depth and up and down players, the real heavy value is the guys that are better. To give another example take the Betts trade, I liked that. Still a little surprised he couldn't get one of there many pitchers. Yet no matter what happens that was a good solid trade. Yet I say that because of how I valued the players we got back. A good young proven OF, a high upside middle infielder who people talk about maybe playing CF, and a bat first catcher that can play many different positions. Take the Workman and Hembree trade, that was great no matter what happens in my book. The Moreland trade was more so so given how on fire he was. Not horrible by any means, yet it certainly makes you wonder what else was out there. Nevermind them needing to be moved to the 40 man roster so soon was a big part of that trade. At the same time these trades didn't hurt your season or add long-term payroll, so that's a big plus. These are those Kemp trades that can net you top 100 guys in the future. Obviously we don't know where these players will end up, but Gray was ranked 18th in the Dodgers system the season after the trade, Binelas in the Sox now? 18th. Everyone would love another prospect, but that's not what Hunter Renfroe was worth. Not to say they'll definitely work out, but you have to try or you never get the surplus value.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Dec 15, 2021 15:49:40 GMT -5
Why sure, if the Nats are willing to talk Juan Soto for Potts, I'd be willing to hear them out.
I'd trade anyone if the price is right. But let's ground this in reality. Bloom has traded Aldo for Schwarber, Scherff for Robles, and Chavis for... that other guy whose name I forget. It's not like he never trades prospects. But he also tries to add them when he can, which as near as I can tell is something you never want to do unless the team is out of contention at the trade deadline.
Ideally, yes, Bloom would only add prospects that were destined to pan out 100% of the time. But you appreciate the unreasonableness of this demand, right?
Last post on this: *most* of them won’t pan out, so I suspect we could go through the top-40 and say these ~25 are a good bet to be worth more now in a trade than later in our system. A mistake will likely be made here or there… a Tatis-sized error? Not with our system above A ball, no. It is still early in The Plan (tm). We’ll see. Ideally, yes, Bloom would trade all the prospects who were destined to not pan out. But you appreciate the unreasonableness of this demand, right?
Though it's also a little funny because your reaction to actually trading prospect depth for a middle reliever was less than psyched:
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 15, 2021 16:06:16 GMT -5
Last post on this: *most* of them won’t pan out, so I suspect we could go through the top-40 and say these ~25 are a good bet to be worth more now in a trade than later in our system. A mistake will likely be made here or there… a Tatis-sized error? Not with our system above A ball, no. It is still early in The Plan (tm). We’ll see. Ideally, yes, Bloom would trade all the prospects who were destined to not pan out. But you appreciate the unreasonableness of this demand, right?
Though it's also a little funny because your reaction to actually trading prospect depth for a middle reliever was less than psyched:
Yea. And Robles was… a guy who had a good year a few years ago. But note I was actually saying what I’m saying now: probably doesn’t matter. I stand by that — Robles was nothing and Scherff will almost certainly be nothing. Good deep dive! Do Beni next. What did I say about Franchy?
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Dec 15, 2021 16:08:19 GMT -5
Ideally, yes, Bloom would trade all the prospects who were destined to not pan out. But you appreciate the unreasonableness of this demand, right?
Though it's also a little funny because your reaction to actually trading prospect depth for a middle reliever was less than psyched:
Yea. And Robles was… a guy who had a good year a few years ago. But note I was actually saying what I’m saying now: probably doesn’t matter. I stand by that — Robles was nothing and Scherff will almost certainly be nothing. Good deep dive! Do Beni next. What did I say about Franchy? I believe you called him "the next Big Papi," but I'm just going on memory here...
|
|
|
Post by Soxfansince1971 on Dec 15, 2021 16:12:22 GMT -5
Ideally, yes, Bloom would trade all the prospects who were destined to not pan out. But you appreciate the unreasonableness of this demand, right?
Though it's also a little funny because your reaction to actually trading prospect depth for a middle reliever was less than psyched:
Yea. And Robles was… a guy who had a good year a few years ago. But note I was actually saying what I’m saying now: probably doesn’t matter. I stand by that — Robles was nothing and Scherff will almost certainly be nothing. Good deep dive! Do Beni next. What did I say about Franchy? no offense Manfred, but you constantly argue not to trade Mookie (who would have been lost for nothing), Beni (who was easily replaced by Renfroe), and Renfroe who will easily be replaced by much better defenders), all while adding 10 players. Please rest your tired agreement. It is beyond boring!
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,990
|
Post by jimoh on Dec 15, 2021 16:25:51 GMT -5
one -
Karl of Delaware (Georgetown, Delaware):
Super power guy Alex Binelas has gone off to the Red Sox in the trade for Hunter Renfro - would he have been a candidate for a high prospect ranking if he were still in the Brewer's organization?
Ben Badler: Would have likely been in the 15-20 range. Big big power, but also some swing holes and defensive limits.
Ben Badler: David Hamilton is the guy I think could sting more to lose. Maybe he ends up a utility type, but I’m a fan of his contact skills, plate discipline and speed.
That's what worries me. If I'm interpreting Badler the right way it sounds like a utility guy is the bigger loss in this deal for the Brewers which tells me he doesn't look at Binelas and see a regular. And the defensive limits doesn't sound too promising either. [...] Hi, I don't think you are understanding Badler. He is not saying that he thinks Hamilton WILL be a utility guy and that as a utility guy he WILL be better than Binelas. He is saying that "maybe" Binelas will ONLY wind up as a utility type, but that his "contact skills, plate discipline and speed" suggest that he will be more than that. He is saying his floor is a utiility guy who stole 50 bases in the minors, but his ceiling is that of a MI with a good BA, OBP, and speed. That's why he thinks Hamilton as a regular, not a utility guy, "could" be better than Binelas.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 15, 2021 16:28:54 GMT -5
You want to hold on to Hudson Potts? Or get even a tiny bit for him? Why sure, if the Nats are willing to talk Juan Soto for Potts, I'd be willing to hear them out. I'd trade anyone if the price is right. But let's ground this in reality. Bloom has traded Aldo for Schwarber, Scherff for Robles, and Chavis for... that other guy whose name I forget. It's not like he never trades prospects. But he also tries to add them when he can, which as near as I can tell is something you never want to do unless the team is out of contention at the trade deadline.
Ideally, yes, Bloom would only add prospects that were destined to pan out 100% of the time. But you appreciate the unreasonableness of this demand, right?
Chavis was dealt for Austin Davis. Yes, he was forgettable. I remember Cora not wanting to turn to him to face Brantley after the Astros had taken a 3-2 lead in Game 4 and opting for Perez instead who gave up a bases clearing double. When your manager doesn't trust a LOOGY over Perez, then that LOOGY didn't really resonate.
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,837
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Dec 15, 2021 16:32:00 GMT -5
I'm all in favor of buying prospects and pined the last two off-seasons for CB to be aggressive with this approach. I'd love to know whether the reports of a Wil Myers trade were accurate and would be disappointed if the opportunity was there and CB didn't close. I also had my eye on Rougned Odor ($8.25M AAV) before the Rangers released him. I thought the Rangers might cough up a top-100 guy to ditch the contract, or at least some of the money remaining on it.
I even had Chris Davis fantasies. I wondered how much of that contract we'd have to take on to pry Grayson Rodriguez loose.
That said, I don't understand the Renfroe-JBJ trade unless Bloom REALLY loves Binelas. In moving Renfore for JBJ, he gave up a superior, less expensive player (and yes, I understand Renfroe's limitations) to acquire a prospect that nobody seems to regard highly.
Shipping Mitch Moreland out at the deadline in '20 didn't cost money - in fact, it saved a little - and brought Rosario, who debuted on SP at 11, and Potts, who debuted at 15. In this trade, we got Binelas, who SP has at 18, and Hamilton, who's at 26. It doesn't add up.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 15, 2021 16:36:12 GMT -5
Yea. And Robles was… a guy who had a good year a few years ago. But note I was actually saying what I’m saying now: probably doesn’t matter. I stand by that — Robles was nothing and Scherff will almost certainly be nothing. Good deep dive! Do Beni next. What did I say about Franchy? no offense Manfred, but you constantly argue not to trade Mookie (who would have been lost for nothing), Beni (who was easily replaced by Renfroe), and Renfroe who will easily be replaced by much better defenders), all while adding 10 players. Please rest your tired agreement. It is beyond boring! Renfroe and Beni could have played together. And I was not against trading Beni in principle. I was against getting little in return.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 15, 2021 16:37:18 GMT -5
Yea. And Robles was… a guy who had a good year a few years ago. But note I was actually saying what I’m saying now: probably doesn’t matter. I stand by that — Robles was nothing and Scherff will almost certainly be nothing. Good deep dive! Do Beni next. What did I say about Franchy? I believe you called him "the next Big Papi," but I'm just going on memory here... Yeahhhh… that sounds close at least.
|
|
ematz1423
Veteran
Posts: 5,384
Member is Online
|
Post by ematz1423 on Dec 15, 2021 16:39:49 GMT -5
I'm all in favor of buying prospects and pined the last two off-seasons for CB to be aggressive with this approach. I'd love to know whether the reports of a Wil Myers trade were accurate and would be disappointed if the opportunity was there and CB didn't close. I also had my eye on Rougned Odor ($8.25M AAV) before the Rangers released him. I thought the Rangers might cough up a top-100 guy to ditch the contract, or at least some of the money remaining on it. I even had Chris Davis fantasies. I wondered how much of that contract we'd have to take on to pry Grayson Rodriguez loose. That said, I don't understand the Renfroe-JBJ trade unless Bloom REALLY loves Binelas. In moving Renfore for JBJ, he gave up a superior, less expensive player (and yes, I understand Renfroe's limitations) to acquire a prospect that nobody seems to regard highly. Shipping Mitch Moreland out at the deadline in '20 didn't cost money - in fact, it saved a little - and brought Rosario, who debuted on SP at 11, and Potts, who debuted at 15. In this trade, we got Binelas, who SP has at 18, and Hamilton, who's at 26. It doesn't add up. I will say that comparing the 11 and 15 prospect for the Sox in 2020 is not apples to apples to the 18 and 26 going into 2022. The farm is quite a bit stronger now than in 2020.
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,837
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Dec 15, 2021 16:46:21 GMT -5
I'm all in favor of buying prospects and pined the last two off-seasons for CB to be aggressive with this approach. I'd love to know whether the reports of a Wil Myers trade were accurate and would be disappointed if the opportunity was there and CB didn't close. I also had my eye on Rougned Odor ($8.25M AAV) before the Rangers released him. I thought the Rangers might cough up a top-100 guy to ditch the contract, or at least some of the money remaining on it. I even had Chris Davis fantasies. I wondered how much of that contract we'd have to take on to pry Grayson Rodriguez loose. That said, I don't understand the Renfroe-JBJ trade unless Bloom REALLY loves Binelas. In moving Renfore for JBJ, he gave up a superior, less expensive player (and yes, I understand Renfroe's limitations) to acquire a prospect that nobody seems to regard highly. Shipping Mitch Moreland out at the deadline in '20 didn't cost money - in fact, it saved a little - and brought Rosario, who debuted on SP at 11, and Potts, who debuted at 15. In this trade, we got Binelas, who SP has at 18, and Hamilton, who's at 26. It doesn't add up. I will say that comparing the 11 and 15 prospect for the Sox in 2020 is not apples to apples to the 18 and 26 going into 2022. The farm is quite a bit stronger now than in 2020. I thought of that, too. But the difference in the system isn't that dramatic. It's not enough to cover the difference in the rankings of the four players and the cost/productivity differences between Renfroe vs. JBJ.
|
|
|