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 pappyman99 on Jul 9, 2024 11:39:13 GMT -5
Happy he clarified that the playoff odds are fairly irrelevant as a sole indicator
As the context of those are are extremely important
|
|
|
Post by crossedsabres8 on Jul 9, 2024 11:40:27 GMT -5
Maybe it's a 3 lane highway, buy, sell, and buy-and-sell
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Jul 9, 2024 11:42:21 GMT -5
When I get my paycheck, I consider it wishy-washy to spend some of it and save some of it. Feels indecisive. Instead I pick a lane - either I spend every penny or I put it all in the bank. It's really the only sensible approach to weighing present value against future value. For the sake of the discourse I really hope that we end up buying some and selling some at the deadline
|
|
|
Post by sgfeer on Jul 9, 2024 11:42:41 GMT -5
Win 5 out of 6 (or better yet sweep), put the pressure on the ownership. Make a deal as early as possible, say Eovaldi, hopefully without overpaying, a nice fair deal for all, and put pressure on other teams.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jul 9, 2024 11:45:33 GMT -5
When I get my paycheck, I consider it wishy-washy to spend some of it and save some of it. Feels indecisive. Instead I pick a lane - either I spend every penny or I put it all in the bank. It's really the only sensible approach to weighing present value against future value. Wish I had a choice when I get my paycheck, lol.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jul 9, 2024 11:47:06 GMT -5
Happy he clarified that the playoff odds are fairly irrelevant as a sole indicator As the context of those are are extremely important I agreed with Breslow's take on the odds wholeheartedly.
|
|
asm18
Veteran
Posts: 2,362
|
Post by asm18 on Jul 9, 2024 12:01:49 GMT -5
McAdam asked Breslow around the 10:30 mark (paraphrasing): How much of a factor is what you would expect your team to do in the playoffs were it get there. I.e. “we don’t expect to get out of the division series” - is that a factor in your decision making?
Breslow: “I think that’s a really dangerous position to take just given what we’ve seen in recent history and the runs of teams that maybe that wouldn’t have been favored at the outset to make deep World Series runs, win the World Series. There’s a new season that starts on Day 1 of the playoffs and often time it’s the team that gets hot at the right time, and sometimes that’s different or supercedes what happens over the course of 162 Games. Do you want to think about “do we believe we have a team built for the World Series?” Of course. It would be silly to ignore that. But if that’s the only decision making criteria, you can find yourself in a situation where you’re just never pushing to make the playoffs, because the chances for all 30 teams winning the World Series is pretty low when you start the season. So I would probably avoid making a decision based on that.”
Wait, so if the Red Sox make the playoffs this year as an underdog, they’re allowed to win the World Series? Since when has that been a rule
|
|
|
Post by theburn on Jul 9, 2024 12:06:34 GMT -5
It already feels like Breslow is hedging with comments like these. Is there even a timetable for Casas' return yet?
|
|
|
Post by awalkinthepark on Jul 9, 2024 12:12:14 GMT -5
Also, the fact that he highlights Grissom as a guy they are clearly banking on should nix the idea that he would be traded.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,479
|
Post by nomar on Jul 9, 2024 12:20:42 GMT -5
Also, the fact that he highlights Grissom as a guy they are clearly banking on should nix the idea that he would be traded. It could also just be his attempt to keep his value up if they do sell on him. Who knows?
|
|
asm18
Veteran
Posts: 2,362
|
Post by asm18 on Jul 9, 2024 12:25:50 GMT -5
It already feels like Breslow is hedging with comments like these. Is there even a timetable for Casas' return yet? Breslow said in passing that Casas’ rehab “is going well” but we haven’t got much in the form of updates aside from he started actual (non-imaginary) dry swings 🤷♂️ Hopefully we get a positive pre-game Casas update from Cora soon
|
|
|
Post by oldfaithful2019 on Jul 9, 2024 12:37:08 GMT -5
Also, the fact that he highlights Grissom as a guy they are clearly banking on should nix the idea that he would be traded. It could also just be his attempt to keep his value up if they do sell on him. Who knows? Coming from the NL East i am sure Breslow had ample information about Grissom to feel good about his future. Vaughn has not played himself out of a roll. Story, Hamilton and Grissom feels like a very good starting point for MI in 2025. That does not mean Grissom could not traded, but I would expect the return to be very immediately worth it and not prospects.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Jul 9, 2024 12:40:59 GMT -5
Playoff odds at 42%. What does 2 of Meidroth, Yorke, Jordan, Paulino, Lugo get you? That’s the group I’m looking to deal from. Low minors guys are not getting traded as often as they used to and I’m looking to add pitching depth, not deal from it. Chris and Ian discussed this exact question on the newest SP podcast. Another great listen!
|
|
|
Post by itinerantherb on Jul 9, 2024 12:50:14 GMT -5
The "lane" metaphor is PR, intended to show an intention to be decisive. Call it the ghost of Chaim. It doesn't mean that he's not open to both buying and selling. I mean, if they were to trade Kenley for a good pitching prospect and trade some of their MI depth in the high minors for Fedde and Mason Miller (not that I'm predicting this), it would be pretty easy to stand up there and say, "well, we found a way to improve now and in the future, so that was a pretty attractive lane to be in."
|
|
asm18
Veteran
Posts: 2,362
|
Post by asm18 on Jul 9, 2024 13:17:44 GMT -5
The "lane" metaphor is PR, intended to show an intention to be decisive. Call it the ghost of Chaim. It doesn't mean that he's not open to both buying and selling. I mean, if they were to trade Kenley for a good pitching prospect and trade some of their MI depth in the high minors for Fedde and Mason Miller (not that I'm predicting this), it would be pretty easy to stand up there and say, "well, we found a way to improve now and in the future, so that was a pretty attractive lane to be in." My quibble with the buy/sell approach is that this all sounds awesome in theory but you actually have to make both trades work simultaneously. As Jeff Passan was saying on Section 10 last week: “What we don’t take into account is how difficult it is to make one trade. One trade takes alot of work usually to make. Think about having to make one trade, but it’s contingent on another. In order for the buy/sell thing to work, you need to have all these different balls in the air at the same time, and things need to line up perfectly.” Like I know the example you mention here is more of a template than anything else (and the premise makes sense). If Craig Breslow told me “hey we’re trading rentals for prospects we REALLY LIKE and then trading prospects we’re kinda meh on for dudes that are just as good as our rentals & also have team control” then hell yeah I’d tell him to go for it without hesitation. But like… he actually has to have that available for him first 🤷♂️
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 9, 2024 13:31:03 GMT -5
The "lane" metaphor is PR, intended to show an intention to be decisive. Call it the ghost of Chaim. It doesn't mean that he's not open to both buying and selling. I mean, if they were to trade Kenley for a good pitching prospect and trade some of their MI depth in the high minors for Fedde and Mason Miller (not that I'm predicting this), it would be pretty easy to stand up there and say, "well, we found a way to improve now and in the future, so that was a pretty attractive lane to be in." My quibble with the buy/sell approach is that this all sounds awesome in theory but you actually have to make both trades work simultaneously. As Jeff Passan was saying on Section 10 last week: “What we don’t take into account is how difficult it is to make one trade. One trade takes alot of work usually to make. Think about having to make one trade, but it’s contingent on another. In order for the buy/sell thing to work, you need to have all these different balls in the air at the same time, and things need to line up perfectly.” Like I know the example you mention here is more of a template than anything else (and the premise makes sense). If Craig Breslow told me “hey we’re trading rentals for prospects we REALLY LIKE and then trading prospects we’re kinda meh on for dudes that are just as good as our rentals & also have team control” then hell yeah I’d tell him to go for it without hesitation. But like… he actually has to have that available for him first 🤷♂️ Passan has a point here, but I dunno, it's not that hard. The Red Sox did it in 2022. Just off the top of my head I believe the Rays and Guardians and Brewers have done it in recent years. So did the Yankees, for that matter, when they traded away Montgomery and added Montas.
|
|
|
Post by oldfaithful2019 on Jul 9, 2024 13:36:19 GMT -5
" The last piece that is often overlooked is the opportunities, until you have the talks, you don't know what opportunities are available to upgrade your team, or opportunities to get something you simply can't walk past" Key phrase for me.
|
|
|
Post by itinerantherb on Jul 9, 2024 13:53:11 GMT -5
My quibble with the buy/sell approach is that this all sounds awesome in theory but you actually have to make both trades work simultaneously. As Jeff Passan was saying on Section 10 last week: “What we don’t take into account is how difficult it is to make one trade. One trade takes alot of work usually to make. Think about having to make one trade, but it’s contingent on another. In order for the buy/sell thing to work, you need to have all these different balls in the air at the same time, and things need to line up perfectly.” Like I know the example you mention here is more of a template than anything else (and the premise makes sense). If Craig Breslow told me “hey we’re trading rentals for prospects we REALLY LIKE and then trading prospects we’re kinda meh on for dudes that are just as good as our rentals & also have team control” then hell yeah I’d tell him to go for it without hesitation. But like… he actually has to have that available for him first 🤷♂️ Passan has a point here, but I dunno, it's not that hard. The Red Sox did it in 2022. Just off the top of my head I believe the Rays and Guardians and Brewers have done it in recent years. So did the Yankees, for that matter, when they traded away Montgomery and added Montas. And of course the relative difficulty also depends on whether one trade is strictly contingent on another being completed. In the made up example that I gave, if they were to acquire Miller and then not find a partner for a Kenley trade, it's not a problem to carry both of them. On the other hand, before trading Pivetta for prospects, they'd have to be near certain that they could replace him in the rotation. I take Passan's point, but some moves are relatively independent of others.
|
|
asm18
Veteran
Posts: 2,362
|
Post by asm18 on Jul 9, 2024 14:01:16 GMT -5
My quibble with the buy/sell approach is that this all sounds awesome in theory but you actually have to make both trades work simultaneously. As Jeff Passan was saying on Section 10 last week: “What we don’t take into account is how difficult it is to make one trade. One trade takes alot of work usually to make. Think about having to make one trade, but it’s contingent on another. In order for the buy/sell thing to work, you need to have all these different balls in the air at the same time, and things need to line up perfectly.” Like I know the example you mention here is more of a template than anything else (and the premise makes sense). If Craig Breslow told me “hey we’re trading rentals for prospects we REALLY LIKE and then trading prospects we’re kinda meh on for dudes that are just as good as our rentals & also have team control” then hell yeah I’d tell him to go for it without hesitation. But like… he actually has to have that available for him first 🤷♂️ Passan has a point here, but I dunno, it's not that hard. The Red Sox did it in 2022. Just off the top of my head I believe the Rays and Guardians and Brewers have done it in recent years. So did the Yankees, for that matter, when they traded away Montgomery and added Montas. The 2022 Red Sox is a great example of buy/sell. Wilyer and Valdez for Vazquez, you get McGuire for a terrible Diekman - and McGuire actually out-hit Vazquez down the stretch as well. (Not to mention they got Pham and Hosmer to replace Dalbec before Hosmer got hurt.) But like… if the Astros trade for Contreras from the Cubs as they originally planned before Dusty Baker allegedly quashed it, does Vazquez still get moved? Does Chaim have to tell the White Sox, “actually never mind, forget our interest in Reese”? I love the idea of a series of trades where you get to have your cake and eat it too - like no one is saying no to that. For the purposes of having a plan on July 30 though… I don’t know if that’s where you realistically aim for, which might be where Breslow is saying he wants to pick a lane. If something like that presents itself, cool
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 9, 2024 14:10:50 GMT -5
Passan has a point here, but I dunno, it's not that hard. The Red Sox did it in 2022. Just off the top of my head I believe the Rays and Guardians and Brewers have done it in recent years. So did the Yankees, for that matter, when they traded away Montgomery and added Montas. The 2022 Red Sox is a great example of buy/sell. Wilyer and Valdez for Vazquez, you get McGuire for a terrible Diekman - and McGuire actually out-hit Vazquez down the stretch as well. (Not to mention they got Pham and Hosmer to replace Dalbec before Hosmer got hurt.) But like… if the Astros trade for Contreras from the Cubs as they originally planned before Dusty Baker allegedly quashed it, does Vazquez still get moved? Does Chaim have to tell the White Sox, “actually never mind, forget our internet in Reese”? I love the idea of a series of trades where you get to have your cake and eat it too - like no one is saying no to that. For the purposes of having a plan on July 30 though… I don’t know if that’s where you realistically aim for, which might be where Breslow is saying he wants to pick a lane. If something like that presents itself, cool The counterfactual cuts both ways. Bloom didn't trade Eovaldi or JDM but maybe he would have if the moving parts had fit together better - and for all we know they nearly did. And then in 2023 I think we saw what it looks like when those moving parts don't come together at all (though the Blalock/Urias trade was decent enough).
All this to say, it's neither wildly hypothetical to imagine a buy/sell scenario working out, nor guaranteed that it will.
And also: standing pat is a totally normal thing that many teams do every trade deadline, typically when they're on the fringe of contention. It's totally fine to do that too.
|
|
|
Post by pappyman99 on Jul 9, 2024 14:24:05 GMT -5
I don’t see the 2022 deadline as some buy/sell success
The team continued to crash and burn that the MLB level as it had the whole month leading to the deadline
Picking up Abreu and Hamilton was nice but also reinforces that you really should make a a full decision as we had better assets to sell than just Vazquez
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 9, 2024 14:30:29 GMT -5
I don’t see the 2022 deadline as some buy/sell success The team continued to crash and burn that the MLB level as it had the whole month leading to the deadline Picking up Abreu and Hamilton was nice but also reinforces that you really should make a a full decision as we had better assets to sell than just Vazquez If only they had had a full sell-off when 2 games out of the WC and then gone into a tail-spin the rest of the season (but gotten John Henry under the luxury tax threshold) they could have escaped criticism!
|
|
|
Post by pappyman99 on Jul 9, 2024 15:03:13 GMT -5
I don’t see the 2022 deadline as some buy/sell success The team continued to crash and burn that the MLB level as it had the whole month leading to the deadline Picking up Abreu and Hamilton was nice but also reinforces that you really should make a a full decision as we had better assets to sell than just Vazquez If only they had had a full sell-off when 2 games out of the WC and then gone into a tail-spin the rest of the season (but gotten John Henry under the luxury tax threshold) they could have escaped criticism! They were already in a tailspin and a free fall well before the deadline . And you know this has nothing to do with Henry’s Wallet
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jul 9, 2024 15:04:05 GMT -5
I don’t see the 2022 deadline as some buy/sell success The team continued to crash and burn that the MLB level as it had the whole month leading to the deadline Picking up Abreu and Hamilton was nice but also reinforces that you really should make a a full decision as we had better assets to sell than just Vazquez The annoying part of 2022 was that McGuire turned into Johnny Bench for 36 games (not the annoying part) which gave the impression that you can buy and sell and still get better. Looking back on it, 2022 was a clear sell with some luck and window dressing (see Hosmer, Eric) to make it not so obvious. The buy/sell/still compete scenario is largely a myth. The thing is McGuire didn’t need to do that for the Red Sox to have gotten better. McGuire was a better player than Vazquez in 2021 too. No hindsight needed to like the swap just for the team on the field.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 9, 2024 15:07:05 GMT -5
I don’t see the 2022 deadline as some buy/sell success The team continued to crash and burn that the MLB level as it had the whole month leading to the deadline Picking up Abreu and Hamilton was nice but also reinforces that you really should make a a full decision as we had better assets to sell than just Vazquez The annoying part of 2022 was that McGuire turned into Johnny Bench for 36 games (not the annoying part) which gave the impression that you can buy and sell and still get better. Looking back on it, 2022 was a clear sell with some luck and window dressing (see Hosmer, Eric) to make it not so obvious. The buy/sell/still compete scenario is largely a myth. I actually think it was the opposite of lucky happenstance. Vazquez->McGuire was a lateral move that happened to work out well. But the team patched some huge holes by adding Pham and Hosmer, really smart moves that didn't really work out because Hosmer got hurt and Pham didn't play that well. But those were the moves that made the team better on paper, which justified their also adding Abreu and Valdez for their future value.
By the way, those Pham/Hosmer additions are an example of how a team with a massive roster hole is in much better position to improve at the deadline - a 1 WAR player is a significant upgrade. The Red Sox don't have any holes like that right now (except at 1B where Casas is set to return).
|
|
|