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.
2013 Non-Waiver Trade Deadline Discussion
|
Post by mainesox on Jul 5, 2013 15:47:04 GMT -5
Sox are in on Garza. The only way it'd make sense to del for him is if you could get away with a package along the lines of Britton and Hazelbaker and maybe evens guy like Kalish if Theo wanted him. point is he doesn't improve the situation enough to warrent anything real valuable going back. I completely disagree, until Buchholz comes back Garza would be the second best pitcher on the team assuming Lackey keeps up his dominance, and even after Buchh comes back Garza would be better than three of the guys currently in our rotation. Even if you want to go a step further and assume Lester returns to dominance in the second half, how is having a #2 (or at least a very good #3) caliber starter as your #4 not improving the situation by a significant margin?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 5, 2013 16:02:53 GMT -5
Here's my question: is Garza clearly an upgrade on the existing rotation candidates? Would you unambiguously start him over two of Lester/Dempster/Doubront? Here's a custom leaderboard comparing the four of them. Yeah, Garza has the nice shiny ERA, but by advanced metrics, the gap between them narrows significantly. Plus, Garza has the more recent injury history, and considering that he's the best arm guaranteed to be traded at the deadline, he's going to cost a ton to acquire. I'm not sold that he's enough of an upgrade to be worth the package he's going to require.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Jul 5, 2013 17:14:59 GMT -5
Here's my question: is Garza clearly an upgrade on the existing rotation candidates? Would you unambiguously start him over two of Lester/Dempster/Doubront? Here's a custom leaderboard comparing the four of them. Yeah, Garza has the nice shiny ERA, but by advanced metrics, the gap between them narrows significantly. Plus, Garza has the more recent injury history, and considering that he's the best arm guaranteed to be traded at the deadline, he's going to cost a ton to acquire. I'm not sold that he's enough of an upgrade to be worth the package he's going to require. Garza is an upgrade over Dempster and Doubront IMO. He would likely cost 2 top ten prospects...Ranaudo & Cecchini?...WMB? We do have a surplus of Milb third basemen...I would not do it under the heading of,,,"If it ain't broke....."
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 5, 2013 17:43:04 GMT -5
What would you be willing to give up for him? I don't necessarily completely agree with you but I won't say you are necessarily wrong. However a top 4 of Buchholz, Lackey, Lester and Dempster is pretty good. Does Garza make them better? Sure, never said otherwise. You say significantly, I disagree, but we may have different ideas on what's significant.
How much furthe do they go? This team isn't in now or never mode, its early and Garza isn't a major difference maker in my opinion. The questionis what are you willing to deal for 2 months of Garza in 2013? Then I can tell you if I can agree with where you are coming from.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Jul 5, 2013 17:45:38 GMT -5
Here's my question: is Garza clearly an upgrade on the existing rotation candidates? Would you unambiguously start him over two of Lester/Dempster/Doubront? Here's a custom leaderboard comparing the four of them. Yeah, Garza has the nice shiny ERA, but by advanced metrics, the gap between them narrows significantly. Plus, Garza has the more recent injury history, and considering that he's the best arm guaranteed to be traded at the deadline, he's going to cost a ton to acquire. I'm not sold that he's enough of an upgrade to be worth the package he's going to require. Garza is an upgrade over Dempster and Doubront IMO. He would likely cost 2 top ten prospects...Ranaudo & Cecchini?...WMB? We do have a surplus of Milb third basemen...I would not do it under the heading of,,,"If it ain't broke....." Garza may be the best arm available at the trading deadline but I can't imagine the Cubs are able to get Ranaduo and Cecchini value for him. Hes in the last year of his contract so he is a rental. The acquiring team could not get any compensation for him at year end. He has had recent injury concerns. I could see his value being a Workman/Britton and a high A or low A prospect who is further away. That's the most I would value him at and even that's hard to stomach but realistically it wouldn't break the future for a run at a title.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 5, 2013 17:53:25 GMT -5
Moved in some posts from the Gameday thread, which means the chronology might be a bit funny.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Jul 5, 2013 17:58:06 GMT -5
Garza is an upgrade over Dempster and Doubront IMO. He would likely cost 2 top ten prospects...Ranaudo & Cecchini?...WMB? We do have a surplus of Milb third basemen...I would not do it under the heading of,,,"If it ain't broke....." Garza may be the best arm available at the trading deadline but I can't imagine the Cubs are able to get Ranaduo and Cecchini value for him. Hes in the last year of his contract so he is a rental. The acquiring team could not get any compensation for him at year end. He has had recent injury concerns. I could see his value being a Workman/Britton and a high A or low A prospect who is further away. That's the most I would value him at and even that's hard to stomach but realistically it wouldn't break the future for a run at a title. After consideration I would modify what I said halfway b/t you and me. I say one top tier prospect and some flotsam.Yes he is a rental...but he is 29, in the prime and has a long track record as a 2 or 3. I would put him on a par with Lester. Grabbing for the brass ring has not stopped teams from coughing up prospects, even for rentals, when they can taste it. We have a pending glut at third so Cecchini or WMB might go IMO. Webster is not fully ready and to me gets by on superior stuff that he can't yet consistently locate. However, we only need 3 starting pitchers in the playoffs. I don't want to trade our treasure. Our top 10 prospects excite me more for our future than I have felt in a long time. How about a Webster for Garza trade?
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Jul 5, 2013 18:01:31 GMT -5
errant copy & paste.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 5, 2013 18:05:15 GMT -5
Garza is an upgrade over Dempster and Doubront IMO. He would likely cost 2 top ten prospects...Ranaudo & Cecchini?...WMB? We do have a surplus of Milb third basemen...I would not do it under the heading of,,,"If it ain't broke....." Garza may be the best arm available at the trading deadline but I can't imagine the Cubs are able to get Ranaduo and Cecchini value for him. Hes in the last year of his contract so he is a rental. The acquiring team could not get any compensation for him at year end. He has had recent injury concerns. I could see his value being a Workman/Britton and a high A or low A prospect who is further away. That's the most I would value him at and even that's hard to stomach but realistically it wouldn't break the future for a run at a title.Of course it wouldn't, but how much better are you in the playoffs having Garza pitch a few games instead of Dempster? It all comes down to actual cost. Owens is an A ball prospect. Workman and Owens for Garza.... No thanks.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Jul 5, 2013 18:23:37 GMT -5
Garza may be the best arm available at the trading deadline but I can't imagine the Cubs are able to get Ranaduo and Cecchini value for him. Hes in the last year of his contract so he is a rental. The acquiring team could not get any compensation for him at year end. He has had recent injury concerns. I could see his value being a Workman/Britton and a high A or low A prospect who is further away. That's the most I would value him at and even that's hard to stomach but realistically it wouldn't break the future for a run at a title.Of course it wouldn't, but how much better are you in the playoffs having Garza pitch a few games instead of Dempster? It all comes down to actual cost. Owens is an A ball prospect. Workman and Owens for Garza.... No thanks. Well if you arbitrarily pick the best prospect in A ball that of course makes it look completely fool hardy. I'm not in favor of a trade but am saying a Workman and Coyle, De La Cruz or Jacobs doesn't hurt the system all that much for an "improved" chance at a title. Yes that is debatable if it is an improved chance and that is why I'd rather move lesser prospects that create a 40 man glut for improving the bullpen then moving any of the top 10 prospects even if WMB, Bogaerts and Cecchini create a perceived bottleneck at 3rd. Bogaerts can be SS then RF. WMB could be a DH. Cecchini could be a LF or 2B down the road. Can't be narrow minded in a prospects future position.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 5, 2013 18:33:30 GMT -5
Garza doesn't improve this team enough for it to be worth 2 top 10 prospects. Now if it were a guy who could do what Napoli and/or Middlebrooks were supposed to do...
But a 3b worth trading for probably won't be on the market.
I'd rather just stand pat or make minor trades with guys who need 40 man spots next year.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jul 5, 2013 18:34:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mainesox on Jul 5, 2013 19:06:58 GMT -5
Here's my question: is Garza clearly an upgrade on the existing rotation candidates? Would you unambiguously start him over two of Lester/Dempster/Doubront? Here's a custom leaderboard comparing the four of them. Yeah, Garza has the nice shiny ERA, but by advanced metrics, the gap between them narrows significantly. Plus, Garza has the more recent injury history, and considering that he's the best arm guaranteed to be traded at the deadline, he's going to cost a ton to acquire. I'm not sold that he's enough of an upgrade to be worth the package he's going to require. Garza is an upgrade over Dempster and Doubront IMO. He would likely cost 2 top ten prospects...Ranaudo & Cecchini?...WMB? We do have a surplus of Milb third basemen...I would not do it under the heading of,,,"If it ain't broke....." I don't think he'll cost that much, I'm think more like a guy from the back half of the top 10, and a couple guys in the teens, but if you're right I definitely wouldn't do two top 10 guys, so maybe the disagreement is as much about how much we think he'll cost as it is about how much of an upgrade we think he'll be. But I do think he'd be a definite upgrade over those guys; I know FIP likes Doubront for some reason, but Garza's K/BB ratio is the best of any of them by a pretty significant margin, as are his WHIP and SIERA. And, at least in the case of Doubront, Garza has a much better track record (including his time in the AL East), goes deeper into outings, and is more consistent. It's also not like Doubront has exactly been the model of health coming to camp out of shape multiple years in a row and having to be shut down for a while in the spring, plus inexplicably losing fastball velocity. Short answer: yes, I would start him over at least Doubront and Dempster without hesitation, and the only reason I would hesitate starting him over Lester is because of who Lester has been in the past, and the belief that in any given start that guy could still show up.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 5, 2013 20:21:56 GMT -5
I guess Garza's just never impressed me much. He's back to being an extreme fly ball pitcher with good but not great strikeout and walk numbers. His injury history also scares me, and I think there's a good chance he needs Tommy John by the end of the season. Doubront might not be efficient enough to go 7 innings, but between the strikeouts and the ground balls, he keeps runs off the board and a strong relief corps can take care of the rest in the postseason.
Plus, the Cubs reportedly asked for Schoop and Eduardo Rodriguez from the Orioles (BA's 50th and 100th ranked prospects in the 2013 preseason list). That's arguably more than the Cubs will get in the end, but I think it's going to at least require an Owens or Ranaudo-level prospect (heading a multi-prospect package) to get a deal done, which is too rich for my blood.
|
|
|
Post by mainesox on Jul 5, 2013 20:52:26 GMT -5
Owens I wouldn't do, but Ranaudo I might be able to see. Knowing what little I do about the internal information the Sox have (which is to say, none) I wouldn't want to give up Ranaudo for Garza, but if they have reason to believe that he's going to continue to be a concern as far as injuries are concerned, or otherwise believe that what he's doing right now is less than sustainable, I could definitely see trying to sell high on him right now. On the flip side, if they have reason to believe this is real, and he can stay healthy, then I wouldn't trade him for Garza either.
Also, this is only tangentially related, but didn't someone who did a mid-season top 50 a couple weeks ago (Callis maybe?) go on Speier's podcast and say that Owens would have been just barely outside of the top 50 (along with Barnes)?
Edit to add: I hadn't noticed that his fly ball numbers are back up this year, that is a bit of a concern to me.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 6, 2013 0:11:37 GMT -5
We all agree Garza is an upgrade over Doubront.its about what we'd give up for a marginally better chance to win this year. If you can trade some 40 man space, like Britton, Hassan, kalish, butler and wright then go for it - none of the top12
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 6, 2013 0:13:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Jul 6, 2013 8:26:45 GMT -5
Doubronts last ten starts have been great. On May 8th he gave up 6 runs and in his ten starts since he has given up 3 or less runs in each one and went a full 6 innings in all but three. His ERA went from 6.40 to 4.11 in that time. I think this SP talk is hedging the bets if Buch has a set back in the next three weeks. www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=doubrfe01&t=p&year=2013
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Jul 6, 2013 9:17:15 GMT -5
Barring injury I would do absolutely nothing at the deadline. There are internal options which won't require BC to surrender valuable assets.
Middle brooks hits a valley and an Iglesias comes to the rescue. Drew pulls a hammie and the Jose slides over. Will hits the pits and Snyder comes to the rescue. Meanwhile Middlebrooks is raking jacks down in Pawtucket preparing to return.
Lackey has been lights out now that he is healthy and totally committed. Felix is proving what his great talent can offer. Lester seems to be regaining his effectiveness.
And the bullpen has been outstanding. Without Bard, Hanrahan,and with a slumping Bailey, along comes Uehara, and all of a sudden our relief situation is not so dire
Carp comes off the bench. Gomes the same. Ross goes on the 60 day and, lo and behold, Lavarnway doesn't miss a beat.
This team has shown me, to my surprise, that it can contend for the post season with the roster as presently constructed with plug-ins from Pawtucket.
Stand pat Ben.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 6, 2013 9:40:12 GMT -5
Barring injury I would do absolutely nothing at the deadline. There are internal options which won't require BC to surrender valuable assets. .. This team has shown me, to my surprise, that it can contend for the post season with the roster as presently constructed with plug-ins from Pawtucket. Stand pat Ben. All the while they are developing young players to be the core or at least solid pieces to the future: Iglesias (bonafide major league SS or versatile utility player) Lavarnway ( at least showing he can perform in a backup role) Doubront ( making strides to being a top notch 4 or 5 for a top team) Webster ( getting invaluable experience learning a the major league level on a contending team) Carp (learning how to hit major league pitching in Fenway and away from Safeco - proven to be at the least an incredibly valuable bench option and possibly much more) Wilson ( throwing well as a middle reliever) Miller (a very good season again) Only guy who's gone "the wrong way"is WMB... The farm has also had an amazing first half wit a plethora of guys moving forward successfully (Bradley, RDLR, Ranaudo, Britton, Workmam, Bogaerts, Cecchini, Owens, Swithart, mookie) Brentz has been solid and Hassan loos good but SSS. This ignores most of the lower minors which as seen promises too. Barnes is the only " higher level" prospect that's gone somewhat downhill and there is plenty of reason to not get too concerned about him. Great 4 months - preseason plan is going way better then could be expected. Stick to it and keep the band together.
|
|
|
Post by 1mpaz10 on Jul 6, 2013 9:49:35 GMT -5
Barring injury I would do absolutely nothing at the deadline. There are internal options which won't require BC to surrender valuable assets. Middle brooks hits a valley and an Iglesias comes to the rescue. Drew pulls a hammie and the Jose slides over. Will hits the pits and Snyder comes to the rescue. Meanwhile Middlebrooks is raking jacks down in Pawtucket preparing to return. Lackey has been lights out now that he is healthy and totally committed. Felix is proving what his great talent can offer. Lester seems to be regaining his effectiveness. And the bullpen has been outstanding. Without Bard, Hanrahan,and with a slumping Bailey, along comes Uehara, and all of a sudden our relief situation is not so dire Carp comes off the bench. Gomes the same. Ross goes on the 60 day and, lo and behold, Lavarnway doesn't miss a beat. This team has shown me, to my surprise, that it can contend for the post season with the roster as presently constructed with plug-ins from Pawtucket. Stand pat Ben.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 6, 2013 9:54:24 GMT -5
Barring injury I would do absolutely nothing at the deadline. There are internal options which won't require BC to surrender valuable assets. Middle brooks hits a valley and an Iglesias comes to the rescue. Drew pulls a hammie and the Jose slides over. Will hits the pits and Snyder comes to the rescue. Meanwhile Middlebrooks is raking jacks down in Pawtucket preparing to return. Lackey has been lights out now that he is healthy and totally committed. Felix is proving what his great talent can offer. Lester seems to be regaining his effectiveness. And the bullpen has been outstanding. Without Bard, Hanrahan,and with a slumping Bailey, along comes Uehara, and all of a sudden our relief situation is not so dire Carp comes off the bench. Gomes the same. Ross goes on the 60 day and, lo and behold, Lavarnway doesn't miss a beat. This team has shown me, to my surprise, that it can contend for the post season with the roster as presently constructed with plug-ins from Pawtucket. Stand pat Ben. Agreed. Depth is our MVP this season.
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Jul 6, 2013 10:20:58 GMT -5
Depth really is such an underrated asset in the MLB. It's something that has allowed Oakland to be successful recently, and it's kept Boston atop this year. Stars are needed to be a great team, but it's just as important to have viable players step up when needed. Snyder, Iglesias, Carp, Bradley, Lava, Webster, and Aceves (recently) were all non-starter depth players at the start of the season, and have all performed well when called upon. This year we won't have to suffer through a Paul Byrd-esque starter or an Eric Patterson-esque outfielder because of the depth Ben has built.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 6, 2013 11:31:17 GMT -5
On the flip side, lots of depth means it's tough to identify an area where the Red Sox could clearly upgrade via trade at the deadline. With the looming 40-man crunch and the general roster crunch at Pawtucket (particularly the rotation and the bullpen), I imagine Ben wants to make a minor trade here or there.
|
|
|
Post by britalb on Jul 6, 2013 13:16:20 GMT -5
A month ago I suggested trading Drew and Victorino. I think my logic was sound - both remain injury-prone and potentially replaceable from Pawtucket, but at this point Victorino is too important to trade and Drew may be too injured to get sufficient value. Plus this team has chemistry - that unquantifiable something that inspires a different hero to emerge nearly every game. But between Biogenesis and the expanded wildcard, I do think it remains a seller's market at the deadline. And the Sox will have a ridiculous number of Rule 5 eligible players to protect in November: wiki.soxprospects.com/Rule+5+Eligible+Playersas well as quite a few 40-man roster members still in the minors: boston.redsox.mlb.com/team/roster_40man.jsp?c_id=bosPerhaps the Sox should try to trade some of them, either for relievers, lower-level prospects, or International Draft money. Are any of them that the Sox don't need close enough to generate value? Will Middlebrooks? Brock Holt? Alex Hassan? Or should the Sox keep them as insurance for as long as possible? You folks are the experts - which should they trade, which should they keep, and which don't actually need protecting? Whom might you showcase in advance of a trade? How would you construct the 40-man roster in November?
|
|
|