In a column just posted by Gordon Edes, he says that the Red Sox are a potential suitor for Johnny Cueto.
http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/red-sox/post/_/id/45482
http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/red-sox/post/_/id/45482
Red Sox Deadline Discussion (nothing is credible) thread
- Thread starter soxhop411
- Start date
E5 Yaz said:
https://twitter.com/TimBritton/status/622930294857838592"]7m7
link to tweet minutes ago[/url]
I think we tend to overrate the presence of scouts anywhere. If Red Sox don't know Hamels by now...
When the Sox send Allard Baird, their VP of scouting, to watch Hamels pitch there is no overrating his presence. There is serious interest from the Sox.
Sure they know Hamels.....what they don't know is if there are any red flags that could indicate an injury. Cameras get all the angles of the pitches however they don't get the action in between pitches or batters. After today there has to be some concern about Hamels health.....maybe Baird saw something concerning that wasn't necessarily caught on tape.
Hopefully the Cueto scouting has more to do with going after him in the offseason. Its unbelievable that they'd give up multiple top 50 prospects to bolster this crappy team.
I must say there's something a little bit unnerving about Allard Baird being the Sox "top evaluator"
Somehow I'm not reassured.
Somehow I'm not reassured.
Maybe they feel a little pressure with the window of opportunity closing on Hamels (hence Baird's presence), but this stuff with Cueto seems like pure nonsense. There's zero logic to us giving up the prospect haul for a rental, and a reality does not exist where the guy who's poised to be this winter's hot free agent signs an outside extension 2 months out from the open bidding.
If the chance exists that we are about to throw a long standing philosophy out the window, of course we'd be out there scouting the holy heck out of all the potential options. That said i still can't see much changing on the Hamels front though, even with us taking what likely amounts to a final look. Our projected offense and catching depth going forward should keep Swihart off the table, and without him it's not happening.
If the chance exists that we are about to throw a long standing philosophy out the window, of course we'd be out there scouting the holy heck out of all the potential options. That said i still can't see much changing on the Hamels front though, even with us taking what likely amounts to a final look. Our projected offense and catching depth going forward should keep Swihart off the table, and without him it's not happening.
This upcoming FA starting pitching class looks to be the strongest in quite some time. Sure some of these guys may not end up hitting FA but there is a virtual certainty that there will be high quality #2 starters available and a strong possibility that multiple "aces" will also reach FA.
Price
Cueto
Zimmerman
Wei-Yin Chen
Mat Latos
Samardzija
Brett Anderson
Mike Leake
Kazmir
Ian Kennedy
There are simply far too many high quality arms becoming available to have it make any sense to trade top 100 prospects for production you can obtain in the off-season for just $$.
Price
Cueto
Zimmerman
Wei-Yin Chen
Mat Latos
Samardzija
Brett Anderson
Mike Leake
Kazmir
Ian Kennedy
There are simply far too many high quality arms becoming available to have it make any sense to trade top 100 prospects for production you can obtain in the off-season for just $$.
Well, in theory at least, there could be more competition for those FA arms. Some team could always outbid you with "just money," but if you have a deep farm system, you could have a better chance of getting the player you want depending on the other team's needs. In theory, at least; obviously it doesn't always or even usually work this way.j44thor said:
Also, sometimes the player just doesn't want to play for you, even if you offer a lot of money (not often, but sometimes). And sometimes, the player takes the richest offer and it becomes immediately apparent that the two sides weren't a good match. Good thing that has never happened to the Red Sox!
Also you forgot Greinke.
jscola85 said:
Fister is a sinkerballer who works in the high 80's. Mediocre K-rate. He'll fit right in with the rest of the rotation!
Lose Remerswaal said:
He seems like he'd be a bad personality match for Boston, but I doubt the Red Sox will get the opportunity to find out. I'd be surprised if he does anything besides re-sign with the Dodgers (for more than his current deal, of course).
Greinke also isn't technically a FA. He has an opt out on his remaining 3yr 71M. He probably gets an extra year tacked on if he opts out but there is some risk, especially in this FA class. LAD may decide to unload the brinks truck for Price instead if he opts out. More likely he opts out only if he has an agreement in principal to return to LAD.
j44thor said:
IDK. Greinke's #'s are stupid good this year and he carries a lot of "legitimate ace" appeal. There is at minimum a 5/$125m deal out there for him imo.
(probably the front runner on my prediction pick for worst contract handed out this offseason)
Iwakuma is already 34, and he spent 11 years pitching in NPB before he came to Seattle.
In NPB, I have read it is expected that you throw a few thousand pitches between starts to "show your fighting spirit!"
(Maybe You Gotta Have Wa is out of date.)
In NPB, I have read it is expected that you throw a few thousand pitches between starts to "show your fighting spirit!"
(Maybe You Gotta Have Wa is out of date.)
This "Greinke can't play in a pressure cooker" nonsense/he's a bad fit for Boston schtick is absurd. The guy is probably the smartest pitcher in the game and would most likely pitch well anywhere. We're talking about a guy that knows the ins and outs of xFIP probably better than most people on this board and he's by all accounts a standup competitor and teammate (multi-time gold glover, serious try-hard).
That being said, with the contract he's likely to get at age 32, I would not want Boston to be the team paying top dollar. In an alternate universe, a player like Greinke is exactly who I would like to be heading the Sox rotation. Mental health history and all.
That being said, with the contract he's likely to get at age 32, I would not want Boston to be the team paying top dollar. In an alternate universe, a player like Greinke is exactly who I would like to be heading the Sox rotation. Mental health history and all.
Yes I know. He was 23? And had gone undiagnosed with social anxiety disorder. Now he's on medication and has not had a problem since (that was 06/07?). I don't believe that a lack of public understanding surrounding mental health issues would preclude him from being successful in an environment like NY or Boston. Someone as athletic, smart, and adaptable like Greinke would be a better bet as far as I'm concerned over a clearly declining player (Hamels/Fister) or pitchers with histories of serious arm issues (Cueto/Zimmermann/Latos). In my opinion, the only pitcher better suited is Price.soxhop411 said:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2015/07/13/zack-greinke-incredible-first-half-all-star-game/30115935/
HriniakPosterChild said:
Wasn't a big bone of contention between Byung Hyun Kim and the management the fact that he ignored their recommended regimen and threw 200 pitches a day between starts? I had assumed that was standard for pitchers in that area of the world.
Greinke is a bad personality fit for Boston, based on a decade old anxiety issue, and we're giving up on Cueto because of one really bad start.
Cracker jack scouting right there.
Cracker jack scouting right there.
sackamano said:
I'm sorry, are you saying the team with the worst record in the AL should trade for Cueto for these last two months?
Cueto did have an MRI (which came back okay) due to some elbow crankiness at the end of May, so there is some smoke there. Not that the Sox should be trolling those waters anyway.
Re: Greinke
I don't want this team going near a player who has even the slightest chance of not being "cut out" for Boston. Carl Crawford--I hate to bring him up--is an example of a guy who faced some doubt prior to the signing. Lo and behold he ended up hating his time here. Greinke is a great pitcher but I just don't feel like rolling the dice. Especially when he's 32 and about to command top dollar.
I don't want this team going near a player who has even the slightest chance of not being "cut out" for Boston. Carl Crawford--I hate to bring him up--is an example of a guy who faced some doubt prior to the signing. Lo and behold he ended up hating his time here. Greinke is a great pitcher but I just don't feel like rolling the dice. Especially when he's 32 and about to command top dollar.
j44thor said:
Greinke has already intimated he plans to opt-out. May just negotiate before opting out to extend his current deal, but more likely he tests the FA waters. LAD has deeper pockets than almost any team though so I don't have any reasonable expectation of him leaving.
Well, giving up on is probably strong language. Certainly you don't want to trade for an injured pitcher on a two month rental, especially as his current team won't be giving him away. I'm sure they'll revisit this during the offseason.sackamano said:
Unless we get one hell of a deal somewhere why bother making a trade to have us become only slightly better this year at the expense of the future? If they scan move an old broken piece fine (But unlikely) The team needs an overhaul.
The issue wasn't that Crawford "couldn't handle the media" and that's why he sucked. Carl just sucked because he sucks. Not like he's doing much better in chill L.A.pdub said:
But I agree, I'm not about to jump on board to pay 32 year old Greinke top dollar. But the argument that he can't succeed here only because he had a decade old anxiety issue that has clearly been addressed is just lazy.
In that same article it doesn't necessarily list the Red Sox as the "favorites " at all. Rival executives say Boston is 1 of 4 destinations most thought of with the Dodgers being the "runaway favorite".soxhop411 said:
You know who benefits keeping the Red Sox name alive in any Hamels rumors? The Phillies. I think all the smoke is coming from them to try to wheedle a better deal out of a more realistic buyer like the Dodgers. The Dodgers (and other contenders) would have a lot more urgency in making a deal than the Red Sox, given the Sox can just back away and decide to wait until November to make a deal or sign a FA.
kieckeredinthehead said:
Maybe. And maybe he likes to visit various ballparks/games throughout the season, but it's only noteworthy when he goes to Philly because Hamels rumors generate clicks, retweets and listener calls?
First of all he's signed through 2018 and the option is for 2019, not 2017.
Second, and more importantly, why in the world would anyone rather trade valuable assets for Hamels and what could end up being a 4/91.5m deal than give Greinke 5/125m? Is it because Hamels is two months younger? Greinke is the superior pitcher and costs only money. Trading for Hamels would be idiotic at this point.
Second, and more importantly, why in the world would anyone rather trade valuable assets for Hamels and what could end up being a 4/91.5m deal than give Greinke 5/125m? Is it because Hamels is two months younger? Greinke is the superior pitcher and costs only money. Trading for Hamels would be idiotic at this point.
glennhoffmania said:
Because Greinke isn't going anywhere, and he will want/get longer than a 5 year deal. Greinke is very happy in LA and the Dodgers will just top basically any offer on the table. Plus, they're basically the exact same age and have extremely similar career figures. It's nice knowing Greinke has had success in the AL but Hamels has been a big game pitcher for the Phillies in the past too. Just as importantly, this org seems to have a categorical aversion to contracts over 4-5 years, so 4/$92M + prospects (assuming none are true deal-breakers like Betts or Devers) may be better in their eyes than a $200M deal for Greinke (which is what he is likely to get, given the Scherzer comp).
If it was January and not July, would trading for Hamels be so outlandish?
He's still under contract for a few years at a reasonable cost. The Sox won't trade X and Betts obviously but they may be able to make something work.
The Sox trading for Hamels would be in preparation for 2016, not a dash to this year's playoffs. Of course, I think teams will be more desperate at the trade deadline to make the deal than the Sox will.
He's still under contract for a few years at a reasonable cost. The Sox won't trade X and Betts obviously but they may be able to make something work.
The Sox trading for Hamels would be in preparation for 2016, not a dash to this year's playoffs. Of course, I think teams will be more desperate at the trade deadline to make the deal than the Sox will.
I know this is just some guys opinion filtered through an ESPN article but this is really bad.soxhop411 said:
I don't think 2016 is totally hopeless, but if the GM is feeling pressure to win they ought to fire him now. They need to be planning around this organizations' lone strength, under 25 talent.
jscola85 said:
I was only referring to previous comments saying that people would be against giving Greinke 5/125 if he opts out. Giving up multiple prospects for the right to pay Hamels a little below market price doesn't sound like a better deal to me.
glennhoffmania said:
I don't necessarily disagree. It's just not a realistic assumption to compare Greinke at 5/$125M because that deal is fantasyland. If the only two options for the org are decent prospects + Hamels for 4/$92M or Greinke at 7/$200M, I think the org goes with Hamels. The key is how well do you trust the org to pick the right prospects to part with. If this were the Schuerholz Braves org of the 90s/aughts, you could feel good they were trading the right guys at the right time.
If that's the case, I think Hamels would be a fine bet. Unfortunately I am not sure it is, as looking at the Peavy deal (our last "prospects for a veteran" trade), giving up Montas and Iglesias appears to have given up two future legit MLB starters for a 4th/5th starter.
jscola85 said:
I think another big assumption is that Greinke is going to get Scherzer's deal. Greinke would be signing his deal when he'll be almost two years older than Scherzer was. And the deferrals matter. I wouldn't be shocked if LA gives him that deal but it's not apples to apples with Scherzer.
glennhoffmania said:
Fair point on the deferrals and age, but as a counterpoint, Greinke is on pace for an even better season than Scherzer. If Lester, an inferior pitcher to both those guys, got 6 years and $155M, I would suspect Greinke will get at least 6 years and something closer to Scherzer's number than Lester's.
jscola85 said:
No doubt that Greinke is going to get a lot of money. But I think he may be worth it. He's been as good or better than Scherzer and Lester for a longer period of time and he's been very durable. If there was a guy over 30 I'd give a huge deal to he'd be at or near the top of the list.
I don't have a linkable source for this....has anyone else heard of the Phillies essentially demanding hamels/papelbon be packaged together?