Trading Chips

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
19,657
Row 14
Definitely should trade if given the chance:
 
Peavy
Badenhop
Miller
Gomes
Pierzynski
Drew
 
 
Should go if convinced you can't resign:
 
Uehara
Lester/Ross
 
 
Listen to offers:
 
Lackey
Doubront
Carp
 
 
I really can't see a scenario where Peavy is on the Red Sox on August 1st.  I would be really pissed if they couldn't dump Drew on someone either.
 

Eck'sSneakyCheese

Member
SoSH Member
May 11, 2011
9,290
NH
Why Miller? He's a fairly important bullpen piece. I'd like to see him stick around or at least be in the same category as Uehara.
 

BosRedSox5

what's an original thought?
Sep 6, 2006
1,471
Colorado Springs, Colorado
I wonder where Middlebrooks should be in this list. Apparently the Sox keep getting calls about him. If the team really likes Marrero as a shortstop, and Bogaerts converts to 3B full time, Middlebrooks is kind of getting edged out. 
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Miller has become a really valuable reliever and I think they should be working out an extension with him.  He could potentially close down the road.
 
I also have no interest in trading Lackey.  Turning his bargain year into a reasonable extension shouldn't be all that difficult.  He'll be needed, even more so if Lester is gone.
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
19,657
Row 14
BosRedSox5 said:
I wonder where Middlebrooks should be in this list. Apparently the Sox keep getting calls about him. If the team really likes Marrero as a shortstop, and Bogaerts converts to 3B full time, Middlebrooks is kind of getting edged out. 
 
Middlebrooks definitely shouldn't.  He is cost controlled with options and at the absolute lowest on field value he could possibly have.  If anything he is the kind of piece you trade in the offseason.  I think Doubront is similar however I can see an NL team talking themselves into thinking Doubront is the solution to the back of their rotation.
 

Drek717

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2003
2,540
The more I think about it I don't see us getting a taker for AJP.  He's got a bad rep around the league and worse production.  No contending team is going to risk him blowing up their club house on a trade, let alone give real value.  Personally I think they should just outright cut the guy.  Maybe some team is desperate enough to pick up his contract.
 
Badenhop and Miller should bring back something interesting for each.  I can't imagine that Drew, especially if subsidized, can't bring back something good too.
 
Peavy is obviously someone they need to move.  He isn't worth a QO but during a playoff chase he's got real value to contending clubs.
 
Gomes is a tough one for me because with Nava getting back on track there is every reason to believe LF will again be the Nava + platoon mate show in 2015.  If so Gomes is the best known quantity for the small side of that platoon.  If Brentz could stay healthy or Hassan could be more consistent one of them would take the job, but neither has done that in 2014.  WMB as a super-utility who spells Nava in LF would be an interesting option if they want to pursue greater stability at 3B in '15 or don't believe Xander can stick at SS period while still giving WMB a shot at regular PT.  Otherwise Gomes is the best option out there.
 
I don't see anyone coming calling for Doubie or Carp.  
 
Lackey is too valuable as a minimum guy for 2015 and at least one proven reliable veteran starter to anchor the youngsters in 2015, need to be blown away to move him.
 
Uehara and Lester depend entirely on the team's belief that they'll resign them.  If they're dubious and think Uehara might retire or that Lester is asking for more than they'll give him then both should be moved as they'll bring back real talent.  If not then both need to be resigned this winter.  Misjudging these two guys is the real test of this FO for 2014.  If they fail to trade either one and lose them to FA it's a massive cock up and waste of value.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,753
Mansfield MA
BosRedSox5 said:
I wonder where Middlebrooks should be in this list. Apparently the Sox keep getting calls about him. If the team really likes Marrero as a shortstop, and Bogaerts converts to 3B full time, Middlebrooks is kind of getting edged out. 
There's a fair amount of uncertainty here - Marrero just arrived at AAA, Middlebrooks may or may not recapture his 2012 bat, and Bogaerts isn't a lock to stick at SS. It seems like wisest course of action to keep all three and have options depending on how things play out.
 

Puffy

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 14, 2006
1,251
Town
They might find a taker for Craig Breslow, as well, in a small deal. Peavy, Drew, and Badenhop should bring back some value, particularly if the Sox eat some money. 
 

BosRedSox5

what's an original thought?
Sep 6, 2006
1,471
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Super Nomario said:
There's a fair amount of uncertainty here - Marrero just arrived at AAA, Middlebrooks may or may not recapture his 2012 bat, and Bogaerts isn't a lock to stick at SS. It seems like wisest course of action to keep all three and have options depending on how things play out.
 
You're probably right. I've always worried about Middlebrooks' plate patience, but he definitely has a lot of other offensive attributes. His ability to hit for power from a position that's traditionally weak offensively is pretty intriguing. I guess it all depends on what kind of calls the team is getting on WMB. If teams are calling because they think we've given up on him and want to buy low, then we shouldn't entertain those kinds of offers. If we're getting offers that could be a really good fit for the team, I'm not that opposed to dealing him. 

I know there's a lot of uncertainty, but we've got a good amount of infield prospects. With Marrero, Betts, Cecchini, Coyle and even someone a little older in Brock Holt we have some guys who could find time (along with Bogaerts) to fill the left side and that's not even considering free agent options. I don't think the team should be that opposed to trading WMB if they can get something they like, or if he's part of a bigger deal. 
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
26,969
Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
Why Miller? He's a fairly important bullpen piece. I'd like to see him stick around or at least be in the same category as Uehara.
 
 
Agreed, Miller's skill set is not readily available in the marketplace.
 
Need a player on a contender to break a leg or tear an elbow for Drew and Pierzynski to become hot commodities. That could mean a waiver-period deal, though the sooner the better.
 

SouthernBoSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2005
11,071
I think Mike Napoli has to be on the list. He is controlled for 1.5 years.

Unless you think 2015 is a championship run I think you dangle him out there.

Given the lack of right handed power, and offense in general. You're looking at what should be a very significant return.
 

MetSox1

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2007
574
Why sell low on Douby?  He's got team control for the time being and is clearly hurt.  Don't sell low on a lefty arm when teams pay top dollar for them when healthy.  He should be a hold (and probably shut down for a bit more given his velo readings)
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
Harry Hooper said:
 
 
Agreed, Miller's skill set is not readily available in the marketplace.
 
Need a player on a contender to break a leg or tear an elbow for Drew and Pierzynski to become hot commodities. That could mean a waiver-period deal, though the sooner the better.
Glad to see so many other people with this opinion on Miller. Hopefully the front office also agrees. After Lester and Uehara, he's the third most important player to resign. I'd have no trouble paying top of the market set up dollars and years for him, which means 4 years and $20 million to start the bidding, and I bet it goes higher. This is a reasonably short-term, low-dollar investment in a high quality, healthy, productive asset that is exactly what "payroll flexibility" should be used to secure.

I'm tempted to approach Gomes as well with an offer of a 1-year extension at his current $5 million to see if they can lock down the left-field platoon as well, and then they can move on to addressing other weaknesses. But, if not, or if they want to take a different route for left field next year, I might add Daniel Nava to the list of players who can be traded at the deadline.

Farrell clearly considers Nava a fungible piece, so I don't know if he can thrive here anymore. And, if he keeps up his post-call-up rate stats for another 3 weeks, he might be attractive enough to contending teams--especially low-budget ones--with poor hitting corner outfielders or DH issues to get something useful back in exchange. The Reds and Mariners might be a match there, for instance.
 

Hank Scorpio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 1, 2013
5,504
As down as I am on WMB, I wouldn't trade him unless some team is actually going to accept him as a major piece in a move for a star player that fills a need (e.g. Giancarlo Stanton). I don't think that will happen, but I suppose it's possible.
 
The rest of our trade chips, I'm just not sure how much value they have. Peavy might bring back something decent. Badenhop's value has probably fallen a bit recently, and there are going to be similar players available. Mujica and Breslow are having "meh" seasons. They might not find takers for Drew and Pierzynski. Gomes has some value, but it's limited. Carp's value has fallen completely since spring training. Herrera could be moved, but you're not getting anything significant for him.
 
I suppose a trade of Doubront might be interesting, but his value/situation is probably similar to that of WMB.
 
The rest of the team basically falls into young players we want to keep (XB, RDLR, Workman, Betts, maybe JBJ, etc), veterans under contract who we want back next season (Pedroia, Napoli, Lackey, Ortiz, Victorino, Tazawa, etc) and players who we should be trying to resign (Lester, Uehara, Miller).
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
SouthernBoSox said:
I think Mike Napoli has to be on the list. He is controlled for 1.5 years.

Unless you think 2015 is a championship run I think you dangle him out there.

Given the lack of right handed power, and offense in general. You're looking at what should be a very significant return.
Deciding whether the team should try to contend in '15 or treat it as a rebuilding year is important.  Lackey and possibly Papi are also possible trade chips if you go this route. 
 

Hank Scorpio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 1, 2013
5,504
Stitch01 said:
Deciding whether the team should try to contend in '15 or treat it as a rebuilding year is important.  Lackey and possibly Papi are also possible trade chips if you go this route. 
 
I get the whole maximizing value thing, but trading Papi at this stage in his career would be nothing short of a travesty. 
 

Lose Remerswaal

Missing an “R”
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
SouthernBoSox said:
I think Mike Napoli has to be on the list. He is controlled for 1.5 years.

Unless you think 2015 is a championship run I think you dangle him out there.

Given the lack of right handed power, and offense in general. You're looking at what should be a very significant return.
 
Then who plays 1B next year?  Unless you think it's Holt, or WMB moves across the diamond and Bogaerts stays at 3B (with Marrero at SS?), you're just going to have to sign someone else to play 1B next year.
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
19,657
Row 14
Bob Montgomery's Helmet Hat said:
Miller has become a really valuable reliever and I think they should be working out an extension with him.  He could potentially close down the road.
 
I also have no interest in trading Lackey.  Turning his bargain year into a reasonable extension shouldn't be all that difficult.  He'll be needed, even more so if Lester is gone.
 
Someone could want Lackey bad.  What if the Priates offer some package of Bell/Meadows/Glasnow/Taillon?  Not saying they will but if they do I would pack Lackey's bag for him.
 

GreenMonsterVsGodzilla

Member
SoSH Member
Hank Scorpio said:
As down as I am on WMB, I wouldn't trade him unless some team is actually going to accept him as a major piece in a move for a star player that fills a need (e.g. Giancarlo Stanton). I don't think that will happen, but I suppose it's possible.
 
The rest of our trade chips, I'm just not sure how much value they have. Peavy might bring back something decent. Badenhop's value has probably fallen a bit recently, and there are going to be similar players available. Mujica and Breslow are having "meh" seasons. They might not find takers for Drew and Pierzynski. Gomes has some value, but it's limited. Carp's value has fallen completely since spring training. Herrera could be moved, but you're not getting anything significant for him.
 
I suppose a trade of Doubront might be interesting, but his value/situation is probably similar to that of WMB.
 
The rest of the team basically falls into young players we want to keep (XB, RDLR, Workman, Betts, maybe JBJ, etc), veterans under contract who we want back next season (Pedroia, Napoli, Lackey, Ortiz, Victorino, Tazawa, etc) and players who we should be trying to resign (Lester, Uehara, Miller).
I don't think it needs to be a Stanton-level player coming back for a trade package to improve this team in 2015.  What this team needs is consistency right now; something you are not getting from the young players (and to some degree, not probably something you should expect from young players in general).  I think this is what Victorino, Napoli, Pedroia (obviously), and Drew (somewhat) were supposed to provide, and to varying degrees because of injury or fall-off have not. 
 
This is to say, if you could package, say, Middlebrooks and Ranaudo/Barnes/Webster for a top 20 ML outfielder, wouldn't you do it?  Possibly even with a third chip thrown in?  The Sox have quantity prospects but uncertain quality - a steady presence in a needed position would do wonders for the team in 2015.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
18,435
where I was last at
I'm not as down on this team as it seems many of you are. I think with some addition, (RH power OF?) maybe Vic (if healthy) can be lead-off, the rotation with Lester looks more than competitive, and the BP with Miller-Taz and maybe Ue, can still be formidable. And the farm still looks like a source of strength and maybe chips to deal with. The Sox should compete in '15. IMO there aren't any super-teams out there. So having said that, I'd make available: AJP, Peavy, Gomes, Drew, Carp, Mujica. And I'd have to be overwhelmed to deal the rookies.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,781
The wrong side of the bridge....
Plympton91 said:
Glad to see so many other people with this opinion on Miller. Hopefully the front office also agrees. After Lester and Uehara, he's the third most important player to resign. I'd have no trouble paying top of the market set up dollars and years for him, which means 4 years and $20 million to start the bidding, and I bet it goes higher. This is a reasonably short-term, low-dollar investment in a high quality, healthy, productive asset that is exactly what "payroll flexibility" should be used to secure.
I like Miller a lot and agree that we should be thinking of locking him up, not dealing him, but a 4-year commitment to a reliever who was walking 5 guys per 9 innings as recently as a year ago seems a bit over the top. I hope it won't be necessary to go that long.
 
 
Farrell clearly considers Nava a fungible piece, so I don't know if he can thrive here anymore. And, if he keeps up his post-call-up rate stats for another 3 weeks, he might be attractive enough to contending teams--especially low-budget ones--with poor hitting corner outfielders or DH issues to get something useful back in exchange. The Reds and Mariners might be a match there, for instance.
Let's cut to the chase and deal him to the A's. You know he'll end up there anyway.
 

Dogman2

Yukon Cornelius
Dope
Mar 19, 2004
13,721
Missoula, MT
Savin Hillbilly said:
I like Miller a lot and agree that we should be thinking of locking him up, not dealing him, but a 4-year commitment to a reliever who was walking 5 guys per 9 innings as recently as a year ago seems a bit over the top. I hope it won't be necessary to go that long.
 
 

Let's cut to the chase and deal him to the A's. You know he'll end up there anyway.
 
Moreover, 5+ mil a year for a guy who has never thrown more than 62 innings in relief in a year is the very definition of extremely poor use of resources. By fWar (I know) he has never had a full season above .5. 
 

Hank Scorpio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 1, 2013
5,504
GreenMonsterVsGodzilla said:
I don't think it needs to be a Stanton-level player coming back for a trade package to improve this team in 2015.  What this team needs is consistency right now; something you are not getting from the young players (and to some degree, not probably something you should expect from young players in general).  I think this is what Victorino, Napoli, Pedroia (obviously), and Drew (somewhat) were supposed to provide, and to varying degrees because of injury or fall-off have not. 
 
This is to say, if you could package, say, Middlebrooks and Ranaudo/Barnes/Webster for a top 20 ML outfielder, wouldn't you do it?  Possibly even with a third chip thrown in?  The Sox have quantity prospects but uncertain quality - a steady presence in a needed position would do wonders for the team in 2015.
 
Absolutely, provided we're talking about "top 20" going forward - an either cost-controlled or locked up player who isn't in his decline years. That is to say, I wouldn't want to start throwing prospects and cost controlled players at the Michael Morses and Coco Crisps of the world.
 

smastroyin

simpering whimperer
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2002
20,684
Do you really think WMB plus Renaudo is enough to bring back a George Springer or Christian Yelich type?
 
I think you are severely overrating what these prospects are worth.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Hank Scorpio said:
 
I get the whole maximizing value thing, but trading Papi at this stage in his career would be nothing short of a travesty. 
I said in another thread that when Im talking about trading I mean having a conversation with him in the offseason about the direction of the team and making sure he'll be happy on a rebuilding team.  If he is, conversation over. 
 
Im not really looking to go down that path either, but if we're trading Napoli we're probably not looking to contend in '15.  Then Ortiz and Lackey become potentially valuable trade chips given they'll be 37 and 40 by 2016.
 

Andrew

broke his neck in costa rica
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
12,013
Western Massachusetts
Stitch01 said:
Deciding whether the team should try to contend in '15 or treat it as a rebuilding year is important.  Lackey and possibly Papi are also possible trade chips if you go this route. 
 
Absolutely not. No one would be willing to offer the enormous amount of value that would make this worthwhile. I get we are a statistically oriented, raw value type of group, but some things are above that. David Ortiz cannot be traded. He is too important to the morale of the region. 
 

GreenMonsterVsGodzilla

Member
SoSH Member
I did not specify a cost-controlled player, or that it would need to be a young player.  I would absolutely make that trade for Michael Morse, except that he's a free agent in 2015.  Two B-plus-ish prospects (1 with ML experience) for a year or two of a 32-yo outfielder?  Trades like that happen all the time.  They will need to make trades like that if they want to be a good team, unless you think every one of the prospects is going to work out or their veteran players are an absolute lock to repeat their 2013's. 
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
64,345
Oregon
I think Napoli could really be worth it to a team that feels it might be a bat away. The Mariners are the team I'm thinking of when I say that.
 
The interesting thing to me is that the Sox are potentially dealing from 2 pools ... the fringy types who are going to bring much back, and the larger pieces, which would really require a strong return to make it worth the team's while to move.
 
Peavy and Miller, and possibly Doubront, would seem to be the logical pieces in the middle ground
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
12,190
Somewhere
E5 Yaz said:
I think Napoli could really be worth it to a team that feels it might be a bat away. The Mariners are the team I'm thinking of when I say that.
 
Nick Franklin would be an appealing target. The Mariners would be a good home for both Napoli and Gomes, as the Mariners badly need some RH bats.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
Savin Hillbilly said:
I like Miller a lot and agree that we should be thinking of locking him up, not dealing him, but a 4-year commitment to a reliever who was walking 5 guys per 9 innings as recently as a year ago seems a bit over the top. I hope it won't be necessary to go that long.

Let's cut to the chase and deal him to the A's. You know he'll end up there anyway.
Miller would be scouting and development signing for sure. They know the adjustments they made with him to turn him into a dominant reliever, and thus should be very clear about the ratio of signal to noise in his stats since then. To me, he's very likely to be one of the best lefthanded relievers in baseball for the next half decade, and I'd take that risk with a small fraction of a payroll falling well below the maximum allotment without a lot of good ways to spend it.

As to Nava to the A's, I thought about that. Probably depends on where they stand with Reddick's year and a half swoon at this point.
 

smastroyin

simpering whimperer
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2002
20,684
GreenMonsterVsGodzilla said:
I did not specify a cost-controlled player, or that it would need to be a young player.  I would absolutely make that trade for Michael Morse, except that he's a free agent in 2015.  Two B-plus-ish prospects (1 with ML experience) for a year or two of a 32-yo outfielder?  Trades like that happen all the time.  They will need to make trades like that if they want to be a good team, unless you think every one of the prospects is going to work out or their veteran players are an absolute lock to repeat their 2013's. 
 
Hank Scorpio said he wanted a top 20 cost controlled outfielder in order to trade prospects.  I named two guys who are, right now, right around the 10th-15th best pre-arbitration OF in MLB.  My reply was to him.
 

Mugsy's Jock

Eli apologist
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 28, 2000
11,526
Bi-Coastal, for the time being
I think it would be ridiculous to trade Mike Napoli.
 
The most glaring hole in the entire Red Sox organization is right handed power.  They're not exactly crawling with MLB-ready first base prospects either.
 
Good God, I don't mind a good rebuild -- but it's hardly as if the Red Sox need to go on a 12-year plan or anything.  This year was a mulligan.  They have tons of in-their-prime quality MLB players and some kids who will absolutely be improved next year.
 
Peavy, Drew, Doubront, Gomes, Nava, Badenhop, Breslow, Mujica -- of course.
WMB, Uehara -- I'd rather not, but I can understand the reasoning.
Lester -- if you think all hope is lost in re-signing him, and he can fetch a piece that eventually gets turned into Stanton, then maybe.
 
And pretty much anybody in the minors save Owens and Swihart is worth considering...but it's hard to get your arms around a deadline-type deal that sees the Sox sending AWAY inexpensive young talent as Giancarlo Stanton isn't walking through that door.  Yet.
 

Drek717

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2003
2,540
Mugsys Jock said:
I think it would be ridiculous to trade Mike Napoli.
 
The most glaring hole in the entire Red Sox organization is right handed power.  They're not exactly crawling with MLB-ready first base prospects either.
 
Good God, I don't mind a good rebuild -- but it's hardly as if the Red Sox need to go on a 12-year plan or anything.  This year was a mulligan.  They have tons of in-their-prime quality MLB players and some kids who will absolutely be improved next year.
I would agree on Napoli.  He isn't something they can replace in the winter and Travis Shaw probably needs most if not all of 2015 in AAA to continue maturation before we even have a good in-house 1B alternative.
 
If in 2015 we have a healthy Victorino, at least average production from LF, and the kind of player we all expect Bogaerts to be when fully acclimated to MLB pitching we'll be a competitive club.  Replace Bradley's production with something more like league average (either from Bradley or Betts) and replace Doubront and Peavy with two of Workman/RDLR/Ranaudo/Webster, and stack the bullpen with the remaining arms from that group and this club could be very strong.  That is all before spending any FA money.
 
This club is as likely to win the 2015 World Series as any other team in baseball if you ask me.  No need to sell guys who could help with that.  Move the guys you won't have back in 2015, but keep the rest.
 
Unless of course you make one of them redundant.  Trade for Giancarlo Stanton and it might be hard to find PT for Nava, for example.
 

Hank Scorpio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 1, 2013
5,504
smastroyin said:
Hank Scorpio said he wanted a top 20 cost controlled outfielder in order to trade prospects.  I named two guys who are, right now, right around the 10th-15th best pre-arbitration OF in MLB.  My reply was to him.
I was asked if I'd make the trade, and I said I would. I don't think WMB + Ranaudo bring back a Springer or a Yelich, but I wouldn't necessarily trade them for any given "top 20 OF". I listed Morse and Crisp as examples of guys I would shy away from, as they are strong candidates for regression (Morse) or decline (Crisp). I realize Morse is a pending free agent anyway, but even hypothetically, I question the value of Morse going forward.

The player doesn't need to be pre-arb to be worth trading for, but I wouldn't want to trade a guy like WMB for what will likely become a bad contract or a guy on his way out the door.
 

OttoC

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2003
7,353
Pedroia. Trade him while you can still get a good return because I don't think he is going to age well. Holt can play second if Betts isn't ready.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Its possible there is a trade out there for Pedroia that wouldn't be batshit crazy from a Red Sox perspective, but Im highly, highly skeptical.  Id probably need an ace pitcher or three elite prospects.  He's 30, doesn't get paid an astronomical amount of money, and churns out 5 WAR seasons.  You could probably cut him at age 35 and come out ahead on the contract.
 

SoxFanInPdx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
2,587
Portland, OR
OttoC said:
Pedroia. Trade him while you can still get a good return because I don't think he is going to age well. Holt can play second if Betts isn't ready.
 
Jesus, is Holt even ready to play daily at second? Seems like such a crazy scenario for my head and heart to comprehend. 
 

BosRedSox5

what's an original thought?
Sep 6, 2006
1,471
Colorado Springs, Colorado
OttoC said:
Pedroia. Trade him while you can still get a good return because I don't think he is going to age well. Holt can play second if Betts isn't ready.
 
I can't tell if you're serious or not, but that would pretty much be the end of goodwill between the players and management in Boston. Pedroia took a huge hometown discount to play for the Sox. 

Anyway, any talk of trading Pedroia is moot, obviously the team doesn't have the same reservations as you do. They signed him to a long term deal just last summer. He's going to retire in Boston. 
 

OttoC

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2003
7,353
SoxFanInPdx said:
 
Jesus, is Holt even ready to play daily at second? Seems like such a crazy scenario for my head and heart to comprehend. 
 
Well, He split his time in the minors between SS and 2B, not playing 3B until the Red Sox picked him up.
 

Hendu for Kutch

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2006
6,005
Nashua, NH
I would feel OK trading Lester to a small market team that you know wouldn't be able to sign him long term if it looks like it'll cost top dollar anyways.

A team like Pittsburgh, maybe, or KC. I wonder what Oakland would have given up before getting Shark. As long as you let him know you have every intention of going after him in the offseason.

Unless of course he doesn't want to go and it'd piss him off. But if he's on board and you're willing to pay top dollar anyways, why not try and get the best of both worlds?
 

OttoC

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2003
7,353
I'm not saying that this is a trade that could be made but would you rather have Giancarlo Stanton or Dustin Pedroia in your lineup? Money issues aside, would Miami make the trade even-up? If the Red Sox are in a rebuilding mode, they could get back quite a bit for Pedroia, an every-day player and some top prospects to fill gaps in their farm system. I'm not running a popularity contest; I'm trying to build a perennial contender.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
12,257
Maine
OttoC said:
I'm not saying that this is a trade that could be made but would you rather have Giancarlo Stanton or Dustin Pedroia in your lineup? Money issues aside, would Miami make the trade even-up? If the Red Sox are in a rebuilding mode, they could get back quite a bit for Pedroia, an every-day player and some top prospects to fill gaps in their farm system. I'm not running a popularity contest; I'm trying to build a perennial contender.
 
The whole hog, trade a star for a boatload of prospects path is the one a team takes when the farm is relatively barren, or overloaded with low minors prospects but without anyone in the higher levels (like, say, the Red Sox circa August 2012).  The Red Sox right now are not one of those teams.  They've got pitching prospects coming out the wazoo at the high levels.  They've got multiple catching prospects and plenty of infielders as well (1B excepted).  If they are deficient, it is in the outfield, which is why Betts and Cecchini were moved there.
 
Basically, I don't think they anywhere close to being in a position where they'd need to trade away a franchise player like Pedroia to "rebuild".  This team isn't far from being a contender in 2015, even with the anemic offense displayed thus far this season.  The shorter term veterans are more useful and practical chips for a quick "rebuild" at this stage.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,781
The wrong side of the bridge....
BosRedSox5 said:
 
I can't tell if you're serious or not, but that would pretty much be the end of goodwill between the players and management in Boston. Pedroia took a huge hometown discount to play for the Sox. 
 
Not only that, but Pedroia has had a large and consistent home/road split over his career. The only exceptions have been 2010, when was hurt and missed half the season, and--surprise!--2014. He's not likely to be as valuable a player anywhere else as he is here, and this would affect the return in any trade.
 
For better and for worse, till retirement do us part, Pedey is ours.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
IMO, the Red Sox have a LOT of tradable commodities, depending on what they're willing to take on in return.  I think, given that 2014 is sunk, and the payroll for 2014 is a sunk cost, that they should be willing to eat any amount of 2014 money to move guys like Peavy, AJP, Drew, etc.  Essentially give them to another team for free (money-wise), so long as that gives them a better prospect in return.  
 
I don't want Koji to go, but I'd love for them to work out a wink-wink deal with him.  Koji, we'll trade you to a contender, go try and win another world series ring, but we want to sign you as soon as we can this coming offseason, and here are the terms…XYZ.  So Koji leaves with the plan being to come right back to Boston.  Yes, it's a bit of a risk, but still.  I think they could get a fair amount for Koji.
 
I'd be willing to move any of AJP, Ross, Gomes, Nava, Victorino, Drew, Peavy, Badenhop, Mujica, Breslow.  I think other teams would want guys like that to shore up their roster for a playoff run.  I'm fine, in many of these cases, with not getting a ton in return.  Just….something useful.  
 

Drek717

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2003
2,540
Rudy Pemberton said:
They are one of the worst teams in baseball, and could potentially lose Lester, Uehara, Peavy, Miller, Gomes, etc. Who knows what happens with Lackey. How in the world could such a team have as good a shot as any to win the WS?

Certainly possible if they make all the right moves and have some fantastic performances from young players, but wouldn't most projection systems look somewhat unfavorably on the '15 Sox based on who is currently under contract?
 
The Differences between 2013 and 2014 are:
1. Shane Victorino not staying healthy.  Vic was one of the two or three most valuable every day players last season.  His complete absence hurts the club in a lot of ways, namely missing him at the top of the lineup as a table setter, his RF defense, and the trickle down effect his absence has had moving Nava out of his comfort zone into RF and making Gomes a more regular player against RHP.
 
2. An ice cold start from Nava and Carp.  Both hit well above career norms last year but both started 2014 well below.  Nava has already shown signs of rebounding, Carp is about back from injury.
 
3. Continued failure at 3B.  In an off-season that will likely see Pablo Sandoval, Chase Headley, Aramis Ramirez, and a few other worthwhile short term 3B veteran options I think something could get figured out to improve this issue for 2015 a la Adrian Beltre in 2010.
 
4. Offensive loss at CF and C due to FAs leaving and their replacements under performing.  The CF issue is one that now has two highly touted prospects competing for the job (Betts and Bradley), the C job has a good young talent in AAA and a top tier talent in AA.  I think it is very possible both are strong bounce back positions in 2015 after this bridge year.
 
5. #4 and #5 starting pitchers.  Buchholz didn't give even a few months of elite performance, Doubie was bad from the start.  The Sox have already inserted Workman into one of these jobs and in 2015 will potentially have Buchholz, Doubront, Webster, Ranaudo, RDLR, and Workman to cover three spots without rushing Owens, Barnes, or Johnson.  Obviously this requires them to keep an ace at the front of the staff (hopefully by re-signing Lester), but that is still an option.
 
They went from 7th worst to WS Champs from 2013 to 2014 without significant help from the farm system.  The 2014 decline is a product of injuries, young guys struggling in their first year, and the one year stop gap veterans on the club not performing.  These variables all coinciding can sink any team's season, and can flip back the other way for the very next season just as easily.  The Sox have all the resources needed to make those moves and the chances of making the right ones only improve if they use the rest of 2014 to test the young guys in order to evaluate them for 2015 (Bogaerts, Bradley, Betts, Vazquez, Middlebrooks, and the young pitching crop all should get significant ML time before 2014 ends).
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,753
Mansfield MA
Drek717 said:
The Sox have all the resources needed to make those moves and the chances of making the right ones only improve if they use the rest of 2014 to test the young guys in order to evaluate them for 2015 (Bogaerts, Bradley, Betts, Vazquez, Middlebrooks, and the young pitching crop all should get significant ML time before 2014 ends).
I've heard others make this argument, and it seems to me that using the rest of this year as an extended audition is as likely to lead to a stupid decision as to a smart one. We're talking about what, 200 or 250 AB? Middlebrooks and Bradley have been terrible at the major league level over ~400 AB the past two seasons. Vazquez has been OKish at AAA, but nothing to suggest he's ready with the stick. I would hate to see a hot couple months lead the team to just handing these guys starting jobs in 2015 without viable alternatives.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
10,602
Miami (oh, Miami!)
Super Nomario said:
I've heard others make this argument, and it seems to me that using the rest of this year as an extended audition is as likely to lead to a stupid decision as to a smart one. We're talking about what, 200 or 250 AB? Middlebrooks and Bradley have been terrible at the major league level over ~400 AB the past two seasons. Vazquez has been OKish at AAA, but nothing to suggest he's ready with the stick. I would hate to see a hot couple months lead the team to just handing these guys starting jobs in 2015 without viable alternatives.
 
Well, the thought is that ML pitching is better than AAA pitching, and a player must learn, quickly or slowly, to adjust to ML quality pitching if they're to be of any use.  It's quite possible that another 200 ABs are required for WMB or Bradley to turn the corner and adjust their swings.  It's also possible that they'll never adjust.  Regardless, it seems wisest to use the worthless ABs in a dead season to try to figure out what we have.  Should WMB or Bradley fail to improve, or worse, regress, I'd imagine the front office will be active in the FA market this off season.  If they improve, I'm certain the FO will be carefully analyzing just what their players did on a near pitch by pitch basis.  
 

BosRedSox5

what's an original thought?
Sep 6, 2006
1,471
Colorado Springs, Colorado
If you were judging someone by the statistics they accumulated in 200-250 at bats, it would be a little short sighted.

If you were evaluating a player based on their approach to the game, their temperament, their practice habits etc... That's a little different.

Scouts make tons of determinations about the potential a certain player has based on a lot fewer than 250 at bats every year.