Your 2015 Boston Red Sox

Status
Not open for further replies.

The Mort Report

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 5, 2007
7,149
Concord
I don't think trading Napoli is the best idea.  He took less money and years to resign here; it would send a terrible message to other players.  Obviously in the last 10-15 years baseball has become more about rooting for laundry, but the players are looking for loyalty when they sign a contract, especially at a discount.  What kind of message would this be sending?  He only has 1 year left on his contract, if the Sox need to deal with a logjam for a year I think balancing the egos is better for business than trading him
 

LostinNJ

New Member
Jul 19, 2005
479
I was wondering about trading Napoli as well. It's possible only if they are certain Craig can be what he once was. How soon will they know that? Probably not this winter.
 
I would hate to see Betts used as a trade chip. In general, I'm hostile to the idea of trading blue-chip prospects for expensive veterans. If the package for Hamels is something like Betts/Swihart/Barnes, we're trading away eighteen cost-controlled years of potential excellence for four expensive years of certain excellence (barring injury). I don't think that's a good trade. Of course prospects don't always pan out, but they don't always fail either,
 
Besides, there's a Hamels equivalent out there who can be had without giving up any prospects. The difference between Hamels and Lester is two extra years on the contract at about $25 million each. Even if he's not worth it those last two years, which is greater: the wasted money at the end of the contract, or the value of the guys we'd have to trade to get Hamels? I'd rather throw away money than throw away talent.
 

HriniakPosterChild

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 6, 2006
14,841
500 feet above Lake Sammammish
The Mort Report said:
I don't think trading Napoli is the best idea.  He took less money and years to resign here; it would send a terrible message to other players.  Obviously in the last 10-15 years baseball has become more about rooting for laundry, but the players are looking for loyalty when they sign a contract, especially at a discount.  What kind of message would this be sending?  He only has 1 year left on his contract, if the Sox need to deal with a logjam for a year I think balancing the egos is better for business than trading him
 
Exactly. Think what it would do to their chances of re-signing Brandon Arroyo.
 

P'tucket rhymes with...

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2006
11,663
The Coney Island of my mind
The Mort Report said:
I don't think trading Napoli is the best idea.  He took less money and years to resign here; it would send a terrible message to other players.  Obviously in the last 10-15 years baseball has become more about rooting for laundry, but the players are looking for loyalty when they sign a contract, especially at a discount.  What kind of message would this be sending?  He only has 1 year left on his contract, if the Sox need to deal with a logjam for a year I think balancing the egos is better for business than trading him
That they're willing to give 33 year old guys with necrotic hips $16 million a year with limited no-trade provisions, and are willing to help underwrite his salary for another team if they decide they don't need him?
 
I'm not seeing "disincentive" here.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
LostinNJ said:
I was wondering about trading Napoli as well. It's possible only if they are certain Craig can be what he once was. How soon will they know that? Probably not this winter.
 
I would hate to see Betts used as a trade chip. In general, I'm hostile to the idea of trading blue-chip prospects for expensive veterans. If the package for Hamels is something like Betts/Swihart/Barnes, we're trading away eighteen cost-controlled years of potential excellence for four expensive years of certain excellence (barring injury). I don't think that's a good trade. Of course prospects don't always pan out, but they don't always fail either,
 
Besides, there's a Hamels equivalent out there who can be had without giving up any prospects. The difference between Hamels and Lester is two extra years on the contract at about $25 million each. Even if he's not worth it those last two years, which is greater: the wasted money at the end of the contract, or the value of the guys we'd have to trade to get Hamels? I'd rather throw away money than throw away talent.
 
Sure you don't want to empty out the farm for any given player unless you're damn sure he's the difference maker for a team that is just "a player away" from winning it all, but if you have an abundance of talent (real or perceived) it's not ALL going to get to the major league roster. Do you let it linger in the minors or do you utilize it in the best way that you can? Do you move some of it to boost the talent that you've already deemed worthy of keeping on the 25 man roster? This is part of the game for teams fortunate enough to draft well. Teams looking to move top tier vets are often looking for young, cost controlled players in return. That's part of the advantage to being in the position that the Sox are in. Also, having the types of players that teams would be VERY interested in also may force a team to take a player they would be less inclined in taking to make the deal work. Make them take an underperforming player, or contract that you no longer want to carry.  If you're interested in Player A AND Player B, we might be open to doing that, but you also HAVE TO take Player C. Again, all of these prospects aren't going to be sitting in Fenway Park at the same time unless it's September.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,635
Cespedes will not be playing RF in 2015 without a Boggs-level fanaticism devoted to improving his defensive ability.
 

RochesterSamHorn

New Member
Nov 10, 2006
104
Rochester, New York
I just don't see the Sox going into next year with such a predominate RH lineup. With Ortiz as the only LH in the lineup (entering his last year?) and a surplus of OFers, I can see the Sox trading for a young cost controlled LH RFer. Yelich /Marlins, Calhoun/Angels, Saunders/Mariners, Smith/Padres, are some options, and I'm sure it would take at least a Mookie Betts to get one of them, but we need another LH bat and where else do we add one?
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
If your plan to get a LH bat requires the Sox to go out and trade prospects for a cost controlled young player who's starting to put everything together in MLB before even making arbitration salaries, you need to come up with a new, realistic plan. Those are players every team will build around, which is why you almost never see them traded, especially not for prospects.

Look at it another way: the Marlins supposedly made a strong push for Lester; if 5 more years of Yelich had been on the table, do you think Lester flies West instead of South?
 

rmurph3

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2003
1,199
Westwood, MA
Tyrone Biggums said:
 If this team just resigns Lester and Buchholz is odd year Clay then this team is good enough to contend.

C (2) Vazquez, Ross
1B (3) Ortiz, Napoli, Craig
2B (1) Pedroia
SS (1) Boegarts
3B (1) Middlebrooks
OF (4) Nava Castillo Cespedes Victorino
UTIL (1) Betts
Total 13

Pitchers
SP - Lester Buchholz RDLR Kelly Webster
RP - Uehara Tazawa Layne Workman Mujica
Total 10
 
 
Not to single you out, but I simply fail to see how you can look at the above roster objectively and call it a contender.
 
- are you projecting full bounceback/growth years for all of this years' disappointments: Bogaerts, Middlebrooks, even Craig? Is this suddenly the 2013 version of Victorino again?
- Castillo somehow makes the leap that Bradley couldn't make this year, with the added degree of difficulty associated with coming off a long layoff?
 
- Buchholz has ONE full-season sub-4.00 ERA in his career, and that was in 2010... i.e. as of Opening Day 2015, officially "a long time ago". You have to question whether you can get 30 starts of ANY quality from him, let alone have those 30 starts actually be helpful.
- Even if you re-sign Lester and get this mythical version of Buchholz, the 3-5 spots in this projected rotation are likely the worst in the division on Opening Day.
- the bullpen can be augmented, of course, but your closer is another year older and likely needs even more support.
 
This front office has a challenge in front of them... between the fruits of the farm system and the pieces added at the trade deadline, there are a lot of decisions to be made. Personally, I think we're entering what will be a very active offseason, and the 2015 roster is going to look very, very different than a pro-forma lineup of the pieces we have on hand now. And honestly, I hope that's the case, because what we have now, even following deadline and best-case Lester return, just isn't good enough.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
rmurph3 said:
 
Not to single you out, but I simply fail to see how you can look at the above roster objectively and call it a contender.
 
- are you projecting full bounceback/growth years for all of this years' disappointments: Bogaerts, Middlebrooks, even Craig? Is this suddenly the 2013 version of Victorino again?
- Castillo somehow makes the leap that Bradley couldn't make this year, with the added degree of difficulty associated with coming off a long layoff?
 
- Buchholz has ONE full-season sub-4.00 ERA in his career, and that was in 2010... i.e. as of Opening Day 2015, officially "a long time ago". You have to question whether you can get 30 starts of ANY quality from him, let alone have those 30 starts actually be helpful.
- Even if you re-sign Lester and get this mythical version of Buchholz, the 3-5 spots in this projected rotation are likely the worst in the division on Opening Day.
- the bullpen can be augmented, of course, but your closer is another year older and likely needs even more support.
 
This front office has a challenge in front of them... between the fruits of the farm system and the pieces added at the trade deadline, there are a lot of decisions to be made. Personally, I think we're entering what will be a very active offseason, and the 2015 roster is going to look very, very different than a pro-forma lineup of the pieces we have on hand now. And honestly, I hope that's the case, because what we have now, even following deadline and best-case Lester return, just isn't good enough.
I want to second most of this. When you come up with a lineup and rotation that you want to call a contender, stack it up next to the lineup and rotation that 5 teams that are going to make the playoffs this season have, and also against the fully healthy Yankees squad (since a projected lineup always assumes full health).

The Red Sox need to do more than just promote the next batch of JBJ's and Workman's to contend. At a minimum from free agency or trade, they need a #1 and #2 starter, they need an 8th inning relief ace to go with Koji, and they need a proven 3Bman (or SS if they're going to put Bogaerts at 3B). It seems to me like the best case reasonable scenario is to end up with Latos in a 4 for 1 deal, Sheilds or Iwakuma out of free agency, bid whatever you need to bid to get Miller back, even if you pay him closer money to set up for a year, and find a SS or 3B (I have no good ideas there; Headley on a make good contract if that's where his market goes?).
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
Plympton, you actually just described a fairly reasonable path back to the playoffs. The team you are describing is Latos, Shields, Buchholz, de la Rosa and Ranaudo in the rotation and a pen of Koji, Miller, Workman, Kelly, Breslow, Mujica and Hembree. You could probably swap Kelly and Ranaudo if you want, or start Ranaudo in Pawtucket as depth and try Webster in the pen. Either way, that's a strong pitching staff with a lot of depth in the minors even after a big trade.
 
The lineup looks like Castillo, Pedroia, Ortiz, Napoli, Cespedes, Betts, Bogaerts, Vazquez and Headley or a trade target. That looks like a contending offense to me, especially when you consider bench depth. Victorino would be a 4th outfielder who plays frequently with Betts moving around to spell other guys when he does. Nava is a back up for the outfield and first base. Craig does the same and they can afford to double up on that kind of player with Betts being capable of covering the rest of the infield. That brings us to Holt who provides a redundancy to Betts defensively and a backup catcher like Ross or a free agent.
 
Basically, they're back to deep depth and are doing it in a way that that allows them to rest guys who are injury prone (Victorino and Craig) and avoid having below average players on the field when injuries do happen. That's essentially a 14 man offense with everyone being starting player caliber, except for whomever ends up as the second catcher. Or, said differently, they have 13 staring players who they will rotate through based on a combination of platoon splits, needed rest, and match ups. There's very likely a lack of a big star in the offense unless Ortiz can fight off father time and/or Pedroia can bounce back, but that depth is pretty impressive, even before we get to any of the minor league guys who will be waiting for a shot.
 
Edit: To clarify - I'm assuming Craig and Victorino spend significant chunks of the season on the DL, so while I have 26 players moving around the roster, injuries should help mitigate that crunch a bit and Betts can spend some time in Pawtucket if necessary as Holt is out of options if I'm counting correctly. He's used one in each of the last there years, right? I'm having trouble finding a site that lists options for players. Edit2: I was incorrect. Soxprospects.com has Holt with 2 options left. Even better. Betts would stay and Holt would go if it came to that.
 
Here's the link to their 40 man roster page: http://soxprospects.com/40man.htm
 

RochesterSamHorn

New Member
Nov 10, 2006
104
Rochester, New York
RochesterSamHorn said:
I just don't see the Sox going into next year with such a predominate RH lineup. With Ortiz as the only LH in the lineup (entering his last year?) and a surplus of OFers, I can see the Sox trading for a young cost controlled LH RFer. Yelich /Marlins, Calhoun/Angels, Saunders/Mariners, Smith/Padres, are some options, and I'm sure it would take at least a Mookie Betts to get one of them, but we need another LH bat and where else do we add one?
 
MLB Trade Rumors:Despite repeated stories that the Marlins will not trade Giancarlo Stanton, his name has appeared in trade speculation, but Scott Lauber of the Boston Herald thinks theRed Sox should have their eyes on another NL East corner outfielder. Jason Heyward, one of the only core players on the Braves not to receive a long-term deal that extended the team’s control this offseason, would look very good in a Red Sox uniform, Lauber opines. Lauber suggests that the BoSox should look to trade a package of three young players to the Braves to land Heyward and extend him so that his prime years come with Boston. Heyward’s left-handed bat would help balance the lineup, and his elite defense is a good fit for Fenway Park’s tricky right field, he adds.
 
I was going to add Heyward to my list but didn't want to bog down the post with too many names. A left handed corner bat is coming next year folks, of this, I am most certain.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Plympton91 said:
I want to second most of this. When you come up with a lineup and rotation that you want to call a contender, stack it up next to the lineup and rotation that 5 teams that are going to make the playoffs this season have, and also against the fully healthy Yankees squad (since a projected lineup always assumes full health).

The Red Sox need to do more than just promote the next batch of JBJ's and Workman's to contend. At a minimum from free agency or trade, they need a #1 and #2 starter, they need an 8th inning relief ace to go with Koji, and they need a proven 3Bman (or SS if they're going to put Bogaerts at 3B). It seems to me like the best case reasonable scenario is to end up with Latos in a 4 for 1 deal, Sheilds or Iwakuma out of free agency, bid whatever you need to bid to get Miller back, even if you pay him closer money to set up for a year, and find a SS or 3B (I have no good ideas there; Headley on a make good contract if that's where his market goes?).
Not sure if they will have enough pitching, they really need X to make a major improvement, and I'm not sure Miller has to be the guy they add in the pen, but I think you have laid out the template for the offseason if they want to contend next year
 
Counts on X making a major improvement and there's not a lot of room for error when you go into the offseason with no #1 or #2 starter, but its a reasonable plan (Im more bullish on '16 and beyond than '15, they can have a good team in '15 but probably will go into the season as more of a 2nd-tier contender than one of the real favorites)
 

geoduck no quahog

not particularly consistent
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2002
13,024
Seattle, WA
This is my absurdist's roster for 2015: You'll note 3 fucked up things
 
1B: Napoli (Craig)
2B: Betts (Holt, Pedroia)
SS: Pedroia (Holt, Bogaerts)
3B: Bogaerts (Holt)
 
LF: Craig (Nava)
CF: Castillo (Bradley)
RF: Cespedes (Nava, Bradley)
 
C: Vazquez (Ross)
DH: Ortiz (Craig)
 
SP: Lester
SP: Scherzer
SP: Kelly
SP: Buccholz
SP: De La Rosa
 
RP: Miller
RP: Mujica
RP: Badenhop
RP: Tazawa
RP: Uehara
RP: Layne
RP: Breslow
 
First: Let's get the payroll out of the way (based on charts upthread)
 
[tablegrid= Projected Payroll 2015 ]Napoli  16,000,000  Betts  550,000  Pedroia  13,750,000  Bogaerts  550,000   Holt  550,000      Craig  6,400,000   Nava  1,400,000  Castillo  10,357,143   Bradley  550,000  Cespedes  9,000,000      Ortiz  16,000,000      Vazquez  550,000   Ross  3,200,000  Lester  24,000,000  Scherzer  26,000,000  Kelly  550,000  Buccholz  7,550,000  De La Rosa  2,000,000      Miller  5,000,000  Mujica  4,750,000  Badenhop  3,000,000  Tazawa  2,500,000  Uehara  14,000,000  Layne  1,000,000  Breslow  100,000      169,307,143       Players 27-40  1,500,000   Dodgers  3,900,000   Benefits  13,000,000      187,707,143       Tax threshold  189,000,000       Over / Under  1,292,857    [/tablegrid] 
 
Now, what have I done!!!
 
1. Pedroia at SS: Why not (I'm sure there are many reasons), but I recalled this ESPN article from 2009: 
 

"They've asked me if I think I could play shortstop," Pedroia says. "They've put it out there and I've told them I'm all for it. I can do it. I can't wait for Tito [Terry Francona] to call me and ask, 'Can you do it?' I can do it. I really want to do it."
 
Pedroia was an all-American shortstop at Arizona State, and takes ground balls at the position during the season...
 
"One thing they know is that I will catch the ball," Pedroia says...
 

When Pedroia signed in 2004, he played shortstop for 42 games in the South Atlantic and Florida State leagues and did not make an error. He moved to second base in 2005 at Portland because of Hanley Ramirez, but still played some short there and in Pawtucket in 2005 and 2006. In 184 games at short in the minors he made just seven errors.
 
Francona played him some games at shortstop in spring training in 2006 and was unimpressed.
 
"Look," Pedroia says, "I was 20 pounds heavier. I tried to get big and it was a disaster. I know it. It's all about quickness, agility and flexibility, and I know it."...
 
"When the idea of moving back to shortstop was floated to me, I welcomed it," Pedroia says. "I'm excited. Tell Derek [Jeter] to enjoy the gold glove and silver slugger awards while he can. Obviously, I'm not serious about the fun I have with Derek, but I'm never stopping believing in the goal. I believe I can play shortstop and help get the Red Sox back where they belong."

 
 
Look, this has a 8.5 level of absurdity...but it solves so many issues: It resolves the outfield clog, gets Betts into the lineup, rids the team of WMB and puts Bogaerts at 3B (a position I feel he's best suited for)
 
2. Sign BOTH Lester and Scherholz (the Yankee move). Best staff in baseball. I plugged AAV's of $24M and $26 respectively. Certainly a GFIN move.

 
3. I trade Victorino and replace him with Bradley, assuming someone takes his salary.
 
This is still a ridiculously right-handed lineup. No solution.
 
This is only to prompt discussion (obviously Pedroia to SS is the biggest canard...but would he be worse than Bogaerts? Is he too old?)
 
It puts four cheap guys on the roster (Betts, Bogaerts, Bradley and Vazquez), but doesn't skimp on salaries anywhere else.
 
Have at me...but be gentle.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
geoduck no quahog said:
This is my absurdist's roster for 2015: You'll note 3 fucked up things
 
Now, what have I done!!!
 
1. Pedroia at SS: Why not (I'm sure there are many reasons), but I recalled this ESPN article from 2009:
That was (effectively) six years ago. He was 25 years old. And they didn't move him to shortstop back then, even though they certainly could have used him there (hello, Nick Green!). The idea that they will move him there at age 31, when it's been almost a decade since he played a grand total of 41 innings there, is just one of those weird SoSH ideas that will not die.
 
The shortstop options for 2015 are, in approximate order of likelihood:
 
1) Xander Bogaerts
2) Brock Holt
3) a trade acquisition like Tulowitzki
4) Deven Marrero
5) Asdrubal Cabrera on a pillow contract
6) Jonathan Herrera
7) Mookie Betts
8) Carlos Rivero
9) my deceased grandmother
10) Dustin Pedroia
 

LeoCarrillo

Do his bits at your peril
SoSH Member
Oct 13, 2008
10,452
Hazen on D&C says outright that they're prepared to address redundancies in the lineup (and holes in the rotation) by trading major leaguers -- not just prospects:
 
There’s two ways we’re going to plug those holes. We’re going to do it with money in the free agent market, and we’re going to be able to do it via trade, having good major league players, not just minor league players to trade. We may trade some minor league guys as well, but having those good, established major league hitters — a lot of these guys that have power, which is a commodity in the game, set us up fairly well in a strong position at least.
 
So who could that be:
 
Victorino: Most definitely. I'd expect him gone with partial freight paid. Mahalo for 2013, Shane.
Craig: Not much of a trade chip. But they could shop if he has a decent September.
Cespedes: Unlikely, as he's fitting in perfectly and a penned-in starter.
Nava: Unlikely, as the the lineup is overly right-handed and he's complementary, not redundant. 
Napoli: This would be bold and a bit cold-hearted after his taking a two-year deal. But if he helps you get a pitcher?
Xander: Doubtful with trade value depressed. But if they're in the Tulo sweepstakes ...
Pedroia, Papi, Vazquez, (likely) Holt: Not happening.
 
So, is Hazen just talking dump Vic and float Craig? He was talking about "guys that have power." So, could Nap be on the move with Craig taking over at 1B? That would be interesting. 
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
43,124
AZ
LeoCarrillo said:
So, is Hazen just talking dump Vic and float Craig? He was talking about "guys that have power." So, could Nap be on the move with Craig taking over at 1B? That would be interesting. 
 
The return would have to be pretty good for a Napoli trade to make sense.  Despite missing some games, he's around 2.4(fg) to 3.2(bref) wins so far this year, and like will tack on to that in the last month a little.  That's certainly not overproduction for a $16 million player, but it's not bad.  There's no reason to expect he won't be the same player next year, with some upside in a better constructed lineup, so I'm not sure trading a good club house guy you're paying $16 million and getting $16 million in value for is anything but a lateral move.  I also think the $16 million price tag probably narrows some of the trading partners, unless they were to consider throwing in cash, in which case it really doesn't make a whole lot of sense.  I suppose for a trade that adds significant needs, having Craig's right handed bat and hoping he finds his way in a fresh season could be a gamble worth taking, but that would have to be one heck of a trade.
 
One other minor point -- Napoli is a guy who I think could have substantial value in the event the Sox find themselves out of it again next year at the trade deadline.  While I don't think the FO should be making plans that assume we'll suck, I think a Napoli rental for $4 million for a playoff hopeful is the kind of trade that can net a decent prospect.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
LeoCarrillo said:
So, is Hazen just talking dump Vic and float Craig? He was talking about "guys that have power." So, could Nap be on the move with Craig taking over at 1B? That would be interesting. 
 
I would guess that Hazen is primarily thinking of Cespedes there. He has far more trade value than Napoli. Both will be FA in 2016, but Cespedes is younger and healthier. Either might get a QO for 2016, but Napoli would probably accept, while Cespedes (unless he tanks in his walk year) would probably decline, and probably find a buyer. Or you could try to extend him if he's a good fit. Either way, he has potential value beyond 2015 that Napoli can't match.
 
Of course all of the above also makes him a good candidate for the Sox to keep, but if we're thinking of trading power from the ML roster, Cespedes seems like a more logical candidate than Napoli, because the return is likely to be more commensurate with the lost 2015 production.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,635
Savin Hillbilly said:
 
I would guess that Hazen is primarily thinking of Cespedes there. He has far more trade value than Napoli. Both will be FA in 2016, but Cespedes is younger and healthier. Either might get a QO for 2016, but Napoli would probably accept, while Cespedes (unless he tanks in his walk year) would probably decline, and probably find a buyer. Or you could try to extend him if he's a good fit. Either way, he has potential value beyond 2015 that Napoli can't match.
 
Of course all of the above also makes him a good candidate for the Sox to keep, but if we're thinking of trading power from the ML roster, Cespedes seems like a more logical candidate than Napoli, because the return is likely to be more commensurate with the lost 2015 production.
 
There's also the reality that turning Cespedes (despite the physical tools) into a capable RF in Fenway is a project, requiring a big investment of time and effort to have a chance to succeed.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
LeoCarrillo said:
So, is Hazen just talking dump Vic and float Craig? He was talking about "guys that have power." So, could Nap be on the move with Craig taking over at 1B? That would be interesting. 
 
The first thing I thought of when reading Hazen's comments about "guys that have power" is that the Sox found something in Seattle to trade for.  
 
My second thought was that Atlanta most certainly would want MLB-ready talent if they're considering trading Heyward.
 
My third thought was that Hazen's just so totally over the Will Middlebrooks Experience.
 

Darnell's Son

He's a machine.
Moderator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,609
Providence, RI
Buzzkill Pauley said:
 
The first thing I thought of when reading Hazen's comments about "guys that have power" is that the Sox found something in Seattle to trade for.  
 
My second thought was that Atlanta most certainly would want MLB-ready talent if they're considering trading Heyward.
 
My third thought was that Hazen's just so totally over the Will Middlebrooks Experience.
So does something like Cespedes, Owens(or another pitcher), and a couple lower tier guys get it done for Heyward?
 

Mighty Joe Young

The North remembers
SoSH Member
Sep 14, 2002
8,466
Halifax, Nova Scotia , Canada
Well .. this is promising ..
 
Even though the Red Sox traded him away, Andrew Miller would be open to a Boston return, writes Brian MacPherson of The Providence Journal.  “I certainly have relationships with a lot of people here,” he said. “I loved my time here. There’s no secret to that. My wife and I loved it here. It’s a great place to play, the way you get treated by the organization. It’s a great place to live. It’s a hard situation to leave. “If I could script it, I’d say, certainly, I’d love to be back.”  In 65 games between the Red Sox and Orioles this season, Miller has pitched to a 2.09 ERA with 14.3 K/9 and 2.6 BB/9.
 
 
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/09/al-east-notes-miller-robertson-pearce.html
 
Will 24/3 get it done? One would think so ..
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,283

BeantownIdaho

New Member
Dec 5, 2005
481
Nampa, Idaho
I would like to see Miller back in Boston - Given his comments today I think there is a real shot at bringing him back...I would even take it a step further and entertain the idea of him being our closer.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
BeantownIdaho said:
I would like to see Miller back in Boston - Given his comments today I think there is a real shot at bringing him back...I would even take it a step further and entertain the idea of him being our closer.
Hopefully the Os crash out of the playoffs quickly, before he becomes more famous. [And for a lot of other reasons.] It's fair to say that he will listen intently to what the Sox have to say, but the only other factor besides money is whether someone hands him a closer's job. And even then, that's not contractual, so he still probably takes the highest bid.
 

seantoo

toots his own horn award winner
Jul 16, 2005
1,308
Southern NH, from Watertown, MA
The Mort Report said:
I don't think trading Napoli is the best idea.  He took less money and years to resign here; it would send a terrible message to other players.  Obviously in the last 10-15 years baseball has become more about rooting for laundry, but the players are looking for loyalty when they sign a contract, especially at a discount.  What kind of message would this be sending?  He only has 1 year left on his contract, if the Sox need to deal with a logjam for a year I think balancing the egos is better for business than trading him
This point is getting taken to an absurd degree. I'm not for or against trading Napoli however he signed a 2 yr deal and finished the first year of the deal. Players are traded ALL the time yet is there a single team that has a 'bad rep' for trading them? No. This point made by several people has no legs to stand on.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
21,733
Rogers Park
seantoo said:
This point is getting taken to an absurd degree. I'm not for or against trading Napoli however he signed a 2 yr deal and finished the first year of the deal. Players are traded ALL the time yet is there a single team that has a 'bad rep' for trading them? No. This point made by several people has no legs to stand on.
 
The Marlins. Which proves your point, really. 
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Darnell's Son said:
So does something like Cespedes, Owens(or another pitcher), and a couple lower tier guys get it done for Heyward?
 
I would not move Owens in a deal for Heyward.  
 
Thought I wouldn't at all mind exploring trade ideas for him.  
 

KillerBs

New Member
Nov 16, 2006
945
It seems a bit pointless to try and forecast the 2015 Sox team now given that you have to assume the team is mid renovation at this point and if nothing else Cherington et al have proven that they are creative, even unpredictable, in the moves they are prepared to make. But I can't really help myself.
 
If we set aside for the moment any unlikely out of the box position changes (eg Betts, Pedroia, Bogaerts or Castillo to 3b does not appear in the cards right now) and try to simply inventory what the Sox have now, focusing just on the offense for the time being, I came up with the following.
 
C Vazquez + ?
1b Napoli
2b Pedroia
3b Holt, WMB
SS Bogaerts
LF Craig, Nava
CF Betts, Castillo, Bradley
RF Cespedes, Victorino
DH Ortiz
 
From this, I draw a few tentative conclusions about the status quo ante going into the off season, some of which are more obvious than others
 
1. We need another 1 year stop gap catcher, as discussed elsewhere, pending Swihart's arrival
 
2. 3b is a verging on a pressing need, as WMB has shown he has no business being in the big leagues now and Holt is better suited as a UI then a starting 3b. The plan has to be WMB is dumped (for nothing) or starts in AAA in 2015 (where? with Cecchini at 3b?). WMB becomes a ML factor only after if he proves he can be a plus, if not plus plus, offensive player in AAA. Thus, pending any major position changes from our existing players, we need to acquire a 3b to at least supplement Holt in 2015.  
 
3. We have 7 options for 5 OF spots:
 
a. It is hard to imagine Bradley having any plausible claim on a MLB job with the Sox before June 2015. Like WMB, he will have to prove again at AAA that he is not a complete black hole offensively.  Until then he is no more than a fine candidate to be a great 4th/5th OFer on a team that doesn't need one. Given his current rock bottom valuation, he doesn't seem like a plausible trade chip.  
 
b. That leaves 6. 2 of them (Craig and Victorino) you probably could not give away now, but if not dealt will expect/demand regular playing time if they are not injured. I expect both will be in the "best shape of their career" at Fort Myers in March. Both, Craig especially, could be exactly what the team needs or a major detriment to the 2015 team, no one knows. Another (Nava) appears to be a more or less fungible mediocrity, but has the rare ability on this team to bat left-handed. Another (Cespedes) is a useful B/B+ player, signed reasonably for only one more year, and thus has some trade value, but is the only one of the 6 you could confidently predict will be a better than average ML player next year. The other two (Betts and Castillo) are prospects. Betts looks like a potential super star you might want to build a team around. He is the one guy everyone will want in a trade, who you don't want to trade.  Castillo is little more than a massive question mark but one that the team has invested hugely in and is untradeable, one presumes.
 
In sum, for various reasons none of Victorino, Craig, Nava or Cespedes or Castillo seem to make sense as trade targets. I cant see Betts being sent down in April 2015 after what he done at the bat in his limited ML playing time.
 
That leaves Castillo presumptively without a chair at the beginning of 2015. And I think that makes sense. I would like to see Rusney prove he can hit AAA pitching before the Sox anoint him the starting CF or RF. I wonder if the Sox will be able to resist giving him a big league gig in Spring 2015 given the money they just gave him.
 
If Rusney is the odd man out to start, the 2015 OF would look like:
 
LF: Craig/Nava
CF: Betts
RF: Cespedes/Victorino
 
This is premised on a Sox conclusion that Betts is a legit ML defensive CFer, which I am not sure of yet.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,259
I think KB captures the OF situation quite well.  I will say that given Cespedes was an All Star LF for a first place team, and will be in a contract year, he (and his agent) will for sure be demanding of playing time come 2015.  He will not accept being a platoon player with Victorino.  Which means that unless Cespedes is traded, he will be a starting OF for this team in 2015.  
 
My guess is that Nava is likely to be part of a larger trade package; essentially a throw in to help lure in a bigger player.  He won't cost the acquiring team very much, and his OBP against RHP's makes him a serviceable player for most teams.  This does assume some indication that Craig is indeed going to be healthy to start 2015 season (seems to be some disagreement as to whether that will be the case). 
 
As for Victorino, my unexpert opinion is that there is at least a 33% chance of him being washed up due to the nature of this injuries. If he is healthy in the spring, he will basically have a 2 month audition with the team while Castillo (and JBJ and perhaps Betts) get some additional AB's down in Pawtucket.  After that point, if the youngsters are mashing it up in AAA, I don't think the team will have any issue with a mid-season DFA/trade, as he will be in the final year of his contract, so it's not like the team would be eating a lot of $$$.  
 

RochesterSamHorn

New Member
Nov 10, 2006
104
Rochester, New York
Pedroia, Betts, Castillo. A redundancy at 2b or a redundancy in cf.?
We have too many pressing needs at other positions, and my gut feeling is that one of these valuable trade chips will not be here for opening day.
 

KillerBs

New Member
Nov 16, 2006
945
Sorry I wasn't clear there -- a Cespedes/Victorino platoon makes no sense.
 
I don't know what Victorino's role could be in that configuration other than backing up Mookie in CF once a week maybe and that is a stretch. I guess he would be scrapping for ABs with Nava vs RHPers and Craig vs LHPers.
 
Maybe subsidizing Victorino's 13M and moving him down the road is the most likely solution. If so, we are looking at Craig/Nava/Betts/Castillo/Cespedes set of OFers, which would mean that not only are Nava and Craig in a death battle for ABs in LF (assuming Cespedes is a RF?), which I can liv with, but Castillo and Betts would be fighting it out for CF playing time too. Not ideal, IMO.  
 
Dealing Nava has its appeal but in a Craig/Nava/Betts/Cespedes/Victorino scenario, Nava would justify some ABs if only because he is a lefty and especially if Craig continues to suck, an eventuality which seems far from remote. Obviously, the extreme right heavy nature of this lineup is a concern. If Holt is on the bench, we could be looking at Papi as the only LHB in the lineup.  
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Red Sox ready to spend big this winter, if you believe Tom Werner.
 
I'm not sure this article tells us anything we weren't assuming -- that the Red Sox are well aware of their financial flexibility and intend to use it if they can. It doesn't mean they will depart from their past patterns regarding long deals, etc. Still, if they're trying to let us down gently about the impending permanent loss of Jon Lester, they've got a funny way of going about it.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,977
chrisfont9 said:
Red Sox ready to spend big this winter, if you believe Tom Werner.
 
I'm not sure this article tells us anything we weren't assuming -- that the Red Sox are well aware of their financial flexibility and intend to use it if they can. It doesn't mean they will depart from their past patterns regarding long deals, etc. Still, if they're trying to let us down gently about the impending permanent loss of Jon Lester, they've got a funny way of going about it.
 
So...
 
"The Boston Red Sox have signed Jon Lester, Max Scherzer and Hanley Ramirez to 3 years $110 million each"? 
 

maxotaur

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
429
Pittsburgh PA
RochesterSamHorn said:
Pedroia, Betts, Castillo. A redundancy at 2b or a redundancy in cf.?
We have too many pressing needs at other positions, and my gut feeling is that one of these valuable trade chips will not be here for opening day.
Realistically that could only mean Betts then. Pedroia is not going anywhere and they didn't sign Castillo to a long-term deal to trade him before opening day.

Personally I don't see any of them as trade chips. Stranger things have certainly happened but...
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
If what is leaking out is true and the Sox do spend then it would make no sense not to spend on Lester. Give the man what he wants. Extend Cespedes since he's been solid since joining the Sox and I feel can only get better with a full season in Fenway under his belt. What I see the Sox actually doing is making a run at Yasmani Tomas. A big raw power bat that is high risk, high reward like Soler was. This is the type of guy that you can stash in the minors for a year or so and let him develop and have him come up in maybe August-September if all goes well.

Uehara will be back unless something crazy occurs. They'll offer him a QO just to cover their asses. However if he does leave I have been impressed with Mujica since the middle of May and think he could be a big part of the pen next year. Miller is always out there as well but I'm guessing that a non contender will give him a shot to close.

That being said an outfield of Castillo Betts and Cespedes is lacking for me. I think that if anything Betts should move over to the left side of the infield and platoon Victorino and Bradley in Right. While it could be dangerous to play that game remember how lethal Victorino was last season and how important to the clubhouse as well. If this team wants to contend they need him back and playing. Betts has shown that he deserves an everyday spot in the lineup. Now this could end up being one of those things where he ends up peaking now and this is the highlight of his career but if I'm the Sox I'm not moving him for anything less than a major impact player. He isn't the next Trout by any means but he could end up being a really good major leaguer. Xander still has the higher ceiling though and should rebound accordingly.

Overall on paper right now you're probably looking at the ceiling of a 75-80 win team. I say 75-80 due to injuries in 2014, natural player progression, and just plain bad luck. If the Sox do sign Lester then it goes up. If they sign Lester and Hanley it goes up. If they sign Lester Hanley and Scherzer then I think this board will explode.

The protected pick does help in these matters. As does the top farm system.
 

In my lifetime

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
959
Connecticut
Tyrone Biggums said:
If what is leaking out is true and the Sox do spend then it would make no sense not to spend on Lester. Give the man what he wants. Extend Cespedes since he's been solid since joining the Sox and I feel can only get better with a full season in Fenway under his belt. What I see the Sox actually doing is making a run at Yasmani Tomas. A big raw power bat that is high risk, high reward like Soler was. This is the type of guy that you can stash in the minors for a year or so and let him develop and have him come up in maybe August-September if all goes well.

Uehara will be back unless something crazy occurs. They'll offer him a QO just to cover their asses. However if he does leave I have been impressed with Mujica since the middle of May and think he could be a big part of the pen next year. Miller is always out there as well but I'm guessing that a non contender will give him a shot to close.


Overall on paper right now you're probably looking at the ceiling of a 75-80 win team. I say 75-80 due to injuries in 2014, natural player progression, and just plain bad luck. If the Sox do sign Lester then it goes up. If they sign Lester and Hanley it goes up. If they sign Lester Hanley and Scherzer then I think this board will explode.
 
 
Uehara's chance at a QO evaporated with his August performance. He could very well sign with them but he will be doing well if he gets an offer of half of the QO.
Lester - if they wanted to give him what he wanted, he would be pitching for them now. One would certainly think they are targeting either Lester or Scherzer with a back up plan of trading for another #1.
The RS are not going to be spending 14 M on Koji, 25M on Lester, 30M on Scherzer =69M on 3 needs including locking in 55M annually for the next 6-7 years.  
 
The RS have the payroll flexibility they crave, but I doubt they feel like blowing that flexibility and handing out multiple 6-7 yr deals on players over 30.  Victorino is looking like almost 3 years of sunk cost for 1 very good year.
They have already spent some of the available money on Cespedes and Castillo to address the team's power shortage in the OF.
Major needs now include:
#1 starter -   ~25M x 6 yrs
#2/3 starter-  ~15M x 3 yrs
Likely Closer - ~6M x 2 yrs
3B - $ depends on whether they go long term or stop gap. figure ~12M
Half of C to a likely 1-2 yr stop gap - ~4M x 1 yr
Fill Out the BP
 
Certainly some of those moves will be the result from trades, but likely would involve the trading of prospects (young pitchers), disappointing prospects (WMB, JBJ) or subsidized veterans (Victorino, Craig) for more proven ML starters.  None of that is likely to result in the significent of payroll.
 
So to me, even addressing just their obvious needs without blowing up the budget on any 1 need, still involves an additional 62M spent for the coming season. Certainly at least half of that will continue annually for at least another 3 years. The financial outlay would likely +/- put them at their budget, leaving them with money to make late season moves as needed.  
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Tyrone Biggums said:
If what is leaking out is true and the Sox do spend then it would make no sense not to spend on Lester. 
You've got the Hug, friendly reporters checking in with Lester, and this. It all adds up to a binge on Lester. Doesn't mean it will work, and it's possible they screw it up completely, since the Sox' recent track record on negotiating with him is what it is. But they're dropping a lot of hints that they feel like they need to get something done, maybe even to make amends for the lowball (or at least the bad PR re the lowball). We'll see.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,635
chrisfont9 said:
You've got the Hug, friendly reporters checking in with Lester, and this. It all adds up to a binge on Lester. Doesn't mean it will work, and it's possible they screw it up completely, since the Sox' recent track record on negotiating with him is what it is. But they're dropping a lot of hints that they feel like they need to get something done, maybe even to make amends for the lowball (or at least the bad PR re the lowball). We'll see.
 
 
You realize, of course, that all the happy talk helped dial down the level of disgust among the fandom in the aftermath of the trade. There were/are still tickets to sell for the 2014 games. The Sox have $$$ to spend, but Lucchino can always dust off his "price of milk" speech.
 

maxotaur

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
429
Pittsburgh PA
Harry Hooper said:
 
 
You realize, of course, that all the happy talk helped dial down the level of disgust among the fandom in the aftermath of the trade. There were/are still tickets to sell for the 2014 games. The Sox have $$$ to spend, but Lucchino can always dust off his "price of milk" speech.
That's a good point. Not to overstate this but that hug may have saved from a lot of lost revenue.
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Harry Hooper said:
You realize, of course, that all the happy talk helped dial down the level of disgust among the fandom in the aftermath of the trade. There were/are still tickets to sell for the 2014 games. The Sox have $$$ to spend, but Lucchino can always dust off his "price of milk" speech.
 
It also seems like everyone is ignoring JWH's comments about spending big $ on FAs over 30. The bottom line is a team is almost always going to be spending big money on the player's declining performance, especially on the end of the deal, and all the talk of "well they can afford it" and "this is a large revenue team" is a slippery slope to a team spending itself into a corner ala the Yankees.
 
I like Lester a lot, and his performance over the past 1.5 seasons was a surprise and great to watch, but I don't think it's some new baseline. I'm sure a lot of the justifications thrown around to pay Lester "whatever he wants" we also thrown around by Tigers' fans when it came to extending Verlander.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.