The off-season

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
So yes. He's most likely worth $13M on the open market - in a year with virtually nothing on the market - and some team would likely be willing to pay a prospect price in order to avoid the competition of signing him and/or taking the risk they could flip him at the deadline for a better prospect.

Assets have value, small or large. His option is one. I don't want to see him in the rotation next year, but as a long man/reliever I'd swallow it. If they could get a decent prospect all the better. But the option will almost definitely be picked up, even if he's relegated to mop up. And it won't preclude them from adding a bullpen arm if they so desire.
If the shoe was on the other foot would you really be willing to pay an even remotely good prospect price on the hope that Buchholz is even a decent flip possibility candidate? I mean his annual track record in that regard is pretty much screaming "worst possible odds". It's an all in bet for the season if there ever was one.

I think you have it wrong with how picking up his option plays out there too. If DD exercises the option and Clay looks good in ST, he's heading north with the 5th spot. Wright pitching well too won't be enough to change or challenge that imo.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,720
Wright seems like the odd man out from here. If he's going well, I'd be happy to see him regularly in long relief to proactively lessen the workload on Buc/Edro/Pom. Get them out after a couple trips through the order and give Wright 8-12 innings per week, while maintaining flexibility to keep him off the field in case of the adverse weather and heat conditions that wreck him instead of being forced to pay him cause it's his slot in the rotation.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Wright seems like the odd man out from here. If he's going well, I'd be happy to see him regularly in long relief to proactively lessen the workload on Buc/Edro/Pom. Get them out after a couple trips through the order and give Wright 8-12 innings per week, while maintaining flexibility to keep him off the field in case of the adverse weather and heat conditions that wreck him instead of being forced to pay him cause it's his slot in the rotation.
That's interesting on paper, but has any team ever managed a pitching staff that way? Routinely taking out multiple starters pitching well, to limit innings while giving some to your long man seems like video game stuff.

I do, however, agree that Wright will be the 6th starter. And the 6th starter always ends up getting plenty of starts.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
That's interesting on paper, but has any team ever managed a pitching staff that way? Routinely taking out multiple starters pitching well, to limit innings while giving some to your long man seems like video game stuff.

I do, however, agree that Wright will be the 6th starter. And the 6th starter always ends up getting plenty of starts.
I'd guess it's partly because if a pitcher can go 8-12 innings a week and be effective, he's going to be starting or that his arm will fall off after a year or two of pitching 150 innings in relief.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,368
Wright seems like the odd man out from here. If he's going well, I'd be happy to see him regularly in long relief to proactively lessen the workload on Buc/Edro/Pom. Get them out after a couple trips through the order and give Wright 8-12 innings per week, while maintaining flexibility to keep him off the field in case of the adverse weather and heat conditions that wreck him instead of being forced to pay him cause it's his slot in the rotation.
I think it's premature to conclude Wright will not be effective in adverse weather conditions. MLB players do make adjustments. There's a limited track record to date.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
Disagree slightly w/Clay getting the 5th spot. I think it's a lot more of a toss up. Wright was sooo great (nearly starting all-star great) in the first half, that I think if he outpitches Clay in spring training and shows the command he had up until the last two starts in July that he wins the spot. We're weighing Clay's September when he looked great and was clutch as hell more heavily than Wright's April through July when he was also clutch as hell. Wright did show cracks before his injury but some regression was going to happen. I mean he was the ERA leader for a stretch.

Of course, Wright will have sweaty palms pitching in the heat so it's a distinct possibility that this won't happen.
 

ElcaballitoMVP

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2008
3,932
I don't think Buchholz is a lock for the 5th spot, but I do think it's a lock that he'll be back. Let him and Wright fight it out for the 5th spot in spring training and send the loser to the pen. It's not a bad problem to have.

Figure out how to add one or two legitimate pieces to the bullpen, maybe sign a 1B/DH if the price is right and lock up the young guys. If a big trade for an ace-level starter comes available that doesn't cost you Benintendi or Moncada, they can look into that (something like JBJ-Kopech-and one or two solid prospects). Otherwise, I don't think the Sox need to do all that much this offseason. They're in a good position to not overpay in dollars or prospects but have the flexibility with both to make the moves DD wants to make.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
I don't think Buchholz is a lock for the 5th spot, but I do think it's a lock that he'll be back. Let him and Wright fight it out for the 5th spot in spring training and send the loser to the pen. It's not a bad problem to have.

Figure out how to add one or two legitimate pieces to the bullpen, maybe sign a 1B/DH if the price is right and lock up the young guys. If a big trade for an ace-level starter comes available that doesn't cost you Benintendi or Moncada, they can look into that (something like JBJ-Kopech-and one or two solid prospects). Otherwise, I don't think the Sox need to do all that much this offseason. They're in a good position to not overpay in dollars or prospects but have the flexibility with both to make the moves DD wants to make.
I'm pretty much in agreement with this, if the long term prognosis on DP is good, and he can build on this year's innings, they have a rock solid 1-4, with two capable guys to handle the 5/6 spots. There's no pressure to empty the bank for Sale.

After that they should let Moncada, Swihart, and Dubon play their way onto the big league roster next season and go from there.
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,720
That's interesting on paper, but has any team ever managed a pitching staff that way? Routinely taking out multiple starters pitching well, to limit innings while giving some to your long man seems like video game stuff.

I do, however, agree that Wright will be the 6th starter. And the 6th starter always ends up getting plenty of starts.
It's rare (Bob Stanley's 80s run stands out), but you have to wonder if what we're seeing with bullpen usage this October might start to trickle down to the regular season in some fashion. I won't pretend to know the fatigue cost of more frequent appearances, but it seems like Wright, as a knuckleballer not dependent on max physical effort like typical relievers, might be uniquely positioned to make an attempt.
 

HangingW/ScottCooper

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,493
Scituate, MA
Assuming Clay's option is picked up, I would expect a three man race for two spots with Pomeranz, Wright and Buchholz. I think their is some interest in Pomeranz is a reliever on this team.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
We're weighing Clay's September when he looked great and was clutch as hell more heavily than Wright's April through July when he was also clutch as hell. Wright did show cracks before his injury but some regression was going to happen. I mean he was the ERA leader for a stretch.
It's not going to boil down to simplified matter of just weighing last year's results though. Regardless how much the people who don't like the idea of Clay being "the guy" here, but want to talk themselves into liking that option, choose to paper theory it out differently. Team tenure, veteran politics, and contract consideration are going to play into that decision as well.

With all things being equal he's not losing a rotation spot to Wright. If they are not equal and he does lose his spot that also probably means he's looking like crap, which just serves to kickstart the annual period of time he spends every year being a negative value asset. Good luck on getting that prospect return then.

But that's just playing out yet another round of the Clay Buchholz Dilemma, 2017. Where if a person doesn't like the idea of Clay being our #5 guy in the rotation.....they are stuck rooting for him to pitch terribly in ST?
 
Last edited:

strek1

Run, Forrest, run!
SoSH Member
Jun 13, 2006
31,747
Hartford area
Remy just Tweeted: " Boston Red Sox: Will Middlebrooks a potential long shot third base option"

NO THANKS - Been there done that.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,250
is Jerry on crack? the guy is extremely lucky to have a WS ring, he should never see a major league game again.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
It's not going to boil down to simplified matter of just weighing last year's results though. Regardless how much the people who don't like the idea of Clay being "the guy" here, but want to talk themselves into liking that option, choose to paper theory it out differently. Team tenure, veteran politics, and contract consideration are going to play into that decision as well.

With all things being equal he's not losing a rotation spot to Wright. If they are not equal and he does lose his spot that also probably means he's looking like crap, which just serves to kickstart the annual period of time he spends every year being a negative value asset. Good luck on getting that prospect return then.

But that's just playing out yet another round of the Clay Buchholz Dilemma, 2017. Where if a person doesn't like the idea of Clay being our #5 guy in the rotation.....they are stuck rooting for him to pitch terribly in ST?
I'm not a Clay hater at all. If he earns the spot, he earns the spot. At worse he's a bullpen innings soaker which has value. But I completely disagree that any of the bolded factor in at all. He lost his job due to ineffectiveness. He was buried for weeks at a time, and Farrell practically pronounced him dead as a Red Sox. It will be about performance and performance alone.

See also: Sandoval vs. Shaw in spring training. Veteran vs. rookie. Big contract vs prospect without much pedigree.
 

MakeMineMoxie

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
722
The floor of Punter's Pub
I'm not a Clay hater at all. If he earns the spot, he earns the spot. At worse he's a bullpen innings soaker which has value. But I completely disagree that any of the bolded factor in at all. He lost his job due to ineffectiveness. He was buried for weeks at a time, and Farrell practically pronounced him dead as a Red Sox. It will be about performance and performance alone.
Yep. I think they'd be foolish to NOT pick up the option and I for one, will have vastly lower expectations for Clay in 2017. I think many of us have been so disappointed in him because we hoped he'd be a solid #2 or #3 and he just isn't. Whatever he can give as a #5 or long relief is fine at this point. Anything above that is gravy.
 

czar

fanboy
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
4,312
Ann Arbor
I'm surprised some seem to think Pomeranz is locked into a 2017 rotation spot. His peripherals were pretty mediocre (particularly if you believe the HR rate is "real" -- near 5.00 FIP) in Boston and he faded down the stretch. Maybe it was innings, maybe not (FBvelo was pretty constant all season), but he was the 5th best SP in Aug-Sept-Oct and that's with Wright on the shelf.

He should obviously get every change to claim a rotation slot in ST (as should Buchholz and Wright) but it's very easy to see a scenario where he ends up in the pen to open 2017.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
21,479
Rogers Park
I'm surprised some seem to think Pomeranz is locked into a 2017 rotation spot. His peripherals were pretty mediocre (particularly if you believe the HR rate is "real" -- near 5.00 FIP) in Boston and he faded down the stretch. Maybe it was innings, maybe not (FBvelo was pretty constant all season), but he was the 5th best SP in Aug-Sept-Oct and that's with Wright on the shelf.

He should obviously get every change to claim a rotation slot in ST (as should Buchholz and Wright) but it's very easy to see a scenario where he ends up in the pen to open 2017.
Why should we ignore what he did in San Diego?

He threw 69 IP in Boston with a 4.72 FIP, but he threw 102 in SD with a 3.15. His hit rate spiked along with his HR rate, but his K/BB ratio actually improved. Basically, he added .066 to his BABIP when he moved to Boston, moving from one of the worst defensive teams to one of the best. Weird.

For the whole year, his BABIP was very close to his career norms.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
I'm not a Clay hater at all. If he earns the spot, he earns the spot. At worse he's a bullpen innings soaker which has value. But I completely disagree that any of the bolded factor in at all. He lost his job due to ineffectiveness. He was buried for weeks at a time, and Farrell practically pronounced him dead as a Red Sox. It will be about performance and performance alone.

See also: Sandoval vs. Shaw in spring training. Veteran vs. rookie. Big contract vs prospect without much pedigree.
The Sandoval call isn't really similar in that DD didn't have the beforehand option to choose whether or not he wanted to go into ST with Panda still on the payroll.

In this case he does.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
I'm surprised some seem to think Pomeranz is locked into a 2017 rotation spot. His peripherals were pretty mediocre (particularly if you believe the HR rate is "real" -- near 5.00 FIP) in Boston and he faded down the stretch. Maybe it was innings, maybe not (FBvelo was pretty constant all season), but he was the 5th best SP in Aug-Sept-Oct and that's with Wright on the shelf.

He should obviously get every change to claim a rotation slot in ST (as should Buchholz and Wright) but it's very easy to see a scenario where he ends up in the pen to open 2017.
For me it's a combo of his SD success and the prospect price paid out for him.

Plus of course the default assumption that DD must be rather high on him in doing that latter.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Assets have value, small or large. His option is one.
This seems like a fallacy to me. An option for the following year has value; his 2017 option had value a year ago. It has no value now, because it's simply an immediate decision to be made, not a future opportunity that you either will or won't have depending on the decision you make now. Either he's worth $13M for next year or he's not. The option, like the Norwegian blue's plumage, don't enter into it.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
This seems like a fallacy to me. An option for the following year has value; his 2017 option had value a year ago. It has no value now, because it's simply an immediate decision to be made, not a future opportunity that you either will or won't have depending on the decision you make now. Either he's worth $13M for next year or he's not. The option, like the Norwegian blue's plumage, don't enter into it.
Word it however you like. Picking up his option and having him on a one year deal for $13.5M in a year when the pitching market is atrocious most certainly has value. You can debate how much or how little that value amounts to, but having the option to pick that up represents value to the Sox. They very well may already have had discussion with another team that would pay a little more in prospect price for the Sox to pick it up, just so that they don't need to try to sign him to a longer deal on the FA market with competition from other suitors.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Word it however you like. Picking up his option and having him on a one year deal for $13.5M in a year when the pitching market is atrocious most certainly has value. You can debate how much or how little that value amounts to, but having the option to pick that up represents value to the Sox. They very well may already have had discussion with another team that would pay a little more in prospect price for the Sox to pick it up, just so that they don't need to try to sign him to a longer deal on the FA market with competition from other suitors.
This makes no sense. I haven't heard that Buchholz's deal includes a clause that voids the option if he's traded, so I assume it doesn't. But it makes no difference. If such a clause exists, then the Sox can't trade Buchholz without picking the option up first (so no team is going to "pay a little more in prospect price" for them to do that). And if it doesn't exist, then the trade partner couldn't care less whether the Sox pick the option up, because they'll do that themselves as long as the trade is completed before the option deadline. Going forward, Buchholz is either a guy with a one-year, $13.5M contract--in no way whatosever different from a guy who happens to have one $13.5M year left on a guaranteed contract--or else he's a free agent with value TBD. The option is 100% meaningless in value terms at this point.

What am I missing?
 

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
3,620
Why is everyone discounting what wright did the beginning of the year? why would clay get a spot over wright? who knows if clay's "mechanical issues" don't flair up again, and he has no future with the team long term. If wright can build on last season, he is a great part of this team for years going forward. I hope wright would get another shot in the rotation
 

ALiveH

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,104
I've seen reasonable arguments for a bunch of different rotation configurations. I'll just trust management to use their superior evaluation skills in spring training to figure it out.

We basically have 2 locks: Price & Porcello
then 1 semi-lock: Ed-Rod.
then there are 3 guys for 2 spots (Wright, Clay, Drew), with the loser going to long relief / 6th starter
 

simplicio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2012
4,720
Why is everyone discounting what wright did the beginning of the year? why would clay get a spot over wright? who knows if clay's "mechanical issues" don't flair up again, and he has no future with the team long term. If wright can build on last season, he is a great part of this team for years going forward. I hope wright would get another shot in the rotation
The biggest knock against Wright in the first half was his knuckleball command failing in wet or sweaty conditions (His downturn just before the shoulder injury brought into question the sustainability of that awesome performance as well). Having him in the pen lets the Sox avoid those situations without screwing with the rest of the rotation, so all else being equal I think he's the first of that trio to go.

That's dependent on all six starters finishing spring training healthy and equally capable, of course.
 

Papo The Snow Tiger

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 18, 2010
1,409
Connecticut
I apologize if this was discussed elsewhere, but I wonder if Clay's future may be brighter if he became a reliever. I'm thinking about how well Andrew Miller is doing now that he's strictly coming out of the pen.
 

dhappy42

Straw Man
Oct 27, 2013
15,725
Michigan
I've seen reasonable arguments for a bunch of different rotation configurations. I'll just trust management to use their superior evaluation skills in spring training to figure it out.

We basically have 2 locks: Price & Porcello
then 1 semi-lock: Ed-Rod.
then there are 3 guys for 2 spots (Wright, Clay, Drew), with the loser going to long relief / 6th starter
And if management is happy with that (there's no reason not to be) then the team has only two or three real "needs" for next year:

1. Replace Ortiz's offensive production
2. Third base
3. Rebuild bullpen depth assuming Ziegler, Tazawa and (maybe) Uehara are gone.

Not saying another "ace" or 4-5 rotation guy wouldn't be a good thing to have, but it seems to me a relatively low priority.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
And if management is happy with that (there's no reason not to be) then the team has only two or three real "needs" for next year:

1. Replace Ortiz's offensive production
2. Third base
3. Rebuild bullpen depth assuming Ziegler, Tazawa and (maybe) Uehara are gone.

Not saying another "ace" or 4-5 rotation guy wouldn't be a good thing to have, but it seems to me a relatively low priority.
I agree that a starter will be very low on Dombrowski's offseason priority list. He's said as much at his offseason press debriefing, simply by including Buchholz among the 6 starting pitchers on the MLB club. Should an all-star caliber pitcher fall into his lap, I'm sure that would work, but I can't see such a thing happening.

Both Farrell and Dombrowski also mentioned there, that they don't expect any one player to replace Ortiz's offensive production. That doesn't mean they won't be looking to get a big bat, but the implication is that they won't be committing big money to one player to be everyday DH. Frankly, I would be surprised if they don't use the opening at DH to build a 25-man roster deep at DH/1B/3B types.

Which leads into third base. The Sox don't need to find an answer for 3B per se, because they have several already, and can increase production there in a variety of ways that include addressing 1B and DH in different ways. The easiest solution is simply to hand it over to Sandoval, and hope that slimming down has made him HUNGRY again (thanks, Cafardo!). They could go with Holt there, or a Rutledge/Shaw platoon. Moncada is doing quite well in the AFL, but certainly needs more time in the minors; I suspect that 500+ PA in AAA is what he needs to be able to build an approach to credibly hit against advanced breaking pitches. Picking up a cheap functionally limited LH slugger like Pedro Alvarez or Brandon Moss, who could fit into a hitters' rotation alongside Ramirez, Young, Shaw, Rutledge, and Holt, is far more likely than buying high on Encarnacion, as awesome as it would be to see him hit 81 games at Fenway.

The bullpen is, of course, what the Sox need to focus on most. Unfortunately, that's also historically Dombrowski's weakest area for team building. Koji will come back, though on a 1-year deal for much less than $9M. Again, the Sox have lots of options, both internal and not. How they deal with DH/1B/3B will determine what players can be traded for bullpen help. Who should they trade...Holt? Shaw? Panda? It depends who they can sign, and what their prospective trade partner wants.

And another reason I think it's highly unlikely that Dombrowski will make any blockbuster additions, is simply that losing Hazen means figuring out how that one move will shake out with talent like Torey Lovullo, Gus Quattlebaum and Amiel Sawdaye, while other more stable organizations are planning out their on-field moves.

So yeah, I see a slow offseason ahead.
 

nothumb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 27, 2006
7,065
yammer's favorite poster
Which leads into third base. The Sox don't need to find an answer for 3B per se, because they have several already, and can increase production there in a variety of ways that include addressing 1B and DH in different ways. The easiest solution is simply to hand it over to Sandoval, and hope that slimming down has made him HUNGRY again (thanks, Cafardo!). They could go with Holt there, or a Rutledge/Shaw platoon. Moncada is doing quite well in the AFL, but certainly needs more time in the minors; I suspect that 500+ PA in AAA is what he needs to be able to build an approach to credibly hit against advanced breaking pitches. Picking up a cheap functionally limited LH slugger like Pedro Alvarez or Brandon Moss, who could fit into a hitters' rotation alongside Ramirez, Young, Shaw, Rutledge, and Holt, is far more likely than buying high on Encarnacion, as awesome as it would be to see him hit 81 games at Fenway.
I have been beating this drum for a couple months, and I still think adding a guy like Moss and then replacing one of Shaw or Panda with a 3b / OF type who mashes lefties would be a good, cheap solution that doesn't hamstring you if Moncada is ready quickly. Maybe that guy is Rutledge, or maybe they could do a little better than that (I was hoping for Prado before he re-upped with MIA).

There are obvious reasons why you might not want to make that decision on moving someone til ST, but if Panda comes back strong (and as much as most of us have resigned ourselves to hating his ample guts, it could happen), I would expect DD to have a feel for Shaw's market.

This would maximize positional flexibility and give you a lot of in-game options as well. Here's that scenario with Panda staying, Shaw going and a Prado / Rutledge type as the 25th man:

vs. RHP:
LF - 10D
CF - JBJ
RF - Mookie
1B - Moss / Hanley
2B - Pedey
SS - X
3B - Panda
C - Leon / Vaz
DH - Moss / Hanley

You can also give Panda some turns at DH against RHP by starting Holt at 3B.

vs. LHP:

LF - Young / AB
CF - JBJ / AB
RF - Mookie
1B - Hanley
2B - Pedey
SS - X
3B - Rutledge
C - Leon / Vaz
DH - rotation of Young / Leon / other RHH who could use a breather with Holt in the field sometimes

Depending on how AB does vs. LHP he may be able to play almost every day and either push Young to DH or give Jackie a breather by covering CF. The downside of this vs. the EE scenario is that you don't have a lefty mashing DH to play every day, but the upside is you don't have three 3B on your roster who all have a replacement-level OPS or worse vs. LHP. And there is certainly enough upside that you may get similar production for much less money, which can be reinvested in the bullpen or in extending your core.

I'm agnostic overall on the EE question - in a vacuum, I think signing him for 4 years / 100M or less would be pretty good value for the Sox, it's more a question of resource allocation. I also kind of suspect that Toronto will end up bringing EE back and letting Joey Bats walk.
 

PapaSox

New Member
Dec 26, 2015
230
MA
There is noise coming out of Detroit that the team would listen to possible trades for Upton, Cabrera and Verlander along with J.D Martinez & Iglesias. It popped up on MLB Trade Rumors (Link Below). Olney's article lead to the posting. It would not surprise me if DD looked to someone like Cabrera and/or Verlander to answer problems he may for see. DD loves both Cabrera and Verlander and I imagine if they were reasonably priced he'd go after one or both. Both Cabrera and Verlander would address perceived holes in the Sox lineup and rotation.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/10/tigers-attemped-to-trade-justin-upton-last-season.html
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,660
Dave Dombrowski acquiring Miguel Cabrera for the third time in their lives would be v romantic.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
While i mostly support those less aggressive approaches to replacing Ortiz and filling out the lineup, I'm having a hard time coming to terms with the total picture sell there in the event picking up Buchholz's option is the most substantial move we make on the pitching side this winter. Going into year 2 and with a wide open window, I just don't realistically see DD's brain being wired into a taking a step backwards here and mostly stand pat elsewhere there off-season.

I think he makes at least one big and noteworthy move in the attempt to clearly upgrade the 2017 team. I'm also starting to think the chances of that being one of the FA closers who pushes Kimbrel to the 8th inning is a lot better then the zero percent people seem to be giving it. I mean as somebody else pointed out previously...it is kinda the most clearly visible and obvious upgrade path on the table atm if we aren't signing EE.
 
Last edited:

Lowrielicious

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 19, 2011
4,328
Paying top dollar for an "proven closer" when we are already paying close to market rate for one of those already seems like a bad allocation of resources. Especially when one comes with draft pick cost and the other has serious off field issues.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,347
I'm more and more liking the DH as the rotational spot with Chris Young entrenched there against lefties.

I also don't see DD trading Moncada. The only prospects I think they could bundle up for starting talent are Devers and Kopech.... which is a substantial package. STravis doesn't have value until he starts playing again and I'd guess they'd like to hold onto Devers or STravis, and as mentioned.... one has value, one doesn't.... yet.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,368
If Detroit is trading players, then Victor Martinez could be a target for the Sox. Must be a 10/5 guy, though.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
If Detroit is trading players, then Victor Martinez could be a target for the Sox. Must be a 10/5 guy, though.
Correct. He signed with them in Nov. 2010. I'm sure he's available if they are rebuilding. I'm surprised about the rumblings since they were so close this year. They do need a rebuild in the next year or two because of how bad their farm system is, but it's probably a competitive team at least to start the season.
 

IpswichSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
2,792
Suburbs of Washington, DC
Paying top dollar for an "proven closer" when we are already paying close to market rate for one of those already seems like a bad allocation of resources.
If you're thinking about only rotating two closers in the traditional closer's role, I would agree that's an inefficient allocation of resources. But if you determine that acquiring game-changing starting pitching is cost prohibitive, the other way to work it is to strengthen the bullpen, even if it means having two "closers." Cleveland is the obvious example of that now with Miller free to be your swing reliever who can enter the game before the 9th inning whenever there's maximum risk. (Obviously, you couldn't play a "second closer" over 162 games as aggressively as Tito has been using Miller lately, but this is the playoffs and we all know and love Playoff Tito.) I have no problem not giving up Moncada +, exercising Clay's option, and heading into ST with six starters and the AAAA filler in Henry Owens, Brian Johnson et. al, as long as resources are directed to strengthen the bullpen.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
If Detroit is trading players, then Victor Martinez could be a target for the Sox. Must be a 10/5 guy, though.
We know he can handle Boston. He is signed for 2 more seasons at 18mil per. I wonder what it would take to acquire VMart. Are we talking a prospect like Devers/Kopech or more like Alex Basabe/Sam Travis/Dubon? He would definitely be an interesting target but I'm not sure why Detroit would be selling. They should be in the market for a decent starting pitcher and if they can get a full year of Daniel Norris they'd be one of the favorites in the AL.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
If you're thinking about only rotating two closers in the traditional closer's role, I would agree that's an inefficient allocation of resources. But if you determine that acquiring game-changing starting pitching is cost prohibitive, the other way to work it is to strengthen the bullpen, even if it means having two "closers." Cleveland is the obvious example of that now with Miller free to be your swing reliever who can enter the game before the 9th inning whenever there's maximum risk. (Obviously, you couldn't play a "second closer" over 162 games as aggressively as Tito has been using Miller lately, but this is the playoffs and we all know and love Playoff Tito.) I have no problem not giving up Moncada +, exercising Clay's option, and heading into ST with six starters and the AAAA filler in Henry Owens, Brian Johnson et. al, as long as resources are directed to strengthen the bullpen.

I'd prefer they resign Ziegler and Koji and avoid any other expensive bullpen arm. With that said, I am extremely bullish on Joe Kelly and think him and Kimbrel will give us two "closers." A Kimbrel/Kelly/Koji/Ziegler/Ross bullpen is a solid foundation. Matt Barnes has also improved every year and Carson Smith is still on the team though I haven't seen any updates on his health but I haven't looked either. There are a lot of if's there, but most bullpens are built on if's. If Carson Smith or Koji return to form, if Joe Kelly's the real deal and not SSS, if Barnes improves. If Kimbrel returns to god and isn't just merely very good.

They also have a few interesting guys on the farm who might be able to help at some point in Chandler Shepherd, Jake Cosart, Jerez, Ben Taylor, Martin, and Scott. Jake Cosart being the most interesting, but also the furthest away. I'd guess Kopech is an outside possibility in the pen at some point in 2017 too.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,368
If you're Ziegler, why would you want to play for a manager who only trusts you to be a ROOGY? I doubt he is playing for the Sox in 2017.

As for Koji, FWIW, Tomase on the radio the other day said he's convinced Koji is not returning.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
If you're Ziegler, why would you want to play for a manager who only trusts you to be a ROOGY? I doubt he is playing for the Sox in 2017.

As for Koji, FWIW, Tomase on the radio the other day said he's convinced Koji is not returning.
He's probably signing with Arizona, but I'd still hope they make an effort to sign the guy. If neither return, they probably have to spend some money in MR though.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,753
Twin Cities
I would love to get V-Mart for our DH/back-up 1B for his 2 yr, $18M per commitment over the money it will take to sign EE for 4+ years. T.Shaw plus a non-top 5 prospect? Would that be something Detroit would consider? I agree with others that DET probably wants pitching.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,816
Honolulu HI
There is noise coming out of Detroit that the team would listen to possible trades for Upton, Cabrera and Verlander along with J.D Martinez & Iglesias. It popped up on MLB Trade Rumors (Link Below). Olney's article lead to the posting. It would not surprise me if DD looked to someone like Cabrera and/or Verlander to answer problems he may for see. DD loves both Cabrera and Verlander and I imagine if they were reasonably priced he'd go after one or both. Both Cabrera and Verlander would address perceived holes in the Sox lineup and rotation.
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/10/tigers-attemped-to-trade-justin-upton-last-season.html
Anyone scared of Votto's contract would be terrified of Cabrera's contract. Detroit has actually guaranteed Cabrera $92 million for his age 40-42 seasons.
So unless Detroit is throwing in a good amount of money, no way can I see taking on Cabrera - regardless of what they want in return. If Detroit really wants to free up money you'd have to think that Verlander and/or V-Mart would be the chips they'd most want to unload. Both are paid well, aging and coming off of bounce-back seasons. Verlander was actually tied (with Sale and Porcello) for the AL lead among pitchers in fWAR this season (5.2). He's signed for 4 more seasons (until his age 37 season). It would be a bit risky (and cost a combined $44 million in salary for 2017) but a trade that involved both players coming to the Sox could potentially fill two holes on the roster.
 
Last edited:

PapaSox

New Member
Dec 26, 2015
230
MA
I'm not advocating a trade because I'm not sure the cost would justify the means or if it is really needed. However, I think a Verlander/J.D Martinez trade would be better. J.D is younger and can added to the DH/OF roles. Verlander would be an interesting adding to the rotation. I think a rotation made up of Price, Porcello, Verlander, EdRod & Pomeranz with Wright/Buchholz doing the pen would be great.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I'm not advocating a trade because I'm not sure the cost would justify the means or if it is really needed. However, I think a Verlander/J.D Martinez trade would be better. J.D is younger and can added to the DH/OF roles. Verlander would be an interesting adding to the rotation. I think a rotation made up of Price, Porcello, Verlander, EdRod & Pomeranz with Wright/Buchholz doing the pen would be great.
Why would the Tigers want to trade J.D. Martinez? He's due to make less than $12 million next season.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,094
Why would the Tigers want to trade J.D. Martinez? He's due to make less than $12 million next season.
Because they want to rebuild? Buster Olney, not some fanboy poster, wrote that the Tigers are "willing to trade anyone". I'm sure they'd want a hefty return and rightfully so, but teams trade guys with Martinez' profile every year, I don't know why you'd view it as some absurd notion.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Because they want to rebuild? Buster Olney, not some fanboy poster, wrote that the Tigers are "willing to trade anyone". I'm sure they'd want a hefty return and rightfully so, but teams trade guys with Martinez' profile every year, I don't know why you'd view it as some absurd notion.
I missed the part where I said it was an absurd notion. I simply asked a question.

Having said that, it strikes me that J.D. is the type of player who stays in a rebuild, and Victor is the type who goes, short of a big overpay.