I know it's really not feasible especially with needs that still have to be addressed, but can you imagine an outfield of Castillo, Betts and Meyers all at slightly more than what Castillo makes?
Otherwise the Red Sox will have to find Craig a place to play. At 30 years old, it’s hard to imagine he’ll develop much as a fourth outfielder. And he’s certainly not going to spend time in the minors.
Or the potential/ perceived return in the market overwhelms the risk they were willing to take. That they liked him for a gamble to rebound doesnt mean they also cant be proactive about using him to get something a bit more useful/ lower risk.MakMan44 said:I don't know, I just really don't get why they have to move Craig now. I suppose they don't think the chances of a bounce back season are high enough that it's worth keeping him around.
MakMan44 said:I don't know, I just really don't get why they have to move Craig now. I suppose they don't think the chances of a bounce back season are high enough that it's worth keeping him around.
That's a fair point and I think it's the best case scenario. I think they're just looking for salary relief at this point, but if they can get a useful piece, even a reliever it's probably for the best.JohntheBaptist said:Or the potential/ perceived return in the market overwhelms the risk they were willing to take. That they liked him for a gamble to rebound doesnt mean they also cant be proactive about using him to get something a bit more useful/ lower risk.
Ahh, that's right.Hee Sox Choi said:Brandon Crawford is a lefty.
bosockboy said:Craig replaces Morse.
67WasBest said:Padres just obtained Derek Norris and are about to sign Josh Johnson again. That gives them 3 Catchers and 6/7 starters depending on how they use Morrow.
Could a Ross / Hannigan for one of WmB/Cecchini, Craig plus another, deal make sense?
Yeah, that seems like a really bad fantasy baseball trade offer ("three guys on my bench for one of your stars?").Hank Scorpio said:
Ross alone is worth more than Craig and WMB/Cecchini combined. The "plus another" would have to be fairly significant.
True if you exclude years of control.Hank Scorpio said:
Ross alone is worth more than Craig and WMB/Cecchini combined. The "plus another" would have to be fairly significant.
I was prepared to ask in what world is Hanigan a star, then checked his Steamer (2.1) and had to re-evaluate my view of him. Ross has a WAR of Steamer projection of 1.9, that's 59th ranked, which makes him a solid 3. So yes, the package as constructed would be woefully inadequate without the other prospect were top 7 and that's not happening. I just researched further and learned Norris may be targeted to 1B anyway so it's all moot.Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:Yeah, that seems like a really bad fantasy baseball trade offer ("three guys on my bench for one of your stars?").
Could a Ross/Hannigan for one of WmB/Cecchini, Craig plus another, deal make sense?
I'm on board. Signed through 2016 around 3.5mill per with an option. Very good defender. Decent .obp guy. Definitely one of the better back ups in the league.amfox1 said:
Jeff Passan @JeffPassan 1m1 minute ago
Source: Padres nearing a deal that would send Ryan Hanigan to Boston for Will Middlebrooks.
amfox1 said:
Jeff Passan @JeffPassan 1m1 minute ago
Source: Padres nearing a deal that would send Ryan Hanigan to Boston for Will Middlebrooks.
Close enough! So, who is your inside source?67WasBest said:Padres just obtained Derek Norris and are about to sign Josh Johnson again. That gives them 3 Catchers and 6/7 starters depending on how they use Morrow.
Could a Ross / Hannigan for one of WmB/Cecchini, Craig plus another, deal make sense?
Fangraphs' Kiley McDaniel reports that the Yankees and Red Sox are the "heavy favorites" to sign Cuban infielder Yoan Moncada.
That's assuming Moncada is cleared by the OFAC before June 15, as both the Yankees and Red Sox can't spend more than $300,000 on any player during the 2015-16 international signing period after exceeding their 2014-15 bonus pools. Moncada, who won't turn 20 until May, is one of the most highly coveted international prospects and is expected to land a contract in the $30-40 million range.
Source: Kiley McDaniel on Twitter
ANAHEIM -- The Angels' front office still has one major target as the offseason winds down, but it isn't Max Scherzer or James Shields or any other big-name starting pitcher.
It's a young, cost-controlled third baseman.
The Angels will need someone to take over at the hot corner once David Freese hits the free-agent market after the 2015 season, don't necessarily have that player in their organization and have made acquiring someone via trade one of their primary goals this winter, a source said.
The club would prefer to acquire a young third baseman in a prospect swap, so as to not further interrupt a Major League club that's coming off a 98-win season, but that thinking could change for the right player.
Someone like Kris Bryant of the Cubs, considered the best third-base prospect in baseball by MLB.com, would be out of reach. The Nos. 2-9 third-base prospects -- Joey Gallo of the Rangers, Miguel Sano of the Twins, D.J. Peterson of the Mariners, Maikel Franco of the Phillies, Garin Cecchini of the Red Sox, Colin Moran of the Astros, Hunter Dozier of the Royals and Jake Lamb of the D-backs, respectively -- all project to be ready by 2016.
I know Zimmermann is a FA soon, but is it really at all likely that Washington deals him before the deadline, if at all? He's the top starter for a top WS contender. The Nats don't have a ton of needs. Makes no sense to build a contender only to cut loose a key piece at just the wrong time.BeantownIdaho said:Cafardo's mailbag today:
NC: I see them acquiring an ace pitcher whether it be Shields or Scherzer or trading for Hamels and Zimmermann.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/08/ask-nick-should-red-sox-get-young-ace-veteran/wENOypqQvWXt4KTbkNTX2H/story.html?event=event25
Minneapolis Millers said:I know Zimmermann is a FA soon, but is it really at all likely that Washington deals him before the deadline, if at all? He's the top starter for a top WS contender. The Nats don't have a ton of needs. Makes no sense to build a contender only to cut loose a key piece at just the wrong tim
67WasBest said:
http://m.angels.mlb.com/news/article/105905298/angels-target-trade-for-third-base-prospect
Not sure if there is a match for Cecchini, but thought I'd share.
67WasBest said:
http://m.angels.mlb.com/news/article/105905298/angels-target-trade-for-third-base-prospect
Not sure if there is a match for Cecchini, but thought I'd share.
Devizier said:
At first glance, Cecchini is one of the few members of that list who might be dispensable for their team (Peterson is another).
Puffy said:
The Sox depth chart at 3B is kind of deceiving, however. Obviously in addition to Sandoval, both Bogaerts and Hanley Ramirez can play 3B. They've also got Brock Holt as an option. But in practice, what would really happen if Sandoval were to go on the DL for a month or two? I am not sure the Sox would want to shift Bogaerts from SS temporarily. Similarly, if they just moved Ramirez to a new position in LF, would they slide him back to 3B? In reality, wouldn't the bulk of the playing time in the event of an extended Sandoval absence have to fall to either Holt or Cecchini, if only to keep from disrupting Bogaert's development and Ramirez' adjustment to LF?
I don't mean to overstate the case. Obviously, they could survive trading Cecchini, but in terms of roster management for 2015, it may be a little more nuanced than it seems on the surface.
Puffy said:
The Sox depth chart at 3B is kind of deceiving, however. Obviously in addition to Sandoval, both Bogaerts and Hanley Ramirez can play 3B. They've also got Brock Holt as an option. But in practice, what would really happen if Sandoval were to go on the DL for a month or two? I am not sure the Sox would want to shift Bogaerts from SS temporarily. Similarly, if they just moved Ramirez to a new position in LF, would they slide him back to 3B? In reality, wouldn't the bulk of the playing time in the event of an extended Sandoval absence have to fall to either Holt or Cecchini, if only to keep from disrupting Bogaert's development and Ramirez' adjustment to LF?
I don't mean to overstate the case. Obviously, they could survive trading Cecchini, but in terms of roster management for 2015, it may be a little more nuanced than it seems on the surface.
BeantownIdaho said:Cafardo's mailbag today:
What are three moves you see the Sox making before the start of spring training? If Craig and Shane Victorino have great springs, and Rusney Castillo doesn’t, could Castillo start in Triple A?
Sean, Southington, Conn.
NC: I see them acquiring an ace pitcher whether it be Shields or Scherzer or trading for Hamels and Zimmermann. I do see another bullpen piece. They signed Mitchell Boggs and hope there’s a revival there, but they could really use a power lefty in the pen. I also see one more outfielder being weeded out between Victorino, Craig, and Nava. I don’t see Castillo going back to Triple-A because he has a big major league contract and he’s made good progress. Things could change if he starts out slowly.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/08/ask-nick-should-red-sox-get-young-ace-veteran/wENOypqQvWXt4KTbkNTX2H/story.html?event=event25
ALiveH said:don't know about Hammels & Zimmerman, but the longer Scherzer & Shields drag on without any noise, the more likely their asks come down significantly a la Drew.
Yazdog8 said:
I just don't see Scherzer coming down enough for the Sox to bid. His initial offer in spring training of last year was 6 years and $144mil which already beats the max offer they made for Lester. No way the Sox are going to be in on him.
Niastri said:If he was covered by the draft, would he be drafted first overall? Is he considered to have skills that make him a likely first division starter after some development time?
If he is going to get double the previous record amateur signing bonus, he better be an elite talent.
I'd agree, all reports indicate 5 strong tools and he plays SS. He might not have been the #1 in any given year, and depending on who was in that draft, but I think it a safe bet he would have been top 5 in any draft.Rasputin said:
Everything I have read about him suggests he has all the potential in the world.
Niastri said:If he was covered by the draft, would he be drafted first overall? Is he considered to have skills that make him a likely first division starter after some development time?
If he is going to get double the previous record amateur signing bonus, he better be an elite talent.