Beyond Lester: Building a Rotation

[Savin Hillbilly]

Savin Hillbilly, that analogy makes some sense, but I think it's different when you apply it to a group of players rather than individuals (as shown above), since you expect statistical regression to the mean to cancel out a bit, countering the impact of "outlier" seasons like Verlander's 2014. I think that the numbers do show that this year's front five are not as good as last year's (which we all agree on). But I think that the effect of increased groundballs in front of our solid infield defense will be cancelled out, and probably overwhelmed by fewer strikeouts and more walks. Those have been shown to have a much stronger influence on FIP and ERA than increasing GB% from say 45% to 50%.

 
I don't think you understood my analogy, though. It has nothing to do with whether Verlander's season was an outlier. (I should probably have left the word "surprisingly" out, since it's not really relevant.) The thing I was trying to get at was your suggestion that the performance of the 2014 starters relative to their initial projection should affect our thinking about the likelihood of various possible outcomes for the 2015 starters. Here's what you said:
 

 
As I mentioned above, you're right that those numbers aren't really a fair representation of what that Opening Day rotation could do. But in fact, it is what happened with that starting five. Now we are looking at a top five which are worse than those guys. Is it reasonable to think that they will outperform last year? Based on what? Blind optimism? Homerism?

 
No, based on the fact that a projection defines the midpoint of a range of possible outcomes. The 2014 starters were projected for an ERA of 4.10 and wound up with a 4.36; assuming for a moment that 4.36 was the worst reasonably likely outcome (however you want to define the limits of "reasonably likely"), then presumably the best reasonably likely outcome would have been something like 3.85. This year's starters are projected for 4.25; if we assume the same range of reasonably likely divergences from that projection as last year, the range would be between 4.00 and 4.50. Therefore about 70% (35/50) of reasonably likely outcomes for this year's rotation are better than the outcome for last year's rotation.
 
Can you point me to the "blind optimism or homerism" in the above?

 

[soxhop411]

The 26-year-old Maeda is coming off his fifth consecutive season with a sub-3.00 ERA, having posted a 2.60 mark with 7.7 K/9 and 2.0 BB/9 in 187 innings for the Carp.  While he’s not thought to have the same ceiling as countrymen Yu Darvish and Masahiro Tanaka, most feel that Maeda can, at the very least, be a competent mid-rotation starter in Major League Baseball.  He’s totaled 1303 1/3 innings in a seven-season career with the Carp, working to a 2.44 ERA with 7.3 K/9 and 1.9 BB/9.
“I am thinking this [going to the majors] is close to becoming a reality. Hopefully I can go in the offseason next year,” Maeda said.
As Ben Badler of Baseball America wrote in a scouting report following Maeda’s last game of the season, the right-hander offers three average-or-better pitches — a 90-94 mph fastball, an 80-84 mph slider and an 85-86 mph changeup — and occasionally works in a cutter and curveball.  Maeda won’t turn 27 until next April, so his age alone could’ve resulted in a significant asking price.  Under the new rules agreed to with Nippon Professional Baseball last winter, however, the Carp would only have been entitled to a maximum $20MM posting fee — a far cry from the posting fees of Darvish and Daisuke Matsuzaka, both of which were in excess of $50MM.
 
Maeda could still be posted next offseason and would be an unrestricted free agent following the 2017 season.  While the entire list of clubs with interest in him is unknown, the Red Sox and Phillies have both scouted Maeda, with Philadelphia GM Ruben Amaro personally making a visit to Japan to watch the right-hander.  Diamondbacks GM Dave Stewart candidly admitted that he “loves” Maeda and would be a player if the right-hander were posted.  MLBTR’s Tim Dierkes ranked Maeda twelfth on his list of this offseason’s top 50 free agents.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/12/kenta-maeda-re-signs-with-hiroshima-carp-will-not-be-posted.html

 

[RedOctober3829]

Jim Bowden tweets that the Giants are out on Shields and were never in on Scherzer.

 

[bosockboy]

I think Shields lands here and BC is waiting this out.

 

[RIrooter09]

If we land Shields do we trade Kelly or move Masterson to the pen?

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

If we land Shields do we trade Kelly or move Masterson to the pen?

I think they move Kelly to the pen. He'll get any spot starts for the first couple of months until Owens etal have settled in at Pawtucket.

 

[MakMan44]

Who else is a fit for Shields at this point?

 

[E5 Yaz]

Who else is a fit for Shields at this point?

 
San Diego. Angels. Detroit, if they don't get Scherzer back. Washington, if they could sign Shields for less than they'd have to pay Zimmermann in free agency. 

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

Rosenthal suggests Shields already has  5/110 offer
 
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/01/james-shields-expected-to-get-nine-figure-deal.html
 
I can't see the Sox going this high to begin with .. they valued Lester - a special case - at 6/137 - at roughly 23m a year. Would they offer Shields 5 years at 22m a year? I don't think so. 
 
Something along the lines of 4/80 seems more their style. Maybe upping the offer to 4/90 if things got serious.

 

[FinanceAdvice]

Don't count the Yankees out in the hunt for Shields.  New bid out is 5 yrs for $110 (mystery team).  I dont see the Sox going that high for a pitcher 33.  What about Scherzerfor 4 years at $30M per year?   He'd probably balk at that (lol  no pun intended).  With Amaro being the truculent asshole that he is, with Scherzer cost too high as well as Shields, looks like our ace is Porcello.  My main target ever since Lester left has been and still is Hamels.  Dont see it happening as the Sox will not give up Bogaerts, Bell or Vazquez.  Nor should they.  For the sake of argument . I'd offer Phillies, Swihart, Owens, and Cecchini (or possibly Merrero).  If Gillick of Phils has a voice, it could happen.  But not counting on it.

 

[The Boomer]

Don't count the Yankees out in the hunt for Shields.  New bid out is 5 yrs for $110 (mystery team).  I dont see the Sox going that high for a pitcher 33.  What about Scherzerfor 4 years at $30M per year?   He'd probably balk at that (lol  no pun intended).  With Amaro being the truculent asshole that he is, with Scherzer cost too high as well as Shields, looks like our ace is Porcello.  My main target ever since Lester left has been and still is Hamels.  Dont see it happening as the Sox will not give up Bogaerts, Bell or Vazquez.  Nor should they.  For the sake of argument . I'd offer Phillies, Swihart, Owens, and Cecchini (or possibly Merrero).  If Gillick of Phils has a voice, it could happen.  But not counting on it.

 

Don't count the Yankees out in the hunt for Shields.  New bid out is 5 yrs for $110 (mystery team).  I dont see the Sox going that high for a pitcher 33.  What about Scherzerfor 4 years at $30M per year?   He'd probably balk at that (lol  no pun intended).  With Amaro being the truculent asshole that he is, with Scherzer cost too high as well as Shields, looks like our ace is Porcello.  My main target ever since Lester left has been and still is Hamels.  Dont see it happening as the Sox will not give up Bogaerts, Bell or Vazquez.  Nor should they.  For the sake of argument . I'd offer Phillies, Swihart, Owens, and Cecchini (or possibly Merrero).  If Gillick of Phils has a voice, it could happen.  But not counting on it.

 
That's way too much to give up if the Sox will eat the Hamels contract!  The only way something like that happens is if the Phillies essentially buy those prospects by paying a huge chunk of the Hamels salary.  Swihart won't be included.  At most, the Sox should offer the Phillies no more than Owens (the centerpiece) and to pick 2 out of 4 from among Cecchini, Marrero, Barnes or Renaudo.

 

[FinanceAdvice]

Boomer, Thanks for reply and the nice avatar .    Well 2 out of three for trades aren't bad.  With the current rotation Sox have now they can be ok  along with the new found bats of Hanly and Sandoval.  Honestly think try could contend all year and maybe make it to playoffs.  However, I feel they need a top of the rotation "ace" aong the likes of Hamels.  I see nothing wrong with giving away top three prospects for the likes of a proven ace who could  probably bring Sox to the WS.
 
SHort of that, I'd make a  push for Shields and then save the prospects.  IMHO, ive seen too many top prospects come and fail JBJ, Will Middle, Lars Anderson, et al to be concerned about giving up the future.  But bottom line is the Sox need another big arm to shore up their rotation.  Can Masterson rebound?  Can Buchholz have a good year?  will kelly thrive at back end?  All too many ifs.  Trade for Hamels first and Plan B sign Shields (maybe 4/90).  Thanks for my lurker post.

 

[pdub]

Boomer, Thanks for reply and the nice avatar .    Well 2 out of three for trades aren't bad.  With the current rotation Sox have now they can be ok  along with the new found bats of Hanly and Sandoval.  Honestly think try could contend all year and maybe make it to playoffs.  However, I feel they need a top of the rotation "ace" aong the likes of Hamels.  I see nothing wrong with giving away top three prospects for the likes of a proven ace who could  probably bring Sox to the WS.
 
SHort of that, I'd make a  push for Shields and then save the prospects.  IMHO, ive seen too many top prospects come and fail JBJ, Will Middle, Lars Anderson, et al to be concerned about giving up the future.  But bottom line is the Sox need another big arm to shore up their rotation.  Can Masterson rebound?  Can Buchholz have a good year?  will kelly thrive at back end?  All too many ifs.  Trade for Hamels first and Plan B sign Shields (maybe 4/90).  Thanks for my lurker post.

I think giving three top prospects for a 31-year-old with a $110M contract is excessive, man. If we were discussing someone like Chris Sale then I might have a different perspective. Given the existence of the second wild-card spot, we don't need to provide a 95-win team in order to enter the playoffs. As such, I'd rather tough it out with what we have, because I think what we have is good, and then re-assess everything at a later date. Recent playoff winners have shown us that its all about getting in and getting hot at the right time. I think we can get in the playoffs with our currently constructed team.

 

[Wake's knuckle]

Clayton Kershaw asked me to mention that having an ace can be overrated in the playoffs... and sometimes lesser players can really surprise.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

Boomer, Thanks for reply and the nice avatar .    Well 2 out of three for trades aren't bad.  With the current rotation Sox have now they can be ok  along with the new found bats of Hanly and Sandoval.  Honestly think try could contend all year and maybe make it to playoffs.  However, I feel they need a top of the rotation "ace" aong the likes of Hamels.  I see nothing wrong with giving away top three prospects for the likes of a proven ace who could  probably bring Sox to the WS.
 
SHort of that, I'd make a  push for Shields and then save the prospects.  IMHO, ive seen too many top prospects come and fail JBJ, Will Middle, Lars Anderson, et al to be concerned about giving up the future.  But bottom line is the Sox need another big arm to shore up their rotation.  Can Masterson rebound?  Can Buchholz have a good year?  will kelly thrive at back end?  All too many ifs.  Trade for Hamels first and Plan B sign Shields (maybe 4/90).  Thanks for my lurker post.

 
Steamer projects Porcello to have the 14th highest WAR out of the entire starting pitching pool next year. Hamels is 25th on that list. I'm not arguing that Steamer projections are the end all be all of looking ahead (they aren't), but this idea that the Red Sox "need a top of the rotation ace" is overblown. Especially so when people point to Hamels. Earlier in the winter someone pointed out that the Red Sox starting rotation had the highest combined projected WAR in the division, even though they didn't have a clear number 1. This is a really high floor rotation, even if the ceiling isn't terribly exciting. Would they benefit from adding a Hamels or Shields or Scherzer? Yeah, of course. Can they make the playoffs and compete there without one? Also yes.
 
FWIW, Buchholz is 44th on that list, Wade Miley is 50th, Masterson is 55th and Kelly is 103rd. Pitchers coming in behind Masterson include Ervin Santana, Tyson Ross, Mat Latos, Chris Archer, and Henderson Alvarez. Between Miley and Masterson? Mike Fiers, Gio Gonzalez, Homer Bailey, and Michael Pineda. At worst, this is a pretty good rotation. There's a very good chance they are really good even if there is virtually no chance they are elite. I mean, Doug Fister and Wade Miley are projected at 0.1 fWAR apart.
 
Ben did a great job of taking away the need for the Sox to land an ace. If the opportunity pops up and the price is right, no one in this rotation is going to stop him from pulling the trigger. But if we go into April with this rotation, this team can and very likely will be a playoff contender.

 

[The Boomer]

 
Steamer projects Porcello to have the 14th highest WAR out of the entire starting pitching pool next year. Hamels is 25th on that list. I'm not arguing that Steamer projections are the end all be all of looking ahead (they aren't), but this idea that the Red Sox "need a top of the rotation ace" is overblown. Especially so when people point to Hamels. Earlier in the winter someone pointed out that the Red Sox starting rotation had the highest combined projected WAR in the division, even though they didn't have a clear number 1. This is a really high floor rotation, even if the ceiling isn't terribly exciting. Would they benefit from adding a Hamels or Shields or Scherzer? Yeah, of course. Can they make the playoffs and compete there without one? Also yes.
 
FWIW, Buchholz is 44th on that list, Wade Miley is 50th, Masterson is 55th and Kelly is 103rd. Pitchers coming in behind Masterson include Ervin Santana, Tyson Ross, Mat Latos, Chris Archer, and Henderson Alvarez. Between Miley and Masterson? Mike Fiers, Gio Gonzalez, Homer Bailey, and Michael Pineda. At worst, this is a pretty good rotation. There's a very good chance they are really good even if there is virtually no chance they are elite. I mean, Doug Fister and Wade Miley are projected at 0.1 fWAR apart.
 
Ben did a great job of taking away the need for the Sox to land an ace. If the opportunity pops up and the price is right, no one in this rotation is going to stop him from pulling the trigger. But if we go into April with this rotation, this team can and very likely will be a playoff contender.

 
Projections will differ but I'm not surprised that Porcello is ranked so high.  In 2013, Cherington exploited a generally deficient evaluation of veteran position players (Gomes, Victorino and Napoli) who were underrated in the market because of injury and perceived limitations.  This year, rather than overspend for declining veteran starting pitchers, he went after undervalued in their prime starters (Porcello, Miley and Masterson) without sacrificing a single youngster or prospect projected as essential to the team's future core giving up only organizational surplus depth (Cespedes, DLR and Webster).  I have a gut feeling that the future Lester lefty ace is already in the organization.  Their lefty ace TBNL will be a short drive away in Rhode Island whenever someone needs replacement because of injury or ineffectiveness. Rodriguez, Owens or Johnson? Any one of them could bump Kelly to the bullpen when ready breaking in as a relatively less pressure #5 starter though their ceilings could well be higher.  It's not unreasonable to project that at least one if not all three of them will provide quality major league innings for a long time to come.

 

[Plympton91]

 
. This is a really high floor rotation, even if the ceiling isn't terribly exciting. Would they benefit from adding a Hamels or Shields or Scherzer? Yeah, of course. Can they make the playoffs and compete there without one? Also yes.
 

nder.

It's funny but I would have said it was a high ceiling, low floor rotation. If Porcello steps forward and one of Buchholz or Masterson regains their 2013 form, they'll have 2 aces. But if Porcello regresses and both Clay and JM can't bounce back, they're doomed. I see a high risk, high reward group, not a low variance group of plodders like Baltimore has.

 

[FanSinceBoggs]

It's funny but I would have said it was a high ceiling, low floor rotation. If Porcello steps forward and one of Buchholz or Masterson regains their 2013 form, they'll have 2 aces. But if Porcello regresses and both Clay and JM can't bounce back, they're doomed. I see a high risk, high reward group, not a low variance group of plodders like Baltimore has.

 
Is the 2013 Buchholz really an ace?  Sure, he would be more valuable than the piece of crap 2014 Buchholz, but the 2013 Buchholz threw just a little over 100 innings before he broke down.  This is the problem with Buchholz over the last three seasons--he either stinks up the joint or he gets hurt.  And he hasn't been the same pitcher ever since he returned from his mysterious 2013 injury.  There is too much high risk with the current group of starters, and thus I agree with you on that point--Masterson is high risk, Kelly is an unknown, and Miley and Porcello are good but we don't know if they will ascend to the top-of-the-rotation.  Cherington can't possibly go into the season with this starting rotation.  The depth behind the starting rotation is OK, but not strong enough to alleviate concerns.   

 

[Plympton91]

 
Is the 2013 Buchholz really an ace?  Sure, he would be more valuable than the piece of crap 2014 Buchholz, but the 2013 Buchholz threw just a little over 100 innings before he broke down.  This is the problem with Buchholz over the last three seasons--he either stinks up the joint or he gets hurt.  And he hasn't been the same pitcher ever since he returned from his mysterious 2013 injury.  There is too much high risk with the current group of starters, and thus agree with you on that point--Masterson is high risk, Kelly is an unknown, and Miley and Porcello are good but we don't know if they will ascend to the top-of-the-rotation.  Cherington can't possibly go into the season with this starting rotation.  The depth behind the starting rotation is OK, but not strong enough to alleviate concerns.   

I certainly can seee the downside, but I'm very optimistic on the rotation. Buchholz had some great starts down the stretch, Farrell was on MLB radio this week saying they know exactly what was wrong with Masterson, and Porcello is just entering his prime. Miley and Kelly are a very good tandem at 4 and 5.

To me, this team's achilles heel, if it has one, will be the bullpen.

 

[FanSinceBoggs]

Farrell was on MLB radio this week saying they know exactly what was wrong with Masterson

 
The Cardinals, who know a few things about pitching, believed that as well:
 

"Mozeliak had shared that the Cardinals organization felt that Masterson's problems were mechanical and that the St. Louis staff could fix them. . .The mechanical adjustments that Mozeliak indicated would help sinkerballer haven't. The righty has been dreadful."
http://www.vivaelbirdos.com/st-louis-cardinals-sabermetrics-analysis/2014/9/1/6091893/justin-masterson-the-st-louis-cardinals-lost-bet
 

 
Masterson never had a clean delivery and was an arm injury waiting to happen.  I would be surprised if his issues are easily resolved.  The Red Sox grossly overpaid for Masterson.  Maybe Masterson can use the Red Sox's money to build some missionaries and turn people into religious fanactics.

 

[67WasBest]

 
The Cardinals, who know a few things about pitching, throught that too:
 
 
Masterson never had a clean delivery and was an arm injury waiting to happen.  I would be surprised if his issues are easily resolved.

He was still injured in StL.  No mystery and no story.

 

[FanSinceBoggs]

Miley and Kelly are a very good tandem at 4 and 5.
 

 
I see Porcello and Miley as 1 and 2.  Kelly as 3, and Masterson (ERA+ 68 in AL and 53 in NL in 2014) and Buchholz (ERA+ 72 in 2014) as the 4 and 5 starters.  If the Red Sox can add a Scherzer or Shields or Hamels, Masterson and Buchholz would compete for the final rotation spot.  That's how I see things.  Expecting both to pitch well is completely unrealistic; getting a good year out of one of the two is probably the best we can hope for.  It wouldn't surprise me if both pitchers are unmitiaged disasters in 2015, which is why it is so important to improve the top of the rotation with a Shields, Scherzer, or Hamels.  In that scenario, even if both pitchers are unmitiaged disasters, the Red Sox can bring in a fifth starter, or give the spot to a guy like S.Wright or B.Johnson, to shore up the bottom of the rotation.

 

[Rasputin]

 
I see Porcello and Miley as 1 and 2.  Kelly as 3, and Masterson (ERA+ 68 in AL and 53 in NL in 2014) and Buchholz (ERA+ 72 in 2014) as the 4 and 5 starters.  If the Red Sox can add a Scherzer or Shields or Hamels, Masterson and Buchholz would compete for the final rotation spot.  That's how I see things.  Expecting both to pitch well is completely unrealistic; getting a good year out of one of the two is probably the best we can hope for.  It wouldn't surprise me if both pitchers are unmitiaged disasters in 2015, which is why it is so important to improve the top of the rotation with a Shields, Scherzer, or Hamels.  In that scenario, even if both pitchers are unmitiaged disasters, the Red Sox can bring in a fifth starter, or give the spot to a guy like S.Wright or B.Johnson, to shore up the bottom of the rotation.

 
I don't think there is anyone else in the world that sees Buchholz and Masterson as the four and five. I think there's also about a 50% chance that we get good or better seasons from both of them. Maybe higher than 50%.

 

[TigerBlood]

Who is the Sox' opening day starter? I'm fairly confident that Porcello will emerge as their "Number 1" over the season, but does Farrell give him the opener? Or does Buchholz have a claim? I think in the grander Red Sox Nation picture, Buch is probably considered by many to be their staff leader (yikes).

 

[RIrooter09]

Porcello on the road in Philly to open the season, Buch gets the home opener.

 

[foulkehampshire]

Who is the Sox' opening day starter? I'm fairly confident that Porcello will emerge as their "Number 1" over the season, but does Farrell give him the opener? Or does Buchholz have a claim? I think in the grander Red Sox Nation picture, Buch is probably considered by many to be their staff leader (yikes).

 
There's only 1 day where that even matters.

 

[FanSinceBoggs]

"I don't think there is anyone else in the world that sees Buchholz and Masterson as the four and five."
 
Based on their 2014 numbers, Buchholz and Masterson would be four and five in the Red Sox's current rotation, unless you want to put Kelly there.  This is a pretty frivolous debate anyway.  The bigger point is: Buchholz and Masterson weren't good pitchers in 2014 and there is a reasonable chance they will continue to perform poorly in 2015.

 

[TigerBlood]

 
There's only 1 day where that even matters.

Right, but I'm still curious. I'm not arguing it's important to their success, just that they are in a situation this season where it's not very clear.

 

[67WasBest]

Right, but I'm still curious. I'm not arguing it's important to their success, just that they are in a situation this season where it's not very clear.

Assuming health for all, I think they'll defer to Buchholz tenure in Boston and give him opening day start.  He might also have the highest ceiling if he harnesses his potential for an entire year.
 
Buchholz, Porcello, Masterson, Miley, Kelly is how I see them lining up atm.

 

[soxhop411]

@jonmorosi: #Nats have been talking with multiple teams on Jordan Zimmermann trade possibilities over past few weeks, sources say.

 

[RedOctober3829]

@jonmorosi: #Nats prepared to trade starter if they sign Scherzer. Zimmermann most likely candidate but one source says Nats would listen on Strasburg.

 

[E5 Yaz]

@jonmorosi: #Nats prepared to trade starter if they sign Scherzer. Zimmermann most likely candidate but one source says Nats would listen on Strasburg.

 
whoa

 

[RedOctober3829]

 
whoa

I'd listen on Betts or X for Strasburg.

 

[Rich Garces Belly]

NM

 

[RedOctober3829]

@jonmorosi: Jordan Zimmermann is most likely #Nats trade candidate if they sign Max Scherzer, sources reiterated to me during last hour.

 

[Clears Cleaver]

Zimmerman opening day, Porcello home opener   :natstown:

 

[bosockboy]

Have to think we'd be involved. Why would the Nats sign Scherzer if they don't want to pay Zimmerman?

 

[FanSinceBoggs]

MLB Trade Rumors speculated that Shields is now looking for a contract under 100 million.  That's a tempting way to upgrade the rotation especially if the Red Sox can sign him for 3 years, giving him a higher annual salary than the other offers.

 

[bosockboy]

This. Though I have no idea what the hell we'd do for SS at this point. And before anyone says it, no, Deven Marrero is not the answer.

Complete guess but possibly taking Desmond back.

 

[soxhop411]

With the Nats deal now official I wonder how long it takes the Nats to flip a starter.

 

[67WasBest]

With the Nats deal now official I wonder how long it takes the Nats to flip a starter.

Have to believe they had their other deal agreed on before making this kind of commitment.  I would expect almost immediate news of a deal, unless the trading partner has to juggle their roster to get it done.

 

[maxotaur]

Have to believe they had their other deal agreed on before making this kind of commitment.  I would expect almost immediate news of a deal, unless the trading partner has to juggle their roster to get it done.

That certainly may be the case but I'm not sure why it would be necessary to have a deal in place. Zimmerman is as easy to move as any player on the planet. He isn't stuck with a huge contract, isn't coming off an injury, and has a ton of proven talent. Doubtful the Nats have any concern of being stuck with him.

 

[67WasBest]

That certainly may be the case but I'm not sure why it would be necessary to have a deal in place. Zimmerman is as easy to move as any player on the planet. He isn't stuck with a huge contract, isn't coming off an injury, and has a ton of proven talent. Doubtful the Nats have any concern of being stuck with him.

Its been widely reported they've been working on a side deal to the Scherzer signing for 3 weeks.

 

[RedOctober3829]

This. Though I have no idea what the hell we'd do for SS at this point. And before anyone says it, no, Deven Marrero is not the answer.

A package centered by Bogaerts for Strasburg and Ian Desmond.

 

[soxhop411]

@Jim_Duquette: Major league source told me its unlikely that anyone will be traded out of the Nats rotation for this year #Nats

 

[The Boomer]

A package centered by Bogaerts for Strasburg and Ian Desmond.

 
Bogaerts has the potential to be Ian Desmond for a fraction of his cost in free agency.  No thank you.  

 

[bosockboy]

If the Sox are sold on Marrero then Desmond for a year makes a lot of sense.

 

[Yaz4Ever]

 
Bogaerts has the potential to be Ian Desmond for a fraction of his cost in free agency.  No thank you.  

True, but he's likely a worse pitcher than Strasburg. Can we agree on this?

If we can get Strasburg and Desmond for a package centering around Xander, I pull the trigger quickly and happily even as an unabashed Bogaerts fan.

If Devin continues to track as our SS of the future, we let Desmond walk via FA and take the pick.

 

[foulkehampshire]

If the Sox are sold on Marrero then Desmond for a year makes a lot of sense.

 
Why would they be? He's done very little offensively outside of 68 games in Portland.

 

[soxhop411]

Uh. Wow


“@JPerrotto: Hearing #Nats RHP Stephen Strasburg is very much available and both sides believe it is time to move on. #MLB”