Let's Talk About Matt Kemp.

[radsoxfan]

If his fielding is as bad as UZR's assesment then LF in Fenway would be great for him for a few years with a potential DH move further down the line then, assuming his offensive numbers can keep him as a middle of the order bat, then no?

 
This is a great idea if you are expecting him to hit like Manny Ramirez in his prime.  Kemp has done that once in his career, in 2011. I don't think he can be an even average defensive right fielder in Fenway, so you have to get all your value from his bat as a LF/DH type.   He was good (though not Manny-good) offensively in 2007 (98 games), 2009, and 2012 (106 games). He was pretty mediocre in 2006 (52 games), 2008, 2010, and 2013 (73 games). 
 
When you throw in the recent injuries, and the fact that he would be signed until he's 35, I just think I would take the under on him being Manny Ramirez with the bat for the majority of that 6 year contract.  If he was a FA, I don't think he would be getting 6/128 on the open market after the year he just had.
 
It's not inconceivable Kemp returns to form and is a dominant middle of the order force for most of the next 6 years.  But paying paying 128M to find out seems like a huge risk for something that I think is at best a 50/50 proposition. Paying 80M or so?  Maybe you could convince me of that... (though I still think its a pretty big risk).

 

[DJnVa]

The Dodgers would be elated if they could dump Ethier on us.

 
Well, as the article says, the Dodgers would also likely be expected to send cash if they dealt Ethier.

 

[FFCI]

Cano to Seattle may be a domino that helps this (Red Sox acquiring Kemp form LA) gain some momentum as Seattle was considered a major player for Kemp. 
 
Now, I'm guessing Seattle may still want to add Kemp and would be willing to give up a lot more in terms of prospects and talent but would want more money from LA now that they have nearly a quarter of a billion dollars committed to Cano.
 
Boston may now be the best spot for LA to move Kemp if they really are looking for more of a salary dump (and require less in terms of prospects).  With the payroll, and Kershaw in his prime, $10 Mill for the beard, my take is that LA probably wants less in terms of prospects and more in terms of players that can help today.
 
Jake Peavy fits that as a key piece of a Kemp trade, no?
 
Unfortunately, the longer this goes, the less likely it is to happen - and the fantasy of Kemp is probably greater than the reality anyway...kind of like the excitement Adrian Gonzalez/Carl Crawford created was greater than anything they actually did on the field... 

 

[TomRicardo]

Cano to Seattle may be a domino that helps this (Red Sox acquiring Kemp form LA) gain some momentum as Seattle was considered a major player for Kemp. 
 
Now, I'm guessing Seattle may still want to add Kemp and would be willing to give up a lot more in terms of prospects and talent but would want more money from LA now that they have nearly a quarter of a billion dollars committed to Cano.
 
Boston may now be the best spot for LA to move Kemp if they really are looking for more of a salary dump (and require less in terms of prospects).  With the payroll, and Kershaw in his prime, $10 Mill for the beard, my take is that LA probably wants less in terms of prospects and more in terms of players that can help today.
 
Jake Peavy fits that as a key piece of a Kemp trade, no?
 
Unfortunately, the longer this goes, the less likely it is to happen - and the fantasy of Kemp is probably greater than the reality anyway...kind of like the excitement Adrian Gonzalez/Carl Crawford created was greater than anything they actually did on the field... 

 
 
Well it depends how much money the Dodgers are throwing at us.  I wouldn't take on Kemp's entire contract for more than a couple of fringe prospects if I was going to take it at all.  I certainly wouldn't give up a guy with as much value as Peavy.

 

[joe dokes]

As I scratch and sniif the Kemp posts, I get a whiff of Eau de Vernon Wells.  Is there anything to this, or is my nose deceiving me?

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

As I scratch and sniif the Kemp posts, I get a whiff of Eau de Vernon Wells.  Is there anything to this, or is my nose deceiving me?

 
Well, if nothing else, Kemp has been a significantly better hitter up to this point--as in, way better (126 OPS+ through age 28/3897 PA, vs. a 108 OPS+ for Wells through age 28/4167 PA).
 
But yeah, there are some resemblances.

 

[jimbobim]

http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/red-sox/post/_/id/33689/matt-kemps-agent-thinks-trade-could-come
 
I'm getting a "Where there's smoke there's fire feeling" with this guy.

 

[Devizier]

I'm assuming a trade for Kemp would involve Gomes (among other pieces) moving the other way. The Red Sox can't afford to carry 5 OF when three of them are essentially LF.
 
However, I think it's far more likely that the Mariners make the trade instead. They've gone all-in with Cano, and they need to cash in on his best years up front (plus their cost-controlled year of Iwakuma and getting the most from Hernandez while he's still young).

 

[soxhop411]

This I found interesting
 

BOSTON -- Dave Stewart, who was best known in Boston as being Roger Clemens' daddy when he pitched (9-1 lifetime against the Rocket, including two wins for Oakland in the 1990 American League Championship Series), says in his 10 years as a player agent, he has never gone to baseball's winter meetings.

But he plans to be in Orlando, Fla., next week. Why? Because Stewart represents Los Angeles Dodgers outfielder Matt Kemp, he has heard all the trade talk swirling around his celebrated client, some of that speculation involving the Boston Red Sox, and he has a "strong feeling something could happen" at the meetings.

 

 


 

http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/red-sox/post/_/id/33689/matt-kemps-agent-thinks-trade-could-come
 
I'm getting a "Where there's smoke there's fire feeling" with this guy.

Really would not shock me if he is traded somewhere in the next week

 

[Sausage in Section 17]

That article reads strongly like Stewart is trying to steer the Dodgers to Boston. I'm not sure how much bearing what the player wants has, but this could be heating up.
 

 
Stewart said he has taken the speculation regarding the Red Sox seriously enough to talk to Kemp about Boston, and what it would be like to play there.

"Boston is a good place," said Stewart, a message 180 degrees removed from what Kemp's teammate, Crawford, said repeatedly after being traded by the Sox in 2012. "It's a good city to play in, especially when they're winning championships.

"I'm 56 years old, and people are still buying me dinner there, and I played for the other team. I told Matt about the city. The key to playing in the city is to perform. Compete, play good-quality baseball, don't dog it. If you don't perform, nobody's going to like it."

Stewart said he believes Kemp would have no reservations about playing for the Red Sox. "And the opportunity to play with Big Papi, he'd love to play with him, learn from him."

That decision is not in Kemp's hands, of course.

"Our destiny is controlled by the Dodgers," Stewart said. "You never know what's going to happen. But one thing we know about Boston is they're going to do whatever it needs to do to maintain the excellence it has had for years. We'll see what happens."

 

[MakMan44]

That article reads strongly like Stewart is trying to steer the Dodgers to Boston. I'm not sure how much bearing what the player wants has, but this could be heating up.

It's worth noting that Kemp does NOT have a no trade clause in his contract. 

 

[knucklecup]

If the Red Sox were able to have a team last year with Lavarnaway, Ross, Salty (now AJ), Napoli, Carp, Nava, Gomes, Bradley, Ellsbury (Kemp), Boegarts, Drew, Middlebrooks on the 40 man, why can't they again this year?

 

[brandonchristensen]

Who is buying Stewart dinners in Boston?
 
That's awesome.

 

[86spike]

Who is buying Stewart dinners in Boston?
 
That's awesome.

Card carrying members of the Roger Clemens Haters Club.

 

[Sam Ray Not]

Card carrying members of the Roger Clemens Haters Club.

So like, everyone?

 

[OCD SS]

I wonder how much "organizational memory" there is regarding Kemp; IIRC he was the primary trade target when they were trying to send Manny to the Dodgers.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

Seeing the recent contracts that have been signed I'm actually feeling Kemp might be a bargain compared to the "field". If he is healthy give the Dodgers a package with Dempster and a few other small pieces. Take on the contract in that case and move along. The lineup would be pretty stacked (again if healthy) 
 
RF- Victorino 
2B- Pedroia
LF- Kemp 
DH-Papi
1B- Napoli  
SS- Xander
C  - AJP
3B- WMB
CF- JBJ/Nava (platoon)
 
Putting Nava in CF is a stretch but he could be a roving OF that could get a start 4 times a week with giving the starters a night off. I'm not necessarily advocating acquiring Kemp but I'm warming up to it more than say Shin Soo Choo. 

 

[mfried]

Seeing the recent contracts that have been signed I'm actually feeling Kemp might be a bargain compared to the "field". If he is healthy give the Dodgers a package with Dempster and a few other small pieces. Take on the contract in that case and move along. The lineup would be pretty stacked (again if healthy) 
 
RF- Victorino 
2B- Pedroia
LF- Kemp 
DH-Papi
1B- Napoli  
SS- Xander
C  - AJP
3B- WMB
CF- JBJ/Nava (platoon)
 
Putting Nava in CF is a stretch but he could be a roving OF that could get a start 4 times a week with giving the starters a night off. I'm not necessarily advocating acquiring Kemp but I'm warming up to it more than say Shin Soo Choo. 

Nava in CF is so much of a stretch that I can guarantee it can't happen for more than 5 games in 2014, and probably less.  The scenario with Victorino in center and Nava in right is still too much of a dropoff. I think that JBJ has to be our CF, and Nava is our 4th outfielder in this Kemp in LF scenario.

 

[BosRedSox5]

Nava has 8 innings of experience playing CF at the MLB level and is far better hitting left handed. Having him platoon with JBJ is ridiculous.

 

[kazuneko]

Seeing the recent contracts that have been signed I'm actually feeling Kemp might be a bargain compared to the "field". If he is healthy give the Dodgers a package with Dempster and a few other small pieces. Take on the contract in that case and move along. The lineup would be pretty stacked (again if healthy) 
 
RF- Victorino 
2B- Pedroia
LF- Kemp 
DH-Papi
1B- Napoli  
SS- Xander
C  - AJP
3B- WMB
CF- JBJ/Nava (platoon)
 
Putting Nava in CF is a stretch but he could be a roving OF that could get a start 4 times a week with giving the starters a night off. I'm not necessarily advocating acquiring Kemp but I'm warming up to it more than say Shin Soo Choo. 

Nava is not defensively versatile enough to be a roving fielder. Also, as a hitter who is most proficient as a LHB he would be ill-suited to platoon with JBJ.
In fact, outside of the contract and the risk of injury one of the the downsides of a Kemp trade is it would leave Nava without a role. Inevitably this means Nava would need to be traded, either as part of the trade for Kemp (through a third team) or immediately after.
But Nava is not only cheap but was also one of the better LF in baseball last season. Clearly Kemp circa 2011 is a vastly superior player, but  In 2013 - for a fraction of the price- Nava outperformed Kemp. I guess if the Sox are convinced that Nava's performance was a fluke and that Kemp is sure to bounce back this could be the type of "sell high, buy low" move that they might want to pursue, but with the significant difference in long term risk between the two players it's a very risky gamble..

 

[jimbobim]

Nava would probably be sent over in a deal for Kemp to be their super 4th OF(Ethier and Crawford are both injury prone and capable of long stretches of sucking). Then Gomes could be our 4th OF. 
 
It would probably make more sense to send Gomes to LA and have Nava available to hit righties but I don't think anyone wants to do that. 

 

[knucklecup]

Here's a thought: Trade JBJ.

I'm not particularly sold on his skillset and he's being talked about around here as an immovable piece who will coast to Ellsburian-esque success but I don't see it that way. If the league views him similarly, he would be an intriguing piece to move.

I believe Victorino was primarily signed for exactly what has played out this offseason; to replace Ellsbury in CF. Nobody thought he would be good enough offensively in RF and I don't think a career year should make us think any differently. He needs to be playing in CF next year.

 

[E5 Yaz]

That article reads strongly like Stewart is trying to steer the Dodgers to Boston. I'm not sure how much bearing what the player wants has, but this could be heating up.
 

 
I wonder whether Stewart did interviews with papers in, say, Seattle or Dallas that read strongly like he was trying to steer Kemp to the Mariners or Rangers

 

[Drek717]

Nava would probably be sent over in a deal for Kemp to be their super 4th OF(Ethier and Crawford are both injury prone and capable of long stretches of sucking). Then Gomes could be our 4th OF. 
 
It would probably make more sense to send Gomes to LA and have Nava available to hit righties but I don't think anyone wants to do that. 

The Dodgers won't want Nava back at all.  They're looking to move an outfielder because they've got four of them and Puig is the only one they aren't committed to at 8 figures for long years, meanwhile their best prospect is Joc Pederson, a LH outfielder.  To  make Nava even more redundant, both Ethier and Crawford are LHB with significant career splits, and Pederson is a LHB who in his first run at AA had a massive split materialize as well.
 
If the Red Sox get Kemp they'll either keep Bradley in AAA as insurance and Victorino's replacement or they're moving Nava.  The only way you even keep Gomes in that scenario is one where against LHP you go with Gomes in left, Victorino in CF, and Kemp in RF, while agains RHP you have Kemp in LF, Bradley in CF, and Vic in RF.  That isn't a bad scenario in my opinion as it takes some of the pressure off JBJ, but it still absolutely necessitates moving Nava.
 
 

Here's a thought: Trade JBJ.

I'm not particularly sold on his skillset and he's being talked about around here as an immovable piece who will coast to Ellsburian-esque success but I don't see it that way. If the league views him similarly, he would be an intriguing piece to move.

I believe Victorino was primarily signed for exactly what has played out this offseason; to replace Ellsbury in CF. Nobody thought he would be good enough offensively in RF and I don't think a career year should make us think any differently. He needs to be playing in CF next year.

Vic was signed to be the bridge if needed between Ellsbury and JBJ.  If you trade Bradley and start Vic in CF for 2014 and 2015 who's your starting CF in 2016?  Because whomever it is he sure as hell isn't a member of the Red Sox farm system right now.  The  next legitimate CF prospect up behind Bradley is Manuel Margo, a 19 year old with all the tools in the world but who just posted a sub-.700 OPS in low A.
 
Bradley is an immovable piece because acceptable CF defense is hard to get, elite CF defense is almost impossible, and Bradley projects to be the later with a pretty solid bat.  He's exactly the kind of prospect you do not trade and if he fails you accept that as part of the opportunity cost present in filling high defensive value positions.

 

[BosRedSox5]

Bradley doesn't have Ellsbury's base stealling ability... or his speed, but he seems to have just as good, if not better plate patience. Add to that the fact that JBJ is a great defensive player with a good arm and I'm not sure what's not projectable about him. He's at least as good in CF as Ellsbury with a better arm and excellent plate patience. He looks like a star to me, and Ben Cherington too it seems.

 

[kazuneko]

 
The Dodgers won't want Nava back at all.  They're looking to move an outfielder because they've got four of them and Puig is the only one they aren't committed to at 8 figures for long years, meanwhile their best prospect is Joc Pederson, a LH outfielder.  To  make Nava even more redundant, both Ethier and Crawford are LHB with significant career splits, and Pederson is a LHB who in his first run at AA had a massive split materialize as well.
 
If the Red Sox get Kemp they'll either keep Bradley in AAA as insurance and Victorino's replacement or they're moving Nava.  The only way you even keep Gomes in that scenario is one where against LHP you go with Gomes in left, Victorino in CF, and Kemp in RF, while agains RHP you have Kemp in LF, Bradley in CF, and Vic in RF.  That isn't a bad scenario in my opinion as it takes some of the pressure off JBJ, but it still absolutely necessitates moving Nava.
 

This is exactly why in a potential Kemp trade it would be Nava that should be moved and not Gomes. Not only would it be nice if the Sox could take some of the pressure of JBJ by platooning him (which trading Nava would allow for) but you'd also have to assume that Nava has signifiicantly more trade value than Gomes.

 

[drbretto]

Comparing JBJ to Ellsbury is tripping people up. Other than being center fielders, there's not much that's similar.

In the field, JBJ is very good to excellent because he has great baseball instincts, takes great routes to the ball, has soft hands and unspectacular but serviceable arm. Ellsbury makes up for his bad routes with speed and has an arm only marginally better than Damon's.

At the plate, they shouldn't be too far off if you assume that 2011 was a fluke. JBJ is very patient at the plate with a great eye. Ellsbury doesn't suck at the plate but has a less disciplined approach.

On the basepaths, JBJ has great instincts as well, that make him a good, smart, baserunner. Ellsbury is also a very good, smart baserunner with excellent instincts and speed. And if JBJ wins in the field, and at the plate they're a coin flip (which I think would be generous to JBJ, but I haven't seen enough MLB ABs to judge), the baserunning game is so far skewed in Ellsbury favore, even factoring in that JBJ is pretty decent.

So, I think of JBJ as a more athletic young JD Drew, but with more flash and less power. He'll do just fine, but he's no Ellsbury.

 

[Mugsy's Jock]

I'd sure prefer to hang onto Nava even if Kemp were acquired. Kemp and Victorino are definitely injury risks, and I'd think you'd want a strong hitter (esp. a lefty) available to back them up. Throw in you're needing somebody to pick up a good 20 games at 1B to cover Napoli, and Nava would have no problem finding the ABs to justify his modest contract.

Not to mention, if JBJ needs more seasoning! Vic in CF and Nava in RF is plausible (if not first choice).

 

[radsoxfan]

Comparing JBJ to Ellsbury is tripping people up. Other than being center fielders, there's not much that's similar.

So, I think of JBJ as a more athletic young JD Drew, but with more flash and less power. He'll do just fine, but he's no Ellsbury.

 
I agree with you on the imperfect Ellsbury/JBJ comparison. It's more convenient than anything else. Ellsbury is much faster, has a much worse arm, and doesn't have Bradley's projected plate discipline.  Besides being LHH CF that have come up through the Red Sox system, they aren't particularly alike. But since it looks like Bradley is stepping into Ellsbury's spot, it's very reasonable to compare their overall projected value, while acknowledging they will get to that point in different ways.
 
Your Drew with less power comp isn't bad... but Drew was very athletic, and though never a big SB guy, I think he was definitely faster than Bradley. I'd say Bradley is a less athletic and powerful version of Drew. 
 
As far as trading Bradley, I think that's almost surely not going to happen, nor should it.  You never say never with trades, since of course it all depends what you are getting back. But it's hard to imagine Bradley is as valuable to another team as he is to the Red Sox. Victorino is great in RF, but he is getting older and is injury prone.  No way the FO wants him to be the full time CF, not to mention how thin it makes the major and upper minor league system at that position.
 
Edit: I guess this is in the Matt Kemp thread, but I didn't post about Kemp. Oops. I guess I'll just repeat.... please don't trade for Matt Kemp unless the Dodgers pay close to half his salary.

 

[nvalvo]

Here's a thought: Trade JBJ.

I'm not particularly sold on his skillset and he's being talked about around here as an immovable piece who will coast to Ellsburian-esque success but I don't see it that way. If the league views him similarly, he would be an intriguing piece to move.

I believe Victorino was primarily signed for exactly what has played out this offseason; to replace Ellsbury in CF. Nobody thought he would be good enough offensively in RF and I don't think a career year should make us think any differently. He needs to be playing in CF next year.

 
I think Victorino has considerable downside risk, and I want him hedged as corner outfielder, not moved to a more important position. 
 
We were the beneficiaries of a career year last year on both sides of the ball. On defense, he put up value that he has never approached before in his career stats — stats which are all over the place. He has posted negative values several times, although typically the negative numbers have come in CF, and he's been more reliable in the corners. Still, it's strange to think that the same player can be worth +25 runs one season and -6 another. Either this is an artifact of UZR's inherent instability, or maybe its, well...
 

 
We didn't see very much of that guy in 2013. I hope he won't be back. 
 
Offensively, he managed to (unsustainably) juice his numbers against righties by stopping switch hitting. I say unsustainably both because he says he will return to switch hitting, and because a full 1/4 of his times reaching base as a righty against a righty were via HBP. I don't see that continuing: he had more HBP in the second half of 2013 than he did in any full year of his career to date. He also had the highest BABIP of his career, some .30 points above his career averages. Meanwhile, his walk rate fell to his lowest full season rate (4.7) and his strikeout rate climbed to his highest full season rate (14.1). 
 
He'll be 33. He played 122 games last season, due to various knocks. His numbers against righties have been sharply up and down in recent years. He should still rake against LHP — his most consistent skill throughout his career — but he's not a lock to repeat his 2013 season. 

 

[drbretto]

 
I agree with you on the imperfect Ellsbury/JBJ comparison. It's more convenient than anything else. Ellsbury is much faster, has a much worse arm, and doesn't have Bradley's projected plate discipline.  Besides being LHH CF that have come up through the Red Sox system, they aren't particularly alike. But since it looks like Bradley is stepping into Ellsbury's spot, it's very reasonable to compare their overall projected value, while acknowledging they will get to that point in different ways.
 
Your Drew with less power comp isn't bad... but Drew was very athletic, and though never a big SB guy, I think he was definitely faster than Bradley. I'd say Bradley is a less athletic and powerful version of Drew. 
 
As far as trading Bradley, I think that's almost surely not going to happen, nor should it.  You never say never with trades, since of course it all depends what you are getting back. But it's hard to imagine Bradley is as valuable to another team as he is to the Red Sox. Victorino is great in RF, but he is getting older and is injury prone.  No way the FO wants him to be the full time CF, not to mention how thin it makes the major and upper minor league system at that position.
 
Edit: I guess this is in the Matt Kemp thread, but I didn't post about Kemp. Oops. I guess I'll just repeat.... please don't trade for Matt Kemp unless the Dodgers pay close to half his salary.

Fair points re: Drew's athleticism. I really only saw his later red Sox years and he didn't seem particularly fast to me (he also has a much, much better arm than both).

But actually my main point was that it's not really fair to compare anyone to Ellsbury because he's gone and there is no one else with his ridiculous baserunning ability. JBJ covers the defensive side and non-baserunning offensive side (potentially) but the sox will have to look at another position to make up for the difference.

That can be Kemp, who wouldn't offer the baserunning value but should provide enough of an offensive upgrade to LF to make up the total runs. It's the cost that troubles me. If you can slot in Kemp for reasonable money, you get more combined value between the two to make up for the loss, rather than trying to fit JBJ into Ellsbury's shoes. If Kemp plus JBJ costs less than Ellsbury, you get the same value as if you had kept Ellsbury with more money go spare.

Ultimately, my goal here is that whichever is the most reasonable deal between Kemp and Choo should happen. Hoping JBJ is going to replace drew is an exercise in futility and unfair to the rookie.

FWIW, I still feel that a reasonably priced Choo/Gomes combo would offer far more offensive value than trading for Kemp, so he should get first look, but if Boras is Boras, Kemp is the next best (and I feel most likely) target.


(I am blaming all typos on my phone)

 

[MakMan44]

Well that's the rub, isn't it? 
 
Choo a near lock to receive more than we'd feel comfortable giving.
 
FWIW, I like the idea of a Kemp-JBJ-Vic (left to right) trio against righties and Gomes-Vic-Kemp against lefties. At least until JBJ proves he can handle ML LHP. (EDIT: This is my way of advocating for trading Nava in case of a Kemp deal.)

 

[ivanvamp]

Well that's the rub, isn't it? 
 
Choo a near lock to receive more than we'd feel comfortable giving.
 
FWIW, I like the idea of a Kemp-JBJ-Vic (left to right) trio against righties and Gomes-Vic-Kemp against lefties. At least until JBJ proves he can handle ML LHP. (EDIT: This is my way of advocating for trading Nava in case of a Kemp deal.)

 
Would you rather keep Carp or Nava?  Because if Nava can play an adequate backup 1b, then you want to keep him, since he can also play OF if you need him to.  

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

 
Would you rather keep Carp or Nava?  Because if Nava can play an adequate backup 1b, then you want to keep him, since he can also play OF if you need him to.  

 
Carp is a little bit younger and still has some upside. I'd love to cash in on Nava's career season

 

[MakMan44]

 
Would you rather keep Carp or Nava?  Because if Nava can play an adequate backup 1b, then you want to keep him, since he can also play OF if you need him to.  

That's a fair point. I see them as pretty interchangeable but I suppose Nava's slightly better defense could make him more valuable in case of an injury. 

 

[Super Nomario]

Comparing JBJ to Ellsbury is tripping people up. Other than being center fielders, there's not much that's similar.

At the plate, they shouldn't be too far off if you assume that 2011 was a fluke. JBJ is very patient at the plate with a great eye. Ellsbury doesn't suck at the plate but has a less disciplined approach.

There's quite a bit of difference at the plate, too. Bradley walks more but strikes out more, too (18% last year in AA; 20% this year in AAA vs Ellsbury, who was a consistent 11-12% guy in the minors), so he hits for a lower average, in the .270s in AA / AAA vs Ellsbury's consistent .300+. Bradley's also got quite a bit more power; his minor league ISOs have been in the .160s while Ellsbury was in the .120s, and Bradley has almost twice as many homers in fewer minor-league PAs.

 

[Paradigm]

I thought Buster Olney made a great point in this article:
 
http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/buster-olney/post?id=3974
 

 
 
Now the Dodgers can work in earnest on the finer points, on rebuilding their farm system, on using the massive stack of chips to create a deep, well-designed roster -- a younger roster. This is part of the reason why the Dodgers have indicated a willingness to absorb some salary in order to move Andre Ethier or Matt Kemp. 

This is not about a salary dump, or about the discomfort of having four front-line outfielders -- Ethier, Kemp, Carl Crawford and Yasiel Puig -- for three spots. This will be about dangling players who might fetch some decent prospect return, depending on how much money the Dodgers eat, and have pieces that fit together better. 

 
Basically, he's saying that the Dodgers are prepared to pay for prospects. It's a very intelligent strategy when you think about it. The Dodgers have an average farm system, but have a few contracts that appeal to other teams. They can basically buy prospects from any team they want by eating more salary in any deal. 
 
So, hypothetically, if the Red Sox offer Anthony Ranaudo but ask the Dodgers to eat $10 million, the Dodgers might call the Mariners and say that they'll eat $20 million if they can get a player like Taijuan Walker back.
 
Think about it: would you pay $10m for the rights to acquire Taijuan Walker (or a similar top 50 prospect) for six years, right now? Yes, you would. And the Dodgers are in a position to do it. 
 
It's brilliant.

 

[JimBoSox9]

I thought Buster Olney made a great point in this article:
 
http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/buster-olney/post?id=3974
 
 
Basically, he's saying that the Dodgers are prepared to pay for prospects. It's a very intelligent strategy when you think about it. The Dodgers have an average farm system, but have a few contracts that appeal to other teams. They can basically buy prospects from any team they want by eating more salary in any deal. 
 
So, hypothetically, if the Red Sox offer Anthony Ranaudo but ask the Dodgers to eat $10 million, the Dodgers might call the Mariners and say that they'll eat $20 million if they can get a player like Taijuan Walker back.
 
Think about it: would you pay $10m for the rights to acquire Taijuan Walker (or a similar top 50 prospect) for six years, right now? Yes, you would. And the Dodgers are in a position to do it. 
 
It's brilliant.

 
I agree with your overall analysis of the situation, but disagree as to the value LA is receiving (and the resulting brilliance).  First, I say $20 is much closer to the floor of what the Dodgers will end up eating than the ceiling.  Second, unless they're getting a tippy tippy top guy back, even with generous error bands looking at average prospect WAR and $/WAR figures, getting fair value back for that eaten money is far from a garauntee.  It's more akin to an overpay for a platinum lottery ticket; given their organizational position it's the right move to make but it's hardly brilliant strategy.

 

[drbretto]

And the Red Sox have some redundancies in the minors. It's really could be a perfect match and another chance for Charington to pull one over LAD. I would not be surprised to see this happen, especially if it has already been determined that someone else will overpay for Choo.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

And the Red Sox have some redundancies in the minors. It's really could be a perfect match and another chance for Charington to pull one over LAD. I would not be surprised to see this happen, especially if it has already been determined that someone else will overpay for Choo.

 
I'm having a hard time seeing how taking on Matt Kemp, his salary (even subsidized), and his questionable shoulder and ankle is a chance to pull one over on the Dodgers.  Especially if this is some grand plan on Ned Colletti's part to acquire high level prospects in return.  Sounds to me like the Dodgers may want a return appropriate for trading 2011 MVP-level Matt Kemp, which is not at all what the acquiring team is going to get.

 

[drbretto]

 
I'm having a hard time seeing how taking on Matt Kemp, his salary (even subsidized), and his questionable shoulder and ankle is a chance to pull one over on the Dodgers.  Especially if this is some grand plan on Ned Colletti's part to acquire high level prospects in return.  Sounds to me like the Dodgers may want a return appropriate for trading 2011 MVP-level Matt Kemp, which is not at all what the acquiring team is going to get.

 
 
Because he can use exactly that information to drive down the price. The Punto Trade was so colossally stupid for the Dodgers. That's not a mistake. That is incompetence on the level of A-Rod negotiating his own 300 million dollar extension. I have faith, after what I've seen over the last year or so that Charrington and co. can sell, or rather unsell*, the value of Kemp enough to get maximum value out of it. The Red Sox can afford to be the Yankees of prospects right now if they needed to, but have the brains to hang onto what they can. 
 
The fact that it's more of an opportunity than a need puts the Sox in a great position. They can offer some really good potential prospects without gutting the system and have the kind of money that can survive through an injury. Once in a while, taking a risk like this is worth it. Just as there is a chance that he is cooked, there's the actual, legitimate chance that he comes back to prime form. This guy was the face of baseball a couple of years ago and he isn't that old. Sometimes it takes a couple of years to get back into a groove after some injuries. 
 
And that possibility, a potential RUN of championships, sounds slightly more likely than the worst-case scenario where the Sox accidentally gave up an unexpected future Hall of Famer and Kemp is injured most of the contract. Even if that happens, assuming Charington has properly assessed the farm system well enough to know who's off the table and has read the market well enough to know which other team out there has the position of need, the prospects to trade, the money and balls the take the risk everything else would be either a fluke (the prospect) or planned-for bad luck.
 
With a really good chance of at least being enough to offset the loss of Ellsbury, the Sox being firmly in the position of power, with a more experienced/competent team of negotiators and the less than zero chance that Beast Mode wakes back up, this is the time for the Sox to have the balls to negotiate it to it's best possible value and pull the trigger.
 
 
 
*Before I end up in the Internet Words thread, I know that's not a damn word.
 
 
 
edit: I really need to go over my posts once or twice before hitting post...

 

[jimbobim]

It's not a bad plan, but I think your underestimating how low Kemp's value is right now compared to his MVP season. Seattle fans and I'm guessing their GM are already nauseated at the idea of trading Walker and other prospects for Price. I seriously doubt Seattle would trade him straight up for a fully subsidized Kemp. However, if someone is willing to offer the Dodgers one their  top three or 4 prospects then Mr. Kemp will be somewhere else.
 
I think one from an organizations top 10, one from the top 15, and lower level guys or a combination of an infield prospect whose similarly struggling  ( WMB, Franklin, Ackley) a top 15 and lower level guys could get it done. 
 
I also agree with 20 million being the floor of the subsidization. I think it would have to be around 35- 50 million to get teams willing to part with actual talent. 
 
Also the dodgers have a near bottomless pit of money, but they are readying extensions for Kershaw and Hanly. I think its inevitable they'll have to trade one of those OF's eventually and Kemp is the only one who will bring back any type of useful part or lottery ticket. 

 

[drbretto]

I'm not making any estimation of Kemp's value. I'm suggesting that Charrington has, and will be able to bring the deal down to a level that few here would argue against. I think he is very much in a power position to negotiate. For all of the reasons that have been stated regarding his value, I don't think any other team is going to offer 4 top tier prospects. I think the value of prospects is extremely high right now and that Charington has a legitimate chance to both offer the best package LAD will get and not give up as much as people here are thinking. 
 
Well, I guess I am estimating Kemp + JBJ's value as roughly at least equivalent to Ellsbury/Nava as the most likely outcome, so I guess you're right there, but I don't think that's too unreasonable. 

 

[JimBoSox9]

C-H-E-R-I-N-G-T-O-N

 

[JakeRae]

The Red Sox GM's name is Ben Cherington.

 

[drbretto]

Yeah, dumbass. It's Cherington. 
 
 
(edit: this could be read as serious, so I'll ruin the joke by stating that it's a joke, as-in me jumping in to call myself out for my bad spelling, just in case. And for the record, it was driving me nuts on my lunch break when I jumped in that I couldn't remember how to spell his name. I looked it up, only noticed the part where there is only one 'r', then proceeded to type it again later with two 'r's anyway.)

 

[Cellar-Door]

So is this another thread that has devolved into....
He's a great deal (based on random but unstated assumptions of what it takes to trade and how much salary is picked up)
vs
What a terrible deal (based on different random but unstated assumptions of what it takes to trade and how much salary is picked up)?

 

[drbretto]

Not really. Though if you wanted to, you could boil just about any of these conversations down to that. I was stating why I felt that the Sox are in a position to make a steal during the winter meetings while others were basically suggesting that they felt that any deal made for Kemp might have to be a bigger steal than I am hoping for before they'll be on board. It's also a little bit about risk assessment and expectations for Kemp's future and how much each poster feels it would take to be worth it. I don't think anyone's flinging poo here (yet).
 
Editing in: Speaking of flying substances, or more specifically substance, while the last few posts may not have have, like, a TON of substance, the baseball season is over and the most interesting and plausible off-season drama right now is this Kemp thing. It could be a controversial trade/non-trade and I'm both catching up on the SoSH feel on it and offering my opinion.

 

[Drek717]

 
Would you rather keep Carp or Nava?  Because if Nava can play an adequate backup 1b, then you want to keep him, since he can also play OF if you need him to.  

I think Nava would bring back significantly more in return.  He had a better season as he played a ton more games, he can play a solid corner OF which is a much more valuable market right now than 1B, and he's got a year of extra control and likely pre-arb salary.
 
At the same time, a Sox OF of Kemp, JBJ, and Bradley would have three guys who could potentially play CF in a pinch already, and the farm has AAA depth at the corners, so they can make due just fine without Nava's depth.
 
Carp would get a C prospect, Nava likely gets something more like a B+ prospect, maybe even a top 5 guy from someone if Choo lands with a big money team.  Houston and Arizona both have corner OF needs and both have more prospects than money.
 
Meanwhile Carp also has much more power upside than Nava, which is important since he's the best in-house option to replace Ortiz or Napoli in the event of an injury, or to replace Ortiz if he goes into accelerated decline or retires in the next year or two.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

I think Nava would bring back significantly more in return.  He had a better season as he played a ton more games, he can play a solid corner OF which is a much more valuable market right now than 1B, and he's got a year of extra control and likely pre-arb salary.

 
Why would teams evaluate trade targets based on how much playing time they got the previous year? How is that relevant to the acquiring team?
 
As you say, Carp has more power upside than Nava; he's not likely to match Nava's OBP, but he should far eclipse Nava's SLG, making him a more valuable overall offensive player going forward*. He's also three years younger. If I'm looking to build a team for the medium to long term, I'm much more interested in Carp. (Which is why I think the Sox should also be more interested in him, even though I think he would bring more in a trade than Nava.)
 
*Both Steamer and Oliver project Nava to be an infinitesimally better hitter than Carp next year -- 110/109 versus 108/108 -- but I don't think either projection system takes into account the fact that Carp's 2012 was significantly hampered by injury. If he's fully recovered from that injury, and there's no reason to think he isn't, it's reasonable to expect him to outperform his projection. And since he's 27 and Nava is 30, the chances are good that the latter will decline sooner and more quickly.