The Untouchables versus Hamels: Round II

[bankshot1]

About a week ago I had a poll designed to get an idea about how we valued the the pool of Sox young players and prospects.
 
The following was the premise:
 
The Red Sox look very well stocked with young high-ceiling players, many of whom will form the core of future teams. But there seems to be some overlap in players, positions, and needs.
 
Lets assume that the Red Sox and Phillies are negotiating a trade for Cole Hamels, and lets say the Phillies want 3 top young players/prospects for Hamels. Further assume Jon Lester will not be on the 2015 team. Who would you not make available for a Hamels trade? Or who would you rather keep for future use either as a Sox player or a trading chip to get a RH power bat, or any other purpose? Who are the untouchables?  Who are not, and who is not for this particular proposed trade?
 
The poll had some 230 respondents and this is how the "untouchables" ranked
 
1-Bogaerts 200 votes
2-Swihart    133
3-Owens       92
4-Betts          75
5-JBJ            45
6-RDLR        30
7-Vasquez    24
8-Workman  11
9-Holt             9
10-Ranaudo   8
 
Assume negotiations have heated up, Lester is gone, and the Phillies have come down to 2 top 10 prospects, and a 3rd lower level prospect, but 1 of the top 10 prospects must be a pitcher.
 
Maybe you can negotiate down/away the 3rd prospect but the Phillies need for two top 10s is carved in stone, or no deal.
 
The Hamels contract is for 4 years @$22.5MM a year, with a 5th option year that is attainable at a team cost of $24 million. There is also a $6 mm buy-out after the 4th year. So the cost may be 4/96MM to 5/114 for Hamels.
 
Who's going to Philly?
 
For info purposes if you don't want to make the trade there is that poll option, and say so in the post, but select the guys who you would consider trading on a gun to head condition. 
 
I have reservations, big ones, but I would probably trade RDLR and Vaz, because I think the Sox need a top of the rotation LHSP, and I'm not sure Owens is ready, and if he is then the Sox got two LHSP..
 
Poll time

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

They way you phrased the question makes me leap at Holt and Ranaudo.  I'd make that deal in a heartbeat.  I don't think there's any way Philly accepts it, but if I'm Ben and they call with that list and those requirements, I'm putting Holt and Ranaudo on a plane before I remember to call Amaro back and say yes.

 

[bankshot1]

They way you phrased the question makes me leap at Holt and Ranaudo.  I'd make that deal in a heartbeat.  I don't think there's any way Philly accepts it, but if I'm Ben and they call with that list and those requirements, I'm putting Holt and Ranaudo on a plane before I remember to call Amaro back and say yes.

There are to many iterations to include in a poll, and I did not want to say "they need Boegarts" and I wanted to see as conditions have changed if SoSH consensus/perceptions of value have changed.

 

[Bleedred]

If Boegarts and Workman get it done, then I make the deal.    Drew bridges for Marrero; Middlebrooks/Cecchini at 3B;  Owens, Ranuado, RDLR all coming up to fill in for the loss of Workman.   I hate trading X, but being realistic, I don't see how the Phillies trade Hamels to the RS if he's not involved (unless 2 of our ace pitching prospects are included)

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Holt and Ranaudo and a lower-level prospect for Cole Hamels?
 
Sign me up!

 

[glennhoffmania]

If Boegarts and Workman get it done, then I make the deal.    Drew bridges for Marrero; Middlebrooks/Cecchini at 3B;  Owens, Ranuado, RDLR all coming up to fill in for the loss of Workman.   I hate trading X, but being realistic, I don't see how the Phillies trade Hamels to the RS if he's not involved (unless 2 of our ace pitching prospects are included)

Drew on a third one-year deal?  That seems unlikely.

 

[P'tucket rhymes with...]

Even though he's head-trauma crazy, Amaro isn't giving up Hamels for "any" two on the list, and might not even for the best two.  So, Workman and Holt for me.

 

[smastroyin]

I would honestly give up all of 6-10 ahead of just xander. I think there are some pretty unrealistic expectations for the Pawtucket pitchers.

 

[MentalDisabldLst]

Is "Boegarts" an inside joke that I've missed on this board, or can multiple people really not spell the name of a future cornerstone of our franchise?
 
I voted RDLR and Swihart because I figure Amaro will go for flashy potential over "expected value"

 

[pokey_reese]

The poll is misleading in that everyone is voting yes/no on their own proposal, and that it isn't clear if we are picking two guys who we would want to send, or that we think Amaro would ask for.  There was a tweet that they were scouting Portland this week, so I assume the asking price includes one or both of Owens/Swihart, plus probably someone else.  I don't know if I do that deal for Hamels.

 

[mwonow]

I would honestly give up all of 6-10 ahead of just xander. I think there are some pretty unrealistic expectations for the Pawtucket pitchers.

I'm there, too - the "have to include one pitcher" is no big deal, I'd like to include two - I voted Ranaudo and Workman, but I'd probably put RDLR in place of either if it was necessary to close the deal.

 

[ivanvamp]

I know that Hamels represents a pretty nice fallback option in the seemingly inevitable event that Lester is gone.  But geez, it pains me to see them not sign Lester, only to have to trade two (or more) top prospects to get Hamels, who is essentially the same caliber pitcher.  
 
I mean, cripes, just sign Lester already.  

 

[MakMan44]

I'd do Rubby and Betts if it came down to it. My assumption would be that the Red Sox would then move Lester for something that helps offset that high cost. 

 

[OCD SS]

My untouchables are X, JBJ, and Swihart (and Devers, although he's not mentioned). I would rather keep Vasquez, Owens or Betts out of a deal:  Vasquez because I think he's starting next year. Betts I think actually gets used for an impact bat down the road. I'm a little less bullish on Owens overall, so if he brings back Hammels I think I'd be OK with him as a centerpiece.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Workman and Holt was easy (really it could have been any of the Pawtucket righties and Holt--but I think Workman has the lowest ceiling of the bunch, though quite likely the highest floor). And of course that doesn't happen.
 
There's absolutely no way I deal Bogaerts for Hamels. Not even one-up.
 
I probably wouldn't give up Swihart either.
 
I might give up Owens or Bradley.
 
Anybody else on that list is probably fair game, although if Betts is part of the deal, then Owens and JBJ won't be.

 

[Drek717]

Holt and Workman, easy.  At that point you have Hamels, Lackey, and Buchholz in the 2015 rotation and need to find 3 more starters out of RDLR, Ranaudo, Doubront, Webster, Wright, Barnes, Owens, and Johnson.  I'd like to think the club could handle that.
 
But no way Philly takes Holt as a piece, and I don't think they're super likely to take a no flash guy like Workman as the key pitcher.  Something more like Betts + Ranaudo is about what I'd expect to pay and then that is a tough decision to make.
 
As a general concept I also hate the idea of letting Lester go only to give up two top 10 prospects in order to pay Hamels pretty much the same AAV Lester would need simply to keep the deal at 4-5 years instead of 6.  It is absolutely horrible use of resources.
 
Now if instead they offered Lester 6/$135M (same AAV as Hamels, means Lester earned 1 year and $30M over what he supposedly would have taken in the spring) now and got him to take that, we'd have something going on.  Then I'd be much more willing to trade Lackey before the deadline to say...the Pirates for Josh Bell and Harold Ramirez while also making a push for Hamels in exchange for Ranaudo and Betts or something similar.  That would set up the rotation with Lester, Hamels, Buchholz, and the same "find 3 from X" pool, but with the top 2 guys being elite LHPs locked in for half a decade.
 
Really, the organization's continued failure to accept what they might consider a mild overpay to retain Lester and therefore exposing themselves to either a significant decline in wins or an overpay of prospects for an external solution is looking worse and worse by the day.

 

[snowmanny]

When is this trade taking place? Why would the Red Sox be trading for Hamels now?

 

[Toe Nash]

The poll is misleading in that everyone is voting yes/no on their own proposal, and that it isn't clear if we are picking two guys who we would want to send, or that we think Amaro would ask for.  There was a tweet that they were scouting Portland this week, so I assume the asking price includes one or both of Owens/Swihart, plus probably someone else.  I don't know if I do that deal for Hamels.

This poll doesn't make any sense. 
 
I'd send Workman and Ranaudo, but they wouldn't take that. Of the ten, a more realistic proposal is X and RDLR or Owens, and I don't think I'd do that, nor would the Phillies, maybe. 

 

[bankshot1]

This poll doesn't make any sense. 
 
I'd send Workman and Ranaudo, but they wouldn't take that. Of the ten, a more realistic proposal is X and RDLR or Owens, and I don't think I'd do that, nor would the Phillies, maybe. 

Press reports are that the Phillies want 3 prospects for Hamels. So I used that as a premise to gauge how people view Sox prospects in trading for a top-of-the-rotation pitcher. What would posters trade.
 
I think 3 guys from the 10 listed is a very full price, an overpay for Hamels, but 2 is doable, plus a lower level prospect. 
I wouldn't do X, RDLR and Owens. I think that's an overpay. I might do two of the 3 but that's it. However that you think its a "maybe" for the Phillies suggests in your mind its close. 
 
And this "trade" could happen at any time, but in my mind its more likely in the off-season. 

 

[Carmen Fanzone]

Workman and Holt for me.

 
Ditto

 

[ookami7m]

Yeah, there's no way the scenario outlined in post 1 is realistic, so of course everyone here would give up Workman and Holt. No one would expect that to be an actual deal though.  

 

[bankshot1]

Yeah, there's no way the scenario outlined in post 1 is realistic, so of course everyone here would give up Workman and Holt. No one would expect that to be an actual deal though.  

Press reports have said the Philles want 3 top prospects for Hamels. I assume they would want back at least 1 top prospect pitcher to replace Hamels in the rotation, another top 10 prospect, and a 3rd prospect of slightly lesser value, That Sox fans want to low-ball or over-value their side of the deal, is probably natural.
 
What would be a realistic/fair trade?

 

[Minneapolis Millers]

Seems like there are conflicting variables here: level of prospects we'd offer v. what Philly would accept, plus whether we'd make the trade.  The lesser the prospect requirements, the more likely we'd do the deal.  But just because I'd trade Holt and Ranaudo doesn't mean Philly would take that.
 
I chose a middle ground, putting out about as much as I'd be willing to give up for Hamels, assuming we can't resign Lester: Betts and RDLR.  I don't want to give up X, Swihart or Owens for Hamels.

 

[ookami7m]

I don't disagree with the 3 top prospects line.
I disagree with the top 2 being Holt and Workman - as I'm sure any reasonable person would. 
When a team asks for 3 top prospects, two of them can't be #8 and #9 on a team's list. They'll want one of the top 5 at a minimum.

 

[P'tucket rhymes with...]

Press reports have said the Philles want 3 top prospects for Hamels. I assume they would want back at least 1 top prospect pitcher to replace Hamels in the rotation, another top 10 prospect, and a 3rd prospect of slightly lesser value, That Sox fans want to low-ball or over-value their side of the deal, is probably natural.
 
What would be a realistic/fair trade?

Of those listed, I'd do Owens, Vasquez and Holt if I wanted Hamels, although I'm not all that hot on acquiring him anyways.
 
Edit--in looking at the results thus far, I'm pleasantly surprised at how few voters are willing to put JBJ in the mix.

 

[bankshot1]

I don't disagree with the 3 top prospects line.
I disagree with the top 2 being Holt and Workman - as I'm sure any reasonable person would. 
When a team asks for 3 top prospects, two of them can't be #8 and #9 on a team's list. They'll want one of the top 5 at a minimum.

I agree. Holt and Workman might not be enough to do the deal. But maybe X or Swihart  or Betts plus RDLR or Workman would. So whats your ouch point?

 

[Mugsy's Jock]

Trying to think of the best package that I'd say 'yes' to, I checked off Swihart and Renaudo.  Swihart could be tremendous, but I'm excited about what I'm seeing from Vazquez.  And I'm not sure why anybody would see Renaudo as anything more than a midlevel starter.  Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it's tradeable.
 
Wonder if as an additional piece the Phillies would have special interest in Philadelphia's own Sean Coyle?
 
Edit:  I do NOT give up X until and unless I see Giancarlo Stanton in the mix.

 

[ookami7m]

I agree. Holt and Workman might not be enough to do the deal. But maybe X or Swihart  or Betts plus RDLR or Workman would. So whats your ouch point?

 
Let's stop looking at it as what the Sox would do or what we as fans would do. What would Philly ask for (after their initial ask of X + Swihart + Owens) - Would X + Workman + 3rd lotto ticket get it done?  Probably
 
But there's no way in hell unless Ben has compromising photos of Amaro that Holt+ Workman gets anything close to Hammels

 

[Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat]

Betts and Workman.  
 
There is no way in hell that I'd have X in a trade for Hamels.

 

[bankshot1]

 
Let's stop looking at it as what the Sox would do or what we as fans would do. What would Philly ask for (after their initial ask of X + Swihart + Owens) - Would X + Workman + 3rd lotto ticket get it done?  Probably
 
But there's no way in hell unless Ben has compromising photos of Amaro that Holt+ Workman gets anything close to Hammels

I never said that Holt and Workman would be enough.
 
Phillies perspective: we know they want 3 prospects, probably a pitcher, Ruiz their catcher is 35, they may want a guy for the future, and maybe a SS as Rollins is also 35 and is under contract through '15 (if he has 600 PA this year). So given the two kid catchers, the pitching prospects, and the middle infielders there are areas of interest. And I'd prefer to hold onto X. I think his upside is buried and hidden in a brutal slump.I think he'll figure it out.
 
IMO it may be more critical for the Phillies to reload using Hamels than the Sox to reload with Hamels. If the Phillies can unload his $22.5MM a year and get 2-3 controllable young players who can soon be starters it may be the way to go. I don't know their prospects but that's an old last place team. They could be a last place team in that division for a long time.

 

[EricFeczko]

I never said that Holt and Workman would be enough.
 
Phillies perspective: we know they want 3 prospects, probably a pitcher, Ruiz their catcher is 35, they may want a guy for the future, and maybe a SS as Rollins is also 35 and is under contract through '15 (if he has 600 PA this year). So given the two kid catchers, the pitching prospects, and the middle infielders there are areas of interest. And I'd prefer to hold onto X. I think his upside is buried and hidden in a brutal slump.I think he'll figure it out.
 
IMO it may be more critical for the Phillies to reload using Hamels than the Sox to reload with Hamels. If the Phillies can unload his $22.5MM a year and get 2-3 controllable young players who can soon be starters it may be the way to go. I don't know their prospects but that's an old last place team. They could be a last place team in that division for a long time.

I think you've hit the nail on the head, except for one small problem. You are assuming that the Phillies FO, and by extension, ruben amaro jr., is a rational agent.