Is Keuchel a consideration? Great numbers in AAA, especially the ground ball rate. Not sure if he is a trade off from what we presently have, or that another roster move is prudent with th possibility of 3 coming back.
Trade Deadline Approach
- Thread starter tims4wins
- Start date
Someone already pointed out that Barraclaw has better numbers in AAA and wouldn't cost a thing (40 man roster spot, but so would Keuchel)
I'm gonna say no. If none of Sale, Houck, and Whitlock were expected back in the near future and they were in desperate need of another pitcher to cover bulk innings (as a true starter or not), then maybe. But they're expecting those guys back and have made it this far without seeking more additions from outside the organization. No sense in starting now, especially with a guy who looked absolutely cooked last season.
Short answer is for this season, I agree with @moondog80.
Long answer is - It's a nuanced question, and I think it depends on the make up of the team and how the team gets there. Generally speaking (if one could "know" you're going to miss the playoffs by 20 or miss by 2, take your pick) I'd pick miss by 20 because then the team could sell and build up assets for the following year). This is obviously an "in retrospect" answer and I accept that the outcome is unknowable ahead of time, but if it were, I'd generally pick the lose by 20 because of the ability to sell players at the deadline.
However, since one cannot know, the more nuanced answer is - at least for me - it depends on the type of team you have.
Last year's team was one of the most frustrating I can remember in the FSG era. They sucked pretty much the entire year, they were horrendous against their division, they had one great month when they played a lot of bad teams, they were old, they were hurt, they were mostly on expiring contracts and because of the 3rd wild card and with a team needing to basically completely implode or be run by morons, it's really tough to not be "within a few games" of the last WC around the all-star game / trade deadline.
That team should have been given up on. They did nothing to show they deserved investment in and the only reasons to watch at all were to see Bello start, say goodbye to Bogaerts and see what Casas did in September. I don't think it was worse than 2011 (because the fallout of losing Francona, how that was handled, and Epstein was really bad), but it was close. I wanted that team to be 30 games out because 30 games out or 3 games out at the deadline didn't matter - they weren't going anywhere - but at 3 games out or whatever the number was (and I don't care to look it up) the front office made a horrendous decision not to sell. Being 30 games out would've been far better.
This year's team is different. I didn't think they'd be this good (I believe I had them at 79-83) but I DID think the younger players would be solid enough (but I thought of that as being Bello, Whitlock, Casas and Houck; I didn't think it'd be Duran and Crawford). But the bigger thing is - unlike last year - this year's team you can see being built toward something. If the team had been 2 games out at the deadline because of great performances from older veterans while the kids had all been awful, I'd have been screaming to sell everything. But they were 2 games out because of the performance of young players (or those with term) and I think they should have been invested in, not just for this year but for 2024 as well.
If this team was being "led" by all the older veterans, I'd want them to finish 30 out instead of 3; but because they're being led by players that are building toward something, I'd want them to finish 3 out instead of 30. Again, it's nuanced, and it depends on "how" the team gets there more than where they are, at least in my opinion.
@BeantownIdaho - FWIW, I advocated for Keuchel (at least when he had the opt out a couple of weeks ago and chose not to use it) and I still do. Sometimes, I think teams just benefit from inclusion of new players and guys with track record I think of as more likely to turn it on than career journeymen. To be clear, I don't think much of Jacques and I've long been advocating someone instead of Bleier, so I'd be totally on board with Keuchel AND Barraclough, but of the two I'd rather take a flier on Keuchel. I fully admit he's been awful and this is mostly just because the team had been begging for pitching to be added, and I'd throw them a bone. I think they deserve that. I understand the reasons people don't want it, and I accept their rationale that it might not work, and I fully admit that, but I don't think the "opener games" are going to work as well with the schedule coming up.
The team had 8 days off in July, which I think really helped rest the bullpen and made managing those games more palatable. Starting today they have 26 games in 27 days, including the Astros twice, the Jays, the Yankees, and the Dodgers. I think it's going to be a lot harder to have BP games in August than it was in July.
Lance Lynn has been atrocious this year and the Dodgers gave up a top 10ish prospect in their system for him, and his xFIP was respectable (around 4) but his xERA was around 5. I'd take a shot on Dallas Keuchel for nothing but JWH's money in the same vein. For better or worse, I think there are guys in that locker room who would still say "we get to play behind Dallas Keuchel!" and be more excited about it than "we get to play behind Kyle Barraclough, Joe Jacques and Richard Bleier..."
When the cost to "try him out" for two or three turns through the rotation while seeing what happens with Sale, etc, is "just" JWH's money and DFAing either Jacques or Bleier, I'd take that chance. But I know I'm in the vast minority here.
Last edited:
Your depictions of the minor league prospects are generally accurate, although everything that I have read about Mayer's performance in AA is that his underlying metrics are just fine--much Anthony's were in Salem despite his poor numbers--and his defense is said to have remained top notch, so I don't think it's fair to say that he is struggling. We can agree to disagree on that, of course.
EDIT: Mayer has a .220 BABIP in Portland, which is about 120 points lower than he's ever posted. Not suggesting that all of that is bad luck. BABIP is said to be a skill. But I think it's reasonable to assume that some of that is bad luck. He's also seeing a career-best 3.85 pitches per plate appearance. I can't find hard-hit stats, but the Sox Prospect guys said the percentage is still good, and Mayer does have 6 HR in about 170 at bats.
The main thing, though, is that the cavalry is already here. In fact, it's a large part of why the Sox found themselves in a position to potentially be buyers this deadline. Casas, Bello, Duran, Winck, Crawford, and Murphy have all been, at worst, solid major leaguers. They are all products of the Sox' minor league system. But that system is not yet at the point where it has true prospect level depth at most positions at every level. So with those players now up, you are correct that there is a gap until the next wave of prospects that are ready for the majors. What Bloom is trying to build toward is excellent depth at nearly every position at every level. And as you noted, that's what all the good teams are building toward. So the Sox are not there yet, but they are making demonstrable progress. I agree with you that it's another year to two before we start to see the organization churning out majory league ready players every year.
The good news is that with so much young talent on the big league right now, plus Devers and Yoshida locked up for years to come, plus salary flexibility, the Sox should be able to credibly contend for the division next year, and perhaps for a championship the year after that. From there, the hope is that the exciting prospects in the lower to mid minors start showing up in the majors.
Last edited:
The latter for me. Not only because of the relative uncertainty of the draft (compared to the NBA or NFL) but because those marginal improvements that get a team close to the playoffs end up mattering a lot, both for individual progress and team chemistry. I'd only consider voting "tank" in unusual circumstances like "it's a virtually meaningless 60-game season". But otherwise, the worst-to-first turnarounds are rare, so if your team tanks you could well be in for 3-4 seasons' worth of suck.
It's the latter for me also. It definitely will hurt for a short time if they fall a game or two short of reaching the playoffs, but the feeling won't last two long after having been able to witness four World Championship's. All I want now for any season is for them not to suck.
Now Kike figures it out in the batter's box!
https://dodgersnation.com/dodgers-news-kike-hernandez-reveals-swing-changes-hes-made-since-coming-to-la/2023/08/03/
https://dodgersnation.com/dodgers-news-kike-hernandez-reveals-swing-changes-hes-made-since-coming-to-la/2023/08/03/
Good for him. He seems like a very likable guy, and I'm pleased he's figured some stuff out.
If he were putting up the exact line he's putting up in LAD in Boston .294/.294/.412/.706 for an 87 OPS+ I'd still say "trade him for what we got"; the only difference is I'd have DFA'ed Arroyo first (and I'd still DFA Arroyo today).
Can we start another Thread on Off-season Trade Approach? Another on Free Agents?
Deadline is gone.
Deadline is gone.
We are 5 days away from the anniversary of the "what does 2023 look like" thread. I might do a big 2024 thing to celebrate if anyone is interested.
