According to sources, the Red Sox had planned to at least engage Cespedes, whose four-year, $36 million contract signed originally with the Oakland A’s expires after next season, on a possible extension. Initially, the Red Sox considered offering the 30-year-old Cespedes, who hit .260 with 22 homers and 100 RBI for the A’s and Boston this past season, a four- to five-year deal, and had had some preliminary discussions with his then-agent, Adam Katz. But then a couple of months ago, Cespedes fired Katz and hired Roc Nation, which — like it did with Robinson Cano — is expected to seek a much larger, long-term contract and make a big splash about it.
I can understand a Cano-type deal might give the FO serious concerns about the signability of Cespedes, and exploring trade possibilities. However the other reasons, other than contract duration, given by the Daily News Bill Madden, was far more interesting.
Two other reasons the Red Sox are open to dealing Cespedes are his open disenchantment with Boston and his refusal to pay any heed to their coaches. “He marches to his own drum and the coaches all hate him,” said a Red Sox insider.
I can understand a Cano-type deal might give the FO serious concerns about the signability of Cespedes, and exploring trade possibilities. However the other reasons, other than contract duration, given by the Daily News Bill Madden, was far more interesting.
Okay maybe he like congas and the coaches like snares, but the coaches "hate him" Really?
Was there any indication during the brief time he was with the Sox that Cespedes was a problem?
I can understand a Cano-type deal might give the FO serious concerns about the signability of Cespedes, and exploring trade possibilities. However the other reasons, other than contract duration, given by the Daily News Bill Madden, was far more interesting.
Okay maybe he like congas and the coaches like snares, but the coaches "hate him" Really?
Was there any indication during the brief time he was with the Sox that Cespedes was a problem?
There's some anti-chemistry tale being circulated about Cespedes, but as far as chemistry is concerned, the Oakland Athletics just about collapsed without him, and not even Good Lester could help them.
There's some anti-chemistry tale circulating about Cespedes, but as far as chemistry is concerned, the Oakland Athletics just about collapsed without him, and not even Good Lester could help them.
Two months is long enough to develop *HATE*? Hardly seems like that would be enough time for the coaches to have even developed a little rapport at all.
Two months is long enough to develop *HATE*? Hardly seems like that would be enough time for the coaches to have even developed a little rapport at all.
I get we don't want it to be true. But, yeah it sure fucking is enough time. I have been a coach and it took me two days to hate working with some of the athletes I had. You tell them to do something and they don't do it. You talk to them about it, and get a shitty answer or outright disrespect, yeah opposite of Shawshank, it is fair to say you hate them right off. Then you have to balance how much this asshole gives you vs. how much he takes away with his shitty attitude. There may be reasons to question this report but the brevity of his tenure is not one.
There are also reasons to believe it, though we don't want to, Billy Beane turfed him for a couple months of Lester.
The Red Sox had four major trade chips going into the deadline, and I think it's safe to say they would have been ranked in the following order:
1) Lester 2)Lackey 3)Uehara 4) Miller. At this point the decision to hold on to Uehara looks questionable and I'd bet that many on this board would consider the return they got for Miller the best of the three they traded.
The Red Sox had four major trade chips going into the deadline, and I think it's safe to say they would have been ranked in the following order:
1) Lester 2)Lackey 3)Uehara 4) Miller. At this point the decision to hold on to Uehara looks questionable and I'd bet that many on this board would consider the return they got for Miller the best of the three they traded.
The bolded is yet to be determined - if Ben can get acquire two major frontline pitchers this winter and the Red Sox are competitive again, a full season of Yoenis Cespedes could be very valuable even if they lose him a year from now.
IMO, this is just BS emanating from the true issue at play here. Money.
When he was acquired from Oakland he was firmly in the mindset that he'd be a free agent at the end of next year if he was still in Oakland, or second option was he'd be a 2015 deadline trade, which would keep him in the same mindset. The 2014 trade to the Sox changed that somewhat, possibly made him think about an extension where the 2014 dollars get gobbled up in a bigger deal. So likely internal discussions have been had, Roc Nation wants an 8-10 year deal, we know what this organization thinks of that, and here we are. Shopping a guy while he's got a year under contract. Couple that with the fact that we are heavy on right handed bats and the play makes sense.
I just don't buy the hate rumors. Not saying its not possible, but I think the trade makes sense from a financial and balancing the batting lineup perspective and I think we'd be stupid not to see what we can get for him. The Cuban success in the majors vibe has never been higher. Only takes one.
If Roc Nation is telling him he's going to get 8-10 he should sue for malpractice. He's not that good a player. Something like 5/90 is his ceiling, or ought to be in a rational market.
If Roc Nation is telling him he's going to get 8-10 he should sue for malpractice. He's not that good a player. Something like 5/90 is his ceiling, or ought to be in a rational market.
The bolded is yet to be determined - if Ben can get acquire two major frontline pitchers this winter and the Red Sox are competitive again, a full season of Yoenis Cespedes could be very valuable even if they lose him a year from now.
The Red Sox had four major trade chips going into the deadline, and I think it's safe to say they would have been ranked in the following order:
1) Lester 2)Lackey 3)Uehara 4) Miller. At this point the decision to hold on to Uehara looks questionable and I'd bet that many on this board would consider the return they got for Miller the best of the three they traded.
It makes a lot of sense for a small-market team to trade for Cespedes + prospects. It allows them to show their fan base that they aren't waving the white flag, and Cespedes is likely to net a pick in the 2016 draft after he declines a QO and signs elsewhere.'
He can't be offered a QO. Furthermore, there's a lot of decent OF's available via FA. The idea that some team is going to give up one of their best starting pitchers for a year of Cespedes really doesn't make sense. If Cherington can get someone like Latos, he's GM of the year.
I don't think anyone is suggesting it'd be a straight up trade for someone like Latos. I don't think a Cespedes + prospects for Latos deal is a complete stretch though, it just depends on what you're willing to include with him.
Cespedes has a .318 wOBA and a .326 wOBA the last two years. The average AL outfielder was .317 in 2014. He is more than worth his current contract and is a nice piece to have, but I feel like he's wildly overrated generally due to the highlight throws and dingers.
He can't be offered a QO. Furthermore, there's a lot of decent OF's available via FA. The idea that some team is going to give up one of their best starting pitchers for a year of Cespedes really doesn't make sense. If Cherington can get someone like Latos, he's GM of the year.
I didn't think it was possible to agree in advance not to offer a QO, but I don't fully understand the rules governing these foreign free agents. Maybe he technically has the right to demand that he be non-tendered, which of course wouldn't give rise to an opportunity to extend a QO.
I didn't think it was possible to agree in advance not to offer a QO, but I don't fully understand the rules governing these foreign free agents. Maybe he technically has the right to demand that he be non-tendered, which of course wouldn't give rise to an opportunity to extend a QO.
Cespedes has a .318 wOBA and a .326 wOBA the last two years. The average AL outfielder was .317 in 2014. He is more than worth his current contract and is a nice piece to have, but I feel like he's wildly overrated generally due to the highlight throws and dingers.
That skillset still tends to earn more money than a less flashy player of equivalent value, and might also return more in trade. I would be pretty surprised if the Red Sox did extend him without overpaying him.
He can't be offered a QO. Furthermore, there's a lot of decent OF's available via FA. The idea that some team is going to give up one of their best starting pitchers for a year of Cespedes really doesn't make sense. If Cherington can get someone like Latos, he's GM of the year.
Seriously you have two steroid users - Cabrera and Cruz. You have Cuddyer who is 35 and coming off an injury. You have Aoki who is all right.
However if you are looking for a power hitting LF, you are going to be hard pressed to find anything close to Cespedes on the market without an asterisk next to their name and a huge price tag.
Seriously you have two steroid users - Cabrera and Cruz. You have Cuddyer who is 35 and coming off an injury. You have Aoki who is all right.
However if you are looking for a power hitting LF, you are going to be hard pressed to find anything close to Cespedes on the market without an asterisk next to their name and a huge price tag.
He's a solid player but that's about it. I personally could not justify giving a player anything near $100M after he just posted a .318 OBP on the year. As for the coaching issues? If true, he needs to go immediately. I don't think this team has the time or space for that kind of an issue to linger into next season.
Also, I've been reading various blurbs on the 'net. There seems to be a belief that Philly is not interested at all in Cespedes, hence we shouldn't expect him to be a piece in, say, a deal for Hamels. Regarding a trade for Latos, I think we would have to provide more than just Cespedes. Also, I don't think such a deal would make sense for the Reds because they're trying to limit salary. Latos is a free agent in 2016, same as Cespedes. They'd be better off just keeping Latos, because he's a better pitcher than Cespedes is a hitter.
Bradford weighs in, saying at least some of the NY Daily News report is untrue:
“All the coaches hate him” is a statement that is just not true. Were there some coaches who were frustrated with Cespedes because of some of the aforementioned issues [not agreeing to play right field, etc]? Absolutely. But talk to straight-talking assistant hitting coach Victor Rodriguez about his work with the righty hitter, and he will offer a detailed look into how Cespedes approached his day-to-day quest to eliminate a well-publicized hole in his swing.
There is a genuine concern that the Red Sox are able to get back the single-minded focus they implemented on Day 1 of spring training in 2013, which makes Cespedes’ uneven two months with the team open for scrutiny. But the organizational hope is some of those bumps in the road are ironed out thanks to the work in Fort Myers, and even the motivation of a contract year.
Still, as Bradford notes, we have too many outfielders, and at least one has to be moved this winter. Wouldn't be shocking to me if it were Cespedes, simply because of the potential price of the extension plus the inability to make a qualifying offer.
Melky Cabrera, Nelson Cruz, Nick Markakis, Michael Cuddyer are probably the best out there, and then you've got guys like Michael Morse, Colby Rasmus, Alex Rios, Aoki, Gomes, and Torii Hunter who could be worthwhile gambles on a 1-year deal (which is all you get Cespdes for). Are those guys as good as Cespedes, probably not...but I'd rather have Latos and one of them than Cespedes and no Latos.
Giving up a year of Latos for one year of Cespedes doesn't make a ton of sense, esp. since they can't get a pick when Cespedes walks.
If the Reds are trying to contend (the only reason they'd want Cespedes), why int he world would they give up Latos? Wouldn't they be much more likely to give up prospects? If they are willing to move Latos, wouldn't they be able to get a player they'd control a lot more than one year of Cespedes?
Why doesn't it make sense to give up one year of something you are deep in (starting pitching) for one year of somewhere you are thin (the outfield)? If the Reds are looking to compete in 2015, they should be trying to assemble the most complete and well rounded roster they can. Additionally, if they don't think they can afford to extend both Latos and Cueto, they should use one of them to improve their team this winter if they can. I'd pick Latos to be the trade bait if I was in their shoes and Cespedes lengthens their lineup and adds some power. It's going to take more than that from the Sox to get it done, but if Ben calls Walt Jocketty and asks to discuss prospects to add to a Cespedes for Latos swap, he's not going to be hung up on.
If they are interested in Cespedes to build around, I'm probably drawing the line somewhere before Swihart, Devers, Owens or Rodriguez, but Cespedes and Margot or Cespedes and two lesser prospects like Ranaudo (or Webster or Barnes ect) and Coyle are deals I'm happy to make and which make sense for the Reds. I might be higher on Latos than some posters in that I'm willing to add Margot to a deal built around Cespedes, but there's room for reasonable minds to disagree there.
Bradford weighs in, saying at least some of the NY Daily News report is untrue:
Still, as Bradford notes, we have too many outfielders, and at least one has to be moved this winter. Wouldn't be shocking to me if it were Cespedes, simply because of the potential price of the extension plus the inability to make a qualifying offer.
Talk about damning with faint praise. He works on his hitting...was there any doubt about that? He certainly fits into the Fenway LF tradition of being less-than-obsessed about working on his fielding.
Well it has temporarily taken the form of Yoenis Cespedes but its final form may be yet to come. One way to look at this is a slowly-developing three-team deal.
Melky Cabrera, Nelson Cruz, Nick Markakis, Michael Cuddyer are probably the best out there, and then you've got guys like Michael Morse, Colby Rasmus, Alex Rios, Aoki, Gomes, and Torii Hunter who could be worthwhile gambles on a 1-year deal (which is all you get Cespdes for). Are those guys as good as Cespedes, probably not...but I'd rather have Latos and one of them than Cespedes and no Latos.
Giving up a year of Latos for one year of Cespedes doesn't make a ton of sense, esp. since they can't get a pick when Cespedes walks.
If the Reds are trying to contend (the only reason they'd want Cespedes), why int he world would they give up Latos? Wouldn't they be much more likely to give up prospects? If they are willing to move Latos, wouldn't they be able to get a player they'd control a lot more than one year of Cespedes?
Because the Reds have pitching but need a RHH OF power bat. The Reds can role with a rotation of Cueto/Bailey/Leake/Simon/Cincragi with Stephenson and Lorenzen for depth.
They have too many starters and desperately need a RHH corner OF bat with pop.
There's some anti-chemistry tale being circulated about Cespedes, but as far as chemistry is concerned, the Oakland Athletics just about collapsed without him, and not even Good Lester could help them.
So you are saying Cespedes' clubhouse value exceeds the combination of Jon Lester and Jonny Gomes. Sign him now, no matter the cost, and fire all those malcontent coaches.
Why? The team that gets Latos can't control him any longer than Cespedes. The only differentiator other than on-field value is that the team with Latos can get a draft pick. Otherwise I think Cespedes-for-Latos is a reasonably close swap. We'd have to throw a prospect or two in, but it shouldn't need to be anybody we'd cry too hard about losing.
My point is that if they are dangling Latos, they can get someone who they would control longer than Cespedes. Or, they could sign someone like Torii Hunter to a one year deal,and keep Latos. Or they could trade Leake.
Trading Latos significantly diminishes their chances at contending. I don't think they are so strong and deep with starters that they would make such a move.
Agree to disagree, I guess. I will be ecstatic if they can pull off a trade like this!
Torii Hunter is going to be 40 years old and was atrocious in the field last season. Sure, tucking him in left field mitigates some of that, but he's in decline all around, and at an age where he's more likely to be Mike Cameron (the Boston years) than something akin to the value Cespedes offers. When you can't hide his defense by DHing him, Hunter is going to be a well below average player.
Approximating Cespedes' value is no where near as easy as you are suggesting. I don't think anyone is arguing that a straight swap with no more significant pieces moving is likely. It'll take Cespedes plus some real minor league value to get Latos, but a move like that makes a lot of sense for both sides. And you still haven't explained why a one year asset from a position of depth for a one year asset to fill a hole doesn't make sense. You keep asserting they can get a piece they control more, but if they are contending, that piece needs to be a major league caliber player and average to above average to make sense for them. Who are these assets they can get instead of Cespedes and why are those teams willing to give that asset up for one year of Mat Latos?
I think the issue with the Reds dealing Latos for Cespedes is less about performance-related value and more about cost savings. The Reds want to reallocate resources to fill other roster holes, and while this trade would move money from starting pitching to the OF, it might not do enough for the Reds. So, a slightly different option might be for Cincinnati to add in Sean Marshall, who is owed $6.5M next year, a steep price for a guy who has been injured much of the past two seasons. The Sox would send back someone cheaper and cost-controlled. Would Workman be enough? I think they'd want a cheap pitcher with upside who can contribute in 2015. Maybe they'd want a lefty who could potentially replace Marshall in the pen now and move into a starting role later. Johnson or Escobar?
The only party that benefits from this questionable "leak" is one that's interested in acquiring him in trade. That should narrow down the sources and certainly excludes the Red Sox.
Why? The team that gets Latos can't control him any longer than Cespedes. The only differentiator other than on-field value is that the team with Latos can get a draft pick. Otherwise I think Cespedes-for-Latos is a reasonably close swap. We'd have to throw a prospect or two in, but it shouldn't need to be anybody we'd cry too hard about losing.
I don't know. If I was offered Latos for Cespedes basically straight up I'd accept it before they could change their mind. Cespedes is a decent player but he has below average OBP skills, doesn't seem like a great defender despite his arm and GG nomination, and may have attitude issues. Latos may not be an ace but he's a solid 27 year old pitcher who may be open to an extension. If Cespedes plus a lottery ticket or two gets Latos I'll be surprised but I'll gladly admit I was wrong if it happens.
I don't know. If I was offered Latos for Cespedes basically straight up I'd accept it before they could change their mind. Cespedes is a decent player but he has below average OBP skills, doesn't seem like a great defender despite his arm and GG nomination, and may have attitude issues. Latos may not be an ace but he's a solid 27 year old pitcher who may be open to an extension. If Cespedes plus a lottery ticket or two gets Latos I'll be surprised but I'll gladly admit I was wrong if it happens.
Yeah, I think Latos is underrated by some here. This situation reminds me a little of the Josh Beckett trade. Latos is a year older than Beckett was when he was traded. There are some significant differences, like Beckett's superior strikeout and walk rates, but their FIPs and xFIPs aren't that far off in their age 22 through 25 seasons. In fact, if I listed them blindly, I bet some people would guess them backwards.
Latos was obviously better in his age 26 season, so including that in the comparison would give it away. Latos is a really good young pitcher who is about to hit his prime years. Picking him up and extending him would be a great move and it won't (and shouldn't) come cheap. If Cespedes is part of the deal, an additional prospect cost is going to be significant. If Cespedes isn't involved, it's going to be a haul of prospects, though probably excluding Swihart, Devers and one of Owens or Rodriquez.
You can't compare 2002-05 raw FIP/xFIP numbers to 2010-13. Beckett's xFIP- for those years was 88, 78, 83, 84; Latos' was 80, 91, 97, 95. Latos is a good pitcher but he's not in Beckett's class.
And I think there's a little underrating of Cespedes going on here too. I mean, I don't particularly love him and I'm happy to move him, but he's a legit power hitter with decent albeit sometimes exasperating defense, and you have to be an awfully good starting pitcher to be worth substantially more than that. We're basically talking about a 3-3.5 win player versus a 3.5-4 win player plus a draft pick. That difference shouldn't cost a prospect arm and a leg, and if it does, you don't do that deal.
You can't compare 2002-05 raw FIP/xFIP numbers to 2010-13. Beckett's xFIP- for those years was 88, 78, 83, 84; Latos' was 80, 91, 97, 95. Latos is a good pitcher but he's not in Beckett's class.
And I think there's a little underrating of Cespedes going on here too. I mean, I don't particularly love him and I'm happy to move him, but he's a legit power hitter with decent albeit sometimes exasperating defense, and you have to be an awfully good starting pitcher to be worth substantially more than that. We're basically talking about a 3-3.5 win player versus a 3.5-4 win player plus a draft pick. That difference shouldn't cost a prospect arm and a leg, and if it does, you don't do that deal.
A significant part of the value with Latos is the possibility that you can immediately sign/extend him and lock up a top arm for his prime years. I think its hard to judge his value - and thus the necessary return - without knowing more information about whether or not he'd be willing to sign a long-term deal and how much AAV he'd be willing to sacrifice for the security of getting a 6-7 year deal in place this winter. Obviously there is lots of risk with an extension too but you don't get many chances to sign Top 15-20 pitchers long-term at market or market-friendly rates at age 27.
I don't know. If I was offered Latos for Cespedes basically straight up I'd accept it before they could change their mind. Cespedes is a decent player but he has below average OBP skills, doesn't seem like a great defender despite his arm and GG nomination, and may have attitude issues. Latos may not be an ace but he's a solid 27 year old pitcher who may be open to an extension. If Cespedes plus a lottery ticket or two gets Latos I'll be surprised but I'll gladly admit I was wrong if it happens.
I don't think you could get away with it being a lottery ticket. You would need to give someone with 2015 or at latest 2016 ML value and the majority of their control years still in-tact. Trading Cespedes to an offense starved, pitching rich Reds team would keep you from having to give a Betts/Owens/Swihart type, but I'd expect to send one of the borderline ML starters (RDLR, Webster, Ranaudo, Barnes, Escobar, Workman) and probably a solid but not blow you away AA/AAA piece. Marrero might interest them as Cozart sucks. Sean Coyle could also interest them as he'd be a worthwhile replacement for Brandon Phillips and could play third as well if Frazier is moved in a year or two when his price tag starts to climb.
The Reds have a pretty mediocre farm system overall too, so they would likely entertain the idea of getting back more by way of quantity than quality. Something like Cespedes, Barnes, Coyle, and Travis Shaw would probably be interesting to them. They need a 1B who isn't a black hole and Shaw would look to be a safe bet to at least be a solid average and OBP guy. Coyle has real upside and is a solid follow up to his 2014 season from shooting up prospect charts, Barnes has good starting potential still but is likely to be a solid late inning reliever at worst right when they'll be losing Chapman to free agency, and Cespedes is the go for it now move to keep fans happy.
I would add, Latos had a ton of missed time this year and barely broke 100 IP. I would expect that to have some legitimate negative impact on his trade value.
My point is that if they are dangling Latos, they can get someone who they would control longer than Cespedes. Or, they could sign someone like Torii Hunter to a one year deal,and keep Latos. Or they could trade Leake.
Trading Latos significantly diminishes their chances at contending. I don't think they are so strong and deep with starters that they would make such a move.
Agree to disagree, I guess. I will be ecstatic if they can pull off a trade like this!
Unless there was some massive Joey Votto news I missed, 1B is the last position the Reds need to fill, at least long term. I doubt they would be interested in Travis Shaw as the most attractive available stopgap if Votto's injury keeps him out to start the season.
I don't think you could get away with it being a lottery ticket. You would need to give someone with 2015 or at latest 2016 ML value and the majority of their control years still in-tact. Trading Cespedes to an offense starved, pitching rich Reds team would keep you from having to give a Betts/Owens/Swihart type, but I'd expect to send one of the borderline ML starters (RDLR, Webster, Ranaudo, Barnes, Escobar, Workman) and probably a solid but not blow you away AA/AAA piece. Marrero might interest them as Cozart sucks. Sean Coyle could also interest them as he'd be a worthwhile replacement for Brandon Phillips and could play third as well if Frazier is moved in a year or two when his price tag starts to climb.
The Reds have a pretty mediocre farm system overall too, so they would likely entertain the idea of getting back more by way of quantity than quality. Something like Cespedes, Barnes, Coyle, and Travis Shaw would probably be interesting to them. They need a 1B who isn't a black hole and Shaw would look to be a safe bet to at least be a solid average and OBP guy. Coyle has real upside and is a solid follow up to his 2014 season from shooting up prospect charts, Barnes has good starting potential still but is likely to be a solid late inning reliever at worst right when they'll be losing Chapman to free agency, and Cespedes is the go for it now move to keep fans happy.
I would add, Latos had a ton of missed time this year and barely broke 100 IP. I would expect that to have some legitimate negative impact on his trade value.
I agree with all of this except the last part. He had offseason knee surgery so he got a late start to the season. But other than that his IP totals have been 184, 194, 209 and 210. Unless you think the knee will linger I don't see any reason to think he has durability issues.
You can't compare 2002-05 raw FIP/xFIP numbers to 2010-13. Beckett's xFIP- for those years was 88, 78, 83, 84; Latos' was 80, 91, 97, 95. Latos is a good pitcher but he's not in Beckett's class.
And I think there's a little underrating of Cespedes going on here too. I mean, I don't particularly love him and I'm happy to move him, but he's a legit power hitter with decent albeit sometimes exasperating defense, and you have to be an awfully good starting pitcher to be worth substantially more than that. We're basically talking about a 3-3.5 win player versus a 3.5-4 win player plus a draft pick. That difference shouldn't cost a prospect arm and a leg, and if it does, you don't do that deal.
You are correct about raw FIP and xFIP. Now it's my turn to point at something we shouldn't do. Comparing pitcher and positional player WAR is tricky business and I don't think we can confidently state that the difference between Cespedes and Latos is in the neighborhood of a half a win. When you add in the fact that Cespedes won't net you a compensation pick and Latos will, the scales tip pretty far toward Latos. Maybe the Reds have to throw in a lottery ticket prospect to balance things out if it's Cespedes and Margot, but that really does feel like where the price should end up.
STEAMER 2015 WAR projections for Latos is 1.2 WAR.
Funny enough STEAMER has Clay Buchholz, Joe Kelly, Brandon Workman and Rubby de la Rosa with higher projections.
I'm not sure if thats an indictment of STEAMER's projections, WAR as a measure, or Matt Latos, but its enough to give me pause on sending Cespedes and Margot.
Hi! It looks like you are not logged in. SoSH has a bunch of content only available to users who have registered so we suggest creating one.
If you are seeing this because of a supposed issue using the site, all site outage notices will be posted to our official Twitter account at
SoSH on Twitter.
Thanks!
