24 replies to this topic

[BrianFromWaltham]

If Schilling doesn't come back who will replace him. 13 mill is a steal, for 15 wins and a sub 4.00 era. How much did the scubs get signed for this year 11/12 million a year? It's not my money but zambrano sure would be nice. Even Willis would look good in a sox uniform. Any ideas?

[Boo Ferriss' Ghost]

1) Zambrano will either resign with the Cubs, or cost 17+ per year.
2) Willis will still be in arbitration, and would cost a haul.
3) Beckett-Papelbon-Lester-Matsuzaka-Wakefield/I am an Idiot

[Bosoxman2004]

Schilling first has to prove he can provide that 15 wins and sub 4.00 era going into his age 40 season.

I don't see 13 million being a steal until G38 goes out there and accomplishes those stats. However if G38 does leave I see the front office continuing to build their staff with YOUNG guys who can provide the same type of expectations as G38 can provide.

Lester I see replacing wakefield when 2008 starts. I am an Idiot and Bowden will be ready later in 08. 2 guys I can see the sox making attempts at will be in trade and they are Santana and Peavy. 2 guys who fit their mold of younger guys with good peripherials.

One thing I've noticed in the recent past with the exception of Clement the front office has sort of shied away from going hard after "free" agents and have really built their staff with trades, posting and through the draft.

Beckett, Schilling, Dice-K, Papelbon, Lester, I am an Idiot, Bowden have all been aquired in these ways.

[Quintananana]

One thing I've noticed in the recent past with the exception of Clement the front office has sort of shied away from going hard after "free" agents and have really built their staff with trades, posting and through the draft.

Beckett, Schilling, Dice-K, Papelbon, Lester, I am an Idiot, Bowden have all been aquired in these ways.

You've noticed this, huh? Have you also noticed that I am an Idiot and Bowden have not been part of the staff yet?? They're still just prospects. Also, Dice-K... kind of a new thing for the Sox (we definately have not used the posting for building a staff in the past).

From Free Agency...

Wakefield
Tavarez
Clement
Piniero
Romero
Timlin

and not too long ago...
Embree
Wade Miller

I think they've gone through FA just as much as they've had to. As any team would prefer, they've tried to bring up their own prospects and are for the first time in awhile, actually having some success with it (especially pitchers).

[Kevin Jewkilis]

Seeing as we have 5 starters under contract for next year, I think the bigger question is who gets left out? Does the team decline Wakefield's option? Move Papelbon or Beckett back into the bullpen?

The off-season is many months away, and I think we need to see how Wake and Schilling hold up as they age, how Papelbon and Matsuzaka adapt, and whether Beckett (and Lester) bounce back. While I'm optimistic on all counts, we won't know for sure.

[Kyle C.]

My guess is the team declines Wake's option and Lester replaces Schilling in the rotation.

Matsuzaka, Beckett, Papelbon, Lester, Possibly Wake/ I am an Idiot.

[ichirob4ichiro]

Matsuzaka, Beckett, Papelbon, Lester,... I am an Idiot.

In a year or two, with Hansen closing, on paper, that looks pretty sick. But we are truly getting ahead of ourselves here. One more year with Schill would just add needed expirence that that rotation would seemingly lack.

[Kyle C.]

In a year or two, with Hansen closing, on paper, that looks pretty sick. But we are truly getting ahead of ourselves here. One more year with Schill would just add needed expirence that that rotation would seemingly lack.

Much agreed, I love the way the rotation could look a few years down the road if everything pans out the way it is supposed to. Schill like mentioned by Ichiro is a great bringer of experience to this young staff and should provide that veteran leadership throughout the season until when he is let go of next year.

[tyrol9]

I think one thing you guys are all forgetting is the high attrition rate of prospects, especially pitching prospects. Granted Buchholz and Bowden look good, if not great, on paper, but they still haven't even done anything past AA. I'm not saying they don't have the ability to become solid major league pitchers, but to count on them to step into the middle of a pennant race and perform the way Lester and Pap did is really the exception, not the rule. And yes, you could point to Street or Verlander or Liriano or whoever you want, but it is still pretty rare that a young guy steps right in and performs.

That being said, all other things being equal, at least right now, I could see either Beckett, Pap, or Matsuzaka stepping into the #1 role (maybe not an ace but a #1) and everyone else filling in, with Lester as your #4 and Wakefield as your #5. And as far as them not picking up Wakefield's option... ARE YOU GUYS NUTS?! He makes $4 million a year. Even as a middle reliever, that's still decent value in today's market. As a guy who you can pencil in for 180ish innings every year of league-average pitching, that's worth more than double that. That's before even taking into account what he means to that clubhouse and this city.

[Kyle C.]

I think one thing you guys are all forgetting is the high attrition rate of prospects, especially pitching prospects. Granted Buchholz and Bowden look good, if not great, on paper, but they still haven't even done anything past AA. I'm not saying they don't have the ability to become solid major league pitchers, but to count on them to step into the middle of a pennant race and perform the way Lester and Pap did is really the exception, not the rule. And yes, you could point to Street or Verlander or Liriano or whoever you want, but it is still pretty rare that a young guy steps right in and performs.

That being said, all other things being equal, at least right now, I could see either Beckett, Pap, or Matsuzaka stepping into the #1 role (maybe not an ace but a #1) and everyone else filling in, with Lester as your #4 and Wakefield as your #5. And as far as them not picking up Wakefield's option... ARE YOU GUYS NUTS?! He makes $4 million a year. Even as a middle reliever, that's still decent value in today's market. As a guy who you can pencil in for 180ish innings every year of league-average pitching, that's worth more than double that. That's before even taking into account what he means to that clubhouse and this city.

I certainly agree with the point you made about I am an Idiot and Bowden not doing anything above Triple A so we shouldn't just pencil them in to the rotation as I did a few posts prior.

For the second part about Wakes option, sure it is a great deal to sign Wake for cheap money every year to be a league average guy in your rotation. Heck anybody would want that, but Wake still this season needs to pitch league average or better to get that option for next season. I wouldn't like him in middle relief rather then as a long man spot guy in the pen. The point I was going to make earlier is just that I don't think that Wake will have the solid season that he usually has, which would hinder him from getting his option picked up. If he doesn't get his option signed then I could see one of the younger ones getting the call. If he gets his option then Bowden and I am an Idiot can get AAA time.

[tmorgan]

Schill leaving would move Lester into the rotation and keep Wake in the rotation. I would guess that next year if Schill returns Wake would move to the 'pen for Lester to take his spot, but if Schill goes, Wake stays. Picking up Wake's option is a better deal than testing the the FA market for relief pitching or picking up Taverez's option.

I doubt that Schill can be signed for $13 mil after ST. The only shot during the season is probably during the AS break if Schill doesn't go because I don't think he would want to be distracted by contract talks while pitching and acting as his own agent. I still think somebody else is going to be willing to offer at least 2/30 for him at the end of the season that the RS will either have to match or let him go.

[judyb]

Who was going to replace Schilling in the rotation in '08 when everyone thought he was going to retire? What's changed? The Red Sox spent over $100M to get Matsuzaka here, locked up Beckett, moved Papelbon back to the rotation, and have held onto Lester, among others, all while assuming Schilling would be gone after '07. What's different now?

[Hello]

Considering the work of art that is Wakefield's contract (from the Red Sox perspective) he would have to literally lose his right arm for the Red Sox to decline it.

At $4M, if he even just serves as the Sox swing man, he is worth the money.

The Sox signed Piniero who isn't even close to matching Wakefield's importance to a $4M contract.

Anyway, if the Sox have 5 starters under contract for next season (I only count 4 including Lester, but I suppose people are counting I am an Idiot or Bowden) then the Sox still pick up his option and use him wherever necessary, be it the rotation or bullpen.

[Quintananana]

Who was going to replace Schilling in the rotation in '08 when everyone thought he was going to retire? What's changed? The Red Sox spent over $100M to get Matsuzaka here, locked up Beckett, moved Papelbon back to the rotation, and have held onto Lester, among others, all while assuming Schilling would be gone after '07. What's different now?

While I don't like posting "Yes, I agree", because that just ends up filling the threads with nonsense, but while reading these posts, that's the same conclusion I've come to myself. They've been planning for this for a year or two now and the only question about whether or not we REALLY try to sign Schilling will be based on basically two things. Papelbon's success in the rotation this season (and in turn, the ability to find a suitable closer). And second, Lester's recovery and ability to find his groove again. Of course the fact is, if Dice-K or Beckett fails during the season, that could cause the necessary signing of Schilling as well but I think they are less likely. I think Dice-K will be fine if not great, and I think Beckett can only improve while he learns when to throw certain pitches, because that seemed to be his biggest problem last season. Wake... is, well, what he is. He's not going to win 15 games again and he'll never be a #2 or #3 guy again most likely. But hey, he's a great #5 pitcher for our rotation. And for the cost, he is a real bargain especially with his versatility.

Barring the FA signing/Trade/Injury replacent that is going to happen, I'll take this rotation next season...

Dice-K
Beckett
Papelbon
Lester
Wakefield

W/a few minor leaguers (I am an Idiot, etc) waiting in the wings if needed.

The bottom four seems like it was the plan all along for Schilling retiring. The only real difference I think is that they planned on Beckett maybe being the #1 guy and bringing in a #2 or 3 guy this past offseason. But when Beckett failed a bit last season, Dice-K stepped into the roll as Schilling replacement and just moved the other four down the list. I think unless someone gets hurt pretty bad this year, or someone really bombs, the Sox will make a reasonable offer for Schilling but won't get into a bidding war over him.

[Hello]

They've been planning for this for a year or two now and the only question about whether or not we REALLY try to sign Schilling will be based on basically two things. Papelbon's success in the rotation this season (and in turn, the ability to find a suitable closer). And second, Lester's recovery and ability to find his groove again.

I think if either or both of those things happen and Schilling even has a decent year, he will be resigned.

However, I think resigning Schilling has more to do with how Schilling performs than how the rest of the rotation performs.

If he does well in 2007, regardless of how the others do, I think he gets an extension...at that point, you could see one of the other starters being traded away for something of need or good prospects.

[Quintananana]

I think if either or both of those things happen and Schilling even has a decent year, he will be resigned.

However, I think resigning Schilling has more to do with how Schilling performs than how the rest of the rotation performs.

If he does well in 2007, regardless of how the others do, I think he gets an extension...at that point, you could see one of the other starters being traded away for something of need or good prospects.

We COULD, yes. But should we?? Hell no! You say that it has more to do with how Schilling performs than how the rest of the rotation does? Are you serious? If Paps performs well, Lester shows that he has recovered and reached the level that he was at before being diagnosed with cancer, Dice-K really is a stud, and Beckett returns to the form he was once at and somewhere where we hoped he would become.... Which one would you trade for one more year of Schilling? Hmmm?? The answer is: None of them!! No way you trade one of those four for another year of Schilling! If you want to use one of our pitchers to fill a need? Use the money that would be saved by NOT signing Schilling. That makes a LOT more sense. The only way Schilling comes back, is as a necessity because someone else in the rotation didnt pan out, or got hurt. Or... Because he had such an amazing year that we would rather pay to keep him than have to face him. And in that case, the one youre describing, no one get's traded to find room for him. They would just be forced to move the worst of the other 5 to the bullpen for the time being.

[marsrover21]

I think if either or both of those things happen and Schilling even has a decent year, he will be resigned.

However, I think resigning Schilling has more to do with how Schilling performs than how the rest of the rotation performs.

If he does well in 2007, regardless of how the others do, I think he gets an extension...at that point, you could see one of the other starters being traded away for something of need or good prospects.

I agree with you here. But I don't think the Sox have their proverbial toes in the vice as far as Schilling goes. As we have seen w/ Lowe and Pedro, the Sox have no problem cutting pitchers they perceive as too old. Even w/o the Rooks and if Schilling does not resign, we have a darn good rotation w/ Monster, Beck, Lester, Paps and Wake being the best number five in the league. Now, the only problem here is if someone gets injured, we don't really have a sixth starter, but I guess that is what the rooks are for. Barring an extension for Tavarez of course.

[Bosoxman2004]

You've noticed this, huh? Have you also noticed that I am an Idiot and Bowden have not been part of the staff yet?? They're still just prospects. Also, Dice-K... kind of a new thing for the Sox (we definately have not used the posting for building a staff in the past).

From Free Agency...

Wakefield
Tavarez
Clement
Piniero
Romero
Timlin

and not too long ago...
Embree
Wade Miller

I think they've gone through FA just as much as they've had to. As any team would prefer, they've tried to bring up their own prospects and are for the first time in awhile, actually having some success with it (especially pitchers).

Actually I was referring to their STARTING staff considering the title of the thread has to do with Schilling. THIS front office has signed ONE current starting pitcher to a free agent contract, that being matt clement. And even clement follows their philosphy of a slightly younger pitcher with decent peripherials.

What I was trying to convey with my post was the fact that this front office has really upped their efforts of trying to go after younger starting pitching without having to get into a financial bidding process against other teams.

At the same time they have used the opposite strategy with their bullpen because relievers are so hard to gauge from one year to the next, so they kind of employ a "throw it against the wall and see what sticks" focus there.

Finally I added I am an Idiot and Bowden to this to show that they are really focusing their attention on getting YOUNGER in their rotation which is my reasoning for wakefield either not getting picked up next year or moving to the bullpen. In fact i could see one or both of Buck or Bowden getting dealt in a trade to replace G38 if he's not resigned.

[rsnwest]

At the same time they have used the opposite strategy with their bullpen because relievers are so hard to gauge from one year to the next, so they kind of employ a "throw it against the wall and see what sticks" focus there.

This sparked an interest in Joe Nathan. IMHO, he's emerging as the best closer in the game. Twinkies can't afford him, and given a consensus here that the Sox will be set in the rotation (pleeeeeeeease) in 2008 - I say dump any remainig money in the farm or ona proven commodity.

Easier said than done, and this season has yet to start though, so I wouldn't count out Schill yet. I hope the Sox will pay (willingly) in 2008 for not extendinf the contract now.

Edited by rsnwest, 28 February 2007 - 02:55 AM.

[marsrover21]

This sparked an interest in Joe Nathan. IMHO, he's emerging as the best closer in the game. Twinkies can't afford him, and given a consensus here that the Sox will be set in the rotation (pleeeeeeeease) in 2008 - I say dump any remainig money in the farm or ona proven commodity.

Easier said then done. Nathan will most likely cost a farm hand or two to acquire in 2008 b/c the Twins are likely to pick up his option and trade him rather than let him go. Course it all depends on the draft pick compensation they would get for letting him walk. Either way, it will cost more than money to pick him up.

[UnfrozenCavemanGrebeck]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but won't Buerhle be available? If so, I wouldn't mind a rotation of Beckett, Dice-K, Buerhle, Papelbon, & Lester with Wakefield moving to the pen. 2 lefty starters? on the Red Sox? That would be pretty sweet




All that said, I'd still love to have Schill back here next season (with I am an Idiot as a late-season call-up rather than throwing him right into the fire)

Edited by JohnnyDamonsbarber, 28 February 2007 - 03:44 AM.

[Bosoxman2004]

I don't see the sox targetting a guy like nathan who obviously has a proven track record. They just don't seem to ever spend a lot of money on their closer, even Foulke came cheap by today's standards. So of the guys who could possibly be available after the upcoming season, I see them targetting someone like Scott Linebrink who is 2 years younger than nathan and would undoubtably be cheaper.


Nathan will probably command at least a 3 or 4 contract in upwards of 10 million plus per season. At 33 years old on opening day 2008 i just don't see the sox paying him into his age 37 or 38 season.

The greatest coup would be if Pineiro could show nathanesque numbers as they are very similar, both failed as starters although honestly Pineiro had more success as a starter. Also both are being converted to the bullpen at roughly the same age (28). IF Pineiro wins the closer battle and puts up a good to great year the sox have an option for 2008.

[TPetey]

I don't see the sox targetting a guy like nathan who obviously has a proven track record. They just don't seem to ever spend a lot of money on their closer, even Foulke came cheap by today's standards. So of the guys who could possibly be available after the upcoming season, I see them targetting someone like Scott Linebrink who is 2 years younger than nathan and would undoubtably be cheaper.
Nathan will probably command at least a 3 or 4 contract in upwards of 10 million plus per season. At 33 years old on opening day 2008 i just don't see the sox paying him into his age 37 or 38 season.

The greatest coup would be if Pineiro could show nathanesque numbers as they are very similar, both failed as starters although honestly Pineiro had more success as a starter. Also both are being converted to the bullpen at roughly the same age (28). IF Pineiro wins the closer battle and puts up a good to great year the sox have an option for 2008.

I agree that Joe Nathan, as great as he's been, is the last thing on the minds of the FO -- regardless of whether or not Pineiro pans out at all, much less at the level of a pitcher with ridiculously good rate stats, like Nathan. They simply have too many low-cost options, either already on the ML roster, or rapidly on the way. Do the names Craig Hansen and Bryce Cox ring any bells?

Moreover, they believe a lights-out closer is less important than an effective 4th or 5th starter (witness Papelbon's transition). The difference between a great closer and an average closer just isn't that large. After all, Detroit managed to reach the World Series with effective starting pitching and Todd Jones at the back end of their bullpen.

A great closer is a nice smooth icing; it's not the cake. Don't overpay for a fancy one at the store if you can make a passable one in your own kitchen.

[doc]

I agree that Joe Nathan, as great as he's been, is the last thing on the minds of the FO -- regardless of whether or not Pineiro pans out at all, much less at the level of a pitcher with ridiculously good rate stats, like Nathan. They simply have too many low-cost options, either already on the ML roster, or rapidly on the way. Do the names Craig Hansen and Bryce Cox ring any bells?

Moreover, they believe a lights-out closer is less important than an effective 4th or 5th starter (witness Papelbon's transition). The difference between a great closer and an average closer just isn't that large. After all, Detroit managed to reach the World Series with effective starting pitching and Todd Jones at the back end of their bullpen.

A great closer is a nice smooth icing; it's not the cake. Don't overpay for a fancy one at the store if you can make a passable one in your own kitchen.

I caught an interesting stat about a month ago but can't find the link if I can I'll post it, but essentially over the last 73 years the team ahead at the bottom of the 8th wins the game close to 80% of the time. So a truly great closer adds to that, but it is also why a decent pitcher like Todd Jones can save 34 games or so.

[Kyle C.]

I caught an interesting stat about a month ago but can't find the link if I can I'll post it, but essentially over the last 73 years the team ahead at the bottom of the 8th wins the game close to 80% of the time. So a truly great closer adds to that, but it is also why a decent pitcher like Todd Jones can save 34 games or so.

Much agreed, Nathan would ofcourse be a great addition to the team but the price would be through the roof to aquire him.

Isn't this thread about who replaces Schilling in the rotation anyway? I am really interested in what Johnny Damon's Barber brought up with Buerhle. He is a solid starter who given the right price wouldn't bother me to much in the rotation alongside; Beckett, Matsuzaka, Papelbon and Lester/Wake. He has had some decent stats in his career. The only thing I don't like about him is his terrible amount of K's and I'm pretty sure he is the guy who gets stolen on repetedly.