From Evan Grant of the
Dallas Morning News, the Red Sox, Marlins and Tigers are the top trade matches for Rangers' catching talent, with Boston at the top of the pile.
Quote
There seems to be the closest thing to a foundation for a match with the Red Sox. Boston is seeking a long-term replacement for Jason Varitek and has some attractive young pitching depth. The Rangers like (i think in this order): Clay I am an Idiot, Michael Bowden, Justin Masterson. The Red Sox like (I think in this order): Taylor Teagarden, Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Gerald Laird. Here's a hypothetical situation I kind of laid out earlier in the week: It wouldn't surprise me if the Rangers are asking for I am an Idiot and danging Saltalamacchia and the Red Sox are asking for Teagarden. Easy solution: Ask Boston to substitute I am an Idiot. But it's never that easy for either team. Teagarden is the catcher the Rangers most want to hold on to and I am an Idiot is the pitcher the Red Sox most want. If you get to the point of exchanging them one-for-one, it means both teams have been willing to compromise that to get something they really want, they are going to have to give up something they really don't want to give up.
.
From Evan's colleague
Mike Hindman:
Quote
Boston wants Taylor Teagarden and Texas wants Clay Buchholz. Texas would like to get Buchholz -- a Nederland, Texas native -- for Jarrod Saltalamacchia or Gerald Laird. Boston would like to get Teagarden for Justin Masterson or Michael Bowden. Utlimately, Jon Daniels and Theo Epstein -- who are fairly close and who have turned to one another more than once in the past to hammer out what they thought was a mutually beneficial deal -- will settle on Jarrod Saltalmacchia or Gerald Laird for the big, Jamaican-born Justin Masterson.
From Amalie Benjamin's
mailbag:
Quote
the talk of Saltalamacchia has heated up (as well as Taylor Teagarden, with Gerald Laird lagging behind because of a theory that some pitchers aren't all that keen about throwing to him).
Yikes. Gerald Laird = Paul Lo Duca? That's the first I've seen or heard of this theory.
I'm more inclined to believe Laird's 2009 salary is what puts him at the bottom of the list -- he made $1.6M last season and after improving to .276/.329/.398 he'll probably net around $3M in another arbitration year. Not that it's a prohibitive number for Boston's payroll, of course, but what type of value over replacement would they be getting for that kind of money -- especially if they give up one of their top pitching prospects to get him?
Bear in mind he's just one season removed from a .224/.278/.349 line in a career-high 120 games. No matter how you slice it, that's worse than Tek's 2008. Laird's never embraced the base on balls, and he turned 29 a couple days ago, so how much improvement could be expected in his on-base abilities? Not much, I'm afraid. And he's probably closer to his decline phase than some may want to believe.
This post has been edited by mabrowndog: 15 November 2008 - 08:50 AM
"Taking a chick ballroom dancing is the fastest way into her pants short of The Weebs Method." -- Maalox
"That thread requires a password. What is P & G?" -- John W Henry
"Chuck certainly sounds like a party starter." -- CHB's intelligent critique of Frisbetarian's Defensive Efficiency article from the 2010 MSP Annual