61 replies to this topic

[Rovin Romine]

I was thinking about my fan experience today. (Always dangerous, I know.) I have to say that the lack of a #1 starter (however you want to define that) is the thing that makes this version of the Sox difficult to watch.

I actually enjoy all the AAA guys stepping up - it's by far the most enjoyable thing about the season. While Ortiz has been a very pleasant surprise, he's also something of a known quantity.

What I feel l lack is that anticipation for a specific starting pitcher. Back when we had a solid #1, I could always feel good about that start and then, I suppose, more charitable about the ups and downs of rookie starters, rehabbers, etc.

Up until 96 we had Clemens plus others (often good #2 and #3s)
97 sucked (Avery).
In 98, we got the 26 year old Pedro Martinez. (Too bad we couldn't trade Jimy Williams.)
Since then, it seems we've had legitimate #1s, though they sometimes went down due to injury (in 05, Clement seemed like the real deal in the beginning).

I think this season is particularly irksome for me because we haven't had any of the SPs take off. They haven't been exactly horrible if you isolate parts of each of their season thusfar, but each one of them has significant question marks and has been very uneven thusfar. Plus, no one really seems "poised" to do so, what with the injuries and whatnot.

I'm not trying to quibble about stats, but wanted to ask, does anyone else feel that if we had a solid #1, even at the expense of a garbage #5, the season would be much more enjoyable to watch?

Strasberg, Buchholz, Doubront, Morales, whomever?

NOT saying that's likely or anything, but in an odd way, doesn't that seem more subjectively exciting than our roster of maybe/maybenots?

I guess what I'm trying to say is that Lester has been the biggest disappointment of the season for me, but I didn't realize that until I started writing this post.

[SoxLegacy]

I agree with you in that the starting pitching from Beckett, Lester, and early on Buchholz has been a bit of rollercoaster ride so far, and one without many peaks. I've been pleasantly surprised by Doubront, and hope that he continues to mature as the season progresses, last night notwithstanding. Morales makes me nervous--really like what I've seen so far, but have my fingers crossed that he can keep it up if shifted to the rotation. If he can, and does, that would be very cool. Definitely on board with the disppointment regarding Lester. He's been my favorite pitcher these past couple of years, but it seems like he's regressing or standing still, and I am not sure why. I am sure that the Red Sox don't know either, and it's gotta be frustrating to the team. I wonder if he's more like a Mike Mussina type in that he doesn't want the "ace" status?

Not sure if someone like Strasburg would be a big difference maker for this team--I think the injuries have had a lot to do with the performance of the team so far,

As far as position players, I too like the performance of Nava and WMB, hoping Kalish joins in the hitting as well. I always have love for Ortiz and Pedey. Papi's year so far has been fun to see, and it looks like Pedroia is beginning to hit his way out of the slump. No if Gonzo can do that and we can get some of the injured folks back...

[Scott Cooper's Grand Slam]

Maybe it was seeing Kevin McNeil's painting in the STATS Auction forum but every time I read one of these threads all I hear is the poster sighing a wistful, "Damn, I miss Pedro."

Edited by Scott Cooper's Grand Slam, 26 June 2012 - 02:00 PM.

[alwyn96]

Of course it would be awesome to have another Hall of Fame pitcher in his prime pitching for the Red Sox. We've been extremely lucky to have some of the best pitchers in the history of baseball to watch.

I will say I wouldn't want a HoF pitcher if it came at the expense of wins, though. As rare and fantastic as watching a truly great player is, winning is pretty special too.

[SoxLegacy]

Maybe it was seeing Kevin McNeil's painting in the STATS Auction forum but every time I read one of these threads all I hear is the poster sighing a wistful, "Damn, I miss Pedro."

Boy, he was so good, wasn't he?!

[Rovin Romine]

Let me know when the "winning" part happens. . .

Just kidding. I know it could be theoretically much better in terms of winning percentage to have 5 #2-3SP to trot out there, but I just wish we had one starter that didn't make me cringe.

On a related note, were there any WS winning teams which didn't have a true #1?

PS - I do miss Pedro. I also miss Hurst, Clemens, Schilling, the '07 Beckett, the '95 Wakefield, the '10 Lester, etc. The point of the thread wasn't to ask if a #1 would be a difference maker, or whether or not it would be nice to have a HOF pitcher in his prime, it was to ask whether, subjectively, it's easier or more fun to root for a team with a true #1 and a good supporting cast v. a team with, say, our staff.

Edited by Rovin Romine, 26 June 2012 - 04:27 PM.

[AcevesSaves]

You're right. We don't have a number 1 starter. In fact, if we were to make a playoff series by some stroke of luck, I'm not even sure who would or would not be included in the rotation at all, let alone who would start the first game. At this point, if we had to play the Rangers best of 5, it wouldn't surprise me if Beckett took the first game, or if he didn't start at all. Same goes for Lester and Morales.

However, the unfortunate fact is that I don't think we have much of a chance to change that this season. Our best pitching prospect is probably Tazawa, who clearly won't be Major League ready AT LEAST until next season. We don't have much trade bait, seeing as teams wouldn't be interested in Crawford due to his extensive contract, I highly doubt the Sox would part with Kalish or Nava even for an ace like Hamels or Greinke, and our infield is lacking depth to the point that trading someone would seriously damage any playoff hopes we have.

Of course, I highly doubt it will stay like this after this season; we are the Red Sox, for God's sake. Greinke, Hamels, Ryan Dempster and Colby Lewis are all possible #1 guys who are projected to be on the market this winter, and I would be seriously surprised if Cherington didn't jump on one or even two of these blue-chippers, especially with the Daisuke contract finally expiring, and the likely "accidental" career ending car accident that befalls John Lackey in November.

But for now, I think we've all got to inhale, buckle up, and get ready for the rollercoaster ride that is the 2012 Red Sox Starting Rotation.

[SoxLegacy]

. The point of the thread wasn't to ask if a #1 would be a difference maker, or whether or not it would be nice to have a HOF pitcher in his prime, it was to ask whether, subjectively, it's easier or more fun to root for a team with a true #1 and a good supporting cast v. a team with, say, our staff.

Then back to the point, I agree with you in that it would be more fun with a true number 1 such as Pedro, simply because I always liked to think, "how will Pedro disembowel the opposing team tonight?" when he took the mound.

[alwyn96]

he point of the thread wasn't to ask if a #1 would be a difference maker, or whether or not it would be nice to have a HOF pitcher in his prime, it was to ask whether, subjectively, it's easier or more fun to root for a team with a true #1 and a good supporting cast v. a team with, say, our staff.

It probably comes down to expectations and how good the supporting guys are, but it is fun as hell to root for a truly dominating pitcher. It is also frustrating as hell to have guys who aren't very good. You're basically describing the 2000 Red Sox - a frustrating, mostly unlikable team made watchable only by transcendent performances from Nomar and Pedro. Pedro was electric - it seemed like he might pitch a no-hitter at any time, but you only got to see him every 5 or so days. The rest of the time it was a mess, and not great to watch. The 2012 Red Sox are frustrating too, but any given day you can usually hope for a decently pitched game.

[OnBase]

I guess what I'm trying to say is that Lester has been the biggest disappointment of the season for me, but I didn't realize that until I started writing this post.

I definitely agree with this last part.

But I don't know the answer to your question. A team with an elite starter and not enough else can be pretty frustrating to watch. And a team that needs an ace to take them where they could go if they just had that one difference maker is frustrating as well. Neither Clemens (who I detested from day one) nor Pedro (who I adore unconditionally) could do it on their own. But my enjoyment factor was infinitely higher with Pedro and that's purely subjective.

Maybe what makes the difference are players and particularly pitchers who enjoy their job. Lester appears to hate his and that's no fun to watch. Aceves, Morales, Beckett on the other hand are clearly in their element while they're on the mound.

[Rovin Romine]

Maybe what makes the difference are players and particularly pitchers who enjoy their job. Lester appears to hate his and that's no fun to watch. Aceves, Morales, Beckett on the other hand are clearly in their element while they're on the mound.

Excellent point.

[alwyn96]

Maybe what makes the difference are players and particularly pitchers who enjoy their job. Lester appears to hate his and that's no fun to watch. Aceves, Morales, Beckett on the other hand are clearly in their element while they're on the mound.

I haven't really noticed that. When Lester's on he looks about as badass as anybody out there, except when he tucks his glove under his chin when getting signs from the catcher. Totally meaningless, but it looks oddly childlike to me.

Edited by alwyn96, 27 June 2012 - 12:37 PM.

[wine111]

You're right. We don't have a number 1 starter. In fact, if we were to make a playoff series by some stroke of luck, I'm not even sure who would or would not be included in the rotation at all, let alone who would start the first game. At this point, if we had to play the Rangers best of 5, it wouldn't surprise me if Beckett took the first game, or if he didn't start at all. Same goes for Lester and Morales.

However, the unfortunate fact is that I don't think we have much of a chance to change that this season. Our best pitching prospect is probably Tazawa, who clearly won't be Major League ready AT LEAST until next season. We don't have much trade bait, seeing as teams wouldn't be interested in Crawford due to his extensive contract, I highly doubt the Sox would part with Kalish or Nava even for an ace like Hamels or Greinke, and our infield is lacking depth to the point that trading someone would seriously damage any playoff hopes we have.

Of course, I highly doubt it will stay like this after this season; we are the Red Sox, for God's sake. Greinke, Hamels, Ryan Dempster and Colby Lewis are all possible #1 guys who are projected to be on the market this winter, and I would be seriously surprised if Cherington didn't jump on one or even two of these blue-chippers, especially with the Daisuke contract finally expiring, and the likely "accidental" career ending car accident that befalls John Lackey in November.

But for now, I think we've all got to inhale, buckle up, and get ready for the rollercoaster ride that is the 2012 Red Sox Starting Rotation.

I would definetly stay away from Ryan Dempster, who is a pitcher with a 115-119 career record with a 4.33 earned run average, which makes him
more of a number 3 or 4, especially in the A.L. East. He's also 35 years old, so he's likely to be heading downhill soon. Colby Lewis is 44-44
with a 4.78 ERA for his career, so he's more a 4 or 5. Both have performed better later in their careers, but nothing close to #1 material. Greinke is a
player who does not like the spotlight (ala Kenny Rogers who could not pitch in New York). Hamels would be a good choice.

[OnBase]

I haven't really noticed that. When Lester's on he looks about as badass as anybody out there, except when he tucks his glove under his chin when getting signs from the catcher. Totally meaningless, but it looks oddly childlike to me.

Yesterday was, if I may continue my superficial observations, less badass and more determined competitor. And it worked. He even smiled in his post-game. There's hope.

[alwyn96]

Yesterday was, if I may continue my superficial observations, less badass and more determined competitor. And it worked. He even smiled in his post-game. There's hope.

I guess people's relative definitions of badass are going to differ. I'd consider Pedro a crazy badass on the mound - there were few more serious and determined competitors, and he would throw any pitch to anyone (or at anyone) at any time - but off the mound he was pretty silly and fun-loving.

Not that that stuff really matters anyway. I don't really care what a pitcher's demeanor is like on the mound, as long as they get people out. Some guys need to get themselves all puffed up to get guys out, others are just regular - there's no one perfect temperament template for pitching dominance. Depends on the guy's personality and what works for him.

[Alex18]

So how much is everyone willing to give up for king Felix after watching what he can do firsthand? I'd throw Barnes, Kalish, bard, and jackey Bradley jr and go from there

[OnBase]

I guess people's relative definitions of badass are going to differ. I'd consider Pedro a crazy badass on the mound - there were few more serious and determined competitors, and he would throw any pitch to anyone (or at anyone) at any time - but off the mound he was pretty silly and fun-loving.

Not that that stuff really matters anyway. I don't really care what a pitcher's demeanor is like on the mound, as long as they get people out. Some guys need to get themselves all puffed up to get guys out, others are just regular - there's no one perfect temperament template for pitching dominance. Depends on the guy's personality and what works for him.

Well yes, what works for any given pitcher is the main concern - and mine for Lester has been that badass wasn't working.

I do miss Pedro.

[Trotsky]

I would suggest a Lester, Iglesias and Nava for Hamels.

[AcevesSaves]

I would suggest a Lester, Iglesias and Nava for Hamels.

I feel like that may be giving up slightly too much considering that we'd still have to resign him this winter. Lester and Nava, or Lester and Iglesias would be a better trade from the Sox standpoint.

[Frank, Fenway]

Why are you guys constantly making up insane trades?

[keyalyn]

Other logical issues aside, Hamels will likely make twice as much as Lester over the next 2 seasons. Can the case be made where Hamels is a better asset than Lester when you factor in the contracts, in addition to giving up an additional solid piece in a trade?

[Trotsky]

The Lester+ for Hamels was a toss-it-out-there post. But basically we've got Beckett, Lester, Dice-K, Doubront, Morales, Cook and Clay all vying for 5 starter spots. While it makes some sense to go for a 6 man rotation for a while, after the trade deadline I just can't see the Sox doing that. Assuming here that Doubront will go back to the BP to preserve his arm, we still have 6 starters so I'd be thinking of ways to deal one of the remaining 6 and look to address a weakness with that asset. Our outfield is very solid. Our BP is very solid. Our infield is very solid (SS being the weak link here, Aviles is looking pretty good still all things considered). It seems to me that the thing we're really missing is another top of the rotation starter and Lester is just not living up to his promise from '08-'10 but he's still very affordable and has more upside than Cook and Dice-K. I could see another team dealing away their ace that will be hitting FA at the end of the season to get Lester plus. Greinke

[chrisfont9]

Cafardo suggests: Lester and Ellsbury for Felix. It's as if he read this thread and wanted to salve your thirst for a #1.

Edited by chrisfont9, 30 June 2012 - 12:26 PM.

[Trotsky]

Cafardo suggests: Lester and Ellsbury for Felix. It's as if he read this thread and wanted to salve your thirst for a #1.

Doesn't make sense from Seattle's POV. Also, Cafardo is an ass.
Greinke makes sense from Milwaukee's POV. And, methinks, Hamels does from Philly's pOV

[pdub]

Other logical issues aside, Hamels will likely make twice as much as Lester over the next 2 seasons. Can the case be made where Hamels is a better asset than Lester when you factor in the contracts, in addition to giving up an additional solid piece in a trade?

Let's pretend we give up Lester + Middlebrooks for Hamels.

Lester + Middlebrooks WAR = 0.7 + (-0.1) = 0.6
Hamels = 2.2

So, we can assume getting Hamels would give us roughly 2 additional wins over Lester and WMB. Is it worth giving up the cost effectiveness of having Lester and WMB, plus the huge contract Hamels WILL get? I cannot say for certain. I also don't think this season is indicative of Lester's true talent, the guy was consistently a ~3.3ERA pitcher until this year. Now, Ellsbury + Lester for Hernandez? I would do that. Felix is younger, affordable given today's standards, and Ellsbury is a player we can afford to lose in such a deal. Our offense has been good this year and our outfield will only become more packed.

[doubrontsneighbor]

Not that this is going to happen, but why would you trade lester and Ellsbury in the same trade? Remember when Cleveland was trading Lee and Vmart? they knew they would get more in two different trades then one mega deal. Ellsbury could have been an MVP just one year ago.

[keyalyn]

The Lester+ for Hamels was a toss-it-out-there post. But basically we've got Beckett, Lester, Dice-K, Doubront, Morales, Cook and Clay all vying for 5 starter spots. While it makes some sense to go for a 6 man rotation for a while, after the trade deadline I just can't see the Sox doing that. Assuming here that Doubront will go back to the BP to preserve his arm, we still have 6 starters so I'd be thinking of ways to deal one of the remaining 6 and look to address a weakness with that asset. Our outfield is very solid. Our BP is very solid. Our infield is very solid (SS being the weak link here, Aviles is looking pretty good still all things considered). It seems to me that the thing we're really missing is another top of the rotation starter and Lester is just not living up to his promise from '08-'10 but he's still very affordable and has more upside than Cook and Dice-K. I could see another team dealing away their ace that will be hitting FA at the end of the season to get Lester plus. Greinke

You are proposing to fix the logjam by trading away a pitcher in return for another pitcher. They would end up with a better piece to the 2012 equation, but at the end of the day they'd still be playing with the same number of pieces. It may be a trade that improves them in 2012, but how would such a trade benefit them in the long term?

Let's pretend we give up Lester + Middlebrooks for Hamels.

Lester + Middlebrooks WAR = 0.7 + (-0.1) = 0.6
Hamels = 2.2

So, we can assume getting Hamels would give us roughly 2 additional wins over Lester and WMB. Is it worth giving up the cost effectiveness of having Lester and WMB, plus the huge contract Hamels WILL get? I cannot say for certain. I also don't think this season is indicative of Lester's true talent, the guy was consistently a ~3.3ERA pitcher until this year. Now, Ellsbury + Lester for Hernandez? I would do that. Felix is younger, affordable given today's standards, and Ellsbury is a player we can afford to lose in such a deal. Our offense has been good this year and our outfield will only become more packed.

Using fangraphs WAR, it would be giving up 3.2WAR in return for 2.3WAR, an obvious loss. But depends on what calculation you prefer.

For this year and this year alone I agree that Hamels for Lester+ may be a quality trade, but for after this year I don't see any way it is a win. Maybe for Felix, who is obviously a significant upgrade over Lester, but not for Hamels who isn't an obviously better pitcher than Lester outside of right now. But trading for Felix also has a great deal of logical issues that make a trade virtually impossible to happen.

[Trotsky]

You are proposing to fix the logjam by trading away a pitcher in return for another pitcher. They would end up with a better piece to the 2012 equation, but at the end of the day they'd still be playing with the same number of pieces. It may be a trade that improves them in 2012, but how would such a trade benefit them in the long term?

Long term, it obviously gets them a foothold onto signing Hamels. There's been no obvious signs that he WANTS to hit FA'cy, the way Ellsbury and Papelbon (and other Boras clients do). Yeah, there's still a log jam, but a much less complicated one. Right now, if we have to move to a 5 man rotation, based on this season's play, I'd be considering bumping Lester out of the rotation. (remember, I said, "consider it".) Adding Hamels (or Greinke) makes that decision a lot easier.
I think Hamels and Greinke should be the only SP's targeted as a realistic option since they will be hitting FA'cy and their respective current teams, while not "out of it" are pretty weak looking and will likely consider them as assets to bring in long term help.
Ellsbury doesn't help them. I don't get why people are considering dealing him to Seattle, Philly or Milwaukee. Lester does. He's affordable and controlled for 2 more years after '12. Package Nava and Iglesias up and it makes sense for both teams.

[pdub]

Lester, Nava, Iglesias for Hernandez?

I see what you're thinking but I can't buy into this. I'm certain Seattle is as skeptical of Nava's newfound skill as much as SoSH is. But yeah, if Nava could be considered a key piece in any deal then I'd take the risk and sell high. At this point, however, I don't think its realistic. Also, I'd have to believe Seattle would ask for WMB since their offense sucks and their current 3B is batting ~.252 (not sure how good of a prospect he is/was).

[rglenmt]

Thinking back to ST and the beginning of the 2011 Season, many respected baseball media predicted the Red Sox with new trade acquisition Adrian Gonzalez and the signing of perennial All State CC, the Red Sox would be 1 of the Greatest Teams in MLB history. How does those predictions look now? And let's not even think about the players who are not playing with the Red Sox for a variety of reasons or those who have retired, been traded or signed elsewhere? It is a good thing that the games are played on the field and not in the media or fantasy. Let's just say, it does not matter anywhere near as much the name of the #1 of Ace of the pitching staff. The Wies ns and Losses matter much more on where the team is in the standings. In the first 3 games of the current series with the Mariners, it matters much more that the Red Sox and 1 and 2 with the 2 losses being walk off wins by the Mariners, and if Aaron Cook, Franklin Morales and Josh Beckett pitch well enough in their next starts to give the team an opportunity to get wins, as all three did that in the current series.

Despite not having all the laudatory predictions with which the 2011 Season began, I like the Red Sox chances of finishing much higher in the AL East which as we all know is the first hurdle to having a chance of playing in the post season and winning the AL or another WS. It is a long long season, we now have the Orioles between the Red Sox and the current AL Leader MFYs and while the MFYs have recently lost the team's CC and its Pettitte, the Red Sox will soon get back Ellsbury and its CC and as a loyal long time Red Sox fan I'll take the Old Towne team's chances with it staff, its bullpen and its position players who have struggled through the first part of this Season.

respecfully submitted,

rglenmt f/k/a pudgefick

[alwyn96]

Starting with Lester's first full year in MLB:

Year Lester ERA+ Hamels ERA+
2008 144 141
2009 136 97
2010 134 133
2011 122 137
2012 93 129

I fail to see how a soon to be very expensive Cole Hamels is that much better than a Jon Lester who is 11 days younger and signed through 2014 on a very team-friendly deal, unless of course you think he's hurt or is somehow washed up at 28.

EDIT: Well, that table looked better in preview, but you get the idea.

Edited by alwyn96, 02 July 2012 - 01:36 AM.

[Trotsky]

IMO Lester is turning into Lackey 2.0 Declining peripherals and the guy does not look happy or focused on the mound. Hamels has been much more consistent.
And also, I don't think Seattle is a good trade target.

Lester, Nava, Iglesias for Hernandez?

I see what you're thinking but I can't buy into this. I'm certain Seattle is as skeptical of Nava's newfound skill as much as SoSH is. But yeah, if Nava could be considered a key piece in any deal then I'd take the risk and sell high. At this point, however, I don't think its realistic. Also, I'd have to believe Seattle would ask for WMB since their offense sucks and their current 3B is batting ~.252 (not sure how good of a prospect he is/was).

Read what I said... it wasn't this.

I think Greinke and Hamels are the two we should be targeting. Seattle doesn't make sense, and guys like Garza are just more "no. 2, 3" type starters. A one game play-in will be murder w/o an ace anymore. 7 game series, I think you can get through w/o an ace, but running into a one game buzzsaw like Verlander against Lester is a white flag.

[alwyn96]

IMO Lester is turning into Lackey 2.0 Declining peripherals and the guy does not look happy or focused on the mound. Hamels has been much more consistent.

Lackey 2.0? I can only assume this means you think that Lester is hurts and needs TJ surgery? Please explain what you think you are seeing with these declining peripherals. One incomplete year's worth of data is not evidence of a "decline", nor has Hamels been more consistent, given his 2009.

Yes, we're all frustrated that Lester isn't pitching well this year, but this overreaction is insane. It sounds like you would have traded Hamels after his rough 2009, too. His k/9 was in the same "decline" as Lester's. I'm sure when Hamels isn't pitching well he doesn't look happy or focused either.

Edited by alwyn96, 02 July 2012 - 11:34 AM.

[alwyn96]

Justin Verlander, postseason:

3 W, 3 L, 42 IP, 5.57 ERA.

Even having the acey-est ace around doesn't guarantee much in the playoffs.

Edited by alwyn96, 02 July 2012 - 11:55 AM.

[OnBase]

Justin Verlander, postseason:

3 W, 3 L, 42 IP, 5.57 ERA.

Even having the acey-est ace around doesn't guarantee much in the playoffs.

Good dig.
Makes me hope we can get Josh the Non-Acey back to the post season.

[wine111]

I don't want to build a pitching staff by trading Lester or Clay B. I might even prefer Roy Halladay to Hamels despite the age
difference. Halladay is expensive but he is also a proven winner in the A.L. East with great command of his pitches. The Phillies
are at the point where they may have to break that team up as they are a very old team in their everyday lineup. Perhaps an
Ellsbury, Beckett and Iglesias trade for Halladay would work for both teams.

Ellsbury would be their new CF and Beckett would perform better in the NL. Ellsbury would give them more youth and he would
give the Phillies a fourth power bat to add to the trio of Ryan Howard, Hunter Pence and Carlos Ruiz (i don't think his power surge
lasts). Jimmy Rollins is signed through 2013 with a team option for 2014. If Iglesias makes even modest offensive strides he should
be ready to be the Phillies every day SS by 2014. The Phillies don't have much at SS in their minor leagues. With Halladay off their
payroll, the Phillies should be able to offer Ellsbury a large enough contract to satisfy him and Boras and keep Ellsbury in Philadelphia
after the 2013 season for about 7 years. I think the Red Sox chances of signing Ellsbury are close to zero with their huge $$
commitments to Crawford and Gonzalez and the large $$$ coming to Lester, Clay B and Pedroia (our Jeter) down the road.

The Red Sox would finally have their ace and they can focus their off season on filling their 4 and 5 starting spots
more effectively. Dubrondt is too fragile an arm to depend on. He has never pitched more than 129 innings as a professional
since 2005 and his command of his pitches is questionable (WHIP of over 1.5). Restore Bard to his bullpen role and hope he
can make it back to where he was (If he can ever make it back to the Major Leagues). A pitcher with command like Halladay
tends to age well as he knows how to conserve pitches by effectively pitching to contact. He can also pitch late into games.
Each season from 2006-2011, Halladay had pitched at least 220 innings. He is signed through 2013 with a $20 million
vesting option for 2014. The Red Sox could keep Nava at leadoff and have a spot ready for Ryan Kalish when he is ready to
take over for Nava. An OF of Nava or Kalish, Ross and Crawford is not awe inspiring by any stretch,but there are always OF
free agents to pursue. They are much easier to sign or trade for than trying to sign or trade for an ace pitcher.

Edited by wine111, 06 July 2012 - 10:46 AM.

[orr4num]

I don't want to build a pitching staff by trading Lester or Clay B. I might even prefer Roy Halladay to Hamels despite the age
difference. Halladay is expensive but he is also a proven winner in the A.L. East with great command of his pitches. The Phillies
are at the point where they may have to break that team up as they are a very old team in their everyday lineup. Perhaps an
Ellsbury, Beckett and Iglesias trade for Halladay would work for both teams.

Ellsbury would be their new CF and Beckett would perform better in the NL. Ellsbury would give them more youth and he would
give the Phillies a fourth power bat to add to the trio of Ryan Howard, Hunter Pence and Carlos Ruiz (i don't think his power surge
lasts). Jimmy Rollins is signed through 2013 with a team option for 2014. If Iglesias makes even modest offensive strides he should
be ready to be the Phillies every day SS by 2014. The Phillies don't have much at SS in their minor leagues. With Halladay off their
payroll, the Phillies should be able to offer Ellsbury a large enough contract to satisfy him and Boras and keep Ellsbury in Philadelphia
after the 2013 season for about 7 years. I think the Red Sox chances of signing Ellsbury are close to zero with their huge $$
commitments ro Crawford and Gonzalez and the large $$$ coming to Lester, Clay B and Pedroia (our Jeter) down the road.

The Red Sox would finally have their ace and they can focus their off season on filling their 4 and 5 starting spots
more effectively. Dubrondt is too fragile an arm to depend on. He has never pitched more than 129 innings as a professional
since 2005 and his command of his pitches is questionable (WHIP of over 1.5). Restore Bard to his bullpen role and hope he
can make it back to where he was (If he can ever make it back to the Major Leagues). A pitcher with command like Halladay
tends to age well as he knows how to conserve pitches by effectively pitching to contact. He can also pitch late into games.
Each season from 2006-2011, Halladay had pitched at least 220 innings. He is signed through 2013 with a $20 million
vesting option for 2014. The Red Sox could keep Nava at leadoff and have a spot ready for Ryan Kalish when he is ready to
take over for Nava. An OF of Nava or Kalish, Ross and Crawford is not awe inspiring by any stretch,but there are always OF
free agents to pursue. They are much easier to sign or trade for than trying to sign or trade for an ace pitcher.

Except they also have Hamels to deal with. Halliday is gonna be 36 next year, and is currently on the DL now. Although, he has proven to be pretty durable over the span of his career, is it logical to assume a 36 year old pitcher with that kind of mileage on his arm and shoulder will continue to be durable? While Beckett is 3 years younger, he's proven to be not so durable, he's fairly inconsistent year-to-year, and he comes with a high price tag to boot. Ellsbury, while potentially an All-star, also has injury issues and will be commanding big money (as most all Scott Boras clients do), and then throw in a SS who's proven he can't hit AAA pitching. if I'm the Phillies, I ask for Bogaerts...and that's if, as the Phillies GM, I even entertain this trade "offer".

[wine111]

Except they also have Hamels to deal with. Halliday is gonna be 36 next year, and is currently on the DL now. Although, he has proven to be pretty durable over the span of his career, is it logical to assume a 36 year old pitcher with that kind of mileage on his arm and shoulder will continue to be durable? While Beckett is 3 years younger, he's proven to be not so durable, he's fairly inconsistent year-to-year, and he comes with a high price tag to boot. Ellsbury, while potentially an All-star, also has injury issues and will be commanding big money (as most all Scott Boras clients do), and then throw in a SS who's proven he can't hit AAA pitching. if I'm the Phillies, I ask for Bogaerts...and that's if, as the Phillies GM, I even entertain this trade "offer".

The Phillies don't have a much better chance of signing Hamels than the Red Sox do. I expect Hamels to be a Yankee or a Dodger. The need for the Phillies to rebuild is becoming urgent. They are practically
ancient and need younger blood. There is no way the Red Sox add Bogaerts to Ellsbury and Beckett for either Hamels or Halladay. Ellsbury has the ability and personality to be the new face of the Phillies
franchise. Beckett can be successful in the National League and this is more than a fair trade for the Phillies. I think Beckett becomes revitalized in Philadelphia as I think he has grown tired of the Boston media. I take the chance on Halladay if I'm Boston. The Phillies farm system is not loaded with top prospects and their fans aren't noted for their patience. The Phillies took their shot with these top arms and now is the time to get something for them. The Red Sox should only make a trade for Hamels if they can sign him right now. Lester should not be part of any trade despite his current struggles.

[Wally Balls]

Matthew Barnes is the next ace the Red Sox will have. UCONN!

[alwyn96]

Matthew Barnes is the next ace the Red Sox will have. UCONN!

Baseball America has him as #13 prospect in baseball. He's pretty sweet, although he's been struggling a bit lately.

[BoredViewer]

If a team blows the Sox away with an offer of top prospects (Arizona?) for Lester - then do it. Otherwise, I think he's the pitcher they least need to move.

[Rovin Romine]

Well, since this has morphed into interesting trade speculation I'll add my two bits.

Many of the trades proposed here are quasi GFIN trades, but the problem with these kinds of trades is that the team has to heal up and get hot for there to be a "now" in which to go for it. But at that point you wouldn't need a trade. (Obviously, this is why GFIN trades are usually for prospects - you don't give up a key piece of a contending team, unless said team is freakishly unbalanced, or there's addition by subtraction (Nomar).)

Assuming Gonzo is really just in a funk and our minor league SSs are for real, Lars and Iglesias seem tradeable for needs, but, per above, who would we need to trade for?

On the other hand, if the Sox were to have a fire sale, it might be a kind of Hanley/Beckett trade in reverse, with someone like DiceK playing the role of MikeLowell'sContract to get us under the Lux Tax threshold.

Someone on the main board wrote that the new playoff format and lack of picks might kill the deadline deal. I'm not sure. If you're a GM in contention (especially on a club which does not often see the post season) how do you react if someone like Ortiz hits the market and it's clear he's headed to either you, or to a team you're in WC contention with? I think there are plenty of front offices who will want to grab their chance at glory. At least during the first few new playoff format seasons, anyway. Healthy Ells, Ortiz. . . DiceK for some prospects? Of course someone would do it.

While it would suck, a fire sale might make the best sense at some point. All of those, "But they only have to play at X pace to get the one game wildcard slot" posts are getting old. Yes, the Sox are within striking distance, but they have to start actually winning actual games. I mean, I agree, yes, a healthy RS club would be absolutely amazing. Problem is, they're not, and there's no guarantee any of the injuries comes back big. Dice K was supposed to be a shot in the arm, but he's so far looking like more of the same, at least as far as final results.


While I'm hopeful I'll be surprised, at this point the only solid starting players we seem to have are Salty, Ross, and Ortiz. (Yeah yeah, IF Pedroia's thumb will heal up which it Should, and IF Gonzo fixes his bat which he Should because there's no reason for it not to happen, and IF Middlebrook's hammy heals as we reasonably Expect it would, and IF Nava re-ignites, and IF Crawford comes back and IF Ells heals soon, and and and, if if if. Problem is, with the exception of Ross and Melancon, nobody seems to be reporting back in from the Great Outer Waste of Mild Suck.)

Let's hope this post is an example of silly pessimism twenty games after the all star break; because even if every reasonable hoped-for result actually happens, there is a finite and narrowing number of opportunities to win games.


What a frustrating season.

[Towney007]

Anyone that thinks this team is going to have a fire sale at the deadline when:

-they're only a few games out of a playoff spot
-have had 20 players on the DL
-and have lost 13 games by 1 run

...is too stupid to bother to talk to. I know Boston sports fans operate in a bubble but good lord.

[Rovin Romine]

I don't think a fire sale is *likely.*

But it is possible. Sometimes guys don't come back from the DL - or when they do they lose something from their game, a la Nomar.

Presumably some of our players will come back none the worse for wear. But some may not. Or maybe all of them will be somewhat dinged and hampered.

For all the talk of injuries and us getting better as players return, we're still waiting for it to happen. After a certain point, no matter how good this team is on paper, they're not going to be able to make up the games they need to.


There's a certain amount of "whateverness" that applies to chronically underperforming players. We'd all like to be able to diagnose whatever is plaguing certain players (witness the how-to-fix speculation on Crawford, Bard, etc.) because it gives us a hope of correctly predicting whether a player will recover or fade away. Many of our guys are in the "whatever" zone though. All the SPs seem to have theories about what's wrong with them, or how they can improve their game, depending. But they actually have to do it. Ditto for Gonzalez, Bard, Crawford, etc. Injuries to be healed up, approaches to be changed; whatever. Just do it; quit giving interviews about it, taking responsibility for it, refusing to talk about it, etc.

Post ASB, do you really think we're a playoff contender (much less have the ability to get though an ALDS/ALS/WS, against good teams) if:

Starters:
Crawford never makes it back, or if he does produces at a .750 OPS clip.
Ellsbury never makes it back, or if he does, produces at a .800 OPS clip.
Nava keeps going at his present pace, not his torrid call up pace.
Gonzalez remains a .750 OPS player with little HR power.
Pedroia's thumb reduces him to a .700 OPS player.
Middlebrooks has rookie ups and downs and/or remains troubled by the hamstring.
Aviles continues to be not effective against RHP as his career suggests.

SP:
Beckett remains as is.
Lester remains as is.
Buchholz remains as is.
Doubront remains as is.
Morales/DiceK/Cook,etc. remains as is.

RP:
Bailey does not make it back in a way that improves on the pen. (Not the hugest problem.)

The point of all this is that the above is completely plausible; and it would result in exactly what we have right now, which is a .500 team. And, if it's a .500 team, you have to think about next year. Especially when you have players who may not resign with the club. So you get what you can for them.

That would suck, because it would mean another season decimated by injury, but considering the possibility of a fire sale is hardly operating in a bubble.

[jnlevetoncnmt]

Anyone that thinks this team is going to have a fire sale at the deadline when:

-they're only a few games out of a playoff spot
-have had 20 players on the DL
-and have lost 13 games by 1 run

...is too stupid to bother to talk to. I know Boston sports fans operate in a bubble but good lord.

I don't see any problem with being sellers at the deadline. If Ben can get any kind of pitching prospects for Aviles, Sweeney, Podsednick, Shoppach or any of the relievers I would do it. Replacing Aviles with Ciriaco/Iglesias is not a big stepdown. Sweeney/Pods is not necessary once Ellsbury comes back. Our relievers all have good numbers, but none really stand out as the type that can pitch in close games, losing a couple would not bother me in the least, especially considering we have Tazawa and Mortenson in the minors.

This franchise really needs more pitching prospects. Following the minor league forum, it only seems like Barnes and Owens are worth getting excited over. Who knows if either will turn into a ML starter worth keeping. If we can get some young lottery ticket A ball type pitching prospects then I would do it.

[Towney007]

For the love of all that is holy. This team is 2.5 games out of a playoff spot. Stop it with the over the top hysteria.

Edited by Towney007, 09 July 2012 - 01:25 AM.

[PhilPlantier]

For the love of all that is holy. This team is 2.5 games out of a playoff spot. Stop it with the over the top hysteria.

I think people using Major League Baseball's New and Exciting Playoff Format™ to justify keeping the nucleus of this turd together are overestimating the significance of earning the right to participate in a one-game crapshoot. The team is 9.5 games out of a real playoff spot.

[Trotsky]

For the love of all that is holy. This team is 2.5 games out of a playoff spot. Stop it with the over the top hysteria.

I realize that. But how deep does this team look to go. One and out is how most view us even if we do get there. Of course there's been plenty of Cardinals teams recently that looked like that also.
As far as Lester goes, I think he's going to continue trending downward. Has been since his '08-'10 peak and his physical presence on the mound suggests someone who is not confident in their abilities any longer. Dude has lost that swagger from those peak seasons. Again, yes, I would deal him in a package to bring back Greinke or Hamels.

[Rovin Romine]

I think people using Major League Baseball's New and Exciting Playoff Format™ to justify keeping the nucleus of this turd together are overestimating the significance of earning the right to participate in a one-game crapshoot. The team is 9.5 games out of a real playoff spot.

Yep. I'm not in the "blow it up right now" camp per se, but it's a real possibility. The team is what it is, not what we'd ideally like it to be.

Should we get to the one game playoff, our main problem is in the title of the thread. Who starts for us? We won't have the luxury of setting the post season rotation if we're battling to get to the single playoff game (since there will be a scrum of teams in it right to the end.) There is a two day gap until the final play off game, so there's a smidge of flexibility. Unfortunately, I'd be worried that one less day of rest or one extra day of rest would mess up any of our starters.

They may not even have a 50-50 chance of getting to play the 5 game ALDS. Does anyone feel comfortable that we can rely on any one of our starters against the other expected wild card? Tampa Bay, White Sox, Angels?

I'd love to see the Sox take off postASB on some good SP and at least 2 starting players reverting to good form, which is also a legitimate possibility - but it's far from a certainty.

[Towney007]

I think people using Major League Baseball's New and Exciting Playoff Format™ to justify keeping the nucleus of this turd together are overestimating the significance of earning the right to participate in a one-game crapshoot. The team is 9.5 games out of a real playoff spot.

You do realize how big the financial return is on one playoff game, right?

They may not even have a 50-50 chance of getting to play the 5 game ALDS. Does anyone feel comfortable that we can rely on any one of our starters against the other expected wild card? Tampa Bay, White Sox, Angels?

In one game anything can happen. By this logic, no one should trade for anything if they've got a shot of making the playoffs through anything other than winning their division.

That's a strategy that'll keep fans happy and pack 'em in....

Edited by Towney007, 09 July 2012 - 11:26 AM.