51 replies to this topic

[SoxScout]

First off, who is untouchable... Xander Bogaerts, Matt Barnes, Jackie Bradley, and Blake Swihart? Are there even untouchables?

Who's next on the list... Garin Cecchini, Bryce Brentz, or Henry Owens? How much cache does Anthony Ranaudo have?

Are Mark Melancon and Ryan Sweeney involved?

I really have no idea what to expect a deal to involve, but of course I am both curious and nervous since we are the perceived leader in the chase.

[MalzoneExpress]

I don't want really want him, so I would be okay with trading Drew Hedman for him. Anyone better and I say, No!

[findguapo]

In my opinion, it would be a horrible decision to trade Melancon. He had 3 horrible performances at the beginning of the year, and has absolutely dealt since. Because of his minor league stint, his trade value must be very low, no reason to trade a guy with low trade value who is cost controlled for so long unless he is a major piece, which he wont be.

[Carl Everetts Therapist]

Shaq Green-Thompson

[czar]

Also not a fan of breaking the bank for him.

One of the biggest problems (for Garza suiters) right now is A) the fact that the Phillies are very aggressively trying to sign Hamels and that B) Greinke picked a bad time to have to take time off to get his "batteries recharged."

Garza might go from the #3 option to the top SP available pretty quickly. And therefore the cost would rise. Don't really want any part of that if it means emptying the farm.

[TomRicardo]

I would say the untouchables are Bogaerts, Barnes, Bradley and Lavarnway.

[gammoseditor]

One of the arguments in favor of Garza was that he's had success in the AL East, but his last year with Tampa he had a FIP of 4.42. Last year, his first in the NL, he was much better at 2.95 but now is back to 4.16. I don't see how's he is a major upgrade for us.

[LeoCarrillo]

I think there'll be some pain involved in who'd go. As in Lavarnway. If we took that hit, then hopefully the rest of the package would be from our excess of OFers (Jacobs, De La Cruz) and maybe some throw-in bullpen arms or Sweeney.

Edit to add: Agree with Ras' one-game worry . . . but if we somehow pick up 3 games on MFY in the next 11 days and are about 6 1/2 out at the deadline, you could make Garza your "go for it while we still have Ellsbury" gamble.

Edited by LeoCarrillo, 20 July 2012 - 12:38 PM.

[Rasputin]

I would like him but I am exceptionally hesitant to make a significant move because we'd be making that move to get into a one game playoff.

I would remove from consideration the guys who can be reasonably expected to help next year, especially those at positions of weakness which means Iglesias, Lavarnway, Kalish go no where. I'd also not even consider sending Barnes, Bogaerts, Bradley, or Swihart.

That probably means we don't get him, which is fine with me.

[bosockboy]

I would like him but I am exceptionally hesitant to make a significant move because we'd be making that move to get into a one game playoff.

We've won the division once since 1995. That's the game now....with that mindset we'd never make a move to get in. More than likely we will participate in 7-8 of these one game Russian Roulettes over the next decade.

[TomRicardo]

Is Iglesias worth anything any more? He can't hit. If Theo is still enamored with him I would use him to get Garza.

Edit - he is still probably an upgrade over awful Aviles

Edited by TomRicardo, 20 July 2012 - 12:32 PM.

[gammoseditor]

Another thing to consider with Garza. His last year of arbitration eligibility is next year and will likely be around $12 million. Does it make sense to spend that money on him when we know we're on a budget and have Lester, Beckett, Buchholz, Doubront, Lackey, Morales, Aceves under control and have potential holes at DH and RF? It's easy to say bring back Ortiz and Ross and trade for Garza but the money might not be there.

Edited by gammoseditor, 20 July 2012 - 12:46 PM.

[johnnywayback]

I don't really have a ton of interest in Garza, so I won't be thrilled if we trade for him. But if the price is something like Cecchini, Lin, and some lottery ticket pitcher we get for Sweeney, I won't be outraged.

[Toe Nash]

We've won the division once since 1995. That's the game now....with that mindset we'd never make a move to get in. More than likely we will participate in 7-8 of these one game Russian Roulettes over the next decade.

What? In a year in which the Yankees aren't going crazy and you've had normal injury luck and your top two starters are performing well and Buchholz started out stronger then you might make a move for a Garza to put you over the top.

But we're ten games back. This year, it makes no sense to go all-in because you're not likely to make up those ten games. Another year, it may only be 5 games at the trading deadline and then your options are more open.

They definitely could have won the division more than once a couple times in there if they had made a big move at the trade deadline. And if the current playoff system had been in effect then, maybe they would have. But this year there's no reason to.

[E5 Yaz]

The Cubs are trading Garza and Dempster. They need help everywhere, but they're going to want to restock pitching.

You start with Britton before moving to what Chicago needs in terms of positional players. If you go Britton, Kalish, a lower minior leaguer, and then a major league arm to replace Garza/Dempster in their rotation (Cook, probably), then you might get a shot at Garza and something else coming back.

I'm not saying I'd do that; just that it might take that much, especially if other teams get involved

[Rasputin]

We've won the division once since 1995. That's the game now....with that mindset we'd never make a move to get in. More than likely we will participate in 7-8 of these one game Russian Roulettes over the next decade.

If we were talking about an off season deal it would be different, but we're not starting even, we're halfway in and down nine and a half games. That's a huge difference. Replay this season and have the Sox be healthy and have the Yankees put eight outfielders, three pitchers, and the ball boy on the DL at the same time and it's different.

Is Iglesias worth anything any more? He can't hit. If Theo is still enamored with him I would use him to get Garza.

Edit - he is still probably an upgrade over awful Aviles

Right now I don't think he would be but he's had more success this year than ever. He had a pretty good May and missed most of June. If he can hit more like May than April for the rest of the year I think he's going to be our starting shortstop next year.

Edit to add, mostly the point is that if we're going to come up with an in house shortstop in the very new future, it's him.

Edited by Rasputin, 20 July 2012 - 12:50 PM.

[Plympton91]

I just don't get the interest in Garza unless they are so worried about the health of Beckett or Lester that there's a chance you'd have to shut one of them down. Beckett's earlier stint on the DL with a shoulder issue and his continued first inning troubles that suggest a difficulty getting loose may have them thinking they're on the verge of losing him. If "losing him" means rotator cuff surgery, then you have an opening in one of your "top 3" for next season, making Garza somewhat attractive.

I would Idenfy the minor leaguers who are second on the depth chart at their position, but not themselves exceedingly high ceiling players, and hold the line on a package of only 2 of them. I would hang up the phone if Theo so much as mentioned any of my top 8 prospects--Bradley, Barnes, Bogaerts, Brentz, Lavarnway, Cecchini (pick your own other 2). When I do that, I come up with a list that includes one of Kalish (behind Bradley, possibly not superior to Linares or Brentz, easy 2013 solution: resign Ross and Sweeney) or Vazquez (very underrated, but even still behind Lavarnway, lower ceiling than Swihart), and one of Pimental or Britton (behind Barnes and Wilson, still inconsistent at AA, young enough to be patient but sadly both already down to 1 option year).

What would my offer be: Kalish and Pimental; maybe a throw in of somebody outside the top 25 like Lin or Vitek.

Edited by Plympton91, 20 July 2012 - 01:00 PM.

[pjr]

Carfardo checks in,

Nick Cafardo‏@nickcafardo
Source: Red Sox lagging behind a few teams in matt garza hunt. Not all sox personnel feel garza would be an upgrade over what they have.

[E5 Yaz]

Carfardo checks in,

Nick Cafardo‏@nickcafardo
Source: Red Sox lagging behind a few teams in matt garza hunt. Not all sox personnel feel garza would be an upgrade over what they have.

Hello, Larry

[Papelbon's Poutine]

I don't see Theo having interest in Lavarnway. Even if he proves to be an ML C he probably will not be a traditional 5-6 games a week behind he plate guy. If his bat turns into what we hope, you'd want him 1b/DH a few games a week. That doesn't fit withy the Cubs being an NL team with a stud 1B prospect. He needs more than a 3-4 day a week piece as his major return.

And if we do trade for him, garza shall be known as The Llama.

[Zedia]

Not that I think any of them are going anywhere, but I thought that Bradley, Barnes, Swihart, and Owens CAN'T be traded (having signed last August). Am I misunderstanding that?

[Papelbon's Poutine]

They could be included as a player to be named later.

[Hokie Sox]

This seems to be a case where BECAUSE Theo knows the Sox system so well, it actually decreases the likelihood of getting this done. The situation is further compounded by the conflicting opinions/evaluations of Garza by Sox brass(see above), and having already made one poor, sell-low transaction in the Youkilis dump, they will not want to meet Theo's asking price.

Put simply: Garza will not be a member of the 2012 Red Sox because Ben Cherington is no Lou Gorman.

Edited by Hokie Sox, 20 July 2012 - 01:42 PM.

[Detts]

Untouchable:

X
Barnes
Bradley
Brentz
Swihart
Owens

Start at:

Ranaudo (trade him before he has zero trade value)
Workman (sell high)
Jacobs (His loooong power stroke could kill him at AA)
Cook

Maybe add a lottery ticket if needed.

Side note: I HATE Garza, so if any of the 'untouchables' get traded for him I'll be breaking shit.

[nvalvo]

I just want to say that I think six years of Kalish's control is pretty valuable; more valuable than some of the deals in this thread are suggesting. That 88 MLB OPS+ at age 22 was pretty impressive for a guy who can play an OK center field, and he's been utterly destroying AAA this year. Sure, that's a small sample, but it's a small sample he probably couldn't generate if his shoulder was still messed up, so it quiets the injury concerns.

He's more of a sure thing than guys like Britton or Pimentel, and he'd be a very useful piece for the Cubs, who need long control of players who project to be solid regulars.

If the bidding gets too far beyond a deal with Kalish as the centerpiece (and it most likely will), I think Ben should bow out.

[Buzzkill Pauley]

I would say the untouchables are Bogaerts, Barnes, Bradley and Lavarnway.

For a non-ace pitcher like Garza, the list is longer. I'd add Swihart, Owens, Cecchini, Workman, and De la Cruz -- more than doubling the list.

A package built around Brentz and Britton probably has enough long-term upside to entice a trade, so long as there are some decent lottery tickets thrown in, like Celestino and Vinicio. But if it doesn't, then there's no reason to pay more.

[maufman]

First off, who is untouchable... Xander Bogaerts, Matt Barnes, Jackie Bradley, and Blake Swihart? Are there even untouchables?

Who's next on the list... Garin Cecchini, Bryce Brentz, or Henry Owens? How much cache does Anthony Ranaudo have?

Bogaerts is special. He won't be part of a Garza package, and Theo won't seriously expect him to be.

I think the asking price will be Barnes and at least one (and perhaps two) of Swihart/Cecchini/Brentz/Owens/Ranuado. That's too rich for my blood, but that's roughly what I think Theo will get from someone else.

Edit: The Gio Gonzalez and Mat Latos packages each involved four prospects, one of whom was better than Barnes, and at least two of the other three of which were in the same neighborhood as the second-tier guys listed above. Garza is not as cheap as those guys, and will therefore command less, but the price will be steep. Too steep, imo.

Edited by maufman, 20 July 2012 - 03:04 PM.

[bosockboy]

My guess is the cost for us starts with Cecchini, Kalish and Ranaudo....or similar. Who would pull the trigger on that?

[maufman]

One more thought -- Garza is on pace for his 5th straight 180+ inning season. Past performance is no guarantee of future results, but someone's going to look at that record, conclude Garza's a good extension target, and overpay.

Every team needs starting pitching, but we need a relatively expensive 2nd/3rd SP like Garza less than a lot of teams, so I'm fairly confident the overpaying team won't be us.

[rembrat]

I would be hesitant to trade for him considering how much he dislikes this organization.

[Drek717]

Nothing with real MLB potential.

I mean, you're essentially asking how much young, cost controlled talent would we risk for a guy who isn't exactly tearing it up in the NL Central, will cost us eight figures next year, and will boot one of Doubront, Morales, or Aceves out of the 2013 rotation (who are all WAY cheaper). And the big payoff this year is getting to boot Doubront or Cook out of the rotation after both have been effective this year.

Just seems wasteful and shortsighted to me. If it's done to let us shut someone down (Doubie because of innings, Lester because of Suck Flu) then I'd rather go after a cheaper one year rental. Francisco Liriano for example has been very good after his horrible April and early May. He's probably going to cost less and isn't going to require a premium for the right to pay him Arb3 money in 2013.

Edited by Drek717, 20 July 2012 - 03:21 PM.

[Seels]

Untouchable:

X
Barnes
Bradley
Brentz
Swihart
Owens

Start at:

Ranaudo (trade him before he has zero trade value)
Workman (sell high)
Jacobs (His loooong power stroke could kill him at AA)
Cook

Maybe add a lottery ticket if needed.

Side note: I HATE Garza, so if any of the 'untouchables' get traded for him I'll be breaking shit.

Why do you have Brentz as untouchable? Guy seems like his absolute ceiling is Cody Ross with worse defense.

[JakeRae]

Cook, Ranaudo and Celestino would be about the maximum of what I would offer. Also, worth mentioning is that I am pretty down on Ranaudo, so other guys currently ranked similarly might not be available in my world. Tazawa and Wilson are the only other guys currently in the SoxProspects top 20 that I'd be willing to base a trade for Garza around.

Lest I be accused of overvaluing prospects, the reason I am so loathe to give up talent is because I don't see Garza as much of an upgrade for this team. If we were throwing out a replacement level player as our 5th starter, I'd be willing to offer a lot more than the above for Garza. This is also the reason why none of the available starters should end up in Boston.

[Kramerica Industries]

I'm shocked that no one has mentioned Daniel Bard's name.

Is he someone you'd part with as the centerpiece of a Garza offer?

Garza would certainly be nice to have but I'm not sure (considering where the red sox are relative to the tax threshold) he will be worth the real dollars it will cost to have him next year. His presence on the roster could be a road block to making clear upgrades in the offseason.

Adding up the acquisition cost I can't imagine it being a smart investment.

Edited by Kramerica Industries, 20 July 2012 - 05:33 PM.

[Detts]

Why do you have Brentz as untouchable? Guy seems like his absolute ceiling is Cody Ross with worse defense.

Plus Arm, Plus Bat Speed, RH Power bat...those don't grow on trees.

He hit the ball as hard as anyone...if not harder...that I have seen here in Greenville. It was just a CANNON SHOT off his bat last year when he squared one up. He is getting fooled by offspeed stuff in Portland, but if/when he figures it out...look out.

[Clears Cleaver]

I'm shocked that no one has mentioned Daniel Bard's name.

Is he someone you'd part with as the centerpiece of a Garza offer?

Garza would certainly be nice to have but I'm not sure (considering where the red sox are relative to the tax threshold) he will be worth the real dollars it will cost to have him next year. His presence on the roster could be a road block to making clear upgrades in the offseason.

Adding up the acquisition cost I can't imagine it being a smart investment.

Bard has no value. maybe less than $0 value given his contract. They should have traded him this offseason

Garza is immediately the best pitcher on the team. and allows them to potentially trade Beckett either now or in the offseason.

[bosockboy]

One thing to remember with the one game playoff; because of possibly going to a final day to secure a one game opportunity, there won't be any assurances of who could pitch in that one game playoff. Worst case scenario you could have Cook against Jered Weaver on the road.

Adding a Garza would assure that you'd have a quality pitcher in that one game playoff (assuming Lester gets his shit together).

[Buzzkill Pauley]

One thing to remember with the one game playoff; because of possibly going to a final day to secure a one game opportunity, there won't be any assurances of who could pitch in that one game playoff. Worst case scenario you could have Cook against Jered Weaver on the road.

Adding a Garza would assure that you'd have a quality pitcher in that one game playoff (assuming Lester gets his shit together).

This makes no logical sense. If there's no assurances of who could pitch in that one-game playoff, how could getting Garza assure anything?

After last year, it's shocking that anyone here could so easily discount injuries and ineffectiveness among the pitching staff. After all, leading into the 2011 season the Sox had the strongest rotation I'd seen assembled since the mid-nineties Braves. On paper, at least.

[Papelbon's Poutine]

Why do people keep throwing Cook out as a piece for Garza? What on earth would CHC want with him? Its as bad as the earlier suggestions about Youks heading there.

(null)

[bosockboy]

This makes no logical sense. If there's no assurances of who could pitch in that one-game playoff, how could getting Garza assure anything?

After last year, it's shocking that anyone here could so easily discount injuries and ineffectiveness among the pitching staff. After all, leading into the 2011 season the Sox had the strongest rotation I'd seen assembled since the mid-nineties Braves. On paper, at least.

It would just mean someone of Cook's ilk wouldn't be pitching an elimination game....the worst we could throw out there of our five starters would be Doubront.

[E5 Yaz]

Why do people keep throwing Cook out as a piece for Garza? What on earth would CHC want with him? Its as bad as the earlier suggestions about Youks heading there.

As one who did this, I'll repeat that once the Cubs trade Dempster and Garza, they'll need major league ready arms to be in their rotation. Cook heading to Chicago, as a piece, gives them such an arm. It's by no means for them the major piece, but something they could use ... while opening the slot in the Sox rotation.

[koufax32]

Why do people keep throwing Cook out as a piece for Garza? What on earth would CHC want with him? Its as bad as the earlier suggestions about Youks heading there.

(null)

At the risk of speaking for others, it appears that the mention of Cook is the equivalent of "Garza Isn't all that important." I tend to agree with that assessment.

[Papelbon's Poutine]

As one who did this, I'll repeat that once the Cubs trade Dempster and Garza, they'll need major league ready arms to be in their rotation. Cook heading to Chicago, as a piece, gives them such an arm. It's by no means for them the major piece, but something they could use ... while opening the slot in the Sox rotation.

Obviously its not a major piece, but I don't even see why they would want him. At that point they would have obviously punted the season, so why wouldn't they call up some young guys to get their feet wet? Why do the arms they trot out need to be major league ready? Wouldn't they benefit more from taking a look at guys and getting them some ML time?

As for the slot in the Sox rotation, cut him. If he's going to Chi you're probably paying his freight anyway.

[Buzzkill Pauley]

It would just mean someone of Cook's ilk wouldn't be pitching an elimination game....the worst we could throw out there of our five starters would be Doubront.

If an all-time elite isn't on the mound, a one game playoff is a roll of the dice. Which IMO is why the Sox shouldn't strip the farm for Garza.

For that matter, I have far more faith in Doubront -- or even Cook -- pitching well in a win-or-go-home situation than I do Beckett or Lester.

[singaporesoxfan]

If it's win or go home I'd hope that at the first sign of trouble Bobby V goes straight to the bullpen.

[Buzzkill Pauley]

If it's win or go home I'd hope that at the first sign of trouble Bobby V goes straight to the bullpen.

He better have Atchison warming up before the first batter steps into the box, then.

[JakeRae]

Obviously its not a major piece, but I don't even see why they would want him. At that point they would have obviously punted the season, so why wouldn't they call up some young guys to get their feet wet? Why do the arms they trot out need to be major league ready? Wouldn't they benefit more from taking a look at guys and getting them some ML time?

As for the slot in the Sox rotation, cut him. If he's going to Chi you're probably paying his freight anyway.

I included Cook because a trade for a starter means he has no role in Boston so it makes sense to include him. If Chicago doesn't want him, feel free to imagine my proposal involving Cook as a 3-team trade where Cook goes somewhere else for prospects that go to Chicago. In any event, the question that was posed was what I would give up for Garza, not what I think it would take to acquire Garza. Cook is part of my answer to that question. If the latter question is being posed, I probably don't include Cook or make the 3-team element explicit.

[mfried]

Bard has no value. maybe less than $0 value given his contract. They should have traded him this offseason

Garza is immediately the best pitcher on the team. and allows them to potentially trade Beckett either now or in the offseason.

Even if Beckett and Lester's failures make Garza look golden, he's not as talented a pitcher as Buchholz.

Edited by mfried, 21 July 2012 - 01:12 PM.

[mfried]

The only kinds of pitcher who would be welcomed by Theo In a Garza trade are strong prospects or rookies - Ranaudo, Doubront, Wilson- NOT Beckett orLester. If we could trade Backett for some strong prospects, and flip them for Garza I would be quite pleased. Pointless to think of Cook as apiece in a direct Garza trade.

[BrooklynDog45]

The only kinds of pitcher who would be welcomed by Theo In a Garza trade are strong prospects or rookies - Ranaudo, Doubront, Wilson- NOT Beckett orLester. If we could trade Backett for some strong prospects, and flip them for Garza I would be quite pleased. Pointless to think of Cook as apiece in a direct Garza trade.

Or Beckett for prospects that are flipped for Lee where Philly picks up money that make Beckett years equal money.