Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?
Non-Tender Deadline (11/30 at midnight EST)
#1
Posted 28 November 2012 - 10:40 AM
1) Sign them to a contract for 2013 or beyond.
2) Offer them arbitration.
3) Decline to tender them any offer, immediately making them free agents.
Last year's deadline was 2 weeks later (Dec. 12) and came after the winter meetings. Under the new CBA, this year's accelerated calendar makes it a far more important part of market dynamics. When clubs meet in Nashville next week (Dec 3-6), everyone involved will have a more complete picture of who's available.
Here are the Sox' players for whom the clock ticks, with year of arb-eligibility in parentheses:
Alfredo Aceves, RHRP (2)
Scott Atchison, RHRP (2)
Andrew Bailey, RHRP (2)
Daniel Bard, RHRP (2)
Craig Breslow, LHRP (3)
Jacoby Ellsbury, OF (3)
Rich Hill, LHRP (3)
Andrew Miller, LHRP (2)
Franklin Morales, LHRP (2)
Jarrod Saltalamacchia, C (3)
Ryan Sweeney, OF (3)
Most of these guys will have decent value to the club, either as projected members of the 2013 team or as trade commodities. IMO those most likely to be non-tendered are Sweeney (who's about to drop further down the depth chart once Jonny Gomes officially signs) and Aceves (who seemed to wear out his welcome last year with his behavioral outbursts). Hill has been NTd twice before, and could be again since he's coming off TJ surgery. Atchison, with UCL issues of his own, is another candidate; his desire to stay near Boston, where his daughter's been getting treatment for a rare medical condition, makes him more likely to re-sign with the Sox on a minor league deal -- just as he did last winter after the club declined his 2012 option.
Then there are the players from other clubs who might garner interest from Boston should they be non-tendered and hit the market. If Kendrys Morales (LAA) and/or Mark Reynolds (BAL) become free agents, that's bound to influence the Sox' tactics with Mike Napoli and Adam LaRoche. Should a decent SP like Jeff Karstens (PIT) be made available, perhaps the Sox think twice about pursuing a more costly and risk-laden option like Zach Greinke.
#2
Posted 28 November 2012 - 11:27 AM
#3
Posted 28 November 2012 - 11:27 AM
I hope to be wrong.
#4
Posted 28 November 2012 - 11:41 AM
#5
Posted 28 November 2012 - 11:46 AM
On the bubble: Atchison, Hill, Miller (I predict at least 1 or 2 will return)
Out (I hope): Aceves, Sweeney
#6
Posted 28 November 2012 - 11:52 AM
Sweeney is going to make $2M, why tender him? What does he do that Kalish can't?
1) Provide proven, experienced quality defense at all three OF positions. (Kalish may have the ability to do this, but the results so far at the ML level have been mixed.)
2) Spend the majority of his time on the bench without compromising the development of a valuable asset.
#7
Posted 28 November 2012 - 11:57 AM
When Francona was the manager, no one heard any problems from Aceves, just that he was willing to go out there every day and pitch for the team that really needed him. When Valentine was the manager, there were suddenly attitude problems with Aceves getting along with the manager.
He could be a solid pitcher again if used in the right role, and we need pitching. Even including his horrific 2012, he's got a career ERA of 3.56 in 324 IP, all in the AL East. He's one year away from 114 IP at a 2.61 ERA.
There's no need to just give him away for nothing, just because he was used incorrectly last year and had problems with Bobby Freaking Valentine. Bringing him back on a one-year deal should be worth the risk.
#8
Posted 28 November 2012 - 01:33 PM
Clashing with Bobby Valentine should earn you a medal. Aceves, when used properly and Lord knows Booby V was too stupid to do that, is very effective and a good weapon out of the pen or swinging into the rotation when needed.Aceves is a decent pitcher if he's used in the right role-- 7th and 8th inning reliever-- and he has a manager who doesn't make his head case issues into big problems.
When Francona was the manager, no one heard any problems from Aceves, just that he was willing to go out there every day and pitch for the team that really needed him. When Valentine was the manager, there were suddenly attitude problems with Aceves getting along with the manager.
He could be a solid pitcher again if used in the right role, and we need pitching. Even including his horrific 2012, he's got a career ERA of 3.56 in 324 IP, all in the AL East. He's one year away from 114 IP at a 2.61 ERA.
There's no need to just give him away for nothing, just because he was used incorrectly last year and had problems with Bobby Freaking Valentine. Bringing him back on a one-year deal should be worth the risk.
#9
Posted 28 November 2012 - 03:09 PM
#10
Posted 28 November 2012 - 04:37 PM
Brian Wilson, Jair Jurrjens, Mike Pelfrey, John Lannan and Luke Hochevar are among the more intriguing names who seem more likely than not to hit the market, and I could see the Sox being interested in all of them to varying degrees as "buy low"/reclamation candidates.
#11
Posted 28 November 2012 - 04:58 PM
There's no need to just give him away for nothing, just because he was used incorrectly last year and had problems with Bobby Freaking Valentine. Bringing him back on a one-year deal should be worth the risk.
Well, there was the whole "5th Starter" audition as well, which Aceves clearly thought was BS. Valentine, IIRC, wanted Bard in the pen, which would have made Aceves the default 5th starter. I know Bard had his problems in 2011, but his entire recovery plan this year is to "do what I did in 2010."
Although I thought it was the right idea to start Bard, you can't help but wonder where the sox would have been mid-season if we a) were spared Aceves's first month in the bullpen (and had Bard on his "regular" game plan), b) were spared Bard's first month starting. There's a decent chance we'd have Beckett and Crawford as two of the main topics of this off season. And still be talking about BVs latest quotes.
I think that one decision really changed the fortunes of the Sox. Hopefully, painful as the season was, that mistake will lead to better things in the future.
#12
Posted 28 November 2012 - 05:45 PM
'dog, I agree with most of those guys, but I don't think Brian Wilson would be on their radar unless they move Bailey. Having Tazawa, Aceves (who I think we tender), Bard, and Bailey leaves little room for Wilson.MLBTR has a list of NT candidates for all 30 clubs.
Brian Wilson, Jair Jurrjens, Mike Pelfrey, John Lannan and Luke Hochevar are among the more intriguing names who seem more likely than not to hit the market, and I could see the Sox being interested in all of them to varying degrees as "buy low"/reclamation candidates.
#13
Posted 28 November 2012 - 07:46 PM
'dog, I agree with most of those guys, but I don't think Brian Wilson would be on their radar unless they move Bailey. Having Tazawa, Aceves (who I think we tender), Bard, and Bailey leaves little room for Wilson.
I disagree for a couple of reasons. First, even if you consider Tazawa and Aceves sure things, there is huge uncertainty about how Bailey will perform in '13 and whether Bard is even a viable major leaguer (or minor leaguer for that matter). Wilson is no sure thing given that he is bouncing back from elbow surgery but as Olney and a few others noted, he is "local" (N.H.) and probably has a better chance to reclaim a closer's role in Boston than he does in many other places.
And, love him or hate him, he is a very marketable personality - I suspect that will appeal to the Sox FO as they attempt to rebuild the team.
#14
Posted 28 November 2012 - 07:54 PM
'dog, I agree with most of those guys, but I don't think Brian Wilson would be on their radar unless they move Bailey. Having Tazawa, Aceves (who I think we tender), Bard, and Bailey leaves little room for Wilson.
Melancon too. The pen is one area that doesn't need a ton of rebuilding. I could see signing Wilson if they moved Bailey,
#15
Posted 28 November 2012 - 07:57 PM
I disagree for a couple of reasons. First, even if you consider Tazawa and Aceves sure things, there is huge uncertainty about how Bailey will perform in '13 and whether Bard is even a viable major leaguer (or minor leaguer for that matter). Wilson is no sure thing given that he is bouncing back from elbow surgery but as Olney and a few others noted, he is "local" (N.H.) and probably has a better chance to reclaim a closer's role in Boston than he does in many other places.
And, love him or hate him, he is a very marketable personality - I suspect that will appeal to the Sox FO as they attempt to rebuild the team.
I love Wilson, it's not a matter of likeability and I agree he'd likely flourish in this spotlight, I just don't see the FO being interested unless they move Bailey. If Bailey goes bye bye, I'd be onboard with a Wilson signing, pending physical of course.
#16
Posted 28 November 2012 - 09:49 PM
I love Wilson, it's not a matter of likeability and I agree he'd likely flourish in this spotlight, I just don't see the FO being interested unless they move Bailey. If Bailey goes bye bye, I'd be onboard with a Wilson signing, pending physical of course.
Again, I am not sure Bailey and Wilson are mutually exclusive. At this point, Bailey cannot be viewed as anything other than a relatively high-ceiling bounce back candidate. Ditto Wilson. The Sox can start the season with both in the pen and if they both pan out they can deal one or the other at the deadline. I think the Sox will have interest but like most other posts in this thread, its all speculation until these guys actually hit the market.
#17
Posted 28 November 2012 - 10:10 PM
#18
Posted 29 November 2012 - 03:43 PM
https://twitter.com/...251566930882560
#RedSox plan to tender a contract to arbitration-eligible RHP Alfredo Aceves before tomorrow night's deadline
#19
Posted 29 November 2012 - 03:46 PM
#20
Posted 29 November 2012 - 04:16 PM
Heyman:https://twitter.com/JonHeymanCBS/status/274252379044577280
That is one I would look into.
#21
Posted 29 November 2012 - 04:37 PM
That is one I would look into.
Weren't there rumors of Ellsbury for Jurrjens last offseason? Or was that just some media speculation/what-iffing that I'm misremembering? I'd look into him too, though if they bring him in that fills the rotation barring other moves. Is everyone comfortable rolling with Buchholz-Lester-Jurrjens-Doubront-Lackey?
#22
Posted 29 November 2012 - 04:41 PM
I'm not comfortable with the idea of including Jurrjens in the rotation, period. There is a reason he is getting non-tendered and it is because he isn't particularly good. I don't like the idea of bringing a low K-rate pitcher who has been seeing his HR% trend in the wrong direction for years now into this division and this park.Weren't there rumors of Ellsbury for Jurrjens last offseason? Or was that just some media speculation/what-iffing that I'm misremembering? I'd look into him too, though if they bring him in that fills the rotation barring other moves. Is everyone comfortable rolling with Buchholz-Lester-Jurrjens-Doubront-Lackey?
#23
Posted 29 November 2012 - 04:49 PM
I'm not comfortable with the idea of including Jurrjens in the rotation, period. There is a reason he is getting non-tendered and it is because he isn't particularly good. I don't like the idea of bringing a low K-rate pitcher who has been seeing his HR% trend in the wrong direction for years now into this division and this park.
Likely not a great pickup, but he has great SSS numbers against the AL
#24
Posted 29 November 2012 - 05:03 PM
Normally, pitchers looking for one-year, make-good contracts have zero interest in Boston. Because Jurrjens has two years left before free agency, however, he might be willing to sign in Boston if we offer two guaranteed years. Personally, I don't like Jurrjens enough to make that commitment and would prefer to look for a one-year salary dump (Bruce Chen is rumored to be available, for example), but if you think Jurrjens might be one of those rare SPs who can consistently outperform his peripherals -- and he was building a nice case for himself in that regard prior to 2012 -- I could see rolling the dice on such a deal.
#25
Posted 30 November 2012 - 03:09 PM
Scott Atchison told WEEI.com Friday afternoon that the Red Sox have informed the 36-year-old reliever that they will not be tendering him a contract, making Atchison a free agent for a second straight season.
http://www.weei.com/...ntract-atchison
Atchison was non-tendered a year ago, choosing to re-sign with the Red Sox.
"I would like to stay in Boston," he said by phone, "but now we're going to have to see what's out there."
Edited by Corsi, 30 November 2012 - 03:19 PM.
#26
Posted 30 November 2012 - 04:36 PM
#28
Posted 30 November 2012 - 07:08 PM
Edited by Savin Hillbilly, 30 November 2012 - 07:10 PM.
#29
Posted 30 November 2012 - 07:19 PM
What do we think the chances are that any or all of those three come back?
I wouldn't be surprised to see either of the pitchers back on minor league deals. It's exactly what happened with both of them last year.
#30
Posted 30 November 2012 - 07:22 PM
Hill - Returns on a minor league deal to continue rehabbing from Tommy John surgery. Whether he ultimately rejoins the club once healthy will depend on if the team trades Miller and/or Breslow.
Sweeney - Vaya con dios.
#31
Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:00 PM
I'll never understand why Sweeney wasn't dropped after the bullshit he pulled last year.
#32
Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:09 PM
It probably came down to Miller vs Hill. Maybe they like Miller better, or maybe they just think it's more likely that Hill comes back on a minor league deal.
#33
Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:10 PM
#34
Posted 30 November 2012 - 08:14 PM
#35
Posted 30 November 2012 - 09:05 PM
...but a lot of upside an this team has oodles of cash, right? Although, it probably came down to a roster spot and they like Breslow and Milller better
I'd say it's 100% about the roster spot.
Edited by bombdiggz, 01 December 2012 - 10:17 PM.
#36
Posted 01 December 2012 - 10:21 AM
#37
Posted 01 December 2012 - 03:11 PM
19.2 IP
8 IP
4 IP
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users












