Good place to start this.
Sox scouted Matthew Boyd tonight in Detroit.
Sox scouted Matthew Boyd tonight in Detroit.
I thought of Greene also and seems much more likely.I feel like it's a lot more likely they were hoping to scout Shane Greene.
Boyd to BOS seems incredibly unlikely: 1) he will be really pricy in terms of prospects since he's under control until 2023, 2) he has given up 10 HRs in 29 innings in June, and 3) not sure where I saw this earlier today, but he has been way worse against good teams than bad teams so far this season.
That's why I said 'hoping to', obviously scouts don't know beforehand when a closer will pitch or not.Just informational, Greene did not pitch last night for Detroit.
\Who will the Sox make available for a guy like Greene?
EDIT_ but more importantly, I should add... what will it actually take to get him?
Scouting other teams' major league talent is a first step toward selling? How does that work?I believe this is the first step toward selling.
First see what talent at what cost is available to improve the underperforming Sox.
Then decide to buy or sell.
Step 1. Think like Felger and take the most cynical view of any situation.Scouting other teams' major league talent is a first step toward selling? How does that work?
They have a perfectly decent chance of making the wild card. Then it's a coin flip to make the actual playoffs. At which point the bullpen likely automatically improves. Why are they selling? Because the Yankees are good?I believe this is the first step toward selling.
First see what talent at what cost is available to improve the underperforming Sox.
Then decide to buy or sell.
The WC standings in 3 weeks will determine whether the RS are sellers or not. As things stand now, no. They are in a cluster of a handful of teams. They are not going to bail on a season while that is the case.I believe this is the first step toward selling.
First see what talent at what cost is available to improve the underperforming Sox.
Then decide to buy or sell.
Fair question. My economy of force approach to writing requires reflection.Scouting other teams' major league talent is a first step toward selling? How does that work?
OK, so what you're saying is they'll take a first step toward buying, but in the end they'll go in the other direction. Got it.Fair question. My economy of force approach to writing requires reflection.
I believe underperforming Red Sox will have parts sold off before the deadline. Sox leadership is taking prudent steps to explore the possibility and cost of improvement - but ultimately ending where I began.
Sell.
I thought Felger was taking a “don’t panic” approach ...... that the team is a playoff contender and, once there, anything can happen.Step 1. Think like Felger and take the most cynical view of any situation.
Step 2. ?Step 1. Think like Felger and take the most cynical view of any situation.
The problem with this is that the Sox need Chavis (or I guess some player, it doesn't have to be Chavis) to play 2B or 1B for the league minimum or close to it so that they can afford to give raises to Mookie, Benintendi, Rodriguez, etc. He has a lot of value in that sense, if he can hit a fastball and keep his K% under 40%.I would definitely say that Chavis is on the trade market for a bullpen arm. I don't think he necessarily fits long term in the Sox plan.... his value is probably somewhat high right now (can play a variety of positions, 5+ more years on team that picks him up, has shown power swing). Moreland should be back soon for the short term and the Sox have a few 1B/3B/DH options that could fill that role if Devers needs to move around (yeah, I'd prefer to keep Devers at 3B though).
Definitely. There are young players who may be stars, like Devers. And there are guys who will give you league average or a bit above performance, but do it cheaply, like Chavis. Hey, maybe he develops into something special too, but so far he looks like a home grown version of what the Sox have been paying free agents market rate to do at 1B. That savings could be huge in keeping emerging talent over the next few years.The problem with this is that the Sox need Chavis (or I guess some player, it doesn't have to be Chavis) to play 2B or 1B for the league minimum or close to it so that they can afford to give raises to Mookie, Benintendi, Rodriguez, etc. He has a lot of value in that sense, if he can hit a fastball and keep his K% under 40%.
I get that.... but it seems like Dalbec could possibly step in and do that right now. He's got a better defensive rep, flashes more power and has the same strikeout problem. Not advocating... but Chavis doesn't really seem to be an irreplaceable part even considering his cost. With Porcello, Panda money (and JDM money) about to come off the books, it seems that they'd be able to find the money there to pay Mookie and give raises around. Additionally, I'm pretty sure the tax threshold will go up a good $15M (gut feeling, no data).Definitely. There are young players who may be stars, like Devers. And there are guys who will give you league average or a bit above performance, but do it cheaply, like Chavis. Hey, maybe he develops into something special too, but so far he looks like a home grown version of what the Sox have been paying free agents market rate to do at 1B. That savings could be huge in keeping emerging talent over the next few years.
I think we have a slightly better idea of the floor on Chavis than a kid currently with 350 at-bats in AA. I'm not picking a horse in the race between them, because I am a crap minor league baseball player evaluator, but I'd be more comfortable keeping the one who has shown something in the majors. I'd be more inclined to give up someone who is a bit more blocked than Chavis or Dalbec. I also don't think trading things of real value for relief pitchers is a good idea. As noted above, you're usually just paying for someone who had a good half season so far, and I'll have to look for the article, but I believe fangraphs had a piece a while ago showing that performance over the first half of a season had little predictive power for performance over the second half for relievers. And paying for a proven multi year reliever stud is just not going to be in the budget in terms of cash or prospects.I get that.... but it seems like Dalbec could possibly step in and do that right now. He's got a better defensive rep, flashes more power and has the same strikeout problem. Not advocating... but Chavis doesn't really seem to be an irreplaceable part even considering his cost. With Porcello, Panda money (and JDM money) about to come off the books, it seems that they'd be able to find the money there to pay Mookie and give raises around. Additionally, I'm pretty sure the tax threshold will go up a good $15M (gut feeling, no data).
To me, a good reliever is going to cost Chavis or Dalbec and possibly another minor arm (like Tanner Houk). If it's Chavis or Dalbec, I think Dalbec has both the higher ceiling and higher floor.*
*Getting flashbacks to the Rizzo-Anderson and Khalish-Reddick (Sox lost on both them... betting on Anderson and Reddick)
Chavis is also younger than that kid in AA. You don't need to be an expert to know what that means in regards to prospects and age related performances.I think we have a slightly better idea of the floor on Chavis than a kid currently with 350 at-bats in AA. I'm not picking a horse in the race between them, because I am a crap minor league baseball player evaluator, but I'd be more comfortable keeping the one who has shown something in the majors. I'd be more inclined to give up someone who is a bit more blocked than Chavis or Dalbec. I also don't think trading things of real value for relief pitchers is a good idea. As noted above, you're usually just paying for someone who had a good half season so far, and I'll have to look for the article, but I believe fangraphs had a piece a while ago showing that performance over the first half of a season had little predictive power for performance over the second half for relievers. And paying for a proven multi year reliever stud is just not going to be in the budget in terms of cash or prospects.
He also can't play a role in the playoffs, where as EdRod can and most likely will. They aren't going to leave a hole in their playoff roster because they have Wright.Wright isn't going to be starting. The rest of your list is a laundry list of players. Which one(s) fill a Pirates need?
Like he's actually thought of what the pirates needThe rest of your list is a laundry list of players. Which one(s) fill a Pirates need?
It's really just about what the Red Sox need.Like he's actually thought of what the pirates need
I could see the Pirates actually wanting EdRod, but I wouldn't trade EdRod for Vazquez alone and as I noted earlier, it just leaves another potential hole come playoff time.It's really just about what the Red Sox need.
The team they have, when healthy, won the World Series last year with a franchise best in wins. It's not unreasonable to have the view that it's hard to imagine fielding a better team, especially if we're talking about deadline trades and adding payroll. They have invested heavily up and down the roster already. It's not as though they can simply discard those that aren't performing well and replace them with players guaranteed to be significantly better. Should they be trading the precious few resources they have in terms of prospects to upgrade spots that could be improved just as easily with players they already have either coming back from injury or simply breaking out of whatever slump they're in?"It's hard to imagine fielding a better team." Wtf? It's really not THAT hard, just look at everyone above you in the standings.
Also them claiming it's not a luxury tax issue seems like total BS.
Similar question -- suppose the Sox trade Castillo, and include cash in the deal to pay a chunk of his salary next year. Does that cash get counted toward the luxury tax threshold? Or is it off the books, just like his original salary? And does this depend on whether the other team puts him on the 25-man roster?That article quoting Henry includes a mention that the Sox are already over the luxury tax threshold of $246 million, according to this site. I believe that is incorrect as the $251.4 payroll figure erroneously includes Rusney Castillo's $11.8 million. Anyone have a definitive answer on this?
No, the team they have didn't win the WS. The team they had last year had a closer and another bullpen pitcher capable of throwing 100 MPH. Kelly was hit and miss, but last year's pen was not the same as this tire fire. Couple that with below expectation performances by players like Sale, JD, and Mookie and you have a mediocre team. It doesn't take much to go from a champion to a wild card contender.The team they have, when healthy, won the World Series last year with a franchise best in wins. It's not unreasonable to have the view that it's hard to imagine fielding a better team, especially if we're talking about deadline trades and adding payroll. They have invested heavily up and down the roster already. It's not as though they can simply discard those that aren't performing well and replace them with players guaranteed to be significantly better. Should they be trading the precious few resources they have in terms of prospects to upgrade spots that could be improved just as easily with players they already have either coming back from injury or simply breaking out of whatever slump they're in?
When you're spending $13M on 1B already, and both players have spent more time on the IL than off, is it wise to invest more in another 1B or wait for one or both of them to get healthy? When you have a $17M pitcher on the IL who is in the process of working his way back, do you spend more to get another pitcher or wait for him to come back? Easy for a fan to say spend whatever it takes, but a lot harder for the team to do so considering not just the financial implications but also roster construction. They only have so many roster spots.
If the team is a wild card contender with a major starting pitching piece on his way back from the DL and a couple of major pieces playing below expectations (though not poorly), that really does seem to point to not making many major moves. Maybe if there's a bullpen upgrade available in the right price range that might be worth it, but standing pat seems like it falls within the reasonable choices.No, the team they have didn't win the WS. The team they had last year had a closer and another bullpen pitcher capable of throwing 100 MPH. Kelly was hit and miss, but last year's pen was not the same as this tire fire. Couple that with below expectation performances by players like Sale, JD, and Mookie and you have a mediocre team. It doesn't take much to go from a champion to a wild card contender.
Top six relievers listed by # of appearances, one is 2018 and one is 2019. Which one looks like a tire fire and which one looks like a championship bullpen?No, the team they have didn't win the WS. The team they had last year had a closer and another bullpen pitcher capable of throwing 100 MPH. Kelly was hit and miss, but last year's pen was not the same as this tire fire. Couple that with below expectation performances by players like Sale, JD, and Mookie and you have a mediocre team. It doesn't take much to go from a champion to a wild card contender.
I guess it comes down to the definition of "a lot".Doesn't sound like the Sox will be adding salary, so they might need to unload salary to add salary
![]()
Red Sox Owner John Henry: "We’re Not Going To Be Looking To Add A Lot Of Payroll" At Deadline
"If we play up to our capabilities we will easily make the playoffs. That’s how I see it," Red Sox …www.mlbtraderumors.com
View attachment 25031
Perhaps a bit of Eovaldi and Pearce buyer's remorse. DD's posterior might be starting to feel a tinge of warmth."My take is that maybe it isn’t the best thing in the world to bring back the same team in its entirety every time. You don’t want to break a team down. But maybe a few changes wouldn’t hurt. But the feeling is always different after you win, apparently."
No.I guess it comes down to the definition of "a lot".
I thought this was the most interesting quote in the article:
Perhaps a bit of Eovaldi and Pearce buyer's remorse. DD's posterior might be starting to feel a tinge of warmth.
Assuming Moreland and Pearce aren't walking through that door anytime soon, Morrison is a perfect platoon partner for Chavis. He also has significant outfield corner experience, so we wouldn't have to risk JD out there.Tweet from Joel Sherman: “Logan Morrison had a July 1 opt out date from AAA with #Yankees, who called up Mike Ford to replace Luke Voit (IL). So this morning Morrison requested his unconditional release.”
This is hardly an endorsement but LoMo makes some sense right about now. Been hitting .289/.341.658 in AAA.
Pearce just had a set back and ended his rehab so he's not a factor at the moment. LoMo as a LHH would ostensibly be for Moreland's spot. Moreland reportedly began "baseball activities" last week so he can't be too far off from a return. I don't think Moreland and LoMo can really co-exist on the same roster, but if they want to give a trial run to LoMo with the thought of maybe spinning him off once Moreland comes back, it might be worth the flier.Assuming Moreland and Pearce aren't walking through that door anytime soon, Morrison is a perfect platoon partner for Chavis. He also has significant outfield corner experience, so we wouldn't have to risk JD out there.
Probably can't beat the price, either.