Wright is starting tomorrow and Brian Johnson goes on Tuesday.Danny_Darwin said:So starter still TBA for tomorrow and Tuesday as of now?
Wright is starting tomorrow and Brian Johnson goes on Tuesday.Danny_Darwin said:So starter still TBA for tomorrow and Tuesday as of now?
The guys who warrant those kinds of offers don't get categorized as "middling" by anyone.
If both were lined up to start the play in game this postseason, who would ypu rather have: Miley or Porcello?
I meant for the entire season.Rasputin said:There's no such thing as consistency over a two game sample.
Probably on a list of best post-deadline deals?Plympton91 said:Best deadline deals as sellers?
Andrew Miller for Edrod looks good so far
Mike Stanley for Tony Armas Jr got us half the Pedro package
Slocomb for Varitek and Lowe is just inexplicably good fortune
The Punto deal goes here somewhere.
Jamie Moyer for Darren Bragg got them a quality outfielder though Moyer went from having Clay Buchholz's durability with Craig Breslow's stuff and then became a near all star for a decade.
Mike Stanton for Mark Brandenburg and Kerry Lacy was a big miss as Stanton was a stud set up guy for years after that
The Leater and Lackey trades look awful right now.
The rotation has already gotten a major upgrade.RedOctober3829 said:If you want to contend next year, the rotation has to get a major, major upgrade.
Rasputin said:The rotation has already gotten a major upgrade.
Kelly and Masterson are out of the rotation and probably won't ever be back in. That leaves Porcello as the lone remaining guy who picked like utter crap and he's almost certainly going to be in the rotation come next April which means you better hope he goes back to what he was before this season.
I'm all for an ace, but a rotation of Buchholz, Rodriguez, Porcello, Miley, and whichever of Johnson, Owens, and Kelly survives probably wouldn't be terrible.
Snoop Soxy Dogg said:
This seems awfully optimistic to me. As we've seen this year, the line between "not terrible" and "terrible" is quite fine. I'd hope that they'd aim higher than that. That rotation does need a major upgrade. Frankly, I'd give up on Buchholz and reallocate his money. It wouldn't be a terrible thing in the big picture if he did get TJS. To me, having to rely on Buchholz over the past 2 years has been one of this team's biggest, consistent, repeated failure. If we haven't learned that the guy is not durable by now, I'm not sure we'll ever learn.
I'd say you sign 1-2 pitchers from this year's crop. - Ace 1, Ace 2, Ed-Rod, Porcello, Miley. Johnson/Owens/Kelly/Reclamation project as your back-ups. Question then becomes how you get Ace 1 and Ace 2, but I think the overhaul is needed.
NDame616 said:
Why stop there? Think we can trade for Trout? Harper? Kershaw?
This ownership group is not going to sign 2 of the high priced FA arms out there. I'm skeptical that they would even sign one. Can you imagine the PR hit if they sign a big pried FA arm 300+ days after letting Lester walk? "HOW CAN THE RED SOX SIGN CUETO NOW AND NOT LESTER LAST YEAR????"
FanSinceBoggs said:
I'm not convinced the Red Sox will do this.
The one difference is the new variable that has been added, and that variable is: the 2015 season, or more specifically, the 2015 starting rotation. The Red Sox failed to put together an adequate starting rotation for the 2015 season and that reality may change their opinion on those lousy 30-year old Max Scherzer types.
Plympton91 said:The Leater and Lackey trades look awful right now.
moondog80 said:
The Lester deal was fine, Cespedes is having a good year in Detroit. The fact that they flipped him for Porcello is another issue.
Snoop Soxy Dogg said:
A bit knee-jerk there, no? I didn't think my suggestion quite matched that level of hyperbole.
1)I said "sign 1-2" of the current crop. a)They're not all going to make Lester money b)You can sign only one and use your farm system to get another. Or whatever. You ignored my larger point, which is that they need two pitchers that are much better than what they've got.
2)I'd hope that they learn from what hasn't worked and make adjustments to their approach. And "adjustments" doesn't have to mean necessarily spending big money on a pitcher (though I happen to think it does). It means a half-assed rotation isn't going to work in the AL East. And I'm sorry, to me a Buchholz-Porcello-Miley-EdRod-Johnson rotation sounds asinine after the past couple of years, and really what we're currently witnessing this year. If they go with that again, well - not looking forward to it.
3)Who cares about the PR? They shouldn't. If they really think the above rotation is the way to go, they should go with it. I think they'd be wrong, but they should do it. If they think they need to pay a frontline starter, they should do it. Ignore the inevitable whining about Lester. I mean, people are going to whine about Lester anyway, that's one thing we're quite good at.
The larger issue of what I'm suggesting isn't the Lester whine-fest, it's what your payroll looks like once you've made those adjustments. I'm not quite sure they can afford to have 3 $20m+ pitchers.
RedOctober3829 said:If you want to contend next year, the rotation has to get a major, major upgrade. Here's how id go at it. Trade for Hamels at deadline, sign Cueto, pick up Buchholz option then trade him in offseason to replenish prospects lost in Hamels deal. Rotation of Hamels, Cueto, ERod, Porcello, Miley. You'd have Napoli, Victorino, and Buchholz off the books to offset the money paid to Hamels/Cueto. I think an offer of Margot/Devers/Johnson could net Hamels. Philly getstwo top OF prospects and a plug in starter and Sox don't give up B's plus Swihart or Moncada.
Snodgrass'Muff said:
Devers is a third baseman and there aren't any indications that he's going to move off of the position in the short term. Also, this is too much to pay for Hamels. Devers is currently the number 15 prospect in all of baseball and Margot is 24th on that list, according to Baseball America. Oh, and Brian Johnson is number 38.
The X Man Cometh said:
Not to mention that their ages dovetail with the core of the Red Sox roster. Right now, the best/most reliable pitcher on the team is a 22 year old. 2 out of the 3 best position players on the team are 22 year olds. Why trade top prospects, who can contribute alongside the core of the team, for a pitcher who by that time will be well past their prime?
If nothing else the Red Sox are victims of their big market status and promises. You can't tell the fans that they're targeting 2017, because "WE'RE THE RED SOX AND WE DON'T DO THAT!" But it's the rational play. Stand pat with the roster, sell what you can to roll value into the future, let Hanley take his lumps in LF and learn it, and play for 2017.
Of the 97 qualified starters in the majors, AL East teams have the following ranks in FIP:Snoop Soxy Dogg said:
2)I'd hope that they learn from what hasn't worked and make adjustments to their approach. And "adjustments" doesn't have to mean necessarily spending big money on a pitcher (though I happen to think it does). It means a half-assed rotation isn't going to work in the AL East. And I'm sorry, to me a Buchholz-Porcello-Miley-EdRod-Johnson rotation sounds asinine after the past couple of years, and really what we're currently witnessing this year. If they go with that again, well - not looking forward to it.
Defense has been poor, they have been "unlucky" in terms of bunching hits, Fenway may have an impact.Rudy Pemberton said:From FIP, all the Sox pitchers look pretty good, or at least respectable.
Buchholz 2.60
Rodriguez 3.57
Miley 3.81
Kelly 4.13
Masterson 4.39
Porcello 4.62
Problem is, in terms of actual ERA....
Buchholz 3.26
Rodriguez 3.59
Miley 4.49
Masterson 5.63
Kelly 5.67
Porcello 5.79
Sox actual ERA is 0.4 higher than their FIP...only the Phillies (0.47) are worse. What do folks make of this?
Probably not terrible is too optimistic?Snoop Soxy Dogg said:
This seems awfully optimistic to me. As we've seen this year, the line between "not terrible" and "terrible" is quite fine. I'd hope that they'd aim higher than that. That rotation does need a major upgrade. Frankly, I'd give up on Buchholz and reallocate his money. It wouldn't be a terrible thing in the big picture if he did get TJS. To me, having to rely on Buchholz over the past 2 years has been one of this team's biggest, consistent, repeated failure. If we haven't learned that the guy is not durable by now, I'm not sure we'll ever learn.
I'd say you sign 1-2 pitchers from this year's crop. - Ace 1, Ace 2, Ed-Rod, Porcello, Miley. Johnson/Owens/Kelly/Reclamation project as your back-ups. Question then becomes how you get Ace 1 and Ace 2, but I think the overhaul is needed.
Rasputin said:Probably not terrible is too optimistic?
There is zero chance this team goes out and gets two aces.
Maybe. But by this offseason, Cole Hamels at 3 years, $67.5 million (with a club option for year 4 at $20) is not going to be a market-value deal, it's going to be a significantly under market deal.Rudy Pemberton said:Trading three top prospects to get Hamels doesn't make a ton of sense to me. The value he provides this year doesn't mean much to a Sox team that is going nowhere. Wouldn't they be better served holding on to the prospects and see who is available in the offseason?
I think I remember saying they don't need two starters which is different than they won't get two starters. I don't remember at which point of the off season I might have said that.Rudy Pemberton said:
What was the claim last year...."they aren't adding two starters!!!!"?
NDame616 said:
Why stop there? Think we can trade for Trout? Harper? Kershaw?
This ownership group is not going to sign 2 of the high priced FA arms out there. I'm skeptical that they would even sign one. Can you imagine the PR hit if they sign a big pried FA arm 300+ days after letting Lester walk? "HOW CAN THE RED SOX SIGN CUETO NOW AND NOT LESTER LAST YEAR????"
I'm with you on the two aces. Fuck this whole "lets figure out some way to get our rotation good enough to be sort of average" attitude. We've got $45.5m coming off the books between Napoli, Victorino, Masterson, De Aza and Breslow and all of those guys can be replaced internally for no added money. Trade for Hamels now and give this team some kind of chance to compete for 2015 (I'd trade Swihart for reasons I've already expressed elsewhere but YMMV), then sign Price for Scherzer money in the offseason. Price-Hamels-Edro-Buchholz-Porcello, with Miley as quality long man depth, is a rotation built to win a goddamn championship. We will still have a very deep farm system and tons of young talent at the core of our roster and if Price sucks in 2019 we can deal with that problem then.RedOctober3829 said:If you want to contend next year, the rotation has to get a major, major upgrade. Here's how id go at it. Trade for Hamels at deadline, sign Cueto, pick up Buchholz option then trade him in offseason to replenish prospects lost in Hamels deal. Rotation of Hamels, Cueto, ERod, Porcello, Miley. You'd have Napoli, Victorino, and Buchholz off the books to offset the money paid to Hamels/Cueto. I think an offer of Margot/Devers/Johnson could net Hamels. Philly getstwo top OF prospects and a plug in starter and Sox don't give up B's plus Swihart or Moncada.
I assume at some point we want to extend Bogaerts and Betts...I'm not sure it's as simple as "$45m is coming off the books, let's spend!" You're advocating something like the following for next year:PrometheusWakefield said:We've got $45.5m coming off the books between Napoli, Victorino, Masterson, De Aza and Breslow and all of those guys can be replaced internally for no added money.
Bogey is represented by Boras, so an extension for him might not be realistic. Erod and Betts on the other hand can be very realistic.Toe Nash said:I assume at some point we want to extend Bogaerts and Betts...I'm not sure it's as simple as "$45m is coming off the books, let's spend!" You're advocating something like the following for next year:
Hamels 23
Cueto ~22
Rodriguez .5
Buchholz 13
Porcello 20
Miley 6
Koji 9
Taz ~4
Other RP 2-5
Vazquez .5
1Bman (Holt?) .5
Pedroia 13
Bogaerts .5, will enter arb in 2017
Sandoval 17.5
Hanley 20
Betts .5
Castillo 11.5
Ortiz 10+
Plus a bench, so figure 5m...That's $181m if you don't spend very much on a bench or filling out the pen, which isn't too crazy, but it's a lot of guys tied up long-term. For 2017 you'd only clear Koji and Papi (maybe) and Xander is going to get expensive whether or not you buy out his arb years in a long-term deal.
I guess you could look to dump a Porcello or blow past the luxury tax but you're just not leaving much flexibility which is kind of the point of having young stars.
I would like to not give up both. Operating on the assumption that Betts, Xander, Swihart, and ERod are off the table my first thought was that either one of Margot or Devers plus Johnson would get them in the ballpark. Then I thought someone like Jackie Bradley, Marco Hernandez, or say Deven Marrero would be a 3rd prospect in a deal. Eventually I did overestimate how much it could take to get Hamels but knowing Amaro and also that Hamels doesn't have to be dealt now makes me think it would take a lot.Snodgrass'Muff said:
Devers is a third baseman and there aren't any indications that he's going to move off of the position in the short term. Also, this is too much to pay for Hamels. Devers is currently the number 15 prospect in all of baseball and Margot is 24th on that list, according to Baseball America. Oh, and Brian Johnson is number 38.
Toe Nash said:I assume at some point we want to extend Bogaerts and Betts...I'm not sure it's as simple as "$45m is coming off the books, let's spend!" You're advocating something like the following for next year:
Hamels 23
Cueto ~22
Rodriguez .5
Buchholz 13
Porcello 20
Miley 6
Koji 9
Taz ~4
Other RP 2-5
Vazquez .5
1Bman (Holt?) .5
Pedroia 13
Bogaerts .5, will enter arb in 2017
Sandoval 17.5
Hanley 20
Betts .5
Castillo 11.5
Ortiz 10+
Plus a bench, so figure 5m...That's $181m if you don't spend very much on a bench or filling out the pen, which isn't too crazy, but it's a lot of guys tied up long-term. For 2017 you'd only clear Koji and Papi (maybe) and Xander is going to get expensive whether or not you buy out his arb years in a long-term deal.
I guess you could look to dump a Porcello or blow past the luxury tax but you're just not leaving much flexibility which is kind of the point of having young stars.
RedOctober3829 said:I would like to not give up both. Operating on the assumption that Betts, Xander, Swihart, and ERod are off the table my first thought was that either one of Margot or Devers plus Johnson would get them in the ballpark. Then I thought someone like Jackie Bradley, Marco Hernandez, or say Deven Marrero would be a 3rd prospect in a deal. Eventually I did overestimate how much it could take to get Hamels but knowing Amaro and also that Hamels doesn't have to be dealt now makes me think it would take a lot.
Toe Nash said:I assume at some point we want to extend Bogaerts and Betts...I'm not sure it's as simple as "$45m is coming off the books, let's spend!" You're advocating something like the following for next year:
Hamels 23
Cueto ~22
Rodriguez .5
Buchholz 13
Porcello 20
Miley 6
Koji 9
Taz ~4
Other RP 2-5
Vazquez .5
1Bman (Holt?) .5
Pedroia 13
Bogaerts .5, will enter arb in 2017
Sandoval 17.5
Hanley 20
Betts .5
Castillo 11.5
Ortiz 10+
Plus a bench, so figure 5m...That's $181m if you don't spend very much on a bench or filling out the pen, which isn't too crazy, but it's a lot of guys tied up long-term. For 2017 you'd only clear Koji and Papi (maybe) and Xander is going to get expensive whether or not you buy out his arb years in a long-term deal.
I guess you could look to dump a Porcello or blow past the luxury tax but you're just not leaving much flexibility which is kind of the point of having young stars.
Right, and so signing three players to $20 million-ish deals has significantly limited their flexibility, compounded by the fact that two of those guys have been disappointing. The Sox payroll situation is not pretty; they're going to need to get creative if they want to sign even one of the Cueto tier, let alone two as some have suggested. Assuming the $189 million LT line is still a hard cap for them.alwyn96 said:
I would think part of the flexibility of having young stars is being able to surround them with expensive FAs, right? Or preferrably inexpensive ones, but those guys are usually less expensive because they have more warts/risk. I mean, you lose the flexibility once you sign the expensive FA, but ultimately flexibility is just a tool to use to get better players, not an end in itself. You just hope they make the right choices on getting better players.
Danny_Darwin said:Right, and so signing three players to $20 million-ish deals has significantly limited their flexibility, compounded by the fact that two of those guys have been disappointing. The Sox payroll situation is not pretty; they're going to need to get creative if they want to sign even one of the Cueto tier, let alone two as some have suggested. Assuming the $189 million LT line is still a hard cap for them.
Rasputin said:
The tax threshhold has never been a hard cap for this team. I don't know if it's still the case, but a while ago the Sox were the team that had paid the second most in luxury tax money, very very very very very very far behind the Yankees.
Rasputin said:
The tax threshhold has never been a hard cap for this team. I don't know if it's still the case, but a while ago the Sox were the team that had paid the second most in luxury tax money, very very very very very very far behind the Yankees.
Danny_Darwin said:
Maybe "hard cap" wasn't the right wording, but they have tried to avoid paying that tax after 2011. I've found various reports suggesting that it was on their minds in the 2012 offseason at the least - hence why they traded Marco Scutaro for a guy whose name I had forgotten until just now. Henry's precise quote that "we can blow through one year" suggests that he's mindful of it as well. Granted, he says he's willing to exceed it for a season, but there actually aren't many expensive contracts coming off the books after 2016 and, as alluded to earlier, Bogaerts and Holt will be arb eligible after that season.
This is true. But a lot of the flexibility disappeared when they signed Sandoval, Hanley and Porcello. Adding two more pitchers for $45m gets rid of the rest of it and reduces your ability to extend someone like Betts or add someone like Victorino on a shorter, mid-range contract, or take on someone with a high salary to push you over the top, or any number of things.alwyn96 said:
I would think part of the flexibility of having young stars is being able to surround them with expensive FAs, right? Or preferrably inexpensive ones, but those guys are usually less expensive because they have more warts/risk. I mean, you lose the flexibility once you sign the expensive FA, but ultimately flexibility is just a tool to use to get better players, not an end in itself. You just hope they make the right choices on getting better players.
Toe Nash said:This is true. But a lot of the flexibility disappeared when they signed Sandoval, Hanley and Porcello. Adding two more pitchers for $45m gets rid of the rest of it and reduces your ability to extend someone like Betts or add someone like Victorino on a shorter, mid-range contract, or take on someone with a high salary to push you over the top, or any number of things.
In my lifetime said:
By 2017 ---- Hanley is almost sure to be DH with a better chance to be playing 1B than LF.
You mean the Era that produced three championships in ten years? Throw the bums out.Thelobsterroll said:The problems of this team extends to the Theo Era. Cherington seems to be a Theo disciple and the front office is filled with like minded individuals. I think it might be time to purge the front office and get a new perspective in there.
The same Theo Era that built 3 World Championships and who has turned the bottom feeding Cubs into what looks like a force to be reckoned with for the next decade? Oh how I long for the Lou Gorman days, you?Thelobsterroll said:The problems of this team extends to the Theo Era. Cherington seems to be a Theo disciple and the front office is filled with like minded individuals. I think it might be time to purge the front office and get a new perspective in there.
jtn46 said:Yeah and while Theo at times would be clever in the name of avoiding risk, he would make a splash often. Cherington built a championship team, so hard to fault him in an extreme manner, but his track record acquiring talent from outside the organization looks poor right now, Uehara and Holt are the only big success stories on the roster right now, and Uehara emerged largely because Hanrahan was a complete disaster.
Sure but Victorino has been a bad acquisition overall, and the Napoli extension appears to have been a mistake. I'm thrilled at the result of 2013 and certainly there is more to being a GM than acquiring players from outside the organization, the Sox are loaded with young talent, and Cherington will likely one day look smart for not giving up that talent to GFIN. Still, I'm salty over letting Lester walk and then giving a contract not far off of Lester's to a guy that's currently one of the worst starters in the league. I don't want Cherington fired, he's good at enough to make him better than a lot of GM's, but Cherington seems to learn slowly that these risk averse moves still carry plenty of risk.Red(s)HawksFan said:
I don't think because they've fallen off now that we can't credit Cherington for Victorino and Napoli's contributions in 2013. Ditto for Jonny Gomes and even Ryan Dempster. Neither of them were abject failures and did contribute to a championship team. What and who have come since then, though...fair game for criticism IMO.