Hot Stove Rumors - The Fenway Edition

absintheofmalaise

too many flowers
Dope
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2005
12,907
The gran facenda
Instead of cluttering up the the threads on Napoli and the other FAs with every unconfirmed Twitter rumor out there, let's just stick them in here until they become actual news.
 

glennhoffmania

but still failing
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
8,397,022
NY
Why do people keep linking Drew to the Yankees?  Do they know something about Jeter that we don't?
 

Minneapolis Millers

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,951
Twin Cities
selahsean said:
 
So when the Mets sign him we get their 2nd highest pick right?
No.  Teams no longer get the forfeited pick from the signing team.  They lose their 2d round pick.  We get a supplemental first round pick. 
 

brs3

sings praises of pinstripes
SoSH Member
May 20, 2008
4,701
Jackson Heights, NYC
glennhoffmania said:
Why do people keep linking Drew to the Yankees?  Do they know something about Jeter that we don't?
 
The guy can't play shortstop anymore. He'll try, and he'll fail. 
 
edit: moved Beltran comment to the Beltran thread
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,156
Not here
glennhoffmania said:
Why do people keep linking Drew to the Yankees?  Do they know something about Jeter that we don't?
 
brs3 said:
The guy can't play shortstop anymore. He'll try, and he'll fail. 
 
He couldn't even really play shortstop when he could play shortstop. I'm not sure there has been anyone as good as Jeter was, who was simultaneously as overrated as Jeter was.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
39,347
deep inside Guido territory
The Red Sox are among several teams to have checked in on veteran starter Tim Hudson. While Boston is said to be a big admirer of the right-hander, it's still a little hard to imagine the loyal Hudson leaving the Braves.
Hudson is drawing significant interest from around the league (MLB.com reported the Indians and Royals, too), but Boston's interest is intriguing, and maybe even to Hudson, who just saw the Red Sox win the World Series. One person familiar with the champs' thinking said, "They really want him."
Of course, Boston is already very well-stocked with starting pitching, having just won with six guys manning five spots. The Red Sox have to do something to make room for Hudson if they could make a deal with him.
 
http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/24204195/red-sox-show-interest-in-tim-hudson-braves-others-still-in-play
 

brs3

sings praises of pinstripes
SoSH Member
May 20, 2008
4,701
Jackson Heights, NYC
Rasputin said:
 
 
He couldn't even really play shortstop when he could play shortstop. I'm not sure there has been anyone as good as Jeter was, who was simultaneously as overrated as Jeter was.
No doubt. I think he's at the point where he literally cannot play baseball every day. If ARod's suspension is held up, moving Jeter to third might make him less likely to crumble to the ground. 
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
10,787
Maine
soxhop411 said:
 
Jeff Passan ‏@JeffPassan28m
One thing is clear early in free agency: Winning, a great clubhouse and big $ has made Boston a very desirable destination for free agents.
 
Night and day from last offseason….
 
 
Desirable destination, or simply a far more credible "mystery team" type negotiating tool?
 
It's a desirable destination for all the reasons Passan states, but there's also a limited number or roster spots available.  And a lot of the free agent names that have been connected to the Red Sox play positions for which the Red Sox aren't necessarily in the market...Hudson and Beltran being a couple prime examples.
 

trekfan55

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 29, 2004
7,962
Panama
gmogmo said:
 
From that link, Boras is making a reference to the contract Andrus just signed.  I know the Sox won't go (or is it I hope?). 

 
While Boras wouldn't even address the qualifying offer issue, he scoffed at the speculation (mine included here in my free-agent roundup) that Drew could wind up with a three-year contract, saying, "A three-year deal, for a 30-year-old free agent, really?"
Boras also said, "Are these writers aware of what Elvins Andrus signed for?" The younger Andrus received $120 million over eight years, though he was not yet a free agent.
 
 
Maybe the key here is the word younger.
 
Boras is good at delivering for his clients but how many teams will sign that huge deal and lose the draft pick (plus the slot money?)
 

HriniakPosterChild

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 6, 2006
10,340
500 feet above Lake Sammammish
brs3 said:
No doubt. I think he's at the point where he literally cannot play baseball every day. If ARod's suspension is held up, moving Jeter to third might make him less likely to crumble to the ground. 
 
You mean, "crumble to the ground again," right?
 
(Because recrumble is not a word.)
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
26,583
AZ
glennhoffmania said:
Why do people keep linking Drew to the Yankees?  Do they know something about Jeter that we don't?
 
I wonder if the Yankees would try to convince Drew to play 3B while A-Rod is gone.
 

mwonow

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2005
5,047
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
 
I wonder if the Yankees would try to convince Drew to play 3B while A-Rod is gone.
 
They should do. It would be great to see CI as a serial "guy who plays to the left of better shortstops" guy!
 

chester

lurker
Jun 9, 2007
1,050
SE LA
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/hot-stove-rumors-troy-tulowitzki-matt-kemp-andre-ethier-carl-crawford-carlos-gonzalez-allen-craig-trevor-rosenthal-110713
 
I know it is risk, but is it too much of a risk to go after Kemp.  6/120 is the price if they have to pay full which is pretty close to while Ells might end up costing. 
 
It obviously matters what the Dodgers what in return but with the way we have been able to fleece them before we may get a good deal and even get them to pick up some of that contract.
 
All I know is a fully capable Kemp in Fenway CF would be amazing and unthinkable a few years ago. 
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,150
chester said:
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/hot-stove-rumors-troy-tulowitzki-matt-kemp-andre-ethier-carl-crawford-carlos-gonzalez-allen-craig-trevor-rosenthal-110713
 
I know it is risk, but is it too much of a risk to go after Kemp.  6/120 is the price if they have to pay full which is pretty close to while Ells might end up costing. 
 
It obviously matters what the Dodgers what in return but with the way we have been able to fleece them before we may get a good deal and even get them to pick up some of that contract.
 
All I know is a fully capable Kemp in Fenway CF would be amazing and unthinkable a few years ago. 
I like Kemp but you would have to wonder how much does he cost and if he can stay healthy. He's 29 and locked up through his age 35 season. I would be wary of taking on a contract like that when the player has only played a combined 179 games over the last two seasons. Sure he's been productive but you can't sit here and tell me he's going to be a sure thing to hold up over the course of a season.
 

knucklecup

hi, I'm a cuckold
Jun 26, 2006
4,235
Chicago, IL
Tyrone Biggums said:
I like Kemp but you would have to wonder how much does he cost and if he can stay healthy. He's 29 and locked up through his age 35 season. I would be wary of taking on a contract like that when the player has only played a combined 179 games over the last two seasons. Sure he's been productive but you can't sit here and tell me he's going to be a sure thing to hold up over the course of a season.
 
208 games for Ellsbury over the last two seasons, Kemp a full year younger than him and Ells looking for more money / same length.
 
I think an Ethier trade and utilizing him the way he should be used as a platoon player is more likely, but there's a strong argument to be made for Kemp if he is in fact available.
 
I see a lot of similarities between Ellsbury entering the 2013 season and Kemp entering the 2014 season.  I think he rakes next year and I will certainly be targeting him in the early rounds of fantasy leagues.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
9,911
Somewhere
Kemp is a risky proposition, especially coming one month after ankle surgery. But it wouldn't hurt to do dilligence. I would still rather have Ellsbury, but their contracts are probably going to be pretty close going forward. You can always hope for a subsidy...
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,207
The wrong side of the bridge....
chester said:
All I know is a fully capable Kemp in Fenway CF would be amazing and unthinkable a few years ago. 
 
Kemp in Fenway CF is unthinkable all right, but not in a good way.
 
Kemp in Fenway LF is a little more thinkable, but not cost-effective.
 
Kemp in Fenway as DH is highly thinkable, but not, at the moment, feasible.
 
There isn't a single one of LA's overpaid outfielders that interests me.
 

JimBoSox9

will you be my friend?
SoSH Member
Nov 1, 2005
16,556
Mid-surburbia
I'm not advocating for Kemp, but I think you undersell the LF->DH option.  If they did get him in lieu of Beltran, putting him in LF would be a no-brainer.  His knees need protecting and Fenway's LF exists to hide big bats for one reason or another.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
10,608
St. Louis, MO
They have to get a big bat somewhere along the line to replace Papi. Kemp in LF for 2-3 years then sliding to DH would seem pretty ideal if the subsidy was enough from LA.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
8,728
Kemp feels way too risky unless you're getting a HUGE subsidy (like at least 60M).  First of all, I don't think he can handle CF long term.  Plus, he already had a fairly major shoulder surgery, and is having another "clean up" shoulder surgery this offseason. He also had ankle surgery this offseason.
 
I know 2013 was a lost season with all the injuries, but he was pretty bad when he played.  I understand the desire to "buy low", but I just dont see the fit at anything remotely close to 6/120 going forward.  
 
knucklecup said:
I see a lot of similarities between Ellsbury entering the 2013 season and Kemp entering the 2014 season.  I think he rakes next year and I will certainly be targeting him in the early rounds of fantasy leagues.
The biggest similarity is that both had one huge outlier HR season that makes fantasy baseball managers in hot stove threads salivate. If you are paying for Kemp's impersonation of Miggy Cabrera from 2011, you are overpaying. It's exactly what the Dodgers did when they gave him 8/$160 million.

He still has solid production in him if he can recover from his injuries, and may have consolidated skills as he has entered his peak years, but you are paying through the roof for a guy who averages 26 HR's a year and will hit .270, while wistfully pining for another 2011 Triple Crown campaign I'd bet we never see again.

Edit to add: I think with this wishcasting for outlier seasons from an OF you may as well retain the guy who demonstrates more value as a fielder and run creator over the course of his career even without a lot of HR's. Namely: Ellsbury.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
21,764
Red(s)HawksFan said:
 
With six starters already in the mix (just counting the guys under contract who can't be optioned/stashed in AAA), adding Hudson would arguably necessitate moving two starters.  Cheap or not, if Hudson is looking to continue to be a starting pitcher, the Red Sox seem like an ill-fit for him.
 
This is just not how the team has ever thought about players during the Henry era.  They are nearly certainly not under the impression that they are stuck with guys on the roster now; instead, they are focused on putting the best team out there in April.  That may well include Hudson, with the expectation that they'll have to move someone or start someone in the minors or the bullpen, or someone else at a position that there's already someone 'in place'
 
Assuming the team is thinking about only 5 starters, or about individual moves without corresponding ones, just isn't going to get us to where the team will end up, imo.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,150
Savin Hillbilly said:
 
Kemp in Fenway CF is unthinkable all right, but not in a good way.
 
Kemp in Fenway LF is a little more thinkable, but not cost-effective.
 
Kemp in Fenway as DH is highly thinkable, but not, at the moment, feasible.
 
There isn't a single one of LA's overpaid outfielders that interests me.
Ellsbury doesn't interest me at all. Kemp is too much of an injury risk. All things considered I would rather have Kemp at 6/120 than Ellsbury at 7/150 or something like that. I would rather have JBJ than either and spend the money elsewhere such as extending some of the current players on the roster and bringing back Napoli/Salty on short term deals.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
8,728
Tyrone Biggums said:
Ellsbury doesn't interest me at all. Kemp is too much of an injury risk. All things considered I would rather have Kemp at 6/120 than Ellsbury at 7/150 or something like that. I would rather have JBJ than either and spend the money elsewhere such as extending some of the current players on the roster and bringing back Napoli/Salty on short term deals.
 
I don't want Ellsbury at 7/150, but I would much rather have that contract on the books than Kemp at 6/120.
 
It's highly likely Kemp cant play CF much longer, and who knows if his power will fully return. He has had shoulder surgery for a labral tear, another shoulder "clean up" procedure, and just had microfracture surgery on his ankle this offseason.   Ellsbury has had his own injury problems, but I'd bet on him going forward before I spend 120M on Kemp.
 

BosRedSox5

what's an original thought?
Sep 6, 2006
1,471
Colorado Springs, Colorado
With Andre Ethier being the most likely trade candidate... and with him being Pedroia's best pal... and with him having an OPS+ of 120 or better for 6 straight years... and with him being a gold glove outfielder... why wouldn't we be interested in getting him and sticking him in LF full time. Ethier, JBJ and Victorino make a formidable offensive and defensive OF. Ethier's been a consistent offensive presence for his whole career. I could see a move to Fenway benefitting him, and benefitting the Red Sox. 
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
8,728
BosRedSox5 said:
With Andre Ethier being the most likely trade candidate... and with him being Pedroia's best pal... and with him having an OPS+ of 120 or better for 6 straight years... and with him being a gold glove outfielder... why wouldn't we be interested in getting him and sticking him in LF full time. Ethier, JBJ and Victorino make a formidable offensive and defensive OF. Ethier's been a consistent offensive presence for his whole career. I could see a move to Fenway benefitting him, and benefitting the Red Sox. 
 
 
The simple answer is that he's not a good defensive outfielder (negative career OF UZR, and negative at all 3 OF positions individually), and is signed to pretty big money for his age 32-36 years. His offense isn't bad, but not sure you want to bet on the decline portion of his career as being anything special.
 
Depends how much of a subsidy the Dodgers are willing to kick in I suppose, but unless it's a huge portion of the contract, definitely pass on Ethier.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
radsoxfan said:
 
 
The simple answer is that he's not a good defensive outfielder, and is signed to huge money for his age 32-36 years.
 
Depends how much of a subsidy the Dodgers are willing to kick in I suppose, but unless it's a huge portion of the contract, definitely pass on Ethier.
 
Well, he's not a good defensive center fielder, where he spent the majority of his innings this past year.  UZR has him at 4.0 runs over 3601 and 1/3 innings in the last 3 years while in right field.  He's about average out there, and can even back up center in an emergency.  There's no where near enough innings to make any serious claims about him in center using UZR, but he didn't appear to be a butcher out there.  If he's third on the depth chart in center, the team is in good shape.  I think bringing him in as a left fielder is actually a good idea, and like it better than expending a pick to sign Beltran, even at 2 years.  And I'm one of the people that is defending the Beltran talk as justifiable.  Putting Ethier in left minimizes his biggest weakness: his range.
 
I would expect Ethier, JBJ, Victorino left to right to be an excellent defensive outfield, and one of the best in the majors.  Offensively it will depend on how JBJ does with a full time role and how Victorino follows up his 2013.  Could be really good, could be below average, but I don't think Ethier is likely to be anything but above average in both respects if they throw him out in front of the monster.
 

Drek717

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2003
2,536
radsoxfan said:
 
 
The simple answer is that he's not a good defensive outfielder (negative career OF UZR, and negative at all 3 OF positions individually), and is signed to pretty big money for his age 32-36 years. His offense isn't bad, but not sure you want to bet on the decline portion of his career as being anything special.
 
Depends how much of a subsidy the Dodgers are willing to kick in I suppose, but unless it's a huge portion of the contract, definitely pass on Ethier.
His last three years of OF defense have been +7.5, -2.6, -1.3 and the last year involved him playing 645 out of 1141 innings in CF, he was a positive UZR defender in both RF and LF last season.
 
All the trade rumor talk I've seen suggests the Dodgers having to subsidize Ethier down to the mid-$40M range for remaining money over 4 years.  That 5th year vesting option won't help them find a taker though, and will likely cost them more money.  He's a damn good hitter against RHP, but can't hit LHP for a shit and therefore requires a platoon partner.  I'd be interested in him as a 4 year, ~$44-48M player assuming the Dodgers don't want anything substantial back.  His defensive versatility displayed last season wouldn't make him a bad safety net for the JBJ/Victorino tandem, but it'd have to be as a salary dump on L.A.'s part with a hefty bit of money swallowed in the process.
 
You'd also need to have a new home lined up for Nava.  Not the worst idea in the world once the small to mid market teams get out-bid for Choo and Cruz.  Nava's low salary and remaining years of control could potentially net the Red Sox some pretty quality prospects in return.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
8,728
Again, the subsidy if the key.  If the Dodgers are paying close to half the salary, all of a sudden it becomes very reasonable.
 
I responded to a post describing him as a gold glove outfielder by calling him "not good".  I pointed out that overall his UZR's for his career are negative at all 3 positions, and negative overall.  I didn't call him a butcher by any means, but I would stick with his slightly below average career UZR numbers rather than trying to divide it up to find some smaller positive sample sizes.  Plus, if anything, I would expect him to get worse on D rather than improve in his age 32-35 seasons.
 
If someone thinks they're getting a gold glove caliber or even above average defender by trading for Ethier, then they will be disappointed when he gets here. At the same time, he would be a better backup defensive RF than Nava, and would be a nice platoon guy for Gomes.  I still would want at least 25-30M kicked in from the Dodgers, and no prospects of consequence going the other way (which isn't really disagreeing with the above).
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
radsoxfan said:
Again the subsidy if the key.  If the Dodgers are paying close to half the salary, all of a sudden it becomes very reasonable.
 
I responded to a post describing him as a gold glove outfielder by calling him "not good".  I pointed out that overall his UZR's for his career are negative at all 3 positions, and negative overall.  I didn't call him a butcher by any means, but I would stick with his career UZR numbers rather than trying to divide it up to find some smaller positive sample sizes.  Plus, if anything, I would expect him to get worse on D rather than improve in his age 32-35 seasons.
 
If someone thinks they're getting an above average defender by trading for Ethier, then they will be disappointed when he gets here. At the same time, he would be a better backup defensive RF than Nava, and would be a nice platoon guy for Gomes.  I still would want at least 25-30M kicked in from the Dodgers, and no prospects of consequence going the other way.
 
You seem to be suggesting that a player cannot improve defensively.  There appears to be a very real change made after the 2010 season, when he was going into his age 29 season.  For the last three years he's been an average defender, even if you include his time in center field.  I think that data is more relevant than how he performed four, five or six years ago.  Then you move him to left where you can cut down on the need for range 81 times a year and I think he gets a very nice boost.  I'd be very surprised if he wasn't an above average defender in left field while playing for the Red Sox.
 
bosockboy said:
I'd prefer a subsidized Ethier over Beltran, but is Ethier 12 million a year better than Nava?
 
I think he's significantly better defensively, especially if he has to move to right field or in an emergency, center.  Offensively what you are paying more for is the consistency.  Ethier, as was pointed out on the last page, has 6 straight seasons of OPS+'s between 121 and 133.  Nava was at 128 last year, but can you really be certain he'll repeat that?  I'd be much more comfortable with Ethier at the plate than Nava, especially over the long haul, and a team like the Red Sox can pay for that certainty.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
8,728
Snodgrass'Muff said:
 
You seem to be suggesting that a player cannot improve defensively.  There appears to be a very real change made after the 2010 season, when he was going into his age 29 season.  For the last three years he's been an average defender, even if you include his time in center field.  I think that data is more relevant than how he performed four, five or six years ago.  Then you move him to left where you can cut down on the need for range 81 times a year and I think he gets a very nice boost.  I'd be very surprised if he wasn't an above average defender in left field while playing for the Red Sox.
 
 
He probably would be fine in LF at Fenway, perhaps even slightly above average in his home games since his range is his main problem.  Combine that with his road performance, and you can probably expect an average defensive LF (then some decline over the 4 years).  
 
I tend to go away from the "very real change" argument when trying to divide up sample sizes unless there is overwhelming evidence to support that position. Instead of a real change, more likely his UZR just had a positive blip in 2011, which happens all the time with UZR. He is overall a negative UZR OF in his career, and I think that's a safer assumption going forward (though I agree, it would be mitigated by Fenway if he plays mostly LF).
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,207
The wrong side of the bridge....
First signing of offseason shakes loose a catcher possibility for Boston
 
At first I thought this was a truly terrible idea, and I can still see it that way--I mean, yeah, clearly what the Sox need is a mid-30s career NL backup catcher known for his defense, because there's a roster gap there....and it's even better if he's a guy whose BIP results cratered last year thanks to a wrist injury that may or may not have lasting effects.....
 
But the more I think about it, I'm kind of intrigued by the idea of going D-first at both catcher slots next year. It would free up money for more offense-oriented acquisitions at LF or 1B. And Hanigan would buy us another development year for Vazquez, who seems like an extremely similar type of player. If he recovers strongly from the injury and goes back to his normal offensive game, which includes zero power but a .360-ish OBP, that would be pretty cool. And the impact of his 40% career CS rate and his apparently elite receiving skills on our pitching staff couldn't be a bad thing.
 
The price would just need to be sufficiently low.
 

YTF

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
With Andre Ethier being the most likely trade candidate... and with him being Pedroia's best pal... and with him having an OPS+ of 120 or better for 6 straight years... and with him being a gold glove outfielder... why wouldn't we be interested in getting him and sticking him in LF full time. Ethier, JBJ and Victorino make a formidable offensive and defensive OF. Ethier's been a consistent offensive presence for his whole career. I could see a move to Fenway benefitting him, and benefitting the Red Sox.
$15.5 Million next season, $18 Million in '15 and '16, 17.5 M in '17 with a vested option of 17.5 M (2.5M buyout) in '18. 4 years/69 M Avg 17.25/year) not counting the option year. I think that's a lot of commitment for Ethier.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,156
Not here
Savin Hillbilly said:
First signing of offseason shakes loose a catcher possibility for Boston
 
Did you mean this to be a link to this thread?
 

YTF

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
This subsidy that's being spoken about.........Dodgers took FULL salary of everyone in the Punto trade PLUS kicked in good prospects. Not so sure that looking back on that deal they're going to subsidize Ethier. I know that they MIGHT feel the need to trim some payroll after all of that, but will they look to be Boston's benefactor again?
 

Minneapolis Millers

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,951
Twin Cities
I don't think LA will subsidize 40% of Eithier's deal. And I hate the idea of even a $10M/yr guy as a "platoon" player. Why mess with Eithier if all you really want/expect/need is Young?
 

soxhop411

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
34,170
 
According to a major league source, the Red Sox have shown some interest in free agent catcher A.J. Pierzynski.
 
The backstop — who will turn 37 years-old Dec. 30 — played on a one-year, $7.5 million contract with the Rangers in 2013.
 
Pierzynski totaled 134 games in ’13, hitting .272 with a .722 OPS and 17 home runs. The left-handed hitter actually hit 10 points higher against lefty pitching than right-handers (.279-.269).
 
Pierzynski’s strength continues to be his bat, although he doesn’t display the kind of patience the Red Sox usually look for. (He walked just three times in the season’s second half.) He is considered a fierce competitor — a trait that has sometimes drawn ire from opponents. The Orlando native has also been singled out for his above-average game awareness.
 
The 16-year veteran’s defensive skills have diminished, with his ability to frame pitches particularly coming into question last season. But Pierzynski is still considered durable, catching 119 games or more in each of the past 12 seasons.
 
http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2013/11/10/source-red-sox-have-shown-some-interest-in-a-j-pierzynski/
 
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
29,087
Oh boy.  A.J. Pierzynski in Boston?  That feels like a 2012 move to me.  From the link I posted.
 
 
 
...and yet, in polls commissioned by publications, including this one, over the past half-dozen years or so, he has been voted by his opponents as the player they would most like to see beaned (2006), baseball's meanest player (2011) and baseball's most hated player (2012). "Now, when those polls come out, it'd be a big upset if somebody else won," he said, resignedly.
 
37 years old, OPS'd to the tune of .722  and posted a OPS+ of 94 last season.  Given all the baggage, his age and what, save for an outlier season two years ago, looks to be a player in decline I would hope that the Sox pass.