Hot Stove Rumors - The Fenway Edition

The Boomer

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2000
2,223
Charlottesville, Virginia
Sox and Rocks said:
Not sure where to ask this; perhaps it deserves its own thread, but can someone explain to me why the Sox are so intent on staying under the $189 threshold this year?  They did it last season (13), so the tax has been reset.  Shouldn't a team with their resources and recent success be willing to go over it?
 
I'm not saying they should plan to go over, or that they should go over at all costs, but if re-signing Drew and signing Tannaka are conceivable, should the luxury tax be a reason not to?  The same could be said of other potential signings as well.
 
I just posted this in another misfit thread:
 
The inability to cut payroll might prevent the Yankees from getting under the luxury tax limit this season despite their promise to do so:
 
http://espn.go.com/b...-28m-luxury-tax
 
I am weirdly rooting for them to cut A Rod's suspension back to not more than 50 games.  It will cause plenty of interesting drama in the Bronx.  This quote is revealing:
 
"Yankees owner Hal Steinbrenner said he hopes to get under the threshold next year, when it rises to $189 million. That would reset the team's tax rate to 12.5 percent for 2015 and get the Yankees some revenue-sharing refunds.
But following agreements Tuesday on a $2 million, one-year deal with second baseman Brian Roberts and a $7 million, two-year contract with left-hander Matt Thornton, the Yankees are at $177.7 million for 15 players next year, when benefits are likely to total between $11 million and $12 million. Their only hope to get below the threshold appears to be if an arbitrator upholds most of Alex Rodriguez's 211-game suspension, relieving the team of a large percentage of the third baseman's $25 million salary."
 

plucy

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2006
390
a rock and a hard place
The revenue rebate comes from the funds allocated to teams in the top 15 markets(excluding OAK). NYY would stand to receive a much bigger rebate since they provide a much larger portion of the funds than the Sox.
 

soxhop411

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
34,189
RT @alexspeier: Farrell said Sox expect to add 1-2 homegrown starters to rotation over the next two seasons.”
Any guesses?
 

Jordu

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2003
6,430
Brookline
RT @alexspeier: Farrell said Sox expect to add 1-2 homegrown starters to rotation over the next two seasons.”
Any guesses?


Ranaudo and Owens seem the most likely.
 

rembrat

Well-Known Member
Bronze Supporter
SoSH Member
May 26, 2006
36,069
Well I think Workman gets a chance to lose his spot. He is ahead of both.
 
Dec 13, 2013
390
As someone who does not watch NPB... what kind of pitcher is Tanaka? I see his strikeout and walk numbers are very nice, but I've also read he pitches to contact. How risky is this guy as an MLB conversion?
 

Minneapolis Millers

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,959
Twin Cities
soxhop411 said:
RT @alexspeier: Farrell said Sox expect to add 1-2 homegrown starters to rotation over the next two seasons.”
Any guesses?
I think that's more about expected rotation openings than about specific prospects. They know they have 4-5 prospects who could legitimately vie for a spot over the next two years
 

AlNipper49

Huge Member
Dope
Apr 3, 2001
40,458
Mtigawi
Given the few premium pitching prospects the sox have in the upper minors along with the optimism that the Red Sox manager must put on, that may be the least controversial statement of all time.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
11,947
That would be a replacement for Peavy after this year and a replacement for Lackey after 2015; and, given the homegrown PawSox rotation, it would be very disappointing if they can't fill those in house.
 

Joshv02

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,633
Brookline
Well, he mentioned Workman, Webster, Barnes, RDLR and Owens (I didn't hear Ranaudo). And he said that Workman was the top of that list. It wasn't obvious to me if he meant 1-2 more in addition to Workman, too, and he gave some good praise to Webster. But, if you assume Workman is already there, it needs to be 1-2 of the other five- I'd guess Webster, Owens, or Barnes, in that order.

That's a reasonable expectation, too - expect to get 2ish starters out of 6 top 100 caliber prospects.
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
19,616
Row 14
Joshv02 said:
Well, he mentioned Workman, Webster, Barnes, RDLR and Owens (I didn't hear Ranaudo). And he said that Workman was the top of that list. It wasn't obvious to me if he meant 1-2 more in addition to Workman, too, and he gave some good praise to Webster. But, if you assume Workman is already there, it needs to be 1-2 of the other five- I'd guess Webster, Owens, or Barnes, in that order.

That's a reasonable expectation, too - expect to get 2ish starters out of 6 top 100 caliber prospects.
 
 
They have more pitching now then they did in 2005 (Lester, Papelbon, Sanchez, Buchholz, Delcarmen, Hanson, Pauley, and even a young Doubront).  
 
I don't think they have a certain name penned in but it is reasonable they think they have at least one legitimate starter out of Workman, Webster, De La Rosa, Barnes, Ranuado, and Owens.
 

seantoo

toots his own horn award winner
Jul 16, 2005
1,308
Southern NH, from Watertown, MA
Jordu said:
Ranaudo and Owens seem the most likely.
I'd go with Owens and Barnes with Ranaudo as the hardest of the group to pin down. His ceiling and basement may have the widest gap in the group.
Workman to me may have the highest basement but I think he also has the lowest ceiling. Personally he'd be the guy I'd move, perhaps later this season if another prospect forces their way into the rotation. Normally Workman, being the easiest to predict would be the type of guy you keep, however this is not a normal situation, the Sox are bound to have more than their fair share of success during the next 2 years with the pitching prospects they have, making Workman expendable.
 

seantoo

toots his own horn award winner
Jul 16, 2005
1,308
Southern NH, from Watertown, MA
JimBoSox9 said:
I find it incredibly hard to believe they Owens will be ready before 2016 (at best).  He's raw as hell.
FWIW, soxprospects has his ETA as 2015. I assume that it will be late 2015. He finished last year, 6 starts, at AA having just turned 21 a few months before with some silly off the chart numbers. He's starting the year there as well. I'll get to see him pitch when the Seadogs play the FIshercats in Manchester and make sure to do so early in the year just to make sure he's not promoted. He's on the fast track, obviously.
 
 
http://soxprospects.com/players/owens-henry.htm
 
Edit: I attempted a table and it was messed up. I went back to follow directions here on how to do them and the links were broke. So I pasted a link instead. Can anyone guide me on how to post tables? I did it years ago and no longer rememeber how. Thanks in advance.
 

The Best Catch in 100 Years

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
767
Kyrgyzstan
JimBoSox9 said:
I find it incredibly hard to believe they Owens will be ready before 2016 (at best).  He's raw as hell.
Care to back this up? Owens more than held his own in AA, and while the walk rate is a little high, it doesn't seem like a huge concern. I wouldn't be shocked to see him up by September 2014, if not earlier.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
2,320
The X Man Cometh said:
As someone who does not watch NPB... what kind of pitcher is Tanaka? I see his strikeout and walk numbers are very nice, but I've also read he pitches to contact. How risky is this guy as an MLB conversion?
He has quite possibly the best splitter in the world and is primarily a control pitcher. Much better career K/BB in NPB than Darvish or DiceK, to me - he seems like a much younger Iwakuma or Kuroda with a bit better fastball velocity.
 

jimbobim

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2012
1,558
Owens is probably their highest upside pitcher on the farm. I would imagine he would spend another month or so in AA then the rest of the season in Pawtucket. Maybe a David Price like addition for the playoffs but that would be the rosiest of predictions. No need to rush him with all the other depth. 
 

absintheofmalaise

too many flowers
Dope
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2005
12,930
The gran facenda
At the Sabermetrics, Scouting and the Science of Baseball Seminar this year, Farrell said that they project Britton as a RP, Workman as a SP and that they were not sure on RDLR. He didn't mention any of the others in the discussion.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
16,485
Philadelphia
I love Owens but I think he's got a fair amount of work to do before he's major league ready. You can put up silly numbers in the minors with very good off speed stuff, but if you only throw 91 and struggle with fastball command, you're going to get lit up by advanced hitters.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
jimbobim said:
Owens is probably their highest upside pitcher on the farm. I would imagine he would spend another month or so in AA then the rest of the season in Pawtucket. Maybe a David Price like addition for the playoffs but that would be the rosiest of predictions. No need to rush him with all the other depth. 
 
Trey Ball would like to have a word.  Alex Speier listed him as the highest upside pitcher in the system and the best chance for an ace in his breakdown for BA.  He also said Webster had the best pure stuff in the system and my be the highest ceiling of any pitching prospect in the system.  The questions about his ability to control his fastball and his confidence are the things holding him back.  Owens will have some added value because he's a lefty, but so is Ball.
 
That said, Owens is much further along which minimizes the chances he flames out a bit while Ball, who has incredible potential, has quite a few big steps to take before we can start getting too excited about him showing up in Fenway.
 

Joshv02

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,633
Brookline
Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
I love Owens but I think he's got a fair amount of work to do before he's major league ready. You can put up silly numbers in the minors with very good off speed stuff, but if you only throw 91 and struggle with fastball command, you're going to get lit up by advanced hitters.
Using Fangraphs aggregation of the data: looking at qualified starters in 2013, over the estimate 149,000 fastballs thrown, the average velocity was 91.34.  Excluding Dickey moves the average up to... 91.36.  The median was a touch higher, but still under 92.
 
If Owens can average 91 or 92 MPH, and touch 95 (which he touches now), then he has average (but not plus) velocity.  I'm not really worried about his velocity.  
 
FB Command/control, I give you.  He certainly needs to work on that.
 

curly2

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2003
3,962
seantoo said:
I'd go with Owens and Barnes with Ranaudo as the hardest of the group to pin down. His ceiling and basement may have the widest gap in the group.
Workman to me may have the highest basement but I think he also has the lowest ceiling. Personally he'd be the guy I'd move, perhaps later this season if another prospect forces their way into the rotation. Normally Workman, being the easiest to predict would be the type of guy you keep, however this is not a normal situation, the Sox are bound to have more than their fair share of success during the next 2 years with the pitching prospects they have, making Workman expendable.
 
That's probably true about the ceiling, but that type of thinking probably led to Bronson Arroyo for Wily Mo Pena. If a guy can give you 200 league-average innings every year, that's a very valuable thing to have, especially if you've got him through his cost-controlled years.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Control needs work, but my goodness, his strikeout numbers are pretty impressive.  
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
2,320
Speaking of Trey Ball, THT had a 2013 draft pitcher mechanics analysis released Thursday and they loved the guy.

"Ball works with a 90-94 mph heater that has good downward plane to it, and outstanding tempo and rhythm to the plate which repeats itself very well. He has a long arm action but it catches up well as he flexes the elbow to pick the ball up cleanly, then rolls the elbow in without looping/dragging the pitching arm. I'm extremely impressed with this set of mechanics; they're a better version of Max Fried's from 2012."
 

someoneanywhere

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Let me say this. We've tussled in the MiL forum about Owens on this sort of thing. The issue is not command. And therein lay the potential problem. The issue is control. Command is something you have in the strike zone. Henry has problems consistently finding the strike zone. I don't doubt his potential, or his Top 10 ranking. But when a guy struggles with control as he does, two red flags out to concern us before we go looking for anything other than a possible cameo or emergency appearance in MLB in 2014. One, major league hitters will make him come to the zone, and if he can't work from a position of aggression, they will also lay off anything but mistakes. That's a recipe for punishment, as Webster discovered in 2013. Two, you have to factor in minor league umpiring. They are going to be tighter on him in the bigs, and even squeeze him some.

Ultimately I think he figures it out, although the tall frame may factor in here. But I wouldn't be looking for a permanent rotation piece anytime real soon.
 

BCsMightyJoeYoung

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 14, 2002
5,202
Halifax, Nova Scotia , Canada
someoneanywhere said:
Let me say this. We've tussled in the MiL forum about Owens on this sort of thing. The issue is not command. And therein lay the potential problem. The issue is control. Command is something you have in the strike zone. Henry has problems consistently finding the strike zone. I don't doubt his potential, or his Top 10 ranking. But when a guy struggles with control as he does, two red flags out to concern us before we go looking for anything other than a possible cameo or emergency appearance in MLB in 2014. One, major league hitters will make him come to the zone, and if he can't work from a position of aggression, they will also lay off anything but mistakes. That's a recipe for punishment, as Webster discovered in 2013. Two, you have to factor in minor league umpiring. They are going to be tighter on him in the bigs, and even squeeze him some.

Ultimately I think he figures it out, although the tall frame may factor in here. But I wouldn't be looking for a permanent rotation piece anytime real soon.
 
Not exactly a comment on Owens .. rather on the bolded quote. Having never actually seen any minor league games I don't have any first hand knowledge. Are minor league umpires more erratic both in and out of the zone ? Or do they simply tend to call a wider strikezone?
 

OttoC

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2003
7,353
I saw Owens start against the Fisher Cats (5th AA start, 25th start of 2013) and there were a few occasions when he threw some pitch that looked incredibly awkward, stiff-armed, almost like a blooper pitch, clocking out at 67-mph on the board. And I'm thinking, "This is his vaunted curveball?" Do you remember that commercial where the father was in the yard trying to teach his son how to throw and the boy was throwing stiff-armed and the father doing the same after retrieving the ball. Owens had better control of his pitch, but I did not understand it.
 
Has anyone else seen him throw that type of pitch?
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,164
ehaz said:
Speaking of Trey Ball, THT had a 2013 draft pitcher mechanics analysis released Thursday and they loved the guy.

"Ball works with a 90-94 mph heater that has good downward plane to it, and outstanding tempo and rhythm to the plate which repeats itself very well. He has a long arm action but it catches up well as he flexes the elbow to pick the ball up cleanly, then rolls the elbow in without looping/dragging the pitching arm. I'm extremely impressed with this set of mechanics; they're a better version of Max Fried's from 2012."
Looking at very limited tape and listening to people such as Callis I would think the consensus is that Ball and Webster probably have the greatest ability to become front line starters while Owens is more of a #2 and De La Rosa is a massive question mark that could either become a number 2 or a great late inning guy. Webster needs to hone his control more in order to have success. Same with De La Rosa.

If Tanaka doesn't get posted I think we'll see Lackey moved for a pretty good collection of prospects given his contract. I doubt any would be considered "blue chip" but 2 B level prospects would be pretty good.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,730
Santa Monica
Tyrone Biggums said:
Looking at very limited tape and listening to people such as Callis I would think the consensus is that Ball and Webster probably have the greatest ability to become front line starters while Owens is more of a #2 and De La Rosa is a massive question mark that could either become a number 2 or a great late inning guy. Webster needs to hone his control more in order to have success. Same with De La Rosa.

If Tanaka doesn't get posted I think we'll see Lackey moved for a pretty good collection of prospects given his contract. I doubt any would be considered "blue chip" but 2 B level prospects would be pretty good.
why move Lackey? we just won a WS with him as our #2. We have 2 more years of him with his revamped elbow at an avg of $8MM/yr.  2 "B level" prospects, no thanks. We have TONS of depth in the minors. The guy we deal/dump is Dempster, Workman takes over as the #6/long man.
 
Yikes, this has all the markings of a "Doug Fister" deal.
 

ItOnceWasMyLife

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 16, 2008
1,827
Yeah, I don't get the "move Lackey" movement.  He looks to be every bit a #2 and maybe more, and his price is great.  You work trades to get a Lackey, not to give one up. 
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,164
benhogan said:
why move Lackey? we just won a WS with him as our #2. We have 2 more years of him with his revamped elbow at an avg of $8MM/yr.  2 "B level" prospects, no thanks. We have TONS of depth in the minors. The guy we deal/dump is Dempster, Workman takes over as the #6/long man.
 
Yikes, this has all the markings of a "Doug Fister" deal.
 
True but then you have to look at what would yield the best return. You will not get a Wil Myers type for Lackey. Dempster would be a straight dump. All about keeping the farm strong and no one knows what Lackey will be like next year. Dempster will have no real trade value, Peavy will somewhat, Doubront has quite a bit and same with Lackey. 
 

someoneanywhere

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
 
Not exactly a comment on Owens .. rather on the bolded quote. Having never actually seen any minor league games I don't have any first hand knowledge. Are minor league umpires more erratic both in and out of the zone ? Or do they simply tend to call a wider strikezone?
 
Yes. And yes. And yes. I'm being a little facetious, obviously, and there are some good ones. The issue is consistency: the game, even at the A ball level, moves too fast for many if not most of them. 
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,730
Santa Monica
Tyrone Biggums said:
 
True but then you have to look at what would yield the best return. You will not get a Wil Myers type for Lackey. Dempster would be a straight dump. All about keeping the farm strong and no one knows what Lackey will be like next year. Dempster will have no real trade value, Peavy will somewhat, Doubront has quite a bit and same with Lackey. 
Wow, with that logic just stick Clay, Felix and Lester on the trade market, they all have more value then Dempster. 
 
For sh!ts and giggles, what do you do with the costs savings of dealing Lackey?  Who should we look to deal him to? I hear the Yankees' need some starting pitching.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Tyrone Biggums said:
 
True but then you have to look at what would yield the best return. You will not get a Wil Myers type for Lackey. Dempster would be a straight dump. All about keeping the farm strong and no one knows what Lackey will be like next year. Dempster will have no real trade value, Peavy will somewhat, Doubront has quite a bit and same with Lackey. 
 
Right, Dempster has no real trade value.  But so what?  Lackey is *significantly* better than Dempster (at least he was in 2013, thanks to his reconstructed elbow), AND he's a lot cheaper in terms of AAV (also thanks to his reconstructed elbow).  WIth all the depth on the farm, I'd rather deal Dempster either for salary relief or for a prospect (with the Sox eating the $$), and have the better SP in the rotation.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
Tyrone Biggums said:
 
True but then you have to look at what would yield the best return. You will not get a Wil Myers type for Lackey. Dempster would be a straight dump. All about keeping the farm strong and no one knows what Lackey will be like next year. Dempster will have no real trade value, Peavy will somewhat, Doubront has quite a bit and same with Lackey. 
 
The bolded is simply untrue.  Last year Lackey's success was very similar to his success in Anaheim.  His k/9 was in the 7-8 range it lived in from 2005-2009, his bb/9 was back below 3, his ground ball rate was back around 45% and his FIP and xFIP were both back in the neighborhood they lived in during his run in those years as well.  Now, he had a career best BABIP and he relied on a the slider more and the curve ball less than he has in the past but his velocity is right where it's always been.  I don't see any reason we shouldn't expect him to be similar to the guy he was out west.
 
With some reversion in his BABIP and his BB/9, which were both career best marks, I think the STEAMER projection is a pretty good guess.  7.12 k/9, 2.41 bb/9, 3.82 ERA, 3.69 FIP, 173 IP.
 
Suggesting he's some kind of wild card who is just as likely to be bad as good is overly pessimistic, IMO.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,156
Not here
Tyrone Biggums said:
 
True but then you have to look at what would yield the best return. You will not get a Wil Myers type for Lackey. Dempster would be a straight dump. All about keeping the farm strong and no one knows what Lackey will be like next year. Dempster will have no real trade value, Peavy will somewhat, Doubront has quite a bit and same with Lackey. 
 
Or, you could just keep the good players and try to win the World Series. The minor league system is to support the major league team, not the other way around. This thing about trading Lackey that has been going around this off season is just ridiculous.
 

Yaz4Ever

stumps for Trump
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
The Red Sox are about to acquire Matt Kemp for Daniel Nava with LAD paying $40M of Kemp's remaining salary.
 
 
 
 
 
 
ok, not true, but this is the RUMORS thread.  Let's salivate over our prospects elsewhere, please.  I get excited when this thread is bumped and (just like the Upton thread being bumped), I'm usually disappointed lately.
 

curly2

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2003
3,962
Rasputin said:
 
Or, you could just keep the good players and try to win the World Series. The minor league system is to support the major league team, not the other way around. This thing about trading Lackey that has been going around this off season is just ridiculous.
 
Exactly. If there is a Wil Myers type deal to be made for Lackey (who also has two years of control, like Shields had when he was traded for Myers), then by all means make it. But cutting payroll and/or easing a logjam in the rotation by trading Lackey for the next Bryce Brentz and Alex Wilson would be foolish.
 

Homar

lurker
Aug 9, 2010
84
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
 
Not exactly a comment on Owens .. rather on the bolded quote. Having never actually seen any minor league games I don't have any first hand knowledge. Are minor league umpires more erratic both in and out of the zone ? Or do they simply tend to call a wider strikezone?
I'm not aware of research on the subject, but observationally, as a former Sea Dog season ticket holder who's seen quite a few minor league games, it seems to me that there are a few very good umps at AA.  This you'd expect as ML umps come from somewhere.   But just as most AA players do not eve sniff the ML coffee, so it is with most AA umps; they're not sufficiently talented, and/or they're flawed in some way.  Their flaws seem to be individual: some have too wide a strike zone, some too narrow, some just seem to blow a lot of calls.  But I'd be terribly surprised if there was one major failing that they all shared.  The best thrive because they're good across the board; the rest fail in their own unique ways.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
ivanvamp said:
 
Right, Dempster has no real trade value.  But so what?  Lackey is *significantly* better than Dempster (at least he was in 2013, thanks to his reconstructed elbow), AND he's a lot cheaper in terms of AAV (also thanks to his reconstructed elbow).  WIth all the depth on the farm, I'd rather deal Dempster either for salary relief or for a prospect (with the Sox eating the $$), and have the better SP in the rotation.
 
According to Speier, his value isn't in his AAV but the value he might provide in 2015.
 
So, with that option in place, does it alter the way that Lackey’s 2014 average annual value is calculated for luxury tax purposes?
Simple answer: No.
Even if the Sox exercised Lackey’s 2015 option today, it wouldn’t impact how his AAV is determined in any year of the contract prior to the option. He’d still represent a $16.5 million player for the purposes of 2014 payroll, and he’d still represent approximately a $500,000 player for the purposes of 2015 payroll.
The implications are twofold: First, Lackey represents, at least as of now, the most expensive player on the Sox’ roster in the coming year, and secondly, he represents a potentially game-changing member of the roster for 2015 if he remains healthy and effective while pitching at the major league minimum. If, for instance, the Sox wanted to sign Jon Lester to a long-term deal that would take effect starting in 2015 (something that the team is expected to explore this spring), the payroll flexibility afforded by Lackey could play a significant role in giving the Sox the flexibility to do so while staying well within the luxury tax threshold.
 
 

snowmanny

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
10,309
Rasputin said:
 
Or, you could just keep the good players and try to win the World Series. The minor league
system is to support the major league team, not the other way around. This thing about trading Lackey that has been going around this off season is just ridiculous.
Right. I do know they won the World Series, but
trading a pitcher better than Jake Peavy who makes less than Peavy for a "B-level" prospect, (i.e. worse than Jose Iglesias) would reflect pretty questionable strategic planning that would make at least one head explode.
 

geoduck no quahog

not particularly consistent
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2002
11,433
Seattle, WA
Yaz4Ever said:
The Red Sox are about to acquire Matt Kemp for Daniel Nava with LAD paying $40M of Kemp's remaining salary.
 
 
 
 
 
 
ok, not true, but this is the RUMORS thread.  Let's salivate over our prospects elsewhere, please.  I get excited when this thread is bumped and (just like the Upton thread being bumped), I'm usually disappointed lately.
 This stopped being a rumors thread a long time ago.
 
I don't understand why folks are shy about starting new threads to discuss each good topic raised here and leave this one as rumors-only.
 

Andrew

broke his neck in costa rica
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
12,011
Western Massachusetts
snowmanny said:
Right. I do know they won the World Series, but
trading a pitcher better than Jake Peavy who makes less than Peavy for a "B-level" prospect, (i.e. worse than Jose Iglesias) would reflect pretty questionable strategic planning that would make at least one head explode.
 
 
There's no universe where disregarding the fact that they won a championship in between those two possible trades can be considered information worth disregarding. The plan with Peavy wasn't "trade away Iglesias, then acquire lesser player than Iglesias" it was to help with that season, and they accomplished their goal. From this point they make decision to best help the team going forward, not constantly checking back and saying "well, we have to end up with something better than Iglesias or this was a failure". 
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
11,947
I'm pretty sure though, that one of the reasons they were willing to part with Iglesias was because Peavy was coming with multiple years of team control.
 

soxhop411

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
34,189
5.  Chris Denorfia
The price Oakland paid for Gentry speaks of the price for righthanded-hitting outfielders who can play center field. Ask the Padres. They have had at least a half-dozen teams try to talk to them about Chris Denorfia, from the Rangers to the Red Sox to the Rockies before they got Drew Stubbs, and Josh Byrnes has told every club he simply won’t deal Denorfia as long as he thinks the Padres can contend for a post-season berth. Which, right now, Byrnes believes, if Josh Johnson bounces back and Andrew Cashner and Tyson Ross emerge as power starters in Petco.
 
http://www.gammonsdaily.com/gammons-notes-overlooked-deals-brett-gardner-will-middlebrooks-and-more/
 

seantoo

toots his own horn award winner
Jul 16, 2005
1,308
Southern NH, from Watertown, MA
curly2 said:
 
That's probably true about the ceiling, but that type of thinking probably led to Bronson Arroyo for Wily Mo Pena. If a guy can give you 200 league-average innings every year, that's a very valuable thing to have, especially if you've got him through his cost-controlled years.
So Workman is now Arroyo? I don't think so. The Sox will have 2 open rotation spots if Lester is extended in the next 3 years. With several years of Doibront, and 2 more among Owens, Barnes, Ranaudo, Webster, DLR and others, Cost control will not be an issue, so high upside is a luxury that they should be seeking. The basement with most of the guys as starting to look like a reliever to.
 

glennhoffmania

but still failing
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
8,397,270
NY
The deadline for Masahiro Tanaka to sign with an MLB team is three weeks from today. The competition for his services will be fierce, but one team you can count out of the race is theRed SoxPeter Abraham of the Boston Globe says that while Boston is impressed with the righty, they are not expected to pursue him.
The Red Sox are one of the few teams in baseball with six starters for five spots: Jon Lester,John LackeyJake PeavyClay BuchholzFelix Doubront and Ryan Dempster. There has been speculation that once Tanaka, Ubaldo Jimenez, Matt Garza and Ervin Santana are off the market, the Sox will look to flip one of their spare starters for a young player, maybe someone who can play the left side of the infield. Lackey and Peavy have been mentioned as the most likely to relocate.
 
 
Link
 
There's no way they're not going after Tanaka simply because they currently have 6 starters, which is what I inferred from this article.
 

soxhop411

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
34,189
glennhoffmania said:
 
Link
 
There's no way they're not going after Tanaka simply because they currently have 6 starters, which is what I inferred from this article.
I am also guessing two other reasons
(the arms we have in the minors)
AND
The price it will cost  for Tanaka who is not "proven" given reports peg his contracct at an excess of 100MM. I would rather that money go to extending Lester.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,156
Not here
glennhoffmania said:
 
Link
 
There's no way they're not going after Tanaka simply because they currently have 6 starters, which is what I inferred from this article.
 
 
If the Sox do indeed decide to sit out the Tanaka sweepstakes, I dare say it will have a lot more to do with their views of Webster, DLR, Barnes, Ranaudo, and whoever the fuck I'm forgetting, than it will with Peavy and Dempster.
 
Why the bloody fuck do people insist on thinking that Lackey is likely to be traded? It makes zero sense.
 
And should Abraham be wrong, and should the Sox land Tanaka, wouldn't it be amusing as all hell to see what other teams come and offer?