Hot Stove Rumors - The Fenway Edition

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,156
Not here
TomRicardo said:
I mean how often do the Red Sox start the season with their five best starters healthy?
Who gives you a better chance to win the fifth game of the season, Ryan Dempster or Brandon Workman?

I think it is still Dempster, but not by much, and if you can get something useful, you pull the trigger without the slightest worry you're going to regret it.
 

YTF

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
MoGator71 said:
But it would really suck to face him in a playoff series. They can have Dempster.
 
 
If they would be willing to take on most or all of the entire contract, sure. But Lackey has value and they have a need. Again, not necessarily advocating this, but it your Texas (or any other team for that matter) what's more attractive in trade, Dempster for one season at 13.25 M or Lackey for 2 seasons for just 2.5 M more? (15.25 for this coming season and the team option of .5 for 2015) 
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,145
The wrong side of the bridge....
TomRicardo said:
I mean how often do the Red Sox start the season with their five best starters healthy?
 
You mean, aside from two of the past three years? (Really, you could argue three of three, depending on how you interpret the situation in 2012.)
 
First five SPs:
2013: Lester, Buchholz, Dempster, Doubront, Lackey
2012: Lester, Beckett, Buchholz, Doubront, Bard
2011: Lester, Lackey, Buchholz, Beckett, Matsuzaka
 
You need SP depth because of the possibility of injuries, but you can't count on the DL as a deus ex machina. There will be times during the year--including, most likely, Opening Day--when all six of the current prospective starters will be healthy, and you'll need a place to put one of them besides the rotation. And since none of our current top six has options remaining, that place will be the bullpen.
 
You could certainly make a case that it's a better use of resources to pay Dempster $13M to be your 7th reliever than to pay him, say, $7M to be somebody else's 5th starter and get some AAAA journeyman in return, while giving that bullpen slot to de la Rosa or Britton or Villareal. But most likely, those are your two choices. (Well, there's also the option of putting Doubront in the bullpen, in which case you get about three times as many innings from Dempster even though Doubront is clearly the better pitcher of the two.)
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
10,507
St. Louis, MO
I think Doubront continues to get better; no way he can be relegated to the pen.

Texas is filling the void with Jerome Williams it appears, so we can probably close that possibility out.
 

MoGator71

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,117
Rudy Pemberton said:
The potential problem with waiting until another teams starter goes down is that once the season starts, most teams budgets are pretty locked in, and you're probably not going to find a team able to assume a substantial percentage of a large contract. If you can move a starter now, you have the benefit of reallocating some of that money elsewhere. That being said, you really can't move a guy like a Dempster when there are so many FA's available. While it's true that someone probably gets hurt, if it's a guy you had hoped to trade (Dempster or Peavy or whoever) then suddenly that asset has a lot less value.
 
True, unless the one year commitment to Dempster (or Peavy) is more attractive to a team vs. giving 3 years to one of the FAs or waiting around hoping they get desperate and settle for a one year deal. That's assuming the Red Sox just want to move the contract; if they're looking for value as well as salary relief then the FAs are obviously more attractive.
 
Waiting also opens up the possibility that whoever ends up entering the last year of his contract relegated to the bullpen while his agent whispers in his ear about what that does to his value starts pissing and moaning about it. Then there goes the leverage, as the Sox are suddenly perceived as "having" to move an unhappy starter. No idea if that's likely with either Peavy or Dempster, and one would assume that Cherington has checked in with these guys in that regard or that their agent(s) have approached Cherington about it. I'm sure these guys can do the math, they see 6 guys for 5 spots, they know something has to give.
 

terrisus

formerly: imgran
SoSH Member
If we had a dollar for every time we thought we had too many starting pitchers going into a season, only to, at some point during the season, find ourselves without enough starting pitchers and have to call someone unready up from the minors or pull someone from the bullpen to make some unplanned starts... Well, we might have enough dollars to get a pizza or something I suppose.
 
Granted you need to find a use for the player until that time may come, and it may be that a player is more useful as a trading chip than as in-season insurance, but, it's a very rare occurence when you don't end up having a dozen or so missed starts throughout a rotation in need of filling.
 

snowmanny

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
10,204
The reasons to trade a starter would include:
1) They decide they want to free up salary to add a piece that will improve the team;
2) They decide they do not want to put Doubront in the bullpen because they want him to start;
3) They decide they do not want to put Doubront in the bullpen because Uehara, Miller, Tazawa, Mujica, Breslow and Workman are already there;
4) All of the above and nobody is hurt.
 

TOleary25

lurker
Sep 30, 2011
358
terrisus said:
If we had a dollar for every time we thought we had too many starting pitchers going into a season, only to, at some point during the season, find ourselves without enough starting pitchers and have to call someone unready up from the minors or pull someone from the bullpen to make some unplanned starts... Well, we might have enough dollars to get a pizza or something I suppose.
 
Granted you need to find a use for the player until that time may come, and it may be that a player is more useful as a trading chip than as in-season insurance, but, it's a very rare occurence when you don't end up having a dozen or so missed starts throughout a rotation in need of filling.
 
I'd agree if the starting pitching depth started and ended with Dempster but the team has a bunch of starting depth in AAA and several players seem primed to contribute in the majors. You could make a case that there probably isn't a whole lot of drop-off between Workman and Dempster at this point. Rubby and Webster had somewhat disappointing seasons but I think they still deserve a look given they both have big upside. Wright is a solid emergency spot starter and Ranaudo/Barnes are a hot start away from being seriously considered for the big leagues. I know people on here have 2006 Bronson Arroyo flashbacks but the structure of this team is very different than that '06 roster.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
10,698
Maine
terrisus said:
If we had a dollar for every time we thought we had too many starting pitchers going into a season, only to, at some point during the season, find ourselves without enough starting pitchers and have to call someone unready up from the minors or pull someone from the bullpen to make some unplanned starts... Well, we might have enough dollars to get a pizza or something I suppose.
 
Granted you need to find a use for the player until that time may come, and it may be that a player is more useful as a trading chip than as in-season insurance, but, it's a very rare occurence when you don't end up having a dozen or so missed starts throughout a rotation in need of filling.
 
Must be cheap pizza since the only time I can recall in recent past that there was a "too much pitching" issue and the team then made a trade from that depth was 2006 when they dealt Arroyo.  And then, the resulting rotation had 43 year old David Wells and nearly 40 year olds Tim Wakefield and Curt Schilling (not to mention Matt Clement's shredded shoulder).  They were clearly playing with fire and got burned.
 
This year is quite different in that the guy they most prefer to move is the oldest pitcher in the rotation, and they have a lot of quality depth at AAA that didn't exist in 2006.  In 2006, their best sixth starter prospect was Lester and then there was a big drop off to the Kason Gabbards and David Pauleys.  I'd put Workman, Webster, De La Rosa, Ranaudo and Barnes ahead of all but Lester in comparison.
 

MoGator71

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,117
Red(s)HawksFan said:
 
Must be cheap pizza since the only time I can recall in recent past that there was a "too much pitching" issue and the team then made a trade from that depth was 2006 when they dealt Arroyo.  And then, the resulting rotation had 43 year old David Wells and nearly 40 year olds Tim Wakefield and Curt Schilling (not to mention Matt Clement's shredded shoulder).  They were clearly playing with fire and got burned.
 
This year is quite different in that the guy they most prefer to move is the oldest pitcher in the rotation, and they have a lot of quality depth at AAA that didn't exist in 2006.  In 2006, their best sixth starter prospect was Lester and then there was a big drop off to the Kason Gabbards and David Pauleys.  I'd put Workman, Webster, De La Rosa, Ranaudo and Barnes ahead of all but Lester in comparison.
 
Yea, a lot gets made of the supposed "Arroyo for Pena disaster" but what did it really cost them? Given all that went wrong in 2006 having Bronson Arroyo around wasn't going to right the ship. And this really isn't a comparable situation to that anyway. They decided to deal the young healthy cost-controlled guy in Arroyo; a better comparison would be if we were advocating trading Doubront rather than sending him to the pen.
 
I guess my feeling on this is, how many guys would have to go down before you started saying "wow, I wish we had Ryan Dempster to make this start"? For me that number is 3, we're already starting Webster and Workman because guys went down and now a 3rd guy is down, it would be nice to have another proven starter. But at that point, like in 2006, you're kind of screwed regardless. 
 
Not to mention that if they keep everybody and start the season with Doubront in the bullpen they're probably a worse baseball team than if Doubront is starting. 
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
11,784
I don't at all understand how anyone could want to see Webster making starts. For this club until he has at least another 75 or so innings at Pawtucket. He got torched in the majors last season, and was worse at the end than the beginning. I was really high on him after his first start, but that all came crashing down quickly. There's just not enough command there yet.
 

jimbobim

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2012
1,558
I have no problem with Webster Barnes Renaudo Workman and De La Rosa spending a significant time being the most loaded rotation in all of AAA.  Depth Depth Depth Development. Nevermind about how fast Owens might move as he has the highest ceiling of the bunch. 
 
I really just want the Tanaka dam to break so the MLB offseason can proceed as regularly scheduled.
 
I also would love for the Red Sox to throw their financial weight around and steal Tanaka  and leave Yankeedom stunned. How awesome would it be to see what Ben would do with such an embarrassment of riches ?  
 

EddieYost

has a special friend in GHoff
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,825
NH
I keep clicking on this thread expecting to see a new Red Sox related rumor and keep being disappointed.  Maybe someone could split the thread?
 

Otis Foster

rex ryan's podiatrist
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
1,577
I don't know if this feeds your jones for rumors: http://bit.ly/1d0CusX
 
MLB has made a formal status request to the Korean Baseball organization on Yoon Suk-min. That's a prerequisite to any MLB team trying to sign him. RS rumored to be in on this.
 
Reading his stats in the link doesn't exactly make me swoon. I'd rather put the money towards signing Tanaka.
 

terrisus

formerly: imgran
SoSH Member
Otis Foster said:
I don't know if this feeds your jones for rumors: http://bit.ly/1d0CusX
 
MLB has made a formal status request to the Korean Baseball organization on Yoon Suk-min. That's a prerequisite to any MLB team trying to sign him. RS rumored to be in on this.
 
Reading his stats in the link doesn't exactly make me swoon. I'd rather put the money towards signing Tanaka.
 
 
 
He completed his seventh KBO season in 2011, and was thus eligible to be posted for an auction among interested MLB clubs with the Tigers' consent. The Tigers, however, didn't grant Yoon his wish to test the big league market, on the grounds that they needed Yoon to compete for a title here.

Yoon also required the team's approval to pursue a major league contract after the 2012 season and the Tigers also declined.

Now that he's played nine years, Yoon can exercise his rights as a full-fledged free agent and doesn't require a green light from the Tigers to sign with an overseas club.
 
So, looks like he would be a regular ordinary free agent as well, without need for a posting fee.