Hot Stove Rumors - The Fenway Edition

[The Best Catch in 100 Years]

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.

Those are slightly above average numbers for an MLB catcher. He's been quite good against RHP over the past couple years (111 wRC+ over the past two seasons) too. I think the Red Sox should be shooting for more from the catcher position, but if the price is right and Salty and McCann get too much from other teams I could stomach a Pierzynski/Ross platoon next year.

 

[The Best Catch in 100 Years]

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.

Here's the article: http://www.providencejournal.com/sports/red-sox/content/20131108-first-signing-of-offseason-shakes-loose-a-catcher-possibility-for-boston.ece
Hanigan's walk rate has been inflated by hitting in front of the pitcher, but it looks like he's been almost equally successful getting on base when he hasn't hit eighth (albeit in a limited number of PAs) and it's not like every #8 hitter in the NL is walking 12% of the time.

 

[rodderick]

Here's the article: http://www.providencejournal.com/sports/red-sox/content/20131108-first-signing-of-offseason-shakes-loose-a-catcher-possibility-for-boston.ece
Hanigan's walk rate has been inflated by hitting in front of the pitcher, but it looks like he's been almost equally successful getting on base when he hasn't hit eighth (albeit in a limited number of PAs) and it's not like every #8 hitter in the NL is walking 12% of the time.

The more I read about Hanigan, the more I'm feeling comfortable about the possibility of him being the Red Sox' catcher in 2014. Throws out runners, good at framing pitches, works the count. His low BABIP last year apparently was mostly the result of bad luck too, seeing as his batting ball profile didn't change drastically. The wrist injury scares me, but I'd be okay if Hanigan is the direction they decide to go in.

 

[OCD SS]

 
Rob Bradford? Hey man, Steve HIlliard here. Yea that's right, AJ's agent. Did you here that the Sox are interested in my client?

I assume that the same way the Sox always appear in on everyone at the trade deadline also applies to the free agent market. If they were to ask after nearly every player they will have a much better sense of the shape of the market (and are less likely to be surprised) than a team that focuses closely on just a few targets. It would also allow them to plan for contingencies and camouflage their intentions

 

[Plympton91]

I don't understand at all why you'd pay $40 to $60 million and give up a prospect to upgrade from Nava to Either, when out of the other side of your mouth you're planning to replace Ellsbury with JBJ because you refuse to pay a dime more than what the SABR formulas say Ellsbury is worth.  If you're dead set on getting the best value out of every dollar and minimizing the risk of long term contracts, then there is absolutely no reason to make any change to the LF platoon.  Taking both expected production and cost into account, it is probably one of the best values in all of major league baseball.  Why would you spend resources there?

 

[MakMan44]

On the topic of Ethier, Gomes is under contract in 2014 and should be the perfect second half of the platoon. After that, finding a RHH 4th OF type should be relatively cheap.

I'm actually moving more toward trading for Ethier if the price is right.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

On the topic of Ethier, Gomes is under contract in 2014 and should be the perfect second half of the platoon.

 
He already is the second half of a platoon. It's not like acquiring Ethier changes Gomes' role. The issue isn't Gomes. The issue is Ethier at $15M plus $53.5M over the following three years, vs. Nava at less than a million plus arb money for the following three years.
 
Sure, the Dodgers could subsidize some of that salary--but that's going to increase the prospect cost. Even unsubsidized, Ethier would probably cost at least a bit of real talent. Subsidized, more than a bit. I don't see the point. If he's going to platoon, yes, he's an improvement, but at too steep a price. If he's not going to platoon, he's probably not an improvement.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2013/11/10/monitoring-baseball-meetings/8gNuNfkHk9L46xuJ0lzaeL/story.html

Carfado wonders if Trumbo for Middlebrooks and Doubrount makes sense. I might be in the minority here but I think it's too high of a price for a guy who has historically tailed off in the 2nd half of the year.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

Isn't part of the problem with Eithier that you're essentially locking into a LF platoon for several years? I like how it worked last year, and I could see a short term Nava upgrade for next year if it makes sense. But isn't the ideal to find a guy who hits his off-side pitcher competently, plays the wall well, and can be slotted into the lineup at that position for 145 games a year? Either doesn't seem to be that guy. Is platooning for LF for the next 5 years how we want to use a roster spot?

Edit: On the positive side, several years of a SOSH filter for guys like me who type "Either" might be worth it.

 

[judyb]

Am I crazy for thinking that's almost like giving away Doubront for the right to swap Middlebrooks for a near clone of himself who plays an easier position and has more service time?

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2013/11/10/monitoring-baseball-meetings/8gNuNfkHk9L46xuJ0lzaeL/story.html

Carfado wonders if Trumbo for Middlebrooks and Doubrount makes sense. I might be in the minority here but I think it's too high of a price for a guy who has historically tailed off in the 2nd half of the year.

 
Trumbo for Middlebrooks straight up is too high of a price, if only because Trumbo is older and is arbitration eligible.  At the plate, Trumbo IS Middlebrooks, just with a longer track record (Trumbo 250/299/469, Middlebrooks 254/294/462).  Middlebrooks is far and away more valuable defensively.

 

[bigyazbread]

Cafardo is slinging stuff on the wall and see what can stick.  With Drew not in the fold, the Sox are not going to move Middlebrooks, and they are certainly not going to do it with a controlled lefthanded started thrown in to "sweeten" the deal.

 

[radsoxfan]

 
He already is the second half of a platoon. It's not like acquiring Ethier changes Gomes' role. The issue isn't Gomes. The issue is Ethier at $15M plus $53.5M over the following three years, vs. Nava at less than a million plus arb money for the following three years.
 
Sure, the Dodgers could subsidize some of that salary--but that's going to increase the prospect cost. Even unsubsidized, Ethier would probably cost at least a bit of real talent. Subsidized, more than a bit. I don't see the point. If he's going to platoon, yes, he's an improvement, but at too steep a price. If he's not going to platoon, he's probably not an improvement.

 
I'm not a big fan of the Ethier idea, and would be fine with Nava/Gomes again. But I think the bolded is almost certainly untrue. Ethier is significantly overpaid, and is a net negative with his contract.  Taking on his full contract and giving up nothing would be insane.   There are still some dumb teams out there, but I think any team would need at least 20M before considering trading for him. And that's without giving up any talent whatsoever.  If the Dodgers want any real prospects, I think they should have to pay around half of his contract.
 
The Trumbo idea is horrible, though not surprising coming from Cafardo. He is just an older version of Middlebrooks. We would basically be giving up Doubront for free, and taking on a guy who has proven he can't get on base 30% of the time.  At least Middlebrooks has some potential upside.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

Cafardo is crazy. I think Doubront and Workman should be viewed as close to untouchable, except for a very major piece of significant need, and that ain't Trumbo. There is a chance that Doubront's trade value will never be higher, but the position he plays, the arm he throws with, his cost, and the Sox current position makes me think the reward side of the equation is greater than the risk side for this team at this time.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Am I crazy for thinking that's almost like giving away Doubront for the right to swap Middlebrooks for a near clone of himself who plays an easier position and has more service time?

 
You are, if by "crazy" you mean "exactly right."
 
[Cafardo, offstage: But....but.....Trumbo has hit 30 HOME RUNS! In the SAME SEASON! TWICE!!!!]

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

Cafardo is crazy. I think Doubront and Workman should be viewed as close to untouchable, except for a very major piece of significant need, and that ain't Trumbo. There is a chance that Doubront's trade value will never be higher, but the position he plays, the arm he throws with, his cost, and the Sox current position makes me think the reward side of the equation is greater than the risk side for this team at this time.

I wouldn't go that far. STL calls tomorrow and offers Shelby Miller or Tavares for Doubront + I'm driving them down to St Louis. I think Doubront has great trade value and it's up to Ben to evaluate if he's going to be a big piece going forward or if he's trade bait.

 

[Drek717]

 

 
He already is the second half of a platoon. It's not like acquiring Ethier changes Gomes' role. The issue isn't Gomes. The issue is Ethier at $15M plus $53.5M over the following three years, vs. Nava at less than a million plus arb money for the following three years.
 
Sure, the Dodgers could subsidize some of that salary--but that's going to increase the prospect cost. Even unsubsidized, Ethier would probably cost at least a bit of real talent. Subsidized, more than a bit. I don't see the point. If he's going to platoon, yes, he's an improvement, but at too steep a price. If he's not going to platoon, he's probably not an improvement.

Back in July Heyman quoted a rival GM as saying they'd have to eat half his contract just to move him, period, no significant compensation attached.  It was viewed as one of the worst extensions in recent history just a few months ago.
 
All the recent rumors suggest that they'd have to eat $20M or better to move him, and that eating more would only move the prospect quality so much.  Short of them eating the vast majority of the deal (defeating the purpose of trading him to a large extent) they're getting a PTBNL level guy back for him and if that means eating less than $30M of the ~$71M guaranteed they'd probably be happy with that.

 
 

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2013/11/10/monitoring-baseball-meetings/8gNuNfkHk9L46xuJ0lzaeL/story.html

Carfado wonders if Trumbo for Middlebrooks and Doubrount makes sense. I might be in the minority here but I think it's too high of a price for a guy who has historically tailed off in the 2nd half of the year.

I don't see where he says Middlebrooks + Doubront for Trumbo.  He says the Angels would be interested in either player, and that the Sox might want Trumbo if they fail to resign Napoli, but he never suggests that the two of them would be a reasonable offer for Trumbo.  Which it isn't, by the way.  Middlebrooks is probably too much and Doubront would be too much for any angels player not named after a tasty fresh water fish.
 
Trumbo's market will be interesting though.  He's a poor man's Nelson Cruz at the plate, a few years younger, worse in the OF corners but is a solid 1B.  What do you pay for a guy like that when so many more well rounded players are available and the Angels are starting to sound desperate to move him?  I could see him moved for surprisingly weak return.

 

I don't understand at all why you'd pay $40 to $60 million and give up a prospect to upgrade from Nava to Either, when out of the other side of your mouth you're planning to replace Ellsbury with JBJ because you refuse to pay a dime more than what the SABR formulas say Ellsbury is worth.  If you're dead set on getting the best value out of every dollar and minimizing the risk of long term contracts, then there is absolutely no reason to make any change to the LF platoon.  Taking both expected production and cost into account, it is probably one of the best values in all of major league baseball.  Why would you spend resources there?

A few reasons why:
1. The team believes Nava's 2013 was a mirage.
2. A small to mid market team is willing to pay good prospects for Nava thanks to his remaining years of control and minimum salary.  If you were a small to mid market team interested in Choo to play one of the corners but unable to meet the $100M+ contract he'd receive Nava's OBP offense is a pretty good substitute that lets you push your money in other directions.
3. The organization believes that Ethier is a significant defensive upgrade over Nava and that his legitimate ability to play RF (whereas for Nava playing RF is similar to batting right handed, an exercise in futility) would be highly valuable should JBJ scuffle early on.
 
Any or all of the above.

 

[Dahabenzapple2]

Just classic idiocy that Cafardo would write about Trumbo

His kind of player for sure

Btw I knew Cafardo was an idiot when I read the Patriot Ledger in the late 70's

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

Just classic idiocy that Cafardo would write about Trumbo

His kind of player for sure

Btw I knew Cafardo was an idiot when I read the Patriot Ledger in the late 70's

Don't get me wrong if the price is right and Napoli leaves then why the hell not bring him in. For the package the Angels would in reality want ill pass. The best option is for Napoli to stay. He played great defense and can play in this market and honestly I feel he's more valuable to the Red Sox than anywhere else and vice versa.

Ethier is a glorified platoon player. Much better way to spend 40-60 million than on him even if you trade Nava which I would. Nava's in the prime of his career and is coming off a career year. Solid player has proven he's a legit MLB player but he's by no means unreadable. If someone wants to trade a legit prospect for him then you have to pull the trigger. JBJ will get a shot, Brentz should get one as well. Kalish? Who knows the guy has been banged up for 2 years. I would use the money being saved on Ellsbury towards locking up Xander to a Nomar like contract to buy out his arbitration years and extending Lester.

 

[Plympton91]

 
A few reasons why:
1. The team believes Nava's 2013 was a mirage.
2. A small to mid market team is willing to pay good prospects for Nava thanks to his remaining years of control and minimum salary.  If you were a small to mid market team interested in Choo to play one of the corners but unable to meet the $100M+ contract he'd receive Nava's OBP offense is a pretty good substitute that lets you push your money in other directions.
3. The organization believes that Ethier is a significant defensive upgrade over Nava and that his legitimate ability to play RF (whereas for Nava playing RF is similar to batting right handed, an exercise in futility) would be highly valuable should JBJ scuffle early on.
 
Any or all of the above.

1. That would require the front office to be comprised of idiots, and they're not.
2. OK. Show me.
3. That's not worth 10 million

 

[DJnVa]

If we deal Middlebrooks for a 1B, we fill one hole (assuming Napoli is gone) and create another and throw in Doubront?
 
What's the point?

 

[Drek717]

1. That would require the front office to be comprised of idiots, and they're not.
2. OK. Show me.
3. That's not worth 10 million

1. He had a BABIP of .352 and in both previous ML call ups was basically a .240/.350/.380 or so guy.  Nava having a career year buoyed by a high BABIP and then dropping back down to that pace isn't something out of the norm for players to do, especially ones who make the majors at the age Nava has.  Do I think he's going to turn back into a pumpkin?  No.  But the FO has access to a ton more information than any of us, and might well see something in his metrics that scares them.
 
2. I'm not a part of a major league front office so why would I be able to do that?  I don't see how small to mid market GMs won't at least be acquiring towards Nava's availability however.  Gomes was played over him in key playoff games and Nava is a very nice comp to Shin Soo Choo for literally pennies on the dollar in salary.  If a team offers/has offered a sweet enough deal then the following steps (namely acquiring his replacement in the form of Ethier) would be put into motion.
 
3. That depends on what degree 1 and 2 above might be true.  If the FO values that defensive versatility it would likely prompt them to explore their options with regards to Nava.  But yes, the defensive upgrade angle would likely only be a catalyst that would need to be backed up by meaningful return from point #2.

 

[Rasputin]

A few reasons why:
1. The team believes Nava's 2013 was a mirage.
2. A small to mid market team is willing to pay good prospects for Nava thanks to his remaining years of control and minimum salary.  If you were a small to mid market team interested in Choo to play one of the corners but unable to meet the $100M+ contract he'd receive Nava's OBP offense is a pretty good substitute that lets you push your money in other directions.
3. The organization believes that Ethier is a significant defensive upgrade over Nava and that his legitimate ability to play RF (whereas for Nava playing RF is similar to batting right handed, an exercise in futility) would be highly valuable should JBJ scuffle early on.
 
Any or all of the above.
 

 

1. That would require the front office to be comprised of idiots, and they're not.
2. OK. Show me.
3. That's not worth 10 million

 
Christ, people, you're both wrong.
 
Daniel Nava's 2013 was a mirage to the extent that he doesn't really have that much power. Twelve homers is more than he has hit in any season including the time he spent destroying high A in 2008 and 2009.
 
But, as many of us pointed out coming into 2013, a Gomes/Nava platoon in left would result in pretty good numbers. I won't go into all the details because I have better things to do, but the status quo in left field is pretty damn good.
 
He doesn't have a ton of value on the trade market because he is a soon to be 31 year old with less than three hundred games in the majors who is one year away from the arb process. He's not going to get a ton of money in the arb process because his team will just release him rather than pay it because he's a poor defensive outfielder with middling power. That's not something you pay to acquire from another club, it's something you bring in a bunch of minor league free agents and major league has beens and hold an open audition for. 
 
While Nava certainly isn't good enough to play RF on anything resembling an every day basis, he did just get 51 starts there for a team that won the World Series. If you're looking for a shert term replacement because Victorino is banged up, Nava is fine. If Victorino goes on the DL, his replacement will likely be someone who can be trusted to play RF with some competence.
 
As previously noted, the Gomes/Nava platoon is a pretty good combination. It also costs less than ten million dollars and no prospects to retain. If you're going to add a multi million dollar salary commitment through 2018, you're not going to do it for anything less than a difference maker.
 
Andre Either is not a difference maker.

 

[circus catch]

I first saw Trumbo and Bourjos available for pitching here http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/10/angels-willing-to-trade-bourjos-trumbo-for-pitching.html, and I thought that with all of our young talented pitchers at our doorstep, we could get something done. I would consider any of our soon-to-be ready pitchers for the two of them - that and more - but not Doubront.  He appears to be one off-season of good conditioning away from being a 200-inning pitcher with a sub 4.00 era, and the Sox are not in a position where they need to consider dealing him.
 
As for Middlebrooks, I honestly hadn't thought of that, because the story specifically said pitchers.  But if they don't sign Napoli and its him for Trumbo, I do it.

 

[chrisfont9]

Cafardo is crazy. I think Doubront and Workman should be viewed as close to untouchable, except for a very major piece of significant need, and that ain't Trumbo. There is a chance that Doubront's trade value will never be higher, but the position he plays, the arm he throws with, his cost, and the Sox current position makes me think the reward side of the equation is greater than the risk side for this team at this time.

Yup. This is about as stupid as the rumors (cough) that Lackey could be had. I get that everyone has his price, but Lackey's is pretty high right now, considering the minimum salary year in 2015. Who would give up enough to talk Ben out of that little gift, so they could tell their fanbase they scored John Lackey?

 

[benhogan]

Don't get me wrong if the price is right and Napoli leaves then why the hell not bring him in. For the package the Angels would in reality want ill pass. The best option is for Napoli to stay. He played great defense and can play in this market and honestly I feel he's more valuable to the Red Sox than anywhere else and vice versa.

Ethier is a glorified platoon player. Much better way to spend 40-60 million than on him even if you trade Nava which I would. Nava's in the prime of his career and is coming off a career year. Solid player has proven he's a legit MLB player but he's by no means unreadable. If someone wants to trade a legit prospect for him then you have to pull the trigger. JBJ will get a shot, Brentz should get one as well. Kalish? Who knows the guy has been banged up for 2 years. I would use the money being saved on Ellsbury towards locking up Xander to a Nomar like contract to buy out his arbitration years and extending Lester.

Agree 100%, use the Ellsbury savings to extend Lester and write a "Matt Moore/Evan Longoria" style contract for Xander. 
 
BUT I'd expect the Sox to follow suit with how they handled Pedroia/Buchholz/Lester with Xander (wait a couple of seasons).
 
Evan Longoria 0 years ML min TB signed him for 6 yrs at 17.5MM + 3 option years (30MM) signed in 2008
Matt Moore 0 years ML min TB signed him for 5yrs at 14MM + 3 option years (26MM) signed in 2012
VS.
Pedroia's after 2 years at ML min they then signed him for 6yrs at 40MM + 1 option (11MM). signed in 2009
Buchholz  after 3 years at ML min they then signed him for 4yrs at 30MM + 2 option years (26.5MM). signed in 2012
Lester after 2 years at ML min they then signed him for 5yrs at 30MM + 1 option (13MM).  signed in 2009
 
Guess its not fair to compare Lester/Pedroia/Buchholz deals with Longoria/Moore since the Sox players were not top 5 prospects when they entered ML baseball, both Longoria/Moore were consensus top 5 prospects. As is Xander.
 
What says' the resident geniuses on this site, sign Xander now or wait a few seasons?

 

[chrisfont9]

Agree 100%, use the Ellsbury savings to extend Lester and write a "Matt Moore/Evan Longoria" style contract for Xander. 
 
BUT I'd expect the Sox to follow suit with how they handled Pedroia/Buchholz/Lester with Xander (wait a couple of seasons).
 
Evan Longoria 0 years ML min TB signed him for 6 yrs at 17.5MM + 3 option years (30MM) signed in 2008
Matt Moore 0 years ML min TB signed him for 5yrs at 14MM + 3 option years (26MM) signed in 2012
VS.
Pedroia's after 2 years at ML min they then signed him for 6yrs at 40MM + 1 option (11MM). signed in 2009
Buchholz  after 3 years at ML min they then signed him for 4yrs at 30MM + 2 option years (26.5MM). signed in 2012
Lester after 2 years at ML min they then signed him for 5yrs at 30MM + 1 option (13MM).  signed in 2009
 
Guess its not fair to compare Lester/Pedroia/Buchholz deals with Longoria/Moore since the Sox players were not top 5 prospects when they entered ML baseball, both Longoria/Moore were consensus top 5 prospects. As is Xander.
 
What says' the resident geniuses on this site, sign Xander now or wait a few seasons?

Wait a few seasons.
 
It's interesting, if these early extensions (buy up Arb years with a couple more tacked on) become standard practice, you'd expect the agents to start holding out for earlier deals or no deal at all. On the other hand, holding on to players til 30-31 isn't really limiting their ability to get a max deal afterward, and the insurance against injury/backsliding will always have value.
 
Anyway, in Bogaerts' case (and Machado and a few other really young guys) you should be able to keep the window open a bit longer on these extensions, because if the Sox buy up two more years beyond arb, Xander will still hit the market at age 29. My guess is they could do something after 2014 for sure, and chances are after 2015 too.

 

[IpswichSox]

Bogaerts is represented by Boras, so delaying Bogaerts' free-agent status wouldn't appear to be a likely outcome.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

Guess its not fair to compare Lester/Pedroia/Buchholz deals with Longoria/Moore since the Sox players were not top 5 prospects when they entered ML baseball, both Longoria/Moore were consensus top 5 prospects. As is Xander.

What says' the resident geniuses on this site, sign Xander now or wait a few seasons?


Clay was BA's number 4 overall in 2008.

I think they wait until Xander has 2 years under his belt before talking long term contract with him.

 

[The Best Catch in 100 Years]

I first saw Trumbo and Bourjos available for pitching here http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/10/angels-willing-to-trade-bourjos-trumbo-for-pitching.html, and I thought that with all of our young talented pitchers at our doorstep, we could get something done. I would consider any of our soon-to-be ready pitchers for the two of them - that and more - but not Doubront.  He appears to be one off-season of good conditioning away from being a 200-inning pitcher with a sub 4.00 era, and the Sox are not in a position where they need to consider dealing him.
 
As for Middlebrooks, I honestly hadn't thought of that, because the story specifically said pitchers.  But if they don't sign Napoli and its him for Trumbo, I do it.

I am curious who those advocating dealing WMB for Trumbo want to play at 3B next year. Trumbo at 3B would be a total disaster. And I would take Carp or Nava over him at 1B too.

 

[Drek717]

 
 
Christ, people, you're both wrong.
 
Daniel Nava's 2013 was a mirage to the extent that he doesn't really have that much power. Twelve homers is more than he has hit in any season including the time he spent destroying high A in 2008 and 2009.
 
But, as many of us pointed out coming into 2013, a Gomes/Nava platoon in left would result in pretty good numbers. I won't go into all the details because I have better things to do, but the status quo in left field is pretty damn good.
 
He doesn't have a ton of value on the trade market because he is a soon to be 31 year old with less than three hundred games in the majors who is one year away from the arb process. He's not going to get a ton of money in the arb process because his team will just release him rather than pay it because he's a poor defensive outfielder with middling power. That's not something you pay to acquire from another club, it's something you bring in a bunch of minor league free agents and major league has beens and hold an open audition for. 
 
While Nava certainly isn't good enough to play RF on anything resembling an every day basis, he did just get 51 starts there for a team that won the World Series. If you're looking for a shert term replacement because Victorino is banged up, Nava is fine. If Victorino goes on the DL, his replacement will likely be someone who can be trusted to play RF with some competence.
 
As previously noted, the Gomes/Nava platoon is a pretty good combination. It also costs less than ten million dollars and no prospects to retain. If you're going to add a multi million dollar salary commitment through 2018, you're not going to do it for anything less than a difference maker.
 
Andre Either is not a difference maker.

Nava's ISO was just a few points lower than his 2012 MLB ISO, when he had 21 doubles and 6 home runs in 267 ABs versus the 29 doubles and 12 home runs he had in 458 ABs this past season.  He also split a lot of seasons between two levels, for example in 2010 he had 10 HR in only 284 ABs in his first go round at AAA (ISO of .169) but spent a little under half that season on the ML roster.
 
The big question on Nava is his K%.  His first run at the majors it was 24.5%, in 2012 it was 19.9%.  Last season it was 17.4%.  The 2011 to 2012 jump was huge to be sure, but the improvement last season coupled with his BABIP spike are what made his 2013 season so impressive.  Interestingly enough he had a similar improvement in K% at AAA, with his three seasons there being 19.7%, 16.9%, and 12.5% respectively.
 
And in a league where pretty much every team understands and values OBP I don't see how a guy who is a pretty safe bet for another .370+ OBP season isn't an appealing commodity to most teams.  He isn't any older than the FAs these teams are chasing and he costs a whole lot less than for example Choo who has a pretty similar skill set.
 
That said, I'm not advocating replacing Nava with Ethier, simply pointing out that it makes sense if the FO doubts Nava going forward for some unknown reason or if some lower payroll club is willing to over-compensate with prospects for Nava's low salary v. production.
 
Personally I think you stick with the Nava/Gomes platoon as I think Nava might off-set any BABIP regression with further K% improvement.  Not to mention that he's a career .332 BABIP guy across all levels so there is reason to believe his BABIP isn't entirely a mirage.  Also, Gomes had one of his more pedestrian seasons against LHP last year while hitting pretty close to his career norm against RHP, so I could definitely see him taking off against lefties in 2014, making a straight platoon potentially more productive than in 2013.  After 2013 the RH side of the platoon can be opened up for Bryce Brentz, Alex Hassan (if he isn't the 1B), and Alex Castellanos depending on who acquits themselves the best this year.  If Brentz bounces back with a repeat of AAA it might even be a good opportunity to break him in for a season before having him replace Victorino in RF.

 

[jacklamabe65]

I think a lot of all this is posturing by the Red Sox to either drive up prices for other teams or to put notice to players wanting to leave Boston that they do have options. I think Ben's most understated talent might be the art of misinformation, which he certainly observed, firsthand, since working with the team in other capacities for fourteen years. I think that we will find a different roster from 2013 because of the realities of baseball these days, but to even predict what it might look like is fruitless at this point. 

 

[JimBoSox9]

I thought this was an interesting tidbit from Gammo that I hadn't seen before.  The full article discusses the lack of power in the game and on the market.
 

So don’t be surprised at what Napoli or any power hitter gets on the market. Take the Red Sox. No one in their system hit 20 homers; Bryce Brentz led the organization with 19 in 88 games at Pawtucket, but while he also struck out 90 times in those 88 games, limited by injuries, he has legitimate, serious power and will get his shot someday. “It’s why we don’t even think about giving up on Will Middlebrooks,” says one Sox official. “It’s why Bogaerts being able to play shortstop is so important.” Another official adds that the next power potential bat in the upper reaches of the organization may be second baseman Sean Coyle, who hit 16 homers and slugged .500 in 60 games in a season plagued by injuries and spent with three different teams. Athletic second baseman-shortstop Mookie Betts had 15 homers, a .417 on base percentage and .506 slug in A ball and could be fast-tracked at several positions, but his skills go way beyond raw power.

 
I think the OF and 1B plans are fairly straightforward, but I've had a devil of a time getting a handle of what Plan A and Plan B are for the left side of the infield and catcher.  It's starting to feel more and more like they are not going to sign an infielder who would preclude being able to easily commit to Xander-SS/WMB-3B out of ST.  My inclination that
 
Xander-SS
WMB-3B
Gova-LF
JBJ-CF
Carp-1B
 
represents too much production uncertainty still holds, but if Beltran and Napoli are the solutions to that, I'd be as excited as fuck to see all three young'ins playing.

 

[Merkle's Boner]

I thought this was an interesting tidbit from Gammo that I hadn't seen before.  The full article discusses the lack of power in the game and on the market.
 
 
 
I think the OF and 1B plans are fairly straightforward, but I've had a devil of a time getting a handle of what Plan A and Plan B are for the left side of the infield and catcher.  It's starting to feel more and more like they are not going to sign an infielder who would preclude being able to easily commit to Xander-SS/WMB-3B out of ST.  My inclination that
 
Xander-SS
WMB-3B
Gova-LF
JBJ-CF
Carp-1B
 
represents too much production uncertainty still holds, but if Beltran and Napoli are the solutions to that, I'd be as excited as fuck to see all three young'ins playing.

I agree with this and don't think this change has gotten enough attention.  Between Pawtucket and Boston WMB hit 27 HRs this season.  It is not unreasonable to expect him to grow that number over the next few years so that he is a consistent 30-35 HR per year guy.  That is extremely valuable in this new world order.  The idea that he may be doing that while batting in the bottom third of the order makes it all the more valuable, IMO.

 

[PrometheusWakefield]

It would be nice if this was a thread to only post rumors and break out discussion of the merits of said rumors to other threads.  
 
I would even organize the threads around the obvious major questions this offseason: First Base, Third Base/Shortstop, Catcher, Outfield, Starting Rotation.  And I suppose Bullpen will eventually get some attention as well.  So Beltran rumor reported in this thread -> debate about merits of Beltran, comparison to Nava, etc, all go in Outfield thread.
 
IMO.

 

[Oppo]

It would be nice if this was a thread to only post rumors and break out discussion of the merits of said rumors to other threads.  
 
I would even organize the threads around the obvious major questions this offseason: First Base, Third Base/Shortstop, Catcher, Outfield, Starting Rotation.  And I suppose Bullpen will eventually get some attention as well.  So Beltran rumor reported in this thread -> debate about merits of Beltran, comparison to Nava, etc, all go in Outfield thread.
 
IMO.

Agreed. Keep opening this thread looking for rumors, not discussion.

 

[Quintanariffic]

I thought this was an interesting tidbit from Gammo that I hadn't seen before.  The full article discusses the lack of power in the game and on the market.
 
 
 
I think the OF and 1B plans are fairly straightforward, but I've had a devil of a time getting a handle of what Plan A and Plan B are for the left side of the infield and catcher.  It's starting to feel more and more like they are not going to sign an infielder who would preclude being able to easily commit to Xander-SS/WMB-3B out of ST.  My inclination that
 
Xander-SS
WMB-3B
Gova-LF
JBJ-CF
Carp-1B
 
represents too much production uncertainty still holds, but if Beltran and Napoli are the solutions to that, I'd be as excited as fuck to see all three young'ins playing.

Interesting.  This serves to only reinforce my belief that, once Drew signs elsewhere, the Sox will be content to sign a glove first utility IF to back up 2B-SS and 3B (someone like John McDonald, in fact) while keeping guys like Brock Holt and Brandon Snyder stored at Pawtucket in to hold things down in case of injury.
 
Edit:  Doh - sorry.  Nevermind my speculation.  I have no rumors to pass on.

 

[soxhop411]

Would the Sox be interested in Ike Davis if Napoli leaves?
http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/eye-on-baseball/24219241/report-mets-shopping-ike-davis-four-or-five-teams-interested

 

[absintheofmalaise]

It would be nice if this was a thread to only post rumors and break out discussion of the merits of said rumors to other threads.  
 
I would even organize the threads around the obvious major questions this offseason: First Base, Third Base/Shortstop, Catcher, Outfield, Starting Rotation.  And I suppose Bullpen will eventually get some attention as well.  So Beltran rumor reported in this thread -> debate about merits of Beltran, comparison to Nava, etc, all go in Outfield thread.
 
IMO.

The Beltran discussion was broken out into the Beltran thread. I'm breaking out the threads when I have time. Another option would to to start the new threads and we can move posts into them and PM one of us to let us know or PM us to let us know when there is some good discussion in here to break out the posts.

 

[nattysez]

FWIW, from the SF Chron:
 

The Boston Red Sox are said to be willing to listen on Jake Peavy and John Lackey. The Giants have no interest in Peavy despite his San Diego ties to manager Bruce Bochy. Lackey is an interesting case. He is due to earn $15.2 million in 2014 but only $500,000, the big-league minimum, in 2015 because of an unusual clause in the long-term contract he signed with Boston that called for that minuscule salary if he needed Tommy John surgery during the life of the deal — which he did.
 

http://blog.sfgate.com/giants/2013/11/11/sf-giants-open-to-trading-for-starters/

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

FWIW, from the SF Chron:
 

http://blog.sfgate.com/giants/2013/11/11/sf-giants-open-to-trading-for-starters/

The only guys on the Giants 25 man roster I would think interest the Sox would be Sandoval and Belt. I'm sure they would be interested in Lackey .. On a two year deal factoring in the option he's incredibly valuable. Would the Giants do a Belt/Lackey swap? Probably not .. They are short on offence as it is. They'd do Sandoval in a heartbeat .. But the Sox would want more one would think.

 

[StuckOnYouk]

San Fran could use a good SP and I'd love Belt. Not sure they would want to deal him though.
 
I wonder if the Sox are worried about Lackey falling back into some complacency after reaching the top of the mountain this year culminating in the ring. Not to mention he may eventually get grouchy about that 550K year and the Sox would rather not deal with a potential headache if they could get something now for him.

 

[Yaz4Ever]

San Fran could use a good SP and I'd love Belt. Not sure they would want to deal him though.
 
I wonder if the Sox are worried about Lackey falling back into some complacency after reaching the top of the mountain this year culminating in the ring. Not to mention he may eventually get grouchy about that 550K year and the Sox would rather not deal with a potential headache if they could get something now for him.

Obviously, I know nothing about the inner workings of his mind, but I've had the same concern about the $500k salary he's due in two years.  I'm not worried about him being complacent this season (again, not knowing him), because I think he's a competitor.  I would understand if they sold while his value is high, but I'd prefer to have him back next year and if he performs anything like he did this year have Ben rework the league minimum deal into something that makes him happy without giving up the leverage the Sox earned by having that clause in the contract in the first place.

 

[bosockboy]

Definitely a good sell high opportunity, and they have the incredible 2015 contract to cash in for the right deal. Definitely dovetails with the Hudson interest.

 

[nattysez]

Looks like Rajai Davis wants playing time (scroll down) -- not sure that's a good fit for a back-up CF/RF role in Boston.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

San Fran could use a good SP and I'd love Belt. Not sure they would want to deal him though.
 
I wonder if the Sox are worried about Lackey falling back into some complacency after reaching the top of the mountain this year culminating in the ring. Not to mention he may eventually get grouchy about that 550K year and the Sox would rather not deal with a potential headache if they could get something now for him.

 
I can't see the Giants dealing Belt for Lackey.  The guy is a slow starter but he had a great season in 2013 and plays very good defense.   The only possibility seems to be an expanded deal where the Sox deal a hitter along with Lackey and even then, I suspect the Giants would pass.  Lackey would be pretty damn good in AT&T and in the NL West though.

 

[radsoxfan]

Obviously, I know nothing about the inner workings of his mind, but I've had the same concern about the $500k salary he's due in two years.  

 
 
Anything is possible, but I really don't think it should be a big issue.  First of all, Lackey signed the damn contract and should abide by it.  He got 16M to rehab an elbow injury and not pitch.  He's a grown man, knew about the terms of the contract (or should have), and signed the deal because it's the best one he got.  He received 82.5M over the course of the contract, and has zero reason to give anything less than his best effort.
 
Even if you think Lackey doesn't care about any of that and will be bitter.... on a more selfish level, he will be pitching for his next contract.  It would be pretty dumb for him to show up out of shape, sulk and moan, or do anything other than pitch his best in a contract year.
 
I can see them trying to work out a short extension that is mutually beneficial.  But if they don't, Lackey should still be plenty motivated.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

 
I can't see the Giants dealing Belt for Lackey.  The guy is a slow starter but he had a great season in 2013 and plays very good defense.   The only possibility seems to be an expanded deal where the Sox deal a hitter along with Lackey and even then, I suspect the Giants would pass.  Lackey would be pretty damn good in AT&T and in the NL West though.

Sabean has been known for going "all in" before by recently trading prospects like Wheeler Alderson (now with Baltimore) to Pittsburgh etc...so this isn't out of the realm of possibility. I wouldn't see Boston doing this unless Napoli doesn't come back or they feel Belt can play left every day. San Francisco also needs offense so I'm not sure if they would do it either. Sanchez is blocked by Posey but he doesn't have the bat to play at 1st.

 

[JimBoSox9]

Guys, Brandon Belt is a 25-year-old who just put up a 140 OPS+ and is under control for 3 more years.  He gets traded for Dubront+Middlebrooks+?, not John Lackey's age 35-36 seasons.  Even Sabean's penchant for veterans doesn't make trading one of your cornerstone hitters make any GFIN sense.  

 

[RochesterSamHorn]

Dubront + Middlebrooks+? ? I'm not so sure. I'm thinking Dubront + Gomes. San Francisco is short on outfielders and would probably prefer Gomes after witnessing the culture and enthusiasm he brings to a clubhouse. And I think Jonny wouldn't mind going back home to do what he does best. His work here is done.