Steve22 said:
Grabbing Stanton wouldn't be a knee-jerk reaction. He's been a target for a while now, and would fit into our long-term plans much more significantly than any of the prospects you just mentioned besides Xander, who is obviously untouchable.
The fact of the matter is that our farm system has pretty much incomparable depth right now, but that's exactly what it is. Depth. If you think we're going to be able to field a Championship caliber team simply by plugging every single hole on our roster with those guys over the next 3-4 years, you've got an absurdly optimistic outlook on their collective potential. The goal is always to build from within, and we've done a tremendous job at doing that. But go back and look at the guys you mentioned. Who on that list is someone you wouldn't be willing to give up for someone of Stanton's caliber? For a generational right handed power bat in Fenway Park?
We have the potential to have a AAA team that wins the IL every year for the next 3 years. Or, we could leverage the strength in our farm system to acquire one of the best players in baseball. Stanton is 23. 23!!! There's a reason the Marlins won't do this deal, because we'd be robbing them. You've fallen in love with our prospects and lost the forrest for the trees. I agree you don't want to deal them for middling talents or one season rentals, but when you have the chance to acquire a franchise player you HAVE to do it.
Let's run through the guys you mentioned:
Pitching: Webster, RDLR, Ranaudo, Barnes, Owens, Workman: Solid prospects, no doubt. I think there's good reason to be excited about Ranaudo and Owens. Barnes could end up as an end of the rotation arm but we pretty much know what we have with Webster, RDLR, and Workman. Bullpen strength. In other words, the single easiest commodity on the free agent market. It's nice to have these guys in the system, but it's a massive stretch to say we NEED them. I'd be happy if two of Ranaudo, Barnes, and Owens end up spending time in the rotation over the next 4-5 years. But either way we're going to have to go outside the org. at some point to grab top of the rotation talent.
JBJ - Once again, it's nice to have him in the system, but do we NEED him? Would he do more for our team than Stanton would? Obviously not. JBJ is a nice player and I think he'll do tremendously well for the Red Sox, but he's not someone I would lose sleep over trading.
Cechini - You're falling into the trap of overvaluing players that have shown some nice potential but haven't proven anything yet. Everything you said about him is true, but does that make him a more valuable asset than Stanton for the next decade? Obviously not. There's just as likely a chance he regresses back to what we expected out of him and we end up with an average every-day third basemen in 2 1/2 years to spell Middlebrooks. You might hit the lottery with Garin, but you also might strike out.
Betts/Coyle - Not worth worrying about. Betts is quite possibly the most unnecessary asset in our farm system right now. He's shown TREMENDOUS potential over one season, and has almost no future payoff for us unless Pedroia bottoms out and then we've got larger problems than maintaining our farm system. He's probably close to reaching his peak trade value some time over the next year, and I'd be ecstatic if he could serve as a major part of some blockbuster trade. In doing that he'd be contributing more to the team than he will on the field for the forseeable future.
Swihart/Vazquez - Both good catching prospects, and unlikely we'd have to deal either/both to get Stanton. But once again, explain to me without using ridiculous comparisons to Posey/Molina how either of these guys would be more valuable than Stanton?
EDIT: I'll just add that the silliest thing the Sox can do right now is overvalue every single asset in the organization because we won a world title. Ben won't allow that to happen. Look at things objectively, and you'll see there is absolutely NO ONE in our system that would be more valuable to the big league club over the next decade than Stanton. And we're not considering X, because he's not going anywhere.
You've completely missed my points, here's where:
The farm system does not have "incomparable depth" It has enough depth to address most, not all, of the ML roster's needs over the next few years if most, not all, of the prospects pan out. The later part of that statement isn't particularly likely, so I don't see the "incomparable depth".
Case in point: this team without Xander Bogaerts has no in-house SS answer worth starting for a first division team anywhere in sight. We would be entirely beholden to signing Stephen Drew and hoping he 1. stays healthy and 2. doesn't regress offensively or defensively. The same argument can be made for WMB adn Cecchini at 3B. The free agent market isn't going to offer up a quality 3B in the relatively near future. The Red Sox have two high upside but unproven quantities there. Chances are relatively good that one of them can fill the role. Instead of gambling on picking the right one why not keep both and feel confident in meeting the franchise's long term needs?
Same with starting pitching. This team needs to produce probably a minimum of two new starters from the farm system by the start of the 2016 season or they'll have to go shopping for free agent starting pitchers in a market where average and over 30 typically equates to eight figures per season for multiple years. So can they really spare starting pitchers?
I'm not over valuing the Red Sox prospects. I'm acknowledging the high flame out rate that prospects have, the needs that the Red Sox will have in the relatively near term (next 2-3 years) and what I'm saying is: Lets keep the good prospects we have to fill as many holes internally as possible, then spend money to fill the ones we can't.
Sure, there isn't a single player we've mentioned that I wouldn't give up for Stanton, outside of Bogaerts. Hell, there isn't a pair of them. But how about five of them? Because that is probably what you'll be looking at to get the deal done. This "incomparable depth" you mentioned evaporates incomparably fast as soon as you take just a couple guys out of the mix. Add in an injury or two, a flame out here and there, and suddenly we might find ourselves not too different from the Yankees, trying to fill every hole with free agents and trades of what few prospects are left because we have no high minors options in-house.
Also, JBJ is a need on this team if they don't sign Ellsbury, so unless they make an incredibly silly move and give him the outlandish deal he's likely to get this winter JBJ is far and away the best option for starting in CF around. Victorino can't hold up over a full season there and the organization wants a RF with CF range, so in order to meet organizational demands it's JBJ or a career journeyman off the FA pile. What do you think is a bigger upgrade, Stanton over the Nava/Gomes platoon or JBJ over Franklin Gutierrez?
You're man crushing over a single player and forgetting that you field a minimum of 9 players every game, a 25 man roster, and generally pull at least 10 others up regularly from the 40 man to fill in for those 25 as they get hurt. Stanton doesn't make the Red Sox a better team if he costs the organization all of it's depth, which he would. All to get him a few years sooner than when he'll be a free agent and start costing $30M a year if you even get to retain him.
Depth is a tenuous thing in baseball. A single injury or flame can turn a "deep" position into a position of need nearly overnight and depth is more important than what any single player can do for you.
