Potential Trade Deadline Targets

geoduck no quahog

not particularly consistent
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2002
13,024
Seattle, WA
Only thing I might take issue with is the assessment of Devers, who appears to be over his head in the majors due to being called up too soon. That puts Nunez at 3B when/if Pedroia returns...and if I'm correct - Devers either stays with the team as 1 position development guy or he's traded (or, realistically) sent down to learn a few things at lower stress. If that opens up a roster spot, the Red Sox might be in the market for a backup infielder that's both Pedroia insurance and theoretically better than what's down in Pawtucket today. I'd think that's an easy get.

In short, I agree with those who call for infield backup. I just think the spot's opened up by sending down Devers. Alternatively, Holt continues to play everywhere and becomes the designated Marwin (which is OK for me).

No real urgency on this team (until their first 5-game losing streak, where we'll all freak out).

{edit: I keep overlooking Swihart who's obvious trade bait considering how the Red Sox are using him)
 

TFisNEXT

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
12,529
Wright, Velazquez, and Workman just pitched a shutout against an offense that's been much closer to MLB average so far than a lot of people expected.
Yeah, this team is not short of 4th and 5th starters. Esp if Pom can regress positively just a little bit when he's off the DL. I'd be surprised if they are shopping for starting pitching at the deadline unless there's a big injury to the top 3.

The biggest need is clearly a bat that can hit lefties. Not sure they can find a good one though with their financial constraints and lack of farm talent to deal. Someone like Canha mentioned earlier in this thread seems like a possibility. He's destroying lefties so far....even with his recent plunge back to earth he's putting up a wRC+ of 164 against LHP. The A's probably want to move him anyway to get the younger Chad Pinder (another lefty masher) more at bats.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
19,863
St. Louis, MO
Only thing I might take issue with is the assessment of Devers, who appears to be over his head in the majors due to being called up too soon. That puts Nunez at 3B when/if Pedroia returns...and if I'm correct - Devers either stays with the team as 1 position development guy or he's traded (or, realistically) sent down to learn a few things at lower stress. If that opens up a roster spot, the Red Sox might be in the market for a backup infielder that's both Pedroia insurance and theoretically better than what's down in Pawtucket today. I'd think that's an easy get.

In short, I agree with those who call for infield backup. I just think the spot's opened up by sending down Devers. Alternatively, Holt continues to play everywhere and becomes the designated Marwin (which is OK for me).

No real urgency on this team (until their first 5-game losing streak, where we'll all freak out).

{edit: I keep overlooking Swihart who's obvious trade bait considering how the Red Sox are using him)
Agreed Devers is an issue, maybe less for the team but more for his development. I suspect once Pedroia is finally healthy, Nunez will take over 3B and let Devers figure stuff out in Pawtucket. A RHH bench bat and a possible LOOGY are the only real shopping items DD has.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Except Nunez hasn't been any better than Devers and isn't exactly a great fielder himself either. Nunez has been hitting somewhat better lately, though. I also don't know how Devers will figure anything out against inferior pitching.

And I'd guess Swihart has 0 trade value.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,059
Hingham, MA
Except Nunez hasn't been any better than Devers and isn't exactly a great fielder himself either. Nunez has been hitting somewhat better lately, though. I also don't know how Devers will figure anything out against inferior pitching.

And I'd guess Swihart has 0 trade value.
Last 10 Nunez is hitting .385 / .390 OBP / .513 SLG / .903 OPS. But it may just be pure BABIP luck, .483 during that time. Season BABIP is .309
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
The biggest need is clearly a bat that can hit lefties.
Which LHSP are likely to make it to a playoff rotation on a team other than the Red Sox? I assume the Jays will trade Happ at the deadline, but other than Paxton, the league leaders are full of RHP.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
19,863
St. Louis, MO
Which LHSP are likely to make it to a playoff rotation on a team other than the Red Sox? I assume the Jays will trade Happ at the deadline, but other than Paxton, the league leaders are full of RHP.
Keuchel? Sabathia? And a PH for someone like Chapman in a late inning key situation.
 

TonyPenaNeverJuiced

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 7, 2015
318
I think you vastly overestimate what Major League Baseball teams 'can afford to' run out as 5th (heck even 4th) starter over a season. 20 games with Wright or Velazquez doesn't feel like any kind of serious concern to me.
I don't feel I overestimate - perhaps it you, lapa, who underestimate what deep-into-the-playoffs MLB teams can afford. Maybe you're cool with W/V for some starts, but if the season ends up on the line and it's one of those two vs. Domingo German - well, I'd rather not be flipping a coin games 159-161.

Wright, Velazquez, and Workman just pitched a shutout against an offense that's been much closer to MLB average so far than a lot of people expected.
Cool sample size. Someone needs to be a long swingman, and Velazquez needs to keep getting looks, but I'm not banking many more shutouts from that fearsome trio.

I think the opposite. In the Sox championship years, if you look at it in terms of generality, they would have just one lousy hitter that played quite a bit down the stretch. Other than that they had quality hitters throughout the lineup. And you look at their number 5 pitchers; they had one that was "Wright/Velazquez." That was Dempster in 2013, Julain Tavrez/Wakefield in 2007 and in 2004 Lowe was awful and Wakefield not very good either.
Dempster, in 2013, pitched mediocre, sure - for 170+ innings. There's a trade off.

Tavarez in 2007, similarly, 134.2 innings. I hope Wright can pitch at Tavarez-2007 level for 100+. Last night was incredible - but my HopeMeter© didn't budge.

Wakefield in 2007: 189ip. He may not have been electric, but those are lots and lots and lots of meaningful innings and chances to win ballgames.

And yes, Lowe was awful in 2004. And he, too, pitched 180+ innings. So did Wakefield.

You don't need your number 5 starter to be that good.
No, but I don't want to advocate for "good." I want to advocate for not having a team that needs lots of guys to handle a short chunk of innings. The 2004 Sox got 5 starts by 3 guys, other than the top 5 starters. The 2007 team had 3 guys make 11 starts outside the top 6 starters (Jon Lester replaced Tav halfway through the year). And the 2013 team is the outlier of sorts: 25 starts by 6 different pitchers not in the normal rotation to start the year. Of course, one of those was Jake Peavy whom we acquired via trade...

Suppose the top 4 are pitching well enough and the number 5 is just okay. How much would a Pomeranz help the Sox if he pitches "well enough" vs for example we have 2 or 3 or maybe more big holes in the lineup such as the catchers? Wouldn't getting a guy like Ramos in a 3 team deal be overall better for the Sox in this scenario?

I think Wright will be fine as a 5 or better.
If the top 4 pitch well - awesome! Am I confident that Wright/Velaz/Beeks/Kevin Appier can pitch the rest of those innings, effectively enough that we're hoping Domingo German blows it in 162? Not in the least.

Would love to get an improvement at catcher in terms of the offense, sure. But why is a catcher coming cheaper than a SP? What is our position of strength in that scenario vs. one I propose?
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
Gotta hand it to you, TPNJ. Your ability to move the goalposts is right up there with Lucy and the football.

The only way to organize all your rationalizing is this: “hold me, I’m scared.”

Maybe you're cool with W/V for some starts, but if the season ends up on the line and it's one of those two vs. Domingo German - well, I'd rather not be flipping a coin games 159-161.



Cool sample size. Someone needs to be a long swingman, and Velazquez needs to keep getting looks, but I'm not banking many more shutouts from that fearsome trio.



Dempster, in 2013, pitched mediocre, sure - for 170+ innings. There's a trade off.

Tavarez in 2007, similarly, 134.2 innings. I hope Wright can pitch at Tavarez-2007 level for 100+. Last night was incredible - but my HopeMeter© didn't budge.

Wakefield in 2007: 189ip. He may not have been electric, but those are lots and lots and lots of meaningful innings and chances to win ballgames.

And yes, Lowe was awful in 2004. And he, too, pitched 180+ innings. So did Wakefield.



No, but I don't want to advocate for "good." I want to advocate for not having a team that needs lots of guys to handle a short chunk of innings. The 2004 Sox got 5 starts by 3 guys, other than the top 5 starters. The 2007 team had 3 guys make 11 starts outside the top 6 starters (Jon Lester replaced Tav halfway through the year). And the 2013 team is the outlier of sorts: 25 starts by 6 different pitchers not in the normal rotation to start the year. Of course, one of those was Jake Peavy whom we acquired via trade...

If the top 4 pitch well - awesome! Am I confident that Wright/Velaz/Beeks/Kevin Appier can pitch the rest of those innings, effectively enough that we're hoping Domingo German blows it in 162? Not in the least.
It almost sounds like you’re saying one or more pitcher(s) will be needed for games that the top-4 pitchers don’t play. But that can’t be right. Because it needs to be only one pitcher that needs to pitch a lot of innings. Which have to be great innings. Unless he doesn’t. Then it could possibly be lots of different pitchers. Or lots of mediocre innings. Or some pitchers throwing mediocre innings and some pitchers throwing good innings. And here are three completely different Red Sox teams that won a championship, each one building its rotation differently. And this team may have good options, but not good enough to pitch a shutout against Somebody German.

And this team has a great chance to win. But they can’t. Until they do. But they might not.

Ok, well, I agree with you there. But I’m also pretty sure that that the Sox don’t need any more starting pitchers than they currently have.
 

judyb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
4,444
Wilmington MA
I could see it, if they had what it takes to add a great SP, but they don't seem to be in that position, so whatever SP they could trade for is likely to just be more depth. And when a team has as many SPs in their bullpen as this team does even with one of their top 5 on the DL, SP depth doesn't seem to be what they need to add.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
But I’m also pretty sure that that the Sox don’t need any more starting pitchers than they currently have.
Agreed with this. There is a big difference between need and want. They have 7-8 guys who can give them a competent start when needed. Not always an All Star/Hall of Fame level, only need to score 1-2 runs to win type start, but 5-6 innings, 2-4 runs, keep the team in the game type start. Of course everyone wants an all star to make every start, but no team has that luxury.

Same thing in the bullpen. Same thing in the lineup. We all want an All Star at every position, but we don't need an All Star at every position.

This team has almost no money to spend in terms of adding payroll. They have nearly nothing in terms of valuable prospects to trade even for cheap/affordable acquisitions. On that budget, it is going to be extremely difficult to walk the tight-rope of acquiring an affordable player who represents a true upgrade to one spot on the roster without potentially weakening any other part of the roster.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
It almost sounds like you’re saying one or more pitcher(s) will be needed for games that the top-4 pitchers don’t play. But that can’t be right. Because it needs to be only one pitcher that needs to pitch a lot of innings. Which have to be great innings. Unless he doesn’t. Then it could possibly be lots of different pitchers. Or lots of mediocre innings. Or some pitchers throwing mediocre innings and some pitchers throwing good innings.
Yeah, I don't really get the emphasis on IP for guys who were brought into the discussion because they were pretty bad. When you're preventing runs at a below-average clip, doing a lot of it is more of a bug than a feature -- and if the point is that the alternatives were even worse, how does that add up to our current situation being worse than those championship-year situations?
 

Clears Cleaver

Lil' Bill
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
11,370
The playoff staff today would be:
Sale
Price
Porcello
EdRod

Kimbrel
Kelly
Barnes
Wright
Pom

They need to find another guy in the pen. Preferably a specialist (roogy might be more valuable given the Astros
And Yankees lineups). Maybe that’s thornburg. Or Workman. Likely neither. That’s the primary goal between now and September 1.

I think you hope Pedroia is healthy and Devers starts to hit. I doubt they can improve C. Bradley will be platooned. Again, doubtful they trade to fill that role. Hopefully he just hits better.
 

shaggydog2000

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2007
11,483
I could see it, if they had what it takes to add a great SP, but they don't seem to be in that position, so whatever SP they could trade for is likely to just be more depth. And when a team has as many SPs in their bullpen as this team does even with one of their top 5 on the DL, SP depth doesn't seem to be what they need to add.
Last year's Pomeranz, and the player Pomeranz was for the vast majority of 2016 is much better than any pitcher they will be able to trade for. Sure seems like a healthy Pom is what they need, not to pick over somebody else's scrap heap dump.
 

Dewey'sCannon

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
870
Maryland
I seriously doubt that Devers get sent down, unless he really goes into a complete tailspin. In part because I don't see Nunez completely taking over 3B. But I could see a platoon there, with Devers sitting against the LHPs.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
I seriously doubt that Devers get sent down, unless he really goes into a complete tailspin. In part because I don't see Nunez completely taking over 3B. But I could see a platoon there, with Devers sitting against the LHPs.
Now that Devers is showing better footwork on defense (which is helping his throws be adequately accurate), I don’t think there’s any reason to send him down to AAA.

However, IF Pedroia is able to sustain 2B, then the last six weeks of the season will likely be used to find out which of Devers (full-time), Devers/Nunez (platoon), or Holt/Nunez (platoon) is immediately giving the team its best chance to win on a consistent basis.

And should they make the playoffs, they’ll roll into October playing the hot hand(s).
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
19,863
St. Louis, MO
Now that Devers is showing better footwork on defense (which is helping his throws be adequately accurate), I don’t think there’s any reason to send him down to AAA.

However, IF Pedroia is able to sustain 2B, then the last six weeks of the season will likely be used to find out which of Devers (full-time), Devers/Nunez (platoon), or Holt/Nunez (platoon) is immediately giving the team its best chance to win on a consistent basis.

And should they make the playoffs, they’ll roll into October playing the hot hand(s).
Nunez could also end up being the de facto platoon mate for JBJ. Benintendi to CF, JDM to LF, Nunez DH. If JBJ and Devers are both in need of platoon partners later in the year, that might facilitate the need for an extra RH bench bat.
 

DanoooME

above replacement level
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2008
19,831
Henderson, NV
I don't feel I overestimate - perhaps it you, lapa, who underestimate what deep-into-the-playoffs MLB teams can afford. Maybe you're cool with W/V for some starts, but if the season ends up on the line and it's one of those two vs. Domingo German - well, I'd rather not be flipping a coin games 159-161.
Have you looked at German's numbers? It's not like he's the new Severino. And it's the Red Sox BATS against German, not our pitcher.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
Nunez could also end up being the de facto platoon mate for JBJ. Benintendi to CF, JDM to LF, Nunez DH. If JBJ and Devers are both in need of platoon partners later in the year, that might facilitate the need for an extra RH bench bat.
That’s why I asked about the number of different LHSP among the likely AL playoff teams. There aren’t enough of them to worry about burning through scarce resources trying to build perfect platoons. 1 per rotation isn’t an insurmountable disadvantage, and my only real concern would be if NYY pulls off a trade for Happ and/or Hamels.

OTOH, trying to find a RHH bench bat for late inning PH work is probably worthwhile, because every team will have a couple LHRP ready for the Sox LHH. Ironically enough, I expect the Sox are likely to need to add someone exactly like Hanley, especially if Pedroia’s knee keeps barking.
 

judyb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
4,444
Wilmington MA
Is here any chance Sam Travis could be that guy? He was so awful v. RHP last season that he had an overall OPS of .667 while having a .958 OPS v. LHPs.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,660
OTOH, trying to find a RHH bench bat for late inning PH work is probably worthwhile, because every team will have a couple LHRP ready for the Sox LHH. Ironically enough, I expect the Sox are likely to need to add someone exactly like Hanley, especially if Pedroia’s knee keeps barking.
Is whatever version of Jose Bautista the Mets got exactly like Hanley at this point? Because that guy is pounding the ball.

Bautista seemed fairly cooked with Atlanta, but his exit velocity’s averaged 96.7 mph in New York. The Atlanta experiment obscured it a little, but he’s not missing fastballs like he was last year with Toronto—.399 wOBA vs. fastballs in 2018 compared with .297 wOBA last year.

Can’t figure the Mets could ask for much of anything for him, but they’re seven teams back of the second wild card and he fits our price range.
 

TonyPenaNeverJuiced

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 7, 2015
318
I'll take my lumps (I draw the line at Peanuts related insults, however).

I'd like to have a 5th starter who I'm confident will be the 5th starter for the rest of the season - it's a lot to ask, there's no guarantees, but I'm gonna ask for it, sorry. I do not want to hope that Cora's got the magic touch at selecting from our 6th, 7th, and 8th options on any given day, week, or 2nd half of season.
 

Dropo's moose

New Member
Jul 20, 2017
16
Agreed with this. There is a big difference between need and want. They have 7-8 guys who can give them a competent start when needed. Not always an All Star/Hall of Fame level, only need to score 1-2 runs to win type start, but 5-6 innings, 2-4 runs, keep the team in the game type start. Of course everyone wants an all star to make every start, but no team has that luxury.

Same thing in the bullpen. Same thing in the lineup. We all want an All Star at every position, but we don't need an All Star at every position.

This team has almost no money to spend in terms of adding payroll. They have nearly nothing in terms of valuable prospects to trade even for cheap/affordable acquisitions. On that budget, it is going to be extremely difficult to walk the tight-rope of acquiring an affordable player who represents a true upgrade to one spot on the roster without potentially weakening any other part of the roster.

I agree with your assessment above.

My question is this. The last 7 Playoff games in 16 and 17 resulted in the Starting Staff pitching a total of 22 innings and allowing 28 earned runs. Minus CBuc and Fister out of that equation the Staff went 16.2 IP and allowed 23 ER with an average of 3 innings per start.
What makes you think Sale Price Porcello and a healthy Pomeranz are going to be any different versus arguably a better Yankees offense and a Houston squad with a full year of Verlander and Cole? If you add the Angels and a Cleveland Team yet to find there stride, I believe its evident luxury tax or no luxury tax to find a Power arm or at least a Pitcher having a very good season to help this staff out.

JD has been a great sign but more times than not good playoff pitching beats good regular season offense
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
I agree with your assessment above.

My question is this. The last 7 Playoff games in 16 and 17 resulted in the Starting Staff pitching a total of 22 innings and allowing 28 earned runs. Minus CBuc and Fister out of that equation the Staff went 16.2 IP and allowed 23 ER with an average of 3 innings per start.
What makes you think Sale Price Porcello and a healthy Pomeranz are going to be any different versus arguably a better Yankees offense and a Houston squad with a full year of Verlander and Cole? If you add the Angels and a Cleveland Team yet to find there stride, I believe its evident luxury tax or no luxury tax to find a Power arm or at least a Pitcher having a very good season to help this staff out.

JD has been a great sign but more times than not good playoff pitching beats good regular season offense
Better rest? Better prep? I'm not sure what you are asking. Are we supposed to judge the pitchers on one or two outings that happened 12 or 24 months prior to this hypothetical post-season series, or on their overall effectiveness during the entire 2018 season?

The Sox just wrapped up a series in Houston in which all four of the guys you named pitched. The end result was 2-2. If they go into a seven game series with the Astros and split four games in Houston in the same manner, that means they need to win 2 out of 3 at home to win the series. I'll take my chances with that.

They've played six games thus far against the Yankees. 3-3 record with starts by Sale, Price, Pomeranz, Porcello (twice), and Rodriguez. Again, I'll take my chances with that going into Game 7.

What I won't do is assume the worst just because a pitcher had one bad outing in last year's postseason (or two years ago). The sample size is ridiculously small and out of date to the point of irrelevance.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
I'll take my lumps (I draw the line at Peanuts related insults, however).

I'd like to have a 5th starter who I'm confident will be the 5th starter for the rest of the season - it's a lot to ask, there's no guarantees, but I'm gonna ask for it, sorry. I do not want to hope that Cora's got the magic touch at selecting from our 6th, 7th, and 8th options on any given day, week, or 2nd half of season.
I wasn’t trying to insult you, but I did want to highlight the fact that your proposal was based on fan anxiety, rather than team need.

I’d love to have the type of rotation consistency that 2004 featured, too. It’s very reassuring. But that’s such a rare event, that it can’t be expected. And even back in 2004, it wasn’t entirely clear DLowe should even have been kept on the 40-man as September rolled into October, much less given a spot on the playoff roster.

The good news is, both Pomeranz and Wright are pretty good pitchers. So is Rodriguez. And the Sox top three are good enough to hang with any other team’s top-3. We fans just gotta roll with it.
 

jtn46

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 10, 2004
9,757
Norwalk, CT
I would think Blake Treinen is very available given he’s a 29-year old reliever in his first arb year and Billy Beane’s not so secret strategy to sell high on relievers. Making $2 million, so fits the budget. Not a huge need but would fit where Carson Smith was supposed to. He is having a great season (11 k/9, 1.95 FIP) after a tough 2017. Prospect price would likely be lower than Hand, Herrera and Iglesias, and maybe even Familia who all have more name-recognition. Could also be in the mix next season to close if Kimbrel walks.
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
If the top 4 pitch well - awesome! Am I confident that Wright/Velaz/Beeks/Kevin Appier can pitch the rest of those innings, effectively enough that we're hoping Domingo German blows it in 162? Not in the least.

Would love to get an improvement at catcher in terms of the offense, sure. But why is a catcher coming cheaper than a SP? What is our position of strength in that scenario vs. one I propose?
--------------

Tony I am "confident" (whatever the significance of that means) that Wright/Velazquez is the equivalent of the past number 5 starters we've had in 2004, 2007, 2013. I don't agree with your focus on "innings pitched" yet completely disregarding ERA. I don't understand your point about IP. Are you saying the number of innings pitched is more important than runs allowed per inning/per nine innings?

And I don't understand your point about the catcher vs a SP. Last year Pomeranz WAR was 3.1 per fangraphs. Only the catchers of 5 teams had a combination of WAR higher than Pomeranz. You are highlighting how important pitching is needed by the Red Sox yet now it's not important as a catcher? It depends on the player, doesn't it?

I'm not sure what you are asking in terms of "position of strength" because I think it obvious that at the moment are SP is tied for 4th in all of baseball for the most Quality Starts that it's a strength. And the catching right now the highest WAR of the two is Leon and he has the 36th ranked WAR.

And I'll just reiterate again. I'm elated how this team is going. No trades for me.
 
Last edited:

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
3,620
med idk, Treinen would be a pretty big get but he is also the kind of guy who could "lose it" fairly quickly. He was infuriating to watch in Washington with his walks and just lack of command sometimes. So maybe Oakland helped him figure something out, but IDK who we would even have to trade for him. guys having great years will not come cheaply at the deadline, especially with a few more years of control
 

lapa

New Member
Apr 20, 2018
544
I don't feel I overestimate - perhaps it you, lapa, who underestimate what deep-into-the-playoffs MLB teams can afford. Maybe you're cool with W/V for some starts, but if the season ends up on the line and it's one of those two vs. Domingo German - well, I'd rather not be flipping a coin games 159-162
Huh? You said the team was in trouble if they had wright Velazquez etc for 102 starts. I don't think that's reasonable given what both the offense and indeed the pitchers you mentioned have put up so far.
Once 'deep into the playoffs' they'll be riding Sale, Price, EdRo with Kimbrel/Kelly for the most part I don't see how our 4th/5th starters will be a big deal - without even going into how we stack up against the other teams. Houston is probably the strongest team and there's nothing we can reasonably
do to get past them by adding players so it is what it is. We'll get into the playoffs just fine unless major drop offs occur and that gives us as good a ticket as anyone else (outside Houston). If anything our fortunes this season are totally riding on ace sale and good price and lockdown kimbrel than any of those other guys you mentioned and of course that the bats keep it up
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
Not that Jon Jay was a fit for this roster because of his handedness, but that's the type of guy the Sox can afford to bring on. A 4th outfielder making 3 mill on an expiring contract who doesn't cost much. The D-Backs gave up an 18 year old starter who was in the DSL last year and a near ready 2nd lefty option out of the pen. This was done in early June too, so the price should go down closer to the deadline.

I said upthread they don't really need to do anything, but I do think even a marginal improvement this season can mean the division and more than one post season game. It's no longer a "just get in the dance" post season format. Plus all the other playoff teams are much more well suited to improve their teams.
 

Doug Beerabelli

Killer Threads
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Brad Miller, 1B and former MI over the years for the Rays, just got designated for assignment. Hit 30 HRs two years ago, but power has waned of late. If he doesn't get traded or picked up at $4.5 million (prorated), maybe a cheap 2B and utility option. Not sure if a trade makes sense unless Rays eat salary, or take some salary back. Not sure the Sox need him, either.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,660
Brad Miller, 1B and former MI over the years for the Rays, just got designated for assignment. Hit 30 HRs two years ago, but power has waned of late. If he doesn't get traded or picked up at $4.5 million (prorated), maybe a cheap 2B and utility option. Not sure if a trade makes sense unless Rays eat salary, or take some salary back. Not sure the Sox need him, either.
I’d expect the Sox to consider this. The ISO isn’t quite there, but Miller’s underlying batted ball data looks stronger than it did that 30-hr season. He ranks 36th in barrels per PA out of 223 qualified players and 25th in exit velocity. He’s having a good year.

He doesn’t really solve our need for a bat against LHP, but if he can play second, he’s probably a better option than Nunez, though it would push Swihart back down to 25th-man status.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
I don't understand your point about IP. Are you saying the number of innings pitched is more important than runs allowed per inning/per nine innings?
.
I'm not him, but sometimes it is. At least during the regular season. I guess it depends on what the word important means too. A starter who gives you 200 innings, 30 starts and allows 4 R/9 is probably more valuable than the guy who gives you 111 innings, 20 starts and allows 3.3 R/9.

An extreme example would be "Who was more "important" to the Redsox success in 2013? Jon Lester or Clay Buchholz?" The guy who gave you 33 starts 213.1 innings and a 3.75 era or the guy who gave you 16 starts, 108.1ip, and a 1.74 era?

According to WAR, Buch was worth 50% more than Jon Lester. That doesn't factor in the 16 games and 105 innings pitched from inferior pitching and I'm not sure how you can factor it in but it has to count for something. This is a very extreme example though since had Buchholz actually pitched a seasons worth of games, he would have had a WAR of around 9.0, and that has only been done by a pitcher 20 times.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,032
I'm not him, but sometimes it is. At least during the regular season. I guess it depends on what the word important means too. A starter who gives you 200 innings, 30 starts and allows 4 R/9 is probably more valuable than the guy who gives you 111 innings, 20 starts and allows 3.3 R/9.

An extreme example would be "Who was more "important" to the Redsox success in 2013? Jon Lester or Clay Buchholz?" The guy who gave you 33 starts 213.1 innings and a 3.75 era or the guy who gave you 16 starts, 108.1ip, and a 1.74 era?

According to WAR, Buch was worth 50% more than Jon Lester. That doesn't factor in the 16 games and 105 innings pitched from inferior pitching and I'm not sure how you can factor it in but it has to count for something. This is a very extreme example though since had Buchholz actually pitched a seasons worth of games, he would have had a WAR of around 9.0, and that has only been done by a pitcher 20 times.
Wakefield, Tim, 2004 ALCS G3

goosebumps. I cried.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
I'm not him, but sometimes it is. At least during the regular season. I guess it depends on what the word important means too. A starter who gives you 200 innings, 30 starts and allows 4 R/9 is probably more valuable than the guy who gives you 111 innings, 20 starts and allows 3.3 R/9.

An extreme example would be "Who was more "important" to the Redsox success in 2013? Jon Lester or Clay Buchholz?" The guy who gave you 33 starts 213.1 innings and a 3.75 era or the guy who gave you 16 starts, 108.1ip, and a 1.74 era?

According to WAR, Buch was worth 50% more than Jon Lester. That doesn't factor in the 16 games and 105 innings pitched from inferior pitching and I'm not sure how you can factor it in but it has to count for something. This is a very extreme example though since had Buchholz actually pitched a seasons worth of games, he would have had a WAR of around 9.0, and that has only been done by a pitcher 20 times.
It’s easy to factor in. You add up the contributions of the player(s) who are the actual replacements. Because it’s not a zero-sum game of comping one player against another and deciding between them. It’s a collaborative game where the 25-man and 40-man rosters are strategically managed to give the team its best chance to win in any given game.

For example, in 2013, you would take Buchholz (16 GS), Peavy (10 GS), and Aceves (6 GS). It isn’t perfect, but the secret is that it doesn’t matter which one of Lester or Buchholz is better during the season.

The 2018 team gets to backfill the innings lost by 2016 All-Star pitcher Drew Pomeranz with innings pitched by 2016 All-Star pitcher Steven Wright. That’s a damn good solution. And while some teams might be slightly better on paper because of having hot prospects with great stuff, the games still get played on the field.
 

TonyPenaNeverJuiced

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 7, 2015
318
I'm not him, but sometimes it is. At least during the regular season. I guess it depends on what the word important means too. A starter who gives you 200 innings, 30 starts and allows 4 R/9 is probably more valuable than the guy who gives you 111 innings, 20 starts and allows 3.3 R/9.
Pretty much this. And not only that - how about the tax on the bullpen with these guys who can't go deep into games? If Sale doesn't go 8 the next day, we're gonna be whining in another thread about the reliever we didn't trade for.

For example, in 2013, you would take Buchholz (16 GS), Peavy (10 GS), and Aceves (6 GS). It isn’t perfect, but the secret is that it doesn’t matter which one of Lester or Buchholz is better during the season.

The 2018 team gets to backfill the innings lost by 2016 All-Star pitcher Drew Pomeranz with innings pitched by 2016 All-Star pitcher Steven Wright. That’s a damn good solution. And while some teams might be slightly better on paper because of having hot prospects with great stuff, the games still get played on the field.
Put simply: I do not believe that Steven Wright should be trusted based on the one good full-season of his career; Tim Wakefield, he is not. I do not see how Wright + Johnson/Velazquez/Beeks are more than coin flips any time on the mound - add them together, count them individually - the results are risky. I don't want 60IP starting from any of them. I do not want to be in a one game playoff and the option is someone on 3 days rest or one of those dudes, including Wright.

This isn't about on-paper, it's about trusting that a pitcher will give you a chance to win - not head-or-tails, not maybe getting a shutout, maybe a blowout. I'll settle for 5IP/3R during game 163 over the lower-odds dice-roll of the guys we've got.

And if Wright can keep it up, I'll be incredibly stoked. I'll eat any hat put in front of me.
 

EricFeczko

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 26, 2014
4,823
The playoff staff today would be:
Sale
Price
Porcello
EdRod

Kimbrel
Kelly
Barnes
Wright
Pom

They need to find another guy in the pen. Preferably a specialist (roogy might be more valuable given the Astros
And Yankees lineups). Maybe that’s thornburg. Or Workman. Likely neither. That’s the primary goal between now and September 1.

I think you hope Pedroia is healthy and Devers starts to hit. I doubt they can improve C. Bradley will be platooned. Again, doubtful they trade to fill that role. Hopefully he just hits better.
I agree that a reliever might work ok. However, a left-handed reliever makes more sense to me than a right-handed reliever, given that we currently have three right handed relievers in the top 90.

Two potential trade target might be players like Jake Diekman (L 3.38 ERA) from the rangers or Ryan Pressely (R 2.85 ERA) from the Twins. Both are high-velocity pitchers with control problems entering the last year of arbitration (I think); neither are ace pitchers (94th and 87th best relievers by ERA respectively), and since this is a sellers market, neither may cost a bundle. Both should be affordable under our budgetary limits (Jake's contract is 2.7 million full year, whereas pressely's is 1.6).

EDIT: Just saw chawson's post, yeah I agree. I also think we'll have a clearer picture of who's around that level come july. Given that we are near the central tendency of relievers, I'm not too worried about picking up a safety reliever. Of course, if Bobby Poyner keeps looking just as good of an option, I'm not sure we'll really need to do do anything.
 

EricFeczko

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 26, 2014
4,823
Pretty much this. And not only that - how about the tax on the bullpen with these guys who can't go deep into games? If Sale doesn't go 8 the next day, we're gonna be whining in another thread about the reliever we didn't trade for.



Put simply: I do not believe that Steven Wright should be trusted based on the one good full-season of his career; Tim Wakefield, he is not. I do not see how Wright + Johnson/Velazquez/Beeks are more than coin flips any time on the mound - add them together, count them individually - the results are risky. I don't want 60IP starting from any of them. I do not want to be in a one game playoff and the option is someone on 3 days rest or one of those dudes, including Wright.

This isn't about on-paper, it's about trusting that a pitcher will give you a chance to win - not head-or-tails, not maybe getting a shutout, maybe a blowout. I'll settle for 5IP/3R during game 163 over the lower-odds dice-roll of the guys we've got.

And if Wright can keep it up, I'll be incredibly stoked. I'll eat any hat put in front of me.
Man, you must think the Yankees rotation sucks.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
I want the best available upgrade period if we're talking hypothetical additions. It makes no sense to me to add a reliever. We're talking about a luxury worth a marginal win. A lefty, even less than that. If the division is decided by a game or two, a reliever will barely move the needle.

As good as their record is, the easiest way to improve the team on paper at this snapshot of the season is at any one of 2b, 3b, or to a lesser extent a platoon option at 1b or centerfield.

By WAA (wins above average) they are ranked the following at each of their weak positions:

Catcher - 27th
2b and 3b - 30th!

We've already rehashed the catcher position. I wouldn't bother there given the lack of alternatives. I would strongly consider 3b if Devers is roughly replacement level a month from now. Or 2b if Pedey can only manage 2 or 3 games a week.

I don't know if DD has the balls to rent a 3b or 2b or not, but if he wants first place he may need to. The Yankees are not going to stand pat.

To me, Jed Lowrie is the perfect fit. He will be owed about 2 mill,. If the A's are willing to eat 500k (or less if Swihart is moved) then the Sox could sneak under their limit. He could play half the games at 2b and maybe DH a game or two a week when JDM plays the outfield.

Billy Beane loves weird players, so maybe there is something in our low minors along with Swihart that dazzles him. The A's are the perfect team for Blake.
 
Last edited:

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,660
Which LHSP are likely to make it to a playoff rotation on a team other than the Red Sox? I assume the Jays will trade Happ at the deadline, but other than Paxton, the league leaders are full of RHP.
This post makes sense in the context that you wrote it. But with news of Ohtani’s injury the odds that the AL East Wild Card team will face Paxton just went up significantly.

Obviously we play to win the division, but the Yankees have more resources to load up at the deadline than we do. Sam Travis getting playing time shouldn’t hurt, but I’d expect we could get some more help.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
This post makes sense in the context that you wrote it. But with news of Ohtani’s injury the odds that the AL East Wild Card team will face Paxton just went up significantly.

Obviously we play to win the division, but the Yankees have more resources to load up at the deadline than we do. Sam Travis getting playing time shouldn’t hurt, but I’d expect we could get some more help.
How much more help can they really get, though? Even setting aside the budgetary limitations for a moment, there are still roster limitations. Without any changes, and assuming Betts and Pedroia are healthy and playing in September/October (which by itself boosts the lineup vs LHP), the bench is some mix of Holt, Nunez, Swihart, Travis, Lin, and Vazquez/Leon. Sure they might want better than Swihart or Travis to start a playoff game,especially if it comes with sitting JBJ's defense, but is better out there? At an affordable price?

I just don't see them making a move expressly to have another RHH for a potential one game playoff off against James Paxton. As good as he is, if a lineup with Betts, Bogaerts, Pedroia, and Martinez can't do it, I'm not sure a moderate bench upgrade is the difference maker.
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
Pretty much this. And not only that - how about the tax on the bullpen with these guys who can't go deep into games? If Sale doesn't go 8 the next day, we're gonna be whining in another thread about the reliever we didn't trade for.



Put simply: I do not believe that Steven Wright should be trusted based on the one good full-season of his career; Tim Wakefield, he is not. I do not see how Wright + Johnson/Velazquez/Beeks are more than coin flips any time on the mound - add them together, count them individually - the results are risky. I don't want 60IP starting from any of them. I do not want to be in a one game playoff and the option is someone on 3 days rest or one of those dudes, including Wright.

This isn't about on-paper, it's about trusting that a pitcher will give you a chance to win - not head-or-tails, not maybe getting a shutout, maybe a blowout. I'll settle for 5IP/3R during game 163 over the lower-odds dice-roll of the guys we've got.

And if Wright can keep it up, I'll be incredibly stoked. I'll eat any hat put in front of me.
We can go at this all day. The #5 starter was not Clay or Peavy. The #5 was Dempster. I think Wright is fine as a number 5 at least.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Put simply: I do not believe that Steven Wright should be trusted based on the one good full-season of his career; Tim Wakefield, he is not. I do not see how Wright + Johnson/Velazquez/Beeks are more than coin flips any time on the mound - add them together, count them individually - the results are risky.
5th starter (never mind 6th or 7th, which is what we're really talking about here) is a risky position. Inherently, and almost universally. A team that gets through the entire season without having to depend, for a substantial number of starts, on coin-flip talent is rare as hell--even among the teams that make it deep into the playoffs.

Here's a list of ten ERA+ numbers:

76, 109, 70, 73, 90, 68, 80, 94, 68, 75

Yuck, right? Those figures belong to the fifth starters* for the last ten World Series champions.

This might be a good time to note that Steven Wright's career ERA+ is 116. (By the way, Tim Wakefield's was 105. And Tim Wakefield's after 1995, the season in which he passed Wright's current IP total and finished 3rd in the Cy Young voting, was 120.)

*In this case, fifth starter = guy with worst ERA among the five pitchers with the most starts on the team.