Potential Trade Deadline Targets
- Thread starter thepriceisright
- Start date
Just throwing out names, but someone like Hellickson or Ross is probably an upgrade on those and allows them to stay in their valuable middle relief/swing roles.
And you hate the idea of some other teams 4-5 starter making the start instead? Any starter you get is going to be worse than Sale, Porcello, Price or EdRod. If there was a clear cut upgrade, I'd be all for it but trading for fringe average players can result in Nunez 2017 or Nunez 2018. If you had the names of those 4/5 SPs that the Sox could acquire, the conversation might change a little. Most of us just don't see any realistic targets given what we have to offer.
Is Tyson Ross a reasonable target? He makes pennies and is a FA after the year. SD is going nowhere. What would he cost to acquire and would you really want him starting a 1 game playoff? It's easy to say the Sox should acquire a 4/5 that you feel comfortable with starting in a 1 game playoff, but naming 4/5s that actually fit that criteria is much, much harder.
Clayton Richard is signed for next year too, at a measly $3mil, so he'd probably fetch a greater return. It's also debatable if he's much better.
I definitely wouldn't mind having him though. He could be a cheap starting option for next season but I'm not sure he's an improvement for this season.
"Probably an upgrade" just doesn't do it for me. And I think that's the best you get with any of these guys, unless you're giving up significant assets (that we may not even have) in a trade or going over the luxury tax. If anything, I'd rather expend the bullets we have on a back-end bullpen arm. That's more important than a 5th starter in the post-season. I also don't think there's a need to have both Johnson and Velazquez as swing men in the pen. Adding a good relief arm would lengthen the pen in that regard, too.
My bad. I had suggested him and accidentally looked at his 2017 contract which was expiring at 1.8.
Though I don't think it's a good idea to have both Velazquez and Johnson in the rotation unless it's just 2 times through or so. I'm not sure either can consistently get through 5 with their stuff.
I would argue that Richard is a big upgrade over whatever they have in Pawtucket though - league average is a lot more valuable than replacement level which isn't guaranteed from Beeks/Cuevas.
Last edited:
One thing that gets glossed over in this "win now" vs "build sustainably" vs "WTF can we even trade, for who" debate is that getting "a couple of wins" improvement out of a deadline acquisition is really, really hard to do.
In order to improve your true talent expectations by a single win at the deadline, you have to get a true talent 3 WAR guy. If you want to improve by two wins, good luck finding a 6 WAR player just hanging around. Those improvements get even harder to find when you are trying to upgrade a team with as few real holes as this team has.
The Red Sox can sit pat or go all in here, but either way it is probably impossible for them to add more than a win, if they can even do that.
Not totally disagreeing on the merits of any of these guys, but I think the argument isn't about postseason composition, when that postseason could literally be one game. It's avoiding that Russian Roulette game. And a handful of starts from a better starter could easily make that difference.
I'm not sure where anyone has suggested this. Not having that guy may mean the difference in winning the division vs having to play the Wild Card game. As for names, do I have any? No one specific, but I also don't have the baseball acumen, resources and connections of DD and the Red Sox front office. With Wright out and Rodriguez seemingly for some time, do we rely on both Johnson and Velazquez as starters?
Much like starting pitching, I think any bullpen arm they add wouldn't be much better than Joe Kelly or Heath Hembree, and they already potentially have a bunch of those. I guess they could luck into a Brad Ziegler again but I wouldn't count on it. If they want a 3rd arm to go with Kimbrel and Barnes, it's going to have to be Thornburg, Buttrey, Braiser or some surprise.
This team isn't really in a place to make improvements. Any move they can afford to possibly make isn't even guaranteed to improve the team. The only real upgrade I see is Dozier. Everything else seems to be shuffling the deck chairs.
Not necessarily looking to add wins. Looking more to minimize any ground lost due to the current DL situation with the starting rotation.
Dozier is also 31, on pace to put up a much different overall offensive season then he did in 2016-2017, and it's the Twins we are talking about being on the hook for that QO money here in the event he decides to pass on the risk of seeing the same general market treatment as a lot of other guys who were supposed to get paid last off-season.
Or put a different way, if Pedroia was to hypothetically retire at the end of this season, do you honestly see yourself rallying around the idea of giving up notable money + the picks for Dozier in the event we see more of that cold spring extend into Aug-Sept?
Exactly. Well put, especially the bolded. This isn't exactly going to be the Blue Jays getting David Cone.
Cot's has them within $600K of the upper threshold. The Pearce trade, and the fairly specific amount of cash Toronto sent with him to offset his remaining salary, is pretty definitive evidence that the Cot's figures are as close to accurate as we're going to get. It was just enough to squeak his salary under the wire with a reasonable margin to account for errors in estimates (specifically benefits and pro-rated salaries for the shuttle guys).
Barring getting a player salary-free (as in the other team picks up all of his remaining salary or they trade away someone of equal salary), any acquisition is likely to put the team over the cap.
A factor to consider when it comes to the 4/5 starter types not acquiring significant assets - at no point is a team going to just up and trade a 4/5 starter type to the Red Sox without calling the MFY first, who can definitely outbid the Red Sox on this. Their starting pitching needs are far greater than ours and while right now they're fishing in the high end pond so far rumors point to them not liking the prices. If Cashman's deadline move choices are emptying the farm on a front line starter or move a couple mid-tier pieces to get Machado and block the Red Sox' acquisition of a 4/5 SP or two I'm pretty sure he'd take the later.
The dream at this point in the season for a Cincinnati or San Diego is the Red Sox and Yankees getting in a bidding war over a back of the rotation starter and giving up a real prospect for someone marginally above or just at league average.
That's assuming WAR is distributed evenly throughout the season, which it isn't (see: JBJ). The larger point of finding "a couple of wins" from a deadline acquisition is valid. We also don't know when we trade for, say, a 3 WAR player if we're going to get the good, bad, or mediocre performance that all players experience through a season. In two months, we may get a couple wins; we could also lose a couple - especially if he's replacing someone who has performed well to this point, even if his true talent is higher.
I won't argue that. But I think one is extremely hard pressed to find a guy who would be more than Russian Roulette vis a vis HV/BJ when trying to avoid the Russian Roulette of the wildcard. The only way to "guarantee" a handful of better starts that could make a difference is by getting someone significantly better than what we have.
I'm not really advocating for going to get a bullpen arm, especially right now. But I do think it's a better use of resources to improve the team's outlook than trading for a mediocre starter when we have mediocre starters who have pitched well.
On the subject of a relief arm, I haven't looked at that market yet, because I don't think we should be making that move yet, if at all. So, I can't really comment on the bolded. The usefulness of a good relief arm, in my opinion, is greater than that of a 5th starter, due to the fact that you're going to use 4-6 relievers in the postseason. Whomever you acquire will pitch, whereas a 5th starter wouldn't. Regardless, I would definitely wait to see more of Kelly, Thornburg, and Brasier over the next couple weeks before making any move for a reliever.
While true, this isn't really relevant because we can't even hope to predict who is going to over or underperform over those two months. All we can do is get the players we think are most likely to be better than what we have and estimate how much they will actually help us. If we trade for someone expected to be worth about 1 WAR over the remainder of the season, we should increase our projected average-case win total by 1, but it is implicitly understood that the error bars for that players real-world impact over that period of time are very large.
If it helps, replace "a 3 WAR player" with "a player whose median true talent expectation is that they would add about three wins over the course of a season." Accurate, but a bit of a mouthful.
Right, and then subtract the expected value of the guy he'd be replacing, since that guy may or may not be replacement level. So that "3 WAR player" is only a "2 WAR addition" if he's replacing a "1 WAR player." In this instance, Clayton Richard (as an example) is a 2 WAR pitcher. Both Velazquez and Johnson are positive-WAR pitchers. At the very, very best, you're expecting less than a 1 win difference. More likely, it's a wash or even that the current guys are better. That's without factoring in a hundred other variables: AL vs NL, Petco vs Fenway, AL East/pennant pressure, how BJ or HV would hold up as a starter over the course of a dozen starts, whether they'd be better or worse as strictly starters, what their true talent level is, acquisition costs of a new pitcher, luxury tax implications, etc. I hope the Red Sox have a better understanding and model for how they value players than we do, but their error bars are still huge.
The annual top 50 trade value series started today. Bogaerts and JBJ are off the list since they only have one more year of control left.
https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2018-trade-value-41-to-50/
Devers is #45
https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2018-trade-value-41-to-50/
Devers is #45
Just throwing it out there - not saying it’s likely or even possible - but if the Angels were to sell, could we get somebody like Tyler Skaggs? Not an FA until 2021. Could be an interesting route to pursue, should it make itself present.
If he's made available, teams would be lining up to get him. Teams that could outbid the Red Sox without breaking a sweat. So no, the Red Sox could not get somebody like him.
But there's no way the Angels make him available even if they are sellers. He's young, cheap and cost controlled for two more years. He's just what they want to hang on to, especially if they see their biggest problem this season as being how long their disabled list is getting rather than their window for contending is closed.
I thought Colon looked respectable the other day (well "looked respectable" and Bartolo Colon don't exactly go together, but I digress)...could be confident he won't be overwhelmed by the moment if he finds himself starting an important September game. That said, IIRC he left Boston under fire last go-round because he didn't want to be considered for any role other than every-fifth-day starting pitcher and at his talent level you'd want to be sure he could be converted to a bullpen role if need be.
I realize this hasn't gone well in the past and he hasn't pitched well lately but how about stretching out Joe Kelly temporarily for five innings and going with Barnes or Hembree in the late innings or trading for Zach Britton to fill that 8th inning hole. Not ideal but since there isn't much starting pitching out there...
Last edited:
Why do people ever think this is a good idea? No, no, hell no.
Leave Joe Kelly alone. He has enough consistency problems in the pen, there's exactly zero reason to introduce him to more and weaken the pen in the process.
Brad Ziegler was a signfiicant improvement because that year's bullpen was in considerably worse shape than this year's. I don't think that vintage Ziegler is better than present day Kelly or Hembree. The most important thing the Sox need is injury insurance, at least to get through the regular season.
I think the 4-5 starter is a pretty significant role going forward.. Especially with the September schedule including the final three at home against the Yankees. We don't don't what the standings will look like at that point, and I'm sure Cora will want to line the top three up for the weekend. Not knowing when the one-game playoff will be, those two spots in the rotation will be key heading into the playoffs.
I don't know what the hell I was thinking. Please note I wrote that at 7am before coffee... I think I read triples as 3B. Amount of triples as amount of games played at third. He's also played tons at 2nd base and a few at home base too.
Kennedy says the Sox are willing to cross the highest lux tax level in the right situation.
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/07/red-sox-trade-rumors-luxury-tax-starting-pitcher-rotation.html
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/07/red-sox-trade-rumors-luxury-tax-starting-pitcher-rotation.html
Here's the actual interview from Drellich
https://www.nbcsports.com/boston/red-sox/red-sox-willing-pay-highest-luxury-tax-weighing-need-starting-pitcher
thanks... Though Again, I think its still not likely unless someone really special drops into our lap
If actually willing to go over it opens up a lot more possibilities. They can absorb money and even the playing field on prospect return.
I'd like to grab Eovaldi if he is available. He can start or relieve. Of course Rays may believe the WC is within reach and they dont like doing deals with division rivals, although they have done so
Britton too
Britton too
I still think the whole "has to be the right special someone" mindset here is being too heavily overstated based on a general principle value rather then the actual penalty in question itself. Especially with Kennedy hinting around at the hump appeal they might see in even "the obscure speed-on-the-bases [type] or you know, last guy out of the bullpen."
Or as Speier summed up in the spring:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2018/03/06/will-red-sox-payroll-keep-them-out-trade-market/oq51rVj8wT9fk1HzTXeN4J/story.html
Ya, I'm coming around on the fact it wouldn't exactly cripple the franchise if they went over for a year, but wouldn't be a good idea in practice.
That said I don't see a worthwhile piece or two (or three) worth it so think it would be silly to go over for a marginal improvement.
They wouldn't have had enough to match up with the O's for Machado, so I don't see an impact player out there even as an out of the blue thing - as in, no other team saw coming either.
Can we bookmark this deal too, so we can flush out these nonsensical ideas that even MVP caliber rentals cost building block type players? I'm not saying dozens of posters thought Devers would have been the price tag. But our beat guys who should know better were floating that stuff. He would have been a massive ovepay. They did well for themselves but no cost controlled big leaguers or blue chippers.
That said I don't see a worthwhile piece or two (or three) worth it so think it would be silly to go over for a marginal improvement.
They wouldn't have had enough to match up with the O's for Machado, so I don't see an impact player out there even as an out of the blue thing - as in, no other team saw coming either.
Can we bookmark this deal too, so we can flush out these nonsensical ideas that even MVP caliber rentals cost building block type players? I'm not saying dozens of posters thought Devers would have been the price tag. But our beat guys who should know better were floating that stuff. He would have been a massive ovepay. They did well for themselves but no cost controlled big leaguers or blue chippers.
Last edited:
I agree, and I think we can whittle this down. If the Sox are ready to exceed the limit, it may make sense to get someone who can slot into next year's rotation.
Here is a list of starting pitchers who'd hit free agency by 2021 (a/k/a making > league minimum) that play for non-contending/rebuilding teams (italicized players are hurt; *asterisks are FA 2022 players who've been reported to be available):
Low tier (Marginal or no improvement): Bettis, Cashner, Jesse Chavez, Colon, DeSclafani, Estrada, Fiers, Fister, Gallardo, Garcia, Hammel, Hellickson, Karns, Kennedy, Liriano, Lyles, Lynn, Nova, Odorizzi, Martin Perez, Clayton Richard, Richards, Roark, Shields, Shoemaker, Straily, Vargas, Wainwright, Zimmermann
Middle tier (Likely improvement): Eovaldi, Gausman, Gibson, Gio Gonzalez, Hamels, Happ, Harvey, Ross, Samardzija, Aaron Sanchez, Ervin Santana, Skaggs, Stroman, Wacha, Wheeler
Upper tier (Considerable improvement): Archer*, Bumgarner, deGrom, Syndergaard*
This is not a huge list.
- Unless one of Johnson or Velazquez gets hurt, none of the guys in the low tier are worth exceeding the limit for. You could make a case that Hellickson or Lynn or Roark belong in the middle tier, but I'd prefer Johnson/Velazquez over any of them.
- Some interesting names in the middle tier, but most of them don't make sense. The Nats are still on the cusp, so I doubt Gio moves. The Angels are in Ohtani mode so Skaggs won't be traded. Gausman, Sanchez, Stroman and Wacha all have a good amount of control left and are doubtful to move. Happ won't make it to us. Hamels, Harvey and Ross could work, but seem like high-risk rentals. I'd be happy with Eovaldi/Wheeler but I think we'd need to give up prospects we don't have.
- Upper tier guys would be huge, but would require us taking even more salary in lieu of prospects. (Archer is a FA in 2022, but available). deGrom is obviously the dream here, but I don't see how it happens without giving up Devers/Benintendi or taking a ton of salary back.
The likeliest scenario I can see is that DD trades for one (or two?) of the Twins pitchers. If the Sox internally believe EdRo or Pomeranz won't be back for the playoffs — which I don't think they'd telegraph — then they'd be looking at a rotation of Sale/Price/Porcello/Johnson/Velazquez through October. If that's the case, I could see DD trading Brian Johnson and a #10-15 prospect for Lance Lynn and Kyle Gibson/Ervin Santana, the latter of whom becomes part of our rotation next season.
Last edited:
To clarify your point here, as we're all trying to recalibrate our sense of the trade market:
Yusniel Diaz, expected to be the centerpiece in the Machado deal, is a 21 year old OF in AA. He is in the midst of a power surge this season, but before this year he was in the back half of a few top-100 prospect lists: 90 and 73. He's two weeks older than Rafael Devers.
That's the centerpiece for an MVP caliber, middle-of-the-order bat SS. Because rental.
Much more succinctly put than my nerd rage ramblings. Thanks.
I'll add that Machado had tons of competition as well and was very likely the best available player. The Yankees could have easily beaten that offer but probably realized they would need to have given up more than he was worth.
Last edited:
I was insistent that this team needed another SP, and was laughed out of this thread a couple of weeks back. Peek my head back in and all kinds of names are being bandied about....
Did you know that E-Rod and Wright were going to get hurt, Pomeranz would struggle getting AAA hitters out and Beeks showed nothing back then?
I did a few days ago when I suggested it, but wasn't able to provide the name of a player who might fit the bill under the constraints that people here imposed on the team.
Maybe someone mentioned this before, apologize if so, but have you taken into consideration they have 9 off days remaining in the season? That means the fifth pitcher doesn't really have to make that many starts if they don't want him to (divide 64 by 5 and you get 12...maybe they only need the guy for 6 or 7 of those 12).
I'd still make upgrading the bullpen the priority.
I'd still make upgrading the bullpen the priority.
Maybe someone mentioned this before, apologize if so, but have you taken into consideration they have 9 off days remaining in the season? That means the fifth pitcher doesn't really have to make that many starts if they don't want him to (divide 64 by 5 and you get 12...maybe they only need the guy for 6 or 7 of those 12).
I'd still make upgrading the bullpen the priority.
I'd still make upgrading the bullpen the priority.