Red Sox Trade Deadline 2022
- Thread starter bosockboy
- Start date
I'm not sure Vazquez would be of much interest for SD, nor do I think Hassell is realistic in that scenario. SD already has Alfaro and Nola with Campusano waiting in the wings. But I was thinking of a deal with SD for Bogaerts, something like X + Strahm for Campusano, Jackson Merrill and Myers. Value is almost even if you look at BTV (18.4 vs 19). The Sox could then look to move Vazquez elsewhere for another prospect and give the job to Campusano.
Then trade JDM + Eovaldi, maybe package them to somewhere like Minnesota for one of their pitching prospects.
Sometimes you have to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
The mistake some teams make at the trade deadline is to deal and remain competitive. If the Red Sox do decide to sell, I want them to go all-in and do so.
He's under club control for 4 more years and probably not *that* valuable as a trade chip. Unless I'm underselling his value, keep.
I'm more in the "keep" with him. If Bloom can get a few parts here and there and a few things go well, (Casas... Duran acting and looking like he belongs) the team could compete next year with a much younger core but they'll need a few parts to hold on to. I can't imagine finding someone as good as Schreiber at his cost through FA next offseason.
Nola hasn't been great this year, and while Alfaro has been pretty good, he's also sporting a BABIP of almost .400 and strikes out a ton, so he probably won't continue hitting as well as he has. Campusano hasn't shown that he's ready yet. A half-season of Vazquez provides a stronger baseline than what they've currently got on the roster, especially if they believe this is the year they can make a deep playoff run (which, looking at the current field, certainly seems possible).
FWIW, the trade I proposed above is also pretty close on BTV:
X: 18.2
Schreib: 11.8
Vaz: 0.4
30.4
Hassell: 38.7
Myers: -6
32.7
If they really want Hassell (which I do), throw in Dalbec - BTV seems to think he has some value, and he at least gives them a Plan B for Hosmer.
Schreiber is under team control through the 2026 season, is in the prime of his career, and his performance isn't completely out of nowhere; I was a fan of his as early as 2018 as a Tigers prospect I thought could develop into a high lev arm (something that team has routinely failed to develop), and his stuff has only gotten better since that time. Unless a team overpays, Schreiber is the type of piece you keep; we have enough vets on short term deals we can flip, moving a guy who won't even hit arb until 2024 is not good roster building.
BTV is pretty wack. Cole, Stanton, Judge, Cortes, and Volpe to the Sox for Sale, JD, Dalbec, JBJ, and Barnes is almost a perfect match in value!
Yeah, I'd love to get Hassell. If they can make it happen, that's cool with me. And I agree, Campusano hasn't done anything at the MLB level yet, just think he'd be a good target as a potential long-term solution to the C spot. He's got to get a chance to play because he really doesn't need anymore time in AAA and finishing out the season at the MLB level with the Sox would give him that chance.
I think a deal with SD makes a lot of sense, what they can get in return is anyone's guess. If they can find a way to get Hassell I think that would be great, but living out here in SD I can tell you the Padres like him a lot too.
If it is in the Sox plans at all, which I haven’t seen reported anywhere, it would most likely be in the off-season not now, but is there any belief that they would be interested in offloading a subsidized Chris Sale this off-season. Obviously it would be easier if he came back and showed he is heathy for 3-4 starts at the end of the season, but I know they are thin on proven starting pitching next year, but even if you have to eat money, if you can remove his last two years at a cost of say 8-10 mill per year, would that make any sense.
Hey, a fellow San Diegan! I get the sense that they value Campusano more given how close he is, but I'd be happy with either and think the Sox should explore both. You could probably make the argument that it's easier to acquire ML-ready outfielders than it is to acquire an offensive threat behind the plate. Sox really don't have any intriguing backstops in the minors - although, they don't have much in the outfield either (Bleis mostly, and Gimenez too, I guess).
This is silly. As discussed whenever that first panicky trade thread was started, there's no way of knowing in April and May if the Sox would claw their way back into things, which teams would be contending at the end of the year, which of those teams would need shortstops, and which of those team's prospects will have gone up or down in value. There was also no way of knowing what kind of season Xander would have, if he would be injured, or if he would be extended.
I'm sure the Sox keep a rolling eye on other team's desirable prospects throughout the course of the year - never know when you might want to make or be involved in a trade. So I'm equally sure that on this Friday, they won't have to say, "Gosh, the Mets - who *do* they have in their minors that we covet? Can we find an intern on short notice to identify them?"
Also, you think Xander, if testing the FA market, is going unsigned due to compensation concerns? To the extent he's willing to uproot his routine/family for just any deal? I mean, maybe he'd look forward to a trade to play SS to the right contender. Maybe he'd flat out reject one to a marginal contender where he'd be asked to DH or play 2B. But I doubt compensation would play into it.
Your second paragraph is what I'm saying. I think they have always had a general sense of what selling at the trade deadline would look like, just like they have always had a sense of what buying would look like. But there's no way, in the past two weeks, they haven't taken a look at the scouting reports of teams that would trade for a SS.
I neither said nor implied "unsigned". Shades of gray. Obviously he would not go unsinged. But it does present an additional cost to teams -- there's a reason the players' union wants to end this practice. 100 players out of 100 will say "I'd rather not have draft compensation attached" as opposed to "eh, it doesn't matter".
I get the idea of selling high on Schreiber, but depending on the return I'm not sure it's a great idea. Moving him creates another hole that needs to be filled and IMO when you consider that he's got four more seasons of control (FA eligible in '27) he IS something of value.
Just for kicks, people should look up what happened the last time the Padres acquired a catcher in a mid season trade, specifically Austin Nola. It’s a doozy!
HIs incentive to waive the NTC is the prospect of not having draft compensation attached to his FA. Maybe he still chooses to exercise his NTC, that's his right. But not having draft compensation is, without question, a real, tangible incentive, even if it's not enough to get him accept a trade.
It’s not a huge amount of money to someone who has already made a ton, but playoff shares do come with incremental $$$. And presumably, the chance to play more baseball, esp playoff baseball, may be appealing.
Players waive NTC’s all the time .
Players waive NTC’s all the time .
Just hit me that this is Xander’s 10th season with the Sox.
Came up at the end of the WS ‘13 season!
Came up at the end of the WS ‘13 season!
Yes, the qualifying offer matters for the free agency of Bogaerts and anyone else who gets them. No one wants to give up those picks, it doesn't necessarily mean the same team won't end up as the high bidder but maybe they are $5 or $10M higher. Why are you arguing this?
I never said that the QO meant that Xander would definitely waive the NTC, just that it was an incentive, so I'm not sure what you'd hope to prove, but knock yourself out.
Not acknowledging the obvious fact that a QO detracts from a player's value is a weird hill to die on.
I am not positive about this as this situation is not especially public (because it involves the disgusting practice of signing 13-14 year olds for the next decade plus), but here is a specific example for you, @Rovin Romine.
NY is currently waiting to sign another #1 overall int'l prospect in January, Cuban CF Brandon Mayea. The penalties they would incur by signing anyone with a QO (you lose picks but also $1M in international spending cap) could keep them from being able to sign Mayea (this part is very unclear, I don't know when the baseball year resets and if that affects these signings still) and thus keep them out on Bogaerts and anyone else with a QO. I have never seen anyone confirm this but it fits their actions in recent years, the last four years they have signed the #1 int'l guy (Dominguez), Cole, the #1 int'l guy (Arias) and this year hopefully Mayea, and no other big FAs.
NY is currently waiting to sign another #1 overall int'l prospect in January, Cuban CF Brandon Mayea. The penalties they would incur by signing anyone with a QO (you lose picks but also $1M in international spending cap) could keep them from being able to sign Mayea (this part is very unclear, I don't know when the baseball year resets and if that affects these signings still) and thus keep them out on Bogaerts and anyone else with a QO. I have never seen anyone confirm this but it fits their actions in recent years, the last four years they have signed the #1 int'l guy (Dominguez), Cole, the #1 int'l guy (Arias) and this year hopefully Mayea, and no other big FAs.
Or because, he like, wants to play competitive baseball? Players waive their NTC, like, all the time, and they often don’t get any kind of incentive for it. What exactly are you arguing here?
I've been convinced. Xander will waive his NTC because of concerns that a QO will have some kind of effect on his free agency. Let no one say otherwise.
I mean I had said it was a non-factor in situ, but nope. Totes wrong with that.
@moondog80 back me up on this.
Whether they trade Xander also depends on how much they want to resign him. Getting rid of the QO makes it easier for some teams to enter the bidding for him. Letting him experience baseball life outside of Boston might make it easier for him to envision playing elsewhere (Lester noted that as a factor for him). The Sox obviously could trade him and let him know that they’re still interested in resigning him, as NY did with Chapman. But I think it would be less likely.
At this point I don't think the Sox are really all that interested in resigning him. If they were, they'd be making much more of an effort to do so now rather than wait until the offseason to compete against everyone else when he's on the open market. If the Sox are in a spot to chase the wild card by the deadline, I think they're fine with keeping him through the end of the season, collect the comp pick when he leaves and they'll say they tried to resign him but he got an offer they didn't feel comfortable beating and that'll be the end of it.
If I had to guess I'd say Xander isn't coming back, but I wouldn't rule out the possibility that they think his agent is overrating his market and waiting for the price to drop. He does have only 7 HR this year, I don't love that trend in his SLG.
If Xander said he wants to see the market to know his value, what are the Sox supposed to do? If he doesn't want to take a discount, which is reasonable, there is no point trying to get him to take one. It also doesn't mean that he is absolutely gone. To me that is most likely what happened here and with Devers. That doesn't mean they won't be back, but they will take a look at what offers they get to make sure they are getting what they are worth.
Which does bring up an interesting point - do we even want him at that price if he opts out? A 30-year-old SS with declining power/defensive skills doesn't sound like a guy I want to ink to a huge contract.
I think his defense is a big issues. It would not surprise me to see Bloom make a very competitive offer to lock up Devers long term, especially in light of his improved defense. If that is the case where does the team move Bogey? Third base is out. So is second. Perhaps left field, but would Bogey even be amenable to that? Keeping him on short doesn't seem like an answer. His defense is suspect and how will it look in year three or four of the deal? As much as I like Bogey, I don't think Bloom can only look at offense when deciding to sign a player. Defense has to factor in as well. All that is to say I don't think they will resign him and he should be a trade chip at the deadline.
I 100% agree with you. I think the trepidation from some is that the same argument could have been, and was made regarding Betts. Of course the fact that they traded him can be construed as evidence they didn't want to meet his market price. As long as they don't trade Bogaerts, it's reasonable to assume they see a market rate deal as a possibility but there's disagreement between the parties on what that market rate is.
Especially since they’ve already signed a middle infielder with declining power skills to a long term contract.
While most upper echelon FA signings are going to be bad value signings, it’s hard to win without them when you aren’t cranking out excess value from prospects- and the Sox aren’t there yet.
Betts was 26 and likely looking for a 10+ year deal for his age 27 season and onward. (He signed for 13 years.) The question was more about the hypothetical decline on back 6 on that sort of deal. Like starting at age 30.
Xander is going to be age 30. I'm not sure what kind of deal he's looking for, but assume if he opts out he's expecting he'll get one or more offers greater than his current contract would be.
His current contract is for age 30, 31, 32, with a vesting option for 33. It's $20m per year, with vesting triggered by 535 PA during his age 32 season (another $20m.) Maybe 120(?) games to trigger.
He probably thinks he's good for the vesting (i.e., I doubt he'd not use his opt out if the Sox merely offered to pick up that last year for certain). So maybe we reasonably read his view of his current deal as essentially 4 years, $80m.
He will only opt out if he thinks he can improve on that. So he's probably thinking he'll be offered (and accept) an absolute floor of 5 years, age 30-35 seasons, for at least $20m per, so $100m. Again, that's a reasonable guess as to floor only - he likely thinks his AAV should be higher, or the contract should run for more years.
Comps? How about a rough comp of Trevor Story? 6 years, age 29-34, $140 guaranteed, team option for age 35 at $20 more than the $5m buyout. . .total $155m with option. Call it an AAV of $23 or $24m.
So. . .looking for a guaranteed 5 years/$117 on the low end? 6/$144 for a mid-range? Something with a $25 AAV for a 5/6/7 year spread of $125/150/175?
Seems reasonable. The Sox allegedly offered to tack on a year to his remaining deal in exchange for not opting out, which essentially would have made it the 5/100 you guess (and I agree) is the absolute floor. I think if he'd take the Story deal to stick around, they'd have jumped on it already. Which is why I suspect they're willing to let him test the market and see what is the best offer he can get, then proceed accordingly.
My guess is if he can find someone willing to give him more than 7 years guaranteed, the Sox will wish him well and let him go. Anything short of that, and they're still in the ballgame. I put their high end somewhere in the 6/170-175 range.
I mostly agree. I think their high end might be a little lower. A Springer-like 6/$150? That beats Story’s deal. And it’s basically what I was hoping they’d offer and X would accept right after they signed Story.
Assuming the expected loss for tonight … I think that’s it. I had in my optimistic scenario the Sox taking 3/4 and getting Eovaldi on track. At best a split in this series is my official throwing in the towel vote to start trading.
I honestly don't think it matters.
Bloom put it best you don't allow a few games before the trade deadline change your organizational plan.
If you can't win a series against any of your AL East opponents in the regular season it seems pretty silly to magically think it would happen in the post season.
I've been in the sell camp since Sale's hand injury.
That was when I grabbed the towel. Devers injury had me tossing in the bullpen.
But if Eovaldi could return and look like ‘21 version (amongst lots of other things that went right for a great stretch) then it made sense to hold and buy. But now…
My thoughts on potential trade partners for BOS players:
CVaz suitors: NYM, CLE, SD, HOU, SF (assume Contreras gets traded first)
JDM suitors: NYM, SEA
Nate suitors: SEA, LAD, MIN, TOR (assume Castillo and Montas get traded first)
Wacha suitors: STL, PHI
Schreiber suitors: NYM, MIN, ATL, PHI
(Verdugo suitor: ATL)
(not including X suitors, on the assumption that BOS will not trade him now and will take the comp pick when he opts out)
CVaz suitors: NYM, CLE, SD, HOU, SF (assume Contreras gets traded first)
JDM suitors: NYM, SEA
Nate suitors: SEA, LAD, MIN, TOR (assume Castillo and Montas get traded first)
Wacha suitors: STL, PHI
Schreiber suitors: NYM, MIN, ATL, PHI
(Verdugo suitor: ATL)
(not including X suitors, on the assumption that BOS will not trade him now and will take the comp pick when he opts out)
There really are two ways this season gets interesting for me.
The first, of course, is if they play well the next 5-6 games going into the trade deadline and they make an interesting move to bolster the team. Then I'll feel like they have a legit chance to make a run.
The second is if they deal away guys like JDM and Eovaldi and such, and acquire good young players or prospects, and let the kids play the rest of the season. I'd love to see what they can do, though so far the returns haven't been too encouraging on that front. Still....I could enjoy watching them learn and grow these last two months.
But if they play poorly going into the deadline and then basically stand pat....ugh, that won't be pleasant.
The first, of course, is if they play well the next 5-6 games going into the trade deadline and they make an interesting move to bolster the team. Then I'll feel like they have a legit chance to make a run.
The second is if they deal away guys like JDM and Eovaldi and such, and acquire good young players or prospects, and let the kids play the rest of the season. I'd love to see what they can do, though so far the returns haven't been too encouraging on that front. Still....I could enjoy watching them learn and grow these last two months.
But if they play poorly going into the deadline and then basically stand pat....ugh, that won't be pleasant.
As far as the kids playing- isn’t that pretty much happening now, with the exception of Casas? The bigger question is - should it be happening? I’m of the opinion that Duran, Casas, Crawford, Winckowski should probably be on the roster the rest of the season regardless of what direction the Sox are going (unless they are traded, of course). But I don’t think Downs or Bello should be here, they aren’t ready. It also seems like moving Plawecki and getting Hernandez up for the rest of the year would be a good idea. Are there are any other prospects folks think should be up?
Walter and Murphy maybe. But Walter has been injured since early June so maybe he's not coming back at all this season. So probably not him.
Thanks for the quick replies BB, Sandy and CC, I was wracking my brain here as I feel like there is some implied blocking of talented prospects in this "play the kids" idea, for which I'm not clear there is great benefit.
I have perceived the Sox (and MLB in general) as incredibly prescriptive developmentally around callups, not just to manipulate service time but genuinely when they think the player is ready. I hope there is more opportunity than is obvious to me, as its looking more likely.