Red Sox Trade Deadline 2022

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
64,898
This has really felt more dragged out than usual. I know it's just an extra two days and the season even started late so not sure why it feels that way, but this has been hanging over the club for well over a month. Maybe there's just more coverage these days.
It’s in part because MLB idiotically pushed back the draft to coincide with the All-Star break so that front offices had to focus on that until a few weeks ago.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
81,181
Oregon
This has really felt more dragged out than usual. I know it's just an extra two days and the season even started late so not sure why it feels that way, but this has been hanging over the club for well over a month. Maybe there's just more coverage these days.
Well, we're not usually sellers, so it might feel longer than it is. But I think the coverage angle is the right one ... there's so much coverage these days building the hype that it feels like a letdown.

My personal guess: At most they dump a reliever or two, but do nothing on real interest
 

amfox1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2003
6,085
The back of your computer
Any idea why Smith has fared so poorly last couple of seasons? He looked like a breakout candidate during 2019-2020. Doesn't seem to have any huge L/R splits either. In any event, Smith plus a decent prospect, and maybe some A ball flier is probably a deal I do for JDM.
Beyond what chawson wrote, Smith played through a host of injuries last year, got inconsistent playing time, didn't perform, seemingly lost confidence. It's a common spiral with many young players, and a change of scenery and different coaching/mentor influences may or may not change things. I'm not confident that Smith is more than a fringe major leaguer, but what seems clear is that Smith will never amount to anything as a New York Met.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Sox pitching depth looks like a lot of guys who could be back of the rotation starters or relievers; it’s really hard to see a top of the rotation guy unless Bello develops. Hopefully Houck and Whitlock as well; but I feel like we have no better idea if that can happen now than we did a year ago.
Yeah, which is why I said 2023 would be a really big year one way or another re pitching prospects. There are potentially 9 farm hands who could pitch for the Sox next year. Technically 8 since Crawford loses his prospect status on 8/5 I think. We don't really have an idea on any of them, either. And all 9 have to be on the 40 man. Possibly 7 if they decide to expose German and Politi.

They have to trust some of these guys to pitch or they need to make moves.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
18,777
Miami (oh, Miami!)
I don't know how the Sox see this, but here's what SoxProspects says about the arrival time of their top farmhands...
***
Or to look at it by arrival time:

Here - Crawford
2023 - P Bello, P Seabold, 1b Casas, SS Downs, Wong
mid 2023 - P Murphy, P Groome, P German
late 2023 - P Walter
2024 - CF/SS Rafaela, 3b Binelas, P Ward, IF/OF Koss
mid 2024 - 2b Yorke, SS Lugo
late 2024 - SS Mayer, CF Jimenez, IF/OF McDonough
2025 - C Hickey
mid 2025 - P Gonzalez, 3b Jordan
late 2025 - IF Paulino, SS/2b Bonaci
2026 - CF Bleis
Four thoughts:

1) if we're considering internal promotion only, I think part of the consideration here has to be not only arrival time, but adapting time which might include defensive position-transitioning. Generally, I'd say we have some talent, but we're thin on true impact bats. Casas may not catch on immediately, same for the 2024 bats.

2) if we're considering organizational instruction and philosophy, I do not have a great deal of faith that the Sox currently have a team in place that can maximally coach and develop MiL players. I get that players are not infinitely coachable (or fungible), but I haven't been impressed with many of our call-ups, either from a fundamentals approach or in terms of how well they play to their strengths. Some of that may be the MLB game-play philosophy. Duran is a good example - amazing speed, but not often used as a pinch runner or given the green light to steal.

3) many of these players might have good trade value - a CF type brining back a heavier hitting LF type.

4) Pitching looks very promising - the club always has an option to put a MiL starter in a bullpen role, and some guys seem to thrive there. We have some live arms coming up. Somebody's going to stick.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
6,693
Yeah, which is why I said 2023 would be a really big year one way or another re pitching prospects. There are potentially 9 farm hands who could pitch for the Sox next year. Technically 8 since Crawford loses his prospect status on 8/5 I think. We don't really have an idea on any of them, either. And all 9 have to be on the 40 man. Possibly 7 if they decide to expose German and Politi.

They have to trust some of these guys to pitch or they need to make moves.
Totally agree- Sox have a lot of arms but it’s difficult to envision many, besides Bello as being really
Impactful, IMO. Of the arms we’ve seen this year, I think Crawford is the most interesting and I’d probably look to move Winckowski and Seabold. How much value do upper level, relatively low ceiling, guys like that have, though? These two were traded in the last few years and I don’t think they’ve gained much if any value since.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Totally agree- Sox have a lot of arms but it’s difficult to envision many, besides Bello as being really
Impactful, IMO. Of the arms we’ve seen this year, I think Crawford is the most interesting and I’d probably look to move Winckowski and Seabold. How much value do upper level, relatively low ceiling, guys like that have, though? These two were traded in the last few years and I don’t think they’ve gained much if any value since.
Bello may potentially be the only impactful starter but Crawford might be decent enough to keep around.

I think Walter and Mata have potential to make an impact out of the bullpen.

I'm not high on Winckowski, Seabold or Groome. Murphy I find intriguing but he's probably in the same boat. I'd guess they have differing values. German and Politi probably have 0 value but would be drafted by other teams.
 

SouthernBoSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2005
11,163
Given what these relievers are getting right now Chaim has to be listening to offers on Schreiber. You're talking about getting top 5+ prospects for a reliever. It has to be explored.

Would make sense to package with JDM or Vazquez to lengthen the service time of the acquirer
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
18,777
Miami (oh, Miami!)
Bello may potentially be the only impactful starter but Crawford might be decent enough to keep around.
Crawford's interesting. He's had some mixed results this year, but he's shown himself capable against some of the better lineups. Growing pains are normal, and I think it's encouraging he had spate of trouble early on, as opposed to illusory effectiveness which teams figured out. (We've also got two months to go.)

It always depends on the offer, and I think Crawford's upside could be overvalued by a club. If so, I'd trade him. Otherwise, if the season ended today, I think he's in the mix for the last couple spots in next year's rotation. But we'll know more by October.
 

KillerBs

lurker
Nov 16, 2006
829
Or even better, if you could use Schreiber et al to obtain someone to be your C, CF or RF (or least solid part of platoon at these positions ) on opening day 2023. Given the state of things, I thinking Chaim needs to use this deadline to begin to build MLB roster for 2023.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
6,693
If you think Schreiber is for real, isn’t he an important part of next years bullpen? It’s not as if the Sox have an abundance of quality RH relievers.

If not, than he probably doesn’t bring much back in return.
 

KillerBs

lurker
Nov 16, 2006
829
Fair enough re Schreiber, but I am thinking it is an easier task to put together a reasonably competent pen, especially given some of our decent pitching depth, then finding a C or 2, one or two CF/RFers and a DH by next March. Add the need for 2b/SS to the mix if Xander walks. Not seeing much of anything in free agency or minors that can address the CF/RF issues by opening day, but we can wish on Ceddane by July maybe?
 

Daniel_Son

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2021
1,007
San Diego
Crawford's interesting. He's had some mixed results this year, but he's shown himself capable against some of the better lineups. Growing pains are normal, and I think it's encouraging he had spate of trouble early on, as opposed to illusory effectiveness which teams figured out. (We've also got two months to go.)

It always depends on the offer, and I think Crawford's upside could be overvalued by a club. If so, I'd trade him. Otherwise, if the season ended today, I think he's in the mix for the last couple spots in next year's rotation. But we'll know more by October.
I'd hang on to him - he's been a top-40ish pitcher for about 2 months now against some pretty good lineups. Plus, our rotation next year is:

  1. Pivetta (currently a mess)
  2. Whitlock/Houck (if they don't end up in the bullpen)
  3. Sale/Paxton (no guarantee they're effective)
  4. Seabold/Winchowski (assuming they don't get traded, and they really haven't shown a ton of promise yet)
  5. ???
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
47,218
If you think Schreiber is for real, isn’t he an important part of next years bullpen? It’s not as if the Sox have an abundance of quality RH relievers.

If not, than he probably doesn’t bring much back in return.
Yankees just traded their #7 prospect for a guy who looks a hell of a lot like Schreiber.

https://stathead.com/baseball/player-comparison.cgi?request=1&sum=1&player_id1=effrosc01&p1yrfrom=2022&p1yrto=2022&player_id2=schrejo01&p2yrfrom=2022&p2yrto=2022&type=p

edit: Fixed link to show 2022 seasons for both. They are both 28 year olds irrelevant before this season having great years with lots of team control left.
 
Last edited:

Yaz4Ever

stumps for Trump
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Yankees just traded their #7 prospect for a guy who looks a hell of a lot like Schreiber.

https://stathead.com/baseball/player-comparison.cgi?request=1&sum=1&player_id1=effrosc01&p1yrfrom=2022&p1yrto=2022&player_id2=schrejo01&p2yrfrom=2022&p2yrto=2022&type=p

edit: Fixed link to show 2022 seasons for both
#7 guy who recently rose to as high as #4 from Baseball America. A top 10 prospect going the right direction. It’s a very significant return.
and Milwaukee got a solid return for Hader

Wonder what we'd get for Schreiber
 

Heating up in the bullpen

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 24, 2007
763
Pittsboro NC
The pitching “has mostly held up” strikes me as pretty false- seeing how the team just went a month without a starter winning a game. They have the second worst ERA in the league.
I just ran through the month of July box scores to respond to this idea of the starters not winning a game in the month (until the last day). Sox starters had four games in July that they left in position to pick up a W, but the Red Sox either lost the game, or the bullpen lost the lead but the Sox later won. Another two games that the starter went 5 IP, gave up 0 or 1 runs, and left a tie game that the Sox later won. There was also a game that Crawford got the W, but Davis went 2 IP as an opener. So that's 7 games that could have been starter Ws that weren't. There were another 4 games that the starter (or opener/starter combined) provided a Quality Start® that the Sox lost by scoring just 1 run.
Your larger point -- second worst ERA in the league -- holds. But the "no wins for starters" thing is a red herring.

The idea of "the pitching holding up" relates back to Cesar Crespo's post, which seems to be referring to the prospects called up to fill in.
So specific to those prospects in July:
Winckowski had 3 good starts (6 IP/2 R , 6/3, 5/2) and 2 bad starts (5/6, 3/5)
Crawford had 5/5 good outings (5.1/0, 5/1, 6/3, 6/3, 5.2/1)
Bello was not effective in three starts (4/4, 4/5, 4/5), but did ok following an opener (4.1/2)
Seabold had one ok start (4/1) and one disaster (2.2/7) before getting hurt
Overall, the Sox got 10 good outings from that group and 7 bad outings. I'd call that a small success. (And we knew going into it that Bello wasn't going to be ready, as excited as we were to see what he could do.)
 

StuckOnYouk

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
3,409
CT
I love what Schreiber brings but yeah considering what NY and SD are giving up for relievers I’d be all ears on Schreiber if anyone out there is interested.
 

NJ_Sox_Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 2, 2006
9,097
NJ
Every JDM rumor to the Mets I have seen has been involving Dominic Smith. Can someone explain why the hell we would want him? He’s not good.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
6,789
Every JDM rumor to the Mets I have seen has been involving Dominic Smith. Can someone explain why the hell we would want him? He’s not good.
Top prospect pedigree and was really good over 139 games in 2019 and 2020, they might think they have a good shot at turning him around.
 

KillerBs

lurker
Nov 16, 2006
829
Every JDM rumor to the Mets I have seen has been involving Dominic Smith. Can someone explain why the hell we would want him? He’s not good.
Could not agree more. He has been very bad at the plate for 2 years 650 PAs, and at least as important is not a positional fit, unless you count replacing Franchy until Casas shows up.

I would rather have Nick Meyer (#27 Mets) a catcher who is described as defensive standout and looks like he can take a walk.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=meyer-000nic
 

ArttyG12

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
98
Top prospect pedigree and was really good over 139 games in 2019 and 2020, they might think they have a good shot at turning him around.
Also might help turn him around if he's just allowed to play 1st, his natural position, instead of forcing him to the outfield like the Mets have had him do because of Alonso. Might as well give him every 1B at bat until Casas is ready. He's a lottery ticket they throw in with Vientos or whoever the real prize is.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
20,057
Rogers Park
Every JDM rumor to the Mets I have seen has been involving Dominic Smith. Can someone explain why the hell we would want him? He’s not good.
Also, Smith has mildly negative value, so his inclusion probably improves the quality of prospect we could get. If we end up non-tendering him after the season, so be it.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
42,642
The 31-year-old is having an excellent year, hitting .282/.327/.432 in 84 games. He leads the big leagues in innings behind the plate over the last two years, and is considered a leader with a demonstrated ability to steward a pitching staff through the postseason to a title.
He’s also elite against big velocity, posting a .314 average this year against pitches of 95-plus mph – 10th among the 110 big leaguers who have seen at least 500 pitches in that range. Such a skill is of considerable value in the postseason given the wealth of power arms that teams face.
Both the Astros and Mets are known to have engaged in substantive talks with the Sox on the 31-year-old, who is earning $7 million this year on an option the Red Sox exercised on his original three-year, $13.3 million deal. The Guardians are also in the market for catching help, but it’s unclear whether they’d pursue a rental player.

One team that has engaged the Sox on the catcher balked at what it deemed “a heavier prospect return than expected,” though such dynamics have characterized most of the trade market to this point, helping to explain the limited number of trades that have occurred.

To date, however, the asking prices on those players (as well as Martinez) have exceeded what other teams were willing to spend. But with Tuesday’s 6 p.m. deadline to make deals drawing ever nearer, movement in asking prices – and thus, potentially in the players themselves – is expected to come soon.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/08/01/sports/christian-vazquez-red-sox-trade-deadline/?event=event25
 

amfox1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2003
6,085
The back of your computer
Every JDM rumor to the Mets I have seen has been involving Dominic Smith. Can someone explain why the hell we would want him? He’s not good.
Trades are two-way streets. You have to give in order to get. Smith doesn't have positive value. He's a DFA candidate by NYM after the trade deadline. BOS taking Smith allows BOS to get a slightly better prospect. BOS also would value Smith higher then NYM because they need to fill out the LH side of the 1B platoon for the rest of the season (and send Franchy to the OF or AAA). Smith's contract also lessens the financial burden of trading for JDM. BOS gets a bigger benefit because JDM's AAV is larger than his cash outlay, which means that NYM pays less cash and BOS saves more AAV, which is important if one of your goals is to get below the luxury tax threshold this season.

It doesn't have to be Dom Smith, they could take back JD Davis, for many of the same reasons, but Smith has a higher upside if Smith were to tap into it in a Red Sox uniform.
 

NJ_Sox_Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 2, 2006
9,097
NJ
Also, Smith has mildly negative value, so his inclusion probably improves the quality of prospect we could get. If we end up non-tendering him after the season, so be it.
Maybe, but doubt they’d move Alvarez, Baty, Ramirez, Vientos, or Mauricio?
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
6,693
Would taking on Smith’s contract really allow the Sox to get a better prospect? Smith is owed like $1.5m the rest of the way. I suspect the rumored interest in Smith is because the Sox have interest in him as a payment. Struggling recently, good a few years ago, can play multiple positions, etc. seems to fit the profile of guys the Sox have been after the last few years, no?
 

amfox1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2003
6,085
The back of your computer
I would rather have Nick Meyer (#27 Mets) a catcher who is described as defensive standout and looks like he can take a walk.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=meyer-000nic
That's great. If Meyer's your guy (backup C profile, 35FV, 40-man eligible after this season), you try to get him as a third piece to the deal. Smith helps you get a better 1st prospect. BTW, Wong is a 40FV and he's already your backup C profile and he's already on the 40-man. So, I'm not sure why I would go after Meyer, who seems duplicative.
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
10,635
Springfield, VA
The idea of "the pitching holding up" relates back to Cesar Crespo's post, which seems to be referring to the prospects called up to fill in.
So specific to those prospects in July:
Winckowski had 3 good starts (6 IP/2 R , 6/3, 5/2) and 2 bad starts (5/6, 3/5)
Crawford had 5/5 good outings (5.1/0, 5/1, 6/3, 6/3, 5.2/1)
Bello was not effective in three starts (4/4, 4/5, 4/5), but did ok following an opener (4.1/2)
Seabold had one ok start (4/1) and one disaster (2.2/7) before getting hurt
Overall, the Sox got 10 good outings from that group and 7 bad outings. I'd call that a small success. (And we knew going into it that Bello wasn't going to be ready, as excited as we were to see what he could do.)
Except that the problem isn't the back-of the rotation. The problem is that there's no front-end.

Look at the staff this year:

1. Sale - injured
2. Eovaldi - injured, still hasn't recovered his velocity
3. Paxton - not healthy yet
4. Whitlock - innings limited
5. Pivetta - inconsistent
6. Wacha - injured
7. Houck - slots in better as a good closer instead of an average-ish (at best) starter
8. Hill -- injured, though the two decent months we got out of him is probably all we could have expected
9. Crawford - OK to good at times
10. Winckowski - OK
11. Seabold - not ready yet
12. Bello - not ready yet

That's a bottom-five, bottom-ten rotation at best.
 

amfox1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2003
6,085
The back of your computer
Yes, I'm suggesting that Schreiber is close to 2022 Josh Hader who is paid vastly more and is not having a typical season for him and will be owed approximately $4m more next year than the $11m he's getting this year.
Well, I'm rooting for you to be right, but I wouldn't expect too much discussion once you tell the other GMs what you want for Schreiber.
 

Yaz4Ever

stumps for Trump
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Well, I'm rooting for you to be right, but I wouldn't expect too much discussion once you tell the other GMs what you want for Schreiber.
All I'm saying is if you look at what Schreiber has done (especially at his salary) and what Hader has done (at his salary), San Diego gave up more than I'd expect and I'd love to see the Sox get something comparable.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
It always depends on the offer, and I think Crawford's upside could be overvalued by a club.
Crawford had 5/5 good outings (5.1/0, 5/1, 6/3, 6/3, 5.2/1)
Last 7 games: 2.92 era, 37.0 ip, 0.973 WHIP, 8bb/36k, hitters slashing .200/.250/.351 with a .242 BAbip.

He's a former binky so I'm probably a little biased, but I think his season last year was largely overlooked due to the 4.28 era and a few bad starts in AAA. The pitcher he was prior to 2021 may has well have been someone else, though he was worth watching in 2018 and 2019 too. Sox prospects says his upside is MR/high quality swing man. I'd like to think it's a little higher than that He improved his control a lot last year, leading to less walks and more strike outs.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=crawfo000kut

He's had a decent minor league career. And it's hard not to love 131k/20bb in 94.2 ip he posted during the 2021 season. 34.4% K%, 5.2% BB%.

As for another team overvaluing him, what would people want in return? Seems like he'd have far more value to the Red Sox barring some ridiculous offer.
 

amfox1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2003
6,085
The back of your computer
All I'm saying is if you look at what Schreiber has done (especially at his salary) and what Hader has done (at his salary), San Diego gave up more than I'd expect and I'd love to see the Sox get something comparable.
So would I. But I'm trying to be realistic. The Yankees gave up a lot for Effross, and Schreiber has a similar profile. Hader has a longer and better track record, his 2022 numbers are skewed by a couple of bad outings, and SD gave up an enormous amount for him that not too many other teams would have given up for a better closer. Schreiber is not a playoff-caliber closer, he's a very good 7th/8th inning arm with no track record before this year.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
55,147
All I'm saying is if you look at what Schreiber has done (especially at his salary) and what Hader has done (at his salary), San Diego gave up more than I'd expect and I'd love to see the Sox get something comparable.
Hader is a month younger than Schreiber and has been maybe the best reliever in baseball since he came up in 2017. Schreiber has half a season of success in lower leverages. I’m not seeing it at all. Effross is the better comparison, but the Yankees grow pitching prospects in a lab on Staten Island so who knows what Schreiber is worth to a non-Yankees team.
 

Yaz4Ever

stumps for Trump
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Hader is a month younger than Schreiber and has been maybe the best reliever in baseball since he came up in 2017. Schreiber has half a season of success in lower leverages. I’m not seeing it at all. Effross is the better comparison, but the Yankees grow pitching prospects in a lab on Staten Island so who knows what Schreiber is worth to a non-Yankees team.
Kimbrel was great once, too. So was Gagne. We all know how they panned out. Not saying Hader will do the same, but he's not performing like pre-2022 Hader right now.
 

Scoops Bolling

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 19, 2007
5,214
Kimbrel was great once, too. So was Gagne. We all know how they panned out. Not saying Hader will do the same, but he's not performing like pre-2022 Hader right now.
Hader had an ERA around 1 until he had a rough stretch of like...4 appearances, and has been nails again since. Effross is an excellent analogue for Schreiber, why you're adamant about trying to compare him to a guy who is not at all comparable is very weird.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
55,147
Kimbrel was great once, too. So was Gagne. We all know how they panned out. Not saying Hader will do the same, but he's not performing like pre-2022 Hader right now.
If your argument is sometimes relievers turn into pumpkins, why would Schreiber be exempt. Again, Hader is younger (by a month) and has a significantly longer track record of being far better. The Effross trade should be the guidepost, but even there, the Yankees paid from strength and also are in a position to overpay a bit to go for the title. We’re nowhere near as close as they are, nor as desperate given our respective historical success as franchises.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
18,777
Miami (oh, Miami!)
Last 7 games: 2.92 era, 37.0 ip, 0.973 WHIP, 8bb/36k, hitters slashing .200/.250/.351 with a .242 BAbip.

He's a former binky so I'm probably a little biased, but I think his season last year was largely overlooked due to the 4.28 era and a few bad starts in AAA. The pitcher he was prior to 2021 may has well have been someone else, though he was worth watching in 2018 and 2019 too. Sox prospects says his upside is MR/high quality swing man. I'd like to think it's a little higher than that He improved his control a lot last year, leading to less walks and more strike outs.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=crawfo000kut

He's had a decent minor league career. And it's hard not to love 131k/20bb in 94.2 ip he posted during the 2021 season. 34.4% K%, 5.2% BB%.

As for another team overvaluing him, what would people want in return? Seems like he'd have far more value to the Red Sox barring some ridiculous offer.
I'm more bullish than bearish on Crawford. I think his upside is a back-of-the-rotation starter. He has good control, and a mix of good (but not outstanding) pitches. That could go on for years or unravel pretty quickly at the ML level, especially if his fastball drops a tick in velocity. That possibility is valuable to the Sox. . .but is it so valuable that he can't be replaced with another potential 4/5 or long man? Especially if they find a trade parter who is willing to price Crawford as a potential #3? Dunno. Depends on what they're offering.
 

Yaz4Ever

stumps for Trump
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
If your argument is sometimes relievers turn into pumpkins, why would Schreiber be exempt. Again, Hader is younger (by a month) and has a significantly longer track record of being far better. The Effross trade should be the guidepost, but even there, the Yankees paid from strength and also are in a position to overpay a bit to go for the title. We’re nowhere near as close as they are, nor as desperate given our respective historical success as franchises.
No argument, just started by saying "heck, I'd like to see what we could get"... this has spiraled out of control. I'll back off.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
20,057
Rogers Park
Baffling to me. The team is going to move one of their best pitchers and few productive cost controlled players for a prospect? How is Houck expendable?
I'd deal Houck in the right deal.

edited to finish my thought: If he could be a big piece in a package for one of the Oakland catchers, say. Shea Langeliers is a prospect I'd send Houck out for — the trade sim says they have almost identical value, and that seems right to me.

I'm more bullish than bearish on Crawford. I think his upside is a back-of-the-rotation starter. He has good control, and a mix of good (but not outstanding) pitches. That could go on for years or unravel pretty quickly at the ML level, especially if his fastball drops a tick in velocity. That possibility is valuable to the Sox. . .but is it so valuable that he can't be replaced with another potential 4/5 or long man? Especially if they find a trade parter who is willing to price Crawford as a potential #3? Dunno. Depends on what they're offering.
If someone values Crawford as a #3 starter, I'd agree: by all means, sell. But a pre-arb fifth starter with a smidge of upside and options remaining is a big asset, especially for a team like the 2023 Red Sox that will be depending on expensive guys with a high-risk/high-reward profile like Sale and Paxton.