Red Sox Trade Deadline 2022
- Thread starter bosockboy
- Start date
December 2022
Dan Altavilla
Angel Bastardo
Adenys Bautista
Brock Bell
Royman Blanco
Brainer Bonaci
Zach Bryant
Cameron Cannon
Triston Casas
Brendan Cellucci
Felix Cepeda
Kole Cottam
Wil Dalton
Joe Davis
Osvaldo De La Rosa
Luis De La Rosa
Tyler Dearden
Nick Decker
Jonathan Diaz
Alex Erro
Tyler Esplin
Albert Feliz
Durbin Feltman
Ryan Fernandez
Ryan Fitzgerald
Antoni Flores
Feleipe Franks
Grant Gambrell
Frank German
Rio Gomez
Wikelman Gonzalez
Bryan Gonzalez
Devlin Granberg
Jaxx Groshans
David Hamilton
Brandon Howlett
Gabriel Jackson
Axel James
Gilberto Jimenez
Christian Koss
Austin Lambright
Dominic LoBrutto
Eduardo Lopez
Bryan Lucas
Naysbel Marcano
Elih Marrero
Alexander Montero
Chris Murphy
Brendan Nail
Nick Northcut
Andres Ortuno
Yusniel Padron-Artiles
Eddinson Paulino
Aaron Perry
AJ Politi
Ceddanne Rafaela
Jose Ramirez
Oscar Rangel
Tyreque Reed
Carlos Reyes
Jorge Rodriguez
Devon Roedahl
Giancarlos Santana
Victor Santos
Stephen Scott
Cody Scroggins
Chase Shugart
Nick Sogard
Noah Song
Dylan Spacke
Miguel Suero
Luis Talavera
Jake Thompson
Freddy Valdez
Michael Valera
Eduardo Vaughan
Jacob Wallace
Brandon Walter
Thaddeus Ward
Grant Williams
Alex Zapete
Ryan Zeferjahn
Red Sox Rule 5 Eligibility | SoxProspects.com
MLB and the MLBPA didn't reach an agreement on an international draft, so the qualifying offer still stands. Xander Bogaerts would benefit from a mid-season trade so he has no draft pick compensation attached to him.
I agree. As much as I want to see some sort of turn around as the season winds down we have to look at the reality of the challenges facing the Sox in the not too distant future. For anyone thinking that there are holes in the current roster, consider that next season has the Sox facing both catchers entering the FA market as well as JDM, Kike', RFsnyder, Eovaldi, Wacha, Hill and Strahm along with the likely opt out of Bogaerts. On top of that RF still needs to be addressed and there is still questions about 1B and the pen. Any moves made at the deadline need to be made with the next couple of seasons in mind and if any of them make a difference in the current season it should be looked at as a bonus.
Same for Eovaldi and JDM (not that JDM is a lock to get a QO, but he would benefit by taking the issue off the table entirely).
The top four on the list are locks for 40-man spots. Gonzalez and Ward are possiblities (depending on how they close the season, Ward being more likely and Gonzalez being less likely) and the rest probably won't be added to the 40-man.
To me, penciling Strahm in as a starter next year at something like 2/15 is a move that a cash strapped orginization like the Royals make. I don’t think we need $20 mill pitchers across the board in the starting rotation next year, but I just don’t think there is room for another flyer.
Now granted there is a LONG way between now and next April, but assuming Evoladi is not resigned, currently your starting 5 looks something like
1. Sale: after two years of essentially not pitching:
2. Pivetta: I actually like him more than most, but he is still developing.
3. Whitlock: not as effective as a starter this year, so this role is in doubt.
4. Paxton: probably no more than 25 innings pitched in the last 1.5 years:
5. Strahm: huge wildcard.
6. Crawford
7. Bello
8. Wink
Also assuming Wacha isn’t back.
If there is too much uncertainty with the starting pitching as above then a big league team who has playoff aspirations, cannot have Strahm in your opening five.
Now granted there is a LONG way between now and next April, but assuming Evoladi is not resigned, currently your starting 5 looks something like
1. Sale: after two years of essentially not pitching:
2. Pivetta: I actually like him more than most, but he is still developing.
3. Whitlock: not as effective as a starter this year, so this role is in doubt.
4. Paxton: probably no more than 25 innings pitched in the last 1.5 years:
5. Strahm: huge wildcard.
6. Crawford
7. Bello
8. Wink
Also assuming Wacha isn’t back.
If there is too much uncertainty with the starting pitching as above then a big league team who has playoff aspirations, cannot have Strahm in your opening five.
I don't get the Strahm as a starter thing. He's not made a real start in four years (his one game started last year was as an opener). He's been solid in relief this year but nothing he's done makes me think he's a prime candidate to move to the rotation at age 31. And certainly not where I'd want him to get a two year deal at double his current annual salary to try it.
As I see it, this is what the 2023 rotation picture looks like right now, with only the first two as locks:
Sale
Pivetta
Paxton
Whitlock
Houck
Seabold
Winckowski
Crawford
Bello
Groome
Mata
Some of those guys are probably not going to be around, some of them are destined for Worcester to ride the shuttle, and some probably end up in the bullpen at some point. I would hope if they're pursuing outside options, it will be guys who can clearly push everyone below Sale down the ladder (hell, I'd be fine if they signed a pitcher or two that render Sale a #3 at best).
As I see it, this is what the 2023 rotation picture looks like right now, with only the first two as locks:
Sale
Pivetta
Paxton
Whitlock
Houck
Seabold
Winckowski
Crawford
Bello
Groome
Mata
Some of those guys are probably not going to be around, some of them are destined for Worcester to ride the shuttle, and some probably end up in the bullpen at some point. I would hope if they're pursuing outside options, it will be guys who can clearly push everyone below Sale down the ladder (hell, I'd be fine if they signed a pitcher or two that render Sale a #3 at best).
In what world can Strahm command a 2 year, $15M deal? He started a few years ago and wasn’t particularly good at it; I’d think 1 year at $3-$4M seems more likely. Regardless, I agree with the above and think they need to find a #2 type, at least. Hard to really see any on the FA market - Manea, Thor, Zach Eflin look like the best of a mediocre group. May have to do the trade route or think about Houck / Whitlock as starters again .
I'd agree with this list. I'm not as bullish on Seabold as some. I like control/pitchability guys but he hasn't shown anything against a deeper/better caliber of lineups than AAA provides. I'm hope he can make the transition, but sometimes it's easier to project a guy with one or two plus pitches.
I think there's enough depth there for a credible lineup:
1) Sale/Paxton (one should pan out)
2) Pivetta
3) Whitlock/Houck (again, one if not both, get pressed into the rotation.)
4 and 5) The scrum: I think Wincowski/Crawford/Bello will provide a #5 guy. Like any of them seem to be ready. But can they squeeze a #4 out of that group? Or will another MiL arm be ready?
They really only need a Hill/Wacha type if Paxton gets healthy this year.
Ward and German is worth holding.
I was pretty bullish on Jiminez but he just hasn’t turned it on. His athleticism I thought would kick his game up a notch at a certain point but he’s ran out of time.
I was pretty bullish on Jiminez but he just hasn’t turned it on. His athleticism I thought would kick his game up a notch at a certain point but he’s ran out of time.
More accurately, he was hurt. Strahm throws everything harder now than he did as a reliever that season. He came up as a SP and was electric starting out, but got hurt several times in KC and SD. I think projecting him is more complicated than just looking at a half-season of starts in 2019 (including one where he got bombed at Coors).
He's hurt now, but his stuff has been excellent this year. I guess I don't see a $7.5M AAV as a terrible hit for a guy filling the Wacha/Hill role who might have upside beyond that. I wouldn't give him Minor's Texas deal (3/$28), but he seems like a good comp.
Strahm is making $3M this year and has put up 0.3 war. I’m not sure how him saying he wants to start suddenly makes him worth 3x AAV what he makes now for 2x as long but stranger things have happened. I’m not opposed to it happening, just think you’d need to see something to give him that kind of $$$.
If the Sox are interested in him as a starter, they should put him in the rotation when he comes back and see how it goes.
If the Sox are interested in him as a starter, they should put him in the rotation when he comes back and see how it goes.
If he got hurt as a starter and then hurt as a reliever, maybe he’s not all that dependable?
I mean, the same could be said for Eovaldi, Wacha, Hill, Richards, Pivetta and Whitlock, right?
Edit: I figure we’ll have to sign one of these 1/$7M types anyway.
I was surprised to see Noah Song on the list of Rule 5 eligible players, since he is blocked by his military commitment. I thought players had to be actively in the development process. Is Rule 5 eligibility determined strictly by the time since the Sox acquired the rights to the player?
In his case does it really matter? No one is going to take him when 1. He might not even be available and 2. If he even is available they have to give a guaranteed major league roster spot to a guy who hasn't pitched in 4 years and that was in low A
I actually think him being not available might make a team more likely to take him. If they do, and he can't be on the active roster wouldn't it be the same as taking a TJS guy and stashing him on the IL for the season? Then they can do whatever they want with him the season after.
They can put him in the restricted list but eventually would have to keep him active once he’s available. He turns 26 in May and hasn’t pitched since ‘19, and that was in the NYPL.
Right. I was going on the assumption that he would be unavailable for the whole season due to his service commitment, but I admittedly don't know when it ends. I don't think him being selected were that the case would be the craziest thing I've seen.
Rule 5 picks have to be on the active roster for a minimum of 90 days, otherwise the requirement to be on the 26-man roster rolls over to the following season; that 90 days doesn’t include time on The restricted list or major league IL. I can’t see a team committing to that for a guy who hasn’t thrown a professional pitch since 2019, and never pitched above short season ball.
Plus they'd have to occupy a spot on the claiming club's 40 man by default.
Most clubs, even rebuilding types, are going to have a point of diminishing returns - who on your own 40 man do you replace at the cost of 90 days of ML service time? Obviously there are cases where you absolutely want to do that - high upside player, good fit, little risk if you're not competing. But there's a limit.
If this were true it would be malpractice. Zero percent chance this is the case.
That said, it would also be malpractice to say anything else at this point.
Maybe Sam just means Chaim is doing it all by himself and consulting no one as he decides the future of the franchise. I mean, aren't we told that giving your employees more responsibility is a great way to boost morale?
Or we can take the man at his word and see what happens.
(You'll notice he didn't say they weren't having internal discussions on how to extend Devers or Xander.)
Devers is under control for two years. I'm not sure why you trade him now. They have a good core for 2023, lots of financial flexibility to sign FAs, trading chips aplenty, and some players on the way up (Casas in particular for position players, but pitchers in plenty - Winckowski, Bello, Seabold, German, Mata, Murphy, Groome.)
I mean, I honestly don't get the whole "Trade Devers Now" stuff that's floating around here. It might make sense in a roto-ball vacuum - but we're not in a vacuum. You have to look at the roster and think about this year, and next year. And the year after. Devers will be the lineup anchor for 2023, and maybe all of 2024, assuming there's no extension and the team is competitive. The team will in some ways be built around him. It makes zero sense to trade away his bat and defense to just go to the FA well and pay for such, or go to the prospect well and trade for such.*
If the Sox do go into fire-sale mode this year there are a handful of other guys who are FAs at the end of the season. (Plus they don't have to staple any dead-weight contract money to any other player in a trade, or make outrageous demands, so they can likely be effective if they go that route - just ask Heath Hembree and Brandon Workman.)
Xander may opt out, but he also has a no-trade clause. Who knows what representations he's made to the team? He's clearly still playing hard and is one of the more senior presences on the club, as well as being one of their few key bats.
Maybe they take offers for Xander if the team absolutely craters this week, or suffers a season changing spate of injuries somehow. But absent that, maybe they plan to compete for the WC even if they have a rough week - and if so, they're simply not going to be able to do that without Xander. Or maybe they have a plan to make a push for him this off-season, before he's a FA? Who knows?
*(The one exception to this generally would be lateraling Devers for a Devers-like talent with more control. . .but what specific club is going to make that trade this year given the current standings? I mean, there might be one. But there's a greater chance no teams fit that criteria or would be willing to do a deal if they did.)
What would it take for Xander to opt in? His ISO is now at .131. I'd have to imagine teams would be pretty hesitant to give him a big offer if it gets much lower than that.
Over the last 29 games, his ISO is .068 over 120 PA/103 at bats.
It's dipped against both, but more so vs R.
.293/.359/.415 vs R, ISO of .122.
.384/.477/.548 vs L, ISO of .164.
For his career .166 vs R, .164 vs L, Career ISO of .167. Had to double check but yeah, his career ISO is somehow higher than his splits vs R or L due to the power of rounding. Or I'm doing something wrong over and over again.
Between 2018-2021: .224 ISO.
If he's sitting at something like .308/.375,/.398, does he opt in? Is there a huge contract waiting for him, especially with a pick attached?
edit: Never mind, thought it was 2 years and not 3 + 1.
Over the last 29 games, his ISO is .068 over 120 PA/103 at bats.
It's dipped against both, but more so vs R.
.293/.359/.415 vs R, ISO of .122.
.384/.477/.548 vs L, ISO of .164.
For his career .166 vs R, .164 vs L, Career ISO of .167. Had to double check but yeah, his career ISO is somehow higher than his splits vs R or L due to the power of rounding. Or I'm doing something wrong over and over again.
Between 2018-2021: .224 ISO.
If he's sitting at something like .308/.375,/.398, does he opt in? Is there a huge contract waiting for him, especially with a pick attached?
edit: Never mind, thought it was 2 years and not 3 + 1.
Last edited:
I thought Xander got banged up from a collision with Duggy if I am remembering correctly. Perhaps injury is to blame for the decrease in power?
Perhaps. I'm more interested in how it affects his value if the lack of power continues for the rest of the season.
Well, kind of. I'd rather he mash and the Sox win a WS but him struggling and opting in isn't a bad scenario for the Sox, considering he bounces back.
Opt-in to 4/$80mm? Outside of a severe injury, nothing. At a minimum, he gets the QO for 1/$20mm and a year to build up value.
Bogaerts OPS+ the past five years: 135, 139, 128, 127, 128. Slugging is down, but his LD and Hard Hit % are at or near his career norms. I don’t think there’s any chance he opts in. Marcus Semien got 7/$175 for his age 31-37 seasons, Xander should be using that as a guide (Semien’s best seasons have been better than X, but X has been much more consistent).
MLB.com had a roundtable discussion about trade deadline. Leads off with the Red Sox situation and Bogaerts, suggesting San Diego as a potential destination if the Sox decide to go that route (and Xander waives the no-trade):
https://www.mlb.com/news/2022-mlb-trade-deadline-discussion
https://www.mlb.com/news/2022-mlb-trade-deadline-discussion
I'm not saying they've come to the conclusion that they should trade Xander, but it's simply impossible to believe that they haven't had the "at what point do we have to think about entertaining offers, and what would we expect those offers to be?" conversation. Whatever they end up doing next Monday & Tuesday, it's not going to be with a plan they only started to think about 48 hours previously. I'd hope that as far back as spring training, or at least the bad start, some thought was given to what selling might look like, even though they were (and maybe still are) hoping it wouldn't come to that.
And FWIW, Xander has a big incentive to waive his no-trade given that it would mean he's not attached to compensation in free agency.
Yeah, at 4 years it's not happening. He's also on pace to put up his best dWAR. And a 5.5 WAR season, which would his 2nd highest. (6.3, 4.9, 4.9) He's at 3.3 WAR atm.
With that said:
From 2018-2021
EV: 90.4 mph
Hard hit %: 44.0%
LD%: 25.0%
ISO: .224
BAbip: .330
GB:FB: .74
2022
EV: 88.3
Hard hit%: 40.4%
LD%: 27.0%
ISO: .131
BAbip: .385
GB:FB: .85
I think the org will make the larger buy/sell decision by Friday (if it's not already made) and it will leak into the national baseball press by Sun. afternoon (last home game before the trade deadline, gotta get those ticket sales). Perhaps something to the effect that free agents are on the table but they're not shopping X (but leaving the door open to be overwhelmed with a trade offer for X) or Devers.
If they're operating under the premise that Tatis is going to play the outfield for the remainder of the season, San Diego makes a heck of a lot of sense as a trade partner. I wonder what they'd give for a package of Xander, Vazquez, and Schreiber. Maybe Hassell if they take Myers as well?
I really wonder what catcher anybody thinks is going to fall out of the sky that’s better than Vazquez. Almost wonder if you throw him a qualifying offer if he doesn’t accept a two-year deal — overpriced, but on a one-year deal it’s worth it to buy some time.
Fangraphs has him 21st among Catchers in WAR.
Fan Graphs vs Bbref since 2019
2019: 3.5 vs 2.3
2020: 1.4 vs 0.9
2021: 0.4 vs 1.0
2022: 0.9 vs 1.7
Weird how it "flipped."
I'd really like to hold onto Schreiber. The Sox really only have Sale (really???) and Pivetta as definites to start planning around as starters for '23 and both Houck and Whitlock IMO should be included. That really dries up the expected arms for the pen for '23. Schreiber would be someone to plug in as a "closer" for '23 to start building back from. Without him, it's completely barren.
I see that but, as I said earlier, we have no idea whether he'll be as effective next year as he is this year ... which means that his value as a lone piece in a deal or as a supplemental piece in a mega deal isn't likely to be higher than it is right now.
If Schreiber can get them something of value, then he should be on the block. They probably acquire a closer in the off-season, if need be.