SELL SELL SELL

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
lexrageorge said:
Gammons is not quite the reliable source he was some time ago.  Yes, I could believe Tony Clark and his staff are much more active in reviewing contracts and advising players whether they should accept or reject the deal.  And perhaps Clark is telling players to reject deals that he thinks are too low. 
 
But I'm not aware of the MLBPA having the right to reject a deal that otherwise meets the terms of the CBA.  There is nothing to stop a Lester or a Pedroia or a Longoria from ignoring the union and accepting a below-market deal.  The players are not employees of the union.  The downside is that if a Lester accepted a significant hometown discount, and then later needs the MLBPA to intervene on his behalf on an unrelated matter, he may have a hard time getting his calls returned. 
I think this is correct, and let me tell you one thing Tony Clark and the Union absolutely cannot do -- force Lester to run the FA gauntlet and perhaps blow his arm out in one of the 10 or so starts he has left this year.

So if Lester and the Sox, for example, were to come together and agree on a contract that fully valued him based on recent signings -- which is to say, 2014 off season signings -- there is not a damn thing the Union can do about that. They may dearly wish him to auction himself after this season; they cannot force it.

As a practical matter then, even if one assumes the Union has some sort of veto power over below market contracts, it doesn't matter. It does not matter because Lester is highly unlikely to agree at this point to anything less than full value based on last offseason, and it does not matter because Lester is almost certainly gone if he hits FA.
 

koufax37

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
2,472
TomRicardo said:
Seriously who is packing Peavy's bag.
 
Miller? Gone
 
Gomes? Gone
 
Who else should be shipping out?
 
I'm with you on increasing overall asset portfolio and financial portfolio at expense of a couple potential wins this season, so happily will take what we can get for Peavy and a few others, Drew if there are any takers, etc.
 
But why do you think Andrew Miller is worth less to the 2015 Red Sox than what we get back?  I need someone to make me a great deal to give up a dominant situational lefty.
 
What are we getting back from Gomes that beats a powerful bench/platoon player and chemistry generator (okay, I didn't really play the chemistry card, but I figured following AJ's departure I could almost get away with it).  If he is out of your 2015 plans because we have better players for that role, okay, but I'm not sure that is the case.  And he has three more payments until that tattoo is officially his.
 
I think our priorities should be roughly (but a balance of all):
#1: Making our total roster talent over the next three years as strong as possible
#2: Making our 2015 team as strong as it can be
#3: Making sure we have playing time for our core prospects (Vazquez over AJ, Xander over Drew)
#4: Staying competitive in 2014 and not trying a fire sale for the sake of selling
#5: Improving financial flexibility, but our financial flexibility seems really strong right now, and we don't have too many salaries to unload
 
So get value where we can, but don't dump for dumping's sake, which I am pretty sure three "sell"s in your topic title indicates in the official English-UsedCarDealer dictionary.
 

mauidano

Mai Tais for everyone!
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2006
35,627
Maui
koufax37 said:
 
I think our priorities should be roughly (but a balance of all):
#1: Making our total roster talent over the next three years as strong as possible
#2: Making our 2015 team as strong as it can be
#3: Making sure we have playing time for our core prospects (Vazquez over AJ, Xander over Drew)
#4: Staying competitive in 2014 and not trying a fire sale for the sake of selling
#5: Improving financial flexibility, but our financial flexibility seems really strong right now, and we don't have too many salaries to unload
 
So get value where we can, but don't dump for dumping's sake, which I am pretty sure three "sell"s in your topic title indicates in the official English-UsedCarDealer dictionary.
We are all disappointed and frustrated.  Don't dump because of it. Be rational in your business dealings. Three days ago we wanted to "BUY, BUY, BUY".  A little patience goes a long way. Make smart choices not emotional choices. You don't HAVE to do much of anything really.
 

jimbobim

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2012
1,558
Considering the overall grumbling coming from "small market" ( which I hate i.e.  Rays)  teams about how hard it is to "compete" I'm glad the union is demanding that players get compensated appropriately given the exploding television revenues. An example of a recent superstar deal that I'm sure the union wasn't thrilled about was the Trout deal.
 
Owners want controllable affordable years between 20-32ish but primarily in the 20's. They're looking to dump those unproductive years after while players naturally should and do want to keep getting paid million to continue their career.
 
Regardless they still don't have authority to outright turn down deals. It's pretty easy if you follow baseball daily to know what a player could get in the open market (SOSH, Fangraphs, leaks). Lester's value now is probably between 140ish to 170ish on a 6-7 year deal. Sherzer probably the same. Due to his age 30 he differs from recent contracts Tanaka Kershaw Grienke given to "Ace" types. The Red Sox would be setting the market for for Sherzer and to a lesser extent Shields.
 
 
As for selling if i can get something easily and substantially better then a fucking compensation pick ( which is ALL the Red Sox will get for refusing to just easily and smartly give Lester his money and I know either the Red Sox won't offer him the necessary money either now or in a couple months Lester is gone to the highest bidder of very close prospects.)
 
I would keep Koji and Miller. Sell high on Nava and give away drew gomes and other expirings. Sell low on Doubie . See if WMB is fixed. 
 
Hope to blow away the  Marlins for stanton this offseason. If not immediately start developing plan B for some type of offensive changes and improvement. ( the last two cubans coming over could use some irrational money thrown at them try and get the next Puig. A risk you can take when your swimming in big market money even if the cranky Boston columnists complain about an overpay if it goes bust ie Matsuzaka )
 

ToeKneeArmAss

Paul Byrd's pitching coach
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dan to Theo to Ben said:
Is it completely out of the realm of possibility to give him (Ross) a golden parachute of sorts, overpay him grossly as a coach to retire this offseason, given his age and concussion history?  Would the union care about such a possibility?
 
Edit: for clarity
This seems like a smart and creative move, assuming Ross would go for it.
 

ToeKneeArmAss

Paul Byrd's pitching coach
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Rudy Pemberton said:
Why would they have to "grossly overpay" Ross to retire? His contract is up after this year. Either being him back as a player or coach, it won't be expensive. What am I missing here?
A gross overpay for a coach (say $1MM?) means a good mentor for our young catchers without using up a roster spot to do it. That's all.
 

mabrowndog

Ask me about total zone...or paint
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2003
39,676
Falmouth, MA
ToeKneeArmAss said:
A gross overpay for a coach (say $1MM?) means a good mentor for our young catchers without using up a roster spot to do it. That's all.
 
Exactly.
 
Rudy, what you're missing is that it provides Ross with a financial incentive not to continue his playing career elsewhere (assuming an oft-concussed, worn-down, 13-year veteran catcher who turns 38 next spring would need any such incentive).
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Sprowl said:
A 40-man roster inventory of trade value:
I don't understand the "SELL!" designation for Middlebrooks. The #1 problem the 2014 Red Sox have is a complete lack of power (.379 SLUG even with the past week's power surge, just better than Seattle's league-worst .373). Even if you think there's only a 20% chance he puts it together and has a 30 HR season in the next couple years, a) there's probably no one in the system under 30 who has better odds, and b) you're selling low given that this year is kind of a wash. If 2015 season started tomorrow, wouldn't he have a good chance of being the opening day 3B?
 

threecy

Cosbologist
SoSH Member
Sep 1, 2006
1,587
Tamworth, NH
ToeKneeArmAss said:
A gross overpay for a coach (say $1MM?) means a good mentor for our young catchers without using up a roster spot to do it. That's all.
Why bother with that when you already have Jason Varitek on the payroll?
 

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
34,441
Haiku
Super Nomario said:
I don't understand the "SELL!" designation for Middlebrooks. The #1 problem the 2014 Red Sox have is a complete lack of power (.379 SLUG even with the past week's power surge, just better than Seattle's league-worst .373). Even if you think there's only a 20% chance he puts it together and has a 30 HR season in the next couple years, a) there's probably no one in the system under 30 who has better odds, and b) you're selling low given that this year is kind of a wash. If 2015 season started tomorrow, wouldn't he have a good chance of being the opening day 3B?
 
Yes, I agree that the 2014 Red Sox are power-starved, but I am not convinced that Middlebrooks can bring enough value in the other tools (hit for average, field, run and throw) to beat out Bogaerts at 3B, and I don't think Bogaerts is a good enough fielder to play shortstop. By that logic, both Middlebrooks and Cecchini are blocked and, like Betts, are trade candidates. Perhaps I should relabel WMB as 'available' rather than 'SELL!', since there is limited urgency to completing a deal now.
 
Revised version:
 
[table 2014 sellers, keepers and fixer-uppers]Red Sox 40-man roster   age salary keep/sell? trade value fixer-upper Burke Badenhop RP 31 2.15m gfi 2015 medium   Craig Breslow RP 33 3.83m SELL! low performance Clay Buchholz SP 29 7.95m gfi 2015 medium performance Rubby De La Rosa SP 25   keep     Felix Doubront SP 26 586K SELL! high performance John Lackey SP 35 15.95m gfi 2015 high   Jon Lester SP 30 13m gfi 2015 very high   Andrew Miller RP 29 1.9m gfi 2015 high   Edward Mujica RP 30 4.75m available low price, performance Jake Peavy SP 33 16.1m SELL! medium price Junichi Tazawa RP 28 1.73m gfi 2015 very high   Koji Uehara RP 39 5m gfi 2015 high                 David Ross C 37 3.1m gfi 2015 low   Christian Vazquez C 23   keep                   Xander Bogaerts SS 21 517K keep     Mike Carp 1B 28 1.4m available low performance Stephen Drew SS 31 14m SELL! low price, performance Brock Holt 3B 26   available medium   Will Middlebrooks DL15 3B 25 541K available medium performance Mike Napoli 1B 32 16m gfi 2015 medium price Dustin Pedroia 2B 30 12.83m keep     David Ortiz DH 38 15.5m keep                   Jackie Bradley Jr. CF 24 502K keep     Jonny Gomes LF 33 5m SELL! medium   Daniel Nava OF 31 556K available medium   Shane Victorino RF 33 13m gfi 2015 medium price               Mookie Betts CF 21   available high   Garin Cecchini 3B 23   available medium   Alex Hassan RF 26   available low   Jonathan Herrera SS 29 1.3m available low   Anthony Ranaudo SP 24   keep     Allen Webster SP 24   keep     Brandon Workman SP 25   keep     Steven Wright SP 29 502K available low   [/table]
 

The Mort Report

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 5, 2007
6,884
Concord
I'm all for selling off pieces that can be replaced at at least 80% of their production(Gomes, Peavy, relievers), but how often do hauls for a guy like Lester usually work out?  The RS can afford him, and if he walks at the end of the season they get a pick.  You can look at acquiring Pedro or CC to the Brewers for Matt LaPorta(!!) and others, trades more often than not dont work out.  Sure some teams have hit home runs on these deals, and I'm some of you can rattle a few off, but its of my belief that these deals generally dont help the team trading the known commodity.  Most of those trades are also based on a team unable to afford the price tag of the player, not because they want to trade them.  I would much rather attempt to sign a known in Lester with the plenty of money they have then hope to get a couple prospects where best chances are we end up with a utility player and a #3 starter...but they are cost controlled!!!
 
As to the Union, they have too much power as it is, but a union works for the players, not the other way around.  Its my understanding they legally have no power to veto a contract, but can advise strongly against it 
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,405
The Mort Report said:
I'm all for selling off pieces that can be replaced at at least 80% of their production(Gomes, Peavy, relievers), but how often do hauls for a guy like Lester usually work out?  The RS can afford him, and if he walks at the end of the season they get a pick.  You can look at acquiring Pedro or CC to the Brewers for Matt LaPorta(!!) and others, trades more often than not dont work out.  Sure some teams have hit home runs on these deals, and I'm some of you can rattle a few off, but its of my belief that these deals generally dont help the team trading the known commodity.  Most of those trades are also based on a team unable to afford the price tag of the player, not because they want to trade them.  I would much rather attempt to sign a known in Lester with the plenty of money they have then hope to get a couple prospects where best chances are we end up with a utility player and a #3 starter...but they are cost controlled!!!
 
As to the Union, they have too much power as it is, but a union works for the players, not the other way around.  Its my understanding they legally have no power to veto a contract, but can advise strongly against it 
 
La Porta was a bust, but if the Red Sox get someone as good as Michael Brantley in return for Lester, then it will have been a successful deal.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Sprowl said:
 
Yes, I agree that the 2014 Red Sox are power-starved, but I am not convinced that Middlebrooks can bring enough value in the other tools (hit for average, field, run and throw) to beat out Bogaerts at 3B, and I don't think Bogaerts is a good enough fielder to play shortstop. By that logic, both Middlebrooks and Cecchini are blocked and, like Betts, are trade candidates. Perhaps I should relabel WMB as 'available' rather than 'SELL!', since there is limited urgency to completing a deal now.
I don't disagree with your skepticism around Middlebrooks' other tools; I just think his power is such a rare asset (not just at the major-league level; it's a weakness in an otherwise fine farm system) that I wouldn't give up on him even if a return to his 2012 form is unlikely. I actually see WMB and JBJ as similar - they've both struggled mightily over his past two seasons, but each has a rare skill (CF D for JBJ, obviously) that makes it worth hoping the rest of the package can come around.
 
Bogaerts' 2015 position is one of the major questions for the team. I'd almost put Drew in the "2015 gfi" bucket if they don't think Xander can stick at short; his bat is coming around this month, and he seems a safer bet as a total package than Holt or Herrera or rushing Marrero to the bigs.
 

RochesterSamHorn

New Member
Nov 10, 2006
104
Rochester, New York
Danny_Darwin said:
 
This is why I am hesitant to jump on the "sell the farm for Stanton" bandwagon - wouldn't they be better off "spreading the wealth" by using their prospect depth to acquire more than one player from the next tier down to fill their many holes? The trading equivalent of what they did after the 2012 season?
I'm in this camp when we collect all our chips. I do not see the A's re-uping Cespedes after next year, and I'm sure he can be had for less in terms of prospects and salary than Stanton.
 

Pilgrim

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 24, 2006
2,406
Jamaica Plain
RochesterSamHorn said:
I'm in this camp when we collect all our chips. I do not see the A's re-uping Cespedes after next year, and I'm sure he can be had for less in terms of prospects and salary than Stanton.
He'll be 30, and isn't anywhere near as good as Stanton.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
19,863
St. Louis, MO
Danny_Darwin said:
This is why I am hesitant to jump on the "sell the farm for Stanton" bandwagon - wouldn't they be better off "spreading the wealth" by using their prospect depth to acquire more than one player from the next tier down to fill their many holes? The trading equivalent of what they did after the 2012 season?
They will have cash for the rest. Papi has carried this lineup for so long, they need to get his heir in here. Tulowitzki or Stanton.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Tulo has missed an average of 47 games a season 08 through 13 and has played in > 130 games once during that period.
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,405
bosockboy said:
They will have cash for the rest. Papi has carried this lineup for so long, they need to get his heir in here. Tulowitzki or Stanton.
 
Cash for whom, exactly? Hasn't the whole push to re-sign Lester been premised (in part, at least) on the underwhelming nature of the free-agent market for pitchers beyond Scherzer? And if anything, the list of available outfielders looks even more bleak, unless you believe Nelson Cruz can do this again while playing serviceable defense. And the same with the list of free-agent left-side infielders. And I can think of at least three deep-pocketed teams who will also be shopping in that particular aisle.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
Danny_Darwin said:
 
This is why I am hesitant to jump on the "sell the farm for Stanton" bandwagon - wouldn't they be better off "spreading the wealth" by using their prospect depth to acquire more than one player from the next tier down to fill their many holes? The trading equivalent of what they did after the 2012 season?
 
How many holes are we really looking at, though?
 
Which current weaknesses need to be improved by trade becomes a difficult question to answer when dealing with a large group of young players who've neither established a baseline of performance nor reached an age where declining physical skills or injury risk clearly offsets the likelihood of positive developments.
 
The biggest weakness I see: power.  Even if Bogaerts and Middlebrooks both become the 25+ hr guys we hope they can be....how much more is available in the minors to offset the risk of age- and injury-based decline from Ortiz, Napoli, Victorino, Pedroia, and even Middlebrooks himself?  
 
There are other issues, of course.  Especially if Lester and Miller and Uehara aren't re-signed.  But power is by far the most glaring.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,422
Not here
Keep the guys we want to have next year. That's Lester, Miller, Uehara, and maybe Ross.

Get Peavy and Mujica the he'll out of town. Everyone who isn't going and controlled is available.

Get Mookie and some of the AAA pitchers up here.

Get Drew to someone and get Middlebrooks up here.

Talk to Lester's people do you know what it will take and give him that offer after he makes his last start.

It's been eight months since we won a world series and that's starting to feel like a long time
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,209
Rasputin said:
Keep the guys we want to have next year. That's Lester, Miller, Uehara, and maybe Ross.

Get Peavy and Mujica the he'll out of town. Everyone who isn't going and controlled is available.

Get Mookie and some of the AAA pitchers up here.

Get Drew to someone and get Middlebrooks up here.

Talk to Lester's people do you know what it will take and give him that offer after he makes his last start.

It's been eight months since we won a world series and that's starting to feel like a long time
 
Lester is a goner no matter how hard you post.   He should be the first piece they target auctioning off.  If they can't get sufficient return, hang on to  him and take your pick.  But make no mistake that he is a gone once the season ends.
 
As for Peavy and Mujica, expect lottery tickets.  Because that is about the best you'll get in return for those guys.  The sad truth is that, aside from Lester (or perhaps Uehara or Miller), the Sox are selling VHS tapes and model ships in a bottle at the end of the lot on the MLB flea market.  Those are lonely stalls to occupy.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,422
Not here
DeJesus Built My Hotrod said:
Lester is a goner no matter how hard you post.   He should be the first piece they target auctioning off.  If they can't get sufficient return, hang on to  him and take your pick.  But make no mistake that he is a gone once the season ends.
You'll forgive me if I don't take your opinion as gospel truth. We know about a half a percent of what's gone on between the team and him since negotiations started and that's not enough to be any reasonable conclusions on.
 

Traut

lost his degree
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
12,750
My Desk
Rasputin said:
You'll forgive me if I don't take your opinion as gospel truth. We know about a half a percent of what's gone on between the team and him since negotiations started and that's not enough to be any reasonable conclusions on.
The Red Sox do not want Lester back.  
 
The Red Sox made a rule that you don't sign 30 year old pitchers to more than 4 year deals. That's based on lots of evidence. Additionally, they have proprietary information on Lester's health they should stick with that rule. 
 
Look if this was the 2003 Red Sox, and management should make an exception to the rule. Baseball is a strange game but the Red Sox have a number of holes on their roster. It's hard to see this team contending next year given that there's a lack of talent in the free agent market and what's out there will be overpriced.
 
In 2013, all of the Sox free agent moves panned out. In 2014, the Red Sox front office whiffed one everyone. Including not making a play for Jose Abreu. 
 
The best Peavy gets the Sox is Brock Holt 2.0. They should try to move Lester because almost anyone they get as a pick in exchange for him won't contribute at the major league level until 2018. Getting a similar caliber player who is a year away helps hasten the rebuilding process. They should also move Koji. Better to sell early than later on a 39 year old pitcher.
 
They should also try and package whomever to get major league talent back in return. If Lester helps get them Hamels that's a plus. 
 
As good as Lester has been, and as much as they're better off with him next year, the Red Sox do not want him back. He is gone.
 

ZMart100

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2008
3,188
I'd add Lackey to this list. With his contract, you might be able to extort a king's ransom (relatively speaking) of prospects from a smaller payroll team. Plus, he's having a career year at 35, so this a good time to sell high. I'd still try to keep Lester. Other than that, if you can get a return for Peavy or any RP between 29 and 38 years old, do it. If the position players were hitting well enough for other teams to want them, the Red Sox wouldn't have to be sellers.
 

ALiveH

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,104
The goal has to be GFI 2015.  Can use the rest of this year to figure out if we have in-house solutions at the positions where we have holes and move the 2015 commitments that are likely to underperform (Victorino and Mujica).
 
This would be my plan for 2015:
Catcher - Vasquez & Ross (with Swihart in the pipeline for a cup of coffee)
DH, 1B, 2B - set with Pedroia & Napoli & Ortiz
SS & 3B - I don't see why we don't bring back Drew.  He's not old.  He was an above average SS in 2013.  He's just been rusty this year.  If not, give it to Bogaerts.  But anyway, can use the rest of this year to give one last shot to Middlebrooks, plus see what Cechini's got at 3B.  Maybe see what Marrero can do.  And figure it out from there.
CF - I think have to roll with JBJ.  He's cost-controlled and even with mediocre bat is a solid regular because of his D.  If his bat improves, he becomes a plus player.
RF - if Victorino is gone, the rest of this year is a tryout for Betts to take this job.
LF - we have a pupu platter of candidates (too many to list really).  I think the rest of this year is a tryout to see who, if anyone, can hold it down including Cechini possibly.
 
Possible FA needs: LF, RF if no one can hold it down.
Maybe the trade fodder + Peavy can fetch a solid OFer.
 
Starting pitching. Have to try to bring back Lester.  He's proven in this market & durable.  Any FA replacement will always have risk of playing in the AL East under this media microscope.
  SP1-3: Lester, Lackey, Buck.  Rest of this year is a tryout for the 4-5 spots among the youngsters.
  RP: have to try to bring back Uehara and all the other relievers who are performing well.  Fill in the rest with young guys who couldn't quite hack it as starters plus free agents.
 

Montana Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 18, 2000
8,881
Twin Bridges, Mt.
JohntheBaptist said:
Maybe we could find something more about his availability than a throwaway tweet before we start projecting Tulowitzki as part of our offseason plans?
The real question is whether Tulo has agreed to move to 3b so Xander can stay at ss.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Montana Fan said:
The real question is whether Tulo has agreed to move to 3b so Xander can stay at ss.
You mean in addition to him missing 30% of his games the last 6 years and turning 30 this October?
 
M

MentalDisabldLst

Guest
mabrowndog said:
Clark is miles above Donald Fehr's peak height on the union totem pole, and he clearly plays harder ball than Michael Weiner did.
 
mabrowndog said:
Pedroia's bargain-basement deal would never have been approved by the MLBPA had Clark been in charge. And despite Lester's stated willingness to take less-than-market in order to remain in Boston, any "discount" is going to be negligible
 
The Cooler, indeed.
 
 

dcmissle said:
You mean in addition to him missing 30% of his games the last 6 years and turning 30 this October?
 
That was an A-Rod-to-the-Yankees / Jeter joke, I think.
 

MyDaughterLovesTomGordon

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
14,181
If Peavy makes this next start against the Rays, I'll be angry. He's not better than Workman or Rubby right now, so he's neither giving us a better chance to win nor making the team better for the future. 
 
Give him to the Pirates for a lottery ticket. 
 
Mujica should be DFA'd. 13 hits in 7.2 innings in July. Horrible. 
 

BeantownIdaho

New Member
Dec 5, 2005
481
Nampa, Idaho
To me it's pretty simple...sell what you need to sell in order to get the pieces you need to get Stanton. If Lester brings pieces you need to get Stanton, trade him. Otherwise, don't. There have to be movable pieces to get what the sox need and want. If we can get mid level prospects out of some on the list that can be used as movable pieces for Hammels or Stanton then do it.
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,405
Perhaps a silly question, but if there's a team out there with an asset that the Marlins might want in a hypothetical Stanton trade (or Hamels, Tulo, your trade target of choice), why would that team not just make its own Stanton trade? 
 

MakMan44

stole corsi's dream
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2009
19,363
dcmissle said:
You mean in addition to him missing 30% of his games the last 6 years and turning 30 this October?
You keep saying this but Tulo still has six 5 win seasons to his name, with 3 of them coming in shortened seasons. In a vacuum, do you prefer Stanton? Of course, but Tulo is still an incredibly dominate player that's locked up to a below market deal.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Danny_Darwin said:
Perhaps a silly question, but if there's a team out there with an asset that the Marlins might want in a hypothetical Stanton trade (or Hamels, Tulo, your trade target of choice), why would that team not just make its own Stanton trade? 
 
There might not be one team with enough assets, but if the Sox can sell off various pieces to acquire those assets from numerous teams, then they have enough to swing a deal.
 
Actually, the Sox *do* have enough to swing a deal, right now.  Just depends whether they are willing to do it.  Selling veterans to acquire more assets is one good way to stockpile so that you can get Stanton and still have plenty left on the farm.
 

MakMan44

stole corsi's dream
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2009
19,363
Danny_Darwin said:
Perhaps a silly question, but if there's a team out there with an asset that the Marlins might want in a hypothetical Stanton trade (or Hamels, Tulo, your trade target of choice), why would that team not just make its own Stanton trade? 
Well if it's a small market team, they're not going to be able to hold onto any of the suggested players anyway. 
 
Also, there's almost no chance Stanton/Tulo gets moved at the deadline so you're trying to acquire assets now to get them in the offseason. 
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
19,863
St. Louis, MO
Danny_Darwin said:
Perhaps a silly question, but if there's a team out there with an asset that the Marlins might want in a hypothetical Stanton trade (or Hamels, Tulo, your trade target of choice), why would that team not just make its own Stanton trade?
They don't have the total haul we have to offer, and/or they don't have the means to extend him.
 

bellowthecat

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2010
589
Massachusetts
I think Lackey could have more trade value than Lester right now.  He's got another year at the minimum and has probably peaked in terms of performance.  If they're serious about Lester extend him for market rate and trade Lackey now while his value is highest.  If some of these other cellar dwellers don't end up selling their good pitchers (Lee, Price, Hamels, Shields) then Lackey could be the best pitcher available at the deadline.  If they do that they could bring potentially bring a nice piece back from say StL, Pit, Cle if those teams are still in it close to the deadline.  At the very least put it out there that you're listening if Price discussions don't distract everyone else.
Edit: I only do this if they offer Lester a fair contract and get him to take it first.  Need one of them in the rotation next year but not both.
 

ALiveH

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,104
If you're willing to trade away one of your 2 best starting pitchers that's not really a plan to win in 2015.
 

twibnotes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
20,232
The Mort Report said:
As to the Union, they have too much power as it is, but a union works for the players, not the other way around.  Its my understanding they legally have no power to veto a contract, but can advise strongly against it 
Problem is, all the folks who are positioned to influence Lester (his agent, the union) are pulling the rope the same direction. Lester would have to counter a lot of forces to take a team-friendly deal.
 

twothousandone

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 18, 2001
3,976
bosockboy said:
They will have cash for the rest. Papi has carried this lineup for so long, they need to get his heir in here. Tulowitzki or Stanton.
 
 

bosockboy said:
They don't have the total haul we have to offer, and/or they don't have the means to extend him.

 
 
Since Colorado (or whomever) would be giving up their SS, do you put Bogaerts and Marrero in that deal, so the Rockies have a better likelihood of getting two major leaguers out of it, including Tulo's replacement? If they say "take out either one and add Vazquez," is that a good deal for the Red Sox?
 

MakMan44

stole corsi's dream
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2009
19,363
twothousandone said:
 
 
 
 
Since Colorado (or whomever) would be giving up their SS, do you put Bogaerts and Marrero in that deal, so the Rockies have a better likelihood of getting two major leaguers out of it, including Tulo's replacement? If they say "take out either one and add Vazquez," is that a good deal for the Red Sox?
Marrero and Vazquez is a fantastic deal for the Red Sox. 
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
MakMan44 said:
Marrero and Vazquez is a fantastic deal for the Red Sox. 
 
Seriously.  There is no way they pick Marrero and Vazquez if Bogaerts and Vazquez is on the table.  And I don't think Bogaerts and Vazquez alone gets it done.
 
M

MentalDisabldLst

Guest
ALiveH said:
If you're willing to trade away one of your 2 best starting pitchers that's not really a plan to win in 2015.
 
Sorry, who are our 2 best starting pitchers in 2015?  I assume you're speaking of the ones who are signed for 2015.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
twothousandone said:
Since Colorado (or whomever) would be giving up their SS, do you put Bogaerts and Marrero in that deal, so the Rockies have a better likelihood of getting two major leaguers out of it, including Tulo's replacement? If they say "take out either one and add Vazquez," is that a good deal for the Red Sox?
 
Remember back in 2009, when reports came out Theo was trying to pry Felix Hernandez from a last-place Seattle team?  
 
That's how I imagine any sort of deal for Tulo or Stanton deadline deal would end up.  We're not talking about losing two promising young players...they'd need to back up the truck.  
 
That's also why I see them working that kind of franchise-altering trade during the offseason instead...when extended time for negotiating might allow the Sox to lose only three or four from the current crop of high-minors talent, instead of five.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
MakMan44 said:
You keep saying this but Tulo still has six 5 win seasons to his name, with 3 of them coming in shortened seasons. In a vacuum, do you prefer Stanton? Of course, but Tulo is still an incredibly dominate player that's locked up to a below market deal.
I think I have alluded to this twice. And considering the other things that are happening, or rather not happening, with the team and the rationale offered for it, I think this is timely.

Proceed with your eyes open, understanding what happened before he hit 30 and that it is extraordinarily unlikely that things will get better in the years ahead. If anything, they are more likely to get worse.

Consider also the cost in prospects, which you have discussed -- and the fact that these are individuals who by definition could not be spun for a front line starting pitcher we seem increasingly likely to lose.

Finally, consider that if they lose that starter and don't replace him with someone nearly as good, you're likely wasting many of Tulo's years in a RS uniform.
 

pokey_reese

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 25, 2008
16,247
Boston, MA
Call the Dodgers, promise them that slotting Lester between Kershaw and Greinke basically guarantees them a trophy, and get Pederson on a plane to Boston.  After what they have been reportedly hearing from the Rays about Price, it will seem like a bargain.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
Rudy Pemberton said:
I don't really see how the Sox could trade 3-5 top prospects for any one player, though. They simply don't have enough talent on the major league roster; they've got holes all over the place. To give up several top prospects for the privilege of paying Stanton or whomever 25M+ for x # of years just doesn't make sense. The prospects are the core of this team and really needed to make this team competitive again. It may not work out, sure, but if you trade multiple prospects, how do you go about building a competitor while still avoiding the kinds of contracts that guys like Lester will sign?
 
They have far more prospects than holes. I don't think 4-5 prospects traded for one player kills their ability to build a contender, it just shifts the way in which they'd have to do it. For 2015 they need to either re-sign Lester or replace him, replace Peavy, replace Gomes, replace Drew, re-sign or replace Ross and re-sign or replace Koji.  That's not an abnormal amount of roster turnover and accounts for six players.  Three are pitchers and three are position players.  Long term they have more spots to fill, but that's true of every team in the majors.
 
In the minors they have Swihart, Marrero, Brentz, Hassan, Betts, Coyle, Cecchini, Middlebrooks, and Shaw as upper minors prospects who could crack the major league roster next year, and Wright, Ranaudo, Diaz, Barnes, Johnson, Webster, Ramirez and Owens as pitchers.  They also have a ton of talent below AA who can fill in the gaps in the upper minors next season like Rijo, Devers, Margot, Ramos, Travis, and Longhi (though he just had a setback with a nasty hand injury), with pitchers like Littrell, Mercedes and Ball.  The reason I listed them all out is to drive home the point that the Red Sox are absolutely flush with prospects who have major league potential.  Filling roster holes from within won't be a problem, even after a big trade.  I know some will point to the Adrian Gonzalez trade, but the system now is much more loaded than it was then.  This is the time to take a risk like that.
 
And if the trade leaves the system a bit light on immediate help, they turn to the free agent market to find average or slightly above average players on short term contracts, a la 2013, to fill out the roster.  They could trade Betts, Ceccini, Coyle, Ranaudo and RDLR to Miami and still have Swihart, Marrero, Middlebrooks, Wright, Diaz, Johnson, Webster, Ramirez, Owens, Barnes, Hassan and Brentz see time at the major league level in 2015.  That's insane.  And all of this is before any prospects they may bring in over the next few days as the deadline approaches. Beyond that, they can target some of the international free agents who are exempt from amateur status like Tomas or Castillo. 
 
So the TL:DR version of this post is "They have a deep enough farm system to trade 4 or 5 prospects away and still fill holes on the major league roster just fine."
 
Edit: I missed Andrew Miller, making the count 7 players and 4 pitchers.