The offseason heading into 2018

Hawk68

lurker
Feb 29, 2008
172
Massachusetts
I see McCutchen as potentially being a big lineup and balance upgrade over JBJ.

I also think it makes a lot of sense in terms of an approach that insists on leaning more towards a GFIN play in 2018, while not being so shortsighted that we ignore the new CBA warning signs beyond that and which has the other big market teams scrambling away from the possibilities of being stuck operating under the constant strain of a bloated payroll. Which is basically where we are already at atm, and only digs that stance in deeper going forward with a signing like JDM. So instead you are left taking your semi-shot now, hope for some favorable outcomes this year, and then looking to get back under the LT next winter. With the expectation that you'll be having to trim some payroll and start banking on more creative/upside type roster fill solutions starting next winter.

Trading JBJ in the immediate aftermath, or even as part of the deal that nets you McCutchen I guess, just starts the more gradually aimed turn over process a year early. As opposed to an all or nothing go at the situation, of course.
I am not a member of the JBJ industrial complex, but we are not going to outslug the NYY.

Balanced play will be the Red Sox opportunity and Marcels bWAR projects McCutcheon at 2.6, JBJ 3.1 and JBJ is three years younger which keeps the "window" open a longer.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
3,819
Boston, MA
I am not a member of the JBJ industrial complex, but we are not going to outslug the NYY.

Balanced play will be the Red Sox opportunity and Marcels bWAR projects McCutcheon at 2.6, JBJ 3.1 and JBJ is three years younger which keeps the "window" open a longer.
Bradley's value is almost all in his defense, but in the trade scenario McCutchen would be playing left. You can't just compare projected WAR values and leave it at that. The question is whether the offensive upgrade in center is worth the defensive downgrade from Bradley to Benintendi in center and Bendintendi to McCutchen in left.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
1,913
I see McCutchen as potentially being a big lineup and balance upgrade over JBJ.
I do not. Cutch was a horse in his prime, but swapping JBJ for him weakens defense, is a wash offensively, costs more, tilts us more right-handed, and is under contract two fewer years, making us a hungry shopper in the 2019 outfield market, which is bad behind Harper (and McCutchen himself).

Unless we’ve got a deal with someone who only wants JBJ (over, say, signing Cain), it’s rearranging deck chairs at best.

If it’s McCutchen and Felipe Rivero for JBJ, then maybe I do it.
 
Last edited:

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
11,247
Somewhere
McCutchen makes sense as a designated hitter/fourth outfielder. His hit profile works for Fenway.

I think a trade cuts into Hanley's role, but I'm not sure he's enough of an upgrade for that.
 

johnnywayback

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2004
1,189
- I'd assume they would need to offer at least 3 years and > his current 13M salary due to inflation. Chapman and Jansen got 5 years, but they were slightly younger. Whereas Davis just got 3 + a vesting option, but he is older. Thus, if 4 years is what he would likely get as a reliever, an extension offer for 3 years + a vesting option could be a good starting point. A FA deal of 4 x 17.25M = 69M would give him the highest AAV for a RP. A reasonable extension offer might be something like 3 x 16.25M = 48.75M, with a 16.25M vesting option based on # of games finished.
I appreciate the analysis, but I think Kimbrel is going to be a lot closer to Chapman/Jansen than he is to Davis when he hits the market. And there are also a lot of teams saving space for Machado/Harper/Donaldson/Kershaw that are going to be looking for something to spend on when they don't get one of those guys.

Add in adjustment for inflation, and I wouldn't be at all shocked to see Kimbrel get close to $100 million. At the very least, that's what I would have in my head if I were him or his agent.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
1,913
McCutchen makes sense as a designated hitter/fourth outfielder. His hit profile works for Fenway.

I think a trade cuts into Hanley's role, but I'm not sure he's enough of an upgrade for that.
I doubt McCutchen wants to DH much before he hits free agency as the second best outfielder on the market.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
48,685
Puig is worth more than McCutchen, 4 years younger, both under contract for one year, Puig had a 3.7 bWAR last year to McCutchen's 2.5.

Joel Sherman yesterday broached a Bradley for Yoennis Cespedes (3/87.5M remaining) deal, which seems to me at least worth thinking about for both sides. Thoughts on that?
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
2,921
Florida
I am not a member of the JBJ industrial complex, but we are not going to outslug the NYY.

Balanced play will be the Red Sox opportunity and Marcels bWAR projects McCutcheon at 2.6, JBJ 3.1 and JBJ is three years younger which keeps the "window" open a longer.
Whether or not we are going to out slug NY shouldn't really factor in to the fielding a more balanced lineup in 2018 decision imo.

I also find somewhat ironic that if I was to dig up a discussion thread from 6 months ago where I was speculating how to approach this window, you'd find a lot more people people being rather adamant then they are now about a striving need for the Sox to be an under the LT spender going forward. Which really only seemed to change after they got blind sided by the fact that this roster makeup wouldn't be able to avoid a LT hit in 2018. Yet instead of rolling with the punches there, which would probably have to include an acknowledgement that this year's reset in itself ultimately didn't accomplish much for us in the long term (beyond saving JH a few bucks), a lot of that has now shifted into essentially wanting us to become the new Dodgers instead. Based around some short sighted and fairly shallow projection that tends to ignore just how deep a hole we'll have dug for ourselves in 2 years time, and any specifics to how we would otherwise expect this FO to attempt to dig ourselves out from it (hint: It won't be with a full rebuild that would realistically take too long, especially with the new CBA incoming talent handicap that probably doesn't end up doing an already fairly barren farm any favors between now and then).

If true it kind of takes a stabbing blow at my rental play theory. But even then I'm left guessing that I'll still ultimately be adding this to my list of things DD did wrong after his usefulness as a GM here peaked out with the Sale trade.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
1,913
Puig is worth more than McCutchen, 4 years younger, both under contract for one year, Puig had a 3.7 bWAR last year to McCutchen's 2.5.

Joel Sherman yesterday broached a Bradley for Yoennis Cespedes (3/87.5M remaining) deal, which seems to me at least worth thinking about for both sides. Thoughts on that?
Cespedes wasn’t very happy or good here.

Steamer projects him at a 119 wRC+ next year — which is probably what we could get from Duda for about 1/$10M.

I’d take deGrom though.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
11,626
Maine
Puig is worth more than McCutchen, 4 years younger, both under contract for one year, Puig had a 3.7 bWAR last year to McCutchen's 2.5.

Joel Sherman yesterday broached a Bradley for Yoennis Cespedes (3/87.5M remaining) deal, which seems to me at least worth thinking about for both sides. Thoughts on that?
Because Cespedes worked soooo well the first time he was in Boston.

Actually, that stint really is irrelevant. I wouldn't do that deal primarily because Cespedes has had problems staying on the field (81 games last year, 132 the year before) and he's four years older than JBJ. That's an expensive trade for what might not be much of an overall upgrade.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
2,921
Florida
Puig is worth more than McCutchen, 4 years younger, both under contract for one year, Puig had a 3.7 bWAR last year to McCutchen's 2.5.

Joel Sherman yesterday broached a Bradley for Yoennis Cespedes (3/87.5M remaining) deal, which seems to me at least worth thinking about for both sides. Thoughts on that?
Puig is definitely worth more. You also have to factor in the possibility that such a trade offer was partially influenced as part of some unseen and elaborate plan LA might of had to put themselves into a better LT position before that Kemp trade came to pass. If the potential offer for Bradley did exist I'm personally guessing it has since expired.

Cespedes makes too much money, and which essentially circles back around to the why not just sign JDM counter angle.
 

Sampo Gida

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 7, 2010
5,044
Matt Holliday had a great first half before being stricken with mono that messed him up in the 2nd half. Provides good leadership from all accounts , which this team seems to need in addition to whatever Pedey offers.

Certainly a backup option for JDM
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
That the next 3 years of Bradley’s worth more than either Puig or McCutcheon, at this stage of their respective careers and contracts, shouldn’t be terribly surprising.

Fortunately for the Sox, DDski seems to remain quite the JBJ booster.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,748
The wrong side of the bridge....
Matt Holliday had a great first half before being stricken with mono that messed him up in the 2nd half. Provides good leadership from all accounts , which this team seems to need in addition to whatever Pedey offers.

Certainly a backup option for JDM
He's 38 and has been declining steadily for five years now. He's not an outfielder anymore. Is there any realistic reason to think he'll provide more value than Hanley, and if not, why bother?
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
That the next 3 years of Bradley’s worth more than either Puig or McCutcheon, at this stage of their respective careers and contracts, shouldn’t be terribly surprising.

Fortunately for the Sox, DDski seems to remain quite the JBJ booster.
Not that this makes me want him over JBJ, but Puig is almost 8 months younger, FWIW.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
Not that this makes me want him over JBJ, but Puig is almost 8 months younger, FWIW.
Sorry if I wasn’t clear; I meant AST:careers, not age:careers - 3 years of JBJ is likely worth more than 2 of Puig, even considering Puig’s likely better offense.

Either one of them is worth more than one year of McCutcheon.
 

Sampo Gida

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 7, 2010
5,044
He's 38 and has been declining steadily for five years now. He's not an outfielder anymore. Is there any realistic reason to think he'll provide more value than Hanley, and if not, why bother?
Yeah, he hit much better than Hanley did before his mono and with more power and besides, Hanley must not be allowed to have his option vest. Holliday can be had cheap and for 1 yr unlike JDM
 
Sep 13, 2006
690
But even then I'm left guessing that I'll still ultimately be adding this to my list of things DD did wrong after his usefulness as a GM here peaked out with the Sale trade.
[SARCASM] Indeed, who can characterize DD's uninspired, lackluster, trade-deadline acquisitions of Eduardo Nunez and Addison Reed as anything but vivid examples of the foibles of a GM whose usefulness is clearly in a very steep decline? [END/SARCASM]
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
[SARCASM] Indeed, who can characterize Gorman's Duquette's Theo's Cherington's DD's uninspired, lackluster, trade-deadline acquisitions of Eduardo Nunez and Addison Reed as anything but vivid examples of the foibles of a GM whose usefulness is clearly in a very steep decline? [END/SARCASM]
FTFY
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
1,913
Cant help but feel like Trader Dave’s getting lapped a bit.

The Dodgers just got five years of Zach Britton-lite for their #15 prospect and a fungible middle reliever.

The Jays just got three years of Yangervis Solarte for their #18 prospect.
 
Last edited:

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
2,921
Florida
[SARCASM] Indeed, who can characterize DD's uninspired, lackluster, trade-deadline acquisitions of Eduardo Nunez and Addison Reed as anything but vivid examples of the foibles of a GM whose usefulness is clearly in a very steep decline? [END/SARCASM]
Generally speaking, I don't tend to put as much overall evaluation stock in a GM's deadline deals as I do their off-season work. But with that said:

Reed was about as A-B-C as it gets, so I'm pretty sure anybody you could put in the GM role would have been confident enough to cash in on that Mets' fire sale. As I've also pointed out in the past, the Nunez acquisition would have left more of an impression on me had DD made that move a lot earlier. He doesn't get extra points there no more then he'll be getting them at this upcoming trade deadline when he brings in the other 1B bat to upgrade Moreland.
 

Sampo Gida

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 7, 2010
5,044
First you ponder signing Bautista, now Holliday? You know Ryan Howard can be had too, right?
Or Adrian Gonzalez. Lol. Seriously, Bautista will be cheap and could bounce back in this park. Holliday had a great first half. Mono is tough but he should be fine now. If neither works you still have the Trade deadline to upgrade and have stolen PA from Hanley.

I also like Bruce at 3/45

I fear JDM will become pull happy here and mess up a swing designed to go R-CF
 

DisgruntledSoxFan77

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 12, 2015
912
Quincy
Or Adrian Gonzalez. Lol. Seriously, Bautista will be cheap and could bounce back in this park. Holliday had a great first half. Mono is tough but he should be fine now. If neither works you still have the Trade deadline to upgrade
Just no! I thought my ideas were insane until I read this!
 
Feb 29, 2008
378
This might be a stupid question, but I don't really get why the Sox always seem to end up a good utility player and a good bullpen arm short at the trade deadline and then have to give up a decent prospect in order to acquire a Nunez or a Reed. Why not just grab somebody like that now, when the cost is just money? Are we hoping that someone from AAA will luck into one of those roles, even though you can never have too much good relief pitching? It can't be that they're waiting to find out if they're in contention at the deadline or not - if not, there are much bigger problems to worry about. Is it just luxury tax worries? Otherwise, I see zero reason not to snag Nunez and a solid set-up man now and avoid having to give up our #5 and #8 prospect at the deadline or whatever.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
This might be a stupid question, but I don't really get why the Sox always seem to end up a good utility player and a good bullpen arm short at the trade deadline and then have to give up a decent prospect in order to acquire a Nunez or a Reed. Why not just grab somebody like that now, when the cost is just money? Are we hoping that someone from AAA will luck into one of those roles, even though you can never have too much good relief pitching? It can't be that they're waiting to find out if they're in contention at the deadline or not - if not, there are much bigger problems to worry about. Is it just luxury tax worries? Otherwise, I see zero reason not to snag Nunez and a solid set-up man now and avoid having to give up our #5 and #8 prospect at the deadline or whatever.
The short answer: because baseball.

The long answer: because you can never tell ahead of time who will be beset by injury or ineffectiveness.

A) Bullpen arms aren’t as consistent, by and large, as starters. Because if those pitchers were as consistent, they would be starters. It’s normal for a team in a playoff race to need a bullpen arm.

B) And, because positional starters face the grind of a 162-game season, it’s likely that one or more of them will need an above-average replacement because of injury or ineffectiveness. It’s also normal for a playoff team to still be able to improve by acquiring one or two available position players.

However, the realities of roster management according to the MLB CBA, the MiLB Free Agency rules, and the 40- and 25-man rosters, means there’s no way to stock up on enough good MLB-ready players to meet every possible need ahead of time.

And because backups face the facts of A) and B) above, but to an even greater extent than first-stringers. It’s better to wait and see, and to respond accordingly.
 
Dec 8, 2017
38
The short answer: because baseball.

The long answer: because you can never tell ahead of time who will be beset by injury or ineffectiveness.

A) Bullpen arms aren’t as consistent, by and large, as starters. Because if those pitchers were as consistent, they would be starters. It’s normal for a team in a playoff race to need a bullpen arm.

B) And, because positional starters face the grind of a 162-game season, it’s likely that one or more of them will need an above-average replacement because of injury or ineffectiveness. It’s also normal for a playoff team to still be able to improve by acquiring one or two available position players.

However, the realities of roster management according to the MLB CBA, the MiLB Free Agency rules, and the 40- and 25-man rosters, means there’s no way to stock up on enough good MLB-ready players to meet every possible need ahead of time.

And because backups face the facts of A) and B) above, but to an even greater extent than first-stringers. It’s better to wait and see, and to respond accordingly.
Indeed, the Sox have attempted this with relievers recently in Carson Smith and Tyler Thornburg (although via trade, not FA signing), but injuries derailed plans. As for Nunez, it'd be nice to be able to snag him, but I'd guess he's holding out for a starting gig somewhere.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
16,955
Rogers Park
This might be a stupid question, but I don't really get why the Sox always seem to end up a good utility player and a good bullpen arm short at the trade deadline and then have to give up a decent prospect in order to acquire a Nunez or a Reed. Why not just grab somebody like that now, when the cost is just money? Are we hoping that someone from AAA will luck into one of those roles, even though you can never have too much good relief pitching? It can't be that they're waiting to find out if they're in contention at the deadline or not - if not, there are much bigger problems to worry about. Is it just luxury tax worries? Otherwise, I see zero reason not to snag Nunez and a solid set-up man now and avoid having to give up our #5 and #8 prospect at the deadline or whatever.
Martin and Woods just made this point with RP, but the story's the same with utility players.

It's usually by trades or with minor league deals, in the offseason, too, and just as with the relievers sometimes those guys are hurt or ineffective when they get the call. Think of Brock Holt, Marco Hernandez or Josh Rutledge last year. All of those guys came over in the offseason — Holt was in the Hanrahan/Melancon deal, Marco came back from the Cubs for Doubront, and Rutledge was originally in the Victorino deal, but he's bounced around a bit, and I think we had him back as a Rule V pick before his most recent DFA.

If you put Marco Hernandez' resume in the minor leagues and his early MLB cups of coffee against Núñez at the same age, they're pretty similar — Núñez was a bit better in the low minors, Marco was better in the high minors and in his early stints at MLB. If Marco's shoulder and Brock's brain had held up, we probably don't trade for Núñez, particularly because Marco looks like he is a 24 year old Núñez. I predict we try again with this personnel in 2018, and I predict it pays off. (If Brock still has nothing in ST, DD might move on from him.)

Rutledge is a similar player, but maybe a tier down. He had a great 28 games in 2016 (.345 OBP!), but was bad in a similar sample in 2017, possibly because of his injuries. But the Giants have brought him in to play a similar role on the Sacramento/San Francisco shuttle.
 

Sampo Gida

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 7, 2010
5,044
Why would this be surprising? Why would the Marlins even want to keep him at his salary unless they want to attract Yankee fans in the area to games (cant imagine this is significant). Basically Marlins should be going all out and jettison anything of value with significant dollars attached. They already pulled the plug on the boat and water is flooding in and its sinking. Might be a bit concerned about ticket sales though which could have them wait until the TD (picture Jeter frantically bailing away to keep it afloat till then)

Pretty sure every player thats any good would want to be gone from Miami except replacement types who see a better chance of a job/playing time. Yelich and Realmuto have alteady said the same

Heck Marlin Man might even want out although seems Jeter promised him a first pitch for 10 season tickets (something like that)
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
1,913
Jay Bruce to the Mets at 3/39M. Glad he’s not ours.

Hopefully this will trigger a few dominoes. The Mets are a Wild Card-hopeful team who just got a bit better. It should push the Diamondbacks’ hand of it pushes anyone’s.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
Jay Bruce to the Mets at 3/39M. Glad he’s not ours.

Hopefully this will trigger a few dominoes. The Mets are a Wild Card-hopeful team who just got a bit better. It should push the Diamondbacks’ hand of it pushes anyone’s.
I’m not a fan of the player but you can’t complain about the deal. He’s a steal at that number. Would look better as a DH though.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
1,913
I’m not a fan of the player but you can’t complain about the deal. He’s a steal at that number. Would look better as a DH though.
Last year was the first time he cleared 1 WAR since 2013. I wouldn’t say steal, but maybe he’ll be alright. Mostly I think he’s an awful fit for our park.
 
Last edited:

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
2,921
Florida
Shame DD couldn't have waited longer then he did before rushing to outbid himself on Moreland. Bruce would of been a great alternative value grab for us at 3/$39 imo. Solid current roster fit that helped improve our middle of the order bat/power situation, and without committing to anything with high regret potential in the process.

Could of worked with or without trading Bradley too for that matter.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
9,151
Moreland in 2018 will be much better than Bruce. Let's not let our hatred of DD get in the way.