67WasBest said:
Yeah was coming to post. I am a Marrero fan, but at best he's a bottom of the order excellent defensive SS. At worst he won't hit and is a glove only.
If Oakland wants him for Shark I'll pay the postage.
Trading for Starting Pitching
- Thread starter ivanvamp
- Start date
Yeah was coming to post. I am a Marrero fan, but at best he's a bottom of the order excellent defensive SS. At worst he won't hit and is a glove only.
If Oakland wants him for Shark I'll pay the postage.
Well, I think given the package Shark went for at the deadline, the Sox would be sending along more.
Interesting is that the rumors around Shark seem to include SSs; he was supposedly headed to the ChiSox over the weekend and Alexis Ramirez was mentioned. Beane doesn't have much else to trade, so he may be trying to balance out his roster by moving Shark, which would play into the Sox's strength of depth.
Interesting is that the rumors around Shark seem to include SSs; he was supposedly headed to the ChiSox over the weekend and Alexis Ramirez was mentioned. Beane doesn't have much else to trade, so he may be trying to balance out his roster by moving Shark, which would play into the Sox's strength of depth.
Marrero, Coyle and a lower level piece for Shark would be fair and address some roster holes for Oakland.
OCD SS said:
Also, I'm not sure railing about Cespedes because of the Hanley Ramirez signing is fair - I don't think, at that time, _ANYONE_ had any realistic idea that Hanley Ramirez not only would contact Boston and offer to move positions to 'come home'. but be willing to move to left field. At the time, I think, they felt Hanley would either remain a SS in free agency, or move somewhere in the infield.
But Hanley Ramirez in LF was -not- a plan that Boston ever had, I think, because outside wishful 'wouldn't it be nice if Hanley Ramirez came home?, it just wasn't a realistic option at the time of the Lester trade.
Whatever plans for Cespedes changed when an unexpected opportunity to obtain a better hitter for more years dropped in their laps. And if you're going 'they should have expected a better LFer to come by...' yeah, well, here, you do the homework: WHAT indications were there that Ramirez was going to come play LF at the time of the Lester trade?
Minneapolis Millers said:
Really? We are ytalking about a legitimate ace who was trade for a Mookie Betts level player ++ just 4 months ago. And now a fair price for him is a good field SS who was overmatched at AAA, plus a lower prospect or two
I guess maybe that makes sense if you tell me Oakland wants Cespedes back, and those guys are the guys going with him to Oakland. Otherwise it would seem that that deal needs a top to it, it needs a Swihart or an Owens at the top of it to make it even remotely competitive with what other teams will offer
List of FA SPs in 2016 (from: http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/09/2016-mlb-free-agents.html):
Starting Pitchers
Clay Buchholz (31) – $13MM club option with a $245K buyout
Mark Buehrle (37)
A.J. Burnett (39)
Trevor Cahill (28) – $13MM club option with a $300K buyout
Jhoulys Chacin (28)
Wei-Yin Chen (30)
Bartolo Colon (43)
Johnny Cueto (30)
Ross Detwiler (30)
R.A. Dickey (41) – $12MM club option with a $1MM buyout
Marco Estrada (32)
Doug Fister (32)
Yovani Gallardo (30)
Jaime Garcia (29) – $11.5MM club option with a $500K buyout
Jeremy Guthrie (37) – $10MM mutual option with a $3.2MM buyout
J.A. Happ (33)
Dan Haren (35)
Tim Hudson (40)
Hisashi Iwakuma (35)
Scott Kazmir (32)
Ian Kennedy (31)
John Lackey (37)
Mat Latos (28)
Mike Leake (28)
Tim Lincecum (32)
Kyle Lohse (37)
Corey Luebke (31) – $7.5MM club option with a $1.75MM buyout
Kris Medlen (30)
Bud Norris (31)
Ross Ohlendorf (33)
Mike Pelfrey (32)
Rick Porcello (27)
David Price (30)
Ricky Romero (31) – $13.1MM club option with a $600K buyout
Jeff Samardzija (31)
Alfredo Simon (35)
Jerome Williams (34)
Jordan Zimmermann (30)
Some interesting name on that list for sure. Price, Zimmerman, Shark, Cueto, Latos, Fister.
Starting Pitchers
Clay Buchholz (31) – $13MM club option with a $245K buyout
Mark Buehrle (37)
A.J. Burnett (39)
Trevor Cahill (28) – $13MM club option with a $300K buyout
Jhoulys Chacin (28)
Wei-Yin Chen (30)
Bartolo Colon (43)
Johnny Cueto (30)
Ross Detwiler (30)
R.A. Dickey (41) – $12MM club option with a $1MM buyout
Marco Estrada (32)
Doug Fister (32)
Yovani Gallardo (30)
Jaime Garcia (29) – $11.5MM club option with a $500K buyout
Jeremy Guthrie (37) – $10MM mutual option with a $3.2MM buyout
J.A. Happ (33)
Dan Haren (35)
Tim Hudson (40)
Hisashi Iwakuma (35)
Scott Kazmir (32)
Ian Kennedy (31)
John Lackey (37)
Mat Latos (28)
Mike Leake (28)
Tim Lincecum (32)
Kyle Lohse (37)
Corey Luebke (31) – $7.5MM club option with a $1.75MM buyout
Kris Medlen (30)
Bud Norris (31)
Ross Ohlendorf (33)
Mike Pelfrey (32)
Rick Porcello (27)
David Price (30)
Ricky Romero (31) – $13.1MM club option with a $600K buyout
Jeff Samardzija (31)
Alfredo Simon (35)
Jerome Williams (34)
Jordan Zimmermann (30)
Some interesting name on that list for sure. Price, Zimmerman, Shark, Cueto, Latos, Fister.
BigMike said:
Not exactly; The A's also got a half-season of Jason Hammel when they were clearly pushing all the chips into the middle of the table; I think you can argue that Beane paid a premium for that that he can't expect to recoup.
It still looks like teams are really not willing to deal top prospects for rentals, so I'm not so sure the market for Shark will be quite so robust, especially as lots of teams feel like they have pitching but are looking for offense. If you think that Beane is looking for a SS, then it's more a matter of who has a SS to deal that's close.This is not to say that such a package gets it done, but I don't think we'll see a "Mookie level" player moved for a rental because the years of control are too valuable.
To me there's a big difference between adding Swihart and Owens; I sort of think of all three of the upper level LHP as a bit interchangeable, and that depth would make me happy to add one along with Marerro as the basis of a deal where I keep Blake as essentially untouchable.
https://twitter.com/jared_carrabis/status/539562782354833408
Guy with direct knowledge of the ChiSox demands.
Seems a bit light, but seems like the trades being made right now are light on the return (Donaldson specifically).
If that's the return the White Sox are looking for, then make it happen, regardless of Lester. You go Lester - Sale as your 1-2? Goodnight, mail it in everyone else because this season is over.
Guy with direct knowledge of the ChiSox demands.
Seems a bit light, but seems like the trades being made right now are light on the return (Donaldson specifically).
If that's the return the White Sox are looking for, then make it happen, regardless of Lester. You go Lester - Sale as your 1-2? Goodnight, mail it in everyone else because this season is over.
Owens maybe, but you forget that Hammel came along with Shark and that Billy absolutely payed a premium so he could get Shark for those extra starts (I forgot the date but he got them well in advance of the deadline). I think he's worth more than suggested so far but less than Swihart, especially since he only has 1 season of control.BigMike said:
Why does everyone seem to forget that this was:BigMike said:
1) a midseason move, which carries a very hefty premium,
2) an early midseason move (early July), which makes the already hefty premium even more expensive, and
3) the A's also got Jason Hammel, who, while he didn't work out that well, at the time of the trade he had posted a 2.98/3.19/3.21 era/fip/xfip.
So the A's gave up Addison Russell, but they also got two top of the rotation arms (remember, just because Hammel didn't work out doesn't mean he wasn't an excellent pitcher prior to the trade, and the A's thought they were getting an excellent SP in him).
So, no, the return for Samardzija won't sniff what they gave up for him.
Marrero and Cecchini, perhaps with Brian Johnson would be very close to getting it done.
https://twitter.com/jared_carrabis/status/539565029386096640czar said:
https://twitter.com/jared_carrabis/status/539565029386096640
link to tweet
This was posted above in the thread, but he states specifically 'this is not my opinion', so the ChiSox want Owens and Betts as the center pieces. Now they can go a hundred different ways from there, but in terms of him having a direct knowledge of what they want, he certainly does have that in terms of the center pieces of the deal.
SoxFanForsyth said:
Again, Jared seems like a good guy, and I've followed him for a few years. But we have to get over this obsession that "one blogger said his sources said this so this so this." The world just went through this with Jake Wesley. What is more likely -- Twitter is driving people to latch on every single rumor or that tens-to-hundreds of bloggers with previously no revealed connections to MLB suddenly have developed inside sources providing information to them rather than the Ken Rosenthals and Buster Olneys of the world.
It's very likely in hypothetical world, the White Sox would ask for a package including two (or more) of the Red Sox top five prospects. That is not surprising (nor news) so it's possible Jared was just saying "this seems like common knowledge that Sale is going to cost a metric ton, it is stupid to think otherwise" and it is being construed as "the Red Sox are having discussions about Chris Sale and I have a direct source to the negotiations."
SoxFanForsyth said:
A half season of Samardzija and Jason Hammels does not account for the difference between Addison Russell and a package like Marrero, Cecchini and Brian Johnson. The Red Sox are not getting away with sending out a package that doesn't even include a top 50 prospect.
https://twitter.com/jared_carrabis/status/539565029386096640SoxFanForsyth said:
link to tweet
This was posted above in the thread, but he states specifically 'this is not my opinion', so the ChiSox want Owens and Betts as the center pieces. Now they can go a hundred different ways from there, but in terms of him having a direct knowledge of what they want, he certainly does have that in terms of the center pieces of the deal.
Great. He's a blogger. It's a well received blog and he's certainly more connected than the average blogger. But he's a blogger. Citing him saying he has a source with direct knowledge doesn't end the discussion about whether he has direct knowledge or not, and even if he has a source feeding him information, that doesn't mean it's accurate.
Edit: Plus czar makes a great point about how to interpret what he's saying in the first place.
Chris Sale…..guy is unbelievable.
2012 (24): 192.0 ip, 3.05 era, 3.27 fip, 140 era+, 1.14 whip, 9.0 k/9
2013 (25): 214.1 ip, 3.07 era, 3.17 fip, 137 era+, 1.07 whip, 9.5 k/9
2014 (26): 174.0 ip, 2.17 era, 2.57 fip, 178 era+, 0.97 whip, 10.8 k/9
His contract:
2015: 6.0 m
2016: 9.1 m
2017: 12.0 m
2018: 12.5 m (team option)
2019: 13.5 m (team option)
The Sox could have perhaps the best SP in the AL (in the conversation with Felix) for 5 years for a grand total of $53.1 million. Sign Lester for an insane amount of money. Trade Cespedes+ for Porcello. Your rotation then becomes: Sale, Lester, Porcello, Buchholz, Kelly.
Yeah, that would work.
2012 (24): 192.0 ip, 3.05 era, 3.27 fip, 140 era+, 1.14 whip, 9.0 k/9
2013 (25): 214.1 ip, 3.07 era, 3.17 fip, 137 era+, 1.07 whip, 9.5 k/9
2014 (26): 174.0 ip, 2.17 era, 2.57 fip, 178 era+, 0.97 whip, 10.8 k/9
His contract:
2015: 6.0 m
2016: 9.1 m
2017: 12.0 m
2018: 12.5 m (team option)
2019: 13.5 m (team option)
The Sox could have perhaps the best SP in the AL (in the conversation with Felix) for 5 years for a grand total of $53.1 million. Sign Lester for an insane amount of money. Trade Cespedes+ for Porcello. Your rotation then becomes: Sale, Lester, Porcello, Buchholz, Kelly.
Yeah, that would work.
The comparison between Bogaerts and Betts is interesting. Even if I were to agree with the relative evaluation, I would consider the reverberation for the Sox. Giving up Betts leaves us with plenty of outfielders. Giving up Bogaerts leaves us with Ramirez with a backup of Marrero. I would really like to keep both of these guys and give up more pitching. However, if getting Sale means giving up one of the B-boys, I would sadly say - give up Betts.ivanvamp said:
mfried said:
I hear you. Position-wise, it makes more sense to move Betts. Though I suppose you could just play Hanley at SS, even though he isn't a very good SS anymore. His bat still makes him very valuable there. And that opens a spot in the OF for Betts again. Again, it would be very, very, very tough for me to watch Betts blossom into McCutchen for some other team.
Then again, it would be very, very, very nice to watch Chris Sale compete for the CYA each of the next 5 seasons at relative bargain basement prices.
ivanvamp said:
This is why I find it hard to believe he's really available and not just "knock our heads off with an absurd offer" available. If you had Sale at that contract, would you trade him for anything shy of Betts, Bogaerts and Owens? And why would you sign Adam LaRoche? The Sale talk just doesn't make sense from Chicago's side unless they're worried about his arm.
I absolutely do not want to give up either Betts or Bogaerts. It's a hitting starved world, and those guys will rake. However... Chris Sale is a currently inexpensive, cost-controlled, young, proven ace. With the offense added in Ramirez, Sandoval, and Castillo (and even, possibly/hopefully Craig), I think you HAVE to consider dealing one of those guys and pitching prospects for Sale. He's one of a very few number of top of the rotation guys I'd consider dealing one of the B's for (with the inexpensive/cost-controlled part distinguishing him from guys like Kershaw and Felix).
Edit: And I agree with others that Chicago would be stupid to trade Sale, unless (a) his medicals are worrisome AND (b) they get a killer return for him.
Edit: And I agree with others that Chicago would be stupid to trade Sale, unless (a) his medicals are worrisome AND (b) they get a killer return for him.
If Chris Sale is really available I can't think of why the Cubs wouldn't be involved other than the fact they are both Chicago teams.
They have an in-his-prime SS with a great contract in Castro and many top level assets. They're one of the few teams who could trump a Red Sox offer.
They have an in-his-prime SS with a great contract in Castro and many top level assets. They're one of the few teams who could trump a Red Sox offer.
Puffy said:
Jared Carrabis is claiming there is dialogue (above), and I've seen speculation from both Cafardo and Edes a while back, though it was not directly tied to any sources.
It doesn't make any sense to me, clearly Chicago is looking to contend. But an Edes mention and new rumors makes me think there is at least a faint whiff of smoke. If so--if--you'd have to think it's being pushed from Ben trying to bowl them over.
http://tinyurl.com/qzzcbop
"Or, should Boston choose, put together a package for White Sox left-hander Chris Sale. Or -- don't laugh -- perhaps both."
http://tinyurl.com/lfeakac
"5. One NL GM said Mookie Betts might be the most “mentioned name” in trade talks this offseason. The GM said Betts would be the main piece in any deal for a front-line starting pitcher, such as Chris Sale, Cole Hamels, or Jonny Cueto."
There is no way the White Sox are trading Sale who has the best non Trout contract in baseball.
diehard24 said:
To clarify, I've not known Edes to wishcast, which is what makes me think there could have been something there.
I pretty much don't want to trade Betts, Bogaerts, or Swihart for anything and I really don't care what that makes me.
I just have this image in my mind of the three of them breaking Papi's record of four rings with the Sox.
I just have this image in my mind of the three of them breaking Papi's record of four rings with the Sox.
mfried said:
Sanchez is 31 YOs and has yet to throw 200 IP in a season while having 53/3 left on his contract. Also the Tigers rather trade Porcello.
Well the NL GM must be Amaro, because nobody else could realistically believe that Betts would be dealt for Hamels or for one year of Cueto.diehard24 said:
Gash Prex said:
Positional redundancy aside (lots of outfield options and Pedey at 2nd), I'd rather hold on to Betts than Bogaerts. To me, the biggest strike against Bogaerts is the fact that he's repped by Boras. Bora's track record indicates that there's essentially a zero percent chance of any contract extensions with Bogaerts (especially if he blossoms).
Dave Cameron did an interesting piece on why the Sox shouldn't deal Betts (in which he mentions Sale): http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/just-a-bit-outside/story/mookie-betts-boston-red-sox-trade-092414
Salient point: "Pitchers are nice until they break." If the Pale Hose are seriously considering moving Sale, one needs to question how close to the "breaking" point do they believe him to be.
One of the things that have bugged me about this board this off-season is the notion that the Sox are going to give up a top three prospect (plus) for the likes of Cueto or Zimmerman or Shark.
There's just no way one year of any of these Ace caliber pitchers is worth any prospect generally considered to be valued between 30 and 50 million. It's not the Player they are acquiring but the contract. So I wish people would stop thinking about trading the farm for Johnny CuetoIII and instead think of trading for 4 WAR. It puts things into better perspective. I mean, there's a pretty good chance Betts does that this year alone.
This is not a mid season deal where options are very limited.
[Edit: OnWisc beat me to it]
There's just no way one year of any of these Ace caliber pitchers is worth any prospect generally considered to be valued between 30 and 50 million. It's not the Player they are acquiring but the contract. So I wish people would stop thinking about trading the farm for Johnny CuetoIII and instead think of trading for 4 WAR. It puts things into better perspective. I mean, there's a pretty good chance Betts does that this year alone.
This is not a mid season deal where options are very limited.
[Edit: OnWisc beat me to it]
Rasputin, on 02 Dec 2014 - 11:29 AM, said:
2. There are plenty of other trade opportunities that SHOULDN'T require Betts, Bogaerts, or Swihart. Sale is great, but I think we can deal from positions of strength to get pitching, rather than trade key pieces of our future.
ex. See what it would take to get Latos from Cinci (I think Cueto is unrealistic, but if he is available, him first). Would Cespedes and one of our young, ML-ready arms (Ranaudo, Workman, Webster) get it done?
What about Ross or Cashner from SD? That shouldn't require 1 of our top 3. Again, they need offense, so would Cespedes and a couple B prospects be enough?
Obviously there are rumors of Cespedes to Detroit. Not loving Porcello, but it is another possibility that Ben can consider.
Cespedes for Iwakuma?
Marrero, Coyle, and one of the ML-ready arms for Shark? Brentz also seems like an Oakland type player that Beane may be interested in.
I would even give up Owens, Marrero (to eventually replace Rollins), another non-top 10 prospect + a lottery ticket for Hamels
If we make 1 trade, we have
1. Lester
2. Trade Candidate
3. Buchholz
4. Kelly
5. Young arm (de la Rosa?)
We could even make 2 of those trades, using our 2 best trade commodities (Cespedes and prospect depth), and it wouldn't diminish our farm system.
1. Lester
2. Prospect trade candidate - Hamels if RAJ ever realizes he isn't getting Betts, Swihart and Owens in the same deal.
3. Cespedes trade candidate
4. Buchholz
5. Kelly
De La Rosa goes to the bullpen where his power arm might play up better than the rotation. I think these trade proposals are all realistic. Obviously none of us are ML GMs, but they are at least in the ballpark. May need to add a piece or tweak something. Bottom line, there should be plenty of opportunities to improve the rotation to championship caliber without trading away Betts, Bogaerts or Swihart (and maybe not even Owens).
1. Sign Lester. It is only money. He has proven he can pitch here, he can be happy here, he can carry a team in the postseason, and he can stay healthy. Not a guarantee for future health, but what is?Rasputin said:
2. There are plenty of other trade opportunities that SHOULDN'T require Betts, Bogaerts, or Swihart. Sale is great, but I think we can deal from positions of strength to get pitching, rather than trade key pieces of our future.
ex. See what it would take to get Latos from Cinci (I think Cueto is unrealistic, but if he is available, him first). Would Cespedes and one of our young, ML-ready arms (Ranaudo, Workman, Webster) get it done?
What about Ross or Cashner from SD? That shouldn't require 1 of our top 3. Again, they need offense, so would Cespedes and a couple B prospects be enough?
Obviously there are rumors of Cespedes to Detroit. Not loving Porcello, but it is another possibility that Ben can consider.
Cespedes for Iwakuma?
Marrero, Coyle, and one of the ML-ready arms for Shark? Brentz also seems like an Oakland type player that Beane may be interested in.
I would even give up Owens, Marrero (to eventually replace Rollins), another non-top 10 prospect + a lottery ticket for Hamels
If we make 1 trade, we have
1. Lester
2. Trade Candidate
3. Buchholz
4. Kelly
5. Young arm (de la Rosa?)
We could even make 2 of those trades, using our 2 best trade commodities (Cespedes and prospect depth), and it wouldn't diminish our farm system.
1. Lester
2. Prospect trade candidate - Hamels if RAJ ever realizes he isn't getting Betts, Swihart and Owens in the same deal.
3. Cespedes trade candidate
4. Buchholz
5. Kelly
De La Rosa goes to the bullpen where his power arm might play up better than the rotation. I think these trade proposals are all realistic. Obviously none of us are ML GMs, but they are at least in the ballpark. May need to add a piece or tweak something. Bottom line, there should be plenty of opportunities to improve the rotation to championship caliber without trading away Betts, Bogaerts or Swihart (and maybe not even Owens).
Bugs the crap out of me too and I mentioned it in the Harper thread. It's not just that these guys are good prospects, it's that they are 21 or 22 years old and may chomp at the bit to have some of their arbitration years bought out so they end up like a Chris Sale and hit free agency at age 30. It's really hard to be that good that young and not want to make 5 million dollars as quickly as possible.BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Bogaerts probably won't do that because of Boras but they have 3 other high ceiling guys like Betts, Swihart, Owens who are at top 25 prospect level (A-/B+) or better and are ready now. It's not Red Sox prospect bias, it's national top 100 prospect lists. Giving up even one of those guys is a huge overpay for a rental and you have to think about and break it down a lot more closely for Sale to give up two of them. Fister was two years out of free agency and the Nats got him for bupkus. The Red Sox could pay that cost 3 times over without giving up the farm.
The Red Sox can reach Sale's value with a lot of different combinations, it's just meeting Chicago's on field needs that could be the problem.
Gash Prex said:
Betts has a career major league slash line of 291/368/444 over 213 plate appearances.
Bogaerts had a career slash line (including the playoffs) of 287/377/436 over 342 plate appearances before his mid season slump began.
The argument for Betts being some kind of proven commodity that we can bank on going forward is more than a little thin. Yes, he has better contact skills than Bogaerts, doesn't strike out as much, and provides additional value beyond his bat, and no I'm not arguing he's due for a similar slump to what Bogaerts struggled through in 2014, but we need to pump the brakes a little with Mookie. He's an incredibly talented young player and has a ton of promise. I'm really excited about him and I really hope we get to see him fulfill that promise in Boston. I'm not convinced he's going to be the better player between him and Bogaerts, though.
Mookie might end up nearly as valuable, but his bat just doesn't have the ceiling that Xander's does because he lacks the power to be a 30 home run threat. Considering the difficulty in finding right handed power bats these days in MLB, Mookie needs to make up a ton of ground on the bases and in the field to catch up. And no, Bogaerts isn't a 30 home run hitter yet, but Mookie isn't a 4 win player yet, either. It's all just projection at this point because 213 major league plate appearances is a really small sample to be betting on.
Edit: This is worthy of its own thread. I'm going to start one up, so if you are going to reply to this, it's probably worth holding on a few minutes.
https://twitter.com/marino_pepen/status/539885706286739457
Again, Google translate didn't translste this one very well, anyone able to help?
My understanding is that the Sox are preparing to pursue SP on the trade market and that Betts and Bogaerts will not be involved. Can anyone confirm? Also, does this have any tea leaves for the Lester move?
As a side note, I'm kind of forcing myself to get more comfortable with a Samardzija - Shields - McCarthy - Kelly - Buchholz rotation.
Again, Google translate didn't translste this one very well, anyone able to help?
My understanding is that the Sox are preparing to pursue SP on the trade market and that Betts and Bogaerts will not be involved. Can anyone confirm? Also, does this have any tea leaves for the Lester move?
As a side note, I'm kind of forcing myself to get more comfortable with a Samardzija - Shields - McCarthy - Kelly - Buchholz rotation.
ATTENTION prepares plan changes #RedSox looking for starting pitching , preliminarily it is said that Betts and Bogaerts , are not in the package.
That's the google translate
I would go with
Red Sox prepare change of plans looking for starting pitching preliminary it is said that Betts and Bogaerts are not in..
That's the google translate
I would go with
Red Sox prepare change of plans looking for starting pitching preliminary it is said that Betts and Bogaerts are not in..
SoxFanForsyth said:
I have no issue with that rotation whatsoever (besides a lack of LHP).
Samardzjia is closer to Lester than one would think, and has better stuff. Groundball pitcher, premium velocity, awesome splitter.
Shields is a workhorse.
McCarthy is good, I like his control. Also generates a good amount of groundballs, Health risk. I'd rather a LHP in his spot, albeit. Not really much on the market. Liriano or Anderson? Meh.
Kelly has upside. Great velocity, generates weak contact. Like to see better control and/or K's.
Buchholz is an enigma. If he's your fifth starter you're probably going to do alright.
jimbobim said:
That Marino Pepen guys seems to tweet a lot, but most of his tweets have zero substance. The news would be if Betts/Bogaerts were in play.
I'm also fine with a Samardzjia/Shields/Buchholz/Kelly/McCarthy rotation. Not perfect, but solid enough to get started.
NJ_Sox_Fan said:
To be fair we also heard this kind of stuff repeatedly with Lackey when he was signed and that turned out ok. Yes there was the pitching hurt year that he was terrible and no one here knew he was hurt, but he redeemed himself quite nicely in 2013. It's a lot easier to root for assholes when they're YOUR assholes.
NJSF, I am with you on Shields. He has the sort of douchey face that makes me want to drive my fist through it until it explodes through the back of his skull. And he's faux ace who will command ace or near-ace money.
If the Sox miss out on Lester and settle on Shields, the hatred most directed undeservingly on the gutty John Lackey will be dwarfed by that I will direct at the fraud who calls himself "Big Game James" should he ever defile a Red Sox uniform.
If the Sox miss out on Lester and settle on Shields, the hatred most directed undeservingly on the gutty John Lackey will be dwarfed by that I will direct at the fraud who calls himself "Big Game James" should he ever defile a Red Sox uniform.