In a heartbeat. But it's not enough.67WasBest said:What about Bogaerts, Cespedes and Cecchini for Sonny Gray and Shark? Would you do it?
67WasBest said:What about Bogaerts, Cespedes and Cecchini for Sonny Gray and Shark? Would you do it?
Right now? Fuck yeah Sonny Gray > Xander. Over the course of their careers, it's a tougher call. Personally, I'm with you. I have trouble trading a talented everyday player for a pitcher.sackamano said:You think Sonny Gray > Xander Bogaerts? Tough one.
I'll take the everyday player.
Yes your right they sent Smith to SD. That leaves Gentry. It may be an upgrade adding Cespedes but I'm not sure that is the direction Oakland is going. Based I what I've been reading BB is trying to address the loss of Lowrie. He may come back around for OF but I think he's using Samardzija to get a SS, thus the White Sox reporting on a potential trade.sackamano said:Who is this Smith? Are you speaking of the pitcher Murphy Smith? Or, are you referring to Seth Smith, who is with the Padres?
In terms of the A's Of ... Crisp, Reddick and Moss could use an upgrade.
This should probably be its own topic, because there's a lot to talk about.67WasBest said:I have a weird feeling they will deal Bogaerts for an ace. If not this offseason, then before next year.
They have what they hope Xander becomes in Hanley. Let him play SS, and if Marrero is ready next year, move him to 1B. By locking down that second rotation spot with such a ballplayer, their kid pitchers can ease in as back of the rotation guys, and their host of position players are trying to fill 1B and maybe a corner OF spot. Sure beats going into next year seeking another #2 guy. Giving away Xander is tough, but obtaining an ace would ease overall roster management and a step worth taking in my opinion.
If we follow the A's trend, that being potentially "younger/cheaper" and how BB works then Kazmir and Shark would be what he would want to trade. I believe Gray is more in tune with how things are shaking out in Oakland in that he is cheap and controllable. They'd need and arm to replace the losses in the rotation. What arm would the Sox want to trade? Would the Sox really want Kazmir? Would Kazmir survive in Boston? Not sure I'd want to go with this trade.67WasBest said:What about Bogaerts, Cespedes and Cecchini for Sonny Gray and Shark? Would you do it?
None of this is wrong, I absolutely agree with it. I just think that Xander's season absolutely tanked his trade value.chawson said:Thinking we should note that trading a stud SS prospect like Hanley for an ace in 2005 is not analogous to trading a stud SS prospect like Bogaerts for an ace today. Bogaerts is worth far more in this environment.
It was a lot harder to get an "ace" back when we traded for Beckett. Only 40 qualified starting pitchers had an xFIP under 4.00 over 2003-2005. From 2012-2014, there were 80 of those.
Not saying Hanley and Bogaerts are the same player, or that they'll have the same value over their careers. But the marginal value of a run is a lot more nowadays. Standout hitters are worth more.
So in the abstract, team needs aside, Bogaerts should very easily bring back Sonny Gray. Recall that Dave Cameron had Bogaerts had #23 in the league in his trade value rankings (Gray was #31).
Yeah, this.Minneapolis Millers said:Anything's possible and few players are really untouchable. But the Sox can go out and buy 2 good pitchers without trading anyone, let alone their 22 year old potential All Star SS. They'll also be able to get a guy like Ross or Shark for < Bogaerts. They have almost no reason to do anything stupid and desperate.
Absent actual intel suggesting t h st ARE talking X trades, let's leave him out of our rank speculations. He's going to be raking in Fenway for the next decade plus if we're lucky.
This times ten. Dealing Bogaerts now would be, IMO, incredibly reckless and desperate. This isn't necessary at all right now and I suspect, what with all we've heard about Xander and how long we've heard it from BC et al, they remain high on him.Rasputin said:Yeah, this.
We're not trading Bogaerts, they're not trading Gray.
We're two starting pitchers and a lefty reliever from having a hell of a ballclub. Lets not fuck it up.
67WasBest said:Perhaps the no trade group has a stronger point. At least by this blurb they are:
“[E]very organization now thinks it has pitching,” says an NL executive. “Maybe not as much as the Mets, but more than in the past. No one can find bats. I just think the teams with bats are king right now.” Here are more notes from the National League.
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/
So you would have rather have given up pretty good prospects and someone equitable to Lowrie for Donaldson? The two top hitters on the market played 3rd Base! I assume that you're in favor of trading for an ace rather than resigning Lester if that's the case.Wingack said:
Toronto was able to find a bat. And that was for a price a lot of teams could have met.
This keeps getting repeated but I do not believe it to be true. Lowrie has been a solid regular when healthy, at an age in which being solid is often a precursor to being excellent. It's true that he has had trouble staying on the field and he hasn't lived up to his debut, but he is only 25. He has upside.Wingack said:Toronto was able to find a bat. And that was for a price a lot of teams could have met.
Agreed, especially considering the Red Sox may already have a young stud in RF named Mookie Betts.I definitely wouldn't trade X for an ace in this pitching environment, and trading him seems ridiculous to me short of a young stud RF (Harper).
This thread is going to look ridiculous in June.
dewystoetap said:If X is the piece that gets Cole I do it. I don't love it, but pitching is a glaring need.
The formerSoxFanForsyth said:Is this just a hypothetical thread or had there been legitimate chatter about a Sox/A's deal involving these players?
I would assume Hanley plays SS until Marrero is ready in 2016. But that idea is horrible to me.MakMan44 said:So to get the ball rolling in a different direction....assuming Hanley plays LF even after a Xander trade, who plays SS?
I heard that Stephen Drew is a free agentMakMan44 said:So to get the ball rolling in a different direction....assuming Hanley plays LF even after a Xander trade, who plays SS?
MakMan44 said:Kluber for Xander would be nuts even though it makes a decent amount of sense for both sides.
I would like to see both actually. I understand the upside and potential, but I don't see X sticking at SS and 3B/LF are blocked. Marrero is close and we are cost controlled at C, RF, and bullpen, as well as reasonable deals at 2B and if things workout CF. Nap, Victorino, and Cespedes come off the books next year. I love homegrown prospects as much as anyone, but sometimes you have to trade "potential" for a proven talent.snowmanny said:I assume that means you'd offer Lester 5/160 minimum*, because I see Bogaerts as worth at least $50Million over his salary the next five years, and I see Lester as at least equal to Hamels.
*I realize there are luxury cap implications that make 5/160 more problematic than 5/110, but I believe the point still stands.
I'd have to double check his numbers but I think he's going to need at least another season in AAA. When he's ready Xander could slid over to 3rd because it's not like Lonnie is anything special over there. I don't think it's actually going to happen, but I do think it makes sense for both sides.Danny_Darwin said:
Why would Cleveland want a young shortstop? Does Lindor profile better elsewhere?
sackamano said:A lot of the mystery here comes down to how well Xander is going able to handle the SS position defensively.
It seems with the Sandoval and Ramirez signings, there's nowhere but SS for him to play with the Red Sox.
MakMan44 said:Kluber for Xander would be nuts even though it makes a decent amount of sense for both sides.
You could say the same thing about Dickey. Realistically, it's not going to happen but it's the only ace that I think a deal could actually make sense for both sides.grimshaw said:If Hanley Ramirez has stuck at SS all this time,why can't Bogaerts? Does anyone think he'll be appreciably worse? IMO at 22, he still has room for improvement and think he'll have a few years in the field of improvement provided he doesn't get a lot bigger.
I just don't see either GM calling up the other with the intent to move their guy. The Indians were 85-77 last year. They're a piece or two away from contention. Why move their Cy Young? Makes no sense to me at all.
MakMan44 said:In the scenario where the Sox whiff on Max and Lester, what happens then? They're going to need to trade for that level of pitcher and we have no clue what it'll actually take to get Hamels. Trading Xander isn't plan A, B, or C, obviously.
Shields maybe, but none of those other names are like to put up Ace like numbers including all of in house options. I'd rather they sign Lester too, it's why I think they should go 7 years but if they don't, it's a big gamble to go into next season with a question mark at the #1 spot.Devizier said:
Make offers to Shields and/or Kuroda? Take a flier on a gamble like Josh Johnson or Brett Anderson?
Not an ideal scenario, but those guys could be useful on short contracts. The Sox have enough depth at SP to take some chances. I would rather see them sign Lester or Scherzer.
Bless you.Rasputin said:Except for the fact that it DOESN'T MAKE SENSE FOR THE RED SOX.
Jesus people, let's not start making holes in the lineup when we don't need to.
There are free agent pitchers. We have money to spend. Let's go get some pitchers.
And not fuck up the team in the process.