Buying for 2015 alone seems like a bad risk reward proposition but with arguably seven spots in the lineup locked down with current players through at least 2016 (Betts, X, Pedroia, Hanley, Sandoval and I'm including Ortiz and Swihart/Vasquez although they are arguable) trading position prospects for young vet pitching strategically makes some sense to me even if this year remains an uphill battle.
What About Buying?
- Thread starter Rasputin
- Start date
My opinion is that the Sox should:
- wait until closer to the deadline,
- see what sort of position they are in, and
- IF it seems like they can feasibly climb into the playoffs over the final two months of the season,
- look for a affordable way to make an upgrade or two.
Just for tracking purposes: 31-40 on June 21. Have gone 8-5 in the 13 since. I originally thought they would need to go 12-6 before the break, they would have to go 4-1 this week to meet that. 3-2 is probably more likely but we'll see.
Byrdbrain said:
Anyone who watched Kyle Weilland take the bump five times down the stretch in 2011 should know all too well the difference between having Peavy and not having Peavy in 2013. Regardless what Iglesias does with his opportunity in Detroit, it was a deal that absolutely had to be done.
That being said, 2015 is a whole 'nuther kettle of fish. There's no one magic bullet to improve this team's woeful baserunning, white-knuckle pitching, and lack of good basic fundamentals.
It's not going to cost nearly that much.BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
-Chapman is going to make a lot of money next year in arbitration (north of 10 million I would guess), so he is essentially a rental or a very overpaid closer.
-Cespedes was the return for Lester, and Cespedes wasn't some low cost top prospect.
The money has to add up, unless there is some sort of desperation factor (the Orioles last year).
I don't think they would need a blue chipper to get it done. Nor do I think the Sox would be interested in a GFIN move with a less than 20% chance of even reaching the playoffs.
Edit - found this article after the post discussing what the price could be. http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/just-a-bit-outside/story/cincinnati-reds-johnny-cueto-aroldis-chapman-trade-052215
Aroldis Chapman would not be overpaid if he made $10M next year. Since taking over as a closer, he's been worth ~2.5 WAR per season. Assuming ~$7M per WAR, that's an expected salary of $18M.
Cueto will probably require at least one, prospect that will hurt to let go of, along the lines of a Margot+Marrero+a GCL/Lowell/Greenville lotto ticket.
Cueto will probably require at least one, prospect that will hurt to let go of, along the lines of a Margot+Marrero+a GCL/Lowell/Greenville lotto ticket.
Sheez, and I thought I was the optimist on this board.
It only makes sense to "buy" for 2015 if you're one or two pieces away from a championship-caliber team. But that's not what we have. The bullpen is atrocious, and we only have two reliable starters (plus maybe Miley on a good day). The offense may finally be above-average now, but that's only been true for about a month. Even if that continues, are they good enough to carry a weak pitching staff? I don't see it.
Maybe they are one-or-two pieces away from being a playoff team, but that only gives us a 10% chance of winning the World Series. There are too many glaring weaknesses to see the odds any higher than that.
Trading away prospects just for a 10% chance only makes sense if the window is closing and it's our last shot at a title before several years of suck. In my opinion, it's the exact opposite situation: the team has tons of young, improving talent, and they'll be in excellent position to contend for the next few years.
Better to hoard resources now and build for 2016 and beyond.
It only makes sense to "buy" for 2015 if you're one or two pieces away from a championship-caliber team. But that's not what we have. The bullpen is atrocious, and we only have two reliable starters (plus maybe Miley on a good day). The offense may finally be above-average now, but that's only been true for about a month. Even if that continues, are they good enough to carry a weak pitching staff? I don't see it.
Maybe they are one-or-two pieces away from being a playoff team, but that only gives us a 10% chance of winning the World Series. There are too many glaring weaknesses to see the odds any higher than that.
Trading away prospects just for a 10% chance only makes sense if the window is closing and it's our last shot at a title before several years of suck. In my opinion, it's the exact opposite situation: the team has tons of young, improving talent, and they'll be in excellent position to contend for the next few years.
Better to hoard resources now and build for 2016 and beyond.
The problem I have with dealing for Cueto is, while I think Margot is expendable (as in not the nigh-untouchable level I'd put Swihart, Betts and Bogaerts at), and I wouldn't hesitate moving him in the right deal, but I'm not comfortable moving him for two months of any pitcher. I'd want at least one full season of control beyond this one. Could try to trade and sign Cueto, but he might not be open to it, and I'd want to see what he does in Boston before giving him big bucks. Would hate to have him get a six or seven year extension in August and then Porcello all over himself.jscola85 said:
I'd rather go all in on Sale or Gray, but that's probably a pipe dream. Barring guys like that, maybe a guy like Iwakuma, Lackey, Peavy, Nomo... Just throwing names around that pop into my mind, solid mid-
rotation guys.
Edit: Regarding Hamels, the most I'd give up for him is agreeing to take on his and Papelbon's contracts, and maybe some low-A lotto ticket. They should be happy to get anything for that kind of contract relief. Too bad someone will give them far more. Glad it won't be us.
There's really no reason not to shore up the bullpen. We are blowing games now because we're giving important innings to the Noe Ramirezes of the organization, and if we get back into the race, we'll be sorry if we exhaust our decent relievers.
I can't imagine Milwaukee would need that much for Will Smith, who would be an upgrade over Layne as the 7th/8th LRL guy (and Layne, of course, would be a MASSIVE upgrade over Breslow as the 2nd lefty). I can't imagine Arizona would be sad to be rid of Brad Ziegler's contract -- he'd bump Ogando back to the 6th inning where he belongs.
I can't imagine Milwaukee would need that much for Will Smith, who would be an upgrade over Layne as the 7th/8th LRL guy (and Layne, of course, would be a MASSIVE upgrade over Breslow as the 2nd lefty). I can't imagine Arizona would be sad to be rid of Brad Ziegler's contract -- he'd bump Ogando back to the 6th inning where he belongs.
Philly is not cash-strapped. They don't need teams to offload payroll - they need prospects to refill their rebuilding effort in the farm system.
As for wanting a pitcher with 1.5 years of control, the pickings are slim for 2017 free agent starters. Gio Gonzalez / Stephen Strasburg (on a contender), Jon Niese, Ivan Nova (not happening), and Edinson Volquez. Sonny Gray isn't even arb-eligible until 2017. The White Sox would probably want something like Betts, Swihart, Devers and Kopech to get Sale - even that might not be enough.
Unfortunately, the options for the Sox rotation upgrades via trade are either Hamels, expensive rentals or back-of-the-rotation filler, at least from my vantage point.
As for wanting a pitcher with 1.5 years of control, the pickings are slim for 2017 free agent starters. Gio Gonzalez / Stephen Strasburg (on a contender), Jon Niese, Ivan Nova (not happening), and Edinson Volquez. Sonny Gray isn't even arb-eligible until 2017. The White Sox would probably want something like Betts, Swihart, Devers and Kopech to get Sale - even that might not be enough.
Unfortunately, the options for the Sox rotation upgrades via trade are either Hamels, expensive rentals or back-of-the-rotation filler, at least from my vantage point.
I don't think they have as much breathing room to take on salary as some of you seem to think they do. They're just under the LT line right now, and they're likely to be cutting it close again next year unless they can get creative (or move a high-priced contract).
What I don't see being discussed a lot here, and what would probably be more reasonable than a trade for a starting pitcher, would be a trade for a 1B. Maybe they can find this year's version of what Salty was when they grabbed him at the 2010 deadline - a post-hype guy who doesn't really fit his team's plans. CJ Cron, maybe? Barring that, there is Adam Lind of the Milwaukee Brewers who has a cheap option for next year.
What I don't see being discussed a lot here, and what would probably be more reasonable than a trade for a starting pitcher, would be a trade for a 1B. Maybe they can find this year's version of what Salty was when they grabbed him at the 2010 deadline - a post-hype guy who doesn't really fit his team's plans. CJ Cron, maybe? Barring that, there is Adam Lind of the Milwaukee Brewers who has a cheap option for next year.
Will Smith would be awesome, but I can't imagine he'd be dirt cheap. He's under team control thru 2020 and is a lefty with big strikeout numbers who has also been really tough on righties this year (perhaps an aberration as righties hit him hard last year). In any event, his overall numbers have been excellent last few years- (especially this year and last year as he stopped giving up HR) but sure, if they can get him that'd be great. I just don't think he'd be super cheap.johnnywayback said:
I'd prefer a Burke Badenhop reunion to Ziegler, personally,
jscola85 said:
Andrew Cashner and Tyson Ross both fit the 1.5 years description, although I doubt San Diego is eager to sell either of them.
Why would we trade for a pitcher when Brian Johnson has done everything you can ask of a player to earn a call up, is 24, and has always been viewed as a very polished, high floor, guy?
If this club was within spitting distance of 1st today, with Pedroia coming back after the break and Betts/Bogaerts really turning it on I could see it (though they need bullpen help at least as much as SP help) but they aren't. If we're looking to improve the rotation on a last place club lets improve it with our own internal options first before giving up prospects to block other prospects.
If this club was within spitting distance of 1st today, with Pedroia coming back after the break and Betts/Bogaerts really turning it on I could see it (though they need bullpen help at least as much as SP help) but they aren't. If we're looking to improve the rotation on a last place club lets improve it with our own internal options first before giving up prospects to block other prospects.
No one is paying the cost in WAR for a closer right now though since it fluctuates so much.jscola85 said:
Miller got 9 mill per last year, coming off a 2.2 win season.
Kimbrel signed for 4yrs/42 in 2014, and even if the cost per win was only 6.5 then, then he would have been paid closer to 16-18. based on his 2-3 win per season over the past 4 seasons. Not to mention he would be overpaid this year.
Chapman is going to be more than 10 (probably more like 12) next year alone. I don't see the Red Sox rolling the dice for the pleasure of breaking the market.
Just because he could earn his 18 mill doesn't mean any team would be close to offering that due to the risk.
Stan Papi Was Framed said:
Another great idea. And if Smith is too dear for the Brewers to sell, there's always Neal Cotts, who per this (http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/whos-available-and-whos-not-from-the-brewers-b99526821z1-310376871.html) is extremely available, and who, if not an 8th-inning guy, would still be a huge upgrade over Breslow.
Point is, they should upgrade the bullpen ASAP, as a completely separate calculation from whether they should try to fix the rotation from within, try to fix it cheaply by trading for Jorge de la Rosa, or try to fix it expensively by trading for Sonny Gray.
fully agreed--the bullpen cries out for an upgrade, and it shouldn't be hard to improve on Breslow/Ross/Barnes. I have no idea how/why Breslow is still on the team. Cotts's contract is just $3MM -- would be nice to get him for a mid-level prospect or lottery ticket if that would work.johnnywayback said:
I'd like to see how close we are to a playoff spot come deadline. I'm not opposed to trading for Cueto as long as we can extend him before he hits free agency, otherwise I'd pass. Hamels doesn't excite me as much since he's older than Cueto and won't cost that much less. I'd rather pay $40M extra for Cueto instead of sending prospects for Hamels. Sonny Gray would be ideal, I'd include almost whatever it takes to get him. But Oakland would be absolutely insane to trade him. Not happening.
Drek717 said:
Johnson absolutely deserves a shot and as you note he's a high floor guy, but he's also a low ceiling guy. I think the banter in this thread is about acquiring a pitcher with a higher proven ceiling than Johnson is forecasted to reach, particularly right out of the chute. While IMO they're all pipe dreams, Gray and Sale are guys you don't mind blocking other prospects with if you can get them and have them be locked up for 3-4+ years.
I'm bullish on the idea of the team scraping their way into contention over the next 3-4 weeks, but I'm not so bullish on them reaching for a starter via trade at the deadline. The guys they rightly should be targeting won't be available (Gray, Sale, et al) and the guys that are likely available are essentially rentals that will be overpriced (Cueto et al). The market doesn't look all that favorable for a team that arguably needs to make multiple acquisitions just to get themselves into contention. If they can't get there with what they have, they shouldn't mortgage any part of the future to try to make it happen.
grimshaw said:
Kimbrel wasn't a free agent - if he were he would have bigger contract offers. Miller wasn't a "Proven CloserTM" and so he took a discount. Chapman is 27, throws harder than anyone in baseball and has been the picture of consistency as a closer. He'd almost certainly top what David Robertson got from the White Sox, which is far more applicable than Kimbrel or even Miller.
FWIW, Craig has cooled off at Pawtucket. http://www.milb.com/player/index.jsp?sid=t533&player_id=501800#/splits/R/hitting/2015/MINORS
Overall, Craig is crushing lefties, but doing little else - so he's Napoli redux.
Nava, traditionally a righty-killer, is just now playing in AAA with 3 AB.
(Interestingly, today's lineup at Pawtucket starts with Nava, Castillo, JBJ. Clearly they want Nava to get ABs. Perhaps a call-up/in-house help indication?)
Overall, Craig is crushing lefties, but doing little else - so he's Napoli redux.
Nava, traditionally a righty-killer, is just now playing in AAA with 3 AB.
(Interestingly, today's lineup at Pawtucket starts with Nava, Castillo, JBJ. Clearly they want Nava to get ABs. Perhaps a call-up/in-house help indication?)
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-pros-and-cons-of-adam-lind/
Dave Cameron mentions a familiar face today. How about Adam Lind?
He's a mediocre defender and can't hit lefties, but other than that he'd be a solid upgrade. Also he has a cheap option for next year, which should be a prerequisite for anyone they pick up, imo. The 1b market is a mountain of crap.
Dave Cameron mentions a familiar face today. How about Adam Lind?
He's a mediocre defender and can't hit lefties, but other than that he'd be a solid upgrade. Also he has a cheap option for next year, which should be a prerequisite for anyone they pick up, imo. The 1b market is a mountain of crap.
If called up, Brian Johnson is only 1/5th of a starting rotation, and he's an unproven commodity at the MLB level.Drek717 said:
Buchholz, Rodriguez and Miley are likely to remain in the rotation for the rest of the season barring them falling off drastically or getting injured. Porcello needs to figure his shit out and quick, because they can't keep running him out there in meaningful games if he's going to be the worst starting pitcher in baseball. Masterson and Kelly deserve nothing given their performances this season.
So while Johnson might be the answer to the Masterson/Kelly rotation spot, he might also fail in that role. And we might need a second answer for the Rick Porcello problem, at least for the stretch run of 2015.
If we were to land the fabled 1.5 years of control pitcher, we'd also enter 2016 with Buchholz, Porcello, Rodriguez, Miley, Pitcher X, Kelly, Johnson, Owens and Wright (9 guys) competing for 5 spots, which would be a perfectly cromulent problem to have, either allowing for strong rotation depth or even a trade to upgrade a position of need (1B, or maybe OF, bullpen, etc)
I can agree to that. He will make more than Robertson in the 2017 off-season.jscola85 said:
My larger point was that any team acquiring him would be paying him a chunk of change to keep him beyond this season, so expending a guy like Devers mentioned above would be rash.
We'll see in 4 weeks.
I would argue that his sustained success at both AA and AAA the last two seasons, throwing at a comparable rate to his AA stint so far in AAA (more K/9, comparable BB/9, little higher H/9). This isn't Michael Bowden where his K/9 dropped significantly and his BB/9 jumped significantly when moving to AAA. At this point his ceiling looks like solid #2 starter material.Red(s)HawksFan said:
If we could land someone with multiple years of control? Sure. The Sale/Gray hypotheticals aren't the problem. It's the notion of giving up someone like Margot or Devers to rent Cueto for a season when the Sox are still last, still a half dozen games out, still holding another solid starting prospect in AAA, and still fielding black holes in the every day lineup.Hank Scorpio said:
Porcello is a problem, but they've committed too much money to him to walk away. They need to ride it just like they did with John Lackey and hope for comparable results. Buchholz, Miley, and Rodriguez are set. So Johnson is your 5th guy.
I'd rather see the club replace Masterson with Johnson and if his addition coupled with a healthy Pedroia and some kind of solution for 1B results in the club going on a big tear getting the club within close proximity to first in the division then it makes sense to entertain another starter and shelving Porcello, if he's still sucking, but I have a hard time seeing this club climb back in it without both Porcello turning it around and Johnson pitching well out of the gate, eliminating much of the need for another starter.
As though he was reading my mind, Dave Cameron wrote a column endorsing an Adam Lind trade for a contender, though he doesn't mention the Red Sox, likely since they're still closer to last place in the standings than to even the fringe contenders like Texas and Detroit.
Papelbon's Poutine said:
Only 2 teams in the AL are further away from the wild card than the Red Sox. Let's be realistic and let's have fun, but don't give up anything of value in order to make a mythical run. On the other hand, there's no player worth dumping that represents any value to another team. So let's just ride this out.
The wild card here is whether or not Cherington feels any pressure to get certain results by a specific time.geoduck no quahog said:
It's a huge problem in sports that the GM may feel a perverse incentive to do something that doesn't maximize the longbrunningeresfsmof the team out of fears about retaining his job. I'm concerned that some of the best strategies people have proposed for the Red Sox might not be viable for Cherington.
Ike Davis is another cheap option if we're looking at options at 1B who can't hit lefties. Both are below average defenders but not total butchers, neither can hit lefties. Davis has a 111 wRC+ for his career, Lind is at 113. Lind has hit much better the last 3 years but Davis would be perfectly functional and may cost very little to acquire.
This is why it's possible to come to the conclusion that a) Ben has done a fine job and b) he should still be fired. The GM is the baseball person primarily responsible for balancing the short- and long- term goals of the organization. If Cherington enters 2016 knowing a bad on-field MLB performance could cost him his job, his incentives are mis-aligned with the organization and they should probably go ahead and fire him.There is no Rev said:
Has Cherington made a move so far that suggests he's going into PanicWinNow Mode? He's not trading away prospects left and right to get "proven veterans", nor has he been shy to call up young players and give them a shot (Betts, Swihart, EdRod, and sounds like Johnson soon). He's also not digging his heels in on a guy like Castillo (to whom he gave $75M) - a guy in fear of his job might say he needs to give Rusney at bats in the majors to justify that he was worth the money that ownership spent.
Super Nomario said:
But if you're the one who can fire him and you think he's done a fine job, why would he enter 2016 thinking that a bad on-field performance could cost him his job? It's not like there's going to be a layoff for a reduction in staff that includes the GM.
Isn't the relationship between GM and owners one of advise and consent? The owners might blame Ben if they were not stats-literate and feel that he had presented them with bad info, but I bet these owners ran a lot of the numbers themselves and agreed with his choices. So there's probably egg on their faces as well.Rasputin said:
By the same token, if Ben C starts to make desperation moves, then its up to Henry & co to tell him to knock it off.
I'm guessing I'm in the majority in saying that I'm plenty happy buying, as long as the player in question is signed past this year. I cant imagine that answer changing much. If they were to go something like 13-6 over the remaining games it would still be a goofy idea to give up prospects for someone like Cueto.
The good news is that another half season has gone by and even leaving out guys like Swihart and E-Rod, there maybe be something like 6-8 guys in the organization that could be considered top 100 prospects. The strength of the farm system is now based in the lower minors and I think theres a good argument that trading out of that pool for a franchise type player to add to this core is a good idea.
Hamels and Chapman are the only guys who seem like they really might be on the block that fit the description, but someone always ends up doing something unexpected. Who knows. Hopefully they keep winning.
The good news is that another half season has gone by and even leaving out guys like Swihart and E-Rod, there maybe be something like 6-8 guys in the organization that could be considered top 100 prospects. The strength of the farm system is now based in the lower minors and I think theres a good argument that trading out of that pool for a franchise type player to add to this core is a good idea.
Hamels and Chapman are the only guys who seem like they really might be on the block that fit the description, but someone always ends up doing something unexpected. Who knows. Hopefully they keep winning.
First things first. They have made remarkable progress in a short time. If I could fast forward to the ASB with a 5-game deficit in both the division and WC -- which is where they stand right now -- I probably would.
It's incumbent on them not to eff this up in the next 5 days, beginning with Porcello tonight.
If they can at least hold here, lots of options may be on the table.
It's incumbent on them not to eff this up in the next 5 days, beginning with Porcello tonight.
If they can at least hold here, lots of options may be on the table.
He and Farrell have a poor history. He has criticized Farrell publicly and took a few shots at his teammate, Colby Rasmus, too. Pass.Pilgrim said:
There were plenty of clues last season that 1B/DH Adam Lind and manager John Farrellnever really saw eye-to-eye. There were some mild complaints from Lind during Spring Training that he was being told conflicting pieces of advice from various sources. There was also the rare public criticism by Farrell who went on record saying Lind was out of shape after he had been sent to the Minor Leagues in May.
AB in DC said:
I'm guessing that while Cherington probably has latitude to trade the Joe Gunkel's of the system to acquire someone like De Aza, if he wants to make a more meaningful trade (ie, trading someone like Swihart or even Margot), then Lucchino and maybe even Henry would need to give the thumbs-up.
The Yankees series is going to be critical to determine where they're really at. A win with Porcello starting tonight would be a nice boost, but they're going into the weekend with most likely Buchholz, EdRod, and Miley against the lefty heavy Yankees in Fenway. They couldn't have the table set any better to make up meaningful ground. They need a series win, both for the standings and for momentum heading into the break.dcmissle said:
Fangraph's playoff odds have been kind to the Sox from the beginning, and it's remarkable how well we are still doing according to their system. Fangraphs currently projects a .540 winning percentage for the rest of the year and a 82-80 final record. That gives us a 27.5% chance at making the playoffs, higher than the Rays or the Tigers and basically even with the Orioles at 27.8%. 3.8% chance at winning the World Series which is sixth in the American League, a sliver behind the Blue Jays at 3.9%.
If we were to make a 2 WAR addition - which of course means adding a 4 WAR upgrade or combination of upgrades since we're halfway through the year - that would put us in about the same territory as the Blue Jays, who are given a 40% chance of making the playoffs.
So at least according to Fangraphs, we are a team on the bubble that should be looking for an upgrade.
If we were to make a 2 WAR addition - which of course means adding a 4 WAR upgrade or combination of upgrades since we're halfway through the year - that would put us in about the same territory as the Blue Jays, who are given a 40% chance of making the playoffs.
So at least according to Fangraphs, we are a team on the bubble that should be looking for an upgrade.
I was about to link to BP's forecasts, which are more pessmisitic, but apparently they decided to fast-forward to July 8, 2017 and a world where Cubs pitcher Clay Buchholz was the 2016 Cy Young winner.