A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : You pretty much nailed it IMO. Which is no surprise!
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    I certainly got it right with Oakland. They swept NY and are in the middle of the chase.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from bucky-dent. Show bucky-dent's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Now now there is plenty of baseball left and only a game away from .500. Anything could happen.enjoy your misery .
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    moon still blaming the team on injuries rather than poor attitude and a number of other FLAWS (flaws not injuries).

    Too bad your optimism clouds your eyes.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Seven American League teams posted wins on Wednesday and all seven teams had started the day ahead of the Red Sox in the standings.

    The Sox are losing ground to too many good teams.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]I have said it is all about the pitching since day 1. Having 3 solid starters (in theory this spring), and a bunch of question marks to fill the 4-5 slots is not the way to build a rotation. I`d rather have quality than quantity, as long as we have guys like Cook as our 6th starter. The problem is how do you get that solid starter?                        starts     ERA     WHIP Morales             5         3.46    1.15  Cook                 6         3.50    1.03 Doubront          19        4.54    1.40 Floyd                18        4.46    1.32 tom, from ther start I said there is little chance that our big 3 starters (Beck/Lest/Buch) would all stay healthy and have good years all at the same time. This was the main reason I wanted a solid #2 starter. (Floyd was not the only guy I mentioned.) The fact that Morales and Cook have done better than Floyd has not changed the fact that we'd be a lot better off had we found a solid #2 starter who gave us 6 IP x 18 starts. I'm thrilled with Morales and Cook. Doubront has done about as expected, but can not give us 32 starts and 190+ IP this year.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    True, but the problem is that Floyd is a perfect example of how difficult it is to get a #2.    Floyd was pretty good 2009 - 2011 I'd say a #2, but the Sox would have given up quite a bit to get him.  Now this year:

    ERA   4.46
    FIP    4.67
    xFIP  4.23
    WAR  1.0

    He probably would have blocked Doubront from starting.  Floyd 12:$7M,13:$9.5M club optionwould have cost players in a trade plus a higher salary and Doubront has pretty much matched him.

    Of course, there are other "#2s" that might have been acquired.  The problem is why would any club give them up before a season starts?  Floyd was a logical candidate, but in this case even a good logical candidate would have been a mistake.

    The Sox top 4 starters have  20, 19, 17, and 17 starts.  Health has been good but performance has not.

    The NYY gave up there best hitting prospect in decades, for a #2 but I'm sure they would use a mulligan on that one.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Teakus. Show Teakus's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Ells needs to be traded before the deadline, but for MAJOR prospects. We fire sale him like we did Youk and I swear I'm switching my allegience to the Albuquerque Bumble Bee's womans field hockey team!  Beckett could be moved as well, but has veto and would need a top tier team to afford him. Possible, but unlikely. Salty could be dealt, as Lava is ready, but I've been watching his developement. Intriguing, if partly frustrating, guy. I do think we clean things up in preparation for next year. Be under lux tax cap for this yr, and go all out for next. I say we PLAN TO GO OVER LUX CAP NEXT YEAR-IN A BIG WAY. I'm talking adding Hamilton big. Papi will be difficult, but we might get lucky with a 2 yr deal. We've treated a beloved guy like crap, so that could cost us. I gotta believe we'll go all out for 2013. It just makes too much sense. Blowing it all trying to win this season? Not so much.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : I think the Pedro call was a good one.  Clay Buchholz was the pick they got. Mo Vaughn,  Clemens,  Garciaparra were all good calls IMO. Youkilis wanted to play to get a contract next year. The NYY have been "lucky" that Mo, Jeter, Posada have all aged incredibly well.
    Posted by tom-uk[/QUOTE]

    Pedro was a good call because he thought he was going to pitch at elite status for four more years and he clearly wasn't. And the fact is that Boston almost matched the Mets offer. That was all on Pedro.  Boston should have signed him for one day so he could announce his retirment in a Sox uniform.

    Papi wants to continue being a Sox.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : Moon, just out of curiosity, is Salty on your "would trade" list ( in the right deal, I assume ) because you think the Sox would get more for him than, say, for Lavarnway? Or do you think, as several people do, that Lavarnway is the better long-term choice at catcher, and should not be traded, even in a nice deal for Boston?
    Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]

    I would trade anybody for the right exchange. I think we have a surplus at the catcher position, and it makes sense to trade one to improve in a higher need area.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]moon still blaming the team on injuries rather than poor attitude and a number of other FLAWS (flaws not injuries). Too bad your optimism clouds your eyes.
    Posted by EnchiladaT[/QUOTE]

    Yeah, we´ve hardly had any injuries. You are right. Attitude is the reason. I am blind.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : Pedro was a good call because he thought he was going to pitch at elite status for four more years and he clearly wasn't. And the fact is that Boston almost matched the Mets offer. That was all on Pedro.  Boston should have signed him for one day so he could announce his retirment in a Sox uniform. Papi wants to continue being a Sox.
    Posted by jesseyeric[/QUOTE]

    I've put this quote up before.

    David Ortiz recently hinted that the offseason could get even more tumultuous for the Red Sox. The designated hitter, who will be eligible for free agency after the World Series, suggested to ESPN's Colleen Dominguez that he would fit into the Yankees’ culture.

    "It's great from what I hear," he said. "It's a good situation to be involved in. Who doesn't want to be involved in a great situation where everything goes the right way?”

    Ortiz says there's "too much drama" in Boston these days and acknowledged that he's thinking about moving on. “I don't know if I want to be part of this drama for next year."


     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]All of the commentators on ESPN, FOX, YES, WGN, emphasize the inordinate number of injuries that the Red Sox have had. According to Burrito, they are all wrong.
    Posted by Calzone65[/QUOTE]

    If 3 or 4 of the following group performed up to career average the Sox would be leading the WC despite the injuries:  Lester,  AGon,  Bard,  Buch,  Beckett, and Pedroia.

    Only one position has seen performance plummet b/c of injury, CF.  With this roster the Sox should have been able to overcome 75 or so games without Ellsbury.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : True, but the problem is that Floyd is a perfect example of how difficult it is to get a #2.    Floyd was pretty good 2009 - 2011 I'd say a #2, but the Sox would have given up quite a bit to get him.  Now this year: ERA   4.46 FIP    4.67 xFIP  4.23 WAR  1.0 He probably would have blocked Doubront from starting.  Floyd  12 :$7M, 13 :$9.5M club option would have cost players in a trade plus a higher salary and Doubront has pretty much matched him. Of course, there are other "#2s" that might have been acquired.  The problem is why would any club give them up before a season starts?  Floyd was a logical candidate, but in this case even a good logical candidate would have been a mistake. The Sox top 4 starters have  20, 19, 17, and 17 starts.  Health has been good but performance has not. The NYY gave up there best hitting prospect in decades, for a #2 but I'm sure they would use a mulligan on that one.
    Posted by tom-uk[/QUOTE]

    Buch and Beckett have missed about 7-8 starts total, so I wouldn´t say "health has been good", but I agree it hasn´t been bad for our starters if we don´t count Lackey and Dice-K. 

    I do think Floyd is better than Doubront, but the 2012 numbers may not show that. 

    Doubront is not going to start 33 games or give us 190+ IP, so he could have slid into Bard´s slot easy enough.

    One of my other big trade ideas this spring was Wandy Rodriguez. If he had put up similar numbers here (even if adjusted for the DH), we´d be a heck of a lot better right now.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : I've put this quote up before. [October 13, 2011 at 9:55am CST] David Ortiz  recently hinted that the offseason could get even more tumultuous for the Red Sox. The designated hitter, who will be eligible for free agency after the World Series, suggested to  ESPN's Colleen Dominguez  that he would fit into the Yankees’ culture. "It's great from what I hear,"  he said.  "It's a good situation to be involved in. Who doesn't want to be involved in a great situation where everything goes the right way?” Ortiz says there's  "too much drama"  in Boston these days and acknowledged that he's thinking about moving on.  “ I don't know if I want to be part of this drama for next year."
    Posted by tom-uk[/QUOTE]

    I don't think Papi is happy with Bobby V. and I always felt that Bobby was a bad choice for the Sox. He can manage kids, but his ego is to big to manage all-stars. I just think Papi was airing his feelings and I don't see Bobby in Boston next year.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Why would Houston have traded him then vs now?  It makes more sense to sell a few tickets and keep your best picture for 100 games, which they did.

    Last year Wandy  4.5  FIP  and 1.5 WAR in 30 starts.

    2012 Doubront/Wandy:

    K/9    8.83   6.13
    BB/9  3.45   2.20
    ERA   4.54   3.79
    WHIP 1.40   1.27
    WAR  1.5     1.8
    VORP 11.6   9.0


     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : If 3 or 4 of the following group performed up to career average the Sox would be leading the WC despite the injuries:  Lester,  AGon,  Bard,  Buch,  Beckett, and Pedroia. Only one position has seen performance plummet b/c of injury, CF.  With this roster the Sox should have been able to overcome 75 or so games without Ellsbury.
    Posted by tom-uk[/QUOTE]

    True, but wouldn´t 80 more games from Ellsbury improve greatly on our .629 CF OPS so far this year?

    We used 10 different guys in CF this year. 9 in RF & 7 in LF.

    16 different OFérs.

    It was probably supposed to go like this:

    Ellsbury    675 PAs
    Crawford  650
    C Ross      400
    Sweeney   275
    DMac         125

    Instead we have this for defensive innings in the OF:

    Ross     540
    Nava    473
    Sween 448
    Byrd     256
    DMac    215
    Ells       149
    Kalish   140
    Pods     138
    AGon    127
    Craw        64
    Repko      32
    Lillibrgdg 30
    Lin            20
    Lars           9
    Spears      4
    Ciriaco      1


     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    I looked up a cool stat on baseballprospectus Moon

    VORP  which includes park and opposition 

    Doub     11.6
    Wandy    9.0

    Sox 2012
    LF  .747  7th in AL
    RF  .792  7th in AL
    CF  .626  last in MLB

    Pedroia  .722         2011  .861

    AGon   .765          2011   .958
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Noticing Shoppach starts again for Beckett. 2 starts in a row for Shoppach. I get the impression they are about to trade him. I like the tandem of Shopp-Salty and would rather the Sox just keep the two. Salty btw should be DHing tonight, not Ciriaco, who is now 2 for his last 20.
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

    Ciriaco got 2 hits. Break out the Duck Boats!!!
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]Why would Houston have traded him then vs now?  It makes more sense to sell a few tickets and keep your best picture for 100 games, which they did. Last year Wandy  4.5  FIP  and 1.5 WAR in 30 starts. 2012 Doubront/Wandy: K/9    8.83   6.13 BB/9  3.45   2.20 ERA   4.54   3.79 WHIP 1.40   1.27 WAR  1.5     1.8 VORP 11.6   9.0
    Posted by tom-uk[/QUOTE]

    Again, I do not see Floyd or Wandy as replacing Doubront. Doubront is not going to start 33 games this year or give us 190+ IP. Bard the same.

    My point all along was that the big 3 were not going to all pitch 33 games and do very well at the same time. The pitcher would have taken some of their starts, some of Bard´s starts (turns out more than some expected) and some of Doubie´s starts.

    So far, he could have taken the 19 starts from these 24 GS´d 19 missed by Beckett and Buch, 5 by Dice-K, or the 10 starts that Bard gave up when he went to AAA.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III : I don't think Papi is happy with Bobby V. and I always felt that Bobby was a bad choice for the Sox. He can manage kids, but his ego is to big to manage all-stars. I just think Papi was airing his feelings and I don't see Bobby in Boston next year.
    Posted by jesseyeric[/QUOTE]

    Pardon me, but I think this is nuts.  What's to manage with a DH?  Hitting is hitting, and 2012 is, once again, a contract year for Ortiz, which he means he wants to hit well.  And he has hit very well this year, which means it is very difficult to argue Bobby V has been bad for Big Papi.  Let's not forget that, thanks to AGon and Bobby V, Ortiz got to hit more in NL parks this year than last year. 

    Or consider Youk.  I have argued and still believe the Sox would have cut Youk loose this year if Francona were still managing because the situation cried out for that.  Middlebrooks was playing much better, and AGon was already at 1B and Ortiz at DH.  No room at the inn even though Bobby V did all kinds of things to keep Youk in the lineup--including sending AGon to RF so Youk could play 1B.  Because Youk was not kept at 3B after he got off the DL, he was understandably unhappy. Solution: move him. 

    Or consider Pedroia.  He has struggled at the plate because of the thumb problems, period.  I think he just might have issues with Bobby V, but that has not and will not change his full bore approach to playing baseball.

    I am not arguing Bobby V is a great manager, only that some of you vastly overstate the effect a manager has.  Before he arrived at Boston with all that talent and big salaries, Francona was a loser.  Ditto Joe Torre before he got to the Yankees.  Ditto Casey Stengal after he left the Yankees. 

    If we ignore, as we should, all this personality and ego baloney, and look at game management, I think a good case can be made for Bobby V this year.  That said, I think the FO won't hesitate to fire him if they don't like the total wins and losses come October. 
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    I said from the start that Bobby V might only be good as a short term fix or "boost". I thought he might light a fire underneath some vets who got too comfy with Tito´s loyalty preferences. 

    Things have not worked out like I had hoped, but I don´t blame BV for Beckett & Lester´s loss of velocity, for Pedey´s hurt thumb and loss of a cribbage partner, for Ellsbury, bailey, CC and other´s injuries. BV has made some mistakes as all managers do. 

    I don´t think BV is the problem. I wouldn´t be crushed if he was let go or brought back for 2013.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Someone tell 1941 that the Sox in the Bridge Year had a host of major injuries and Tito somehow still won 89 games. That idiot is saying the team would be 10 games under .500 if Tito was in charge instead of BV. Tito's worst year was 10 games over .500. He never once entered the All-Star Break under 10 games OVER .500
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    We have had devastaing injuries and key players not performing, especially in the starting pitching staff. What team is going to overcome that?

    All that said, most of us looked at BV as a short term solution. I don't think it turned out to be a good choice. But with guys like BV a team can get hot and really crank for a while also. It breaks both ways. We absolutely still have a chance and guys like Ellsbury and Buchholz are keys. 

    Beckett is probably better than his record has shown. Hopefully the pitching staff can pull it together. There is still time. I see us putting up some runs on the board. Middlebrooks has been a pleasant surprise. If the regulars just play as they have in the past we are a different team. We probably will make a significant move at the deadline still IMO.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    We are getting close to the big choice at the trade deadline. I have not given up on the Sox chances for 2012, especially if we can remain relatively healthy. Papi returns. Maybe Bailey. Ellsbury hits like 2011 for the next 3 months. AGon & Pedey improve to close to career norms. Lester & Beckett improve. Buch stays healthy. We don´t really need all of these things to happen, just a few of them to make the playoffs.

    That being said, I think this may be too much wishful thinking, and a strong argument can be made to pack it in for this year, and thereby greatly improving our chances for 2013 and beyond. THIS IS NOT MY CHOICE OF PLANS, but follow it through with me...

    Trade all players who will be FAs this winter for prospects or players under team control for more than this year and get under the luxury tax limit, so we can :

    Dice-K: if he gets healthy try and unload to save a few thousand dollars.

    Podsednik: probably worth more to us than what we’d get by trading him, but unless we extend him as our 5th OFér bridge to the prospects, he´s not going to lead us anywhere. Get what we can for him.

    Cook: I´d like to extend Aaron. If I knew he´d accept arb, I´d keep him, but trading him now could get us a nice prospect, and we could re-sign him this winter anyways.

    Padilla: Same as Cook. Extend or trade.

    Shoppach: May want to seek a more meaningful role elsewhere next year, especially with Lava breathing down his neck. I don´t think he wants to be our 30% or less catcher next year. Unless we deal Lava or Salty, I´d look to see if we can get a nice prospect for Shoppach.

    Ross: I was a strong advocate for signing Ross this year. I had hoped it was for more tha 1 year, but the facts are facts. We could get a nice prospect for Cody, and trading him would be totally giving up on 2012.

    Ortiz: The big off-season decision that will affect several further moves. His Red Sox heroics are legendary. His performance has been grand. There are a lot of reasons to extend Papi, and there are areas of team weakness that need fixing as well. We probably can’t do both via signings. I can´t see trading Papi this deadline, but if we really want to have a better chance next year and beyond, we could see what we can get for him. 

    Trading some of these players to contenders for prospects could help us going forward, but some of these guys will not bring much in return. Some could be replaced without hurting our chances this year too much at all.

    Look seriously at dealing players that will be FAs after 2013 unless extended beforehand. Again, we´d get good prospects and get below the tax cap number for 2012. This will allow us to go over the limit next year and or beyond at less of an expense. 

    Free Agents after 2013:

    Ellsbury: Trading Jacoby makes a lot of sense to me, since in my opinion, he will not want to play here after 2013, even if we match or offer slightly more than the highest bidder. New rules dictate that trading him after next year begins means the team getting him can not get the comp picks if they lose him to free agency after 2013. To me, this means his value will be highest from this deadline to the day before 2013 starts. I would not just give Jacoby away. We could use the comp picks ourselves, and 1.5 years of Jacoby playing hard for us as he seeks to raise his open market free agent status would help our chances this year and next. We also have some great OF prospects on the rise. This decision may be even bigger than the Papi one.

    Saltalamacchia: To me, how this season ends for Salty will determine a lot. Stamina and durability seemed like an issue last year, so this year is a good test in that area.  His improvement defensively and in CERA-related areas since May 1st would look a lot nicer if it continued through September. With Lavarnway itching to get his shot, Salty’s durability & stamina test this August and September may determine our willingness to extend him beyond 2013. Extension or not, Salty could be a trade candidate as well now or this winter, if we decide to go with Lava. Conversely, we could extend Salty and trade Lava. The Papi decision also has a lot to do with this call, since Lava could be our DH/back-up catcher (or third string catcher) if Papi walks.

    Sweeney: With so many lefty OF’ers in the system, I see Sweeney as the odd man out. I think he could be traded this deadlinenow that CC or Ells are up. He is so bad vs LHPs, and not really that great vs RHPs that it really forces him to be at most a platoon OF’er/late inning defensive type OF’er. I think a prospect would be woirth more to us than this LH´d hitting OFér going forward. As it looks now, Ross may play vs RHPs over Sweeney anyways for the remainder of 2012, and Nava, Kalish and others may be better vs RHPs in 2013 as well (Assuming Ross walks).

    Punto: I never understood why we gave this guy 2 years, but he may end up being traded before his 2 years are up anyways, especially if Aviles is pushed to the utlity IF’er position by the rise of Ciriaco, Iggy or Bogaerts. See if we caqn get some salry relief by trading him. No good prospect return is expected here.

    Albers: He´s had a nice season, but could get us a decent prospect in return.

    R. Hill: Depending on his health and performance, he may be traded or offered arb or an extension.

    (Lester has a team option at $13M with a $250K buyout for 2014. My guess is he stays or gets traded, but this option is close to a given. I´d look to see what offers are out there, but I doubt we´d get a nice return as compared to the chances he can regain form as he heads into normal pitcher prime ages.)

    (I believe Iglesias has to stay on the ML roster after 2013, but he is still under team control. I am not sure about his arb status after 2013, but he is making $2M this year and next. Trading him could save us money and open the way for Ciriaco, Bogaerts and other SS prospects.)

    Atchison is under team control for several years, but is at the age where he probably will not be in our plans for much longer than 2013. He might net a decent prospect if healthy.

     Trading any of these guys this deadline or this winter could happen, especially if we look beyond 2013 as out best chance to win it all. 

    I wouldn´t hand these 2013 guys away. We can win in 2013. However, stockpiling prospects this deadline could help us be in a better position to trade for players in areas of great weakness on this team. The Nats got Gio Gonzalez last winter. My guess is that we could have the prospects many teams want after the stockpiling plan is done.

    We could also look to trade Beckett. We could trade Buch or Doubront if it meant we improved at starting pitcher.

    I´ve always been for looking to trade CC for salary relief.

    Let´s assume we trade Papi, Ross, Dice-K, Pods, Shoppach, Cook, Padilla, Sweeney, Punto, Albers  and Atchison.

    Our 2013 roster would look like this:

    SP1 Beckett

    SP2 Lester

    SP3 _________

    SP4 Buchholtz

    SP5 Lackey

    SP6 Doubront/Morales (Long relief)

    RP1 Bailey

    RP2 Aceves

    RP3 Bard

    RP4 Miller

    RP5 Melancon

    RP6 Mortensen

    RP7 Tazawa/Carpenter/Stewart/Others

    C Salty/ _____ (Shoppach?)

    DH Lavarnway]

    1B AGon

    2B Pedey

    3B Middlebrooks

    SS Aviles/Ciriaco

    LF Crawford

    CF Ellsbury

    RF ___________

    OF Nava/Kalish/Linares/others

    We could look to trade prospects to fill the big gaps, or sign Papi back, or sign Hamilton, or some other big name player.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part III

    Trading CC is a complete pipe dream. Let's hope he hits this year or gets the surgury and can hit next year. Worse sign we ever made. 

    Lots of tough calls to make, and some easy ones, but the luxury tax issues are a huge problem and we are not going to find it easy to unload salaries. We are the team that is supposed to sign such contracts not unload them. Until we fix our salary issues going forward we will always be fighting with one hand tied behind our backs. And it is not going to be easy to unload some of these contracts.

    Ergo, the need to focus on youth going forward, to supplement the team cost effectively, and trying somehow to unload whatever salary we can so that we can address problem areas. Fortunately we have tremendous talent coming up. We are in bridge years now, but no one is talking about it, as it's just bad PR.

    It's not popular, but letting Ortiz go does address salary issues and might enable us to have a better chance at winning in the next 2-3 years. He is going to cost $17 mil a year in a 1 year deal and $30 mil for a 2 year deal and that's more than twice as much as any other DH that I'm aware of. There are guys who can hit well and fill the DH spot for $2-$3 mil, who can also help us with positional flexibility ( for example the Cody Ross deal ). Then we sign a major starting pitcher or do a deal picking up the salary for a guy like Garza. Plus maybe get a sandwich round pick. Just from offering Ortiz arb again. 

    I know it sounds crazy but when Ortiz eventually tanks, as a 39-40 year old DH making more than $15 mil a year, maybe you all will feel differently then.

     

Share