A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    Great day for the prospects. Solid game from workman with Lavarnway catching by the way. Both Cechinni and Bogaerts real solid in the futures game. Cechinni looks for real guys. He might actually end up our megastud. He sure looks for real.

    Can't help but think there is a possibility Workman and / or Britton are being shopped for Garza. Makes a lot of sense maybe. Theo might well like both prospects. Wants to unload Garza for pitching I would think. Maybe Ranaudo involved?

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Javi60. Show Javi60's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    a realistic view means to me to focus on the final period of this season beginning next Fri July 19 until the end... to be able to climb that tough steep slope, we should start by admitting we need more strength in key spots such as 3b, 1b, pitching and hitting...at least 3 or 4 new players...either from farm or mainlyfrom other clubs... So july trades are a must... Not proposing a total give away of prospects, but yes, some potential talent to get needed value to keep going and to be a winner...the team we have today have been magnificent, but will hardly win ninety games... Not enough, in my view... We have just fininished a tough corageous trip to the West... In those last ten games , we lost 50% of our divisional lead...

     

     

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to Javi60's comment:

    a realistic view means to me to focus on the final period of this season beginning next Fri July 19 until the end... to be able to climb that tough steep slope, we should start by admitting we need more strength in key spots such as 3b, 1b, pitching and hitting...at least 3 or 4 new players...either from farm or mainlyfrom other clubs... So july trades are a must... Not proposing a total give away of prospects, but yes, some potential talent to get needed value to keep going and to be a winner...the team we have today have been magnificent, but will hardly win ninety games... Not enough, in my view... We have just fininished a tough corageous trip to the West... In those last ten games , we lost 50% of our divisional lead...

     

     



    I have always wanted to upgrade the rotation from the top or near the top, but I just do not see Garza as the answer. I guess if we can extend him, I'd go along with the idea more, but I just don't see the probable upgrade as worth the trade off in prospects. Plus, to me, he should replace Lester in the rotation, but in reality, they'd probably move Doubront to long relief. Felix may need a little rest, but he's pitching very well, so I'd hate to mess with his streak. Another option could be to move Dempster to closer- but that's too wild to be serious.

    I think we might pick up a corner IF'er who kills lefties. He could play 3B vs LHPs while Drew rides the bench and Iggy plays 3B, or he could provide help at 1B, if Napoli continues to struggle.

    We should pick up another pen arm- maybe 2 if we don't get a SP. I doubt we trade for more than 2 pitchers and a corner IF'er, so I see 3 tops. More likely 2: a corner IF'er or 3Bman and a relif pitcher.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    If we "go big" at the deadline, who will it be for?

    Cliff Lee

    G. Stanton

    M Garza

    A Ramirez (3B)

    M Young

    Others?

    Sox4ever

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from soxnewmex. Show soxnewmex's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    Moon, if the Phils come out of the break and lose 9 of 10 then maybe they'll put Lee out there, if they continue to play well, as they have lately and are back at .500, then they'll be looking to buy, or so says their GM.  If the Phils go into a nose dive I think the Sox may go for Lee.  Stanton would be even bigger because young, but we'd have to lose guys we really really like, so bittersweet.  Those two are the only truly big ones on the list.  Of the lesser lights, I wouldn't be surprised to see Young or Garza on the Sox.  I'd like to have Young if he doesn't cost too much in terms of prospects.  I don't want Garza, we'd have to give up something to get him and I don't see how he's much of an improvement over what we already have.   Ramierez has power, but is getting older too and would cost more in terms of prospects than Young?  Don't know.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to soxnewmex's comment:

    Moon, if the Phils come out of the break and lose 9 of 10 then maybe they'll put Lee out there, if they continue to play well, as they have lately and are back at .500, then they'll be looking to buy, or so says their GM.  If the Phils go into a nose dive I think the Sox may go for Lee.  Stanton would be even bigger because young, but we'd have to lose guys we really really like, so bittersweet.  Those two are the only truly big ones on the list.  Of the lesser lights, I wouldn't be surprised to see Young or Garza on the Sox.  I'd like to have Young if he doesn't cost too much in terms of prospects.  I don't want Garza, we'd have to give up something to get him and I don't see how he's much of an improvement over what we already have.   Ramierez has power, but is getting older too and would cost more in terms of prospects than Young?  Don't know.




    A Ramirez is owed a lot of money, so I think the cost may be the same as Young. He's almost at the point of just taking his salary. He's owed about $3.5M after the deadline, then $16M next year and a $4M buyout for 2015 on a mutual option. That's a total of about $24M for 1.3 seasons. I actually think we could get him for a couple midlevel prospects. 

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    When you have a chance to win it all , you want to go for it. The problem becomes how much you are willing to sacrifice the future. Guys like Lee and Stanton would cost more than we would like to lose. If we could pick up some bullpen help for a B list prospect or two, then take the gamble. But it is not normally good policy to trade young for old. We have some very highly regarded young prospects. Personally , I would rather count on them to provide the boost down the stretch. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    When you have a chance to win it all , you want to go for it. The problem becomes how much you are willing to sacrifice the future. Guys like Lee and Stanton would cost more than we would like to lose. If we could pick up some bullpen help for a B list prospect or two, then take the gamble. But it is not normally good policy to trade young for old. We have some very highly regarded young prospects. Personally , I would rather count on them to provide the boost down the stretch. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.



    The thing about Lee is that not only would he cost several top prospects, he'd eat up a big chunk of the spending budget in upcoming years.

    Stanton is at least relatively inexpensive financially and will be entering his prime, unlike Lee.

    I think we can get Jessie Crain and A Ramirez for blocked prospects and rule 5 borderline prospects and maybe one guy from our #11 to 20 list.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    Interesting facts   Laughing

    • The Red Sox lead the majors with 496 runs and a .351 OBP
    • Boston's 58 wins is the most ever before the All-Star break
    • Boston has 20 series wins which already matches the total in all of 2012.
    • Since June 10th, Uehara owns a 0.56 ERA with 24 Ks in 17 outings.
    • A large ice caramel latte with whip cream at Dunkin Donuts has 660 calories  Yell
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II


    I thought you guys may be interested to know that we bumped into and chatted for a bit with Gomes and Napoli at Pike Place Market in Seattle.  At the time, we didn't know they were cruising for flowers.  We just thanked them for the great season and the great attitude they seemed to bring to the team.  They were very cordial and thanked us for the support.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    When you have a chance to win it all , you want to go for it. The problem becomes how much you are willing to sacrifice the future. Guys like Lee and Stanton would cost more than we would like to lose. If we could pick up some bullpen help for a B list prospect or two, then take the gamble. But it is not normally good policy to trade young for old. We have some very highly regarded young prospects. Personally , I would rather count on them to provide the boost down the stretch. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

     



    The thing about Lee is that not only would he cost several top prospects, he'd eat up a big chunk of the spending budget in upcoming years.

     

    Stanton is at least relatively inexpensive financially and will be entering his prime, unlike Lee.

    I think we can get Jessie Crain and A Ramirez for blocked prospects and rule 5 borderline prospects and maybe one guy from our #11 to 20 list.

    [/QUOTE]


    A. Rameirez is always hurt (currently on the DL) and will cost waaaay more than hes worth in terms or prospects, $$ and production. Hes will be owed about 4M this year, then 16 in 2014 with a 4M buyout in 2015. 24M for a year and 2 months? I think we cando better than that. To me, thats not smart business. Since 2009, hes had 2 years where hes played more that 145 games. He hasnt played in 150 games since 2006. Not to mention he will be 36 next year. Id rather get Young if they choose to go that route. Much cheaper in terms of $$ and prospects as well as being a FA after the year. No commitment.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    When you have a chance to win it all , you want to go for it. The problem becomes how much you are willing to sacrifice the future. Guys like Lee and Stanton would cost more than we would like to lose. If we could pick up some bullpen help for a B list prospect or two, then take the gamble. But it is not normally good policy to trade young for old. We have some very highly regarded young prospects. Personally , I would rather count on them to provide the boost down the stretch. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

     

     



    The thing about Lee is that not only would he cost several top prospects, he'd eat up a big chunk of the spending budget in upcoming years.

     

     

    Stanton is at least relatively inexpensive financially and will be entering his prime, unlike Lee.

    I think we can get Jessie Crain and A Ramirez for blocked prospects and rule 5 borderline prospects and maybe one guy from our #11 to 20 list.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    A. Rameirez is always hurt (currently on the DL) and will cost waaaay more than hes worth in terms or prospects, $$ and production. Hes will be owed about 4M this year, then 16 in 2014 with a 4M buyout in 2015. 24M for a year and 2 months? I think we cando better than that. To me, thats not smart business. Since 2009, hes had 2 years where hes played more that 145 games. He hasnt played in 150 games since 2006. Not to mention he will be 36 next year. Id rather get Young if they choose to go that route. Much cheaper in terms of $$ and prospects as well as being a FA after the year. No commitment.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    My thoughts are that his high contract cost will mean he will only cost mid level prospects and no more. 

    I would not sign ARam for $24M and 2 playoff seasons, but if we are going to give better prospects for 1 playoff season of M Young, then I'd think about ARam instead.

    I agree, I would not give top prospects for ARam, and then not be able to sign a nice FA this winter due to his contract.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    Taking on salaries like Young's or Ramirez' should help our trade partners enough that high-end prospects should not be involved. But either could come as part of a package involving either Garza or Lee, which would then involve prospects. But if the deals are not expanded to include a starter along with a third-baseman, then I believe Ben holds the line on any top prospect. Only prospects that we would be exposed to losing in the rule 5 draft should be offered in deals. If our farm system is as strong as we are led to believe then the solutions to fill our holes are probably in our system, at least better solutions than most, without costing us any top prospects.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to jidgef's comment:

    Taking on salaries like Young's or Ramirez' should help our trade partners enough that high-end prospects should not be involved. But either could come as part of a package involving either Garza or Lee, which would then involve prospects. But if the deals are not expanded to include a starter along with a third-baseman, then I believe Ben holds the line on any top prospect. Only prospects that we would be exposed to losing in the rule 5 draft should be offered in deals. If our farm system is as strong as we are led to believe then the solutions to fill our holes are probably in our system, at least better solutions than most, without costing us any top prospects.



    I agree, but will add that Ben may see some of our rule 5 prospects as being about as good as some of our 40 man players, so he may trade a couple 40 man roster players to make room for a couple rule 5 players that he sees as not being a drop off- or much of one. The return value must offset any drop off.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

     

    Starting tomorrow the Red Sox play the next ten games vs. the Yankees (3), Rays (4) and then head to Baltimore for three.  Brutal is you ask me.   LOL

    AL East: The most competitive division in all of sports

    P.S. When do we get to play Houston again?   LOL

     

     

     

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to jidgef's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Taking on salaries like Young's or Ramirez' should help our trade partners enough that high-end prospects should not be involved. But either could come as part of a package involving either Garza or Lee, which would then involve prospects. But if the deals are not expanded to include a starter along with a third-baseman, then I believe Ben holds the line on any top prospect. Only prospects that we would be exposed to losing in the rule 5 draft should be offered in deals. If our farm system is as strong as we are led to believe then the solutions to fill our holes are probably in our system, at least better solutions than most, without costing us any top prospects.

     



    I agree, but will add that Ben may see some of our rule 5 prospects as being about as good as some of our 40 man players, so he may trade a couple 40 man roster players to make room for a couple rule 5 players that he sees as not being a drop off- or much of one. The return value must offset any drop off.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Agreed Moon. There are players on our forty-man roster who will never see Fenway from the home dugout, just as there are several in our system, not yet on the forty-man, who we do not want to lose to the rule 5 draft. Bard, sadly, Butler and Hassan are all just taking up spots on the forty-man roster in my opinion, and something could still happen with regard to free-agents to be, particularly Drew, who clearly does not fit into plans beyond this year. That's ten percent of the forty-man roster right there. I'm a little fuzzy on the rules (huge understatement there!) but I think some of our better prospects are still too young to be concerned about losing them to the draft.

    Is this the Sea Dogs weekend?

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to Ice-Cream's comment:

     

    Starting tomorrow the Red Sox play the next ten games vs. the Yankees (3), Rays (4) and then head to Baltimore for three.  Brutal is you ask me.   LOL

    AL East: The most competitive division in all of sports

    P.S. When do we get to play Houston again?   LOL

    Early August: I have tickets to all 3 games.

     

     

     




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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to jidgef's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:\



    I agree, but will add that Ben may see some of our rule 5 prospects as being about as good as some of our 40 man players, so he may trade a couple 40 man roster players to make room for a couple rule 5 players that he sees as not being a drop off- or much of one. The return value must offset any drop off.

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to jidgef's comment:

    [/QUOTE]

    Agreed Moon. There are players on our forty-man roster who will never see Fenway from the home dugout, just as there are several in our system, not yet on the forty-man, who we do not want to lose to the rule 5 draft. Bard, sadly, Butler and Hassan are all just taking up spots on the forty-man roster in my opinion, and something could still happen with regard to free-agents to be, particularly Drew, who clearly does not fit into plans beyond this year. That's ten percent of the forty-man roster right there. I'm a little fuzzy on the rules (huge understatement there!) but I think some of our better prospects are still too young to be concerned about losing them to the draft.

     

    [QUOTE]

    Here's a complete list of the players and when they become eligible for rule 5:

    http://www.soxprospects.com/wiki.html

    Red= top 40/Bold Black 41-60 or others with ML possibilities

    2013: Mario Alcantara, Michael Almanzar, Chris Balcom-Miller, Carson Blair, Xander Bogaerts, Bryce Brentz, Chris Carpenter, Garin Cecchini, Keith Couch, William Cuevas, Keury De La Cruz, Luis Diaz, Leonel Escobar, Derrik Gibson, Dreily Guerrero, Jeremy Hazelbaker, Jayson Hernandez, Chris Hernandez, Peter Hissey, Jeremy Kehrt, Aaron Kurcz, Juan Carlos Linares, Heiker Meneses, Boss Moanaroa, Eric Nieson, Nefi Ogando, Yunior Ortega, Oscar Perez, Matthew Price, Anthony Ranaudo, David Renfroe, Pete Ruiz, Felix Sanchez, Kyle Stroup, Francisco Taveras, Raynel Velette, Jose Vinicio, Kolbrin Vitek, Shannon Wilkerson, Madison Younginer

    8 Red

    6 Black

     

    6 Player likely to be lost to free agency:

    Ellsbury, Saltalamaccia, Napoli, S Drew, and J Hanrahan 

     

    Others that may be traded, released, or removed from the 40 man roster:

    Bard, Kalish, Morales, Miller, Lavarnway, Middlebrooks, Britton, Bailey, D Ross, Webster, de la Rosa, A Wilson, S Wright, D Butler, A Hassan, J Gomes, B Holt, de la Torre, P Beato, B Snyder, B Workman, and Lester ($13M club option w $.25M buyout- voided if traded), Thornton ($6M club option w $1M buyout). 

     

    Is this the Sea Dogs weekend?

    Nobody has answered, so I'm guessing next weekend (July 26-28). I'm free for anyday, unless soemthing comes up.

    [/QUOTE]


     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from jidgef. Show jidgef's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    The game on either the 27th or 28th is at Fenway.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to Ice-Cream's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Starting tomorrow the Red Sox play the next ten games vs. the Yankees (3), Rays (4) and then head to Baltimore for three.  Brutal is you ask me.   LOL

    AL East: The most competitive division in all of sports

    P.S. When do we get to play Houston again?   LOL

    Early August: I have tickets to all 3 games.



    [/QUOTE]

    That's awesome moonslav59!!!  Have a great time!!!   Laughing

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to Ice-Cream's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to Ice-Cream's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

    Starting tomorrow the Red Sox play the next ten games vs. the Yankees (3), Rays (4) and then head to Baltimore for three.  Brutal is you ask me.   LOL

    AL East: The most competitive division in all of sports

    P.S. When do we get to play Houston again?   LOL

    Early August: I have tickets to all 3 games.

     



     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    That's awesome moonslav59!!!  Have a great time!!!   Laughing

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I try to get to 6-10 away games over a season. I'm also going to see the Rangers series too.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from 808soxfan. Show 808soxfan's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    If we "go big" at the deadline, who will it be for?

    Cliff Lee

    G. Stanton

    M Garza

    A Ramirez (3B)

    M Young

    Others?

    Sox4ever




    Stanton. Young and inexpensive means that he would be expensive in prospects/players. In a way earlier post this year, I suggested Nava in a package of about 5 players. Not that Nava would be the centerpiece, but he has shown that he can play at the MLB level and would be affordable to the Marlins. I'll let you choose the other 4 in the package.

    M Young/A Ramirez - I would rather give Bogaerts a shot at 3rd.

    Garza? - I think we have better options in the farm system.



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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to 808soxfan's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    If we "go big" at the deadline, who will it be for?

    Cliff Lee

    G. Stanton

    M Garza

    A Ramirez (3B)

    M Young

    Others?

    Sox4ever

     




    Stanton. Young and inexpensive means that he would be expensive in prospects/players. In a way earlier post this year, I suggested Nava in a package of about 5 players. Not that Nava would be the centerpiece, but he has shown that he can play at the MLB level and would be affordable to the Marlins. I'll let you choose the other 4 in the package.

     

    M Young/A Ramirez - I would rather give Bogaerts a shot at 3rd.

    Garza? - I think we have better options in the farm system.



    [/QUOTE]

    Who is better than Garza, and why isn't he already starting for us?

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from 808soxfan. Show 808soxfan's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to 808soxfan's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    If we "go big" at the deadline, who will it be for?

    Cliff Lee

    G. Stanton

    M Garza

    A Ramirez (3B)

    M Young

    Others?

    Sox4ever

     

     




    Stanton. Young and inexpensive means that he would be expensive in prospects/players. In a way earlier post this year, I suggested Nava in a package of about 5 players. Not that Nava would be the centerpiece, but he has shown that he can play at the MLB level and would be affordable to the Marlins. I'll let you choose the other 4 in the package.

     

     

    M Young/A Ramirez - I would rather give Bogaerts a shot at 3rd.

    Garza? - I think we have better options in the farm system.



     

    [/QUOTE]

    Who is better than Garza, and why isn't he already starting for us?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Hey Moon. My main point is Garza is a rental who will probably cost two top pitching prospects. "Better options" in my terminology means allowing some of the young farm talent to pitch rather than trading it for a fraction of a year.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share