A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Yeah, I figured you were talking about deadline deals emp.

     

    Have to see where the rotation is at come july. A lot can happen in 2 months. Buchholz is having some issues right now, so hold on tight. I like the idea of another bat if Middy doesnt get his act together this year. For some reason Stanton worries me with all his little nagging injuries so far. Theyre not impact ones. Stuff  like that tends to linger and pop up again and again. I know hes got monster potential and would hit 40+ bombs in Fenway, but......

    If were in it and doing well, I think we would obviously be buyers and all the names being bantered around like Drew, Salty and Ellsbury will probably stay put. If you can add a piece to them, then fine. Or maybe give up a prospect or 2. If the team is crusin' along and they have a tight knit bunch with good chemistry, theres no reason to break that up. Who cares if you just let a couple guys walk at the end of the year if the trade off is a WSC.

     

    I'm not so sure we'd be obvious buyers. We have done little at the deadline the last few years.

    I ask you this, if keeping some or most of Ellsbury, Salty, Aceves, Drew, Napoli or Salty to the end of the year improve our odds of winning a ring from this to that, do you keep them?

    From 5% to 10%?

    From 5% to 20%?

    From 5% to 25%?

    From 5% to 33%?

    From 10% to 15%?

    to 25%?

    to 33%?

    From 15% to 25%?

    to 33%?

    From 20% to 33%?

    From 25% to 33%?

     

    How much would trading one of Drew, Salty or Ellsbury decrease our chances?

    Trading 2 of them?

    3 of them?

     

    Not easy questions, but what are your ball park guesses at this moment in the season?

     



    Trading Salty would effect every aspect of the team. especially the pitching staff that's been fine even in most Losses. I'd trade Drew & Ells over Salty at this point. 

    Naps important, he's streaky & i hope he gets hot again. Not sure we have anyone to replace him, unless Middlebrooks proves himself and is an option. 

    And Aceves? ... I don't think he's the glue that holds this team together.

     

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

    Ranaudo with a 1 hitter tonight. Bogaerts with 2 dingers and a double. The farm keeps chugging along. Ranaudo doesn't seem to have enough stuff to be a good major league starter but if you are 6'7" or so and can locate a fastball on a downward plane, good things can happen. At least as long as the control is there. People are going to start clamoring for a promotion for him to AAA ball soon but he needs work badly on his changeup. 

    At the same time he is leading the Eastern league in ERA I would bet. it is tremendous to see the starting pitching talent we have in AA and AAA ball. Best I've ever seen us have at that level.



    This is pretty much on par with what I've been hearing about him.  He's is dominating AA hitters with a major league fastball.  However the other pitches haven't developed as much.  I think he still has some room for growth, he missed a whole season and is still young.  If nothing else develops (and theres no reason to think it won't at least a little) he has late inning reliver stuff at the MLB level.

    I say his stuff develops at least enough to make him a #4 guy with some seasons in his prime as a #2 guy.  Maybe more than that if he pushes his stuff to his ceiling.

    The System in General is very impressive this year.  It has been close to a "best case scenario" 

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

    I have no problem trading Drew either. Unfortunately we won't get much for any of them so its kind of a moot point anyway.


    Trading Drew gets you salary dump / cap flexibility.

    Who would pick up Gomes 10m??

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to lasitter's comment:

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

    I have no problem trading Drew either. Unfortunately we won't get much for any of them so its kind of a moot point anyway.



    Trading Drew gets you salary dump / cap flexibility.

     

    Who would pick up Gomes 10m??



    Do we need it? We are under the cap now with room and have more money (including Drews) coming off the books next year.  It makes sense if you are about to add a bunch of money.  But if it's for an aging pitcher who has tanked in the playoffs his last couple go arounds then count me out. 

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    With regard to the trade ideas I'm hearing, the one thing that keeps jumping out at me is this: if you think the Red Sox have any chance at all this year, then trading Salty would be an extraordinarily bad idea.  Why?  Because we have NO ONE to replace him.

    Lavarnway has done NOTHING at the major league level to suggest he is ready for the job, either OFFENSIVELY or DEFENSIVELY.  To think otherwise is pure fantasy.

    If, on the other hand, you think the Sox have no chance this year, then sure, trading Salty makes sense.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    I sure as heck wouldn't give up "Aceves,Lav,Nava,Boggy,Webster" for Stanton and a raw A pitching prospect. That's 2 of our top 3 prospects plus a regular OF, a solid catching prospect and a decent starter depth guy. For a guy who is hitting .227 with 3 HR so far this year. Stanton is a stud but I'd prefer he had much better numbers this year before doing that deal. 

    If his stock is low, what better time to trade for him. 'Cause that's not what he is. Maybe we don't need to give up as much as i thought? 

    Lav,Ace,Nava,Brentz,Webster?

    Lav,Ace,Nava,Boggy,Workman? 

    Maybe only 4 out of the 5?

    maybe Iglesias instead of Bogaerts?

    Minor league depth is a great thing, don't get me wrong. But if that depth becomes a spoil of redundancies that isn't necessarily helping the big club win, something needs to happen.

     

     

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to emp9's comment:

    I sure as heck wouldn't give up "Aceves,Lav,Nava,Boggy,Webster" for Stanton and a raw A pitching prospect. That's 2 of our top 3 prospects plus a regular OF, a solid catching prospect and a decent starter depth guy. For a guy who is hitting .227 with 3 HR so far this year. Stanton is a stud but I'd prefer he had much better numbers this year before doing that deal. 

    If his stock is low, what better time to trade for him. 'Cause that's not what he is. Maybe we don't need to give up as much as i thought? 

    Lav,Ace,Nava,Brentz,Webster?

    Lav,Ace,Nava,Boggy,Workman? 

    Maybe only 4 out of the 5?

    maybe Iglesias instead of Bogaerts?

    Minor league depth is a great thing, don't get me wrong. But if that depth becomes a spoil of redundancies that isn't necessarily helping the big club win, something needs to happen.

     

     



    To pry Stanton even now with his slow start you re looking at Boggie and Barnes/Ranaudo ( one of the 2) to start. The 2 more of Cecchini,Webster,Swihart,RDLA,maybe Brentz and Lava. Ain't no way Fl will take Nave, Workman, or Ace. Forget that. Stanton would solve a lot of problems for the RS for the next 10 yrs in the middle of the order with out a dought. And I personally...would make the trade in a nano second

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    Trading Salty would effect every aspect of the team. especially the pitching staff that's been fine even in most Losses. I'd trade Drew & Ells over Salty at this point. 

    The fact that Ross has not played full seasons before, does not mean her cannot play 60% of the games for 2 months. He's dont that several times in his career. He is not your typical 36 year old catcher. He has low mileage (675 career games in 12 seasons).

    I think the staff would do better with him, and worse in the 40% games with Lava. Overall, it might be even or a slight loss, but when Salty's bat probably goes ice cold by August, I'd think Lava might make up for that loss on offense.

    I do agree though; I'd trade Drew and Ells before Salty, if we are in it at the deadline.

     

     

    Naps important, he's streaky & i hope he gets hot again. Not sure we have anyone to replace him, unless Middlebrooks proves himself and is an option. 

    Naps will not be traded, if we are still in it.

     

    And Aceves? ... I don't think he's the glue that holds this team together.

    He does provide nice insurance, but my guess is, he will be dealt this year.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to makonikyman's comment:

    In response to emp9's comment:

     

    I sure as heck wouldn't give up "Aceves,Lav,Nava,Boggy,Webster" for Stanton and a raw A pitching prospect. That's 2 of our top 3 prospects plus a regular OF, a solid catching prospect and a decent starter depth guy. For a guy who is hitting .227 with 3 HR so far this year. Stanton is a stud but I'd prefer he had much better numbers this year before doing that deal. 

    If his stock is low, what better time to trade for him. 'Cause that's not what he is. Maybe we don't need to give up as much as i thought? 

    Lav,Ace,Nava,Brentz,Webster?

    Lav,Ace,Nava,Boggy,Workman? 

    Maybe only 4 out of the 5?

    maybe Iglesias instead of Bogaerts?

    Minor league depth is a great thing, don't get me wrong. But if that depth becomes a spoil of redundancies that isn't necessarily helping the big club win, something needs to happen.

     

     

     



    To pry Stanton even now with his slow start you re looking at Boggie and Barnes/Ranaudo ( one of the 2) to start. The 2 more of Cecchini,Webster,Swihart,RDLA,maybe Brentz and Lava. Ain't no way Fl will take Nave, Workman, or Ace. Forget that. Stanton would solve a lot of problems for the RS for the next 10 yrs in the middle of the order with out a dought. And I personally...would make the trade in a nano second

     



    As good as Stanton was last year, the guy is still roughly a lifetime .268 hitter, in Miami with no pressure having a down year this year. I wouldn't give up that much for him. Some would. I wouldn't. 

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    People always overate their own prospects when looking at hypothetical trades.

    Best case scenario, if he fully reaches his ceiling Bogaerts is Stanton.   There is no way this trade happens without at least starting with a prospect like the Xman, throw in one of the top pitching prospects (Barnes/Webster/Ranaduo) and you have the beginnings of a package. 

    Personally I like the slow and steady approach.  We have a good solid core of prospects coming up, and I want to see what we have on them.  Sure some of them will fizzle and we may look back and say "we should of sold high him" but if a couple pan out then it's all worth it.

    I don't think you trade away our farm for Stanton, there is nothing wrong with Stanton as he is the ideal kinda guy to build around.  Nothing wrong with giving up a ton of talent for guy like Stanton either, just staying within is a personal preference of mine right now.  I want to build around Bogaerts and the pitching coming up.  Maybe all of Ranaudo/Barnes/Owens/Webster become above average pitchers but none are aces (very plausible scenario) well then you can go out and pay a guy $20 to anchor the rotation.  That is ok because the rest of the rotation is cost controlled.

    It's also easier to go out and overpay for a middle of the order bat when you already have a guy like Bogearts under control there.  Sure Stanton is cost controlled to, but he does hit the market much sooner than Bogaerts (clock hasn't started ticking) and he is arbitration eligible this year.   

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    People always overate their own prospects when looking at hypothetical trades.

    Best case scenario, if he fully reaches his ceiling Bogaerts is Stanton.   There is no way this trade happens without at least starting with a prospect like the Xman, throw in one of the top pitching prospects (Barnes/Webster/Ranaduo) and you have the beginnings of a package. 

    Personally I like the slow and steady approach.  We have a good solid core of prospects coming up, and I want to see what we have on them.  Sure some of them will fizzle and we may look back and say "we should of sold high him" but if a couple pan out then it's all worth it.

    I don't think you trade away our farm for Stanton, there is nothing wrong with Stanton as he is the ideal kinda guy to build around.  Nothing wrong with giving up a ton of talent for guy like Stanton either, just staying within is a personal preference of mine right now.  I want to build around Bogaerts and the pitching coming up.  Maybe all of Ranaudo/Barnes/Owens/Webster become above average pitchers but none are aces (very plausible scenario) well then you can go out and pay a guy $20 to anchor the rotation.  That is ok because the rest of the rotation is cost controlled.

    It's also easier to go out and overpay for a middle of the order bat when you already have a guy like Bogearts under control there.  Sure Stanton is cost controlled to, but he does hit the market much sooner than Bogaerts (clock hasn't started ticking) and he is arbitration eligible this year.   



    I agree wholeheartedly....

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    With regard to the trade ideas I'm hearing, the one thing that keeps jumping out at me is this: if you think the Red Sox have any chance at all this year, then trading Salty would be an extraordinarily bad idea.  Why?  Because we have NO ONE to replace him.

    Lavarnway has done NOTHING at the major league level to suggest he is ready for the job, either OFFENSIVELY or DEFENSIVELY.  To think otherwise is pure fantasy.

    If, on the other hand, you think the Sox have no chance this year, then sure, trading Salty makes sense.



    I repeat, Salty is on pace to cost us 19 RUNS defensively this year. He's throwing out runners at a God awful 11% rate. Lavarnway has played maybe 2 games in the majors so far this year so how do we know what he can do? Lavarnway's minor league record as a hitter is far stronger than Salty's and Salty's defense has been consistently bad forever. I wouldn't trade Salty for nothing but I would look to get some value for him because he is clearly replaceable. If not him then Ross. Lavarnway is probably ready at this point to help us. And we have 2 catchers behind him doing just fine in the farm ranks. It's a position of strength.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

    I repeat, Salty is on pace to cost us 19 RUNS defensively this year. He's throwing out runners at a God awful 11% rate. Lavarnway has played maybe 2 games in the majors so far this year so how do we know what he can do? Lavarnway's minor league record as a hitter is far stronger than Salty's and Salty's defense has been consistently bad forever. I wouldn't trade Salty for nothing but I would look to get some value for him because he is clearly replaceable. If not him then Ross. Lavarnway is probably ready at this point to help us. And we have 2 catchers behind him doing just fine in the farm ranks. It's a position of strength.



    First of all I don't think 19 runs is a huge number over the course of the season.  Secondly, what can't be measured is how well Salty is doing as far as calling games and working with the pitchers.  Overall our pitching is much improved and it's possible that Salty is part of that.  It's an X factor, admittedly.

    I can't see any way Lavarnway is going to be an upgrade at catcher THIS SEASON.  Aside from his unimpressive major league numbers, he's just not experienced.  Expecting him to jump in mid-season and do a good job defensively would be sheer folly, IMO.

    Again, I'm only looking at this from the perspective of us having a chance THIS SEASON.

    Sorry for the caps, I'm not yelling, they're just for emphasis.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to lasitter's comment:

     

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

    I have no problem trading Drew either. Unfortunately we won't get much for any of them so its kind of a moot point anyway.



    Trading Drew gets you salary dump / cap flexibility.

     

    Who would pick up Gomes 10m??

     




    Thats all it does. It doesnt make you better unless Iggy can hit at an 800+ OPS clip. You lose a tone of offense switching Drew for Iggy. Why cant you guys see this? Im sorry, but Iggy isnt going to make that many more plays that Drew to make up for it. Also counting the erratic throws and kicked balls on occasion. Drew is solid and accurate defensively and brings a good stick.

     

    Nobody will pick up gomes for that much.

    Not even going to get into the salty thing. If you guys cant see why its foolish to think Lav and Ross will be better than Salty at this point, then theres no changing your minds. No stat, none, can account for the loss of 19 runs. It's absurd.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    Thats all it does. It doesnt make you better unless Iggy can hit at an 800+ OPS clip. You lose a tone of offense switching Drew for Iggy. Why cant you guys see this? Im sorry, but Iggy isnt going to make that many more plays that Drew to make up for it. Also counting the erratic throws and kicked balls on occasion. Drew is solid and accurate defensively and brings a good stick.

    1) We don't know if Drew will hit at .800 let alone plus. To think Iggy has to hit .800 or more to avoid us "losing a ton of offense" is absurd. Why can't you see this? Drew is likely to end up at .725-.775, which is good for a SS. Iggy is likely to end up at .625-.675, which is bad, even for SSs, especially if nearer .600 than .675. My guess is the differential would likely be about 75-100 points. That is pretty large, but if Iggy could hit .700+, I doubt anyone would say they'd rather have Drew at .750 than Iggy at .700 (except maybe you).

    2) Iggy has fantastic range- probably the best in MLB. There's no argument he makes more plays. The question is how many. I find it hard to imagine it's any less than 30 over 150 games. I'd guess it's more like 45-60. Maybe he gives back 15-20 in bad throws or botched easy plays, but he's an obvious plus on defense over Drew.

     

    Nobody will pick up gomes for that much.

    Gomes is not going anywhere. He has killed lefties over the years, and that is one of our biggest weaknesses. The hope is he will regain that special skill. As bad as he has been so far, he's still better than many other starters vs LHPs. He's not the weakest link vs lefties.

     

    Not even going to get into the salty thing. If you guys cant see why its foolish to think Lav and Ross will be better than Salty at this point, then theres no changing your minds. No stat, none, can account for the loss of 19 runs. It's absurd.

    It's not about believeing we are better with Ross/Lava than Salty/Ross. It's about 2 months of Salty vs years and years of another good player. It's about projecting a common Salty late summer slump. It's about thinking Ross can handle 60-65% of the action for 2 months and maybe get more out of the staff than Salty would have. It's about Lava getting a chance to hit primarily vs LHPs, something Ross and Salty do worse against than righties.

    It's about planning for the future, instead of getting nothing for Salty this winter.

    You may not agree, but saying "why can't you guys see this?" is being a bit overdramatic. I can see how trading Salty might lessen our chances of winning this year, but I happen to think it would be by a slight amount, and if Salty does slump again, we might even be better with Ross & Lava for 2 months.

    Salty:

    7/12  .182/.260/.424/.685

    8/12  .205/.263/.329/.591

    9/12  .180/.301/.361/.662

    8/11  .221/.264/.485/.749

    9/11  .162/.174/.368/.542

     

    The guy has hit about a combined .195 the2 months of 2012 and 2011. He's playing more games now than any season of his career. 

     

    My position hasn't changed: extend him or trade him for good value.

     
  16. 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:

     

    Thats all it does. It doesnt make you better unless Iggy can hit at an 800+ OPS clip. You lose a tone of offense switching Drew for Iggy. Why cant you guys see this? Im sorry, but Iggy isnt going to make that many more plays that Drew to make up for it. Also counting the erratic throws and kicked balls on occasion. Drew is solid and accurate defensively and brings a good stick.

    1) We don't know if Drew will hit at .800 let alone plus. To think Iggy has to hit .800 or more to avoid us "losing a ton of offense" is absurd. Why can't you see this? Drew is likely to end up at .725-.775, which is good for a SS. Iggy is likely to end up at .625-.675, which is bad, even for SSs, especially if nearer .600 than .675. My guess is the differential would likely be about 75-100 points. That is pretty large, but if Iggy could hit .700+, I doubt anyone would say they'd rather have Drew at .750 than Iggy at .700 (except maybe you).

    2) Iggy has fantastic range- probably the best in MLB. There's no argument he makes more plays. The question is how many. I find it hard to imagine it's any less than 30 over 150 games. I'd guess it's more like 45-60. Maybe he gives back 15-20 in bad throws or botched easy plays, but he's an obvious plus on defense over Drew.

     

    Nobody will pick up gomes for that much.

    Gomes is not going anywhere. He has killed lefties over the years, and that is one of our biggest weaknesses. The hope is he will regain that special skill. As bad as he has been so far, he's still better than many other starters vs LHPs. He's not the weakest link vs lefties.

     

    Not even going to get into the salty thing. If you guys cant see why its foolish to think Lav and Ross will be better than Salty at this point, then theres no changing your minds. No stat, none, can account for the loss of 19 runs. It's absurd.

    It's not about believeing we are better with Ross/Lava than Salty/Ross. It's about 2 months of Salty vs years and years of another good player. It's about projecting a common Salty late summer slump. It's about thinking Ross can handle 60-65% of the action for 2 months and maybe get more out of the staff than Salty would have. It's about Lava getting a chance to hit primarily vs LHPs, something Ross and Salty do worse against than righties.

    It's about planning for the future, instead of getting nothing for Salty this winter.

    You may not agree, but saying "why can't you guys see this?" is being a bit overdramatic. I can see how trading Salty might lessen our chances of winning this year, but I happen to think it would be by a slight amount, and if Salty does slump again, we might even be better with Ross & Lava for 2 months.

    Salty:

    7/12  .182/.260/.424/.685

    8/12  .205/.263/.329/.591

    9/12  .180/.301/.361/.662

    8/11  .221/.264/.485/.749

    9/11  .162/.174/.368/.542

     

    The guy has hit about a combined .195 the2 months of 2012 and 2011. He's playing more games now than any season of his career. 

     

    My position hasn't changed: extend him or trade him for good value.

     




    Your right, maybe a bit dramatic on my part. But, I do understand your point. I think where we differ is the effect the catcher has on the starters, who are very comfortable with Salty and like the way he catches and calls a game. Saltys offense has improved a lot this year so whos to say he will suffer another late season fall off.

     

    Im of the opinion that if it doesnt make us better, dont do it. Im not talking for the future either. If we are going to trade a vital piece like our starting catcher, then we have to be 100% sure we will be better at the position going forward. You admit that we will probably have a slight drop off. I say it will be more than slight. To me, thats not acceptable.

    The reason Ross is a BU is 1)because of his age and 2)the fact when he gets enough AB's hes not nearly as effective. Lavarnway hasnt proved a thing to me in MLB, both offensively and especially defensively. IMO, both guys would be questionable in their new roles. Not worth taking the chance if we are in the race.

    Same with SS. Although I dont think Drew will be above 800OPS by years end, I do believe he will be very close. I dont think Iggy will come close to 700 once hes given enough AB's. More like 625ish. To me, 150pt. difference in OPS is huge. Defensively, Drew has been more than solid. Naps has talked about his consistency and how accurate his throws are. he get to a lot of balls too. Not as big a difference than most thought. Estimating how many balls you think Iggy would have got to, IMO, is useless. no disrespect.

    Personally, I dont think letting someone walk (possible QO?) and not recieving anything is a bad thing when the loss of production is that great. We will have to agree to disagree on this one Moon. If we have a legit chance this year Im not as concerned about getting something back for Drew and salty if it means we dont improve this year. Thats why we make moves at the deadline.

    I think maybe adding another bat or a pitcher will be the most important moves. a lot can happen in 2 months, but as of right now Middy is the key here on offense. If he continues to struggle, then the Sox will have to send him down and look for a replacement. Depending on how the starters are doing and what our own prospects are doing, we might be looking on the starting pitching or bullpen market too.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    Well, I was sort of shocked when writing down names of people I would be willing to trade for the "right piece."  Of the fielders, I would trade anyone except Pedroia, Middlebrooks, and Ross.  Pitchers, I would trade Aceves, Doubie, and Bard.  I won't comment on minor league prospects; I don't think I know enough to say who should go.  I'm not for trading everybody,  just the select several we need.  To the right NL team, couldn't we get quite a bit back for Ells, Aceves, Bard, Drew?  Some pitching coach out there will think they can turn Bard around.  Iggy could go for Drew if he's not in the plans (not my choice).  So you give up a starting SS, CF, a long reliever/spot starter, and a short reliever.  If we want to be sellers at the deadline, seems like we've got a lot to offer.

    I like Salty but I think we would be just fine with Ross and one of the young catchers.  We've essentially got two pitching coaches, so I don't think the pitching staff will go haywire without Salty.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    We've got to get that next-young-big-middle-of-the-order bat.  Papi is a phenom but how much longer can we realistically count on him?

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    People always overate their own prospects when looking at hypothetical trades.

    Best case scenario, if he fully reaches his ceiling Bogaerts is Stanton.   There is no way this trade happens without at least starting with a prospect like the Xman, throw in one of the top pitching prospects (Barnes/Webster/Ranaduo) and you have the beginnings of a package. 

    Personally I like the slow and steady approach.  We have a good solid core of prospects coming up, and I want to see what we have on them.  Sure some of them will fizzle and we may look back and say "we should of sold high him" but if a couple pan out then it's all worth it.

    I don't think you trade away our farm for Stanton, there is nothing wrong with Stanton as he is the ideal kinda guy to build around.  Nothing wrong with giving up a ton of talent for guy like Stanton either, just staying within is a personal preference of mine right now.  I want to build around Bogaerts and the pitching coming up.  Maybe all of Ranaudo/Barnes/Owens/Webster become above average pitchers but none are aces (very plausible scenario) well then you can go out and pay a guy $20 to anchor the rotation.  That is ok because the rest of the rotation is cost controlled.

    It's also easier to go out and overpay for a middle of the order bat when you already have a guy like Bogearts under control there.  Sure Stanton is cost controlled to, but he does hit the market much sooner than Bogaerts (clock hasn't started ticking) and he is arbitration eligible this year.   



    I'm down w/ waiting for XB, but that's taking the long way home so to speak. I was thinking more about this year, if it comes down to making a run.And sense I initially thought they'd win 20 more games this year I'm a little trigger-happy i guess. Well, in a wait 'til mid-late July sorta way. 

     

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    When a catcher cost his teams 19 runs as compared to an average catcher over 135 games, that is a lot of runs. That is one position alone costing us a number of games defensively as in maybe 4-5? At least. It's not good ok. It's horrible. He's already cost us at least 7 runs defensively.

    And if we can improve the team while also getting a return value for the trade I'm all for it. Again, i wouldn't give him away but history has shown that Salty generally swoons in the 2nd half. 

    I think we have a shot this year. I'm all for trading for a stud pitcher and if it costs us a few prospects I'm open to the concept but I'd rather lose some supplementary pieces like Drew and Salty, maybe a reliever and some secondary prospects and try to do a salary dump deal for someone like Cliff Lee. Of Mauer or some other salary dump option as long as the deal is for a solid player under maybe 2-3 years of control.

     

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    My gut feeling is that Ross is not recovering well from the injury. I have no problem if we could put him on the DL, get him healthy and give Lavarnway his PT at least until he comes back. In this way we see how Lavarnway is doing.  Ideally we trade one of the catchers.  

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to RedsoxProspects's comment:

    My gut feeling is that Ross is not recovering well from the injury. I have no problem if we could put him on the DL, get him healthy and give Lavarnway his PT at least until he comes back. In this way we see how Lavarnway is doing.    



    To me, this idea makes a lot more sense.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    What's kind of ironic for me about this whole Salty debate is that moon was instrumental in converting me into a supporter of Salty's.  I was always bringing up Salty's high CERA, and it was moon who kept pointing out that Salty's CERA had improved a lot since the first part of 2012, and also that it took Varitek several years to become a good CERA catcher.

    So now I finally want to keep Salty, and moon wants to trade him. Laughing 

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to lasitter's comment:

     

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

    I have no problem trading Drew either. Unfortunately we won't get much for any of them so its kind of a moot point anyway.



    Trading Drew gets you salary dump / cap flexibility.

     

    Who would pick up Gomes 10m??

     




    Thats all it does. It doesnt make you better unless Iggy can hit at an 800+ OPS clip. You lose a tone of offense switching Drew for Iggy. Why cant you guys see this? Im sorry, but Iggy isnt going to make that many more plays that Drew to make up for it. Also counting the erratic throws and kicked balls on occasion. Drew is solid and accurate defensively and brings a good stick.

     

    Nobody will pick up gomes for that much.

    Not even going to get into the salty thing. If you guys cant see why its foolish to think Lav and Ross will be better than Salty at this point, then theres no changing your minds. No stat, none, can account for the loss of 19 runs. It's absurd.



    Salty is actually up to a negative 21 runs cost now, after last night's game. As defined:

    Rtot -- Total Zone Total Fielding Runs Above Avg
    The number of runs above or below average the player was worth based on the number of plays made.
    This number combines the Rtz, Rdp, Rof, Rcatchnumbers into a total defensive contribution.

    Link: http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/saltaja01.shtml

    hint: They are kind of credible.

     

Share