Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?
posted at 9/22/2013 10:05 PM EDT
In response to moonslav59's comment:
I literally don't think the Sox Front Office would even discuss that trade in a meeting. I think Ben's secretary would have the autonomy to turn that trade down, herself. Ben literally told everyone who called near the deadline that Will was "unavailable." Forget including Doubront as well in trade for Stanton. Let's agree to disagree. Middlebrooks & Doubront are two players you haven't put much stock in over the years, but their value within the Sox organization is significantly higher than on this board.
Look, I'm tired of people saying I do not value Middy or Doubront. Suggesting some possible trades for mega stars is not devaluing a player.
Stanton is a very good proven player.
No player is "unavailable".
I'd hate to lose Middlebrooks, but his future is not a certainty. The fact that we have Bogey and Cecchini to play 3B, makes the trade a possibility, but I doubt it happens- not because Ben would say no (although he might), but because Miami's secretary would hang up on Ben.
BTW, I have mentioned trading for Stanton several times, and this was the first time I mentioned Doubront, as far as I know. I was only responding to someone's post. I actually think Miami would rather have younger prospects than Doubront, and they also may take Cecchini instead of Middy: something like this:
2 from Webster, de la Rose, Barnes, Workman, Britton or maybe Ranaudo (I'd avoid putting Owens in this group).
1 from Brentz, Coyle, Betts, Hassan, Wilson
The Sox Front Office would never consider that trade, believe it or not. You have a history of posts that suggest you don't put much stock in Middlebrooks or Doubront. These are facts. By the way, some players are in fact "unavailable," whether you want to believe it or not. Xander Boegarts is "unavailable." Period. Straight up for Stanton? The Sox wouldn't think twice about it. Just because you want Giancarlo Stanton, it doesn't mean the Sox Front Office does. They may consider the possibility at the price, but that "right" price, but would never include Middlebrooks or Boegarts.