Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from MadMc1944. Show MadMc1944's posts

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    Moon those stats don't lie---Stanton is a good player and he shold be a good player for years to come.

    We don't know about Xander---he could be as talented as Giancarlo or he could be like WMB--an okay player who may find some consistentcy in the next few years. I would not have any problem trading WMB for some prospects and replace him at third with Xander or Cecchini, then perhaps try to sign Drew at SS.

    Looking at Xander I see great potential---but potential doesn't mean wins--it's what you do with the potential.

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

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    His last start might be the determining factor of who has the best record in AL.

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

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    Wow, after reading many of his posts, I've come to the conclusion that this "Softy" character is an imbecile, wrapped in a moron.

    Why does anyone ever respond to his posts?  I feel dumber just reading them!

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

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to MadMc1944's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Jasko and Crazy--

    It's not that I don't like Doubie now or next year. I think another team would be willing to give us some prospects that we don't have to carry right now on our 40. Doubrount has not exhibited an interest in coming into camp in good shape in the past.

    Dempster, Lester, Lackey, Buch, Ranaudo, Barnes, Owens, Workman, Wright--I think have a stronger work ethic than what Doubie has exhibited. We will need players at 1 B, perhaps a catcher, CF, SS and possibly a closer.

    I love Ue and Breslow  as a  set-up guys but it would be great to have a Cishek, Nathan, Soria, Perkins, or Collins to close or add added depth in the pen.

    Plus if we could add a guy like Granderson or Cuddyer for CF or a corner OF for Doubie ---I think we would be looking good.

     



    People think that if someone suggests trading a player, they do not value them. I'd say mentioning Doubront's name is the same sentence as Stanton is a great compliment to the lefty.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Stanton?  Yes.

    Mitch Moreland? Not so much...

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

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    In response to MadMc1944's comment:

    Moon those stats don't lie---Stanton is a good player and he shold be a good player for years to come.

    We don't know about Xander---he could be as talented as Giancarlo or he could be like WMB--an okay player who may find some consistentcy in the next few years. I would not have any problem trading WMB for some prospects and replace him at third with Xander or Cecchini, then perhaps try to sign Drew at SS.

    Looking at Xander I see great potential---but potential doesn't mean wins--it's what you do with the potential.




    Yes, but we need to weigh this:

    3 years of control for Stanton (all at rising arb salaries)

    vs 

    5-6 years of control for Bogaerts (2-3 years at min wage)

     

    I realize Bogey may turn out to be just an average player, and we already know Stanton is much better than average. I get that, but I would not trade Bogey straight up for Stanton. I wouldn't argue with anyone who would.

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

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    People think that if someone suggests trading a player, they do not value them. I'd say mentioning Doubront's name is the same sentence as Stanton is a great compliment to the lefty.

     

     

     



    Stanton?  Yes.

     

    Mitch Moreland? Not so much...

    I agree. The Mitch Moreland part of the statement does kind of devalue Doubront, but it could just be that the psoter is overvaluing Moreland.

    The fact that he mentioned Stanton shows to me, he values Doubront and is not just trying to dump him out of some idea that he is a bum.

    Sox4ever

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxpride34. Show redsoxpride34's posts

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    i could see us going after a blockbuster deal with the marlines for stanton and cishek, koji was great for us this year, but he is old and has one year left on his contract. we currently do not have a bonafied replacement for him. sure, we still have bailey and hanrahan, both injury prone but talented pitchers. but the reality is that we cannot put much faith in those guys going forward. i doubt we will retain both, but we should keep one of the two. stanton would give us a much needed presence in the middle of the batting order and someone to build our line up around. the cost of such acquisitions is always the challenge, but in this case we have tons to offer. obviously the first name that will come up is bogaerts. i, like many of you, do not want to trade him. i believe we could get a deal done without him, but if the marlins will only do the deal if he is involved, then we have to strongly consider it. as someone mentioned above, we have xander under control for 5-6 years, stanton would be for 3, cishek im not sure. (probably 1 or 2 yrs) if I am ben cherington and co, i think in the end i ultimately would do the deal. why? because it comes down to potential vs production. stanton is 23 yrs old, almost 24, he had 37 homers and 86 rbi last year in 123 games, playing for the abysimal marlins. that projects to over 40 homers and 95-100 rbi. he has hit 30+ homers the past 2 years, and if not for injuries would have done the same this year. ( he still technically could, but i wouldnt bet on it) the only thing that is concerning with stanton is injuries. the past 2 years he has been injured. that being said, i would still offer up alot for him. i still think we can get him without bogaerts, but time will tell. 

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

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    would do Doubront , cecchini and jbj for Stanton.

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

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    In response to RedSoxFireman's comment:

    Forget Stanton, the Mariners have no reason to trade this near zeo cost player for years to come.



    But what about the Marlins?

     

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    In response to RedSoxFireman's comment:

    Forget Stanton, the Mariners have no reason to trade this near zeo cost player for years to come.




    Stanton does indeed cost the Mariners nothing; he also contributes nothing to them.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxpride34. Show redsoxpride34's posts

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    In response to RedSoxFireman's comment:

    Forget Stanton, the Mariners have no reason to trade this near zeo cost player for years to come.



    that is true, but consider this, he will keep going up in cost each year substantially and the team is not going to win with just him. they have way too many holes, dealing him could fill 3 or 4 holes on the team depending on what they get back. say the sox deal them jdj, webster, lavarnway, and de la rosa, they now have young controllable players at multiple positions as opposed to just one. also keep in mind that stantons value is not going to get much higher than it will be this offseason. the older and more expensive he gets, the lower his value gets. and the chances of him signing a long term deal with miami are next to zero. 

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

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    In response to RedSoxFireman's comment:

    Forget Stanton, the Mariners have no reason to trade this near zeo cost player for years to come.



    Another clown classic.

     

    Newsflash: Stanton is on the Marlins not the Mariners.

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

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    In response to redsoxpride34's comment:

    i could see us going after a blockbuster deal with the marlines for stanton and cishek, koji was great for us this year, but he is old and has one year left on his contract. we currently do not have a bonafied replacement for him. sure, we still have bailey and hanrahan, both injury prone but talented pitchers. but the reality is that we cannot put much faith in those guys going forward. i doubt we will retain both, but we should keep one of the two. stanton would give us a much needed presence in the middle of the batting order and someone to build our line up around. the cost of such acquisitions is always the challenge, but in this case we have tons to offer. obviously the first name that will come up is bogaerts. i, like many of you, do not want to trade him. i believe we could get a deal done without him, but if the marlins will only do the deal if he is involved, then we have to strongly consider it. as someone mentioned above, we have xander under control for 5-6 years, stanton would be for 3, cishek im not sure. (probably 1 or 2 yrs) if I am ben cherington and co, i think in the end i ultimately would do the deal. why? because it comes down to potential vs production. stanton is 23 yrs old, almost 24, he had 37 homers and 86 rbi last year in 123 games, playing for the abysimal marlins. that projects to over 40 homers and 95-100 rbi. he has hit 30+ homers the past 2 years, and if not for injuries would have done the same this year. ( he still technically could, but i wouldnt bet on it) the only thing that is concerning with stanton is injuries. the past 2 years he has been injured. that being said, i would still offer up alot for him. i still think we can get him without bogaerts, but time will tell. 



    Cishek has 4 arb years left.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    In response to BurritoT-'s comment:

    sorry softlaw as much as I would never have trade Iggy I think Peavey is a game changer, he is determined and talented. And unlike inking him to a Lackey sized deal we only have him for one more year - the team is not tied down to his contract long-term.



    Couldn't agree more.

    I loved Iggy, but he was never going to be handed the FT SS job- like it or not.

    Getting 2 playoff cycles out of Peavy was a "game changer".

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from MadMc1944. Show MadMc1944's posts

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    Giancarlo might be just too expensive to have to come up with Xander and Cecchini and perhaps Owens, Barnes and Rubby.

    You could go after FA's like Morales, Granderson, Pence or Nelson Cruz.

    You could try to trade for these players that may not break the bank and players that could possibly turn into a DH when Ortiz retires: 

    Matt Holliday-----------------Chris Carter

    Michael Cuddyer-------------Edwin Encarnacion

    Tulo---------------------------Batista

    CarGo-------------------------Trumbo

    Joe Mauer--------------------Matt Kemp

    Andre Ethier

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

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    In response to MadMc1944's comment:

    Giancarlo might be just too expensive to have to come up with Xander and Cecchini and perhaps Owens, Barnes and Rubby.

    You could go after FA's like Morales, Granderson, Pence or Nelson Cruz.

    You could try to trade for these players that may not break the bank and players that could possibly turn into a DH when Ortiz retires: 

    Matt Holliday-----------------Chris Carter

    Michael Cuddyer-------------Edwin Encarnacion

    Tulo---------------------------Batista

    CarGo-------------------------Trumbo

    Joe Mauer--------------------Matt Kemp

    Andre Ethier



    No FA is going to be that big bopper we need behind Papi, but getting 3 good FAs could help us maintain the balanced approach we had this year.

    I don't trust the Colorado guys to be able to duplicate their numbers in the AL east.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from MadMc1944. Show MadMc1944's posts

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    I'd be very happy with Kendrys, Granderson and Pence for FA. That would be about $40 M right there.

    I see that Mauer is being shut down for the balance of the season due to a concussion.

    I know Carter is another K machine like Nap---he'll probably finish with 30 dingers---he might be able to provide some protection for Ortiz. Hit Carter 3, Ortiz 4, Morales 5, Granderson 6.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    In response to MadMc1944's comment:

    I'd be very happy with Kendrys, Granderson and Pence for FA. That would be about $40 M right there.

    I see that Mauer is being shut down for the balance of the season due to a concussion.

    I know Carter is another K machine like Nap---he'll probably finish with 30 dingers---he might be able to provide some protection for Ortiz. Hit Carter 3, Ortiz 4, Morales 5, Granderson 6.



    Why would the Sox bring in Pence AND Granderson when they have two players who are more productive and actually under contract in Victorino & Nava, not to mention the fact that Carp will definitely be in the mix because they love his versatility.  Jonny Gomes isn't going anywhere, either.  Bradley Jr. will likely be in the mix as well.  Besides, I'd be surprised if the Sox have any interest in Granderson at all at this point & Pence will likely re-sign with SF.  

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

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    In response to RedSoxFireman's comment:

    Forget Stanton, the Mariners have no reason to trade this near zeo cost player for years to come.



    The Mariners have acquired Stanton from the Marlins?  I totally missed that, what did they give up for him?

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

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    In response to BurritoT-'s comment:

    Ideally as Ortiz is getting on in years we want to aquire a #4 and move Ortiz to #5.... one of these years we are dead meat if we don't go get our new power machine.



    The Sox lineup is so balanced I don't see it as a major issue.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    In response to RedSoxFireman's comment:

    Forget Stanton, the Mariners have no reason to trade this near zeo cost player for years to come.



    Why would the Mariners care if the Marlins made a move?

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: Are Doubrount's days numbered with the Sox?

    In response to billge's comment:

    would do Doubront , cecchini and jbj for Stanton.



    Who wouldn't?

     

Share