Depth

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: Depth

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    OK, I really did not want to get into specifics until mid-July, but I'll throw this one out there:

    1) Trade Ellsbury for a very good prospect.

    2) Trade Drew for a decent prospect (pay part of Drew's deal if needed).

    3) Trade the prospects from above and maybe a player/prospect that will need to be on the 40 man roster next year (or be rule 5'd or DFA'd) plus Doubront to Milwaukee for Yovani Gallardo. He's off to a poor start, so maybe his pricetag is a bit lower. He just turned 27 and is only 1.5 years older than Doubront. His contract?

    13:$7.75M, 14:$11.25M, 15:$13M club option ($0.6M buyout)

    We get better at starting SS and starting CF and 5th starter, but get worse on the bench.

    I can see the the forest beyond the trees.

    Sox4ever

    The Red Sox (not "we" as I am not on their payroll) do not necessary get better at shortstop and they may get much worse at third if Middlebrooks doesn't pick it up this season and they don't have a decent backup plan.  I don't see how they get better in center if you include offense as part of the game.  Not seeing the forest does not mean giving up on the possibility of a postseason run this season, which you never bought into in the first place.  

     

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

    Re: Depth

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Yes, I am "very down" on a young pitcher who doesn't seem to care about coming to camp in shape or not 2 out of 3 years.



    I think you're making too big a deal about the 'out of shape' business.  I don't think Josh Beckett was ever big on an offseason regime, but you always defended him because of his numbers.  Likewise our main concern with Doubront should be his numbers.

     

     
  3. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Depth

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    [QUOTE]Yes, I am "very down" on a young pitcher who doesn't seem to care about coming to camp in shape or not 2 out of 3 years.

     

     



    I think you're making too big a deal about the 'out of shape' business.  I don't think Josh Beckett was ever big on an offseason regime, but you always defended him because of his numbers.  Likewise our main concern with Doubront should be his numbers.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    OK, if I wanted to trade one of our players for a guy on another team that has had an ERA of over 4.85 and a WHIP over 1.445 the last 2 years and who also came to camp out of shape in 2 of his first 3 years in the bigs, you'd be roasting me alive.

    I didn't always defend Beckett, but since you brought up the numbers, what numbers are you liking about Doubront?

    His 1.645 WHIP this year?

    His 4.88 ERA (worse than 2012)?

    His 1 BB per 2 IP rate?

    He's got great potential, and I'm sure some GM wants him as much as you do.

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

    Re: Depth


    Moon, I go with southpaw on keeping Drew & Ellsbury for depth purposes. Bradley Jr. just hasn't sold me yet, and Victorino's reliability remains in question.

    Major thanks for the research on roster Rule 5 eligibility though, I hadn't realized the situation was so dire. I figure must -keeps are Brentz, Bogaerts, Cecchini, Ranaudo, Workman, .

    Possibiles include Almanzar, Hazelbaker, Wilkerson, Ruiz, Kurcz and Ogando.

    So my earlier predictions on dfa's / trades / aren't sufficient. Major roster renovation looms ahead.

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

    Re: Depth

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    The following players will be eligible for the 2013 Rule 5 Draft if they are not added to the 40-man roster by November 20, 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, Jose Garcia, Derrik Gibson, Dreily Guerrero, Jeremy Hazelbaker, Jayson Hernandez, Chris Hernandez, Peter Hissey, Brandon Jacobs, Jeremy Kehrt, Aaron Kurcz, Juan Carlos Linares, Mario Martinez, Heiker Meneses, Boss Moanaroa, Nefi Ogando, Gerardo Olivares, Yunior Ortega, Oscar Perez, Rafael Perez, Mathew Price, Anthony Ranaudo, David Renfroe, Pete Ruiz, Felix Sanchez, Brandon Snyder, Alfredo Soto, Kyle Stroup, Francisco Taveras, Raynel Velette, Jose Vinicio, Kolbrin Vitek, Shannon Wilkerson, Brandon Workman, Madison Younginer

     

    The following players will be eligible for the 2014 Rule 5 Draft if they are not added to the 40-man roster by November 20, 2014:

    Anthony Amaya, Jonathan Aro, Matt Barnes, David Chester, Jose Colorado, Sean Coyle, Jacob Dahlstrand, Jason Garcia, Matt Gedman, Sergio Gomez, Williams Jerez, Elis Jimenez, Bryan Johns, Matty Johnson, Zach Kapstein, Braden Kapteyn, Ben Klafczynski, Cody Koback, Jesus Loya, Chris Martin, Mike McCarthy, Frank Montas, Nick Natoli, Matty Ott, Miguel Pena, Kendrick Perkins, Carlos Pinales, Noe Ramirez, Henry Ramos, Tim Roberson, Robby Scott, Travis Shaw, David Sopilka, Blake Swihart, Drew Turocy

    Sox4ever




    Looks like probably six guys that we definitely want to keep in 2013.  Should not be too hard to make room. I can think of five or six on the current 40 man who we could easily cut. No need to think about 2014 yet.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Depth

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    [QUOTE]Yes, I am "very down" on a young pitcher who doesn't seem to care about coming to camp in shape or not 2 out of 3 years.

     

     



    I think you're making too big a deal about the 'out of shape' business.  I don't think Josh Beckett was ever big on an offseason regime, but you always defended him because of his numbers.  Likewise our main concern with Doubront should be his numbers.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    youre using beckett as an example of conditioning being overrated? Really? lol

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

    Re: Depth

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    I think you're making too big a deal about the 'out of shape' business.  I don't think Josh Beckett was ever big on an offseason regime, but you always defended him because of his numbers.  Likewise our main concern with Doubront should be his numbers.

    OK, if I wanted to trade one of our players for a guy on another team that has had an ERA of over 4.85 and a WHIP over 1.445 the last 2 years and who also came to camp out of shape in 2 of his first 3 years in the bigs, you'd be roasting me alive.

    I didn't always defend Beckett, but since you brought up the numbers, what numbers are you liking about Doubront?

    His 1.645 WHIP this year?

    His 4.88 ERA (worse than 2012)?

    His 1 BB per 2 IP rate?

    He's got great potential, and I'm sure some GM wants him as much as you do.



    I didn't actually say I liked his numbers, I just said that's what he should be judged on.

    His YTD numbers are not great, but I do like his 2.74 ERA over the last 4 starts.

     

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

    Re: Depth

    In response to jimedfred's comment:


    Moon, I go with southpaw on keeping Drew & Ellsbury for depth purposes. Bradley Jr. just hasn't sold me yet, and Victorino's reliability remains in question.

    Major thanks for the research on roster Rule 5 eligibility though, I hadn't realized the situation was so dire. I figure must -keeps are Brentz, Bogaerts, Cecchini, Ranaudo, Workman, .

    Possibiles include Almanzar, Hazelbaker, Wilkerson, Ruiz, Kurcz and Ogando.

    So my earlier predictions on dfa's / trades / aren't sufficient. Major roster renovation looms ahead.



    It's not easy making 2 or 3 for one trades in the winter. Everyone is up against the Rule 5 and 40 man roster issues. Rather than lose some good players, we may need to make a 2 or 3 for one deal this summer anyways.

    As for Ellsbury and Drew, I'd be surprised if either was dealt and shocked if both are dealt. That doesn't stop me from hoping it happens, as long as we get good returns.

    I don't feel like we get worse with Iggy over Drew and JBJ over Ellsbury, but of course our bench is seriously weakened. However, I feel the gain we can get via trade should outweigh the possible loss at starting SS & CF and big loss on the 2013 bench. If the return does not outweigh the loss, then of course, no trade(s).

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

    Re: Depth

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    I think you're making too big a deal about the 'out of shape' business.  I don't think Josh Beckett was ever big on an offseason regime, but you always defended him because of his numbers.  Likewise our main concern with Doubront should be his numbers.

    OK, if I wanted to trade one of our players for a guy on another team that has had an ERA of over 4.85 and a WHIP over 1.445 the last 2 years and who also came to camp out of shape in 2 of his first 3 years in the bigs, you'd be roasting me alive.

    I didn't always defend Beckett, but since you brought up the numbers, what numbers are you liking about Doubront?

    His 1.645 WHIP this year?

    His 4.88 ERA (worse than 2012)?

    His 1 BB per 2 IP rate?

    He's got great potential, and I'm sure some GM wants him as much as you do.

     



    I didn't actually say I liked his numbers, I just said that's what he should be judged on.

     

    His YTD numbers are not great, but I do like his 2.74 ERA over the last 4 starts.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    He has looked good recently, and other GMs see that too. All I know is there are better pitchers in MLB than Doubront. In theory, trading Doubront and a good prospect or two should net us a better pitcher. That theory is pretty solid. The argument is really about the chances the possible net gain at that SP slot outweighs the possible loss in CF and/or SS and bench. 

     

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

    Re: Depth

    In response to georom4's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Yes, I am "very down" on a young pitcher who doesn't seem to care about coming to camp in shape or not 2 out of 3 years.

     

     

     

     



    I think you're making too big a deal about the 'out of shape' business.  I don't think Josh Beckett was ever big on an offseason regime, but you always defended him because of his numbers.  Likewise our main concern with Doubront should be his numbers.

     

     

     



    youre using beckett as an example of conditioning being overrated? Really? lol

     



    Um, maybe you could show me where I said anything like that about Beckett.  

     

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

    Re: Depth

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    The following players will be eligible for the 2013 Rule 5 Draft if they are not added to the 40-man roster by November 20, 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, Jose Garcia, Derrik Gibson, Dreily Guerrero, Jeremy Hazelbaker, Jayson Hernandez, Chris Hernandez, Peter Hissey, Brandon Jacobs, Jeremy Kehrt, Aaron Kurcz, Juan Carlos Linares, Mario Martinez, Heiker Meneses, Boss Moanaroa, Nefi Ogando, Gerardo Olivares, Yunior Ortega, Oscar Perez, Rafael Perez, Mathew Price, Anthony Ranaudo, David Renfroe, Pete Ruiz, Felix Sanchez, Brandon Snyder, Alfredo Soto, Kyle Stroup, Francisco Taveras, Raynel Velette, Jose Vinicio, Kolbrin Vitek, Shannon Wilkerson, Brandon Workman, Madison Younginer

     

    The following players will be eligible for the 2014 Rule 5 Draft if they are not added to the 40-man roster by November 20, 2014:

    Anthony Amaya, Jonathan Aro, Matt Barnes, David Chester, Jose Colorado, Sean Coyle, Jacob Dahlstrand, Jason Garcia, Matt Gedman, Sergio Gomez, Williams Jerez, Elis Jimenez, Bryan Johns, Matty Johnson, Zach Kapstein, Braden Kapteyn, Ben Klafczynski, Cody Koback, Jesus Loya, Chris Martin, Mike McCarthy, Frank Montas, Nick Natoli, Matty Ott, Miguel Pena, Kendrick Perkins, Carlos Pinales, Noe Ramirez, Henry Ramos, Tim Roberson, Robby Scott, Travis Shaw, David Sopilka, Blake Swihart, Drew Turocy

    Sox4ever

     




    Looks like probably six guys that we definitely want to keep in 2013.  Should not be too hard to make room. I can think of five or six on the current 40 man who we could easily cut. No need to think about 2014 yet.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree. There are only 6 guys that need to be protected, but I'd still hate to lose Linares and Carpenter for nothing. We could possible package them with Aceves and get a better player on a 40 man roster, or a prospect that does not need to be protected until the following year.

    Player who may walk as FAs this winter:

    Ellsbury, Drew, Hanrahan, Napoli, Salty

    We will also want to sign some free agents that will take up some slots. Here's a rough look at next year's roster (assuming no signings or trades):

    SP1-5: Buccholz, Lester, Lackey, Dempster, Doubront

    BP 6-12: Bailey, Tazawa, Breslow, Aceves, Miller, Morales, Mortensen

    13 Ross C

    14 Lavarnway C

    15 Carp 1B

    16 Pedey 2B

    17 Middlebooks 3B

    18 Iglesias SS

    19 Ciriaco UIF

    20 Nava LF

    21 Gomes LF

    22 JBJ CF

    23 Victorino RF

    24 Brentz RF

    25 Ortiz DH

    (Note: Ciriaco is expendable, and maybe Bogaerts can be ready for this slot, but nobody else who needs to be protected fits this role, except Holt. It seems one of Holt or Ciriaco could be moved or cut. Aceves or Mortensen might be moved)

    Minors on 40 man now: Webster, Bard, Kalish, Wilson, Wright, de la Rosa, Britton, Vazquez, Hassan, Holt, Butler, de la Torre

    Projected 15 players on the 2014 40 man roster:

    1) Webster

    2) Bogaerts

    3) de la Rosa

    4) Ranaudo

    5) Workman

    6) de la Cruz

    7) Workman

    8) Britton

    9) Bard

    10) Kalish

    11) Cecchini

    12) Wilson

    13) Vazquez

    14) de la Torre

    15) One of: Holt, Hassan, Butler, Wright

     

    As you can see, if we sign a 1Bman, OF'er, and SP, we'd need to move all the guys on the #15 line plus two more (Aceves & de la Torre?)

    It's not a major issue, but if we wait until winter, we won't be able to move these bottom guys easily.

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

    Re: Depth

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    He has looked good recently, and other GMs see that too.  All I know is there are better pitchers in MLB than Doubront. In theory, trading Doubront and a good prospect or two should net us a better pitcher. That theory is pretty solid. The argument is really about the chances the possible net gain at that SP slot outweighs the possible loss in CF and/or SS and bench. 



    The challenge with many of these trade proposals is finding a team that would match up with us.  A team that has what we want and needs what we have.

    A team looking for an Ellsbury or a Drew at the deadline is a team in playoff contention.  A team in playoff contention isn't likely to be trading a good pitcher.

    If there's a team that would want to acquire Doubront and a prospect for a better pitcher, that would appear to be a team not in contention looking to shed payroll.

    I'm just thinking out loud.  I'd be interested to hear what actual trade partner matchups you see out there. 

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

    Re: Depth

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    He has looked good recently, and other GMs see that too.  All I know is there are better pitchers in MLB than Doubront. In theory, trading Doubront and a good prospect or two should net us a better pitcher. That theory is pretty solid. The argument is really about the chances the possible net gain at that SP slot outweighs the possible loss in CF and/or SS and bench. 

     



    The challenge with many of these trade proposals is finding a team that would match up with us.  A team that has what we want and needs what we have.

     

    A team looking for an Ellsbury or a Drew at the deadline is a team in playoff contention.  A team in playoff contention isn't likely to be trading a good pitcher.

    If there's a team that would want to acquire Doubront and a prospect for a better pitcher, that would appear to be a team not in contention looking to shed payroll.

    I'm just thinking out loud.  I'd be interested to hear what actual trade partner matchups you see out there. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, it would probably involve 3 teams.

    1) Contender trading a propsect for Ellsbury.

    2) Contender trading a prospect for Drew.

    3) Non-contender trading us a good pitcher for Doubront and 2 prospects as they rebuild for the longterm future.

    This is not easy to do, but I'm sure it is not impossible.

    We could trade just one of Ellsbury or Drew. We could trade Aceves, if his value rises by July 31st.  We could also trade Doubront or Dempster for a prospect, and then package multiple prospects for one big player (hopefully for 2+ years of control).

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

    Re: Depth

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    He has looked good recently, and other GMs see that too.  All I know is there are better pitchers in MLB than Doubront. In theory, trading Doubront and a good prospect or two should net us a better pitcher. That theory is pretty solid. The argument is really about the chances the possible net gain at that SP slot outweighs the possible loss in CF and/or SS and bench. 

     

     



    The challenge with many of these trade proposals is finding a team that would match up with us.  A team that has what we want and needs what we have.

     

     

    A team looking for an Ellsbury or a Drew at the deadline is a team in playoff contention.  A team in playoff contention isn't likely to be trading a good pitcher.

    If there's a team that would want to acquire Doubront and a prospect for a better pitcher, that would appear to be a team not in contention looking to shed payroll.

    I'm just thinking out loud.  I'd be interested to hear what actual trade partner matchups you see out there. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, it would probably involve 3 teams.

     

    1) Contender trading a propsect for Ellsbury.

    2) Contender trading a prospect for Drew.

    3) Non-contender trading us a good pitcher for Doubront and 2 prospects as they rebuild for the longterm future.

    This is not easy to do, but I'm sure it is not impossible.

    We could trade just one of Ellsbury or Drew. We could trade Aceves, if his value rises by July 31st.  We could also trade Doubront or Dempster for a prospect, and then package multiple prospects for one big player (hopefully for 2+ years of control).

    [/QUOTE]


    We talk about contenders, but let's hope we are contenders.

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

    Re: Depth

    An interesting name on the 40-man roster is Bard. Any thoughts on what the team does if he shows little to no improvement this year? Im thinking they might non tender him instead of paying 2M. Although we shed some payroll with the loss of Drew, Ells, Salty, Naps and Hanrahan, after arbitration cases, FA signings and options we are going to be close to our mark again. Every dollar counts. It would be a possible big loss if Bard does find his form, but roster spots are going to be very valuable after this season with all our rule-5 eligible players.

    Im thinking that if we do need some pitching, we could easily package up just prospects to get one. I guess we'll have to wait to see where we stand in July and where are needs are.

    Farrell will find ways to juggle Iggy, Middy and Drew in the lineup. All 3 are iomportant to this team going forward. Ellsbury is too valuable to let go, as we saw tonight. Great win for the boys tonight. Gomes, Ells and Iggy all had solid games along with papi's WO HR.

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

    Re: Depth

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    An interesting name on the 40-man roster is Bard. Any thoughts on what the team does if he shows little to no improvement this year? Im thinking they might non tender him instead of paying 2M. Although we shed some payroll with the loss of Drew, Ells, Salty, Naps and Hanrahan, after arbitration cases, FA signings and options we are going to be close to our mark again. Every dollar counts. It would be a possible big loss if Bard does find his form, but roster spots are going to be very valuable after this season with all our rule-5 eligible players.

    Im thinking that if we do need some pitching, we could easily package up just prospects to get one. I guess we'll have to wait to see where we stand in July and where are needs are.

    Farrell will find ways to juggle Iggy, Middy and Drew in the lineup. All 3 are iomportant to this team going forward. Ellsbury is too valuable to let go, as we saw tonight. Great win for the boys tonight. Gomes, Ells and Iggy all had solid games along with papi's WO HR.



    I think it is more likely we trade 2-3 prospects for a 2 month rental or salary dump than any type of trade I have suggested. Maybe 2 will be players from next year's 40 man roster projection, and that might help clear space for fgree agents and marginal rule 5 players, but I'd hate to trade any of our top prospects for a short fix.

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

    Re: Depth

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    An interesting name on the 40-man roster is Bard. Any thoughts on what the team does if he shows little to no improvement this year? Im thinking they might non tender him instead of paying 2M. Although we shed some payroll with the loss of Drew, Ells, Salty, Naps and Hanrahan, after arbitration cases, FA signings and options we are going to be close to our mark again. Every dollar counts. It would be a possible big loss if Bard does find his form, but roster spots are going to be very valuable after this season with all our rule-5 eligible players.

    Im thinking that if we do need some pitching, we could easily package up just prospects to get one. I guess we'll have to wait to see where we stand in July and where are needs are.

    Farrell will find ways to juggle Iggy, Middy and Drew in the lineup. All 3 are iomportant to this team going forward. Ellsbury is too valuable to let go, as we saw tonight. Great win for the boys tonight. Gomes, Ells and Iggy all had solid games along with papi's WO HR.

     



    I think it is more likely we trade 2-3 prospects for a 2 month rental or salary dump than any type of trade I have suggested. Maybe 2 will be players from next year's 40 man roster projection, and that might help clear space for fgree agents and marginal rule 5 players, but I'd hate to trade any of our top prospects for a short fix.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I agree. I wouldnt trade top guys for a rental. I would, like you suggested, trade some rule-5 eligible guys who arent in the plans for the future if I could first.

    What do you think about the Bard situation?

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

    Re: Depth

    What do you think about the Bard situation?

    Bard was one of MLB's top set up men for about 3 years. I wouldn't give up on him as quickly as some here seem to want to do. He has nasty stuff when on, but there has to be a limit on how long you stick with a guy.

    I could see us trading some of these guys in some sort of 2 or 3 for one deal:

    Linares, Britton, Workman, Wilson, Wright, Carpenter, Hazelbaker, Hassan, Butler and Holt.

    We could deal Aceves, Bard and/or Mortensen for a non 40 man roster player to clear space.

    There's lots that can be done, but waiting until this winter might mean we lose a nice player or two to rule 5.

    Sox4ever

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

    Re: Depth

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    What do you think about the Bard situation?

    Bard was one of MLB's top set up men for about 3 years. I wouldn't give up on him as quickly as some here seem to want to do. He has nasty stuff when on, but there has to be a limit on how long you stick with a guy.

    I could see us trading some of these guys in some sort of 2 or 3 for one deal:

    Linares, Britton, Workman, Wilson, Wright, Carpenter, Hazelbaker, Hassan, Butler and Holt.

    We could deal Aceves, Bard and/or Mortensen for a non 40 man roster player to clear space.

    There's lots that can be done, but waiting until this winter might mean we lose a nice player or two to rule 5.

    Sox4ever




    I believe there will be moves made with a couple players mentioned during the season AND after as well. Bard is a tough one. The potential is there, but will it ever come back? Tough call for sure.

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

    Re: Depth

    In the last 95 years , we have two championships. Any time you have a chance for another , you go for it.  If we stay on top , you do not trade an Ellsbury for a prospect. Don't worry too much about the Rule 5 draft. You can only lose a maximum of two players. Anyone selected has to stay on the 25 man roster all year. It is a gamble to draft these guys. Last year Hazelbaker , a pretty decent prospect , was not protected and not drafted. Protect your top players and prospects , and don't worry about the rest. It looks like we have a team that has a real shot. We have good depth to protect against injuries , and an excellent crop on the farm . Things are looking pretty bright. Don't over think things. Put your best nine on the field and go for it. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: Depth

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    These team doesn't cut it as more than a bubble playoff early exit team on two fronts:

    Impotent slugging v LP

    weak past 2 starting pitchers

     

    Those two areas need to change, and Ellsbury has his low numbers moving up at a good time to deal him to an NL contender. S. Drew should also be traded to a team with a middle infield injury.

    With Iglesias making it clear that S. Drew needs to go, Ciriaco needs to be moved through waivers and parked in AAA and Holt needs to be called up when S. Drew goes.

    If the Red Sox GM thinks this early start means status quo is going to get it done, he is mistaken!



    I can see you really enjoyed that Big Papi walkoff and dramatic Red Sox win.  

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

    Re: Depth

    In response to Sheriff-Rojas' comment:

     

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

     

     

     

    These team doesn't cut it as more than a bubble playoff early exit team on two fronts:

    Impotent slugging v LP

    weak past 2 starting pitchers

     

    Those two areas need to change, and Ellsbury has his low numbers moving up at a good time to deal him to an NL contender. S. Drew should also be traded to a team with a middle infield injury.

    With Iglesias making it clear that S. Drew needs to go, Ciriaco needs to be moved through waivers and parked in AAA and Holt needs to be called up when S. Drew goes.

    If the Red Sox GM thinks this early start means status quo is going to get it done, he is mistaken!

     

     



    I can see you really enjoyed that Big Papi walkoff and dramatic Red Sox win.  

     

     

     




    when he gets stuck in this mode its tunnel vision, ie; lather, rinse, repeat...Im just glad some "fans" here arent running the team.

     

    I was listening to the last 3 innings on the radio on my way home last night. I started pounding the roof of my car while I was driving when Papi hit the walk-off. Apparently the guy next to me was listening too because he was pumping his fist as well.

    farrell gave Drew a rest last night so Iggy could play SS. Hes going to have to get creative once Middy comes back because I doubt very highly they will move Drew, or Ells for that matter. Nor should they. Its a cliche, but these things DO usually have a way of working out...

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Depth

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to Sheriff-Rojas' comment:

     

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

     

     

     

    These team doesn't cut it as more than a bubble playoff early exit team on two fronts:

    Impotent slugging v LP

    weak past 2 starting pitchers

     

    Those two areas need to change, and Ellsbury has his low numbers moving up at a good time to deal him to an NL contender. S. Drew should also be traded to a team with a middle infield injury.

    With Iglesias making it clear that S. Drew needs to go, Ciriaco needs to be moved through waivers and parked in AAA and Holt needs to be called up when S. Drew goes.

    If the Red Sox GM thinks this early start means status quo is going to get it done, he is mistaken!

     

     



    I can see you really enjoyed that Big Papi walkoff and dramatic Red Sox win.  

     

     

     




    when he gets stuck in this mode its tunnel vision, ie; lather, rinse, repeat...Im just glad some "fans" here arent running the team.

     

    I was listening to the last 3 innings on the radio on my way home last night. I started pounding the roof of my car while I was driving when Papi hit the walk-off. Apparently the guy next to me was listening too because he was pumping his fist as well.

    farrell gave Drew a rest last night so Iggy could play SS. Hes going to have to get creative once Middy comes back because I doubt very highly they will move Drew, or Ells for that matter. Nor should they. Its a cliche, but these things DO usually have a way of working out...




    southpaw,

    This team can compete all season with this kind of depth and solid pitching but there is a long way to go and three other good teams in our division.  I can't wait to see where guys like Michael Almanzar 23, Bogy 20 and Cecchino 22, fit into our future plans.

    If Iggy has finally arrived as our starting SS next season, Bogy should be swapping positions at some point.  Almanzer and Cecchino could also be putting a lot of pressure on Middy in the next two years. 

    It's a nice problem to have!

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share