Name the outside Starting Pitching targets you are going to budget for trade or FA market value to make sure you acquire him or them?

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

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

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TrotterNixon's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    1st choice: B. McCarthy $22M/3 (If he looks healthy, I might go to $25M/3 or $30M/4 with IP incentives.)

    If yes, I'd then offer S. Marcum $12M/2 (see Guthrie is SM says no).

    [ ...then I'd .... offer J Guthrie $11M/2 ...]

    [/QUOTE]

    Does this mean you are cpying my 1st choice as your own?

    Blatant Bidenism here.

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm trying to figure out how much of McCarthy's success is due to Oakland.  And how would he differentiate himslef from our other #3 types.  I also see little added value in Guthrie, as opposed to a Morales or Tazawa.  Marcum, yes, if you can get him that, though with two declining years, I'd suspect an injury.

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

    ...then I'd .... offer J Guthrie $11M/2 ...]

    That will get the 2nd rate bum McCarthey. So, your plan is MCarthey and Guthrie. Marcum will say no.

    Your plan is pitiful. No need to pay that for 2nd rate starting pitchers. The Red Sox have plenty of second rate pitchers.

    I thought the second-rate Guthrie was your idea?

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

    1st choice: B. McCarthy $22M/3 (If he looks healthy, I might go to $25M/3 or $30M/4 with IP incentives.)

    If yes, I'd then offer S. Marcum $12M/2 (see Guthrie is SM says no).

    [ ...then I'd .... offer J Guthrie $11M/2 ...]

    That will get the 2nd rate bum McCarthey. So, your plan is MCarthey and Guthrie. Marcum will say no.

    Your plan is pitiful. No need to pay that for 2nd rate starting pitchers. The Red Sox have plenty of second rate pitchers.

    Now that I've forced your specific plan from nothingness; since you believe the Red Sox problem over the last half decade has been pitching, tell the readers what these moves are going to do for the Red Sox starting pitching staff performance in 2013? You have written that the Red Sox will need a miracle to contend for a playoff spot in 2013, so why blow that kind of money on 2nd rate pitchers? 

     

    I have always been for upgrading the staff at the top 2 slots, not the bottom like you. That being said, I don't see Greinke or Haren as worthwhile gambles. So, my plan is to treat 2013 as a bridge year to 2014, and I hope we can build a foundation of solid starters in hopes that we get a stud next July or winter.

    Obviously, I don't think McCarthy is an ace, but I do think, if healthy, he can come close to 2 slot status, but more likely 3 slot material. Guthrie could be a solid #4 starter this year and next. 

    You have neglected to take my offer for Brett Anderson seriously, because my offer is more specific than your low-balling vague "pool" offer, as if by offering a pool of lower prospects that is somehow better than me offering specific higher rated ones.

    I offered Lava, Tazawa & Lin-the SS for Anderson. That would allow us to trade Doubront, Morales, Aceves, and Brentz (would it sound better to you, if I said a pool of anyone below Brentz on the prospect chart?) for J. Upton. (This is just one of a few specific offers I have suggested for Upton-- and none include Ellsbury unless a 3rd team is involved.)

    Since I do not have a lot of faith in Lester going forward, I'd like to load up on 2-4 slot starters. Buch's health and Lackey's future is also questionable. If we end up with "too much pitching", we can always trade one at nearly any given moment.

     

     2014 staff

    1) _________ (ace to be acquired after this winter)

    2) Buchholtz

    3) Lester (?)

    4) Anderson

    5) McCarthy

    6) Marcum or Guthrie or Lackey (?)

     

    With Upton and this staff and a possible other FA pick-up like Bourn in CF if and after we trade Ellsbury, and maybe Ross in LF, Papi at DH, and a trade for K Morales to play 1B, I might revise my thinking on 2013 being a "bridge year", but I doubt all that will happen.

     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from bald-predictions. Show bald-predictions's posts

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?f...p;v=gsa4uLmTw0M
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from bald-predictions. Show bald-predictions's posts

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?f...p;v=gsa4uLmTw0M
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from bald-predictions. Show bald-predictions's posts

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?f...p;v=gsa4uLmTw0M
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from bald-predictions. Show bald-predictions's posts

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?f...p;v=gsa4uLmTw0M
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    In response to hill55's comment:

    That has to cost a good $12.5M.  I'm not sure why they wouldn't have targetted Haren instead.

    Jim Bowden of ESPN expects Dan Haren to be traded by Friday's option deadline:

    https://twitter.com/JimBowdenESPNxm/status/263812572971667457

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

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:

    That has to cost a good $12.5M.  I'm not sure why they wouldn't have targetted Haren instead.

     

    Jim Bowden of ESPN expects Dan Haren to be traded by Friday's option deadline:

    https://twitter.com/JimBowdenESPNxm/status/263812572971667457

    [/QUOTE]

    They are clearly freeing up money to not be outbid by the Rangers or Dodgers for Greinke.  They are in a good position, as Greinke has said he enjoys it there. The Dodgers have now supposedly set their sights on a trade for James Shields, who should bring a very nice return to the Rays.

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

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:

    That has to cost a good $12.5M.  I'm not sure why they wouldn't have targetted Haren instead.

     

    Jim Bowden of ESPN expects Dan Haren to be traded by Friday's option deadline:

    https://twitter.com/JimBowdenESPNxm/status/263812572971667457

    [/QUOTE]

    They are clearly freeing up money to not be outbid by the Rangers or Dodgers for Greinke.  They are in a good position, as Greinke has said he enjoys it there. The Dodgers have now supposedly set their sights on a trade for James Shields, who should bring a very nice return to the Rays.

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

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:

    That has to cost a good $12.5M.  I'm not sure why they wouldn't have targetted Haren instead.

     

    Jim Bowden of ESPN expects Dan Haren to be traded by Friday's option deadline:

    https://twitter.com/JimBowdenESPNxm/status/263812572971667457

    [/QUOTE]

    They are clearly freeing up money to not be outbid by the Rangers or Dodgers for Greinke.  They are in a good position, as Greinke has said he enjoys it there. The Dodgers have now supposedly set their sights on a trade for James Shields, who should bring a very nice return to the Rays.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

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

    In response to hill55's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hill55's comment:

    That has to cost a good $12.5M.  I'm not sure why they wouldn't have targetted Haren instead.

     

    Jim Bowden of ESPN expects Dan Haren to be traded by Friday's option deadline:

    https://twitter.com/JimBowdenESPNxm/status/263812572971667457

    [/QUOTE]

    They are clearly freeing up money to not be outbid by the Rangers or Dodgers for Greinke.  They are in a good position, as Greinke has said he enjoys it there. The Dodgers have now supposedly set their sights on a trade for James Shields, who should bring a very nice return to the Rays.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

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

    I'm trading myself to the Dodgers for a fresh supply of chicken and beer !!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Hetch

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

    I'm trading myself to the Dodgers for a fresh supply of chicken and beer !!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Hetch

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

    I'm trading myself to the Dodgers for a fresh supply of chicken and beer !!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Hetch

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

    Francis, Harden and Bedard?  That's 3 Canadian bums LOL

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

    In response to TrotterNixon's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    because my offer is more specific than your low-balling vague "pool" offer, as if by offering a pool of lower prospects that is somehow better than me offering specific higher rated ones.

    You don't pay attention. I am the one on this board who gives specifics and ridicules those who don't, which has included you.

    This is not a "low-balling vaue pool offer offering a pool of lower prospects:

    Ellsbury for one season

    Ellsbury's draft compensation

    Brentz (or Bogearts if required to make the deal)

    De La Roas or Webster

    Plus, if required to meet competing market offers, unlikely,  any other prospect on the farm except Barnes Bradley, Jr.

    That's as specific as it gets, and is without a doubt is a pool that is a trade market value close the deal for J. Upton offer

    Your offer isn't realistic, at all. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    At least you now admit I made an offer. It took you months to do a simple thing like that.

    AZ does not want Ellsbury for 1 year. Yes, they'd value the draft pick and the prospects you offer, but other than Bogaerts, they won't get too excited over any of the others and certainly can get better elsewhere.

    I'd do this trade in a heartbeat, but AZ will not.

    My offers give AZ more of what they want: top prospects and/or ML ready players with several years of team control. Most posters on this site have criticized my offer as being too much- not too little, but clearly you know better.

    You offering "pools of players" that are worse than the specific players I offer is not more "realistic". If it's the word "pools" that would make my offer acceptable to you, then substitute the words "or anyone from the pool of players" rated lower than each player I list.

    Go fetch!

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share