Quickly Competitive ...or else a fire sale/re-rebuild?

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

    Quickly Competitive ...or else a fire sale/re-rebuild?

    Interesting post ...  http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1461462-2013-boston-red-sox-why-the-team-could-trade-many-of-their-players-this-summer

    As suddenly as the Red Sox changed last 2nd half ... and as quickly as the team has moved this off season (realizing as I say that, some will heartily disagree with the term "quickly")  this article surprised me with the idea that if we aren't competitive by the trade deadline, things could quickly change again ....

      Knowing some here are often building the next the trade of the century, this is sounds like rich territory for more free wheeling thinlking...

      What do ya think?

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from xXR3S1NXx. Show xXR3S1NXx's posts

    Re: Quickly Competitive ...or else a fire sale/re-rebuild?

    I see this year as a win-win any way you look at it. If we are winning this year, thats great we've taken a step in the right direction. But at the same time even if we are loosing and some of these player are having good years(Even if players arnt having great years teams are desperate at the trading deadline and will do pretty much anything to get thier hands on proven players) we can flip players to contending teams for a premium and add more Good prospects to our system. And dont forget the money we have. 

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

    Re: Quickly Competitive ...or else a fire sale/re-rebuild?

    In response to EdithBRTN's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The writer's speculation could apply to any other team that falls out of contention any year. Just more speculation saying that anything is possible. The writer's boss told him to write a column and he quickly typed out this one. No news here.

    [/QUOTE]


    Ahhh ... maybe you have that train of thought, but it isn't the way I have seen the Sox in the last decade, or for that matter how I have ever thought of the Sox.  We are used to the Bucs, Marlins, Expos/Nats, Royals and such being sellers.  Until this last season, Sox have been buyers, not sellers.

     

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

    Re: Quickly Competitive ...or else a fire sale/re-rebuild?

    One of the few positive ideas that come out of this winter's moves is the idea that we may get some real youthful talent by trading some of these guys we just signed at the deadline.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Quickly Competitive ...or else a fire sale/re-rebuild?

    In response to bobbysu's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    One of the few positive ideas that come out of this winter's moves is the idea that we may get some real youthful talent by trading some of these guys we just signed at the deadline.

    [/QUOTE]

    Thats why length of Contract is important. You can also move guys to in the Next Off-Season, if they have a good season. Sell high, Ben.

    [/QUOTE]

    True, but if they do poorly, the lenght of the deal becomes a huge negative.

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

    Re: Quickly Competitive ...or else a fire sale/re-rebuild?

    In response to xXR3S1NXx's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I see this year as a win-win any way you look at it. If we are winning this year, thats great we've taken a step in the right direction. But at the same time even if we are loosing and some of these player are having good years(Even if players arnt having great years teams are desperate at the trading deadline and will do pretty much anything to get thier hands on proven players) we can flip players to contending teams for a premium and add more Good prospects to our system. And dont forget the money we have. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Totally agree, and would guess that's all part of Ben's strategy i.e. add a number of short-term deals for proven veterans that might push the Sox into the playoffs in 2013....that cost nothing in terms of draft picks....and certainly SOME of them could be unwound in June/July/August by trading them away.  Even "giving" them away for middling prospects would be ok as they all cost nothing to acquire but salary.

    If Gomes, or Dempster, or Ross is doing ok through June/July but the Sox aren't....we could give them away for literally nothing and it wouldn't hurt because we would have their future salaries to invest in a better FA class.  But we would be able to get something for some/most/all of them.

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

    Re: Quickly Competitive ...or else a fire sale/re-rebuild?

    But we would be able to get something for some/most/all of them.

    We may have to pay part of their salaries in some cases.

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

    Re: Quickly Competitive ...or else a fire sale/re-rebuild?

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    But we would be able to get something for some/most/all of them.

    We may have to pay part of their salaries in some cases.

    [/QUOTE]


    Possibly.  But in other cases we might get something back.....seems reasonable to me that they could net positively if necessary.

    In any case, these are simply not big risks in the greater scheme of things i.e. no draft pick cost, rich team, little else to spend our money on....and by July or so these are all 0.3 - 2.3 year contracts, right?:

    • Drew: 1
    • Ross: 2
    • Gomes: 2
    • Dempster: 2
    • Victorino: 3
    • (Napoli): 3

     

     

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

    Re: Quickly Competitive ...or else a fire sale/re-rebuild?

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    But we would be able to get something for some/most/all of them.

    We may have to pay part of their salaries in some cases.

    [/QUOTE]


    Possibly.  But in other cases we might get something back.....seems reasonable to me that they could net positively if necessary.

    In any case, these are simply not big risks in the greater scheme of things i.e. no draft pick cost, rich team, little else to spend our money on....and by July or so these are all 0.3 - 2.3 year contracts, right?:

    • Drew: 1
    • Ross: 2
    • Gomes: 2
    • Dempster: 2
    • Victorino: 3
    • (Napoli): 3

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    There's also a chance none of these guys will be wanted in July of 2013 or beyond, especially at these salaries.

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

    Re: Quickly Competitive ...or else a fire sale/re-rebuild?

    the only plan Ben has is too reach .500

     

    these new players might get us there...might..

     

    playoffs?  lol   NO

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Quickly Competitive ...or else a fire sale/re-rebuild?

    But we would be able to get something for some/most/all of them.

    We may have to pay part of their salaries in some cases.

    [/QUOTE]


    Possibly.  But in other cases we might get something back.....seems reasonable to me that they could net positively if necessary.

    In any case, these are simply not big risks in the greater scheme of things i.e. no draft pick cost, rich team, little else to spend our money on....and by July or so these are all 0.3 - 2.3 year contracts, right?:

    • Drew: 1
    • Ross: 2
    • Gomes: 2
    • Dempster: 2
    • Victorino: 3
    • (Napoli): 3

     

    [/QUOTE]

    There's also a chance none of these guys will be wanted in July of 2013 or beyond, especially at these salaries.

    [/QUOTE]

    I know.  I thought we'd just agreed that.  But I am very happy with fielding what I think will be a playoff competing team in 2013, most on short-term contracts (1-3 years), no draft picks expended, spending salary money we had to spend on something (very happy we didn't speculate on Greinke and Hamilton's next 12 cumulative seasons!), plus we have partial- or full-get out clauses on some of them should 2013 go south on us.

    I have seen a number of clever suggested moves - several from you - but no more sensible long- or short-term strategies than what the Sox have done so far.

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

    Re: Quickly Competitive ...or else a fire sale/re-rebuild?

    In response to bobbysu's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I would like this team to spend more money on the Scouting side, International as well. I would like this team to give more money on other teams Good Scouts, and grab them. You start here, you wont be disappointed.

    [/QUOTE]

    Bobby, what teams have invested in/drafted/signed more top players than the Sox over the past 10-12 years?  Rizzo (AGon), Pedroia, Midds(?), Youk, Hanley/Anibal (a.k.a. 2007 WS victory) Ells, Papelbon, Lester, Buchholz, Bard....batting champion Freddy Sanchez, overrated IMO GG 30+ HR Reddick, overrated IMO Masterson....etc.

    IMO, the Sox have done a great job drafting/signing....and a great job keeping our best prospects or trading a few for good value.

    But to suggest the Sox have done a poor job scouting/drafting/signing seems indefensible to me.  How do you defend that?

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Quickly Competitive ...or else a fire sale/re-rebuild?

    In response to EdithBRTN's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to SinceYaz's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to EdithBRTN's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The writer's speculation could apply to any other team that falls out of contention any year. Just more speculation saying that anything is possible. The writer's boss told him to write a column and he quickly typed out this one. No news here.

    [/QUOTE]


    Ahhh ... maybe you have that train of thought, but it isn't the way I have seen the Sox in the last decade, or for that matter how I have ever thought of the Sox.  We are used to the Bucs, Marlins, Expos/Nats, Royals and such being sellers.  Until this last season, Sox have been buyers, not sellers.

     

    [/QUOTE]
    I was responding to the premise that the writer has no clue whatsoever what the 2013 Red Sox record will be at the trading deadline and is also speculating / guessing on what the response will be from ownership / the FO. I can just as easily speculate that their record will be fine at that time and they will do nothing be buyers then.  The column is merely nonsense fodder for forums to chew on. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Munch, munch, munch ... tasty snack. Like tater chips, no value but you can't eat just one.  :o)  Heck, I can't eat just one slice of pie, either.  Isn't that all this forum is?  Our expression of thought and perspective ... over a hobby. 

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

    Re: Quickly Competitive ...or else a fire sale/re-rebuild?

    Here is some of that article:

    Although the Boston Red Sox spent heavily this offseason to improve a team that lost 93 games in 2012, they could trade many of their players this summer if the team doesn't play as expected.

    WEEI’s Alex Speier outlined how the Red Sox have spent over $150 million this offseason in an effort to fill numerous roster holes.

    Other than figuring out their first base situation, the Red Sox may have made their last major move before spring training by finalizing a trade for new closer Joel Hanrahan.

    Although the Red Sox hope their moves will help them compete in 2013, the current composition of their roster makes a fire sale later this summer a very strong possibility if the team falls out of contention.

     

    As Eddie Kasko once said: "If ifs and buts, were candy and nuts, we'd all have a helluva Christmas."  This article speculates on situations that are not likely to happen.  While I don't necessarily expect the Red Sox to be front runners at the trading deadline, it's more likely that they'll be in that gray area where they're in contention, but not necessarily in a clear position to make the playoffs.  Heck, even the dreadful 2012 Red Sox were only 3.5 games out of the wildcard race at the deadline.  If one or a few of the acquired players are performing well mid-season, they're not likely to part with a player whose continued success they would be relying on to secure a possible playoff spot.  On the other hand, if the acquired player was not playing well, they would have little or no trade value.

    The more likely scenario would be that a prospect or two develops ahead of schedule and performs well when given an opportunity when say, a regular goes down with an injury (see Middlebrooks, 2012).  Hopefully, if this happens, the team will manage it better than they did with Youk last season and get more out of it than a bag of balls.  Trade opportunities will develop when gluts occur.  Who knows, maybe Ryan Kalish will emerge this season and make Ellsbury expendable.  Maybe it will be Lavernway making Salty more expendable.    While the Sox may not have top tier pitchers, they may get solid production from a deep (and hopefully healthy) staff, making someone available.  We already know they are loaded in the bullpen and some more shuffling will take place before the season starts.  If they can hang on to as many as these arms as they can, they may be able to reap some rewards at the deadline.  Someone like Bard or Andrew Miller could reap nice dividends down the road.

    But fire sale?  Not bloody likely.  That's more for teams like Cleveland and Florida.  

     
  24. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Quickly Competitive ...or else a fire sale/re-rebuild?

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to bobbysu's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I would like this team to spend more money on the Scouting side, International as well. I would like this team to give more money on other teams Good Scouts, and grab them. You start here, you wont be disappointed.

    [/QUOTE]

    Bobby, what teams have invested in/drafted/signed more top players than the Sox over the past 10-12 years?  Rizzo (AGon), Pedroia, Midds(?), Youk, Hanley/Anibal (a.k.a. 2007 WS victory) Ells, Papelbon, Lester, Buchholz, Bard....batting champion Freddy Sanchez, overrated IMO GG 30+ HR Reddick, overrated IMO Masterson....etc.

    IMO, the Sox have done a great job drafting/signing....and a great job keeping our best prospects or trading a few for good value.

    But to suggest the Sox have done a poor job scouting/drafting/signing seems indefensible to me.  How do you defend that?

    [/QUOTE]

    The only place I would like to see them do better is starting pitching, realistically.  In that scope, I am thinking of the scouting the Rays seem to have done concerning that area.  I realize they had many years of low standing to acquire high draft selections, but they sure did seem to find a good number of high quality starters.  I know we have had Lester, Bucholz and now Doubie ... with some good prospects coming.

    Position players, we have done fairly well.

     

Share