Red Sox in "striking distance" of Mike Napoli, Nick Swisher, and Cody Ross

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxfan28. Show redsoxfan28's posts

    Red Sox in "striking distance" of Mike Napoli, Nick Swisher, and Cody Ross

    RedSox appear to be within striking distance of Swisher,Napoli & CRoss but in all 3 scenarios not giving extra yr that's holding them back

    what does that mean?

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

    Re: Red Sox in

    It means we're damned if they do, damned if they don't.

    Because none of these are starting pitchers, which they've needed since late 2011.

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

    Re: Red Sox in

    Not a bad idea to acquire position players first.  There are still a lot of pitchers available.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Red Sox in

    yeah, its not like pitchers are flying off the shelves. i'm sure BC has been doing his fiar share of work checking out pitchers. but theres lots of offseason left to get that done. get deals done as they present themselves. nothing you can do while players are still shopping around looking to see who will give them the best deal. doesn't matter the order of getting things done as long as they get done.

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

    Re: Red Sox in

    zilla,

    i agree that starting pitching is the number one need.  i doubt that too many people could dispute this thought after what has transpired in september of 2011 and then again all lasat year.

    the sox are seemingly not high on any of their current minor league guys to man first, left field or right field, and i can understand looking at guys like swisher, gomes, napoli and ross, but at some point a struggling team needs to just put a young guy out there and let him play.

    oakland put reddick in right field and there was no way they thought that he would hit 30 home runs, make an all star team, etc when they put him out there in april.  he just got a full time chance and blossomed out to have the season of his life.

    he certainly gave no indications during his years in boston that he would perform like he did in 2012, but with the chance he succeeded probably beyond even his own wildest dreams.

    for that reason i would like to see a guy like gomez or sands get a full time shot at first base next year.  either guy is likely to be more productive than loney and possibly more productive (and durable) than napoli.  i don't know much about their fielding, but they may field better than napoli as well.  neither guy will be slower than napoli on the bases.

    if both get a chance at first and maybe left field and both bomb there will some vet around somewhere in june who will fill in fo the rest of the year.

    this same concept might also apply well to kalish.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: Red Sox in

    If extra year is:

    Third year for Cody, Fourth year for Naps, fourth year for Swish:

    yes to Naps, yes to Swish, maybe to Cody.

    Third year for Cody, Fourth year for Naps, fifth for Swish

    Yes to Cody, yes to Naps, no to Swish

    Dont lose these guys because we are unwilling to go extra year.  Swish and Naps are both very good ball players. 

    Trade for a pitcher.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from donrd4. Show donrd4's posts

    Re: Red Sox in

    In response to redsoxfan28's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    JIM BOWDEN @JimBowdenESPNxm

    RedSox appear to be within striking distance of Swisher,Napoli & CRoss but in all 3 scenarios not giving extra yr that's holding them back

    what does that mean?

    [/QUOTE]

    What that means is we lucked out on over paying for backups.....

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bisson1. Show Bisson1's posts

    Re: Red Sox in

    This could create a pretty potent lineup, will be interesting to see what route they go with in terms of pitching. I don't think Sanchez or Grienke are worth what they're looking for.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from donrd4. Show donrd4's posts

    Re: Red Sox in

    In response to redsoxfan28's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    JIM BOWDEN @JimBowdenESPNxm

    RedSox appear to be within striking distance of Swisher,Napoli & CRoss but in all 3 scenarios not giving extra yr that's holding them back

    what does that mean?

    [/QUOTE]

    Swisher i can't hit when it counts..... Napoli i hit well only at fenway ,so thats only half the games to go with his 200BA....and Cody Ross ,i can get  a lot more money in free agency... but if not i always wanted to stay in Boston

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

    Re: Red Sox in

    If we sign the trio, we will have Gomes, Ells, Ross, Swisher in OF.  My guess is Gomes backup Swisher in LF and Swisher backs up Napoli at 1B when Napoli DHs against lefties and that's when Gomes will start at LF??? I think Sox will have another 200 different lineups for 2013 as well.  

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Red Sox in

    In response to seannybboi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    If we sign the trio, we will have Gomes, Ells, Ross, Swisher in OF.  My guess is Gomes backup Swisher in LF and Swisher backs up Napoli at 1B when Napoli DHs against lefties and that's when Gomes will start at LF??? I think Sox will have another 200 different lineups for 2013 as well.  

    [/QUOTE]


    good. that gives us versatility. guys who can play multiple positions will be good in case he have bad luck with injuries again this year

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

    Re: Red Sox in

    We will not get all three, otherwise Gomes will be paid $5M/yr to sit.

    We may get 2 of 3.

    We will get 1 of 3.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bisson1. Show Bisson1's posts

    Re: Red Sox in

    The only one I'd really want to see signed is Napoli. 

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

    Re: Red Sox in

    In response to Bisson1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The only one I'd really want to see signed is Napoli. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Agreed, they won't get all 3, but I think Gomes will do his fair share of sitting anyway.  There bench was lacking in quality depth last year and they clearly don't want to make that mistake again..

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

    Re: Red Sox in

    Yes, but $5M for someone that won't even platoon vs LHPs is not going to happen.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: Red Sox in

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yes, but $5M for someone that won't even platoon vs LHPs is not going to happen.

    [/QUOTE]

    He will only platoon against LHP.  That means he's getting 5M/yr to sit 75% of the time. (sigh)

    The plan is to sign all 3 (I agree w you that it is not likely to happen; however, it is the plan).  I assume that the plan is: when we face LHP: Gomes to LF, Ross to RF, Swish to 1B , Naps to C (this is the only time Gomes will play).

    If we sign C.Ross, Swish, Naps : Gomes will only play against LHP

    If we dont sign any of C.Ross, Swish, Naps: Gomes will only play against LHP.

    Yes: we did overpay Gomes to play to play 25% of the time.  If that overpay causes us to lose out on Naps, I'll be furious.

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

    Re: Red Sox in

    I actually think this is a brilliant strategy, and have found a way that will allow Gomes to play vs LHP.

    Vs All: CF Ellsbury, 2B Pedroia, DH Ortiz, 3B Middlebrooks, RF Ross, SS Iglesias

    Vs RHP: C Salty, 1B Napoli, LF Swisher

    Vs LHP: C Napoli, 1B Swisher, LF Gomes

    This makes complete sense since Salty is atrocious against LHP.  

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

    Re: Red Sox in

    In response to Drewski5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yes, but $5M for someone that won't even platoon vs LHPs is not going to happen.

    [/QUOTE]

    He will only platoon against LHP.  That means he's getting 5M/yr to sit 75% of the time. (sigh)

    The plan is to sign all 3 (I agree w you that it is not likely to happen; however, it is the plan).  I assume that the plan is: when we face LHP: Gomes to LF, Ross to RF, Swish to 1B , Naps to C (this is the only time Gomes will play).

    If we sign C.Ross, Swish, Naps : Gomes will only play against LHP

    If we dont sign any of C.Ross, Swish, Naps: Gomes will only play against LHP.

    Yes: we did overpay Gomes to play to play 25% of the time.  If that overpay causes us to lose out on Naps, I'll be furious.

    [/QUOTE]

    My guess is $10M added to our top offer for Naps would get him to sign right now, so you would be right to be furious.

    I think Naps should only catch in NL parks, but if we trade Salty (likely), there would be room for Gomes to play vs LHPs even with all 3 signed.

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

    Re: Red Sox in

    See above scenario.  We can keep Slaty if we let Napoli catch vs LHP.  We can then deal Lavarnway for a starter like Galvin Floyd or someone like that.

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

    Re: Red Sox in

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yes, but $5M for someone that won't even platoon vs LHPs is not going to happen.

    [/QUOTE]

    I didnt say he'd "only" play against lefties, but he's not going to be an every day player by any stretch.  Don't be too concerned about the money, either.  This isn't last year. They will have no issues overpaying for role players, if they feel they are the right fit, as they likely won't get too close to the luxury tax level...

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from hodgkinsfl1. Show hodgkinsfl1's posts

    Re: Red Sox in

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yes, but $5M for someone that won't even platoon vs LHPs is not going to happen.

    [/QUOTE]

    What do you care what they pay?  it is not coming out of your pocket
    .

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: Red Sox in

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Drewski5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yes, but $5M for someone that won't even platoon vs LHPs is not going to happen.

    [/QUOTE]

    He will only platoon against LHP.  That means he's getting 5M/yr to sit 75% of the time. (sigh)

    The plan is to sign all 3 (I agree w you that it is not likely to happen; however, it is the plan).  I assume that the plan is: when we face LHP: Gomes to LF, Ross to RF, Swish to 1B , Naps to C (this is the only time Gomes will play).

    If we sign C.Ross, Swish, Naps : Gomes will only play against LHP

    If we dont sign any of C.Ross, Swish, Naps: Gomes will only play against LHP.

    Yes: we did overpay Gomes to play to play 25% of the time.  If that overpay causes us to lose out on Naps, I'll be furious.

    [/QUOTE]

    My guess is $10M added to our top offer for Naps would get him to sign right now, so you would be right to be furious.

    I think Naps should only catch in NL parks, but if we trade Salty (likely), there would be room for Gomes to play vs LHPs even with all 3 signed.

    [/QUOTE]

    I was furious when we gave Smoltz 8M, Penny 5M and then saw solid #3 pitchers sign for 13M.   If we lose out on Napoli, I would be furious for similar reasons.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: Red Sox in

    In response to hodgkinsfl1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yes, but $5M for someone that won't even platoon vs LHPs is not going to happen.

    [/QUOTE]

    What do you care what they pay?  it is not coming out of your pocket
    .

    [/QUOTE]

    Opportunity cost.  What if we are unwilling to budge from 3/36 for Naps and then see him sign for 3/40.  I'd rather have Naps at 3/40 than gomes at 2/10.

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

    Re: Red Sox in

    In response to Drewski5's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yes, but $5M for someone that won't even platoon vs LHPs is not going to happen.

    [/QUOTE]

    He will only platoon against LHP.  That means he's getting 5M/yr to sit 75% of the time. (sigh)

    The plan is to sign all 3 (I agree w you that it is not likely to happen; however, it is the plan).  I assume that the plan is: when we face LHP: Gomes to LF, Ross to RF, Swish to 1B , Naps to C (this is the only time Gomes will play).

    If we sign C.Ross, Swish, Naps : Gomes will only play against LHP

    If we dont sign any of C.Ross, Swish, Naps: Gomes will only play against LHP.

    Yes: we did overpay Gomes to play to play 25% of the time.  If that overpay causes us to lose out on Naps, I'll be furious.

    [/QUOTE]

    Cody Ross is going to sign with SF.  They will need another OF when Pagan signs elsewhere. 

    I'm not personally excited about any of these possibilities,  except for the "kid" from KC in a package for Jon Lester.  I think he could be special.

    I would'nt worry about the 25%-75% thing...  players always go on the DL...  especially OF'ers(Crawford, Ellsbury).

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: Red Sox in

    In response to titletownfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I actually think this is a brilliant strategy, and have found a way that will allow Gomes to play vs LHP.

    Vs All: CF Ellsbury, 2B Pedroia, DH Ortiz, 3B Middlebrooks, RF Ross, SS Iglesias

    Vs RHP: C Salty, 1B Napoli, LF Swisher

    Vs LHP: C Napoli, 1B Swisher, LF Gomes

    This makes complete sense since Salty is atrocious against LHP.  

    [/QUOTE]

    I would love this.  But  David Ross  was brought in and dubbed "more than a back up."  Maybe:

    Vs RHP: C Salty/D.Ross, 1B Napoli, LF Swisher

    Vs LHP: C Napoli, 1B Swisher, LF Gomes.

    Salty could also pinch hit against righties when he's not playing.

    Or he could get dealt for a pen arm.  

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share