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

    Should the Red Sox be sellers?

    With a loss tonight, the Red Sox will fall out of first place. The Rays are surging. The Orioles still look strong. Even if the Red Sox can hang onto the second wild card, should the team really trade away its prospects for a one-game playoff that they'd likely lose?

    The plan for 2013 was to rebuild, not to contend. Surpassing expectations is a good thing, but not if it changes the overall course of the franchise for a mere short-term, limited gain. The Red Sox are more likely to be in a position to win a championship in 2014 and 2015. Bearing that in mind, why not sell off veterans for additional prospects instead of trading prospects for veterans?

    The Red Sox could likely fetch a nice bundle of prospects for Ellsbury and Lester. Saltalamacchia and Napoli could both land some decent cost-controlled talent. The Red Sox would still conceivably win the wild card regardless, and more importantly, they'd be in a stronger position for next year and beyond.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from soxguy617. Show soxguy617's posts

    Re: Should the Red Sox be sellers?

    In response to davidap's comment:

    With a loss tonight, the Red Sox will fall out of first place. The Rays are surging. The Orioles still look strong. Even if the Red Sox can hang onto the second wild card, should the team really trade away its prospects for a one-game playoff that they'd likely lose?

    The plan for 2013 was to rebuild, not to contend. Surpassing expectations is a good thing, but not if it changes the overall course of the franchise for a mere short-term, limited gain. The Red Sox are more likely to be in a position to win a championship in 2014 and 2015. Bearing that in mind, why not sell off veterans for additional prospects instead of trading prospects for veterans?

    The Red Sox could likely fetch a nice bundle of prospects for Ellsbury and Lester. Saltalamacchia and Napoli could both land some decent cost-controlled talent. The Red Sox would still conceivably win the wild card regardless, and more importantly, they'd be in a stronger position for next year and beyond.




    No, they should in no way be sellers....they had the best record in the AL a few days ago. Not like there are any real powerhouses in the AL. There could be an arguement for them standing pat. More than likely what will happen is they will trade some 2nd or 3rd tier prospects for some BP help and/or starting pitching depth.....

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

    Re: Should the Red Sox be sellers?

    No, you can't be sellers.

    What you can do is be less inclined to trade away your top prospects because of how good we can be for the next decade.  So I think people may get dissapointed if they expect a #4 hitter or a #1 pitcher.  I just don't think they should make that move right now, and I definitely don't think the will.

    I do think they will try to find a starter/reliever/OF/3B who can be had for good value and can help the team down the stretch.  

    Maybe that's Michael young, Peavy, Santana, Gordon, Cuddyer.  I think the Sox will explore multiple players and bite on who can be had for the best price.

    I also think they go hard after Gonzalez to strengthen up the pitching without giving up prospects, or to at least drive up his price. 

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

    Re: Should the Red Sox be sellers?

    In response to soxguy617's comment:

    In response to davidap's comment:

    With a loss tonight, the Red Sox will fall out of first place. The Rays are surging. The Orioles still look strong. Even if the Red Sox can hang onto the second wild card, should the team really trade away its prospects for a one-game playoff that they'd likely lose?

    The plan for 2013 was to rebuild, not to contend. Surpassing expectations is a good thing, but not if it changes the overall course of the franchise for a mere short-term, limited gain. The Red Sox are more likely to be in a position to win a championship in 2014 and 2015. Bearing that in mind, why not sell off veterans for additional prospects instead of trading prospects for veterans?

    The Red Sox could likely fetch a nice bundle of prospects for Ellsbury and Lester. Saltalamacchia and Napoli could both land some decent cost-controlled talent. The Red Sox would still conceivably win the wild card regardless, and more importantly, they'd be in a stronger position for next year and beyond.


    No, they should in no way be sellers....they had the best record in the AL a few days ago. Not like there are any real powerhouses in the AL. There could be an arguement for them standing pat. More than likely what will happen is they will trade some 2nd or 3rd tier prospects for some BP help and/or starting pitching depth.....



    First of all, op is clearly trolling, it's a stupid question.

    Second, the sox still have the best record in the AL

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Marioguy424. Show Marioguy424's posts

    Re: Should the Red Sox be sellers?

     Seriously?

     Don't get me wrong- I am all for maintaining the current farm system. I think that the nuts who want to trade for Stanton, Lee, or Papelbon don't understand the price that those players would cost and that you should not trade away top prospects for rentals unless they are a steal. (Stanton, being in only his fourth year, is an exception, but he is injury-prone and inconsistent, and the asking price would be THROUGH THE ROOF.) I think that a trade for Peavy or Crain (or both, seeing that they are on the same team) would be the biggest trade we should make this season. However, I do not want a team with the most wins in baseball to sell off and collapse, either. Lackey is facing Hellickson tonight, and Lackey's E.R.A. is almost two runs lower, so we are likely to maintain our lead in the AL East. You act as if we would be lucky to make the playoffs- I still think that we are the most talented team in our division, and probably one of the most talented in the AL. The reason we failed last year was not because we didn't have talent- it was because everyone had a bad year at once, our stars all got lazy and underperformed at once, and mainly because we had a HORRIBLE manager. Everyone (including me) forgot this year that this team was still talented, and were shocked when they performed at a level that, in all honesty, shouldn't have been surprising. Our bats have been quiet recently because we have faced some of the best pitchers in the business- most pitchers are not David Price and Matt Moore, so I really think that you underestimate our chances. Don't mortgage our future on an unworthy rental? Sure. But not trying to improve this year's team, which is the best Sox team we have seen in a while, let alone selling off our players to try to improve the farm system when we have a chance to go deep in the playoffs for the first time since 2008, is just as foolish as going overboard for Stanton or Lee, if not more so.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Should the Red Sox be sellers?

    If the deal maks sense for more/better pitching .........  Put Bogarts on 3rd......Move Middlebrooks, Salty & Drew.....

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

    Re: Should the Red Sox be sellers?

    They wont trade anyone from the current MLB roster. Ben already said it.

    If they trade, they will try to trade  some rule-5 prospects the cant protecr. And if the deal is sweet enough, they might let a better prospect go. But it would have to be too good not to.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from slasher9. Show slasher9's posts

    Re: Should the Red Sox be sellers?

    Troll thread

    that is all

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

    Re: Should the Red Sox be sellers?

    First of all, op is clearly trolling, it's a stupid question.

    Second, the sox still have the best record in the AL



    I'm not trolling. I didn't say "will" they be sellers, I asked "should" they be sellers. Nor did I claim the team would collapse. I expressed cautious optimism that they would still reach the playoffs even if they got rid of some people from the major league roster.

    Obviously the team won't sell off anyone because it would generate bad publicity and the organization would never hear the end of it from the media or the pink hat fans. But sometimes the right decision isn't always the popular decision.

    I'm more interested in the question of whether trading players from the major league roster would improve the team's long-term trajectory. I think the answer to that question is yes, and I bet that knowledgeable fans would be in favor of such a move, if they understood the bigger picture. Apathy doesn't come from losing, it comes from proceeding without a plan.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share