Trading, with an eye to the future

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

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future : I see Ellsbury in a Sox uniform next season unless we get an offer we can't refuse like an Upton or Kemp type player.  Theo not only should have money to barter with Boras but also enough leverage with prospects to upgrade RF if he feels its necessary.  Trading your lead off batter and starting CF just to fill our RF position with a RH bat doesn't make much sense if you then have an even larger hole to fill.
    Posted by craze4sox[/QUOTE]

    Exactly - Theo will have so much leverage that Boras will take his client somewhere else.  

    Crawford can bat leadoff.  The longer we wait, the less value Ellsbury has in a trade deal, and the more likely that deal is contingent on an extension.


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

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    I disagree about Crawford being a lead-off hitter, base stealing aside there is very little in his career splits that suggest this would be his best spot. As somebody else pointed out, moving Pedey there might make more sense.

    There is something to be said for NOT extending players when they won't give you a discount on their fair value in arbitration and an extra year or two and simply going through the arbitration process with them.

    The cost is slightly higher but the risk is greatly reduced. So long as the next CBA allows for draft pick compensation the years of service on the field and draft pick compensation has real value.

    I concur that Boras is not likely to advise his client to extend and frankly I am not sure the RS want to do that right now any way. But I also contend that the RS aren't sitting around panicking about having to move Ellsbury quick because he isn't extended or that they have penciled in the names of the guys they have in AAA just yet. IMO they already have to hope that one of the farm hands can play RF in 2012.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future : Exactly - Theo will have so much leverage that Boras will take his client somewhere else.   Crawford can bat leadoff.  The longer we wait, the less value Ellsbury has in a trade deal, and the more likely that deal is contingent on an extension.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    #1 So we trade Jacoby for a RHH RF
    #2 We move Crawford to lead off and CF where he will probably be less effective than Jacoby?  If it was for Kemp, Pence or Upton maybe, because we upgrade our power in the OF and may still have a player capable of playing CF besides Carl.  But still no lead off batter as good as Jacoby
    #3 We still have two or three youngsters for LF who need to learn the ropes in order to match Carl or Jacobys experience. 

    I would rather keep Jacoby until it comes closer to the time we absolutely need to deal with Boras, then sign or possibly trade Jacoby before he hits the market. We still have the talent on the farm to either work a kid like Reddick or Kalish in slowly, or package some youngsters to upgrade RF next season.  It seems less risky to me.  Believe me, we won't be the only team that may not want to deal with Boras.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future:
    [QUOTE]I think both of you have made excellent posts.  Meanwhile a thread about Teixeira not being an all-star gets much more attention.  Go figure.  True Sox fans with an interest in the team beyond what they did last game should take thritysomething's ideas to heart. I do feel that Papelbon stays only if he values himself below Mariano Rivera money, considerably below.  And I base that on the belief that the front office values closers, along with any other reliever, as too risky to throw too much money or too many years at them.  That means maybe 5 - 7 million dollar range for the top guys, and 2 years, maybe three on contract length.  As for the OF picture, I could see Ellsbury being traded in the off-season if it brought the Sox a RHH OFer who has more years of control, and probably more power.  Ellsbury is proving very valuable.  But that means he will cost more in arbitration, and bring more in trade value.  So unless Ellsbury agrees to an extension, I see him gone by 2014.  But he might bring in a RHH OFer who IS still around in 2014. I also believe that the starting pitching picture, which, it has been pointed out, is quite secure, long-term, is why Theo has stated that he is more likely to bring in a bat than a starter as we close in on the July trade deadline.  Trading good prospects for a rent-a-pitcher does not make sense to me, or to them IMO.
    Posted by parhunter1[/QUOTE]


    I thought this way when Bard wasn't cutting it early on, but not now.
    Bard should be seen to take Paps spot at this point.
    Unless Bard tanks, I see no way they re-sign Paps. It's cheaper to replace Bard's role.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future:
    [QUOTE]I disagree about Crawford being a lead-off hitter, base stealing aside there is very little in his career splits that suggest this would be his best spot. As somebody else pointed out, moving Pedey there might make more sense. There is something to be said for NOT extending players when they won't give you a discount on their fair value in arbitration and an extra year or two and simply going through the arbitration process with them. The cost is slightly higher but the risk is greatly reduced. So long as the next CBA allows for draft pick compensation the years of service on the field and draft pick compensation has real value. I concur that Boras is not likely to advise his client to extend and frankly I am not sure the RS want to do that right now any way. But I also contend that the RS aren't sitting around panicking about having to move Ellsbury quick because he isn't extended or that they have penciled in the names of the guys they have in AAA just yet. IMO they already have to hope that one of the farm hands can play RF in 2012.
    Posted by fivekatz[/QUOTE]

    Crawford's splits at leadoff are skewed, because they are almost exclusively from the beginning of his career, ages 21 - 23.  In this lineup, absent Ellsbury, I think he'd be the best leadoff man.  That could change with the SS and DH situation next year.

    The Sox aren't panicking, but I think they know their window to sell on Ellsbury will never be higher than in the next year, and they can do a lot better than two years of service and a couple of compensation picks.

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

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future : #1 So we trade Jacoby for a RHH RF #2 We move Crawford to lead off and CF where he will probably be less effective than Jacoby?  If it was for Kemp, Pence or Upton maybe, because we upgrade our power in the OF and may still have a player capable of playing CF besides Carl.  But still no lead off batter as good as Jacoby #3 We still have two or three youngsters for LF who need to learn the ropes in order to match Carl or Jacobys experience.  I would rather keep Jacoby until it comes closer to the time we absolutely need to deal with Boras, then sign or possibly trade Jacoby before he hits the market. We still have the talent on the farm to either work a kid like Reddick or Kalish in slowly, or package some youngsters to upgrade RF next season.  It seems less risky to me.  Believe me, we won't be the only team that may not want to deal with Boras.
    Posted by craze4sox[/QUOTE]

    Crawford might be slightly less effective than Ellsbury at the leadoff spot, but if one of the names you mention is also in the lineup, it's a net plus.

    I'm not advocating throwing Ellsbury away, but it seems like we have enough MLB-ready or near MLB-ready cost-controlled talent to make the trade that lands an elite RH OF bat.  


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

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future : Crawford's splits at leadoff are skewed, because they are almost exclusively from the beginning of his career, ages 21 - 23.  In this lineup, absent Ellsbury, I think he'd be the best leadoff man.  That could change with the SS and DH situation next year. The Sox aren't panicking, but I think they know their window to sell on Ellsbury will never be higher than in the next year, and they can do a lot better than two years of service and a couple of compensation picks.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    I don't see Carl handling LHP well enough to ever have a decent OBP as a lead off guy.  Carl has played almost 400 games at lead off and has a career OBP of 319, thats probably not going to change that drastically at this point.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from jidgef. Show jidgef's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    Just a few thoughts...
    This is a very good thread; I hope it doesn't get derailed by the knuckleheads.
    1) I am old enough to remember a shortstop on a multi-pennant winning team who struggled to hit .220. His name was Mark Belanger and he is still the best shortstop I have ever seen play. If Iglesias is as good as people say, our lineup can carry a .220 hitter. Remember, this is the POST-steroid era.
    2) I wonder how much chatter there would be about moving Ellsbury if he had any other agent in the world? I also wonder what's more valuable, a right-handed hitting right-fielder with some power or one of the top young leadoff hitters in the game who happens to play the most difficult outfield position? We have lots of money and can match any team's offer to keep him. And as long as we have a farm system replacing one position player and one key pitcher every year for minimum dollars, we can easily afford to pay Ellsbury.
    3) As much as I like Paplebon, I think we'll let him test the waters, especially with the season Bard is putting together. I think Paps may find the pockets aren't quite as deep as he had hoped and that the grass is greener here. I may be all wet, but I don't see him running off to the highest bidder, just because they are the highest bidder, if there is much less chance of contending. I think he's too much of a competitor for that and the process might just bring him back to Boston.
    4) I don't know as much about the prospects as many on here do, but I do know that we just let a very good hitting catcher walk because we wouldn't live with his weak defense. As good a hitter as Lavernway is, he would have to improve by leaps and bounds to get past a very solid Salty and any other back-up catcher who would emulate Tek's role here.
    5) My only negative comment...I notice Miller is listed as a starter on many of the future rosters posted. As much as I like his potential, and what he's done so far, I need to see a lot more before I'm convinced. There are thousands of "unlimited potential" players who have amounted to next to nothing, even after multiple chances and changes of scenery. Hope I'm wrong, but he still needs to convince me that he can put it all together.
     
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    Agree Jid.

    The Paps market will be interesting. I just don't see him in Boston unless Bard tanks. Theo won't commit what he doesn't have to. Pap will want 3-4 years.
    They've already over-paid for Jenks...
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future:
    [QUOTE]Just a few thoughts... This is a very good thread; I hope it doesn't get derailed by the knuckleheads. 1) I am old enough to remember a shortstop on a multi-pennant winning team who struggled to hit .220. His name was Mark Belanger and he is still the best shortstop I have ever seen play. If Iglesias is as good as people say, our lineup can carry a .220 hitter. Remember, this is the POST-steroid era. 2) I wonder how much chatter there would be about moving Ellsbury if he had any other agent in the world? I also wonder what's more valuable, a right-handed hitting right-fielder with some power or one of the top young leadoff hitters in the game who happens to play the most difficult outfield position? We have lots of money and can match any team's offer to keep him. And as long as we have a farm system replacing one position player and one key pitcher every year for minimum dollars, we can easily afford to pay Ellsbury. 3) As much as I like Paplebon, I think we'll let him test the waters, especially with the season Bard is putting together. I think Paps may find the pockets aren't quite as deep as he had hoped and that the grass is greener here. I may be all wet, but I don't see him running off to the highest bidder, just because they are the highest bidder, if there is much less chance of contending. I think he's too much of a competitor for that and the process might just bring him back to Boston. 4) I don't know as much about the prospects as many on here do, but I do know that we just let a very good hitting catcher walk because we wouldn't live with his weak defense. As good a hitter as Lavernway is, he would have to improve by leaps and bounds to get past a very solid Salty and any other back-up catcher who would emulate Tek's role here. 5) My only negative comment...I notice Miller is listed as a starter on many of the future rosters posted. As much as I like his potential, and what he's done so far, I need to see a lot more before I'm convinced. There are thousands of "unlimited potential" players who have amounted to next to nothing, even after multiple chances and changes of scenery. Hope I'm wrong, but he still needs to convince me that he can put it all together.  
    Posted by jidgef[/QUOTE]

    I fully agree on all points jidge, I like Miller and think he could stick for a few reasons.  We know he now has better control since slowing his fastball down.  In time he could even learn to control the extra speed a bit better.  He also has a major league curve ball, confidence and poise needed to progress even further.  Lastly, hes a lefty so he will definately get a good chance to make it.

    I could be completely wrong but I don't think he has reached full potential yet.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from jidgef. Show jidgef's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future : I fully agree on all points jidge, I like Miller and think he could stick for a few reasons.  We know he now has better control since slowing his fastball down.  In time he could even learn to control the extra speed a bit better.  He also has a major league curve ball, confidence and poise needed to progress even further.  Lastly, hes a lefty so he will definately get a good chance to make it. I could be completely wrong but I don't think he has reached full potential yet.
    Posted by craze4sox[/QUOTE]
    There's no question he has not reached his full potential yet. My point was simply that so many like him NEVER reach their potential. No one will be pulling for him more than me! And throwing with that "other" hand buys you more looks than you may otherwise deserve.Wink
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future : There's no question he has not reached his full potential yet. My point was simply that so many like him NEVER reach their potential. No one will be pulling for him more than me! And throwing with that "other" hand buys you more looks tan you may otherwise deserve.
    Posted by jidgef[/QUOTE]

    Very true, it could go either way
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    Miller is a work in progress. He may end up in the BP by late August, if the need is there.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from jidgef. Show jidgef's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    Harns, if he's in the bullpen in August it will mean our starters are all back on track. I could absolutely live with that!
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from jidgef. Show jidgef's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    My two cents on Crawford; I don't like him as a lead-off hitter, for all the OBP issues mentioned, especially against lefties. I do like him as a middle of the order guy and our lineup took off when he starting hitting well in the sixth spot. Long term he will not be sixth, but as long as Ortiz is hitting like he is this year, that bumps CC to six.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthomas43. Show mthomas43's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Trading, with an eye to the future : Solid post thirty, but we have a few differences.  I see Doubront along with Kalish or Reddick being dangled as trade bait and possibly packaged at some point with Lowrie. My 2014 lineup would look something like this ... Ellsbury CF , I don't see Theo messing with success at leadoff.  He gambled once with Damon and it hurt.  If Iglesias can improve offensively to the point of leading off it could change but nobody else can take that role at this point. RHH - Pede 2B , LHH - Crawford LF LHH - Gonzo 1B RHH - Youk DH or Lavarnway - Youk could become a trade chip if the kid continues to assault the baseball. ???????????? RF - My wish is still to see Westmoreland recover at some point and according to most sources hes making great strides.  Outside of that I have no idea what Theo's plan may be for the future. RHH - Middlebrooks 3B SWH - Salty and Fed, who is an outstanding defender and beginning to raise his offense.   Theo likes Salty and feels he could have a similar career as Tek. RHH- Iglesias SS , Hopefully SP - Lester, Beckett, Clay, Miller? and Renaudo - Anthony has a good fastball and curveball but will need to develop a "change up" before getting a shot at the bigs.  At 21, I think he has a higher ceiling than Weiland who is now 24. I see Lackeys arm giving out before his contract expires.
    Posted by craze4sox[/QUOTE]

    Where is Lavarnway?  His bat has to fit somewhere.

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

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    You forgot about Wakefield in the rotation.

    My longshot guess is that Iglesias, Lavarney, & ??? go in exchange for hanley.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter1. Show parhunter1's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    I've always thought that if the Sox traded for Hanley it would be with the intention to move him to CF. 
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    Gee. I thought Theo wanted Hanley out of town.
    It would be embarressing to have him back.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future:
    [QUOTE]You forgot about Wakefield in the rotation. My longshot guess is that Iglesias, Lavarney, & ??? go in exchange for hanley.
    Posted by Joebreidey[/QUOTE]

    You could be right Joe, I know Hanley would like to come back.  It's been a long time since Hanley was traded, it would be a nice to see him back.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future : I see him as "untouchable" because the Red Sox have a projected need (Youkilis won't last too many more years at 3B), there is a reasonable possibility that he will fill the need, and there are no good internal alternatives within the timeframe in question. I'm not suggesting that he is a "sure thing", by any stretch of the imagination, simply that his value to the Red Sox exceeds his value to another team. Middlebrooks ought to be on the Top 10 lists next year, and might break the BA Top 100. Successfully jumping a level while adding 40 points of batting average does a lot to resurrect a player's reputation! He is still two big steps from Boston, however.
    Posted by thirtysomething[/QUOTE]

    Youkilis (32), coming off an injury the year previous, and relocating again to 3B. Has 6 errors on the season and I'd like to see his defensive numbers at the end of this season, because knowing Youk- It might just stay at 6.  In his 8th Season (but has really only played 6 combined- not all due to injuries of course).  Looking at his Offense, it might be hard to just plug someone else in and pat everone on the back job well done. He's averaging a hit a game, on his way to hit 50 Doubles, 26 HRs, 100 walks, over 100 RBI, batting .285. Pretty sure his 2013 Team Option will be picked-up.

    What's your projection on how long Youkilis is still at 3B after 2013?

    Honestly, I'm just curious.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from tomnev. Show tomnev's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    3B as traditionally been a position where you can be a little older and still play it and be productive....Schmidt....Ripken....Chipper Jones...and others have benn productive until 36 or so....so I thnk we could count on Youk at 3rd until the 2015 season if we hold onto him. Youks approach at the plate is one that should age well.....of course he needs to stay healthy which could be an issue.

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

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    It's all about roster construction with short term needs weighted against long term contracts...our current teams nucleaus is signed through 2013 (two more seasons)...Our short term needs, as in next year are pitching: closer and 5th starter. Positin players: DH, SS and RF We have guys in our sytem that are projectable to fill the closer role (Bard), 5th starter (Miller or Doubront), SS (Iglesias) and RF (Kalish or Reddick). Perhaps the most glaring need is replacing Drew with a RH bat, other wise if we resign Papi the to-do then is SS...

    Longer term as in 2013 and 2014 3B (Youk) and centerfield (Ellsbury) are both on the to-do whether we resign them or go in a different direction (Middlebrooks/Kalish). Then we get into the 2014-2015 cylce where our starting pitching becomes the todo that's where Ranaudo and Weiland enter the mix and resigning of Lester...

    If you look at our roster Crawfrod, Pedrioa and Gonzalez represents the longterm nucleaus around which player will be added and subtracted...Buchholz and Lester (assuming he's resigned) would be the starting pitchers that the future rotations will be built around...
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from thirtysomething. Show thirtysomething's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    "What's your projection on how long Youkilis is still at 3B after 2013?"

    That is an unanswerable question, emp9. I'm not concerned with his errors. Youkilis generally makes the plays that he can reach. I *am* concerned with his defensive range, and believe that is diminished due to injuries and age.

    Youkilis has 250+ innings at third base in 2004, 2008, 2009, and 2011. His defensive stats for those four years:
    DRS: +6, +7, +1, -11
    RZR: .735, .729, .740, .676
    UZR/150: +19.6, +20.0, -4.9, -12.1

    Defensive stats ought generally be read over a multi-year sample (instead of looking at lines that each represent 1-3 months of full-time play), but I believe there is reasonable evidence to suggest that he *was* an average or better defensive 3B, but *is* below average this year.

    What I can't tell you is how that will progress. If he is healthier in 2012 than this year, his defense ought to improve. If the nagging injuries continue, or spread, then his defense could decline further.

    All else equal, I believe Youkilis is more valuable as a gold-glove 1B than as a below-average defensive 3B. If the physical toll of playing 3B hampers his ability to stay in the lineup and mash, then he would be more valuable as a 150 GS DH than as a 110 GS 3B. Thus I would expect that his next contract will come from a team that needs either a 1B or a DH.

    If the Red Sox need a DH in 2013, I could imagine Youkilis moving over at that time with another player (Lowrie? Middlebrooks? Navarro?) taking over the defensive duties. If not, then I expect Youkilis will sign with another club in 2014.




     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from 111SoxFan111. Show 111SoxFan111's posts

    Re: Trading, with an eye to the future

    In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Trading, with an eye to the future : Crawford's splits at leadoff are skewed, because they are almost exclusively from the beginning of his career, ages 21 - 23.  In this lineup, absent Ellsbury, I think he'd be the best leadoff man.  That could change with the SS and DH situation next year. The Sox aren't panicking, but I think they know their window to sell on Ellsbury will never be higher than in the next year, and they can do a lot better than two years of service and a couple of compensation picks.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]
    Absent Ells, Pedroia is best leadoff hitter IMO.

    Needs for next year are likely closer, RF and SS.  I suspect RS won't deal for 5th starter unless it is a low cost "project" which Theo seems to like ... either way 5th starter will be open competition, IMO with lots of options and the back up plan of trading if necessary.  If Reddick crushes for the rest of the year, he may be slated for 2012, but if that happens I expect they'll sign a high level RH 4th fielder.  I think SS is the most interesting spot right now.  They've got 3 guys who might possibly be the answer (Jed, Navvy, JI) but all are far from certain ... plus the team option on Scutaro.  What to do?
     

Share