AZ was going to get a 19-year-old Walker & a 21-year-old Franklin - they're looking down the road.  They wouldn't be interested in Aceves or Morales - only Barnes & Bogaerts / Middlebrooks would start the conversation, with probably a Webster & Doubront thrown in to match the value the Mariners were willing to part with.  Upton doesn't convince me he's worth that kind of haul.

1) We don't have to match Seattle's offer. We may just have to our-offer teh remaining offers.

2) We don't know what AZ wants from us. They may or may not want Aceves or Morales, but I think they would, however, my choices also includes Doubront and Tazawa, of which I am sure everyone wants.

They may take: Doubront, Tazawa, Lava, Brentz, Cecchini, and Vinicio. Maybe not.

I'd give Bradley instead of 2-3 of these guys, but I think they are not looking for OF'ers at the head of the offer.

In response to moonslav59's comment:

which is why they'd be asking for XB/MB or both plus WMB. unless BC pulls some voodoo magic theres no way AZ lets Upton go to boston without giving up one of those 3 (im thinking at least 2). which is way too much. Then theres the issue of his no-trade clause.. which could be a tactical move..... or it could mean he doesn't want to come to boston (a very real possilibity considering his bro played for the Rays and every ALE team except the rays is on his no trade list)

which is why they'd be asking for XB/MB or both plus WMB.

That's the rumored initial asking price, but we don't know what they might settle on.

In response to moonslav59's comment:

It isn't really the same as a flaw.  A flaw is K/W, fielding, running, health.

This is more an attempt to put Upton on an apples/apples basis.  When we were looking at Beltre, and so many posters were complaining that he couldn't hit, they were looking at LA/Seattle numbers.  My reasoning was that you start with his road numbers, since that should remain semi-consistent no matter who he plays for, then try to figure out what he'll do at Fenway.

His career OPS is .731, and his road OPS last year was .670.  So is there a reason to expect something different than his career .731 road OPS?  It's kind of an odd thing, but Sweeney, with -0- road HRs last year, still had a higher road OPS than Upton.

Which is not to say he couldn't be good, but he's averaged 138 games per year since becoming a starter, doesn't have a great rep, and a pedestrian player outside his own little hitting paradise.

In response to mef429's comment:

Sorry, I don't get the logic.

Upton turning down the Seattle offer does not mean that Boston must match or exceed the Seattle offer. It means that is AZ wants to trade Upton, they may deal him for the next best offer, which could be significantly less than what Seattle offered.

Besides, I think my 6 player offer is better than what Seattle offered.

I also think that Bradley, Doubront, Tazawa and one of Vinicio/Britton/Lava is better as well.

I'd prefer to keep Bogaerts or Barnes over Bradley in the deal above, but if it takes exchanging one of them for Bradley, I'd strongly consider it.

Yes lets trade Middlebrooks and then run around looking for a replacement for the next 3 years.

In response to moonslav59's comment:

Az was about to make out like a bandit on the seattle trade.. you gotta think from their POV. If they're not gonna get a comprable deal from another team then they might as well hang onto him. Idk what they would take but i doubt its anything less than at least 2 out of WMB, XB, MB and maybe JBJ. IMO i don't think there is any way around that really. Which is a no from me.

 

In response to notin's comment:

Drew had 8 seasons with an OPS of .880 or better.  But nobody considers him an elite hitter, a difference-maker or even a good #5 hitter.  Why?  There was always something missing.  Mainly HR's and RBI.

I see the same thing in Upton's numbers.  Nice numbers but there's something missing.  As with Drew it's the HR's and RBI.  He simply doesn't hit that many HR's and he doesn't have great numbers with RISP. 

With Upton it's the 'P' word - potential.  That's the main thing that gets anyone excited about him.   

I have to admit I'm going out of my way to make Upton's numbers look bad.  But I do have a feeling that trading the kind of package for him that has been discussed would be a huge mistake. 

When you're making this kind of deal now you have to consider the intangibles.  Is Upton a guy who would respond positively to the kind of pressure that would be put on him in Boston? 

I see the same thing in Upton's numbers.  Nice numbers but there's something missing.  As with Drew it's the HR's and RBI.  He simply doesn't hit that many HR's and he doesn't have great numbers with RISP. 

With Upton it's the 'P' word - potential.  That's the main thing that gets anyone excited about him.   

I have to admit I'm going out of my way to make Upton's numbers look bad.  But I do have a feeling that trading the kind of package for him that has been discussed would be a huge mistake. 

When you're making this kind of deal now you have to consider the intangibles.  Is Upton a guy who would respond positively to the kind of pressure that would be put on him in Boston?

That's mostly where I am at in this deal.  Some posters are treating him as an elite player.  I think he has the potential to be very good, but it seems like no one wants to acknowledge the downside risk, let alone evaluate it.

Forget the egregious H/A splits for a minute.  Forget the name and everything else.  Just ask yourselves, what would you give up for a RF with the following annual stats since he became a starter.

84 R, 21 HRs, 70 RBIs, 16/7 SB/CS, .281 avg 

That line will probably be worse than we get from Bogaerts.  If that is the line you expect, then even Bogaerts straight up for Upton is an overpay.  The only way to justify the trade would be to say that you expect a significant improvement from Upton over what we saw from his first 5 seasons and nearly 3,000 PAs.

In response to moonslav59's comment:

[/QUOTE]

I think Ben would part with 2 "young pitchers" from Doubront, Morales, Tazawa or Aceves (+cash with Aceves). If we then signed Marcum, we'd hardly miss any 2 of these guys.

Then, add guys like Lava, Cecchini (blocked), Owens or Britton, Brentz or de la Cruz, and Iggy or Vinicio and we might not have to part with Boggy or Barnes.

[/QUOTE]

If the Sox move on from Napoli, why not go for a cheaper option at 1B and use Nap $ to get Marcum?

 

In response to moonslav59's comment:

Yeah, I know the numbers are there, but I guess the "WOW" factor-as in "We've got to get this dude no matter what" isn't there for me.  Maybe it's mainly perception, as I don't follow the AZ market at all.

 

In response to mef429's comment:

I wouldn't give 2 out of those 3 either, but I would give Bradley and a bunch of other young players and see if we can get the talks starting.

In response to rickerd2's comment:

I'm fine with not trading for Upton if the price is too high, but players with higher "WOW Factors" just don't come along very often.

He's available.

He's under team control for 3 years (ages 26, 27 & 28).

His contract is very reasonable as compared to FA costs today.

We need a middle order hitter.

 

I think if Ben thought J Up was a difference maker, sufficient to get us to the playoffs I could see him dealing a lot of prospects. 

On paper, if all the stars are in alignment,  they may be good enough to compete. My feeling it may be 2014 that we can compete. 

The Rays, Yankees and Jays are better than the Sox right now.

If you get Brentz and JBJ half a season of Major league experience,  they will be ready to start next season. Boggie may be tried at 3 b,  if WMB has a sophomore slump, likened to Manny Machado from Balt.--a true SS brought in to play 3 b down the stretch.

It appears the Yankees are prepared to go after Upton.

In response to moonslav59's comment:

thats the thing moon. i don't see any way around giving up at least 2 of those 3.. if we can then jump on it. but i wouldn't hold my breath if i were you

hope the yankmes get him, another expensive whack job, seattle offered way too much. sox need morse , or maybe smoak, vics ok in right for now, wait for killer B.s

In response to moonslav59's comment:

I don't know, Moon - I think what you're offering AZ is a couple of players who make them slightly less horrible for the next few years, and a handful of players who project to average at best 4 years down the line.  What Seattle offered was a projected ace in Walker, and a projected top 20% offensive SS.  And that's not including Pryor and Furbush - who was at least as impressive as Tazawa in 2012.  I don't think your offer is realistic.  Even if you start the ball rolling with Bradley - he's the #88 prospect, according to Scouting Book, where Walker and Franklin were #7 and #37. 

 

Can someone name one player (from the past) that we gave up top prospects for and it turned out long term? Yes I know of Beckett and that was good for one year. everyone here yearns to have those players back that we traded. Why not just play the kids and see if maybe Bradley is a better ball player?

In response to Promise4you2's comment:

+1

And to amplify, even with a late season slump Bradley got on base at a .430 clip last year. He's a gold glove center fielder with a plus arm. He's already won a CWS MVP. And everyone who knows him says his baseball instincts and character are off the charts. Why would you look to move a kid like that for an outfielder who puts up a sub .800 OPS every other year and who is rumoured to have a questionable attitude?

In response to carnie's comment:

Carnie my friend, I know that your questionwas not directed to me. You know how I feel about playing the kids. Gosh I yearn for 75 when it was a homegrown nucleus. Rooster, Fisk, Hobson, Rice, Lynn, Evans, Yaz, Cooper, Lee, Rico and on and on! grow from within and fill the gaps with players from outside.

I wouldn't give 2 out of those 3 either, but I would give Bradley and a bunch of other young players and see if we can get the talks starting.

[/QUOTE]


thats the thing moon. i don't see any way around giving up at least 2 of those 3.. if we can then jump on it. but i wouldn't hold my breath if i were you

 

Perhaps I am overvaluing Tazawa, Cecchini, Owens, Lava and a SS other than Boggy, but I think AZ would listen closely to an offer with just one of the big 3 involved, if we offered more players than what Seattle did.

Hard to know how AZ values our kids.

In response to Promise4you2's comment:

1) We gave up Carl Pavano and Tony Armas Jr for Pedro Martinez.

2) We traded Casey Fossum, Brandon Lyon, and Jorge de la Rosa for Curt Schilling.

We don't win a ring in 2004 without either of these guys.

There are a few more, like maybe Don Aase for Jerry Remy...

Why would you look to move a kid like that for an outfielder who puts up a sub .800 OPS every other year and who is rumoured to have a questionable attitude?

.816

.899

.799

.898

.785 (played hurt for part of season)

Saying "under .800" is true, but under by .001 one year, and injured the other is kind of selective pin-pointing, isn't it?

One could say he has been over .799 in 4 of his first 5 seasons in MLB at ages 20-24.

Or, over .785 (not a bad OPS) in all 5 of his first 5 seasons.

Here are two player's OPS the last 6 years:

704, 847, 756, 803, 799, 770  (Under 770 every other year and under 756 in 2 of the last 3 yrs)

812, 1046, 784, 842, 960, 794 (Under 812 about every other year, including 2 of the last 3 yrs)

When some of us criticized the signing of these two players to 3 year deals at $13M a year, they were staunchly defended by many of the same posters bashing Upton for being "inconsistent" or not good enough to invest so much in for 3 years. I realize the FAs signed cost us no prospects and their financial cost is almost exactly what Upton's salary will be over the next 3 years, but the FAs are over 30, and Upton did all he has done before the age of 25. He certainly projects to doing much offensively better than Shane & Napd over the next 3 years. He fills the need for a middle order hitter for 3 years. 

 

 

We've been seriously burned by big-ticket busts the last few years.  Lackey, Crawford and to a lesser extent A-Gon. 

Upton has too many red flags warning that he could easily be another bust in Boston. 

In response to moonslav59's comment:

Good point, but here's the difference: Pedro, Schilling = stud hoss ace pitchers coming back.

So if we learn from Red Sox history, we learn that the only kind of player we should be trading top prospects for is an ace pitcher.