Odds we get Zito??

[CrespoBlows]

If the Detroit FO is smart, they would realize that Smoltz probably doesn't put them over the top as a favorite to win the WS. That alone might convince them not to part with too much young talent. The Tiger FO has not shown a tendency towards a win-it-now mentality. For them to part with a boat-load of young talent would be more contrary to their management philosophy than it would be for the Boston FO.

 

I disagree.

 

The Tigers have been obssessed with trying to contend. That's why they overpaid for Rodriguez, signed Rogers, signed Todd Jones, and threw a $15 million per toward Ordonez. The Tigers probably would part with a Humberto Sanchez in order to get Smoltz.

 

Also, Smoltz would put both the Red Sox and Tigers over the top.

[CrespoBlows]

If no other team wants top part with that caliber of prospect for Smoltz, the Sox might be able to get him for less. Also, don't forget that the Braves would probably like to free themselves from Smoltz's contract. They could put that $ to use in their rebuilding process. The fact is that none of us has any idea what other teams would be willing to trade for Smoltz. Assuming the other teams are not being run by complete *******s, the Sox should be able and willing to bid competitively.

 

The Braves have an option $8 million option on Smoltz. That's pretty fair for the Braves.

 

BUT, I would move Craig Hansen for John Smoltz. I don't know if the Braves would.

[Matt]

Smoltz is 39 years old. There's no way I'd give Hansen up for Smoltz. Unlike some, I have yet to give up on Hansen, and I'm willing to bet that Hansen's value in 3 years will be a hell of a lot more than Smoltz's in the same time span.

[CrespoBlows]

Smoltz is 39 years old. There's no way I'd give Hansen up for Smoltz. Unlike some, I have yet to give up on Hansen, and I'm willing to bet that Hansen's value in 3 years will be a hell of a lot more than Smoltz's in the same time span.

 

What if you win the World Series in 2006? Would it be worth it then?

[SchillingIsTheNatural]

What if you win the World Series in 2006? Would it be worth it then?

 

Exactly. The goal is to win the World Series. Obviously you don't want to cripple yourself for the future so the team can no longer compete after a strong push for a championship....but this is the Boston Red Sox. You can guarantee this team would continue to bring in top talent and great players.....there was life in Boston after Damon, Garciaparra, Pedro Martinez, Roger Clemens......the team can recover and move on.

 

...personally....I think this team is ready to win now...I say they go after that last piece of the puzzle to fill out a great contending team.

[a700hitter]

...personally....I think this team is ready to win now...I say they go after that last piece of the puzzle to fill out a great contending team.

Building for the future is nice, but the future is so uncertain. Grab for the ring that is within reach now. Once the Championship banner goes up, it's there forever. The future can become the present and then the past very quickly with nothing to show for it.

[example1]

I think that winning the world series is largely a result of getting to the playoffs and then getting some luck along the way. All of the Schilling, Foulke and Nomar moves in 04 would have been for naught if Dave Roberts doesn't steal 2nd.

 

That being said, I'm still not in favor of "going after it this year" by trying to get Smoltz if it means trading away our "contender" ability for the next few years. I would rather have Beckett, Lester, Papelbon, Crisp, Youkilis, Ortiz, Delcarmen and Hansen over the next 5 years than trade any of them in hopes of being in contention and getting lucky this year.

 

I would probably deal Pedroia for him, but certainly not young pitching talent.

[Matt]

What if you win the World Series in 2006? Would it be worth it then?

 

And what if you don't? Then you've just given up one of your top young pitching prospects for a 40-year-old pitcher nearing the end of his career. Trading for Smoltz does not make the Red Sox a sure thing to win the World Series. If I trade away one of my young arms, I want another relatively young arm in return. Someone who will spend more than just one season with the Red Sox.

[ksushi]

Young pitching is in most cases very stupid to let go of.

[schillingouttheks]

Young pitching is in most cases very stupid to let go of.

I still don't understand what the Mets saw in Victor Zambrano. If they just held onto Kazmir they wouldn't have had to worry about Soler this year... They'd be deadly.

[ksushi]

That folks, is exactly why you do not part with young arms. I would hate to Hansen or Lester throwing smoke in the visiting bullpen at fenway someday when they could be on our staff potentially getting lots of outs.

[example1]

So we're in agreement then? Don't trade Lester or Hansen for Smoltz?

 

Perhaps for Dontrelle or someone young (Kazmir, anyone?) but not Smoltz.

[schillingouttheks]

I'd trade Hansen. Smoltz would basically cover our rotation and put us in serious contention and a great chance to win the '06 and '07 WS. It would be a move for now. We're the Red Sox, we want to win every year we can, and that's the sweetest thing of all. I don't want to keep putting off now just for the future. If you can win now, you take it. The future's just as uncertain. If you can make a move to win now without hurting yourself too bad 3-5 years down the road, why not? If Papelbon stays as our closer (which is probably the case, Tito indicated that there's most likely no reason whatsoever to ever move him if this is what's going to happen year after year out of our closer), then Hansen's expendability rises. Besides, it's not like there's nothing in the FA market every year. Winning makes people want to come here, and winning also gives us more opportunity to sign players (more money from the fans). If we could get Smoltz for Hansen this year, do it. If it's Lester, I wouldn't, because Lester's helping us out a lot right now.

[ksushi]

Don't bother hinting at a Kazmir trade, please.

[Mr Crunchy]

as it stands today

the red sox and the white sox are both 7-2 to win the world series

(5dimes.com)

craig hansen or jon smoltz??

good question

i'll take the guy who is 16-4 in the post season over the rookie who throws 100 but has yet to find the confidence to challenge hitters

atlanta wont deal smoltz for hansen straight up UNLESS smoltz insists on moving to fenway

 

due to his long career in atlanta i think they'll let him make his own deal so long as its not insane on their end,plus hes got the tenure to rebuff anything he dont like

[Cocos Disciples]

But Craig Hansen is our closer of the next 10 years. Smoltz may improve our odds of winning it all, and, to be honest, I would do it in 2004. But, as earlier mentioned, it does not guarantee anything, and I do not want to take that risk.

[jsinger121]

But Craig Hansen is our closer of the next 10 years. Smoltz may improve our odds of winning it all' date=' and, to be honest, I would do it in 2004. But, as earlier mentioned, it does not guarantee anything, and I do not want to take that risk.[/quote']

 

Hansen right now is not the closer of the future but a setup man. That could change next year if they decide to move Paps to the rotation.

[Mr Crunchy]

its nice to be able to pencil in your closer for 2016 and the years in between but i for 1 dont see the future in that light.

1st off

we got an allstar closer who may be the best in the business and hes 24 yrs old

he aint going anywhere for a while

2nd off

hansen,of all the young arms,seems farthest away from success,i know hes younger

but he hasnt exactly grabbed the bull by the horns and challenged hitters with his 100mph heat either

he may have the raw goods to be the best

however

he needs to show a little more confidence and production before we set our minds ahead to the 2010 rotation and where hansen fits in.

[Cocos Disciples]

But a dominant setup man is still a great thing to have for 10 years, a guy who shortens the game to 7 innings. I do not think losing that for Smoltz, a guy who we will have for 2 months and 9 starts, is worth it.

[SchillingIsTheNatural]

I'll throw out another option...

 

The Chicago Cubs are a mess and I'm sure they would look into making a move. How about Dustin Pedroia, Craig Hansen, and maybe someone else for Carlos Zambrano? Probably not enough but it would be worth a look.

 

Another player I like is Damaso Marte. Adding another lefty to our bullpen would be a nice addition. I'm not sure what Pittsburgh would want in return.

[Cocos Disciples]

That is a reasonable trade, because Zambrano is young, and, if we get him, we would hopefully sign him to an extension. With Smoltz, it's only 2 months. With Zamby, it's 5+ years as a 1-A with Beckett.

[CrespoBlows]

Zambrano isn't going anywhere. The Cubs are a rudderless organization, but they aren't that bad. Besides, Zambrano's going to break apart one of these days. Baker has run these guys into the ground.

[Mr Crunchy]

But a dominant setup man is still a great thing to have for 10 years' date=' a guy who shortens the game to 7 innings. I do not think losing that for Smoltz, a guy who we will have for 2 months and 9 starts, is worth it.[/quote']

 

dominant set up guys become dominant closers

see mariano rivera for example

 

of course if you can guarantee me that the hansen im looking now is going to b adominant anything for 10 years then no,

you dont make the move

but as it stands

if i have smoltz beckett schilling&lester with a wakefield and a pen

of paps timlin and delcarmen then i like my chances of winning it all this year

this year,not in 08-09-10

this year

 

after all

how long do you think schillings going to pitch for??

wake too,he isnt tremendous but pencil in 200ips with an era of 4.00 and i'll take it all day long my man...

 

hes still our #1 guy and its a lot easier looking for a set up guy than a 1

[Cocos Disciples]

I think Schilling retires at the end of next year. Wakefield could possibly go longer, since he is a knuckleballer. Also, if you can guarantee me a WS victory this year, yeah, I would do that trade, but nothing is ever guaranteed. I would rather be a contender for the next 10 years and win a couple titles than win it this year and not contend, although we likely still would contend without Hansen. I don't know, I guess I just talked myself out of it.

[schillingouttheks]

Right. If we have a shot this year at the WS, I want to take whatever steps necessary. If getting Smoltz for Hansen will give us that boost to win the WS, I'm taking it. Besides, Coco's Disciples, we could most likely get one more year out of Smoltz next year. If they'll accept Hansen along with another prospect that we don't mind parting with, for Smoltz, then I'd be willing to do it. You have Schill-Smoltz-Beckett-Lester-Wake with the 'pen consisting of Timlin, Paps, Delcarmen, J. Lopez (I REALLY like that guy)...that really makes us the favorite to win. Imagine winning this year, and still having Smoltz to help us for next year....and suddenly you see back to back WS titles, or at least GREAT shots at winning back to back titles. I know it's wishful thinknig, but if we can win this year, that's what I want. The future's just as much of a cloud as bringing in Smoltz is. It's a risk I'm willing to take. As long as Lester's name stays out of trade talks, then I'd be interested in negotiating.

 

By the way, question, when's Schill's contract up?

 

EDIT: Right, Coco's Disciples, but Bagwell was supposed to give us WS titles, we were supposed to win in '75, '86....oops. How do you know that these kids will bring us WS titles? If we can be contenders NOW, with great shots to win it all, NOW, then I would love to win another WS, NOW.

[Cocos Disciples]

Maybe Bagwell would have, but that's a thing of the past. I'm not saying it's a guaranteed thing, because nothing is. Things can go wrong, sure. But trading Hansen, who could bring us a couple titles, for a guy who could bring us one title, doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.

[Cocos Disciples]

I know this wouldn't happen, but what about Jarrod Saltamacchia. The Braves already have their catcher of the future, and if we could trade, say, Hansen, Moss and Edgar Martinez maybe, for Smoltz and Saltamacchia, then flip Saltamacchia in another deal, or keep him, I don't know. Just a thought.:dunno:

[schillingouttheks]

Maybe Bagwell would have' date=' but that's a thing of the past. I'm not saying it's a guaranteed thing, because nothing is. Things can go wrong, sure. But trading Hansen, who could bring us a couple titles, for a guy who could bring us one title, doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.[/quote']

2*

 

Smoltz can pitch one more year after this.

[Cocos Disciples]

Oh. That makes it a little better.

[example1]

as it stands today

the red sox and the white sox are both 7-2 to win the world series

(5dimes.com)

craig hansen or jon smoltz??

good question

i'll take the guy who is 16-4 in the post season over the rookie who throws 100 but has yet to find the confidence to challenge hitters

atlanta wont deal smoltz for hansen straight up UNLESS smoltz insists on moving to fenway

 

due to his long career in atlanta i think they'll let him make his own deal so long as its not insane on their end,plus hes got the tenure to rebuff anything he dont like

 

"has yet to find the confidence to challenge hitters"

 

He has thrown 9.2 innings in the majors Mr Crunchy. 9.2