WEEI Rumor: Santana to Red Sox for Coco, Buchholz, Lester

[YAZMAN]

********. The NYY formula was always to buy the best bat on the market no matter what the price and to ride it out with old pitching. Who were the "cant' miss superstars" you're talking about? Alfonso Soriano? He's had a pretty good career. Who else? Mike Lowell?

 

At NO point have the Yankees made even ONE move that rivaled the intelligence of signing Matsuzaka to a huge front-loaded (i.e., bidding price heavy) contract. The Red Sox front office simply is not the Yankees front office.

 

I would expect people to realize that this FO has been to the playoffs in 03, 04, 05 and 07; they won the WS twice, and came a run (or a few pitches) away from getting to the Series as favorites in 03.

 

Again, the Yankees mantra is to go after guys like Damon and Lowell. The Red Sox mantra is to let those guys go if they want contracts that are longer than the Sox want to pay. If you don't see that difference then it is going to be a long, long life under Theo's regime for you.

 

The "can't miss" was in parentheses because in their opinion they were "can't miss" but obviously they did miss. Their formula for success both sucked and failed. The Sox plan worked. We need to protect our young talent and continue to develop and nurture it. Without the homegrown young studs like Youk, Pedroia, and Ellsbury this October we would have been...well, we would have been and incredibly talented, underachieving team that came up short. Kind of like the NY teams of the last half dozen or so years.

 

BTW, your analysis is great but your reading comprehension sucks, LOL.

[example1]

The "can't miss" was in parentheses because in their opinion they were "can't miss" but obviously they did miss. Their formula for success both sucked and failed. The Sox plan worked. We need to protect our young talent and continue to develop and nurture it. Without the homegrown young studs like Youk, Pedroia, and Ellsbury this October we would have been...well, we would have been and incredibly talented, underachieving team that came up short. Kind of like the NY teams of the last half dozen or so years.

 

BTW, your analysis is great but your reading comprehension sucks, LOL.

 

Yes, I think my reading comprehension dips down a bit after 12 posts about the same thing and feverishly typing responses. Sorry man. You're right, the "can't miss" FA acquisitions were mostly bad through and through.

 

Humorously, I didn't notice this from JM earlier:

 

Jackosonianmarch

Getting Santana would guarantee you guys 2-3 more championships based solely on the young 3 headed monster you could throw out there every 5 days and then to start off a playoff series. Not getting him and keeping status quo only guarantees you success, with a good shot at anoter ring.

 

Status quo?

 

Hey!! This just came out a few days ago:

 

From Baseball Prospectus (I won't quote the whole thing, just relevant for my case):

 

And, I'm bolding just for fun:

 

So here is what BP thinks as of 11/2/07

 

 

1. Clay Buchholz, RHP

DOB: 8/14/84

Height/Weight: 6-3/190

Bats/Throws: L/R

Draft: 1st round, 2005, Angelina College (TX)

2007 Stats: 1.77 ERA at Double-A (86.2-55-22-116); 3.96 ERA at Triple-A (38.2-32-13-55); 1.59 ERA at MLB (22.2-14-10-22)

 

Year In Review: After finishing the previous year on such a strong note, the Red Sox surprised some by starting Buchholz off at Double-A this season, but he blew away hitters at two levels before throwing a no-hitter in his second big league start, and establishing himself as the top pitching prospect in the game.

 

The Good: Buchholz is the total package with outstanding stuff, outstanding command and control, and outstanding mound presence. His four-seam fastball sits at 92-94 mph, can touch 97, and features excellent movement. It also isn’t even his best pitch. His plus-plus curveball is a true 12-6 breaker, and multiple scouts relay stories of batters falling down while trying to hit it. His changeup is also an above-average offering that features a late and heavy drop. He also mixes in a solid slider, and a two-seam fastball with some sink. His mechanics are smooth and sound, and he pitches with a fearless intensity.

 

The Bad: Anything here is nitpicking. At times, Buchholz becomes a bit too enamored with his secondary offerings, and needs to focus more on setting everything up with his fastball. Some felt this was solved at the big league level when Jason Varitek called all the pitches. Buchholz was shut down at the end of the season due to minor arm soreness, but it was done purely on a precautionary basis, and there are no long-term concerns.

 

Fun Fact: While at Angelina college, Buchholz was also the best hitter on the team, and would still have been drafted in the first ten rounds as an outfielder if he'd never pitched.

 

Perfect World Projection: Buchholz is one of the few pitching prospects around with true ace potential.

 

Timetable: Buchholz’ ascent is the primary reason Curt Schilling has been spending time writing good-bye letters to his Boston teammates. Buchholz is penciled in for an Opening Day rotation slot, and could be an impact pitcher immediately.

 

 

... a700 was asking about which pitchers have ever had impact on stretch runs as rookies. BP seems to think he can be an impact pitcher as soon as April.

 

And the other guy everyone wants to throw into the mix:

 

 

2. Jacoby Ellsbury, CF

DOB: 9/11/83

Height/Weight: 6-1/185

Bats/Throws: L/L

Draft: 1st round, 2005, Oregon State

2007 Stats: .452/.518/.644 at Double-A (17 G); .298/.360/.380 at Triple-A (87 G); .353/.394/.509 at MLB (33 G)

 

Year In Review: After successful full-season debut, Ellsbury was the hottest hitter in the minors during the first three weeks of the season, and overtook Coco Crisp for the starting job in center during the postseason.

 

The Good: Ellsbury’s top tools are his speed and glovework, but he’s a very good hitter as well. He makes good contact, uses all fields, and projects as a consistent .290-.310 hitter annually in the big leagues. He’s a plus-plus runner with outstanding instincts on the basepaths; one scout called him the best base runner he saw all year. He gets excellent jumps on balls in the outfield, and covers a ton of ground to both sides.

 

The Bad: Ellsbury needs to develop better secondary skills to move into the elite category as a hitter. He doesn’t have much power, though most feel he’ll grow enough to be good for 10-15 home runs annually. His excellent plate coverage works against him at times, and he needs to be more patient to profile as a pure leadoff man.

 

Fun Fact: While Oregon State is coming off back-to-back College World Series titles, success on the diamond is new to them, as their most successful hitting alum in the big leagues is Steve Lyons; Ellsbury’s three home runs in the majors already ranks second.

 

[b}Perfect World Projection: An above-average big league center fielder and occasional All-Star.[/b]

 

Timetable: Ellsbury’s performance in the postseason cemented his place in the Red Sox outfield of the future. That future starts in 2008, and Ellsbury will be the starting center fielder.

 

 

So we'll trade two starters, one who is "one of the few pitchers around with true ace potential" (which usually comes at 15-20m), one who projects to have roughly the impact that Torii Hunter has had in Minn (above average CF, occasional All-Star), and for SOME of you, a 3rd prospect (basically, take your pick if you're already giving away Buchholz and Ellsbury). Personally, I think there is no reason Ellsbury won't be an All-Star almost every year, with Fenway selling out every game and the Nation traveling to all ends of the earth to watch. Any Red Sox who puts up a decent season will be annual contenders for an All-Star spot, particularly if the team keeps up its high profile.

 

Again, no thanks guys. I have been in favor of keeping Ellsbury, Pedroia, Youkilis, Buchholz and Bowden since each of them has been in the Sox organization. I'd be willing to move Bowden; hell, I'd be willing to move Masterson AND Bowden to get Santana. Just not either Ellsbury or Buchholz, and certainly not both. I would do Buchholz for Santana straight up, except that I think Buchholz is going to be at least as good as Matsuzaka was this year, as a rookie. He will do so for pennies on the dollar, and this team has a way of spending its money to get potent returns.

[a700hitter]

Jacksonian' date=' I have heard the "window for multiple championships" thing for so long now it makes me sick. I just celebrated a championship, two years after celebrating another. a700 and other reactionaries around here said "we have a window" "we have a window" for the past few years. We let Pedro go and it was "but our window!". Damon leaves and its "but our window is closing"[/quote']Reactionary? I think you are leaving out a very important fact that led to the 2007 World Series Championship. My complaint was that the Red Sox were letting established stars go and the window that was closing was the window for Manny and Ortiz, who I still believe to be the cornerstones of the Championship teams. Well.. what happened? Once the established players... Damon, Pedro, Lowe, Mueller etc. left and they had some key injuries, the team imploded and dropped out of the race in August 2006. Now, don't go getting lost in discussing the merits of whether we should have kept those guys, because that is not my point. As you know, this team didn't recover solely as a result of the infusion of youth from our farm. Sure Pedroia and Youkilis were very key components, but Ellsbury saw limited action and only after the team had built up a tremendous lead. Coincidently, the lead was slipping away as he got his playing time. Now don't get caught up in arguing about the merits of Ellsbury, because as I have said, I think he is going to be a star. My point is not to criticize Ellsbury. My point is that John Henry, the owners, and the FO infused a ton of money into the team to turn this thing around in a hurry. Dice K, J.D. and Lugo cost a fortune. I, the reactionary, was very happy that the FO had decided to exercise their financial strength. Dice K helped solidify the rotation. He tired at the end after they built a very big lead. Although J.D. had a disappointing regular season, we probably don't get out of the ALCS unless he hits the Grand Salami. The owners made the financial moves they needed to in order to keep the window open.

 

I am glad that you conclude that John Henry's open checkbook is a key element of keeping the window open. On that we can both agree. That has always been my position, and I only butted heads with posters on this site who did not think big spending was necessary. I think it now would be hard to deny the tremendous financial resources of the Red Sox. That sentiment was not as uniformly present on this site in 2005 and 2006.

 

The window is closing on Manny and Ortiz, and if they want to keep the window open post Manny and Ortiz, they have some hard work ahead. Replacing one of them will be very, very difficult, but replacing both of them... It'll take brains, wallet and a little luck.

[example1]

From the same article:

 

The Big Picture: Rankings Combined With Non-Rookies 25 Years Old Or Younger (As Of Opening Day 2008)

 

1. Clay Buchholz, RHP

2. Jon Lester, LHP

3. Jacoby Ellsbury, CF

4. Dustin Pedroia, 2B

 

BP thinks Ellsbury will be better than Pedroia, and still believes that Lester will be more valuable than both. Buchholz eclipses all of them. Remember, Pedroia was (as far as he deserves) the rookie of the year this year.

 

a700, you said earlier that ace-caliber pitching is the most coveted thing on the market. Well, for a team that already believes it has 2 aces in matsuzaka (200+ Ks) and Beckett (2007 Cy Young?) there is little more valuable than ace caliber, MLB minimum $, pitching; and eventual #2 caliber, LEFTY, MLB minimum $, pitching.

[a700hitter]

a700' date=' you said earlier that ace-caliber pitching is the most coveted thing on the market. Well, for a team that already believes it has 2 aces in matsuzaka (200+ Ks) and Beckett (2007 Cy Young?) there is little more valuable than ace caliber, MLB minimum $, pitching; and eventual #2 caliber, LEFTY, MLB minimum $, pitching.[/quote']If one of them becomes a dominant ace and the other goes the way of Palooka-ville, I'll be happy. Chances are that neither will be a dominant ace or a reliable #2 for at least 2 years. By then Santana and Beckett could have 2 more Cy Young Awards and World Championships.

[example1]

Reactionary? I think you are leaving out a very important fact that led to the 2007 World Series Championship. My complaint was that the Red Sox were letting established stars go and the window that was closing was the window for Manny and Ortiz, who I still believe to be the cornerstones of the Championship teams. Well.. what happened? Once the established players... Damon, Pedro, Lowe, Mueller etc. left and they had some key injuries, the team imploded and dropped out of the race in August 2006. Now, don't go getting lost in discussing the merits of whether we should have kept those guys, because that is not my point. As you know, this team didn't recover solely as a result of the infusion of youth from our farm. Sure Pedroia and Youkilis were very key components, but Ellsbury saw limited action and only after the team had built up a tremendous lead. Coincidently, the lead was slipping away as he got his playing time. Now don't get caught up in arguing about the merits of Ellsbury, because as I have said, I think he is going to be a star. My point is not to criticize Ellsbury. My point is that John Henry, the owners, and the FO infused a ton of money into the team to turn this thing around in a hurry. Dice K, J.D. and Lugo cost a fortune. I, the reactionary, was very happy that the FO had decided to exercise their financial strength. Dice K helped solidify the rotation. He tired at the end after they built a very big lead. Although J.D. had a disappointing regular season, we probably don't get out of the ALCS unless he hits the Grand Salami. The owners made the financial moves they needed to in order to keep the window open.

 

1. I know you like Ellsbury now. I'm not arguing with you about that (though others would trade him in a heartbeat).

 

2. You seem to be acknowledging both

 

a. the FO was right to let Damon, Pedro and Lowe go (their combined 07 salaries

was more than the combined salaries of Dice, JD and Lugo)

 

b. without the young talent that you would otherwise have been dealt for Teixeira or

Helton or whoever else, this team would not have won. Or, perhaps more

accurately, this exact mix of players DID win, so now you don't regret the

decision.

 

I guess you must be able to see why keeping someone who might be (next year) 80% of Johan Santana could be a good thing, given that Ellsbury is the other name everyone throws around.

 

I am glad that you conclude that John Henry's open checkbook is a key element of keeping the window open. On that we can both agree. That has always been my position, and I only butted heads with posters on this site who did not think big spending was necessary. I think it now would be hard to deny the tremendous financial resources of the Red Sox. That sentiment was not as uniformly present on this site in 2005 and 2006.

 

The Red Sox are the only team that has utilized the moneyball approach but without the moneyball limitations. They treat each and every dollar as if they were the A's, won't overpay beyond what their best statistics can tell them is the production to expect from a player. They project the top-end and bottom end of a players production, and pick a spot in the middle. Then the figure out how many wins that would give the team, how much those wins would help the team financially, and then make their offer from there. Of course things like advertising and popularity of players comes into it a bit, because a guy like David Ortiz is simply going to draw more fans to the park than a guy like Hafner (who lacks the same personality). But overall they are greedy, money hoarding businessmen who take great pride in their team and the way it is constructed. They will spend money when they need to, but will not be coerced into spending money. Dice-K is making Basically, they are a brilliant, brilliant baseball thinktank with hundreds of millions of dollars to use and a fanbase that can't get enough. Myself included.

 

The window is closing on Manny and Ortiz, and if they want to keep the window open post Manny and Ortiz, they have some hard work ahead. Replacing one of them will be very, very difficult, but replacing both of them... It'll take brains, wallet and a little luck.

 

Ortiz has an option for 2011, I believe. That gives him the 08, 09, 10, and 11 seasons remaining. Manny will need to be replaced, but he can be replaced in some way-shape-or-form through a combination of improved defense, improved pitching, improved speed, and some hitting, along with millions of dollars.

[example1]

If one of them becomes a dominant ace and the other goes the way of Palooka-ville' date=' I'll be happy. Chances are that neither will be a dominant ace or a reliable #2 for at least 2 years. By then Santana and Beckett could have 2 more Cy Young Awards and World Championships.[/quote']

 

Well my man, you've been saying that about both of them as they worked their way through the system. Lester has had a 10 K game and a 9 K game, along with a World Series clinching win. Buchholz has a no-hitter and a number of games where he looked dominant.

 

You've been watching them walk down the path for awhile and now they're knocking on the door. I can see your skepticism is waining on both of them, and I think it's about time. Buchholz went from being called a potential #1 to a true potential ace (jeff francis was a #1, but not an ace) in the past season. At no point has there been doubt, just from watching his stuff and approach, that he will be a #1 caliber pitcher.

[example1]

Here's what I offer for Santana:

 

Lester, Kalish and Bowden or Masterson.

 

That's a pretty damn nice package. Kalish is young but he projects in the BP article (and other scouting reports I've seen) as very, very good.

 

BP: "A dynamic outfielder capable of 20 home run/40 stolen base campaigns."

 

He's got 5 tools, but is younger than Ellsbury. He ranks above Bowden, who could be a #3 starter (if not better, he's very young), and Lester is a very nice pitcher (combined with Liriano they would be some nasty lefties). I would offer other pieces, but not Ellsbury or Buchholz. Those guys are basically starters at this point and key pieces moving forward. The Sox are going to try to move Coco, for instance, relying on Ellsbury in CF. THeo is already talking about it at the winter meetings, which indicates that Ellsbury is off the table.

[TheKilo]

What I find to be funny is all the people who have boners over Ellsbury right now are the same ones who said we shouldn't criticize Pedroia for struggling in '06.

 

He's a good player guys, but in no way is Ellsbury an untouchable IMO. Buchholz is the only one.

[example1]

What I find to be funny is all the people who have boners over Ellsbury right now are the same ones who said we shouldn't criticize Pedroia for struggling in '06.

 

huh?

 

He's a good player guys, but in no way is Ellsbury an untouchable IMO. Buchholz is the only one.

 

That's probably right. He's not untouchable, but he is a top young talent at this point and if they moved him it would have to be for someone significant, particularly given their other CF options currently.

[Taliesin]

Ellsbury should be untouchable. I can't think of anyone in the game I would trade him for. No one. He's faster than Ichiro down the line. He changes the complexion of the game every time he's at bat. He creates errors by otherwise sure-handed third baseman by his presence.

 

Without him, we don't win this World Series. We have a potential unstoppable 1-2 for years to come. No thank you to anyone else...not fat Miggy. Not a soul. I'm starting to have an odd faith in this ownership group that they "GET IT" by the mere fact they seem to be serious in bringing back 38 and Lowell. Any mention of trading J.E. gives me hallucinations and flashbacks to the Gorman years. This kid is a superstar in the making. He's untouchable and anyone who thinks otherwise hasn't lived long enough on this earth.

[jacksonianmarch]

Here's what I offer for Santana:

 

Lester, Kalish and Bowden or Masterson.

 

That's a pretty damn nice package. Kalish is young but he projects in the BP article (and other scouting reports I've seen) as very, very good.

 

BP: "A dynamic outfielder capable of 20 home run/40 stolen base campaigns."

 

He's got 5 tools, but is younger than Ellsbury. He ranks above Bowden, who could be a #3 starter (if not better, he's very young), and Lester is a very nice pitcher (combined with Liriano they would be some nasty lefties). I would offer other pieces, but not Ellsbury or Buchholz. Those guys are basically starters at this point and key pieces moving forward. The Sox are going to try to move Coco, for instance, relying on Ellsbury in CF. THeo is already talking about it at the winter meetings, which indicates that Ellsbury is off the table.

 

that gets a couple snickers and a dial tone when you propose that to Minny.

[jacksonianmarch]

Reactionary? I think you are leaving out a very important fact that led to the 2007 World Series Championship. My complaint was that the Red Sox were letting established stars go and the window that was closing was the window for Manny and Ortiz, who I still believe to be the cornerstones of the Championship teams. Well.. what happened? Once the established players... Damon, Pedro, Lowe, Mueller etc. left and they had some key injuries, the team imploded and dropped out of the race in August 2006. Now, don't go getting lost in discussing the merits of whether we should have kept those guys, because that is not my point. As you know, this team didn't recover solely as a result of the infusion of youth from our farm. Sure Pedroia and Youkilis were very key components, but Ellsbury saw limited action and only after the team had built up a tremendous lead. Coincidently, the lead was slipping away as he got his playing time. Now don't get caught up in arguing about the merits of Ellsbury, because as I have said, I think he is going to be a star. My point is not to criticize Ellsbury. My point is that John Henry, the owners, and the FO infused a ton of money into the team to turn this thing around in a hurry. Dice K, J.D. and Lugo cost a fortune. I, the reactionary, was very happy that the FO had decided to exercise their financial strength. Dice K helped solidify the rotation. He tired at the end after they built a very big lead. Although J.D. had a disappointing regular season, we probably don't get out of the ALCS unless he hits the Grand Salami. The owners made the financial moves they needed to in order to keep the window open.

 

I am glad that you conclude that John Henry's open checkbook is a key element of keeping the window open. On that we can both agree. That has always been my position, and I only butted heads with posters on this site who did not think big spending was necessary. I think it now would be hard to deny the tremendous financial resources of the Red Sox. That sentiment was not as uniformly present on this site in 2005 and 2006.

 

The window is closing on Manny and Ortiz, and if they want to keep the window open post Manny and Ortiz, they have some hard work ahead. Replacing one of them will be very, very difficult, but replacing both of them... It'll take brains, wallet and a little luck.

 

The Papi Manny combo is the best 3-4 punch since Ruth and Gehrig. It will be nearly impossible to replace their production when they are done. And yes, the window is closing on them. But a better way to keep that window open is to even out the lineup and add Santana to the rotation.

[jacksonianmarch]

Yes, I think my reading comprehension dips down a bit after 12 posts about the same thing and feverishly typing responses. Sorry man. You're right, the "can't miss" FA acquisitions were mostly bad through and through.

 

Humorously, I didn't notice this from JM earlier:

 

 

 

Status quo?

 

Hey!! This just came out a few days ago:

 

From Baseball Prospectus (I won't quote the whole thing, just relevant for my case):

 

And, I'm bolding just for fun:

 

So here is what BP thinks as of 11/2/07

 

 

 

... a700 was asking about which pitchers have ever had impact on stretch runs as rookies. BP seems to think he can be an impact pitcher as soon as April.

 

And the other guy everyone wants to throw into the mix:

 

 

 

So we'll trade two starters, one who is "one of the few pitchers around with true ace potential" (which usually comes at 15-20m), one who projects to have roughly the impact that Torii Hunter has had in Minn (above average CF, occasional All-Star), and for SOME of you, a 3rd prospect (basically, take your pick if you're already giving away Buchholz and Ellsbury). Personally, I think there is no reason Ellsbury won't be an All-Star almost every year, with Fenway selling out every game and the Nation traveling to all ends of the earth to watch. Any Red Sox who puts up a decent season will be annual contenders for an All-Star spot, particularly if the team keeps up its high profile.

 

Again, no thanks guys. I have been in favor of keeping Ellsbury, Pedroia, Youkilis, Buchholz and Bowden since each of them has been in the Sox organization. I'd be willing to move Bowden; hell, I'd be willing to move Masterson AND Bowden to get Santana. Just not either Ellsbury or Buchholz, and certainly not both. I would do Buchholz for Santana straight up, except that I think Buchholz is going to be at least as good as Matsuzaka was this year, as a rookie. He will do so for pennies on the dollar, and this team has a way of spending its money to get potent returns.

 

Example. Seriously buddy, chill out a bit. If I was going totally off hype, I'd be telling you that my teams rotation was set to be AWESOME RIGHT NOW, LOOK AT THESE ROOKIES BAH!!!

 

I am excited for them, but know that they wont make a seamless transition. No rookie does. Their first full yr is usually filled with injury, inconsistency, some solid outings and some miserable ones. Not necessarily the stalwart performances that scream success early on. And for every pitching prospect who meets the hype, 1 has his career decimated by injury and another disappoints. But in my situation, the yankees rotation is so shallow that watching these rookies develop seems like the most prudent idea since we dont have an ace and one of these three kids MIGHT be one for yrs to come. But you guys already have an ace. And if you could deal Buchholz for ANOTHER one, you do it every day of the week. Beckett, Santana, DiceK, Schilling, Lester? Talk about a top 4 with current and future success. That would be dominant.

[riverside sluggers]

rotoworld

The Twins reportedly have approached the Red Sox about Coco Crisp as a potential replacement for Torii Hunter.

 

Neither Kevin Slowey nor Scott Baker figures to be on the table, but the Twins do have minor league pitching they could use to acquire Crisp. Jeff Manship and reliever Eduardo Morlan are a couple of possibilites. They could also put Juan Rincon on the table, but the Red Sox probably wouldn't have much interest in him.

 

http://www.startribune.com/blogs/neal/?p=264

 

This "Twins insider" begins to talk about the prospect of signing Mike Lowell

 

Mike Lowell could be available as a free agent. As well as he played for The Nation this season he’ll be 34 next season, and Boston may be reluctant to sign him to a multi-year deal at that age. The problem is that he’s probably worth around $8 million a year.

[SchillingIsTheNatural]

If one of them becomes a dominant ace and the other goes the way of Palooka-ville' date=' I'll be happy. Chances are that neither will be a dominant ace or a reliable #2 for at least 2 years. By then Santana and Beckett could have 2 more Cy Young Awards and World Championships.[/quote']

 

I have to completeley disagree. Both pitchers will be playing for the Red Sox which includes and excellent defense and top notch offense. If they can hold an ERA under 4.00 they can win 15+ games. Daisuke Matsuzaka did not pitch too well this season and he won 15 games. Tim Wakefield is extremely hit or miss and he won 17 games. By no means were those guys ace caliber pitchers yet still won a bunch of games.

 

Clay Buchholz through a handful of starts had an ERA under 2.00

 

Jon Lester did not lose a game and he struggled all year recovering from his cancer treatment.

 

To be considered an ace on the Red Sox you basically need to establish an ERA around 3.5 and I deffinitly think these guys have the goods to do that.

[Mr Crunchy]

big time spenders in minnesota

carl pohlad is the jeremy jacobs of minneappolis without the fan club

he should be assaulted physically every time he leaves the house

[rician blast]

Waddya mean, Crunch? If I have my numbers right, last time I checked the 07-08 NHL Salary Cap was a touch over $50m and the B's were only $500k under the cap. I agree that historically the Jacobs were tight-assed and it cost the team in terms of the on-ice product. Now, though, the fact that the Bruins STILL suck is due to their innefectiveness in the salary cap-era. I believe their FO and their scouting must be horrible.

 

Chara looks nothing like a $7.5m player

Bergeron is over-paid at $4.75m

Marco Sturm hasn't earned his $3.5m

Mark Savard is quite a playmaker and might be worth his $5m if he had someone to pass to . Right now he is the B's top scorer...at #57 in the league.

 

Other teams come up with young kids who fly, battle, check, score...The B's can't seem to find them. Doesn't matter who is coaching, they just seem to lack heart, talent and depth.

 

Maybe THAT is where they're being cheap now...hiring s***** scouts, s***** FO guys, etc. and it translates to lousy talent and character in their players.

[Paradisecity]

s***** scouts and bad FO decisions?

 

Sounds like a certain baseball team in New York 5 years ago...

[TheKilo]

huh?

 

 

 

That's probably right. He's not untouchable, but he is a top young talent at this point and if they moved him it would have to be for someone significant, particularly given their other CF options currently.

 

Anyone basing their decisions off of Ellsbury's major league plate appearances and postseason plate appearances is foolish.

 

Handing the reins to Ellsbury off the bat next year is foolish, without a proper backup in place.

[CrespoBlows]

huh?

 

 

 

 

 

I think he's trying to say that Ellsbury is not as good as his 180 AB sample that we saw in September and in October.

 

I'd put him at a .300/.370/.400/.770 batter, while playing HOF worthy defense.

 

I wouldn't trade him for a lot of players, but Cabrera isn't one of them.

[example1]

Anyone basing their decisions off of Ellsbury's major league plate appearances and postseason plate appearances is foolish.

 

Handing the reins to Ellsbury off the bat next year is foolish, without a proper backup in place.

 

What does he need to do to show you that he is worthy of an MLB spot TheKilo? I mean, nobody complained too much when Crisp was hitting .230 for a good portion of the season and it is just OBVIOUS from watching the at-bats that Ellsbury is not as overwhelmed by MLB pitching as Crisp appears to be. To me, Crisp looks like he's swinging a tree trunk and it is clearly too heavy for him. He just BARELY catches up to fastballs, whether they are 88 or 99mph.

 

Who do you suggest should be his backup? Andrus Jones? C'mon. If it isn't Coco then it is just going to be some other mediocre CF because the Sox aren't going to go out and break the bank for a backup to a player that THEY are sure will hold his own.

[TheKilo]

Ellsbury, to me, looks like he can be a very talented MLB player. If you didn't notice the holes in his swing, and his tendency to swing at crap in the dirt, you need to open your eyes.

 

Ellsbury's BABIP was .380. My eyes felt as though he got a few cheap hits along the way (a few - a lot).

 

You've loved Ellsbury for a while, so I bet it's probably not going to matter what I say here. But to just hand the reins over to Ellsbury right off the bat, especially with how well Crisp played defensively (OVER 8 WIN SHARES).

 

Do I think Ellsbury will be the better player? Probably. I'd really like to see the team hang on to both players for '08, and transition Jacoby into the CF job after a month or two.

[silvercreekcc2006]

Ellsbury, to me, looks like he can be a very talented MLB player. If you didn't notice the holes in his swing, and his tendency to swing at crap in the dirt, you need to open your eyes.

 

Ellsbury's BABIP was .380. My eyes felt as though he got a few cheap hits along the way (a few - a lot).

 

You've loved Ellsbury for a while, so I bet it's probably not going to matter what I say here. But to just hand the reins over to Ellsbury right off the bat, especially with how well Crisp played defensively (OVER 8 WIN SHARES).

 

Do I think Ellsbury will be the better player? Probably. I'd really like to see the team hang on to both players for '08, and transition Jacoby into the CF job after a month or two.

 

You're nuts. Package Crisp off, and put the kid in Center.

[a700hitter]

To be considered an ace on the Red Sox you basically need to establish an ERA around 3.5 and I deffinitly think these guys have the goods to do that.

You are using the word ace loosely. I am talking about a dominant shut down ace like Beckett, not a 15 game winner. I don't see both of them becoming 15 game winners for 2 years.

[example1]

Ellsbury, to me, looks like he can be a very talented MLB player. If you didn't notice the holes in his swing, and his tendency to swing at crap in the dirt, you need to open your eyes.

 

Ellsbury's BABIP was .380. My eyes felt as though he got a few cheap hits along the way (a few - a lot).

 

You've loved Ellsbury for a while, so I bet it's probably not going to matter what I say here. But to just hand the reins over to Ellsbury right off the bat, especially with how well Crisp played defensively (OVER 8 WIN SHARES).

 

Do I think Ellsbury will be the better player? Probably. I'd really like to see the team hang on to both players for '08, and transition Jacoby into the CF job after a month or two.

 

1. The luckiest player in history? Possibly Ichiro, with BABIPs of .371, .347, .333, .401, .319, .350, .390, (career .359). Or, perhaps its the fact that anything not hit right at someone is either a hit or a bang-bang play. Ellsbury's the same way. Left handed, high contact, puts the ball on the ground, beats them out. We shouldn't expect .400-type BABIP numbers, but we shouldn't expect him to hit 3 week slumps where he looks like he shouldn't be in the majors either.

 

2. Speaking of that, it's funny. I'm told to "open my eyes" to see the holes in Ellsbury's swing? Don't you have bad dreams about the holes in Coco Crisp's swings like I do? I see that s*** with my eyes CLOSED. Seriously man. I'm not sure what your point is, but if it is anything other than "Ellsbury deserves to be the outright starting CF next year assuming he stays healthy and has a normal spring" then I should stop listening, unless you have a non-Crisp option.

 

3. I've been saying that Crisp would be an ideal 4th OF/bench guy since mid-season. He's a switch hitter, can realistically play all 3 OF positions, and can be a speed guy in the late innings. So in that sense we agree. He is also young enough where he will retain trade value over time for his defensive prowess alone.

 

4. Ellsbury is widely regarded as a tremendous fielder, as the Sox Minor League Defensive Player of the Year in 06 and 07. So you're losing no defense--or a negligible amount--gaining someone who can realistically hit .300 as a rookie, who has more explosive speed, a sweeter swing, and who projects to add a bit more power to his stroke. Christ, we're talking about a Dustin Pedroia with Crisp's speed in CF. A guy who made diving catch after diving catch for the Sox down the stretch. Playing LF or CF, whether the ball is up against the fence or in the Tampa Bay bullpen, Ellsbury has gotten to it.

 

5. Whose career minor league numbers are better?

[table] ????| AB | AVG | OBP | SLG | OPS | R |

Player A:| 1040 | .308 | .391 | .454| .845| 167|

Player B:| 1017 | .314 | .390 | .426| .816 |174|

[/table]

 

I advocated for Dustin PedroiA at this time last year, based on the above stats. Add 105 SBs and I'm going to advocate for JacoBy Ellsbury this year. I don't think I'm being silly. If anything THIS is the no-brainer. The stats Ellsbury put up this year were polar opposites to what Pedroia did last year, so anyone who was looking for a security blanket for Pedroia last year should feel a bit more confident with Ellsbury. He'll need a backup, but I'm simply not worried about a guy who tends to put up ABs like Ellsbury does.

[Mr Crunchy]

as far as the bruins go

the year they let billy guerin walk for 9m to dallas they signed martin lapointe to 5m

1 guy had 45 goals the other didnt have 45 in his career.

chara has been a disaster

the entire f***ing management has been a disaster since the neely wesley for barry pedersen deal back in the day.

 

they do have some youngsters who skate well and they play hard

they need to lose that gigantic stiff and get some mobile defensemen who skate every shift

[schillingouttheks]

The Bruins need new owners. I refuse to pay to see them play while they're owned by people who have pretty much publically said that they're more interested in making money than winning.

[BoSox21]

I felt sorry for Bruins fans not only when they traded Thornton for a collection of scrubs, but when they traded Brad Boyes for Dennis Wideman. But I'm a Habs fan so I really have no pity

[rician blast]

I felt sorry for Bruins fans not only when they traded Thornton for a collection of scrubs' date=' but when they traded Brad Boyes for Dennis Wideman. But I'm a Habs fan so I really have no pity[/quote']

 

Apparently they're hanging onto Sturm in hopes (get this) that he'll score 30 goals AND be a defensive presence on the front line so as to somewhat justify trading Thornton.

 

My take on Thornton was always that he was going to fail when they needed him most. I watched year after year and saw him take stupid retaliatory penalties in the playoffs, not shoot when he should shoot, generally not be the leader you'd have expected him to be. Frankly I was never confident that they could win anything with him as the centerpiece.

 

So they trade him for Sturm, Stuart and Primeau. Couple of years later, Primeau is in Calgary and Stuart is with the Kings. In their place we now find Chuck Kobasew and Andrew Ference.

 

So it comes down to Sturm ($3.5m) Kobasew ($1.2m) and Ference ($1.4m) for a combined $6.1m versus retaining Thornton for about $7-7.5m. Bottom line? You HAVE to get more for Thornton than this.

 

I'll be watching tonight against Buffalo and I'm not as much interested in whether they win as I am what kind of effort they put forth...I expect to be dissapointed.