Official 2009-2010 Hot Stove season thread

[BSN07]

Sox just picked up V-mart's option. Now we need to sign him for the long term.

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/

 

Agreed. A 4 year extension at around 14M AAV would be nice. Not sure if that would get it done though.

[bsox0407]

Agreed. A 4 year extension at around 14M AAV would be nice. Not sure if that would get it done though.

 

i think he needs to be our catcher for a long time to come. I think we move forward if Tek retires that Dusty Brown could make a back up for the sox in the near future. Kottaras is not the guy i want since he is not the greatest hitter.

 

AS for SS i am okay with resigning Alex Gonzalez and wait until Iglesias comes through and i am okay if Lowrie to play if he is completely healthy. he kind of impressed me when Lowell went down with his injury in 2008 when i saw him Seattle

[ehaz]

I know this is kind of a crackpipe-fanboy scenario but I couldn't stop thinking about this. With Halladay destined to be traded with the Jays not contending and obviously not able to re-sign Halladay (he's frustrated with the direction of the team and wants to win), what if we traded for Halladay AND signed the best available pitcher on the market (John Lackey).

 

Halladay

Lester

Beckett

Lackey

Buchholz or Dice-K

 

Thats an unbelievable rotation to say the least. It's pretty much the AL-All Star rotation. 5 years 85 million? to sign Lackey, trade for Halladay.

Here's a quote from Jon Heyman on Halladay:

Halladay, 31, would seem to be a likely bet to go somewhere, considering he's told the Blue Jays that he won't be staying once his contract expires after 2010, he's probably somewhat annoyed not to have been traded last summer, and the deposed GM J.P. Ricciardi appears to have lost his job partly for botching the fire sale of one of baseball's best pitchers. However, one GM opined that Halladay's value, while down from last summer because only one year remains on his contract, may not fall further from now to the summer trading season. If Halladay goes, the Red Sox, who are probably annoyed to have let the Yankees beat them for Teixeira and seen the Yankees match them with two titles this decade, look like a prime candidate. Last summer they offered Clay Buchholz, Justin Masterson, Michael Bowden, Nick Hagadone and a positional prospect, and while they no longer have Masterson and presumably wouldn't surrender as much now with Halladay a half-year closer to free agency, one way to close the gap on the Yankees would be to acquire Halladay, who's 18-6 lifetime vs. New York.

With the Red Sox probably not going to offer as much since they're just getting a rental for Halladay, how much could it take to trade for him? Will we need to give up Clay Buchholz? Could we do it for less?

 

 

Also, signing Lackey would take up some of the money that would be needed to sign a left fielder. So why not just sign one of the most underrated players on the market for less than Bay? I'm talking about center fielder, Mike Cameron. Here's a Bay vs Cameron comparison from Fangraphs:

Did you know that, since 2002 (the first year we calculate WAR for), Mike Cameron has been worth +29.6 wins, or about the same as David Ortiz, Aramis Ramirez, and Jim Thome? Or that Cameron has posted a WAR of +4.0 or higher in three of the last four seasons? Yet, due to a slew of factors that include accumulating a large portion of value on defense, spending most of his career in extreme pitchers parks, and posting a low average with a lot of strikeouts, Cameron has never gotten the recognition he deserves.

That will continue this winter, when Bay signs a contract that dwarfs what Cameron will receive, despite the fact that there’s really no argument for Bay being a better player.

Bay is a better hitter – that much is clear. Bay’s career wOBA is .384 versus a .347 mark for Cameron. A 40 point gap in wOBA is significant, and is the obvious driving force for the difference in perception between the two. But how much more value does Bay provide with the bat than Cameron in any given year?

Bay has produced +28 runs above average per 600 PA with the bat since 2002, while Cameron is at +13 runs above average per 600 PA over the same time frame. That’s a 15 run per season gap. It’s a real difference, but probably smaller than the perception of their relative offensive abilities.

That’s just the offensive side, of course. On the other side of the ball, Cameron is one of the better defensive center fielders in the game, while Bay is a bad defensive corner outfielder. You don’t have to trust UZR to agree with those assessments. Those aren’t controversial statements.

If we want to look at the numbers, Cameron is +6 UZR/150 over the last eight years, while Bay is -8 UZR/150. But, of course, they aren’t being compared to the same average baseline, since Cameron plays CF and Bay plays LF. Historically, the gap between an average LF and an average CF is about 10 runs, so the gap is actually 24 runs over their careers.

Even if you don’t like UZR, and you want to cut that number in half to account for your uncertainty about defensive value, you’ll still come out with a total value that makes them about equal. And, given the samples we have, you should trust UZR a lot more than that. With a correct amount of regression, the defensive difference comes out larger than the offensive difference, making Cameron the better player overall.

So, if Cameron has been the better player, why are teams going to pay more for Bay? Overvaluing offense is certainly one factor, but there’s also the age issue. Cameron is going to be 37 next year, while Bay just turned 31. That changes the way we project them going forward.

However, the primary factor in any aging curve has to be the starting point of a player’s value. Cameron may be older, but he’s also better, and he has a skill set that ages significantly better. He’s shown little to no erosion in skills over the last few years. At worst, you could use the age gap to make them have fairly similar projections in value for 2010.

Yet Bay is going to get a three to five year deal for something in the neighborhood of $15 million per season, while Cameron is probably going to have to settle for a one year deal for around the $10 million he made last year.

[BSN07]

I know this is kind of a crackpipe-fanboy scenario but I couldn't stop thinking about this. With Halladay destined to be traded with the Jays not contending and obviously not able to re-sign Halladay (he's frustrated with the direction of the team and wants to win), what if we traded for Halladay AND signed the best available pitcher on the market (John Lackey).

 

Halladay

Lester

Beckett

Lackey

Buchholz or Dice-K

 

Thats an unbelievable rotation to say the least. It's pretty much the AL-All Star rotation. 5 years 85 million? to sign Lackey, trade for Halladay.

Here's a quote from Jon Heyman on Halladay:

 

With the Red Sox probably not going to offer as much since they're just getting a rental for Halladay, how much could it take to trade for him? Will we need to give up Clay Buchholz? Could we do it for less?

 

Toronto isn't excepting a deal without Buchholz. The Sox are not going to trade Buchholz.

[example1]

Toronto isn't excepting a deal without Buchholz. The Sox are not going to trade Buchholz.

 

How do you know this? You think Toronto will hold onto Halladay if other teams aren't willing to give up true ace-potential pitchers for one year of a player at something like $13m/season?

 

I don't. I think they are desperate to shed payroll and that Buchholz (and his salary) straight up for Halladay would be a steal for the Jays at this point. Let alone a number of other players.

 

Last trade deadline it might have made more sense, in that he would be contributing to 1.5 seasons and would have impacted 2 playoff runs. Not now.

[BSN07]

How do you know this? You think Toronto will hold onto Halladay if other teams aren't willing to give up true ace-potential pitchers for one year of a player at something like $13m/season?

 

I don't. I think they are desperate to shed payroll and that Buchholz (and his salary) straight up for Halladay would be a steal for the Jays at this point. Let alone a number of other players.

 

Last trade deadline it might have made more sense, in that he would be contributing to 1.5 seasons and would have impacted 2 playoff runs. Not now.

 

Your probably right. The Jays might except a deal without Buchholz. But who's going to be the SP going back? I mean they really have to get a solid SP back don't they? I think they would be more interested in Happ then say Bowden or Tazawa(just my opinion, like you said before, I don't really know what Toronto's GM is thinking/doing).

 

Kelly could be someone of interest. But they may want someone a little closer to ML level:dunno:

 

It's definitely an interesting topic. You think they Sox could extend both Beckett and Halladay? They have to be able to sign one. Unless Buchholz makes that last final hurdle and becomes a #1 type horse.

[BSN07]

The Rockies are willing to listen to trade offers for outfielder Brad Hawpe.

 

Latest from Joel Sherman.

 

Would Hawpe be a viable option in LF for the Sox if Bay/Holliday fall through?

 

Most here believe it's going to be one or the other. I think Bay will get more years somewhere else(SF or Seattle if I had to pick) and signs elsewhere. Holliday is probably the #1 target, but when dealing with Boras there is no sure thing. If both of those players sign elsewhere we are looking at Damon, Vlad, Ankiel, Dye, Nady's of the world.

 

If Hawpe's price tag wasn't outrageous it might be worth looking into.

[Dojji]

If we lose out on both Bay and Holliday, I go headlong after Hawpe. Coors or no, he'd be a good addition.

 

With Martinez switch hitting, I think we can absorb the lefty. We're going to be pretty vulnerable to lefty specialists though, if we need to pick up a LHH.

 

I think Holliday established that the Coors Effect is somewhat overblown anyway.

[Dipre]

If we lose out on both Bay and Holliday, I go headlong after Hawpe. Coors or no, he'd be a good addition.

 

I think Holliday established that the Coors Effect is somewhat overblown anyway.

 

The problem with Hawpe is that he's the worst defensive player in the Major Leagues, the stats say it, and just watching him over a couple games gives you the feeling that the man has no idea what the f*** he's doing in the OF.

 

About the "Coors effect": One glance at his stats will tell you he's pretty good away from Coors by his own standards. You don't need to use Holliday a s a benchmark even though the premise is correct.

[Dojji]

The problem with Hawpe is that he's the worst defensive player in the Major Leagues' date=' the stats say it, and just watching him over a couple games gives you the feeling that the man has no idea what the f*** he's doing in the OF.[/quote']

 

We've never seen that before in our left field have we?

 

The -46.6 UZR/150 in 2008 is pretty yikes though. I don't think even Manny was ever that bad.

[yankees228]

Take this at what it's worth...

 

http://yankees.lhblogs.com/2009/11/09/mariners-gm-felix-is-our-property/

[Dojji]

Not much of a shock there really.

[BSN07]

The problem with Hawpe is that he's the worst defensive player in the Major Leagues, the stats say it, and just watching him over a couple games gives you the feeling that the man has no idea what the f*** he's doing in the OF.

 

About the "Coors effect": One glance at his stats will tell you he's pretty good away from Coors by his own standards. You don't need to use Holliday a s a benchmark even though the premise is correct.

 

Maybe a switch to LF is all he needs:dunno:

[Dipre]

We've never seen that before in our left field have we?

 

The -46.6 UZR/150 in 2008 is pretty yikes though. I don't think even Manny was ever that bad.

 

He's also not playing every game at Fenway champ.

[BSN07]

Take this at what it's worth...

 

http://yankees.lhblogs.com/2009/11/09/mariners-gm-felix-is-our-property/

 

Meh, not anything I wouldn't expect. He certainly doesn't close the door to the idea of trading Felix though. So we will see.

[Dipre]

Meh' date=' not anything I wouldn't expect. He certainly doesn't close the door to the idea of trading Felix though. So we will see.[/quote']

 

The Mariners simply have absolutely no reason to trade Felix Hernandez.

[Dojji]

Dipre is right.

[BSN07]

WEEI.com's Rob Bradford reports that Roy Halladay has identified the Red Sox as a team he'd be willing to accept a trade too. Doc has a full no-trade clause

[Dojji]

as long as it doesn't cost us Buchholz I'm all for it.

[BSN07]

The Mariners simply have absolutely no reason to trade Felix Hernandez.

 

I never said they did have a reason. I just stated they didn't flat out say "no".

[Dipre]

I never said they did have a reason. I just stated they didn't flat out say "no".

 

The real factor here is whether he'll be reluctant to accept a contract extension in the case that he was dead set on leaving Seattle. Otherwise, he stays a Mariner

[Dojji]

http://boston.redsox.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20091108&content_id=7638454&vkey=news_bos&fext=.jsp&c_id=bos

BOSTON -- The Red Sox haven't ruled out bringing back shortstop Alex Gonzalez for the 2010 season, but they did decline his $6 million option, according to Major League sources.

[BSN07]

The real factor here is whether he'll be reluctant to accept a contract extension in the case that he was dead set on leaving Seattle. Otherwise' date=' he stays a Mariner[/quote']

 

Well the only scenarios I see Seattle trading Felix is if as you say they can't sign him to an extension. Or if the Sox were able to pull of the so called " 3 team deal" that would send Adrian to Seattle and Felix to Boston.

 

Besides that I agree, there is little reason to trade him.

[ehaz]

Toronto isn't excepting a deal without Buchholz. The Sox are not going to trade Buchholz.

I think they could get it done without Buchholz. Halladay is now a one year rent-a-player. Riccardi really f***ed up when he didn't get a trade done at the deadline. Halladay has now only one chance to help a playoff team, whereas at the deadline he had two. thats worth a significant amount.

How do you know this? You think Toronto will hold onto Halladay if other teams aren't willing to give up true ace-potential pitchers for one year of a player at something like $13m/season?

^Exactly, and it's even more than 13m it's 15.5 i think.

Not many teams will be interested because even though he's signed for one year, it is a lot for one year (to most teams).

[Dojji]

Heck, I think we should try very hard to negotiate a contract window if we want to go after Halladay.

 

Lock him down at $20M a year for the next 5-6 years. He'll be worth it and that would really justify the prospects going the other way IMHO.

[Dipre]

Heck, I think we should try very hard to negotiate a contract window if we want to go after Halladay.

 

Lock him down at $20M a year for the next 5-6 years. He'll be worth it and that would really justify the prospects going the other way IMHO.

 

Handing a 5+, 100 mill + contract to a 32-year-old pitcher is a recipe for disaster IMHO.

[bsox0407]

Handing a 5+' date=' 100 mill + contract to a 32-year-old pitcher is a recipe for disaster IMHO.[/quote']

 

i heard the Sox are offering 4yr 60 million to Bay. Leave halladay on the table and go with clay. we will get more with clay since he has a longer baseball life barring injury. he is still on the upside of his career.

[Spudboy]

Heck, I think we should try very hard to negotiate a contract window if we want to go after Halladay.

 

Lock him down at $20M a year for the next 5-6 years. He'll be worth it and that would really justify the prospects going the other way IMHO.

 

 

Can you send me some of your meds?

[Spudboy]

Handing a 5+' date=' 100 mill + contract to a 32-year-old pitcher is a recipe for disaster IMHO.[/quote']

 

No s***!

 

Is there an example of a 38 y.o. pitcher being worth $20.m/year?

 

Anyone who believes that 5-6, $20.m/yr. for a 32 y.o. pitcher is a reasonable investment should double up on the Thorazine.

[Dojji]

Handing a 5+' date=' 100 mill + contract to a 32-year-old pitcher is a recipe for disaster IMHO.[/quote']

 

Probably as crazy as gving a 37 year old pitcher a 4 year $52M contract extension or so to come and carry us into and through the playoffs.

 

Halladay isn't a run of the mill 32 year old pitcher. He's got the right skillset and body type to be effective well into his declining years.