Official 2009-2010 Hot Stove season thread

[BSN07]

The Red Sox have acquired utility player Tug Hulett from the Royals, according to Bob Dutton of The KC Star. The Royals will receive either cash or a player to be named later in the deal.

 

The 26-year-old Hulett has hit .194/.270/.254 in 75 career plate appearances in the big leagues, spending most of the last three seasons in Triple-A. He's a career .284/.394/.418 hitter in the minors, and is capable of playing second, third, and short.

 

That should get a rise out of Dojji

[BSN07]

And look how that turned out......

 

Hansen had great stuff, but no brains.

[example1]

Craig Hansen?

 

Hansen and Tazawa both played in their first year. I was looking more for age, should have been clearer about that. Nice catch.

[TheKilo]

The deal for Halladay obviously has to be contingent on an extension being signed, but I really have mixed feelings about giving up both Buchholz and Kelly for a 32 year old pitcher, even if it is Halladay.

[a700hitter]

What # do you think he would be on Toronto?

 

I think the Jays probably could get Buchholz for Halladay and that this is the type of move that would ensure that he goes to the Sox and not someplace else. I just think that including a guy like Kelly would be too much. As you know (I'm sure we agree here) Halladay is an absolute beast. He would not only improve the rotation immediately, (because the Sox would have 3 bona-fide #1s) but he would also improve the bullpen because he has the uncanny ability to pitch deep into games. Between Lester, Beckett and Halliday the would be able to rest the middle-relievers 3/5 nights, which would be invaluable in a long season.

On a crappy team Buchholz might be a #2 iby the end of the season. The emphasis is on "crappy".

 

Your evaluation about Lester was basically that because nobody can tell what he's going to become he should be moved before his stock drops. I looked up the quotes the other day, that's what you were saying. I could change the name "Lester" to "Buchholz" and it would be the same thing.

 

I just get the sense that you see all prospects as the same. It's like saying that all college football players are equally unlikely to have success at the NFL level. Sometimes the skills that players have just makes them obvious candidates to be great at the NFL level. Buchholz has dominated all levels of play and has had a number of very good starts on the MLB level.

 

Still, I think Halladay is good enough to send some highupside players for.

At the time of those quotes about Lester, he was doing pretty bad. Was I supposed to know that he had cancer? As for seeing all prospects as being the same, I think you are guilty of that. You see Buchholz as a Lester type. That's a tall order for Buchholz. Lester has already set a record for k's in a season by a Red Sox left hander. Here's how I feel about most prospects. Usually when they are still in the minors, it takes 1 or 2 years in the minors plus 1 -3 years in the majors before they achieve star status, if they ever get there at all. That's a minimum of 3 years to a maximum of 5 years. If the Sox can get a current Cy Young guy or an All Star for those developmental years, I will usually favor it. By time we are done with the star, the prospect we trade will be becoming a star and getting ready to hit the open market, so we can get him back for our next crop of prospects. As for trading Buchholz now, you and BSN07 are both wrong because I am not advocating trading him for 1 year of Halladay, so I don't know how you could change the name Lester to Buchholz. His value is higher than most prospects (see I do make distinctions), because he has had some success in the majors and we have already lived through his minor league years and most of his ML growing pains. He is on the cusp, so why sell him cheap.

[example1]

On a crappy team Buchholz might be a #2 iby the end of the season. The emphasis is on "crappy".

 

Alright... Who is better on Toronto then?

 

At the time of those quotes about Lester, he was doing pretty bad. Was I supposed to know that he had cancer? As for seeing all prospects as being the same, I think you are guilty of that.

 

Really? You think that I'm lumping Stolmy and Bowden and Johnson and Weiland and Buchholz all together and saying they're all going to be good?

 

I think my discernment among those players is much more nuanced than your consensus "he's just a prospect, sell him before his stock falls" approach.

 

 

You see Buchholz as a Lester type. That's a tall order for Buchholz. Lester has already set a record for k's in a season by a Red Sox left hander.

 

The only way that I see them as similar is that I think both will be contributors on a very good MLB team. I think they also through roughly as hard as one another, they are roughly the same age, and they are both very cheap given their talent.

 

As for trading Buchholz now, you and BSN07 are both wrong because I am not advocating trading him for 1 year of Halladay, so I don't know how you could change the name Lester to Buchholz. His value is higher than most prospects (see I do make distinctions), because he has had some success in the majors and we have already lived through his minor league years and most of his ML growing pains. He is on the cusp, so why sell him cheap.

 

His value is higher than most prospects because most prospects don't have plus-plus changeups and breaking balls, a very desirable (and still developing frame) and a mid-90's FB. THAT'S why his value is higher than most prospects.

 

Also, I actually don't think you're advocating for selling Buchholz for one year of Halladay. I'd venture to guess that we would both be okay with them trading for Halladay if it was basically just Buchholz for him, and if they could sign Halladay to an extension. That seems reasonable, because TOR would actually get a good return--which seems necessary.

[example1]

The deal for Halladay obviously has to be contingent on an extension being signed' date=' but I really have mixed feelings about giving up both Buchholz and Kelly for a 32 year old pitcher, even if it is Halladay.[/quote']

 

On soxprospects a number of the mods and more longtime posters are indicating that the deal might actually be more like Kelly + + for Halladay.

 

To me that seems much more likely and reasonable.

 

I would argue that the Jays lost their chance at Buchholz at the trade deadline. Two postseasons vs. one postseason is not an insubstantial difference.

 

Kelly is the Red Sox best prospect. He pitched in the futures game. He had really good success in the minros and he doesn't appear to be too far from the majors. I would think that Kelly, Bowden and Lowrie or Stolmy would be a good deal and would give the Jays a nice return (elite prospect ++) for one year of an expensive (and getting expensiver) player.

 

If the Sox can deal a top prospect like Kelly and get Halladay (while keeping Buchholz) then they will be in really, really great shape.

 

Buchholz could be used for an elite bat, or he could be part of the league's best rotation:

 

Halladay

Lester

Beckett

Buchholz

Matsuzaka

[TheKilo]

I see no way the Sox get Halladay without trading Buchholz short of taking Vernon Wells's contract back with him.

[Dojji]

That should get a rise out of Dojji

 

Actually I am intrigued. Hulett is interesting. I suspect he's just minor league filler, though, especially because he doesn't really have the defensive chops to be a full-time SS.

 

That OBP did grab my attention however.

[a700hitter]

Alright... Who is better on Toronto then?

Toronto's pitching really sucks. I couldn't name there other 4 starters without checking their roster.

 

 

 

Really? You think that I'm lumping Stolmy and Bowden and Johnson and Weiland and Buchholz all together and saying they're all going to be good?

 

I think my discernment among those players is much more nuanced than your consensus "he's just a prospect, sell him before his stock falls" approach.

Gee, you don't like when someone generalizes about your point of view. It is annoying isn't it.

 

His value is higher than most prospects because most prospects don't have plus-plus changeups and breaking balls' date=' a very desirable (and still developing frame) and a mid-90's FB. THAT'S why his value is higher than most prospects. [/quote']Duh. Yeah, talent is what counts. My point is that the same guy with the same talent has more value the further on he is in his development, and Buchholz could be getting to a breakout year.

 

 

Also' date=' I actually don't think you're advocating for selling Buchholz for one year of Halladay. I'd venture to guess that we would both be okay with them trading for Halladay if it was basically just Buchholz for him, and if they could sign Halladay to an extension. That seems reasonable, because TOR would actually get a good return--which seems necessary.[/quote']It would depend on the terms of the extension.

[Dipre]

Actually I am intrigued. Hulett is interesting. I suspect he's just minor league filler, though, especially because he doesn't really have the defensive chops to be a full-time SS.

 

That OBP did grab my attention however.

 

The comedic value of this post is absolutely amazing.

[Dojji]

Well, I am the same guy who wants to see Jeff Natale tried in the big leagues as a backup 1B to see if his plate discipline translates. Worst case scenario you're out a bench slot and a few thousand.

[Dipre]

Well' date=' I am the same guy who wants to see Jeff Natale tried in the big leagues as a backup 1B to see if his plate discipline translates. Worst case scenario you're out a bench slot and a few thousand.[/quote']

 

I said that because i honestly thought you were kidding.

 

You were serious?

 

Then LOLx3, my good sir.

[Dojji]

Well, I went into this saying he's probably minor league filler, but I have no idea why being intrigued by a middle infielder with a .390 career minor league OBP is so laughable.

 

If the season started today, Lowrie and Hulett would be our SS and backup INF respectively. Theo's probably working the phones frantically to make sure it doesn't actually come to that, but on the other hand both of them seem to have attractive skillsets. It'd make us all uncomfortable to go with that combination, but it probably wouldn't be a disaster.

 

And you yourself know better than to judge a guy on 75 big league plate appearances.

 

As for Natale, the guy has Youks-like discipline. He's also clearly not challenged by AAA pitchers. If he could cover 1B at least adequately I think he could be a very pleasant surprise -- it's a pity he'll never, ever get the chance to prove it here.

[Dipre]

Well, I went into this saying he's probably minor league filler, but I have no idea why being intrigued by a middle infielder with a .390 career minor league OBP is so laughable.

 

If the season started today, Lowrie and Hulett would be our SS and backup INF respectively. Theo's probably working the phones frantically to make sure it doesn't actually come to that, but on the other hand both of them seem to have attractive skillsets. It'd make us all uncomfortable to go with that combination, but it probably wouldn't be a disaster.

 

And you yourself know better than to judge a guy on 75 big league plate appearances.

 

As for Natale, the guy has Youks-like discipline. He's also clearly not challenged by AAA pitchers. If he could cover 1B at least adequately I think he could be a very pleasant surprise -- it's a pity he'll never, ever get the chance to prove it here.

 

Lol you took it the wrong way.

 

But if you need an answer, i have my reasons to doubt a guy's minor-league dossier when he's 26 years old and hasn't managed to stay in the Majors with the Royals even though he's capable of playing multiple positions.

 

And also, because he embodies the "Doiji player" tag.

[Dojji]

I guess that's fair, although in fairness to Hulett the Royals are one of those "veteran lover" teams -- witness them struggling through the entire year with Mike Jacobs' uninspiring bat while Kila Ka'aihue smothered in Omaha.

[Dipre]

I guess that's fair' date=' although in fairness to Hulett the Royals are one of those "veteran lover" teams -- witness them struggling through the entire year with Mike Jacobs' uninspiring bat while Kila Ka'aihue smothered in Omaha.[/quote']

 

Hence the "multiple positions" point to counter exactly that argument.

[Rdsxmbnt]

Highly doubt Theo would ever even trade Buchholz for Halladay straight up

[Dipre]

Highly doubt Theo would ever even trade Buchholz for Halladay straight up

 

Not for one year of a 32-year-old Halladay he won't.

[redsoxrules]

Highly doubt Theo would ever even trade Buchholz for Halladay straight up

 

If he knew Halladay would take a 5 year extension then yes I think he would

[Gom]

Buchholz for Halladay straight up? Are you f***ing kidding me?

 

NEWS FLASH: Yankees acquire Lincecum for Melky Cabrera and Ian Kennedy. Get f***ing real.

 

I don't really see what you guys love about Buchholz so much. Everyone knows I'm more of a veteran than prospect kind of guy...but his numbers are not overwhelming to me.

 

He's 25 years old.

He only pitched 92 innings. He hasn't had a full season in the majors yet.

He had a 4.21 ERA with a 1.38 WHIP.

He had 6.7 K/9IP

He had a 1.89 K/BB ratio

 

You can't compare him to Felix who is in another league and younger.

 

Beckett? At the same age:

 

3.38 ERA

178.2 IP

1.18 WHIP

K/G 8.36

K/BB 2.86

 

CC

4.03 ERA

1.26 WHIP

7.36 K/G

2.60 K/BB

 

Santana

228 IP

2.61 ERA

0.92 WHIP

9.25 K/G

5.29 K/BB

 

I just don't see it. He hasn't pitched a full season, he's not exactly young for a prospect, most of these pitchers had been pitching YEARS in the majors. He doesn't have a blazing fastball, he doesn't overpower you. He's got a great curve when it's working.

 

In my opinion, at best, he's a number three in the AL East.

 

I'm not here touting Hughes or Chamberlain as superstars...they're not. To think you can get Halladay that easily..well, you're believing your own team's press clippings. He's just not that good...better yet, he's nowhere near as good as most of you believe. I'm sure if you go check out most pitchers who had similar numbers, you would find that Buchholz can be a decent pitcher...but not an ace.

 

If I was the Jays, and this is as objective as I can make it, I'd probably want Hughes more than any of the three. He's got an assortment of pitches, and he's got two years on Clay. However, I'd want to restock my entire farm system if I was them.

 

I don't know who they'd want from the Red Sox, but I'd be looking at Hughes, Montero, Jackson and maybe Cano. The Jays are in an incredible position. As long as they grant the team time to work out an extension, they can restock their team and they hold the balance of power in the AL East in their hand. They can effectively gut one of our team's farm system, and turn themselves into a solid team in three years with the right move.

 

I really think Philly is a sleeper here. They can dangle Drabek and Happ. Both of those pitchers have shown more than our big three of Clay, Joba, and Phil. Also, the Dodgers can throw a whole bunch of solid young players at them.

 

You guys are way too high on Clay. Way too high. My opinion, anyways.

[Dipre]

And this, folks, is why i keep telling Gom he needs to let the people who know what they're talking about have this kind of conversation.

 

If Bucholz is as mediocre as you say, then why is he the most coveted player by any team that initiates trade talks with the Sox?

 

Because of the way he projects.

 

You know very little about Clay Bucholz or his upside, so don't comment on it.

[Dojji]

Yeah, because Lincecum's cost controlled contract is really compared to halladay's fairly expensive one, and a 25 year old Lincecum is no more valuable than 32 year old Halladay.

 

Right.

 

I mean I don't even disagree with you, but could you please at least try not to make you analogies a total suck orgy?

[Rdsxmbnt]

It's not mostly about stats (yet) with Clay. He has a very strong command of 4 above-average to plus (to plus-plus?) pitches and after a certain date in 2009 he was able to really command them and the results showed. He has a a high GB%, increasing K/9 rate, and pretty solid composure compared to the Clay we saw earlier in the season. ANY team would cream themselves to have him on their team with the prospect of him being cost-controlled for the next 5 years. Absolutely no chance he goes for anyone short of Felix or Hanley (and maybe Agon).

[Cocos Disciples]

Not to nit-pick, but Kyle Drabek hasn't pitched an inning over AA.

[a700hitter]

Buchholz for Halladay straight up? Are you f***ing kidding me?

Unless it is part of a trade and sign, the Red Sox would turn it down.

[Gom]

And this, folks, is why i keep telling Gom he needs to let the people who know what they're talking about have this kind of conversation.

 

If Bucholz is as mediocre as you say, then why is he the most coveted player by any team that initiates trade talks with the Sox?

 

Because of the way he projects.

 

You know very little about Clay Bucholz or his upside, so don't comment on it.

I don't know why he is so "coveted". To tell you the truth, I think that's more the Red Sox PR machine more than anything. How do you know this is what teams are asking for? You make s*** up well, kid. You really do. How does he project? This is up your alley Dipre, you can make up all the s*** you want. However, just a quick look at three dominant pitchers in their late 20's and 30, he doesn't compare. Not even close.

 

Tell you what. Show me a dominant pitcher that is pitching now that put up his career numbers up to age 25. I'll buy it then. Again, I'm not saying he sucks, I'm just saying that so far, at 25, his career has been mediocre. That is NOT really debatable.

 

Dipre, you fall into the category of someone who knows just enough to look like an idiot. Again...

 

Someone with CREDIBILITY please show me why Buchholz is supposed to be that good.

[Dipre]

It's not mostly about stats (yet) with Clay. He has a very strong command of 4 above-average to plus (to plus-plus?) pitches and after a certain date in 2009 he was able to really command them and the results showed. He has a a high GB%' date=' increasing K/9 rate, and pretty solid composure compared to the Clay we saw earlier in the season. ANY team would cream themselves to have him on their team with the prospect of him being cost-controlled for the next 5 years. Absolutely no chance he goes for anyone short of Felix or Hanley (and maybe Agon).[/quote']

 

Someone should look up the first 190.2 innings of Chris Carpenter, Curt Schilling and Roy Halladay ,then get back to us.

[Dipre]

I don't know why he is so "coveted". To tell you the truth' date=' I think that's more the Red Sox PR machine more than anything. [/b']

 

How does he project? This is up your alley Dipre, you can make up all the s*** you want.

 

Tell you what. Show me a dominant pitcher that is pitching now that put up his career numbers up to age 25.

 

Again, I'm not saying he sucks, I'm just saying that so far, at 25, his career has been mediocre. That is NOT really debatable.

 

I give up then.

 

Read my above post, look up the stats, and do some reading on the kids' repertoire. You might find your answer there.

[Lester82]

http://www.newsday.com/columnists/ken-davidoff/yanks-red-sox-not-likely-to-push-for-halladay-1.1622813

 

Eh, something tells me Ken Davidoff may be wrong about knowing what the Red Sox will do... especially if it's just speculation -- seemingly taken for fact by the NY Daily News and others ran with it-- that Buchholz and Kelly have to be the starter for talks.