Couple of thoughts generated on "The Baseball Reporters"

[33Innings]

I was just listening to the Sports Hub and one caller asked about the idea of trading Jacoby Ellsbury in exchange for a top-notch pitcher. Tony Massarotti, in response, served up the interesting notion that Ellsbury's performance this year could prove too much of a good thing if his success rate elevates his desired salary. That said, I wonder if a hypothetical deal like this caller suggested would be a case of fixing what's not broken.

 

Also, Massarotti noted that nearly all of the positive scouting reports concerning Ryan Lavarnway's future in catching come from Boston. Experts from elsewhere aren't so sure and Mazz says he envisions Lavarnway as more of a DH, possible a first baseman, and concludes "Don't mess with Saltalamacchia!"

 

But I don't know. Does anyone have an opinion on either of these one way or the other?

[BornToRun]

Trading Ellsbury would be the most retarded thing imaginable.

[Palodios]

I actually had this exact idea in one of the other threads. Ellsbury is a perfect "sell-high" candidate, whose price is only going to skyrocket. In a three team trade with maybe one or two other prospects, I bet the Red Sox could get an ace for him.

 

Personally, I say pull the trigger, but its not exactly a popular move.

[BeepBeepYoureDumb]

Trading Ellsbury would be the most retarded thing imaginable.

 

How? What if he never approaches MVP level production again? Possible. He's had three full major league seasons now. Two so-so but promising, one absolutely unreal. Even if he does play at this level for a few years straight, I still think a Kershaw or a King Felix would be near impossible to turn down for him.

[BeepBeepYoureDumb]

Personally, I say pull the trigger, but its not exactly a popular move.

 

Maybe not popular, but smart, imo. Imagine Lester, Beckett, Kershaw, Buchholz in the playoffs? f***. That'd be popular.

[BornToRun]

If he continues to play like this, you gotta resign him. He's an amazing talent and if he's gonna play like this every year, stealing 50 bags, hitting 30 homers, and playing good defense, you've got to pay the man because he's worth it. That's the kind of player that only comes along once in a while.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Only guy I would ever trade Ellsbury for is Kershaw or Felix. Period.

[BigPapiEnFuego]

Seeing how our starting pitching has been this year, If an offer for Ellsbury came where we would get a great SP I would say the Red Sox would have to do it. The Sox already have a powerful offense and could find a CF I'm sure.

[a700hitter]

Only guy I would ever trade Ellsbury for is Kershaw or Felix. Period.

Never trade an everyday star for a pitcher. Never.

[ORS]

Never trade an everyday star for a pitcher. Never.

This.

 

There's actually something very positive in the timing, if you ask me. With arb years left, they've got control of him at a reasonable price where they can see if this year is just a "sell high" year, or if he has indeed turned the corner and become one of the game's elite.

 

Given the volatile nature of staring pitching - that so few of them remain elite for long periods of time - I think the safer bet is to see what Ellsbury does in his follow-up campaign.

[Spitball]

Scott Boros would be the only reason the Sox should trade Ellsbury. Scott Boros is the only reason the Sox won't be able to trade Ellsbury for a fair return.

 

I vote to keep him. Ellsbury, not Boros.

[Dojji]

There is one person I would trade Jacoby Ellsbury for.

 

That person is Matt Kemp.

[Palodios]

This.

 

There's actually something very positive in the timing, if you ask me. With arb years left, they've got control of him at a reasonable price where they can see if this year is just a "sell high" year, or if he has indeed turned the corner and become one of the game's elite.

 

Given the volatile nature of staring pitching - that so few of them remain elite for long periods of time - I think the safer bet is to see what Ellsbury does in his follow-up campaign.

 

Starting pitcher is violatile at high levels, sure. But there are some guys that everyone sees coming, and knows they are going to perform at a high level for years to come. Hernandez and Kershaw are the only two guys of that caliber on s***** teams that come to mind.

 

What concerns me is that they may not have seen this coming. I don't think they saw Ellsbury getting 12 million in arbitration in 2012, and yet it very well may happen. If they come up short as far as money is concerned because of him, I would hate to see it limit what they can do in free agency.

[SoxSport]

They will have Ells pretty cheap after arb next year. Let's see him repeat what he's doing this year before we talk about big contracts.

The guy they should deal is Crawford, but it will have to be a salary swap.

Putting him on waivers told you a bit about their thinking.

[ORS]

Starting pitcher is violatile at high levels, sure. But there are some guys that everyone sees coming, and knows they are going to perform at a high level for years to come. Hernandez and Kershaw are the only two guys of that caliber on s***** teams that come to mind.

 

What concerns me is that they may not have seen this coming. I don't think they saw Ellsbury getting 12 million in arbitration in 2012, and yet it very well may happen. If they come up short as far as money is concerned because of him, I would hate to see it limit what they can do in free agency.

Josh Beckett and John Lackey both had that same look a couple/few years ago, prior to the Red Sox acquiring them. AJ Burnett, Mark Prior, Scott Kazmir, etc, etc, etc.....

 

Only a handful of these guys turn into CC Sabathia, Roy Halladay, et al. I think the turnover rate with SP is higher than the chances that Ellsbury is a fluke.

[ORS]

They will have Ells pretty cheap after arb next year. Let's see him repeat what he's doing this year before we talk about big contracts.

The guy they should deal is Crawford, but it will have to be a salary swap.

Putting him on waivers told you a bit about their thinking.

Not in August it didn't. Everyone goes on waivers in August. If they put him on irrevocable waivers in the offseason, like they did with Manny prior to the attempted ARod trade, that will tell you something.

[SoxFanForsyth]

They will have Ells pretty cheap after arb next year. Let's see him repeat what he's doing this year before we talk about big contracts.

The guy they should deal is Crawford, but it will have to be a salary swap.

Putting him on waivers told you a bit about their thinking.

 

So, by this logic, the Tigers don't like Verlander, either? The Sox always put everyone on waivers, and it seems like every single year people go nuts over the players they throw on there. It's standard practice to add just about everyone to waivers

[Palodios]

Josh Beckett and John Lackey both had that same look a couple/few years ago, prior to the Red Sox acquiring them. AJ Burnett, Mark Prior, Scott Kazmir, etc, etc, etc.....

 

Only a handful of these guys turn into CC Sabathia, Roy Halladay, et al. I think the turnover rate with SP is higher than the chances that Ellsbury is a fluke.

 

I don't mean to trade for one of those 1-b type guys. I'm talking about trading Ellsbury for a bonafide ace. Josh Johnson, Felix Hernandez, Clayton Kershaw. If a deal can be done with him and maybe one or two top prospects, I'd say do it, if not, keep him.

[SoxFanForsyth]

I don't mean to trade for one of those 1-b type guys. I'm talking about trading Ellsbury for a bonafide ace. Josh Johnson' date=' Felix Hernandez, Clayton Kershaw. If a deal can be done with him and maybe one or two top prospects, I'd say do it, if not, keep him.[/quote']

 

The only reason I didn't include JJ on my list of trade candidates is because he's coming off an injury. If I'm going to give up Ellsbury, it's only for a sure thing, or as close as you can possibly get, i.e. Felix or Kershaw.

[a700hitter]

I don't mean to trade for one of those 1-b type guys. I'm talking about trading Ellsbury for a bonafide ace. Josh Johnson' date=' Felix Hernandez, Clayton Kershaw. If a deal can be done with him and maybe one or two top prospects, I'd say do it, if not, keep him.[/quote']As I said befor, I would never trade a full time star for a pitcher, ever, but especially not for Josh Johnson with his history of injury.

[Palodios]

As I said befor' date=' I would never trade a full time star for a pitcher, ever, but especially not for Josh Johnson with his history of injury.[/quote']

 

Good call, I forgot about that completely. There aren't that many aces on bad teams, so it is a very small list of guys worth Ellsbury's value.

[AtWork]

I was just listening to the Sports Hub and one caller asked about the idea of trading Jacoby Ellsbury in exchange for a top-notch pitcher. Tony Massarotti, in response, served up the interesting notion that Ellsbury's performance this year could prove too much of a good thing if his success rate elevates his desired salary. That said, I wonder if a hypothetical deal like this caller suggested would be a case of fixing what's not broken.

 

Also, Massarotti noted that nearly all of the positive scouting reports concerning Ryan Lavarnway's future in catching come from Boston. Experts from elsewhere aren't so sure and Mazz says he envisions Lavarnway as more of a DH, possible a first baseman, and concludes "Don't mess with Saltalamacchia!"

 

But I don't know. Does anyone have an opinion on either of these one way or the other?

 

I would not trade Ellsbury, we have the ability to resign him to a $20 million a year deal if we choose to do so in 2.5 years and elite position players are inherently more valuable than elite starting pitching. Besides, we could also sign a starter pitching via free agency and keep Ellsbury.

 

I doubt many people here have seen Lavarnway catch much, I know I haven't. So I can't really tell you if he's good, bad or average. But I think a year of working with Gary Tuck can do wonders. If he still isn't coming around after that, then I'd change his position.

[example1]

Never trade an everyday star for a pitcher. Never.

 

I agree with this, but would you trade a player like Ellsbury for, say, Pedro in his prime? I probably would. Especially if Kalish and Reddick provide a suitable replacement in CF.

 

I was just thinking to myself and one of my friends the other day about the possibility that Ellsbury will ultimately be traded. I think he would be the perfect player to include in a deal for Felix.

 

He's from the NW, Seattle would need to get a legitimate star back to placate teir fans, they have no reason to keep Hernandez if he could help them build a decent team.

 

The main reason they would trade him is if he won't be willing to work on an extension with them. With Boras as an agent I suspect this could be the case. If they can get Felix back in a year or two then they would have to consider it very, very strongly.

 

Imagine having Felix and Lester for the next 6-10 years, along with Beckett. No matter who the opposing team put up there the Sox would be able to match with an ace of their own.

[mvp 78]

Ellsbury >>>>> Delino Deshields

[ORS]

I agree with this, but would you trade a player like Ellsbury for, say, Pedro in his prime? I probably would. Especially if Kalish and Reddick provide a suitable replacement in CF.

 

I was just thinking to myself and one of my friends the other day about the possibility that Ellsbury will ultimately be traded. I think he would be the perfect player to include in a deal for Felix.

 

He's from the NW, Seattle would need to get a legitimate star back to placate teir fans, they have no reason to keep Hernandez if he could help them build a decent team.

 

The main reason they would trade him is if he won't be willing to work on an extension with them. With Boras as an agent I suspect this could be the case. If they can get Felix back in a year or two then they would have to consider it very, very strongly.

 

Imagine having Felix and Lester for the next 6-10 years, along with Beckett. No matter who the opposing team put up there the Sox would be able to match with an ace of their own.

Yeah, I'd trade him for Pedro in his prime. Unfortunately, Pedro in his prime has only come around twice in the history of baseball (him and Koufax). There is no Pedro in his prime available right now (probably not for the foreseeable future either).

[Palodios]

Yeah' date=' I'd trade him for Pedro in his prime. Unfortunately, Pedro in his prime has only come around twice in the history of baseball (him and Koufax). There is no Pedro in his prime available right now (probably not for the foreseeable future either).[/quote']

 

Pedro was right around Hernandez's age when he emerged with his first truly great season.

 

I think there is a much greater chance of Ellsbury declining than Hernandez. Plus, if both turn out to be career Red Sox, then it makes a big difference that Felix is three years younger than Jacoby.

[ORS]

Pedro was right around Hernandez's age when he emerged with his first truly great season.

 

I think there is a much greater chance of Ellsbury declining than Hernandez. Plus, if both turn out to be career Red Sox, then it makes a big difference that Felix is three years younger than Jacoby.

Every good young pitcher turns 25 at some point....very few of them (ie, close to none of them) turn into Pedro Martinez.

 

I don't think it's a "much greater" chance. I'd say more of a chance, but I'm pretty confident that the development to Jacoby's game is legit. Also, how do you reconcile your concern about escalating cost for Ellsbury with the fact that Hernandez is going to cost $68M over the next 5 years? Is it because you think he's a sure fire bet to be worth that and Ellsbury is destined for some sort of regression? If so, you must be very pessimistic about Ellsbury's future.

[Palodios]

Every good young pitcher turns 25 at some point....very few of them (ie, close to none of them) turn into Pedro Martinez.

 

I don't think it's a "much greater" chance. I'd say more of a chance, but I'm pretty confident that the development to Jacoby's game is legit. Also, how do you reconcile your concern about escalating cost for Ellsbury with the fact that Hernandez is going to cost $68M over the next 5 years? Is it because you think he's a sure fire bet to be worth that and Ellsbury is destined for some sort of regression? If so, you must be very pessimistic about Ellsbury's future.

 

Starting pitching on the free agent market costs significantly more than outfielders. The Red Sox would probably need to spend 5-10 million on a starting pitcher for 2012 anyway.

 

Also, the point wasn't that Felix will turn into Pedro. The point was that Felix may not have hit his prime yet.

[example1]

Yeah' date=' I'd trade him for Pedro in his prime. Unfortunately, Pedro in his prime has only come around twice in the history of baseball (him and Koufax). There is no Pedro in his prime available right now (probably not for the foreseeable future either).[/quote']

 

Would you give up extra pieces for Pedro too? I certainly would. I ask because I think it would cost Ells plus plus to get someone like that and I think the same is true of Felix.

 

I realize Pedro is a once in a lifetime talent but I think Felix is the closest thing since in terms of overwhelming arsenal age and natural talent.

 

Also, I think there are other pitchers in recent memory I would move ellsbury for, including Halladay, Maddox, Randy Johnson, maybe even Schilling.

 

For me it is more about the combination of players in a deal than the value of the individual. for instance, is Kalish plus Felix more valuable than ellsbury plus (insert 5th starter name here)? I think that is probably a net gain, given what I've seen from Kalish.

[a700hitter]

Would you give up extra pieces for Pedro too? I certainly would. I ask because I think it would cost Ells plus plus to get someone like that and I think the same is true of Felix.

 

I realize Pedro is a once in a lifetime talent but I think Felix is the closest thing since in terms of overwhelming arsenal age and natural talent.

 

Also, I think there are other pitchers in recent memory I would move ellsbury for, including Halladay, Maddox, Randy Johnson, maybe even Schilling.

 

For me it is more about the combination of players in a deal than the value of the individual. for instance, is Kalish plus Felix more valuable than ellsbury plus (insert 5th starter name here)? I think that is probably a net gain, given what I've seen from Kalish.

No, I wouldn't trade an everyday star for any of those pitchers. I don't think any of those players were traded for everyday stars. The Sox got Pedro for pitching prospects. The answer is never. I would trade other pitchers, pitching prospects, over the hill position players and everyday prospects, but never an everyday star, never.