2011-2012 Offseason Thread

[iortiz]

I agree. I can't see them being competitive without another starting pitcher and they have much too much money invested in this team not to give themselves a fighting chance. Ben may get too cute with the waiting game and find out that there is no one to take to the dance. He got too cute with the Ortiz situation and he got burned.

 

If we stay short (bring the SP) because Ortiz, Ben is officially the boob. There is no other way to see it. The SP was/is our #1 priority, instead they signed Ortiz +- 15M. As I said, I want to believe they have everything figure it out.

 

For the record, I like Ortiz, but the SP is/was more important.

[Palodios]

About the arbitration offer to Ortiz' date=' is it possible the Sox think they could convince an arbitrator that he doesn't actually deserve a raise from the 12.5 million? The arbitration rules say that one of the factors to consider is the market rates for other players at the same position. Vlad Guerrero only got about $8 million last year after a 115 RBI season.[/quote']

 

Generally, players only stay at the same value (or get decreases) if they really stunk it up. The problem is, Ortiz has really set the market for himself. He made 12.25 last year, and is coming off a better year this year. Once again, we're talking about a .300 average, .400 OBP, .950 OBP.

[Palodios]

If we stay short (bring the SP) because Ortiz' date=' Ben is officially the boob. There is no other way to see it. The SP was/is our #1 priority, instead they signed Ortiz +- 15M.[/quote']

 

I really have to disagree here.

 

Without Ortiz, who do you reasonably hit after Gonzalez? Willingham, Ramirez, Beltran, and Cuddyer may play positions, but they don't hit anywhere near as well as Ortiz, are nowhere as consistent, and all got multi-year deals.

 

I'm sorry, but you just don't find a closer, a #4 hitter, and two AL East starters for 24 million. Ben has come pretty damn close so far.

[jung]

I think they are trying very hard not to bust the cap, and frankly if another pitcher or 2 come off the board, it wouldn't be worth busting the cap for the likes of Joe Saunders.

 

This is in my view a legitimate concern. The Sox according to LL seem stuck in cement with regard to their cap tactics. LL claims that they try to stay near the cap limit whether they go over it or not. I think that was OK the way the cap rates where structured in the past. You could make the argument that as long as you stay really close to the cap limit who cares about the rate. Based on the old rate structure if you go over by $1M, worse case you owe $400k.

 

However the cap rate structure has now changed with the first year rate down by 5% to 17.5% but the 4th year rate up 50%. So now you are almost encouraged to bust the cap in alternate years so that you are either at 0% or no worse than 17.5% but punished severely for busting the cap 4 years running.

 

Granted even at 50%, if you are always right around the cap what does it matter. However I think that what is likely, especially with the way JH seems to be looking at things lately, is that there will be a year where the Sox really want to go after somebody or a few somebody's hard to make a run but the FO will be blocked from going after the players they want because JH is not going to pay $.50 on the dollar in tax. How easy would it be in this day and age to see an opportunity to bust the cap by $10M. I don't see JH at this stage of the game wanting to pay another $5M in tax.

 

If they go over by a little bit this year that would be a shame as they will set themselves up for 2013 being a 4th year running over the cap. There is a good deal of money coming off the books next year and the cap ceiling goes up again next year. I still think it would make sense for them to stay under if they can because with all that money coming of the books next year and the cap ceiling going up there is a good chance that they will be able to sign players and still stay under next year. If they can stay under this year and next year they are back to a 0% rate setting themselves up for what I would like to see them do from here on out as a cap strategy. I would like to see them set themselves up to go over in alternate years if they have to, playing both the money that comes off the books and the ever raising cap ceiling so that if they need to and want to they can go over in alternate years never paying a higher rate than 17.5%. I think if they can set themselves up that way, it will appeal to JH's business sensibilities and the FO will have the freedom it will need and want to go over the cap.

[seabeachfred]

Not to quibble but I believe Elston Howard came up in 1955. Pumpsie Green in 1959

 

You don't see our friend 700 stumble very much so you got him in a rare minor mistake. He is one of the most astute posters on this board, but it does point out something that, thank God, is way behind us. It is hard to comprehend how the Red Sox could be so color bigoted that they had a chance to sign players like Jackie Robinson, Willie Mays and Hank Aaron and passed? It is also hard to fathom how liberal Massachusetts is supposed to be and yet how bigoted Boston has been accused of being. Not my problem; I have my own cross to bear. When some people hear I'm a Republican there is some suspicion about me as well. I just open my wallet and show my picture, coin and stamp of Lincoln embedded in it and tell them to shove off.

[seabeachfred]

I could live with Rich Harden. He has been injured a lot' date=' so there is risk, but if he is healthy enough to throw maybe 120-140 innings, he is a functional #4-5 SP. His career numbers are better than Saunders-career ERA of 3.76 pitching mostly under similar conditions to Saunders. He might not work out, but he is a serviceable warm body to toss out there.[/quote']

 

Well I knew I wasn't going to sneak Saunders by you but I figured Harden would pass muster after what we discussed on Sawxheads last summer. Sad to say I wasn't aware that Harden was even a FA until I was clued it. We should go after him.

[jung]

If memory serves me they had Mays in hand if they wanted him. Crazy Tom Yawkee.

[Elktonnick]

You don't see our friend 700 stumble very much so you got him in a rare minor mistake. He is one of the most astute posters on this board' date=' but it does point out something that, thank God, is way behind us. It is hard to comprehend how the Red Sox could be so color bigoted that they had a chance to sign players like Jackie Robinson, Willie Mays and Hank Aaron and passed? It is also hard to fathom how liberal Massachusetts is supposed to be and yet how bigoted Boston has been accused of being. Not my problem; I have my own cross to bear. When some people hear I'm a Republican there is some suspicion about me as well. I just open my wallet and show my picture, coin and stamp of Lincoln embedded in it and tell them to shove off.[/quote']

 

Most of the posters here are too young to remember but the Civil Rights Act of 1964 wouldn't have passed if the Republican minority in the Senate hadn't supported Lyndon Johnson and broke the fillerbuster by the Senate Democrats. I remember it well because President Johnson made the annoucement during his commencement address at my Alma Mater Holy Cross in Worcester Ma.

[jung]

The Southern Democrats lead by a relatively young Strom Thurman were a force to be reckoned with at the time as it was very difficult to win national public office unless you had them in your camp.

[seabeachfred]

Three questions:

 

1) How do you know he absolutely didn't have a market? Talks with the O's were pretty heated, and a couple other teams were said to be in on Ortiz. Does this not represent a "market"?

 

2) What if their line of thinking was "Offer arb, if he takes it, keep him, if he doesn't, take picks, and we would have to blow the cap to replace his production and get a pitcher anyways". This may very well be the case, and if it is, it's not a problem. You're over-thinking this. Again, Lucchino has said more than once that they are willing to blow the cap for an acquisition that makes a lot of sense. If they are willing to blow the LT for a good pitcher, then what's the problem?

 

3) Who said they don't need him? He posted a slash line that would make the Giants' GM wet. It's not easy to replace that kind of production, and with the way dollars are flying around for mediocre talent, well, it's even more difficult to replace his production, unless you want to make Lavarnway a full-time DH, which doesn't make sense. That kid needs to be a catcher for the Sox.

 

 

And a P.S: Caps don't make your argument any stronger.

 

Well we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one UN. First of all, the Orioles pulled out after only a few days of interest, and whether they were serious or just trying to get the Red Sox to up the ante and offer him arbitration we may never know. Please, though, don't say the Royals interest was anything but tepid at best and the Tigers really never showed very much interest except to make less than a cursory move on him.

 

On your second point we would have enough offense to absorb his loss, especially with the return to form of Youkilis and Crawford, which I believe will take place. I still insist offering him arbitration was a bad move and it is causing ripple effects all over the team. It means Lavarnway is blocked for another year whether he is ready or not, and with Ryan on the team there would have been no rumors of taking Varitek back----and I'm keeping my eye on that one because until they finally say he is gone he is not gone.

 

If Sabean was drooling over Ortiz it was just that drooling. He made no offer, no hint of an offer and, besides, do you think the Giants, who put a big premium on their great starting pitching, would put a defense dud like Ortiz on first base.

 

Well, we can always agree UN and on this one we most certainly don't. I repeat, giving arbitration to Ortiz was a bad mistake that tied our hands, and until Lucchino puts his money where his mouth is about going over the cap I will continue to take that tack. When things change in that regard let me know and I'll issue my Mea Culpa.

[Elktonnick]

If memory serves me they had Mays in hand if they wanted him. Crazy Tom Yawkee.

 

Yes they did as did the Braves. The Braves actually could have had Mays and Aaron as did the Giants. Neither team however wanted to have two black outfielders. Imagine a lineup with both Mays and Aaron.

[seabeachfred]

Id rather take a chance on injury prone Rich Harden than Joe Saunders. Even if Harden has a few DL stints I think he'd be more valuable than Saunders. I could see Saunders coming and putting up Lackey level numbers, maybe worse.

 

 

And I don't get the thing about the owners saying multiple times they would break the luxury tax threshold. I think they are bullshitting and will continue to do so until I see otherwise. They've had multiple opportunities to acquire pitchers that are needed but they haven't done so. Believing what they say is gullible. I will not be gullible.

 

I don't either BPEF. Call it cynical or not but I have reasons to doubt the veracity of Lucchino and Co. in anything they say. When it takes these keystone cops to take two months to name a new manager anyone has the right to say "show me the money". I don't know if those who believe them are gullible but they are certainly very trusting.

 

I take the tack that former President Reagan was fond of saying....Trust but Verify.

[seabeachfred]

If we stay short (bring the SP) because Ortiz, Ben is officially the boob. There is no other way to see it. The SP was/is our #1 priority, instead they signed Ortiz +- 15M. As I said, I want to believe they have everything figure it out.

 

For the record, I like Ortiz, but the SP is/was more important.

 

Some posters on this board blanch and roil inside when you or anyone else casts aspersions at Cherington's prowess as a GM, but it is quite possible that he may be in over his head. I liked his trade for Bailey and Melancon, but his pussy footing over our starting pitching is forcing him to take a risk that could blow up in his face as the Ortiz bungle did. As you said starting was our #1 priority but Cherries doesn't at this time to have understood it, and as Big Papi El Fuego put it so aptly, all this talk from Lucchino could be nothing more than the stuff you use to fertilize your lawn in the spring.

[jung]

Well there are three possibilities at this point:

- they don't break the cap

- They just barely break the cap

- They go flying past the thing like it was not even there

 

I think that last option is just not possible this year. To many players have already gone by and it is not like the Sox are interested in even a large sampling of what is left. That leaves either breaking it by a little or not breaking it.

 

If they break it by a little that would be a real shame as indicated earlier. Staying under this year sets them up to be able to be able to make signings next year, while staying under. As others here have mentioned a good deal of money comes off the books next year and the cap ceiling is going up next year. Staying under this year and next would be great as two years in a row under gets them back to a 0% tax rate.

[Palodios]

Some posters on this board blanch and roil inside when you or anyone else casts aspersions at Cherington's prowess as a GM' date=' but it is quite possible that he may be in over his head. I liked his trade for Bailey and Melancon, but his pussy footing over our starting pitching is forcing him to take a risk that could blow up in his face as the Ortiz bungle did. As you said starting was our #1 priority but Cherries doesn't at this time to have understood it, and as Big Papi El Fuego put it so aptly, all this talk from Lucchino could be nothing more than the stuff you use to fertilize your lawn in the spring.[/quote']

 

Ben has been here for two months, and people scrutinize his every move. He's made five moves. I've liked two of them, dislike two of them, and am neutral with the Ortiz move. If you guys think he is such a terrible GM, what would you have done to solve the pitching problem?

 

None of the Red Sox's best options are off the table. Wilson/Buerhle/Darvish were wayyyy out of their price range. Gonzalez/Cahill/Sanchez would lose a ton of value and effectiveness in the AL East. Which realistic pitching option has Ben missed out on? Kuroda/Garza/Oswalt/Saunders/Jackson are all still available.

[jung]

No sense in mentioning pitching options missed at this point because all we are going to hear back is that the grand Sox "wait it out" plan is still in play. However, I think when it is all said and done, it is the mid-pack pitcher that would have been the best fit for this team this year and I just don't think the Sox will end up with any of them. I will grant you that the guys like Jackson and others in that crowd all have their shortcomings and are all being overpaid. But that is what is happening with pitching these days. They are all overpaid. That is also what makes it hard to swallow the idea that there is the grand Sox strategy of waiting for some significant discount to happen within the ranks of the remaining pitchers this year. That may well be their strategy but it is hard to see how it is likely to bear results. As I said earlier I think you will see some reduction at the last minute but significant reduction???....about as likely as holding out for pink elephants and blue moons.

 

Also although a different topic altogether, I don't put much stock in what LL says either. Everything he says is designed for effect in my experience and I don't think he much cares how close he gets to the truth. That may in fact be appropriate for his position. Certainly BB of the Patriots never tells us much and I get the feeling that if he has to tell a white lie in order not to tell us something he does not want revealed, he is going to do it. The difference I think is that you don't come away from discussions with BB feeling like you need a long hot bath....I kinda do feel that way after a presser from LL.

 

I really have been reluctant to point fingers at BC. I think his hands are tied even more than Theo's ever were. I think he has been put in some really bad spots. As I said early on about the Ortiz arb thing and has been repeated tonight by muggah and me again, I think there is a pretty darned good chance that marketing influences have played into the Ortiz arbitration deal and that is not BC. That would be his boss at work.

[Palodios]

No sense in mentioning pitching options missed at this point because all we are going to hear back is that the grand Sox "wait it out" plan is still in play. However' date=' I this[/quote']

 

It would make a LOT of sense to mention pitching options missed, because I have absolutely no idea which options everyone is talking about. It is one thing if players are getting swiped off the board, but from what I can tell, all of the second tier pitchers are still available.

[jung]

It would make a LOT of sense to mention pitching options missed, because I have absolutely no idea which options everyone is talking about. It is one thing if players are getting swiped off the board, but from what I can tell, all of the second tier pitchers are still available.

 

Jesus what the hell does it matter. My point has been that I don't think they will end up with them.

 

In the first place, there are not that many of them.

 

OK, Here is an example. Cafardo keeps reporting or "we" keep reporting that Cafardo keeps reporting that the Sox are still in the running for Oswalt and Kurodo. However Cafardo has said that they are currently outside of the Sox price range. I don't think their prices will fall far enough to satisfy the Sox.

 

These are not exactly stud pitchers, none of them in this pack are and I think when push comes to shove, the Sox will not want to pay for these guys. The way the Sox have monkeyed around with their pitching options this off-season makes me think that when it comes time for a decision, the Sox will make a value judgement about the difference in performance between one of these guys and somebody they might bring up out of Pawtucket at mid-season and will decide that they will not be getting much for their $7-$10M investment in Mr XYZ whoever he is. I also think that term may end up being more of a problem than per year salary as none of these guys even give you the warm and fuzzies about something like 3 years. Shorten the contract and the per year goes up.

 

It is probably worth pointing out that this board was all atwitter about guys like Buerhle and it was not until those guys started disappearing that reality sunk in around here and the fact that we were never in the running for those guys became the excepted view. We heard the same s*** about those guys as we hear about Oswalt and Kuroda now. "The Sox are talking to Buerhle blah blah blah."

 

Again, I am not so much questioning that this is there strategy. I just don't think it will net them arms. I think they want somebody to fall into the $5M and less range depending on the specific guy and they want short years as well. Once you get there you are borderline picking guys off the scrape heap so I don't think the guys we are talking about will get to there. Somebody else will offer them more years or more money if not both. I also think that this is why there are still Wake rumblings because while I hate the idea I think the Sox figure if all else fails, meaning none of these guys fall as far as they want them to fall, then even Wake might be an option for half a season or something like that.

 

Examples....Jackson is looking for 5 years. If the Sox give him 5 years I will burn my Red Sox hat. Oswalt has been trying to draw interest by claiming he is only interested in a one year deal but wants over $10M. Oswalt is probably the most likely guy for the Sox but he scares me the most. I think he could easily go out there and after his first start report directly to the DL.

 

If we want to bring Ortiz back into the discussion I think if they had that $15M to play with the Sox would be a bit more willing to move their price range up and landing one of these guys would go from a tense, death row watch kinda' affair to falling off a log.

 

I will be happy to be wrong on this but like someone else just posted tonight I am entirely from Missouri on this one.

[iortiz]

I really have to disagree here.

 

Without Ortiz, who do you reasonably hit after Gonzalez? Willingham, Ramirez, Beltran, and Cuddyer may play positions, but they don't hit anywhere near as well as Ortiz, are nowhere as consistent, and all got multi-year deals.

 

I'm sorry, but you just don't find a closer, a #4 hitter, and two AL East starters for 24 million. Ben has come pretty damn close so far.

 

This team was unbalanced, reason why we collapsed. This team has been unbalanced, reason why we haven't won a single PO game in three years. Do you want to repeat the same error again?

 

What about Lavernway as DH? I would've used Ortiz' money in a guy like Buerhle (see the thing year by year, of course). Yes, you surly wouldn't have had the same offensive production but the way I see the thing, Still you would have had a respectable offense and with a guy like Buerhle, you would've had solid rotation as well.

 

Beckett-Lester-Buch-Buerhle (still available Kuroda/Oswalt)-Bard

 

Ells

Peddy

Gonzo

Youk

Lav

Crawford

Kalish

Scu

Salty

 

how does it sound?

 

Of course, all this is based on "they won't go oven the CAP".

 

Some posters on this board blanch and roil inside when you or anyone else casts aspersions at Cherington's prowess as a GM' date=' but it is quite possible that he may be in over his head. I liked his trade for Bailey and Melancon, but his pussy footing over our starting pitching is forcing him to take a risk that could blow up in his face as the Ortiz bungle did. As you said starting was our #1 priority but Cherries doesn't at this time to have understood it, and as Big Papi El Fuego put it so aptly, all this talk from Lucchino could be nothing more than the stuff you use to fertilize your lawn in the spring.[/quote']

 

We collapsed last year because our P.I.T.C.H.I.N.G. You don't need to be a scientific in order to know that. As I said, if we stay short ( bring the SP) because Ortiz, Ben will be the "boob" for me.

 

Ben has been here for two months, and people scrutinize his every move. He's made five moves. I've liked two of them, dislike two of them, and am neutral with the Ortiz move. If you guys think he is such a terrible GM, what would you have done to solve the pitching problem?

 

None of the Red Sox's best options are off the table. Wilson/Buerhle/Darvish were wayyyy out of their price range. Gonzalez/Cahill/Sanchez would lose a ton of value and effectiveness in the AL East. Which realistic pitching option has Ben missed out on? Kuroda/Garza/Oswalt/Saunders/Jackson are all still available.

 

Yes Pal, there's still options, but some of the candidates you mentioned will cost you +- Buerhle's money/year regardless I like 100 times more Buerhle than the current available. I've been saying that Buerhle's contract is a fair one. He is healthy, young and have put the numbers.

 

On the other hand If you bring me Kuroda/Garza/Oswalt/Jackson, fine, I'll be very happy, just because we already have Ortiz, but please! do not put the words Saunders and Red Sox in the same sentence. :thumbdown

[Bellhorn04]

This is in my view a legitimate concern. The Sox according to LL seem stuck in cement with regard to their cap tactics. LL claims that they try to stay near the cap limit whether they go over it or not. I think that was OK the way the cap rates where structured in the past. You could make the argument that as long as you stay really close to the cap limit who cares about the rate. Based on the old rate structure if you go over by $1M, worse case you owe $400k.

 

However the cap rate structure has now changed with the first year rate down by 5% to 17.5% but the 4th year rate up 50%. So now you are almost encouraged to bust the cap in alternate years so that you are either at 0% or no worse than 17.5% but punished severely for busting the cap 4 years running.

 

Granted even at 50%, if you are always right around the cap what does it matter. However I think that what is likely, especially with the way JH seems to be looking at things lately, is that there will be a year where the Sox really want to go after somebody or a few somebody's hard to make a run but the FO will be blocked from going after the players they want because JH is not going to pay $.50 on the dollar in tax. How easy would it be in this day and age to see an opportunity to bust the cap by $10M. I don't see JH at this stage of the game wanting to pay another $5M in tax.

 

If they go over by a little bit this year that would be a shame as they will set themselves up for 2013 being a 4th year running over the cap. There is a good deal of money coming off the books next year and the cap ceiling goes up again next year. I still think it would make sense for them to stay under if they can because with all that money coming of the books next year and the cap ceiling going up there is a good chance that they will be able to sign players and still stay under next year. If they can stay under this year and next year they are back to a 0% rate setting themselves up for what I would like to see them do from here on out as a cap strategy. I would like to see them set themselves up to go over in alternate years if they have to, playing both the money that comes off the books and the ever raising cap ceiling so that if they need to and want to they can go over in alternate years never paying a higher rate than 17.5%. I think if they can set themselves up that way, it will appeal to JH's business sensibilities and the FO will have the freedom it will need and want to go over the cap.

 

Some good nitty gritty stuff about the tax there, jung. Just a couple of things.

 

-Tax thresholds for next 5 years:

 

2012 178 m

2013 178 m

2014 189 m

2015 189 m

2016 189 m

 

-The differential cost of exceeding the cap every year vs. only doing it in alternate years as you suggest is effectively 32.5% (50.0 - 17.5), right? So on 10 million salary you would be effectively penalized 3.25 million. A huge chunk of money, but then you have to compare that to its impact on total revenues and total expenses, including income taxes I suppose.

[Palodios]

This team was unbalanced, reason why we collapsed. This team has been unbalanced, reason why we haven't won a single PO game in three years. Do you want to repeat the same error again?

 

 

I definitely agree. I have posted many times about balancing this team, even if it meant trading elite players for two good players. However, look at the lineup you posted. It is 3 players deep, then you have Youk who can't stay on the field, a rookie, the LVP of the league last year, and then a near--rookie. I prefer not to replace questionmarks in the rotation with question marks in the roster.

 

I would have LOVED to see Buerhle here. I'm definitely with you. But at 15 million? That's big money, and with the group of pitchers available next year, I'd really hesitate on giving it to him. Plus, who knows how much he would have cost to bring to the Red Sox, especially with the collapse last year, and the Marlins seeming content to overbid everyone.

[User Name]

This team didn't underachieve last year because of a "lack of balance". They underachieved because they lacked discipline, a bit of pitching depth (mainly because of Wakefield), and because of the injury to Bucholz.

[a700hitter]

The top tier FA pitchers are gone, except for Madson, and he's a reliever. We missed out on Gio Gonzalez. The Cubs want too much for Garza. It's being reported that Oswalt, Kuroda and Jackson are out of our price range. Where does this leave us? Where is this patient wait and see approach going to take us? At this point, I am really hoping that Benny has a rabbit in his hat that we don't know about, because none of the other publicly reported options, e.g Saunders are very encouraging.

[jacksonianmarch]

Booby Jenks had another back surgery to remove some bone chips. He will be unable to start spring training on time

[SoxSport]

The top tier FA pitchers are gone' date=' except for Madson, and he's a reliever. We missed out on Gio Gonzalez. The Cubs want too much for Garza. It's being reported that Oswalt, Kuroda and Jackson are out of our price range. Where does this leave us? Where is this patient wait and see approach going to take us? At this point, I am really hoping that Benny has a rabbit in his hat that we don't know about, because none of the other publicly reported options, e.g Saunders are very encouraging.[/quote']

 

They made their bed committing to Ortiz. If they want to stay below the cap, they will have to trade for a pitcher, or go bottom fishing. I see Jenks needs further surgery on his back. Makes you wonder how they could sign this guy without looking at an MRI of his lumbar spine area. Those bone spurs are obvious, and they compress the nerves resulting in pain down the leg. How do I know that?

 

They can always trade for a Garza, but will have to start with Middlebrook in the package.

 

I would go for King Felix--using Youkilis and Bard as the bait. Youks needs a switch back to 1B, and Seattle needs a first baseman who can hit. Bard would be a nice chip as well. The media would go ga-ga again if the Sox got Felix.

[Station 13]

Booby Jenks had another back surgery to remove some bone chips. He will be unable to start spring training on time

 

 

I guess this turd won't pitch at all in 2012.

[jacksonianmarch]

They made their bed committing to Ortiz. If they want to stay below the cap, they will have to trade for a pitcher, or go bottom fishing. I see Jenks needs further surgery on his back. Makes you wonder how they could sign this guy without looking at an MRI of his lumbar spine area. Those bone spurs are obvious, and they compress the nerves resulting in pain down the leg. How do I know that?

 

They can always trade for a Garza, but will have to start with Middlebrook in the package.

 

I would go for King Felix--using Youkilis and Bard as the bait. Youks needs a switch back to 1B, and Seattle needs a first baseman who can hit. Bard would be a nice chip as well. The media would go ga-ga again if the Sox got Felix.

 

If the M's go out and deal Felix, they're going to go into full out rebuild mode. That would make an older, frequently injured 1b unattractive to them.

[User Name]

The Mariners aren't trading Felix. Let's focus on reality.

[Station 13]

Realistcally they would want something like Bard, Middlebrooks, Ranuado and Jacobs. I would not deal with the FA like Marcum, Grienki, Cain, Hamels hitting the market.

[SoxSport]

If the M's go out and deal Felix' date=' they're going to go into full out rebuild mode. That would make an older, frequently injured 1b unattractive to them.[/quote']

 

Youks is pretty cheap,$12 mil or so, and is one of the best hitters and first baseman around when healthy. Which is right now. He's blocked at 1B, and he really can't hack it at 3B anymore at 32. That's the feeling I've heard around baseball outside of the Red Sox.

 

I doubt Seattle will get Fielder. He wants to go to a contender.Bard is a top young pitcher who could fit as a starter or closer for a young team. The Mariners have enough young pitching to replace Felix. At this point, Seattle should deal Felix for a few good players.