If the sox blew it up thread

[SemperFi Sox]

I think Beckett is the guy to trade. He should bring a decent value in return.

 

Lester is younger, cheaper and a LHP, you'd get more for him.

[Bellhorn04]

Lester is younger' date=' cheaper and a LHP, you'd get more for him.[/quote']

 

Possibly, but Lester's numbers this year are a problem. Beckett's ERA is no better than Lester's but his WHIP is a lot better.

[redsoxbeatz]

so you're unwilling to trade Ortiz in fear of a bad finish' date=' but would trade Lester and Beckett? That makes no sense. If either of those guys goes it's because we're selling and the rest of the season doesn't matter.[/quote']

 

I don't know if I would say fear a bad finish. It's not like Lester or Beckett are helping this team win anyway, Ortiz is. I guess I shouldn't have implied I want Ortiz just to hopefully finish decently but he'd be good to have next year, too. Especially with how he is hitting and his physical condition.

[Bellhorn04]

I don't know if I would say fear a bad finish. It's not like Lester or Beckett are helping this team win anyway' date=' Ortiz is. I guess I shouldn't have implied I want Ortiz just to hopefully finish decently but he'd be good to have next year, too. Especially with how he is hitting and his physical condition.[/quote']

 

Plus this team would be virtually unwatchable now without Ortiz. The offence would be boring and inept beyond description. You would want to stab yourself watching it.

[FredLynn]

Plus this team would be virtually unwatchable now without Ortiz. The offence would be boring and inept beyond description. You would want to stab yourself watching it.

 

That is absolutely not true. By trading Ortiz our FO would be admitting that failure is unavoidable this year. Maybe then they would bring up some of the kids like Lavarnway and Ciriaco permanently. I would rather watch those guys play than the sloths we are putting on the field now.

[Bellhorn04]

That is absolutely not true. By trading Ortiz our FO would be admitting that failure is unavoidable this year. Maybe then they would bring up some of the kids like Lavarnway and Ciriaco permanently. I would rather watch those guys play than the sloths we are putting on the field now.

 

Ortiz is not a sloth. He is one of the two or three best hitters in the league. Our offence this year would be brutal without him. Ciriaco is fun to watch, absolutely, keep him up.

The thing is you need a middle of the order bat to drive in guys like Ciriaco. Gonzalez has not been that guy this year and who knows when he will be again.

 

We have no idea what Lavarnway can produce at the MLB level. He only has 7 homers this year at Pawtucket. That doesn't bode well for him being the next Manny/Ortiz slugger.

 

I realize I'm not speaking for everyone when I say the team would be unwatchable without Ortiz.

 

I guess what I should be saying is, this team really needs a big middle of the order bat and Ortiz is that man right now. If he goes we need a big bat to replace him.

[Guest]

Ortiz is not a sloth. He is one of the two or three best hitters in the league. Our offence this year would be brutal without him. Ciriaco is fun to watch, absolutely, keep him up.

The thing is you need a middle of the order bat to drive in guys like Ciriaco. Gonzalez has not been that guy this year and who knows when he will be again.

 

We have no idea what Lavarnway can produce at the MLB level. He only has 7 homers this year at Pawtucket. That doesn't bode well for him being the next Manny/Ortiz slugger.

 

I realize I'm not speaking for everyone when I say the team would be unwatchable without Ortiz.

 

I guess what I should be saying is, this team really needs a big middle of the order bat and Ortiz is that man right now. If he goes we need a big bat to replace him.

 

If we could get someone of value in return for losing Ortiz for the rest of the season IMO that would be worth not watching him play for the team for the rest of the year. It just makes good sense for long term strategy to obtain as many players who figure in our future and discard those from the past, no matter how productive they are now.

[SoxSport]

Eckersley said in an interview it's all about the big 3 starters--Beckett, Lester and Buchholz. He said they are going nowhere unless those 3 turn it around and pitch more consistently and to their capabilities. He says Lester has regressed the last two years into a bit of a head case. I say the guy is overweight and flat out of shape. Eck also said Beckett is past his prime--not a #1 starter anymore.

[example1]

Ortiz is not a sloth. He is one of the two or three best hitters in the league. Our offence this year would be brutal without him. Ciriaco is fun to watch, absolutely, keep him up.

The thing is you need a middle of the order bat to drive in guys like Ciriaco. Gonzalez has not been that guy this year and who knows when he will be again.

 

We have no idea what Lavarnway can produce at the MLB level. He only has 7 homers this year at Pawtucket. That doesn't bode well for him being the next Manny/Ortiz slugger.

 

I realize I'm not speaking for everyone when I say the team would be unwatchable without Ortiz.

 

I guess what I should be saying is, this team really needs a big middle of the order bat and Ortiz is that man right now. If he goes we need a big bat to replace him.

 

If the team would be unwatchable without Ortiz then they must be damn-near unwatchable now, right? I mean, Ortiz only bats 1/9th of the time and doesn't play the field.

 

Lavarnway had 21, 22 and 32 HR the last 3 years at combined minor league levels. He's got Middlebrooks-like power with better OBP potential. His biggest problem is he isn't a great catcher and he can't run.

 

He will cost 2% of what Ortiz does. They can re-use that money elsewhere.

[example1]

Eckersley said in an interview it's all about the big 3 starters--Beckett' date=' Lester and Buchholz. He said they are going nowhere unless those 3 turn it around and pitch more consistently and to their capabilities. He says Lester has regressed the last two years into a bit of a head case. I say the guy is overweight and flat out of shape. Eck also said Beckett is past his prime--not a #1 starter anymore.[/quote']

 

Gotta love Eck and his in-depth analysis.

 

This seems really obvious.

 

Here's the question: If the Sox moved some guys so they got another #1 or #2 starter (effectively bumping Lester, Beckett, Buchholz down the rotation) would that be good enough, or do they need to literally get rid of Lester, Beckett and/or Buchholz to have any shot in 2012 or 2013?

 

If it is the later, then they are in deep s***. If they would be able to add some true top of the rotation guys and hope that settles things down bit, that might be more do-able with the talent the Sox have in their system right now.

 

Wouldn't Seattle at least have to THINK about a Felix deal for Bogaerts, Barnes, Doubront, Brentz and Cecchini? I mean, that's a huge haul of likely MLB contributers, including a guy comparable to Hanley Ramirez, a possible #2 starter, a current #4-5 starter, a power OF and a 3B with both pop and speed. If they wouldn't consider it, their GM should be fired.

[d-money]

Beckett.I would get rid of this guy.I dont know who else to say.

[Guest]

Gotta love Eck and his in-depth analysis.

 

This seems really obvious.

 

Here's the question: If the Sox moved some guys so they got another #1 or #2 starter (effectively bumping Lester, Beckett, Buchholz down the rotation) would that be good enough, or do they need to literally get rid of Lester, Beckett and/or Buchholz to have any shot in 2012 or 2013?

 

If it is the later, then they are in deep s***. If they would be able to add some true top of the rotation guys and hope that settles things down bit, that might be more do-able with the talent the Sox have in their system right now.

 

Wouldn't Seattle at least have to THINK about a Felix deal for Bogaerts, Barnes, Doubront, Brentz and Cecchini? I mean, that's a huge haul of likely MLB contributers, including a guy comparable to Hanley Ramirez, a possible #2 starter, a current #4-5 starter, a power OF and a 3B with both pop and speed. If they wouldn't consider it, their GM should be fired.

 

No way I would offer that trade. I am keeping every single top pitching prospect we have, and we don't have many. They guys to get rid of are on the 25 man roster right now. Its not going to be a quick process-probably 2-3 years. The sooner they get started the sooner they can finish the job.

[resdubwhite]

It has to be Beckett.

 

If the team can free up his salary (or a portion of) then the FO can look at rebuilding this team.

 

Team needs probably 2 SP's in. One clearly a leader and obvious no.1. This hopefully get Lester to get his thumb out of his ass.

 

Now, I know a lot of money has been invested into the AGon and Crawford, but Papi needs help. Unless either of the other 2 come out and find some form. Personally, I would send Crawford off for Tommy John now.

 

If the FO can find a way to get rid of Lackey in the new year and eat some of the salary then great too. Even if we have a relatively decent first half from him next year (I know, I laughed too) then ship his ass. I'll fly to boston, rent a car and drie him to Logan.

[example1]

No way I would offer that trade. I am keeping every single top pitching prospect we have' date=' and we don't have many. They guys to get rid of are on the 25 man roster right now. Its not going to be a quick process-probably 2-3 years. The sooner they get started the sooner they can finish the job.[/quote']

 

My point was less about the specific package, and more about the idea that Seattle would HAVE to be willing to move Felix for the right package.

 

I think the assumption that another team would take Beckett and return anything significant is wishful thinking. Perhaps they would take him, but I doubt they would give back pitchers who have anything like the ceiling that Beckett does. Same with Lester.

 

AT some point they are going to need to find a replacement level ace. Think about it this way: just about every ace in baseball is a top draft pick. The Sox aren't going to get a Verlander, Felix type without either drastically overpaying or signing them as a FA. This is true of all the better, large market teams. Think about it:

 

Yankees: only one true 'ace': CC, huge, huge contract in FA

Red Sox: no true ace, Lester is closest thing and he's been a long time in the making

Phillies: multiple true aces, two were huge FA pays, one was a draftee (Hamels, 17th overall pick)

Tigers: Verlander: 2nd overall pick, Tigers

Giants: Matt Cain: 25th overall pick, Giants

Rangers: Darvish: huge international signing

Washington: Strasburg: 1st overall pick

 

I suspect the list goes on. Essentially: top tier, "ace" pitchers are either huge FA signings, or top draft picks, or diamond in the rough international signings. The Sox aren't going to easily replace Beckett (#2 overall pick) or Lester. If what they need is a true stopper, they can either develop him from within, or find him from without. If it is find him from without, then they have to have their eyes open and be ready to jump at those select guys at any time over a multi-year period. If Kershaw or Felix or someone like that were to suddenly be available, it shouldn't matter if they are in "holding the cards" time, because those guys are so rarely available they would have to move.

 

Is Hamels at that level? Would trading Beckett and making a move for Hamels make sense? No prospects if you land him as a FA, he's young enough to be around for a few years, etc.,

 

That said, this dynamic definitely supports your assertion that the Sox shouldn't trade their young pitching talent (Barnes, at #19 overall).

[Brennan]

I would personally keep Lester. Being young and a lefty and having alot of talent buried in there somewhere, he can be worked with. I agree that Beckett is a cancer and has spurned the fanbase way too much at this point. I would also keep Doubie as a back of the rotation guy and possibly Bucholz long enough for him to maybe improve on his trade value (one more season max). Do the best possible job to get some good prospects for Ortiz in the offseason and really really focus on the farm for the next few years. I have always thought that Ellsbury was a truly special player but if he can't stay healthy for us then what the hell are we holding on for? He has alot of value and we sure as f*** will miss him as he develops into a superstar for someone else but hey.. sacrifice now and think of the future.

 

Do it soon so we can be a SOLID contender in a few years.

[Guest]

My point was less about the specific package, and more about the idea that Seattle would HAVE to be willing to move Felix for the right package.

 

I think the assumption that another team would take Beckett and return anything significant is wishful thinking. Perhaps they would take him, but I doubt they would give back pitchers who have anything like the ceiling that Beckett does. Same with Lester.

 

AT some point they are going to need to find a replacement level ace. Think about it this way: just about every ace in baseball is a top draft pick. The Sox aren't going to get a Verlander, Felix type without either drastically overpaying or signing them as a FA. This is true of all the better, large market teams. Think about it:

 

Yankees: only one true 'ace': CC, huge, huge contract in FA

Red Sox: no true ace, Lester is closest thing and he's been a long time in the making

Phillies: multiple true aces, two were huge FA pays, one was a draftee (Hamels, 17th overall pick)

Tigers: Verlander: 2nd overall pick, Tigers

Giants: Matt Cain: 25th overall pick, Giants

Rangers: Darvish: huge international signing

Washington: Strasburg: 1st overall pick

 

I suspect the list goes on. Essentially: top tier, "ace" pitchers are either huge FA signings, or top draft picks, or diamond in the rough international signings. The Sox aren't going to easily replace Beckett (#2 overall pick) or Lester. If what they need is a true stopper, they can either develop him from within, or find him from without. If it is find him from without, then they have to have their eyes open and be ready to jump at those select guys at any time over a multi-year period. If Kershaw or Felix or someone like that were to suddenly be available, it shouldn't matter if they are in "holding the cards" time, because those guys are so rarely available they would have to move.

 

Is Hamels at that level? Would trading Beckett and making a move for Hamels make sense? No prospects if you land him as a FA, he's young enough to be around for a few years, etc.,

 

That said, this dynamic definitely supports your assertion that the Sox shouldn't trade their young pitching talent (Barnes, at #19 overall).

 

Good analysis, again. Just to take it one step further, I would not only make all of our top pitching prospects off limits, but I would make it a point to get some more by trading either players on our current roster, such as Beckett (if we can find someone to take his contract), Ortiz, and Ellsbury, among others, to make that happen. I could almost see trading some of our position player prospects if we got a good return for them in terms of more pitching prospects.

All this sort of make it look like trading Kelly wasn't such a good idea after all.

[jung]

Very good post E1

[Palodios]

I think the assumption that another team would take Beckett and return anything significant is wishful thinking. Perhaps they would take him' date=' but I doubt they would give back pitchers who have anything like the ceiling that Beckett does. Same with Lester. [/quote']

 

I would argue that both Beckett and Lester are worth significant prospects. Afterall, Beckett is coming off a season with 2.89 ERA and 1.03 WHIP. There is always a team who believes "They can fix him" when the player in question has elite stuff. His contract is reasonable, and the Red Sox would probably throw in 5-10 million to increase the pot.

 

Take it on the other side-- if the Angels were trying to trade Dan Haren, would you do it? He's a very good pitcher, but having an off season.

 

As far as Lester-- definitely not someone I'd want to trade, but he had the highest winning percentage of any pitcher in baseball until recently, and he's healthy. If Ubaldo pulled in the haul that he did, I have no doubt that Lester would as well.

[SCM33]

I think Beckett is the guy to trade. He should bring a decent value in return.

 

Lester is younger' date=' cheaper and a LHP, you'd get more for him.[/quote']

 

Possibly' date=' but Lester's numbers this year are a problem. Beckett's ERA is no better than Lester's but his WHIP is a lot better.[/quote']

 

The point of getting rid of Beckett would not be to get a return. The point of getting rid of Beckett would be so the team stops dying.....he is a disease.

[Palodios]

The point of getting rid of Beckett would not be to get a return. The point of getting rid of Beckett would be so the team stops dying.....he is a disease.

 

I agree, but if you can get value for him, I'd say do it. I think he'll be a great fit with the Rangers, personally. I think they'll be desperate enough to trade a top chip for him, maybe more depending on how much the Red Sox bite. With Hamilton hitting free agency and a very weak field in the AL this year, this could be their best shot.

[SoxSport]

They already traded low on one guy--Youkilis. Look what happened there. It would be foolish to trade low on any other underachiever right now.

[example1]

I could almost see trading some of our position player prospects if we got a good return for them in terms of more pitching prospects.

All this sort of make it look like trading Kelly wasn't such a good idea after all.

 

They already traded low on one guy--Youkilis. Look what happened there. It would be foolish to trade low on any other underachiever right now.

 

Had you heard of Zach Stewart before the Sox traded for him? I hadn't either, but he was at one point the Blue Jays best prospect and has been involved in a few good trades. He's only 25, is cost controlled until 2018, and has a few really good starts under his belt at the MLB level (along with some very poor ones) to complement pretty good minor league numbers.

 

I would argue that Cherington is ahead of the curve on this discussion, actually. The addition of guys like Mortenson, Malencon, Stewart, etc., all show that he values cost-controlled young pitching pretty highly. Rome wasn't built in a day and neither will be the next generation pitching staff.

 

Let's keep our fingers crossed that Buchholz gets healthy and returns to form as a good pitcher, Doubront remains viable, and Barnes progress through the minors pretty quickly. One more decent SP from the minors (Britton, Ranaudo, etc.,) and the Sox will be in much better shape for a big FA acquisition after 2014.

[Guest]

Had you heard of Zach Stewart before the Sox traded for him? I hadn't either, but he was at one point the Blue Jays best prospect and has been involved in a few good trades. He's only 25, is cost controlled until 2018, and has a few really good starts under his belt at the MLB level (along with some very poor ones) to complement pretty good minor league numbers.

 

I would argue that Cherington is ahead of the curve on this discussion, actually. The addition of guys like Mortenson, Malencon, Stewart, etc., all show that he values cost-controlled young pitching pretty highly. Rome wasn't built in a day and neither will be the next generation pitching staff.

 

Let's keep our fingers crossed that Buchholz gets healthy and returns to form as a good pitcher, Doubront remains viable, and Barnes progress through the minors pretty quickly. One more decent SP from the minors (Britton, Ranaudo, etc.,) and the Sox will be in much better shape for a big FA acquisition after 2014.

 

Stewart's addition was potentially a plus. The others, Mortenson, Melancon and the rest of the relievers he added are not nearly as important. RPs are a crapshoot, mostly. Its more good starters that we need.

[example1]

Both Mortenson and Melancon are under team control for 6 years. If one of them turns out to be a good reliever the moves would have been worth it. When you're talking about improving the pitching staff you simply can't take the smaller moves and throw them away. A good staff is one that is filled with marquee players and a number of guys who are good but you're not sure how they got there, or how good they are.

 

Everyone is calling for the Sox to be more like the Rays. I would argue that going out of their way to get arms like Mortenson and Melancon and sticking with guys like Miller and Padilla is much closer to the TB model than hiring established relievers and hoping their volatility doesn't catch them on a downswing. If the Sox are smart they will have a bunch of viable, cheep arms. If the Sox had signed Madson like so many here (myself included) were calling for, they would be even more up a creek than they are.

[redsoxbeatz]

http://www.overthemonster.com/2012/7/10/3148592/boston-red-sox-armchair-gm-mid-season-addition-matt-sullivan#storyjump

 

interesting article

[a700hitter]

Both Mortenson and Melancon are under team control for 6 years. If one of them turns out to be a good reliever the moves would have been worth it. When you're talking about improving the pitching staff you simply can't take the smaller moves and throw them away. A good staff is one that is filled with marquee players and a number of guys who are good but you're not sure how they got there, or how good they are.

 

Everyone is calling for the Sox to be more like the Rays. I would argue that going out of their way to get arms like Mortenson and Melancon and sticking with guys like Miller and Padilla is much closer to the TB model than hiring established relievers and hoping their volatility doesn't catch them on a downswing. If the Sox are smart they will have a bunch of viable, cheep arms. If the Sox had signed Madson like so many here (myself included) were calling for, they would be even more up a creek than they are.

Madson signed a 1 year contract for $6 million with an option and a $2.5 million buyout, so we wouldn't be too much further up the creek. We are paying Bailey $4 million and we aren't going to get much use out of him either. They are projecting August or September for his return.

 

Mortensen stinks. He tops out at 87 with his fastball. Melancon stinks too. These are viable garbage time arms -- nothing more. They are last guy out of the pen caliber right before you have to use a position player. I'm aware of the anomaly of of Melancon's good half season and his dominating AAA career, but he is generally a bust. Also, he didn't come for free, so this is not in line with the Tampa model. He came at the cost of a cheap infielder with a good stick who could start for most teams when healthy.

[redsoxbeatz]

On topic of blowing up the sox.... Fire valentine.

[Bellhorn04]

On topic of blowing up the sox.... Fire valentine.

 

Right now that looks like the proverbial rearranging of deck chairs on the Titanic. Let him complete a season anyway IMO.

[Guest]

Mortensen stinks. He tops out at 87 with his fastball. Melancon stinks too. These are viable garbage time arms -- nothing more.

 

This is untrue this year. Since his return from the minors on June 11 Melancon has an ERA of 0.68 and a BAA of .170. Mortensen for the season has an ERA of 1.33 and a WHIP of .787.

I would take those numbers on my team any day.

[Guest]

On topic of blowing up the sox.... Fire valentine.

 

Valentine was handed a pile of dog s*** and told to make steak. Its not his fault that our starting pitching stinks.