So you're the Sox' GM...What's your plan?

[Palodios]

Read what i posted above carefully. Notice Edes' specific mention that they are trying to make a run for the playoffs this year. The fact that neither pitcher is a rental is inconsequential if they're turning down offers for other pieces. They are trying to make a go for it' date=' even though i can't quite understand why.[/quote']

 

I don't see any players being mentioned as off limits beside Lester, but trading Lester makes absolutely no sense for anyone.

 

Lester's 2014 option becomes void if he gets traded, meaning that any team trading for Lester would be paying for the value of 2.3 years of service, but only get 1.3 years out of him. If I were The Boob, I wouldn't trade him for anything less than two-three top 50 prospects, but in reality he's probably only worth one to other teams, and that's for a 5.00 ERA guy this season.

[User Name]

I don't see any players being mentioned as off limits beside Lester, but trading Lester makes absolutely no sense for anyone.

 

Lester's 2014 option becomes void if he gets traded, meaning that any team trading for Lester would be paying for the value of 2.3 years of service, but only get 1.3 years out of him. If I were The Boob, I wouldn't trade him for anything less than two-three top 50 prospects, but in reality he's probably only worth one to other teams, and that's for a 5.00 ERA guy this season.

 

Teams have supposedly inquired about the availability of Clay, Aceves and Morales, and were told no on all three counts.

 

If teams are seriously offering something of value for Lester (who has officially become a reclamation project) and the Red Sox deemed him "untouchable" then that's as clear an indication as any that they actually think they can compete this year. Couple that with their repeated attempts to obtain JJ and Garza right now even though their price would be higher than in the off-season, and it seems as clear as day.

[jacksonianmarch]

It makes no sense to deal Lester right now, especially if you think he can turn it around. Olney said it best on EEI today, Beckett and Lester will return 30 cents on the dollar right now. There is no point in moving them now unless you can show they can finish the yr with a run. If they do, you deal them in the offseason

[example1]

Rob Bradford and Alex Speier did a podcast the other day discussing the Sox trade deadline strategy and the players they have available right now to trade. It was actually really good. I think Speier is one of the better baseball writers out there, he's very non-reactionary.

 

Anyway, their point was that even the pitchers who appear to be decent bets on the trade market are huge risks. Guys like Garza and Josh Johnson appear to be decent options, with the probability that they help in 2013. However, trading even a decent prospect for them stands a very good chance of being a net negative. Essentially, the value of a cost controlled prospect has never been higher than it is now, especially pitchers.

 

Interestingly, Speier spoke about some Sox scouts and FO staff who believe that Matt Barnes isn't actually their best pitching prospect. He has the highest value because he's cashed in his opportunity, but in fact they are just as high on Henry Owens who is apparently extremely advanced for his age and a very smart pitcher. His stuff hasn't completely come together yet (he's only 20 and in his first full season, drafted supplemental 1st round 2011) but as a lefty his frame (6-7) and secondary stuff mixes very nicely with a really stellar changeup and good breaking stuff. His velocity has increased to 92-94 this season. Owens leads all of minor league baseball in K/9, which is a good indication of his ability to make hitters miss his pitches.

 

I don't know Owens well, but Speier is less prone to hyperbole than others and he had Owens in the Sox top 5 least moveable prospects, with Bogaerts, Middlebrooks, Bradley Jr, and Barnes. He said that the Sox see Owens alone as too much to give up for a guy like Garza and I found the general argument pretty convincing.

 

SO... if I were the Sox GM...

 

1) Let the expensive pitching contracts expire, or work to get out from under them (when there are obvious replacements). This is Beckett, Lester, Lackey and Dice-K. Obviously, if Lester turns it around and is signable at a decent rate, that would be okay to do. They probably can't play to get away from Buchholz, which might is okay since he is likely the best of the bunch and affordable. Doubront will probably be a servicable #3 type starter. Barnes could be up in 2 years, Owens a few years after that.

 

2) Trade from positions of strength and organizational aptitude: the Sox seem capable of finding under-valued offensive pieces, pitching is much harder to come by.

 

3) Target trades for pitchers roughly 25 or younger who are cost controlled. Remain very stingy with extension contracts for those guys if those contracts aren't team-friendly.

 

4) Free up money whenever possible and don't trade prospects except for long-term upside.

 

5) Seriously shop the following list of players on the 40 man, even taking risks on some prospects and get pitching, pitching, pitching:

 

Albers, Matt

Anderson, Lars

Atchison, Scott

Aviles, Mike

Bard, Daniel

Beckett, Josh

Ellsbury, Jacoby

Iglesias, Jose

Lavarnway, Ryan

Lester, Jon

Lin, Che-Hsuan

Melancon, Mark

Nava, Daniel

Ortiz, David

Padillia, Vicente

Ross, Cody

Saltalamacchia, Jarrod

Shoppach, Kelly

Sweeney, Ryan

 

Do we really think the team would be a ton worse if it lost those guys? I think they could field a decent team moving forward even if they moved most of those guys. They would also, incidentally, free up about $64m.

 

Yes, its extreme, but they need to find a way to get the next diamond in the rough and they should strike while the iron is hot for some of these teams. Is Oakland unusually willing to give up low-ball prospects to make a run? How about Pittsburgh? Washington?

 

The game and lay of the land has changed and the Sox need to adjust. I'm confident they will return to being a very good team once they get straightened out, but they were on the wrong side of the undervalued asset equation for the past few years and need to correct for that.

 

Sorry for the long post...

[RedSoxNC84]

First thing, I'd start Shoppach every day.. if our record is 21-9 with shop and 19-40 with salty... imagine if you could start shop for the bulk of those other 59 games..

 

They put up enough runs without the Saltybombs to make up for Shoppach's hitting.

[DocHolliday]

Rob Bradford and Alex Speier did a podcast the other day discussing the Sox trade deadline strategy and the players they have available right now to trade. It was actually really good. I think Speier is one of the better baseball writers out there, he's very non-reactionary.

 

Anyway, their point was that even the pitchers who appear to be decent bets on the trade market are huge risks. Guys like Garza and Josh Johnson appear to be decent options, with the probability that they help in 2013. However, trading even a decent prospect for them stands a very good chance of being a net negative. Essentially, the value of a cost controlled prospect has never been higher than it is now, especially pitchers.

 

Interestingly, Speier spoke about some Sox scouts and FO staff who believe that Matt Barnes isn't actually their best pitching prospect. He has the highest value because he's cashed in his opportunity, but in fact they are just as high on Henry Owens who is apparently extremely advanced for his age and a very smart pitcher. His stuff hasn't completely come together yet (he's only 20 and in his first full season, drafted supplemental 1st round 2011) but as a lefty his frame (6-7) and secondary stuff mixes very nicely with a really stellar changeup and good breaking stuff. His velocity has increased to 92-94 this season. Owens leads all of minor league baseball in K/9, which is a good indication of his ability to make hitters miss his pitches.

 

I don't know Owens well, but Speier is less prone to hyperbole than others and he had Owens in the Sox top 5 least moveable prospects, with Bogaerts, Middlebrooks, Bradley Jr, and Barnes. He said that the Sox see Owens alone as too much to give up for a guy like Garza and I found the general argument pretty convincing.

 

SO... if I were the Sox GM...

 

1) Let the expensive pitching contracts expire, or work to get out from under them (when there are obvious replacements). This is Beckett, Lester, Lackey and Dice-K. Obviously, if Lester turns it around and is signable at a decent rate, that would be okay to do. They probably can't play to get away from Buchholz, which might is okay since he is likely the best of the bunch and affordable. Doubront will probably be a servicable #3 type starter. Barnes could be up in 2 years, Owens a few years after that.

 

2) Trade from positions of strength and organizational aptitude: the Sox seem capable of finding under-valued offensive pieces, pitching is much harder to come by.

 

3) Target trades for pitchers roughly 25 or younger who are cost controlled. Remain very stingy with extension contracts for those guys if those contracts aren't team-friendly.

 

4) Free up money whenever possible and don't trade prospects except for long-term upside.

 

5) Seriously shop the following list of players on the 40 man, even taking risks on some prospects and get pitching, pitching, pitching:

 

Albers, Matt

Anderson, Lars

Atchison, Scott

Aviles, Mike

Bard, Daniel

Beckett, Josh

Ellsbury, Jacoby

Iglesias, Jose

Lavarnway, Ryan

Lester, Jon

Lin, Che-Hsuan

Melancon, Mark

Nava, Daniel

Ortiz, David

Padillia, Vicente

Ross, Cody

Saltalamacchia, Jarrod

Shoppach, Kelly

Sweeney, Ryan

 

Do we really think the team would be a ton worse if it lost those guys? I think they could field a decent team moving forward even if they moved most of those guys. They would also, incidentally, free up about $64m.

 

Yes, its extreme, but they need to find a way to get the next diamond in the rough and they should strike while the iron is hot for some of these teams. Is Oakland unusually willing to give up low-ball prospects to make a run? How about Pittsburgh? Washington?

 

The game and lay of the land has changed and the Sox need to adjust. I'm confident they will return to being a very good team once they get straightened out, but they were on the wrong side of the undervalued asset equation for the past few years and need to correct for that.

 

Sorry for the long post...

 

Great post!

 

The only thing I would change is removing Lester and possibly Iglesias from that list. You mentioned hanging onto Lester if he can turn it around and I'm certain he will. It may not be this season but he will not be this bad for his whole career. He's fairly affordable going forward and is what he is when right- a solid #2.

 

As for Iglesias, I like that he seems to be improving his offensive approach to the game as he's gotten more at bats under his belt. He reminds a lot of a young Elvis Andrus- with more glove but less bat. His defense is off the charts and has an impact on the game that is rare. Like you mentioned, the organization does have a bit of a niche in acquiring undervalued offense. If you're dead set on getting the pitching back to a respectable level, you have to place a premium on defense- especially up the middle.

 

Unless you're getting better value, they need to stick with Iglesias since they've already invested a lot in him.

[example1]

All of the above pieces were assumed to be bringing back better value. Obviously they wouldn't move Iglesias just to move him. However, if someone demanded him as part of a deal for a top pitching prospect I would move him in a heartbeat. I love the idea of having Iglesias, and he's totally cheap, but they have also drafted heavily at SS and CF and could potentially pretty quickly have Marrero ready to go (he's just a year younger than Iglesias).

[DocHolliday]

All of the above pieces were assumed to be bringing back better value. Obviously they wouldn't move Iglesias just to move him. However' date=' if someone demanded him as part of a deal for a top pitching prospect I would move him in a heartbeat. I love the idea of having Iglesias, and he's totally cheap, but they have also drafted heavily at SS and CF and could potentially pretty quickly have Marrero ready to go (he's just a year younger than Iglesias).[/quote']

 

Agreed. As you have mentioned elsewhere, I think they should stay away from the JJ's and Garzas's at this point as well. Even if they were able to somehow get them without giving up much, I still don't think that it would be enough to get them over the hump. This team has been too inconsistent and, realistically is several pieces away from being a legitimate contender again.

 

If this team ever did wake up and play to their true talent level the rest of the way, the group as currently constituted is talented and good enough to compete for a title AND they would keep their prospect pool intact.

 

But I don't see that happening this year.

[Orange Juiced]

To me, here's what the roster could look like in 2013 and 2014, just factoring in minor leaguers that will have made their way to the majors, as well as guys whose contracts will run out (assume we don't re-sign them). Well, I will assume that they re-sign Ortiz after this year because..well..I'm pretty confident they'll do that.

 

2013

C - Salty, Lavarnway

1b - Gonzalez

2b - Pedroia

3b - Middlebrooks

SS - ???

LF - Crawford

CF - Ellsbury

RF - Kalish

DH - Ortiz

 

SP - Beckett, Lester, Buchholz, Doubront, Lackey

RP - Morales, Atchison, Hill, Melancon, Bard, Bailey, Tazawa

 

2014

C - Saltalamacchia, Lavarnway

1b - Gonzalez

2b - Pedroia

3b - Middlebrooks

SS - Bogaerts (current minor league #s: .284/.358/.478, 14 hr)

LF - Crawford

CF - Jackie Bradley Jr (minor league #s: .341/.452/.510, 6 hr, 22 sb)

RF - Kalish

DH - Ortiz (I am assuming they sign him to a 2-year deal this offseason)

 

SP - Beckett, Lester, Buchholz, Doubront, Lackey (all under control through 2014...Lester has a 2014 team option)

RP - Barnes (minor league #s: 7-3, 2.30 era, 0.97 whip, 10.8 k/9), Morales, Melancon, Bard, Bailey, Alex Wilson (minor league #s: 5-2, 3.41 era, 1.37 whip, 9.5 k/9)

 

They have some very exciting young players coming up through the system that I'd really like to see play for Boston. I want to see Matt Barnes, Alex Wilson, Jackie Bradley Jr, Ryan Lavarnway, Xander Bogaerts, Bryce Brentz, and Blake Swihart play for the major league club. They have enough locked-in veterans to provide the framework for inserting these young guys as they emerge ready.

 

I also think that next year both Beckett and Lester will be better. Lester because (as I started a thread just about him) he's too good to have fallen off a cliff (IMO), and Beckett because it'll be the odd year Beckett. Look at his years by even-odd (ERA only to make it simple):

 

2002: 4.10

2003: 3.04 (-1.06)

2004: 3.79 (+0.75)

2005: 3.38 (-0.41)

2006: 5.01 (+1.63)

2007: 3.27 (-1.74)

2008: 4.03 (+0.76)

2009: 3.86 (-0.17)

2010: 5.78 (+1.92)

2011: 2.89 (-2.89)

2012: 4.53 (+1.64)

 

See a pretty remarkable pattern here? So I expect (though I have no idea why this is the case with Beckett) him to be much better next year, and *THEN* they should deal him after that, when he only has one year left on his contract, coming off a good season. He should then fetch something pretty nice.

[User Name]

Brandon Jacobs seems to be an afterthought in your post juiced, and he's probably the highest-upside player in the Sox farm system right after Xander.

[SemperFi Sox]

Brandon Jacobs seems to be an afterthought in your post juiced' date=' and he's probably the highest-upside player in the Sox farm system right after Xander.[/quote']

 

I disagree, I'd put Bradley Jr, Swihart , Barnes and Cecchini ahead of him.

 

Jacobs has been a liability defensively, needs to improve a lot.

[User Name]

I disagree, I'd put Bradley Jr, Swihart , Barnes and Cecchini ahead of him.

 

Jacobs has been a liability defensively, needs to improve a lot.

 

But the offensive power potential is unlimited, and ultimately, it's usually the bat and not the glove that gets people to the Majors. Also note that i'm speaking specifically about potential and not present-time output.

[SemperFi Sox]

But the offensive power potential is unlimited' date=' and ultimately, it's usually the bat and not the glove that gets people to the Majors. Also note that i'm speaking specifically about potential and not present-time output.[/quote']

 

I'm a little surprised at his power surge, he's said himself he's never been a HR hitter. Would be nice if he became one though.

[Orange Juiced]

But the offensive power potential is unlimited' date=' and ultimately, it's usually the bat and not the glove that gets people to the Majors. Also note that i'm speaking specifically about potential and not present-time output.[/quote']

 

Your point is well taken. Add Jacobs to the list of guys that could be making the team in 2014. Again, lots of good young talent in the system right now.

[User Name]

I'm a little surprised at his power surge' date=' he's said himself he's never been a HR hitter. Would be nice if he became one though.[/quote']

 

Well remember that he was fully committed to football before he became a full-time baseball player. That may have hampered the development of his power game.

[Orange Juiced]

Given what my post #39 looks like, I think the only real major things I'd try to do if I was the Sox would be as follows:

 

(1) Trade Ellsbury after this season. I love the guy but because he's a Boras client, he will absolutely be testing the free-agent market. And that means he'll get a 6-year, 100+ million dollar deal from somebody. And that will come after he turns 30. No thanks to that. So he's almost certainly going to be gone after 2013 regardless. So I think they would be well advised to move him and get something of value in return. And I think the return could be significant. Seek good young pitching talent that should be in the rotation in 2014. Maybe to the Braves for Julio Teheran, or to the Mets for Zach Wheeler, or to the Reds for Daniel Corcino. Something like that. A top pitching prospect who should make the majors in 2014.

 

(2) Keep Beckett through 2013 and then move him after 2013. For reasons I stated earlier, he should (if his career pattern holds true, which it has for his *entire* career) have a really good 2013, which will not only help the Sox that year, but it will also increase his trade value. So after 2013 they can move him. The plan would be to have Barnes replace him in the rotation in 2014.

 

(3) Try like crazy to move Lackey, even if it means eating a sizeable portion of his contract (which it almost certainly would).

 

(4) Presently, move any and all excess to acquire even nominal prospects: Sweeney, Nava, Albers, Aviles, Atchison, Padilla, Ross, Miller, etc. If they can end up getting a bunch of somewhat useful prospects, those chips could be used to get one or two really good prospects, perhaps.

[a700hitter]

All of the above pieces were assumed to be bringing back better value. Obviously they wouldn't move Iglesias just to move him. However' date=' if someone demanded him as part of a deal for a top pitching prospect I would move him in a heartbeat. I love the idea of having Iglesias, and he's totally cheap, but they have also drafted heavily at SS and CF and could potentially pretty quickly have Marrero ready to go (he's just a year younger than Iglesias).[/quote']

Doesn't Iglesias make $2 million/year? That is quite an expensive all field-no hit minor league SS.

[example1]

No, from what I see it is more like 500k. They spent a lot to get him and his signing bonus works out to about 2m a year, but that's been spent.

[SoxSport]

I would fire most of the current front office, and replace them with experienced people who aren't committed to the status quo. In other words, can make major changes without having them reflect on themselves.

 

When a team screws up royally in FA signings and trades, you have to replace the people who made those deals. Not just the head guy, but most everybody else, too. That means Cherington and a few others.

 

Clearly, they have to cut salary. So you start dumping salary. They could dump Crawford in a minute for nothing, and it would not affect the team. Another dump would be Beckett. He's a $5mil pitcher making 3 times that. Dump him. I would trade Salty while he has value.They have Lav waiting in the wings--too long, now. I would dump Aviles, who is the picture of mediocrity too common on this team these days. An example of the low salary retread they have brought in--instead of giving the farm system a chance. There is no upside with retreads. Iglesias has far more upside, and would boost their defense to another level.Another dump is Sweeney, who is useless except as a defensive replacement. I would move Lester to the BP, and keep Morales in the rotation--keeping Lester in the rotation right now is a sign of incompetence.

[jung]

The "utility/retread" is the other shoe dropping from the exorbitant spending on star players that really have not been proven worthy of their lofty sums. Crawford is the best example but there are others.

[Laser Show]

If the Blue Jays could find a team willing to absorb Vernon Wells terrible contract, we should be able to find someone to take on Crawford, Beckett, and possibly Lackeys.

[Bellhorn04]

If the Blue Jays could find a team willing to absorb Vernon Wells terrible contract' date=' we should be able to find someone to take on Crawford, Beckett, and possibly Lackeys.[/quote']

 

You have a lot of faith in the stupidity of other GM's. The guy that took Wells got fired right after the season.

[User Name]

A sucker's born every minute.

[Orange Juiced]

You have a lot of faith in the stupidity of other GM's. The guy that took Wells got fired right after the season.

 

Heh. And at least Wells was coming off a good season. In 2010, the year before he got traded, he hit .273/.331/.515/.847, 125 ops+, 31 hr, 88 rbi. So he was productive. Beckett is in the midst of a pretty craptastic season so his value is naturally going to be lower.

[Elktonnick]

I would fire most of the current front office, and replace them with experienced people who aren't committed to the status quo. In other words, can make major changes without having them reflect on themselves.

 

When a team screws up royally in FA signings and trades, you have to replace the people who made those deals. Not just the head guy, but most everybody else, too. That means Cherington and a few others.

 

Clearly, they have to cut salary. So you start dumping salary. They could dump Crawford in a minute for nothing, and it would not affect the team. Another dump would be Beckett. He's a $5mil pitcher making 3 times that. Dump him. I would trade Salty while he has value.They have Lav waiting in the wings--too long, now. I would dump Aviles, who is the picture of mediocrity too common on this team these days. An example of the low salary retread they have brought in--instead of giving the farm system a chance. There is no upside with retreads. Iglesias has far more upside, and would boost their defense to another level.Another dump is Sweeney, who is useless except as a defensive replacement. I would move Lester to the BP, and keep Morales in the rotation--keeping Lester in the rotation right now is a sign of incompetence.

 

I agree with everything you post above. I assume you include the entire baseball ops crowd in the FO shakeup who IMO must go as well. I also think that if they decide to keep BV (I wouldn't object either way) they must find a decent pitching coach who is the manager's choice. Whomever they decide is their manager, whether it be BV or someone else, he should decide who is coaches will be. The current setup is crazy.

[Laser Show]

You have a lot of faith in the stupidity of other GM's. The guy that took Wells got fired right after the season.

 

Are you claiming that every other GM in the league is completely competent? There has to be someone out there.

 

Another idea, which is a pretty bad one by the way, would be to swap bad contracts. Crawford for Werth? Beckett for Johan? Lackey for Zito?

[Bellhorn04]

Are you claiming that every other GM in the league is completely competent? There has to be someone out there.

 

Another idea, which is a pretty bad one by the way, would be to swap bad contracts. Crawford for Werth? Beckett for Johan? Lackey for Zito?

 

We should be able to trade Beckett. But as of this moment I can't see anyway on earth we could trade Crawford or Lackey.

[Elktonnick]

We should be able to trade Beckett. But as of this moment I can't see anyway on earth we could trade Crawford or Lackey.

 

One can trade anyone. It's all about what one is willing to accept (or give up in return)

[Bellhorn04]

One can trade anyone. It's all about what one is willing to accept (or give up in return)

 

OK, to rephrase, I don't think we could make trades for Crawford or Lackey that would be anything but prohibitively stupid. We could probably trade Lackey for a low-level prospect if we paid 90% of his remaining contract.

[jung]

You can trade anyone but I seriously doubt the way he is playing and facing TJ that anybody will offer the Sox anything that would give them some sort of player to look forward to and relieve them of Crawford's hefty salary obligations. Realistically, they are stuck with him.

 

The Sox likely have no choice but to wait for Lackey to pitch and then decide what to do with him. In reality he should never have been brought over to the AL east and would do well almost anywhere else.

 

Beckett is looking more and more like a piece that could be moved but he will likely only go to a Texas team.