Trades before the deadline?

[Dojji]

You're wrong.

[redsoxfan3]

For a year and a half of one of the most durable and reliable starters in the entire major leagues, a man proven in the AL East who's never pitched less than 200 innings a season in his life and who's been a legit ace type each of the last 3 years, plus an instant solution to our closer problem? Yer darn tootin. We're one of the teams that would have the ability to sign Shields after his contract expires, and you have to factor that in. We'd never have gotten him from the Rays, but now he's in play, and he's exactly the sort of pitcher it's safest to take an expensive risk on from our perspective.

 

And for clarification, I meant one of Webster and RdlR (not both), plus Bogaerts and 2 B+ prospects, which for an ace and a top young closer is a fair price to pay even if the bill makes you cringe. Heck, it makes me cringe, and it's still a fair price to pay.

 

I don't know if I would call him an ace. He might be the best pitcher for the Royals, but he would only have the third best ERA in our rotation (Buchholz and Lackey). If you don't want to include Buchholz because he hasn't been here all season, he still would not be our ace this year by looking at the numbers. I would consider him to be a good number two starter.

 

He might be durable and might be reliable, but for potentially only getting him for a year and a half, I don't think it is worth giving up our best positional prospect and best pitching prospect in return. I do know that you meant one of Webster or De La Rosa. I think it is insane to trade one of those two and Bogaerts in the same package for Shields and Holland. Not to mention you want to trade two more prospects.

 

Holland is a good, young closer, but we all know that closers come and go. Uehara has been effective. I think we can test the market for another closer/reliable arm that will not cost us our top prospects and a year and a half of Shields. I know we do not know what to expect from Brian Wilson, but he might be a realistic option to sign to be a reliable bullpen arm. He would not cost us any prospects.

 

If I remember correctly, those instant solutions for our closer problem have not worked out. Look at Bailey and Hanrahan. Not to mention, Melancon pitched s***** here. Uehara is doing good in the closing role. I would welcome any improvements, but not in this situation.

 

Our rotation has been strong, I don't think we have to trade top prospects for a SP who won't even be here for two years and a reliable closer. I am just thankful that you are not our GM. We would not even have a farm system. You have to think more than short-term.

[User Name]

Very convincing argument. You pretty much stated everything i wanted to. Not only is Shields not an ace, but Holland is not that good. Dojji has an inexplicable boner for Royals players that forces him to overrate them.

[SoxFanForsyth]

I'm not trading high for Garza. The extra risk of his injury history combined with the fact that his team will expect to be paid as if for a top of the line starter puts him comfortably outside my price range.

 

We're talking about replacing an injured starter. Durability needs to be the key word here, or all you get for your assets is two injured starters. Haven't we been down that road often enough to figure that out by now?

 

That doesn't necessarily mean Ervin Santana, who's the guy I want, but one guy it definitely does not mean is Matt Garza.

 

If we were trading big for a starting pitcher and putting our top guys on the line, I'd want nothing less than a true frontline guy. That being the case, I have to wonder -- if we dangled Bogaerts, who is incredibly valuable but honestly something of a luxury right now, is there any way we could bring James Shields to Boston? Sure, I'm going back to the KC well again, but I'm doing it because I think the teams line up fairly well. What KC has going spare tends to be pitching right now, and they're starving for offense, while what we have to trade is position players and position prospects, many with high offensive potential, and any major weaknesses we have are in pitching.

 

If I thought we could get both Shields AND Greg Holland, I would happily dangle Bogaerts plus Webster/RdlR plus Brentz plus one more prospect in the B+ range -- someone like Workman or Swihart. I'd expect that kind of offer to at least keep Dayton Moore on the phone. It would solve all our major evident problems in one fell swoop, and set us up for the future as well, and we can technically spare all of these prospects while fielding a highly competitive team.

 

Considering they're unlikely to keep James beyond next year I have to think that offer would keep KC on the phone even with all they've invested in "Big Game James" and considering that we'd get an additional year out of him, and he's one of the most durable and reliable starters in major league baseball, I'd have no problem knocking the doors off Kauffman Stadium to get him.

 

Yugh. Reading this made me want to vomit. Thankfully, Ben is the GM and not you right now. That's not a personal attack, but if you want give up Bogaerts for anything less than Kershaw or Stanton, you're out of your freaking mind, especially calling Bogaerts a surplus because of a .470 BABIP fueled run by Iglesias.

 

By the way have you noticed that we have Brandon Snyder playing?!? Bogaerts is NOT a surplus

[SoxFanForsyth]

Point blank: 2013 is a competitive bridge year to future sustained success from our farm. I, like many others, am thrilled with the team this year, and I think we can make a deep playoff push.

 

But this isn't the team that were building. The team that were building towards has Bogaerts at SS, Bradley in CF or LF, Webster, Ranaudo, Barnes, RDLR, and Barnes in the rotation or bullpen (not all of them, some will be used for trades and rightfully so). That's the team you build for.

 

We cannot cannot cannot splurge in our pants because we have a good team without clubhouse issues for the first time in the past 5-6 years and go make this a short term run rather than making it a long term sustained run.

 

Do not trade Bogaerts. Do not trade Bradley. We can trade one of the pitchers because they're not all going to pan out and we do have an abundance, but do not overpay for something.

 

Cant find anything on the market? You've got Aceves, Workman, Britton, RDLR, and Webster as rotation and bullpen depth. That's as good as most anything you're going to find on the market without mortgaging the future.

 

Don't. Splurge. Your. Pants.

[Rick Ross]

Even though Uehara has stepped in well as the closer, I feel the Sox need another reliever. That being said, I doubt giving up prospects is a Ben Cherington thing. It's not worth to rid of Bogearts or Cecchini to get a starter in this market, either.

 

The only upgrades that the Red Sox need right now are in the pitching. Even if Buchholz comes back, we may have another injury bug in the works that can pop out any time this season. I suggest giving up a mid-level prospect like Holt due to the amount of depth we have at first base (and possibly another lower-level C prospect) in order to receive someone like Travis Wood. He's been a solid pitcher for the Cubs so far, he keeps ground ball rates high and walk rates low, at 2.6 per 9 IP. He doesn't strike out too many batters at 6.5 per 9 IP this year, but he's known to be a smart guy. His off-speed stuff has a lot of movement; the only problem is, I don't know if he's on the trading block.

[jung]

Well I guess there is what we think the Sox should do and there is what they will do. I think it very likely that BC will do the thing least likely to disturb future plans while providing something of an answer to this year's issues. To me, that says he will try to bring in a reliever regardless of the alternatives we have in the system now.

 

As for a starter...we have a real dilemma here. It is impractical to stash a front line pitcher someplace in the system just in case. Nobody expends money that way. The recent news on Buch is pretty good. Sounds like he will make it back after all. At least the timeline he is on now suggests that the Sox will know by trade deadline. Replacing Buch is a whole different deal though. Who replaces one of the two best starting pitchers of the first half...It will surely cost something if we really try to bring in a stud. However that is a hole at that point that BC will likely have no choice but to fill.

[seabeachfred]

I would only trade Bogey or Bradley (not the two of them under any circumstances) only if we are talking about an ace pitcher, a No. 1, a horse. Since none of those on the market this talk of any trade for those "B" boys in my opinion is both premature and ridiculous. Who is going to trade us an ace anyway?

[Standing Room]

Yugh. Reading this made me want to vomit. Thankfully, Ben is the GM and not you right now. That's not a personal attack, but if you want give up Bogaerts for anything less than Kershaw or Stanton, you're out of your freaking mind, especially calling Bogaerts a surplus because of a .470 BABIP fueled run by Iglesias.

 

By the way have you noticed that we have Brandon Snyder playing?!? Bogaerts is NOT a surplus

 

I agree with everything you said. The idea that our best prospect is a surplus is ridiculous.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Wonder if the Jays would listen on Bautista? He could be a 3B option

[rjortiz]

Wonder if the Jays would listen on Bautista? He could be a 3B option

 

Love the idea, but I think they'd want Bogaerts in any deal for him.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Love the idea, but I think they'd want Bogaerts in any deal for him.

 

Yeah I was thinking if we could go like Cecchini Ranaudo and Brentz or something like that, it may be worth it, but that likely wouldn't get it done

[rjortiz]

Yeah I was thinking if we could go like Cecchini Ranaudo and Brentz or something like that, it may be worth it, but that likely wouldn't get it done

 

The Blue Jays signed him to a pretty good deal, but these are the ideas the Red Sox should be pursuing. No Michael Youngs at the deadline.

[seabeachfred]

Well we all have our peccadillos Forsythe. I've been panned for my wish to get Matt Garza on our staff. Even my close friends on this board look at me weird when I say it, but I think Dojii and others have people they think will help the team. Even my sometimes foil User was beating the drums for Koji to be out closer early on. Of course, he seems to have struck gold with that at the moment. To me Garza is what we could use; for Dojii he likes Santana. Whoever can help the Red Sox is just fine with me as long as we don't have to give the store away to get them.

 

You say go to tomorrow's game? I have to make a decision in the next minute or two. My wife Linda just suggested I go to both games. Whatever, wish me and the team luck.

[jung]

Want Joey Bats....get WMB to stop expanding the strike zone and be as selective as Bats and BANG....Joey Bats without the leg lift start to the swing.

[rjortiz]

If you look at the roster, the Red Sox don't have a lot of holes. The only place they could conceivably use an upgrade is at 3B, but they have internal options that look just as good as what the trade market can offer. Nava is slumping a bit, but he's still been very good against RHP, and Gomes is starting to swing the bat.

 

We could use a few bullpen arms, but again internal options might be the better route. De La Rosa and Webster could be very good options out of the bullpen. I don't think we should be looking for a closer, but rather fifth or sixth options out of the pen. The rotation has been very solid. Lackey and Buchholz can anchor the front. Dempster, Doubront, and Lester are pretty good options for the back end of the rotation. I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but the only weakness I could possibly see from this team is not having an elite third option for the postseason.

[rjortiz]

Want Joey Bats....get WMB to stop expanding the strike zone and be as selective as Bats and BANG....Joey Bats without the leg lift start to the swing.

 

Middlebrooks' raw power isn't even in the same stratosphere as Bautista's.

[jung]

WMB has no shortage of power...just no idea what to do with it. Bats might have a bit more power but it is not worlds different. Bats just puts great swings on the ball because he knows what he can hit and what he can't hit. WMB swings at pitches he can't hit with a boat oar. Edited July 6, 2013 by jung

[rjortiz]

WMB has no shortage of power...just no idea what to do with it. Bats might have a bit more power but it is not worlds different. Bats just puts great swings on the ball because he knows what he can hit and what he can't hit. WMB swings a pitches he can't hit with a boat oar.

 

There aren't many players with an 80 power grade, but Bautista is definitely one of them. He has 40-50 HR power. Middlebrooks is definitely a step below that. If you're super optimistic, he probably grades out at 70.

[Dojji]

I agree with everything you said. The idea that our best prospect is a surplus is ridiculous.

 

I didn't say surplus. There's a difference between a surplus and a luxury. It's all the difference between a player who's unnecessary, and a player who you can do without if there's a good reason to. We can fill our spots going forward without Bogaerts which means that if you have a deal that you're convinced makes a big enough impact to the team, it's fine to pull the trigger.

 

What I see in this thread is a whole bunch of people underestimating the HELL out of James Shields. He would have a huge positive impact to this team if you could get him away from KC. I'd easily count on him down the stretch or in the playoffs far more than I'd count on Clay "Blink And He's Injured Again" Buchholz or John "Do We Even Remember The Last 3 Years" Lackey even if the latter two techincally have a higher ERA. None of Buchholz, Lester or Lackey deserve pride of place over Shields if he were brought in, as all have been too inconsistent, and all but Lester have been far less durable. If I'm trading high for a guy over the short term, he'd better make all his starts. Quality is almost secondary to that, and Shield's quality is very high anyway.

 

And need I remind you once again, Shields is proven in the AL East. That's worth something right there.

Edited July 6, 2013 by Dojji

[jung]

There aren't many players with an 80 power grade, but Bautista is definitely one of them. He has 40-50 HR power. Middlebrooks is definitely a step below that. If you're super optimistic, he probably grades out at 70.

 

They may have to come up with a new category for Davis using that rocking chair swing with that two ton, heavy barrel bat. All kinds of ways to skin the cat I guess.

[rjortiz]

I didn't say surplus. There's a difference between a surplus and a luxury. It's all the difference between a player who's unnecessary, and a player who you can do without if there's a good reason to. We can fill our spots going forward without Bogaerts which means that if you have a deal that you're convinced makes a big enough impact to the team, it's fine to pull the trigger.

 

What I see in this thread is a whole bunch of people underestimating the HELL out of James Shields. He would have a huge positive impact to this team if you could get him away from KC. I'd easily count on him down the stretch or in the playoffs far more than I'd count on Clay "Blink And He's Injured Again" Buchholz or John "Do We Even Remember The Last 3 Years" Lackey even if the latter two techincally have a higher ERA. None of Buchholz, Lester or Lackey deserve pride of place over Shields if he were brought in, as all have been too inconsistent, and all but Lester have been far less durable. If I'm trading high for a guy over the short term, he'd better make all his starts. Quality is almost secondary to that, and Shield's quality is very high anyway.

 

And need I remind you once again, Shields is proven in the AL East. That's worth something right there.

 

Shields is a great pitcher, but he only has 1 1/2 year of team control left. Getting those two would unquestionably improve the team in the short term, but I think we're sacrificing too much cost-controlled talent to make that deal.

[rjortiz]

I actually don't mind trading the other three, but I don't think you trade potential 30+ HR SS's who is under team control for six years for a pitcher about to hit free agency. Shields isn't even a top 15 pitcher. Edited July 6, 2013 by rjortiz

[jacksonianmarch]

Shields doesn't hit FA until after 2014

[User Name]

Shields doesn't hit FA until after 2014

 

You mean 1 1/2 years from now, like every post mentioning the subject above you has suggested? Read plz

[jacksonianmarch]

You mean 1 1/2 years from now, like every post mentioning the subject above you has suggested? Read plz

 

Take your Midol there champ. I was responding to rjortiz saying that he didn't want to deal away Bogaerts for a guy about to hit FA

[User Name]

Shields is a great pitcher, but he only has 1 1/2 year of team control left. Getting those two would unquestionably improve the team in the short term, but I think we're sacrificing too much cost-controlled talent to make that deal.

 

From rjortiz. That time you spent telling me to take a pill that you oh so badly need could have been spent reading. Take a midol and read plz.

[Standing Room]

From rjortiz. That time you spent telling me to take a pill that you oh so badly need could have been spent reading. Take a midol and read plz.

 

Jackso hasn't had the opportunity to embarrass himself in days, he's just making up for lost time.

[Spitball]

Scott Feldman and Ricky Nolasco have now been traded for pretty much crap. The market has apparently been set in the buyer's favor.

[Standing Room]

Scott Feldman and Ricky Nolasco have now been traded for pretty much crap. The market has apparently been set in the buyer's favor.

 

Feldman and Nolasco were traded for crap because they're crap pitchers. A quality pitcher like Garza will cost more.