Giancarlo Stanton?

[SoxSport]

They can't keep Bradley down in the minors too long--it wrecked Kalish injured in Pawtucket when he should have been in Boston. Bradley is their 5 tool guy in the future. And the future is now.

[User Name]

^This is some really dumb revisionist history. Kalish is fragile, and would have likely gotten injured at the ML level too. Please stop.

[mvp 78]

It is some terrible logic.

[Bellhorn04]

They can't keep Bradley down in the minors too long--it wrecked Kalish injured in Pawtucket when he should have been in Boston. Bradley is their 5 tool guy in the future. And the future is now.

 

Yeah, playing in Boston is much safer for outfielders. Just ask Ellsbury.

[sk7326]

He is definitely the plan for Ellsbury's departure - I am expecting Ellsbury to be gone. Bradley to me has less ceiling, but chance for elite defense, already has an excellent batting eye (even with a .133 BA he was getting on base as much as WMB) and solid in the other areas. Yeah he is probably not a 50+ SB sort, but that matters way less than it seems.

 

Also remember he had like 61 PA above single-A entering this season. The time to just get reps has helped.

[Dojji]

I wouldn't be shocked if Ellsbury and the Red Sox managed to get something done.

 

Would be a nice problem to have.

[Bellhorn04]

I wouldn't be shocked if Ellsbury and the Red Sox managed to get something done.

 

Would be a nice problem to have.

 

I would be shocked. As good a player as he is, economically it just doesn't work with Bradley as his replacement.

 

Also don't forget we just added $15 million to next year's payroll with Peavy.

[Palodios]

I would be shocked. As good a player as he is, economically it just doesn't work with Bradley as his replacement.

 

Also don't forget we just added $15 million to next year's payroll with Peavy.

 

The payroll next year will definitely still be flexible. Even with Pedroia's new deal, and Peavy, they're losing 10 million on Drew, 7 million on Hanrahan, 4 million on Bailey. The 10 million they spent on Ellsbury this year could go straight back to him.

 

Plus, if they go deep into the playoffs, they'll pull a good amount of money back in to reinvest, and might be worth to surpass the luxury tax again (which goes up 10+ million anyway). All that being said, I see them giving him a qualifying offer, and moving on since there are already 2 other solid CF options in the organization.

[User Name]

I think it won't be as flexible as you predict. They'll need a catcher (hopefully not Salty), 1B, and several BP arms to fill out next year's roster even if they swap JBJ for Ellsbury at CF.

[Lord Snow]

I wouldn't be shocked if Ellsbury and the Red Sox managed to get something done.

 

Would be a nice problem to have.

 

I think it all depends on how the market shakes out. If Ellsbury is willing to sign for $15M/year or less I think he stays. If somebody decides to give him Carl Crawford money then he is gone gone GONE!

[SeanJohn93]

I would not want the sox to trade for him. If we look at the St. Louis cardinals, you will see that baseball America has them ranked as the best farm system in the game with the sox not far behind. They ate competitive this year and have prospects in the wings that are ready to keep the team championship caliber for years to come. I would much rather have a mix of quality players both pitching and positional than to give up all that for one player who is injury prone.

[Palodios]

I think it won't be as flexible as you predict. They'll need a catcher (hopefully not Salty), 1B, and several BP arms to fill out next year's roster even if they swap JBJ for Ellsbury at CF.

 

I don't agree that the Red Sox need several bullpen arms. The only current RP free agent is Uehara, and I seriously doubt they'll let him go unless he retires. Taz, Miller, Breslow are under contract. They'd probably want to add one more guy for the bullpen, but they have a lot of depth beyond that.

 

The Sox's farm system and depth has been overflowing. For SP/RP options they have Morales, Wilson, Britton, RDLR, Wright, Workman, Ranaudo, Webster all for low salaries. If Buchholz is healthy, they have another arm available as well.

 

Assuming they don't trade a pitcher, they're probably around 130 million. That's 50 million under the cap. Unless they make a serious run at one of the high-cost players, they have plenty of room.

[User Name]

I don't agree that the Red Sox need several bullpen arms. The only current RP free agent is Uehara, and I seriously doubt they'll let him go unless he retires. Taz, Miller, Breslow are under contract. They'd probably want to add one more guy for the bullpen, but they have a lot of depth beyond that.

 

The Sox's farm system and depth has been overflowing. For SP/RP options they have Morales, Wilson, Britton, RDLR, Wright, Workman, Ranaudo, Webster all for low salaries. If Buchholz is healthy, they have another arm available as well.

 

Assuming they don't trade a pitcher, they're probably around 130 million. That's 50 million under the cap. Unless they make a serious run at one of the high-cost players, they have plenty of room.

 

Remember arb raises, injury limbo for Miller, and i was counting Uehara as one of the BP arms they need to replace, even if they bring him back. I doubt they'll convert any more starters to the BP unless RDLR completely implodes Also, they still have to fill up C and 1B. Color me surprised if next year's payroll is not slightly higher than this year's. It's still below the cap, but does not afford for significant flexibility.

[Brock Holt]

I think the OF situation is going to be very interesting next season. If I'm the Sox, I try as hard as possible to re-sign Ellsbury. If they do re-sign Ellsbury, where does JBJ play though? LF? Another year in the minors? is he trade bait?

[SeanJohn93]

I was surprised the sox didn't go after Luke Gregerson from San Diego

[Northern Star]

Write down, on paper, the estimated production from Stanton in Boston, vs the estimated production of the players we are giving up. I don't see the value, assuming Xander is part of the deal, for 2 seasons and then what? $200 mil contract?

[Northern Star]

I think the OF situation is going to be very interesting next season. If I'm the Sox, I try as hard as possible to re-sign Ellsbury. If they do re-sign Ellsbury, where does JBJ play though? LF? Another year in the minors? is he trade bait?

 

Ells is simply not worth it. Replace him with JBJ and move on.

[Palodios]

Remember arb raises, injury limbo for Miller, and i was counting Uehara as one of the BP arms they need to replace, even if they bring him back. I doubt they'll convert any more starters to the BP unless RDLR completely implodes Also, they still have to fill up C and 1B. Color me surprised if next year's payroll is not slightly higher than this year's. It's still below the cap, but does not afford for significant flexibility.

 

I doubt the Red Sox will go big on C/1B. If they do go for McCann, I think they'll want to split his bat between C and 1B, alternating Lavs/Ross and Nava/Carp at those positions, with Vazquez and Brentz in the minors as depth. Personally, I bet they go with Salty/Morales or Salty/Napoli at first next year.

[Northern Star]

On the other side of this, the Marlins do love their salary dumps, so maybe the return for Stanton would not have to be that significant.

[win red sox]

I don't agree that the Red Sox need several bullpen arms. The only current RP free agent is Uehara, and I seriously doubt they'll let him go unless he retires. Taz, Miller, Breslow are under contract. They'd probably want to add one more guy for the bullpen, but they have a lot of depth beyond that.

 

The Sox's farm system and depth has been overflowing. For SP/RP options they have Morales, Wilson, Britton, RDLR, Wright, Workman, Ranaudo, Webster all for low salaries. If Buchholz is healthy, they have another arm available as well.

 

Assuming they don't trade a pitcher, they're probably around 130 million. That's 50 million under the cap. Unless they make a serious run at one of the high-cost players, they have plenty of room.

 

koji has one more arb, won't be a free agent until 2015.

[User Name]

Yeah just saw that on Cot's. Thought it was a mistake.

[sk7326]

The payroll next year will definitely still be flexible. Even with Pedroia's new deal, and Peavy, they're losing 10 million on Drew, 7 million on Hanrahan, 4 million on Bailey. The 10 million they spent on Ellsbury this year could go straight back to him.

 

Plus, if they go deep into the playoffs, they'll pull a good amount of money back in to reinvest, and might be worth to surpass the luxury tax again (which goes up 10+ million anyway). All that being said, I see them giving him a qualifying offer, and moving on since there are already 2 other solid CF options in the organization.

 

Payroll is ALWAYS flexible (the owners can whine all they want, but ballpark is a license to print money and the TV station, better it go into the ballclub) - but not sure the money is best spend on resigning a 30 year old CF with injury history. If they could get him for 3 years, that is one thing - 5 years is a lot tougher. The financial commitment - who cares, not my money.

 

They will need bullpen arms next season - but they always do. But relievers are a dime a dozen, almost none of them are reliable year to year - so you are better off building a bullpen this way. If they wanted to put De La Rosa or Ranaudo in the bullpen, that would be great though low probability. (bullpen a good way to break in future starters) This is an area where Tampa has shown a lot of people - it's a lot more cost effective to sift through other team's garbage and random guys in the farm than expending any sort of long term effort on relievers.

[User Name]

Payroll is ALWAYS flexible (the owners can whine all they want, but ballpark is a license to print money and the TV station, better it go into the ballclub) -

 

Yeah this is really not how it works. There's a reason why luxury tax penalties are so steep right now. Staying under has become less a nice commodity and more a forceful obligation.

[sk7326]

Yeah this is really not how it works. There's a reason why luxury tax penalties are so steep right now. Staying under has become less a nice commodity and more a forceful obligation.

 

It is not how it works for teams without a relatively bottomless source of revenue. The Sox ain't the Rays here. They are just deciding how much profit they want and deciding accordingly. Granted it helps the "scrappy underdog" narrative, and it is good financial judgment. The money is there to make an Ellsbury deal happen - if it doesn't, that is a (completely justifiable) choice.

[mvp 78]

The Sox are portrayed as a scrappy underdog?

 

Their revenue is not bottomless.

[User Name]

In fact, if you analyze the data presented in Forbes (which includes a pretty good estimate of tv rmoney) the Red Sox aren't even top five in revenue. Implying that the Red Sox have a "bottomless revenue stream" is a major fallacy. They would certainly drop to the bottom tier in terms of revenue if they decided to be idiots and incur luxury tax penalties. There is no "we're poor" narrative, what does exist are members of the fanbase waaaaay overvaluing how much money the team and its assets produce.

[Bellhorn04]

In fact, if you analyze the data presented in Forbes (which includes a pretty good estimate of tv rmoney) the Red Sox aren't even top five in revenue. Implying that the Red Sox have a "bottomless revenue stream" is a major fallacy. They would certainly drop to the bottom tier in terms of revenue if they decided to be idiots and incur luxury tax penalties. There is no "we're poor" narrative, what does exist are members of the fanbase waaaaay overvaluing how much money the team and its assets produce.

 

The only Forbes revenue figures that I can find, from the 2013 Business of Baseball issue, show the Red Sox at #2 in 2012 gross revenue with 336 million, behind the Yankees at 471 million. But I have no idea what these numbers include or if there are other numbers.

[User Name]

The only Forbes revenue figures that I can find, from the 2013 Business of Baseball issue, show the Red Sox at #2 in 2012 gross revenue with 336 million, behind the Yankees at 471 million. But I have no idea what these numbers include or if there are other numbers.

 

If you go here: http://www.forbes.com/pictures/mlm45eidmk/1-new-york-yankees-5/

 

You'll find the operating income for each team (These are 2012 figures, since 2013 is under way). That's the true "revenue" that is earned from operating the team (after tax deductions, player expenses yada yada yada). The Red Sox had a 23.9 million operating income last year. This is inferior to the Cubs, Nationals, Astros, Orioles, Padres, Pirates and A's. The Yankees are a wild-card because no one knows exactly how much money they make from the YES network, but 2012 was not kind to them either way. The Angels and Dodgers join that team this year, and will certainly have a higher operating income than the Red Sox.

 

Also, you can reasonably assume that the Red Sox' overall operating income was boosted by the Dodgers deal, and you'll notice that smaller market teams with more conservative payroll inclinations are making more money overall than some of the big spenders. The Red Sox don't have infinite money. That notion, and the notion that they are cheap, is flat out incorrect.

[italstallianion]

I feel like trading for Stanton is like creating a problem just to solve it.

 

Just for argument's sake, is Stanton really that much better than Trout and Harper?

[User Name]

He's not better than either, and he wouldn't be worth the aggregate value of the prospects it would take to obtain him + a monster extension.