Can Mike Carp be the Sox full time 1B in 2014

[mvp 78]

If that starts again I will be...displeased.

 

Isn't that why there's a 5 character minimum?

[SoxFanForsyth]

Can I start saying 'child please'?

[Youk Of The Nation]

No. No one is allowed to say anything catchphrase-y anymore. You must all communicate entirely in either lojban or uploaded videos of you using American Sign Language. Navajo is also acceptable.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Alright, I claim 'Navajo' as my new catchphrase.

[VA Sox Fan]

Can I start saying 'child please'?

 

No. No one is allowed to say anything catchphrase-y anymore. You must all communicate entirely in either lojban or uploaded videos of you using American Sign Language. Navajo is also acceptable.

 

But I SO LOVE "Child please" It allows me to be PC, which I hate!

[sk7326]

IMO what the Sox have done this year is at least as hard as dealing with a couple of juggernauts. It really takes a special bunch of modern baseball players, most of them with guaranteed contracts to have been as steadfastly dedicated to this process of generating offense. I would not take what we have seen this year and use it to determine that simply plugging in more mid-tier players will work as well.

 

Sox will probably be left having to determine if even they can continue like this in 2014 or beyond...... a thousand more pitches looked at than the next best team in that regard...are you kidding me???? A guy being a mid-tier player is no guarantee that he will sign up and agree to buy into what has been an almost team-wide adherence to a process and a plate approach. Not sure there is a formula for what they are doing....they surely did not expect it either.

 

1. I suspect they expected more than what the fans and media were expecting. There was a lot of "worst possible outcomes" that came true with a lot of these guys the last year plus. We did not need guys to be amazing - to just be a version of their normal selves. (that certainly held with Ellsbury, Pedroia)

 

2. This is the formula they had in 2003, 2004 too - really 2012 was the first major departure from a very on-base centric approach. It is less about some sort of adherence to a philosophy than it is signing players who are wired that way already. Some guys just want to take the bat off their shoulder, and coaching can only do so much.

 

3. Mid-tier starters are dicey, I agree. But what we have seen across baseball over and over again is that you can efficiently cobble together solid platoons from cheaper guys. That has been the team's masterstroke this season - effectively using platoons to wallpaper over their weak spots.

 

What is funny is that a lot of this sort of stuff is really just an extension of stuff Earl Weaver knew and espoused many moons ago.

[mvp 78]

"Baby s*** the tub again!"

[User Name]

You can only resign a 40 year old so many times.

 

You're getting one of the best hitters in the game at the age of 23 and building around him and Bogaerts, along w WMB and Bradley.

 

I don't see how looking 1 year in the future is ridiculous.

 

It's exactly because you're only looking at one year in the future. He's a great hitter, but he has legitimate injury issues and would cost way more than what the Sox should be willing to pay. You forget all about the "big picture" and "the future" or "keeping a healthy, productive farm system" as soon as you see a guy with star power who you like. First Cliff Lee, now Stanton. They're not a fit.

[SoxFanForsyth]

It's exactly because you're only looking at one year in the future. He's a great hitter, but he has legitimate injury issues and would cost way more than what the Sox should be willing to pay. You forget all about the "big picture" and "the future" or "keeping a healthy, productive farm system" as soon as you see a guy with star power who you like. First Cliff Lee, now Stanton. They're not a fit.

 

I never wanted to sell the farm for Lee.

 

Stanton? That's different.

 

There's a balance between being insanely over-stingy with your prospects and selling the farm for anyone. You're on the overly stingy side.

 

Stanton is a guy you do give up a lot for. And we would still have Bogaerts, Bradley, Owens, Ball, Vazquez, Webster, Barnes, etc.

 

Yeah you're giving up talent but it's redundant talent, like I said earlier.

 

Stanton is precisely the player you go after and deal your surplus for.

[User Name]

Problematic assumptions:

 

A) That the Marlins give up Stanton for that package.

 

B ) The fact that the talent is "redundant".

 

C) That Stanton, if A & B apply, stays healthy and productive enough to justify the trade.

 

Sounds like a whole lot of ? and very little certainty.

 

In the end, this is a wet dream that, like Lee, is just not going to happen.

[VJCPatriot]

If Napoli gets hot and puts up big power numbers down the stretch, they might re-sign him. If not, he's not worth $13 miilion/year. Carp could get a shot, maybe even Nava.

 

LOL Nava at 1st base?? He'll be lucky to hit 10 homeruns per year, no less 20. And at age 30, he ain't getting a whole lot better than what he just gave this year. He's a good roleplayer, but you're in trouble if Nava is a starter for you.

 

Maybe we'll look at some free agents. Its tough to find a young power hitter at 1b who would be available. Gotta look at teams with an excess of players/prospects at that position. That's how we landed Salty, eventually.

 

Maybe we can deal with the As or the Pirates to nab one of their top 1b prospects. Apparently they are both two deep in top 10 1b prospects. Miles Head and Matt Olson As. Alex Dickerson and Matt Curry Pirates.

 

http://www.scoutingbook.com/prospects/1b

[SoxFanForsyth]

Problematic assumptions:

 

A) That the Marlins give up Stanton for that package.

 

B ) The fact that the talent is "redundant".

 

C) That Stanton, if A & B apply, stays healthy and productive enough to justify the trade.

 

Sounds like a whole lot of ? and very little certainty.

 

In the end, this is a wet dream that, like Lee, is just not going to happen.

 

A. That would be the best package the Marlins would get offered, mainly because that's better than any other group of prospects that other teams have.

 

B. Betts? Pedroia. Cecchini? Middlebrooks. Ranaudo? Barnes, Owens, Ball, Workman, Webster. Swihart? Vazquez, Lavarnway, Denney, not to mention if we sign Salty or McCann.

 

C. Every single player has injury risks. Given, Stanton has had a couple of short stints on the DL, fine, if that's going to keep you from a 40+ HR bat, that's fine. But that's pretty ridiculous if you ask me. He's certainly not guaranteed to be on the DL at all, and playing LF at Fenway would alleviate a lot of running and potential injuries.

 

It's funny how you always make these definitive statements at the end "it's not going to happen" like you somehow have this connection to Ben Cherrington's earpiece.

 

Fact is, you have absolutely no idea whether it will happen or not.

 

But, oh wait. Isn't this article funny? http://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2013/7/30/4571540/mlb-trade-rumors-giancarlo-stanton-red-sox-deadline

 

"Boston will give up whatever it takes to net Giancarlo Stanton"

 

But no, you probably know better than all of the sources.

 

Child please.

[User Name]

Yeah just like they got Cliff Lee right? You're the one who's making these assumptions that they'll acquire these players based on ridiculous media speculation with zero regard for the other team's involvement or the Sox' actual needs. The Marlins are not a feeding tube for the Sox. They literally have no reason to trade Stanton right now with the lowest possible leverage after an injury-filled, sub par season. But don't let a silly thing like logic or common sense stop you from pursuing your Stanton wet dream. I don't need a "direct line" to BC in order to see that something is simply not going to happen. At least not now, since they could always sign him as a FA without giving up half the farm system.

 

Care to make a sig wager like you did with Jacko? Let's see how incorrect my "definitive statements" are.

 

Please stop.

 

Also: A) Lol No.

 

B ) You know that's not how it works, the importance of depth in the farm system for plugging holes other than the ones THE TEAM DOESN'T HAVE is pretty important.

 

C) Even though every player has injury risks, Stanton has played less than 130 games two years in a row. That both gives teams pause about his overall health status and diminishes the Marlin's bargaining power. In what universe is that a perfect storm for a Stanton trade?

[Palodios]

"Boston will give up whatever it takes to net Giancarlo Stanton"

 

If that is the case, then why are Bogaertz + Bradley + company here, and Stanton still in Miami? The Red Sox had enough pieces to overwhelm Miami, but it didn't happen.

 

I think you don't understand exactly what kind of prospect + financial cost Stanton would be. Especially considering that Napoli can give almost near-same production as him for significantly less, and less risk. This debate will go around in circles from here, I think.

[User Name]

....and he'll stay in Miami

[SoxFanForsyth]

Yeah just like they got Cliff Lee right? You're the one who's making these assumptions that they'll acquire these players based on ridiculous media speculation with zero regard for the other team's involvement or the Sox' actual needs. The Marlins are not a feeding tube for the Sox. They literally have no reason to trade Stanton right now with the lowest possible leverage after an injury-filled, sub par season. But don't let a silly thing like logic or common sense stop you from pursuing your Stanton wet dream. I don't need a "direct line" to BC in order to see that something is simply not going to happen. At least not now, since they could always sign him as a FA without giving up half the farm system.

 

Care to make a sig wager like you did with Jacko? Let's see how incorrect my "definitive statements" are.

 

Please stop.

 

Also: A) Lol No.

 

B ) You know that's not how it works, the importance of depth in the farm system for plugging holes other than the ones THE TEAM DOESN'T HAVE is pretty important.

 

C) Even though every player has injury risks, Stanton has played less than 130 games two years in a row. That both gives teams pause about his overall health status and diminishes the Marlin's bargaining power. In what universe is that a perfect storm for a Stanton trade?

 

1. Yes, the Marlins are going to sit on Stanton and wait until he's got less team control before they trade him. That's how they'll get the most value! Right? Right?!? Wait. No, that's completely wrong. The Marlins have teams standing at the door trying to get him. The Phillies have "tried to trade for him at least 10 times" according to Ruben Amaro Jr. Doesn't sound like that ankle injury has really suppressed his value huh? Tack that on to the report that the Red Sox will "give whatever it takes" to trade for him, and I'm pretty sure his value hasn't been affected. So maybe you do need a bit more of a direct line to Ben Cherrington to know what he's thinking.

 

But don't let silly logic involving, oh, I don't know, years of team control before an inevitable 9 figure deal get in the way of your opinion.

 

2. No, I'm not making a sig bet, not without proper odds. The chances are that the Sox and Marlins don't make the deal. But that doesn't mean that they won't have some very strong discussions about it, and that the Sox are just "not interested".

 

I'll make a sig bet with you that there a lot of reports of the Sox and Marlins discussing a deal for Stanton this offseason. That would go against everything you say because you're saying the deal makes no sense for the Sox, so why would they even discuss?

[SoxFanForsyth]

If that is the case, then why are Bogaertz + Bradley + company here, and Stanton still in Miami? The Red Sox had enough pieces to overwhelm Miami, but it didn't happen.

 

I think you don't understand exactly what kind of prospect + financial cost Stanton would be. Especially considering that Napoli can give almost near-same production as him for significantly less, and less risk. This debate will go around in circles from here, I think.

 

The Marlins were inquired of about 100 times regarding Stanton at the deadline, and every time they got the same answer "not interested". Wouldn't even listen on him for now.

 

Joel Sherman

‏@Joelsherman1

Hear #Rangers #Pirates particularly call #Marlins often on Stanton, told no. Word is ownership decision, Loria doesn't want to move Stanton

 

From Ken Rosenthal:

 

The Rangers ask the Marlins for Giancarlo Stanton "every week," a Major League source tells Rosenthal, and keep hearing "no."

 

This is all from the deadline, but considering Stanton's outspokenness about not exactly enjoying his time in Miami, they're almost certain to trade him because they won't be able to resign him.

[marklmw]

If that is the case, then why are Bogaertz + Bradley + company here, and Stanton still in Miami? The Red Sox had enough pieces to overwhelm Miami, but it didn't happen.

 

I think you don't understand exactly what kind of prospect + financial cost Stanton would be. Especially considering that Napoli can give almost near-same production as him for significantly less, and less risk. This debate will go around in circles from here, I think.

 

Obviously we would all take Stanton on our team but it all comes down to the right price. The whole idea of building a farm system is not only to bring some of the players up to the Boston Red Sox but also to use for trades. If we have players that are blocked it is better to deal them then when their value is high to fill a need. Lars Anderson comes to mind. Although the Sox have plenty of offense now I can appreciate what Stanton may bring to the club long term. We have a big void to fill when Papi hangs them up. So it is not out of the question that Sox will go after him but I would image and Bogaerts and Bradley would not be part of any package. At age 26 Abreu seems like the perfect fit for Boston.

[User Name]

We're going in circles here. Only time will tell, but don't be disappointed if it doesn't happen, because it's very likely that it won't. The stars have to align pretty well for the Sox to get Stanton, and you're oversimplifying the situation for the sake of pushing your argument.

 

It really isn't that simple, as Palodios stated above. You get like this every time a big-ticket player becomes available, and it's very unlikely the Sox go down that road again after the clusterf*** that were the Gonzales/Crawford acquisition.

[SoxFanForsyth]

We're going in circles here. Only time will tell, but don't be disappointed if it doesn't happen, because it's very likely that it won't. The stars have to align pretty well for the Sox to get Stanton, and you're oversimplifying the situation for the sake of pushing your argument.

 

It really isn't that simple, as Palodios stated above. You get like this every time a big-ticket player becomes available, and it's very unlikely the Sox go down that road again after the clusterf*** that were the Gonzales/Crawford acquisition.

 

I'm fine with everything you say here except for comparing it to the AGon/Crawford acquisitions.

 

It's not even in the same area code, particularly with Crawford, but also AGon was 29, not 23, and had 1 year remaining on his deal. Plus he was coming off shoulder surgery that suppressed his power.

[User Name]

I'm talking the financial commitment, not talent level or age. For the trade to make sense, the Sox would have to lock up Stanton long term, and it'd take some serious money/years to do it.

[SoxFanForsyth]

I'm talking the financial commitment, not talent level or age. For the trade to make sense, the Sox would have to lock up Stanton long term, and it'd take some serious money/years to do it.

 

So you don't think the Red Sox will drop any more 9 figure contracts? If they were ever to do it, this is the type of player they would commit to.

[User Name]

I think they will eventually, but they will probably be a lot more stingy about it. I think they're serious about their "build from within, complement from outside" philosophy. If Stanton was a FA, they'd be all over him, but the $$$ + prospects combination is very rich.

 

To be honest, i think Choo is more up their alley and would not be surprised to see them sign him if Boras drops those ridiculous demands.

[marklmw]

So you don't think the Red Sox will drop any more 9 figure contracts? If they were ever to do it, this is the type of player they would commit to.

While the Gonzalez contact was excessive it was the Crawford contract that was boneheaded and not well thought out. Stanton is more useful and beneficial to Bostons future. Crawford was not a need. We already had our 1-5 line-up in tact when we signed him.

[SoxFanForsyth]

I think they will eventually, but they will probably be a lot more stingy about it. I think they're serious about their "build from within, complement from outside" philosophy. If Stanton was a FA, they'd be all over him, but the $$$ + prospects combination is very rich.

 

To be honest, i think Choo is more up their alley and would not be surprised to see them sign him if Boras drops those ridiculous demands.

 

If they're goign to spend on Choo, they may as well spend on Ellsbury. At least you know Ellsbury fits well here.

 

Choo, though, is on OBP machine. Not sure his power would play at Fenway, but he hit 20 HR this year and has a .424 OBP, which is kind of outrageous, with 20 SB.

 

He may get more money than Ellsbury to be honest.

[marklmw]

I think they will eventually, but they will probably be a lot more stingy about it. I think they're serious about their "build from within, complement from outside" philosophy. If Stanton was a FA, they'd be all over him, but the $$$ + prospects combination is very rich.

 

To be honest, i think Choo is more up their alley and would not be surprised to see them sign him if Boras drops those ridiculous demands.

 

Boras is rediculous but the guy wins for his clients more than he loses. He as on record saying that he can get more than 5 years for Choo. Plain stupid.

[User Name]

That depends on what both want. And a lot depends on what happens with Napoli/Drew. I would not be entirely surprised if the Sox ended up with both Choo/Ellsbury, or neither of them. Choo is likely to get more money because he's a better overall ballplayer, but he's older.

[mvp 78]

Choo also sucks as a CF and would need to move to a corner OF. Personally, I love Victorino in RF, so don't really want to move him.

UN?, you thinking Choo in LF, JBJ in CF?

[SoxFanForsyth]

Choo also sucks as a CF and would need to move to a corner OF. Personally, I love Victorino in RF, so don't really want to move him.

UN?, you thinking Choo in LF, JBJ in CF?

 

This is what I would think. Choo would also make a very solid leadoff hitter with his OBP.

[User Name]

An OF of Choo/JBJ/Vic or Choo/Ellsbury/Vic would be the terror of all things flying.