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

[SoxFanForsyth]

For any team other than the Marlins, I'd agree with you, but the Marlins are a shoestring budget operation and they don't like paying for players. They want that guy who they can start the clock on. That's what they've traded for every chance they get for decades, you know that's coming when you discuss a trade with the Marlins. At least you do if you've been paying attention.

 

If we were doing a deal with any of the 27 other teams we'd actually trade with, you'd be exactly right, but not the Marlins.

 

Add that facet of the marlins to the fact that for PR purposes they need a headliner coming back, someone they can immediately sell as their new face of the franchise, and the conclusion that the Marlins would demand Bogaerts or no deal, becomes inescapable.

 

Ranaudo is, what, 10-15 AAA starts away from being MLB ready? Cecchini will start the year in AAA. Betts and Swihart both will start the year in AA and could well advance to AAA by the end of the season, and be up by mid-2015.

 

And yes. The Marlins do need to trade him sooner rather than later. This is a guy who is going to absolutely demand a 25mm/year contract when he hits FA. The closer to FA you get, the less you get in prospects. That's simple.

 

Point blank, the offer that I proposed is the best offer they will get right now. And the offers are only going to go down in value the longer that the Marlins hang on to him.

[SoxFanForsyth]

The flaw in your argument is that Florida is not obliged to make a deal at all. They don't have to take the least awful deal. If they don't see a deal they like, they wait for someone to get twitchy and overpay at the deadline, and work on keeping Stanton if possible in the meanwhile. They have more than enough leverage that a team is not going to back them into a corner and force them to accept a small handful of B+ guys when that's not what their franchise needs from a Stanton deal..

 

The Marlins' target in a Stanton trade is someone they can sell as a true replacement for Stanton to keep the fans from checking out entirely over the fact that Stanton was traded at all. On our roster, that *is* Bogaerts, however you want to rationalize that it isn't. They aren't interested in "fair value" if "fair value" is 12-18 months away from big league time because 12-18 months of empty stadiums will be the direct result of that kind of trade.

 

So from Florida's perspective, looking at things through the window of their front office, value isn't the only consideration -- they want specific results from the trade. Bogaerts happens to fill that demand in a way no one else they can ask us for will do, and from this team with this extended roster, they will ask for or accept no one else other than Xander Bogaerts headlining a deal for Giancarlo Stanton, you can take that to the bank SFF. If you're not prepared to part with exactly Bogaerts, and no one other than Bogaerts, headlining the trade for Stanton, the Giancarlo Stanton pipe dream is exactly that. The Marlins have too little reason to accept the bag-o-goodies package and too much need for a headline guy for me to think any other creative/clever offer package gets it done this time.

 

This is ridiculous.

 

The Marlins aren't going to be like "Oh, you won't trade us Bogearts? Fine, we'll deal to another team and take a lesser package but get their best prospect".

 

That's silly reasoning by you.

[Dojji]

They don't need a guy who's half a year or more from being big league ready. They want a guy WHO IS ON THE ROSTER AND A STAR OF THE TEAM ON OPENING DAY.

 

Again, that would be a good package on any of the 27 teams we'd deal with other than Miami. The Marlins are limited in what they can accept for Stanton because of the unique demands a Stanton trade puts on their franchise. Loria will only accept players in a deal with 6 years of control going forward, that's a longstanding practice of the team under his ownership, and the franchise needs that centerpiece guy they can immediately start saying "Sure we broke our solemn promise to the fans, again, for the umpteenth time, by trading Stanton, but look at this great player we got back, he was so worth it!"

 

If they can't get that guy they're spiking themselves in the foot and destroying any shred of credibility they have left in their community, so they'll go hell for leather after that kind of deal even if it means throwing away a bag-o-goodies trade anyone else would accept to get him. Heck, your deal probably is better on paper, in a vacuum, but the Marlins are enough of a unique case that they'd still demand Bogaerts instead.

[Dojji]

This is ridiculous.

 

The Marlins aren't going to be like "Oh, you won't trade us Bogearts? Fine, we'll deal to another team and take a lesser package but get their best prospect".

 

That's silly reasoning by you.

 

No, it's silly reasoning by Miami, because you watch them do exactly that.

[SoxFanForsyth]

They don't need a guy who's half a year or more from being big league ready. They want a guy WHO IS ON THE ROSTER AND A STAR OF THE TEAM ON OPENING DAY.

 

Again, that would be a good package on any of the 27 teams we'd deal with other than Miami. The Marlins are limited in what they can accept for Stanton because of the unique demands a Stanton trade puts on their franchise. Loria will only accept players in a deal with 6 years of control going forward, that's a longstanding practice of the team under his ownership, and the franchise needs that centerpiece guy they can immediately start saying "Sure we broke our solemn promise to the fans, again, for the umpteenth time, by trading Stanton, but look at this great player we got back, he was so worth it!"

 

If they can't get that guy they're spiking themselves in the foot and destroying any shred of credibility they have left in their community, so they'll go hell for leather after that kind of deal even if it means throwing away a bag-o-goodies trade anyone else would accept to get him. Heck, your deal probably is better on paper, in a vacuum, but the Marlins are enough of a unique case that they'd still demand Bogaerts instead.

 

Because the Marlins are going to compete next year? Come on man. This is preposterous. You're implying that, only a year after dumping Reyes, Buehrle, etc, they're not going to make a trade that gives them players who are prime, young talents during the span when they will be most likely to compete because of bad PR??

 

I can't even comprehend your logic it's so fallible.

[Dojji]

Because the Marlins are going to compete next year? Come on man. This is preposterous. You're implying that, only a year after dumping Reyes, Buehrle, etc, they're not going to make a trade that gives them players who are prime, young talents during the span when they will be most likely to compete because of bad PR??

 

I can't even comprehend your logic it's so fallible.

 

Who said anything about competing? Who said the Marlins CARE about competing. they haven't shown yet that the concept of competing is even in their headspace, they just want a headline guy they can sell to the masses to keep trying to sell their brand of baseball in Miami, and if they're going to lose Stanton they want a similarly charismatic talent back. Anthony Ranaudo ain't it. Xander Bogaerts on the other hand might be.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Who said anything about competing? Who said the Marlins CARE about competing. they haven't shown yet that the concept of competing is even in their headspace, they just want a headline guy they can sell to the masses to keep trying to sell their brand of baseball in Miami, and if they're going to lose Stanton they want a similarly charismatic talent back. Anthony Ranaudo ain't it. Xander Bogaerts on the other hand might be.

 

If they wanted to sell tickets, they would have never traded Reyes Buehrle Johnson, and the entire crew that went to Toronto.

 

You're theory is completely contradictory to anything and everything they've done.

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

Who said anything about competing? Who said the Marlins CARE about competing. they haven't shown yet that the concept of competing is even in their headspace, they just want a headline guy they can sell to the masses to keep trying to sell their brand of baseball in Miami, and if they're going to lose Stanton they want a similarly charismatic talent back. Anthony Ranaudo ain't it. Xander Bogaerts on the other hand might be.

 

This is incredibly false, believe me.

[Dojji]

No, yours is. The closest thing to contradictory the Marlins have ever done to contraindicating their usual MO is BRINGING IN Reyes and Buehrle in the first place.

 

This is a team that stresses maximum PR bang for minimum ownership buck, and always has under Loria.

[SoxFanForsyth]

No, yours is. The closest thing to contradictory the Marlins have ever done to contraindicating their usual MO is BRINGING IN Reyes and Buehrle in the first place.

 

If they were more worried about attendance than about rebuilding, they wouldn't have traded all of those players for prospects. Period. That's it.

[Dojji]

If they were more worried about attendance than about rebuilding, they wouldn't have traded all of those players for prospects. Period. That's it.

 

you're still not seeing it because you're making the mistake of looking at the Marlins operation as an ordinary franchise and applying ordinary franchise assumptions to the Marlins MO. They don't act like an ordinary franchise, and the reason why is the owner. Jeff Loria will not pay for talent, at all, ever, and that leaves the FO to try to make the best them they can with NO money spent. in order to provoke some kind of attendance in any given year. The FO does care about both PR and attendance, as well as rebuilding, but they are given NO money to work with. The reason that seems illogical to you is because it is. However, Loria does not care for your puny logic. He's there to skim as much money out of the lucrative Florida market as he can without sinking or reinvesting any money into it ever, leaving the actual baseball people to make as much of the situation as they can.

 

There's also the fact that the ownership and the FO have sworn not to trade Bogaerts, and their credibility gap with the fans is bad enough to begin with right now after trading Buehrle and Reyes, who they also swore they would not deal. I'm assuming that even if Loria is insane, the baseball people in the FO are not, and the trade of Stanton will be done to minimize the fan revolt that will inevitably follow a Stanton trade. Since they have the leverage they need to make strong demands in any deal for stanton, one of those demands is a player they can placate the fans with in the short term while the team preps for another owner-induced selloff.

 

in other words, you're making a trade proposal presuming an ordinary franchise running with total operational freedom and few extenuating circumstances when none of these assumpions apply to the Marlins.

[SoxFanForsyth]

you're still not seeing it because you're making the mistake of looking at the Marlins operation as an ordinary franchise and applying ordinary franchise assumptions to the Marlins MO. They don't act like an ordinary franchise, and the reason why is the owner. Jeff Loria will not pay for talent, at all, ever, and that leaves the FO to try to make the best them they can with NO money spent. in order to provoke some kind of attendance in any given year. The FO does care about both PR and attendance, as well as rebuilding, but they are given NO money to work with. The reason that seems illogical to you is because it is. However, Loria does not care for your puny logic. He's there to skim as much money out of the lucrative Florida market as he can without sinking or reinvesting any money into it ever, leaving the actual baseball people to make as much of the situation as they can.

 

There's also the fact that the ownership and the FO have sworn not to trade Bogaerts, and their credibility gap with the fans is bad enough to begin with right now after trading Buehrle and Reyes, who they also swore they would not deal. I'm assuming that even if Loria is insane, the baseball people in the FO are not, and the trade of Stanton will be done to minimize the fan revolt that will inevitably follow a Stanton trade. Since they have the leverage they need to make strong demands in any deal for stanton, one of those demands is a player they can placate the fans with in the short term while the team preps for another owner-induced selloff.

 

in other words, you're making a trade proposal presuming an ordinary franchise running with total operational freedom and few extenuating circumstances when none of these assumpions apply to the Marlins.

 

So if he's not going to spend money on talent, then he isn't going to extend Stanton, so he's going to have to trade him. And he has actually has gotten the proper returns for a lot of players (see: HanRam, Sanchez, etc.).

 

You're taking the ownership and going to the extreme with them. They're going to trade Stanton and they're going to take the best return, not just 1 sexy player that leaves them in the basement.

[Dojji]

They're not going to trade him on your schedule though. There's plenty of time to wait for a better deal if they don't like yours. that's going to allow them to cherry-pick what they want out of a deal and I maintain that what they want is going to be a premiere position player who's got 6 more years of control and is big league ready. Maybe more than one, but definitely at least one.

 

If their rotation wasn't already their sole saving grace there might be other alternatives, but right now, they have enough leverage, and their need is sufficiently weighted towards position players, and we have few enough really supremely talented position players in the high minors, that both the BPA theory and the team needs theory favors going after Bogaerts -- or another team's top offensive prospect if Bogaerts is not available.

[Palodios]

They're not going to trade him on your schedule though. There's plenty of time to wait for a better deal if they don't like yours. that's going to allow them to cherry-pick what they want out of a deal and I maintain that what they want is going to be a premiere position player who's got 6 more years of control and is big league ready. Maybe more than one, but definitely at least one.

 

If their rotation wasn't already their sole saving grace there might be other alternatives, but right now, they have enough leverage, and their need is sufficiently weighted towards position players, and we have few enough really supremely talented position players in the high minors, that both the BPA theory and the team needs theory favors going after Bogaerts -- or another team's top offensive prospect if Bogaerts is not available.

 

Stanton has played an average of 120 games the last two years. The guy hasn't been healthy. If someone is willing to overlook that and sell the farm to get him, why wouldn't they take the deal instead of running the risk of seeing him get hurt again? Stanton could singlehandedly restock their farm, but if he gets hurt next year, they'll probably only be able to get 1-2 top prospects instead of 3-5.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Stanton has played an average of 120 games the last two years. The guy hasn't been healthy. If someone is willing to overlook that and sell the farm to get him, why wouldn't they take the deal instead of running the risk of seeing him get hurt again? Stanton could singlehandedly restock their farm, but if he gets hurt next year, they'll probably only be able to get 1-2 top prospects instead of 3-5.

 

I would 110% make the trade that I suggested for Stanton, even if he has had a few injury concerns. He's as good as Manny.

[User Name]

I would 110% make the trade that I suggested for Stanton, even if he has had a few injury concerns. He's as good as Manny.

 

No he isn't, and the injury concerns are legit. Emptying the farm because you're star-struck for a guy like Stanton is a good way to set the organization back quickly.

[marklmw]

I would 110% make the trade that I suggested for Stanton, even if he has had a few injury concerns. He's as good as Manny.

As good as Manny ... don't go there ... I had to eat my words comparing Ellsbury to Boggs.

[SoxFanForsyth]

No he isn't, and the injury concerns are legit. Emptying the farm because you're star-struck for a guy like Stanton is a good way to set the organization back quickly.

 

Manny through age 23: 133 OPS+, 50 HR, average 162 game season: 33 HR

 

Stanton through age 23: 139 OPS+, 117 HR, Average 162 game season: 39 HR.

 

He is just as talented as Manny was by his age.

[marklmw]

Stanton has played an average of 120 games the last two years. The guy hasn't been healthy. If someone is willing to overlook that and sell the farm to get him, why wouldn't they take the deal instead of running the risk of seeing him get hurt again? Stanton could singlehandedly restock their farm, but if he gets hurt next year, they'll probably only be able to get 1-2 top prospects instead of 3-5.

Having the success this season has really screwed up the Sox 'rebuilding' effort.

[User Name]

Manny through age 23: 133 OPS+, 50 HR, average 162 game season: 33 HR

 

Stanton through age 23: 139 OPS+, 117 HR, Average 162 game season: 39 HR.

 

He is just as talented as Manny was by his age.

 

Yeah but Manny was healthy, and had better on-base skill, even though Stanton has more power. Don't fall into the fanboy death trap. He's not a good fit for the Sox. If you're going to empty the farm, do it for star pitching.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Manny through age 23: 130 wRC+, .243 ISO.

 

Stanton through age 23: 139 wRC+, .272 ISO.

 

At this point in their respective careers, not only is Stanton as good as Manny, he's better

[Palodios]

No he isn't, and the injury concerns are legit. Emptying the farm because you're star-struck for a guy like Stanton is a good way to set the organization back quickly.

 

This. Putting the organization's entire future in the hands of one player seems ridiculous. The 2012 Dodgers won't be around next time.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Yeah but Manny was healthy, and had better on-base skill, even though Stanton has more power. Don't fall into the fanboy death trap. He's not a good fit for the Sox. If you're going to empty the farm, do it for star pitching.

 

I'm sorry. Did you just say he's not a good fit for Boston??

 

He has posted a .370 OBP this year. He posted a .361 OBP last year. AND HE'S 23.

[User Name]

Manny through age 23: 130 wRC+, .243 ISO.

 

Stanton through age 23: 139 wRC+, .272 ISO.

 

At this point in their respective careers, not only is Stanton as good as Manny, he's better

 

Manny's age-23 season was his second full season in the Majors. Stanton's was his fourth. You're stacking the deck for Stanton, and still missing the bigger point. He is not a fit. Why empty the farm for a guy with recurring injury issues who could be signed as a FA anyway? Because you KNOW he'll test the market.

[User Name]

This. Putting the organization's entire future in the hands of one player seems ridiculous. The 2012 Dodgers won't be around next time.

 

Quite simple, really.

[SoxFanForsyth]

This. Putting the organization's entire future in the hands of one player seems ridiculous. The 2012 Dodgers won't be around next time.

 

It's 4 players, all of which are either blocked or have a surplus of talent along with them.

 

Barnes/Ranaudo? Still have Owens, Ball, Barnes/Ranaudo (whoever doesn't go), Webster, Workman.

 

Swihart? Still have Vazquez, who, in AA had more BB than K, as well as Lavarnway and Jon Denney.

 

Betts? Pedroia. Period.

 

Cecchini is the only player here that you would be getting rid of where he could feasibly push someone out (Middlebrooks) and it could affect this team.

 

Let's not go over the top here. We're not trading for an overpaid and underperforming player. This is a cornerstone player, at the ripe age of 23.

 

Comparing this to the Dodgers is ridiculous. It's not even close Pal, come on.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Manny's age-23 season was his second full season in the Majors. Stanton's was his fourth. You're stacking the deck for Stanton, and still missing the bigger point. He is not a fit. Why empty the farm for a guy with recurring injury issues who could be signed as a FA anyway? Because you KNOW he'll test the market.

 

Because he's not hitting FA until 2017? You're getting 3 extra years of a cost controlled 40+ HR corner outfielder?

[marklmw]

Manny through age 23: 130 wRC+, .243 ISO.

 

Stanton through age 23: 139 wRC+, .272 ISO.

 

At this point in their respective careers, not only is Stanton as good as Manny, he's better

 

I do not like the 'at this point' argument. Manny has HOF numbers so you have to be careful comparing a youngster to a player with a full body of work. Is Mike Trout better than Willy Mays ... Mickey Mantel ... Jim Rice etc.

[Palodios]

It's 4 players, all of which are either blocked or have a surplus of talent along with them.

 

Barnes/Ranaudo? Still have Owens, Ball, Barnes/Ranaudo (whoever doesn't go), Webster, Workman.

 

Swihart? Still have Vazquez, who, in AA had more BB than K, as well as Lavarnway and Jon Denney.

 

Betts? Pedroia. Period.

 

Cecchini is the only player here that you would be getting rid of where he could feasibly push someone out (Middlebrooks) and it could affect this team.

 

Let's not go over the top here. We're not trading for an overpaid and underperforming player. This is a cornerstone player, at the ripe age of 23.

 

Comparing this to the Dodgers is ridiculous. It's not even close Pal, come on.

 

I'm not comparing this to the Dodgers. I'm comparing Stanton to Gonzalez, and surely you must see why it is a valid comparison.

[SoxFanForsyth]

I have no idea how retaining Middlebrooks, Bogaerts, Bradley, Owens, Ball, Denney, Vazquez, Barnes or Ranaudo, Webster, RDLR, Workman, Marrero is putting the future of the organization in 1 player.

 

Just makes no sense.