2014 Roster Projections

[marklmw]

The only problem with that User is that Peavy would be more in demand in a trade than Dempster would be, and Jake will be needed by us next year in my opinion. I think you can see now why I would very much appreciate it if Ben did not make any big trades at the Winter Meetings that would negate some of our pitching depth, both in our rotation and within our prospects group. Dempster is replaceable; I don't think Peavy is at the present time....and who knows what kind of shape or mental shape Doubrant is going to show up in and how healthy Buchholz is going to be and for how long. Of course I could say how we don't know if Lackey will be as effective as this season and whether Lester has returned fully to ace status. To be safe let's hold onto what we have with the possible exception of Ryan.

 

Because of the question mark with Buchholz I have to agree with UN and insist that we hold onto Peavy unless we somehow sign a comparable replacement for him and there are not so many options out there. Dempster can be a salary dump alone because I would rather give the experience to Workman, Webster or any prospect that can be called up. Peavy has the heart of a Pedroia.

[Palodios]

You are conflating things. They won't trade both Peavy/Dempster either ways, my point is to trade Dempster (if you will trade one) and keep Peavy, which makes the most sense from a roster construction perspective. It also has little to do with the construction on the offensive side, because you're not trading Demspter or Peavy for a position player who's a clear upgrade over any of the guys we have, or can protect against injury at a key position. You would have to give up pitching depth (both a starter to clear salary and some of the young pitching you want on the MLB roster) to pull off a trade. Simply getting rid of Dempster/Peavy wouldn't be enough to get one of the marquee FA's left on the market. They'd be better off blowing the LT and keeping their pitching in that case.

 

This all started with a comment I made on the Peavy for Gardner trade. My opinion is that is a pretty fair deal, although maybe the Red Sox need to eat some money there. In that (clearly not going to happen) scenario, Gardner at 4 million, snag Drew at 3/30 million. Your rotation is Lester, Lackey, Buchholz, Doubront, Dempster. The lineup is good, and has significant depth in the outfield, infield, catcher, relief. Maybe they might go after someone like a Johann Santana to stash in the minors and hope they catch lightning in the bottle and he gets healthy. That kind of depth isn't there right now.

[User Name]

This all started with a comment I made on the Peavy for Gardner trade. My opinion is that is a pretty fair deal, although maybe the Red Sox need to eat some money there. In that (clearly not going to happen) scenario, Gardner at 4 million, snag Drew at 3/30 million. Your rotation is Lester, Lackey, Buchholz, Doubront, Dempster. The lineup is good, and has significant depth in the outfield, infield, catcher, relief. Maybe they might go after someone like a Johann Santana to stash in the minors and hope they catch lightning in the bottle and he gets healthy. That kind of depth isn't there right now.

 

The problem here is twofold: How much better than a JBJ/insert righty hitter platoon would Gardner really be? You're overpaying for probably less than a win, and problem number two is that you may negate any gain from Gardner because of how much Dempster objectively sucks. You're better off signing Drew (and 3/30 is probably not enough) then trading a package around WMB (with the depth the Sox have at 3B at MLB and the minors) for that final hitter you lack without weakening the pitching.

[Hoplite]

I think that you are forgetting that we had a very low WAR from 3B last season that is projected to increase greatly this season. I think it will be a long shot to land Drew based on the number of years Drew will want and the number that Boston is willing to give with Cecchini replacing Bogaerts as our top non-pitching prospect.

 

Unless Middlebrooks suddenly learns plate discipline, I don't see any reason to expect him to improve. I think most of our improvement will come from the bottom of the rotation (Dempster was terrible outside of April) and the bullpen (we blew something like 25 saves and Uehara only blew 3).

[Palodios]

The problem here is twofold: How much better than a JBJ/insert righty hitter platoon would Gardner really be? You're overpaying for probably less than a win, and problem number two is that you may negate any gain from Gardner because of how much Dempster objectively sucks. You're better off signing Drew (and 3/30 is probably not enough) then trading a package around WMB (with the depth the Sox have at 3B at MLB and the minors) for that final hitter you lack without weakening the pitching.

 

If someone gets hurt, or Bradley turns out to need another year, he adds 4 wins. With money to add significant IF depth, it could add 2-3 more wins. Peavy was worth 2.4 fWar last year, in a year when he was healthy.

[User Name]

If someone gets hurt, or Bradley turns out to need another year, he adds 4 wins. With money to add significant IF depth, it could add 2-3 more wins. Peavy was worth 2.4 fWar last year, in a year when he was healthy.

 

You are conveniently ignoring the part of my post where i do get another hitter, sign Drew and move XB to third. Anyways, this discussion has run its course, since NY will never trade Gardner to the Sox anyway.

[Palodios]

You are conveniently ignoring the part of my post where i do get another hitter, sign Drew and move XB to third. Anyways, this discussion has run its course, since NY will never trade Gardner to the Sox anyway.

 

Your solution was to sign Drew, and then trade away valuable depth in WMB. I want good depth at ALL positions. You're right though, the trade isn't happening -- it just seemed like a very good fit for both teams.

[User Name]

Your solution was to sign Drew, and then trade away valuable depth in WMB. I want good depth at ALL positions. You're right though, the trade isn't happening -- it just seemed like a very good fit for both teams.

 

You can't have depth at ALL positions man. You gotta give up something to get something.

[Palodios]

You can't have depth at ALL positions man. You gotta give up something to get something.

 

They had very good depth at all positions last year, and it worked out. That's why it seems so important.

[User Name]

They had very good depth at all positions last year, and it worked out. That's why it seems so important.

 

They had a platoon of Brock Holt and Brandon Snyder and an out-of-position Iglesias take a good amount of AB's at 3B last year, so depth wasn't that good there......

[Palodios]

They had a platoon of Brock Holt and Brandon Snyder and an out-of-position Iglesias take a good amount of AB's at 3B last year, so depth wasn't that good there......

 

Iglesias was serviceable there. Snyder only got 50 AB, and Holt 59.

[DirtDog]

Unless Middlebrooks suddenly learns plate discipline, I don't see any reason to expect him to improve. I think most of our improvement will come from the bottom of the rotation (Dempster was terrible outside of April) and the bullpen (we blew something like 25 saves and Uehara only blew 3).

 

I think it's reasonable for him to improve a little bit, but just because he won't be a star doesn't mean he is a bust. If he can provide .260/.310/.475 with 22-25 homers I will take it. With an average or above average glove... at the pricing of a pre-arb player... that's value.

[User Name]

Iglesias was serviceable there. Snyder only got 50 AB, and Holt 59.

 

But he'd never played the position and he was actually not very good defensively there. Playing a guy out of position to fill a need is the direct opposite of the term "depth" as it pertains to baseball.

[Palodios]

But he'd never played the position and he was actually not very good defensively there. Playing a guy out of position to fill a need is the direct opposite of the term "depth" as it pertains to baseball.

 

Yet he was still leaps and bounds better than AAAA slobs like Synder and Holt.

[User Name]

Yet he was still leaps and bounds better than AAAA slobs like Synder and Holt.

 

Yeah but that's beside the point. The point is that you're never going to have MLB-level depth at the ready for all positions. And in all honesty, there's no place where you need MLB-ready depth more than at SP. You can play a SS at 3B, but you can't have an OF starting a game for you.

[marklmw]

Unless Middlebrooks suddenly learns plate discipline, I don't see any reason to expect him to improve. I think most of our improvement will come from the bottom of the rotation (Dempster was terrible outside of April) and the bullpen (we blew something like 25 saves and Uehara only blew 3).

Are you kidding me? .... Middlebrooks over basically 1 full season hit 32 HR's. Not every player lights it up in the very beginning of their major league careers. WMB is a very good athlete ... a light might go off one day as it often does with professional athletes and suddenly he is working major league pitchers vs. them working him. Once he learns how to lay off the outside breaking balls he will become someone to contend with. I think he was over anxious last season and because of his poor start began pressing too much ... hopefully he will figure things out.

[dupree]

I think it would come back to bite us in the ass if we were to trade WMB. I would play him in LF before i would include him in a package to aquire an OF bat. If getting a big bat at the expense of WMB is what it takes, then no thanks i would rather have him here hitting HRs and doubles off the Monster.

[User Name]

But playing him in LF? Seriously?

[a700hitter]

It doesn't seem that there is a lot of anticipation among baseball fans or the media around the upcoming GM meetings. There are usually a couple of hot rumors going into the meetings. What is the scuttlebutt this year?

[Palodios]

It doesn't seem that there is a lot of anticipation among baseball fans or the media around the upcoming GM meetings. There are usually a couple of hot rumors going into the meetings. What is the scuttlebutt this year?

 

Maybe that's because you're a Red Sox fan, and Ben is mostly done. Kemp, Headley, and Price seem to be the big names hanging out there.

[User Name]

Also, many top free agents signed before the WM. That is rare, especially with Boras clients.

[a700hitter]

Maybe that's because you're a Red Sox fan, and Ben is mostly done. Kemp, Headley, and Price seem to be the big names hanging out there.

Maybe so, but besides Red Sox involvement, there doesn't seem to be any evidencE of teams being poised to make a deal. I'd be surprised if the Rays part with Price. Also, I haven't heard much about Headley being shopped.

[Palodios]

Yeah but that's beside the point. The point is that you're never going to have MLB-level depth at the ready for all positions. And in all honesty, there's no place where you need MLB-ready depth more than at SP. You can play a SS at 3B, but you can't have an OF starting a game for you.

 

Beside which point? The Red Sox have significantly worse depth on their bench this year than last year, and none of the available free agents fix that under 30-40 million. That's the point.

[mvp 78]

The depth option at 3b last April was Snyder and Holt. That's no better than what they have today.

[User Name]

Beside which point? The Red Sox have significantly worse depth on their bench this year than last year, and none of the available free agents fix that under 30-40 million. That's the point.

 

This doesn't make any sense. What the Sox lack (A RH platoon partner for JBJ, LH IF who can play 3B) are easily acquirable, and they have MiLB pieces who could either contribute (Bryce Brentz, Vasquez) or could be used to acquire other necessary parts, even in the offseason, without weakening the pitching. You are missing the forest because of the trees. It's a lot easier to acquire offensive players at any position during the off-season, season or even during Thanksgiving dinner than it is to acquire starting pitching. You don't weaken the pitching because you're scared an offensive prospect is going to have growing pains.

[DirtDog]

The depth option at 3b last April was Snyder and Holt. That's no better than what they have today.

Bit of stretch cause he probably won't be ready until 2015, but there's Cecchini...

[DirtDog]

I love how some of you guys want MLB starting talent backing up all positions. It doesn't work like that. If they were good enough to be starters, they'd be elsewhere. We aren't going to be able to sign a talented guy and sell him that he will be coming off the bench. Who exactly do you guys want? Michael Young?

[mvp 78]

Bit of stretch cause he probably won't be ready until 2015, but there's Cecchini...

 

But if you needed him to fill in for a week or two, it's no worse than playing Iggy out of position.

[mvp 78]

I love how some of you guys want MLB starting talent backing up all positions. It doesn't work like that. If they were good enough to be starters, they'd be elsewhere. We aren't going to be able to sign a talented guy and sell him that he will be coming off the bench. Who exactly do you guys want? Michael Young?

 

It's the offseason, if you can't bitch about the umps or a bad loss, might as well bitch about the 25th guy on the roster.

[Palodios]

This doesn't make any sense. What the Sox lack (A RH platoon partner for JBJ, LH IF who can play 3B) are easily acquirable, and they have MiLB pieces who could either contribute (Bryce Brentz, Vasquez) or could be used to acquire other necessary parts, even in the offseason, without weakening the pitching. You are missing the forest because of the trees. It's a lot easier to acquire offensive players at any position during the off-season, season or even during Thanksgiving dinner than it is to acquire starting pitching. You don't weaken the pitching because you're scared an offensive prospect is going to have growing pains

 

Aren't Lh 3b uncommon ? Finding quality replacements really isn't as easy as you make it seem. Cite 2011 all you want but the 2010 Red Sox didn't make the playoffs because they had injuries to position players and couldn't replace them. The Red Sox have one more starter than they did last year and an extra year of seasoning for several young arms. Plus Workman looks legit. They have depth at sp but none at if or of.