2014 Offseason Thread

[User Name]

When you deal 5 prospects, you're not going to be able to deal from a position of strength. Cespedes, Cecchini, and 3 pitchers is a big haul. This organization has several top pitching prospects, and some will be duds, and some studs. I just have zero confidence that they will trade the right ones, because their track record has been tough lately.

 

The "right ones" would be a very subjective thing to explain. A prospect that blossomed elsewhere may not have done so in the Boston pressure cooker. Also, Cespedes is not a prospect. Trading Cespedes in a package for Frazier would be an exercise in futility IMO.

[BSN07]

How about just a big package for Frazier and Cueto, which would essentially solve the Red Sox' offseason were they to sign Lester? I'd overpay to get it done.

It’s an open question as to whether or not the Reds will sign Johnny Cueto to a new contract, though an extension shouldn’t be ruled out on purely financial reasons, John Fay of the Cincinnati Enquirer opines. Though Fay thinks extending Cueto would cost “probably north of $150MM,” the Reds will be seeing a revenue increase over the next few years thanks to a new TV deal. If Cueto will take a back-loaded deal, that would lessen the burden on the Reds’ payroll until Brandon Phillips‘ contract is off the books following the 2017 campaign.

I don't think they deal Cueto, I think Latos is the more likely candidate imo.

[Palodios]

The "right ones" would be a very subjective thing to explain. A prospect that blossomed elsewhere may not have done so in the Boston pressure cooker.

 

For the sake of argument, let's consider the "right ones" are the the players that the older gentlemen here will blast Ben for in 2018 for trading away now, regardless of where or how they blossomed.

 

You were talking about trading away outfielders... Cespdes is not a prospect, but isn't he the most tradeable OF asset? Who else were you referring to here? Baseball heavily underrates Nava, the price is too high for Castillo and Vic, Margot is too young, Bradley isn't a top chip anymore, Betts is supposedly untouchable. I don't understand how the Red Sox's outfield depth helps Cinci here.

[sk7326]

I think Betts would provide a higher overall value than Headley at 3B, who i think is cooked, but could be wrong, specially with half his games at Fenway. Victorino's injury du jour could be easily covered by the Nava/Craig tandem (a healthy Craig should at least be able to hit lefties) with Cespedes in RF. That would limit Holt's exposure while moving him to the super-utility spot where he excels and belongs. I'd save that cash instead of spending it on Headley.

 

Headley's defense + walk rates allows him to stay useful even if his power numbers are things we'll never see again. Holt I'd actually also see as an interesting sell-high opportunity. What to do with Betts is the darndest of the questions of the offseason. If the team wants to be creative, he is the best candidate for a super-utlity role where he gets his 600 PAs across 5 or 6 positions.

[Spudboy]

In an ideal world you sign Lester and sweeten the pot by creating a package around the significant stable of blocked prospects the Red Sox currently have to get the Phillies to eat some of the salary left on Hamels' deal. They don't even need to tweak the bullpen IMO.

 

C-Vasquez

1B- Napoli

2B-Pedroia

SS-Bogaerts

3B-Betts

LF-Cespedes

CF-Castillo

RF-Victorino

DH-Ortiz

 

Bench:

OF/1B-Nava

OF/1B-Craig

UTIL-Holt

C-Ross or FA

 

Rotation:

Lester

Hamels

Kelly

Buchholz

De La Rosa/ FA acquisition (preferably Justin Masterson)

 

Bullpen:

Workman

Britton

Layne

Webster

Mujica

Tazawa

Uehara

 

This would be, in my opinion, one of the Sox' best-case scenarios entering 2015. There's a lot of positional versatility, good power potential in a league starved for power, and a decent rotation that could hold steady until the kids start arriving. It would be difficult to construct, but i don't think it's a "pipe dream" type scenario. I'm also of the opinion that moving Betts to 3B to fill a clear need would be a good idea. WMB is cooked, and Cecchini needs more time to develop.

 

This is pretty much what I have been envisioning. One difference is that I had the Sox resigning Badenhop in the pen. Although I had Layne slotted there too so I was not sure what to do.

 

I have suggested either Graig at 3rd or maybe Betts. No one seems to like my idea, though.

 

I had also mentioned Masterson several times. No one like that idea, either!

 

Again, I like the idea of using in-house assets to plug an area of need. It's good management and makes both good baseball and business sense. Why waste money on Panda when we have someone who can play that position almost as well and eventually better and at a much lower cost. This is as close to Republican as I will ever get!

[User Name]

For the sake of argument, let's consider the "right ones" are the the players that the older gentlemen here will blast Ben for in 2018 for trading away now, regardless of where or how they blossomed.

 

You were talking about trading away outfielders... Cespdes is not a prospect, but isn't he the most tradeable OF asset? Who else were you referring to here? Baseball heavily underrates Nava, the price is too high for Castillo and Vic, Margot is too young, Bradley isn't a top chip anymore, Betts is supposedly untouchable. I don't understand how the Red Sox's outfield depth helps Cinci here.

 

I'm actually talking about Castillo, Margot and Victorino. Castillo is not that expensive by current market standards, Margot is young but his stock is sky-high right now, and Vic would be a one-year rental on whom the Sox could eat some salary to make more palatable. If they just HAD to get Cespedes to get a deal done though, i'd still do it.

[a700hitter]

Actually our best arm is, and always has been, Henry Owens. Followed by Eddy Rodriguez and Brian Johnson. Those are the elite arms. And Owens, being a top 15 prospect, is an elite prospect.

 

Everyone seems to have given up on Barnes. Not saying he is an elite prospect, just saying he's a breakout candidate this year. Don't overlook him.

 

Either way, the end of this year is when we should see the real elite pitching prospects.

From MLBTraderumors.com yesterday:

 

•Rival scouts have worked hard to cut through the hype in their evaluations of the Red Sox‘s pitching prospects. The biggest debate concerns Henry Owens and how his 92-mile-per-hour fastball and slow curve would play in the big leagues. Meanwhile, some believe that left-hander Brian Johnson might be the best pitcher in Boston’s system.

I'll stand by my assertion that we are not in a position of strength with regard to our pitching prospects. Edited November 17, 2014 by a700hitter

[User Name]

I don't think they deal Cueto, I think Latos is the more likely candidate imo.

 

And he may actually be the better fit. It's an either-or proposition in my book (if they're actually in the market of course)

[BSN07]

This is pretty much what I have been envisioning. One difference is that I had the Sox resigning Badenhop in the pen. Although I had Layne slotted there too so I was not sure what to do.

 

I have suggested either Graig at 3rd or maybe Betts. No one seems to like my idea, though.

 

I had also mentioned Masterson several times. No one like that idea, either!

 

Again, I like the idea of using in-house assets to plug an area of need. It's good management and makes both good baseball and business sense. Why waste money on Panda when we have someone who can play that position almost as well and eventually better and at a much lower cost. This is as close to Republican as I will ever get!

 

It's not that the idea isn't good it is just that Craig has health ? and Betts i have to assume it is not a viable position for him. There is an opening at 3B and from everything we have read the Sox are looking to fill it with an outside source. I would have to imagine with few spots open if the team felt Betts could man 3B and have him starting everyday than they wouldn't be looking elsewhere.

[User Name]

Panda's OPS in the last 4 seasons:

 

2011: 909

2012: 789

2013: 758

2014: 739

 

If that isn't a trend in the wrong direction, then i don't know what is. Sure, he's dynamite in the playoffs, but that doesn't mean jack s*** if he can't help you get there.

 

Also, no matter what, a 6 year-deal for a guy with that body type has a significant chance of turning into an albatross quickly. If i had to choose one of the FA 3B options, i'd go with Headley, who's the righty bat with better D and on-base ability, and i've laready made my thoughts about him being cooked well known, so that gives you an idea about my interest in Panda.

[Spudboy]

It's not that the idea isn't good it is just that Craig has health ? and Betts i have to assume it is not a viable position for him. There is an opening at 3B and from everything we have read the Sox are looking to fill it with an outside source. I would have to imagine with few spots open if the team felt Betts could man 3B and have him starting everyday than they wouldn't be looking elsewhere.

 

I covered this stuff last week in a post. I was speculating as to what the Sox would do at 3rd if they fail to land Sandoval or Headley. Obviously I am aware of what the Sox are currently doing and of the ongoing issue of Craig's health.

[BSN07]

From MLBTraderumors.com yesterday:

 

I'll stand by my assertion that we are not in a position of strength with regard to our pitching prospects.

 

These kind of stories are ridiculous. What the reporter should have asked is why teams weren't trying to sift through the hype before? Were these organizations really letting media hype influence their decisions?

 

Its very doubtful.

[sk7326]

These kind of stories are ridiculous. What the reporter should have asked is why teams weren't trying to sift through the hype before? Were these organizations really letting media hype influence their decisions?

 

Its very doubtful.

 

You can always find contrary scouts ... on one hand Owens' velocity is not a turn on, but his delivery and changeup are.

 

But you do point to larger problem for the Sox when lining up prospect deals. They have a lot of pitching inventory - but most of it is good strong deal filler. There is not a lot of staff anchor projection in the guys, stuff to build a deal around. Outfield does represent an area of strength because of cost control - Cespedes, Castillo (sure why not), Craig, all have solid value contracts (the latter makes some health assumptions of course). I don't think this makes them an anchor around a huge deal, but still very useful.

[sk7326]

What is interesting is that the sort of prospect inventory Boston has is more about solid quantity than necessarily projected superstars. (although yes Margot, the kids in the big club, Swihart - all can be dreamt on). For teams like Boston or New York, solid prospect depth + the ability to take on money has been a powerful equation to get deals done. In this "makin it rain" era of baseball prosperity I wonder how much that edge still really matters. Obviously some teams are smaller revenue than others, but nowadays every team can afford to keep one or two of its home grown studs (and in cases like the Pirates and Reds, they have done so). Does the ability to push around piles of chips matter as much now?

[a700hitter]

These kind of stories are ridiculous. What the reporter should have asked is why teams weren't trying to sift through the hype before? Were these organizations really letting media hype influence their decisions?

 

Its very doubtful.

Organizations have been known to hype prospects, but they usually trade hyped prospects. In this case, maybe the Red Sox hype was genuinely believed within the organization, but the fruits of the farm have been rotten thus far. I think teams talent evaluators take the lazy approach to talent in other organizations in many cases by giving deference to the other team's evaluations. The other teams are now re-evaluating our prospects based on our recent string of duds. It's not at all far-fetched. It makes a lot of sense.

[sk7326]

Organizations have been known to hype prospects, but they usually trade hyped prospects. In this case, maybe the Red Sox hype was genuinely believed within the organization, but the fruits of the farm have been rotten thus far. I think teams talent evaluators take the lazy approach to talent in other organizations in many cases by giving deference to the other team's evaluations. The other teams are now re-evaluating our prospects based on our recent string of duds. It's not at all far-fetched. It makes a lot of sense.

 

I dunno - teams have very large pro scouting operations who spend their lives scouting other organizations and whatnot. This is not monetarily driven (hell, it's the small teams competitive advantage when done right) If you look at the Sox 4 position prospect graduation in the last few years - it's 2 for 4 or thereabouts which is more or less what you'd expect.

[Bellhorn04]

I'm actually talking about Castillo, Margot and Victorino. Castillo is not that expensive by current market standards, Margot is young but his stock is sky-high right now, and Vic would be a one-year rental on whom the Sox could eat some salary to make more palatable. If they just HAD to get Cespedes to get a deal done though, i'd still do it.

 

Hey UN, welcome back. I agree about Castillo not being expensive, but I'd be pretty surprised to see them sign him and trade him right away.

[SoxFanForsyth]

From MLBTraderumors.com yesterday:

 

I'll stand by my assertion that we are not in a position of strength with regard to our pitching prospects.

 

There are way way more scouts who say that Owens is going to be a solid mid rotation arm than those who are suspect to him based on his 92 mph fastball (which plays up thanks to an elite change up). At some point you have to look at his results.

 

2013: 2.67 era between A+-AA, 11.3 k/9, 4.5 bb/9, 3.2 years younger than average age of competition.

2014: 2.90 era between AA and AAA, 9.6 k/9, 3.3 bb/9, 4.1 years younger than average age of competition.

 

What about those numbers makes you doubt him? And why not mention the fact that those same scouts love Brian Johnson, who isn't a hyped prospect? Isn't this just a 1-for-1 kind of thing? The depth remains the same regardless of whether you like Johnson or Owens. Or is the hype machine right on Johnson because it rates him low and wrong on Owens because it rated him highly?

 

And what is this whole 'hype' crap anyway? You realize there are a ton of 3rd party independent outlets that are scouting heavily and ranking these prospects? When BA, Baseball Prospectus, Keith Law of ESPN, and MLB all agree that a prospect (Owens in this example) is an excellent prospect, how is there this 'hype machine' that teams force upon independent ratings??

 

Your argument has so many holes i can't even cover all of them. You find 1 negative review of a player and give it more weight than the hundreds of good reviews. That is called pessimism, not realism. You need to shift toward a bit more of a realistic approach rather than 'I hate all prospects all our prospects suck' approach.

 

Prospects are going to flake out, it's the nature of the beast. But just because JBJ and Webster didn't pan out yet doesn't mean we have no depth. That's absurd.

[a700hitter]

I drank all the kool aid on WMB, Bradley, XB and Ranaudo when they were signed. There is a trend being established, and the value of these guys who were supposed to be our future has come crashing down. By all means, continue to drink your own kool aid. I just hope the FO is starting to see the need for improvement in scouting and player development. Edited November 17, 2014 by a700hitter

[a700hitter]

And what is this whole 'hype' crap anyway? You realize there are a ton of 3rd party independent outlets that are scouting heavily and ranking these prospects? When BA, Baseball Prospectus, Keith Law of ESPN, and MLB all agree that a prospect (Owens in this example) is an excellent prospect, how is there this 'hype machine' that teams force upon independent ratings??

If you don't believe that teams hype their prospects, then your head is in the crapper. The Yankees and Dodgers among others have been very skillful at hyping prospects and using them to get established players.

[a700hitter]

Prospects are going to flake out, it's the nature of the beast. But just because JBJ and Webster didn't pan out yet doesn't mean we have no depth. That's absurd.

WE don't have depth to land Cueto and Frazier.

[User Name]

Hey UN, welcome back. I agree about Castillo not being expensive, but I'd be pretty surprised to see them sign him and trade him right away.

 

I wouldn't be, if the price is right. And thanks.

[User Name]

I dunno - teams have very large pro scouting operations who spend their lives scouting other organizations and whatnot. This is not monetarily driven (hell, it's the small teams competitive advantage when done right) If you look at the Sox 4 position prospect graduation in the last few years - it's 2 for 4 or thereabouts which is more or less what you'd expect.

 

Actually 2 for 4 is excellent based on prospect flameout rate.

[Palodios]

When was the last time we saw a prospect as completely untouchable on the mound as Owens? This is a guy who has been a no-hitter threat every time he has been on the mound. The 92 mph fastball may prevent him from being an ace, but I doubt it will stop him from being a mid rotation starter.

[a700hitter]

When was the last time we saw a prospect as completely untouchable on the mound as Owens? This is a guy who has been a no-hitter threat every time he has been on the mound. The 92 mph fastball may prevent him from being an ace, but I doubt it will stop him from being a mid rotation starter.

Could he land Cueto for us?

[SoxFanForsyth]

Could he land Cueto for us?

 

?? Of course he could. Cueto has 1 year left. The Sox would never trade a player of as high of a caliber as Owens for 1 year of Cueto, even with a QO.

[a700hitter]

?? Of course he could. Cueto has 1 year left. The Sox would never trade a player of as high of a caliber as Owens for 1 year of Cueto, even with a QO.

If you want Cueto, you aren't going to get him for Workman or Nava.

[SoxFanForsyth]

I drank all the kool aid on WMB, Bradley, XB and Ranaudo when they were signed. There is a trend being established, and the value of these guys who were supposed to be our future has come crashing down. By all means, continue to drink your own kool aid. I just hope the FO is starting to see the need for improvement in scouting and player development.

 

Your problem is that, for 3 of those players, you're declaring them busts based on rookie seasons in their young 20's, or in Ranaudo's case, about 7 starts.

 

Lester had a 7.96 K/9 and a 6.93 BB/9 in his first 7 starts. Scherzer didn't put it all together until he was 28. Shields had a 4.20 ERA in his first 150 games started.

 

I know this might boggle your mind so strap in. Players have to adjust to the MLB level. It doesn't just happen. They don't just come out guns blazing. It's part of the transition and development.

[SoxFanForsyth]

If you want Cueto, you aren't going to get him for Workman or Nava.

 

No, but you get him for a Marrero, Ranaudo, and Coyle.

[a700hitter]

No, but you get him for a Marrero, Ranaudo, and Coyle.

Ben should get that done immediately if that's what it would take.