2014 Offseason Thread

[cbbosox]

If i were the Sox i would offer Cecchini,Owens,Kelly,Coyle and Margot OR Devers. Maybe substitute Johnson or Rodriguez for Kelly if they wanted.

It is a lot but it would allow us to keep Swihart,Betts and Bogaerts and some pitching and younger prospects.

[Station 13]

If i were the Sox i would offer Cecchini,Owens,Kelly,Coyle and Margot OR Devers. Maybe substitute Johnson or Rodriguez for Kelly if they wanted.

It is a lot but it would allow us to keep Swihart,Betts and Bogaerts and some pitching and younger prospects.

 

If you give up all that, you go to Billy Beane for Sonny Gray, and might able to take 2 players off the list.

[mvp 78]

If i were the Sox i would offer Cecchini,Owens,Kelly,Coyle and Margot OR Devers. Maybe substitute Johnson or Rodriguez for Kelly if they wanted.

It is a lot but it would allow us to keep Swihart,Betts and Bogaerts and some pitching and younger prospects.

 

Those 5 for Hamels? Yikes.

 

If Amaro called me and said "I want Owens, Rodriguez and Cecchini" I tell him to go screw.

[mvp 78]

You do that deal for mid 90's Pedro, not 30 yr old Hamels.

[Palodios]

If i were the Sox i would offer Cecchini,Owens,Kelly,Coyle and Margot OR Devers. Maybe substitute Johnson or Rodriguez for Kelly if they wanted.

It is a lot but it would allow us to keep Swihart,Betts and Bogaerts and some pitching and younger prospects.

 

You don't play "Pick 5" with pitchers in their 30s who already will cost 100M+. The last time the Red Sox played that game, it was for cost-controlled Felix Hernandez.

[seabeachfred]

Those 5 for Hamels? Yikes.

 

If Amaro called me and said "I want Owens, Rodriguez and Cecchini" I tell him to go screw.

 

Well who would you be willing to trade to get Hamels? Betts and Swihart are non starters in my opinion but it would cost us some talent and there's no getting around that. We need that No. 1 ace and I think you would agree with that and Scherzer is not coming to Boston---you know that too. I would make t hat trade because it would keep the two I feel have a great future with us.

[sk7326]

Not much to say about the Lester thing. Would a market-ish offer have gotten him signed before free agency? It's possible - but clearly they played the FA game poorly. On the bright side they did put humpty dumpty back together decently. Both trades for pitchers were solid. The Masterson signing is low risk high reward, but I don't trust that he'll ever figure out a way to get lefties out consistently. But the rotation depth is now legitimately good, and allows them to not deal from desperation for one of the premium guys.

[User Name]

How are you doing SK? You were gone there for a bit. As you know, i'm a big fan of Masterson's, and i think Fenway actually helps neutralize LH power for pitchers like him.

[sk7326]

How are you doing SK? You were gone there for a bit. As you know, i'm a big fan of Masterson's, and i think Fenway actually helps neutralize LH power for pitchers like him.

 

Life with a work swell and following around a 2-year old.

 

Masterson's splits have been ghastly his whole career - that arm slot just doesn't create deception against lefties. That worries me, although I think he could be a phenomenal super reliever if a manager were creative (which won't happen here, but just putting that out there). At the same time, he is very durable and is certainly better than the 2014 model. The Red Sox have turned to durability with their rotation choices - which is smart. After losing Lester, it would have been nice to see a corresponding Wow move, but those plays aren't out there. Right now this gives them a rotation that (assuming Buchholz returns to say 2/3 of his 2013 incarnation) will be competitive every night, and plus on many of them. That, with an offensive uptick, is an 85-90 win team. I like that this keeps them from doing something stupid to get a Cueto or Hamels.

[Spudboy]

One reporter commented that the Phillies have lost a lot of leverage on Hamels this week. The Red Sox, Cubs, and Dodgers all filled holes in their rotation, and the Phillies have made it clear that they are selling because of the Rollins trade. It would be great to see the Red Sox pull him in -- I wonder if Cecchini still has enough value to headline that kind of deal.

 

Cechini won't be a center piece or headliner in any trade. He'll be one of the pieces that in total seem to make a fair trade.

[mvp 78]

Well who would you be willing to trade to get Hamels? Betts and Swihart are non starters in my opinion but it would cost us some talent and there's no getting around that. We need that No. 1 ace and I think you would agree with that and Scherzer is not coming to Boston---you know that too. I would make t hat trade because it would keep the two I feel have a great future with us.

 

Trade 1: XB and no one else of value

Trade 2: anyone not named Betts, Owens, Swihart, XB, Vazquez, Ball

[User Name]

Keep XB plz.

[sk7326]

Those 5 for Hamels? Yikes.

 

If Amaro called me and said "I want Owens, Rodriguez and Cecchini" I tell him to go screw.

 

Very simple (OK, not that simple - since there is no such thing as NO, but the price is higher than the market would reasonably pay):

 

NO: Bogaerts, Betts, Swihart ... combo of upside and probability too high

MAYBE BUT THIS BETTER BE GOOD: Owens, Rodriguez, Margot ... first two are pitchers, little more uncertainty than hitters due to arm stuff, Margot still a bit far from bigs

TRADE FILLER: Cecchini, Merrero, Vasquez, any other pitcher ... either upside questions (Vasquez, Merrero, Cecchini) with good probability, or probability questions (Barnes) with good upside.

PROBABLY BUT I'M GOING TO HAVE BAD DREAMS ABOUT IT: Ball, Sam Travis, Michael Chavis, Michael Kopech, Rafael Devers ... just so far from the bigs right now that there is a calculated reason to include them in a trade that can help Boston now. But good chance these guys will blossom elsewhere and give you an ulcer when the big leaguer's contribution has passed.

[jd98]

Who's the opening day starter? Porcello is the only one worth a crap last year, but that's his only good year and he was the #4 for the Tigers. They want Buchholz to be an ace and he's been with the team the longest by far, but he was terrible last year. Masterson was the opening day starter last year but ended up one of the worst SP in all of baseball. Miley started the first game in Australia or wherever it was, and was the #2 when they started the normal season, but he also got worse last year. Kelly's probably not an option. So who's it gonna be?

[Bellhorn04]

Would we better off signing Shields for $110 million or trading for Hamels?

[sk7326]

Would we better off signing Shields for $110 million or trading for Hamels?

 

Depends on the trade but Hamels.

 

Better pitcher now, likelier better pitcher in 4 years, his salary is completely reasonable for his caliber.

 

That said, this is the offseason the sign Shields where the Sox have a protected 1st rounder. But the years could bother me pretty quickly.

[Palodios]

Depends on the trade but Hamels.

 

Better pitcher now, likelier better pitcher in 4 years, his salary is completely reasonable for his caliber.

 

That said, this is the offseason the sign Shields where the Sox have a protected 1st rounder. But the years could bother me pretty quickly.

 

The Red Sox have a protected first rounder, but they also don't want to obliterate their farm system either. Remember, they already lost two second round picks this year. They also overspent on the international draft this year, and will completely miss out on that draft.

[dupree]

^agreed. We need an ace. Or a legit #2. We have rotation full of #3s who of healthy will provide a lot of innings. I like Hamels over Shields on the simple fact he is younger and is a LHP, his track record in interleague against AL east teams insist that in pressie but I honestly don't have faith in putting Big Game James on the hill in a game 1 of any series in the post season and feel confident that he will provide us good innings to position us for a win the take a series lead. I still think Ben has one more move for a legit starter and then he may add one bullpen arm like Sergio Romo. I like him as insurance for Koji. I'm not sure what kind of contract he will want tho.

[sk7326]

The Red Sox have a protected first rounder, but they also don't want to obliterate their farm system either. Remember, they already lost two second round picks this year. They also overspent on the international draft this year, and will completely miss out on that draft.

 

That is the "depends on the trade" thing. The system has some excellent depth - so cashing in some of it is not unreasonable at all. If the Hamels trade did obliterate that depth then there is an issue. But if you are going to go fishing for "qualified" free agents, a year where you have a protected first is the time to do it.

[RedSoxNC84]

The Wade Miley trade is reportedly complete now.

[cp176]

Those 5 for Hamels? Yikes.

 

If Amaro called me and said "I want Owens, Rodriguez and Cecchini" I tell him to go screw.

 

He could not pry Rodriguez out of my hands. The other two plus - in a heartbeat.

[seabeachfred]

Trade 1: XB and no one else of value

Trade 2: anyone not named Betts, Owens, Swihart, XB, Vazquez, Ball

 

I'm in that neighborhood too. I would certainly add Bogaerts to a trade for Hamels, but, then again, I have exhausted my bloviating that the guy is not the player the Red Sox think he is. However, it would take one more besides X to get Hamels if he was in the deal. I would be willing to add Owens (reluctantly) to get Hamels because I really believe with Cole in the rotation we could win the AL East next season and to me it starts with winning the division because of how the WC is now shaped.

[MJantomaso]

I think this rotation is going to stay the way it is. Cherries is probably going to try and catch lightning in a bottle for this year. Then make a big splash in the slew of pitchers next offseason. Trading key pieces to this franchises future for Hammels is pretty dumb considering the amount of talert that will be available next offseason.

[seabeachfred]

Would we better off signing Shields for $110 million or trading for Hamels?

 

Bell---I want the lefty. Remember, they seem to do better against the Yankees and Rays than righties do. Still, those who would take Shields have the argument it wouldn't cost us players, only money. However, remember that we haven't always done well competing against other teams for prime talent, Pablo and Hanley being exceptions this year.

[Behindenemylines]

Sox go into the season with the starting staff they have unless they sign Shields, trade for Zimmermann, or Phillies lower their asking price.

[example1]

I'm in that neighborhood too. I would certainly add Bogaerts to a trade for Hamels, but, then again, I have exhausted my bloviating that the guy is not the player the Red Sox think he is. However, it would take one more besides X to get Hamels if he was in the deal. I would be willing to add Owens (reluctantly) to get Hamels because I really believe with Cole in the rotation we could win the AL East next season and to me it starts with winning the division because of how the WC is now shaped.

 

You would trade Bogaerts and Owens for Hamels? Wow. No thanks.

[a700hitter]

You would trade Bogaerts and Owens for Hamels? Wow. No thanks.

That's what the Phillies GM would say.

[BSN07]

He hates Bogaerts with a fiery passion haha

[User Name]

That's what the Phillies GM would say.

 

No. No he wouldn't.

[Gringo]

You are Ben Cherington. You have been given the green light to sign one top of the line free agent starting pitcher.

 

Who do you sign?