Sandoval or Headley?

[a700hitter]

Yes. Not Felix or Kershaw, but yes.

Any examples?

[a700hitter]

Victorino, Holt, and Craig to the bench. Cespedes traded.

 

Another option is Victorino starts, but Betts plays every day, just at a different position, giving 2b, 3b, LF, CF, and RF a regular day off.

That would be a strong bench.

[Orange Juiced]

Any examples?

 

Sure.

 

Cueto

Hamels

 

To name a couple.

 

Of course, if the other team is loaded with hitters and only has the one good pitcher, they're less likely to do that. I'm talking about trades in a bit of a context-free environment.

 

But you could absolutely get Cueto or Hamels for that. Well, maybe not Hamels because Amaro is a complete idiot (hence the Ryan Howard contract). You could get Price for that in a cocaine heartbeat.

[sk7326]

Any examples?

 

Strasburg or Jordan Zimmermann (short hitches on both, but you asked)

[Orange Juiced]

That would be a strong bench.

 

Yes it would be. Add a veteran catcher to back up Vazquez and the bench would be versatile and deep and talented. Redundancies everywhere. Sign Lester, trade Cespedes+ for a #2, and this team is an AL favorite.

[a700hitter]

Sure.

 

Cueto

Hamels

 

To name a couple.

 

Of course, if the other team is loaded with hitters and only has the one good pitcher, they're less likely to do that. I'm talking about trades in a bit of a context-free environment.

 

But you could absolutely get Cueto or Hamels for that. Well, maybe not Hamels because Amaro is a complete idiot (hence the Ryan Howard contract). You could get Price for that in a cocaine heartbeat.

I would take either one of those guys in that deal.

[a700hitter]

Strasburg or Jordan Zimmermann (short hitches on both, but you asked)

I'd say yes to both of those guys too, but is Zimmerman a #1on his team?

[a700hitter]

I am not convinced that Zimmerman is better than Iwakuma.

[sk7326]

I am not convinced that Zimmerman is better than Iwakuma.

 

Relatively close in terms of performance to date. Zimmermann if 5 years younger. He was a co-#1 on the best team in the NL last year.

[a700hitter]

Relatively close in terms of performance to date. Zimmermann if 5 years younger. He was a co-#1 on the best team in the NL last year.

He would have been the number 3 on that team if Gio hadn't had an injury plagued season. Do you think we could get Zimmerman for Cespedes and and second tier prospect?

[BSN07]

He would have been the number 3 on that team if Gio hadn't had an injury plagued season. Do you think we could get Zimmerman for Cespedes and and second tier prospect?

 

Maybe. The Nats would have to move R. Zimmerman to 1B. If they are willing to do that than it opens up a spot for Cespedes. Cepedes +1 should be able to fetch 1 season of a mid to top rotation arm. I'm still holding out hope Detroit some how manages to sign Scherzer soon and make Price available. Detroit is looking for a power COF and may match up well for Cespedes. Cespedes, WMB and a P prospect is a good all around package for one year of Price. Hell Cespedes straight up for one year of Porcello would work too if the Sox find a front line SP somewhere else.

[a700hitter]

Maybe. The Nats would have to move R. Zimmerman to 1B. If they are willing to do that than it opens up a spot for Cespedes. Cepedes +1 should be able to fetch 1 season of a mid to top rotation arm. I'm still holding out hope Detroit some how manages to sign Scherzer soon and make Price available. Detroit is looking for a power COF and may match up well for Cespedes. Cespedes, WMB and a P prospect is a good all around package for one year of Price. Hell Cespedes straight up for one year of Porcello would work too if the Sox find a front line SP somewhere else.

 

How would moving R.Zimmerman from 3rd base to first base open up a spot for Cespedes? Porcello is 25 and just had back to back productive seasons. I don't think they will be rushing to move him.

[BSN07]

How would moving R.Zimmerman from 3rd base to first base open up a spot for Cespedes? Porcello is 25 and just had back to back productive seasons. I don't think they will be rushing to move him.

 

Because Zimmerman was moved to LF when he returned from the DL and the team has no plans to put him back on 3B.

 

I mentioned Porcello cause he only has one year of control left and idk the chances of Detroit extending him.

[a700hitter]

Because Zimmerman was moved to LF when he returned from the DL and the team has no plans to put him back on 3B.

 

I mentioned Porcello cause he only has one year of control left and idk the chances of Detroit extending him.

 

The Nat's still have Worth and Harper playing the corners.

[User Name]

Harper's moving to CF with Zimmerman manning 1st if they get a COF.

[Spudboy]

Well, at least the Sox now have a 3rd baseman.

[BSN07]

Harper's moving to CF with Zimmerman manning 1st if they get a COF.

 

yes this is the idea I've heard.

[a700hitter]

Denard Span is a FA?

[seabeachfred]

I just wonder how long it is going to take before we get those two standout starting pitchers we need. We were able to get two hitters the team wanted very quickly but the sooner we can take care of business the better. It is well known here that I have little confidence in our front office at the present time and the fear is they may find a way to gum things up, and no matter how elated some of my colleagues are here, if we fail to get those two stand out pitchers this new spending spree is not going to work.

[sk7326]

I just wonder how long it is going to take before we get those two standout starting pitchers we need. We were able to get two hitters the team wanted very quickly but the sooner we can take care of business the better. It is well known here that I have little confidence in our front office at the present time and the fear is they may find a way to gum things up, and no matter how elated some of my colleagues are here, if we fail to get those two stand out pitchers this new spending spree is not going to work.

 

We'll see how it goes - in many of the essential ways it is the same front office it has been for the past decade, which has been a pretty good one. There will be upgrades in pitching. Whether it is Lester or something via trade (Latos, Cueto, Zimmermann?) or both. But fixing two positions where they got essentially zippo last season was essential.

[Orange Juiced]

I just wonder how long it is going to take before we get those two standout starting pitchers we need. We were able to get two hitters the team wanted very quickly but the sooner we can take care of business the better. It is well known here that I have little confidence in our front office at the present time and the fear is they may find a way to gum things up, and no matter how elated some of my colleagues are here, if we fail to get those two stand out pitchers this new spending spree is not going to work.

 

It's not even Thanksgiving yet, Fred.

 

Everyone can relax. The Red Sox are NOT spending this money on Panda and Hanley only to not upgrade their rotation as well.

 

The only thing that gets me a little antsy is 700's scenario whereby X or Betts gets dealt for a #2 starter type. That would kill me. Of course, I think Cherington is smart enough to so something so colossally stupid.

 

(But Lucchino might be...)

[User Name]

I'm actually a bit iffy on Cherington as well. Some here love to call me (and others) "polyanna" and stupid s*** like that, but the truth is, i call a spade a spade.

 

Right now the spade is that Cherington is all over the place in my humble opinion. They had a set organizational philosophy which they s*** on after just one crappy year. Upgrades needed to be made, but not with a spending spree of this magnitude, and even less so if they do trade some of the better kids to get a pitcher. It makes sense from a business standpoint to a certain degree, but where's the organizational consistency?

[a700hitter]

It's not even Thanksgiving yet, Fred.

 

Everyone can relax. The Red Sox are NOT spending this money on Panda and Hanley only to not upgrade their rotation as well.

 

The only thing that gets me a little antsy is 700's scenario whereby X or Betts gets dealt for a #2 starter type. That would kill me. Of course, I think Cherington is smart enough to so something so colossally stupid.

 

(But Lucchino might be...)

A year ago many would have thought it would have been colossally stupid to trade Bradley and Middlebrooks.

[sk7326]

A year ago many would have thought it would have been colossally stupid to trade Bradley and Middlebrooks.

 

True about Bradley. Only reason you'd say that about Middlebrooks was because it was a serious case of selling low. Hard to expect him to actually get LESS valuable than he was in 2013.

[seabeachfred]

I'm actually a bit iffy on Cherington as well. Some here love to call me (and others) "polyanna" and stupid s*** like that, but the truth is, i call a spade a spade.

 

Right now the spade is that Cherington is all over the place in my humble opinion. They had a set organizational philosophy which they s*** on after just one crappy year. Upgrades needed to be made, but not with a spending spree of this magnitude, and even less so if they do trade some of the better kids to get a pitcher. It makes sense from a business standpoint to a certain degree, but where's the organizational consistency?

 

Oh vey, I actually totally agree with you on this. My God, what's next.....pigs fly? Here is where we may differ again. I really believe that the poor showing of our young players this past season has shaken the front office to the core about rebuilding or retooling with youth. I just hope we don't become like the Yankees and shitcan our farm system.

[User Name]

Simple: Sign Hanley to play 3B, sign a pitcher (Lester) , trade Cespedes+ for the other one (Iwakuma, Latos).

 

They'd still have an extremely solid lineup and a deep bench to exploit platoon advantages. I just don't get where Panda fits in here.

[sk7326]

I'm actually a bit iffy on Cherington as well. Some here love to call me (and others) "polyanna" and stupid s*** like that, but the truth is, i call a spade a spade.

 

Right now the spade is that Cherington is all over the place in my humble opinion. They had a set organizational philosophy which they s*** on after just one crappy year. Upgrades needed to be made, but not with a spending spree of this magnitude, and even less so if they do trade some of the better kids to get a pitcher. It makes sense from a business standpoint to a certain degree, but where's the organizational consistency?

 

I think the more interesting question regarding this is who is actually driving? We know Cherington has had a lot of experience in org development, and the scouting is top notch. This franchise has drafted well year after year. I think ownership priorities shift very violently - and Cherington and the baseball working stiffs are left to make the best of it baseball-wise. That is a flaw in the machinery.

 

I think at times the dynamic in the front office is more or less like what we saw in the Gonzalez trade. Ownership made the dump with the Dodgers, and it was up to Cherington's folks to swoop in and identify prospects to make it a tractable (in fact, quite good by salary dump standards) baseball deal. I am not trying to exempt him from accountability or scrutiny, but I do wonder how empowered he is at times. (or whether the level of empowerment has been consistent, if that makes sense)

[Youk Of The Nation]

Simple: Sign Hanley to play 3B, sign a pitcher (Lester) , trade Cespedes+ for the other one (Iwakuma, Latos).

 

They'd still have an extremely solid lineup and a deep bench to exploit platoon advantages. I just don't get where Panda fits in here.

 

He doesn't fit anywhere, including standard airline seats.

[User Name]

I think the more interesting question regarding this is who is actually driving? We know Cherington has had a lot of experience in org development, and the scouting is top notch. This franchise has drafted well year after year. I think ownership priorities shift very violently - and Cherington and the baseball working stiffs are left to make the best of it baseball-wise. That is a flaw in the machinery.

 

I think at times the dynamic in the front office is more or less like what we saw in the Gonzalez trade. Ownership made the dump with the Dodgers, and it was up to Cherington's folks to swoop in and identify prospects to make it a tractable (in fact, quite good by salary dump standards) baseball deal. I am not trying to exempt him from accountability or scrutiny, but I do wonder how empowered he is at times. (or whether the level of empowerment has been consistent, if that makes sense)

 

The Panda move looks like a ticket-selling Lucchino move to me. I wouldn't doubt him being empowered once again regarding baseball operations after the disaster that was 2014.

[Bellhorn04]

I'm actually a bit iffy on Cherington as well. Some here love to call me (and others) "polyanna" and stupid s*** like that, but the truth is, i call a spade a spade.

 

Right now the spade is that Cherington is all over the place in my humble opinion. They had a set organizational philosophy which they s*** on after just one crappy year. Upgrades needed to be made, but not with a spending spree of this magnitude, and even less so if they do trade some of the better kids to get a pitcher. It makes sense from a business standpoint to a certain degree, but where's the organizational consistency?

 

It's a conflicted philosophy, because no matter what they say, they always have an eye on attendance and ratings too. Personally the lack of consistency doesn't bother me too much. I expect it.