2015 Red Sox Trade Deadline Thread

[Palodios]

Semi serious. When I hear about sacrificing the future, I expect the future to be better than last place finishes in back to back years. Big market big payroll teams like the Red Sox should be able to work in new players without finishing last.

 

Last place finishes in back to back years ? I think you need to look up the word 'finish' in the dictionary because you keep using it incorrectly.

 

I joke, but there is a lot of baseball left. And I think Ben and the farm system may surprise you.

[mvp 78]

I have more faith in the farm system than Ben. Ben seems smart, but I believe ownership directed him to sign AGon 2.0 and Crawford 2.0 this offseason. Not sure if he is allowed to make any calls on his own.

[a700hitter]

Last place finishes in back to back years ? I think you need to look up the word 'finish' in the dictionary because you keep using it incorrectly.

 

I joke, but there is a lot of baseball left. And I think Ben and the farm system may surprise you.

i appreciate some of the position players coming out of the system, but they are not quite Lynn, Rice, Dewey or even Nomar. They are very good players and nice output by the system. The problem that I have with our farm system and scouting is the lack of big time arms produced over an extended period

[mvp 78]

It took a long time for Evans to mature. His hitting wasn't much to speak about for the first half of his career. Edited July 12, 2015 by mvp 78

[Palodios]

i appreciate some of the position players coming out of the system, but they are not quite Lynn, Rice, Dewey or even Nomar. They are very good players and nice output by the system. The problem that I have with our farm system and scouting is the lack of big time arms produced over an extended period

 

It seems to me that they are doing all the right things, but the results have been mixed when it comes to pitching.

 

The Red Sox overpaid to get the top two pitchers in the international draft last year. They dismantled the team in 2012 and 2014 to try to get into elite draft picks and traded for a bunch of prospects like Webster RDLR Escobar Hembree Wright and Rodriguez. They paid stupid money to acquire Moncada.

 

This Brian Johnson guy ? They knew he was a low ceiling high floor guy, but the draft class was weak and it made sense to draft someone who would hit the majors early.

 

Most of the moves they make are logical and but unfortunately, developing players takes time. Hopefully Owens and Johnson have excellent debuts this year.

[Spudboy]

It seems to me that they are doing all the right things, but the results have been mixed when it comes to pitching.

 

The Red Sox overpaid to get the top two pitchers in the international draft last year. They dismantled the team in 2012 and 2014 to try to get into elite draft picks and traded for a bunch of prospects like Webster RDLR Escobar Hembree Wright and Rodriguez. They paid stupid money to acquire Moncada.

 

This Brian Johnson guy ? They knew he was a low ceiling high floor guy, but the draft class was weak and it made sense to draft someone who would hit the majors early.

 

Most of the moves they make are logical and but unfortunately, developing players takes time. Hopefully Owens and Johnson have excellent debuts this year.

 

What?

[cp176]

I'll take that as a compliment too. It's what I'm here for.

 

It was meant as a compliment.

[cp176]

Also, I'm not here to "chum the waters," just to kill some time like everyone else on here.

 

good to know

[Palodios]

What?

Before Moncada, they overspent on Espinoza and Acosta in the international draft, but they're still high schoolers.

[Spudboy]

Before Moncada, they overspent on Espinoza and Acosta in the international draft, but they're still high schoolers.

 

Oh. Thanks.

[a700hitter]

Also, I'm not here to "chum the waters," just to kill some time like everyone else on here.

I'm here, because I have nowhere else to go. And TalkSox is better than any other Red Sox forum.

[cp176]

I'm here, because I have nowhere else to go. And TalkSox is better than any other Red Sox forum.

 

I'm here because I can't sleep anymore and I don't want to do my yard work. The positive side of this is that when I was younger, I never would have had the time to do this. Now I do.

[jacksonianmarch]

You're going to see a market for Uehara, and I think the sox would be dumb not to move him.

[a700hitter]

You're going to see a market for Uehara, and I think the sox would be dumb not to move him.

Agreed, unless they decide to be buyers, which is unlikely, because Ben has his head too far up his ass to know how to get this team back on track. This season is salvageable. And without "sacrificing the future", but this guy is clueless.

Edited July 13, 2015 by a700hitter

[Bellhorn04]

You're going to see a market for Uehara, and I think the sox would be dumb not to move him.

 

Then we need a closer for next year.

[jacksonianmarch]

Not really. I think Tazawa is a closer in the making and should do well in that role. I also think Barnes will end up as a solid reliever eventually, but he was a little over his head right now. My question is whether the sox are actually going to "go for it". I said from the beginning this year that the sox seemed to make some questionable big money signings yet leave large holes in important areas that left you scratching your head. My bet is the sox are going to make some more moves, maybe a splash or two, but if they don't have a complete playoff bound roster in mind, they'll fill the closer role internally.

[a700hitter]

Not really. I think Tazawa is a closer in the making and should do well in that role. I also think Barnes will end up as a solid reliever eventually, but he was a little over his head right now. My question is whether the sox are actually going to "go for it". I said from the beginning this year that the sox seemed to make some questionable big money signings yet leave large holes in important areas that left you scratching your head. My bet is the sox are going to make some more moves, maybe a splash or two, but if they don't have a complete playoff bound roster in mind, they'll fill the closer role internally.

It is time for the Red Sox to give Matt Barnes the Craig Hansen award and ship him out of town.

[a700hitter]

Then we need a closer for next year.

last year, Ben gave away 80 percent of the starting rotation. I'd like to say traded, but I am still trying to figure out what we got in return. If he would do that, he will certainly trade away a 40 year old reliever.

[jacksonianmarch]

a700, I could have said the same thing about Betances when we saw him get lit up in Mo's final season. Guys with his stuff aren't easy to find. It sometimes takes a bit to harness it. This is his first year as a reliever, and to make that adjustment at the big league level is not easy. I think you let him simmer in AAA this yr, don't call him back up in September, and bring him in to ST with a shot to make the team. He has been this highly regarded draftee his whole career. This was his first big challenge and he failed. Make him earn it, and he will. I really like his stuff. If you don't want him, we'll take him and turn him into a high end setup man or closer

[a700hitter]

a700, I could have said the same thing about Betances when we saw him get lit up in Mo's final season. Guys with his stuff aren't easy to find. It sometimes takes a bit to harness it. This is his first year as a reliever, and to make that adjustment at the big league level is not easy. I think you let him simmer in AAA this yr, don't call him back up in September, and bring him in to ST with a shot to make the team. He has been this highly regarded draftee his whole career. This was his first big challenge and he failed. Make him earn it, and he will. I really like his stuff. If you don't want him, we'll take him and turn him into a high end setup man or closer

The difference is that Betances always posted big strike out numbers at every level. Unbelievable strike out numbers. That hasn't been Matt Barnes. He is Craig Hansen.

[Bellhorn04]

i appreciate some of the position players coming out of the system, but they are not quite Lynn, Rice, Dewey or even Nomar. They are very good players and nice output by the system. The problem that I have with our farm system and scouting is the lack of big time arms produced over an extended period

 

Lynn, Rice, Dewey, Fisk - that was a once-in-a-millennium crop, or once-in-forever. And of course none of them were pitchers. For our #1 pitchers in the 70's we had to trade for Tiant and Eck. There's almost always been a problem producing pitching.

[Bellhorn04]

Not really. I think Tazawa is a closer in the making and should do well in that role.

 

Then we need a new set-up man.

 

Trading Koji might get us a nice prospect. But trading any good pitcher also adds to our to-do list for 2016.

[sk7326]

i appreciate some of the position players coming out of the system, but they are not quite Lynn, Rice, Dewey or even Nomar. They are very good players and nice output by the system. The problem that I have with our farm system and scouting is the lack of big time arms produced over an extended period

 

FWIW, both Betts and Bogaerts were a full two years younger than Lynn when they hit the show and a year younger than Rice. As noted, Lynn and Rice were a once in a lifetime sort of class (and Rice in particular was the ultimate marriage of player and ballpark).

 

The arms I share the frustration - although it seems that a lot of organizational priority has been on sourcing that via other means. It is also one of the places where the draft positions of the last decade really show.

[Kimmi]

FWIW, both Betts and Bogaerts were a full two years younger than Lynn when they hit the show and a year younger than Rice. As noted, Lynn and Rice were a once in a lifetime sort of class (and Rice in particular was the ultimate marriage of player and ballpark).

 

The arms I share the frustration - although it seems that a lot of organizational priority has been on sourcing that via other means. It is also one of the places where the draft positions of the last decade really show.

 

Yes, drafting position does show. It's also the philosophy of the FO not to specifically draft pitching just because pitching is a need. Their philosophy is to typically draft the best available player, and then deal from areas of strength to acquire pitching.

[Elktonnick]

Yes, drafting position does show. It's also the philosophy of the FO not to specifically draft pitching just because pitching is a need. Their philosophy is to typically draft the best available player, and then deal from areas of strength to acquire pitching.

 

Not to be argumentative, but if that is their philosophy then why didn't execute to get a true number 1 starter like they did in years past. For some inexplicable reason, Boston has stopped doing the things that got them their 2004 and 2007 titles.

[SoxnCycles]

Not to be argumentative, but if that is their philosophy then why didn't execute to get a true number 1 starter like they did in years past. For some inexplicable reason, Boston has stopped doing the things that got them their 2004 and 2007 titles.

 

Like who?

[Bellhorn04]

Hypothetically, the Red Sox had at least 5 options by which they could have retained or acquired a #1 or #1/2 starter.

 

1) Not trade Lackey.

2) Sign Lester.

3) Sign Scherzer.

4) Sign Shields.

5) Trade for Hamels.

[SoxnCycles]

Hypothetically, the Red Sox had at least 5 options by which they could have retained or acquired a #1 or #1/2 starter.

 

1) Not trade Lackey.

2) Sign Lester.

3) Sign Scherzer.

4) Sign Shields.

5) Trade for Hamels.

 

Only Hamels fits the "deal from areas of strength to acquire pitching" philosophy, as stated previously.

 

I'm convinced that Lackey had had enough of Boston and was willing to sit out, rather than play for $500 grand for the

Sox.

 

They royally screwed up the Lester negotiations, but it doesn't have much to do with what they should have done this off season.

 

They weren't going to give Scherzer 7 years at age 30.

 

Shields was possible, but it's debatable that he's a #1/#2.

Hey! Maybe the Padres will deal him to us!

 

It'll be fun around here, the first time he gives up 7 runs in 4 innings

Edited July 13, 2015 by SoxnCycles

[Elktonnick]

Hypothetically, the Red Sox had at least 5 options by which they could have retained or acquired a #1 or #1/2 starter.

 

1) Not trade Lackey.

2) Sign Lester.

3) Sign Scherzer.

4) Sign Shields.

5) Trade for Hamels.

 

For what's it's worth, I can't help but think that the Red Sox front office of 12 years ago would have made a major play for Scherzer but they were hungry for a title back then.

[sk7326]

Not to be argumentative, but if that is their philosophy then why didn't execute to get a true number 1 starter like they did in years past. For some inexplicable reason, Boston has stopped doing the things that got them their 2004 and 2007 titles.

 

They didn't in 2013 - it worked out well.