2015 Red Sox Trade Deadline Thread

[Kimmi]

I'm reading that the Sox are trying to work out a prospect package to get Hamels. Depending on the prospect package, I don't really get this move at this point.

[a700hitter]

I'm reading that the Sox are trying to work out a prospect package to get Hamels. Depending on the prospect package, I don't really get this move at this point.

It would be for next year.

[a700hitter]

I'd keep Taz too if I could.

 

He has been the Sox workhorse out of the pen for years.

He might be damaged goods from being overworked. It is up to the coaching and training staff to recognize the signs. If so, they should move him and get something for him before his arm falls off.

[Dojji]

My ideal deadline right now is one in which the team either does nothing, or sheds contracts. Adding contracts now is insane. Edited July 24, 2015 by Dojji

[Bellhorn04]

My ideal deadline right now is one in which the team either does nothing, or sheds contracts. Adding contracts now is insane.

 

A trade for a pitcher under control beyond 2015 is not necessarily insane.

[Palodios]

Do the Red Sox really want to spend 100 million and Swihart on a 32 year old pitcher with an ERA hovering around 4.00?

 

They really need to wait till the offseason....

[a700hitter]

Do the Red Sox really want to spend 100 million and Swihart on a 32 year old pitcher with an ERA hovering around 4.00?

 

They really need to wait till the offseason....

Will Swihart be our catcher moving forward or will it be Vazquez? If he is blocked at catcher, he is expendable.

[Palodios]

Will Swihart be our catcher moving forward or will it be Vazquez? If he is blocked at catcher, he is expendable.

 

Whether we keep Swihart or not, he's worth more than Hamels. I'd centerpiece him for a trade for a cheap young pitcher, not an expensive declining one.

[a700hitter]

Whether we keep Swihart or not, he's worth more than Hamels. I'd centerpiece him for a trade for a cheap young pitcher, not an expensive declining one.

If he is going to be stuck behind another catcher, his value will not be that high. Teams will be aware that he is blocked. That's just the way it is. That scenario has palyed out witha few teams over the last few years. Right now the Mets have the issue. They would love to move one of their catchers, but they have not been getting value offers. Swihart is a good hitter. Can he play another position and hit well enough to hold down another position? If he can, he will have more value. If he is just a catcher and we have him slotted behind Vazquez, he isn't worth a lot to us.

[Dojji]

Until we know that Vazquez is back and healthy I want no part of trading Swihart.

[a700hitter]

Until we know that Vazquez is back and healthy I want no part of trading Swihart.

His recovery has gone very well. He is on schedule.

 

http://nesn.com/2015/07/red-sox-catcher-christian-vazquez-throws-for-first-time-since-surgery-video/

[Spudboy]

Until we know that Vazquez is back and healthy I want no part of trading Swihart.

 

Yup. And I say we keep Hanigan. Move Swihart to 3rd or 1st.

[iortiz]

I wouldn't trade for Hamels at this point. I'd rather try to move Porcello and Panda even if that mean not getting nothing in return; we only need to get rid of those stupid contracts.

[Kimmi]

Do the Red Sox really want to spend 100 million and Swihart on a 32 year old pitcher with an ERA hovering around 4.00?

 

They really need to wait till the offseason....

 

At this point, giving up prospects for Hamels doesn't make much sense. As you said, wait until the offseason where they can get better pitching without having to give up any prospects. That said, to get one of the top line starters, the Sox will have to be willing to commit to more years than what they would have to with Hamels.

[Kimmi]

Until we know that Vazquez is back and healthy I want no part of trading Swihart.

 

I concur. We saw first hand this year how important depth at that position is.

[Dojji]

His recovery has gone very well. He is on schedule.

 

http://nesn.com/2015/07/red-sox-catcher-christian-vazquez-throws-for-first-time-since-surgery-video/

all that means is that there's nothing physically wrong. It takes more than that for me to be convinced he's recovering in all aspects of his game, especially in a position like catcher where there's no substitude for reps.

 

Especially since this kid's talent on the offensive side of the baseball was pretty mediocre to begin with. I'm honestly not sure what missing a year of at bats is going to mean for Vazquez' offensive development but I can't think it's good.If we want a great defender guy who can't hit we have Sandy Leon for that. Vazquez NEEDS to hit at least a little to be useful, if he can't do that he's a career backup catcher -- a very very good one, but still just a backup. And he's just lost one of his most formative developmental years to pick up his offensive game.

 

Let's not forget that this was supposed to be the year Vazquez proved those like me who were 100% behind him, right that he was a starter in the first place. That remains unestablished.

 

 

We cannot spare Swihart at the moment.

Edited July 24, 2015 by Dojji

[reYoukilis]

I was more impressed with Vasquez than Swihart in the limited amount I saw of both. But sure, wait for Vasquez to prove himself again before making any kind of decision.

[cp176]

I was more impressed with Vasquez than Swihart in the limited amount I saw of both. But sure, wait for Vasquez to prove himself again before making any kind of decision.

 

I think I agree with this. I did not see enough hits coming out of Swihart to make me think that he is a future star. It would be nice to keep them both but if the decision to trade Swihart was made and it actually looked like it could help us, I would be in favor.

[Kimmi]

I was more impressed with Vasquez than Swihart in the limited amount I saw of both. But sure, wait for Vasquez to prove himself again before making any kind of decision.

 

I was too. I am far more concerned with defense from a catcher than I am with offense, and Vazquez shines defensively. This is not to take anything away from Swihart. I think he still needs more development in that area.

[jacksonianmarch]

Vasquez is a defensive whiz from the getgo. Swihart is more the offensive type. Most offensive rookies don't start out gangbusters, they usually start out slow and eventually adjust. It was easier to see Vasquez's skill because his D is nearly a finished product. They are going to have an interesting decision to make in the offseason. Swihart is ready. So is Christian. Who do they start and do they move one of them?

[Kimmi]

I think I agree with this. I did not see enough hits coming out of Swihart to make me think that he is a future star. It would be nice to keep them both but if the decision to trade Swihart was made and it actually looked like it could help us, I would be in favor.

 

I don't see the Sox keeping them both with the intention of having them platoon at catcher. Hanigan is still under contract, and to me it makes more sense having him as the backup for Vazquez or Swihart. It would probably make sense to trade one of them eventually, but I think they should hang on to both for now until we have a clearer picture of them both.

 

I wonder how realistic/beneficial it would be to move Swihart to 1B. Would he be of more value to us there for the long term, or more value to us in a trade?

[jacksonianmarch]

Kimmi, Swihart has the goods to catch. You move guys off the position when the position is either too tough for them physically or if they really aren't that good of a catcher. Swihart will at least be an average defensive catcher and at his age, his body can handle it. Plus, RSN wouldn't tolerate him at 1b as of right now as he's probably going to take a couple years to develop his power. And if you're watching the next 2 years and see a total of 16 or so homers from him over that time, then you'll be complaining about how he cant hit.

 

My assumption is that they're going to do a time share, a la Yankees in 97-98 with Posada and Girardi. It took a few years for Jorge to really establish himself, but it was under the tutelage of Girardi. If it's Vasquez and Swihart, there wont be tutelage, it'd be two guys trying to win the job outright, which could be a good thing. If Vasquez wins the job with his glove, then you can get a lot of Blake in trade

[Palodios]

In addition to the Os floating Gausman, the Mets are apparently considering moving Zack Wheeler.

 

The Red Sox have still been asking about young high upside pitching-- I wonder what they're going to be able to do with the limited major league trade pieces they have.

 

The Mets are connected to Zobrist. I wonder if a Wheeler for Holt deal makes sense.

Edited July 25, 2015 by Palodios

[BigPapi]

Royals have aquired cueto.

[Spudboy]

Royals have aquired cueto.

 

Hope they don't extend him.

[Kimmi]

Hope they don't extend him.

 

My understanding is that the FO's preference is still to find young, cost-controlled pitching. I have a hard time seeing the FO giving Cueto the kind of contract that he will likely command. I'm guessing right now, the FO is looking more into the trade market than at free agency.

 

Good for the Royals and good for Cueto.

[a700hitter]

"Young cost controlled ace" -- More double speak from the FO. Every team wants the young ace arm, because it should have more miles left on it. The result of those pitchers being so desirable is that the cost will be enormous. So much for cost control. The only way to get a young ace that is "cost-controlled" is someone under contract with another team or with too few years for Arbitration or Free Agency. Those guys are going to cost a fortune in prospects. They are the hottest properties around. Teams are not going to give them away. The "young cost controlled ace" is like looking for the holy grail. Every other team is looking for him too. The last time we landed one for a good price was Pedro. He has been retired for 5 years after a nice long career and is going into the Hall today. It doesn't happen very often at all.

[Bellhorn04]

"Young cost controlled ace" -- More double speak from the FO. Every team wants the young ace arm, because it should have more miles left on it. The result of those pitchers being so desirable is that the cost will be enormous. So much for cost control. The only way to get a young ace that is "cost-controlled" is someone under contract with another team or with too few years for Arbitration or Free Agency. Those guys are going to cost a fortune in prospects. They are the hottest properties around. Teams are not going to give them away. The "young cost controlled ace" is like looking for the holy grail. Every other team is looking for him too. The last time we landed one for a good price was Pedro. He has been retired for 5 years after a nice long career and is going into the Hall today. It doesn't happen very often at all.

 

True, if there were young cost-controlled aces available at a tolerable price in prospects I would think we'd already have one.

[Kimmi]

True, if there were young cost-controlled aces available at a tolerable price in prospects I would think we'd already have one.

 

No doubt the cost is likely going to be high. Ben has not been willing to pay that yet, but he is going to have to change that willingness. This is one of the reasons for building a strong farm system, to have the pieces to trade for areas of need. OTOH, we got Rodriguez for 2 months of Miller.

[cp176]

Common sense would seem to indicate this but based on our most recent deals, anything could happen. I'm leaning 700s way on this one. i want to know who these young cost controlled aces are. If they didn't cost much in terms of dollars and cents, it would take a boatload of prospects to get them. If they are out there and available, be surprised if we got one .