Wade Miley: Not bad actually

[Kimmi]

Really, Miley is going to be part of the rotation solution, and that is fine.

 

Free agency will be a tricky place to find difference making starting pitching. Price is the one guy, and he's 29 but will force you to buy a number of decline years (and surrender a pick). Is that worth it? You can go either way there. The other sexy names on the starter list have major question marks - is Jordan Zimmermann any good really, and is Cueto's arm going to remain attached to his body.

 

I actually like the idea of signing Lackey. Durable, knows Boston. Similary Mark Buehrle is useful on a short deal (Dan Haren less so, but still). If you want to take a short money flyer (with the modest expectations that come with it), could do a lot worse than Cliff Lee.

 

From a business standpoint, I shudder at the thought of giving Price the type of contract that he will likely command. Plus the draft pick, as you mentioned. However, as a fan, I'd love to have him on the team.

 

I tend to think that our #1 is going to come via trade rather than free agency.

[Palodios]

Price/Cueto won't cost draft picks, but Zimmerman will.

[cp176]

From a business standpoint, I shudder at the thought of giving Price the type of contract that he will likely command. Plus the draft pick, as you mentioned. However, as a fan, I'd love to have him on the team.

 

I tend to think that our #1 is going to come via trade rather than free agency.

 

One of each would be a good thing I think!

[a700hitter]

From a business standpoint, I shudder at the thought of giving Price the type of contract that he will likely command. Plus the draft pick, as you mentioned. However, as a fan, I'd love to have him on the team.

 

I tend to think that our #1 is going to come via trade rather than free agency.

It is not my business so it doesn't make me shudder at all. But I am a fan

[Kimmi]

Price/Cueto won't cost draft picks, but Zimmerman will.

 

I forgot about Price and Cueto not being eligible for a qualifying offer. Good point.

 

I still shudder at the thought of the contract that he will receive.

[Kimmi]

One of each would be a good thing I think!

 

It would be very good. At this point, I think we need to take everything that Dombrowski says with a grain of salt, but it sounds like he will be looking to add one top of the rotation starter, plus several relievers, including a potential closer as a back up for Koji.

[Kimmi]

It is not my business so it doesn't make me shudder at all. But I am a fan

 

It makes me shudder because I know what tends to happen at the back end of such contracts. And because the contract is so large, the team will be more or less stuck with it, and a potential "black hole" in the rotation for 2-3 years. Short term he should be fine. Long term he could handcuff the team.

[a700hitter]

It makes me shudder because I know what tends to happen at the back end of such contracts. And because the contract is so large, the team will be more or less stuck with it, and a potential "black hole" in the rotation for 2-3 years. Short term he should be fine. Long term he could handcuff the team.

I'd prefer to be handcuffed at the end of a $200 million Price contract instead of the front end of the $170 million spent on Hanley and Porcello. So, Price doesn't make me shudder.

[Kimmi]

I'd prefer to be handcuffed at the end of a $200 million Price contract instead of the front end of the $170 million spent on Hanley and Porcello. So, Price doesn't make me shudder.

 

Hanley's and Pablo's contracts have been terrible to date, and are a good example of how a team can be handcuffed once the contract turns bad. While the chances are good that Price will live up to his contract in the early years, there is no guarantee of that either. Hanley's and Pablo's contracts being terrible are not going to make signing Price to a ludicrous deal any better of an idea.

 

Just to be clear, I am not opposed to signing Price. I would love to have him on the team. But I will still shudder at his contract.

[a700hitter]

Hanley's and Pablo's contracts have been terrible to date, and are a good example of how a team can be handcuffed once the contract turns bad. While the chances are good that Price will live up to his contract in the early years, there is no guarantee of that either. Hanley's and Pablo's contracts being terrible are not going to make signing Price to a ludicrous deal any better of an idea.

 

Just to be clear, I am not opposed to signing Price. I would love to have him on the team. But I will still shudder at his contract.

I didn't even mention Pablo. That is you reading what you want to see. Those contracts didn't turn bad. They were bad from the beginning. I' d rather get 3 top years from Price at the risk of him sliding down a hill in his final 2 or 3. Contracts don't bother me if we get some good years from the guy. It's not my business. Let John Henry worry about the finances. As a fan, it bothers me that they get players like Pablo, Porcello and Hanley who are just not good players. Save the Hanley is a good hitter when healthy argument. He's rarely healthy and he is the worst outfielder that I have seen in a Red Sox uniform. Edited October 14, 2015 by a700hitter

[mvp 78]

He makes Wily Mo look like Jim Edmonds.

[a700hitter]

He makes Wily Mo look like Jim Edmonds.

As funny as that sounds, it is true.

[sk7326]

Price is probably the first option in that he is good and has been good in the AL East. If you give him 7 years, he should be excellent for at least 3 of them and good for a couple more. A trade makes more sense just because there are more targets and more control.

 

Chris Sale is an obvious one ... Matt Harvey might be another, although I'd be surprised if the Mets were that obtuse ... Felix Hernandez would be another interesting one (shorter hitch, but still 3-4 years of control) if you think that his dropoff this year is curable - and DiPoto knowing the Sox brain trust might help there. There might even be a legitimate conversation to be had surrounding Strasburg (given the bloodletting in Nats-land).

 

As cp noted, Sox have so many guys who should (and need to honestly) be moved for career development that they can stock many trades. Of the above, Sale clearly is the only one I'd want to trade one of the "untouchables" for.

[Spudboy]

I'd prefer to be handcuffed at the end of a $200 million Price contract instead of the front end of the $170 million spent on Hanley and Porcello. So, Price doesn't make me shudder.

 

 

Me too.

[a700hitter]

Price is probably the first option in that he is good and has been good in the AL East. If you give him 7 years, he should be excellent for at least 3 of them and good for a couple more. A trade makes more sense just because there are more targets and more control.

 

Chris Sale is an obvious one ... Matt Harvey might be another, although I'd be surprised if the Mets were that obtuse ... Felix Hernandez would be another interesting one (shorter hitch, but still 3-4 years of control) if you think that his dropoff this year is curable - and DiPoto knowing the Sox brain trust might help there. There might even be a legitimate conversation to be had surrounding Strasburg (given the bloodletting in Nats-land).

 

As cp noted, Sox have so many guys who should (and need to honestly) be moved for career development that they can stock many trades. Of the above, Sale clearly is the only one I'd want to trade one of the "untouchables" for.

I like Greinke on a 5 year deal.

[sk7326]

I like Greinke on a 5 year deal.

 

I did not include Greinke since I think there is a .000000000001% chance he is not back in LA next season.

[a700hitter]

I did not include Greinke since I think there is a .000000000001% chance he is not back in LA next season.

That's a reason not to like him?

[Palodios]

It may be worth kicking the tires on Scherzer. He is an ace who might be available for less combined money/talent than other options.

[sk7326]

That's a reason not to like him?

 

I like him, but had filtered him out of the thought process

[sk7326]

It may be worth kicking the tires on Scherzer. He is an ace who might be available for less combined money/talent than other options.

 

Maybe. I'd be really curious about Strasburg though. There have been injury issues - and perhaps the Nationals might be ready to listen on him. It would be a massive overreaction, but would not be a stunning one. I mean their season was basically a mix of shaky back of the rotation starting, a bad bullpen and a horrific manager.

[Palodios]

Maybe. I'd be really curious about Strasburg though. There have been injury issues - and perhaps the Nationals might be ready to listen on him. It would be a massive overreaction, but would not be a stunning one. I mean their season was basically a mix of shaky back of the rotation starting, a bad bullpen and a horrific manager.

 

Strasburg would cost a ton, is extremely injury prone, and is a free agent after 2016. I'm more interested in Scherzer/ Gio Gonzalez, personally.

[Bellhorn04]

It may be worth kicking the tires on Scherzer. He is an ace who might be available for less combined money/talent than other options.

 

But what makes you think Washington would want to move him - he was even better than expected in Year 1 of his contract.

[cp176]

I really hope that Sale, Harvey, and Gray will be the types of top of the rotation guys they go after. Through free agency, Price than Greinke I hope will be the top two targets.

[sk7326]

Strasburg would cost a ton, is extremely injury prone, and is a free agent after 2016. I'm more interested in Scherzer/ Gio Gonzalez, personally.

 

Last year first one since his return from TJ where he was below 150 IP. So the other two factors are more relevant. And the price while high could be mitigated by the single year of control. Extending a 27 year old is much more palatable. Really any such trade would test how stupid and reactionary the Nats are. A lot of their ills will be cured by a managerial change (not all, but it is significant) - the potential upgrade from Matt Williams to even an Alex Cora would be noticeable.

[Palodios]

But what makes you think Washington would want to move him - he was even better than expected in Year 1 of his contract.

 

I imagine the Nationals are probably going to go into a soft rebuild over the next few years. They might be competitive again in a few years, but would they rather keep Scherzer, or upgrade to someone younger with the 30M/Y when they are competitive again? The later years in these kinds of contracts always suck.

[Kimmi]

I didn't even mention Pablo. That is you reading what you want to see. Those contracts didn't turn bad. They were bad from the beginning. I' d rather get 3 top years from Price at the risk of him sliding down a hill in his final 2 or 3. Contracts don't bother me if we get some good years from the guy. It's not my business. Let John Henry worry about the finances. As a fan, it bothers me that they get players like Pablo, Porcello and Hanley who are just not good players. Save the Hanley is a good hitter when healthy argument. He's rarely healthy and he is the worst outfielder that I have seen in a Red Sox uniform.

 

No, that was not me reading what I wanted to see, it was me reading and trying to post at close to 10 pm on a weeknight. Pablo or Porcello, the point stands. Their contracts being bad in the first year does not make handing out a huge contract to Price any better of an idea.

 

It's not my money either. I will be thrilled if we sign Price. I just don't like hearing criticism of the FO for not signing someone like Price, then hearing criticism from the same people for signing someone like Price when the contract goes south.

[a700hitter]

No, that was not me reading what I wanted to see, it was me reading and trying to post at close to 10 pm on a weeknight. Pablo or Porcello, the point stands. Their contracts being bad in the first year does not make handing out a huge contract to Price any better of an idea.

 

It's not my money either. I will be thrilled if we sign Price. I just don't like hearing criticism of the FO for not signing someone like Price, then hearing criticism from the same people for signing someone like Price when the contract goes south.

From my standpoint as a fan,a big contract with Price would be a much better idea than the contracts with Hanley, Porcello or Pablo, because Price is elite at a premium position and I am pretty sure that he will put up a few really good seasons. The bad investment on the back end of the deal is not my concern. That is ownership's problem. I have no financial interest in the team. None of us are businessmen with regard to the Red Sox, so the $ doesn't matter to me. I only care about the quality of the players on the field. Edited October 14, 2015 by a700hitter

[a700hitter]

It's not my money either. I will be thrilled if we sign Price. I just don't like hearing criticism of the FO for not signing someone like Price, then hearing criticism from the same people for signing someone like Price when the contract goes south.

Let me get this straight, the large contracts make you shudder, because you are worried about the reaction of some fans if they contract goes bad?

[Kimmi]

From my standpoint as a fan,a big contract with Price would be a much better idea than the contracts with Hanley, Porcello or Pablo, because Price is elite at a premium position and I am pretty sure that he will put up a few really good seasons. The bad investment on the back end of the deal is not my concern. That is ownership's problem. I have no financial interest in the team. None of us are businessmen with regard to the Red Sox, so the $ doesn't matter to me. I only care about the quality of the players on the field.

 

That's the thing about long contracts. The quality of the player on the field will eventually decline.

[Kimmi]

Let me get this straight, the large contracts make you shudder, because you are worried about the reaction of some fans if they contract goes bad?

 

No, the large contracts make me shudder because I don't like large contracts.