2016 Trade and Roster Move Speculation thread

[moonslav59]

I'm not saying that Holt wouldn't be a fine second baseman somewhere. What I'm saying is that what Holt is able to do as a supersub has a lot more value.

 

There was an ex-player/baseball analyst on the radio about a month ago saying that every team wants a Brock Holt, or tries to create their own, but it's not easy. Very few guys can do what he does.

 

Trust me, I'm not Holt's brother & never thought I'd have to defend the guy. I was just curious to find out why another guy put him in a 100 different trade proposals as if the Red Sox actually considered moving him.

 

Where have I ever even come close to saying the Sox have considered moving him?

 

Yes, few guys can do what Holt can do and that value is a value every GM covets, so why is it so hard to understand me expecting something very good in return for him and others in a larger package?

 

I'm not saying if we trade him, we won't miss his flexibility skill set. I'm just saying that with Papi retiring, the need for a super sub is lessened.

 

I'm saying we will need to create roster space for Moncada, Beni, Swihart and maybe even Pablo next yeara.

 

I'm saying I really like Hernandez, Young and to a lesser extent Rutledge as subs...maybe not more than Holt, but to the extent that the downgrade will not outweigh the upgrade at the pitching position. If that is not the case, I say no to the trade.

 

I'm saying I'm not trying to dump Holt because I don't value him. I value him highly and think another GM should value him higher than ours. It's my opinion., I'm not saying it's DD's opinion.

[moonslav59]

I still think you are missing my point, so I won't continue to try to explain. A lot can happen between now and next season and I agree they'll have some interesting decisions to make, but they won't need to create a spot for Sam Travis. He's a highly touted prospect who is missing most of this season. He'll either win the full time job at 1st in Boston or play full time in Pawtucket.

 

Travis was an after thought. There is also Moncada, Beni, Swihart and Pablo to find room for and just Papi's slot opening up

 

If we cut or trade Pablo, there are 2 slots. Keeping Holt and moving Hernandez in the minors is fine with me, but to me our shallowest depth position with my above scenario and Holt taking Pablo's place would be SS and 3B- both positions Holt is not my choice as a sub (over Hernandez at SS/3B and Rutledge at 3B and Marrero at SS)

Edited July 21, 2016 by moonslav59

[Dojji]

If we got a good price on Holt, I'd be content to move him and gamble on Marco Hernandez being able to be a solid replacement in the utility role. I think Hernandez is quite talented.

[moonslav59]

If we got a good price on Holt, I'd be content to move him and gamble on Marco Hernandez being able to be a solid replacement in the utility role. I think Hernandez is quite talented.

 

He can't play 1B or OF like Holt can, but he plays SS and probably 3B better than Holt, and that is where I see our depth issue need next season.

[moonslav59]

Lot's of talk today about Sale, Quintana and Gray being on the block this summer.

 

Would you trade any of these packages for one of these guys?

 

A) Benintendi, Swihart, Devers, Holt or Hernandez and Owens or Johnson

 

Moncada, Swihart, Devers, Owens or Johnson

 

C) Benintendi, Moncada and Swihart or Devers

 

D) Swihart, Devers, Kopech, Travis and one from Holt, Hernandez, Owens or Johnson

 

I'd give D for any, but prefer Quintana, Sale and Gray in this order.

 

I might give A for Quintana or Sale.

 

B is a close call and worse than A.

 

I doubt I'd go as high as C for any of these guys.

 

Your thoughts or suggestions?

 

Maybe we can sub in Kelly or give Owens and Johnson instead of Holt or Hernadez on A or Kopech or Travis on D.

 

 

[cp176]

Roster speculation = if they are smart (which they are), we sign Betts, Bogaerts, and Bradley for whatever it takes for as long as we can have them. End of story!

[Slasher9]

Lot's of talk today about Sale, Quintana and Gray being on the block this summer.

 

Would you trade any of these packages for one of these guys?

 

A) Benintendi, Swihart, Devers, Holt or Hernandez and Owens or Johnson

 

Moncada, Swihart, Devers, Owens or Johnson

 

C) Benintendi, Moncada and Swihart or Devers

 

D) Swihart, Devers, Kopech, Travis and one from Holt, Hernandez, Owens or Johnson

 

I'd give D for any, but prefer Quintana, Sale and Gray in this order.

 

I might give A for Quintana or Sale.

 

B is a close call and worse than A.

 

I doubt I'd go as high as C for any of these guys.

 

Your thoughts or suggestions?

 

Maybe we can sub in Kelly or give Owens and Johnson instead of Holt or Hernadez on A or Kopech or Travis on D.

 

 

I'd do A or D for sale or Q.

I'd consider B.

I would not do C.

[Jack Flap]

The only thing I've seen is that Sale and Quintana are likely not available:

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/07/white-sox-sellers-trade-deadline-rumor.html

 

...so I'll hold my crazy trade proposals for now. If either of those guys did come on the market, we might wish we still had Espinoza as a trade chip.

 

I will say, though, that we now have Price, Porcello, Wright, and Pomeranz under contract for not only 2017 but 2018 as well. If we did make a surprise run at a big fish like Sale or Quintana, I think E-Rod would be part of the package.

[Bellhorn04]

Sure would be nice if E-Rod laid claim to that last rotation spot.

 

We have to take future payroll considerations into account with all this - including the possibility of locking down one or more of our superstar B's.

[cp176]

Sure would be nice if E-Rod laid claim to that last rotation spot.

 

We have to take future payroll considerations into account with all this - including the possibility of locking down one or more of our superstar B's.

 

more I say - all of the more

[Kimmi]

The only thing I've seen is that Sale and Quintana are likely not available:

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/07/white-sox-sellers-trade-deadline-rumor.html

 

...so I'll hold my crazy trade proposals for now. If either of those guys did come on the market, we might wish we still had Espinoza as a trade chip.

 

I will say, though, that we now have Price, Porcello, Wright, and Pomeranz under contract for not only 2017 but 2018 as well. If we did make a surprise run at a big fish like Sale or Quintana, I think E-Rod would be part of the package.

 

In one of the tweets, Rosenthal said that the White Sox were offered a "king's ransom" for Sale within the last 48 hours and they flat out said no. If a king's ransom won't even get consideration, then Sale is not being moved for any package that we would be willing to part with.

 

I get Moon's desire to build the rotation from the top, but IMO, the top of our rotation looks pretty good. When factoring in cost, adding a non-PED version of someone like Santana makes more sense to me.

[d-money]

In one of the tweets, Rosenthal said that the White Sox were offered a "king's ransom" for Sale within the last 48 hours and they flat out said no. If a king's ransom won't even get consideration, then Sale is not being moved for any package that we would be willing to part with.

 

I get Moon's desire to build the rotation from the top, but IMO, the top of our rotation looks pretty good. When factoring in cost, adding a non-PED version of someone like Santana makes more sense to me.

 

Sucks for sale. To be stuck with an awful team.

[Bellhorn04]

Sucks for sale. To be stuck with an awful team.

 

He really signed a team-friendly contract. He could have been a free agent after 2017, but he agreed to cheap team options for 2018 and 2019. Yikes.

[Jack Flap]

Sure would be nice if E-Rod laid claim to that last rotation spot.

 

We have to take future payroll considerations into account with all this - including the possibility of locking down one or more of our superstar B's.

 

Good point.

[mvp 78]

In one of the tweets, Rosenthal said that the White Sox were offered a "king's ransom" for Sale within the last 48 hours and they flat out said no. If a king's ransom won't even get consideration, then Sale is not being moved for any package that we would be willing to part with.

 

I get Moon's desire to build the rotation from the top, but IMO, the top of our rotation looks pretty good. When factoring in cost, adding a non-PED version of someone like Santana makes more sense to me.

 

Why does this matter?

[Slasher9]

Why does this matter?

 

because some of us do not want proven cheaters on our team.

[mvp 78]

because some of us do not want proven cheaters on our team.

 

And yet you cheer Papi without any sense of irony?

 

I just don't understand how anyone can have such a clear "no cheaters" policy, but ignore the elephant in the room.

[SoxnCycles]

Time to move this to the Dead Horse thread...

[southpaw777]

That actually was unkowingly a very meaningful trade. When Stanley went to the Yankees, the Sox got Tomy Armas Jr. in return. Armas Jr. was later flipped to Montreal for some pitcher named Pedro Martinez

 

Good memory. I forgot that thats where they got TAJ

[Jack Flap]

And yet you cheer Papi without any sense of irony?

 

I just don't understand how anyone can have such a clear "no cheaters" policy, but ignore the elephant in the room.

 

Slasher is also a big Manny Ramirez fan, if I'm not mistaken.

[Slasher9]

Slasher is also a big Manny Ramirez fan, if I'm not mistaken.

 

correct. a Boston Red Sox Manny Ramirez fan.

Edited July 22, 2016 by Slasher9

[Slasher9]

And yet you cheer Papi without any sense of irony?

 

I just don't understand how anyone can have such a clear "no cheaters" policy, but ignore the elephant in the room.

 

proven. i guess i dont consider the 2003 supposed list released by xyz.com as "proof" that anyone on that supposed list was a cheater. now if Ortiz had tested positive for a PeD and served a suspension i would not want the Red Sox to trade for or sign him.

[mvp 78]

correct. a Boston Red Sox Manny Ramirez fan.

 

Do you believe he was clean with the Sox?

 

What if Santana made a one time mistake and is clean now? Is that ok?

[Slasher9]

Do you believe he was clean with the Sox?

 

What if Santana made a one time mistake and is clean now? Is that ok?

 

yes.

no.

[mvp 78]

yes.

no.

 

Ok, I think I understand your position now.

[Slasher9]

Ok, I think I understand your position now.

 

i think in the Manny thread you may have been the one to dismiss bill simmons? i dont read all of his stuff but that Manny Ramirez article is exactly how i feel about Manny.

[mvp 78]

i think in the Manny thread you may have been the one to dismiss bill simmons? i dont read all of his stuff but that Manny Ramirez article is exactly how i feel about Manny.

 

I just can't read him anymore. His writing style is just brutal.

[a700hitter]

I think the only fair way to evaluate the legacies of players that played during the steroid era is to realize that we have no reliable list of players who used PEDs with proof that they used. We do know enough to acknowledge that the use of PEDs was fairly pervasive during that era. There is hard evidence of use against very few players -- e.g. Palmiero, Bonds, ARod and Clemens, but with regard to others there is merely suspicion and innuendo e.g. Nomar. Next because there is no reliable list of who used, every player from that era should be viewed with suspicion. These decisions should not be made on the basis of rumor and innuendo.

 

For these reasons, I think the PED issue can't be an issue in voting for admission to the Hall, even for those who got caught. The use was pervasive, and if it wasn't openly encouraged by MLB (they loved the MaGwire - Sosa HR race because it brought baseball back from the 94 strike), they certainly turned a blind eye and tacitly approved it. They are in large part responsible for the pervasiveness of PEDs. They cannot act holier than thou at this juncture. As for tainting the players from that period, unfortunately they all carry a taint. Molitor and others went in without any taint, but that is not fair. No one should be beyond suspicion from that era including Jeter. When all the crap was going down with MaGwire and Bonds and Sosa, there was a time when the press was heralding ARod as the player who would rescue baseball from the steroid era by re-writing the record books and doing it the "right way". They could not have been more wrong. Everyone should carry the taint from that era, and if their achievements are borderline Hall-worthy, it should count against them.

Edited July 22, 2016 by a700hitter

[moonslav59]

In one of the tweets, Rosenthal said that the White Sox were offered a "king's ransom" for Sale within the last 48 hours and they flat out said no. If a king's ransom won't even get consideration, then Sale is not being moved for any package that we would be willing to part with.

 

I get Moon's desire to build the rotation from the top, but IMO, the top of our rotation looks pretty good. When factoring in cost, adding a non-PED version of someone like Santana makes more sense to me.

 

The reason I still like to "build from the top" is that the bottom ends up looking like many teams' top.

 

If we replace ERod with Quintana, then Pomeranz becomes our #5, Wright our #4 and Porcello our #3.

 

[Kimmi]

Why does this matter?

 

Because when I see players like ARod or Cruz helping their team win, it makes me sick to my stomach. All I think is what a freaking cheater.

 

I am not naive enough to think that all Red Sox players were always clean. As much as I loved Manny when he was here, I would not want him back on my team now, knowing what I know.

 

IMO, the Ortiz case is different, for many reasons that have already been stated. If he failed a drug test today, I would have a difficult time rooting for him, even with his great legacy.