2016-2017 Offseason Trade Speculation Thread

[cp176]

I just think his all around game will be better. His hit tool is outstanding vs LH and RHP. His defense is GG calibur. Does not have the same arm, but Im not as high on JBjs arm as a lot of people. I value Beni's all around game and approach more than JBJ. I think JBJ can get in his own head and overthink things, Especially with the bat. Jbj starts arb and Benintendi has 6 years, which is not really a big deal to me because we got the $$. Its still part of my thought process though.

Now, thats not to say I dont value JBJ. Of course I do or I wouldnt be listing him as a headliner to a deal. JBJ is a GG Allstar CFer which will bring back something we need. We have another Allstar, possible league MVP, who can play CF and has GG defense already in RF. I can also easily see Beni as an AS GG OFer in the future. so my thought is we can afford to trade JBJ and still have two studs still out there with Moncada being groomed in the OF this winer and into 2017. Young and Holt could platoon out there, which is fine until Moncada is ready.

So, with Moncada now being worked out in the OF, I can once again see three young AS

OFers by 2018. Moncada making his OF debut sometime in 2017.

 

Thanks for the answer. i think that I actually agree with you. I'm not sure the Red Sox have seen any of these guys perform long enough for them to have totally made up their minds yet though. if they decide to upgrade starting pitching for real this year, someone is going to get traded. Whoever goes, there is bound to be a lot of head shaking. Other than make a big play for a dh, they might not do anything. it might be enough. On the other hand they might just sit tight. I hope not though. A power bat and a totr guy and this team rolls along. Outfielders can be replaced. i don't want John Henry to horde his money!

[Dojji]

I could see this in the not too distant future:

 

C: Vazquez-Swihart

 

Umm Leon? Let's not pretend that Leon didn't flat out win the "Vazquez/Swihart controversy" at catcher this year. Before we talk about catcher being split between those two as so called "catcher of the future," I sure as heck want to see what Sandy Leon does in 2017. Maybe fades back into nothingness, in fact that's where I'd lay my money, but Leon has earned a chance to fail at the very least.

 

1B: Devers/Tavis

 

TBH I see an acquisition here post-Hanley. Travis is not a sure thing and will probably have to battle with Travis Shaw for a crack at the roster, and Shaw beats Travis on versatility if nothing else. As for Devers... he's still got a ways to go before pencilling him into any future lineups.

 

2B: Pedey (Moncada)

I'll be honest, I see this as Mauricio Dubon's job if at some point we decide to move on from Pedroia -- at least until we draft someone else to play the 2B position. I think it's going to be important to NOT have 2 guys with offensive focus manning the middle infield. If one guy (Bogaerts) is going to focus on offense for the most part and be a more or less adequate defender at best, then I want the other guy (preferably both of the guys around him) to be stronger defenders that can cover the edges of his zone if needed and take some defensive pressure off him. That's why I'd rather have a former SS at second than a future corner infielder like Moncada.

 

Besides, I am a little nervous at just how raw Moncada is right now and how many mental mistakes he made in his brief debut, and judging by how brief the debut was, so were the Sox. Moncada is "wait and see" with me right now.

 

SS: Dubon

3B: Bogey (Moncada)

 

I discussed this in another post, no need to go over it again. Suffice it to say that our future 3B is likely Moncada, that's probably the best place to put him for the time being.

 

LF: Benintendi (Moncada)

CF: Bradley

RF: Betts

Don't see any reason to speculate about Moncada in the outfield at this time. Benintendi is our LF until further notice, and should really be left in place as long as there isn't a good reason to move him. That young outfield excites me, it's going to be important not to mess with them -- doing so would be a classic example of a team outsmarting itself.

 

DH: Moncada/Devers

 

Not convinced this team is going to maintain a full time DH either, I see.

Edited October 16, 2016 by Dojji

[S5Dewey]

Still better than the oft injured bad attitude SS in Detroit by a country mile...

 

Sorry, coulnt resist

 

Ya know, it's a funny thing about bad attitudes. They seem to matter more when someone is looking for an excuse for a player's being traded. Look at Josh Donaldson, for example. This guy got run out of California for getting into a dispute with the GM and then came to Toronto and got in a dispute with the FO there, but it seems there is a cadre of people here who think we should have gotten him.... "bad attitude" and all. Why? Because he's a good player.

[S5Dewey]

You know that's not the reason we don't move a nearly 5 WAR shortstop talent off shortstop. As a third baseman Bogaerts' bat is a lot less special, and that's just the truth. We get more raw wins out of having Bogaerts at SS and a replacement 3B than we do by having Bogaerts at 3B and a replacement at SS. If we can solve the 3B problem without screwing with something special at another position, we need to do it.

 

I'd be interested in seeing if the Red Sox experiment with Dubon at third base at all. It would show what they're thinking.

 

My post was a response to those who justified the Iggy trade after he (Iggy) got into that televised pushy-pushy with his catcher and then said that his "bad attitude" was the reason for his being traded. That's so much hogwash and we know it.

 

I don't want to buy into the theory that Bogaerts bat isn't that special if he's playing 3B. That would be admitting that his psyche IS so fragile that he thinks he has to be a SS and I don't think that's the case.

Whether or not the team would be improved by moving XBo to 3B and bringing in another shortstop would depend on who that SS is.

[Kimmi]

I really have trouble with how people take the idea of suggesting a trade of one of our players as "giving up on him". I never see it that way, unless you're dumping a salary. I would say that if a person was to suggest a trade of Moncada for Quintana, then that person is far from "giving up" but instead is showing how much he really values Moncada.

 

I didn't mean to imply that you were giving up on him, though I have gotten the impression that there are some here who have, or who have at least downgraded him a good bit based off of the tiny sample size.

 

I understand that suggesting that the team trade a player does not mean that you WANT the player traded or that you don't like the player. I have said that about JBJ. I love the guy and would hate to see him traded, but if he can bring us back a young pitcher at a somewhat reasonable price, you have to make the trade.

 

I would hate to trade Moncada, because I do think he's going to be something special, but if he can bring us back a cost controlled young ace, I think you have to make that trade.

 

That said, I can't see him being traded. I just don't think the FO is willing to part with him unless they are absolutely blown away by an offer.

[Kimmi]

My post was a response to those who justified the Iggy trade after he (Iggy) got into that televised pushy-pushy with his catcher and then said that his "bad attitude" was the reason for his being traded. That's so much hogwash and we know it.

 

I don't want to buy into the theory that Bogaerts bat isn't that special if he's playing 3B. That would be admitting that his psyche IS so fragile that he thinks he has to be a SS and I don't think that's the case.

Whether or not the team would be improved by moving XBo to 3B and bringing in another shortstop would depend on who that SS is.

 

I much prefer a defensive shortstop over an offensive one. That said, I liked the trade, and my justification of the trade had nothing to do with Iggy's attitude.

 

1. We needed pitching. Getting Peavy not only solidified the rotation, it also solidified the BP.

 

2. Iglesias was expendable. If we did not have Bogaerts, as well as other 3B/SS prospects in the system, I would not have liked the trade. As good as Iglesias is defensively, Bogaerts is the better overall shortstop.

[Bellhorn04]

Trying to get S5Dewey to like the Iggy trade is like trying to get Captain Ahab to like Moby Dick.

[Kimmi]

I was not happy with Bogaerts seeming to be bothered by being moved to 3B in 2014. If I'm not mistaken, he made a comment admitting to this. I believe he saw it as some sort of 'demotion', that he was moved to 3rd because the FO thought Drew was a better shortstop.

 

If that was the case, and I'm not saying that it was, then I have problem with that. Maybe it was just immaturity, I don't know.

 

IMO, Bogaerts should have taken that move as a positive and ran with it. He should have approached it as the FO saying thank goodness that Bogey can play 3rd base because there are no other 3rd basemen available. He should have approached it with a 'whatever the team needs me to do' attitude.

[Kimmi]

Trying to get S5Dewey to like the Iggy trade is like trying to get Captain Ahab to like Moby Dick.

 

LOL

 

I know it often takes several years to fully assess whether a trade was good or not, but the fact that we won the World Series that year, regardless of how big or small Peavy's role in that was, makes it a good trade.

 

Iglesias could go on to be a perennial all star, and the trade would still be worth it to me because of the championship.

[S5Dewey]

I much prefer a defensive shortstop over an offensive one. That said, I liked the trade, and my justification of the trade had nothing to do with Iggy's attitude.

 

1. We needed pitching. Getting Peavy not only solidified the rotation, it also solidified the BP.

 

2. Iglesias was expendable. If we did not have Bogaerts, as well as other 3B/SS prospects in the system, I would not have liked the trade. As good as Iglesias is defensively, Bogaerts is the better overall shortstop.

 

I didn't like the trade from the first moment I heard about it, but at least my reasons for not liking it have changed now.

 

Moon has convinced me that whether it was right or wrong, the FO had decided that XBo was the SS of the future for the Sox, making Iggy expendable. My position now is that if their intent was to trade Iggy they didn't get nearly enough for him. They gave up a GG-calber SS, runner up ROY batting ~.300 for an aging pitcher in the twilight of his career. It was a bad trade. IMO the FO should have gotten more for him, and if they wanted a pitcher they could have gotten one for less than Jose Iglesias. We got hoodwinked on that one.

 

I will give you that XBo is a better overall SS, due to the fact that Iggy will never approach what XBo does at the plate, but defensively I'll take Iggy every time. (BTW, he's cut his errors this year from 11 in 2015 to five this year and has a better than average fielding &-age while making successful plays that other SS don't make).

 

At the end of the day I still maintain that the team would be better with cost-controlled Iggy & XBo on the left side of the IF - you can put them wherever you want - and having spent Pandamoney on pitching.

 

It was clearly a mistake, both short term and long term.

[Bellhorn04]

It was a bad trade. IMO the FO should have gotten more for him, and if they wanted a pitcher they could have gotten one for less than Jose Iglesias. We got hoodwinked on that one.

 

But you have to compare it to other deadline deals made by contending teams. They are often big overpays. Look at what Theo gave up to get a relief pitcher for a few months.

[Nick]

I didn't like the trade from the first moment I heard about it, but at least my reasons for not liking it have changed now.

 

Moon has convinced me that whether it was right or wrong, the FO had decided that XBo was the SS of the future for the Sox, making Iggy expendable. My position now is that if their intent was to trade Iggy they didn't get nearly enough for him. They gave up a GG-calber SS, runner up ROY batting ~.300 for an aging pitcher in the twilight of his career. It was a bad trade. IMO the FO should have gotten more for him, and if they wanted a pitcher they could have gotten one for less than Jose Iglesias. We got hoodwinked on that one.

 

I will give you that XBo is a better overall SS, due to the fact that Iggy will never approach what XBo does at the plate, but defensively I'll take Iggy every time. (BTW, he's cut his errors this year from 11 in 2015 to five this year and has a better than average fielding &-age while making successful plays that other SS don't make).

 

At the end of the day I still maintain that the team would be better with cost-controlled Iggy & XBo on the left side of the IF - you can put them wherever you want - and having spent Pandamoney on pitching.

 

It was clearly a mistake, both short term and long term.

 

It's always a mistake to look back on a trade in a vacuum.

 

Clay B. I believe was injured. We needed a starter. Detroit Tigers read newspapers or has access to internet. They knew Clay B was injured and Sox needed a starter desperately. Right or wrong, Sox front office FELT IT OWED TO THE FANS AND THE PLAYERS TO 'GO FOR IT'. The Tigers were in a better negotiating position.

 

That's what the Orioles did with E Rod. Don't you think NOW they may regret the Miller trade? But at the time, they were 'going for it'.

 

Does anyone here honestly believe Red Sox fans would be patient? Don't we all want the Sox FO at least trying to be competitive? Isn't that why Sox signed Pablo and Hanley shortly after swearing off on long term contracts that they dismantled in a trade to the Dodgers?

 

Winning the Division after two last places is a feather in the cap for the Organization. Yep, they gave away Espinoza in the process.

 

I'm sure all the Monday morning quarterbacks will be dissecting the trade into next decade forgetting that we did win the Division. (and a poster will point out maybe Pomeranz trade did not yield substantive return....can't win here unless the team makes PERFECT TRADE EVERY TIME.

Edited October 16, 2016 by Nick

[Kimmi]

I didn't like the trade from the first moment I heard about it, but at least my reasons for not liking it have changed now.

 

Moon has convinced me that whether it was right or wrong, the FO had decided that XBo was the SS of the future for the Sox, making Iggy expendable. My position now is that if their intent was to trade Iggy they didn't get nearly enough for him. They gave up a GG-calber SS, runner up ROY batting ~.300 for an aging pitcher in the twilight of his career. It was a bad trade. IMO the FO should have gotten more for him, and if they wanted a pitcher they could have gotten one for less than Jose Iglesias. We got hoodwinked on that one.

 

I will give you that XBo is a better overall SS, due to the fact that Iggy will never approach what XBo does at the plate, but defensively I'll take Iggy every time. (BTW, he's cut his errors this year from 11 in 2015 to five this year and has a better than average fielding &-age while making successful plays that other SS don't make).

 

At the end of the day I still maintain that the team would be better with cost-controlled Iggy & XBo on the left side of the IF - you can put them wherever you want - and having spent Pandamoney on pitching.

 

It was clearly a mistake, both short term and long term.

 

Have my reasons for liking the trade changed? I think it's fair to say that winning the World Series makes the trade even sweeter, since that was the point, but that doesn't change my original reasons for liking the trade.

 

Put it this way, had we not won the World Series, I'd still do that trade over again every time.

 

Now without the championship, the trade might not end up being worth it, in hindsight. But I still believe strongly that for a team trying to win it all, you have to do it.

[S5Dewey]

Have my reasons for liking the trade changed? I think it's fair to say that winning the World Series makes the trade even sweeter, since that was the point, but that doesn't change my original reasons for liking the trade.

 

Put it this way, had we not won the World Series, I'd still do that trade over again every time.

 

Now without the championship, the trade might not end up being worth it, in hindsight. But I still believe strongly that for a team trying to win it all, you have to do it.

 

Well, yes. It's easy to have an opinion when one has hindsight to help them but I was opposed to this trade right from Day 1. Not so much that I had a "man-crush" on Iggy but because I could see the value of having both of those cost-controlled outstanding players on the left side of the IF going into the future.

 

I had no objection to their picking up a pitcher (although I still don't think a. that we needed one, and b. that his contribution was that significant) but they gave up too much to get that pitcher. It was a panic move that looks better in the context of the WS Championship.

[Dojji]

My post was a response to those who justified the Iggy trade after he (Iggy) got into that televised pushy-pushy with his catcher and then said that his "bad attitude" was the reason for his being traded. That's so much hogwash and we know it.

 

I don't want to buy into the theory that Bogaerts bat isn't that special if he's playing 3B. That would be admitting that his psyche IS so fragile that he thinks he has to be a SS and I don't think that's the case.

Whether or not the team would be improved by moving XBo to 3B and bringing in another shortstop would depend on who that SS is.

 

You misread what I wrote slightly. I said his bat isn't as special playing 3B and that's just a fact. At SS Bogaerts is one of the top hitters at his position in baseball and a perennial All-Star candidate. At 3B... he's a pretty good power hitting corner IF.

[Dojji]

Trying to get S5Dewey to like the Iggy trade is like trying to get Captain Ahab to like Moby Dick.

 

Iglesias was never going to get to play full time at his natural position here. Going after Jake Peavy and using Iglesias as part of the bait was the right decision when it was made.

[Bellhorn04]

I had no objection to their picking up a pitcher (although I still don't think a. that we needed one, and b. that his contribution was that significant) but they gave up too much to get that pitcher. It was a panic move that looks better in the context of the WS Championship.

 

Calling it a 'panic move' is absurd. They were in contention for a championship, they did need a starting pitcher, and there's this thing called the trade deadline that tends to impact the urgency of making a move.

[S5Dewey]

Calling it a 'panic move' is absurd. They were in contention for a championship, they did need a starting pitcher, and there's this thing called the trade deadline that tends to impact the urgency of making a move.

 

Of course it was a panic move! And the panic was brought on by the looming trade deadline. The FO felt they had to do Something and do it quickly so they didn't get fair value for what they were trading away.

[Bellhorn04]

Of course it was a panic move! And the panic was brought on by the looming trade deadline. The FO felt they had to do Something and do it quickly so they didn't get fair value for what they were trading away.

 

They did what you're supposed to do when you have a chance to win it all and you have a need.

[Dojji]

It should be noted that in the last 2 years Iglesias has provided the Tigers 1.5 and 1.8 bWAR. Less in 2 years combined than Bogaerts provided us in this year alone.

[S5Dewey]

Trying to get S5Dewey to like the Iggy trade is like trying to get Captain Ahab to like Moby Dick.

 

You're right about this. I've been posting for a long time, both here and on the old BDC, and I'm usually not one to rail on about how "right" I think I was on any topic. I'll usually leave that to someone else.

 

However, I'm making an exception on this tpoic because it was SO OBVIOUS to me that Iggy was part of a core of young, cost-controlled, outstanding players in the system that would be the core of this team for the future. I could see Iggy, XBo, JBJ, and Vazquez with Mookie in the wings, all of them cheap and leaving lots of money to buy the necessary pitching. Swihart and now Benintendi only sweetened the pot. And the FO blew it.

 

I simply don't understand how anyone can defend the trade without implying that since they won the WS that hear it must have been the right thing to have done. I see that as a poor assumption.

 

Ironically, and just so you know that I see both sides of this coin, I also believe that had that trade NOT been made the Sox wouldn't even have been in the WS. It was Iggy's crucial error in the ALCS that opened the door for the Sox to win the series. However, THAT is hindsight - which I don't think is fair to use in an argument. That trade was still a stupid move at the time.

[Dojji]

I simply don't understand how anyone can defend the trade without implying that since they won the WS that hear it must have been the right thing to have done.

 

Bogaerts was the heir presumptive at SS. The team was committed to Bogaerts at shortstop long term, all talk of Bogaerts to 3B as a permanent option was by prospect watchers.

 

Iglesias meanwhile was also a fulltime SS. He was good enough to start as was Bogaerts, but he was the lesser player in terms of overall potential. Now they could have accomodated Iglesias by moving the better player to a position where he's far less valuable, so that a lesser player could take over full time SS, but why the hell would you do that when it isn't that hard to find a replacement 3B through trade or FA?

[S5Dewey]

Bogaerts was the heir presumptive at SS. The team was committed to Bogaerts at shortstop long term, all talk of Bogaerts to 3B as a permanent option was by prospect watchers.

 

Iglesias meanwhile was also a fulltime SS. He was good enough to start as was Bogaerts, but he was the lesser player in terms of overall potential. Now they could have accomodated Iglesias by moving the better player to a position where he's far less valuable, so that a lesser player could take over full time SS, but why the hell would you do that when it isn't that hard to find a replacement 3B through trade or FA?

Did you...er... happen to watch the 2016 season?

[Dojji]

And it still isn't that hard to find a replacement 3B. THe fact that we've had some really weird luck over the last few years really doesn't change that.

[bosoxmal]

We have Beni and Betts who can play CF. We have nobody to play SS.

 

We have Young and Holt who can play LF, and finding a cheap LF addition is much easier than finding a decent SS. It usually is not a good plan to trade a 3.7 to 4.7 WAR position player and then have to go out and replace him.

 

 

Wanna trade? Bogaerts and Bradley for Lindor. This Guardians SS (lefty hitter) is the mirror image of Mookey Betts. Problem? Francona would never go for it! He's not looking at WAR, he's looking at flesh and blood (and. from up close)

[Dojji]

Lindor is not all that much better than Bogaerts. They're within 1 WAR of each other. You are really underselling Bradley in a deal like that. I do think Lindor is, and is going to remain, a better shortstop than Bogaerts, but trading Bogaerts in a roughly sideways move that also costs us another high performance player is an exercise in outsmarting ourselves.

[Nick]

We are all doing excruciating painful mental gymnastics.....Signing EE will simplify much of our perceived problems. I'd take chance on his last two years of contract over Price's.

 

That said.....we don't need to do anything other than acquire some bullpen help, and I would not even go overboard there either.

 

See what our shortcomings are at trade deadline.... (but EE signing will go long way in recouping Ortiz' production)

[moonslav59]

Let me get this straight....you convinced me to spend $60M on a possible superstar just so we can trade him for Q? Oh by the way, WE'RE NOT THE ONES GETTING ADDITIONAL PLAYERS BUT WE HAVE TO GIVE UP ADDITIONAL FUTURE TALENT? Sure, where do I sign off on that trade? Really, this is how you are going to waste my money? Moncada's sunken cost is far different than others (Craig, Castille, Pablo) on the Sox roster. They have proven that YOU were wrong assessing their baseball skills........that's what I think Henry would say to Moon, the Sox GM.

 

I look at it this way, the money spent on Moncada is the money saved on Quintana, as his $4.2M luxury tax cost is a windfall of savings on future tax consequences. Moncada's money does not an will not count against the luxury tax. Our tax will be 50% in 2017, if we got over. That's a very significant aspect of any addition we contemplate.

 

Look, I'm not for trading Moncada. I think he could become one of the greatest players of the next decade.

 

Look, I'm not for trading Moncada. I think he could be one of the greatest players of the decade.

 

However, Quintana is an ace getting paid less than an arb pitcher of average quality. The money he will save us on the luxury tax should not be underestimated. Our tax rate will be 50% next season. Moncada's money does not cost against the limit and will not cost if we trade him. I'm not saying $60M means nothing to Henry, but it balances the low cost of Quintana.

 

I'd love to find a way to get Q without parting with Moncada, but I don't want to trade JBJ either. I doubt Swihart and Kopech get us Q. We could add Basabe, and they'd still say no.

[moonslav59]

Too much talent given up for frazier and Robertson. We dont need another LHP andway...at least not without trading one.

 

Porcello, Wright and Buch are RHPs, so we could move Pom to the pen or trade a lefty. We might also include ERod (plus someone else) in the trade to Chicago, instead of Moncada.

[moonslav59]

I didn't mean to imply that you were giving up on him, though I have gotten the impression that there are some here who have, or who have at least downgraded him a good bit based off of the tiny sample size.

 

I understand that suggesting that the team trade a player does not mean that you WANT the player traded or that you don't like the player. I have said that about JBJ. I love the guy and would hate to see him traded, but if he can bring us back a young pitcher at a somewhat reasonable price, you have to make the trade.

 

I would hate to trade Moncada, because I do think he's going to be something special, but if he can bring us back a cost controlled young ace, I think you have to make that trade.

 

That said, I can't see him being traded. I just don't think the FO is willing to part with him unless they are absolutely blown away by an offer.

 

Thanks Kimmi, and I didn't mean to vent on you, because I know you don't assume someone is giving up on a player just because they suggest a trade.

 

It's funny how most of my suggested trades are criticized for "giving up too much", when in reality, I think my suggested offers are probably under what it might take.

 

It's all speculation in the end though. For all we know, the CWS may have already decided not to rebuild, or if they do want to trade, they may want JBJ, Swihart and Kopech.