2016-2017 Offseason Trade Speculation Thread

[Kimmi]

They aren't just picking names from a hat. Hopefully they have good reasons for every move.

 

That's what I keep saying, even the Pablo move.

 

I may not like it, but I can understand the rationale behind it.

[Kimmi]

I never liked that trade. Many justify it as Peavey "stabilizing the rotation'. Nonsense. He sucked.

 

Not nonsense at all. Peavy helped not only solidify the rotation, but indirectly helped solidify the bullpen as well.

[Kimmi]

I'm not right very often, so when I am I want to make the best of it!!

 

But whether you are right is a matter of opinion.

 

I respectfully disagree with you.

[a700hitter]

That's what I keep saying, even the Pablo move.

 

I may not like it, but I can understand the rationale behind it.

The rationale doesn't absolve them from the judgment that it was a lousy move. There is always a rationale, even for lousy moves, but the rationale isn't an excuse.

[Kimmi]

The rationale doesn't absolve them from the judgment that it was a lousy move. There is always a rationale, even for lousy moves, but the rationale isn't an excuse.

 

It's not meant to be an excuse.

 

It's like the rationale for signing Price. We needed an ace. The fact that Price didn't pitch like an ace is not Dombrowski's fault.

[S5Dewey]

But whether you are right is a matter of opinion.

 

I respectfully disagree with you.

 

I can live with that.

[Eddy Ballgame]

I'm not right very often, so when I am I want to make the best of it!!

 

I'm not sure what you think you're "right" about. I doubt you'd find anyone in the Red Sox organization who wouldn't make that trade again "Twice on Sunday." Jake Peavy stabilized the rotation when they desperately needed a starter, which would've been enough in itself to justify the trade, but the psychological boost a move like that gives a team is immeasurable. Throw in the fact that he was pretty much holding court in the dugout during games when he wasn't pitching, teaching other pitchers things that you can't put a value on, and it's easy to see why several players were quoted as saying that he was such an integral part of their WORLD SERIES VICTORY.

 

Let's take a look at your obsession (Jose Iglesias).

 

1. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox were very concerned about his medical reports. Obviously they were right.

2. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox were concerned about his attitude all the way back to Pawtucket. Obviously they were right.

3. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox were concerned about his "focus." Debatable unless you watch him every day.

4. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox were concerned about his ability to hit, and hit with any kind of pop at all. 30 extra base hits in 514 plate appearances this year. Pretty brutal.

5. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox saw Xander Bogaerts as the future at SS. There are probably 1000 MLB executives, and my guess is that not one of them would ever consider trading Bogaerts for Iglesias.

 

There have been several trades in Red Sox history that haven't worked out, and they will continually be discussed forever. Trust me, this isn't one of them.

Edited October 19, 2016 by Eddy Ballgame

[Nick]

I'm not sure what you think you're "right" about. I doubt you'd find anyone in the Red Sox organization who wouldn't make that trade again "Twice on Sunday." Jake Peavy stabilized the rotation when they desperately needed a starter, which would've been enough in itself to justify the trade, but the psychological boost a move like that gives a team is immeasurable. Throw in the fact that he was pretty much holding court in the dugout during games when he wasn't pitching, teaching other pitchers things that you can't put a value on, and it's easy to see why several players were quoted as saying that he was such an integral part of their WORLD SERIES VICTORY.

 

Let's take a look at your obsession (Jose Iglesias).

 

1. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox were very concerned about his medical reports. Obviously they were right.

2. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox were concerned about his attitude all the way back to Pawtucket. Obviously they were right.

3. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox were concerned about his "focus." Debatable unless you watch him every day.

4. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox were concerned about his ability to hit, and hit with any kind of pop at all. 30 extra base hits in 514 plate appearances this year. Pretty brutal.

5. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox saw Xander Bogaerts as the future at SS. There are probably 1000 MLB executives, and my guess is that not one of them would ever consider trading Bogaerts for Iglesias.

 

There have been several trades in Red Sox history that haven't worked out, and they will continually be discussed forever. Trust me, this isn't one of them.

 

Yep, some fans would rather sacrifice the efforts of 24 players trying to win the Division. Love Monday morning quarterbacks.

 

Let me say this. I don't give a f*** if Espinoza becomes a Hall of Famer. DD did what he had to do at the time to give 2016 Sox a chance to win the Division.

[S5Dewey]

I'm not sure what you think you're "right" about. I doubt you'd find anyone in the Red Sox organization who wouldn't make that trade again "Twice on Sunday." Jake Peavy stabilized the rotation when they desperately needed a starter, which would've been enough in itself to justify the trade, but the psychological boost a move like that gives a team is immeasurable. Throw in the fact that he was pretty much holding court in the dugout during games when he wasn't pitching, teaching other pitchers things that you can't put a value on, and it's easy to see why several players were quoted as saying that he was such an integral part of their WORLD SERIES VICTORY.

 

Let's take a look at your obsession (Jose Iglesias).

 

1. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox were very concerned about his medical reports. Obviously they were right.

2. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox were concerned about his attitude all the way back to Pawtucket. Obviously they were right.

3. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox were concerned about his "focus." Debatable unless you watch him every day.

4. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox were concerned about his ability to hit, and hit with any kind of pop at all. 30 extra base hits in 514 plate appearances this year. Pretty brutal.

5. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox saw Xander Bogaerts as the future at SS. There are probably 1000 MLB executives, and my guess is that not one of them would ever consider trading Bogaerts for Iglesias.

 

There have been several trades in Red Sox history that haven't worked out, and they will continually be discussed forever. Trust me, this isn't one of them.

 

Meh.

 

My contention all along is that the Boston Red Sox would be a better team with an infield of Bogaerts and Iglesias on the left side of it than with Bogaerts and 'God only knows who' there, and more money to spend on pitching.

 

The proof here is in the pudding. Regardless of all the "articles you can find" Jose Iglesias is the starting SS for a very good MLB team. Just like the Detroit Tigers, I don't care about 'articles'. I care about ability and production...and the Red Sox and what would make them a better team.

 

And I don't know how to break this to you but this trade already has been talked about for years. Three of 'em to be exact. And probably will be into the future.

[moonslav59]

Yep, some fans would rather sacrifice the efforts of 24 players trying to win the Division.

 

Pomeranz and Espi were not the only two choices.

 

 

Love Monday morning quarterbacks.

 

How is it Monday morning QB'ing, when some of us hated the deal the second it was made?

[Dojji]

The rationale doesn't absolve them from the judgment that it was a lousy move. There is always a rationale, even for lousy moves, but the rationale isn't an excuse.

 

No it's not an excuse. But the fact of the matter is it's still VERY possible for some of our stinkers to turn it around. Especially Shaw, Price and Pomeranz, all of which have displayed the talent to rise above their current struggles. Pablo I'm a little more skeptical, but I'll admit it's more because of the lying he did in the previous offseason than because of an honest assessment of his true athletic ability.

[Kimmi]

I'm not sure what you think you're "right" about. I doubt you'd find anyone in the Red Sox organization who wouldn't make that trade again "Twice on Sunday." Jake Peavy stabilized the rotation when they desperately needed a starter, which would've been enough in itself to justify the trade, but the psychological boost a move like that gives a team is immeasurable. Throw in the fact that he was pretty much holding court in the dugout during games when he wasn't pitching, teaching other pitchers things that you can't put a value on, and it's easy to see why several players were quoted as saying that he was such an integral part of their WORLD SERIES VICTORY.

 

Let's take a look at your obsession (Jose Iglesias).

 

1. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox were very concerned about his medical reports. Obviously they were right.

2. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox were concerned about his attitude all the way back to Pawtucket. Obviously they were right.

3. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox were concerned about his "focus." Debatable unless you watch him every day.

4. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox were concerned about his ability to hit, and hit with any kind of pop at all. 30 extra base hits in 514 plate appearances this year. Pretty brutal.

5. There are articles that you can find that will show you that the Sox saw Xander Bogaerts as the future at SS. There are probably 1000 MLB executives, and my guess is that not one of them would ever consider trading Bogaerts for Iglesias.

 

There have been several trades in Red Sox history that haven't worked out, and they will continually be discussed forever. Trust me, this isn't one of them.

 

I fully endorse this post.

[Nick]

Yep, some fans would rather sacrifice the efforts of 24 players trying to win the Division.

 

Pomeranz and Espi were not the only two choices.

 

 

Love Monday morning quarterbacks.

 

How is it Monday morning QB'ing, when some of us hated the deal the second it was made?

 

Name a trade you would have made and let me know if you know for sure what you would had to give up.....

 

Again the problem is DD lives in a real world.....you have no idea how may trades he looked at.....rest of us live in fantasy baseball world.....we just do.

[cp176]

Yep, some fans would rather sacrifice the efforts of 24 players trying to win the Division. Love Monday morning quarterbacks.

 

Let me say this. I don't give a f*** if Espinoza becomes a Hall of Famer. DD did what he had to do at the time to give 2016 Sox a chance to win the Division.

 

i like your style. I might not always agree with you but the direction works for me. As a fan, I am not overly concerned about what we might be like in 5 or 6 years. Maybe just a little - but not much. I am much more concerned about what we will be like next year. People building the program obviously have to be concerned about the future. They have to be as concerned about their 6th graders as they are about their seniors if you know what I mean. I am more concerned about the varsity. i'm not coaching anymore.

[Jack Flap]

Lol, we really need a thread just for the Peavy trade.

[Bellhorn04]

Meh.

 

My contention all along is that the Boston Red Sox would be a better team with an infield of Bogaerts and Iglesias on the left side of it than with Bogaerts and 'God only knows who' there, and more money to spend on pitching.

 

The proof here is in the pudding. Regardless of all the "articles you can find" Jose Iglesias is the starting SS for a very good MLB team. Just like the Detroit Tigers, I don't care about 'articles'. I care about ability and production...and the Red Sox and what would make them a better team.

 

And I don't know how to break this to you but this trade already has been talked about for years. Three of 'em to be exact. And probably will be into the future.

 

I can talk about this trade all day and be perfectly comfortable about it, because Iggy just isn't that good as an all-around player. He's a plus defender, but his offense is so bad that he nets out to an adequate, average player with a WAR of 1.8 this year and 5.6 for his career. He only made 2.1 million this year so he was a decent value for the Tigers.

[Bellhorn04]

It's not meant to be an excuse.

 

It's like the rationale for signing Price. We needed an ace. The fact that Price didn't pitch like an ace is not Dombrowski's fault.

 

Like I said, there's always a rationale. There was a rationale for the 70 million offer to Lester. They thought he was serious about the hometown discount, it was just a starting point, they used the Josh Beckett extension as a comparative.

 

There was a rationale for selling Babe Ruth too. He was a boozer with a questionable attitude and Frazee got 100 grand for him.

[oldtimer]

Meh.

 

My contention all along is that the Boston Red Sox would be a better team with an infield of Bogaerts and Iglesias on the left side of it than with Bogaerts and 'God only knows who' there, and more money to spend on pitching.

 

The proof here is in the pudding. Regardless of all the "articles you can find" Jose Iglesias is the starting SS for a very good MLB team. Just like the Detroit Tigers, I don't care about 'articles'. I care about ability and production...and the Red Sox and what would make them a better team.

 

And I don't know how to break this to you but this trade already has been talked about for years. Three of 'em to be exact. And probably will be into the future.

 

I am a big proponent of speed and defense from the lineup players. Since the regular season is such a grind, I also like durable players (usually meaning in their 20's). In Bogaerts we have an infielder who has decent range and is solid at defense, not GG level but good. He has been durable and hits well. Iglesias has not been durable. Third is the issue. If Moncada comes along, a big if, then we have a young 5 tool player at third are are set at all positions except maybe catcher. It may be the smartest move to nurture Moncada and keep Shaw or Hernandez until he comes along. We do have 4 candidates at catcher to choose from. Leon has lost some of the attractiveness so I would keep an open mind on promoting any of our 4 to the starting role.

 

JBJ is coming into his own as a GG level defender, with speed and durability. Everyone would be done a big favor if he worked on his swing mechanics to develop a compact swing where he could emphasize contact over power. During the regular season, a player may get weak pitching often enough to put up impressive power numbers, but in the playoffs, we are seeing again this year that there are few weak pitchers and the big swingers are being held down.

[moonslav59]

I am a big proponent of speed and defense from the lineup players. Since the regular season is such a grind, I also like durable players (usually meaning in their 20's). In Bogaerts we have an infielder who has decent range and is solid at defense, not GG level but good. He has been durable and hits well. Iglesias has not been durable. Third is the issue. If Moncada comes along, a big if, then we have a young 5 tool player at third are are set at all positions except maybe catcher. It may be the smartest move to nurture Moncada and keep Shaw or Hernandez until he comes along. We do have 4 candidates at catcher to choose from. Leon has lost some of the attractiveness so I would keep an open mind on promoting any of our 4 to the starting role.

 

JBJ is coming into his own as a GG level defender, with speed and durability. Everyone would be done a big favor if he worked on his swing mechanics to develop a compact swing where he could emphasize contact over power. During the regular season, a player may get weak pitching often enough to put up impressive power numbers, but in the playoffs, we are seeing again this year that there are few weak pitchers and the big swingers are being held down.

 

I'm fine with Bogey at SS, but I wouldn't say he's "good on defense". I'm a little bummed out that he showed progress on D last year, but then took a step backwards this year...

 

UZR/150:

2014: -3.7 (20th out of 31)

2015: +0.9 (15th out of 31)

2016: -2.8 (17th out of 29)

 

DRS:

2014: -9 (25th)

2015: -1 (16th)

2016_ -10 (27th)

 

2014-2016 combined:

UZR/150:

Iggy +7.9 (9th out of 32)

Bogey -1.6 (18th out of 32)

DRS

Iggy 0 (14th)

Bogey -20 (28th)

 

If you're not a plus, I wouldn't call you "good".

[S5Dewey]

I am a big proponent of speed and defense from the lineup players. Since the regular season is such a grind, I also like durable players (usually meaning in their 20's). In Bogaerts we have an infielder who has decent range and is solid at defense, not GG level but good. He has been durable and hits well. Iglesias has not been durable. Third is the issue. If Moncada comes along, a big if, then we have a young 5 tool player at third are are set at all positions except maybe catcher. It may be the smartest move to nurture Moncada and keep Shaw or Hernandez until he comes along. We do have 4 candidates at catcher to choose from. Leon has lost some of the attractiveness so I would keep an open mind on promoting any of our 4 to the starting role.

 

JBJ is coming into his own as a GG level defender, with speed and durability. Everyone would be done a big favor if he worked on his swing mechanics to develop a compact swing where he could emphasize contact over power. During the regular season, a player may get weak pitching often enough to put up impressive power numbers, but in the playoffs, we are seeing again this year that there are few weak pitchers and the big swingers are being held down.

 

I agree with you .... almost .. in what you say about speed and defense. However, I'm an "up the middle" guy. I believe in speed and defense up the middle, and anything you get offensively above ~.700 OPS is a plus. At the same time I believe that power comes from the corners and I expect my corner positions to have an OPS >.800 and anything you get defensively above average defense is a plus. The more "plus" players a team has, the better their chances of winning.

 

Sure, durability is good, but sometimes it's easy to confuse one long stint on the DL with being "brittle". In the case at hand, yeah, he lost one season to an injury when he didn't report it, but other than that his injury history has been fairly ordinary. Everyone goes down with an injury occasionally. Even Pedey. :-)

 

I see JBJ doing exactly what you said.. getting his swing more compact in the off season. He did that for a while this year but then reverted to his old habits and his swing got longer. IMO he's a short swing from being a perennial AS.

 

You'd think I'd have learned by now, but every year I'm impressed by the pitching in the playoffs and what a huge difference it makes. The old adage of "Good pitching beats good hitting" always rings true in the playoffs. I can't say I'm disappointed by Price's performance in the playoffs - it's exactly what it's been in the past so I was somewhat expecting it - but I will say that it's disheartening that the Red Sox have that much money tied up in a pitcher who can't get it done in October. Now it seems that we need two high priced pitchers, one who can get us TO October and a second one who can get us THROUGH October. :-(

[moonslav59]

Name a trade you would have made and let me know if you know for sure what you would had to give up.....

 

Again the problem is DD lives in a real world.....you have no idea how may trades he looked at.....rest of us live in fantasy baseball world.....we just do.

 

I've named several trades in the past, but the problem is, we can never be sure the other teams would say yes.

 

Take the Kimbrel deal, last winter I suggested we sign Clippard and make a minor trade for KRod. I also said I'd rather have signed Miller than pay more (per year) for Kimbrel. Assuming those possibilities, maybe even combined, were possible, then I'd have offered a mega deal to sign Carrasco, Salazar, Quintana or Sale, but again, those guys were probably not available unless there was a massive overpay. I thought I was offering an overpay, but we'll never know, if it was "massive" enough. I did not include Espi in the deal, but now that he has been traded, one could consider the chances with him added to a deal.

 

I offered Swihart, Margot, Guerra (still had high value then), Owens & Johnson (both had higher value last winter). Sub Espi for Owens and Johnson and I think we get someone to listen.

 

Looking at trades made recently, and trying to figure out if we could have offered more is also a difficult thing to do, but I think we could have gotten Matt Moore for less than Espi, Margot, Guerra and Allen...way less.

 

Right now, I'd have offered Swihart, Margot, Allen and Espi for Quintana, and had we signed Miller, we'd have Quintana-Miller, instead of Pomeranz-Kimbrel (minus Swihart). I realize this is jusr speculation, and I know I'll be accused of beating a dead horse, but we gave up top talent for the right to pay FA like money for a closer and a mid-rotation starter with a very little record of success. I know, it sounds like Monday morning quarterbacking to always say this and that deal suck, but I have offered alternative suggestions that are more times than not criticized for offering too much- not too little.

[moonslav59]

I can talk about this trade all day and be perfectly comfortable about it, because Iggy just isn't that good as an all-around player. He's a plus defender, but his offense is so bad that he nets out to an adequate, average player with a WAR of 1.8 this year and 5.6 for his career. He only made 2.1 million this year so he was a decent value for the Tigers.

 

His offense has not been so bad as many think it has or would be.

 

His .694 OPS since 2013 places him 25th out of 42 SSs with 100+ PAs.

 

On fangraph's value page, he places 21st out of 42 on SS batting since 2013. He's 10th on defense, despite playing about half the innings as others. Boegy places 25th on D and 11th in batting.

 

But, this really isn't about Iggy vs Bogey, it's about Iggy + Bogey.

[Eddy Ballgame]

Lol, we really need a thread just for the Peavy trade.

 

I've named several trades in the past, but the problem is, we can never be sure the other teams would say yes.

 

Take the Kimbrel deal, last winter I suggested we sign Clippard and make a minor trade for KRod. I also said I'd rather have signed Miller than pay more (per year) for Kimbrel. Assuming those possibilities, maybe even combined, were possible, then I'd have offered a mega deal to sign Carrasco, Salazar, Quintana or Sale, but again, those guys were probably not available unless there was a massive overpay. I thought I was offering an overpay, but we'll never know, if it was "massive" enough. I did not include Espi in the deal, but now that he has been traded, one could consider the chances with him added to a deal.

 

I offered Swihart, Margot, Guerra (still had high value then), Owens & Johnson (both had higher value last winter). Sub Espi for Owens and Johnson and I think we get someone to listen.

 

Looking at trades made recently, and trying to figure out if we could have offered more is also a difficult thing to do, but I think we could have gotten Matt Moore for less than Espi, Margot, Guerra and Allen...way less.

 

Right now, I'd have offered Swihart, Margot, Allen and Espi for Quintana, and had we signed Miller, we'd have Quintana-Miller, instead of Pomeranz-Kimbrel (minus Swihart). I realize this is jusr speculation, and I know I'll be accused of beating a dead horse, but we gave up top talent for the right to pay FA like money for a closer and a mid-rotation starter with a very little record of success. I know, it sounds like Monday morning quarterbacking to always say this and that deal suck, but I have offered alternative suggestions that are more times than not criticized for offering too much- not too little.

 

Trade proposals are fun to discuss, but as fans, we simply don't have nearly enough information to ever be able to say "I think we could've made this trade."

 

For example, you mention that you think that the Sox could've obtained Matt Moore. The problem with that is that teams almost never make significant inter-division trades anymore and I can't see Tampa Bay having any interest at all in trading Matt Moore to the Sox or the Sox trading top prospects to Tampa. It's just not something that would happen.

Edited October 20, 2016 by Eddy Ballgame

[Bellhorn04]

His offense has not been so bad as many think it has or would be.

 

His .694 OPS since 2013 places him 25th out of 42 SSs with 100+ PAs.

 

On fangraph's value page, he places 21st out of 42 on SS batting since 2013. He's 10th on defense, despite playing about half the innings as others. Boegy places 25th on D and 11th in batting.

 

But, this really isn't about Iggy vs Bogey, it's about Iggy + Bogey.

 

Iggy's WAR of 1.8 in 2016 and 5.6 for his career identifies him as an average all-around player.

[Slasher9]

Not nonsense at all. Peavy helped not only solidify the rotation, but indirectly helped solidify the bullpen as well.

 

and we won the WS in 2013. i'll trade anyone if it ends up in a parade. im perfectly happy with iglesias in detroit and xander playing SS in boston. iglesias had a yuuuge dropped popup in that 2013 ALCS. he is hitting better than all of us thought.

[moonslav59]

Iggy's WAR of 1.8 in 2016 and 5.6 for his career identifies him as an average all-around player.

 

WAR is a stat heavily influenced by playing time, and while Iggy's injuries should count against him, when he plays, he's above average over-all.

Out of the top 43 SSs since 2013, Bogey places 7th in WAR at 9.4, and he has 2017 PAs since 2013. Iggy places 24th, but he has only 1349 PAs (about 2/3rd of what Bogey has). If you add 50% of Iggy's WAR to his 5.6, he'd be at 8.4 with 2064 PAs. That would place him 11th out of 43- clearly top third.

 

If he keeps getting hurt, then his value is average or below average. I get that, but when he plays, he's about top 3rd "all around"

 

[moonslav59]

and we won the WS in 2013. i'll trade anyone if it ends up in a parade. im perfectly happy with iglesias in detroit and xander playing SS in boston. iglesias had a yuuuge dropped popup in that 2013 ALCS. he is hitting better than all of us thought.

 

That's like saying the Lugo signing was good, because we won with him as our SS.

[mvp 78]

His offense has not been so bad as many think it has or would be.

 

His .694 OPS since 2013 places him 25th out of 42 SSs with 100+ PAs.

 

On fangraph's value page, he places 21st out of 42 on SS batting since 2013. He's 10th on defense, despite playing about half the innings as others. Boegy places 25th on D and 11th in batting.

 

But, this really isn't about Iggy vs Bogey, it's about Iggy + Bogey.

 

That's weird since Bogey is 4th in WAR since the start of the 2014 season when he became a full time player.

[Bellhorn04]

What the Sox got out of Peavy in 2013 was exactly what they were looking for: a solid #3.

 

10 starts

64.2 IP (excellent)

4.04 ERA

102 ERA+

1.16 WHIP

[mvp 78]

What the Sox got out of Peavy in 2013 was exactly what they were looking for: a solid #3.

 

10 starts

64.2 IP (excellent)

4.04 ERA

102 ERA+

1.16 WHIP

 

The only way the trade could have come back questionable is if Iggy turned into Ozzie Smith or Omar Vizquel. He didn't.