2016-2017 Offseason Trade Speculation Thread

[Nick]

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.

 

Nope it's about Bogey + Moncada > Bogey + Iggy

[Slasher9]

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

 

im not bummed we didnt sign someone else instead of him. we won the WS that year.

 

plus he had 13 hits in the 2007 post season so it's not like he didnt pitch in.....

Edited October 20, 2016 by Slasher9

[moonslav59]

Nope it's about Bogey + Moncada > Bogey + Iggy

 

or Bogey + Iggy + Moncada > Bogey + Moncada + Shaw/Pablo

[mvp 78]

or Bogey + Iggy + Moncada > Bogey + Moncada + Shaw/Pablo

 

There's a really good chance that if they retained Iggy, that they wouldn't have signed Moncada.

[moonslav59]

There's a really good chance that if they retained Iggy, that they wouldn't have signed Moncada.

 

That's hard to know, especially since Moncada was years away from the bigs and Iggy has had injury issues.

 

Moncada's position was also an unknown.

[Eddy Ballgame]

or Bogey + Iggy + Moncada > Bogey + Moncada + Shaw/Pablo

 

This doesn't take into account that the Sox very well may not have won the World Series in '13 without making that trade.

 

Also, Bogaerts said that he wasn't comfortable at 3rd and didn't like playing the position. You could say that he would've became used to 3rd and they should've made him play there anyway. I'm just not sure that it's a good idea to take your "all-world" prospect and stick him somewhere he doesn't to be.

[Bellhorn04]

or Bogey + Iggy + Moncada > Bogey + Moncada + Shaw/Pablo

 

So basically Iggy > Shaw/Pablo.

 

Probably so, but it's not much of a difference, and it all depends on Iggy's durability, which hasn't been good, etc. etc.

[moonslav59]

This doesn't take into account that the Sox very well may not have won the World Series in '13 without making that trade.

 

I'm not so sure, but I certainly get why they made the move.

 

Also, Bogaerts said that he wasn't comfortable at 3rd and didn't like playing the position. You could say that he would've became used to 3rd and they should've made him play there anyway. I'm just not sure that it's a good idea to take your "all-world" prospect and stick him somewhere he doesn't to be.

 

Well, if he keeps getting worse on defense, maybe we'll end up hurting his feelings anyways.

 

I thought he looked pretty good at 3B on defense (although the metrics don't show it in just over 400 innings played there), and I'm not sold on the idea that his playing 3B was the root cause of his offensive struggles in 2014, but like I said, I'm fine with him at SS right now.

Edited October 20, 2016 by moonslav59

[Eddy Ballgame]

This doesn't take into account that the Sox very well may not have won the World Series in '13 without making that trade.

 

I'm not so sure, but I certainly get why they made the move.

 

Also, Bogaerts said that he wasn't comfortable at 3rd and didn't like playing the position. You could say that he would've became used to 3rd and they should've made him play there anyway. I'm just not sure that it's a good idea to take your "all-world" prospect and stick him somewhere he doesn't to be.

 

Well, if he keeps getting worse on defense, maybe we'll end up hurting his feelings anyways.

 

I thought he looked pretty good at 3B on defense (although the metrics don't show it in just over 400 innings played there), and I'm not sold on the idea that his playing 3B was the root cause of his offensive struggles in 2014, but like I said, I'm fine with him at SS right now.

 

I don't think you can say he "got worse" on defense, especially at his age. He may not have had as good a year defensively as '15, but then again, defensive metrics are pretty flawed, so who really knows.

 

I know you're more into statistics, but there probably isn't a more "mental" sport than baseball, especially at that level. Yogi Berra was definitely onto something before he started butchering his percentages. Whether or not the move to a position he didn't like playing affected his offense is debatable, but I don't see how it couldn't, although I'm sure he would feel even more comfortable if he knew you were "fine with him at SS."

Edited October 20, 2016 by Eddy Ballgame

[moonslav59]

I don't think you can say he "got worse" on defense, especially at his age. He may not have had as good a year defensively as '15, but then again, defensive metrics are pretty flawed, so who really knows.

 

I know you're more into statistics, but there probably isn't a more "mental" sport than baseball, especially at that level. Yogi Berra was definitely onto something before he started butchering his percentages. Whether or not the move to a position he didn't like playing affected his offense is debatable, but I don't see how it couldn't, although I'm sure he would feel even more comfortable if he knew you were "fine with him at SS."��

 

I watch every play of every game every year, and I thought he was doing worse on D before I looked to the metrics to confirm my observations.

 

I realize he may have just had an "off year" or a slump, same as hitters do, but I'm pretty certain he showed a significant regression from 2015 on defense. That's not good for someone expected to continue improving like he did from 2013/2014 to 2015. He's still okay at SS, but not great.

[Wade Boggs]

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

 

He won't lol

[moonslav59]

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

 

Really? He had to become that good to off-set what Peavy brought us for 1.3 years worth of control?

[moonslav59]

Rumor has it, the Royals are looking to save some money next year. Here's a look at some of their bigger contracts:

 

$62.5M/4 Ian Kennedy (may opt out after 2017 with $6M buyout! making it possibly $19.5M/1)

 

$60M/3 Alex Gordon (including $4M buyout on a $23M 2020 mutual option)

 

$21M/3 Yordano Ventura (including $1M buyout on $12M option for 2020. There is also a team option on 2021 at $12M (with $1M buyout.)

 

$18M/2 Joakim Soria (including $1M buyout on $10M option for 2019)

 

$11M/1 Lorenzo Cain

 

$11M/1 or $1.5M buyout on mutual option Kendrys Morales

 

$10M/1 or $2.5M buyout Wade Davis

 

$10M/1 or $3M buyout Edinson Volquez

 

$8.7M/1 Mike Moustakas

 

$8M/1 Jason Vargas

 

Last arb: Eric Hosmer (made $8.25M this year) & Danny Duffy (made $4.2M this year)

 

Some interesting names here. If we end up trading JBJ, KC has a couple OF'er that would fit right in. Moustakas would also be a great fit, especially if we could get him to extend, but he might also block Moncada and Devers at 3B. Wade Davis might be a fit.

 

Your thoughts?

 

Edited October 21, 2016 by moonslav59

[cp176]

I think that if a trade occurs that involves one of our outfielders than you look to replace him. I would do nothing with respect to third base. Rather than sign someone for even a year, I would take a chance that between Shaw, Sandoval, and Moncada the job will get done. I don't see any urgency with respect to third base.

[moonslav59]

I think that if a trade occurs that involves one of our outfielders than you look to replace him. I would do nothing with respect to third base. Rather than sign someone for even a year, I would take a chance that between Shaw, Sandoval, and Moncada the job will get done. I don't see any urgency with respect to third base.

 

I feel when you have the worst 3B WAR in MLB, there has to be a sense of urgency, but I don't disagree with the idea to let things play out. Pablo and Moncada were not really part of the equation this year, so things have changed already without any acquisitions.

 

I do have some serious doubts about Moncada's ability to be a decent fielding 3Bman, but we should know a little more after watching him play in the Fall League. If upper management deems him likely to be unfit to play 3B for an extended time in the bigs, then maybe a one year fix might be called for. I hate the idea of relying on just a Pablo-Shaw combo to get us out of the bottom 5 in 3B WAR next year.

[Dojji]

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

 

The lugo signing wasn't good, but it's hard to criticize anything the FO does when we win it all.

 

I will say though that Lugo shines a light on the whole third base question all the same. We won the World Series with a guy who put up 0.6 WAR in one of the most sensitive field positions. Perhaps we should not be so harsh on Travis Shaw who despite all the trials and tribulations of the second half, was a 2 WAR ballplayer. Championship teams have holes sometimes, you don't need to strain for perfection in every last detail. Just get a team that's good enough to compete and hope for a bit of postseason magic. That's what half the teams that actually won the Series wound up doing.

[Nick]

I never understood why we didn't try to re-sign Beltre. He was the consummate baseball professional. Victor Martinez too.

 

When can we start signing international players? July 1st?

[Palodios]

I never understood why we didn't try to re-sign Beltre. He was the consummate baseball professional. Victor Martinez too.

 

When can we start signing international players? July 1st?

 

That was during the weird period where letting good players go was very profitable with draft picks. Between VMart and Beltre, they pulled in Bradley, Swihart, Owens and Barnes.

 

Not signing Beltre was a mistake, but I'm not sure anyone knew he was going to look like a hall of fame candidate right now.

[Dojji]

Compensation picks is your answer. IIRC we got the pick that turned into JBJ by walking away from Beltre.

 

EDIT: Ninja'd by Palodios.

[Bellhorn04]

Really? He had to become that good to off-set what Peavy brought us for 1.3 years worth of control?

 

The Peavy trade always has to be put in the context that it was a deadline deal made by a team trying to win it all.

 

You will normally overpay on one of those deals.

 

The Sox won the World Series that year.

 

We can argue forever whether we would have won without Peavy and no one will ever know.

 

But the point is, the deal falls into a different category than an offseason trade.

[Palodios]

The Peavy deal looks much better in light of the Pomeranz deal.

[sk7326]

I never understood why we didn't try to re-sign Beltre. He was the consummate baseball professional. Victor Martinez too.

 

When can we start signing international players? July 1st?

 

Because they ended up having two of the 10 best hitters in baseball to man the corners (or so they thought).

 

The secret "thing which happened that the team never really recovered from" was Yook's body falling apart.

[S5Dewey]

The lugo signing wasn't good, but it's hard to criticize anything the FO does when we win it all.

This is where you and I have a difference of opinion. I look at all trades not only in terms of what the trade does for us this year but also what it does for (or to!) us in future years.

 

You can believe if you want that the Iggy/Peavey trade was what put us over the top and I'll disagree. That's fine. There's room for that in my life. But I don't see how anyone can disagree that the trade hurt us in future years, which was my contention all along. As I've already said, IMO their first mistake was trading Iggy. The second and bigger mistakes was that, if they were Hell-bent on doing it, they didn't get enough for him.

 

I can remember pre 2004 when folks on the old BDC board saying that they'd settle for nine last place finishes if we could win the WS just ONCE. Well, that's been debunked now! Playing for one year championships is what teams with smaller payrolls like Kansas City do. We're Sox fans and we now want to be in contention every year, and I don't think that's unreasonable giving the payroll we've become accustomed to. In order to to that we have to either keep our home-grown outstanding talent or, if we trade it, get at least fair value in return. And in this case they didn't do either.

[moonslav59]

That was during the weird period where letting good players go was very profitable with draft picks. Between VMart and Beltre, they pulled in Bradley, Swihart, Owens and Barnes.

 

Not signing Beltre was a mistake, but I'm not sure anyone knew he was going to look like a hall of fame candidate right now.

 

Yes, the idea was to get the draft picks and then spend the money "saved" elsewhere (which they did). The problem was the way they spent the savings.

[cp176]

I feel when you have the worst 3B WAR in MLB, there has to be a sense of urgency, but I don't disagree with the idea to let things play out. Pablo and Moncada were not really part of the equation this year, so things have changed already without any acquisitions.

 

I do have some serious doubts about Moncada's ability to be a decent fielding 3Bman, but we should know a little more after watching him play in the Fall League. If upper management deems him likely to be unfit to play 3B for an extended time in the bigs, then maybe a one year fix might be called for. I hate the idea of relying on just a Pablo-Shaw combo to get us out of the bottom 5 in 3B WAR next year.

 

I think that I might look at things differently if third wasn't the only place on the field that they look a little weak. I am willing to look beyond what the stats say about where Shaw and company ranks. 16 H/runs from him plus a decent RBI total to go along with a decent job done in the field. With 3 guys vying for the position, I don't see why anyone would view it as a situation so urgent that it takes priority over anything else.

[moonslav59]

This is where you and I have a difference of opinion. I look at all trades not only in terms of what the trade does for us this year but also what it does for (or to!) us in future years.

 

You can believe if you want that the Iggy/Peavey trade was what put us over the top and I'll disagree. That's fine. There's room for that in my life. But I don't see how anyone can disagree that the trade hurt us in future years, which was my contention all along. As I've already said, IMO their first mistake was trading Iggy. The second and bigger mistakes was that, if they were Hell-bent on doing it, they didn't get enough for him.

 

I can remember pre 2004 when folks on the old BDC board saying that they'd settle for nine last place finishes if we could win the WS just ONCE. Well, that's been debunked now! Playing for one year championships is what teams with smaller payrolls like Kansas City do. We're Sox fans and we now want to be in contention every year, and I don't think that's unreasonable giving the payroll we've become accustomed to. In order to to that we have to either keep our home-grown outstanding talent or, if we trade it, get at least fair value in return. And in this case they didn't do either.

 

I used to feel that way about finishing in last place 9 times to just get one ring. That was prior to 2004, which changed everything.

 

I'm totally with you on the long term aspects of trades. Just because a deal may or may not have led to a championship, it doesn't mean you negate the long term aspect of the trade.

 

Almost everyone agrees the HanRam & A Sanchez for Beckett & Lowell was a win-win. We got our "ace" and won a ring in 2007. Lowell gave us much more than hoped for as well, but look what HanRam and Sanchez did! I'm not saying I'd redo the trade, but we lost a lot in that deal too.

[moonslav59]

I think that I might look at things differently if third wasn't the only place on the field that they look a little weak. I am willing to look beyond what the stats say about where Shaw and company ranks. 16 H/runs from him plus a decent RBI total to go along with a decent job done in the field. With 3 guys vying for the position, I don't see why anyone would view it as a situation so urgent that it takes priority over anything else.

 

I agree that the pen has higher urgency. I'd even prefer an ace over a 3Bman, so I think we are on the same page here. I might have less trust in Shaw than you do. His first half numbers don't jive with his whole career in AA/AAA.

[Bellhorn04]

This is where you and I have a difference of opinion. I look at all trades not only in terms of what the trade does for us this year but also what it does for (or to!) us in future years.

 

You can believe if you want that the Iggy/Peavey trade was what put us over the top and I'll disagree. That's fine. There's room for that in my life. But I don't see how anyone can disagree that the trade hurt us in future years, which was my contention all along. As I've already said, IMO their first mistake was trading Iggy. The second and bigger mistakes was that, if they were Hell-bent on doing it, they didn't get enough for him.

 

They weren't hell-bent on trading him. It just so happened that when they were trying to swing a deal for Peavy, in a 3-team trade, Iggy was what they had to give up.

 

This is not Jeff Bagwell we're talking about. Iggy is a slightly above-average player who has missed one full season plus chunks of 2 others and has a modest career WAR of 5.6.

[S5Dewey]

I agree that the pen has higher urgency. I'd even prefer an ace over a 3Bman, so I think we are on the same page here. I might have less trust in Shaw than you do. His first half numbers don't jive with his whole career in AA/AAA.

 

I think we'd all prefer an ace over a 3Bman. The difference there is in the cost, either in money or players/prospects, and that pesky Luxury tax thing.

 

For some reason which I can't explain I have more faith in Shaw improving than I do in Sandy Leon improving in spite of the fact that a case can be made that both of them have reverted to what they are.

[kenmeister]

 

Not signing Beltre was a mistake, but I'm not sure anyone knew he was going to look like a hall of fame candidate right now.

 

Beltre had an awesome year for the Sox in 2010, at least as I recall, and there really does need to be a consideration made for players who are PROVEN that they can play here. We've had our share of Renteria - maybe even Price - type players who are good elsewhere but they come here and don't play at the same level. Count me as one of the people who was upset when Beltre wasn't resigned. What's worse about the whole Beltre thing is that in going for the wrong Andre, we lost Anthony Rizzo as well. Beltre at 3B, Rizzo at 1B, we'd be much better.