2016-2017 Offseason Trade Speculation Thread

[jacksonianmarch]

That makes almost no sense. Rather than negotiating in the offseason, you'd rather have them up against a deadline with multiple desperate trade partners? Panda is a recurring disaster who was declining when he was signed. If he turns into something, good for you, but planning as if he's a viable option is stupid. Shaw got exposed, and basically was so bad that the brass decided, albeit for a short period of time, to rush a kid who started the yr in A ball to replace him. If Moncada can handle the spot, then great, but he might be the white whale of a prospect used to get what you really need.... pitching. Tazawa was dead by year's end. Kimbrel could use some help, and the guys under contract outside of him, aren't reliable.

[Dojji]

Yes I would do exactly that. Because none of our positional crises are clear enough or well enough defined to attempt a proper patch in the offseason. We need time to see what our internal options are going to do. And the obvious trades to create a surefire solution for any of our major deficiencies are not present. This is not a good time to go blundering around in the trade market. Nothing but a sure thing is worth trading for, and for our key positional needs, there are no sure things out there and clearly available.

 

Don't waste resources on almost-but-not-quite-what-you-want, just for the sake of having done something. That's a great way to squander resources you will (not might but will) need later.

[moonslav59]

Man oh man, I wish we had signed Andrew Miller!

[Dojji]

Well we've done better than that -- if our hope for Kelly bears out, we've signed the next one.

[jacksonianmarch]

That's absolutely absurd Dojji. Your Kool Aid is running like a damn river right now. You're saying that Joe Kelly could be the next Andrew Miller, ie the best reliever in baseball right now. You're full of it today

[moonslav59]

At the time, I thought the $36M/4 for Andrew Miller was a good deal for the Yanks and thought we should have out bid them.

 

We could have has ERod and Miller.

[Spudboy]

At the time, I thought the $36M/4 for Andrew Miller was a good deal for the Yanks and thought we should have out bid them.

 

We could have has ERod and Miller.

 

Bingo.

 

And they should have re-signed Lester.

 

Whatever.

[Spudboy]

That's absolutely absurd Dojji. Your Kool Aid is running like a damn river right now. You're saying that Joe Kelly could be the next Andrew Miller, ie the best reliever in baseball right now. You're full of it today

 

Lol.

 

It's Dojji.

[moonslav59]

Bingo.

 

And they should have re-signed Lester.

 

Whatever.

 

For what we ended up paying Price, we could have had both.

[Jack Flap]

At the time, I thought the $36M/4 for Andrew Miller was a good deal for the Yanks and thought we should have out bid them.

 

We could have has ERod and Miller.

 

And if we had Miller, the Kimbrel trade likely wouldn't have been necessary, meaning we'd still have Margot, et. al.

 

Despite the protestations around the time of the trade that Margot was hopelessly blocked in Boston and never would have played for us no matter what, having him ready to step into CF would be pretty convenient right about now if we wanted to trade JBJ for a starting pitcher.

[Dojji]

That's absolutely absurd Dojji. Your Kool Aid is running like a damn river right now. You're saying that Joe Kelly could be the next Andrew Miller, ie the best reliever in baseball right now. You're full of it today

 

I wasn't being serious guys.

[Dojji]

And if we had Miller, the Kimbrel trade likely wouldn't have been necessary, meaning we'd still have Margot, et. al.

 

Despite the protestations around the time of the trade that Margot was hopelessly blocked in Boston and never would have played for us no matter what, having him ready to step into CF would be pretty convenient right about now if we wanted to trade JBJ for a starting pitcher.

 

Margot or Benintendi -- pick one, trade the other. You can't give both the meaningful playing time they need. You've seen the issues we're having trying to develop 2 players for the same position at catcher, it just doesn't work very well, the issue at the moment at catcher seems to be more centered around there never being a good time to trade one catcher or the other without screwing our depth. We did not have the same problem with the two young CF prospects.

 

When it comes to having two top prospects in the same position at the same level, it just doesn't do to be indecisive. You need to pick one and move the other and trust your read on which one to move. We picked Benintendi. It was the right decision. The only question was what to trade Margot FOR.

Edited October 31, 2016 by Dojji

[jacksonianmarch]

Your issue with developing a catcher has nothing to do with your OF glut at the time. Your issues with catcher is that one is seriously offensively challenged and the other is seriously defensively challenged.

 

I think it was UN? that I had a bet with in the offseason that Swihart would be below average in 2016 as a defensive catcher. I think the fact that the sox moved him to LF supports that theory. I think it's the only sig bet I won this offseason

Edited October 31, 2016 by jacksonianmarch

[moonslav59]

And if we had Miller, the Kimbrel trade likely wouldn't have been necessary, meaning we'd still have Margot, et. al.

 

Despite the protestations around the time of the trade that Margot was hopelessly blocked in Boston and never would have played for us no matter what, having him ready to step into CF would be pretty convenient right about now if we wanted to trade JBJ for a starting pitcher.

 

If we had Miller, we could have traded Margot and others for something else.

 

Even if we kept Margot, we'd be better off.

[moonslav59]

Maddon does make it difficult to pull for the Cubs, but I agree with you.

 

I actually like Madden.

[Dojji]

If we had Miller, we could have traded Margot and others for something else.

 

Even if we kept Margot, we'd be better off.

 

I think we should have gone after Miller too, but it's water under the bridge now and has no bearing on the upcoming offseason.

[Eddy Ballgame]

I think we should have gone after Miller too, but it's water under the bridge now and has no bearing on the upcoming offseason.

 

The Sox did go after Miller. Their best offer was 4/32. Not sure if they were offered an opportunity to outbid the Yankees' 4/36, but Miller made it clear that the money was going to be the deciding factor, as it was his first opportunity to cash in.

[moonslav59]

I think we should have gone after Miller too, but it's water under the bridge now and has no bearing on the upcoming offseason.

 

Too bad there's no Andrew Miller in this winter's FA market.

[mvp 78]

What about signing Saunders for DH? I think I'd rather him than Bautista if they aren't going for EE.

[oldtimer]

What about signing Saunders for DH? I think I'd rather him than Bautista if they aren't going for EE.

 

There is also talk about Trumbo as a FA DH. I still prefer Beltran as a more polished hitter but with less power.

[mvp 78]

There is also talk about Trumbo as a FA DH. I still prefer Beltran as a more polished hitter but with less power.

 

Beltran is a good option as well. I'd rather go short term with him than grab EE at top dollar.

[Eddy Ballgame]

Beltran is a good option as well. I'd rather go short term with him than grab EE at top dollar.

 

I agree. There seems to be plenty of free agent "DH types," so they should have lots of options without worrying about giving anyone any type of long term deal.

 

I think they'll put their own value on EE and see if it's anywhere close to where the market is, though.

[sk7326]

I think Beltran for a 2/40 sort of hitch makes sense. He can also play an outfield corner from time to time (and presumably 1B).

 

My guess is they do nothing at 3B - the options are there to cobble together a solid level of production.

[mvp 78]

If they believe in Moncada, they are really just looking for a placeholder at 3b until late 2017 or 2018 when Moncada could be ready.

[Eddy Ballgame]

I think Beltran for a 2/40 sort of hitch makes sense. He can also play an outfield corner from time to time (and presumably 1B).

 

That sounds reasonable for Beltran. My guess is that Texas will certainly want him back, though.

 

My guess is they do nothing at 3B - the options are there to cobble together a solid level of production.

 

Agreed, unless by some miracle, they move Sandoval, they'll go with in house options.

[moonslav59]

What about signing Saunders for DH? I think I'd rather him than Bautista if they aren't going for EE.

 

Despite his poor ending to 2016, I agree. I doubt we sign him though.

[moonslav59]

If they believe in Moncada, they are really just looking for a placeholder at 3b until late 2017 or 2018 when Moncada could be ready.

 

That's why I keep mentioning Frazier, but he's not worth a significant overpay.

[Nick]

Projecting ahead

 

Xander becomes FA in 2020, JBJ and Betts the following year. Pablo's and Hanley's contracts will go away after 2019 season, $5M buy out on Pablo's. That will release $40M in annual contracts.

 

Rick Porcello will be a free agent for 2020 season along with Xander. I'm thinking $40M 'savings', adjusted for mlb 'inflation' (I'm not talking about cpi for your nerds out there) will cover Xander and Porcello. Porcello signing maybe more critical than Xander's at that point. We may have other options. Beni, Moncada, Devers all maybe in their prime by then as they go through their arbitration years.

 

Sox will still be locked into Price's contract until 2022, $32M per year.

 

No way we'll not resign Betts.

 

I would love it but I just don't think we can afford to have EE's contract if it goes beyond 4 years. Too much money will be needed to keep our current youngsters on the roster by then.

 

That is why I won't be too upset if we don't do much this winter. Yes Moon, we'll need to shore up our bullpen but we can do it without giving up the farm.

 

E Rod needs to be given time to develop into upper echelon starting pitcher (ie DO NOT TRADE HIM). Who knows if he'll get there but you don't trade away a guy with his potential. At a comparable age, 2017 season would be Lester's break out year (something similar to what Porcello did in 2016). Guys like Wright and Pomeranz also need to be retained. They come cheap.

 

I'm not worried about the 50% penalty if we are going over the limit by $20M at max. That's only a $10M penalty. It's just cash at that point. We paid $30M penalty on a $30M signing. And what was the posting fee for our friend from Japan? 50% penalty on say $10M? I'll speak for John Henry. In my best imitation of Matt Damon to Johnny Chan in movie Rounders, "Don't sweat it, Moon".

Edited November 2, 2016 by Nick

[cp176]

My guess is that they do nothing with respect to third base. No need. That one gets taken care of in house.

On the same page as E/Ballgame with respect to Encarnarcion - Red sox will place their own value on him. If he wants to be in Boston, he'll come but he probably will be able to get more $ somewhere else.

 

Shaw/Sandoval/Moncada/Holt/Devers etc. etc. etc. - this group will match the production of any journeyman pro who might cost us something. We also might find something really good amongst this group. it really is worth waiting to see how it plays out. No panic mode needed.

[moonslav59]

Projecting ahead

 

Xander becomes FA in 2020, JBJ and Betts the following year. Pablo's and Hanley's contracts will go away after 2019 season, $5M buy out on Pablo's. That will release $40M in annual contracts.

 

Rick Porcello will be a free agent for 2020 season along with Xander. I'm thinking $40M 'savings', adjusted for mlb 'inflation' (I'm not talking about cpi for your nerds out there) will cover Xander and Porcello. Porcello signing maybe more critical than Xander's at that point. We may have other options. Beni, Moncada, Devers all maybe in their prime by then as they go through their arbitration years.

 

Sox will still be locked into Price's contract until 2022, $32M per year.

 

No way we'll not resign Betts.

 

I would love it but I just don't think we can afford to have EE's contract if it goes beyond 4 years. Too much money will be needed to keep our current youngsters on the roster by then.

 

That is why I won't be too upset if we don't do much this winter. Yes Moon, we'll need to shore up our bullpen but we can do it without giving up the farm.

 

E Rod needs to be given time to develop into upper echelon starting pitcher (ie DO NOT TRADE HIM). Who knows if he'll get there but you don't trade away a guy with his potential. At a comparable age, 2017 season would have been Lester's break out year (something similar to what Porcello did in 2016). Guys like Wright and Pomeranz also need to be retained. They come cheap.

 

I don't disagree with anything here. I do think we can keep all the kids, if we don't get wrapped up in any deals that go beyond 2019.

 

 

I'm not worried about the 50% penalty if we are going over the limit by $20M at max. That's only a $10M penalty. It's just cash at that point. We paid $30M penalty on a $30M signing. And what was the posting fee for our friend from Japan? 50% penalty on say $10M? I'll speak for John Henry. In my best imitation of Matt Damon to Johnny Chan in movie Rounders, "Don't sweat it, Moon".

 

I really don't care, if we go over, but I've always gone on the assumption we won't go over by much, since we never have. This past season was the most, and we have to also look at the fact that Henry is also paying for Craig and Castillo, so that $10M tax is amplified. I'd be happy, if we signed EE and Jensen, as long as we planned to lock up our kids when the time comes.

 

I looked at last winter as a one time splurge to get us back to significance with the idea that we'd reset the luxury tax this winter or next, and if it was next winter, we wouldn't go over by much this winter.

 

I could be wrong. I have been before.