2016-2017 Offseason Trade Speculation Thread

[moonslav59]

I didn't see moving Mookie from 2B to CF as being a "demotion". In fact, I saw it as a promotion, and since there's little to no future for a 2Bman in the Red Sox organization it was a promotion begging to be made. I recognize that there's a mindset that CF is the premier outfield position but IMO that doesn't hold true in Fenway park. We learned the value of having two CF'ers in Fenway with one in CF and one in RF during Victornio's stay here - or at least I hope we did. I see CF & RF as being equal on the defensive spectrum in Fenway with LF being the only OF demotion.

 

Either Mookie saw it that way too or he, as you say, did what the team asked him to do and made the best of it. Either way, Mookie was the winner.

 

There certainly was a big difference on how Betts handles both position changes than how Bogey did.

 

[Dojji]

No there isn't. Bogaerts was uncomfortable, played uncomfortably, and said he was uncomfortable. So did Betts, if not quite in so many words. The difference is the team stuck with the shift, and Betts had the time to actually get used to the position over time. Bogaerts would have adjusted too.

 

The reason they didn't do the same thing with Bogaerts is because no one with two eyes connected to a working brain actually thought Iglesias was going to wind up being the better of the two shortstops since Iglesias was a high-floor-low-ceiling player, and Bogaerts' tremendous ceiling as a shortstop was obvious even at 20 years old. At the moment of course it's no contest at all. Iglesias is a fringe-average shortstop who lives on inconsistent, flashy defense, and Bogaerts is easily one of the 5 best shortstops in baseball right now.

 

(for the record: As inconsistent and not-all-that-good as Iglesias is, he beats the pants off any other shortstop we'd had at that position for years, with the exception of 2013 Stephen Drew, and if we didn't have Bogaerts, I would have been satisfied with Iglesias' work, since he's young, cost-controlled, and not a liability on either side of the ball. But we did have Bogaerts, and he is and was always going to be the better of the two shortstops)

 

Also we all thought Middlebrooks was the future at 3B at the time anyway, with another top prospect (Cecchini) closing in behind him, so moving a shortstop over to cover a position that looked like it was sorted, wasn't on the itinerary. I refuse to ride management too hard for making decisions that only look bad based on information that was by no means clear at the time, such as the failure of our 3B prospects.

Edited November 20, 2016 by Dojji

[Kimmi]

The fact that it's an "ego thing" doesn't mean that the limitation can be ignored. Players can't always be expected to put their ego aside. This is competitive sports, not the military. Ego can be central to the confidence some players need to perform well.

 

I have no problem with a player having an ego. I do have a problem with a player having an ego so big that he thinks he's better than the team. You can't have a player on the team who's going to pout because he thinks he's too good to play a position or a role that the team asks him to play.

 

You take that ego and you channel it into becoming the best player in whatever role the team asks you to fill.

[Kimmi]

I didn't see moving Mookie from 2B to CF as being a "demotion". In fact, I saw it as a promotion, and since there's little to no future for a 2Bman in the Red Sox organization it was a promotion begging to be made. I recognize that there's a mindset that CF is the premier outfield position but IMO that doesn't hold true in Fenway park. We learned the value of having two CF'ers in Fenway with one in CF and one in RF during Victornio's stay here - or at least I hope we did. I see CF & RF as being equal on the defensive spectrum in Fenway with LF being the only OF demotion.

 

Either Mookie saw it that way too or he, as you say, did what the team asked him to do and made the best of it. Either way, Mookie was the winner.

 

That was the reason why I used the word 'demotion' in quotes. I didn't think Mookie was demoted, nor did I think that Xander was demoted when he was moved to 3B..

 

That said, I can see how some people or some players would look at those moves as demotions even though they shouldn't.

[Dojji]

I have no problem with a player having an ego. I do have a problem with a player having an ego so big that he thinks he's better than the team. You can't have a player on the team who's going to pout because he thinks he's too good to play a position or a role that the team asks him to play.

 

And we don't. Bogaerts made it clear that he was uncomfortable, and didn't play third well, and didn't hit well while playing third, but he certainly tried to play the position his manager told him to play. He just couldn't make the adjustment on the fly while he was still adjusting to playing big league ball as well. It was too much all at once.

 

If they really wanted X to make that adjustment, they shouldn't have done it on the fly, he should have played substantially more 3B in the minors, the same way they did it later with Travis Shaw. Throwing him into the position on the fly, at the big league level, was a tall ask of such a young player.

Edited November 20, 2016 by Dojji

[moonslav59]

No there isn't. Bogaerts was uncomfortable, played uncomfortably, and said he was uncomfortable. So did Betts, if not quite in so many words. The difference is the team stuck with the shift, and Betts had the time to actually get used to the position over time. Bogaerts would have adjusted too.

 

The reason they didn't do the same thing with Bogaerts is because no one with two eyes connected to a working brain actually thought Iglesias was going to wind up being the better of the two shortstops since Iglesias was a high-floor-low-ceiling player, and Bogaerts' tremendous ceiling as a shortstop was obvious even at 20 years old. At the moment of course it's no contest at all. Iglesias is a fringe-average shortstop who lives on inconsistent, flashy defense, and Bogaerts is easily one of the 5 best shortstops in baseball right now.

 

(for the record: As inconsistent and not-all-that-good as Iglesias is, he beats the pants off any other shortstop we'd had at that position for years, with the exception of 2013 Stephen Drew, and if we didn't have Bogaerts, I would have been satisfied with Iglesias' work, since he's young, cost-controlled, and not a liability on either side of the ball. But we did have Bogaerts, and he is and was always going to be the better of the two shortstops)

 

Also we all thought Middlebrooks was the future at 3B at the time anyway, with another top prospect (Cecchini) closing in behind him, so moving a shortstop over to cover a position that looked like it was sorted, wasn't on the itinerary. I refuse to ride management too hard for making decisions that only look bad based on information that was by no means clear at the time, such as the failure of our 3B prospects.

 

To me, Bogey's defense at SS is no where near what Betts has been at his new positions.

 

It's apples and oranges.

 

I'm still not sure if not moving Bogey to 3B for good was the right choice, and it has nothing to do with Iggy.

 

He's still not above average (16th in top 30 UZR/150 this year).

 

[Dojji]

The only reason to move Bogaerts, who is an average defender overall at SS, is to make room for a better defender. There has been no shortstop in recent Red Sox history who has been a better than average defender at shortstop over multiple seasons, you have to go back to John Valentin to find a shortstop who returned consistently above average value defensively for multiple seasons (Nomar had his moments, but was not consistent).

 

If a decision to move Bogaerts doesn't have anything to do with the presence if Iglesias in Bogaerts' rookie campaign, it doesn't have anything to do with anything at all.

Edited November 20, 2016 by Dojji

[S5Dewey]

The only reason to move Bogaerts, who is an average defender overall at SS, is to make room for a better defender. There has been no shortstop in recent Red Sox history who has been a better than average defender at shortstop over multiple seasons, you have to go back to John Valentin to find a shortstop who returned consistently above average value defensively for multiple seasons (Nomar had his moments, but was not consistent).

 

If a decision to move Bogaerts doesn't have anything to do with the presence if Iglesias in Bogaerts' rookie campaign, it doesn't have anything to do with anything at all.

First a couple of disclaimers.

Disclaimer #1 - It goes against my grain to dis a player on my team but I'm willing to make an exception because I'm getting tired of the revisionist history involving Iggy.

Disclaimer #2 - In spite of my disdain for defensive metrics I'm going to do what the stat geeks do when trying to make a point. I'm going to Baseball Reference and their stats. BR has a stat called Rdrs/yr, which is the number of runs above or below average a fielder was worth over 1200 innings (or approx. 135 games)

 

Dojji was correct when he said that no shortstop in recent Red Sox history who has been a better than average defender at shortstop over multiple seasons but there was one who was exactly at average. Iglesias was exactly average over his three years in Boston @ 0 and in 2016 he was +10 for the Tigers. Bogaerts OTOH has had one year (2015) when he was exactly average. In 2014 he was -12 in 99 games at SS and in 2016 he was -9 in 157 games. In short, Bogaerts defense allowed 19 more runs that Iggy's did in 2016.

 

According to BR Iglesias has a 2016 dWAR of 1.1 while Bogaerts had a dWAR of -0.1

 

If you want to say that Bogaert's offense more than makes up for the difference I'll go with that (without looking it up) but can we please put to bed the idea that Bogaerts is a better SS than Iggy?

 

Either that, or can we agree that defensive metrics are so much bullcrap?

[moonslav59]

Here are the best UZR/150 seasons by our SSs since 2003:

(500+ innings)

 

2004 Resse 19.8

2006 Gonzo 14.6

 

2013 Drew 6.7

2012 Aviles 5.2

2009 Green 3.0

 

2011 Scutaro 1.7

2015 Bogey 0.9

2003 Nomar 0.1

2007 Lugo -0.6

 

2016 Bogey -2.8

2008 Lugo -3.3

2014 Bogey -3.7

2010 Scutaro -4.5

 

2005 Renteria -9.6

 

Best overall UZR/150 since 2003 (450+ innings)

20.3 Iggy

19.8 Reese

14.4 Gonzo

8.3 Drew

7.1 Aviles

4.8 A Cora

3.0 Green

2.8 Lowrie

-1.0 Bogey

-1.9 Scutaro

-5.0 Cabrera

-5.8 Nomar

-7.9 Lugo

-9.6 Renteria

 

DRS (partially a product of more innings)

 

Aviles 15/1170 innings

Reese 12/508

Cora 10/1071

Iggy 7/452

Cab 6/491

Gonzo 0/1327

Green 0/644

Lowrie -1/1124

Scutaro -3/2095

Nomar -5/1676

Renteria -13/1293

Bogey -18/3672

Lugo -21/2143

 

 

 

Edited November 21, 2016 by moonslav59

[Bellhorn04]

According to BR Iglesias has a 2016 dWAR of 1.1 while Bogaerts had a dWAR of -0.1

 

If you want to say that Bogaert's offense more than makes up for the difference I'll go with that (without looking it up) but can we please put to bed the idea that Bogaerts is a better SS than Iggy?

 

Either that, or can we agree that defensive metrics are so much bullcrap?

 

The metrics aren't bullcrap. Iggy is the better defensive SS.

 

Because of his offense Bogey had the better overall season with a 3.6 WAR to Iggy's 1.8.

[moonslav59]

Most innings at SS since I started following the Sox (1970):

 

8749 Burleson

8348 Nomar

 

4808 Valantin

4204 Hoffman

3713 Luis Rivera

3672 Bogey

3097 Aparicio

 

2143 Lugo

2094 Scutaro

2086 Owen

1976 Gutierrez

1815 J Reed

 

1432 Drew

1327 Gonzo

1293 Renteria

1213 Petrocelli

1170 Aviles

1124 Lowrie

1074 Guerrero

1071 Cora

 

 

 

[S5Dewey]

The metrics aren't bullcrap. Iggy is the better defensive SS.

 

Thank you. Maybe now we can put the "all flash and no substance" argument to bed once and for all.

[Fan_since_Boggs]

The Mets don’t seem to be looking for a big change at catcher, as Kristie Ackert of the New York Daily News reports that the team told representatives of a free agent catcher that Travis d’Arnaud will be given every opportunity to succeed next season. Since the Mets offered d’Arnaud as part of trade talks for Jonathan Lucroy over the summer, it’s notable that the team is reaffirming its commitment to the talented but oft-injured catcher, though it could be that New York was more enamored with Lucroy than it is with the options on free agent catching market. Ackert does note that the Mets could look for a more reliable backup, given d’Arnaud’s injury history and the shared offensive struggles of Kevin Plawecki and Rene Rivera.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

 

While the Mets aren't giving up on d'Arnaud, they aren't locked into him either and did try to upgrade the position at the trade deadline last season.

 

Swihart and Owens to the Mets for Wheeler and something else. The Red Sox could ask for a prospect as the "something else" or a position player on the 40 man. The Mets would probably like to unload C.Granderson, who could DH for one season in Boston. I'm not sure about L.Duda's health prognostication, or the value the Mets place on him, but a healthy Duda could DH in Boston.

 

Wheeler would start the year in AAA. Slowly build up his innings, unleash him in the second half.

Edited November 21, 2016 by Fan_since_Boggs

[notin]

Why bother with Zack Wheeler? He's missed 2 full seasons and wasn't exactly Sandy Koufax when he could pitch. Sure he might live up to his potential he had four years ago, but he also might spend the rest of his career bouncing from DL to active roster. If the Sox do try to acquire this human lottery ticket, hopefully they're smart enough to not use legitimate trade chips that could otherwise be dealt for a pitcher whose actually thrown a pitch since 2014....

[Dojji]

Thank you. Maybe now we can put the "all flash and no substance" argument to bed once and for all.

 

Nope. Because Iggy is nowhere near as great as his flash and dash makes one think -- if he were he'd be Ozzie Smith. He absoutely has the talent to be one of the greats but he seems to have real trouble tapping that talent consistently.

 

Iglesias is a perfectly decent overall SS who I'd be very content with if he were our everyday guy, and he looks like one of the best ever on the rare moments he happens to be concentrating. He's solid, with flashes of genius, but at the end of the day merely solid. He doesn't have the stick to make the overall picture match what we're getting from Bogaerts at the moment.

[harmony]

Why bother with Zack Wheeler? He's missed 2 full seasons and wasn't exactly Sandy Koufax when he could pitch. Sure he might live up to his potential he had four years ago, but he also might spend the rest of his career bouncing from DL to active roster. If the Sox do try to acquire this human lottery ticket, hopefully they're smart enough to not use legitimate trade chips that could otherwise be dealt for a pitcher whose actually thrown a pitch since 2014....

Blake Swihart and Henry Owens could be considered "human lottery tickets" as well.

[Spudboy]

Nope. Because Iggy is nowhere near as great as his flash and dash makes one think -- if he were he'd be Ozzie Smith. He absoutely has the talent to be one of the greats but he seems to have real trouble tapping that talent consistently.

 

Iglesias is a perfectly decent overall SS who I'd be very content with if he were our everyday guy, and he looks like one of the best ever on the rare moments he happens to be concentrating. He's solid, with flashes of genius, but at the end of the day merely solid. He doesn't have the stick to make the overall picture match what we're getting from Bogaerts at the moment.

 

How many times have you seen Iggy play over the past few years? Hundreds of times?

[mvp 78]

It's almost Thanksgiving.... WHY HAVEN'T THEY SIGNED ANYONE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE....

[cp176]

Maybe we do nothing. Maybe we get the dh most of us want. We might have a GM who is confident enough in his decision making so that he feels no need to pacify the fan base. To date his moves have made some sense. Whether people like his moves or not is debatealbe. The big arguement seems to come from people that think he gave up too much young talent to get what he wanted in return. It is possible that he thought and still thinks that much of that talent is over rated. It is what we tend to do. I have just read recently that now many scouts seem to think that maybe the euphoria surrounding Moncada (I'm guilty here) is a bit over blown. Also, even though his youth still factors in, there are those that are now saying that maybe even Espinoza might now come with the "next Pedro" sticker firmly stuck to him. Having a solid farm is vital. Everybody knows that - even our GM (little sarcasm) knows that. Over rating young prospects is just something that we tend to see here.

My bet is that we sign a dh. If we trade with anyone, I bet it will be because somebody really wants the player or players that we have and are willing to give us a great deal in return.

[notin]

Blake Swihart and Henry Owens could be considered p"human lottery tickets" as well.

 

Maybe but at least both of them have actually played in the last couple seasons. With Wheeler, you not only get standard prospect question marks, but also legitimate health concerns.

[moonslav59]

Nope. Because Iggy is nowhere near as great as his flash and dash makes one think -- if he were he'd be Ozzie Smith. He absoutely has the talent to be one of the greats but he seems to have real trouble tapping that talent consistently.

 

Iglesias is a perfectly decent overall SS who I'd be very content with if he were our everyday guy, and he looks like one of the best ever on the rare moments he happens to be concentrating. He's solid, with flashes of genius, but at the end of the day merely solid. He doesn't have the stick to make the overall picture match what we're getting from Bogaerts at the moment.

 

I see Iggy as having rare moments of not concentrating. You don't have a UZR/150 like he does by snoozing even 51% of the time.

 

Bogey's career OPS is just 60 points higher than Iggy's. Certainly, I'd project Bogey's future OPS to be more like 100 points better, but the differential expected at the time of the trade has not yet materialized.

 

To me, Iggy's biggest fault is not 100% concentration, it has been his health issues.

 

The Iggyphiles have mostly contended that we could have/should have kept both. Bogey would have solved our 3B issues (Middy>Holt>Pablo>Shaw) while Iggy helped our pitching staff out by playing plus plus defense at SS.

 

It's hard to imagine how it all would have worked out, especially had Iggy got hurt in Boston as much as in Detroit. It's not clear which choice would have won out in the longer run. If you believe Peavy was essential to winning in 2013, then you have your answer. If not, it's a little more foggy. If believe keeping Iggy would have kept us from signing Pablo, then maybe you have your answer right there too.

 

This has been an interesting debate with both sides having strong points to make on many different levels.

[mvp 78]

Hard to help the pitching staff when you're injured.

[S5Dewey]

Here are the best UZR/150 seasons by our SSs since 2003:

(500+ innings)

 

Best overall UZR/150 since 2003 (450+ innings)

20.3 Iggy

19.8 Reese

14.4 Gonzo

8.3 Drew

7.1 Aviles

4.8 A Cora

3.0 Green

2.8 Lowrie

-1.0 Bogey

-1.9 Scutaro

-5.0 Cabrera

-5.8 Nomar

-7.9 Lugo

-9.6 Renteria

 

 

Having been a Sox fan all my life it seems like I'd always waited for that other shoe to fall, for something dreadful to happen to ruin what would have been a great moment. That all changed in 2004. Very possibly the best phrase I've ever heard in my baseball life was Joe Casitigione saying, "Pokey Reese has it...".

 

It's sometimes difficult to win, to get those last three outs or to make that last play that seals the win, and I knew inside that Reese was the guy whom I wanted to have the chance to make that play. Even now that phrase is locked away someplace between my ears and I hear Stiggy say it occasionally, and when I do the hair still stands up a bit on the back of my neck. "Pokey Reese has it...".

 

Thanks for the memory, Moon.

[S5Dewey]

Hard to help the pitching staff when you're injured.

 

Injured or not, when Iggy is making $2.1M and Sandoval is making $17.6M that's $15.5M that can be spent on pitching.

 

As a point of reference, Andrew Miller made $9M last year.

Edited November 21, 2016 by S5Dewey

[moonslav59]

Hard to help the pitching staff when you're injured.

 

I mentioned that as my biggest issue with Iggy.

[Fan_since_Boggs]

Blake Swihart and Henry Owens could be considered "human lottery tickets" as well.

 

Notin: I think Harmony hit the nail on the head. I'm giving up Owens, who has limited trade value and upside--he isn't much of a prospect anymore. Many questions surround Swihart. Is he good enough defensively to stick at catcher? Is he going to hit enough to overcome his defensive limitations at catcher (small sample size but his numbers at AAA last season were not encouraging)? Is he going to hit enough to play LF? Essentially, the Red Sox and Mets would be exchanging lottery tickets, but the Mets might prefer a catcher lottery ticket while the Red Sox might prefer a SP. Obviously, the Red Sox would need to examine Wheeler's medicals before agreeing to a trade.

 

In terms of upside, I would rank Wheeler higher than Swihart and Owens, but some people probably see more upside in Swihart than Wheeler.

[moonslav59]

Having been a Sox fan all my life it seems like I'd always waited for that other shoe to fall, for something dreadful to happen to ruin what would have been a great moment. That all changed in 2004. Very possibly the best phrase I've ever heard in my baseball life was Joe Casitigione saying, "Pokey Reese has it...".

 

It's sometimes difficult to win, to get those last three outs or to make that last play that seals the win, and I knew inside that Reese was the guy whom I wanted to have the chance to make that play. Even now that phrase is locked away someplace between my ears and I hear Stiggy say it occasionally, and when I do the hair still stands up a bit on the back of my neck. "Pokey Reese has it...".

 

Thanks for the memory, Moon.

 

You're more than welcome.

 

You and I have always been the defense first SS guys, and it's no coincidence that the years we won rings, we had great to decent fielding SSs. The one year I think really hurt was 2006. I loved having Gonzo at SS, but I think the disappointing season soured Sox management on the idea that great defense at SS wins more than having a better hitting SS than the SS norm.

 

The funny thing was, right after Gonzo left us, he had a stretch of new found offense. He had a .793 OPS in 2007 with 16 HRs. That was his career high OPS.

He later had 23 HRs in 2010 and repeated his .793 OPS.

 

I cried when we traded Burleson. That was sick!

[moonslav59]

Injured or not, when Iggy is making $2.1M and Sandoval is making $17.6M that's $15.5M that can be spent on pitching.

 

As a point of reference, Andrew Miller made $9M last year.

 

Add the other $6.5M a year to our last Lester offer, and we could have had Lester and Miller with Iggy at SS and Bogey at 3B.

[S5Dewey]

You're more than welcome.

 

You and I have always been the defense first SS guys, and it's no coincidence that the years we won rings, we had great to decent fielding SSs. The one year I think really hurt was 2006. I loved having Gonzo at SS, but I think the disappointing season soured Sox management on the idea that great defense at SS wins more than having a better hitting SS than the SS norm.

 

The funny thing was, right after Gonzo left us, he had a stretch of new found offense. He had a .793 OPS in 2007 with 16 HRs. That was his career high OPS.

He later had 23 HRs in 2010 and repeated his .793 OPS.

 

I cried when we traded Burleson. That was sick!

 

With the caveat that one can hear anything.... It may not have been the disappointing season in 2006 that precipitated the Gonzo trade. The rumor that was abounding at the time was that Gonzo had trouble keeping those good hands off other player's wives. If so, that's probably not a good clubhouse influence.

[moonslav59]

With the caveat that one can hear anything.... It may not have been the disappointing season in 2006 that precipitated the Gonzo trade. The rumor that was abounding at the time was that Gonzo had trouble keeping those good hands off other player's wives. If so, that's probably not a good clubhouse influence.

 

I heard that about Cabrera in 2004 but not about Gonzo in 2006.