Red Sox Trade Deadline 2017 Thread

[a700hitter]

Duda is a better hitter than Moreland. If you got Duda, he'd be your DH and Ramirez would move to 1b

The Yankees can have him

[jacksonianmarch]

I don't want him. Duda is a DH playing 1b. We already have a DH.

[Larry Cook]

Would the tigers trade Cabrera? How much of that contract would the six eat?

[Jasonbay44]

Would the tigers trade Cabrera? How much of that contract would the six eat?

I'd stay away from that. He's old, starting to break down some and I'm not sure Tigers will eat enough of his contract to make it worth it.

[BstHcpr]

I'd stay away from that. He's old, starting to break down some and I'm not sure Tigers will eat enough of his contract to make it worth it.

 

Agreed. He's got 6/200 left on that contract. The Tigers would have to pick up $100 million of that before I started talking trade.

[a700hitter]

Agreed. He's got 6/200 left on that contract. The Tigers would have to pick up $100 million of that before I started talking trade.

Miggy for 6/100 would be a steal compared to Pablo 5/90 or Hanley at 5/100. I'd go 6/150 for Miggy,

[Fan_since_Boggs]

Duda is pretty much the same as Moreland, they're both mediocre. Why would we trade for someone who is same level player as guy we already have?

 

You're right.

 

Duda 1.2 WAR

Moreland 0.9 WAR

Alonso 1.5 WAR

 

Duda and Alonso are better offensive players but Moreland makes up some ground with his glove. But if you think Moreland is going to hit again and is just going through a bad stretch, he is comparable to Duda and Alonso.

 

The weird thing about Alonso is that his oWAR is impressive (2.5) but not his dWAR (-1.4). In contrast, Moreland's oWAR is 0.6. If the Red Sox think Alonso is a better fielder than his current dWAR would suggest, trading for him would make sense--he is a much better offensive player than Moreland.

 

But let's say Moreland, Duda, and Alonso are basically the same players in terms of value, where do the Red Sox go in order to improve the offense? The first basemen who are clearly better than Moreland either aren't available or the Red Sox don't have the minor league assets to acquire them, leaving us with the likes of Duda and Alonso.

 

As such, maybe the Red Sox promote Devers, find a relief pitcher, and that's it. Just hope that guys like Moreland, Benintendi, and Bogaerts hit better over the next three months.

Edited July 24, 2017 by Fan_since_Boggs

[BstHcpr]

Miggy for 6/100 would be a steal compared to Pablo 5/90 or Hanley at 5/100. I'd go 6/150 for Miggy,

 

Maybe we could give them just make them take Hanley, and work out a trade from there.

[jacksonianmarch]

Miggy is in serious decline

[Nick]

Miggy is in serious decline

 

Yep, why buy a property in decline? What's wrong with us?

[Nick]

With Jacoby Ellsbury looking like an expendable part on the Yankees roster, ESPN’s Buster Olney (subscription required) looks at some of the potential large contracts New York could take on as a way of facilitating a trade for the outfielder, who is owed roughly $75MM between now and the end of the 2020 season. Olney’s names (all speculative) range from other unfavorable contracts like Jordan Zimmermann to more valuable assets like Giancarlo Stanton, though obviously much more than just Ellsbury would need to be included in a Stanton trade. Ellsbury has full control over his future via a no-trade clause, though Olney wonders if the outfielder would accept a deal to a team that could offer more playing time if Ellsbury becomes the odd man out in the Yankee outfield.

 

One of the best move Sox ever made.....passing on Ellsbury. (for the money he was demanding)

[cp176]

Ben was the HM and if he was such a puppet that he couldn't implement his own plan, then he was useless and gets credit for anything good that happened in his tenure. He was either accountable for what happened on his watch or he was a puppet regime that doesn't matter.

 

this I agree with

[cp176]

To date, DD has stayed away from all of the worthless one year rentals that have been discussed over and over here. Giving up any prospects for a rental third baseman just to fill a gap for a few months makes 0 sense. I cannot believe the amount of whining about the trades that he has made on here by people who support the idea of going out and trading any prospects to find a one year third baseman, or first baseman, or dh. DD's moves have been big moves for the most part with expectations at least of getting something substantial in return for what is given up. Once again - just my opinion. I'm glad he is in charge.

[Nick]

To date, DD has stayed away from all of the worthless one year rentals that have been discussed over and over here. Giving up any prospects for a rental third baseman just to fill a gap for a few months makes 0 sense. I cannot believe the amount of whining about the trades that he has made on here by people who support the idea of going out and trading any prospects to find a one year third baseman, or first baseman, or dh. DD's moves have been big moves for the most part with expectations at least of getting something substantial in return for what is given up. Once again - just my opinion. I'm glad he is in charge.

 

Basically he went after Ziegler last year as a 'rental'. I think most agreed we needed him. Others had multiple team control years.

[Kimmi]

First of all, Sox has been one of top five spenders over the years. Budget for DD did not suddenly increase. Let's not paint the picture that we're all of sudden overspending.

 

On the heels of two last places (yeah, DD finished up the year on that second one), he came in with a mandate from Sox ownership.

 

We won the Division last year and we are currently in 1st place. It's a bottom line game. Simple as that.

 

Let me know when we get to that impending cliff.

 

The budget did not suddenly increase, but the budget for signing pitchers over the age of 30 suddenly did.

 

Henry panicked after 2 last places that were actually quite fluky. He should have allowed Ben to see his long term plan come to fruition.

[Kimmi]

Cherrington just had way too many awful deals in such a short tenure. He also seemed intent on not trading any prospects. I couldn't of seen him making some of these trades DD pulled off. That being said - DD has made some highly questionable moves. Shaw trade is looking like one of the worst in recent memory

 

I am no fan of Dombrowski's philosophy, but I can't blame him for the Shaw trade. I can blame him for not having a 3rd base back up plan, but at the time of the trade, Shaw was not the answer.

[Kimmi]

Ben would have never had the balls to make the moves DD has made, but DD wouldn't of had the patience that allowed Ben to accumulate the assets DD used.

 

They are different GMs for different times.

 

I am sure that Ben would not made all the moves that Dombrowski did, but I'm also sure that Ben would have traded away some of his prospects last year, as the timing was right to do so.

[Kimmi]

D.D. took over a team that had back to back dismal last place finishes. Won the Division last year and is leading it so far this year. Ortiz retired. Added players like Sale , Price , Pomeranz and Kimbrel. The results speak for themselves. Dombrowski is a knowledgable , experienced baseball man. Ben was a novice. I cannot understand the Cherington nostalgia that some people have. Maybe it is the love of following the progress of prospects through the system , and the willingness to abide cellar dwelling Sox teams as long as the " future looks bright ".

 

Dombrowski was only able to make the moves that he made because of the work that Cherington and Theo did. This is still largely Ben's and Theo's team.

[Kimmi]

Well, he's not at fault for the team not winning, unless you fault him for the repeated collapses of his historically weak bullpens.

 

But the weak farm system and the horrific contracts he gave to players like Cabrera and Verlander, could cripple that franchise for years, especially if the team continues to play poorly, which will likely negatively impact attendance and in turn, earnings. This means their spending will be capped by the debt-equity ratio of the CBA.

 

So he left a team with no farm system and likely handicapped their ability to pay for free agents. Not a good spot...

 

Zing!

[Jack Flap]

Ben was the HM and if he was such a puppet that he couldn't implement his own plan, then he was useless and gets credit for anything good that happened in his tenure. He was either accountable for what happened on his watch or he was a puppet regime that doesn't matter.

 

I don't know that it necessarily makes Ben a "puppet" because he may have had pressure placed on him from above to do this or that. I recall some of Dombrowski's more extravagant expenditures in Detroit being excused on the grounds that the aging owner wanted to win a championship by any means necessary...nor has DD been free from all constraints in Boston, either, as it looks pretty certain that his freedom to spend was curtailed last winter due to luxury tax considerations.

 

However, I've always been of the opinion that Ben was the GM, so at the end of the day he owns any moves made or not made. There were some things that happened later in his tenure that didn't seem to fit his M.O. (though I don't know if the Sandoval signing is necessarily one of them), but we'll likely never know the full inside story.

 

To date, DD has stayed away from all of the worthless one year rentals that have been discussed over and over here. Giving up any prospects for a rental third baseman just to fill a gap for a few months makes 0 sense. I cannot believe the amount of whining about the trades that he has made on here by people who support the idea of going out and trading any prospects to find a one year third baseman, or first baseman, or dh. DD's moves have been big moves for the most part with expectations at least of getting something substantial in return for what is given up. Once again - just my opinion. I'm glad he is in charge.

 

You've said this a couple of times, but from what I've read, a lot of people entertained the idea of trading for a rental with the understanding that we shouldn't have to give up a lot in return, and if the ask was unreasonable, we'd move on. Comparing this hypothetical with DD's other trades where we sent off some of the best prospects in baseball is really apples and oranges.

[Nick]

Dombrowski was only able to make the moves that he made because of the work that Cherington and Theo did. This is still largely Ben's and Theo's team.

 

Nope.....How long are you going to give credit to Theo?

 

It's DD's team. Ben would not have signed Kimbrel and Price. THEY PUT THE TEAM OVER THE TOP. Otherwise we would have been in last place last year.

 

DD inherited the worst signing in baseball history, Pablo Sandoval.

 

And no way in hell Ben would have traded away Moncada and Kopech.

 

Do you want to see this team without Price, Sale, Pomeranz and Kimbrel?

 

Is your goal for this team to just to hang out on the edges?

Edited July 24, 2017 by Nick

[mvp 78]

To date, DD has stayed away from all of the worthless one year rentals that have been discussed over and over here. Giving up any prospects for a rental third baseman just to fill a gap for a few months makes 0 sense. I cannot believe the amount of whining about the trades that he has made on here by people who support the idea of going out and trading any prospects to find a one year third baseman, or first baseman, or dh. DD's moves have been big moves for the most part with expectations at least of getting something substantial in return for what is given up. Once again - just my opinion. I'm glad he is in charge.

 

He has done a pretty good job. The only straight up failure was the Travis Shaw trade. However, Shaw looked horrible during the 2nd half of last year. No one was upset when he was traded.

[mvp 78]

The budget did not suddenly increase, but the budget for signing pitchers over the age of 30 suddenly did.

 

Henry panicked after 2 last places that were actually quite fluky. He should have allowed Ben to see his long term plan come to fruition.

 

Imo, they should have never had that position in the first place and should have just re-signed Lester.

[Kimmi]

Nope.....How long are you going to give credit to Theo?

 

It's DD's team. Ben would not have signed Kimbrel and Price. THEY PUT THE TEAM OVER THE TOP. Otherwise we would have been in last place last year.

 

DD inherited the worst signing in baseball history, Pablo Sandoval.

 

And no way in hell Ben would have traded away Moncada and Kopech.

 

Do you want to see this team without Price, Sale, Pomeranz and Kimbrel?

 

Is your goal for this team to just to hang out on the edges?

 

1. I will give Theo credit as long as his players are having a big impact on this team.

 

2. It's not Dombrowski's team. Even the players that he acquired, he was able to do so only because of the farm that Theo and Ben built. And that includes the ability to sign Price to a large contract because of the large number of cost controlled players that we have.

 

3. I agree on Pablo.

 

4. I don't know exactly what pieces Ben would have traded and for whom, but I am extremely confident that Ben would have been ready to make some trades to put the team in a position to win in 2016.

 

5. No, of course not. Do I think there were other ways to get the team to the playoffs without gutting the farm? Absolutely.

 

6. No, of course not. I have no way of proving it, but I am 100% certain that we would have made the playoffs last year with Ben as GM.

[Bellhorn04]

Ben Cherington is pretty much a mystery IMO. Nobody knows exactly what moves he made and what moves he didn't make for us. After he's replaced by DD he gets a job at a university and then he becomes VP of baseball operations for the Jays. If he had gone on to take another GM job we might be able to judge him better.

[Kimmi]

Imo, they should have never had that position in the first place and should have just re-signed Lester.

 

Agreed.

[moonslav59]

Nope.....How long are you going to give credit to Theo?

 

It's DD's team. Ben would not have signed Kimbrel and Price. THEY PUT THE TEAM OVER THE TOP. Otherwise we would have been in last place last year.

 

We have no way of knowing. I feel certain that Ben would have signed someone big (maybe Cueto). I also feel he would have traded some of our top prospects in a blockbuster (like for Sale), but I do agree that he would not have made that exact same trade for a RP'er (KImbrel).

 

I have little doubt that Ben was poised to pull some triggers, and if he was hesitant, Larry & Co would have insisted he do somethings large.

 

DD inherited the worst signing in baseball history, Pablo Sandoval.

 

No, inheriting CC was worse. ($142M / 7 was worse than $95M/5 not even counting inflation). Remind us who signed CC.

 

 

And no way in hell Ben would have traded away Moncada and Kopech.

Maybe- maybe not, but he'd have traded some big prospects. Even if for the simple reason that there just plainly was not enough room on the 40 man roster for all of them.

 

 

Do you want to see this team without Price, Sale, Pomeranz and Kimbrel?

Depends who we might have gotten instead, but the Sale trade was essential. Maybe we'd have Cueto & Quintana instead of Price and Kimbrel, Maybe we'd have Miller or Chapman instead of Kimbrel. (We would not have had Pomeranz for Espi.)

[mvp 78]

Nah, CC could actually play. Sandoval's contract is worse than CC's.

[moonslav59]

Nah, CC could actually play. Sandoval's contract is worse than CC's.

 

CC sucked.

 

We lucked out when the Dodgers took him off our hands. Had they not, CC's name would be major cah-cah in Boston... more than Pablo.

 

It was a 7 year deal- not 5.

 

Counting MLB inflation, CC's contract was more than the $3M differential between him and Pablo.

 

I believe CC didn't even play his last contract year. (Pablo may not either, in fact, he may not even play in 3 of the 5 year deal.)

[a700hitter]

Miggy is in serious decline

He's not that old. I see no reason why he cannot be a serious offensive force as a DH until age 40 like Ortiz had been.