Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

Stanton or Votto

dustcover

By dustcover
in Boston Red Sox Talk

 Share

Recommended Posts

oldtimer FCL Red Sox

oldtimer

Verified Member
Posted
Posted
I'm sure DD would rather keep JBJ in CF and Beni in RF, but if we acquire Stanton of JD Martinez, then trading JBJ for a SP'er might make sense.

 

I'm not high on Hosmer at all. He's not the answer at clean-up. He's not a plus fielder anymore. He'll want and get 5+ years. That's too many years to commit to a marginal 1Bman- a position of usual strength and power in MLB.

 

I get the trepidation on Moustakas. I get not wanting to further deplete the farm to get Stanton. I get how signing JD Martinez to 6 years, at his age, and hurting our fine OF defense or benching HRam, so he can play DH is not ideal either.

 

I'm wondering, if trying to go the shortest terms possible while still getting impact-ful talent might be the way to go.

 

1B Santana for 3 years

RP Bryan Shaw for 3 years

2B Kendrick for 1 year

then maybe help at DH (Duda) or a mid-level SP'er (Lynn/Holland).

 

I'm not sure if this is enough, but there's less risk of a 4-5 year bust.

 

 

 

 

Maybe you mis spoke about keeping Beni in RF and probably meant LF. Keeping the outfield intact with Beni, JBJ and Betts is certainly one option.

 

Like the idea of staying away from the expensive (in either $ or talent) contracts and staying with good servicable players for 3 year contracts max. Santana makes sense to me but I think there are better RP and 2nd base options.

 

We should start to see some movement from the front office. Moustakas could be a good sign for 3 or 4 years max but that involves moving Devers, so both Santana and Moustakas doesn't make a lot of sense as Devers needs to be developed as a long term Red Sox player.

  • Replies 785
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

moonslav59 GOAT

moonslav59

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Maybe you mis spoke about keeping Beni in RF and probably meant LF. Keeping the outfield intact with Beni, JBJ and Betts is certainly one option.

 

Like the idea of staying away from the expensive (in either $ or talent) contracts and staying with good servicable players for 3 year contracts max. Santana makes sense to me but I think there are better RP and 2nd base options.

 

We should start to see some movement from the front office. Moustakas could be a good sign for 3 or 4 years max but that involves moving Devers, so both Santana and Moustakas doesn't make a lot of sense as Devers needs to be developed as a long term Red Sox player.

 

Yes, I meant Beni staying in LF.

 

I do not think we spend some of the limited money we have on 2B, when Pedey might be back in 2 months, and we have Hernandez/Holt/Lin/Marrero to carry us for 2 months. If none work out, we'll seek the next Nunez-type mid season replacement.

 

We need power. I doubt we get it at 2B.

 

I'm very sympathetic to the view of avoiding long term mega-deals, and Santana would be a very good choice, IMO. I'm not sure what Moose will get, but if we cna get him for 4 years (or even 5), he might be a better choice than JD at 6-7 years at his age.

 

Stanton is young, however, and his contract is long, but it only runs to age 37. JD's deal will be almost entirely beyond prime years.

 

(BTW, signinng Santana keeps Devers at 3B. Maybe you misspoke in your last sentence.)

 

moonslav59 GOAT

moonslav59

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
For a Stanton deal to work, you have to add power without eliminating the Power you have.

 

Castillo, Hembree, Chavis, Ockimey & Swihart for Stanton

 

cp176 Salem RidgeYaks

cp176

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Castillo, Hembree, Chavis, Ockimey & Swihart for Stanton

 

 

? Really??? I would be stunned - pleasantly I guess but my guess is no.

Larry Cook FCL Red Sox

Larry Cook

Verified Member
Posted
Posted
We can't give up a lot of talent AND take on the whole contract. That could turn it into a bad deal.

 

In case you have not noticed, bad over pays is the desperate dave way!

moonslav59 GOAT

moonslav59

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
We can't give up a lot of talent AND take on the whole contract. That could turn it into a bad deal.

 

Nobody is giving them top talent AND paying for the whole contract.

 

They are not getting Beni or Devers, even if they pay part of the deal.

notin MVP

notin

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Nobody is giving them top talent AND paying for the whole contract.

 

They are not getting Beni or Devers, even if they pay part of the deal.

 

Of course we're giving up top talent and paying the whole contract. Have you forgotten who our GM is?

 

He'll offer Benintendi and Rodriguez and not only take on Stanton's whole contract, he'll take back Prado too...

Kimmi Boston Red Sox

Kimmi

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
We can't give up a lot of talent AND take on the whole contract. That could turn it into a bad deal.

 

Just taking on the whole contract would be a bad deal. Maybe not in terms of money, but a 10 year deal is insane.

Kimmi Boston Red Sox

Kimmi

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Of course we're giving up top talent and paying the whole contract. Have you forgotten who our GM is?

 

He'll offer Benintendi and Rodriguez and not only take on Stanton's whole contract, he'll take back Prado too...

 

I don't know if you're joking or not, but this is a concern for me. Not those exact pieces, but I wouldn't put it past Dombrowski to overpay.

Kimmi Boston Red Sox

Kimmi

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
There was a good point made that Marlins fans would not be happy with the Marlins trading Stanton as a flat salary dump. If the Marlins don't get fan appeasing players/prospects in return, fans will not be happy with Jeter.
moonslav59 GOAT

moonslav59

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Just taking on the whole contract would be a bad deal. Maybe not in terms of money, but a 10 year deal is insane.

 

Not really for a 28 year stud.

moonslav59 GOAT

moonslav59

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Of course we're giving up top talent and paying the whole contract. Have you forgotten who our GM is?

 

He'll offer Benintendi and Rodriguez and not only take on Stanton's whole contract, he'll take back Prado too...

 

I really do not think he will come close to that return, even without Prado and the Marlins paying $10M a year on GS's deal.

jacksonianmarch GOAT

jacksonianmarch

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
I doubt the Marlins give him away. The duration is the sticking point, not the AAV. In the end, the bidding will require top talent to go to the Marlins and the entire contract will be eaten. It’s the way the world works
notin MVP

notin

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted (edited)
I doubt the Marlins give him away. The duration is the sticking point, not the AAV. In the end, the bidding will require top talent to go to the Marlins and the entire contract will be eaten. It’s the way the world works

 

He won't be given away, but the talent might not be so elite.

 

And it certainly won't requre a top prospect. Otherwise the Sox would not be involved.

 

Nut both the duration and sticking point are issues. The overall commitment is $300mill, and the only reason he got that deal in the first place was to appease him after complaints from a previous fire sale (in the wake of the Josj Johnson trade).

 

Or do you actually think the Marlins care about their fans and baseball team now?

Edited by notin
a700hitter Cooperstown

a700hitter

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Just taking on the whole contract would be a bad deal. Maybe not in terms of money, but a 10 year deal is insane.
I thought only 8 years were left on that contract.
Bellhorn04 MVP

Bellhorn04

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
I thought only 8 years were left on that contract.

 

10 years is correct. Total owing 295 million. Originally 13 years, 325 million. AAV for tax purposes 25 million.

 

Opt-out after 2020 (3 years away).

a700hitter Cooperstown

a700hitter

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
10 years is correct. Total owing 295 million. Originally 13 years, 325 million. AAV for tax purposes 25 million.

 

Opt-out after 2020 (3 years away).

i didn’t realize that the contract had been a 13 year contract. Manny Ramirez was signed at age 28 for 8 years. Manny put up awesome numbers for the duration of that contract. He fell precipitously afterward. $25 million AAV is not a bad value for Stanton imo and the length is long but if he produces like Manny until age 36, the contract would be an excellent value.
Bellhorn04 MVP

Bellhorn04

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
i didn’t realize that the contract had been a 13 year contract. Manny Ramirez was signed at age 28 for 8 years. Manny put up awesome numbers for the duration of that contract. He fell precipitously afterward. $25 million AAV is not a bad value for Stanton imo and the length is long but if he produces like Manny until age 36, the contract would be an excellent value.

 

Yes, I've been thinking about the comps with Manny too.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
The Talk Sox Caretaker Fund
The Talk Sox Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Red Sox community on the internet.

Become a Caretaker

  • Member Statistics

    8,549
    Total Members
    48,845
    Most Online
    Sthpaw777
    Newest Member
    Sthpaw777
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...