The Depth Argument

[notin]

Maybe I'm biased, but I think too highly of Beni to trade 5 years of him for 4 insanely cheap years of Archer. It's a close call, though.

 

If we signed JD and made this trade, I would not be upset. Keeping JBJ in CF adds some value.

 

C: Vazquez

1b: Moreland (and maybe Swihart)

2b: Hernandez

3b: Devers

SS: Bogaerts

LF: Martinez

CF: Bradley

RF: Betts

DH: Ramirez

 

SP: Sale, Price, Archer, Porcello, Pomeranz

RP: Kimbrel, Smith, Barnes, Kelly, Hembree, Johnson, Scott

 

Bench: Leon, Marrero, Holt.

 

Whats not to like?

 

Personally I'd try to deal Holt for a fourth OF capable of playing all 3 positions.

 

I might consider a better 2b as well....

[moonslav59]

C: Vazquez

1b: Moreland (and maybe Swihart)

2b: Hernandez

3b: Devers

SS: Bogaerts

LF: Martinez

CF: Bradley

RF: Betts

DH: Ramirez

 

SP: Sale, Price, Archer, Porcello, Pomeranz

RP: Kimbrel, Smith, Barnes, Kelly, Hembree, Johnson, Scott

 

Bench: Leon, Marrero, Holt.

 

Whats not to like?

 

Personally I'd try to deal Holt for a fourth OF capable of playing all 3 positions.

 

I might consider a better 2b as well....

 

It looks great, but we already traded away our farm, and we need to keep our last remaining low-cost controlled players around. I realize Archer is low cost controlled as well, but Beni and Devers are probably the last two guys we should trade.

[Behindenemylines]

Because of the slow FA market there are going to be many players who end up signing 1 year deals in January. The key will be for DD to sign a depth SP to go along with the power bat. Does the slow market mean that teams are done with the long contracts for big dollars that never see a player productive to the end, or are they waiting for next off season.

[notin]

It looks great, but we already traded away our farm, and we need to keep our last remaining low-cost controlled players around. I realize Archer is low cost controlled as well, but Beni and Devers are probably the last two guys we should trade.

 

There is a very short list of players I would trade Benintendi for, but Archer is most definitely on it. The real question is, is Chavis enough ancillary trade bait to convince Tampa top make the deal.

[oldtimer]

Because of the slow FA market there are going to be many players who end up signing 1 year deals in January. The key will be for DD to sign a depth SP to go along with the power bat. Does the slow market mean that teams are done with the long contracts for big dollars that never see a player productive to the end, or are they waiting for next off season.

 

I go to the official site of the red sox every day and see the same non-news postings. This certainly is a very slow off season. I believe most of us have similar opinions of the club needs going forward and sitting still is not a top option. Other than Moreland, we have not done much at all that has been benficial for the team this off season. Maybe DD will get something done. I have supported him but am beginning to wonder.

[Bellhorn04]

I go to the official site of the red sox every day and see the same non-news postings. This certainly is a very slow off season. I believe most of us have similar opinions of the club needs going forward and sitting still is not a top option. Other than Moreland, we have not done much at all that has been benficial for the team this off season. Maybe DD will get something done. I have supported him but am beginning to wonder.

 

None of the top free agents outside of Santana have signed yet, however. This offseason is a different one.

[moonslav59]

None of the top free agents outside of Santana have signed yet, however. This offseason is a different one.

 

True, hardly any top free agents have signed, but there have been some hefty trades.

 

I'm not worried. There's a lot of FAs left to sign. If the prices go down, we may have lucked out by re-setting this year instead of next, like so many other top teams seem to be doing this winter.

[OH FOY]

Hell no keep Archer in Tampa, we beat the snot out of him. Counter-productive. Almost automatic win.

[cp176]

There is a very short list of players I would trade Benintendi for, but Archer is most definitely on it. The real question is, is Chavis enough ancillary trade bait to convince Tampa top make the deal.

 

I've liked Archer now for some time as well notin and I would love to see him in Boston- but I'm thinking not at the expense of losing a young player who we really don't know what to expect from going forward. We can at least make reasonable guesses as to what JBJ may give us but with Beni I don't think so. He could become one of the best hitters in baseball. We just don't know but if he does i think he becomes much more valuable than the addition of Archer right now. Betts, Benintendi, Devers - my 3 keepers

[Jack Flap]

This discussion is an encouraging one...as much as the focus has been on a bat, I'd love to see us add at least one more solid SP, and I hope Dombrowski is thinking along the same lines.

[moonslav59]

I've liked Archer now for some time as well notin and I would love to see him in Boston- but I'm thinking not at the expense of losing a young player who we really don't know what to expect from going forward. We can at least make reasonable guesses as to what JBJ may give us but with Beni I don't think so. He could become one of the best hitters in baseball. We just don't know but if he does i think he becomes much more valuable than the addition of Archer right now. Betts, Benintendi, Devers - my 3 keepers

 

I agree, but there is a lot to be said for obtaining a "known" value like Archer as well as knowing his contract is a steal!

 

Beni is pre-arb, but his last 2 arb years will likely cost way more than Archer's cost, especially, if he turns out as good as we both think he will.

 

[notin]

I agree, but there is a lot to be said for obtaining a "known" value like Archer as well as knowing his contract is a steal!

 

Beni is pre-arb, but his last 2 arb years will likely cost way more than Archer's cost, especially, if he turns out as good as we both think he will.

 

 

So basically if Benintendi doesn't pan out, the Sox get the better end of the deal. And if he does pan out, the Sox get Archer and a little more financial flexibility. Sounds like a no-brainer to me...

[Bellhorn04]

So basically if Benintendi doesn't pan out, the Sox get the better end of the deal. And if he does pan out, the Sox get Archer and a little more financial flexibility. Sounds like a no-brainer to me...

 

No doubt, but for these very reasons the Rays would be asking for a huge return for Archer...they also have a history of not trading with other AL East teams I think...

[cp176]

So basically if Benintendi doesn't pan out, the Sox get the better end of the deal. And if he does pan out, the Sox get Archer and a little more financial flexibility. Sounds like a no-brainer to me...

 

Oh God notin you've lobbed me another softball! lol If that is your idea of a no brainer than you must think that that Bagwell deal was special too right?

 

I don't think Benintenid will turn in to Mike Trout but if he is just getting going many of us I think would prefer to keep him.

[moonslav59]

I prefer to keep Beni, too, but Archer is a true ace. notin is beginning to swing me towards agrrement.

[jacksonianmarch]

Archer has a similar problem to Gerrit Cole. Over the last 2 seasons, Archer's HR rate jumped and he has thrown to a 4+ ERA for 2 consecutive years. If he moved to Boston, he would need to find a way to return to the days where his HR rates were sub 1/9IP.

[moonslav59]

Archer has a similar problem to Gerrit Cole. Over the last 2 seasons, Archer's HR rate jumped and he has thrown to a 4+ ERA for 2 consecutive years. If he moved to Boston, he would need to find a way to return to the days where his HR rates were sub 1/9IP.

 

Again, Fenway is not a HR park.

[cp176]

I prefer to keep Beni, too, but Archer is a true ace. notin is beginning to swing me towards agrrement.

 

You have to be just kidding here right? I like Archer too but a "true ace"? Nope - sorry - don't see it. he would surely be more motivated than in past years by changing uniforms but ACE - really! He is a good pitcher. Not worth giving up Benintendi for just yet but a good pitcher none the less.

[Bellhorn04]

After giving it some consideration I don't think I would trade Benintendi for Archer. Archer's numbers at Fenway are really bad. 7 starts, 33.1 IP, 27 ER, 41 H, 23 BB, 1.92 WHIP, .842 OPS. Small sample but a frightening one.

[moonslav59]

You have to be just kidding here right? I like Archer too but a "true ace"? Nope - sorry - don't see it. he would surely be more motivated than in past years by changing uniforms but ACE - really! He is a good pitcher. Not worth giving up Benintendi for just yet but a good pitcher none the less.

 

Maybe we disagree on what an "ace" is, but to me, if you are top 30, you're close to an ace at worst. If you are top 15, there is little argument.

 

Archer's WAR rank in previous seasons:

 

11th in 2017 (4.6)

34th in 2016 (3.2)

10th in 2015 (5.2)

31st in 2014 (3.2)

 

2014-2017: 12th (16.2)

 

2015-2017: 8th (13.0)

(Better than Price, Verlander, Lester, Bumgarner, Keuchel & Cueto-- all considered "aces".)

 

The last 3 years, Archer has the 8th best xFIP at 77. He placed 29th in WHIP at 1.21. He placed 19th in K/BB at 3.80.

 

I'd say he's an ace.

 

His .325 BAbip this year is a major reason his numbers slipped.

 

,

[notin]

Oh God notin you've lobbed me another softball! lol If that is your idea of a no brainer than you must think that that Bagwell deal was special too right?

 

I don't think Benintenid will turn in to Mike Trout but if he is just getting going many of us I think would prefer to keep him.

 

How is trading for 4 years of Chris Archer supposed to compare to trading for 3 months of Larry Anderson?

 

The Bagwell trade was 27 years ago. Clearly not every prospect or young player trade works out so badly...

[notin]

After giving it some consideration I don't think I would trade Benintendi for Archer. Archer's numbers at Fenway are really bad. 7 starts, 33.1 IP, 27 ER, 41 H, 23 BB, 1.92 WHIP, .842 OPS. Small sample but a frightening one.

 

Also completely at the hands of Red Sox hitters, who have put together one of the best offenses in the AL for most of his career. Also the one team he would never face again...

[dgalehouse]

Chris Archer is a good pitcher. He is not a great one. We have seen how the Sox have hammered him. You do not trade a young , every day player with the upside of Benintendi for Chris Archer. No way. I think our boredom and anxiety so far this hot stove season is causing some irrational thinking. We surely would like to have J.D. Martinez , a top starting pitcher and , possibly , Nunez. But we should not make a dumb move like giving up Benintendi. Forget it.

[moonslav59]

It's a close call.

 

5 years of largely unknown years of Beni at an unknown cost for 4 years of a largely "known" top 20-30 SP'er in MLB at a very economical cost.

 

There are large pluses and minus to both sides of this debate.

[cp176]

How is trading for 4 years of Chris Archer supposed to compare to trading for 3 months of Larry Anderson?

 

The Bagwell trade was 27 years ago. Clearly not every prospect or young player trade works out so badly...

 

It isn't necessarily about the time - that is a statistic - it is about the significance of the actual move that is made. It is all about the people being moved. Right I get it - We Benintendi now and he goes on to have a great year next year and in future years but that is ok because we got Chris Archer for 4 years regardless of how he pitches.

[notin]

It isn't necessarily about the time - that is a statistic - it is about the significance of the actual move that is made. It is all about the people being moved. Right I get it - We Benintendi now and he goes on to have a great year next year and in future years but that is ok because we got Chris Archer for 4 years regardless of how he pitches.

 

Absolutely. Archer is an ace and one of the best starting pitchers in MLB. If the Sox could get him for Benintendi, they'd be foolish not to. Especially if they actually sign Martinez.

 

Of course Tampa doesn't do that deal straight up. It really comes down to how many ancillary pieces are involved.

 

And it might be premature to label Benintendi as great. Even if he does become great, the Sox window to win closes significantly in two years, which may not time with Benintendi's greatness.

 

Of course, even if he does become great, it guarantees nothing. Ted Williams was great. Carl Yastrzemski was great. Jim Rice was great. Those three Hall of Famers manned left field for over half a century. And also combined for how many World Series titles?

[OH FOY]

JBJ for Archer OK, not Benni. Edited December 29, 2017 by OH FOY!

[harmony]

JBJ for Archer OK, not Benni.

I suspect neither Jackie Bradley Jr. nor Andrew Benintendi would be enough to land Chris Archer.

[moonslav59]

Beni, Chavis & Johnson, maybe.

[cp176]

Absolutely. Archer is an ace and one of the best starting pitchers in MLB. If the Sox could get him for Benintendi, they'd be foolish not to. Especially if they actually sign Martinez.

 

Of course Tampa doesn't do that deal straight up. It really comes down to how many ancillary pieces are involved.

 

And it might be premature to label Benintendi as great. Even if he does become great, the Sox window to win closes significantly in two years, which may not time with Benintendi's greatness.

 

Of course, even if he does become great, it guarantees nothing. Ted Williams was great. Carl Yastrzemski was great. Jim Rice was great. Those three Hall of Famers manned left field for over half a century. And also combined for how many World Series titles?

 

Oh boy - here we go. Nobody has labeled anybody here as anything other than you and one other. When I think of what an ace is Chris Archer's mug does not appear. A good pitcher - yes most of the time but an ace - really?

Once again, no one has labeled Benintendi as great. He should be good I think though.

 

You are getting a little off track here I think when you use Williams, Yastrzemski, and Rice to try to prove your point. My guess is that if they played in this era of feel good sports where lots of teams make the playoffs, we would have seen some titles for them all. Doesn't matter though, using these 3 to prove your point is what I consider to be foolish.