Who should the Sox have play CF on opening day?

[mvp 78]

A..

[mvp 78]

Maybe, but we ended up trading him for a pretty good return.

 

His career OPS before 2020: .701.

His OPS in 54 gms in 2020: .798 (by far- a career best).

 

Change Choice C to $9M/2 and D to $5M/1, if you want.

 

Either way, I'd take D or C, and I've been JBJ's biggest apologist fan over the years!

 

335 BABIP was career high too.

[moonslav59]

Why not?

 

Unless the player they acquire is on a one year deal...

 

Because our roster depth (quantity) seems worse than our roster value (quality), in general.

 

I'm not saying we should NOT make any 2 or 3 for one deals. I'd offer Chavis and Chatham for one "real" ML player, every day of the week.

[notin]

Because our roster depth (quantity) seems worse than our roster value (quality), in general.

 

I'm not saying we should NOT make any 2 or 3 for one deals. I'd offer Chavis and Chatham for one "real" ML player, every day of the week.

 

But if the goal is to be competitive in, say, 2021, steps have to be taken now. You have to get players when they are availble. Why wait until 2021 to make any moves? Not like we have a slew of game changers on the farm system ready to bowl over MLB...

[moonslav59]

But if the goal is to be competitive in, say, 2021, steps have to be taken now. You have to get players when they are availble. Why wait until 2021 to make any moves? Not like we have a slew of game changers on the farm system ready to bowl over MLB...

 

Again, I'm not saying we shouldn't make any 2 for 1 type deals, but we seem to be in more of a rebuilding mode than a go for it all in 2021 mode, but yes, if we can make a 2 for 1 deal that helps us longer term, I'm all for it. (Most of my suggested trades on MLBTV have us giving more players than receiving.)

[notin]

Again, I'm not saying we shouldn't make any 2 for 1 type deals, but we seem to be in more of a rebuilding mode than a go for it all in 2021 mode, but yes, if we can make a 2 for 1 deal that helps us longer term, I'm all for it. (Most of my suggested trades on MLBTV have us giving more players than receiving.)

 

If the Sox are in "rebuilding" mode, then they have to get players who will equate to an improvement at some point. Even if they signed Trevor Bauer, which they won't. He will still be here in 2022.

 

If the Sox are not going to acquire MLB talent to improve this team, they should deal Bogaerts now...

[mvp 78]

If the Sox are in "rebuilding" mode, then they have to get players who will equate to an improvement at some point. Even if they signed Trevor Bauer, which they won't. He will still be here in 2022.

 

If the Sox are not going to acquire MLB talent to improve this team, they should deal Bogaerts now...

 

They'll extend him and Devers by opening day 2022.

[moonslav59]

If the Sox are in "rebuilding" mode, then they have to get players who will equate to an improvement at some point. Even if they signed Trevor Bauer, which they won't. He will still be here in 2022.

 

If the Sox are not going to acquire MLB talent to improve this team, they should deal Bogaerts now...

 

I'm not disagreeing with your point.

 

My point is all the 3, 4 and 5 for 1 deals we made got us into this mess, in the first place. Our 40 man roster depth is about as bad as its been in decades. To win and sustain winning, you need roster depth and a bright looking future (farm and controllable young players).

 

In general, we need to add quality players to our roster. We could conceivably add 6-8 free agents to our 40 man roster, this winter, and that would allow us to make several 2 or 3 for 1 deals, but the 3 players we trade, if they are slotted in the 30-40 slots on our roster, will not bring us back much. Although the trade value site says we can get something very promising for Chavis + Chatham, I'll beleive it when I see it.

 

Is now the time to make a Chris Sale type trade, assuming one is out there?

 

I think now, and I guess you agree.

 

That does not mean we can not improve the longer term outlook and our chances in 2021 with a 2 or 3 for 1 deal, now. We clearly will be signing 3-4 free agents, minimum, and have roster room to make a few deals like this, but in general, if we really want to be building for 2022 and beyond, in theory, we should be looking at trading JD, Eovaldi, ERod and anyone else who will be a FA after 2021 and maybe even 2022.

 

Of course, the fans would be irate. The plan looks to be to improve in 2021 with our eyes on 2022 and beyond. That doesn't mean every deal or signing has to help both areas. One year FA signings only address one but are perfectly fine and even logical.

[moonslav59]

They'll extend him and Devers by opening day 2022.

 

Bogey is already under team control through 2026 (option year).

 

Devers and maybe ERod are the only urgent extension players. (ERod is a FA after 2021, but we may want to wait and see with him, and Devers is after 2023.)

 

Others not so urgent:

 

after 2021:

Barnes

 

after 2022:

Vaz (option year 2022)

 

after 2023:

JD

Eovaldi

Beni

Renfroe

 

after 2024:

Verdugo

Pivetta

DHern

[mvp 78]

Bogey is already under team control through 2026 (option year).

 

Devers and maybe ERod are the only urgent extension players. (ERod is a FA after 2021, but we may want to wait and see with him, and Devers is after 2023.)

 

Others not so urgent:

 

after 2021:

Barnes

 

after 2022:

Vaz (option year 2022)

 

after 2023:

JD

Eovaldi

Beni

Renfroe

 

after 2024:

Verdugo

Pivetta

DHern

 

Bogey has an opt out after 2022. They're going to fix that next offseason IMO.

[Bellhorn04]

Bogey has an opt out after 2022. They're going to fix that next offseason IMO.

 

Which raises a question: has any player ever received a new deal basically in return for removing an opt out?

[moonslav59]

Which raises a question: has any player ever received a new deal basically in return for removing an opt out?

 

Good question, especially 2 years early.

[mvp 78]

Which raises a question: has any player ever received a new deal basically in return for removing an opt out?

 

Not that I know of. Would be in our best interests though.

[moonslav59]

Not that I know of. Would be in our best interests though.

 

With the economy as such, maybe Bogey might bite.

[mvp 78]

With the economy as such, maybe Bogey might bite.

 

Maybe? I'd still offer it though. Bogey is THE franchise player IMO.

[moonslav59]

Maybe? I'd still offer it though. Bogey is THE franchise player IMO.

 

To me, it's Devers & Sale, but Bogey is close.

[mvp 78]

To me, it's Devers & Sale, but Bogey is close.

 

Devers/Sale haven't been around long enough.

 

Bogey has 2 WS rings in his 10 years with the Sox. He's also a great leader off the field.

[moonslav59]

Devers/Sale haven't been around long enough.

 

Bogey has 2 WS rings in his 10 years with the Sox. He's also a great leader off the field.

 

I'm thinking going forward.

 

By your criteria, Pedey is the man.

[mvp 78]

I'm thinking going forward.

 

By your criteria, Pedey is the man.

 

If he had two functioning legs, they would have slapped the "C" on him.

[mvp 78]

And yes, to a large portion of the fanbase, Pedey was the face of the franchise, especially post-Papi.

[moonslav59]

And yes, to a large portion of the fanbase, Pedey was the face of the franchise, especially post-Papi.

 

And, after the Betts trade...

[Kimmi]

With the economy as such, maybe Bogey might bite.

 

Bogey seems to want to stay with the Sox, unlike some other player who shall not be named.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Bogey seems to want to stay with the Sox, unlike some other player who shall not be named.

 

Bruce Hurst? Jason Bay?

 

Ok... nomar jokes -- and yet: sources confirm multiple Red Sox posters facetiously discussing the cold stove season.

[notin]

If he had two functioning legs, they would have slapped the "C" on him.

 

The “C”? For “Crippled”?!?

[moonslav59]

Bogey seems to want to stay with the Sox, unlike some other player who shall not be named.

 

Would you call him the "franchise player?"

[TylerD]

I'm thinking going forward.

 

By your criteria, Pedey is the man.

Pedey is the man!!!!

 

If it wasn’t for the damn injuries.

[moonslav59]

Pedey is the man!!!!

 

If it wasn’t for the damn injuries.

 

Agreed, but he ain't the current "franchise player."

[Bellhorn04]

Would you call him the "franchise player?"

 

I'll call him that if he's still here for 2023.

[mvp 78]

Agreed, but he ain't the current "franchise player."

 

No, it's Xander.

[mvp 78]

I'll call him that if he's still here for 2023.

 

Working on the grounds crew. Playing in the dirt.