A Realistic View at 2021: Part II

[Bellhorn04]

That's not a bad strategy.

 

It then begs the question: why hold onto Barnes and get next to nothing, if you know you only have 2 more months of team control and are going to let him walk?

 

In contention or not.

 

You really have to ask why?

[Bellhorn04]

I have no problem trading Barnes next month, if we can get a solid starting pitching prospect for him,

 

Add that guy to (hopefully) two potential starters in this draft (rocker and bednar) and we cooking with gas!!!

 

You and moon belong in the same loony bin!

[Bellhorn04]

You guys do realize that in those wonderful future years you're dreaming of, there may also be players in their contract years? You going to trade them at the deadline too?

[moonslav59]

You really have to ask why?

 

I know the standard answer, but thinking outside the box is what got the Rays where they are now.

[moonslav59]

You guys do realize that in those wonderful future years you're dreaming of, there may also be players in their contract years? You going to trade them at the deadline too?

 

Of course. It's the way you continually refresh your system, and once you get real good at it, and accumulate so many studs, you can afford to trade a Blake Snell and not miss a beat.

[Bellhorn04]

Of course. It's the way you continually refresh your system, and once you get real good at it, and accumulate so many studs, you can afford to trade a Blake Snell and not miss a beat.

 

What we're talking about is trading guys at the deadline when you're in contention.

 

Last I checked, they didn't trade Snell at the deadline.

 

The only deadline trade they made when in contention is the Stanek guy, I believe, and they got somebody better back.

 

You're going to have to come up with some better examples than that.

[moonslav59]

What we're talking about is trading guys at the deadline when you're in contention.

 

Last I checked, they didn't trade Snell at the deadline.

 

The only deadline trade they made when in contention is the Stanek guy, I believe, and they got somebody better back.

 

You're going to have to come up with some better examples than that.

 

The Rays have a long history of trading very good players when in contention- either over the winter or at the deadline. I'm not sure it matters all that much when the deal is made. When you trade a very good player for prospects, when you are supposed to be in contention, it's a strategy not many teams use.

 

The Dodgers have made winter deals like the Rays, but I can't think of any deadline deals, so it does have a different set of issues. I grant that.

 

I think the Sox traded David Wells, when some thought we still had a shot.

 

The Rays have traded a few at the deadline. Here are some I remember:

 

July 2019: In the thick of a playoff race, they traded Ryne Stanek and a prospect for Nick Anderson, who was basically a prospect and Trevor Richards (2nd year in MLB)

 

July 2018: Chris Archer for Tyler Glasnow, Austin Meadows & Shane Baz. (Would you not want those 3 for Barnes?) The Rays had a nice 62-48 record at the time of the deal and were in the thick of a WC race. The ended up making the playoffs and finished closer to first in the ALE than they were at the time of the trade (7 GB to 7.5 GB).

 

In 2009, the Rays were 70-58 on the Waiver wire deadline. They still had a decent chance at making the playoffs as a WC team. They traded Scott Kazmir for 3 PTBNLs and ended up missing the playoffs and just 6 games above .500. The 3 PTBNLs were Matthew Sweeney, Alex Torres & Sean Rodriguez.

 

Speaking of Kazmir, they got him in a deadline trade for Victor Zambrano, but the Rays were not in contention that year.

 

Some memorable Rays winter trades while viewed as serious contenders:

 

Dec 2009: Jesse Chavez for Rafael Soriano

Jan 2011: Matt Garza for Chris Archer, R Chirinos, Sam Fuld & Brandon Guyer

Dec 2012: Jamie Shields & Wade Davis for Wil Myers, Jake Odorizzi & Mike Montgomery (they later traded Odorizzi for J Palacios)

Dec 2014: Wil Myers & scraps for Jake Bauers, R Rivera, Burch Smith and others.

Dec 2017: Longoria for Christian Arroyo & Denard Span

 

I'm probably forgetting some other deals.

Edited June 5, 2021 by moonslav59

[notin]

What we're talking about is trading guys at the deadline when you're in contention.

 

Last I checked, they didn't trade Snell at the deadline.

 

The only deadline trade they made when in contention is the Stanek guy, I believe, and they got somebody better back.

 

You're going to have to come up with some better examples than that.

 

They got Nick Anderson and Trevor Richards. They also gave up top prospect OF Jesus Sanchez...

[Bellhorn04]

They got Nick Anderson and Trevor Richards. They also gave up top prospect OF Jesus Sanchez...

 

So they were actually buyers, not sellers.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Since this is the Realistic thread, 2021 version: how many here think Matt Barnes has suddenly turned the corner on his career and will have another decade like the last two months and go straight to the Hall of Fame? Now, how many here think Bloom also thinks that, and is planning on making his first longterm big money contract offer to a... relief pitcher?

 

What makes more sense for the guy Henry and Co. hired to change the Red Sox business plan: lock up Barnes or cash in on their best deadline chip and deal Barnes to a contender blessed with a bountiful farm system?

[dgalehouse]

If the Sox are in contention at the deadline ( and I think they will be ) , why in the world would they even consider trading Matt Barnes ? That makes no sense whatsoever.

[Bellhorn04]

Since this is the Realistic thread, 2021 version: how many here think Matt Barnes has suddenly turned the corner on his career and will have another decade like the last two months and go straight to the Hall of Fame? Now, how many here think Bloom also thinks that, and is planning on making his first longterm big money contract offer to a... relief pitcher?

 

What makes more sense for the guy Henry and Co. hired to change the Red Sox business plan: lock up Barnes or cash in on their best deadline chip and deal Barnes to a contender blessed with a bountiful farm system?

 

Probably neither.

 

If they're in contention, no way they trade Barnes.

 

They likely won't make him a big offer, either.

[Nick]

One thing Bloom does well is not to get attached to a player. There's always someone else.

 

Suppose Sale comes back and he's back to pretty much his old self and say E Rod is still no better than Richards, Eovaldi, Privetta and Martin.

 

Sox at the point has no upside with E Rod. Why not trade E Rod and get something in return? Even with E Rod out, other five will return in 2022 and Houck and Whitlock can add depth along with Seabold.

 

That's what Bloom does. From where I sit, he'll do a bang up job with developing organizational pitching depth. He's doing it right now.

[Bellhorn04]

One thing Bloom does well is not to get attached to a player. There's always someone else.

 

Suppose Sale comes back and he's back to pretty much his old self and say E Rod is still no better than Richards, Eovaldi, Privetta and Martin.

 

Sox at the point has no upside with E Rod. Why not trade E Rod and get something in return? Even with E Rod out, other five will return in 2022 and Houck and Whitlock can add depth along with Seabold.

 

That's quite a stack of hypotheticals.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

If the Sox are in contention at the deadline ( and I think they will be ) , why in the world would they even consider trading Matt Barnes ? That makes no sense whatsoever.

 

I agree with you, but I also think Bloom disagrees with us. His stance may be: why in the world would I let my best trade chip walk in two months for nothing in return, when I was hired to continually improve organizational depth and save as much money as possible in the process?

[dgalehouse]

I honestly think some fans would not mind playing second fiddle to the Yankees , and never quite winning the pennant , as long as we had a few promising youngsters down on the farm and the " future looked bright." (None of the boys down at Clancy's feel that way.) The " future " never really gets here. It's always in the future.

[Bellhorn04]

July 2018: Chris Archer for Tyler Glasnow, Austin Meadows & Shane Baz. (Would you not want those 3 for Barnes?) The Rays had a nice 62-48 record at the time of the deal and were in the thick of a WC race. The ended up making the playoffs and finished closer to first in the ALE than they were at the time of the trade (7 GB to 7.5 GB).

 

No, they were 54-53 when they traded Archer. They ended up winning 90 games but missed the playoffs. You're looking at the wrong year.

[Bellhorn04]

I agree with you, but I also think Bloom disagrees with us. His stance may be: why in the world would I let my best trade chip walk in two months for nothing in return, when I was hired to continually improve organizational depth and save as much money as possible in the process?

 

Bloom was hired to win, too. This is the Red Sox, not the Rays.

[Bellhorn04]

I honestly think some fans would not mind playing second fiddle to the Yankees , and never quite winning the pennant , as long as we had a few promising youngsters down on the farm and the " future looked bright." (None of the boys down at Clancy's feel that way.) The " future " never really gets here. It's always in the future.

 

You have to keep a balance between the present and the future.

[Nick]

That's quite a stack of hypotheticals.

 

Nope not really.

 

So this is what I hear all of you will do.

 

Sign Barnes to 3/4 years at almost $20M adding delta of $14M for possibly next 4 years.

 

Sox will sign E Rod to 5 year $100M deal. And call it a 'steal'.

 

Xander if he opts out after 2022 while making $20M will be extended for 6 years at $150M. Delta is only $5M.

 

Hoping to get a home town discount, Devers will be signed to 6 year, $150M deal this winter.

 

Verdugo in two years will require sizable raise.

 

My hypothetical has chance of happening.

[Bellhorn04]

Nope not really.

 

So this is what I hear all of you will do.

 

Sign Barnes to 3/4 years at almost $20M adding delta of $14M for possibly next 4 years.

 

Sox will sign E Rod to 5 year $100M deal. And call it a 'steal'.

 

 

I said no such things.

[notin]

Probably neither.

 

If they're in contention, no way they trade Barnes.

 

They likely won't make him a big offer, either.

 

What if some sort of Stanek/Nick Anderson trade falls into Bloom’s lap?

 

It’s hard to predict a realistic trade for Barnes, typically because if the Sox need a starter, most teams looking to acquire Barnes won’t be trading a starter...

[Nick]

I said no such things.

 

I was just summarizing some of the posts.....you only mentioned my idea of trading E Rod when Sale returns was little far fetched....you're probably correct.

 

You do know that my hair brain idea is to bring in a $30M Ace instead of signing E Rod, despite saying that's not in Bloom's DNA.

 

I want Bloom to continue what he's doing. But if we have chance to go for it, I'd say go. As long as we're not trading away our young talent, I guess I don't really care how much money they spend.

 

I don't feel this is the year to GO. Our pitching is very above average but I don't see a stud.

Edited June 5, 2021 by Nick

[notin]

Why are the only two options:

 

1. Trade Barnes?

2. Make Barnes the highest paid relief pitcher in MLB history?

 

I don’t think 30 year old Matt Barnes is going to break salary records based on two months...

[notin]

I honestly think some fans would not mind playing second fiddle to the Yankees , and never quite winning the pennant , as long as we had a few promising youngsters down on the farm and the " future looked bright." (None of the boys down at Clancy's feel that way.) The " future " never really gets here. It's always in the future.

 

And some fans think remembering there will be another season is tantamount to surrendering.

 

Also, f*** the boys down at Clancy’s. How come they’re always out drinking and never at home? Maybe a few of them need to stop using baseball talk as an excuse to advance their cirrhosis and take in some much needed AA meetings...

Edited June 5, 2021 by notin

[Nick]

Kiké Hernández is not leading off in a game he’s starting for the first time this season. He had batted first in all 39 starts before Saturday. Cora has moved Hernández to the seventh spot.

 

Santana will bat first.

 

Hernández did not play Thursday and Friday. He took some time to work on his swing with hitting coaches Tim Hyers and Peter Fatse. He is batting only .228 with a .284 on-base percentage and .383 slugging percentage.

 

Cora can be very stubborn. I wonder if he ever considered maybe Kike is uncomfortable leading off.

 

Wouldn't it be great if Kike can kick ass hitting 7th in the lineup? If the batter order doesn't matter, why insist on batting the guy first?

[Bellhorn04]

Why are the only two options:

 

1. Trade Barnes?

2. Make Barnes the highest paid relief pitcher in MLB history?

 

I don’t think 30 year old Matt Barnes is going to break salary records based on two months...

 

Which makes sense. Although historically, speaking, I think a few relievers have landed fat contracts due to recency bias...

[Bellhorn04]

Kiké Hernández is not leading off in a game he’s starting for the first time this season. He had batted first in all 39 starts before Saturday. Cora has moved Hernández to the seventh spot.

 

Santana will bat first.

 

Hernández did not play Thursday and Friday. He took some time to work on his swing with hitting coaches Tim Hyers and Peter Fatse. He is batting only .228 with a .284 on-base percentage and .383 slugging percentage.

 

Cora can be very stubborn. I wonder if he ever considered maybe Kike is uncomfortable leading off.

 

Wouldn't it be great if Kike can kick ass hitting 7th in the lineup? If the batter order doesn't matter, why insist on batting the guy first?

 

I agree that Cora can be stubborn, but Kike did say he liked hitting leadoff.

[notin]

Which makes sense. Although historically, speaking, I think a few relievers have landed fat contracts due to recency bias...

 

Obviously, Liam Hendricks.

 

Worth noting that Hendricks also had twice the career fWAR as Barnes. Maybe the “recency bias” is more a coincidence and Hendricks got that deal because he’s actually a really good relief pitcher and a team did their homework.

 

Alex Colome had career numbers more similar to Barnes and struggled to land a deal. No Recency Bias there?

[Bellhorn04]

Obviously, Liam Hendricks.

 

Worth noting that Hendricks also had twice the career fWAR as Barnes. Maybe the “recency bias” is more a coincidence and Hendricks got that deal because he’s actually a really good relief pitcher and a team did their homework.

 

Alex Colome had career numbers more similar to Barnes and struggled to land a deal. No Recency Bias there?

 

There's not much logic or consistency with this stuff.