Third Baseman Ketel Marte Is On the Boston Red Sox's Radar

[JoeBrady]

2 hours ago, Old Red said:

Didn’t Marte also have some issues last year of wanting to be on the field? His teammates were frustrated with the number of days off requests. 

Too lazy for a deep dive, but he averaged 141 games from 2022-24.  Weak, but not terrible.

[Old Red]

3 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

Raffy was finished at 3rd.  Whether they signed Bregman or not made no difference.  I kind of look at Bregman as the bridge to Mayer.  The issue with Casas injury could not have been predicted.

Raffy was not a good 3B no doubt, but I believe if Cora had his way Raffy still would have been the 3B.

[Old Red]

1 minute ago, JoeBrady said:

Too lazy for a deep dive, but he averaged 141 games from 2022-24.  Weak, but not terrible.

I believe last year was the problem, and there were some different things going on.

[Hugh2]

Just now, Duran Is The Man said:

he's certainly not afraid to make them -good or bad. i won't go over all the trades as i know Moon has done this many times, but, in my mind, the Crochet trade was the only good trade. and we paid a heavy price in that deal. 

We paid a fair price for that trade and so far it has worked out amazing.  Narvaez was a great trade, Quinn Preister was a great trade, Yhoiker Jajardo was a good trade, I liked teh David Sandlin trade, the Sonny Gray trade should work out great, I'm also very optimistic about the Oviedo trade what gets looked over with him is when he returned, his STUFF+ took a dramatic turn forward he looks like a candidate to be a completely different pitcher. Getting Dick FItts and Weissert for Verdugo.

 

His only two bad trades was Devers and Chris Sale. 

Sale had been injured hot garbage here for years.  It's a bad look winning a cy young but who could have predicted that? and it's not like his year would have put us over the top and Sale regressed last year.  Honestly that trade may have been a blessing in disguise because what if we don't trade for Crochet? or even worse what if we extended him or his options get picked up because of his performance and then he retreats back to being injured?

The Devers trade I'll mark down as bad, but we still don't know what they can do with Harrison and Hicks and I think it is obvious he was forced into making that trade. 

[Hugh2]

5 minutes ago, Old Red said:

That’s what Suspects are good for. Producing in a Red Sox uniform, or traded for someone who does. The White Sox paid a heavy price too. A good well worth it trade for both sides.

Prospects are 100% for building your team, and sometimes that means trading guys away.  And if ownership isn't going to let you play in the deep end then you're going to have to make big swings for guys like Crochet.  I don't think Bloom had the balls to make a trade like that. 

[JoeBrady]

5 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

I love how people assume that all of

Duran/Rafaeal/Anthony///Narvaez/Story/Abreu/Crochett/Chapman could regress next year but.

Tucker/Alonso/Marte/Schwarber/Bichette would all not or be better

That's always been a pet peeve of mine.  There is a risk with every player, and context is king.  Prospects flame out more than vets do, but at a far lower cost.  But highly ranked prospects flame out less often.  Just like 28 year old free agents flame out less often than 32 year old free agents.

Both prospects and veterans can be good or bad risks.  The talent is predicting one from the other.

[Hugh2]

I'm going to throw my hat in the ring and publicy state that I think when we look back a year from now that the Oviedo trade was the great trade that we had no ideal how great it was at the time.  

If I'm wrong I'm wrong, but if I'm right I'm gloating like a MF. 

[Old Red]

5 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Prospects are 100% for building your team, and sometimes that means trading guys away.  And if ownership isn't going to let you play in the deep end then you're going to have to make big swings for guys like Crochet.  I don't think Bloom had the balls to make a trade like that. 

I agree on Bloom, or trade Sale either.

[Duran Is The Man]

4 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

We paid a fair price for that trade and so far it has worked out amazing.  Narvaez was a great trade, Quinn Preister was a great trade, Yhoiker Jajardo was a good trade, I liked teh David Sandlin trade, the Sonny Gray trade should work out great, I'm also very optimistic about the Oviedo trade what gets looked over with him is when he returned, his STUFF+ took a dramatic turn forward he looks like a candidate to be a completely different pitcher. Getting Dick FItts and Weissert for Verdugo.

 

His only two bad trades was Devers and Chris Sale. 

Sale had been injured hot garbage here for years.  It's a bad look winning a cy young but who could have predicted that? and it's not like his year would have put us over the top and Sale regressed last year.  Honestly that trade may have been a blessing in disguise because what if we don't trade for Crochet? or even worse what if we extended him or his options get picked up because of his performance and then he retreats back to being injured?

The Devers trade I'll mark down as bad, but we still don't know what they can do with Harrison and Hicks and I think it is obvious he was forced into making that trade. 

you see the glass half full, i see it as bone dry with a hole in the bottom.

Narvaez was a blind squirrel finds an acorn deal that actually worked out. i'll give them that one. trading Yorke for Priester was a good trade. giving him to Milwaukee for nothing was stupid beyond words. Fajardo and Sandlin are TBD. i hope Gray works out. Oviedo....who knows? he's another in a long line of desperation moves they hope pans out. the return in the Devers and Sale trades was absolutely f***ing horrible. then trading James Tibbs III (the one guy i thought might make it someday) from that trade for a few months of Dustin May.  AYFKM?? 

[drewski6]

21 minutes ago, Old Red said:

I get on paper it could have been a 3 year deal for the player, but outside of something drastic happening like being injured he was only staying for 1 year, and then go shopping again, or negotiate an even longer deal from the Red Sox. It really wasn’t too complicated . If he can get $160M good for him, but I hope it isn’t from Boston.

outside of something "drastic" to bregmans detriment only* 

gotta throw that in there.  Because if Bregman got an MVP thats pretty drastic, and hes still opting out.  

It wasnt a mutual thing.  Bregman was protected from something drastic happening positively to his earning potential (it going up) the sox were not protected at all agianst the down-side.

I think thats worthy of clarifying.

Its also not particularly a good argument for re-upping Bregman large and long, because here I am, me, Andrew, talking about the very real possibility that Bregman age 5 years overnight and how screwed we'd be and Im not talking about it like its some remote chance.

ANd Ive said all along, Id have to have a long talk w my medical team on Bregman before Im comy going large and long there.

But you can always find a reason to not play in the deep end of the free agent pool, you can always talk yourself out of taking a risk, and avoiding risks is how you quickly turn into the Athletics, and I dont want that either.

Passing on Bregman , in a vacuum, would not infuriate anybody.  Passing on all of the top hitters, when we so obviously need a couple hitters, is worthy of frustration.

 

[Randy Red Sox]

3 hours ago, Old Red said:

Didn’t Marte also have some issues last year of wanting to be on the field? His teammates were frustrated with the number of days off requests. 

Mr Cora will be happy to accommodate him as he likes days off for his players

[Hugh2]

3 minutes ago, Duran Is The Man said:

you see the glass half full, i see it as bone dry with a hole in the bottom.

Narvaez was a blind squirrel finds an acorn deal that actually worked out. i'll give them that one. trading Yorke for Priester was a good trade. giving him to Milwaukee for nothing was stupid beyond words. Fajardo and Sandlin are TBD. i hope Gray works out. Oviedo....who knows? he's another in a long line of desperation moves they hope pans out. the return in the Devers and Sale trades was absolutely f***ing horrible. then trading James Tibbs III (the one guy i thought might make it someday) from that trade for a few months of Dustin May.  AYFKM?? 

See, I don't think that's even close to an accurate assesment. 

Just because you or I didn't know who he was doesn't mean the Sox didn't.  And right now Kyle Harrison literally has the exact same profile Quinn Preister did at the time of that trade. 24, young, former top 25 overal prospect, and hasn't really put it together yet.  You scold them for trading him to a team that helped him put it together but then claim Naraez was dumb luck because you didn't know who he was. 

[Duran Is The Man]

4 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

See, I don't think that's even close to an accurate assesment. 

Just because you or I didn't know who he was doesn't mean the Sox didn't.  And right now Kyle Harrison literally has the exact same profile Quinn Preister did at the time of that trade. 24, young, former top 25 overal prospect, and hasn't really put it together yet.  You scold them for trading him to a team that helped him put it together but then claim Naraez was dumb luck because you didn't know who he was. 

you must be one of Henry's 39 vice-presidents.

[Randy Red Sox]

Just now, Duran Is The Man said:

you must be one of Henry's 39 vice-presidents.

And all 39 are on 1 yr contracts

[Hugh2]

3 minutes ago, Duran Is The Man said:

you must be one of Henry's 39 vice-presidents.

WHat does that even mean? 

[Randy Red Sox]

1 hour ago, Old Red said:

It was always going to be just a 1 year contract, and that’s what makes the Raffy fiasco even worse IMO.

we should have at least gotten some useful talent back in return

[Old Red]

13 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

outside of something "drastic" to bregmans detriment only* 

gotta throw that in there.  Because if Bregman got an MVP thats pretty drastic, and hes still opting out.  

It wasnt a mutual thing.  Bregman was protected from something drastic happening positively to his earning potential (it going up) the sox were not protected at all agianst the down-side.

I think thats worthy of clarifying.

Its also not particularly a good argument for re-upping Bregman large and long, because here I am, me, Andrew, talking about the very real possibility that Bregman age 5 years overnight and how screwed we'd be and Im not talking about it like its some remote chance.

ANd Ive said all along, Id have to have a long talk w my medical team on Bregman before Im comy going large and long there.

But you can always find a reason to not play in the deep end of the free agent pool, you can always talk yourself out of taking a risk, and avoiding risks is how you quickly turn into the Athletics, and I dont want that either.

Passing on Bregman , in a vacuum, would not infuriate anybody.  Passing on all of the top hitters, when we so obviously need a couple hitters, is worthy of frustration.

 

I’ve already said it wasn’t a mutual agreement, and it could have been a three year deal for the PLAYER. Bregman has opted-out just like I think most thought he would.

[JoeBrady]

37 minutes ago, Old Red said:

I believe last year was the problem, and there were some different things going on.

That's why I didn't address 2025.  He had one legit injury, so I don't know if he was dogging it.  And the house getting broken into could've affected him.  I'm prone towards overlooking things if they are one-time issues.

[JoeBrady]

31 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

then claim Naraez was dumb luck because you didn't know who he was. 

It's been like this on the internet for a 100 years.  And not just the RS.  For fans that don't like the GM, for any team, every good move is attributable to luck or the owner over-ruling the GM.

[Hugh2]

7 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

It's been like this on the internet for a 100 years.  And not just the RS.  For fans that don't like the GM, for any team, every good move is attributable to luck or the owner over-ruling the GM.

I mean, you got be consistent both ways.  These teams spend fortunes on personnel and technology that evaluate these guys and we have literally zero ideal what they knew or thought about Narvaez before trading for him other than they traded for him. 

Erod was a far away prospect, Narvaez was literally mlb level who started on the 2025 roster, the Sox obviously targeted him so it's ludicrous to suggest that they just made some random trade for a catcher and happened to guess right.  They traded away Teel and needed a catcher, they then went out and got a guy who happened to be a stud.  That's not luck.....

 

[mvp 78]

1 hour ago, Duran Is The Man said:

you see the glass half full, i see it as bone dry with a hole in the bottom.

Narvaez was a blind squirrel finds an acorn deal that actually worked out. i'll give them that one. trading Yorke for Priester was a good trade. giving him to Milwaukee for nothing was stupid beyond words. Fajardo and Sandlin are TBD. i hope Gray works out. Oviedo....who knows? he's another in a long line of desperation moves they hope pans out. the return in the Devers and Sale trades was absolutely f***ing horrible. then trading James Tibbs III (the one guy i thought might make it someday) from that trade for a few months of Dustin May.  AYFKM?? 

Quinn Priester

for

Yophery Rodriguez #38

John Holobetz #18

Marcus Phillips #12

I disagree that the trade was for "nothing." 

[Hugh2]

13 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Quinn Priester

for

Yophery Rodriguez #38

John Holobetz #18

Marcus Phillips #12

I disagree that the trade was for "nothing." 

And on top of that, how good was Quinn Priester at that point in time? 

Couldn't we use the same exact logic he used on Carlos Narvaez and say that the Brewers just got lucky.  Nobody thought he was that good then, and up until then we had already built Quinn Priester back up a little bit and made him look better. 

Breslow actually gets credit for that trade on the other end getting value for Nick Yorke. 

[mvp 78]

40 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

And on top of that, how good was Quinn Priester at that point in time? 

Couldn't we use the same exact logic he used on Carlos Narvaez and say that the Brewers just got lucky.  Nobody thought he was that good then, and up until then we had already built Quinn Priester back up a little bit and made him look better. 

Breslow actually gets credit for that trade on the other end getting value for Nick Yorke. 

The Brewers improved upon Priester. They do a good job with their pitching development too. He was fine here and the Sox could have used him. That trade isn't a complete bust, it's just a little unique for a team that is trying to get into the playoffs. 

[drewski6]

4 hours ago, JoeBrady said:

That's always been a pet peeve of mine.  There is a risk with every player, and context is king.  Prospects flame out more than vets do, but at a far lower cost.  But highly ranked prospects flame out less often.  Just like 28 year old free agents flame out less often than 32 year old free agents.

Both prospects and veterans can be good or bad risks.  The talent is predicting one from the other.

scared-money / risk averse/ accountant mindset.

[drewski6]

If you're too afraid to miss, you wont swing enough.

[drewski6]

3 hours ago, JoeBrady said:

It's been like this on the internet for a 100 years.  And not just the RS.  For fans that don't like the GM, for any team, every good move is attributable to luck or the owner over-ruling the GM.

It's been like this on the internet for a 100 years.  And not just the RS.  For fans that like a prospect/youngster, for any team, every set-back is attributable to moving him around the diamond too much (or calling him up too soon, or not soon enough)

[drewski6]

https://www.overthemonster.com/red-sox-comentary/94192/will-flemming-isnt-lying-to-you-but-it-looks-like-the-red-sox-are

Great article.

[drewski6]

he Red Sox are only collecting value players, and if nothing of value is available, they move on and don’t get anything good. Now, some might say this is a brilliant strategy because if you do it for long enough, you’ll eventually compile the most value-filled roster top to bottom anywhere in the sport. But here’s the problem, I don’t think that approach wins championships. I’d love for the Red Sox to prove me wrong, but running an MLB team isn’t just akin to managing a portfolio. It also has aspects of the following imperfect real world scenario sprinkled in:

Suppose you’re taking a cross-country road trip and you’re goal is to get there in the most economic way possible. So you start your journey on the east coast and you decide you’re going to be really good about only filling up at the cheapest gas stations possible. It works great for a while, but then you start to encounter more and more remote stretches of highway with larger gaps between towns and more treacherous terrain. You skip by places to fill up because the gas there wasn’t a good value, and then eventually you get to the point where you have less than a quarter tank left and there’s 146 miles to the next station on the other side of the mountain pass. You’re options are either to pay for what you need, even if it’s not good value, or chance the success of the entire trip because you were too cheap to pay for it.

That’s where we’re with the Red Sox. It doesn’t matter how well Roman Anthony can drive the bus if you run out of gas in a blizzard in the middle of Mooseball, Montana. In baseball, sometimes you have to deviate from the initial plan and go after guys who are good and not cheap to address a need, and if you don’t like that, you’re in the wrong industry! The key is finding the right balance between maximizing the value on the roster and when to cross the line. Or as Andrew Friedman so succinctly put it a decade ago:

“If you’re always rational about every free agent, you will finish third on every free agent.”

Oh, and if you’re not willing to do what it takes to finish first on any of the big free agents, stop feeding good people in the industry steaming piles of bull. Either that or you go on Twitter and face the toxic (but entirely justified) masses yourself. I’d be willing to pay Fenway Park ticket prices to witness those fireworks!

[mvp 78]

1 hour ago, drewski6 said:

scared-money / risk averse/ accountant mindset.

Accountants are cool. 

[drewski6]

7 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Accountants are cool. 

I remember being in a room with about 300 accountants , it was a regional meeting, Boston/Burlington/Quincy offices for a top 6 accounting firm where i worked at the time (mcgladrey)

And they asked who was interested in getting cross trained in sales and marketing. I was the only one who raised my hand.

I left the firm a year later, left accountancy and went into pharmaceutical contractual negotiation, but I still use elements of my accounting degree.  But Im glad I made the move. Accounting wasnt for me, Im too analytical.  At least for entry level accounting.