Early Trade deadline deals the selling Sox should make

[Bellhorn04]

5 minutes ago, notin said:

It’s a small honor, but IMHO an undeserved one.  And undeserved honors are the basis of being overrated.

”Overrated” doesn’t mean “bad;” it just means you got more love than you deserve…

But it's kind of an accidental honor.  It's not like anyone can cast a vote for unanimous...

[notin]

5 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

But it's kind of an accidental honor.  It's not like anyone can cast a vote for unanimous...

True, but there voting history is littered with voters claiming “if Babe Ruth didn’t get in unanimously” or “Ripken is getting in anyway so I will vote for X instead.”  None of that happened here.  I mean, who voted against Ted Williams and why?

[mvp 78]

29 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

The unanimous thing is questionable but doesn't mean all that much IMHO. Some of the voters do dumb things.

Voting for the Hall of Fame is deeply unserious. 

 

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, mvp 78 said:

Maybe early on, but he held on for a few too many years. 

He was actually better after the early on years, except of course year one w BOS (165 ERA+)

The last 2 years, agreed, but from age 34 to 42, he has a ERA+ at 100 or better in 8 of 9 years, and the one below was at 99, so you can understand why a knuckleballer might think he can pitch to 50.

Career w BOS

28-33 y/o 108 ERA+ 5.06 FIP

34-42 y/o 110 ERA+ 4.50 FIP

43-44 y/o 83 ERA+ 4.77 FIP

[mvp 78]

7 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

He was actually better after the early on years, except of course year one w BOS (165 ERA+)

The last 2 years, agreed, but from age 34 to 42, he has a ERA+ at 100 or better in 8 of 9 years, and the one below was at 99, so you can understand why a knuckleballer might think he can pitch to 50.

Career w BOS

28-33 y/o 108 ERA+ 5.06 FIP

34-42 y/o 110 ERA+ 4.50 FIP

43-44 y/o 83 ERA+ 4.77 FIP

The problem with Wake was that his best years were in years that ultimately didn't matter. The years that were important to the Sox (99, 04, 07, 08, 11) were years where he just didn't pitch all that well in. 

His last two years were pretty bad and he should have retired after 09 when he missed half the season or at the very least after 10 when the bottom fell out. 

[notin]

6 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

The problem with Wake was that his best years were in years that ultimately didn't matter. The years that were important to the Sox (99, 04, 07, 08, 11) were years where he just didn't pitch all that well in. 

His last two years were pretty bad and he should have retired after 09 when he missed half the season or at the very least after 10 when the bottom fell out. 

Cut him some slack for 1999, when he split time between being a starter and a reliever (closer, actually).

In fact from 1999 to 2001, he pitched in 190 games, including 66 starts and 56 GF. 
 
He did anything and everything the team asked.  Unlike a certain nameless third baseman….

[mvp 78]

14 minutes ago, notin said:

Cut him some slack for 1999, when he split time between being a starter and a reliever (closer, actually).

In fact from 1999 to 2001, he pitched in 190 games, including 66 starts and 56 GF. 
 
He did anything and everything the team asked.  Unlike a certain nameless third baseman….

They should have left him as a reliever because that 5.86 ERA ERA and 829 OPS as a starter didn't work for me! 

Look at that dogwater roster that Jimy took to 94 wins and the ALCS. It was an amazing managerial job. 

[Nick]

14 hours ago, notin said:

Trading Chapman isn’t punting 2027.   He should be replaced, but at some point it’s going to stop being wise to rely on 39 yo relief pitchers…

If every GM feels the same way as you do, why would they give us anything in return? Do you have better options for 2027 at the same price? Name him. 

[mvp 78]

5 minutes ago, Nick said:

If every GM feels the same way as you do, why would they give us anything in return? Do you have better options for 2027 at the same price? Name him. 

GM's want to win this year. Chapman could help a team at the top of the standings do that. Sox are at the top of the draft board instead. 

[Bellhorn04]

2 hours ago, notin said:

True, but there voting history is littered with voters claiming “if Babe Ruth didn’t get in unanimously” or “Ripken is getting in anyway so I will vote for X instead.”  None of that happened here.  I mean, who voted against Ted Williams and why?

My first guess would be someone Ted spoke unkindly to.  He was known to be rather contemptuous of the "knights of the keyboard".  

[notin]

49 minutes ago, Nick said:

If every GM feels the same way as you do, why would they give us anything in return? Do you have better options for 2027 at the same price? Name him. 

Because anyone trading for Chapman is only looking at 2026.  Chapman is far from being part of any 2027 plans anyway since he has a mutual option that he can decline.  In fact, his option is mutual so he only likely exercises if he tanks (at which point the team declines it).

Not sure what he is worth in a trade but not likely anyone’s top prospect.  But the Sox can at least pay some salary to get a better one.  Theyre not going to acquire a franchise-altering piece here, unless it’s someone in A-ball that just breaks out, like Houston got with Yordan Alvarez for Josh Fields…

[JoeBrady]

4 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

I've heard some fans really yearning for Matt Chapman

I'm not sure anyone is 'yearning' for him.  I've seen suggestions that we acquire him him and Adames, but in exchange, SF has to pick up salaries of Story and Yoshida.

[mvp 78]

21 minutes ago, notin said:

Because anyone trading for Chapman is only looking at 2026.  Chapman is far from being part of any 2027 plans anyway since he has a mutual option that he can decline.  In fact, his option is mutual so he only likely exercises if he tanks (at which point the team declines it).

Not sure what he is worth in a trade but not likely anyone’s top prospect.  But the Sox can at least pay some salary to get a better one.  Theyre not going to acquire a franchise-altering piece here, unless it’s someone in A-ball that just breaks out, like Houston got with Yordan Alvarez for Josh Fields…

His contract is only 13M. That's not the holdup over a certain tier of prospect IMO.

[mvp 78]

Just now, JoeBrady said:

I'm not sure anyone is 'yearning' for him.  I've seen suggestions that we acquire him him and Adames, but in exchange, SF has to pick up salaries of Story and Yoshida.

I'm saying that I've seen and heard it all over over the place, not just on here. Adding Adames to it only compounds the problem. Who cares if they cover the full cost of Masa and Story for another 18 months. Adames and Chapman are signed into the 2030's! 

Not sure how trading for underperforming, aging, overpaid players is going to help the Boston Red Sox. 

[Old Red]

3 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

I'm saying that I've seen and heard it all over over the place, not just on here. Adding Adames to it only compounds the problem. Who cares if they cover the full cost of Masa and Story for another 18 months. Adames and Chapman are signed into the 2030's! 

Not sure how trading for underperforming, aging, overpaid players is going to help the Boston Red Sox. 

Someone has been beating the drums for Chapman for 3 years now. I don’t see anyway like you said the Red Sox are trading for an aging 3B with plenty of more time left on their contract. It’s just more uncooked spaghetti not sticking to a wall.

[JoeBrady]

2 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

Not sure how trading for underperforming, aging, overpaid players is going to help the Boston Red Sox. 

Without going into the calculations, I figure that Adames + Chapman cost us $230.8M, and I would expect another 30.1 bWAR for their remaining 10.33 seasons, collectively.  But more importantly, they are a near-perfect fit.  Their projected .743 & .718 are tons better than what we currently have.

[Old Red]

24 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

Without going into the calculations, I figure that Adames + Chapman cost us $230.8M, and I would expect another 30.1 bWAR for their remaining 10.33 seasons, collectively.  But more importantly, they are a near-perfect fit.  Their projected .743 & .718 are tons better than what we currently have.

Yes the Red Sox will pick up those 2 contracts no problem.🙈

[drewski6]

1 minute ago, Old Red said:

Yes the Red Sox will pick up those 2 contracts no problem.🙈

And would pass 2 teams in the race to the playoffs.  Unfortunately, there are 4 more we'd still need to pass.

[drewski6]

Just now, drewski6 said:

And would pass 2 teams in the race to the playoffs.  Unfortunately, there are 4 more we'd still need to pass.

🙈

[moonslav59]

6 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

The problem with Wake was that his best years were in years that ultimately didn't matter. The years that were important to the Sox (99, 04, 07, 08, 11) were years where he just didn't pitch all that well in. 

His last two years were pretty bad and he should have retired after 09 when he missed half the season or at the very least after 10 when the bottom fell out. 

Agreed. In hindsight, after 2008, but he did well from 2001 to 2008.

It is strange that his two worst seasons in those 8 years were 2004 (99 ERA+) and 2007 (100 ERA+.)

[JoeBrady]

2 hours ago, Old Red said:

Someone has beating the drums for Chapman for 3 years now. I don’t see anyway like you said the Red Sox are trading for an aging 3B with plenty of more time left on their contract. It’s just more uncooked spaghetti not sticking to a wall.

Chapman would've been a great signing 3 years ago.  That's when we could've had the Devers conversation.  A move to DH would've precluded Yoshida.  But such is life.

Past that, we won't get any elegant solutions.  You have to give up something regardless.  Even if a real good 27 year old was available, they would still want a contract taking them to age 35 and beyond.  You have to pick your poison.

That said, I am glad that opinions are starting to turn against acquiring aging players.  Just 4 weeks ago, there were a lot of people that were adamant that we needed to acquire Bregman (32), Suarez (34+), Alonso (31+). Marte (32+).

[JoeBrady]

23 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Yes the Red Sox will pick up those 2 contracts no problem.🙈

There is no chance that SF makes that trade, so it is for discussion purposes only.

[drewski6]

3 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

Chapman would've been a great signing 3 years ago.  That's when we could've had the Devers conversation.  A move to DH would've precluded Yoshida.  But such is life.

Past that, we won't get any elegant solutions.  You have to give up something regardless.  Even if a real good 27 year old was available, they would still want a contract taking them to age 35 and beyond.  You have to pick your poison.

That said, I am glad that opinions are starting to turn against acquiring aging players.  Just 4 weeks ago, there were a lot of people that were adamant that we needed to acquire Bregman (32), Suarez (34+), Alonso (31+). Marte (32+).

We're getting away from wanting aging players cuz we're punting

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

June 11th is an offday... and that might be the day -- if I were CBO -- to phone 29 other clubs and make everyone in the system available.

The next 15 games are vs. three first-place teams, plus the Yankees and Orioles. If the Red Sox maintain their torrid pace of eight games below .500, and go something like 4-11 or 3-12, then it's time to blow it all up.

Breslow can even wear the explosive vest and sprint into the front office full of Assistant VPs... and lock the door.

Why not? If we're going to have a firesale of valuable veterans in July anyway, that means we're going to totally rely on prospects in another rebuild. So might as well see what kind of quality we can get for our own highly-touted prospects. Maybe, Sam Almighty, there are young guys who might actually turn out better.

We're not getting a Juan Soto deal for Anthony and acquiring CJ Abrams and James Wood, but how about Crochet -- who is already hurt after one great year? What kind of package would teams give up for a healthy Beast (and don't freak... a year from now, Eyanson might be the next Jacob Miz).

How could we not listen to offers on everyone?

[drewski6]

1 minute ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

 

How could we not listen to offers on everyone?

well for one, we have a GM who is incapable of listening.

[Old Red]

5 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

There is no chance that SF makes that trade, so it is for discussion purposes only.

Still.🙈

[drewski6]

The future is 6'5 guys and up.  So clear.  Stop with the noodlebat fundamental position players and just get a bevy of freaks.  Keep Justin Gonzales.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Just now, drewski6 said:

well for one, we have a GM who is incapable of listening.

He listens, but words go in one ear and right out the same lobe, forced back by a rugby scrum of Merriam-Webster Thesaurus options.

[drewski6]

2 minutes ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

He listens, but words go in one ear and right out the same lobe, forced back by a rugby scrum of Merriam-Webster Thesaurus options.

This is when my girl would say "regurgitating the last 2 words of what I said isnt listening"

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

11 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

This is when my girl would say "regurgitating the last 2 words of what I said isnt listening"

Brez said many lines were crossed, but they just couldn't align that last line with the alignment they were aligning.