example1

You have been pretty consistent on liking Beckett. I have been too. Few who see his arm and presence could think he's not a good pitcher, even when he struggled historically.

I don't think you felt this way after 2006 and I don't think most of the Nation did either. He had top of rotation stuff, but he hadn't harnessed it and he looked concerning re: injury. Now, I love Beckett and did when he was in FLA, but when his contract is done there will be no doubt who was more valuable: Hanley Ramirez. In that sense he absolutely was a crapshoot.

Beckett, Lester, Dice-K, Sheets and Wakefield, with no obvious replacements available? I think that's risky, thought I agree that the offensive upgrade would be worth it. I just think its worth really pushing this deal because any deal that can be had WITHOUT Clay or Kelly would greatly impact this franchise moving forward. Of course, if they signed Chapman that would work too by givin gthem a AA or AAA arm with that MLB caliber upside.

You're right that not all these prospects we have are going to be good, but I'm not listing all the prospects we have. The players in dispute are Kelly, Westmoreland and Buchholz. Many people think they will be good. I think at this point Buchholz is less a prospect and more an MLB player. In that sense he comes with slightly less risk and will contribute more quickly. Theo may be offering Reddick and/or Kalish instead of Westmoreland; Bowden and/or Pimentel instead of Kelly. Dojji was right that this is an odd comparison, but I appreciate where you're coming from with it. Different positions and diferent ages make the comparison questionable. That said, I don't think many people are saying Bay/Holliday OR Adrian Gonzalez. Ideally it would be Bay/Holliday AND Gonzalez. That said, if they just got Adrian Gonzalez and found Bay or Holliday to be too expensive it would still be better to get Gonzalez even if their "big" LF answer doesn't come until later (in 2010 or 2011 even). Having Gonzalez is better than not having him, regardless of their status in LF.

Assuming that by "spare part of two" you are talking about prospects, how can you then say its a fair deal? You don't know the value of the players you are proposing they trade. I agree that getting AG would be great, but at any cost? No. Buchholz and Kelly would be a great return for SD. Just randomly throwing other good prospects ontop of that seems superfluous.

I quoted those to you earlier, one was asked by Kilo. One by someone else. They asked independently of one another based on what you were saying. just sayin'.

That was merely the "get Adrian Gonzalez" plan. It didn't address LF. If they got Gonzalez and signed Holliday this would be quite a team.

The impact of losing Kelly and Buchholz could be lessened by signing Aroldis Chapman, if they need another high upside arm to have in the top tiers of their development pool. Trade Buchholz and Kelly (keep Westmoreland) Sign John Lackey Sign Aroldis Chapman That could work.

I think it would be a lot to give up Buchholz and Kelly or Westoreland. This would be creating a hole to fill a hole, which I don't love in theory. Yes, they could sign Lackey but he'll cost a lot and he doesn't have Buchholz's upside (let the freakout commense from those who say "If Buchholz can become Lackey then we're lucky".) It sounds like the addition of Kelly and Westmoreland is actually the issue, less than Buchholz.

I hope we don't see a platoon of Hermida and Gomes as well. The hard part is that we know this is going to come down to Holliday and Boras. I think the entire time they've wanted to get Holliday over Bay, which is a very risky move if they don't get either. That doesn't mean they should go after Holliday without sparing any expense, but they shouldn't spare much. They will be in much better shape longterm if they have Holliday on their roster.

Yes he did. If the Red Sox have internally stopped caring if they can beat the Yankees on paper, then Josh Reddick would be an obvious option to carry the team through 1 season. LF: Hermida/Ellsbury CF: Ellsbury/Reddick RF: Drew/Reddick It isn't as good an option as getting Holliday, but it keeps them from having to be fleeced by FAs or trading partners for a LF. As for 3B, I think one option would be to have a combination of Kevin Youkilis (1B/3B ), Victor Martinez (C/1B ), Max Ramirez (C/1B ) and Jason Varitek © man those positions. Ramirez is a good hitter. There's reason to think he could hold his own... again, if we're writing off beating the Yankees on paper. Both of these options (Reddick and Ramirez) may not be best case scenarios, but both represent an option that doesn't force a binary choice between ruining the future with overpriced FAs or ruining the future with an enormously expensive trade. The article--and you--argued that there's only two options, I think there's quite a few more. I will ask again, in the interest of this discussion, did you listen to the Lucchino interview?

I wasn't talking about options that are available now. I was talking about options that would be available over the next year or so, most of which we don't know about. Why are you so stuck on this question and why do you think I would know? Again, if Beltre costs too much they they won't pay him. If he demands a contract that is longer than they're comfortable paying, they won't sign him. It seems pretty simple... Using what? WAR/$$? WARP? VORP? I don't think any of these are "major acquisitions" in terms of star-power. I think, however, that trading your starting 3B and signing a new starting SS are major acquisitions for the team. Perhaps not for the future of the ball club, but certainly for the 2010 team. How am I supposed to know which of your lines are throw aways and which are the nuggets of gold that you're blessing us with? Again, and this is something you really need to start understanding, these options aren't set in stone. Beltre isn't sitting out there with a widely-known value. He's a FA and thus is available to multiple teams. I suspect they will go after Beltre, but with Scott Boras calling the shots for him I wouldn't be shocked if the cost becomes prohibitive. Did you actually listen to the Lucchino interview I posted? I assume you didn't, since nothing you're mentioning references it. Why not talk the interview I posted in response to your clinging to the Theo "bridge" line? It's another member of the FO, afterall.

While he is an alternative, his play has been really bad the past two years. .6 WAR and -.4, for a total or 0.2 WAR over two seasons. He is indeed a cheaper version of Beltre, but without the actual positive contriutions to his team. The confounding issue with the 3B position (which I think might lead them back to Beltre) is that there aren't good options on the horizon, either internally or through FA over the next few years. Youkilis may be an option at 3B, but as time goes on I suspect he is more and more a 1B/DH, and less a 3B option. I'm confident they've projected into the future to see who else is available and that if they sign Beltre it's becasue there really aren't many better options out there. I'm intregued by Atkins, but he couldn't even start for COL this past year and was abysmal the year before. I liked him in 06 and 07, not so much in 10 and 11.

I believe them to. So when they make trades or don't make trades I assume it is about the future as much as it is about the present. I think they have that value and they want to stick to it. There are only a limited number of players who would have represented a more significant move than swallowing Lowell's salary for a good catching prospect. That was a bold move and is the type of thing the Sox can do because of their financial advantage. They didn't land Holliday or Halladay, but moving Lowell and getting Scutaro signed seem like pretty big moves to me. He hasn't been a big bust in Seattle. He's been worth more than his contract every season and, according to WAR, he's been more valuable than Lowell. This is simply an incorrect--though common--misconception that I shared with you before I looked deeper into the numbers. The thing I hate about Beltre, more than his performance or the type of player he is, is his 2004 season. If he hadn't had that year I'd see him as a nice--albeit unspectacular--player. Instead, I'm pretty sure he used roids to get a big contract. I know, you hate that type of unfounded speculation, but if it is warranted with anyone I think it's him. His numbers that year were MVP'esque and he hasn't approached it since. THAT is what turns me off about him. Otherwise, he's a good glove, decent power, poor plate discipline guy who will give the team 3-5 WAR on a yearly basis... not horrible.

Success can come in many shapes and forms, we agree. So why does that mean that they I should get upset if they don't get who I think they should get or who is the public consensus #1 choice. If success comes in many forms isn't there reason to think this successful and well-resourced FO might know another way of getting there? Not to belabor the point, but let's take Adrian Beltre and Mike Lowell, for instance. Based on a number of different measurements, Beltre will outproduce the Mike Lowell that we've seen the past few years, largely due to his glove. He's expected to be healthy, he's younger and he hits with some pop. Not exciting, but he's likely to produce enough (when both sides of the ball are taken into account) to actually strengthen his 1/9th of the team. If this type of addition is combined with a number of other trends, it actually comes across as an acceptable move at the right price--to me at least. Where this team may be trying to make its biggest impact is with run prevention; namely, realizing that 5 very good starting pitchers with a very good defense can carry a team to the playoffs. Beltre may make more than he should, but he probably won't be paid more than he's worth. They need all players to be able to field well if they are going to exploit their pitching/defensive advantage. Which leads to .... I wonder if Bay or Holliday are going to be the option here? Bay's defense really isn't very good, but I think he'd be a good DH... whether he'll take DH money to stay is another question. Holliday seems like he's going to be really expensive and that Boras is going to play this goddamn game of chicken again for his client.

Not at all. I think I've been clear that they need to get Bay or Holliday. I don't feel like it is shocking though. I wasn't expecting them to go and trade Buchholz or Kelly etc., What the author doesn't point out is that there are plenty of opportunities to make trades for good players without moving guys who are necessarily part of the future. Victor Martinez was a case in point: Masterson, Price, Hagadone. All good players but not essential pieces to the Sox winning the WS. The reality is that peoplereally do see guys like Buchholz, Kelly and Westmoreland as ACTUALLY capable of being MLB stars, not just average players. That's like 4 players out of hundreds in the system--it isn't chronic overvaluing, they've nailed it a number of times with their prospects so far. The rest are still available and so the Sox ability to make trades may be limited to players who can be had for those hundreds of players... that could be okay if they handle it correctly. A way of expanding this pool of players is by trading MLB players and eating their salary to get back good prospects and young players. That's what they're trying to do with Lowell. That's another direction, between the "trade prospects" and "sign FA" duality the article mentioned. No. Everyone make mistakes. I just don't question their motives. I think they really want to win and they really dislike losing.

They don't like not winning every year and they especially don't like it when it is obvious that the team isn't set the way it should be and the Sox aren't just throwing enormous piles of money at the problem. I think throwing money at the problem when it isn't absolutely the answer is what makes teams like the Red Sox end up with 80 wins for a few years, not making the playoffs year after year.

2.

I don't know why people are questioning what is going on in Theo's mind, or calling for some type of inconsistency between his like of JD Drew and of Adrian Beltre. Beltre may have a s***** OBP, but he's averaged 3.5 WAR over the past 4 seasons. During that same time (Lowell's time in Boston), Lowell has averaged 3.2 WAR. Beltre's contribution comes very strongly from the defensive side of the ball, but it has been there consistently throughout his career--even when his bat sucks. Again, I don't love Beltre but I don't see obvious better answers since Beltre is a type B. The key, for me, is a 3 year deal at the most, perhaps with options. If the Sox are going to take decent-non-stars as FAs they need to not end up being a burden on their finances. Otherwise it will just be another sunk contract by the 3rd or 4th season.

Thanks for this. I couldn't have summarized it better myself.

I'm so shocked to read Shaughnessy is playing the "smarter than the FO" game, and that a700 is jumping on his bandwagon. Shaughnessy's crap had a lot more credibility before the Sox won 2 World Series and made the playoffs every year. I wonder what time last night Shaughnessy finished that article and hit "send". While everyone else is talking about the Lowell deal he's still complaining that Theo didn't declare the Sox to be 2010 World Series champions. I would say that eating Lowell's contract for a better trade piece or for someone who might rightly vault to the top of the Sox prospect list is pretty aggressive and a good use of their money. Leaping to conclusions before the offseason is over; demanding that the Sox beat the Yankees on paper when we're months from the season starting; overvaluing Curtis Granderson because he's a famous name... He will look foolish if it turns out the Sox were waiting so they could offer Mauer a 10-year deal, or to snag Pujols at $30m/yr and they weren't satisfied with giving up their farm for Adrian Gonzalez so they could have a chance to win in 2010 (when they already have one).

...Breaking this quote from Dojji's off... I think this is a really interesting option. Between Victor Martinez and Max Ramirez they have two C/1B who can produce offensively. This is a really impressive type of versatility. As much as part of me wants Theo to swing Ramirez for a "shiny new toy" like Halladay, I also wouldn't be shocked if Ramirez is a guy he wants to add to the core of this team moving forward. He's cost controlled and versatile enough to contribute at two key positions. If the Sox had drafted and developed a 25 year old catcher/1B who hit like Ramirez does I would expect Theo to defend him very strongly like he does all the rest of his best prospects. It will be interesting to see what happens with this acquisition.