Dojji

Maybe that would be to the good. Not like there's plenty of other threads with the same conversation happening.

Wait wait... so an attack on someone's character somehow doesn't count as an attack merely because it's accurate? Since when? Pointing out flaws in someone's character and attacking for them may be accurate, may even be correct (a subtly but significantly different thing), and in a few odd cases it might even be the right thing to do, but that doesn't mean that's not exactly what you're doing. I've always found it better policy to confine my comments to a player's actions, and highlight character only as and when the player's actions make that character obvious. Even then, better tread lightly on the mind reading. The judgmental streak in New England society is an ancient pattern in the way we think, and has led to tragedy before.

Not really, the only positions Moncada definitely can't play are shortstop, catcher, and possibly centerfield.

First season shaw gives us plenty of reason to trust him with the job if Sandoval can't do it. If he can't get it done, there's plenty of opportunity for a midseason trade.

Reminder: If we're looking for a cheap 3B bridge, we already have one.

Taking options off the table when trying to build the best team possible does you no favors. Yes, you can build an average bullpen super cheap, depending on luck, but why the hell would you need to when you have one of the largest payrolls in the league? There are many ways to gain individual talent and the cheapest ones have a certain charm of efficienty to them, but when it comes to assembling the best roster possible, the only real way to do that is to take no options off the table. The last thing you need to be doing when in the same division as the Yankees is tying your own hands behind your back because doing something that expensively improves the team "doesn't feel right."

Dodgers cutting payroll http://www.latimes.com/sports/dodgers/la-sp-dodgers-debt-payroll-20161126-story.html Let's get the obvious out of the way -- Clayton Kershaw is not walking through that door. Neither is Yasmani Grandal. They need to lose payroll, not their entire franchise identity. That out of the way, anyone you'd like to see the Sox go after?

If we can't get the best guys on the market, I don't want us trolling for scraps. We do NOT need a full time DH. If an obvious deal to bring in a great one appears, great, if not, no problem.

if a real chance to grab Longoria is on the table Moncada is not even a factor. There are a ton of different ways to get Moncada into the lineup once he is ready which he clearly is not yet

Ican't see the Tigers giving up a decent asset like VMart without a solid return which is why I'm saying no

VMart is nowhere near consistent enough in the last few years to risk trading that kind of assets for. I'd rather roll Swihart out there as our DH and see what he can prove with the bat.

We in this baseball community need to have a long hard think about why we make it so hard for players. Passion is one thing, I get passion, but past a certain point it's pretty clear that we're our own worst enemy. When a player coming to Boston has to worry about surviving the fanbase as well as enduring the season, there's a problem.

I would be all for a move like this from purely the standpoint of expanding depth. We're gambling pretty hard on Moncada being ready sooner than later though, if we deal Sandoval. If we do a trade like this I'd like to follow it up with a reasonable deal for Mike Moustakas. He's a very talented third baseman on the last year of his contract with a team that isn't competitive, he ought to be available for a fair price. If healthy Moustakas is an all star level third baseman with 25 HR power and a decent to good defensive skillset, is young enough to be well worth re-signing for 5 years, and would be a good compliment to what we already have going on in the infield. Also I really doubt he's going to deal with major health issues relating from his current injuries. ACL tears are bad when they happen, and recovery from the injury itself can take awhile, but they don't tend to leave major aftereffects behind them. So it's a move worth exploring if you want to bridge to Moncada/Devers, or even just want Moustakas in its own right.

I see little reason to believe Cain is a substantial upgrade over the guys we have now.

You have to think that if Sam Travis could play third base at all, he'd be playing it right now. It's not like there was a 3B prospect blocking him in the first half of the year, and it's always smart when developing a prospect to play him as far up the defensive spectrum as you can get away with, for example, Pedroia went through the minors as a shortstop, Miguel Cabrera as a third baseman, Mookie as a second baseman, and so on.

The more likely the Chisox are to deal Sale, the less likely they are to deal Quintana. It's one thing to trade one of your two aces when you're not competitive, it's quite another thing to have nothing left to build your rotation around.

Because the one thing of all things we absolutely need to be doing right now is reducing our bullpen depth? For those looking for a solution at third base -- Moonslav keeps putting forward Frazier, and it's not a bad call to have an eye on Frazier, but keep an eye on Mike Moustakas as well. The Royals are at a crossroads this offseason. They can try for one more bite of the apple or they can sell off and reposition for another bite in 3 years. You can easily make an argument for either course of action and I have no idea which way Dayton Moore is going to take the Royals, but with the weakness of the KC rotation and the overall strength of the competition in the Central Division with a strong Guardians team, I expect Moore to sell some pieces off to reposition for another run at titles and glory 3-4 years down the road. With only 1 year left of team control, Moustakas might be one of the pieces moved. And he'd be a decent fit if healthy -- nothing amazing, but a solid upgrade over either Sandoval or Shaw as they are right now.

The thing about it is, we don't need an offense that performed at the level of last year or greater. We had a substantial lead on the second best offense in the majors, and there's every chance our rotation will perform significantly better next year, it's in a much better place than it was in April of 2016. We just need the offense to carry its share, last year it carried the whole team instead. We can afford a small dropoff if the expected improvement in the rotation comes through. Also while the bullpen is where we need the most work -- I did want to stress that if NOTHING is done, the team is still going into 2017 in pretty decent shape with a good chance to win the division, the big concern being the shallow state of the pen.

I like the work DD has done with the roster since he came on board. He's been focusing on the short and intermediate term and has been building strength and depth at the big league level while leaving key prospects be. I believe we are in a far better position than I think some fans are giving the team credit for, so I thought I'd do a quick general overview and sort of touch on why I feel this way. Rotation: Everyone is under the impression that our rotation is a little weak on the top. I'll grant that any rotation can always be better, but I think our rotation next season is going to manifest as a strength of the squad rather than a weakness. I would like to pick up a couple depth starters to stash in the minors, that's actually the extent of meddling with the rotation we absolutely need to do. While our rotation did not pitch well in the playoffs, the same rotation has every chance to do so another time, I think it's important not to overreact to what happened to the squad in October, especially going up against an Guardians team that was playing its heart out and was just at that next level at the right time. And I do like the fact that the team has solid roster control of its entire rotation for next year and beyond, which gives us a very solid basis to explore potential upgrades with the security that if the price becomes unfavorable, we can simply walk away. With 2 former CYA winners, and some very solid depth behind them (all of Wright, Pomeranz, and E-Rod have pitched at a #2 level for extended periods over the last 2 years) I think we have a very good potential in our rotation, and with a modest amount of luck may even have a very good one indeed. And having Buchholz in the wings to replace a starter who struggles or is hurt is very nice insurance. If we can swing a major upgrade safely, of course there's no reason not to do it, but there's also no reason to gut the farm or sacrifice our strength and depth in other areas in order to do so. If I was using a 5 star scale to assess our level of urgency to upgrade the rotation, I would put it at a solid 2 stars.] Lineup: There's no denying it so I won't even bother -- we're going to feel the loss of David Ortiz next year. At the same time though, he was one hitter out of 9, and our lineup from top to bottom was the major driving force of the team last year. With youngsters like Betts and Bogaerts coming into their own, and perhaps even more importantly the first fully healthy year from Pedroia in a dog's age, along with the rotation a potentially strong asset next season, I'm not desperate to overreact to unresolved controversies in the roster at catcher, DH, and third base. The big question this offseason: Do we need an offensive DH to replace some (since you can't possibly replace all) of the lost value from David Ortiz. My answer: That's one way to do it, but far from the only way. Personally I'm intrigued by the possibility of keeping Blake Swihart on the roster as a DH and third catcher, and letting his bat develop to see if that improves his trade value. My screwy theories aside, we can probably mix and match and use DH to rest people, and I'm thinking especially of Pedroia here, to try to keep them fresher over the course of the year than they otherwise would be. I'm of the personal opinion that sacrificing the potential versatility and flexibility of an open DH, for all but the best full time DH hitters, is more likely to be seen as a mistake in hindsight than it is to be seen as a brilliant move. I think the best move we can possibly make at DH is no move at all. It takes a certain discipline to not make a move when it's not the right time to make a move, especially after a disappointing showing in the playoffs, but I think I can hope that DD has that level of discipline. Point to consider: With shortstop covered by a player who should be a major offensive contributor, and catcher not exactly a position dominated by great hitters leaguewide, not only is third base the closest thing we have major offensive concern, but we should be able to hide a poor offensive third baseman if we have to, mentally substituting the great offense we get from SS to compensate for poor offense from 3B, if that makes any sense. While an upgrade at 3B is moderately desirable, we already have a lot of assets tied up in 3B as it is, so a major move of more assets or money at 3B probably is not desirable and is only questionably necessary. It's hard to argue we are desperate for a new third baseman when the least optimistic numbers out there still say that Travis Shaw was a perfectly adequate replacement. Also I'm probably the biggest Sandoval skeptic in the room and I'm encouraged by the news I've been reading about Sandoval's recovery. He deserves a crack at 3B based on what we've seen so far about his offseason regimen, which he seems to be taking seriously at last. We may eventually need to solve 3B with a significant roster move, but it's a problem we can address at the deadline if we have to -- not all problems need to be solved immediately, or are even best addressed at once rather than over time. IF there was a decent FA 3B to go after, I might feel differently, but if any move to upgrade 3B is going to need to be a trade anyway, then wait for the deadline and give your internal options a chance to fail. On my 5 star urgency scale, I'd say a major upgrade to the lineup is one single star, no more than that. Our lineup was the driving force behind our making the playoffs this year, I would look to upgrade in other areas where an upgrade is easier, rather than blowing major assets trying to double down on the thing we got most right this year. Defense and bench: Our defensive numbers came out as kinda sorta averagish this campaign if memory serves. That said defense is not a major issue for the team, and our weakest offensive positions are defensive assets at their positions, and it goes without saying that our outfield defense looks to continue to be fantastic, so I don't see a major reason why we need to upgrade the gloves. Bench is again, a major asset of the franchise. If Sandoval takes the 3B job back we'll have Shaw, Holt, Young, and a good defensive catcher (one of Leon or Vazquez will surely be the backup even if Swihart swings the starting job). That might be the best bench in major league baseball, if it's not, it's up there. I see shoring our defense and depth as a one star priority on the 5 star scale. Bullpen: This is the area that probably needs the most work. Fortunately, it's also the area that of all aspects of a baseball team, is the easiest to make changes. Let me start by saying I'm not all that worried about Craig Kimbrel as the closer. Between Papelbon and Koji, we got a little spoiled over the last decade or so at the closer's position, as closer go, if you leave aside the price we paid for him (and you *have* to leave that aside to fairly assess the bullpen, any other form of analysis consists of pointless ego-stroking) Kimbrel 2013 really isn't that bad. He's a hell of a lot better than Andrew Bailey. The fact that he's a decent bet to improve on a slightly subpar 2013 campaign is nice, but I would be looking to bring in another big arm if I could do so, since we've lost Koji and our bullpen depth is poor. Bullpens are the most ephemeral factor in a baseball team, and that can lead people into the mistake of assuming that it's a poor place to spend assets or that no one should pay big money for relievers. Similar to my views on the rotation, I feel that the only way to build the best possible bullpen consistently is to turn over every stone. If you can upgrade the bullpen with money, spend money. If you can grab a key arm in trade, make a trade. Trying to go cheap on the pen and just mix and match AAAA guys until someone sticks is a decent move for a small market struggling to pay the bills. If you're not a small market struggling to pay the bills, then you should be prepared to pay the sticker price for the best bullpen you can assemble, especially if you're trying to win championships. I'm a little concerned because DD has a tendency to assume he can patch together the lower middle of the pen over the season and has a long track record of not prioritizing the pen as a place to make substantial upgrades, and I feel a substantial upgrade is required. On my 5 star urgency rating, I place upgrading the bullpen at 3 stars -- the highest of any of these factors, but still not precisely desperate. Final analysis time, I think the team overall is in excellent shape and I'd say we have to be the frontrunners to retake the division this year even if no major changes to the roster happen. I would like to see a few upgrades take place here and there to maximize our chances in the playoffs, but we are in a position not to make panic moves and I'd like to hope DD understands just how important it is to not overreact to offseason pressure. I think most of our biggest problems are going to be more solvable in the middle of next season than they will be in the offseason due to the season giving us a chance to stack external options against internal ones and make a more informed decision. Putting my turban on and gazing into my crystal ball for a moment, I expect a quiet offseason with most of the big moves taking place in the bullpen area, and I expect any major moves at the positions to wait for June next year, with the possible exception of signing a DH which I hope they don't do (Pedroia in particular would benefit from regular DH time to prevent the wear and tear that's sabotaged him in the last several postseasons) EDIT: Huh. Apparently it is possible to make a post too long. I just passed the 10,000 character limit and my post was rejected. Never encountered that before.

You raise an excellent point OH FOY! Stick around and post a bit more often, your perspective is very solid here. Enjoy your turkey day.

Translation: "If it takes more projected games for Castro to reach the same 1.1 fWAR than Leon or Vazquez, then he's probably not even as good as the guys we have and I don't know why people want him so bad." It's an interesting point -- if one player has 2 WAR over 150 games, but another has 1.5 WAR over 80 games, the second player is probably actually more useful. I wonder what kind of barometer fWAR/G would actually be, and whether it might be useful to track that as a stat. Hey Moonslav, you like to crunch numbers, feel like exploring this for us? What's the fWAR/G of each of our starters last year?

We should count ourselves lucky. How many different terrible gambling puns could Vegas have gone for instead? The Vegas Spades? The Vegas High Rollers? The Vegas Loose Slots? I mean in a world where a AAA baseball team just renamed itself the New Orieans Baby Cakes we got off pretty lightly here.

If I have my choice between meh, meh, meh, and meh+1, but have to give up $9M a year for meh+1, then I go with meh. Nothing against Castro, but you'd be hard pressed to argue he's a significant enough upgrade to spend money on until other more serious problems (bullpen f'rex) are dealt with.

So the Sox cashed in on a guy who was highly touted but probably, on account of his age and all the X factors that can plague a young starting pitching prospect, significantly overhyped. Sounds like a distinct possibility they sold high, to me. Fantastic stuff is not all there is to being a good pitcher, if a guy can command big league value now that can help the team, and is that far removed from big league status, I see no reason not to go for it -- 4 years of prospect development is forever, the odds are never in favor of any particular 18 year old making the majors at all, much less doing anything when he gets there.

There's "highly" and there's "trade an ace highly." I'm sure half the league would like to trade a position player or reliever for Swihart, some may even trade a bottom of the rotation starter. But you can ask the moon and stars for an ace, and probably get it. Swihart is of an age and experience level where he's more of an ex-prospect than a prospect, that's just the facts. Swihart has attractive qualities, especially with offensive catchers so sparse, but a team with an expendable ace does not have to settle for a pretty good return or a solid ex-prospect, they can ask for bona fide fully cost-controlled elite prospects and get them, probably alongside at least a couple established regulars (another thing that Blake Swihart is not). Roster math and arbitration math are working against him now, he still has some value but is not a pristine asset and has had the opportunity to show his warts without the real opportunity to demonstrate progress that usually goes with it. I have my doubts that there's a team in this league that would willingly center a deal for one of their aces around Blake Swihart. Half the league probably would be interested in this guy if he was dangled, but they would want to make a different kind of trade, target other of the team's needs.