Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

User Name

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    18,192

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Boston Red Sox Videos

2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking

Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker

News

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by User Name

  1. User Name
    ....or you can just re-sign Napoli, instead of going for Trumbo, who is an extremely similar player to someone the Red Sox may be trying to replace.
  2. User Name
    But you certainly wouldn't get WMB for Trumbo straight up. And WMB's free-swinging ways are what have him on the outside looking in.
  3. User Name
    Trumbo? As a hitter, he's the opposite of the Sox' organizational hitting philosophy. Doesn't make sense.
  4. User Name
    Oh, so you mean the Red Sox DO give opportunities to the young guys? Go figure. Also, did Dempster beat up your kid at school or something?
  5. User Name
    I love how he keeps talking about the Red Sox "blocking the young guys" while the Red Sox churn out player after player from the minors to the MLB roster. Can someone please take away his computer?
  6. User Name
    Who, instead of Ellsbury, has actually proven he can sustain his HR numbers. marklmw is grasping at straws with the whole two year recovery time for shoulder injuries. I have not seen that assessment anywhere else.
  7. User Name
    How would batting him third make him hit more homers? He doesn't hit more homers because he doesn't have HR power. 2011 was a fluke.
  8. User Name
    Such genial eloquence.
  9. User Name
    Again, dumping money is not the same as giving up money+prospects. It just isn't. And in these types of deals, you don't "jettison" guys from the 40-man all the time. Sometimes you have to give up value. In the Burnett trade for example, they gave up a guy with potential who ended up being traded for Vernon Wells.
  10. User Name
    That's exactly why it matters where they come from. Throwing money without draft pick compensation or prospect cost is not the same as only money. Think about it, sometimes a crappy prospect turns out to be a guy of real value. David Murphy was a throw-in in the Gagne deal, and he sure would have looked good in a Sox uniform for a number of years.
  11. User Name
    Probably not, mainly because pitchers are creatures of habit. Teams will do it from time to time to give their starters extra rest (the Tigers did for a bit this year IIRC) but not at the beginning of the season when guys are still building arm strength. It'd throw them off their regime.
  12. User Name
    Yeah but in doing so, you're moving your own goalposts. Please try to be a bit more clear if you are referring to buy-low options in general, only trades, or only FA's, which was your original point.
  13. User Name
    Did you read the actual question? The actual question was regarding garbage bin free agent acquisitions. Please read through the thread before jumping in.
  14. User Name
    Burnett was a trade/salary dump. He doesn't qualify as a buy-low type guy.
  15. User Name
    Nope. 2/12. Colon and Kazmir are good examples.
  16. User Name
    Liriano got a two-year, guaranteed 12.75 million contract though. The only reason they re-worked it into a 1+ option contract is because he broke his non-throwing arm.
  17. User Name
    Dustin Pedroia isn't going anywhere.
  18. User Name
    Except the part where he's not a safe bet to provide better production than Peavy next year.
  19. User Name
    Some people will look at his approach and think he has contact issues. He doesn't. He's just very selective at the plate, and that usually results in a lot of K's. As he matures and reaches his prime, he's a candidate to cut down on the K's and increase his batting average as he gets acclimated to the pitchers in this league.
  20. User Name
    Why can't he be the next Mike Trout? 'cause he black?
  21. User Name
    Yeah, the problem is, that the Red Sox would have zero leverage in negotiations. Teams won't be coerced into giving up decent prospects if they know the Sox are actively trying to trade him, especially with that price tag for one year, and even lees so for a portion of the season. Also, teams can (more likely will) point to his injury history and offensive flop in the post-season as undermining factors. If he takes the QO, he is worth more to the Sox than anyone else.
  22. User Name
    This post is several types of wrong. What money was Bard tying up? He was making near league-minimum money. Ellsbury is almost guaranteed to not come back, and it's not because the Red Sox need to free up money to allocate to him. They have the resources, but don't want to get locked into a retarded contract, and understandably so. If Drew returns, why trade him away? Keep him and his solid overall production. Besides, who would give up solid prospects for a year of Drew at big money? Why would we want Garza? He's not an upgrade over the pitchers we currently have in the rotation and/or waiting in the wings. The Stanton fixation is something i don't understand. He's fragile, about to get expensive, and would cost a ton to get. He's not a specific need, to boot.
  23. User Name
    Salty sucks, Tanaka is an unknown, Ellsbury is a pipe dream. McCann is a battle-tested catcher who is significantly better than Salty overall. If he comes at a reasonable price in money /years (60/4) do it. Otherwise look for a catcher with better D and allocate the rest of the resources to a reasonable upgrade.
  24. User Name
    No we don't. He has one arb year left at big money. That seriously cripples his value, as high as it is.
  25. User Name
    With only one year before FA and what he'll be making through arb, how much raping can the Tigers do?
×
×
  • Create New...