Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

sk7326

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,647

  • 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

2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by sk7326

  1. sk7326
    Belt has some real upside for sure - but if you are looking at him as a "buy low" trade opportunity, a legit #3 and a starting caliber 3B is WAYYYYY too high a price for a flyer.
  2. sk7326
    Oh I am not saying Uehara will be BAD, although at his age and given the concerns about his usage entering the season you have to be prepared for that possibility. Last year was an aberration in that he was a 3-win pitcher when he had never been more than a typical 1-2 win sort of hombre. Can he handle that sort of usage again is a legitimate question - but he deserves the benefit of the doubt, absolutely. I just look at the nature of bullpen sample sizes - there is a large history of year-to-year wild fluctuations that you have to be ready to cycle guys through again. The 4 LCS teams all used closers who they did not intend when the season began. It's just the nature of the gig.
  3. sk7326
    If you play in a homerun graveyard like the A's, lovely. You need everything to win - you don't think the Red Sox could have won the title without having a lineup that could crack good pitching, do you? Sometimes good hitting is not scoring 6 runs a game - it is being able to ignite a rally when your 7-8-9 hitters come up. No guarantees about the Sox bullpen at all - bullpens vary so much year to year, that to think that Breslow can deliver again next season is crazy. Indeed Uehara will not repeat this season from simple regression alone. If the Red Sox threw a smart offer at Jesse Crain, that would be very sensible - he could be dynamite when used carefully. Manny Parra is a good idea as well (failed young starters are a good source for potential bullpen dynamos) Internally all of the pitchers like De La Rosa, Ranaudo, Webster, should get serious looks at bullpen help also. Also, if they cannot move Dempster and he is relegated to the bullpen, his stuff is a strong candidate to play up when he does not have to turn a lineup over.
  4. sk7326
    Beltran for 3 years doesn't make sense for sure. Getting younger is easier to say than to do. Agility with contracts is the next best thing in a lot of cases. It's not like there is an influx of 25 year old outfielders in the organizations - that still needs a little work. (the Westmoreland thing hurts in this regard, though clearly thank god he has a chance to live a normal life, fingers crossed)
  5. sk7326
    Beltran with a qualifying offer = no ...
  6. sk7326
    I am not sure how fair that is. After all, he has been designated, cut etc. Every team has had a chance to get him and the Red Sox were the ones who saw enough to find him work. Now the limitations with Nava are clear - he is really a platoon bat disguised as a switch hitter. He really shouldn't be playing against lefties, and his glove does not add any value. But he has always had a big league approach at the plate, and from the left side he is a very useful hitter in your lineup. They were able to cobble together pretty good production out of the corners despite the lack of big names. Nava, like Salty and Victorino, would do his career a world of good by giving up the switch hitting thing. Even so, the Red Sox gave Nava a chance to show that he should be playing baseball for a living for somebody, which is pretty amazing given his story.
  7. sk7326
    What fans who want to deal Peavy look at are his salary and his postseason performance. But if you want to just use those datapoints: 1. He had 3 starts. One bad, one good, one in between. So - if that's what you want to use - he's a guy in the middle. 2. He is making $14ish for 1 year with a vesting option he will never hit. That is a completely justifiable salary for a mid-level starter. 3. Peavy was pretty good in 2011/2012, and last year his peripherals were ok. The homeruns were a problem, but a year at Fenway should aid that. There is no reason to move him.
  8. sk7326
    Moving to a corner makes sense - although in all of the cases you cite, those were very much corner-level bats (or at least Hunter could fake it and Lynn and Davis were when their bodies were not falling to pieces). Victorino is less so but clearly sticking with right-handed allowed to access his power a lot more frequently. The caution about his season is how much of it was tied with his defensive performance. Certainly metrically, it was a phenomenal season - but we also know defensive measurement is still evolving. I tend to advocate more for a backup-upside sort. Moving Victorino to CF weakens 2 positions, but there is nothing wrong with supplementing the outfield force.
  9. sk7326
    Pronounced platoon splits which were getting worse. His defensive metrics were slipping some, though he is more good than amazing as CF throughout. There was a real possibility that he just cannot produce acceptable quality from the left side. The Red Sox deserve a lot of credit for seeing the defensive value he'd add moving to a corner - and there was some good fortune with the hamstring injury which got Victorino to focus on the side of the plate he is actually good at. I am happy to be wrong about him.
  10. sk7326
    2012 WAS an oddity ... but the decline from 2011-2012 at his age is more typical than the rise to fringe-MVP level from 2012-2013. To say there is no age-related downside is silly, although if he were just an average player the next 2 years the contract is a huge win for Boston. At the same time, yes, I am encouraged because he made a couple of permanent changes which might have lasting positive impact - especially giving up left-handed hitting.
  11. sk7326
    Well it depends on their priorities and what they are willing to pay - their desired profit margins and such. The revenue will go up - winning a title does that. This is not an argument for taking on a long term deal, unless it was a Cy Young winner who is 2 years younger than Jon Lester and not likely to sniff a 90 win season anytime soon - not that such a player is remotely available. But short run value plays are not bad things - especially if it allows them to deal with the rest of their pitching in a manner they want. Now, I do think Peavy is locked in, but he also has a pretty friendly deal by today's standards - as long as you are not expecting Oscar Taveras coming back or anything. I don't mind the idea of signing another veteran and spinning Dempster off ... given Buchholz' health there is merit, especially if Allen Webster's early non-groundball tendencies are a harbinger. Overall, I think the pitching question is interesting - because there is some market upside - but clearly if they stood pat, it would not be a tragedy.
  12. sk7326
    The obvious "timeshare" name is Chris Young - righty plus defensive CF with some three outcomes sort of upside. At the end of the day, you have to treat LF as an open job, and RF as at least something you need some mild protection for. (Victorino's comeback at 32 is enough of an oddity to want to be prepared)
  13. sk7326
    Now the rotation is not a huge priority certainly - but there are positive value fliers out there, and a couple of staff ace sorts in the trade market to at least see how unreasonable the demands are. Certainly I wouldn't put this ahead of relief pitching or improved certainty in the outfield.
  14. sk7326
    The cost in dollars is less of an issue than the years - why Hudson or Haren are attractive is that they might only require a 1-year deal, especially for a title contender. 1 year and something with incentives to get to $15M or so is not at all unreasonable for a team like Boston.
  15. sk7326
    Darvish' WCB experience (which drove a lot of Matsuzaka's scouting too) gave a good look at his potential. His height and stuff were enough that if he wasn't a sure thing (and who is), his probability and upside were very very high.
  16. sk7326
    A multi-year is fair if the downside protection is sufficient. They wanted it last year - so it stands to reason that they would want something again, though it might be as simple as the protection they had in LAckey's case.
  17. sk7326
    Ummm ... Hudson was also successful in the AL ... as was Dan Haren ... Dempster should be moved, but if he isn't, that's OK. He is disposable on a playoff roster, but he is invaluable for the marathon. Also - he has a good contract, I would not eat salary without getting something of value coming back.
  18. sk7326
    I doubt Napoli gets a clean 3 years from the market. Perhaps 1 year + option, MAYBE 2 + option. He was a 4-win player last year, and for a team in Boston's position (playoff contender, significant marginal revenue per win) that is a $16M-$17M sort of dude. I'd feel more comfortable having that be an incentive laden upside. What we can be assured is that he will not be signing for a $5M base salary. As far as Koji goes - he is the closer to start the season, and you use him basically the way Farrell did. Limit the work early, but you definitely want him to have a few 4+ out saves from a perspective of conditioning. Furthermore, best to be prepared for Koji to not be the answer next year. Certainly he won't be as good as he was this year, because that is basically impossible.
  19. sk7326
    Basically - this is the value we applied to Tim Wakefield's presence. That he took his starts and kept a staff organized. He struggled at times, but that was not the point. And the industry has priced that single value quite high now. Jackson had a bad season, but a #4 starter who doesn't miss turns has innate value. Even Dempster proved that. Every start you don't need to wheel out Kyle Weiland or 2011 Tim Wakefield is a win for your rotation.
  20. sk7326
    It was not good - although $13M a year is a fair contract for proven innings soakers like Jackson. Dempster was a much better value obviously. His record was not perfect - but it would be disingenuous or stupid to mention the past without noting it's the best decade in modern Red Sox history. It was when they went away from it that it got muddled up. Indeed, in 2011 they were a 90 win team that got crushed by injuries in the pitching staff. That the media narrative became the folklore does not mean it actually was true.
  21. sk7326
    He will get it. Shortstop replacement level is much worse than it was a decade ago when Nomah was walking the earth. Drew and Peralta are clearly the best SS options, with Drew having a solid edge defensively. You don't think a contender would pay $12M a year for a 4-win shortstop? He'd be worth MORE if he did not have such a checkered injury past.
  22. sk7326
    Ellsbury was awful down the stretch in 2008 - that's why he was benched during the biggest part of the season. Crisp had some potential for sure but he has clearly settled into what he is: a good CF to have until you find a better one.
  23. sk7326
    This isn't Theo Epstein's era ... it's Theo Epstein's lieutenants. Cherington won using the 4th highest payroll in baseball, the team leaders from the 2007 team and the former pitching coach and PawSox managers who he and his boss brought in. 2013 didn't repudiate the Theo Epstein era, it reinforced it.
  24. sk7326
    Not arguably - but Darvish was also much better than Matsuzaka stuff-wise. Of course Matsuzaka was great stuff wise too - that was not the problem. I am not sure how the new posting agreement will work, but I believe finishing in the Top 3 is what matters as Tanaka will have some sort of choice. At least that is what the reports indicate will be part of the new posting agreement.
  25. sk7326
    Have to look at market inflation. It is more a supply-demand question than using a past pitcher comp.
×
×
  • Create New...