Kimmi

I don't know exactly what article you're referring to, but I remember reading about how impressed Ortiz, Pedroia, and some other teammates were with the muscle Hanley added last offseason. He worked hard during the offseason to add the muscle that he thought the Sox wanted him to add in preparation for the role that he was going to play on the team. Hanley stunk to high heaven last year, but I agree with you that his "dog" reputation is very misguided.

There is plenty of sound rationale behind the idea of starting Rodriguez in AAA. There is also plenty of sound rationale against it. Do I think the Rodriguez deserves to be in the starting rotation when the team breaks camp? Absolutely, without a doubt. Do I see the benefits of having him start in AAA? Absolutely. The idea that Rodriguez starts in AAA is not one that is lacking in common sense.

That's probably the reason why Chapman has not been traded yet. Just because the Reds' price is even more steep than what we paid for Kimbrel, that doesn't make Kimbrel's price less of an overpay. That said, we will see how the market plays out for the rest of the closer type relievers. If guys like Chapman or Miller are traded for returns comparable to Kimbrel's trade, then perhaps Dombrowksi judged the market correctly. That said, we will also need to see how the market plays out for trades on young pitchers. If, for example, Gray is traded for a package that we could have easily swung using some of the prospects traded for Kimbrel, then perhaps Dombrowski would have been better off being more patient.

I've said many times that starting Rodriguez at AAA wouldn't be a bad idea because it allows for much better depth and flexibility. It may not be right, and based on everything I've read, it's not going to happen, but it's really not as bad or as uncommon move as some think it is. The point made that starting him in AAA might hurt him more than it helps the team is a valid one. But the old cliche that you can never have enough pitching is very true. The best way to have quality depth in case of injury/underperformance is to have someone like Rodriguez ready to go in AAA.

Hanley was given a strict offseason regimen to follow. From what I've read early in the offseason, it seems that Hanley has taken it to heart. If Hanley is back with the Sox this upcoming season, hopefully he will work hard on the defensive side and his approach at the plate will be return to what made him such a good hitter throughout his career. I'm wondering if Hanley's early HR success with our team is what caused him to try to be a completely different type of hitter. I'm not expecting much from him defensively, but Hanley really is a very good offensive player.

Ben's legacy is the wealth of young, talented players that this team has, both at the major league and minor league levels.

Fair point about Buchholz reputation preceding him. The value in Buchholz' deal is that it's only for one year. If he ends up being the "bad Buchholz", it will be easy enough to eat that contract.

I agree that you can't build a rotation depending on him to be an ace or to make it through an entire season. At the very least, he should be able to give Owens the time in AAA to become more seasoned. At best, he can be an ace for the team for a half season or more. As long as Dombrowski gets us our #1, Clay is worth that risk for $13 mil, no?

I wouldn't put too much stock in his playoff record. Price has shown that he is a very good pitcher and his playoff sample is too small to draw any conclusions from. Playoff performance is not at all a concern for me in deciding whether to sign him or not.

This is exactly why I would have preferred saving those prospects that were dealt in the Kimbrel trade to trade for a young, cost-controlled starter. Buehrle has stated that he will either pitch for the Cardinals or he will retire.

If Vazquez is ready, he'd be my choice of starters. As far as the 4th OF goes, I'd love to have De Aza back.

Spot on post OJ. I have nothing to add except to say that I have all the confidence in the world that Dombrowski will acquire a #1 starter for this team. I wll be shocked if he doesn't.

In terms of what I consider key moves, a # 1 starter and one more strong BP arm are our big needs. Obviously, there are other things that need to be done, like obtaining a 4th OF and obtaining some depth pieces for the pen. There may or may not be other big changes, such as moving Hanley or Pablo, which I think would be a good idea. However, if the FO gets us a #1 starter and one more strong reliever and makes no other big moves, I am feeling good about this team for next year. I have stated several times that I don't want Hanley at first base. But if he stays on the team and stinks as bad as some of us are fearing, Shaw should be able to fill in nicely. I have felt all along that the team is only a few key moves away from contention. Kimbrel was a key move. Two more key moves to go.

If Dombrowski was unable to get anything done during the trade heavy part of the season, then all of the free agent options that are available now would still be availalbe. All I'm saying is that I think he narrowed some of his options by trading for Kimbrel so early and giving up the package that he did. You obviously don't know me well at all. I am almost always in agreement with what the FO does, and have often been called a homer and a pollyanna because of my defense of the FO moves. To imply that I am never happy is absurd. Dombrowski has pretty much made two moves. Pick up Buchholz' option, which I am in full agreement with and very happy about, and trade for Kimbrel, in which I love the return, just didn't like the price because of the limitations it might put on the rest of our offseason, not because of losing those prospects. I have even stated that if the rest of the offseason works out well as far as filling our holes without sacrificing our long term outlook, then I will be good with the Kimbrel trade. So stop with the never happy nonsense.

You might be right about JBJ not being the centerpiece of a deal, but I don't think it's a given. There is a premium on defense right now. Also, I know they project differently and that the team would be selling high on JBJ (that's kind of the point, isn't it?), but JBJ was worth 2.4 WAR in 74 games. Mookie was worth 4.8 WAR in 145 games. Over a full season, JBJ would have been worth roughly the same as Mookie. Yes, I know that JBJ is not Mookie. But I do think that he currently has more trade value than some people give him credit for.

I agree that getting rid of either Panda or Hanley would be ideal, but I don't think it's a necessity. With Ortiz announcing his retirement, he will not need to reach a certain number of at bats. He and Hanley (and the rest of the team) would benefit from Hanley DHing once or maybe even twice a week. A defensive substitution can be made for Hanley late in games. And if Hanley really stinks that bad at 1B, then we have Shaw. I agree on the pitching front. I would prefer a #1 and a #2/3, but I'd be okay with a true #1.

Agreed SK.

Point taken about his age. It's quite possible that he will mature and his attitude won't be an issue. In terms of his pitching ability, I'd absolutely want him on the team.

The team was not in as dire shape coming into this offseason as some of are making it out to be. The position players are more or less set. If Dombrowski adds at least a #1 to our rotation and fixes the BP, which he has gone a fair way towards doing, then the team will contend this year, barring significant injuries or underperformances.

You have no idea whether any doors were already closed. There is a long way to go in the offseason and the tide can change. Someone who is not seemingly available today might be available next month. If Sale or Gray are not available, Carrasco or Fernandez might be. Yes, it would cost us, but add Swihart or JBJ plus another top prospect to the package that we gave up for Kimbrel, and I think you're pretty darn close to be being able to land a top starter.

If we get a #1 starter and one more strong BP arm, we are good to go.

Exactly Pal. We have no way of knowing for sure, but I have the impression that neither Price nor Greinke have Boston at the top of their lists. Not sure about Cueto. I understand the idea of being aggressive in making trades so you don't lose out, but IMO, Dombrowski closed some other doors by not showing a little more patience.

That is pretty much what I'm saying. They may end up having no other choice but to go with 2nd tier starters, but that is not their plan. And if they fail to get an ace and make some other major deal just to excite the fan base, then they really haven't learned their lesson at all.

I will say that if the FO can address the rest of its needs (mainly a #1 starter) without gutting the farm or otherwise sacrificing our long term outlook, then this trade starts looking much better. If Kimbrel also helps lead us to another WS ring in the next 3 years, then it will have been worth it for me, even if Margot ends up being a perennial all star.

I think what I dislike the most about this trade is that the Sox have somewhat painted themselves into a corner as far as getting that #1.