Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

moonslav59

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    103,135

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    127

 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 moonslav59

  1. moonslav59
    True, but it still seems silly. Such original names in the first place... NOT!
  2. moonslav59
    I would not give up anywhere near the suggested offer, here. I'd hesitate to just give Duran or one from Tolle/Early, let alone two. Arias would not be needed. I might offer Garcia, Clarke and Sandlin. Maybe Campbell and Phillips.
  3. moonslav59
    I agree. There is only one guy we added, yesterday that may need to be DFA's, and that's T Gray. All the others are low level prospects.
  4. moonslav59
    I think this was more about making room for the 3 guys we wanted to protect. We basically swapped out prospects in danger of being selected for prospects that are far from Rule 5 consideration. We did gain prospects though, so you are right. We got rid of 3 borderline players plus Hoppe and added 4 prospects. Time will tell.
  5. moonslav59
    If we re-sign Matz, the Bernie trade makes more sense, to me.
  6. moonslav59
    Nope. DHam, Hicks for Castillo plus cash? LOL
  7. moonslav59
    More changes today than I expected. No more Lowe, Bernardino, Murphy, Winckowski & Hoppe. Added Sandlin, Drohan & Uberstine to the 40. Added some prospects, all low level. Now, we wait to see who might be selected Rule 5, and who gets added/subtracted via trade, DFA'd or added by signings.
  8. moonslav59
    Missed Hoppe for Luke Heyman (2025 SEA 14th round draftee, who plays 1B/C) Hoppe was added to the 40.
  9. moonslav59
    I guess our 40 was pretty deep, as we traded 3 guys, instead of DFA'g more than just Wink. (Maybe Wink gets traded, if he's not claimed. I'm sure we tried to trade him.) We also thought our farm was rather short on ML ready prospects as we promoted a bunch, this year, but we basically had 4, if you count Hoppe who was traded and added to the 40 w SEA. I like Bernardino. I still had some hope with Murphy. Maybe I was higher on Wink than I should have been. Hoppe came out of nowhere. I had Mullins ahead of him. Maybe this is a sign Moran has life, but once we start signing FA's, someone else has to go. What's the first to go list, now? (Assuming no better players get traded.) 1. T Gray 2. Grissom 3. Eaton or Sogard (if Grissom stays) 4. Moran or Criswell (out of options) 5. Hicks (in my dreams)
  10. moonslav59
    SEA traded for Hoppe and added him to the 40, so there was someone that flew under our radar. We selected Sandlin, Drohan & Uberstine to take the slots of Murphy (traded), Bernardino (traded) & Winckowski (DFA'd)
  11. moonslav59
    With so few hitting prospects, maybe we should hold onto him. Can he play 1B?
  12. moonslav59
    I was wrong on the last two, but I guess they got some promising prospects with Bernardino, Murphy and Hoppe. Out with the young and in with the new, I guess.
  13. moonslav59
    I thought Torres might fit a double Sox need: 2B and a one year deal that might allow a reset on the soon to be year 3 tax, assuming we go over this year (year 2.) Go large and long on one guy and large and short on another.
  14. moonslav59
    Have we named anybody? I guess there's still an hour to the deadline.
  15. moonslav59
    I could certainly see MIA trade for Sandlin. Maybe a team like PIT might, if the brass think highly enough of his upside. I've kinda soured on him, but he still has some promise.
  16. moonslav59
    I'm a master couponer, but you are right. The Crochet extension was necessary to make the deal worth it. The thing is, even if people want to say Crochet & Anthony's extensions equal Devers, we still need to use the savings from Buehler, Gio, Ref, Wilson, May, Matz & Lowe. Bottom line: we have $35-45M to spend up to the line and $55-65M to go to the second line. I'm not going to show how maybe we could add some more budget room by trading Yoshida or Hicks, but including Duran ($7.7M AAV) Campbell ($7.5M) or Rafaela (6.3) or Bello (9.2) could gives us more wiggle room, if we make it tight. If you go with $60M, we could get Bregman or Bichette PLUS Alonso, and make a trade that does not add salary for a SP2- like Campbell + others for Ryan. This is not pie-in-the-sky thinking, but in reality, I'm not sure we are even considering going this bold. I'm pretty certain we ain't goin' Drewski Bold.
  17. moonslav59
    Yes. 14 games in 2024 (65 innings) Career Innings 2445 C 66 1B 29 2B 2 LF 1 3B
  18. moonslav59
    Drew, I get hoping for the world, but getting 2 boppers is a long shot. Three is La-La-Land. I hate breaking it to you, because I'd love something that bold.
  19. moonslav59
    So, Murphy for a single A catcher clears a slot. Bernardino to SEA for a utility type guy who has AAA experience. (no 40 man needed?) I liked BB. Hoppe (not on 40) to SEA for a faraway C/1Bman. Did I miss anything else while walking my dogs?
  20. moonslav59
    More than I expected.
  21. moonslav59
    He looks like a much better player already!
  22. moonslav59
    That's 1/3 of our pitchers, but seriously, he did get real bad. Consider this, though, 2022>>> minors BB%: 14.7 Guerrero 14.0 Kelly 13.3 Drohan (some want him added) 12.4 Murphy (out of options) 11.8 Ort (hung on for a long time and stayed in the bigs)
  23. moonslav59
    I think that's how they see it. Improve where you can and see what comes down the pike.
  24. moonslav59
    That's why I only suggest K Marte.
  25. moonslav59
    BTV has K Marte about the same value as Ryan, and I agree.
×
×
  • Create New...