moonslav59

BTV has Kiermaier at -9.7 and Fairbanks at +9.4. I'd give Chavis (7.5) and Chatham (1.9) straight up for the both, but if we could get TB to pay a little cash, it would be nice. That's 9.4 for -0.3.

To me, it's Devers & Sale, but Bogey is close.

Well... Sale missed year 1 of his extension. Price gave us a lot of innings year 1, but he had his worst career ERA+ in 2016. Eovaldi sucked his first year after signing. Lackey sucked year 1 and then missed year 2. OK: Buchholz pitched more innings in 2012 than ever, but his 4.56 ERA was not all that great for year 1. His year 2 was great (237 ERA+ is one of MLB's all time best, but it was only for 108 IP). Good: Porcello won the Cy Young, year one of his deal. Lester did well all 3 years of that deal. Beckett, too. It was the next deal that... Clement retired before his deal ended- sad case. Foulke fell off a cliff.

The BTV site updated some Sox players' values: The prior values are what I recall: Duran 12.0>14.0 Jimenez 8.5>10.8 Houck 5.0>6.0 Ward 4.5>5.3 Groome 3.7>4.5 Arroyo 2.0>3.6 Pivetta 3.0>3.3 Bello 1.0>1.6 Barnes 0.0> 1.2 Wong 4.0> 3.1 Brasier 4.7> 2.9 Chatham 4.7> 1.9 Taylor 1.6>1.3

I meant about the injury to HRam- not that he might have gotten hurt at 3B, too.

With the economy as such, maybe Bogey might bite.

Nice.

Good question, especially 2 years early.

right out of the gate! HRam was decent year 2. We should have traded him after that season.

Ideally, we'd have Monday morning'd Scherzer, Porcello, Cruz & Headley Then the next year... Greinke and maybe Cespedes

B-I-N-G-O! Plus, pushing HRam to the OF ended up getting him hurt (talk about Monday morning QB'ing!)

What if you had $55M?

I figured since you had Pillar. I like your choices.

Was the problem the plan or the players they chose? (Try not being a Monday morning QB on this answer.) Had we signed: SP: Porcello 3B: HRam or Headley OF: Nelson Cruz or even Melky Cabrera ...we might have not felt the plan was so bad. Then, go for the ace the next year (Price or Greinke).

Is the Bradley JBJ or Archie?

Bogey is already under team control through 2026 (option year). Devers and maybe ERod are the only urgent extension players. (ERod is a FA after 2021, but we may want to wait and see with him, and Devers is after 2023.) Others not so urgent: after 2021: Barnes after 2022: Vaz (option year 2022) after 2023: JD Eovaldi Beni Renfroe after 2024: Verdugo Pivetta DHern

I'm not disagreeing with your point. My point is all the 3, 4 and 5 for 1 deals we made got us into this mess, in the first place. Our 40 man roster depth is about as bad as its been in decades. To win and sustain winning, you need roster depth and a bright looking future (farm and controllable young players). In general, we need to add quality players to our roster. We could conceivably add 6-8 free agents to our 40 man roster, this winter, and that would allow us to make several 2 or 3 for 1 deals, but the 3 players we trade, if they are slotted in the 30-40 slots on our roster, will not bring us back much. Although the trade value site says we can get something very promising for Chavis + Chatham, I'll beleive it when I see it. Is now the time to make a Chris Sale type trade, assuming one is out there? I think now, and I guess you agree. That does not mean we can not improve the longer term outlook and our chances in 2021 with a 2 or 3 for 1 deal, now. We clearly will be signing 3-4 free agents, minimum, and have roster room to make a few deals like this, but in general, if we really want to be building for 2022 and beyond, in theory, we should be looking at trading JD, Eovaldi, ERod and anyone else who will be a FA after 2021 and maybe even 2022. Of course, the fans would be irate. The plan looks to be to improve in 2021 with our eyes on 2022 and beyond. That doesn't mean every deal or signing has to help both areas. One year FA signings only address one but are perfectly fine and even logical.

I doubt Pollock is available, either. I don't think I want McCutchen or Polanco, unless we've already traded Beni.

Again, I'm not saying we shouldn't make any 2 for 1 type deals, but we seem to be in more of a rebuilding mode than a go for it all in 2021 mode, but yes, if we can make a 2 for 1 deal that helps us longer term, I'm all for it. (Most of my suggested trades on MLBTV have us giving more players than receiving.)

Also, maybe (not all CF'ers)... -43 Upton -35 Hicks -21 Pollock -18 McCutchen -18 Castellanos -14 Polanco -13 Piscotty -12 Grichuk -8 Garcia 2B: -41 Cano -25 Odor -20 Moustakas -18 Kingery SP: -49 Bumgarner -21 Cueto -19 Greinke -12 Cobb -9 Duffy -8 Roark -7 Kikuchi -4 Lyles RP -13 Familia -11 Kimbrel -11 Kelly -9 A Miller -4 Pomeranz

I thought the plan made sense, but execution was off, bigtime on 2 of the top 3 additions.

Another "what if?" What if we had just taken Verdugo and Graterol (3.41 ERA & 0.900 WHIP in 2020 plus a better post season)? What about Verdugo & Maeda (6-1 2.70 with a 0.750 WHIP)? MLB Trade Values: 46.6 Maeda 21.3 Downs 15.0 Graterol

I think the plan had merit, but they just signed the wrong "O" guys.

Yes, but not many added as much as we did through trades.

Because our roster depth (quantity) seems worse than our roster value (quality), in general. I'm not saying we should NOT make any 2 or 3 for one deals. I'd offer Chavis and Chatham for one "real" ML player, every day of the week.