notin

No. Rule 5 apples to players not on the 40-man roster. Options apply to players who are. It would be closer to a minor league free agent situation.

I don't think an invitation to ST is relevant. He can't be on the 40-man roster and can't be on a minor league roster without clearing waivers, regardless of ST invites. I'm not sure whether or not he can go through ST with the AAA team. But even if he can, ST is going to end and he can only play in Boston without being exposed to the waiver process. And he will get claimed. Some GM somewhere will see him out there and think "Free backup catcher with actual potential. Thank you."

And here I was laughing out loud at your signature line and assuming it was directed at me. I don't care if you take yours down or not, but if you are offended by mine, I can remove it. Mine was inspired by and a response to a700's...

I did miss that. Ooops. Sorry. Swihart would have to be removed from the 40-man and clear waivers to be sent to the minors. Certainly this is an option as well. But despite his track record and health revord recently, I'm not so sure he'd clear waivers...

And Robinson Cano

The eye test really isn't a fair way to judge players you don't see equally.

I'm more on board with Swihart and Marrero than I am with Brentz. As for Holt, the Sox only have 4 bench spots amd a 2B position undetermined. The following players are candidates: Marco Hernandez (the reported frontrunner at 2B), Holt, Leon, Brentz, Marrero and Swihart. Only Holt and Hernandez have options left. I could also certainly see a situation where Holt starts st 2B and Hernandez goes to Pawtucket. But Holt's concussion last year might lead to more precaution...

Actually both fWAR and bWAR rate Bogaerts as better than Iglesias. Your choice to use bWAR to prove Iglesias' defensive value was questioned by me, as B-R.com does not really value Iglesias' defense as much as many of Iglesias' admirers do. It's OK to be a fan of the defensive player, but really, if you'er going to look for any stat r metric that says Iglesias is a better all around SS than Bogaerts, you are going to search for a long time. That initial "asset on both sides" argument was really not nearly as convincing about anything as you seem to think it was...

I don't think you are going to want to use bWAR here, and now that you have you must acknowledge the consequenses The difference between Bogaert's defense and Iglesias' defense is only 1.5 bWAR, or less than half of the contributions Bogaerts' gave at the plate in this one year sample size. You get too caught up in the negative number for Bogerts' defense that you tried to ignore that Iglesias defense - his selling point - isn't significantly better and only 1.1 dWAR above replacement level himself. And really, over the past 3 seasons, Bogaerts has given 12.5 oWAR on offense and 0.5 dWAR. So he is also an asset of both sides as well, right? Over that same stretch, Iglesias oWAR (4.4) is actually better than his selling point dWAR (2.6), which is probably a much less impressive number than many thought Iglesias would receive defensively, and a far, far cry from Andrelton Simmons' 10.2 dWAR in that same stretch. In fact, I don't think B-R likes Iglesias' defense as much as some of Jose's fans do. It credits more dWAR over the past 3 seasons to the following shortstops: Simmons, Brandon Crawford, Francisco Lindor, Corey Seager, Troy Tulowitzki, and Trevor Story (in less than 2 seasons!!) and has the same dWAR as Elvis Andrus and Adeiny Hecheverria. And that is from the names I looked at, as B-R.com is a lot more cumbersome than fangraphs for this kind of thing...

And I didn't get him anything. ..

I was more thinking signing guys to minor league deals. Over the years, I have said a lot of things on this board and BDC and, way back when, ESPN. Not sure how many are true or my warped perception or just my own ill-conceived opinions full of foulness and black magic. But one thing I have always said that will always be absolutely true - there is no such thing as a bad minor league contract...

He has that working against him. What he has working for him is, for some reason, Dombrowski seems to like him. He's kept him through a few trading opportunities. He facilitated an ill-conceived switch to LF to keep his bat in the majors. DD might have a bit of a man-crush on Swihart. And as Swihart is out of options, it looks like (although I might be misinterpreting things here) he and fellow option-less teammates Marrero and Brentz appear to have some sort of inside track to the roster. At least we know DD hasn't done much to supplant them so far. Although soxprospects.com apparently has less faith in Swihart and Brentz than I do. (I did not know it was possible to have less faith in Brentz than I do..)

In the last 3 years, Iglesias has been worth 5.2 fWAR. Bogaerts was worth 4.9 fWAR in 2016 alone. The Sox kept the right shortstop. Although I stand by my long-held opinion they should have dealt Worthless Will Middlebrooks directly to Chicago and not even bothered with Detroit...

The argument for players and managers voting should have died completely when they awarded a Gold Glove to a player who spent the overwhelming majority of the season as a DH and played only 28 games in the field...

Using this logic, Roger Maris was clearly using steroids despite many of them not being invented and all ofthem ccompletely absent from baseball during his career. ..

I'm thinking Swihart platoons with Moreland. Not a big deal either way, but Swihart is out of options, unlike Travis. I'm not wild about the internal 2b options. But as the Sox have three of them, one of Holt, Hernandez or Marrero figures to start. It's entirely possible Holt starts the season in Pawtucket as he is the only one with an option left...

The chatter has been surprisingly quiet on Martinez, but I would be surprised if the Sox are the only suitor. I get the whole "patience" tactic, because if the Sox move on, Martinez' price could easily drop to the point where we all look back and wonder what Dombrowski was thinking. Just like with Encarnacion last year and (on the trade front) with Josh Donaldson four years ago, when Cherington was told JD wasn't available and moved on while Alex Anthopolous refused to take no for an answer and acquired Donaldson for relatively little. ..

It was always a silly answer. It was never a crime to like Holt or want him on the team. That opinion has been shared by our last two GMs. But it is always hypocritical to think a player has value to the team and think that means he doesn't have alue to anyone else for the exact same reasons. There ia a big difference between calling a poster stupid and an answer stupid. I've had numerous posts I've made called out for being stupid or inaccurate and plenty of times I've looked back and thought "Valid point. What was I thinking?" I've even called myself out, and done so as recently as the Jeff Samardzija trade proposal yesterday...

I can agree with that. However when a player's value is based on being paid as little as possible, it really does mean he should be considered tradable. ..

Not necessarily. First of all, we don't know what money Martinez will be getting. Second, he can make depth moves off the 40-man roster that don't count against the tax...

There were probably times when it was. But his value to Boston was never "MORE" than in a trade. I think it was a combination of people liking Holt when a lot of fans views trades as for undesirable players, and a lot of fans thinking his versatility was a really rare skill. To me, he looked like a guy on a BABIP-fueled hot streak at the plate that forced him into the lineup where he had to play multiple positions he had no idea how to field. But to some people, that is the definition of versatility, I guess...

It's hard to say if Belt has less power than Hanley, but he is certainly a more powerful hitter away from SF. I'm not sure Holt and Travis hold all that much value. And over the years, when I have been saying "trade Holt" and received that universal (and always stupid) answer "Holt's more valuable to Boston than he is in a trade," when the opposite was always true. (And what people meant was "He's good. You're only supposed to trade bad players.") But right now, with Holt's health situation and Pedroia's health situation, for the first time ever, Holt might actually be worth more to the Red Sox than he is in a trade...

Really if the Giants want Bradley - and they reportedly do - it's probably going to come down to them giving up prospects they don't have or taking back Hanley. If Bradley for Belt is the baseline, slight edge to the Giants. Somehow they are going to have to sweeten their offer, or help out Boston. Or settle for Billy Hamilton. I think a reliever or a prospect back from SF evens the deal better, especially with Belt's health history..

Especially since pitchers and catchers report in only 45 days...

I'm talking about addressing even small needs like minor league depth for starting pitching or relievers. Or a bench bat. Or a stopgap 2B. Or any other need this team might have. Twelve weeks and so far he has gotten us Esteban Quiroz and Mike Olt. I get why he hasn't brought JD Martinez or Jake Arrieta or whoever is on his radar. But I don't get why in 12 weeks has has only gotten Esteban Quiroz and Mike Olt. Especially since there is a really good chance both of them are completely worthless...