Hugh2

There was a chance Bogaerts would flop and be the next Lars Anderson. Betts could of flopped, and almost all of humanity gave up on JBJ...heck! Porcello never pitched much more than average until he was 27. Every prospect has a bust factor until they are in the big leagues, performing, putting up numbers, and officially not a bust.

That's fine, but what happens when we need it in 5-6 years from now? Whatever position you will need to fill in 2020 (just picking a year to make a point) you'd need to have that talent in your system between 2015-2018 unless you go outside the system. It takes 3-5 years to develop talent, so if we aren't getting that talent over the next couple of years we will HAVE to go outside the organization and pay FA prices. Now we will have all the money in the world by 2021, but I also suspect some people will be signed from here to there and presumably some will be big money extensions to our superstars. We could always draft a gem in the 2nd or 5th rounds, but at this point luck is just as relevant if not more than skill when drafting stars there.

If you name he who must not be named by name the death eaters might come for you.

In hindsight, Guerra has taken a HUGE step back, while Asuaje went from being a throw in to a guy who looks like he was a bright MLB future. I think within reasonable certainty you can project the high end prospects to definitely be MLB players the question is in what capacity. I could easily see Moncada being a good player but not a perennial all star, I can see Kopech never fully putting it together but being a late inning reliever with that arm.

The problem here is that we don't know about the guys who are coming in due to guys leaving. Sometimes a CFO is really great because he has a great controller, so for all we know many of the guys getting promotions could be the real brains of the operations and the Sox could benefit from hiring from within. This isn't a guess or an assumption, just a plausibility. Is plausibility a word? I know plausible is....I'm making it one if it isn't.

I'm not sure the rotation will be that much better, even with Sale. It's kind of hard to not assume they will be better and I believe they will. You added Sale, Price might not struggle out of the gate too and ERod could take a step back. However, Porcello could regress to something inbetween 2016 and 2015 and you might not get the same performance out of Wright that you did. Still it's hard to argue against the improved rotation. I do think the defense will be better, and I do think relief pitching will be better as well. Overall better and more well balanced team.

I think we should keep our expectations very low of what we will get back.

What about 13 Clay Buccholzs??? 175 tied up in the pitching staff? Which after the most dominant 6 weeks in baseball history all go on the DL. Your team as a whole is over the luxury tax and all the pitchers are on the DL forcing Trey Ball to the top of the rotation

The Red Sox will trade Buccholz for salary relief as he is redundant. If the Sox have to kick in a significant portion of his 13.5 million I suspect they will look for something they need in return like a platoon corner infielder who can hit LHP. If they get zero salary relief and/or nothing of value back they will keep him as a swing man. It's simple

People need to get over the fact that the prospect package could return more value to Chicago. Of course it does!!!! That's how trades work. You would not invest $10 in the stock market to MAYBE get $10 back in the future. There is an element of risk, so potential future value must be higher to make a trade even. Even if you knew with 100% certainty Sale would give you 20 WAR and Moncada would give 30 WAR (money aside) even then that WAR today is worth more, think of the same concept as TVM. Still, despite all that, I hated the Pom Pom trade and always will. But the Kimbrel, Sale trades are justifiable and make sense. I think I like the Thornburg trade too.

Yup, I think Swihart dropped in a lot of peoples minds much more than his actual value and talent did and I really hope he has a good break out season too. I think people are forgetting how good this lineup can be even without Ortiz, we took a step back this off season but not a big one. The pitching took a much more larger leap forward. I expect a slightly better overall team in 2017 that is better balanced.

I agree with this 100% which is why I said the Sox are negotiating from a position of weakness, because they don't have to trade him. They can walk away from the bargaining table. That was my main gripe, Clay could be useful as you said but so could getting under the luxury tax. I've moved on from Clay more than once, but it does seem a little less worrisome when the success of the Sox pitching relies on about a dozen other guys before him. He's a costly depth option that may be useful or he could be traded if a team bites.

didn't the Yankees start playing better after Arod retired, they traded away their veterans and the younger guys started to play better? Kind of reminds me of the end to our 2015 season, although I think the Yankees are still another year off from seriously contending.

Don't be surprised to see Swihart back with the Sox early in 2017.

They don't have to find a team to eat the whole contract, they could easily kick in 3-6 million. They also have other avenues for getting under the luxury tax. The Sox have gone over the limit before, they just don't like to live there like NYY or the LAD, they can easily reset next year. I still think they try to get under this year but even if they don't they are at no risk of losing a draft pick because they aren't that far over.

Possibly, an expensive one at that but you never know what you'll get out of Clay. He could give us one real good half and help this team out, but if the opportunity presents itself I think they trade him or will at least try to.

I also doubt they knew with 100% certainty they would land Chris Sale, perhaps they would have acted differently otherwise? 13.5 is peanuts now-a-days. I'm not sure what Harmony meant when he said we aren't negotiating from a position of strength. We aren't negotiating from a position of weakness either!!! We don't HAVE to trade Clay Buchholz, the Red Sox aren't going to go out of business or bankrupt if they don't trade Clay and for how much in demand pitching is now I think we could easily find another team who would take a waiver one 1 year of Clay, especially if we kicked in a few million.

This is what I was thinking, especially with the return you can get on relief pitching. Teams are even starting to draft pitchers and stick them into relief roles immediately

These is a very ignorant comment. You can have the best scouts in the world and do ok, but the CBA agreements of now and the one that took place after 2011 have seriously hurt the Sox in drafting talent. They don't have money to throw around in later rounds, and they no longer have the same avenues for bringing in international talent. Good scouting is very important, and with these retraints its as important as ever. But it is a problem, it's not an EASY thing to scout and bring in future MLB star power when you are picking in the back end of the first round and/or losing your draft picks. Those are very real concerns going forward.

Exactly, and some of these guys will be extended as well.

I don't see losing Pom Kimbrel and kelly as a big deal. Pom could arguably be the odd man out of the rotation this year if Erod takes a step forward. Kelly has never been of value to this team so if he is good in the pen going forward GREAT, and if anything we could probably trade him to restock the farm. Kimbrel could sting a little bit but this team is loading up arms. You lose guys every year, every team losses guys every year so I don't see losing those guys as a huge deal and if anything we could have something better replacing them.

Kopech could come back to bite us in the ass, but theres also a good chance he winds up in the bullpen. He'll be good there, but I think it's more probable that he becomes one of the best closers in baseball than an ACE. I think he's more likely to become the next chapman than the next Syndergaad. I still hate the Pomeranz trade. Sale is gone in 3 years, so is Porcello, and Price could opt out. Pomeranz didn't help us last year down the stretch and we may have bought high on him. He's still yet to have ever pitch a full year healthy in a MLB rotation. Seeing how he didn't help us, and Sale makes him expendable now I really wish we didn't give up one of the best young pitching prospects in the game for him.

I don't think Holt is a long term solution at 3B but I think the Sox would have no problem sticking him there in a pinch if Pablo went on the D.L. or he was so terrible they had to bench him. I could see them trading for a guy if they have too, but they'll stick Holt there in the meantime.

The only trade I really have a problem with in hindsight is the Pomeranz trade. We traded Moncada and Kopech but the return was a strong addition which could lead to the best rotation in baseball. The Margot, Guerra, Asuaje, Allen trade hurt a little but Margot was redundant and our outfield is fine in Betts/JBJ/Benintendi for years to come. Guerra looks to have been sold high on but Asuaje has taken a huge step forward but we gained a dominant late inning relief arm. I don't think we gave up anything that will come back to bite us in the ass for the Thornburg trade, none of those guys have high ceilings and I think we sold high on all of them. Yes we traded away a ton of chips but we got back so much more elite proven talent. We don't need those prospects because this team is set for the next 3 years. The top guys we still have in our system are in the only areas that may have openings in a couple years in Devers at 3B, Sam Travis at 1B (one sooner than the other). The Pomeranz trade still irks me, you traded away a potential ace for a guy to help you down the stretch but I was skeptical from day one he could because of his innings. Turns out I was right, not because I'm brilliant but because that seems to be a very predictive and re-occurring theme in the game of baseball. What DD didn't do was trade away Devers, Travis, Groome, Swihart, JBJ, Betts, Bogaerts, and Benintendi. Lets also not forget that by the time guys like Groome and Devers are in the majors and under team control the Sox will likely extended at least some one or two of Bogaerts, Betts, JBJ. So this "window" we talk about might be closer to 5-6 years than the 3 we are saying now.

I agree, jackflap almost always has good points and I've used the bird in hand reference in the past as well. Hypothetically if every prospect develops the team trading for prospects should win the trade every single time. If you're trading Chris Sale for a guy who has a 50% chance of being Chris Sale then you need to trade at least two of those prospects to get him. As a finance guy, I also see a similar concept to time value of money at work here. If you were trading Chris Sale for a guy you knew with 100% certainty was going to be the next Chris Sale then all things being equal you'd still have to get a little premium on your return because you're trading now for then.