Hugh2
-
Posts
4,264 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
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
2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by Hugh2
-
I wouldn't be surprised to see Swihart back in the fold by mid season behind the plate.
-
Keeping those two is big, but even know....if one or both of them bust we have no other high end talent in the system. After those two theres a drop off to Sam Travis but after him theres a massive drop off. Guys will be top ten prospects the next year or two who never would even be top 20 prospects over the last several years. How was DD's drafts in Detroit? off the top of my head they were not that great.
-
Agreed, if you're in last place you have every right to hoard prospects. If you are in first and have a loaded farm it makes sense to strengthen the big club. I'm at level excited yet concerned right now. If DD trades Devers and Groome next year I'll be at level pissed.
-
And I think many of us also understand we won't need as deep a farm for the next 2-3 years.
-
These were the same type of people who at some point wanted to trade Bogaerts, Betts, JBJ, Swihart, Barnes, Owens.
-
Well, as I said I was making up stats to prove a greater point. I think that's probably an impossible or close to impossible thing to quantify. Want 18% for 7? or maybe 37% for 2? Point is, there is real value in having a competitive team that can stay competitive for a larger number of consecutive years. Because it's not always the best team to win it all, often it is the good team that gets hot at the end of the year. FTR, I'm not against trading prospects, and I really like the Sale deal. I just dislike the overall reality of trading so much of our farm in it's totality over the last year. I personally think you need balance, I don't want to say we shouldn't ever trade our prospects and be willing to empty the farm a little, but we shouldn't go from full to empty, I'd be more comfortable with full to 1/2 full.
-
That doesn't justify a bad move by default. If we were desperate for a starter would we be justified trading Moncada, Kopech, Devers, Espinoza, and Benintendi for Rich Hill??? Thats obviously ridiculous but the point is there is a point where you've given up too much. I don't like the trade, I think we gave up too much talent for Pom. It's also not the talent, it's the ceiling we gave up too. I don't like it, do I not have a right as a fan to hate a trade? Now I'm fully aware I sit in an arm chair typing this (actually a bed) but I would have either explored a trade were I didn't give up as high end talent for Pom, or I added to Espinoza to trade for a more proven commodity. Surely pitchers have been traded at the deadline who have actually pitched one full season in the majors as a starter. At the time of the trade Pom had ZERO such seasons.
-
Well I don't have a dog, and you still run the risk of seeing your cash lose value to inflation or being stolen if you bury it in the ground. Also, again...not liking a few trades isn't analogous with hating all trades and not taking on risk. I never said all that and most have not.
-
What if you could do the same thing without mortgaging the future? Would you rather have a 25% chance of winning the world series every year for 4 years or a 20% chance of winning it every for 10? ^^^^obviously made up stats to make a point. Not saying I'm right or you're wrong, but that is how someone like me looks at it.
-
Us fans who don't plan on dying in 52 weeks have every right to be excited about this team next year and worry about the future impact of decisions made today. If you have all your money invested in J.P. Morgan wouldn't you be concerned with the long term outlook of the companies performance? We might not be shareholders as fans but we are stake holders. To each their own, but don't tell us how to root, we can care about today and tomorrow and you can care just about today. That's the beautiful thing about being a fan, you can love the team and if you want you can love everything else that comes with it from the business side to team building side to the development side. To each there own.
-
I wouldn't say we ARE going to pay because we never truly know how things will transpire but I would say that odds that we pay down the road have significantly increased.
-
I do think that catchers can have an impact on a pitchers era however I also think it's very very very hard to determine as well. Price struggled earlier in the year and turned it on as the season went on. Now was that because of Vas? or did Prices early season struggles stand alone and we shouldn't read into the small sample size? From what I've heard pitchers love throwing to Vaz and we know how great his defense is, my concern is with his bat.
-
I literally did not say that. I didn't like that move, I didn't like what we gave up, and I didn't think Pom could last the season. So far I've been right. Not liking a trade is NOT analogous with wanting to do nothing.
-
I understand why the trade was made, I don't believe in trading from desperation. Pomeranz was a career reliever starting and approaching a predictable slow down due to his innings. If you want to justify giving up a prospect as promising as Espinoza, then I would have wanted to get back a more reliable commodity.
-
Fair points. However I suspect teams know more about the guys they are trading for than we realize. As you said teams will always know more about their own guys; that's very reasonable. But teams have vast scouting departments and not only is it normal to ramp up scouting with teams you trade often with but teams will also ramp up scouting of particular players as well. They also exchange medicals as well and as we've seen with the Padres it's not smiled upon to be fraudulent about certain prospects. I think teams generally know exactly what they're buying. However I'd agree with you teams often think they are selling high, but sometimes other teams think they're buying low. Sometimes you're right and sometimes you're wrong. I think there are other times however where you don't trade a guy because there are red flags or because you're down on them but rather you realize you have to give up tremendous value to get it back. The Sox may very well think the world of Moncada and Kopech, but that's the price you pay for Chris Sale.
-
I think that's debatable. There was a lot of worry about Pomeranz ability to pitch down the stretch, and he's never proven to be a starting pitcher for a full season. Surely most are happy with the Chris Sale trade, but what if we traded Moncada, Kopech, Basabe, and Diaz for Thornburg instead? I think it's reasonable that most sensible fans would see that as a major waste of resources. I found the trade for a guy who's never proven to have the durability to be a starter in the majors a major overpay by giving up a guy who's arguably the best pitching prospect we've had in a decade, and arguably the best pitching prospect in the game. Now Pom may very well come back and prove himself and I'm optimistic he can but I don't like the trade and I suspect I will never like a trade on that scale. If I'm giving up talent where the sky is the limit, I expect similar value back. I'd feel much better about packaging Espinoza up with a few other prospect for a more reliable and proven commodity E.G. The Sale trade.
-
It's a little bit easier to project pitching prospects because you can measure velocity, you can project body types etc etc etc. It's a lot harder to predict how a batter is going to adjust to seeing advanced breaking stuff, and control until they got there. At the same time, a younger pitcher can have a lot more go wrong during their development as well if they get injured or never reign in their command. Espinoza was special, still a lot of risk but very special regardless. We could end up really regretting that trade one day.
-
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