Darren -- fair enough

Just got back from my conference. Damn I hope this report is right, but it seems like it's been quite a while with no confirmation, eh?

Also, I've been infatuated with trading Manny for longer than I've been infatuated with Brocktoon.

I don't think you have been infatuated with trading Manny. You've been infatuated with trading Manny for Lastings Milledge and multiple other stars and cash. As I see it, you've been infatuated with ponies. I'm all for trading Manny for ponies, but I've never heard a single report of a trade offer for Manny which the Red Sox turned down which I (or you) would have rather they took. Given that, I don't really know what it means to be infatuated with trading Manny.

Wait a minute, I've finally figured it out after all this pony talk. MCOA is Atrios!

You've been infatuated with trading Manny for Lastings Milledge and multiple other stars and cash. As I see it, you've been infatuated with ponies.

Well, sort of. I do think it's quite possible that other teams value Manny more highly than they should. And there are also other teams that have an open DH slot. So there are a few instances where it's not pony fantasizing to think a Manny trade could improve the Red Sox.

I'm all for trading Manny for ponies, but I've never heard a single report of a trade offer for Manny which the Red Sox turned down which I (or you) would have rather they took.

Honestly, I haven't heard any solid reports of any deals that they have turned down (or been turned down on). They're always quite vague. Some of them, the ones involving Milledge, sounded pretty good to me.

Atrios uses the pony bit all wrong. I'd rather be Yglesias, or best of all, Waring. My problem, here, is that it's been now three years of attempted Manny trades, and nothing has happened. There has been, over three years, never a report of a trade offer to the Sox that we would like. At some point, I think it becomes necessary to assume that this great return is not coming. (Also, this year, the Red Sox would pretty much have to make a revenue-neutral trade, given that wins are running at a cost of maybe $5M per in the free agent market. I think that makes a good trade even more unlikely than it was before.)

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news on Brocktoon, but according to the Globe today, no deal is in place, and Drew is seeking, um, slightly more money:

The Sox' primary target among position players remains outfielder J.D. Drew, who is believed to be seeking a deal in the four-year, $56 million range. The Cubs, who were believed to have interest in Drew, signed Alfonso Soriano and were still among the teams bidding for free agent center fielder Gary Mathews Jr., who began his professional career with the Cubs...

I still like him at 4/56, so long as they have some ideas about the bullpen that come relatively cheap. Also, I cite the following as evidence that I have been, like, so totally right about the Matsuzaka thing:

The Sox haven't been mentioned among the suitors for lefty Ted Lilly, who may be too expensive for their tastes. According to one club executive, Lilly is seeking a deal in the four-year, $40 million range..

4/40 for Lilly. I'll take Matsuzaka at $20M per, thank you, and I project 6/100 for Zito, at least.

Edes also reports that the Sox still plan to keep Papelbon in the rotation. I'm wondering, though, whether the Sox have backed themselves into a corner here, as they may soon lack both the cash or talent to acquire a new closer, and the market may not actually contain any acceptable closers anyway. At what point does Papelbon to the pen become a fait accompli, with the Sox just waiting for any excuse in spring to return him to the pen? I still cling to the somewhat silly hope that the Sox will solve the bullpen without Papelbon, and he'll become a top 10 pitcher in the AL - I can't get over my impression that he has ace quality stuff now, with the splitter. But we'll see.

"Also, this year, the Red Sox would pretty much have to make a revenue-neutral trade, given that wins are running at a cost of maybe $5M per in the free agent market. I think that makes a good trade even more unlikely than it was before."

I can't figure out what this means. Intuitively, the crazy market makes a good trade for Manny more likely, not less. What am I missing?

I'd be ok with Drew at 4/$56 too, so long as it was a David Wells-style, playing time and performance incentive-laden deal. If they could structure something like $10M for 120 games, and then an additional $1M for every 10 games or number of PAs after that, I think that could really work. Maybe another $1M or something for top 5 MVP finishes, or for every extra .010 of OBP after .390. Of course this is Boras, so I'm probably talking ponies here. I love incentive-based contracts though, and Drew seems like the perfect candidate for one. It's a way to really ensure that you're getting value for your money and compensating the player for what they do that year, rather than what they did in the past.

I don't even really care who they get in the bullpen next year. No matter who they get, there's always one or two or four guys who are just going to suck.

At what point does Papelbon to the pen become a fait accompli, with the Sox just waiting for any excuse in spring to return him to the pen?

Isn't that all rather dependant on his health? I'll admit I haven't followed the whole Papelbon thing as extensively as (I assume) most of you have, but if Theo and gang truly believe Pap can't physically handle the workload of a closer, doesn't it basically not matter whether the Sox have Timlin or Gagne or me slotted as the closer for 2007, since Pap isn't leaving the rotation? Has there been any indication to this end?

I can't figure out what this means. Intuitively, the crazy market makes a good trade for Manny more likely, not less. What am I missing?

It means the value of cash is far lower now than ever before. As such, a trade in which the Red Sox save money - say, dealing Manny for prospects - is not particularly useful because $10M only gets you Ted Lilly. A trade would then require the Red Sox to get talent in return, rahter than getting savings in return and planning to spend that savings on free agent talent.

Isn't that all rather dependant on his health? I'll admit I haven't followed the whole Papelbon thing as extensively as (I assume) most of you have, but if Theo and gang truly believe Pap can't physically handle the workload of a closer, doesn't it basically not matter whether the Sox have Timlin or Gagne or me slotted as the closer for 2007, since Pap isn't leaving the rotation? Has there been any indication to this end?

Whether a person is better suited physically to the pen or rotation seems a lot more complicated than that to me. I certianly don't agree that in general, a less durable pitcher should be in the rotation.

Yes, Papelbon's health in the big question mark in all this. But I don't think it particularly affects the question of whether Li'l Papi pitches out of the rotation or bullpen. If anything, I think that questions about his shoulder make it more likely he'll end up as the closer.

If anything, I think that questions about his shoulder make it more likely he'll end up as the closer.

I'm certainly not qualified to say that one way or another--although I can see the arguments on both sides--but haven't the Red Sox, at least publically, come to the other conclusion? To some extent, if the Sox believe Papelbon can last starting but can't closing, that's more important to how he'll be used in 2007 than whether or not it's actually true. Would they stick Pap back into the closer's spot if they really think that come September he'll be hurt again?

haven't the Red Sox, at least publically, come to the other conclusion?

I don't think so. I'll defer if there's any evidence, but I think that the Sox have publicly been saying merely that they always planned to make Papelbon a starter, and that Papelbon has always wanted to be a starter. I don't think that argument about what's best given his health have particularly entered into the discussion. It's about what's best for the Red Sox, and they think Papelbon will be a really good starting pitcher (if healthy). I tend to agree (if healthy).

I see where you're coming from now, though, and if the Red Sox have been making such arguments a central piece of their case for moving Li'l Papi to the rotation, then, ok.

I don't think so. I'll defer if there's any evidence, but I think that the Sox have publicly been saying merely that they always planned to make Papelbon a starter, and that Papelbon has always wanted to be a starter.

Well, there's lines like The Red Sox would also be in favor of keeping Papelbon at the back end of the bullpen, but, for health reasons, they've decided to convert him back to a starter. Papelbon's shoulder obviously felt the brunt of the stressful innings that come with closing. The team feels they can keep him healthier by having him on a more structured schedule. (Source) and I could cite a couple of others like that. Either I can't find or there doesn't exist a direct quote of Theo or Tito or someone saying that themselves, but the general impression I got is that the Sox feel Pap's health is best served starting

The Cubs, who were believed to have interest in Drew, signed Alfonso Soriano and were still among the teams bidding for free agent center fielder Gary Mathews Jr., who began his professional career with the Cubs...

False. He began his professional career with the Padres.

Sorry for the Cubs hijack (well, no, not really), but this would make one too many signings based on one good year for my blood. And the Cubs don't need Matthews.

From the October 1 Globe:

"Jonathan Papelbon is going to enter next spring training as a starting pitcher," Epstein said. "We talked about letting the medical issue dictate that."

Team medical personnel feel pitching every fifth day would lessen the strain on Papelbon's shoulder, Epstein said. And the rotation needs help.

That's the most direct comment I've seen. Tito alluded to it in another interview without really specifying it.

J.D. Drew, who is believed to be seeking a deal in the four-year, $56 million range.

I wonder what the basis for that belief is. I can't imagine Boras leaving money on the table. I understand GM's think (wrongly) that Soriano is a better player than Drew, but I'd be shocked if Boras was not putting together one of his 75 page reports showing how much Drew is better than Soriano.

He should probably be starting at least around 6 years, 108 million and at least see how that goes before settling for less.

I understand GM's think (wrongly) that Soriano is a better player than Drew, but I'd be shocked if Boras was not putting together one of his 75 page reports showing how much Drew is better than Soriano.

It's a market inefficiency!

And, because they are geniuses who know what market inefficiencies are and other Econ 101 terms as well, the Sox may be on the verge of signing JD Drew - at least that's what they're saying on SoSH that Buster Olney is saying on Insider. And he got the Matsuzaka scoop, so he might well have a good Sox source.

"And, because they are geniuses who know what market inefficiencies are and other Econ 101 terms as well,"

I sense much snark in you, young one.

I will hate Boras forever if he lets Drew sign for any team besides the Angels for what is essentially Gary Matthews Jr. money.

Clemens as a closer is baloney. No way he wants to do it and no way a team with any smarts asks him too. Most of his worst innings seem to be the 1st and he also seems to thrive on having a set schedule (and of course, his special arrangement depends on it).

Good news about Brocktoon: the Angels, who might have gone after him, have instead signed Matthews. Bad news about Brocktoon: the Angels paid Matthews 5/50. That's bound to up Drew's price.

I have to decide, if he's looking for 4/56, do it right now. I'd prefer 4/50, but in this market you can't afford to be choosy.

Darren is going to faint when he hears the Red Sox are inquiring about Clemens' interest in being a closer.

That's actually pretty cool.