Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Sox Therapy > Discussion
Sox Therapy
— Where Thinking Red Sox Fans Obsess about the Sox

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. The Yankee Clapper Posted: October 29, 2021 at 07:15 PM (#6049973)
Should be a big fine when Commissioner Manfred eventually realizes you’ve traded Bryan Bello twice. Way back in the George Allen era, the Redskins did that with a draft choice, but that was in the paper & pencil days, long before computers, so the fine should be higher now.
   2. Nasty Nate Posted: November 01, 2021 at 09:57 AM (#6050484)
Cool post. As you allude to, it's tough to propose hypothetical trades without people being overly critical.

The Matt Olson idea is intriguing. I know it's sometimes distasteful (or something) when fans of high-spending teams just assume good players on other teams are just available. But the fact of the matter is that lower-spending teams trade guys like Olson at this stage of their careers.
   3. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: November 01, 2021 at 10:26 AM (#6050488)
The Royals already have an heir for Salvy - MJ Melendez - he led all the minors in HR and I'm not sure what they're going to do with him next year with Salvy signed long term. They're also not trading Whit Merrifield, they're going to be in "let's win now" mode.

I can see Cleveland dealing Ramirez, and it will probably be for less than that, they always seem to do a move trade that has everyone scratching their heads, but it works out for them.
   4. Jose is Absurdly Correct but not Helpful Posted: November 01, 2021 at 10:35 AM (#6050490)
Thanks for the info RR. What do you think the Royals would want for Merrifield?

Cool post. As you allude to, it's tough to propose hypothetical trades without people being overly critical.


Thanks. I'd rather get mocked than just say "hey the Sox should get these really good players." Like so many things the devil is in the details and while getting Olson for example is a great idea the question becomes what do you give up?
   5. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: November 01, 2021 at 11:21 AM (#6050498)

Thanks for the info RR. What do you think the Royals would want for Merrifield?


They're in "win now" mode. They're not trading him.

I also appreciate these articles, its easy to say "we should trade for this guy", it's harder to say "we should give up these guys to get this guy" and have it not just be three bums you don't want anymore.
   6. Nasty Nate Posted: November 01, 2021 at 11:35 AM (#6050505)
Red Sox Get: P Jon Gray
Rockies Get: IF Jeter Downs, a minor league pitcher

Gray has only 1 more year before free agency, so maybe he's available?
   7. Jose is Absurdly Correct but not Helpful Posted: November 01, 2021 at 11:41 AM (#6050506)
I thought about Gray, couldn't make it work in my mind. I think you might have something there though.
   8. villageidiom Posted: November 01, 2021 at 01:41 PM (#6050534)
These trade proposals are interesting and all, but I fail to see how any of this provides answers to the incredibly urgent questions about the state of cancel culture.
   9. Darren Posted: November 01, 2021 at 11:05 PM (#6050645)
I don't think I'd give up anything for Gray.
   10. villageidiom Posted: November 01, 2021 at 11:49 PM (#6050651)
When did Keith Hernandez and Clyde Frazier take over Darren's account?
   11. Nasty Nate Posted: November 02, 2021 at 08:31 AM (#6050664)
I don't think I'd give up anything for Gray.
Is it because he actually is a free agent this off-season? I agree that is a good reason to not give anything to the Rockies for him.
   12. Rally Posted: November 02, 2021 at 08:54 AM (#6050667)
Should be a big fine when Commissioner Manfred eventually realizes you’ve traded Bryan Bello twice. Way back in the George Allen era, the Redskins did that with a draft choice, but that was in the paper & pencil days, long before computers, so the fine should be higher now.


About 5 years ago they traded Luis A. Basabe in two separate deals.
   13. Jose is Absurdly Correct but not Helpful Posted: November 02, 2021 at 09:04 AM (#6050670)
As I recall the one that went to the Diamondbacks for Ziegler was the "wrong" one. The DBack GM was confused as to which one to ask for and asked for the wrong one.
   14. Darren Posted: November 02, 2021 at 09:24 AM (#6050673)
Is it because he actually is a free agent this off-season? I agree that is a good reason to not give anything to the Rockies for him.


Yes, I'm old fashioned that way.
   15. Nasty Nate Posted: November 02, 2021 at 09:28 AM (#6050674)
Trading for free agents is the new market inefficiency
   16. Darren Posted: November 02, 2021 at 11:58 AM (#6050698)
The A's do appear to be in a bit of a tear-down mode, so who else might be available there? Chapman seems almost untouchable or at least too costly in terms of return for the Sox taste. Laureano is about to start costing actual money and could fill CF, moving Hernandez back to a super-utility role. Taking on Andrus's contract might help you get something else, but a poor fielding shortstop is the complete opposite of what this team needs.


I guess, in general, I've had a hard time even considering substantial trades because a) the Sox, like many teams, seem very intent on protecting their prospects of value; and b) everything that the Sox really need is available in free agency. If they want to go big at 1B, there's Freeman, Rizzo, or Belt. Or, as I'd prefer, if they are looking to sure up their defense by getting a good SS, there are a ton of those: Correa, Seager, Semien, Story, Baez, Simmons, etc. In terms of pitching, there are 4 HOFs available, a bunch of good starters that could slot well at #2 or #3, and health-related flyers like Syndergaard. Throw in some other wildcards like Taylor and Schwarber, and it's all out there for the getting.

The one place of need that I don't really see a lot of good free agent options is catcher. I'm not sure what they could acquire for some combination of Dalbec and some of the non-top prospects, though.
   17. Darren Posted: November 02, 2021 at 12:16 PM (#6050705)
I'm really intrigued by what Jose Ramirez would be worth. My immediate reaction to the package above is NO WAY! but that has more to do with emotional attachment to homegrown guys than logic. I also can't imagine that the Red Sox would want to undo pretty much all the work they've done rebuilding the farm system to get a (great) player for 2 years.

But all that aside, what does a player like Ramirez cost in a trade? The most recent comps would be Mookie and Lindor. But both those guys were only signed for 1 year at close to market price. I think you'd have to go back to maybe Miguel Cabrera, who dragged along Dontrelle Willis's contract and still netted a top 10 prospect, a newly graduated top 10 prospect, and other interesting pieces. And prospects have become even more valuable since then! All of this makes me think there's very little chance that someone out there has enough, and is willing to part with it, for Ramirez. Perhaps after 2022.

   18. Moses Taylor loves a good maim Posted: November 02, 2021 at 12:39 PM (#6050711)
The one place of need that I don't really see a lot of good free agent options is catcher. I'm not sure what they could acquire for some combination of Dalbec and some of the non-top prospects, though.

If the Cubs don't extend Contreras, I expect they'll trade him. Hell, I could be convinced they should trade him no matter what. Only 1 year of control, so whatever he's traded for will feel underwhelming for Cubs fans.
   19. Jose is Absurdly Correct but not Helpful Posted: November 02, 2021 at 01:08 PM (#6050721)
I'm really intrigued by what Jose Ramirez would be worth.


So am I my friend, so am I.
   20. John DiFool2 Posted: November 02, 2021 at 01:16 PM (#6050722)
I'm not sure what's so spectacular about JR anyway. He's coming off a .266/.355/.538 season, he's slightly above average with the glove, and he'll be 29. He may not ever see 6 WAR again. Best players on his thru age 28 comp list are Sheff and Rolen, but he can't hit like the former nor field like the latter; about half had pretty disappointing 2nd halves of their careers, despite Longoria having a shot at winning Comeback PotY.
   21. Darren Posted: November 02, 2021 at 01:38 PM (#6050725)
If the Cubs don't extend Contreras, I expect they'll trade him. Hell, I could be convinced they should trade him no matter what. Only 1 year of control, so whatever he's traded for will feel underwhelming for Cubs fans.


That's interesting. However, the catch is that for one year, I think the Sox are ok with staying with Vazquez and co.
   22. Darren Posted: November 02, 2021 at 01:46 PM (#6050727)
I'm not sure what's so spectacular about JR anyway. He's coming off a .266/.355/.538 season, he's slightly above average with the glove, and he'll be 29. He may not ever see 6 WAR again.


That line plus his defense added up to 6.7 bWAR and 6.3 fWAR. By Steamer, he's projected for 5.7 WAR next year, which is tied for 5th among hitters, and I would guess that ZIPS and other systems see him similarly. His options are for $11 million (2022) and $13 million (2023). WAR and projections are not the end-all, be-all, but that's the argument for his value.

Edit: with that said, Fangraphs put him at #26 on their trade value list, so maybe he's gettable with anyone in that range.
   23. Nasty Nate Posted: November 02, 2021 at 01:48 PM (#6050728)
I'm not sure what's so spectacular about JR anyway. He's coming off a .266/.355/.538 season, he's slightly above average with the glove, and he'll be 29. He may not ever see 6 WAR again. Best players on his thru age 28 comp list are Sheff and Rolen, but he can't hit like the former nor field like the latter; about half had pretty disappointing 2nd halves of their careers, despite Longoria having a shot at winning Comeback PotY.
I don't really understand this post. You list a bunch of reasons why he is great, sprinkle in a couple non-sequiturs, and then conclude he is not great.

Either way, I don't think he's a trade target this offseason for the Red Sox even if Cleveland puts him on the market.
   24. Darren Posted: November 02, 2021 at 02:43 PM (#6050731)
don't really understand this post. You list a bunch of reasons why he is great, sprinkle in a couple non-sequiturs, and then conclude he is not great.


It reminds me of Youkilis a little. If you looked at his skills separately, they weren't Earth-shattering. But add it all up and it's a great player.
   25. Darren Posted: November 04, 2021 at 12:56 PM (#6051245)
I'm really intrigued by what Jose Ramirez would be worth.



So am I my friend, so am I.


As you can see, I've basically concluded that Jose Ramirez is priceless. :)
   26. Darren Posted: November 04, 2021 at 01:19 PM (#6051251)
Also, you call those dumb trades? I'll show you some dumb trades:

Red Sox Get: Juan Soto
Nats Get: Devers, Verdugo, Duran

Red Sox Get: Pete Alonso, Jeff McNeil
Mets Get: Devers, Dalbec

Red Sox Get: Eric Hosmer, Campusano
SD Gets: Dalbec, Wong, Ward?

   27. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: November 05, 2021 at 01:00 PM (#6051424)

Red Sox Get: Eric Hosmer, Campusano
SD Gets: Dalbec, Wong, Ward?


Ew. Is Campusaro enough of a prospect to take on Hosmer? I would much rather the Sox keep Dalbec and hope he improves than get Hosmer and hope he isn't the massive waste of $$ he is.
   28. Darren Posted: November 06, 2021 at 09:40 AM (#6051540)
I said it was dumb!

Campusano is like top 5 by some rankings. Hosmer could be useful as a platoon 1b.

I said it was dumb!
   29. Jose is Absurdly Correct but not Helpful Posted: November 06, 2021 at 10:10 AM (#6051542)
Darren is stupid!

OK he's not really, just wanted to pile on. Campusano isn't coming here but that framework (stud young player + bad contract) is a way for the Sox to leverage their financial position.

- Schwahbah officially declined his option.

- Tim Locastro signed as a fourth outfielder. Good defense/speed guy. Nice pick up who fits the roster well.
   30. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: November 06, 2021 at 02:27 PM (#6051581)
If the Red Sox trade Devers within the next 5 years I will conclude that Chaim Bloom (or whoever is in charge at the time) has taken a handful of crazy pills while being clubbed over the head with a stupid stick.
   31. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: November 09, 2021 at 09:48 AM (#6052036)

If the Red Sox trade Devers within the next 5 years I will conclude that Chaim Bloom (or whoever is in charge at the time) has taken a handful of crazy pills while being clubbed over the head with a stupid stick.


Devers is the line too far? What if the Sox decide to go big and sign some really expensive FA pitchers and the team decides it JUST CANT carry the burden of going over the tax threshold too many years in a row and they decide to trade Betts Devers to free themselves of the terrible tax burden their recent and completely foreseeable decisions have left them with?
   32. Jose is Absurdly Correct but not Helpful Posted: November 09, 2021 at 10:24 AM (#6052044)
Or what if they build a consistent contender, win a World Series every few years and regularly have one of the highest payrolls in baseball? What then?
   33. Nasty Nate Posted: November 09, 2021 at 10:29 AM (#6052046)
Or what if they build a consistent contender, win a World Series every few years and regularly have one of the highest payrolls in baseball? What then?
Not enough information. In this scenario, did they sell bricks with people's names on them?
   34. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: November 09, 2021 at 12:46 PM (#6052085)
What if the Sox decide to go big and sign some really expensive FA pitchers and the team decides it JUST CANT carry the burden of going over the tax threshold too many years in a row
That's not "going big". "Going big" is signing expensive FA pitchers and keeping Devers.


edit...and Devers is cheap right now. Even if he wasn't, even if they sign him to a 10 year deal, he should stay. He isn't anchored to 3b. He can play 1B. He can DH 40 games a year. I don't care, as long as he's batting near the top of the order for the immediate future.
   35. Darren Posted: November 09, 2021 at 01:41 PM (#6052096)
Devers is the line too far? What if the Sox decide to go big and sign some really expensive FA pitchers and the team decides it JUST CANT carry the burden of going over the tax threshold too many years in a row and they decide to trade Betts Devers to free themselves of the terrible tax burden their recent and completely foreseeable decisions have left them with?


That would be a bad idea. I would not endorse it. :)

However, the Red Sox payroll has very little on it for 2023 and beyond. So little, in fact, that even if they went really big in 2022, and went over whatever the tax limit is, they would likely be able get back under it in 2023.

Or what if they build a consistent contender, win a World Series every few years and regularly have one of the highest payrolls in baseball? What then?


I feel like we switched sides over the past 2 years! I agree with you that we really shouldn't ask more of the team than being near or at the top in payroll every year. However, when they dealt Mookie and Price, they pretty clearly sold it as dipping back under the limit so they could reset. Now, they seem to be treating the limit as their upper limit, which is not cool.
   36. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: November 10, 2021 at 11:57 AM (#6052245)

I feel like we switched sides over the past 2 years! I agree with you that we really shouldn't ask more of the team than being near or at the top in payroll every year. However, when they dealt Mookie and Price, they pretty clearly sold it as dipping back under the limit so they could reset. Now, they seem to be treating the limit as their upper limit, which is not cool.


I really don't care what they set their limit at, as long as they don't trade good players to get rid of bad contracts.
   37. Nasty Nate Posted: November 10, 2021 at 12:04 PM (#6052249)
I really don't care what they set their limit at, as long as they don't trade good players to get rid of bad contracts.


Counterpoint - the Punto trade
   38. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: November 10, 2021 at 01:14 PM (#6052281)
Counterpoint - the Punto trade


Fair point, I should clarify to state I don't like trading good, cheap, players (and yes, I will argue that for whatever Betts made in arbitration, one year of him is cheap) as incentive for other teams to take back 'bad' contracts.

Gonzalez would have been a nice piece to have at 1B, but considering his rather large contract, I was fully on board with resetting the team by getting rid of Crawford and Beckett (to a much lesser extent). I have repeatedly said I would have been fine with the Sox trading JD Martinez, understanding that some times big pieces with big anchors need to move.

   39. Captain Joe Bivens, Pointless and Wonderful Posted: November 10, 2021 at 01:32 PM (#6052291)
I think JD is a steal at 19M.
   40. Darren Posted: November 10, 2021 at 03:41 PM (#6052331)
Fair point, I should clarify to state I don't like trading good, cheap, players (and yes, I will argue that for whatever Betts made in arbitration, one year of him is cheap) as incentive for other teams to take back 'bad' contracts.


Not to split hairs, here, but I felt like Price at 3/$48 million was pretty much market value. YMMV though.
   41. Jose is Absurdly Correct but not Helpful Posted: November 11, 2021 at 08:22 AM (#6052472)
Dumb trades aside I'm starting to think the Sox are going to do something big this winter. There have been enough articles in the paper recently that makes me think someone is planting stories to feel out the public sentiment.
   42. Nasty Nate Posted: November 11, 2021 at 09:05 AM (#6052477)
...makes me think someone is planting stories...
I knew that Larry Lucchino "retirement" was a smokescreen!
   43. Jose is Absurdly Correct but not Helpful Posted: November 11, 2021 at 09:08 AM (#6052479)
Wait until you see the hatchet piece on Tim Hyers that the Globe is prepping.
   44. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: November 11, 2021 at 10:35 AM (#6052493)

Not to split hairs, here, but I felt like Price at 3/$48 million was pretty much market value. YMMV though.


Sure, 3/$48 is pretty reasonable, except Price was on a 3/$92 contract with the Sox. Even after the trade the Sox were on the hook for 3/$48.
   45. Darren Posted: November 11, 2021 at 02:24 PM (#6052537)
What I'm saying is that they didn't use Mookie to get rid of a bad contract. The portion of the contract they got rid of was a market value contract.
   46. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: November 12, 2021 at 10:02 AM (#6052651)
What I'm saying is that they didn't use Mookie to get rid of a bad contract. The portion of the contract they got rid of was a market value contract.


Do you think Price - at 3/48 - was a positive, negative, or neutral in that trade? Do you see it as Betts for Verdugo/Downs/Wong and Price was tossed in as a net zero add?
   47. Darren Posted: November 12, 2021 at 11:42 AM (#6052672)
When I wrote the above, I was thinking 3/48 was about market value, so a small positive (a player on a fair contract has some value).

There was some discussion at the time that he was worth more like 3/30, but I disagreed with that. Again, YMMV.

Edit: I should add that from the outside, we are going to have a very hard time determining how the Red Sox and Dodgers saw it, since they had access to his medical records and we didn't.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Backlasher
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.4586 seconds
34 querie(s) executed