The Red Sox 2009-2010 Offseason Discussion Thread in The Archives Forum

0 Points

The Red Sox 2009-2010 Offseason Discussion Thread

Author	Comment
Nolson20		#941	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 320 11/19/09 2:09 AM	WillyCoPapi3 wrote: I'm amazed at how many people "don't see Mauer hitting free agency." I understand why people think he might not, but seeing as how he'd be getting paid out the ass if he hit FA I'd venture to guess it's far from a foregone conclusion that he'll re-up with the Twins before next offseason. Oh, and I think getting one of Halladay/Lackey is almost as important as the Red Sox getting one of Holliday/Bay. There really aren't many plausible ways for the team to significantly upgrade it's offense this offseason, so I'd like to see them try and put together the best rotation in baseball for next year and the foreseeable future...which getting one of Halladay/Lackey would ensure. I think Mauer is a different guy. He isn't a Boras client and is a Minnesota kid. The Twins will throw big bucks his way and although it won't be as much as the Yanks or Sox I don't see him leaving Minnesota if they don't completely low ball him.
Interact My Recent Posts
WillyCoPapi3		#942	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 3929 11/19/09 2:57 AM Veteran Member	Hence why I said I understand the logic behind thinking Mauer might re-sign. However, I think it's far from the certainty that a lot of people (not necessarily on this board) have been claiming it to be. Why would we ever PH for Varitek? I mean, what if we PH for him, and it goes to extras, and vic martinez gets eaten by dinosaurs? We'd have to use the emergency catcher. -FenwayTheHardWay
Interact My Recent Posts
Guidas		#943	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 81 11/19/09 10:54 AM	Sibby Sisti wrote: Guidas wrote: A couple quick points on all of this. 1. If the Sox lose a few picks by signing Lackey and another free agent, don't they gain one if Bay is not signed? In response to your question #1. No, they do not get a pick if Bay is not signed, only if he IS signed. Sox lose a first round pick to Anaheim by signing Lackey. Since they only have one first round pick, that is all they can lose. If they sign another Type "A" FA they lose a second round pick. They acquire a first round pick from the team that signs Bay. Oops - my bad. I meant "Not signed by Boston" - in other words if someone else signs him, Sox get a draft pick, so if Sox sign Lackey and Holliday, they at least get one first round pick back from Bay being signed by another team.
Interact My Recent Posts
jdb		#944	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 266 11/19/09 11:01 AM	I could also see Ellsbury be the center piece of a Halladay deal. Im not sure what else it would take but he would take Buch, Kelly and Westmoreland off the table. Maybe Bowden, Navvaro and one of Stolmy or Doubront? That would give them a regular CF with All Star potential and a back end of the rotation guy for this season and a couple of pretty good prospects for the future. Of course losing Ellsbury wouldnt only leave a huge hole in CF but also leadoff. I would love to get Cameron to play CF but leadoff would get harder to fill if we didnt go after Figgens. Say we did that trade and got Figgens I think you could kiss the Bay or Holliday LF option good bye. It would just be too much payroll in my mind adding Halladay and his salary and extension, plus Figgens and Cameron and their 10 million a year. LF could be a platoon of Hermida and Willingham if the Nats would be interested in a package of a Kalish or Reddick. You have to ask yourself if taking a bat like Bay or Holliday out of the lineup is worth having Halladay pitching every 5th day. I also like Yunel at SS but would pass on Drew. If we could get a 28 year old SS that has some good seasons under his belt for Bard like Buffs suggested you have to do it.
Interact My Recent Posts
AMarshal2		#945	[url]	[-]
Posts: 9021 11/19/09 11:21 AM	Sibby Sisti wrote: Guidas wrote: A couple quick points on all of this. 1. If the Sox lose a few picks by signing Lackey and another free agent, don't they gain one if Bay is not signed? 2. As much as Beltre would be an upgrade defensively, my guess is that Lowell will be a 0 UZR at worst next year (unless he re-injures the hip) given that the 3 year average includes last years truly substandard mobility, and that all sources indicate his lateral movement will improve with the continued rehab/healing. That and he'll be in his walk year, so there evidence that there could be an appreciable increase in his offensive output as well. 3. If the Sox can get Roy Halladay, I would be more than glad to build a deal around Casey Kelly if Toronto would go for it. He prob reaches the majors best-case sometime in 2011 and more likely full time (i.e. 180 innings or more worth) in 2012. By then the Sox, with their resources should be able to find a #2-3, which seems to be his best case projection according to info posted earlier on this site. 4. Btw, my Doomsday scenario is Halladay, Bay and Granderson to the Yankees. If I were Theo I would do anything to prevent the first one. As much as I could to stop the second, and live with the 3rd. In response to your question #1. No, they do not get a pick if Bay is not signed, only if he IS signed. Sox lose a first round pick to Anaheim by signing Lackey. Since they only have one first round pick, that is all they can lose. If they sign another Type "A" FA they lose a second round pick. They acquire a first round pick from the team that signs Bay. He was absolutely correct. If the Red Sox do not sign Bay and instead sign one Type A FA (e.g. Holliday, Lackey) they net 1 more early pick by adding 2 as Bay compensation (1st supplemental and the team's 1st or 2nd round pick) and losing 1 for signing the Type A FA (their 1st). The chances are near zero that Bay does not sign that with another team before the ASB next year, so that's not a scenario that needs to be nitpicked. aminahyaquin: Alou is a 37 year old 7 time MVP with a .347 lifetime batting average and a world of hustle. he can golden glove field in his sleep. tGG: Alou is actually 42, has never won an MVP, has a .303 lifetime batting average, and is mediocre at best in the field. joshv02: But, other than that, you're wrong. Last Edited By: AMarshal2 11/19/09 11:24 AM. Edited 1 time.
Interact My Recent Posts
Guidas		#946	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 82 11/19/09 11:53 AM	Another random observation from the Callis chat yesterday: Nick (Washington Dc) Hi Jim, love your work. Can you give a quick 2-3 sentence scouting report of Stolmy Pimentel? Other than having a great name, what's to like? Jim Callis (2:41 PM) 19-year-old righthander, advanced beyond his years. Fastball, curveball, changeup all show potential to be solid or better.
Interact My Recent Posts
BB HBP HURT		#947	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 109 11/19/09 12:14 PM	Don't know if this has been mentioned or is even newsworthy, Jacoby Ellsbury changing his number from 46 to 2. "If a frog had wings, he would'nt bump his booty" Former Red Sox Manager Jimy Williams
Interact My Recent Posts
Yirmiyahu		#948	[url]	[-]
Posts: 605 11/19/09 12:16 PM Forum Moderator	jdb wrote: I could also see Ellsbury be the center piece of a Halladay deal. Im not sure what else it would take but he would take Buch, Kelly and Westmoreland off the table. Maybe Bowden, Navvaro and one of Stolmy or Doubront? That would give them a regular CF with All Star potential and a back end of the rotation guy for this season and a couple of pretty good prospects for the future. Of course losing Ellsbury wouldnt only leave a huge hole in CF but also leadoff. I would love to get Cameron to play CF but leadoff would get harder to fill if we didnt go after Figgens. Say we did that trade and got Figgens I think you could kiss the Bay or Holliday LF option good bye. It would just be too much payroll in my mind adding Halladay and his salary and extension, plus Figgens and Cameron and their 10 million a year. LF could be a platoon of Hermida and Willingham if the Nats would be interested in a package of a Kalish or Reddick. You have to ask yourself if taking a bat like Bay or Holliday out of the lineup is worth having Halladay pitching every 5th day. I don't think it's necessarily economically unreasonable to trade Ellsbury, extend Halladay, sign Bay/Holliday, sign Figgins/Beltre for third base, and acquire Granderson/Cameron/Byrd as a centerfield replacement. The Sox payroll has been in decline for 3 straight years, and Epstein has discussed significantly raising the payroll to the point that the $170 million luxury tax threshold may be a consideration. Also consider that the dead weight of Varitek/Ortiz/Lowell/Lugo ($37.75 million) comes off the books after 2010, as well as V-Mart and Beckett ($19.8 million) if they're not re-signed. jdb wrote: I also like Yunel at SS but would pass on Drew. If we could get a 28 year old SS that has some good seasons under his belt for Bard like Buffs suggested you have to do it. I would pass on Drew too. I know some people, including Buffs (whose opinion I value), have mentioned Drew as a possible SS solution. I just don't understand the appeal. He's got a career UZR/150 of -7.8 (even worse than Hanley Ramirez), and a career line of .253/.302/.407/.710 away from Chase Field, one of the most hitter-friendly parks in baseball (2nd behind Coors Field in both 2008 and 2009). Meanwhile, he's a left-handed pull hitter who probably wouldn't benefit too much from Fenway's dimensions. Fangraphs doesn't think too highly of him either, rating him 26th in WAR/RAR among shortstops over the past 3 years (despite his 1877 PA's over that period of time). So serious question: can someone explain the appeal to me?
Interact My Recent Posts
Nexus		#949	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 317 11/19/09 1:00 PM	Yirmiyahu wrote: I don't think it's necessarily economically unreasonable to trade Ellsbury, extend Halladay, sign Bay/Holliday, sign Figgins/Beltre for third base, and acquire Granderson/Cameron/Byrd as a centerfield replacement. The Sox payroll has been in decline for 3 straight years, and Epstein has discussed significantly raising the payroll to the point that the $170 million luxury tax threshold may be a consideration. Also consider that the dead weight of Varitek/Ortiz/Lowell/Lugo ($37.75 million) comes off the books after 2010, as well as V-Mart and Beckett ($19.8 million) if they're not re-signed. If I'm not mistaken, I believe perks, incentives/awards, and any other player benefits are a part of the fiscal payroll. If Theo is serious about approaching the tax threshold, I'd take a guess that would mean $160M dedicated to just player salaries. I am going to take another guess and say $20+ million will be allocated to the arb eligible players (btw, the Oki decision is due by tomorrow as well). Given our current guaranteed committments, that would equal a payroll over $130+ million... before Bay/Holliday. That doesn't give the team much room to go on a spending spree and/or absorb large contracts. That said, upgrading 1B/3B and LF would leave us with at least 3 guys who really should be everyday regulars (and are paid like it, too). I would expect some of those salaries to be moved.
Interact My Recent Posts
Nexus		#950	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 318 11/19/09 1:06 PM	Bay rejects Boston's 4yr/$60 million offer. Heyman Edit: Sorry, Heyman's "sources" are using "'believed' to be 'close' to $60 million" language. Translation: Heyman has no clue what the term were... Last Edited By: Nexus 11/19/09 1:14 PM. Edited 1 time.
Interact My Recent Posts
TokenWilliams		#951	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 523 11/19/09 2:11 PM	I'd be shocked if Adrian Beltre got a contract for 4 years at over 10M per season... I just dont see it happening after his year last year and the economic climate. That's not to say I dont think he'd produce in the right situation for that or even out produce it; I just don't think he'll get that... Call it an educated hunch more than anything else. I don't see the need for his services for too many players that will have money to throw around. He'd be a great sign for the Giants. They could move Sandoval to 1b... Anyways, put me in the camp that would love to see him in Boston. I've wanted him since day one, but part of my facination is what he could bring at a lower cost in money and years. I expect him to go for a 1 or 2 year deal in a place like Boston or Philly to build value and cash in. Not sure of the Sox interest, but the Phillies would be silly not to go for him and he'd be silly not to sign there for a 1 year deal if the big multi year pay day isn't there... maybe it's more wishful thinking than anything... regardless I do not think the Sox will displace a Lowell or Ortiz which is a little disappointing.
Interact My Recent Posts
Yirmiyahu		#952	[url]	[-]
Posts: 606 11/19/09 2:36 PM Forum Moderator	TokenWilliams wrote: Not sure of the Sox interest, but the Phillies would be silly not to go for him and he'd be silly not to sign there for a 1 year deal if the big multi year pay day isn't there... maybe it's more wishful thinking than anything... regardless I do not think the Sox will displace a Lowell or Ortiz which is a little disappointing. I'm not a big fan of the idea either, but it does make some sense to keep Ortiz and Lowell in big roles at the beginning of the season, with the possibility of giving up on one/both if they're not producing by the trade deadline. Considering that they both have a chance to rebound, the money tied up in them, and the fact that they have no-trade protection, it might not be worth it to try to cut/trade them this off-season unless the Sox acquire an impact bat (Adrian Gonzalez, Miggy Cabrera, Prince Fielder, Joey Votto, Hanley Ramirez, etc).
Interact My Recent Posts
mredsox89		#953	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 838 11/19/09 2:37 PM	Nexus wrote: Bay rejects Boston's 4yr/$60 million offer. Heyman Edit: Sorry, Heyman's "sources" are using "'believed' to be 'close' to $60 million" language. Translation: Heyman has no clue what the term were... Stunner, lol. I mean that was the deal proposed during the season and they didn't agree so no real reason for Bay to not test the FA market at this point.
Interact My Recent Posts
Nexus		#954	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 319 11/19/09 4:32 PM	Sorry, Lowrie fans.... "We're going to acquire somebody to be our shortstop. At this point, [Lowrie] has to prove his health," Epstein said. "He's not someone we can depend on right now. I think, ultimately, he will be. But until he proves his health, we can't let the season hang in the balance. We can't allow ourselves to have instability at shortstop again if he's not able to answer the bell health-wise. I think he will get to the point where he can demonstrate his dependability and his health. We're not going to rely on good offseason reports. He has to show up and do it day in and day out before we rely on him. So yeah, we'll be acquiring a shortstop via trade or free agency." link
Interact My Recent Posts
mredsox89		#955	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 839 11/19/09 4:35 PM	Nexus wrote: Sorry, Lowrie fans.... "We're going to acquire somebody to be our shortstop. At this point, [Lowrie] has to prove his health," Epstein said. "He's not someone we can depend on right now. I think, ultimately, he will be. But until he proves his health, we can't let the season hang in the balance. We can't allow ourselves to have instability at shortstop again if he's not able to answer the bell health-wise. I think he will get to the point where he can demonstrate his dependability and his health. We're not going to rely on good offseason reports. He has to show up and do it day in and day out before we rely on him. So yeah, we'll be acquiring a shortstop via trade or free agency." link He hasn't proven that he can be an everyday SS yet and I don't think it is a surprise that he won't be the starting SS on opening day.
Interact My Recent Posts
Norm in Oregon		#956	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 1004 11/19/09 4:36 PM Veteran Member	mredsox89 wrote: Nexus wrote: Bay rejects Boston's 4yr/$60 million offer. Heyman Edit: Sorry, Heyman's "sources" are using "'believed' to be 'close' to $60 million" language. Translation: Heyman has no clue what the term were... Stunner, lol. I mean that was the deal proposed during the season and they didn't agree so no real reason for Bay to not test the FA market at this point. I'll go back to what I said a few weeks back. There's almost no market at the $18-$20 million/year rate (with a 4+ year commitment) for Bay/Holliday outside of New York/Boston. The Angels got Abreu back and, no they won't be posting Bay in right field. Ditto the Dodgers and Manny. Tactically what should the Sox do? Wouldn't the smart move be to let New York sign one of those players - with no competition - then the Sox sign the other one? Is Holliday that much better than Bay that you'd get into a bidding war for his services? Wouldn't that cost you a lot of money in the end? Who else is on the board at those prices? Thoughts? Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. ~ Frederick Douglass
Interact My Recent Posts
Yirmiyahu		#957	[url]	[-]
Posts: 608 11/19/09 4:38 PM Forum Moderator	I'm not disappointed, even as a Lowrie fan. What I'm hoping for is that they give him a chance as a backup infielder, with the possibility of earning more playing time.
Interact My Recent Posts
mredsox89		#958	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 840 11/19/09 5:16 PM	Norm in Oregon wrote: mredsox89 wrote: Nexus wrote: Bay rejects Boston's 4yr/$60 million offer. Heyman Edit: Sorry, Heyman's "sources" are using "'believed' to be 'close' to $60 million" language. Translation: Heyman has no clue what the term were... Stunner, lol. I mean that was the deal proposed during the season and they didn't agree so no real reason for Bay to not test the FA market at this point. I'll go back to what I said a few weeks back. There's almost no market at the $18-$20 million/year rate (with a 4+ year commitment) for Bay/Holliday outside of New York/Boston. The Angels got Abreu back and, no they won't be posting Bay in right field. Ditto the Dodgers and Manny. Tactically what should the Sox do? Wouldn't the smart move be to let New York sign one of those players - with no competition - then the Sox sign the other one? Is Holliday that much better than Bay that you'd get into a bidding war for his services? Wouldn't that cost you a lot of money in the end? Who else is on the board at those prices? Thoughts? Yea, completely agree with that. I didn't say that the Sox did anything wrong. Heyman just seemed to be reporting nothing new. As you said, there are only 5 or so teams that can ever afford an $18 million per year player. The Mets aren't looking, the Angels signed Abreu, Sox/Yanks/Cardinals are all involved. One team is gonna end up missing out, and I would bet that unless Holliday inks soon with the Cardinals they are going to miss out
Interact My Recent Posts
SoxSail		#959	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 340 11/19/09 5:43 PM	Norm in Oregon wrote: I'll go back to what I said a few weeks back. There's almost no market at the $18-$20 million/year rate (with a 4+ year commitment) for Bay/Holliday outside of New York/Boston. The Angels got Abreu back and, no they won't be posting Bay in right field. Ditto the Dodgers and Manny. Tactically what should the Sox do? Wouldn't the smart move be to let New York sign one of those players - with no competition - then the Sox sign the other one? Is Holliday that much better than Bay that you'd get into a bidding war for his services? Wouldn't that cost you a lot of money in the end? Who else is on the board at those prices? Thoughts? Well, I do think you have to make a good faith offer to Holliday. You can't just let the Yanks have him if their price is lower than what you'd offer. Other than that, yeah, help them overpay, then sign the other. If there is a third team pushing to sign the other guys though, it gets a little complicated, because you have to factor in the cost (whether monetary, in prospects or in losses) of not signing either, and paying to replace those wins/not replacing those wins.
Interact My Recent Posts
Nexus		#960	[url]	[-]
Veteran Member Posts: 320 11/19/09 5:43 PM	Norm in Oregon wrote: Tactically what should the Sox do? Wouldn't the smart move be to let New York sign one of those players - with no competition - then the Sox sign the other one? Is Holliday that much better than Bay that you'd get into a bidding war for his services? Wouldn't that cost you a lot of money in the end? Who else is on the board at those prices? Thoughts? Personally, and I am sure I am in the minority here, but I say wait now that we have Hermida in the fold. I don't like Hermida's swing at Fenway, but I like it at the other ALE parks. I think there will be growing pains, but his advanced approach at the plate leaves me hopeful. I wouldn't be shocked to see him put up a .850+ OPS season, which is fine considering you're paying him a fraction of what Bay or Holliday would cost. I don't think Holliday is a .900+ OPS player in the AL anyway. I am not advocating Hermida as option A, but I don't think LF should be our primary concern. If Bay and Holliday sign elsewhere, fine. Take the picks and use the LF money towards upgrading the infield or trading and extending a Halladay, Josh Johnson type.
Interact My Recent Posts

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

SoxProspects.com

SoxProspects Links

The Red Sox 2009-2010 Offseason Discussion Thread

Nick (Washington Dc)

Jim Callis

(2:41 PM)