iamshack Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 20, 2017 -> 07:26 PM) Sonny bombed Darn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaDoc Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 For those of you who complained about my trade proposal, watching Todd tonight who is owed 8-10 million this year, he does not enhance your return he hurts it. Just to be fair, when I proposed the trade everyone was talking about including Frazier, who to me carries negative value today. Since I think we have some payroll flexibility, I would hope he gets hot from now to deadline to get a B-C+ couple prospects as compensation so I wouldn't include him as a negative in a trade. At the deadline, he goes to open trials for others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beautox Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 QUOTE (BamaDoc @ Jun 20, 2017 -> 10:14 PM) For those of you who complained about my trade proposal, watching Todd tonight who is owed 8-10 million this year, he does not enhance your return he hurts it. Just to be fair, when I proposed the trade everyone was talking about including Frazier, who to me carries negative value today. Since I think we have some payroll flexibility, I would hope he gets hot from now to deadline to get a B-C+ couple prospects as compensation so I wouldn't include him as a negative in a trade. At the deadline, he goes to open trials for others. Todd will return a similar value to what the sox gave up when they got Youkilis from the red sox. I could see Swihart + Bell or Beeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 QUOTE (beautox @ Jun 20, 2017 -> 10:44 PM) Todd will return a similar value to what the sox gave up when they got Youkilis from the red sox. I could see Swihart + Bell or Beeks. And I think I would gladly accept that deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldsox Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 (edited) Who or what did we give up for Youkilis? Edited June 21, 2017 by oldsox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox59 Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 QUOTE (oldsox @ Jun 21, 2017 -> 09:52 AM) Who or what did we give up for Youkilis? Lillibridge and Zach Stewart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 QUOTE (oldsox @ Jun 21, 2017 -> 10:52 AM) Who or what did we give up for Youkilis? Lillibridge and Zach Stewart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 Damnit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beautox Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 QUOTE (oldsox @ Jun 21, 2017 -> 09:52 AM) Who or what did we give up for Youkilis? The White Sox acquired Kevin Youkilis and cash(5.5m) from the Red Sox in exchange for pitcher Zach Stewart and utility player Brent Lillibridge (.175/.232/.190 - .422). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 Hate this current Yankees skid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCCWS Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 Listening to their broadcast last night, Devers is tearing up AA and will probably move to AAA very soon. The Panda move seems doomed. Their thought is the Red Sox will not spend much if anything at 3rd at the deadline and will continue w Rutledge/Marrerro and bring up devers in August after 6 weeks in AAA getting adjusted. But Yankees may want Todd for a rental. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 I wonder if the Red Sox would be willing to deal Sandoval away along with at least B level prospects. Not necessarily to us but to someone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jun 21, 2017 -> 12:57 PM) I wonder if the Red Sox would be willing to deal Sandoval away along with at least B level prospects. Not necessarily to us but to someone. If a team was willing to take on salary, I bet they would pay up a bit to get rid of him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harfman77 Posted June 21, 2017 Author Share Posted June 21, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 21, 2017 -> 01:27 PM) If a team was willing to take on salary, I bet they would pay up a bit to get rid of him. Panda, Swihart, Ball, and Owens $15M for Frazier, Swarzak, and the remaining $36M owed to Panda over the next 2.5 seasons. Sox get a few reclamation projects in three former top 100 prospects and can plug Panda in at DH and hope he builds enough value back up to trade again in another year. Red Sox are facing a 40 man roster crunch and this frees two spots for them to add Devers and protect another guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Jun 21, 2017 -> 01:48 PM) Panda, Swihart, Ball, and Owens $15M for Frazier, Swarzak, and the remaining $36M owed to Panda over the next 2.5 seasons. Sox get a few reclamation projects in three former top 100 prospects and can plug Panda in at DH and hope he builds enough value back up to trade again in another year. Red Sox are facing a 40 man roster crunch and this frees two spots for them to add Devers and protect another guy. My guess... JR veto's the deal not wanting to take on the cash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Jun 21, 2017 -> 12:48 PM) Panda, Swihart, Ball, and Owens $15M for Frazier, Swarzak, and the remaining $36M owed to Panda over the next 2.5 seasons. Sox get a few reclamation projects in three former top 100 prospects and can plug Panda in at DH and hope he builds enough value back up to trade again in another year. Red Sox are facing a 40 man roster crunch and this frees two spots for them to add Devers and protect another guy. I highly doubt the White Sox are going to be taking salary on this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox59 Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jun 21, 2017 -> 02:03 PM) I highly doubt the White Sox are going to be taking salary on this year. I doubt it too. But they should at least be open to it. Not necessarily for Panda, but just in general. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Jun 21, 2017 -> 02:05 PM) I doubt it too. But they should at least be open to it. Not necessarily for Panda, but just in general. I really feel like that ship sailed with JR's check to Luis Robert and MLB's tax fund. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shipps Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 21, 2017 -> 02:09 PM) I really feel like that ship sailed with JR's check to Luis Robert and MLB's tax fund. As you will every time budget is brought up with the Sox. LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FT35 Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 21, 2017 -> 01:09 PM) I really feel like that ship sailed with JR's check to Luis Robert and MLB's tax fund. +1!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 21, 2017 -> 01:09 PM) I really feel like that ship sailed with JR's check to Luis Robert and MLB's tax fund. Exactly. That was WAY out of character for JR. Not just something he hasn't done, but something he's actively lobbied against. We basically HAVE to take that as evidence that Rick Hahn sold it hard, and that JR is definitely willing to go off the deep end if Hahn makes a good enough case. But the immediate trade for marginal amounts of international bonus salary relief and the slight underslot reaches in the first couple rounds of the draft, IMO, are evidence that JR insisted that Hahn borrow from one place to support another. And if that's true, I'm totally cool with it -- both from JR (who just dropped a chunk of money on something he doesn't personally like) and Hahn (who correctly assessed that this was a draft in which it was worth it to punt a bit to get Robert, who is a much better prospect than anyone available anyway). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jun 21, 2017 -> 02:15 PM) Exactly. That was WAY out of character for JR. Not just something he hasn't done, but something he's actively lobbied against. We basically HAVE to take that as evidence that Rick Hahn sold it hard, and that JR is definitely willing to go off the deep end if Hahn makes a good enough case. But the immediate trade for marginal amounts of international bonus salary relief and the slight underslot reaches in the first couple rounds of the draft, IMO, are evidence that JR insisted that Hahn borrow from one place to support another. And if that's true, I'm totally cool with it -- both from JR (who just dropped a chunk of money on something he doesn't personally like) and Hahn (who correctly assessed that this was a draft in which it was worth it to punt a bit to get Robert, who is a much better prospect than anyone available anyway). I for one am not shocked he did it, I feel like JR only cares up until a hard cap is set. He's not against giving overslot money for amateurs now because he the total amount is capped. He gave the go ahead this time because he already "won" in the new CBA creating a hard cap. He follows the rules to a tee to get bargaining power with owners, but it's not like, a moral thing. He just wants cost certainty. Now, I am not saying we won't be cost conscious now that we signed Robert. But I thought the behavior was always more likely with a new CBA signed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shipps Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 I may totally be off base here but it sure seems like in the past ten years or so the Sox have done a bunch of moves were everyone said they are too cheap and way to financially conscious to do. They can only prove that theory wrong so many times before I tend to believe they arent as cheap as some people make them out to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FT35 Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 QUOTE (shipps @ Jun 21, 2017 -> 01:54 PM) I may totally be off base here but it sure seems like in the past ten years or so the Sox have done a bunch of moves were everyone said they are too cheap and way to financially conscious to do. They can only prove that theory wrong so many times before I tend to believe they arent as cheap as some people make them out to be. They create that perception because the design of their teams have led them to make those types of decisions. Over the last decade, they have fielded a team with above average talent on paper but still were left with holes to plug each year. So...that led them to find the bargain type players or look for the 1-year deals until the opportunity to sign a long term "fix" came up. They had no farm system to turn to and they were stuck in the Free Agent vortex of overpaying for average talent. That would limit them from offering up BIG $ to the better players and people started to label them as "cheap" because of it. Add to that model the lack of ANY legitimate post-season success to justify taking a large financial risk and you've got a pattern of financial hesitancy caused by your tendency to plug holes and roll the dice on players way past their primes with no payoff outside a dwindling fan base (which only complicates matters). I don't think they're as cheap as they are reluctant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCCWS Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Jun 21, 2017 -> 02:48 PM) Panda, Swihart, Ball, and Owens $15M for Frazier, Swarzak, and the remaining $36M owed to Panda over the next 2.5 seasons. Sox get a few reclamation projects in three former top 100 prospects and can plug Panda in at DH and hope he builds enough value back up to trade again in another year. Red Sox are facing a 40 man roster crunch and this frees two spots for them to add Devers and protect another guy. The more time he spend in AAA, the worse Swihart's hitting gets. maybe a change of scenery can get him turned around. I doubt Red Sox will want Frazier. As I posted previously, they have a band-aid for now, Brock Holt is heading for rehab in AAA and Devers may be 6-8 weeks away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.