Clay Buchholz

[chisoxfan09]

He has been very impressive in AAA but most boards hae the Redsox not dealing way any of their prospects. His 2009 stats are very good but he had a bad run at the end of 2008. Any thoughts?

 

2009 Season

Team League W L ERA G GS CG SHO SV IP H R ER HR BB SO GO/AO AVG

PAW INT 5 0 1.90 12 11 1 1 0 71.0 42 16 15 7 17 65 1.35 .165

 

I for one think a change of scenery would do him well and he is publicly kinda stating he wants a shot in the bigs but with the logjam the Redsox have it is gonna be real hard for him to get called up. I think they need a power bat so could any discussion start with Dye? Mods move this thread to the right forum if not in right one.

[Heads22]

Um, I don't see him changing scenery unless they absolutely have to.

[Chisoxfn]

Of course I'd love to have him. He's a bit overhyped but he's still a legitimate top 30 prospect in baseball, more likely still a top 15 one despite being a Red Sawk. He's got good stuff though and the BoSox aren't giving him up for just anyone. They'd have to get quite the pieces for the deal to make sense.

 

I do think a package based upon the Cuban Missile and a veteran reliever or one of our older bats might work. But if the MIssile plays like he did last year at SS, well that is pretty f***ing tough to replace and Bucholtz hasn't proven a ton. Its tough but thats the only way we are getting Clay.

[bighurt4life]

They still have Lowrie as their future SS and won't really be willing to give up Bucholz for anything less than a major return. They seem to think that he's an elite talent, an #1 starter type and probably wouldn't give him up for one + year of Dye unless we threw in a top prospect along the lines of Poreda as well.

[beck72]

Of course I'd love to have him. He's a bit overhyped but he's still a legitimate top 30 prospect in baseball, more likely still a top 15 one despite being a Red Sawk. He's got good stuff though and the BoSox aren't giving him up for just anyone. They'd have to get quite the pieces for the deal to make sense.

 

I do think a package based upon the Cuban Missile and a veteran reliever or one of our older bats might work. But if the MIssile plays like he did last year at SS, well that is pretty f***ing tough to replace and Bucholtz hasn't proven a ton. Its tough but thats the only way we are getting Clay.

Having Alexei signed for 2 1/2 more years would have to be appealing, with his blend of power and high light reel defense [though he's lacking in some fundamentals and basic baseball IQ]. Lowrie could then be their super utility guy.

 

Buchholz has dominated the minors but hasn't had the sustained success in the majors. I don't know the reason. Yet pitching for the Red Sox, Clay has to get results. Given time, Clay could probably get it figured out. If he struggles with the Red Sox in the bigs, they'll send him back down or put him in the pen. The sox can afford to be more patient with him.

 

I do think the sox need another young stellar RHSP to add to Floyd and Danks. Richard may be coming back to earth. Contreras will be gone after this year. Poreda is questionable. And the sox minor league options are a year or two away. Adding top SP is tougher to do than adding a bat. Esp. as the sox have an in-house option for SS in Beckham. The question would be if the Red sox would want to deal Clay centered around Alexei.

[Jordan4life_2007]

I don't think I've seen a pitching inventory like what Boston is sporting this year (starters and bullpen) since the Braves in the early to mid 90's. They would have to be blown away to deal Buchholz. They really don't have any legitimate needs. I'd love to snatch him up.

Edited June 22, 2009 by Jordan4life

[chisoxfan09]

Yeah exactly what I thought as I posted this. Their only really glaring need may be (I stress may) to replace Papi at DH with another left handed bat. But we really don't have anyone like that except for Thome who is older and has maybe 1 more year left in the tank. The only power bat we could think about without a trade clause is Dye plus another prospect but with most of our AA/AAA players having good to very good years I am hesitant to hope this happens. But it is really starting to come into the forefront that in the SP arena we need another RHP. Preferably either Ace or no 2. Hence my other thread about Harden or Webb. Fun stuff this virtual GM'ing.

[Jerksticks]

This guy would have been one of the major parts in the Mark Buehrle deal 2 years back. Imagine if we were still waiting on this guy from that trade? That would suck.

[DBAHO]

I think Saito's a pitcher the Sox may look at, especially if Linebrink keeps struggling.

 

And the Red Sox have said he could be dealt for a prospect IIRC.

[Dizzy Sox]

I think it would take a ton to get Bucholz away from Boston--as it should. He had a lousy year last year but has dominated everywhere else and is still young.

[Balta1701]

So their starting rotation depth chart is:

 

Beckett

Matsuzaka

Lester

Wakefield

Penny

Smoltz

 

Anyone I'm missing?

 

Then Buchholz?

 

If I'm reading that right, then they have at least 1 opening for a starting pitcher to open 2010, and could have an opening sooner if they could move Penny and Daisuke stays on the DL. And Wakefield can always be moved temporarily to the bullpen.

[Wise Master Buehrle]

I don't think I've seen a pitching inventory like what Boston is sporting this year (starters and bullpen) since the Braves in the early to mid 90's. They would have to be blown away to deal Buchholz. They really don't have any legitimate needs. I'd love to snatch him up.

 

Aren't the Red Sox going to need a future long term 3rd basemen? What kind of deal is Lowell on, and how is his body holding up?

 

If we could create a deal around Josh Fields for Buchholz, I think that would be great. Fields is a talented guy as well as Clay, and despite that no hitter they both might classify as project players that might need a change of scenery and more seasoning. IMO Alexei is more proven and a deal STARTING with Alexei for Clay is absolutely ridiculous. Talks starting for Alexei start at Jon Lester, IMO.

 

I know pretty well that Buchholz for Fields straight up would not work, so I could see us throwing in a pitching prospect or two to sweeten the deal. Someone like Hudson, Carter, Omogrosso or sweeten the deal.

 

I could see them considering something like that at least, especially if they are comfortable with their SP... heck acquiring a guy like Buchholz would make it easier to part with a guy like Richard so maybe Richard and Fields can get the deal done?

Edited June 22, 2009 by DanksFan

[Dizzy Sox]

Aren't the Red Sox going to need a future long term 3rd basemen? What kind of deal is Lowell on, and how is his body holding up?

 

If we could create a deal around Josh Fields for Buchholz, I think that would be great. Fields is a talented guy as well as Clay, and despite that no hitter they both might classify as project players that might need a change of scenery and more seasoning. IMO Alexei is more proven and a deal STARTING with Alexei for Clay is absolutely ridiculous. Talks starting for Alexei start at Jon Lester, IMO.

 

I know pretty well that Buchholz for Fields straight up would not work, so I could see us throwing in a pitching prospect or two to sweeten the deal. Someone like Hudson, Carter, Omogrosso or sweeten the deal.

 

I could see them considering something like that at least, especially if they are comfortable with their SP... heck acquiring a guy like Buchholz would make it easier to part with a guy like Richard so maybe Richard and Fields can get the deal done?

 

If the Red Sox would trade Bucholz--and that is a big if--it would take at least one of the Beckham/Flowers/Danks group plus one or more of a Richard/Hudson/Omogrosso/etc. Despite his troubles in the majors last year, he is one of the top ten pitching prospects around.

 

Josh Fields has zero trade value. None. Nada.

Edited June 22, 2009 by Dizzy Sox

[Balta1701]

If the Red Sox would trade Bucholz--and that is a big if--it would take at least one of the Beckham/Flowers/Danks group plus one or more of a Richard/Hudson/Omogrosso/etc. Despite his troubles in the majors last year, he is one of the top ten pitching prospects around.

 

Josh Fields has zero trade value. None. Nada.

Why would the Red Sox move Buchholz and want a starting pitcher back?

 

Isn't the whole concept of this talk that they already have too many starting pitchers that the kid is blocked?

[Dizzy Sox]

Why would the Red Sox move Buchholz and want a starting pitcher back?

 

Isn't the whole concept of this talk that they already have too many starting pitchers that the kid is blocked?

 

Putting aside the fact that of the aforementioned group all but Lester and Beckett are old and/or come with big question marks, if the Red Sox are going to trade a guy like Bucholz, they will require top talent in return, and yes, sometimes you accumulate pitching even if there is no immediate room for a player. The Vasquez/Young trade is a perfect example of that. Or look at the flip side of that...The Rays all but gave away Edwin Jackson because they didn't have room in the rotation for him, and you bet they would like to take that back now that Kazmir is hurt and Sonnistine has pitched poorly.

 

Anyway this is all pretty much moot because if the Red Sox do move Bucholz they are going to demand the moon in return--more than we would be willing to give up.

[chisoxfan09]

Putting aside the fact that of the aforementioned group all but Lester and Beckett are old and/or come with big question marks, if the Red Sox are going to trade a guy like Bucholz, they will require top talent in return, and yes, sometimes you accumulate pitching even if there is no immediate room for a player. The Vasquez/Young trade is a perfect example of that. Or look at the flip side of that...The Rays all but gave away Edwin Jackson because they didn't have room in the rotation for him, and you bet they would like to take that back now that Kazmir is hurt and Sonnistine has pitched poorly.

 

Anyway this is all pretty much moot because if the Red Sox do move Bucholz they are going to demand the moon in return--more than we would be willing to give up.

 

Always curious and funny how each team extremely over value their players. Wonder how hard the Redsox fans would laugh at us proposing a Feilds for Buchholz swap plus one other prospect cuz each one may need a "Change of Scenery"?

[Jordan4life_2007]

Yeah exactly what I thought as I posted this. Their only really glaring need may be (I stress may) to replace Papi at DH with another left handed bat. But we really don't have anyone like that except for Thome who is older and has maybe 1 more year left in the tank. The only power bat we could think about without a trade clause is Dye plus another prospect but with most of our AA/AAA players having good to very good years I am hesitant to hope this happens. But it is really starting to come into the forefront that in the SP arena we need another RHP. Preferably either Ace or no 2. Hence my other thread about Harden or Webb. Fun stuff this virtual GM'ing.

 

Papi's June splits: .308/.400/.654. So it looks like he's come out of his two month coma from earlier this season. If this continues to be the case, the Red Sox are officially a juggernaut. Outside of Alexi and Beckham, there's nobody currently on the big league club that would even remotely interest them in a deal for Buchholz. So any deal would have to revolve around one of those two and minor leaguers. I really don't see any realistic match.

 

 

Aren't the Red Sox going to need a future long term 3rd basemen? What kind of deal is Lowell on, and how is his body holding up?

 

If we could create a deal around Josh Fields for Buchholz, I think that would be great. Fields is a talented guy as well as Clay, and despite that no hitter they both might classify as project players that might need a change of scenery and more seasoning. IMO Alexei is more proven and a deal STARTING with Alexei for Clay is absolutely ridiculous. Talks starting for Alexei start at Jon Lester, IMO.

 

I know pretty well that Buchholz for Fields straight up would not work, so I could see us throwing in a pitching prospect or two to sweeten the deal. Someone like Hudson, Carter, Omogrosso or sweeten the deal.

 

I could see them considering something like that at least, especially if they are comfortable with their SP... heck acquiring a guy like Buchholz would make it easier to part with a guy like Richard so maybe Richard and Fields can get the deal done?

 

No offense, but I don't know why some people think that other teams around baseball are looking to give away premier prospects for our crap. Josh Fields has ZERO value. None. You'd be lucky to get a utility infielder for him. You say combine Fields with somebody like Hudson, Carter or Omogrosso? Why would they do this when Buchholz is a better and more proven prospect than any of them? They've already got legitimate pitching prospects in Michael Bowden, Nick Hagadone, and Casey Kelly. Makes no sense for them to deal CB for pitching.

[Jordan4life_2007]

Always curious and funny how each team extremely over value their players. Wonder how hard the Redsox fans would laugh at us proposing a Feilds for Buchholz swap plus one other prospect cuz each one may need a "Change of Scenery"?

 

He had 15 up and down starts last year after a dazzling 2007 debut (albeit just 4 games and 3 starts). His K/9 and GB/FB ratio were 8.53 and 1.59. Both very good, obviously. And his FIP was 4.82. Now that's not really good. But it was significantly lower than his normal ERA. Which suggests he pitched a lot better than his normal ERA shows. This isn't like Gavin Floyd, who had 3-4 underachieving years, before the Phillies finally cut him loose. This is nowhere near the "Change of scenery" stage yet.

Edited June 23, 2009 by Jordan4life

[Wise Master Buehrle]

No offense, but I don't know why some people think that other teams around baseball are looking to give away premier prospects for our crap. Josh Fields has ZERO value. None. You'd be lucky to get a utility infielder for him. You say combine Fields with somebody like Hudson, Carter or Omogrosso? Why would they do this when Buchholz is a better and more proven prospect than any of them? They've already got legitimate pitching prospects in Michael Bowden, Nick Hagadone, and Casey Kelly. Makes no sense for them to deal CB for pitching.

 

Uhhh, I actually proposed a trade of CB centered around a third basemen. If they like the idea of Josh Fields, then additional lower-level pitching is just icing on the deal. Of course, according to you, Josh Fields has zero value. As a 26-year old with only 1 full year of MLB service, I find that hard to believe. Especially considering he had a successful 100 game campaign only 2 years ago. Of course, your typical sports fan that takes part in the "what have you done for me lately" mantra also feels that this applies in trade conversations too. Any GM with half a brain would realize that Fields is a potential power-hitting fulltime 3rd basemen who just wasn't able to get a shot here because he got off to a slow start and we were forced to bring up Beckham to make our lineup better.

 

Seriously, if Buchholz was THAT good, he'd be in Boston right now, and they would have no reason to sign Smoltz or Penny. Obviously they still are not comfortable with him. In all seriousness, where do you draw the line? How does Fields have no value whatsoever? Joe Borchard.. We knew he had no value whatsoever, yet we were still able to trade him for another top-prospect who hasn't completely panned out. Would you say that Joe Borchard when he was traded had more value then Josh Fields right now? I don't think so, and this is why KW has not jumped the gun on any trades. He's probably gotten some offers on Fields, but he probably feels lowballed by them because most smart teams would try to get him on the cheap now. My guess is you will see Fields traded for a player of similar value (talented but hasn't put it all together/not gotten enough PT) closer to the deadline. And I don't mean Buchholz because he is still on that pedestal. It would probably be more of an under-the-radar type of guy.

 

No offense, but just because you say he has no value does not make me a buyer of what you're selling.

Edited June 23, 2009 by DanksFan

[ZoomSlowik]

Buchholz is not REMOTELY comparable to Thornton when we acquired him. Buchholz is 24 and has been largely successful throughout his minor league career with half a season of unsuccessful performance in the majors, Thornton was a 29 year old reliever that couldn't find the plate with a GPS.

 

 

[Balta1701]

Buchholz is not REMOTELY comparable to Thornton when we acquired him. Buchholz is 24 and has been largely successful throughout his minor league career with half a season of unsuccessful performance in the majors, Thornton was a 29 year old reliever that couldn't find the plate with a GPS.

If Buchholz comes up and struggles for another 1/3 year, then you can compare him to Floyd.

[Jordan4life_2007]

Uhhh, I actually proposed a trade of CB centered around a third basemen. If they like the idea of Josh Fields, then additional lower-level pitching is just icing on the deal. Of course, according to you, Josh Fields has zero value. As a 26-year old with only 1 full year of MLB service, I find that hard to believe. Especially considering he had a successful 100 game campaign only 2 years ago. Of course, your typical sports fan that takes part in the "what have you done for me lately" mantra also feels that this applies in trade conversations too. Any GM with half a brain would realize that Fields is a potential power-hitting fulltime 3rd basemen who just wasn't able to get a shot here because he got off to a slow start and we were forced to bring up Beckham to make our lineup better.

 

You have a very different definition of the word "successful" than I do. Yeah, he showed some flashes in 2007. But sorry, a line of .244/.308/.480/.788 doesn't qualify as "successful" to me. That's not getting into the fact that he's a K machine and plays a horrible 3B. Josh has been arguably the worst 3B in baseball this year. That's no exaggeration. Out of all qualifed 3rd baseman, Josh is second to last in average, third to last in HR's, second to last in RBI, and third to last in OPS. His K% is 32.5% (second highest behind Mark Reynolds). His defense has been pitiful. He fails the eye test and is near or at the bottom of every defensive metric that's out there. That's not just a slow start. Josh is bad at baseball. End of story.

 

Seriously, if Buchholz was THAT good, he'd be in Boston right now, and they would have no reason to sign Smoltz or Penny. Obviously they still are not comfortable with him. In all seriousness, where do you draw the line? How does Fields have no value whatsoever? Joe Borchard.. We knew he had no value whatsoever, yet we were still able to trade him for another top-prospect who hasn't completely panned out. Would you say that Joe Borchard when he was traded had more value then Josh Fields right now? I don't think so, and this is why KW has not jumped the gun on any trades. He's probably gotten some offers on Fields, but he probably feels lowballed by them because most smart teams would try to get him on the cheap now. My guess is you will see Fields traded for a player of similar value (talented but hasn't put it all together/not gotten enough PT) closer to the deadline. And I don't mean Buchholz because he is still on that pedestal. It would probably be more of an under-the-radar type of guy.

 

Josh Beckett, Jon Lester, Tim Wakefield, Daisuke Matsuzaka, Brad Penny and soon to be John Smoltz. A lot of guys would struggle to break that rotation. Because of their unequaled pitching depth, combined with the fact CB obviously had command/control issues, they had the luxury of sending him back to AAA to work his problems out. It had nothing to do with him not being good enough, or a lack of stuff or injury. And now that he's obviously conquered AAA hitters, they're still struggling to find a spot for him because they're so deep pitching wise. And like Zoom said, your Matt Thornton comparison is WAYYYY off and in no ways comparable to the current discussion.

 

No offense, but just because you say he has no value does not make me a buyer of what you're selling.

 

I'm not trying to convince you that Josh has no value. I know he has no value. And when the trade deadline comes and goes and he's either still here or we've sent him off for a B or C prospect, you'll see this as well.

Edited June 23, 2009 by Jordan4life

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

You have a very different definition of the word "successful" than I do. Yeah, he showed some flashes in 2007. But sorry, a line of .244/.308/.480/.788 doesn't qualify as "successful" to me. That's not getting into the fact that he's a K machine and plays a horrible 3B. Josh has been arguably the worst 3B in baseball this year. That's no exaggeration. Out of all qualifed 3rd baseman, Josh is second to last in average, third to last in HR's, second to last in RBI, and third to last in OPS. His K% is 32.5% (second highest behind Mark Reynolds). His defense has been pitiful. He fails the eye test and is near or at the bottom of every defensive metric that's out there. That's not just a slow start. Josh is bad at baseball. End of story.

 

 

 

Josh Beckett, Jon Lester, Tim Wakefield, Daisuke Matsuzaka, Brad Penny and soon to be John Smoltz. A lot of guys would struggle to break that rotation. Because of their unequaled pitching depth, combined with the fact CB obviously had command/control issues, they had the luxury of sending him back to AAA to work his problems out. It had nothing to do with him not being good enough, or a lack of stuff or injury. And now that he's obviously conquered AAA hitters, they're still struggling to find a spot for him because they're so deep pitching wise. And like Zoom said, your Matt Thornton comparison is WAYYYY off and in no ways comparable to the current discussion.

 

 

 

I'm not trying to convince you that Josh has no value. I know he has no value. And when the trade deadline comes and goes and he's either still here or we've sent him off for a B or C prospect, you'll see this as well.

 

Nice post.

 

Buchholz is not going to be traded in a "quantity over quality" type of deal. The Red Sox wouldn't deal him for Salty, Teagarden, or even Johan Santana. To think we could pick him up for anything less than the best we've got is kind of spacey, and truthfully, even if we offered Beckham straight-up, that's still an iffy deal for both teams, and I doubt it would get done. And I don't see why the Red Sox would want to lose Buchholz just to upgrade Lowrie, who is already a good player, so an Alexei deal probably doesn't match either. I just can't see any situation where the Red Sox trade him for anything less than an elite young player who is already producing in the Majors and also fills a need they don't think they can fill internally. With the type of money the Red Sox can spend, they can just go out and sign guys when holes open up if they'd like to, so giving up great prospects has to be a special kind of thing for them. Like the Beckett deal, for example.

 

BTW I disagree with those who feel Clay is over-hyped. IMO Bowden and especially Masterson are very over-hyped, but not Clay. He's got a shot at becoming a legit ace, even in a division as tough as the AL East.

 

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

edit: double post

Edited June 23, 2009 by Kenny Hates Prospects

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

edit: triple post

Edited June 23, 2009 by Kenny Hates Prospects