2015 Offseason

[LDF]

If Martinez leaves Detroit, I think Seattle is the top desination for making sense and wanting to win now.

 

while I agree, I bet its going to be who offers him the most money. that is why

I highly doubt the sox will be there. don't get me wrong, if JR says go for it, he will

pay the money. I just don't think it will happen.

Edited September 23, 2014 by LDF

[LDF]

Which means Kendrys Morales, with a full offseason and spring training, becomes one of the five or so likeliest options for the Sox.

 

I'd actually rather have Billy Butler, despite his RHedness.

 

ding ding ding this is what I was waiting for. I was going to start on this in the offseason.

my problem is his agent.

[caulfield12]

ding ding ding this is what I was waiting for. I was going to start on this in the offseason.

my problem is his agent.

 

But we all saw how Boras had no or little leverage with Stephen Drew and Morales this past season...and the prior offseason.

 

Morales needs to sign quickly and come to spring training ready to play or he will be out of baseball entirely.

[Vance Law]

AJP for backup catcher next year. Go ahead, tell me I'm crazy.

 

 

[caulfield12]

AJP for backup catcher next year. Go ahead, tell me I'm crazy.

 

 

You're out of your mind.

 

We might as well bring back Buehrle (greg's dream) and Paulie for one more year, too.

 

No thanks.

 

Although I do think we need a veteran "mentor" of the Jose Molina ilk who can really teach Tyler about the finer nuances of the game defensively.

[Vance Law]

You're out of your mind.

 

We might as well bring back Buehrle (greg's dream) and Paulie for one more year, too.

 

No thanks.

 

Although I do think we need a veteran "mentor" of the Jose Molina ilk who can really teach Tyler about the finer nuances of the game defensively.

 

I'm not rooting for it to happen. Just noting that he isn't likely to get a starting job anywhere. We could use a left-handed backup.

[caulfield12]

I'm not rooting for it to happen. Just noting that he isn't likely to get a starting job anywhere. We could use a left-handed backup.

 

 

Jaso-unlikely

J.Castro--at what cost?

Lobaton

Hank Conger

Grandal---Cuban connection, mentioned numerous times, huge disappointment this year

J. Baker

[LDF]

But we all saw how Boras had no or little leverage with Stephen Drew and Morales this past season...and the prior offseason.

 

Morales needs to sign quickly and come to spring training ready to play or he will be out of baseball entirely.

 

except that was last yr and a price tag of a "comp pick" came with it. when does any of

borAss clients has sign early?

 

this offseason, with the lack of offensive hitting players, I expect it to be

way different.

[NorthSideSox72]

You're out of your mind.

 

We might as well bring back Buehrle (greg's dream) and Paulie for one more year, too.

 

No thanks.

 

Although I do think we need a veteran "mentor" of the Jose Molina ilk who can really teach Tyler about the finer nuances of the game defensively.

Flowers is already better defensively than AJ was.

 

[Y2Jimmy0]

My following responses are made with the caveat I don't care about Jerry's pocketbook, just the fact if the Sox sign a player to a multi year deal and he is a bust, the fact we can't get rid of him will annoy me to no end.

Aoki: No. Please God no. Mr Slappy will be so hated on this board all season.

Shields: No, because it'll take a 5-6 year deal and there's a huge risk he could flop at any time. Now if he'd go for 2-3 years, sure. He seems awfully durable and is still pretty good.

Butler: If he is willing to admit he's a huge question mark and take a 2-3 year Keppinger type deal, fine. Playing KC 19 times means he'd get 76 at bats against the Royals which could help the batting average and production since he'd want to beat his old team's ass.

V-Mart: Not gonna happen but would be a nice signee for 1-3 years. Again, somebody will probably give him a 5-6 year deal and the Adam Dunn deal has made those unpopular on the south side.

 

I was reading Toronto put Buehrle on waivers this season. How bout a trade where they pay 3/4 of his contract and we send them a minor league stiff and bring back Mark? Then we could move one of the other lefties to the bullpen. Or Rodon could start his career in the bullpen for a year.

 

 

Rodon is not starting his career in the bullpen. That would be a horrible idea as well.

[witesoxfan]

I was reading Toronto put Buehrle on waivers this season. How bout a trade where they pay 3/4 of his contract and we send them a minor league stiff and bring back Mark? Then we could move one of the other lefties to the bullpen. Or Rodon could start his career in the bullpen for a year.

 

Yes, because all Toronto would want back for paying $15 million and losing a capable mid-rotation starter is some minor league stiff. And Rick Hahn has personally said on numerous occasions that Rodon will not pitch out of the bullpen, so no on that one too.

[southsider2k5]

AJP for backup catcher next year. Go ahead, tell me I'm crazy.

 

Won't happen. Either we get a good starting catcher on the market somewhere (trade probably) or Flowers/Nieto/Phegley are the catchers next year. They aren't going to bring in a back up when they already have cheap back ups on the roster.

[Vance Law]

Won't happen. Either we get a good starting catcher on the market somewhere (trade probably) or Flowers/Nieto/Phegley are the catchers next year. They aren't going to bring in a back up when they already have cheap back ups on the roster.

 

I feel pretty certain Nieto will be starting full-time at Birmingham or Charlotte. I kind of think Phegley will be moved, but we'll see.

Edited September 23, 2014 by Vance Law

[shysocks]

Haven't seen Ervin Santana's name thrown around very much. What do folks think about him? His ceiling is unspectacular and he'll be 32 next year. But while other teams will be hurling themselves off the peak of Mount Scherzer, some of the best deals of any offseason are for guys a couple tiers down. He's still a righty that can give you good innings. The thing that would make me nervous is his gopheritis; he gave up a lot of homers in Anaheim so bringing him to the Cell could be a mistake.

 

I wouldn't be terribly upset if I saw the Sox had signed him for 2/$25M. Could he be had for that and would you give it to him?

[southsider2k5]

Haven't seen Ervin Santana's name thrown around very much. What do folks think about him? His ceiling is unspectacular and he'll be 32 next year. But while other teams will be hurling themselves off the peak of Mount Scherzer, some of the best deals of any offseason are for guys a couple tiers down. He's still a righty that can give you good innings. The thing that would make me nervous is his gopheritis; he gave up a lot of homers in Anaheim so bringing him to the Cell could be a mistake.

 

I wouldn't be terribly upset if I saw the Sox had signed him for 2/$25M. Could he be had for that and would you give it to him?

 

I would. The last thing we need to do is waste our resources on a mediocre starting pitcher.

[Chisoxfn]

I would. The last thing we need to do is waste our resources on a mediocre starting pitcher.

Santana at that price is a good move. He's been a 2.5-3 war pitcher in 3 of the past 4 years all while throwing over 200 innings in 3 of the last 4 years (I guess technically he hasn't done it yet but I believe he has 2 starts left this season). Stuff is good as well and what he does struggle with from time to time would appear to be something our coaching staff excels at. I really like this idea, more so if you can find someway to get some form of cash savings for Danks.

[shysocks]

I would. The last thing we need to do is waste our resources on a mediocre starting pitcher.

That's fair. I think he's probably better than mediocre though.

[LDF]

That's fair. I think he's probably better than mediocre though.

 

but again, using the resources will be a waste. there are probably other options

in the fa market that may be a good option. also trades for a #4-5 pitcher until

Rodon can be inserted.

[shysocks]

but again, using the resources will be a waste. there are probably other options

in the fa market that may be a good option. also trades for a #4-5 pitcher until

Rodon can be inserted.

There may be better options. A lot of them will cost more. If we're playing in a lower-level market and we're talking starting pitchers, which is one of the most obvious areas this team needs improvement, I'd rather have Santana than Masterson. Masterson's name is thrown around all the time here but he really doesn't have **** on Santana.

[LDF]

There may be better options. A lot of them will cost more. If we're playing in a lower-level market and we're talking starting pitchers, which is one of the most obvious areas this team needs improvement, I'd rather have Santana than Masterson. Masterson's name is thrown around all the time here but he really doesn't have **** on Santana.

 

you are coming up with a salary that you would like. just b/c he sign for a low amount is

not what he is going to sign on his next contract.

[Balta1701]

Santana at that price is a good move. He's been a 2.5-3 war pitcher in 3 of the past 4 years all while throwing over 200 innings in 3 of the last 4 years (I guess technically he hasn't done it yet but I believe he has 2 starts left this season). Stuff is good as well and what he does struggle with from time to time would appear to be something our coaching staff excels at. I really like this idea, more so if you can find someway to get some form of cash savings for Danks.

There's the problem.

 

Any of these 2-3 WAR pitchers are a tiny upgrade because you don't put them in the spot Rodon is going to take before next season ends, you need to put them in Danks's spot. So, we're paying $10 million+ a year for Santana and we're paying money to get rid of Danks, so we're paying $20 million+ per year for a 1-2 WAR upgrade in the rotation.

 

Financially there's no way this makes sense unless Danks is swapped for a different position player at a similar cost, putting the sunk cost onto a different spot. And if you're doing that, why are you spending money on your starting pitching staff when you're just trying to run out the contract of someone like Upton in the OF?

[Chisoxfn]

There's the problem.

 

Any of these 2-3 WAR pitchers are a tiny upgrade because you don't put them in the spot Rodon is going to take before next season ends, you need to put them in Danks's spot. So, we're paying $10 million+ a year for Santana and we're paying money to get rid of Danks, so we're paying $20 million+ per year for a 1-2 WAR upgrade in the rotation.

 

Financially there's no way this makes sense unless Danks is swapped for a different position player at a similar cost, putting the sunk cost onto a different spot. And if you're doing that, why are you spending money on your starting pitching staff when you're just trying to run out the contract of someone like Upton in the OF?

I presume you are doing it because you are trying to field a contending team sooner. You aren't replacing Rodon, rather you are replacing Danks with Santana and putting less pressure on Rodon. You are going with a rotation of Sale / Q / Santana / Noesi / Rodon. You then are running out a more capable outfielder that you got for Danks (say Ethier) and then moving guys like Bassit / Carroll to the bullpen and maybe making another bullpen signing. Plus you might be exploring other positional upgrades as well. Clearly you also have to figure out a way to add one more bat to the mix as well.

 

A 1-2 WAR upgrade can be a pretty significant difference in the grand scheme of things, especially if who you got for Danks (while overpriced) is a 1-2 WAR upgrade as well over your existing starter in the outfield. Now you are talking 2-4 WAR upgrade, which doesn't amount to 2-4 wins and could actually have a much larger impact then that. Bottom line you are making your team better while not adding on any extremely long term deals so when guys like Ethier / Santana come off books, the timing goes well with other young guys on the existing roster who can get raises, etc, plus you also have flexibility to add new pieces to put you further over the top potentially.

 

Note: Ethier has been a 3 WAR player in 5 of the past 7 years. Compare that to Viciedo who has been a

[Balta1701]

I presume you are doing it because you are trying to field a contending team sooner. You aren't replacing Rodon, rather you are replacing Danks with Santana and putting less pressure on Rodon. You are going with a rotation of Sale / Q / Santana / Noesi / Rodon. You then are running out a more capable outfielder that you got for Danks (say Ethier) and then moving guys like Bassit / Carroll to the bullpen and maybe making another bullpen signing. Plus you might be exploring other positional upgrades as well. Clearly you also have to figure out a way to add one more bat to the mix as well.

 

A 1-2 WAR upgrade can be a pretty significant difference in the grand scheme of things, especially if who you got for Danks (while overpriced) is a 1-2 WAR upgrade as well over your existing starter in the outfield. Now you are talking 2-4 WAR upgrade, which doesn't amount to 2-4 wins and could actually have a much larger impact then that. Bottom line you are making your team better while not adding on any extremely long term deals so when guys like Ethier / Santana come off books, the timing goes well with other young guys on the existing roster who can get raises, etc, plus you also have flexibility to add new pieces to put you further over the top potentially.

See, my biggest disagreement is on the latter part. I think you're completely destroying your flexibility if you sign a >$10 million+ pitcher and you have to take on a separate bad contract to move Danks. You're stuck dealing with that bad contract and you're dealing with a pitcher probably on a multi-year deal on top of that.

 

If we take on a $10 million+ pitcher to fill a rotation spot and move Danks for someone with equal salary, then we're talking about a salary commitment for the next 2 years of >$75 million+ just for those guys without solving the bullpen holes or the lineup holes.

 

Unless they guy you're trading for under the bad contract for bad contract swap suddenly returns to whatever form earned him his contract, by going out and spending money on a veteran to replace Danks you're leaving yourself the same hole. It's a lateral move that to me removes flexibility by tying up additional money.

[caulfield12]

I presume you are doing it because you are trying to field a contending team sooner. You aren't replacing Rodon, rather you are replacing Danks with Santana and putting less pressure on Rodon. You are going with a rotation of Sale / Q / Santana / Noesi / Rodon. You then are running out a more capable outfielder that you got for Danks (say Ethier) and then moving guys like Bassit / Carroll to the bullpen and maybe making another bullpen signing. Plus you might be exploring other positional upgrades as well. Clearly you also have to figure out a way to add one more bat to the mix as well.

 

A 1-2 WAR upgrade can be a pretty significant difference in the grand scheme of things, especially if who you got for Danks (while overpriced) is a 1-2 WAR upgrade as well over your existing starter in the outfield. Now you are talking 2-4 WAR upgrade, which doesn't amount to 2-4 wins and could actually have a much larger impact then that. Bottom line you are making your team better while not adding on any extremely long term deals so when guys like Ethier / Santana come off books, the timing goes well with other young guys on the existing roster who can get raises, etc, plus you also have flexibility to add new pieces to put you further over the top potentially.

 

 

Sounds good in theory if Ethier's slump is an anomaly caused by inconsistent playing time and not the signal of a decline.

 

Also, his splits are even more pronounced than in 2011-2013.

 

The Dodgers are more likely to want to keep Hanley Ramirez and move him to 3B after Uribe leaves at the end of 2015, but there's also a very good chance Hanley ends up with an AL team where he can DH occasionally instead of being exposed to the rigors of SS everyday, where he's one of the 5-6 worst guys in baseball defensively but the best offensively.

 

They can patch the back end of their rotation, rather than take on a bad contract.

 

I think they'd be willing to send Ethier?Crawford AND money for something, but NOT take on Danks.

 

[Chisoxfn]

See, my biggest disagreement is on the latter part. I think you're completely destroying your flexibility if you sign a >$10 million+ pitcher and you have to take on a separate bad contract to move Danks. You're stuck dealing with that bad contract and you're dealing with a pitcher probably on a multi-year deal on top of that.

 

If we take on a $10 million+ pitcher to fill a rotation spot and move Danks for someone with equal salary, then we're talking about a salary commitment for the next 2 years of >$75 million+ just for those guys without solving the bullpen holes or the lineup holes.

 

Unless they guy you're trading for under the bad contract for bad contract swap suddenly returns to whatever form earned him his contract, by going out and spending money on a veteran to replace Danks you're leaving yourself the same hole. It's a lateral move that to me removes flexibility by tying up additional money.

2 yrs is pretty short term in nature. You are talking about the season you are playing and one follow-up season. That is nothing to fill major positional holes on your team. The alternative, which is having below league average players at two positions, which are pretty crucial. Not when you are trying to contend. At some point, you will have some inefficiencies with the use of the cash if you are going to contend (unless you get extremely lucky). Nothing that is being discussed over a 2 year time frame is going to be an extreme detriment to the franchise. 4 years, sure, but 2 years, you aren't hindering yourself. Santana at the proposed 2 year deal is at a market friendly deal with minimized downside risk because if there was an injury you aren't looking at a huge capital outlay.