Free Agents, years and money

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm surprised this thread hasn't focused more on pitching


    We need another quality reliever....I am not comfortable w/ Koji again; remember what happened to Oki?

    We also need 2 starters.  Lester and Lackey proved to be enough in a short series.  But after that, who do you have you can count on?  Buck?  He's a joke.  Peavy?  Ditto.  Doubrant?  Hopefully.......Dempster?  Yeah right.......We need 2 quality starters........

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Didn't the Sox just win a World Series with all these guys you are now writing off?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    So you'd rather rely on Peavy, Buchholtz and Dempster as your 3-5 guys?  How much weight did these guys really have this Oct?

    [/QUOTE]

    They carried enough weight to win a World Series.

     

    The Sox won in 2007 with Julian Tavarez, Tim Wakefield and 40yo Curt Schilling in the rotation.   They can start the year with the 6 on the roster (someone will likely be hurt) and will get contributions from Ranaudo, Webste, Bsrnes and/or Owens at some point.

     

    The silly thing to do is needlessly overspend for the luxury of having all stars everywhere.

     

    Also, you forgot Doubront and Workman as 3-4-5 candidates...

    [/QUOTE]


    I didn't forget Doubrant and if you put Workman in the rotation you lose him in the pen

    1 - Lester

    2 - Lackey

    3 - ?

    4 - ?

    5 - Doubrant

    I'll live w/ Peavy in the 4 hole, I don't want to see Dempster in the rotation, and I prefer to keep Workman in the pen.  that means we need a starter and a quality starter at that......A lot of things went right for us 2013, I wouldn't count on Lackey having as good a year.  And in a 7 game series you only need 2 QS's.....Note that I didn't even consider Buck because he can not be relied on for a single start - ever.  They are light on SP.....Period.

    [/QUOTE]

    You undervalue Dempster, who is under contract next year amd has outpitched your proposed target Roy Halladay now for two years running.

     

    You also greatly exaggerate the health issues surrounding Buchholz.  Also the Sox do have depth st the farm level, where they need it.

     

    They also undoubtedly have more faith in these guys than you, hence their contracts.

     

    The Sox will probably do some due diligence on SP this offseason, but it will probably not be a top priority.   Its nit so simple as filling out a bunch of forms to upgrade SP.

    [/QUOTE]


    Clay "Day to Day" Buchholtz will always have health issues

    Halladay over Dempster because of the potential upside

    Internal options are pegged for a 5th or 6th guy, we need a #3 man

    The time is now to trade "Day To Day" Clay due to his contract options on the horizon

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from fl+adam,. Show fl+adam,'s posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    The Sox have an excess of starter capable pitchers, not a shortage.  The sox could conceivably trade both Peavy and Dempster and have no problem placing quality starters in the starting 5...with a choice of several rookies manning the 5th spot.

     

    Weaknesses are obvious.  replace the 4 major FA's, and 1 or 2 needs to be a 4th-6th middle of the bat hitter, with at least one as a right hand hitter.  I like adding napoli and choo as an example,

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm surprised this thread hasn't focused more on pitching


    We need another quality reliever....I am not comfortable w/ Koji again; remember what happened to Oki?

    We also need 2 starters.  Lester and Lackey proved to be enough in a short series.  But after that, who do you have you can count on?  Buck?  He's a joke.  Peavy?  Ditto.  Doubrant?  Hopefully.......Dempster?  Yeah right.......We need 2 quality starters........

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Didn't the Sox just win a World Series with all these guys you are now writing off?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    So you'd rather rely on Peavy, Buchholtz and Dempster as your 3-5 guys?  How much weight did these guys really have this Oct?

    [/QUOTE]

    They carried enough weight to win a World Series.

     

    The Sox won in 2007 with Julian Tavarez, Tim Wakefield and 40yo Curt Schilling in the rotation.   They can start the year with the 6 on the roster (someone will likely be hurt) and will get contributions from Ranaudo, Webste, Bsrnes and/or Owens at some point.

     

    The silly thing to do is needlessly overspend for the luxury of having all stars everywhere.

     

    Also, you forgot Doubront and Workman as 3-4-5 candidates...

    [/QUOTE]


    I didn't forget Doubrant and if you put Workman in the rotation you lose him in the pen

    1 - Lester

    2 - Lackey

    3 - ?

    4 - ?

    5 - Doubrant

    I'll live w/ Peavy in the 4 hole, I don't want to see Dempster in the rotation, and I prefer to keep Workman in the pen.  that means we need a starter and a quality starter at that......A lot of things went right for us 2013, I wouldn't count on Lackey having as good a year.  And in a 7 game series you only need 2 QS's.....Note that I didn't even consider Buck because he can not be relied on for a single start - ever.  They are light on SP.....Period.

    [/QUOTE]

    You undervalue Dempster, who is under contract next year amd has outpitched your proposed target Roy Halladay now for two years running.

     

    You also greatly exaggerate the health issues surrounding Buchholz.  Also the Sox do have depth st the farm level, where they need it.

     

    They also undoubtedly have more faith in these guys than you, hence their contracts.

     

    The Sox will probably do some due diligence on SP this offseason, but it will probably not be a top priority.   Its nit so simple as filling out a bunch of forms to upgrade SP.

    [/QUOTE]


    Clay "Day to Day" Buchholtz will always have health issues

    Halladay over Dempster because of the potential upside

    Internal options are pegged for a 5th or 6th guy, we need a #3 man

    The time is now to trade "Day To Day" Clay due to his contract options on the horizon

    [/QUOTE]

    I am not sure how much "upside"  Halladay has left.  He will be 37 next year and has battled injuries and ineffectness for 2 years now.  If the problem is pitcher health, Halladay looks like a poor solution going forward. I would prefer Dempster at this point.

     

    The Sox areunlikely to give up on Buchholz and have a far better idea of his health than we have.  If he really is as fragile as you believe, what trade value would he really have?  And why does the health history of Buchholz bother you, but not the health history of Halladay?  At this stage, 29yo Buchholz certainly has much more upside than Halladay. 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    Buch's not going anywhere. Even if he just keeps giving us half seasons like 2013, he'll be worth this money:

    14:$7.7M, 

    15:$12M, 

    16:$13M club option ($0.245M buyout), 

    17:$13.5M club option ($0.5M buyout)

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BMav. Show BMav's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money


    Where is the attractive markets for Napoli-Drew-Salty? If St. Louis and the Dodgers don't go all in on Drew, I don't see any of them in great shape.

    Napoli is not young and STILL has the hip condition. Guaranteeing a player in his health and ability 3+ years seems crazy to me. And the only way he becomes worth the pick is if you get multiple years out of him. Ask yourself this, would you want the Red Sox to give up a pick to pay Mike Napoli big money in his health and age situation? I predict not only will Napoli be back on the Red Sox terms, but that he will not recieve a single offer from any other team. Nada for Napoli.

    Salty's main market seems to be the Chicago teams. They won 63-66 games between them. If you like winning, good luck in Chicago. Philly is already too lefty dominated. Texas and Salty have a burned bridge between them. Unless the Yankees go after him, I think his market is pretty limited to losing situations. And I am being generous in saying that about the Yankees. This might explain why he seemeed depressed in that interview.

    Which gets to my point. If your Stephen Drew, would you prefer 1-14 in Boston or 4-44 in Pittsburgh or the Mets? And if you are Salty, would you prefer 1-12 with Boston or 4-40 in either Chicago situation?

    Neither player is old, especially not Salty. Don't they have faith in their abilities? Isn't the Boston situation as perfect as their is out there other then the weather. And the weather ain't so hot in Chicago or New York either. What would you do if you were them? I would take the 1 year deal believing I would be able to make 3-30 and 3-28 respectively and maybe even a lot more next year if the Sox don't offer the QO. And if they do, I make another 15 million for 1 year. I would prefer the 1 year deals for bigger short term money and a better situation. Long term certainty isn't that great if you are certain to be in the dump.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Buch's not going anywhere. Even if he just keeps giving us half seasons like 2013, he'll be worth this money:

    14:$7.7M, 

    15:$12M, 

    16:$13M club option ($0.245M buyout), 

    17:$13.5M club option ($0.5M buyout)

    [/QUOTE]


    I didn't think we signed guys to play half the season?

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm surprised this thread hasn't focused more on pitching


    We need another quality reliever....I am not comfortable w/ Koji again; remember what happened to Oki?

    We also need 2 starters.  Lester and Lackey proved to be enough in a short series.  But after that, who do you have you can count on?  Buck?  He's a joke.  Peavy?  Ditto.  Doubrant?  Hopefully.......Dempster?  Yeah right.......We need 2 quality starters........

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Didn't the Sox just win a World Series with all these guys you are now writing off?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    So you'd rather rely on Peavy, Buchholtz and Dempster as your 3-5 guys?  How much weight did these guys really have this Oct?

    [/QUOTE]

    They carried enough weight to win a World Series.

     

    The Sox won in 2007 with Julian Tavarez, Tim Wakefield and 40yo Curt Schilling in the rotation.   They can start the year with the 6 on the roster (someone will likely be hurt) and will get contributions from Ranaudo, Webste, Bsrnes and/or Owens at some point.

     

    The silly thing to do is needlessly overspend for the luxury of having all stars everywhere.

     

    Also, you forgot Doubront and Workman as 3-4-5 candidates...

    [/QUOTE]


    I didn't forget Doubrant and if you put Workman in the rotation you lose him in the pen

    1 - Lester

    2 - Lackey

    3 - ?

    4 - ?

    5 - Doubrant

    I'll live w/ Peavy in the 4 hole, I don't want to see Dempster in the rotation, and I prefer to keep Workman in the pen.  that means we need a starter and a quality starter at that......A lot of things went right for us 2013, I wouldn't count on Lackey having as good a year.  And in a 7 game series you only need 2 QS's.....Note that I didn't even consider Buck because he can not be relied on for a single start - ever.  They are light on SP.....Period.

    [/QUOTE]

    You undervalue Dempster, who is under contract next year amd has outpitched your proposed target Roy Halladay now for two years running.

     

    You also greatly exaggerate the health issues surrounding Buchholz.  Also the Sox do have depth st the farm level, where they need it.

     

    They also undoubtedly have more faith in these guys than you, hence their contracts.

     

    The Sox will probably do some due diligence on SP this offseason, but it will probably not be a top priority.   Its nit so simple as filling out a bunch of forms to upgrade SP.

    [/QUOTE]


    Clay "Day to Day" Buchholtz will always have health issues

    Halladay over Dempster because of the potential upside

    Internal options are pegged for a 5th or 6th guy, we need a #3 man

    The time is now to trade "Day To Day" Clay due to his contract options on the horizon

    [/QUOTE]

    I am not sure how much "upside"  Halladay has left.  He will be 37 next year and has battled injuries and ineffectness for 2 years now.  If the problem is pitcher health, Halladay looks like a poor solution going forward. I would prefer Dempster at this point.

     

    The Sox areunlikely to give up on Buchholz and have a far better idea of his health than we have.  If he really is as fragile as you believe, what trade value would he really have?  And why does the health history of Buchholz bother you, but not the health history of Halladay?  At this stage, 29yo Buchholz certainly has much more upside than Halladay. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Are you seriously suggesting that Day to Day Clay is NOT fragile?

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Buch's not going anywhere. Even if he just keeps giving us half seasons like 2013, he'll be worth this money:

    14:$7.7M, 

    15:$12M, 

    16:$13M club option ($0.245M buyout), 

    17:$13.5M club option ($0.5M buyout)

    [/QUOTE]


    I didn't think we signed guys to play half the season?

    [/QUOTE]

    Obviously not, but my point was that even if he just plays 3 months every year at the level he pitched this year, he just about earns these salaries ($46M/4). Of course, I don't want or expect him to be hurt that much, but his salary is not a burden going forward, unless he misses a lot of time.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm surprised this thread hasn't focused more on pitching


    We need another quality reliever....I am not comfortable w/ Koji again; remember what happened to Oki?

    We also need 2 starters.  Lester and Lackey proved to be enough in a short series.  But after that, who do you have you can count on?  Buck?  He's a joke.  Peavy?  Ditto.  Doubrant?  Hopefully.......Dempster?  Yeah right.......We need 2 quality starters........

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Didn't the Sox just win a World Series with all these guys you are now writing off?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    So you'd rather rely on Peavy, Buchholtz and Dempster as your 3-5 guys?  How much weight did these guys really have this Oct?

    [/QUOTE]

    They carried enough weight to win a World Series.

     

    The Sox won in 2007 with Julian Tavarez, Tim Wakefield and 40yo Curt Schilling in the rotation.   They can start the year with the 6 on the roster (someone will likely be hurt) and will get contributions from Ranaudo, Webste, Bsrnes and/or Owens at some point.

     

    The silly thing to do is needlessly overspend for the luxury of having all stars everywhere.

     

    Also, you forgot Doubront and Workman as 3-4-5 candidates...

    [/QUOTE]


    I didn't forget Doubrant and if you put Workman in the rotation you lose him in the pen

    1 - Lester

    2 - Lackey

    3 - ?

    4 - ?

    5 - Doubrant

    I'll live w/ Peavy in the 4 hole, I don't want to see Dempster in the rotation, and I prefer to keep Workman in the pen.  that means we need a starter and a quality starter at that......A lot of things went right for us 2013, I wouldn't count on Lackey having as good a year.  And in a 7 game series you only need 2 QS's.....Note that I didn't even consider Buck because he can not be relied on for a single start - ever.  They are light on SP.....Period.

    [/QUOTE]

    You undervalue Dempster, who is under contract next year amd has outpitched your proposed target Roy Halladay now for two years running.

     

    You also greatly exaggerate the health issues surrounding Buchholz.  Also the Sox do have depth st the farm level, where they need it.

     

    They also undoubtedly have more faith in these guys than you, hence their contracts.

     

    The Sox will probably do some due diligence on SP this offseason, but it will probably not be a top priority.   Its nit so simple as filling out a bunch of forms to upgrade SP.

    [/QUOTE]


    Clay "Day to Day" Buchholtz will always have health issues

    Halladay over Dempster because of the potential upside

    Internal options are pegged for a 5th or 6th guy, we need a #3 man

    The time is now to trade "Day To Day" Clay due to his contract options on the horizon

    [/QUOTE]

    I am not sure how much "upside"  Halladay has left.  He will be 37 next year and has battled injuries and ineffectness for 2 years now.  If the problem is pitcher health, Halladay looks like a poor solution going forward. I would prefer Dempster at this point.

     

    The Sox areunlikely to give up on Buchholz and have a far better idea of his health than we have.  If he really is as fragile as you believe, what trade value would he really have?  And why does the health history of Buchholz bother you, but not the health history of Halladay?  At this stage, 29yo Buchholz certainly has much more upside than Halladay. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Are you seriously suggesting that Day to Day Clay is NOT fragile?

    [/QUOTE]

    Are you suggesting Halladay is not?

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm surprised this thread hasn't focused more on pitching


    We need another quality reliever....I am not comfortable w/ Koji again; remember what happened to Oki?

    We also need 2 starters.  Lester and Lackey proved to be enough in a short series.  But after that, who do you have you can count on?  Buck?  He's a joke.  Peavy?  Ditto.  Doubrant?  Hopefully.......Dempster?  Yeah right.......We need 2 quality starters........

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Didn't the Sox just win a World Series with all these guys you are now writing off?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    So you'd rather rely on Peavy, Buchholtz and Dempster as your 3-5 guys?  How much weight did these guys really have this Oct?

    [/QUOTE]

    They carried enough weight to win a World Series.

     

    The Sox won in 2007 with Julian Tavarez, Tim Wakefield and 40yo Curt Schilling in the rotation.   They can start the year with the 6 on the roster (someone will likely be hurt) and will get contributions from Ranaudo, Webste, Bsrnes and/or Owens at some point.

     

    The silly thing to do is needlessly overspend for the luxury of having all stars everywhere.

     

    Also, you forgot Doubront and Workman as 3-4-5 candidates...

    [/QUOTE]


    I didn't forget Doubrant and if you put Workman in the rotation you lose him in the pen

    1 - Lester

    2 - Lackey

    3 - ?

    4 - ?

    5 - Doubrant

    I'll live w/ Peavy in the 4 hole, I don't want to see Dempster in the rotation, and I prefer to keep Workman in the pen.  that means we need a starter and a quality starter at that......A lot of things went right for us 2013, I wouldn't count on Lackey having as good a year.  And in a 7 game series you only need 2 QS's.....Note that I didn't even consider Buck because he can not be relied on for a single start - ever.  They are light on SP.....Period.

    [/QUOTE]

    You undervalue Dempster, who is under contract next year amd has outpitched your proposed target Roy Halladay now for two years running.

     

    You also greatly exaggerate the health issues surrounding Buchholz.  Also the Sox do have depth st the farm level, where they need it.

     

    They also undoubtedly have more faith in these guys than you, hence their contracts.

     

    The Sox will probably do some due diligence on SP this offseason, but it will probably not be a top priority.   Its nit so simple as filling out a bunch of forms to upgrade SP.

    [/QUOTE]


    Clay "Day to Day" Buchholtz will always have health issues

    Halladay over Dempster because of the potential upside

    Internal options are pegged for a 5th or 6th guy, we need a #3 man

    The time is now to trade "Day To Day" Clay due to his contract options on the horizon

    [/QUOTE]

    I am not sure how much "upside"  Halladay has left.  He will be 37 next year and has battled injuries and ineffectness for 2 years now.  If the problem is pitcher health, Halladay looks like a poor solution going forward. I would prefer Dempster at this point.

     

    The Sox areunlikely to give up on Buchholz and have a far better idea of his health than we have.  If he really is as fragile as you believe, what trade value would he really have?  And why does the health history of Buchholz bother you, but not the health history of Halladay?  At this stage, 29yo Buchholz certainly has much more upside than Halladay. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Are you seriously suggesting that Day to Day Clay is NOT fragile?

    [/QUOTE]

     

    Do you always answer a question with a question?   Know why people do that?  I do.  It's because they do not have a good answer.  Ah, deflection.

     

    So I will ask again.  Why is it that THRITY SEVEN YEAR OLD ROY HALLADAY AND HIS 215 IP IN THE LAST TWO SEASONS does not concern you as a health risk, but 29yo Clay Buchholz and his 297 IP in the last 2 seasons does?

     

    Is that question all that difficult?  Or does it boil down quite simply to "the grass is always greener"?

     

    And please do not try justifying anything with the "upside" of a 37 year old pitcher who has not been good for two years now.  At that age, they are very, very unlikely to come back.

     

    So - simple question.  Besides the obvious "I need a new whipping boy" answer, why does the health history of Roy Halladay not concern you, but the health history of Clay Buchholz does?  

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    Halladay could be had for a 1 year deal w/o giving up a draft pick.  His upside is more than Clay's because well, he's simply had a better career with better peak years.

    Clay is at a point in his contract where decisions must be made.  He is affordable next year and that makes him a good trade candidate.  After that, his price goes up for 2 years for the remainder of his contract.  If we don't exercise the option, we lose him and we don't get a draft pick.  Therefore, I would suggest the thing to that after demonstrating to the league that he is healthy, trade him this Spring for something equivilant to a draft pick.  Of course, the driving factor in all of this is that he can not be relied upon from start to start.  Why do you think we allowed the single greatest pitcher in Red Sox history to walk?

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Halladay could be had for a 1 year deal w/o giving up a draft pick.  His upside is more than Clay's because well, he's simply had a better career with better peak years.

    [/QUOTE]

    Halladay is also very possibly cooked and done.  Have you looked at his record for the last two years and his age? 

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Halladay could be had for a 1 year deal w/o giving up a draft pick.  His upside is more than Clay's because well, he's simply had a better career with better peak years.

    Clay is at a point in his contract where decisions must be made.  He is affordable next year and that makes him a good trade candidate.  After that, his price goes up for 2 years for the remainder of his contract.  If we don't exercise the option, we lose him and we don't get a draft pick.  Therefore, I would suggest the thing to that after demonstrating to the league that he is healthy, trade him this Spring for something equivilant to a draft pick.  Of course, the driving factor in all of this is that he can not be relied upon from start to start.  Why do you think we allowed the single greatest pitcher in Red Sox history to walk?

    [/QUOTE]

    Buchholz' contract is insanely friendly.  He is owed $19.7mill over 2 years.  For comparison, Ryan Dempster got $26mill over 2 years.  And when his options - roughly equal to Dempster money - become an issue,  the only other player on the Sox rostet making anything will be Dustin Pedroia.  Why on earth would you deal that for the equivalent of a draft pick?

     

    Are you afvocating freeing up more cash for more Ryan Dempsters?

     

    If Clay gets hurt again, the Sox have the pitching depth to cover it.  If not, he is a reasonably priced TOR option.

     

     

    But, hey, at least he got you off your anti-Lester pedestal...

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Halladay could be had for a 1 year deal w/o giving up a draft pick.  His upside is more than Clay's because well, he's simply had a better career with better peak years.

    Clay is at a point in his contract where decisions must be made.  He is affordable next year and that makes him a good trade candidate.  After that, his price goes up for 2 years for the remainder of his contract.  If we don't exercise the option, we lose him and we don't get a draft pick.  Therefore, I would suggest the thing to that after demonstrating to the league that he is healthy, trade him this Spring for something equivilant to a draft pick.  Of course, the driving factor in all of this is that he can not be relied upon from start to start.  Why do you think we allowed the single greatest pitcher in Red Sox history to walk?

    [/QUOTE]

    Buchholz' contract is insanely friendly.  He is owed $19.7mill over 2 years.  For comparison, Ryan Dempster got $26mill over 2 years.  And when his options - roughly equal to Dempster money - become an issue,  the only other player on the Sox rostet making anything will be Dustin Pedroia.  Why on earth would you deal that for the equivalent of a draft pick?

     

    Are you afvocating freeing up more cash for more Ryan Dempsters?

     

    If Clay gets hurt again, the Sox have the pitching depth to cover it.  If not, he is a reasonably priced TOR option.

     

     

    But, hey, at least he got you off your anti-Lester pedestal...

    [/QUOTE]


    Whoever said I liked Dempster?

    I am leaving Lester alone because he earned it.  That's the way it works.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from slasher9. Show slasher9's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Halladay could be had for a 1 year deal w/o giving up a draft pick.  His upside is more than Clay's because well, he's simply had a better career with better peak years.

    [/QUOTE]

    My office is located in Phillies country so I get to follow him closely.  He looked terrible this past season.  I would not want to pay his salary next year.  I really think he has become an average pitcher at best. 

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    After all of the hand-wringing in recent seasons about not having a "true ace," I don't understand the urgency to give up on a guy who clearly displays that kind of potential and is controlled for several more seasons at reasonable money.

    Granted, if some GM called on Buchholz and was willing to pay the going price for a Cy Young type pitcher -- a franchise-altering haul including multiple young stud major league players and/or top prospects -- I'd have to listen, but that's about what it would take.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    After all of the hand-wringing in recent seasons about not having a "true ace," I don't understand the urgency to give up on a guy who clearly displays that kind of potential and is controlled for several more seasons at reasonable money.

    Granted, if some GM called on Buchholz and was willing to pay the going price for a Cy Young type pitcher -- a franchise-altering haul including multiple young stud major league players and/or top prospects -- I'd have to listen, but that's about what it would take.

    [/QUOTE]


    Day to Day Clay will never win a CY YOUNG.  EVER.  Let alone be a "true ace".  He can't make 30 starts or come close to 200 IP's and he can't finish a season strong.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Day to Day Clay will never win a CY YOUNG.  EVER.  Let alone be a "true ace".  He can't make 30 starts or come close to 200 IP's and he can't finish a season strong.

    [/QUOTE]

    Can't come close to 200 innings?  Just one year ago he pitched 189.1.  That's about 95% of 200.  Most people consider 95% 'close'.

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Day to Day Clay will never win a CY YOUNG.  EVER.  Let alone be a "true ace".  He can't make 30 starts or come close to 200 IP's and he can't finish a season strong.

    [/QUOTE]

    Can't come close to 200 innings?  Just one year ago he pitched 189.1.  That's about 95% of 200.  Most people consider 95% 'close'.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    LOL


    I believe in 6 seasons he's had 3 over 150  IP (Big Whoop) and 3 seasons at or below 100 IP (Horrific).........If you are relying on him to pitch more than 150 (which is not even close to 200 IP) then you will be very disappointed..........If you rely on Day to Day Clay, you will pay the price.........

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from garyhow. Show garyhow's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    My take on Red Sox

    Ells - make a play. 5yrs @17 per 85 mil total. Will he stay in Boston for less becomes the ?. Obviously some one will offer more but how much more. Winning WS's does count for something. Crawford $ I don't see it. But I'm perfectly happy to put JBJ in CF to start 14. This would determine what I do w/ infield. If Ells were to resign JBJ /Gomes platoon in LF. Nava becomes trade bait. I would probably look to trade Nava this off season regardless, his value will never be higher than it is now, Pkg him w/ a pitching prospect for a C is a possibility.

    Drew/Naps- If resign Ells only [1] stays. My preference would be Drew. Boegarts stays at 3B and Middlebrooks moves to 1B. If yr's or $ get too high then try to resign Naps and Boegarts goes to SS.

    Catcher- my biggest concern. while we have young guys coming. I'm not the biggest Salty fan. No way 4 yrs for Salty, if we can't resign for 2 yrs need to trade for replacement. I'm against big $ for McCann. Or 2 yr deal for C.Ruiz might be doable til young guys ready.

    Pitching- one thing RS have a surplus of is pitching [can't believe I'm saying this]. But because of developement of Britton and Workman this yr, return of healthy Miller and 6 starters already penciled in for next yr before we even talk about Owens/Barnes/Raunado/Webster/DeLaRosa who are getting close. This could be used to help find a C in trade mkt.

    Final Option- and one I have no problem with. Lets face it even if all our FA's return the chances of winning WS again are pretty slim. As Warren Buffett would say "Buy when people are selling and sell when people are buying". All our FA's are going to be overpried coming off WS chapionship. Unless our FA's are willing to give hometeam discount to stay and possibly win another WS let them walk and start building for 15 as we thought we were doing anyway before this yr. An infield of Cecchini / Boegarts / Pedroia /Middlebrooks and OF of JBJ CF / Vic RF / Gomes Nava LF who knows maybe Kalish finally is healthy and can make Nava tradeable. Brentz provides some insurance. I know someone will say Cecchini isn't ready maybe Holt/Snyder starts yr at 3B til he is ready but 15 is the goal to win anothe WS. After winning an unexpected WS in 13 Ben is playing with house $. Building the next great RS team should still be the plan. Over paying for FA's is what got us in a lot of trouble in 11 & 12. Lets face it Boston might be the best organization to play for w/ 3 WS Championships in the last 10 yrs, should not have to over pay to get players to play here, they should want to come here for a chance at a ring! If its all about the $ then let that player walk.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    In response to garyhow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    My take on Red Sox

    Ells - make a play. 5yrs @17 per 85 mil total. Will he stay in Boston for less becomes the ?. Obviously some one will offer more but how much more. Winning WS's does count for something. Crawford $ I don't see it. But I'm perfectly happy to put JBJ in CF to start 14. This would determine what I do w/ infield. If Ells were to resign JBJ /Gomes platoon in LF. Nava becomes trade bait. I would probably look to trade Nava this off season regardless, his value will never be higher than it is now, Pkg him w/ a pitching prospect for a C is a possibility.

    Drew/Naps- If resign Ells only [1] stays. My preference would be Drew. Boegarts stays at 3B and Middlebrooks moves to 1B. If yr's or $ get too high then try to resign Naps and Boegarts goes to SS.

    Catcher- my biggest concern. while we have young guys coming. I'm not the biggest Salty fan. No way 4 yrs for Salty, if we can't resign for 2 yrs need to trade for replacement. I'm against big $ for McCann. Or 2 yr deal for C.Ruiz might be doable til young guys ready.

    Pitching- one thing RS have a surplus of is pitching [can't believe I'm saying this]. But because of developement of Britton and Workman this yr, return of healthy Miller and 6 starters already penciled in for next yr before we even talk about Owens/Barnes/Raunado/Webster/DeLaRosa who are getting close. This could be used to help find a C in trade mkt.

    Final Option- and one I have no problem with. Lets face it even if all our FA's return the chances of winning WS again are pretty slim. As Warren Buffett would say "Buy when people are selling and sell when people are buying". All our FA's are going to be overpried coming off WS chapionship. Unless our FA's are willing to give hometeam discount to stay and possibly win another WS let them walk and start building for 15 as we thought we were doing anyway before this yr. An infield of Cecchini / Boegarts / Pedroia /Middlebrooks and OF of JBJ CF / Vic RF / Gomes Nava LF who knows maybe Kalish finally is healthy and can make Nava tradeable. Brentz provides some insurance. I know someone will say Cecchini isn't ready maybe Holt/Snyder starts yr at 3B til he is ready but 15 is the goal to win anothe WS. After winning an unexpected WS in 13 Ben is playing with house $. Building the next great RS team should still be the plan. Over paying for FA's is what got us in a lot of trouble in 11 & 12. Lets face it Boston might be the best organization to play for w/ 3 WS Championships in the last 10 yrs, should not have to over pay to get players to play here, they should want to come here for a chance at a ring! If its all about the $ then let that player walk.

    [/QUOTE]


    Although I don't agree with everything, I thought your post made good sense and was well thought out.......

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Free Agents, years and money

    He can't make 30 starts or come close to 200 IP's

    He came within 1 start and 10.2 IP of these marks all of one season ago, so that's unlikely.

    and he can't finish a season strong.

    As he has a career ERA of 3.87 in August and 3.27 in September, that's also unlikely.

    I believe in 6 seasons he's had 3 over 150  IP (Big Whoop) and 3 seasons at or below 100 IP (Horrific)

    As I'm sure you know, Buchholz started 2008 in the major leagues, wasn't ready, went back to the minors, and returned in the summer of 2009, so injuries weren't the reason for his low IP totals in those years, as you imply. (In MLB/MiLB combined, Clay started 26 games in '08 and 32 games in '09.) That's like saying Bogaerts and Bradley aren't durable because they each played in <40 major league games this season.

    So Buchholz has had four seasons (2010-13) in which he was on the major league roster all season, or would have been if not for injury. In two of those four, he started 28-29 games and pitched 170-190 innings, numbers that don't exactly scream "workhorse," but not "Mr. Glass," either. The other two, obviously, have been cut very short due to injury.

    Do two injured years over a four-year period mean a player can never be relied upon, and will never live up to their potential? I'll leave that to you to judge...but you might want to take a look at the results of the age 27-28 seasons of, say, Curt Schilling or Roy Halladay.

    I get that what was supposed to be a little boo boo ended up meaning three months on the DL...I'm frustrated by that as much as anybody, and by the fact that his career so far has not been all that it could be. I'm certainly not saying Buchholz has been a picture of durability (or consistent performance). But I am saying I wouldn't give up on him yet, and if I let him go it would not be cheaply. ("The equivalent of a draft pick"? Letting Stephen Drew walk will get you that.) The guy had, what, a 1.70 ERA? He was one of the best pitchers in baseball this year when he pitched. That's worth a little bit of patience.

     

Share