Time to trade for Matt Kemp

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

    Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    This is a great time for the Red Sox to make a bold strike in the trade market that will likely help solidify their line up for the next five years.

    Kemp is a middle of the order, right handed power hitting outfielder that not many teams have.  And, he is not just a home run/strike out type of power hitter like Dunn.

    Yes, I know that his last two seasons have been limited by injuries, but injuries are a part of the game.  If a young guy played all 162 games last season, there is no guarantee that he plays even one in 2014.

    It is also nice to think of home grown talent like Bradley being able to fill center field for the next 7 years, but if there is a better option available Bradley may just have to wait his turn for another year.

    It will not be the worst thing for Bradley to start the season in Pawtucket and stay prepared/ready in all three outfield spots if Victorino, Kemp or Nava get hurt.  He does not have to have a guarantee in center field for 2014 just because he has been groomed to eventually replace Ellsbury.

    Kemp is a good center fielder and will easily transition to left field, then to first base and then to DH if/when necessary and still provide quality offense for at least most of the 6 remaining years on his contract.

    The Dodgers will have to pick up 5 M of his salary, but they already know that when they first thought of trading him. And, they know that they will have to do the same if they want to trade either Eithier or Crawford if they are indeed serious about thinning out their current outfield salary issues.

    Trade them Renaudo (promising young pitcher), Betts (their second baseman of the future) and Morales who can help them either as a starter or reliever in 2014.  Perhaps someone may need to be either added to the deal or substituted for one of the three guys I mentioned.

    For those of you who want to keep all of the young pitching in Renaudo's age group, please remember that statisitically not all of these guys are likely to make it in the major leagues and also likely that none of them are probably going to make serious contributions in Boston in 2014.  Renaudo may eventually make it to the Hall of Fame, but that is the risk of trading any young player for a better chance to win now.

    Betts is an intriguing prospect, but since it appears that he only is a second baseman, he is not likely to play much second base in Boston for the next 6-7 years.

    Morales is a hard throwing lefty who can either start or relieve, and is not very expensive either.

    If a fourth guy needs to go in this trade, I would consider adding Brents since it does not appear that he has a future in Boston and even less of a future if a power hitting outfielder (like Kemp) is acquired.

    Kemp is fairly young (younger than Ellsbury) and the Sox do not appear to have any sure shots to become middle of the order thumpers beyond Ortiz (who is only signed for one more year although he may play further than 2014 if he plays well again in 2014) and Napoli (who is only signed for 2014 and 2015) unless you can predict that Middlebrooks and Bogaerts will be able to bat third and fourth when Ortiz and Napoli depart.  If you think that Gomes is a regular, middle of the order hitter I would disagree (although he brought some nice things to the 2013 team).  He is a .250 type hitter who has some power but nothing like Kemp.  Also, Gomes is only signed through 2014 and is not a quliaty fielder.

    Nava, Carp, Pierszinski and others are also not really regular, middle of the order hitters either, in my opinion.  Middlebrooks and Bogaerts may not be three through five hitters this year either. If the Sox bring back Drew, he is also not a middle of the order hitter.

    The Sox offense is likely to drop off in 2014 without Ellsbury in the leadoff position. Guys like Carp and Nava might not replicate their 2013 performances. Oriz may also not replicate his 2013 stats as he is going to be 38 years old in 2014.  Pierzinski (sp) may or may not balance off what Saltalamacchia did either.

    For the luxury tax issues of adding Kemp at 15 M the Sox would have to move probably two of their three older, high salary starting pitchers, but it seems that they are already poised to make such moves and give guys like Workman a chance to start.  Sending Morales in the deal would save some money but certainly not enough (by himself) to stay below the tax line.

    If Granderson can get 4 years at 60 M, I would be more than comfortable with giving Kemp  6 years at 90 M as he is better suited to Fenway, played about the same number of games as Granderson last year, has better spits against lefties and righties, is younger than Granderson and since the Sox are in the AL, he can eventually transition to the DH position as mentioned above.

    I think that even if Kemp is not completely ready to start the season on April 2, he is still worth the gamble.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from 808soxfan. Show 808soxfan's posts

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    If he can return to form, it would be a good trade. I am also concerned with the logjam of prospects that everyone wants to keep; yet, they will not all be able to play.

     

    However, the real test would be the physical. A 6-year $90M gamble is quite a gamble for dead weight if he does not come back. 

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

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    A good move IF we get Mr Peabody's Wayback Machine with him.

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

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    Charlie,

    The bigger question that needs to be asked is why would the Dodgers trade a player who they felt was worthy of a 20M a year contract. A player who once was seen as on the cusp of being in the elite group of perenial MVP candidates? If the guys healthy wouldn't you think they'd be better with him than without? Any team looking to aquire him must first assertain the extent of his shoulder injury, it's pretty simple if Kemp can pass a physical and his shoulder injury is such that the doctor's don't see it as chronic and is something he can rehab and regain both the strength and mobility pre-injury within a reasonable amount of time. Then and only then would the risk be worth it, regardless of how much of the contract the Dodgers would be willing to assume. 

    End of the day if Kemp's shoulder prevents him from being the 30-30 guy he was expected to be  pre-injury and he hits .300 with 10 or 15 homers with a .800 OPS, while he still might be worth the money's he's being paid, you don't sell the farm for him...

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

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    I also was one of the voices wanting Kemp.  Recent reports indicate that such move will not be made.  In knowledge, Sox staff are concerned about his health.  I don't see money or prospects being issues for a team like the Red Sox.  They are concerned if Kemp would be worth giving up our assets.  Like everyone is saying, Kemp is a super star when he's healthy.  But his decreasing numbers for past 3 seasons might have scared our staff away.  One thing I would like to mention is even if Kemp comes to Boston, Jackie will play CF.  Kemp would play LF and they will give him occasional break and will not risk anything to lose him again during the season.  I still like to see Ben betting on Kemp because return could be huge.  But I also understand that he has to put a lot on the table for that return.  

    Sox are currently waiting out on Drew and see how his market goes.  If Sox decide to sign Drew, I think they might revisit on Kemp talk with Middlebrooks on the table.  Dodgers have been interested in Middlebrooks.  Dodgers' offseason wishlist includes 3B.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    Why all this talk for Kemp ????   Overrated, overpaid,often injured "FAT-CAT"  !!!   No thanks !!

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

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    In response to Bill-806's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Why all this talk for Kemp ????   Overrated, overpaid,often injured "FAT-CAT"  !!!   No thanks !!

    [/QUOTE]


    Finally, a voice of reason.  Why do so many people want the RS to deal like the Yankees?

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    In response to KRomine's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bill-806's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Why all this talk for Kemp ????   Overrated, overpaid,often injured "FAT-CAT"  !!!   No thanks !!

    [/QUOTE]


    Finally, a voice of reason.  Why do so many people want the RS to deal like the Yankees?

    [/QUOTE]As DAD would say......... "SON, a lot of posters on this board have called you a lot of things, but a voice of reason?? Call mom and tell her that we have a compliment here" !!!!!


     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Iceman4. Show Iceman4's posts

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    No on Kemp unless we are giving up little...........injury waiting to happen

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from donrd4. Show donrd4's posts

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    In response to charliedarling's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    This is a great time for the Red Sox to make a bold strike in the trade market that will likely help solidify their line up for the next five years.

    Kemp is a middle of the order, right handed power hitting outfielder that not many teams have.  And, he is not just a home run/strike out type of power hitter like Dunn.

    Yes, I know that his last two seasons have been limited by injuries, but injuries are a part of the game.  If a young guy played all 162 games last season, there is no guarantee that he plays even one in 2014.

    It is also nice to think of home grown talent like Bradley being able to fill center field for the next 7 years, but if there is a better option available Bradley may just have to wait his turn for another year.

    It will not be the worst thing for Bradley to start the season in Pawtucket and stay prepared/ready in all three outfield spots if Victorino, Kemp or Nava get hurt.  He does not have to have a guarantee in center field for 2014 just because he has been groomed to eventually replace Ellsbury.

    Kemp is a good center fielder and will easily transition to left field, then to first base and then to DH if/when necessary and still provide quality offense for at least most of the 6 remaining years on his contract.

    The Dodgers will have to pick up 5 M of his salary, but they already know that when they first thought of trading him. And, they know that they will have to do the same if they want to trade either Eithier or Crawford if they are indeed serious about thinning out their current outfield salary issues.

    Trade them Renaudo (promising young pitcher), Betts (their second baseman of the future) and Morales who can help them either as a starter or reliever in 2014.  Perhaps someone may need to be either added to the deal or substituted for one of the three guys I mentioned.

    For those of you who want to keep all of the young pitching in Renaudo's age group, please remember that statisitically not all of these guys are likely to make it in the major leagues and also likely that none of them are probably going to make serious contributions in Boston in 2014.  Renaudo may eventually make it to the Hall of Fame, but that is the risk of trading any young player for a better chance to win now.

    Betts is an intriguing prospect, but since it appears that he only is a second baseman, he is not likely to play much second base in Boston for the next 6-7 years.

    Morales is a hard throwing lefty who can either start or relieve, and is not very expensive either.

    If a fourth guy needs to go in this trade, I would consider adding Brents since it does not appear that he has a future in Boston and even less of a future if a power hitting outfielder (like Kemp) is acquired.

    Kemp is fairly young (younger than Ellsbury) and the Sox do not appear to have any sure shots to become middle of the order thumpers beyond Ortiz (who is only signed for one more year although he may play further than 2014 if he plays well again in 2014) and Napoli (who is only signed for 2014 and 2015) unless you can predict that Middlebrooks and Bogaerts will be able to bat third and fourth when Ortiz and Napoli depart.  If you think that Gomes is a regular, middle of the order hitter I would disagree (although he brought some nice things to the 2013 team).  He is a .250 type hitter who has some power but nothing like Kemp.  Also, Gomes is only signed through 2014 and is not a quliaty fielder.

    Nava, Carp, Pierszinski and others are also not really regular, middle of the order hitters either, in my opinion.  Middlebrooks and Bogaerts may not be three through five hitters this year either. If the Sox bring back Drew, he is also not a middle of the order hitter.

    The Sox offense is likely to drop off in 2014 without Ellsbury in the leadoff position. Guys like Carp and Nava might not replicate their 2013 performances. Oriz may also not replicate his 2013 stats as he is going to be 38 years old in 2014.  Pierzinski (sp) may or may not balance off what Saltalamacchia did either.

    For the luxury tax issues of adding Kemp at 15 M the Sox would have to move probably two of their three older, high salary starting pitchers, but it seems that they are already poised to make such moves and give guys like Workman a chance to start.  Sending Morales in the deal would save some money but certainly not enough (by himself) to stay below the tax line.

    If Granderson can get 4 years at 60 M, I would be more than comfortable with giving Kemp  6 years at 90 M as he is better suited to Fenway, played about the same number of games as Granderson last year, has better spits against lefties and righties, is younger than Granderson and since the Sox are in the AL, he can eventually transition to the DH position as mentioned above.

    I think that even if Kemp is not completely ready to start the season on April 2, he is still worth the gamble.

    [/QUOTE]

    Why ? Some reporter sticks Kemps name out there and you decide to run with it. Why not give up a lot for a player not a gamble?  Stanton from Marlins? Now run with that one if you like?

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

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    Kemp didn't just have a few injuries, he's had re-occurring injuries that mirror those that can really derail a guys career. 

    We're aren't talking broken bones hear, we are talking about torn labrum, and a hamstring that is constantly getting pulled.  A torn labrum can mess with a guys shoulders for the rest of his life, which will hurt his swing.  People who have the same re-occurring injury can usually spell trouble as well, everyone pulls a hamstring every once and a while, but there is a difference between a grade 1 and a grade 3 sprain and when a guy is constantly pulling it I suspect that is an issue he will continue to deal with for the rest of his life. 

    He's also had Knee injury's and rotator cuff injuries as well.  We could on all day with his injuries in their impact on athletic performance.  Bones heal back stronger, but a lot of soft tissue structural damage causes symptoms that re-occur and persist for life....especially when you consider that you are asking Kemp to continue to play the SAME ACTIVITIES that lead to injury day in and day out into his 30's?

    I'm sorry but anyone who wants to trade for Kemp is dreaming on what he did and is not taking any perspective into what he probably will be in the future, and the writing may be on the wall as he's had a hard time staying on the field the last two years.

    No to Kemp people!

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from FL33178. Show FL33178's posts

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Kemp didn't just have a few injuries, he's had re-occurring injuries that mirror those that can really derail a guys career. 

    We're aren't talking broken bones hear, we are talking about torn labrum, and a hamstring that is constantly getting pulled.  A torn labrum can mess with a guys shoulders for the rest of his life, which will hurt his swing.  People who have the same re-occurring injury can usually spell trouble as well, everyone pulls a hamstring every once and a while, but there is a difference between a grade 1 and a grade 3 sprain and when a guy is constantly pulling it I suspect that is an issue he will continue to deal with for the rest of his life. 

    He's also had Knee injury's and rotator cuff injuries as well.  We could on all day with his injuries in their impact on athletic performance.  Bones heal back stronger, but a lot of soft tissue structural damage causes symptoms that re-occur and persist for life....especially when you consider that you are asking Kemp to continue to play the SAME ACTIVITIES that lead to injury day in and day out into his 30's?

    I'm sorry but anyone who wants to trade for Kemp is dreaming on what he did and is not taking any perspective into what he probably will be in the future, and the writing may be on the wall as he's had a hard time staying on the field the last two years.

    No to Kemp people!

    [/QUOTE]

    Trading for him would be a calculated risk, but now is the time to make the move if Cherington wants to do it. When healthy, he is a MVP-caliber player, and his value may never be lower. The Red Sox aren’t going to be major players on the free agent market this year, so pulling off a trade like this could make sense for them if they feel his injuries won’t be a problem going forward.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    In response to charliedarling's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    This is a great time for the Red Sox to make a bold strike in the trade market that will likely help solidify their line up for the next five years.

    Kemp is a middle of the order, right handed power hitting outfielder that not many teams have.  And, he is not just a home run/strike out type of power hitter like Dunn.

    Yes, I know that his last two seasons have been limited by injuries, but injuries are a part of the game.  If a young guy played all 162 games last season, there is no guarantee that he plays even one in 2014.

    It is also nice to think of home grown talent like Bradley being able to fill center field for the next 7 years, but if there is a better option available Bradley may just have to wait his turn for another year.

    It will not be the worst thing for Bradley to start the season in Pawtucket and stay prepared/ready in all three outfield spots if Victorino, Kemp or Nava get hurt.  He does not have to have a guarantee in center field for 2014 just because he has been groomed to eventually replace Ellsbury.

    Kemp is a good center fielder and will easily transition to left field, then to first base and then to DH if/when necessary and still provide quality offense for at least most of the 6 remaining years on his contract.

    The Dodgers will have to pick up 5 M of his salary, but they already know that when they first thought of trading him. And, they know that they will have to do the same if they want to trade either Eithier or Crawford if they are indeed serious about thinning out their current outfield salary issues.

    Trade them Renaudo (promising young pitcher), Betts (their second baseman of the future) and Morales who can help them either as a starter or reliever in 2014.  Perhaps someone may need to be either added to the deal or substituted for one of the three guys I mentioned.

    For those of you who want to keep all of the young pitching in Renaudo's age group, please remember that statisitically not all of these guys are likely to make it in the major leagues and also likely that none of them are probably going to make serious contributions in Boston in 2014.  Renaudo may eventually make it to the Hall of Fame, but that is the risk of trading any young player for a better chance to win now.

    Betts is an intriguing prospect, but since it appears that he only is a second baseman, he is not likely to play much second base in Boston for the next 6-7 years.

    Morales is a hard throwing lefty who can either start or relieve, and is not very expensive either.

    If a fourth guy needs to go in this trade, I would consider adding Brents since it does not appear that he has a future in Boston and even less of a future if a power hitting outfielder (like Kemp) is acquired.

    Kemp is fairly young (younger than Ellsbury) and the Sox do not appear to have any sure shots to become middle of the order thumpers beyond Ortiz (who is only signed for one more year although he may play further than 2014 if he plays well again in 2014) and Napoli (who is only signed for 2014 and 2015) unless you can predict that Middlebrooks and Bogaerts will be able to bat third and fourth when Ortiz and Napoli depart.  If you think that Gomes is a regular, middle of the order hitter I would disagree (although he brought some nice things to the 2013 team).  He is a .250 type hitter who has some power but nothing like Kemp.  Also, Gomes is only signed through 2014 and is not a quliaty fielder.

    Nava, Carp, Pierszinski and others are also not really regular, middle of the order hitters either, in my opinion.  Middlebrooks and Bogaerts may not be three through five hitters this year either. If the Sox bring back Drew, he is also not a middle of the order hitter.

    The Sox offense is likely to drop off in 2014 without Ellsbury in the leadoff position. Guys like Carp and Nava might not replicate their 2013 performances. Oriz may also not replicate his 2013 stats as he is going to be 38 years old in 2014.  Pierzinski (sp) may or may not balance off what Saltalamacchia did either.

    For the luxury tax issues of adding Kemp at 15 M the Sox would have to move probably two of their three older, high salary starting pitchers, but it seems that they are already poised to make such moves and give guys like Workman a chance to start.  Sending Morales in the deal would save some money but certainly not enough (by himself) to stay below the tax line.

    If Granderson can get 4 years at 60 M, I would be more than comfortable with giving Kemp  6 years at 90 M as he is better suited to Fenway, played about the same number of games as Granderson last year, has better spits against lefties and righties, is younger than Granderson and since the Sox are in the AL, he can eventually transition to the DH position as mentioned above.

    I think that even if Kemp is not completely ready to start the season on April 2, he is still worth the gamble.

    [/QUOTE]


    I dont think you fully understand what exactly his injuries consist of and how they will affect him.

    micro-fracture surgery will almost always have issues with athletes. Especially in the knees and ankles. Torn labrum AND the damage to his AC joint in his shoulder. no more power. Hes also had a number of hamstring injuries the last 2-3 years. Those just dont go away. hes a hot mess. if we could get him for less than 10M per and not give up a lot, Im in and will take the risk. Other than that, Id steer clear of Kemp.

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

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    The only way I could see the risk being worth it is if LA was willing to eat a vast amount of salary and accept a much lesser return (no top prospects or key major league players). In other words, they'd have to be desperate to get rid of him. I don't get the impression that's the case, and there seem to be other suitors.

    Best to just walk away from this one.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    In response to croc's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    A good move IF we get Mr Peabody's Wayback Machine with him.

    [/QUOTE]

    +1000 for
    Bullwinkle Show quotes!!! 

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

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    Kemp could also end up as a $128mill version of Grady Sizemore...

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

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    In response to FL33178's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Kemp didn't just have a few injuries, he's had re-occurring injuries that mirror those that can really derail a guys career. 

    We're aren't talking broken bones hear, we are talking about torn labrum, and a hamstring that is constantly getting pulled.  A torn labrum can mess with a guys shoulders for the rest of his life, which will hurt his swing.  People who have the same re-occurring injury can usually spell trouble as well, everyone pulls a hamstring every once and a while, but there is a difference between a grade 1 and a grade 3 sprain and when a guy is constantly pulling it I suspect that is an issue he will continue to deal with for the rest of his life. 

    He's also had Knee injury's and rotator cuff injuries as well.  We could on all day with his injuries in their impact on athletic performance.  Bones heal back stronger, but a lot of soft tissue structural damage causes symptoms that re-occur and persist for life....especially when you consider that you are asking Kemp to continue to play the SAME ACTIVITIES that lead to injury day in and day out into his 30's?

    I'm sorry but anyone who wants to trade for Kemp is dreaming on what he did and is not taking any perspective into what he probably will be in the future, and the writing may be on the wall as he's had a hard time staying on the field the last two years.

    No to Kemp people!

    [/QUOTE]

    Trading for him would be a calculated risk, but now is the time to make the move if Cherington wants to do it. When healthy, he is a MVP-caliber player, and his value may never be lower. The Red Sox aren’t going to be major players on the free agent market this year, so pulling off a trade like this could make sense for them if they feel his injuries won’t be a problem going forward.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes that is the Key word "when healthy" that is why I said people are "dreaming" on what he was and not what is likely to be.

    Take it from someone who has an educational background in health and human performance and has worked for years as a trainer.  I wouldn't go anywhere near Kemp.  His recent injury history looks like a guy that has hit a wall, can't stay healthy, and has endured injury's that people normally do not 100% recover from and often stop athletes careers.

    Just say NO to KEMP!!!

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

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Kemp could also end up as a $128mill version of Grady Sizemore...

    [/QUOTE]

     

    X 10^10

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

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    808, certainly Kemp would have to pass an extensive physical before a trade for him would take place with any team.

    Beantowne,  I see the Dodgers looking to trade Kemp, Eithier or Crawford as a means to cut back on salary for their outfield crew.  Even the Dodgers really should not want to pay Kemp 20 M, Crawford 20 M, Eithier 17 M, Puig 8 M and whatever they have to pay for their 5th guy.
    Those 4 big slaries are around 65 M just for outfielders.  Also, their best prospect is an outfielder, but I cannot remember his name.

    Also, Beantowne, I am not sure that Renaudo, Betts and maybe Brentz would be considered "selling the farm" for Kemp.  Including Morales is surely not selling the farm, and there are still other guys who could go in a trade who would also not be considered huge losses as well.

    Bill806, Kemp was almost a 40-40 guy with over 130 RBIs in the year before the first of his shoulder injuries occured and finished second in the NL MVP voting to a PED user/abuser.  That does not sound over rated or "fat cat" to me.  I will admit that he is overpaid, but which guy making 20 M a year to play a sport is not overpaid to some degree?

    Certainly, his injuries in the last two seasons make him a risk, but an extenisve physical with MRIs, xrays, strength evaluations, etc, etc should show his readiness (or lack of same) to make a major contribution in 2014 and beyond.  Obviously, if he shows poorly in the testing that the Sox would do on him, then the deal is off and both teams move on.

    Moving a few guys off the 40 man roster at this point would not hurt the Sox either especially if they are picking up one very, very good player.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    In response to charliedarling's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    808, certainly Kemp would have to pass an extensive physical before a trade for him would take place with any team.

    Beantowne,  I see the Dodgers looking to trade Kemp, Eithier or Crawford as a means to cut back on salary for their outfield crew.  Even the Dodgers really should not want to pay Kemp 20 M, Crawford 20 M, Eithier 17 M, Puig 8 M and whatever they have to pay for their 5th guy.
    Those 4 big slaries are around 65 M just for outfielders.  Also, their best prospect is an outfielder, but I cannot remember his name.

    Also, Beantowne, I am not sure that Renaudo, Betts and maybe Brentz would be considered "selling the farm" for Kemp.  Including Morales is surely not selling the farm, and there are still other guys who could go in a trade who would also not be considered huge losses as well.

    Bill806, Kemp was almost a 40-40 guy with over 130 RBIs in the year before the first of his shoulder injuries occured and finished second in the NL MVP voting to a PED user/abuser.  That does not sound over rated or "fat cat" to me.  I will admit that he is overpaid, but which guy making 20 M a year to play a sport is not overpaid to some degree?

    Certainly, his injuries in the last two seasons make him a risk, but an extenisve physical with MRIs, xrays, strength evaluations, etc, etc should show his readiness (or lack of same) to make a major contribution in 2014 and beyond.  Obviously, if he shows poorly in the testing that the Sox would do on him, then the deal is off and both teams move on.

    Moving a few guys off the 40 man roster at this point would not hurt the Sox either especially if they are picking up one very, very good player.

    [/QUOTE]

    The problem with microfracture surgery is it WILL breakdown in a couple years, if not sooner. Especially with an athlete. With as much running and pressure put on that ankle, I wouldnt trust it one bit. No matter what it looks like now. The shoulder will take some of that power away. especially his injuries (Labrum and AC joint damage). For what it will cost to get him, its not worth the risk.

    I wouldnt give up Ranaudo, Betts, Brentz for him AND pay him per for the next 6 years...No way. Hes set to make 21.5M per. even if the LAD eat 30-40M, he will still cost 16M for 6 years.

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

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    Sox have determined to end the Kemp talk.  Sox out of Kemp race.  Reported by Jon Heyman.

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

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    In response to charliedarling's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    This is a great time for the Red Sox to make a bold strike in the trade market that will likely help solidify their line up for the next five years.

    Kemp is a middle of the order, right handed power hitting outfielder that not many teams have.  And, he is not just a home run/strike out type of power hitter like Dunn.

    Yes, I know that his last two seasons have been limited by injuries, but injuries are a part of the game.  If a young guy played all 162 games last season, there is no guarantee that he plays even one in 2014.

    It is also nice to think of home grown talent like Bradley being able to fill center field for the next 7 years, but if there is a better option available Bradley may just have to wait his turn for another year.

    It will not be the worst thing for Bradley to start the season in Pawtucket and stay prepared/ready in all three outfield spots if Victorino, Kemp or Nava get hurt.  He does not have to have a guarantee in center field for 2014 just because he has been groomed to eventually replace Ellsbury.

    Kemp is a good center fielder and will easily transition to left field, then to first base and then to DH if/when necessary and still provide quality offense for at least most of the 6 remaining years on his contract.

    The Dodgers will have to pick up 5 M of his salary, but they already know that when they first thought of trading him. And, they know that they will have to do the same if they want to trade either Eithier or Crawford if they are indeed serious about thinning out their current outfield salary issues.

    Trade them Renaudo (promising young pitcher), Betts (their second baseman of the future) and Morales who can help them either as a starter or reliever in 2014.  Perhaps someone may need to be either added to the deal or substituted for one of the three guys I mentioned.

    For those of you who want to keep all of the young pitching in Renaudo's age group, please remember that statisitically not all of these guys are likely to make it in the major leagues and also likely that none of them are probably going to make serious contributions in Boston in 2014.  Renaudo may eventually make it to the Hall of Fame, but that is the risk of trading any young player for a better chance to win now.

    Betts is an intriguing prospect, but since it appears that he only is a second baseman, he is not likely to play much second base in Boston for the next 6-7 years.

    Morales is a hard throwing lefty who can either start or relieve, and is not very expensive either.

    If a fourth guy needs to go in this trade, I would consider adding Brents since it does not appear that he has a future in Boston and even less of a future if a power hitting outfielder (like Kemp) is acquired.

    Kemp is fairly young (younger than Ellsbury) and the Sox do not appear to have any sure shots to become middle of the order thumpers beyond Ortiz (who is only signed for one more year although he may play further than 2014 if he plays well again in 2014) and Napoli (who is only signed for 2014 and 2015) unless you can predict that Middlebrooks and Bogaerts will be able to bat third and fourth when Ortiz and Napoli depart.  If you think that Gomes is a regular, middle of the order hitter I would disagree (although he brought some nice things to the 2013 team).  He is a .250 type hitter who has some power but nothing like Kemp.  Also, Gomes is only signed through 2014 and is not a quliaty fielder.

    Nava, Carp, Pierszinski and others are also not really regular, middle of the order hitters either, in my opinion.  Middlebrooks and Bogaerts may not be three through five hitters this year either. If the Sox bring back Drew, he is also not a middle of the order hitter.

    The Sox offense is likely to drop off in 2014 without Ellsbury in the leadoff position. Guys like Carp and Nava might not replicate their 2013 performances. Oriz may also not replicate his 2013 stats as he is going to be 38 years old in 2014.  Pierzinski (sp) may or may not balance off what Saltalamacchia did either.

    For the luxury tax issues of adding Kemp at 15 M the Sox would have to move probably two of their three older, high salary starting pitchers, but it seems that they are already poised to make such moves and give guys like Workman a chance to start.  Sending Morales in the deal would save some money but certainly not enough (by himself) to stay below the tax line.

    If Granderson can get 4 years at 60 M, I would be more than comfortable with giving Kemp  6 years at 90 M as he is better suited to Fenway, played about the same number of games as Granderson last year, has better spits against lefties and righties, is younger than Granderson and since the Sox are in the AL, he can eventually transition to the DH position as mentioned above.

    I think that even if Kemp is not completely ready to start the season on April 2, he is still worth the gamble.

    [/QUOTE]


     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from FL33178. Show FL33178's posts

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    In response to docdeke's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to charliedarling's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    This is a great time for the Red Sox to make a bold strike in the trade market that will likely help solidify their line up for the next five years.

    Kemp is a middle of the order, right handed power hitting outfielder that not many teams have.  And, he is not just a home run/strike out type of power hitter like Dunn.

    Yes, I know that his last two seasons have been limited by injuries, but injuries are a part of the game.  If a young guy played all 162 games last season, there is no guarantee that he plays even one in 2014.

    It is also nice to think of home grown talent like Bradley being able to fill center field for the next 7 years, but if there is a better option available Bradley may just have to wait his turn for another year.

    It will not be the worst thing for Bradley to start the season in Pawtucket and stay prepared/ready in all three outfield spots if Victorino, Kemp or Nava get hurt.  He does not have to have a guarantee in center field for 2014 just because he has been groomed to eventually replace Ellsbury.

    Kemp is a good center fielder and will easily transition to left field, then to first base and then to DH if/when necessary and still provide quality offense for at least most of the 6 remaining years on his contract.

    The Dodgers will have to pick up 5 M of his salary, but they already know that when they first thought of trading him. And, they know that they will have to do the same if they want to trade either Eithier or Crawford if they are indeed serious about thinning out their current outfield salary issues.

    Trade them Renaudo (promising young pitcher), Betts (their second baseman of the future) and Morales who can help them either as a starter or reliever in 2014.  Perhaps someone may need to be either added to the deal or substituted for one of the three guys I mentioned.

    For those of you who want to keep all of the young pitching in Renaudo's age group, please remember that statisitically not all of these guys are likely to make it in the major leagues and also likely that none of them are probably going to make serious contributions in Boston in 2014.  Renaudo may eventually make it to the Hall of Fame, but that is the risk of trading any young player for a better chance to win now.

    Betts is an intriguing prospect, but since it appears that he only is a second baseman, he is not likely to play much second base in Boston for the next 6-7 years.

    Morales is a hard throwing lefty who can either start or relieve, and is not very expensive either.

    If a fourth guy needs to go in this trade, I would consider adding Brents since it does not appear that he has a future in Boston and even less of a future if a power hitting outfielder (like Kemp) is acquired.

    Kemp is fairly young (younger than Ellsbury) and the Sox do not appear to have any sure shots to become middle of the order thumpers beyond Ortiz (who is only signed for one more year although he may play further than 2014 if he plays well again in 2014) and Napoli (who is only signed for 2014 and 2015) unless you can predict that Middlebrooks and Bogaerts will be able to bat third and fourth when Ortiz and Napoli depart.  If you think that Gomes is a regular, middle of the order hitter I would disagree (although he brought some nice things to the 2013 team).  He is a .250 type hitter who has some power but nothing like Kemp.  Also, Gomes is only signed through 2014 and is not a quliaty fielder.

    Nava, Carp, Pierszinski and others are also not really regular, middle of the order hitters either, in my opinion.  Middlebrooks and Bogaerts may not be three through five hitters this year either. If the Sox bring back Drew, he is also not a middle of the order hitter.

    The Sox offense is likely to drop off in 2014 without Ellsbury in the leadoff position. Guys like Carp and Nava might not replicate their 2013 performances. Oriz may also not replicate his 2013 stats as he is going to be 38 years old in 2014.  Pierzinski (sp) may or may not balance off what Saltalamacchia did either.

    For the luxury tax issues of adding Kemp at 15 M the Sox would have to move probably two of their three older, high salary starting pitchers, but it seems that they are already poised to make such moves and give guys like Workman a chance to start.  Sending Morales in the deal would save some money but certainly not enough (by himself) to stay below the tax line.

    If Granderson can get 4 years at 60 M, I would be more than comfortable with giving Kemp  6 years at 90 M as he is better suited to Fenway, played about the same number of games as Granderson last year, has better spits against lefties and righties, is younger than Granderson and since the Sox are in the AL, he can eventually transition to the DH position as mentioned above.

    I think that even if Kemp is not completely ready to start the season on April 2, he is still worth the gamble.

    [/QUOTE]


    [/QUOTE]

    +1

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from docdeke. Show docdeke's posts

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    Maybe for Dempster, dodgers pay some salary and a couple of red sox prospects, contingent on games Kemp plays or something along them lines and probably will be a good deal for both teams

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

    Re: Time to trade for Matt Kemp

    In response to charliedarling's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    808, certainly Kemp would have to pass an extensive physical before a trade for him would take place with any team.

    Beantowne,  I see the Dodgers looking to trade Kemp, Eithier or Crawford as a means to cut back on salary for their outfield crew.  Even the Dodgers really should not want to pay Kemp 20 M, Crawford 20 M, Eithier 17 M, Puig 8 M and whatever they have to pay for their 5th guy.
    Those 4 big slaries are around 65 M just for outfielders.  Also, their best prospect is an outfielder, but I cannot remember his name.

    Also, Beantowne, I am not sure that Renaudo, Betts and maybe Brentz would be considered "selling the farm" for Kemp.  Including Morales is surely not selling the farm, and there are still other guys who could go in a trade who would also not be considered huge losses as well.

    Bill806, Kemp was almost a 40-40 guy with over 130 RBIs in the year before the first of his shoulder injuries occured and finished second in the NL MVP voting to a PED user/abuser.  That does not sound over rated or "fat cat" to me.  I will admit that he is overpaid, but which guy making 20 M a year to play a sport is not overpaid to some degree?

    Certainly, his injuries in the last two seasons make him a risk, but an extenisve physical with MRIs, xrays, strength evaluations, etc, etc should show his readiness (or lack of same) to make a major contribution in 2014 and beyond.  Obviously, if he shows poorly in the testing that the Sox would do on him, then the deal is off and both teams move on.

    Moving a few guys off the 40 man roster at this point would not hurt the Sox either especially if they are picking up one very, very good player.

    [/QUOTE]

    And how is Kemp going to pass "an extensive physical" if he's still in a walking boot, due to his latest ankle surgery?

     

Share