Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    'Selling high' sounds great, but it's somewhat of a buzz phrase too.  There's a huge amount of uncertainty involved.  I don't care if you're Bill James or Bill-806 - nobody knows exactly how many good years Lackey has left.  It might be 3 or 4.  Why couldn't he be a guy like Kuroda pitching his best at age 38?  Nobody knows.

    I just think it's highly probable that trading Lackey would weaken our starting rotation for the next two years. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Or, from a slightly different perspective, this is the universe of all SPs in 2012, with even 150 IPs, regardless of ERA, but in order of best ERA-

    • Dickey-2.0
    • Kuroda-3.8
    • Vogelsong-(-0.6)
    • Dempster-1.3
    • Colon-3.9
    • Burnett-4.0
    • Harang-0.4
    • Hudson-1.7
    • Arroyo-0.8
    • Westbrook-(-0.2)
    • Zito-(-0.6)
    • Millwood-DNP
    • Halladay-(-0.8)
    • Chen-1.4
    • Wolf-DNP

    15 names, 3 guys pitched well, 4 guys were mediocre (assuming y'all consider Dempster mediocre), 6 guys pitched badly, and 2 guys never pitched again.

    And the average pitcher from that group of 15, is Dempster.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    I hate to say this but Buchholz may be the logical centerpiece of any trade that could bring us a future OF or 1B.  Clay has yet to pitch 200 innings or become the Ace we expected because of health issues which is a huge concern.  I don't want to trade Clay but I think teams would be much more likely to trade a young star for a Buchholz package, rather than a pitcher coming off TJ who had a solid year. 

    Lackey or Peavy would probably need to be packaged with more prospects than Clay but the right combination of players could still get just about any deal done in my opinion because of our deep farm.

    I'd have everyone except Doubront (I think he is better than his stats) on the block.

    And the #1 guy on my list to ask about is not Lackey, it is Lester.  I think Lackey could get you a solid prospect like Davidson.  I think Peavy could get you a decent prospect.  But Lester is the guy that could get you a Dickey or Shields package.

    And as good as he's been, he is a little inconsistent, and he is only ours for 1 more year.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to craze4sox's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to craze4sox's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to southpaw777's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to craze4sox's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to southpaw777's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I ask this because the Dbacks really need, and are looking for a Pitcher like Lackey to solidify their rotation. At an average of 8.5M a year for 2 years, hes a great bargain. He would do well at Chase Field too.

    The Dbacks have loads of good young pitching, as well as position players, and are willing to deal some of their prospects for pitching. Im sure we could always add to the deal, but I think the Sox and Az match up good. Just a thought.

     



    I think we need to trade a pitcher or two plus prospects for a centerpiece.  We have more options now than ever in the starting rotation and on the farm.  I'm still not really high on Bradley or Middy being the next generation of fixtures in our lineup.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    If a team offered a package like the Royals did with the Rays for Lackey and say...Alex Wilson or Brian Johnson, would you take it?

    I would.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, I think the Will Myers trade was a brilliant move by the Rays.  It should give them another Longoria type in the lineup for many years. 

    [/QUOTE]


    This is what Im trying to tell everyone. I dont just want to trade away a pitcher just because we have a bunch. Nor do I want to just let a guy like Lackey go for peanuts. But a return like Wil Myers, Jake Odorizzi, Patrick Leonard, and Mike Montgomery? Yeah, thats a no Brainer IMHO.

    [/QUOTE]

    We did a great job finding the right mix of complimentry players last season but at some point I would love to stop hearing how many great potential prospects we may have and the word (BRIDGE) to get there.  I do believe Bogy will be the real deal but a 3B (Machado type) at some point not SS so I would bring back Drew for insurance and sign M. Young next season for back up at multiple positions. 

    Outside of Bogy?  I don't see Bradley as the next Jacoby or Middy ever having the plate discipline to help our lineup all that much at 3B or 1B.  I would go after a Stanton type, or do our best to solidify 1B for the future next season if we don't want Nap back long term.

    [/QUOTE]


    They wont give up on Middy or a guy like Brentz. Sure, they may have low OBP's (310-320) but they are going to jack 30 bombs. That kind of raw power is rare in todays MLB. I can live with a lower OBP if they are still peoducing and are good defensively.

    Bogey needs to stay put. Period. BC has already stated that they see him remaining a SS for his career and thats how they are handling it. Just because a few scouts said he might move off the position a couple years ago, doesnt mean it applies today. Actually, most of them now say he should be able to stick at SS. Maybe take Drew back if the market isnt nice to him on another 1yr deal, but Im all for starting Xanders MLB career now.

    Stanton gets hurt a lot, has a lower BA and will cost a lot for only 3 years. Nope, pass.

    I dont think Lackey will be a low 3ERA guy. More like high 3's low 4's. If a good deal comes around. jump.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I hate to say this but Buchholz may be the logical centerpiece of any trade that could bring us a future OF or 1B.  Clay has yet to pitch 200 innings or become the Ace we expected because of health issues which is a huge concern.  I don't want to trade Clay but I think teams would be much more likely to trade a young star for a Buchholz package, rather than a pitcher coming off TJ who had a solid year. 

    Lackey or Peavy would probably need to be packaged with more prospects than Clay but the right combination of players could still get just about any deal done in my opinion because of our deep farm.

    I'd have everyone except Doubront (I think he is better than his stats) on the block.

    And the #1 guy on my list to ask about is not Lackey, it is Lester.  I think Lackey could get you a solid prospect like Davidson.  I think Peavy could get you a decent prospect.  But Lester is the guy that could get you a Dickey or Shields package.

    And as good as he's been, he is a little inconsistent, and he is only ours for 1 more year.

    [/QUOTE]


    Im on the side of an extension for Lester, so him and Doubie are off limits to me.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I hate to say this but Buchholz may be the logical centerpiece of any trade that could bring us a future OF or 1B.  Clay has yet to pitch 200 innings or become the Ace we expected because of health issues which is a huge concern.  I don't want to trade Clay but I think teams would be much more likely to trade a young star for a Buchholz package, rather than a pitcher coming off TJ who had a solid year. 

    Lackey or Peavy would probably need to be packaged with more prospects than Clay but the right combination of players could still get just about any deal done in my opinion because of our deep farm.

    I'd have everyone except Doubront (I think he is better than his stats) on the block.

    And the #1 guy on my list to ask about is not Lackey, it is Lester.  I think Lackey could get you a solid prospect like Davidson.  I think Peavy could get you a decent prospect.  But Lester is the guy that could get you a Dickey or Shields package.

    And as good as he's been, he is a little inconsistent, and he is only ours for 1 more year.

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree on Lester but feel it would leave us a huge hole on the left side of the mound with only Doub to rely on for help.  Dempster is nothing more than an expensive throw in to any potental package but I think Clay, Peavy or Lacky in the right package could get a deal done for a kid like CJ Cron or even a Stanton if the Sox are willing to give up more. 

    You also have to consider the fact all our best young arms on the farm are also righties.  Trading Lester I think would really hurt at this point.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to craze4sox's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I hate to say this but Buchholz may be the logical centerpiece of any trade that could bring us a future OF or 1B.  Clay has yet to pitch 200 innings or become the Ace we expected because of health issues which is a huge concern.  I don't want to trade Clay but I think teams would be much more likely to trade a young star for a Buchholz package, rather than a pitcher coming off TJ who had a solid year. 

    Lackey or Peavy would probably need to be packaged with more prospects than Clay but the right combination of players could still get just about any deal done in my opinion because of our deep farm.

    I'd have everyone except Doubront (I think he is better than his stats) on the block.

    And the #1 guy on my list to ask about is not Lackey, it is Lester.  I think Lackey could get you a solid prospect like Davidson.  I think Peavy could get you a decent prospect.  But Lester is the guy that could get you a Dickey or Shields package.

    And as good as he's been, he is a little inconsistent, and he is only ours for 1 more year.

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree on Lester but feel it would leave us a huge hole on the left side of the mound with only Doub to rely on for help.  Dempster is nothing more than an expensive throw in to any potental package but I think Clay, Peavy or Lacky in the right package could get a deal done for a kid like CJ Cron or even a Stanton if the Sox are willing to give up more. 

    You also have to consider the fact all our best young arms on the farm are also righties.  Trading Lester I think would really hurt at this point.

    [/QUOTE]


    The knock on Cron is he cant catch up to high velocity FB. Hes got the potential, but we already have WMB and Brentz in the system. All 3 are very similar. lower OBP high power from the right side.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to craze4sox's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I hate to say this but Buchholz may be the logical centerpiece of any trade that could bring us a future OF or 1B.  Clay has yet to pitch 200 innings or become the Ace we expected because of health issues which is a huge concern.  I don't want to trade Clay but I think teams would be much more likely to trade a young star for a Buchholz package, rather than a pitcher coming off TJ who had a solid year. 

    Lackey or Peavy would probably need to be packaged with more prospects than Clay but the right combination of players could still get just about any deal done in my opinion because of our deep farm.

    I'd have everyone except Doubront (I think he is better than his stats) on the block.

    And the #1 guy on my list to ask about is not Lackey, it is Lester.  I think Lackey could get you a solid prospect like Davidson.  I think Peavy could get you a decent prospect.  But Lester is the guy that could get you a Dickey or Shields package.

    And as good as he's been, he is a little inconsistent, and he is only ours for 1 more year.



    I agree on Lester but feel it would leave us a huge hole on the left side of the mound with only Doub to rely on for help.  Dempster is nothing more than an expensive throw in to any potental package but I think Clay, Peavy or Lacky in the right package could get a deal done for a kid like CJ Cron or even a Stanton if the Sox are willing to give up more. 

    You also have to consider the fact all our best young arms on the farm are also righties.  Trading Lester I think would really hurt at this point.

    [/QUOTE]


    The knock on Cron is he cant catch up to high velocity FB. Hes got the potential, but we already have WMB and Brentz in the system. All 3 are very similar. lower OBP high power from the right side.

    [/QUOTE]

    Cron is only 23 but its still a good point.  if we do trade for a young centerpiece I would hope it would be for a higher OB percentage and lower SO guy who can play against all pitching.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to southpaw777's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I hate to say this but Buchholz may be the logical centerpiece of any trade that could bring us a future OF or 1B.  Clay has yet to pitch 200 innings or become the Ace we expected because of health issues which is a huge concern.  I don't want to trade Clay but I think teams would be much more likely to trade a young star for a Buchholz package, rather than a pitcher coming off TJ who had a solid year. 

    Lackey or Peavy would probably need to be packaged with more prospects than Clay but the right combination of players could still get just about any deal done in my opinion because of our deep farm.

    I'd have everyone except Doubront (I think he is better than his stats) on the block.

    And the #1 guy on my list to ask about is not Lackey, it is Lester.  I think Lackey could get you a solid prospect like Davidson.  I think Peavy could get you a decent prospect.  But Lester is the guy that could get you a Dickey or Shields package.

    And as good as he's been, he is a little inconsistent, and he is only ours for 1 more year.

    [/QUOTE]


    Im on the side of an extension for Lester, so him and Doubie are off limits to me.

    [/QUOTE]

    Ack!  I was supposed to include that.  I'd offer him an extension with a small hometown discount.  He's been at about 3.67 WAR over the past 3 years.  3.67*$5M*5 years, and tear up this year's contract.  Offer him $85/5, including 2014, plus an option for year 6.  That would take him to the end of age 35.  If he wants to test the market, I would consider him as good as gone, and trade him (assuming the return is good).

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I hate to say this but Buchholz may be the logical centerpiece of any trade that could bring us a future OF or 1B.  Clay has yet to pitch 200 innings or become the Ace we expected because of health issues which is a huge concern.  I don't want to trade Clay but I think teams would be much more likely to trade a young star for a Buchholz package, rather than a pitcher coming off TJ who had a solid year. 

    Lackey or Peavy would probably need to be packaged with more prospects than Clay but the right combination of players could still get just about any deal done in my opinion because of our deep farm.

    I'd have everyone except Doubront (I think he is better than his stats) on the block.

    And the #1 guy on my list to ask about is not Lackey, it is Lester.  I think Lackey could get you a solid prospect like Davidson.  I think Peavy could get you a decent prospect.  But Lester is the guy that could get you a Dickey or Shields package.

    And as good as he's been, he is a little inconsistent, and he is only ours for 1 more year.




    Im on the side of an extension for Lester, so him and Doubie are off limits to me.

    [/QUOTE]

    Ack!  I was supposed to include that.  I'd offer him an extension with a small hometown discount.  He's been at about 3.67 WAR over the past 3 years.  3.67*$5M*5 years, and tear up this year's contract.  Offer him $85/5, including 2014, plus an option for year 6.  That would take him to the end of age 35.  If he wants to test the market, I would consider him as good as gone, and trade him (assuming the return is good).

    [/QUOTE]


    I was very interested in Matt Davidson too. He could play at either corner IF spot. Good all around offensive numbers and good D as well. Scouts say hes about ready for the show.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    The knock on Cron is he cant catch up to high velocity FB. Hes got the potential, but we already have WMB and Brentz in the system. All 3 are very similar. lower OBP high power from the right side.

    He is also a 1B with 29 errors in 219 games.  That's almost unfathomable.  I see no appeal in a 1B that can't field, and has a .746 OPS in AA at age 23.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    I was very interested in Matt Davidson too. He could play at either corner IF spot. Good all around offensive numbers and good D as well. Scouts say hes about ready for the show.

    I also like the fact that AZ should be motivated to move him.  They have Goldschmidt and Prado, and while they could move Prado, I don't think they will.  And he also has enough of a major league sample to see that he at least held his own.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?


    In all fairness, Cron made 10 errors last season in 124 games with a .991 fielding percentage at 1B which is the type of improvement you love to see in young players. 

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    I'd listen to any offer a team makes for anyone on our team.

    Sure, I want Lackey back, but if a team wants to give us something more than he's worth, how can anyone be against that.

    Just because someone suggests trading a player, it doesn't mean they do not value that player as much as others. Lackey haas extremely high value to us and others due to his comparative low cost over the next two years of team control.

    I do not think it is unreasonable to expect something close to his 2013 numbers next year or even in 2015. I certainly expect better numbers from him than from Peavy or Dempster, but so do other GMs. The fact that you can get 2 years of Lackey for about the same cost as one year of Peavy or Dempster is a gold mine in today's market.

     

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to southpaw777's comment:
    [QUOTE]I dont think Lackey will be a low 3ERA guy. More like high 3's low 4's. If a good deal comes around. jump.

    [/QUOTE]

    He won't be a low 3ERA guy, but we don't need him to be a low 3ERA guy.  Red Sox starters that can deliver 180+ innings with an ERA under 4 are extremely valuable.  It's not an easy accomplishment.  The only two that did it last year were Lackey (3.52) and Lester (3.75), and they carried us to a World Series.

    Doubront, Peavy, or any of the prospects are unlikely to deliver an ERA under 4.  Buch is unlikely to deliver 180+ innings. 

     

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to chickenandboose's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In a heart beat, or at least try to trade Peavy.

    [/QUOTE]


    I don't see either of them as contributing next year.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    Heck, let's trade both Lester and Lackey.  Winning it all again would be a bore.  Let's stock up on hitting prospects.  Good starting pitching is overrated. :-) 

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to bosoxmal's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to chickenandboose's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In a heart beat, or at least try to trade Peavy.

    [/QUOTE]


    I don't see either of them as contributing next year.

    [/QUOTE]

    Where'd you see that - in your Ouija board?

     

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to bosoxmal's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to chickenandboose's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In a heart beat, or at least try to trade Peavy.

    [/QUOTE]


    I don't see either of them as contributing next year.

    [/QUOTE]


     

    Of course they will contribute.  If they make 30 starts apiece, that is contributing.  (Peavy is admittedly iffy-er for this, but it is not unheard of for him either.)

     

    Failure to out up Cy Young numbers does not make a pitcher deadweight.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    People forget that Peavy is one season removed from a 32-start, 219-inning, 3.37-ERA year. I would not be too quick to write him off.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    People forget that Peavy is one season removed from a 32-start, 219-inning, 3.37-ERA year. I would not be too quick to write him off.

    [/QUOTE]


    I do know that about him, but really his recent past does indicate some wear and tear and durability concerns.  He has only topped 144IP once since 2008 (in 2012), and even his 144IP 2013 was not without injury.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    People forget that Peavy is one season removed from a 32-start, 219-inning, 3.37-ERA year. I would not be too quick to write him off.

    [/QUOTE]


    I do know that about him, but really his recent past does indicate some wear and tear and durability concerns.  He has only topped 144IP once since 2008 (in 2012), and even his 144IP 2013 was not without injury.

    [/QUOTE]


    True. I was more talking to the guy who said he wouldn't contribute.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    Just for funsies, 2014 WAR by Steamer-

    • Lester      3.3
    • Buchholz  2.4
    • Lackey     3.2
    • Peavy      3.0
    • Doubront 2.4
    • Dempster 0.8
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Just for funsies, 2014 WAR by Steamer-

    • Lester      3.3
    • Buchholz  2.4
    • Lackey     3.2
    • Peavy      3.0
    • Doubront 2.4
    • Dempster 0.8

    [/QUOTE]


    not much of a predicted dropoff from lackey to peavy. If Buch can stay healthy, he'll make up the other .2

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    What type of prospects do we think we could even get back for Lackey?  I'm sure we could get some quality guys, but it's not like we would get a top 25 prospect. And if we wanted prospects with higher ceilings, then we would likely have to accept guys that are younger, more raw, and further away (not that I'm entirely opposed to that).  It's not like we would get back Xander Bogaerts or anything for him. 

    Lackey might not be as good as he was last year, but perhaps he comes really close for the next two years.  If you can explain away his 2011 season (because it is obvious he was pitching hurt the entire time) then he is effectively the same pitcher today as he has always been.....perhaps he does give us two more solid years.

    And if he does pitch solid for two more years, then he's a Q.O. candidate, which means he would either give us one more year, or return a draft pick and thus give us a prospect anyways. 

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    What type of prospects do we think we could even get back for Lackey?  I'm sure we could get some quality guys, but it's not like we would get a top 25 prospect. And if we wanted prospects with higher ceilings, then we would likely have to accept guys that are younger, more raw, and further away (not that I'm entirely opposed to that).  It's not like we would get back Xander Bogaerts or anything for him. 

    Lackey might not be as good as he was last year, but perhaps he comes really close for the next two years.  If you can explain away his 2011 season (because it is obvious he was pitching hurt the entire time) then he is effectively the same pitcher today as he has always been.....perhaps he does give us two more solid years.

    And if he does pitch solid for two more years, then he's a Q.O. candidate, which means he would either give us one more year, or return a draft pick and thus give us a prospect anyways. 

    [/QUOTE]


    He probably wouldnt be the only one involved in the trade. And of couse, it depends on the return. Lackey could get someone better than 25. Id bet $$ on that.

     

Share