PDA

View Full Version : Beckham and Santiago to the Jays?


Fastball23
10-30-2013, 02:08 PM
Gregor Chisholm ‏@gregorMLB 4m (https://twitter.com/gregorMLB/status/395611826907406336)
http://MLB.com (http://t.co/1JVq4qLuX5) report: #BlueJays (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23BlueJays&src=hash) interested in #WhiteSox (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23WhiteSox&src=hash) 2B Gordon Beckham: http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/tor/toronto-blue-jays-interested-in-second-baseman-gordon-beckham?ymd=20131030&content_id=63520456&vkey=news_tor … (http://t.co/UX63Mb1WSE)

kittle42
10-30-2013, 02:23 PM
Will they take back Nestor Molina? Man was that trade one of KW's worst or what?

Moses_Scurry
10-30-2013, 02:35 PM
Will they take back Nestor Molina? Man was that trade one of KW's worst or what?

Eh, nothing for nothing. The Swisher trades are numero uno in my book because of Gio.

Fastball23
10-30-2013, 02:38 PM
It would be great if the Jays took on Danks salary.

blandman
10-30-2013, 02:57 PM
The Jays have a lot of high end failed pitching prospects that probably have Don Cooper frothing at the mouth. Kyle Drabek and Ricky Romero, anyone?

Seriously, we should get those guys. I really think Coop can fix 'em.

doublem23
10-30-2013, 03:07 PM
Eh, nothing for nothing. The Swisher trades are numero uno in my book because of Gio.

Yeah, precisely, we gave up garbage to get garbage, probably happens 1,000 times every MLB season

Chez
10-30-2013, 03:20 PM
Eh, nothing for nothing.

Sergio Santos, whom KW traded for the great Nestor Molina, pitched awfully well in September. If he stays healthy -- a big "if" -- the trade will go down as undeniably terrible. Santos isn't close to being "nothing" or "garbage."

Plus, I thought RH was considering trading surplus piching for bats. Why would he want more surplus pitching like Romero and Drabek?

Moses_Scurry
10-30-2013, 03:27 PM
Sergio Santos, whom KW traded for the great Nestor Molina, pitched awfully well in September. If he stays healthy -- a big "if" -- the trade will go down as undeniably terrible. Santos isn't close to being "nothing" or "garbage."

Plus, I thought RH was considering trading surplus piching for bats. Why would he want more surplus pitching like Romero and Drabek?

I was referring to how the trade turned out. At the time it may have looked bad (or good if you thought Molina would be a stud), but as it turned out it was exactly nothing for nothing and definitely not KW's worst trade.

doublem23
10-30-2013, 03:33 PM
Plus, I thought RH was considering trading surplus piching for bats. Why would he want more surplus pitching like Romero and Drabek?

Because more pitching means more leverage to find more bats?

Plus, the Sox currently have 3 pitchers really set in stone for the 2014 season; Sale and Quintana based on merit, and Danks based on contract. After that there's still a whole lot of question marks. Johnson looked good but is untested. Santiago and Reinzo have been up and down, and the jury is still out on them. I'd prefer to not talk about Axelrod... No team in baseball history has lamented the amount of arms it has in its arsenal.

Plus, between Keppinger, Semien, and Sanchez the Sox probably feel like they can find someone to play 2B next season if Beckham is dealt. And it's not like trading him will negatively effect the offense. Man, does he suck.

Rocky Soprano
10-30-2013, 03:34 PM
Beckham is getting married in less than 2 weeks. Congrats and surprise, you and your wife are moving to Toronto! :D:

cards press box
10-30-2013, 03:38 PM
Mlbtraderumors is reporting this rumor, as well.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

doublem23
10-30-2013, 03:40 PM
Mlbtraderumors is reporting this rumor, as well.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

Well they just recycle content, their source is the same article that is linked in the OP

Huisj
10-30-2013, 03:41 PM
I was referring to how the trade turned out. At the time it may have looked bad (or good if you thought Molina would be a stud), but as it turned out it was exactly nothing for nothing and definitely not KW's worst trade.

I think you missed a key part of that previous post by Chez. It doesn't say he pitched awful. It says he pitched awfully well.

Season stats (most of which came in August and September):
25 IP
11 H
4 BB (2 IBB)
28 K
1.75 ERA

So at the time it may have looked bad. At this time, it also looks bad.

Moses_Scurry
10-30-2013, 03:51 PM
I think you missed a key part of that previous post by Chez. It doesn't say he pitched awful. It says he pitched awfully well.

Season stats (most of which came in August and September):
25 IP
11 H
4 BB (2 IBB)
28 K
1.75 ERA

So at the time it may have looked bad. At this time, it also looks bad.

At the time it may have looked bad. At this time, it is a nothing trade. Unless you think that Santos could have netted anything useful. We'll never know, but I have my doubts. People don't generally trade much for closers unless it is a closer with a much more established record.

Fastball23
10-30-2013, 03:59 PM
Would be awesome to get Lawrie in the deal

Fastball23
10-30-2013, 04:05 PM
If we do trade Danks that will give the Sox more money to sign Ellsbury.

My lineup for next season
1 Ellsbury CF
2 Semien 2B
3 Garcia RF
4 Abreu 1B
5 Dunn DH
6 Lawrie 3B
7 Viciedo LF
8 AJ C
9 Ramirez SS

doublem23
10-30-2013, 04:10 PM
If we do trade Danks that will give the Sox more money to sign Ellsbury.


You think there's a team out there that's going to take Danks and the money?

Fastball23
10-30-2013, 04:15 PM
You think there's a team out there that's going to take Danks and the money?

There was a team out there that took Rios and his money.

doublem23
10-30-2013, 04:18 PM
There was a team out there that took Rios and his money.

Rios wasn't nearly as bad as Danks last year, doesn't have major health questions, and is owed $12 million over 1 year whereas Danks is owed more than $40 million over the next 3 seasons. Not very comparable situations.

kobo
10-30-2013, 04:23 PM
What's with the fascination with Ellsbury? When he's healthy he's awesome and might be the best leadoff hitter in the game. But he just turned 30, he does have health issues, and he's going to get a 5-7 year deal that pays him $15 - $20 million a year. No thanks. I don't want the Sox signing any more guys over 30 to long term deals.

spawn
10-30-2013, 04:26 PM
Rios wasn't nearly as bad as Danks last year, doesn't have major health questions, and is owed $12 million over 1 year whereas Danks is owed more than $40 million over the next 3 seasons. Not very comparable situations.

On top of that, Rios was having a pretty good season, is healthy, and with Nelson Cruz getting that suspension, he filled a need.

DSpivack
10-30-2013, 04:27 PM
What's with the fascination with Ellsbury? When he's healthy he's awesome and might be the best leadoff hitter in the game. But he just turned 30, he does have health issues, and he's going to get a 5-7 year deal that pays him $15 - $20 million a year. No thanks. I don't want the Sox signing any more guys over 30 to long term deals.

I wouldn't worry about it too much, Abreu will likely be the only big free agent signing the Sox make this offseason. I expect more player development with smaller signings and trades.

doublem23
10-30-2013, 04:30 PM
I wouldn't worry about it too much, Abreu will likely be the only big free agent signing the Sox make this offseason. I expect more player development with smaller signings and trades.

Agreed, I think Hahn specifically mentioned at Abreu's press conference that the Red Sox went from 93-loss laughingstock in 2012 to the cusp of the World Series this year by adding mid-level veterans and not making a sexy big-name splash.

cards press box
10-30-2013, 04:41 PM
Rios wasn't nearly as bad as Danks last year, doesn't have major health questions, and is owed $12 million over 1 year whereas Danks is owed more than $40 million over the next 3 seasons. Not very comparable situations.

I wouldn't give up on Danks yet. I saw enough positive last year to think that he might pitch well once he is two years removed from surgery. We'll see.

blandman
10-30-2013, 04:42 PM
What's with the fascination with Ellsbury? When he's healthy he's awesome and might be the best leadoff hitter in the game. But he just turned 30, he does have health issues, and he's going to get a 5-7 year deal that pays him $15 - $20 million a year. No thanks. I don't want the Sox signing any more guys over 30 to long term deals.

Agreed, whole-heartedly. Long term deals should only go to players that will be in their prime still in 3-5 years.

doublem23
10-30-2013, 04:46 PM
I wouldn't give up on Danks yet. I saw enough positive last year to think that he might pitch well once he is two years removed from surgery. We'll see.

Oh, I agree, I am more high on Danks having a good bounce back season probably than anybody else on this board, I just don't think someone is going to come along and take him and his contract off our hands.

spawn
10-30-2013, 04:46 PM
I wouldn't give up on Danks yet. I saw enough positive last year to think that he might pitch well once he is two years removed from surgery. We'll see.

I wasn't expecting Danks to have a great year last season. I am hopeful he regains his form this season.

blandman
10-30-2013, 05:18 PM
I wasn't expecting Danks to have a great year last season. I am hopeful he regains his form this season.

Hopeful is one thing. Expecting it should be quite another. As mentioned, no one has ever successfully come back from his surgery without further complication.

spawn
10-30-2013, 05:29 PM
Oh, I agree, I am more high on Danks having a good bounce back season probably than anybody else on this board, I just don't think someone is going to come along and take him and his contract off our hands.

Agreed. Not after the season he had.

slavko
10-30-2013, 05:40 PM
I think you missed a key part of that previous post by Chez. It doesn't say he pitched awful. It says he pitched awfully well.

Season stats (most of which came in August and September):
25 IP
11 H
4 BB (2 IBB)
28 K
1.75 ERA

So at the time it may have looked bad. At this time, it also looks bad.

Kenny's reasoning must have been based on having Addison Reed in the pipeline. Plus Sergio fell off the chart in September when he got tired. So what does Addison Reed do in September when he gets tired? (all together) He falls off the chart!

But those numbers for Sergio this September look great. (he wasn't tired)

One has to conclude that Kenny didn't maximize his return from those assets. On field management of the talent has to be blamed as well.

MISoxfan
10-30-2013, 05:48 PM
Rios wasn't nearly as bad as Danks last year, doesn't have major health questions, and is owed $12 million over 1 year whereas Danks is owed more than $40 million over the next 3 seasons. Not very comparable situations.

Maybe he meant back in '09?

Tragg
10-30-2013, 07:52 PM
Santos was a viable closer. We got nothing for him. He got hurt for Toronto - garbage he wasn't. Neither was Quentin nor Jackson, 2 other players Williams gave away.

TDog
10-30-2013, 08:20 PM
This is pretty much the same speculation that was going around last off-season, even if the off-season hasn't technically begun.

Boondock Saint
10-30-2013, 08:30 PM
Santos was a viable closer. We got nothing for him. He got hurt for Toronto - garbage he wasn't. Neither was Quentin nor Jackson, 2 other players Williams gave away.

Santos had one solid season as a closer, that's not as valuable as you want to think it is. Quentin was and still is a China doll. Jackson was and still is wildly unpredictable.

It's really unfair to place blame on KW for not getting a lot in return for those guys when they really weren't that valuable to begin with.

mzh
10-30-2013, 09:11 PM
The problem with Jackson wasn't what we got for him. That move was as much a Teahen salary dump as anything. The fact that KW gave up Hudson, injured as he's been, to get him is nothing short of an atrocity.

DrCrawdad
10-30-2013, 09:16 PM
Sergio Santos, whom KW traded for the great Nestor Molina, pitched awfully well in September. If he stays healthy -- a big "if" -- the trade will go down as undeniably terrible. Santos isn't close to being "nothing" or "garbage."

Plus, I thought RH was considering trading surplus piching for bats. Why would he want more surplus pitching like Romero and Drabek?

Kenny's reasoning must have been based on having Addison Reed in the pipeline. Plus Sergio fell off the chart in September when he got tired. So what does Addison Reed do in September when he gets tired? (all together) He falls off the chart!

But those numbers for Sergio this September look great. (he wasn't tired)

One has to conclude that Kenny didn't maximize his return from those assets. On field management of the talent has to be blamed as well.

Santos was a viable closer. We got nothing for him. He got hurt for Toronto - garbage he wasn't. Neither was Quentin nor Jackson, 2 other players Williams gave away.

Santos had one solid season as a closer, that's not as valuable as you want to think it is. Quentin was and still is a China doll. Jackson was and still is wildly unpredictable.

It's really unfair to place blame on KW for not getting a lot in return for those guys when they really weren't that valuable to begin with.

I can't remember the guy's name, but the Sox hired away the Jays Latin America scout. The player this scout has the Sox go after turns to crap is not very encouraging to me, scary actually. Regardless of what you think of Santos, it is at the least discouraging that the very first move made on the basis of this new Latin scout turns out so poorly. On top of it, this was a player from this scouts previous employer. You'd think the scout would have hit a HR.

SoxSpeed22
10-30-2013, 09:19 PM
Semien should have to have a big part for next year. I don't think that they will get a top prospect, but they can get something for Beckham.

SoxSpeed22
10-30-2013, 09:28 PM
As far as Molina goes, there were legitimate concerns about his stuff not being good enough to get high level hitters out. He seemed to improve once he got booted to the pen. There was also the fact he was hurt. We'll have to see how he does next year.

DSpivack
10-31-2013, 01:29 AM
I can't remember the guy's name, but the Sox hired away the Jays Latin America scout. The player this scout has the Sox go after turns to crap is not very encouraging to me, scary actually. Regardless of what you think of Santos, it is at the least discouraging that the very first move made on the basis of this new Latin scout turns out so poorly. On top of it, this was a player from this scouts previous employer. You'd think the scout would have hit a HR.

Marco Paddy. Here's the final segment of the lengthy SSS series on the Sox in Latin America.

http://www.southsidesox.com/minors/2013/2/11/3975340/marco-paddy-puts-white-sox-latin-american-operations-back-on-track

JB98
10-31-2013, 02:06 AM
What's with the fascination with Ellsbury? When he's healthy he's awesome and might be the best leadoff hitter in the game. But he just turned 30, he does have health issues, and he's going to get a 5-7 year deal that pays him $15 - $20 million a year. No thanks. I don't want the Sox signing any more guys over 30 to long term deals.

:clap:

I want no part of Ellsbury. It would be one thing if he were 26. He's not. He's 30. He's got maybe two prime years left. A rebuilding team definitely should not sign Ellsbury, because he'll be washed up by the time the rebuilding is complete.

I will laugh my ass off if the Cubs throw millions at Ellsbury.

cards press box
10-31-2013, 03:21 AM
I wonder if Boston has soured on Salty?

ZombieRob
10-31-2013, 03:54 AM
You think there's a team out there that's going to take Danks and the money?
That and you can almost book it he's going to be a Cub

DumpJerry
10-31-2013, 08:21 AM
That and you can almost book it he's going to be a Cub
If I were you, I would not fly to Vegas to place money on that one.

Gammons Peter
10-31-2013, 09:31 AM
Marco Paddy. Here's the final segment of the lengthy SSS series on the Sox in Latin America.

http://www.southsidesox.com/minors/2013/2/11/3975340/marco-paddy-puts-white-sox-latin-american-operations-back-on-track


Anyone know anthing about Luis Martinez?

from the SSS story:
Paddy also instantaneously signaled the shift in White Sox strategy. Part of that $778,500 spent in 2011 is attributable to Paddy, who used $250,000 to ink (http://www.southsidesox.com/2012/1/11/2700361/white-sox-sign-luis-martinez-signal-shift-in-international-free-agent) pitcher Luis Martinez, a Venezuelan right-hander. That signing, mere days after he was hired, was the largest bonus the White Sox have handed out since the Wilder era.

Hitmen77
10-31-2013, 10:07 AM
The problem with Jackson wasn't what we got for him. That move was as much a Teahen salary dump as anything. The fact that KW gave up Hudson, injured as he's been, to get him is nothing short of an atrocity.

....and, of course, it was KW who gave Teahen that lousy contract extension in the first place. So, if the trade with Toronto was essentially a salary dump, then it was KW fixing one of his other mistakes.

As far the trade to acquire Jackson from Arizona, let's not forget that it wasn't just Jackson for Hudson straight up. The Sox gave up this guy too:
http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2013/08/arizona_diamondbacks_call_up_m.html

doublem23
10-31-2013, 10:30 AM
I can't remember the guy's name, but the Sox hired away the Jays Latin America scout. The player this scout has the Sox go after turns to crap is not very encouraging to me, scary actually. Regardless of what you think of Santos, it is at the least discouraging that the very first move made on the basis of this new Latin scout turns out so poorly. On top of it, this was a player from this scouts previous employer. You'd think the scout would have hit a HR.

Latin American scouts actually scout players in Latin America, not Latin American players already playing within MLB organizations.

TheVulture
10-31-2013, 12:23 PM
If Ellsbury were signed to a five year deal he would only be 34 in his final year. I'm not really advocating signing him, but I would think there'd be just about as decent a chance he'd be a similar player in the fifth year as any other free agent signing. It's not like there are a lot of free agents around aged 29 or younger. I can't see signing him for 15 million a year regardless, though. I'd imagine he would go around 10-12 million a year.

kittle42
10-31-2013, 12:32 PM
The Jays have a lot of high end failed pitching prospects that probably have Don Cooper frothing at the mouth. Kyle Drabek and Ricky Romero, anyone?

Seriously, we should get those guys. I really think Coop can fix 'em.

He didn't fix Francisco Liriano. Someone else did.

kittle42
10-31-2013, 12:33 PM
I was referring to how the trade turned out. At the time it may have looked bad (or good if you thought Molina would be a stud), but as it turned out it was exactly nothing for nothing and definitely not KW's worst trade.

That is almost irrelevant, though - a trade should not really be judged in hindsight, but instead should be judged based on what could have been gotten in terms of value at the time. Otherwise, every time a solid veteran is traded for a not-so-hot prospect who turns out years later to be great would be a "horrible" trade.

TaylorStSox
10-31-2013, 12:41 PM
KW sold high on a converted SS. He had Reed ready. Molina was a legit prospect. It was a good, logical trade. Honestly, who cares? Molina looks like a bust and Santos has thrown 41 innings over the last 2 years.

Moses_Scurry
10-31-2013, 12:43 PM
That is almost irrelevant, though - a trade should not really be judged in hindsight, but instead should be judged based on what could have been gotten in terms of value at the time. Otherwise, every time a solid veteran is traded for a not-so-hot prospect who turns out years later to be great would be a "horrible" trade.

But the team is and has been no better or worse off since the trade, unless you think they could have gotten something better for Santos.

I don't think it was very good trade mainly because of what you said here. But to put it up as his worst trade of his tenure when you've got trades like the Todd Richie or Billy Koch trades that actually hurt the team because the guy they got sucked on the ML roster or hurt the team because the guy they ended up trading away like Gio ended up being really good doesn't work in my opinion.

Thinking about it, the Foulke, Koch trade was pretty awful because Koch sucked and Foulke was awesome after the trade. Getting Cotts makes up for it though for his 2005 alone. I still put the Swisher trade combos as the worst KW's time as GM.

kittle42
10-31-2013, 01:17 PM
But the team is and has been no better or worse off since the trade, unless you think they could have gotten something better for Santos.

I don't think it was very good trade mainly because of what you said here. But to put it up as his worst trade of his tenure when you've got trades like the Todd Richie or Billy Koch trades that actually hurt the team because the guy they got sucked on the ML roster or hurt the team because the guy they ended up trading away like Gio ended up being really good doesn't work in my opinion.

Thinking about it, the Foulke, Koch trade was pretty awful because Koch sucked and Foulke was awesome after the trade. Getting Cotts makes up for it though for his 2005 alone. I still put the Swisher trade combos as the worst KW's time as GM.

I am saying he could have gotten more for Santos, but what do I know?

It's not the worst trade by a longshot, but it's up with the rest.

Moses_Scurry
10-31-2013, 01:33 PM
I am saying he could have gotten more for Santos, but what do I know?

It's not the worst trade by a longshot, but it's up with the rest.

I think the best they could have gotten was a different untested minor leaguer. Maybe he would have amounted to something better than Molina. Who knows?

blandman
10-31-2013, 01:35 PM
I think the best they could have gotten was a different untested minor leaguer. Maybe he would have amounted to something better than Molina. Who knows?

Molina was a crapshoot, a former high prospect that stalled. It was a risk. Yeah, it could have turned out to be worth it, but ultimately Santos' value was probably worth a better prospect in return.

I don't think it was his worst deal though, and far from it.

JB98
10-31-2013, 02:36 PM
KW sold high on a converted SS. He had Reed ready. Molina was a legit prospect. It was a good, logical trade. Honestly, who cares? Molina looks like a bust and Santos has thrown 41 innings over the last 2 years.

Seriously. Of all the things to lament, this isn't one.

The trade hasn't helped either team. There's no point in revisiting it.

TDog
10-31-2013, 02:49 PM
I am saying he could have gotten more for Santos, but what do I know?

It's not the worst trade by a longshot, but it's up with the rest.

I don't think you're right about Santos. Fans and baseball analysts were looking at his stuff and how little wear he had on his arm, only having pitched professionally for one season and about 50 innings before he made it to the Sox bullpen at the age of 26. I think the White Sox and other teams considered him a bit fragile without the strength to make it through a season. In two seasons with the Sox, he had struggles maintaining his stuff late in the season, but he had done enough to that point to impress many.

I don't know that I was surprised that he was traded, but I don't believe I was surprised that the White Sox didn't get more for him. And, really, he has pitched only a little over 30 seasons for the Blue Jays since they acquired him. Maybe his minor league experience in the Blue Jays system is what he needed to be a major league reliever. Maybe the White Sox brought him up too early, not because he couldn't get major league hitters out, but because he wasn't up to the rigors of what it means to be a go-to reliever in a major league bullpen. He turned 30 while pitching in the minors last season, and his age might limit his major league ceiling, regardless of the mileage on his arm. It's hard to tell because relievers who are strong after 30 generally have learned things from a background of pitching experience that Santos will never have.

The Blue Jays appear to have gotten the better of this trade at the moment (unlike the Sirotka-Wells deal about a decade ago), but I think both teams were trading for pitchers they believed could have better futures.

kittle42
10-31-2013, 02:51 PM
I don't think you're right about Santos. Fans and baseball analysts were looking at his stuff and how little wear he had on his arm, only having pitched professionally for one season and about 50 innings before he made it to the Sox bullpen at the age of 26. I think the White Sox and other teams considered him a bit fragile without the strength to make it through a season. In two seasons with the Sox, he had struggles maintaining his stuff late in the season, but he had done enough to that point to impress many.

I don't know that I was surprised that he was traded, but I don't believe I was surprised that the White Sox didn't get more for him. And, really, he has pitched only a little over 30 seasons for the Blue Jays since they acquired him. Maybe his minor league experience in the Blue Jays system is what he needed to be a major league reliever. Maybe the White Sox brought him up too early, not because he couldn't get major league hitters out, but because he wasn't up to the rigors of what it means to be a go-to reliever in a major league bullpen. He turned 30 while pitching in the minors last season, and his age might limit his major league ceiling, regardless of the mileage on his arm. It's hard to tell because relievers who are strong after 30 generally have learned things from a background of pitching experience that Santos will never have.

The Blue Jays appear to have gotten the better of this trade at the moment (unlike the Sirotka-Wells deal about a decade ago), but I think both teams were trading for pitchers they believed could have better futures.

Eh, I lost interest to the point where I don't care if I'm wrong. Funny how that can happen!

kobo
10-31-2013, 02:55 PM
If Ellsbury were signed to a five year deal he would only be 34 in his final year. I'm not really advocating signing him, but I would think there'd be just about as decent a chance he'd be a similar player in the fifth year as any other free agent signing. It's not like there are a lot of free agents around aged 29 or younger. I can't see signing him for 15 million a year regardless, though. I'd imagine he would go around 10-12 million a year.
Except that it's already been speculated he will get that much. Ken Rosenthal a week or 2 ago stated he thinks Ellsbury could get $20 million a year. Seattle is reportedly very high on him and Rosenthal said he thinks they are going to sign him to a 6-7 year deal at $21 million per. Regardless if that happens or not, the FA market is slim and a player like Ellsbury is going to get top $. And he played hurt during the Series with a hand/wrist injury that actually happened before his foot problem in September: http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/red-sox-center-fielder-jacoby-ellsbury-pushes-through-world-series-with-injury-103113

He just turned 30, he's had injury issues the last couple years, this is not the kind of player I want the Sox making an investment in at this time.

SoxSpeed22
10-31-2013, 03:29 PM
I guess the stupid teams never learn (referring to the Mariners paying that much for Ellsbury).
I would like to improve center field, but not at that cost.

cards press box
10-31-2013, 03:36 PM
Santos was a viable closer. We got nothing for him. He got hurt for Toronto - garbage he wasn't. Neither was Quentin nor Jackson, 2 other players Williams gave away.

Have to take the good with the bad. Toronto probably doesn't think Daniel Webb and Myles Jaye for Jason Frasor looks too good right now, either.

TDog
10-31-2013, 03:40 PM
Eh, I lost interest to the point where I don't care if I'm wrong. Funny how that can happen!

Maybe I was confused by the lack of strong conviction. I probably should have left out the first sentence because I certainly didn't intend to be point-counterpointing you. I just never believed that Santos was as highly regarded in baseball as he was by the fans.

kittle42
10-31-2013, 06:10 PM
Maybe I was confused by the lack of strong conviction. I probably should have left out the first sentence because I certainly didn't intend to be point-counterpointing you. I just never believed that Santos was as highly regarded in baseball as he was by the fans.

No, you had a good point.

Tragg
10-31-2013, 09:12 PM
I guess the stupid teams never learn (referring to the Mariners paying that much for Ellsbury).
I would like to improve center field, but not at that cost.

From where we are in CF, it wouldn't cost much at all to improve.

I think the Angels are peddling a good fielding CF. Don't know what they want for him.

A. Cavatica
10-31-2013, 10:45 PM
I wonder if Boston has soured on Salty?

They did not extend a qualifying offer...so they've soured on him at $14 mil, anyway.

Tragg
10-31-2013, 11:40 PM
Have to take the good with the bad. Toronto probably doesn't think Daniel Webb and Myles Jaye for Jason Frasor looks too good right now, either.

Yea, but Frasor was never much. And those are the trades the Sox excel at...when it's a seemingly nothing trade.

cards press box
11-01-2013, 04:12 AM
Webb pitched well for the Sox in nine games in September. And Webb had a great year in the minors in 2013: 2-1 record with a 1.87 ERA at three stops from A to AAA and 11.2 K's per 9 innings. Webb might be in the Sox bullpen last year.

As for Myles Jaye, he is a 21 year old starter who at high single A (he was promoted for 1 game late in the year to AA Birmingham). He is a raw and probably needs to work on a secondary pitch. Future Sox estimates his ETA as 2016.

That is a pretty good haul for an OK middle reliever that Toronto didn't even keep.

cards press box
11-01-2013, 04:14 AM
They did not extend a qualifying offer...so they've soured on him at $14 mil, anyway.

If Boston doesn't make a qualifying offer, then the Sox can sign Salty and not surrender a 2nd round draft pick. That is pretty important.

Tragg
11-02-2013, 11:05 AM
Anyway, they can have Beckham and Danks for a couple of their top prospects.

TheVulture
11-04-2013, 12:36 PM
Except that it's already been speculated he will get that much. Ken Rosenthal a week or 2 ago stated he thinks Ellsbury could get $20 million a year. Seattle is reportedly very high on him and Rosenthal said he thinks they are going to sign him to a 6-7 year deal at $21 million per.

Wow. That's ludicrous. Ellsbury isn't the type you build a lineup around...If this is true, at this rate half the league will be making 20 mil/year before long.

tebman
11-04-2013, 04:01 PM
Wow. That's ludicrous. Ellsbury isn't the type you build a lineup around...If this is true, at this rate half the league will be making 20 mil/year before long.

Bill Veeck said it best: "It isn't the high price of stars that is expensive, it's the high price of mediocrity."

cards press box
11-04-2013, 06:35 PM
If Boston doesn't make a qualifying offer, then the Sox can sign Salty and not surrender a 2nd round draft pick. That is pretty important.

The Red Sox apparently will not give Salty a qualifying offer.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/red-sox-unlikely-to-make-qualifying-offer-to-saltalamacchia.html

blandman
11-04-2013, 06:41 PM
The Red Sox apparently will not give Salty a qualifying offer.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/11/red-sox-unlikely-to-make-qualifying-offer-to-saltalamacchia.html

MLBtraderumors also predicted we'd sign him in their offseason preview.

I don't know who to believe. Local media is saying there won't be any more big signings, but signing Salty just makes so much damn sense.

cws05champ
11-04-2013, 11:31 PM
MLBtraderumors also predicted we'd sign him in their offseason preview.

I don't know who to believe. Local media is saying there won't be any more big signings, but signing Salty just makes so much damn sense.

I would not be a big fan of signing Salty....even though he didn't get a qualifying offer from the Red Sox. I would rather take a shot on a 1 or 2 year deal with Carlos Ruiz or bringing AJ back. I just don't think it's smart to get into a high dollar semi-long term deal with a Catcher who will add more K's to a lineup that can ill afford to have more.

DSpivack
11-04-2013, 11:50 PM
I would not be a big fan of signing Salty....even though he didn't get a qualifying offer from the Red Sox. I would rather take a shot on a 1 or 2 year deal with Carlos Ruiz or bringing AJ back. I just don't think it's smart to get into a high dollar semi-long term deal with a Catcher who will add more K's to a lineup that can ill afford to have more.

I wouldn't mind Salty, but it depends on the price. MLBTradeRumors predicted 4 years and $36 million. That's nuts!

blandman
11-05-2013, 12:00 AM
I would not be a big fan of signing Salty....even though he didn't get a qualifying offer from the Red Sox. I would rather take a shot on a 1 or 2 year deal with Carlos Ruiz or bringing AJ back. I just don't think it's smart to get into a high dollar semi-long term deal with a Catcher who will add more K's to a lineup that can ill afford to have more.

If the move is for the next two years, it certainly should be a vetaran to help the pitchers along. K's shouldn't matter in the least because in 3-4 years when we're competing the lineup *should* be more balanced. Salty's young enough to still be here and be good.

SoxSpeed22
11-05-2013, 12:17 AM
I'm okay with Dioner Navarro. I'm not expecting our catcher next year to be Buster Posey, but I am expecting him to play good defense, have good chemistry with the pitchers and be somewhat competent at the plate. Last year, our catchers were liabilities on both sides of the field.

KRS1
11-05-2013, 12:47 AM
I wouldn't mind Salty, but it depends on the price. MLBTradeRumors predicted 4 years and $36 million. That's nuts!
Yes. That's crazy money for a guy with exactly one good full season who also happens to be average-at-best defensively.

asindc
11-05-2013, 08:14 AM
I wouldn't mind Salty, but it depends on the price. MLBTradeRumors predicted 4 years and $36 million. That's nuts!

I want Salty, but at the price? Hell no.

kittle42
11-05-2013, 10:55 AM
I want Salty, but at the price? Hell no.

All things considered with market inflation, it's not far off what he is worth on the open market. Here are last year's salaries:

Link (http://www.spotrac.com/rankings/mlb/catcher/)

asindc
11-05-2013, 12:03 PM
All things considered with market inflation, it's not far off what he is worth on the open market. Here are last year's salaries:

Link (http://www.spotrac.com/rankings/mlb/catcher/)

Still, no. Rather see the team sign a veteran stop gap than pay that price.

blandman
11-05-2013, 12:29 PM
Still, no. Rather see the team sign a veteran stop gap than pay that price.

I agree that's a lot to pay for someone who's just slightly above average offensively, but offense at that position does come with a premium in cost. And having offense there means you don't necessarily need world beaters at traditionally offensive positions.

kittle42
11-05-2013, 12:45 PM
I agree that's a lot to pay for someone who's just slightly above average offensively, but offense at that position does come with a premium in cost. And having offense there means you don't necessarily need world beaters at traditionally offensive positions.

It's again the issue I raised in the AJ thread about whether the Sox intend on competing or rebuilding the next few season. If the former, Salty is fine. If the latter, you could go that route, but I would also advocate stopgaps like Dioneer Navarro.

blandman
11-05-2013, 12:51 PM
It's again the issue I raised in the AJ thread about whether the Sox intend on competing or rebuilding the next few season. If the former, Salty is fine. If the latter, you could go that route, but I would also advocate stopgaps like Dioneer Navarro.

I think a lot will depend on draft projections, too. If they think they're nabbing their catcher of the future, a stopgap is likely.

If we're talking about getting people for the future in free agency, yeah...it doesn't make the most sense with what's out there this season. Really, there's only one young, potential long term core piece out there (Masahiro Tanaka), and while I would LOVE for that to happen, I think two $60+ million international free signings is highly unlikely. Barring that unlikely scenario, the only signings we're looking at are veterans and also-rans at 1-2 years while we rebuild.

JB98
11-05-2013, 01:30 PM
The problem with signing a stopgap is who are you stopping the gap for? If the Sox had a catching prospect who appeared to be a year or two away from the big leagues, then, yes, you sign a stopgap. Do the Sox have that player? I'm not sure they do.

It comes down to whether the Sox are looking for a long-term solution at the position, and whether they think Salty is that solution. If they believe so, then pay the money and get him in here. If not, then they need to pursue other avenues. I think catcher is a position that needs to be addressed this offseason.

kittle42
11-05-2013, 01:53 PM
The problem with signing a stopgap is who are you stopping the gap for? If the Sox had a catching prospect who appeared to be a year or two away from the big leagues, then, yes, you sign a stopgap. Do the Sox have that player? I'm not sure they do.

It comes down to whether the Sox are looking for a long-term solution at the position, and whether they think Salty is that solution. If they believe so, then pay the money and get him in here. If not, then they need to pursue other avenues. I think catcher is a position that needs to be addressed this offseason.

Good points.

SCCWS
11-05-2013, 02:38 PM
The problem with signing a stopgap is who are you stopping the gap for? If the Sox had a catching prospect who appeared to be a year or two away from the big leagues, then, yes, you sign a stopgap. Do the Sox have that player? I'm not sure they do.

It comes down to whether the Sox are looking for a long-term solution at the position, and whether they think Salty is that solution. If they believe so, then pay the money and get him in here. If not, then they need to pursue other avenues. I think catcher is a position that needs to be addressed this offseason.

Hopefully they look at Salty as a stopgap because he is a liability defensively. He was one of the worse catchers in AL at throwing out basestealers. His % was worse than Flowers and Phegley. But it was not the Red Sox pitchers since their backup, Ross was one of the best in AL.

Moses_Scurry
11-05-2013, 02:50 PM
The problem with signing a stopgap is who are you stopping the gap for? If the Sox had a catching prospect who appeared to be a year or two away from the big leagues, then, yes, you sign a stopgap. Do the Sox have that player? I'm not sure they do.

It comes down to whether the Sox are looking for a long-term solution at the position, and whether they think Salty is that solution. If they believe so, then pay the money and get him in here. If not, then they need to pursue other avenues. I think catcher is a position that needs to be addressed this offseason.

Maybe if they sign a stopgap, they'll be tipping their hand that they are planning on drafting Alex Jackson.

SBSoxFan
11-06-2013, 04:55 AM
If the move is for the next two years, it certainly should be a vetaran to help the pitchers along. K's shouldn't matter in the least because in 3-4 years when we're competing the lineup *should* be more balanced. Salty's young enough to still be here and be good.

He's not very good now, is he? It looks like he had a career year last year. And didn't he not start the last couple of games of the World Series?

doublem23
11-08-2013, 01:22 PM
FWIW, here's a column from Boston that suggests the Red Sox have not soured on Saltalamacchia but instead did not extend him a qualifying offer because they made offers to Stephen Drew and Mike Napoli. Had they made offers to all three players, they ran the risk of eclipsing MLB's $189 million luxury tax payroll mark, which the Sawx are trying to avoid.

http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/alex-speier/2013/11/08/how-much-can-red-sox-spend-winter-2014-payroll

TheVulture
11-12-2013, 03:27 AM
It's again the issue I raised in the AJ thread about whether the Sox intend on competing or rebuilding the next few season. If the former, Salty is fine. If the latter, you could go that route, but I would also advocate stopgaps like Dioneer Navarro.

I'm still trying to figure out how signing a catcher to ten million a year would disrupt the rebuilding process. It's not like we have any good catching prospects, but even if we did, between the 30-40 games the backup would get plus a .190 hitting DH who sucks even worse against lefties and should be benched as much as possible, there would still be plenty of at bats to go around. The Sox are not the Marlins. There's no reason they can't rebuild and add valuable parts at the same time.

35th and Shields
11-12-2013, 12:38 PM
I'm still trying to figure out how signing a catcher to ten million a year would disrupt the rebuilding process. It's not like we have any good catching prospects, but even if we did, between the 30-40 games the backup would get plus a .190 hitting DH who sucks even worse against lefties and should be benched as much as possible, there would still be plenty of at bats to go around. The Sox are not the Marlins. There's no reason they can't rebuild and add valuable parts at the same time.

Very true. Especially when you consider even the best farm systems in the league generate very few good MLB players. Combination of FA and system development is key.

#1swisher
11-12-2013, 08:55 PM
“I hope that Beckham or other players who have seen their names out there on an annual basis know that it’s just part of the business,” Hahn said. “Players get speculated about and names get bandied about sometimes when that’s not the reality in terms of what’s going on.”

http://www.csnchicago.com/white-sox/white-sox-open-dealing-almost-anyone

TDog
11-13-2013, 12:36 PM
Before the 2005 season, a Cubs fan in my office was hassling me about a White Sox trade rumor. It seems there was a source who had learned the White Sox were looking to deal one of their new acquisitions, free agent catcher A.J. Pierzynski.

There is so much out there with so little credibility that I don't believe players take trade rumors seriously.

Mohoney
11-25-2013, 01:15 PM
The problem with signing a stopgap is who are you stopping the gap for? If the Sox had a catching prospect who appeared to be a year or two away from the big leagues, then, yes, you sign a stopgap. Do the Sox have that player? I'm not sure they do.

It comes down to whether the Sox are looking for a long-term solution at the position, and whether they think Salty is that solution. If they believe so, then pay the money and get him in here. If not, then they need to pursue other avenues. I think catcher is a position that needs to be addressed this offseason.

There is one other advantage that might present itself with signing a stopgap catcher to a 1-year deal, but it's kind of a risk. If the guy we sign puts up a nice first half, then a contender that needs a catcher at the trade deadline might give up something in a trade that could help accelerate the rebuild. If the guy we sign does nothing, then the return for him in a deadline deal will be minimal, and we wasted a half-season of starts that could have been used to develop a player who might fit into the long-term plans of the team.

Either way, though, it seems that something majorly catastrophic would need to happen for the catcher position to provide less value to the organization in 2014 than it did in 2013, where the only positive outcome was finding out that Tyler Flowers is not a capable major league catcher.

TDog
11-25-2013, 05:46 PM
There is one other advantage that might present itself with signing a stopgap catcher to a 1-year deal, but it's kind of a risk. If the guy we sign puts up a nice first half, then a contender that needs a catcher at the trade deadline ...


The A's did that before they put together a winning team. They did that with Orlando Cabrera after his 2008 season with the White Sox. That was a down year for the A's, and everyone knew they were signing him to deal him to a contender midseason. When they traded him the Twins on July 31, 2009, they got minor league infielder Tyler Ladendorf in return.

Ladendorf was a second-round pick of the Twins in the June 2008 draft, so he had signed with the Twins only weeks earlier. Ladendorf is a six-year minor-leaguer who played a few games for AAA Sacramento last year. He also played a few games for Sacramento in 2011. He doesn't seem to have developed as a hitter.

If memory serves, Cabrera was having a pretty good season for the A's offensively and defensively when they traded him, and the Twins needed a shortstop. I recall Punto, Tolbert, Harris and Casilla playing shortstop for the Twins before Cabrera came to the team, and I think Cabrera, playing only in August and September led the team in innings at short. Still, all they gave up to fill a need in a tight divisional race was Ladendorf.

In general, I don't see teams giving up a lot at deadline to get players with only a couple of months left on their contracts even if it is to fill a need. I don't believe it's a gamble with a chance of much return. Maybe you can get more for a catcher because catchers do get hurt, and a contending team needs a catcher. But the fact that catchers can be banged up also contributes to the risk because the catcher you sign has a greater chance of getting hurt than other position players.

Mohoney
11-25-2013, 06:20 PM
The A's did that before they put together a winning team. They did that with Orlando Cabrera after his 2008 season with the White Sox. That was a down year for the A's, and everyone knew they were signing him to deal him to a contender midseason. When they traded him the Twins on July 31, 2009, they got minor league infielder Tyler Ladendorf in return.

Who would have been Oakland's shortstop in 2009 had they not signed Cabrera? Did Cabrera needlessly take at-bats away from anybody that might have had a future as the A's shortstop? If he did, then of course the plan was bad, but if he didn't, then the A's made something out of nothing.

Ladendorf didn't work out for the A's, but I still like the idea behind the moves. The A's turned a position where they had absolutely no immediate plan, or future plan for that matter, into a 21 year-old prospect at the deadline. In a go-nowhere season, small organizational victories like this are the only positives that can realistically be expected.

soxfanreggie
11-25-2013, 07:50 PM
Who would have been Oakland's shortstop in 2009 had they not signed Cabrera? Did Cabrera needlessly take at-bats away from anybody that might have had a future as the A's shortstop? If he did, then of course the plan was bad, but if he didn't, then the A's made something out of nothing.

Ladendorf didn't work out for the A's, but I still like the idea behind the moves. The A's turned a position where they had absolutely no immediate plan, or future plan for that matter, into a 21 year-old prospect at the deadline. In a go-nowhere season, small organizational victories like this are the only positives that can realistically be expected.

I think Phegley could use some more at-bats in the majors, but I think we know what we have with Flowers. Flowers could be a back-up here, but he isn't going to be a good or even decent starting catcher IMO. I don't know what Phegley is going to do, but I'd rather sign someone and decide on one of those two as a back-up or give Phegley the majority of ABs.

KRS1
11-25-2013, 08:05 PM
I think Phegley could use some more at-bats in the majors, but I think we know what we have with Flowers. Flowers could be a back-up here, but he isn't going to be a good or even decent starting catcher IMO. I don't know what Phegley is going to do, but I'd rather sign someone and decide on one of those two as a back-up or give Phegley the majority of ABs.
Regardless, both of them better be working their asses off on their D if they want to have any chance of sticking long-term.

TDog
11-25-2013, 08:30 PM
Who would have been Oakland's shortstop in 2009 had they not signed Cabrera? Did Cabrera needlessly take at-bats away from anybody that might have had a future as the A's shortstop? If he did, then of course the plan was bad, but if he didn't, then the A's made something out of nothing.

Ladendorf didn't work out for the A's, but I still like the idea behind the moves. The A's turned a position where they had absolutely no immediate plan, or future plan for that matter, into a 21 year-old prospect at the deadline. In a go-nowhere season, small organizational victories like this are the only positives that can realistically be expected.

Without Cabrera, the A's would have gone with Cliff Pennington, who had been brought up at the end of 2008. As it turned out, he got another year in Sacramento, at least until the A's traded Cabrera.

Signing Cabrera was considered an idiotic move at the time by the Bay Area media. The Bay Area media also deemed the Ladendorf deal a salary dump the day of the trade. Part of the disbelief over the Cabrera situation from sign to trade was that the A's were crying poor. I doubt many A's fans even remember Ladendorf's name. Pennington is no longer with the A's as he was traded before the 2012 season, and he has developed into more of a utility infielder who plays a strong shortstop rather than an everyday shortstop.

Regardless, it wasn't considered a good move for a non-contending team at the time to sign a shortstop for $4 million to a one-year contract for the intention of trading him at the deadline. People who cover baseball pointed out at the time that players in the last year of their contract generally have very little trade value in July. There are exceptions, but Orlando Cabrera wasn't one of them, despite the Twins' need, and I don't see any free agent catchers this offseason who could be considered to be among them.