Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by GreenSox

  1. That's fine, if for a good player; not for a pile of utility infielders and other junk.
  2. The odds are probably on his side. This winter meetings has the makings of a Hahn special: trade 4 of your best 6 prospects for a good, not great, player. Some will like it; some won't.
  3. Narvaez was our 2nd to best hitter his last season here. Sox grabbed him off the scrap heap and developed him.
  4. I'm sure he's close to a lot of Royals. Sox signed a Royals coach or 2. That's it. Not their players. As for Eflin, the only knock I see is that he doesn't get enough innings in. He would have been a good add for the rotation, even if they want a higher-end guy next year. Price was reasonable and he's only 28.
  5. Yes, the injuries and declines in production aren't his fault per se. But perhaps had he done things differently, we could have overcome that. Picking up Kimbel's and not Rodon's option is inexplicable. No one thought that was a good idea. Using so many resources on the bullpen was unwise. Had he redeployed those resources, we might have been able to overcome the things that did not go well and were not "his fault." I
  6. Were this a one year blip, an anomaly, amidst great success, then I could go with that. The problem is that it's the successes, not the failures, that have been the anomaly, under Hahn. And by that logic, if Vegas has us pegged at, say 82 wins, and the team wins 76, it will also not be his fault. Regardless, there's nothing stopping him from improving this team for next season. Let's see him do it.
  7. Their history says that they don't have a clue whether he is or isn't. But because has no external affirmation (prospect ranking), they don't want to take the chance that he isn't, and would prefer some decliner that they can wishcast will rebound.
  8. Just awful. Considering salary, Lambert is the highest value player in that deal. I think Moncada has a reasonable chance to bounce back anyway.
  9. We did that on occasion, but always quickly reverted to the "proven veteran" comfort zone. In 2013 we trade Santiago and a Rule 5 guy for Eaton; in 2014, Hahn trades 4 young players for 1 year of that proven veteran top of the rotation starter Samardzija.
  10. I would prefer him to Wong, too, but you can't give up serious prospects for either of these two. Trading serious prospects for mediocre older players is the Hahn way, but it's the losing way.
  11. Fine, I guess, if the price is basically nothing. Kepler's career OBP is a miserable .317. He's not cheap either, for a guy who can't hit. This just seems lazy; so often, they focus on players that they are familiar with (Cubs, division players) instead of doing real scouting.
  12. Providing the Brewers a decent piece for Kolten Wong would make it an even worse move.
  13. Then trade Graveman for them. If you go by WAR, Graveman had a higher WAR than Gonzalez and Winker combined last year (quite the feat, as WAR generally disfavors relievers). You just can't trade a good player, Hendriks, for 2 mediocre/bad players.
  14. I don't think Lux' 3 WAR is anywhere close to legit. He doesn't hit for power, his D is okay, not great, and his OBP is good, not great. He's kind of what we would could have reasonably expected out of Madrigal. Sosa or Gonzales should be able to deliver something close to that. Sox really need outfielders.
  15. They've got a few Mendicks on the 40 man; and even though it's a sunk cost, the aren't dumping Leury.
  16. By org. depth, I mean lower minor leagues. Sox have a lot of infielders in the upper minors; just adding more doesn't help. But, as I suggested, if there's a pitcher or an OF, then that's a different story.
  17. Why didn't the Sox clear all of the riff-raff off of the 40 man roster; it would maximize flexibility to take advantage of opportunities that may arise.
  18. Dealing with the Rays' Rule 5 guys won't help organizational depth. If they could get a major league pitcher or OF out of it (worthy of the non-Rule 5 prospect they will have to send in return), then fine. That would require the Sox org. actually having knowledge of the Rays' system, which is a dubious assumption. The Sox certainly don't have a Rule 5 crunch. There are at least 5 guys on there who you would never keep if it meant exposing a real prospect, including a couple that probably shouldn't be on there at all regardless of the circumstances. There are also 9 infielders on the roster; 11 if you include Sheets and Vaughn. There are also 6 only OFs, only 2 of which can actually play OF (Engel and Robert); Eloy is a DH, Sheets and Vaughn are infielders and the 6th is an org. guy.
  19. Yea I can understand making a trade, but Liriano had an ERA in excess of 5 and a WHIP >1.4 that season (and similar numbers the season prior). But the Sox do that. Shields wasn't having a good season, was 34 and had been a hard-used pitcher for many seasons. Sox FO was unphased. And both were terrible with the Sox.
  20. It wasn't even the lower levels in a lot of cases. Semien and Bassitt (Phegley, too, in that trade) were in the majors, as was Escobar a couple of years before. Sox, apparently, couldn't tell the difference between those guys and Yolmer. Tatis, Devenski and Montas were lower level. A lot of talent sent away for horsesh.... in return. I'd prefer the Sox avoid that route. Giving Tampa Bay open access to our young pitching, even such as it is, is scary.
  21. Then the Sox should take advantage of the market, hand the ball to Reynaldo and get the haul for Hendriks.
  22. Trading for the obvious is lazy, unimaginative and you pay a premium price. Right up Hahn''s alley.
  • Create New...