GreenSox

I think Shirley said that there's a prep arm he really likes; maybe we'll see him (although those guys are high risk)

They are going to develop him. Will need him in a couple of years, if not sooner.

Always be open to selling; you usually get the best of it value-wise, and it makes sense if you trade where you have depth, a player you won't be able to extend, etc. Heck we sold tonight (I don't know whether or not it was a great deal, but we sold). Sox certainly shouldn't be buying aging pitchers.

I think Smith is more of a drafting failure: 5 inning college pitcher with a less than smooth delivery. And to then pay him over-slot. As for this trade, it's not a great value trade. That said, I think it's pretty clear that the Sox weren't big fans of Gonzalez; heck he had to beg to be coached. (I had hope they'd take the opportunity to dump Beni, but alas). They really wanted the extra pick so they had to pay up for it. I hope Shirley makes great use of it. But, please, no reaching (see Smith above).

They can have any reliever except for Taylor; heck, any 2 except for Taylor.

I presume you mean "He" as in Bannister. It's hard to tell the talent he inherited. Crochet needs to be credited to Bannister. Hahnber wouldn't let him leave the pen and kept rushing him. Shultz wasn't a universally beloved pick; Taylor was an injured pitcher who played 1 year in college; he could throw hard. No one has been able to do anything with Palette or Kelley, but Shirley used nearly all of rounds 2-5 to get Kelley. It's hard for me to discern how much real talent there was.

Pretty awful series. Thoroughly outplayed. Actually, bullpen was good except for Eisert. That said, starting Grichuk and Perez, the 2 worst players on the roster, for all 3 games, is not a serious effort. It's a clown act. It's "I'm the smartest guy in the room" nonsense. Okay they hit RH - so what? Sox have gotten a lot out of Grichuk - but he didn't suddenly become great at age 34. Pick the spots.

He's had 9 games with 2 IP, for a cool 1.00 ERA and didn't allow an ER in 8 of them. But he's had several outings between 1 and 2 innings, for ERA of 4.63. He started 4 games in April and allowed 1 hit and 0 ER. To me, when he's on, he looks unhittable; but he's not always on. I hope they try him as a starter; but yall may be right.

Need some pitching!

And/or Shirley. I'm a litter easier on Bannister because he inherited a big hole. Building takes time, especially from the abyss. I thought they might have been able to make a reliever out of Cannon. And still interested in why they decided Taylor is just a reliever.

It's something to consider in the offseason if Bonemer's ready (he probably will be); also presuming no injuries or performance downturns from anyone on the middle infield. Depth has an amazing ability to get used. But if there really is excess, we can trade it for young pitching, where we have a deficit. Not long ago, tonight's opponent thought they had a lot of prospect depth; that lasted about a month with 1 injury and 1 bust and then they were scrambling. Now the media is trying to convince the good Sox to send them some of ours.

That's what quality youth brings. Beni is still an albatross really, but as the only one, it's manageable. We've had some good fortune (Peters, e.g) but it's about darn time. And yes I'm greedy: We should have been 1/1 last year and getting ready to bring up Cade Anderson. We didn't tank 2023-25: we just suc##ed.

The general consensus here is that the Sox will take Roch; those on here who seem to have some connections seem to think it's likely Roch. Law says that the scouts want Emerson and the FO wants Lackey and Roch is a distant 3rd. Like 2 years ago, when my only request was to not take Smith, the bloggers and those "in the know" would say "don't worry; they're not taking a pitcher." Of course, no one had much of an idea as the candidates all had questions. But last year, everyone nailed the Carlson pick. I am just excited to find out who it will be.

What's the price? You can't pay a top 100 prospect for a 36 year old non-ace; he's in the midst of a great season which could very well even out over the 2nd half, as it did in 2025: first half 2.5 ERA and 1.083 WHIP; 2nd half 5.45 and 1.46.

Just want to point out that Bonemer will be ready next year to take a spot; Emerson should extend the window....a window that should be open a decade + (unless we start doing stupid stuff). One thing I prefer about Roch is that he bats right... right handed hitting proficiency is becoming a scarce commodity.

I sat in the LF bleachers my only time there - it was a lot of fun. Spent a long weekend in Cleveland....had a great time.

Shouldn't be. And certainly should never pay that price. But probably will be. Again, though, moves like this are how we got bad. ( it was a big part of it). Imagine had the Cubs chosen Crochet instead of Madrigal. And it's not like Chapman has been pristine. His 1.27 WHIP trails Grant Taylor, Newcomb, Richard, the much maligned (at least by me) Eisert; it also trails Tyler Davis and also much maligned Leasure. And for the bWAR believers, behind Taylor and Newcomb and Hudson.

Good to hear; I didn't see it. I did notice that he didn't walk a bunch, which has usually been his issue when struggling.

But isn't that the primary tool for a top draft pick? Just as an example (and I'm no scout; I really know nothing about any of these guys other than what I read), if it ends up that Emerson can't hit and Roch can't hit, what do you have? With Emerson, it's a complete washout - a guy who can't play at all. With Roch, you have Royce Clayton (or, in an earlier era, Ron Hansen or Roger Metzger). Well, to me, Claytons are easy to find so I'd still go with the hit tool. Now Lackey is a little different in that defensive catchers are a little harder to find. While Emerson would be my choice if I were picking, as a fan, I just want them to pick who they think is best, irrespective of saving a few bucks on slot, current roster, etc.

Newcomb can throw some heat. Nice bounce-back. Disappointed that Murphy stumbled...he'd been throwing well. Maybe the first inning isn't for him.

C and LF in the pros; some IF in college> These senior signings are just weird to me; basically all are for fractions of slot (he was at 50K, c. 15% of slot). But some must be legit prospects, who just didn't "turn it on" until their 4th college season. He's already at AA. Awfully impressive. AAA is really just a place holder now.

Webb just gave up 7 runs, 11 hits in 3 innings v. Colorado. That would be a nice Hahn/Shields channeling. Webb also plays his home games in a decided pitchers' park; even though he does have reverse splits. More of a control pitcher. And when trading with these sick teams like Mets, Giants, RedSox, how do we know that the player we're trading for wasn't the clubhouse problem? Of course, I'm against all of these trades. (I do like your idea of Whitlock among reliever trades). We're contending while building a great young core; keep that going. Trading for vets never helps, and more often than not, makes us worse. I turn on MLb network and they say "Hagen Smith and Bonemer for Sonny Gray and Chapman." Madness. Bowden says that Getz told him we would buy if we were contending at the end of July. It's like the Sox have some obligation. Yet they never suggest that the Nats, Cardinals or any team in a similar situation do that nonsense. With Bonemer, the Sox FINALLY draft and develop a top 20 position prospect. Have we done that this century?

Both done by Preller; this time, he can't trade with himself. He may move Miller, but not for a top 20 guy. Good teams save their top prospects.

Probably right. I will say this: I'm glad we're 10 ahead of Detroit and tied with Cleveland versus 10 ahead of Cleveland and tied with Detroit.

As did his predecessor. But Getz got the big signing right. When you are choosing between 5th starters and middle relievers and platoon outfielders, you are going to have a lot of misses. Ideally you fill most of those spots internally, and using the $ on, say, extending Vargas.