harfman77

QUOTE (glangon @ Jul 16, 2014 -> 05:10 AM) Unless we get a mouthwatering deal, I wouldn't move Alexei. I reckon Hahn sees him and Abreu as the heart of the infield and is building around them. He will be a FA right in the middle of your window of contention, and if he is not going to be re-signed it is time to start auditioning his replacements and determine whether or not Sanchez or Semien can stick at the position, at the same time help fill some holes in the organizational depth chart so that there are more players ready to contribute off the farm when holes develop on the ML level. That said, I am not sure there is a big enough market for a SS to make it worthwhile to trade him during the season. The Mets, Mariners, Reds, and Pirates are all possible destinations, but the Yankees and possibly Dodgers will join the bidding in the off-season.

Everyone is on the market for the right price. I like Gillaspie, but would deal him tomorrow if I felt that a team was willing to provide what I deem appropriate value in return.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jul 17, 2014 -> 09:18 AM) anytime a trade partner is mentioned, finding one of their top prospects and saying "I just want this guy" is funny. Of course that OF would have a bunch of upside, but in a thread where we are talking about the Dodgers wanting to unload a highly paid poorly performing outfielder, why would you mention that you want their affordable up and coming prospect. It is just silly I said I would take on half of Kemps contract if they threw in Pederson, because taking on Kemp is a huge financial risk and I would want that balanced with something else. The Erik Johnson thing was a joke. The Dodgers are going to have a bunch of money come due to re-up Greinke and Ramirez so maybe getting Kemp off their books is worth that much to them. Realistically, taking on Kemp at all is a terrible idea. Why would the Sox take on a headcase that is owed $107M and underperforming? That is a less silly idea than targeting someone that may actually contribute to the long term success of the franchise? So blowing up the payroll to take on a bad player is good, and we should not entertain the idea of targeting excess prospects of a team that is trying to go all into win a WS.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 17, 2014 -> 09:13 AM) Yes, but it isn't realistic. Depends what the deal is for, but you're right probably not.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jul 17, 2014 -> 09:12 AM) Right but why would the Dodgers ever trade him? There's been no indication of him being available at all, and most of the reason Dodger OF trades come up in the first place is because they want to move someone expensive to make ROOM for Pederson. No idea why they would. He was mentioned as a piece in a trade for Price, and considering what the A's gave up, you would definitely have to think he is in play. Again, moving an OF doesn't open up space for Pederson, they have to move two, and outside of moving Puig, I don't see any way that their front office can move two of those contracts.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jul 17, 2014 -> 09:11 AM) So would the Dodgers, but they can't just cut Matt Kemp Even if they dump Kemp they still have to clear out one of Ethier, Crawford or Puig to find playing time for Pederson.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jul 17, 2014 -> 09:07 AM) I like how everytime the Dodgers are mentioned as a trade partner for anything, inevitably people post "I just want Joc Pederson". Because he would fit a need perfectly. An OF of Pederson, Eaton, and Garcia is cheap and has a ton of upside to contribute to the offensive core for the next 5 years.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jul 17, 2014 -> 09:06 AM) Well, and that he's two years removed from an MVP-level campaign. Dayan's "platform" season, on the other hand, was the one where he hit 25 homers and still somehow managed not to touch 100 wRC+. I'm not saying we should get him, but if a couple plausible conditions were met, it might be worth considering because it is indeed an upside play: (1) we believe that he is fully healthy (or soon to be) for the first time since his success, and (2) the Dodgers are willing to make him into a $50m investment (instead of $107m) and only ask for a few "interesting flyer" types of prospects. Something like Snodgress, Wendelken, and a random. Ideally, this would correspond with a "change of scenery" trade that got rid of Viciedo and/or De Aza. You'd stick him in LF from day one and enjoy a rather nice defensive upgrade from those two guys (he's miscast in CF, but we have Eaton), and if he has trouble staying healthy, it's the perfect opportunity to shift into the A's-style rotating DH model (with the departures of both Dunn and Konerko) where we essentially carry 4 starting OFers and give them all plenty of rest. Now, it would be a tremendous risk that I'm not even sure I'd take, but it does make some sense to consider given that we have few high payroll commitments and don't seem to be great fits with any big free agents coming soon. He has been playing LF since Crawford was hurt and hasn't performed much better. At this point it appears the biggest obstacle he has is between his ears.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Jul 17, 2014 -> 08:31 AM) Just heard on SportsCenter that Kemp either wants to play, or wants to get traded. First, are any of you interested in Kemp if the Dodgers pick up most of his deal and what would you give up? Second, if they are not willing to eat any money, he's probably worth Chris Curley with that contract. Thoughts on Kemp? I would give up Erik Johnson for him if the Dodgers kicked in $50M and Joc Pederson.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jul 9, 2014 -> 03:19 PM) -I would say the 2.43 BB/9 is more of the outlier pulling his career numbers up, given his 1.9 BB/9 coming into the year and 1.5 BB/9 in the minors. -That LD% means virtually nothing to me given that Quintana has a 22.4% LD% this year and a 21.2% for his career. Chris Sale had a LD% of 23% in 2012 and 21.4% last year. You'd prefer it to be lower, but it's not in a bad spot. -A career FB% of 41.3% and 41.6% this year is more than adequate. You prefer him throwing more grounders, but he's not dependent upon flyball outs the way a guy like Chris Young or Marco Estrada are. -A .262 BABIP is not otherworldly unsustainable though, especially given his career BABIP of .291. This isn't the pitching version of Tyler Flowers hitting .360 with a .600 BABIP. -A high flyball percentage in a pitcher's park and a lower flyball percentage on the road would indicate to me a smart pitcher who works well in his environment. He was 2.25 BB/9 last season, so the trend is moving away from his career low 1.7. Fair enough on LD%. The more flyballs, the more homeruns when he doesn't have the luxury of pitching in Oakland. No, but a regression to his norm would allow him to be less effective than he has been this season. You could assume that it is the work of a smart pitcher, or you could believe that he has been lucky on the road this season.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jul 9, 2014 -> 06:41 PM) what happen the the buzz regarding Mariners???? any updates??? Theres buzz that they may be targeting Willingham from the Twins.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jul 9, 2014 -> 04:17 PM) Not seeing the logic here. Park factors act as moving reference points; they don't change the amount of runs required to win. They affect both teams equally. I don't believe that they don't change the number of runs required to win. I believe that the average score of the winning team in all games at the Cell is higher than the average score of the winning team in every game at PetCo.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Jul 9, 2014 -> 02:01 PM) If the Sox pitching depth is so deep, why are we having problems filling holes? The Sox have called up this organizational depth and failed. The Sox have tried rehab projects and those too have failed. Hell, the Sox were so desperate they signed Noesi after Texas released him shorty after the Sox kicked his ass.I'm glad he's pitching better for the Sox but that's pretty desperate. So, where is this depth? Still in AA and below for the time being which does nothing to help the Sox right now. I'll gladly take that kid from Seattle. Jones is hurt, he'll be back. Noesi is a starting pitcher, Maurer is a RP which doesn't help with the depth issues at SP. Noesi is also a guy that the Sox have targeted since he was in the Yankees organization. While not helping the rotation issues, it does create an issue in the OF though as the Sox have nothing in the system that is even projected to replicate the production of Viciedo. So you make your line-up significantly worse to make your bullpen marginally better. And no, the depth in AA does not help the Sox right now and if a bullpen arm was all the Sox needed to make a run for the playoffs a deal like that would make sense, but when there are so many wholes in the roster it doesn't make good sense to add to your bullpen. If Maurer could be a starter he would be one now as Seattle has their own rotation issues.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jul 9, 2014 -> 02:23 PM) Not that Bowden knows how to spell Urias, Phili would have done that trade twice already if they could have. That one was my fault, transposition error. But still, that is a deal I would take for Q.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jul 9, 2014 -> 01:50 PM) His career BB/9 is 2.02, career HR/9 is 1.12, and career FB% is 41.3%. Can you tell me why you expect too many home runs and too many walks when he's been fairly proficient at reigning them in throughout his entire career thus far? Because he put those numbers up in Oakland, a pitchers haven. His BB/9 rate this season is 2.43 up from 2.25 last season and his career numbers are pulled down by what appears to be an outlier 1.71 BB/9 in his rookie season. He has a 20% LD% as well. In USCF more of those fly balls and line drives turn into HR's at USCF and he isn't aided by the extra outs that are picked up in Oakland in the vast foul territories. He is also currently operating with an unsustainable BABIP (.262) and has a FIP of 4.40 and a xFIP of 4.49. His fly ball percentage is 47.1% at home and 36.3% on the road, I would not think that discrepancy to be sustainable either.

No reason to sign him. The Sox are not winning anything this year and AJ is not going to solve anything for next season. Having AJ gets in the way when Hahn does acquire a C this summer and has to turn around and DFA him and eat whats left on his contract. If he was 10 years younger, then he would be worth a shot, but at his age and the Sox proximity to contention, he doesn't make any more sense now than he did when the Sox let him walk originally.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Jul 9, 2014 -> 01:01 PM) A team that has desperately been trying to fill the two voids in the rotation would be dumb for trading for a younger right handed pitcher? Really? Yes, to make yourself worse at a position to add depth to your deepest organizational position is dumb. We probably have 3-4 guys in the org that will be able to step in as ML relievers in the next couple of seasons in addition to Webb, Petricka, and Jones.

Jim Bowden lists the four blockbusters he would like to see. Padres - Grandal and Street for Angels - Taylor Lindsey, Kaleb Cowart, Jose Rondon, RJ Alvarez, and Victor Alcantara Rays - Price, Zobrist, Jennings, and Peralta for Cardinals - Oscar Taveras, Martinez, Bourjos, and Wong - adds caveat of a Price extension Mets - Murphy and Colon for A's - Milone, Cook, and Nate Freiman Phillies - Coles Hamels for Dodgers - Joc Pederson, Julio Arias, and Alex Guerrero If the Dodgers were to offer that package for a LHSP, Hahn needs to get in the conversation.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Jul 9, 2014 -> 11:50 AM) What's intriguing about Ackley - he can't hit a lick. He walks a little, but his obp and ops are horrid. Franklin's not a top defender. Don't see much upside with Ackley at all; maybe with Franklin if he can start hitting. Prefer Maurer (upside, but he's not enough). In our dreams. He's definitely the Yankee catcher prospect I'd want. Seattle is perhaps the worst park for hitters in baseball. Guys like Ackley may have a bat that will better fit in at USCF than at SafeCo. I would certainly take a flier on him as a throw in on a deal. Trading Viciedo for a RP is just dumb when that is really the only thing that our farm system develops consistently.

Milone would be a trainwreck in USCF. Too many HR's and too many walks.

Quintana is the only trade legitimate trade chip that will bring back a significant amount of talent that can help in the near term. The Sox have consistently struggled to attract top tier talent in free agency, so if this team is going to improve it is going to need to be through the trade market. A deal with the Jays with Beckham for Sanchez, Norris and Pompey would be something to consider. Based on his age, contract status, and performance, he should have as much value as Smardzjia did in a deal.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 7, 2014 -> 04:58 PM) What the hell happened with Yoan Moncada? Surprised we haven't heard yet about the Yankees signing him. He has not been cleared to sign yet.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jul 4, 2014 -> 03:07 PM) Mitchell is one of those prospects whose stats I rarely visit - I feel like I know his deal and usually there's nothing but sadness to see in his current numbers. So, with that in mind, I checked on things since he's hit so well in AA. I wanted to be able to tell myself that there could be some relevance to his AA production thus far. Let's look at things chronologically. It seems to me that we really set Jared up for failure. 2009 - he's drafted at 20 years old and is known to be quite raw for a 4-year college player. Hits well in Kannapolis in 34 games, drawing a lot of walks and sporting a .296/.417 line. Nearly 29% K rate is a concern, but sample is small. 149 wRC+ 2010 - Awful showing in AFL. .163/.239, 31% K rate. No power. Suffers a gruesome ankle injury in ST, misses entire season. 2011 - Despite time away from baseball and only 34 games experience in A- (and a pitiful AFL showing), he goes to A+. Not insane, by any stretch. He's 22 and they feel like he's too old to be in A-. Okay. He puts up a .222/.304/.377 line. 34% K rate. 93 wRC+. Wasn't ready/needed more time. 2012 - f*** the bad year in A+, he's going to AA. And...it could have been worse. .240/.368/.440, 127 wRC+. His walks recovered a lot, which is always a good sign for a young guy. Still, very high K rate at 31%. He's 23 years old, really not too old for AA. A case of the strikeouts in particular screaming out "don't be fooled by the OBP!" 2013 - He starts in AAA. Not pretty. Walks dip (11.3%), strikeouts skyrocket (37.6%). At this point, we have the cajones to demote his ass despite a modestly okay OBP (.329) and wRC+ (96). He falls on his face in AA, though, an obvious sign of a guy who has been jerked around so much that he's lost his grip. AA numbers are .174/.297, 70 wRC+, 14.1% BB/33% K. 2014 - Given all that....we put the motherf***er back in AAA. Again, he's trying to break everything we know about advanced statistics. High walks, alarming Ks again. .199/.348. Now he's in AA and has hit well in the couple weeks he's been there - .340/.400, 9.7% BB/22.6% K, 194 wRC+. So given his history, I just don't see how we could have ever had a reasonable expectation that he succeed in AAA. The fact that he had some success in AA in 2012 seemed like a fluke. I don't see how you ever promote a player with a K rate north of 30%. It seems to me that we needed to just be okay with the fact that his rawness out of the draft and the major industry the next season were going to make him old for his levels and just deal with that. Instead, we've just inexplicably promoted him over and over. You hear guys like Buddy Bell complaining that he's stubborn and this or that and those things might play into his struggles...but I'd probably be reluctant to make changes when I'm incredibly overmatched too. I don't know whether he'll do well in AA over the course of the season or not. Depends whether his mind is right and whether he has EVER been ready to be a AA player. 1. Buddy Bell is terrible. 2. You left out Mitchell ripping up the AFL last season with a .304/.425/.580 line before heading back to AAA this season. When Mitchell was drafted, the commentators said he had a lot of tools but his pitch recognition was pretty poor, they mentioned that playing football took time away from his development so he had a chance to be good if he were able to improve his pitch recognition now that he wouldn't be spending time on the gridiron.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 10:57 AM) The Cubs way over-signed last year; they're signing this year. What are the penalties? Penalties: • 0-5 percent over pool: 75 percent tax on the pool overage. • 5-10 percent over pool: 75 percent tax on the pool overage. Team won’t be allowed to sign a player for more than $500,000 during the 2014-15 signing period. • 10-15 percent over pool: 100 percent tax on the pool overage. Team won’t be allowed to sign a player for more than $500,000 during the 2014-15 signing period. • 15 percent or more over pool: 100 percent tax on the pool overage. Team won’t be allowed to sign a player for more than $250,000 during the 2014-15 signing period The Cubs cand sign anyone for more than $250K.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 08:47 AM) Here's the thing though, the Yankees might well not be abusing the system. There's some pretty severe penalties coming for dumping everything they had into this year. If you look at free agency in terms of a draft, the Yankees signing 9-10 of the top 30 is the equivalent of having 9-10 first round picks in the draft, I think most everyone would trade two first round picks to pick up 6-7 extra top tier talented players. Add in the likelihood now that they will sign Yoan Moncada as their system is terrible and other teams are then penalized for following the rules and not being able to compete with what the Yankees will bid.