Clase going down sure makes Grant Taylor a little more enticing... If they're able to get a couple top 100 guys I'm doing it in a heartbeat IMO  

Closing is Taylor's floor. #1 or #2 is his ceiling, and I would be looking for more of that level of return. 

This helps in multiple ways so glad to see it.

I'm not trading Grant Taylor now unless a team (for some reason) offers a haul.

11 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Closing is Taylor's floor. #1 or #2 is his ceiling, and I would be looking for more of that level of return. 

For sure, more so just getting the convo started, I'd shoot for the moon for him but would definitely move on if they're getting 2-3 top 100 guys 

But Clase going down helps with the other guys too which is good 

Edited July 28, 2025Jul 28 by Rey21

If the leaks about Taylor not being considered a starter are true, you deal him if someone offers you a top closer price for him.  Keeping a Ferrari at your trailercourt is pointless.

23 minutes ago, Rey21 said:

Clase going down sure makes Grant Taylor a little more enticing... If they're able to get a couple top 100 guys I'm doing it in a heartbeat IMO  

I definitely would take the hitter equivalent of Taylor .

Looking at the 2024 deadline deals, the only closer moved who brought back significance was Tanner Scott, when combined with Brian Hoeing, brought back a couple of MLB ready pitching prospects, and a couple of meh bats. Any other closers of note only really brought back pairs of arms. 

Tracking every 2024 Trade Deadline deal

If the Sox wanted to move Taylor, I would think they'd get better offers in the off-season, as Taylor is really just a leverage arm, at this point, and has TOR starter ceiling. 

36 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Closing is Taylor's floor. #1 or #2 is his ceiling, and I would be looking for more of that level of return. 

I'm so insanely hesitant to trade Taylor because of this.

9 minutes ago, Quin said:

I'm so insanely hesitant to trade Taylor because of this.

The problem is that the Sox actions speak differently.

23 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Looking at the 2024 deadline deals, the only closer moved who brought back significance was Tanner Scott, when combined with Brian Hoeing, brought back a couple of MLB ready pitching prospects, and a couple of meh bats. Any other closers of note only really brought back pairs of arms. 

Tracking every 2024 Trade Deadline deal

If the Sox wanted to move Taylor, I would think they'd get better offers in the off-season, as Taylor is really just a leverage arm, at this point, and has TOR starter ceiling. 

Tanner Scott was a rental though

The teams who need a closer or late bullpen help are the ones with the most intriguing top prospects (Phillies, Tigers, Dodgers), even with Taylor's untapped potential I'm cool with moving on if it nets bats, I have faith in Bannister to build up a bullpen and a rotation 

Edited July 28, 2025Jul 28 by Rey21

26 minutes ago, Rey21 said:

Tanner Scott was a rental though

The teams who need a closer or late bullpen help are the ones with the most intriguing top prospects (Phillies, Tigers, Dodgers), even with Taylor's untapped potential I'm cool with moving on if it nets bats, I have faith in Bannister to build up a bullpen and a rotation 

Sure, but Taylor has a much higher ceiling than a closer. IF you were looking to move Taylor for "bats", a 2024 Crochet workload next season as a starter probably presents him as a TOR starter. I don't think he brings back that level of return as a leverage arm (he's not even a proven closer, yet really) at the TDL. I'm betting the interest Getz is getting right now is from GMs offering leverage arm returns for a TOR starter with oodles of cheap control. 

Edited July 28, 2025Jul 28 by WestEddy

29 minutes ago, Quin said:

I'm so insanely hesitant to trade Taylor because of this.

Yeah but it's well settled that the Sox generally suck at player development. So if the FO believes they can't make him a TOR SP (and others believe they can as evidenced by the demand) then you still should move him if you are getting a haul of good position players (2 Top 100) because 1) getting good position players is rare these days and 2) even if he becomes a great SP elsewhere its unlikely he would have become one here.

13 minutes ago, SoCalChiSox said:

Yeah but it's well settled that the Sox generally suck at player development. So if the FO believes they can't make him a TOR SP (and others believe they can as evidenced by the demand) then you still should move him if you are getting a haul of good position players (2 Top 100) because 1) getting good position players is rare these days and 2) even if he becomes a great SP elsewhere its unlikely he would have become one here.

But this is like, the one thing they are good at.

18 minutes ago, Quin said:

But this is like, the one thing they are good at.

Again, if the feeling is that his extension doesn't fit his body that has been floated out there is true, the Sox don't see Taylor as a starter long term, no matter what they are saying publicly.

24 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Sure, but Taylor has a much higher ceiling than a closer. IF you were looking to move Taylor for "bats", a 2024 Crochet workload next season as a starter probably presents him as a TOR starter. I don't think he brings back that level of return as a leverage arm (he's not even a proven closer, yet really) at the TDL. I'm betting the interest Getz is getting right now is from GMs offering leverage arm returns for a TOR starter with oodles of cheap control. 

He does. But he’s a guy that throws 102, so he has a floor of spectator. The way the Sox haven’t been able to draft and develop offense, I would think getting a hitter his level would be a nice get. Certainly it would take something really good, and I agree teams are probably not going to offer what you or I think is equal value but offensive.

1 hour ago, Rey21 said:

Clase going down sure makes Grant Taylor a little more enticing... If they're able to get a couple top 100 guys I'm doing it in a heartbeat IMO  

Taylor hasn't proven anything except that he throws hard. You'd selling low. I don't get the fascination with moving him. 

He barely pitched in college. They're being careful with his usage. We have no idea if he might become a starter but he's a baby in his MLB time now . It's not like he was a big top 100 name. He's still a project . You'd be trading all his upside for a downside price. 

9 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

He does. But he’s a guy that throws 102, so he has a floor of spectator. The way the Sox haven’t been able to draft and develop offense, I would think getting a hitter his level would be a nice get. Certainly it would take something really good, and I agree teams are probably not going to offer what you or I think is equal value but offensive.

I fully doubt that anyone is willing to pay full closer price for Taylor, considering he is completely unproven at any level.

9 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

I fully doubt that anyone is willing to pay full closer price for Taylor, considering he is completely unproven at any level.

I agree, but as Hawk once said, everyone except Michael Jordan is available if the price is right.

10 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

I agree, but as Hawk once said, everyone except Michael Jordan is available if the price is right.

That's my feeling.  This rebuild has no sacred cows.  Honestly, I think teams are sniffing around him because they think they can get Grant Taylor for less than it would cost to get say a Duran from Minny.

13 minutes ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

Taylor hasn't proven anything except that he throws hard. You'd selling low. I don't get the fascination with moving him. 

He barely pitched in college. They're being careful with his usage. We have no idea if he might become a starter but he's a baby in his MLB time now . It's not like he was a big top 100 name. He's still a project . You'd be trading all his upside for a downside price. 

And that's why teams want him - he's got a ton of upside and wouldn't cost much right now. You'd only trade him if some team was willing to meet you close to halfway on his current value vs. potential value, and no one is going to do that because it'd make his lower potential outcomes way too expensive to obtain.

14 minutes ago, almagest said:

And that's why teams want him - he's got a ton of upside and wouldn't cost much right now. You'd only trade him if some team was willing to meet you close to halfway on his current value vs. potential value, and no one is going to do that because it'd make his lower potential outcomes way too expensive to obtain.

And that's not going to happen was my point. 

Have at it if you like thinking there are fantasy offers out there.

Very few trades have gone down so far and the typical returns are pitchers. The market is setting up to be much like last year. 

 

Edited July 28, 2025Jul 28 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

25 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

I agree, but as Hawk once said, everyone except Michael Jordan is available if the price is right.

And we have the one owner whose track record would even dispute that "except Michael Jordan" part, if it were happening in the 2020's.

Yeah if people are going to offer pitching in return and play that game then forget it. I need 2 Top 100 bats for Taylor, at least one a savage.

For context...

 

A collection on Emmanuel Clase’s first pitches to start an inning. #Guardians pic.twitter.com/9MJBWDZKW6

— Travis Hudson (@TravisFHudson) July 28, 2025