August 15, 201312 yr Bad when NOBODY claims you on a $500K deal... HE's been with what, 5 teams in the past 4 seasons? Of course, he'll end up with the rebuilding bullpen next year, another version of Riske or Frasor but less expensive.
August 15, 201312 yr Author QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 14, 2013 -> 08:40 PM) Bad when NOBODY claims you on a $500K deal... HE's been with what, 5 teams in the past 4 seasons? Of course, he'll end up with the rebuilding bullpen next year, another version of Riske or Frasor but less expensive. If we could get a return like for Lindstrom like we did for Frasor then I'll be ecstatic.
August 15, 201312 yr He's the latest Sox acquisition to be blah. Please somebody, pick him up. New bodies in bullpen needed next season. Edited August 15, 201312 yr by greg775
August 15, 201312 yr QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 14, 2013 -> 08:40 PM) Bad when NOBODY claims you on a $500K deal... HE's been with what, 5 teams in the past 4 seasons? Of course, he'll end up with the rebuilding bullpen next year, another version of Riske or Frasor but less expensive. It's a bare minimum of $1 mill. The buyout is merely $500k. And he has a WHIP of 1.48 this year, a mediocre K rate, and a mediocre walk rate. This really isn't that surprising. QUOTE (Marty34 @ Aug 14, 2013 -> 09:03 PM) What we're learning is the Sox don't have many desirable players. Not a shock. They've traded away Thornton, Crain (while DL'd), Peavy, and Rios. Teams inquired about De Aza, Ramirez, Beckham, Keppinger, and Sale for sure. But, in regards to a guy like Matt Lindstrom, what kind of reponse do you actually expect? QUOTE (Jake @ Aug 14, 2013 -> 09:15 PM) I think teams are sometimes just careless with the waiver process I think it's entirely the opposite...I think teams let a lot of these marginal guys go through waivers because it allows for more options later on. Why claim a guy like this when I can let him go through waivers when, if I let him go (and 28 others do too), I can go back out and get him later on? What possible benefit is there for claiming him? I'm leveraging against myself, and if I really wanted the guy, I have to actually pay MORE now, even if incrementally. If I let him go, the Sox will likely take any young guy I throw at them later this month in return for him. Really, the only time you should ever claim a player on waivers is, if after all options are weighed, you simply can't afford NOT to have that player. Those thresholds vary by team, but they will hold true all the same.
August 15, 201312 yr QUOTE (Marty34 @ Aug 14, 2013 -> 09:03 PM) What we're learning is the Sox don't have many desirable players. Not a shock. These guys are the suckiest bunch of sucks that ever sucked!
August 15, 201312 yr Yeesh, lots of people dislike Lindstrom on this site. For a guy with a 3.5 ERA/FIP, he sure gets a lot of hate. I understand his K/BB numbers aren't good, but he rarely gives up the long ball. So peripheral-wise, he's not too bad. Edited August 15, 201312 yr by chw42
August 15, 201312 yr Lindstrom is not that bad. If we get an offer that is decent I am sure he is gone. But, who replaces him next year in the pen? Do we go after free agents or promote from within?
August 15, 201312 yr QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Aug 15, 2013 -> 12:45 PM) Lindstrom is not that bad. If we get an offer that is decent I am sure he is gone. But, who replaces him next year in the pen? Do we go after free agents or promote from within? I'd probably do some of both. The pen right now is: Reed Jones Veal Troncoso Purcey Axelrod Lindstrom I'd say that for next year, Reed, Jones, and Veal are likely candidates. Axelrod has a role as the last guy/long guy out until we find someone better. I'd wager Daniel Webb is up next year. That's 5 guys, one of which is a lefty, leaving 2 open spots as written. Don't know why you'd pencil in Purcey or Troncoso next year unless you're shooting for the #1 pick. Santos Rodriguez could be a possible lefty contributor next year if they want to bring him up. That still leaves at least 1 spot for a FA signing, maybe more if they want to sign a lefty or another righty instead of Webb or Santos L. Rodriguez.
August 15, 201312 yr Oh, and if they want to put together a roster that has a shot at competing if things go right, adding at least 1 veteran arm to that young bullpen, if for no reason other than a stabilizing, veteran presence...would be a good thing. Heck, might want to do that even if they're trying to shoot for another high draft pick just so that the kids continue to have a veteran around out there.
August 19, 201312 yr Author With the recent great outings Lindstrom has been having, I would imagine someone wants him to solidify their bullpen. With him clearing waivers, he can be traded to anyone.
August 21, 201312 yr QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Aug 19, 2013 -> 10:39 AM) With the recent great outings Lindstrom has been having, I would imagine someone wants him to solidify their bullpen. With him clearing waivers, he can be traded to anyone. At this point I certainly wouldn't be shocked if he is moved, though keeping him would be 1 less BP arm to acquire in the off season in case the Sox are thinking of competing next year. He said he wants to be on the Sox in 2014.
August 21, 201312 yr Unfortunately, I think Lindstrom fits into the category of being too good to give away for nothing, but not good enough to get anything valuable in return for him.
August 21, 201312 yr QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 15, 2013 -> 11:52 AM) I'd probably do some of both. The pen right now is: Reed Jones Veal Troncoso Purcey Axelrod Lindstrom I'd say that for next year, Reed, Jones, and Veal are likely candidates. Axelrod has a role as the last guy/long guy out until we find someone better. I'd wager Daniel Webb is up next year. That's 5 guys, one of which is a lefty, leaving 2 open spots as written. Don't know why you'd pencil in Purcey or Troncoso next year unless you're shooting for the #1 pick. Santos Rodriguez could be a possible lefty contributor next year if they want to bring him up. That still leaves at least 1 spot for a FA signing, maybe more if they want to sign a lefty or another righty instead of Webb or Santos L. Rodriguez. Leesman could be a decent long man.
August 21, 201312 yr QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Aug 21, 2013 -> 01:15 PM) Leesman could be a decent long man. Leesman looked good enough that I think he can get lefties out.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.