Sox likely to be quiet in free agency after Abreu

[caulfield12]

Franklyn Guteriez on the cheap, anyone?

 

We need offense now more than ever...it would be a luxury to have him about 4-5 years ago, but his best days are behind him.

[caulfield12]

Catcher is first, second, and third on that list. If they don't come up with some sort of constituency plan at catcher this offseason, even with Abreu signed, it's a complete failure. You can't count on Flowers or Phegley. If nothing else, bring another catching prospect into the system, even if it means trading Santiago or even Quintana for one. The system has quite a few infielders right now with quite a few of them likely capable of covering 3B if necessary. They have 3 capable outfielders and could look to bring in more. For all intents and purposes, they have zilch for catchers right now.

 

 

It's going to be someone like Buck or Suzuki. There's just no way they're bringing back AJ, and McCann/Salty will ultimately either be too expensive or stay put.

 

I wish they could figure out a way for Viciedo to catch, haha. He's been put at every position on the field except for CF and the middle infield!

 

Navarro and Carlos Ruiz are two other options, albeit far from ideal.

 

I'd actually amend my first sentence to say Buck/Suzuki/Ruiz. They have to get a veteran in there who could catch at least 100-110 games and lead the pitching staff.

[LeoSchumacher]

Franklyn Guteriez on the cheap, anyone?

I'd rather have Chris Young than Gutierrez!

[2nd_city_saint787]

It's going to be someone like Buck or Suzuki. There's just no way they're bringing back AJ, and McCann/Salty will ultimately either be too expensive or stay put.

 

I wish they could figure out a way for Viciedo to catch, haha. He's been put at every position on the field except for CF and the middle infield!

 

Navarro and Carlos Ruiz are two other options, albeit far from ideal.

 

I'd actually amend my first sentence to say Buck/Suzuki/Ruiz. They have to get a veteran in there who could catch at least 100-110 games and lead the pitching staff.

 

I still wish the Sox can get their hands on Jaso. Not sure what the A's need though. Perhaps Beckham and some minor leaguers? Even with them non tendering Suzuki they still have Voght and Norris but I believe both are RH and neither bring as much to the table as Jaso....

 

EDIT- Vogt is actually a LH hitter so maybeeee they let Jaso go.

 

Edited November 2, 2013 by scs787

[caulfield12]

Catcher is first, second, and third on that list. If they don't come up with some sort of constituency plan at catcher this offseason, even with Abreu signed, it's a complete failure. You can't count on Flowers or Phegley. If nothing else, bring another catching prospect into the system, even if it means trading Santiago or even Quintana for one. The system has quite a few infielders right now with quite a few of them likely capable of covering 3B if necessary. They have 3 capable outfielders and could look to bring in more. For all intents and purposes, they have zilch for catchers right now.

 

 

contingency

[Marty34]

Catcher is first, second, and third on that list. If they don't come up with some sort of constituency plan at catcher this offseason, even with Abreu signed, it's a complete failure. You can't count on Flowers or Phegley. If nothing else, bring another catching prospect into the system, even if it means trading Santiago or even Quintana for one. The system has quite a few infielders right now with quite a few of them likely capable of covering 3B if necessary. They have 3 capable outfielders and could look to bring in more. For all intents and purposes, they have zilch for catchers right now.

 

I don't think it's a good idea to to use Santiago or Quintana to get a catcher. Any trade involving those two has to bring back the best hitter possible 26 or under regardless of position. Santiago and Quintana are the best trade chips we have they need to be maximized.

[Marty34]

How is adding Jacoby Ellsbury, the 2011 MVP* and nearly 6 WAR player last year going to push this team further from a championship? How does he have little upside? That's just stupid.

 

You're stuck in what guys did in the past. Ellsbury doesn't win the Sox anything, he might get them back to 80 wins. Money wasted.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

You're stuck in what guys did in the past. Ellsbury doesn't win the Sox anything, he might get them back to 80 wins. Money wasted.

So we don't want to get to 80 wins after winning 63 ? Are we supposed to win 70 then 75 then 80 then 85 in your plan then compete in the 5 th year ?

Edited November 2, 2013 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

[sircaffey]

So we don't want to get to 80 wins after winning 63 ? Are we supposed to win 70 then 75 then 80 then 85 in your plan then compete in the 5 th year ?

It's about timing. The timing is not right to lock in a $120 million contract. The organization is simply not ready to optimize such an investment. You sign him now, and when the Sox are actually ready to seriously compete he's past his prime and a drain on payroll. It would be a hindrance. You wait and when the organization has developed enough of it's own players, then you sign that high priced free agent in his prime. Ellsbury would absolutely hinder the Sox's chances going forward, IMO.

[witesoxfan]

It's going to be someone like Buck or Suzuki. There's just no way they're bringing back AJ, and McCann/Salty will ultimately either be too expensive or stay put.

 

I wish they could figure out a way for Viciedo to catch, haha. He's been put at every position on the field except for CF and the middle infield!

 

Navarro and Carlos Ruiz are two other options, albeit far from ideal.

 

I'd actually amend my first sentence to say Buck/Suzuki/Ruiz. They have to get a veteran in there who could catch at least 100-110 games and lead the pitching staff.

 

Ruiz is an ok idea. He is a bit older, but is also a guy that improved as he got older. How much of that was PED related is a different story, but he's honestly not a terrible buy low option.

 

And yes, contingency. It's been a long week.

 

I don't think it's a good idea to to use Santiago or Quintana to get a catcher. Any trade involving those two has to bring back the best hitter possible 26 or under regardless of position. Santiago and Quintana are the best trade chips we have they need to be maximized.

 

I do generally agree. But, not that it's happening or likely or even being talked about other than here, Castro is the kind a player the Sox should target with Quintana/Santiago. Sanchez is not. I implied, NAY, suggested it earlier, but I would not do anything with him. I do like Sanchez, but the only starter I'm trading for him is Danks, and I'm not taking any of the contract.

 

You're stuck in what guys did in the past. Ellsbury doesn't win the Sox anything, he might get them back to 80 wins. Money wasted.

 

This is where I think you're crazy again. Ellsbury is a 6 win player just on his own. I honestly think just adding Ellsbury and excluding any surplus value the Sox get from Abreu to Konerko makes the Sox an 80 win team. Ellsbury does so.much.right that it'd he hard for the Sox to lose. He's still a great, great player.

[oldsox]

Catcher is first, second, and third on that list. If they don't come up with some sort of constituency plan at catcher this offseason, even with Abreu signed, it's a complete failure. You can't count on Flowers or Phegley. If nothing else, bring another catching prospect into the system, even if it means trading Santiago or even Quintana for one. The system has quite a few infielders right now with quite a few of them likely capable of covering 3B if necessary. They have 3 capable outfielders and could look to bring in more. For all intents and purposes, they have zilch for catchers right now.

Yorvit Torrealba is on the FA list. Rockies let him go, partly to save money. He played well last year. Better than our guys at catcher.

[southsider2k5]

So we don't want to get to 80 wins after winning 63 ? Are we supposed to win 70 then 75 then 80 then 85 in your plan then compete in the 5 th year ?

 

No, no. We lose 120 games for 5 straight years to accumulate loads of talent, while trading off all major leaguers. Then whammo, we win 120 and the world series. It is simple really.

[Marty34]

No, no. We lose 120 games for 5 straight years to accumulate loads of talent, while trading off all major leaguers. Then whammo, we win 120 and the world series. It is simple really.

 

You're advocating keeping major leaguers from a 99-loss team? That's a certain path to a 120 losses.

[Balta1701]

You're advocating keeping major leaguers from a 99-loss team? That's a certain path to a 120 losses.

I know, how dumb was it for the Red Sox to hold on to Lester and Ortiz? F***ing failures, absolutely guaranteed them 120 losses in 2013.

[Marty34]

This is where I think you're crazy again. Ellsbury is a 6 win player just on his own. I honestly think just adding Ellsbury and excluding any surplus value the Sox get from Abreu to Konerko makes the Sox an 80 win team. Ellsbury does so.much.right that it'd he hard for the Sox to lose. He's still a great, great player.

 

Ellsbury is 30 y.o., fragile, and going to be owed north of $150M, 80 wins is likely a high point for the Sox during the Ellsbury contract. Boras' contracts have a high rate of albatross.

[Marty34]

I know, how dumb was it for the Red Sox to hold on to Lester and Ortiz? F***ing failures, absolutely guaranteed them 120 losses in 2013.

 

Never thought you'd advocate keeping Beckham, but here it is.

[TaylorStSox]

I'm actually agreeing with Marty. The Sox aren't in a position to invest $20M a year in a 30 year old whose game is so reliant on speed. It doesn't make sense.

[caulfield12]

Ellsbury is 30 y.o., fragile, and going to be owed north of $150M, 80 wins is likely a high point for the Sox during the Ellsbury contract. Boras' contracts have a high rate of albatross.

 

 

So basically we shouldn't add anyone older than 30 for the next 5-6 years?

 

That kind of flies right in the face of the 2004-2005 offseason.

Edited November 2, 2013 by caulfield12

[2nd_city_saint787]

I'm actually agreeing with Marty. The Sox aren't in a position to invest $20M a year in a 30 year old whose game is so reliant on speed. It doesn't make sense.

 

Going back to the comment about the Sox not wanting to punt on 2014 it absolutely makes sense. The payroll as it stands now is so low that they can add a guy like Ellsbury and it won't kill them financially. The addition of a 20M a year player still puts the Sox under 90M in payroll, and around 75M next season., with the Sox usually sitting around 120M.

 

You bring in Ellsbury, trade for another key piece to the offense, and hope Abreu is a world beater and you compete right away.

[TaylorStSox]

Going back to the comment about the Sox not wanting to punt on 2014 it absolutely makes sense. The payroll as it stands now is so low that they can add a guy like Ellsbury and it won't kill them financially. The addition of a 20M a year player still puts the Sox under 90M in payroll, and around 75M next season., with the Sox usually sitting around 120M.

 

You bring in Ellsbury, trade for another key piece to the offense, and hope Abreu is a world beater and you compete right away.

I certainly don't think the Sox are even close to being in a position to consider themselves contenders in 14.

[2nd_city_saint787]

I certainly don't think the Sox are even close to being in a position to consider themselves contenders in 14.

 

This is a team that lost 55 games by 2 runs or less(36 by 1 run, most in the majors), yes, the record looks bad on paper but it's not like they were consistently getting blown out. If you make 3 offensive upgrades there's no reason they shouldn't be at least closer to competing in 2014.

 

How many of those 1-2 run games they lost were caused by errors? You upgrade CF defensively with Ellsbury and that helps a lot.

 

How many of those 1-2 run games were caused by having a middle of the order bat that had a .310 slugging% vs RHP(what we mainly faced)? You hope you upgraded that with Abreu over PK.

 

How many of those 1-2 run games were caused by having a Catcher platoon that hit in the .200s with an OBP around .220 and defensively wasn't very good to boot? An upgrade there helps the team a lot as well.

Edited November 2, 2013 by scs787

[southsider2k5]

You're advocating keeping major leaguers from a 99-loss team? That's a certain path to a 120 losses.

 

Now I know you are trolling.

[Balta1701]

I certainly don't think the Sox are even close to being in a position to consider themselves contenders in 14.

Now that they have the gaping hole at 1b filled...they can tell themselves "if everything goes right they have a shot" and be serious in it. If their guys are able to remember to catch the white flying sphere instead of having it hit them in the face, and the talent they have with the bats plays like they're capable of, this could be a solid team, but based on last year that's a lot of if's.

 

They can now say "what are the guys we think we need to pull the plug on" and try to move them or replace them with something they'd prefer, and they can sort of wait on the right deal to come along.

[TaylorStSox]

This is a team that lost 55 games by 2 runs or less(36 by 1 run, most in the majors), yes, the record looks bad on paper but it's not like they were consistently getting blown out. If you make 3 offensive upgrades there's no reason they shouldn't be at least closer to competing in 2014.

Is there really a correlation between run differential and future success? This team found ways to lose because they're really bad at baseball, not because they're close.

[TaylorStSox]

You keep adding pieces that will give you long term success. A 30 year old, injury prone, $20M a year speedster isn't one of those pieces IMO.