“There’s a growing expectation from rival execs that Jon Lester is going to be traded before [the July] deadline,” ESPN’s Buster Olney reports (Twitter link), and the Dodgers are seen as the likeliest candidate to add the Red Sox left-hander. Los Angeles has shown interest in Lester, though there were conflicting reports yesterday about whether the two sides had actually seriously discussed a trade.
Here’s some more news surrounding the defending World Series champs…
- The Royals, Dodgers and Nationals are the latest known suitors for reliever Andrew Miller, according to ESPN Boston’s Gordon Edes and Peter Gammons of GammonsDaily.com. (Edes reported the Royals’ interest while Gammons reported on the two NL teams.) Boston is known to be shopping Miller, with the Braves and Pirates also amongst the clubs checking in on the lefty. Miller has posted an outstanding 2.45 ERA, 14.5 K/9 and 5.0 K/BB ratio over 40 1/3 relief innings for the Sox this season.
- Also from Gammons, several other teams were interested in Edwin Escobar and Heath Hembree, the two ex-Giants prospects obtained by the Red Sox in the Jake Peavy trade. Two different rival executives told Gammons they tried to get Hembree as a future set-up man, while Escobar’s stock was higher before he began his tough season at Triple-A.
- In a piece full of notes and observations about the Red Sox, Peter Abraham of the Boston Globe is baffled that Lester and the Sox seemed so mutually interested in a contract extension yet now Lester could be a trade candidate. “Why the Sox seem almost eager to chase away one of their cornerstone players is a mystery,” Abraham writes, predicting that if Lester hits the open market, he’ll sign elsewhere since another teams will spend big for the southpaw.
- Also from Abraham, he opines that the Red Sox should extend Miller rather than trade him, stay away from Matt Kemp in any trade talks with the Dodgers and release struggling reliever Edward Mujica.
I can see a Red Sox-Dodgers trade involving Lester and Miller. The Dodgers would need to give up one of their top prospects (Pederson, Urias, Seager) to get that done though, and it seems they don’t want to part with any of them. The Red Sox really should stay away from Kemp unless he’s a throw-in (a really expensive one at that).
We don’t need Lester.
No but you want Lester.
Not at the cost of a top prospect.
Then you probably won’t get him
I wouldn’t give up Kemp for him. Our rotation is loaded. I wouldn’t trade an everyday player for a pitcher who might give us 6 or 7 starts and then bolt. There’s no way we’re going to give up Pederson or Seager on a rental.
Yes you def don’t want to give up one of the worst values in baseball for an ace lefty with a superb post-season record.
Then you ain’t in the discussion to get Lester at all. It would take 2 of your top 3 prospects, plus some, to get in the conversation. It’s ok. I know the Giants would love to add Lester to their rotation.
The discussion for Lester hasn’t even been serious. It’s kind of funny how you think the Red Sox hold all the chips with a guy who walks in two months and a guy the Dodgers DON’T need. Remember the name of this site and put an empahasis on RUMORS.
And as a Dodger fan I would LOVE for the giants to trade away their future for Lester.
Unfortunately, the Giant’s probably just don’t have the prospects for a Lester trade, as much as they’d like it.
Sure they do. Crick is good enough to highlight a Lester trade. He is on par with Segura at the time of the Greinke to Angels deal.
I wouldn’t give up Kemp for him. Our rotation is loaded. I wouldn’t trade an everyday player for a pitcher who might give us 6 or 7 starts and then bolt. There’s no way we’re going to give up Pederson or Seager on a rental.
True. But I want the prospects more.
So does everyone else.
True. But I want the prospects more.
At least 2 of the three (Seager + Pederson or Seager + Urias).
I doubt they’ll give up Seager out of any of them. Maybe Pederson + Urias if the Red Sox throw in a B-prospect. Or if they agree to take on most of Kemp’s contract, perhaps?
We have some nice rule 5 guys that can be throw ins, so no problem there. But its gonna take at least 2 top prospects as the trade partner centerpiece for Lester.
I expect that if Urias or Pederson is involved in a trade for Lester you will see one of Bostons catching prospects going the other direction. It is a place of immediate need for LAD and Boston has built up some impressive depth.
Best we would throw in from the catching realm would be Butler, who is a journeyman solid defender and a mediocre bat. He does have occasional explosive power, but he’s not a prospect. He’s a Tim Federowicz redux.
I would wager that if Lester for Pederson and Urias was close but LAD wanted ether Swihart or Vazquez to even the ledger it would be a lot closer to happening than what Boston fans want to hear.
Uh, yeah. 🙂 But you can’t equate Swihart and Vazquez. The upside on the former is much higher.
Uh, yeah. 🙂 But you can’t equate Swihart and Vazquez. The upside on the former is much higher.
No way. Vasquez has everyone drooling with his arm and game calling (even though he’s not the greatest ball blocker). Swihart is our no. 2 prospect. He’s a potential centerpiece for a trade. He’s not going to be a throw in.
Swihart is arguably a better prospect than both of them.
No he is not better than Pederson. There is probably only 6 guys in all of baseball that are on that level.
Pederson is somewhere around 20-30 in most prospect ranks. And that comes with the qualifier that he learns to hit lefties. Swihart is generally considered the superior prospect.
Pederson is a plus power prospect that has a problem with K-rate and hitting lefties so far. He is creaming the ball at an advanced level. He is closer to the big leagues and working on the the things to make him a compete player.
Pederson has been ranked around 12-16 by the 3 ranking agencies. He’s not top 6. Swihart is not as well ranked as Pederson, but he plays a much more “primed” position. His value is probably equal or better because of that.
I put more into level of competition and being almost ready than most of the scouting services do. So unless someone in the lower levels of the minors is absolutely a monster (Bryant earlier this year) I will not really put them over a kid that is dominating in AAA.
Then how about a trade of Travis Shaw for Urias? Just kidding of course. Unless the dodgers are keen.
A solid catcher at AA with a slash line of .303/.356/.489 (OPS of .845), including 11 dingers, in just over 300 AB’s, beats a very good “platoon hitting” outfielder in the PCL.
On Baseball Americas midseason top 50 Swihart was above Pederson.
Best we would throw in from the catching realm would be Butler, who is a journeyman solid defender and a mediocre bat. He does have occasional explosive power, but he’s not a prospect. He’s a Tim Federowicz redux.
You have a good point. I can’t imagine the Red Sox would part with Swihart though. Or even Vazquez for that matter. Dan Butler maybe but he probably doesn’t have too much value.
Or maybe, Lavarnway. He’s much better than the ratings indicate, and he needs a new scenery. He’s hit 30+ HR’s at Pawtucket before.
Him too. Those would probably be the only two they would part with. Swihart and Vazquez are too valuable, particularly Swihart.
Swihart is not a throw in. He’s our number 2 prospect. He’s a potential centerpiece.
Oh, I know. I’m a Sox fan as well 😛
Huh? Lavarnway has 31 HR in 240 G at Pawtucket, spread over four seasons. You confusing him with somebody else?
Nope. I may be combining a part season at AA Portland with a majority season at AAA Pawtucket, but he’s had 30+ dingers in one season. He’s got potential.
That was 2011, split evenly between Portland and Pawtucket. Since then, over the last three years and 260 games, he has 17 home runs total. I’m not sure what happened to that power (though obviously have suspicions), but he doesn’t appear to have it any more. Note that he is now 26…
I can tell you what happened. He listened to his hitting coaches and started using a toe tap for timing at the plate. That limits his stride and power. He’s a big guy with the potential to be a Buster Posey-like hitter, but has not reached potential. He’s a solid defender who needs a new approach.
Yeah, I heard about that, but then why doesn’t he go back? Three years with a new swing that CLEARLY ISN’T WORKING is a bit much. If he could find 20+ HR power again, he would have a future in the majors.
Good question. In some senses, the toe tap did work. He hit something like .297 in 60+ AB’s in the Majors for us in 2012. He had very little power though. Gap with occasional homer. I’ve sent him a facebook message before, saying he should go back to his big stride and put the premium on power. He has not done so, for whatever reason. But a new coach could probably convince him to revert. Reversion has worked for Jackie Bradley this season.
Note that JBJ switched from a stance that allowed him to generate moderate power to one that will result in near-zero home run power (he’ll still hit doubles). A necessary move, as it slashed his K rate in half, but a costly one. Lavarnway may have improved his contact, but he paid a far greater price (since he had much more power to start with).
He sucks as a defender. he is a DFA candidate this off season. If the dodgers think he has any value then trade him.
1/2 a season of a very good pitcher that only pitches once every five days for two top prospects? Even if the Sox add Miller this wouldn’t be good for the Dodgers. Seager is a top 5 MLB prospect playing a premium position. Lester is a 30 year old pitcher who becomes a free agent in two months.
That’s the market price. Look at what the Rangers had to pay the Cubs last season for a pure rental on Garza. Olt, arguably the best prospect in baseball, a top pitching prospect, a mediocre pitching prospect and a throw in. Its just the going rate. It costs what it costs. You’re either in or you’re out. No one’s forcing anyone.
Olt was never near being the top prospect in baseball.
BA 2011 Fall Rankings, No. 7
At the time of the trade for Garza Mike Olt was nowhere near being the top prospect in baseball. 2011 is not 2013.
MLB.com had him as #58 right before the Garza trade. The extremely bullish baseballamerica (BA) had him #22 before the trade. He wasn’t #1.
Even if you want to argue about the prospects in Garza, there are other examples, and regardless, Lester is worth twice what Garza was. Lester is a dominant lefty with a sub 3.00 ERA and peripherals to match. His trade value is astronomical and you can rest assured he’s not going to be moved for less than multiple stellar prospects.
Look at 2012 when Milwaukee traded Greinke to the Angels. The return was a borderline BA top 50 and 2 B/B- SP prospects. That is the type of return you should expect. If you do end up trading with the Dodgers and get a Joc Pederson, who is a BA top 20 prospect, it will probably be paired with a B/B- type and maybe a C+ type. There is no way you are going to get multiple top 20 prospects for a half season rental. Especially from a team that isn’t struggling for starting pitching.
Lester is better than Greinke and deserves a better return. 2 elite prospects is the price. We can just hold him, make him a Q/O and get a first round pick instead. Its a matter of whether they want him bad enough. But we aren’t selling low.
Where are you finding him top five? He is in the high teens everywhere. And he probably wont stick at shortstop. Still he is an elite prospect.
Check out Keith Law’s newest prospect rankings. He’s #5.
Thanks, I had not seen it. But Sickels, BA, and at least one other, MLB.com maybe has him in the teens. Sickels and BA much more reputable than Law.
At least 2 of the three (Seager + Pederson or Seager + Urias).
Lester and Miller for Pederson and another top 10 prospect not named Seager or Urias would work for me. Yes, Pederson could be a star — or maybe not. He can’t really hit lefties and strikes out a lot. And the Dodgers certainly don’t need him, with the four starting outfielders they have now. And with Lester and Miller, the Dodgers become the favorites to win the fall classic this year. Kershaw, Lester, Grienke and Ryu as the playoff rotation and a solid lefty specialist would be awesome.
Pederson and Urias, for Lester alone, is a good start. We can send back a rule 5 guy. No way you get even Lester for less than 2 of your top 3 guys.
Half a season of Lester isn’t worth 2 of those prospects. Look at the Greinke trade to the Angels as the framework of a potential Lester deal. That was a borderline top 50 position prospect and 2 B/B- pitchers. If the Red Sox throw in Miller, getting Pederson and and a couple of B/B- type of pitchers is a good, realistic return.
There is no such thing as “throwing in” a stud lefty RP such as Miller. The guys got very positive value on his own.
Again, there is a great likelyhood that Lester is the best and only ace available at this years deadline.
I agree that it’s unrealistic to expect multiple top prospects for Lester, but if it was a straight deal, Pederson would be the headliner. But IF we are talking another piece like Miller, there’s gotta be more going the Sox way.
Another scenario: Lester, Miller and Marrero (SS prospect and top 5 in very stromg Sox system) to LAD for Seager and Pederson
Well, if Seager and co. are out of the question, then Miller is off the table. Lester for Pederson + B spec could be the framework.
Please review last year’s top starter rental trade of Garza by the Cubs to the Rangers. They traded Olt (the #1 prospect in baseball), a top pitching prospect and two throw ins for him. The going rate is two top prospects, plus more.
Mike Olt was never the #1 ranked prospect in baseball. Maybe in the Rangers system. What list had him as #1?
He was ranked No. 7 by BA coming out of the AFL in 2011, after strong performances during the season and fall. He was in the same group as Wil Meyers, Bryce Harper, Gerrit Cole, and Mike Trout. He was arguably one of the best prospects in baseball at that time. He dropped back to No. 22 even after a strong 2012 season.
At the time of the Garza trade he was not even a top 50 prospect. And he hasn’t shown anything on the Cubs to believe he is more than a platoon player.
Keith Law had Olt as #75 in 2012, and #71 in 2013.
I wasn’t trying to imply that Miller is just some throw in. He absolutely has value on his own. I do think Lester by himself is worth Pederson and a B/B- pitching prospect. I was saying by adding a Miller, you help to justify adding another B/B- prospect and the difference between Pederson today and Segura in 2012, that’s all. For both Lester and Miller, I could see Pederson, 2 of Anderson/Lee/Windle/Reed and a relief prospect or low level toolsy OF type.
As a Red Sox fan I am completely sure that the Dodgers wouldn’t do that trade and I don’t blame them.
You shouldn’t move Miller unless you can package him with someone else to get a potential outfield power bat. He’s a good left-handed option out of the pen. Why not just resign him? It’s not like the Red Sox need prospects. There are a very few things they legitimately need. And it’s not like they need salary relief. I do agree that they should release Mujica. As far as Kemp is concerned, there has to be a better option, with more certainty than Matt Kemp. Why take a risk on him rediscovering his power stroke?
Kemp’s actually having an average year in limited play so I’m not as down on him as I had been. My problem is with the length of his contract. Five years is too long and too big a risk. They’ve got so many pitchers and infielders now in AAA that I would not be surprised if they try to overwhelm Florida with a huge haul for Stanton or someone like Andrew McCutchen from Pitt. Ben knows what he’s doing it’s just that it’s hard to tell at this point what direction the Sox will eventually take.
I think we need to get over the obsession with Stanton. The McCutchen thing is new though. I don’t see that ever happening. Make a trade for a guy or two with power potential who are a few years away or we can make a trade for a very good outfielder without having to target some of the best players in the game. Neither of their GM’s would even be willing to listen on them at this point.
And I think the jury is still out on Ben. The offseason before the World Series was clearly amazing as was the Dodgers trade. This past offseason was horrible. Not a single signing made the team worked out. I won’t blame him for Bobby V, because I think he was forced on him. I really hope he isn’t an all or nothing GM.
Actually, I see that McCutcheon is signed for a few years so that won’t happen. But the idea is that they have too many good minor leaguers to protect them all from the Rule 5 draft so they do need to trim their 40-man roster. What do we think they’re going to get for Miller or Uehara or Gomes or any other player that is supposedly on the block? That’s right, more prospects. Whoever is willing to trade a good power OF’er is going to get a haul, I’m just not sure yet who it will be.
I understand that the Rule 5 is approaching and I’m not sure who they Red Sox might lose this year if they’re not on the 40 man. They could definitely package some of their second tier prospects to get a solid outfielder, but none of the the legit prospects are in danger in the rule 5. The Marlins are going to do everything possible to extend Stanton in the offseason. If they fail they may consider moving him, but it’s anything but a sure thing and the Red Sox can’t wait around for it. They have to make some deals this offseason to sure up the offense.
Honestly the outfield can be fixed with free agents, I would just sign Nelson Cruz and stop worrying about the next big trade target
Right but Cruz is getting up there in age, and there will be multiple suitors for him. Can’t count on getting him.
Honestly the outfield can be fixed with free agents, I would just sign Nelson Cruz and stop worrying about the next big trade target
the 40 man crunch isn’t as bad as the article wants to make it out to be. Once they DFA Lavarnway, Butler, Britton and drop all the expiring contract guys they will be fine. Just a few fringy guys like Diaz, Almanzar again and maybe at worst Coyle will be left out.
Yeah, it is time to DFA some of the non-producers like Lavarnway. I don’t know about Butler; he’s good depth in case they change Swihart’s position (which they should). My point is that we’re not done seeing the Sox trade pieces like Miller or Uehara for more minor leaguers so it would make sense to package some of the good ones for a good bat (or a replacement for Lester).
Why would they change Swihart’s position? He is an above average defensive catcher. Catcher is one of the most valuable positions to be able to play. An above average defensive catcher who is also an above average hitter is almost impossible to find. Swihart appears to be that. But yes, Butler may hang around for depth, but they have other org. guys they can plug in at AAA.
I’ve seen mentions of a position switch for Swihart and because we have Vazquez I think it would make more sense for him to play 1B in order to have them both on the 25-man roster and playing daily. I’d rather not trade either one and I would rather not have one backing up the other. Either that or they can switch Vazquez’ position but I’ve really liked what I’ve seen from Vazquez behind the plate.
Moving Swihart to first would cripple his value. It isn’t impossible but it seems like a pretty bad move. I’d rather have the problem of alternating two awesome catchers. Great catching is hard to come by. Vazquez’ value comes mostly from his defense, switching him would be even worse.
Agreed, but I just don’t think either would be happy catching only half-time. It’s been done before such as with the two oldest Molina bros in Anaheim, but I don’t think it’s fair to either one of them. Anyway, Swihart will play at AAA next year and Vazquez will get a whole year under his belt at the major league level so the landscape will be clearer then.
Their happiness don’t really enter into it. Swihart is earmarked for the starting catcher position and Vazquez is looked at as the backup. If they both have the potential to be starters it makes more sense to trade one of them than to switch Swihart’s position.
I wasn’t referring to happiness, I was referring to production and consistency. Like I said, I would love it if they kept both because they’re both rare commodities. I think that trading either one would be a mistake. We’ll see what happens.
They are rare commodities, which is why it makes sense to move one if they both demonstrate the ability to hit and play defense on the major league level. but as you said above, that will be something that becomes more clear at the end of next season when Swihart gets a chance in the bigs.
Now is not the time to shop for meeting our own needs. Right now, we need to focus exclusively on getting the best prospects and trade chips we can. We go shopping in the off-season for what we need.
Lester and Miller for Pederson, Seager, Urias and Kemp
Not even close.
It’s not even close, but you gotta pony up for a premium ace and another great RP lefty that is in high demand around the league.
Look around what we got for Peavy and what the Rangers were willing to give up for a rental Garza. Or 1 year before the rental Greinke deal.
How about Lester, Miller and Ross for Pederson and Urias.
Rays won’t be trading Price since they are back in contention. They will get similar value in the off-season anyway. Lester is the biggest fish out there…by a mile. Plus the Sox got some high leverage relievers to spare.
Pederson is a remote possibility for Lester. Urias and Seager would require Lester and a top player/prospect like Bogaerts or Betts. 1/2 a year of Lester is not even close to being worth a prospect like Urias.
You realize that Betts and Bogaerts are equal to higher in trade value than any of the big three dodger prospects. Your proposal is like trading Lester and five dollars for four dollars and ninety cents.
I know. Just as ridiculous as Red Sox fans thinking Lester is worth Seager + Urias.
I agree. Both ideas are silly.
They don’t want to deal 1, why would they deal all 3? If you’re talking Lester and Miller to LA, it will most likely take Pederson and a couple of their B level prospects.
Whoops meant to be put EITHER of the the 3
Come on man. Don’t be that guy.
If that was a joke, I thought that was really funny.
lester will be with the red sox even if they trade him. he said multiple time that he he coming back next year.
That’s not necessarily true.
He said he would be welcome to a return in FA. That doesn’t mean he is coming. Money talks, just look at Ellsbury.
Sure, *if* the Red Sox are one of the teams with the high offer on the table. I agree that trading him isn’t likely to change that equation.
To Red Sox fans: please stop thinking that the Dodgers will give up Seager or Urias for a 1/2 year of Lester. Ned Coletti would be run out of town if it happened. Lester is good but not even remotely worth either of those prospects.
Seager is probably off the table, but Urias is still 2+ years away and a lot can happen in that time, If Coletti feels he is another ace away from a title than I think trading him and a few other pieces for Lester would be a good move for LA if it is the difference in a deep playoff run.
Urias is young but probably only 1 year away at this rate. He’s also a Mexican in a Mexican heavy market. That’s the main reason they targeted Adrian so heavily.
Main reason? Doubtful. The main reason was that James Loney was terrible and the 1B market at the time was extremely weak. Contributing factor, maybe.
If the Dodgers want him bad enough they’ll give up one of their top guys. Wouldn’t be the first time a team has given up a stud prospect for a rental. Ex. The Giants trading Zach Wheeler for 1/2 a year of Carlos Beltran.
And how did that turn out for the Giants? Pretty sure they and their fan base regret the trade. Pederson is the only one that is a possibility, and even that is pretty remote unless the Dodgers get a prospect in return.
Perhaps a B-prospect or maybe Andrew Miller. But why would the Red Sox trade Lester and a prospect who is better than Pederson for Pederson straight up?
Didn’t say Lester + a top prospect. Just a decent prospect.
And how did that trade work out for the Giants.
Didn’t say that it did haha
If the Dodgers want him bad enough they’ll give up one of their top guys. Wouldn’t be the first time a team has given up a stud prospect for a rental. Ex. The Giants trading Zach Wheeler for 1/2 a year of Carlos Beltran.
He wouldn’t be run out of town if the Dodgers win the world series.
To Dodgers fans: ace pitchers at the trade deadline, rental or not, get a top prospect in return. It’s happened a million times before and it will happen again.
Pederson is a possibility. Urias and Seager are way too valuable for the long term success of the Dodgers for them to give them up for 1/2 a year of Lester.
Pederson makes the most sense for the Red Sox, as well. He’s major-league ready and would be ready to contribute next year.
Pederson is a possibility. Urias and Seager are way too valuable for the long term success of the Dodgers for them to give them up for 1/2 a year of Lester.
Joc Pederson would be the key piece for the Red Sox. You either find a way to get it done or you don’t — but Lester and Miller are pretty good players.
The Dodgers don’t.
Sure, I don’t have a problem with that. I personally want to see Lester stay in Boston.
Not even a half year. More like two months (of the regular season). Colletti doesn’t have to worry about being run out of town. He and ownership seem to be on the same page. No more giving up top prospects for rentals.
Hopefully the Carlos Santana for Casey Blake deal is still fresh in his memory.
That was one of the few deals where a top prospect was dealt for a short-term solution, but that was in the days of backloaded contracts and a depleted farm. Fortunately for Dodgers fans, those days are behind us.
Why not trade Lester they gave Peavy away
Well let’s see, Peavy was one of the 10 worst starting pitchers in the majors in just about every metric measurable. Lester is one of the ten best. Sounds about the same.
How is Peavy’s trade a give away? They got 2 young cost controlled assets for an expiring contract that was not performing up to the cost. I consider that an increase in value.
You’re making too much sense.
I see you have just arrived from an alternate universe. Welcome. In this world the Red Sox acquired young arms under team control with at the very least, solid pen potential in exchange for one of the worst performing pitchers in the league.
Sox made a mistake on Mujica, release him, get 1 of the kids up, to at least get a few Months in. Nobody is going to Trade for him, move on. Cubs ate 29 million on Soriano, and the Sox are worried about 7 million.
Might they see how he looks in ST next year first? I’m not sure I see the benefit of releasing him now.
Might they see how he looks in ST next year first? I’m not sure I see the benefit of releasing him now.
I’d wait to see how thin their bullpen is after whatever trades they make. They might want his miserableness just to throw some worthless innings. The sox don’t have any significant bullpen youth on the way up right now anyway. Unless they move workman to the pen but I think that is more likely to happen next season.
Off-course they did it was the 25th time in a row we signed a National League pitcher that did not cut in the AL East. STOP SIGNING NL PITCHERS to pitch in the AL East. 9 out of 10 they fail.
It is baffling to me how these educated writers are essentially saying “pass up the chance” to have the equivalent of the best draft of a decade. That’s foolish. Trade Lester, Miller, Drew, etc., and score as much of the cheap, youthful talent and trade chips that you can. Squeeze the market for as much as we can get. This chance doesn’t come around often, and when it does, “yo soy fiesta de las ventas.”
2 month Lester, Miller, and Drew isn’t going to net you much.
I can’t understand how a big market team like the Red Sox can’t figure out a way to keep their homegrown ace. With such a strong farm system, do they really need to trade him off? And can they seamlessly replace him next year with the young talent they have?
No they cannot seamlessly replace him. He has stated repeatedly for what it is worth that he would still be willing to resign with Boston even if they traded him. That seems a bit too risky to me, but it’s probably another case of the Red Sox trying to have their cake and eat it too.
I know. How often do guys actually come back half a season after being traded? Has that *ever* happened? Especially after the Red Sox completely low-balled him with that ridiculous reported $80m-ish offer (might as well not have even made an offer), do they even really want him? And does he really want to come back? I think the Red Sox have been outsmarting themselves.
Rick Aguilera. Traded from the Twins to the Red Sox, then returning to the Twins. It happens, just not often. Usually if the two sides are in agreement on terms, the player gets extended prior to free agency. If they are not in agreement on terms, then free agency does nothing to improve the situation (unless, as with Varitek and Ortiz, the player has limited options elsewhere).
He could come back, but why take the chance? I think this is Pedro all over again. They don’t really want to pay him anything approaching market value for 6 or 7 year, so they’ll make him a crumby offer and when he leaves claim to have tried really hard. They have to stop pretending to be a small market team when it comes to reuping their talent. It’s getting embarrassing.
Cliff Lee resigned with the Phillies after being traded but I’m not sure if it was just half a season.
The Red Sox have plenty of SP depth in the minors, but none with ace potential. Besides, I’m not sure Boston fans have the patience for a rotation featuring three rookies.
We can. We just don’t want to. Not at the market price that Lester seems to want. We have too many better options.
a third ace starter is low on la’s priority list compared to relievers and teams don’t trade top 20 MLB prospects for relief pitchers unless if they are perhaps an elite closer. Andrew Miller isn’t. The value for Lester is whatever the team that offers the most is. his value isn’t determined by the dreams of sox fans. Things could change like if one of the top 3 starters all of a sudden is injured or something, but other than that a starting pitcher just isn’t a pressing need.
Lester and Miller to LA for Pederson and Garcia. Rumors out of Boston heard it here first.
No chance. We aren’t packaging Miller with Lester. Second, it will take a minimum of Seager + Pederson or Seager+Urias, or Pederson+Urias+more, to score Lester alone. Maybe we would do Lester and Miller for Seager+Pederson+Urias.
How is Lester alone worth two top 20 prospects? Is there any precedence for a team giving up two top 20 mlb prospects for a 1/2 a year rental?
The same way that Matt Garza was, last year. That’s the going rate for the best starter available at the trade deadline.
None of the prospects the Cubs got were top 20 mlb prospects. Not even top 50.
Ridiculous. They got the Rangers No. 2 prospect, Mike Olt (one time a top ranked prospect in all of baseball), and a top 10 BA pitcher, ranked No. 3 in the Rangers organization, in CJ Edwards.
We’re talking about MLB rankings, not individual organization rankings. They may have been high in the Rangers system. Edwards isn’t a top 50 prospect, and neither was Olt at the time of the Garza trade.
If you think the Dodgers are willing to give up their top 2 prospects for 2 rentals you are crazy. If you think they would give their top 3 prospects for 2 rentals than you are absolutely out of your mind bonkers.
I know that some team is going to. You think that a dominant lefty with a sub 3.00 ERA and the best available starter on the market is going to go for anything less than 2 top organizational prospects, its you whose bonkers.
Joc, Urias, and Kemp (dodgers pay 75-100%) for Lester, Miller and Vazquez?
I don’t want to see Ross catching every game, maybe Lester, Miller, Marrero and 50-50 split on Kemp.
I guess to add is that if the dodgers are so bonkers for lester, why is there no talk of the much more valuable Price? if one is going to go for broke giving up 3 impact prospects why not pull the trigger on a guy who still has one arb year, plenty of time to re-sign him if there is mutual interest. At the least a year and a half rental. Price is also 2 years younger, has 400 less ip on his arm. The only performance downside is Price gives up homers at a high rate, but his other periphs are about the same except for Price k’s more. Lester is performing at a higher level this season as he’s having a career year. Otherwise it should be all about the price being right for lad. bit it’s not, because the dodgers are not obsessing about acquiring a third #1 starter. It makes little sense.
Price is probably not available. Rays are (kind of) back in it.
Wouldn’t acquiring Kemp be tantamount to having Carl Crawford? I thought the “New” Red Sox were going to steer clear of those contracts?
Depends on how much contract the Dodgers eat. If they eat half then Kemp for 5 years at 10 million per year is not bad at all
It would still be bad. Kemp is below replacement level. 10 mil a year for below average is still pretty bad.
the only trade i see happening is Edward Mujica for chris perez lol