What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

*** Official 2012 Red Sox Offseason Thread *** (1 Viewer)

David Yudkin

Footballguy
Didn't see a thread on this yet . . .

IMO, Sox should have Bard and Aceves start. (Bard was converted from a starter to a set up man and Aceves has been a decent spot starter.) Re-sign Paps and revamp the rst of the bullpen. Should be much more cost effective to get decent bullpen help than trying to load up on expensive starting pitchers.

Boston needs to trade Youk for whatever they can get for him. He seems to be too surly and has issues playing nice with others. That will leave them in need of a RF, 3B, and a DH. I would bring back Papi, but they may let him go. I don't know who's in the free agent pool this year at 3B or RF, but hopefully they can trade Youk for a right handed power hitting corner outfielder.

I doubt they can afford someone in the Pujols or Fielder class, but maybe they can get another RH bat somewhere.

Rotation of Beckett, Lester, Buchholz, Bard, Aceves could be decent enough if they continue to score a lot of runs.

 
Aceves is better served in the Wakefield (spot start/long relief) role instead of SP. I'm for keeping Bard in the pen, but swapping to closer. I'm not a big "closer" fan, but I'm not for paying them like they have and are paid.

Sizemore is a play only if it's short year(s) and highly based on incentives. I've dealt w/ Drew for too long only to have a younger version take his place.

 
I've heard that ownership wants Valentine but Cheington doesn't, so they are having a Mexican standoff at the moment.

Pretty sad that the biggest offseason news in Boston is Heidi Watney leaving. :cry:

 
Please change the subtitle. I get hungry every time I see it. :(

Might I recommend something like "entering a 5-year rebuilding phase" ...

 
Please change the subtitle. I get hungry every time I see it. :( Might I recommend something like "entering a 5-year rebuilding phase" ...
I'm not sure I agree with the last part. They still have the same team (less Paps) that has won 90+ games pretty consistently. You make it sound like they are a 100 loss team barely scraping by.They were on pace to win 100 games in the beginning of September. Why will they be any less competitive?
 
Please change the subtitle. I get hungry every time I see it. :( Might I recommend something like "entering a 5-year rebuilding phase" ...
I'm not sure I agree with the last part. They still have the same team (less Paps) that has won 90+ games pretty consistently. You make it sound like they are a 100 loss team barely scraping by.They were on pace to win 100 games in the beginning of September. Why will they be any less competitive?
Your new manager will be tuned out by early June.
 
Have to wonder after today's trade (Lowrie and Weiland to Houston for Marc Melancon) whether the Sawx are really going to go the cheap closer route - use Melancon to close and move Bard to the rotation....................OR trade for Andrew Bailey knowing they have Melancon as a backup.

 
Bard to the rotation? Ooof.
Starting pitching >>>>>> Relief pitching
I agree, but he most likely will not post 200 IP in 12. Nate Silver did some nice work in comparing the value of a closer w/ a 2.00 ERA to a SP over @ baseballprospectus
Well, Bard was at 3.33 last year. :unsure:
ERASep 10.34Aug 3.27Jul 0.00Jun 0.00I'm not saying that he'll have a 0.00 ERA, but he shat the bed in September in a major way, so I think that it levels out lower than 3.00, but it's a moot point.
 
Have to wonder after today's trade (Lowrie and Weiland to Houston for Marc Melancon) whether the Sawx are really going to go the cheap closer route - use Melancon to close and move Bard to the rotation....................OR trade for Andrew Bailey knowing they have Melancon as a backup.
Curious as well. I'd lean to trading for Bailey, but I'm not sure what Beane is looking for in the deal.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top