Baseball Digest Daily contacted me (and Randy Booth from Over The Monster) to participate in a roundtable discussion about the future of the Red Sox- including thoughts on the Santana trade, longterm contracts for Youkilis and Francona, exercising Manny's contract option, Varitek's role, and Julio Lugo's future at shortstop.
You can read the full discussion here - but I've also included my answers below.
Thanks to Baseball Digest Daily for inviting me to be a part of a roundtable discussion with such interesting questions- and thanks also for not including a lame, completely recycled question, like asking us to compare Clay Buchholz with Joba Chamberlain or Ian Kennedy.
What are your thoughts on these same questions?
Question 1: Are you prepared to give either or both Jacoby Ellsbury or Jon Lester in addition to other prospects in order to obtain Johan Santana?
I'm greedy - I want them all. Is that so much to ask?
My thoughts on the Santana SituationTM have run the gamut this offseason. In the afterglow of the World Series victory, I couldn't bear the thought of parting ways with Lester or Ellsbury. But I came to my senses when I realized I was entirely too emotionally attached to contemplate losing anyone on that team (except Gagne - I would have personally paid someone to take him off our hands... thanks Brewers!) It was that blinding glare off the shiny, shiny World Series trophy! It was clouding my rational judgment!
Afterglow aside, I am now prepared to give up Lester. I admire and respect him and appreciate what he has done for the Sox, but of course I'm prepared to deal him for an ace. I have even managed to prepare myself to give up Ellsbury, although I don't prefer to. But I am not yet prepared to give up both Ellsbury and Lester in the same package to obtain Santana. If Theo can nab Santana for a Lester, Lowrie, Masterson and Crisp package- I will be thrilled. But not both prospects. Not unless there's some kind of creative 5-2 swap.
Ultimately, I want Santana in Boston home whites - but if not, I want to minimize the collateral damage. Ideally, that means he ends up on a crappy non-contender (a crappy non-contender in the NL would be perfect), or stays with the Twins in '08 and goes to FA at the end of the year. But if he ends up on a contender like the Mets, I would be satisfied. Or maybe "relieved" is a better word.
Question 2: Would you like to see the Red Sox Front Office give long-term contracts to Kevin Youkilis and/or Terry Francona? Why?
I think it may be more of a question whether Youk would be willing to go for a long-term deal at this point. I would be very happy to see the front office offer him a long-term contract- he's got excellent defensive skills and that.390 OBP was lovely to have on the offensive side. But the front office will likely want a discount on a multi-year deal, and Youk might choose to take one-year deals until the looming specter of free agency drives his price up to the level he'd like. I'm hoping he would jump on the trendy Schilling-Lowell "We Heart The Sox" train, and forego the siren song of free agency for a guaranteed deal.
To me, the Francona deal is much simpler - I'd like him signed to a multi-year deal. And I have a feeling totally unsubstantiated by any actual factual evidence that if the Sox offered, the deal would get done. I would also like John Farrell to agree to stay on our staff until the end of time (or at least until he retires) - though I'm not sure that I'll get that wish. I am not above starting a "Stay, Coach Farrell" chant if I need to.
Question 3: Manny Ramirez's future with Boston depends on the club options in 2009-10 (20 M$/year) and Jason Varitek becomes a free agent after next season. What do you want to see happen during or after the 2008 season?
Dear, sweet, kooky Manny. If 2007 was the start of a downward trend for him, and the offensive decline continues in 2008, I don't see being able to summon any enthusiasm for paying him at his contract option price, even with the current market rate for outfielders. But if he rebounds with a season nearing .900 OPS, or a 145-ish OPS+, I will be fine with exercising his '09 option at $20MM. If Andruw Jones gets $18MM, Manny for $20MM at those offensive stat levels is OK - at the very least, it would give the team a stopgap while the long-term LF situation is sorted. Manny's bat is essentially irreplaceable, you're not going to find a "replacement" for him at the plate. But his defensive weaknesses make it possible to sacrifice some offense (if the load can properly be allocated down the rest of the batting order) and still come out even stevens on overall production (or slightly improved?) with the right balanced defensively/offensively skilled fielder to slot in.
As for Varitek - we have Mirabelli! Why would we need to look any further? Let's just sign The Stud Who Hits Bombs to a multi-year deal, and be done with it!
Back in the real world... In my opinion, the catcher's position is where our most desperate need is developing. We need a long-term solution there, and how. The Cash Experiment did not work out with satisfactory results, and Kotteras has not progressed to the level of a solid #2-- and there are doubts whether he could ever be a #1. The Varitek contract is therefore the center puzzle piece in sorting out the catcher's position not just for the next 3-4 years, but for the next 10-12. I'd love to see us get a solid catching talent into Fenway this year, and then sign Varitek to a 2-year extension so that he can mentor and transition in that prospect to the full-time role. Ideally, the prospect would be solid enough to jump in immediately as legitimate relief for Varitek- because I don't think we can expect him to keep up with only one day off every trip through the rotation. I expect the Sox will follow the Lowell model, and hold out until the offseason to negotiate - because I think Boras is not going to let Tek agree to the type of hometown discount it would take to get the deal done before then.
Question 4: Do you think Julio Lugo should be the starting shortstop in 2008 and beyond? Explain.
I don't know how he managed it, but my general dissatisfaction with Lugo at SS has worn away into acceptance. Maybe it's that Afterglow again - that's a killer, I'm telling you. After his trip to Mendoza land earlier this season, he seems to have recovered on the offensive side of the ball - and defensively, he is at least an above-average or better shortstop (his 2007 PMR was 101.14- ranking him #11 overall). I feel like our needs for a 4th outfielder, and a long-term LF and C are so much more pressing, that I am fine with keeping Lugo at SS through the end of his contract.
Question 5: Do you see the Red Sox ever leaving Fenway Park? Why?
I suppose if Wrigley Field can be renamed, anything is possible... but I doubt it. The owners, especially someone like Lucchino (who was so instrumental in upgrading Camden Yards for the O's without sacrificing the history, feel and quirks of the park), seem to be committed to modernizing Fenway- not trying to build yet another new soulless ballpark that attempts to recreate the spirit of what Fenway already has.
on January 14, 2008 7:38 AM
Question 1: I agree with you... although the more I think of a Lester/Crisp/Masterson/Lowrie swap the less satisfied I am with it (and it is definitively as far as I'm prepared to go). Yes, my growing doubt has been magnified by chatting with Lowrie and Masterson this weekend and being reminded that I think they are excellent fits for the Sox. My original reasoning was that Lester would be upgraded to Santana (and I'm not entirely sure his control issues will ever go away, though clearly John Farrell knows more than I do, yes?), Crisp and Ellsbury are redundant and Crisp would be better served by a fresh start (and could really be destroyed by the fans if Ellsbury went on to be a superstar and he got saddled with all the what-could-have-beens), Lowrie I think will be a more successful 2B than SS and he'll be blocked by Pedroia (and I really want the kid to have a major league career--he's one of my favorites), and Masterson, while a tremendous prospect, is a prospect, not a proven upper-level player. That said, these players and the enormously large contract necessary to sign Santana seem to me an awful lot to invest in one human being. I'm not sure I foresee seven continuing years of dominance; I'm not sure I'm comfortable with that much invested in one person. In some ways the whole thing just screams "old Yankee mindset move" to me. I'm not averse to trading the farm for a player you need (e.g. Beckett)--sometimes that's the best use of the star pups. But even if the Yankees got Santana, if they had to give up Hughes, Kennedy and someone else talented, I'd prefer that to the Sox making the deal. Mets, of course, would be ideal.
Side note: while I do think Ellsbury is currently overrated when folks talk about their reluctance to trade him, I really don't want to see him go, both because I think everyone is better served if Crisp goes, and because, dammit, I'm a fan, and the kid is exciting to watch.
Question 2: Totally agree on Francona and Farrell. I'm a firm believer that some managers do well with certain types of players and certain situations, and if you keep your (successful) manager, you have an element of stability that defines your ball club. Farrell I think is a genius. As far as Youkilis, I can't see him forgoing free agency in a Schilling/Lowell way because those guys had the luxury of doing that after they'd already cashed in! And I don't think I want to commit big money to him in a long-term contract; the way he plays I'm just not sure he's not a breakdown risk.
Question 3: Agree on Manny. If he doesn't utterly tank (and those stories about his workouts are encouraging!) I wouldn't be averse to overpaying a year for an extra year to see if any of the kids make their way up or a better option comes up in a trade or free agency. (Another reason, IMO, that I might rather keep a youngster like Masterson. We will have a greater need for hitting than pitching in the next few years.)
Given that Cash was a longtime journeyman, I think he gave us everything we might have expected of him; at an absolute minimum, Wake liked him,
http://www.sittingstill.net/photos/07September4/090407_9784.jpg
and proved he could pitch to someone besides Mirabelli in this century! I think the relatively cheap one-year deal on Dougie was in part because there's not a good market for catchers, but also to see if Dusty Brown can hit in AAA. Dusty's an excellent defensive catcher, and I've seen him catch Charlie Zink; the knock has been his hitting, but he was doing very well in Portland before his promotion to Pawtucket at the end of the year. I really think he's passing Kottaras on the depth chart. Mark Wagner is another player I could see as a 2009 possibility.
Question 4: "Fine" indeed, is the word. Given that I publicly threatened to kill the man with a screaming monkey slingshot at the end of June, "fine" is a lot of progress for me. I never understood Theo's obsession with him. But his defense was considerably better than I expected, I think he plays the game with great intensity, and not incidentally, I think he's great with Manny. Not infrequently after Manny did something questionable (like have a ball go over his head because he was too shallow) you could see Lugo out there chewing him out. And I think Manny takes that better from a peer than he does from the coaching staff. I wish I could say without reservation that I think Lowrie will make a fine SS, but I don't think his defense quite makes it there. So rather than continue the revolving door, I'm fine with Lugo.
Question 5: Agreed with a caveat. First, I have to mention that as an adopted San Diego fan, I can tell you Padres fans, too, are enormously grateful to Lucchino for what he did, giving them Petco Park and also changing the whole fan experience of the Padres. The caveat, then--there's no way I see the team moving under current ownership. They've played it exactly right thus far, making changes and improvements and adding revenue sources without losing the ballpark. But if the Sox were to win another World Series soon, and they decide their work is done, and they sell, and the team is potentially even better positioned to rake in cash for a new owner...? I don't know. I sure hope not, though.