2012-2013 Off-season thread part III:

[GrkGawdofWalkz]

Continuation. etc.

[jim51990]

In regards to what i was saying in the other thread i didnt mean just a specific prospect i meant that no prospect would be untouchable to me in a stanton trade.

[BradytoGronkTD]

The question is how many of your top prospects are you willing to give up for stanton. Stanton is a fantastic piece to have, but if it wipes out the entire farm its not such a great idea.

The only players i would sell the entire farm for are King Felix and Verlander.

[Nomar]

Im not against giving up Bogaerts in a Stanton deal, but i wouldnt be for giving up much more than Bogaerts. Like if Bogaerts in in then Barnes & JBJ are staying, ect.

[ruckus16969]

It would take 2 of them guys. Probably XB and Barnes. Or JBJ and Barnes. Plus a couple othdr guys. Maybe Doubront?

Stanton imo would end up being like Manny. Probably cause all kinds of problems off the field. But be great on the field.

[Nomar]

It would take 2 of them guys. Probably XB and Barnes. Or JBJ and Barnes. Plus a couple othdr guys. Maybe Doubront?

Stanton imo would end up being like Manny. Probably cause all kinds of problems off the field. But be great on the field.

How can you say that? He's never caused any trouble at all that I can remember. I would give something like Bogaerts, RDLR, Cecchini, Swihart, and Brentz.

[ruckus16969]

He is always tweeting all kinds of wise *** remarks. Can you imagine him being in Boston with the media all over him all the time. He would definitely get himself into trouble. I don't think he would beat up any 60 year old guys or nothing like that.

Im not saying I would love to have him here at all. He'd be perfect for this team. But he would be entertaining andfun for us.

[ruckus16969]

What would it take to get Kubel here? He would be perfect for LF until we trade Ells the he could take over for Victorino. Id rather him then Upton. Just cause he wouldn't cost us the farm. Would Iggy be enough?

[Nomar]

He is always tweeting all kinds of wise *** remarks. Can you imagine him being in Boston with the media all over him all the time. He would definitely get himself into trouble. I don't think he would beat up any 60 year old guys or nothing like that.

Im not saying I would love to have him here at all. He'd be perfect for this team. But he would be entertaining andfun for us.

Lots of people tweet dumb stuff. Look at Logan Morrison. He says a lot more on twitter and is loved for it. I think you formed this opinion after his "Alright, im pissed off! Plain and simple" tweet, and that was a totally justifiable tweet IMO.

[ruckus16969]

Maybe I got him confused with Morrison.

[Nomar]

Maybe I got him confused with Morrison.

Lol i would believe it. LoMo is hilarious though.

[ruckus16969]

To bad we couldnt get him here.

[RedSoxtober]

Soxtober, I think that Lackeyfan's fear is that the team would have to give up so much in the trade that they'd have nothing left to build WITH.

I understood that. However, I'd contend that the Sox system is well regarded for the breadth of its talent (particularly at the lower levels) rather than a few key pieces at the top (e.g., the Yankees with Montero, Betances, Banuelos a few years ago).

With that in mind my trade suggestion included club-controlled MLB pieces (Buchholz, Middlebrooks) along with fewer top prospects (Bogaerts, Ranaudo, ???). I'd rather not give up Bogaerts but receiving Stanton back gives us at least as much production. The Sox probably replace him in the long range plan with Cecchini and we protect the higher ceiling pitching prospects (Barnes, RDLR, Webster). As a personal preference I'd rather keep the arms to build for the future.

[Nomar]

I understood that. However, I'd contend that the Sox system is well regarded for the breadth of its talent (particularly at the lower levels) rather than a few key pieces at the top (e.g., the Yankees with Montero, Betances, Banuelos a few years ago).

With that in mind my trade suggestion included club-controlled MLB pieces (Buchholz, Middlebrooks) along with fewer top prospects (Bogaerts, Ranaudo, ???). I'd rather not give up Bogaerts but receiving Stanton back gives us at least as much production. The Sox probably replace him in the long range plan with Cecchini and we protect the higher ceiling pitching prospects (Barnes, RDLR, Webster). As a personal preference I'd rather keep the arms to build for the future.

That's how I see it as well, but I don't know how interested they'd be in Buchholz. There's a chance that Miami would rather have Doubront.

I would rather give up Barnes than Bogaerts even if we had to add one more player in to compensate for the gap between those two though. Reason being that Bogaerts and Stanton would likely end up being one of if not the best 3, 4 punch in the MLB. But if we have to give XB up so be it, because I doubt he ends up being as good as Stanton.

[EEasyA]

Ken Rosenthal @Ken_Rosenthal

Lots of interest in #Marlins’ Stanton, but sources all but rule out a deal. One source says chances are “as close to zero as they can be


Sorry Normar and Majesty. Looks like they are not trading him.