Theo Epstein Links: Compensation, Baker, Quade

The Red Sox and Cubs began negotiations today about the compensation package required to finalize Theo Epstein's move to Chicago, and WEEI's John Dennis reports that the talks have gotten off to a slow start.  The Cubs just want to send money as compensation, while the Red Sox are looking for prospects instead.  This seemingly represents a shift in Boston's stance from just yesterday, when SI's Jon Heyman reported the Sox preferred cash.

Here's the latest on those talks and a few other Theo-related items…

  • Negotiations between the Cubs and Red Sox "are moving along at a snail's pace," according to Bruce Levine of ESPN Chicago.  "There's no such thing as a timetable for these transactions," but there doesn't appear to be anything major that would keep Epstein from eventually joining the Cubs.
  • Also from Levine, Cubs owner Tom Ricketts has presented a list of players to interim GM Randy Bush, scouting director Tim Wilken and director of player personnel Oneri Fleita.  The front office members will report back to Ricketts indicating which of the players they would be comfortable trading to Boston as compensation.
  • "The Red Sox like utilityman Jeff Baker," writes Nick Cafardo of the Boston Globe, though Baker alone wouldn't be suitable compensation.  Cafardo says the Sox would also "love" to send John Lackey to the Cubs but unsurprisingly, "that is also a long shot."  Cafardo lists a few of the Cubs' notable prospects who could conceivably go to the Sox, though I'd personally be surprised if Chicago would part with top minor leaguers like Brett Jackson or Matt Szczur.
  • In addition to taking some Boston front office members with him to Chicago, Epstein may also take some of the Red Sox medical staff, tweets Tony Massarotti of the Boston Globe.
  • Mike Quade says he wasn't consulted about the Cubs' pursuit of Epstein, the incumbent manager tells ESPN Chicago, though he has no hard feelings about not being a part of the GM search.
  • With no deal finalized yet, it was "business as usual" for Epstein, pending new Red Sox GM Ben Cherington and other front office staffers today, reports Gordon Edes of ESPN Boston
  • Edes notes that the Red Sox gave Jed Hoyer and Josh Byrnes permission to take two front office members each when Hoyer and Byrnes left Boston for the GM jobs in San Diego and Arizona, respectively.  Edes believes Mike Hazen, Boston's vice president of player development and amateur scouting, is "untouchable" both because the Red Sox brass his contribution to the club's minor league system and because the Cubs already have Wilken performing similar duties.


Leave a Reply

40 Comments on "Theo Epstein Links: Compensation, Baker, Quade"


MCMLXXVII
3 years 9 months ago

Sounds like Theo might just take the entire front office if he wills it.

start_wearing_purple
start_wearing_purple
3 years 9 months ago

I don’t have anything to back this up but I heard a rumor somewhere that it’s not necessarily the negotiations between the Sox and Cubs that are the reason things are going slowly but rather an issue of exactly who Theo wants to take along with him.

3 years 9 months ago

Theo will only get people the Red Sox don’t care to lose.  They aren’t just going to let their GM walk from his contract, take whoever he wants and get crap prospects or a couple million dollars…it’s the Red Sox.  They have more money than the Cubs.  For the record, Szczur is not an elite prospect…the guy wouldn’t be top 10 in the Red Sox system and they are a middle of the pack system right now.  Ryan Kalish, Josh Reddick, Bryce Brentz, Brandon Jacobs, and Xander Bogaerts (if he gets moved to the OF) are all better outfield prospects than him.  The Cubs have a few high upside recent IFA signings that the Red Sox could want, but can we stop acting like Szczur is an elite prospect?  The Cubs system is one of the worst 10 in all of baseball, and the only stuff left outside of Jackson and the lower minor talent is crap the Rays didn’t want for Matt Garza.

notsureifsrs
3 years 9 months ago

if we’re not getting a good prospect, i’d rather see them push for someone like marshall. he’s only got a year left on his deal, so they shouldn’t object too strongly

johnsilver
3 years 9 months ago

Exactly, or really.. After seeing what they Cubs even have on the farm, take Lackey. Boston has a system full of OF anyway at the lower to AA levels with the abilities of the Jackson guy the Cubs fans think is so outstanding and these guys (Hassan, Kalish, Brentz, Jacobs, even Hazelbaker possibly) haven’t had the benefit of the best hitters league in the minors.

Joshua Edwards
3 years 9 months ago

Marshall won’t go anywhere–he’s the Cubs best, most consistent relief pitcher over the past three years. Other teams don’t know who he is but he won’t leave Chicago–I promise.

The only thing that makes developing a guy like Marmol possible is because Marshall can get anyone out. He’s the lynchpin in the pen.

godzillacub
3 years 9 months ago

Baseball America disagrees with your assessment of Szczur, as they ranked him in #48 in their midseason top 50 (beating ALL Red Sox prospects except Anthony Ranaudo). But, I’m sure your totally correct about this case and I completely trust your analysis over experts in the field who do this for a living.

johnsilver
3 years 9 months ago

Was thinking that also when glanced at just the stats of Jackson and Szcur. Szcur looks like a Lin type, both age and all and hardly anyone expects him to ever be anything except possibly a 4-5 OF at the very, very best. jackson looks like is having a hard time hitting, even in the PCL, a hitters league… These guys are like…Nothing… Hardly top 25-30, if that in the Sox system.

godzillacub
3 years 9 months ago

I know right?! A .939 OPS is sooooo bad. Ugh. Get that trash off the field, amiright!?

Also, Jackson would be #1 in your system according to Baseball America. But, in your defense, that’s super close to number 25. It’s like, only 24 away.

Daniel Han
3 years 9 months ago

what about McNutt do you not consider him a top prospect?

Daniel Han
3 years 9 months ago

what about McNutt do you not consider him a top prospect?

DunkinDonuts
3 years 9 months ago

That would actually be a topic of discussion during the negotiations over compensation, as the Red Sox would want to use it as leverage.  I think those issues will be resolved around the same time.

jayrig5
3 years 9 months ago

I would send Jeff Baker in an instant.  He serves no real purpose when you have Castro, Barney, DeWitt, and Lemahieu.  I prefer him to DeWitt, but that’s not saying much.  

The fact that Hendry traded Alburquerqe for him still kind of bothers me.

godzillacub
3 years 9 months ago

“Not Jeff Baker! He’s untouchable!” – Jim Hendry

jayrig5
3 years 9 months ago

Haha, exactly why he needed to go.  In an ESPN chat with Keith Law this summer, someone brought up that statement, and Law said he should have been fired on the spot.

Little did we know, maybe he was.

gradylittle
3 years 9 months ago

I wouldn’t mind getting Jeff Baker, but him as compensation alone, no way!

johnsilver
3 years 9 months ago

Just why would Boston need Jeff Baker? They already have Lowrie and Aviles. Sure, they can probably move Lowrie and get some BP help this winter, but Aviles is still the best utility guy they have had in years and see no way for them to keep 2 of these guys. Baker is no better than Aviles, plus Aviles has speed. This makes no sense.

0bsessions
3 years 9 months ago

“Aviles is still the best utility guy they have had in year”

Fixed that one for you. Did you forget Bill Hall already? Jack of all trades, master of none, but man was he useful.

johnsilver
3 years 9 months ago

No, I meant it. Hall I (at least) saw little use for. he could play defense at no position. hit only in useless situations and struk out in any situaion (it seemed) when a hit was called for. Hall was one of those guys that fell into Tito’s  “Good ‘ole Boy’s club” that t seemed Pedey, Ortiz, mcDonald and several other members fell into and regardless of how pathetic a couple were and played that they would talk to him right, possibly even buddyy/buddy like pedey. they got plenty of playing time.

Long winded response huh? apologies for that.. Alex Cora was who had in mind btw.. Aviles/Lowrie are the best pair of utility guys since Cora overall.

NomarGarciaparra
3 years 9 months ago

What’s the deal with Jeff Baker? I don’t see anything special or particular useful about him (I don’t mean that in a snappy way…it’s a serious inquiry).

He’s a utility infielder, which we already have in Lowrie and Aviles…his offense is not better than either one of them.

3 years 9 months ago

Because he kills left handed pitching. In the last three years he has averaged .323 against lefties compared to .228 against righties. Nothing spectacular on defense but can play multiple positions and is pretty average at all of them.

3 years 9 months ago

Because he kills left handed pitching. In the last three years he has averaged .323 against lefties compared to .228 against righties. Nothing spectacular on defense but can play multiple positions and is pretty average at all of them.

Joshua Edwards
3 years 9 months ago

He’s a good hitter vs. lefties–not bad against righties. Defense is C- at best, no matter where you put him.

He couldn’t make it in the Rockies hitting-heavy system, he’s been looking for a position to get his bat in a lineup for two years, and Cubs are bad enough to give him a shot. He might be a decent DH.

But it sounds like any major league players in the deal for Epstein would set a precedent MLB does not want to see. 

BoSoXaddict
3 years 9 months ago

Why is it unreasonable for the Sox to get Garza..

3 years 9 months ago

Because….
1) The cubs are planning on building their rotation around Garza
2) Epstein is not worth giving up Garza for
3) If the cubs did give the Bo Sox Garza, then they wouldn’t have ANYTHING left in the rotation.

3 years 9 months ago

Because….
1) The cubs are planning on building their rotation around Garza
2) Epstein is not worth giving up Garza for
3) If the cubs did give the Bo Sox Garza, then they wouldn’t have ANYTHING left in the rotation.

BoSoXaddict
3 years 9 months ago

Why is it unreasonable for the Sox to get Garza..

3 years 9 months ago

I just wanted to say that……. Nick Carfado is dumb. If you dont believe me then you’ve never read one of his articles

Fangaffes
3 years 9 months ago

“This seemingly represents a shift in Boston’s stance from just yesterday, when SI’s Jon Heyman reported the Sox preferred cash.”

The idea that  the Red Sox would want cash (which they have plenty of) over prospects (which they’re relatively bereft of) is just laughable.

hawkny1
3 years 9 months ago

Whomever the Cubs give up as a token for signing Epstein it won’t matter.  As for Quade, he will not be Theo’s choice to manage the team on the field.  If replaceable, he will be gone by spring training.

Tommy L
3 years 9 months ago

Check out my take on the Red Sox at http://thebestsoxblog.mlblogs.com

DunkinDonuts
3 years 9 months ago

I was positive that Massarotti was being snarky when he tweeted that, but the delivery makes me wonder.  If it’s true, half the Cubs roster will be on the DL by May.

MaineSox
3 years 9 months ago

Pretty sure you forgot the one in a Red Sox uniform.

notsureifsrs
3 years 9 months ago

it’s genius. taking out soriano and zambrano to get some insurance money

johnsilver
3 years 9 months ago

Not sure if Boston has a shrink on full time duty or not, but maybe the Cubs need a new one after bradley, Zambrano to keep people like that under control, or at least someone to write those people stronger prescriptions.

0bsessions
3 years 9 months ago

Whether he was being snarky or not is irrelevant. The important part is that everything that Tony Massarotti says is wrong.

MaineSox
3 years 9 months ago

That’s unacceptable!

MaineSox
3 years 9 months ago

Touché

Fangaffes
3 years 9 months ago

Except when he says the opposite of Felger.

0bsessions
3 years 9 months ago

These occasions are the result of a coin flip. Massarotti doesn’t actually intend to be right, he’s just forced to by the whims of fate.

The truth is, as a result of said coin flips, there is an infinite number of parallel universes where Massarotti is, in fact, wrong. This is how the world manages to function.

(Blame Community for this post, I eat up anything dealing in parallel timelines)