East Notes: Mets, Jays, Shields, Red Sox, Nationals

As it stands now, the Mets don't have a great deal of money to spend in free agency after exercising the options on David Wright and R.A. Dickey for 2013. However, the club could free up cash by opting to trade one or both if they are unable to come to terms on contract extensions. The Mets have a serious need for outfield help and multiple baseball officials told Mike Puma of the New York Post that they see Cody Ross as a possible free agent target for the team. Here's more from the AL and NL East:

  • Diamondbacks GM Kevin Towers told MLB.com's Barry M. Bloom that "the Blue Jays have kicked the tires about possibly interviewing" Matt Williams for their managerial vacancy, but have yet to formally ask for permission. Williams is scheduled to meet with top Rockies officials at Coors Field and will be the final candidate to do so, according to Thomas Harding of MLB.com.
  • James Shields, who is set to become the highest-paid player in Rays' franchise history, is prepared to be a prime subject of the Hot Stove rumor mill this winter, writes the Tampa Bay Times' Marc Topkin. "Obviously my name's been thrown around a lot," the right-hander said. "I'm just going to go about my business and not really worry about it. Obviously I want to be a Ray. I've been here 12 years, this is my home. If it does happen, it'll be a sad day."
  • Michael Silverman of the Boston Herald suggests that the Red Sox should trade Jacoby Ellsbury as they are unlikely to come to terms with him on a contract extension. The Red Sox could find a partner in the Rangers as they may prefer to give Ellsbury a long-term commitment rather than Josh Hamilton and can afford to part with shortstop Elvis Andrus
  • The Red Sox are bolstering their scouting department in anticipation of having, for the first time since 1993 and just the second time since 1967, a top ten pick in the amateur draft, reports WEEI.com's Alex Speier. The team rehired John Booher, the person most directly involved in the scouting process of Ellsbury in 2005 and Nick Hagadone in 2007, and hired former MLB pitcher Brian Moehler as an area scout for Georgia.
  • Tom Kotchman, who resigned last week as a manager and scout in the Angels organization, interviewed with the Red Sox on Thursday, tweets Conor Glassey of Baseball America. Glassey points to former Angels scouting director Eddie Bane's position with Boston as the club's new Special Assistant to Player Personnel for the mutual interest. 
  • The Red Sox wanted to hold on to reliever Michael Olmstead, but their current 40-man roster crunch made it impossible, explains Alex Speier of WEEI.com. The 6'7", 245-pound right-hander signed with the Brewers as a minor league free agent last night.
  • For now, people familiar with the Nationals’ thinking expect them to either trade arbitration-eligible John Lannan or allow him to walk, writes Adam Kilgore of the Washington Post. The Nats could instead convert Christian Garcia from a reliever to a starter to fill out the rotation, but his history of arm trouble may make that too risky.

Edward Creech contributed to this post.

55 Responses to East Notes: Mets, Jays, Shields, Red Sox, Nationals Leave a Reply

  1. Devern Hansack 3 years ago

    “Yeah, Sandy Rosario, Mauro Gomez, and Danny Valencia are totally more important.” – Cherington

    • johnsilver 3 years ago

      That type of roster move is going to be our crying point all winter have a feeling as we see maybe even Fields and Hazelbaker leave.

      Boston simply must protect the non essentials.. You know.. The type of players that they could find on the waiver wire for nearly free if an emergency arose during the regular season.

      Does it make sense? Of course not. Duquette was the best at roster management, but the media ran him out of town.

      • Devern Hansack 3 years ago

        He manages the Red Sox like a novice would manage a team on MLB the Show. The fact that Rosario, Gomez, Valencia, and Zach Stewart are still on the roster while solid upside guys like Olmsted and Lin aren’t makes little sense. Aside from the Dodgers trade (which, admittedly, happened with a team with a questionable GM who is working with Monopoly money), Cherington has made a ton of questionable moves.

        • Dustroia15 3 years ago

          Stewert is a stud…said no one ever

        • Jim McGrath 3 years ago

          add to the list DeJesus, Beato, Nava and Kalish plus Stewart, Valencia and Iglesias.Of that group, Iggy, Nava and Kalish may be claimed–That would have saved Michael O–I mean unless he is a problem guy, or injured, or whatever, to give up on a guy, age 26 with a 14.2 K/9 is very shortsighted. I’d like to hear BenC explain that move.

  2. Guest 3 years ago


    • Dustroia15 3 years ago

      I wouldn’t trade Middlebrooks for Wright straight up.

      Sox could keep Middlebrooks for under $1M a year fr the next several years and have another $19M or so to spend.

      Adding Jason Bay to sit on the bench? That means the Sox would be increasing their payroll by about $35M for a marginal upgrade at 3B and a decline in the OF….plus giving up 2 of their top 10 prospects.

    • dc21892 3 years ago


  3. MB923 3 years ago

    If they traded Dickey, who is only making $5 million next year, how would that be enough money to free up to extend David Wright? And Cody Ross in all likelihood will be making more than Dickey next year. So signing Ross and trading RA would do more harm than good if they want to extend Wright and keep their payroll as low as possible lol

  4. Dustroia15 3 years ago

    Ellsbury, Middlebrooks, Saltalamacchia, Barnes, Aceves


    Wright, Davis, Harvey

    This would leave to Red Sox with no OF but Brentz and Bradley are a year or so away, they could resign Ross, try and get Hunter…Bourn would be an ideal replacement I CF and could be moved depending on if Bradley would be considered the better defender.



    • johnsilver 3 years ago

      I don’t understand this infatuation among a few Red Sox fans with Wright. 3b is the strongest position in the Red Sox farm system, like from A ball up. Bogaerts will in all liklihood be moved to 3b soon, Cecchini, Middlebrooks.. It’s like.. Why even THINK of paying someone 15m+ to play the position, much less give anything up to acquire them when they have so many top people already?

      It makes no sense at all.

      • Dustroia15 3 years ago

        Middlebrooks would be gone, Bogaerts is 2 years away. If Bogaerts does move to 3B, Wright could play 3B on the off days and DH. Maybe one of them ends up in left field, maybe Bogaerts remains at SS. Tough to predict now but there are options.

        Ike Davis would fill a huge void at 1B which looks to be a huge void for the forseeable future. Harvey can start now, he is the equivalent to what we could potentially see from Barnes later.

        • LazerTown 3 years ago

          But why would the mets do that?

          Would make it harder to compete now, and would hurt them longer run. Davis and Harvey are better chances in the long run than middlebrooks and barnes.

          Davis really turned it around in the 2nd half after having valley fever.

          Really don’t see this ever happening because both teams probably won’t be in it this year, so they would both be giving up prospects and acquiring future free agents.

          More likely that mets find a 3rd team, because davis and harvey aren’t worth giving up to get barnes and middlebrooks.

          Aceves and Salty really don’t have much value at this point, and who knows what to expect from ellsbury. I think they end up much better if they just decide to trade wright for prospects.

      • johnsmith4 3 years ago

        Middlebrooks for Wright? What??? I guess fans don’t like having a potential all-star 3B at the price of $500k.

    • tacko 3 years ago

      So let me get this straight. You think it would be a fair trade for the Mets to trade their best third-baseman in franchise history, a young and affordable for years to come slugging first-baseman, and their best pitching prospect who has proven himself in the majors this year, for another third-baseman (albeit younger and more affordable), an injury-prone center-fielder coming off a very forgettable year heading for free agency next year, an average catcher heading for free agency next year, a much lesser pitching prospect, and a middle-reliever?

      • Dustroia15 3 years ago

        Wright may be gone for nothing. Mets have another high end prospect/young 1B.

        To replace Wright, you get Middlebrooks. Middlebrooks trade value is probably slightly higher than that of Davis.

        Wright and Ellsbury have similar value but Ellsbury has the edge being 30-40% cheaper this year.

        Harvey is pitching in the majors now but prospect rankings had Barnes higher ranked last year.

        Mets need a catcher and Aceves could replace Harvey in the rotation for the time being.

        • tacko 3 years ago

          Even if the Mets don’t sign Wright to an extension this offseason, they will still get prospects for him at next year’s deadline, and worst-case scenario, a compensation pick next year with a qualifying offer. There’s no way they get nothing for him.

          Middlebrooks’ trade value may be higher than Davis’, but nowhere near high enough to justify the trade you suggested. Middlebrooks is very talented, and has high upside, but he’s not the sure-fire superstar the NE media is making him out to be. Compare Middlebrooks’ minor league and rookie stats to Wrights, for example. Wright has always hit better, played better defense, and walked at a higher rate than him.

          And Harvey has always been a much better prospect than Barnes. Not only is Barnes two years older, but he’s never been ranked as a top 100 BA prospect, which isn’t a tell-all of things, but Harvey has always been projected to be a more superior pitcher than Barnes.

          • jjs91 3 years ago

            I’m pretty sure Barnes isnt 25 so i cant imagine him being 2 yrs older than harvey. Not sure why you keep bringing up the top 100 This is barnes second season of eligibility and he will make it. Harvey may be better but they have a similar ceiling and Barnes doesnt have harvey’s control problems. And no Harvey hasnt proved anything in the majors until he plays a full season. With that said the trade makes no sense, ellsubury for a season only makes sense for a contender.

          • buddaley 3 years ago

            Harvey is a year older than Barnes. He was born in March 1989 while Barnes was born in June 1990. Of course, Barnes reached high A ball at age 22 while Harvey pitched in the majors as a 23 year old.

          • Ben_Cherington 3 years ago

            “Not only is Barnes two years older, but he’s never been ranked as a top 100″

            PROVE IT.

        • hrbomber1113 3 years ago

          LOL gee what team do you follow? Ellsbury has more value than Wright? Ellsbury is an outfielder who’s agent is Boras coming off a year of injury and awful performance. Before that he’s a grab bag of one elite year, one good year and a couple of decent seasons and a ton of injury. His elite year looks like an outlier and even his good/decent years didn’t show that type of player. Even if you get an elite performer he won’t stay healthy and on top of that…check the league man. In this FA market alone you can get outfielders in Bourn/Victorino/Upton/Swisher/Melky/Hamilton/Hunter/Ichiro etc…but 3B? who’s available? Youkilis who should be at 1B anyway? David Wright would get a TON more than Ellsbury if they were traded right now.

    • UnbaisedSoxFan 3 years ago

      Makes complete sense…said no body.

    • Howard 3 years ago

      Middlebrooks is worse than Lawrie

    • burnboll 3 years ago

      I think Mets should try to find a club, like Cincinnati, who has lots of good prospects, and trade Wright to them for 2-3 of their top 15 prospects (one from the top 5, the other two from the top 15).

      Remember, Wright will walk after the coming season, but a team like Cincy, could really use a boost like Wright to make a run for the title.

      But Red Sox have no use for Wright. They are in rebuild mode, and he would be gone after next year anyway. Don’t trade away the future for one year of Wright.

  5. Middlebrooks shouldn’t even be traded, too much potential.

    • burnboll 3 years ago

      The thing is, Red Sox may see his ceiling as lower than what is widely known, and may sell “high” on him.

      My point is, they know him better than anyone else, so they can hopefully judge if he’s gonna be a future stud, or if the stuff he showed this spring was just being in the zone.

      So if Red Sox trade him, there is probably good reason. Now, I don’t have any idea either way. Just saying.

  6. Paul Shailor 3 years ago

    Just do Lackey for Bay.

    • burnboll 3 years ago

      Not a bad suggestion, I think both players may have chances of bounce back years.

      Lackey has a terrible attitude, a cancer to a clubhouse, so he would definitely be better in a different environment.

      • LazerTown 3 years ago

        Bay still owed $19M vs $30.5M for Lackey. But at this point bay is pretty much useless, while lackey should still be able to handle the backend of the rotation. I think that the sox wouldn’t do the trade, just because lackey still could return to form.

        • burnboll 3 years ago

          I have to be honest and admit that I dont know enough about the current status of Bay to make a fair evaluation. Before Berkman’s bounce back year with Cardinals I considered him done.

          Been pretty hesitent to write off guys ever since.

          • LazerTown 3 years ago

            Berkman wasn’t nearly as bad though. His avg/power were way down, but at least he was still hitting 15 hr power and getting on base at a .360/.370 clip, which is still very good. Something that while not nearly as good as he used to be, he still isn’t going to be a black hole in your lineup, and is actually worth still playing regularly.


            2011: .246/.329/.374
            2012: .165/.237/.299

            Both years that puts him basically absolute bottom in offense from LF, and I don’t see many teams even wanting to take the chance to play him everyday.

          • burnboll 3 years ago

            He’s even worse this year, despite the fences moved in at Citi Field.

            I am no expert in swing analysis and that stuff, and I’d like some expert opinion on what mechanical wise/approach wise/bat speed wise, what’s gone wrong with Bay.

            It would be very interesting if one of the more radical thinking GM’s would trade for him. What would they be seeing that we’re not?

            Is there “hidden value”?

            As a Mets player, Bay is IMO toast. It really would be interesting to see if he, with a very rigourous off season training program, somehow could turn it around.

            I don’t he will though

  7. deewitt92 3 years ago

    Would anyone agree with me on a Dickey to Texas Rangers for Profar? Would I be asking to much?

    • Guest 3 years ago

      why would someone downvote a question? Do they not like questions?

      • burnboll 3 years ago

        I think many found the suggested trade, Dickey, albeit very good this year, for the top prospect in baseball, Profar, to be a quite… off the charts. No offence.

        I don’t quite understand when you have fans of one team that suggests that other teams would do bone headed trades with their team?

        We should realize that all GM’s have at least a common grasp of basic value of players.

        Where a “ninja” move is made today, is when a GM first trade for one player, like Aviles (Toronto from Red Sox) in order to trade him to Indians for bullpen arms. And we’re not even sure GM Antapopoulos is done, he may trade the bullpen arms to a club that lacks bullpen depth in return for eg a first baseman or whatever.

        But to just think that a team will send off super stars for scraps, I don’t get that wishful thinking from fans.

        • Guest 3 years ago

          its still in form of a question, if he made a outright statement as most here do that would be different, downvoters logic is still wrong, simple comment with why its bad trade is correct response

        • LazerTown 3 years ago

          The fact of the matter is that often times people have these unreal values placed on prospects. Some prospects pan out, some don’t, but history has shown that if you want to acquire a top notch proven player that it is going to cost you some talent. It is like a loan, you have to pay more to get the production now. Sure if the Rangers may be able to get dickey without giving up Profar, but to say the Mets would have to throw in someone else to get profar, or even other people suggested profar for price would still be an overpay is preposterous. Dickey and Price are proven commodities, cy young canidates.

          • johnsilver 3 years ago

            Little different situation there between Price and Dickey. yes.. both just had Cy young type seasons, but Price would get 2-3x as much in a trade type scenario as Dickey. We have seen time after time in games.. Like from one game to the next, from every knuckleballer, even HOF’er Phil Niekro that the pitch is quirky from 1 game to the next and those type of pitchers live and die from that single pitch, with little to nothing else.

            Price is a legitimate front line “normal” type starter and that type will always be looked at differently. Sorry Mets fans, but remember Wake was always looked like that also, all knuckleballers always have and will be.

    • burnboll 3 years ago

      I don’t know. Why not ask for a Jason Bay-Mike Trout trade while at it. I’m sure Angels would like to beef up their lineup.

    • Al_Oliver 3 years ago

      Profar is the best prospect in basesball, so yeah, just a little bit too much

      • LazerTown 3 years ago

        Your kidding right?
        Dickey is still a cy young canidate, if rangers want to pick him up, then they are going to have to give up some big talent.

    • Look at Dickey’s age again.

      • LazerTown 3 years ago

        Knuckleballer though. So worried less about declining velocity.

    • padresgm 3 years ago

      Woah, when I first read this, I thought it said Lackey…

    • Sky14 3 years ago

      Considering that Profar is half the age of Dickey, the top prospect in baseball, a SS, and under team control for 6 years, I think you might be asking for a little too much.

    • deewitt92 3 years ago

      Jeez I was just asking lol would the Rangers even be interested? Like if we added say…Familia or duda?

  8. Adam Bomb 3 years ago

    this may sound crazy but i miss the mediocre red sox rosters of the 90s. lee tinsley, darren bragg, reggie jefferson, etc. may actually prefer those days over the 2007 red sox. at least tickets were affordable and the players were likeable.

  9. UnbaisedSoxFan 3 years ago

    Trading Middlebrooks for Wright would be the biggest mistake that Ben could make.

  10. Frank 3 years ago

    how about Wright and Bay for Lackey Webster A.Miller Cecchini and Jacobs (probally another prospect needed)
    move Middlebrooks to 1st
    Trade Jacoby for Andrus and then sign Sizemore to play CF
    OF- Bay/Kalish Sizemore Ross
    IF- Wright Andrus Pedroia Middlebrooks
    C- Salti DH Ortiz
    then following year Bradley takes over in CF and Brentz in LF, possibly Lavarnway at C

    • dc21892 3 years ago

      No Wright is the type of player Boston just freed themselves from. One year from now he will be getting a huge pay day. No thanks. Would much rather have a stop gap first baseman, Middlebrooks at 3rd and Lackey for league min in his final season.

  11. Frank 3 years ago

    Pitching Wise
    Bullpen: Breslow Morales Bailey Bard Tazawa Mortensen/Carpenter Sign Mike Adams
    Lester Doubront Bucholz Sign Haren and Carlos Villanueva

  12. dc21892 3 years ago

    It would be nice if Boston brought Kotchman in. He’s been around a while and has a lot of front office experience.

  13. hefe300 3 years ago

    The Red Sox would have to include something else in an Ellsbury for Andrus deal. 2 year of Elvis is more valuable than 1 year of Ellsbury.

    • dc21892 3 years ago

      Ok, take Lackey and his money?! Deal! Texas is getting someone else too.

      • dc21892 3 years ago

        We’ll even pay 400k for you to have him in his last year for free…

Leave a Reply