Trade Deadline is a week from tomorrow!  Could the Red Sox "stand pat"? - video Dailymotion

WEEI-FM / WEEI

#MLB Trade Deadline is a week from tomorrow!  Could the Red Sox "stand pat"? Do you think Breslow and the #redsox could still make a big move?

Transcript

00:00read this morning, ESPN.com, Jeff Passan, baseball insider for the worldwide leader,

00:06noted this, the latest Red Sox, could they just stand pat? At this moment,

00:14this is this morning, two hours ago, at this moment, the Red Sox are not inclined to engage

00:22in any large-scale deadline moves, period. Why do you people trust this team? Why? How many times

00:34can they, uh, I don't, I get in trouble if I use the L word, um, tell you it's raining when it's not

00:40for you to stop asking them what the weather is. Isn't that the same guy who, like, a week ago said

00:47the World Series contender and they're gonna make a huge move at the...

00:51Well, there have been those who are speculating that, yes.

00:53No, wasn't Passan the same guy who said it?

00:56Well, at that time, perhaps they were. I think...

00:58He regurgitates what he hears.

01:00You can, I mean, I, I suppose you can read into it that standing, standing pat doesn't necessarily

01:06mean that you think this team is good enough as it stands now to, to be a contender. It means that

01:15you may have determined since the, since the 10-run streak ended that they are not

01:21worth investing. Well, Sam Kennedy told us that. Remember that? He literally, I think

01:25it was Lake Winnipesaukee. And he said, well, if we're not playing good baseball around the

01:32trade deadline, then is it worth making a move? You know, and I think that's gonna be

01:37the thing. They got seven games before the trade deadline. And if they continue on this

01:42kind of like losing streak, maybe that's the excuse that they give us.

01:46I'll finish the full graph that Passan wrote. He adds, chief baseball officer Breslow has

01:52said the team wants to add after trading Devers. And while it would surprise no one if they

01:57did, Boston is an organization that deeply values operating efficiently and a market like

02:02this is the epitome of inefficient. Holding now would speak to the Red Sox comfort with their

02:07current roster and the exceptional price to bolster it. Yeah. I mean, operating efficiency

02:14is for Tampa. It's not for the Boston Red Sox. I, and like, if you're not at, you have

02:23to add, if you're going for it this year, you have to have add a legit arm and you're going

02:29to have to part with prospects and, or somebody legit like Jaron Duran. And if you're not doing

02:36that, then I mean, maybe the analytics, maybe the bots are telling you that you can, you

02:44know, you're a playoff team and anything can happen once you get there. I mean, I, you

02:48know, well, as a guy who looks at it as a glass half full, yeah, maybe this is the best thing

02:53for the Red Sox and the people that want them to do something. Because if they struggle, then

02:59it's like, you need to add talent where if they went on another, like hot winning streak,

03:04maybe they go like, look at all the talent we have. We don't really have to do much.

03:08We've been saying this for three years though, Wiggy. It's been the same thing. I believe we

03:13said this at the same point last season. We were like, oh, maybe this will be a good thing. Maybe

03:17this will force their hands. Right. And they did add this off season. I think that's what we're

03:22forgetting is like last off season, we went into this season very excited. Curtis had them winning

03:25the world series. Getting. So getting to, sorry, my apologies. But it just.

03:31Is that like Shime having the Patriots at six wins? We're finding that audio. Oh, you are?

03:35Everybody I've talked to, whether it's Jackson, Mitch, everybody remembers him saying six wins.

03:40I've literally never said six wins. Everyone remembers. You know why? A single time have

03:43I ever said six wins. You know why he said six wins? Because he didn't give credits, credit

03:47to the Patriots for winning the last game of the year. So he's like, well, they'll double

03:51their wins from three, which will be six. But anyway, yes, the expectation was high when

03:55eight, when they added. And so that, that they did that last season. So I just don't

04:01think that we should be putting too many, too, too many exclamation points around like,

04:05oh, this could actually work. But remember what, what did they do this year that they

04:08didn't do last year, the year before the year before that they have been beating the

04:13drum about they need to add at the deadline, but they haven't, they have not added at the

04:21deadline legitimately in a considerable amount of time. No, no. But what I'm saying is they

04:25never talked about adding at the deadline during the season like they did, like they

04:31have this year. They have legitimately, whether it's Breslau. Well, there were, Alex Cora and

04:36others were asking, Ralphie, Raphael Devers, your guy Ralphie was asking them to add at the

04:41deadline and they didn't. But they weren't publicly saying, oh, we've been, we heard Breslau

04:46and we heard Sam Kennedy publicly and Breslau saying, we need to add an impact on. That's

04:51what we need. Can we just, they have never said that in years prior publicly. Focus on

04:58what they do and not what they say. When they traded Devers, they traded him the moment a

05:07team would assume the full contract. They prioritized the financial burden being relieved over the

05:15package being better for the current roster. Do we all agree with that as the series of

05:19events? They prioritized getting the money off the books. John Henry was rightfully pissed

05:25and he didn't want to pay Devers a dime to play somewhere else because of how insubordinate

05:30he was here. Yeah. So they said in that trade, which is why it's what I focused on when Greg

05:36was taking his pants off, was that they said that the team wasn't as important as the undoing

05:43of the contract. They could have had a better return if they assumed some of the money, more

05:50suitors would have been engaged and they could have improved the roster while also removing

05:55the player. But instead they took a lesser package to let the other team assume the full

06:00deal. So a team that behaves in that way is telling you the roster is secondary to the

06:07financial concerns of the owner. Like, so when they said they would reallocate the resources,

06:12they legitimately just had an opportunity to show you that the team was more important

06:17than the finances and they chose not.

Trade Deadline is a week from tomorrow! Could the Red Sox "stand pat"?

Category

Transcript

Recommended