Skip to content

Red Sox will meet with the agent for C.J. Wilson and Roy Oswalt next week

Dec 3, 2011, 2:22 PM EDT

red sox logo

According to Michael Silverman of the Boston Herald, the Red Sox will meet with Bob Garber, the agent for C.J. Wilson and Roy Oswalt, at the Winter Meetings next week in Dallas.

Red Sox general manager Ben Cherington spoke with Garber at the general managers’ meetings last month in Milwaukee, though it was believed to be a matter of due diligence at the time. While the club is in the process of negotiating with free agent slugger David Ortiz and evaluating their options to replace closer Jonathan Papelbon, they apparently haven’t ruled out making an addition to a starting rotation which wilted down the stretch.

The Nationals, Angels and Marlins are among the teams who have expressed serious interest in Wilson thus far. The Rangers are still in the mix, though Jon Heyman of reported this afternoon that they haven’t made much progress in talks. The market for Oswalt hasn’t been nearly as strong, likely due to concerns over his degenerative back condition, but the idea of a multi-year contract might be easier to swallow for teams like the Red Sox, Yankees or Nationals.

  1. uyf1950 - Dec 3, 2011 at 3:09 PM

    They should sign CJ Wilson for the approximately 5 years $18MM plus per it will take. Then resign Eric Bedard he can pitch out of the #5 slot until Dice K comes back around the All Star Break. Pick up a couple of inexpensive guys for the bullpen. They will need to sign a closer because right now Bard is just not ready. I believe Francisco Cordero is still available he can probably be had on a 2 year deal because of his age for say about $18MM total +/-. That takes care of the pitching staff.
    Resign Ortiz for 2 years at about $25MM or if he accepts arbitration he’ll get about $14.5MM for 1 year.
    That basically just leaves RF that needs to be addressed. They can go the platoon route with in house personal or sign a FA (for example Cuddyer).

    Net effect of this if they sign Wilson, Ortiz and a FA Closer and Right Fielder they are looking at a 2012 payroll of something in the neighborhood of $195MM unless they shed some payroll by trading an existing player under contract. Considering the luxury tax threshold for 2012 is still $178MM and the Red Sox while they have in the past gone over the threshold it has normally not been by much. Exceeding the threshold by upwards of $15MM at the new rate for 2012 of 42% would have them pay a tax of about $7MM. That I believe would be the most they would have paid in any year since the luxury tax was started.

    Just food for thought.

    • Ari Collins - Dec 3, 2011 at 4:42 PM

      Seems like a reasonable plan, but I doubt they go that high.

      More likely they’ll go for a lower price FA at RF, closer, and starter. I think even getting Ortiz and a guy like Edwin Jackson (probably $13MM-$14MM a year) might be out of their budget, which has been about $160MM the last two years, and would get nearly there if they simply sign Ortiz for $12.5MM.

      Not that I’d be totally shocked (or unhappy!) if they went your suggested route.

  2. 1943mrmojorisin1971 - Dec 3, 2011 at 3:15 PM

    Lackey and Smoltz 2.0?

  3. bosoxfan1950 - Dec 3, 2011 at 4:14 PM

    I agree, we should “resign” Bedard. But not “resign” Ortiz. “Resign” means to quit, to end something that had been on-going, like a job.
    So, yeah, cut Bedard loose, but “re-sign” Ortiz.
    As for C.J. Wilson, I’d rather have Buehrle, Harang, or even Oswalt (or two of the three if we trade Beckett for some one like Garza). Hell, I’d even be okay with the signings of any of: Jason Marquis, Jeff Francis, Wandy Rodriquez, Rich Harden, or Scott Kazmir. The key to how the rotation shapes up, IMHO, is if Cherington has the courage to trade Beckett and get an effective starter for him in a trade. Regardless, we still need two front line starters.
    And, yes, for a closer, Cordero is probably available, but so, too, is Madson whom I would prefer. But if we can’t afford Madson (and I really think we can) then Cordero (or Rodriquez or even Lidge) would be okay with me.
    And I also agree that Bard is not ready to be a closer. He may never be. He lacks that certain something that Rivera and Papelbon, “The Beard,” Madson, and Bell all have that makes them dominant. Commonly referred to as “the killer instinct” and/or the “take no prisoners” mind set. But Bard is still one of the premiere set-up relievers in MLB.
    And, keeping Bard, Aceves, Morales, and the new Closer, we seek to upgrade the other three slots in the Bull Pen.
    I still maintain that we seek a heavy right-handed bat for RF ONLY when all these other issues are resolved AND IF we still have money in the coffers (or prospects in the farm system) to do so. But to spend money or use up prospects for a right fielder and then skimp on starters or Bull Pen guys would be, IMHO, a huge mistake.

    • uyf1950 - Dec 3, 2011 at 4:38 PM

      Thank you for your attention to detail in critiquing my first post.

      I do think most everyone should have understood what I meant. I look seeing what you think of other posters errors when they comment.

      • Ari Collins - Dec 3, 2011 at 4:43 PM

        Don’t pay any attention to him. After all, he thinks they should trade Beckett, which is just crazy talk.

    • bigharold - Dec 3, 2011 at 6:49 PM

      ““resign” Bedard. But not “resign” Ortiz. “Resign” ”

      Give it a rest. You knew what he meant. This isn’t, nor should it be treated as the SATs. Unless of course you are interested in every yahoo that reads this blog to provide you with “constructive criticism on each and everyone of your post.

      “Cherington has the courage to trade Beckett and get an effective starter for him in a trade. Regardless, we still need two front line starters.”

      Beckett is an effective starter. What makes you think he can be traded for a better starter?

    • deadeyedesign23 - Dec 3, 2011 at 7:40 PM

      For someone who’s such a dick about “resign” versus “re-sign” you’d think you’d know that bullpen is one word and not a proper noun.

  4. tilllman40 - Dec 3, 2011 at 4:29 PM

    Wow bosox fan a lil touchy in moms basement?no need to be a dick harvard grad

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. G. Stanton (2548)
  2. G. Springer (2546)
  3. H. Ramirez (2526)
  4. S. Strasburg (2402)
  5. J. Baez (2377)
  1. C. Correa (2361)
  2. M. Teixeira (2324)
  3. B. Crawford (2297)
  4. H. Pence (2291)
  5. B. Harper (2096)