SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
|
Post by theburn on Jul 14, 2014 11:29:54 GMT -5
Displaced Sox fan in Denver here, not a chance CarGo gets moved this year. The PR backlash against Monfort recent fan interactions is so great right now, there is no way they will be willing to move the 2nd most popular player in town. On top of that, he is not even willing to move Cuddyer who is essentially worthless at this point. I think you're absolutely right that Tulo and CarGo will stay put this year. Ben Cherington shouldn't make a huge buy move this season anyway. I'm considering a Gonzalez trade no sooner than this coming offseason.
|
|
|
Post by rider on Jul 14, 2014 12:49:24 GMT -5
I like him but wouldn't be willing to give up the premium prospect it would take to get him. If they want to settle for a package of quantity over quality, sure, but that's not gonna happen
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 14, 2014 14:38:30 GMT -5
How would people think of starting a package with Mookie and Allen Webster? Obviously that by itself probably wouldn't get it done, maybe include someone like Coyle, but as a starting point, it gives them a top-20 prospect with a lot of positional versatility, and a guy that, if he can ever figure out his command/control a little more, would profile well in Coors, because he has the stuff to get ground balls. I feel like they really need more arms too. If Gonzalez could be had for Webster, Mookie and one of our borderline top-100 guys or something, that's a deal I'd at least strongly consider
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Jul 14, 2014 15:00:07 GMT -5
How would people think of starting a package with Mookie and Allen Webster? Obviously that by itself probably wouldn't get it done, maybe include someone like Coyle, but as a starting point, it gives them a top-20 prospect with a lot of positional versatility, and a guy that, if he can ever figure out his command/control a little more, would profile well in Coors, because he has the stuff to get ground balls. I feel like they really need more arms too. If Gonzalez could be had for Webster, Mookie and one of our borderline top-100 guys or something, that's a deal I'd at least strongly consider Rockies are going to value pitching prospects much more than position players. They can't develop them, and they surely can't attract them as FA's. I'm waiting for them to ruin Jon Gray.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 14, 2014 15:14:12 GMT -5
How would people think of starting a package with Mookie and Allen Webster? Obviously that by itself probably wouldn't get it done, maybe include someone like Coyle, but as a starting point, it gives them a top-20 prospect with a lot of positional versatility, and a guy that, if he can ever figure out his command/control a little more, would profile well in Coors, because he has the stuff to get ground balls. I feel like they really need more arms too. If Gonzalez could be had for Webster, Mookie and one of our borderline top-100 guys or something, that's a deal I'd at least strongly consider Rockies are going to value pitching prospects much more than position players. They can't develop them, and they surely can't attract them as FA's. I'm waiting for them to ruin Jon Gray. Well I thought of Owens, but I was trying to find a guy who induces a lot of ground balls/has the stuff too, so I thought Webster profiled better, and also allows us to keep our top pitching prospect. I'd be more reluctant to deal mookie if we had to also include Owens- especially for Gonzalez, with all the question marks surrounding him should he move away from Coors/that he has anyway
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Jul 14, 2014 15:50:35 GMT -5
Given his splits and injury history I wouldn't give up Betts, Owens or Swihart for him.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jul 14, 2014 18:09:12 GMT -5
Given his splits and injury history I wouldn't give up Betts, Owens or Swihart for him. If they're going to blow it up and trade Cargo and Tulo. We get Cargo. I wonder if they'd be interested in Coyle and Marrero as their middle infield. Coyle would probably put up some pretty good numbers out there. They get a SS to take over when they deal Tulo. Would also want a pitcher. Not giving em Owens. They can deal Tulo for some premium pitching talent. I'm thinking Mets.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 14, 2014 19:17:47 GMT -5
Given his splits and injury history I wouldn't give up Betts, Owens or Swihart for him. If they're going to blow it up and trade Cargo and Tulo. We get Cargo. I wonder if they'd be interested in Coyle and Marrero as their middle infield. Coyle would probably put up some pretty good numbers out there. They get a SS to take over when they deal Tulo. Would also want a pitcher. Not giving em Owens. They can deal Tulo for some premium pitching talent. I'm thinking Mets. I think if Coyle and Marrero keep hitting, that pair plus someone like Brian Johnson/Barnes/Webster would definitely make them think at least- still think they hold out for a better return though, at least in the short run. It kinda depends, I have already seen rumors that Tulo might force his way out (or try to) this offseason, in which case I think they probably lower the asking price a little. I seriously doubt that it will get down without the inclusion of Mookie or Owens or someone of that category, and if I'm right, I'd make every effort to get Stanton first, because I think he's more likely to be worth it
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jul 15, 2014 9:20:41 GMT -5
Mookie is a no-go in a Cargo package. His salary is high over the next 3 years 53m. AAV is good though. Injury question now. And, the home/away splits from any Rockie preclude Mookie from being in the deal. Sickels had Mookie 3rd in his Top 75.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 15, 2014 10:47:34 GMT -5
Mookie is a no-go in a Cargo package. His salary is high over the next 3 years 53m. AAV is good though. Injury question now. And, the home/away splits from any Rockie preclude Mookie from being in the deal. Sickels had Mookie 3rd in his Top 75. Sickels had him 9th, but regardless, who do you think we can put in the deal and get him? They will demand a top prospect, Mookie is blocked anyway, even more so if you acquire Gonzalez to play RF in Fenway- so what's the problem with including mookie? If you want Gonzalez, that's probably who you're going to have to give up.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 15, 2014 10:55:19 GMT -5
Mookie is a no-go in a Cargo package. His salary is high over the next 3 years 53m. AAV is good though. Injury question now. And, the home/away splits from any Rockie preclude Mookie from being in the deal. Sickels had Mookie 3rd in his Top 75. Sickels had him 9th, but regardless, who do you think we can put in the deal and get him? They will demand a top prospect, Mookie is blocked anyway, even more so if you acquire Gonzalez to play RF in Fenway- so what's the problem with including mookie? If you want Gonzalez, that's probably who you're going to have to give up. Kinda why I'm not interested. I'd be more interested in Heyward.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Jul 15, 2014 17:06:30 GMT -5
Over the past 3.5 seasons Cargo has compiled 10.7 fWAR. He is 28.
Over the past 3.5 season Heyward has compiled 15 fWAR. He is 24.
I would consider this apples and oranges. Then again, I would stay away from any deal from Cargo as his walk rates and defense concern me. I think that once he hits his 30s he won't be worth the contract.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 15, 2014 17:17:12 GMT -5
To be fair, Gonzalez is only 28; his current deal takes him through his age-31 season, so you'd not get too many of his decline years.
Has anyone read any good analyses of to what extent Gonzalez is a product of his home park?
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Jul 15, 2014 18:41:38 GMT -5
His splits have always been bad, but this year they're beyond that. He doesn't walk and plays horrible D, which puts almost all the pressure on his bat.
I don't want him period, let alone for a steep price. I don't see the draw really.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Jul 15, 2014 19:26:06 GMT -5
His splits have always been bad, but this year they're beyond that. He doesn't walk and plays horrible D, which puts almost all the pressure on his bat. I don't want him period, let alone for a steep price. I don't see the draw really. I agree with this. And you didn't mention yet that he is constantly hurt. He'll be lucky to break 100 games this year, he played 110 last year, and 135, 127, 145 the three years before that. For his career he's hit 262/318/443 on the road - and outside of one strong year its been a lot worse than that.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 15, 2014 21:06:30 GMT -5
To be fair, lots of great players have awful home/road splits. Nelson Cruz is 253/.310/.465 road, .287/.351/.542 home. Ian Kinsler is .247/.313/.403 road, .304/.384/.509 home. Corey Hart is .259/.314/.442 road, .288/.350/.529 home. Paul Konerko is .270/.344/.447 road, .289/.372/.539 home. Some of that is playing in a home ballpark that is a hitters park (and for Gonzalez, playing in a lot of other NL West road ballparks that are cavernous). But a lot of it is also just some combination of flukey noise and the "being more comfortable in your home ballpark/uncomfortable with travel" that results in a majority of players playing better in their home ballpark. Just looking at his home/road splits and thinking that he'll perform like his road splits going forward is not really a good way of projecting how good he'd be for the Red Sox. For instance, Matt Holliday was another guy who was supposed to be just a product of Coors Field, but he has done just fine since moving to the Cardinals.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Jul 16, 2014 0:27:37 GMT -5
To be fair, lots of great players have awful home/road splits. Nelson Cruz is 253/.310/.465 road, .287/.351/.542 home. Ian Kinsler is .247/.313/.403 road, .304/.384/.509 home. Corey Hart is .259/.314/.442 road, .288/.350/.529 home. Paul Konerko is .270/.344/.447 road, .289/.372/.539 home. Some of that is playing in a home ballpark that is a hitters park (and for Gonzalez, playing in a lot of other NL West road ballparks that are cavernous). But a lot of it is also just some combination of flukey noise and the "being more comfortable in your home ballpark/uncomfortable with travel" that results in a majority of players playing better in their home ballpark. Just looking at his home/road splits and thinking that he'll perform like his road splits going forward is not really a good way of projecting how good he'd be for the Red Sox. For instance, Matt Holliday was another guy who was supposed to be just a product of Coors Field, but he has done just fine since moving to the Cardinals. Admittedly I was a pessimistic that Holliday would perform at an All-Star level away from Coors and he certainly proved me wrong. But over each of his last two seasons in Colorado he hit .300 or better on the road - so it isn't like he couldn't hit at all on the road. Looking back at the numbers, Holliday (when he was on the Rockies) seems to have been only slightly better than Gonzalez with pretty similar skill sets (good power & average but sub-par defense and fewer walks than one would like). But just because Holliday worked out, it doesn't mean that Gonzalez is worth the risk. (it should be noted that Holliday had better K-rates) I would rather sell the house for Stanton than mortgage it for Gonzalez.
|
|
|
Post by theburn on Jul 16, 2014 11:08:21 GMT -5
It's also worth mentioning that Gonzalez has actually performed better against left-handed pitching over the last season and a half.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 16, 2014 14:02:31 GMT -5
Yea the other thing to point out is that Fenway is also a hitters park, and while I thought it might take a little away from Gonzalez' power, being so deep in RF and him (I thought) being primarily a pull power guy, but I think he'd do fine here-his spray charts/home run charts with a fenway overlay look fine, and it seems like he drives the ball to the opposite field more than I thought. I definitely would rather have Stanton, but as long as we're not trading more than one of our top guys in the deal, I'd think about it. I think a lot of people are underestimating the effect the horrible production/lack of protection from the bottom of the lineup is having on the guys at the top, and I think anyone who can hit like Gonzalez, even if you take his numbers with a grain of salt to account for the Coors effect, would be a very helpful addition.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Jul 16, 2014 14:19:12 GMT -5
plays horrible D, which puts almost all the pressure on his bat. ...as his walk rates and defense concern me. Where are people getting the idea that Cargo is a bad defender? He has positive career UZR and DRS numbers in CF and RF in his career, with just below average (-0.7) marks in LF. The hamstring issues in 2012 definitely sapped his range a little bit, but he was still terrific last year and remains a rather dynamic corner outfielder -- he also still possesses one of the strongest arms in the game.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Jul 16, 2014 16:36:49 GMT -5
plays horrible D, which puts almost all the pressure on his bat. ...as his walk rates and defense concern me. Where are people getting the idea that Cargo is a bad defender? He has positive career UZR and DRS numbers in CF and RF in his career, with just below average (-0.7) marks in LF. The hamstring issues in 2012 definitely sapped his range a little bit, but he was still terrific last year and remains a rather dynamic corner outfielder -- he also still possesses one of the strongest arms in the game. He also is on pace for a -1.8 dWAR season this year, and while injuries certainly can hamper your ability to effectively field, this guy is always hurt.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 16, 2014 16:50:51 GMT -5
It's dangerous to evaluate a guy based on one year of defensive stats. Looking at a larger sample and across multiple stats, Gonzalez looks like about an average defensive corner outfielder.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 16, 2014 16:53:52 GMT -5
I'd bet he's an upgrade over Nava, Gomes and Carp. Holy crap, Nava has a 33.9 UZR/150 in LF this year and has a 22 in the OF overall and 42.6 at 1B.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Jul 16, 2014 17:57:07 GMT -5
It's dangerous to evaluate a guy based on one year of defensive stats. Looking at a larger sample and across multiple stats, Gonzalez looks like about an average defensive corner outfielder. It also makes more sense to assume his most recent work is what you're going to get than to use how he was at 24 years old. An injury prone outfielder is automatically a risk defensively. With the offensive questions, why would it be prudent to trade a good package for someone who could be slightly above average defensively in RF and isn't a sure thing at the plate?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 16, 2014 19:26:13 GMT -5
He was a plus defensive outfielder as recently as 2013, so it isn't as if his career marks were all accrued in his distant youth. I'm not saying we should trade a huge package for him, but let's not undersell him, either.
|
|
|