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.
Red Sox agree to sign Grady Sizemore
|
Post by soxcentral on Jan 26, 2014 16:57:14 GMT -5
Moonstone, do we know Villareal is not going to clear waivers? Unless I missed something he still could clear and provide the same depth in AAA.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Jan 26, 2014 17:27:36 GMT -5
What Sizemore gives the Sox is a layer of insurance in a spot where they were lacking sufficient depth with at least some upside to boot. Sure, if everyone is healthy and performs, he doesn't fit the roster. But if Bradley disappoints or is hurt in spring, Sizemore takes that spot. If Victorino is hurt, he takes his 25 man spot. If a trade becomes available where someone is willing to overpay for Carp, you have a solid backup plan. If Gomes or Nava or Papi go down, you don't have to rush Hassan or Brentz or settle for a lesser replacement.
I think some people tend to like it when rosters are constructed in a way that the pieces fit nicely into spots, but more often than not something goes wrong. I think, given the already strong depth at RP, adding this level of depth to CF/RF was more important than holding onto Villareal to fill the same roll for the bullpen. This is especially true given the fact Bradley has yet to perform at the major league level and Victorino is heading into his age 33 season coming off an injury riddled campaign.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Jan 26, 2014 18:00:52 GMT -5
I agree. And this potential could last until the all star break.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 26, 2014 18:24:46 GMT -5
Villareal was a right handed power pitcher who could throw 96-97 with experience. None of the guys you mention or allude to fit that description. In short, Villareal is a pretty good arm to throw away for a player who hasn't played in two years. Sizemore can't be traded until mid June and even then, no one is giving you anything for him unless he shows he can still play. I really don't see how you can have both him and Bradley on the roster. You would have to trade Carp or Nava likely for less than they are worth. I don't see how the Sox would be better off short-term or long-term by doing that. If you are arguing that there is NO chance that Sizemore can be more valuable than Bradley at least to start the season then this was a bad move. I don't see how the Sox are better off by giving Sizemore Carp's job. In its simplest format, if Sizemore was the equal to what Carp would bring to the team, then you now have a player that can play CF and RF rather than a Nava duplication role plus you have whatever return you got for Carp. Carp plus a B prospect like Barnes for a B+ prospect like Owens would work for me.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 26, 2014 18:40:30 GMT -5
Since there is a window of time where the Sox can still trade Villarreal then it stands to reason that if they don't engineer a trade, there wasn't significant interest.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 26, 2014 19:24:51 GMT -5
Moonstone, do we know Villareal is not going to clear waivers? Unless I missed something he still could clear and provide the same depth in AAA. I don't think there's much of a chance that all 30 teams pass on a free look at an arm like that. The Red Sox basically signed Mejaris to take Villareal's job as the 13th pitcher.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,963
|
Post by jimoh on Jan 26, 2014 19:56:40 GMT -5
Moonstone, do we know Villareal is not going to clear waivers? Unless I missed something he still could clear and provide the same depth in AAA. I don't think there's much of a chance that all 30 teams pass on a free look at an arm like that. The Red Sox basically signed Mejaris to take Villareal's job as the 13th pitcher. Except that he has an out-clause in March, presumably the end.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 26, 2014 20:50:46 GMT -5
I don't think there's much of a chance that all 30 teams pass on a free look at an arm like that. The Red Sox basically signed Mejaris to take Villareal's job as the 13th pitcher. Except that he has an out-clause in March, presumably the end. Right exactly for all intents and purposes he's in the same position Villareal was. The 13th pitcher is usually a player without options like Boof Bonner.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jan 26, 2014 21:33:42 GMT -5
What Sizemore gives the Sox is a layer of insurance in a spot where they were lacking sufficient depth with at least some upside to boot. Sure, if everyone is healthy and performs, he doesn't fit the roster. But if Bradley disappoints or is hurt in spring, Sizemore takes that spot. If Victorino is hurt, he takes his 25 man spot. If a trade becomes available where someone is willing to overpay for Carp, you have a solid backup plan. If Gomes or Nava or Papi go down, you don't have to rush Hassan or Brentz or settle for a lesser replacement. All true, the only problem is Sizemore seems particularly unsuited for an insurance role. You want a reliable, durable quad-A guy for that job, not an injury prone lottery ticket.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Jan 26, 2014 21:55:44 GMT -5
What Sizemore gives the Sox is a layer of insurance in a spot where they were lacking sufficient depth with at least some upside to boot. Sure, if everyone is healthy and performs, he doesn't fit the roster. But if Bradley disappoints or is hurt in spring, Sizemore takes that spot. If Victorino is hurt, he takes his 25 man spot. If a trade becomes available where someone is willing to overpay for Carp, you have a solid backup plan. If Gomes or Nava or Papi go down, you don't have to rush Hassan or Brentz or settle for a lesser replacement. All true, the only problem is Sizemore seems particularly unsuited for an insurance role. You want a reliable, durable quad-A guy for that job, not an injury prone lottery ticket. But I don't think one layer of depth precludes them from the other. Cousins seems to be exactly what you are talking about. He is probably not quite as good as they would have liked from that spot, but I'm guessing that speaks to the lack of available players to fill that roll. And that is exactly why the Sizemore signing makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 26, 2014 22:12:55 GMT -5
All true, the only problem is Sizemore seems particularly unsuited for an insurance role. You want a reliable, durable quad-A guy for that job, not an injury prone lottery ticket. But I don't think one layer of depth precludes them from the other. Cousins seems to be exactly what you are talking about. He is probably not quite as good as they would have liked from that spot, but I'm guessing that speaks to the lack of available players to fill that roll. And that is exactly why the Sizemore signing makes sense. Good point, both the Cousins and Sizemore signings should be viewed in the context of both.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 27, 2014 14:27:43 GMT -5
He isn't.
You would have to consider the increased health risk that Sizemore brings to the table as well as years of controll. Carp has a considerable advantage in both areas. Trading Carp to make room for Sizemore would be a bad move IMO.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Jan 27, 2014 15:11:03 GMT -5
But I don't think one layer of depth precludes them from the other. Cousins seems to be exactly what you are talking about. He is probably not quite as good as they would have liked from that spot, but I'm guessing that speaks to the lack of available players to fill that roll. And that is exactly why the Sizemore signing makes sense. Good point, both the Cousins and Sizemore signings should be viewed in the context of both. Yeah, that is right, I think. Sizemore provides some upside that Cousins doesn't, and Cousins provides some stability that Sizemore doesn't. It'd be great if they were in the same person, but if they were, their name would be "Jackie Bradley, Jr." This is all Cherington's maniacal focus on buying out downside risk, I think. Whatever chance Grady Sizemore has of being good is that much less of a chance the Sox have of being caught with below-average production in the outfield. It may not be a great chance, but it's real. And right now, there's not much negative to that buy-out of downside risk. Now, if it costs a player like Carp, that's a whole different story, but there's no reason to think that Cherington would do that, really. Cousins adds a little further floor to their downside potential.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 27, 2014 15:27:09 GMT -5
The following conversation was apparently overheard at the winter meetings between Jack Z. and Ben Cherrington.
Jack Z: We are need a left handed power hitting 1B and really like Mike Carp. We know him too and were dumb to realease him. We will trade you Felix Hernandez for him. I know that Felix has a big contract you may not be able to afford, so we will pay his entire salary. We really need Carp!
Ben C: Well we don't really have a sold backup plan for Carp right now, maybe if we sign Grady Sizemore! I'll get back to you.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jan 27, 2014 16:27:23 GMT -5
You want to vote to out law "no love" but are cool with made up humorless conversations? :-)
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Jan 27, 2014 16:39:03 GMT -5
Yeah, I 'm not really sure what you were going for on that one moonstone.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Jan 27, 2014 17:00:44 GMT -5
You want to vote to out law "no love" but are cool with made up humorless conversations? :-) A lot of people in Seattle would, at this point, put Jack Z in the made up and humorless category...
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jan 27, 2014 17:02:04 GMT -5
You want to vote to out law "no love" but are cool with made up humorless conversations? :-) A lot of people in Seattle would, at this point, put Jack Z in the made up and humorless category... Or in the pillory.
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Jan 27, 2014 20:17:11 GMT -5
Grady had the same surgeries of Matt Kemp. For people who were clamoring about trading for Kemp and his $120 million deal... do you not understand that Sizemore was Matt Kemp and is Kemp in four years? Would you not risk under a mil to pick up a lottery ticket that has a high ceiling as much as Kemp?... the only difference is that Kemp cashed out and both players are examples of why the Sox avoid the mega guaranteed deals.
After saying all that... Grady Sizemore has a greater chance of getting cut from the Red Sox than he does of making the roster without a DL stint to start the season IMO. I expect him to be around for the end of the season with a strong supporting role. If Grady can make it with any team, it will be one that feels like they have a strong enough team to be patient. That said, I expect it to be like Tim Tebow... much ado about nothing in the long run... I like scratch tickets too, but you mainly lose or break even if anything. I'm hoping for the best, but planning for the worst on this one unfortunately... hope I'm wrong.
Reality has me thinking that Grady has the upside of what we hoped Rocco Baldelli could give us years ago. We saw this gamble before, let's hope we hit on this one.
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Jan 27, 2014 20:36:50 GMT -5
Good point, both the Cousins and Sizemore signings should be viewed in the context of both. Yeah, that is right, I think. Sizemore provides some upside that Cousins doesn't, and Cousins provides some stability that Sizemore doesn't. It'd be great if they were in the same person, but if they were, their name would be "Jackie Bradley, Jr." This is all Cherington's maniacal focus on buying out downside risk, I think. Whatever chance Grady Sizemore has of being good is that much less of a chance the Sox have of being caught with below-average production in the outfield. It may not be a great chance, but it's real. And right now, there's not much negative to that buy-out of downside risk. Now, if it costs a player like Carp, that's a whole different story, but there's no reason to think that Cherington would do that, really. Cousins adds a little further floor to their downside potential. Solid analysis and really it is exactly how I feel at this point. I like the calculated gamble the team is making, it's all you can do in a game of poker is to make the right move by the odds and the chips fall where they may. I don't see Carp going anywhere either and can't see Ben moving him from this Sizemore signing no matter how it turns out. I see a bit of work that could still be done to sign some CF depth in the high minors even with Cousins. It is the only position that I am really worried about depth on the team. I like the high risk / hedged move done by the Sox... I think this is why Henry is such a good baseball owner... he is a natural from his day job. The concept translates exceptionally well.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 27, 2014 21:13:44 GMT -5
Grady had the same surgeries of Matt Kemp. I could be wrong, but I don't believe this is true at all. Kemp: Left Shoulder, left ankle Sizemore: left elbow, lower abdomen, left knee, sports hernia, back, right knee And there's also the massive disparity in money, so the comparison is apples and oranges. They're both outfielders is about it.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 27, 2014 21:26:52 GMT -5
Kemp also had microfracture surgery, but he had his on his ankle while Sizemore had it on both knees (as well as the other surgeries mentioned above by Chris). I agree that it's a pretty weak comparison-- Sizemore's injury history is just so much longer.
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Jan 27, 2014 22:08:34 GMT -5
Grady had the same surgeries of Matt Kemp. I could be wrong, but I don't believe this is true at all. Kemp: Left Shoulder, left ankle Sizemore: left elbow, lower abdomen, left knee, sports hernia, back, right knee And there's also the massive disparity in money, so the comparison is apples and oranges. They're both outfielders is about it. Sorry... by same surgeries... I meant microfracture as those were the ones that worried me. The disparity in money was what I was pointing out and meant to compare apples to oranges because they were the same type of dominant player in their prime. They both carry a massive injury risk. Both have had very major injuries including potentially career ending microfracture. The level of injuries were also the comparison. That said, it wasn't my best work... but I hope that clears it up.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 28, 2014 3:14:04 GMT -5
You want to vote to out law "no love" but are cool with made up humorless conversations? :-) You want to keep no love? Mike Carp is a backup OF/1B. A good one but a backup none the less. You don't need a reliable backup plan to trade a player like that.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Jan 28, 2014 8:06:24 GMT -5
You want to vote to out law "no love" but are cool with made up humorless conversations? :-) You want to keep no love? Mike Carp is a backup OF/1B. A good one but a backup none the less. You don't need a reliable backup plan to trade a player like that. You never cease to amaze me with your ability to take a small portion of a post, completely twist it to be something it is not, and then argue it to the end. In that post I listed a series of potential benefits to signing Sizemore. One of them was that - should the right deal become available for Carp - there is a solid backup plan. I did not say that without this trade the Sox wouldn't have been able to trade Carp. I certainly did not say that without this trade they would pass on a completely lopsided trade in the their favor. This trade adds a layer of depth that increases roster flexibility and minimizes downside risk (as braintoast said). There is not need to create a strawman beyond that.
|
|
|