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 mgoetze on Mar 26, 2016 1:18:53 GMT -5
I've never seen a left handed third baseman. Wow, I thought Pablo Sandoval was pretty hard to overlook.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 26, 2016 1:42:17 GMT -5
I've never seen a left handed third baseman. Wow, I thought Pablo Sandoval was pretty hard to overlook. ? ? ?
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Mar 26, 2016 1:42:44 GMT -5
I've never seen a left handed third baseman. Wow, I thought Pablo Sandoval was pretty hard to overlook. Pablo throws with his right hand. Find me a left handed throwing third baseman. They don't exist for a reason.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Mar 26, 2016 1:46:27 GMT -5
Wow, I thought Pablo Sandoval was pretty hard to overlook. Pablo throws with his right hand. Find me a left handed throwing third baseman. They don't exist for a reason. Of course he throws with his right hand, would be pretty awkward to throw from third to first otherwise. Nevertheless, he is a natural left-hander.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 26, 2016 1:49:24 GMT -5
Wow, I thought Pablo Sandoval was pretty hard to overlook. Pablo throws with his right hand. Find me a left handed throwing third baseman. They don't exist for a reason. It's rare but would seem doable as long as the arm strength is there. Not throwing across the body would logically seem more difficult.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,990
|
Post by jimoh on Mar 26, 2016 7:07:49 GMT -5
Pablo throws with his right hand. Find me a left handed throwing third baseman. They don't exist for a reason. It's rare but would seem doable as long as the arm strength is there. Not throwing across the body would logically seem more difficult. It's not just more difficult but the time involved in turning the body to get ready to throw would result in a lot of infield hits. LH 1b Don Mattingly played three games, two as the starter, at 3b in 1986. Presumably several people had the flu or something--I don't remember, though I remember it happened. Started two double plays, 11 assists in 18 innings (above average), one error. He played 2b once a couple years before. Edit: and here is the story: itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2013/03/04/when-don-mattingly-played-third-base/3b Pagliarulo was hurt and the backup infielders were weak offensively. The Mariners tried to challenge Mattingly with bunts but were not successful. Mattingly was the last LH to play 3b. But Wee Willie Keeler was LH and once played 44 games at 3b
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 26, 2016 9:39:31 GMT -5
It's rare but would seem doable as long as the arm strength is there. Not throwing across the body would logically seem more difficult. It's not just more difficult but the time involved in turning the body to get ready to throw would result in a lot of infield hits. LH 1b Don Mattingly played three games, two as the starter, at 3b in 1986. Presumably several people had the flu or something--I don't remember, though I remember it happened. Started two double plays, 11 assists in 18 innings (above average), one error. He played 2b once a couple years before. Edit: and here is the story: itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2013/03/04/when-don-mattingly-played-third-base/3b Pagliarulo was hurt and the backup infielders were weak offensively. The Mariners tried to challenge Mattingly with bunts but were not successful. Mattingly was the last LH to play 3b. But Wee Willie Keeler was LH and once played 44 games at 3b It's all moot anyways, he doesn't have the arm strength to play 3B. I'm guessing it's pretty much 1B or bust for him. Next year, Ortiz and Pablo will be gone. If Sam surprises, Hanley can DH, Sam can play 1B.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Mar 26, 2016 21:21:48 GMT -5
“@jonheyman: Scout on red sox prospect Sam travis: ”the next Paul goldschmidt“”
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Mar 26, 2016 21:38:17 GMT -5
At this point, how surprising would it really be if Sam Travis becomes a good first baseman? If he were to play in the majors right now, Steamer projects him for 97 wRC+ already, good for half a WAR if playing a full season. Given his age, the expectation is certainly for those numbers to rise, not fall. (ZiPS is slightly more pessimistic - giving him "only" 89 wRC+.) Of course there is still downside risk and you can't just pencil him in for 2017-2022, but I would not actually be surprised if he turned out to be an above-average regular for at least a couple of years.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 26, 2016 21:54:32 GMT -5
At this point, how surprising would it really be if Sam Travis becomes a good first baseman? If he were to play in the majors right now, Steamer projects him for 97 wRC+ already, good for half a WAR if playing a full season. Given his age, the expectation is certainly for those numbers to rise, not fall. (ZiPS is slightly more pessimistic - giving him "only" 89 wRC+.) Of course there is still downside risk and you can't just pencil him in for 2017-2022, but I would not actually be surprised if he turned out to be an above-average regular for at least a couple of years. I just meant a big enough surprise to move Hanley off the bag which in turn returns us to a DH with no other real role. I do think he's a legit ML candidate but I'm expecting big things out of Hanley and that would be a lot for him to overcome. Interesting point to ponder, what if he goes to Pawtucket and continues to absolutely rake, now what ? His former college teammate Schwarber continues to insist that Travis is a much better hitter than people think. Maybe it simply took Travis longer to adjust to wood than Benintendi.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Mar 26, 2016 23:16:18 GMT -5
I just meant a big enough surprise to move Hanley off the bag which in turn returns us to a DH with no other real role. In my mind, Hanley becoming a full-time DH starting 2017 is the baseline scenario. Sure, in theory it would be nice to have a full roster of great batters who can also play the field, but those players don't grow on trees and take a lot of resources to acquire. Simpler to get 2 players who can mash the ball but aren't good fielders, and park one at 1B and one at DH.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 27, 2016 1:12:29 GMT -5
I just meant a big enough surprise to move Hanley off the bag which in turn returns us to a DH with no other real role. In my mind, Hanley becoming a full-time DH starting 2017 is the baseline scenario. Sure, in theory it would be nice to have a full roster of great batters who can also play the field, but those players don't grow on trees and take a lot of resources to acquire. Simpler to get 2 players who can mash the ball but aren't good fielders, and park one at 1B and one at DH. I agree I have Hanley at DH next year and think Travis has inside track at 1B.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 27, 2016 1:23:11 GMT -5
In my mind, Hanley becoming a full-time DH starting 2017 is the baseline scenario. Sure, in theory it would be nice to have a full roster of great batters who can also play the field, but those players don't grow on trees and take a lot of resources to acquire. Simpler to get 2 players who can mash the ball but aren't good fielders, and park one at 1B and one at DH. I agree I have Hanley at DH next year and think Travis has inside track at 1B. I also agree with that but in order for that to be likely, Travis would have to profile as a solid first baseman. For a team like the Sox, second division starter isn't going to fly. There are two camps here, one which says he could hit for a lot of power, the other which says he could be a doubles machine. Neither camp has him as an elite defender. If he looks like camp one, it'll happen, if he looks like camp two, I'm not so sure the Sox aren't better off spreading the at bats around (keeping both Swihart and Vazquez, for example). I'm optimistic that it'll be camp one. What will get real interesting here is if it happens now and he's raking in Pawtucket and 'forces' a promotion. That'll give the Sox a pleasant situation to have to deal with. I'd be surprised if the White Sox aren't all over the Red Sox first base situation.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 27, 2016 2:02:56 GMT -5
I wanted to add that I do like Travis and I'm optimistic so take this as intended.
Travis being next year's first baseman isn't the only plausible scenario and that doesn't even include a myriad of trade possibilities. As an example, Bradley, Benintendi and Moncada all have the kind of years we are happy with. Next May could see Benintendi in the outfield, Moncada at 3B and Shaw at 1B. Or, what if Shaw's bat is as good as Ortiz thinks it will be and Panda returns to being worth the contract.
Next year's first baseman isn't limited to just looking at Travis in isolation. These things always seem to have a way of working out, sometimes in unexpected ways.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Mar 27, 2016 2:14:02 GMT -5
Next year's first baseman isn't limited to just looking at Travis in isolation. These things always seem to have a way of working out, sometimes in unexpected ways. Right, and as such, questions like this: Interesting point to ponder, what if he goes to Pawtucket and continues to absolutely rake, now what ? can only be answered if you also tell me who's injured and/or performing poorly in the majors. And if everything else goes perfectly, yes perhaps the Sox have the resources to go get a great 1B, blocking S. Travis. If Panda and Travis S. both stink and Moncada isn't ready, they might have to splurge on a 3B instead, etc. etc.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 27, 2016 3:27:20 GMT -5
I agree I have Hanley at DH next year and think Travis has inside track at 1B. I also agree with that but in order for that to be likely, Travis would have to profile as a solid first baseman. For a team like the Sox, second division starter isn't going to fly. There are two camps here, one which says he could hit for a lot of power, the other which says he could be a doubles machine. Neither camp has him as an elite defender. If he looks like camp one, it'll happen, if he looks like camp two, I'm not so sure the Sox aren't better off spreading the at bats around (keeping both Swihart and Vazquez, for example). I'm optimistic that it'll be camp one. What will get real interesting here is if it happens now and he's raking in Pawtucket and 'forces' a promotion. That'll give the Sox a pleasant situation to have to deal with. I'd be surprised if the White Sox aren't all over the Red Sox first base situation. Not sure why he would have to be an elite defender. He's seen as an above average one and that's more then good enough with his bat. Don't think he ever hits for a lot of power, don't think many people think he will. He has raw power, but his swing means more doubles then HR's. I'm very high on him, so this might be a bit high, but thinking he's like a .280 hitter, .330-.340 on base %, around 15 HR might get to 20 as he fills out and a bunch of doubles. More then good enough for a team like the Red Sox.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 27, 2016 3:40:58 GMT -5
I wanted to add that I do like Travis and I'm optimistic so take this as intended. Travis being next year's first baseman isn't the only plausible scenario and that doesn't even include a myriad of trade possibilities. As an example, Bradley, Benintendi and Moncada all have the kind of years we are happy with. Next May could see Benintendi in the outfield, Moncada at 3B and Shaw at 1B. Or, what if Shaw's bat is as good as Ortiz thinks it will be and Panda returns to being worth the contract. Next year's first baseman isn't limited to just looking at Travis in isolation. These things always seem to have a way of working out, sometimes in unexpected ways. Never said he was only option just that I think he has inside track if they move Hanley to DH. I think Shaw is our third baseman this year. Think he shines while Pablo is getting healthy and keeps job for the season. I just don't see Pablo hitting enough or improving his D to fight off Shaw. I think by deadline they are eating a massive amount of money and trading him. I would say chances are very slim Moncada is starting at 3b next year at this time, even if he has a huge year. Maybe by mid season or end of year, but not to start the year. Benintendi on the other hand has a much better chance, still not that great. Once again more like mid season or end of year. Sox learned a big lesson with Bradley. Better to have young players start year in minors, get on a roll and then bring them up to the majors.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 27, 2016 7:14:31 GMT -5
“@jonheyman: Scout on red sox prospect Sam travis: ”the next Paul goldschmidt“” Wouldn't that be nice?
|
|
|
Post by jchang on Mar 27, 2016 7:45:08 GMT -5
if the choice were between a prospect making min, who we expect to play at the WAR 2 level versus a free agent pushing 30, who averaged WAR 3 when he was 27-29, wanting a 15m/yr for 3+ yrs, I would take the prospect. Besides, I get an odd sense of deja vu, as if we had done this before, was it at 3B? But then again there have been free agents who delivered, ex. Beltre, who unfortunately we did not retain given that we had Youk and Gonzo. Anyways, I would want several prospects at MLB min or in arb to make money available for not over the hill stars.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 27, 2016 7:48:43 GMT -5
if the choice were between a prospect making min, who we expect to play at the WAR 2 level versus a free agent pushing 30, who averaged WAR 3 when he was 27-29, wanting a 15m/yr for 3+ yrs, I would take the prospect. Besides, I get an odd sense of deja vu, as if we had done this before, was it at 3B? But then again there have been free agents who delivered, ex. Beltre, who unfortunately we did not retain given that we had Youk and Gonzo. Anyways, I would want several prospects at MLB min or in arb to make money available for not over the hill stars. We also did that with Will Middlebrooks. There are no guaranteed methods.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 27, 2016 7:52:04 GMT -5
“@jonheyman: Scout on red sox prospect Sam travis: ”the next Paul goldschmidt“” Wouldn't that be nice? Marc Normandin @marc_Normandin 19m19 minutes ago Portland, ME Do not make me feel bad about my Sam Travis love, anonymous scouts. Don't you take this from me. Marc Normandin @marc_Normandin 19m19 minutes ago Portland, ME I wish anonymous scouts would stop putting ridiculous tags on Sox prospects I like
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 27, 2016 7:54:46 GMT -5
Marc Normandin @marc_Normandin 19m19 minutes ago Portland, ME Do not make me feel bad about my Sam Travis love, anonymous scouts. Don't you take this from me. Marc Normandin @marc_Normandin 19m19 minutes ago Portland, ME I wish anonymous scouts would stop putting ridiculous tags on Sox prospects I like We'll face a conundrum when we have Goldschmidt and Rizzo on the same team. It's a good thing Shaw plays 3B also.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Mar 27, 2016 8:07:25 GMT -5
if the choice were between a prospect making min, who we expect to play at the WAR 2 level versus a free agent pushing 30, who averaged WAR 3 when he was 27-29, wanting a 15m/yr for 3+ yrs, I would take the prospect. Besides, I get an odd sense of deja vu, as if we had done this before, was it at 3B? But then again there have been free agents who delivered, ex. Beltre, who unfortunately we did not retain given that we had Youk and Gonzo. Anyways, I would want several prospects at MLB min or in arb to make money available for not over the hill stars. The Sox had a choice between re-signing Beltre and trading for Gonzalez and chose the latter. Also, they used the two compensation picks for Beltre to draft Swihart 26th and JBJ 40th. Although it's possible that had they not had those picks, they would have drafted Swihart at 19 instead of Barnes, or (more likely) Bradley 36th instead of Owens. When you have two picks in close succession, and two guys you really want, you don't necessarily take them in the order they are on your draft board (which was probably the subject of debate anyway). If the second guy seems much more likely to be taken by one of the teams picking in between, you swap them.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 27, 2016 8:09:28 GMT -5
Not sure why he would have to be an elite defender. He's seen as an above average one and that's more then good enough with his bat. I don't know that that's true. Most scouting reports that I've seen say Travis' defense at 1B is average or so.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Mar 27, 2016 8:23:57 GMT -5
Not sure the Red Sox are going to have the resources to go big in free agency ... if they exercise the option on Buchholz, they'll be at around 163 million in committed salaries, plus arb2 years for Kelly & Ross, arb1 years for Xander, Holt, JBJ, and Layne. So, just pure guess, that's another, what, 10-15 million, at least? You're already at nearly 180 million, and you've got to resign or replace Koji and Tazawa, and need someone to replace Ortiz. Plus, you need some room in the payroll to start signing some of the kids to long-term extensions.
So, I'm thinking the Sox really need to cover 1B/DH with people on the roster already (Hanley, Shaw, Travis).
|
|
|