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.
Draft order (Red Sox will pick #7)
|
Post by Jonathan Singer on Sept 14, 2012 8:49:47 GMT -5
I'd be stunned if Appel slipped below the Cubs. They need pitching and they would pay him.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 14, 2012 13:28:45 GMT -5
I think it comes down to how they get the most value out of the pick. I know that's kind of a non-answer, but it depends on the caliber of players in the draft. For the sake of argument, let's say this winds up being a bad talent pool.
Scenario 1: A true "top ten" talent is available at the Sox pick - they snag him. Scenario 2: There are maybe 3 "top ten" talents, but a lot of "supp. round" talent such that spreading the bonus money from the first pick brings in the best haul - perhaps they go low with the first pick and use the money elsewhere.
The thing is, remember these things:
1) The Sox almost never draft this high and, let's face it, won't for a long time after this. It took a special kind of awfulness to bring them this low. Even if the guy available at 7 were to be a guy that typically goes at, say, 14, you're still getting the kind of guy that rarely falls to where the Sox pick, and punting on that pick to spread the money to a bunch of guys that would typically go in the supplemental round would be a poor use of the pick.
2) The Sox have had success going over-slot with guys like Middlebrooks, Kalish, Rizzo, Head, and perhaps Reddick (not sure he was enough over-slot to include here), potential success with guys like Britton, and maybe even relative success with guys like Lars Anderson, but going over-slot is a lottery ticket that may not pan out - see Ty Weeden, David Mailman, Austin Bailey, Hunter Cervenka, Tyler Wilson, Pete Hissey (jury still out, but for $1M he's not panning out to that degree). Maybe at some point I'll do a full evaluation of over-slot signings, but I think using the pick to take the best guy there is going to be a LOT better use of the pick than punting on it and spreading the bonus out.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Sept 14, 2012 14:43:35 GMT -5
I think it comes down to how they get the most value out of the pick. I know that's kind of a non-answer, but it depends on the caliber of players in the draft. For the sake of argument, let's say this winds up being a bad talent pool. Scenario 1: A true "top ten" talent is available at the Sox pick - they snag him. Scenario 2: There are maybe 3 "top ten" talents, but a lot of "supp. round" talent such that spreading the bonus money from the first pick brings in the best haul - perhaps they go low with the first pick and use the money elsewhere. The thing is, remember these things: 1) The Sox almost never draft this high and, let's face it, won't for a long time after this. It took a special kind of awfulness to bring them this low. Even if the guy available at 7 were to be a guy that typically goes at, say, 14, you're still getting the kind of guy that rarely falls to where the Sox pick, and punting on that pick to spread the money to a bunch of guys that would typically go in the supplemental round would be a poor use of the pick. 2) The Sox have had success going over-slot with guys like Middlebrooks, Kalish, Rizzo, Head, and perhaps Reddick (not sure he was enough over-slot to include here), potential success with guys like Britton, and maybe even relative success with guys like Lars Anderson, but going over-slot is a lottery ticket that may not pan out - see Ty Weeden, David Mailman, Austin Bailey, Hunter Cervenka, Tyler Wilson, Pete Hissey (jury still out, but for $1M he's not panning out to that degree). Maybe at some point I'll do a full evaluation of over-slot signings, but I think using the pick to take the best guy there is going to be a LOT better use of the pick than punting on it and spreading the bonus out. Couldn't agree more with this last sentence.
|
|
|
Post by borisman on Sept 14, 2012 15:12:02 GMT -5
I say we punt if the player we pick wants over slot and he's not worth it, especially if the 2014 draft has more talent. So we get the 8th or 10th pick a year later. Not that big of deal if the talent is worth waiting for.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Sept 14, 2012 17:11:20 GMT -5
Borisman I agree. Fashionable to say or not, and despite what management will try to sell, we are not likely to be a highly competitive team next year. The re-tooling will have to be major and relatively longer term. We need to acquire/develop talent. In the draft grab the talent if you can get it. If the guy doesn't sign, wait 'till next year when the pool is better.
Off topic but this year has seemingly seen a progressive abandonment of the grind-it-out at bats that run up pitch counts. Maybe part of that is team despondency with the record/play but players such as Aviles and Ciriaco (much as I like him) are at odds with the prior organizational philosophy. I think next year's team will re-instate the value of higher OBP and increasing pitch counts via purchases in free agency and turnover in personnel.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Sept 14, 2012 17:42:29 GMT -5
There will be plenty of guys who make the bigs out of this draft and some might become All Stars. We need to scout like crazy and find them for June of 2013 and not worry about June 2014 just yet.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Sept 14, 2012 23:33:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by gatortough on Sept 15, 2012 9:20:35 GMT -5
It feels to me like the next two games are pretty important games in terms of our draft slot. Right now we're only 1.5 games "ahead" of the Mets, which would put us on the cusp of the protected area. Given that we have our two "best" pitchers going the next two games, I for one, am hoping for both to lose a 1-0 game (I'd be okay with losing a slugfest if it gave some of the young guys to shine, think Iggy with a 3 hit night with a double and lavarnway hits a couple of bombs and throws out a runner). There is a lot of bunching in this area of the draft order, with 6-10 separated by just 2.5 gms, all teams which we lose a tie to. We have to really showcase our AAA roster in all its mediocrity in the biggest moments during the home stretch, and the next two games seem like a key place to do that
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Sept 15, 2012 9:54:55 GMT -5
After Sundays game our last 15 are vs the Rays, O's and Yanks. All fighting for the playoffs. I don't see too many winning streaks in our future.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Sept 15, 2012 10:04:20 GMT -5
It's the only race that matters - the battle for a top 11 draft spot (as of 9/15am):
#6 MIA -- (wins tiebreaker with any teams other than SD/KC based on 2011 record) #7 BOS 1.0 GB #8 KC 1.5 GB (wins tiebreaker with any other team (tied with SD) based on 2011 record) #9 PIT (compensation pick due to failure to sign Mark Appel) #10 TOR 2.0 GB #11 NYM 2.5 GB (wins tiebreaker with TOR) #12 SEA 5.0 GB (wins tiebreaker with SD) #13 SD 5.0 GB
Note: the top 11 draft picks are protected and cannot be lost.
It should be noted that BOS loses the tiebreaker with any team.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Sept 15, 2012 10:28:53 GMT -5
We're almost a mortal lock to get that top 10 pick. That is protected. The 11th and 12th teams are already up to 69 wins. We have 64. Would have to finish 6-12 to finish at 70. I don't even see that. I guess one of the questions is. Now that we have a protected pick. Is there a free agent out there worth signing? No. In order to lose a draft pick, BOS would need to sign a player who turned down a qualifying offer (expected to be approx. $13.3mm). Players expected to be made a qualifying offer include David Ortiz, Josh Hamilton, Mike Napoli, Nick Swisher and Zach Grienke. Other than Ortiz (who obviously would not require the loss of a pick), I don't see BOS signing any of the other four. It is much more likely that BOS will sign Ross and Ortiz and then go bargain hunting to fill the remaining holes (1B, LF, SP). I assume none of BJ Upton, Michael Bourn, Edwin Jackson or Shane Victorino will be made a qualifying offer.
|
|
|
Post by remember04 on Sept 15, 2012 10:31:12 GMT -5
Marlins remaining schedule
Sat, 9/15 Reds Sun, 9/16 Reds Mon, 9/17 Braves Tue, 9/18 Braves Wed, 9/19 Braves Fri, 9/21 at Mets Sat, 9/22 at Mets Sun, 9/23 at Mets Tue, 9/25 at Braves Wed, 9/26 at Braves Thu, 9/27 at Braves Fri, 9/28 Phillies Sat, 9/29 Phillies Sun, 9/30 Phillies Mon, 10/1 Mets Tue, 10/2 Mets Wed, 10/3 Mets
|
|
|
Post by remember04 on Sept 15, 2012 10:38:46 GMT -5
Royals remaining schedule
Sat Sept 15 Angels Sun Sept 16 Angels Tue Sept 18 White Sox Wed Sept 19 White Sox Thu Sept 20 White Sox Fri Sept 21 Indians Sat Sept 22 Indians Sun Sept 23 Indians Mon Sept 24 @tigers Tue Sept 25 @tigers Wed Sept 26 @tigers Thu Sept 27 @tigers Fri Sept 28 @indians Sat Sept 29 @indians Sun Sept 30 @indians Mon Oct 1 Tigers Tue Oct 2 Tigers Wed Oct 3 Tigers
|
|
|
Post by remember04 on Sept 15, 2012 10:40:56 GMT -5
It would be nice if we could pass Miami but I wouldn't bet on it and we better keep an eye on KC
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Sept 15, 2012 15:23:50 GMT -5
Back to the #10 pick.
|
|
|
Post by ancientsoxfogey on Sept 15, 2012 15:33:58 GMT -5
The intrigue is just getting started. After tomorrow's game the Sox finish the season with the 3 top dogs fighting desperately for playoff position (and to the loser, even playoff entry). This could be a scenario where the Sox collapse almost completely, with the other teams seemingly being far more motivated. Or it could go just the other way -- we all know examples of low-echelon teams wreaking havoc on playoff contenders in past years.
|
|
|
Post by spp on Sept 16, 2012 8:37:55 GMT -5
If the Sox have the 10th worst record, they would have the 11th pick (Pittsburgh inserted at 9). Would the pick be protected if they sign a tendered free agent?
|
|
|
Post by borisman on Sept 16, 2012 8:46:11 GMT -5
If the Sox have the 10th worst record, they would have the 11th pick (Pittsburgh inserted at 9). Would the pick be protected if they sign a tendered free agent? Read reply no. 84 above.
|
|
|
Post by ancientsoxfogey on Sept 16, 2012 17:14:02 GMT -5
The intrigue is just getting started. After tomorrow's game the Sox finish the season with the 3 top dogs fighting desperately for playoff position (and to the loser, even playoff entry). This could be a scenario where the Sox collapse almost completely, with the other teams seemingly being far more motivated. Or it could go just the other way -- we all know examples of low-echelon teams wreaking havoc on playoff contenders in past years. And the easy part of the schedule ends with another loss, in what somebody called a must-lose game. We're in pretty good tanking position, all things considered.
|
|
|
Post by mjammz on Sept 16, 2012 20:01:56 GMT -5
I can't see us goin better than 4-11 in our final 15 games that will leave us with a 70-92 record, that we give us a very good chance at the #6 pick and #7 at worst
On top of that Miami and the Mets will play 6 times before the end of the season. The Indians and Royals play 6 times and the Twins play the Indians/Blue Jays a combine 6 times. Thats 18 games with teams directly effecting our pick status that are guaranteed to be won by a team surrounding us.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Sept 17, 2012 5:43:44 GMT -5
We can kill two birds with 13 stones...err games. Let's lose 13 in a row to TB and Baltimore. Put a lot of heat on the Yankees to keep winning and they haven't showed the capability to string wins together. Lock up that 6th draft pick. Then beat the MFY's once or twice to finish the season.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Sept 17, 2012 7:04:16 GMT -5
It's the only race that matters - the battle for a top 11 draft spot (as of 9/17am):
#6 MIA -- #7 BOS 1.0 GB #8 KC 1.5 GB (wins tiebreaker with NYM based on 2011 record) #9 PIT (compensation pick due to failure to sign Mark Appel) #10 NYM 1.5 GB #11 TOR 2.0 GB #12 SEA 5.0 GB
All teams have 15 games left, except KC/NYM who each have 16 games left.
Note: the top 11 draft picks are protected and cannot be lost.
It should be noted that BOS loses the tiebreaker with any team.
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Sept 17, 2012 7:59:15 GMT -5
Borisman I agree. Fashionable to say or not, and despite what management will try to sell, we are not likely to be a highly competitive team next year. The re-tooling will have to be major and relatively longer term. We need to acquire/develop talent. In the draft grab the talent if you can get it. If the guy doesn't sign, wait 'till next year when the pool is better. Off topic but this year has seemingly seen a progressive abandonment of the grind-it-out at bats that run up pitch counts. Maybe part of that is team despondency with the record/play but players such as Aviles and Ciriaco (much as I like him) are at odds with the prior organizational philosophy. I think next year's team will re-instate the value of higher OBP and increasing pitch counts via purchases in free agency and turnover in personnel. I don't disagree with your goal, but the fact is that the Red Sox consistently see in the top 5 for pitches: 4th this season. They are seeing ~3.9 P/PA which is near to the top of the league, too. They're middle of the pack in K%, and top 10 in AVG (0.265, my how times seem to have changed) and SLG. However, they're second to last in BB%. Even their contact distribution isn't bad; top 10 in LD% and FB%, bottom 5 in GB%. BABIP is top 10, too. The issue isn't that they're not seeing pitches, it's that they're not stringing together baserunners like they used to. They're in the bottom third for +WPA (1 STDev below, in fact). I'm all in favor of acquiring players that put the team in the top 5 for OBP. It's a lot easier to manufacture runs if guys are on base in front of you.
|
|
|
Post by bentossaurus on Sept 17, 2012 8:23:37 GMT -5
Unless you have guys who are run producing RBI hitters. In that case forgetaboutit buddy.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 17, 2012 9:41:57 GMT -5
Second to last in walk percentage absolutely implies that plate discipline is lacking. Note that plate discipline is different than taking pitches-- lots of players with bad plate discipline will just take fastballs down the middle of the plate, get behind in the count, and then strikeout on breaking stuff out of the zone once they're at two strikes and have to protect the plate (Ciriaco is particularly prone to this). They'll see a lot of pitches per at bat, but it isn't reflective of the sort of plate discipline which helps an offense score runs. Real plate discipline is waiting until the pitcher throws you something you can drive and then driving it. If they can't or aren't, you take the walk, but the real goal is only swinging at pitches you can handle and not swinging at pitches you can't.
This team, as currently constructed, has few players who are good enough at identifying pitches to only swing at strikes. Guys like Pedroia (career O-Swing% of 25.5%, below the league average of 30%), Ortiz (23.6%) and Nava (21.0%) rarely swing at pitches outside the zone, and even guys like Ellsbury (26.3%) and Ross (28.7%) are fairly good by this measure. Compare that with guys like Saltalamacchia (32.5%), Aviles (33.1%), Gomez (34.7%), Ciriaco (a jaw-droppingly bad 47.4%), Iglesias (similarly-bad 44.6%), etc. who are particularly bad and comprise most of the September lineup.
|
|
|