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.
Sox: Headed up or headed down?
|
Post by dcsoxfan on Sept 11, 2014 11:50:50 GMT -5
The decisions that had the most profound effect on the Red Sox performance this year weren't made this last season; they were made years ago.
There are only 5-10 true impact players (players who will give you 20 WAR before they hit free agency) in any draft class and a third to a half will be taken in the first 10 to 15 picks. There another dozen players who will give you 10 WAR. Between 2002 and 2007 the Red Sox did an incredible job; despite low draft position they found at least one of these type of players each year (I am extrapolating on Rizzo). The core provided by the first four of these drafts -- Lester, Papelbon, Pedroia, Ellsbury, Buccholz -- were consistently worth 15+ Cost controlled WAR a year.
That class all reached the point where they were no longer cost controlled, and the current returns from the 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 drafts and international FA class is only a couple WAR. With a luxury tax limit, it is very, very difficult to build a consistent winner without cost controlled assets.
None of this is to say management made mistakes. Many of the decisions had positive effects. For example Hanley Ramirez and Anibal Sanchez ended up being significantly more valuable than Beckett and Lowell, but Beckett and Lowell led to a championship. There are very few decisions that improve a team in the short run that don't come at the cost of hurting the team in the longer run. The 2014 Red Sox represent the accumulation of those decisions over the last decade.
I personally think the Red Sox current position dictates taking the longer view at this moment, but, of course, many would disagree.
|
|
|
Post by jclmontana on Sept 11, 2014 12:01:20 GMT -5
In the age of baseball parity, competitive balance, mediocrity, or whatever you want to call it, small variations in talent, luck, and year-to-year differences in player performance are going to create a much larger variation in winning percentage. Front office mistakes can be thrown in here as well. Poor team building choices, even small ones, can potentially have a much bigger impact on standings. If you have teams bunched up talent-wise, with far fewer super-teams, then relatively small dips in overall team performance can result in really bad records. Here is a The Atlantic article that talks about parity in baseball, and the issue of payroll. An interesting read. In short, payroll matters in being successful, but not necessarily in winning championships. www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2014/09/bud-seligs-legacy-its-not-parity/379648/I don't have any study to back it up, but I think baseball is heading towards more instability in year to year records: more worse to firsts, firsts to worsts, and more Cinderella teams popping up each year. Part of this is the parity issue: the talent gap is not as big between many teams, so smaller upgrades in talent can result in big gains in the standings. Also, when the stars align and everyone on a team has an above average to career year, it will really show up in the standings (2013 Red Sox). It also appears that teams are taking more risks and going for an all or nothing approach that will result in either good to great seasons, or unmitigated disasters. Billy Beane selling out his farm system to load up for a short-window run at glory. Big money contracts for relatively unproven Cuban players. The huge contracts given to elite or sort-of elite free agents that are almost guaranteed to be ugly at the end of the contract.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Sept 11, 2014 12:49:28 GMT -5
They are going sideways.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Sept 11, 2014 12:54:49 GMT -5
I would say 99% of free agents only care about the dollar signs. It's why Ginacarlo Stanton might actually end up re-signing with the Marlins if they actually follow their words and offer him a lucrative contract. I mean, look at Mariners and their ability to land Robinson Cano away from the Yankees of all teams. Even when the Red Sox were in their prime I don't remember a player ever taking less to go play for them. I've heard of players taking a hometown discount (Mike Lowell), but not take less to come play here from another team. What about Drew for the 2013 season wasn't he offered more by the Yankees but he wanted to be guaranteed to play SS and took the sox offer which was lower. Even if that story is true it's still not a 1-1 comparison. Stephen Drew would have taken less to play a position he is most comfortable with, not because he wanted to play for the team. He has a better chance at making more and being a starter for longer if he is able to hit respectively for a short stop instead of a light hitting 2B who is playing out of position. That and he might also really enjoy playing SS. If the Yankees offered more and SS was made readily available I'm all but certain he would have been a Yankee.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Sept 11, 2014 12:58:16 GMT -5
How much further down can they go?
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,948
|
Post by jimoh on Sept 11, 2014 13:05:16 GMT -5
Jimed14...respectfully...you have made this argument more that once....and it has credence...but it's not like the Red Sox were fielding bad ballclubs. We could've just as easily won in 75 or 86...and the 78 ballclub was a great team. We also ran into major buzzsaw's with early 90's A's and the late 90's Yankees. We also made a lot of boneheaded, non-baseball decisions back then like letting Carlton Fisk go when he was 32 and still one of the best 2-3 catchers in baseball. And the pitching was never good enough. For those who don't remember, this is even worse than jimed's summary: Fisk was not just let go as a free agent, he was made a free agent early because the incompetent Haywood Sullivan mailed his contract to him a day late.
|
|
ianrs
Veteran
Posts: 2,405
|
Post by ianrs on Sept 11, 2014 13:22:33 GMT -5
Well, here's an answer from Werner. I think this [hypothetical FA spending] coupled with the impressive amount of cost-controlled assets we have throughout the system means we are on the way up. And as Joshv02 points out above...we really can't sink any lower. Just think of it as following San Francisco's model of awful-World Series-awful-World Series!
|
|
|
Post by MLBDreams on Sept 11, 2014 13:30:47 GMT -5
I think the team is headed down for 2015 season. They have too many holes to fill in. I'll be more shock if Cherington/Farrell doesn't lose their job based on 2012 & 2014 seasons (Ben) and this season (John).
Theo have 9 winning seasons until Sept, 2011 collapse. He lost his job for horrible month. Grady Little lost his job for unable to pull out Pedro early during 2003 playoffs. Terry Francona lost his job for give ball to Daniel Bard so often during Sept collapse and lose all games that Daniel failed to do his job (unable to get strike or get out). Bob Valentine lose his job for the same reason as this current 2014 team (awful all phases of pitching, hitting & fielding and mostly unwatchable games). That 2014 is much worst than 2012.
I think Henry/Werner/Lucchino are lunatic enough not to fire Ben and/or John for their poor decisions. Theo is much better GM than Ben is and always field solid teams. No last place finish. Ben got 2 losing seasons out of 3. That's too many. JBJ, Bogaerts and Middlebrooks are failed as full time starter as MLB hitters. Drew still can't hit. Victorino, Petey & Napoli been hurting.
I cannot see better 2015 team with all same players around. Bucholz, RDLR, Kelly, Webster & Ranaudo are not championship caliber pitching staffs that can carry all way. There's no hope for the team if Ben/John are safe.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Sept 11, 2014 14:10:05 GMT -5
I think the team is headed down for 2015 season. They have too many holes to fill in. I'll be more shock if Cherington/Farrell doesn't lose their job based on 2012 & 2014 seasons (Ben) and this season (John). Theo have 9 winning seasons until Sept, 2011 collapse. He lost his job for horrible month. Grady Little lost his job for unable to pull out Pedro early during 2003 playoffs. Terry Francona lost his job for give ball to Daniel Bard so often during Sept collapse and lose all games that Daniel failed to do his job (unable to get strike or get out). Bob Valentine lose his job for the same reason as this current 2014 team (awful all phases of pitching, hitting & fielding and mostly unwatchable games). That 2014 is much worst than 2012. I think Henry/Werner/Lucchino are lunatic enough not to fire Ben and/or John for their poor decisions. Theo is much better GM than Ben is and always field solid teams. No last place finish. Ben got 2 losing seasons out of 3. That's too many. JBJ, Bogaerts and Middlebrooks are failed as full time starter as MLB hitters. Drew still can't hit. Victorino, Petey & Napoli been hurting. I cannot see better 2015 team with all same players around. Bucholz, RDLR, Kelly, Webster & Ranaudo are not championship caliber pitching staffs that can carry all way. There's no hope for the team if Ben/John are safe. You're being way too hard on Cherington, in my opinion. Firstly, how can you blame 2012 on him? 1) The previous GM, your boy Theo, left Ben in the tough position of having Crawford, Gonzo, and Beckett signed to mega contracts that greatly limited our flexibility. Ben was able to pull off a miracle trade in a year where Gonzo had a meager (for him) 117 OPS+, Crawford played only 31 games, and Becket was posting a career low K% and getting pounded nearly every start. 2) Lucchino also bypassed Cherington's first big recommendation under his tenure, hiring a new manager, instead selecting a joke of a person who we all knew wouldn't be successful manning the ship in Boston. 3) And on top of that, Jacoby Ellsbury and David Ortiz played 74 and 90 games, respectively, while the lowest ERA of any starter in a rotation that included Lester, Buchholz, Beckett, and Doubront was Lester's 4.82 mark. Please, 2012 is not on Cherington. As for 2014, many have pointed out that there was widespread consensus going into the season from fans, analysts, and projection systems that the Red Sox were, at absolute worst, a competitive team in the hunt for a playoff spot.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,438
|
Post by nomar on Sept 11, 2014 14:14:10 GMT -5
I think the team is headed down for 2015 season. They have too many holes to fill in. I'll be more shock if Cherington/Farrell doesn't lose their job based on 2012 & 2014 seasons (Ben) and this season (John). Theo have 9 winning seasons until Sept, 2011 collapse. He lost his job for horrible month. Grady Little lost his job for unable to pull out Pedro early during 2003 playoffs. Terry Francona lost his job for give ball to Daniel Bard so often during Sept collapse and lose all games that Daniel failed to do his job (unable to get strike or get out). Bob Valentine lose his job for the same reason as this current 2014 team (awful all phases of pitching, hitting & fielding and mostly unwatchable games). That 2014 is much worst than 2012. I think Henry/Werner/Lucchino are lunatic enough not to fire Ben and/or John for their poor decisions. Theo is much better GM than Ben is and always field solid teams. No last place finish. Ben got 2 losing seasons out of 3. That's too many. JBJ, Bogaerts and Middlebrooks are failed as full time starter as MLB hitters. Drew still can't hit. Victorino, Petey & Napoli been hurting. I cannot see better 2015 team with all same players around. Bucholz, RDLR, Kelly, Webster & Ranaudo are not championship caliber pitching staffs that can carry all way. There's no hope for the team if Ben/John are safe. The only major poor decision made this year was signing Drew, which I do think played into Xander's slump. Drew isn't on the team anymore, if you cared to notice ("Drew still can't hit"). Theo is the reason BC had to search for a team to bail us out. Tell me when Cherington makes a move like Carl Crawford's contract. Rookies have to adjust at some point. Sometimes it doesn't go well. That was the case this year. What holes do we have next year? Bogaerts is playing great, as is betts. Napoli and Ortiz can still hit. Pedroia could improve offensively after his surgery but should at least be as good as he was this year (a 4 WAR player). CF production will be better as we have multiple options out there (Catillo, Betts, JBJ for now), and well probably make a RF acquisition and have Cespedes or Craig/Nava in LF. The only hole I see is 3B and backup catcher. The rotation will get filled through free agency/trades I'm sure. I just don't see any scenario in which we don't improve by a good amount at least.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Sept 11, 2014 14:39:32 GMT -5
You can look at this as a fan or as an owner/manager. As a fan, it's great knowing the owner/management team will spend the money required to win. Can't argue that. Now, do they have a solid plan as how to do it going forward? I don't think so. John Henry can do as many studies as he wants. I think the front office is reactionary, not having a workable valid plan. If they think making the playoffs once every 5 years is a good plan, I ain't buying it. We had a great season last year but were very fortunate to win it all. If you make it one out of five. You could go 20-25 years without winning it. I want to know how offering Jon Lester 105m in spring training and signing him is more risky than signing Castillo? Who has never played an inning in MLB. Throwing money at all free agents is crazy. A la MFY's. But, identifying key free agents and signing them is something we can afford. Lester is the latter IMO. Many writers have said we could have signed him for something similiar to the Homer Bailey contract. How do we react? Throwing a ton of money at an unknown. Crazy.
Our front office isn't as smart as they think they are. Most of their success is because the Sox have a lot of money to spend. Not all. Most. I don't just mean free agents. I mean previous draft system. Int'l free agents too. We spent a lot of money. We won! Great!! Let's not act like we won because we're wicked smaht. And, nobody else is.
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan on Sept 11, 2014 15:08:23 GMT -5
Actually, I think the Red Sox strength lies in the organizational skills of the front office. They have constructed a first rate amateur scouting department that has allowed them to basically out-draft the rest of league between 2002 and 2007. That, combined with the supreme good fortune of Minnesota DFAing Ortiz is probably the biggest reason for the Sox success.
if the trio of Bogaerts, Betts and Swihart live up to expectations, this team will be well-positioned for another run of success.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Sept 11, 2014 15:33:34 GMT -5
My own take, but I think Kelly, Barnes, and De La Rosa slot in somewhere at 3 through 5. I think the latter two have more upside than that though. That leaves Buchholz and whoever they acquire in the marketplace or through trades. As for Castillo and Betts, I think they're both on the team next year. Again this is my own opinion, but I'd take Betts over Ellsbury right now. Cespedes is fine in LF but nowhere else. Add in healthy versions of Napoli and Pedroia, an improving Bogaerts and an Ortiz who hasn't regressed too much, and you've got Holt, Nava and Victorino on the bench. That leaves the big hole at third which has to be filled and another catcher. All of that is without any trades, but I expect some movement. Can the additional parts they bring on get them into playoff contention? That will be the big question. But that's a good core to start off with, I think. I agree with this completely. If, and these are two very big IF's, we can acquire a top starting pitcher and a 3B this offseason we are likely to field a very competitive team for 2015. The future is not as bleak as some here seem to keep projecting, but they do have 2 clear tasks to accomplish through free agency and trades. I think that the Sox need at least one prominent starter, at least two very solid relievers (hopefully of the high-voltage variety), a front line catcher who can hit .250 with some power and a third baseman with power. How they do this without stripping the farm and/or spending huge bucks while staying with their pledge not to issue long term contracts, will require something magical. I don't want to trade Mookie, Bogaerts, Swihart. Margot or Coyle. Our newer pitchers auditioning for a position on the Sox or any other team next year, have not accorded themselves well collectively. I neglected to mention RDLR above but I am not too high on him either. I would put Buch anywhere from 2-5, based upon his puzzling inconsistency/loss of velocity, and hope that Kelley can occupy a three spot.. To me RDLR is a 4 or 5 and none of the other guys has appeared to be more than a AAAA...Possibly Barnes will make a jump. Owens has never given me a fever either. I think that Johnson might be the best/most polished (Buehrle-esqe) of that bunch. But, it is hard to envision trading any combination of that "stockpile" of pitchers for a major piece. I suspect that late arrivals, Rodriguez and Escobar, both of whom are LH and can throw mid 90s , and to whom less is emotionally invested by the Sox and the fan base, will be more likely to get train tickets.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Sept 11, 2014 15:51:46 GMT -5
The decisions that had the most profound effect on the Red Sox performance this year weren't made this last season; they were made years ago.[...] I personally think the Red Sox current position dictates taking the longer view at this moment, but, of course, many would disagree. This is what I think, but with the important caveat that the team produced almost nothing from their international scouting for quite a few years, really from Ramirez/Sanchez to Xander, the team got very poor returns. This is the one clear, inexcusable mistake from the Theo years, imo. They made some moves in the latter years of his rein that didn't work out and strayed from their philosophy (Crawford in particular), but that's been talked about enough. But the lack of production from Latin America was a noticeable issue at the time and wasn't dealt with, and, to me, a bigger issue with the long-term success of the team. I think Cherington has done a very good job patching together teams while building the player development pipeline. He makes mistakes pretty quickly and moves on from them cleanly. I wonder if he'll be able to get away with that through this winter, though ... so far, his philosophy has been to hedge risk with a bunch of small bets, none of which will hurt much if they don't pan out. But I feel like he won't be able to do that this summer; he's probably going to have to make a fairly bold move for some top-line talent.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Sept 11, 2014 16:05:32 GMT -5
You can look at this as a fan or as an owner/manager. As a fan, it's great knowing the owner/management team will spend the money required to win. Can't argue that. Now, do they have a solid plan as how to do it going forward? I don't think so. John Henry can do as many studies as he wants. I think the front office is reactionary, not having a workable valid plan. If they think making the playoffs once every 5 years is a good plan, I ain't buying it. We had a great season last year but were very fortunate to win it all. If you make it one out of five. You could go 20-25 years without winning it. I want to know how offering Jon Lester 105m in spring training and signing him is more risky than signing Castillo? Who has never played an inning in MLB. Throwing money at all free agents is crazy. A la MFY's. But, identifying key free agents and signing them is something we can afford. Lester is the latter IMO. Many writers have said we could have signed him for something similiar to the Homer Bailey contract. How do we react? Throwing a ton of money at an unknown. Crazy. Our front office isn't as smart as they think they are. Most of their success is because the Sox have a lot of money to spend. Not all. Most. I don't just mean free agents. I mean previous draft system. Int'l free agents too. We spent a lot of money. We won! Great!! Let's not act like we won because we're wicked smaht. And, nobody else is. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Sept 11, 2014 17:16:18 GMT -5
I think the Sox are headed up. This year was about as bad as it gets. Last year was as good as it gets.
Xander and Betts will hit. Might have to deal with bad d at SS. Mookie has improved big time in center. I think he will be good enough on D no matter where he ends up playing.
The Drew move was made because of an injury at 3b , people seem to forget that. If Xander reacted badly to it, that's on him, not management. No X in team.
I do think the Sox made a mistake in not having a better option in Center. I think they blew it sending Nava down after a few bad weeks.
I also think they should have signed Lester before the season started. They now pay more for at least 2 starters. Either in free agent money and or trading prospects.
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,810
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Sept 11, 2014 17:38:32 GMT -5
I guess it's clear by now that I'm not Bill Gates when it comes to using a computer!! But in response to EV, you make some decent points but you're reaching on some others. Doubront was a below average ERA-plus P each year except for 2010, when he pitched all of 12 games. It's not a major surprise he stunk this year - since he generally wasn't any good before. And Clay barely made it through the PS last year, so is it any surprise he wasn't ready to start the season?
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Sept 11, 2014 18:47:47 GMT -5
I'm old enough to remember listening to the Redsox on the radio in 67 because we didn't get to see them very often up in Maine. It's part of the reason I became such a big fan. Yaz was a superhero to a 12 year old kid listening to every game from that year on the radio. Especially at the end of the year and during the series. But we all have to adapt right? We are in a new era of revenue sharing where any team with a good front office and a little luck can win it all. For example, Baltimore has an ambulatory idiot for a manager to me but they are winning. Every dog has his day now. And we should just get used to it and appreciate everything which comes our way. For example, the Mookster! Yes, there is a God! You didn't miss much TV wise. We are about the same age. Only about half the games were on TV in Boston then. And we listened to most gameson the radio outside anyway. AC was a luxury for most folks in Southie and Somerville back then, where I grew up. Those 3 deckers were hot during the summer.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Sept 11, 2014 18:59:31 GMT -5
You can look at this as a fan or as an owner/manager. As a fan, it's great knowing the owner/management team will spend the money required to win. Can't argue that. Now, do they have a solid plan as how to do it going forward? I don't think so. John Henry can do as many studies as he wants. I think the front office is reactionary, not having a workable valid plan. If they think making the playoffs once every 5 years is a good plan, I ain't buying it. We had a great season last year but were very fortunate to win it all. If you make it one out of five. You could go 20-25 years without winning it. I want to know how offering Jon Lester 105m in spring training and signing him is more risky than signing Castillo? Who has never played an inning in MLB. Throwing money at all free agents is crazy. A la MFY's. But, identifying key free agents and signing them is something we can afford. Lester is the latter IMO. Many writers have said we could have signed him for something similiar to the Homer Bailey contract. How do we react? Throwing a ton of money at an unknown. Crazy. Our front office isn't as smart as they think they are. Most of their success is because the Sox have a lot of money to spend. Not all. Most. I don't just mean free agents. I mean previous draft system. Int'l free agents too. We spent a lot of money. We won! Great!! Let's not act like we won because we're wicked smaht. And, nobody else is. Thank you. Because you say so? They may be smarter than you think. But most clubs are smart, too. Some years we're smarter than they are, other years vice-versa. There's also variance in player performance that is unpredictable (yes, some of it is predictable, too). I have no issue taking a step back to take two steps forward. They are clearly trying to transition to a younger core of home grown talent, and that has been challenged with some struggles. I still this is the best long term move for the franchise. I have no doubt they will supplement with free agents and spend the money when appropriate.
|
|
|
Post by bigpupp on Sept 11, 2014 20:07:09 GMT -5
Our front office isn't as smart as they think they are. Most of their success is because the Sox have a lot of money to spend. Not all. Most. I don't just mean free agents. I mean previous draft system. Int'l free agents too. We spent a lot of money. We won! Great!! Let's not act like we won because we're wicked smaht. And, nobody else is. And most posters arent as smart as they think they are. In fact, this post right here could have been posted in 2012 just as easily as 2014. The Sox were looking down, with even less hope of going anywhere in the future, yet the front office was smart enough to bring a championship only one year later.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Sept 11, 2014 21:06:28 GMT -5
I can not say if we are headed up or down, but I can say we are in position to make something happen for 2015.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,516
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Sept 11, 2014 21:25:18 GMT -5
You can look at this as a fan or as an owner/manager. As a fan, it's great knowing the owner/management team will spend the money required to win. Can't argue that. Now, do they have a solid plan as how to do it going forward? I don't think so. John Henry can do as many studies as he wants. I think the front office is reactionary, not having a workable valid plan. If they think making the playoffs once every 5 years is a good plan, I ain't buying it. We had a great season last year but were very fortunate to win it all. If you make it one out of five. You could go 20-25 years without winning it. I want to know how offering Jon Lester 105m in spring training and signing him is more risky than signing Castillo? Who has never played an inning in MLB. Throwing money at all free agents is crazy. A la MFY's. But, identifying key free agents and signing them is something we can afford. Lester is the latter IMO. Many writers have said we could have signed him for something similiar to the Homer Bailey contract. How do we react? Throwing a ton of money at an unknown. Crazy. Our front office isn't as smart as they think they are. Most of their success is because the Sox have a lot of money to spend. Not all. Most. I don't just mean free agents. I mean previous draft system. Int'l free agents too. We spent a lot of money. We won! Great!! Let's not act like we won because we're wicked smaht. And, nobody else is. I agree with what I bolded. I think that letting Lester go will be a terrible mistake and that the cost of replacing him will exceed what it would have taken to simply re-sign a pitcher who actually wanted to stay here. I can live with a down year or two but missing the playoffs four times in five years isn't a great thing. Obviously toward the end of the Theo era the farm system wasn't producing a heckuva lot and it showed that it's harder to stay consistently great, especially when other teams are pushing forward. I hope that if the Sox farm system is as good as we hope it is, then it will give the Sox a window to consistently be in the playoff hunt and not have to punt seasons by July. I think it was obvious about ten years ago that the Sox were ahead of the curve, but over time I think a lot of other front offices caught up. Doesn't mean that the Sox are run by a bunch of dummies, but it means that they have a lot more front office/brain power competition than what they once had (no competition from the Phillies, though).
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Sept 11, 2014 22:36:31 GMT -5
I fear that the bad results will force them to do something dumb. Let's say they trade Betts and Bogarts for Hamels and sign John Lester to a 7 year contract. That should make the team more competitive in the short term but long term it would be a disaster.
Worse yet.....I am worried that they will continue to jerk.around Bogarts by either playing him at third or.sending him to the minors.
If you listen to talk radio they all want Bogarts gone.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,882
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 12, 2014 0:11:28 GMT -5
I think that the Sox need . . . a front line catcher who can hit .250 with some power The Sox have a catcher who is probably the best defensive player in all of baseball, a guy who can save you 45 runs in 120 games, and who has in fact been the 8th best catcher in MLB despite being a black hole offensively.* And he has always struggled when he's moved to a new level and hit much better when he has repeated a level, and scouts have always thought he'd be at least an OK hitting catcher. There's a very good chance he'll be one of the top 4 or 5 catchers in baseball next year (he'd need only 0.5 WAR more of offense per 120 games to be 5th this year), and he's pretty much guaranteed to be in the top 10 again. And this is a guy you think needs to be replaced? *And let's note that runs scored on offense and runs saved on defense are equal, except that a) runs saved on defense are still cheaper salary-wise, and b) runs scored on offense lose value in the post-season but runs saved on defense don't. You'd never trade a 0 WAR offense, 5 WAR defense catcher for his opposite number.
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Sept 12, 2014 4:25:29 GMT -5
I didn't become a fan until college (2002) and for the life of me couldn't understand why other fan bases thought we Sox fans were entitled asshats. These past 3 seasons have shown me what other teams fans hate. Maybe I'm odd in that I enjoy just being able to watch a beisbol game with a cold beer in my hand regardless of the outcome, but all of this whining about needing to be "teh bestest! 1!! 1" all the time is pitiful.
|
|
|