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 jmei on Oct 10, 2014 9:38:59 GMT -5
Steamer projects Cecchini at an MLB average 2.1 WAR per 600 PA, and that projection doesn't know that he finished strong at AAA after quite possibly making a significant adjustment. The backup plan, Holt, projects at 1.6, and WMB projects to bounce back to 1.8, and will get a chance to hit every day in AAA to try to get to an even better number. So it makes no sense to be talking about guys who project to be a bit better, like Alvarez (2.2) or Valbuena (2.3), unless you can get them for free and not commit a 40-man roster spot to them. Which you can't. That pretty much limits the realistic options to Headley, Sandoval, Ramirez, probably Donaldson at the right price, and maybe Wright. Only the first two help the lineup balance. A big trade for Donaldson sounds good in theory, but we should be saving our chips for Heyward and Stanton. So there are really just two questions here: 1) If you're signing a FA, Headley or Sandoval? 2) Is the upgrade of said FA over Cecchini (if any) over the course of the contract, plus the freeing of Cecchini as a trade chip (or to play 1B or DH, should his bat especially blossom), worth the money and possibly a draft pick? Note the paradox with any FA signing at a position where you have a prospect already: it frees up one more prospect to package for a Hamels, Heyward, or Stanton, but (even more so) it eats up budget that you may well need in order to sign those trade targets to extensions. Personally, I'll give up 1.0 - 1.5 wins in 2015, and quite possibly nothing at all subsequently, and save the $15M a year and possibly a draft pick as well. When you add the possibility, however slim, that Betts could play 3B for at least a year and hence solve the OF logjam, it becomes an even easier decision. If they do sign Headley or Sandoval, I'll take it as a sign that they've seen Betts take infield at 3B and look unacceptable, and that either they're not nearly as high on Cecchini as I am, or that they think it's a viable strategy to sign a FA and deal him after a season if Cecchini continues to bloom. A big chunk of that Cecchini projection is from very optimistic defensive projections, though. His projected wRC+ of 98 is not that much greater than Holt (94) or Middlebrooks (97). If he's a below-average defender (as most scouting reports suggest), he's closer to a win and a half. One of the reasons I'm interested in Valbuena is that I think he's a better hitter than his Steamer-projected 100 wRC+. If my earlier analysis is accurate and he's likely to put up a league-average BABIP, that would make him something like a 108-110 wRC+ and a three win player. I agree that if you think he's closer to a two win player, he's probably not worth trading for (by all accounts, the Cubs want real prospect value for him). I can understand not signing Headley if you think that money can be better deployed elsewhere (i.e., if the opportunity cost is high enough). But I don't really see any other position where I think their money would be better invested. Third base is still their weakest position player spot, and the only other spot that might need an upgrade is backup catcher, but there's no free agent that you'd want to spend real money for other than Martin. Maybe a reclamation starter like Masterson or Brett Anderson to compete for a rotation spot (especially under your preferred add-only-one-starter plan)? Or take on money (Cliff Lee? CarGo?) in a trade? They could also spend on bullpen guys, but that's usually a bad investment. I suppose your answer is to save cash for a trade-and-extend guy like Stanton or Heyward, but I'm skeptical that those guys get moved. (Note that I'm not too concerned about payroll in 2016 and beyond, considering that they have a good chunk of money coming off the books next year ($43m from Napoli, Cespedes, Victorino, and Mujica) and very little long-term committed money.)
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Oct 10, 2014 9:55:27 GMT -5
Sox can always sign Youk to be backup plan B next season at 3b after Cecchini, then Holt, then Middlebrooks. odds aren't really good teams will be knocking his door down to sign him and odds are also about the same Youk stays healthy as does Sandoval remain under 275lbs after he signs a long term deal...
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Oct 10, 2014 11:56:51 GMT -5
Youk didn't last long in Japan this year and hit about the same as he did for the Yankees in 2013. I cannot recall any other player who had such a steep decline in performance so early in his career, following those three phenomenal seasons of 2008,2009 and 2010, when he was 29,30 and 31. He'll be 36 next year and I doubt he is an option.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 10, 2014 11:57:39 GMT -5
I really think Valbueno would be a fair return for Doubront. Valbueno had a better year in 2014 but overall they would seem to have similar value to me. Doubront has 3 years of control left as compared to one for Valbueno. A little more than a year ago Doubront was worth 2.9 WAR, which is higher than Valbueno's best year. Valbueno has two years of control left (he's a super-two). Recency and scouting reports matter-- if you think Doubront is as likely as Valbueno to have a three win season next year or the year after, well, I've got a bridge to sell you. I see the mlb service time but according to Cot's he has 1 more year left doesn't he: Cot's: Luis Valbuena 3b 1 year/$1.71M (2014) 1 year/$1.71M (2014) re-signed by Chicago Cubs 1/17/14 (avoided arbitration)1 year/$0.93M (2013) re-signed by Chicago Cubs 1/10/13 (avoided arbitration)1 year/$0.4952M (2012) re-signed by Toronto 3/12 claimed by Chicago Cubs off waivers from Toronto 4/4/12 sent outright to Triple-A by Chicago Cubs 4/7/12 contract purchased by Chicago Cubs 6/14/12 1 year (2011) re-signed by Cleveland 2/11 acquired by Toronto in trade from Cleveland 11/26/11 1 year/$0.4147M (2010) re-signed by Cleveland 3/10/10 1 year/$0.4003M (2009) acquired by Cleveland in three-way trade from Seattle 12/10/08 re-signed by Cleveland 3/9/09 1 year (2008) contract purchased by Seattle 9/1/08 signed by Seattle 8/02 as amateur free agent from Venezuela agent: Elite Sports Group ML service: 3.148
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Oct 10, 2014 12:14:43 GMT -5
No; as Jmei said, he is a super two, so he gets 4 years of arbitration. He avoided twice, and he'll have two more rounds. More fundamentally, he had 3.148 years prior to this year. He added another year (you cannot add more than one year in any given championship season, even though there is technically more than 180 days in a season). So, he has less than 5 years now. He'll have his pre-5th year and pre-6th year under team control.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Oct 10, 2014 12:29:16 GMT -5
Youk didn't last long in Japan this year and hit about the same as he did for the Yankees in 2013. I cannot recall any other player who had such a steep decline in performance so early in his career, following those three phenomenal seasons of 2008,2009 and 2010, when he was 29,30 and 31. He'll be 36 next year and I doubt he is an option. I am with you Dan on the unlikelihood of Youk being able to stay on the field playing 3b for maybe even a 30 day stretch at this point of his career. It's my thoughts that it's equally likely Sandoval will look like Cecil Fielder come August-September of the 1st season of his new deal. Both would be bad bets, only signing Youk cheaper and both have high rewards if they stay healthy/don't gain weight. Might as well sign the guy to a minor league deal and bring him to Ft. Myers. I'd rather him take some hacks there and see what he's got left than see Middlebrooks attempt it again.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 10, 2014 12:35:06 GMT -5
I see jmei's points and conventionally 3rd base does look like the biggest area of need beyond pitching but I'd much rather spend what money we have mainly on pitching. $50-$55 mil is not that much when you are in need of really at least 2 top starters.
Lester/Hamels - $25 mil (+\- $3 mil ) Liriano/Santana - $15 mil ( +\- $3 mil )
Leaving only $15 mil for relievers, catcher and 3rd base. If they sign Headly for $12 mil how is that going to work?
So they really limit their starting pitching signs if they also sign a Headley / Sandoval / Martin. And the bidding on all those guys might even get crazy. So what do they do then?
The genius's so far this off season are the Orioles. Hardy signed a team friendly deal as far as I'm concerned. They need to kick the tires on all these guys. And move fast probably before it gets crazy.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 10, 2014 12:36:52 GMT -5
No; as Jmei said, he is a super two, so he gets 4 years of arbitration. He avoided twice, and he'll have two more rounds. More fundamentally, he had 3.148 years prior to this year. He added another year (you cannot add more than one year in any given championship season, even though there is technically more than 180 days in a season). So, he has less than 5 years now. He'll have his pre-5th year and pre-6th year under team control. Ok, schooled by jmei again! I didn't realize super 2 status give 4 years of arb. I thought it just let the player free after 5 years.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 10, 2014 12:58:42 GMT -5
I see jmei's points and conventionally 3rd base does look like the biggest area of need beyond pitching but I'd much rather spend what money we have mainly on pitching. $50-$55 mil is not that much when you are in need of really at least 2 top starters. Lester/Hamels - $25 mil (+\- $3 mil ) Liriano/Santana - $15 mil ( +\- $3 mil ) Leaving only $15 mil for relievers, catcher and 3rd base. If they sign Headly for $12 mil how is that going to work? So they really limit their starting pitching signs if they also sign a Headley / Sandoval / Martin. And the bidding on all those guys might even get crazy. So what do they do then? This is indeed a potential problem. My solution to it has always been to trade Cespedes for pitching (which would be an AAV-neutral move), thus avoiding the need to spend cash on a Liriano/Santana type and allocating that cash instead to Headley.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Oct 10, 2014 12:59:35 GMT -5
My preference is for the Sox to sign two of the three top pitchers, assuming there is going to be an annual cost of somewhere in the $45M range. That will use up the bulk of the available money and the rest should be used for RPs, or for an opportunity during the season.
That means no big contract for a 3B or a catcher (I'm with Vazquez as the starter). I think the Yankees will sign Headley. While I like Sandoval - and am not as concerned about his physique as some others, at least for several more years - I think he is going to be too expensive and not worth the big contract he might attract. A good contract, yes, but not a monster, as he seems to be targeting (that based on flimsy info).
I am not as enthusiastic about Holt as many others because of his second half. I think he is a terrific utility player, but won't be able to hold down a fulltime position, especially 3B where better hitting and more power really are needed. After being a big fan for several years, I'm out on Middlebrooks now. That leaves Cecchini and Betts, and, possibly, Coyle or Cespedes or Castillo (all very long shots, but worth trying). I really like the idea of trying Cespedes there, and if he could handle it defensively, he probably would be more valuable than he is in LF.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Oct 10, 2014 14:44:36 GMT -5
It really is a shame since the team has little dependable power as it is and would seem to be looking for a power hitter on the market already, whether it be LH, or RH to protect Ortiz and Napoli.
Still various odd ball players the team could bring in during ST on MiLB deals with a chance to break camp and platoon with Cecchini/Holt next season.. Uggla, Youk. I am serious on both of those. Grinders at the plate who know how to take pitches. Yes. They have had problems last year or so (both), tho it does not mean team couldn't bring in both on minor league deals. Am of the opinion the 3b situation isn't as bad as it's being currently painted right now. cecchini and Holt, with Middlebrooks at Pawtucket (if he isn't given away) is at worst not as bad as some teams have currently. Bring in one of those veterans to ONLY face LH pitching if they show anything at all during the spring and you have another clubhouse leader to boot, to go along with pedroia.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Oct 10, 2014 20:23:32 GMT -5
Sorry John, but Uggla and Youk are cooked, guys who would provide much less value than, say, Nava. You can add to their declining hitting skills horrid defense for the former and the latter's bad back, Reserving roster spots for them would cripple the team before the season even starts.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 10, 2014 22:29:02 GMT -5
I see jmei's points and conventionally 3rd base does look like the biggest area of need beyond pitching but I'd much rather spend what money we have mainly on pitching. $50-$55 mil is not that much when you are in need of really at least 2 top starters. Lester/Hamels - $25 mil (+\- $3 mil ) Liriano/Santana - $15 mil ( +\- $3 mil ) Leaving only $15 mil for relievers, catcher and 3rd base. If they sign Headly for $12 mil how is that going to work? So they really limit their starting pitching signs if they also sign a Headley / Sandoval / Martin. And the bidding on all those guys might even get crazy. So what do they do then? This is indeed a potential problem. My solution to it has always been to trade Cespedes for pitching (which would be an AAV-neutral move), thus avoiding the need to spend cash on a Liriano/Santana type and allocating that cash instead to Headley. If they can't sign Cespedes to an extention I would trade him in a nanosecond also, for pitching, a 3rd baseman or a catcher. I'm hopeful still that they can extend him though. In such a case we can trade someone else in the OF but it sure seems that the best OF trade candidate is Cespedes. I don't understand why they don't at least consider Castillo or Mookie at 3rd. I'm guessing that they don't think they can play well there but I'm not convinced of that. I wouldn't be at all surprised if they do extend Cespedes and we suddenly hear about Mookie or Castillo as being slotted at 3rd next Spring. It makes sense not to talk about it now, even if they are considering it. A few other shoes need to drop.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Oct 10, 2014 22:29:53 GMT -5
Sorry John, but Uggla and Youk are cooked, guys who would provide much less value than, say, Nava. You can add to their declining hitting skills horrid defense for the former and the latter's bad back, Reserving roster spots for them would cripple the team before the season even starts. It's on me Norm. You and everyone else here can probably tell by now how much against am here on spending on any of the available FA and how much faith I have in Middlebrooks, but do think cecchini and Holt can take care of 3b next year with just a "little" bit of veteran presence as relief. Shame Uggs never would voluntarily switch to 3b earlier and resisted the change whenever it was put forth. It could possibly now have extended his career a little bit. Do think he possibly could have a slight chance of helping someone with the bat, though you are right on the defense. It's probably the worst (at 2b) in the league, or close to it range wise. He needs to learn 3b/1b quick to continue a career.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 10, 2014 22:45:53 GMT -5
I don't understand why they don't at least consider Castillo or Mookie at 3rd. I'm guessing that they don't think they can play well there but I'm not convinced of that. I wouldn't be at all surprised if they do extend Cespedes and we suddenly hear about Mookie or Castillo as being slotted at 3rd next Spring. It makes sense not to talk about it now, even if they are considering it. A few other shoes need to drop. This is not fantasy baseball. You can't just move guys to positions they've literally never played before and hope that they can learn the position in a couple weeks in Spring Training. This is especially true for guys like Castillo and Cespedes (who danr brought up above) who are outfielders-- the difference in athleticism and skill needed to play the infield is not something that's easy to pick up. Every once in a while, you get someone like Brock Holt who can move from the infield to the outfield, but there's a reason you almost never see it the other way around.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 10, 2014 23:29:51 GMT -5
Mookie is one special athlete, with all kinds of data indicating he can adapt well to different athletic challenges be they a reverse 2 handed dunk, playing CF, bowling at a top level or playing 2nd. He was adamant in an interview that his arm was good enough for SS. Xander played 3rd in the WBC with no prior training at 3rd before. Mookie may well have been moved off SS simply because Marerro, their 1st round pick, joined the same team. I'm not convinced he can't play the left side and I can see several good reasons for them to not bring it up yet for personnel reasons, proprietary information reasons going into this winter and just reasons to not wanting to rock the boat prematurely. For example, discouraging Cechinni, Holt, Middlebrooks....before they even start the winter conditioning phase.
I am clearly not saying Mookie or any of the other options like Castillo ( I haven't considered Cespedes there ) are definite 3rd base options. I'm just not convinced yet that the option of an internal solution has been ruled out considering all the parameters. Again, we don't know how competitive the FA market will be yet for Headley/Sandoval and all the other FA and trade pieces will be moving around like crazy on the winter chessboard. Ben has to bob and weave all winter to get his team better and if it requires an internal solution at 3rd at some point to do that given the remaining options next March, I could see someone like Mookie or Castillo emerging as a viable 3rd base option.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,907
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Oct 10, 2014 23:53:55 GMT -5
Kiley McDaniels said today that Mookie may play CF next year and Castillo may have to play RF. Weird because I thought Castillo looked pretty solid out in center.
|
|
|
Post by xanderbogaerts2 on Oct 11, 2014 2:30:58 GMT -5
Kiley McDaniels said today that Mookie may play CF next year and Castillo may have to play RF. Weird because I thought Castillo looked pretty solid out in center. That's how I would line it up. Castillo has a better arm, and Betts loses the most value on the corners.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 11, 2014 7:38:28 GMT -5
Mookie is one special athlete, with all kinds of data indicating he can adapt well to different athletic challenges be they a reverse 2 handed dunk, playing CF, bowling at a top level or playing 2nd. He was adamant in an interview that his arm was good enough for SS. Xander played 3rd in the WBC with no prior training at 3rd before. Mookie may well have been moved off SS simply because Marerro, their 1st round pick, joined the same team. I'm not convinced he can't play the left side and I can see several good reasons for them to not bring it up yet for personnel reasons, proprietary information reasons going into this winter and just reasons to not wanting to rock the boat prematurely. For example, discouraging Cechinni, Holt, Middlebrooks....before they even start the winter conditioning phase. I am clearly not saying Mookie or any of the other options like Castillo ( I haven't considered Cespedes there ) are definite 3rd base options. I'm just not convinced yet that the option of an internal solution has been ruled out considering all the parameters. Again, we don't know how competitive the FA market will be yet for Headley/Sandoval and all the other FA and trade pieces will be moving around like crazy on the winter chessboard. Ben has to bob and weave all winter to get his team better and if it requires an internal solution at 3rd at some point to do that given the remaining options next March, I could see someone like Mookie or Castillo emerging as a viable 3rd base option. This is a well-made argument. I think it's fair to suggest that Betts, who has extensive experience playing in the infield, has a small chance of being shifted over to 3B. As you mentioned, this would require that the other third base options be found too expensive in free agency/trade (always a possibility) and probably also that the outfield logjam ends up being unresolved (because they want to keep/extend Cespedes and don't want to sell low on Victorino/Craig). I would still think it's a risk to shift one of your top prospects to a position he's never played before, that his skillset may not be suited for, and one where he might be a worse overall player than if you played him in the outfield. But maybe that's a risk you take if you think he has the aptitude for it and the alternative options are especially unappealing. But, I'll reiterate, I think there's next to no chance that Castillo or Cespedes (who you didn't bring up, but another poster did above) are transitioned to third base. Playing on the infield is just a totally different skill than being an outfielder-- the footwork is different, balls are on you a lot quicker, the throws are different, etc., and you almost never see a guy make a mid-career switch between a corner outfield spot and a non-1B infield spot.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Oct 11, 2014 11:52:42 GMT -5
I brought up the Cespedes and Castillo ideas because - maybe it was last week - someone posted that they both had been seen taking ground balls in the infield and both had seemed quite capable. Cespedes' arm specifically was mentioned as being quite suitable for a 3B.
Now that was all very sketchy and somewhat speculative, but still, interesting. However, I do understand the realities. Mickey Mantle was said to have had one hell of a knuckleball but they never put him on the mound. The chances of either Cespedes or Castillo going to 3B are minimal, but then this is the time of year to have some fun with small possibilities.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 11, 2014 14:35:57 GMT -5
I brought up the Cespedes and Castillo ideas because - maybe it was last week - someone posted that they both had been seen taking ground balls in the infield and both had seemed quite capable. Cespedes' arm specifically was mentioned as being quite suitable for a 3B. Now that was all very sketchy and somewhat speculative, but still, interesting. However, I do understand the realities. Mickey Mantle was said to have had one hell of a knuckleball but they never put him on the mound. The chances of either Cespedes or Castillo going to 3B are minimal, but then this is the time of year to have some fun with small possibilities. There's a game of telephone going on here. A beat writer saw Cespedes making throws from third base before a game. He could've been shagging or just goofing around for all we know. He noted Cespedes's arm from third was great and reminded him of Beltre. This was unsurprising. Considering that Cespedes was unwilling to move from left field to right field because he felt uncomfortable, there is zero reason to think he'd be ok moving into the infield. Castillo used to play some infield in Cuba. That was before he moved to center full time and won a gold glove. He worked out some in the infield at his showcases before he was signed but scouts reportedly didn't like what they saw. I'm with jmei. It's not worth even thinking about Castillo or Cespedes moving into the infield unless we're given reason to think otherwise.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,990
|
Post by jimoh on Oct 11, 2014 15:51:47 GMT -5
Castillo or Cespedes at 3b could happen if all three starting infielders crash together trying for a popup and get concussions, or get hit by a falling satellite during a mound conference.
|
|
|
Post by bigpupp on Oct 11, 2014 18:21:06 GMT -5
Castillo or Cespedes at 3b could happen if all three starting infielders crash together trying for a popup and get concussions, or get hit by a falling satellite during a mound conference. ...or that dinosaur ever shows up.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 11, 2014 18:42:49 GMT -5
I have no idea if Castillo is cut out for 3rd but given the logjam in the OF, the constraints on the available cash to fill a lot of different slots, the possibility that Victorino may come back ok, the possibility that they do want Cespedes long term in the OF, and the fact that Castillo did audition at SS and he has a strong arm, I would think Castillo is a POSSIBILITY at 3rd. As compared to Mookie or any of the other OF. Mookie is probably more likely in my book but I haven't seen him play there at all...etc. I'm just saying it's possible we still go with an internal solution, but not likely. Maybe 15% likely.
There is going to be competition for 3rd basemen this winter. No doubt about it.
I guess the only part of this which even needs discussing is at what point do we consider an internal option. To me, it's 1) If Sandoval or Headley are even above $50 mil over 4 years and 2) if we can't get someone at 3rd at a reasonable cost in terms of trade value who is better than Valbuena. I'd go internal if Valbuena is our option. I think we would have close to the same performance or better if it's Mookie, Cechinni at 3rd...etc.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Oct 11, 2014 22:12:56 GMT -5
I really doubt cherrington moves mookie, Castillo or cespedes to third next season
Internal candidates include bogaerts, checchini and holt.
I think the sox view bogaerts as a short stop and holt as a super utility guy. Checchini needs more at bats at Pawtucket.
The sox gave been rumored to like the guy in Seattle and Seattle has been rumored to want cespedes.
Another rumor is Oakland would be willing to move Donaldson. Would they want cespedes back?
|
|
|