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 outfield discussion
|
Post by sarasoxer on Nov 17, 2012 8:44:58 GMT -5
I am just worried we are gonna get locked in some dumb deals. I really have a great feeling for the outfielders on this team. I think Jacobs is being slept on also. I really wish it was 2013 offseason because I feel the FO would have a better feel for what we have. We are deep with pitching,SS, and OF. I sometimes wish that we were somewhere else than Boston so that the market and fan demands did not color the rebuild process. It would be nice to hit a couple of home runs high in the draft and watch our minor leaguers develop. A home-grown Juggernaut of young guys would be the most rewarding of all. Hamilton would generate immediate excitement but would represent the kind of risk we assumed with Crawford, Lackey & in the trade for Bailey. We touched the hot stove once. Just because the financial burns have healed doesn't mean that we have to immediately and indiscriminately turn the burner back on high.
|
|
|
Post by pbgallag on Nov 17, 2012 10:20:53 GMT -5
Extend Ellsbury, sign Hamilton, make do with Kalish, Sweeney, Sands until Brentz arrives. Or sign Ross for 2yrs & platoon him with Kalish or Sweeney until Brentz arrives. Ellsbury and Hamilton would be a $300M roll of the dice. Not going to happen.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Nov 17, 2012 11:15:05 GMT -5
Ellsbury-Sweeney-Nava with Kalish and Brentz on the farm.
Justin Upton could fill a huge hole here.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Nov 17, 2012 11:48:10 GMT -5
Ellsbury-Sweeney-Nava with Kalish and Brentz on the farm. Justin Upton could fill a huge hole here. You're seriously ok with an OF of Ellsbury, Sweeney and Nava?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 17, 2012 12:35:55 GMT -5
I posted about why I think the Red Sox should sign Nick Swisher here. I think an outfield of a Sands/Nava platoon, Ellsbury, and Swisher (with Sweeney or Kalish as the 4th OF) is a playoff-caliber combination. I don't think they'll be able to sign Hamilton for the reasons I outline in my post.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Nov 17, 2012 13:06:26 GMT -5
I posted about why I think the Red Sox should sign Nick Swisher here. I think an outfield of a Sands/Nava platoon, Ellsbury, and Swisher (with Sweeney or Kalish as the 4th OF) is a playoff-caliber combination. I don't think they'll be able to sign Hamilton for the reasons I outline in my post. jmei substitute Swisher for Ross and isn't this about what we had last year? Sands & Kalish are big unknowns and Sweeney is Sweeney. Nava is a wonderful story....but. Sands hit a robust .296 in the PCL which was 38th in the league on a team that collectively hit .298. His average was just behind Max Ramirez with whom we briefly flirted and two points ahead of Tim Federowicz who we traded. He is 25. Are his stats that much different from the less than immortalized Mauro Gomez? Sands in 220 MLABs has hit .222 with 4 hrs. I have read the recent favorable article cited by SteveofBradenton and certainly Sands does have great size and power. There is intrigue here. Ells will have something of a bounce back year but even if he escapes the injury bug, .290 15 hrs., 75 rbis and 35 steals would be a very good season. So, besides Swisher & Ells, we look, on paper, somewhat suspect at the other OF position and certainly a far cry from Lynn, Rice & Evans. The capacity for explosive offense trumps at Fenway especially with the 27th ranked pitching staff.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Nov 17, 2012 13:15:39 GMT -5
I posted about why I think the Red Sox should sign Nick Swisher here. I think an outfield of a Sands/Nava platoon, Ellsbury, and Swisher (with Sweeney or Kalish as the 4th OF) is a playoff-caliber combination. I don't think they'll be able to sign Hamilton for the reasons I outline in my post. I like this solution a lot. On the assumption that the Sox do get Napoli, their infield with Middlebrooks, Iglesias, and Pedroia in the other spots ain't too shabby. There are enough offensive options at catcher right now so that there's nothing to worry about there either. Sands can also spell Napoli, who can fill in for Ross/Lavarnway-Saltalamacchia. They need to pick one of Ciriaco/De Jesus as the utility guy (or maybe both) and Kalish can be the 5th outfielder (if I'm counting right jmei) Honestly I expect Bradely to be up sooner rather than later, and Brentz shows up at some point also in the most optimistic scenario. Now, what to do with Bogaerts when he's ready... As I've written elsewhere and often, they have the opportunity to really get this youth thing rollin'. Might as well take advantage of that. There's a lot of OBP and a bit of slugging in that lineup - whether Ellsbury rebounds or not. I think it's more than enough to compete for a playoff spot if the pitching gets righted.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 17, 2012 14:08:19 GMT -5
jmei substitute Swisher for Ross and isn't this about what we had last year? Sands & Kalish are big unknowns and Sweeney is Sweeney. Nava is a wonderful story....but. Sands hit a robust .296 in the PCL which was 38th in the league on a team that collectively hit .298. His average was just behind Max Ramirez with whom we briefly flirted and two points ahead of Tim Federowicz who we traded. He is 25. Are his stats that much different from the less than immortalized Mauro Gomez? Sands in 220 MLABs has hit .222 with 4 hrs. I have read the recent favorable article cited by SteveofBradenton and certainly Sands does have great size and power. There is intrigue here. Ells will have something of a bounce back year but even if he escapes the injury bug, .290 15 hrs., 75 rbis and 35 steals would be a very good season. So, besides Swisher & Ells, we look, on paper, somewhat suspect at the other OF position and certainly a far cry from Lynn, Rice & Evans. The capacity for explosive offense trumps at Fenway especially with the 27th ranked pitching staff. First off, look at the list of players who played in the outfield for the 2012 Red Sox. Marlon Byrd started 33 games in center, Darnell MacDonald had 16 games between CF and RF, Scott Podsednik had 28 at CF/RF and 59 games at all outfield positions. Replacing those starts with a combination of Swisher and a healthy Ellsbury and you have an instant upgrade. Second, Nick Swisher is a pretty substantial upgrade on Ross, especially versus RHP. Swisher last year was a 128 wRC+, whereas Ross, despite being heavily platooned, was only at 113. In particular, Swisher has 40 points of OBP over Ross with similar power, which is really a huge, huge improvement. Third, Nava is pretty underrated. He's about league average offensively overall for a left fielder (league-average wOBA is .330, Nava is .328 over his career and .330 in 2012). He does very well versus righties, with a career split of .261/.369/.399, .343 wOBA in 374 PAs. Sands, in a tiny sample size (86 PAs), has killed lefties in the majors-- .316/.372/.532 triple-slash and a .392 wOBA. You're right not to be too impressed by his AAA statistics and yeah, he might be no better than Gomez, but a Gomez who can play a passable LF is a pretty valuable bench bat (think Eric Hinske). That looks like a good platoon that should be league-average at worst.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Nov 17, 2012 19:59:46 GMT -5
I haven't seen many (or any) mentions of Bradley as a RF. Is there a reason for this?
If the Red Sox keep Ellsbury or pickup another CF type, would Bradley fit well as a right fielder in Fenways large right field?
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Nov 17, 2012 20:23:28 GMT -5
I haven't seen many (or any) mentions of Bradley as a RF. Is there a reason for this? If the Red Sox keep Ellsbury or pickup another CF type, would Bradley fit well as a right fielder in Fenways large right field? You probably haven't heard much about it because it doesn't make sense to move and elite defender at center to right. It can be done without repurcussion as long as the arm is there, which it is for Bradley. Therefore; yes, he would fit well in Fenway's RF. I'll be curious to see what happens in the near future. If the Sox sign Swisher for RF and Ellsbury does well enough to warrant a new contract with the Red sox, does Ellsbury move to LF when Bradley is ready? Or does Ellsbury stay in CF with Swisher to LF and Bradley to RF? And if the Sox sign Hamilton how does that play out? Hamilton is most a LF going forward. Ah, well as the old Chinese curse goes: may you live in interesting times.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Nov 17, 2012 20:32:17 GMT -5
jmei I grant that Swisher, if signed, would be an improvement on Ross as far as OBP is concerned and as a switch hitter with roughly equal metrics from each side, would be a more all around every day offensive player over the regular season.The Sox seem 'back to the future' on OBP so I believe that he could be a prime target regardless of us having to give up a draft pick to the MFYs. I do think that Swisher would be a downgrade defensively (bull in a china shop) from Ross (no Mays himself). Overall tho, I agree with you in relative value. And if we get to the playoffs, maybe we just sit Swisher given his .169 average over 46 playoff games. After all he has proven awful versus good pitching over a substantial sample size. Moreover, if the Yanks don't want him, that should give us pause...
I have to take issue on your Nava assessment tho. A lifetime .243 hitter with 7 hrs and 59 RBIs.in 428 official ABs at a corner OF position is not representative of league average. He appears to be a classic AAAA player. He is good at working counts and getting on base at roughly 90 points higher than his BA. He is not a starter on a contender that also has weakness at 1B, catcher, OF and SS.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 17, 2012 22:36:07 GMT -5
I do think that Swisher would be a downgrade defensively (bull in a china shop) from Ross (no Mays himself). Swisher is actually a pretty decent defender defender in RF per advanced statistics. He has a career 4.5 UZR/150 in RF, including positive marks in each of the last three seasons. He might not be fleet of foot, but he takes good routes to balls, has an accurate arm, and doesn't commit many errors. Cody Ross is rated as a career 1.6 UZR/150 defender, by the way. Swisher is probably not better than an average defender in RF, and won't get better as he ages, but it's an exaggeration to say that he is a bad defender or worse than Ross. Overall tho, I agree with you in relative value. And if we get to the playoffs, maybe we just sit Swisher given his .169 average over 46 playoff games. After all he has proven awful versus good pitching over a substantial sample size. Moreover, if the Yanks don't want him, that should give us pause... I don't think it's fair to judge a player based on limited postseason PAs (just 181) against superior competition. That's a month and a half's worth of PAs. Every player has slumps and I think his wider body of work is more representative of his past performance and predictive of his future performance than his admittedly poor postseason record. But you raise a good point I hadn't noticed before-- Swisher really has been terrible (.169/.283/.305) in the playoffs. I still think he should be a Red Sox target given the likelihood that he'll be signed to a team-friendly contract and because I think most situational splits are bogus and just small sample size artifacts. Also, the Yankees likely won't pursue him with full force because of well-publicized payroll problems in 2014, when they have to re-sign Cano and perhaps Granderson but need to get below the CBT line. I'm not aware of any stories indicating that the Yankees won't pursue him for any other reason. I have to take issue on your Nava assessment tho. A lifetime .243 hitter with 7 hrs and 59 RBIs.in 428 official ABs at a corner OF position is not representative of league average. He appears to be a classic AAAA player. He is good at working counts and getting on base at roughly 90 points higher than his BA. He is not a starter on a contender that also has weakness at 1B, catcher, OF and SS. First off, can we stop judging prospects solely based on batting average? I know you're better than that. Second, I don't know what to tell you-- you're just factually wrong if you don't think Nava hits about as well as a league-average LF. This is not 2007 anymore-- the average corner outfielder in 2012 is decidedly mediocre offensively. MLB LFs in 2012 hit .261/.326/.431 ( link). Nava hit .243/.352/.390 in 317 PAs in 2012 and is at .243/.352/.379 over 505 PAs in his career. His superior OBP (.026 difference between 2012 and career) just about makes up for the difference in slugging (.041 difference) since one point of OBP is worth just a bit less than two points in SLG (the wOBA results-- .330 average LF, .330 Nava in 2012-- confirm this). You can argue that Nava might be worse in 2013 than he was in 2012, but he hit with a reasonable BABIP (.295) last year and there are no obvious regression red flags. Moreover, note that the Bill James projections (admittedly very bullish on players with great AAA stats like Nava) project a .266/.367/.414 line for Nava in 2013. Finally, if we sign Napoli and Swisher as I have advocated, the Red Sox can afford to carry a league-average offensive LF in Nava and still be a top offense if everyone else other than SS is well above league-average at their position, which should be the case (see link). Obviously, if Swisher and/or Napoli are not signed, it may be more difficult to carry Nava's bat.
|
|
|
Post by sdsoxfan on Nov 17, 2012 23:02:49 GMT -5
Sox need to aim higher than Swisher, Ells and Nava/Sands/Sweeney. This outfield would deliver less than average AL production with half their games at Fenway. Plus signing Swisher for anything close to 4/$60m and losing our second round pick (#38 or so) is foolish. Sight upgrade from Ross, but Ross only cost $3m.
Sox need to target Justin Upton, G Stanton, C. Gonzales or Hamilton. We need a couple elite position players after not getting a single MVP vote for first time in 70+ years.
Manny, Damon and Nixon do not bear any resemblance to Ellls, Swisher & Nava.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 18, 2012 0:23:01 GMT -5
Manny, Damon and Nixon do not bear any resemblance to Ellls, Swisher & Nava. I was actually kind of curious about this, so I decided to make a little table comparing the 2004 Boston Red Sox and my projected 2013 Boston Red Sox. To refresh your memory, the 2004 Boston Red Sox led the league in runs scored that year with 949, which ranks third in runs scored by any team between 2001-2012 (only behind the 2007 Yankees and the 2003 Red Sox). I took the regulars from the 2004 team and ranked them from best to worst according to RC+, a stat that takes their wOBA and adjusts it for park-effects and league context (100 is average). I then did the same for my projected 2013 lineup with their production over the last two years (2011-12). Here are the results: 2004 2013 1 Ramirez, 153 Ortiz, 159 2 Ortiz, 147 Napoli, 146 3 Nixon, 127 Ellsbury, 129 4 Varitek, 125 Swisher, 126 5 Millar, 124 Pedroia, 123 6 Damon, 123 Middlebrooks, 121 7 Bellhorn, 114 D. Ross, 110 8 Mueller, 111 Nava, 103 9 Cabrera, 75 Iglesias, 9
It looks like my lineup stacks up reasonably favorably, at least from the first through the seventh best hitters in the lineup (the 2004 team does have the clear edge in the eighth and ninth best hitters, though). (Sidenote: that is not a typo on Iglesias. He literally has nowhere to go but up.) I admit my data is slightly cherry-picked-- it includes the monster 2011s from Napoli and Ellsbury which are unlikely to be repeated while omitting their significantly worse seasons in 2010. And I don't want to suggest that my ideal 2013 lineup is the equal of that stacked 2004 team. But I just wanted to illustrate that this is not some piddling league-average lineup, but rather one which, going by the data, has the depth and upside to be one of the best in the league. The outfield has two very good hitters in Ellsbury and Swisher and one league-average one in Nava, which, when combined with the excellent bats in the infield and DH, should be more than enough to excel offensively.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Nov 18, 2012 0:24:33 GMT -5
Neither Upton nor Stanton could be had at less than the cost of 2, probably three of the top 5 prospects on this site. Something like Bogaerts, Bradley and Webster, at a minimum, would be needed before Stanton could ever be pried loose from the Marlins given that they're currently in full reset mode.
You may be comfortable with that idea, I hate it. It's why I hang around this site, trying to figure out who''ll deliver the goods for the next playoff/series go-round. Look down the list of the 2007 playoff team. Ellsbury, Pedroia, Papelbon, and Lester were all big cogs in that machine. That can happen again and it will if the team doesn't sell short. In that sense, I'm very happy they admitted they were on the wrong track. Beckett was at the margin when it came to performance for pay, and Crawford nothing but a sunk cost given the injuries. Gonzalez was bringing something to the table but the team was cash-strapped and badly under-performing. The trauma at the end of 2011 seems to have left them dazed. It was time for a change.
As for Carlos Gonzalez, I'm sorry but I see him as largely a creature of his environment. It's my own bias but I think Bradley would outperform him right now if they played side-by-side in that thin air, if not in home runs than in just about every other aspect of the game. Why pay a premium when you don't have to?
Hamilton might be someone the team can get if they make an offer he won't refuse or that Texas won't trump. The Sox will have to decide how far they want to go in that direction. One thing is for certain, there are enough red flags for a mayday parade in Moscow. Over the prime of his career, age 26-31, Hamilton has averaged less than 130 games. He was hurt again at the end of last season. His numbers reflected that from September on. Any FO would want to think long and hard about length and breadth of any commitment. When he's on he's phenomenal. But no one can tell when that's going to be happening. So, it would be a crapshoot with the team investing, once again, in an uncertain resource. They just visited that road and it had a lot of potholes.
|
|
|
Post by sdsoxfan on Nov 18, 2012 1:20:22 GMT -5
Generally need to give value for elite players. 2004 & 2007 title teams had little contribution from homegrown players.
In 2004 it was Schilling/Pedro/Manny/Ortiz/Foulke/Lowe/Varttek/Damon/Millar/Mueller coming in trade or free agency with only Nixon as a key homegrown contributor.
In 2007, Lester/Paps/Pedey/Youk/Ells contributed more, but not nearly as much as Beckett/Schilling/Manny/Ortiz/Lowell. It's is the model we should target going forward with a good mix of homegrown, trades and free agents.
We all love prospects, but I'd give Bradley/Brentz/Webster for Stanton in a heartbeat. Stanton is a proven stud, is only 23, is cost controlled for a few more years and should be a perennial Allstar in our lineup.
Stanton/Ells/Hamilton outfield could help deliver More WS wins. (Trade/Homegrown/FA)
Should be able to get Upton for a bit less. If Hamilton wants too many years, then how about Stanton/Ells/Bogaerts.
Remember when Detroit traded 6 prospects including top 4 prospects for Cabrera and took on Willis' bloated contract? Detroit took a chance and was the big winner in that trade getting to WS twice with Cabrera an elite performer.
We need a combination of 1-2 good young prospects graduating to MLB team each year as well as some key free agents and trades to fill holes and get proven elite players. While our system is deep, many of our prospects will only prove to be league average. Use deep system of prospects to trade for 1-2 elte players.
Hope Cherington dares to be great.
Swisher/Ross/Victorino = raising the white flag
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Nov 18, 2012 1:47:34 GMT -5
Hate to burst that bubble, but there's no way that Bradley/Brentz/Webster gets Stanton, none. Marlins management will join a cloister and takes vows of poverty before that ever happens. And Upton might actually cost more given his age and track record - one I'm not all that impressed with yet.
As good as he is, Stanton doesn't have the profile as a hitter that Cabrera had at his age. I don't disagree that we need other players to fill in the blanks, but please look at your own list for hints. Ortiz was picked up on the waiver wires. Lowell was considered washed up and essentially a throw-in on the Beckett deal. Millar and Mueller were astute pickups but they've got nothing at all on Napoli (if he's signed) and Middlebrooks. I'd take the latter in a flash and not think twice about it.
I miss Manny also, but players like that come along rarely. Stanton isn't in his class either. But I know someone who looks like he might be in Stanton's class. He's the number one prospect on this site and he'd be gone baby gone before Stanton ever walked through the clubhouse door.
Incidentally, they can pass on Ross and Victorino and I wouldn't give them a second look. But you're undervaluing Swisher by quite a bit.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Nov 18, 2012 9:27:47 GMT -5
Extend Ellsbury, sign Hamilton, make do with Kalish, Sweeney, Sands until Brentz arrives. Or sign Ross for 2yrs & platoon him with Kalish or Sweeney until Brentz arrives. I have no problem letting Ellsbury walk after this season and putting that money into pitching while letting Bradley roam center field. for 2014 forward. .
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 18, 2012 11:49:45 GMT -5
Generally need to give value for elite players. 2004 & 2007 title teams had little contribution from homegrown players. We all love prospects, but I'd give Bradley/Brentz/Webster for Stanton in a heartbeat. Stanton is a proven stud, is only 23, is cost controlled for a few more years and should be a perennial Allstar in our lineup. I noticed you omitted Xander Bogaerts in your Stanton trade proposal. Can you think of any logical reason why the Marlins would do the same thing? They're not interested in letting the Sox retain their best prospects (Bogaerts and Barnes - especially Bogaerts). There's nobody here on this board that wouldn't make a Bradley/Brentz/Webster deal for Stanton, but that's not realistic. I'm sure it would take all 3 killer "B" prospects and it would take Webster, too. As great as Stanton is, I'd prefer to keep the pitching prospects and Xander. We'll need all of them, considering our pitching needs a serious infusion of youth and Xander is a SS projecting to hit at least 30 homers/year with a decent to good OBP. Because at that point, you're talking 6 years of control with Xander playing a key position, six years of control with Bradley playing an important position, and the young pitching in Barnes and Webster. And you'd only have Stanton guaranteed for three seasons and there'd still be a chance he could walk after 2015. I say, keep the prospects, save the money, and go after Stanton with a killer offer when he's a free agent. Short of getting dealt to New York or Texas, the chance will be there.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Nov 18, 2012 15:05:19 GMT -5
I'd love to get Stanton but I agree with Norm the cost would be 2 or 3 of the top Prospects.
I like Swisher and would take him over Ross any day.
But if the stats show Swisher as a decent defender that's an argument against stats.
|
|
|
Post by terriblehondo on Nov 18, 2012 15:39:55 GMT -5
I have to agree with Ray if the stats show Swisher as a decent outfielder the stats that are used to measure defense are not worth anything. I sure as hell would not want to see him playing right field in Fenway for 80 games a year. Left field or 1st base ok but right only if absolutely needed.
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Nov 18, 2012 19:55:46 GMT -5
Generally need to give value for elite players. 2004 & 2007 title teams had little contribution from homegrown players. We all love prospects, but I'd give Bradley/Brentz/Webster for Stanton in a heartbeat. Stanton is a proven stud, is only 23, is cost controlled for a few more years and should be a perennial Allstar in our lineup. I noticed you omitted Xander Bogaerts in your Stanton trade proposal. Can you think of any logical reason why the Marlins would do the same thing? They're not interested in letting the Sox retain their best prospects (Bogaerts and Barnes - especially Bogaerts). There's nobody here on this board that wouldn't make a Bradley/Brentz/Webster deal for Stanton, but that's not realistic. I'm sure it would take all 3 killer "B" prospects and it would take Webster, too. As great as Stanton is, I'd prefer to keep the pitching prospects and Xander. We'll need all of them, considering our pitching needs a serious infusion of youth and Xander is a SS projecting to hit at least 30 homers/year with a decent to good OBP. Because at that point, you're talking 6 years of control with Xander playing a key position, six years of control with Bradley playing an important position, and the young pitching in Barnes and Webster. And you'd only have Stanton guaranteed for three seasons and there'd still be a chance he could walk after 2015. I say, keep the prospects, save the money, and go after Stanton with a killer offer when he's a free agent. Short of getting dealt to New York or Texas, the chance will be there. Stanton is not a free agent for another five years. Thats the reason you empty the farm if you could get him... but there is no shot they trade his minimum wage productive player until arbitration. Sent from my SGH-T999 using proboards
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Nov 18, 2012 20:02:03 GMT -5
Stats obviously have their place and I confess that I am more a creature of traditional metrics than the multitude of newer, more exotic ones created in stat geek labs today. But, hell I don't have an IPad either.
I trust my eyes too. I have watched a lot of Yankee games over the past 3-4 years (rooting for them to lose) and on that basis view Swisher as a below average fielder. A number of my friends are Yankee fans and think that Swisher is a defensive klutz. But, playing in a short porch right field, he seems ok. He has a pretty fair arm.To me, he does not go back on the ball well and appears to have below average speed, range and athleticism. But, IMO, putting him in Fenway's spacious RF over 81 games is a prescription for disahhster.
I do think that Swisher could be ok in left at Fenway as its dimensions mimic RF in Yankee Stadium. If acquired and if we put him there, then the discussed Sands/Nava platoon would man RF. I have no idea about Sands' defensive prowess so perhaps he could do it. Nava to me tho has the same range issues that Swisher does and he has a much weaker arm. To me he is a LFer not a RFer in Fenway. Swisher's acquisition IMO would thus create a dilemma. I think that it would relegate Nava to being a bench player, traded or released.
jmei to your comment, I did not just look to batting average in judging Nava. I examined all the stats available including the esoteric. None of them stood out to me so I did not mention them. Beyond that I noted his hrs., RBIs, ability to work counts and his resultant higher than average OBP. So, I say back to you, I know that you are better than that. Nava is an overachiever of the first order and exemplifies the Sox patient batting philosophy. I hope that there is a place for him on the bench in 2013.
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Nov 18, 2012 20:11:34 GMT -5
Stats obviously have their place and I confess that I am more a creature of traditional metrics than the multitude of newer, more exotic ones created in stat geek labs today. But, hell I don't have an IPad either. I trust my eyes too. I have watched a lot of Yankee games over the past 3-4 years (rooting for them to lose) and on that basis view Swisher as a below average fielder. A number of my friends are Yankee fans and think that Swisher is a defensive klutz. But, playing in a short porch right field, he seems ok. He has a pretty fair arm.To me, he does not go back on the ball well and appears to have below average speed, range and athleticism. But, IMO, putting him in Fenway's spacious RF over 81 games is a prescription for disahhster. I do think that Swisher could be ok in left at Fenway as its dimensions mimic RF in Yankee Stadium. If acquired and if we put him there, then the discussed Sands/Nava platoon would man RF. I have no idea about Sands' defensive prowess so perhaps he could do it. Nava to me tho has the same range issues that Swisher does and he has a much weaker arm. To me he is a LFer not a RFer in Fenway. Swisher's acquisition IMO would thus create a dilemma. I think that it would relegate Nava to being a bench player, traded or released. jmei to your comment, I did not just look to batting average in judging Nava. I examined all the stats available including the esoteric. None of them stood out to me so I did not mention them. Beyond that I noted his hrs., RBIs, ability to work counts and his resultant higher than average OBP. So, I say back to you, I know that you are better than that. Nava is an overachiever of the first order and exemplifies the Sox patient batting philosophy. I hope that there is a place for him on the bench in 2013. It should be noted that swisher was benched during the playoffs along with arod because his bat sucked. I dont think swisher is a good enough player to give up a pick for. Sent from my SGH-T999 using proboards
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2012 20:56:41 GMT -5
i like linares. guys who don't strike out in the minors tend to do well at the major league level. and linares struck out only 66 times in 412 at-bats. that is 16% of the time, which is not alot. he is righty with some pop who is built for Fenway. I'd give him a chance and see what he can do in spring training. if he does, well give him a spot on the roster.
i'd rather give him a chance than give ross a three year deal. it would be dumb to sign ross for three years with a decent replacement in linares and brentz knocking on the door.
|
|
|