|
Post by bentossaurus on Nov 25, 2012 12:45:57 GMT -5
You really wouldn't want Desmond Jennings? ? Also, ftr, Morrison was playing hurt for a lot of the year. If I have a whole in CF then Jennings would be nice to try out (but I'm not sold on him ever reaching his upside). In LF at Fenway he would be as bad of a fit as Crawford - so the value would be far less than the cost. Morrison is a bit of a reclamation project and still isn't the BIG bat the team would like to have out there. Everyone else is just not good IMO. If the Red Sox are going outside of the organization to fill LF they should get a + player (Hamilton/trade for Gordon) Gordon actually has a higher UZR than Jennings. The overall discussion has been great. I'd just like to add, say no to foolish attempts to compete in 2013.
|
|
|
Post by DesignatedForAssignment on Nov 25, 2012 13:54:03 GMT -5
Nava ... Nava ... Nava ... nava nava nava-nava. Nava/Gomes in LF, with Sweeney full-time in RF, not an attractive option. Sands 2011: start 34 game for LAD in LF, 16 games in RF. I doubt he is an option for RF at Fenway. But maybe on the road.
If they sign a LF-RF full-time player, the platoon is Gomes/Sweeney. With Nava optioned. If Nava goes on waivers, he is not outrightable, I bet he signs elsewhere. Maybe the Sox are committed to Nava this year due to his option, so he is not a waiver candidate. Hassan appears to be blocked by Gomes. (What am I missing?)
I'd be thrilled if the Sox just go with what they've got in the OF. In my book, Linares, Brentz, Kalish, J-Haz, Maier are all in the mix for RF, as the season progresses.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Nov 25, 2012 14:14:48 GMT -5
I've enjoyed the Nava discussion. If I were Nava I'd hire jmei as my agent.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2012 16:49:26 GMT -5
I've enjoyed the Nava discussion. If I were Nava I'd hire jmei as my agent. Lol he's going to need all the help he can get. The Red Sox have now put three corner outfielders on the roster since the end of the season and are clearly looking to add another. One more thing to keep in mind is that if Nava makes the team and they sign Swisher, the sox are going to have to keep five outfielders as neither Nava, Swisher or Gomes can play center.
|
|
|
Post by jro545454 on Nov 25, 2012 18:41:11 GMT -5
Swisher has played CF in the past but it is far from his best position. Sweeney has a greater chance of sticking simply because he can back up Ellsbury in CF.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 25, 2012 19:02:59 GMT -5
I think the Sox could start the season with Swisher, Ellsbury, Nava, Gomes, and Sweeney on the roster (your other two bench players: Lavarnway (with Ross as the nominal starter) and Ciriaco) with Sands and Kalish (both have one option left) in AAA. The Red Sox have regularly kept five OFs, especially if one of them can also backup one of the infield positions (in this case, Swisher can backup 1B).
That would leave you with a Pawtucket outfield of Hassan/Sands in LF, Kalish in CF, Brentz in RF, and Linares/Hazelbaker as the backup OFs (Maier is no more than a ST invite for me). Sands also splits ABs at 1B/DH with Gomez. I fully expect Kalish to replace either Sweeney or Nava on the MLB roster by mid-season.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Nov 25, 2012 19:03:29 GMT -5
It depends how much redundancy they want on the roster - in theory they could put Kalish & Nava & Sands at AAA, but what's the point when Brentz, Hassan, Linares, and Hazelbaker are all projected to start at that level?
The offseason is young and I'd be surprised if all those players (& Sweeney) are still in the organization come Opening Day.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Nov 25, 2012 23:07:43 GMT -5
ZiPS projects Nava to hit .240/.329/.369 in 2013. Even if he platoons, its really not a very exciting proposition for me.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Nov 26, 2012 3:25:04 GMT -5
I think the Red Sox should try and win in 2013 - but with two rules:
1. The loss of prospects/draft picks are only warranted if the returning player is a long term solution (under 30 and under team control for multiple seasons)
2. A player signed to a long term contract (more than 3 years) must be of an elite level and be expected to remain at that elite level for the majority of the contractual years.
There is plenty of money in the cashcow (otherwise the owners are simply going to pocket it or invest in the stadium).
|
|
|
Post by The Town Sports Cards on Nov 26, 2012 7:12:01 GMT -5
I think you have a MLB OF of Nava/Ellsbury/Swisher, with the bench of Gomes and Sweeney (Gomes in a platoon with Nava), and in AAA you have Sands at 1B, and Kalish/Hazelbaker/Brentz/Hassan rotating in the OF and DH, with Linares a bench player.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 26, 2012 8:56:33 GMT -5
I think you have a MLB OF of Nava/Ellsbury/Swisher, with the bench of Gomes and Sweeney (Gomes in a platoon with Nava), and in AAA you have Sands at 1B, and Kalish/Hazelbaker/Brentz/Hassan rotating in the OF and DH, with Linares a bench player. So you think the guy they just signed for $5M/yr is going to be on the bench in favor of a guy with an option remaining who has never broke camp in the majors?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 26, 2012 12:36:12 GMT -5
Even Cherington would concede that Gomes is only marginally more than a very good platoon player. He might be the nominal Opening Day starter (even against a righty), but I'd be surprised if he starts more than 81 games in LF.
|
|
|
Post by DesignatedForAssignment on Nov 26, 2012 12:50:54 GMT -5
i am glad the professionals are in charge of the Sox rosters. And not some of the geniuses who post here on occasion. But if they sign Swisher, I switch sides. I'd be glad to see Sweeney in RF for 100 games.
Sands is rarely mentioned. I contend he can play RF on the road. @ NY Y, BALT.
I predict Brentz in July. He won't burn an option. Unless Kalish surprises. Then I predict Kalish before July. I predict Linares is not a bench player, but soon to make his mlb debut. Soon in the geological sense.
ZIPS is so precise with their projections. Makes me suspicious. NormOregon is more holistic in his futuristic musings.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Nov 26, 2012 13:02:43 GMT -5
Career vs RHP
Gomes - 223 / 307 / 425 / 732 Sweeney - 293 / 347 / 402 / 749 Nava (sss) - 261 / 369 / 399 / 768
Gomes will get some at-bats vs RHP, but for me he's the 3rd best choice given that roster. He's not getting paid $5M/yr to hit RHP, that's for sure.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Nov 26, 2012 14:08:31 GMT -5
Career vs RHP Gomes - 223 / 307 / 425 / 732 Sweeney - 293 / 347 / 402 / 749 Nava (sss) - 261 / 369 / 399 / 768 Gomes will get some at-bats vs RHP, but for me he's the 3rd best choice given that roster. He's not getting paid $5M/yr to hit RHP, that's for sure. I think Gnomes is here to mash LHP and see if he hits RHP well at Fenway. Signing Gnomes may be Cherrington's way of admitting the Ross boat has left the docks. I really hope we pass on Swisher and stay away from both Uptons. I'd like to see Nava starts the year a a reserve OF, (Maybe platoon a bit with Gnomes in LF, especially on the road against RHP) but remember Pedro can also be reserve OF in a pinch, so we do not necessarily need to carry 5 OF. In my mind the question is "what can Cherrington do to upgrade RF", assuming he keeps Ellsbury, because everybody seems to doubt Sweeney. (assuming Cherrington even retains Sweeney for 2013.) I would hope we start Kalish and Brentz in Pawtucket and give them both a ton of at bats. (Kalish in the leadoff spot) Let them prove they belong on the big league roster.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 26, 2012 14:21:34 GMT -5
^ This.
He's a 350-or-so PA player. He'll start against LHP and against some RHP at Fenway. He's essentially Ross lite when it became clear Ross wanted 600-PA starter money. I just think that calling Gomes a "bench" player like he's only going to get 150 PA is a bit silly.
|
|
|
Post by The Town Sports Cards on Nov 26, 2012 14:41:17 GMT -5
I think you have a MLB OF of Nava/Ellsbury/Swisher, with the bench of Gomes and Sweeney (Gomes in a platoon with Nava), and in AAA you have Sands at 1B, and Kalish/Hazelbaker/Brentz/Hassan rotating in the OF and DH, with Linares a bench player. So you think the guy they just signed for $5M/yr is going to be on the bench in favor of a guy with an option remaining who has never broke camp in the majors? I put Gomes on the "bench" only because he would be in a platoon with Nava in LF, and usually you play the RHP platoon more than the LHP platoon. So yes, if on opening day the Red Sox faced a RHP, Nava would start and Gomes would be on the bench.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Nov 28, 2012 14:17:34 GMT -5
^ This. He's a 350-or-so PA player. He'll start against LHP and against some RHP at Fenway. He's essentially Ross lite when it became clear Ross wanted 600-PA starter money. I just think that calling Gomes a "bench" player like he's only going to get 150 PA is a bit silly. For clarification purposes only can you please explain the exact difference between a bench player and a platoon player?
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Dec 1, 2012 15:57:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 1, 2012 16:16:31 GMT -5
Other potential FAs who fit that profile: Angel Pagan, Grady Sizemore. Pagan in particular could be a good pickup if he loses the game of musical chairs for CF spots.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2012 19:14:41 GMT -5
Other potential FAs who fit that profile: Angel Pagan, Grady Sizemore. Pagan in particular could be a good pickup if he loses the game of musical chairs for CF spots. Can Sizemore play CF anymore? In any case, I'm really surprised that they don't seem, publicly anyways, to be interested in Pagan. It seems that he'd be a really good fit for them. I'd bet he hits for more power in Fenway than he has in his previous stops.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Dec 1, 2012 20:10:51 GMT -5
I suspect Pagan, as a true CF, will get more years and $ than would make sense giving him for RF. Sizemore... who knows where he's at physically now.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Dec 1, 2012 20:12:35 GMT -5
Kalish told Pete, that he is feeling better then ever... Wouldn't mind Kalish as RF combo
|
|
|
Post by mainesox on Dec 1, 2012 20:16:31 GMT -5
I don't mind platoons, and I think they can work really well in the right situation, but how many platoons can one team really have? You already have a platoon in LF and at C, if you add another one in RF would you even have enough roster space left for a backup infielder?
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Dec 1, 2012 20:26:20 GMT -5
If you trust Papi to back up first base, you can have 1 utility infielder (Ciriaco), 1 backup catcher, and one true platoon (Nava/Gomes) and still have room for a RF 'platoon' (say, Ross/Kalish) and 12 pitchers.
Of course Gomes/Nava is not an ideal platoon in terms of positional flexibility.
Another option is a 4-man OF with Gomes-Ellsbury-Kalish-RF.
|
|