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.
7/27-7/30 Red Sox vs. White Sox Series Thread
|
Post by soxfan06 on Jul 30, 2015 16:21:46 GMT -5
The retrospective on the Sandoval signing is bleak.
I thought at the time since he was an above average hitter and a solid defender and the contract wasn't outrageous, that it was a decent move.
The one person who had it right all along with jmei. Ugh, what a horrible signing. The worst part is his atrocious defense.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,828
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Jul 30, 2015 16:41:27 GMT -5
The retrospective on the Sandoval signing is bleak. I thought at the time since he was an above average hitter and a solid defender and the contract wasn't outrageous, that it was a decent move. The one person who had it right all along with jmei. Ugh, what a horrible signing. The worst part is his atrocious defense. There were plenty of skeptics if I recall. I thought it was an overpay, but that he'd be a 2.5 or 3 WAR guy. If only...
|
|
|
Post by pedroiaesque on Jul 30, 2015 16:51:15 GMT -5
Or he could clear. He's cleared before. ...in May 2011. Since then, he's hit .270/.358/.391 (108 wRC+) in 1339 PAs and accumulated 4.2 fWAR (a prorated 1.9 fWAR per 600 PAs). I'm willing to bet that he doesn't clear waivers (or is pulled back/traded before we can find out). This is a more inexplicable DFA than the De Aza one. I think it would be a dramatic understatement to say that the roster moves this year have been suspect. This isn't just about whether or not Breslow should be DFA'ed. I flat-out do not get some of these moves (like calling up Brian Johnson before the all-star break for no plausible reason).
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 30, 2015 17:13:00 GMT -5
...in May 2011. Since then, he's hit .270/.358/.391 (108 wRC+) in 1339 PAs and accumulated 4.2 fWAR (a prorated 1.9 fWAR per 600 PAs). I'm willing to bet that he doesn't clear waivers (or is pulled back/traded before we can find out). This is a more inexplicable DFA than the De Aza one. I think it would be a dramatic understatement to say that the roster moves this year have been suspect. This isn't just about whether or not Breslow should be DFA'ed. I flat-out do not get some of these moves (like calling up Brian Johnson before the all-star break for no plausible reason). The things that make me doubt the front office most are not the big moves that have blown up in their face like signing Sandoval or Ramirez. Those contracts look terrible right now, but there were multiple other teams who would have signed them to contracts of a similar size, and each signing made sense in terms of filling a hole on the roster. The moves that make me doubt the front office most are things like the above that seem totally unjustifiable. Yes, even in the aggregate, messing up on lots of little moves like that won't add up to what one Sandoval signing will end up costing them. But those little ****-ups suggest a bad decision-making process, which is the worst possible explanation for their numerous missteps over the last two years.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 30, 2015 17:38:55 GMT -5
I think it would be a dramatic understatement to say that the roster moves this year have been suspect. This isn't just about whether or not Breslow should be DFA'ed. I flat-out do not get some of these moves (like calling up Brian Johnson before the all-star break for no plausible reason). The things that make me doubt the front office most are not the big moves that have blown up in their face like signing Sandoval or Ramirez. Those contracts look terrible right now, but there were multiple other teams who would have signed them to contracts of a similar size, and each signing made sense in terms of filling a hole on the roster. The moves that make me doubt the front office most are things like the above that seem totally unjustifiable. Yes, even in the aggregate, messing up on lots of little moves like that won't add up to what one Sandoval signing will end up costing them. But those little ****-ups suggest a bad decision-making process, which is the worst possible explanation for their numerous missteps over the last two years. I don't think I'm alone when saying that Sandoval and Ramirez are a way bigger issue than maybe losing Nava. And please don't quote the rest of year projections for him because I looked at those projections for Sandoval and Ramirez before the season. I don't think projections work very well for the Red Sox lately. I mean they are off by about 20 wins for the season.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 30, 2015 17:50:17 GMT -5
What does "bigger issue" mean? I'm not sure you're disagreeing with him.
I get what he's saying - you can sort of get the single mistake of, say, going all in on Sandoval just because he was the best available option to fill a hole you had (if anyone says Donaldson they get cut). Even if the process failed, there was at least a process.
It's just that there have been several little moves this year where the lack of process behind them is so puzzling, you wonder what the hell was going on. There have been so many times, for example, where they've basically bungled a call-up from Triple-A (the famous Dickey-Kazmir-Gray call-up for Bradley, the debut of Brian Johnson after a long layoff, any number of Pawtucket relievers not really getting much of a shot before being shuttled back down) or something else (off the top of my head, even letting Pedroia rush back from his injury - they don't HAVE to let him play; not really having much of a plan on how Rusney Castillo was going to be used; somehow giving Justin Masterson starts after he came back from the DL; etc.) that, while those little things probably don't even add up to much, don't show an organization with a plan and are more indicative of actual issues than the things that people are getting fired up about right now. I completely get where jmei is coming from there, and I think it's a great point.
You don't fire the GM because he signed Hanley at a discount and the left field experiment has gone horribly. No GM in the game says no in Cherington's position there. Sure, the Sandoval signing could have been predicted to have been bad at the time, but again, they had to do SOMETHING there - Middlebrooks hasn't made anyone miss him either and Headley's also been bad. But the way the organization keeps screwing up the little things - the things that got screwed up FAR less often under Epstein, it seems - it is eroding my faith in this regime.
|
|
|
Post by DesignatedForAssignment on Jul 30, 2015 17:59:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 30, 2015 18:00:49 GMT -5
I'm quite used to the stupid decisions they have made over the last two years about moving players up and down, all in the name of preserving depth. I've argued until I'm blue in the face that Carp, Sizemore, Craig, whoever else, were just terrible players who had no business on a major league roster and the opportunity cost of playing them hurts more than losing the depth because someone who should be better has options. Now their eventual replacements turned out to also suck, but the process was something I've never agreed with. You want the best 25 man roster always and you want the best lineup always. Those two things are more important than being afraid of losing some below-replacement level player.
A guy like Craig should have started in AAA to start the season. A guy like Nava should not have been in AAA last year because we were so afraid of losing Carp who will likely never play in the majors again. You could also say the same thing about the pitching. Breslow doesn't belong on the roster over the guys who have options.
All that said, Sandoval and Ramirez should be better than they are and they need to figure out why these players always seem to be below replacement level instead of the 2-3 WAR they should be. And also have to figure out how Porcello went from 2.7, 2.8, 2.7 fWAR over the last 3 seasons to 0.2 this year (which even seems high).
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 30, 2015 18:16:00 GMT -5
All that said, Sandoval and Ramirez should be better than they are and they need to figure out why these players always seem to be below replacement level instead of the 2-3 WAR they should be. And also have to figure out how Porcello went from 2.7, 2.8, 2.7 fWAR over the last 3 seasons to 0.2 this year (which even seems high). Who are "these players"? The three you listed here, yes, but Napoli and Victorino were worth a combined 10 fWAR in 2013. Uehara's been all right, I would say. Miley's been basically fine. The reclamation projects (Sizemore, Craig, Masterson) have gone poorly, and that's a problem but it's not what you're talking about here. I think the best explanation for Sandoval, Ramirez, and Porcello all sucking is that it's bad luck in a sample size of three. If Pedroia strikes out in three straight at bats, we don't ask what's wrong with him. (Most of us, at least...)
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 30, 2015 18:23:42 GMT -5
All that said, Sandoval and Ramirez should be better than they are and they need to figure out why these players always seem to be below replacement level instead of the 2-3 WAR they should be. And also have to figure out how Porcello went from 2.7, 2.8, 2.7 fWAR over the last 3 seasons to 0.2 this year (which even seems high). Who are "these players"? The three you listed here, yes, but Napoli and Victorino were worth a combined 10 fWAR in 2013. Uehara's been all right, I would say. Miley's been basically fine. The reclamation projects (Sizemore, Craig, Masterson) have gone poorly, and that's a problem but it's not what you're talking about here. I think the best explanation for Sandoval, Ramirez, and Porcello all sucking is that it's bad luck in a sample size of three. If Pedroia strikes out in three straight at bats, we don't ask what's wrong with him. (Most of us, at least...) A sample size of all season is not that small. We're talking about those three players missing their WAR projections by 8-10.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Jul 30, 2015 18:34:28 GMT -5
I am with JimEd on this. It's hard to argue that the decisions on the margains have more influence on this year than the play of the of guys who will have the most impact on the outcomes of the games. That doesn't mean the FO hasn't been bad, but the problem clearly has been the play of the guys you count on for production and they have had more than enough opportunities to change it.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 30, 2015 18:38:12 GMT -5
Who are "these players"? The three you listed here, yes, but Napoli and Victorino were worth a combined 10 fWAR in 2013. Uehara's been all right, I would say. Miley's been basically fine. The reclamation projects (Sizemore, Craig, Masterson) have gone poorly, and that's a problem but it's not what you're talking about here. I think the best explanation for Sandoval, Ramirez, and Porcello all sucking is that it's bad luck in a sample size of three. If Pedroia strikes out in three straight at bats, we don't ask what's wrong with him. (Most of us, at least...) A sample size of all season is not that small. We're talking about those three players missing their WAR projections by 8-10. It's only been two-thirds of a season, and that is absolutely a small sample. Lots of players significant underperform their projections every year, and it just so happens that three of them happen to be playing on the same team this year. You could easily argue that, say, the White Sox have been equally snakebitten. Alexei Ramirez (Steamer preseason projected 2.2 fWAR; currently -0.6 fWAR), Adam LaRoche (Steamer preseason projected 1.4 fWAR; currently -0.7 fWAR), Avisail Garcia (Steamer preseason projected 0.6 fWAR; currently -0.9 fWAR) have combined to miss their marks at similar levels to Boston's trio of futility.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 30, 2015 18:40:01 GMT -5
I am with JimEd on this. It's hard to argue that the decisions on the margains have more influence on this year than the play of the of guys who will have the most impact on the outcomes of the games. That doesn't mean the FO hasn't been bad, but the problem clearly has been the play of the guys you count on for production and they have had more than enough opportunities to change it. Noone is arguing that. I made it clear in my first post that the big misses on Sandoval et al. matter a lot more to the underlying W/L record than the little misses ("Yes, even in the aggregate, messing up on lots of little moves like that won't add up to what one Sandoval signing will end up costing them"). The point is that the little misses reflect far worse on their process than the big misses do, and the quality of the process is what a front office should primarily be evaluated on.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Jul 30, 2015 18:40:45 GMT -5
It's been bad at all levels the past two years. Even the vendors have lost a step.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Jul 30, 2015 18:44:42 GMT -5
Just one observation on Sandoval...
Part of the reasoning for getting him was because of his consistently clutch play in the post season. Which for the 2015 Red Sox is a moot point.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Jul 30, 2015 18:48:39 GMT -5
Noone is arguing that. I made it clear in my first post that the big misses on Sandoval et al. matter a lot more to the underlying W/L record than the little misses ("Yes, even in the aggregate, messing up on lots of little moves like that won't add up to what one Sandoval signing will end up costing them"). The point is that the little misses reflect far worse on their process than the big misses do, and the quality of the process is what a front office should primarily be evaluated on. Understood. I may have misinterpreted the bulk of the posts. I have been firmly in the get rid of BC camp for a long time as I think my posts have shown.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 30, 2015 18:48:54 GMT -5
A sample size of all season is not that small. We're talking about those three players missing their WAR projections by 8-10. It's only been two-thirds of a season, and that is absolutely a small sample. Lots of players significant underperform their projections every year, and it just so happens that three of them happen to be playing on the same team this year. You could easily argue that, say, the White Sox have been equally snakebitten. Alexei Ramirez (Steamer preseason projected 2.2 fWAR; currently -0.6 fWAR), Adam LaRoche (Steamer preseason projected 1.4 fWAR; currently -0.7 fWAR), Avisail Garcia (Steamer preseason projected 0.6 fWAR; currently -0.9 fWAR) have combined to miss their marks at similar levels to Boston's trio of futility. Porcello 2.7, 2.8, 2.7... what do you expect this year? 0.2? Sandoval 2.6, 1.9, 3.0... what do you expect this year? -0.8? Ramirez 2.5, 5.1, 3.3... what do you expect this year? -0.9? These aren't just misses, they are catastrophic misses. I don't really care about the White Sox and their problems, but they didn't underperform nearly as badly. The season isn't over yet, but so far, those three are 10.5 fWAR behind last season.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jul 30, 2015 18:51:39 GMT -5
A sample size of all season is not that small. We're talking about those three players missing their WAR projections by 8-10. It's only been two-thirds of a season, and that is absolutely a small sample. Lots of players significant underperform their projections every year, and it just so happens that three of them happen to be playing on the same team this year. You could easily argue that, say, the White Sox have been equally snakebitten. Alexei Ramirez (Steamer preseason projected 2.2 fWAR; currently -0.6 fWAR), Adam LaRoche (Steamer preseason projected 1.4 fWAR; currently -0.7 fWAR), Avisail Garcia (Steamer preseason projected 0.6 fWAR; currently -0.9 fWAR) have combined to miss their marks at similar levels to Boston's trio of futility. There's also Rusney Castillo (2.6 projected, -0.4 actual), Allen Craig (0.9 projected, -0.5 actual), Daniel Nava (1.4 projected, -0.3 actual), Jackie Bradley (1.0 projected, -0.3 actual) - admittedly smaller sample for those guys, but still significantly poor seasons from these guys that adds up to a 7 WAR underperformance.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 30, 2015 18:56:16 GMT -5
We were predicted to win about 86-87 games and we're on pace to win 70 which will probably go down with not caring about winning anymore. I have no idea how the projections can be so different than the results for two years. There is more to this than just picking the right players.
|
|
|
Post by DesignatedForAssignment on Jul 30, 2015 19:02:49 GMT -5
Re: Nava ... one of 3 possibilities
a. Sox concluded that neither Napoli nor De Aza is being traded tomorrow, therefore there is no spot for Nava on the roster and he has to go. b. Napoli or De Aza does get traded, a roster spot would exist in 24 hours, and Nava is being lost unnecessarily. c. A trade is being worked out for Nava and the other party wanted 24 hours to clear a spot on their 40-man roster.
Is it possible that the Sox are so impressed with De Aza that their going to try to bring him back next year, making Nava expendable? At his salary level and versatility, Nava seems like the ideal 25th-man bench player.
|
|
|
Post by templeusox on Jul 30, 2015 19:05:11 GMT -5
Steven Wright is an embarrassment to the sport.
|
|
|
Post by templeusox on Jul 30, 2015 19:09:23 GMT -5
Wright 100% can't be on the team. He's an embarrassment.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Jul 30, 2015 19:10:42 GMT -5
We were predicted to win about 86-87 games and we're on pace to win 70 which will probably go down with not caring about winning anymore. I have no idea how the projections can be so different than the results for two years. There is more to this than just picking the right players. Let's start with the "you don't need an ace" philosophy and work our way up.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 30, 2015 19:19:39 GMT -5
Steven Wright is an embarrassment to the sport. Can we please stop with this ridiculous BS?
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 30, 2015 19:27:09 GMT -5
We were predicted to win about 86-87 games and we're on pace to win 70 which will probably go down with not caring about winning anymore. I have no idea how the projections can be so different than the results for two years. There is more to this than just picking the right players. So you want an explanation for this systemic failure two seasons in a row. But then how can we account for hugely overperforming in 2013?
|
|
|