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 deepjohn on Jun 30, 2016 10:27:51 GMT -5
With a .132 IsoP in over 100 PA in AA and just 2HR? Doesn't look like it to me. Now, if he goes on a 2-week, .400/.550/.800 or so binge, I think that might be time to revisit the question. If we assume Benny Baseball "figured it out" on June 6, then in the 66 PAs since, he has hit .300/.400/.567. The significant number could be the .267 IsoP, since it stabilizes soon (around 120 PAs) and correlates to exit velocity. He's also walked six times in that stretch, two intentional, with only 8 Ks, which suggests they may be pitching around him. Get your Benny Baseball collector's items ready. UPDATE: With four homers since June 6, Benny has a .258 IsoP, to go with a K% of 11 and a BB% of 9, in 101 PAs. That might put him in elite +6 WAR range, if he could sustain such high power with such great zone command in the MLB (I said if). Or, this could be his peak value to trade him for the +4 WAR pitching you can never have too much of, if he can't sustain it and his true value is less (I said if). (Reason you can never have too much pitching, same reason you can never have too much gold. Everybody wants it. It's a safer store of value.)
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jun 30, 2016 10:39:34 GMT -5
Trying to rationalize why four is worth more than six is really the perfect fine to your endless stream of increasingly ridiculous Benintendi-for-Teheran arguments.
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jun 30, 2016 10:45:49 GMT -5
Trying to rationalize why four is worth more than six is really the perfect fine to your endless stream of increasingly ridiculous Benintendi-for-Teheran arguments. Did you read closely. I said if.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 30, 2016 10:54:08 GMT -5
Trying to rationalize why four is worth more than six is really the perfect fine to your endless stream of increasingly ridiculous Benintendi-for-Teheran arguments. Did you read closely. I said if. You seem to argue with hypotheticals a lot. The way I see it - 1. Benintendi will be a very good player. 2. Tehran would be a disaster at worst and average at best in Fenway. 3. It would take much more than just Benintendi to trade for just Tehran.
|
|
|
Post by humanbeingbean on Jun 30, 2016 11:14:51 GMT -5
I honestly just think deepjohn works for the Braves FO and wants to say how valuable Teheran is to Sox fans.
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jun 30, 2016 11:19:33 GMT -5
I honestly just think deepjohn works for the Braves FO and wants to say how valuable Teheran is to Sox fans. You flatterer. Actually, I work for the Sox FO and just want the fans to know what the FO is thinking. (Kidding!)
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jun 30, 2016 11:23:48 GMT -5
Did you read closely. I said if. You seem to argue with hypotheticals a lot. The way I see it - 1. Benintendi will be a very good player. 2. Tehran would be a disaster at worst and average at best in Fenway. 3. It would take much more than just Benintendi to trade for just Tehran. Actually, I try not to argue because it's always a waste of time. People think what they want to think and you can't change their minds by arguing with them. I do try, whenever everybody here says one thing, to find another point of view. The contrarian view is often worth considering, because I find it's easy for me to get caught up in the herd.
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jun 30, 2016 11:53:28 GMT -5
I honestly just think deepjohn works for the Braves FO and wants to say how valuable Teheran is to Sox fans. You flatterer. Actually, I work for the Sox FO and just want the fans to know what the FO is thinking. (Kidding!) Oops, looks like I've been outed.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Jun 30, 2016 12:06:22 GMT -5
If we get a super-charged version of the Kimbrel trade in overpaying for a starter, I will cancel mlb.tv and stop watching the Red Sox for an indeterminate amount of time. I maybe would just flip to being a soccer-only fan like some European person.
|
|
|
Post by cto94 on Jun 30, 2016 12:06:59 GMT -5
You flatterer. Actually, I work for the Sox FO and just want the fans to know what the FO is thinking. (Kidding!) Oops, looks like I've been outed. Well "powerful arms" doesn't exactly describe Teheran, but yea if we are going to try to deal for a high-end arm, Benintendi will probably be involved
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jun 30, 2016 12:14:11 GMT -5
You flatterer. Actually, I work for the Sox FO and just want the fans to know what the FO is thinking. (Kidding!) Oops, looks like I've been outed. "Win now" is such a nice euphemism for horrible long term planning.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Jun 30, 2016 13:17:25 GMT -5
We have a good team NOW & adding an ELITE arm (not Teheran) may send a jolt into our current team to put them over the top. May take the pressure off Price & co. Just have to weigh out current wins vs. future wins. Keeping in mind we need SP help for next year as well.
|
|
|
Post by Canseco on Jun 30, 2016 13:25:32 GMT -5
My goodness... PLEASE do not gut the system in an attempt to salvage this flawed team. Benintendi and Moncada have the potential to form an exceptional long term core to go along with Betts, Bogaerts, and Bradley. Show some restraint, DD.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Jun 30, 2016 16:14:16 GMT -5
I maybe would just flip to being a soccer-only fan like some European person. Funny, I haven't watched a single game of the European Championship that is currently in progress. Check out eSports, though - I've watched some Hearthstone tournaments lately.
|
|
|
Post by cto94 on Jun 30, 2016 17:07:35 GMT -5
I think it's worth thinking about dealing Benintendi if he's the only one of him, Moncada, Devers, and Espinoza that gets dealt. We do have a lot of young controlled talent at the big league level now and some promising young guys at the lower levels, so dealing a combo of say, Benintendi and Swihart, or maybe Vazquez, along with Owens or at worst Kopech for a good starting pitcher who's not a rental and not posting unsustainable stats fueled by a friendly home park or unsustainable batted ball luck is a move I would fully endorse. The issue is I can't think of a pitcher like that on a team that would be motivated to make such a deal- maybe Quintana? Not sure if that's an attractive enough deal. Either way, it's true that we can probably afford to deal at least one highly rated prospect in the right deal, and I have enough faith in Dombrowski as a talent evaluator (he was the architect behind the '97 and '03 Marlins, which should be all the proof we need) that he's not going to sell prospects without getting fair value.
|
|
|
Post by pasadenasox on Jun 30, 2016 17:18:15 GMT -5
Do not trade Andrew Benintendi unless its for Clayton Kershaw or Madison Bumgarner, etc. Just don't.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 30, 2016 17:22:17 GMT -5
I think it's worth thinking about dealing Benintendi if he's the only one of him, Moncada, Devers, and Espinoza that gets dealt. We do have a lot of young controlled talent at the big league level now and some promising young guys at the lower levels, so dealing a combo of say, Benintendi and Swihart, or maybe Vazquez, along with Owens or at worst Kopech for a good starting pitcher who's not a rental and not posting unsustainable stats fueled by a friendly home park or unsustainable batted ball luck is a move I would fully endorse. The issue is I can't think of a pitcher like that on a team that would be motivated to make such a deal- maybe Quintana? Not sure if that's an attractive enough deal. Either way, it's true that we can probably afford to deal at least one highly rated prospect in the right deal, and I have enough faith in Dombrowski as a talent evaluator (he was the architect behind the '97 and '03 Marlins, which should be all the proof we need) that he's not going to sell prospects without getting fair value. No, if you just have to trade top 4 players trade Devers or even Espinoza, not Benintendi or Moncada.
|
|
|
Post by sammo420 on Jun 30, 2016 17:28:32 GMT -5
Oops, looks like I've been outed. "Win now" is such a nice euphemism for horrible long term planning. It doesn't make sense, either. We did win 3 championships in recent years, right? I think this is poor reporting, stereotyping Dombrowski as a "win now" type based on his time with Detroit. I have a tough time believing this ownership would change it's mind like that. 2013 should be a good reminder that the best team on paper doesn't always win. You need a lot of things to break your way.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Jun 30, 2016 17:50:38 GMT -5
The only way I would trade Benintendi (or Moncada) is for a pitcher like Kershaw, Bumgarner (like pasadenasox said above^^^) or possibly Sale. And since I doubt any of those pitchers will be on the market there should be no chance we trade Benintendi. My prediction is if we do trade him for someone like Tehran we will (not fondly) look back on it as Bagwell Pt. 2. At least at the time Bagwell was blocked at 3B by the next big thing in the form of Scott Cooper.
If it is deemed we need pitching help deal 2nd tier, or lower, prospects for a middle of the rotation type of guy.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jun 30, 2016 21:22:38 GMT -5
You flatterer. Actually, I work for the Sox FO and just want the fans to know what the FO is thinking. (Kidding!) Oops, looks like I've been outed. If you parse what's actually said here, it's (a) Dombrowski has been told to win now and (b) the team has good prospects. It's not simply "he's been told to win now and trade his top prospects." Splitting hairs a bit maybe, but there's a difference. The latter would be that the players are part of the "report." The former, and what it actually is, is the report followed by Olney mentioning that the Red Sox have good prospects.
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Jun 30, 2016 21:35:57 GMT -5
It's weird how people forget/ignore that under Theo and Ben, who those same people love to remind us cherished their prospects, we made a "big" deadline deal just about every time we were in contention.
|
|
|
Post by templeusox on Jun 30, 2016 21:54:37 GMT -5
Maybe the next big star we bring from outside the organization will be the one that works!
What's the definition of crazy again?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 1, 2016 7:04:45 GMT -5
I moved a bunch of discussion about a specific trade proposal to the Braves thread in the trade proposal subforum.
|
|
|
Post by cto94 on Jul 1, 2016 10:51:43 GMT -5
Yeah I really think Benintendi is being slightly overvalued here- Bagwell was one of the best hitters of his generation. I've never seen anyone project Benintendi to be that good, and I would see it as being a little detached from reality to declare now that trading him for anyone short of Kershaw or Bumgarner would be "Bagwell 2.0." I'm not saying he should be dealt, certainly not for a rental reliever, nor do I think we should part with him lightly. But the reality is that you have to give up talent to get it, and I would 100% build a deal for Quintana around him, or one of the Mets young arms (not Harvey) or in theory possibly even Jose Fernandez. We're not talking about Larry Andersen here. And for what it's worth, the reason I'd think about Benintendi at least over Espinoza is that Espinoza is the best pitching prospect to come through the system in I don't know how long, and by the general consensus has the highest ceiling in the system. If I thought Devers could bring the same return, I would say he should be the one to go, but I think realistically, right now it would be between AB and Moncada, and I prefer Moncada because he seems like he has a higher ceiling with a comparable floor
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Jul 1, 2016 15:13:05 GMT -5
Yeah I really think Benintendi is being slightly overvalued here- Bagwell was one of the best hitters of his generation. I've never seen anyone project Benintendi to be that good, and I would see it as being a little detached from reality to declare now that trading him for anyone short of Kershaw or Bumgarner would be "Bagwell 2.0." I'm not saying he should be dealt, certainly not for a rental reliever, nor do I think we should part with him lightly. But the reality is that you have to give up talent to get it, and I would 100% build a deal for Quintana around him, or one of the Mets young arms (not Harvey) or in theory possibly even Jose Fernandez. We're not talking about Larry Andersen here. And for what it's worth, the reason I'd think about Benintendi at least over Espinoza is that Espinoza is the best pitching prospect to come through the system in I don't know how long, and by the general consensus has the highest ceiling in the system. If I thought Devers could bring the same return, I would say he should be the one to go, but I think realistically, right now it would be between AB and Moncada, and I prefer Moncada because he seems like he has a higher ceiling with a comparable floor Could be more of a Scott Cooper type than Bagwell. At the time, Cooper was also valued very high (through AA). I remember we told Houston to just "pick one".
|
|
|