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.
Poll: How Do You Solve a Problem Like Hanley?
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 18, 2015 10:53:46 GMT -5
Since they seem opposed to looking at him at 1B this year ...
A) I've given three options for moving him to a corner: 1B, 3B, or him and Panda at 1B and 3B, to be determined in ST.
B) I've given three fallback plans (Plan Bs) for what happens if they try him at 1B in ST and he's awful. The "move him back to LF" versus "swap him with Sandoval" options are very tough to choose from, until we know just how good Castillo and Shaw are, so just make your best guess.
The assumption here is that he can be an adequate 3B (-10 DRS), so there are no fallback plans for that.
In terms of choosing a Plan B, assume that Castillo is in the OF if he's in the infield, and that Castillo is about a 2.5 WAR player. And that if he has to go back to the OF, they would either trade for a 1B or use Travis Shaw there, depending on how well Shaw plays the rest of the year.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Aug 18, 2015 11:16:45 GMT -5
The Trade him option is ambiguous, but I'm assuming after his 2015 season it would involve taking on a large part of his salary and getting little back in return. That just doesn't seem appealing to me.
If some team would be willing to look past his 2015 season in trade talks I'd be interested (he was signed last year at market rate). If someone put a waiver claim on him I'd be more than willing to let him go for nothing (duh).
|
|
|
Post by awall on Aug 18, 2015 11:30:11 GMT -5
I'd happily pick up 5-6 million/yr of his salary if it returned a decent prospect or two. Maybe even a PTBNL.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Aug 18, 2015 11:39:42 GMT -5
It's tough to say trade him bc I think it's obvious he's a DH only now. I'm not sold he could handle 3B or 1B but we need to try this year.
Curious who would want him? Could the White Sox take him with a little money for Laroche? A subsidized Hanley plus prospects for Carasco?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 18, 2015 11:54:50 GMT -5
Since they seem opposed to looking at him at 1B this year ... A) I've given three options for moving him to a corner: 1B, 3B, or him and Panda at 1B and 3B, to be determined in ST. B) I've given three fallback plans (Plan Bs) for what happens if they try him at 1B in ST and he's awful. The "move him back to LF" versus "swap him with Sandoval" options are very tough to choose from, until we know just how good Castillo and Shaw are, so just make your best guess. The assumption here is that he can be an adequate 3B (-10 DRS), so there are no fallback plans for that. In terms of choosing a Plan B, assume that Castillo is in the OF if he's in the infield, and that Castillo is about a 2.5 WAR player. And that if he has to go back to the OF, they would either trade for a 1B or use Travis Shaw there, depending on how well Shaw plays the rest of the year. All of the fallback plans regarding moving Hanley to different positions could easily (I'd argue likely) be disasters which is why I'm leaning towards eating as much of the contract as necessary to get rid of him for nothing. Let him be the next Renteria, IDC. It's kind of amusing that when the rumors about Matt Kemp were coming up last year, I expected him to be exactly what Hanley has become and wanted no part of him. It would have worked out better if they went the Kemp route. He's a DH and we don't need 2. And this year, not even a passable DH.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Aug 18, 2015 12:08:34 GMT -5
As far as trading him goes... I think it's kind of magical thinking to suppose we can just get rid of him, and the problem will be solved. No team is going to take him to play the outfield, obviously. I don't think anyone is really going to want him to play in the infield (though maybe San Diego at 3B? or Arizona because they're insane?). So he's a DH, sporting a 101 wRC+, who'll be 32 next year, and is making 22 million a year. I bet you'd have to eat about $40 million of the contract just to get rid of him, if not more, and that's without getting anything back. Is that still worth it? Is it a better option than keeping him around as Papi insurance? But of course we've seen the cost, in the last two seasons, of keeping ineffective veterans around as depth options...
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Aug 18, 2015 13:02:07 GMT -5
I was just thinking to myself, "you know what the problem with SoxProspects forum is? Not enough Sound of Music references!"
Personally, I have much more faith that he'd be able to handle first base than third. I mean, he was a bad SS, but he was a SS, and can first base be harder than that? But, the problem with first is that if he's really bad there, he destabilizes the whole infield ...
I only didn't choose "trade" because I can't imagine there's a taker for him out there.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 18, 2015 13:03:52 GMT -5
I'm happy to be the last member of the "keep him in LF" club.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Aug 18, 2015 13:12:18 GMT -5
I am in favor of trading Hanley because I think the team is better off with a better defensive outfield, and I don't think he will be a good 1B. Also, his bat has not turned out to be all that great. It might be better next year, but if a deal could be done, it would be smart for the Sox to do it. But I think it will be very difficult to do.
The only teams that should be interested in him are AL teams in need of a DH. And he might turn out to be a really good DH. But his salary is well above what a DH should get - i.e. what Ortiz is getting - and the Sox would have to kick in a bunch of coin.
I think there is a reasonable chance that Sandoval will be better next year. I write that because at times this year he has been really good, which I think means he isn't in a true decline phase, just in a terribly inconsistent one. That may be due to changing teams, leagues, etc. and tension he feels about his situation. There also isn't a good near-term alternative to him in the minor league pipeline, or in the FA market.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Aug 18, 2015 13:18:29 GMT -5
You certainly explore the idea of trading him, but what has already been said.....who would take him?
For awhile I thought first base, but more and more I would be absolutely scared with him there. We got spoiled with guys like Napoli and Adrian Gonzalez. These guys covered up some poor throws and picked some sure base hits over the last several years. Both were excellent for making adjustments, catching foul balls, scooping up short throws, and even holding runners on. Hanley, who to me seems dis-interested, would be a disaster in all of those ways. We would be cringing on ALL ground balls. We would be pissed off all season when he FORGOT to cut off the throw from the outfield, and we'd have a heart attack when Buch and Miley throw over to first time after time.
Sadly, with Papi still our DH, third base MAY be the best place for him......although teams would be bunting like crazy for hits over the course of a season.
The reason I would rather move Hanley rather than Panda (who I would like to trade also) is the ATTITUDE. Maybe it is just his mannerisms but he looks confused, uninterested, and oblivious to baseball situations. I still can't see WHERE he could be traded to. Usually the Dodgers could be counted on, but they've already had their time and want nothing more to do with him. The money would have to be pretty big going back, but I think in the long run for the organization it may be the best investment.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 18, 2015 13:28:31 GMT -5
You certainly explore the idea of trading him, but what has already been said.....who would take him?For awhile I thought first base, but more and more I would be absolutely scared with him there. We got spoiled with guys like Napoli and Adrian Gonzalez. These guys covered up some poor throws and picked some sure base hits over the last several years. Both were excellent for making adjustments, catching foul balls, scooping up short throws, and even holding runners on. Hanley, who to me seems dis-interested, would be a disaster in all of those ways. We would be cringing on ALL ground balls. We would be pissed off all season when he FORGOT to cut off the throw from the outfield, and we'd have a heart attack when Buch and Miley throw over to first time after time. Sadly, with Papi still our DH, third base MAY be the best place for him......although teams would be bunting like crazy for hits over the course of a season. The reason I would rather move Hanley rather than Panda (who I would like to trade also) is the ATTITUDE. Maybe it is just his mannerisms but he looks confused, uninterested, and oblivious to baseball situations. I still can't see WHERE he could be traded to. Usually the Dodgers could be counted on, but they've already had their time and want nothing more to do with him. The money would have to be pretty big going back, but I think in the long run for the organization it may be the best investment. The more money you throw in, the more teams would be interested. The Angels got rid of Hamilton.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 18, 2015 13:37:46 GMT -5
I dislike the idea of selling low on Hanley. It is very unlikely that he will hit or field worse next year than he has this year, no matter what position he plays. If you can move him while eating, say, $15m or less, sure, you move him, but the acquiring team has to agree to take on most of his salary for it to be worth it for the Red Sox. I suspect they'll have a hard time finding trade offers that reach that threshold.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 18, 2015 13:39:09 GMT -5
One argument for not trading them is that he's very likely to be worth his contract once Papi retires and he becomes the full-time DH. His career numbers as a PH and DH are great, suggesting he has the skill to sit and not get cold, which is actually as tough as fielding a position. He's also likely to stay healthier, too.
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Aug 18, 2015 13:42:06 GMT -5
I would have a talk with him and see where his head is. If I don't like what I hear try to move him. If I like what I hear then I would ask papi how much more years he wants to go hopefully one then I would try Hanley in Left again and then DH. But right now I am disgusted with him ,he killed us . Except the crappy pitching his defense killed the Sox. I don't want him at first, don't trust him. I am at 90% moving him cut my loses. I want a good OF. Good defense and fix that stupid pitching and pen.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 18, 2015 13:42:11 GMT -5
One argument for not trading them is that he's very likely to be worth his contract once Papi retires and he becomes the full-time DH. His career numbers as a PH and DH are great, suggesting he has the skill to sit and not get cold, which is actually as tough as fielding a position. He's also likely to stay healthier, too. They really need to think about next year though, unless they want to punt another season which I doubt they do. Maybe they can rent him out for a year.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 18, 2015 13:44:36 GMT -5
I dislike the idea of selling low on Hanley. It is very unlikely that he will hit or field worse next year than he has this year, no matter what position he plays. If you can move him while eating, say, $15m or less, sure, you move him, but the acquiring team has to agree to take on most of his salary for it to be worth it for the Red Sox. I suspect they'll have a hard time finding trade offers that reach that threshold. I feel like we've had this exact discussion before regarding Allen Craig. What's the opportunity cost of Hanley being a disaster again? It's more than just money and so-called trade value. I'd actually be shocked and a little mad if they decide to count on all 3 of Hanley, Pablo and Porcello next season. Over $60 million a season for below replacement level performance.
|
|
|
Post by semsox on Aug 18, 2015 13:47:47 GMT -5
I also dislike the idea of selling low on Hanley, because he's our replacement DH in 2017. I have no doubt that if he were a full-time DH he'd mash and be an asset to the club. Unfortunately, right now he's not an asset to the club, and his continued presence in LF hurts the team more than it helps for any given game, and that's before factoring in taking ABs and evaluation time away from JBJ and Castillo. I wish they had DLed him, and then sent him on a rehab assignment with a 1B man's mitt. I can understand not wanting to throw him out at a new position in the middle of the season if you're afraid of embarrassing the guy, but doing so in the relative anonymity of the minors wouldn't be the worst course of action.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 18, 2015 13:51:32 GMT -5
Allen Craig had all of 59 plate appearances in the major leagues this year before being DFAed.
Again-- it's about how you evaluate those players. I think Hanley Ramirez, Pablo Sandoval, and Rick Porcello are all significantly above-replacement-level (probably even above-average players, though Hanley's defense means he's the biggest question mark there). If you think that's the case, you absolutely bring them back unless an acquiring team assumes most of their contracts.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Aug 18, 2015 13:55:45 GMT -5
I would have a talk with him and see where his head is. Smartest thing written in this thread. Find out what Hanley wants to do. He may tell you that he is going to work all off-season to get better in LF (or he isn't). He may tell you that he would rather play 3B (or 1B) next year. For all the buttkissing being done publicly, the organization is going to have to tell Hanley what they really think about his defense, and Hanley is going to have to communicate what he thinks about his defense (and what he plans to do about it). I truly believe that his defensive struggles have impacted him offensively, so the best way to maximize his offense is to get him and the team on the same page with respect to his defense. I think the two best options are to keep him in LF or move him to 3B (in which case the team ought to trade Sandoval for pitching). I think 1B is even more of a disaster waiting to happen. I assume next year's game plan is for Hanley to play 30-40 games at DH (I assume 2016 will be Ortiz's final year before he retires) and 100-110 games in LF/3B, and it will become standard to sub him out after he bats in the final third of the game. In 2017, he becomes the full-time DH.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 18, 2015 13:56:32 GMT -5
Allen Craig had all of 59 plate appearances in the major leagues this year before being DFAed. Again-- it's about how you evaluate those players. I think Hanley Ramirez, Pablo Sandoval, and Rick Porcello are all significantly above-replacement-level (probably even above-average players, though Hanley's defense means he's the biggest question mark there). If you think that's the case, you absolutely bring them back unless an acquiring team assumes most of their contracts. Do you think they'd DFA Hanley if he showed up and was as bad as he's been this year? I don't.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 18, 2015 14:02:40 GMT -5
I would have a talk with him and see where his head is. Smartest thing written in this thread. Find out what Hanley wants to do. He may tell you that he is going to work all off-season to get better in LF (or he isn't). He may tell you that he would rather play 3B (or 1B) next year. For all the buttkissing being done publicly, the organization is going to have to tell Hanley what they really think about his defense, and Hanley is going to have to communicate what he thinks about his defense (and what he plans to do about it). I truly believe that his defensive struggles have impacted him offensively, so the best way to maximize his offense is to get him and the team on the same page with respect to his defense. I think the two best options are to keep him in LF or move him to 3B (in which case the team ought to trade Sandoval for pitching). I think 1B is even more of a disaster waiting to happen. I assume next year's game plan is for Hanley to play 30-40 games at DH (I assume 2016 will be Ortiz's final year before he retires) and 100-110 games in LF/3B, and it will become standard to sub him out after he bats in the final third of the game. In 2017, he becomes the full-time DH. I also wonder how much of his issues are due to putting on an absurd amount of muscle in one year. I bet it takes awhile to get used to a new body.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Aug 18, 2015 14:05:43 GMT -5
I dislike the idea of selling low on Hanley. It is very unlikely that he will hit or field worse next year than he has this year, no matter what position he plays. If you can move him while eating, say, $15m or less, sure, you move him, but the acquiring team has to agree to take on most of his salary for it to be worth it for the Red Sox. I suspect they'll have a hard time finding trade offers that reach that threshold. I feel like we've had this exact discussion before regarding Allen Craig. What's the opportunity cost of Hanley being a disaster again? It's more than just money and so-called trade value. I'd actually be shocked and a little mad if they decide to count on all 3 of Hanley, Pablo and Porcello next season. Over $60 million a season for below replacement level performance.Seeing as they are 3 players with at least 3 years of ~ $20M ACV, the only way this team will be good next year is with improvement from these three. It would be hard to find anyone who would take on their contracts without a big chunk contributed by the Red Sox. Similar to the Yankees relying on Tex, A-Rod, and Sabitha being better in order to compete this year. I'm with JMei on this one, putrid performance this year from these three, but they shouldn't be evaluated only on their 2015 performance.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 18, 2015 15:07:27 GMT -5
Allen Craig had all of 59 plate appearances in the major leagues this year before being DFAed. Again-- it's about how you evaluate those players. I think Hanley Ramirez, Pablo Sandoval, and Rick Porcello are all significantly above-replacement-level (probably even above-average players, though Hanley's defense means he's the biggest question mark there). If you think that's the case, you absolutely bring them back unless an acquiring team assumes most of their contracts. Do you think they'd DFA Hanley if he showed up and was as bad as he's been this year? I don't. If at any point the team thinks that Hanley Ramirez is likely to perform at a sub-replacement-level going forward (which would almost certainly be driven by his defense) and they were in contention, I absolutely think they would reduce his playing time by playing him more at DH and/or trying him at a new position.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Aug 18, 2015 15:10:32 GMT -5
It seemed that the Sox were reluctant to ask Hanley to move to first base, particularly in light of his public comments that he wanted to stay where he is. Last night's fourth inning performance is continuing evidence of his inability to field the position. And, it seems he is unwilling to put in the extra time to to improve his routes and judgement on balls hit near the wall. If he can best help the team, he should be given a first baseman's mitt and told to take a crash (no pun intended) course on the position.
My preference is to get him out of here. I don't really think he cares about winning or losing. Manny's nephew. I like the Betts-Junior-Castillo combo in the OF. Go for Davis in the offseason or stick with Shaw until the following season when Sam Travis is ready.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Aug 18, 2015 15:12:04 GMT -5
Maybe I have my rose colored glasses on, but I don't see why we would be less comfortable with Hanley adapting to 1B than we would be by expecting him to improve in the outfield. Given his career in the infield, I'd expect his range to be acceptable for 1B, and his glovework on balls hit to him adequate for 1B. He'd have to learn the footwork of finding 1st base and his responsibilities on cut offs, and that's something that should be very easy to learn. Also, catching on target throws at first is simple, yes I said simple. Even with some pepper and spin on it, if the ball is close to your chest it is layup territory. I also believe being involved in the routine plays could help temper his lack of urgency and lapses of concentration.
My two major concerns with him learning first is his decision making on balls that the 2B or pitcher should be/not be fielding, and scooping bad balls. These are things I would not scoff at, there's a real chance Hanley would be very bad at these plays and cost the team runs. But seeing his play in the outfield, I just don't see why this is scarier than his ability to get to balls hit to left.
He's improved this year, from being clueless to just a really bad outfielder. I don't think he will ever be comfortable tracking balls, playing the wall, or holding runners. It's a familiar feeling to me, liners and grounders in the infield were never a problem, but for some reason I could never tell if the ball would land in front or behind me in the OF till it was too late. The stutter steps, back and fourth routes, and jumping in the outfield (when your not against the fence) are clear signs he misplays a lot of balls. He's improved in the same sense as hitting the backboard is improving on an airball.
|
|
|