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.
Sox Sign Shane Victorino: 3yrs/$39mil
|
Post by Guidas on Dec 4, 2012 23:34:08 GMT -5
I'm not ready to jump off of a bridge for this deal, but I'm far from happy about it. I think the 2-3 mil per year overpays will add up quickly, if we can't get some value buys here. Looking like a 80-win season more than likely. I do like the defense and I think there's a lot of value in the specific set up (over-valuing RF defense and under-valuing LF defense) because of the home park effect. I just don't see how we couldn't entice Victorino with a few mil less. Only way this makes sense to me is if they move Ellsbury because otherwise, i think we could have sat back and waited out Victorino and if we missed out on him, so be it. Cleveland reportedly offered 4/44, and multiple teams offered three years (at unknown AAV's). If you like the player enough, this is the cost in today's crazy market. OK, so if Ben now flips Victorino to Cleve for Choo I'll give him complete genius props.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 4, 2012 23:58:09 GMT -5
You are taking this regression to the mean thing way too far. BABIP for a hitter is heavily influenced by the players ability. If his batspeed regresses and there are reports that it did, the player will not have a BABIP in line with the rest of his career. And you're playing more confidence in limited sample sizes that further your narrative than is warranted. The far more likely hypothesis is bad luck, given: (a) Victorino hit more line drives and ground balls in 2012 than he did in 2011 or 2010, and both strongly correlate to a high BABIP. His infield fly ball rate (which might otherwise drag down his BABIP and reflect declining bat speed) was roughly similar to previous years. (b) The areas where his BABIP lagged point to bad luck. Here is his BABIP sorted by batted ball type: GB LD FB 2012 0.274 0.656 0.086 Career 0.271 0.707 0.104 The big discrepancies are in line drive and fly ball BABIP, which don't match with the "weak bat speed" (or "declining speed") hypothesis. Weak bat speed probably manifests itself most in slow ground balls, but Victorino seemed to hit GBs hard enough to get as many hits on them as he has in the past. Line drives and fly balls, on the other hand, are much more likely to be luck-dependent, and those are the areas where his BABIP declined. (Potential contrary evidence here.) (c) The speed of his home runs off the bat (data from ESPN's home run tracker) was similar in 2012 (101.8) than it was in 2011 (102.2) and 2010 (101).
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Dec 5, 2012 0:05:03 GMT -5
I'm mildly on the dislike end of this signing, and here's why. *** I have no clue if that power will return, but even if it doesn't, Victorino should be an above-average regular in CF once his BABIP bounces back to career norms. But Victorino won't be playing in CF, and even if you assume otherworldly defense in RF, it's tough for him to be worth the contract if his power doesn't return. I'd have been thrilled with Victorino at three years, $30m, but the extra $9m tempers my enthusiasm considerably. This won't be a disaster, but it does seem to be an overpay. Agreed. The one thing Victorino's signing does is permit the Red Sox to move Ellsbury sooner than later, while there is still a big market for OFs. The overpay was needed to lock Shane up quickly. I will not be surprised to see (1) Ellsbury traded (with or without a catcher) for pitching and (2) Cody Ross signed to play RF in the near term. IF Ells is traded, i'd be ok with Victorino in CF, until Bradley is ready.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,787
|
Post by nomar on Dec 5, 2012 1:21:16 GMT -5
Me too! They HAVE over spent for each player they have tied up, but I LOVE that they are short-term contracts. I'm also totally on-board of NOT losing their 2nd rounder. Lets get a starter now Ben. I'm NOT for Lohse because of the draft choice. See if Anibel will take a 4 year contract for $16 million per year, and lets get to Ft Myers! Add me to this camp.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Dec 5, 2012 1:55:21 GMT -5
I'm mildly on the dislike end of this signing, and here's why. Victorino has been a good player over his career, and you don't need UZR to prove it. His career triple-slash .273/.339/.428, 29 steals per 600 PAs) is similar to pre-2011 Jacoby Ellsbury (.291/.344/.405, 54 steals per 600 PAs) with more power and fewer steals. It's also quite similar to pre-2010 Carl Crawford (.296/.337/.444, 45 steals per 600 PAs). That profile is very valuable, especially accompanied by well-above average defense at center field. Of course, Victorino had a bad 2012, but that's mostly because his BABIP (.278) was near a career low (his career BABIP is .296) and far below his xBABIP (.295) while his walk and strikeout rates were in line with his career averages. Some have questioned his bat speed, but from a statistical perspective it's hard to tell. His contact rates have held relatively steady but his effectiveness against fastballs has declined four years in a row, which is a definite red flag. That said, as long as he's making decent contact, he's a good bet to hit .270 and get on base .340 or so. The bigger question is with regards to his power, as he hit for a career-low ISO last year (.128; .154 career). Part of that decline is a low HR/FB (6%, career 7.5%), but he also only hit 7 triples when he had hit 16 a year before (he hit doubles at a similar rate as he has in the past). I have no clue if that power will return, but even if it doesn't, Victorino should be an above-average regular in CF once his BABIP bounces back to career norms. But Victorino won't be playing in CF, and even if you assume otherworldly defense in RF, it's tough for him to be worth the contract if his power doesn't return. I'd have been thrilled with Victorino at three years, $30m, but the extra $9m tempers my enthusiasm considerably. This won't be a disaster, but it does seem to be an overpay. Why? I don't get that line of thinking. If he plays good enough to be worth a 3/$30M deal wouldn't it make all the sense in the world to overpay by $9M to make sure you didn't need to go to 4 years to sign him? I think it is a fantastic strategy. Literally brilliant by the Red Sox front office. The market for these players has proven to be a long term one (Upton 5, Pagan 4, Hamilton is gonna get 4+, Bourn 4+), so the strategy of basically buying out that final year is brilliant. Keeps long term flexibility but allows you to sign the talent you want. Cherrington is hitting a home run so far this offseason IMO. Lots of work left to do, but so far so great IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Dec 5, 2012 2:48:48 GMT -5
I think Beasley and the others who've mentioned the overpay as the new pricepoint have it right. We're watching this new market, one that values access to young talent in a different way, emerge before our eyes.
It used to be that the promise of more money could lure a highly valued draftee down to a slot where you could pick them up as a bonus, along with your higher slotted draftees. That money appears to have migrated into this arena where you pay extra to get an unencumbered FA, one who won't cost you a draft pick, since the slotting on those doesn't have much give given the cap and the penalties that go with it.
In other words, the Sox have set their value on a second rounder at $2-3 million a year for three years. That's the overpay for Victorino.
|
|
sarcasmo
Rookie
Formerly known as mtomeo
Posts: 91
|
Post by sarcasmo on Dec 5, 2012 8:25:23 GMT -5
I'm not crazy about the signing and I was really hoping we avoided him, but after reading through this thread, I'm coming around on him.. The Flying Hawaiian's bat does not impress me, but, he creates roster flexibility, has CF defense in our spacious RF, is a gamer, and will add a decent clubhouse presense.
This isn't going to vault us into contention, but it does allow BC the room for some creativity, just like the Napoli signing. Salty and Ellsbury are essentially expendable once the right deal appears. Whether that's this offseason or in the near future doesn't really matter. He can waity for the right package(s). C'mon Wil Myers!
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Dec 5, 2012 8:38:51 GMT -5
Why? I don't get that line of thinking. If he plays good enough to be worth a 3/$30M deal wouldn't it make all the sense in the world to overpay by $9M to make sure you didn't need to go to 4 years to sign him? I think it is a fantastic strategy. Literally brilliant by the Red Sox front office. Cherrington is hitting a home run so far this offseason IMO. Lots of work left to do, but so far so great IMO. Really - OK, so translate, please. How many wins will this "brilliant" acquisition strategy translate into? Cause I think any GM predicating his off season on significant acquisitions whom he hopes will play better than they did in 2 of the last 3 years is revealing the actions of desperation, ignorance or both.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Dec 5, 2012 8:54:04 GMT -5
How many wins will this "brilliant" acquisition strategy translate into? Cause I think any GM predicating his off season on significant acquisitions whom he hopes will play better than they did in 2 of the last 3 years is revealing the actions of desperation, ignorance or both. Year - fWAR - rWAR 2010 - 3.8 - 2.8 2011 - 5.9 - 5.2 2012 - 3.3 - 2.4 CF and RF are not the same WAR calculation, but he played 1/3 of last season in left, the Sox are treating RF as CF-lite, Victorino is likely to play a significant amount of CF, and while the bat is relatively weak in RF the glove is relatively strong.
|
|
|
Post by awall422 on Dec 5, 2012 9:01:46 GMT -5
I'm basing my judgment on the assumption that the Sox move Ellsbury for pitching, if that holds true then I think this is a solid move. I wonder what it would have cost them to get Span instead?
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Dec 5, 2012 9:11:26 GMT -5
I think most in baseball would put Meyer above Henry Owens (though it could be close). So, at least Henry Owens.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Dec 5, 2012 10:02:48 GMT -5
I think most in baseball would put Meyer above Henry Owens (though it could be close). So, at least Henry Owens. More like Webster, or maybe even Barnes, just looking at some of the early prospect lists (Sickels, ect...)
|
|
|
Post by kindasweaty on Dec 5, 2012 10:36:56 GMT -5
Really - OK, so translate, please. How many wins will this "brilliant" acquisition strategy translate into? Cause I think any GM predicating his off season on significant acquisitions whom he hopes will play better than they did in 2 of the last 3 years is revealing the actions of desperation, ignorance or both. This year? Based off last year probably ~5 wins. For $26 mil annually. Pretty sure I saw elsewhere that the cost of a win is $5.5 mil on the open market, so he added market value talent, versatile talent. And both of these guys happen to have had their worst years last year. And they're all short term! I don't understand the sudden apathy this idea attracts here. For years we've all patted ourselves on the back for out "Sign player X to a short term contract at a little extra money." Now the GM is doing it and we hate it. Even if these guys crash and burn in the third year of their contract, we don't have to say "Oh boy he'll be fun to watch for another year." Remember Mike Lowell? Kevin Youkilis? J.D. Drew? All guys whose contracts went on just a liiiittle too long. Ben's signings avoid that problem and don't bother the Red Sox ability to make a high dollar move at all.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Dec 5, 2012 10:54:44 GMT -5
I see very little mention of Victorino's speed on the basepaths. Given the signings of Napoli, Gomes, and Ross, Victorino's speed (39 SB in 45 attempts last year) is another dimension that is badly needed on this team. I'm still a little lukewarm on the signing, but I don't think its as bad as some people are making it out to be, and I agree with the point that the overpaying per year is worth not going to a fourth year on his contract.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Dec 5, 2012 11:03:46 GMT -5
More like Webster, or maybe even Barnes, just looking at some of the early prospect lists (Sickels, ect...) Right, Sickels has Myers above Webster. I think that will probably be the exception (or one of them) and that Meyer will be between Webster and Owens, rather than above them both. But, in all events, something reater than Owens (but still a pitcher) is for all intents and purposes Webster.
|
|
|
Post by patrmac04 on Dec 5, 2012 11:52:05 GMT -5
Apparently someone had a 4 year deal out for Victorino. Actually the more I look at it, freaking Angel Pagan got 4 years 40 million and BJ Upton got that 75 million dollar deal I can only wonder what Nick Swisher would have been worth... The more I look at the current crop of CF/RF on the market the more I'm leaning towards this being a responsible deal. Is it perfect? No, not even close, but its for only 3 years at a price the Red Sox can not only afford, but dump at some point if the contract begins to look truly awful. Yep... this Sent from my SGH-T999 using proboards
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Dec 5, 2012 12:09:46 GMT -5
If the goal of the new CBA was to increase the worth of ML players, while toning down the cost of new talent, it appears to be working. There will also be different valuation for a player you hold for the entire year, one who can net you a draft choice, and a player who's traded mid-season. The trade market will reflect that at some point.
|
|
|
Post by wildcardwillie on Dec 5, 2012 12:27:46 GMT -5
It is always tough to guage the market when you see people over/underpaying for players and I can totally see both sides of the arguement, its ok to over pay here and there when there is a bidding war with certain players. If the sox over pay 3 mil a yr on 4 players thats 12 mil a yr u could have spent on another player or add a few mil and find good pitching. On the other hand you pinch pennies and lose players to other teams over a couple mil and ur team is aweful. im not uge fan of all the signings but im going to wait and see how they turn out before I judge. I am glad they were short term
|
|
|
Post by jioh on Dec 5, 2012 12:51:49 GMT -5
..... Remember Mike Lowell? Kevin Youkilis? J.D. Drew? All guys whose contracts went on just a liiiittle too long. Ben's signings avoid that problem and don't bother the Red Sox ability to make a high dollar move at all. Lowell counts as two arguments. He's guy who was over the hill and on the decline when we got him, but then he rebounded a bit and helped us win in 07. Then we extended him too long.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Dec 5, 2012 13:31:03 GMT -5
Jeff Keppinger got a three year deal.... Now will everyone understand how this offseason is playing out?!?!
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Dec 5, 2012 13:42:14 GMT -5
Jeff Keppinger got a three year deal.... Now will everyone understand how this offseason is playing out?!?! I think it is becoming clear that a lot of people underestimated the price of a win when this off season started. Teams must now be rethinking their budgets.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Dec 5, 2012 13:53:52 GMT -5
Even more reason to trade Victorino for Choo the moment he signs.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 5, 2012 13:56:03 GMT -5
Jeff Keppinger got a three year deal.... Now will everyone understand how this offseason is playing out?!?! Just because other teams act foolish doesn't mean that I would want my team to act foolish.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 5, 2012 13:57:45 GMT -5
Even more reason to trade Victorino for Choo the moment he signs. They couldn't even if they wanted to. I don't think a newly signed free agent can be dealt at least until mid-season unless he approves the deal (I recall this happening to the lefty reliever Mike Myers awhile back).
|
|
|
Post by honkbal on Dec 5, 2012 13:58:20 GMT -5
Even more reason to trade Victorino for Choo the moment he signs. Pretty sure you still can't do that. Also it makes no sense.
|
|
|