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.
8/28-8/30 Red Sox @ Mets Series Thread
|
Post by blizzards39 on Aug 28, 2015 23:42:18 GMT -5
me too, which is why I said Bradley and not Betts. My bad, misread. I think Gray and Miller are overrated though. I'd rather try to trade for a Carrasco or a Salazar or a Quintana Only way I see betts in gone in gray or degrom. Can't see either happening. Also DD comment to day about Bucholtz may spell the end for Miley or Porcello.
|
|
|
Post by m1keyboots on Aug 29, 2015 0:27:31 GMT -5
I think they need to keep mooks and bradley and do something with one of the catchers. Both are starters IMO cv elite defense throwing catching, contact ability. BS above average defensive catcher, can throw a little, good athlete but cv is not a poor athlete, definitely more offensive upside in BS. but at Fenway I feel like having 2 center fielders (one being the best in the world IMO) is insutrumental. I think blake/shaw/kopech or the like would get us a cost controlled ace and a bullpen arm too. btw, I can still hit 82 on the gun, can I pitch for the sox instead of the Arlington/alexandria senators? I throw strikes!
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan on Aug 29, 2015 0:28:10 GMT -5
I would have thought the whole point in hiring Dombrowski would be to find an under-valued pitcher or two, not to gut the farm system for an established starter.
No GM is going to give Red Sox, with their loaded farm system and entitled fan base, anything resembling a bargain on a Sonny Gray, Shelby Miller, Carlos Carrasco or Danny Salazar.
Acquiring a top of the line starter for prospects will be an exercise in short-term gain and long-term pain.
|
|
|
Post by telluricrook on Aug 29, 2015 0:29:15 GMT -5
My bad, misread. I think Gray and Miller are overrated though. I'd rather try to trade for a Carrasco or a Salazar or a Quintana Only way I see betts in gone in gray or degrom. Can't see either happening. Also DD comment to day about Bucholtz may spell the end for Miley or Porcello. What did he say?
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Aug 29, 2015 0:33:58 GMT -5
Just back from a nice get together with a lot of friends. I left right after Ortiz' home run. It was two to one at that point. Come back to a nice result, they win 6-4. Looks like the bullpen made it exciting, no surprise there. I look at the box score. Those kids are just all right .
I think we all know what they have to fix. Man there are a lot of gut wrenching comments in here. Must have been a tough game for people to watch.
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,656
|
Post by gerry on Aug 29, 2015 1:01:59 GMT -5
Gur-wrenching, but largely due to typical Sox management of pitcher: slow hook for lost RP's Ogando and Taz, pulling Papi early. Based on recent head scratchers from the coaches, i increasingly wonder if John Farrell was given bad advice about pitching decisions.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,911
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 29, 2015 1:51:21 GMT -5
I would have thought the whole point in hiring Dombrowski would be to find an under-valued pitcher or two, not to gut the farm system for an established starter. No GM is going to give Red Sox, with their loaded farm system and entitled fan base, anything resembling a bargain on a Sonny Gray, Shelby Miller, Carlos Carrasco or Danny Salazar. Acquiring a top of the line starter for prospects will be an exercise in short-term gain and long-term pain. So you're in favor of having Swihart and Vazquez play their whole careers starting 80 games each, and Margot being a 4th outfielder, and Guerra being a backup SS? The whole point of having a farm system like ours is to trade away the redundant pieces, and you want them to be as good as possible while still being redundant.The notion that trading some top-50-type prospects this winter would automatically constitute "gutting" the farm system is silly. The only sillier notion being repeated endlessly here is that Betts or Bradley will be traded because they're redundant, too. It's as if LF has ceased to exist. Who exactly plays LF if you trade one of those guys? Nobody nearly as good as the supposedly redundant OF you dealt.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,911
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 29, 2015 2:32:48 GMT -5
In his 35 PA since his insane five games with the 1.972 OPS, JBJ has come way back to earth: just .290 / .371 / .645.
He's now at .309 / .394 / .654 in 94 PA since he was called up.
I'm beginning to really like the idea of him as leadoff hitter next year.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 29, 2015 3:54:52 GMT -5
Not his call. If he disobeyed the coaches orders and whiffed on a 3-0 swing, he'd be reprimanded. Which is completely ridiculous - reprimand away, I say. I honestly think he has a higher projected wOBA keeping his bat on his shoulder at that point. How often do you think an AL rookie pitcher practices his swings? Even on a 3-0 meatball, I'm skeptical that Owens gets a hit more than, say, 20% of the time there.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Aug 29, 2015 5:49:30 GMT -5
Gur-wrenching, but largely due to typical Sox management of pitcher: slow hook for lost RP's Ogando and Taz, pulling Papi early. Based on recent head scratchers from the coaches, i increasingly wonder if John Farrell was given bad advice about pitching decisions. Yes. 1950's handling of a pitching staff. But perhaps this kind of thing is an experiment to see how, in this case, Taz could deal with it. On the plus side, this was one of the most fun games to watch with the kids showing up everywhere. I hope this game makes an impression on the Sox management a/k/a DD. Puhleeze keep Swihart, JBJ, Mookie, Castillo, Shaw. Let these guys continue to grow. And keep Vazquez, Devers, Moncada and one of Owens and Johnson. Vazquez can play 50-60 games...both catchers would be rested. If we have a protected pick, no guarantee now, spend for one top pitcher. The rest of the farm, excluding Espinoza, is game along with Hanley (who I assume is gone, gone, gone).
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Aug 29, 2015 5:58:51 GMT -5
Gur-wrenching, but largely due to typical Sox management of pitcher: slow hook for lost RP's Ogando and Taz, pulling Papi early. Based on recent head scratchers from the coaches, i increasingly wonder if John Farrell was given bad advice about pitching decisions. Yes. 1950's handling of a pitching staff. But perhaps this kind of thing is an experiment to see how, in this case, Taz could deal with it. On the plus side, this was one of the most fun games to watch with the kids showing up everywhere. I hope this game makes an impression on the Sox management a/k/a DD. Puhleeze keep Swihart, JBJ, Mookie, Castillo, Shaw. Let these guys continue to grow. And keep Vazquez, Devers, Moncada and one of Owens and Johnson. Vazquez can play 50-60 games...both catchers would be rested. If we have a protected pick, no guarantee now, spend for one top pitcher. The rest of the farm, excluding Espinoza, is game along with Hanley (who I assume is gone, gone, gone). Just a reminder that Price and Cueto would not cost a pick because they were traded mid season.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Aug 29, 2015 6:09:54 GMT -5
Yes. 1950's handling of a pitching staff. But perhaps this kind of thing is an experiment to see how, in this case, Taz could deal with it. On the plus side, this was one of the most fun games to watch with the kids showing up everywhere. I hope this game makes an impression on the Sox management a/k/a DD. Puhleeze keep Swihart, JBJ, Mookie, Castillo, Shaw. Let these guys continue to grow. And keep Vazquez, Devers, Moncada and one of Owens and Johnson. Vazquez can play 50-60 games...both catchers would be rested. If we have a protected pick, no guarantee now, spend for one top pitcher. The rest of the farm, excluding Espinoza, is game along with Hanley (who I assume is gone, gone, gone). Just a reminder that Price and Cueto would not cost a pick because they were traded mid season. Good reminder and thanks. Cueto makes me nervous and Price long term at 31 does too.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Aug 29, 2015 6:46:16 GMT -5
Gutting our farm system and buying when we were a last place team quite frankly doesnt make sense. We need an overhaul of the team not a quick fix or two. Trading away guys like Margot and Guerra is one thing but Betts, Bradley and Swihart are another.
Dombrowski also mentioned both Bradley and Betts as franchise cornerstones.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Aug 29, 2015 7:08:31 GMT -5
Gutting our farm system and buying when we were a last place team quite frankly doesnt make sense. We need an overhaul of the team not a quick fix or two. Trading away guys like Margot and Guerra is one thing but Betts, Bradley and Swihart are another. Dombrowski also mentioned both Bradley and Betts as franchise cornerstones. I don't think we need an overhaul of the team at all. We are close to set with position players (with 1B being the only question). We need a starter (or two depending on Buccholz), and we need to build a bullpen. That is far from having to overhaul the team.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,632
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 29, 2015 7:45:36 GMT -5
Just back from a nice get together with a lot of friends. I left right after Ortiz' home run. It was two to one at that point. Come back to a nice result, they win 6-4. Looks like the bullpen made it exciting, no surprise there. I look at the box score. Those kids are just all right . I think we all know what they have to fix. Man there are a lot of gut wrenching comments in here. Must have been a tough game for people to watch. All I can say is - where was Craig Breslow when we needed him in 1986 to get the last out in the 10th inning in the Mets home ballpark? I guess this makes up for it.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Aug 29, 2015 8:03:01 GMT -5
Gutting our farm system and buying when we were a last place team quite frankly doesnt make sense. We need an overhaul of the team not a quick fix or two. Trading away guys like Margot and Guerra is one thing but Betts, Bradley and Swihart are another. Dombrowski also mentioned both Bradley and Betts as franchise cornerstones. I don't think we need an overhaul of the team at all. We are close to set with position players (with 1B being the only question). We need a starter (or two depending on Buccholz), and we need to build a bullpen. That is far from having to overhaul the team. Right but we're set with a 3B with a negative WAR and stuck with Porcello in the rotation as well as Hanley. I am totally fine with going out and improving pitching via free agency but not with trading Mookie or bradley for a pitcher when: A: There is no guarantee Pablo, Porcello or buchholz will bounce back, and we will be competitive again. B: If we trade Betts or Bradley we'll just need another outfielder. Young outfielders like that are more of a sure thing to give us 3-4 WAR+ next year than a young pitcher due to the volatility of pitching. Is it really worth that gamble and the financial concerns that come with it, knowing we have them under cheap control? No.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Aug 29, 2015 8:06:11 GMT -5
I don't think we need an overhaul of the team at all. We are close to set with position players (with 1B being the only question). We need a starter (or two depending on Buccholz), and we need to build a bullpen. That is far from having to overhaul the team. Right but we're set with a 3B with a negative WAR and stuck with Porcello in the rotation as well as Hanley. I am totally fine with going out and improving pitching via free agency but not with trading Mookie or bradley for a pitcher when: A: There is no guarantee Pablo, Porcello or buchholz will bounce back, and we will be competitive again. B: If we trade Betts or Bradley we'll just need another outfielder. Young outfielders like that are more of a sure thing to give us 3-4 WAR+ next year than a young pitcher due to the volatility of pitching. Is it really worth that gamble and the financial concerns that come with it, knowing we have them under cheap control? No. For this year, we are. For next year we aren't. There isn't a huge track record of 28 year old hitters permanently falling off a cliff without injury. There also isn't a track record of pitchers permanently pitching with an ERA more than a full run above their peripherals. Pablo and Porcello are as good bets as there are to bounce back in my opinion. Hanley's still injured also. He was scratched for his shoulder last night, the same shoulder he ran into the wall with
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Aug 29, 2015 8:17:53 GMT -5
I would have thought the whole point in hiring Dombrowski would be to find an under-valued pitcher or two, not to gut the farm system for an established starter. No GM is going to give Red Sox, with their loaded farm system and entitled fan base, anything resembling a bargain on a Sonny Gray, Shelby Miller, Carlos Carrasco or Danny Salazar. Acquiring a top of the line starter for prospects will be an exercise in short-term gain and long-term pain. So you're in favor of having Swihart and Vazquez play their whole careers starting 80 games each, and Margot being a 4th outfielder, and Guerra being a backup SS? The whole point of having a farm system like ours is to trade away the redundant pieces, and you want them to be as good as possible while still being redundant.The notion that trading some top-50-type prospects this winter would automatically constitute "gutting" the farm system is silly. The only sillier notion being repeated endlessly here is that Betts or Bradley will be traded because they're redundant, too. It's as if LF has ceased to exist. Who exactly plays LF if you trade one of those guys? Nobody nearly as good as the supposedly redundant OF you dealt. I think we have to wait a year on a Swihart/Vasquez decision. We don't know if Vazquez is healthy enough to hand the reins to. And, we really don't know what we have in Swihart. I hope Dombrowski is patient with this position. If, we're going to have a good offensive team. And, it appears we're going to. My preference is an elite defense and pitch-framing catcher here. That would be Vazquez. A 300/350/430 hitting catcher should get some interest:) too though. Blake's not terrible defensively either. He just needs to learn the league and out staff better. Which will come with experience. And, allow him to call a better game. As for Margot, I'd deal him in a heartbeat. We're stacked in CF.
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan on Aug 29, 2015 8:19:57 GMT -5
Gutting our farm system and buying when we were a last place team quite frankly doesnt make sense. We need an overhaul of the team not a quick fix or two. Trading away guys like Margot and Guerra is one thing but Betts, Bradley and Swihart are another. Dombrowski also mentioned both Bradley and Betts as franchise cornerstones. I don't think we need an overhaul of the team at all. We are close to set with position players (with 1B being the only question). We need a starter (or two depending on Buccholz), and we need to build a bullpen. That is far from having to overhaul the team. The Red Sox aren't going to get Sonny Gray or any of the other names being bandied about in this forum without giving up three premium prospects -- you're essentially looking at a cost of 40 or even 60 (worst/best case) WAR over 2018 -- 2022. Equally do you really want to package Margot/Guerra for a middle of the rotation starter? Don't we already potentially have enough of those? Derrick Norris --a top 15 prospect -- plus bought two months of David Price. Addison Russell -- a top 5 prospect got you a year and a half of Jeff Samardzja. The return on prospects is just not that high. What I hope they brought Dombrowski in to do was what he did in Detroit: find undervalued assets like Scherzer and Fister and trade for them before the other teams realize what they have. Trading prospects at market value is a really bad idea.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Aug 29, 2015 8:22:53 GMT -5
So you're in favor of having Swihart and Vazquez play their whole careers starting 80 games each, and Margot being a 4th outfielder, and Guerra being a backup SS? The whole point of having a farm system like ours is to trade away the redundant pieces, and you want them to be as good as possible while still being redundant.The notion that trading some top-50-type prospects this winter would automatically constitute "gutting" the farm system is silly. The only sillier notion being repeated endlessly here is that Betts or Bradley will be traded because they're redundant, too. It's as if LF has ceased to exist. Who exactly plays LF if you trade one of those guys? Nobody nearly as good as the supposedly redundant OF you dealt. I think we have to wait a year on a Swihart/Vasquez decision. We don't know if Vazquez is healthy enough to hand the reins to. And, we really don't know what we have in Swihart. I hope Dombrowski is patient with this position. If, we're going to have a good offensive team. And, it appears we're going to. My preference is an elite defense and pitch-framing catcher here. That would be Vazquez. A 300/350/430 hitting catcher should get some interest:) too though. Blake's not terrible defensively either. He just needs to learn the league and out staff better. Which will come with experience. And, allow him to call a better game. As for Margot, I'd deal him in a heartbeat. We're stacked in CF. I agree completely on the catcher situation. I don't think it would be wise to go into next year with Vazquez (coming off TJ) and Hanigan (not the picture of health). With only a Humberto Quintero or Sandy Leon type behind them.
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan on Aug 29, 2015 8:28:56 GMT -5
I would have thought the whole point in hiring Dombrowski would be to find an under-valued pitcher or two, not to gut the farm system for an established starter. No GM is going to give Red Sox, with their loaded farm system and entitled fan base, anything resembling a bargain on a Sonny Gray, Shelby Miller, Carlos Carrasco or Danny Salazar. Acquiring a top of the line starter for prospects will be an exercise in short-term gain and long-term pain. So you're in favor of having Swihart and Vazquez play their whole careers starting 80 games each, and Margot being a 4th outfielder, and Guerra being a backup SS? The whole point of having a farm system like ours is to trade away the redundant pieces, and you want them to be as good as possible while still being redundant.The notion that trading some top-50-type prospects this winter would automatically constitute "gutting" the farm system is silly. The only sillier notion being repeated endlessly here is that Betts or Bradley will be traded because they're redundant, too. It's as if LF has ceased to exist. Who exactly plays LF if you trade one of those guys? Nobody nearly as good as the supposedly redundant OF you dealt. No. But I am in favor of holding on two them for another year. I don't believe their trade value will approach their actual value; the Red Sox would be much better holding both for a year, maybe two, and trading them then when the return will be much higher. I think if you look at the numbers you'll find when you trade prospects, the expected value of the return is half the value of the prospects -- and even less for the Red Sox who go into trades in the unfortunate position of being viewed as desperate.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Aug 29, 2015 8:33:50 GMT -5
So you're in favor of having Swihart and Vazquez play their whole careers starting 80 games each, and Margot being a 4th outfielder, and Guerra being a backup SS? The whole point of having a farm system like ours is to trade away the redundant pieces, and you want them to be as good as possible while still being redundant.The notion that trading some top-50-type prospects this winter would automatically constitute "gutting" the farm system is silly. The only sillier notion being repeated endlessly here is that Betts or Bradley will be traded because they're redundant, too. It's as if LF has ceased to exist. Who exactly plays LF if you trade one of those guys? Nobody nearly as good as the supposedly redundant OF you dealt. No. But I am in favor of holding on two them for another year. I don't believe their trade value will approach their actual value; the Red Sox would be much better holding both for a year, maybe two, and trading them then when the return will be much higher. I think if you look at the numbers you'll find when you trade prospects, the expected value of the return is half the value of the prospects -- and even less for the Red Sox who go into trades in the unfortunate position of being viewed as desperate. I would agree with you when talking about trading for rentals, which makes sense actually. Rentals will almost always give you production in a season when its very useful to you, while prospects could end up giving you production when it doesn't matter because you suck anyway. However, when trading prospects for long term solutions, I'm not sure I agree.
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan on Aug 29, 2015 9:05:09 GMT -5
No. But I am in favor of holding on two them for another year. I don't believe their trade value will approach their actual value; the Red Sox would be much better holding both for a year, maybe two, and trading them then when the return will be much higher. I think if you look at the numbers you'll find when you trade prospects, the expected value of the return is half the value of the prospects -- and even less for the Red Sox who go into trades in the unfortunate position of being viewed as desperate. I would agree with you when talking about trading for rentals, which makes sense actually. Rentals will almost always give you production in a season when its very useful to you, while prospects could end up giving you production when it doesn't matter because you suck anyway. However, when trading prospects for long term solutions, I'm not sure I agree. If the Red Sox feel compelled to trade one of their catchers, it should be for a Lucas Giolito or Tyler Glasnow, not as part of a package for Sonny Gray. The cost of free agents is now so high and MLB has imposed so many obstacles to keep good teams from acquiring amateur talent that Red Sox can no longer keep trading prospects at full market value and count on their resources and player development prowess to make up the difference. Fortunately, with two wild cards, they shouldn't have to.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Aug 29, 2015 9:29:28 GMT -5
Am I missing something or did they just take Papi out of a tie game when he was due to lead off the 9th inning? Heel tightness. Another reason Ortiz cannot play 1B regularly.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 29, 2015 9:33:35 GMT -5
357 inside the park HR's by catchers in ML history. Last one by Damien Miller, 8/18/2. Red Sox: Hal Wagner 7/7/46. That was just before my mother knew I was on the way. Link didn't show up for some reason. Edit: for some reason the board doesn't like my link. One more try. bb_catchers dot tripod dot com slash catchers slash iphr.htm. Since it's a website on tripod.com, do we know if it's been updated since 2002? I'm kidding. A little.
|
|
|