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.
2016 Red Sox Spring Training News/Discussion
|
Post by fan72 on Mar 30, 2016 19:35:17 GMT -5
I was actually fine with the Bailey, Reddick trade at the time. I was not that high on Reddick. I also liked the Lackey trade, thought Craig would come around, and liked Kelly's potential. He made some bad moves , but pretty much hit on everything in 12 offseason. Also liked the fact he refused to give up Betts, Boegarts, and Swihart last offseason, when the media was clamoring for an ace.
|
|
|
Post by DesignatedKyle on Mar 30, 2016 21:13:46 GMT -5
I didn't have much confidence in the Lackey deal from the start (never been a Craig fan whatsoever) but was ok with the Lester for Cespy deal. Cespy for Porcello I hated.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,952
|
Post by ericmvan on Mar 31, 2016 2:43:34 GMT -5
A couple of Castillo / Holt notes: Castillo as a LF (including translated CF and RF numbers) was + 17 Plays Made (DRS range) / 150 G last year. What does that project to this year? I've got a bunch of tweaks to my system I want to test, but I doubt they'll change my current answer much. And that, alas, is +5.5. One-year samples regress to the mean hugely. And, in this model at least, little of that regression is because he played less than 700 innings; if he'd played a full 1340 (recent average of innings in 150 games), he'd project to +7. Several of the alternate models proved to be better, and to my surprise project Rusney at +9.1 PM (which would be -0.5 in CF). Right now the safest thing to say about him is that he has average range for CF and a plus arm for anywhere. He may yet be elite, but we don't know that yet. So that's another big unknown about him -- close to a win of uncertainty defensively, in addition to the offense. Now I've got to decide which of three or four very similar models is best, and then do Arm and GFP (Good Fielding Plays). And then the predictors for guys with more than one year of data.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 31, 2016 4:28:52 GMT -5
I didn't have much confidence in the Lackey deal from the start (never been a Craig fan whatsoever) but was ok with the Lester for Cespy deal. Cespy for Porcello I hated. I hated both deals at time. Only saving grace was Miller for Erod. Ben's mistake was wanting proven major league help, when it should have been take best deal. You could always flip prospects for vets in offseason. Now I loved Cespy for Porcello trade, the extension was stupid . Still think Porcello turns it around and becomes a solid 3.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 31, 2016 8:47:13 GMT -5
If Kelly's improvement is legit then that Lackey trade could turn into a big win.
I'm very happy with the decisions to have Holt in left and Shaw at third to start the year. Sends a good message and I think they are two very important pieces to the lineup. I get Shaw wasn't highly touted as a prospect so he gets little to no love and he's not s lock to perform (who is?), but he has me excited. The Will Middlebrook comps are just lousy and lazy. Middlebrooks was way more hyped than Shaw but is fatal flaw was easy to identify and it's what killed him and always held him back.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 31, 2016 10:53:20 GMT -5
If Kelly's improvement is legit then that Lackey trade could turn into a big win. I'm very happy with the decisions to have Holt in left and Shaw at third to start the year. Sends a good message and I think they are two very important pieces to the lineup. I get Shaw wasn't highly touted as a prospect so he gets little to no love and he's not s lock to perform (who is?), but he has me excited. The Will Middlebrook comps are just lousy and lazy. Middlebrooks was way more hyped than Shaw but is fatal flaw was easy to identify and it's what killed him and always held him back. It sure would make it look good. I just think what else could we have got if we didn't want or get Craig. I just think 1&1/3 season of Lackey with one season at min salary was worth more then Kelly and paying Craig to play in minors. I understand starting Holt just think they are giving up on Castillo before ever giving him a chance. I am excited about Shaw also, just not sure what to expect. His minor league numbers are all over the place. He also performed a lot better in majors then minors last year, not something you see that often. Really can't wait to see how he does.
|
|
|
Post by DesignatedKyle on Mar 31, 2016 12:15:37 GMT -5
If Kelly's improvement is legit then that Lackey trade could turn into a big win. I'm very happy with the decisions to have Holt in left and Shaw at third to start the year. Sends a good message and I think they are two very important pieces to the lineup. I get Shaw wasn't highly touted as a prospect so he gets little to no love and he's not s lock to perform (who is?), but he has me excited. The Will Middlebrook comps are just lousy and lazy. Middlebrooks was way more hyped than Shaw but is fatal flaw was easy to identify and it's what killed him and always held him back. It sure would make it look good. I just think what else could we have got if we didn't want or get Craig. I just think 1&1/3 season of Lackey with one season at min salary was worth more then Kelly and paying Craig to play in minors. I understand starting Holt just think they are giving up on Castillo before ever giving him a chance. I am excited about Shaw also, just not sure what to expect. His minor league numbers are all over the place. He also performed a lot better in majors then minors last year, not something you see that often. Really can't wait to see how he does. I agree with being a little more concerned about the Castillo situation. I mean it's not like Brock would be unable to get playing time, as a utility guy he'd probably play 3, maybe 4 games a week as well as being a late-game sub. We haven't seen enough of Castillo to really make a good judgement, in my opinion. I guess what makes it more difficult is the fact that we still aren't 100% on Bradley, either. It's understandable to not want to head into the new season with 2/3 of the outfield being question marks offensively. (Although you absolutely can't argue with the Castillo/JBJ/Mookie trio on defense.)
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 31, 2016 12:23:11 GMT -5
I'd rather Castillo gets some regular at bats in AAA than be the 5th OF. He's definitely good depth at this point for CF/RF and I'd be hesitant to trade him because of that without another option coming back, but I'd rather see if he can refine his supposed new approach in AAA. He cannot be the 4th OF on a team that has Chris Young.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Mar 31, 2016 12:51:42 GMT -5
Is Workman eligible to be moved to the 60 Day DL? Or are there rules preventing him being moved there?
If it's possible, I would like to see him put on the 60 Day DL and Murphy added to the 40 Man Roster. Then Castillo sent down & Murphy added to the Active Roster. Then I'd like to see Murphy & Young named as the platoon splits in Left Field & Holt returned back to the Super Utility Role.
I think it makes the team stronger.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 31, 2016 12:56:17 GMT -5
I don't understand why people like Murphy so much. Castillo would be better than he is in almost a worst case scenario.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 31, 2016 13:02:39 GMT -5
Workman is eligible for (and will be placed on) the 60-day DL. However, the 40-man roster is not the reason that Murphy doesn't have a roster spot, it's the 25-man roster. For him to make the 25-man roster, Murphy either has to displace Castillo (which is possible, but, as jimed mentions above, is a lateral move at best and probably a downgrade once you take defense into account) or the Red Sox have to go with a six-man bullpen (which isn't happening).
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Mar 31, 2016 13:10:47 GMT -5
I don't understand why people like Murphy so much. Castillo would be better than he is in almost a worst case scenario. I guess it would depend upon what you value in your 25th spot on the roster. Do you prefer a left handed pinchhitter or a guy who can play good defense and pinch run and have occasional power? If you gave them a bunch of at-bats, then yeah I'd think Castillo's defense would win out over Murphy's bat, but as a spot player, I think it comes down to what you're looking for. My guess is that Murphy winds up in LF for Baltimore, but we'll see.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Mar 31, 2016 13:26:48 GMT -5
Workman is eligible for (and will be placed on) the 60-day DL. However, the 40-man roster is not the reason that Murphy doesn't have a roster spot, it's the 25-man roster. For him to make the 25-man roster, Murphy either has to displace Castillo (which is possible, but, as jimed mentions above, is a lateral move at best and probably a downgrade once you take defense into account) or the Red Sox have to go with a six-man bullpen (which isn't happening). I disagree. The 40 man roster is full. There is no way to add him and then get him to the 25 man roster. That's why I asked if there are any rules preventing the Sox from moving Workman to the 60 day dl. I don't think adding Murphy over Castillo is a "lateral move at best and probably a downgrade once you take defense into account". I think it makes the team stronger and deeper.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Mar 31, 2016 14:21:42 GMT -5
I don't understand why people like Murphy so much. Castillo would be better than he is in almost a worst case scenario. Well, it probably has something to do with the .200 point ops difference between the two players versus RHP, and the idea to use Young already against lefties. David Murphy *might* see two balls a game in left field, but might see 4 at bats. If Rusney's not capable of playing everyday, and your OF already has JBJ and Mookie in it, and you need a mental fielder more than an athletic one, I don't see it as a huge problem carrying Murphy while Rusney gets at bats. Then again, I also didn't watch Murphy that much in left this spring training, not sure if he looked fine or atrocious.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 31, 2016 14:45:59 GMT -5
I don't understand why people like Murphy so much. Castillo would be better than he is in almost a worst case scenario. Well, it probably has something to do with the .200 point ops difference between the two players versus RHP, and the idea to use Young already against lefties. David Murphy *might* see two balls a game in left field, but might see 4 at bats. If Rusney's not capable of playing everyday, and your OF already has JBJ and Mookie in it, and you need a mental fielder more than an athletic one, I don't see it as a huge problem carrying Murphy while Rusney gets at bats. Then again, I also didn't watch Murphy that much in left this spring training, not sure if he looked fine or atrocious. I'd much rather have Nava back than Murphy.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 31, 2016 14:55:36 GMT -5
It's pretty crazy to think that the Red Sox will have 5 guys in the lineup making (pretty much) league minimum on opening day and 4 bench players making $39.44 million assuming Castillo is there (plus a bonus of $6.2 million for Allen Craig in the minors).
It's like the main difference between now and 2012 is that they the young guys producing. They're wasting as much money as ever, but can afford it for now because of that.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Mar 31, 2016 14:56:10 GMT -5
Question to the Mods/Staff, are we doing the prediction game again this year?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 31, 2016 15:33:15 GMT -5
Question to the Mods/Staff, are we doing the prediction game again this year? Feel free to post it up, and I'll sticky it.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 31, 2016 15:39:03 GMT -5
Workman is eligible for (and will be placed on) the 60-day DL. However, the 40-man roster is not the reason that Murphy doesn't have a roster spot, it's the 25-man roster. For him to make the 25-man roster, Murphy either has to displace Castillo (which is possible, but, as jimed mentions above, is a lateral move at best and probably a downgrade once you take defense into account) or the Red Sox have to go with a six-man bullpen (which isn't happening). I disagree. The 40 man roster is full. There is no way to add him and then get him to the 25 man roster. That's why I asked if there are any rules preventing the Sox from moving Workman to the 60 day dl. I don't think adding Murphy over Castillo is a "lateral move at best and probably a downgrade once you take defense into account". I think it makes the team stronger and deeper. I agree. If the choice is Castillo as your 5th OF or Murphy, I pick Murphy. If your starting Holt against RHP your saying that you value Holt's Bat over Castillo's D. Well Murphy had a better ops last year and almost the same in 2014. I get Holt's D is better, but we can use another guy that can hit RHP. Castillo would be much better in minors getting regular ABs and adding more depth. It will do him no good playing 1 or 2 games a week, but that perfect for an older player like Murphy.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 31, 2016 15:42:42 GMT -5
Versus RHP, Murphy is almost certainly worse than Holt once you take into account defense/baserunning, so either way, we're talking about a fifth outfielder who is a true backup (i.e., not a platoon starter). Of the four guys he'd essentially back up (Bogaerts, Pedroia, Bradley, Betts), the spot he'd most often play is in CF versus LHP, which favors Castillo over Murphy.
I also think the fit is better for Castillo if he's coming off the bench-- he could be a defensive replacement for Young in LF and pinch-run for Ortiz/Ramirez (and Sandoval/Hanigan, if either of them is starting). Murphy would be a better pinch-hitter, but there aren't really any great pinch-hitting opportunities (maybe Swihart/Hanigan, and even then, it's close to a push once you take into account the pinch-hit penalty).
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 31, 2016 15:45:00 GMT -5
Versus RHP, Murphy is almost certainly worse than Holt once you take into account defense/baserunning, so either way, we're talking about a fifth outfielder who is a true backup (i.e., not a platoon starter). Of the four guys he'd essentially back up (Bogaerts, Pedroia, Bradley, Betts), the spot he'd most often play is in CF versus LHP, which favors Castillo over Murphy. I also think the fit is better for Castillo if he's coming off the bench-- he could be a defensive replacement for Young in LF and pinch-run for Ortiz/Ramirez (and Sandoval/Hanigan, if either of them is starting). Murphy would be a better pinch-hitter, but there aren't really any great pinch-hitting opportunities (maybe Swihart/Hanigan, and even then, it's close to a push once you take into account the pinch-hit penalty). Add the fact that Farrell almost never pinch hits for a catcher.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 31, 2016 16:03:46 GMT -5
You guys make very good points, but I still think it's better for the team in the long run for Castillo to get regular ABs in minors. If you don't like Murphy then go get a hazzlebaker type OF for D and baserunning if that's what you feel this team needs.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 31, 2016 16:21:53 GMT -5
Guys with Castillo's skill set don't exactly grow on trees. He's a plus defender in center field who, even if he doesn't walk or hit for much power, makes enough contact and has the batted ball profile to hit for a .260+ average. I think, at worst, he's still a solid fourth outfielder in the one win range. It won't make a huge difference because you don't expect him to get that much playing time, but every little bit counts, and I'm not sure if playing in AAA is really going to help his development all that much.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 31, 2016 17:06:20 GMT -5
See that's what doesn't make sense to me. If you think he's a current .260 plus hitter with his great D why would Sox say they are giving 90% of AB to Young and Holt? I have to think Red Sox don't currently think he could do that. I believe that Castillo hitting .260 plus with his D and raw power that is going to show up if given playing time, would have more value to Sox then Holt's .280 average with good on base skills, no power and OK D. Add in fact that Holt playing OF all the time means he won't get to play a lot in the infield where his bat looks a lot better and he has a ton of value.
Main reason I think minors is a good idea is to rediscover his power. Per his Cuban stats Castillo has power, but besides 10 games in 2014 he has yet to show it in majors.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Mar 31, 2016 17:16:25 GMT -5
Guys with Castillo's skill set don't exactly grow on trees. He's a plus defender in center field who, even if he doesn't walk or hit for much power, makes enough contact and has the batted ball profile to hit for a .260+ average. I think, at worst, he's still a solid fourth outfielder in the one win range. It won't make a huge difference because you don't expect him to get that much playing time, but every little bit counts, and I'm not sure if playing in AAA is really going to help his development all that much. Yeah but.... I am not convinced that he would hit .260 despite his physique, strength and athleticism. He beat out many toppers in 2015 that inflated his average. He did not look good offensively last season or this spring....driving very few balls. Having missed time in prior year(s) and having played in and out last season was inopportune. Playing regularly in AAA this year, with some expert instruction, might afford shortening the swing and developing his offensive best. If so, he could be valuable late year, or next year, or become something of a trade chip. IMO the amount he could/would add this year defensively would be outweighed by the prospect of enhanced future value....and it would be more fair to him as a ballplayer.
|
|
|