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.
Making Room for Moncada and Devers
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 30, 2016 18:06:53 GMT -5
Everyone is right with the 148. If the dead money does not count against cap that helps. But you have roughly 40 mil to sign 17 more players plus free agents. I do not think dd would spent 20 or half of the available money on a dh. I hope not, especially on what would have to be a 5-year deal, most likely, for Encarnacion. Not sure if Bautista would do a 3/70 or so, but even then, it's a bit much to spend when you've got Moncada/Benintendi/Devers all probably due up in the next 2+ years. Then again, that's right around when Hanley/Sandoval/Porcello's contracts expire, which is $60m.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Jul 30, 2016 18:29:01 GMT -5
Everyone is right with the 148. If the dead money does not count against cap that helps. But you have roughly 40 mil to sign 17 more players plus free agents. I do not think dd would spent 20 or half of the available money on a dh. I hope not, especially on what would have to be a 5-year deal, most likely, for Encarnacion. Not sure if Bautista would do a 3/70 or so, but even then, it's a bit much to spend when you've got Moncada/Benintendi/Devers all probably due up in the next 2+ years. Then again, that's right around when Hanley/Sandoval/Porcello's contracts expire, which is $60m. I would have thought that nearly everyone agrees neither Pablo nor Hanley will be with the Sox by the end of their respective contracts anyway.
|
|
|
Post by tookme55 on Jul 30, 2016 18:44:58 GMT -5
$148M includes $20M+ in dead money. Projected luxury tax may reach as high as $209M. We have money to sign Encarnacion.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,881
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 30, 2016 21:10:36 GMT -5
A breakdown of Devers' season. He's been very clearly streaky in terms of results.
First, just the stretches with their quality. As is usual here, EqA is an estimate -- it's actually c. 2 X OBP + SA scaled to match that stat.
Str G PA EqA 4/7 - 4/12 6 25 .299 4/13 - 4/26 11 48 .118 4/27 - 5/13 15 60 .283 5/14 - 5/25 10 41 .138 5/26 - 6/9 13 52 .329 6/10 - 6/28 14 55 .203 7/1 - 7/23 21 95 .385 7/24 - 7/29 5 22 .220 Now, a detailed look at the four hot stretches:
Str G PA BA OBP SA EqA K% BB% HRC BABIP 4/7 - 4/12 6 25 .238 .360 .524 .299 .160 .160 .059 .250 4/27 - 5/13 15 60 .291 .350 .473 .283 .133 .083 .043 .311 5/26 - 6/9 13 52 .383 .442 .489 .329 .135 .096 .025 .436 7/1 - 7/23 21 95 .391 .442 .736 .385 .211 .084 .045 .484 There's a nice improving trend there; the last hot streak was also easily the longest. That his K rate was highest when he was hottest is interesting; it suggests going deeper into counts along with his hardest contact (in terms of HR and BABIP).
The four cold stretches also show a clear improvement:
Str G PA BA OBP SA EqA K% BB% HRC BABIP 4/13 - 4/26 11 48 .071 .188 .071 .118 .188 .125 .000 .091 5/14 - 5/25 10 41 .132 .190 .158 .138 .268 .049 .000 .179 6/10 - 6/28 14 55 .241 .255 .315 .203 .109 .018 .000 .271 7/24 - 7/29 5 22 .200 .273 .350 .220 .286 .048 .071 .231 The latest slump is a mirror of the second (with harder contact), while the third saw him getting himself out unusually early in counts.
I would wait and see how long this one lasts, and then move him to Portland 4 or 5 games into his next hot one. When he's going well, he doesn't seem to much left to learn from high-A pitchers.
Edit: After I wrote this and before I posted it, he went 2/4, HR. If that really is the beginning of a new hot streak (and it would be odd if it wasn't), that's a very good sign.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Aug 2, 2016 14:50:48 GMT -5
Could we rotate 4 of's with one being dh? Saves their legs and $$$$ spent on a dh. Would like to make a run at Greinke. Won't cost anywhere near prospects for Sale
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Aug 2, 2016 22:32:43 GMT -5
With the Benintendi era beginning, we'll likely, eventually, have the best Boston Outfield since Rice, Lynn, Evans with the new edition Killer B's of Benintendi, Bradley and Betts. Moncada as hinted by DDo is not far behind which to me means he'll be called up in September. I can't see Moncada going to first but instead being spot started at third for this season and likely to take over third base sometime in May or June of next season. Potentially Travis Shaw would be trade bait at that time (May/June 2017) season) or moved at the trade deadline next season. Hopefully we move Pablo anyway we can, backhoe etc. Hanley is likely to stick around for another season. Devers appears to be about 2 years away, or possibly the start of the 2019 season which is the last year, unless extended, for Betts and Bogaerts. At this point Pedey will be 35 and be at a point where nearly all infielders drop off dramatically. Devers either wins over 3rd base or is moved to first. Should he beat out Moncada at third Moncada moves to second.
|
|
|
Post by cto94 on Aug 3, 2016 10:53:57 GMT -5
With the Benintendi era beginning, we'll likely, eventually, have the best Boston Outfield since Rice, Lynn, Evans with the new edition Killer B's of Benintendi, Bradley and Betts. Moncada as hinted by DDo is not far behind which to me means he'll be called up in September. I can't see Moncada going to first but instead being spot started at third for this season and likely to take over third base sometime in May or June of next season. Potentially Travis Shaw would be trade bait at that time (May/June 2017) season) or moved at the trade deadline next season. Hopefully we move Pablo anyway we can, backhoe etc. Hanley is likely to stick around for another season. Devers appears to be about 2 years away, or possibly the start of the 2019 season which is the last year, unless extended, for Betts and Bogaerts. At this point Pedey will be 35 and be at a point where nearly all infielders drop off dramatically. Devers either wins over 3rd base or is moved to first. Should he beat out Moncada at third Moncada moves to second. Only issue is that in the long run, most scouting reports seem to point to Moncada moving off 2B. My guess for the long run is that when Devers is ready, Bradley is dealt in an offseason deal to preserve money to retain Bogaerts and Betts, and Moncada is shifted to CF, assuming he doesn't bulk up too much and lose speed (which seems unlikely given the fact that he doesn't look like he could bulk up too much more).
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Aug 3, 2016 11:16:34 GMT -5
Could we rotate 4 of's with one being dh? Saves their legs and $$$$ spent on a dh. That doesn't make sense given the Red Sox personnel. Benintendi, Betts, and Bradley are young, and probably don't need a night or two off from outfielding a week. With your scenario, you'd have a clearly suboptimal defensive alignment in the outfield 75% of the time. If you're not going to be strict with a four-man rotation, then the fourth outfielder is basically the starting DH, right? And Edwin Encarnacion is better enough at hitting than Bryce Brentz or Chris Young or whoever else is available that you certainly consider the cost. That doesn't mean you pay $150 million for him. Buy 4/$80? Heck yes.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Aug 3, 2016 12:18:59 GMT -5
Could we rotate 4 of's with one being dh? Saves their legs and $$$$ spent on a dh. That doesn't make sense given the Red Sox personnel. Benintendi, Betts, and Bradley are young, and probably don't need a night or two off from outfielding a week. With your scenario, you'd have a clearly suboptimal defensive alignment in the outfield 75% of the time. If you're not going to be strict with a four-man rotation, then the fourth outfielder is basically the starting DH, right? And Edwin Encarnacion is better enough at hitting than Bryce Brentz or Chris Young or whoever else is available that you certainly consider the cost. That doesn't mean you pay $150 million for him. Buy 4/$80? Heck yes. Yeah, 4th guy would be dh. I'm guessing Moncada will be a better outfielder than 3b. I'd use the money saved to get Greinke. 1b/3b combo of Hanley, Shaw and Pablo. I think it allows you to carry 13 p's too.
|
|
|
Post by cto94 on Aug 3, 2016 12:36:56 GMT -5
That doesn't make sense given the Red Sox personnel. Benintendi, Betts, and Bradley are young, and probably don't need a night or two off from outfielding a week. With your scenario, you'd have a clearly suboptimal defensive alignment in the outfield 75% of the time. If you're not going to be strict with a four-man rotation, then the fourth outfielder is basically the starting DH, right? And Edwin Encarnacion is better enough at hitting than Bryce Brentz or Chris Young or whoever else is available that you certainly consider the cost. That doesn't mean you pay $150 million for him. Buy 4/$80? Heck yes. Yeah, 4th guy would be dh. I'm guessing Moncada will be a better outfielder than 3b. I'd use the money saved to get Greinke. 1b/3b combo of Hanley, Shaw and Pablo. I think it allows you to carry 13 p's too. Isn't Greinke basically on the same deal as Price, except older and without the opt-outs? I'd rather stick with what we have, I really don't like the idea of paying Greinke and Price a combined $63m when they're in their mid-to-late 30s
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 3, 2016 13:09:58 GMT -5
I hope not, especially on what would have to be a 5-year deal, most likely, for Encarnacion. Not sure if Bautista would do a 3/70 or so, but even then, it's a bit much to spend when you've got Moncada/Benintendi/Devers all probably due up in the next 2+ years. Then again, that's right around when Hanley/Sandoval/Porcello's contracts expire, which is $60m. I would have thought that nearly everyone agrees neither Pablo nor Hanley will be with the Sox by the end of their respective contracts anyway. Maybe not, but odds are, the Sox will still be paying them until they do. It may be less than the full amount, but they're on the hook for some substantial $.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Aug 3, 2016 14:23:45 GMT -5
“@clearthebases: Moncada out of the lineup second straight day. No reason why, yet.”
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,881
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 3, 2016 14:55:15 GMT -5
I was wondering if Devers as a rookie two years from now was realistic. Could I find a guy who didn't have great overall numbers at age 19, but started slowly and finished strong, and then was a rookie at age 21?
I grabbed all 64 players who were rookies going into their age 21 season and got 130 AB that year, from 1990 (start of BA's Top 100 list) until the present.
I sorted in reverse chronological order, which put Nomar Mazara at the top of the list.
He played most of his age 19 season in low-A. He hit .211 / .282 / .313 in his first 163 PA, through May 15. He then hit .295 / .399 / .562 in 298 PA and got promoted to AA after August 3, where he hit .306 / .381 / .518. He went from being unranked to being BA's #87 prospect.
Devers hit .186 / .269 / .295 in high-A over 175 PA, and has hit .335 / .380 / .538 in 237 PA since. That's a pretty great comp, except that given the level, it's a significantly better performance, as befitting a guy who was already BA's #18 prospect.
Folks who don't think that Devers has a strong chance of forcing his way into into the lineup sometime in 2018 are not being realistic. Any plan has to include the possibility that at some point in 2018, he would be just wasting his time to continue in AAA -- which I think is never a good idea.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,435
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Aug 3, 2016 14:59:46 GMT -5
I was wondering if Devers as a rookie two years from now was realistic. Could I find a guy who didn't have great overall numbers at age 19, but started slowly and finished strong, and then was a rookie at age 21? I grabbed all 64 players who were rookies going into their age 21 season and got 130 AB that year, from 1990 (start of BA's Top 100 list) until the present. I sorted in reverse chronological order, which put Nomar Mazara at the top of the list. He played most of his age 19 season in low-A. He hit .211 / .282 / .313 in his first 163 PA, through May 15. He then hit .295 / .399 / .562 in 298 PA and got promoted to AA after August 3, where he hit .306 / .381 / .518. He went from being unranked to being BA's #87 prospect. Devers hit .186 / .269 / .295 in high-A over 175 PA, and has hit .335 / .380 / .538 in 237 PA since. That's a pretty great comp, except that given the level, it's a significantly better performance, as befitting a guy who was already BA's #18 prospect. Folks who don't think that Devers has a strong chance of forcing his way into into the lineup sometime in 2018 are not being realistic. Any plan has to include the possibility that at some point in 2018, he would be just wasting his time to continue in AAA -- which I think is never a good idea. If 2017 goes well he rakes in AA, at which point he'll be ready for AAA and not too far away from getting to the bigs. 2018 is definitely conceivable. We also have less incentive to be aggressive with him than we had with Benintendi and Moncada.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Aug 3, 2016 15:19:37 GMT -5
Rafa could allow us to release Hanley mid2018, so his option doesn't kick in. Travis platoon at 1b.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Aug 3, 2016 15:40:36 GMT -5
I was wondering if Devers as a rookie two years from now was realistic. Could I find a guy who didn't have great overall numbers at age 19, but started slowly and finished strong, and then was a rookie at age 21? I grabbed all 64 players who were rookies going into their age 21 season and got 130 AB that year, from 1990 (start of BA's Top 100 list) until the present. I sorted in reverse chronological order, which put Nomar Mazara at the top of the list. He played most of his age 19 season in low-A. He hit .211 / .282 / .313 in his first 163 PA, through May 15. He then hit .295 / .399 / .562 in 298 PA and got promoted to AA after August 3, where he hit .306 / .381 / .518. He went from being unranked to being BA's #87 prospect. Devers hit .186 / .269 / .295 in high-A over 175 PA, and has hit .335 / .380 / .538 in 237 PA since. That's a pretty great comp, except that given the level, it's a significantly better performance, as befitting a guy who was already BA's #18 prospect. Folks who don't think that Devers has a strong chance of forcing his way into into the lineup sometime in 2018 are not being realistic. Any plan has to include the possibility that at some point in 2018, he would be just wasting his time to continue in AAA -- which I think is never a good idea. By the same token, the Red Sox cannot assume that Devers will be ready in 2018. If Devers is ready in July 2018, the Red Sox should be able to find him a way to play. If is not able to force his way into the lineup, that either means that the big league roster does not need the help (a good thing) or that he needs more time in AAA. Teams are always able to find roles for prospects who are ready to contribute: see Mookie Betts to the OF, Xander to third; Benintendi to left.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 3, 2016 15:43:52 GMT -5
Right, I think the obsession with making sure prospects aren't blocked years before they're MLB-ready is unnecessary. If your biggest problem is that you have too many good players, chances are, things are going pretty well.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 3, 2016 15:56:59 GMT -5
Right, I think the obsession with making sure prospects aren't blocked years before they're MLB-ready is unnecessary. If your biggest problem is that you have too many good players, chances are, things are going pretty well. I agree. Ideally, the "prospect" starts forcing himself into the picture and allows the team to trade the incumbent veteran. Depending on contract status or time of year, that veteran might bring back real value (eg, Carlos Beltran).
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 3, 2016 16:16:08 GMT -5
Right, I think the obsession with making sure prospects aren't blocked years before they're MLB-ready is unnecessary. If your biggest problem is that you have too many good players, chances are, things are going pretty well. Well, it should come into play when thinking about signing a big free agent for a lot of years.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Aug 4, 2016 5:42:04 GMT -5
With the Benintendi era beginning, we'll likely, eventually, have the best Boston Outfield since Rice, Lynn, Evans with the new edition Killer B's of Benintendi, Bradley and Betts. Moncada as hinted by DDo is not far behind which to me means he'll be called up in September. I can't see Moncada going to first but instead being spot started at third for this season and likely to take over third base sometime in May or June of next season. Potentially Travis Shaw would be trade bait at that time (May/June 2017) season) or moved at the trade deadline next season. Hopefully we move Pablo anyway we can, backhoe etc. Hanley is likely to stick around for another season. Devers appears to be about 2 years away, or possibly the start of the 2019 season which is the last year, unless extended, for Betts and Bogaerts. At this point Pedey will be 35 and be at a point where nearly all infielders drop off dramatically. Devers either wins over 3rd base or is moved to first. Should he beat out Moncada at third Moncada moves to second. Only issue is that in the long run, most scouting reports seem to point to Moncada moving off 2B. My guess for the long run is that when Devers is ready, Bradley is dealt in an offseason deal to preserve money to retain Bogaerts and Betts, and Moncada is shifted to CF, assuming he doesn't bulk up too much and lose speed (which seems unlikely given the fact that he doesn't look like he could bulk up too much more). Responses like this are derailers without actually responding to the post. The long run (9 years from now??) is not what was discussed and its speculation on the scouts and in addition they have no idea what the needs of the team will be down the road because that is likely so far down the road as to not worthy of discussion or even pointing it out. BTW Moncada has been working out at third so.........
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 4, 2016 6:11:32 GMT -5
What? He's talking about when Devers is MLB-ready, which is two years from now.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,881
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 4, 2016 8:15:03 GMT -5
One common response here has been, why worry now? These things have a way of working themselves out. Jimed has already pointed out that we do need to think about this now, because we need to decide whether to obtain a DH over the winter. But you can also try to estimate the odds that there will be a logjam in two years.
For things to work themselves out, one of the following four things needs to happen:
-- We decide that Benintendi is a bust after he's had 2 years of MLB experience (or less), or he has a major injury -- We decide that Moncada is a bust after he's had a bit more than 1 year of MLB experience, or he has a major injury -- Pedroia has a major injury -- Devers stalls in AA or AAA Cecchini-style and is not, after all, knocking hard on the door before the end of 2018.
Obviously, the odds of each of the first three things happening are very slim. What about the fourth? Do top-20 hitting prospects ever stall in the high minors?
2015. Byron Buxton's struggles have all been in MLB; he has a near-1000 OPS in AAA. Joey Gallo was promoted to MLB after killing it in AA, and struggled in AAA when he was sent back down last year, but was very good there this year. Jorge Soler, great AAA numbers. J.P. Crawford. Had a terrible first 117 PA after his promotion to AAA this year, but is .298 / .376 / .404 since June 19. Others: Kris Bryant, Addison Russell, Carlos Correa, Corey Seager, Joc Pederson, Francisco Lindor, Miguel Sano, Blake Swihart, Kyle Schwarber.
Well, that's nobody. Looking at guys who ended up busting ...
Jesus Montero killed it in AAA (and actually had great numbers while catching his rookie season -- his problem was that he couldn't hit as a DH).
Domonic Brown was called up after a great 51 PA in AAA, had that spectacular first 10 games, then tanked, and was even worse in AAA when he was sent back down. Unlike JBJ, never recovered from being rushed.
Justin Smoak is a bit of a Beintendi comp in that he was the #11 pick out of college and was in AA the year after he was drafted (but at 22 rather than 21), and ended up as the #13 prospect. He had a terrible 94 PA (510 OPS) after an early July promotion to AAA that year, but bounced back to be good but not great (870 as a 1B in the PCL) the rest of the way. He was merely good again the next year before getting called up.
Preliminary conclusions:
1) Top 20 hitting prospects usually have AA experience. Devers is a prodigy. But we know that. 2) They very, very rarely don't get a chance in MLB in an expected timetable. As in, I didn't find one in this little exploration. However, because of #1, we're dealing with a SSS. 3) It seems far more likely than not that Devers will arrive more or less when expected, and that there will be no obvious way to fit him in.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,435
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Aug 4, 2016 8:25:51 GMT -5
Or we could sign a DH this winter and trade one of said DH or Shaw once Devers forces his way up. By the time Devers is ready I think Hanley will be borderline useless, too.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,881
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 4, 2016 8:58:35 GMT -5
Preliminary conclusions: 2) They very, very rarely don't get a chance in MLB in an expected timetable. As in, I didn't find one in this little exploration. However, because of #1, we're dealing with a SSS. Well, Lars Anderson is an example of a guy who was a top 20 prospect based on high-A and a bit of AA ball (though at age 20, not 19). Sandwiched around being named the #17 prospect, he hit .285 / .390 / .445 in his first 516 PA in AA, then closed the 2009 year with .148 / .239 / .204 in 159 PA. And never really hit again. He was a unique sort of head case, as Gabe Kabler once wrote about eloquently. We don't know whether Devers has a similar hidden flaw, of course.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,881
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 4, 2016 9:24:10 GMT -5
Or we could sign a DH this winter and trade one of said DH or Shaw once Devers forces his way up. By the time Devers is ready I think Hanley will be borderline useless, too. You have to work out both scenarios in detail. Which I've been meaning to do anyway. Obtaining a DH, Part 1. You're opening the season with Shaw at 3B and Hanley at 1B; the bench has Holt and Young. Young has no obvious platoon role, unless Benny struggles unexpectedly versus LHP. You probably want the last spot on the bench to be an Aaron Hill type to platoon with Shaw, which means that you give away Sandoval in the off-season, eating nearly all of his contract; he's unlikely to establish any trade value as a backup 1B / 3B. Not obtaining a DH, Part 1. It's the same as above, except that your DH is a Sandoval / Young platoon. So whatever your DH cost is (say, a draft pick plus Encarnacion's salary), it's not reaping you the DH's full value; you're paying for the upgrade from that platoon, which looks to be OK and might be good. Obtaining a DH, Part 2. When Moncada is ready, he takes over at 3B. Shaw goes to the bench ( a luxury, given that he's a 3.5 WAR sort of player), supplanting the Hill type, and starts some 1B against certain RHP. Still no platoon role for Young. Not obtaining a DH, Part 2. When Moncada is ready, he takes over 3B. Shaw goes to 1B, where he's a big defensive upgrade over Hanley. Hanley goes to DH, where his career numbers are tremendous. Versus LHP, Hanley plays 1B and Young is the DH. Sandoval is probably traded, and maybe nets you salary relief and/or someone of value. Alternately, if he looks like a valuable bench piece, you can keep him and move the Hill type, since he's no longer needed as Shaw's 3B platoon partner. Now your new DH represents the offensive upgrade over a Shaw / Young platoon, minus the defensive downgrade from Shaw to Hanley, minus a possible offensive downgrade because Hanley is not primarily a DH, minus whatever you could have gotten for Sandoval. Could that possibly be worth the price? I'm very dubious. A Shaw / Young platoon is not a weak spot in a lineup; it's solid. I'm not panicking to upgrade that to Encarnacion, if the cost means swapping a great defensive 1B for an average one, not giving Hanley a chance to DH, and eliminating any chance of getting some useful value from Sandoval, in addition to a draft pick and the salary commitment. It strikes me as vaguely idiotic even if Rafael Devers did not exist.
|
|
|