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
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,790
|
Post by nomar on Aug 4, 2016 9:51:51 GMT -5
If the deal is only for 2-4 years, and we're not over the luxury tax threshold, presuming the player is good enough for a team to take his contract, I'd still be fine with it.
Next year there's no telling if Moncada will even be ready to start in April. To me he still seems like he's got some developing to do, and likely will need some time in AAA. Nobody who strikes out as much as he does seems to adapt to the MLB without a prolonged cold streak.
I'd rather be over prepared and have to move an asset than rely on a platoon or a rookie to play every day, especially while Hanley is always a risk to get injured to begin with and hasn't shown he'll be a good DH. In 2017 were going to be aiming to be contenders. If we spend on a great hitter, even if on paper the marginal gain is less than what we're paying for per dollar, I think I would be okay with it (depending on what the actual deal is).
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Aug 4, 2016 9:52:45 GMT -5
Kevin Thomas @clearthebases 19h19 hours ago Febles & Moncada working on fielding balls in OF. Now at 3B
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 4, 2016 10:32:01 GMT -5
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? There are a number of other factors that could cause things to "work themselves out." For instance: -One of Benintendi, Moncada or Devers is traded. -Pedroia suffers natural age-related hitting and/or defensive decline and is no longer an above-average starter. -Betts or Bradley suffer significant performance decline, get hurt, or are traded. -Devers adds weight and ends up fitting better defensively at 1B or DH. Remember, we're talking about a situation no earlier than two years from now. The odds of one or more of the above items happening by then are, in the aggregate, pretty high.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 4, 2016 10:53:57 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.Do you really have any confidence in a Sandoval/Young platoon at DH? Even if you assume (a very optimistic assumption) Sandoval's bat goes back to his 2012-14 form, it doesn't play that well at DH (plus, he's one of the worst baserunners in the league). They'd maybe get a win or a win and a half out of those two, while Encarnacion looks like a four win player. More importantly, you're assuming full health. If literally any non-C (and maybe non-Bogaerts) starter gets injured, there's a huge benefit to having the next guy up be a starting-caliber option rather than, say, Marco Hernandez. That added depth value is huge, and that 10th man on the roster is almost guaranteed to get a large chunk of playing time over the course of a long season. While the Red Sox do have guys like Betts and Bogaerts and Bradley that won't need a lot of time off, they also have guys like Pedroia and Ramirez and Sandoval who will.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Aug 4, 2016 11:46:51 GMT -5
Agree. With signing EE, that pushes everyone down a level. Hanley/Shaw/EE for 1B/3B/DH is a huge upgrade. When Moncada is ready (we really don't know when that will be), then Shaw becomes a very good bench player. Sandoval's bat limits him to 3B only. Young is a very good 4th OF, not a DH. If Pablo can slim down to 300 lbs maybe we find a taker to take on some of his salary.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,924
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 4, 2016 14:51:00 GMT -5
If the deal is only for 2-4 years, and we're not over the luxury tax threshold, presuming the player is good enough for a team to take his contract, I'd still be fine with it. Next year there's no telling if Moncada will even be ready to start in April. To me he still seems like he's got some developing to do, and likely will need some time in AAA. Nobody who strikes out as much as he does seems to adapt to the MLB without a prolonged cold streak. I'd rather be over prepared and have to move an asset than rely on a platoon or a rookie to play every day, especially while Hanley is always a risk to get injured to begin with and hasn't shown he'll be a good DH. In 2017 were going to be aiming to be contenders. If we spend on a great hitter, even if on paper the marginal gain is less than what we're paying for per dollar, I think I would be okay with it (depending on what the actual deal is). 1) I've always thought his ETA is June or July. If you knew he was going to be ready in April, signing a DH would make no sense at all; you don't spend a draft pick and huge $ to relegate an above-average starter (Shaw) to the bench, especially when that's also a defensive downgrade of more than a win. 2) The way you do this is to only look at years in which he did DH, and weight his non-DH appearances each year by how much he DH'd in that year (as a % of his career DH appearances). The equivalent sample size for the non-DH PA is the lesser of the actual or the weighted PA (when it's the weighted, I put it in quotes). Here's the results: Role PA BA OBP SA EqA Field "2240" .269 .337 .442 .270 DH 147 .326 .374 .600 .323 And now look at the year-to-year breakdown. In 2007 and 2008, and again in 2011 to 2013, he had 4 to 11 PA a year at DH, so we lump those together; whereas the last 3 years he's done quite a bit more. Year(s) PA EqA PA EqA Diff 2007-13 "1000" .291 37 .286 -.005 2014 482 .283 23 .354 .071 2015 381 .238 47 .316 .078 2016 377 .273 40 .346 .072 As a very occasional DH, he had no difference at all (.285 / .358 / .492 in the field, .314 / .351 / .486 as DH). Since he started doing it more, the results are pretty startling both in their degree and their consistency. Here are the career totals over the last three years: Role PA BA OBP SA EqA Field 1240 .262 .328 .421 .261 DH 110 .330 .382 .640 .335 It's a tiny sample size, but it's been outrageously better, three years in a row. It passes the smell test, too, given that he's never been a great fielder and that his mentor and idol is one of the two greatest DH's of all time. Whatever mental tricks there are to being a good DH, you can bet that he's been taught them. You can regress that to the mean a heck of a lot and still come out with a solid split, and hence added value. When you add how much better Shaw is defensively at 1B (about a win if they're platooning), the Shaw / Ramirez option threatens to approach the Ramirez / Encarnacion one. You don't do that just to add depth; you have to be sure you're making the regular lineup much better.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,790
|
Post by nomar on Aug 4, 2016 15:16:21 GMT -5
If the deal is only for 2-4 years, and we're not over the luxury tax threshold, presuming the player is good enough for a team to take his contract, I'd still be fine with it. Next year there's no telling if Moncada will even be ready to start in April. To me he still seems like he's got some developing to do, and likely will need some time in AAA. Nobody who strikes out as much as he does seems to adapt to the MLB without a prolonged cold streak. I'd rather be over prepared and have to move an asset than rely on a platoon or a rookie to play every day, especially while Hanley is always a risk to get injured to begin with and hasn't shown he'll be a good DH. In 2017 were going to be aiming to be contenders. If we spend on a great hitter, even if on paper the marginal gain is less than what we're paying for per dollar, I think I would be okay with it (depending on what the actual deal is). 1) I've always thought his ETA is June or July. If you knew he was going to be ready in April, signing a DH would make no sense at all; you don't spend a draft pick and huge $ to relegate an above-average starter (Shaw) to the bench, especially when that's also a defensive downgrade of more than a win. 2) The way you do this is to only look at years in which he did DH, and weight his non-DH appearances each year by how much he DH'd in that year (as a % of his career DH appearances). The equivalent sample size for the non-DH PA is the lesser of the actual or the weighted PA (when it's the weighted, I put it in quotes). Here's the results: Role PA BA OBP SA EqA Field "2240" .269 .337 .442 .270 DH 147 .326 .374 .600 .323 And now look at the year-to-year breakdown. In 2007 and 2008, and again in 2011 to 2013, he had 4 to 11 PA a year at DH, so we lump those together; whereas the last 3 years he's done quite a bit more. Year(s) PA EqA PA EqA Diff 2007-13 "1000" .291 37 .286 -.005 2014 482 .283 23 .354 .071 2015 381 .238 47 .316 .078 2016 377 .273 40 .346 .072 As a very occasional DH, he had no difference at all (.285 / .358 / .492 in the field, .314 / .351 / .486 as DH). Since he started doing it more, the results are pretty startling both in their degree and their consistency. Here are the career totals over the last three years: Role PA BA OBP SA EqA Field 1240 .262 .328 .421 .261 DH 110 .330 .382 .640 .335 It's a tiny sample size, but it's been outrageously better, three years in a row. It passes the smell test, too, given that he's never been a great fielder and that his mentor and idol is one of the two greatest DH's of all time. Whatever mental tricks there are to being a good DH, you can bet that he's been taught them. You can regress that to the mean a heck of a lot and still come out with a solid split, and hence added value. When you add how much better Shaw is defensively at 1B (about a win if they're platooning), the Shaw / Ramirez option threatens to approach the Ramirez / Encarnacion one. You don't do that just to add depth; you have to be sure you're making the regular lineup much better. If you want to heavily weigh Hanley's hitting or DH'ing from 2+ years ago more so than the hitter he's been this year and last year then feel free, but I think DH'ing won't help him much more than his natural aging is hurting his offense. I think Encarnacion at DH is at minimum 2 wins better than any other 3B/1B/DH combo we throw out there in all likelihood. I don't like the small sample size aspect of the DH stats you pulled or the fact that Hanley has declined offensively since he got here. I don't trust him to be a great DH, nor do I trust a DH platoon with Sandoval and Young (who I would rather have on the bench). Losing a draft pick hurts, but chances are once you have EE, Shaw, Moncada, and Devers (maybe Hanley too but not sure) all ready to play every day, the return you get from trading someone (likely EE or Shaw) will be as valuable as that draft pick. The major cost is the monetary cost after you take that into account, and I think we can handle giving EE a 4 year deal with no long term problems financially.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Aug 4, 2016 15:19:37 GMT -5
Do you really have any confidence in a Sandoval/Young platoon at DH? Even if you assume (a very optimistic assumption) Sandoval's bat goes back to his 2012-14 form, it doesn't play that well at DH (plus, he's one of the worst baserunners in the league). They'd maybe get a win or a win and a half out of those two, while Encarnacion looks like a four win player. More importantly, you're assuming full health. If literally any non-C (and maybe non-Bogaerts) starter gets injured, there's a huge benefit to having the next guy up be a starting-caliber option rather than, say, Marco Hernandez. That added depth value is huge, and that 10th man on the roster is almost guaranteed to get a large chunk of playing time over the course of a long season. While the Red Sox do have guys like Betts and Bogaerts and Bradley that won't need a lot of time off, they also have guys like Pedroia and Ramirez and Sandoval who will. I'd have some confidence in a Young/Sandoval platoon, but I wouldn't say I'm confident. I think you have to give a player who has a $20M per year contract and one bad year followed by an injured year some chance to play. I wasn't fond of Sandoval as a free agent target, but even in his terrible year last year he hit righties league average. He's by no means an ideal option to DH, but I think eating his salary while also paying someone else to DH and take up a roster spot is less ideal. Your second paragraph is much more in line with my thinking, I'm far less confident in Sandoval returning to the field for more than 30 games a year. I don't want to see them sign another DH type who can't play the field, I'd prefer they get someone who can improve positional depth and let players get more off days at DH. If Martin Prado could be convinced to sign and was still available to play the OF he might be my preference. But I'd have to think a bit more about it.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Aug 6, 2016 15:28:54 GMT -5
I'm against the EE signing because I think he wants a long-term deal. We have had enough signing high-priced older players that haven't panned out. I'm expecting next year Moncada to be available whether it be spring or mid-summer anyways. Thus at the worst vs right-handed pitching we'll get a bump.
We have two potential DH's that can hit lefties next year - and that is Hanley and Chris Young. One of the should be decent enough vs righties and we also have Sandoval that can hit righties. And for the outfield we 'd have Chris Young getting enough at bats because he can sub at any position.
3b is Brock Holt and sometimes Shaw until Moncada comes. Until Moncada comes are hitting should be well enough. And we'll have solid pitching (should have). With Moncada arrival, then we could put Hanley Ramirez 1b primarily to pasture and make him DH. Hanley is not a good defensive 1b. I don't believe with age he will turn into a good defender. Therefore, I think it best to try to keep him off the defensive side and obviously acquiring a DH such as EE won't do that. -------- And as for Devers - if he is to be called up in 2018 - it means he is doing extremely well and projecting extremely well. So what's the big deal? You play him. In 2017 - I find it hard to believe that there won't be any weaknesses in the infield or at DH. Also will Pedroia be healthy (then Moncada goes to 2nd)? How well is Shaw playing in 2017? He can only bat vs lefties? Well if he's at 1st and that's where we're weak in 2017 and Devers is playing great - then trade Shaw before 2018. Now Devers plays 1st. You'd know about Shaw in 2017 and if you need to work in Devers to 1b.
Or in 2018 Devers splits at DH with Hanley if Shaw is fine? If so, then we say goodbye for certain with Pablo.
And now that Chris Young is gone in 2018 Brock Holt backs up the outfielders and all other positions excluding catcher and 1b. By that time Sam Travis should be a decent backup too.
There should be zero agita if Devers is ready in 2018.
|
|
|
Post by barney27 on Aug 6, 2016 18:29:37 GMT -5
When moncada gets past striking out 40% of the time in AA. Then you talk about when he comes up. He looks like a dynamic talent, but does he learn to play any other position. How good is his defense going to be? Hitting is one thing but getting to play another position on top of trying to figure out the bigs is tough. Not saying he will not do it. Just saying I think we are rushing him some. I think 2 years is a more realistic timeline. No ee signing. I think the sox have to look at what they have coming with contracts over the next 3-5 years. jbj, mookie, xb, and the 2 catchers will not be cheap. Plus they look right now like they will have to buy some pitching which will not come cheap.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Aug 6, 2016 22:06:50 GMT -5
I expect Moncada to improve his strikeout rate and by mid-July have a defensive spot he can hold onto. Even if he can't hold onto a defensive spot, he would be/ has a chance to be a very good option vs righties by the 2nd half of next year. Sure it's a risk but all is a risk. I expect Moncada to be a contributor between April - July. Whether he'll be good in his 1st year is anybody's guess.
I agree with barney; no EE, but I don't believe sox need starting pitching in the foreseeable future. They could use help in the bullpen however.
I just believe the most important thing is to try to get Hanley off of 1st base and the quicker Moncada can take 3b, the faster we can put Hanley where he belongs; as a DH. Whether he is part-time or full-time DH depends on Hanley's ability to handle right-handed pitching.
|
|
|
Post by barney27 on Aug 7, 2016 8:23:06 GMT -5
I expect Moncada to improve his strikeout rate and by mid-July have a defensive spot he can hold onto. Even if he can't hold onto a defensive spot, he would be/ has a chance to be a very good option vs righties by the 2nd half of next year. Sure it's a risk but all is a risk. I expect Moncada to be a contributor between April - July. Whether he'll be good in his 1st year is anybody's guess. I agree with barney; no EE, but I don't believe sox need starting pitching in the foreseeable future. They could use help in the bullpen however. I just believe the most important thing is to try to get Hanley off of 1st base and the quicker Moncada can take 3b, the faster we can put Hanley where he belongs; as a DH. Whether he is part-time or full-time DH depends on Hanley's ability to handle right-handed pitching. The high strikeout rate could be a lot of things. Pitch recognition, pressure to move up to the bigs, better pitching, and maybe trying to swing for the fences too much. The potential is there, just a matter of when it happens. It is all a risk. But, I think the sox are a little concerned that they do not want the same thing that happened to jbj his first couple of years, to happen to both beni and moncada. There is no rush to make it happen they have many options.
|
|
|
Post by barney27 on Aug 7, 2016 9:23:25 GMT -5
My apologies to all. Moncada strikeout rate is 33.6% not 40%. Still very high for a non power hitter.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 7, 2016 9:41:47 GMT -5
My apologies to all. Moncada strikeout rate is 33.6% not 40%. Still very high for a non power hitter. 30.1% with a .255 ISO. The .255 ISO is higher than Mike Trout's career ISO. Yeah the k-rate is high, but it's heading down and not worth bringing up 100 times while he's adjusting to a new level.
|
|
|
Post by dnfl333 on Aug 7, 2016 11:28:40 GMT -5
My apologies to all. Moncada strikeout rate is 33.6% not 40%. Still very high for a non power hitter. Some constructive criticism here, The Player is 21 with a combined .400 ob and .500 SLG pct and your worried about a K rate? 50 of 106 hits for extra bases. Your talking superstar status if it all plays out. The K rate is a non issue
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Aug 7, 2016 11:38:21 GMT -5
I expect Moncada to improve his strikeout rate and by mid-July have a defensive spot he can hold onto. Even if he can't hold onto a defensive spot, he would be/ has a chance to be a very good option vs righties by the 2nd half of next year. Sure it's a risk but all is a risk. I expect Moncada to be a contributor between April - July. Whether he'll be good in his 1st year is anybody's guess. I agree with barney; no EE, but I don't believe sox need starting pitching in the foreseeable future. They could use help in the bullpen however. I just believe the most important thing is to try to get Hanley off of 1st base and the quicker Moncada can take 3b, the faster we can put Hanley where he belongs; as a DH. Whether he is part-time or full-time DH depends on Hanley's ability to handle right-handed pitching. The high strikeout rate could be a lot of things. Pitch recognition, pressure to move up to the bigs, better pitching, and maybe trying to swing for the fences too much. The potential is there, just a matter of when it happens. It is all a risk. But, I think the sox are a little concerned that they do not want the same thing that happened to jbj his first couple of years, to happen to both beni and moncada. There is no rush to make it happen they have many options. I just don't believe the JBJ issue should be used as the main measuring stick. We've also had Betts and Shaw do well when they arrived. If Moncada can help us win games, he should be brought up. My guess is that the sooner management expects him to be brought up will determine what they're potentially going to do in the off-season. As we both agree there are risks, and I'm just as concerned the Sox management will overpay and/or trade young talent for a position Moncada would have "soon" been ready to fill. Thus the possibility of a bad trade or another bad signing for an over-the-hill player.
|
|
|
Post by rookie13 on Aug 7, 2016 15:53:02 GMT -5
If he murders AA pitching for the rest of the month do the Sox give him a September call up?
|
|
|
Post by barney27 on Aug 8, 2016 6:55:09 GMT -5
The high strikeout rate could be a lot of things. Pitch recognition, pressure to move up to the bigs, better pitching, and maybe trying to swing for the fences too much. The potential is there, just a matter of when it happens. It is all a risk. But, I think the sox are a little concerned that they do not want the same thing that happened to jbj his first couple of years, to happen to both beni and moncada. There is no rush to make it happen they have many options. I just don't believe the JBJ issue should be used as the main measuring stick. We've also had Betts and Shaw do well when they arrived. If Moncada can help us win games, he should be brought up. My guess is that the sooner management expects him to be brought up will determine what they're potentially going to do in the off-season. As we both agree there are risks, and I'm just as concerned the Sox management will overpay and/or trade young talent for a position Moncada would have "soon" been ready to fill. Thus the possibility of a bad trade or another bad signing for an over-the-hill player. Was not suggesting that jbj situation is the main measuring stick, just mentioning that could be a factor.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Aug 8, 2016 8:36:41 GMT -5
Moncada will be in Boston this year. Not saying he's staying here for ever but unless his injury is worse than expected... I expect him in Boston soon.
The offense lost with Ortiz could be mostly replaced in house with Benintendi upgrading the left field spot and Xander adding some additional power. I wouldn't go spending big long term dollars to Edwin and giving up a first rd pick.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 8, 2016 21:44:29 GMT -5
1) I've always thought his ETA is June or July. If you knew he was going to be ready in April, signing a DH would make no sense at all; you don't spend a draft pick and huge $ to relegate an above-average starter (Shaw) to the bench, especially when that's also a defensive downgrade of more than a win. 2) The way you do this is to only look at years in which he did DH, and weight his non-DH appearances each year by how much he DH'd in that year (as a % of his career DH appearances). The equivalent sample size for the non-DH PA is the lesser of the actual or the weighted PA (when it's the weighted, I put it in quotes). Here's the results: Role PA BA OBP SA EqA Field "2240" .269 .337 .442 .270 DH 147 .326 .374 .600 .323 And now look at the year-to-year breakdown. In 2007 and 2008, and again in 2011 to 2013, he had 4 to 11 PA a year at DH, so we lump those together; whereas the last 3 years he's done quite a bit more. Year(s) PA EqA PA EqA Diff 2007-13 "1000" .291 37 .286 -.005 2014 482 .283 23 .354 .071 2015 381 .238 47 .316 .078 2016 377 .273 40 .346 .072 As a very occasional DH, he had no difference at all (.285 / .358 / .492 in the field, .314 / .351 / .486 as DH). Since he started doing it more, the results are pretty startling both in their degree and their consistency. Here are the career totals over the last three years: Role PA BA OBP SA EqA Field 1240 .262 .328 .421 .261 DH 110 .330 .382 .640 .335 It's a tiny sample size, but it's been outrageously better, three years in a row. It passes the smell test, too, given that he's never been a great fielder and that his mentor and idol is one of the two greatest DH's of all time. Whatever mental tricks there are to being a good DH, you can bet that he's been taught them. You can regress that to the mean a heck of a lot and still come out with a solid split, and hence added value. When you add how much better Shaw is defensively at 1B (about a win if they're platooning), the Shaw / Ramirez option threatens to approach the Ramirez / Encarnacion one. You don't do that just to add depth; you have to be sure you're making the regular lineup much better. If you want to heavily weigh Hanley's hitting or DH'ing from 2+ years ago more so than the hitter he's been this year and last year then feel free, but I think DH'ing won't help him much more than his natural aging is hurting his offense. I think Encarnacion at DH is at minimum 2 wins better than any other 3B/1B/DH combo we throw out there in all likelihood. I don't like the small sample size aspect of the DH stats you pulled or the fact that Hanley has declined offensively since he got here. I don't trust him to be a great DH, nor do I trust a DH platoon with Sandoval and Young (who I would rather have on the bench). Losing a draft pick hurts, but chances are once you have EE, Shaw, Moncada, and Devers (maybe Hanley too but not sure) all ready to play every day, the return you get from trading someone (likely EE or Shaw) will be as valuable as that draft pick. The major cost is the monetary cost after you take that into account, and I think we can handle giving EE a 4 year deal with no long term problems financially. You'll be paying $12M for each of those wins for the next four years or so, and hoping (probably unrealistically) after 2 or so that it doesn't become more like $25-$30M, because at 35-36 he's probably not close to a 4-win player. And then, when Devers is ready, good luck unloading a $25M/year DH who's hitting .240/.300/.450. After Price, Hanley, and especially Sandoval, I'd be VERY cautious about dipping to high-priced free agency for a luxury, let alone a perceived need like Price or Sandoval was.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 8, 2016 21:47:18 GMT -5
If he murders AA pitching for the rest of the month do the Sox give him a September call up? Once the AA season is over, I would hope so. I don't think he's long for the minors, and it's better to get him PA soon, presuming he'll be up for good probably by next July. Besides, maybe he makes a difference this year.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 8, 2016 21:52:02 GMT -5
When moncada gets past striking out 40% of the time in AA. Then you talk about when he comes up. He looks like a dynamic talent, but does he learn to play any other position. How good is his defense going to be? Hitting is one thing but getting to play another position on top of trying to figure out the bigs is tough. Not saying he will not do it. Just saying I think we are rushing him some. I think 2 years is a more realistic timeline. No ee signing. I think the sox have to look at what they have coming with contracts over the next 3-5 years. jbj, mookie, xb, and the 2 catchers will not be cheap. Plus they look right now like they will have to buy some pitching which will not come cheap. Well, it's about 31%, which still isn't good. But it's not as brutal as you make it out to be. It's also unlikely that they go looking for any starting pitching, because the rotation is 5 deep. So while there will be some bullpen costs, it's not going to be astronomical. If anything, the cash that's freeing up would be best spent locking up some of the young guys longer-term.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,924
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 9, 2016 2:02:52 GMT -5
1) I've always thought his ETA is June or July. If you knew he was going to be ready in April, signing a DH would make no sense at all; you don't spend a draft pick and huge $ to relegate an above-average starter (Shaw) to the bench, especially when that's also a defensive downgrade of more than a win. 2) The way you do this is to only look at years in which he did DH, and weight his non-DH appearances each year by how much he DH'd in that year (as a % of his career DH appearances). The equivalent sample size for the non-DH PA is the lesser of the actual or the weighted PA (when it's the weighted, I put it in quotes). Here's the results: Role PA BA OBP SA EqA Field "2240" .269 .337 .442 .270 DH 147 .326 .374 .600 .323 And now look at the year-to-year breakdown. In 2007 and 2008, and again in 2011 to 2013, he had 4 to 11 PA a year at DH, so we lump those together; whereas the last 3 years he's done quite a bit more. Year(s) PA EqA PA EqA Diff 2007-13 "1000" .291 37 .286 -.005 2014 482 .283 23 .354 .071 2015 381 .238 47 .316 .078 2016 377 .273 40 .346 .072 As a very occasional DH, he had no difference at all (.285 / .358 / .492 in the field, .314 / .351 / .486 as DH). Since he started doing it more, the results are pretty startling both in their degree and their consistency. Here are the career totals over the last three years: Role PA BA OBP SA EqA Field 1240 .262 .328 .421 .261 DH 110 .330 .382 .640 .335 It's a tiny sample size, but it's been outrageously better, three years in a row. It passes the smell test, too, given that he's never been a great fielder and that his mentor and idol is one of the two greatest DH's of all time. Whatever mental tricks there are to being a good DH, you can bet that he's been taught them. You can regress that to the mean a heck of a lot and still come out with a solid split, and hence added value. When you add how much better Shaw is defensively at 1B (about a win if they're platooning), the Shaw / Ramirez option threatens to approach the Ramirez / Encarnacion one. You don't do that just to add depth; you have to be sure you're making the regular lineup much better. If you want to heavily weigh Hanley's hitting or DH'ing from 2+ years ago more so than the hitter he's been this year and last year then feel free, but I think DH'ing won't help him much more than his natural aging is hurting his offense. I think Encarnacion at DH is at minimum 2 wins better than any other 3B/1B/DH combo we throw out there in all likelihood. I don't like the small sample size aspect of the DH stats you pulled or the fact that Hanley has declined offensively since he got here. I don't trust him to be a great DH, nor do I trust a DH platoon with Sandoval and Young (who I would rather have on the bench). Losing a draft pick hurts, but chances are once you have EE, Shaw, Moncada, and Devers (maybe Hanley too but not sure) all ready to play every day, the return you get from trading someone (likely EE or Shaw) will be as valuable as that draft pick. The major cost is the monetary cost after you take that into account, and I think we can handle giving EE a 4 year deal with no long term problems financially. I'm looking at Halley's last three years only, and especially his two years with the Sox. Last year he hit .245 / .289 / .397 as a LF. Crap. But when he DH'd, he hit .295 / .319 / .682. Now, if you're smart, you're thinking there might be a big confound here, because he was tremendous through his injury on May 3 and awful afterwards. Did he have those splits because he DH'd more in April? No. When he was healthy, only 5% of his PA came as a DH; after he got hurt, it was 13%. The confound actually reduces the size of the DH effect. When healthy, he hit .279 / .340 / .558 as a LF. In his sole game as a DH, he went 2/5 with 2 HR. After he got hurt, he hit .234 / .271 / .346 as a LF. But as a DH, he hit .282 / .310 / .564. OK, so maybe he was already hot when he DH'd? No. For instance, he was 4/29, 2 BB, HBP, no XBH as a LF from May 20 to May 27, then DH'd two games in a row in Texas and went 4/8, 2B, 2 HR, IBB. This year he's hitting .268 / .348 / .426 as a 1B, which is better than last year, but still not what you'd want from a DH. Except that when he has been the DH, he's hit .351 / .400 / .649. Yes, the sample sizes are tiny, but the splits are immense (especially considering that hitters on average have a noticeable split the other way) and have been consistently so. There is no question he's better as a DH than as a position player; the only unknown is how much better he truly is. More on that later, maybe. And, BTW, Sandoval has the better fielding metrics at 1B, and like most hitters, has struggled at DH. Next year's team (vs. RHP) has Sandoval at 1B and Hanley at DH.
|
|
|
Post by barney27 on Aug 9, 2016 16:50:07 GMT -5
When moncada gets past striking out 40% of the time in AA. Then you talk about when he comes up. He looks like a dynamic talent, but does he learn to play any other position. How good is his defense going to be? Hitting is one thing but getting to play another position on top of trying to figure out the bigs is tough. Not saying he will not do it. Just saying I think we are rushing him some. I think 2 years is a more realistic timeline. No ee signing. I think the sox have to look at what they have coming with contracts over the next 3-5 years. jbj, mookie, xb, and the 2 catchers will not be cheap. Plus they look right now like they will have to buy some pitching which will not come cheap. Well, it's about 31%, which still isn't good. But it's not as brutal as you make it out to be. It's also unlikely that they go looking for any starting pitching, because the rotation is 5 deep. So while there will be some bullpen costs, it's not going to be astronomical. If anything, the cash that's freeing up would be best spent locking up some of the young guys longer-term. My apologies on the math error on strikeouts. Also was not aware that walks are included in strikeout rate. I agree with the relief pitching acquisitions. No ee for dh. Take care of the young guys you have. It is a big jump from AA to the bigs. I will go with the majority and say he has a big league ready bat. The projected landing spots for moncada are 2nd, 3rd, and right field. Petey is still playing 2nd base at a high level and is an icon. 3rd just starting to take grounders at AA. I have read where many 2nd base and ss do not take well to playing 3rd, even though they have the arm to play it. Right in fenway is very difficult and you need a center fielder type player to handle it. Shane V when healthy comes to mind. He has never played the outfield. Is moncada another dewey or trot. I do not know. Lots of pressure to play that position. We are asking and awful lot of a young guy. Maybe it happens and you can say I told you so.
|
|
|
Post by Canseco on Aug 9, 2016 17:00:22 GMT -5
Moncada will be in Boston this year. Not saying he's staying here for ever but unless his injury is worse than expected... I expect him in Boston soon. The offense lost with Ortiz could be mostly replaced in house with Benintendi upgrading the left field spot and Xander adding some additional power. I wouldn't go spending big long term dollars to Edwin and giving up a first rd pick. Amen.
|
|
|