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.
2016-2017 Red Sox Offseason (Non-Manager) Discussion
|
Post by Legion of Bloom on Dec 13, 2016 13:18:23 GMT -5
I don't like Rutledge as a platoon partner for Pablo, I would rather someone like Plouffe or Valencia.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Dec 13, 2016 13:20:09 GMT -5
You are off a month, 13 is late June the ASB is mid July. They have no reason to rush him back, they are in it to win the WS not a division title which the latest vegas odds had the Sox winning by 11 games. Yeah, the procedure was done on May 24th, so ASB would be just shy of 14 months. I hope that's about what they're aiming for, but this BP should be good enough to withstand a slight setback if he needs longer. The reports from the Sox indicate he make it back to start the season. Either way I'm excited for him to be one of the pitchers used in high leverage situations.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,990
|
Post by jimoh on Dec 13, 2016 13:32:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 13, 2016 13:43:59 GMT -5
Yeah, the procedure was done on May 24th, so ASB would be just shy of 14 months. I hope that's about what they're aiming for, but this BP should be good enough to withstand a slight setback if he needs longer. The reports from the Sox indicate he make it back to start the season. Either way I'm excited for him to be one of the pitchers used in high leverage situations. Maybe I'm misinterpreting your post, but are there reports that Carson Smith will be ready in time for the start of the season? The only reporting I could find had Dombrowski suggesting June 1 as a realistic timeline for Smith's return ( link).
|
|
|
Post by rookie13 on Dec 13, 2016 14:32:09 GMT -5
I think the Sox should take their time with Smith. There's no need to rush him back, especially when you consider his very unorthodox delivery. The bullpen looks plenty capable, so I don't see the need to get him on the team asap.
Unless the bullpen implodes and is pitching horribly, they should let him take extra time to make sure he's 100% healthy.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Dec 13, 2016 14:39:20 GMT -5
From day 1, Dominguez was considered a glove first 3Bman, not sure why that didn't seem to pan out but that's life. As a minor league signing (and not on the 40 man), pretty much the only shot he'd have at seeing Boston would be a long injury to Pablo. Hernandez and Marrero would be called up before he got a call. It's a solid signing for the Sox. Nothing lost buying an insurance plan for Sandoval. This scouting report says different. He had good defense but it's the bat that made him a 1st rounder. Comments: While teammate Mike Moustakas has been getting more buzz lately because of his torrid home run pace, Dominguez' skills should not be overlooked. He, too, can hit for power and should hit for average as well. At the same time, he's considered to be one of the better defensive third baseman to come out of a draft in a long time. The whole package should make him a first round pick.If you click in to the expanded report there are not straight grades but under hit tool it says: "Good solid bat with power potential." Baseball America also had him among their "Best Pure Hitters" and "Best Power Hitters" in their "Best Tools" 2007 draft preview. I remember the hype about this guy particularly well because we knew a family who had a son who played against him and kept telling me he and Moustakis we're "can't miss MLB players" according to the scouts who were at the games.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,907
|
Post by nomar on Dec 13, 2016 15:36:11 GMT -5
I was being sarcastic about Dominguez by the way.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 13, 2016 21:57:25 GMT -5
From day 1, Dominguez was considered a glove first 3Bman, not sure why that didn't seem to pan out but that's life. As a minor league signing (and not on the 40 man), pretty much the only shot he'd have at seeing Boston would be a long injury to Pablo. Hernandez and Marrero would be called up before he got a call. It's a solid signing for the Sox. Nothing lost buying an insurance plan for Sandoval. This scouting report says different. He had good defense but it's the bat that made him a 1st rounder. Comments: While teammate Mike Moustakas has been getting more buzz lately because of his torrid home run pace, Dominguez' skills should not be overlooked. He, too, can hit for power and should hit for average as well. At the same time, he's considered to be one of the better defensive third baseman to come out of a draft in a long time. The whole package should make him a first round pick.If you click in to the expanded report there are not straight grades but under hit tool it says: "Good solid bat with power potential." Baseball America also had him among their "Best Pure Hitters" and "Best Power Hitters" in their "Best Tools" 2007 draft preview. I remember the hype about this guy particularly well because we knew a family who had a son who played against him and kept telling me he and Moustakis we're "can't miss MLB players" according to the scouts who were at the games. My bad on "from day one", I should have said from day one of his MLB career. From Goldstein in 2010: Dominguez is one of, if not the best defensive third baseman in the minors. He has outstanding instincts, soft hands, silky-smooth actions, and a plus arm. While in the minors, his hitting never really developed but his defense was elite. His MLB stat lines don't show that though. ADD: 2013 his bat was anemic but his defense earned him a roster spot for 2014. In 2014, both his offense and defense were negative to the point that he was one of the worse players in baseball. ADD2: I still think it's a solid pickup for insurance against a long Pablo DL trip.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 13, 2016 23:51:48 GMT -5
What's the over/under on number of starts Dominguez makes in 2017?
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Dec 14, 2016 0:35:12 GMT -5
The reports from the Sox indicate he make it back to start the season. Either way I'm excited for him to be one of the pitchers used in high leverage situations. Maybe I'm misinterpreting your post, but are there reports that Carson Smith will be ready in time for the start of the season? The only reporting I could find had Dombrowski suggesting June 1 as a realistic timeline for Smith's return ( link). I missed the word may before make it back. I recall reading it but I can't find a link now. Edit: That link leaves it open and DD is hedging his bets by saying June 1st. I've seen a quote where Smith believes he could be back by opening day. I'd say those are the parameters and it very well could be between those 2 dates
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,990
|
Post by jimoh on Dec 14, 2016 6:27:28 GMT -5
This scouting report says different. He had good defense but it's the bat that made him a 1st rounder. Comments: While teammate Mike Moustakas has been getting more buzz lately because of his torrid home run pace, Dominguez' skills should not be overlooked. He, too, can hit for power and should hit for average as well. At the same time, he's considered to be one of the better defensive third baseman to come out of a draft in a long time. The whole package should make him a first round pick.[...] I remember the hype about this guy particularly well because we knew a family who had a son who played against him and kept telling me he and Moustakis we're "can't miss MLB players" according to the scouts who were at the games. Matt Huegel Matt Huegel Dominguez with a .231/.273/.371 career MLB line. Mike Moustakis, first almost 2000 PAs in mlb: .236 .290 .379 .668 (he hit very well in the minors of course)
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Dec 14, 2016 13:08:34 GMT -5
This scouting report says different. He had good defense but it's the bat that made him a 1st rounder. Comments: While teammate Mike Moustakas has been getting more buzz lately because of his torrid home run pace, Dominguez' skills should not be overlooked. He, too, can hit for power and should hit for average as well. At the same time, he's considered to be one of the better defensive third baseman to come out of a draft in a long time. The whole package should make him a first round pick.[...] I remember the hype about this guy particularly well because we knew a family who had a son who played against him and kept telling me he and Moustakis we're "can't miss MLB players" according to the scouts who were at the games. Matt Huegel Matt Huegel Dominguez with a .231/.273/.371 career MLB line. Mike Moustakis, first almost 2000 PAs in mlb: .236 .290 .379 .668 (he hit very well in the minors of course) My point exactly. Word of caution to anyone who says that (insert your binkie prospects names here) are "sure things" or will "rake" or "deal" in the majors. This is the most humbling game in the world, and even the experts get this wrong very, very often.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 14, 2016 13:13:04 GMT -5
Fun tidbit: The #1 B-Ref similarity score to Matt Dominguez is Will Middlebrooks.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Dec 14, 2016 14:57:59 GMT -5
and in 2014, the worst WPA in the AL: 1. JBJ -4.11 2. Dominguez -3.76 5. Stephen Drew -2.35 6. Bogaerts -2.32
That 2014 team was truly miserable
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Dec 14, 2016 15:49:14 GMT -5
Fun tidbit: The #1 B-Ref similarity score to Matt Dominguez is Will Middlebrooks. Isn't that the opposite of a fun bit (
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 14, 2016 16:14:38 GMT -5
Matt Huegel Matt Huegel Dominguez with a .231/.273/.371 career MLB line. Mike Moustakis, first almost 2000 PAs in mlb: .236 .290 .379 .668 (he hit very well in the minors of course) My point exactly. Word of caution to anyone who says that (insert your binkie prospects names here) are "sure things" or will "rake" or "deal" in the majors. This is the most humbling game in the world, and even the experts get this wrong very, very often. In recent years, Red Sox position player prospects have a pretty freaking high hit rate. Moncada was the one who I was iffy on, but your strategy of trading every prospect is a good way of ensuring you're never going to get almost free production for several years instead of paying full price (actually overpaying) for every player on your team. I honestly believe that sitting on every prospect would have eventually turned the Red Sox into a dynasty that would last more than 3 years, despite the busts. The best players in the majors are pretty much all under 25 now.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 14, 2016 16:57:58 GMT -5
My point exactly. Word of caution to anyone who says that (insert your binkie prospects names here) are "sure things" or will "rake" or "deal" in the majors. This is the most humbling game in the world, and even the experts get this wrong very, very often. In recent years, Red Sox position player prospects have a pretty freaking high hit rate. Moncada was the one who I was iffy on, but your strategy of trading every prospect is a good way of ensuring you're never going to get almost free production for several years instead of paying full price (actually overpaying) for every player on your team. I honestly believe that sitting on every prospect would have eventually turned the Red Sox into a dynasty that would last more than 3 years, despite the busts. The best players in the majors are pretty much all under 25 now. I've looked into that success rate in detail; it's definitely for real, and I've argued that it's the result of superior emphasis on makeup. And I agree that it probably doesn't apply to Moncada. He was an off-the-scale physical talent, and we were bidding against every other team in an open market. A world of difference between that and drafting one guy out of hundreds on your draft board, and trying to get an edge by doing a better job of scouting brains. So there's no reason to believe he aced the psych tests as well. Was it KLaw who just put his bust rate at 30%? I can buy that. There's a lot of variance in his future defensive value, too.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 14, 2016 17:14:36 GMT -5
In recent years, Red Sox position player prospects have a pretty freaking high hit rate. Moncada was the one who I was iffy on, but your strategy of trading every prospect is a good way of ensuring you're never going to get almost free production for several years instead of paying full price (actually overpaying) for every player on your team. I honestly believe that sitting on every prospect would have eventually turned the Red Sox into a dynasty that would last more than 3 years, despite the busts. The best players in the majors are pretty much all under 25 now. I've looked into that success rate in detail; it's definitely for real, and I've argued that it's the result of superior emphasis on makeup. And I agree that it probably doesn't apply to Moncada. He was an off-the-scale physical talent, and we were bidding against every other team in an open market. A world of difference between that and drafting one guy out of hundreds on your draft board, and trying to get an edge by doing a better job of scouting brains. So there's no reason to believe he aced the psych tests as well. Was it KLaw who just put his bust rate at 30%? I can buy that. There's a lot of variance in his future defensive value, too. In his very short time with the Red Sox, Moncada ran straight through a stop sign by Butterfield and didn't run on a fly ball with two outs. They couldn't even trust him to pinch run after that, let alone deal with the strikeout problems. He's like the opposite of Mookie and Xander, two guys who are always using their intelligence to take extra bases without being reckless.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Dec 14, 2016 20:01:12 GMT -5
My point exactly. Word of caution to anyone who says that (insert your binkie prospects names here) are "sure things" or will "rake" or "deal" in the majors. This is the most humbling game in the world, and even the experts get this wrong very, very often. In recent years, Red Sox position player prospects have a pretty freaking high hit rate. Moncada was the one who I was iffy on, but your strategy of trading every prospect is a good way of ensuring you're never going to get almost free production for several years instead of paying full price (actually overpaying) for every player on your team. I honestly believe that sitting on every prospect would have eventually turned the Red Sox into a dynasty that would last more than 3 years, despite the busts. The best players in the majors are pretty much all under 25 now. I definitely do not want to trade them all. I was iffy about this deal in particulal but signed on after giving it a bit of thought because they retained Devers, who I've been on record as the superior prospect at 3rd, and because no one went off the MLB roster - although I would've been open to JBJ as a sell-high candidtae, and who I really like - if it got you to keep out Kopech. I also hated giving up Espinosa for Pomeranz and Margot in the deal for a reliever. Cherington traded a few guys that I thought was insane given the return - Reddick and Lowrie being the top two that come to mind. That said, I'm pretty sure several of our current faves may follow Dominguez' path. Travis is one who I think could go either way, anc at best I think he has the ceiling of an average MLB first baseman. Swihart is another who I think doesn't project as anything special if he's not a catcher, but who could beabove average or even a star in that position. My only point was that even guys like Domiguez, who are highly touted all through the minors, can go the other way and sometimes it's not a bad thing to sell high. In fact, I remember we all had a long conversation about Middlebrooks when he was going crazy in AA whether he was a star in the making, a Travis Fryman-type or a small sample freak. Knowing who and when to deal high is always the toughest call, and made correctly - or incorrectly - by people who have more direct knowledge and experience than anyone here.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Dec 15, 2016 13:23:12 GMT -5
My point exactly. Word of caution to anyone who says that (insert your binkie prospects names here) are "sure things" or will "rake" or "deal" in the majors. This is the most humbling game in the world, and even the experts get this wrong very, very often. In recent years, Red Sox position player prospects have a pretty freaking high hit rate. Moncada was the one who I was iffy on, but your strategy of trading every prospect is a good way of ensuring you're never going to get almost free production for several years instead of paying full price (actually overpaying) for every player on your team. I honestly believe that sitting on every prospect would have eventually turned the Red Sox into a dynasty that would last more than 3 years, despite the busts. The best players in the majors are pretty much all under 25 now. Jimed, in many cases I'd be totally on board with your statement but with the Red Sox it is not necc. as you state. Becuase we have so many young players pre-arbitration eligible and veterans under contract for the next several seasons the Sox need for support SHOULD be minimal, and should a need incur we will overpay but it should be the players on the perimeter and not core players so we can handle that. If the Sox draft well the next few season we should be fine. If we draft well the next few seasons then their might be a few years between what we have, who leaves and who develops quick enough from the farm to increase the concern but it should be limited to a year or two four to five years down the road.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Dec 16, 2016 8:17:31 GMT -5
Anyone else find it eerily creepy that the Sox last won back to back championships in 1917 and 1918 and 100 years later the Sox are well positioned to do the same very thing?
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,907
|
Post by nomar on Dec 16, 2016 8:28:42 GMT -5
Anyone else find it eerily creepy that the Sox last won back to back championships in 1917 and 1918 and 100 years later the Sox are well positioned to do the same very thing? Eerily arousing
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Dec 16, 2016 8:42:08 GMT -5
Anyone else find it eerily creepy that the Sox last won back to back championships in 1917 and 1918 and 100 years later the Sox are well positioned to do the same very thing? Eerily arousing Comment of the year. Lol. Congratulations sir.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,696
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 16, 2016 10:06:32 GMT -5
Anyone else find it eerily creepy that the Sox last won back to back championships in 1917 and 1918 and 100 years later the Sox are well positioned to do the same very thing? Huh? If you mean by Sox as the White Sox and Red Sox, ok - the White Sox won the 1917 World Series and the Red Sox won the 1918 World Series. The Red Sox last won the World Series back-to-back in 1915 and 1916. Am I misunderstanding something?
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Dec 16, 2016 11:14:29 GMT -5
and in 2014, the worst WPA in the AL: 1. JBJ -4.11 2. Dominguez -3.76 5. Stephen Drew -2.35 6. Bogaerts -2.32 That 2014 team was truly miserable A cautious reminder to all about how nearly all prospects will take a year to 2 (if not longer) to reach their own level. Even Harper and Machado (possibly the next $300,000,000 baseball players) took several years to begin to reach their potential.
|
|
|