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.
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 30, 2016 19:27:48 GMT -5
Please provide some empirical evidence that Brock Holt is a "better player." He's certainly not a better hitter based on OPS. And I'd like some evidence that he's a better defensive 3b than Shaw. Beyond that, using Holt as a starter 1) clearly wears him down and kills his performance, and 2) means that they lose his outstanding flexibility between positions as a superutility, which is where his true value arises from. I think this approach would be an unmitigated disaster. Look at when they both played a complete season. Brock Holt's 2015 season vs Shaw's 2016. Holt had a higher ba, and obp, while Shaw has the higher slugging and they had near equal OPS. Holt imo has a better chance to hit left-handed pitching in that he hit left-handers pretty well for a full season in 2015 (and in 2014) while Shaw hit left handers pretty well in 2015 it was a shortened season. Both got wipted out vs lefties this year- but as far as a hitter and they have the same OPS- the guy that is more complete is better. If you want to look at 2016 season only - I'm nto sure that is fair - in that Holt had a concussion which crushed him for lots of at bats during his concussion and I remember him saying when he first came back it hurt him afterwards.
I don't believe 2015 season of Shaw is relevant. With just 248pa's, the opposing pitchers hadn't found his weaknesses. While Holt had 2 years of being consistent in 2014 and 2015 with pa's doubling Shaw of 492 and 509 respectively.
As far as 3b, I don't have that. Just an opinion. Holt hasn't been given one position to start. Therefore he is working on all positions. If he was allowed to work primarily at one position naturally I believe he would improve at it. As far as Shaw defensively - I don't believe he charges well, I don't believe his arm is better than Holt. I believe Holt can have better range if he was allowed to work at it. So in summary I'll take the more consistent hitting of Holt and the above mentioned fielding.
As far as 1-- "Clearly wearing him down:" Holt gets worn down when he is playing every day over the course of a full season. In July I'm expecting Moncada to become available. And there are days before July that Shaw can sub for Holt. PLUS what I have proposed is the Red Sox to go after Pearce. Pearce hits lefties so Holt won't be playing everyday even before the Moncada arrival. Therefore he can sub for some players on an occasional day as well. In 2014 and 2015 he showed he was pretty good through July 4th of both 2014 and 2015 season when he was playing nearly every day. Now if we get Pearce and Holt doesn't bat vs lefties, I don't believe he'd wear down before Moncada arrives.
1A-- I don't want Holt or Shaw being much of a sub in the outfield to start the season. I thought Young was the better player last year, so super-sub Holt is already behind the 8-ball to start as far as an outfield sub. We don't need Holt there much.
2-- Holt offers outstanding flexibility but if he is better than another player - which imo he is better than Shaw- then I want the guy that is better getting more at bats everyday. I'm trying to play my best and trying to win everyday. If Holt is better than Shaw, then he should be used more than Shaw at every opportunity because he gives us the best opportunity to win. As mentioned in number 1 - he can still be a sub in the 1st half of the season before the Moncada arrival while being a primary starter while he doesn't paly much vs lefties if we get that right-handed bat which I feel we should get.
I think it's important the Sox go after a righty bat that hit lefties that can play 1st and 3rd. This righty bat will limit Moncada's at bats vs lefties too but in terms of being worn down, the righty bat takes that issue away barring injury. I'd be open to giving sporadic at bats to Holt or Shaw or Panda and definitely Moncada vs lefties. As well as if Pearce is hitting the cover off the ball vs lefties then give him sporadic bats vs righties. Then see how they do. Maybe Shaw is more like 2015? We did that with Young. Young reduces the chance of Holt wearing down. The same with getting Pearce.
IMO to rely on Shaw though - or Panda and have them play full time and have them go against lefties without them showing us they've improved is the potential disaster.
Travis Shaw's career OPS is 50 points higher. That's a huge difference. Now, OBP is more important for scoring, but Shaw still leads wRC+, 97 to 92. And Shaw is an above-average 3b: www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=11982&position=1B/3BHolt almost certainly isn't better defensively, and is probably worse, perhaps significantly so. Shaw has been worth 3.0 fWAR to Holt's 4.2, but in half as many PA. Holt has worn down every time he's started regularly. What do you do if Moncada isn't ready? Holt isn't better, he's probably not even as good, and he may be actually slightly to moderately worse. Plus you're giving up depth and flexibility. I say, keep both Shaw and Sandoval until somebody claims the position, or Moncada's ready, barring a great offer for Shaw. They have nothing to lose by doing so.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 30, 2016 19:43:58 GMT -5
Shaw has been worth 3.0 fWAR in about 800 PA over his career. As Ted Williams said, and JBJ (and Xander Bogaerts, to a lesser extent) has been excellent evidence of, you really can't properly evaluate a hitter until he's had 1000 MLB AB (or PA, I suppose). So Shaw has been a marginally above-average player so far in his short, 1.5-year career, at roughly 2.5 fWAR per full season. Yes, he's very streaky. He's also an above-average defensive 3b. He costs nothing. He's entering his prime. He's still on the theoretical upswing of his plate approach development curve. Since HR power peaks at 27-28, his best power years are probably in the near future, too. He's shown an ability to exceed expectations, and odds. He's outperformed Sandoval two years in a row, one of which was due to a season-ending Sandoval shoulder injury--the type of injury that affects hitting, and power in particular. It literally makes no sense whatsoever to trade Shaw right now, unless they get a "can't refuse" offer. They can wait until the 3b depth situation is more stable, and it costs them nothing. They have no critical need, and their only significant needs are (and this is arguable) DH/CIF (and he fits one need as a wholly serviceable MLB starter), and RP. Both of those can be addressed via FA. Absolutely, if a good deal comes around, I hope they take it. But their rotation is set, their OF is set, C is in flux but with multiple options, and MIF is set. They're a roughly 95-win team as constituted. There's no point in pre-emptively creating holes, unless the "want" they fill is as (reliably) much better than the option there as the loss of Shaw figures to be. I don't think counting on Sandoval or Moncada for anything is wise. I'd rather be pleasantly surprised than (as with the rotation 4-5 through July this past year) horribly disappointed. That just puts them in a *need* situation where they give up another Espinoza to fill a hole they created. Travis Shaw is going to have a prime? I'm not so sure about this at all. Hanley Ramirez had the same exact shoulder operation and continued to hit well throughout his career. I expect this to continue with Pablo. I know your approach is to keep everything in house and conserve. Dave Dombrowski doesn't fit this style. I think you're going to be disappointed with the way he thinks. He sees needs and fills them. There's a chance he keeps Shaw if they don't sign Edwin Encarnacion, but if they do, I'm expecting a trade. 1) Pablo Sandoval has never been the hitter Hanley has. 2) Sandoval was awful *before* his injury 3) What "need" do you think the Sox have to fill? And, more importantly, what makes you think Shaw will have enough value in trade to justify the loss of depth for an improvement wherever the incoming player will be? And how big of an improvement do you expect? Say you trade him for a 'pen arm...who does the incoming pitcher replace, and are you gaining more than you can expect to lose? You're giving up a 2.5-WAR player who costs nothing. How certain are you that Sandoval (who was a -1.5 or so WAR player *before* injury) can beat 2.5 WAR? What happens if he's no good? Moncada struggles in AAA? Unless the Sox can **clearly and significantly** improve, the risk due to loss of depth is WAY more critical than a marginal improvement in the bullpen (where a good 7th-inning arm like Ziegler can be obtained a lot more readily, and cheaply, than a starting-caliber 3b). You're talking about Dombrowski aggressively filling needs...but you're claiming he's going to potentially create one. Now, he might if the price is right, and if they got a guy like, say, Wade Davis, I might say it was worth the risk. But I think it's a bad idea to trade Shaw just to trade him. Average players have real value...they let you bide your time until great ones come along. And average players making league minimum are VERY valuable. Right now, Shaw's providing about $15M yearly in excess value, on top of being great depth for an otherwise tenuous position.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 30, 2016 19:51:59 GMT -5
Btw, that $15M is an under-estimate, given that 2.5 WAR over a full season translates to approximately $20M in the FA market.
Also, Shaw may not have a "prime," but he's an inexperienced player who's reaching the age where hitters historically peak. Nobody knows if he will, but the signs point to it happening over the next 3-5 years...exactly the time he's under contract. Furthermore, you'd be selling low on his value after a tough last two months. I'm not arguing against trading him, just against trading him in the offseason for anything less than a "win" trade.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Oct 30, 2016 21:44:44 GMT -5
Btw, that $15M is an under-estimate, given that 2.5 WAR over a full season translates to approximately $20M in the FA market. Also, Shaw may not have a "prime," but he's an inexperienced player who's reaching the age where hitters historically peak. Nobody knows if he will, but the signs point to it happening over the next 3-5 years...exactly the time he's under contract. Furthermore, you'd be selling low on his value after a tough last two months. I'm not arguing against trading him, just against trading him in the offseason for anything less than a "win" trade. I'll make a easy prediction. The Sox will sign Edwin Encarnacion and trades Shaw.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Oct 30, 2016 21:48:23 GMT -5
Pablo's weight was the biggest reason for his decline. While Pablo wasn't Hanley, Pablo was 20-25 homerun guy in his first full two years in the big leagues. If he's in shape he has a better hit tool and can probably be above average defensively. If not, then Marco Hernandez and Moncada/Dubon are good fall back options.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Oct 30, 2016 21:49:47 GMT -5
I could see a Danny Valencia and another player traded for Shaw. That fills needs and makes the Sox better in 2017.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Oct 30, 2016 21:53:58 GMT -5
I could see a Danny Valencia and another player traded for Shaw. That fills needs and makes the Sox better in 2017. Kind of? Danny is atrocious at third base, and probably a worse defender than Shaw at 1B as well. Unless he's facing a lefty, he's a replacement level player, so I'm not sure he's the guy you want to point to to replace Shaw -- unless you're pretty comfortable with Pablo playing everyday vs righties, and OK without having an average-plus defensive third baseman.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 30, 2016 22:10:45 GMT -5
Btw, that $15M is an under-estimate, given that 2.5 WAR over a full season translates to approximately $20M in the FA market. Also, Shaw may not have a "prime," but he's an inexperienced player who's reaching the age where hitters historically peak. Nobody knows if he will, but the signs point to it happening over the next 3-5 years...exactly the time he's under contract. Furthermore, you'd be selling low on his value after a tough last two months. I'm not arguing against trading him, just against trading him in the offseason for anything less than a "win" trade. I'll make a easy prediction. The Sox will sign Edwin Encarnacion and trades Shaw. That wouldn't surprise me. I wouldn't like it, but it wouldn't be surprising, either. If they're going to do an overpriced FA, I'd rather see Beltran or Bautista on a much shorter deal. Now, if they do trade Shaw, what do they look to get back? RP? Minor league (high-A/AA, high upside) 1b/DH type masher? Regardless, Encarnacion doesn't at all affect their 3b depth, although it does mean they can absorb a terrible offensive 3b more readily. Then again, they could spend that $22M/year over five years on elite bullpen arms (for shorter contracts, too), not trade Shaw, and probably be a better team, especially in the playoffs. They'd also have a lot more valuable commodities in trades if they ever wanted to move those relievers (vs. a giant contract for an aging slugger).
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Oct 31, 2016 0:29:01 GMT -5
Look at when they both played a complete season. Brock Holt's 2015 season vs Shaw's 2016. Holt had a higher ba, and obp, while Shaw has the higher slugging and they had near equal OPS. Holt imo has a better chance to hit left-handed pitching in that he hit left-handers pretty well for a full season in 2015 (and in 2014) while Shaw hit left handers pretty well in 2015 it was a shortened season. Both got wipted out vs lefties this year- but as far as a hitter and they have the same OPS- the guy that is more complete is better. If you want to look at 2016 season only - I'm nto sure that is fair - in that Holt had a concussion which crushed him for lots of at bats during his concussion and I remember him saying when he first came back it hurt him afterwards.
I don't believe 2015 season of Shaw is relevant. With just 248pa's, the opposing pitchers hadn't found his weaknesses. While Holt had 2 years of being consistent in 2014 and 2015 with pa's doubling Shaw of 492 and 509 respectively.
As far as 3b, I don't have that. Just an opinion. Holt hasn't been given one position to start. Therefore he is working on all positions. If he was allowed to work primarily at one position naturally I believe he would improve at it. As far as Shaw defensively - I don't believe he charges well, I don't believe his arm is better than Holt. I believe Holt can have better range if he was allowed to work at it. So in summary I'll take the more consistent hitting of Holt and the above mentioned fielding.
As far as 1-- "Clearly wearing him down:" Holt gets worn down when he is playing every day over the course of a full season. In July I'm expecting Moncada to become available. And there are days before July that Shaw can sub for Holt. PLUS what I have proposed is the Red Sox to go after Pearce. Pearce hits lefties so Holt won't be playing everyday even before the Moncada arrival. Therefore he can sub for some players on an occasional day as well. In 2014 and 2015 he showed he was pretty good through July 4th of both 2014 and 2015 season when he was playing nearly every day. Now if we get Pearce and Holt doesn't bat vs lefties, I don't believe he'd wear down before Moncada arrives.
1A-- I don't want Holt or Shaw being much of a sub in the outfield to start the season. I thought Young was the better player last year, so super-sub Holt is already behind the 8-ball to start as far as an outfield sub. We don't need Holt there much.
2-- Holt offers outstanding flexibility but if he is better than another player - which imo he is better than Shaw- then I want the guy that is better getting more at bats everyday. I'm trying to play my best and trying to win everyday. If Holt is better than Shaw, then he should be used more than Shaw at every opportunity because he gives us the best opportunity to win. As mentioned in number 1 - he can still be a sub in the 1st half of the season before the Moncada arrival while being a primary starter while he doesn't paly much vs lefties if we get that right-handed bat which I feel we should get.
I think it's important the Sox go after a righty bat that hit lefties that can play 1st and 3rd. This righty bat will limit Moncada's at bats vs lefties too but in terms of being worn down, the righty bat takes that issue away barring injury. I'd be open to giving sporadic at bats to Holt or Shaw or Panda and definitely Moncada vs lefties. As well as if Pearce is hitting the cover off the ball vs lefties then give him sporadic bats vs righties. Then see how they do. Maybe Shaw is more like 2015? We did that with Young. Young reduces the chance of Holt wearing down. The same with getting Pearce.
IMO to rely on Shaw though - or Panda and have them play full time and have them go against lefties without them showing us they've improved is the potential disaster.
Travis Shaw's career OPS is 50 points higher. That's a huge difference. Now, OBP is more important for scoring, but Shaw still leads wRC+, 97 to 92. And Shaw is an above-average 3b: www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=11982&position=1B/3BHolt almost certainly isn't better defensively, and is probably worse, perhaps significantly so. Shaw has been worth 3.0 fWAR to Holt's 4.2, but in half as many PA. Holt has worn down every time he's started regularly. What do you do if Moncada isn't ready? Holt isn't better, he's probably not even as good, and he may be actually slightly to moderately worse. Plus you're giving up depth and flexibility. I say, keep both Shaw and Sandoval until somebody claims the position, or Moncada's ready, barring a great offer for Shaw. They have nothing to lose by doing so. Travis Shaw's OPS is not 50 points higher if you exclude his 2015 season which imo should be done. MLB scouting has found his weakness and Travis was never much of a hitter in minor league ball so expect him to be more like 2016 and more like what we was in the minors and not use the 2015 outlier. I believe 2016 is more accurate to project for Travis going forward. And again- Holt's effectiveness this year was affected by his concussion while he played and even a time when he came back he even said the concussion was affecting him.
I believe Holt will be better defensively just as nearly any more athletically gifted player that has shown he's very good all over the field would be especially better if they have a stronger arm if you allow them to focus on one position.
Therefore as I said before- Holt's better because his ba and obp are the same while Shaw slugs better and they have about the same OPS when comparing full season vs full season. Then add in Holt's ceiling to play at 3rd, Holt is better.
And again as I said prior Holt wore down greatly after early July in which he was being forced to play every day. With the acquisition of Pearce and the eventual arrival of Moncada I don't see Holt close to wearing down and as mentioned previously Shaw can sub for Holt too thus reducing the possibility of Holt wearing down even further.
And while you say "what if Moncada isn't ready" - that can be said for any player to a degree. What if JBJ revert back to prior years? What if Xander reverts back and is more like 2nd half etc. I am confident he will be ready to be at least decent. If you aren't then we can agree to disagree. If he isn't ready I still have Pearce. And if I need a player like Valencia I can go get him without breaking the bank. And if I'm right about Moncada, I saved the Red Sox a lot of money by not wasting a ton of money on a guy like EE or maybe they could use their money and get themselves some better relief pitching.
I agree with you - keep them - though I'd try to trade Pablo but realize realistically we can't. However we can pickup one righty bat at this moment. And imo Pearce would be a nice pickup while we're not throwing a ton of money at old man EE.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 31, 2016 1:01:18 GMT -5
This is really easy.
A) Travis Shaw is your best 3B. He's quite a bit better defensively than Sandoval, and he'll project comparably offensively. Combined in a platoon with someone like Sean Rodriguez (by which I mean, Sean Rodriguez), he'll give you better-than-average value for very little expenditure.
B) As a player who has always outperformed his scouting expectations, especially defensively, he has more actual value than trade value.
C) As a streaky hitter, he has major upside compared to a more consistent hitter with the same numbers and same projections. The only difference between Carlos Pena 2001- 2006 versus 2007 and after was the length of his slumps (something I analyzed at the end of the '05 season, complete with very good projections).
D) 3B is one of the two deepest positions in MLB. If you tried to trade him, it would be a buyer's market.
Conclusion: You are not trading Travis Shaw. It makes less than zero sense.
So, your only question becomes: does a Pablo Sandoval / Chris Young (offensive) // Sandoval / Hanley Ramirez (defensive) platoon at 1B project to be so bad that you can't risk going into the season with it?
Now, since it is likelier than not that you have an elite prospect to take overt at 1B starting as soon as July 2018, if you did dump Sandoval for nothing, you would want to replace him with a stopgap like Steve Pearce (by which I probably mean, Steve Pearce, but I haven't analyzed the alternatives, for reasons which are about to become clear).
Does that make sense? You still hope that a) Yoan Moncada takes over 3B at some point in the season, and b) Sam Travis becomes a viable, doesn't-suck option at 1B at some point.
Note that if Moncada moves Shaw to 1B, Shaw's defensive contribution actually improves (he saves more runs there because it's easier) and his actual offensive contribution is unchanged. This is one of those cases where you ignore the theoretical lost value from moving a player to an easier position. If Moncada can outhit Sandoval, and/or save more runs at 3B than Sandoval does at 1B, all of that is upside in addition to the 6.5 R/150 of defense you get by moving Shaw to 1B.
E) There was always reason to believe that Sandoval would benefit Bill Mueller-like from Fenway Park. We still don't know if that's true.
So, the only question is ... do you think the combination of Sandoval, Moncada, and Travis projects to be a season-damaging black hole that warrants dumping Sandoval for nothing before you find out if E is true or not?
I think the answer to that is obviously not. It's certainly possible, but it's not likely. What's likely is that it'll be OK. Folks should look at the other teams in the post-season and see what they got at various positions.
How much should you worry about the possibility of suckage? If you projected to be on the cusp of the playoffs, where a small risk of a 2 WAR black hole would be of serious concern, you'd have to think long and hard. But this team is not on the cusp. So you don't have to factor in the error bars on what you get from 1B, and worry about the downside risk of various bad- and worse-case scenarios. Just go with the projections, and they say that dumping Sandoval to sign Pearce or the equivalent would make very little sense.
Nobody wants a bridge year, but the idea that you can't tolerate a bridge of half a year or a year at a single position, even if the bridge will probably be OK, is just not rational.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 31, 2016 19:06:05 GMT -5
Travis Shaw's career OPS is 50 points higher. That's a huge difference. Now, OBP is more important for scoring, but Shaw still leads wRC+, 97 to 92. And Shaw is an above-average 3b: www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=11982&position=1B/3BHolt almost certainly isn't better defensively, and is probably worse, perhaps significantly so. Shaw has been worth 3.0 fWAR to Holt's 4.2, but in half as many PA. Holt has worn down every time he's started regularly. What do you do if Moncada isn't ready? Holt isn't better, he's probably not even as good, and he may be actually slightly to moderately worse. Plus you're giving up depth and flexibility. I say, keep both Shaw and Sandoval until somebody claims the position, or Moncada's ready, barring a great offer for Shaw. They have nothing to lose by doing so. Travis Shaw's OPS is not 50 points higher if you exclude his 2015 season which imo should be done. MLB scouting has found his weakness and Travis was never much of a hitter in minor league ball so expect him to be more like 2016 and more like what we was in the minors and not use the 2015 outlier. I believe 2016 is more accurate to project for Travis going forward. And again- Holt's effectiveness this year was affected by his concussion while he played and even a time when he came back he even said the concussion was affecting him.
I believe Holt will be better defensively just as nearly any more athletically gifted player that has shown he's very good all over the field would be especially better if they have a stronger arm if you allow them to focus on one position.
Therefore as I said before- Holt's better because his ba and obp are the same while Shaw slugs better and they have about the same OPS when comparing full season vs full season. Then add in Holt's ceiling to play at 3rd, Holt is better.
And again as I said prior Holt wore down greatly after early July in which he was being forced to play every day. With the acquisition of Pearce and the eventual arrival of Moncada I don't see Holt close to wearing down and as mentioned previously Shaw can sub for Holt too thus reducing the possibility of Holt wearing down even further.
And while you say "what if Moncada isn't ready" - that can be said for any player to a degree. What if JBJ revert back to prior years? What if Xander reverts back and is more like 2nd half etc. I am confident he will be ready to be at least decent. If you aren't then we can agree to disagree. If he isn't ready I still have Pearce. And if I need a player like Valencia I can go get him without breaking the bank. And if I'm right about Moncada, I saved the Red Sox a lot of money by not wasting a ton of money on a guy like EE or maybe they could use their money and get themselves some better relief pitching.
I agree with you - keep them - though I'd try to trade Pablo but realize realistically we can't. However we can pickup one righty bat at this moment. And imo Pearce would be a nice pickup while we're not throwing a ton of money at old man EE.
"I think only the data that supports my argument should be included." "Never" hit in the minors is a patently false statement. This is all just speculation and opinion, so you're entitled to it, but if ifs and buts were candy and nuts, every day would be Christmas. Equating a rookie who struggled mightily in his first look to an established MLB player who improved signficantly with experience and clear approach development that coincided with that improvement? Yikes.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Oct 31, 2016 19:59:22 GMT -5
Travis Shaw's OPS is not 50 points higher if you exclude his 2015 season which imo should be done. MLB scouting has found his weakness and Travis was never much of a hitter in minor league ball so expect him to be more like 2016 and more like what we was in the minors and not use the 2015 outlier. I believe 2016 is more accurate to project for Travis going forward. And again- Holt's effectiveness this year was affected by his concussion while he played and even a time when he came back he even said the concussion was affecting him.
I believe Holt will be better defensively just as nearly any more athletically gifted player that has shown he's very good all over the field would be especially better if they have a stronger arm if you allow them to focus on one position.
Therefore as I said before- Holt's better because his ba and obp are the same while Shaw slugs better and they have about the same OPS when comparing full season vs full season. Then add in Holt's ceiling to play at 3rd, Holt is better.
And again as I said prior Holt wore down greatly after early July in which he was being forced to play every day. With the acquisition of Pearce and the eventual arrival of Moncada I don't see Holt close to wearing down and as mentioned previously Shaw can sub for Holt too thus reducing the possibility of Holt wearing down even further.
And while you say "what if Moncada isn't ready" - that can be said for any player to a degree. What if JBJ revert back to prior years? What if Xander reverts back and is more like 2nd half etc. I am confident he will be ready to be at least decent. If you aren't then we can agree to disagree. If he isn't ready I still have Pearce. And if I need a player like Valencia I can go get him without breaking the bank. And if I'm right about Moncada, I saved the Red Sox a lot of money by not wasting a ton of money on a guy like EE or maybe they could use their money and get themselves some better relief pitching.
I agree with you - keep them - though I'd try to trade Pablo but realize realistically we can't. However we can pickup one righty bat at this moment. And imo Pearce would be a nice pickup while we're not throwing a ton of money at old man EE.
"I think only the data that supports my argument should be included." "Never" hit in the minors is a patently false statement. This is all just speculation and opinion, so you're entitled to it, but if ifs and buts were candy and nuts, every day would be Christmas. Equating a rookie who struggled mightily in his first look to an established MLB player who improved signficantly with experience and clear approach development that coincided with that improvement? Yikes. Well we can agree to disagree. For the record I hope what you say that Travis is entering his prime and keeps getting better each year. I hope that's what happens. As for the minors- I'm looking at his AAA numbers (see below) and they aren't good imo to project he'd be anything but a platoon reserve.
As for ""I think only the data that supports my argument should be included." You've deliberately isolated the comment while just ignoring the context that I said I believe they've found his weaknesses (he's now exposed) and you must've known he wasn't so hot in AAA, right? He hit in AA so I was wrong. I don't see why AA should supersede AAA. I just think your statements could be said for any young player yet you want to take a negative outlook (what if he doesn't . . . ?) on Moncada? The number 1 prospect?
I've also argued with ericvman regarding Henry Owens - I look at some minor league stats. I didn't make it up with him and I'm not making it up with you. You can't say Travis was that good AAA, can you? To me those numbers in AAA show he isn't much of a hitter and this year confirmed it - so I'm skeptical.
www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.cgi?id=shaw--002tra
And here are his minor league splits; He has shown us he can't hit lefties in the minors (AAA) and this year in the big leagues in 2016 he showed the same thing. I think that is what is he is. A platoon player. I'm not making it up like you almost imply above. But again I hope you're right-- I hope Travis tears it up.
www.milb.com/player/index.jsp?sid=t533&player_id=543768#/splits/R/hitting/2014/MINORS
www.milb.com/player/index.jsp?sid=t533&player_id=543768#/splits/R/hitting/2015/MINORS
In 2013 Travis showed some power in the minors and had a good obp, but in 2012 he was lousy again vs lefties. Three of 4 years from 2012 -2015 we was lousy vs lefties in the minors and he was lousy this year vs lefties, I won't be optimistic that he is nothing but a platoon player and hope because he is a Red Sox he becomes an all-star. .
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 31, 2016 21:49:39 GMT -5
"I think only the data that supports my argument should be included." "Never" hit in the minors is a patently false statement. This is all just speculation and opinion, so you're entitled to it, but if ifs and buts were candy and nuts, every day would be Christmas. Equating a rookie who struggled mightily in his first look to an established MLB player who improved signficantly with experience and clear approach development that coincided with that improvement? Yikes. Well we can agree to disagree. For the record I hope what you say that Travis is entering his prime and keeps getting better each year. I hope that's what happens. As for the minors- I'm looking at his AAA numbers (see below) and they aren't good imo to project he'd be anything but a platoon reserve.
As for ""I think only the data that supports my argument should be included." You've deliberately isolated the comment while just ignoring the context that I said I believe they've found his weaknesses (he's now exposed) and you must've known he wasn't so hot in AAA, right? He hit in AA so I was wrong. I don't see why AA should supersede AAA. I just think your statements could be said for any young player yet you want to take a negative outlook (what if he doesn't . . . ?) on Moncada? The number 1 prospect?
I've also argued with ericvman regarding Henry Owens - I look at some minor league stats. I didn't make it up with him and I'm not making it up with you. You can't say Travis was that good AAA, can you? To me those numbers in AAA show he isn't much of a hitter and this year confirmed it - so I'm skeptical.
www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.cgi?id=shaw--002tra
And here are his minor league splits; He has shown us he can't hit lefties in the minors (AAA) and this year in the big leagues in 2016 he showed the same thing. I think that is what is he is. A platoon player. I'm not making it up like you almost imply above. But again I hope you're right-- I hope Travis tears it up.
www.milb.com/player/index.jsp?sid=t533&player_id=543768#/splits/R/hitting/2014/MINORS
www.milb.com/player/index.jsp?sid=t533&player_id=543768#/splits/R/hitting/2015/MINORS
In 2013 Travis showed some power in the minors and had a good obp, but in 2012 he was lousy again vs lefties. Three of 4 years from 2012 -2015 we was lousy vs lefties in the minors and he was lousy this year vs lefties, I won't be optimistic that he is nothing but a platoon player and hope because he is a Red Sox he becomes an all-star. .
I doubt Shaw becomes an All-Star, but even last year he was a serviceable regular. He's streaky. That's well-established. Hitters make adjustments all of the time, and Shaw has shown some ability to do that. He may never hit lefties well, but it's certainly not unreasonable to think he'll improve. Historical prime is 26-29 for hitters power-wise; he may yet improve his approach to increase his BA/OBP as well. Simply saying "he struggled for two months this year so the rest of his performance in MLB isn't relevant" is cherry-picking, and you're basing it on an opinion, not on hard data. Even then, if you're right and pitchers adjusted to him, it by no means says he can't adjust himself. "Better player" is itself subjective, so on that we can agree to disagree; I simply don't think it's reflected in the data to date. Either way, we both hope he continues to improve.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 31, 2016 23:50:17 GMT -5
"I think only the data that supports my argument should be included." "Never" hit in the minors is a patently false statement. This is all just speculation and opinion, so you're entitled to it, but if ifs and buts were candy and nuts, every day would be Christmas. Equating a rookie who struggled mightily in his first look to an established MLB player who improved signficantly with experience and clear approach development that coincided with that improvement? Yikes. Well we can agree to disagree. For the record I hope what you say that Travis is entering his prime and keeps getting better each year. I hope that's what happens. As for the minors- I'm looking at his AAA numbers (see below) and they aren't good imo to project he'd be anything but a platoon reserve.
As for ""I think only the data that supports my argument should be included." You've deliberately isolated the comment while just ignoring the context that I said I believe they've found his weaknesses (he's now exposed) and you must've known he wasn't so hot in AAA, right? He hit in AA so I was wrong. I don't see why AA should supersede AAA. I just think your statements could be said for any young player yet you want to take a negative outlook (what if he doesn't . . . ?) on Moncada? The number 1 prospect?
I've also argued with ericvman regarding Henry Owens - I look at some minor league stats. I didn't make it up with him and I'm not making it up with you. You can't say Travis was that good AAA, can you? To me those numbers in AAA show he isn't much of a hitter and this year confirmed it - so I'm skeptical.
www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.cgi?id=shaw--002tra
And here are his minor league splits; He has shown us he can't hit lefties in the minors (AAA) and this year in the big leagues in 2016 he showed the same thing. I think that is what is he is. A platoon player. I'm not making it up like you almost imply above. But again I hope you're right-- I hope Travis tears it up.
www.milb.com/player/index.jsp?sid=t533&player_id=543768#/splits/R/hitting/2014/MINORS
www.milb.com/player/index.jsp?sid=t533&player_id=543768#/splits/R/hitting/2015/MINORS
In 2013 Travis showed some power in the minors and had a good obp, but in 2012 he was lousy again vs lefties. Three of 4 years from 2012 -2015 we was lousy vs lefties in the minors and he was lousy this year vs lefties, I won't be optimistic that he is nothing but a platoon player and hope because he is a Red Sox he becomes an all-star. .
Btw, I'm very high on Moncada, and always have been since he hit the scene in Cuba at 16-17. I absolutely think he'll be terrific...I just think it's a mistake to base team-building plans on the presumption that he'll be a better MLB player than Shaw by the middle of next year. It's certainly possible...he might be awesome...but I wouldn't anticipate it. For that reason, I agree 100% that signing a guy like EE to a huge deal isn't a great idea, because I think it's **much** more likely (and thus a much safer bet) that Moncada WILL be ready by June 2018. I simply disagree with the idea that Holt should be the starting 3b, since I think that Shaw is at least as good a starting option (or similar enough as to be equivalent), and his starting at third (or Panda, if he wins the job) frees Holt up to play his best position: wherever he's needed, whenever he's needed, that day. Regardless, I appreciate the banter. It's a good position for the Sox to be in to have those options, rather than not.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Nov 1, 2016 11:21:57 GMT -5
I'm rather shocked that so many people think the Red Sox will go into 2017 without picking up a big bat. I personally can't conceive a scenario where DD believes that having Shaw/Sandoval/Holt/Hernandez for 1B/DH & 3B is good enough to start the year (aside from Moncada looking amazing this offseason and winning the 3B job by spring training). Keep in mind that it's not just the starting spots to worry about but a single injury would derail the depth of the corner infielders.
If Sandoval is passable to start the season and Hernandez' 3B defense looks 'good enough' then Shaw becomes redundant and should be traded, but we aren't there yet. I can't imagine Shaw's value will dip too much between now and the start of next season, so it's best to hang onto him until the Red Sox know what they really have.
An important name that seems to be overlooked is Josh Rutledge. With the other options all being left-handed (and Moncada hitting better from the left side in 2016) his role as a RHH infielder could be very valuable. DD felt the need to trade for Aaron Hill last year to fill this role and hopefully Rutledge makes an additional trade unnecessary.
Has anyone seen updates on Rutledge's rehab?
|
|
|
Post by DesignatedKyle on Nov 1, 2016 17:35:15 GMT -5
Well we can agree to disagree. For the record I hope what you say that Travis is entering his prime and keeps getting better each year. I hope that's what happens. As for the minors- I'm looking at his AAA numbers (see below) and they aren't good imo to project he'd be anything but a platoon reserve.
As for ""I think only the data that supports my argument should be included." You've deliberately isolated the comment while just ignoring the context that I said I believe they've found his weaknesses (he's now exposed) and you must've known he wasn't so hot in AAA, right? He hit in AA so I was wrong. I don't see why AA should supersede AAA. I just think your statements could be said for any young player yet you want to take a negative outlook (what if he doesn't . . . ?) on Moncada? The number 1 prospect?
I've also argued with ericvman regarding Henry Owens - I look at some minor league stats. I didn't make it up with him and I'm not making it up with you. You can't say Travis was that good AAA, can you? To me those numbers in AAA show he isn't much of a hitter and this year confirmed it - so I'm skeptical.
www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.cgi?id=shaw--002tra
And here are his minor league splits; He has shown us he can't hit lefties in the minors (AAA) and this year in the big leagues in 2016 he showed the same thing. I think that is what is he is. A platoon player. I'm not making it up like you almost imply above. But again I hope you're right-- I hope Travis tears it up.
www.milb.com/player/index.jsp?sid=t533&player_id=543768#/splits/R/hitting/2014/MINORS
www.milb.com/player/index.jsp?sid=t533&player_id=543768#/splits/R/hitting/2015/MINORS
In 2013 Travis showed some power in the minors and had a good obp, but in 2012 he was lousy again vs lefties. Three of 4 years from 2012 -2015 we was lousy vs lefties in the minors and he was lousy this year vs lefties, I won't be optimistic that he is nothing but a platoon player and hope because he is a Red Sox he becomes an all-star. .
Simply saying "he struggled for two months this year so the rest of his performance in MLB isn't relevant" is cherry-picking, and you're basing it on an opinion, not on hard data. He struggled for a lot more than two months this year. June 1 to the end of the season he hit .207/.270/.361/.631. 2nd half wRC+ of 59 (!). That's horrific any way you slice it. Do I think that's his true talent level, no, but I don't think we can count on the .376 BABIP he put up in the first two months of the season.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 1, 2016 19:07:51 GMT -5
Ditto on the .229 BABIP in the 2nd half of the season.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 1, 2016 20:14:32 GMT -5
Travis Shaw is a career .251/.312/.442 hitter and that feels exactly right.
|
|
|
Post by juanpena on Nov 1, 2016 20:35:41 GMT -5
I personally can't conceive a scenario where DD believes that having Shaw/Sandoval/Holt/Hernandez for 1B/DH & 3B is good enough to start the year (aside from Moncada looking amazing this offseason and winning the 3B job by spring training). Did Hanley Ramirez retire?
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Nov 1, 2016 21:18:25 GMT -5
I'm rather shocked that so many people think the Red Sox will go into 2017 without picking up a big bat. I personally can't conceive a scenario where DD believes that having Shaw/Sandoval/Holt/Hernandez for 1B/DH & 3B is good enough to start the year (aside from Moncada looking amazing this offseason and winning the 3B job by spring training). Keep in mind that it's not just the starting spots to worry about but a single injury would derail the depth of the corner infielders. If Sandoval is passable to start the season and Hernandez' 3B defense looks 'good enough' then Shaw becomes redundant and should be traded, but we aren't there yet. I can't imagine Shaw's value will dip too much between now and the start of next season, so it's best to hang onto him until the Red Sox know what they really have. An important name that seems to be overlooked is Josh Rutledge. With the other options all being left-handed (and Moncada hitting better from the left side in 2016) his role as a RHH infielder could be very valuable. DD felt the need to trade for Aaron Hill last year to fill this role and hopefully Rutledge makes an additional trade unnecessary. Has anyone seen updates on Rutledge's rehab? I just don't believe in the need. Improve the bullpen and if our 4/5 starters don't collapse/be as awful as they were which I think some said was historically bad for 4/5 starters, then we've already improved. How awful was the bullpen for a stretch, also? Expect improvement there. You add at least one right-handed bat that hits lefties, our other lefty bats are pretty good vs righties. Why not improve the bullpen? Why not improve the catcher? Why not get a right bat so our lefty bats don't have to face lefties much? There are multiple needs, why waste on one big bat while having potential with the others in which we could have otherwise filled? IMO Kimbrel is more of a problem than a big bat. Kimbrel was average this year and not so hot last year.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 2, 2016 16:25:39 GMT -5
I'm rather shocked that so many people think the Red Sox will go into 2017 without picking up a big bat. I personally can't conceive a scenario where DD believes that having Shaw/Sandoval/Holt/Hernandez for 1B & 3B is good enough to start the year (aside from Moncada looking amazing this offseason and winning the 3B job by spring training). Keep in mind that it's not just the starting spots to worry about but a single injury would derail the depth of the corner infielders. If Sandoval is passable to start the season and Hernandez' 3B defense looks 'good enough' then Shaw becomes redundant and should be traded, but we aren't there yet. I can't imagine Shaw's value will dip too much between now and the start of next season, so it's best to hang onto him until the Red Sox know what they really have. An important name that seems to be overlooked is Josh Rutledge. With the other options all being left-handed (and Moncada hitting better from the left side in 2016) his role as a RHH infielder could be very valuable. DD felt the need to trade for Aaron Hill last year to fill this role and hopefully Rutledge makes an additional trade unnecessary. Has anyone seen updates on Rutledge's rehab? How about the scenario where he's capable of rational thought? (I removed DH from that sentence because they have a terrific one.) Rutledge isn't very good. Nice guy to have in AAA. That's why you sign Sean Rodriguez to fill the Rutledge / Hill role. He's basically a RH-hitting version of Holt. He's very, very good.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 2, 2016 17:14:44 GMT -5
I'm rather shocked that so many people think the Red Sox will go into 2017 without picking up a big bat. I personally can't conceive a scenario where DD believes that having Shaw/Sandoval/Holt/Hernandez for 1B & 3B is good enough to start the year (aside from Moncada looking amazing this offseason and winning the 3B job by spring training). Keep in mind that it's not just the starting spots to worry about but a single injury would derail the depth of the corner infielders. If Sandoval is passable to start the season and Hernandez' 3B defense looks 'good enough' then Shaw becomes redundant and should be traded, but we aren't there yet. I can't imagine Shaw's value will dip too much between now and the start of next season, so it's best to hang onto him until the Red Sox know what they really have. An important name that seems to be overlooked is Josh Rutledge. With the other options all being left-handed (and Moncada hitting better from the left side in 2016) his role as a RHH infielder could be very valuable. DD felt the need to trade for Aaron Hill last year to fill this role and hopefully Rutledge makes an additional trade unnecessary. Has anyone seen updates on Rutledge's rehab? How about the scenario where he's capable of rational thought? (I removed DH from that sentence because they have a terrific one.) Rutledge isn't very good. Nice guy to have in AAA. That's why you sign Sean Rodriguez to fill the Rutledge / Hill role. He's basically a RH-hitting version of Holt. He's very, very good. I'd guess that some team would be willing to promise Rodriguez a full time job after his .859 OPS this year even though it was by far the best of his career and probably a fluke. We might be competing with teams like the Rays and Pirates for signing him and they'd promise him a lot more playing time than we would. We could beat them with money, but it could still be an overpay based on that. Maybe a Chris Young type of contract would get it done depending on what is most important to him - playing time or money. I wouldn't count on him being better defensively than Holt at 3rd though. He has played very little of it. I'm on board for signing him and dumping Sandoval if possible.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Nov 2, 2016 18:21:05 GMT -5
I'm rather shocked that so many people think the Red Sox will go into 2017 without picking up a big bat. I personally can't conceive a scenario where DD believes that having Shaw/Sandoval/Holt/Hernandez for 1B & 3B is good enough to start the year (aside from Moncada looking amazing this offseason and winning the 3B job by spring training). Keep in mind that it's not just the starting spots to worry about but a single injury would derail the depth of the corner infielders. If Sandoval is passable to start the season and Hernandez' 3B defense looks 'good enough' then Shaw becomes redundant and should be traded, but we aren't there yet. I can't imagine Shaw's value will dip too much between now and the start of next season, so it's best to hang onto him until the Red Sox know what they really have. An important name that seems to be overlooked is Josh Rutledge. With the other options all being left-handed (and Moncada hitting better from the left side in 2016) his role as a RHH infielder could be very valuable. DD felt the need to trade for Aaron Hill last year to fill this role and hopefully Rutledge makes an additional trade unnecessary. Has anyone seen updates on Rutledge's rehab? How about the scenario where he's capable of rational thought? (I removed DH from that sentence because they have a terrific one.) Rutledge isn't very good. Nice guy to have in AAA. That's why you sign Sean Rodriguez to fill the Rutledge / Hill role. He's basically a RH-hitting version of Holt. He's very, very good. Jeez Sean, 32 next season, is a lifetime .234 hitter with an OBP of .303, a slugging % of .390 and a resulting OPS of .693....and this after factoring in a career year. He strikes out at nearly a 30% rate. Can't we do better?
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 3, 2016 11:53:01 GMT -5
How about the scenario where he's capable of rational thought? (I removed DH from that sentence because they have a terrific one.) Rutledge isn't very good. Nice guy to have in AAA. That's why you sign Sean Rodriguez to fill the Rutledge / Hill role. He's basically a RH-hitting version of Holt. He's very, very good. I'd guess that some team would be willing to promise Rodriguez a full time job after his .859 OPS this year even though it was by far the best of his career and probably a fluke. We might be competing with teams like the Rays and Pirates for signing him and they'd promise him a lot more playing time than we would. We could beat them with money, but it could still be an overpay based on that. Maybe a Chris Young type of contract would get it done depending on what is most important to him - playing time or money. I wouldn't count on him being better defensively than Holt at 3rd though. He has played very little of it. I'm on board for signing him and dumping Sandoval if possible.
Jeez Sean, 32 next season, is a lifetime .234 hitter with an OBP of .303, a slugging % of .390 and a resulting OPS of .693....and this after factoring in a career year. He strikes out at nearly a 30% rate. Can't we do better? Two rebuttals that cancel each other out! He's not going to get a full-time offer for the reasons sarasoxer states. But what he omits is the career platoon splits: 78 wRC+ vs. RHP, 112 vs. LHP (in 1001 PA). Even regressed to the mean, that makes him the clear best available choice as a 3B platoon partner, and a very solid option. Valencia is terrible defensively, Hill has a relatively neutral platoon split, and anyone who would be a better platoon option (e.g., Prado) will be playing every day. A key is that he's not just a 3B platoon partner. That's his primarily role, but his ability to play average defense everywhere but CF (where he can play in a pinch) is an asset. Shaw actually hits LHP great at home when he's hot, so Rodriguez could give some other guys a day off in those games. And when a couple of guys are banged up, he'll be useful vs. RHP.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 3, 2016 23:17:17 GMT -5
I'm rather shocked that so many people think the Red Sox will go into 2017 without picking up a big bat. I personally can't conceive a scenario where DD believes that having Shaw/Sandoval/Holt/Hernandez for 1B/DH & 3B is good enough to start the year (aside from Moncada looking amazing this offseason and winning the 3B job by spring training). Keep in mind that it's not just the starting spots to worry about but a single injury would derail the depth of the corner infielders. If Sandoval is passable to start the season and Hernandez' 3B defense looks 'good enough' then Shaw becomes redundant and should be traded, but we aren't there yet. I can't imagine Shaw's value will dip too much between now and the start of next season, so it's best to hang onto him until the Red Sox know what they really have. An important name that seems to be overlooked is Josh Rutledge. With the other options all being left-handed (and Moncada hitting better from the left side in 2016) his role as a RHH infielder could be very valuable. DD felt the need to trade for Aaron Hill last year to fill this role and hopefully Rutledge makes an additional trade unnecessary. Has anyone seen updates on Rutledge's rehab? I just don't believe in the need. Improve the bullpen and if our 4/5 starters don't collapse/be as awful as they were which I think some said was historically bad for 4/5 starters, then we've already improved. How awful was the bullpen for a stretch, also? Expect improvement there. You add at least one right-handed bat that hits lefties, our other lefty bats are pretty good vs righties. Why not improve the bullpen? Why not improve the catcher? Why not get a right bat so our lefty bats don't have to face lefties much? There are multiple needs, why waste on one big bat while having potential with the others in which we could have otherwise filled? IMO Kimbrel is more of a problem than a big bat. Kimbrel was average this year and not so hot last year. I agree. The 4/5 starting spots were catastrophically bad for 2/3 of the season. It borders on inconceivable, without incredibly horrendous luck, that the rotation will struggle nearly as badly in 2017. Rodriguez will probably be much more healthy, they have a full season of Pomeranz, and Buchholz was much better towards the end of the year. Between those three, and the numerous back-up options, I'd say a 3.8-4.2 combined ERA out of the 4-5 spots is pretty likely. That's as opposed to the 6+ they got most of last year. Two runs per nine innings fewer, over, say, 360 innings...is 40 fewer runs per pitcher, or 80 fewer overall. Call it 50-60 since it was 2/3 of the season. So even if all else stays the same, losing Ortiz probably hurts their total RS by about 60 runs. So, it's a wash. That $20-22M can be better spent improving the team elsewhere. Hell, Benintendi for a full year in LF is going to add significant offense (and defense). They don't **need* to score 900 runs, especially if they give up 100 fewer.
|
|
|