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 umassgrad2005 on Nov 23, 2017 12:39:39 GMT -5
Just to add way more detail than needed in Tampa Duda had a 108 wRC+ against RHP and a 40 wRC+ against LHP. Against RHP at Tropicana field it was 83 wRC+ and 133 wRC+ on the road. Which makes sense as Tampa is the worst hitting park in the AL East. He also played half his games at DH for the first time in his career and that can really mess with some guys. Takes time to adjust to not playing in the field after doing it your whole career.
Fenway is 310' in LF and 302' in RF with it going to 380' in that bump, Citi field is 335' in LF, 330' in RF and that bump is 378 and I guess in 2015 they reduced it to 370'. So looking at his spray chart RF isn't going to really hurt him at Fenway and pesky pole should actually help him. Nevermind the massive difference the wall will make. He played in NL in a ton of those huge parks. Nevermind most of his HRs look like deep bombs.
As to the difference in projections only being .4 war. That is highly misleading if you plan on using them to platoon. Duda will really increase his production without LHP dragging down his numbers, Moreland really won't that much. Those projections don't take a platoon into account. We now have the perfect manager to get the most out of a player like Duda. Duda is the perfect guy to platoon to increase his value, Moreland is not even close to a great platoon option for RHP.
Moreland had an .819 OPS at Fenway last year, Duda even with his Tampa numbers had an .818 OPS for the season playing his home games in two of the worst hitter parks in majors. That's him also being a full-time player facing LHP. So I just don't see why Moreland is such a great fit at Fenway. If I had to predict Duda's OPS at Fenway it would be over .900. His career OPS at Fenway is 1.083 if you really want to use limited sample sizes.
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,675
|
1B in 2018
Nov 23, 2017 13:55:42 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by gerry on Nov 23, 2017 13:55:42 GMT -5
Just to add way more detail than needed in Tampa Duda had a 108 wRC+ against RHP and a 40 wRC+ against LHP. Against RHP at Tropicana field it was 83 wRC+ and 133 wRC+ on the road. Which makes sense as Tampa is the worst hitting park in the AL East. He also played half his games at DH for the first time in his career and that can really mess with some guys. Takes time to adjust to not playing in the field after doing it your whole career. Fenway is 310' in LF and 302' in RF with it going to 380' in that bump, Citi field is 335' in LF, 330' in RF and that bump is 378 and I guess in 2015 they reduced it to 370'. So looking at his spray chart RF isn't going to really hurt him at Fenway and pesky pole should actually help him. Nevermind the massive difference the wall will make. He played in NL in a ton of those huge parks. Nevermind most of his HRs look like deep bombs. As to the difference in projections only being .4 war. That is highly misleading if you plan on using them to platoon. Duda will really increase his production without LHP dragging down his numbers, Moreland really won't that much. Those projections don't take a platoon into account. We now have the perfect manager to get the most out of a player like Duda. Duda is the perfect guy to platoon to increase his value, Moreland is not even close to a great platoon option for RHP. Moreland had an .819 OPS at Fenway last year, Duda even with his Tampa numbers had an .818 OPS for the season playing his home games in two of the worst hitter parks in majors. That's him also being a full-time player facing LHP. So I just don't see why Moreland is such a great fit at Fenway. If I had to predict Duda's OPS at Fenway it would be over .900. His career OPS at Fenway is 1.083 if you really want to use limited sample sizes. Reading the dialogue between you and Eric has been fascinating and enlightening in the extreme. Like many, I think this team, healthy, is a well rounded winner next year, in all aspects of the game. The choices for improvement are so many: JDM, Stanton, Ohtani, Santana, Duda, Hosmer, Lomo, Belt, Bruce, Bour, Moreland, Brentz, Swihart, Marco, Quiros; and most of them are easy adds. The question seems to be (considering all circumstances from park effects to payroll penalties to skill sets and health status of existing players, to extending "the kids", to the current course corrections with the new coaching staff) which of these many excellent choices offer the most potential to get the Sox into the WS. And the choice, IMO, will be determined on the margins, as you two so eloquently argue. Like Moreland, Duda checks off so many boxes: LHB with power (you just can't dismiss MM's 30+ doubles and consistent 22-23HR; nor that he also faced too many LHP), good glove, good guy, veteran, and a salary low enough to allow the Sox to bring in another good bat and start extending the kids. One advantage Duda has that MM doesn't is DH experience. Duda platooning with Hanley as DH/1B in Fenway could be explosive. It could be enough to spike the needle. With Duda as DH and, for example, Santana at 1B, and Hanley and Brentz RHB off the bench, the Sox will have added above average at bats with terrific power plus excellent 1B defense (which with this young IF is more important than you let on) all for less cost than adding years of JDM or Stanton. By extension, Duda + Moreland. Duda + Belt. Duda + LoMo. Duda + Hosmer all seem like better choices than breaking the bank and/or farm for either of the two huge contracts.
|
|
|
1B in 2018
Nov 23, 2017 14:02:12 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by jiant2520 on Nov 23, 2017 14:02:12 GMT -5
I have not looked it up, but I would assume Moreland playing in Texas and Boston, two hitter friendly parks, has helped him. Duda, who played in TB and NY, two pitcher parks, has hurt a tad, no?
Its very clear that Duda is the better power hitter, and the more patient hitter too, while keeping in mind that if used exclusively as a platoon hitter, which I believe we are all proposing, his numbers should improve, not to mention hitting in a hitters park helping his numbers.
The last three healthy seasons Duda has averaged a HR every 17.1, 17.4 and 14.1 ABs, while walking 11.6, 11.9 and 12.2 percent of the time.
Moreland: HR every 20.5, 20.9 and 23.1 ABs, while walking 6.2, 7.0 and 9.9 percent of the time.
Those are big differences, not even taking into account Fenway Park and only facing right handed pitchers, mostly, if the Sox were to sign Duda. Moreland does not have platoon splits, so sitting him vs lefties will not really improve him as a hitter. I think Moreland is more of a known for the Sox and is the better defender.
I don't think it is close as far as who the better power/patient hitter is. Depending on price tag and what you are looking for... I mean I'd take Hosmer over both if the price was right, same with Bour...
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,675
|
1B in 2018
Nov 23, 2017 16:10:43 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by gerry on Nov 23, 2017 16:10:43 GMT -5
I have not looked it up, but I would assume Moreland playing in Texas and Boston, two hitter friendly parks, has helped him. Duda, who played in TB and NY, two pitcher parks, has hurt a tad, no? Its very clear that Duda is the better power hitter, and the more patient hitter too, while keeping in mind that if used exclusively as a platoon hitter, which I believe we are all proposing, his numbers should improve, not to mention hitting in a hitters park helping his numbers. The last three healthy seasons Duda has averaged a HR every 17.1, 17.4 and 14.1 ABs, while walking 11.6, 11.9 and 12.2 percent of the time. Moreland: HR every 20.5, 20.9 and 23.1 ABs, while walking 6.2, 7.0 and 9.9 percent of the time. Those are big differences, not even taking into account Fenway Park and only facing right handed pitchers, mostly, if the Sox were to sign Duda. Moreland does not have platoon splits, so sitting him vs lefties will not really improve him as a hitter. I think Moreland is more of a known for the Sox and is the better defender. I don't think it is close as far as who the better power/patient hitter is. Depending on price tag and what you are looking for... I mean I'd take Hosmer over both if the price was right, same with Bour... Yes, but what do you think of the concept of signing Duda as DH + Moreland??? (Or maybe Santana? ) as 1B, hanging on to Hanley + Brentz to back them both, helping Hanley stay healthy and with limited PA's, and having $$$$ left to start extending those who are amenable. Keeping the core, adding power, on short term contracts, staying under 237 for midseason upgrades, maintaining strong defense at 1B. That's a lot of boxes to check off!!
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,675
|
1B in 2018
Nov 23, 2017 16:14:14 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by gerry on Nov 23, 2017 16:14:14 GMT -5
And happy Thanksgiving. We have much to be thankful for.
|
|
|
1B in 2018
Nov 23, 2017 17:40:01 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by jiant2520 on Nov 23, 2017 17:40:01 GMT -5
I have not looked it up, but I would assume Moreland playing in Texas and Boston, two hitter friendly parks, has helped him. Duda, who played in TB and NY, two pitcher parks, has hurt a tad, no? Its very clear that Duda is the better power hitter, and the more patient hitter too, while keeping in mind that if used exclusively as a platoon hitter, which I believe we are all proposing, his numbers should improve, not to mention hitting in a hitters park helping his numbers. The last three healthy seasons Duda has averaged a HR every 17.1, 17.4 and 14.1 ABs, while walking 11.6, 11.9 and 12.2 percent of the time. Moreland: HR every 20.5, 20.9 and 23.1 ABs, while walking 6.2, 7.0 and 9.9 percent of the time. Those are big differences, not even taking into account Fenway Park and only facing right handed pitchers, mostly, if the Sox were to sign Duda. Moreland does not have platoon splits, so sitting him vs lefties will not really improve him as a hitter. I think Moreland is more of a known for the Sox and is the better defender. I don't think it is close as far as who the better power/patient hitter is. Depending on price tag and what you are looking for... I mean I'd take Hosmer over both if the price was right, same with Bour... Yes, but what do you think of the concept of signing Duda as DH + Moreland??? (Or maybe Santana? ) as 1B, hanging on to Hanley + Brentz to back them both, helping Hanley stay healthy and with limited PA's, and having $$$$ left to start extending those who are amenable. Keeping the core, adding power, on short term contracts, staying under 237 for midseason upgrades, maintaining strong defense at 1B. That's a lot of boxes to check off!! I would not prefer signing both Moreland and Duda. I like Duda as a platoon option. If the Sox signed Santana at 1B and and could not get Martinez or Stanton, I would be ok with Duda playing DH with Ramirez and a little 1B. That is not my preference though.
|
|
|
1B in 2018
Nov 23, 2017 18:35:04 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by m1keyboots on Nov 23, 2017 18:35:04 GMT -5
I don't understand people being down on bringing in Hosmer. His D is good enough and his swing would benefit him in Fenway. Going into his prime, in a better lineup and a short porch in left I can see his slugging % growing as I write this. He seems like exactly what they need. Him and Devers on the corners for the next 5 years batting 4,5 looks like one of the best combo's in MLB. So whats the rub? He hits groundalls as often as Dee Gordon and after 7 years of defensive metrics he's still rated well below average. Without even talking about the offensive regression hes bound to slide into, I wouldnt want to see Bogey and Devers constantly throwing to a guy unable to consistently pick throws. Edit: without getting into who posted it, but someone actually said he believes Moreland is "solid" at first. They compared him to Duda and took out both of their 2017 seasons (weirdly, taking out Dudas bad play, and Moreland GG caliber play). Then went on to say he wasnt good at picking throws, or reaching off the bag. Then lightening the insanity by saying he had a good arm. Moreland won the GG there last year, he was probably a top 3 defender there this year. Boston hadnt seen a defender as good around the bag since a prime Gonzalez. I dont know why anyone would hash on MMs defense. Say he strikes out too much, or can't take a walk, but bringing up his defense to pile on is either proof that maybe you didn't watch that much redsox baseball, or just plain dont like Mitch as a player
|
|
|
1B in 2018
Nov 23, 2017 20:19:03 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Nov 23, 2017 20:19:03 GMT -5
A lot of discussion between two players who are projected by Steamer to be within 0.4 WAR of each other. I'd stick with Moreland, who is what we know. Duda was terrible in Tampa after he was traded. Duda doesn't seem to be one who would benefit from the Monster like Moreland does based on spray charts. Considering the cost of both players should be low with their lack of markets, don't you think even a half win is a good improvement considering how close the division was last year? That's just assuming the steam projection is close. If Duda outperforms the projection, then it's not even close I think.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 23, 2017 21:06:45 GMT -5
Eh, I was underwhelmed by Moreland's defens last year.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 23, 2017 21:36:53 GMT -5
Just to add way more detail than needed in Tampa Duda had a 108 wRC+ against RHP and a 40 wRC+ against LHP. Against RHP at Tropicana field it was 83 wRC+ and 133 wRC+ on the road. Which makes sense as Tampa is the worst hitting park in the AL East. He also played half his games at DH for the first time in his career and that can really mess with some guys. Takes time to adjust to not playing in the field after doing it your whole career. Fenway is 310' in LF and 302' in RF with it going to 380' in that bump, Citi field is 335' in LF, 330' in RF and that bump is 378 and I guess in 2015 they reduced it to 370'. So looking at his spray chart RF isn't going to really hurt him at Fenway and pesky pole should actually help him. Nevermind the massive difference the wall will make. He played in NL in a ton of those huge parks. Nevermind most of his HRs look like deep bombs. As to the difference in projections only being .4 war. That is highly misleading if you plan on using them to platoon. Duda will really increase his production without LHP dragging down his numbers, Moreland really won't that much. Those projections don't take a platoon into account. We now have the perfect manager to get the most out of a player like Duda. Duda is the perfect guy to platoon to increase his value, Moreland is not even close to a great platoon option for RHP. Moreland had an .819 OPS at Fenway last year, Duda even with his Tampa numbers had an .818 OPS for the season playing his home games in two of the worst hitter parks in majors. That's him also being a full-time player facing LHP. So I just don't see why Moreland is such a great fit at Fenway. If I had to predict Duda's OPS at Fenway it would be over .900. His career OPS at Fenway is 1.083 if you really want to use limited sample sizes. Reading the dialogue between you and Eric has been fascinating and enlightening in the extreme. Like many, I think this team, healthy, is a well rounded winner next year, in all aspects of the game. The choices for improvement are so many: JDM, Stanton, Ohtani, Santana, Duda, Hosmer, Lomo, Belt, Bruce, Bour, Moreland, Brentz, Swihart, Marco, Quiros; and most of them are easy adds. The question seems to be (considering all circumstances from park effects to payroll penalties to skill sets and health status of existing players, to extending "the kids", to the current course corrections with the new coaching staff) which of these many excellent choices offer the most potential to get the Sox into the WS. And the choice, IMO, will be determined on the margins, as you two so eloquently argue. Like Moreland, Duda checks off so many boxes: LHB with power (you just can't dismiss MM's 30+ doubles and consistent 22-23HR; nor that he also faced too many LHP), good glove, good guy, veteran, and a salary low enough to allow the Sox to bring in another good bat and start extending the kids. One advantage Duda has that MM doesn't is DH experience. Duda platooning with Hanley as DH/1B in Fenway could be explosive. It could be enough to spike the needle. With Duda as DH and, for example, Santana at 1B, and Hanley and Brentz RHB off the bench, the Sox will have added above average at bats with terrific power plus excellent 1B defense (which with this young IF is more important than you let on) all for less cost than adding years of JDM or Stanton. By extension, Duda + Moreland. Duda + Belt. Duda + LoMo. Duda + Hosmer all seem like better choices than breaking the bank and/or farm for either of the two huge contracts. I think you're 100% right that this is all about the WS and winning it all. DD goes after the best he can get. He did it with Price, Kimbrel, Sale, Pomeranz and even set-up guys like Smith and Thornburgh. With that in mind he is going after Martinez and Stanton. What I don't know is if Santana, Hosmer, Lomo, Duda, Bruce etc. are fall back options just in case or if he plans on signing two guys or he would sign two guys if the price is right. If he gets Martinez to DH, does he bring in another guy to play 1B on a small deal like Duda or Moreland? Or are those guys only if they get Stanton and still need a guy for 1B? Without knowing his spending limited we are all just guessing. Does he move a Kelly to get more money? Does it not matter because he plans on going past 237 million? I truly believe Moreland was brought in last year because he was the best option that fit under the luxury tax. Without that worry I bet we would have signed or traded for someone else. So budget plays a big factor. That is no slight on Moreland who had a good season for us, it's just what I believe. It all depends what players like Hosmer and Santana sign for and what it takes to sign Martinez. We already know what Stanton's mega deal looks like. If their deals are anything close to Martinez than it's an easy choice for me. Sign Martinez. Hosmer scares me to death and he would need to be really cheap for me to even consider him. I like Santana but I wouldn't just expect he's a great defender going forward. It was only one year. I can see how he could and why he might not be as good as last year. I want no part of Lomo unless it;s a really cheap deal. Is Belt available? The Giants need bats. So that would be a weird trade, but who knows. Maybe if they get Stanton type thing. You might be right that going for a couple of lower guys might be better. I would just be shocked if that is DD plan A or even plan B. If your goal is winning it all Martinez and Stanton will help you more than anyone else most likely. They are the safer bets.
|
|
brendan98
Veteran
Posts: 750
Member is Online
|
Post by brendan98 on Nov 24, 2017 10:51:24 GMT -5
Sign me up for Santana. Love the way he grinds out at bats, similar to what the Sox used to do but got away from a little the last couple of years, and even more last year without Ortiz. Santana is good from both sides of the plate, gets on base, provides some power, is a presence in the lineup because he makes pitchers work, and is a very good defender.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 24, 2017 13:30:54 GMT -5
Rob Bradford had another one of those "Why the Red Sox should get Player X" articles this morning. This time it was Jose Abreu.
I'm not recommending this avenue in particular but the article says that the White Sox have had interest in JBJ, although I don't know why a rebuilding team would want JBJ who gets more expensive thru arbitration and would only have 3 years of control. I would assume JBJ plus best prospects to get Abreu? I imagine Chavis would be a 3b the White Sox would want to go with Moncada at 2b? Perhaps if not Groome they'd want Mata? The Red Sox don't have too many high end pitchers. But then again it's only two years and JBJ alone has an extra year - valuewise the Red Sox really shouldn't have to kick much else in (maybe JBJ and Ockimey?), but really, what's in it for the White Sox to move Abreu for another guy whose service time isn't that drastically different? I'd think they'd want near ready prospects with six years of control ahead of them.
Abreu is arbitration eligible and under control for two more seasons. He could be the Red Sox "big splurge" for a middle of the order 1b power bat if they don't land Stanton in a deal or Martinez as a free agent or don't want to sign Hosmer.
In this scenario Abreu would probably make about $35 million or so over the two years remaining in arbitration - I don't know how that computes for the AAV as far as luxury tax purposes go.
If the Sox were to deal for Abreu, who obviously costs less than Stanton or Martinez/year, the corollary is that they could then, if they think he'd be worth it, slide Rusney Castillo into the vacant CF slot for another $10 million/year AAV or close to that, or pursue another CF or corner OF via free agency.
If getting Martinez is Plan A, dealing for Stanton in Plan B, signing Hosmer is Plan C, then I would think this is Plan D? I guess you could argue Santana who's a good player, has power, takes his walks - basically a Mike Napoli type player would be a better Plan C or D.
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,675
|
Post by gerry on Nov 24, 2017 16:03:12 GMT -5
Rob Bradford had another one of those "Why the Red Sox should get Player X" articles this morning. This time it was Jose Abreu. I'm not recommending this avenue in particular but the article says that the White Sox have had interest in JBJ, although I don't know why a rebuilding team would want JBJ who gets more expensive thru arbitration and would only have 3 years of control. I would assume JBJ plus best prospects to get Abreu? I imagine Chavis would be a 3b the White Sox would want to go with Moncada at 2b? Perhaps if not Groome they'd want Mata? The Red Sox don't have too many high end pitchers. But then again it's only two years and JBJ alone has an extra year - valuewise the Red Sox really shouldn't have to kick much else in (maybe JBJ and Ockimey?), but really, what's in it for the White Sox to move Abreu for another guy whose service time isn't that drastically different? I'd think they'd want near ready prospects with six years of control ahead of them. Abreu is arbitration eligible and under control for two more seasons. He could be the Red Sox "big splurge" for a middle of the order 1b power bat if they don't land Stanton in a deal or Martinez as a free agent or don't want to sign Hosmer. In this scenario Abreu would probably make about $35 million or so over the two years remaining in arbitration - I don't know how that computes for the AAV as far as luxury tax purposes go. If the Sox were to deal for Abreu, who obviously costs less than Stanton or Martinez/year, the corollary is that they could then, if they think he'd be worth it, slide Rusney Castillo into the vacant CF slot for another $10 million/year AAV or close to that, or pursue another CF or corner OF via free agency. If getting Martinez is Plan A, dealing for Stanton in Plan B, signing Hosmer is Plan C, then I would think this is Plan D? I guess you could argue Santana who's a good player, has power, takes his walks - basically a Mike Napoli type player would be a better Plan C or D. Your Plan C-D could/maybe should be Plan A. For the same $$ as Abreu sign Santana for 1B and some DH, hold onto JBJ and an Ockimey type. This would maintain OF excellence, prevent further deterioration of the Farm, improve IF "D" over Duda, Hanley or Lomo, and improve offense, as Santana will hit a few more HR than MM did/would, and with a higher OBP. Then sign Duda for DH/1B to enhance power/HR production. This allows Hanley and Brentz RHB to Platoon with Duda and rest all of Santana, Hanley and Duda through October. Added Power + OBP + defense at 1B and CF + preserving good prospects + plus $$ room for a contract extension or two + short term deals. All this for less than the outrageous costs for long term deals of JDM or Stanton, and likely near the cost for Hosmer. Unless "Big Splash" is a priority for some reason, sounds like a successful plan A.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 24, 2017 16:27:12 GMT -5
Rob Bradford had another one of those "Why the Red Sox should get Player X" articles this morning. This time it was Jose Abreu. I'm not recommending this avenue in particular but the article says that the White Sox have had interest in JBJ, although I don't know why a rebuilding team would want JBJ who gets more expensive thru arbitration and would only have 3 years of control. I would assume JBJ plus best prospects to get Abreu? I imagine Chavis would be a 3b the White Sox would want to go with Moncada at 2b? Perhaps if not Groome they'd want Mata? The Red Sox don't have too many high end pitchers. But then again it's only two years and JBJ alone has an extra year - valuewise the Red Sox really shouldn't have to kick much else in (maybe JBJ and Ockimey?), but really, what's in it for the White Sox to move Abreu for another guy whose service time isn't that drastically different? I'd think they'd want near ready prospects with six years of control ahead of them. Abreu is arbitration eligible and under control for two more seasons. He could be the Red Sox "big splurge" for a middle of the order 1b power bat if they don't land Stanton in a deal or Martinez as a free agent or don't want to sign Hosmer. In this scenario Abreu would probably make about $35 million or so over the two years remaining in arbitration - I don't know how that computes for the AAV as far as luxury tax purposes go. If the Sox were to deal for Abreu, who obviously costs less than Stanton or Martinez/year, the corollary is that they could then, if they think he'd be worth it, slide Rusney Castillo into the vacant CF slot for another $10 million/year AAV or close to that, or pursue another CF or corner OF via free agency. If getting Martinez is Plan A, dealing for Stanton in Plan B, signing Hosmer is Plan C, then I would think this is Plan D? I guess you could argue Santana who's a good player, has power, takes his walks - basically a Mike Napoli type player would be a better Plan C or D. Your Plan C-D could/maybe should be Plan A. For the same $$ as Abreu sign Santana for 1B and some DH, hold onto JBJ and an Ockimey type. This would maintain OF excellence, prevent further deterioration of the Farm, improve IF "D" over Duda, Hanley or Lomo, and improve offense, as Santana will hit a few more HR than MM did/would, and with a higher OBP. Then sign Duda for DH/1B to enhance power/HR production. This allows Hanley and Brentz RHB to Platoon with Duda and rest all of Santana, Hanley and Duda through October. Added Power + OBP + defense at 1B and CF + preserving good prospects + plus $$ room for a contract extension or two + short term deals. All this for less than the outrageous costs for long term deals of JDM or Stanton, and likely near the cost for Hosmer. Unless "Big Splash" is a priority for some reason, sounds like a successful plan A. I threw it Abreu out there, but if Stanton is going to cost top notch prospects as I suspect - rather than just taking on the contract, I'd make JD Martinez plan A. The Red Sox need a middle of the order masher who can truly hit, somebody who takes David Ortiz's place. Yes, I suspect Mookie will have a better season, Benintendi will improve, Devers will give the Sox a lot more production this season than they got at 3b all combined last year, and if Bogaerts stays healthy he should too, but Hanley's health is a question mark, I'm not convinced that JBJ is that much better than we saw last year, and they will be taking a hit at 2b for a portion of the season, which could drag on if Pedroia doesn't come back healthy. If injuries hit, the lineup as constituted, isn't strong enough to withstand too many hits. The Sox play at Fenway. I would think a great Red Sox team should lead the league in runs scored. As good as Santana has been, if you're trying to improve the farm system dealing away prospects for Stanton or Abreu or losing draft picks to sign Hosmer or Santana aren't going to help. Getting Duda or Morrison are nice secondary type moves but I still feel like this team needs a guy pitchers don't want to deal with in the middle of the order the way they didn't want to deal with Manny or Ortiz. Stanton and Martinez are the two closest guys that fit that description and I'd place Abreu and then Hosmer 3rd and 4th. Martinez doesn't cost any draft picks - and I get it's not a 1st rounder they'd lose, but still at this point the Sox need to do as much as they reasonably can to preserve the farm system while drastically improving the middle of the lineup. The issue with Abreu is if the Sox do deal JBJ - and I would deal JBJ for Abreu straight up and take my chances with Castillo in CF, who else would go in that deal? Again, not sure that losing Ockimey or Chavis or Groome or Mata is a great idea. If it's not in that tier then you consider it, but I'd just as soon pay Martinez and hang onto the kids and even JBJ until he's a year or two away from free agency.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 24, 2017 16:33:50 GMT -5
Keep in mind that JBJ got hurt at the very beginning of a hot streak twice last year. For someone as streaky as he is, that makes a huge difference for his season totals.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 24, 2017 16:44:26 GMT -5
I would say Martinez is plan A, he cost just money. Stanton is plan B and Abreu is plan C. Maybe Stanton and Abreu are plan B1 and B2. I would but Stanton before Abreu because he is younger and that huge contract should drive down his price. Option A is by far the best choice.
If you trade Bradley for Abreu, you have to replace Bradley. Overall the cheaper options at 1B look better than the cheaper OF options this year. Reports say Bruce wants 70 to 80 million, which is really funny. I was thinking 2-3 years at around 15 million per.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 24, 2017 23:55:13 GMT -5
Sign me up for Santana. Love the way he grinds out at bats, similar to what the Sox used to do but got away from a little the last couple of years, and even more last year without Ortiz. Santana is good from both sides of the plate, gets on base, provides some power, is a presence in the lineup because he makes pitchers work, and is a very good defender. He's probably going to be a relative bargain, too...a 3-WAR player at $15M AAV/4 yr. Bump for Santana.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 26, 2017 2:16:25 GMT -5
At ESPN, David Schoenfield analyzes the 1B market in his examination of Eric Hosmer. The big news is that he thinks the Indians will pursue a cheap solution like Duda or Moreland rather than try to re-sign Santana. This is opposite what I read earlier, but it's now being echoed in the Cleveland press. That changes everything. Like I did, he lists the Rangers as shoppers, but he also reminds me that I meant to exclude them because they need a place to play Joey Gallo for at least this year. They can wait a year and figure out if they're continuing with Beltre at 3B (like we did with Papi at DH), and it gives them a year to see if 1B prospect Ronald Guzman gets even better. And if Beltre retires, money they might spend at 1B this year would be better spent next year pursuing Josh Donaldson, etc. He thinks the Mariners are probably done after trading for Ryon Healy, but I think their plan is to wait and re-sign Alonso on the cheap. Same difference -- they're not likely players for the big three of Hosmer, Santana, and Morrison. He agrees that the Angels are players, but thinks they'll target the likes of Morrison rather than Hosmer or Santana. I'm not sure I see the logic there. The Rockies are the wild card. I assumed they'd go with rookie Ryan McMahon (a 3B conversion), and MLBTradeRumors has that as their likeliest option, but they don't rule out Hosmer etc. Schoenfield is skeptical that they'll open up the wallet when they need to extend Arenado. That leaves the Royals, Angels, and, if willing to go over $237M, the Red Sox as likely bidders for the top 3. If the Rockies get into it, that drives up prices across the board, and I think that's the scenario where the Sox could punt as prices rise and re-sign Moreland. But if there are just 3 teams pursuing three guys, that's a buyer's market. Here's are five things worth noting about Hosmer. 1) He's been so universally identified as the guy most likely to get a bad contract that it paradoxically no longer seems likely. Sportswriters and bloggers aren't the smartest tools in the shed (one Rockies blog had them eager to re-sign 0.9 WAR Mark Reynolds because, 30 homers!), and if they all understand this, so does every GM. 2) He is hugely more valuable to the Red Sox than anyone else, because of his swing. If I'm Hosmer, I want to play for the Sox, period. 3) He's a clubhouse leader and has a stellar record in the clutch, so it would seem to follow that he wants to play for a winner. The Sox are much more likely to win championships over the next 6 years than the Royals or Angels. 4) It's very easy to explain some of the discrepancy between his bad defensive metrics and good eyeball reports. There's one thing that causes a guy to look good while getting to fewer balls than average, and that's bad positioning. Is there any evidence that this might be the case? It's logical that a team that deploys shifts well also positions their infielders well, period. And in fact there is a significant correlation between runs saved by shifts and infield DRS totals. Where do the Royals rank in runs saved by shifts over the last 6 years? In a virtual dead heat for last by a mile. The Marlins have saved 2 runs and the Royals 3, but each year's total has been rounded to the nearest run, so we actually don't know who was worse. But the next worst team, the Cardinals, saved 16. His range metrics have been so subpar that I find it hard to believe that he has better than average range. Even average might be a stretch. But I also think that he's definitely better than his numbers and likely not the bad defender that they portray. It's worth noting that he's +12 runs career in Good Fielding Plays minus Miscues, and a lot of that has to be scooping throws. 5) There is a price point where he's the best option (even including the tax you pay on part of his salary, plus the loss of a draft pick plus moving down 10 slots on your best pick), even if he doesn't tweak his swing to hit fewer ground balls (which you know every team but the Royals will try to have him do). Given the above, that price point might well become a reality. It's easy to see him as a 3.5 to 4.0 WAR player for the Sox (he projects at 2.9, crudely) and it's also easy to see him shocking the world and signing for, say, an $18M AAV. That he and JDM are represented by the same agent makes this a bit likelier, I think. The long-term ramifications of signing both Martinez and Hosmer or Santana are another issue entirely. The short version is that it makes Michael Chavis a LF, which probably means you're trading JBJ going into his 2020 walk year (if not a year earlier). 2020 is the year you need to get under the cap to avoid the massive penalties, so the extra money you have to budget is not the entire 1B salary, but the difference between the 1B AAV and JBJ's final year of arbitration. That shouldn't be a deal breaker.
|
|
|
Post by jiant2520 on Nov 26, 2017 2:52:08 GMT -5
Yes, as I've said, if the price is right we should sign Hosmer. I like him and think he will be a doubles machine in Boston. If we can do 17-18 mil per, I am on board. However, like you said, if the price gets driven up by Colorado, or another team, we may need option three or four, and Duda may just be there waiting.
It all depends man... if Duda signs a 1yr 7.5 mil deal and Hosmer is asking for over 100 million.... I mean, we need BP help too.... Duda on one year, plus a BP piece for way less than Hosmer overall, and maybe for next year only too.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,988
|
Post by jimoh on Nov 26, 2017 6:08:06 GMT -5
At ESPN, David Schoenfield analyzes the 1B market in his examination of Eric Hosmer. The big news is that he thinks the Indians will pursue a cheap solution like Duda or Moreland rather than try to re-sign Santana. This is opposite what I read earlier, but it's now being echoed in the Cleveland press. That changes everything. [...] 4) It's very easy to explain some of the discrepancy between his bad defensive metrics and good eyeball reports. There's one thing that causes a guy to look good while getting to fewer balls than average, and that's bad positioning. Is there any evidence that this might be the case? [...] Lots of interesting things in that long post, but this claim puzzles me. There's only "one thing" that "causes a guy to look good while getting to fewer balls than average" and that's bad positioning? What about actual lack of range, actual slower reflexes, actual lesser quickness?
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 26, 2017 12:07:34 GMT -5
At ESPN, David Schoenfield analyzes the 1B market in his examination of Eric Hosmer. The big news is that he thinks the Indians will pursue a cheap solution like Duda or Moreland rather than try to re-sign Santana. This is opposite what I read earlier, but it's now being echoed in the Cleveland press. That changes everything. [...] 4) It's very easy to explain some of the discrepancy between his bad defensive metrics and good eyeball reports. There's one thing that causes a guy to look good while getting to fewer balls than average, and that's bad positioning. Is there any evidence that this might be the case? [...] Lots of interesting things in that long post, but this claim puzzles me. There's only "one thing" that "causes a guy to look good while getting to fewer balls than average" and that's bad positioning? What about actual lack of range, actual slower reflexes, actual lesser quickness? Let me try to ease your puzzlement. First, saying "only one thing" does indeed assert that there are no other things. Saying merely "one thing" is rather different; it explicitly does not exclude alternatives, but does assert that the named thing is the primary thing, and perhaps the only one widely agreed upon. So I myself am puzzled that you inserted "only." There of course may well be other reasons why expert observers believe a fielder is very good when advanced defensive metrics say he makes fewer plays than average. Slow first steps and bad routes by outfielders aren't recognized as easily as pure bad range. For infielders, defensive inconsistency that is not reflected in errors charged is probably such a reason. There may well be infielders with good tools (range, hands, quickness) and solid positioning who sometimes simply fail to execute a play that's made 50% to 75% of the time by others -- because they were distracted, were anticipating a ball hit in the other direction, etc. IOW, the infield equivalent of a bad jump. GG voters wouldn't recognize that, either. However, you have not named such a thing. All three things you named are clearly evident to the Gold Glove voters. The most infamous guy who won a mess of Gold Gloves while having terrible defensive numbers was Derek Jeter. After the 2005 season, Bill James looked at video of his 20 best and worst plays of the year according to BIS and compared them to Adam Everett's 20 best and worst ("... sort of like watching video of Barbara Bush dancing at the White House, and then watching Demi Moore dancing in Striptease. The two men could not possibly be more different in ... style and manner ..."). He noticed two main differences: Jeter played "much shallower" than Everett and usually threw on the run rather than planting his feet immediately. Of course, if you play much closer to home, you'll get to far fewer balls despite having the same physical range. Hence the infamous "pasta diving." (Throwing on the run also impresses voters, but that's not something that can be fixed simply.) According to an article at Grantland, when Jeter went from -10 DRS to +3 in 2009 (at age 35!), it was because he had worked on "aggressive defensive positioning."
|
|
|
1B in 2018
Nov 26, 2017 13:34:43 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by jackiebradleyjrjr on Nov 26, 2017 13:34:43 GMT -5
Lots of interesting things in that long post, but this claim puzzles me. There's only "one thing" that "causes a guy to look good while getting to fewer balls than average" and that's bad positioning? What about actual lack of range, actual slower reflexes, actual lesser quickness? Let me try to ease your puzzlement. First, saying "only one thing" does indeed assert that there are no other things. Saying merely "one thing" is rather different; it explicitly does not exclude alternatives, but does assert that the named thing is the primary thing, and perhaps the only one widely agreed upon. So I myself am puzzled that you inserted "only." There of course may well be other reasons why expert observers believe a fielder is very good when advanced defensive metrics say he makes fewer plays than average. Slow first steps and bad routes by outfielders aren't recognized as easily as pure bad range. For infielders, defensive inconsistency that is not reflected in errors charged is probably such a reason. There may well be infielders with good tools (range, hands, quickness) and solid positioning who sometimes simply fail to execute a play that's made 50% to 75% of the time by others -- because they were distracted, were anticipating a ball hit in the other direction, etc. IOW, the infield equivalent of a bad jump. GG voters wouldn't recognize that, either. However, you have not named such a thing. All three things you named are clearly evident to the Gold Glove voters. The most infamous guy who won a mess of Gold Gloves while having terrible defensive numbers was Derek Jeter. After the 2005 season, Bill James looked at video of his 20 best and worst plays of the year according to BIS and compared them to Adam Everett's 20 best and worst ("... sort of like watching video of Barbara Bush dancing at the White House, and then watching Demi Moore dancing in Striptease. The two men could not possibly be more different in ... style and manner ..."). He noticed two main differences: Jeter played "much shallower" than Everett and usually threw on the run rather than planting his feet immediately. Of course, if you play much closer to home, you'll get to far fewer balls despite having the same physical range. Hence the infamous "pasta diving." (Throwing on the run also impresses voters, but that's not something that can be fixed simply.) According to an article at Grantland, when Jeter went from -10 DRS to +3 in 2009 (at age 35!), it was because he had worked on "aggressive defensive positioning." Sorry, Eric, not to take this in an unproductive direction but when you say, "there's one thing that causes...." what you are saying is there is only one thing that causes it. Of course it excludes alternatives-- hence the ONE thing. If you had said, "one of the things that causes..." or "the primary cause is..." that would have been different. Doesn't mean your overall point isn't correct. But the reason jimoh was puzzled is simple: what you wrote and what you intended to write were two different things.
|
|
|
Post by oleary25 on Nov 26, 2017 14:30:48 GMT -5
Lots of speculation here on what to do. For my two cents worth why not try to trade for Jose Abreu, and sign Carlos Gonzalez to a 1 year prove it contract maybe with an option ? Abreu will cost 17 mil per the next 2 years and wouldn’t block Chavis from 1B if they didn’t trade him. I’d imagine a deal centered around JBJ, with Mata , and Travis would appeal to CWS.Now by signing Cargo we’d get a left handed bat with power with good defense that could play LF as well as Spell in Cf and RF and split at bats with Brentz . Now by doing this you’ve not compromised your future allocation of funds to help extend or resign Sale, Kimbral, Betts, or Xander. While improving the middle of the order. Line up when everyone’s healthy 2B Pedroia Cf Benny RF Betts 1B Abreu 3B Devers DH Ramirez LF Cargo SS Xander C Vazquez. That’s a pretty loaded lineup with balance throughout. Bench S Swihart, Brentz R , Holt L Leon S. Just a thought let me know what your opinions are below.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 26, 2017 14:36:47 GMT -5
Generally, I think that the little hyperbolic rhetorical flourishes you frequently use are unnecessary and water down your argument rather than bolstering it.
|
|
|
1B in 2018
Nov 26, 2017 14:41:40 GMT -5
via mobile
jdb likes this
Post by telson13 on Nov 26, 2017 14:41:40 GMT -5
Lots of speculation here on what to do. For my two cents worth why not try to trade for Jose Abreu, and sign Carlos Gonzalez to a 1 year prove it contract maybe with an option ? Abreu will cost 17 mil per the next 2 years and wouldn’t block Chavis from 1B if they didn’t trade him. I’d imagine a deal centered around JBJ, with Mata , and Travis would appeal to CWS.Now by signing Cargo we’d get a left handed bat with power with good defense that could play LF as well as Spell in Cf and RF and split at bats with Brentz . Now by doing this you’ve not compromised your future allocation of funds to help extend or resign Sale, Kimbral, Betts, or Xander. While improving the middle of the order. Line up when everyone’s healthy 2B Pedroia Cf Benny RF Betts 1B Abreu 3B Devers DH Ramirez LF Cargo SS Xander C Vazquez. That’s a pretty loaded lineup with balance throughout. Bench S Swihart, Brentz R , Holt L Leon S. Just a thought let me know what your opinions are below. Most likely, Chavis wouldn't be blocked because in a deal to get Abreu, he's almost assuredly gone. Abreu is the worst of the options available for this reason: potentially highest talent cost, least control years.
|
|
|