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.
Mitch Moreland Re-Signed (Two-Year Deal)
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 18, 2017 18:14:39 GMT -5
I think I remember seeing that there were no major 1B free agents next year, so it's definitely not a problem that he signed for 2.
|
|
|
Post by Coreno on Dec 18, 2017 18:30:04 GMT -5
I don't get the two years, unless that's the only way he would accept a part time role. I can live with this if Martinez is signed to DH and act as a 4th OF. He signed way under market last year. This is closer to what he was worth then and now. Eh. I'm not really sure I see where you're getting that from. He's only getting a $1M raise after putting up 2WAR. Last winter, he was coming of a walk year where he only gave the Rangers .7WAR. I think the two years works decent for both sides. Moreland is 32 and probably knows he's never getting any big payday. He likely plays out the rest of his career basically year-to-year after this deal. He's best as a platoon 1B, and should still be a useful role player if his bat takes any steps back, due to his defense. He was signed to be a platoon guy last year so I hope that is the plan here. I like this if it means still getting a premier bat for DH. That technically forces Hanley out of the starting 9 vs. RHP, but I think they could still keep him happy as that 10th man. Starting at 1st vs. LHP, and as the designated PH and backup 1b/DH (with JDM, or whoever that acquisition may be, sliding into the field to give other guys days off) should get him to that sweet spot of ~400ABs where he gets enough playing time to hopefully keep him happy, but not so much that his option vests, and maybe he actually stays healthy. ADD: If Hanley somehow gets his groove back and mashes next year, and is back in 2019 then the first base situation continues with them splitting time. If not, the closest 2 internal options at 1B, Sam Travis and Michael Chavis, are both RHH. So Moreland as a defensive LHH should be a good fit in some capacity with the 2019 Red Sox.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Dec 18, 2017 18:39:35 GMT -5
Yeap, for the price point and and the two years is actually perfect. Everyone talks about next year's free agent class, but the 2019 free agent class is better suited to meet the Sox needs in the future.
|
|
|
Post by kenster on Dec 18, 2017 19:06:10 GMT -5
I like Mitch Moreland but this is yet another example of Dombrowski’s lack of creativity.
|
|
|
Post by Coreno on Dec 18, 2017 19:18:20 GMT -5
I like Mitch Moreland but this is yet another example of Dombrowski’s lack of creativity. If your complaint with Dombrowski is that he has no creativity and always just goes after the obvious top-of-the-line option to fill a need, I don't see how you can turn around and call a move like this another example of his lack of creativity. Is it just because he was with the team last year? Honestly, Moreland has probably been his most creative move with the Red Sox. You could make an argument for Pomeranz since he was just starting to establish his value as a near frontline starter, but they still paid a pretty hefty price on that one.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 18, 2017 19:25:31 GMT -5
I don't get the two years It puts the Sox in the market for Goldshmidt or in the market for one of the best kept secrets in baseball in Nolan Arenado two years from now. The point being there were tons of options that would only take one year. Leave open a spot for a player like Travis, Chavis or Ockimey if they are awesome this year. Maybe move Devers there if he is horrible at 3B. After hearing from DD and Moreland I'm ok with two years. DD said they could platoon Moreland and Ramirez at 1B and Moreland said playing time wasn't talked about yet. So it sounds like two years at that money was so good, he took it without knowing or being told he would play full-time. I can live with that, over two years of Moreland being a full-time player.
|
|
|
Post by nonothing on Dec 18, 2017 19:31:02 GMT -5
The Moreland deal is a much better value than the Santana deal. And 2 years is fine. The second year is almost an option value. Nobody will balk at that number for a second year if he needs to be traded. This is a gold glove caliber 1B with a pretty decent bat. It is a good deal and leaves money for bigger needs.
Martinez may play a combo of LF and DH, and they trade JBJ. I would like to believe this means they are close to a trade getting very high value for JBJ and signing Martinez. I think JBJ is worth a lot, so I will be disappointed if they don't get a lot for him.
I do not see Hanley in a platoon, and I don't think they try at all costs not to let Hanley's option vest. Hanley is an exceptional hitter when healthy. If he plays well this season, we will be happy to have him locked in at DH for 1 yr $22MM in 2019. If he isn't good, they won't let him vest the option. But they don't need to worry about that in April and May. Hanley is too good of a hitter to write off. They need to just let that situation play out and see what happens with the guys in AAA whether they are pushing for spots at the MLB level for real or not.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 18, 2017 19:32:26 GMT -5
I like Mitch Moreland but this is yet another example of Dombrowski’s lack of creativity. If your complaint with Dombrowski is that he has no creativity and always just goes after the obvious top-of-the-line option to fill a need, I don't see how you can turn around and call a move like this another example of his lack of creativity. Is it just because he was with the team last year? Honestly, Moreland has probably been his most creative move with the Red Sox. You could make an argument for Pomeranz since he was just starting to establish his value as a near frontline starter, but they still paid a pretty hefty price on that one. For me this is DD being Smart and Creative. Rather than overpay Hosmer, along with Martinez, moves that would get people to declare he won the offseason war with the Yankees. He went with the Smart low cost move, that gives us flexibility going forward. I would have preferred Duda, but that is kinda splitting hairs. I can certainly see the value in having a good defensive 1B with our infield.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 18, 2017 19:34:57 GMT -5
No he didn't, these are horrible markets for a guy like Moreland. Just tons of other options that drive the price down. In this market, with all the options, this is a top rate type of deal. He jumped at it because he wasn't getting a better deal. Yeah ok. I'll let you be right because I don't want to argue for 100 posts. Just remember you replied to my post.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Dec 18, 2017 19:43:18 GMT -5
As some projected earlier, signing JD for pop and Moreland to maintain that infield defense at a reasonable price was the most probable solution since the day after the world series ended. I expect JD to happen soon now. My bet is that DD really wants a good defensive 1st baseman if he's going to rely on Devers at 3rd. I think JD now gets signed and JBJ is traded for pitching. If they can sign Nunez also that would really cap this process. He's flexible enough to play in a lot of positions without the team missing a beat. He's important also.
|
|
|
Post by ponch73 on Dec 18, 2017 22:47:15 GMT -5
I like the signing. Better than paying Hosmer. .877 OPS before breaking his toe, and Statcast really likes him. Still had 22 HRs last year. Need to sign JDM, but this is a solid move. What is Statcast's track record in predicting free agent performance?
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Dec 18, 2017 23:29:00 GMT -5
Lord you people will literally complain about anything huh?
Good deal. Glad to have Mitch back. He as a steal last year. Excited to bring him back into the fold.
|
|
|
Post by daltonjones on Dec 19, 2017 0:00:05 GMT -5
I think the union and the clubhouse will not abide restricting a nominally healthy Hanley's at-bats (unless and until there have been a couple hundred pretty bad ones).
So we are looking for a platoon DH/corner outfielder.
This is not so bad though, we have a lot of players who need to bounce back. If most do, we don't need much. If most don't, a new 1st and DH would have us contending down to the wire for the second WC (a poor use of $237 plus million)
We can wait until early May, see if we really need 1st, DH, or starting pitching. We will have to overpay for it then, but it will be available. And much less of an overpay than Hosmer or JD.
|
|
|
Post by swingingbunt on Dec 19, 2017 1:15:57 GMT -5
I think the union and the clubhouse will not abide restricting a nominally healthy Hanley's at-bats (unless and until there have been a couple hundred pretty bad ones). So we are looking for a platoon DH/corner outfielder. This is not so bad though, we have a lot of players who need to bounce back. If most do, we don't need much. If most don't, a new 1st and DH would have us contending down to the wire for the second WC (a poor use of $237 plus million) We can wait until early May, see if we really need 1st, DH, or starting pitching. We will have to overpay for it then, but it will be available. And much less of an overpay than Hosmer or JD. What is the union supposed to do about Hanley not getting the playtime he wants? He had a negative WAR last year, and has been worth a LOT less than Moreland over the last 3 years. Last I checked there is nothing that says players with large contacts are guaranteed a spot in the lineup each day.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Dec 19, 2017 1:37:07 GMT -5
I like the resigning of Moreland. He had a pretty good season considering that he played half of it on a broken foot and had some other dings as well. I had reservations about Hosmer. Rather than spending a huge amount this year, the Sox should position themselves for next year's bumper crop of FAs.
There still is a lot of talk about JBJ being traded after DD said he wasn't being marketed. I think it would be a big mistake to trade him. JDM should be a DH most of the time. If he doesn't want to be, then he should play somewhere else.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 19, 2017 2:35:51 GMT -5
The Eric Hosmer being our #1 target theory has been debunked. Confirmed, actually. Let me explain. And no, this is not about defending my ego. I hated the Kimbrel trade and hated the Sale trade and I was prepared to think DDo had blown it again by somehow identifying the wrong #1 target. (The only major DDo move I've liked was the Pomeranz trade. I disliked getting Nunez, which I argued against, and I'm very pleased to admit I was 100% wrong.) Last year's Sale trade pissed me off so much that it was effortless to leave here and get a lot of work done on my book. When I saw this news, my immediate reaction, was great, I'm out of here, lots of work done on the book again! Then I thought it through. Boras's initial asking price for JDM, as floated to media sources, was a bit higher than online estimates. His asking price for Hosmer was insanely higher. JDM has never looked like a tough or frustrating negotiation, just your standard Boras one, where he succeeds in getting you to pay a bit more than you'd hoped. Hosmer had the potential to be very frustrating, if teams came in with numbers like every online analyst had, but Boras stuck to the sort of crazy contract demands he was talking about. DDo goes to the winter meetings to get at least one bat and comes back frustrated. He then immediately signs a 1B, a signing which I touted long and hard here as the obvious thing to do if you signed JDM -- the guy whose asking price appears to be reasonable. And you don't grab Moreland unless you think you can sign JDM, as ESPN is already explaining, and sign him at a reasonable price (I agree that they signed Moreland now because he'd received a comparable offer, quite possibly from the Indians). If JDM had been the #1 target, I don't see where the frustration comes from. If that was the frustrating negotiation, you don't immediately sign Moreland. You start asking what the price on Hosmer is. There was a frustrating negotiation, they quickly punted on Hosmer, and Hosmer (not JDM) is the guy that everyone thought Boras would be asking an extra moon for in the first place. If their #1 target was JDM, DDo comes back saying he'd made some progress, talks were fruitful, they were hopeful, etc. And then you sign Moreland and everyone knows that JDM is next. The big loser here is Eric Hosmer. I think what happened is that Boras (and maybe Hosmer) dreamed so hard and long on how much he might earn when he became a FA at such an early age that they underestimated the negative affect of his inconsistency and, even more importantly, ignored the reality of the market. My error, in thinking we would sign Hosmer (perhaps even on the cheap!) was thinking that he and Boras (maybe it's just Boras) would look at the market and realize their demands were nuts. Remember, last winter it looked like not just the Red Sox but the Yankees and maybe the Dodgers would be contenders for his services, as Greg Bird (never a top 100 prospect) was hurt all of 2016 and Cody Bellinger seemed likely to end up in the OF, at least short-term. It's as if they came up with the figure they thought they could get if they got two or three of those three teams bidding for his services, and never readjusted. My guess here is that he ends up signing with the Angels for less total money that the Sox offered him -- maybe a lot less (and wherever he signs, I'm predicting that there will be reports that we offered more). The Twins are another possibility.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 19, 2017 3:50:08 GMT -5
The Eric Hosmer being our #1 target theory has been debunked. Confirmed, actually. Let me explain. And no, this is not about defending my ego. I hated the Kimbrel trade and hated the Sale trade and I was prepared to think DDo had blown it again by somehow identifying the wrong #1 target. (The only major DDo move I've liked was the Pomeranz trade. I disliked getting Nunez, which I argued against, and I'm very pleased to admit I was 100% wrong.) Last year's Sale trade pissed me off so much that it was effortless to leave here and get a lot of work done on my book. When I saw this news, my immediate reaction, was great, I'm out of here, lots of work done on the book again! Then I thought it through. Boras's initial asking price for JDM, as floated to media sources, was a bit higher than online estimates. His asking price for Hosmer was insanely higher. JDM has never looked like a tough or frustrating negotiation, just your standard Boras one, where he succeeds in getting you to pay a bit more than you'd hoped. Hosmer had the potential to be very frustrating, if teams came in with numbers like every online analyst had, but Boras stuck to the sort of crazy contract demands he was talking about. DDo goes to the winter meetings to get at least one bat and comes back frustrated. He then immediately signs a 1B, a signing which I touted long and hard here as the obvious thing to do if you signed JDM -- the guy whose asking price appears to be reasonable. And you don't grab Moreland unless you think you can sign JDM, as ESPN is already explaining, and sign him at a reasonable price (I agree that they signed Moreland now because he'd received a comparable offer, quite possibly from the Indians). If JDM had been the #1 target, I don't see where the frustration comes from. If that was the frustrating negotiation, you don't immediately sign Moreland. You start asking what the price on Hosmer is. There was a frustrating negotiation, they quickly punted on Hosmer, and Hosmer (not JDM) is the guy that everyone thought Boras would be asking an extra moon for in the first place. If their #1 target was JDM, DDo comes back saying he'd made some progress, talks were fruitful, they were hopeful, etc. And then you sign Moreland and everyone knows that JDM is next. The big loser here is Eric Hosmer. I think what happened is that Boras (and maybe Hosmer) dreamed so hard and long on how much he might earn when he became a FA at such an early age that they underestimated the negative affect of his inconsistency and, even more importantly, ignored the reality of the market. My error, in thinking we would sign Hosmer (perhaps even on the cheap!) was thinking that he and Boras (maybe it's just Boras) would look at the market and realize their demands were nuts. Remember, last winter it looked like not just the Red Sox but the Yankees and maybe the Dodgers would be contenders for his services, as Greg Bird (never a top 100 prospect) was hurt all of 2016 and Cody Bellinger seemed likely to end up in the OF, at least short-term. It's as if they came up with the figure they thought they could get if they got two or three of those three teams bidding for his services, and never readjusted. My guess here is that he ends up signing with the Angels for less total money that the Sox offered him -- maybe a lot less (and wherever he signs, I'm predicting that there will be reports that we offered more). The Twins are another possibility. Eric come on. I respect going all in when you believe in a player. Thing is everything has always pointed to Martinez being the number one target. I mean everything. Reports at winter meetings of Martinez meeting face to face with Red Sox, while Hosmer was having two face to face meetings with Padres. Reports Padres are the favorites, Red Sox lurking. Martinez is the safe player, who DD knows very well. He is the best Bat available , exactly what we need. What does Boras want for Hosmer? No one really knows, but we know he wants 200 million for Martinez. Which is like 60 to 70 million over most early estimates. Are there reports he wants more than 200 million for Hosmer? I haven't seen any of those. Your theory has been debunked. DD is frustrated because he likes to move fast, not because he didn't get his #1 target. If he wanted Hosmer he would have signed him.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,989
|
Post by jimoh on Dec 19, 2017 5:26:32 GMT -5
The Eric Hosmer being our #1 target theory has been debunked. Confirmed, actually. Let me explain. And no, this is not about defending my ego. [...] My error, in thinking we would sign Hosmer (perhaps even on the cheap!) was thinking that he and Boras (maybe it's just Boras) would look at the market and realize their demands were nuts.[...] You are certainly right that it can be hard for people like Hosmer and Boras and sometimes other people to realize or admit that their ideas were wrong.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 19, 2017 8:29:43 GMT -5
And no, this is not about defending my ego.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Dec 19, 2017 8:59:14 GMT -5
Yeah Eric my man, sometimes we just have a bad day lol.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 19, 2017 9:30:28 GMT -5
Mitch Moreland totally plays baseball. When he plays it, he does it at first base. I don't recommend trying to play a baseball game without a first baseman. Some first basemen are better than Mitch Moreland. Others are worse.
.....
My favorite moment in The Simpsons is at the end of the episode "Blood Feud." The family is sitting around trying to think of a moral of the story. Eventually, Lisa says "maybe there is no moral" and Homer yells out "EXACTLY! IT'S JUST A BUNCH OF STUFF THAT HAPPENED."
I love this because a) it's hilarious, and b) it's relevant to all of those times we try to attach narrative to stuff when there really isn't any. Mitch Moreland isn't a sign the Red Sox are smart or stupid, creative or obtuse, thrifty or generous. He's just a bunch of stuff that happened. He's a warm-blooded first baseman signed by a team that really needed a first baseman.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 19, 2017 9:30:30 GMT -5
You guys are ridiculous. Hosmer being a target has not been debunked at all. It is easily plausible that what the Red Sox thought he was worth was nowhere close to what Boras was asking for and Moreland almost undoubtedly got an offer that the Red Sox matched because there was a danger in waiting around forever. That does not mean that Hosmer was not their #1 target. I think some people have some pretty thin skin when Eric starts talking. Just shut up and listen is my advice and get what you can from it.
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,678
|
Post by gerry on Dec 19, 2017 17:42:36 GMT -5
You guys are ridiculous. Hosmer being a target has not been debunked at all. It is easily plausible that what the Red Sox thought he was worth was nowhere close to what Boras was asking for and Moreland almost undoubtedly got an offer that the Red Sox matched because there was a danger in waiting around forever. That does not mean that Hosmer was not their #1 target. I think some people have some pretty thin skin when Eric starts talking. Just shut up and listen is my advice and get what you can from it. [br Eric, following your knowledge-based, well-considered thought processes through "The Great Moreland, Hanley, Hosmer, Duda, Santana, Abreu, Bour, LoMo, Belt, Adams, JDM Debate & Discussion" has been nothing short of a compelling graduate course in applied baseball science. Thank you, and such masterful contributors as UMass, Telson, Jimed, Chris to name just a few. This public discourse has been by far the best part of the Red Sox post season. You have jump started these happy, hopeful holidays. May your days be merry and bright, and the 2018 season at least as exciting, interesting and successful.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Dec 19, 2017 18:12:16 GMT -5
You guys are ridiculous. Hosmer being a target has not been debunked at all. It is easily plausible that what the Red Sox thought he was worth was nowhere close to what Boras was asking for and Moreland almost undoubtedly got an offer that the Red Sox matched because there was a danger in waiting around forever. That does not mean that Hosmer was not their #1 target. I think some people have some pretty thin skin when Eric starts talking. Just shut up and listen is my advice and get what you can from it. In the same way that the 'Hosmer #1 Target" theory has not been debunked, it has neither been confirmed. The world may never know.
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Dec 19, 2017 18:15:23 GMT -5
I've never been the biggest Moreland fan. He's definitely serviceable though. After seeing the Carlos Santanna deal, I definitely like this deal more for sox. Santanna isn't that much better than Moreland and Mitch is basically 1/3 the price and they don't lose any draft picks to resign him. This deal seems like a great move. Not sure what else this may mean to the rest of the off season though. Carlos Santana is significantly better than Mitch Moreland and if signing him to the same deal the Phillies got him for was an option, then signing Moreland is huge a mistake. Unless it means we're getting Martinez. I have to disagree that Santanna is significantly better than Moreland to the tune of 3 times more expensive per year plus an extra year and a draft pick. I'll take the Moreland deal over Santanna.
|
|
|