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 m1keyboots on Dec 22, 2017 15:29:04 GMT -5
Yay!!! I might have come off a little rude to people begging to fork over 200 mil to Eric Hosmer bc he had a career year and is Jeter-esque overrated on defense. Mitch again, played gold glove defense with average offense from the left side with broken bones in his foot. And we're getting these things for about 16 million less a year than would be for Hosmer.
Now comes the unfortunate period where im wondering if we jeapordize having elite day in, day out defense with offensive surges in Center from JBJ for 2 years of JDM being worth his money.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 22, 2017 17:07:59 GMT -5
www.espn.com/mlb/stats/batting/_/position/1b/sort/WARBR/order/trueI can't believe I'm going to do this, but Moreland isn't horrible if you sign Martinez. Moreland is more like security in case Ramirez gets injured or sucks again. He was tied for 19th amoung 1B if you go by bwar, he is in the 30s if you go by fwar, which doesn't seem to value his D. The thing is DD already talked about platooning Ramirez and Moreland. So we most likely aren't going to see Moreland play 150 games. This is a depth move in my opinion, not a move for a starter. We could have simply signed no one and just had Travis platoon with Ramirez, as he killed lefties last year. If you do that, then Ramirez gets hurt or sucks, you are in trouble. Now at least you could platoon Travis and Moreland, something Cora will do and Farrell wouldn't. All while not bogging down our payroll in the future. We didn't need to add Moreland if we sign Martinez, it's a luxury move to increase depth. I would have preferred Duda, but would Duda sign here knowing he wouldn't be a full-time player? In my opinion there were only two for sure upgrades on the free agent market, Santana and Hosmer. We tried for both, but weren't going to go crazy. Looking at long-term payroll that seems smart. Especially when we have 3 players in Travis, Chavis and Ockimey that can help in the future. Other guys like Morrison are risky and isn't a certain upgrade over Ramirez and Moreland. Nevermind can you even sign him, with Ramirez here? Ramirez makes everything harder, if you plan on signing Martinez. There is what one guy available on the trade market in Abreu that is a massive upgrade. I get some of the 3rd and 4th pieces in trades gave been bad. Especially the 4th pieces in the Kimbrel and Thornburg trades. Those were a clear overpay. Thing is those same guys are still 3rd and 4th pieces in an Abreu trade. You add them all up and you still aren't close to having enough to trade for Abreu. Who could you trade them for? None of them would improve our 1B depth. I don't see how those moves have anything to do with Moreland unless you can show me how you trade those guys for an upgrade. As long as we get Martinez the Moreland signing looks fine.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 22, 2017 17:25:55 GMT -5
www.espn.com/mlb/stats/batting/_/position/1b/sort/WARBR/order/trueI can't believe I'm going to do this, but Moreland isn't horrible if you sign Martinez. Moreland is more like security in case Ramirez gets injured or sucks again. He was tied for 19th amoung 1B if you go by bwar, he is in the 30s if you go by fwar, which doesn't seem to value his D. The thing is DD already talked about platooning Ramirez and Moreland. So we most likely aren't going to see Moreland play 150 games. This is a depth move in my opinion, not a move for a starter. We could have simply signed no one and just had Travis platoon with Ramirez, as he killed lefties last year. If you do that, then Ramirez gets hurt or sucks, you are in trouble. Now at least you could platoon Travis and Moreland, something Cora will do and Farrell wouldn't. All while not bogging down our payroll in the future. We didn't need to add Moreland if we sign Martinez, it's a luxury move to increase depth. I would have preferred Duda, but would Duda sign here knowing he wouldn't be a full-time player? In my opinion there were only two for sure upgrades on the free agent market, Santana and Hosmer. We tried for both, but weren't going to go crazy. Looking at long-term payroll that seems smart. Especially when we have 3 players in Travis, Chavis and Ockimey that can help in the future. Other guys like Morrison are risky and isn't a certain upgrade over Ramirez and Moreland. Nevermind can you even sign him, with Ramirez here? Ramirez makes everything harder, if you plan on signing Martinez. There is what one guy available on the trade market in Abreu that is a massive upgrade. I get some of the 3rd and 4th pieces in trades gave been bad. Especially the 4th pieces in the Kimbrel and Thornburg trades. Those were a clear overpay. Thing is those same guys are still 3rd and 4th pieces in an Abreu trade. You add them all up and you still aren't close to having enough to trade for Abreu. Who could you trade them for? None of them would improve our 1B depth. I don't see how those moves have anything to do with Moreland unless you can show me how you trade those guys for an upgrade. As long as we get Martinez the Moreland signing looks fine. Agree. I said almost the exact same thing here: forum.soxprospects.com/post/292214
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Dec 22, 2017 17:38:03 GMT -5
Agreed and somewhat surprised there are so many naysayers. Moreland just seems to make sense to me as long as they get JD. On top of everything that has been mentioned I think he is good in the clubhouse also, which is big for a guy who isn't going to play every night.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Dec 23, 2017 10:52:34 GMT -5
Agreed and somewhat surprised there are so many naysayers. Moreland just seems to make sense to me as long as they get JD. On top of everything that has been mentioned I think he is good in the clubhouse also, which is big for a guy who isn't going to play every night. I don't agree with anyone that says MM stinks. IMO he is mediocre. But the Sox are probably going over the 1st threshold, then why should they settle for mediocrity? Secondly, suppose he doesn't hit well enough? He is not a lock to hit well enough. Then you've increased the chances of Hanley get his at bats for 2019 even if he doesn't perform that well (which I'm skeptical Hanley will perform "well."). The Red Sox should have tried to get a better player. I get the idea that the Red Sox are just "scared" to challenge the vesting option, or they aren't very bright. I'm not yet like those that want to bash DD for everything including "global warming," but he did sacrifice the farm to win now. If he is going to spend near the $237m threshold this year and possibly next, in my view he should be solidifying 1b - not gambling. I don't hate they got MM. And I would even be okay (not like it-- but if he hits very well- he is being productive which is fine.) if Hanley got his at bats if he hits very well. But I don't think it will play out that Hanley is doing "really good." At that point, if again the Sox again don't do much in the playoffs (or worse don't make it) and 1b gave us little production, more than likely I'm going to turn on DD and maybe blame him for everything including "global warming" as some others seem to do too.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 23, 2017 16:53:07 GMT -5
Agreed and somewhat surprised there are so many naysayers. Moreland just seems to make sense to me as long as they get JD. On top of everything that has been mentioned I think he is good in the clubhouse also, which is big for a guy who isn't going to play every night. I don't agree with anyone that says MM stinks. IMO he is mediocre. But the Sox are probably going over the 1st threshold, then why should they settle for mediocrity? Secondly, suppose he doesn't hit well enough? He is not a lock to hit well enough. Then you've increased the chances of Hanley get his at bats for 2019 even if he doesn't perform that well (which I'm skeptical Hanley will perform "well."). The Red Sox should have tried to get a better player. I get the idea that the Red Sox are just "scared" to challenge the vesting option, or they aren't very bright. I'm not yet like those that want to bash DD for everything including "global warming," but he did sacrifice the farm to win now. If he is going to spend near the $237m threshold this year and possibly next, in my view he should be solidifying 1b - not gambling. I don't hate they got MM. And I would even be okay (not like it-- but if he hits very well- he is being productive which is fine.) if Hanley got his at bats if he hits very well. But I don't think it will play out that Hanley is doing "really good." At that point, if again the Sox again don't do much in the playoffs (or worse don't make it) and 1b gave us little production, more than likely I'm going to turn on DD and maybe blame him for everything including "global warming" as some others seem to do too. DD talked about platooning Moreland and Ramirez when he announced Morelands signing. So I don't think he's scared of not giving Ramirez a chance at that option. It's basically are you better than Moreland? Now prove it if you want ABs. The plan sure sounds like sign Martinez to DH and be like the 4th OF. Thus opening up some DH ABs for Ramirez and the rest of the time platooning Ramirez and Moreland at 1B. Its risky, but also has a fairly high upside. Wouldn't surprise me one bit to get 3-4 war at 1B combined for those two. Ramirez will be playing for a contract, so he will give you 110%. Gives Cora the ability late in games with the lead to turn to a GG defender in Moreland. I would agree with your opinion if the plan was to start Moreland 150 games at 1B again, but that doesn't sound like the plan according to DD. Moreland was signed to make sure Hanley doesn't just vest that option because even if he sucks we have no other options.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Dec 23, 2017 17:19:00 GMT -5
I don't agree with anyone that says MM stinks. IMO he is mediocre. But the Sox are probably going over the 1st threshold, then why should they settle for mediocrity? Secondly, suppose he doesn't hit well enough? He is not a lock to hit well enough. Then you've increased the chances of Hanley get his at bats for 2019 even if he doesn't perform that well (which I'm skeptical Hanley will perform "well."). The Red Sox should have tried to get a better player. I get the idea that the Red Sox are just "scared" to challenge the vesting option, or they aren't very bright. I'm not yet like those that want to bash DD for everything including "global warming," but he did sacrifice the farm to win now. If he is going to spend near the $237m threshold this year and possibly next, in my view he should be solidifying 1b - not gambling. I don't hate they got MM. And I would even be okay (not like it-- but if he hits very well- he is being productive which is fine.) if Hanley got his at bats if he hits very well. But I don't think it will play out that Hanley is doing "really good." At that point, if again the Sox again don't do much in the playoffs (or worse don't make it) and 1b gave us little production, more than likely I'm going to turn on DD and maybe blame him for everything including "global warming" as some others seem to do too. DD talked about platooning Moreland and Ramirez when he announced Morelands signing. So I don't think he's scared of not giving Ramirez a chance at that option. It's basically are you better than Moreland? Now prove it if you want ABs. The plan sure sounds like sign Martinez to DH and be like the 4th OF. Thus opening up some DH ABs for Ramirez and the rest of the time platooning Ramirez and Moreland at 1B. Its risky, but also has a fairly high upside. Wouldn't surprise me one bit to get 3-4 war at 1B combined for those two. Ramirez will be playing for a contract, so he will give you 110%. Gives Cora the ability late in games with the lead to turn to a GG defender in Moreland. I would agree with your opinion if the plan was to start Moreland 150 games at 1B again, but that doesn't sound like the plan according to DD. Moreland was signed to make sure Hanley doesn't just vest that option because even if he sucks we have no other options. My opinion as to how things shake out - I'd like it to be as you just said. Then I come back to-- they should have gotten someone better than MM. MM imo doesn't ensure he'll be a better hitter vs righties than Hanley. OFC there are few assurances - ever.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Dec 23, 2017 18:00:55 GMT -5
Okay, I've read all three pages and I need to step back here for a second. Anyone else finding all of the "Moreland signing proves that the the Red Sox REAL target was X" takes confusing as hell? Looks to me like a bunch of people went into this offseason with some preconceived notions and are now using Mitch Moreland to justify why they were right in the first place about some player who isn't Mitch Moreland. Note: Please don't respond to this with a "but MY take on why Mitch Moreland shows the Red Sox were REALLY interested in Kenny Lofton was the right one and here is why." My original post on this subject on the roster building thread ( I think ) was essentially leaning towards signing JD but kick tires in general with Moreland as a serious option. That appears to be still in play. I don't see why it is surprising that DD might have kicked the tires and got the lay of the land and signed Moreland. No one knows who the primary target was but at the right price all top players are the taarget if he's managing the team correctly.
|
|
manfred
Veteran
Posts: 11,419
Member is Online
|
Post by manfred on Dec 26, 2017 11:19:47 GMT -5
This seems precisely designed not to make the Sandoval/Ramirez mistake of overpaying players who are not really good but simply the best when the music stops in the offseason. Sox’s need of 1B doesn’t mean they have to pay the best free agent as if he is a great option (as they did with Pablo). I say sign JD (maybe), wait until next offseason for a prize (*cough* Harper *cough*).
|
|
|
Post by m1keyboots on Dec 27, 2017 20:32:54 GMT -5
This seems precisely designed not to make the Sandoval/Ramirez mistake of overpaying players who are not really good but simply the best when the music stops in the offseason. Sox’s need of 1B doesn’t mean they have to pay the best free agent as if he is a great option (as they did with Pablo). I say sign JD (maybe), wait until next offseason for a prize (*cough* Harper *cough*). Ill just say this. Watching Bryce on Masn everyday for the last 5 years hasnt shown him to me, to be a 40 mil a year guy. That is just my opinion. I understand that swing can hypnotize people. The screaming at umpires for calls (that dont appear to be bad) and pulling a hammy or two every year. If the goal is to get th offense, id say just break the bank for Trout in a couple years.
|
|
|