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 beasleyrockah on Jan 26, 2019 16:26:24 GMT -5
The Tony Watson argument is tough for me for the fact that his stock was down as a free agent and then he rebounded in a big way last season. Credit him for the improvement and the Giants for the scouting/coaching, but it's not like he was some sure fire impact reliever. He came into FA with 7.16 K/9 + 2.70 BB/9 the prior season, and then posted 9.82 K/9 + 1.91 BB/9 last year. It's not like his 2017 season was an outlier, it looked like his 2016 season without the BABIP luck, and he seemed like another former good reliever who was cruising towards replacement level as he entered his mid-30s. He certainly represented an upgrade over Poyner/internal options, and they could've used a credible lefty, but I can't fault them for passing on a multi-year deal for a veteran reliever who appeared to be in decline when they'd already spent so much on the rest of the roster. If the argument is the Red Sox should identify a cheap veteran reliever who will revert back to form and outproduce his contract, sure, but that's kind of tough to do right?
This offseason does kind of feel like 2012, when they gave themselves so little flexibility financially they couldn't take advantage of seemingly good value buys in free agency.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 26, 2019 23:05:15 GMT -5
How doesn't it? I don't care how good your offense or starting pitching is if your bullpen implodes all the time. Nevermind most of the season you'll only play one of Moreland and Pearce. I'm a big believer in the your only as good as your weakest link. Well right now that is the bullpen. One Steve Pearce-priced reliever isn't going to be the difference between a bad bullpen and a good one, though. It's very possible that such a reliever would make no difference at all. No it won't, but it could make a bad bullpen average. Right now Pearce salary might get you Brach and Kelley. Add in a few million and you could easily add two rather good players.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Jan 26, 2019 23:23:05 GMT -5
We didn;t get Tony Watson so that was a blunder? We'll see. We didn't need him last year, right? So it wasn't a blunder last year. ANy relief pitcher we would have gotten we don';t know if they would have done "a Kimbrel" or "a Kelly." So I can't see calling it a mistake thus far. Right, it's not so much a criticism because things wound up working out fine (although, as I've mentioned a few times, if they wound up hurting their chances this year because of how they had to use the starters in the playoffs, then maybe it didn't work out fine - conversation for another time though). But the one I was thinking of was Tony Watson as well. Bobby Poyner made the opening day roster. For the contract that Watson wound up signing, the only justification, assuming he'd have signed with the Red Sox for the same price (big assumption), was the Red Sox were adamant about avoiding the $237M mark. Now, maybe the fact that they realized they needed a starter midseason, and therefore had little choice but to go over that mark, changed the plan. But in that case, they miscalculated and should have signed a guy like Watson in the preseason. It is possible to make a mistake and have it not cost you. I believe not signing Tony Watson, assuming he'd have signed for similar money, was a mistake. I'm not sure you can make a credible argument that they couldn't have used him (which is a different thing than saying they NEEDED him, which they clearly did not). You are the one who introduced "blunder." Nobody called anything they did a blunder. But it is a miscalculation to pass on parts of the free agent market in the offseason for monetary reasons, then wind up going over the final tax threshold midseason anyway. Then penalties are NOT that great - the Red Sox paid $11+ million in tax this year, or in other words, only slightly more than they paid Rusney Castillo to play for the PawSox and much less than they paid Pablo Sandoval to play for the Giants. If they don't think big-money deals for relievers are worth it at all, then that's one thing and I guess could justify not getting in on a Robertson or Ottavino type. But if they don't even pick anyone up in the Brach/Kelley/etc. band on a reasonable one-year deal, then go over the $248M mark anyway, then I will again say that was a miscalculation and a mistake, whether or not it cost them.Okay Chris thanks. I'm confused whether we are arguing or not if what you;re saying is not a criticism. Maybe it;s back and forth on irrelevant minutia. Anyways, I had used "blunder' because when you said "shame" plus if you read after your initial post the tone of subsequent posts from umass, plus natesp4 pssu pedro combine with your point -the word blunder just wasn;t directed at your post but the totaliity of the entire group of them. It wasn;t just one post. All of the posts in summation sounded like "we made a mistake." A mistake can be a blunder. That;s why I used that terminology but that's not important- I don't believe. But I don;t agree they should have necessarily signed Watson. While you say it is possible to make a mistake and not cost you- yes. But it is also possible that if one were to think we didn;t need Watson then the SOx shouldn;t get him. I have no way of knowing whether Henry is going to go to $244m or $248m etc. So to get a player you don;t need and who knows what the owner is thinking in terms of the limit of his cap- imo don't get him. Maybe they make a deal with a team for 2b in which the other team will eat some money as an example because he is just that $2m or $3m over the owners cap. I always believe there is a limit. I just think if the SOx or people such as me who agree with being patient to not sign Watson last year then we can't look at it like you say " that you can make a mistake whether it cost them or not." We'd look at it like we didn't feel we needed him then the end result justified our point of view to not get him. I have to say I am indifferent to whether we sign any of these other one year deal relievers. I don;t know them nor do I trust them which is why I don't think it is necessarily a mistake to not sign them. My guess is that the Red Sox don't trust them otherwise they would have made minor moves to free up a few million at the very least. I'd like Kimbrel for a 1 year deal though because I trust him but that looks like has zero shot to happen. I've seen the last two offseasons when we've made some trades for relievers they've been a disaster so far. But the FA's we trade for during the season have been okay. I trust them more. IMO if you are going to go over - trust the player you go for otherwise see what you have internal. I'd prefer to see what they;re doing during the season if there is mention of monetary concerns.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 26, 2019 23:36:36 GMT -5
One Steve Pearce-priced reliever isn't going to be the difference between a bad bullpen and a good one, though. It's very possible that such a reliever would make no difference at all. No it won't, but it could make a bad bullpen average. Right now Pearce salary might get you Brach and Kelley. Add in a few million and you could easily add two rather good players. I'd rather have Pearce than Brach and Kelley, and I do think that Kelley plus Brach would cost more than what Pearce is making - not by a ton, but a little bit more. The real choice would be Pearce and one of Kelly or Brach. Having Pearce on the roster isn't preventing the Sox from picking up Kelley. Not having Pearce on the roster means that any early injury to Moreland and you're playing Sam Travis at first base. No thank you to that. Pearce has plenty of value on the 2019 Red Sox team. I'm not of the belief that Chavis is ready to play 1b at the major league level yet. I wouldn't expect him any sooner than the all-star break if then. And I don't trust Moreland to stay reasonably consistent throughout the season.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jan 27, 2019 0:35:54 GMT -5
No it won't, but it could make a bad bullpen average. Right now Pearce salary might get you Brach and Kelley. Add in a few million and you could easily add two rather good players. I'd rather have Pearce than Brach and Kelley, and I do think that Kelley plus Brach would cost more than what Pearce is making - not by a ton, but a little bit more. The real choice would be Pearce and one of Kelly or Brach. Having Pearce on the roster isn't preventing the Sox from picking up Kelley. Not having Pearce on the roster means that any early injury to Moreland and you're playing Sam Travis at first base. No thank you to that. Pearce has plenty of value on the 2019 Red Sox team. I'm not of the belief that Chavis is ready to play 1b at the major league level yet. I wouldn't expect him any sooner than the all-star break if then. And I don't trust Moreland to stay reasonably consistent throughout the season. I really agree with this. Pearce might not be an All-Star over a full season, but he sure looks like one against LHP (you’d better believe I appreciate him more with NY’s Happ/Paxton deals). He’s still pretty good against RHP too, and he offers good positional flexibility...we’ve seen him play a pretty damn good 1b, and totally passable, solid COF. That’s VERY important, in my mind, for exactly the reason you said, and others of a similar nature (PH options, OF options in the case of injury, etc). The drop-off from what they have to Pearce is significant but manageable in the OF (obviously short-term if you’re talking Mookie; less critical with Beni) and essentially nil at 1b, even R-on-R. But the drop-off from Kelley/Brach to what they already have or what they seem sure they can find/create? I think that’s very small. Basically I think they see finding a Pearce equivalent in-season for a catastrophe as being fairly difficult, whereas they see relievers of Kelly/Brach’s level as pretty fungible. I’m inclined to agree with that assessment. Relievers are so volatile, it’s no guarantee that Brach/Kelly would be good, and even if they were, the Sox seem confident that they can find/promote a Brasier or at the very least, another Brach/Kelley, but going volume and seeing who shakes out.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 27, 2019 0:37:22 GMT -5
No it won't, but it could make a bad bullpen average. Right now Pearce salary might get you Brach and Kelley. Add in a few million and you could easily add two rather good players. I'd rather have Pearce than Brach and Kelley, and I do think that Kelley plus Brach would cost more than what Pearce is making - not by a ton, but a little bit more. The real choice would be Pearce and one of Kelly or Brach. Having Pearce on the roster isn't preventing the Sox from picking up Kelley. Not having Pearce on the roster means that any early injury to Moreland and you're playing Sam Travis at first base. No thank you to that. Pearce has plenty of value on the 2019 Red Sox team. I'm not of the belief that Chavis is ready to play 1b at the major league level yet. I wouldn't expect him any sooner than the all-star break if then. And I don't trust Moreland to stay reasonably consistent throughout the season. So that's where you lose me. What happens if Barnes goes down? Braiser reverts back to his normal self? Nunez isn't great at first, neither is Swihart but at the same time they won't tank the team either. Injuries in the bullpen and the team could implode. Right now you could sign two guys in the bullpen using Pearce money. Still got guys like Holland, Kelley, Sipp, heck even Sergio Romo, even a Ryan Madsen could be huge for this team. Some of these guys are going to sign for peanuts, yet they bring a ton of veteran experience, along with a rather good chance they can be decent to good relievers, maybe even better.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 27, 2019 0:43:58 GMT -5
I'd rather have Pearce than Brach and Kelley, and I do think that Kelley plus Brach would cost more than what Pearce is making - not by a ton, but a little bit more. The real choice would be Pearce and one of Kelly or Brach. Having Pearce on the roster isn't preventing the Sox from picking up Kelley. Not having Pearce on the roster means that any early injury to Moreland and you're playing Sam Travis at first base. No thank you to that. Pearce has plenty of value on the 2019 Red Sox team. I'm not of the belief that Chavis is ready to play 1b at the major league level yet. I wouldn't expect him any sooner than the all-star break if then. And I don't trust Moreland to stay reasonably consistent throughout the season. I really agree with this. Pearce might not be an All-Star over a full season, but he sure looks like one against LHP (you’d better believe I appreciate him more with NY’s Happ/Paxton deals). He’s still pretty good against RHP too, and he offers good positional flexibility...we’ve seen him play a pretty damn good 1b, and totally passable, solid COF. That’s VERY important, in my mind, for exactly the reason you said, and others of a similar nature (PH options, OF options in the case of injury, etc). The drop-off from what they have to Pearce is significant but manageable in the OF (obviously short-term if you’re talking Mookie; less critical with Beni) and essentially nil at 1b, even R-on-R. But the drop-off from Kelley/Brach to what they already have or what they seem sure they can find/create? I think that’s very small. Basically I think they see finding a Pearce equivalent in-season for a catastrophe as being fairly difficult, whereas they see relievers of Kelly/Brach’s level as pretty fungible. I’m inclined to agree with that assessment. Relievers are so volatile, it’s no guarantee that Brach/Kelly would be good, and even if they were, the Sox seem confident that they can find/promote a Brasier or at the very least, another Brach/Kelley, but going volume and seeing who shakes out. If they went volume on a bunch of Brach and Kelleys yea OK I can get behind that. They went with more of a trying to find Braiser types is what worries we. We don't have a bunch of proven guys just coming off bad seasons. Heck Barnes, Braiser, Hembree, Johnson and Workman were coming off more like career years. The next bunch is all guys coming off major injuries with a chance none are the same, then guys that have done nothing like Brewer. Edit; Getting a platoon guy is always going to cost less and be easier than getting good bullpen help. Look at Watson, 3.5 million, how much would he cost in a trade? A lot more than Pearce did. Watson was also worth more bwar last year.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jan 27, 2019 0:46:49 GMT -5
In this vein, I’m still pretty convinced they move a C, maybe Vazquez because of salary, and probably another lower-mid-level salary or two as well. I think they’ll create a little space and scoop up even more arms for the ST mix (that may be when some of those trades are made too, as injuries hit other teams and the Sox have a better handle on their own needs due to injuries, returnees like Smith/Thornburg/Pedroia/Wright etc...). Something tells me that while they may not be “counting on” prospects, they probably feel pretty good about Lakins, Feltman, Houck, Hernandez, and Shawaryn being able to step into the ‘pen sooner rather than later. My guess is they clear salary to give themselves a $10-12M cushion, collect a few PTBNLs with big arms, and look around for a quality arm come deadline time if they think they “need” him. And frankly, I think Kimbrel re-upping is still very possible as DD waits him out for a team-friendly deal.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jan 27, 2019 0:56:45 GMT -5
I'd rather have Pearce than Brach and Kelley, and I do think that Kelley plus Brach would cost more than what Pearce is making - not by a ton, but a little bit more. The real choice would be Pearce and one of Kelly or Brach. Having Pearce on the roster isn't preventing the Sox from picking up Kelley. Not having Pearce on the roster means that any early injury to Moreland and you're playing Sam Travis at first base. No thank you to that. Pearce has plenty of value on the 2019 Red Sox team. I'm not of the belief that Chavis is ready to play 1b at the major league level yet. I wouldn't expect him any sooner than the all-star break if then. And I don't trust Moreland to stay reasonably consistent throughout the season. So that's where you lose me. What happens if Barnes goes down? Braiser reverts back to his normal self? Nunez isn't great at first, neither is Swihart but at the same time they won't tank the team either. Injuries in the bullpen and the team could implode. Right now you could sign two guys in the bullpen using Pearce money. Still got guys like Holland, Kelley, Sipp, heck even Sergio Romo, even a Ryan Madsen could be huge for this team. Some of these guys are going to sign for peanuts, yet they bring a ton of veteran experience, along with a rather good chance they can be decent to good relievers, maybe even better. I think Madson could be a real sleeper signing. He had a bad year statistically, but his peripherals weren’t remotely as bad, he had a poor strand rate, and gave up too many HR. But really, his contact and swing rates were fine (13.9% SwStr too), his contact quality wasn’t all that different from usual for him...he just kind of had a bum year with some rotten luck and not-great underlying performance. I think he could easily rebound (he still throws gas and has very good stuff), and as you say he’s an experienced vet. I think he’d be a terrific pickup if he signed a deal in the range these guys are going, like $2-2.5M. Hell, maybe he’ll do lower guarantee with some bigger incentives, or a cheap 1+1 with a performance/appearance-based vesting option. Can’t buy a WS victory...
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 27, 2019 1:06:37 GMT -5
I'd rather have Pearce than Brach and Kelley, and I do think that Kelley plus Brach would cost more than what Pearce is making - not by a ton, but a little bit more. The real choice would be Pearce and one of Kelly or Brach. Having Pearce on the roster isn't preventing the Sox from picking up Kelley. Not having Pearce on the roster means that any early injury to Moreland and you're playing Sam Travis at first base. No thank you to that. Pearce has plenty of value on the 2019 Red Sox team. I'm not of the belief that Chavis is ready to play 1b at the major league level yet. I wouldn't expect him any sooner than the all-star break if then. And I don't trust Moreland to stay reasonably consistent throughout the season. So that's where you lose me. What happens if Barnes goes down? Braiser reverts back to his normal self? Nunez isn't great at first, neither is Swihart but at the same time they won't tank the team either. Injuries in the bullpen and the team could implode. Right now you could sign two guys in the bullpen using Pearce money. Still got guys like Holland, Kelley, Sipp, heck even Sergio Romo, even a Ryan Madsen could be huge for this team. Some of these guys are going to sign for peanuts, yet they bring a ton of veteran experience, along with a rather good chance they can be decent to good relievers, maybe even better. If they didn't bring back Pearce they'd be risking be paper thin behind 1b if Moreland got hurt or slumped badly - which he will, plus they'd be out of a valuable middle of the order bat, which Pearce was during his time with the Sox last year. But they have left themselves paper thin as far as relievers go, so I don't disagree with that point you're making at all. That is a concern of mine. If they dump Leon that puts another couple of million back into the coffers. There is no reason I can think of why they wouldn't or couldn't get a Shawn Kelley. If they don't they're being foolish. As it is I think they're kidding themselves. I mean, last year what the Greatest Red Sox team that we'll ever see in our lifetime, but yet, they still had to go out and spend money to go get Eovaldi, Pearce, and Kinsler and they were lined up to get Herrera. They know they will likely have to do this again and the odds are they will need to spend enough money that they're going to wind up going over the highest luxury tax limit, so why the hell wouldn't they just saunter up to that limit now? Odds are pretty good they go over so I really don't think it's a Pearce versus Kelly plus Brach kind of decision anyways. Like I said, there's nothing stopping them from dumping Leon and signing Kelley. To do nothing would be foolish - and exactly for the reason you say. Odds are somebody will get injured. Right now the bullpen tentatively has Barnes as the closer with Brasier, Wright, Thornburg, Hembree, Workman, and Johnson penciled in with Velazquez, Poyner, and Brewer the first to receive calls if Thornburg can't hack it, Wright is hurt or somebody gets hurt or doesn't perform, so there's some depth, but not a lot early on. And the high leverage area is lacking, especially if Wright isn't completely healthy, Thornburg isn't the guy he was in Milwaukee and/or doesn't even make the club or Brasier isn't the guy he was last season.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 27, 2019 1:11:17 GMT -5
So that's where you lose me. What happens if Barnes goes down? Braiser reverts back to his normal self? Nunez isn't great at first, neither is Swihart but at the same time they won't tank the team either. Injuries in the bullpen and the team could implode. Right now you could sign two guys in the bullpen using Pearce money. Still got guys like Holland, Kelley, Sipp, heck even Sergio Romo, even a Ryan Madsen could be huge for this team. Some of these guys are going to sign for peanuts, yet they bring a ton of veteran experience, along with a rather good chance they can be decent to good relievers, maybe even better. I think Madson could be a real sleeper signing. He had a bad year statistically, but his peripherals weren’t remotely as bad, he had a poor strand rate, and gave up too many HR. But really, his contact and swing rates were fine (13.9% SwStr too), his contact quality wasn’t all that different from usual for him...he just kind of had a bum year with some rotten luck and not-great underlying performance. I think he could easily rebound (he still throws gas and has very good stuff), and as you say he’s an experienced vet. I think he’d be a terrific pickup if he signed a deal in the range these guys are going, like $2-2.5M. Hell, maybe he’ll do lower guarantee with some bigger incentives, or a cheap 1+1 with a performance/appearance-based vesting option. Can’t buy a WS victory... I think Madson looked like toast in the World Series. He could have gotten votes for MVP of the World Series - for the Red Sox as he figured prominently in 3 of the 4 Red Sox victories. But his acquisition would continue the Red Sox pattern of picking up a guy on the losing World Series team. The 2005 Red Sox went out and got Edgar Renteria who was on the 2004 Cardinals. The Red Sox went out and picked up Franklin Morales (who like Joe Kelly would get a World Series ring with the Red Sox) and Aaron Cook who were on the 2007 Colorado Rockies and the 2014 Red Sox picked up Edward Mujica and soon thereafter dealt for Joe Kelly and Allen Craig who all played on the 2013 Cardinals. So picking up Ryan Madson of the 2018 Dodgers would continue that pattern.....I'd rather they pick up Walker Buehler!
|
|
|
Post by sparkygian on Jan 27, 2019 6:52:39 GMT -5
most everyone seems to be assuming that Barnes is going to be the 'closer' next year, assuming the bullpen roster stays as it is. I don't recall Barnes ever taking on that role full-time, not even in the minors. I checked his stats and he's got a total of two saves over his whole professional career. Is there a chance that Brasier is chosen for this role instead? I know it would seem unfair to pass Barnes over for Brasier, since Barnes has been a decent veteran Red Sox pitcher, whereas Brasier has only pitched for the Sox for less than half a season, and the rest of last season for Pawtucket, I believe. However it seems like I remember reading or hearing that Brasier was the closer for Pawtucket, and definitely was mainly a closer with every other club he's pitched for, stateside, and I believe overseas too. He's got a pretty good track record as a closer in the minors (78 saves; 100 SOpps).
Would it be improper to give Brasier the majority of the save situations over Barnes? Has DD and/or Cora already specifically addressed who the closer is going to be, or if it's going to be an open competition at ST? I can't recall hearing anything from them other than stating that both Brasier and Barnes are thought to be more than competent enough to fill Kimbrel's role.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jan 27, 2019 9:31:45 GMT -5
I'd rather have Pearce than Brach and Kelley, and I do think that Kelley plus Brach would cost more than what Pearce is making - not by a ton, but a little bit more. The real choice would be Pearce and one of Kelly or Brach. Having Pearce on the roster isn't preventing the Sox from picking up Kelley. Not having Pearce on the roster means that any early injury to Moreland and you're playing Sam Travis at first base. No thank you to that. Pearce has plenty of value on the 2019 Red Sox team. I'm not of the belief that Chavis is ready to play 1b at the major league level yet. I wouldn't expect him any sooner than the all-star break if then. And I don't trust Moreland to stay reasonably consistent throughout the season. So that's where you lose me. What happens if Barnes goes down? Braiser reverts back to his normal self? Nunez isn't great at first, neither is Swihart but at the same time they won't tank the team either. Injuries in the bullpen and the team could implode. Right now you could sign two guys in the bullpen using Pearce money. Still got guys like Holland, Kelley, Sipp, heck even Sergio Romo, even a Ryan Madsen could be huge for this team. Some of these guys are going to sign for peanuts, yet they bring a ton of veteran experience, along with a rather good chance they can be decent to good relievers, maybe even better. I think the disconnect here is that you don’t think sub-par offense at first base is a problem for this team, and the rest of us do.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jan 27, 2019 10:34:39 GMT -5
So that's where you lose me. What happens if Barnes goes down? Braiser reverts back to his normal self? Nunez isn't great at first, neither is Swihart but at the same time they won't tank the team either. Injuries in the bullpen and the team could implode. Right now you could sign two guys in the bullpen using Pearce money. Still got guys like Holland, Kelley, Sipp, heck even Sergio Romo, even a Ryan Madsen could be huge for this team. Some of these guys are going to sign for peanuts, yet they bring a ton of veteran experience, along with a rather good chance they can be decent to good relievers, maybe even better. I think the disconnect here is that you don’t think sub-par offense at first base is a problem for this team, and the rest of us do. I think one thing to think about is that it's likely the Red Sox don't quite get the historic output from the combo of Betts and JDM that they did last year. If so they need the slack picked up. This would be helped by improvement everywhere else which is possible, but 1b is one of those areas. You figure you can't get less out of the catching offensively. You'd hope that Pedroia is mostly back and that they can be at least better than last year. You hope that JBJ builds on what he did in the 2nd half, that Benni blossoms, and that 1b is stabilized so they're not searching like they did last year when Hanley wasn't what he once was and Travis wasn't the answer. Of course the biggest addition to the offense would be the maturation of Devers at 3b. The Red Sox really didn't address 2b (hoping Pedroia is healthy) or catcher (hoping for regression to the mean there somewhat) so keeping 1b stable is important.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 27, 2019 11:11:23 GMT -5
I'd rather have Pearce than Brach and Kelley, and I do think that Kelley plus Brach would cost more than what Pearce is making - not by a ton, but a little bit more. The real choice would be Pearce and one of Kelly or Brach. Having Pearce on the roster isn't preventing the Sox from picking up Kelley. Not having Pearce on the roster means that any early injury to Moreland and you're playing Sam Travis at first base. No thank you to that. Pearce has plenty of value on the 2019 Red Sox team. I'm not of the belief that Chavis is ready to play 1b at the major league level yet. I wouldn't expect him any sooner than the all-star break if then. And I don't trust Moreland to stay reasonably consistent throughout the season. So that's where you lose me. What happens if Barnes goes down? Braiser reverts back to his normal self? Nunez isn't great at first, neither is Swihart but at the same time they won't tank the team either. Injuries in the bullpen and the team could implode. Right now you could sign two guys in the bullpen using Pearce money. Still got guys like Holland, Kelley, Sipp, heck even Sergio Romo, even a Ryan Madsen could be huge for this team. Some of these guys are going to sign for peanuts, yet they bring a ton of veteran experience, along with a rather good chance they can be decent to good relievers, maybe even better. What happens if Moreland gets hurt or goes 3 months OPS'ing .500 like he seems to do? A team with Moreland on it, needs a Pearce also. And I wouldn't count on Chavis or Travis or Swihart (since he only hits as a LHB) and especially not Nunez. The relief pitching at the bottom of the barrel isn't going to significantly improve this team more than their minor league depth would. Especially if they had to give up Pearce to get it.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jan 27, 2019 11:20:03 GMT -5
I think the disconnect here is that you don’t think sub-par offense at first base is a problem for this team, and the rest of us do. I think one thing to think about is that it's likely the Red Sox don't quite get the historic output from the combo of Betts and JDM that they did last year. If so they need the slack picked up. This would be helped by improvement everywhere else which is possible, but 1b is one of those areas. You figure you can't get less out of the catching offensively. You'd hope that Pedroia is mostly back and that they can be at least better than last year. You hope that JBJ builds on what he did in the 2nd half, that Benni blossoms, and that 1b is stabilized so they're not searching like they did last year when Hanley wasn't what he once was and Travis wasn't the answer. Of course the biggest addition to the offense would be the maturation of Devers at 3b. The Red Sox really didn't address 2b (hoping Pedroia is healthy) or catcher (hoping for regression to the mean there somewhat) so keeping 1b stable is important. On a more basic level, runs lost or gained relative to average at 1B aren't particularly more or less valuable than runs gained or lost at any other position. Yes, relievers get the leverage advantage but it just isn't that big a deal.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Jan 27, 2019 11:55:56 GMT -5
As far as the spending at 1B goes I'd talk about Moreland before Pearce. I realize Moreland was signed last year, but that deal felt questionable at the time given the market and they knew they'd be strapped for cash in year 2. Once they sunk the money into Moreland they still needed a platoon match for him and there are few better options than Pearce. I'd rather unload Moreland's salary even if you had to eat 1-2m than lose Pearce.
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,677
|
Post by gerry on Jan 27, 2019 13:11:46 GMT -5
As far as the spending at 1B goes I'd talk about Moreland before Pearce. I realize Moreland was signed last year, but that deal felt questionable at the time given the market and they knew they'd be strapped for cash in year 2. Once they sunk the money into Moreland they still needed a platoon match for him and there are few better options than Pearce. I'd rather unload Moreland's salary even if you had to eat 1-2m than lose Pearce. We shouldn’t have to lose either, and we don’t. They are far more valuable than a replacement level RP. Separately, they each face age and injury issues. Combined, MM and Pearce give the Sox an above average first baseman with solid/GG defense at the position, veteran leadership and strong clubhouse presence clearly appreciated by team mates, and probable above average offense vs LHP and RHP. By the #’s this duo is quite capable of delivering 30HR, 35-40 doubles, 80-100 RBI, with reasonable K/BB rate, on essentially a one year $12.750 contract. All this while giving Chavis, Travis, Dalbec, Ockimey time to figure things out to take over 1B at league minimum in 2020. DDo got this one right.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,989
|
Post by jimoh on Jan 27, 2019 14:04:18 GMT -5
As far as the spending at 1B goes I'd talk about Moreland before Pearce. I realize Moreland was signed last year, but that deal felt questionable at the time given the market and they knew they'd be strapped for cash in year 2. Once they sunk the money into Moreland they still needed a platoon match for him and there are few better options than Pearce. I'd rather unload Moreland's salary even if you had to eat 1-2m than lose Pearce. We shouldn’t have to lose either, and we don’t. They are far more valuable than a replacement level RP. Separately, they each face age and injury issues. Combined, MM and Pearce give the Sox an above average first baseman with solid/GG defense at the position, veteran leadership and strong clubhouse presence clearly appreciated by team mates, and probable above average offense vs LHP and RHP. By the #’s this duo is quite capable of delivering 30HR, 35-40 doubles, 80-100 RBI, with reasonable K/BB rate, on essentially a one year $12.750 contract. All this while giving Chavis, Travis, Dalbec, Ockimey time to figure things out to take over 1B at league minimum in 2020. DDo got this one right. Yes, and they effectively give us a backup at four positions: since your DH can play LF and RF a little and your RF and LF can both play CF, you can play both Moreland and Pearce together when any OF needs a break. Papi was great but a DH who can play the field is a big help.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 27, 2019 15:53:32 GMT -5
So that's where you lose me. What happens if Barnes goes down? Braiser reverts back to his normal self? Nunez isn't great at first, neither is Swihart but at the same time they won't tank the team either. Injuries in the bullpen and the team could implode. Right now you could sign two guys in the bullpen using Pearce money. Still got guys like Holland, Kelley, Sipp, heck even Sergio Romo, even a Ryan Madsen could be huge for this team. Some of these guys are going to sign for peanuts, yet they bring a ton of veteran experience, along with a rather good chance they can be decent to good relievers, maybe even better. What happens if Moreland gets hurt or goes 3 months OPS'ing .500 like he seems to do? A team with Moreland on it, needs a Pearce also. And I wouldn't count on Chavis or Travis or Swihart (since he only hits as a LHB) and especially not Nunez. The relief pitching at the bottom of the barrel isn't going to significantly improve this team more than their minor league depth would. Especially if they had to give up Pearce to get it. You have so many different options on offense. You can have Devers split time at 1B and 3B with Nunez, Holt, and Lin splitting time at 3B. You don't have those options with our bullpen. I'd trust Chavis being a good platoon partner over expecting our other rookie pitchers to be very good relievers. Why wouldn't you? The guy hits, its his D that has been the issue, not his offense. Heck by mid-season Dalbec could be an option at 3B, heck maybe even 1B if need be. Can't count on Swihart when he's shown he can at least hit major league pitching? Sure not close to ideal, but he's proven. Yet lets count on minor league free agent guys to fill out our bullpen. Yea that sounds smart. Heck you could always give Martinez a first base glove also, allowing a guy like Pedoria to rest at DH. The options are endless and I'd rather Martinez at 1B than the OF. Everyone needs to stop acting like there won't be a couple of these bullpen guys that go on to be very good. Acting like they won't move the neddle is laughable and only true if you have a bunch of 1 bwar or better pitchers in our bullpen. How many of those do you think we have?
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 27, 2019 16:03:02 GMT -5
So that's where you lose me. What happens if Barnes goes down? Braiser reverts back to his normal self? Nunez isn't great at first, neither is Swihart but at the same time they won't tank the team either. Injuries in the bullpen and the team could implode. Right now you could sign two guys in the bullpen using Pearce money. Still got guys like Holland, Kelley, Sipp, heck even Sergio Romo, even a Ryan Madsen could be huge for this team. Some of these guys are going to sign for peanuts, yet they bring a ton of veteran experience, along with a rather good chance they can be decent to good relievers, maybe even better. I think the disconnect here is that you don’t think sub-par offense at first base is a problem for this team, and the rest of us do. No we just have more options at 1B than the bullpen currently. It really works out well for a Chavis, because Moreland is on fire to start the season. Giving Chavis a couple of months in AAA and delaying his clock, while giving him ABs and a chance to get hot against AAA pitching.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 27, 2019 16:54:14 GMT -5
What happens if Moreland gets hurt or goes 3 months OPS'ing .500 like he seems to do? A team with Moreland on it, needs a Pearce also. And I wouldn't count on Chavis or Travis or Swihart (since he only hits as a LHB) and especially not Nunez. The relief pitching at the bottom of the barrel isn't going to significantly improve this team more than their minor league depth would. Especially if they had to give up Pearce to get it. You have so many different options on offense. You can have Devers split time at 1B and 3B with Nunez, Holt, and Lin splitting time at 3B. You don't have those options with our bullpen. I'd trust Chavis being a good platoon partner over expecting our other rookie pitchers to be very good relievers. Why wouldn't you? The guy hits, its his D that has been the issue, not his offense. Heck by mid-season Dalbec could be an option at 3B, heck maybe even 1B if need be. Can't count on Swihart when he's shown he can at least hit major league pitching? Sure not close to ideal, but he's proven. Yet lets count on minor league free agent guys to fill out our bullpen. Yea that sounds smart. Heck you could always give Martinez a first base glove also, allowing a guy like Pedoria to rest at DH. The options are endless and I'd rather Martinez at 1B than the OF. Everyone needs to stop acting like there won't be a couple of these bullpen guys that go on to be very good. Acting like they won't move the neddle is laughable and only true if you have a bunch of 1 bwar or better pitchers in our bullpen. How many of those do you think we have? I wouldn't count on Swihart to platoon with Moreland because Swihart's dominant hitting side is also left handed. Devers also would be in that position if you're moving him over to put Nunez at 3B. Maybe Chavis can make the jump, but I certainly wouldn't count on either he or Travis to be the platoon partner that Moreland really needs. The jump from AAA to the majors is huge for someone like Chavis who has a lot of questions that we can only hope will be resolved (instead of counted on) at this point. He also could use regular playing time for further development. The short side of a platoon isn't ideal for that. Have we not established that relief pitchers who sign one year $3 million deals do not reliably provide 1 WAR seasons? If they did, they'd be getting a lot more. They're about as likely to not even belong in the majors as they are to have a 1 win season. Holland, Kelley and Sipp will show you that if you look at their recent history. Hell, even Cody Allen was replacement level last season.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 27, 2019 17:07:50 GMT -5
most everyone seems to be assuming that Barnes is going to be the 'closer' next year, assuming the bullpen roster stays as it is. I don't recall Barnes ever taking on that role full-time, not even in the minors. I checked his stats and he's got a total of two saves over his whole professional career. Is there a chance that Brasier is chosen for this role instead? I know it would seem unfair to pass Barnes over for Brasier, since Barnes has been a decent veteran Red Sox pitcher, whereas Brasier has only pitched for the Sox for less than half a season, and the rest of last season for Pawtucket, I believe. However it seems like I remember reading or hearing that Brasier was the closer for Pawtucket, and definitely was mainly a closer with every other club he's pitched for, stateside, and I believe overseas too. He's got a pretty good track record as a closer in the minors (78 saves; 100 SOpps). Would it be improper to give Brasier the majority of the save situations over Barnes? Has DD and/or Cora already specifically addressed who the closer is going to be, or if it's going to be an open competition at ST? I can't recall hearing anything from them other than stating that both Brasier and Barnes are thought to be more than competent enough to fill Kimbrel's role. I also think Brasier should be the guy to get first crack at the closer role. He closed in Pawtucket and he seems to have the mentality for the position. Plus, I'd rather not remove Barnes in his role of pitching really high leverage innings in the 7th and 8th innings and maybe coming in with men on base.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jan 27, 2019 17:12:26 GMT -5
I think Madson looked like toast in the World Series. He could have gotten votes for MVP of the World Series - for the Red Sox as he figured prominently in 3 of the 4 Red Sox victories. But his acquisition would continue the Red Sox pattern of picking up a guy on the losing World Series team. The 2005 Red Sox went out and got Edgar Renteria who was on the 2004 Cardinals. The Red Sox went out and picked up Franklin Morales (who like Joe Kelly would get a World Series ring with the Red Sox) and Aaron Cook who were on the 2007 Colorado Rockies and the 2014 Red Sox picked up Edward Mujica and soon thereafter dealt for Joe Kelly and Allen Craig who all played on the 2013 Cardinals. So picking up Ryan Madson of the 2018 Dodgers would continue that pattern.....I'd rather they pick up Walker Buehler! He’s still sitting 95...and I def don’t put much stock in the WSas a small sample. I mean, playoff Mookie was a shell of regular season Mookie. On a cheap deal, I think Madison has a ton of upside and, provides he’s even just OK, if he became expendable due to call-ups/breakouts, his resume would warrant some (even if minor) value back in trade, especially if he’s got an extra low-cost year racked on as an option. Plus,I think volume is the way to go. *Somebody* will have a good year, and at that cost there’s essentially no downside. If the Sox are really going this route with the bullpen, they need bodies with upside...and the side benefit is that teams are *always* looking for ‘pen help. It might net just a few 35-40 FV guys in trades (think Reed/Ziegler in reverse), but the Sox need every body they can get on the farm. That said, yeah...Walker Buehller would be a nice slot-in for the 2/3/4 position in the rotation. He looks like a future true ace. Oh well, there’s always FA in, what, 2024?
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jan 27, 2019 17:15:47 GMT -5
We shouldn’t have to lose either, and we don’t. They are far more valuable than a replacement level RP. Separately, they each face age and injury issues. Combined, MM and Pearce give the Sox an above average first baseman with solid/GG defense at the position, veteran leadership and strong clubhouse presence clearly appreciated by team mates, and probable above average offense vs LHP and RHP. By the #’s this duo is quite capable of delivering 30HR, 35-40 doubles, 80-100 RBI, with reasonable K/BB rate, on essentially a one year $12.750 contract. All this while giving Chavis, Travis, Dalbec, Ockimey time to figure things out to take over 1B at league minimum in 2020. DDo got this one right. Yes, and they effectively give us a backup at four positions: since your DH can play LF and RF a little and your RF and LF can both play CF, you can play both Moreland and Pearce together when any OF needs a break. Papi was great but a DH who can play the field is a big help. The most underrated aspect of having Pearce. And it’s not just that he can play those positions, but actually field them pretty well. He’s the anti-Nuñez.
|
|
|