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.
2020 Vision: Position Players
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,912
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 2, 2019 12:32:24 GMT -5
(There's already talk about this in random other threads, of course. That's inefficient!)
A discussion of the 2020 roster has to begin with an accurate sense of how good the current roster is.
The quality of a roster is not measured by its win/loss record.
We can explain 87% of a win/loss record by the stats that show up in a slash line. The other 13% is double plays, errors, stolen bases and caught stealing, wild pitches and passed balls, baserunning, and most crucially, the timeliness of everything. That's far and away the biggest factor.
You can call the leftover 13% the Win Efficiency. It's not predictive. (The SB/CS and baserunning components probably are, and ditto for E, GDP, and WP/PB to a small degree. I used to adjust for most of that, but each of them has a large luck or strategic favor and it's simply not worth the effort to factor them out.)
Here's the Sox over the last four seasons (2019 is of course the season pace). The numbers are Slash Line wins and Win Efficiency, with MLB ranks in parentheses.
2016: 100.3 (2), -7.3 (29) 2017: 86.6 (t-9), +6.4 (1) 2018: 99.1 (3), +9.0 (1) 2019: 93.1 (6), -5.6 (26)
(Incidentally, the Sox and Yankees have the two biggest year-to-year variances in WE. The Phillies are 4th and the Dodgers 5th. Passionate fan bases and/or huge payrolls.)
But wait, there's more.
The Sox tried to use the opening weeks of the season as an extended spring training and it was a disaster. They started 6-13 without any WE problem at all (they were actually +0.4).
Since then:
2019: 99.8 (4), -6.4 (28)
That our slash line since the slow start is actually a bit more more impressive than last year's is surprising at first. Of course the offense is even better, as Devers and Vazquez have been hugely better, Xander also ... the team's offensive wOBA has gone from .340 to .358.
However, more than half of that gain has been the MLB-wide increase in offense. When you adjust for that, it's just .343 to .351, 8 points instead of 18. And that explains why the apparent suckiness of the starting pitching hasn't been as extreme as it seems. The raw wOBA allowed by the pitching (starters and pen) has gone from .305 to .321, but adjusted, it's just .308 to .315, -7 points instead of -16.
So, having established that we still have an elite roster, certainly in the top 5 in MLB, let's start with what might be the biggest question in some people's minds.
Trading Mookie Betts.
It's obviously an insanely terrible idea. A guy is great as Mookie is most valuable to a team that has an excellent shot at winning the WS with him, and an excellent shot of missing the playoffs entirely without him. That describes us. Perfectly. It perhaps describes us better than anyone, given the division we play in. How can you win the trade if he's more valuable to us than the other team? The best NL team that could really use a CF is the Mets, and they're an 86-win slash-line team; they're not an elite team with him.
Furthermore, it's not unclear at all that he wants to leave; his teammates have signed below-market deals to stay. It seems to me that you have a very good chance to re-sign him, but he wants to do so at a bit below market, the standard "home-town discount" (it's a real thing) rather than way below like Xander. If you trade him, you reduce the odds of re-signing him to close to zero, I think.
And in terms of "restocking the farm system," a) you actually won't get that much for him, as evidenced by FanGraphs not ranking him in their top 50 in trade value (in part because he'll make a ton in arbitration), b) our only real need in the short-middle term is starting pitching, the most volatile sort of prospect, and c) even if the pitcher you get pans out, there's no guarantee that we'll be this good when he starts to contribute.
Finally, if you trade Mookie for a pitching prospect the average fan has never heard of (and, I'm sure, another one or two that the average person on this board has never heard of), you will hemorrhage ticket sales. The lost revenue will translate to less ability to spend on players in the future.
Insanely terrible idea. We put it away, we keep it hidden. We never speak of it again! (Frodo to Gandalf about the One Ring.)
Next post: why re-signing Brock Holt is, suprisingly, a no-brainer.
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on Sept 2, 2019 12:55:03 GMT -5
Trading Mookie Betts. Insanely terrible idea. We put it away, we keep it hidden. We never speak of it again! (Frodo to Gandalf about the One Ring.)
I agree with the first half of your analysis and believe this is an excellent, top-5 roster position player wise going into 2020. Not one that can't be tweaked, but that's for another time. And I do not disagree with your 'Don't Trade Mookie' stance either, in a vacuum. But we do not know that some of your assumptions are true, mainly that he'll likely take a slight home town discount and that is all it will take to bring him back. This is to be determined. Also the idea that he won't re-sign If we trade him would really depend on circumstance. If the Sox made a fair to generous offer and Mookie still prefers to wait for a potential bidding war in FA to drive up his price, why wouldn't he be open to us next year if we are the top bidder? In this scenario the team's approach wouldn't be disrespectful to Mookie at all. With what we know right now, yes, trading Mookie is likely a bad idea. If it plays out where no extension is signed and it is clear he wants to be a FA no matter what, I don't see how this wouldn't be worthy of discussion by the organization, and by us.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 2, 2019 12:56:40 GMT -5
Trading Mookie Betts. Insanely terrible idea. We put it away, we keep it hidden. We never speak of it again! (Frodo to Gandalf about the One Ring.)
I agree with the first half of your analysis and believe this is an excellent, top-5 roster position player wise going into 2020. Not one that can't be tweaked, but that's for another time. And I do not disagree with your 'Don't Trade Mookie' stance either, in a vacuum. But we do not know that some of your assumptions are true, mainly that he'll likely take a slight home town discount and that is all it will take to bring him back. This is to be determined. Also the idea that he won't re-sign If we trade him would really depend on circumstance. If the Sox made a fair to generous offer and Mookie still prefers to wait for a potential bidding war in FA to drive up his price, why wouldn't he be open to us next year if we are the top bidder? In this scenario the team's approach wouldn't be disrespectful to Mookie at all. With what we know right now, yes, trading Mookie is likely a bad idea. If it plays out where no extension is signed and it is clear he wants to be a FA no matter what, I don't see how this wouldn't be worthy of discussion by the organization, and by us. Even if he doesn't re-sign, having him on the team in 2020 has the absolute most value to the Red Sox, as stated in Eric's post.
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on Sept 2, 2019 13:00:21 GMT -5
I agree with the first half of your analysis and believe this is an excellent, top-5 roster position player wise going into 2020. Not one that can't be tweaked, but that's for another time. And I do not disagree with your 'Don't Trade Mookie' stance either, in a vacuum. But we do not know that some of your assumptions are true, mainly that he'll likely take a slight home town discount and that is all it will take to bring him back. This is to be determined. Also the idea that he won't re-sign If we trade him would really depend on circumstance. If the Sox made a fair to generous offer and Mookie still prefers to wait for a potential bidding war in FA to drive up his price, why wouldn't he be open to us next year if we are the top bidder? In this scenario the team's approach wouldn't be disrespectful to Mookie at all. With what we know right now, yes, trading Mookie is likely a bad idea. If it plays out where no extension is signed and it is clear he wants to be a FA no matter what, I don't see how this wouldn't be worthy of discussion by the organization, and by us. Even if he doesn't re-sign, having him on the team in 2020 has the absolute most value to the Red Sox, as stated in Eric's post. Same positions we had in a different thread. In 2020, yes. In 2021-2024, no. I see where you guys are coming from and are not saying you're wrong, I just am not as sure about this as you both are. It's not as clear cut as I think you're both making it out to be, and we need to let it play out before jumping to conclusions.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 2, 2019 13:03:50 GMT -5
Eric, which year do you think the Red Sox will try to reset the luxury tax? And how could they ever do it?
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Sept 2, 2019 13:19:29 GMT -5
I want to keep Mookie and Holt too. But how can the Sox afford everyone and then try to keep under $208M? You add in $15m for Medical and additional value for minor leagues -- how can you keep both Mookie or JDm? One has to go, is that right?
Beni and ERod will get big raises won't they? Then add in Holt's raise? I'm not even counting JBJ. Then the Sox have big questions regarding durability/ injury when it comes to Sale, Price, Eovaldi, Johnson, Velaz and Wright -- you need to throw something decent in terms of money at another starter (which adds to the cap for a decent starter), don't you? It still is tight even without it, isn't it?
Everything adds up. They have about $133m (excluding Mookie and JDM while including medical and minors) and overall that is just for 5 players, isn't it? I'm counting Pedroia and Pablo in this $133m. This is not a lot to play with.
I don't want to trade Mookie but 3 teams might be very interested -- Dodgers (if they don't win it all and scoring runs is an issue), ChiSox (OBP is near the bottom while having terrific slugging) and SDP (overall lousy hitting).
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Sept 2, 2019 13:27:08 GMT -5
Trading Mookie Betts. Insanely terrible idea. We put it away, we keep it hidden. We never speak of it again! (Frodo to Gandalf about the One Ring.)
But we do not know that some of your assumptions are true, mainly that he'll likely take a slight home town discount and that is all it will take to bring him back. This is to be determined. Also the idea that he won't re-sign If we trade him would really depend on circumstance. If the Sox made a fair to generous offer and Mookie still prefers to wait for a potential bidding war in FA to drive up his price, why wouldn't he be open to us next year if we are the top bidder? In this scenario the team's approach wouldn't be disrespectful to Mookie at all. With what we know right now, yes, trading Mookie is likely a bad idea. If it plays out where no extension is signed and it is clear he wants to be a FA no matter what, I don't see how this wouldn't be worthy of discussion by the organization, and by us. I agree with all you are saying here. Though I'm okay going for broke next year trying to win it all and if we lose in a bidding war the following year that would suck -- but I think next year Sox can be extremely tough again as long as they can afford him while I think they are going to go under the cap.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,912
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 2, 2019 14:02:09 GMT -5
Trading Mookie Betts. Insanely terrible idea. We put it away, we keep it hidden. We never speak of it again! (Frodo to Gandalf about the One Ring.)
I agree with the first half of your analysis and believe this is an excellent, top-5 roster position player wise going into 2020. Not one that can't be tweaked, but that's for another time. And I do not disagree with your 'Don't Trade Mookie' stance either, in a vacuum. But we do not know that some of your assumptions are true, mainly that he'll likely take a slight home town discount and that is all it will take to bring him back. This is to be determined. Also the idea that he won't re-sign If we trade him would really depend on circumstance. If the Sox made a fair to generous offer and Mookie still prefers to wait for a potential bidding war in FA to drive up his price, why wouldn't he be open to us next year if we are the top bidder? In this scenario the team's approach wouldn't be disrespectful to Mookie at all. With what we know right now, yes, trading Mookie is likely a bad idea. If it plays out where no extension is signed and it is clear he wants to be a FA no matter what, I don't see how this wouldn't be worthy of discussion by the organization, and by us. I think you're absolutely right about trading him not killing the chances of re-signing him. But it's still a terrible idea. It's no longer an elite roster if you trade away his 6+ wins; it's back in the next pack of teams that hope to make the playoffs.
While I'm at it, let's talk about:
Trading JBJ.
This is much more interesting. You would have to get a replacement, someone who could play RF in Fenway. A slight downgrade on the field for one year would be worth it if the talent you acquired blossomed in the long run.
It's just really tricky to pull off. I've already looked into the idea of trading Dalbec and JBJ for an MLB-ready RF prospect who's ranked #40-75 or so, which is to say, trading the guy who's blocked for a somewhat better guy who fills a need, and using JBJ's one year it make up the difference. It would probably have to be a 3-team trade. But there's no such player who looks to be available: all those prospects play for rebuilding teams.
What really makes the trade hard is that the player coming back has to be a good defender. That would have to come from a contender who was overstocked with that kind of player and who would trade the blocked young guy for Dalbec. So they would have to have an immediate need at 3B as well. IBJ would go to the Mets, and they would send a prospect or prospects to us and/or the other contender, depending on the player we're getting back.
There's a lot to like about this idea. It gives you insurance against Duran being just a 4th OFer, and against Mookie leaving as a FA (but not both, of course). If neither happens, you have depth.
I can find at least one interesting idea (yeah, I know this should go in a different forum, so consider this not a trade proposal but a proof of concep!): Dalbec to the Braves for Ender Inciarte and prospect(s), and JBJ to the Mets for prospect(s). Inciarte has two years left at $6M a year (plus an option), so that's about a $3M savings (depending on what JBJ gets in arb) and not necessarily a downgrade on the field. The Braves have Josh Donaldson going to FA and nothing resembling a replacement that I can find. They have tons of OF depth.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,912
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 2, 2019 14:28:22 GMT -5
Eric, which year do you think the Red Sox will try to reset the luxury tax? And how could they ever do it? I'm pretty sure they'll do it this year, because Pablo is off the books (they have to give him $5M buyout, but that was already figured into the AAV). If they re-sign Mookie, they won't be under it for a while.
Based on the spreadsheet at Baseball Prospectus, I have them with about $12M to spend on arb raises and acquisitions. The arb raises shouldn't be that much, but it would leave them with very little room to do anything else.
Replacing JBJ with someone cheaper would not only make it doable, but would allow them to re-sign Holt. A great target would be Alex Verdugo, as the Dodgers have nine regulars for 7 positions. If they like him too much, then have them eat a chunk of A.J. Pollock's contract.
I think they have to trade JBJ -- and he may not bring back much -- and they have to trade Dalbec to replace him.
Edit: another thing you could see them doing is replacing Leon with a minimum-salary guy, which could save you $2M+. Find a blocked catcher who's a defensive whiz and can't hit a lick. IOW, the next Sandy Leon, minus the extremely rare hot streaks.
|
|
|
Post by jbsox on Sept 2, 2019 15:29:54 GMT -5
I’m hoping we don’t worry about resetting the tax as it just really limits our options. Ideally we’ll be bumping up against the last tax level again extend Mookie, sign a solid SP ect.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Sept 2, 2019 15:32:03 GMT -5
(There's already talk about this in random other threads, of course. That's inefficient!)
A discussion of the 2020 roster has to begin with an accurate sense of how good the current roster is Trading Mookie Betts.
It's obviously an insanely terrible idea. A guy is great as Mookie is most valuable to a team that has an excellent shot at winning the WS with him, and an excellent shot of missing the playoffs entirely without him. That describes us. Perfectly. It perhaps describes us better than anyone, given the division we play in. How can you win the trade if he's more valuable to us than the other team? The best NL team that could really use a CF is the Mets, and they're an 86-win slash-line team; they're not an elite team with him.
This could be true if you could guarentee me a year out of Chris Sale next year, you know, the Sox best pitcher. At this point, it's a hope. I'm not going all in and keeping Betts around in a year where you *hope* to have your best pitcher around. Without Sale, you're as much of a contender as you are this year (as in not much of a contender). You trade Mookie Betts for more controllable great young talent next year and bite the bullet for 2020.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 2, 2019 15:46:24 GMT -5
(There's already talk about this in random other threads, of course. That's inefficient!) A discussion of the 2020 roster has to begin with an accurate sense of how good the current roster is Trading Mookie Betts.
It's obviously an insanely terrible idea. A guy is great as Mookie is most valuable to a team that has an excellent shot at winning the WS with him, and an excellent shot of missing the playoffs entirely without him. That describes us. Perfectly. It perhaps describes us better than anyone, given the division we play in. How can you win the trade if he's more valuable to us than the other team? The best NL team that could really use a CF is the Mets, and they're an 86-win slash-line team; they're not an elite team with him.
This could be true if you could guarentee me a year out of Chris Sale next year, you know, the Sox best pitcher. At this point, it's a hope. I'm not going all in and keeping Betts around in a year where you *hope* to have your best pitcher around. Without Sale, you're as much of a contender as you are this year (as in not much of a contender). You trade Mookie Betts for more controllable great young talent next year and bite the bullet for 2020. I'm not the most optimistic guy when it comes to Sale's health, but I don't think 0 WAR is a reasonable median projection for him next year...
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Sept 2, 2019 16:09:12 GMT -5
This could be true if you could guarentee me a year out of Chris Sale next year, you know, the Sox best pitcher. At this point, it's a hope. I'm not going all in and keeping Betts around in a year where you *hope* to have your best pitcher around. Without Sale, you're as much of a contender as you are this year (as in not much of a contender). You trade Mookie Betts for more controllable great young talent next year and bite the bullet for 2020. I'm not the most optimistic guy when it comes to Sale's health, but I don't think 0 WAR is a reasonable median projection for him next year... Still, you're banking on him giving him solid production if you keep Betts. Not to mention the rotation questions beyond him. Eovaldi always being a question. Price should be okay, but nothing given there. Porcello gone and that's no major loss, based on what's been given this year. Eduardo having maybe his first full major league season ever this year. The whole rotation is a major question frankly and your only viable depth right now in 2020 is a 20 year old pitcher in AA named Mata. I'm not risking only one year of Betts with a rotation that's currently in the state it's in right now. Add- We are already talking about 2020 because of this pitching staff right now as a whole. The Sox already have the number one offense in baseball and they're already out of it basically, baring a miracle.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Sept 2, 2019 16:55:20 GMT -5
Eric now that is a very well done useful study.
My only issue is if you keep Betts without resigning him because he's so important to 2020, you can't reset the tax. It needs to be a year were you go all in with spending at the minimum. Unless DD goes trade happy you just don't have enough money to fill the roster openings. Certainly not when 60% of the rotation is a major injury risk, you have zero young starters for depth and the price for the type of guys we'd need will be through the roof. If you don't have enough to keep a guy like Porcello after the year he just had, you have major money issues.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 2, 2019 17:25:50 GMT -5
I'm not the most optimistic guy when it comes to Sale's health, but I don't think 0 WAR is a reasonable median projection for him next year... Still, you're banking on him giving him solid production if you keep Betts. Not to mention the rotation questions beyond him. Eovaldi always being a question. Price should be okay, but nothing given there. Porcello gone and that's no major loss, based on what's been given this year. Eduardo having maybe his first full major league season ever this year. The whole rotation is a major question frankly and your only viable depth right now in 2020 is a 20 year old pitcher in AA named Mata. I'm not risking only one year of Betts with a rotation that's currently in the state it's in right now. Add- We are already talking about 2020 because of this pitching staff right now as a whole. The Sox already have the number one offense in baseball and they're already out of it basically, baring a miracle. With that attitude, may as well go for a total rebuild. That's kind of insane. What we're counting on is a return to normalcy for Price, Sale and Eovaldi, ya know like we saw for stretches in 2018. We won the WS without the best Sale. What you're counting on is for the entire staff to suck sh*t like they did this year to make your argument. And if you always think that's going to happen, they may as well never try to win.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 2, 2019 17:27:38 GMT -5
Not necessarily advocating for this, but it's probably worth pointing out that if Betts and JBJ are traded that should open up enough money for Gerrit Cole. Not if they're resetting. How many $30 million pitchers do you want on one team?
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Sept 2, 2019 17:38:43 GMT -5
Still, you're banking on him giving him solid production if you keep Betts. Not to mention the rotation questions beyond him. Eovaldi always being a question. Price should be okay, but nothing given there. Porcello gone and that's no major loss, based on what's been given this year. Eduardo having maybe his first full major league season ever this year. The whole rotation is a major question frankly and your only viable depth right now in 2020 is a 20 year old pitcher in AA named Mata. I'm not risking only one year of Betts with a rotation that's currently in the state it's in right now. Add- We are already talking about 2020 because of this pitching staff right now as a whole. The Sox already have the number one offense in baseball and they're already out of it basically, baring a miracle. With that attitude, may as well go for a total rebuild. That's kind of insane. What we're counting on is a return to normalcy for Price, Sale and Eovaldi, ya know like we saw for stretches in 2018. We won the WS without the best Sale. What you're counting on is for the entire staff to suck sh*t like they did this year to make your argument. And if you always think that's going to happen, they may as well never try to win. Sale gave you over 5 wins in value in 2018. You have to make it there first. Ths state of the rotation is awful right now with a questionable Sale moving forward and with Eovaldi. It is what it is. You're not going full rebuild, but if you want to reset and then gain valuable controle over young players, trading Mookie Betts and JBJ is the easiest answer while doing all of this. You're shedding 35 million dollars right there by doing both.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 2, 2019 17:44:29 GMT -5
With that attitude, may as well go for a total rebuild. That's kind of insane. What we're counting on is a return to normalcy for Price, Sale and Eovaldi, ya know like we saw for stretches in 2018. We won the WS without the best Sale. What you're counting on is for the entire staff to suck sh*t like they did this year to make your argument. And if you always think that's going to happen, they may as well never try to win. Sale gave you over 5 wins in value in 2018. You have to make it there first. Ths state of the rotation is awful right now with a questionable Sale moving forward and with Eovaldi. It is what it is. You're not going full rebuild, but if you want to reset and then gain valuable controle over young players, trading Mookie Betts and JBJ is the easiest answer while doing all of this. You're shedding 35 million dollars right there by doing both. I'll wait for a suggestion on how to replace Sale, Price and Eovaldi. If that's not possible, then full rebuild is the only option if you think there's no chance for a rebound.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Sept 2, 2019 18:26:14 GMT -5
The one last thing I'll say before this becomes a long withstanding argument on the board is that if the Sox screw up this Mookie Betts decision, you're talking potentially 5 years where your team is set back from this decision. Not just one year.
Instead of recouping value for Betts, you kept him and let him go for a fourth round pick. 4th round!!!
I don't agree with the premise that the Sox are instant contenders based on the question marks in the 2020 rotation. I would rather play the safe route instead of a presumed "home town discount" when Mookie Betts has shown ZERO indication of taking to this point. In fact, he's saying the opposite and saying he sees his value being set in free agency.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Sept 2, 2019 19:37:39 GMT -5
Few tidbits that are related and not related that belong somewhere, so I'll put it here-
-The Sox have been putting Mookie Betts a little more often in CF this past week. I don't know if this is to showcase Mookie in the off-season as a potential CF (increasing his value) or because they don't believe in JBJ against LHP anymore, or a little but of both.
One thing I will say is that Mookie showed that he easily has the skills to be a top 10 defensive CF in MLB tomorrow if he wanted. He looked really good out there still.
-Price's 10/5 rights go into affect after the 2020 season. The latest the Sox can trade him is at the 2020 deadline without him controlling his destiny of where he wants to play.
-Sale's 10/5 rights go into affect after 2021.
-Porcello's 10/5 rights to into affect immediately if the Sox resign him this off-season. So anybody who's thinking he should get a pillow contract here and if things don't work out, you trade him. That isn't happening. He controls where he goes if he resigns with the Sox past this year. Yet another good reason to let him walk.
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,754
|
Post by mobaz on Sept 2, 2019 19:38:45 GMT -5
The one last thing I'll say before this becomes a long withstanding argument on the board is that if the Sox screw up this Mookie Betts decision, you're talking potentially 5 years where your team is set back from this decision. Not just one year. Instead of recouping value for Betts, you kept him and let him go for a fourth round pick. 4th round!!! I don't agree with the premise that the Sox are instant contenders based on the question marks in the 2020 rotation. I would rather play the safe route instead of a presumed "home town discount" when Mookie Betts has shown ZERO indication of taking to this point. In fact, he's saying the opposite and saying he sees his value being set in free agency. Okay, but what value are you going to get? It's not obvious that you can trade him for anyone that will give you 8 WAR for a career much less in a single season. Not at his anticipated arb salary and stated desire to go to free agency.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Sept 2, 2019 20:46:46 GMT -5
The one last thing I'll say before this becomes a long withstanding argument on the board is that if the Sox screw up this Mookie Betts decision, you're talking potentially 5 years where your team is set back from this decision. Not just one year. Instead of recouping value for Betts, you kept him and let him go for a fourth round pick. 4th round!!! I don't agree with the premise that the Sox are instant contenders based on the question marks in the 2020 rotation. I would rather play the safe route instead of a presumed "home town discount" when Mookie Betts has shown ZERO indication of taking to this point. In fact, he's saying the opposite and saying he sees his value being set in free agency. Okay, but what value are you going to get? It's not obvious that you can trade him for anyone that will give you 8 WAR for a career much less in a single season. Not at his anticipated arb salary and stated desire to go to free agency. That is the 100 million dollar question and a conversation you'd love to be a fly on the wall for. A little complicated because of the free agency proposition, but there's two teams that come to mind when you're talking about 2 teams wanting to win now and could pull the trigger imo- The Astros. Build a trade package around Kyle Tucker, who seems like a sure bet to be a MLB regular someday real soon. The Braves. Their top 3 prospects seem like okay bets to become everyday players soon in Ian Anderson, Cristian Pache, and Drew Waters. The one thing you can also do is add a Workman on top of the package to get more value out of a deal for a team looking to win now. Lots of options you can go there in the trade route. The simple answer is I'm arm chairing this ideas out loud. I would have no idea what will be offered, but I know a team could offer a lot for even one year of a MVP calibre player like Mookie, because he can provide the value for only one year.
|
|
|
Post by jimmydugan on Sept 2, 2019 21:47:05 GMT -5
Erics analysis also passes the smell test. Even without significant improvements it seems pretty obvious that this team is a 86-108 win team, and with some decent improvements, it's probably closer to 93-95 wins, right? I don't think it takes super detailed analysis to arrive at that. There's too much talent not to see this as a playoff team.
I think that there is too much of a fit between the Red Sox and the OFers we have for it to make much sense making a trade. You always listen to offers, but assuming there's payroll space, JBJ and Mookie on reasonable 1 year deals seems perfect.I don't think there's going to be dramatic disagreement over JBJ's value at this point. He's probably the exact player he has been the last 3 years, more or less. So no one will be overpaying enough for that to make sense.
For hitters, resign Holt to a reasonable 2 year deal and call it a day for 2 main reasons: 1) he gives us significant depth at corner OF/IF with a relatively great bat for the last couple of years 2) if the Sox don't resign Holt. I will definitely cry.
I'd love more depth here. But I'm assuming there's little budget for that. (Also I'm hoping that you're just glancing at the budget and those numbers are a little off)
Starters (and i'm using the term very loosely) against RHP: 1b: Holt/Chavis if he adjusts/Dalbec if he takes a step forward 2b: Marco/Holt/Lin if necessary
vs. LHP: 1b: Travis if necessary/Chavis if he adjusts/Dalbec possibly for second half 2b: Chavis/Holt (no major splits, right?)/Marco if he's not giving 3b&SS a day off/Lin
Pinch hitters available (whoever doesn't start out of...): RHB: Chavis/Travis/Dalbec later on/regular on rest LHB: Holt/whatever regular is sitting
Marco/Lin/JBJ handle most of the pinch running and defensive replacements.
Ride that out for half a season. You should be able to adjust if any of the main starters (Holt/Marco/Chavis) can't give you 80 avg starts.
Spend the rest on pitching depth.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,912
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 2, 2019 22:41:29 GMT -5
(There's already talk about this in random other threads, of course. That's inefficient!)
A discussion of the 2020 roster has to begin with an accurate sense of how good the current roster is Trading Mookie Betts.
It's obviously an insanely terrible idea. A guy is great as Mookie is most valuable to a team that has an excellent shot at winning the WS with him, and an excellent shot of missing the playoffs entirely without him. That describes us. Perfectly. It perhaps describes us better than anyone, given the division we play in. How can you win the trade if he's more valuable to us than the other team? The best NL team that could really use a CF is the Mets, and they're an 86-win slash-line team; they're not an elite team with him.
This could be true if you could guarentee me a year out of Chris Sale next year, you know, the Sox best pitcher.
At this point, it's a hope. I'm not going all in and keeping Betts around in a year where you *hope* to have your best pitcher around. Without Sale, you're as much of a contender as you are this year (as in not much of a contender). You trade Mookie Betts for more controllable great young talent next year and bite the bullet for 2020. I'm not the most optimistic guy when it comes to Sale's health, but I don't think 0 WAR is a reasonable median projection for him next year... Still, you're banking on him giving him solid production if you keep Betts. Not to mention the rotation questions beyond him. Eovaldi always being a question. Price should be okay, but nothing given there. Porcello gone and that's no major loss, based on what's been given this year. Eduardo having maybe his first full major league season ever this year. The whole rotation is a major question frankly and your only viable depth right now in 2020 is a 20 year old pitcher in AA named Mata. I'm not risking only one year of Betts with a rotation that's currently in the state it's in right now. Add- We are already talking about 2020 because of this pitching staff right now as a whole. The Sox already have the number one offense in baseball and they're already out of it basically, baring a miracle. Sale, who had averaged 5.6 WAR per year, gave us 2.2 WAR this year, and the Sox have still been a 100 talent-win team after the slow start.
Rick Porcello has alternated good and bad years for six years now. In 2014-2015 he averaged 2.2 WAR per year. In 2016-2017 he average 2.2 WAR per year. In 2018 and 2019 he's fallen off dramatically and projects to only average 2.1 WAR.
So the "no great loss" was exactly the contribution from Sale whose absence you think is both likely, and which would warrant punting the season.
You talk as if every MLB pitcher isn't a question mark. It's absolutely true that for all their extraordinary talent, not one of Sale, Price, Eovaldi, or E-Rod have been consistently healthy and/or have pitched up to their potential. Note that we got 100 wins worth of talent with essentially nothing from Eovaldi, and with Porcello having one of his down years; they've combined for 0.8 WAR. This roster is insanely talented now. Your attitude is, well, we can't be certain that everyone will be as good as we reasonably expect, so let's blow it up!
Add- We are already talking about 2020 because of this pitching staff right now as a whole.
No, as I explained in the post you presumably read, the pitching overall (since the slow start) hasn't fallen off that far from last year, in terms of what they have allowed in terms of hits, homers, walks, and so on. It's just 3 wins less. That's not 3 wins below average, that's 3 wins less than we got last year. It's still 2 wins above average. When you have an offense that's 16 wins above average, having a pitching staff that's just 2 wins above average does not, I think, cost you a playoff spot ... hmm ... let's see ... 81 + 16 + 2 = 99. Yup.
We're talking about 2020 already because two different things happened: the slow start, which cost us 6 wins, and because the pitching has been terrible at avoiding big innings and the hitters have been terrible at rallying from just behind at the end of games, and that's cost another 6 wins. If neither of those things had happened we'd be way in the WC lead. if only one had happened, we'd be a bit in the lead.
But I said all that already, didn't I?
(I did have you blocked, and I won't be responding to your further posts.)
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Sept 2, 2019 22:51:51 GMT -5
Position players for 2020. First rule of thumb, do not trade homegrown players in the offseason.
In the outfield we have Betts, Bradley and Benintendi. Martinez can fill in left field if needed.
Betts will bounce back and have a killer year because he is an every other year kind of guy and Cora will keep him in the lead off spot all next year,
Bradley is what he is. Great glove, barely adequate bat but prone to short super hot streaks. Our pitchers love his defense and we should pencil him in for batting 9th in 2020.
Benintendi had a down year in 2019. Part of the problem was the move to the lead off position and part was pitchers adjusting how they pitched him. I think he has a better year in 2020 and we need to pencil him for batting 5th next season,
At dh, we have Martinez, yet another guy who’s numbers will benefit from Betts being the lead off hitter all next season. I doubt severely he opts out and we need to pencil him in for batting 4th next season,
In the infield, we have work to do on one half and are set in the other half.
At third base, we have devers and there is no doubt he has to regress from the monster year he had this year. But should still have a good year and we need to pencil him in the second spot in the batting order.
At short, we have bogey. Again I expect a regression year from the monster year he had this year, but the numbers will still be good. He should hit third in the batting order in 2020.
At second base we have a bit of a black hole. Pedrioa is not claiming his old position in 2020, but will still claim valuable cap space. Holt is a free agent and could easily leave. My best guess is the position is shared between chavis, Marco and maybe Lin, if holt leaves. This position hits eight in the batting lineup,
At first base, we have another black hole. Pearce is finally out of here and maybe we can offload Moreland to some unsuspecting team. My best guess is we have another share situation. Chavis, Martinez and maybe Travis can play first, or the Sox can give dalbec a shot. This position should bat seventh in the lineup.
At catcher, we have Vazquez. Again, I expect a regression in his numbers, but his defense is decent and he can bat 6th.
In the bench, we have Marco, not very reliable, Lin, not really good, Travis, not really good and the need for a back up catcher, easy to find in the free agent market, but will not be much of a bat. I prefer to bring back sandy because our pitchers love throwing to the guy.
This lineup should be more than capable of putting runs on the board similar to 2018.
|
|
|