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.
Recent Posts
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 14, 2012 16:06:39 GMT -5
No, It does not make me think differently. I fully expect the Red Sox to compete for the Division Title next year & every year.Anything less is unacceptable. I still fully expect the Red Sox to sign the best free agent hitter available - Josh Hamilton - to play a corner Outfield spot & bat 3rd or 4th. I still fully expect the Red Sox to sign either Grienke or Sanchez. I still fully expect the Red Sox to trade for another Big Bat to play 1B & bat 3rd or 4th.I still fully expect the Red Sox to sign or trade for an experienced SS to compete for the starting job with Iglesias. I still fully expect the Red Sox to sign or trade for a RH bat to play or platoon in a corner Outfield spot. I still fully expect Kalish, Sweeney, Sands, Nava, Gomez, De Jesus, Ciriaco to be traded or to compete for a bench spot. The Boston Red Sox have the money and the fan base and should absolutely be expected to compete for a playoff spot every year. None of this lets sign a bunch of guys for 1-3 year deals and play some of the kids and lets see what they can do and wait for the rest of the kids to develop. That's unacceptable! In your plan, you want the Red Sox to trade Xander, JBJ, Cecchini, Workman, and Melancon for Fielder. Your plan also calls for trading more prospects/assets for OF/SS help, and would take the Red Sox over the luxury tax for the next few seasons. All this takes me back to your first statement...how do you expect the Red Sox to compete year in and year out by trading away their elite cost controlled talent, immediately going over the luxury tax, and loading up on expensive contracts for aging players? The Red Sox would have absolutely zero financial flexibility and would be forced into the same scenario as last winter, where they had players disappoint and get injured, but couldn't pay to fix the holes because they maxed out the budget. You can't sign the most expensive FA's in baseball and trade away your elite position player prospects, you need good value at a few spots. This is like the Phillies franchise model, except less sustainable and worse...at least they heavily invested in top pitching and just screwed up with Howard.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 14, 2012 14:33:35 GMT -5
The deal makes human sense for the Jays in the same way human greed makes sense for the Marlins. The state of the division is part of it, but fan morale was down in Toronto after the Farrell trade, even though a lot of them wanted Farrell out. AA has done a great job of gathering talent, but ownership can be impatient, and I think he was nervous he would never get to "go for it" with this organization if he didn't pull the trigger this offseason. Another season of watching the Orioles and Rays compete while the Red Sox and Yankees progress their "retooling" might lead to an overreaction and even great GM's can get fired in those situations. Toronto is a great city, but FA's seem to largely stay away when the money is close, it's certainly not a top destination. I think the money they assumed could've been more effectively spent on the FA market, but maybe they felt they'd have to overextend to land FA's. As a baseball fan I'm excited to see what other moves AA makes now that he's in "win now" mode.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 13, 2012 23:28:58 GMT -5
I'm a big Law fan, but this piece was suspect. (Paraphrasing) he said it wasn't a bad baseball deal at the end, but he generally ripped every aspect of the deal for the Marlins, and minimized every possible risk/downside for the Jays. It read heavily biased and narrative driven, almost like a non-Speier local media report, just with better metrics and actual scouting analysis. He even said it didn't substantially alter their future, and completely undersold the financial commitment.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 13, 2012 23:09:33 GMT -5
If Stanton is available, he's destined for Texas. I think they value Profar and Andrus too much for Upton, but Stanton is THE type of guy that would make moving them a no brainer.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 13, 2012 22:56:26 GMT -5
It could be that I'm just one of the ignorant few that isn't expecting this team to carry a $90-100M payroll from now on, based on the "we learned our lesson from Carl Crawford" theory. (If that turns out to be true, a hat tip to Mr Beaupre who correctly forecast me as lacking worth in 3rd grade.) Barring that unlikely possibility, I expect the team to add payroll if it makes sense based on value and if it adds premium players at open positions. For me, it comes down to this team really needing talent and having the financial resources to acquire it. I don't think anyone is advocating for a $90-100m payroll. You can avoid long term $17-25mAAV deals and still spend money. My ideal scenario is signing a core of good value FA's on short term deals (2-3yr), and the payroll should be just below the luxury tax. The Red Sox organization moving forward will be as good as the internal pieces, both prospects and current players (Lester, Buchholz, Pedroia, Bard etc.). Almost all the core guys have had down years, and maybe the stink of the 2012 Red Sox was contagious. Maybe Lester will rediscover himself under Farrell's magic touch, I'd just like to evaluate them for another year. If they aren't going to be near elite players, just have a complete rebuild. I don't see why anyone is in a rush to surround this core with elite veteran FA's, that signing is always based on up front production and is very risky on the back end. The financial freedom can be used many ways, including overpaying on AAV to secure short term contracts for real talent. It's been pointed out already that the Jays lost real talent in this deal, and outside of Johnson & Bonifacio they could've just signed these guys last offseason, almost all of them are coming off relative down years. It's all about finding value, committing money is whatever, just find good value...even in the best case scenario there isn't THAT much surplus value here, and it contains a lot of risk. The best asset in the deal has a lengthy injury history and is on track to be the top FA pitcher in his class. He was good last year, but it was not at his past standards and certainly not "ace like". You can trade good prospects and take on all that money, or you could keep your cost controlled talent and sign Swisher, Napoli, Drew, Melky, Haren, and Jackson (obvious off the top hypothetical).
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 13, 2012 16:07:22 GMT -5
Everything Jmei said, I need to type faster. It's not like he had a SSS of bad luck with BABIP, his BABIP has declined at a consistent rate for three seasons now (~30 points per season). His contact profile has changed and he's striking out more, it's natural to see a big drop in BABIP. Injuries have played a part, but are we really projecting him to be more healthy as he ages, even at 1B? Maybe it's just a convenient narrative, but his all out playing style has made him continuously breakdown, I can't just dismiss injuries because I don't expect good health moving forward. Youk's road numbers the past two seasons have been terrible. His approach is still an asset, but with less bat speed he'll have to guess more and pitchers are already challenging him more due to the diminished power. He can be a valuable player for the right price and I'm certainly not ruling him out, but I don't think an explanation is needed for why he no longer has the same high BABIP, he's a different (worse) hitter now.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 12, 2012 16:51:24 GMT -5
If you take Napoli's career season of 2011 out of the stats, things look a little closer between Salty and him. The fact is the differences are not that great. Napoli is 4 years older. Salty is just entering his peak years. Napoli is past them. This past season Salty had more HRs, more XBHs overall, more runs scored and more RBIs with about the same ABs. Napoli had more walks and a higher OBA, and that is the principal difference. Both are considered sub-par defensive catchers with low throw-out percentages. The statistical differences between the two are not significant enough to say that replacing Salty with Napoli would have any major effect on the team's performance. Napoli is not a star player. His impact on the team overall would be minimal, mostly improving a bench that has been notably weak for several years, and he would be worth adding just for that reason, but not for a premium price. Napoli's career year is definitely an outlier, but Napoli's WORST offensive season is much better than Salty's BEST, so removing the career year doesn't make any argument. Napoli is a much better hitter, with all due respect your supporting argument is extremely weak (RBI's, runs scored, etc.). Napoli easily has more power, hitting exactly 1 more HR (in ~30 more plate appearances) and a few more XBH's in a single season isn't that meaningful. Napoli still had a better slugging percentage and higher ISO than Salty, despite Napoli performing below his career averages in both categories and Salty establishing new highs. I guess the difference in age shouldn't be overlooked, but it's doubtful Napoli will command more than 2-3 years and Salty is only under control for one season so it's not a big factor either way. The fact is Salty's bat doesn't play at 1B, and Napoli is a good bet to be league average at worst.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 11, 2012 23:02:02 GMT -5
I think Buchholz for Gordon would be good value from the Red Sox side, but with their pitching problems it's unlikely they'd consider it. Everyone gets intrigued by Buchholz's great runs and his one season as an elite #2 type starter, but he hasn't been durable and he's been inconsistent the duration of his career. At worst he's an above average pitcher, at best he's an elite #2, but do people really think he's going to be elite year in and year out moving forward? I think Gordon probably will be an elite corner outfielder the next 3-5 seasons. Gordon has been pretty damn good the last two seasons, he isn't owed that much more than Clay, and they are roughly the same age.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 5, 2012 18:26:18 GMT -5
There is no way the team contends with Haren or Jackson as SP + Iglesias ( I assume he is your starting SS), Napoli, Nava/Sands as everyday starters. The line up is just to weak (very weak) and Haren or Jackson don't upgrade the SP over what is already in the system.[/b] Who are these five pitchers who are as good or better than Haren and Jackson?
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 4, 2012 15:08:36 GMT -5
I'd be down to trade Pedroia, Lester, Buchholz, Middlebrooks, Bogaerts, *insert Red Sox player here* for some insane return package of elite near MLB ready talent. But, in Pedroia's case, that probably isn't going to happen.
Now, that's not to say Pedroia doesn't still have tremendous trade value, but let's be practical here. Pedroia is coming off an injury plagued year where he had his worst offensive performance, and he has the stink of the 2012 Red Sox on him, it's not like his value is at an all time high. He's a near 30 year old second baseman with a little body, his skills are generally undervalued, and the same reasons why people here are skeptical of Pedroia's long term value are probably shared across the industry.
The Red Sox would have to clearly "win" the trade to even think about dealing Pedroia at this point. There are many reasons why this is unlikely. The main reason is he's under team control through 2015 on a team friendly number. If he's dealt, he can void the option, so the acquiring team only has him under control for two seasons. That's not a recipe for a stupid return, I'm fairly confident no team values Pedroia more than the Red Sox do. Look, I'm skeptical of Pedroia 3-5 years from now, but is he really going to break the bank as a 32 year old 2B after 2015? He might, but in order to do so he'd need to be elite for the next three seasons. It's ignorant to write off the 2014 and 2015 Red Sox, and he could very well be the best player on those teams. We could make a thread for any player and discuss a plan for an insanely good return, but it's as pointless as coming up with trade proposals for Felix Hernandez.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 4, 2012 12:14:20 GMT -5
Here's what happened with Ross: Ross: I want 3 years and $30m. Cherington: uh... we'll call you. Exactly. Ross wasn't going to skip free agency when he was a week away for a "fair" deal. Ross just isn't the type of player you overextend for. I'm not sure where some of you are thinking this is a thin OF market, if any spot has depth it's clearly the OF.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 2, 2012 21:39:14 GMT -5
The 4th round pick might be an overpay, but there are a few things at play here in addition to the ticking clock on Brady. The Patriots are one of the favorites to take the AFC, and there's a good chance this pick is one of the last of the round.
Also, let's not forget this is the youngest team of the Belichick era. With all the picks spent in past few seasons, there just isn't much room for the type of value guy you typically find in the 4th. Bill tends to identify situational players/projects at this point in the draft. They have most of their core ST guys locked up, and there just isn't much room for more project guys who wouldn't be able to contribute in their rookie year. They absolutely could've found a guy in the 4th to crack their 53 man roster next year, but there was a lower chance than past years. All that said, they knew they needed an upgrade and he was the only viable option at the deadline...it's not exactly the baseball deadline.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 2, 2012 19:51:49 GMT -5
Admittedly I don't know Haren's medical status, but this is disappointing for the reported return. He had been a borderline ace for the past 5 seasons before 2012, and only required a one year commitment. The loss of velocity is obviously a big concern, but without the back and velocity concerns this guy just isn't on the market.
The fact that his stock fell so much in just one year points to the volatility of pitching. Haren's main appeal was his upside mixed with just a one year commitment. If he recovered from his injury he'd be either a key part to a contending Red Sox team or a valuable trade deadline piece. Even last year he was league average and made 30 starts, and he actually pitched better down the stretch. This season should be the time to make value plays with low risk, and even if he flamed out it was just a one year deal. Since they don't want to trade significant prospects for a legit pitcher, they'll have to sign someone, and anyone better than Haren is likely to be paid nearly as much or more annually over a multi-year pact, which is much more risky than hoping his back holds up for one season. I'm disappointed, especially if the plan is to sign another flawed/injured non-elite pitcher and hope for the best.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 2, 2012 19:08:26 GMT -5
Looks like Haren is on his way to the Cubs for Carlos Marmol... another missed opportunity by Ben Cherington. Or the Angels like Marmol more than whatever the Red Sox were offering? I mean, the Red Sox don't have an equivalent piece, and the Angles are a current world series contender, so doing it for a package of prospects might not have been of interest to them. Marmol had negative trade value, I think he's owed ~$10m (without looking) and while he strikes people out he kinda sucks now. I know they shopped him heavily last year and were reportedly willing to kick in money, I just don't see that as a crazy valuable piece. There must be money going to the Angels.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Oct 4, 2012 12:46:01 GMT -5
I don't understand why they didn't deal with this a month or two ago? Was it more unceremonious? No. Did it keep them in the pennant race? No. Did they players want him to stay? No. Did they at least avoid other coaching conflicts by keeping him? No. Every day he was around this team, a new thing went badly. It just doesn't make sense. Once the trade went down the organization realized it was a lost year, and the best possible finish would be to tank for a great draft pick. Keeping Bobby guaranteed an uninspired team who would play out the games and lose the large majority of those games. This really was the best realistic scenario post-Punto trade.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Oct 2, 2012 22:17:06 GMT -5
~cough~ Jake Peavy on a "pillow contract" ~cough cough~ It's extremely doubtful Peavy would be looking for a "pillow contract". He's pitched very well this year, he's 31, it's a weak market for SP, and he's had a history of injuries. There's very limited upside in taking a one year deal in hopes of pitching better next year and staying healthy again, this is pretty much the ideal walk year for him. If Dan Haren hits the market, he's the type of guy who would fit the pillow contract mold.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Sept 26, 2012 22:58:24 GMT -5
For example, the Angels' Haren and Santana are assigned costs associated with their buyouts. That throws a wrinkle into those projections for me. I expect that, given the cost of good pitching, one or both will be back with the team next year. Certainly it's hard to imagine Haren, who's been very good, hitting the market.I read somewhere on Mlbtr today that the angels don't plan on picking up either one's option..I'd post the link, but I'm on my phone and itd be too painful. Will do it tomorrow. If I remember correctly, after factoring in the buyout, the Haren decision is essentially 1/12m. He's pitched better lately, and he's been an elite and durable pitcher for a while now. I realize this a different pitching environment and he's struggled with back problems this year, but that price still sounds very reasonable. I'd definitely be willing to give up assets to obtain him for that price, I can't see the Angels paying the buyout even if they re-sign Greinke.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Sept 24, 2012 21:25:43 GMT -5
So the one thing I that these rosters hammer home is that the Red Sox aren't competing next year. Buccholz and Lester as a credible one-two in the AL east? Pure wishcasting. To be fair, the Orioles are contending in the AL East with a Wei-Yen Chen & Jason Hammel 1-2 punch. The Red Sox aren't going to be division favorites with that rotation, but for one year Lester and Buchholz certainly could do it. There is more to a contender than the top two pitchers on Opening Day. For the record, I don't expect the Red Sox to be contenders, but with so much uncertainty with the roster it's pointless to speak in absolutes. Wishcasting is extreme in this case and is reserved to the people penciling in guys like Sands and Kalish for big roles next season.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Sept 20, 2012 21:34:24 GMT -5
I'd like him for the right cost (obviously), but the discussion here seems way off. He isn't good enough to justify taking on Wells contract, so talking about giving up prospects in addition seems crazy. It would essentially be paying Mark Trumbo $20m+ each of the next two seasons, except it would be worse, because Vernon Wells would have to come too.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Sept 18, 2012 23:30:49 GMT -5
He's much more interesting than the rest of the available crop. He's under control for a while and he's probably at worst league average, with some legit upside to be much better than that. If we're talking about "value plays", he fits the mold. Leaving Citi Field will be huge for him, and the flukey Valley Fever really impacted his overall numbers, this is the perfect buy low. Salty/Kalish sounds great to me. As much as I liked Kalish he missed a lot of time during a key development stage and there's just a lot of risk there for me. I'd be open to moving Lavarnway and lesser pieces for him as well. I don't want to keep making hypothetical proposals, but he's a great target.
Or maybe we could take on Howard's contract for all the RBI's.
|
|
|
Brentz
Sept 13, 2012 21:16:38 GMT -5
Post by beasleyrockah on Sept 13, 2012 21:16:38 GMT -5
So you'd be cool with Salty hitting 3/4/5 for the Sox next year? This my exact question until I scrolled down and saw your post. If I knew how to send karma on this forum, they'd be going your way.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Sept 5, 2012 13:51:13 GMT -5
Is Cecchini behind the curve? Maybe not, but he's certainly not ahead of the curve and that's what you want to see. I mean, if we're all excited that Bogaerts is in AA as a 19 year old, it would be terribly inconsistant to dismiss the fact that Cecchini is both two years older and two levels behind him. Either age matters or it doesn't. It's can't be a thing where if a guy is advanced, that's awesome, but if a guy is behind, we just hand-wave it away. No one is comparing Cecchini to Bogaerts and no one is dismissing the age, I don't see the inconsistency. Cecchini's upside is as a future above average MLB regular, Bogaerts has superstar potential. There's a huge difference between factoring in age and not taking him serious as a legit prospect because he isn't super age advanced. It's not like people are getting excited about A ball stats in isolation, this guy has the tools and pedigree to match. It seems like you're suggesting a guy must be excelling in an age advanced setting to be taken seriously, and I don't agree with that, you evaluate on a case by case basis. Sure, he isn't a top 20 prospect in baseball like Bogaerts is, but we're allowed to get excited about non-elite prospects, and I don't think anyone is going overboard. There's a large range of possible outcomes at this point of his development, but he's certainly a legit top 10 prospect in this system at this point imo.
|
|
|