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 telson13 on Mar 24, 2019 21:15:06 GMT -5
I understand that's a very simple blanket statement. But I was just thinking about the last time the Sox actually signed a homegrown all star to an extension? aside from Dustin Pedroia I can't think of anyone else in recent history. I would like to think if they're serious about keeping some of these guys then the time to get serious would be now. Your comment made me start to think about the history of the Sox home grown talent and losing players to free agency. Other than Luchino screwing up the negotiation for Lester I can't think of one player where the Sox screwed up. Look at Ellsbury in NY. But the fact is the Sox over the past 30 years have not developed that many of their own draft picks into all stars. The ones that did were traded. Of course Roger is a different story but I have always contended that Duquette pissed him off and that is when he started working a lot harder in the gym with the help of roids at some point. I think it is safe to say that as far as developing home grown guys the Sox have been more successful over the past 5 years than at any other time since the late sixties early seventies. !975 with Rice and Lynn as rookies was a magical year, the Fisk hr. What memories, that was the year the Sox hooked me for life. The next 2 that I hope/expect to step up to star level are Benny and Devers, Benny is just about there and this could be the year RD explodes. Lots of upside with those 2. DD has some serious work to do when the season ends. Idk...that’s maybe true with pitching (which is also notoriously tough anyway, so I’m not sure I’d ding them too badly there), but i don’t think it’s that true with hitters. Some major success stories (past 30 yr): Ellis Burks (on the cusp of 30 yr; his departure was much more a product of poor evaluation at the MLB level after one down year) Mo Vaughn Nomar Youk Pedroia Ellsbury All were perennial All-Stars, if not superstars (Nomar was a true superstar, as was Vaughn; Nomar probably would've been a HOFer if not for that Cabrera FB to his wrist) Some minor successes: Greenwell (also at that 30-yr cusp) Trot Nixon (who never reached his dreamed-on level as a 7th pick but who was still very good for a long time) Travis Shaw Recent successes, as you noted, include Mookie, Bogey, Beni, JBJ to an extent, probably Devers. I’m still holding out hope for Swihart. Lester’s the lone huge SP success, but they’ve had a bevy of relievers who’ve gone on to some success elsewhere (the latest being Ryan Presley, who’s become insanely good with that slider). In their defense, they’re nearly always very competitive, so they don’t get many top-10 picks, and success rate drops very quickly after 5 and again after 15. Their position player success (career WAR) has been outstanding the past 15-20 years. And, as you note, they’re on a very strong run and appear to have continued that run with Chavis, Casas, and Duran, and possibly others. We’ll see if they can mount a pitching comeback with Hernandez, Houck, and Groome.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 24, 2019 20:40:26 GMT -5
Worth noting too that during the Epstein era, they were much better about extending players early. Youk, Lester, Buchholz, and Pedroia all were extended well in advance of free agency, all of which worked out great from a team perspective. Even as frustrating as Buchholz was, no one ever really wanted to trade him, because that contract was so good. Some of that's just circumstance, but it does kind of seem like in recent years either haven't quite nailed some of their internal evaluations, or haven't had the conviction to act on them. Maybe they tried to extend Mookie early and he was just never interested, but it seems like if you'd really gone hard after him early on you could have gotten something done. Or Rich Hill, for a much smaller example. There's a ton of hindsight there but still, if there was one team that should have known what they had there, it should have been the one that identified it in the first place. Which, by the way, right about now would be a great time to lock up Devers, BEFORE the breakout. Or even Beni, who's only a few gusts of wind away from his own MVP campaign, really. Agreed, wholeheartedly. I’ve had a similar gestalt approach impression re: the current FO and extensions. Seems like a lot of wait-and-see. Funny, Devers is getting a lot of love out there (https://fantasy.fangraphs.com/2019-bold-predictions/), and I’m fully onboard with getting him paid before he goes nuts.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 24, 2019 20:35:39 GMT -5
Mookie’s averaged 8.0 fWAR/yr the past three years. That’s a transformational player; replace a slightly below-avg to avg OF (1-2 WAR player; could be COF *or* CF, which has premium value) with Mookie, and a .500 team is instantly a strong WC contender. He’d likely return substantially more than Machado did at the deadline, whether he was traded pre-season or in July. For a team on a stretch drive, he’d be adding 3 wins...which is a ton over 60-70 games. Also, if he’s going to FA, I can guarantee you that just about every team in baseball will be interested, because he IS that transformational player. Teams are going to line up to get an early “in” with him to make their pitch. Because he can play any OF spot, he’ll have a broad range of suitors. He’s almost certain to start a bidding war. They’ll get plenty back, but no matter what it is it’ll never make up for losing Mookie. Nothing beyond hurt feelings to trade him and then sign him in free agency, maybe with a nod and a wink. Honestly, this might be the best idea, if he’s really wedded to trying FA. I’d hate to see him leave at all (Mookie is really someone I’d love seeing as a career Red Sox), but if they’re going to have to pay no matter what, this is where the best bet is...excepting the fact that losing him is a huge hit to a playoff run. But if the cards fall a certain way, this is probably the advisable route. Let’s hope it doesn’t come to that, and their arb settlement this year portends a “fair value” extension.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 21, 2019 22:30:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 21, 2019 22:23:57 GMT -5
FTH, do you mean, sign him irregardless of the effect on the Lux Tax punishments? Pretty much, yeah. I don't think there's any realistic Mookie contract that I would even think twice about. I saw McCutcheon mentioned elsewhere, but Mookie’s hit tool (particularly his contact rate) and arm are clearly superior; his baserunning is better, too, although their speed is similar at prime. Mookie’s also arguably the best “athlete” the game has seen in a while (though I’m maybe unfairly dinging Trout for a substantial size/strength advantage; regardless it’s *very* close). Mookie’s better than McCutcheon ever was, and so I agree with you. I think Mookie’s a very, very good bet to age well...any loss of power/speed e’ll probably make up for with contact quality/skill, at least for a good while. He’s very likely going to provide a LOT of excess value for a half-decade or more even at stupid-looking AAV ($40M, at $8M/win, and he’s still giving you 3 extra wins a year at his current 3-year pace). Plus, there’s a huge benefit to concentrating value at one lineup spot: An 8-WAR guy and two 2-WAR guys is a lot better than 3 4-WAR guys, because 2-WAR guys are easy to find and/or develop. No matter what realistic deal they come up with, he’s almost certain to be worth it.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 21, 2019 22:10:03 GMT -5
A contending NL team might be willing to do a rental for 2020: they wouldn't offer much worthwhile in a deal (he wouldn't sign with them either, before FA). But you could likely get a young player, maybe an OF with a future. My guess is Betts stays for very large dollars unless he has something he can't stand about the franchise. If he doesn't stay, it will likely be just walking away,no rental trade. And yes I do think Henry has a limit. Mookie’s averaged 8.0 fWAR/yr the past three years. That’s a transformational player; replace a slightly below-avg to avg OF (1-2 WAR player; could be COF *or* CF, which has premium value) with Mookie, and a .500 team is instantly a strong WC contender. He’d likely return substantially more than Machado did at the deadline, whether he was traded pre-season or in July. For a team on a stretch drive, he’d be adding 3 wins...which is a ton over 60-70 games. Also, if he’s going to FA, I can guarantee you that just about every team in baseball will be interested, because he IS that transformational player. Teams are going to line up to get an early “in” with him to make their pitch. Because he can play any OF spot, he’ll have a broad range of suitors. He’s almost certain to start a bidding war. They’ll get plenty back, but no matter what it is it’ll never make up for losing Mookie.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 21, 2019 21:50:03 GMT -5
Devers is hitting 3rd isn't he? Cora has been on him since last year, as well as EdRod to do more. I like that Cora is “demanding” that of them; I think he’s doing so in a way that demonstrates tremendous confidence in their abilities but with a clear expectation that they shoulder the responsibility of making the most of those abilities through persistence and growth. I just love his management style, which (and I’ll always give Farrell credit for his great work in ‘13) has really been unseen in these parts since Tito, and possibly long before him as well. The closeness, accountability, and clarity of communication on this team seems at a whole other level these days (hence, 108 reg season wins and a WS title after an 11-3 postseason against the three other best teams in the game).
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 21, 2019 21:36:41 GMT -5
What does this have to do with 2019? Just because we don’t have a shutdown closer now doesn’t mean we won’t have one sometime during the season. Someone in the BP could be 2019 koji. Where was Koji on the depth chart going into the 2013 season? Lol, 4 if I recall correctly, after Hanrahan (elbow), Bailey (shoulder), Tazawa (failed brief CL experiment). I fully agree with you. For one, Barnes was pure dominance last year outside of a very brief but very poor stretch. He’s improved his command, mix, and results every year. His McCullersing of the Astros in the ALCS (14/15 pitches CBs they could barely hit) was, to me, a clear demonstration that he’s artived as a *pitcher*: a thinker, and gamesman. Brasier showed supreme stuff and had very good results. Hembree remains a bit of an enigma, but he’s improved slowly and misses tons of bats. He could go buckwild with maybe one or two small tweaks. Darwinzon has stupid good stuff—best of the lot, really (and that’s saying something with Barnes in there)—and could very easily been a revelation en route to a permanent rotation spot. There’s a bevy of longshot guys with huge stuff, too; Ellington’s been wild but he’s had extremely successful stretches before; Thornburg’s stuff has been excellent if not the command just yet (no surprise given the thoracic outlet surgery; that the stuff alone is back is big). Bullpens are so volatile (look at what happens to Cleveland last year) that I’m not sweating it at all yet. It *coukd* blow up in their faces, but so did Miller, Allen, et al. With Feltman, Big D, and Lakins, plus a baker’s dozen reclamation arms, there’s a pretty good chance they have sufficient depth to come out looking just fine, and maybe smelling like roses.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 20, 2019 17:16:44 GMT -5
I agree. This March has been a bit of a dud from the team. It doesn't really matter, but it would be nice to have some sort of juice to these fake games. It matters if it spills into the season... last spring they were great and got off to a great start. This year they are easing guys in; let’s just hope they are ready to go. The teams key quality, besides talent, last season was its ability to not have any prolonged slumps. Did they very lose more then 3 in a row? Once, all to the Rays in August if I recall correctly. The consistency of that team last year, particularly given the significant “component” slumps (offense, SP, bullpen) that they did have was incredible. On that note, though...I think they have a chance to do that, again. Especially because of the SP depth/quality, but also because I think the offense this year will see substantial improvements from Devers, JBJ, Beni, and the C duo/trio. Not to mention, potentially at 2b, where Pedroia looks like he might come back for a big chunk of the season, Holt seems to have made a real change, and Nunez is much healthier. They might not be “better” overall offensively (although I personally think they actually will be, if only marginally), but I think the big lineup holes they had last year 7-9 will be mostly closed up, and thus make them a little more resistant to prolonged offensive droughts. Lots of small stuff, too...like having Pearce over Hanley, hopefully better health from Mookie/Bogey, and having guys like Chavis or their prospect depth pitching-wise (in the high minors). Obviously, the big question is the bullpen, which could very well create some consistency problems. In this vein, though...can anyone remember being THIS excited about a Sox season in their lifetimes? I remember going into 2011, which seemed like a juggernaut, and maybe ‘87 when they got so close but kept the team mostly intact. But this team was SO fun to watch last year, and there are millions of storylines, from the MVP repeat chase (and same-team battle between Mookie and JDM) to potential big-time breakouts for Beni or Devers or ERod, to seeing a full season of Eovaldi, or the bullpen experiment, or a possibly transcendent Sale season. JBJ’s new swing, Bogey’s pre-ordained walk-year breakout, Lin’s possible emergence as a darkhorse “good” player development story; The Evolution before our eyes, Feltman’s meteoric rise, Chavis feasting on MLB pitching the way he has the last two years in the minors; Houck’s ascendence, Groome’s return, Casas’s, Duran’s, and Flores’s bursting on the scene. Mata putting it together, and the couple of pop-up dream-on guys who seem to show up every year. Key IFA and rule 4...so much going on, all backlit by the team chasing history as repeat WS winners and possible dynasty-beginners. SO. MUCH. FUN.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 20, 2019 16:28:55 GMT -5
This is my problem with the catching situation - if by "good" you mean above average then probably none of our options are good to start the season. Leon and Vazquez very likely never get to good, Swihart could get there but needs playing time. Last year was very frustrating at the catching position and, if Swihart doesn't turn into that good player, then it's likely to be a point of frustration for the foreseeable future. It just doesn't seem like a good team building move to ditch a high upside player for the sake of keeping two below-average, minimal upside catchers. Keep either Vazquez or Leon for the stability and Swihart for the upside. Keeping Leon and Vazquez just seems like you're locking in a below average output for the next 2-4 years and I don't know why the team would do that. Yeah, that's what I meant. I think there is some "good"Ness in what CV and Leon bring. The handling of staff, the ability to at times be good throwers and for the most part CV can put the bat on the ball and Leon is Leon Swihart hasnt really shown anything, but for being a quick catcher. This isn't a slight on him, he hasn't had a shot. However after winning the world series with CV/Leon and their production I think it's fine to keep both for a couple years. I was just hoping the cries for the purging of say our catchers, or center fielder, for more offense. It's always more offense. Luckily the bosox know the game is about more. On the flipside, I’d argue that the Sox are in the unique position of being SO good, particularly offensively, that they could survive (and thrive) giving Leon substantial time and riding out Swihart’s growing pains. Leon/Vasquez is a redundant combination, with markedly limited upside. As a team approaching a salary crunch, squeezing an extra 1-2 wins out of a low-cost player like Swihart (who may well provide more, still at low cost) is a good gamble.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 20, 2019 16:21:10 GMT -5
I would hope that Mookie doesn't put them in a position where they have to actively look to trade him either next offseason or before the 2020 trade deadline. But if he hasn't shown willingness to extend at a reasonable #, which should probably be just lower than Trout's, you have to at least look I certainly think they'll have to listen to offers, especially if they have no intention of approaching Trout's contract figure. The problem with Mookie is that’s he’s essentially untradeable. Just like he, or Trout, won’t get their “true” contract worth (which would be in excess of $50M AAV at $8M per win), they also won’t return their true value in trade. As someone who’s looking more and more like a Trout-level (or a smidge below, to be realistic) performer...a perennial 7-9 WAR player...Mookie *reasonably* should return what Sale did, even with just 2 years. Maybe a bit more, since his projected value for two years is nearly Sale’s for three, admittedly at greater cost but with substantially less risk as a positional player vs pitcher. That’s basically two top-20 prospects (one of them a top-3, a 65-FV player; the other a 55-60), plus probably an additional top-100-150 (45+ or 50 FV).. And that’s because over two years, Mookie looks to be worth $140-160M in production value but cost only $45-$50M. So $100M in excess value is a big price to pay, and from the Sox’s standpoint, they need an overpay (say, $120-14M EV) to justify the huge hit to their competitiveness, and the fan base blow-back. To top it off, there are very few teams that have the prospect capital to do that deal (there are only 5 top-5 prospects, and dropping out of that zone means bumping up the other players...so who out there has a 3-20-120 combo, or, say, an 8-12-90?). SD and ATL could do it. Houston could possibly, if they’d part with Whitley-Tucker-James-Nova. And maybe the Sox could find a partner like the Mets, who would do DeGrom/Syndergaard plus Giménez and Mauricio. But the list of partners is real short...it’s really ONLY contenders or borderline contenders with deep systems and/or very high-end controlled talent.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 20, 2019 14:48:35 GMT -5
It still seems borderline bizarre to me that both Keuchel and Kimbrel remain unsigned. Idk if it’s the refusal of both to settle or a general lack of interest (or, really, the combination of both, namely lack of interest at what the players deem “reasonable”), but wow... Those are two players who would almost assuredly be significant booms to any contender. And given the extremely hotly contested AL East (OK, there are some major, varied in nature, salary constraints there), NL East, and NL Central...you’d think *somebody* would bite the bullet. I mean, ATL needs relief help in a huge way, NYM or Washington both could benefit from a reliable, quality innings-absorbing SP, MIL actually arguably *needs* a SP, Cincy is on the verge of being good and could use either to dramatically boost their chances in an “up-for-grabs” division...it’s just weird. I’m all for fiscal restraint, it’s generally the smart way to do business. But I don’t think either of those two will get fat deals, so I doubt either contract looks like an albatross no matter how the years/$ shake out. I mean, imagine if SD signed Keuchel...with Machado and their stupidly good/deep talent well, they’d be in WC contention this year and for the foreseeable future. They’d also be able to keep payroll low for years on that bunch. 10 top-100 guys?! They should have a TON of avg-to-better regulars making league minimum for the next 5-7 years.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 19, 2019 23:12:18 GMT -5
Yeah, there's like 5 colleges in a really small area. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps is like that too. I looked at UCSD for post-grad training and it was incredible. Had a buddy who did his immunology post-doc at Scripps and I visited then, too. What killed me (besides that particular spot being not my favorite training-wise) was the rent. $2800/mo in 2010 for a 1-bedroom. OUCH. But I totally got why. My friend paid significantly less for an ok little 2-bedroom about a 1/4 mile from the beach...and wow, that was a steal. Really gorgeous corner of the world, in so many ways. Berkeley was great, too (tho obviously the Bay’s climate can’t quite measure up), and tuition was minimal ($1800?) since my dad lived in CA, but I got scairt visiting after I got accepted...too wild for me (at that time at least). After I matriculated back east, I saw Berkeley had some big hullabaloo about a guy who went naked to his classes and filled a lawsuit to do so. I’m out there, but I can’t see *that far* out from where I stand, which says something.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 19, 2019 22:59:34 GMT -5
News has it that Trout is going to sign a 12 year, $430 million extension with the Angels. Let's assume this goes as reported. Now we have the brackets: Harper 13 years, $330 million, Trout 12 years, $430 million. You really have to ask: Does this mean that Trout is going to be stuck with a not-quite-good-enough team for the rest of his career because he eats up too much of salary and they won't surround him with quite enough other good to excellent players to get over the hump? Or are they going to commit to whatever they need to do to get him a championship or two? And now Mookie Betts' situation comes into clear focus. Clear-eyed argument is that he is a better player than Harper, but a little (not much) less than Trout. It sure looks as though it is going to take upwards of $400 million over a comparable length contract to sign him, and I bet, even if he is willing to take slightly less than Trout, that he will want a 4 in the LH column of his new contract. Well 400 million divided by 11 years is 36.36 million/year so I think you have the right idea. I wrote this elsewhere in response to a post umassgrad made that I agreed very much with: Do a crescendo-decrescendo deal, with pre-FA arb buyout at a rough estimate $28M. Add eleven years, so 12 total, at 28-33-35-35-38-40-40-38-38-35-35-30. At peak, and about where you’d expect peak production, he’s the game’s highest paid player. At the back, when his production might be expected to decline some, there’s a little room created to offset it with outside talent. That deal comes out to 12/425. It is *absolutely* reasonable to reduce those numbers slightly to end up in the 12/400 range, and I’d say preferably at the back end, or to add a year and go 13/$431M, to top Trout’s deal. Nobody is Mike Trout, and a player of his caliber without suspected enhancement hasn’t been seen in 70 years. Mookie’s not at that caliber, but he’s much closer to Trout than Harper or Machado. He’s also marketable and just an *exciting* player in every single aspect of the game. He really, really ought to remain in the Bean. Get ‘er done.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 17, 2019 17:13:15 GMT -5
I like it... Be where your feet are. He's been reading Baba Ram Das. Who would have thunk it. Or watching The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai in the 8th Dimension. Wow, is that ever a blast from the past.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 17, 2019 17:08:43 GMT -5
For what it's worth, Pomona and Pitzer are two different colleges. They're so small that they have combined athletics programs. Lol, yes I neglected that, so thank you for clarifying. Nishioka went to Pomona College. I was confused by that when I was looking at WC schools (Pomona and UC Berkeley) but the next year as a freshman going on a spring break track travel competition to UCSD and running/long-jumping against kids from “Pomona-Pitzer.” I later got the impression from talking to them that there was opportunity for a significant amount of shared academics, too. So they’re independent entities but seemed linked in an unusually tight way, at least as I understood it. It’s also about the best climate in the universe, and I kick myself sometimes for staying in NE and freezing my ass off.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 16, 2019 22:19:50 GMT -5
Another scoreless inning for Darwinzon today.. up to 10 innings so far this spring. Is it too early to get excited about this kid? It’s never too early to get excited about a kid who didn’t start pitching until he was 15, and has elite spin on his CB and FB along with 70 velocity and elite movement on said FB. His FB movement at that velo, in my lifetime, is matched only by Rivera (who threw a cutter, so you’d expect it), and Daniel Bard, who threw a 2-seam that changed zip codes with its late run. I really can’t think of anyone else like that. Big D is someone we SHOULD be excited about, at the very least just to see how he looks starting against advanced competition. Of course, if you’re talking about “excited over MLB relief role,” I’m with Sarasoxer that late May/early June (9-10 starts in, anticipating 120 total IP this year) sounds right and reasonable. It’s entirely possible they Chris Sale 2011 him, and get him 70-90 MLB innings, with him breaking camp, but my guess is they get him those starts for developmental reasons.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 15, 2019 22:28:29 GMT -5
The next guy up after Netzler also homered. Nitschioka (sp.) is his name. Neither one of them are known for their power. After a strikeout, the next guy also homered. I didn’t see who the third guy was as I was watching the other game. Porcello was throwing to Vasquez in the other game. In one inning it looked like Porcello was working almost exclusively on his breaking ball. He also seemed to be having problems with runners getting a good jump on him. Two of them stood second and Vasquez didn’t have much of a chance to get either one. Jimenez threw the next couple of innings after Porcello. Jimenez doesn’t look like he has missed many meals. His body reminds me of Sabathia. Nishioka was a late pick out of Pomona-Pitzer, which is an *extremely* good small college academically (think MIT, Amherst college, Williams College). I believe he was a neuroscience major. Had an outstanding season in Greenville (161 wRC+) and played a little in Portland. My favorite dark horse in the system: intelligent Sr sign who looks like an outside shot at making MLB. www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=sa3002754&position=2B
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 14, 2019 22:36:18 GMT -5
My above comments notwithstanding... the fact that Darwinzon pitched only a single inning, and that coming in the 6th, worries me that they're thinking about keeping him up in the bullpen. It's entirely possible that they just wanted to see what it looked like in a single-inning relief outing, which I get, but still, I feel like Cora wouldn't be afraid to do that. If they do it, I will be the first one out there saying it'd be an incredibly short-sighted move. Porcello is, in all likelihood, walking next year. Darwinzon is their best candidate to replace him internally. That's far more important than getting him up this year to pitch the 7th or 8th. Not saying there's not going to be a point in the season in which that calculus changes, but for now, I think it slants heavily towards his getting more reps in the rotation. Developmentally, they’d have to weigh the lost innings (lost rep time on command, secondary refinement, any effect on innings restriction next year) against the benefit of experience at the MLB level (including coaching, relationships with teammates, help with approach from teammates, exposure to better diet/conditioning, etc). I think anything that moves him further from starting long-term is a mistake. If they view this as a Chris Sale ca. 2010-11 type deal, I’m ok with it. Sale almost certainly benefitted, as did the team. I’m 100% onboard with grooming him as a Porcello replacement, it’s the best, most logical plan that saves the most $ both short- and longer-term, and offers considerable upside. If they think working at the MLB level with Levangie/Bannister will help improve his one glaring weakness (command related to effort) better than AAA starting, I’m all-in. I have a high degree of confidence that he helps the club in relief right away.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 14, 2019 22:21:30 GMT -5
To dab at the corners of mouths, Feltman was not a high velocity guy today. His first several FBs were 95 and a bit off target. Later in the inning he was 93-94....not "wow" Kelly/Kimbrel or even Hembree velocity. Maybe there is more. He had a great diving splitter or curve. High, max effort was clear. Perhaps he can help at some point but he is not Moses on today's performance. Pitchers typically gain velocity over the course of the summer, and historically he’s sat a couple ticks higher. It’s still ST, I’m more concerned with whether he’s commanding and what his secondaries look like. I appreciate you’re advocating restraint, tho.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 14, 2019 22:17:56 GMT -5
I do anticipate by Sept all three guys will be up if not sooner and you might even add Houck to the list, but I just don't get beastly out of that. Nor with Mejia either. He was decent with the Mets, not great. I think if the Red Sox get one high leverage reliable reliever out of that bunch this season (I'll nominate Feltman) and they get a middle reliever who is average (I'll nominate Lakins) who they can put on a post-season roster, they'll probably be doing cartwheels. You have to admit, that's a lot of names of relievers who could be good this year. I wouldn't bet money on any of them individually, but as a collective I could see your "one reliable reliever and one middle reliever" situation being fairly likely. If that does turn out to be the case, that's a better bullpen than we took into the playoffs last year. Admittedly, probably not an elite bullpen this year, but still should be enough to get the job done. Kind of my feeling, too. SO many names, that it just seems more likely than not that at least will come up huge (a la Brasier) and at least one or two more come out pretty strong. Reliably excellent relievers are rare, but there are LOTS who are very good to excellent for one year. Barnes, IMO, is approaching that first class. There are several others who are “meh” but reliably serviceable. And about 15 names (including guys who could break out from the minors) who have some compelling quality about them that hints at success. The odds are in Boston’s favor right now, IMO. Still like to see them get Madson, tho. $1M flier, he sits 95 and has good secondaries. Way underperformed his peripherals. Nothing to lose.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 12, 2019 23:27:48 GMT -5
Notable: Darwinson and Dalbec remain in big league camp. That Chavis isn’t still up surprises me a little, but maybe they really do plan on getting him some 2b reps. Dalbec is surprising to me; Big D is not. He’s been fantastic and I could see them wanting to get him a little extra time with MLB coaching and a little better idea of whether he’s a relief option now. Edit: as Chris said, I don’t think he STAYS now, because I think they want him (and should ultimately plan on him) starting, but I could see them wanting to figure out if, should the need arise from some catastrophe, they could bring him up in a pinch and anticipate success. He very obviously needs reps, and I think it would be very short-sighted to deprive him of that barring a genuine “need.”
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 10, 2019 11:54:26 GMT -5
Would love to see the Pats take Isabella in the 3rd round. Think he’s still available then? I'd say like 65-35 he is right now. I wouldn't take him before the third round, maybe late second. I’d love to see them use their 2nd-round (vs the Bears’) for Isabella. He’s fast as hell and he seems like a REAL good fit for their system. Plus, reading interviews it sounds like he’s kind of a self-made player...lots of hard work to translate his speed to football skills. Just seems like the kind of player who thrives in NE.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 9, 2019 15:38:52 GMT -5
At least Rodriguez looked good today. Pretty efficient, which always seems to be the biggest onstacle for him to overcome.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 9, 2019 15:29:32 GMT -5
There are a lot of hurdles for Pedroia to leap before he’s back, but he’s passed the first one. Played Thursday, felt good Friday, and is back on the field on Saturday. Let’s see him keep it up. Even a reduced Pedey would be a *substantial* boon to this team. If he can hit .270/.330/.400 in 120 games, with his usual doubles and 8-12 HR, and play above-avg defense, that’s something like 2-3 wins better at second than last year. It’s a major upgrade (not even bringing into it the positional stability, improved overall INF defense, ability to move Nunez’s salary, etc), and if he somehow plays defense near his previous levels, it would essentially amount to adding an All-Star. Could be one of several areas of significant improvement. Really good to see him out there again.
|
|
|