|
Post by stevedillard on May 16, 2016 12:55:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on May 6, 2016 19:43:29 GMT -5
Should have walked him
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on May 4, 2016 19:19:25 GMT -5
I remember when he still had the speed to turn those into homers.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on May 4, 2016 16:15:02 GMT -5
I would only question that if his value is fairly low that he would be better than Hannigan. I know Swihart's receiving skills are questionable, but seeing Hannigan swinging through crap without even a David Ross big hit now and then is frustrating. If they are not going to develope Swihart's catching at Pawtucket, let him sit as Vasquez's backup, a potential PH and useful day off sub guy.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on May 2, 2016 19:04:45 GMT -5
Too bad he's hurt and needs surgery, but otherwise this is pretty much the best case scenario for the Sox. Yeah can put him on the 60-day and clear up a 40-man spot the insurance claim now. fixed it for you (hopefully).
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Apr 6, 2016 12:14:33 GMT -5
Yankory and Cosart
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Mar 8, 2016 15:02:35 GMT -5
Andy Yount Texas
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Feb 24, 2016 19:08:46 GMT -5
What this does seem to confirm is that Panda and Hanley were not force on Ben by owners. If that was the mistake, there would be no reason to change analytic systems.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Feb 21, 2016 9:51:49 GMT -5
Money wise that is a very good deal for the Orioles. But I would never give up a 1st round pick to sign him. Although for a lot of the short term deals, it often is deferring the pick, because they get a pick when the player leaves. For example, when Duke signed Nelson Cruz in 2014 he gave up a first (or second depending on Jimenez), but when Cruz left for Seattle the following year, Duke got a 1st round Comp. pick back (36th). Three years makes it a bit harder to project that he would get a qualifying offer, but the value of that "lost pick" has to be reduced for that possibility.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Feb 9, 2016 12:09:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Jan 20, 2016 15:17:41 GMT -5
This is a bit esoteric, and I'm genuinely interested in it because it may reveal why we like baseball. Here's the background. This is an issue I have thought about a bit recently, particularly as sabremetrics and BABIP concepts have made use more aware of the individual one-on-one events between a pitcher and a batter. Here's the question: is there be a "right" outcome of each battle. By that I mean baseball's rules don't seem tied to what I perceive as rewarding the winner of that battle. A batter can scorch a line drive or hit a long fly ball, as an out, but can get fooled and dribble a swinging bunt for a hit. While these things even out supposedly over a long season, in an individual game -- indeed the last game (Bucky Dent), or the last out (Willie McCovey) -- it can be unfair. A hard grounder becomes an inning ending DP, while a chopper prevents the DP from being turned. (And don't get me started on the passed ball, where the pitcher "wins" but loses.)
I tend to lean more toward the abstract, where a good hit should be rewarded more than baseball currently does. But when I raised it with others, they seem to disagree with my take. They like watching the game because of this unpredictable nature.
Do people enjoy the somewhat artificial rules of baseball, that a ball caught, no matter how well hit, is an out? Obviously and historically we all have grown up and accept those rules, but if you could construct the game anew, would you still adopt that flyball/ground ball distinction? Even if you accept that distinction, would you tweak it, to distinguish between a hard out vs. a weak play where the batter is fooled?
Or do you tend to see fielding as being a critical part of the game you enjoy, so you view a long liner into the gap, caught by the JBJ-esk centerfielder, as being the "right" result?
In the total opposite end of the spectrum (absurd), for example, with technology today you could you remake baseball to reward hits based on distance travelled, exit velocity, etc. Even to me that is too sterile.
So, I throw this out there, where do you fall on the spectrum?
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Jan 6, 2016 9:46:56 GMT -5
Forgive me if this was discussed elsewhere, but I looked and didn't see Guerra discussed. I am trying to understand this sentence.
He can't mean Guerra would be 45th on the Boston prospect list, can he?
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Dec 20, 2015 7:25:53 GMT -5
Other notables off the top of my head: Moises Alou was drafted 2nd overall in 1986, Pretty sure Alou was an international signing. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_Major_League_Baseball_draftBut to the point of prediction, it seems the past few years that the December list varies greatly from the final draft, other than the top one or two guys. Injuries have killed Manea, Funkhouser, the Virginia lefty, etc. And Benintendi, though pretty unusual, was not even on the top 100 list even in April, IIRC (I tried to look him up on BA lists, and recall he only got some mention in early spring, and finally broke through thereafter.)
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Dec 16, 2015 10:02:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Dec 11, 2015 11:09:39 GMT -5
I suspect Atlanta is looking to convert him to SS. [/Trey Ball]
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Dec 8, 2015 20:06:21 GMT -5
Twitter says Brett Gardner
edit: Jack Curry says Andy Warren and prospect
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Dec 5, 2015 7:58:27 GMT -5
Viz the opt out. If so, the deal would be 3 years, 95 million and we get a draft pick (or did the deal say we cant offer arb?)
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Nov 3, 2015 16:32:05 GMT -5
By the way, nobody is mentioning this, but it killed me that the booth was referring to this as brilliant by Hosmer. It wound up being so, but unless they scouted Duda's arm and knew there was a good chance he blows the throw, this should have been running into the last out at home to end the GAME. I guess it's a chance you take up 3-1, but still - ballsy, yes; brilliant? eh... On the same theory, they should have sent Gordon last year in the 7th game, knowing the throw would likely be off the mark quite a bit.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Oct 26, 2015 11:20:47 GMT -5
Pretty clear from the timing of this announcement that Ben lost out on the first base gig to Amaro.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Oct 24, 2015 20:49:05 GMT -5
It's not hard to see why Margot is ranked ahead of Benintendi at the moment, and it's also not hard to see Benintendi ultimately being the better player, too. I personally like Benintendi better as a prospect, but I have no problem with him being ranked behind Margot, who I also like. Your answer of Margot now, but Benintendi in the long term had me confused. If offered a premier pitcher, and the other team says 'which of the two would you give up" who do you pick? I would give up Margot, which is why I have Benintendi rated higher on my rankings.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Oct 24, 2015 19:58:30 GMT -5
Can we at least add "for 1st base coach" to the title, to save at least a couple of heart attacks.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Oct 19, 2015 12:23:49 GMT -5
At this time last year, Benintendi was not even listed in the top 100
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Oct 18, 2015 14:21:23 GMT -5
Just the sort of smug thing a Sox fan would say.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Oct 8, 2015 6:43:27 GMT -5
1. Yoan Moncada 2. Anderson Espinoza 3. Andrew Benintendi 4. Rafael Devers 5. Manuel Margot 6. Michael Kopech 7. Brian Johnson 8. Javier Guerra 9. Michael Chavis 10. Sam Travis 11. Logan Allen 12. Wendell Rijo 13. Pat Light 14. Nick Longhi 15. Williams Jerez 16. Devon Marrero 17. Yoan Aybar 18. Luis Alexander Basabe 19. Garin Cecchini 20. Roniel Raudes 21. Trey Ball 22. Mauricio Dubon 23. Teddy Stankiewicz 24. Jake Cosart 25. Marc Brakmen 26. Josh Okimkey 27. Luis Ysla 28. Luis Alejandro Basabe 29. Noe Ramirez 30. Victor Acosta 31. Edwin Escobar 32. Marco Hernandez 33. Ty Buttrey 34. Travis Lakins 35. Carlos Asuaje 36. Christopher Acosta 37. Jordan Procyshen 38. Austin Glorius 39. Gerson Bautista 40. Emmanuel DeJesus
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Oct 5, 2015 19:07:58 GMT -5
It's kind of surprising that Devers had a lower OPS than Moncada in Greenville, while hitting so many more doubles and more HR but Devers did have more AB. It is surprising nonetheless to me yet speaks well for Moncada. For all of his impressive stats. Rafael did not walk much at all. His profile is not that of.a free swinger, but his k/bb is a bit worrisome given how promising Almanzar was felled by a similar bad peripheral.
|
|