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 James Dunne on Apr 5, 2024 10:02:45 GMT -5
Kind of a bummer to me seeing Yorke drop to 11, not that I disagree with it but I still think he can be a solid ML 2nd baseman. Repeating AA after a full season isn't the greatest of signs even if part of it might be related to Grissom going to be there when his rehab assignment starts up. Hopefully Yorke can get some momentum back this season. Feels to me less like Yorke dropped than the system got deeper above him. I'm good with that. It's a little of both. Cespedes and Fitts have moved up, but you'll also note that we lowered Yorke's ceiling grade.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Apr 4, 2024 15:20:02 GMT -5
How shocked would anyone be if the pitchers starting for the Red Sox in this series were the three best pitchers at the end of the Season? Shocked would be much too strong of a word, but yes I would be at least surprised if all three of them turned out to be better than Pivetta and Bello.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Apr 4, 2024 15:07:16 GMT -5
Watched both angles in the embedded video - in the first clip where they switch cameras my median was 4.78, second one which stays with the overhead view it was 5.01... so I think there actually may be a 1/4 second difference between cameras.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Apr 4, 2024 14:03:06 GMT -5
"There's a lot to be said for nowhere."
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Apr 4, 2024 12:52:47 GMT -5
I was blown away by this. I had never considered Chicago to be a great guitarist band but whoa... ADD: I was curious so I Googled it: What did Hendrix say about Kath? Like pretty much everyone who came to see the band perform, Hendrix was mesmerised by Kath's guitar playing, going so far as to claim that he thought the Chicago guitarist played six strings better than he did, naming Kath the “best guitarist in the universe”. High praise indeed. It is pretty jarring to hear Chicago's early stuff, which is pretty rockin' and inventive, lined up against schlocky garbage like "You're the Inspiration." Ugh.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Apr 4, 2024 11:02:00 GMT -5
Maybe Worcester will get a window tomorrow, but I'm not liking Portland's chances.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Apr 3, 2024 13:12:16 GMT -5
Indeed. While the Frinkiac post did immediately follow yours, it was not meant as a response to that but rather to some of the rest of the discussion speaking more broadly about the type of players the team should be looking at (including at least one response about why Wiggins wasn't a fit specifically because of type).
Again, this is probably a bit a bit reductive, but: Good: Identifying the player who is good, and speaking about the traits that make that player good, traits which will almost inevitably fit a type; Bad: Identifying the type of player you like and then finding players who fit that.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Apr 3, 2024 11:06:55 GMT -5
]Given the recently draft and development history, and how Breslow has already mentioned a desire to infuse the system with pitching talent, I agree with all of this. I understand the general principle of Player> Profile, I just don't fully agree with that as I would with the "best player available" axiom. Player profiles generally are tied to bonus potential, and teams are certainly considering that as part of their draft process. If you find a player that carries conviction from the scouting staff and fits a profile you can reasonably accommodate from a bonus standpoint, then how is the profile not part of the criteria which helps you stack your draft board? NC State C Jake Cozart would be a great pick in the 1st round IMO. Profile wise, they took a similar player in Teel in a similar spot last year. Would the profile over player warrant any discussions in this case? That's a specific player, though. You're not talking about Cozart as an abstraction, you're talking about him as a baseball player who is really good. That's a big difference than saying "the Red Sox should target a catcher" and THEN landing on Cozart, which is a wrong approach. Best player doesn't mean ignoring the profile entirely, it means that you don't lead with a profile to narrow down your pick. Like, if one guy is a better hitter and a first baseman only, and the other guy is a shortstop with a broader range of skills, you may determine that the second guy is better. But if you go in thinking "you need to draft a shortstop with a broad range of skills" then you miss a Tristan Casas, who wouldn't necessarily fit a standard exciting profile (other than being really good at hitting). I'll also say this - if the way you grade players means that you're never landing on pitchers (which is what's happened with the Red Sox in the last several seasons), then that needs to be re-evaluated as well. But even still, the above post about how the Red Sox needs to specifically target high-velocity pitchers in rounds two and three... that's MUCH too profile-focuses, specific, and limiting.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Apr 3, 2024 10:42:46 GMT -5
The Red Sox have a 92 wRC+, .106 ISO, and 27.6% K Rate. They’ve faced some great pitching aside from game 5 so it’s not a big concern, but I would love to see them mash long ball prone Ross Stripling today. Casas, Story, Yoshida, Abreu, Rafaela, Wong (among others) are currently on pace for 0 home runs, which is a concern if it holds all season. Story's on pace for 82 doubles though!
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Apr 3, 2024 8:55:29 GMT -5
You cannot take his glove out of the lineup. The Sox likely lose last night if Rafaela is not in CF to make that catch in the 11th. If all else is equal, another guy might not make that catch. But maybe another guy doesn't pop out with the bases loaded in the third, and then pop out again swinging at the first pitch right after Casas walks in the sixth, and then hit soft lineout to shortstop trying to pull an outside changeup with the bases loaded in the 7th. Now that Rafaela is a decent-but-flawed major leaguer rather than a blank-slate prospect, the frustrating parts of his game are going to come to the surface. And there are frustrating parts of his game. Obviously we need to be patient here, but the worries that people are expressing here aren't new, they're the concerns some people had with him as he came through the system and then again last September.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Apr 2, 2024 12:56:57 GMT -5
I’m always amazed when guys just lose it. He was a pretty good player who looked like he could get even better and instead… all ip in smoke. In one of his baseball abstracts, Bill James said the average age for players reaching that cliff was 32, which was a lot younger that I thought it would be because of all the exceptional stars that played so much longer. Benintendi's still only 29 though. He fell off one cliff at like 24 and the next one at 28. Without injuries involved, that's always surprising.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Apr 2, 2024 12:52:37 GMT -5
You just hope that it doesn't ruin Rafaela's long-term development. This isn't a situation where he's getting called up from Class A, or, say, trying to ramp back in six weeks after spending four years in the military. If a month or so at a level too high "ruins" his development, then his development was too easily ruin-able for him to be an impact player.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Apr 2, 2024 9:32:38 GMT -5
the CHW game was delayed in the bottom of the 8th because the 1st base coach was MIA,,, Did I miss something? Beyond the missing coach, why is the rest of the stadium empty? Because the White Sox were losing 9-0 in the 8th inning and it was 43 degrees and raining.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Apr 2, 2024 9:03:49 GMT -5
While four games are not meaningful, the combination of a 63.3% swing rate combined with just a 65.8% contact rate (and even moreso the 72.2% contact rate in the strike zone) are, uhhh, definitely not going to calm the skeptics.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Apr 2, 2024 7:53:36 GMT -5
After having no spring training, Snell is apparently going to make his season debut on Monday with just two simulated games under his belt, one against AA hitters. It'll be interesting to see how that goes. Speaking of pitchers who obviously held out way too long in free agency, I see Clevinger's deal with the White Sox was for 1/3. Fangraphs crowdsource predicted 2/24; MLBTR had 2/26. Teams must have hated the under-the-hood numbers on him, but still, even Severino got 1/13.
Obviously every pitcher is different, but I just don't think this is the issue it would have been 40 or even 20 years ago. Players know what they have to do to ramp up. As far as Clevinger, I feel like that's also a sign that his off-field BS is worse than we realize and a lot of teams just didn't feel like dealing with it.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Apr 1, 2024 14:55:32 GMT -5
There is no room for nuance in this logic, even in this day and age? College players are moving faster, and the system + current 40-man roster gives good short and long term coverage at most positions, if not all of them. If ever there was a time for a team to prioritize a position, this would appear to be it. Not to mention it’s a great opportunity for Breslow and co. to infuse arms they personally ID’d, rather than the arms left over by their predecessor. Now, if Santucci is best arm available at 12 and they have him graded as a late first, I get not reaching too much for an arm. But assuming they have arms they like somewhat close to best player available, I’d hope they prioritize pitching every time. Outright rejecting a player because he doesn't fit a type is a bad method, especially with the first-round pick. There's a big leap between "the Red Sox have abandoned pitching in the draft and need to do a better job balancing that" and a few of the above posts with VERY particular specifications of the type of pitcher the Red Sox should be targeting.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Apr 1, 2024 13:29:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Mar 29, 2024 20:20:39 GMT -5
Well that was quite the ending. Ooof.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Mar 29, 2024 18:49:50 GMT -5
Yesterday's game (early season, on road, close game, bullpen "rested") was the exact type of situation where it makes sense to use multiple relievers, including the high-leverage ones, in short stints. Also, it worked. It is baffling to me that people have an issue with it.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Mar 29, 2024 17:57:50 GMT -5
Say, what's up with Brandon Belt? He had a really good season last year (albeit with some worrisome peripherals), FG crowdsource projection 1/9.5, and as near as I can tell there aren't even any rumors about his potentially signing with a team. Same question re: Clevinger but I do recall at least a couple rumors with him.
Belt was bad in 2022 and his strikeout rate got significantly worse last year, up to 34.9% (career 24.6%). He got bailed out by a .370 BABIP, but nobody's paying that kind of money for a DH/1B to flip around that kind of regression at 35. He still puts up professional ABs and there might be enough power there for him to deliver like a .230/.340/.440, but it's not a profile that teams have been valuing. I actually think a decent, above-average hitter is a much better use of the DH spot than a mix-and-match approach that many teams seem to be using now, but that's just not the reality of how rosters are being put together right now.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Mar 29, 2024 8:54:57 GMT -5
Yesyesyesyesyesyesyesyesyesyesyesyesyes
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Mar 28, 2024 12:02:28 GMT -5
Wait, why did we add him to the 40? Was he already on the Rays 40? They just signed him to a minor league deal though, I don't get why he would've been added at any point Because he had an upward mobility clause (similar to an opt out, except for the 40-man roster rather than 26-man). The Rays only had him on a minor league deal so that they had spring training to figure out the 40-man situation.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Mar 26, 2024 22:48:32 GMT -5
Accounting for situation, that's one of the worst deals I've ever seen a guy get in free agency. At least with Snell, if he puts up a big season then he's answered some of those consistency questions and he's freed himself from the QO. He'd be up for a potentially bigger payday. But Montgomery? Hard to see any situation where he's more in demand than he was this winter.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Mar 26, 2024 19:32:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Mar 26, 2024 12:37:51 GMT -5
Excited to see what Bleis can do this year, here's to hoping for a big bounce back. I kind of like this quote “I’m limiting my expectations this year,” Bleis said. “I went into last year with a lot of expectations and then look what happened. So this year I’m going in just focused on staying healthy and playing well and spending the whole year hoping to show people what I can do.” Sounds like he's got a pretty good head on his shoulders and wants to just get back to playing ball, I think if he keeps that type of mindset with his tools he'll be A-Okay. I don't know if we should expect him to come out the gates hot in fact we probably should expect some early season troubles. By the end of the year if he stays healthy his tools will start to play loud again and the sky will be the limit though. I wonder if the shoulder subluxation wasn't something which was already an issue before he was shut down and had surgery? Similar to what was the case with Mayer trying to play through an injury perhaps leading to poor results. It was definitely already bothering him during that week he came back and went 1 for 18, which really tanked his line. He hadn't been lighting the world afire in April, but he'd been decent enough for a guy in his first full-season league.
|
|
|