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 brendan98 on Jun 6, 2013 9:04:26 GMT -5
why is this guy still wasting time in Portland? I don't think it's wasting time. He is refining his approach against pitchers of high stuff. Right now, it certainly appears that Xander is getting better every day, don’t think there is a whole lot of reason to mess with that at the moment, isn’t that what you want for him developmentally? If he keeps putting up video game numbers through June, than the Red Sox probably don’t have any choice than to promote him, but right now I would chalk this up to a super talented player getting ridiculously hot, rather than the level of competition not being adequate.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Jun 5, 2013 15:26:01 GMT -5
As a HS hitting coach, I can tell you that it is pretty rare to find any HS player who has a whole lot of ability hitting breaking balls. Most HS coaches are telling kids to look for the fastball and hit it, and while we work on hitting the breaking ball, we want our kids hitting the fastball as much as possible. Several of the posters have (correctly) pointed out, that Frazier's elite bat speed will be beneficial to him when learning to hit a breaking ball, the longer you can stay back as a hitter and let the ball travel deeper into the zone (pick up spin and location), the better chance you have to put a good swing on a breaking ball. Frazier's bat speed will at least give him an advantage as he begins to see lots of different offerings from professional pitching, no guarantee he will be able to make the adjustment, but assuming he is coachable, it should not be any more of an issue than it is for any other player. That bat speed is not coachable however, and it is very impressive.
The way I see it, since the Red Sox very rarely pick in the top 10 in the draft, they should be looking to add an impact player with the 7th selection. Aside from Appel, Gray and Bryant, who I am assuming will be #1, #2 & #3 in this draft, my preference for the Sox is either Stewart or Frazier, and while it seems I am probably in the minority, I actually have them even (4a and 4b). To me they both have an extaordinary ceiling, but also a potentially significant development path, sometimes in order to hit it big, you have to gamble a little, and I think Stewart and Frazier are the Sox best bets to get that ace starter or 5 tool outfielder.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Apr 25, 2013 8:50:39 GMT -5
[/quote]Wow. I didn't know YouTube allowed porn. [/quote]
Great line!! Sorry, but I may have to use it.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Apr 24, 2013 10:46:32 GMT -5
I think he has top of the rotation stuff, but is held back a little bit by fringy command. By that, I do not mean that he is going to walk too many hitters, rather that if he is missing his locations in the MLB he might not live up to the top of the rotation stuff.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Apr 23, 2013 16:24:05 GMT -5
From what I saw early last year, it is highly unlikely he sticks at 3B. I guess it is possible to make dramatic improvement at the position, but I think it doubtful.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Apr 23, 2013 12:47:59 GMT -5
I don't see why he should be considered a late bloomer at 22 in AA. Probably wrong choice of words, better to call him slow to develop. I agree that at 22 in AA he is in a pretty good spot in his development if his future development is at a more normal pace (closer to 1 level per season).
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Apr 23, 2013 10:08:33 GMT -5
So Michael Almanzar has become mostly an afterthought in the hierarchy of Red Sox prospects, long gone is the excitement of the 17 year old, with the frame and the bloodlines, who received the $1.5 M signing bonus back in 2007. Almanzar’s progression has been slow, and his stats were underwhelming in his first four pro seasons, and after posting an awful .578 & .469 OPS in a 2011 season split between Greenville & Salem respectively, it appeared an almost certainty that Almanzar was a bust.
Then out of nowhere, Almanzar posts a .300/.353/.458 season in 2012, with a much improved walk to strikeout ratio and lower strikeout rate. So the Sox send him to the AFL and he struggles badly, and I think the organization must be wondering what they have in this guy. Despite the poor AFL performance, Almanzar is sent to AA for the first time for the 2013 season, and one could easily make an argument that he has been the most impressive Red Sox positional prospect so far this year, albeit in a SSS. So far this year, Almanzar is sporting a 1.001 OPS.
What is it that the Sox have in Almanzar? Is he a late bloomer, or an enigma?
His numbers seem to indicate that he has developed a better approach at the plate since last season. Could it be as simple as a young player finally beginning to slow the game down in his head, letting his talent begin to show?
If this is the real Michael Almanzar, and he is about to push for a MLB job in the next couple of years, he is almost certain to move off 3B. I saw him play the position early last season, and although it was just 2 games, he was awful defensively, so bad I even question his ability to handle 1B adequately, although I’d have to think that he could become at least average at the position with some work.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Apr 17, 2013 21:06:59 GMT -5
So Shaw is ranked #27 on this site, and I understand that despite having some pretty good numbers in the minor leagues the last couple of years, that he is viewed as a fringe prospect because of his (lack of) tools. Anyhow, for whatever reason I like Shaw as a prospect, and am curious to know what it would take production wise, for him to be considered a legit prospect, or is it more a tools thing than a production thing. His writeup on the site indicates Shaw can be a little long with his swing and speculates that his batspeed will be tested in the upper minors. Would AA pitching be a good indicator, and might a successful AA season as a 23 year old (turned 23 yesterday), indicate that Shaw has enough upside to be in consideration as the Sox 1B of the future?
Love Shaw's 124 BB versus 172 K as a professional ballplayer, and he has also posted solid XBH numbers.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Apr 10, 2013 8:56:32 GMT -5
Drew and Bailey (Motte may be heading for Tommy John) for Matt Adams?
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Mar 19, 2013 9:44:37 GMT -5
In my opinion, you send JBJ down to Pawtucket, and let him tear it up like Middlebrooks did last year, it doesn't have to be the entire month of April (like WMB), but you should quickly be able to see if JBJ doesn't have a lot to learn from AAA, or if he needs to spend more time there, if it is the former, call him up 4/12.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Mar 15, 2013 10:44:36 GMT -5
Saying that service time should not be a factor in whether or not JBJ breaks camp with the big league club, is a foolish statement. Per WEEI (Bradford and Speier), because of his non 40 man roster status, if JBJ is with the Sox prior to April 12 and stays on the big league roster, he would be eligible for free agency after the 2018 season, if he was called up April 12 or later he would not be eligible for free agency until after 2019. Quite simply put, it would be an extremely poor business decision to take the chance that Bradley would become a free agent a year earlier, so he can play in the first 9 games of this season. I like JBJ as a prospect, I think he will be our leadoff hitter and center fielder for years to come, but we should be able to wait a week and a half for it to begin, rather than risk losing him a full season earlier.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Feb 27, 2013 15:40:29 GMT -5
So Ben Cherington traded a bunch of Salary and got back two main prospects, one of them has the ceiling and closest comp. of Kevin Brown? The other has the ceiling and closest comp. of Pedro Martinez? Uhh, doesn't this say a lot about the way we're thinking 6 games into spring training? I guess Barnes's ceiling is Roger Clemens and Xander's ceiling is A-rod then! And I forgot that Jackie Bradley's ceiling is probably Willy Mayes, Maggie in the globe had it right... This system is stacked! Yeah , but none of these guys makes up for the loss of Michael Olmsted! TIC
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Feb 15, 2013 10:08:50 GMT -5
Davidson sounds like a RH version of Travis Shaw to me.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Jan 3, 2013 11:14:57 GMT -5
Am I the only one who sees a long swing watching Cecchini, I do not see any mention of it on his player page, but he does not get enough separation between his lower half and upper half, which causes his hands to commit early, and is almost certainly the reason behind his struggles vs LHP. It is not a terribly difficult adjustment to fix it (I've helped plenty of HS kids with the exact same issue) but it is somewhat concerning that it has not been addressed up to this point, especially with him coming from a baseball family, I would have thought his father would have corrected it long ago.
|
|
|
Ethier
Dec 18, 2012 10:22:16 GMT -5
Post by brendan98 on Dec 18, 2012 10:22:16 GMT -5
Just saw a report that the Dodgers are considering trading Andre Ethier. He is making big $$$, $85M over the next 5 years, not sure he fits into what the Sox are trying to do, and I am guessing the Dodgers will be looking for good prospects and not a salary dump. He would be a great platoon partner to go with Gomes, as his splits against lefties are even more extreme than Gomes' against righties, but it would be an awful expensive platoon as well.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Dec 17, 2012 10:00:21 GMT -5
I like this signing too, every year, you see the smart small market clubs load up on middle relievers and players looking to re-establish their value, on short term contracts, and then trading those guys at the deadline for good pieces if they fall out of contention. If Drew returns to pre-injury form, he could net the Sox a very good prospect during the season, or a draft pick when the season is over.
As for Iglesias, it will be interesting to see how he takes this setback, does he come to spring training with something to prove, or does he let this negatively affect his play, will be interesting to watch.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Nov 20, 2012 13:49:15 GMT -5
I didn't have much use for the Newman's article, however the video that accompanied the article was somewhat disturbing to me. Cecchini's player profile on this site says that he has excellent bat speed, but it certainly does not show up on the video, I might not even call it average bat speed on the video, and for those that have suggested Cecchini could eventually make WMB a first baseman or trade bait, I'd argue it's not very likely with that swing.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Nov 9, 2012 20:22:32 GMT -5
A veteran SS/Utility Infielder that can play SS everyday (like Mike Aviles) needs to be added to the roster and Iglesias should compete for the starting job during spring training but if all he does is what he did last year (in the Majors & Minors) he should be sent back to AAA. He has not shown that he deserves to get the opening day assignment or "250 ABs out of the gate Pedro style" It amazes me that you place so little value on the once in a generation defensive talent that Jose Iglesias has. A baseball players value is not limited to how good he is offensively. Defense is actually a very critical part of the game, and every out a defensive player makes contributes to saving runs, without going into the defensive metrics for Iglesias (which honestly isn't my thing), I can still tell you without a doubt that Iglesias will save many, many runs compared to Aviles (or your average SS). A run saved is as valuable as a run scored, ask a pitcher on the team and they will tell you more valuable. I am not sure anyone has a real solid grasp of just how many runs Iglesias will save with his defense, maybe I am wrong in my thinking that defensive metrics is a largely speculative statistic, but from years of coaching I can tell you that every out you get to shorten a game is valuable, and Jose Iglesias is quite possibly the best defensive player in baseball at possibly the most critical defensive position. I guarantee you that if you ask the Red Sox pitchers who they think should be the Red Sox starting SS next year, Iglesias would be the unanimous choice.
|
|
|
Salty
Nov 9, 2012 12:01:57 GMT -5
Post by brendan98 on Nov 9, 2012 12:01:57 GMT -5
I'd really like to know what everyone thinks about this guy, he had a few big HR's this past year, and I was actually a little optimistic about him during the 1st half, but he fell off a cliff in the summer months, and his .288 OBP for the season (for the 2nd year in a row, BTW) is really hard to swallow. IMO, he is an average to below average defensive catcher, in taking all aspects under consideration (blocking, throwing, calling a game). As far as I am concerned, the only reason Salty has any value at all is that he has good power at an offensively deficient position.
If the Sox go with Salty at C in 2013, I think we know pretty well what we will get, and I would rather see the Sox give Lavarnway a full season of starts to see if he can be better.
I guess another question I have is, due to the lack of talent at the C position, does Salty have trade value? I'd rather have a strong defensive C, with minimal offense, than a weaker defensive C, with mid 20 HR power but abysmal on base skills.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Nov 5, 2012 15:33:47 GMT -5
Why do so many posters talk about Middlebrooks as if he is a finished product. WMB has improved in each of his professional seasons, he flew through the AA level playing only 96 games in Portland, and then topped that by needing only 40 games in AAA before making the jump to Boston. With less than a full season of games played above the A ball level, one would think Middlebrooks would have struggled facing MLB pitching, but an .835 OPS is hardly a struggle, and while some argue that his plate discipline will catch up with him, I'd argue back, that pitchers made some adjustments on Will last year, and he figured out what they were doing and made the adjustments he had to in order to overcome. WMB has very little experience at upper levels, and I believe he can continue to get better as he plays and continues to learn, I see no reason he can't maintain or improve upon his rookie OPS.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Nov 5, 2012 8:54:15 GMT -5
The pen is not the biggest area of need right now but any chance the Sox pursure Joakim Soria? Coming off injuries he might come cheap and be a good buy low candidate. Soria has long been mentioned as an ideal candidate to be a starter, as he has 4 quality pitches. Coming off surgery might not be the ideal time for a conversion, but Soria will not sign with the Sox to be a setup man, so it would have to be as the closer or offer him a chance to start.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Nov 1, 2012 14:42:18 GMT -5
I would not trade Middlebrooks for Wright straight up, let alone throw in a top pitching prospect.
Middlebrooks just turned 24, and has less than a year of service time, Wright is a soon to be 30 year old, 1 year away from free agency. Thanks, but no thanks.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Oct 31, 2012 18:56:23 GMT -5
That makes little sense. WMB has all the makings of an all-around above average 3B, and Xander at SS would be Tulowitskian. You wanna mess all that up so we can get a FIRST BASEMAN, which is the easiest position to fill while we have Iglesias OPSing .000? Agreed. IF WMB gets moved it would be to make room for either Bogaerts or Cechini (who I really like - high OBP, etc) and to fetch some badly needed pitching. Of course that's down the road. The Sox need WBM now and he needs to establish his value. The Sox need more quality players, and trading Middlebrooks make little sense, unless they are able to fill the holes they have all over the field first. Trading Middlebrooks so that Xander can play 3B makes no sense if we are still looking for long term options at the corner OF spots, and 1B. Now if we can fill those holes adequately, and acquire a good arm or two, them that is a different story, but that is a lot to speculate at this point. I think it makes sense to at least consider a future with Middlebrooks, Bogaerts, and Iglesias all in the lineup, because it may give the Sox the best chance to win going forward.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Oct 31, 2012 12:18:45 GMT -5
Surely we'll have a better idea where things stand in a year -- Best case, Middlebrooks and Iglesias have strong years and one becomes a heck of a trade chip depending on how Bogaerts' fielding looks at SS. While I understand the thought process with this thinking, I have a hard time agreeing with it. "The Trade" did a pretty nice job of purging the roster of overpaid, underperforming veterans who were on the wrong side of 30, though some still remain. Despite that, the roster has more questions, than solid answers at this point. To me Middlebrooks and Iglesias are part of the building process, not trade chips. It does appear that Xander can be an impact player, one that the Sox could sorely use, but it does not make sense to me that we should view Iglesias or Middlebrooks as spare parts just because we have to have a position for Xander. Xander's value is primarily in his offensive ability, Iglesias value is primarily in his defensive ability, and Middlebrooks is a little of both, based upon that I do not think it is viable to move Iglesias or Middlebrooks for Xander, especially since the Sox have short and long term needs at 1B and the corner OF positions, which could conceivably be positions where Xander could project to be above average defensively in the future, unlike SS or 3B.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Oct 22, 2012 8:07:59 GMT -5
It's a crazy thought and certainly would be unprecedented but does anybody think that the Sox could make a trade with the Yankees for A Rod getting them to pay half ( or more ) of his remaining contract and have A Rod play 1B? Crazy huh? It wouldn't be crazy. It would be downright stupid. The Yanks would love for somebody to take A-Rod off their hands and pay any if not half the freight. Think about it. He's 38, declining, and has red-flags beyond the game to put it mildly. His contract runs thru 2017. Do you really want to pay a portion (half?) of his contract when he's ages 38 - 42? And have him hit as a 1b, a position he's never played, and which is supposed to have great production, which you won't get out of a 38 year old A-Rod, let alone a 42 year old A-Rod. Why in the world would the Sox EVER do this? Do you feel that Lucchino thinks the Sox need A-Rod's "marketability"? C'mon. The Sox don't need a washed up name. They need good young players to develop, some smart free agent signings and some astute deals. A-Rod would be neither of the three. Agreed 100%. Hopefully nobody lets the Yankees off the hook for this albatross of a contract, and the Yanks have to live with it for years to come.
|
|
|