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 dcb26 on Feb 9, 2013 13:27:49 GMT -5
Honest question, does the organization have anything to gain by not giving him every chance to fail/succeed as a starter?
Maybe a bad start or two for the Sox, and pushing back the timetable for his permanent role, but if that's only a situational lefty/middle-relief guy, then isn't that a small price to pay compared to the chance he has some success as a starter?
This isn't really specific to Hernandez so much as a general thought on these types of situations.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Jan 3, 2013 9:27:44 GMT -5
lars anderson stunk in up with Columbus after the trade ..... coulda been content with Sands/Gomez/Salty ... a true improvise. like other teams do. Oh, James Loney was something else. Michael Almanzar Brock Holt is too short. Stephen Drew, no and there is no Brian Daubach when we need one. That was...strangely beautiful
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Dec 15, 2012 11:36:05 GMT -5
Well, so far the team hasn't been improved. I don't see how anyone can make a case that it has. All the signings have been for MLB experienced players but none make the team better. Victorino & Dempster fill a need but that's it. Ross & Gomes fill a Platoon/Bench role but that's it. Uehara is a confusing signing & adds little if anything at all that wasn't already available in the system. And Napoli ( if it goes through) will be awful defensively at 1B and is not the type of hitter this team needs in the middle of the order. I agree that the offseason is not done and more could come. But it doesn't look like there is an attempt being made to compete for this year. That's fine. Hold on to all the kids, let them develop in the Minors. It just seems odd that a team like Boston with all their resources wtite off any season so easily. As it stands now it will be a 70 - 78 win season & if everybody performs to their best ability the team could approach 82 maybe even 85. I'm not trying to be a jerk, this is a serious question, but are you saying that Napoli isn't better than Loney? That Gomes and Victorino aren't better than Podsednik and Kalish? That Ross isn't better than...nobody? That Dempster isn't better than Aaron Cook? If you want to say that the Sox could have been improved more than they have, I'm sure that's true, certainly for 2013 anyway (although I'm solidly in the "they aren't done yet" camp,) but to me all of these deals are the definition of improving the team.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Dec 8, 2012 16:04:43 GMT -5
Picking between these options, I'd rather see what's behind door number 3. Unless Lester and Buchholz both return/develop into top of the rotation starters, and closer to the #1 than the #2 starter version of top of the rotation, this team isn't going to compete with either Lohse or Dempster. May as well give Rubby or Webster a shot...... Agreed. I think Dempster is underrated by a lot of folks, but age and injuries are a serious concern. I'd prefer Edwin Jackson, Shaun Marcum, and Anibal Sanchez to Dempster or Lohse by far, even accounting for the fact that those latter two will be paid much less. Agree with your Agreed. I've thought all along that the FA market didn't offer what the Sox needed in terms of pitching, and the way it's shaping up is reinforcing that for me. At this point, a FA pitcher could still provide some value If the Sox think they need mid-back of the rotation depth, but if they want to really upgrade the rotation I think it's going to require a trade.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Dec 8, 2012 15:58:34 GMT -5
...Favorite Pick: Josh Fields (RHP, Houston Astros) – Many in the industry were surprised when Fields was not protected by the Red Sox. The 27-year-old right-hander finished the season strong by not allowing a run in 10 appearances with Triple-A Pawtucket and then continued to show well in the Arizona Fall League. His fastball-curveball combination is big-league ready and his command has improved to the point that he can hang with the big boys. He has a setup reliever ceiling and could pitch in that role by the end of the season. I know the "Fields should have been protected" argument has been made and hashed and rehashed several times, but I've been wondering lately about letting him walk and signing Uehara. If Fields comes anywhere close to what the quote says, then there's no way Uehara's worth more than an extra half a win, right? Is that worth letting Fields walk for, especially given the overall composition of the 2013 Sox? Granted that sounds like a perfect world scenario for Fields, and Uehara should still be better - and I like Uehara on the Sox - I'm not trying to say it was one or the other, but I'm not sure I see so great a difference that I would let Fields walk for nothing while signing Uehara for 4+ million.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Dec 4, 2012 19:46:35 GMT -5
Maybe I'm the only one, or one of few, but I love the way the Sox are approaching this offseason. What I see is a plan which focuses on holding on to prospects/young talent, addressing the weak spots on the roster without losing their financial flexibility and maintaining the ability to sign someone to a high-value contract should the right player emerge, and changing the culture of the team.
It looks to me like the Sox focused on the type of players they needed to bring in (versatile +defensive outfielder, reliable backup catching options, offensive players with good OBP skills etc) rather than getting stuck on any one individual player, and then went signed the players who best fit those needs.
I don't love deal Victorino got, I'm not sure I love the deals Gomes, Napoli, or Ross got, but they allowed the Sox to bring in the guys they wanted without sacrificing their salary room or young talent, and gained a lot of positional flexibility in the process.
I don't know, maybe I'm just desperate for some reason to feel good about this team, but I really like what I've seen so far, and it looks to me that what's happened so far is setting up additional moves that will follow.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Dec 3, 2012 21:42:19 GMT -5
MLB: 4 Red Sox: 5 ORG: 6 MISC: 4
Total: 19
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Nov 22, 2012 7:19:11 GMT -5
I would disappointed if the "significant payroll" BC added this offseason was to create platoons in right and left with veterans entering their 30s. In practical terms I agree, but if the Sox could find a couple of OF bats who hit RHP the way Gomes and Ross hit LHP, then yeah, I'd be OK with All-Star level production from both corner OF spots. It's rare that a team pulls off even 1 true platoon, never mind multiple positions, but if you can find the right bench guys, with the right splits and the necessary defensive versatility to be bench guys, you can build a hell of a team.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Nov 11, 2012 12:50:39 GMT -5
I would keep Sweeney and take my chances with Hazelbaker getting selected. Sweeney is an idea 4th outfielder and I don't think Hazelbaker would last the year on a roster with his inability to play CF and his high strikeout rate. I might also lose Ciriaco for De Jesus, but I hate Ciriaco with a passion (mostly because the one time I listened to EEI this year, it was filled with idiots wanting them to start Ciriaco at SS next year). Agree with all of this (aside from the hatred for Ciriaco, but I agree about the massively overrated part.) I'd still like to avoid losing Hill if at all possible, although that's partly sentimental I think - still, he's been untouchable at times. Also, Vazquez and Butler are quickly becoming redundant. I'd be fine with the Sox not protecting Butler if there's any chance Vazquez would be ready defensively to play in the majors in an emergency situation next year.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Nov 10, 2012 11:07:18 GMT -5
It's one of the reasons I prefer b-ref's version of WAR better than FanGraphs'. I think trying to use xFIP to calculate WAR misses the point. WAR is supposed to be a retroactive value calculation. "How many wins was R.A. Dickey worth above replacement in 2012," not "how many wins would R.A. Dickey have been worth above replacement in 2012 under standard temperature and pressure." Agree with you if you're using WAR to measure past success (this is why I included both WAR numbers) although I admit I kind-of still like plain old ERA for that. However, in this case, I'm not particularly concerned with what Dickey did in 2012, he was very good to great, no doubt. I'm more concerned with whether he will be able to do that again. Then there's the age thing. Even Wakefield was starting to show signs of breaking down by the time he hit 40, and he was lower stress and less reliant on his fastball than Dickey. Frankly, even if I'm wrong in everything else I've said, Dickey is a guy who's had his career year last year, driving up his value and making him a huge sell-high candidate. I just don't see giving up anything significant for a guy like that. If the Mets are shopping him, there's a reason why. If he were a free agent I'd be interested, but there's no way I would give up anything more than a fringe prospect for him
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Nov 9, 2012 21:12:47 GMT -5
I think you're collectively underrating Dickey significantly. If a non-knuckleballer had his recent success, this would require an Adrian Gonzalez-esque deal to acquire him. Dickey's WAR the past 3 years (his only successful seasons as a starter) are 2.8, 2.5, 4.6 (3.4, 3.1, 5.6 on b-ref.) In that time he's had K/9 over 6 once, and an xFIP under 3.75 once. He was good last year, but an Adrian Gonzalez deal? This sounds more like a good #3 pitcher to me - his numbers are roughly comparable to Edwin Jackson or Kuroda over that stretch. (Also, using WAR to support my point re: a pitcher. Is this how you feel all the time?)
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Nov 9, 2012 20:39:07 GMT -5
A veteran SS/Utility Infielder that can play SS everyday (like Mike Aviles) needs to be added to the roster and Iglesis 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" If the difference between the Red Sox being in rebuilding mode and being World Series contenders in 2013 was their SS hitting .200 vs. their SS hitting .250, I'd agree with you. It isn't. Iglesias hasn't proven he's a major league hitter, but he has proven what he is at the AAA level. if the Red Sox are convinced he's nothing mroe than AAAA filler than sure, stick him in Pawtucket. Otherwise, he needs to start until he proves he is not capable of being an everyday player (and this is from someone who is as down on Iglesias' bat as anyone.)
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Nov 9, 2012 8:03:48 GMT -5
For me it's the uncertainty of the knuckleball rather than how Dickey will age that makes me hesitate. I don't have a deep seated hatred of the pitch like some around here, but I have trouble believing in any sort of consistent elite production from a knuckleball.
Also, I think there's a legitimate chance the Red Sox could get Josh Johnson for a similar return to what you're discussing, and personally I'd rather take my chances on his health than Dickey's knuckleball.
Plus, I have to believe that where Dickey is pitching his home games has something to do with his success.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Nov 9, 2012 7:55:00 GMT -5
"Never trade away prospects" is an idea that gets tossed around a lot here, which I guess makes sense because this is a prospect-oriented site.
Realistically, this philosophy is, well, insane. I get that what people usually mean is "Never trade away prospects in stupid trades" but this idea that homegrown players will always turn out better than everyone else out there, and will always be more valuable if held on to, and especially this belief that they will always reach their developmental ceiling, it just isn't true.
Becoming too protective of homegrown talent is just as damaging as being too willing to part with it.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Nov 4, 2012 12:27:39 GMT -5
Curious what anybody thinks of BJ Upton, especially if Ross doesn't re-sign.
I've never been an Upton fan, but his power would certainly play well in Fenway, he's capable of being a great defender, and is a very good baserunner. His K-rates are awful, and he always posts low avg. and therefore low OBP, but his career ISOD is .081, which is respectable - he's not exactly an undisciplined hitter. Then of course there's questions about his attitude/makeup.
Personally I don't expect him to get a huge offer, he's overshadowed by Hamilton and his brother as far as potentially available outfielders, and if the Sox are going to spend on a FA outfielder, I'd much prefer Upton to Hamilton/Bourne/Ross/Swisher (as an OF)/whoever else is out there.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Oct 9, 2012 18:43:58 GMT -5
The thing with Farrell and compensation is, it's true there are other guys who could turn out to be the "right" manager at this point, but even if there are other equally capable candidates out there, if the Sox are sold that Farrell is a "right" manager, even if he's not the only "right" manager, then giving up some compensation is worth it.
My opinion changes if we are suddenly talking top prospects, but I think it's worth giving up a little bit to be certain they're getting the guy they think is in the best position to succeed, rather than picking up someone else free of compensation cost and hoping they're just as capable of that success.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Oct 2, 2012 20:00:20 GMT -5
The other side of this conversation is the downside to NOT playing Iglesias in 2013. Aviles and Ciriaco are not long term answers. There is no one else within the organization ready to step in at the position. So the alternatives to Iglesias are either playing someone who is unlikely to provide upside, or pay for a replacement either through free agency or trade. This I absolutely agree with, and it's the main reason why I'm in favor of Iglesias next year, although I would certainly investigate other SS if they are available. Too much of the rest of what I'm reading here just sounds like overly hopeful optimism though. This year is simply too small a sample size to make any kind of statistical analysis on Iglesias based on his time in the majors. The way his WAR/defenensive numbers are being thrown around is like taking the "12 homers in 80 AB" guy, and then trying to make a "fair" projection for him by saying " look, even if you cut his HR in HALF, he's still gonna hit 45 next year!"
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Sept 30, 2012 10:01:59 GMT -5
But if there's a MarkTeixeira deal out there for Ellsbury or (yes even) Pedroia out there this winter, they really need to take it. This I agree with. In absence of any other factors, sure, you might as well make the team better for next year than for a couple years down the road, but the focus has to be on some kind of long-term plan (remember when we used to hear about the Sox' long term plan back in 04-07?) Specific to Ellsbury, it's easy to say that the Sox should keep him for now and move him at the deadline if it doesn't look like he'll re-sign, but really here's the possible scenarios if the Sox keep Ellsbury this winter: Ellsbury re-signs in Boston - seems highly unlikely, but sure Ellsbury has a good year, the Sox have a good year - You can't trade the best player on a contender at the deadline, so the best the Sox could hope to get back is a draft pick (and I think Ellsbury has a lot more value in a trade than the equivalent of a compensation pick) Ellsbury has a bad year, the Sox have a good year - Sure, trade him, but what are the Sox going to get back? Ellsbury has a good year, the Sox have a bad year - Trade him, but is the reduced return for Ellsbury being moved at the deadline vs. in the offseason worth his contributions to a team that isn't going anywhere? Ellsbury has a terrible year, Sox have a terrible year - shit sandwich Everyone and everything is average - Do the Sox move him or not? If they do they won't get too much of a return, but is the team good enough to hope it, and Ellsbury, both catch fire in the 2nd half? (This is, I imagine, the most likely scenario if the Sox keep Ellsbury this winter.) For me, if there's a good deal out there for him this winter, I take it, unless I/the Sox truly expect Ellsbury to return to 2011 form and truly expect him to sign in Boston
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Sept 25, 2012 21:58:12 GMT -5
I tend to agree with elguapo's point, I can't think of too many guys with the mix of stuff and positive results that Huntzinger/Fields/Olmsted have that have been unprotected. There have been plenty of Beau Vaughans with nice numbers but minor-league quality stuff, and a number of guys with good arms who never had much success, but, in an admittedly small sample, all 3 of the pitchers listed above tend to stand out (at least for me) from most of the other relief pitchers to come through the upper minors in recent years.
I seriously doubt all 3 of those guys are in the org. next season, but I'd be a little disappointed to lose even 1 for absolutely no return.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Sept 25, 2012 19:11:49 GMT -5
I would just like to point out that Mauro is hitting with the same line as Hosmer did last year. Mauro 292 BA, 333 OBP, 449 SLG Hosmer (last year) 293 BA, 334 OBP, 465 SLG ... Adrian Gonzalez is not giving the Dodgers value right now and Mauro is by far outhitting him in the small sample size. Gonzalez w/ Dodgers 255 BA, 308 OBP, 427 SLG Now that's a far cry from his career norms at 293 BA, 370 OBP, 507 SLG... but even those numbers don't show a huge number of wins over Mauro as a starting first baseman offensively. Now I'm not saying that Mauro is anywhere close to Gonzo as an all around player, but he is certainly overlooked by the fans here and undervalued in general. Patrmac04, with all due respect, are you suggesting that Mauro Gomez is, or is nearly, the equal of Eric Hosmer and/or Adrian Gonzalez? I mean, I see your last line there, but I guess I'm not getting what the point is then. This is a 96 PA sample from Gomez, who had a career year in AAA, and for the first time in 7 years of pro ball is playing in the majors, in a platoon situation. I don't see how there's any statistical argument that puts Gomez even close to either of those players
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Sept 24, 2012 18:27:43 GMT -5
I guess I shouldn't be surprised given the whole point of the thread, but it would be nice if this could be somewhat grounded in reality and not yet another thread that devolves into everybody naming that-guy-they've-always-wanted-to-watch-hit-at-Fenway and then explaining (I'm assuming because this is a prospect site) why said player's .699 wOBA shouldn't cost more than the 3rd best starter in Portland.
Anyway, I'm all for in-house/cheap options next year. I'd rather spend the money/prospects to acquire offense at a more premium position than to try to find the best hitting 1B out there to replace the last best hitting 1B out there that we had.
In the free agent market, Napoli or Swisher make a lot of sense (and damn that hurts, because I can't stand Swisher) but they both have power, OBP, positional flexibility, can hit right handed, and I don't see either one commanding a ton of money - I'm guessing roughly Cody Ross money. If he could be gotten on a 1-yr deal, I'd check out Berkman as well.
I'm not certain though that the Sox wouldn't be better off giving Gomez/Sands/some other Org. guy a shot though.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Sept 20, 2012 8:43:07 GMT -5
Hernandez is an interesting case, I've always felt that minor league stats were next to useless for evaluating a player's major league future, but I also feel like it's a mistake to take a guy who's put up very good-great stats at every level and not give them a chance.
I would hope that, at the very least, the Sox give Hernandez a long look as a starter in spring training before they move him to the 'pen.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Sept 18, 2012 19:12:29 GMT -5
None of that really explains why the Red Sox wouldn't be better off with Edwin Jackson on a 2-3 year deal. Yeah, I mean, getting a pitcher who's better than the best pitcher in your rotation is great, but getting a pitcher who's better than the worst pitcher in your rotation is still an upgrade.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Sept 16, 2012 10:59:37 GMT -5
1. Xander Bogaerts 2. Jackie Bradley Jr. 3. Matt Barnes 4. Allen Webster 5. Henry Owens 6. Blake Swihart 7. Garin Cecchini 8. Bryce Brentz 9. Jose Iglesias 10. Anthony Ranaudo 11. Drake Britton 12. Brandon Workman 13. Brandon Jacobs 14. Stolmy Pimentel 15. Keury De La Cruz 16. Jose Vinicio 17. Brian Johnson 18. Deven Marrero 19. Travis Shaw 20. Alex Wilson 21. Ty Buttrey 22. Mauro Gomez 23. Jeremy Hazelbaker 24. Tzu-Wei Lin 25. Pat Light 26. Cody Kukuk 27. Juan Carlos Linares 28. Sean Coyle 29. Ivan De Jesus 30. Chris Carpenter 31. Chris Hernandez 32. Josh Fields 33. Che-Hsuan Lin 34. Mickey Pena 35. Christian Vazquez 36. Jamie Callahan 37. Dan Butler 38. Aaron Kurcz 39. Brock Huntzinger 40. Michael Almanzar
|
|
|