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 Matt Huegel on May 2, 2013 10:21:20 GMT -5
IMO, the only guy on your list who could get a promotion anytime soon is Coyle. Only issue there is Meneses, but they could figure something out.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on May 1, 2013 16:21:58 GMT -5
Barnes is getting all the love today, and rightfully so, but Chris Martin deserves a mention. After today, his stat line reads 1-0, 0.00ERA, 2S, 16.2IP, 8H, 0ER, .140BAA, 20K/5BB. Martin turns 27 in just over a month, yet, conveniently, there's no rush to promote him. I'm no scout, nor have I seen him pitch in person, but Boston could have a nice under the radar bullpen arm in Martin. He's not Rule 5 eligible for another 2 years, and has all 3 options intact. Last year, I remember reading that he could be on the fast track to the majors, so I'll be following his progression this season. For those who have seen him, would his stuff play up in the MLB? Pete Ruiz, too. He had another nice outing today. Both these guys could be competing for spots in the Boston bullpen - the big question is when. Ian talked about both these guys in the most recent Podcast. Said he believes they are both future major leaguers.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Apr 29, 2013 21:26:58 GMT -5
Come on, who would call him that? And why? What is the relationship between the player and this nickname? I don't see any, and I don't see any sense in it. Tell me why I am wrong. You're wrong because that's not the definition of offensive. It's just an old running joke. The fact that it's so inane is what makes it funny.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Apr 26, 2013 9:42:03 GMT -5
Well, I'm sure that's what he meant, but the phrase "the move does not count against the Sox's options on him" is still misleading.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Apr 25, 2013 16:38:18 GMT -5
"According to the ESPN article written by Joe McDonald, they did not use an option on the call up. Not that reporters have never been wrong..." They optioned him in March. Pretty sure he used up his 20 days already? Yeah, you're right. Mcdonald shows a lack of knowledge on the rule there. If you're on the 40-man and down in minors for more than 20 total days during a season, you burn that option year. Has nothing to do with the most recent call-up. You can find more info on that rule on the Wiki.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Apr 25, 2013 15:44:03 GMT -5
He has already his two this year and added muscle in the offseason. But really, he had 46 xbh last year (good) and already has 8 this year (better), and that's a larger sample showing he's driving the ball with authority. How many ultimately clear the fence in the majors assuming things continue on trajectory ... kind of a crap shoot. Yeah, I get that and am optimistic myself. My only point was that 15 home runs is a pretty nice projection for him, and that that is not his floor in terms of power.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Apr 25, 2013 15:16:16 GMT -5
If he continues to hit thru June, I certainly hope they move him up to Portland by the 4th of July. I'm sure people want to see more power (home runs), but as long as he's contributing in all phases of the game, and driving the ball to the gaps then I don't care about the HRs. They'll either come with physical maturity or they won't. Nothing wrong with a 15 hr hitter who bats over .300, gets on same and hits a bunch of doubles. I'm very anxious to see him vs legit competition in AA. Until then, we really only know what we already know: he's very good against young unpolished pitching. Right, of course. That's what you hope he grows into, with a ceiling of a 20 HR guy. The thing is, he hit four last year. I'm not saying it won't develop, or even that our scouts don't project it to, but there's still a big gap between four and 15, and he needs to prove the power is developing to that point before we can even assume he'll hit that many.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Apr 25, 2013 14:31:04 GMT -5
How is it that the short, up the middle defender leads the system in IsoP? Sean Coyle up to .405 IsoP after tonight. 57.1 XBH%. Is he going to fill out too much or will he be able to stay at second? Could he be a candidate to move to third at some point? Don't think the arm is there for third. I think it's pretty much second or bust with him, but from all accounts seems like he'll be able to handle the position short- and long-term
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Apr 24, 2013 14:37:24 GMT -5
Using that as a general outline of who is most likely to come in in important situations, I would put him between Wilson and Miller right now. In other words, all things being equal, Bard gets in an important inning over Wilson, but after all those other guys.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Apr 23, 2013 17:01:25 GMT -5
They play that between innings at McCoy. I had no idea that was players in it though, but then again I've never paid attention past the mascots dancing.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Apr 23, 2013 10:19:38 GMT -5
Why Ranaudo over Cuevas? Cuevas pitched as much and had better stats across the board other than G/F ration (and ERA if you really think that has meaning). Yeah, don't understand that either. I voted for Cuevas, although Workman made me pause. Cuevas got it because of the larger sample size.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Apr 18, 2013 12:39:04 GMT -5
Ian Cundall's at the game. I'm assuming he'll have something in his next Scouting Scratch on Rubby.
Also, the McCoy gun is fairly consistent but is a mph or two hot (assuming that's where Speier got his readings) so just keep that in mind.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Apr 16, 2013 14:19:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Mar 26, 2013 16:20:02 GMT -5
Yes, a "severe" left wrist strain on March 15. I don't think he's going to be ready to start the season.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Mar 5, 2013 16:47:15 GMT -5
The app works well. I have it on my iphone and I thought it was free, maybe I'm misremembering though.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Feb 22, 2013 10:14:57 GMT -5
There should be one up somewhat soon today. Real life gets in the way sometimes, but there'll definitely be one today.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Feb 21, 2013 17:49:18 GMT -5
Well its hard to do a study like this unless you are really into the draft or have great memory but as far as I can remember this guys were in the back-end or outside 1st round projections early on their draft years(I've been following the draft closely since 2007): Andrew Cashner, Matt Harvey(He was a top prospect out of HS but he had two tough years at UNC before turning a corner as a Jr), Hayden Simpson(Well he never ranked in the 1st round projections), Trevor Baue, Kyle Zimmer and Chris Stratton. I'm sure there are more and that I'm forgetting some of the guys just thought about these guys. Of recent Sox draftees I remember Reymond Fuentes was considered a late riser, and I think Casey Kelly was also.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Feb 18, 2013 18:08:57 GMT -5
Bradford wrote on why he's still on the team this morning. It's not as simple as whether his talent is worth the headache that comes with it. He also does bring some positive attributes to the table on the intangibles side. Also has an option left, which seems to get mentioned very infrequently. I'm guessing if he doesn't handle a reduced role in MLB well, demoting him might be about the same as cutting him in practice at this point. Otherwise, I would say he should project to open at Pawtucket. www.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/rob-bradford/2013/02/18/look-why-alfredo-aceves-still-red-sox
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Feb 18, 2013 12:09:19 GMT -5
I mean, you can go to the News page and click the "Prospect Previews" label anytime, and they're also all linked from the players' individual pages. I don't know what you mean by archive them in this thread.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Feb 16, 2013 12:19:45 GMT -5
I wrote on Workman after talking to him. He talked a little about the cutter. I know people that saw him last year thought it was a very important pitch for him in that it allowed him to get quick outs on the ground, and keep his pitch count down by not constantly having to go deep in counts. news.soxprospects.com/2013/01/workman-looking-to-build-on-breakout.html
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Feb 14, 2013 15:24:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Feb 9, 2013 11:39:43 GMT -5
Yeah the report is that he will only play SS, 3B, and DH in the WBC. I also heard Profar was out so he might play more short, but someone would have to confirm that on Profar.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Feb 7, 2013 14:10:51 GMT -5
Odd that he asked him about Cecchini but not Swihart. I would have liked to hear his opinion on throwing to him. Definitely a worthwhile read though.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Jan 31, 2013 11:33:09 GMT -5
Well yeah considering present 40 power translates to about 10-14 home runs, and he had 20 last year, it's just incorrect in the most basic way.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Jan 31, 2013 10:50:40 GMT -5
Even funnier: Rodriguez is due $29m in 2013, $26m in 2014, $22m in 2015, $21m in 2016, and $21m in 2017, and there's not a chance in hell his contract is voided. The only way the Yankees will be rid of that monstrosity of a contract is if he retires, and with his ego, I can't imagine that happening soon. Reporters have mentioned that if he retires because of his hips, the Yankees could at least collect insurance on the contract. That said, he'd probably still count against the CBT I'd think, as he'd still be getting paid. The Yankees could then use the insurance money to go past the CBT then, however. Heard that too. But it wouldn't be if he retired per se. I think he'd basically have to prove every year that he is unable to play because of injury, and of course the insurance companies would look to do everything to prove otherwise. Like you mention though, I don't think it would affect the CBT calculation so not sure what the full implications would be.
|
|
|