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 ctfisher on Aug 10, 2015 11:08:07 GMT -5
He'll start next year in Salem whether he gets promoted or not. Complaining about a 3week promotion is silly Probably, but it couldn't hurt to get him some exposure to more advanced pitching for a few weeks. They've also been oddly conservative all year with promotions: don't get why Moncada wasn't moved to Salem a couple weeks ago
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Aug 10, 2015 10:47:03 GMT -5
We needed a thread for the 2015 7th overall pick. Seriously, why is this guy still in Lowell? He is too advanced for NY-Penn league pitching, and with the season winding down I think it's a good idea to get his feet wet with a promotion. I'm also happy to see that he is still hitting for power with a wood bat, albeit in a small sample size. It was something I was worried about when he was drafted, based on his lack of track record and small stature. Based on what evidence? He's got a 147 wRC+, 19:14 BB:K ratio and he's hitting for power, plus mostly getting the ball in the air. I'd say that's good enough to push him to Greenville for a couple of weeks, the outfield there isn't anything special for now
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Aug 6, 2015 10:50:51 GMT -5
Boston no longer holds a significant advantage w/r/t financial resources. There's a lot of TV/cable money floating around. Oh, and David Price is not coming to Boston. Maybe there's not a huge edge for us anymore, but I think it's still pretty significant. The Sox have the 3rd highest payroll in the majors, and they spend $65m more than #10 (Toronto), which is basically the Marlin's payroll by itself. Even with all the TV money around, I'd say the Sox, Dodgers, and Yankees have a clear edge on the rest of the league, with maybe a couple of exceptions. Either way, the Sox have way more financial muscle than all but about 6 or 7 other teams. On Price, obviously it's a long shot, but unless you have some kind of source within his camp or something, you never know. The FO has to know something's gotta change with their approach, and the most glaring flaw is the lack of starting pitching. They don't seem to be patient enough to wait for it to develop through the farm, they don't seem to want to part with prospects to acquire it, and they don't want to spend the money on the guys that hit the free agent market. One of those things will change this offseason (I hope) and it might be the money. Doubt it will, but if it is, there's no reason they couldn't be a serious contender to sign him EDIT: Apart from the fact that he doesn't like Ortiz maybe
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Aug 6, 2015 10:18:33 GMT -5
Once you turn 22 as a tall lanky lefty, your control never improves any further. I'm guessing this is sarcasm. Well played, but with Owens, my belief is that unless he develops near pinpoint control there's no chance to rise above a 3/4. That "deception" won't play vs. MLB hitters, and his FB is, in terms of MLB starters, is pedestrian. The Change is very good when it's on, but it's not enough. And I will be a rare thing to improve his control enough to lower his BB/9 below 3.0 at the MLB level IMHO. Like I said, 4/5s are important and needed, but I've seen this guy almost a dozen times over the years. He's no ace, near ace or #2. I know I'm not no expert, but based on this front office's track record, neither are they. I think it's way too early to claim his deception won't play at the MLB level, and it doesn't make sense. If it's hard to pick up on the ball out of a guys hand, it just is. It's not like guys in AAA aren't making the bigs cause their eye sight isn't good enough or something. He's 6'6 and lanky, it's natural that his fastball would play up because it leaves his hand significantly closer to the plate than you would normally see, and the change just makes it tougher to time the heater
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Aug 6, 2015 9:51:43 GMT -5
I've been on board with Trading Swihart for a young pitcher for a while now. It wouldn't be a bad idea to explore a trade for Carrasco + Carlos Santana for Swihart+ I love that trade, although I feel like the + would have to be pretty significant. That also still leaves us with the Hanley/JBJ/Castillo issue, unless Bradley is part of the package going to the Indians
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Aug 6, 2015 8:50:16 GMT -5
I think jumping to conclusions on Swihart's bat isn't wise at this stage, given his age and track record. I also do really like his swing from both sides of the plate, and I've felt his at bats have been looking better recently as well. That being said, I think we should try to use him as the key piece in a deal for a top of the rotation starter, because he's extremely valuable still, and he's at least somewhat superfluous given that we have Vazquez, and he has a lower floor because his defense hasn't come as advertised.
On a separate note, I wouldn't be against giving Napoli another shot at a low base salary with a bunch of incentives and platooning him and Shaw at 1B next year. Between the two of them, I think you get some solid production, plus Shaw can function as your back-up 3B, and it saves money over pursuing a pricey free agent. Maybe we'd need to see a little more out of Shaw, but I can't imagine bringing Nap back would cost us more than $5m guaranteed, and I think we should be devoting as much of our payroll as possible to improving the pitching staff for next year. This does assume that Hanley stays in LF next year though, which I don't like, because it also basically relegates both Bradley and Castillo to platoon roles themselves
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Aug 6, 2015 8:30:56 GMT -5
It's probably one-sided to only look at the additions though. I won't go through them all but, while Toronto gained Carroll, the lost Johnson and Lou Williams. Rim protection and bench scoring are rather important. Also, Charlotte gained 2 guys with similar skill sets (which is also what Zeller brings) so there additions are a bit mitigated. Biyombo (rim protection) and MO Williams (scoring, distribution and leadership off the bench) will be felt as well. I don't disagree that some teams could be better. I just think those same teams lost as much as they gained in some cases. PS. I like Okafor, but talk to me when Philly starts showing interest in winning games. Then I'll buy their improvement. Zeller doesn't really offer the same skill set as Kaminsky or Hawes at all, he hasn't developed into the shooter people thought he would be. Biyombo is a loss, but not a huge one, and they also added Jeremy Lin to replace Williams, which I think could easily end up being a wash. Overall, I think it's pretty clear they got better, especially when you factor in Kemba Walker coming back from injury, and adding Nic Batum. With Toronto, that's fair, but they do still have Valanciunas, and James Johnson can block shots as well, plus Carroll is a massive improvement for their perimeter D, which mitigates losing rim protection. And I get your point with Philly, but they actually drafted a guy who can play his rookie season, so I'm taking that as a step in the right direction. Plus with all those young guys, you have to factor in some improvement internally, and it's not like they really lost anyone
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Aug 6, 2015 8:23:33 GMT -5
Get ready to be extremely surprised then. Carl Crawford got 7/142 entering his age 29 season, and that was four years ago. And he was three years older than Heyward. Yeah offense still gets paid more, but if anything, teams are buying more into defense as time goes on, so I see no reason to believe he'll get less than what Crawford got, and I think he'll get significantly more. You don't think a team like Houston views Heyward as a star caliber player? They seem like an obvious fit to me, assuming that they're ready to start spending significantly on the big league roster. His wRC+ the last four years: 121 120 110 116 I wouldn't call that "wildly inconsistent" and while health is a concern he's probably going to play 140 games for the third time in those last four seasons. His power numbers have been wildly inconsistent, that's primarily what I was talking about. I really don't buy Crawford as a great comparison. He'd been to multiple all-star games and had a much higher profile than Heyward does at this stage. I'm not debating the guy's value, I just don't think that GMs weigh advanced stats into contract offers as much as all of you seem to think, especially when the traditional ones favor their argument. It's more a question of leverage, and GMs can point out a bunch of question marks to drive his price down. Injury, power/lack thereof at a corner OF, and he's never hit for a particularly high average. Doesn't matter if Houston thinks he's a star or not, if they don't think others will pay him like one, then they won't offer him that kind of money. Anyway, as I said, we'll see in the offseason, and I don't feel like making the same points again. It will be interesting to watch unfold because it'll give us some indication of how heavily advanced metrics are being weighted by clubs in negotiations, and how much they'll still turn to traditional numbers if it favors their argument.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Aug 5, 2015 11:35:49 GMT -5
Not really sure why people think the east will be better this year. I guess it could be if things pan out, but plenty of talent switched over to the west. Who went to the West that wasn't already there that really moves the needle? Anyway, list of East teams that appear to have improved this offseason/will improve next season through health or development, aside from us: Hornets (Kaminsky, Hawes, no Lance) Sixers (Okafor paired with Noel is a really good frontcourt) Knicks (Melo plays, Porzingis, Lopez, Jerian Grant) Raptors (Demarre Carroll) Heat (Justise, full season of Dragic, Whiteside, healthy Bosh) Bucks (Monroe, development) Pacers (Paul George) Magic (Development, Hezonja) The Hawks lost Carroll and added Splitter and will probably slip a little, the Nets should suck, Detroit lost Monroe, and the Wizards replaced Paul Pierce with Jared Dudley, but should see more development out of Beal and Porter, so you can call them a wash. The Bulls are also tough to get a read on, but I think they'll benefit from not being run into the gorund by Thibs and they a couple fresh rotation guys (Mcdermott, Portis) to carry some of the burden that should be able to contribute this year. Aside from that, I'd expect every other team in the East to be better next year than they were last year, even the Cavs, with continuity and full seasons from Shump, Mozgov, and possibly JR, plus Mo Williams.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Aug 5, 2015 11:04:17 GMT -5
If we can get Horford and that Brooklyn pick turns into a top-5 pick, that's a 50+ win team that is extremely attractive to free agents Although no win predictions were made, I think they (Pelton anyway) view the C's already as a 50 win team. Or close. Remember: 26 - 12 post Rondo/Green, w/IT and JC and JJ. I think someone mentioned that ESPN's projections, presumably Pelton's, had the C's at 47, but personally I feel that's a little bullish. Plus the East is going to be better this year. Regardless, Horford would push them to being conference final contenders at least, and make them infinitely more attractive than they are now to free agents. Horford, Stevens, and a young core with cap flexibility and picks looks like an absolutely ideal spot for a true alpha dog star I'd say
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Aug 5, 2015 10:57:51 GMT -5
Well, Heyward does have a 27 home run season of his own and multiple 5+ WAR seasons, and he'll be considerably younger than any of those players were (he's on pace for four 5+ rWAR seasons, which is pretty impressive for a player yet to turn 26). You're right that those players were probably more highly regarded when they reached free agency than Heyward is, but between his age (including the fact that GMs are more conscious of aging curves these days) and inflation, I think he'll get least $130m+ guaranteed (assuming he opts for a true long-term deal and not a Porcello-esque short but high AAV deal). ADD: or what he said. I get the argument, I just think that there's a reason that you rarely see WAR cited when contracts are announced. People still emphasize offensive performance, especially at the corner spots, and even if he's 26, he's been pretty wildly inconsistent offensively and injury prone. I wouldn't argue that he might well produce that value, and it's true that he's a somewhat unique case given his age, but unless he signs and 8 or 9 year deal, I'd be extremely surprised to see him get that kind of money. We'll see how it turns out in a couple months, and I doubt it ends up being relevant unless he ends up having a much less friendly market than we're all assuming and the Sox manage to steal him below market somehow
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Aug 5, 2015 10:27:45 GMT -5
Not sure if this is the right thread for it, but is Barnes being moved back to the rotation in Pawtucket just a function of needing another arm for the rotation down there, or is it a development move to make him work on his offspeed stuff more cause the bullpen transition hasn't gone smoothly?
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Aug 5, 2015 8:36:24 GMT -5
In the same piece, they thought AL Horford could be THE target (paraphrase) in FA and Johnson and Jerebko could prove to be key pieces if Cousins or Love (if things don't work out following the extension) become available. If we can get Horford and that Brooklyn pick turns into a top-5 pick, that's a 50+ win team that is extremely attractive to free agents
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Aug 4, 2015 14:53:11 GMT -5
I agree that he would be extremely valuable, but the market for Victorino doesn't exactly indicate that Heyward will get more than $150m. Think about the free agent position players that have signed for similar contracts in the past: I don't think there's a single one without a 30 homer season on their resume, or at the very least, several 20 homer seasons with high batting averages, and I think GM's see that and it gives them leverage. Eh, teams have also been willing to give significant money to players with significant defensive value and more well-rounded offensive value. Think Joe Mauer or Buster Posey or Jacoby Ellsbury. The best comp is probably old friend Carl Crawford, who got $142m five years ago despite being a corner outfielder with good but not great offensive production and a lot of his value coming on defense. Mauer won batting titles as a catcher, Posey is the best hitting catcher in the game, and Crawford and Ellsbury both consistently stole 50+ bases, not to mention that Crawford actually hit for power more consistently than Heyward has, and even Ellsbury was only a year or two removed from 30 homers and being arguably the best player in the AL. Even Mauer was only a year removed from hitting 28 homers and putting up 7.6 WAR when he signed his deal, and he's a hometown guy as well, which meant they probably overpayed a little. I'm not saying Heyward isn't going to get a big deal, but if he gets a whole lot more than about $100m over 5 or 6 years, I'll be very surprised. He's very clearly not regarded in the same way as any of those players were when they signed their deals; all of them were perennial all-stars, and most of them had better offensive track records in one way or another
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Aug 4, 2015 12:41:34 GMT -5
I imagine there are a lot of fans, not FO people, who believe he's not going to get that kind of money. And I agree with the thought it would be a tough PR sell on the surface. But I do think he'll get offers for 7+ years and north of $150m. I am unsure people realize the value of acquiring via FA an established, above-average position player during their age 26-32 seasons. We know a market for Heyward's skillset exists or else Victorino would have never received offers for as high as $44m guaranteed as a 32 year old OF coming off a 'bad' 3.0 fWAR season. I guess I should disclose I am not advocating the Sox go all-in for Heyward. Rather, if given a choice to pursue either Heyward or one of the top-tier FA pitchers, the decision for me is obvious if the goal is to maximize the return. I agree that he would be extremely valuable, but the market for Victorino doesn't exactly indicate that Heyward will get more than $150m. Think about the free agent position players that have signed for similar contracts in the past: I don't think there's a single one without a 30 homer season on their resume, or at the very least, several 20 homer seasons with high batting averages, and I think GM's see that and it gives them leverage.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Aug 4, 2015 8:30:42 GMT -5
We can be pretty darn sure that the FO will give John Farrell strict orders to continue playing every veteran possible in order to avoid that scenario (top 3 pick, 100 loss area) in order to continue selling 35k tickets per home game, under ANY circumstances. Putting a mediocre product on the field is one thing, putting up a totally lousy product that loses 100 games? Entirely different. Season ticket sales could even plummet, as could corporate support. There are repercussions (monetarily) beyond just getting a top 3 pick that habitually lousy teams.. San Diego.. Seattle.. Do not have to deal with in Boston. Playing the veterans is what got us to this point, so I doubt it would matter if they did lean on Farrell to play them, but that makes no sense. We're not making the playoffs, this team is bad, the season has been an embarrassment. A couple extra wins in August and September aren't going to be the difference between someone paying $40k+ for season tickets or not, and sponsors aren't going to drop the sox cause they're a big market team and people are going to watch next year, whether they lose 90 games or 100, which is pretty much what we're talking about at this point. The season is a lost cause and the draft pick is the silver lining. If they thought/acted the way you're suggesting, we wouldn't have traded Lackey, Lester, and Miller last year, or pulled off the Punto trade. They're going to maximize the value of that pick, and it's pretty clear already. Porcello wouldn't be on the DL with a phantom injury if they were going to keep playing the veterans, and Castillo wouldn't be getting playing time over De Aza either.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Aug 3, 2015 11:57:34 GMT -5
Worried about him debuting vs the Yanks in NY. Remember another kid who debuted vs them without command and didn't throw all that hard name of Bobby Sprowl. My dad and I were at Fenway park that weekend in fact, called "The Yankee massacre series". Sprowl got hammered, never did turn into the great pitcher Boston thought he would.. Thrust into a playoff race, barely a year after being drafted. Think the Sox should have set Owens up vs a crappy lineup.. Like the Rays, or another team and certainly not at Yankee stadium. Very shortsighted. Well, I agree that would be ideal but sooner or later he will have to face the iron...sort of like playing JBJ against what 3 lefties in succession? What concerns me for the particular game is that I recall Owens as more over the top... and thus less likely to neutralize the lefty heavy line-up. He does not have impeccable control and is matched against patience and power. The Yankees are also on something of an offensive roll. True Owens has not given up a lot of hits in the minors but when he has (the times I have seen him) there is hard contact. If he continually misses with his FB, watch out for the change-up to entertain as a souvenir. Obviously I hope not but I'm guessing 4+ innings 5 runs with a couple of hrs. Honestly, who cares? If he has a good debut, great, if not, it's not like it's a crucial game for us, and he doesn't seem like the kind of guy who's going to go into an emotional tailspin cause he didn't dominate his first time out. I'm in favor of getting him out there against big league hitters as much as possible
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Aug 3, 2015 11:54:18 GMT -5
Possibly the front office may even be thinking of Chris Davis at first, but that would just add to the blockage. I like Heyward, but he will get HUGE dollars and has never really put up big numbers. Not sure we can stay with the idea of not giving out contracts for 30+ year old pitchers. IF, and that is a giant if, we want to compete in 2016, we may have to go after one of those guys. I don't disagree, but I think people often lose sight of the fact he will be entering his age 26 season going into next season. For comparison's sake, Ellsbury wasn't even arb-eligible at the same age. I don't know what he'll get. 8/$175M might be too low. But if given a choice, I'd rather spend that sort of money on Heyward v. the 6/$150M it would take to sign Jordan Zimmermann. I think there are enough people involved in personnel decisions around the league that a corner outfielder who hits .290ish with maybe 15 homers is probably not going to get that kind of money. I definitely think we should check in and find out what his market's like, cause he'd be a great fit, and if we can get him at a reasonable price, that frees us up to deal someone like Margot as part of a package for a good starter
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 30, 2015 13:24:11 GMT -5
Names like Carlos Carrasco seriously don't get you excited. I'd rather shed and wait until the offseason to go after a big name. Cashner, Carrasco and Tyson Ross do not do much but level the ship for now before it sinks. Carrasco is pretty nasty if you look at his stats for more than like 5 seconds, less than 2 BB/9, over 10 K/9 and a 2.74 xFIP. Under control long term too. He'd be our ace if we had him, no question
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 30, 2015 10:46:08 GMT -5
Folks, it's not a zero-sum game. Maybe BOTH Cherington and Farrell are bad at their jobs. Yes but it's not all on Cherington...period as was asserted, and I'd say there's more evidence that Farrell is bad at his. It's just harder to evaluate a GM in a relatively short period of time
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 30, 2015 9:59:57 GMT -5
Mets looking for an of on the cheap. Would anyone move Holt for Wheeler? Everyone except the Mets, they just nearly dealt him for Carlos Gomez. Doubt they turn around and flip him for Brock Holt
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 30, 2015 9:53:44 GMT -5
We have two choices. 1. Ride it out. Our guys have to play better right? Gambling with tv revenue if we do that. Will take 2-3 years to get the younger prospects up and going. 2. Do something bold. Sign Cueto or Price. Would be a gamble. Good-bye to Clay. Make a baseball trade. Really good prospects for a really good young pitcher. This board will hate trading prospects. But, it might work for the right pitcher. I'd bet the Sox split the difference and try to trade for a veteran pither who makes some cash they get a good deal on. Sell it. Someone likes James Shields. We will suck again next year. Why do you get rid of Clay? That doesn't make sense at all if you're going for it. Also, I think in a deal for the right pitcher, people would be on board with dealing prospects, but "really good young pitchers" don't show up on the trade market very often, and you tend to have to overpay. Personally, I'd part with a Swihart or Margot along with some other decent to good prospects if it got us Sonny Gray or one of the Mets good young arms, but I wouldn't be willing to package those two or deal Bogaerts or Betts
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 30, 2015 8:54:48 GMT -5
If Farrell remains the manager we have a good shot at a top ten every year from here on. That's a ridiculous comment. This mess is on Ben Cherington..............Period Really? Cause that seems like an even more ridiculous comment. With the exception of 2013, Farrell has failed to get anything close to the expected production out of the talent on this team, and Cherington, even if you hated every move he's made from the get go (which I doubt, cause if you did, you'd probably be working in an MLB front office somewhere and not posting here) you have to admit that he's gotten us a stacked farm system which is starting to pay some serious dividends.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 30, 2015 8:31:30 GMT -5
Have liked the way the Braves have re-organized over the last 6 months, but I'm shocked about this latest trade. Peraza and Wood? Both young with LOTS of upside. I don't understand how picking up a 30-year old Cuban bat is worth losing talent like that! Not totally sure how much upside Wood has. Sure he's 24 and a lefty, but he kinda seems like the type of guy who is what he is. 3 pitches, good control, but it doesn't seem like he has wipeout stuff or anything that would make you think he's going to become more than the #3 type guy he is now
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jul 29, 2015 15:28:49 GMT -5
On a slightly different note, it's going to be borderline hysterical watching Sandoval flail away at eye-level fastballs and sliders in the dirt Thursday night
|
|
|