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.
3/31-4/3 Red Sox @ Orioles Series Thread
|
Post by MLBDreams on Apr 1, 2014 18:45:58 GMT -5
Is that Edward Mujica on top right next to Mike Carp? He played for STL from last year.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Apr 1, 2014 19:02:37 GMT -5
Is that Edward Mujica on top right next to Mike Carp? He played for STL from last year. Yeah, he was there. So was Jonathan Herrera. Guys like Ellsbury, Drew and Salty were obviously not there too.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 2, 2014 8:41:18 GMT -5
Most if not all of what you got from Salty on a one year deal. No. The OBP will be lower and I would suspect the SA will be lower. And the one year deal thing isn't that big a deal. Like I said before I hardly think that Salty's contract is untradeable. If one year was all they'd need from Salty I doubt they'd have an issue dealing that contract away. Salty's stats for last 3 years - .235/.288/.450 BABIP .304 .222/.288/.454 BABIP .265 .273/.338/.466 BABIP .372 Pretty safe to say there will be quite a bit of regression this year once that BAPIP falls - enough that I'd expect AJP to put up roughly the same #'s.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Apr 2, 2014 8:46:10 GMT -5
BABIP
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 2, 2014 8:58:56 GMT -5
Dammit, no matter how many times I type it... Arrgh
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 2, 2014 9:00:38 GMT -5
Is this trolling or a mistake? I have to pick trolling.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 2, 2014 9:57:50 GMT -5
Most if not all of what you got from Salty on a one year deal. No. The OBP will be lower and I would suspect the SA will be lower. And the one year deal thing isn't that big a deal. Like I said before I hardly think that Salty's contract is untradeable. If one year was all they'd need from Salty I doubt they'd have an issue dealing that contract away. I agree and still think the decision to go with Pierzynski instead of Saltalamacchia (especially given the prices involved-- 1/$8.25m for Pierzynski when Saltalamacchia signed for 3/$21m) was pretty inexplicable. Every projection system available has Saltalamacchia projected to perform better offensively than Pierzynski this year, most by a decently sized margin (the average of the four on Fangraphs by wRC+ has Pierzynski at 89 and Saltalamacchia at 97). Saltalamacchia is also probably a better defensive player, with much better pitch framing numbers and slightly better pitch blocking (compare here with here). If the front office is justifying signing an older, worse player for a higher AAV because of just the one-year versus three-year thing, I think they've overvalued the benefit of going year-to-year. For one thing, going with Pierzynski leaves the Red Sox very little of a safety net if Vazquez is not ready to be the full-time starting catcher next year. Vazquez certainly flashes a lot of potential, but there are still questions about his bat, and catcher is one of those few positions where easing a guy in (e.g., by starting him off as a backup for a year or two before giving him the starting gig) is the ideal course of action. Also, as mentioned above, Saltalamacchia's deal would have been eminently movable if Vazquez turns out to be 100% ready for the starting job, or you could just keep him around as the backup and also give him some at bats at DH/1B. Instead, they're stuck banking on Vazquez, as next year's class of free agent catchers is not impressive, with Russell Martin (who the Red Sox are likely to avoid, assuming they want a short-term option) and a bunch of borderline options. Finally, even if they really wanted something that was two years, max (and they did offer Saltalamacchia a two year deal), they should have upped the guaranteed money and offered 2/$20m or something. Pierzynski isn't a terrible player, but Saltalamacchia is basically better in every single way (except durability, I guess), and I'd be happy to pay a little extra to get the better player in a season where the Red Sox need every win in what looks to be a tight divisional race. Instead, they offered a deal that maxed out at $18m if all incentives were met and which likely guaranteed much less. Just inexplicable. [Sorry for rehashing the offseason stuff. Had to get it off my chest.]
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Apr 2, 2014 10:31:51 GMT -5
No. The OBP will be lower and I would suspect the SA will be lower. And the one year deal thing isn't that big a deal. Like I said before I hardly think that Salty's contract is untradeable. If one year was all they'd need from Salty I doubt they'd have an issue dealing that contract away. I agree and still think the decision to go with Pierzynski instead of Saltalamacchia (especially given the prices involved-- 1/$8.25m for Pierzynski when Saltalamacchia signed for 3/$21m) was pretty inexplicable. Every projection system available has Saltalamacchia projected to perform better offensively than Pierzynski this year, most by a decently sized margin (the average of the four on Fangraphs by wRC+ has Pierzynski at 89 and Saltalamacchia at 97). Saltalamacchia is also probably a better defensive player, with much better pitch framing numbers and slightly better pitch blocking (compare here with here). If the front office is justifying signing an older, worse player for a higher AAV because of just the one-year versus three-year thing, I think they've overvalued the benefit of going year-to-year. For one thing, going with Pierzynski leaves the Red Sox very little of a safety net if Vazquez is not ready to be the full-time starting catcher next year. Vazquez certainly flashes a lot of potential, but there are still questions about his bat, and catcher is one of those few positions where easing a guy in (e.g., by starting him off as a backup for a year or two before giving him the starting gig) is the ideal course of action. Also, as mentioned above, Saltalamacchia's deal would have been eminently movable if Vazquez turns out to be 100% ready for the starting job, or you could just keep him around as the backup and also give him some at bats at DH/1B. Instead, they're stuck banking on Vazquez, as next year's class of free agent catchers is not impressive, with Russell Martin (who the Red Sox are likely to avoid, assuming they want a short-term option) and a bunch of borderline options. Finally, even if they really wanted something that was two years, max (and they did offer Saltalamacchia a two year deal), they should have upped the guaranteed money and offered 2/$20m or something. Pierzynski isn't a terrible player, but Saltalamacchia is basically better in every single way (except durability, I guess), and I'd be happy to pay a little extra to get the better player in a season where the Red Sox need every win in what looks to be a tight divisional race. Instead, they offered a deal that maxed out at $18m if all incentives were met and which likely guaranteed much less. Just inexplicable. [Sorry for rehashing the offseason stuff. Had to get it off my chest.] Jmei, aren't you a big proponent of BABIP and regression? Look at Salty's BABIP last year vs. career (Jimed posted stats above) and tell me what you think he'll put up this year? He had 2 consecutive years at .288 OBP before last year. His BABIP drove up his BA, which in turn drove up his OBP and OPS. Yeah, Salty will take a few more walks, but AJP will hit for a higher avg 0 in the end their OBP should be pretty similar. I'd also prefer AJP defensively to Salty as well. I'm kind of indifferent either way, but I think you are exaggerating how much better Salty is the AJP. I think they're roughly equal. I'm fine with the decision to let Salty walk and go with AJP.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 2, 2014 11:15:36 GMT -5
All the projections discussed above (you can view them on Saltalamacchia's Fangraphs page and Pierzynski's on his Fangraphs page) do regress Saltalamacchia's BABIP significantly (the average of the four projections have him at a .315 BABIP). Keep in mind that that projected BABIP is still significantly lower than his career mark (.323 in 1300+ career BIP, which is well above the point at which career BABIP becomes somewhat predictive), and if anything, his projected BABIP might even be a little lower than what I'd guess it'd be. More importantly, Saltalamacchia's high OBP last year was not just driven by a high BABIP. He's also improved his walk rate three years in a row, from 6.2% to 8.5% to 9.1% (that last mark is higher than the non-pitcher league average of 8.9%). As such, the projection systems see him as out-OBPing Pierzynski next year (average of .307 compared to .300 for Pierzynski). Yes, Saltalamacchia had a .288 OBP in both 2012 and 2011. But in 2012, his BABIP was way below his career average and in 2011, he'd yet to make the improvements he has in his walk rate over the past few years. 2013 was obviously a big outlier for Saltalamacchia, but that doesn't mean you throw it out completely, it means you include more data to minimize small sample concerns. Here's a chart comparing Saltalamacchia and Pierzynski over the past three years. They compare very favorably, which combined with the fact that Saltalamacchia is younger (still in his prime, while Pierzynski is likely to only decline from here) and the fact that Saltalamacchia has had his better offensive seasons more recently than Pierzynski (more recent seasons are more predictive that more distant seasons) makes it clear why it makes sense that the projection systems like Saltalamacchia more. I also disagree re: defense. The only major knock on Saltalamacchia's defense is that he sucks at controlling the running game, but there's significant evidence that the pitcher is much more responsible for stolen bases than the catcher is, and the Red Sox pitchers (particular Jon Lester and John Lackey) are notorious for being terrible at keeping baserunners close to first. Pierzynski doesn't have that strong of an arm either, and at best he'll be marginally better at throwing out baserunners. Meanwhile, as I discussed above, Saltalamacchia is a much better pitch-framer and a slightly better pitch-blocker. We saw this in the Opening Day game-- Pierzynski is jerky and sudden with his glove, which lost him at least two or three borderline pitches. He also struggled at framing low breaking pitches, as he tends to turn his glove over to try and block it rather than framing the pitch properly.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 2, 2014 11:32:48 GMT -5
I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that the Red Sox could have just traded Salty and his contract next year. He appeared to have not much interest in him as a free agent and with the likelihood of regression, he could easily be considered overpaid.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Apr 2, 2014 11:52:48 GMT -5
I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that the Red Sox could have just traded Salty and his contract next year. He appeared to have not much interest in him as a free agent Just because they can't trade him for a 1st round pick doesn't mean they can't trade him for a PTBNL.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 2, 2014 12:00:24 GMT -5
I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that the Red Sox could have just traded Salty and his contract next year. He appeared to have not much interest in him as a free agent and with the likelihood of regression, he could easily be considered overpaid. I think Saltalamacchia would be worth at least $10m on a one-year deal (i.e., I'd rather have Saltalamacchia for 1/$10m than Pierzynski for 1/$8.5m). That means that if I signed him for 3/$21m and had to move him after 2014, I would have been willing to eat $3m (making the rest of his contract effectively 2/$11m) to move him for nothing. I'm pretty confident that someone would take Saltalamacchia for 2/$11m, even if he performed below career norms in 2014.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Apr 2, 2014 12:27:54 GMT -5
It seems pretty clear to me that any team in baseball could have had Salty for just a little more than 3 years/$21 mil. Who really wants to play for the Marlins? Especially for a catcher in that humidity.
I think the Redsox had several other catchers in mind before Pierzynsky but they didn't pan out. They even apparently considered the bane of this forum, Lavarnway, before bringing Salty back. Hello? When it came right down to it they even wanted Pierzynsky over Salty.
Salty wasn't coming back. I think it was more than the numbers. I never thought Salty was truly a championship caliber catcher ( yeah I know we did win last year ). They did it in spite of him. That throw he made to third which cost them a game was the final straw.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Apr 2, 2014 12:46:01 GMT -5
It seems pretty clear to me that any team in baseball could have had Salty for just a little more than 3 years/$21 mil. Who really wants to play for the Marlins? Especially for a catcher in that humidity. I think the Redsox had several other catchers in mind before Pierzynsky but they didn't pan out. They even apparently considered the bane of this forum, Lavarnway, before bringing Salty back. Hello? When it came right down to it they even wanted Pierzynsky over Salty. Salty wasn't coming back. I think it was more than the numbers. I never thought Salty was truly a championship caliber catcher ( yeah I know we did win last year ). They did it in spite of him. That throw he made to third which cost them a game was the final straw. Except that he helped the team do just that, win a championship. And while Saltalamacchia's throwing skills may be marginal, the rest of his game has improved a bit. I don't think the team would have done as well with Lavarnway behind the mask, and even a few wins can make a huge difference when a team is in the playoff hunt. No "in spite" about it, he brought value and gave them some of those wins. As for where he ended up, I don't know how many offers he fielded, but I got the impression he actually wanted to go to Florida since that's where he's from originally. We'll see how Pierzynski plays out, but he's not very good defensively and his lack of patience is tough to watch. That doesn't mean the team is guaranteed to lose because of him, but it may put them closer to that margin.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Apr 2, 2014 13:06:48 GMT -5
I think Jmei stated things much better than I did. I don't really understand why there wasn't a bigger deal to be had for Salty. At that contract he's quite the bargain. As for playing with the Marlins if he had other offers that were close, he is from around that area so Miami is a home-coming for him and as bad as they've been they are a team with a future. Anytime you have Fernandez leading your staff you have a chance.
Anyways I honestly think that Salty did grow offensively as a player. He took his fair share of walks last season. I took that as a sign of offensive maturation. He bashed 39 doubles last year while his HR total was down. I know his BABIP was pretty good, but the man, when he made contact, made very good contact so I'm not surprised that those line shots came down for hits. My guess is his numbers will take a beating in Miami, but I think he would have hit pretty well for the Sox this year. Maybe .250 with 45 walks and 30 something doubles and around 20 homers. At least with his Ks, he'd be working the pitcher which is more than can be said for an aging AJP who may never draw a walk or even go to a full count this year (OK now I'm exaggerating, I think).
It all came down to that one year vs three year thing, but for the reasons Jmei outlined well, I didn't think that needed to be a deal-breaker. If Salty had signed a 3 year $36 million deal, I wouldn't feel as strongly as I feel about this, but given what actually occurred, I think the Sox weakened their options and put a ridiculous hacker into the lineup that doesn't belong in this grinding Red Sox lineup that gets into pitchers' bullpens.
And I'll tell you this - while watching the World Series and other post-season games, I actually tracked how many pitches the Sox were make the opposing starters throw - because while they were striking out at a ferocious pace, they were only running up those guys' pitch counts and getting them out of there before seven innings - it was obvious those guys would be lucky to make it thru six and this was with the Sox looking hopeless out there (for awhile). It's harder to do that with AJP in your lineup giving the opposing pitcher easy quick outs.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 2, 2014 13:13:20 GMT -5
Russell Martin is getting $8.5 million and I'd take him all day long over Salty.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Apr 2, 2014 13:48:26 GMT -5
Gordon Edes ?@gordonedes 10 min. 4/2 at BAL: Nava RF, Pedroia 2B, Ortiz DH, Napoli 1B, Gomes LF, Sizemore CF, Bogaerts SS, Pierzynski C, Middlebrooks 3B, Lackey SP.
|
|
|
Post by godot on Apr 2, 2014 13:52:52 GMT -5
Jimei's analysis is fairly on spot, at least for this pea-brain, but perhaps there is a bigger picture at work, which could result in Lester packing up. Sox felt Salty wanting and they believe they have better options in the wings, so a three or even two year contract was out. Seems they have faith in their system and policy of developing from within and do not have to pay their players "market salaries and contracts. They were burnt with some of these long term and expensive signings. They misjudged with Beltre who is doing just fine three years later, while they are crossing their fingers with Middlebrooks and lost the gamble with Youklis. Good move on Pedro, but not so on Damon. Do not know about Bay, but they had their chances with Holiday, settling for the Cameron, Ellsburby in left mess. Now after two games some believe they hit it with Sizemore, but there answer was Bradley Jr. Now Lester who is hitting 30. They really will not replace him for a number of reasons, but they believe they will. Good luck. Hubris is dangerous.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Apr 2, 2014 14:01:11 GMT -5
The actors with the best player evaluation & projection systems are MLB teams. The most any MLB team was willing to commit in the free market to Salty was 3x$7m.
It's a continual source of wonder to me when an amateur's analysis of player value is clearly out of step with the market and the main question that occurs to him over and over is: "Why are all these teams so wrong?"
When one team seemingly overpays, or an agent overplays his hand and has to settle for a discount later, that's one thing, but Salty signed below [some] expectations in an active, competitive market.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Apr 2, 2014 14:04:00 GMT -5
Gordon Edes ?@gordonedes 10 min. 4/2 at BAL: Nava RF, Pedroia 2B, Ortiz DH, Napoli 1B, Gomes LF, Sizemore CF, Bogaerts SS, Pierzynski C, Middlebrooks 3B, Lackey SP. I'd complain about Gomes being in there vs. a RHP with Carp and JBJ on the bench, but he is 5 for 12 against Jimenez with 2 HR, 2 BB, and a 1.417 OPS.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Apr 2, 2014 14:43:03 GMT -5
Well, this is sorta disheartening to me: To use the honorary visit to the White House to do the bidding of Samsung as part of his contract just seems a little cheap to me.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Apr 2, 2014 14:44:45 GMT -5
Jimei's analysis is fairly on spot, at least for this pea-brain, but perhaps there is a bigger picture at work, which could result in Lester packing up. Sox felt Salty wanting and they believe they have better options in the wings, so a three or even two year contract was out. Seems they have faith in their system and policy of developing from within and do not have to pay their players "market salaries and contracts. They were burnt with some of these long term and expensive signings. They misjudged with Beltre who is doing just fine three years later, while they are crossing their fingers with Middlebrooks and lost the gamble with Youklis. Good move on Pedro, but not so on Damon. Do not know about Bay, but they had their chances with Holiday, settling for the Cameron, Ellsburby in left mess. Now after two games some believe they hit it with Sizemore, but there answer was Bradley Jr. Now Lester who is hitting 30. They really will not replace him for a number of reasons, but they believe they will. Good luck. Hubris is dangerous. I still think Lester gets extended Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Apr 2, 2014 15:08:05 GMT -5
Not sure if this post breaks is out of line within the thread topic (sorry if it is)....but can anyone give me some feedback on the quality of MLB.TV streaming?
I am considering purchasing.......as I am not local to New England....tired of following on Gameday. Want to get games on my laptop.
|
|
|
Post by godot on Apr 2, 2014 15:10:55 GMT -5
Not sure if this post breaks is out of line within the thread topic (sorry if it is)....but can anyone give me some feedback on the quality of MLB.TV streaming? I am considering purchasing.......as I am not local to New England....tired of following on Gameday. Want to get games on my laptop. It's ok and improving. The inexpensive package gives the opposing teams announcers when not form Fenway, which can be interesting.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Apr 2, 2014 15:13:53 GMT -5
Not sure if this post breaks is out of line within the thread topic (sorry if it is)....but can anyone give me some feedback on the quality of MLB.TV streaming? I am considering purchasing.......as I am not local to New England....tired of following on Gameday. Want to get games on my laptop. I've had MLB.tv for four years now I think. I like it a lot and the quality is great. Granted, you have to have a good internet connection and a fairly new computer. Also, the benefit of watching on your phone/tablet is a nice benefit.
|
|
|