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.
|
Post by James Dunne on Jun 17, 2014 7:42:40 GMT -5
Adding in a Lester extension (or replacement) and figuring out what goes on with Lackey (guessing he gets extended as well), that leaves them with little flexibility. If Bradley is still hitting like .200/.290/.290 at the end of the year then it's tough to keep running him out there even with the lovely defense. At something like .230/.325/.330 though?
That's why I think it makes sense to take the entire season to evaluate Bradley. At his current production he's not doing enough, but he's not that far from where he's a sensible low-budget solution on a team with bigger holes to fill.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 17, 2014 8:01:21 GMT -5
Are there bigger holes to fill, though? Even taking into account Lester/Lackey extensions, they look to have three potential holes (CF, 3B, C) and enough money to, at a minimum, fill two of them with mid-tier-or-better free agents. Which of those has the weakest incumbents?
Catcher will need a free agent signing (you need someone better than David Ross as your backup if Vazquez doesn't hit or is injured), so that's one. Is CF or 3B a bigger need next year? Even at that second triple-slash and with elite defense, Bradley is a slightly below-average player, which I think is less than what you'd get from a Holt/Middlebrooks platoon at 3B. So I'd still be inclined to upgrade the outfield before I'd look at 3B.
|
|
|
Post by adiospaydro2005 on Jun 17, 2014 8:02:15 GMT -5
Victorino will hopefully be back soon to play RF and Nava is providing some production in LF. I still hope that the Red Sox continue to work Betts in CF as they need to get more offense in the lineup. Perhaps Holt should get some playing time at 2nd or DH when Victorino comes back as Pedrioia and Ortiz have been providing little to no production over the last month or so.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Jun 17, 2014 8:02:17 GMT -5
Considering the weak crop of CFs this offseason (just Rasmus, basically) compared to the solid crop of corner outfielders (M. Cabrera, Willingham, S. Smith, Denorfia, Cruz, Cuddyer, etc.), as well as the fact that Bradley doesn't look like he's improving enough with the bat to pencil in as the CF starter next year, Betts is almost certainly the leading 2015 CF candidate as of now. Given that Bradley has a huge problem hitting anything on the inside part of the plate. He is going to need realistically at least 800 At bats in the majors in order to figure this out. I think at the beginning of the year, Cherrington's thought was, all things being equal, the Sox could afford to carry Bradley's weak bat while he worked through his issues. Unfortunately Nava fell apart and Victorino is a walking banana. It now looks like Nava is finding is way back, which puts the platoon with Gomes back in play. And while Holt has provided a shot of life to an otherwise dead lineup filled with lifeless bodies (Ortiz, Pedrioa, and Napoli), he serves us better on the infield regardless of what happens with Victorino. So Cherrington has a decision to make. Does he trade for another outfielder or does he tough it out with what he has. Based on our stockpile of pitching depth and excess infielders most with little trade value, I have proposed we trade Pedroia (clearly a player in decline), Lester, Webster and Ranauldo to Atlanta for Heyward and most did not like that trade. Plan B - the bleacher report is saying that team's might be able to pry an outfielder from Colorado for an arm or two. That could be a road to explore for Cherrington.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Jun 17, 2014 8:48:33 GMT -5
So the question may be: are you better off with Betts in CF, and someone else in LF, with Bradley either as an elite 4th OFer* Considering our RF next season is Victorino, and we can't count on him being healthy, and his platoon split is suspect, and he'll be in the last year of his contract, and Betts has limited experience in CF and hasn't even reached the majors yet, the obvious course to me to is plan for a CF-RF rotation of Betts-Bradley-Victorino, with Nava in LF. Plus Brock Holt, which means you could add a corner OF/1B or a backup SS.
|
|
|
Post by suttree on Jun 17, 2014 8:59:57 GMT -5
Adding in a Lester extension (or replacement) and figuring out what goes on with Lackey (guessing he gets extended as well), that leaves them with little flexibility. If Bradley is still hitting like .200/.290/.290 at the end of the year then it's tough to keep running him out there even with the lovely defense. At something like .230/.325/.330 though? That's why I think it makes sense to take the entire season to evaluate Bradley. At his current production he's not doing enough, but he's not that far from where he's a sensible low-budget solution on a team with bigger holes to fill. At this point Betts is going to need a full time position. Is the opportunity cost of putting Betts in LF instead of CF worth it to keep Bradley? If Bradley were a steady 3 WAR player, then probably. If he is a borderline regular? That seems unreasonable given other cheap options like Holt and Nava being squeezed out.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jun 17, 2014 9:11:13 GMT -5
Mookie in CF and leading off. We need a LH bat in LF. Not Cuddyer or Willingham IMO. Trade for Cargo or Sign Melky for 3 years. Will have a great bench of; Nava, JBJ and Brockstar. Plus, whomever we sign as a backup C.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jun 17, 2014 9:14:28 GMT -5
Nava 2014 Line against righties 244/359/359 102 wRC+ Gomes 2014 Line against lefties 324/438/493 159 wRC+
Now Nava started out the year terrible, and he was able to bring his split up above average in 37 June PA. There really is no reason why we can't have one of the more productive left fields if we continue to use this platoon split.
Edit: If we are talking 2015, and I said this multiple times, I think Middlebrooks taking Gomes spot is the best bet, then we worry about CF/RF.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 17, 2014 9:20:24 GMT -5
If Middlebrooks' bat isn't good enough to stick at 3B, why would you think it's good enough to stick in LF?
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Jun 17, 2014 9:20:41 GMT -5
WMB has never played in the OF. Let's see if they give him some reps there (they have apparently indicated they will) and let's how he looks there. I still think he'll be better in a platoon with Holt at 3B.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Jun 17, 2014 9:22:38 GMT -5
Trade for Cargo or Sign Melky for 3 years. Will have a great bench of; Nava, JBJ and Brockstar. fWAR, 2013-present: Daniel Nava: 1.8 Brock Holt: 0.5 Jackie Bradley, Jr: 0.1 Melky Cabrera: 0.1 Just a little perspective.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jun 17, 2014 9:31:18 GMT -5
If Middlebrooks' bat isn't good enough to stick at 3B, why would you think it's good enough to stick in LF? Middlebrooks is a career 288/342/491 123 wRC+ against lefties. A lot of that comes from 2012, but in 2014 he is 108 wRC+ and 2013 111 wRC+. There is an obvious split there. My point is that you can put Nava and Gomes --- eventually Middlebrooks --- in LF, and have two low cost, team controlled players who are not every day starters putting put above average production. I would take that and allocate my resources to other team problems.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 17, 2014 9:36:39 GMT -5
If Middlebrooks is a good enough hitter to platoon in LF, he's better off used on a platoon at 3B with Holt. It's a hell of a lot easier to find a half-decent RHH left fielder than it is to find a half-decent third baseman, plus we already know that Middlebrooks plays decent 3B defense but are less sure that he'd take to LF well.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,925
|
Post by ericmvan on Jun 17, 2014 9:38:09 GMT -5
The left fielder X in question would need to be good enough offensively to counter the drop-off defensively from Bradley to Betts in center and also the (likely) dropoff from Betts to X in left. There are a few players around the league who fit that description, so not at all an impossible proposition. But there's then the question of allocation of resources. If third base (given a Bogaerts move back to short) and catcher continue to be issues, would the upgrade there be a better use of the money the Sox have to spend? Longer term (beyond 2015), first base and right field and I guess DH could all be concerns. By then, though, I suppose we'll have a better idea of the player Bradley is. And Betts too, for that matter. You're over-thinking it. If we've given CF to Betts over Bradley, it's because Betts is better overall. Combine offense and defense here. So, all you have to do to assure that this is the better alignment is find a LF who is overall as good in LF as JBJ was in CF, or better. And if JBJ was overall average in CF, that's easy. (Worst case for Betts overall in CF is that he's roughly as good as in LF, losing UZR but gaining an offsetting value of his RC/27. But he's probably a better CF than a RF. Gravy.) I agree that the development of the likes of Marrero, Middlebrooks, Cecchini, and Coyle may well impact this.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jun 17, 2014 10:08:47 GMT -5
Trade for Cargo or Sign Melky for 3 years. Will have a great bench of; Nava, JBJ and Brockstar. fWAR, 2013-present: Daniel Nava: 1.8 Brock Holt: 0.5 Jackie Bradley, Jr: 0.1 Melky Cabrera: 0.1 Just a little perspective. A little different if you include 2012 eh?
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Jun 17, 2014 10:14:08 GMT -5
A little different if you include 2012 eh? Not a good sign when you're handing out a contract for 2015-2017 based on results from 2012.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jun 17, 2014 10:25:19 GMT -5
A little different if you include 2012 eh? Not a good sign when you're handing out a contract for 2015-2017 based on results from 2012. I'll go back to 2011. Look what he's done from 2011-2014. One bad year. You can have Nava.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 17, 2014 11:26:02 GMT -5
Why? Seems like a pretty bad idea to me. A pretty bad idea? Or a slightly less effective idea that may lead to a couple less runs over the course of a year as argued by sabermetrics ? I still am not sure I fully understand the argument that the 3 hole isn't that important. I believe it has something to do with opportunities with men in scoring position for that batting spot right? Does that take into consideration that teams usually put their best batters like Pujols, Cabrera, Ortiz in the 3 hole? The first time through the lineup, the 3rd hitter more often than not comes up to bat with 2 outs and no one on. That's why you want your best hitter 4th. Because he either leads off an inning or definitely has someone on base.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 17, 2014 11:32:38 GMT -5
We need a lot more of Holts and Betts if we want so many platoons. And also have to pray that JF sticks to the platoons.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jun 17, 2014 11:52:42 GMT -5
We need a lot more of Holts and Betts if we want so many platoons. And also have to pray that JF sticks to the platoons. You want to platoon Mookie? He'd only play 50 games per year. He's got to play every day. I think Holt can be useful as that 10th man type of player at a couple of different positions. Give Xander at 3b a blow if he's not playing SS, plays 2nd when Pedey needs a day, can play LF and slide another OF into CF if Mookie needs a day. If the front office isn't stubborn, Xander can still play shortstop here and there too. Play him there when you have a flyball pitcher like Workman. Back to 3rd in the late innings if you're ahead. With questionable offense out of catcher and shortstop if we don't play Xander there, tough to carry JBJ's bat until he figures it out. Maybe, Mookie won't work out either. Who knows at this point.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 17, 2014 12:10:32 GMT -5
We need a lot more of Holts and Betts if we want so many platoons. And also have to pray that JF sticks to the platoons. You want to platoon Mookie? He'd only play 50 games per year. He's got to play every day. I think Holt can be useful as that 10th man type of player at a couple of different positions. Give Xander at 3b a blow if he's not playing SS, plays 2nd when Pedey needs a day, can play LF and slide another OF into CF if Mookie needs a day. If the front office isn't stubborn, Xander can still play shortstop here and there too. Play him there when you have a flyball pitcher like Workman. Back to 3rd in the late innings if you're ahead. With questionable offense out of catcher and shortstop if we don't play Xander there, tough to carry JBJ's bat until he figures it out. Maybe, Mookie won't work out either. Who knows at this point. No, we need more positionally flexible players to have platoons. Especially with a full-time DH. That was what I meant.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Jun 17, 2014 12:13:54 GMT -5
Boston Herald:
Only a tiny little bit though. Mostly he's a victim of his own performance.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 17, 2014 12:27:09 GMT -5
Boston Herald: Only a tiny little bit though. Mostly he's a victim of his own performance. Can't wait for Carp to get back.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Jun 17, 2014 14:26:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Jun 17, 2014 14:58:22 GMT -5
With Sizemore gone and JBJ riding the bench, will Victorino be playing CF when he gets back?
|
|
|