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.
2014-15 offseason discussion
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Jan 23, 2015 16:08:12 GMT -5
Assuming we sign one more reliever of the Badehop caliber, I think this team should be one of the favorites for the playoffs. I'm looking at 91-92 wins. I like the depth and the fact that they have strength at so many positions. When you spread out the downside risk over more players, the chances of achieving a quality output is increased. We have lots of solid position players. Not all of them are going to slump. If even 6 hit as expected, that's a decent offense. And we have some young guys who may turn out to be stars ( Bogaerts, Betts, Castillo ). If even one of those guys hits big that makes a huge difference.
And the starters should be pretty steady, if not spectacular. Maybe we have a solid overall pen.
I have no problem with standing relatively pat, and try to build some value in Craig, Victorino and Nava for a trade of 1 or more. I have no problem with Cecchini as injury depth for this team in AAA for the OF or 3rd base. Either he or Craig probably get traded IMO.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Jan 23, 2015 16:24:56 GMT -5
You should also look at other teams' holes with as much scrutiny. The Red Sox are average or better at every position with a ton of depth. Most other teams have a lot more question marks than we do. So you think that factoring the starter acquisitions, the additions of Ramirez and Sandoval but minus Miller and with Koji yet another year older, move us from a decidedly sub .500 team to the best team in baseball? Gosh, I sure hope that you're right. 3 starter acquisitions (not including Kelly) + Ramirez + Sandoval + Betts full season + Castillo + Vazquez full season + Bogaerts improvement = potential for big improvement
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 23, 2015 16:53:32 GMT -5
I take the view that they are relatively good but because you can't project everything, sometimes they are way off. To use the worst case as the example is not painting an accurate overall picture, it's only portraying the extreme. ADD: Having the Red Sox at or near the top last year was pretty universal, it wasn't limited to the Steamers. I don't think anyone here is necessarily picking on Steamer in particular so much as team win projections in general. "Sometimes they are way off." Sometimes they hit the mark. Where's the value in that? Or, is the point here merely to establish a methodology for "winning on paper?" Because a significant portion of our discussions (e.g., should they make a win-now trade or signing?) depends on trying to predict how good the 2015 Red Sox are. If you're going to go down that road, you might as well start with a system that has proven to be one of the more accurate set of projections out there, including outperforming Vegas by some measures.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jan 23, 2015 17:48:43 GMT -5
I was picking on Steamer in particular. Like baseball players, some projection systems are certainly better than others and I was trying to gauge if Steamer was more Mike Trout, Jason Heyward, or Jonny Gomes.
To me, the best thing about Steamer/Fangraphs is the interface. You can sort and manipulate it any number of basic ways without even pasting stuff into excel.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Jan 23, 2015 18:09:54 GMT -5
Any updates on Nava/Miley? Would be kinda awkward telling Miley how much he sucks. Guidas could do that job for them.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 23, 2015 18:15:53 GMT -5
How can you reasonably compare anything with a sample size of 30 ?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 23, 2015 20:12:56 GMT -5
Based on Steamer/Fangraphs projections, the Red Sox win more games by making Betts a full-time starter and not giving his PA's away.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jan 23, 2015 20:24:06 GMT -5
Based on Steamer/Fangraphs projections, the Red Sox win more games by making Betts a full-time starter and not giving his PA's away. I'm sorry, but that's the sort of reductive analysis that gets me so worked up. Arguing that Betts should be a full time starter needs to be deeper than "Steamer says so!" And I agree that he should be a full-timer.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 23, 2015 20:33:21 GMT -5
Based on Steamer/Fangraphs projections, the Red Sox win more games by making Betts a full-time starter and not giving his PA's away. I'm sorry, but that's the sort of reductive analysis that gets me so worked up. Arguing that Betts should be a full time starter needs to be deeper than "Steamer says so!" And I agree that he should be a full-timer. It was an argument that Steamer/Fangraphs standings projection is low. Betts is getting more than 389 PAs and a lot more than 2.4 WAR.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 23, 2015 20:34:41 GMT -5
Based on Steamer/Fangraphs projections, the Red Sox win more games by making Betts a full-time starter and not giving his PA's away. I'm sorry, but that's the sort of reductive analysis that gets me so worked up. Arguing that Betts should be a full time starter needs to be deeper than "Steamer says so!" And I agree that he should be a full-timer. Actually, it isn't from my viewpoint. It's more or less putting a number to a scouting consensus rather than the other way around.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Jan 23, 2015 20:41:34 GMT -5
I'm sorry, but that's the sort of reductive analysis that gets me so worked up. Arguing that Betts should be a full time starter needs to be deeper than "Steamer says so!" And I agree that he should be a full-timer. Actually, it isn't from my viewpoint. It's more or less putting a number to a scouting consensus rather than the other way around. You of all people think Bett's gets more than 389 AB though correct?
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 23, 2015 20:45:00 GMT -5
For me, Betts is the full time lead off hitter. That's not based on what Steamer thinks but the Steamer proportionate confirmation is good to see. The only thing I'm not sure of is CF or RF and I'm also not sure how a healthy Victorino fits into this if he isn't traded. There's a news story out there that Shane has been sending Farrell pictures of his Abs which is hillarious. Definite early on candidate for the David Ortiz BSOHL with pictures award.
|
|
|
Post by wskeleton76 on Jan 23, 2015 20:50:25 GMT -5
Actually, it isn't from my viewpoint. It's more or less putting a number to a scouting consensus rather than the other way around. You of all people think Bett's gets more than 389 AB though correct? More than 600.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Jan 23, 2015 20:55:13 GMT -5
If Betts is as good as their own projections suggest then he's getting more than 400 PAs.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jan 23, 2015 21:45:01 GMT -5
Any updates on Nava/Miley? Would be kinda awkward telling Miley how much he sucks. Guidas could do that job for them. Miley is a number 4 starter who faced pitchers 3-4 times a game until he shows he's not. Nava is the greatest on base machine since Kevin Youkilis (against right handed pitching, at least).
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Jan 24, 2015 7:15:22 GMT -5
Barring a trade or Henry Owens setting the world on fire, our rotation is comprised of two guys (Masterson and Clay) who pitched terribly last year, two guys (Miley and Kelly) who've never pitched a full season in the AL let alone the AL East, and one guy (Porcello) who defines mediocrity. We're going to have to win an awful lot of 7-5 and 8-6 games to get to a Steamer projected win total of 90. Exactly. Somewhere between pessimism and optimism....realism
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Jan 24, 2015 8:58:37 GMT -5
Barring a trade or Henry Owens setting the world on fire, our rotation is comprised of two guys (Masterson and Clay) who pitched terribly last year, two guys (Miley and Kelly) who've never pitched a full season in the AL let alone the AL East, and one guy (Porcello) who defines mediocrity. We're going to have to win an awful lot of 7-5 and 8-6 games to get to a Steamer projected win total of 90. Exactly. Somewhere between pessimism and optimism....realism Well, if you're using that post to illustrate pessimism, I guess ... but that's going too far, imo. Porcello does not "define mediocrity"; he's a young pitcher who has gotten better over his career and was a 3.2/3.1 fWAR pitcher over the last 2 years. Whether guys have pitched in the AL or not is irrelevant. And while Masterson did pitch terribly last year, he was also hurt. Buchholz, well, what are you gonna do? That guy's a mystery. Look, it's pretty clear the Sox have identified what they believe is the most efficient path to building a pitching staff from scratch: acquire a ton of depth of young arms with good GB rates. Maybe there are some other, hidden qualities that we don't know about, too, but this seems to be what they're going with. It is not an optimal solution; I've certainly made clear my preference for more on the top end of the rotation. But it's also not some kind of ridiculous disaster of a pitching staff, and there's real depth below it. I think at least one of the AAA lefties will be ready to contribute mid-way through the season, Wright is being overlooked, and Barnes could refine his curve enough to be a weapon. Barring a rotation of established major leaguers, the Sox are trying to minimize the downside by maximizing the number of guys who could be good. At least it's a lot more fun than signing retreads and hoping for the best. You know, something I just thought of while mentioning the GB tendencies of the team: catchers who control the running game are an important complement to that quality in pitchers. Ground balls limit extra base hits, and then with catchers that control the running game, you're going to force teams into stringing together a few hits in a row to score some runs.The Sox definitely have a plan that they're executing on ... it'll at the very least be interesting to see how it pans out.
|
|
|
Post by artfuldodger on Jan 24, 2015 9:02:55 GMT -5
Unlike some, I have not dismissed the idea of James Shields signing. 4 or more years would be beyond my comfort level. He is a competitor who would be a good signing at 3years at around 20 million per. Plus, his record at Fenway is skewed. For the past three years, Shields record at Fenway has been:
By Stadium ERA W L SV SVO GP GS CG IP H R ER HR BB SO AVG Fenway Park 1.80 1 0 0 0 3 3 0 20.0 16 5 4 1 6 16 .225
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 24, 2015 9:26:52 GMT -5
Exactly. Somewhere between pessimism and optimism....realism Well, if you're using that post to illustrate pessimism, I guess ... but that's going too far, imo. Porcello does not "define mediocrity"; he's a young pitcher who has gotten better over his career and was a 3.2/3.1 fWAR pitcher over the last 2 years. Whether guys have pitched in the AL or not is irrelevant. And while Masterson did pitch terribly last year, he was also hurt. Buchholz, well, what are you gonna do? That guy's a mystery. Look, it's pretty clear the Sox have identified what they believe is the most efficient path to building a pitching staff from scratch: acquire a ton of depth of young arms with good GB rates. Maybe there are some other, hidden qualities that we don't know about, too, but this seems to be what they're going with. It is not an optimal solution; I've certainly made clear my preference for more on the top end of the rotation. But it's also not some kind of ridiculous disaster of a pitching staff, and there's real depth below it. I think at least one of the AAA lefties will be ready to contribute mid-way through the season, Wright is being overlooked, and Barnes could refine his curve enough to be a weapon. Barring a rotation of established major leaguers, the Sox are trying to minimize the downside by maximizing the number of guys who could be good. At least it's a lot more fun than signing retreads and hoping for the best. You know, something I just thought of while mentioning the GB tendencies of the team: catchers who control the running game are an important complement to that quality in pitchers. Ground balls limit extra base hits, and then with catchers that control the running game, you're going to force teams into stringing together a few hits in a row to score some runs.The Sox definitely have a plan that they're executing on ... it'll at the very least be interesting to see how it pans out. Another important facet of the ground ball pitcher / running game catcher combo is that it keeps the double play in order which is exactly what you want for a ground ball pitcher. The Sox might set records for DPs this year.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Jan 24, 2015 9:49:40 GMT -5
Barring a trade or Henry Owens setting the world on fire, our rotation is comprised of two guys (Masterson and Clay) who pitched terribly last year, two guys (Miley and Kelly) who've never pitched a full season in the AL let alone the AL East, and one guy (Porcello) who defines mediocrity. We're going to have to win an awful lot of 7-5 and 8-6 games to get to a Steamer projected win total of 90. You are completely off base on Porcello. The guy just turned 26. He has been worth 3 WAR a year since he was 23. Porcello is not 34 year old journeyman pitcher.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jan 24, 2015 10:03:35 GMT -5
I was picking on Steamer in particular. Like baseball players, some projection systems are certainly better than others and I was trying to gauge if Steamer was more Mike Trout, Jason Heyward, or Jonny Gomes. Trying to figure out who the Bill James system is. Jeff Francoeur? Ryan Howard?
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jan 24, 2015 10:06:58 GMT -5
Barring a trade or Henry Owens setting the world on fire, our rotation is comprised of two guys (Masterson and Clay) who pitched terribly last year, two guys (Miley and Kelly) who've never pitched a full season in the AL let alone the AL East, and one guy (Porcello) who defines mediocrity. We're going to have to win an awful lot of 7-5 and 8-6 games to get to a Steamer projected win total of 90. Can we stop talking about the AL East this way? It's not what it once was.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Jan 24, 2015 10:35:22 GMT -5
Barring a trade or Henry Owens setting the world on fire, our rotation is comprised of two guys (Masterson and Clay) who pitched terribly last year, two guys (Miley and Kelly) who've never pitched a full season in the AL let alone the AL East, and one guy (Porcello) who defines mediocrity. We're going to have to win an awful lot of 7-5 and 8-6 games to get to a Steamer projected win total of 90. Can we stop talking about the AL East this way? It's not what it once was. Yeah, I was going to say the same thing ... I mean, the rest of the AL East has to deal with the Red Sox lineup, but the Sox pitchers don't exactly have a murderer's row to face ... The AL East is probably above average in part because the parks are relatively friendly for offense, but this isn't the fearsome AL East of a few years ago.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jan 24, 2015 10:58:48 GMT -5
Actually looking at it a little more I may have to reconsider. The Blue Jays are going to be very tough and the Orioles and Yankees will both probably be average to above. The Rays are really the only soft opponent. It's not a great division anymore but that has more to do with the lack of top-end rotations than anything else.
Still adjusting to the dystopian world of .300 OBP guys being above average hitters that we're living in.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Jan 24, 2015 11:00:55 GMT -5
Red Sox Weekend at Foxwoods is on NESN 9 to 4 today. Most of the players are there. Pretty good stuff so far. Bunch of guys from the 75 team are there. Bill Lee just had me in stitches." Still crazy after all these years"
|
|
|