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 bryce on Aug 18, 2014 22:34:50 GMT -5
Do you think Allen Craig+Mookie Betts+Yoenis Cespedes will hit over 60 HR?
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 16,515
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 18, 2014 23:20:18 GMT -5
Do you think Allen Craig+Mookie Betts+Yoenis Cespedes will hit over 60 HR? No, so what's your point? The guys you mentioned are going to cost precious prospects. How much better would they really be given what you'd have to give up? And in Bruce's case, he's a decent player, but he's not that good. If they're going to give up precious prospects it better be for an ace pitcher or an outfielder who's better than the two you mentioned.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Aug 19, 2014 6:50:15 GMT -5
Do you think Allen Craig+Mookie Betts+Yoenis Cespedes will hit over 60 HR? Number of teams in 2014 who will have 60+ HRs from three outfielders: 4. Colorado (Uhh, we could have a reason for that) Florida (substitute Stanton on just about any team and they get to 60 HRs) Orioles (only if we consider Nelson Cruz an "OFer") Toronto 60 HRs will likely be the cut off for an average (total) OF production. There are about 14 teams in baseball who are on track for 60 HRs in their total outfield. Note that many of these AL teams rotate their DH. Yes, to answer a rational version of your question: I think a team with Craig/Betts/Cespedes as their primary OFers will likely get 60+ HRs from their OF. Most projections -- assuming just a little bit of heath from Craig -- will probably say something like 15/8/25 from those three, which gets you to ~50 right there. However, that is a silly way to look at how to create an offense.
|
|
|
Post by bryce on Aug 19, 2014 7:39:53 GMT -5
Does Heyward really make sense for us next year? He is a similar player to Victorino, albeit a better one because of age, injury history, and batting. And he is only under contract for 1 more year. So at some point to keep Heyward we would have to commit a contract to him, which there is a good possibility we will have that opportunity next offseason. Seeing that we would have to both trade away players and resign him, with Victorino on the roster this doesn't make sense to me in 2015, at least with how the roster is at this moment. 2016 I'm completely on board, let's sign him. What I said means that why don't we get Heyward and Bruce in the down year? That may decrease the package we need to send for him. Also,we can still package some of our current star such as Shane Victorino,Mike Napoli or Yoenis Cespedes included, maybe decrease it as well. Heyward perform badly offense this year depite his outstanding defense. As you say,if we don't pursue him until he hits free agency and he has an another breakout season next year,he will be expensive at that time. It's terrible to bid for him at the moment. We can try to aquaire him and another starting pitcher from the kingdom of pitchers-Braves. All in All,what I want to say is that it's wise for Ben to get cheaper ones like Heyward or Bruce but not luxuries such as Giancarlo or CarGo. I am sorry to post too many same messages here for you painfully reading. I am a newcomer,so I don't know the rules here. Maybe I should post this one in the other forum to discuss such a odd idea of trade. I am sorry to disturb all of you. Thanking you for your reading!
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Aug 19, 2014 9:25:45 GMT -5
It is fine to discuss these concepts in this thread. Specific trade proposals belong in the trade proposal forum. Let's keep this broader discussion of next year's roster out of the Rusney Castillo thread.
ATL and CIN will not view trading Heyward and Bruce as trades in which they should take a discount. The problem with suggesting such a large number of moves for the offseason is the simple fact that trades are difficult to make in the real world. Teams don't like to make trades and generally like their players more than other teams' players (unlike the fantasy baseball world, in which only stats matter). Teams have to be concerned about clubhouse politics and constructing lineups and not just about stats. So, we can say that Jay Bruce is having a down year (and he is), but CIN will say that this year did not represent his true value and will not trade him for less than his true (pre-2014) value.
I would expect to hear the same thing about Jason Heyward, even though Heyward's power numbers have fallen two years in a row. Even if ATL were inclined to trade Heyward, they would not be looking for players who are paid a lot of money and whose contract ends at the same time as Heyward. Instead, they (as would CIN) be likely looking for top prospects to replenish their prospect pools.
Like others have stated, I see no trade pool for Victorino until he prove he can stay healthy over an extended time. Therefore, Victorino is likely a trade deadline deal next year, if at all. As for Napoli, I don't see him being traded to open a spot at 1B for Allen Craig - he would be one the last people I would even consider trading.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Aug 19, 2014 11:45:52 GMT -5
There is little chance that Stanton will be traded this offseason, much to the dismay of many posters here. It is possible that the Red Sox will trade Cespedes this offseason, if they believe Craig and Victorino are healthy. However, it is more likely that Cespedes will be a trade deadline deal if (1) they don't believe they can re-sign him or they do not want to re-sign him or (2) the Red Sox are out of the race again. Because of the health concerns with Craig and Victorino, I don't see the Red Sox trading away viable power bats such as Napoli or Cespedes. The Red Sox offseason is likely to be centered around acquiring pitching, not bats. The red sox have scored the least amount of runs in the American League....why would they not be looking at bats? I think the FO will be looking at any and all ways to improve what currently is not a very good team.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Aug 19, 2014 12:34:24 GMT -5
While I don't think it's ideal, and I don't see the Sox not adding a position player, I think you can field a team with the players you have and explain every position. Ortiz, Napoli, Pedroia, Craig, and Cespedes all have earned starting spots. Vazquez glove will carry his spot alone. Between Bradley, Betts, and Victorino you have a good chance get having decent production from CF. Bogaerts is projected to be a top player in the league at some point. 3B is the toughest to explain, but between Middlebrooks and Holt, and the possibility that Cecchinni, Bogaerts, or Betts might get some time there you can justify it.
Not ideal at all, but compared to other lineups it isn't terrible. They will add pieces.
On the other hand, I don't think you can explain starting 2015 with a rotation of Buchholz, Webster, Workman, DLR, and Kelly.
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan on Aug 19, 2014 12:36:15 GMT -5
The Red Sox will go after pitching because overpaying for Lester or Scherzer and trying to build an offense around the trio of Betts, Bogaerts and Swihart makes more sense than trading your top prospects for two years of Stanton and the opportunity to overpay him for the next decade.
|
|
|
Post by juniorp90 on Aug 19, 2014 12:47:09 GMT -5
C-VASQUEZ 1B-CRAIG 2B-PEDROIA 3B-SANDOVAL (FA) SS-BOGAERTS LF-CESPEDES CF-R. CASTILLO (FA) RF-BETTS DH-ORTIZ
BENCH: Ross, Holt, Nava, Victorino
1-LESTER (FA) 2-CASHNER OR LATOS (TRADE) 3-BUCHHOLZ 4-DE LA ROSA 5-WEBSTER/RANAUDO
UEHARA TAZAWA WORKMAN HEMBREE ESCOBAR MILLER (FA) AJ RAMOS (TRADE)
Here my comments: With the possible protected pick (Top 10) and Compensation, we have two safe draft picks.
We have enough prospects in the farm to get some of the best pitchers available (to mention Cashner or Latos). Also relievers (Ramos).
And of course with those possibly safe selections, we can sign Jon Lester, Pablo Sandoval and Miller without risking the draft.
There is money, and we want to win. ***I forgot Napoli, which of course, would be on the market in my opinion...
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Aug 19, 2014 16:36:23 GMT -5
AMFOX, I want to pick your brain tell me your starting rotation next year. What you want it to be. Just curious How you think of the young kids and so forth.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Aug 19, 2014 17:13:12 GMT -5
AMFOX, I want to pick your brain tell me your starting rotation next year. What you want it to be. Just curious How you think of the young kids and so forth. I think the 2015 Red Sox rotation is currently unknowable. The main job of Ben and his team is to figure it out this offseason and spring training. The organization has approx. $55mm to spend under the luxury tax threshold, according to my calculations, and mainly needs pitching and a third baseman (under the assumption that Bogaerts should be given every opportunity to retain the SS job and that Holt fits best as a 10th man). My current projection for the 2015 rotation is as follows: [Free agent] Buchholz Kelly De La Rosa Webster with Workman as the swingman and whoever's left of Escobar, Rodriguez, Barnes, Ranaudo, Owens, Johnson and Wright beginning next year in AAA. My projection assumes no trades. I believe one or more trades are likely this offseason, and it would not surprise me if any of the pitchers listed above were traded for a #2-3 starter. I don't see the Red Sox signing either Lester or Scherzer. It would be a great story if Lester re-signs with the team but I just don't believe this story will have a happy ending for us. I could see the Red Sox being a player for Shields, assuming they have a protected pick. I also could see the Red Sox being a player for Maeda (Japanese 26YO pitcher). edit: revised to add Ranaudo, Owens and Johnson at AAA.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Aug 19, 2014 17:20:51 GMT -5
I have moved the Stanton discussion to the trade proposal thread, where it belongs.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Aug 19, 2014 17:39:24 GMT -5
My current projection for the 2015 rotation is as follows: [Free agent] Buchholz Kelly De La Rosa Webster I hope I can be forgiven for thinking, at the present time at least, that Kelly is pretty poor for a #3 pitcher. (I think Steven Wright could be a pretty good choice for that slot though... wish the Sox would try to provide some evidence there.)
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 16,515
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 19, 2014 17:53:25 GMT -5
AMFOX, I want to pick your brain tell me your starting rotation next year. What you want it to be. Just curious How you think of the young kids and so forth. I think the 2015 Red Sox rotation is currently unknowable. The main job of Ben and his team is to figure it out this offseason and spring training. The organization has approx. $55mm to spend under the luxury tax threshold, according to my calculations, and mainly needs pitching and a third baseman (under the assumption that Bogaerts should be given every opportunity to retain the SS job and that Holt fits best as a 10th man). My current projection for the 2015 rotation is as follows: [Free agent] Buchholz Kelly De La Rosa Webster with Workman as the swingman and Escobar, Rodriguez, Barnes and Wright beginning next year in AAA. My projection assumes no trades. I believe one or more trades are likely this offseason, and it would not surprise me if any of the pitchers listed above were traded for a #2-3 starter. I don't see the Red Sox signing either Lester or Scherzer. It would be a great story if Lester re-signs with the team but I just don't believe this story will have a happy ending for us. I could see the Red Sox being a player for Shields, assuming they have a protected pick. I also could see the Red Sox being a player for Maeda (Japanese 26YO pitcher). Where does Anthony Ranaudo fit into this? The AAA rotation? I would think Owens would begin in AAA, so you'd have six among Ranaudo, if he's not dealt or starting in Boston, Escobar, Rodriguez, Wright, and Barnes.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 19, 2014 18:00:10 GMT -5
I think we'll see some significant trade(s) this winter. We have too many AAA prospects who are close to ML ready and we're probably not willing to give a lot of them a shot at the same time.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Aug 19, 2014 22:28:34 GMT -5
I think the rotation is one free agent starter away from being set.
The biggest need remains a left handed bat that can play left field.
I think we add a couple quality bullpen arms and we are ready to return to the playoffs.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Aug 20, 2014 18:07:00 GMT -5
My current projection for the 2015 rotation is as follows: [Free agent] Buchholz Kelly De La Rosa Webster I hope I can be forgiven for thinking, at the present time at least, that Kelly is pretty poor for a #3 pitcher. (I think Steven Wright could be a pretty good choice for that slot though... wish the Sox would try to provide some evidence there.) Kelly is a poor choice but Wright could be a good one? What's he done in the majors to show that? I get he hasn't had much of a chance but this seems like irrational fan love. I agree with AmFox that the remainder of this year is key. Unfortunately, there are too many guys we need answers on and not enough rotation spots. Too bad Clay is what he is because we need him to pitch. One thought is to do a six man rotation but messing with their routines doesn't help get answers. I kind of wish they would put Workman in the pen and let Ranaudo take his turn. However, I also watch Workman and at times feel like he could possibly be a real solid kid rotation guy.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Aug 20, 2014 23:24:51 GMT -5
Cherington has made it fairly plain that he intends to add veteran pitching in the off-season. He will try to sign Lester. If that doesn't work, he will try to sign one of the other big FAs. He also may trade for a pitcher like Hamels. I think he has been very definitive on this. The Sox will add at least one big name pitcher and probably more than one.
I think that more moves may occur in the OF. A lot will depend on the Castillo negotiations. If he is signed, then one or two of the existing OFs almost certainly is going to be traded.
It appears that Middlebrooks is not going to establish himself as the 3B this season and I think his clock then runs out. Either Holt will be the 3B or they will go after an established 3B. Earlier in the season I thought Marrero would become the SS and Bogaerts would move back to 3B. I don't think that now. Marrero's slump pretty much eliminates that possibility.
I would not be surprised if there was a fairly substantial turnover of personnel before next season. The present team just isn't cutting it, and there are no promising indicators that it will.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Aug 21, 2014 0:15:04 GMT -5
I think the 2015 Red Sox rotation is currently unknowable. The main job of Ben and his team is to figure it out this offseason and spring training. The organization has approx. $55mm to spend under the luxury tax threshold, according to my calculations, and mainly needs pitching and a third baseman (under the assumption that Bogaerts should be given every opportunity to retain the SS job and that Holt fits best as a 10th man). I don't see the Red Sox signing either Lester or Scherzer. It would be a great story if Lester re-signs with the team but I just don't believe this story will have a happy ending for us. I could see the Red Sox being a player for Shields, assuming they have a protected pick. I also could see the Red Sox being a player for Maeda (Japanese 26YO pitcher). I agree it appears the favorite is the field vs Boston right now. Looking at 2015 the team does have approximately 55 million to spend. However looking beyond we see, according to Cot's, committed salaries of 22.37 mil in 2016, 26.125 mil in 2017, 17.125 mil in 2018 and 15.125 mil in 2019. Question is where will Boston spend it's money? There are few extension candidates on the roster for the next three to four seasons. You can argue Napoli and Cespedes. Buchholz isn't currently looking like an extension candidate and the young players; Bogaerts, Bradley, Betts, Vazquez, De La Rosa etc... have numerous years of control before really needing to worry about extensions. The free agent market has been lean with no improvement in site. Adding payroll through trade is one method but there is a finite number of prospects to obtain worthy talent.
There is uncertainty but not improbability the team will have cost control at:
C - Vazquez or Swihart SS - Bogaerts or Marrero 3B - Cecchini or Middlebrooks OF- Betts or Bradley or longer term Margot SP - Kelly, De La Rosa, Webster, Workman, Owens, Barnes, Johnson, Escobar, Rodriguez, etc . . RP - any of the above plus a number of other minor league arms
In addition a somewhat team friendly deal at 2B with Pedroia and maybe soon a rather affordable AAV in the OF by signing Castillo. There are still weaknesses at 1B and potentially 3B in addition to a front of the rotation starter but 100 million of salary flexibility come 2016 is one potential reality.
I'd argue there are very few teams in the MLB set up to be aggressive on Lester better than Boston (w/ the Cubs in this category as well). I know the philosophy has been counter to such a signing but this roster construction can absorb one or two risky signings including a year or two of sunk salary cost. Even as the arb salaries rise exceeding the luxury threshold is a small likelihood in the near future years. Take into account the new CBA may increase the threshold beyond its current constitution.
Perhaps the front office continues the current course limiting contract length and AAV in relation but there are increasingly less avenues to value spend. Clearly extending your existing young players is number one. Trading for a 25 to 28 year old and following it up with an extension is an option but it limits the ability to do the first option. Signing free agents on a limited market once the QO is altered is not going to be for value as competition adds years and dollars. Signing internationally although risky may be the new inefficiency however it appears the market is catching up. If the team is comfortable approaching the luxury tax then there is a portion of the payroll that supports a 6 year Lester deal and a few other similar deals as long as said deals are staggered to avoid multiple players declines coinciding during the last two contract years creating "dead" cap space. For example sign Lester to a 6 year deal from '15 to '20, followed by another such deal to whichever worthy player from '17 to '22 and again to another worthy player from '19 to '24 in which the Lester deal will clear and the cycle can continue. Essentially you have earmarked a portion, say 25 million to 30 million, of payroll each season to riskier investment in which the expected outcome may only be a 40% return but could very well be 70% with the possibility and hope the lost value is made up for in the first four years of the extension.
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Aug 21, 2014 15:18:29 GMT -5
I want the Sox to promote a hitting coach from internal. I want U.L. Washington. This is the guy who is credited with fixing Mookie Betts. I see a transition with the Sox and its is going to continue. We are going to get younger and younger and I feel someone who is in the system working with young kids is the key. I believe veterans may not be as needy. I also believe our veterans will be young. The ownership has a mandate no more long term deals with over 30 year olds. Papi is 36 or 37,Nap next year last year,Victorino last year next.
I cant help to think the hitting coach got a free ride this year. I feel bad that he was hurt earlier but maybe the Sox should of gave him the est of the year off? I also know the hitting coach isnt the only reason for the struggles. We use to have awesome hitting coachs. Magadan was underrated.
|
|
|
Post by klostrophobic on Aug 21, 2014 16:46:01 GMT -5
How can you reasonably assess the talents of a hitting coach as a fan?
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Aug 21, 2014 16:46:52 GMT -5
A couple of questions about how the value of player contracts are calculated for purposes of the cap:
- If a player is given a cash bonus to sign, over and above his annual salary, is the total of the bonus included in the first year, or is it spread out over the life of the contract?
- If a certain amount of a player's salary is deferred, to be paid over a period of time after he retires, how is that calculated for purposes of the cap? Or is it even legal to do?
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Aug 21, 2014 16:51:47 GMT -5
How can you reasonably assess the talents of a hitting coach as a fan? Generally, I think that is very hard to do. However, sometimes patterns can be seen, or a player obviously has a problem which he doesn't seem to be trying to correct. I think JBJ is a good example of the second. I don't know if there is a pattern except for the fact that so many players are struggling. Managers can be very odd about coaches, sometimes very protective, sometimes very distant. I don't know about Farrell and his relationships with his coaches.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Aug 21, 2014 16:54:09 GMT -5
A couple of questions about how the value of player contracts are calculated for purposes of the cap: - If a player is given a cash bonus to sign, over and above his annual salary, is the total of the bonus included in the first year, or is it spread out over the life of the contract? - If a certain amount of a player's salary is deferred, to be paid over a period of time after he retires, how is that calculated for purposes of the cap? Or is it even legal to do? - It is spread out over the term of the contract (as is a buyout at the end of the contract). - They calculate the present value of the deferred payments and spread it over the term of the contract (I don't know what discount rate they use).
|
|
|
Post by ethanbein on Aug 21, 2014 17:40:28 GMT -5
- They calculate the present value of the deferred payments and spread it over the term of the contract (I don't know what discount rate they use). Wait, so is it that salary over the life of the contract is not discounted, but payments after the term of the contract are discounted? If that's how it works, couldn't a team convince a player to take most of his salary from the final year of a deal in the following year, which would cause that payment to be discounted in calculating AAV? That could be pretty significant on longer deals if that's how it works. I'm sure I'm missing some nuance, though.
|
|
|