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 burythehammer on Sept 6, 2014 16:30:46 GMT -5
To me what they better worry about is having one lefty in Nava who it seems everyone wants to trade. With the mix of fielders plus Holt than Nava might just service as they have to have at least one outfield lefty (off the bench anyway). Seems as though out of all the talk no one wants to look at that aspect. Nava as the only lefty has been mentioned, so it is being talked about. I think Nava as the 4th outfielder is one of the better bets in this conversation. What I think will happen in order of confidence: 1. Castillo will be one of the three starting outfielders. 2. Nava will be one of the five outfielders. 3. Cespedes will be one of the three starting outfielders. 4. Betts will be one of the three starting outfielders. 5. Craig will be one of the five outfielders. 6. Victorino will be one of the five outfielders. 1A. Stanton will be one of the three starting outfielders .
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 6, 2014 16:48:18 GMT -5
Lotta people here are big on sell low strategies. Usually works out about as well as it sounds. I assume you are referring to Victorino? What are the alternatives? 1. Keep him and give him one of the five outfield spots. Which means you would have to: a. Sell low on Craig. b. Sell Nava and have 5 righties in the OF. c. Sell Cespedes and weaken the starters. d. Sell/start Mookie in the minors and weaken the starters. You can't count on him as one of your top 3 OFers. He doesn't make sense as the 4th OFer with 3 righties ahead of him. He could possibly make sense as the 5th outfielder, but that would also involve selling low on Craig. He also isn't critical in that role because Betts, Castillo, and Holt are all capable of playing CF and Cespedes, Craig, Nava, Betts, Castillo, and Holt can all play right. It makes more sense to hold on Craig because if he does bounce back he is likely to replace either Cespedes or Napoli in 2016. Victorino has no value beyond next year. So with that said, what do you suppose we do? I know jmei has mentioned trading Cespedes and I agree with him that of the above options that makes the most sense assuming you can get a starter back for him, but I think dumping Victorino is the better option, since I don't like the idea of weakening the top 3 OF spots. No, it was more of a general comment - I was talking about all the chatter in the last six weeks on getting rid of Buchholz (gee, that died down), Middlebrooks, Bradley, and Victorino. Vic - and I love all he did for us - is the only one I'd consider in that group, and even then you'll be getting almost nothing back and eating salary. A few of us suggested trading Doubront after the WS because his value was likely never to be higher. More of us were wondering when Middlebrooks had his breakout AA season if he was more Brandon Inge or Evan Longoria (at the time he looked like the latter). Ditto Lars Anderson, Michael Bowden and a few others. This is really an important component of front offices - knowing what you have (i.e. not falling in love with your prospects) and being ruthlessly clear-eyed on when, and when not to deal them. What differentiates good talent evaluators from elite talent evaluators is knowing when you can maximize return vs. performance. But really, it was just a general comment in the game day thread about how so many people seem ready to sell at the bottom of value. As for what they are going to do in the outfield - and with the pitching - I have zero clue. I can't see a strategy or a plan right now and anxiously await the off-season. Ben's had one really good one and two not so good ones. I am fascinated to see how this one will go and how they make sense of all the pieces/assets.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Sept 6, 2014 17:26:56 GMT -5
There are so few hitters like Cespedes that the odds of getting another are really low. Hitting is enormously valuable now, the most valuable it has been in a generation, especially reliable high-impact hitting. It is doubly important for the Sox to keep Cespedes because Ortiz is going to run down before too much longer. You're overrating Cespedes' bat. He's a good hitter, but far from a transcendental one. He's got a 115 wRC+ this year with the Red Sox, a 115 wRC+ this year as a whole, and a career 117 wRC+ (that's a stat which accurately weighs the relative contributions of OBP and slugging, where 100 is league-average). That's good, but far from great-- it compares to the 2012-2014 offensive production of guys like Starling Marte (118 wRC+), Matt Joyce (116 wRC+), Andre Ethier (115 wRC+), and Brett Gardener (115 wRC+). Over the past three years, Allen Craig has a 118 wRC+ and Daniel Nava has a 112 wRC+, so a Craig/Nava platoon may well approximate Cespedes' offensive production (though they are worse defenders and thus likely represent worse overall production; Craig may also not be a great bet to perform similar to his 2012-14 self in 2015). You are falling into that trap of putting too much into pure obscure numbers as I sometimes refer to them JMEI. It can be dangerous. Add defensive runs saved, his flat out power and runs when it counts. I imagine if Cespedes, Joyce, Marte were all on the market at the same time? Cespedes would make as much as both those combined and then some. Cespedes has the "potential" to be a short term at least counter to Ortiz, as well as RH protection that even Napoli has never been against pitchers. If there is one guy on the roster, or even around the league the team should look to sign/extend, it should be him 1st.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Sept 6, 2014 17:39:37 GMT -5
The Sox should give Cepedes the $100M in a deal this winter. There isn't another player available who can give the Sox what he does. Outs in 70% of his plate appearances? Like Mark Trumbo? Did anyone have an issue getting him (if they could have) prior to last season? The D-Backs paid dearly to acquire him, though he was hurt this year, they can probably expect him to return to crushing the ball in 2015. Cespedes is Trumbo with a cannon arm and + fielder.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Sept 6, 2014 18:09:53 GMT -5
I could be wrong, but as memory serves, most here thought the D-Backs were insane to pay what they did for Trumbo.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Sept 6, 2014 18:15:44 GMT -5
Cespedes is clearly a good fit in Fenway though, as a pull happy player, with minimal pickings in the FA market next winter. He will probably put up better numbers in Fenway than almost any park in baseball. And the Redsox can afford him and do apparently want him. Not saying it's easy to sign him but he's probably worth more to Boston than just about any other team. I don't see the Yankees or Dodgers wanting him badly. My bet is that they extend him this winter.
It is important that they find out this winter though. If he can't be extended we should trade him almost for sure.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Sept 6, 2014 18:22:38 GMT -5
Cespedes "breaking out" within the next couple of years is a possibility too. Not saying you bank on that happening, but I like his chances of having a 130 wRC+ year a lot more than people around his level of production right now (Span, Ellsbury, Castro).
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Sept 6, 2014 18:56:42 GMT -5
Honestly I just didn't understand the Craig acquisition at the time and still don't understand it now. I would prefer not only Victorino but also JBJ as one of our 5 outfielders over Craig.
(I would also much prefer Lackey as one of our starting pitchers next year over Kelly...)
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Sept 6, 2014 18:58:01 GMT -5
I could be wrong, but as memory serves, most here thought the D-Backs were insane to pay what they did for Trumbo. There was a back n forth with regards as to was it an over pay or not. Probably would haven't been an issue had Trumbo not gotten hurt this year. What the D-backs were after was something that is Sooo rare now in the game and Cherrington is costing the team AB's for others at the 3b position still in Middlebrooks.. immense RH power potential. It's hard to find and why people like Trumbo, Cespedes and think even the to be 36YO FA Josh Willingham will get a 1-2y deal that will be worth more than he just made, always injured or not.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Sept 6, 2014 19:02:31 GMT -5
There are so few hitters like Cespedes that the odds of getting another are really low. Hitting is enormously valuable now, the most valuable it has been in a generation, especially reliable high-impact hitting. It is doubly important for the Sox to keep Cespedes because Ortiz is going to run down before too much longer. You're overrating Cespedes' bat. He's a good hitter, but far from a transcendental one. He's got a 115 wRC+ this year with the Red Sox, a 115 wRC+ this year as a whole, and a career 117 wRC+ (that's a stat which accurately weighs the relative contributions of OBP and slugging, where 100 is league-average). That's good, but far from great-- it compares to the 2012-2014 offensive production of guys like Starling Marte (118 wRC+), Matt Joyce (116 wRC+), Andre Ethier (115 wRC+), and Brett Gardener (115 wRC+). Over the past three years, Allen Craig has a 118 wRC+ and Daniel Nava has a 112 wRC+, so a Craig/Nava platoon may well approximate Cespedes' offensive production (though they are worse defenders and thus likely represent worse overall production; Craig may also not be a great bet to perform similar to his 2012-14 self in 2015). I looked at that stat, but I am not a big fan of it. I also looked at OPS+ and Cespedes is a little behind Napoli in that category, but catching up. The thing with Cespedes is that he is only 26 years old. He hasn't reached his prime yet. I still am old-fashioned enough to look at actual performance. Cespedes wins more games than Nava, a lot more, and Nava is OK with me. I think Cespedes can be a 30 HR hitter with the Sox, maybe more, and I don't know of anyone they can acquire (assuming that he who should not be named is not available) who can come close to that. There also is no one in the Sox minors, other than possibly Devers, who might come close to that. He is an impact player and there are very few like him. They should pay him what it will take.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Sept 6, 2014 19:10:28 GMT -5
I looked at that stat, but I am not a big fan of it. I also looked at OPS+ Whoever decided it would be a good idea to publish an OPS+ stat should be taken out back and shot. It is a bad stat masquerading as a good stat, and it has no raison d'etre.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Sept 6, 2014 19:50:14 GMT -5
They both are comparison stats, which don't excite me. When hardly anyone is hitting, being among the leaders in one of these stats is not a big deal. That's the problem now. The hitting generally sucks. So when you have someone who does hit, especially in crucial situations, you put a high value on him.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Sept 6, 2014 19:52:21 GMT -5
I looked at that stat, but I am not a big fan of it. I also looked at OPS+ Whoever decided it would be a good idea to publish an OPS+ stat should be taken out back and shot. It is a bad stat masquerading as a good stat, and it has no raison d'etre. No wish to start a flamer on this topic (again) over this, though I feel that way in general with several of the stats several of the people constantly refer to as gospel as to how good a ball player is/is not. Not they can't be used IN ADDITION to the basic lines (obp like) though feel it can be harmful in over analyzing in some cases and not trying to poke at anyone of you guys here.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,322
|
Post by radiohix on Sept 6, 2014 19:56:57 GMT -5
Cespedes is Trumbo with a cannon arm and + fielder. Beside the arm, he's really a bad fielder with no range and bad routes and those are not the numbers talking.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 6, 2014 20:45:54 GMT -5
You're overrating Cespedes' bat. He's a good hitter, but far from a transcendental one. He's got a 115 wRC+ this year with the Red Sox, a 115 wRC+ this year as a whole, and a career 117 wRC+ (that's a stat which accurately weighs the relative contributions of OBP and slugging, where 100 is league-average). That's good, but far from great-- it compares to the 2012-2014 offensive production of guys like Starling Marte (118 wRC+), Matt Joyce (116 wRC+), Andre Ethier (115 wRC+), and Brett Gardener (115 wRC+). Over the past three years, Allen Craig has a 118 wRC+ and Daniel Nava has a 112 wRC+, so a Craig/Nava platoon may well approximate Cespedes' offensive production (though they are worse defenders and thus likely represent worse overall production; Craig may also not be a great bet to perform similar to his 2012-14 self in 2015). I looked at that stat, but I am not a big fan of it. I also looked at OPS+ and Cespedes is a little behind Napoli in that category, but catching up. The thing with Cespedes is that he is only 26 years old. He hasn't reached his prime yet. I still am old-fashioned enough to look at actual performance. Cespedes wins more games than Nava, a lot more, and Nava is OK with me. I think Cespedes can be a 30 HR hitter with the Sox, maybe more, and I don't know of anyone they can acquire (assuming that he who should not be named is not available) who can come close to that. There also is no one in the Sox minors, other than possibly Devers, who might come close to that. He is an impact player and there are very few like him. They should pay him what it will take. You might not be a big fan of it, but I'm confident that just about every front office in baseball uses a stat similar to it to evaluate players' hitting ability (with the only differences likely being more sophisticated park/competition adjustments). I'm not sure what you mean by actual performance, but linear weights-type stats like wOBA (from which wRC+ is derived) do exactly that-- they take actual production (a player's singles, doubles, triples, home runs, and walks/HBPs) and weighs them according to how likely they are to contribute to team scoring. OPS is flawed because it weighs slugging and OBP equally, when in actuality one point of OBP is worth about almost twice as much as a point of slugging. Stats like wOBA and wRC+ correct for that. By the way, Cespedes is 28 (and turns 29 in October), not 26, and is well within his prime. He'll likely hit better in Fenway, but most hitters do. He hits lots of home runs, but doesn't get on base, and getting on base is very important to team scoring. I hope you'll admit that judging a player solely based on how many home runs he hits is a flawed way of evaluating a player.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Sept 6, 2014 21:00:40 GMT -5
Could I be convinced that there could be some benefit to having a guy who hits HR even if it is at the expense of OBP, probably.
But I'm not sure how many HR's/XBH's a guy like Cespedes would have to have to compensate for a .300 OBP. I think the Sox could make it work, but the problem they could run in to is having multiple sub .300 OBP guys in the lineup if they stick with say Vazquez or JBJ. It just doesn't give them a lot of wiggle room in any other spot in the lineup to have a low OBP guy, be it full time or due to injury.
Is there any correlation between HR's and winning games? Thinking about it generally it seems to help, but it often comes at the expense of BA/OBP etc. If I had the time I'd look into this, but maybe one of the other stat-centric posters has done this or could do it easily
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 6, 2014 21:02:23 GMT -5
Cespedes is clearly a good fit in Fenway though, as a pull happy player, with minimal pickings in the FA market next winter. He will probably put up better numbers in Fenway than almost any park in baseball. And the Redsox can afford him and do apparently want him. Not saying it's easy to sign him but he's probably worth more to Boston than just about any other team. I don't see the Yankees or Dodgers wanting him badly. My bet is that they extend him this winter. The thing is, every hitter will put up better numbers in Fenway than in most parks, because Fenway is an extreme hitter's park. The calculus isn't "is he a good fit in Fenway," but "is he a better fit in Fenway than other guys," and the answer to that question is more nebulous. I also think Cespedes will be helped by Fenway less than you might expect. The Green Monster massively inflates doubles for right-handed hitters but actually plays neutralish in terms of HRs, because a lot of hard-hit line drives bounce off the top of the wall in Fenway when they would be HRs in other parks. True, Cespedes pulls the ball a lot, but a lot of his pull power is of the crazy-hard-hit-line-drive type as opposed to the towering fly ball type, and so Fenway doesn't help him as much as you'd think. (I think the real actual benefit of Fenway for him is its lack of foul territory-- Yoenis hits a ton of popups that are foul balls here but easy outs elsewhere. It's a small sample, but we're already starting to see this happen-- his IFFB is down from 13.6% in Oakland (consistent with his career rates) to just 8.3% as a member of the Red Sox this season.)
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Sept 6, 2014 21:16:23 GMT -5
That is so true and few seem to be able to wrap their heads around it. Jimmy Rice was tortured by the wall, his low liners were singles/Doubles. Dwight Evans, Nick Esasky, Tony Armas got tremendous benefits from the wall, being pull hitters. It's also why Cody Ross came to fenway and had the tremendous year he did, a dead pull, Flyball hitter with mediocre power.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 6, 2014 21:26:10 GMT -5
By the way, the fact that many of you are so bullish on Cespedes as an elite hitter is why I'd rather trade him than sell low on Victorino or Nava or even Craig. Yeah, Cespedes is a much, much safer bet to be an above-average hitter than those other guys, but the public perception of him still outpaces what I think he'd reasonably project to contribute next year. It's just really easy to overvalue home runs, and he still has some of that mystical Cuban aura about him.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Sept 6, 2014 21:32:47 GMT -5
I looked at that stat, but I am not a big fan of it. I also looked at OPS+ and Cespedes is a little behind Napoli in that category, but catching up. The thing with Cespedes is that he is only 26 years old. He hasn't reached his prime yet. I still am old-fashioned enough to look at actual performance. Cespedes wins more games than Nava, a lot more, and Nava is OK with me. I think Cespedes can be a 30 HR hitter with the Sox, maybe more, and I don't know of anyone they can acquire (assuming that he who should not be named is not available) who can come close to that. There also is no one in the Sox minors, other than possibly Devers, who might come close to that. He is an impact player and there are very few like him. They should pay him what it will take. You might not be a big fan of it, but I'm confident that just about every front office in baseball uses a stat similar to it to evaluate players' hitting ability (with the only differences likely being more sophisticated park/competition adjustments). I'm not sure what you mean by actual performance, but linear weights-type stats like wOBA (from which wRC+ is derived) do exactly that-- they take actual production (a player's singles, doubles, triples, home runs, and walks/HBPs) and weighs them according to how likely they are to contribute to team scoring. OPS is flawed because it weighs slugging and OBP equally, when in actuality one point of OBP is worth about almost twice as much as a point of slugging. Stats like wOBA and wRC+ correct for that. By the way, Cespedes is 28 (and turns 29 in October), not 26, and is well within his prime. He'll likely hit better in Fenway, but most hitters do. He hits lots of home runs, but doesn't get on base, and getting on base is very important to team scoring. I hope you'll admit that judging a player solely based on how many home runs he hits is a flawed way of evaluating a player. I just don't get it. At a minimum...Cespedes has done the one thing this team had a terrible time doing all year.....driving runs in. And people say...trade him because the advanced metrics say it really isn't or trade him because of some hypothetical future prediction value. I get that stuff is useful and important...but for God's sake...don't you think this team is better with him on it.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 6, 2014 21:38:47 GMT -5
I don't mean to be glib, but I don't think using RBIs to evaluate a player is a good idea.
I will readily admit that he is definitely one of their three best outfielders, and trading him makes the 2015 outfield at least slightly worse. But if you can get someone like Mat Latos for him and massively upgrade the rotation? I think you have to at least consider it.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Sept 6, 2014 21:51:36 GMT -5
And I didn't say that RBI's was a good stat..and you have now pointed out to 2 posters your opinions of counting stats. That's fine..I don't take it personally.
I can only speak to having watched a guy have a positive impact in plating runs by driving in runs...and given the difficulty of our favorite team in doing that all year..I don't want to trade him. I am not going to concern myself with his hypothetical regression. He is under contract for next year....at a reasonable price. Let's ride it out.
I swear that sabermetrics has a portent gene in it.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Sept 6, 2014 21:53:31 GMT -5
I don't mean to be glib, but I don't think using RBIs to evaluate a player is a good idea. I will readily admit that he is definitely one of their three best outfielders, and trading him makes the 2015 outfield at least slightly worse. But if you can get someone like Mat Latos for him and massively upgrade the rotation? I think you have to at least consider it. Think what you are suggesting getting in return is approximate to 2-3x as much as they gave up, that is half a season of a #2 and getting (in a Latos type) 2 full seasons of something that is nearly the same. I can't see a team giving up that much talent, even if Boston sweetened the pot by including of the Pawsox pitchers, say Workman, Ranaudo, Wright. None of the others, but one of those 3 or adding Middlebrooks also. My 2c. You might have other thoughts? I'd be curious to hear what are thinking of a possible Latos/Cespedes. Have thought of him, much more than Hamels, who would be very difficult with the contrary Amaro.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 6, 2014 21:57:55 GMT -5
And I didn't say that RBI's was a good stat..and you have now pointed out to 2 posters your opinions of counting stats. That's fine..I don't take it personally. I can only speak to having watched a guy have a positive impact in plating runs by driving in runs...and given the difficulty of our favorite team in doing that all year..I don't want to trade him. I am not going to concern myself with his hypothetical regression. He is under contract for next year....at a reasonable price. Let's ride it out. I swear that sabermetrics has a portent gene in it. Sorry, I assumed "driving runs in" = RBIs. Not an unreasonable assumption, I think. It's not that I think he's going to regress. It's that I don't think he's been all that great in the first place, even in his stint with the Red Sox. He has certainly had his fair share of of big hits, but he's also made a lot of outs, and that matters as well.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 6, 2014 22:06:14 GMT -5
Think what you are suggesting getting in return is approximate to 2-3x as much as they gave up, that is half a season of a #2 and getting (in a Latos type) 2 full seasons of something that is nearly the same. I can't see a team giving up that much talent, even if Boston sweetened the pot by including of the Pawsox pitchers, say Workman, Ranaudo, Wright. None of the others, but one of those 3 or adding Middlebrooks also. My 2c. You might have other thoughts? I'd be curious to hear what are thinking of a possible Latos/Cespedes. Have thought of him, much more than Hamels, who would be very difficult with the contrary Amaro. This is more a question for the trade proposal subforum, but I think Cespedes and one of Workman or Ranaudo would be enough to get Latos. Latos struggled with injuries this year, and didn't perform as well when he was on the field. I think he and Cespedes are both likely to be three to three and a half win-ish players next year, which makes exchanging them seem like it could work. The addition of Workman/Ranaudo is meant to make up for the fact that Latos can receive a QO but Cespedes can't. Alternatively, maybe Cespedes for Mike Leake straight-up. I've always liked Leake, and he's made big strides this year.
|
|
|