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 soxfan1615 on Nov 12, 2014 17:16:32 GMT -5
What do you guys think of signing old friend Jed Lowrie for like 2yr/22MM as a fallback option at 3rd? Assuming Sandoval and Headley resign with Giants and Yanks respectively. Coming off a down year, he could be serviceable and cheap. A little stopgap until Cecchini or Devers. I think your Devers schedule is very optimistic. He might get a September callup in 2017 but he won't be our opening day starter. I agree with the point that's been made several times (by jmei IIRC) that Lowrie will be more valuable to a team looking for a SS or 2B than to us. and he will most likely bust
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 12, 2014 17:18:56 GMT -5
I don't think he's worth 20m to begin with but someone who thinks a 3b is better think that player can justifiably play first at that salary. The defense shouldn't be valued that much in real dollars.
|
|
|
Post by sdsoxfan on Nov 12, 2014 18:35:05 GMT -5
1 Betts RF 2 Pedroia 2B 3 Ortiz DH 4 Cespedes LF 5 Napoli 1B 6 Sandoval 3B 7 Castillo CF 8 Bogaerts SS 9 Vazquez C
Adding Panda to our lineup gives us a chance to deliver top 3 MLB offense with above average/excellent defense outside of SS. All top free agents in their prime come with above market salaries that are difficult for them to live up to. We happen to have a significant need at 3B which has been a black hole for 2+ years and if Cecchini or Middlebrooks ultimately deserve MLB playing time could push Panda to the primary DH in a year or two when Papi finally retires. Watching our 2014 team deliver the most inept offense (outside of Papi) that we've seen since the mid 1980's was painful and shouldn't ever happen to a WS defending champ with the resources we have available. Giving the Panda $90-95M over 6 years similar to Hunter Pence money is not an overpay through his age 34 season and teaming him with Papi/Cespedes/Napoli in the heart of our order will provide him with significantly more lineup protection than he ever got in SF.
All the vitriol/hate by posters apparently is based on the fear of Panda getting $10M more than he deserves during each of last 2 years of his 6 year contract (age 33-34 years) because his body won't age well.
Panda loves to compete and loves to play. Bochy loves this guy and the brighter the lights, the better he plays which will endear him to Sox fans. Add in two top starters and this team will be in the hunt in 2015 with lots of position player depth on major league and in Pawtucket.
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Nov 12, 2014 19:04:30 GMT -5
Like I said in the offseason thread, I'd much rather throw money at Hanley than either Sandoval or Headley. Hanley vs. RHP: .298/.367/.492/.860, .194 iso, 129 wRC+ Sandoval vs. RHP: .304/.357/.493/.850, .189 iso, 132 wRC+ Headley vs. RHP: .269/.357/.411/.768, .143 iso, 118 wRC+ Yes, Headley's numbers are probably a little deflated because he played in Petco for most of his career, but if we are going to pay big money for anyone it should be Hanley. Not to mention that Hanley has pretty much no RvL splits while Sandoval, a switch hitter, has huge RvL splits to go along with his huge gut. Oh gees, thank you for this. You too, danr. I'm all in on Hanley now. Honestly the only thing making me somewhat okay with signing Panda was the fact that he's a LH bat, but these splits, combined with the fact that Cespedes and Napoli could be elsewhere after the season, make me buy in. My new order of 3B preference: 1) Hanley Ramirez 2) Josh Donaldson (trade) 3) Daniel Murphy (trade) 4) Chase Headley 5) Pedro Alvarez (trade)
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 12, 2014 23:00:09 GMT -5
1 Betts RF 2 Pedroia 2B 3 Ortiz DH 4 Cespedes LF 5 Napoli 1B 6 Sandoval 3B 7 Castillo CF 8 Bogaerts SS 9 Vazquez C Adding Panda to our lineup gives us a chance to deliver top 3 MLB offense with above average/excellent defense outside of SS. All top free agents in their prime come with above market salaries that are difficult for them to live up to. We happen to have a significant need at 3B which has been a black hole for 2+ years and if Cecchini or Middlebrooks ultimately deserve MLB playing time could push Panda to the primary DH in a year or two when Papi finally retires. Watching our 2014 team deliver the most inept offense (outside of Papi) that we've seen since the mid 1980's was painful and shouldn't ever happen to a WS defending champ with the resources we have available. Giving the Panda $90-95M over 6 years similar to Hunter Pence money is not an overpay through his age 34 season and teaming him with Papi/Cespedes/Napoli in the heart of our order will provide him with significantly more lineup protection than he ever got in SF. All the vitriol/hate by posters apparently is based on the fear of Panda getting $10M more than he deserves during each of last 2 years of his 6 year contract (age 33-34 years) because his body won't age well. Panda loves to compete and loves to play. Bochy loves this guy and the brighter the lights, the better he plays which will endear him to Sox fans. Add in two top starters and this team will be in the hunt in 2015 with lots of position player depth on major league and in Pawtucket. I'd prefer a lineup of: Betts LF Pedroia 2B H. Ramirez 3B Ortiz DH Napoli 1B Heyward RF Bogaerts SS Castillo CF Vazquez C (although I'm hoping by year's end it will be Swihart, which would really balance out the lineup) Of course the trick would be to find a way to get Jason Heyward, as I think he'd be the best LH hitting option available if Sandoval doesn't come to Boston.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 12, 2014 23:08:52 GMT -5
I don't think Cecchini is going to eventually hit 15 to 20 per year Perhaps not, but I'm not so sure of that. It seems to me that he was trying to incorporate power into his swing and struggled most of the season until he seemed to find something toward the end of the season that allowed him to hit well and with some power as most of his hitting including his power was during the last six weeks of the season. The downside of that was that Cecchini's K rate jumped up. Maybe he's just a AAAA type of player or a platoon player with little power who can't play 3b, but I do think that the rough start in AAA was more the blip than his past track record. I do think he'll wind up a regular at some point soon, although I suspect it will be for somebody else.
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Nov 13, 2014 5:20:30 GMT -5
So far, the 3B options we've mentioned via trade are: Josh Donaldson Luis Valbuena Pedro Alvarez Daniel Murphy David Freese
This is kind of a long shot, considering Seattle is certainly contending in 2015, and DJ Peterson may not be ready until 2016, but if Boston ends up filling their hole at 3B via trade, I'd like to see them contact Seattle about Kyle Seager. Ranked 15th in baseball in WAR (fangraphs), team control through 2017, entering his age 27 season. Unfortunately, they don't seem to be a great trade partner (due to their SP depth and Zunino), but Cespedes would certainly be enticing for them, at least as a starting piece to get the ball rolling.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 13, 2014 9:29:25 GMT -5
I don't think he's worth 20m to begin with but someone who thinks a 3b is better think that player can justifiably play first at that salary. The defense shouldn't be valued that much in real dollars. Hanley has a much better bat than Sandoval so he'd be much more acceptable at 1b or DH. Seriously, if Sandoval played 1B now, he'd be getting a James Loney type of contract.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 13, 2014 9:32:56 GMT -5
I don't think Cecchini is going to eventually hit 15 to 20 per year Perhaps not, but I'm not so sure of that. It seems to me that he was trying to incorporate power into his swing and struggled most of the season until he seemed to find something toward the end of the season that allowed him to hit well and with some power as most of his hitting including his power was during the last six weeks of the season. The downside of that was that Cecchini's K rate jumped up. Maybe he's just a AAAA type of player or a platoon player with little power who can't play 3b, but I do think that the rough start in AAA was more the blip than his past track record. I do think he'll wind up a regular at some point soon, although I suspect it will be for somebody else. I think Cecchini's best case scenario is a Daniel Murphy type unless his walk and strikeout rates go back to what they were in AA and below.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Nov 13, 2014 9:45:51 GMT -5
I'm curious to know why anyone would think that Hanley would magically be able to stay healthy upon signing with the Sox?
Count me in, thinking that he would be a better player for the Sox at 3B than Sandoval, but not if he plays less than 100 games which has been the case in 3 of the last 4 years.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Nov 13, 2014 10:07:55 GMT -5
I'm curious to know why anyone would think that Hanley would magically be able to stay healthy upon signing with the Sox? Count me in, thinking that he would be a better player for the Sox at 3B than Sandoval, but not if he plays less than 100 games which has been the case in 3 of the last 4 years. Games played by year from 2006-14: 158, 154, 153, 151, 142, 92, 157, 86, 128. So under 100 games in two of the last four seasons. Let's review the non-trivial injuries: 2011: back (14 games missed); sprained left shoulder (52 games missed) 2012: nothing (minor hand injury forced him to miss 3 games) 2013: right thumb (24 games missed); strained left hamstring (28 games missed; returned, missed 3 additional games after a few games back); bruised right shoulder (8 games missed); left hamstring again (4 games missed) 2014: minor calf injury (3 games missed, 1 more a week later); right shoulder injury (8 games missed over three weeks); wrist injury (3 games missed); right oblique strain (14 games missed) So the bad news is that, yes, he's been quite injury prone lately. The good news is that not a single one of those injuries have really carried over multiple seasons. The right shoulder injury is his only ailment to impede him for more than one season, and in both 2013 and 2014, is was rather minor. It does cause concern regarding his throwing strength, but that's somewhat mitigated long term by the ability to shift him to 1B/LF/DH. Other than that, the left hamstring injury was alarming, but it was nice to see that it didn't bother him at all in 2014. So, I don't know. Would you rather have an injury ridden player who may miss time out of the blue due to a random injury, or one who has one or two specific ailments that have lingered significantly over multiple seasons?
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Nov 13, 2014 10:52:50 GMT -5
If Hanleys injury history scares you, then so too should Pablos
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Nov 13, 2014 16:09:59 GMT -5
“@cjnitkowski: Pablo not a bad fit in Fenway. Brooks Baseball spray chart from 2013-14 batting LH. Note doubles & HR. l @2014flop t.co/16FOxv3nTl”
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Nov 13, 2014 20:31:02 GMT -5
If they really want him then they won't let him leave Boston next week without signing a contract.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Nov 13, 2014 20:45:14 GMT -5
Remember this toy we found after the trades that resulted in acquiring Cespedes and Craig: katron.org/projects/baseball/hit-location/Now run it for Panda in ATT for 2014 overlaid with Fenway. Imprecise, yes, because you're dealing with NL pitchers, etc. But if you want to go for length of batted ball he gets 17 HRs in the home games alone.
|
|
ehaz
Rookie
Posts: 26
|
Post by ehaz on Nov 13, 2014 21:15:30 GMT -5
So far, the 3B options we've mentioned via trade are:Josh Donaldson Luis Valbuena Pedro Alvarez Daniel Murphy David Freese This is kind of a long shot, considering Seattle is certainly contending in 2015, and DJ Peterson may not be ready until 2016, but if Boston ends up filling their hole at 3B via trade, I'd like to see them contact Seattle about Kyle Seager. Ranked 15th in baseball in WAR (fangraphs), team control through 2017, entering his age 27 season. Unfortunately, they don't seem to be a great trade partner (due to their SP depth and Zunino), but Cespedes would certainly be enticing for them, at least as a starting piece to get the ball rolling. Yes, you can totally get the ball rolling with Yoenis freaking Cespedes on a one year contract for a 26 year old third baseman who was worth 6 WAR on a minimum contract. You're offering Betts ++ to even keep Seattle on the line
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Nov 13, 2014 22:07:01 GMT -5
So far, the 3B options we've mentioned via trade are:Josh Donaldson Luis Valbuena Pedro Alvarez Daniel Murphy David Freese This is kind of a long shot, considering Seattle is certainly contending in 2015, and DJ Peterson may not be ready until 2016, but if Boston ends up filling their hole at 3B via trade, I'd like to see them contact Seattle about Kyle Seager. Ranked 15th in baseball in WAR (fangraphs), team control through 2017, entering his age 27 season. Unfortunately, they don't seem to be a great trade partner (due to their SP depth and Zunino), but Cespedes would certainly be enticing for them, at least as a starting piece to get the ball rolling. Yes, you can totally get the ball rolling with Yoenis freaking Cespedes on a one year contract for a 26 year old third baseman who was worth 6 WAR on a minimum contract. You're offering Betts ++ to even keep Seattle on the line Get the ball rolling doesn't equal centerpiece of a deal moron.
|
|
ehaz
Rookie
Posts: 26
|
Post by ehaz on Nov 13, 2014 22:33:10 GMT -5
So you would say the Red Sox got the 'ball rolling' on dumping a half billion dollars in contracts with Nick Punto, right?
Regardless, why would Seattle ever entertain trading the only piece of their lineup that can actually hit besides Cano when they're likely spending this offseason in order to contend?
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Nov 13, 2014 23:44:22 GMT -5
So you would say the Red Sox got the 'ball rolling' on dumping a half billion dollars in contracts with Nick Punto, right? Regardless, why would Seattle ever entertain trading the only piece of their lineup that can actually hit besides Cano when they're likely spending this offseason in order to contend? Um no, no I wouldn't say that. I said it was a long shot, guess you didn't read that part. They have a top 20 prospect who can fill the vacancy within a year, and a gaping hole in LF with the struggles of Dustin Ackley. Of course it would take numerous top prospects for a player of his worth, but not once have you seen me post ludicrous proposals like Marerro, Ranaudo, Coyle for Hamels, as some other posters have. Again, it's a long shot, as I said, but still worth mentioning if we're entertaining all possibilities at the position.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Nov 15, 2014 20:36:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Nov 16, 2014 13:09:54 GMT -5
Marketing is absolutely an important factor in this decision, and if Cherington doesn't factor it into his decision at least SOME he's being negligent in his job. Many people will say otherwise but his job is to create a marketable team as well as a winning team. In a lot of markets, the former is even more important than winning. There are lots of team owners who probably don't even care about winning that much as long as the cash cow keeps pumping out dollar signs.
Edit: And isn't "The Panda" exactly what the doctor ordered from a marketing viewpoint. Fresh new talent. Possible Papi replacement as a fan favorite. Colorful. Record of success. Left handed power bat which in itself positions us as a contender if we just get some starting pitching.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 16, 2014 13:14:07 GMT -5
Marketing is absolutely an important factor in this decision, and if Cherington doesn't factor it into his decision at least SOME he's being negligent in his job. Many people will say otherwise but his job is to create a marketable team as well as a winning team. In a lot of markets, the former is even more important than winning. There are lots of team owners who probably don't even care about winning that much as long as the cash cow keeps pumping out dollar signs. Edit: And isn't "The Panda" exactly what the doctor ordered from a marketing viewpoint. Fresh new talent. Possible Papi replacement as a fan favorite. Colorful. Record of success. Left handed power bat which in itself positions us as a contender if we just get some starting pitching. Can you please go look at Sandoval's stats? www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=5409&position=3B
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,016
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 16, 2014 13:24:51 GMT -5
A sure sign that the Apocalypse is nigh: Nick "If the Sox sign Sandoval, they'll likely bat Rusney Castillo leadoff and have Mookie Betts platoon with Allen Craig hitting 7th" Cafardo actually provides some useful information in today's Globe.
I'd been wondering if the CBA permitted weight clauses, and Cafardo points out (or asserts) that they can only be bonuses, not penalties.
I'd have no problem if they signed him to a contract that had relatively modest guarantees and sizable bonuses for maintaining a playable weight. That would essentially protect the team against the one thing we all fear.
Something like a 6 year deal starting at $16M plus a $3M bonus for not exceeding a certain weight all season long, with the guaranteed money going down and the weight bonus going up $1M a year, finishing at $11M with an $8M bonus in year 6. The idea is that the total value with the bonuses has to be really attractive, of course.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 16, 2014 13:40:42 GMT -5
I'm wondering what a Craig/Betts platoon looks like. I imagine it's one that would be even more annoying than watching Gomes vs RHP while Nava was on the bench. I didn't think it was possible to think of a dumber one.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 16, 2014 13:55:59 GMT -5
A sure sign that the Apocalypse is nigh: Nick "If the Sox sign Sandoval, they'll likely bat Rusney Castillo leadoff and have Mookie Betts platoon with Allen Craig hitting 7th" Cafardo actually provides some useful information in today's Globe. I'd been wondering if the CBA permitted weight clauses, and Cafardo points out (or asserts) that they can only be bonuses, not penalties. I'd have no problem if they signed him to a contract that had relatively modest guarantees and sizable bonuses for maintaining a playable weight. That would essentially protect the team against the one thing we all fear. Something like a 6 year deal starting at $16M plus a $3M bonus for not exceeding a certain weight all season long, with the guaranteed money going down and the weight bonus going up $1M a year, finishing at $11M with an $8M bonus in year 6. The idea is that the total value with the bonuses has to be really attractive, of course. The problem is that other teams are almost certain to offer him straight-up fully-guaranteed contracts, and so in order to get him to go for a contract like the above with significant conditional money, you'll have to significantly increase the total potential financial outlay, potentially to the point where it's not worth it anymore. While his weight is a concern, there's no guarantee that a skinny Sandoval is necessarily an effective one, which means you might still end up significantly overpaying. Also, considering that Sandoval has expressed some frustration/annoyance with the constant focus on his weight in the past, I'm not sure he'd go for a contract like this one that makes his annual weigh-ins the subject of a considerable media circus.
|
|
|