Nava, fine, but how many positions do you want Brock Holt to back up? The guy's the primary middle-infield backup already. And I already said I wasn't comfortable with JBJ and felt he needed the reps down in Pawtucket ... I guess I could've said that the Sox are depending on Victorino's health or Bradley's bat, and I'm not sure I'd feel all that solid about either. Really, if Victorino breaks down, you're talking about replacing him with JBJ or Weeks. I think the chances are high that Craig's a better player than either of them this year, and the team is just better constructed with him on it than any of these options.
If Ramirez gets hurt, Craig is the clear replacement for him. Same with Napoli ... and I mean "replacement" not just in the positional sense but in the sense of possibly approximating some semblance of the offensive profile, as well. He offers some long-term value as a Napoli replacement at reasonable AAV, too, if that's needed. It's just a better team with Craig on it.
Imagine the risk of Victorino breaking down and the risk of JBJ not hitting and killing his long-term value, then think of Ben Cherington's attitude toward downside risk ... I'd be stunned if Craig goes anywhere.
So as jmei already pointed out, you're still ignoring Castillo, who seems to me to be a major part of this equation. As for JBJ killing his long-term value by not hitting... he already has 530 MLB PAs to his name, and they haven't been pretty. How much lower can his "long-term value" (do you mean to the Sox or to a potential trade partner) get? Sure, I suppose some AAA PAs to get his swing down would be reasonable, but even if Craig is gone, JBJ is only up if an outfielder gets injured, and they could still call up Weeks instead if they wanted to keep JBJ in AAA a bit longer.
As for Ramirez or Napoli getting hurt, as far as I'm concerned, Craig is the short side of the platoon to replace them (with Nava or Holt providing the long side). It's not like the batting order is stuffed with lefties so even against a left-handed starter it would still be conceivable to start Nava or Holt instead to maintain some semblance of "balance", though of course you could just bring them in as soon the RHRs come instead... either way, Craig shouldn't be getting much playing time, even in the case of an injury.
Now it's possible that Craig is suddenly able to mash right-handed pitching again, and I take it you are more optimistic about that than I am. But if he doesn't return to peak form I really don't see a need for him on this roster.
1. Having the best lineup playing daily. 2. Having the best 25-man roster. 3. Having sufficient depth on the 25-man roster and in AAA. ... ... 10. Maximizing Craig's trade value. 11. Not hurting Victorino's feelings.
Having Weeks as another legit utility option in AAA could free up Holt to backup CF/RF for a DL stint. JBJ showing signs of life with his bat makes him another option to backup CF/RF. Given those two depth options, we're getting to the point where we have enough depth that we don't need either Victorino or Craig. We can easily afford to move one of them.
Absent of trades, I have Craig in AAA and Victorino on the bench with Castillo in RF and Mookie in CF.
I don't want this becoming another Carp/Sizemore/Nava situation where the best player (Nava, Castillo) is in AAA just to not hurt feelings and worrying about having enough depth to man 3 major league outfields in case of 6 injuries or who our 2016 1B is (Napoli).
Last Edit: Mar 25, 2015 11:19:59 GMT -5 by jimed14
“We just lost a World Series game in 18 innings. But after that [meeting], it didn’t feel like we lost. It felt like we won.”
JimEd I agree with your list save for 11. IMO finding out exactly what Sox have in Craig should be more highly considered. Not knowing what you suggest for 4-10, I'd offer Craig 4+ ABs a day in AAA as about 5-6.
I made a New Year's resolution to lose 75 pounds. Only 86 pounds to go.
Of note, many teams were turned off by his old MRIs, whereas the Red Sox brought him in and took new ones, which looked better.
Still pretty much no chance he stays with the organization unless he decides not to opt out, but interesting nonetheless.
Last Edit: Mar 25, 2015 14:51:58 GMT -5 by Chris Hatfield
"We really don't need the whole commercial break/warm-up routine every time a new reliever comes into the game. It certainly made sense in 1884 when they only switched pitchers when the starter was attacked by pickaxe or caught consumption, and no reliever was warming up because he was busy gambling and drinking." - JD
I still think I'm going to wake up and say "I shouldn't listen to the podcast before bed, I dreamed the Sox signed a guy from Curaçao named Charlie Zink." - KOC
JimEd has a simple solution. Craig has options, Vic doesn't get sore sitting, so put Craig in AAA and Vic on the bench. If Craig develops tremendous trade value, trade him. Otherwise, keep him around until next year when Shanf isn't around.
1. Having the best lineup playing daily. 2. Having the best 25-man roster. 3. Having sufficient depth on the 25-man roster and in AAA. ... ... 10. Maximizing Craig's trade value. 11. Not hurting Victorino's feelings.
Having Weeks as another legit utility option in AAA could free up Holt to backup CF/RF for a DL stint. JBJ showing signs of life with his bat makes him another option to backup CF/RF. Given those two depth options, we're getting to the point where we have enough depth that we don't need either Victorino or Craig. We can easily afford to move one of them.
Absent of trades, I have Craig in AAA and Victorino on the bench with Castillo in RF and Mookie in CF.
I don't want this becoming another Carp/Sizemore/Nava situation where the best player (Nava, Castillo) is in AAA just to not hurt feelings and worrying about having enough depth to man 3 major league outfields in case of 6 injuries or who our 2016 1B is (Napoli).
Well, that's the thing-- I don't think it's clear that Castillo or Bradley are significantly better players on a per-game basis than Victorino or Craig. Sure, if Victorino and Craig look like shells of themselves, you shouldn't let them push better players to the bench/AAA. But the Red Sox aren't keeping them around just to avoid hurting their feelings-- it's because those two guys were, as recently as 2013, All-Star-caliber players, and they absolutely still have the potential to reach that level of performance. Implying that those two are going to suck because Grady Sizemore sucked last year is every bit as short-sighted as saying that Betts will suck because Bogaerts/Bradley/Middlebrooks sucked last year.
Now, to get more granular, Victorino's continued physical problems (giving up switch-hitting because of the physical toll, inability to play multiple games in a row) are legitimately very worrying. If he's just not healthy enough to play at a high level and is unlikely to get healthy enough to play at a high level, they need to DL him or release him, full stop. But the organization hasn't reached that point yet, and they're the ones who have the best sense of his physical condition. I suspect they're leaning towards concluding that Victorino can't get healthy enough to be that guy again, but they're willing to give him another couple weeks to see if that changes.
Remember, I don't think there's any urgency to resolve the situation before the end of Spring Training, and so I think it's premature to commit to any direction before then. You want as much information on as possible, and the next few weeks will provide a lot more detail on Victorino's physical condition and how Craig and Bradley look coming off down seasons and whether Castillo is in good enough physical condition to start the year in the majors. I just don't see a lot of (frankly, any) downside to waiting until the start of the season to figure things out (it's not like anyone is clamoring to trade for Victorino or Craig now), whereas there's plenty of upside (injuries internally might resolve the logjam, external injuries might lead to more demand for one of those guys, you get as much information as possible before comitting in any direction).
Yea, as of now the best outfield has to be Hanley, Castillo, Betts. Craig and Victorino may have something to say about that, but they have yet to prove otherwise. The difference between Vic and Castillo isn't big though, so I'm ok with a short term solution, like optioning Craig, DLing Vic, optioning Castillo, as long as it is roadmapping to the Hanley, Castillo, Betts outfield somewhere down the road.
Before any statement was made about Vic being the starting RF, I think most of us had this penciled in as the starting outfield.
Well, that's the thing-- I don't think it's clear that Castillo or Bradley are significantly better players on a per-game basis than Victorino or Craig. Sure, if Victorino and Craig look like shells of themselves, you shouldn't let them push better players to the bench/AAA. But the Red Sox aren't keeping them around just to avoid hurting their feelings-- it's because those two guys were, as recently as 2013, All-Star-caliber players, and they absolutely still have the potential to reach that level of performance. Implying that those two are going to suck because Grady Sizemore sucked last year is every bit as short-sighted as saying that Betts will suck because Bogaerts/Bradley/Middlebrooks sucked last year.
I'm not implying that those to are going to suck because Grady Sizemore sucked last year. I'm saying they have a good chance of sucking or being hurt all year because they both either sucked or were hurt last year.
The related point is that I don't want another Sizemore situation where someone undeserving is getting innings and plate appearances over someone better. I don't know why it's shortsighted to think what happened last season is possible again this season. We have much, much more depth than last year that we don't have to worry about hoarding it as much.
And you know damn well that Betts is going to get more games off than he needs to because of John Farrell trying to find playing time for these older guys. But even if that's just me being cynical, the rest of the points stand on their own.
Last Edit: Mar 25, 2015 16:03:03 GMT -5 by jimed14
“We just lost a World Series game in 18 innings. But after that [meeting], it didn’t feel like we lost. It felt like we won.”
I'm not implying that those to are going to suck because Grady Sizemore sucked last year. I'm saying they have a good chance of sucking or being hurt all year because they both either sucked or were hurt last year.
The related point is that I don't want another Sizemore situation where someone undeserving is getting innings and plate appearances over someone better. I don't know why it's shortsighted to think what happened last season is possible again this season. We have much, much more depth than last year that we don't have to worry about hoarding it as much.
And you know damn well that Betts is going to get more games off than he needs to because of John Farrell trying to find playing time for these older guys. But even if that's just me being cynical, the rest of the points stand on their own.
Putting too much emphasis on last year's results is a bad way of evaluating players (see: the short-lived furor over Boston's 2012-13 offseason). Sure, there's a good chance that Victorino and Craig are worse than Castillo or Bradley, but there's also a good chance that they're better. It's not like Castillo and Bradley are paragons of stability, either-- one was literally the worst hitter in baseball last year and the other has played three months of organized ball in the last two years. I'm just saying that it's not as clear-cut as you're suggesting.
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Mar 25, 2015 17:29:32 GMT -5
barring a trade before the season.....if Victorino and Craig are healthy and ready to play.....they'll be on the 25 man...and that's the way it should be. These are proven MLB players who need career resurrection to be tradeable commodities. It's a long season the young grasshoppers will be in the mix at some point.
Plus this is how Farrell likes to manage. Any other notion is, frankly, roster malpractice
"I'm a professional and I know what I have to do," said Sandoval, listed as 5-11 and 255. "I know where I've failed and how I've grown up. If I had signed (with the Giants), I knew I would be under a (weight) regimen for five years, and I'm not going to be happy someplace where I'm under that kind of regimen, where I can't be myself."
Translation - I know what's best for me and what's best for me is to remain undisciplined and fat. San Francisco wouldn't let me do that. So, that's why I came to Boston. This should be an interesting next five years.
"I'm a professional and I know what I have to do," said Sandoval, listed as 5-11 and 255. "I know where I've failed and how I've grown up. If I had signed (with the Giants), I knew I would be under a (weight) regimen for five years, and I'm not going to be happy someplace where I'm under that kind of regimen, where I can't be myself."
Translation - I know what's best for me and what's best for me is to remain undisciplined and fat. San Francisco wouldn't let me do that. So, that's why I came to Boston. This should be an interesting next five years.
LOVE the photo! If he eats like THAT, it will be an interesting 5 years. "Panda......put down that spoon.....and walk slowly away! Do not, I repeat, do not look back."
"I'm a professional and I know what I have to do," said Sandoval, listed as 5-11 and 255. "I know where I've failed and how I've grown up. If I had signed (with the Giants), I knew I would be under a (weight) regimen for five years, and I'm not going to be happy someplace where I'm under that kind of regimen, where I can't be myself."
Translation - I know what's best for me and what's best for me is to remain undisciplined and fat. San Francisco wouldn't let me do that. So, that's why I came to Boston. This should be an interesting next five years.
LOVE the photo! If he eats like THAT, it will be an interesting 5 years. "Panda......put down that spoon.....and walk slowly away! Do not, I repeat, do not look back."
It's important to note that this picture was taken during the recent filming of a to be classic episode of Man vs Food where Pablo defeated a previously fasting Adam Richmond in a match that went extra innings. It is photo-shopped just like that "other picture" of Pablo recently in the papers! The sundae is really bigger than it appears.
Last Edit: Mar 25, 2015 19:28:29 GMT -5 by sarasoxer
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 25, 2015 20:49:44 GMT -5
I had seen the Victorino quote here and just got around to reading the entire article.
Here's his concluding statement:
"That's why they're called prospects," Victorino said. "And I understand the future is important, but for an organization - and anybody, any organization, not just here [with the Red Sox] - I'm going to give up, maybe not everybody, but I'm going to give up 2-3 pieces that I think are necessary for a certain guy. Because it warrants it. This guy is established."
I'm guessing the 2-3 pieces he's willing to give up are 2-3 pieces that can play RF.
Minor detaails but.. 1. I've seen comments to the effect that he's noticeably slower in his reactions. 2. He's giving up switch hitting not because he's a better hitter but because of the toll it takes on his body. 3. He's yet to play back to back games. 4. He's yet to top .500 OPS.
Last Edit: Mar 25, 2015 21:08:49 GMT -5 by philsbosoxfan
Proud survivor of a hole in the ozone layer, an ice age, a complete polar cap meltdown, a worldwide millennium computer shutdown, and multiple; solar storms, Mayan calendar dates, Nostradamus quatrains and Apocalypses, China viruses and untested vaccines
Minor detaails but.. 1. I've seen comments to the effect that he's noticeably slower in his reactions. 2. He's giving up switch hitting not because he's a better hitter but because of the toll it takes on his body. 3. He's yet to play back to back games. 4. He's yet to top .500 OPS.
So as jmei already pointed out, you're still ignoring Castillo, who seems to me to be a major part of this equation. As for JBJ killing his long-term value by not hitting... he already has 530 MLB PAs to his name, and they haven't been pretty. How much lower can his "long-term value" (do you mean to the Sox or to a potential trade partner) get? Sure, I suppose some AAA PAs to get his swing down would be reasonable, but even if Craig is gone, JBJ is only up if an outfielder gets injured, and they could still call up Weeks instead if they wanted to keep JBJ in AAA a bit longer.
As for Ramirez or Napoli getting hurt, as far as I'm concerned, Craig is the short side of the platoon to replace them (with Nava or Holt providing the long side). It's not like the batting order is stuffed with lefties so even against a left-handed starter it would still be conceivable to start Nava or Holt instead to maintain some semblance of "balance", though of course you could just bring them in as soon the RHRs come instead... either way, Craig shouldn't be getting much playing time, even in the case of an injury.
Now it's possible that Craig is suddenly able to mash right-handed pitching again, and I take it you are more optimistic about that than I am. But if he doesn't return to peak form I really don't see a need for him on this roster.
I didn't mention Castillo because no one believes he's a candidate to trade. I was responding to the idea that Craig should be the one to trade instead of Victorino ... Castillo's irrelevant to that question. I'm not quite sure what you are arguing, that you keep Victorino and deal Craig, or that you deal both? Certainly, the lesson of last year should be that you don't give up depth if you don't need to.
Now, I can see the logic in giving Victorino some time to prove he's healthy or not and getting a little more of a sense of Castillo. And I realize that rationally I'm jumping the gun, but I just don't expect Victorino to be healthy. And I do expect Castillo to be good.
The point about JBJ is that you can't rush him back. He needs time to rebuild his swing, playing every day outside of Boston. If you rush him, you do irreparable damage to his value to this team.
I didn't mention Castillo because no one believes he's a candidate to trade. I was responding to the idea that Craig should be the one to trade instead of Victorino ... Castillo's irrelevant to that question. I'm not quite sure what you are arguing, that you keep Victorino and deal Craig, or that you deal both? Certainly, the lesson of last year should be that you don't give up depth if you don't need to.
You're saying if we trade Craig we have to play Victorino and are close to playing JBJ. We're saying that's not true because Castillo exists.
I didn't mention Castillo because no one believes he's a candidate to trade. I was responding to the idea that Craig should be the one to trade instead of Victorino ... Castillo's irrelevant to that question. I'm not quite sure what you are arguing, that you keep Victorino and deal Craig, or that you deal both? Certainly, the lesson of last year should be that you don't give up depth if you don't need to.
You're saying if we trade Craig we have to play Victorino and are close to playing JBJ. We're saying that's not true because Castillo exists.
I'm talking about the 25-man roster. If the Sox trade Craig, you are giving a 25-man slot to either Victorino, JBJ, or Weeks. I'm saying Craig is the best option of those four right now for a variety of reasons. Castillo is only tangentially related to my point, at best.
edit to add: Well, in the real world, Castillo is very relevant to the whole dynamic (if not to my point) because he's likely to be in AAA to delay a decision on Victorino and making it possible to keep both Castillo and Craig. Personally, I don't like that because I'm fairly confident Castillo's one of the three best outfielders on the team and should be starting from Opening Day, but I admit that it's probably the prudent way to go.
Last Edit: Mar 26, 2015 5:40:23 GMT -5 by brianthetaoist
You're saying if we trade Craig we have to play Victorino and are close to playing JBJ. We're saying that's not true because Castillo exists.
I'm talking about the 25-man roster. If the Sox trade Craig, you are giving a 25-man slot to either Victorino, JBJ, or Weeks. I'm saying Craig is the best option of those four right now for a variety of reasons. Castillo is only tangentially related to my point, at best.
Why isn't Castillo a candidate to start on the 25-man? Even if Victorino is the nominal starter, they could easily justify him starting just three or so times a week and giving the rest of the starts to Castillo.
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 26, 2015 7:43:16 GMT -5
Brian MacPherson ?@brianmacp 9m9 minutes ago Bryce Brentz, Heath Hembree other cuts. RT @bradfo Henry Owens packing up, headed to minor league camp
Proud survivor of a hole in the ozone layer, an ice age, a complete polar cap meltdown, a worldwide millennium computer shutdown, and multiple; solar storms, Mayan calendar dates, Nostradamus quatrains and Apocalypses, China viruses and untested vaccines
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 26, 2015 8:18:28 GMT -5
Gordon Edes ?@gordonedes 1m1 minute ago Sox assign Henry Owens to minor-league camp, option Cecchini, Brentz, Hembree and Spruill to Pawtucket. Release Mitchell Boggs
Last Edit: Mar 26, 2015 8:25:08 GMT -5 by philsbosoxfan
Proud survivor of a hole in the ozone layer, an ice age, a complete polar cap meltdown, a worldwide millennium computer shutdown, and multiple; solar storms, Mayan calendar dates, Nostradamus quatrains and Apocalypses, China viruses and untested vaccines
Nothing wrong with Sandoval wanting to do what he wants ..... as long as he realizes that if he slows down further and his body type leads to a drastic reduction in capabilities a few years down the road that the Sox may end up putting him on the bench. I don't want to hear any of this Victorino-type whining about his entitlement while he is here.
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 26, 2015 8:24:39 GMT -5
Brian MacPherson ?@brianmacp Victorino fired up about "Mazz and whoever that other guy is" interpreting his comments as him wanting Mookie Betts traded.
Brian MacPherson ?@brianmacp Victorino: "Don't sit behind a mike and be a coward and put words in my mouth." Reiterated belief Betts is a McCutchen in the making.
Last Edit: Mar 26, 2015 8:28:20 GMT -5 by philsbosoxfan
Proud survivor of a hole in the ozone layer, an ice age, a complete polar cap meltdown, a worldwide millennium computer shutdown, and multiple; solar storms, Mayan calendar dates, Nostradamus quatrains and Apocalypses, China viruses and untested vaccines