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.
What Can Be Done to Fix the Sox?
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 28, 2015 7:42:21 GMT -5
If they get, as Bill James projects I don't believe that Bill James' best projections are publicly available. I bet he's sick of having his name attached to those. They had Mookie OPSing .950 last year.
|
|
|
Post by ryantoworkman on Dec 28, 2015 9:28:36 GMT -5
If they get, as Bill James projects I don't believe that Bill James' best projections are publicly available. Forgive my shorthand. Bill James Handbook, as written by his editors and without HIS direct input. I assume people here understand he does not contribute to HIS book any longer.
|
|
|
Post by ryantoworkman on Dec 28, 2015 9:29:06 GMT -5
I don't believe that Bill James' best projections are publicly available. I bet he's sick of having his name attached to those. They had Mookie OPSing .950 last year. Until he gets his royalty payment.
|
|
|
Post by ryantoworkman on Dec 28, 2015 11:13:03 GMT -5
The Red Sox manage risk assessment when they build their roster each year. I found it interesting two years ago when Bill James was speaking often to "Healthy Games as League Average, or Better" as a statistic with far greater meaning than he had ever believed. He spoke of the great cost associated with obtaining talent, and how disruptive that is to an organization. This was something we all discuss, as in, "how many games will player X lose to injury this year;" but what James was discussing was not just that, but how many games a guy is out there, in so bad a condition, as it render themselves ineffectuve.
Guys like Pedroia are a perfect case in point. He'll ruin his body to make a play, then shake it off and keep playing. But his production suffers during this time and his recovery is delayed. The discussions with the Analytics Department are around quantifying the impact of these "hurt games" and determining the value of a healthy replacement for a short period. I believe they have uncovered data that I dictates this as the desired way to proceed. To that end, I think this is also why nearly every name on the 40 man roster may provide value in 2016.
An position by position examination of the roster shows how they have mitigated their risks:
Starting pitching - a new Ace to lead them, and 9 deep with guys who have had success, or have upside. Even with the Buchholz injury risk, this is the way to start a season.
Bullpen - when your discussions boil down to Elias versus Wright as your 7th piece, and you have 3 closers among your top 4 things are pretty good. Great depth at AAA also.
Catcher - assuming health for Vazquez, no other team has 3 viable options behind the dish. Leon stuck around on an ml deal to provide another layer of receiving protection.
1B - those who fear Hanley can't play here neglect to realize he's already demonstrated nearly every skill required. He's stretched to receive balls at 2B before, and while the footwork at 1B is a little more intricate, we're not talking about learning ballet here. Shaw, Swihart, Sandoval, and by later in the year Travis, and Moncada could be options. Plenty of depth to assure a capable player man's the position all year.
2B - Pedroia likely once again miss time to injury. He has no off switch, and I don't think many of us would want it any other way. Holt, Marrero, Hernandez and Rutledge, and possibly Moncada by year end says they're ok here.
SS - one of their leanest spots, but many young healthy options led by X. Marrero, Jernandez, and Holt make for 4 deep, and while there would no doubt be an offensive hit to any of them, Merroro would at least provide Gold Glove defense if needed.
3B - Sandoval best be on his game because Shaw would sure like to start somewhere. Holt, Hanley, and later Moncada represent enough depth to succeed
OF - while the presence of 4 "official" outfielders would indicate a lack of depth, Holt, Shaw, and Swihart assure they'll be fine in the outfield. The 3 starters, all with the skills to play a very good CF, makes for a very deep and flexible group.
DH - Papi, Hanley, Swihart, they're good
We can see there are secondary, and tertiary plans for about any possible negative occurance. Few teams can match that comfort at this point in the offseason. I think they've done about as well as I could have hoped this offseason, and I think they've got the horses for a deep run. Let's get this party started!
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,501
|
Post by nomar on Dec 28, 2015 11:15:56 GMT -5
If Castillo shows pretty much anything above a league average bat, he's at worst an equal pay guy, who's potential bat upside probably gives him trade value, though I'm not sure why they'd move him if that's what they're getting. His deal is really not bad at all given the current salary structure. The only potential problem I see is if at some point they are starting JBJ and Vazquez, both of them end up with sub league average bats, a non-above average Castillo could render a third of the lineup relatively inept offensively. Despite Vazquez and JBJ's defense, I think there is a point where the defense first guy philosophy turns down, at least that's what my logic says. But if the rest of the lineup hits like they could/should, the offense should be great 1-6, so it might not matter. I don't think they need another bat right now Better chance Castillo is a below average bat than above.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 28, 2015 11:48:44 GMT -5
I don't believe that Bill James' best projections are publicly available. Forgive my shorthand. Bill James Handbook, as written by his editors and without HIS direct input. I assume people here understand he does not contribute to HIS book any longer. As is the annual tradition, I will point out that the Bill James projection system is optimistic to the point of being useless.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Dec 28, 2015 11:57:44 GMT -5
If Castillo shows pretty much anything above a league average bat, he's at worst an equal pay guy, who's potential bat upside probably gives him trade value, though I'm not sure why they'd move him if that's what they're getting. His deal is really not bad at all given the current salary structure. The only potential problem I see is if at some point they are starting JBJ and Vazquez, both of them end up with sub league average bats, a non-above average Castillo could render a third of the lineup relatively inept offensively. Despite Vazquez and JBJ's defense, I think there is a point where the defense first guy philosophy turns down, at least that's what my logic says. But if the rest of the lineup hits like they could/should, the offense should be great 1-6, so it might not matter. I don't think they need another bat right now Better chance Castillo is a below average bat than above. His GB% scares me a lot.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,501
|
Post by nomar on Dec 28, 2015 13:16:49 GMT -5
Better chance Castillo is a below average bat than above. His GB% scares me a lot. I've always been in that boat too. Steamer has him at 92 wRC+ which I think sounds right.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Dec 28, 2015 14:31:30 GMT -5
As is the annual tradition, I will point out that the Bill James projection system is optimistic to the point of being useless. On a related note, ZiPS projections for the Red Sox came out today, which has mainly served to strengthen my conviction that Steamer is the superior projection system.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,018
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 29, 2015 17:53:20 GMT -5
Ehh, I'm not so sure they're going to trade anyone. Wright possibly if he doesn't make the roster, but with Buch and Kelly likely to not go full years, they need some arms back there. Johnson's arm is a question mark too. I agree as fantasy he winter goes...I'm talking more about during the year, especially as the trade deadline approaches. If they're in good shape, young guys pitching well in AAA, Price doing well, Rodriguez taking a step forward, etc, I could actually see them trading Buchholz or even Kelly, both of who have upside value in addition to their basic value based on their current pitching. I can see a few contenders believing either one would put them over the top. Even in ST, I can see teams inquiring heavily, although I think you're right and the Sox will preserve their depth until it's very likely they don't need to anymore. Certainly we all hope for the scenario you describe, where you have a set of positive outcomes that allow you to deal a pitcher at the deadline. But I find it hard to imagine one where Buchholz is your sixth or seventh best starter, and hence the guy you deal. If he's desirable to another contender, he's going to be one one of your three best pitchers, and probably your #2. And if he's healthy, teams will probably be wary of trading for him and having him break down immediately. OTOH, the idea that the second best guy out of Kelly, Owens, Elias, and Johnson will seem like a significant upgrade to some contender's rotation, while the other two are also pitching well, is not far-fetched. The best of those guys is your 5th starter, or your long man with Wright as the 5th starter, and you deal the next one on the depth chart. Of course, there is also the ranking by MLB experience and hence the other team's confidence, which is Kelly, Elias, Owens, Johnson, and that isn't likely to change. It's also true that there may be very little difference among the top two or three guys. In which case it's very easy to see Kelly being dealt to open up his roster spot for Elias, Owens, or Johnson (and his rotation spot for that guy or Wright). The other thing that's interesting here is what you might get back. You could see a three-team deal where the prospects coming back form part a package with Castillo for a short-term LF upgrade. And of course we may have Swihart to deal, too. If 1B is a problem at that point, we should have trade options.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 31, 2015 16:24:03 GMT -5
sounds like Rusney's playing winter ball so that's good
|
|
|
Post by blizzards39 on Jan 1, 2016 15:48:32 GMT -5
With the apparent falling price to the 4 big bats, along with know this is Ortizs final season, should the Sox make a play? Can't see Cespedes but Davis, Gordon and Uptin all make some sense. Maybe Davis the most?
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Jan 1, 2016 16:04:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Jan 1, 2016 16:07:50 GMT -5
Better chance Castillo is a below average bat than above. His GB% scares me a lot. Whenever I watched Derek Jeter, it seemed that he had a lot of weak contact with many slow rollers to third or short when he pulled the ball. He beat out a goodly number. Castillo gives me that same impression...lots of weak toppers in that direction. He is fast enough that he too beat out a lot of them...thereby bolstering his average. I was surprised at this with Castillo because he seemingly had something of an uppercut swing. If so, is it because he is way out in front of those balls or that the perceived uppercut comes early in the swing? Whatever the causative factor, what can be done, if anything to address this matter? The guy is obviously strong as I recall one shot off the center field back wall at Fenway....Riceian in nature.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Jan 1, 2016 16:18:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by blizzards39 on Jan 1, 2016 16:28:57 GMT -5
I'd rather Chris Davis
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,501
|
Post by nomar on Jan 1, 2016 16:47:09 GMT -5
That's just shortsighted. All 3 will be over 30, Davis will get the most money and has a 30% strikeout rate already.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Jan 1, 2016 18:23:34 GMT -5
Chris Davis is a landmine.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 1, 2016 19:18:32 GMT -5
Whenever I watched Derek Jeter, it seemed that he had a lot of weak contact with many slow rollers to third or short when he pulled the ball. He beat out a goodly number. Castillo gives me that same impression...lots of weak toppers in that direction. He is fast enough that he too beat out a lot of them...thereby bolstering his average. I was surprised at this with Castillo because he seemingly had something of an uppercut swing. If so, is it because he is way out in front of those balls or that the perceived uppercut comes early in the swing? Whatever the causative factor, what can be done, if anything to address this matter? The guy is obviously strong as I recall one shot off the center field back wall at Fenway....Riceian in nature. Castillo takes such big swings that he doesn't get out of the box well at all. Iglesias is who you're talking about.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Jan 2, 2016 1:03:07 GMT -5
Whenever I watched Derek Jeter, it seemed that he had a lot of weak contact with many slow rollers to third or short when he pulled the ball. He beat out a goodly number. Castillo gives me that same impression...lots of weak toppers in that direction. He is fast enough that he too beat out a lot of them...thereby bolstering his average. I was surprised at this with Castillo because he seemingly had something of an uppercut swing. If so, is it because he is way out in front of those balls or that the perceived uppercut comes early in the swing? Whatever the causative factor, what can be done, if anything to address this matter? The guy is obviously strong as I recall one shot off the center field back wall at Fenway....Riceian in nature. Castillo takes such big swings that he doesn't get out of the box well at all. Iglesias is who you're talking about. His swing gets long and I am still not sure if he can pick up the spin on the pitched ball. Most of the time he does not appear to have a clue if he is swinging at a curve or slider. But his natural hand eye coordination allows him to get a bat on, but not with authority most pitches other guys could not get to. Barring injury this should be a tell all year for him.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Jan 2, 2016 9:16:55 GMT -5
Whenever I watched Derek Jeter, it seemed that he had a lot of weak contact with many slow rollers to third or short when he pulled the ball. He beat out a goodly number. Castillo gives me that same impression...lots of weak toppers in that direction. He is fast enough that he too beat out a lot of them...thereby bolstering his average. I was surprised at this with Castillo because he seemingly had something of an uppercut swing. If so, is it because he is way out in front of those balls or that the perceived uppercut comes early in the swing? Whatever the causative factor, what can be done, if anything to address this matter? The guy is obviously strong as I recall one shot off the center field back wall at Fenway....Riceian in nature. Castillo takes such big swings that he doesn't get out of the box well at all. Iglesias is who you're talking about. Nope I was talking about Castillo. There were many times that he beat out slow rollers. True I recall that big, long swing as well. Still when he pulls the ball, he is often on top. When he is a little late, it seemed that he hit a lot of pops to the right side. This signified to me that his swing was decidedly upward. When he is a bit late to the ball, he hits the underside and when he is early the opposite occurs. It makes sense that with a long swing, regardless of path, that he would have to commit earlier and thus have less time to assess spin and location. Perhaps all those are factors.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 2, 2016 10:37:36 GMT -5
Castillo takes such big swings that he doesn't get out of the box well at all. Iglesias is who you're talking about. Nope I was talking about Castillo. There were many times that he beat out slow rollers. True I recall that big, long swing as well. Still when he pulls the ball, he is often on top. When he is a little late, it seemed that he hit a lot of pops to the right side. This signified to me that his swing was decidedly upward. When he is a bit late to the ball, he hits the underside and when he is early the opposite occurs. It makes sense that with a long swing, regardless of path, that he would have to commit earlier and thus have less time to assess spin and location. Perhaps all those are factors. I don't think it's true that Castillo is popup prone. Per Fangraphs' batted ball classifications, he's hit exactly 1 infield fly ball in 250 career batted balls, which is an extraordinarily low rate of popups. Among hitters with 250+ PAs last year, he has the twelfth-lowest infield fly ball rate. That's backed up by the scouting reports, who generally describe him as having a flat, line-drive oriented swing rather than an uppercut swing (see here or here). In fact, that was generally one of the criticisms of Castillo-- that his flat swing meant he couldn't fully utilize his raw power because he hit too many low-trajectory line drives and ground balls. Indeed, he had the highest ground ball rate of hitters with 250+ PAs last year, which matches with the scouting reports.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 4,129
Member is Online
|
Post by jimoh on Jan 2, 2016 14:44:36 GMT -5
Nope I was talking about Castillo. There were many times that he beat out slow rollers. True I recall that big, long swing as well. Still when he pulls the ball, he is often on top. When he is a little late, it seemed that he hit a lot of pops to the right side. This signified to me that his swing was decidedly upward. When he is a bit late to the ball, he hits the underside and when he is early the opposite occurs. It makes sense that with a long swing, regardless of path, that he would have to commit earlier and thus have less time to assess spin and location. Perhaps all those are factors. I don't think it's true that Castillo is popup prone. Per Fangraphs' batted ball classifications, he's hit exactly 1 infield fly ball in 250 career batted balls, which is an extraordinarily low rate of popups. Among hitters with 250+ PAs last year, he has the twelfth-lowest infield fly ball rate. That's backed up by the scouting reports, who generally describe him as having a flat, line-drive oriented swing rather than an uppercut swing (see here or here). In fact, that was generally one of the criticisms of Castillo-- that his flat swing meant he couldn't fully utilize his raw power because he hit too many low-trajectory line drives and ground balls. Indeed, he had the highest ground ball rate of hitters with 250+ PAs last year, which matches with the scouting reports. Does Castillo have an inherent tendency to hit ground balls, or just a tendency to hit ground balls when not going well, as was for much of last year? I don't see anything in those two scouting reports predicting that he would hit ground balls or that he swings downward; rather they suggest he will hit a lot of line drives.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 2, 2016 15:07:03 GMT -5
The first scouting link discussed how he swings down on the ball and hits a lot of balls with topspin, and there are mechanical reasons to think he'll consistently be a high-ground-ball guy. He'll probably always be a high-BABIP, middling-power guy.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Jan 2, 2016 17:20:11 GMT -5
Nope I was talking about Castillo. There were many times that he beat out slow rollers. True I recall that big, long swing as well. Still when he pulls the ball, he is often on top. When he is a little late, it seemed that he hit a lot of pops to the right side. This signified to me that his swing was decidedly upward. When he is a bit late to the ball, he hits the underside and when he is early the opposite occurs. It makes sense that with a long swing, regardless of path, that he would have to commit earlier and thus have less time to assess spin and location. Perhaps all those are factors. I don't think it's true that Castillo is popup prone. Per Fangraphs' batted ball classifications, he's hit exactly 1 infield fly ball in 250 career batted balls, which is an extraordinarily low rate of popups. Among hitters with 250+ PAs last year, he has the twelfth-lowest infield fly ball rate. That's backed up by the scouting reports, who generally describe him as having a flat, line-drive oriented swing rather than an uppercut swing (see here or here). In fact, that was generally one of the criticisms of Castillo-- that his flat swing meant he couldn't fully utilize his raw power because he hit too many low-trajectory line drives and ground balls. Indeed, he had the highest ground ball rate of hitters with 250+ PAs last year, which matches with the scouting reports. Thanks for your links. I should have looked at Fangraphs first rather than relying solely on memory. In my mind a large % of balls he hit to the opposite field were in the air and the ones he pulled had a significantly higher % on the ground. When I said "pops" that was imprecise. I meant weak flys inclusive. But again, in my mind's eye, his swing looked uppercut and certainly not level. Then again, the view was from center field so perhaps thru the zone he was level. Still, for a level swing his GB% is astronomical.
|
|
|