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 cologneredsox on Jun 11, 2015 9:09:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Jun 11, 2015 10:35:55 GMT -5
Yes, because the difference between the playoffs and the number one overall pick is Ortiz' 100 PAs versus lefties the rest of the season. Agree. I am not in favor of sitting Ortiz, except for your obligatory days rest, every now and then. Besides the fact that he, of all the people, I would trust to work out the kinks, we are going to be sitting on the proverbial emotional powderkeg that will explode if it continues with any consistency. I love what this guy has done, how he has led, how he has represented in a Sox uniform, but i don't think he will not take a decision to cut his at-bats with grace and dignity. It could lead to a player mutiny.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jun 11, 2015 11:11:58 GMT -5
There are a couple of developments this year that I think are partly responsible for the hitting problems of some of the Sox players, particularly those known for good strike zone judgment and patient batting, such as Ortiz and Napoli and maybe Betts.
The strike zone has changed. It is lower and sometimes wider than anytime I can recall. And maybe as a result of trying to adjust to the new strike zone, umpires are not as consistent in their strike calling.
Also, pitchers are throwing more first and second pitch strikes and the Sox are receiving fewer walks than in any season in many years. I calculated the average walks per game for the Sox each year back through 2003. This year the average is 2.85, the lowest rate in that period. Last year's rate of 2.92 was the second lowest. The rate has been dropping since 2009 when it was 4.07. The rates in the World Series years: 2013: 3.59, 2007: 4.25. 2004: 4.07. The drop from the peak year of 2007 to now is nearly one and half walks a game, or about 30 percent fewer walks.
I can't watch many of the games here, but I have listened to the radio broadcasts of nearly all of them. The radio guys constantly are commenting on the strike zone and, in particular, the problems that Napoli and Ortiz seem to be having with it. It seems that most of the time Napoli has two strikes on him before he swings the bat. Napoli never has been known for complaining about the calls of the umpires but he is doing it quite a bit this year. Ortiz always has been a complainer but the calls this year seem to be bothering him more than ever.
I think the hitters are having a very hard time adjusting to the changes, in part because the new strike zone is not consistent. It isn't clear how far below the knee it has gone, and it changes from umpire to umpire and from inning to inning.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 11, 2015 11:30:19 GMT -5
Also, pitchers are throwing more first and second pitch strikes and the Sox are receiving fewer walks than in any season in many years. I calculated the average walks per game for the Sox each year back through 2003. This year the average is 2.85, the lowest rate in that period. Last year's rate of 2.92 was the second lowest. The rate has been dropping since 2009 when it was 4.07. The rates in the World Series years: 2013: 3.59, 2007: 4.25. 2004: 4.07. The drop from the peak year of 2007 to now is nearly one and half walks a game, or about 30 percent fewer walks. The trend you identify is somewhat obscured by the fact that there are fewer plate appearances per game these days, as strikeouts are up and hits are down. As a percentage of all plate appearances, the Red Sox offense's walk percentage is down somewhat from its heyday, but not as much as the above would suggest: 2015: 8.5% 2014: 8.6% 2013: 9.1% 2012: 6.9% 2011: 9.0% 2010: 9.2% 2009: 10.4% 2008: 10.1% 2007: 10.7%
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jun 11, 2015 11:31:51 GMT -5
I'd love to see MLB allow managers to challenge 10-12 pitches per game. Literally takes 3-4 seconds per challenge. A minute or so per game x2. Or, the amount of time it takes Buchholz to get ready to throw a pitch.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Jun 11, 2015 11:46:18 GMT -5
I think it's clear the strike zone is bigger and more pitches have adjusted to the take and rake approach.
I also think the shifts are killing the sox.
I'd like to know if the Red Sox hitters are hitting into the shifts more than other teams? Just from flipping around the games I'm seeing some big home run guys bunting and going the other way more. Davis bunted for his fist two bunt hits the last two days. I've seen Howard, Fielder, and several others do it this year.
|
|
|
Post by klostrophobic on Jun 11, 2015 13:18:24 GMT -5
This is a really great year to be a seller. How many teams are really out of the playoff picture in the AL right now? I count Oakland, and even they have a positive run differential so they're probably on the verge of ripping off a 12-2 streak and getting back into it. So really we have zero teams in the AL right now who have no realistic shot at the playoffs. This creates an opportunity to corner the market and be the sole seller between now and the deadline.
Napoli, Victorino, Breslow are the only year-end FA guys and not really sure what you can really get for them unless Napoli heats up and some team with a poor 1B/DH situation needs a bat. But if you're willing to auction off Tazawa, who is under team control next year as well you could potentially get another Eduardo Rodriguez-level prospect.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jun 11, 2015 13:26:21 GMT -5
Also, pitchers are throwing more first and second pitch strikes and the Sox are receiving fewer walks than in any season in many years. I calculated the average walks per game for the Sox each year back through 2003. This year the average is 2.85, the lowest rate in that period. Last year's rate of 2.92 was the second lowest. The rate has been dropping since 2009 when it was 4.07. The rates in the World Series years: 2013: 3.59, 2007: 4.25. 2004: 4.07. The drop from the peak year of 2007 to now is nearly one and half walks a game, or about 30 percent fewer walks. The trend you identify is somewhat obscured by the fact that there are fewer plate appearances per game these days, as strikeouts are up and hits are down. As a percentage of all plate appearances, the Red Sox offense's walk percentage is down somewhat from its heyday, but not as much as the above would suggest: 2015: 8.5% 2014: 8.6% 2013: 9.1% 2012: 6.9% 2011: 9.0% 2010: 9.2% 2009: 10.4% 2008: 10.1% 2007: 10.7% They look different but they aren't. Walks per game is a numerical result of the percentage of walks per plate appearance. And there really has not been a statistically significant decline in plate appearances, at least for the Sox. They had 6358 plate appearances in 2010, 6166 in 2012, 6392 in 2013, 6226 in 2014 and at their present rate they will have 6325 in 2015. The average number of plate appearances per game: 2004 40.2 2007 39.67 2010 39.25 2012 38.1 2013 39.4 2014 38.4 2015 39.0 Since 2007 there has been a 32 percent decline in the number of walks per game but only a 1.6 percent decline in plate appearances per game. I think that shows that the decline in walks is related to something other than the decline in plate appearances, which has been entirely insignificant. And the decline in walks does not track with hitting, which has been up and down during this period.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Jun 11, 2015 14:12:17 GMT -5
This is a really great year to be a seller. How many teams are really out of the playoff picture in the AL right now? I count Oakland, and even they have a positive run differential so they're probably on the verge of ripping off a 12-2 streak and getting back into it. So really we have zero teams in the AL right now who have no realistic shot at the playoffs. This creates an opportunity to corner the market and be the sole seller between now and the deadline. No chance this happens. MIL and PHI are already selling, and I'd expect OAK to move in that direction soon. This ownership is not punting the year in mid-June.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jun 12, 2015 9:03:19 GMT -5
This is a really great year to be a seller. How many teams are really out of the playoff picture in the AL right now? I count Oakland, and even they have a positive run differential so they're probably on the verge of ripping off a 12-2 streak and getting back into it. So really we have zero teams in the AL right now who have no realistic shot at the playoffs. This creates an opportunity to corner the market and be the sole seller between now and the deadline. No chance this happens. MIL and PHI are already selling, and I'd expect OAK to move in that direction soon. This ownership is not punting the year in mid-June. Because they aren't in touch with reality. The chances that the team makes the playoffs is very low. So low that selling could be worth it. But what do the Red Sox really have that teams are going to give up significant talent for? The two free agents, Victorino and Napoli are paid a lot of money and won't garner much of s return. When the time comes the guy they should trade is Tazawa. But they won't do that because Tazawa is signed for next year and ownership is under the false illusion that the team can win the World Series next year with a couple of tweaks.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jun 12, 2015 9:25:58 GMT -5
Tazawa is not going to bring another Rodriguez. That kind of deal happens only about once in a decade. It takes about that long for GMs to stop thinking that they might make the same kind of mistake that Baltimore made.
The truth is the Sox have no players we would want them to sell who would bring significant value from other teams. If the Sox are going to make trades that add value to the team, value will have to be given up, and that means the top prospects or the young guys on the team now.
Barring a turnaround very soon, a significant improvement in the hitting,this season is going to be lost. If that becomes obvious, then some players should be jettisoned. But there won't much value coming in return. The value will come, if it comes, from making room for some guys at Pawtucket, or by making bigger deals that include good players on both sides.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jun 12, 2015 15:29:46 GMT -5
Tazawa may not bring another Rodriguez, but that's because Rodriguez became a much better prospect after the deal was made.
I think he would bring a prospect equivalent to Rodriguez's stature at the time of the trade. Probably a little better because Tazawa isn't a free agent in the upcoming offseason. He's exactly the type of guy teams pay up for in.a pennant race.
|
|
|
Post by pokeefe363 on Jun 12, 2015 16:25:02 GMT -5
This will not happen primarily due to fan and management emotions, but here's what would probably make the most sense looking to the future:
Trade for Prospects: Ortiz, Napoli, Sandoval (eat a bit of the contract), Victorino, Breslow (or DFA him) Shop Actively: Uehara, Tazawa, Layne, Buchholz
Moving all of these guys would clear up $40 million for next year, not including the $31 million from the guys hitting FA at the end of the season. Even if you ate some of the contracts, you still could have $40-50+ million to spend in the offseason. That leaves you with this lineup:
C: Swihart 1B: Craig/Nava 2B: Pedroia SS: Bogaerts 3B: Holt LF: Castillo CF: Bradley RF: Betts DH: Ramirez
Can we argue that this lineup with the defensive improvements is much worse than what we've currently got? Plus you pick-up some prospects, free up a lot of money, and get younger.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Jun 12, 2015 16:48:01 GMT -5
Trade for Prospects: Ortiz, Napoli, Sandoval (eat a bit of the contract), Victorino, Breslow (or DFA him) Shop Actively: Uehara, Tazawa, Layne, Buchholz Ortiz cannot be traded without his consent (10/5 guy). Trading Napoli, Victorino and/or Breslow doesn't save any money off next year's budget, since they are all free agents. Good luck trading Sandoval, which would squarely point the finger at management for screwing up, so I don't see it happening. Why would you trade Layne? He's cost-controlled for another four years. Taz and Buch are possibilities closer to the deadline, and I would look to trade Koji once the Red Sox are out of it, if a market develops for him.
|
|
|
Post by pokeefe363 on Jun 12, 2015 18:56:19 GMT -5
Trade for Prospects: Ortiz, Napoli, Sandoval (eat a bit of the contract), Victorino, Breslow (or DFA him) Shop Actively: Uehara, Tazawa, Layne, Buchholz Ortiz cannot be traded without his consent (10/5 guy). Trading Napoli, Victorino and/or Breslow doesn't save any money off next year's budget, since they are all free agents. Good luck trading Sandoval, which would squarely point the finger at management for screwing up, so I don't see it happening. Why would you trade Layne? He's cost-controlled for another four years. Taz and Buch are possibilities closer to the deadline, and I would look to trade Koji once the Red Sox are out of it, if a market develops for him. Good point on Ortiz. Napoli, Victorino, and Breslow you're just trying to get anything in a wasted year. Sandoval is admitting a mistake yes. Layne: A lot of scouts have talked him up and he would probably fetch a lot. Relievers are fairly fungible, especially middle relievers with average stuff. He probably commands far more than he's worth in the trade market. All the players would be $71 million less than we spent this year.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jun 12, 2015 20:55:47 GMT -5
Blow it up. Play the kids. Deal every veteran you possibly can.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jun 12, 2015 20:58:03 GMT -5
Blow it up. Play the kids. Deal every veteran you possibly can. Which, as we've covered, is basically no one.
|
|
|
Post by beany24 on Jun 12, 2015 21:03:35 GMT -5
Great idea. Combined, Craig and Nava could probably hit less than Napoli. And Ramirez can replace Ortiz jogging out DP ground balls.
|
|
|
Post by pokeefe363 on Jun 12, 2015 21:21:51 GMT -5
Great idea. Combined, Craig and Nava could probably hit less than Napoli. And Ramirez can replace Ortiz jogging out DP ground balls. Napoli is a FA at the end of the year and the Sox have shown no interest in extending him. Ramirez has been worth significant negative value at LF while Ortiz has struggled mightily at the plate. You don't think Bradley could put up similar numbers while greatly improving the defense? I'm not saying Craig or Nava are the long-term answer, but you might as well get something for the vets while you ride out a losing season.
|
|
|
Post by johnmark on Jun 12, 2015 21:38:42 GMT -5
When A Craig is in the conversation to turn the team around...you know you are screwed.
|
|
|
Post by 07redsox on Jun 13, 2015 2:50:07 GMT -5
Great idea. Combined, Craig and Nava could probably hit less than Napoli. And Ramirez can replace Ortiz jogging out DP ground balls. Napoli is a FA at the end of the year and the Sox have shown no interest in extending him. Ramirez has been worth significant negative value at LF while Ortiz has struggled mightily at the plate. You don't think Bradley could put up similar numbers while greatly improving the defense? I'm not saying Craig or Nava are the long-term answer, but you might as well get something for the vets while you ride out a losing season. Assuming I am reading your scenario correctly (Ortiz gone, Hanley to DH, and Bradley to LF) then no, I doubt Bradley could match Ortiz' almost .900 OPS against RHP this season (another reason why Ortiz needs to be platooned with Hanley at DH for the rest of the season, his numbers against LHP are beyond horrible). Although the defensive upgrade would most likely be enormous, so it really may not matter in the long run.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2015 4:31:18 GMT -5
The problem has less to do with who's on the field and more to do with who's in the front office. The Giants have won three out of the last five World Series with Bruce Bochy and Brian Sabean and a cast of silent partners. Meanwhile, the Red Sox have, at any given time, Henry, Werner, Lucchino, Cherrington, and/or Ferrell with his face in front of a camera adding his two cents worth.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Jun 13, 2015 5:21:27 GMT -5
Napoli is a FA at the end of the year and the Sox have shown no interest in extending him. Eh, there is absolutely no reason to show interest to the general public even if you have such interest. It is also just plain too early to make a call on Napoli. There are a lot of moving parts involved. Before the season I would have said the main factor in deciding whether to extend Napoli is Napoli's performance. Right now I feel more like there are bigger factors: I can see Napoli getting extended only if Ramirez figures out LF or Ortiz' option does not vest.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Jun 13, 2015 6:52:18 GMT -5
The problem has less to do with who's on the field and more to do with who's in the front office. The Giants have won three out of the last five World Series with Bruce Bochy and Brian Sabean and a cast of silent partners. Meanwhile, the Red Sox have, at any given time, Henry, Werner, Lucchino, Cherrington, and/or Ferrell with his face in front of a camera adding his two cents worth. This has absolutely nothing to do with the way the Red Sox have played or how the team was constructed.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jun 13, 2015 7:36:21 GMT -5
Napoli is a FA at the end of the year and the Sox have shown no interest in extending him. Eh, there is absolutely no reason to show interest to the general public even if you have such interest. It is also just plain too early to make a call on Napoli. There are a lot of moving parts involved. Before the season I would have said the main factor in deciding whether to extend Napoli is Napoli's performance. Right now I feel more like there are bigger factors: I can see Napoli getting extended only if Ramirez figures out LF or Ortiz' option does not vest. Given that Napoli looks like a guy who is in decline, I certainly would hope that the Sox don't commit substantial resources to re-sign him. That would be a mistake. I honestly think the team would be better off with Hanley at 1b in 2016 and JBJ in the outfield. The Sox need to know if JBJ can be a major league hitter and actually now wouldn't be a bad time to find out. Or if Hanley at 1b isn't an idea that could work, then maybe they simply need to get somebody else at 1b. Napoli isn't getting any younger and he isn't getting any better and they can spend their $15 million or so more wisely.
|
|
|