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 WindyCityRedSox169 on Oct 24, 2015 10:16:14 GMT -5
Tough situation to call. In the past, Boston would package 2-3 B+ (Boston media hyped) prospects, for an Ace and be done with it. But never have I seen 4-5 potential A (some A+) prospects (and so young) ready to break out (or not). I'm actually a bit worried. You have a new GM, wanting to make a splash and dozens of shiny new trading beads he just pulled from the stocking he was given for xmas. I agree with many of the previous posters, for now, I'd plug a few holes with some B level FA's, see how the rooks develop, both at the MLB and MilB levels. No need to rush into things when so much is unknown. I don't see Dombrowski coming into Boston and saying wow I have all of these minor leaguers what can I get for them. He is going to be systematic about it and evaluate/assign value to the prospect just like everyone does. If he feels he is winning a deal he is going to pull the trigger like any other GM would do. Is Dombrowski more aggressive than others? Maybe but he also hasn't lost a ton of deals he has been in on either. Everyone saying oh we have Devers/Moncada/Espinoza/Margot/Benintiendi/Kopech/etc. lets see how they develop and don't touch them. The problem is these would be the same people 2-3 years from now which if 50% of those kids pan out to be average or below you are stuck with no trade value and no value at the MLB level and be ripping on the front office. Dombrowski is very smart and his job isn't to hold onto all of the prospects to see what they can be (even though that is what much of this forum would love). He should determine what ways to improve the club and find the best value in doing so. If he feels one of the ways to do that is via our prospects (to a degree) I would agree with that approach. The odds of all of those guys I mentioned above panning out is not tremendous therefore it becomes a game of Russian roulette. Who do you hold onto and who do you use as trade chips? If it was an easy answer everyone on this board would be a baseball GM. Unfortunately it isn't.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Oct 24, 2015 11:30:15 GMT -5
Of course, the notion that we "must" get a top-of-the-rotation starter is monumentally wrong, and wrong several different ways. It would be a damn good idea, but that's a long way from "must." Any time you think you "must" have anything (other than water), you're in big trouble. I'm sure DDo is acutely aware of this. Using bWAR/GS and SIERA weighted equally, the best KC pitcher this year was Ventura, who ranked 48th out of 150. Then they traded for Cueto, who ranked 37th. You're talking about going most of the season with a staff leader who was a top #3 starter, and trading for a lesser #2 at the deadline, and nevertheless leading the league in wins and then winning the pennant. Meanwhile, the team with the #1 and #3 pitchers in MLB loses in the NLDS. And I'm pretty well convinced that Eduardo Rodriguez can be a top-of-the-rotation guy if he can learn to thrown an average MLB curveball. It may be splitting hairs but I partially disagree with you. If we want a better chance to seriously contend for it all in 2016 we "must" get a TOR starter. I agree with you that anytime you believe you are in that position you are in big trouble and that usually the full ramifications of that reveals itself over time. I'd like the Sox to sign at least a #2 type pitcher if not more this off-season and not trade any major pieces on the 40 man roster and wait to see how next season plays out to see if there is any major injuries to key players or guys taking the next step up (E-Rod?) and to see if the young players continue to grow. This off-season does not seem like the best time to start trading major assets away. And by that I mean trading any one of our younger players who has already played in Boston (Betts, Bogaerts, Vasquez, Swihart, JBJ, E-Rod) and our top 5 prospects. Our core is young and that is harder to project by the nature of projecting, lack of track record at the highest level. I think waiting until at least 1/3 of the way through next season should be the time to consider trading these players. Obviously if you are overwhelmed by an offer, not bloody likely, things change. Even then, if everything is going swimmingly well I'd only want to part with 1 or 2 of the players listed above. If we want to have sustained winning then building from the farm and only supplementing the gaps at the ML level with trades using prospects and/or veterans who are past their peak/s is the way to go. Using free agency to much will almost guarantee failure; maybe not today but certainly tomorrow. Spending money all the time and not investing in your future is a sure fire way to f yourself when you are older. We are in a division with a team with deeper pockets, and even they are not the powerhouse they once were due in large part to spending like drunk sailors on a shore leave. The Sox with Theo Epstein built the team up through the farm and won a few championships but then in a misdirected attempt to stay 'sexy' was pressured to "feed the monster" and I believe many of the big free agent signings had Larry Lucchino's finger prints all over them. I fear that part of the reason DD is here now is the owners are becoming impatient again as ratings dip. Signing the 2 biggest positional players on the free market last season to me at least had Lucchino's calling card all over it, they were 'sexy' signing to draw up interest/rating etc. I believe they wanted to keep Ben on board but it would have been a demotion of sorts. I think they grew impatient with Ben for not making a big trade utilizing prospects from a farm system that had been rated as one of the best for the past several years. Now we are finally beginning to see the fruits of his and others labor with a very exciting young talented core. To abandon this approach now would be criminal. We as fan have sustained the growing pains of this partial youth commitment mixed with top free agent hitters when one tier down from that was the correct move to do at that point in time. Any signing or trade should be based on where your team is on the competitive cycle. You don't break the bank on a closer when you are scrapping the bottom of the barrel, of course this is common sense however it's an extreme example to make a point. The lesson of that should be used subtly too. In 2013 they took the right approach and at that point and time it worked out perfectly, perhaps even better than should have been expected. The chances of repeating that was extremely unlikely however that was unlikely to be the expectation when they did it. It was a bridge approach that gave the team a realistic shot at contending and possibly making the playoffs and likely no more. Now the Sox thanks in large part to being non committal and having mixed up approaches are in flux again, but this time it's different. They have the core in place and the talent in the minors too. This talent in large part can sustain and bridge the gap to compete year in and out again. The rush to win or more accurately try and win now should be in large part restrained with only a few important trades needed to get there possibly in just 2 years. Signing Pablo and Hanley not only didn't help the long term approach but set the team back by burdening the team with large multi year contracts AND occupying roster spots. The only way to remedy that is likely swallowing part of these contracts which puts more financial constraints on the team too. Most fans here get this and are somewhat willing to wait but I fear fans like us are not what drives the bus. "Feeding the monster" is for the typical or fringe fan. The ironic part of all this is success/winning is what brought the typical/fringe fan on board and drove up profits. The team then tried to put the cart before the horse by catering to them and bringing in 'sexy' (well known names) free agents.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Oct 25, 2015 12:56:54 GMT -5
Not sure if this is the proper place to post this - but the Streamer projections for 2016 are out: www.fangraphs.com/projections.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&type=steamer600&team=0&lg=al&players=0&sort=26,d Couple of highlights: Mookie is projected to have the T-5th highest WAR in the AL for position players Xander's projection doesn't call for as much of as a regression as I might have thought (given his BABIP) They project a big bounceback from Hanley, and a lesser one from Pablo. And JBJ (he of the 4 WAR *floor*), is at 2.4 - which is actually not bad, that's pretty much the mean for an everyday starter
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Oct 25, 2015 16:43:58 GMT -5
Zack Greinke would fit the bill for the Red Sox this winter, but Scott Lauber of the Boston Herald wonders if Boston would be the best place for him. One source close to the pitcher speculated that Greinke “definitely wouldn’t want any more stress or additional media attention,” though that was only his assumption and not something he heard directly from the former Cy Young Award winner. One can’t help but speculate if Greinke, who has been diagnosed with social anxiety disorder and clinical depression, may prefer to pitch in a market with less pressure than Boston. www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/10/zack-greinke-red-sox.html
|
|
|
Post by blizzards39 on Oct 25, 2015 16:54:15 GMT -5
Alex Gordon. Id really like to see the Sox take a run at him and possibly trade Castillo.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,015
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 25, 2015 17:22:08 GMT -5
Not sure if this is the proper place to post this - but the Streamer projections for 2016 are out: www.fangraphs.com/projections.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&type=steamer600&team=0&lg=al&players=0&sort=26,d Couple of highlights: Mookie is projected to have the T-5th highest WAR in the AL for position players Xander's projection doesn't call for as much of as a regression as I might have thought (given his BABIP) They project a big bounceback from Hanley, and a lesser one from Pablo. And JBJ (he of the 4 WAR *floor*), is at 2.4 - which is actually not bad, that's pretty much the mean for an everyday starter BTW, I meant to note that I actually have no idea of what I think JBJ's floor in WAR is, because I need to update my translations among metrics, which I no longer trust. I think his offensive floor (10th % projection) is average MLB starting CFer (.266 / .330 / .409), maybe a tick above, and his defense has a +10 floor. Steamer is projecting him at .256 / .327 / .407 (with +8 defense), and anyone who thinks that's a reasonable projection for his mean performance -- that's he's as likely to slug .357 as .457 -- should e-mail me about some Florida real estate I have for sale. (Well, it's actually not me -- it's a Nigerian friend. Who is naturally enhanced.)
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 25, 2015 20:01:24 GMT -5
I think his offensive floor (10th % projection) is average MLB starting CFer (.266 / .330 / .409), maybe a tick above, and his defense has a +10 floor. Steamer is projecting him at .256 / .327 / .407 (with +8 defense), and anyone who thinks that's a reasonable projection for his mean performance -- that's he's as likely to slug .357 as .457 -- should e-mail me about some Florida real estate I have for sale. (Well, it's actually not me -- it's a Nigerian friend. Who is naturally enhanced.) I mean, Bradley has a .349 SLG in 785 major league plate appearances. It's fine to disagree with the projection, but it seems not unreasonable to me.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Oct 25, 2015 23:26:03 GMT -5
Here's a very simple calculation, very basic. Figure out how many additional bases Bradley averages for every hit he does get. Over the course of his still young career, that number is about .6. So he averages 1.6 bases for every hit. By that estimate, if he hits .266 he'll slug about .425, which sounds about right to me. If it's .256 it should be about .410.
Now, that includes those poor stretches with the Sox when he had 1.28 and 1.34 bases per hit, and it also includes last year's figure where he was at 2 bases for every hit, and higher than that over the last two months when he got red hot before finally cooling off. I don't think we'll see that. But I do think he's capable of averaging 1.6 bases for every hit. So the slugging will be a function of the contact rate. No surprise there. If he does hit .260-.270 I think he'll be, at a minimum, at .425-.430 for his slugging. So yes, I agree with Eric. The error bounds need to be skewed. If he hits between .250 and .270 there is little chance he's slugging below .400.
One additional point. If he were to hit .266, you can bank on at least .80 and probably higher on the discipline. I'd wager .350 for an OBP. That's just who he is.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,015
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 26, 2015 0:10:15 GMT -5
Of course, the notion that we "must" get a top-of-the-rotation starter is monumentally wrong, and wrong several different ways. It would be a damn good idea, but that's a long way from "must." Any time you think you "must" have anything (other than water), you're in big trouble. I'm sure DDo is acutely aware of this. Using bWAR/GS and SIERA weighted equally, the best KC pitcher this year was Ventura, who ranked 48th out of 150. Then they traded for Cueto, who ranked 37th. You're talking about going most of the season with a staff leader who was a top #3 starter, and trading for a lesser #2 at the deadline, and nevertheless leading the league in wins and then winning the pennant. Meanwhile, the team with the #1 and #3 pitchers in MLB loses in the NLDS. And I'm pretty well convinced that Eduardo Rodriguez can be a top-of-the-rotation guy if he can learn to thrown an average MLB curveball. It may be splitting hairs but I partially disagree with you. If we want a better chance to seriously contend for it all in 2016 we "must" get a TOR starter. I agree with you that anytime you believe you are in that position you are in big trouble and that usually the full ramifications of that reveals itself over time. I'd like the Sox to sign at least a #2 type pitcher if not more this off-season and not trade any major pieces on the 40 man roster and wait to see how next season plays out to see if there is any major injuries to key players or guys taking the next step up (E-Rod?) and to see if the young players continue to grow. This off-season does not seem like the best time to start trading major assets away. And by that I mean trading any one of our younger players who has already played in Boston (Betts, Bogaerts, Vasquez, Swihart, JBJ, E-Rod) and our top 5 prospects. Our core is young and that is harder to project by the nature of projecting, lack of track record at the highest level. I think waiting until at least 1/3 of the way through next season should be the time to consider trading these players. Obviously if you are overwhelmed by an offer, not bloody likely, things change. Even then, if everything is going swimmingly well I'd only want to part with 1 or 2 of the players listed above. If we want to have sustained winning then building from the farm and only supplementing the gaps at the ML level with trades using prospects and/or veterans who are past their peak/s is the way to go. Using free agency to much will almost guarantee failure; maybe not today but certainly tomorrow. Spending money all the time and not investing in your future is a sure fire way to f yourself when you are older. We are in a division with a team with deeper pockets, and even they are not the powerhouse they once were due in large part to spending like drunk sailors on a shore leave. It seems to me that most of this (which I largely agree with) contradicts your opening wish. The problem that I see with signing an established FA #2 or better starter, which is to say Price, Cueto, or (costing a draft pick, too) Greinke, or Zimmerman, is that it's hard to see it paying off in the long run. The only good reason to tie up $20M or $30M a year for five to seven years is if you don't think your rotation two to five years from now projects to be good enough to win a WS. And it's not wise to count on any of those guys to still be as good as they are now as they get further into their contracts. All of that, of course, is what you're saying in your last paragraph above. But it's true that we want to get somebody. Right now it's Buchholz, Porcello (who Steamer projects to be the 32nd best pitcher in MLB, i.e., an average #2 starter, and I think that's right), Rodriguez (a borderline 2/3), Miley, and a choice of Kelly or Wright with Owens waiting in the wings, and the possibility of signing Hill. It seems clear to me that we should deal Miley, whose floor and ceiling are MLB average, and replace him with the best pitcher we can get at a price that makes sense. If we're focused just on next year, there are many other interesting FA options. Hisashi Iwakuma, Wei-Yin Chen, and J.A. Happ all pitched like number #2s (as did John Lackey and A.J. Burnett, but signing either might be unrealistic). Brett Anderson, Scott Kazmir, Yovanni Gallardo and Mike Leake were all #3s who need to be looked at both analytically and with a scouting eye to see if they might step up and be a bargain (look at what the Pirates seemed to have done with Happ). Jeff Samardzija, Matt Latos, Ian Kennedy and Doug Fister, ditto as potential buy-low comebacks. Marco Estrada and Chris Young may or may not get too much interest based on their post-season work, but maybe they have real rather than illusory upside, too. And of course at the same time we should be looking to see what we can get in trade, with the same thought process: find the guy who projects to be some kind of #2 starter or better who represents the best combination of pure quality and bang-for-the-buck. Do the smartest possible thing. (Now, it's true that if we do re-sign Hill, it probably eliminates Chen, Anderson, and Kazmir, but that still leaves you with 11 FA possibilities and a host of potential trade targets. Happ I find too interesting to eliminate just because he's a lefty.)
|
|
|
Post by borisman on Oct 26, 2015 15:00:36 GMT -5
Not sure if this is the proper place to post this - but the Streamer projections for 2016 are out: www.fangraphs.com/projections.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&type=steamer600&team=0&lg=al&players=0&sort=26,d Couple of highlights: Mookie is projected to have the T-5th highest WAR in the AL for position players Xander's projection doesn't call for as much of as a regression as I might have thought (given his BABIP)
They project a big bounceback from Hanley, and a lesser one from Pablo. And JBJ (he of the 4 WAR *floor*), is at 2.4 - which is actually not bad, that's pretty much the mean for an everyday starter I may be in the minority here but I don't think X will suffer a significant drop in BABIP unless his power numbers jump. He's very good at "guiding" the ball (kind of like Boggs) to an open spot when he hits it. I think that is one reason he didn't hit as many home runs and doubles as he's capable of.
|
|
|
Post by heisenberg on Oct 26, 2015 15:08:05 GMT -5
Not sure if this is the proper place to post this - but the Streamer projections for 2016 are out: www.fangraphs.com/projections.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&type=steamer600&team=0&lg=al&players=0&sort=26,d Couple of highlights: Mookie is projected to have the T-5th highest WAR in the AL for position players Xander's projection doesn't call for as much of as a regression as I might have thought (given his BABIP)
They project a big bounceback from Hanley, and a lesser one from Pablo. And JBJ (he of the 4 WAR *floor*), is at 2.4 - which is actually not bad, that's pretty much the mean for an everyday starter I may be in the minority here but I don't think X will suffer a significant drop in BABIP unless his power numbers jump. He's very good at "guiding" the ball (kind of like Boggs) to an open spot when he hits it. I think that is one reason he didn't hit as many home runs and doubles as he's capable of. Now I've heard it all.
|
|
|
Post by borisman on Oct 26, 2015 15:15:18 GMT -5
I may be in the minority here but I don't think X will suffer a significant drop in BABIP unless his power numbers jump. He's very good at "guiding" the ball (kind of like Boggs) to an open spot when he hits it. I think that is one reason he didn't hit as many home runs and doubles as he's capable of. Now I've heard it all. Don't take it so literal, as I'm not sure how to better describe it, but, yeah, hear it.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Oct 26, 2015 15:41:47 GMT -5
I think going with the pitch is a better term. Boggs was great at it. Xander really did great going with the outside stuff. He showed signs of turning on the inside stuff. My apologize for using a HOF guy to compare.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,501
|
Post by nomar on Oct 27, 2015 8:48:24 GMT -5
Iwakuma could be a sneaky good pickup as long as we stay deep in the rotation. Iwakuma missed time last year and Buchholz always does, but having Kelly and Owens/Johnson in waiting could offset risk there. Iwakuma could be a steal this offseason.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 27, 2015 8:58:53 GMT -5
Iwakuma could be a sneaky good pickup as long as we stay deep in the rotation. Iwakuma missed time last year and Buchholz always does, but having Kelly and Owens/Johnson in waiting could offset risk there. Iwakuma could be a steal this offseason. Iwakuma will likely be offered the QO. He may have missed some time this year, but I don't think anyone is going to be sleeping on him, even though fans might. He's a solid #3 despite his age. My guess is he returns to Seattle on a 2 or 3 year deal or something.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Oct 27, 2015 12:35:31 GMT -5
I know a lot of these pitchers are crap shoots....I like Smardzija for a few reasons.....good track record, Less miles on his arm....alpha type guy, which is what I think we need, right handed, coming off a down year so he will be reasonable. I know his success was in the NL, but I think he will be better next year (with us) with a better defense, less of a launching pad for a home park. Just to good of stuff.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,838
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Oct 27, 2015 17:28:08 GMT -5
I know a lot of these pitchers are crap shoots....I like Smardzija for a few reasons.....good track record, Less miles on his arm....alpha type guy, which is what I think we need, right handed, coming off a down year so he will be reasonable. I know his success was in the NL, but I think he will be better next year (with us) with a better defense, less of a launching pad for a home park. Just to good of stuff. My only problem with him, other that his 2015 season, is he will receive a qualifying offer.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Oct 28, 2015 8:14:49 GMT -5
I know a lot of these pitchers are crap shoots....I like Smardzija for a few reasons.....good track record, Less miles on his arm....alpha type guy, which is what I think we need, right handed, coming off a down year so he will be reasonable. I know his success was in the NL, but I think he will be better next year (with us) with a better defense, less of a launching pad for a home park. Just to good of stuff. My only problem with him, other that his 2015 season, is he will receive a qualifying offer. Fair enough...if we want to keep that pick (good pick), then I wouldn't want any of the FA pitchers...If they're good enough to sign, they will have a QO (Cueto & Price will not be worth their asking price)..if they are not good enough for a QO, we already have a full cupboard of them....Then the only way is a trade. I like Carrasco, go ahead & give them Margot, Miley, Owens, Johnson (some combination) for him & use the x-tra money for the bullpen.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 28, 2015 12:50:12 GMT -5
My only problem with him, other that his 2015 season, is he will receive a qualifying offer. Fair enough...if we want to keep that pick (good pick), then I wouldn't want any of the FA pitchers...If they're good enough to sign, they will have a QO (Cueto & Price will not be worth their asking price)..if they are not good enough for a QO, we already have a full cupboard of them....Then the only way is a trade. I like Carrasco, go ahead & give them Margot, Miley, Owens, Johnson (some combination) for him & use the x-tra money for the bullpen. I doubt they'd take Margot, Miley, and Owens for Carrasco. If the Sox are going to get a front-line TOR starter, especially one who is cost controlled, I suspect it will cost them three of Margot, Devers, Kopech, Guerra, and Owens. With Johnson out a part of the season and still uncertain going into next season (yes he won't need TJ surgery, but I'd think another team looking to acquire him would want to make sure he's completely healthy first). I'd assume what Heyman wrote was reasonably accurate - that DDo wouldn't flip out and deal Moncada, Espinoza, or Benintendi. The price of a TOR starter is going to be very steep, more steep than I think a lot of people here would imagine. Margot (who is an excellent prospect that might be a better option than JBJ a few years down the road) would be a part of a package to get a #2/#3 type starter, but you figure to get an ace it would take Devers as well, along with a great pitching prospect. I'd just as soon sign Zimmerman or Greinke (I'd love to see Greinke if he's open to pitching for Boston) and punt the 12th pick of the draft than deal both Margot and Devers. Obviously I'd prefer to sign Price, and I'd hope the Sox have a lot of due diligence involved re: Cueto. He's pitched mostly terrible with KC. Is it an injury waiting to happen? Is it flukey? Is he going to be more of that guy going forward? Or is it a stretch that tells you very little, and that the greater body of work - the guy with the 2nd best ERA in baseball over the past few years is the more likely result? Kind of like when Clemens struggled horribly at the end of 1988, but it didn't stop him from still being great afterward. I would trust that the Sox statistical analysts and trusted scouts would supply a better answer on Cueto than I would. All I know is that his value will be down, and he could be a great bargain for another team if he pitches like he was in Cincy or a big albatross if he pitches as he has in KC.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,838
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Oct 28, 2015 14:16:36 GMT -5
My only problem with him, other that his 2015 season, is he will receive a qualifying offer. Fair enough...if we want to keep that pick (good pick), then I wouldn't want any of the FA pitchers...If they're good enough to sign, they will have a QO (Cueto & Price will not be worth their asking price)..if they are not good enough for a QO, we already have a full cupboard of them....Then the only way is a trade. I like Carrasco, go ahead & give them Margot, Miley, Owens, Johnson (some combination) for him & use the x-tra money for the bullpen. My comment is slightly misconstrued. I'm NOT against losing our 1st round pick (and the dough that goes along with it), I'm just not wanting to do it for Smardzija . I like him and believe he will be very useful going forward, but his poor season is a red flag for losing the pick and all of the money it will take to sign him. I'm fine losing the pick for Greinke. I can see signing Cueto if we can get him for less years (and of course less $ after his poor 2nd half).
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Oct 28, 2015 15:00:43 GMT -5
Makes sense of Shark, the assumption would be for them to offer the QO.....agree that Cueto or Greinke would be worth losing #12 as they would be more reasonable than Price....I just don't think Price would be worth 7/200...how many of these owners after year 2 or 3 wish they hadn't crippled their clubs financial flexibility for years with these deals. It's like a new car, total euphoria in the first year, then, you know.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Oct 28, 2015 18:04:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Nick Rabasco2 on Oct 28, 2015 18:07:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 28, 2015 20:18:51 GMT -5
I agree. I get tired or hearing this. The Sox, last time I checked, play 81 games on the road, too where defense in LF matters a lot. Not to mention, that there's a big difference between Carl Yastrzemski in LF and Hanley Ramirez in LF. Even at Fenway, leftfield defense matters.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Oct 28, 2015 20:30:39 GMT -5
Which means at least 1 OF’er will be moved
|
|
|