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.
6/9-6/11 Red Sox @ Orioles Series Thread
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Jun 11, 2015 21:54:36 GMT -5
Also, he's playing badly this year but I think Heyward will turn it around
|
|
|
Post by DesignatedForAssignment on Jun 11, 2015 21:56:11 GMT -5
Because you didn't get anything from Peavy that you we're getting from Workman at the time. And Peavy was no difference maker in the playoffs. Peavy helped us win a WS so I call it a win. Iglesias has cooled off since May 1st, back to equilibrium ... which is good because if he makes the Hall of Fame we lose points.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jun 11, 2015 21:59:56 GMT -5
Small market teams are able to keep their stars now. It's harder to trade for them. We did a study that said free-agency and 30 something's isn't the way to go. Try the shorter term free agents. Not, the 7-8 year guys. What superstar could we have gotten if we didn't hoard prospects? Donaldson, Price, etc We didn't have the 3b Beane wanted for Donaldson. Why do you think he wanted Lawrie? He needed a 3b in return. TB hasn't traded with us or NYY. I'm guessing their asking price from us is high. Also, Price is gonna be a free agent. Why would a last-place team trade for a rental?
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Jun 11, 2015 22:03:25 GMT -5
So, 28/30 teams are doing it right. A team with our payroll shouldn't miss the playoffs 5 times in 6 years. Poor evaluation of major league talent is our problem. Let guys like; Beltre and Lester go. Signed bums like; Crawford, Sandoval and Lackey. Poor trades. Reddick, Iglesias. Those moves were all made because the figures backed them up. Why did they fail? The person making the decision has to know more than stats. Its too early to tell still with Lester. I'll agree on the other points although I think Cherington had the right idea with the Iggy trade. I get the argument it wasn't necessary but it worked out and there is no guarantee we would've won without him.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Jun 11, 2015 22:03:35 GMT -5
We didn't have the 3b Beane wanted for Donaldson. Why do you think he wanted Lawrie? He needed a 3b in return. TB hasn't traded with us or NYY. I'm guessing their asking price from us is high. Also, Price is gonna be a free agent. Why would a last-place team trade for a rental? we had Holt, he's not as good but we could've given more prospects. We could've extended price. We could've traded for and extended Greinke. Also you didn't answer my quedtion. If stats are the problem, how come the "stats nerd" with no scouting background (Theo) did 1000x better than the former Scout?
|
|
|
Post by johnmark on Jun 11, 2015 22:04:20 GMT -5
Miley showing some fire...sadly he also showed that he sucks.
Bring up Johnson, play the young guys, look to next year. Seems like I am back in the early 90s.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jun 11, 2015 22:10:37 GMT -5
We didn't have the 3b Beane wanted for Donaldson. Why do you think he wanted Lawrie? He needed a 3b in return. TB hasn't traded with us or NYY. I'm guessing their asking price from us is high. Also, Price is gonna be a free agent. Why would a last-place team trade for a rental? we had Holt, he's not as good but we could've given more prospects. We could've extended price. We could've traded for and extended Greinke. Also you didn't answer my quedtion. If stats are the problem, how come the "stats nerd" with no scouting background (Theo) did 1000x better than the former Scout? I consider BC and Theo the same. Theo was better at his job. Don't forget a big payroll has helped both of them. Our stats-based studies show you shouldn't sign pitchers like Price to long-term deals.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jun 11, 2015 22:12:24 GMT -5
Oh good, the "Ben Cherington hoards prospects/well what would you have done" debate. It had been a couple weeks.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jun 11, 2015 22:20:03 GMT -5
Oh good, the "Ben Cherington hoards prospects/well what would you have done" debate. It had been a couple weeks. Speaking of prospects. What are your thoughts on JBJ? He really seems to be finding himself in AAA. Merloni has always said being rushed hurt him. Do we give him an extended look? I would.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Jun 11, 2015 22:20:18 GMT -5
we had Holt, he's not as good but we could've given more prospects. We could've extended price. We could've traded for and extended Greinke. Also you didn't answer my quedtion. If stats are the problem, how come the "stats nerd" with no scouting background (Theo) did 1000x better than the former Scout? I consider BC and Theo the same. Theo was better at his job. Don't forget a big payroll has helped both of them. Our stats-based studies show you shouldn't sign pitchers like Price to long-term deals. Ben is the "scouting and stats" guy you want, unless you want a clown like Amaro who uses scouting way more than stats. I preferred Theo, who had no scouting background, yet won 2 championships and kept us competitive every single year. I think too much scouting which leads to prospect hoarding is the problem, not not enough scouting. Also, what's your problem with not handing out big contracts to over 30s?
|
|
|
Post by xycosis on Jun 11, 2015 22:20:25 GMT -5
When I hear Fire Farrell... only one thing comes to mind.
Workman batting in game 3 of the World Series 9th inning, in a tie game.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jun 11, 2015 22:28:41 GMT -5
I consider BC and Theo the same. Theo was better at his job. Don't forget a big payroll has helped both of them. Our stats-based studies show you shouldn't sign pitchers like Price to long-term deals. Ben is the "scouting and stats" guy you want, unless you want a clown like Amaro who uses scouting way more than stats. I preferred Theo, who had no scouting background, yet won 2 championships and kept us competitive every single year. I think too much scouting which leads to prospect hoarding is the problem, not not enough scouting. Also, what's your problem with not handing out big contracts to over 30s? The 30+ guys is an organizational decision. Whomever our GM is will have to live with it. Thso also used a large budget to assist in his trades, free agent signings and over-slot signings and supplemental pick manipulation. 1. John Henry doesn't want long term deals to the 30+ guys. 2. Small-market teams are locking up stars. Revenue sharing. 3. New slot system 4. Hard to get extra picks now. A lot of the things Theo figured out are no longer as easy to do. Talent evaluation of MLB players is crucial. BC sucks at it.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Jun 11, 2015 22:30:02 GMT -5
The Sox should probably bring JBJ up for one last shot. Not sure how they do it though. I don't think Mookie should go down. They are committed to Rusney. Hanley could be put on the DL, I guess. They should do something now though so they can decide who to move at the trade dead line.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Jun 11, 2015 22:31:50 GMT -5
Ben is the "scouting and stats" guy you want, unless you want a clown like Amaro who uses scouting way more than stats. I preferred Theo, who had no scouting background, yet won 2 championships and kept us competitive every single year. I think too much scouting which leads to prospect hoarding is the problem, not not enough scouting. Also, what's your problem with not handing out big contracts to over 30s? The 30+ guys is an organizational decision. Whomever our GM is will have to live with it. Thso also used a large budget to assist in his trades, free agent signings and over-slot signings and supplemental pick manipulation. 1. John Henry doesn't want long term deals to the 30+ guys. 2. Small-market teams are locking up stars. Revenue sharing. 3. New slot system 4. Hard to get extra picks now. A lot of the things Theo figured out are no longer as easy to do. Talent evaluation of MLB players is crucial. BC sucks at it. are there more stars being locked up by small market teams? I don't see it. Greinke, Price, Donaldson and Heyward have all been traded lately and I'm sure I'm forgetting someone else
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jun 11, 2015 22:43:30 GMT -5
The 30+ guys is an organizational decision. Whomever our GM is will have to live with it. Thso also used a large budget to assist in his trades, free agent signings and over-slot signings and supplemental pick manipulation. 1. John Henry doesn't want long term deals to the 30+ guys. 2. Small-market teams are locking up stars. Revenue sharing. 3. New slot system 4. Hard to get extra picks now. A lot of the things Theo figured out are no longer as easy to do. Talent evaluation of MLB players is crucial. BC sucks at it. are there more stars being locked up by small market teams? I don't see it. Greinke, Price, Donaldson and Heyward have all been traded lately and I'm sure I'm forgetting someone else Grienke was a free-agent signing in LA. Our payroll was tapped out that off-season. You can have Heyward. I already explained Donaldson. Price is a rental.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Jun 11, 2015 22:47:57 GMT -5
are there more stars being locked up by small market teams? I don't see it. Greinke, Price, Donaldson and Heyward have all been traded lately and I'm sure I'm forgetting someone else Grienke was a free-agent signing in LA. Our payroll was tapped out that off-season. You can have Heyward. I already explained Donaldson. Price is a rental. Greinke was traded to the Brewers then the Angels, but OK. And you ignored that we had Holt.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Jun 11, 2015 22:50:52 GMT -5
The Sox should probably bring JBJ up for one last shot. Not sure how they do it though. I don't think Mookie should go down. They are committed to Rusney. Hanley could be put on the DL, I guess. They should do something now though so they can decide who to move at the trade dead line. Hanley to DH, JBJ, Mookie and Castillo OF.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jun 11, 2015 22:59:52 GMT -5
Oh good, the "Ben Cherington hoards prospects/well what would you have done" debate. It had been a couple weeks. It's weird how the Red Sox can't find a qualified GM when we've clearly got a dozen of them posting on this board.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jun 11, 2015 23:57:47 GMT -5
Alright, so we can't even fall back on the "they're only 3 games back in this weak division" thing anymore. This team has a bad record, bad scored/allowed numbers, and now they're buried in the standings. I like to think I'm one of the more patient baseball fans out there. I don't tend to get too worked up over a bad game or a bad week or even a bad month. But... this team is just bad. Sounds like you've come around. They are quite a bad team. Anything is possible - I do remember a 50-57 1991 Red Sox team going 31-9 before dropping dead down the stretch with a 3-12 record. That team had Roger Clemens heading the rotation, unlike this team. I think this team is far more likely to lose 90 games than to actually compete for a playoff spot. The lineup is made up of guys who have seen better days, guys who will see better days, and guys who simply aren't that good. BC invested heavily in Kelly, Masterson, Porcello, and Miley, guys who should be hitting their prime, but they're just not very good, unfortunately (we'll hold out hope for Kelly and Porcello nonetheless, though). I'm starting to think that 2016 will be a washout, too. They might have need to focus on youth over the next few seasons. Concentrate on putting together a good young core and let it mature. Don't tie up payroll with these mid tier Sandoval type contracts.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jun 12, 2015 0:02:21 GMT -5
Our front office does a good job with amateur talent. They are absolutely pathetic at evaluating MLB players and roster composition. We really need a professional GM. Someone who has a scouting background and knows the numbers. Not just a numbers geek who thinks that's all that matters. I disagree about the scouting background. I think we need a stats oriented GM who isn't a prospect hoarder like Ben is. Theo was great for us I agree that Theo was a great GM, but what prospects was he trading? He loathed dealing prospects, too and lamented that he would have loved to put together a team that was all homegrown, sort of the way the 1988 Red Sox were. The only major prospect he dealt was Anthony Rizzo in the Adrian Gonzalez deal, which I'm sure Theo would rather have not made the deal. Most of the prospects Theo dealt were questionable prospects. Like a Brandon Moss. Theo was able to get a Schilling or a Jason Bay without giving up blue chip prospects. I think he's similar to Ben Cherington that way. And quite frankly, I'm glad he's holding onto the prospects, because that's the only shot the Sox have in being good in the future. Because almost all of the moves he's made to be competitive in the present have backfired.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Jun 12, 2015 2:02:28 GMT -5
So, 28/30 teams are doing it right. A team with our payroll shouldn't miss the playoffs 5 times in 6 years. Poor evaluation of major league talent is our problem. Let guys like; Beltre and Lester go. Signed bums like; Crawford, Sandoval and Lackey. Poor trades. Reddick, Iglesias. Those moves were all made because the figures backed them up. Why did they fail? The person making the decision has to know more than stats. In fact, they were mostly made in defiance of the figures. This former statistical consultant for the team excoriated one Cherington trade after another as being statistically indefensible, to the degree that it got written up in ESPN The Magazine and to the degree that the F.O. tweeted around my take-down of the Iglesias trade on SOSH, and my former colleague Tom Tippett gave me the courtesy of explaining the rationale behind it. Cherington has had success trading for minor league talent (ERod, Holt) where scouting is the dominant tool of assessment. I don't know why he's done such a poor job of using statistical analysis to judge MLB talent -- whether he's getting good analysis and ignoring it, or getting insufficient analysis. I do know that at one point Lucchino believed that it wasn't cost effective to spend any money at all paying statistical consultants to supplement Bill James and Tippett. I think it was after last season that Henry talked about re-emphasizing analysis. I rather suspect that for the previous five years, everyone doing analysis other than James (who is a visionary out-of-the-box thinker but not someone who actually does in-depth statistical analysis) and Tippett (who also has the full-time job of coding all the team's in-house software) was an intern or the equivalent. If they've hired anyone heavy-duty since, a) they've kept it under the radar as they didn't do with Voros McCracken and myself, and b) it's probably too soon to have started reaping the benefits -- and that probably includes the time it would take for Cherington to start trusting the new intel (if there is indeed any).
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Jun 12, 2015 4:30:29 GMT -5
When I hear Fire Farrell... only one thing comes to mind. Workman batting in game 3 of the World Series 9th inning, in a tie game. Farrell's original sin was starting "Pixie Dust" Gomes against RHP over Nava during the playoffs; that was far more egregious than Grady Little leaving Pedro in one inning too long. But I suppose you can't fire a manager after winning a World Series
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Jun 12, 2015 4:40:37 GMT -5
As far as hoarding prospects, it is near certain that after the 2013 season, Cherington could have had Stanton for Xander + (JBJ? Owens?). Assuming he could have signed Stanton to a reasonable extension (admittedly uncertain), I make that trade with no hesitation, even if with a heavy heart
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Jun 12, 2015 4:51:25 GMT -5
Alright, so we can't even fall back on the "they're only 3 games back in this weak division" thing anymore. This team has a bad record, bad scored/allowed numbers, and now they're buried in the standings. I like to think I'm one of the more patient baseball fans out there. I don't tend to get too worked up over a bad game or a bad week or even a bad month. But... this team is just bad. Sounds like you've come around. They are quite a bad team. Anything is possible - I do remember a 50-57 1991 Red Sox team going 31-9 before dropping dead down the stretch with a 3-12 record. That team had Roger Clemens heading the rotation, unlike this team. I think this team is far more likely to lose 90 games than to actually compete for a playoff spot. The lineup is made up of guys who have seen better days, guys who will see better days, and guys who simply aren't that good. BC invested heavily in Kelly, Masterson, Porcello, and Miley, guys who should be hitting their prime, but they're just not very good, unfortunately (we'll hold out hope for Kelly and Porcello nonetheless, though). I'm starting to think that 2016 will be a washout, too. They might have need to focus on youth over the next few seasons. Concentrate on putting together a good young core and let it mature. Don't tie up payroll with these mid tier Sandoval type contracts. Theo traded for Schilling and Gonzalez, both of which helped us win a WS. I'm guessing it was Hoyer or Lucchino who traded for Beckett because I see no way Cherington does that.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jun 12, 2015 6:41:20 GMT -5
So, 28/30 teams are doing it right. A team with our payroll shouldn't miss the playoffs 5 times in 6 years. Poor evaluation of major league talent is our problem. Let guys like; Beltre and Lester go. Signed bums like; Crawford, Sandoval and Lackey. Poor trades. Reddick, Iglesias. Those moves were all made because the figures backed them up. Why did they fail? The person making the decision has to know more than stats. In fact, they were mostly made in defiance of the figures. This former statistical consultant for the team excoriated one Cherington trade after another as being statistically indefensible, to the degree that it got written up in ESPN The Magazine and to the degree that the F.O. tweeted around my take-down of the Iglesias trade on SOSH, and my former colleague Tom Tippett gave me the courtesy of explaining the rationale behind it. Cherington has had success trading for minor league talent (ERod, Holt) where scouting is the dominant tool of assessment. I don't know why he's done such a poor job of using statistical analysis to judge MLB talent -- whether he's getting good analysis and ignoring it, or getting insufficient analysis. I do know that at one point Lucchino believed that it wasn't cost effective to spend any money at all paying statistical consultants to supplement Bill James and Tippett. I think it was after last season that Henry talked about re-emphasizing analysis. I rather suspect that for the previous five years, everyone doing analysis other than James (who is a visionary out-of-the-box thinker but not someone who actually does in-depth statistical analysis) and Tippett (who also has the full-time job of coding all the team's in-house software) was an intern or the equivalent. If they've hired anyone heavy-duty since, a) they've kept it under the radar as they didn't do with Voros McCracken and myself, and b) it's probably too soon to have started reaping the benefits -- and that probably includes the time it would take for Cherington to start trusting the new intel (if there is indeed any). We're using statistics to make our decisions. And, we should. Don't get me wrong there. I don't feel we're incorporating other tried and true scouting with it. Physical condition of athlete. What serious look at Sandoval makes someone comfortable giving that slob 5 years? I don't need stats to tell me Porcello isn't a front of the rotation starter. He is a borderline two at best. Hanley was a clubhouse problem in Miami and LA. The whole world knew that. We are asking him to do something different and didn't appear concerned about it. While many writers thought he might be an odd fit. Every interview I've heard with Cherington he defends the move by throwing out the; "Our projections show he's going to be a good fit here. " He may be using stats, just not the right ones. And, in all honesty, We made a ton of projection mistakes under Theo too. Lugo, Renteria, Clement, Dice-K, Lackey and Crawford come to mind. What stats did the front office use for those moves? Theo was able to make up for those bad signings because of our drafting and player development; Lester, Papelbon, Buchholz, Pedroia, Ellsbury and others used as trade chips. He had a great feel for in-season needs. Played his hunches well. 1yr deal for Beltre. Harder to draft and develop now with slotting and not as many supplemental picks. So, BC does it have it more difficult. He's been awful though. I'd rather have you making the call. You seem to have a feel and stats accumen. I thought Iglesias high BA was a result of babip luck. Doesn't appear so. Your pumping Wright's tires looks good to. What stats are we using now, and maybe more importantly. Which ones are we ignoring?
|
|
|