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.
8/7-8/9 Red Sox @ Tigers Series Thread
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Aug 9, 2015 18:38:30 GMT -5
Dan's point about today's game is right on. It looks very different without the defense. The Mays-like over the head catch Bradley made is something only a few guys in baseball could even pull off, and I doubt any of them would make it look any smoother. The diamond is just filled with young guys. I suppose the team was hoping to do this, start integrating the minor league players into the mix, within the framework of a successful season. That didn't happen what with slow starts, poor seasons, and injuries - again - derailing any sort of playoff push. But all the playing time for these guys will pay off. I don't have any doubt about that.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Aug 9, 2015 18:48:33 GMT -5
Sports is entertainment. This game was entertaining. If they lost with Panda and Hanley on the bench, I still would have enjoyed it.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,899
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Aug 9, 2015 18:49:21 GMT -5
I missed a great game from JBJ. This next month is huge for him. If he hits like he can, our outlook is a lot brighter.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,399
|
Post by radiohix on Aug 9, 2015 18:57:12 GMT -5
I missed a great game from JBJ. This next month is huge for him. If he hits like he can, our outlook is a lot brighter. Same here! Maybe we're jinxing himI love the guy so much (A real joy to watch patrolling CF, he's the equivalent of Iglesias playing center.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Aug 9, 2015 18:57:51 GMT -5
I missed a great game from JBJ. This next month is huge for him. If he hits like he can, our outlook is a lot brighter. Many said Iggy couldn't hit enough to make his defense worth keeping. Watching the putrid D this year should make all root for JBJ.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 9, 2015 19:30:20 GMT -5
That's like saying that Xander Bogaerts wasn't the player Daniel Nava was in the majors last year. You guys missed my point, which was in response to some posting about Margot being in the Sox OF in 2017. Maybe I should have structured it differently. What I meant is that Margot is not close to being ready for the big leagues. One more year probably will not be enough because he is not as advanced as was JBJ when he was at AA. However, I don't think his age has much to do with the difference between their fielding and throwing skills. From all reports, Margot is very good, but JBJ is in a class by himself, probably the best fielding and throwing CF in all of baseball. Margot has a 65 defensive rating on him. JBJ probably should be a 75 or 80.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 9, 2015 19:31:30 GMT -5
“@jackiebradleyjr: I was in no way trying to make it seem like I was ”calling out“ anyone. It was suppose to be motivational but got taken out of context.” I must have missed something. What was that in reference to?
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Aug 9, 2015 19:36:22 GMT -5
Pete Abraham @peteabe 30m30 minutes ago Of note: Farrell left open the idea of Betts playing a corner OF spot. So Bradley could play some more in CF. Under discussion. I'm a huge proponent of this. While JBJ's defense can be an asset in Fenway's RF, I think he has to be in center when he's in the lineup. Somewhat questionably, the Sox have never thrown Betts or Castillo into left field at any level. Mookie comes off as more of a LF than a RF, while the opposite is true for Rusney, but Mookie strikes me as being a little more reliable. Shouldn't matter much -- the team should look to get them each exposure at both spots the rest of this season. I am pretty ambivalent about this type of move and it smells of SSS revision. It is apparent, and has been for a while that JBJ is the best centerfielder and should play the position if he is productive at the plate, but you've now invested over a 1/2 season of Mookie learning the position, just to move him.Ben spoke recently about trying to get away from these type of changes. "One of the things we have been faced with the last two years — and I’m taking responsibility for this — we’ve had a lot of transition,” Cherington said, via The Providence Journal. “Young player to the big leagues, that’s one form of transition. Players in a new environment is another form of transition. Players in a new role or a new position is another form of transition. We’ve had a lot of that the last two years, and sometimes along with transition, it can affect performance. We’ve seen that over time historically."
I don't know what the correct answer is, but unless you send JBJ back down when Mookie comes back, your are basically screwing Castillo out of at bats, because Hanley isn't going anywhere else this season. Castillo needs his development time also at this point. It's a byproduct of very poor planning. We've invested time in developing Mookie as an outfielder as a whole, though. He's tremendously transitioned from second to center, and I have no doubt he'd be just as good, if not better, in a corner. And, learning a corner outfield spot after playing center - and let's note that no one is advocating for Betts to become a full time LF/RF, but rather a guy who can seamlessly alternate between CF and one of them - is a whole lot simpler than just about any other non-DH position switch. It's not really the type of situation where you're ripping a player out of his comfort zone and putting him in a position to be exposed/freeze progress (a la Bogaerts at SS/3B last year).
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Aug 9, 2015 19:40:22 GMT -5
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,399
|
Post by radiohix on Aug 9, 2015 19:52:57 GMT -5
One of this "little moves" ( DFAing him) that makes you question this FO competence.
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Aug 9, 2015 19:55:13 GMT -5
You're going to criticize a transaction based on FIVE innings?
Sorry, but it makes me question your competence, not the FO.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,399
|
Post by radiohix on Aug 9, 2015 20:14:25 GMT -5
You're going to criticize a transaction based on FIVE innings? Sorry, but it makes me question your competence, not the FO. He has 3 year-options, throws hard (94 mph), signed to a relativily high bonus, gets called to the majors for one appearance then gets DFA'd while keeping Craig Effing Breslow and Justin Masterson...Maybe I'm incompetent at the arm-chair GMing thing but would you care to enlighting me on the logic behind those moves?
|
|
|
Post by blizzards39 on Aug 9, 2015 20:49:26 GMT -5
The masterson DFA only makes sence if there is a trade in the horizon. The rotation is thin and he could be used as emergency?? Could Ben be making some deal to shed the salary and get the Sox under the LT? ?
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Aug 9, 2015 20:56:19 GMT -5
Not likely. They wouldn't DFA him if they had a deal in the works. This was overdue. He had no future with the Sox.
|
|
|
Post by ancientsoxfogey on Aug 9, 2015 21:12:24 GMT -5
I'm thinking/hoping that JBJ's game today, if it isn't a breakout/statement game, will at least lift some of the burden off his shoulders. I have to believe he was getting really frustrated with his struggles in the Show, especially since he had seemingly thoroughly conquered AAA this year. Not saying he'll all of a sudden turn into a whirling dervish on offense, but maybe he can find the wherewithal to settle in and at least be a fairly consistent and useful bottom-of-the-order hitter. After all, it doesn't look as if the Sox will be hurting for top-of-the-order hitters in the next couple of years. Their real issue looks to be the 4-7 spots in the order.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 9, 2015 21:52:59 GMT -5
You're going to criticize a transaction based on FIVE innings? Sorry, but it makes me question your competence, not the FO. Why is that? Hinojosa at least had a shot at helping the ballclub. What was Masterson going to do for the club? If I were in the FO, I would have DFAd Masterson before I'd ever DFA Hinojosa, and I think this is something that a lot of people on this board would agree with me on. This doesn't mean that Hinojosa is going to be a good reliever for Philly, as 5 IP is way too small a sample size, but he certainly has greater than a non-zero chance of being useful. Masterson had no such shot at being useful. He was a waste of $9 million.
|
|
|
Post by semsox on Aug 10, 2015 7:22:41 GMT -5
I'm thinking/hoping that JBJ's game today, if it isn't a breakout/statement game, will at least lift some of the burden off his shoulders. I have to believe he was getting really frustrated with his struggles in the Show, especially since he had seemingly thoroughly conquered AAA this year. Not saying he'll all of a sudden turn into a whirling dervish on offense, but maybe he can find the wherewithal to settle in and at least be a fairly consistent and useful bottom-of-the-order hitter. After all, it doesn't look as if the Sox will be hurting for top-of-the-order hitters in the next couple of years. Their real issue looks to be the 4-7 spots in the order. Agreed. It's nice to have the results finally show up for him. To my eye, his approach looks much improved, and he's had good patient at bats, but just wasn't getting the results from it; even after yesterday's game, his BABIP is .163 on the year (for reference it was .284 in his putrid 2014 season). Bumping up his average with a normal BABIP would give him around a .250/.380/.380 line, which is right in line with what people expect from him: a high OBP, modest power, and GG play in CF. I just hope they keep trotting him out there to get established.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 10, 2015 7:31:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Aug 10, 2015 10:20:31 GMT -5
You're going to criticize a transaction based on FIVE innings? Sorry, but it makes me question your competence, not the FO. Why is that? Hinojosa at least had a shot at helping the ballclub. What was Masterson going to do for the club? If I were in the FO, I would have DFAd Masterson before I'd ever DFA Hinojosa, and I think this is something that a lot of people on this board would agree with me on. This doesn't mean that Hinojosa is going to be a good reliever for Philly, as 5 IP is way too small a sample size, but he certainly has greater than a non-zero chance of being useful. Masterson had no such shot at being useful. He was a waste of $9 million. Maybe you will be so kind as to highlight the text where I advocate for Masterson, or for the dismissal of Hinojosa? I questioned the position taken by the poster who submitted FIVE INNINGS as his only evidence. I stand by that. It was a nonsensical post, based on air, much like yours.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,833
|
Post by wcp3 on Aug 10, 2015 10:44:11 GMT -5
@beno, I think you're off base here.
I don't think anyone's hyping up Hinojosa after 5 innings, so much as people are questioning the logic behind BC's decision-making.
Why DFA the guy without giving him some innings, especially when there are two vets (Masterson and Breslow) who have zero future with your club? Wouldn't it make more sense to give those innings to the unknown guy, just to see if you have something?
Hinojosa may not turn into anything, but that doesn't mean the decision to cut him was logical.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 10, 2015 11:24:11 GMT -5
The Red Sox weren't punting the season at that point. Hinojosa didn't even look as good as Breslow when he came up. It's fair to criticize, but at that point when he was designated, they needed the roster spot. It's not like they just DFA'ed him now.
I didn't see anything in him. Even if it turns out to be a bad decision, it's not going to be some huge loss.
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Aug 10, 2015 11:26:42 GMT -5
One of this "little moves" ( DFAing him) that makes you question this FO competence. I don't know how to multi-post, so quoting this one post is in response to wcp3 saying, "no one was hyping up Hinojosa after five innings." That's the only thing the poster submitted. Notice the poster's comment, then read the tweet. How is the connection being made by the poster unclear, or that I was questioning this methodology specifically?
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Aug 10, 2015 12:17:03 GMT -5
One of this "little moves" ( DFAing him) that makes you question this FO competence. I don't know how to multi-post, so quoting this one post is in response to wcp3 saying, "no one was hyping up Hinojosa after five innings." That's the only thing the poster submitted. Notice the poster's comment, then read the tweet. How is the connection being made by the poster unclear, or that I was questioning this methodology specifically? I use the tab feature of my browser (Firefox, but Chrome, IE, and the others work the same way). Use the right right button to reply to the target post in a new tab. That leaves the tab with the thread still available. You can pick out other posts in the same fashion and "reply" to them. Cut and paste to the reply you'll make from the other "reply" which you'll discard when done. Use the BBCode view for those cut and paste operations, and you'll gradually figure out how to do the quotes. Finally, use BBCode back and forth with the Preview to get it looking right. It works well for me.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 10, 2015 12:45:41 GMT -5
One of this "little moves" ( DFAing him) that makes you question this FO competence. I don't know how to multi-post, so quoting this one post is in response to wcp3 saying, "no one was hyping up Hinojosa after five innings." That's the only thing the poster submitted. Notice the poster's comment, then read the tweet. How is the connection being made by the poster unclear, or that I was questioning this methodology specifically? I don't know how to multi-post, so quoting this one post is in response to wcp3 saying, "no one was hyping up Hinojosa after five innings." That's the only thing the poster submitted. Notice the poster's comment, then read the tweet. How is the connection being made by the poster unclear, or that I was questioning this methodology specifically? I use the tab feature of my browser (Firefox, but Chrome, IE, and the others work the same way). Use the right right button to reply to the target post in a new tab. That leaves the tab with the thread still available. You can pick out other posts in the same fashion and "reply" to them. Cut and paste to the reply you'll make from the other "reply" which you'll discard when done. Use the BBCode view for those cut and paste operations, and you'll gradually figure out how to do the quotes. Finally, use BBCode back and forth with the Preview to get it looking right. It works well for me. You have to select each post you want to quote with the button to the top right. When you select multiple posts and hit Quote, it will multiquote.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Aug 10, 2015 13:51:12 GMT -5
^ I did not know this. Thanks.
|
|
|