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.
2016 Red Sox Spring Training News/Discussion
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 29, 2016 12:09:15 GMT -5
I think I'd rather let SD have Sandoval for nothing, with as much money as it took for them to take him. Are you really so confident that his replacement is on this team? Or are you so down on him? I feel that he is at least a 1-WAR player, and that both Holt and Shaw have a chance to be exposed dramatically with every-day playing. I'm not sure I even have a strong feeling which has more upside. Sandoval is the only one with a history of lighting it up at any level, so I'm inclined to lean towards him (which doesn't mean I expect him to be better than 2 WAR this year). I am confident that Pablo is not going to rebound nearly enough for him to be a worthy starter. And I get the feeling that this is the last chance to trade him, if there even is one.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Mar 29, 2016 12:11:42 GMT -5
Let's say that the #s stabilize after 800 PAs. IIRC it's more than twice that for RHH.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 29, 2016 12:12:30 GMT -5
Who is this guy and what has he done with John Farrell? On a serious note, who is the backup infielder now? If they send Castillo to AAA, it would be Marrero. If they don't send Castillo down, it would still be Holt.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 29, 2016 12:14:43 GMT -5
I think it's a fair question to ask whether Castillo or Marrero should fill that last roster spot, but I think it still goes to Castillo. Assuming that everyone else is healthy, that player will effectively be the backups at CF, RF, SS and 2B (with Holt moving around as necessary) and I'd estimate will start somewhere around 20-30% of the games. I think the team is better off on the field with Castillo in that role-- I think he's likely to be a better hitter than Marrero, and not that much worse of a defender/baserunner.
The argument for Marrero would be based on the idea that Castillo is better off getting full playing time in Pawtucket instead of being a part-time player in Boston. I don't really buy it, though. Castillo turns 29 this year and is entering his second full season in the system. I don't know how much upside he really has left. At this point, I think his development (and Boston's evaluation of him) is probably better served getting fewer reps against higher-quality competition as opposed to getting more reps against lower-quality competition. Plus, if there's a decent chance he's a fourth outfielder long-term (as appears increasingly likely), he might as well start getting used to that role.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Mar 29, 2016 12:18:03 GMT -5
I think it's a fair question to ask whether Castillo or Marrero should fill that last roster spot, but I think it still goes to Castillo. Assuming that everyone else is healthy, that player will effectively be the backups at CF, RF, SS and 2B (with Holt moving around as necessary) and I'd estimate will start somewhere around 20-30% of the games. I think the team is better off on the field with Castillo in that role-- I think he's likely to be a better hitter than Marrero, and not that much worse of a defender/baserunner. The argument for Marrero would be based on the idea that Castillo is better off getting full playing time in Pawtucket instead of being a part-time player in Boston. I don't really buy it, though. Castillo turns 29 this year and is entering his second full season in the system. I don't know how much upside he really has left. At this point, I think his development (and Boston's evaluation of him) is probably better served getting fewer reps against higher-quality competition as opposed to getting more reps against lower-quality competition. Plus, if there's a decent chance he's a fourth outfielder long-term (as appears increasingly likely), he might as well start getting used to that role. Not to mention Castillo seems to be habitually plagued by little nagging injuries. The "he needs to play everyday" mantra isn't a good fit here.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 29, 2016 12:18:18 GMT -5
Let's say that the #s stabilize after 800 PAs. IIRC it's more than twice that for RHH. There's an established procedure for regressing it, too. You add the number of league-average platoon split PAs necessary to reach the stabilization point. If you do that, Castillo's platoon splits are slightly higher than average but not enough to make him a strict platoon player. If he's good enough to play versus LHP, he should be good enough to play versus RHP (with recognition that the first part of that statement may or may not be true).
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Mar 29, 2016 12:29:42 GMT -5
Even if Marrero is on the roster, I believe the correct move if Pedroia needs to leave the game is usually to move Holt to 2B and sub in an OF. I would only play Marrero at SS.
Brock Holt gets mischaracterized a lot. He's not a typical utility player. He's actually a starting-caliber 2B (and I believe a plus defender there) who happens to (a) be able to play 6 other positions in a pinch and (b) be blocked at 2B in Boston by the presence of a certain D. Pedroia.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,501
|
Post by nomar on Mar 29, 2016 12:38:10 GMT -5
Brock Holt can still be a utility player once the need for one arises. April hasn't even started yet. Things can and will change
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Mar 29, 2016 13:06:22 GMT -5
A holt/young LF platoon, combined with a bradley/castillo platoon CF (with platoon ==> >= 90% matchup)could make sense. otherwise, castillo has no place on this roster
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 29, 2016 13:28:13 GMT -5
A holt/young LF platoon, combined with a bradley/castillo platoon CF (with platoon ==> >= 90% matchup)could make sense. otherwise, castillo has no place on this roster He still is quite good CF/RF depth.
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Mar 29, 2016 13:58:36 GMT -5
There's no rational analysis that James Shields, a 3 WAR pitcher, is better than Joe Kelly or Henry Owens. Right. I WAS AS CAREFUL AS I COULD POSSIBLY BE TO NOT MAKE ANY SUCH ASSERTION.Any true statement can be turned into a ridiculous one by removing all of the critical qualifying phrases. "There's no rational analysis where a wealthy businessman with narcissistic personality disorder would make a good president who could be trusted to protect civil liberties." "No wealthy businessman could be a good president. Right." That's pretty much precisely the quality of response you just gave. No, it's not. There is a rational analysis that would posit that you're vastly overstating both the effect AND how confident we can be that we know the effect of him pitching in Fenway. Like, what, you're knocking 2 WAR off his projection because of Fenway (for a RHP no less)? I don't think so. And that's pretty much what you would have to do for it to be a toss up between him and someone who either has zero track record or is just flat out terrible or both, like the guys you mention. This is obviously not taking into account contracts or any of that, and I'm not advocating we trade for Shields, but I strongly disagree with you that he wouldn't be a clear upgrade/
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 29, 2016 15:00:00 GMT -5
Those numbers mean almost nothing without knowing amount of games and innings pitched at home and at Fenway. Even then I'm assuming the total innings will be low and thus a few bad games could really skew the results. Sure I can see why someone would be worried, but to act like those numbers predict that James Shield can't be an upgrade is crazy. It was 13 GS in each place. Fewer innings at Fenway because they didn't let him pitch as many. The point of those stats is that they provide evidence for the same belief as derived by looking at every one of Shield's hit locations with hit/fx data and applying Fenway park adjustments to those specific locations (this from former Mariners analyst Tony Blenginio at FanGraphs). Shields gives up more fly balls to center and left than almost anyone, and Fenway is crazy, off-the-scale extreme for turning outs in those places into hits. The sample sizes are plenty big enough to confirm the expectation derived from the low-level data. So I justed looked at box scores for those 26 starts with a focus on the 13 starts at Fenway. Out of those 13 starts Shields had two very bad outings and 4 very good ones, with the rest in between. The two bad starts were both in 2008 1 inning 4 ER, and 3 &1/2 innings 7 ER. Good starts 6 innings 1 ER which he did twice, 8 &1/3 innings 0 ER and 8 innings 3 ER. That start in 2008 of 1 inning really hurts his ERA and it really means nothing. As Shields had to have an injury or there was a rain delay. So knowing that those 13 starts were over 8 plus years and he had more really good starts then bad ones, I don't think Shields is going to have a 5 plus ERA at Fenway. You have to be really careful when looking at very limited sample sizes over a large period of time. Also with our OF defense it could make James Shield look better. With Betts, Bradley and Castillo we might have best OF defense in the game.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Mar 29, 2016 15:45:59 GMT -5
I've heard nothing from the Red Sox themselves suggesting that they're going to send Castillo down. And if you send him down, who do you replace him with? I guess Marrero could handle the defensive side, but he's a blackhole offensively. This sure sounds like poor roster construction; again, unless something's coming soon Not sure why this would be considered poor roster construction. They have been counting on Castillo to be a big part of their OF alignment. As it stands right now, they have 5 guys on the 25 man that can play the OF, with platoons. The fact that they are seemingly going to a plan B speaks more to his not being capable than anything else. I think the jury is still out on the player, but if they have been looking for a certain improvement and not getting it, I give the front office credit for being open minded about the options.
|
|
|
Post by humanbeingbean on Mar 29, 2016 16:18:38 GMT -5
I fear Benintendi is turning into a cyborg.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Mar 29, 2016 16:25:37 GMT -5
There was a write-up on Fangraphs exploring the best destinations for Rusney to be traded. They conclude San Diego for Upton with the Padres swallowing a few million. www.fangraphs.com/blogs/lets-find-rusney-castillo-a-new-home/Also exploring adding Sandoval to the package could be interesting. Would be nice to have another IF on the bench rather than Kung Pao Panda.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 29, 2016 16:41:06 GMT -5
There was a write-up on Fangraphs exploring the best destinations for Rusney to be traded. They conclude San Diego for Upton with the Padres swallowing a few million. www.fangraphs.com/blogs/lets-find-rusney-castillo-a-new-home/Also exploring adding Sandoval to the package could be interesting. Would be nice to have another IF on the bench rather than Kung Pao Panda. That is flat out just a bad article. Those trades make zero sense. Why would we trade an over priced player with upside for Upton? Then the Brewers trade is even worse, saying we ship out one or both of Johnson and Travis just to get rid of his salary. That's crazy talk, we would be better just eating the money. I just don't get why they don't want to send him to minors for depth. After the way he played at end of last year, I would really like to see him get a chance to prove he can play.
|
|
|
Post by fan72 on Mar 29, 2016 17:18:06 GMT -5
I would not go near Melvin Upton.exactly right we know what Upton is, but do we know what Castillo is going to be. I don't think he will be the player he was projected to be, but his defense alone holds value.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Mar 29, 2016 17:30:03 GMT -5
I fear Benintendi is turning into a cyborg. Pretty much the polar opposite of chicken and beer.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 29, 2016 19:01:56 GMT -5
Are you really so confident that his replacement is on this team? Or are you so down on him? I feel that he is at least a 1-WAR player, and that both Holt and Shaw have a chance to be exposed dramatically with every-day playing. I'm not sure I even have a strong feeling which has more upside. Sandoval is the only one with a history of lighting it up at any level, so I'm inclined to lean towards him (which doesn't mean I expect him to be better than 2 WAR this year). I am confident that Pablo is not going to rebound nearly enough for him to be a worthy starter. And I get the feeling that this is the last chance to trade him, if there even is one. Exactly. I can't think of a contract worst then Sandoval's currently in the whole league. If you can move him for something better that can help you, you do it ASAP. I just don't think he can play 3b anymore. Sandoval is the classic example of a guy that get huge long term deal and just mails it in. He doesn't do anything but show up and collect the checks. After last year when he was called worst positional player in Baseball he shows up over weight this spring. He has no pride, self-drive, motivation or love for the game. Please trade him ASAP.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Mar 29, 2016 19:56:12 GMT -5
The Hamilton, Pujols and Ellsbury deals are all worse than Sandoval's.
|
|
|
Post by fan72 on Mar 29, 2016 20:16:59 GMT -5
Some other really bad contacts or potentially really bad contracts. sabathia, verlander, Cabrera, cano, kemp, Ian Kennedy,werth, homer Bailey, votto, Andrus, choo. Sandavols is bad but it's only four more years they cab absorb that, but some of these other contracts can be franchise crushing.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Mar 29, 2016 20:49:52 GMT -5
On the Baseball America podcast they said the Angels farm system was among the worst systems they've ever seen. Combine that with the Hamilton and Pujols deals and OUCH.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Mar 29, 2016 21:04:03 GMT -5
The real loser is Trout. I don't think they ever understood how good he was, that they could build the team around him without the need for those fat contracts.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Mar 29, 2016 21:07:01 GMT -5
I'd consider Votto's deal straight up right now. We could use a top 1st baseman and he was worth 7.6 WAR last year with a $14 mil salary. If he continues to produce he is worth that long term deal and he will be roughly 40 at the end of it. At some point Cinci might want to move that contract. They got their value last year for sure.
So, is the end result Castillo gets traded? Yes or no.
To me, yes. In the next year, probably sooner. With the Brock holt comment Farrell is effectively stating "Here Castillo is. That center fielder you want. Come get him".
If he tanks, so much for that scenario. That's why move him now. Dombrowski had nothing to do with that deal but if he holds onto that risk it's his to a degree. Sandoval wasn't his deal either. No pride of authorship on either of those guys.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 29, 2016 23:35:44 GMT -5
The Hamilton, Pujols and Ellsbury deals are all worse than Sandoval's. I don't agree Hamilton deal is only 2 more years and the contract the Rangers have is in no way worse then Sandoval's because Angels are paying a huge part of it. I also don't think Pujols and Ellsbury deals are currently worse as they both are still productive players that put up 3.1 and 1.9 bwar last year. Sandoval had a -.9.
|
|
|