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 Coreno on Mar 29, 2016 23:46:43 GMT -5
I know its heading into the final year but I'm kind of surprised nobody mentioned the Ryan Howard deal. I mean I know I lean optimist but I still think I would rather have Pablo than Howard for $25M, even as an expiring deal.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 30, 2016 6:31:06 GMT -5
I know its heading into the final year but I'm kind of surprised nobody mentioned the Ryan Howard deal. I mean I know I lean optimist but I still think I would rather have Pablo than Howard for $25M, even as an expiring deal. Howard also has a $10m buyout in 2017. Boy, that contract stunk.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,955
|
Post by ericmvan on Mar 30, 2016 7:27:35 GMT -5
A couple of Castillo / Holt notes:
Castillo as a LF (including translated CF and RF numbers) was + 17 Plays Made (DRS range) / 150 G last year. What does that project to this year?
I've got a bunch of tweaks to my system I want to test, but I doubt they'll change my current answer much. And that, alas, is +5.5. One-year samples regress to the mean hugely. And, in this model at least, little of that regression is because he played less than 700 innings; if he'd played a full 1340 (recent average of innings in 150 games), he'd project to +7.
Here are the 14 seasons that best match Rusney (all translated to LF; CF would be that number - 9.6), and what each guy did the following year: (* = regressed for SSS)
Name Year Age Inn-1 PM-1/ Inn PM/ David Lough 2013 27 708.0 17.0 500.3 22.8 Willie Harris 2007 29 730.7 15.9 693.3 21.2 A.J. Pollock 2014 26 585.3 17.4 1303.7 20.2 Craig Gentry 2013 29 647.7 19.4 560.0 19.3 Chris Heisey 2013 28 455.0 18.1 544.0 18.8 Jacoby Ellsbury 2012 28 611.3 17.0 1188.3 17.3 Rajai Davis 2008 27 496.7 17.1 891.3 9.5 Chris Heisey 2014 29 544.0 18.8 163.3 5.3* Jason Michaels 2005 29 635.3 15.1 1018.3 3.5 Abraham Almonte 2014 25 429.7 17.5 531.0 0.4 Chris Young 2013 28 725.0 16.7 739.3 -0.4 Tony Gwynn 2012 28 677.0 18.7 578.0 -3.7 Justin Maxwell 2012 28 693.0 19.4 567.0 -10.5 Gabe Gross 2006 26 416.0 19.6 327.0 -10.8* Rusney Castillo 2015 27 614.3 16.9 ? ?
Next, what's your batting order vs. RHP with Holt in LF?
It has to be:
Betts Pedroia Ortiz Bogaerts Ramirez Sandoval Bradley or Holt Catcher Holt or Bradley
If you bat Ortiz 4th, he'll see a lot more LHR, and that guy will then try to pitch around Hanley in order to face Sandoval, and if you pinch-hit Young, they'll being in a RHR. Papi still has a big platoon split, so isolating him from LHR by surrounding him with four really good RHB is a very nice idea. If they want to use a LHR against him, make them waste him on a single hitter.
Put two top RHB between Ortiz and Sandoval, and they'll bring in a LHR to pitch to the latter, which means he has to face Chris Young (who has a nice .254 / .375 / .403 line in 80 career PH appearances, probably mostly vs. LHR, granted). Which means that the opposition is probably better off not bringing him until the next guy.
If Sandoval hits anywhere but 6, you're going to end up with a lot of him vs. LHR or Young vs. RHR situations, or you'll have to hit Shaw for Young when they change pitchers back to a RHR. You really want to avoid having Young used just as bait.
Bradley 7 and Holt 9 optimizes the lineup against SP. Holt fits the profile of second leadoff guy at least as well as Bradley, but JBJ's power will be much more useful in the 7 hole. OTOH, Bradley and Holt will see a lot of LHR. You're not pinch-hitting for JBJ because of his defense and mild platoon split, nor for Holt because they'll being in a RHR.
But Holt 7 and Bradley 9 is better in late innings against bullpens with good LHR. If they bypass the LHR / Sandoval matchup and bring in the LHR to face Holt-catcher-Bradley, they get Young versus the LHR. If they bring in the LHR to face Sandoval, he gets Young, and then you have the option of hitting Castillo for Holt, which is half-baiting them to bring in a RHR, who would then get Shaw. (This only works if Castillo has been putting up solid numbers vs. LHP and has shown some ability to pinch-hit, of course.) It wouldn't happen that often, but there would be game situations where it would be worth exhausting the bench to get Shaw versus a certain RHR as opposed to Holt versus a certain LHR.
Now, when Shaw plays 3B, the same logic applies. Sometimes you'll want to just maximize the lineup versus the SP, which is probably JBJ 6, Shaw 7, Holt 9. Other times you'll want to put the guy you're likeliest to pinch-hit for 6th, so you can put Holt 6 and Bradley 9. The six hole is stylistically flexible (general good hitter), while 7 is more a SA over OBP spot. I like Shaw there.
|
|
|
Post by notguilty on Mar 30, 2016 8:28:48 GMT -5
OMG..The Red Sox are planning to play the players that give them the best chance to win at a given point in time! No "we know he's terrible, but his track record is great", "he's a veteran", "he's got a big contract so you've got to play him", etc. Somewhat reasonable excuses that meant you kept the better players on the bench or in the minors. I think that kind of complacency has really killed this team over the past two years. Now, maybe you trade a Panda or a Castillo and they go on to flourish elsewhere. But if that's the price to pay to get rid of complacency, I'll take it. Man, managing for your job is quite something. John Farrell feeling like the rest of us, actually having to perform to keep our jobs. Welcome to our world, John. You know, after a night of sleep, reading the thread and listening to some commentary as to why the Holt to LF might not be such a great move, I've changed my mind a bit. I still appreciate the team showing a sense of urgency, but I'm starting to think this is probably not the best roster construction (especially considering the fact that they let Murphy go). Now I'm panicked that John "I'm managing for my job here" Farrell is actually going to be making terrible decisions in the name of winning here and now. Flip-flopping, I know, probably speaks more to the real lack of trust in Farrell making the right calls. I mean, DD has to let him make those calls so he has cause to fire him later if they don't work out... My hope now is after Cleveland, Castillo goes back to regular LF and Brock to jack of all trades. Otherwise, yes, I don't quite understand why they'd have Rusney on the bench rather than playing every day in AAA.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Mar 30, 2016 8:43:35 GMT -5
Danny Rosenbaum was released.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Mar 30, 2016 9:14:13 GMT -5
I'm starting to think this is probably not the best roster construction Well yes, the roster construction broke down when they decided their 4th OF should be someone who can platoon with Bradley (i.e. Young) rather than someone who can platoon with Castillo (e.g. de Aza) or has more neutral splits.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 30, 2016 9:31:50 GMT -5
I'm starting to think this is probably not the best roster construction Well yes, the roster construction broke down when they decided their 4th OF should be someone who can platoon with Bradley (i.e. Young) rather than someone who can platoon with Castillo (e.g. de Aza) or has more neutral splits. I think they signed Young because they had the opportunity to sign such a good fit for Fenway, optimization be damned. I agree that he's redundant. Really though, Castillo is the problem.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Mar 30, 2016 9:36:46 GMT -5
Danny Rosenbaum was released. Well at least they got Butler back
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Mar 30, 2016 10:39:46 GMT -5
Well yes, the roster construction broke down when they decided their 4th OF should be someone who can platoon with Bradley (i.e. Young) rather than someone who can platoon with Castillo (e.g. de Aza) or has more neutral splits. I think they signed Young because they had the opportunity to sign such a good fit for Fenway, optimization be damned. I agree that he's redundant. Really though, Castillo is the problem. Dombrowski was quite transparent that he was looking for a RHH OF - and this was before signing Young
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Mar 30, 2016 10:46:30 GMT -5
Just spitballing; but if Mookie is still determined on his "can't walk your way to Fenway" kick (he has no BBs this spring), why not bat Holt leadoff when he's in the lineup and take advantage of Mookie's XBP; certainly a better option than Sandoval in 6th, and probably could hit 5th ahead of Hanley. Then return him to leadoff vs. LHP.
Holt had a 9% BB last year and is an excellent baserunner
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Mar 30, 2016 10:59:23 GMT -5
Ken Laird @kenlairdweei 14m14 minutes ago Farrell on OF vs. LHPs: "Chris Young will be the field against LHPs. If it's a tough lefty we might have Rusney in CF as 1 scenario"
|
|
|
Post by mandelbro on Mar 30, 2016 11:02:20 GMT -5
Just spitballing; but if Mookie is still determined on his "can't walk your way to Fenway" kick (he has no BBs this spring), why not bat Holt leadoff when he's in the lineup and take advantage of Mookie's XBP; certainly a better option than Sandoval in 6th, and probably could hit 5th ahead of Hanley. Then return him to leadoff vs. LHP. Holt had a 9% BB last year and is an excellent baserunner Interesting thought. I think the problem with that approach would be that part of optimizing the lineup is getting your best hitters the most at-bats, and Holt simply isn't one of them. As I've said already, I don't think Mookie should be leading off when he's seemingly a mortal lock to rip 60+ extra base hits. My preferred leadoff man would Pedroia personally. Pedroia's always gotten on base, he's still one of the best hitters in the lineup overall. Seniority is served by having him near the top. And like Eric has alluded to, I've always felt that Pedroia has more professional at-bats when he's setting the table than when he thinks he needs to hit the ball to the moon.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,074
|
Post by nomar on Mar 30, 2016 12:17:07 GMT -5
Ken Laird @kenlairdweei 14m14 minutes ago Farrell on OF vs. LHPs: "Chris Young will be the field against LHPs. If it's a tough lefty we might have Rusney in CF as 1 scenario" Wonder what JBJ's "tough lefty" split is, considering that most tough pitchers throw above 92 and Rusney might as well not have arms vs those guys.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 30, 2016 12:32:58 GMT -5
Ken Laird @kenlairdweei 14m14 minutes ago Farrell on OF vs. LHPs: "Chris Young will be the field against LHPs. If it's a tough lefty we might have Rusney in CF as 1 scenario" Wonder what JBJ's "tough lefty" split is, considering that most tough pitchers throw above 92 and Rusney might as well not have arms vs those guys. There was only one qualified left-handed starting pitcher in the AL last year who averaged more than 92 mph on his fastball, and he pitches for the Red Sox now. If you drop the IP threshold down to 100, you get Danny Duffy and Carlos Rodon. There are a bunch of tough left-handed SP who don't throw that hard-- think Dallas Keuchal, Cole Hamels, Jose Quintana, Drew Smyly, etc.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Mar 30, 2016 13:10:18 GMT -5
Wonder what JBJ's "tough lefty" split is, considering that most tough pitchers throw above 92 and Rusney might as well not have arms vs those guys. There was only one qualified left-handed starting pitcher in the AL last year who averaged more than 92 mph on his fastball, and he pitches for the Red Sox now. If you drop the IP threshold down to 100, you get Danny Duffy and Carlos Rodon. There are a bunch of tough left-handed SP who don't throw that hard-- think Dallas Keuchal, Cole Hamels, Jose Quintana, Drew Smyly, etc. Umm - Chris Sale
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,074
|
Post by nomar on Mar 30, 2016 13:19:38 GMT -5
Wonder what JBJ's "tough lefty" split is, considering that most tough pitchers throw above 92 and Rusney might as well not have arms vs those guys. There was only one qualified left-handed starting pitcher in the AL last year who averaged more than 92 mph on his fastball, and he pitches for the Red Sox now. If you drop the IP threshold down to 100, you get Danny Duffy and Carlos Rodon. There are a bunch of tough left-handed SP who don't throw that hard-- think Dallas Keuchal, Cole Hamels, Jose Quintana, Drew Smyly, etc. Fair point. But I'll let my joke stand on its feeble legs.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,491
|
Post by radiohix on Mar 30, 2016 14:37:23 GMT -5
Re: Castillo. Is there a GM out there who Eff'd up in a serie of move more than Ben C. did in 2014-2015? - Signing Castillo where he blew up the rest of the competition - Signing Sandoval - Signing Hanley - Trading Cespedes for Porcello I wish they hire him again so they could fire him a second time!
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Mar 30, 2016 14:55:54 GMT -5
Well yes, the roster construction broke down when they decided their 4th OF should be someone who can platoon with Bradley (i.e. Young) rather than someone who can platoon with Castillo (e.g. de Aza) or has more neutral splits. I think they signed Young because they had the opportunity to sign such a good fit for Fenway, optimization be damned. I agree that he's redundant. Really though, Castillo is the problem. I still believe - probably to my detriment - that Castillo is a league average or better CF candidate. Not that I want to displace JBJ, but perhaps with him getting some AAA play in CF the Sox may be able to convince some team of this well enough so they'd only have to pick up a couple mil a year off his contract in a trade.
|
|
|
Post by mandelbro on Mar 30, 2016 15:57:54 GMT -5
Re: Castillo. Is there a GM out there who Eff'd up in a serie of move more than Ben C. did in 2014-2015? - Signing Castillo where he blew up the rest of the competition - Signing Sandoval - Signing Hanley - Trading Cespedes for Porcello I wish they hire him again so they could fire him a second time! I disagree strongly trading Cespedes for Porcello was a mistake. At the time, Cespedes was coming off a mediocre-at-best half season with the Red Sox. He slashed .269/.296/.423 in Boston and reportedly didn't want to play right field. He'd gotten consistently worse since arriving stateside, and he was set to be a free agent. meanwhile, Porcello was a young pitcher on an upward trajectory. The Red Sox turned an outfielder who wasn't in their plans (and who they had good reason not to consider in their plans) into a 1-year test drive of a potential starting pitcher for the next five years.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,491
|
Post by radiohix on Mar 30, 2016 16:08:56 GMT -5
Re: Castillo. Is there a GM out there who Eff'd up in a serie of move more than Ben C. did in 2014-2015? - Signing Castillo where he blew up the rest of the competition - Signing Sandoval - Signing Hanley - Trading Cespedes for Porcello I wish they hire him again so they could fire him a second time! I disagree strongly trading Cespedes for Porcello was a mistake. At the time, Cespedes was coming off a mediocre-at-best half season with the Red Sox. He slashed .269/.296/.423 in Boston and reportedly didn't want to play right field. He'd gotten consistently worse since arriving stateside, and he was set to be a free agent. meanwhile, Porcello was a young pitcher on an upward trajectory. The Red Sox turned an outfielder who wasn't in their plans (and who they had good reason not to consider in their plans) into a 1-year test drive of a potential starting pitcher for the next five years. Thing is I really liked that move at the time, especially considering the fact that Cespedes wasn't eligible for a QO so no draft pick when he'll leave, but we can't argue with the results: the difference between Cespedes and Hanley was something like 7 wins (a WC spot). Good process, bad results I guess.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 30, 2016 16:41:48 GMT -5
Just spitballing; but if Mookie is still determined on his "can't walk your way to Fenway" kick (he has no BBs this spring), why not bat Holt leadoff when he's in the lineup and take advantage of Mookie's XBP; certainly a better option than Sandoval in 6th, and probably could hit 5th ahead of Hanley. Then return him to leadoff vs. LHP. Holt had a 9% BB last year and is an excellent baserunner Because he proved last year that he was one of the team's best two hitters. The further you drop him the fewer PA and the less important the sum total of situations. He put up an adequate OBP last year, and I don't think it's unrealistic to expect the BA to climb. I also doubt that he's going to continue with the low BB rate. Maybe 2nd, but 6th is a waste of his bat and fifth would only really make sense if Hanley's so-so.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Mar 30, 2016 17:32:18 GMT -5
Well yes, the roster construction broke down when they decided their 4th OF should be someone who can platoon with Bradley (i.e. Young) rather than someone who can platoon with Castillo (e.g. de Aza) or has more neutral splits. I think they signed Young because they had the opportunity to sign such a good fit for Fenway, optimization be damned. I agree that he's redundant. Really though, Castillo is the problem. Thank You. I know you were a early fan of him. He's done nothing but sign a big check so far. Some who mention his D were sure Iggy was a no go because he'd never hit enough. Iggy plays a much more important position for D, and has hit. Health is his only question, which is also one of the many questions with Rusney.If he wasn't on the Sox and making big green,he'd be laughed at or ignored.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Mar 30, 2016 18:20:41 GMT -5
Re: Castillo. Is there a GM out there who Eff'd up in a serie of move more than Ben C. did in 2014-2015? - Signing Castillo where he blew up the rest of the competition - Signing Sandoval - Signing Hanley - Trading Cespedes for Porcello I wish they hire him again so they could fire him a second time! I disagree strongly trading Cespedes for Porcello was a mistake. At the time, Cespedes was coming off a mediocre-at-best half season with the Red Sox. He slashed .269/.296/.423 in Boston and reportedly didn't want to play right field. He'd gotten consistently worse since arriving stateside, and he was set to be a free agent. meanwhile, Porcello was a young pitcher on an upward trajectory. The Red Sox turned an outfielder who wasn't in their plans (and who they had good reason not to consider in their plans) into a 1-year test drive of a potential starting pitcher for the next five years. Fair, but I think you can just substitute the Porcello extension instead. I'm still giving him the benefit of the doubt on Hanley because I think he has a decent chance of turning it around. However, add: - Adding Alex Hassan to the 40-man roster instead of Josh Fields, Nov. 2012 (small move, but still, it was baffling at the time, given that Hassan didn't seem a possibility to be selected, whereas Fields, while fringy, seemed certain) - Roster management in 2015 that led to the addition of Dalier Hinojosa to the roster for less than a week in May when other AAA relievers would have sufficed, then having to DFA him in July. (Hinojosa is now pitching late innings for Philly) - I don't impute entire drafts onto GMs, but will impute the first round pick, so let's go with Trey Ball over Austin Meadows in 2013 (while also giving credit for Benintendi last year over, say, Fulmer) - Promoting Jackie Bradley to the majors to start 2013 based on a hot spring when he had all of 61 games in Portland the previous season. - Signing Stephen Drew midseason in 2014 to play shortstop - Not giving a qualifying offer to Jarrod Saltalamacchia in 2013 - Not picking what to do with Matt Barnes last year and just sticking with it. I'm sure I'm forgetting things...
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Mar 30, 2016 18:56:31 GMT -5
...such as dumping Melancon. For all the wise decisions that were made (see 2013) what dismayed me was how often he fell prey to media bluster and hype.
Dombrowski seems to have this aura that surrounds him. I'm hoping that acts as a force-field, deflecting all that crap.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Mar 30, 2016 19:15:26 GMT -5
I still, and always will, really dislike Reddick-Bailey. They gave up way too early on Reddick, and I think he could've learned to tailor his approach to Fenway.
I'm not so down on the Ball pick. Retrospective draft analysis is highly questionable. Ball had helium and upside at the time.
Moncada was a coup. Castillo not so much.
|
|
|