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.
|
Post by beavertontim on Sept 7, 2020 16:48:32 GMT -5
So who do we add to protect this off season?
|
|
|
Post by soxin8 on Sept 8, 2020 13:34:24 GMT -5
It looks to me to be Groome, Houck, Mata, and the new acquisitions Seabold, Rosario, Potts. Maybe Connor Wong also. There will be several DFA's to speculate on. This is probably another reason they chose not to promote Duran because it would mean they would have to move another player off the roster this off season. I wonder if Pedroia will get placed on the roster for another year or just released now. eric will have a better analysis of this soon.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 8, 2020 23:16:02 GMT -5
Presumably we are talking about the December Rule 5 draft. That will be particularly difficult to predict this year since there is likely to be a lot of movement before the deadline because of the financial situations throughout baseball. We also don't know about the 3 PTBNL, one out and 2 in and what their status will have to be.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Sept 9, 2020 0:06:45 GMT -5
It is wild that the Red Sox have 10 players they will presumably need to add (the seven who soxin8 mentioned plus Rodriguez, Sale, and Pedroia who are on the 60-day), only have one pending free agent (Bradley), but couldn't really be accurately described as having a roster crunch.
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Sept 9, 2020 4:54:50 GMT -5
Everyone respects what pedey has done for the red sox as a player but enough is enough waive the guy. We have been carrying him for 4 years of nothing. Maybe he can come back as a bench coach or front office guy.
|
|
|
Post by beavertontim on Sept 9, 2020 9:56:14 GMT -5
Everyone respects what pedey has done for the red sox as a player but enough is enough waive the guy. We have been carrying him for 4 years of nothing. Maybe he can come back as a bench coach or front office guy. I am thinking the same. That or let him retire with an injury settlement of everything he would be paid next year. I know they still get dinged for the salary hit, but the roster spot opens up this way. I don't see the guy as a coach. Hard nosed player, but I am not sure he has got the make up of a rah rah team is everything guy. I have no idea of what he could or could not do in the front office. That skill set is not really obvious from play.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 9, 2020 10:51:24 GMT -5
/photo/1
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,881
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 9, 2020 12:20:20 GMT -5
My current projection. Anyone projected for MLB who is dealt is presumed to be replaced by an acquisition.
C (4): Vazquez, Plawecki; Wong, Grullon CIF (4): Dalbec, Devers, LHH 1B Acquisition; Potts MIF (4): Bogaerts, Chavis; Arauz, Munoz OF (7): Benintendi, CF Acquisition, Verdugo, Martinez, RHH 4th OF Acquisition; Rosario, Wilson
SP (11): Sale, Rodriguez, Eovaldi, Perez, Pivetta, Acquisition; Seabold, Houck, Mata, Groome, Mazza RP: (8) Closer Acquisition, Barnes, Brasier, Hernandez, 2 Setup Acquisitions; Valdez, Taylor
NRI: Peraza, Lin; Godley, Weber, and possibly other P
That's 38, which leaves open a spot (plus one for Rule 5). It's hard to see that going to Chatham or Aybar.
You'll note that I have no reserve MI listed on the MLB roster, and only 12 pitchers. The extra spot could go to one of those; whether they acquire a third setup guy depends on how Valdez looks the rest of the way.
If they don't pick up a reserve MI, or a 2B to make Chavis into the 10th player, then it's Munoz, Peraza, or Lin.
|
|
|
Post by mwgray13 on Sept 9, 2020 12:36:28 GMT -5
Look at this list, its 23 pitchers, and the team ERA is north of 6 (6.17 as of 9/9/20), almost 3/4 of a run higher than Colorado. What are we trying to keep? Some but not all of the reclamation projects/rebound candidates will not stick. Godley, Weber, Covey, Mazza, Hall, Kickham, Triggs, Walden .... On the position player side of things there are guys like Lin, Pereza, Arroyo, Arrauz, Grullon, an/or Plawecki. Don't be surprised if a few get let go and sign back on with the Sox on Milb contracts, if that is a thing next year.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 9, 2020 13:03:31 GMT -5
It is wild that the Red Sox have 10 players they will presumably need to add (the seven who soxin8 mentioned plus Rodriguez, Sale, and Pedroia who are on the 60-day), only have one pending free agent (Bradley), but couldn't really be accurately described as having a roster crunch. 4 added back - Benintendi
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Sept 9, 2020 13:26:18 GMT -5
Heh, I'd written the roster in a word doc in the morning before the Benintendi/Arroyo move happened and then posted at night. The lesson here is always to check the transactions page at SoxProspects.com before posting any roster projections.
|
|
|
Post by jbsox on Sept 9, 2020 17:11:32 GMT -5
My current projection. Anyone projected for MLB who is dealt is presumed to be replaced by an acquisition.
C (4): Vazquez, Plawecki; Wong, Grullon CIF (4): Dalbec, Devers, LHH 1B Acquisition; Potts MIF (4): Bogaerts, Chavis; Arauz, Munoz OF (7): Benintendi, CF Acquisition, Verdugo, Martinez, RHH 4th OF Acquisition; Rosario, Wilson
SP (11): Sale, Rodriguez, Eovaldi, Perez, Pivetta, Acquisition; Seabold, Houck, Mata, Groome, Mazza RP: (8) Closer Acquisition, Barnes, Brasier, Hernandez, 2 Setup Acquisitions; Valdez, Taylor
NRI: Peraza, Lin; Godley, Weber, and possibly other P
That's 38, which leaves open a spot (plus one for Rule 5). It's hard to see that going to Chatham or Aybar.
You'll note that I have no reserve MI listed on the MLB roster, and only 12 pitchers. The extra spot could go to one of those; whether they acquire a third setup guy depends on how Valdez looks the rest of the way.
If they don't pick up a reserve MI, or a 2B to make Chavis into the 10th player, then it's Munoz, Peraza, or Lin.
Do you see someone like Chatham having trade value? I’m not sure I foresee just dropping him off the 40. Interesting have have Muñoz on there. There are a lot pitchers we are throwing off the wall you are leaving off. Looks like Mazza has moved ahead of Weber and the likes of others. I had some hope for Brice but he has been disappointing lately. Brewer seems like a candidate to bring back. Springs has been ok recently. However if we can find better options in the free agent market I’m all for it of course, and maybe a few of these guys can slip through and you bring back off the 40 to maintain depth.
|
|
|
Post by beavertontim on Sept 9, 2020 22:48:43 GMT -5
My current projection. Anyone projected for MLB who is dealt is presumed to be replaced by an acquisition.
C (4): Vazquez, Plawecki; Wong, Grullon CIF (4): Dalbec, Devers, LHH 1B Acquisition; Potts MIF (4): Bogaerts, Chavis; Arauz, Munoz OF (7): Benintendi, CF Acquisition, Verdugo, Martinez, RHH 4th OF Acquisition; Rosario, Wilson
SP (11): Sale, Rodriguez, Eovaldi, Perez, Pivetta, Acquisition; Seabold, Houck, Mata, Groome, Mazza RP: (8) Closer Acquisition, Barnes, Brasier, Hernandez, 2 Setup Acquisitions; Valdez, Taylor
NRI: Peraza, Lin; Godley, Weber, and possibly other P
That's 38, which leaves open a spot (plus one for Rule 5). It's hard to see that going to Chatham or Aybar. You'll note that I have no reserve MI listed on the MLB roster, and only 12 pitchers. The extra spot could go to one of those; whether they acquire a third setup guy depends on how Valdez looks the rest of the way. If they don't pick up a reserve MI, or a 2B to make Chavis into the 10th player, then it's Munoz, Peraza, or Lin.
Do you see someone like Chatham having trade value? I’m not sure I foresee just dropping him off the 40. Interesting have have Muñoz on there. There are a lot pitchers we are throwing off the wall you are leaving off. Looks like Mazza has moved ahead of Weber and the likes of others. I had some hope for Brice but he has been disappointing lately. Brewer seems like a candidate to bring back. Springs has been ok recently. However if we can find better options in the free agent market I’m all for it of course, and maybe a few of these guys can slip through and you bring back off the 40 to maintain depth. The rule 5 draft is planned for 12/9/2020. I would guess most acquisitions will be after that date so some of the spots left open above could be filled for draft day and then cuts could be made as people were signed.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,881
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 15, 2020 10:52:32 GMT -5
My current projection. Anyone projected for MLB who is dealt is presumed to be replaced by an acquisition.
C (4): Vazquez, Plawecki; Wong, Grullon CIF (4): Dalbec, Devers, LHH 1B Acquisition; Potts MIF (4): Bogaerts, Chavis; Arauz, Munoz OF (7): Benintendi, CF Acquisition, Verdugo, Martinez, RHH 4th OF Acquisition; Rosario, Wilson
SP (11): Sale, Rodriguez, Eovaldi, Perez, Pivetta, Acquisition; Seabold, Houck, Mata, Groome, Mazza RP: (8) Closer Acquisition, Barnes, Brasier, Hernandez, 2 Setup Acquisitions; Valdez, Taylor
NRI: Peraza, Lin; Godley, Weber, and possibly other P
That's 38, which leaves open a spot (plus one for Rule 5). It's hard to see that going to Chatham or Aybar.
You'll note that I have no reserve MI listed on the MLB roster, and only 12 pitchers. The extra spot could go to one of those; whether they acquire a third setup guy depends on how Valdez looks the rest of the way.
If they don't pick up a reserve MI, or a 2B to make Chavis into the 10th player, then it's Munoz, Peraza, or Lin.
The extra spot now looks like Arroyo. But that means there's no room for a starting 2B acquisition if there's one that they can get that projects to be clearly better than Chavis / Arroyo / Peraza / Munoz. If there is such a guy, the best way to accommodate him would probably be to deal Wilson for a pre-Rule 5 of equal value, or make a trade that opens a spot. But note that in that scenario, there's no room on the Opening Day roster for Chavis if everyone is healthy.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 15, 2020 11:17:06 GMT -5
I still think forearm strain is a killer for Godley. I also think the LF competition will be Munoz/Bennintendi. Munoz looks better than 2019/2020 bennie.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Sept 15, 2020 11:32:19 GMT -5
My current projection. Anyone projected for MLB who is dealt is presumed to be replaced by an acquisition.
C (4): Vazquez, Plawecki; Wong, Grullon CIF (4): Dalbec, Devers, LHH 1B Acquisition; Potts MIF (4): Bogaerts, Chavis; Arauz, Munoz OF (7): Benintendi, CF Acquisition, Verdugo, Martinez, RHH 4th OF Acquisition; Rosario, Wilson
SP (11): Sale, Rodriguez, Eovaldi, Perez, Pivetta, Acquisition; Seabold, Houck, Mata, Groome, Mazza RP: (8) Closer Acquisition, Barnes, Brasier, Hernandez, 2 Setup Acquisitions; Valdez, Taylor
NRI: Peraza, Lin; Godley, Weber, and possibly other P
That's 38, which leaves open a spot (plus one for Rule 5). It's hard to see that going to Chatham or Aybar.
You'll note that I have no reserve MI listed on the MLB roster, and only 12 pitchers. The extra spot could go to one of those; whether they acquire a third setup guy depends on how Valdez looks the rest of the way.
If they don't pick up a reserve MI, or a 2B to make Chavis into the 10th player, then it's Munoz, Peraza, or Lin.
The extra spot now looks like Arroyo. But that means there's no room for a starting 2B acquisition if there's one that they can get that projects to be clearly better than Chavis / Arroyo / Peraza / Munoz. If there is such a guy, the best way to accommodate him would probably be to deal Wilson for a pre-Rule 5 of equal value, or make a trade that opens a spot. But note that in that scenario, there's no room on the Opening Day roster for Chavis if everyone is healthy. Trade Chavis for Merrifield!* *With one caveat: Chavis is hitting .333/.419/.481 in his last 8 games with only a 23% K rate. Probably just SSS stuff, but on the off chance he keeps up that pace for the rest of the season I'd rather keep him and see if the adjustment is real.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 15, 2020 14:44:51 GMT -5
My current projection. Anyone projected for MLB who is dealt is presumed to be replaced by an acquisition.
C (4): Vazquez, Plawecki; Wong, Grullon CIF (4): Dalbec, Devers, LHH 1B Acquisition; Potts MIF (4): Bogaerts, Chavis; Arauz, Munoz OF (7): Benintendi, CF Acquisition, Verdugo, Martinez, RHH 4th OF Acquisition; Rosario, Wilson
SP (11): Sale, Rodriguez, Eovaldi, Perez, Pivetta, Acquisition; Seabold, Houck, Mata, Groome, Mazza RP: (8) Closer Acquisition, Barnes, Brasier, Hernandez, 2 Setup Acquisitions; Valdez, Taylor
NRI: Peraza, Lin; Godley, Weber, and possibly other P
That's 38, which leaves open a spot (plus one for Rule 5). It's hard to see that going to Chatham or Aybar. You'll note that I have no reserve MI listed on the MLB roster, and only 12 pitchers. The extra spot could go to one of those; whether they acquire a third setup guy depends on how Valdez looks the rest of the way. If they don't pick up a reserve MI, or a 2B to make Chavis into the 10th player, then it's Munoz, Peraza, or Lin.
The extra spot now looks like Arroyo. But that means there's no room for a starting 2B acquisition if there's one that they can get that projects to be clearly better than Chavis / Arroyo / Peraza / Munoz. If there is such a guy, the best way to accommodate him would probably be to deal Wilson for a pre-Rule 5 of equal value, or make a trade that opens a spot. But note that in that scenario, there's no room on the Opening Day roster for Chavis if everyone is healthy. I think you've got them acquiring too many people without others leaving. - I don't think they acquire a LHH 1B and a backup OF while also keeping Chavis, Munoz, and Arroyo. The numbers don't make any sense. Chavis and/or Munoz ARE your RHH bench OF. - On the other hand, I can't see them not bringing in someone to at least compete for 2B. - I also don't see them acquiring 3 relief pitchers. - I think there will almost certainly be plans to bring in vets on minor league deals with opt-outs to compete for spots on the MLB roster, so this is really projecting the roster they're going to come into camp with more than anything else. My current projection. Planned 26-man roster in bold. C: Vazquez, Plawecki, Grullon, Wong CIF: Dalbec, Devers, Potts MIF: Bogaerts, 2B Acquisition (1 year vet), Arroyo, Chatham, Arauz OF: Benintendi, CF Acquisition (1 year vet - JBJ?), Verdugo, Martinez, Rosario, Wilson (lurking: Duran) UT: Munoz, Chavis13 on 26-man, 20 on 40-man. 2B and CF acquisitions are to keep the seats warm for Downs and Duran. (Non-Tender: Peraza, Lin - I think they'll hope he passes through waivers; DFA: Pedroia - David Wright deal) SP: SP Acquisition, Sale (to be put on 60-day), Rodriguez, Eovaldi, Perez, Pivetta, Houck, Seabold, Mata, Groome, Mazza RP: RP Acquisition, Barnes, Brasier, Hernandez, Taylor, Valdez, 1 of Brewer/Walden/Brice, R5 pick, Aybar 13 on 26-man, 20 on 40-man. (Non-Tender: Hart, Covey, Weber, Godley, Hall, Stock (who I think they would particularly hope to re-sign as MLFA, but out of options), Kickham, Springs, Triggs, Leyer, other two of Brewer/Walden/Brice, Tapia) I think they obviously hope to re-sign a number of the guys they cut loose as MLFAs but won't lose sleep if they don't. I do have to say that I have no idea how they're going to handle the pitchers. I can't ever remember them having THIS MANY guys to potentially non-tender, but they kind of have to, particularly on the pitching side.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,881
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 18, 2020 2:24:41 GMT -5
The extra spot now looks like Arroyo. But that means there's no room for a starting 2B acquisition if there's one that they can get that projects to be clearly better than Chavis / Arroyo / Peraza / Munoz. If there is such a guy, the best way to accommodate him would probably be to deal Wilson for a pre-Rule 5 of equal value, or make a trade that opens a spot. But note that in that scenario, there's no room on the Opening Day roster for Chavis if everyone is healthy. I think you've got them acquiring too many people without others leaving. - I don't think they acquire a LHH 1B and a backup OF while also keeping Chavis, Munoz, and Arroyo. The numbers don't make any sense. Chavis and/or Munoz ARE your RHH bench OF. - On the other hand, I can't see them not bringing in someone to at least compete for 2B. - I also don't see them acquiring 3 relief pitchers. - I think there will almost certainly be plans to bring in vets on minor league deals with opt-outs to compete for spots on the MLB roster, so this is really projecting the roster they're going to come into camp with more than anything else. My current projection. Planned 26-man roster in bold. C: Vazquez, Plawecki, Grullon, Wong CIF: Dalbec, Devers, Potts MIF: Bogaerts, 2B Acquisition (1 year vet), Arroyo, Chatham, Arauz OF: Benintendi, CF Acquisition (1 year vet - JBJ?), Verdugo, Martinez, Rosario, Wilson (lurking: Duran) UT: Munoz, Chavis13 on 26-man, 20 on 40-man. 2B and CF acquisitions are to keep the seats warm for Downs and Duran. (Non-Tender: Peraza, Lin - I think they'll hope he passes through waivers; DFA: Pedroia - David Wright deal) SP: SP Acquisition, Sale (to be put on 60-day), Rodriguez, Eovaldi, Perez, Pivetta, Houck, Seabold, Mata, Groome, Mazza RP: RP Acquisition, Barnes, Brasier, Hernandez, Taylor, Valdez, 1 of Brewer/Walden/Brice, R5 pick, Aybar 13 on 26-man, 20 on 40-man. (Non-Tender: Hart, Covey, Weber, Godley, Hall, Stock (who I think they would particularly hope to re-sign as MLFA, but out of options), Kickham, Springs, Triggs, Leyer, other two of Brewer/Walden/Brice, Tapia) I think they obviously hope to re-sign a number of the guys they cut loose as MLFAs but won't lose sleep if they don't. I do have to say that I have no idea how they're going to handle the pitchers. I can't ever remember them having THIS MANY guys to potentially non-tender, but they kind of have to, particularly on the pitching side. A bench consisting of Arroyo, Chavis, and Munoz is problematical for three reasons. Most obviously, they're all RHB (thanks to phil for reminding me of that!)
Next, Arroyo and Chavis are fairly redundant; they are both 3B who have been tried at 2B because that's our position of need. Arroyo can play SS in a pinch (ideally, the new starting 2B is your backup SS, as Peraza was supposed to be), while Chavis can handle 1B well and is learning LF (and should be able to play RF). There are relatively few days you'd need them both, and a LHB who played 1B and maybe corner OF would almost certainly be much more useful, especially as protection against Dalbec troubles severe enough to send him back to AAA.
Mitch Moreland has been awful for the Padres and they have no use for him if the NL doesn't keep the DH, and I doubt they will. So he's a likely FA (or available in trade if the Padres do pick up his option after all, as phil points out, but I don't think that's certain). He's such a good pinch-hitter that he should be able to stick around in that role for a while, and playing only occasionally should result in him staying healthy and/or rested enough to keep his bat alive longer than two months.
Finally, Munoz is definitely a different hitter this year; he's gone from a GB hitter to a LD hitter, and that has allowed him to hit FB really well. But they are throwing him a lot less of them, they're trying to get him to chase much more and he is doing just that, hence the terrible K and BB results. The new approach certainly has promise, but he had a 234 wRC+ in his first 21 PA and a 37 in the 22 coming into tonight's game. He is still a work in progress, and would be a perfect guy to go to Worcester and continue to work on his game, while being available for a call-up to fill in anywhere. Defensively, same story: his career OF numbers coming into this season were terrible, and this year they've been great in a tiny sample size of 77 innings.
Nor do I think that Chavis can fill the 4th OF spot. They went out and got Pillar last winter, a guy who plays great defense in CF and RF and who was coming off a breakthrough year at the plate that made him a perfect fit for Fenway, as I figured out when we signed him; indeed, he put up a 180 wRC+ at home and 59 on the road for a career-best 109 wRC+ for us. There's no way you settle for a guy with a career 88 wRC+ with a career 32 innings in LF only to fill that role. In fact, if it weren't for Pillar's BLM-skeptical social media post (and very hollow apology), I think they'd bring him back.
Now, here's a fascinating set of splits for Chavis. It struck me that he was a guy who needed to play every day in order to get into a rhythm. (I used to do these splits for the Sox.) So I checked his career numbers:
.171 / .214 / .315 (117 PA) after 1 or more days off .255 / .309 / .474 (137 PA) playing for the 2nd or 3rd day in a row .296 / .375 / .500 (142 PA) playing for the 4th through 8th day in a row .246 / .325 / .333 (69 PA) playing for 9 to 16 days in a row
This year, he's hit much better on days 2 and 3. In fact, the split you see is just:
.130 / .175 / .148 (57 PA) after 1 or more days off. Last year it was .211 / .250 / .474. I imagine it's been tougher (or impossible) to take BP on an off day this year.
.310 / .359 / .552 (64 PA) after that. He hasn't played 9+ days.
I might well give this guy the everyday 2B job. Make sure he takes a little BP whenever possible when the team is off. Give him the day off but maybe have him hit a round in the cage after he plays 8 straight days.
If they're not willing to do that, he'd be better off being dealt to a club that's willing to play him everyday.
If they obtain a 2B and keep Chavis, I admit that having Arroyo, who is out of options, and Chavis, who is probably too good to option (I don't know how he'd take it), is a problem for the 26. But that can be sorted out in ST, and if any of the 14 position players is on the IL, then there's room for both (with Chavis likely starting). You might be able to option him briefly to learn to play RF.
If you're planning to contend, there's no way you keep Chatham (way overrated as a prospect here, I fear) and Aybar on the 40-man if that's the only thing preventing you from adding Mitch Moreland or somebody like him, and someone like Kevin Pillar, to the 26. If there's a team that likes Chatham as a future backup MI, get what you can for him. You're very unlikely to regret that.
The rotation is currently very interesting. We have two more starts for Houck and two from Pivetta. With the ability to drill down into Statcast data, you can tell immensely more about a pitcher in two or three starts than you used to be able to, when all you had was results. And I've got a lot of analysis I want to do on Pivetta's past that I can compare to his two starts from this year. There is certainly a possible future where you don't add a mid-rotation starter and instead try to corner the market on the best NRI potential upside surprises.
Finally, the bullpen. You penciled Taylor in as a bullpen regular but at no point this year has he been anything but awful, and he ended up on the IL. He came out of nowhere a bit last year. I may look at his numbers later, but it's really simple for me to skip that work now and pencil him as optioned to Worcester as part of the necessary depth there.
Brewer hadn't been good enough to keep in the org at any point in his tenure here. Walden was a guy throwing his slider insanely often, knowing it would eventually cost him. This year he's lost 24% of the movement (6.3" to 4.8"), is throwing it 22% of the time instead of 37%, and it and his other pitches are getting killed. I'd keep him in the org in case he bounces back, but no one will claim him on waivers.
I was able to spot where Brice got hurt, but even before the injury, he wasn't quite good that I'd feel comfortable reserving a spot for him on the 26. He's out of options, so will anybody else? Again, I bet you can get him through waivers.
So you have an acquisition, Barnes, Brasier who did not repeat his prior great season, and Darwinzon as your late-inning quartet. You caught what I missed, that the Rule 5 guy is likely to be the last man in the pen (I'm thinking 6 SP, the last used as a good long man and spot starter, and 7 relievers). Valdez still seems like a keeper as the 6th man in the pen, doing long relief and mopup and able to handle higher leverage when needed. But I don't think he's good enough to be your fifth best reliever, especially given Brasier's history.
And here's the thing: you can go get a guy who has a solid track record as a #5 man in the pen -- Hembree quality, essentially -- whom you think has untapped late-inning potential. He fills the Taylor spot in your roster.
As for the 40-man future of the other pitching candidates, that's an ever-changing carousel. I'll put that in a post (along with adding up to 40!) after I look at the latest numbers tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 18, 2020 4:14:06 GMT -5
I think you've got them acquiring too many people without others leaving. - I don't think they acquire a LHH 1B and a backup OF while also keeping Chavis, Munoz, and Arroyo. The numbers don't make any sense. Chavis and/or Munoz ARE your RHH bench OF. - On the other hand, I can't see them not bringing in someone to at least compete for 2B. - I also don't see them acquiring 3 relief pitchers. - I think there will almost certainly be plans to bring in vets on minor league deals with opt-outs to compete for spots on the MLB roster, so this is really projecting the roster they're going to come into camp with more than anything else. My current projection. Planned 26-man roster in bold. C: Vazquez, Plawecki, Grullon, Wong CIF: Dalbec, Devers, Potts MIF: Bogaerts, 2B Acquisition (1 year vet), Arroyo, Chatham, Arauz OF: Benintendi, CF Acquisition (1 year vet - JBJ?), Verdugo, Martinez, Rosario, Wilson (lurking: Duran) UT: Munoz, Chavis13 on 26-man, 20 on 40-man. 2B and CF acquisitions are to keep the seats warm for Downs and Duran. (Non-Tender: Peraza, Lin - I think they'll hope he passes through waivers; DFA: Pedroia - David Wright deal) SP: SP Acquisition, Sale (to be put on 60-day), Rodriguez, Eovaldi, Perez, Pivetta, Houck, Seabold, Mata, Groome, Mazza RP: RP Acquisition, Barnes, Brasier, Hernandez, Taylor, Valdez, 1 of Brewer/Walden/Brice, R5 pick, Aybar 13 on 26-man, 20 on 40-man. (Non-Tender: Hart, Covey, Weber, Godley, Hall, Stock (who I think they would particularly hope to re-sign as MLFA, but out of options), Kickham, Springs, Triggs, Leyer, other two of Brewer/Walden/Brice, Tapia) I think they obviously hope to re-sign a number of the guys they cut loose as MLFAs but won't lose sleep if they don't. I do have to say that I have no idea how they're going to handle the pitchers. I can't ever remember them having THIS MANY guys to potentially non-tender, but they kind of have to, particularly on the pitching side. A bench consisting of Arroyo, Chavis, and Munoz is problematical for two reasons.
First, Arroyo and Chavis are fairly redundant; they are both 3B who have been tried at 2B because that's our position of need. Arroyo can play SS in a pinch (ideally, the new starting 2B is your backup SS, as Peraza was supposed to be), while Chavis can handle 1B well and is learning LF (and should be able to play RF). There are relatively few days you'd need them both, and a LHB who played 1B and maybe corner OF would almost certainly be much more useful, especially as protection against Dalbec troubles severe enough to send him back to AAA. Mitch Moreland has been awful for the Padres and they have no use for him if the NL doesn't keep the DH, and I doubt they will. So he's a likely FA. He's such a good pinch-hitter that he may be able to stick around in that role for a while, and playing only occasionally should result in him staying healthy and/or rested enough to keep his bat alive longer than two months.
Munoz is definitely a different hitter this year; he's gone from a GB hitter to a LD hitter, and that has allowed him to hit FB really well. But they are throwing him a lot less of them, they're trying to get him to chase much more and he is doing just that, hence the terrible K and BB results. The new approach certainly has promise, but he had a 234 wRC+ in his first 21 PA and a 37 in the 22 coming into tonight's game. He is still a work in progress, and would be a perfect guy to go to Worcester and continue to work on his game, while being available for a call-up to fill in anywhere. Defensively, same story: his career OF numbers coming into this season were terrible, and this year they've been great in a tiny sample size of 77 innings. Nor do I think that Chavis can fill the 4th OF spot. They went out and got Pillar last winter, a guy who plays great defense in CF and RF and who was coming off a breakthrough year at the plate that made him a perfect fit for Fenway, as I figured out when we signed him; indeed, he put up a 180 wRC+ at home and 59 on the road for a career-best 109 wRC+ for us. There's no way you settle for a guy with a career 88 wRC+ with a career 32 innings in LF only to fill that role. In fact, if it weren't for Pillar's BLM-skeptical social media post (and very hollow apology), I think they'd bring him back.
I admit that having Arroyo, who is out of options, and Chavis, who is probably too good to option (I don't know how he'd take it), is a problem for the 26. But that can be sorted out in ST, and if any of the 14 position players is on the IL, then there's room for both (with one of them possibly starting). If you're planning to contend, there's no way you keep Chatham (way overrated as a prospect here, I fear) and Aybar on the 40-man if that's the only thing preventing you from adding Mitch Moreland or somebody like him, and someone like Kevin Pillar, to the 26. If there's a team that likes Chatham as a future backup MI, get what you can for him. You're very unlikely to regret that.
The rotation is currently very interesting. We have two more starts for Houck and two from Pivetta. With the ability to drill down into Statcast data, you can tell immensely more about a pitcher in two or three starts than you used to be able to, when all you had was results. And I've got a lot of analysis I want to do on Pivetta's past that I can compare to his two starts from this year. There is certainly a possible future where you don't add a mid-rotation starter and instead try to corner the market on the best NRI potential upside surprises.
Finally, the bullpen. You penciled Taylor in as a bullpen regular but at no point this year has he been anything but awful, and he ended up on the IL. He came out of nowhere a bit last year. I may look at his numbers later, but it's really simple for me to skip that work now and pencil him as optioned to Worcester as part of the necessary depth there.
Brewer hadn't been good enough to keep in the org at any point in his tenure here. Walden was a guy throwing his slider insanely often, knowing it would eventually cost him. This year he's lost 24% of the movement (6.3" to 4.8"), is throwing it 22% of the time instead of 37%, and it and his other pitches are getting killed. I'd keep him in the org in case he bounces back, but no one will claim him on waivers. I was able to spot where Brice got hurt, but even before the injury, he wasn't quite good that I'd feel comfortable reserving a spot for him on the 26. He's out of options, so will anybody else? Again, I bet you can get him through waivers. So you have an acquisition, Barnes, Brasier who did not repeat his prior great season, and Darwinzon as your late-inning quartet. You caught what I missed, that the Rule 5 guy is likely to be the last man in the pen (I'm thinking 6 SP, the last used as a good long man and spot starter, and 7 relievers). Valdez still seems like a keeper as the 6th man in the pen, doing long relief and mopup and able to handle higher leverage when needed. But I don't think he's good enough to be your fifth best reliever, especially given Brasier's history.
And here's the thing: you can go get a guy who has a solid track record as a #5 man in the pen -- Hembree quality, essentially -- whom you think has untapped late-inning potential. He fills the Taylor spot in your roster. As for the 40-man future of the other pitching candidates, that's an ever-changing carousel. I'll put that in a post (along with adding up to 40!) after I look at the latest numbers tomorrow.
A couple of comments. A bench of Arroyo, Chavis and Munoz is also problematic because they also all bat right handed. To build a competitive team, you are counting on significant rebounds from Chavis and Bennintendi. That seems unlikely to me. I also think the NL DH is here to stay. Stay or gone, Mitch is only $3m. The Padres would be foolish to give that up rather than using him as a trade chip or trying to unload Hosmer. I'm guessing Bloom is going to go the trade route. Something like Benni & money for a $$ outfielder, Chavis or Arroyo plus $$ for a starting second baseman and Houck or Pivetta plus $$ for a mid rotation starter. Note that $$ can take on several forms.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,881
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 18, 2020 4:26:02 GMT -5
A couple of comments. A bench of Arroyo, Chavis and Munoz is also problematic because they also all bat right handed. To build a competitive team, you are counting on significant rebounds from Chavis and Bennintendi. That seems unlikely to me. I also think the NL DH is here to stay. Stay or gone, Mitch is only $3m. The Padres would be foolish to give that up rather than using him as a trade chip or trying to unload Hosmer. I'm guessing Bloom is going to go the trade route. Something like Benni & money for a $$ outfielder, Chavis or Arroyo plus $$ for a starting second baseman and Houck or Pivetta plus $$ for a mid rotation starter. Note that $$ can take on several forms. I had the all-RHB bench as my very first point, and then somehow erased it!
Re Chavis, see my addition to to my post. You're the only person awake to read my late-night ramblings before I've finished editing them!
Beni I do worry about. Last year he had unimaginably bad numbers in his first PA of the game leading off but great numbers in his subsequent PA. It was only after he was demoted after this "failure" that his season tanked. So putting him back into the leadoff spot was f-ing malpractice. The track record for guys who started his career as he did and then had a big off year was not good, and if he bounces back to post-2018 expectations after this year it will, I think, be an MLB first. But they diddn't have sports psychologists in the old days. They need a good one for him. His trade value will be small; you're better off trying to resurrect the older version.
I think Houck and Pivetta will be mid-rotation starters. It wouldn't surprise me if they were both mid-rotation starters next year.
BTW, I have a separate reason to call my old boss Zack Scott (the Sox still owe me for playoff tickets I bought for games that were never played!). I may call him up and mention those Chavis numbers.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 18, 2020 4:57:06 GMT -5
A couple of comments. A bench of Arroyo, Chavis and Munoz is also problematic because they also all bat right handed. To build a competitive team, you are counting on significant rebounds from Chavis and Bennintendi. That seems unlikely to me. I also think the NL DH is here to stay. Stay or gone, Mitch is only $3m. The Padres would be foolish to give that up rather than using him as a trade chip or trying to unload Hosmer. I'm guessing Bloom is going to go the trade route. Something like Benni & money for a $$ outfielder, Chavis or Arroyo plus $$ for a starting second baseman and Houck or Pivetta plus $$ for a mid rotation starter. Note that $$ can take on several forms. I had the all-RHB bench as my very first point, and then somehow erased it! Re Chavis, see my addition to to my post. You're the only person awake to read my late-night ramblings before I've finished editing them! Beni I do worry about. Last year he had unimaginably bad numbers in his first PA of the game leading off but great numbers in his subsequent PA. It was only after he was demoted after this "failure" that his season tanked. So putting him back into the leadoff spot was f-ing malpractice. The track record for guys who started his career as he did and then had a big off year was not good, and if he bounces back to post-2018 expectations after this year it will, I think, be an MLB first. But they diddn't have sports psychologists in the old days. They need a good one for him. His trade value will be small; you're better off trying to resurrect the older version.
I think Houck and Pivetta will be mid-rotation starters. It wouldn't surprise me if they were both mid-rotation starters next year.
BTW, I have a separate reason to call my old boss Zack Scott (the Sox still owe me for playoff tickets I bought for games that were never played!). I may call him up and mention those Chavis numbers.
I'm more pessimistic about Houck and Pivetta than you. Yes it's possible but in Houck's case, he struggles mightily against lefties but in a strange way. It's like he loses command of everything, it's not just the splitter. It's more like the yips for whatever reason. I do like the separation between the four seamer and two seamer though. In Pivetta's case, he has major command issues of his secondaries and batters pretty much know that if it's over the plate, it's a fastball. He's been hit hard at summer camp in spite of his stuff. We've seen too many similar pitchers to have much confidence. I believe the Yankees would be in batting practice mode against either of them right now.
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Sept 18, 2020 6:00:48 GMT -5
If pivetta and houck are mid rotation starters next season pencil us in for another high draft pick. They should be fifth starters on this team if they are lucky. Show be houck after 10 gs and then lets have this convo id say his era is higher then Perez.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 18, 2020 6:51:31 GMT -5
Pivetta reminds me of the Ranaudo/Webster/De La Rosa years.
Houck has a chance but needs work.
Re: Bennintendi. What makes more sense for a given team. Give him a chance to find his way at $5m or give him a chance to find his way at minimum wage ? In reality, that's what we are looking at.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,881
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 18, 2020 7:00:17 GMT -5
I had the all-RHB bench as my very first point, and then somehow erased it! Re Chavis, see my addition to to my post. You're the only person awake to read my late-night ramblings before I've finished editing them! Beni I do worry about. Last year he had unimaginably bad numbers in his first PA of the game leading off but great numbers in his subsequent PA. It was only after he was demoted after this "failure" that his season tanked. So putting him back into the leadoff spot was f-ing malpractice. The track record for guys who started his career as he did and then had a big off year was not good, and if he bounces back to post-2018 expectations after this year it will, I think, be an MLB first. But they diddn't have sports psychologists in the old days. They need a good one for him. His trade value will be small; you're better off trying to resurrect the older version.
I think Houck and Pivetta will be mid-rotation starters. It wouldn't surprise me if they were both mid-rotation starters next year.
BTW, I have a separate reason to call my old boss Zack Scott (the Sox still owe me for playoff tickets I bought for games that were never played!). I may call him up and mention those Chavis numbers.
I'm more pessimistic about Houck and Pivetta than you. Yes it's possible but in Houck's case, he struggles mightily against lefties but in a strange way. It's like he loses command of everything, it's not just the splitter. It's more like the yips for whatever reason. I do like the separation between the four seamer and two seamer though. In Pivetta's case, he has major command issues of his secondaries and batters pretty much know that if it's over the plate, it's a fastball. He's been hit hard at summer camp in spite of his stuff. We've seen too many similar pitchers to have much confidence. I believe the Yankees would be in batting practice mode against either of them right now. Pivetta's been hit substantially harder in his career by 7 through 9 hitters than 1, 2, 5, and 6. That immediately tells you that his approach is fubar.
He can make a big step forward simple by throwing the right pitch at the right time to the right hitters. He wasn't working on that at Pawtucket; he was just trying to work on his command.
He's pitched his whole career worried too much about walking guys and therefore predictably throwing the FB when behind in the the count, when a slider would get a swing and miss.
After his first 2 pitches Houck completely dominated lefties in his debut, without throwing a single effective splitter. Before his next start I'll look into just how he did that. We do know for a fact that he has 80 movement on his slider and 80 movement (separation from 4-seamer) on his sinker.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,881
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 18, 2020 7:07:07 GMT -5
If pivetta and houck are mid rotation starters next season pencil us in for another high draft pick. They should be fifth starters on this team if they are lucky. Show be houck after 10 gs and then lets have this convo id say his era is higher then Perez. "Mid-rotation starter" refers to a level of quality, not the actual use. The #3 starter on some teams is a near ace. This year our #3 starters were often AAA pitchers.
If Houck and/or Pivetta are mid-rotation starters next year, that simply means that they're league average or a bit better. The potential is clearly there. One game is enough time to get a read on pitch movement, and we already know that almost no one in MLB can match Houck's slider.
|
|
|