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 jchang on Aug 18, 2015 21:13:23 GMT -5
Iso dropped from 293 to 274 with no xbh tonight. Ok ba did go from 328 to 371 and slg from 621 to 645.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 18, 2015 21:36:53 GMT -5
Chris Davis may been tempting, but he's not an ideal fit for Fenway, isn't young, has shown he can be inconsistent, and has a low floor. I love Shaw, but I don't know if I completely bank on him having 1B next year. Signing that Korean 1B Park Jung Ho seems like a good play if he is as nearly as cheap as Kang was, as he could platoon with Shaw and give us flexibility if Shaw or Pablo/3B get hurt or bust. I'd rather go with Shaw. He's been over 1 fWAR in less than 70 PAs this year. That's over 2 WAR more than Hanley already.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Aug 18, 2015 22:34:48 GMT -5
I hope they give him the shot at 1B in 2016.
I thought Jerry made a good point on NESN Monday night. He said there are players that become very good major league hitters despite being mediocre in the minors because they benefit from ML pitchers keeping the ball around the plate better. This year has been/will be a too small sample size to see if this applies to Shaw. But based on what he has done so far, and contingent on ML pitchers not figuring out a hole in his swing (which ML pitchers are very adept at doing), I think he is quickly earning the right to have the chance to be the everyday 1B in 2016.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Aug 18, 2015 22:47:44 GMT -5
I hope they give him the shot at 1B in 2016.
I thought Jerry made a good point on NESN Monday night. He said there are players that become very good major league hitters despite being mediocre in the minors because they benefit from ML pitchers keeping the ball around the plate better. This year has been/will be a too small sample size to see if this applies to Shaw. But based on what he has done so far, and contingent on ML pitchers not figuring out a hole in his swing (which ML pitchers are very adept at doing), I think he is quickly earning the right to have the chance to be the everyday 1B in 2016. regardless of sample size, he should at least get a shot,
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Aug 18, 2015 22:58:29 GMT -5
Some time ago when I wrote a piece pushing Shaw I pointed out that he had a history of getting better but sometimes it took him a while, including three shots at Portland. This year at Pawtucket looks worse than last year, but it is deceptive. He had a poor start but then caught fire and hit well above .300 before he started riding the shuttle between Pawtucket and Boston.
He is very good at the game of baseball. He does the little things very well. He has excellent instincts. I will be surprised if he is not a major league regular. He may not be a superstar, but I think he will do reasonably well. Given the present options he seems like a good bet next year. However, now with Dombrowski, all bets are off.
|
|
|
Post by blizzards39 on Aug 18, 2015 22:59:25 GMT -5
I hope they give him the shot at 1B in 2016.
I thought Jerry made a good point on NESN Monday night. He said there are players that become very good major league hitters despite being mediocre in the minors because they benefit from ML pitchers keeping the ball around the plate better. This year has been/will be a too small sample size to see if this applies to Shaw. But based on what he has done so far, and contingent on ML pitchers not figuring out a hole in his swing (which ML pitchers are very adept at doing), I think he is quickly earning the right to have the chance to be the everyday 1B in 2016. regardless of sample size, he should at least get a shot, Id much rather go into the season with shaw at 1B and have grienke/Price/Cueto starting the opener than have Chris Davis at 1B and Wade Miley pitching that day.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Aug 18, 2015 23:29:36 GMT -5
I hope they give him the shot at 1B in 2016.
I thought Jerry made a good point on NESN Monday night. He said there are players that become very good major league hitters despite being mediocre in the minors because they benefit from ML pitchers keeping the ball around the plate better. This year has been/will be a too small sample size to see if this applies to Shaw. But based on what he has done so far, and contingent on ML pitchers not figuring out a hole in his swing (which ML pitchers are very adept at doing), I think he is quickly earning the right to have the chance to be the everyday 1B in 2016. I made the same point about Jose Iglesias in conjunction with his very low strike out rate. He put the ball in play but he needed to make harder contact or increase the line drive/ground ball rate and with experience and quick wrist usually means you have the natural ability to adapt. If Shaw can be anywhere even close to what he has been the rest of the way he should earn the chance. With Dombrowski (and his penchant for trades) on board he just may get the chance either here or somewhere else. The off season just became alot harder to predict what will happen.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 19, 2015 0:02:54 GMT -5
FWIW, Shaw was a Trackman superstar in the AFL back in '13, when Kris Bryant barely edged him out for MVP. He was making a lot of solid, up-the-middle contact, as well as crushing (superlative exit velocities) the ball with loft. Who knows, maybe something has clicked now like it did then, and the following spring in Portland. Regardless, he's an average 3b and a good 1b defensively, so he deserves a shot I think. Tough to argue against .371 with a mid-600 SLG, even if it's only 70 or 80 PA. If he's anything close to .300/.375/.500 at the end of the year (200 PA or so), how could he not be in there next spring? Of course, they'd need a backup plan, but with a league-minimum salary, he ought to be the first choice until he proves he shouldn't be.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 19, 2015 6:15:02 GMT -5
Tough to argue against .371 with a mid-600 SLG, even if it's only 70 or 80 PA. If he's anything close to .300/.375/.500 at the end of the year (200 PA or so), how could he not be in there next spring? Of course, they'd need a backup plan, but with a league-minimum salary, he ought to be the first choice until he proves he shouldn't be. 200 good major league PAs shouldn't make us forget his prior minor league record, which is decent but not great. I'm not convinced the power and contact ability he's flashed so far is sustainable. One other issue is that there really isn't another internal option if Shaw struggles or is injured. The only other players in the system who could fill in at 1B are Brock Holt, the corpse of Allen Craig, and Garin Cecchini (and, I suppose, Sandoval and Ramirez), none of which inspire much (any) confidence. As such, they have to bring in an external option anyways, and if they do, I'd rather it be an option you can pencil in as the starting 1B. Shaw as a depth option makes me feel a lot better than Shaw as a starter and a role player type as the only backup.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 19, 2015 6:59:31 GMT -5
Tough to argue against .371 with a mid-600 SLG, even if it's only 70 or 80 PA. If he's anything close to .300/.375/.500 at the end of the year (200 PA or so), how could he not be in there next spring? Of course, they'd need a backup plan, but with a league-minimum salary, he ought to be the first choice until he proves he shouldn't be. 200 good major league PAs shouldn't make us forget his prior minor league record, which is decent but not great. I'm not convinced the power and contact ability he's flashed so far is sustainable. One other issue is that there really isn't another internal option if Shaw struggles or is injured. The only other players in the system who could fill in at 1B are Brock Holt, the corpse of Allen Craig, and Garin Cecchini (and, I suppose, Sandoval and Ramirez), none of which inspire much (any) confidence. As such, they have to bring in an external option anyways, and if they do, I'd rather it be an option you can pencil in as the starting 1B. Shaw as a depth option makes me feel a lot better than Shaw as a starter and a role player type as the only backup. I really hope the hiring of Dombrowski signals an end to being so obsessed with depth that the priority does not follow 1. starting lineup 2. 25 man roster 3. minor league depth
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,888
|
Post by nomar on Aug 19, 2015 7:02:33 GMT -5
Tough to argue against .371 with a mid-600 SLG, even if it's only 70 or 80 PA. If he's anything close to .300/.375/.500 at the end of the year (200 PA or so), how could he not be in there next spring? Of course, they'd need a backup plan, but with a league-minimum salary, he ought to be the first choice until he proves he shouldn't be. 200 good major league PAs shouldn't make us forget his prior minor league record, which is decent but not great. I'm not convinced the power and contact ability he's flashed so far is sustainable. One other issue is that there really isn't another internal option if Shaw struggles or is injured. The only other players in the system who could fill in at 1B are Brock Holt, the corpse of Allen Craig, and Garin Cecchini (and, I suppose, Sandoval and Ramirez), none of which inspire much (any) confidence. As such, they have to bring in an external option anyways, and if they do, I'd rather it be an option you can pencil in as the starting 1B. Shaw as a depth option makes me feel a lot better than Shaw as a starter and a role player type as the only backup. Agreed. There's much less risk having Shaw as a solid CIF backup coming into the year, with a low cost viable starter in front of him. Personally, I like the idea of trading for Yonder Alonso. He's never really hit at Petco, but has a 122 road wRC+, a good glove, and very little trade value. He could emerge in his age 29 season with us, or he could be replacement level and give Shaw an opportunity to earn the starting role. Good chance that we find a solid solution between those two for 2016. Steve Pearce is a cheap FA who could be a platoon with Shaw at 1B and step into LF in a pinch. And not to beat a dead horse, but another platoon/starting option is Park Jung Ho, who has risk and upside attached to him as a high power/high K% guy. We don't have to break the bank at 1B next year with big bats like Devers and Moncada in the pipeline. Chris Davis will get 4/80-5/100. That's too rich for me.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Aug 19, 2015 8:40:29 GMT -5
There also is Sam Travis at Portland. He has been one of the best hitters in the Sox system this year even though he has not shown a lot of power so far.
|
|
art
Veteran
Posts: 341
|
Post by art on Aug 19, 2015 9:08:41 GMT -5
One other issue is that there really isn't another internal option if Shaw struggles or is injured. The only other players in the system who could fill in at 1B are Brock Holt, the corpse of Allen Craig, and Garin Cecchini (and, I suppose, Sandoval and Ramirez), none of which inspire much (any) confidence. As such, they have to bring in an external option anyways, and if they do, I'd rather it be an option you can pencil in as the starting 1B. Shaw as a depth option makes me feel a lot better than Shaw as a starter and a role player type as the only backup. I disagree with spending any money on a 1B. This team can score enough runs. Its problem is run prevention. I think all spending should be on improving the pitching staff. Shaw should at least be adequate at 1B, both defensively and offensively. You don't need an all star at every position. Get a AAAA guy to stash at Pawtucket as a backup.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 19, 2015 10:33:54 GMT -5
Tough to argue against .371 with a mid-600 SLG, even if it's only 70 or 80 PA. If he's anything close to .300/.375/.500 at the end of the year (200 PA or so), how could he not be in there next spring? Of course, they'd need a backup plan, but with a league-minimum salary, he ought to be the first choice until he proves he shouldn't be. 200 good major league PAs shouldn't make us forget his prior minor league record, which is decent but not great. I'm not convinced the power and contact ability he's flashed so far is sustainable. One other issue is that there really isn't another internal option if Shaw struggles or is injured. The only other players in the system who could fill in at 1B are Brock Holt, the corpse of Allen Craig, and Garin Cecchini (and, I suppose, Sandoval and Ramirez), none of which inspire much (any) confidence. As such, they have to bring in an external option anyways, and if they do, I'd rather it be an option you can pencil in as the starting 1B. Shaw as a depth option makes me feel a lot better than Shaw as a starter and a role player type as the only backup. One thing to consider with going out an acquiring a starting 1b is how it's going to look to (especially young) players in the system to have a guy far exceed expectations, do everything right, and get put on the bench for it. That's already happening for different reasons with JBJ. Trust me, I haven't forgotten Shaw's bipolar minor league career. There's been more bad than good. If they do make a trade/FA signing though, I think they're better off keeping the cost low by buying low on a guy like Alonso, or a depth signing. The last thing they need is another 4/60 or similar contract, especially with Travis on the way, not to mention the group of Devers/Moncada/Chavis/Longhi that's probably 2-4 years away but likely to shake up the INF corners in a big way. I'd rather see that spending go towards a top quality starter, and some legitimate bullpen arms.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 19, 2015 10:46:46 GMT -5
One thing to consider with going out an acquiring a starting 1b is how it's going to look to (especially young) players in the system to have a guy far exceed expectations, do everything right, and get put on the bench for it. That's already happening for different reasons with JBJ. Not to be too brusque, but who cares? Would that really make young players try less hard? You could well take the opposite view and argue that you don't want to just hand young guys jobs, but instead want to make them earn it by outperforming their teammates for it. I'm not sure Bradley is a comparable-- he was, after all, the worst hitter in baseball last year, and now that he's bounced back, he's getting regular playing time again and may well receive a starting outfield spot next year. Generally, I don't know that this organization in general is one that "blocks" young talent that they believe in. Jimed's inevitable objections aside, they moved Crisp to open up CF for Ellsbury, moved Youkilis for Middlebrooks, moved Masterson and Kelly for Rodriguez, Johnson and Owens, moved Craig and Nava and Victorino for Castillo and Bradley and Shaw, etc. I just don't really believe in Shaw, and I suspect the organization doesn't really believe in him either (although, with Dombrowski's hiring, obviously anything is in play).
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 19, 2015 11:06:19 GMT -5
One thing to consider with going out an acquiring a starting 1b is how it's going to look to (especially young) players in the system to have a guy far exceed expectations, do everything right, and get put on the bench for it. That's already happening for different reasons with JBJ. Not to be too brusque, but who cares? Would that really make young players try less hard? You could well take the opposite view and argue that you don't want to just hand young guys jobs, but instead want to make them earn it by outperforming their teammates for it. I'm not sure Bradley is a comparable-- he was, after all, the worst hitter in baseball last year, and now that he's bounced back, he's getting regular playing time again and may well receive a starting outfield spot next year. Generally, I don't know that this organization in general is one that "blocks" young talent that they believe in. Jimed's inevitable objections aside, they moved Crisp to open up CF for Ellsbury, moved Youkilis for Middlebrooks, moved Masterson and Kelly for Rodriguez, Johnson and Owens, moved Craig and Nava and Victorino for Castillo and Bradley and Shaw, etc. I just don't really believe in Shaw, and I suspect the organization doesn't really believe in him either (although, with Dombrowski's hiring, obviously anything is in play). Human beings care. Employees don't much care for employers who dole out "no-confidence" votes for good performance. And the FO might care, because it's the sort of thing that breeds frustration, discontentment, and discourages guys from signing early-career deals that save the team money in the long run. I agree-and pointed out-that JBJ's situation is both similar and yet different-but it's still a discouraging one for him. Will players "try" less? In an idealized world, no, but frustration and discontent are real and, if you've ever worked in a large organization, you'll know that they're infectious, even when not malignant. A person outperforming their job expectation and getting demoted for it is bad for any business, not because of how it affects them (although it may be a poor move on that front as well), but how it is perceived by those around them. The assertion that people are robotic in their work effort, never swayed by human events around them, is simply not reality. Now, how big of a deal would it be? Maybe inconsequential, maybe more. I'm not sure of to what extent the issue applies to Shaw, or if it even will, but I stand by my opinion that Shaw at .300/.375/.500 would have earned a starting nod, and replacing him out of hand would be a questionable move.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Aug 19, 2015 11:25:29 GMT -5
I'd like you to find an example of teammate who tried less hard because a player got his role trimmed and that teammate thought that was unfair.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 19, 2015 13:10:13 GMT -5
Tough to argue against .371 with a mid-600 SLG, even if it's only 70 or 80 PA. If he's anything close to .300/.375/.500 at the end of the year (200 PA or so), how could he not be in there next spring? Of course, they'd need a backup plan, but with a league-minimum salary, he ought to be the first choice until he proves he shouldn't be. 200 good major league PAs shouldn't make us forget his prior minor league record, which is decent but not great. I'm not convinced the power and contact ability he's flashed so far is sustainable. One other issue is that there really isn't another internal option if Shaw struggles or is injured. The only other players in the system who could fill in at 1B are Brock Holt, the corpse of Allen Craig, and Garin Cecchini (and, I suppose, Sandoval and Ramirez), none of which inspire much (any) confidence. As such, they have to bring in an external option anyways, and if they do, I'd rather it be an option you can pencil in as the starting 1B. Shaw as a depth option makes me feel a lot better than Shaw as a starter and a role player type as the only backup. This. The best explanation for Shaw's AAA vs. MLB performance this year is that he's a streaky-as-hell hitter and that the latter has more or less accidentally been composed of only hot stuff. He had a 559 OPS on May 19 (including his 0/2 in MLB), then had a 930 in his 99 PA before his second recall, then had a 549 in 93 PA (13 in MLB) before his final recall and insane hot stretch. Shaw's overall quality as an MLB hitter will be a function of the proportion of his hot and cold. His OPS the rest of the way could be anywhere between 400 (all cold) and 900 (all hot). What we've seen so far suggests a guy who would be a below-average MLB starting 1B, but a good starting 3B. That would be a great guy to have on next year's bench, and a viable fill-in at 3B in a scenario where Sandoval isn't there. But there's nothing in his history that suggests right now that making him the starting 1B and also acquiring a LH bat for the bench is a good idea. If he puts up a 900 OPS the rest of the way, that assessment might well change. Or 400, for that matter -- in which case, you might want him as an up-and-down guy.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 19, 2015 13:54:30 GMT -5
There also is Sam Travis at Portland. He has been one of the best hitters in the Sox system this year even though he has not shown a lot of power so far. He's in that interesting zone where he projects to be a perfectly reasonable puzzle piece, starting probably in mid-'17, a guy who projects to be an average starter or a bit above, but is not so good that acquiring someone who would block him might seem counter-productive.
|
|
dd
Veteran
Posts: 979
|
Post by dd on Aug 19, 2015 21:32:13 GMT -5
I'd like you to find an example of teammate who tried less hard because a player got his role trimmed and that teammate thought that was unfair. Is there an advanced stat for that? :-) It sounds like you're expecting to find (or for Telson to find) a situation where a player decides "They treated my buddy badly so I'm gonna play half-assed." I don't think that's how it happens. IMO baseball players are pretty much like everybody else. Even when you think you're giving everything you've got, sometimes you're not. Many people work harder if they like their boss and feel that employees are being treated fairly. They might also be more willing to re-up. It's probably not a huge factor but I'm quite sure it has an effect sometimes even though one will never find an example that can be pointed to with certainty given all the other factors that affect performance (and sign-ability).
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Aug 19, 2015 22:10:09 GMT -5
Yeah, for sure. That's why things went south on Bobby Valentine, from the Mike Aviles situation on down. But that was a manager who was already a jerk treating an individual player (and later on players, plural) worse than he deserved, not an organization deciding they could upgrade a position of the current player. If the organization was consistently pulling the leg out from under its own developed players than maybe it would be one thing, but nobody is going to start a clubhouse riot if the team signs a first baseman who they think is better than Travis Shaw.
And I like Travis Shaw! I think they can probably find a better starting first baseman for next season, but if for some reason they can't I don't think Shaw would hurt them by any means and he'd give the benefit of being cost effective. But claiming that other players on the team will think its unfair if Shaw isn't the starter and it will negatively impact them? Nah - that's basically putting team "chemistry" before team-building, which is the quickest way to an unhappy, losing clubhouse. Think of Nick Swisher - read teammates quotes about him when he's on good teams or on bad ones. You'd think he's a split personality. In reality, his rah rah stuff is fun on a winning team but wears thin in a real hurry when you're losing.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 19, 2015 23:09:48 GMT -5
I'd like you to find an example of teammate who tried less hard because a player got his role trimmed and that teammate thought that was unfair. That's a reduction to absurdity and not worth any more time than pointing out exactly that.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 19, 2015 23:15:30 GMT -5
There also is Sam Travis at Portland. He has been one of the best hitters in the Sox system this year even though he has not shown a lot of power so far. He's in that interesting zone where he projects to be a perfectly reasonable puzzle piece, starting probably in mid-'17, a guy who projects to be an average starter or a bit above, but is not so good that acquiring someone who would block him might seem counter-productive. He actually seems like the kind of player whose presence is simply to reduce salary...providing league-average performance (1.5-2 WAR) for "bargain" prices for several years, allowing that money to be spent elsewhere. Part of the reason I'd prefer to see them cobble together some 1b arb cuts/minor FA signs/buy low players. If they can limit contract terms to 2 years, all the better.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 20, 2015 6:00:27 GMT -5
That's just the thing-- I think there's a substantial likelihood that he's much worse than a 1.5 to 2 win player. Considering his minor league track record and his skill set, there's a good chance he ends up striking out a lot and not hiring for much power, in which case they're in trouble if the backup plan is a similarly fringy option.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Aug 20, 2015 6:38:37 GMT -5
That's just the thing-- I think there's a substantial likelihood that he's much worse than a 1.5 to 2 win player. Considering his minor league track record and his skill set, there's a good chance he ends up striking out a lot and not hiring for much power, in which case they're in trouble if the backup plan is a similarly fringy option. I think they're talking about Sam Travis now, not Travis Shaw
|
|
|