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.
dd
Veteran
Posts: 979
|
Post by dd on Apr 28, 2013 18:00:51 GMT -5
Tremendous interview up on EEI's site with Speier and Kevin Boles about Almanzar. Really thoughtful, interesting answers from Boles. Personally I started following the minors in 2007 and Almanzar was really the first guy I started following from the moment he entered the organization and fell in love with him as a prospect. I know I totally gave up on him before last year and really didn't think much of his year in Salem either. I'm still tempering expectations but it's awesome to see him turn his career around like this. I was surprised to hear the positive comments about his defense. Has anybody here seen him this year and what's your take?
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Apr 29, 2013 9:54:41 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2013 17:37:54 GMT -5
Tiger Death House baby!! Where's temple?
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Apr 29, 2013 18:27:37 GMT -5
Where did Tiger Death House come from? Is it possible to kill it off. I think it is very offensive.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Apr 29, 2013 18:54:54 GMT -5
Offensive to who? Tigers?
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Apr 29, 2013 19:10:04 GMT -5
Where did Tiger Death House come from? Is it possible to kill it off. I think it is very offensive. I'll kind of take credit. In the old forum I opened a thread for a nick name for our most exciting prospect, a 17 y/o that not many knew much about, I wanted Big Poppa just because I was into old school rap back then but Temple came up with Tiger Death House and he won for some reason. BTW in what sense is that offensive?
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Apr 29, 2013 19:12:48 GMT -5
Yeah it's been around for like five years now and this is the first time I'm hearing it's offensive. What's the deal?
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Apr 29, 2013 19:48:52 GMT -5
Come on, who would call him that? And why? What is the relationship between the player and this nickname? I don't see any, and I don't see any sense in it. Tell me why I am wrong.
|
|
|
Post by ancientsoxfogey on Apr 29, 2013 20:43:26 GMT -5
To be honest, I've been uncomfortable with the organization's handling of Almanzar for a long time. They essentially drowned him for 3 years in levels of pro ball that he wasn't ready to handle either physically or emotionally. To me, it is absolutely astounding that he has found a way to come out of the other side of that experience and evolve into something even remotely promising. Lots of players, especially those with maturity yet to develop, would have thrown up their hands in resignation and moved on. Let's remember, we have a current 3B with good defensive chops, a lot of power, but terrible BB/K numbers, numbers that could cloud his entire career in the majors. If he doesn't evolve from where he is now, how good does Almanzar have to become to push him at some point in the future? It is not at all clear that 3B is any kind of a done deal for this organization, even short to mid term.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Huegel on Apr 29, 2013 21:26:58 GMT -5
Come on, who would call him that? And why? What is the relationship between the player and this nickname? I don't see any, and I don't see any sense in it. Tell me why I am wrong. You're wrong because that's not the definition of offensive. It's just an old running joke. The fact that it's so inane is what makes it funny.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Apr 29, 2013 21:51:53 GMT -5
Come on, who would call him that? And why? What is the relationship between the player and this nickname? I don't see any, and I don't see any sense in it. Tell me why I am wrong. Sounds like u say its dumb not offensive. It could be offensive to tigers because people cut down trees to make bats and build baseball fields and tigers live in areas with lots of trees so cutting down th trees is offensive to tigers... Get it.. No? Yea it's not offensive for any reason. Unless.... someone you know was eaten by a tiger?
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Apr 30, 2013 9:15:59 GMT -5
Offensive is a subjective term so something may be more offensive to some people than to others. I know it is a joke, but I don't think a prospect's nickname should be a joke. It could be humorous if it actually relates to something about him in not any demeaning way. While this isn't demeaning, and I am sure never was intended to be, it doesn't relate to him in any way I can see.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Apr 30, 2013 10:11:28 GMT -5
Let's end this discussion now and stick to on-the-field matters. Otherwise, I will move the entire discussion into an off-topic thread for further consideration.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,972
|
Post by jimoh on May 1, 2013 8:21:53 GMT -5
The podcast, near the end, had what to me seemed a pessimistic view of Almanzar from one of the guys who's seem him play: big strong guy who can bash fastballs, and sometimes muscle basehits even with poor contact, but still weak on secondary pitches and not really hustling.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on May 1, 2013 8:42:04 GMT -5
That description makes him sound like a guy Seattle, Miami, Colorado or the White Sox GMs would be lusting after, just based on their track records. Perhaps Amaro in Philly, too.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 1, 2013 9:13:07 GMT -5
Yeah, Almanzar is this year's Chih-Hsien Chiang memorial sell-high trade bait.
|
|
|
Post by shumbly on May 1, 2013 9:36:15 GMT -5
Yeah, Almanzar is this year's Chih-Hsien Chiang memorial sell-high trade bait. At what point does this become more than this, and turn into his true talent level? This was a guy who was always talented physically, appears to have taken steps forward in both his k and bb rates, and based on a couple reports even improving defensively. He has always been young for his level also. I understand the not hustling thing is a problem, but there are plenty of major leaguers who don't bust it all the time. I'm not saying I believe this is neccessarily sustainable, just asking at what point it becomes so.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on May 1, 2013 11:00:09 GMT -5
At what point does this become more than this, and turn into his true talent level? This was a guy who was always talented physically, appears to have taken steps forward in both his k and bb rates, and based on a couple reports even improving defensively. He has always been young for his level also. I understand the not hustling thing is a problem, but there are plenty of major leaguers who don't bust it all the time. I'm not saying I believe this is neccessarily sustainable, just asking at what point it becomes so. I don't disagree with the thought that the mid-season deadline may be a ripe time to maximize Almanzar's trade value, although I don't think that Almanzar and Chiang are totally parallel situations. Chiang showed little power until Portland (6 HR/328 PAs in Salem) and, in fact, was a fourth OF (switched from 2B when he outgrew the position). The fact that Chiang developed any trade value at all when he was a release candidate was fairly extraordinary, and the fact that the Red Sox took advantage of this was more so. Almanzar was a deep disappointment for many years because of his high bonus, pedigree and outsized expectations. He is now beginning, finally, to match those lofty expectations. To answer your question, I think we will need another 150 PAs, minimum, to see how Almanzar adjusts to the adjustments that will come from pitchers who face him for a second or third time this year. BTW, I disagree on the K/BB taking steps forward comment. His BB rate is about the same as last year but his K rate has increased (but is still acceptable). I also note that Almanzar has handled 58 chances without an error this year.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 1, 2013 12:06:09 GMT -5
I would also like to see what position Almanzar plays if Shaw isn't on the roster. Even in the AFL he was splitting duty between third and first. The fact that he's playing 3B full(ish)-time right now might just be more a result of Shaw's presence than anything.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on May 1, 2013 12:24:04 GMT -5
I would also like to see what position Almanzar plays if Shaw isn't on the roster. Even in the AFL he was splitting duty between third and first. The fact that he's playing 3B full(ish)-time right now might just be more a result of Shaw's presence than anything. IMO, the Red Sox would be best served to play Almanzar primarily at third base through the all-star break (and keep Shaw at Portland), in order to maximize their respective trade values.
|
|
|
Post by hammerhead on May 1, 2013 13:10:54 GMT -5
One issue might be that Cecchini may force his way into the Portland 3B conversation sooner than later.... So Promote Shaw, Promote Cecchini and play Tiger Death House at 1stbase. It kind of solves itself.
Not that any of that will happen in the immediate time frame
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on May 1, 2013 14:22:02 GMT -5
1B/3B depth
BOS - Napoli/Middlebrooks AAA - Snyder/Sutton AA - Shaw/Almanzar (also Vitek) A+ - Renfroe/Cecchini A - Moanaroa/Moore (also Chester/Miller)
I think it is likely that we will not see any movement for a while. There is no 40-man depth in the minors at either position and neither Shaw nor Almanzar are ready to step in. (Holt is on the 40-man but is off to a very slow start.)
Therefore, the organization will need the AAA depth until deep into the season.
BTW, because of the lack of corner IF depth in the organization (counting Bogaerts as SS for now), it would not surprise me if the Red Sox take a polished corner IF prospect (Bryant or Moran) with the #7 pick. That pick could then start in Salem next year, with Cecchini starting in Portland and Shaw and (if still with the team) Almanzar starting in Pawtucket. Bingo, instant depth.
|
|
|
Post by mainesox on May 1, 2013 15:35:09 GMT -5
BTW, because of the lack of corner IF depth in the organization (counting Bogaerts as SS for now), it would not surprise me if the Red Sox take a polished corner IF prospect (Bryant or Moran) with the #7 pick. That pick could then start in Salem next year, with Cecchini starting in Portland and Shaw and (if still with the team) Almanzar starting in Pawtucket. Bingo, instant depth. It's really a minor nitpick because I agree with your point, but while I think it's entirely possible (maybe even likely) that they take one of the corner infield guys, I'm not sure that organizational need (or lack of organizational depth) will be the reason they take them. If one of those two is available and they see them as the best player on the board they would obviously take them, but if - for example - Frazier was also available and they had him ranked higher I don't think they take Bryant or Moran just because they need corner infielders. The only way I see organizational need coming into play (or at least I hope this is the case) is if they have two guys more or less tied, or they've gone back and forth on which they like better, and one happens to play a position they lack depth at.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 1, 2013 16:48:35 GMT -5
I agree with Mainesox. Nobody on that Greenville roster is going to keep the Red Sox from starting whoever they take at number 7 in Salem if they wanted to, be it one of the pitchers, one of outfielders, or one of the corner infielders. I note, however, that I say that because there aren't any shortstops in play for that pick.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 1, 2013 20:51:25 GMT -5
Chiang didn't build any real trade value. He was filer. Sox traded 4 guys and he was the worst of he four at the time of the deal. Tray on Robinson was the "rise" Seattle got for Bedard. Sox had to ship Fife, FedEx and Jaun Rodruguez to LA. Almanzar is in a different category than Chiang and if he's not then he's not worth anything more than a throwing for organizational depth.
Trades this year will be interesting because of the lack of team need and 40 crunch coming. Usually you're looking for bullpen depth or a starter but those seem to be covered baring injury. We'll see.
Edit: I realize that perhaps "trade value" meant someone actually taking him from you so I that's what was being said, my bad.
|
|
|