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 julyanmorley on Feb 22, 2024 15:54:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by puzzler on Feb 22, 2024 15:54:54 GMT -5
The problem with Dalbec as 4th bench person is that the only backup SSs are he and Grissom: no Reyes, nobody good at D. Grissom at SS and Valdez at 2b is not a good ninth inning look. Will Story play every inning? Or Dalbec and Reyes both make the roster and Valdez starts in AAA. This - Valdez and one of the relievers on the 2024 projected roster will be in AAA. |
|
|
|
Post by puzzler on Feb 22, 2024 16:02:45 GMT -5
What's the deal with Red Sox fans love affair with Dalbec...aside from a 100 game stretch when he first came up, he's repeatedly shown that he can't consistently hit major league pitching. For every hundred AB's he gets he'll have 6 singles, 2 doubles and 6 homeruns for a. 140 average to go along with 35-40 strikeuts and 2-3 walks--a bit of sarcasm there. He plays mediocre defense. There is a reason why the Red Sox kept down in AAA all of last year (unless the dude wants to become the next Crash Davis and be the career leader in minor league homeruns) and apparently no other MLB team wanted to trade for him. We could find a better bench player off the waiver wire. Based on what they need from Dalbec (RH power bat who can back up 1B/3B/OF) the only person I can think of that is readily available and that would be most of that would be Garrett Cooper. Maybe he is better, but he would cost more $ and an additional roster spot. |
|
|
|
Post by bettsonmookie on Feb 22, 2024 16:26:03 GMT -5
What's the deal with Red Sox fans love affair with Dalbec...aside from a 100 game stretch when he first came up, he's repeatedly shown that he can't consistently hit major league pitching. For every hundred AB's he gets he'll have 6 singles, 2 doubles and 6 homeruns for a. 140 average to go along with 35-40 strikeuts and 2-3 walks--a bit of sarcasm there. He plays mediocre defense. There is a reason why the Red Sox kept down in AAA all of last year (unless the dude wants to become the next Crash Davis and be the career leader in minor league homeruns) and apparently no other MLB team wanted to trade for him. We could find a better bench player off the waiver wire. Based on what they need from Dalbec (RH power bat who can back up 1B/3B/OF) the only person I can think of that is readily available and that would be most of that would be Garrett Cooper. Maybe he is better, but he would cost more $ and an additional roster spot. Even if Cooper projects to be marginally better than Dalbec for 2024, Dalbec is a far higher upside play due to his age/cost-controllable contract. Dalbec showed major flashes in AAA last year, and IF (big if, not holding my breath) he is able to make an adjustment at the MLB level, he could provide a team with his prime years on a rookie-scale contract. As we saw with Duran, who was pretty much written off and now holds significant market value due to his age and contract term, Dalbec *could* emerge as a similarly valuable asset. Is the marginal benefit of Cooper > Dalbec in '24 worth writing off this potential upside scenario? I personally do not think so. I say give Bobby his last shot to prove what he did in AAA last year was sustainable. After all, it is a "see what you've got" type of year. Lean into it. |
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Feb 22, 2024 16:50:49 GMT -5
It's always bothered me that the 'market' for prospects is so inefficient that the response to "this kid is good, but he's redundant/blocked on our team" tends to be "maybe he could be ok at doing something he's worse/less valuable at" instead of "he should do his thing somewhere else." It's why I'm much more down on all the BPA talk around the draft than most here. At the time of the draft they wouldn't know which position will be a position of need 4 or 5 years down the road. That's why its BPA. |
|
|
|
Post by awalkinthepark on Feb 22, 2024 17:48:56 GMT -5
What's the deal with Red Sox fans love affair with Dalbec...aside from a 100 game stretch when he first came up, he's repeatedly shown that he can't consistently hit major league pitching. For every hundred AB's he gets he'll have 6 singles, 2 doubles and 6 homeruns for a. 140 average to go along with 35-40 strikeuts and 2-3 walks--a bit of sarcasm there. He plays mediocre defense. There is a reason why the Red Sox kept down in AAA all of last year (unless the dude wants to become the next Crash Davis and be the career leader in minor league homeruns) and apparently no other MLB team wanted to trade for him. We could find a better bench player off the waiver wire. I'm not sure love affair is the right word. Like others have said he checks off a lot of boxes on what the Sox need - right handed power and can play 1B/3B. He should be fine to roll with against lefties, he has a career 128 wRC+ vs. LHP and even in 2022 he managed a 115 wRC+ vs. them. His career barrel rate is 17.3% which is absolutely elite. The problem obviously is the Ks and the fact that he can't hit right handed pitching.
They can and should have gone out and gotten a better right handed hitter this winter, there is no reason they should be in a position to give him ~250 plate appearances, but the ship sailed. At this point I would rather roll with him than anyone they can grab off the waiver wire if only because of the power potential he brings to the plate and that he's making the mlb minimum and has an option still.
|
|
|
|
Post by 0ap0 on Feb 22, 2024 18:22:44 GMT -5
It's always bothered me that the 'market' for prospects is so inefficient that the response to "this kid is good, but he's redundant/blocked on our team" tends to be "maybe he could be ok at doing something he's worse/less valuable at" instead of "he should do his thing somewhere else." It's why I'm much more down on all the BPA talk around the draft than most here. At the time of the draft they wouldn't know which position will be a position of need 4 or 5 years down the road. That's why its BPA. Largely true, but not entirely unforeseeable. So yes, but also forecasting need should play a role in the selection. IMO, anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by puzzler on Feb 22, 2024 19:00:06 GMT -5
At the time of the draft they wouldn't know which position will be a position of need 4 or 5 years down the road. That's why its BPA. Largely true, but not entirely unforeseeable. So yes, but also forecasting need should play a role in the selection. IMO, anyway. In the case of Yorke though, they did exactly what you would suggest. By almost every publication he was NOT the BPA - and they've had (and may still for all we know) a hole at 2B for a long, long time. So for all intents and purposes Bloom did forecast the need and it still turned out that it was filled before Yorke was in position to take the job.
|
|
|
|
Post by rhswanzey on Feb 22, 2024 19:49:42 GMT -5
Largely true, but not entirely unforeseeable. So yes, but also forecasting need should play a role in the selection. IMO, anyway. In the case of Yorke though, they did exactly what you would suggest. By almost every publication he was NOT the BPA - and they've had (and may still for all we know) a hole at 2B for a long, long time. So for all intents and purposes Bloom did forecast the need and it still turned out that it was filled before Yorke was in position to take the job.
Retroactive discussions about draft picks are incomplete without bonus and slot value information. Yorke was selected at least in part because by drafting him above where he was expected to go, Boston saved almost a million of their draft pool. This allowed them to go overslot for Blaze Jordan with the following pick. The same thing happened when they drafted Mikey Romero in 2022 to land Roman Anthony overslot. |
|
|
|
Post by puzzler on Feb 22, 2024 20:47:26 GMT -5
In the case of Yorke though, they did exactly what you would suggest. By almost every publication he was NOT the BPA - and they've had (and may still for all we know) a hole at 2B for a long, long time. So for all intents and purposes Bloom did forecast the need and it still turned out that it was filled before Yorke was in position to take the job.
Retroactive discussions about draft picks are incomplete without bonus and slot value information. Yorke was selected at least in part because by drafting him above where he was expected to go, Boston saved almost a million of their draft pool. This allowed them to go overslot for Blaze Jordan with the following pick. The same thing happened when they drafted Mikey Romero in 2022 to land Roman Anthony overslot. It's not a commentary on the draft strategy, but it's still true that Yorke was drafted at a position of need at the time and was also not the best player available. |
|
|
|
Post by rhswanzey on Feb 22, 2024 20:53:30 GMT -5
Retroactive discussions about draft picks are incomplete without bonus and slot value information. Yorke was selected at least in part because by drafting him above where he was expected to go, Boston saved almost a million of their draft pool. This allowed them to go overslot for Blaze Jordan with the following pick. The same thing happened when they drafted Mikey Romero in 2022 to land Roman Anthony overslot. It's not a commentary on the draft strategy, but it's still true that Yorke was drafted at a position of need at the time and was also not the best player available. The implied point I was making was that Yorke being a signability pick held equal (or very likely greater) weight than the position he played. I’m not disputing that Boston lacked an obvious long term second baseman at the time he was drafted. I’m disputing the implication that it was what motivated selecting Yorke. |
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Feb 22, 2024 21:03:17 GMT -5
At the time of the draft they wouldn't know which position will be a position of need 4 or 5 years down the road. That's why its BPA. Largely true, but not entirely unforeseeable. So yes, but also forecasting need should play a role in the selection. IMO, anyway. You can think a team is set at a position for 10 years but then just like that a major injury could end or diminish a career. Or a current major hole could be a major asset within a year or two. BPA. |
|
|
|
Post by sxfan on Feb 22, 2024 21:05:40 GMT -5
Nick Yorke probably going to probably play a lot of LF this year I'm guessing.
|
|
|
|
Post by puzzler on Feb 22, 2024 22:46:47 GMT -5
It's not a commentary on the draft strategy, but it's still true that Yorke was drafted at a position of need at the time and was also not the best player available. The implied point I was making was that Yorke being a signability pick held equal (or very likely greater) weight than the position he played. I’m not disputing that Boston lacked an obvious long term second baseman at the time he was drafted. I’m disputing the implication that it was what motivated selecting Yorke. I agree with you. That was not Bloom's motivation. I'm saying that if it had been, drafting based on need still resulted in that draftee being blocked at the major league level. |
|
|
|
Post by a2sox on Feb 23, 2024 0:30:20 GMT -5
Great piece from Jen McCaffrey in the Athletic on the new staff's approach to pitching: theathletic.com/5291591/2024/02/22/red-sox-andrew-bailey-run-prevention-unit/?source=nyt&access_token=12484200Bailey and crew are stressing getting ahead in counts. This excerpt from Cora was interesting: Manager Alex Cora has appreciated the focus on getting quicker outs. In previous years, pitchers may have been too focused on pitching to the edges instead of attacking the zone.
“Everybody talks about throwing strikes, but we went from one philosophy to another in three years, and I think, with all due respect to the people that were running things (chief baseball officer) Chaim (Bloom) and the group, sometimes you got to be more consistent in that aspect,” Cora said. “There were reasons for it and we tried our best, but it didn’t work out. We got hit hard in the zone last year.” |
|
asm18
Veteran
Posts: 2,890
|
Post by asm18 on Feb 23, 2024 7:14:54 GMT -5
Manager Alex Cora has appreciated the focus on getting quicker outs. In previous years, pitchers may have been too focused on pitching to the edges instead of attacking the zone.
“Everybody talks about throwing strikes, but we went from one philosophy to another in three years, and I think, with all due respect to the people that were running things (chief baseball officer) Chaim (Bloom) and the group, sometimes you got to be more consistent in that aspect,” Cora said. “There were reasons for it and we tried our best, but it didn’t work out. We got hit hard in the zone last year.” That part definitely stood out, and makes you wonder about some sort of disconnect between the pitching staff-coaches-front office. The case study from last year is Nick Pivetta, who got demoted to the bullpen and as Cora related last September, had a Come to Jesus moment via Chris Martin: “He[Chris Martin]’s a big part of what Nick is doing right now. When he went over there [to the bullpen], he talked to him about being aggressive. Use your best pitches as much as possible. Don’t waste pitches. Attack. Be in attack mode… As we know, the previous year and earlier in the season, Nick was shying away from the zone. Whatever Chris told Nick, it changed his season, maybe his career.” It’s certainly great that this new mindset (along with his new sweeper) seems to have unlocked Prime Pivetta. But why exactly did it take Pivetta getting banished to the bullpen and Chris Martin being the one to ask him, “Hey man have you considered throwing strikes mores?” to finally elicit a change? |
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Feb 23, 2024 7:45:56 GMT -5
Manager Alex Cora has appreciated the focus on getting quicker outs. In previous years, pitchers may have been too focused on pitching to the edges instead of attacking the zone.
“Everybody talks about throwing strikes, but we went from one philosophy to another in three years, and I think, with all due respect to the people that were running things (chief baseball officer) Chaim (Bloom) and the group, sometimes you got to be more consistent in that aspect,” Cora said. “There were reasons for it and we tried our best, but it didn’t work out. We got hit hard in the zone last year.” That part definitely stood out, and makes you wonder about some sort of disconnect between the pitching staff-coaches-front office. The case study from last year is Nick Pivetta, who got demoted to the bullpen and as Cora related last September, had a Come to Jesus moment via Chris Martin: “He[Chris Martin]’s a big part of what Nick is doing right now. When he went over there [to the bullpen], he talked to him about being aggressive. Use your best pitches as much as possible. Don’t waste pitches. Attack. Be in attack mode… As we know, the previous year and earlier in the season, Nick was shying away from the zone. Whatever Chris told Nick, it changed his season, maybe his career.” It’s certainly great that this new mindset (along with his new sweeper) seems to have unlocked Prime Pivetta. But why exactly did it take Pivetta getting banished to the bullpen and Chris Martin being the one to ask him, “Hey man have you considered throwing strikes mores?” to finally elicit a change? Makes you wonder what Dave Bush and co were telling him? Feels to me it'd be kind of counter-intuitive to not pitch "aggressively" and obviously it's in a pitchers best interest to get ahead in the count so it strikes me as strange it took Bailey and co. to come in and say attack the zone and stop nibbling so much. |
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,815 
|
Post by cdj on Feb 23, 2024 9:24:34 GMT -5
Disgusting.
|
|
badfishnbc
Veteran
Doing you all a favor and leaving through the gate in right field since 2012.
Posts: 496
|
Post by badfishnbc on Feb 23, 2024 9:30:48 GMT -5
What's the deal with Red Sox fans love affair with Dalbec...aside from a 100 game stretch when he first came up, he's repeatedly shown that he can't consistently hit major league pitching. For every hundred AB's he gets he'll have 6 singles, 2 doubles and 6 homeruns for a. 140 average to go along with 35-40 strikeuts and 2-3 walks--a bit of sarcasm there. He plays mediocre defense. There is a reason why the Red Sox kept down in AAA all of last year (unless the dude wants to become the next Crash Davis and be the career leader in minor league homeruns) and apparently no other MLB team wanted to trade for him. We could find a better bench player off the waiver wire. This. I do not love Dalbec for this team, and I would want to see who shakes loose from some other rosters to fill the role Dalbec would be asked to play. |
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Feb 23, 2024 9:31:05 GMT -5
Not that I want to get into the weeds on this as I've felt the Montgomery ship has sailed a long time ago, but honestly at this point it's also on Montgomery and Boras to re-assess and lower their demands. If Montgomery is still asking for something like 6/150 then that's on them. It seems that contract isn't out there for him. Not taking the Sox completely off the hook at all but if they don't feel like Montgomery is worth what he is demanding right now then they'd be kind of stupid to sign him. |
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Feb 23, 2024 9:32:47 GMT -5
Re: Milliken's commentary... This is such silly framing. "Fit him into their budget." It's clearly not a question of there being a fixed budget that they would need to squeeze Montgomery into because they were obviously willing to expand their budget to pay for Yamamoto; they just don't think Montgomery is worth whatever his asking price is - which is evidently the case for all 30 MLB teams to this point, given that he remains unsigned.
And it's just not "embarrassing" if they don't want to shell out nine figures for a 31 year old pitcher who projects for a 4 ERA. There are things about this offseason I'm annoyed about, but the failure to pay Boras' ransom for Montgomery (when no other team has either) isn't one of them.
|
|
asm18
Veteran
Posts: 2,890
|
Post by asm18 on Feb 23, 2024 9:34:45 GMT -5
I’m still extremely skeptical. But with that said…
You can’t be as stupid as to keep on engaging with Boras about Montgomery and expect to get him for a ridiculous bargain right? It’s like if I keep on going back to the dealership to look at an Aston Martin being like, “Eh, I dunno I have a budget.” Like can you talk to Jordan Montgomery and realistically not expect to have to outlay at least 90-100 million dollars at bare minimum for conversations to even be worth your time?
|
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Feb 23, 2024 9:42:42 GMT -5
I’m still extremely skeptical. But with that said… You can’t be as stupid as to keep on engaging with Boras about Montgomery and expect to get him for a ridiculous bargain right? It’s like if I keep on going back to the dealership to look at an Aston Martin being like, “Eh, I dunno I have a budget.” Like can you talk to Jordan Montgomery and realistically not expect to have to outlay at least 90-100 million dollars at bare minimum for conversations to even be worth your time? It's not like every Boras client gets ridiculously overpaid. And no other team has signed him, right? It seems clear that his price is going to have to come down if he wants to sign a contract. And also, who's to say the Red Sox wouldn't be willing to pay 90-100 million.
With this tweet, by the way, and even the whiny Milliken one, there seems to be more smoke with Montgomery and the Red Sox than with any other team...
|
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Feb 23, 2024 9:43:59 GMT -5
The talk of a fixed budget is just bs, for what purpose is up to you to decide. There is no cash flow issue. If Yamamoto was unsigned and willing to sign for Jordan Montgomery's asking price, the Red Sox would not have this fixed budget they cannot go over.
edit: I see incandeza made the exact same point first. Damn you!
|
|
|
|
Post by chr31ter on Feb 23, 2024 9:48:42 GMT -5
It's incredibly frustrating, because this team is not that bad.
They need one more good starting pitcher, and they'd become really interesting. There's two of them just sitting out there and... I guess it's more important to cut payroll?
I don't get it. At this point, I need someone at an ownership level to explain to me why there's a need or a desire to be $30 million under the CBT threshold.
|
|
|
