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.
Red Sox acquire Danny Jansen for Coffey, Paulino, Batista
|
Post by Soxfansince1971 on Jul 28, 2024 11:16:04 GMT -5
Absolutely, this was my first thought. He looks like a perfect fit for Fenway, so extend him in the next two months before he get to FA (after you have had a few weeks of a tryout). Always a great idea to trade a younger, cheaper, better player in favor of an older, more expensive, worse player. younger player that will never sniff Fenway, ya sure
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,008
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 28, 2024 11:53:52 GMT -5
I am actually a little confused as to what the plan is here. The idea is supposedly that Jansen is a righty bat that will help the lineup against lefties. But also that he's replacing Reese McGuire, who has only had 18 PAs against lefties all season, a trivial number. Jansen could also take some PAs from Wong - but Wong is himself a righty who has a 154 wRC+ against lefties.
It's been suggested that Jansen would take PAs away from Dom Smith via Wong playing 1B. But is that the team's actual plan? Wong has all of 10 innings at 1B in his career. And in any case Casas should return in a few weeks.
Does Jansen take PAs from Yoshida? Seems like a bad idea; Yoshida is clearly the better hitter at this point and has a history of minimal splits going back to his career in Japan.
And to top it all off, Jansen actually has pretty significant reverse splits for his career - 90 wRC+ vs. L and 105 wRC+ vs. R.
Really, the most sensible use of Jansen would be to have him get PAs as a catcher mostly against righties; then you really are upgrading from McGuire at the most improvable spot in the lineup and getting Wong some extra rest, which he could probably use (he has just a 73 wRC+ in July and his K rate has ballooned to 29%; he might be wearing down like he did last year). I'd be fine with that. But then they haven't actually done anything to improve the lineup against lefties; it's an addition of a "righty bat" in only a pro forma sense.
I think I've figured it out, combining ideas of others with some thoughts of my own.
The key here is that they have obtained the righty bat they were looking for without burning a roster spot. And that in turn solves a dilemma with Casas' return.
Wong has played 9 2/3 innings at 1B in his career (all levels). He has played 227 2/3 innings at 2B, almost all of it in the the minors with the Dodgers. He becomes the 2B platoon partner with Hamilton, and that means they can send Westbrook down when needed. Instead of adding a roster spot had they traded for Turner, they have actually freed one up!
I've been concerned for a while that Casas would have to take Smith's roster spot (since Smith took Casas's), when you'd like to keep Smith so that they can gradually work Casas up to full time usage. Smith is also great insurance against a Casas setback. Having two 1B-only players on the roster is crazy under any other circumstances, but we need to do it.
Romy plays 1B vs. lefties until Casas is activated. So the bench in mid or late August is Jansen, Refsnyder, Smith, and Romy. When rosters expand on 9/1, hopefully Grissom is ready to take some or all of the 2B time from Wong.
The lesson here is "don't let the really good become the enemy of the merely OK." There were certainly better RH bats to be had, but when you also improve the bat of the backup catcher in the same stroke, that's probably close to a wash.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,008
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 28, 2024 12:20:31 GMT -5
Note that they will likely keep Westbrook as the 2B vs. LHP, while using Jansen to reduce Wong's playing time at catcher. Wong replaces him at 2B when he gets hot again, or when Casas is activated and Westbrook optioned.
|
|
|
Post by pappyman99 on Jul 28, 2024 12:21:52 GMT -5
For me this is kind of a DD trade where you are like okay nothing to have a heart attack about
But couldn’t Coffey and Paulino been valuable sweeteners part of a deal for someone actually impactful?
I fear the needle really hasn’t moved for us. The Mariners look like they meaningly got better, they Yankees will get better we know that
And low key the rangers are only 3.5 behind us and just got Max back, mahle very close, with Jung and Degrom on the horizon
|
|
|
Post by keninten on Jul 28, 2024 12:22:13 GMT -5
I am actually a little confused as to what the plan is here. The idea is supposedly that Jansen is a righty bat that will help the lineup against lefties. But also that he's replacing Reese McGuire, who has only had 18 PAs against lefties all season, a trivial number. Jansen could also take some PAs from Wong - but Wong is himself a righty who has a 154 wRC+ against lefties.
It's been suggested that Jansen would take PAs away from Dom Smith via Wong playing 1B. But is that the team's actual plan? Wong has all of 10 innings at 1B in his career. And in any case Casas should return in a few weeks.
Does Jansen take PAs from Yoshida? Seems like a bad idea; Yoshida is clearly the better hitter at this point and has a history of minimal splits going back to his career in Japan.
And to top it all off, Jansen actually has pretty significant reverse splits for his career - 90 wRC+ vs. L and 105 wRC+ vs. R.
Really, the most sensible use of Jansen would be to have him get PAs as a catcher mostly against righties; then you really are upgrading from McGuire at the most improvable spot in the lineup and getting Wong some extra rest, which he could probably use (he has just a 73 wRC+ in July and his K rate has ballooned to 29%; he might be wearing down like he did last year). I'd be fine with that. But then they haven't actually done anything to improve the lineup against lefties; it's an addition of a "righty bat" in only a pro forma sense.
I think I've figured it out, combining ideas of others with some thoughts of my own.
The key here is that they have obtained the righty bat they were looking for without burning a roster spot. And that in turn solves a dilemma with Casas' return.
Wong has played 9 2/3 innings at 1B in his career (all levels). He has played 227 2/3 innings at 2B, almost all of it in the the minors with the Dodgers. He becomes the 2B platoon partner with Hamilton, and that means they can send Westbrook down when needed. Instead of adding a roster spot had they traded for Turner, they have actually freed one up!
I've been concerned for a while that Casas would have to take Smith's roster spot (since Smith took Casas's), when you'd like to keep Smith so that they can gradually work Casas up to full time usage. Smith is also great insurance against a Casas setback. Having two 1B-only players on the roster is crazy under any other circumstances, but we need to do it.
Romy plays 1B vs. lefties until Casas is activated. So the bench in mid or late August is Jansen, Refsnyder, Smith, and Romy. When rosters expand on 9/1, hopefully Grissom is ready to take some or all of the 2B time from Wong.
The lesson here is "don't let the really good become the enemy of the merely OK." There were certainly better RH bats to be had, but when you also improve the bat of the backup catcher in the same stroke, that's probably close to a wash.
There you go. This is the 2nd base upgrade we were hoping for.
|
|
|
Post by oldfaithful2019 on Jul 28, 2024 13:07:17 GMT -5
I think I've figured it out, combining ideas of others with some thoughts of my own.
The key here is that they have obtained the righty bat they were looking for without burning a roster spot. And that in turn solves a dilemma with Casas' return.
Wong has played 9 2/3 innings at 1B in his career (all levels). He has played 227 2/3 innings at 2B, almost all of it in the the minors with the Dodgers. He becomes the 2B platoon partner with Hamilton, and that means they can send Westbrook down when needed. Instead of adding a roster spot had they traded for Turner, they have actually freed one up!
I've been concerned for a while that Casas would have to take Smith's roster spot (since Smith took Casas's), when you'd like to keep Smith so that they can gradually work Casas up to full time usage. Smith is also great insurance against a Casas setback. Having two 1B-only players on the roster is crazy under any other circumstances, but we need to do it.
Romy plays 1B vs. lefties until Casas is activated. So the bench in mid or late August is Jansen, Refsnyder, Smith, and Romy. When rosters expand on 9/1, hopefully Grissom is ready to take some or all of the 2B time from Wong.
The lesson here is "don't let the really good become the enemy of the merely OK." There were certainly better RH bats to be had, but when you also improve the bat of the backup catcher in the same stroke, that's probably close to a wash.
There you go. This is the 2nd base upgrade we were hoping for. Sending out Westbroook and bringing up Yorke would be upgrade enough for me. I do recall when the Sox got Wong the thought was he may turn out to be a utility player more than every day catcher. I think we'll be finding out about that the next few weeks.
|
|
|
Post by wildsox on Jul 28, 2024 13:09:33 GMT -5
There you go. This is the 2nd base upgrade we were hoping for. Sending out Westbroook and bringing up Yorke would be upgrade enough for me. I do recall when the Sox got Wong the thought was he may turn out to be a utility player more than every day catcher. I think we'll be finding out about that the next few weeks. or even Meidroth
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Jul 28, 2024 14:00:06 GMT -5
Best thing I can say about this trade: "at least they didn't give up even more." Worst thing I can say about this trade: "I think they might have been able to get a 6th-inning reliever for those players, instead." I'm mildly annoyed at this trade but I don't really have a reason why, just seems so pointless unless this is a larger part of something still in the works. Maybe Breslow just made the trade so that he can definitively say he's a buyer at the deadline?
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jul 28, 2024 17:09:31 GMT -5
Confirming some theories
|
|
asm18
Veteran
Posts: 2,524
|
Post by asm18 on Jul 28, 2024 17:17:23 GMT -5
Vaughn Grissom has a clear role/spot if he can get right…
|
|
|
Post by soxinsf on Jul 28, 2024 19:38:39 GMT -5
Looks like they are holding out for Grissom
Two hits today. Has played two in a row.
Whether tomorrow or next week, if the guy stays healthy, he would be the obvious choice to play 2B, not Yorke who played LF today.
As for Jansen, it’s a light-hitting RH batter replacing a LH journeyman. A wash, but maybe more.
|
|
|
Post by bosoxnation on Jul 28, 2024 19:44:29 GMT -5
Looks like they are holding out for Grissom Two hits today. Has played two in a row. Whether tomorrow or next week, if the guy stays healthy, he would be the obvious choice to play 2B, not Yorke who played LF today. As for Jansen, it’s a light-hitting RH batter replacing a LH journeyman. A wash, but maybe more. Hes got a ton of power. the last 3 years he's hit 43 HRs in 667 ABs. 14 HRs in 222 ABs per season. That's legit power. Problem is this year is not even close to those last 3.
|
|
|
Post by sxfan on Jul 28, 2024 19:58:20 GMT -5
You guys can look up the rules, but I'm 99 percent sure I'm right about this-
The catching position is the only position in MLB where you're allowed to bring the player back that was pinched hit for, (aka taken out of the game and allowed to come back into the game).
So Jansen or Wong starts 2 at bats a game over Yoshida because of handedness. Then they pinch hit Yoshida. Then they bring back Wong or Jansen in an emergency).
Not a big deal and you replace the worst hitter by far in the lineup with a actual capable at bat. (Reese McGuire)
I also advocate for Jansen extended beyond this year and hope the Sox think the same way as well. Perfect fit for Fenway despite, bad results in limited at bats so far.
|
|
alnipper
Veteran
Living the dream
Posts: 637
|
Post by alnipper on Jul 28, 2024 20:17:23 GMT -5
"might? MIGHT?" Now I'm QUESTIONING the trade. Might even call this a giveaway. I'm not that high on either prospect, but not in the same league. Watching our lack of pitching tonight really makes wonder the logic of the trade. I do understand the logic of adding a righty bat. Hard pass on Wong at 2nd. Wong has lost his power some, so hopefully this trade helps. My knee jerk grade is a D+/C-.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 28, 2024 21:13:35 GMT -5
ESTEVEZ Angels' closer dealt to Philadelphia for a lower price yeah, no, those were two of the better pitching prospects in philadelphia. we gave up a rule 5 guy who was likely not getting protected, a guy i'm not sure has ever been the sp60, and cutter coffey who had a great june but has mostly been kind of whatever as a prospect thus far. Just as a point of information, Batista was ranked 60th for one month. He kind of hung around the unofficial 61-80 range since being named the Latin program POTY.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 28, 2024 21:16:08 GMT -5
You guys can look up the rules, but I'm 99 percent sure I'm right about this- The catching position is the only position in MLB where you're allowed to bring the player back that was pinched hit for, (aka taken out of the game and allowed to come back into the game). So Jansen or Wong starts 2 at bats a game over Yoshida because of handedness. Then they pinch hit Yoshida. Then they bring back Wong or Jansen in an emergency). Not a big deal and you replace the worst hitter by far in the lineup with a actual capable at bat. (Reese McGuire) I also advocate for Jansen extended beyond this year and hope the Sox think the same way as well. Perfect fit for Fenway despite, bad results in limited at bats so far. This isn't correct.
|
|
|
Post by nonothing on Jul 29, 2024 9:21:15 GMT -5
"might? MIGHT?" Now I'm QUESTIONING the trade. Might even call this a giveaway. I'm not that high on either prospect, but not in the same league. Watching our lack of pitching tonight really makes wonder the logic of the trade. I do understand the logic of adding a righty bat. Hard pass on Wong at 2nd. Wong has lost his power some, so hopefully this trade helps. My knee jerk grade is a D+/C-. Why does this trade imply we won't trade for more pitching? How many players do you think we can play at SS, or move to lesser positions at AAA and AA? We have current MLB middle infielders (4): Rafaela, Gonzalez, Hamilton and Westbrook, plus currently in MiLB (7): Grissom, Valdez, Yorke, Mayer, Sogard, Meidroth, Campbell, who by year end we would expect to all be in AAA or above. So Paulino was not likely going to be able to move up and yet needed a roster spot this winter ahead of guys more advanced than he is. Coffey was behind all those guys, with Romero coming back from injury and needing SS reps. Romero was drafted in Round 1 of Coffey's draft yr, when he was Round 2. They certainly could have kept Paulino at AA and Coffey and Romero moved up to AA when ready, but then they have other higher ceiling guys developmentlly about a year behind in Arias, Cespedes and Zanetello. Coffey and Paulino were just sandwiched into a development window behind a big crop and in front of another high ceiling crop, plus plenty of org types in AA and then guys like Nunez, Pinto and others from DSL to join FCL next yr behind. So for us, those guys were expendable. Then the question becomes, were those guys desired by the teams with the additional pitching you/we want? My gut is they were not so relevant to accomplishing those trades that they could not substitute other similar tier players. It would be odd for a team with a solid starter to say... well if you don't include that AA middle IF who I have would have to roster this offseason, but really isn't yet ready for MLB, I just can't trade you my pitcher. Or... if you can't include that SS with a big power streak who otherwise hasn't been great, then no deal for that pitcher you want. Or that really young 6' tall pitcher who has barely pitched... he is the guy I just have to get to trade you my pitcher. So since none of those statements are likely to ever be made... why would these move preclude the Red Sox for trading for more valuable players? Instead you could think we upgraded the MLB club and avoided having to release some guys we might otherwise have had to release in the DRL crunch post-draft. No, the traded players wouldn't have been the released guys. But there would have been others we would have needed to release per SP contributors' math that seems very reasonable/reliable. So far, we got Paxton and Jansen for 4 players in the minors. We DFA'd Anderson and McGuire, who lacked the ability to be optionable. So we have net positively gotten Paxton for Anderson and Jansen for McGuire, and we traded away 4 guys better than the 4 guys we now don't have to release, but maybe the combination of short term upper level depth guys we keep/long term lower level guys we keep in the minors isn't worth much/any less to the org over time than the 4 guys we traded to improve the MLB club. And if they want to trade for more impactful pitching, I assume it will cost different players. Yet I don't think we would particularly miss the guys traded, even if we trade bigger prospects ahead of or behind them. That does not mean each of the 4 traded players will be busts. They may all work out to happen to be meaningful players over time. It just means we have more guys in our org, and it's ok to lose a few guys that may end up helping other teams if we have plenty of good prospects still in our org. You have to make choices. These were not particularly tough choices.
|
|
|
Post by sxfan on Jul 29, 2024 9:55:18 GMT -5
You guys can look up the rules, but I'm 99 percent sure I'm right about this- The catching position is the only position in MLB where you're allowed to bring the player back that was pinched hit for, (aka taken out of the game and allowed to come back into the game). So Jansen or Wong starts 2 at bats a game over Yoshida because of handedness. Then they pinch hit Yoshida. Then they bring back Wong or Jansen in an emergency). Not a big deal and you replace the worst hitter by far in the lineup with a actual capable at bat. (Reese McGuire) I also advocate for Jansen extended beyond this year and hope the Sox think the same way as well. Perfect fit for Fenway despite, bad results in limited at bats so far. This isn't correct. Ahh yeah I stand corrected. Had too much confidence after Yankees game made me drink. I read something on Reddit how maybe they were discussing it last CBA talks. It should be a rule for catcher and player safety. Disregard.
|
|
alnipper
Veteran
Living the dream
Posts: 637
|
Post by alnipper on Jul 29, 2024 11:44:32 GMT -5
"might? MIGHT?" Now I'm QUESTIONING the trade. Might even call this a giveaway. I'm not that high on either prospect, but not in the same league. Watching our lack of pitching tonight really makes wonder the logic of the trade. I do understand the logic of adding a righty bat. Hard pass on Wong at 2nd. Wong has lost his power some, so hopefully this trade helps. My knee jerk grade is a D+/C-. Why does this trade imply we won't trade for more pitching? How many players do you think we can play at SS, or move to lesser positions at AAA and AA? We have current MLB middle infielders (4): Rafaela, Gonzalez, Hamilton and Westbrook, plus currently in MiLB (7): Grissom, Valdez, Yorke, Mayer, Sogard, Meidroth, Campbell, who by year end we would expect to all be in AAA or above. So Paulino was not likely going to be able to move up and yet needed a roster spot this winter ahead of guys more advanced than he is. Coffey was behind all those guys, with Romero coming back from injury and needing SS reps. Romero was drafted in Round 1 of Coffey's draft yr, when he was Round 2. They certainly could have kept Paulino at AA and Coffey and Romero moved up to AA when ready, but then they have other higher ceiling guys developmentlly about a year behind in Arias, Cespedes and Zanetello. Coffey and Paulino were just sandwiched into a development window behind a big crop and in front of another high ceiling crop, plus plenty of org types in AA and then guys like Nunez, Pinto and others from DSL to join FCL next yr behind. So for us, those guys were expendable. Then the question becomes, were those guys desired by the teams with the additional pitching you/we want? My gut is they were not so relevant to accomplishing those trades that they could not substitute other similar tier players. It would be odd for a team with a solid starter to say... well if you don't include that AA middle IF who I have would have to roster this offseason, but really isn't yet ready for MLB, I just can't trade you my pitcher. Or... if you can't include that SS with a big power streak who otherwise hasn't been great, then no deal for that pitcher you want. Or that really young 6' tall pitcher who has barely pitched... he is the guy I just have to get to trade you my pitcher. So since none of those statements are likely to ever be made... why would these move preclude the Red Sox for trading for more valuable players? Instead you could think we upgraded the MLB club and avoided having to release some guys we might otherwise have had to release in the DRL crunch post-draft. No, the traded players wouldn't have been the released guys. But there would have been others we would have needed to release per SP contributors' math that seems very reasonable/reliable. So far, we got Paxton and Jansen for 4 players in the minors. We DFA'd Anderson and McGuire, who lacked the ability to be optionable. So we have net positively gotten Paxton for Anderson and Jansen for McGuire, and we traded away 4 guys better than the 4 guys we now don't have to release, but maybe the combination of short term upper level depth guys we keep/long term lower level guys we keep in the minors isn't worth much/any less to the org over time than the 4 guys we traded to improve the MLB club. And if they want to trade for more impactful pitching, I assume it will cost different players. Yet I don't think we would particularly miss the guys traded, even if we trade bigger prospects ahead of or behind them. That does not mean each of the 4 traded players will be busts. They may all work out to happen to be meaningful players over time. It just means we have more guys in our org, and it's ok to lose a few guys that may end up helping other teams if we have plenty of good prospects still in our org. You have to make choices. These were not particularly tough choices. Nothing I didn't think of. I am reading the price of pitching is insane and they did overpay from a source of strength. Just because they can afford to trade from a strength doesn't mean I like this specific trade. On a possible positive note. I wonder if we'll get any return for our newest two DFA's?
|
|
|
Post by seamus on Jul 29, 2024 11:53:50 GMT -5
The big league roster is better with Jansen on it, and if losing Paulino/Coffey hurts in the long run, it means a bunch of prospects ranked above them didn't pan out, so the team is in hot water anyway. It may be an overpay in the abstract, but this is clearly a super weird trade market that favors sellers, and I'm glad that the front office is willing to adapt to circumstances on the fly.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 29, 2024 12:28:45 GMT -5
The way I put it on the podcast is that yes, this might be an overpay in a vacuum, but it's a good sign that the system is at a place where the slight overpay is one the org likely won't miss, if that makes sense.
FWIW, speaking only for myself, Coffey probably wouldn't have been in the top 30 had we re-ranked before the trade (not even accounting for the ~3 draftees probably entering ahead of him in Monty, Tolle and Cason). I personally had him at 30 last month and looking quickly, identified 6 guys I probably would've moved ahead of him.
|
|
|
Post by pappyman99 on Jul 29, 2024 13:04:58 GMT -5
The way I put it on the podcast is that yes, this might be an overpay in a vacuum, but it's a good sign that the system is at a place where the slight overpay is one the org likely won't miss, if that makes sense. FWIW, speaking only for myself, Coffey probably wouldn't have been in the top 30 had we re-ranked before the trade (not even accounting for the ~3 draftees probably entering ahead of him in Monty, Tolle and Cason). I personally had him at 30 last month and looking quickly, identified 6 guys I probably would've moved ahead of him. Would a slightly optimistic outcome for Paulino be the infield version of Margot’s MLB career ?
|
|
|
Post by rkarp on Jul 29, 2024 13:10:22 GMT -5
The way I put it on the podcast is that yes, this might be an overpay in a vacuum, but it's a good sign that the system is at a place where the slight overpay is one the org likely won't miss, if that makes sense. FWIW, speaking only for myself, Coffey probably wouldn't have been in the top 30 had we re-ranked before the trade (not even accounting for the ~3 draftees probably entering ahead of him in Monty, Tolle and Cason). I personally had him at 30 last month and looking quickly, identified 6 guys I probably would've moved ahead of him. Would a slightly optimistic outcome for Paulino be the infield version of Margot’s MLB career ? I thought Margot was the far superior fielder playing a premium position in CF
|
|
|
Post by pappyman99 on Jul 29, 2024 13:22:04 GMT -5
I mean more in terms of career productivity in the MLB
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 3,011
|
Post by mobaz on Jul 29, 2024 13:35:15 GMT -5
Espinal seems like an easy (too easy?) comp for Paulino's majors performance ceiling and role. Not really much seller's remorse there since flags fly forever.
|
|
|