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.
Future Left Side of the Infield
|
Post by psusox14 on Jun 13, 2013 23:15:21 GMT -5
In an ideal world, I think our team would benefit most from having Bogaerts at short with Cecchini at third and Iglesias at the utility man. As much as I love WMB, I don't see his future on the Red Sox unless he can really develop some sort of approach that could get him up to a 275/350. And I just don't see that happening. So: SS: Xander 3B: Cecchini 2B: Pedroia 1B: *Acquisition UTIL: Iggy
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 13, 2013 23:27:26 GMT -5
I still think it's funny that only two months ago, we had folks wanting to trade Cecchini or move him to 1B (ditto with Xander) because Middlebrooks had 3B locked down for the next half-decade, and now it's the total opposite. Remember, never count your chickens before they've had a couple seasons of above-average MLB performance.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Jun 14, 2013 7:46:46 GMT -5
I still think it's funny that only two months ago, we had folks wanting to trade Cecchini or move him to 1B (ditto with Xander) because Middlebrooks had 3B locked down for the next half-decade, and now it's the total opposite. Remember, never count your chickens before they've had a couple seasons of above-average MLB performance. True. Also, don't toss your chickens into the fryer until they've had a full season of under-average MLB performance.
|
|
|
Post by pokeefe363 on Jun 14, 2013 8:30:37 GMT -5
To me, this is the same WMB we saw before his breakout year in Portland. He has always been a strike-out heavy, low OBP guy and we all knew last year that he was playing over his head. Personally, I've never been high on WMB because I hate low OBP guys, but I'm not sure why his struggles are that surprising. His plate discipline has always been an issue and it was never fixed in the minors. I believe he's the one that should be traded in the long run. It might be good to look at NL teams that have a 1B logjam and pickup a bigger bat.
On the Xander/Iglesias conversation: Xander's footwork may not be good enough to stick at SS in the long run anyway and Iglesias is a true 80 on defense. I think Brendan Ryan is a good case study on what a defense first SS can be worth. He's had an above average WAR each of the last 4 years and his bat has been arguably the floor we project Iglesias to be at. In only 24 games, Iglesias has had a 1.7 WAR and that's him playing a less premium position that he isn't familiar with. If Iglesias can hit .250 and we can get normal production out of 3B, then our offense will be more than fine. I think long term, Cecchini would be a good option in LF/RF especially considering our lack of OF depth and the fact that all three of our current starting OF will need to be replaced in the next couple of years.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 14, 2013 8:34:46 GMT -5
If Xander keeps proving he can stay at SS he's the SS. A bat like that at a premium position is too valuable. Not a fan of this argument. Just because he could play shortstop - which would maximize his market value - doesn't mean he needs to because of it. He's going to be with our organization for years to come before we worry about other teams competing for his services. Point is, if we have Iglesias and Bogaerts on our major league roster, Iggy is certainly going to be the shortstop. If he fails collapses offensively to the point where he shouldn't be a starting player, Bogaerts can always shift back. See the Mike Trout / Peter Bourjos situation in LAA, for example. Many people want Trout to be the full time center fielder because he's an incredibly valuable all around player, and his ability to play center field would maximize his player value year. Yet, Mike Scioscia is currently making the best decision to keep Trout in LF when Bourjos is playing, because Bourjos is a better fielder there. It's really about maximizing value to the team, not the player. You seem to be focused on just Jose and Xander in this scenario. Why so quick to move X? Is it because Jose is so good defensively? What if X is an average to better hen that SS with a monster bat and Cecchini is a good defensive 3b and an above average bat? Maybe the Xander Garin left side is more valuable then the Jose/Xander. We can't look at anything in a vacuum. We have a few (not a lot) players who seem like they can be good major leaguers. None should be traded because we have the others. All are still unproven so having them all makes it highly likely a good solution awaits the future of our infield. Once we start dealing them off that likelihood goes down. Sure if a great deal is to be had this can be seen as a position of strength, but there isn't a set answer to who where yet, so talking like there is, is foolhardy.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 14, 2013 8:49:04 GMT -5
On the Xander/Iglesias conversation: Xander's footwork may not be good enough to stick at SS in the long run anyway and Iglesias is a true 80 on defense. I think Brendan Ryan is a good case study on what a defense first SS can be worth. He's had an above average WAR each of the last 4 years and his bat has been arguably the floor we project Iglesias to be at. In only 24 games, Iglesias has had a 1.7 WAR and that's him playing a less premium position that he isn't familiar with. If Iglesias can hit .250 and we can get normal production out of 3B, then our offense will be more than fine. I think long term, Cecchini would be a good option in LF/RF especially considering our lack of OF depth and the fact that all three of our current starting OF will need to be replaced in the next couple of years. See, I think Brendan Ryan (career .241/.303/.322) is more a middle-of-the-road projection for Iglesias than a floor. Remember, Iglesias has only hit .257/.307/.314 in 1209 minor league PAs, and only .244/.296/.292 in 916 AAA PAs. Even if you think he'll be a better major league hitter because he won't be bored or whatever, the odds are that he'll have trouble regularly cracking a .300 OBP or a .350 SLG. (Also, Brendan Ryan has not always been above-average. His fWARs the last four years: 2.8, 1.3, 2.8, 1.4, albeit in limited playing time. He's been worth 2.38 WAR per 600 PAs in his career, which is slightly above average. That's roughly my projection for Iglesias as well.)
|
|
|
Post by pokeefe363 on Jun 14, 2013 8:56:42 GMT -5
www.baseball-reference.com/players/r/ryanbr01.shtmlBaseball Reference pegs him at 4.5, 2.1, 3.8, 3.5 . Regardless, my point is that a 2.38 WAR player consistently is a good player. Not to mention he will always have some value because of his defense. Will Middlebrooks is average to below average defensively and will likely put up under a .330 OBP. I don't want that kind of player in my lineup even if he does hit 20 HR. Unless he's putting up 30+ HR, then that's not worth it in my mind. I really like Cecchini's approach and I hope he continues to progress. I see a Iglesias as somewhere between Rey Ordonez and Omar Vizquel. Time will tell which one he is, but either way I like him to be our starting SS for at least 2 years until we can clearly fill SS and 3B with someone other than WMB.
|
|
|
Post by wskeleton76 on Jun 14, 2013 9:12:54 GMT -5
Come on. Iggy was too rushed. He increased his power and speed last off season. Don't judge him by his minor stat.
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Jun 14, 2013 9:41:05 GMT -5
I will continue my crusade that our best fit for Xander is in RF.
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Jun 14, 2013 12:27:51 GMT -5
Come on. Iggy was too rushed. He increased his power and speed last off season. Don't judge him by his minor stat. Yeah guys, judge him off his 84 PA's and killer .523 BABIP!Iglesias is the perfect trade candidate to me. No reason not to form the infield around Xander for the short and long term (starting whenever he's ready), as a SS.
|
|
|
Post by semperfisox on Jun 14, 2013 12:43:58 GMT -5
I will continue my crusade that our best fit for Xander is in RF. But does he have the arm? I'm not familiar with that skill set of his.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 14, 2013 12:45:03 GMT -5
I see a Iglesias as somewhere between Rey Ordonez and Omar Vizquel. Time will tell which one he is, but either way I like him to be our starting SS for at least 2 years until we can clearly fill SS and 3B with someone other than WMB. So Iglesias falls between a guy barely worth a spot on an MLB roster and a borderline Hall of Famer (to some)? Defense at short is starting to be one of those things that became so under-rated that now it's way over-rated. Defense versus offense is also one of those things that cannot be talked about in a vacuum either. Brendan Ryan is not someone I would want playing for my team. Talk about his D all you want, but offensively he's clearly terrible. All you need to know about his BR WAR numbers are that he had his offensive WAR at 2.0 for 2011. .248/.313/.326/.639 is worth 2 wins above replacement level? WTF is replacement level? If that's true then a 2.0 WAR is brutal, which means his 2.6 defense WAR that year is also brutal. The overall point is none of these numbers mean anything so we should stop citing them. Defensive stats are the most unreliable numbers. We all know Ryan is a great defensive short stop, but we also know he's terrible offensively. Quite possibly the worst offensive player in Baseball. Whether or not he's valuable depends on the entire teams composition. For the Mariners, I'd argue he's a liability overall because their lineup top to bottom isn't very good and they cannot afford a guy like him in it. He's not a guy you can plug into any team and say he's helpful. Iglesias, is probably the same way. On some teams, he may be hugely valuable because they can carry his bat and defensively, he's the piece they need. On another, he may be a liability. Conversely, a big time offensive Short Stop without a glove may do the opposite to those teams.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Jun 14, 2013 13:03:26 GMT -5
I think some people are misunderstanding my points in this thread. I am not one of the more avid Iggy supporters, and I am not set on him being our future shortstop for years to come. It's tough to put an accurate prediction on how his MLB line will be over a full season (mainly one that isn't fueled by this ridiculous hot streak this year), but I think it will generally be around .245/.290/.325 territory. His glove will be elite. I'm saying that if the organization decides to start Iglesias (as in, he is the starter at shortstop for a significant period of time), and this time corresponds with Bogaert's time on the Red Sox, then Bogaert's should/will be the third baseman.
As for the person who pointed out that it is easy to go on the market and find a solid offensive third baseman over a good shortstop, hence displaying Bogaert's value as a shortstop, I completely agree. That's why I said it comes down to Iglesias vs. that possible solid third baseman. I am not opposed in any way to Bogaert's playing his natural position as he breaks into the league. I'm simply stating that if he starts alongside potentially the best defensive shortstop in the majors, he can handle a move to third that won't do more harm than good.
|
|
|
Post by semperfisox on Jun 14, 2013 13:08:31 GMT -5
I think some people are misunderstanding my points in this thread. I am not one of the more avid Iggy supporters, and I am not set on him being our future shortstop for years to come. It's tough to put an accurate prediction on how his MLB line will be over a full season (mainly one that isn't fueled by this ridiculous hot streak this year), but I think it will generally be around .245/.290/.325 territory. His glove will be elite. I'm saying that if the organization decides to start Iglesias (as in, he is the starter at shortstop for a significant period of time), and this time corresponds with Bogaert's time on the Red Sox, then Bogaert's should/will be the third baseman. As for the person who pointed out that it is easy to go on the market and find a solid offensive third baseman over a good shortstop, hence displaying Bogaert's value as a shortstop, I completely agree. That's why I said it comes down to Iglesias vs. that possible solid third baseman. I am not opposed in any way to Bogaert's playing his natural position as he breaks into the league. I'm simply stating that if he starts alongside potentially the best defensive shortstop in the majors, he can handle a move to third that won't do more harm than good. I'd glady take that slash line for Iggy if he continues to be Ozzie like with the glove....I'm sure the Sox would be too. Cant and won't have plus hitters at every position.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jun 14, 2013 13:27:13 GMT -5
It's getting very ridiculous that Drew keeps starting and Iglesias sits on the bench. Even with his SSS, why not ride it as long as it lasts?
I don't know how anyone can forecast what Iglesias will hit in the future. He has changed so much in the past couple of years, especially in the last year, that I think predictions are impossible to base on facts. The facts keep changing. He's certainly not going to hit anywhere close to where he is hitting now, but I don't think he is showing any reason to believe that he can't be a fairly decent hitter.
That's why I would put him in the lineup now, and trade Drew to Denver. They just lost their shortstop for a while. Drew is the perfect mid-season trade for a team that needs a stopgap. With Bogaerts developing, the Sox need to know if Iglesias really can hit enough to be a regular. There's only one way to find out.
|
|
|
Post by kingstephanos on Jun 14, 2013 13:49:47 GMT -5
From the BA Chat today I asked: "Steve (Eastcoast): Would you move Xander Bogaerts to the outfield in deference to either Will Middlebrooks and/or Jose Iglesias (if all are on the Red Sox MLB team in 2014)? Thanks!
J.J. Cooper: I'm not ready to declare Jose Iglesias a big league hitter, even if his 78 at-bats have been excellent. Vernon Wells posted a 1.000 OPS in April, and then reverted back to what we expected from Wells. In over 800 Triple-A ABs, Iglesias has posted a sub-.600 OPS. I'm just not buying that he's anywhere close to this as a hitter. So with that in mind, no, I would look at Bogaerts as the SS of the future until he proves he can't handle the position, with Iglesias likely serving as a useful utilityman." IMO the tone and roster construction of a team is set by its best player(s) - which goes for all team sports, not just baseball. Average players, like Iglesias and Middlebrooks do not block or move all-star players to other positions. When that is done - like in the case of the Los Angeles Angles - it creates a mismatched roster; and in for LAA it seems their roster mismanagement will keep them out of playoff contention for 2 straight years (at the very least). Good to great teams are built from the best players outward, not the other way round. Instead of stubbornly keeping an average at best player like Iglesias in place, trading him for other team needs is the most prudent allocation of a teams roster. (The same goes for WMB if Iglesias remains at short).
|
|
|
Post by tjb21 on Jun 14, 2013 14:03:40 GMT -5
It's getting very ridiculous that Drew keeps starting and Iglesias sits on the bench. Even with his SSS, why not ride it as long as it lasts? I don't know how anyone can forecast what Iglesias will hit in the future. He has changed so much in the past couple of years, especially in the last year, that I think predictions are impossible to base on facts. The facts keep changing. He's certainly not going to hit anywhere close to where he is hitting now, but I don't think he is showing any reason to believe that he can't be a fairly decent hitter. That's why I would put him in the lineup now, and trade Drew to Denver. They just lost their shortstop for a while. Drew is the perfect mid-season trade for a team that needs a stopgap. With Bogaerts developing, the Sox need to know if Iglesias really can hit enough to be a regular. There's only one way to find out. I don't think they will trade Drew unless they get a really good prospect in return, which I think is doubtful. My guess: They'll keep him all year, offer him the QO, and collect the pick.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 14, 2013 14:09:55 GMT -5
It's getting very ridiculous that Drew keeps starting and Iglesias sits on the bench. Even with his SSS, why not ride it as long as it lasts? I don't know how anyone can forecast what Iglesias will hit in the future. He has changed so much in the past couple of years, especially in the last year, that I think predictions are impossible to base on facts. The facts keep changing. He's certainly not going to hit anywhere close to where he is hitting now, but I don't think he is showing any reason to believe that he can't be a fairly decent hitter. 916 PAs of terrible AAA production seems like a pretty good reason. And I'm not sure what major changes you think he made in the last year. But if you think 87 MLB PAs is enough to totally change our scouting report on him, I won't continue to belabor the point.
|
|
|
Post by Legion of Bloom on Jun 14, 2013 14:17:34 GMT -5
People seem to forget that Iglesias is only 23 years old and that was aggressively pushed through our system. He would be a 2 WAR player on defense alone (See: Ryan, Brendan), and even then I still think he ends up hitting a decent line at the major league level. Considering his age, that he's definitely filling out (looks much stronger this year), injuries which have derailed his development, I still think we have not seen what Iglesias can become and owe it to ourselves to give him a chance.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Jun 14, 2013 14:21:46 GMT -5
People seem to forget that Iglesias is only 23 years old and that was aggressively pushed through our system. He would be a 2 WAR player on defense alone (See: Ryan, Brendan), and even then I still think he ends up hitting a decent line at the major league level. Considering his age, that he's definitely filling out (looks much stronger this year), injuries which have derailed his development, I still think we have not seen what Iglesias can become and owe it to ourselves to give him a chance. I don't think he's been aggressively pushed at all. At the AAA level, he got 387 PA's in 2011, 396 in 2012, and 133 this season. All of that came out to a .244/.296/.292/.588 line. That's 916 AAA PA's total, so you can't blame us for being heavily inclined to consider that over his 87 PA for the Red Sox this year when evaluating him.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jun 14, 2013 14:54:12 GMT -5
I'm not questioning the scouting reports on Iglesias from previous years, but I think it is entirely possible for a player to change, and get better, even worse, sometimes. Iglesias can't possibly look like the player of 2011 and 2012. His body is more filled out. He obviously is physically stronger. He is more self-confident. He has a much better idea of what he is doing at the plate. He has become far more selective. His pitch recognition has improved.
Look at him today, not what he was. He definitely is better. Consequently, the past scouting reports have to be discounted somewhat, not because they were wrong, but because they simply don't apply as much to the player today.
That being said, I am not arguing that he is going to be a superstar hitter. What I am saying is that we simply don't know now what he will be. Almost certainly he is not going to be a Mendoza-line hitter. If he can hit .275 or so, he is going to be an All-Star. Let's give him the chance. Drew is not worth playing. I see that Farrell benched him tonight. I hope that lasts for a while.
As to collecting a pick on Drew, I think that unless he picks up his game dramatically, there is no chance of that happening. If the Sox were to make a qualified offer to Drew, he wouldn't get any offers. He'd be crazy not to accept it. The Red Sox would be crazy to offer it. Again, this assumes he doesn't improve significantly, and he is showing no sign of doing that.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 4,000
|
Post by jimoh on Jun 14, 2013 14:55:56 GMT -5
People seem to forget that Iglesias is only 23 years old and that was aggressively pushed through our system. He would be a 2 WAR player on defense alone (See: Ryan, Brendan), and even then I still think he ends up hitting a decent line at the major league level. Considering his age, that he's definitely filling out (looks much stronger this year), injuries which have derailed his development, I still think we have not seen what Iglesias can become and owe it to ourselves to give him a chance. I don't think he's been aggressively pushed at all. At the AAA level, he got 387 PA's in 2011, 396 in 2012, and 133 this season. All of that came out to a .244/.296/.292/.588 line. That's 916 AAA PA's total, so you can't blame us for being heavily inclined to consider that over his 87 PA for the Red Sox this year when evaluating him. Not aggressively pushed? I think when people say he was aggressively pushed they mean his first year in AAA he was 21, younger than Garin Cecchini is now (Cecchini is 22 in A-ball). That means that using aggregate AAA stats can be misleading. How would Jackie Bradley have done if they'd sent him straight to AAA right after the draft at age 21?
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Jun 14, 2013 14:58:55 GMT -5
I don't see us trading Almanzar because Ortiz and Napoli are both probably not long term solutions, and I feel like he is the only guy in the system I could see having any chance of hitting enough to play either position for the red sox. At least in my opinion. [\quote] I've been mulling the Ortiz situation over in my head for a bit now. Can we really apply the same aging curve to him as we do other players? He's the first true DH. He almost never plays defense so as long as his bat speed doesn't slow he should be able to hit productively. Can we assume that a 40 year old Ortiz is equivalent to a 40 year old Paul Konerko? Or will Ortiz still be able to be productive because he hasn't had the normal wear and tear that even a 1B will have over a career?
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jun 14, 2013 14:59:26 GMT -5
Not aggressively pushed? I think when people say he was aggressively pushed they mean his first year in AAA he was 21, younger than Garin Cecchini is now (Cecchini is 22 in A-ball). That means that using aggregate AAA stats can be misleading. How would Jackie Bradley have done if they'd sent him straight to AAA right after the draft at age 21? Except that Iglesias hasn't been good at AAA at any point.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 14, 2013 15:34:41 GMT -5
I'm not questioning the scouting reports on Iglesias from previous years, but I think it is entirely possible for a player to change, and get better, even worse, sometimes. Iglesias can't possibly look like the player of 2011 and 2012. His body is more filled out. He obviously is physically stronger. He is more self-confident. He has a much better idea of what he is doing at the plate. He has become far more selective. His pitch recognition has improved. Look at him today, not what he was. He definitely is better. Consequently, the past scouting reports have to be discounted somewhat, not because they were wrong, but because they simply don't apply as much to the player today. In 133 AAA PAs this year, Iglesias hit .202/.262/.319 (remember, only 87 ML PAs). Yes, he had terrible BABIP luck in the minors (.204), and maybe the power improvement is legit (.118 ISO in the majors, .118 in the minors, .057 minors career). But even giving him the benefit of the doubt, he should be hitting closer to .260/.300/.380, which is good but not that much better than Brendan Ryan. And while that's an above-average player and certainly very useful, it's not much better than Drew (even considering the better defense) and it's probably not worth moving Xander to 3B for.
|
|
|