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.
Recent Posts
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 20, 2015 10:39:12 GMT -5
You don't often see a young OF traded for a young OF straight up. It's like this weird scenario where both teams are saying "we like your guy better." Not saying it couldn't happen, it's just a bit rare.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 19, 2015 16:51:50 GMT -5
I'm so curious to see what Salazar will cost if he gets dealt. Same here. Before we signed Price, Salazar was the guy I really coveted. His stuff is filthy. He's the same age as JBJ. The peripherals scream burgeoning ace. As far as I can tell the cost for Salazar should be a ransom. And is certainly a much more attractive talent than Shelby Miller. Am I wrong? We'll see. Anyway - the Indians should not be selling these guys off frankly. They have a dominating young rotation that can carry them in the postseason. Why not build around that? Trading Salazar for anything less than a serious impact bat is robbing Peter to pay Paul imo. Like how someone else described the CWS. The impact is in place. Chase depth and improvements that can nudge them from 81 wins to 89. Then when you get to the playoffs let that pitching take over. Yeah I'm not familiar enough with their system to know what other pitching depth they have. For a while we saw the Rays trade away pitchers and come away with better teams, though we've also seen them burn themselves out (as any team that builds through the draft with little to no payroll eventually does). I certainly wouldn't be quick to deal Carrasco or Salazar, then again, I don't think they are either. Would assume the package would be pretty nice.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 19, 2015 16:48:47 GMT -5
In Gammon's latest piece, he drops the nugget that Panda is working out twice a day in the Dominican and has a new diet chef. Thank the lord. That is great news but I still wish we had a platoon partner for him in case he proves incapable of hitting LHP again. Looking over the team's performance last year, the quickest fix you could see was to improve the overall 3B performance by platooning Panda with a RHB. Holt and Shaw have even splits but the overall offensive performance at 3B would really tick up if you had a Danny Valencia type lefty masher to platoon with Panda. Would go from one of the worst teams in the league offensively at 3B to one of the best. I think if Shaw makes the roster it'll be because he's shown some diversity in spring between 1B/3B/LF. I think they're gonna give Panda every opportunity to bring it around, and that type of player might mentally make him press if he thinks he's being platooned. (I personally don't hate the idea). Not sure the price of that player is that different between right now and in June, and it has some 40 man implications for a problem we're not sure if we have yet. I honestly feel like DD knows he's not entirely sure what he has yet with this team but is practicing patience. Come June/July, I doubt he will continue to be patient.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 19, 2015 16:37:24 GMT -5
So what does everyone think about Joe Kelly? If you buy into Peter Gammons and his quotes, he's basically said the Sox were very happy with the work Brian Bannister & Co did with Carl Willis around the halfway point last year in analyzing and getting Porcello, Ross, and Kelly back on track (pitch type, sequence, mechanics, etc.)
So, I don't think any of us are super worried about Porcello or Ross, but has anyone looked into Joe Kelly's 8 game stretch and seen anything that represents a vastly different approach or results? Obviously the runs are down, strikeouts are a bit up, and the walks are down, but 8 games is still a pretty small sample.
What's everyone's thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 19, 2015 16:24:37 GMT -5
Mookie finished 210th out of 243 qualifiers.
Looking at his scores from each round he struggled at times with each of the patterns. But he also did not bowl poorly. I am sure he is happy to have been given the opportunity to compete against the best in bowling. He certainly did not embarrass himself, it was a very credible effort...especially for someone not bowling the lines needed to be competitive at the level he was trying to compete at. He'll have to settle for being a star MLB Ofer sadly
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 19, 2015 14:13:32 GMT -5
In Gammon's latest piece, he drops the nugget that Panda is working out twice a day in the Dominican and has a new diet chef. Thank the lord.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 19, 2015 13:16:44 GMT -5
It sounds like Dombrowski and Co loves Joe Kelly. So them upgrading the rotation probably requires someone who is clearly better. Moore, with his poor year post TJ, is another question mark. I don't see them targeting a question mark to replace a question mark. I think if we see an upgrade in the rotation it'll be a clear upgrade.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 18, 2015 20:46:08 GMT -5
His weight is a massive negative in itself. He got his big paycheck, got fatter than ever and looked awful on the field. He had conditioning issues all season. They basically sent him home at the end.
The last thing this team needs is another big contract to a big body. The dropoff/injury potential is too great. Give me another player whose effort I can't so easily question.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 18, 2015 18:26:22 GMT -5
Yeah, it'd be close. If I'm making a big deal about valuing 2016 wins over future ones by that margin I'd certainly want Carrasco. May I ask why? They weren't wildly different numbers wise in 2015
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 18, 2015 17:06:49 GMT -5
That'd be nearly 520lbs at the corners. Slow rollers down the line would roll downhill fair
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 18, 2015 16:57:59 GMT -5
Jon Morosi @jonmorosi 4m4 minutes ago Sources: #Dodgers engaged in ongoing trade talks with #Indians (Carrasco or Salazar) and #Rays (Odorizzi) aimed at acquiring starter. @fs1 I'm so curious to see what Salazar will cost if he gets dealt.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 18, 2015 15:23:32 GMT -5
I personally hope one of Castillo or Sandoval isn't on this team by opening day. Too many iffy people in the lineup still. Definitely wishful thinking, but after seeing Dombrowski get someone to take Fielder I won't completely rule a salary dump out. Interesting note that's probably been said here 500 times, but I believe the Tigers finished 2nd or 3rd in the bidding on Rusney Castillo. So Dombrowski liked him at one time. Not sure if that love has faded or not.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 18, 2015 15:20:08 GMT -5
Heyman says Henderson Alvarez is nearing a deal with the A's.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 18, 2015 14:53:20 GMT -5
I was ecstatic with the improvements Xander made last season. I certainly hope he improves, but I would settle for the same....if his power starts to arrive. His accuracy of his throwing to first was 100% better. Stephen Drew was never a big favorite, but one of the things I really liked about him.....was he always made accurate throws to 2nd and 1st. I really appreciate that from an infielder. You think it is something to take for granted at times, and then Steve Sax nails an old lady in the 1st row behind first. I love the great defensive play as much as anyone, but I'd rather have dependability from my fielders. Will be interesting to see if Xander struggles at all if Hanley has trouble picking/corralling throws an average 1b makes
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 18, 2015 14:42:15 GMT -5
And I think there's even more evidence of the apparent separation between Kimbrel and other options simply because of the big package they gave up for him. Do we honestly think this scouting/player development department doesn't know what they have? Guys an entire staff scouts/drafts/signs/develops? Like we think they can't do math on expected value that people on here do in 15 minutes? Come on now. It's fun to discuss and comment on this stuff, but to sit here and post with hubris like we know things they don't, is well... not smart. In no way am I saying they're infallible, but I think it's pretty clear with their current roster construction and where the market was, they were largely shopping at the Kimbrel store, and that's it. Do I like Kimbrel? Hell yes. Do I like the price they paid? Hell no. But it's baseball, and Sox were largely put in this situation by farting around with half measures the last two years. So how can we judge the quality of the trade? Ah, by simply observing *that the trade was made* After all, Lackey and Littrell for Kelly and Craig; what could possibly go wrong? You can view the trade any way you want. I'm not saying it will definitely be a good trade or that they're infallible, at all. If you think they're better off acquiring Montas and Rondon or something like that, that's an entirely different conversation. There is a universe in which those signings/trades could work out better.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 18, 2015 14:39:01 GMT -5
Obviously the deals they strike make sense to them. It does not make sense to me. If you're going to disagree with me, you need to defend the underlying logic-- that "elite" players are disproportionately more valuable. When I tried to push you on that point, your response has been "well it made sense to them, and they're smarter than you." Do you see why that's not responsive? I definitely see elite players as extremely valuable. We saw last year a pitching staff that had no one to break slumps and to lead by example. I love the addition of Price for that reason. Edit: And I don't think he'll live up to his contract performance wise unless he opts out. But for him, I'll take this guy nurturing our young crop of lefties and Joe Kelly who the Sox desperately need some sort of competence from. /end edit/ I think your teammates get better when you have guys who just go do work and take the pressure off everyone else. I don't think there's a metric for this. I also don't view anything in a vacuum. I see value in overspending early to get a jump on the market and keep other options open. I see value in having a much improved pen while trying to lure Price to Boston, a guy who has had an iffy history with the town and also made them show him their roster for the next 5 years. Elite elite closer in his prime years is something I think he probably felt good about. And lastly, I also don't view it as that horrific because I don't value Margot and Guerra as high as anyone else. I saw Margot move up to AA and saw his splits worsen and be largely incapable of hitting RHP. Baseball America didn't seem to pick up on this, but I'm not going to suddenly assume other teams didn't. Guerra's glove will carry him to the majors. His stock was super high, but I also don't trust that power with that swing in that park. Allen has no plus pitches. Asuaje is an afterthought. And lastly, hundreds of trades are talked about, and few are made. Simply because it's so difficult to make them and teams values and needs are so diversely spread. Just because there might be 6 other names out there you like, doesn't make any of them do-able. 3 will probably not move simply because the teams don't want to, one or two you won't value as highly, and the others maybe the other team won't value your prospects highly enough, or they won't line up with the needs of their system. I'll never sit here and be naive enough just to throw out a name and say "They could have gotten that guy for cheaper" when I (and everyone on here) has ZERO knowledge of the trading market.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 18, 2015 14:09:18 GMT -5
By far the more interesting stuff is to try and evaluate whether their presumed reasons for doing so make sense. I've looked at it and concluded that it doesn't, and you're welcome to disagree, but the reason you disagree should go beyond "well the Red Sox did it, so it probably made sense." Yeah, no where did I ever say because the Red Sox did it, it makes sense. I personally think they have a very targeted plan, and a much more comprehensive view of their prospects than we do, and the deals they strike make sense TO THEM. I do not think they simply punted a big package of prospects for Kimbrel if they believed they had other means to get what they were looking for through other avenues. I agree the more interesting discussion is if their "plan of attack" (that presumably explains their reasoning for doing these deals) is the right one for this offseason. They're taking a decidedly un-reserved approach to it with the high-cost elite guys they've targeted in Kimbrel and Price.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 18, 2015 13:52:10 GMT -5
They were linked to Aroldis early, then Kimbrel. And they went out on and got Price and had a Greinke deal in place. On top of that they go out and add Carson Smith, who is similarly young and under control, and though he doesn't have the track record, had elite numbers. So, no I have no definitive proof, but when Dave Dombrowski comes out and says he wants POWER ARMS and acquires all elite talent, I read between the lines and assume they're not gonna add some 32 year old junkballer on a long term contract. Well, for whatever it's worth, I don't see how any of that means they had determined that they must acquire one of the top 2 or 3 closers in the game. Even if you're saying they were limiting the search to POWER ARMS in all caps, as their reported interest in Kelvin Herrera would also be a bit of evidence for, arms that could have cost less include Herrera, Ken Giles, Frank Montas, Arodys Vizcaino, Bruce Rondon, and probably others (not sure if Arquimedes Caminero would be available, but he'd fit too). Am I saying those guys are as good as Kimbrel? Certainly not. But my point is that there's no reason to believe that because they started at the top of the list and found a deal they liked doesn't mean that they were limiting themselves only to the top of the list. I don't buy the Herrera price was less, especially when the Royals probably wanted ML assets. DD made it clear they didn't want to do that. (Royals wouldn't take JBJ) And I like the package Giles returned better simply because I love love love Velasquez. And Frank Montas? Really? We're talking about guys on Kimbrel's level. Do I like Montas? Yes, a lot. Do I think they wanted a guy with little MLB track record considering the plethora of under control back end relief options they have cluttering the 40man? No. And I get your point, and I surmise that it is speculation just like my opinion is speculation. But at least my speculation is backed up by the fact that from what we've heard they were only linked to elite guys, and ended up going out and getting only elite guys. I don't understand why anyone wouldn't at least read a little bit into that haha. Like it's not smelling smoke and thinking there might be fire, it's smelling smoke and SEEING the fire.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 18, 2015 13:32:16 GMT -5
And I think there's even more evidence of the apparent separation between Kimbrel and other options simply because of the big package they gave up for him.
Do we honestly think this scouting/player development department doesn't know what they have? Guys an entire staff scouts/drafts/signs/develops? Like we think they can't do math on expected value that people on here do in 15 minutes? Come on now.
It's fun to discuss and comment on this stuff, but to sit here and post with hubris like we know things they don't, is well... not smart. In no way am I saying they're infallible, but I think it's pretty clear with their current roster construction and where the market was, they were largely shopping at the Kimbrel store, and that's it. Do I like Kimbrel? Hell yes. Do I like the price they paid? Hell no. But it's baseball, and Sox were largely put in this situation by farting around with half measures the last two years.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 18, 2015 13:20:28 GMT -5
Just because the Red Sox acquired Kimbrel, you can't assume they could only have moved forward by acquiring Craig Kimbrel or someone better. You can't assume, for example, that just because they DID acquire a relief pitcher who bumped Koji to the 8th that they were definitely going to acquire such a pitcher. It just as easily could have been the case that in looking to upgrade the bullpen, Dombrowski started from the top and worked his way down - and why not do that? But if the prices for relief pitchers who'd have taken the 9th from Uehara were all deemed too high, they could have kept moving down and looked into the likes of, say, Melancon or Giles, and so forth. If you start with "the Red Sox needed to acquire a relief pitcher at least as good as Kimbrel," then yeah, you're obviously going to be able to justify giving up pretty much anything for Kimbrel given the options available at that level, and there's no point in discussing it any further. What you're not getting (or actively refusing to acknowledge for some reason) is that there are those of us who believe the Red Sox were not locked into acquiring a pitcher as good as Kimbrel, whether through their own strategy or through actual necessity. I've yet to see any evidence that Dombrowski thought the Red Sox HAD to acquire a Kimbrel-level relief pitcher. Do you have any, pokeyreesespieces? Maybe I missed something, so if I did, I'm all ears. And again, the fact that they did acquire him does not mean that they felt they HAD to acquire someone of that level. They were linked to Aroldis early, then Kimbrel. And they went out on and got Price and had a Greinke deal in place. On top of that they go out and add Carson Smith, who is similarly young and under control, and though he doesn't have the track record, had elite numbers. So, no I have no definitive proof, but when Dave Dombrowski comes out and says he wants POWER ARMS and acquires all elite talent, I read between the lines and assume they're not gonna add some 32 year old junkballer on a long term contract.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 18, 2015 12:08:10 GMT -5
Sometimes it's good to re-read these threads for perspective.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 18, 2015 12:01:54 GMT -5
Except O'Day's WAR numbers over the last 3-4 years are in no way comparable to Kimbrel's. Darren O'Day, bWAR, last three years: 2.0, 2.3, 2.8 (average of 2.4, with an upwards trajectory) Craig Kimbrel, bWAR, last three years: 3.3, 2.5, 1.3 (average of 2.4, with a downwards trajectory) ADD: to be clear, I'm not suggesting that O'Day is as good or better than Kimbrel-- he's not (O'Day relies more on weak contact, which is a less sustainable means of production than striking everyone out, and he's much older). I'm saying the difference between them wasn't worth giving up Margot/Guerra+. I just have yet to see a comparison of guy they could have gotten that I actually view on the same plane as Kimbrel, that also affords the Sox the age and flexibility he does. Viewing everything in a vacuum is just mind-numbing to me. At age 32 with that skillset I don't think O'Day was ever even that seriously considered for what it would have taken to get him to come to the red sox, say 4/36? And with Koji and Taz presumably gone after next season, the Sox are in much better position for next year not having to get into the bidding for Jansen or trading even more for another guy. These are all things that are part of the equation, and yet we pretend like they're not. I just think it's wildly stupid to not consider roster building needs and the market when talking about these deals. The evaluations always come off wildly uninformed. If they're looking for a particular skillset, age, performance, and character in a player, you simply can't just plug in 1 of the 4 and pretend like it's comparable. Especially with closing, a job that is so incredibly volatile and mindset-based, and in an environment like Boston. "They could have had x player instead of y player" just always seems to me like we're recommending they get a fish sandwich when they want a cheeseburger. I would have fully agreed that they had better options if say, Aroldis Chapman (sans bad character bullcrap) or Kenley Jansen had been avail on free agency, but they weren't.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 18, 2015 11:26:34 GMT -5
Umm... who? Considering they also wanted to add Carson Smith, and wanted a big enough name to move 40 year old Koji to the 8th? He meant you can could have someone like O'Day of a similar contract and production without giving up the prospects/assets we dealt. Except O'Day's WAR numbers over the last 3-4 years are in no way comparable to Kimbrel's.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 18, 2015 11:03:55 GMT -5
What makes this an overpay is that there were proportionally cheaper alternatives available. Umm... who? Considering they also wanted to add Carson Smith, and wanted a big enough name to move 40 year old Koji to the 8th?
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 15, 2015 16:21:35 GMT -5
Well, I think there's two ways people are looking at this. 1) The market price for relief pitching in the 2015-16 offseason. I think it's beginning to look more like the Red Sox overpaid by the cost of a Logan Allen or so (or, in what I'd liked to have seen, the lack of some kind of second piece throw-in coming back to Boston...) rather than by the cost of, say, upgrading from a lesser prospect to one of Margot and Guerra, based on what relief pitching is going for right now. 2) But, is the market price for relief pitching going to lead to a good return on value? I think you could say, if you wanted, that the Red Sox paid market value for Kimbrel while still saying that they overpaid for the value they'll get in return by more than they should have. "more than they should have" What does that mean? If they wanted to shore up the pen by a certain amount, was there an avenue for them to do so that was substantially cheaper, while keeping in mind the value they place in veteran presence and track record?
|
|
|