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 fenwaythehardway on Aug 25, 2019 11:37:43 GMT -5
I'd sit on Santa's knee. But with his lack of command (historically) that I don't see dramatically improving, the effort he puts into his pitches, and an expected velocity drop as starter, I think that he'd last 4-5. For the foreseeable future, IMO, he and the Sox, have found his niche. We have long pined for a power BP lefty. We now have one. he is fun to watch in that role. He is just 22 though, I think they should still try next year, they can always plug him back in to this role. We need to have more patience to try and develop starters, it is the organization's achilles heel. Except that the Red Sox have taken a patient approach with a lot of marginal starting pitching prospects over the years, and when has it ever worked out for them? It usually just ends with guys getting hurt and falling off before they have a chance to contribute, or they just end up in the bullpen anyway. And specific to Darwinzon, he's got such a strong reliever profile, you'd really be putting the team's needs in front of the player's best developmental path, which isn't likely to benefit anyone. It isn't unusual at all for pitchers to take time to develop. Of course it is more common that they don't turn a corner with command and control but it happens. Darwinzon would have to take not one but several steps forward on his command/control, AND develop a third pitch, before you're really talking about him as a significant piece in the rotation. It's not a matter of turning the corner, he has to turn like three or four corners. It's just asking for too many things to go right.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 24, 2019 21:34:36 GMT -5
Prediction. Next year, his contract year, he suddenly discovers left field. I dare you to make less sense.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 24, 2019 21:18:03 GMT -5
All the more reason not expend what few resources you have on a fragile pitcher! What would you have done? Like how do you take Eovaldi's money and deepen the team getting your second basemen, starter, and more depth? Step one: sign Charlie Morton instead. Step two: whatever.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 22, 2019 17:04:16 GMT -5
This is Dombrowski's main weakness. Eduardo Nunez was so bad as second baseman in 2018 that they had to trade for Kinsler, and then their opening day second baseman in 2019 was... Eduardo Nunez. There were so many little ways this roster could have been optimized and deepened, and instead the gave Eovaldi a way over-market contract and called it a day. The reports were Pedroia was coming back so they wanted a cheap solution to bridge the gap. I question the logic in relying on Pedroia returning and staying healthy. We do have to keep in mind he was told to stay under the luxury and needed some space to make a move if needed.All the more reason not expend what few resources you have on a fragile pitcher!
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 22, 2019 13:26:31 GMT -5
That they have stopped trading (significant) prospects and started holding onto them since the Sale trade, tells me that DDO is cognizant of not doing what he did in Detroit. I agree, but meant more roster construction overall. As in not having adequate starting depth, 4th OF depth, that type of stuff. I should have used the word 'roster' instead of 'organization' in the other post. This is Dombrowski's main weakness. Eduardo Nunez was so bad as second baseman in 2018 that they had to trade for Kinsler, and then their opening day second baseman in 2019 was... Eduardo Nunez. There were so many little ways this roster could have been optimized and deepened, and instead the gave Eovaldi a way over-market contract and called it a day.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 22, 2019 11:50:03 GMT -5
Yup. I really feel compelled to comment on this because I legit had like 3-4 pretty long data-driven posts on this in detail early in the year (April-May), specifically making the CB his main pitch, and intentionally using the 4FB up and out of the zone. All because of the prediction he would end up his old self. BBSavant showed an essentially unchanged pitcher with a completely different plan. He was blowing guys away at 91-92 in April before his velo trended up. His success has very little to do with velocity and everything to do with his new attack plan. Not disagreeing with you at all, but if his curve is so obviously nasty and this has nothing to do with an uptick in velocity, why did it take this staff so long to figure out, "just throw more curve balls"? (My real underlying agenda is to replace the pitching coaches) The question is why did it take baseball so long to figure this out. Throwing a breaking ball as your primary pitch is essentially a post Rich Hill phenomenon. A few soft-tossing lefties did it, but it just wasn't considered as a viable strategy for "normal" pitchers. For some perspective, Workman has thrown his curveball 47.0% of the time this year. How many curveballs is that? The sixth most of anyone in a season of 50 innings or more since we've had pitch type data.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 22, 2019 11:10:35 GMT -5
The Red Sox play in a pitching-hostile environment (not just the park, but the division), and there's been plenty of research showing that teams in more pitching-friendly environments are more successful when it comes to developing pitching. Which is to say, I think a "develop hitters, buy pitchers" strategy is probably a smart one of this team. That, and being more aggressive about moving guys to the bullpen. I totally agree with this. Hitters are easier to project, too. Taking an 18-22 year old pitcher thinking he’ll help in three years is a complete crapshoot. He has to a) develp and b) stay healthy. Both big “if”s. But if you have redundancy at offensive positions, you can let other teams take the pitcher-development risk for you. The line of [Moncada], Devers, Chavis, and Dalbec at 3B is a great example. Moncada yields Sale, Devers is our guy, and the other two could be flexibility going forward. The interesting thing too is that if you look at the "pitching factory" organizations in recent history, it's not necessarily that they shy away from 20 year old top-100 guys or anything, but they're not just doing it with a parade of those guys. Like Atlanta came into the season with a whole rotation's worth of guys who were theoretically knocking on the door, and they still had to go out and sign Keuchel. It's just too hard to get everyone to develop on the same timeline, and be healthy at the same time. It seems like If you want to really build around pitching, you have to be looking in every possible player pool all the time. Tampa Bay and Cleveland are good examples, they do develop their own prospects well, but they pick up other people's broken prospects and develop them, and they do well by buying low on journeyman types like Eovaldi and Bauer and then selling them for a profit.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 22, 2019 8:39:18 GMT -5
Using your excess minor league talent to acquire MLB pitching is just as legitimate as developing it yourself. Using the extra cash you have on hand to buy pitching because you've developed an entire lineup on your own is legitimate. The Red Sox didn't develop pitching for the 2018 team either. The difference between that team and this is that last year the pitching they went outside of the organization to get was very good, and this year the pitching they went out of the organization to get was very poor. The Red Sox play in a pitching-hostile environment (not just the park, but the division), and there's been plenty of research showing that teams in more pitching-friendly environments are more successful when it comes to developing pitching. Which is to say, I think a "develop hitters, buy pitchers" strategy is probably a smart one of this team. That, and being more aggressive about moving guys to the bullpen.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 21, 2019 9:45:37 GMT -5
I can be at times, other times like when you're being literally attacked, then not so much. That's a little bit like saying you've got your drinking problem under control, except for when there's alcohol around. Acting well counts the most in situations when you are tempted to act poorly.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 21, 2019 9:09:43 GMT -5
Oh I knew you'd change the Devers argument, Mr. Argumentative. Cannot possibly ever admit you've ever been wrong about a damn thing. The weakest possible characteristic about a person. I'm a great person Humble, too.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 20, 2019 19:25:31 GMT -5
...Says the guy with 50 argumentative and completely made up posts since noon today Says you dude. *kisses fingers*
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 20, 2019 19:23:55 GMT -5
Anyway, there is a good chance that trading Dalbec is a better use of his value than putting him at first base. The Red Sox pitching seems like a harder-to-fill need than first base and may need to package prospects to do that, and Bobby Dalbec might be in the wheelhouse for such a move. But having him play first base isn't some numbskull waste of on opportunity to sell high on a player who stinks, and if they can't get good value for him then they should just keep him and play him. I'm fairly skeptical of him being, like, this middle-of-the-order stud, but I think he could end up Khris Davis on the cheap. Which is pretty useful, especially when there isn't another option around. Dalbec is a hard guy to evaluate which makes it hard to make any sort of definitive statement on whether or not to trade him, but my feeling is that he's not the kind of prospect a lot of organizations are going to want to trade into, particularly because of his age and his contact issues. I think the Red Sox could probably get a team to pay for the projections, but probably not get one to pay for the upside. Given that he fills a position of need, they'll probably keep that upside for themselves.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 20, 2019 18:58:36 GMT -5
I like Johnson, and I love how he has persevered— but he is not good. Yeah, I'm really happy that the guy got to be a significant part of the 2018 team, but at 28 and with pretty minimal stuff, that season could easily be the high water mark for him.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 20, 2019 18:50:20 GMT -5
Everyone's just going to forget that he can play third? Consider that everyone in baseball is looking at the same stuff you're looking at. Getting less reps at a position when you're being used primarily at another position, hurts or helps value? Ask Swihart this question. Playing catcher is a completely different thing and you know it.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 20, 2019 15:42:52 GMT -5
It's more along the lines of making fun of the "every baseball GM is way dumber than you are" assumption. Not dumb, Dalbec's value is at third base. He'd be worth something to someone if he keeps playing third base in the minor leagues. He has zero value playing first base for the Sox. He's worth more somewhere else. Everyone's just going to forget that he can play third? Consider that everyone in baseball is looking at the same stuff you're looking at.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 20, 2019 15:28:41 GMT -5
Doctors make definitive decisions without knowing what the definitive problem is all the time. Yet, I can't make those statements based on the probability of what is going on here. Funny. I can think of no other explanation for this dichotomy other than how jealous we all are of your perfect opinions.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 20, 2019 14:28:30 GMT -5
Question: Houck is throwing well out of the bullpen, so he looks like he could help there either this year or next. Will he get another shot at starting, or does his shift to the pen look increasingly permanent? If Houck is making starts for next year's team, it will mean that either A) he totally re-made himself over the winter or B) something has gone horribly wrong. I could see the team using him a little bit more like they've used Velazquez or Johnson this year, but other than that I think he's a reliever at this point.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 20, 2019 9:07:45 GMT -5
ZIPS Projects Dalbec to strike out 40 percent of the time, all the time. Hitting less than .200 most of the time. An OPS of under .700 all the time. They project that the next 3 years with Dalbec. The equals out to a half win player. Add another half for defense maybe and that's a 1 win player at first base the next 3 years. The Sox can and should do a lot better than this. It's one thing if he's adding another win on defense at third base, but he has no chance at first base. Trade him while he's a top 100 prospect.
Add- I'm not a big Michael Chavis fan, but ZIPS projects even him to be a full win better than Dalbec the next 3 years. Ah, the classic "this guys sucks, trade him while he has value" gambit.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 20, 2019 9:05:51 GMT -5
This whole discussion is idiotic. The doctors made a call. Experts. The word for now is no tear. They will look again in 6 weeks. Yet people who are armed with nothing more than WebMD are somehow able to say how things are not what they appear? All we can do is wait and see. I mean, I do tend to believe that they wouldn't just give him a PRP injection for a diagnosis of "actually your elbow is totally fine", so on that basis I'm assuming his elbow is not totally fine. But, he's not getting TJ, so it isn't completely trashed either. I think that's about the limit of what we can say with confidence. Seems to me that the way this is going we won't see Sale back until 2022 & the Red Sox should plan for it every way they construct, build, spend, trade & consider the roster going forward. Some people are more confident.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 19, 2019 17:14:27 GMT -5
Surgery is always the absolute last resort, even for professional athletes. But if rehab doesn't work he'll miss basically 2 seasons instead of 1. Pitchers have a history of getting stronger afterwards. Again, not saying he should get it for the sake of getting it. I'm saying if they're saying surgery is likely or that there's enough damage to seriously consider it to go ahead and do it. Is anyone saying that?
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 18, 2019 8:58:05 GMT -5
The Red Sox were obviously working off a lot more information than this but... man, if you want a chart that makes the Sale extension look like an extremely bad idea, I think we've located it.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 17, 2019 21:53:05 GMT -5
He was throwing in the mid 80s in April. If that wasn't planned then that's concerning. Well, he's getting a second opinion from Dr. Andrews so yeah it I guess it was concerning.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 17, 2019 21:14:08 GMT -5
You can predict that a guy who breaks down at the end of every single season is going to be fr more likely to break down than players who don't have such a history. I love Sale, love watching him pitch, loved the trade for him, was super excited that I got to see him in the World Series game I went to. But that was a flat-out dumb contract. It was obviously a bad investment the second it was inked. It's interesting how tight lipped the organization and Sale were about his shoulder last season, how Chris Sale accepted a contract in his walk year, and how the Red Sox had him soft tossing in April to live hitters (which, I'd be pissed if I was a fan going to the game). It just seems like both sides knew Sale was a health concern moving forward. I doubt they suspected TJ was on the horizon, but just adding it up I did wonder why Sale accepted an extension. FWIW, I still don't believe for one second that any starter, much less Chris f'n Sale, pitches a major league game and doesn't throw their best fastball at least once. www.fangraphs.com/graphs.aspx?playerid=10603&position=P&pitchgraphs=true&statArr=&legend=1&split=base&time=daily&start=2017&end=2019&rtype=mult>1=15&dStatArray=FA&ymin=&ymax=His peak velos never fully came back after he went on the DL last year.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 17, 2019 20:49:15 GMT -5
Because you knew damn well that he'd have a bad year and then need TJS at the end of it and not win the Cy Young and cost twice as much. I've said since the beginning I didn't like the deal so it's not hindsight. He's going to be over 30. He was gassed at the end of 2 years ago and got hurt at the end of last year. They completely babied him this year to try and preserve his arm. That's not a great optic for a 5 year extension when he's getting older. Now we know the skinny guy with a violent delivery needs TJ.LOL, after 1600 innings of a 3.03 ERA, the "Chris Sale is going to get hurt" crew is finally vindicated.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 17, 2019 16:47:00 GMT -5
I don't use "lol" unless I actually laugh out loud, so lol. Yeah, the reactions to the Lackey trade at the time were pretty scathing. But the Orioles didn't target DSL players in the Cashner trade because they wanted more International talent specifically. No idea where you're getting that from. Prado and Romero wasn't a crazy return at all for three months of a guy without much of a track record. If they'd traded him for Int'l money it wouldn't made a lot of sense, so all they needed was to like Prado and/or Romero more than what they'd have gotten on the 2019 market. Sucks for the new regime that Duquette missed the boat on all that opportunity in the first place, but that's no reason *not* to trade for them. When the Orioles announced the trade, they said specifically that they were trying to improve their international talent. I'm not sure why they'd say that if they weren't targeting DSL players. They should be trying to improve their farm system period. And also spending their international pool money that they've been wasting for a decade until very recently. Targeting very young players is probably your best shot at getting anything significant in return for Andrew Cashner.
|
|
|