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 thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 13, 2024 13:21:40 GMT -5
I'll just say that it's super weird seeing so many people still whistling past the graveyard today. The Front Office laid out their own agenda how many ever months ago it was - and then failed every part of it. I think it's a pretty healthy attitude to seek out the enjoyable within situations you don't control. “It’s super weird to see people act like rational adults when discussing a hobby.”
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 12, 2024 14:05:52 GMT -5
Happy College Baseball Opening Week to all who celebrate! D1 Baseball released their top 200 college prospects for anyone with a sub, kind of makes a good viewing guide: d1baseball.com/prospects/2024-mlb-draft-top-200-d1-college-prospects/I'll be at McNeese vs. Texas A&M on Friday, and then University of San Diego vs. Texas on Saturday. A&M obviously has Braden Montgomery, who I've already mentioned I will be banging the drum for for the Sox, but they also have a pretty intriguing crop of arms that should get plenty of Day Two looks if they can find some control. Texas has a pretty stacked outfield group prospect-wise and I should get to see either LeBarron Johnson (saw him last year, was impressed) or Tanner Witt, which will be a good watch as well. I'm hoping it's Witt, as I'm just interested to see what the velo looks like after his recovery. One guy that's going to be out of my range in terms of seeing live but I will stamp as a potential riser is Will Taylor at Clemson. Made the decision to transition to a full-time baseball player after slashing .362/.489/.523 despite doubling between Football and Baseball, I think he has elite physical tools with some still-untapped upside to affect the game both as a threat to hit for power and in the field, where I think he can be a long-term center fielder but may be blocked by Cam Cannarella. Would not surprise me at all to see him elevate his status to a borderline first round guy by the time the draft rolls around.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 12, 2024 11:41:08 GMT -5
No, for one very simple reason. The key words in there is that you're wasting A YEAR of Devers' prime. Even if this is a complete bridge year, he will enter next season at 28, roughly the midpoint of what people peg as an athlete's "prime", and should be more than capable of providing value for a few years following that (at the very least on offense).
I think the better question is how long he lasts at third. My crazy/stupid idea that I had for a little bit this offseason was pursuing Matt Chapman and just biting the bullet with Casas as a long-term DH, which I talked myself out of.
But again, no I would not be looking to trade Devers unless someone with a time machine came back from 2027 with assurances that all of Mayer, Anthony, and Teel were stars or something.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 12, 2024 9:15:43 GMT -5
Keith Law's Red Sox top 20: 1. Marcelo Mayer 2. Roman Anthony 3. Ceddanne Rafaela 4. Kyle Teel 5. Miguel Bleis 6. Wilyer Abreu 7. Mikey Romero 8. Yoeilin Cespedes 9. Nick Yorke 10. Nazzan Zanetello 11. Wikelman Gonzalez 12. Luis Perales 13. Yordanny Monegro 14. Johanfran Garcia 15. Blaze Jordan 16. Richard Fitts 17. Eddinson Paulino 18. Branon Walter 19. Chase Meidroth 20. Bryan Mata theathletic.com/5261710/2024/02/12/red-sox-2024-top-prospects-keith-law/My main two takeaways: 1. Even as someone with reservations on Yorke, Romero above him is pretty wild. 2. The second straight guy that’s had the two top pitchers a smidge lower, but Monegro being lumped into that general tier is interesting.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 9, 2024 10:05:15 GMT -5
You guys are all using fWAR when the point was that Verdugo was being called an offensive subtraction. Fangraphs Off was -3.5 and Def was +3.5 Verdugo is a defensive subtraction, yes, but nothing material as an offensive subtraction especially considering his replacements in O’Neill and Abreu. So if the original post would’ve said “Position Player” instead of “Offense”, which are clearly interchangeable in this context, your thoughts on the statement itself would change? That feels like a semantic misinterpretation on your part, but I won’t belabor the point arguing semantics.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 9, 2024 9:42:41 GMT -5
I've not made a prediction yet, and still won't until we see what the team is looking like as it goes into spring training. But - looking at the current projected active roster: Pitching Additions - Giolito, Slaten, Mata, Campbell Pitching subtractions - Sale Offense Additions - Grissom, a (hopefully) healthy Story, O'Neill Significant Subtractions - Verdugo To me it is all going to be about playing better, smarter baseball (defense, base running), better health, and some significant upgrades to players we've seen for awhile. There additions are quite unproven and could go either way. Verdugo had a 98 wRC+ and the 4th lowest WPA on the team. I wouldn’t call that a significant subtraction And yet he was still the 4th most valuable player on the team per bWAR (5th per fWAR). Not sure how anyone wouldn't call that a significant subtraction for playing time alone.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 9, 2024 8:03:53 GMT -5
This reaffirms Law’s quote that the Sox don’t have any pitching in the system (reaffirms in that Law isn’t on an island with the opinion, anyway), given the difference in rankings for Gonzalez and Perales. On the hitter side, the Jordan and Brannon rankings are the obvious shockers, Brannon especially.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 8, 2024 10:59:37 GMT -5
It's actually been posted in two threads already..
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 7, 2024 16:11:57 GMT -5
Does he still count against last draft's bonus pool? When does that effectively roll over to where these guys are just minor league free agents?
Could you theoretically tell a guy to hold off on signing a UDFA deal and giving them a more lucrative free agent deal after this endpoint?
Either way, that's a fun gamble. Certainly low odds it works out but maybe he's a late bloomer. Would be a hell of a bullet point for the "pitching factory" resume lol
|
|
|
Teel Sox
Feb 7, 2024 9:00:47 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 7, 2024 9:00:47 GMT -5
A little surprised Keith Law only has him as his 54th best prospect. Thought he would be a little higher. It's pretty well in line with other pubs - do you think the consensus is too low, or do you just think that Teel is someone that Law would be high on in general? I’m assuming the latter as Law was a big Teel guy going into the draft, IIRC.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 7, 2024 8:09:28 GMT -5
Doesn’t the fact that the Sox have had all this data on him and have kept him in AAA kind of go against your own point? No.
They kept him in AAA because he wasn't better than Justin Turner, who filled his potential role by moving from DH. And there were no injuries at either 3B or 1B until late in the season. As soon as one of those finally went on the IL, they called him up immediately. (And he outhit Devers and everyone else his first week!)
(They also called him up on 4/10 when Duvall got hurt, swapping him out for Duran after a week; on 5/7 when Arroyo got hurt, for the 6 days before they got Pablo Reyes; and from 6/23 to 6/27 when Verdugo was on the bereavement list. Three brief recalls to fill positions he didn't even play.)
Ah yes, nothing says confidence in a player in three brief call up stints where they glue him to the bench and one week of production late in the season. Consider me extremely unconvinced. I’ll add that I’m pretty shocked a self-proclaimed numbers guy would attempt to extract anything meaningful from a one week sample, especially given the context of a hitter like Dalbec.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 6, 2024 14:45:31 GMT -5
I like Duran, but continue to be in on the idea of trading him if the team is paying for 2023 Duran. Conflicted about this reporting because I think in theory both of these are positive moves for the long-term development of the roster, but it would also make it much more disappointing if they didn't backfill the roster with more talent, given the money they'd be saving on the Jansen trade in particular.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 6, 2024 14:39:39 GMT -5
Does anyone know if the Pipeline archives their Top 100 lists? I know high schoolers are more likely to rise late in the cycle as they get more exposure, but it does feel like a remarkably heavy college class, even for this early on. I'm not really complaining about that as I had my whole tangent on why I'd generally draft for floor early in the MLB Draft, but it's just interesting to see.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 6, 2024 14:32:48 GMT -5
He's going to need to prove he can hit and stay healthy this year. If he does both things, I doubt he will be available at 12. If he doesn't hit or stay healthy then I'm not sure I'd be pumped about him at 12. But we'll see - it's a long way to go. I agree. I think I like Seaver King's profile a little more at this stage, though he has production concerns of his own.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 6, 2024 13:15:37 GMT -5
In theory, yeah, but in reality will it actually? If/when Rafaela is established as a big league regular, do you really think the Red Sox won't still pursue a bench guy with middle infield flexibility? And if not, what would they use that extra spot on? I suppose you could go add another pitcher, but then at that point your position player depth is on really thin ice, as an injury to whatever position Rafaela could conceivably fill in at now leaves a hole at at least one position. It's also just a lot harder to keep functional non-prospect depth in AAA than it is on an MLB bench. Versatility is certainly a valuable thing to have, I'm not going to argue it isn't, but I definitely disagree with the degree to which some people value it, at least in this context. You can't really use it to carry an extra pitcher, there's a 13 pitcher limit on the 26 man (in Sep. you can have 14). Oh good call, that was nagging me in the back of my head but I wasn’t sure what it was. Even more to my point then.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 6, 2024 12:53:54 GMT -5
A young player who can already cover that many positions passably, and in his case much better than that, is exceedingly valuable. The simple reason is that it opens up spots on the roster otherwise reserved to fill those utility positions.In theory, yeah, but in reality will it actually? If/when Rafaela is established as a big league regular, do you really think the Red Sox won't still pursue a bench guy with middle infield flexibility? And if not, what would they use that extra spot on? I suppose you could go add another pitcher, but then at that point your position player depth is on really thin ice, as an injury to whatever position Rafaela could conceivably fill in at now leaves a hole at at least one position. It's also just a lot harder to keep functional non-prospect depth in AAA than it is on an MLB bench. Versatility is certainly a valuable thing to have, I'm not going to argue it isn't, but I definitely disagree with the degree to which some people value it, at least in this context.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 5, 2024 16:37:50 GMT -5
Has there ever been any kind of study done on the effects on height on outfield range? This is probably stupid but I was thinking about the names mentioned here (Kiermaier, Cain, Taylor, JBJ) and how most of them are considerably taller than Rafaela, with the exception of JBJ, who I did not realize was so short. This is absolutely not me saying that Rafaela is too short to be a great defender, but assuming most other things are roughly equal, I do wonder how much the extra 2-3 inches of reach would impact defensive range over a long period of time. Catching a ball in the outfield has as much to do with positioning, reading the ball of the bat, taking the correct route. The history of baseball is full of undersized players who excelled defensively from the Little Professor to Kirby Puckett to JBJ. Height is one factor but there are many more. Hence "assuming most other things are roughly equal".
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 5, 2024 11:32:19 GMT -5
Has there ever been any kind of study done on the effects on height on outfield range? This is probably stupid but I was thinking about the names mentioned here (Kiermaier, Cain, Taylor, JBJ) and how most of them are considerably taller than Rafaela, with the exception of JBJ, who I did not realize was so short. This is absolutely not me saying that Rafaela is too short to be a great defender, but assuming most other things are roughly equal, I do wonder how much the extra 2-3 inches of reach would impact defensive range over a long period of time. I'd figure that wingspan has more to do with it than height. Obviously the two are correlated, so I think you'd be onto something. Oh yeah I just meant height as more of a proxy for wingspan given that info isn’t readily available like it is for NBA/NFL players
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 5, 2024 11:11:29 GMT -5
Has there ever been any kind of study done on the effects on height on outfield range? This is probably stupid but I was thinking about the names mentioned here (Kiermaier, Cain, Taylor, JBJ) and how most of them are considerably taller than Rafaela, with the exception of JBJ, who I did not realize was so short. This is absolutely not me saying that Rafaela is too short to be a great defender, but assuming most other things are roughly equal, I do wonder how much the extra 2-3 inches of reach would impact defensive range over a long period of time.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 4, 2024 11:17:28 GMT -5
Dalbec has about 950 mlb PA. For two brief periods, one about 95 PA and one about 120, he has hit like Jimmie Foxx. The rest of the time, he has hit like a poor backup SS. That doesn't include going 0-12 with 5k and zero BB in the postseason, when we were a few hits away from the World Series. Isn't it time to give up hope? See my previous post ...
But the larger issue is this. The Red Sox literally have an infinitely better set of information on Dalbec's great AAA year than we do, since we have only the rawest data, and know nothing about what he was working on or might have modified or changed.
What we do know is that Sox need a backup 1B / 3B who hits righty, so that the rare off days for Devers and Casas can be against lefty pitchers with a big platoon split. They had an interesting 3B in Urias who could have probably learned 1B and they traded him. They chose not to resign their very good veteran (and clubhouse model). That left one guy for the job. Period.
And since you suddenly seem to be a fan of small samples, the first thing he did upon his his September recall was outhit Devers and Casas for a week. So it's fairly evident that he still has the upside he always has; the difference is an apparent major improvement in staying this last year.
That Dalbec is the backup 1B / 3B is as clear as the starters at those positions.
So one might ask rhetorically, how does this post fit in a thread named "Predicting the 2024 Opening Say Roster?"
I am more than half serious about this: someone should start a thread called "Let's Start Bitching Now!" Those of us with a low tolerance for pointless complaints will be grateful.
Doesn’t the fact that the Sox have had all this data on him and have kept him in AAA kind of go against your own point?
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 2, 2024 12:06:55 GMT -5
You're probably right. I think there's a trend with prospects (that I certainly contribute to) where when they have a deficiency that may be deemed difficult to fix, people are quick to just write them off as having that deficiency and go "too bad so sad". Everything that's been made about the very specific swing-and-miss issues Yorke has is certainly legitimate in my eyes and is a concern moving forward, but also shouldn't get in the way of the fact that he was producing really good numbers as a 21 year old in AA, and still has an abundance of hitting talent. I'm probably a little bit lower on him than most still, but will admit that I have been too quick to write him off as you say (though like you also say, I still think he makes a ton of sense as a trade chip and I would certainly go that route if I were the FO). add: I think one of the reasons I shade lower on Yorke is because I am irrationally high on Blaze Jordan and think he gets caught up in some of this same weirdness, but gets penalized for it disproportionately (in my opinion) more and the gap in the rankings is too wide in reflecting that (again, in my opinion). So that's me saying there's a tiny bit of reason behind it but also acknowledging my biases. I also think that when people start to have a general understanding of what a prospect is, some of the shine wears off a bit. Like, we have a pretty good idea of Yorke's range of outcomes at this point IMO, but Antonio Anderson (random-ish example) could be just about anything, so he's deemed more "exciting", if that makes sense. Not saying it's necessarily right or wrong, but I do think that's something that's affected Yorke's perception a bit lately. Yeah prospect fatigue is definitely a thing. I also agree that Yorke will not make it if he keeps striking out as often as he has, but I do think he has the potential the cut that K rate down. He has been pretty aggressively moved up through the minors. He could have started last year in A+ after struggling there in 2022, but held his own in AA still. I think if he had gotten more time at his last couple of stops he would probably K less often, but he keeps moving up the ladder too quickly to prove that out. We’ll see what he can do in AAA this season. The good news is that there is no rush for him to make his debut. Hopefully he can iron out his swing and miss issues in Worcester. The thing that I think is the real Rorschach Test (the odds that I both spelled that correctly and used the reference correctly are slim to none) with him, to me, is the fact that he keeps changing his swing. If you're a pessimist like me you can look at that and say okay well he's not comfortable with his swing mechanics, so maybe he'll always have some element of swing and miss or streakiness to his game. On the flip side, you can say that if he ever settles on a swing and gets comfortable with it, it should alleviate some of his issues. I don't think either stance is necessarily wrong, but I think where he ultimately settles with his mechanics will probably go a long way into determining the level his hit tool reaches.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 2, 2024 11:52:24 GMT -5
“The rest of it” is about how you’re obviously cherry-picking the positives without acknowledging the moderate-to-substantial setbacks a couple of the top prospects took. Seems inconsistent to me. You have a charming habit of obnoxiously insinuating that I'm arguing in bad faith, and I'm about one comment away from blocking you over it. In this case you're not even disagreeing with my conclusion, so what's the point?
Bleis' season was already lost by the 7/6 ranking so nothing changed with him. Mayer had been struggling and IIRC it only came out after this point that it was because of his health issues, which mitigates whatever effect the negative performance should have had on the rankings. In any case, the national rankings haven't seriously lowered their estimations on him - perhaps only slightly - and I think the same goes for soxprospects. Teel was an important addition, and yes other teams added draft talent, but most did not add talent at that level; meanwhile other teams did graduate prospects but the Red Sox' didn't graduate anyone significant (just Valdez and Chris Murphy I think). I did in fact mention the other negative trends; I guess you're just cherry-picking by not mentioning those?
If you think that my insinuations that you're arguing in bad faith constitutes a habit, maybe some self-reflection on your own arguments could do you some good? Block me all you want, I genuinely could not care less, all I'm saying is that sticking your fingers in your ear and refusing to acknowledge how anyone could possibly have viewpoint of the system that is not wholly positive ("pretty hard to see how a downward trend from last summer could be justified") just doesn't seem very logical. Maybe that's just me, though!
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 2, 2024 11:49:44 GMT -5
Nick Yorke had a better year than Spencer Jones at the plate, while a year younger and playing a more difficult position, and everyone is kinda not feeling great about him being our #5 prospect. He’s the forgotten man of the system IMO. Glad to have a plan B to Grissom if he cant stick at 2B long term. I wouldn’t be shocked to see Yorke dealt if the right trade arises, but I think he’s being written off prematurely lately. You're probably right. I think there's a trend with prospects (that I certainly contribute to) where when they have a deficiency that may be deemed difficult to fix, people are quick to just write them off as having that deficiency and go "too bad so sad". Everything that's been made about the very specific swing-and-miss issues Yorke has is certainly legitimate in my eyes and is a concern moving forward, but also shouldn't get in the way of the fact that he was producing really good numbers as a 21 year old in AA, and still has an abundance of hitting talent. I'm probably a little bit lower on him than most still, but will admit that I have been too quick to write him off as you say (though like you also say, I still think he makes a ton of sense as a trade chip and I would certainly go that route if I were the FO). add: I think one of the reasons I shade lower on Yorke is because I am irrationally high on Blaze Jordan and think he gets caught up in some of this same weirdness, but gets penalized for it disproportionately (in my opinion) more and the gap in the rankings is too wide in reflecting that (again, in my opinion). So that's me saying there's a tiny bit of reason behind it but also acknowledging my biases. I also think that when people start to have a general understanding of what a prospect is, some of the shine wears off a bit. Like, we have a pretty good idea of Yorke's range of outcomes at this point IMO, but Antonio Anderson (random-ish example) could be just about anything, so he's deemed more "exciting", if that makes sense. Not saying it's necessarily right or wrong, but I do think that's something that's affected Yorke's perception a bit lately.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 2, 2024 11:32:09 GMT -5
I have no idea how you're coming to most of these conclusions here. How can you look at those two columns side-by-side and NOT think a downward trend is justified? The second half of Mayer's season was marred by injuries (which, also, Anthony becoming the team's #1 prospect absolutely had something to do with Mayer falling), Bleis had a completely lost season, and Drohan and Romero are both pretty significant fallers, likely due to the former being overranked to begin with. You can make the case that Kyle Teel is a pretty significant bump up and I do love Teel, but everyone else had a draft pick too, so those effects are going to be pretty marginal. You also say that Rafaela "only seemed better" but it seems like the consensus on him has been relatively stable, and I would say correctly so. That's not to say that I think the farm system is in a worse spot now than it was in July, because I don't. And I certainly think that the drop from 5 to 13 is too steep, so I'm not exactly defending the rankings. But to stick your fingers in your ear and act like nothing negative has happened (I'm sure it's VERY coincidental that you omitted Mayer and Bleis) doesn't make a ton of sense to me. Though funnily enough, I ultimately agree with your assessment of where they should rank. Uhh okay, glad we agree. Though I'm not sure what the rest of this is about then.
Maybe Chris or James could weigh in on whether "a downward trend is justified." Personally I'm not seeing it.
“The rest of it” is about how you’re obviously cherry-picking the positives without acknowledging the moderate-to-substantial setbacks a couple of the top prospects took. Seems inconsistent to me.
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Feb 2, 2024 11:26:57 GMT -5
I'm a little skeptical that this does anything to drastically change ownership's willingness (or lack thereof) to spend, but definitely feel more confident in whatever the strategic vision ends up becoming.
|
|
|