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
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 26, 2015 12:40:36 GMT -5
Assuming the Sox do not get an ace in a trade now, the two FA pitchers who interest me the most are Cueto and Price. Price is about to be 30, but he is an incredibly durable pitcher who has gotten better over time. I think he probably has at least five more years of premium pitching ahead, assuming no serious injuries.
Cueto is a little younger and it will be interesting to see how he does with KC the rest of this season and in the post-season.
I will not be completely surprised if Hamels winds up with the Sox, although right now it doesn't look very likely.
My first choice of a deal would be one that unloaded some expensive under-performing players for a power-hitting outfielder, and/or a good-hitting 1B.
I am dubious that the Sox are going to get a young cost-controlled really good pitcher, except possibly in a deal with San Diego in which the Sox take on one of those outfielders, and perhaps another pitcher.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 26, 2015 12:37:58 GMT -5
Assuming the Sox do not get an ace in a trade now, the two FA pitchers who interest me the most are Cueto and Price. Price is about to be 30, but he is an incredibly durable pitcher who has gotten better over time. I think he probably has at least five more years of premium pitching ahead, assuming no serious injuries.
Cueto is a little younger and it will be interesting to see how he does with KC the rest of this season and in the post-season.
I will not be completely surprised if Hamels winds up with the Sox, although right now it doesn't look very likely.
My first choice of a deal would be one that unloaded some expensive under-performing players for a power-hitting outfielder, and/or a good-hitting 1B.
I am dubious that the Sox are going to get a young cost-controlled really good pitcher, except possibly in a deal with San Diego in which the Sox take on one of those outfielders, and perhaps another pitcher.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 26, 2015 11:57:46 GMT -5
What no one has mentioned is that the atmospheric conditions yesterday were not ideal for a knuckleballer. The ball moved more and more unpredictably.
I have come around a bit on Wright. I think he could be pretty good but he needs a catcher who is more adept at catching that pitch. And with all the problems the Sox have, trying to deal with this issue is just one too many.
Thus, I think Wright should not be starting at this time. Either he should spend more time at Pawtucket refining his approach, or he should be traded.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 25, 2015 18:15:40 GMT -5
Hamels just no-hit the Cubs.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 24, 2015 14:33:21 GMT -5
Yes, I just read that. Victorino could help a contender. After last night I don't know about Tazawa. St. Louis just added Cishek, which may take them out of the market.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 24, 2015 14:08:26 GMT -5
Dave Cameron has an interesting analysis of the market for pitching right now. www.fangraphs.com/blogs/so-are-we-in-a-buyers-market-now/He says a buyer's market may be developing because a number of teams that thought they were going to be contenders no longer are. The result is that more pitchers may be available at the deadline than the the number being sought. There only are a few teams now looking for pitching to help them this season. If San Diego and Detroit become sellers the market could be flooded and values will go down. They may already have gone down. He thinks Texas may be the only team now still seriously interested in Hamels and they may back off. In my opinion, the Phillies may have blown their chance to maximize his value. He doesn't say much about the Red Sox other than what everyone knows. If he is right, there are going to be pitchers available for whom there is no ready market. Unfortunately, they are pitchers like Dan Haren, who no team in its right mind would want, unless they just need to fill a spot and don't much care about the results. I don't think any of the contenders is looking for a closer. That probably rules out trading Uehara, which is fine with me. The really good pitchers on the market, Hamels excepted, are going to be free agents. The best strategy for the Sox concerning pitching might be to wait for the off season. However, if San Diego becomes a seller, then Ross would be a good target and there could be a good matchup between the Sox and them.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 23, 2015 15:21:01 GMT -5
Marrero did very well defensively at 2B briefly for the Sox. There seems no doubt he would be one of the better defensive SSs in MLB if he got the chance. Right now is not the time his type of player gets moved, except if a team has a sudden injury or as an add-on to a deal. Most teams willing to deal right now are looking for sudden upgrades in pitching or hitting, or both.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 23, 2015 15:12:44 GMT -5
One of the more impressive pitching performances at GCL this year, Bautista going 6 shutout innings allowing only three hits. This kid had a 0.96 ERA in the DL last year. Spring scouting report said his FB was 93-95. I wonder what it is now?
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 23, 2015 12:11:19 GMT -5
This revisionist history of if the Red Sox had Lackey plus Lester/Scherzer/Hamels is pointless to me. You could argue if the position players performed even closet to their projections the team would be in the race with these current mediocre pitchers. I get that a lot of posters here believe you NEED an ace to win, or that elite pitching is the only thing that wins in October, but this team was supposed to be elite offensively and instead they've been a bottom 5 group in the league. Focusing solely on the pitching is missing the point entirely, this team has been lost hitting and fielding as well. Signing one elite pitcher would've been an investment for short term production with long term risk, it would've been the wrong move given the current results of this team. Although I have been writing a lot about the pitching problem, that does not mean that the team does not have other problems. This entire team is a mess. Everything has gone wrong. I think there is a core of players who can help the team return to contention next year, but that there should be a fairly substantial makeover of both pitcher and position players.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 23, 2015 12:07:25 GMT -5
I wouldn't touch Teheran if Atlanta is offering him. Almost surely that would mean that something is wrong with him. Atlanta is one the shrewdest trading teams there is, and one should be wary of them.
Also, the Sox aren't going to trade Swihart, if they trade him, until they know that Vazquez is OK.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 23, 2015 10:49:23 GMT -5
DanR, I agee...if I was a Red Sox GM. But other teams have different needs and I just find it hard to believe that Cecchini or Marrero couldn't get consistent at bats for some major league teams with some of the players that get consistent AB's at SS and DH. SoxStats on Twitter recently tweeted that Ken Rosenthal was on the radio and said that the Braves and Red Sox seem to match up in a trade for Julio Teheran. What would be an appropriate package for him? Owens or Johnson and Marrero? Is that too much or too little? I really have no idea on Teheran's value. He is young and was very highly regarded but has been terrible this year (despite having good secondary stats) Do you really want another pitcher with problems?
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 23, 2015 10:48:07 GMT -5
I just finished the globe's most recent article on Cherington and his most recent comments, as well as Farrell''s. Disappointing doesn't start to express how I see the current state of the nation. Disalluded? Maybe disemboweled.... 1. Kelly to stay in the rotation. 2. Johnson sent down. 3. Farrell surprised by Johnson's lobs to first for pickoffs. If the pick offs are an issue, why is this discovered in a major league game? Why has this not been fixed? Is there any teaching and development occurring other than what players execute on their own or naturally occurs through the passage of time? The two players who have developed and progressed (Betts, Bogaerts) certainly seem to have improved on their own and struggle making adjustments particularly quickly. The issue with Rodriguez and tipping off pitches also speaks to this. Shouldn't self scouting have caught and corrected this before game time? This management team seems to make a choice, then sticks with it without regard to their lying eyes. It is time to blow this up in a big way. I really don't mind the management team staying in place as long as they are willing to make the moves necessary to make sure this underperformance never returns. It seems to me that with current personnel we are strong up the middle and I do think Sandoval and Hanley in lf and third will improve. To me, this is all about starting pitching and I would love to see the three top young lefties with every start in Boston possible this year. All the others have been disappointing. Porcello ( I just misspelled as Porcelo and my iPad autocorrected to porcelain!) is overmatched but likely to be unmovable. Buckholz is off the table now with the shot (until Farrell said his time down would equal his time ramping up I thought then shot could bring him back sooner) Miley seems a value especially to a contending smaller market team looking to add a piece for a play off run and also replace a pending free agent. Kelly has shown nothing but how overmatched we are when dealing with the St. Louis front office. I do see potential value to others who may feel the Red Sox have actually hurt his development. All the bullpen arms obviously would be available and could land a significant prospect or two. I agree that Castillo and Bradley should split time in right. Any at bat by De Aza, Nava, Craig, Victorino, Napoli and even Hanagan are wasted opportunities. Forget about the risk in promotions, move as many pieces not a part of the 2016 mlb plan as you can, and move up replacements from within. Margot should be in Pawtucket with a September look. Benintendi needs to move quickly as well. It would be interesting to include him and the Greenville infield to Salem and watch them hit as a group. If their is management resistance to this 'don't trust any player over thirty' approach, rename him Pharrell and give him his freedom! I read all that also and concluded that some new ideas, new eyes, new brains are desperately needed in Sox management. They are too set in a way of thinking and operating that is failing.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 23, 2015 10:44:01 GMT -5
A few other WARs of pitchers who might be available: Sale 4.1 Archer 3.3 Gray 3.2T. Ross 2.5 Samardzija 2.2 Kazmir 2.2 Leake 1.4 Shields 0.9 T. Walker 0.8 Haren 0.8 Garza 0.2 Pretty sure none of these guys are going to be available without a Godfather offer that we probably wouldn't be willing to make Note the applicable word. I have read numerous stories that Sale might be available, but it obviously would take a huge deal. But he might be worth it. Tampa has a history of trading its good pitchers and they need to strengthen their team in many areas. Beane will trade anyone in what he considers the right deal. Yes, they would be very expensive, but they also have huge value.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 23, 2015 10:40:06 GMT -5
I don't know if this is the right place to put this but I really wonder about the value our prospects have in the 10-20 range. I would really like to see what a Marrero/Coyle/Cecchini trio would fetch. They are all completely blocked and will likely never see consistent AB's for the Red Sox yet they all seem good enough to earn major league AB's for some team. Could this fetch a decent to good relief pitcher under team control for a couple seasons? Maybe a lesser version of Brock Holt so we can trade him for more value? At this point the only young guns that I would even consider trading (obvious caveats apply) are Owens and Margot and if they are on the table you expect a good young player under team control to come back. The best way to think about this is to turn it around. What would you trade to get each of these players? To take it further, look at their minor league stats and compare them to the stats of prospects on other teams. I think you will see that of those three, the only one with any value, and it isn't very high, is Marrero, and that is because of his fielding. He probably hasn't hit well enough to be a regular for most teams, but since there is a shortage of shortstops, he might be able to play for a team that has good hitters at other positions. Coyle is hurt all the time and only briefly has hit well, and not at the AAA level. Cecchini is hitting very poorly in AAA for the second year in a row and hasn't established a position for himself that he could play in the majors.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 23, 2015 10:31:44 GMT -5
Using fangraphs calculations, Scherzer's WAR of 5.1 is .1 higher than the combined WAR of these: Buchholz, Miley, Porcello, Rodriguez, Masterson, Kelly and Weight. And Buchholz has a WAR of 3.1, leaving 1.9 to be shared by the rest, of which Miley has 1.3,
The WARs of elite pitchers who either will be FAs after this season or are likely to be traded, or both:
Greinke 3.7 Price 3.5 Cueto 2.7 Hamels 2.5 Zimmerman 2.5
A few other WARs of pitchers who might be available:
Sale 4.1 Archer 3.3 Gray 3.2 T. Ross 2.5 Samardzija 2.2 Kazmir 2.2 Leake 1.4 Shields 0.9 T. Walker 0.8 Haren 0.8 Garza 0.2
WARs of previous Sox pitchers
Lester 2.5 Lackey 2.0 Peavy 0.4 de la Rosa 0.2
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 22, 2015 21:19:12 GMT -5
Really stupid to have Swihart try to bunt when he was the one who started the hitting earlier. Very poor management.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 22, 2015 11:04:00 GMT -5
Looks like defense doesn't matter according to the Wall Street Journal: www.wsj.com/articles/defensive-stats-shift-back-toward-irrelevance-1437518138Two excerpts: The quality of a fielder doesn’t matter on most plays. Inside-Edge partner Kenny Kendrena says 24% of plays are almost always hits and 62% are almost always outs. The remaining plays where defenders can really distinguish themselves are so infrequent, he said, that the success in converting them can distort a fielder’s true skill.Given that position players have had 76,112 total chances this season. Baseball’s best defensive team, the Houston Astros, has saved only 25 hits all season because of the skill of its defenders, according to Inside-Edge...Dramatic infield shifts are now factored into the zone-based systems. But the evidence shows that teams save more hits this way than they do with conventional range. For example, the Rays have saved 15 runs with outstanding defensive plays, but nearly twice as many with their radical shifts, which they rely on more than any other team. The piece is more nuanced than that, and they don't have any reels of Hanley playing left-field, but there are some interesting observations. Thanks for this. It supports some of the doubts I have expressed about defensive metrics. However, what it doesn't point out is that frequently it is just one play that a good fielder makes - or a poor fielder doesn't make - that changes the game - or even the season - for a team. And I don't think it is a coincidence that much of the time the best teams are very good defensively. Houston is a good example.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 22, 2015 10:27:46 GMT -5
Cherington made the same kind of devastating mistake two years in a row, taking a big risk with an important part of the team with no backup if it didn't work. Last year he gambled on the outfield not having any established high level performer except Victorino who had an injury history. He had no solid backup plan if the team's outfielders didn't hit, which they didn't. This season he gambled on the pitching not having any high level performer except Buchholz and his inconsistent history. He acquired a bunch of 3,4 and 5 level pitchers: Masterson trying to come back from an injury; Kelly not really established yet because of command problems; Porcello, who just had his best season, but was not heavily relied on by Detroit; and Miley, a solid pitcher but not a top of the rotation stopper. Except the starting pitching has been the best thing on the team. They rank 16th in xFIP-. That they've given up a lot more runs than they should have is the result of untimely execution, which is either luck or psychology. And of course the backup was Rodriguez, Johnson, Wright, Barnes, and Owens. We probably had a better backup plan for the rotation that any team in baseball. We're not as far apart as it may seem. It depends on one's definition of backup. In my use of it, I meant that when the team did not receive the quality of pitching that was expected, it did not make the moves necessary to gain that quality. Having unproven minor league pitchers available is a backup plan to fill rotation slots if there is a calamity, or total failure - which is almost the situation this year. However, the risk they took for which they had no backup plan, was thinking that unproven, injured, mid-range pitchers could perform at higher levels - or at least some could. There was no ace, no stopper, but they thought that on average the pitching performances would be good enough to offset that. When that proved not to be the case, replacing those pitchers with the minor leaguers also did not yield high quality results - with the exception of some of Rodiguez's performances. You cannot escape the fact that this pitching staff has allowed more runs than any other in the American League and only two in the National League, Philadelphia and Colorado, have allowed more. Relatively speaking, the hitting has been better. The Sox are 11th in runs scored in the AL, and 17th overall. Of course, that isn't anything to brag about when you are trying to have a contending team. I prioposed keeping De Aza not as a starter but as the 4th OF. I view him somewhat like Holt, as someone who can do well in stretches and provides energy to the team. I agree that he should not be a regular. The regulars have to be better. I also agree that much of the nucleus of a future contending team may be mostly in place, and a way to get a better idea of whether that is the case is to play the players who right now are the best candidates to be on that team, and to jettison those who are not.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 21, 2015 22:02:22 GMT -5
Assuming the Sox lose, they will be 10 games under .500. The Yankees are 10 games over.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 21, 2015 18:52:11 GMT -5
Nava up, Marero down.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 21, 2015 16:59:48 GMT -5
Guidas, I agree with most of what you just posted. However, they are developing pitching in the system now. There are quite a few quite promising pitchers from the GCL to Pawtucket. However, there was a period of time when the system was pretty barren of good pitching. I also disagree that no team can remain competitive. What about St. Louis? They manage to be competitive almost every year. They have changed ownership, managers, GMs, etc., and they keep producing winning teams with tremendous fan support. I think they have finished last only one time in their history. The Yankees also have been pretty competitive most of the time. However, overall your point is valid. It is no different in baseball than it is in most businesses. It is hard to stay on top for any period of time. However, barring a flock of simultaneous injuries, which does happen now and then, I don't think a team with the resources and fan support that the Red Sox have should be finishing last three out of four years. I don't have the sense of an overall organizational philosophy like St. Louis has. He said no team can be consistently competitive by just being homegrown. St. Louis and the Yankees have effectively used trades and FA for years. Good point. I made an edit that I think covers that.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 21, 2015 16:55:14 GMT -5
Guidas, I agree with most of what you just posted. However, they are developing pitching in the system now. There are quite a few quite promising pitchers from the GCL to Pawtucket. However, there was a period of time when the system was pretty barren of good pitching.
I also disagree that no team can remain competitive. What about St. Louis? They manage to be competitive almost every year. They have changed ownership, managers, GMs, etc., and they keep producing winning teams with tremendous fan support. I think they have finished last only one time in their history. The Yankees also have been pretty competitive most of the time. However, overall your point is valid. It is no different in baseball than it is in most businesses. It is hard to stay on top for any period of time. However, barring a flock of simultaneous injuries, which does happen now and then, I don't think a team with the resources and fan support that the Red Sox have should be finishing last three out of four years. I don't have the sense of an overall organizational philosophy like St. Louis has that gives them a long-term strategy that keeps them winning.
It is not a strategy to decide not to sign pitchers past the age of 30, or to make other such pronouncements. What is a strategy is doing a thorough analysis of a team's needs and filling them as effectively as possible even if it sometimes means resigning a star who is 30.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 21, 2015 15:10:36 GMT -5
Cherington made the same kind of devastating mistake two years in a row, taking a big risk with an important part of the team with no backup if it didn't work. Last year he gambled on the outfield not having any established high level performer except Victorino who had an injury history. He had no solid backup plan if the team's outfielders didn't hit, which they didn't.
This season he gambled on the pitching not having any high level performer except Buchholz and his inconsistent history. He acquired a bunch of 3,4 and 5 level pitchers: Masterson trying to come back from an injury; Kelly not really established yet because of command problems; Porcello, who just had his best season, but was not heavily relied on by Detroit; and Miley, a solid pitcher but not a top of the rotation stopper. The bullpen had only two superior RPs. The rest are replacement level performers.
Add in the facts that the outfield problem still is not completely solved, and there is no obvious internal replacement for Napoli, who is in the last year of his contract.
Sometimes an enterprise has no choice to do things in certain ways that make it vulnerable if those things don't work. However, the Sox are not that kind of enterprise. They have enormous resources. They just chose not to use them to strengthen the team by limiting its vulnerabilities and make it a real contender. I don't think it is all Cherington's fault, maybe a lot of it isn't. I suspect it was an enterprise decision, coming from the top, and reinforced by others in senior levels.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 21, 2015 13:42:31 GMT -5
Wright varies the speed of his knuckleball, from the mid 60s to low 80s. Most are in the 70s, but yesterday he was changing the speed of every pitch. It seems to work well when the ball doesn't hang over the plate, which it was doing some.
I'd rather see Wright as a relief pitcher. I think he can be more effective in that role.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 21, 2015 13:38:04 GMT -5
It appears he is the Red Sox version of Urias.
|
|
|