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 tonyc on Dec 21, 2015 10:21:27 GMT -5
Very much agree Eric, and there are many other late blooming pitchers over the decades. Also, it is not an improvement of command and secondary pitches needed, primarily, but improvement of sequencing, which is well within his reach and why he showed that improvement.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Dec 14, 2015 14:57:59 GMT -5
NC are you an actual scout? I agree with you on the Lackey trade, that with his age and Kelly's stuff from here on it may be better for the Sox; seems other people dislike it. Rip, as I see it, during George Steinbrenner's life, because of his assets, and the luxury tax having a less effective bite, the MFY could just throw money against the wall and see what stuck- no longer true.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Dec 7, 2015 21:02:23 GMT -5
Great thread, as opposed to the Price "escape clause" obsessed thread- multiple views, informative, good links. Reassuring to see you come around too Jmei. I liked it from the start and am thrilled they didn't trade Kelly, whom I've always liked more than most here, love the stuff and upside (of course I liked Alan Webster too). Given my agreement with Ericvan about him, and to a degree Wright, and potential improvement of Owens, I was fine with viewing Miley as surplus, for the Sox situation despite the value to other teams of his consistency and price. Also don't like his disrespect of the manager (didn't like Lackey's anger at the manager when being taken out either). Smith seems to have real upside, albeit some health risk, and the potential to lose both Japanese relievers, as well as health/age risk of Uehara made this a major need. Nice surprise potential of Elias as a lefty from the pen, and he fills the depth needs too if many injuries occur.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Dec 2, 2015 13:59:18 GMT -5
Read all but the last few pages of posts. The detail on the opt out was educational, but geeze, other than Sox champs and a few others optimism I went from jumping up and down joy to more of a downer mood from the vibe of this thread. Not many of you have been around for the life of George S., when we just had to watch MFY sign Gossage , Jackson etc. and usually know before the season we were going to just chase the horizon for the most part, for a couple decades. For those of you on this site back when the Sox drafted Brandon Workman there was more unconditional joy to that event than this one! Heisenberg was right here, though I'll keep coming back for what is best about this site, this was not one fo the finer threads, moodwise visa vis the actual huge positive event.
Good post Rip on why a team building approach is what to an extent works here, versus strict value. I'm roughly slightly favorable to the opt out, good points by Jmei, however, the key is it's quite possible a bad downturn can occur in year 6.or 7, rather than just after the opt out point. On a different notes, juxtaposed with Tomase's recent article about Yawkey's racism, and some of Price's prior comments, and having favorite previous players like Tommy Harper and Reggie Smith have their share of issues in Boston, isn't it wonderful that just about every starting player, and a number of the pitchers will now be black?
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Nov 29, 2015 12:05:27 GMT -5
Yes good review Gerry, but I'd have a couple of edits. Lynn was quite good, considered about the best defensive outfielder in the league. At that time Stratomatic was one of the few sources of arm ratings, where anything lower than zero was excellent, and only Clemente, Jesse Barfield and Ellis Valentine got -5. Lynn and Yaz both had -3, and Evans had -4. Lynn and Yaz were known as quite accurate and consistent. They got excellent jumps which made up for lack of pure speed, and the Reds in 75 were shocked at how great Yaz still played the field. Lastly, Rick Miller played all 3 positions as a backup at gold glove level and was even better than Lynn. By strat terms the only outfield 1, all three I can recall ever. So yes todays athletes are faster and more athletic, but for combo of range and throwing arm, Yaz, Lynn, Evans could give this group a good run, but insert Miller and that's your best ever hands down.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Nov 18, 2015 11:57:23 GMT -5
A 3. If this deal were done in a vacuum, worse, but many things not given sufficient weight are interconnected here. Just as the power of the press is cited as an essential checkpoint in an effective Democracy, the goodwill of the press and fans does have power, not just in mood but economics in this case. I'm intrinsically a Ben Cherington, longterm value type, as are most in this forum. However, the last place finishes gave him the boot and enough of them can degrade attendance, finances, create a press malstrom and make this place one which players, and perhaps executives if it got bad enough would sometimes avoid. The franchise was forced to think short term in this instance and play NY Yankee type general management- acquire the needed pieces and get burned sometimes in value deals, as they did sometimes (Jay Buhner, i.e), but for the most part it worked for them since free agency, with the understanding that they'd cover themselves by throwing enough money against the wall with free agent acquistions. This will be the next part of DD's plan, and with a starter plus an outfielder, perhaps another bullpen piece acquired largely through those means this will be a very successful offseason.
This type of plan can burn out a farm system, and saddle one with bad contracts, however in this particular instance is needed. I don't buy that alternative assets which are as essential as Kimbrel will necessarily pop up in time to make this season a potentially great one. Given Speier's article describing how much elite relief pitchers are vulnerable to decline, the ones a notch or two below are parabolically far more variable, and the Sox have a historic weakness here. Also, the starting pitchers available for the same package would be substandard, especially given the existing midroation depth,and the top tier ones would require said package plus a real painful, longterm unwise addition- Moncada, Espinoza, Swihart, etc. Again, in a vacuum this is a deal to avoid, but the timing made it necessary and positive.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Nov 16, 2015 22:17:25 GMT -5
Geostorm, thanks so much for posting Alex Speier's article. I don't get the Globe and dearly miss him. The moderators and posters here are wonderful and I read here for a decade before posting, and read way more than posting, but he is truly matchless. He further articulates the concern some of the most astute posters here have had as an "opportunity cost" risk in case of needs arising. On the other hand he echoes the unique market situation at this point for relievers, and the Redsox historic weakness, and I'm down with the deal because of it. I am surprised and concerned about the high risk of health and ineffectiveness of even this elite class of relievers, and will breathlessly keep fingers crossed here. Lastly, similar to Babe Ruth being in his own category due to elite hitting, and pitching ability too, Mariano- contrary to the inadequate measures of relief pitching by war- is truly in his own category as not just one of the greatest relievers, but greatest pitchers period. I hope more worthy relievers are elected to the hall.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Nov 15, 2015 23:14:23 GMT -5
Thanks Redsoxchamps, for your earlier post, which was the best summation of why while "losing" in value the sox made the right move. Granted there is risk, but despite the headline of "ambivalent" reactions to the trade, this was also the consensus opinion of the scouts and executives polled in the recent article. I'm glad that several posters reiterated, contrary to the opinions of the very wise forum moderators here, that the current negotiation market limited to elite relievers would not have given viable alternatives of value, without greatly increasing risk (wcsox- did you professionally work or sit in on big league contract negotiations?). Of course, this situation also paints a dismal picture of the Cafardos and Shaunessy's who act oblivious to value when they act like it was practically a "great trade" which it was not. But in conjunction with other moves, if we return to success, the TV ratings, attendance, good feelings of fans and writers, and resultant revenues all provide future value and make or keep this team one desirable for other players to come to.
Glosserbelly, we could have used top relievers, in 75, 86 and 03, but in all three instances just needed competent managers, who in 75 and 03 would have stuck with their existing top relievers. As DC pointed out, we had several mid-nineties throwing relievers waiting to relieve Pedro. In '75, when staffs had only a couple of relievers, Jim Wiloughby their ace easily disposed of the Reds, had his great sinkerball going, and then gets pinch hit for with none on and two out by Cecile Cooper, in a 1 for 19 slump. And Wiloughy was a converted starter, easily capable of 4 inning + relief stints.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Nov 14, 2015 11:04:28 GMT -5
This is the first time I've ever diverged in FEELING rather than opinion from the 5 or so posters here whom I have the most respect for, all of whom dislike or hate this deal. I agree they gave up too much of a prospect haul, and especially for a reliever. However, based upon rumors and also based upon what it would take to trade for a starter, I've been trembling at the real possibility of saying goodbye to Moncada or Espinosa and perhaps that will not happen period. If indeed DD makes his next additions from free agency only, given another year of development of those two, and perhaps others will next year place them in more of a protected status from even DD- or at least give them a greater valuation in trades. Despite the speculation here of a return to Lou Gorman, we do not yet know that, or as DC speculated, whether this precedes a sale and rape of our prospects. Perhaps DD is achieving a mere imperative to bring us back to respectability. He indeed seems within reach of achieving that and leaving our best prospects intact.
As far as the haul, DD perhaps did dicker/attempt to lower price as much as possible. But given that Chapman and Kimbrel at the top would soon be traded- this is the CURRENT market for the few elite closers in the new and sexy recognition of relievers import with how the Royals just won. And, yes a lesser haul/better value deal, as is typical, may have been achieved going a bit lower down the totem pole, however, Chapman had less years of control, Melancon had problems pitching here, Papelbon has issues and is older, etc down the line- and this is our biggest need with the least failure latitude. I second the study showing how WAR cannot capture the true value of relievers, (and pitchers in general) for a different reason. The true value of a player goes beyond their contribution, but is also the net effect on the rest of the cast. A good hitter will make those around him better by virtue of his protecting other hitters and sustaining or exploiting rallies began. However, pitchers are uniquely subject to exhaustion and degradation of their quality when pushed to or beyond a certain limit. A good pitcher will protect and optimize the quality of performance of the entire rest of the staff. While this seems most relevant for a workhorse ace, witnessing of an inappropriately placed/overworked Tazawa last year displays the domino effect of a lack of a good closer. This becomes especially pertinent in a marathon post season structure, where maintaining effeciveness with challenged endurance can take a bullpen, or pitching staff down without great depth and quality. Additionally, a great bullpen will cause teams to outperform/outwin their plus/minus by more effectively exploiting key innings, something also not captured enough in WAR.
Jmei, glad you downgraded your earlier dread to a dislike, as I've been around not just for Bagwell, but Sparky Lyle and Cecile Cooper- just vomit sick from moment those were done. Of course Guerra and Margot could put on muscle and develope power and Allen could pick up a few ticks and we could have a Bagwell part two on our hands- and indeed this could be a foreshadowing of a GM who stumbled and may continue to in value of prosect deals in a way his three highly intelligent predecessors did not. But in the snap shot of this moment I've let out a big sigh of relief and am pleased we may contend without a further, much expected rape.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Nov 10, 2015 21:53:41 GMT -5
My thoughts exactly sox champs.. something like JBJ, Owens and Guerra for a good starter.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Nov 9, 2015 13:03:39 GMT -5
Sorry Jody, but perhaps you're looking at stats but not recalling circumstances at the time of Peavy. He pitched very well down the stretch- 4-1 4.04, 3.79 fip, averaging 6.5 innings per start, all of which was distorted by a high run total shootout- which I attended at Colorado. This saved an otherwise tired pitching staff, crucial innings for a bullpen especially which could not have afforded it and would have probably been more gassed and ineffective in the postseason. Again, there was no margin as they, with him finished one game ahead of Oakland, and losing that may have created a more difficult scenario. Also, had he not pitched well and clinched the Tampa game 6, I believe David Price awaited game 7. Even though he pitched poorly the next game they won,and they won the world series game he pitched as well. Fair chance of no promised land without him.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Nov 9, 2015 10:33:51 GMT -5
Probably Jimed. If you recall, Torrez had a cut finger that almost caused him to miss the start, but it resulted in the ball diving, and the yanks shaking their heads, until he started getting his pitches up, and Zimmer ignored that so we got Dented.b
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Nov 9, 2015 1:30:57 GMT -5
My family is from Montreal, so I spent all my summers there. When Bill Lee got hit by a driver jogging during spring training, he cracked up the Montreal Gazette writer, as he said " I got up as quick as I could before she could hit me again."
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Nov 7, 2015 15:43:19 GMT -5
Despite poor playoff stats, without Peavy, fair chance the sox would not win in 2013. Recall that he pitched well in the regular season, saving tired bullpen arms and they finished one game ahead of Oakland. As a result of that Oakland faced Detroit, took them the limit and caused their rotation to line up poorly against the sox. Peavy also won a crucial playoff clinching game, and allowed Workman to go to the pen. And I'm extremely biased- nothing would have been worth depriving me of the pleasure of seeing 10 years of Iglesias playing shortstop- except maybe the world series.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Nov 4, 2015 16:38:27 GMT -5
Thanks all for a level of detail I didn't have at the time as a fanatic sox fan living in NY, dependant on a sporting news subscription, occasionally borrowing the Boston Globe from the library, and turning a screechy faint radio signal in every direction from WTIC Hartford to eventually get some audible poetic calls from Ned Martin. Once in the '70's a friend/ enemy Yank fan was pacing around our Brooklyn neighborhood for 2 hours awaiting my return from the Bronx after the Yanks swept the sox, licking his chops at the opportunity to cut into me- I saw him and quickly jumped some fences and escaped through some backyards and basements. I believe Yawkey would've approved the Rudi and Fingers deals as he had earlier attempted to purchase Bando for in excess of 1 million. I think I'd heard that he woud've also bought Vida Blue had he known the Yanks would get him. For that game 4 1978 I had been hoping they'd start Tom Burgmeir, who as I recollect had some excellent super long relief appearances- from 4-7 innnings as I recall, who came in anyhow after Sprowl and pitched well- they would have won.
I loved Fisk especially, and was in terrible pain about losing him. Loved Cecil Cooper- hit over .300 at every minor league level, and was aghast at that trade, as well as dumping Tudor. One good thing that came of Easler, he later become the sox hitting coach and without his relentless work at correcting Mo Vaughn's swing into one generating loft, Mo was not much at first. In fact the real prospect was Phil Plantier initially, who must've gotten injured after a great year or so. After '86 couldn't stand Gorman and his attempts to trade away youth- tried to trade Vaughn early on, and Bagwell was inevitable given that m.o. Loved Duquette's intelligence, and just knew that once he was aboard the sox would have a shot at the ring in my lifetime.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Oct 30, 2015 11:08:11 GMT -5
Also, I was not a big fan of the Sandoval signing, due to his longterm decline, at the bidding war price we paid out. I was quite excited, however, about Hanley, and we did get him below max. market terms, and he has elite ceiling, recently, and in April, while Papi is year to year at his age- last year could be an outlier for Hanley and I wouldn't dump him- yet.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Oct 30, 2015 10:49:09 GMT -5
Hanley's value is at an all time low, and hopefully the injury, new position and adjustment to playing in Boston are in the rear window and he'd improve, therefore shouldn't be moved- yet at least. Also, despite some positive reports I don't see that Sam Travis was better at a lower level than Travis Shaw was, and Shaw did crush it at that postseason league to add a bit of credibilty, not to mention his far superior size, plus look at the difficult adjustment, initially even prospects at Xander and Mookie's level faced- so I wooudn't necessarily count on Sam Travis until proven. So I'm with keeping both and seeing what happens.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Oct 16, 2015 13:59:30 GMT -5
My feelings exactly Telson, hopefully he's not the outlier no weight gainer like the guy we traded for Schilling. Seems he may have the highest ceiling in our system after Espinoza and Kopech. Of course it's under the assumption that the velocity uptick will occur, enabling his pitchability to shine at advanced levels. Logan Allen appears more almost like Brian Johnson, high floor. All this, of course subject to great variability given their ages.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Sept 13, 2015 22:29:36 GMT -5
Relevant to your thread jmei, a movie, which one of the Roger Ebert team had called the best baseball movie in 20 years deals with this. "Sugar" is the title, and it didn't get the big notoriety because it was an indie, but it was great, and so realistic that in the speical features afterward, Papi, Pedro. Sosa and others said that's eaxactly how it is. Anyone see it? Also recommend the documentary on Doc Ellis pitching a no-hitter on lsd, many wonderful interviews with those great Pirates of the '70's.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Sept 10, 2015 14:12:19 GMT -5
Very good thread! I like both, and too bad we couldn't see Margot's numbers had he played another 30 days after "figuring it out." However, I'm in the group that sees Margot as closer to a duplicate of the others and Beni as an unusual high onbase/ power ceiling whom I prefer. Also, the age advancement points are well taken, but I"ve had a theory based on some observation, but would love some hard numbers- CALLING ERIC! Not only do a number of the highest batting average players ever bat lefthanded, but it seems to me that players who are lefties are more probable to still develope in the minors a year or two later than righties, and successfully make it to the show without washing out.. again a theory, need some numbers, and an explantion would be the inherent advantage in seeing breaking stuff better from righties- the common conquerer of minor leaguers.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Sept 7, 2015 13:29:42 GMT -5
I know this contradicts this whole discussion, but does the data on pitcher height not corollating with performance or risk break down specifically into starting pitchers as well? I forgot whether it was Cherington quoted, but as you know the predominant view is the bulk will enable them to maintain velocity deeper into games, aside from generating it. It seems also that starting pitchers are the one position where excessive weight - on a large enough frame- didn't seem to hinder good performance- ie. Bartolo Colon, David Wells, Sabathia and Mickey Lolich. Without seeing the data, I too have this same bias with starters, and would view the Ron Guidrys, Pedros and Espinozas as exceptions via their amazing abilities in all those areas you beautifully articulated. Telson, would this preconception I share be so off that the main factor not enabling smaller wiry framed pitchers from suceeding in larger numbers be mainly the prejudice which denies them the opportunity to become starting pitchers at every level?
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Sept 7, 2015 11:32:53 GMT -5
Thanks Telson, quite comprehensive. I imagine the torque generated from the more advantageous tendon attachements may also explain why so many of the top outfield throwing arms have tended to be from the somewhat muscular, but wiry and not bulky highly muscular frames. A sampling of some of the top outfield arms of the 1970s - Reggie Smith, Ellis Valentine, Dave Parker, Cesar Geronimo, Roberto Clemente, Carl Yastrzemski, Dwight Evans, Rusty Staub, and just prior Willie Mays and Hank Aaron, and just after Jesse Barfield. Note that almost all these players had frames of approximately 6" 180 lbs.. just Evans and perhaps Valentine were heavier but also taller. The only bulky frame in the bunch was Parker, at 238, though he had a 6'5" frame.
So it would seem that with the players checking your above skillsets to an exceptional degree, our attempts at projecting their power and velocity based upon size will be inaccurate, and we'll have to go more on the scouting reports of the actual in game performance.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Sept 5, 2015 12:45:06 GMT -5
Regarding Benintendi, isn't it interesting that there was just a post that his swing seems to have a disconnect to the shocking distance the ball ends up with. This is coincidentally parallel to the recent reports of Espinoza having a unique ease of motion resulting in outrageous velocity. And both players achieving such power with small frames. This would seem to point to two different phenomena- One, the unique emphasis in baseball on not just the speed/power of other sports, but minute precison- the hand/eye of a Dustin Pedroia- whom that scout cited as a comp for Andrew, and the exact mechanics to optimize pitching velocity. But there may be a seccond factor at play, and I'd like for Telson and his Orthopaedic expertise to chime in; I remember reading some time ago about different character within muscle itself. Some types would be stronger/denser for its given weight than others. This may also perhaps explain these two young players, and going back a few others: Ron Guidry was listed close to 165 lbs but threw 98 mph and could bench close to 300! Bobby Orr was 185 lbs but had one of the hardest shots, and knocked over players far larger. Anyone watching football has seen powerful running backs around 200 lbs collide with defensive lineman 300 lbs, resulting in a wash.
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Sept 5, 2015 12:31:14 GMT -5
Jimoh thanks for the clarification on Lynn's weighlifting, that might explain the decline. Know anything about Rice? Yes I remember that event with Swann, though it did take Lynn a while to get going- he was only a 1-15 in Strat-o matic- just above average, but not real fast. As for Donnie Sadler for sure, he never hit well enough to get the consistent reps in fielding. But boy, his quickness was incredible, his range beyond anyone's- he was the second fastest runner in the league only behind a Texas outfielder, and he had a cannon that played well in the outfield or shortstop. Nice to see someone else remember him, he does deserve tribute for unique skills!
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Sept 4, 2015 23:43:56 GMT -5
But greatest defensive sox ever? Not even close- too bad he couldn't hit enogh to start, but Donnie Sadler could play every infield (except first) and outfield position at a gold glove level- I can't think of anyone in history like him other than Honus Wagner- who did play every position incredibly well, before he was signed.
|
|
|