Your 2015 Boston Red Sox
- Thread starter In my lifetime
- Start date
- Status
The only unrealistic part is the .331 avg. If he hits .331 the .405 and .493 are most likely accurate.
.290/.358/.425 is right in line with James. Add 41 points of avg and he's up to .331/.409/.466. Little less ISO.
.290/.358/.425 is right in line with James. Add 41 points of avg and he's up to .331/.409/.466. Little less ISO.
Sincere apologies for the lack of a definite source, but I just read over at Pro Sports Daily that we're nearing an agreement with Sandoval. 5 years and $100M. The source is the same guy who revealed the Rusney Castillo signing first. All I have so far is that the guy's twitter is Marino_Pepen.
I'll edit this post once something more concrete is released.
I'll edit this post once something more concrete is released.
X posting...Papelbon's Poutine said:
Matt Huegel @MattHuegelSP Aug 22
.@Marino_Pepen reporting that #RedSox are close to signing Cuban OF Rusney Castillo for around 6yrs/$72m. #RumorMill
So he is a legit reporter (I believe he covers the Red Sox for the Spanish press....
Papelbon's Poutine said:
But consistent with not being a party to a drawn-out multi-team process a la Boras.
I'd be pretty annoyed if we shot our load on Sandoval and ended up with McCarthy as our best FA SP signing.
And here I was hoping the Red Sox would announce the return of Jon Lester about 45 seconds into his free agency.
http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/just-a-bit-outside/story/boston-red-sox-cincinnati-reds-johnny-cueto-yoenis-cespedes-trade-makes-sense-for-both-110514
Of course, there are a myriad of reasons why a deal like this might not happen, and we shouldn't expect this trade to actually happen. Plenty of things that look good from the outside fall apart when inside information is added to the mix. Maybe the Red Sox have figured out how to use seven outfielders at one time next year. Maybe Cueto loves cheese-and-meat covered hot dogs, so he will give the Reds a significant discount in order to not be separated from Skyline Chili. But as outsiders, just looking at each team's strengths and weaknesses, a Cespedes (and stuff) for Cueto trade seems to make a good amount of sense for both sides.
I like Cespedes but him and a Webster/Renaudo for Cueto I would do in a heartbeat. Cespedes would murder the NL Central. The ballparks are launchpads.
Of course, there are a myriad of reasons why a deal like this might not happen, and we shouldn't expect this trade to actually happen. Plenty of things that look good from the outside fall apart when inside information is added to the mix. Maybe the Red Sox have figured out how to use seven outfielders at one time next year. Maybe Cueto loves cheese-and-meat covered hot dogs, so he will give the Reds a significant discount in order to not be separated from Skyline Chili. But as outsiders, just looking at each team's strengths and weaknesses, a Cespedes (and stuff) for Cueto trade seems to make a good amount of sense for both sides.
I like Cespedes but him and a Webster/Renaudo for Cueto I would do in a heartbeat. Cespedes would murder the NL Central. The ballparks are launchpads.
Getting Cueto would be a fantastic move. The price suggested by Cameron there seems low-- he's got Cespedes and Ranaudo for Cueto and Marshall's $6.5 million contract, which the Red Sox would jump all over, but the Reds should get a little more than that. Cueto is coming off a season where he threw 243 innings of 2.25 ERA baseball and going into his age 29 season. I think Cespedes would hit a lot of homers for them next year, but they're unlikely to pay up for an extension for him.
But taking Marshall's contract and giving them the IL pitcher of the year who was 14-4, 2.61 in AAA this year is a start. We'd need to add at least one more decent prospect, maybe one of our 10-20 ranked prospects, which the Red Sox should certainly be willing to do.
The bloom has kind of come off Cespedes around here as he didn't look good in the field, doesn't walk, and there have been these stories about the staff not liking him, etc. But from the Red point of view, he is a 100 RBI guy with potential to hit 30+ HRs in their park, athletic with a cannon arm, who would really boost the middle of their lineup while they make one last run at the postseason in 2015.
They might think that a highlight-reel slugger, a pitching prospect, freeing up Marshall's $6.5 million, plus another good prospect is a pretty good return for one year of Cueto.
But taking Marshall's contract and giving them the IL pitcher of the year who was 14-4, 2.61 in AAA this year is a start. We'd need to add at least one more decent prospect, maybe one of our 10-20 ranked prospects, which the Red Sox should certainly be willing to do.
The bloom has kind of come off Cespedes around here as he didn't look good in the field, doesn't walk, and there have been these stories about the staff not liking him, etc. But from the Red point of view, he is a 100 RBI guy with potential to hit 30+ HRs in their park, athletic with a cannon arm, who would really boost the middle of their lineup while they make one last run at the postseason in 2015.
They might think that a highlight-reel slugger, a pitching prospect, freeing up Marshall's $6.5 million, plus another good prospect is a pretty good return for one year of Cueto.
I can't see Cespedes and Ranaudo (or Webster) as being enough for a guy like Cueto. I think it can be done without including Betts/Bogaerts/Swihart, but I would think you'd have to include Owens or Rodriguez instead of (or more likely, in addition to) Webster or Ranaudo.
You have to keep in mind, if the Reds are willing to deal Cueto, the Red Sox aren't the only team that are going to be lining up to acquire him.
If we are able to trade for Cueto, I'd hope we'd get a window to work out a contract extension - although the FO might be hesitant to give him nine figures over 6+ seasons until he shows he can pitch in Boston.
You have to keep in mind, if the Reds are willing to deal Cueto, the Red Sox aren't the only team that are going to be lining up to acquire him.
If we are able to trade for Cueto, I'd hope we'd get a window to work out a contract extension - although the FO might be hesitant to give him nine figures over 6+ seasons until he shows he can pitch in Boston.
Hank Scorpio said:
Cueto is on a one-year deal though.It's not like whoever gets him is guaranteed to keep him for the long term, a factor that should depress his intrinsic value. Would another team be willing to give top prospects for a guy you know will be a free agent next year? At a time you can just go out and sign a free agent? I actually think the framework suggested by Cameron, Cespedes+Ranaudo/Webster+$6.5m in salary relief (and may be you add a lottery ticket to top it off) is quite good and not that easily matched.
Rather than alternate offerings, the main alternate option, I think is for the Reds to sit tight, maybe try to sign a Markakis or trade for a Marlon Byrd, trade Cueto at the July deadline if they are out of it. That or try to substitute Latos for Cueto in the proposed deal above.
Snoop Soxy Dogg said:
The Reds know they can't afford Cueto after this year so I think it's more likely they try to move him and extend Latos. The Reds have four starting pitchers that will be free agents after 2015. As Cameron mentions in the article, moving Cueto and Marshall frees up some money to replace Cueto in the rotation (Masterson? McCarthy? Santana?).
A rotation of Latos, Bailey, Leake, Simon, Masterson is still pretty solid and the potential line-up with Cespedes and a healthy Bruce/Votto could be one of the best in the league if things go right. Ranaudo would give them a potential replacement in the rotation if/when Simon or Leake leave via free agency.
Snoop Soxy Dogg said:
This was my first thought. The package Cameron suggested sounds more like what it would take to get Latos, IMO. Cameron's goal with that piece is to spark draw traffic and spark discussion, so I don't take it to mean much other than as fodder for message board posts and comment threads, but it seems a bit of a light offer from the Sox. Don't get me wrong, I'd be effing thrilled to be wrong here, but I just don't see it.
TOleary25 said:
Why is this being posted as though it's a known fact, lately? Is there a quote from someone in the Reds' front office suggesting they don't think they can afford him? Or is it just "Small market team means no big contracts?" I mean, they signed Joey Votto to a mega deal, so they are clearly willing to spend when they like someone. It's not a lock that they will be able to extend him, but I would be shocked if they've already written off the possibility.
Also, the phrase "moving Cueto and Marshall frees up some money to replace Cueto in the rotation" made me laugh. If their goal is to free up money they haven't spent yet to use in free agency to replace him, why not just spend money on him in the first place? If they want to compete, extending Cueto is their best option. I'm really not seeing the argument for the Reds being unable to keep Cueto after 2015.
Snodgrass'Muff said:
Joey Votto's mega deal is one of the reasons they probably don't have the money to resign Ceuto. They have $67m already guaranteed in 2016 according to cots, and that's not factoring arbitration numbers. Cueto likely will cost $25M at least in 2016 so they would already be around $100M with two/three other starting pitching spots to fill. How often do you see a mid-market team committing $60M+ on just three players? I guess there is a possibility they can extend him but it just looks doubtful at this point.
Snodgrass'Muff said:
Not sure what doesn't make sense to you. According to Cots, Cueto is on the books for $15M and Marshall for $6.5M. That's $21.5M total, Cespedes is at $10.5M. That frees up ~$11M this year for a starter.
Well I think it's tied into the idea that the Reds have a weaker farm system, so as their core players get more expensive they don't have cheap talent to supplement them. I think they could certainly afford to keep Cueto but they run the risk of becoming like the Tigers by doing so.
I think it comes from the frequent reports from Cincy saying they can't sign both. People then assume they can't sign the most expensive, when in fact the reason they can't sign both is likely because they want to keep the most expensive one.Snodgrass'Muff said:
I'd agree as well that the deal Cameron outlined sounds like a much better fit for Latos, freeing up the $6.5M from Marshall to add to a Cueto extension.
TOleary25 said:
They have depth in their minors as well. Stephenson has a ridiculous fastball. Also I am not sure why they would go out and get Masterson to start instead of Cingrani. Cingrani was injured last year but was great the year before. Masterson was worse healthy last year.
Also I am not sure Latos can get Cespedes now with his elbow injury and his decreased velocity. It is a bit of crap shoot to see what will happen with the stem cell injection. That said he may be easier to extend now for the Reds.
Ideally yep, but how would that work? Once the season starts, he's not very likely to give up his one shot at a big FA deal unless it's for a huge non-Cherington-like contract. I would think we have to view him as a one-year player, which is why it's (theoretically) possible to get him for another one-year player and a prospect. That said, I'm for giving up one of our several B-list lottery tickets, and if he loves it in Boston, then see what can be done after next year vs the open market.Hank Scorpio said:
As for playing in Boston, normally I like to think of these issues as somewhat overblown, but I see on Wikipedia he crashed out of his playoff start last year pretty badly, with Pittsburgh fans mocking him. So my inclination to assume he has thick enough skin is perhaps subject to closer investigation. Again, though, that's only an issue for a long-term deal. Still worth having him for a season at the right price.
It's simply preposterous! I think Dave needs to read this board so that he is not suggesting trade proposal that this forum finds preposterous.Snodgrass'Muff said:
Sorry, could not resist. I think it would be great but you may have something there in that it may take a few lesser prospects ... again I offer Escobar & Brentz. Absorbing Sean Marshall's contract helps but I'd throw in Mujica and do a contract trade.
ha ha, as you should...lxt said:
here is my mea culpa on my sarcasm, maybe your trade suggestion wasn't so silly.
benhogan said:
Mine as well. Preposterous was too strong a word. I still think it's not enough for Cueto, but you seem to agree there is a need to add value from the Sox. I would argue Brentz and Escobar is not enough, but I'd be splitting hairs.
Well Done.Snodgrass'Muff said:
Mine as well. Preposterous was too strong a word. I still think it's not enough for Cueto, but you seem to agree there is a need to add value from the Sox. I would argue Brentz and Escobar is not enough, but I'd be splitting hairs.
I also have a problem with offering too much since we only get him for a year. If he'd agree to sign a 3 to 4 year extension as part of the trade (Sort of like Gonzales did) then I'd offer Cespedes and Owens straight up.
Saw this on TradeRumors
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/11/rockies-willing-to-listen-on-tulowitzki-gonzalez.html
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/11/rockies-willing-to-listen-on-tulowitzki-gonzalez.html
I'm not sure the proposal is that crazy; its a difference of perception regarding cueto. The difference between cueto and cespedes was somewhere around 0.7 fWAR or 2.3 bWAR this year, and it depends on how you project cueto in 2015.Snodgrass'Muff said:
FWIW, steamer projects Cueto and cepesdes to produce the same amount of value next season. Personally, I don't buy Cueto's projection, I think he'll do a bit better than 170 IP and will outperform his FIP (as usual). I don't think he'll pitch almost 250 innings with 2.28 ERA, however. Projecting Cueto as a 4 fWAR player and cespedes as a 3 fWAR player, however, is fairly reasonable.
If you're talking about a difference of about a win, taking on Sean Marshall and adding a minor league pitcher makes up that difference pretty nicely, and gives the reds additional years of control on young pitching.
I don't think such a trade would happen for multiple reasons, some of which you note, but I wouldn't call the offer itself "light".
EDIT: 2.3 bWAR, not 1.5. I need to work on my artithmetic.
lxt said:
Why would Cueto, due to be an FA after his age 29 season, sign an extension that would make him an FA after his age 32 or 33 season?
An extension he'll consider will be more like six years — as you say, similar to Gonzales' seven year extension with the Sox.
Similarly, I would be more than happy to trade Clay Buchholz as long as the return was fair value for his pitching performance from the first half of the 2013 season.MakMan44 said:
Fascinating read .
http://ken.arneson.name/2014/11/10-things-i-believe-about-baseball-without-evidence/
Just one part that I found fascinating
Belief Without Evidence #7: SQL-reliant GMs don’t value the third dimension of #6 enough
In a vast sea of unordered pitches from an unordered group of pitchers, you will get a randomly-distributed plethora of good pitches to hit, so the numbers will all work out in the end. So you acquire hitters based on these vast seas of data, ignoring what the batter does with difficult pitches to hit, because in the long run, they don’t matter much.
But against a good pitcher on a good day who does not give you a good pitch to hit, what do those batters do? Do they hit a ball hard if they don’t get a good pitch to hit?
To me, the biggest difference between the A’s in the playoffs and the Giants in the playoffs is Pablo Sandoval. Because there may not be anyone in baseball right now better than Sandoval who does damage even when he does not get a good pitch to hit. He can turn pitches in the dirt, in his eyes, and/or six inches off the plate into a hit. He’s almost immune to prediction state manipulation by opposing pitchers. And Hunter Pence, though not as extreme as Sandoval, has similar characteristics.
The A’s simply do not pursue those types of players. Players like Sandoval tend to have low OBPs, because they swing at so many bad pitches. Minor leaguers with that profile flop far more than they succeed, so they’re a bad risk to take. But there are times, against a good pitcher on a good day who is simply not giving hitters a good pitch to hit, that it is valuable to have a player who often does damage even with a bad pitch to hit. And those times happen more often in the playoffs.
A technology that used a system of evaluating players in which high-level statistics of player value were derived from a low-level {speed, location, movement, swing path, prediction state} matrix would better identify the true value of such players.
http://ken.arneson.name/2014/11/10-things-i-believe-about-baseball-without-evidence/
Just one part that I found fascinating
Belief Without Evidence #7: SQL-reliant GMs don’t value the third dimension of #6 enough
In a vast sea of unordered pitches from an unordered group of pitchers, you will get a randomly-distributed plethora of good pitches to hit, so the numbers will all work out in the end. So you acquire hitters based on these vast seas of data, ignoring what the batter does with difficult pitches to hit, because in the long run, they don’t matter much.
But against a good pitcher on a good day who does not give you a good pitch to hit, what do those batters do? Do they hit a ball hard if they don’t get a good pitch to hit?
To me, the biggest difference between the A’s in the playoffs and the Giants in the playoffs is Pablo Sandoval. Because there may not be anyone in baseball right now better than Sandoval who does damage even when he does not get a good pitch to hit. He can turn pitches in the dirt, in his eyes, and/or six inches off the plate into a hit. He’s almost immune to prediction state manipulation by opposing pitchers. And Hunter Pence, though not as extreme as Sandoval, has similar characteristics.
The A’s simply do not pursue those types of players. Players like Sandoval tend to have low OBPs, because they swing at so many bad pitches. Minor leaguers with that profile flop far more than they succeed, so they’re a bad risk to take. But there are times, against a good pitcher on a good day who is simply not giving hitters a good pitch to hit, that it is valuable to have a player who often does damage even with a bad pitch to hit. And those times happen more often in the playoffs.
A technology that used a system of evaluating players in which high-level statistics of player value were derived from a low-level {speed, location, movement, swing path, prediction state} matrix would better identify the true value of such players.
jimbobim said:
Wow. This guy is brilliant. Thank you for posting this!!! (Where did you find this???)
The main reason I personally would have labelled your previous suggestions preposterous was the assignment of real value to Mujica. He turned his season around pretty well and I don't think he's an albatross at $4.75M for one more year, but no team is giving him real trade value at that price.lxt said:
Also, Brentz would probably have less value to Cincy with Cespedes than to Boston without Cespedes. At that point the Sox are committing to some form of Nava/Craig/Victorino platoon in LF and Brentz would be valuable depth. Meanwhile Cincy's 2nd and 3rd best prospects on most lists are OFs, and depending on the list Blandino (a SS) and Yorman Rodriguez (a OF) trade places in the top 10. Rodriguez got a taste of the bigs last year as well. They're incredibly poor on IF depth, especially anything in the upper minors (they just drafted Blandino).
I think you'd see a preference for Sean Coyle or Deven Marrero over Brentz. Wendell Rijo would also likely REALLY interest them as he's in an ideal position to pair with Blandino straight up through the minors, developing a strong battery they would have daydreams about breaking in together at the ML level.
If I was to spitball a deal for Cueto I'd guess something like this:
Cueto + Marshall for Cespedes + one of Webster/Ranaudo/RDLR/Barnes + Travis Shaw + Noe Ramirez + Wendell Rijo. You could probably swap Sean Coyle for Rijo, maybe talk them into Asuaje instead of Rijo but I'd doubt that. Shaw would be a nice piece for them as 1B has been a black hole and having Shaw would let them defer some risk by signing a one year vet to fill the gap. Adam LaRoche for example just had his option declined and is 35. A one year deal for nice money could land him and when teamed with Cespedes would massively overhaul their offense. If Mesoraco continues to hit like last year while Bruce and Votto bounce back from very poor seasons they could then have the best offense in the NL in a GFIN move before having to resign some of their pitchers and likely losing Aroldis Chapman to FA after 2016 (hence why they'd probably like Noe Ramirez). When that rebuild does hit they would then have their own in-house OF options to replace Cespedes, Shaw could replace LaRoche, and they would have Blandino/Rijo on the horizon to handle up the middle.
That relies entirely on no other team throwing a blue chipper into the pot for the right to pay Cueto $20M+ per for the next seven years mind you. If some team is willing to do that I don't think the Sox will be game with all the other pitching options available.
Drek717 said:
why would they even sign a vet 1B to "fill the gap"? Votto is an MVP caliber player when healthy and he is generally pretty healthy outside of last year. why would they be interested in shaw at all with votto signed through 2024? he is their starting 1B for many, many years, no matter how badly he sucks.
edit: a gimpy Joey Votto last year was a better hitter than Mike Napoli and he would have been the 2nd best hitter on our team. the guy is an otherworldly talent and i fully expect him to have a bounceback season. if the reds dont expect the same there is no reason to be trading for Cespedes because there is no way in hell they compete next year without a return to form from Votto.
Something that's been on my mind, want to see what others think. One of the hesitations I have with the team trading for a guy like Cueto is that I wonder whether they'd sign him to an extension when the time comes. It "seems", for the moment, that the FO has a plan built around avoiding long pitching deals. This seems somewhat apparent since they've had an interest in Cole Hamels, for example, when they could easily sign Lester as a similar pitcher. Hamels only has a 4-year deal left.
Cueto would be 29-ish when his time comes to be a free agent, with another great season he'll certainly command a typical 6 year/$120M package. Is this the type of guy we would sign to such a deal? Or might the team be planning to trade for him anyway and try to make a one-year run at the World Series? I see the names Hamels and Shields being thrown around in rumors, it seems no coincidence that they both will have deals in the 4-5 year range.
TL
R - basically, I'm slightly skeptical on trading for a guy like Cueto because I am not optimistic the team would sign him to an extension in the future.
Cueto would be 29-ish when his time comes to be a free agent, with another great season he'll certainly command a typical 6 year/$120M package. Is this the type of guy we would sign to such a deal? Or might the team be planning to trade for him anyway and try to make a one-year run at the World Series? I see the names Hamels and Shields being thrown around in rumors, it seems no coincidence that they both will have deals in the 4-5 year range.
TL
R - basically, I'm slightly skeptical on trading for a guy like Cueto because I am not optimistic the team would sign him to an extension in the future.pdub said:
Just to be that guy,,, if Cueto has another great season he'll command a far larger deal than that, probably 7/150+. He and Lester are very comparable pitchers, but Cueto will be hitting the market a year younger. Your point still stands though, and I agree. I don't think Boston would trade away anything of value for a 1 year rental, unless they could make sure there would be some sort of 4-5 year contract extension.
[SIZE=12pt]Here is a roster projection based on and trading Cespedes + prospects for Cueto + Marshall, and signing Sandoval and Lester[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]With a reported ~$50M to spend, they should be able to swing this and maybe add Ross, if they aren’t comfortable with letting Butler and Lavarnway compete for backup catcher.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]STARTING PITCHERS[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Clay Buchholz[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Johnny Cueto[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Rubby de la Rosa[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Joe Kelly[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Jon Lester[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]RELIEF PITCHERS[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Burke Badenhop[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Sean Marshall[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Edward Mujica[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Junichi Tazawa[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Brandon Workman[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Steven Wright[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Koji Uehara[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]STARTING POSITION PLAYERS[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]C Christian Vazquez[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]1B Mike Napoli[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]2B Dustin Pedroia[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]SS Xander Boegarts[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]3B Pablo Sandoval[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]OF Mookie Betts[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]OF Rusney Castillo[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]OF Shane Victorino[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]DH David Ortiz[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]BENCH[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Butler or Lavarnway or Ross[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Allen Craig[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Brock Holt [/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Daniel Nava[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]This looks like a serious contending team to me. I’d rather have a good defensive infielder on the bench instead of Craig or Nava, but I’m not sure how that reasonably happens. There would be pitching prospect depth in Pawtucket to cover typical pitching injuries and/or trade needs. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]With a reported ~$50M to spend, they should be able to swing this and maybe add Ross, if they aren’t comfortable with letting Butler and Lavarnway compete for backup catcher.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]STARTING PITCHERS[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Clay Buchholz[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Johnny Cueto[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Rubby de la Rosa[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Joe Kelly[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Jon Lester[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]RELIEF PITCHERS[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Burke Badenhop[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Sean Marshall[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Edward Mujica[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Junichi Tazawa[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Brandon Workman[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Steven Wright[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Koji Uehara[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]STARTING POSITION PLAYERS[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]C Christian Vazquez[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]1B Mike Napoli[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]2B Dustin Pedroia[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]SS Xander Boegarts[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]3B Pablo Sandoval[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]OF Mookie Betts[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]OF Rusney Castillo[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]OF Shane Victorino[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]DH David Ortiz[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]BENCH[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Butler or Lavarnway or Ross[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Allen Craig[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Brock Holt [/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Daniel Nava[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]This looks like a serious contending team to me. I’d rather have a good defensive infielder on the bench instead of Craig or Nava, but I’m not sure how that reasonably happens. There would be pitching prospect depth in Pawtucket to cover typical pitching injuries and/or trade needs. [/SIZE]
TigerBlood said:
Also keep in mind that there is an absolutely stacked class in 2016 - Zimmermann, Cueto, Price, Iwakuma, Latos, etc. Though there'd probably be more competition as well for those guys. That said, not sure how much that really plays into this year's decision.
jimbobim said:
The counter-argument to that would be Vlad Guerrero, a notorious bad-ball hitter. In 188 PAs in the playoffs (admittedly many in the later stage of his career), he posted a .664 OPS. Or Alfonso Soriano, another free-swinging, bad-ball hitter - 186 PAs in the postseason, .562 OPS.
I'm skeptical about this argument. A superior ability to hit good pitches, unless it is offset by a corresponding inferior ability to hit bad pitches, would logically produce a high BABIP and/or ISO--if not, then it's just a superior ability to make contact with good pitches, which he obviously possesses, but which is a different and far less useful thing.
Sandoval has only had a BABIP above .320 once in a full season, in his first full year at age 22. Since then, in five seasons, his BABIP is .302 and his ISO is .159--both fine but unexceptional. So if he's really ripping the cover off pitchers' pitches at an unusual rate, he must be popping up more than his share of meatballs.
The idea that he's better than most at hitting good pitches obviously plays into the "he's a postseason god" meme--but that sample size is so small (about 130 balls in play, including dingers) that I think skepticism even about his postseason ability is in order, let alone about this explanation for it.
Sandoval has only had a BABIP above .320 once in a full season, in his first full year at age 22. Since then, in five seasons, his BABIP is .302 and his ISO is .159--both fine but unexceptional. So if he's really ripping the cover off pitchers' pitches at an unusual rate, he must be popping up more than his share of meatballs.
The idea that he's better than most at hitting good pitches obviously plays into the "he's a postseason god" meme--but that sample size is so small (about 130 balls in play, including dingers) that I think skepticism even about his postseason ability is in order, let alone about this explanation for it.
phenweigh said:
i have zero confidence in that rotation.
edit: whoa sorry, really just skimmed through and saw bucholz and cueto at the top and made a stupid post. i apologize. that is a decent roatation with lester and cueto. are we assuming castillo and betts are 3-5 win players next year? a roattion that replaces shields with lester seems more likely and not nearly as good. but i am of the mind that we will really be competing for a WC spot and dont really expect us to be a top tier team next season
sean1562 said:
I have more confidence in that rotation than I do the Sox will actually be able to trade for Cueto and sign Lester.
If you have zero confidence in a rotation that has two top 10-15 starters in all of baseball I am scared to imagine how you will feel when the top of the rotation looks much worse.
I am not sure there is a better scenario than having Lesser and Cueto as your #1 an #2 starters.
I am not sure there is a better scenario than having Lesser and Cueto as your #1 an #2 starters.
sean1562 said:
You mean confidence in the likelihood of Ben acquiring it, or in its likely performance once acquired?
sean1562 said:
Maybe I shouldn't have listed the pitchers alphabetically, but I'm not a fan of designating #1 through #5 starters. Major league baseball doesn't really work like a high school tennis match.
yea, i should have read the thing, stupid mistake on my part. im not sure they will be able to make that happen but it could be a decent rotation if bucholz bounces back and de la rosa proves he is more than a set up guy/potential closer.phenweigh said:
Yeah, I brain farted on that one. Was looking at their least productive positions last year and 1B was awful because Votto missed so much time. As a result they'd likely want something more like Coyle + Rijo or Marrero + Rijo as opposed to Shaw, since a 1B won't do much for them. Maybe Cecchini as well since he'd be a potential replacement for Fraizer if they want to flip him soon as he is getting into his arb. years.sean1562 said:
Any deal with the Reds would be interesting. They aren't a small money team in reality, but they've committed so much to Votto, Bruce, and Phillips with Mesoraco, Cueto, and Latos unpaid still. Mesoraco has a ways to go until he needs a big new deal, but not long enough to get out from under Votto's monster obligation, and maybe not Phillips' as Mesoraco would be well into his arb. years by then and likely close enough to FA to ride it out and go for the monster deal. Meanwhile they're too strapped to afford both Latos and Cueto in the short term. A real lesson to be learned there in terms of just how long a deal you hand out no matter how good the player.
I could see Allen Craig in AAA to begin next season and Weeks sticking. Also depends on Victorino as well as if Craig looks good in Spring Training.
- Status