Alex Verdugo - on-field discussion thread

JBJ_HOF

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2014
402
Verdugo has thrown 97mph on statcast from the outfield, one of the strongest outfield arms in the majors.
 

The Allented Mr Ripley

holden
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 2, 2003
12,055
South Shore, MA
Verdugo was a highly-touted pitcher in HS.

Verdugo, who was drafted by the Dodgers in the 2014 MLB Draft out of Sahuaro High School in Ariz., was listed as an outfielder but praised for his arm. Scouting reports wrote that the lefty had a “plus-plus” arm and could throw a fastball of up to 93 mph. While competing at the state quarterfinals his junior year, he struck out 18 batters in six innings – and against the Sox last June, he threw a ball from the outfield 97.1 mph to nail Rafael Devers at home plate.
 

Earthbound64

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
You don't get to crow hop on the mound.
I'm assuming you can get more velocity with a running/hop start.
I get that, I didn't know if there was some sort of conversion chart or just a WAG. Carry on.
Yeah, wasn't meant to be a straight calculation or anything (hence the "probably like" wording).
Just that it's not like we have a pitcher in the outfield or something.
 
Nov 24, 2007
279
PBO NC
Any chance he can pitch in relief?
He wants to pitch. From the same article quoted above from March 9:
"Alex Verdugo wants to prove he can be a two-way player.
The newly-acquired Red Sox rightfielder — who is recovering from a back injury — expressed his interest in pitching to The Athletic. If it were up up him — and once he’s played a full season healthily — Verdugo would begin an offseason throwing program, throw bullpens at spring training, and then perhaps make his pitching debut during the regular season."
Bloom hasn't said no. Hasn't said yes either.
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
6,940
He's a 24 year old on pace to be a 5-6 win player this year with 4 more years of team control, if they ever let him pitch, even in a mop up situation, whoever is manager should be fired on the spot.
 
Nov 24, 2007
279
PBO NC
In 2016, with a full head of steam, JBJ unleashed a 105 mph throw to the plate. It was noted at the time as the second fastest of the Statcast era. It was also off-target and the run scored.
 

Humphrey

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2010
1,120
He's a 24 year old on pace to be a 5-6 win player this year with 4 more years of team control, if they ever let him pitch, even in a mop up situation, whoever is manager should be fired on the spot.
Who's the last field player to hurt themselves significantly pitching? We sure know of several pitchers who've hurt themselves batting or running the bases.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
12,864
Maine
Who's the last field player to hurt themselves significantly pitching? We sure know of several pitchers who've hurt themselves batting or running the bases.
Canseco?

I feel like there's one that was more recent than that, but he's the one that leaps to mind.

Edit: I know the question is more about longer term type injuries, but just this year Jose Peraza had to leave a game after being hit by a line drive while he was on the mound.
 
Last edited:

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
4,383
Boston, MA
Does Ohtani's Tommy John surgery count? He was likely damaged goods before he came to MLB, but if Verdugo blew out his elbow, he wouldn't be playing the outfield for a year, either.
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
6,940
Who's the last field player to hurt themselves significantly pitching? We sure know of several pitchers who've hurt themselves batting or running the bases.
I don't know, but what's the upside? They aren't going to make him a pitcher so why risk it at all. Who's the last star caliber position player that a team let pitch?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
12,864
Maine
I don't know, but what's the upside? They aren't going to make him a pitcher so why risk it at all. Who's the last star caliber position player that a team let pitch?
Anthony Rizzo closed a game for the Cubs in 2018 (faced one batter).

Chris Davis pitched in a game last year. He's not much of a "star" anymore, but he also pitched in 2012 when he was a much better and more important player to his team.

A number of Hall of Fame position players made appearances on the mound, though most are from the earlier days of the game (Cap Anson, Honus Wagner, Tris Speaker, Ty Cobb, etc). Jimmie Foxx, Ted Williams, and Stan Musial also pitched. The most recent HOFer to do it was Wade Boggs, but both his appearances were at the tail end of his career, long after he was still a perennial all star.
 

billy ashley

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
979
Washington DC
Not related to the pitching stuff: he's been a joy to watch.

I've been thinking about how Verdugo is exactly the player many of us thought Mookie Betts would settle into after he skyrocketed through the minors and had that really impressive abbreviated stint with the big league team.

Good contract skills, lots of walks, averagish, power and really good OF defense. Sure Betts became a superstar, but most of us would have been more than content if he had simply evolved into an 850 OPS guy with a good glove. We seem to have that with Verdugo.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
10,246
He's got a long long way to go to really be compared with Betts, of course. Mookie's proven it over many years now. However, just this short season alone....

Verdugo: 1.6 bWAR
Betts: 3.0 bWAR

So Betts has been about twice as valuable a player as Verdugo, which is no slight to Verdugo, because Betts is awesome.

But now factor in salary:

Verdugo: 1.6 bWAR at $563 thousand
Betts: 3.0 bWAR at $27 million

So Betts costs about 50 times (48.0) more than Verdugo, for twice the on-field production or value. Now at some point you want to spend for better players. But having quality players at league minimum is so crucial because you can then spend that money well elsewhere. Verdugo likely will never ever be as good as Betts. Likely won't even come close, actually.

But Verdugo is a good player, and potentially a tremendous player. And for the next few years they get him at a tiny fraction of the cost of Betts.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
22,227
Mookie being on pace for 12 bWAR / 162 games makes me [irrationally?] sad.

You're happy to get the salary relief, a quality replacement, hopefully a 2B solution back for a guy who wasn't going to sign pre-FA, but even when you move on, it hurts.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
10,246
Mookie being on pace for 12 bWAR / 162 games makes me [irrationally?] sad.

You're happy to get the salary relief, a quality replacement, hopefully a 2B solution back for a guy who wasn't going to sign pre-FA, but even when you move on, it hurts.
Believe me....I get it. Mookie has been my favorite player ever since he emerged in the minors. I was rooting for him back in 2013 and 2014. Very painful to see him on another team, especially as he's absolutely destroying the NL so far.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mookie being on pace for 12 bWAR / 162 games makes me [irrationally?] sad.

You're happy to get the salary relief, a quality replacement, hopefully a 2B solution back for a guy who wasn't going to sign pre-FA, but even when you move on, it hurts.
It would be difficult for it to hurt me less, and Verdugo is a nice piece of that.

And this is a Verdugo thread. I love the kid.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,610
Portsmouth, NH
He's got a long long way to go to really be compared with Betts, of course. Mookie's proven it over many years now. However, just this short season alone....

Verdugo: 1.6 bWAR
Betts: 3.0 bWAR

So Betts has been about twice as valuable a player as Verdugo, which is no slight to Verdugo, because Betts is awesome.

But now factor in salary:

Verdugo: 1.6 bWAR at $563 thousand
Betts: 3.0 bWAR at $27 million

So Betts costs about 50 times (48.0) more than Verdugo, for twice the on-field production or value. Now at some point you want to spend for better players. But having quality players at league minimum is so crucial because you can then spend that money well elsewhere. Verdugo likely will never ever be as good as Betts. Likely won't even come close, actually.

But Verdugo is a good player, and potentially a tremendous player. And for the next few years they get him at a tiny fraction of the cost of Betts.
If you read his post again, he isn’t comparing him to what Mookie ended up turning into, simply what got us excited about him to being with. He blew well past obviously, but no one rationally thinks a guy has a good shot to turn into a top 5 player.

edit: typo; to correct that op isnt* comparing him to present day Betts, which he clarified himself
 
Last edited:

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
22,227
I know. the 3.0 bWAR in 42 games just caught me by surprise a bit.

To get on-topic, Verdugo has grounded out quite a bit. I'd like to see more balls in the air, which at Fenway would mean more monster shots with his natural oppo power. His OPS is in the high 800s right now, but I think it's a bit BABIP inflated. More balls in the air and it could be a sustainable 880-920 OPS, and that's when you can start talking All-Star.

He also has been too aggressive on the bases. Need to rein that in, but I sense Roenicke and the staff this year really haven't coached much, with the overall impatient approach in the batter's box, so I'm willing to see what happens if 2021 is more normal in terms of spring training and season length.
 

billy ashley

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
979
Washington DC
If you read his post again, he's comparing him to what Mookie ended up turning into, simply what got us excited about him to being with. He blew well past obviously, but no one rationally thinks a guy has a good shot to turn into a top 5 player.

Yep. Thanks for catching that if I was unclear.

My point is Verdugo looks like what we thought we had in Betts in 2015 and during his "bad" 2017. There was a lot of reason to think his first superstar reason (16) was the limit for him and kind of a fluke, but he emerged in 18 as the only realistic Trout challenger and hasn't really looked back, since. We're talking about a potential 100 WAR guy. Fuck, it hurts that he's gone.

But yeah, Verdugo looks like the player we thought we had before Betts became who he is now. A well rounded sneaky star capable of an MVP caliber season with the benefit of BABIP luck and a fluky high HR/FB rate. Verdugo is a super valuable building block and basically free. As much as losing Betts sucked, Verdugo + Downs + the catcher / utility prospect I'm blanking on was a really good haul for one season of Betts.
 
Last edited:

santadevil

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,852
Saskatchestan
Good contract skills, lots of walks, averagish, power and really good OF defense. Sure Betts became a superstar, but most of us would have been more than content if he had simply evolved into an 850 OPS guy with a good glove. We seem to have that with Verdugo.
Can't believe no one has applauded this yet
 

Apisith

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2007
2,470
Bangkok
Hope we can use some salary room to lock up 2-3 of his FA years. Him and Devers should be priorities for an extension. We’ll need to lock in cost controlled years to open up a decent contention window.
 

A Bad Man

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2016
263
Fangraphs has Mookie at a more reasonable 2.3 fWAR, compared to Verdugo's 1.5. Mookie is a 6-7 WAR player in his prime, which we knew. Verdugo looks like a 4-5 WAR player. This is amazing and cause for serious celebration.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
17,592
Rogers Park
Hope we can use some salary room to lock up 2-3 of his FA years. Him and Devers should be priorities for an extension. We’ll need to lock in cost controlled years to open up a decent contention window.
If they'll sign, both would be good candidates for a Wil Myers-style deal that include a couple low-dollar years at the beginning to hold the AAV to something reasonable throughout.

Fangraphs has Mookie at a more reasonable 2.3 fWAR, compared to Verdugo's 1.5. Mookie is a 6-7 WAR player in his prime, which we knew. Verdugo looks like a 4-5 WAR player. This is amazing and cause for serious celebration.
Exactly. We got five years of control of Verdugo plus whatever we get out of Wong and Downs, for one year of Betts. Plus Price, however you value that part of the deal. I think LA got great value from Price, honestly, and I think he'll really help them.

Amazing trade. Way better than we had any right to expect. From when Bloom took over, he really played this well.

Do I think management effed up terribly by not getting to yes with Betts back in 2017? I do. I also don't know what it would've cost to do so.

Would that have had knock-on effects in terms of their ability to retain other star players like Bogaerts, Sale, and Devers? Presumably it would.

Now, time will tell what the right move was. It may be that we're looking back on this decision in 2023, with Sale, Bogaerts, Devers, and Verdugo all signed long term and posting All Star-type seasons while Jay Groome, Jeter Downs, Jarren Duran, and Triston Casas are establishing themselves as good regulars on pre-arb contracts. And perhaps at that moment LA, whether they've managed to win a WS or no during Mookie's projected prime (I like their odds), is now trying to figure out how to retain their other star players like Seager and Bellinger, and meanwhile Betts is now 30 and they still owe him like $270m or whatever it is.

I guess the question is whether it's better to have three players you project to post 5 WAR or one player you project to post 9 WAR, and the answer is I don't know.
 

brandonchristensen

mad photochops
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2012
26,437
If they'll sign, both would be good candidates for a Wil Myers-style deal that include a couple low-dollar years at the beginning to hold the AAV to something reasonable throughout.



Exactly. We got five years of control of Verdugo plus whatever we get out of Wong and Downs, for one year of Betts. Plus Price, however you value that part of the deal. I think LA got great value from Price, honestly, and I think he'll really help them.

Amazing trade. Way better than we had any right to expect. From when Bloom took over, he really played this well.

Do I think management effed up terribly by not getting to yes with Betts back in 2017? I do. I also don't know what it would've cost to do so.

Would that have had knock-on effects in terms of their ability to retain other star players like Bogaerts, Sale, and Devers? Presumably it would.

Now, time will tell what the right move was. It may be that we're looking back on this decision in 2023, with Sale, Bogaerts, Devers, and Verdugo all signed long term and posting All Star-type seasons while Jay Groome, Jeter Downs, Jarren Duran, and Triston Casas are establishing themselves as good regulars on pre-arb contracts. And perhaps at that moment LA, whether they've managed to win a WS or no during Mookie's projected prime (I like their odds), is now trying to figure out how to retain their other star players like Seager and Bellinger, and meanwhile Betts is now 30 and they still owe him like $270m or whatever it is.

I guess the question is whether it's better to have three players you project to post 5 WAR or one player you project to post 9 WAR, and the answer is I don't know.
The scary thing about his contract is that life is unexpected. Even if he is great for even FIVE years - he could get hurt on a slide and all of a sudden he’s out for 5 more at 30+ a year and he can’t play. It’s not about Mookie, it’s about handicapping your team.

Of course you don’t pay someone that expecting that, but it can happen (see: Pedroia) and there’s nothing the team can do about it.

I will never support a 10-year contract.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,610
Portsmouth, NH
The scary thing about his contract is that life is unexpected. Even if he is great for even FIVE years - he could get hurt on a slide and all of a sudden he’s out for 5 more at 30+ a year and he can’t play. It’s not about Mookie, it’s about handicapping your team.

Of course you don’t pay someone that expecting that, but it can happen (see: Pedroia) and there’s nothing the team can do about it.

I will never support a 10-year contract.
Thank you. I'm not worrying about someone sliding, but don't handicap the payroll. And no 10 years contracts (or in Mookie's case, 13 years).
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
7,002
Westwood MA
It would be difficult for it to hurt me less, and Verdugo is a nice piece of that.

And this is a Verdugo thread. I love the kid.
I love the kid too and what he has shown so far and thank God for that, can you imagine the reaction if he was struggling.

I have no problem with the trade or the return they got from it.

I will defer to others here who are much more plugged into the behind the scenes aspect of this, but in my opinion (and it's just that, my opinion), he did not want to sign here/play here, he intimated about wanted to test the waters and see what he could get and forced the Red Sox hand.

Then he lands in LA and without playing a game signs a massive contract and kisses off free agency.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck. it's a duck, ie, he wasn't going to stay here, people need to understand that and be at peace with it.

I am; players come and go and move on, cheer for the name on the front of the jersey and not the back, you'll sleep a lot better at night if you do, ie, don't fall in love with any one player but love the team as a whole.

Just like Brady and the Patriots, he decided it was time to move on, thanks for the trophies Tom, best of luck to you in Tampa; Cam Newton, come on down, let's see what you've got.

All things end badly or they wouldn't end.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
9,300
Fangraphs has Mookie at a more reasonable 2.3 fWAR, compared to Verdugo's 1.5. Mookie is a 6-7 WAR player in his prime, which we knew. Verdugo looks like a 4-5 WAR player. This is amazing and cause for serious celebration.
I like Verdugo, I'm optimistic about his future, and I understand the need for the trade given the hole we put ourselves in.

But this thread has gone a little overboard talking about how good Verdugo is going to be, comparisons to Mookie, etc. The guy has 3.6 career WAR in 199 career games (653 plate appearances). He's had a nice start this year and he could maybe turn into a consistent 4-5 WAR type player if things fall right, but the error bars are still HUGE.

Mookie is a once in a generation perennial MVP/HOF player who has 40 WAR in 835 games (3813 plate appearances). Basically a 7-8 WAR player over less than 6 seasons in the majors and still in his early prime.

There is a reason the Dodgers traded us Verdugo and other prospects for 1 year of Mookie and the right to give him another $365M. Mookie is that good.

Not that ZIPS is perfect or anything, but they have Mookie as a 6 win player and Verdugo as a 2 win player in 2021 and 2022.
 

SydneySox

A dash of cool to add the heat
SoSH Member
Sep 19, 2005
15,605
The Eastern Suburbs
I like Verdugo, I'm optimistic about his future, and I understand the need for the trade given the hole we put ourselves in.

But this thread has gone a little overboard talking about how good Verdugo is going to be, comparisons to Mookie, etc. The guy has 3.6 career WAR in 199 career games (653 plate appearances). He's had a nice start this year and he could maybe turn into a consistent 4-5 WAR type player if things fall right, but the error bars are still HUGE.

Mookie is a once in a generation perennial MVP/HOF player who has 40 WAR in 835 games (3813 plate appearances). Basically a 7-8 WAR player over less than 6 seasons in the majors and still in his early prime.

There is a reason the Dodgers traded us Verdugo and other prospects for 1 year of Mookie and the right to give him another $365M. Mookie is that good.

Not that ZIPS is perfect or anything, but they have Mookie as a 6 win player and Verdugo as a 2 win player in 2021 and 2022.
This was not a video game choice of Verdugo vs Mookie. No one in the universe in your video game would choose Verdugo over Mookie. We get it.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
9,300
This was not a video game choice of Verdugo vs Mookie. No one in the universe in your video game would choose Verdugo over Mookie. We get it.
Of course, but the talk of Verdugo as 80% of Mookie is just wacky. Verdugo has had a nice start but we have people extrapolating a 40 game sample into a year, and then that year into a cheap 5 year run of excellence.

Verdugo's chances of flaming out into nothing are as good as him becoming a consistent 4-5 win player. I honestly don't say that as a knock on Verdugo, I just think people are not fully understanding how different it is to be a multi-year consistent MVP level player versus a promising but largely unproven young player. The error bars are relatively small on the former and massive on the latter.
 

SydneySox

A dash of cool to add the heat
SoSH Member
Sep 19, 2005
15,605
The Eastern Suburbs
Of course, but the talk of Verdugo as 80% of Mookie is just wacky. Verdugo has had a nice start but we have people extrapolating a 40 game sample into a year, and then that year into a cheap 5 year run of excellence.

Verdugo's chances of flaming out into nothing are as good as him becoming a consistent 4-5 win player. I honestly don't say that as a knock on Verdugo, I just think people are not fully understanding how different it is to be a multi-year consistent MVP level player versus a promising but largely unproven young player. The error bars are relatively small on the former and massive on the latter.
We all get it. That's an implied bias in every post here. It's not WEEI.
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
6,940
There is a reason the Dodgers traded us Verdugo and other prospects for 1 year of Mookie and the right to give him another $365M. Mookie is that good.

Not that ZIPS is perfect or anything, but they have Mookie as a 6 win player and Verdugo as a 2 win player in 2021 and 2022.
Yeah, that reason is that the dodgers farm system was stacked so they could afford to take the risk with a team that hadn't actually won anything with this group of players. Also not sure whoever said Verdugo was 80% of Mookie, realistically probably more like 50% or so, which is still easily worth 1 year of Betts to a team that wasn't going to contend with or without him this year.
 

mauidano

Mai Tais for everyone!
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2006
28,960
Maui
Mookie is a once in a generation baseball player.

Verdugo is a really good baseball player. He’s got some maturing to do.

The nature of the game is financial. We got a bargain that we can afford with potential.

We’ll be okay.
 

NJ_Sox_Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 2, 2006
6,312
NJ
Mookie is a once in a generation baseball player.

Verdugo is a really good baseball player. He’s got some maturing to do.

The nature of the game is financial. We got a bargain that we can afford with potential.

We’ll be okay.
Is Mookie really once in a generation though? Because in the same generation we have Trout, Tatis, Acuna, Bellinger, etc. to name a few. I am not saying by any stretch that Verdugo > Mookie, but I think the Sox did really well on this trade based on what we have seen so far. Betts was never going to sign here.
 

BillMuellerFanClub

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
1,079
Is Mookie really once in a generation though? Because in the same generation we have Trout, Tatis, Acuna, Bellinger, etc. to name a few. I am not saying by any stretch that Verdugo > Mookie, but I think the Sox did really well on this trade based on what we have seen so far. Betts was never going to sign here.
I would say in this context the 'once in a generation' is the ability of a team to produce and retain a player of that caliber, not necessarily that he's peerless in the sport. There are a few teams that haven't had the luck / talent to produce or sign a player of his stature in decades.
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
7,002
Westwood MA
Huge disagree with that.

Did David Ortiz's playing days end badly?
He had a tremendous career with the Red Sox and is a beloved member of the Red Sox family, his heroics in the post season are legendary, specifically 2004 and 2013.

Had the pleasure of meeting him twice, he's a fantastic human being, my second favorite Red Sox player behind Yaz.

All of that said; the Red Sox got swept by the Indians in the ALDS in his final year, Ortiz hit .111, going 1-9, his lone hit was a double.

Is that your version of going out on a high note?
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
17,592
Rogers Park
I like Verdugo, I'm optimistic about his future, and I understand the need for the trade given the hole we put ourselves in.

But this thread has gone a little overboard talking about how good Verdugo is going to be, comparisons to Mookie, etc. The guy has 3.6 career WAR in 199 career games (653 plate appearances). He's had a nice start this year and he could maybe turn into a consistent 4-5 WAR type player if things fall right, but the error bars are still HUGE.

Mookie is a once in a generation perennial MVP/HOF player who has 40 WAR in 835 games (3813 plate appearances). Basically a 7-8 WAR player over less than 6 seasons in the majors and still in his early prime.

There is a reason the Dodgers traded us Verdugo and other prospects for 1 year of Mookie and the right to give him another $365M. Mookie is that good.

Not that ZIPS is perfect or anything, but they have Mookie as a 6 win player and Verdugo as a 2 win player in 2021 and 2022.
Your caution is well-taken, but a few things:

Verdugo is another of these guys where B-R and Fangraphs disagree on his defense: so you've quoted the Fangraphs career WAR (3.6), but Baseball-Reference has 5.2. I have no idea which approximation is the better one in this case, but I think that's likely part of why people see him the way they do.

Also, Verdugo was a consensus top-50 prospect for years before he arrived in LA — topping out at #19 (BP)/#35 (BA) — on the basis of a track record considerably longer than what you describe. He posted a great 500 PA season in AAA as a 21 year old, and cracked the majors.

Mookie, of course, also reached the majors at 21 — that was the season of the Mookie Meter, when he was hitting .400 in Portland into June — and for more than a cup of coffee, but the 2014 Red Sox were godawful at 71-91 and and the 2017 Dodgers won 104 games and the pennant and took the eventual World Series champion (that we now know was cheating egregiously) to a Game Seven. More opportunities in Boston.

So it's not like Verdugo is some Michael Chavis-like dubious prospect (BA #85, not listed at BP) with some real tools (plus power!) mixed with serious flaws in his game, who came up and had a hot start before cratering. Chavis had a K-rate around 30% in AAA. There was always uncertainty about whether he was going to be able to succeed at this level. If there was a knock on Verdugo, it would have been limited power, but he's actually showing higher ISO in the majors than he did in any sustained stint in the minors.

I wonder what the next ZIPS update will show about Verdugo now that he's extended and even improved on his rate of production from his first half-full season in LA with another half season in Boston.
 

SouthernBoSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2005
11,093
He had a tremendous career with the Red Sox and is a beloved member of the Red Sox family, his heroics in the post season are legendary, specifically 2004 and 2013.

Had the pleasure of meeting him twice, he's a fantastic human being, my second favorite Red Sox player behind Yaz.

All of that said; the Red Sox got swept by the Indians in the ALDS in his final year, Ortiz hit .111, going 1-9, his lone hit was a double.

Is that your version of going out on a high note?
Um... David Ortiz was 40 years old, he led the league in Doubles, RBI, SLG, and OPS. He went to the All-Star game and was a legitimate MVP candidate. It's one the the greatest 40 year old seasons in the history of the sport...

To consider it anything other than a high note would be lunacy
 

Rough Carrigan

reasons within Reason
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I like Verdugo, I'm optimistic about his future, and I understand the need for the trade given the hole we put ourselves in.

But this thread has gone a little overboard talking about how good Verdugo is going to be, comparisons to Mookie, etc. The guy has 3.6 career WAR in 199 career games (653 plate appearances). He's had a nice start this year and he could maybe turn into a consistent 4-5 WAR type player if things fall right, but the error bars are still HUGE.

Mookie is a once in a generation perennial MVP/HOF player who has 40 WAR in 835 games (3813 plate appearances). Basically a 7-8 WAR player over less than 6 seasons in the majors and still in his early prime.

There is a reason the Dodgers traded us Verdugo and other prospects for 1 year of Mookie and the right to give him another $365M. Mookie is that good.

Not that ZIPS is perfect or anything, but they have Mookie as a 6 win player and Verdugo as a 2 win player in 2021 and 2022.
Mookie is not a "7-8 WAR player"
He's been over 6.4 WAR once in his career. He might do it again but that's not the pattern of his production. 2016 - 6.4 WAR, 2017 3.3 WAR, 2018 8.7 WAR, 2019 5.2 WAR. He's a terrific player but let's not exaggerate.
 
Last edited:

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
17,592
Rogers Park
Mookie is not a "7-8 WAR player"
He's been over 6.4 WAR once in his career. He might do it again but that's not the patter of his production. 2016 - 6.4 WAR, 2017 3.3 WAR, 2018 8.7 WAR, 2019 5.2 WAR. He's a terrific player but let's not exaggerate.
Where are these numbers from?

Fangraphs, 2014-: 1.8, 4.8, 8.3, 5.3, 10.4, 6.6, 2.3 (so far), averaging 7.1 in complete seasons
B-R, 2014-: 2.3, 6.1, 9.5, 6.3, 10.6, 6.9, 2.6 (so far), averaging 7.9 in complete seasons.

edit: Looks like you're reading the oWAR from baseball-reference, not the WAR, and Mookie is, uhh, a pretty good defender.