Alex Verdugo - on-field discussion thread

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
6,787
Westwood MA
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
Um...........ok, thanks for chiming in.
 

Earthbound64

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
All things end badly or they wouldn't end.
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?
So you think the reason his career ended was because of that?
Since, that's what you said - that the bad ending is why it ended.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
51,857
John Elway won Super Bowls his last two seasons and retired immediately after. That sounds like one of those cliches that would be OK if you just change 'All' to 'Most'.
 

A Bad Man

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2016
255
Highly unlikely we get Verdugo without the back issue and character concerns. It was a lovely buy low.

I would argue that Mookie is at the end of his prime, not the beginning. Primes are not what they used to be (27-30, say). This is an older study from 2013, but Zimmerman's points are I think still relevant. Essentially, it's all downhill after 25-26. A player's prime, now, is something like 21-26.

Edit: a hitter's prime, I should say. Pitching is another matter.
 
Last edited:

Bergs

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2005
14,250
John Elway won Super Bowls his last two seasons and retired immediately after. That sounds like one of those cliches that would be OK if you just change 'All' to 'Most'.
Guys....it's a movie quote. Jesus.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,972
Admitting that you’ve watched Cocktails enough to quote it is akin to admitting that you own every Billy Joel album and concert video.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,505
Portsmouth, NH
Admitting that you’ve watched Cocktails enough to quote it is akin to admitting that you own every Billy Joel album and concert video.
First, it's Cocktail. No S.
Second, it's a glorious 80s movie and peak Cruise dialed up to insane, falling directly in the middle of a two year, five movie peak of Top Gun, Color of Money, Cocktail, Rain Man and Born on the Fourth of July. That's pretty much every flavor of Cruise, minus action hero/secret agent.
In short, not knowing any quotes from Cocktail is akin to being completely soulless or unable to enjoy life.
 

Manramsclan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
2,708
In short, not knowing any quotes from Cocktail is akin to being completely soulless or unable to enjoy life.
"There's nothing inanimate about Coral."

Verdugo is at again. Hustles his ass off for an infield hit. Steals second. Goes to third on a Xander ground out and is left there by J.D.

Against all odds* he is becoming one of my favorite players on this team. He's good guys.

*Please don't ask me to quote this 80s movie
 

Pedroia's Itchy Nose

Member
SoSH Member
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.
I think two separate questions are being discussed at the same time here. They are both important and worthy of teasing out.

On the one hand, we're talking about the on field performance of these two players, and I completely agree with @radsoxfan that some of the excitement in this thread has gone too far. Verdugo has shown the potential to be very good over a short stretch and he comes with an impressive minor league track record. He could very well prove to be an excellent, all-star caliber player but like @radsoxfan suggests it's ridiculous to be projecting that level of sustained performance over the length of his pre-FA years. What Mookie will provide over the near term is a much safer bet.

On the other hand, we're talking about value relative to cost: a very different question. If we only consider the current year of Mookie's deal, then I'd argue that the value proposition is clearly in the Red Sox' favor as the Sox weren't going anywhere with or without Mookie this year, and any future value that the team gets out of Verdugo etc. is pure gravy. If we consider Mookie's full contract then it gets a lot murkier, but I can't agree with @radsoxfan 's premise that Mookie comes with smaller error bars in the context of his entire career. @radsoxfan , I know you weren't explicitly arguing this but in the context of the discussion it's a relevant take to consider even if you weren't fully intending it. For Mookie's deal to be worthwhile he has to perform. Lack of performance, whether it's due to injury, random variance or age-related decline, carries a substantial downside risk. If Mookie sustains his performance on the high end of what might be expected over time the upside is limited by the cost of the deal. Verdugo (and the rest of the return) do not carry this downside risk. If they don't perform, they simply won't get paid (much). I suppose there is some risk of a player setting their arb floor high and then performing poorly afterward, but even in this case the damage is nothing compared to what a few poor or lost years could do to the value proposition of Mookie's contract. In that sense, the return that the Sox got has very little downside risk and a high potential upside. So in this case I don't think we can say the error bars are smaller for Mookie. If anything, over the length of the deal I think the error bars are a lot larger for that contract.

TL;DR: Yes, if you're talking about pure performance Mookie is a much more solid bet to sustain his current level over the next few years than Verdugo is to sustain his performance this season. But if you're talking about value relative to cost, then I'd argue that Verdugo has a much smaller error bar than Mookie due to the nature of Mookie's contract.
 

Twilight

lurker
Nov 17, 2006
65
It's been mentioned before so apologies if this is unnecessary for this audience. I often need to remind myself that you can only put nine guys in the lineup at once, so there is significant value in packing more WAR into one position. It may be harder to quantify, and it may not even constitute a "good deal" for the organization. But if you want to contend, it's important to have a few guys who greatly exceed League average, rather than a lineup full of decent value propositions. Sometimes you can get that extra WAR with pre-arb players, but most teams have to spend to contend eventually. I forget who said it, but (paraphrasing) it's not the high price of superstar talent that kills you; it's the high price of mediocrity.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
17,522
Rogers Park
It's been mentioned before so apologies if this is unnecessary for this audience. I often need to remind myself that you can only put nine guys in the lineup at once, so there is significant value in packing more WAR into one position. It may be harder to quantify, and it may not even constitute a "good deal" for the organization. But if you want to contend, it's important to have a few guys who greatly exceed League average, rather than a lineup full of decent value propositions. Sometimes you can get that extra WAR with pre-arb players, but most teams have to spend to contend eventually. I forget who said it, but (paraphrasing) it's not the high price of superstar talent that kills you; it's the high price of mediocrity.
There is definitely some truth to this, so don't see it as a criticism, but I wonder if it misrepresents our circumstances. We go into next year with perhaps five players plausibly projected at 5 WAR — Sale, Rodriguez, Devers, Bogaerts, and Verdugo — but too few steady regulars — Vazquez, Eovaldi, Perez, Barnes. Bradley (if he returns); who knows what's up with Benintendi. It's not like we have an entire roster of steady, league average players that doom us to 85 wins and missing the Wild Card by two games. We have a core of borderline superstars — one of whom is recuperating from myocarditis; another just started playing catch after elbow surgery — surrounded by Michael Chavis, Ryan Weber, and Chris Mazza.

The Red Sox have positive WAR from their position players this year. Our lineup is in the top ten in wOBA — ahead of both the Yankees and the Rays. Our defense, even, has been average-ish. It helps that fangraphs thinks Christian Vazquez is one of the better defenders in the game at any position.

The problem we have is that circumstances foreseen and unforeseen — trades, injuries, pandemics — put us in a situation where we aren't even close to mediocre on the pitching side of the equation. As a result, our pitching staff is the worst in the big leagues by a wide margin, and by fWAR we're about as far from the second worst (Detroit) as they are from the ninth worst (St. Louis). If we had more mediocrity in our rotation and bullpen we'd be above .500 and on the fringes of the playoff picture. We have thirteen (13) pitchers with FIPs above 6.00 this season, and only one of them is a position player.

Upgrading Verdugo to Betts is obviously desirable for precisely the reason you say: roster spots are scarce! But that said, it's the sort of move you make to make your 106-win team a 110-win team. That's why the Dodgers were willing to spend a lot in prospects and payroll to make it happen.

From where we sit, we need to upgrade the Ryan Webers to — I dunno — Collin McHughs. We need to replace Matt Hall's innings with Darwinzon Hernandez.
 

koufax32

He'll cry if he wants to...
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2006
7,369
Duval
It's been mentioned before so apologies if this is unnecessary for this audience. I often need to remind myself that you can only put nine guys in the lineup at once, so there is significant value in packing more WAR into one position. It may be harder to quantify, and it may not even constitute a "good deal" for the organization. But if you want to contend, it's important to have a few guys who greatly exceed League average, rather than a lineup full of decent value propositions. Sometimes you can get that extra WAR with pre-arb players, but most teams have to spend to contend eventually. I forget who said it, but (paraphrasing) it's not the high price of superstar talent that kills you; it's the high price of mediocrity.
Branch Rickey?

edit: scratch that. It’s Bill Veeck

It isn’t the high price of stars that is expensive; it’s the high price of mediocrity
 
Last edited:

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
9,717
Verdugo now hitting .326/.381/.511/.893, with 6 hr, 33 runs, 15 doubles in 47 games (178 ab). Project that out over 150 games (that's the number I like to use, figuring most normal players will miss some games for rest, getting nicked up, etc.):

568 ab, 48 2b, 19 hr, 105 r, .326/.381/.511/.893

That's pretty damned solid. Add in good defense and we're looking at a very very nice all-around player. Brings tons of energy as well.
 

A Bad Man

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2016
255
Dugie's BABIP a little lucky with his EV I think. Still, I love this player. Can't wait to see what Downs can do.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
2,310
Twin Cities
The guy who has always seemed to me like a close comp for Verdugo is Michael Brantley. Similar offensive profile (good contact, good speed, gap power). Solid D. If he could have that career, with slightly better injury luck, we‘d be happy.
 
Last edited: