Craig should start the season on the bench. One bad season doesn't mean you give up on a player as talented as Craig.
OptimusPapi said:Craig should start the season on the bench. One bad season doesn't mean you give up on a player as talented as Craig.
True but why take the chance that another gm realizes this simple fact and claims him. And the attitude expressed on this board that it will be good riddance is ignorant.Harry Hooper said:
A waiver/option to Pawtucket doesn't mean you've given up on the guy.
The thing is, he can't demonstrate that last year was an aberration without paying time and that might not be available with the big club.OptimusPapi said:Ok then there is no chance of losing him. I still think it is better to have him break camp with the team since the odds are decent that last year was a hiccup.
If Craig were a free agent, would you offer him a 4 year, $26 million contract this offseason?OptimusPapi said:Ok then there is no chance of losing him. I still think it is better to have him break camp with the team since the odds are decent that last year was a hiccup.
It's ignorant to want to allocate his $26 million elsewhere?OptimusPapi said:True but why take the chance that another gm realizes this simple fact and claims him. And the attitude expressed on this board that it will be good riddance is ignorant.
Plympton91 said:Unless he wins a spot in spring training like Sizemore did (and didn't that work out great!) put him at Pawtucket until he hits, like you'd do with any other minor league invitee.
Well the red sox felt comfortable giving Victorino a 3 year 39 million dollars and while his 2012 isn't as bad as Craigs 2014 it shows that labeling a player in their early 30's as washed up is a little short sighted. Mike Lowell says hi as well. I am not advocating given Craig a full time role but he at least deserves a bench spot in order to see what he has left.Plympton91 said:If Craig were a free agent, would you offer him a 4 year, $26 million contract this offseason?
Of course not. With his health and historically bad finish to last season, he'd be lucky to get anything other than a minor league deal. Unless he wins a spot in spring training like Sizemore did (and didn't that work out great!) put him at Pawtucket until he hits, like you'd do with any other minor league invitee.
To do otherwise would be falling for the sunk cost fallacy. The Red Sox have at least 5 people capable of playing at a higher level than Craig did in Aug/Sept, with more positional versatility, and for those that are lefthanded, a better fit on the roster given the oversupply of righthanded hitters currently. They shouldn't give away games in April and May again on a snipe hunt for the past glories of a once great player
That's a ridiculous comparison because context matters.OptimusPapi said:Well the red sox felt comfortable giving Victorino a 3 year 39 million dollars and while his 2012 isn't as bad as Craigs 2014 it shows that labeling a player in their early 30's as washed up is a little short sighted. Mike Lowell says hi as well. I am not advocating given Craig a full time role but he at least deserves a bench spot in order to see what he has left.
Yup, that's the bet. Basically you want a ~30 percent chance that he recovers; given DRS's comments, I'm not sure I would take that bet.Rasputin said:I think a lot of y'all are forgetting how good good Allen Craig is.
You don't dump him for the roster spot and the cash because if Allen Craig gets back to what he was in 2013, you have a guy who is probably just a rung down from being an MVP candidate, and you have him for his age 30-33 seasons for relatively little money.
Keeping him is betting the twenty six million that you can get 80 million worth of value out of him.
EricFeczko said:That's a ridiculous comparison because context matters.
Shane Victorino was a 3ish fWAR player in 2012 with a 94 wRC+; in other words a league average bat with great defense who played 154 games.
Mike Lowell had a bad year in 150 games, in part, due to a 248 BABIP. If his BABIP was at his career average, he becomes a league average bat with solid defense.
Allen Craig had a lisfranc injury from 2013-2014, which appears to have sapped his power and ability to play in the outfield. He was worth -1.4 fWAR last year in 126 games while playing abhorrent defense and wielding a 69 wRC+ bat. If he displayed his career average BABIP, he would have been a league average bat with terrible defense.
Furthermore, if you want to see what Craig has left, that means you need to get him at bats (which he won't be doing much on the bench), why not try to get him to Pawtucket instead?
Yup, that's the bet. Basically you want a ~30 percent chance that he recovers; given DRS's comments, I'm not sure I would take that bet.
EDIT: Added in a reply to Ras.
All the same arguments were made for keeping the corpse of Grady Sizemore. It's a suckers' bet.Rasputin said:I think a lot of y'all are forgetting how good good Allen Craig is.
You don't dump him for the roster spot and the cash because if Allen Craig gets back to what he was in 2013, you have a guy who is probably just a rung down from being an MVP candidate, and you have him for his age 30-33 seasons for relatively little money.
Keeping him is betting the twenty six million that you can get 80 million worth of value out of him.
His power started dropping prior to the injury itself, but was masked due to a very high BABIP in 2013. it is possible that the injury went undiagnosed, which might explain the drop in power.Plympton91 said:All the same arguments were made for keeping the corpse of Grady Sizemore. It's a suckers' bet.
Keep the players who are the surest bets to be productive in the roles they're needed to play.
I'm also pretty sure that someone made a post earlier in the fall that showed Craig had already dropped off before the lisfranc injury. There may be some deterioration due to another cause, such as stricter PED testing.
Just an off the cuff calculation. 26/80 = 0.325. Essentially Ras is saying that you are paying 26 million for the chance at 80 million. If you win that bet more than 32.5 percent of the time, you win more money than you lose in the long run.Snoop Soxy Dogg said:
I would. Not sure where the 30% comes from
Plympton91 said:All the same arguments were made for keeping the corpse of Grady Sizemore. It's a suckers' bet.
Rudy Pemberton said:So, the Sox are looking to move Cespedes and have no idea what to do with Allen Craig, right? Should we be concerned that just a few months after acquiring these guys, they seem willing to cut bait?
MakMan44 said:Expecting Margot, JBJ, Nava and Brentz to be MLB quality players in 2016 seems a bit foolish. Margot hasn't played above A ball, JBJ hasn't shown he can hit ML pitching, Nava is only getting older and Brentz's upside seems to be a back up player at this point.
Players have to clear optional assignment waivers to be optioned if it's been more than 3 years since their MLB debut. But, no one ever gets claimed off optional assignment waivers, anyway.Once again, Allen Craig, currently of the Boston Red Sox, with less than five years of service time and only two options used does NOT need to be exposed to waivers in order to be sent to the minor leagues.
Being on a major league roster and being starting caliber players are two different things.Rasputin said:
Other than Margot, it's not remotely unlikely to see JBJ, Nava, and Brentz on major league rosters in 2016.
I'd say he takes the roles of both Carp and Gomes and composites them into one player who's salary for next year isn't much higher than what those two were paid last season.snowmanny said:Instead of who?
No it wasn't. I said right before that they'd have to pickup an OF.MakMan44 said:Being on a major league roster and being starting caliber players are two different things.
EDIT: His point was that dumping Craig was okay because we had all these surplus players who can fill spots in 2016. My point is that we don't know that yet.
Good post. I think that's all very plausible and potentially fruitful. I'd have no trouble just riding Cespedes for what he can give in 2015 and then letting him walk, but trading him for something more needed is also smart.Drek717 said:I'd say he takes the roles of both Carp and Gomes and composites them into one player who's salary for next year isn't much higher than what those two were paid last season.
Now the obvious follow up there is "why do we need Carp OR Gomes types for next year?" Well, Ortiz is still getting older, Napoli is too, wasn't healthy enough this season, and is having major facial surgery this winter, and if you expect Daniel Nava to play somewhere with any regularity you need a platoon bat to pair him with as he simply doesn't belong in the lineup against a LHP.
At this point I'm really hoping the plan is to flip Cespedes who, given the dry OF market, should have a lot of suitors. That would free up LF for a Nava/Craig platoon that Craig can completely take over if he bounces back (and his defensive issues are entirely range related, so Fenway's LF is ideal for him) while Betts, Castillo, and Victorino sort out CF and RF. That is an acceptable five man OF for a club that would still have Brock Holt as a LH high OBP super utility guy on the bench with Bradley, Brentz, Hassan, Cecchini, and Middlebrooks in AAA.
In fact, that would make me incredibly comfortable with taking a long term 3B option from the FA or trade markets, knowing that the club could effectively rotate the two components of a LF platoon as needed until a worthwhile tandem or singular player emerged. If Nava doesn't produce against RHP he can be rotated out with Bradley (obviously in another OF position to maximize his defensive value) or Cecchini (who is a mediocre 3B at best anyhow) while the insurance policies for Craig would be Victorino (assuming he loses RF to one of Betts/Castillo), Middlebrooks (significantly better against LHP, talk of him playing OF some last season when down in AAA), Brentz (hit well against higher level pitching both last ST and in his brief cup of coffee to end the season) and Hassan (scraping the bottom of the barrel, but he is a good OBP guy).
If the club feels good in what it has with Castillo and Betts the risk of trading Cespedes is pretty well mitigated thanks to significant ML and AAA depth. I could see a long term situation where Nava and Craig split LF for part of 2015, Craig bounces back and takes over 1B after that while Cecchini and Brentz form a new LF platoon shortly thereafter providing a similar level of offensive production.
swingin val said:How poorly would Betts have to play 3B in order for it to not be a worthwhile gamble?
Instead of paying 10-20 million dollars for a FA 3B (Headley, Panda), that money could be spent on a SP. Instead of Panda + Lester + McCarthy (as an example), with the money saved, it could be Betts + Lester + Scherzer.
This helps ease the OF crunch, for now it would be Cespedes, Castillo, Victorino, with Nava and Craig as reserves, and Holt as utility.
Sprowl said:
I don't think Betts has the arm for 3B, although on brief evidence, he does look to have the glove for any infield position. The throws from any position farther from first base than second base are high, looping and usually late. It's not that he's way off target or in the dirt, but his arm is more a popgun than a cannon.
Besides, Bogaerts will end up at 3B sooner rather than later, and sooner might be in 2015. :unsure2:
jscola85 said:
I don't understand this at all. Bogaerts was an unmitigated disaster defensively at third last year, and, coincidence or not, he stunk hitting while playing third too. Every bit of commentary that has come from the coaching staff and management team has been pretty strongly in favor of keeping him at SS. Not to mention, there aren't any good options to fill in SS via free agency. Hanley is an awful defender, we've moved on from Drew, Asdrubal Cabrera moved to 2nd, and Hardy re-upped. So what's the option at short? Deven Marrero? Clint Barmes?
Sprowl said:
I disagree. The unexpected position switch hurt his confidence at the plate, and he showed inexperience on numerous plays (eg, not knowing which base to throw to), but his tools are better suited to 3B (good on diving stops, barehand pickups and throws across the diamond), and he looked just fine at third in 2013. Don't trust partial season UZR numbers.
Besides, the eye and tool tests at shortstop do not look good for Bogaerts. He can't jump, his double play footwork is poor, his range is just OK. I wouldn't count too heavily on public pronouncements of support from the coaching staff either, which seem to me to be dictated by the need to boost a 21-year-old's shaky confidence.
jscola85 said:
Well, I guess we just disagree here. By my eye test he looked terrible as well at 3rd, not just UZR or DRS. Maybe it is inexperience at the position, but some guys just don't pick up the quick reactions necessary to play 3rd. Regardless, barring some major unforeseeen trade, the available pieces on the roster and FA suggest moving him to 3rd this year doesn't make any sense. Again, I know you can't trust everything that Cherington and co. say, but they've been adamant even in his minor league days that they felt he belonged at SS, so I am betting that they at least want to give him one full year to prove whether or not he can handle it.
jscola85 said:
...By my eye test he looked terrible as well at 3rd...
I'd expect Bogaerts to get more like 2-3 years at SS, simply because there aren't any good options to replace him with and his bat should be good enough to cover for below average defense.Sprowl said:
I don't think Betts has the arm for 3B, although on brief evidence, he does look to have the glove for any infield position. The throws from any position farther from first base than second base are high, looping and usually late. It's not that he's way off target or in the dirt, but his arm is more a popgun than a cannon.
Besides, Bogaerts will end up at 3B sooner rather than later, and sooner might be in 2015. :unsure2:
Drek717 said:I'd expect Bogaerts to get more like 2-3 years at 3B, simply because there aren't any good options to replace him with and his bat should be good enough to cover for below average defense.
I mean, Asdrubal Cabrera is not a good player anymore and he's hands down the best available SS in the FA market. The best play appears to be rolling with Bogaerts until Marrero can push him off SS by showing he's capable of hitting ML pitching (likely having to do so from the bench), or another prospect emerges from the farm (no real good candidates unless Chavis somehow manages to stick there).
SS is probably the lone truly weak position throughout the Sox minor league system in fact. A bunch of small good glove types not a one with real potential to hit in the high minors, to say nothing of how they'd fare against ML pitching.
geoduck no quahog said:
So, you say terrible at both short and 3rd...and on that basis decide he's the long term shortstop, a defensive position exponentially more critical than 3rd base.
Are you talking about throws from the OF this year? Or throws from SS in 2011?Sprowl said:
The throws from any position farther from first base than second base are high, looping and usually late.
I assume you mean X plays SS for the next 2-3 years.Drek717 said:I'd expect Bogaerts to get more like 2-3 years at 3B, simply because there aren't any good options to replace him with and his bat should be good enough to cover for below average defense.
I mean, Asdrubal Cabrera is not a good player anymore and he's hands down the best available SS in the FA market. The best play appears to be rolling with Bogaerts until Marrero can push him off SS by showing he's capable of hitting ML pitching (likely having to do so from the bench), or another prospect emerges from the farm (no real good candidates unless Chavis somehow manages to stick there).
SS is probably the lone truly weak position throughout the Sox minor league system in fact. A bunch of small good glove types not a one with real potential to hit in the high minors, to say nothing of how they'd fare against ML pitching.
Yes, his outfield throws are all that I've seen of Betts' arm, aside from his few weeks at 2B after Pedroia's surgery. Aside from the high error rate and Farrell's clarity that Betts would not be playing SS or 3B, I don't know what his 2011 SS experience was like.Eddie Jurak said:Are you talking about throws from the OF this year? Or throws from SS in 2011?
Yes, typo.Savin Hillbilly said:
You mean 2-3 years at SS, right? I think that's probably right depending on whether/how quickly Marrero's bat develops.
Further away than Coyle, who is the next best 3B option behind WMB and Cecchini. If 3B remains a black hole through 2015 it probably isn't out of the question to consider Swihart moving there as well, assuming Vaz locks up the majority of catching work.Trotsky said:Well crap.... how close (and how realistic is it to think of...) are Devers or Chavis as a 3rd base option and are they, or should they, even figure into where to play X long term?
Supposedly he's made a ton of progress at 3B this past year and looks to potentially be able to stay there, but yes, it is still far from a certainty.sean1562 said:considering that they are 19 and havent played above rookie ball i would say extremely unrealistic. Devers might have to move to 1B
Trotsky said:Well crap.... how close (and how realistic is it to think of...) are Devers or Chavis as a 3rd base option and are they, or should they, even figure into where to play X long term?
jscola85 said:
Those guys are like 2018-19 targets for MLB debut.