Fix This Team: A Speculative Alternative to the Roster Shakeup Thread

[Hagios]

 
A team of replacement players will win 47.7 games per year. Call it 48.
 
The Red Sox have repeatedly stated that they try to win 95 games per year. I haven't heard that claim as often lately (more on that below).
 
The current market price is about 8 million per WAR. The Red Sox have a budget of about 200 million.
 
So if the Red Sox are relying soley on free agent talent, they can realistically acquire about 25 WAR. That gets them to 73 wins. That's a pretty humbling thought. The 2004 team was almost exclusively free agent talent and they won 98 games. Either the 2004 team massively overproduced compared to their projections, or baseball has radically changed in the past 10 years. So forget about targetting 95 wins. Let's try to target 92 wins instead.
 
If you want win the division, then you need to rely on home-grown players for the core of your team. Basically you need a minimum of 25 WAR out of your home grown players, and probably closer to 30. Guesstimating for inflation, a pre-arbitration player costs about a million per win, and an arbitration eligible player costs about a 3 million per win (see here).Assume half your core is pre-arb and the other half is arbitration eligible, and you're looking at 2 million per win. 
 
So in order to get 92 wins on a budget of 200 million, we need to get 26 wins out of their home grown talent. That will use up 52 million of the budget. The remaining 148 million can be used to purchase an additional 18 wins.
 
Another way of driving this home is to compare Cole Hamels to Mookie Betts. The steamers projection for Hamels was 2.9 WAR. The Steamers on Betts was 2.6 WAR. Betts will make about 500k this season. Hamels will make about 22 million this year. As of right now, Hamels has accrued 1.2 WAR and Betts has accrued 1.0 WAR. Yet another way of putting it is that everyone who wanted to include Betts in a trade for Hamels was so far beyond wrong that even string theory be like "that's beyond wrong".
 
The point that I really want to make is that much of the hand-wringing over bad contracts and underperforming players is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic (not that the Red Sox season is going to sink, they may get hot and sneak into a playoff spot). The only way to count on getting a legit contender is to build a powerful team through the draft. That means giving the kids a long leash because that's the only way to do it.

 

[Plympton91]

I agree that reading Betts for Hamels would have been insane, but boiling everything down to WAR leaves out two very important constraints. You can only have 8 position players on the field at one time, but you need 5 starting pitchers.

Thus the comparison of Hamels WAR to Betts is only half the picture. You also have to compare Hamels to the 5th starter he'd replace and Betts to the alternative CF. Would a team with Hamels in the rotation and Jackie Bradley in CF really only be 0.2 wins better than a team with justin Masterson in the rotation and Mookie Betts in CF?

Further, A big part of Betts WAR right now is just the "add factor" for CF, isn't it? If they'd put Betts in RF and played Castillo in CF for the rest of the season, Betts WAR would be lower, right? That's too ad hoc for me to put credence in tenths of a win.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

So if the Red Sox are relying soley on free agent talent, they can realistically acquire about 25 WAR. That gets them to 73 wins. That's a pretty humbling thought. The 2004 team was almost exclusively free agent talent and they won 98 games. Either the 2004 team massively overproduced compared to their projections, or baseball has radically changed in the past 10 years. So forget about targetting 95 wins. Let's try to target 92 wins instead.

 
How did this bald misrepresention the 25 go so long unremarked!
 
7.9 WAR : Schilling - traded by DBacks
5.5 WAR : Pedro- traded by Expos
4.0 WAR : Varitek - traded by Mariners
3.7 WAR : Bellhorn - traded by Rockies
1.8 WAR : Cabrera - traded by Expos
1.2 WAR : Mirabelli - traded by Rangers
0.6 WAR : Embree - traded by Padres
0.3 WAR : Roberts - traded by Padres
-0.3 WAR: Mientkiewicz - traded by Twins
-0.7 WAR: Lowe - traded by Mariners
24.0 WAR - acquired in trade
 
4.2 WAR : Ortiz - released by Twins
2.8 WAR : Millar - released by Marlins
2.7 WAR : Arroyo - released by Pirates
1.2 WAR : Wakefield - released by Pirates
0.6 WAR : Leskanic - released by Royals
0.3 WAR : Myers - released by Mariners
0.1 WAR : Kapler - released by Rockies
11.9 WAR - acquired after release
 
4.2 WAR - Damon - Free Agent
4.1 WAR - Ramirez - Free Agent
3.5 WAR : Foulke - Free Agent
1.4 WAR : Timlin - Free Agent
1.3 WAR : Reese - Free Agent
1.2 WAR : Mueller - Free Agent
15.7 WAR - acquired as free agent
 
0.9 WAR : Nixon - Drafted
1.4 WAR : Youkilis - Drafted
2.3 WAR - acquired through amateur draft
 
 
The 2004 Sox World Series roster featured players contributing 2.3 WAR out of the amateur draft, and a whopping 35.9 WAR from trades, waiver wire pickups, and DFA dumpster diving.
 
The facts of your example, unfortunately, do not support your conclusions that the amateur draft is the only way to build a championship team.

 

[jscola85]

2004 was a different era though - far more talent became available via free agency and trades than today because there was a much greater disparity between the have's (MFYs, Sox, Detroit, etc.) and have not's (everyone else).  The influx of TV revenue for midmarket teams has allowed them to lock up young talent through their prime, preventing teams like Boston from buying talent the way they used to.
 
Now more than ever in the free agent era, the draft and development of prospects is crucial to building a contender.  Look at last year.  The Giants core was almost all homegrown - Sandoval, Posey, Crawford, Belt, Panik, Bumgarner, and Romo.  The Royals were basically 100% homegrown outside of Shields.  Maybe that's a bit of an outlier but I suspect will be more and more of the norm.  The majority of teams with strong records this year - Houston, KC, Minny, Tampa, STL, CHC, SF, NYM - have been built primarily around homegrown talent.  Even big market teams like the Nats' key pieces are homegrown - Zimmermann, Strasburg, Harper, Espinosa, Desmond, Rendon, Storen, etc.

 

[dynomite]

Looking through some "biggest mid-season turnaround" lists (for no particular reason) I came across the 2013 LA Dodgers. To wit:

As of June 11, 2015, the Red Sox are 27-33 with 223 RS and 270 RA (-47).

As of June 7, 2013, the Dodgers were 27-33 with 215 RS and 251 RA (-36).

The Dodgers ended up winning 92 games and the NL West after Puig debuted on June 3 and went 46-10 from June 22 to September 1.

So... There's still hope!

 

[Philip Jeff Frye]

The Dodgers ended up winning 92 games and the NL West after Puig debuted on June 3 and went 46-10 from June 22 to September 1.

So... There's still hope!

So all we need is for 2015 Rusney and his OPS+ of 47 to turn into 2013 Puig  and his OPS+ of 159!

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

So all we need is for 2015 Rusney and his OPS+ of 47 to turn into 2013 Puig  and his OPS+ of 159!

 
I think we'll need more than that.  Puig's debut gets a lot of credit, but what gets lost is the fact that Zack Greinke missed most of the first two months with a broken collarbone (essentially replaced by a horrible and injured Josh Beckett) and Hanley was out for all but four games in April/May.  They both returned roughly around the same time as Puig arrived.  Hanley and Greinke ended up tied for second on the team with a 5.2 bWAR (ahead of Puig) despite missing the time.  Gotta think they had as much impact on the turnaround as Puig did.
 
So if Rusney is Puig, who fills the Greinke and Hanley roles?  Not to mention some guy named Kershaw....do we have one of those?

 

[dynomite]

 
So if Rusney is Puig, who fills the Greinke and Hanley roles?  Not to mention some guy named Kershaw....do we have one of those?

Meh. Those Dodgers had one ace, maybe two. According to the t-shirts the Red Sox have one starting every day!

 

[FlyBono]

2004 was a different era though - far more talent became available via free agency and trades than today because there was a much greater disparity between the have's (MFYs, Sox, Detroit, etc.) and have not's (everyone else).  The influx of TV revenue for midmarket teams has allowed them to lock up young talent through their prime, preventing teams like Boston from buying talent the way they used to.
 
Now more than ever in the free agent era, the draft and development of prospects is crucial to building a contender.  Look at last year.  The Giants core was almost all homegrown - Sandoval, Posey, Crawford, Belt, Panik, Bumgarner, and Romo.  The Royals were basically 100% homegrown outside of Shields.  Maybe that's a bit of an outlier but I suspect will be more and more of the norm.  The majority of teams with strong records this year - Houston, KC, Minny, Tampa, STL, CHC, SF, NYM - have been built primarily around homegrown talent.  Even big market teams like the Nats' key pieces are homegrown - Zimmermann, Strasburg, Harper, Espinosa, Desmond, Rendon, Storen, etc.

 
Great Post..
Problem with the above in Boston is the win now attitude. Look at last season with XB and the SS position. Instead of letting the player develop, they get nervous and re-sign Drew and you know the rest. I believe in the Scouting Drafting and Development process to build a Team but when you do that as an Organization you must be willing to commit 100% to a player you give the position to. That was prevalent in the 07 Series with Lester Buc Paps Youks Ellsbury Pedroia Delcarmen. 
 
This year I believe it all falls again on Ownership much like the Beckett extension, AGone and Crawford deals. I believe that is why Epstein left. I believe its not Cherington's call when it comes to Managerial and big money free agent signs. Henry in his press conference said, baseball is changing. Yes it is John, back to Pitching being a dominate force and good defense. I was on the bandwagon with the Panda and HR signings but wasn't looking at the entire body of work. They both cannot play D. The other issue was no Ace in the rotation. I was against signing Lester at that money but here is what I would have looked at.
 
Scherzer is an elite power pitcher (age 30) gets 210 million payed out over 14 years. You take the Panda and HR contracts to = 183mil minus the buyouts. You think Scherzer would have taken 26mil over 7 to = 182 and not have to wait another 7 yrs to get paid? There is your ace. 3B option Lowrie 3yr deal 22 mil in Houston.
Power bat options, JUpton LF (age 27) traded out of Atlanta. Why wasn't Boston in on that elite player? Elite closer Kimbrell dealt (age 27) and a decent defensive 1B traded out of Miami in Morrison with an .820 OPS vs RHP. Where was Boston on these players?
 
Getting back to the Team at hand I understand Players have down years and WMbrooks was not the player they thought BUT, Napoil has hit .213 since 14 AS break, Papi is aging, Koji is 40 and you have a core of young talent that needs time to develop. Which = what u have now.
The moral of this Thread is, Blow it the f#k up and go with youth. You cannot deal players like Lackey and Lester and not get a Team's top prospect see Cubs with Russell McKinney. If your going to build with youth then be committed to it. Do not again trade for the Kelly's, Craigs, Cespedes and every other lame duck contract out there.......

 

[jimbobim]

 
Great Post..
Problem with the above in Boston is the win now attitude. Look at last season with XB and the SS position. Instead of letting the player develop, they get nervous and re-sign Drew and you know the rest. I believe in the Scouting Drafting and Development process to build a Team but when you do that as an Organization you must be willing to commit 100% to a player you give the position to. That was prevalent in the 07 Series with Lester Buc Paps Youks Ellsbury Pedroia Delcarmen. 
 
This year I believe it all falls again on Ownership much like the Beckett extension, AGone and Crawford deals. I believe that is why Epstein left. I believe its not Cherington's call when it comes to Managerial and big money free agent signs. Henry in his press conference said, baseball is changing. Yes it is John, back to Pitching being a dominate force and good defense. I was on the bandwagon with the Panda and HR signings but wasn't looking at the entire body of work. They both cannot play D. The other issue was no Ace in the rotation. I was against signing Lester at that money but here is what I would have looked at.
 
Scherzer is an elite power pitcher (age 30) gets 210 million payed out over 14 years. You take the Panda and HR contracts to = 183mil minus the buyouts. You think Scherzer would have taken 26mil over 7 to = 182 and not have to wait another 7 yrs to get paid? There is your ace. 3B option Lowrie 3yr deal 22 mil in Houston.
Power bat options, JUpton LF (age 27) traded out of Atlanta. Why wasn't Boston in on that elite player? Elite closer Kimbrell dealt (age 27) and a decent defensive 1B traded out of Miami in Morrison with an .820 OPS vs RHP. Where was Boston on these players?
 
Getting back to the Team at hand I understand Players have down years and WMbrooks was not the player they thought BUT, Napoil has hit .213 since 14 AS break, Papi is aging, Koji is 40 and you have a core of young talent that needs time to develop. Which = what u have now.
The moral of this Thread is, Blow it the f#k up and go with youth. You cannot deal players like Lackey and Lester and not get a Team's top prospect see Cubs with Russell McKinney. If your going to build with youth then be committed to it. Do not again trade for the Kelly's, Craigs, Cespedes and every other lame duck contract out there.......

Pretending the GM's both Theo and Ben don't hand out massive contracts and those transactions are solely ownership IMO is delusional. Theo got out of dodge after massively overpaying for CC which forced the team to also trade a cornerstone 1b (Gonzo) who they had traded an all star 1b prospect whom currently is tearing it up for Theo's Cubs Rizzo. The Hanley and Pablo contacts and hell the Porcello contract still represent a much smaller commitment compared to CC Agone Lackey Beckett. 
 
The reality is it's exceedingly rare to be granted the amount of time Theo was to "rebuild the Cubs" in a big market. There are so many points I disagree with in this post but giving a pass to Theo ,whose building an offense first team in Chicago, is probably the largest. Also "blow it up" sounds nice but as the Sell thread posts show there is not much your going to move without eating money or in all liklihood getting nothing. In fact relying so much on three very young guys up the middle is arguably hurting this team too. I like youth as much as the next guy, but it's not a cure all. 

 

[The X Man Cometh]

 
I think we'll need more than that.  Puig's debut gets a lot of credit, but what gets lost is the fact that Zack Greinke missed most of the first two months with a broken collarbone (essentially replaced by a horrible and injured Josh Beckett) and Hanley was out for all but four games in April/May.  They both returned roughly around the same time as Puig arrived.  Hanley and Greinke ended up tied for second on the team with a 5.2 bWAR (ahead of Puig) despite missing the time.  Gotta think they had as much impact on the turnaround as Puig did.
 
So if Rusney is Puig, who fills the Greinke and Hanley roles?  Not to mention some guy named Kershaw....do we have one of those?

 
Perhaps some platooning gimmickry could improve things?
 
The key would be getting Victorino off the disabled list.
 
3B: Sandoval vs. RHP (130 wRC+), Holt vs. LHP (167 wRC+)
DH: Ortiz vs. RHP (138 wRC+), Ramirez vs. LHP (145 wRC+)
RF: Holt vs. RHP (122 wRC+), Victorino vs. LHP (210 wRC+ so far, has always mashed lefties)
LF: Ramirez vs. RHP (108 wRC+), Brentz vs. LHP (.371 wOBA in Pawtucket, has mashed lefties in AAA)
 
Obviously the whole thing hinges on getting Victorino back and Brentz holding his own to some degree. But if Brentz can tread water, and Vic can stay healthy, you could have huge midseason upgrades offensively at two positions (3B and DH) plus an upgrade in RF. Hypothetical star 3B instead of 83 wRC+ Panda is your Puig, Hypothetical DH is Hanley off the disabled list. And you get better in RF, so Brentz can afford to scuffle a bit.

 

[The X Man Cometh]

One more thought. If Brentz isn't palatable and we're still looking for ways to salvage the season, there's a certain recent minor folk hero who is playing on a basement team in the NL, has only gotten 100 at bats, and has made a career out of hitting against lefties...

 

[Hee Sox Choi]

Oh Jesus, don't get Rembrat started.

 

[nattysez]

Pretending the GM's both Theo and Ben don't hand out massive contracts and those transactions are solely ownership IMO is delusional. Theo got out of dodge after massively overpaying for CC which forced the team to also trade a cornerstone 1b (Gonzo) who they had traded an all star 1b prospect whom currently is tearing it up for Theo's Cubs Rizzo. The Hanley and Pablo contacts and hell the Porcello contract still represent a much smaller commitment compared to CC Agone Lackey Beckett. 
 
The reality is it's exceedingly rare to be granted the amount of time Theo was to "rebuild the Cubs" in a big market. There are so many points I disagree with in this post but giving a pass to Theo ,whose building an offense first team in Chicago, is probably the largest. Also "blow it up" sounds nice but as the Sell thread posts show there is not much your going to move without eating money or in all liklihood getting nothing. In fact relying so much on three very young guys up the middle is arguably hurting this team too. I like youth as much as the next guy, but it's not a cure all. 

 
Regardless of whom you want to blame, the team philosophy on FA signings continues to shift without rhyme or reason, which is concerning.
 
They built 2004 and 2007 with smart acquisitions, with Manny being the only long-term, huge deal they signed (IIRC).  
 
Then they got away from that with AGon and Crawford and Theo said on his way out the door that the pressure to win made you do things you knew you shouldn't.  
 
Then they claimed to "reset" with the Punto deal and went back to a "smart contracts only" philosophy, bringing in ShaneVic, Nap, etc., on reasonable short-term deals.  And they won in 2013.
 
Then, HAVING JUST WON IN 2013 using the "smart contracts only" approach, they claimed this past off-season that you need to overpay for offense and went RIGHT BACK to the failed AGon-CC approach with Panda and Hanley.  It should be noted that Theo arguably did the same thing in Chicago, signing Lester to a megabucks deal that is currently working out as well as the Hanley/Panda deals (though I'd assume he'd argue that this was part of a plan -- pay big for pitching and develop young offense through the system).  
 
There's no "fix" for 2015.  I'd just play out the string this year and publicly keep insisting that the team is one hot streak away from contention.  I'd consider trading Koji at the deadline, but otherwise keep everyone (though I might start figuring out a graceful exit for Papi if things continue apace).  In the meantime, I'd spend the rest of the summer figuring out who my new manager and GM will be, and also determining which other FO guys to retain (it may be time to let Allard Baird go).  Then fire BC and JF on October 1 and start over.      

 

[Philip Jeff Frye]

 
Regardless of whom you want to blame, the team philosophy on FA signings continues to shift without rhyme or reason, which is concerning.
 
They built 2004 and 2007 with smart acquisitions, with Manny being the only long-term, huge deal they signed (IIRC).  
 
Then they got away from that with AGon and Crawford and Theo said on his way out the door that the pressure to win made you do things you knew you shouldn't.  
 

This is not true at all.  The 2004 team had several significant free agents signed to relatively expensive deals (Manny, Damon, Foulke) and even those "smart acquisitions" were, in part, because the Red Sox were willling to use their financial resources to acquire (and then extend) players that other teams could not contemplate resigning once they hit free agency (Pedro, Schilling).  Similarly in 2007, they acquired two significant players (Beckett and Lowell) because of their willingness to spend money on those players.  These trades are exactly analogous to the Adrian Gonzalez deal, even if the way things ultimately played out were different.

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

People keep referring to Gonzalez as a "bad" deal, but really, would you rather have him or Mike Napoli right now? Even on their current deals?
 
I know the answer is "Napoli" because either "2013" or "that's how they got rid of Crawford," but Gonzalez has been pretty consistently good since leaving. 

 

[dynomite]

People keep referring to Gonzalez as a "bad" deal, but really, would you rather have him or Mike Napoli right now? Even on their current deals?
 
I know the answer is "Napoli" because either "2013" or "that's how they got rid of Crawford," but Gonzalez has been pretty consistently good since leaving. 

Almost no one refers to Gonzo as a bad deal. In fact, it's the opposite: most people believe his was the GOOD deal that the Sox included so the Dodgers would accept the BAD deals of Crawford and Beckett.

To be fair, though, the Dodgers owe Gonzalez $65 million over the next 3 seasons for his ages 34-36 years. Whether his was a "good" deal will likely be decided in the eyes of most by how those last 3 years play out. The Sabathia contract, for instance, looks a lot different now than it did in 2012.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

People keep referring to Gonzalez as a "bad" deal, but really, would you rather have him or Mike Napoli right now? Even on their current deals?
 
I know the answer is "Napoli" because either "2013" or "that's how they got rid of Crawford," but Gonzalez has been pretty consistently good since leaving.

 
I'd rather have Gonzalez than Napoli all along (assuming it was at all possible to jettison Crawford and Beckett without losing him).  People tend to view him as a bad deal because he was underperforming from a power standpoint that year and then got lumped into the purge, but he's slashed .290/.348/.487/.835 for an OPS+ of 134 (Napoli in the same time: .245/.354/.442/.796, 120 OPS+) since the beginning of 2013 while missing a grand total of nine team games in that time (Napoli's missed 71).
 
He's forever tied to Crawford since they were brought in in the same week and they were dealt away together, but there's no way Gonzalez should be lumped with him when analyzing the quality of the acquisitions.  You do the Gonzalez deal again 10 out of 10 times.  You never do the Crawford deal again.

 

[catomatic]

 
I'd rather have Gonzalez than Napoli all along (assuming it was at all possible to jettison Crawford and Beckett without losing him).  People tend to view him as a bad deal because he was underperforming from a power standpoint that year and then got lumped into the purge, but he's slashed .290/.348/.487/.835 for an OPS+ of 134 (Napoli in the same time: .245/.354/.442/.796, 120 OPS+) since the beginning of 2013 while missing a grand total of nine team games in that time (Napoli's missed 71).
 
He's forever tied to Crawford since they were brought in in the same week and they were dealt away together, but there's no way Gonzalez should be lumped with him when analyzing the quality of the acquisitions.  You do the Gonzalez deal again 10 out of 10 times.  You never do the Crawford deal again.

You're forgetting the whole "God must not have chosen us to win this year" or whatever quote that was that wound up the beat writers into a frenzy on AGon's character. Remember? He wasn't a Boston guy, or something. I confess to having had a negative response to the quote at the time but I certainly didn't put stock in it after a brief moment of disdain.

 

[joyofsox]

Gonzalez said after the 2011 collapse:
"It's definitely something that didn't plan for. We were wholly confident that we would make the playoffs but it didn't happen. We didn't do a better job with the lead. I'm a firm believer that God has a plan and it wasn't in his plan for us to move forward."
He also complained about playing too many Sunday night games.
 
http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2011/09/carl_crawford_a.html

 

[soxhop411]

“@jonmorosi: #RedSox had a scout at Johnny Cueto’s most recent start, but now they have second-worst record in AL. Can they legitimately buy at deadline?”

 

[bosockboy]

Certainly not a rental like Cueto. But they can buy pieces for 2016 and beyond.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

“@jonmorosi: #RedSox had a scout at Johnny Cueto’s most recent start, but now they have second-worst record in AL. Can they legitimately buy at deadline?”

 
Not that they are or should be in on a rental like Cueto, but why the fuck can't they buy at the deadline?  Is there are a rule that a team has to be over .500 or with X games of a playoff spot in order to be a buyer?  If they feel they can improve the team for the foreseeable future, they should be doing it whether it's May 31, July 31 or December 31.

 

[bobesox]

And certainly if the Sox can get rid of folks they don't want in 2016.

 

[RedOctober3829]

Not that they are or should be in on a rental like Cueto, but why the fuck can't they buy at the deadline?  Is there are a rule that a team has to be over .500 or with X games of a playoff spot in order to be a buyer?  If they feel they can improve the team for the foreseeable future, they should be doing it whether it's May 31, July 31 or December 31.

You answered your question in your first sentence. Unless you sign him to a long term deal it makes less than zero sense to give up assets for a rental.

 

[E5 Yaz]

Remember the value of short-term deals? Remember prioritizing winning approaches to the game? Remember putting defense and baserunning at the top of the priority pyramid? 
All out the door because of a thirst for that all-so-hard-to-find offense. Bad move. Yes, the Orioles and Blue Jays can hit the crap out the ball. But what separated them from the Red Sox team over the last week was their ability to make pivotal plays the newly-constructed Sox simply aren't equipped to execute.

 
http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/rob-bradford/2015/06/15/red-sox-chosen-path-has-proven-be-wrong-one?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/rob-bradford/2015/06/15/red-sox-chosen-path-has-proven-be-wrong-one?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

It's too easy to kill Ben for signing Hanley and Panda now that they aren't working out for the time being. Not to go over ground that's been better covered elsewhere, they were signed because the RS didn't have any organizational answers for 3B and power, which mostly had to do with the fact that between 2007 and 2010, the Red Sox weren't able to really develop any of their draft picks despite spending a ton of money. And in addition to not having cost controlled players to level out the budget, perhaps there is a ripple effect that forces younger prospects like JBJ and X and Mookie to climb the minors too quickly - not having enough competition.

(Interesting note that I just saw: between 2007 and 2011, the Red Sox did not select a college senior in any of the first 10 picks of each year.)

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

(Interesting note that I just saw: between 2007 and 2011, the Red Sox did not select a college senior in any of the first 10 picks of each year.)

The best college picks usually are signed after sophomore or junior year, depending on eligibility.

Seniors generally are "easy signs" because it's either the minors or some independent league, if they want to keep playing.

 

[nattysez]

Dave Cameron weighs in:
 

The Red Sox have a number of real problems that are going to require active steps in order to fix them. They need to dump one DH, find a new left fielder, upgrade at first base, find a platoon partner for Pablo Sandoval, and add another talented arm or two to the pitching staff. That’s not all easily accomplished, and while the team has a good farm system, the best talents remain in the lower rungs of the minor leagues, so the team can’t really count on significant infusions of talent from within the organization.
 
The Red Sox are in a tough position. They’re better than they’ve played, and should be expected to perform decently in the second half if the team is kept together, but they’ve dug themselves a large enough hole that even a solid finish probably doesn’t salvage the 2015 season. The assembled pieces don’t make a cohesive roster, and the team needs to make some significant decisions about how to proceed the rest of this year and heading into next year. There are still some good pieces in place, but it isn’t entirely clear how the Red Sox are going to sort out the Hanley Ramirez situation, and unless Pablo Sandoval starts hitting, this doesn’t look like an offense that can carry a mediocre pitching staff.
 
The 2016 Red Sox are going to have to look a lot different than the 2015 Red Sox. How they get there isn’t so obvious, though, and the organization is probably going to have to make some tough decisions over the rest of the year. If David Ortiz doesn’t give them a get-out-of-jail-free card by retiring, unwinding this mess could be quite the challenge indeed.
 

 

[E5 Yaz]

Pete Abraham retweeted


98.5 The Sports Hub ‏@985TheSportsHub  4h4 hours ago
.@PeteAbe on @Toucherandrich: Red Sox ‘Immensely Screwed’ Long Term: http://cbsloc.al/1BhdME8 

 

[KillerBs]

You know I really dont think it is that hard to "unwind this mess" tho building a good baseball team is another thing altogether.
 
The critical decision moving forward is deciding that Hanley needs to be able to play 1b and then selling him on the idea. The Ortiz situation is secondary to this but needs to be addressed too.
 
The advantages to Hanley playing some 1b are evident: he is a bad defensive LF, we have a need at 1b this year and next, DH is largely spoken for this year and maybe next and we have at least 3 young OFers who for this year at least, it makes sense to give full-time playing time to.
 
The team needs to make the difficult decision to move on from Napoli and sell Hanley on a shift to 1b, with the idea that when Big Papi retires Hanley moves to DH. This may be delicate but should be doable.
 
Regarding Papi, the team message to him has to be, as far as I am concerned, whatever you want Papi, whatever you want. Tell him up front that the team is not going to mess around with him by sitting him so he doesnt get the 425 PAs he needs for the 2016 option to vest, tho obviously he could sit vs some LHPers. Let him know, if he wants to come back next year and DH, that is great by us. Maybe Papi can help sell Hanley on a move to 1b, to decrease the need to DH Hanley putting Papi on the bench.  

 

[Toe Nash]

"They’ve invested a lot of money in Rick Porcello and Wade Miley, who haven’t proven they can pitch in the American League or certainly for the Red Sox."
 
Uh...
 
Edit: Miley is only guaranteed around $15.5m after this year, and Porcello HAS proven he can pitch in the AL...

 

[ivanvamp]

 

Pete Abraham retweeted


98.5 The Sports Hub ‏@985TheSportsHub  4h4 hours ago
.@PeteAbe on @Toucherandrich: Red Sox ‘Immensely Screwed’ Long Term: http://cbsloc.al/1BhdME8 

 

 
They're not "immensely screwed" if their young players indeed turn out as good as we think they can be.  Betts can be an all-star.  Bogaerts can be the best SS in the AL.  Swihart can be one of the best C.  Castillo and Moncada have potential to be terrific.  They don't need all of them to be great, just some of them.  And I think that's still very possible.

 

[KillerBs]

I doubt that Porcello could be moved at this point, and I am not especially troubled (or excited) by the fact that we have him locked up for the next 4 years, but if they could move Miley down the road for something, they should do that, especially if they think he will be a distraction if he needs to go to the pen. We need to clear some space in the starting rotation for the "kids" in 2015/16 as part of rebuild. 

 

[Otis Foster]

You know I really dont think it is that hard to "unwind this mess" tho building a good baseball team is another thing altogether.
 
The critical decision moving forward is deciding that Hanley needs to be able to play 1b and then selling him on the idea. The Ortiz situation is secondary to this but needs to be addressed too.
 
The advantages to Hanley playing some 1b are evident: he is a bad defensive LF, we have a need at 1b this year and next, DH is largely spoken for this year and maybe next and we have at least 3 young OFers who for this year at least, it makes sense to give full-time playing time to.
 
The team needs to make the difficult decision to move on from Napoli and sell Hanley on a shift to 1b, with the idea that when Big Papi retires Hanley moves to DH. This may be delicate but should be doable.
 
Regarding Papi, the team message to him has to be, as far as I am concerned, whatever you want Papi, whatever you want. Tell him up front that the team is not going to mess around with him by sitting him so he doesnt get the 425 PAs he needs for the 2016 option to vest, tho obviously he could sit vs some LHPers. Let him know, if he wants to come back next year and DH, that is great by us. Maybe Papi can help sell Hanley on a move to 1b, to decrease the need to DH Hanley putting Papi on the bench.  

 
They are close. Papi was apparently one reason Hanley chose to come here.

 

[Stan Papi Was Framed]

 
They're not "immensely screwed" if their young players indeed turn out as good as we think they can be.  Betts can be an all-star.  Bogaerts can be the best SS in the AL.  Swihart can be one of the best C.  Castillo and Moncada have potential to be terrific.  They don't need all of them to be great, just some of them.  And I think that's still very possible.

agreed. and don't forget Devers.  though he's just in low A, he has potential as a top bat.  Margot in high A is also interesting, in large part for his speed and defense (though he has shown he may hit as well--not a Devers by any stretch though)
 
their big problems at the moment seem to be LF, 1B, C.  Catcher looks like a place where they can improve with Vazquez back next year and Swihart getting more experience.  Hanley is a disaster in LF and I have no idea what they do about this other than moving him to DH which doesn't seem possible anytime soon (apart from making him a platoon parter with Ortiz, which is obviously only a partial solution). at 1B, I don't know the answer.  Lind's bat is intriguing, but would be nice to get someone who improves the defense or at least doesn't destroy it.
 
oh yeah, bullpen is another issue.  I'd try to address that by seeing if any of the guys in high minors can fit--Aro, Hinojosa, Light, Escobar (once he gets some innings under his belt), and Hembree (who I forgot about because he was just promoted).  Bring these guys up this year and see if they can pitch.  while I'm thinking about giving guys a shot, it seems time to give JBJ one more chance. maybe DL Hanley--he seems to be pretty dinged up. 
 
thèse don't seem like massively unsolvable problems.  Biggest problem, sadly, seems to be Hanley in LF.   I say sadly since I was excited about his bat and in general about his return to Boston.  

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

45]
Pete Abraham retweeted
45]
98.5 The Sports Hub ‏@985TheSportsHub  4h4
link to tweet hours ago
.@PeteAbe on @Toucherandrich: Red Sox Immensely Screwed Long Term: http://cbsloc.al/1BhdME8 

No one in Boston should keep giving this blow hard more press than what he gets. The Red Sox have one of the top farm systems in baseball. A simple solution to Pete Abe is this. Hanley shifts to DH and Panda moves to 1B. Yes Panda is fat. Yes you want him to lose weight. Fortunately the Sox are far from screwed because of this. Panda is still relatively young.

On the pitching front is the part that is concerning. They need more than just Eddie to pan out. Miley was a bad fit to begin with and the Porcello contract was bat shit crazy. Two months however does not make a team. When you're dealing with 5 year pacts, 2 months is a very small sample size.

The issue is with Ben. He made very questionable decisions in 2014 and it rolled into this year. Koji should have been moved at the deadline, Craig, Castillo the jury is still out on but SSS isn't looking great etc...

Move Taz Koji and anyone else in the pen who has short term value to a contender. Kelly might end up being the 9th inning answer next year but for now Koji doesn't fit on the team.

Trade Napoli somewhere. Call up Craig because you really have nothing to lose there. If he didn't get claimed the last time he was optioned then he won't this time.

Then make a move for Hamels. They want Margot Vazquez and Johnson? For a good contract in this market and 4 years of control? Done.

If you can move Clay to replace some of the young talent you just traded for Hamels then do it.


Say, Billy Beane has a grown up daughter now. Wonder if he's up for the Sox job again

 

[Stan Papi Was Framed]

agree with you Biggums on the insufferable Peter Abraham
 
Starting pitching doesn't seem disastrous to me, though of course there are question marks.  but it seems reasonable to be able to find 5 guys out of Clay, Porcello, Rodriguez, Miley, Kelly, B. Johnson, Owens

 

[RedOctober3829]

agree with you Biggums on the insufferable Peter Abraham
 
Starting pitching doesn't seem disastrous to me, though of course there are question marks.  but it seems reasonable to be able to find 5 guys out of Clay, Porcello, Rodriguez, Miley, Kelly, B. Johnson, Owens

It shouldn't be disastrous, but it's not a rotation that is going to win a team a championship.

 

[Stan Papi Was Framed]

It shouldn't be disastrous, but it's not a rotation that is going to win a team a championship.

fair point, but I think this is salvageable--in other words, they could start with the current pieces and add one or two more if they really turn out to be a contender next year

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

In fact, it's precisely in the long term that we are not immensely screwed. It's a temporary problem, and I think one of the ways to make sense of this season is to consider that Sandoval and Hanley may have been signed not as saviors but as placeholders, because the infield and outfield corners is one place where we don't have much ML-ready or near-ML ready talent.
 
Starting in 2017, guys like Moncada, Devers, Chavis, Travis and Longhi will start trickling onto the MLB roster. Not all of them will pan out, but some will. We won't be able to fill every spot with a homegrown average-or-better player--but if we can fill most of them that way, then we can be more selective with our FA signings and still have money to extend the best of the homegrown guys.
 
In the meantime, we're in a bit of a hiatus, where we're strong with young talent up the middle, but weaker at the corners, especially the infield corners (it's hard to overestimate the ripple effects of WMB's and Cecchini's successive failures to be the 3B answer). So signing Panda and Hanley made sense; they're not going to block anybody serious for a while, and the money was there. But it's quite possible the Sox never expected either to be a home run signing.

 

[Stitch01]

No.  You make this type of category error a lot.  It is the same flawed logic as saying "well each of these ten individual players is performing at their 40th percentile of expectations, and that's not way off the mean expectation, so its not disappointing that all ten players are performing at their 40th percentile"
 

 

[Mugsy's Jock]

1. Bench Papi against every LHP already and platoon with Hanley at DH.
2. Start finding out now (moreso in practice than in games for the next month) if Hanley can play a tolerable 3B or 1B and if Panda can play a tolerable 1B. Could inform if any of those are options for 2016.
3. Five man rotation (Buchholz, EdRo, Miley, Porcello, Masterson) with a plan developed to get Johnson 5-6 MLB starts this season without pitching a nun reasonable number of innings. If Owens turns a corner, he gets a cup of coffee too.
4. Kelly to bullpen for 7th and 8th. Wright become one of the better garbage time and extra innings pitchers in the league.
5. Commit to JBJ getting 5 games/week by resting Mookie/Toolsney/Shane 1-2 games/week and also gibing him the OF starts when Hanley DHs.
6. Mix and match with BROCKHOLT, though I prioritize developing JBJ over finding BRICKHOLT ABs as future>present.

But just do #1. Please.

 

[Max Venerable]

Get rid of Napoli.  He's out after the season anyway.  Do it now, any way you can.  Eat the money.
 
Bring up JBJ and let the rest of the season be one for the acclimation of the young guys to the MLB and the adjustment by the veterans to their new roles (Hanley needs to be playing some 3B and 1B, Sandoval 1B, Ortiz only hitting against RHP).
 
Stick with a 4 man rotation of  Rodriguez, Porcello, Buchholz, Miley, Johnson.  Kelly should move to the pen.  I don't care what they do with Masterson.  Let these guys take their knocks and learn from them this year.  Shut Rodriguez down early, say after 150 IP.
 
I don't think this saves the season by any means, but hopefully it sets a tone for next season and gives us some options as we explore the abilities of guys in various roles/positions.

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

I love the idea of getting rid of Napoli, even if you can only get a bag of balls for him.
 
But who plays first?  You can't move Hanley or Panda there mid-season, unless you're prepared for embarrassment.

 

[Coachster]

We've got some onerous contracts. We also have some loyalty to people that frankly, I'm baffled by. Like a lot of you, I read the daily baseball transactions. How many times do you see a guy DFA'd who might actually be better than what we have? In the last 24 hours, the Mets DFA'd Dillon Gee. He is what he is, but he's a whole level better than Masterson, and is a hell of a lot more consistent than Kelly or Miley. Let's cut Masterson's ass, eat the 9 mil, move Kelly to the pen and see what Gee could do. Ronald Belasario was DFA'd yesterday too. I know he's right handed, but seriously, Craig Breslow and Robbie Ross Jr.? Matt Barnes? We saw Belasario last year and his stuff was nasty.
 
Fucking Sandy Leon drives me nuts. How much worse could Quintero be? (and how long till Hannagan is back?)
 
I'm aware these moves are deck-chairs-on-the-Titanic level moves, but it's a place to start.
 

I love the idea of getting rid of Napoli, even if you can only get a bag of balls for him.
 
But who plays first?  You can't move Hanley or Panda there mid-season, unless you're prepared for embarrassment.

More embarrassment than we've already suffered? Give Hanley the glove and tell him best of luck. 

 

[mfried]

Get rid of Napoli.  He's out after the season anyway.  Do it now, any way you can.  Eat the money.
 
Bring up JBJ and let the rest of the season be one for the acclimation of the young guys to the MLB and the adjustment by the veterans to their new roles (Hanley needs to be playing some 3B and 1B, Sandoval 1B, Ortiz only hitting against RHP).
 
Stick with a 4 man rotation of  Rodriguez, Porcello, Buchholz, Miley, Johnson.  Kelly should move to the pen.  I don't care what they do with Masterson.  Let these guys take their knocks and learn from them this year.  Shut Rodriguez down early, say after 150 IP.
 
I don't think this saves the season by any means, but hopefully it sets a tone for next season and gives us some options as we explore the abilities of guys in various roles/positions.

This sounds brilliant - especially if you can create a 4-man rotation with 5 pitchers.

 

[Stan Papi Was Framed]

I love the idea of getting rid of Napoli, even if you can only get a bag of balls for him.
 
But who plays first?  You can't move Hanley or Panda there mid-season, unless you're prepared for embarrassment.

Holt can play first.  I'd think about trying Travis Shaw there.  he had a terrible April at Pawtucket but has been better since then.  he's also 25 so worth seeing if he can do anything.  Realistically, I don't expect him to do better than a .700 OPS, but even that would be better than Napoli at this point.  I would not be shocked if his defense is also better than Nap's.

 

[Hagios]

More embarrassment than we've already suffered? Give Hanley the glove and tell him best of luck. 

 
Good thoughts, but I disagree with this last part. Hanley's problem in LF is not a lack of athleticism. His problem is that he is a loafer who doesn't concentrate. Moving him to first would be a disaster (I seem to recall we used to have these same threads about that other LF'er). 
 
And I don't like moving Sandoval to first because he'd be an expensive light hitting first basemen. Now, if the coaches and scouts agree with what his UZR is telling us (SSS disclaimer) then I guess they have no other choice. But Sandoval didn't just get fat this season, and he's been a league average defender. 
 
So like it or not, the Sox either have to get all Bill Belichick on Ortiz, or they have to accept Ramirez at LF for another year.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Holt can play first. 

 
Holt looks every bit the official 1" he's listed as taller than Pedroia. With Panda's throws....yeah.  They'd have to offer goalie masks to fans sitting down the 1B line.