Garbage time again: what's the plan this time?

[BosRedSox5]

Is there any inkling that the front office has plans to get rid of Cherington? If they decided on that course of action internally, would we ever know about it until the axe dropped? 

There have been many posters here who make a compelling argument for cutting him loose, but I wonder how ownership feels about him. Do they feel he's done enough to warrant a longer look? Are they making inquiries behind the scenes? 

 

[dcmissle]

The urgency we see is interesting in that (I) the season is lost (II) relatively speaking, the team is not sitting on high value guys who need to be moved by the deadline and (III) while we don't know for sure, the best guess is that they internally are not very far down introspection highway; just weeks ago, they were insistent that no towels were being thrown in.

This is the ideal situation to take your time and evaluate everything and everyone carefully. If I'm Henry, I order such a stand down. There is no reason to rush anything.

 

[jscola85]

Is there any inkling that the front office has plans to get rid of Cherington? If they decided on that course of action internally, would we ever know about it until the axe dropped? 

There have been many posters here who make a compelling argument for cutting him loose, but I wonder how ownership feels about him. Do they feel he's done enough to warrant a longer look? Are they making inquiries behind the scenes? 

 
Well there's not much to go on except the public comments by Henry, who was quoted recently as saying that Cherington isn't going anywhere for a long time.  So whether fans want him gone or not may be irrelevant, as what little we have to glean suggests Cherington is going to get at least another year.

 

[chrisfont9]

 
Sure. My initial reaction to the Panda signing was not positive. I talked myself into getting behind it, and I'm still optimistic he can be an above average player for most of his contract, but he's overpaid and that's not going to change. Price of doing business on the free agent market, though. Anyway, it's absolutely fair to question the front office. They've made some mistakes along the way. It's the "FIRE EVERYONE!" crap that's drawing some ire. I think it's too early to have a final opinion on Hanley, Panda, Porcello or Miley, but two of the four have some work to do if they are going to get back to being close to worth their contracts. I think they can do it, and probably will, but I also think it is unlikely any of them exceed their contract value. Again, cost of doing business.
 
What we do know is that the farm system is incredibly well stocked and has some very high impact talent moving up through it right now. The major league roster has some really excellent young players getting their feet wet. And this is happening at a time when the free agent market is either more expensive than it ever has been, or is thinner than it used to be (depending on the tier of talent you are looking at) and in some years, is both. They splurged last winter, but they did it because of how rarely those opportunities present themselves. It's a fascinating landscape to watch develop and is wholly unrecognizable if you are holding on to an expectation that it should be similar to even 5 years ago. The sport is changing in a lot of ways and I don't think any of us are really caught up with it just yet.

OK, but I guess I question how much of the downturn was knowable to the FO. A lot of the criticism comes in the form of suggesting they should have known better. I still think the dropoffs are on the players and the manager. The evidence was that the roster should have worked out much better as constructed.

 

[WenZink]

Looking at the payroll vs. production right now, and it is stark to see that, by and large, the guys cashing big checks have been the biggest disasters.  Here's their salary by player this year:
 
Ramirez: $19.8M, -0.9 fWAR
Sandoval: $17.6M, -0.9 fWAR
Napoli: $16.0M, -0.2 fWAR
Ortiz: $16.0M, 0.4 fWAR
Victorino: $13.0M, 0.2 fWAR
Porcello: $12.5M, 0.0 fWAR
Castillo: $11.3M, -0.5 fWAR
 
That's $106M in payroll producing -1.9 WAR collectively - and this doesn't even factor in Masterson or Craig just collecting paychecks for zero or negative production to the MLB team.  Just an astounding misallocation of resources.  The good news is that the guys producing are the ones on attractive contracts.  Betts, Bogaerts, Holt, EdRod, Miley, Pedroia and Buchholz (pre-injury) were all on either below-market deals or still are still pre-arbitration.
 
In some ways, this is a good problem, as you want your young guys being contributors.  In another, it's a real challenge, as moving big salaries with 3-4 years left on a deal will be a tough pill to swallow.  There's not a lot of teams that can or will stomach a $20M+ commitment for a mediocre veteran player - unless AJ Preller wants to start wheeling and dealing again.
 
Bottom line, the team needs to clear the flotsam and jetsam.  Napoli and Victorino will solve themselves soon.  Ortiz has already said he's not going anywhere, so there's not much they can do there.  The real issue lies in the most recent signings.  In order for this team to get righted, the organization has to figure out what to do with Porcello, Castillo, Sandoval and Ramirez.  It will likely require eating a big chunk of one of these deals to move on, and also require someone (likely Porcello or Castillo) bouncing back to be solid contributors, but they need to find a way to clear out payroll and roster space.  They just cannot make improvements to this team if they're going into 2016 with over $100M committed to guys playing at or below replacement level, even with guys like Betts, Bogaerts, and EdRod basically playing for free.

 
So what your saying is that even after just 4 months, the Sox should sell low on every big deal, rather than wait to see if there is improvement in year 2.  Okay, got it!

 

[nighthob]

So what your saying is that even after just 4 months, the Sox should sell low on every big deal, rather than wait to see if there is improvement in year 2.  Okay, got it!

That's not really what he's saying, but hey, great job lighting up that strawman.

 

[jscola85]

Yeah, I'm kind of baffled at the love for Hanley. A 775 OPS for a guy who is lousy defensively isn't worth $22M. Ortiz is putting up that kind of performance for a lot less money and many seem to want him gone sooner than later. In hindsight, they'd have been better off keeping and resigning Cespedes and spending the Hanley $$$ on pitching (and avoiding Porcello). It is early in the contracts, of course, and perhaps year 2+ is better for all these guys.

 
What's startled and disappointed me with Ramirez is the complete evaporation of plate discipline.  He walked 11% of his PAs last year; that's down by half to 5.4%.  Adding another 40 points to his OBP would mean quite a bit to his overall value.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

 
Ben also inherited a bunch of bloated contracts and a team that had not won a playoff game since 2008.

 
Please stop this right now. They won 95 games and made the playoffs in 2009 and the only reason you and Dan Shaughnessy can say things like this is because Papelbon gave up like 5 runs while only getting 3 outs and totally blew Game 3. They had a fine season in 2009; unfortunately they didn't win a playoff game, but that doesn't make them a bad team at all. Game 3 saw their All-Star closer implode in spectacular fashion, that's all. It's not like they should have looked to upgrade that spot.
 
So enough. We don't get to move around the narrative by ignoring 2009. 2009 was a fine year. Didn't work out in the playoffs, but that's baseball.
 
Sorry, this is a huge pet peeve of mine.

 

[WenZink]

That's not really what he's saying, but hey, great job lighting up that strawman.

 
Really?  Then explain?  I think dumping Ramriez or Porcello right now is madness.  Absolutely the worst way to manage a club.  Porcello should be better next year, and maybe Ramirez improves in the field with one more Spring Training.  These contracts are not complete wrecks, but expecting to get any value at all, right now, is just not worth discussing.

 

[jscola85]

 
So what your saying is that even after just 4 months, the Sox should sell low on every big deal, rather than wait to see if there is improvement in year 2.  Okay, got it!

 
Umm, no.  Quite the opposite.  If you read what I wrote, you'll notice that I said they need to determine which of those 4 long-term deals they signed (Hanley, Panda, Porcello, Castillo) they think will bounce back, and for the ones that they regret they just need to cut bait sooner than later.  It sucks to admit a mistake early on but sometimes it is necessary, otherwise you are just killing your flexibility.  If they really think all four will bounce back and provide near or greater value than their contract, great, but just be aware that means that the team has about zero flexibility to improve in the interim except through bounce-backs and internal development.  With $100M+ committed to those guys, the rest of the payroll will end up with guys in arbitration, filling out the fringes of the roster, and paying the young guys like Betts/Bogaerts/EdRod.  
 
As Rudy mentioned, big market teams can eat a big contract or two, but they can't stomach 4-5 guys making 8 figures a year providing replacement-level production on multi-year deals.

 

[WenZink]

 
Umm, no.  Quite the opposite.  If you read what I wrote, you'll notice that I said they need to determine which of those 4 long-term deals they signed (Hanley, Panda, Porcello, Castillo) they think will bounce back, and for the ones that they regret they just need to cut bait sooner than later.  It sucks to admit a mistake early on but sometimes it is necessary, otherwise you are just killing your flexibility.  If they really think all four will bounce back and provide near or greater value than their contract, great, but just be aware that means that the team has about zero flexibility to improve in the interim except through bounce-backs and internal development.  With $100M+ committed to those guys, the rest of the payroll will end up with guys in arbitration, filling out the fringes of the roster, and paying the young guys like Betts/Bogaerts/EdRod.  
 
As Rudy mentioned, big market teams can eat a big contract or two, but they can't stomach 4-5 guys making 8 figures a year providing replacement-level production on multi-year deals.

 
How can you make any evaluation after 4 months?  That's the point.  It's entirely too premature to make that kind of determination.  It's actually easier to determine which young players are playing better than they are projected to do (in the long run) and try to sell high.

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

These are historic times we are living in, friends.
 
Times that some of our grandfathers may recall, but times that none of us (other than Stiffy) can recall.  Times when the Boston Red Sox were consistently the doormats of the American League.  And no, we're not talking pre "Cardiac Kids" 1967 Impossible Dream Red Sox, the seasons we were all taught that the Red Sox regularly came in last in the American League, because they didn't; they weren't very good, but they were regularly in 2nd or 3rd to last place.  In fact you have to go back over EIGHTY (80) years to find a time that the Red Sox came in last more than once in a decade.  Here are the last dozen last place finishes for the Sox:

2014
2012
1992
1932
1930
1929
1928
1927
1926
1925
1923
1922
 
Yes, before 1992 the last time the Sox came in last at all was in the post Harry Frazee sale of Babe Ruth era.  Only one last place finish in the 79 seasons between 1933 and 2011, and now 
two out of the last three seasons with perhaps a third last place finish out of four heading our way.
 
So yeah, this team IS as historic as you think it is and yes, they are as bad as you think they are.  Apologize not for your wallowing, angst, and disdain, for these are historic times that you will be able to tell your grandkids about.

 

[jscola85]

 
How can you make any evaluation after 4 months?  That's the point.  It's entirely too premature to make that kind of determination.  It's actually easier to determine which young players are playing better than they are projected to do (in the long run) and try to sell high.

 
You can't make an evaluation in 4 months?  I think it's safe to say at least that the plan for Ramirez to play LF is and will be an unmitigated disaster.  I don't think any amount of time will get him to be an even passable defender in left.  Then you couple that with his disturbing plate discipline deterioration and I think it is safe to be concerned about his future value.  To be worth $22M, Ramirez needs to mash in left (not just be above average) and be at least passable defensively.  That, or he needs to move to DH, but the roster already has a DH and they have no ability to move him.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

 
Whether Cherington is the right GM to shepherd through that next clean slate phase is another question.

 
It's funny.  A couple of years ago, we killed the Red Sox for paying top-dollar contracts to AGon and Crawford; last year; we criticized them for going with the youngsters who obviously weren't ready; and this year, Ben is giving out medium-tier contracts to average or above-average players and that isn't working either.
 
The Red Sox haven't won over 90 games since 2009 (other than 2013 obviously) and between 2009 and 2014, they haven't been able to develop or keep any impact homegrown players, which is particularly noticeable in terms of the lack of power arms in the bullpen.
 
I'm not sure any team other than the MFYs or the current Dodgers could weather such a drought, particularly in the current context where impact FA players are hard to come by.  Maybe the point is that the Red Sox really need to draft and develop better (which it looks like they are doing, Trey Ball notwithstanding).

 

[alwyn96]

 
What's startled and disappointed me with Ramirez is the complete evaporation of plate discipline.  He walked 11% of his PAs last year; that's down by half to 5.4%.  Adding another 40 points to his OBP would mean quite a bit to his overall value.

 
The lower walk rate is a bummer, but Ramirez has also been a little unlucky in the hit department this year, with a .258 BABIP despite really hitting the crap out of the ball. If you give him a regular .300 BABIP and make all those extra hits singles, he's hitting something like 294/326/504, which is a top 10 hitting OF in the AL. He's also been among the very best hitters in baseball over the past 3 years.
 
Still doesn't make up for the atrocious defense, obviously. It's really amazing just how bad he's been, although he did make a decent catch last night which was a nice surprise.

 

[Max Power]

 
You can't make an evaluation in 4 months?  I think it's safe to say at least that the plan for Ramirez to play LF is and will be an unmitigated disaster.  I don't think any amount of time will get him to be an even passable defender in left.  Then you couple that with his disturbing plate discipline deterioration and I think it is safe to be concerned about his future value.  To be worth $22M, Ramirez needs to mash in left (not just be above average) and be at least passable defensively.  That, or he needs to move to DH, but the roster already has a DH and they have no ability to move him.

 
Have you watched the team at all in the last six weeks? Hanley has been much better in left field than he was over the first two months of the season. Every fly ball was an adventure to start the year, but he's making all the routine plays now. He's also become significantly better than De Aza at playing balls off the wall at home. If he learns to back up stolen base attempts properly and not to run into walls, he'll be acceptable out there next year.

 

[Alcohol&Overcalls]

Would we still want the FO gutted if they'd finished, say, fourth in 2014? What about 2012, or both?
 
Because remember, they punted - the FO made an apparent decision to ship out veterans, play young guys, and improve draft position (similar to 2012). If they kept the veterans and picked up 7 games and jumped the Rays, what now? The focus on last place seems out of place when it was quasi-intentional in at least one, and probably both, years.
 
If the process is flawed or broken, sure - let's ship them out. But it's so weird to focus on win totals in seasons that had a significant swath dedicated to, well, not winning. 

 

[moondog80]

 
Have you watched the team at all in the last six weeks? Hanley has been much better in left field than he was over the first two months of the season. Every fly ball was an adventure to start the year, but he's making all the routine plays now. He's also become significantly better than De Aza at playing balls off the wall at home. If he learns to back up stolen base attempts properly and not to run into walls, he'll be acceptable out there next year.

 
I more or less agree with this.  My desire to see him try 1B is because out of the perhaps misguided notion that we can plug JBJ into LF, while we have no obvious internal option for 1B next year.

 

[plucy]

I'm stunned at how unathletic Hanley appears. Besides the poor defense, his base running is awful (partially mental). Either his hamstring problems have forced him to be les aggressive or his bulked up physique has slowed him down. He looked better last year.

 

[WenZink]

 
You can't make an evaluation in 4 months?  I think it's safe to say at least that the plan for Ramirez to play LF is and will be an unmitigated disaster.  I don't think any amount of time will get him to be an even passable defender in left.  Then you couple that with his disturbing plate discipline deterioration and I think it is safe to be concerned about his future value.  To be worth $22M, Ramirez needs to mash in left (not just be above average) and be at least passable defensively.  That, or he needs to move to DH, but the roster already has a DH and they have no ability to move him.

 
You posted a list of salaries, and then the players' WAR, after just 4 months.  Most of those players had a defensive component to WAR, which needs 2+ years to be reliable.  And this is your basis for evaluation?  4-month WAR(s) mean next to nothing.
 
Hanley has said, it is tough for him to take practice in the outfield before a game, because he's worried he won't be able to take the field come game time.  Fine.  If that's the problem, give him every other day off, and have him work on his off-days.  His lack of plate discipline may be to due to pressing, given the fact that the Sox season has just gone down the tubes.  Let him hit the reset button on his Sox career.  But to cut-and-run does the team no good.  Eating salary to move a player means you still carry the money on the cap, and yet, you have no upside.  In a just over a year, the Sox will need a DH.  If they plan to continue the full-time DH system, that they've had since Ortiz arrived, then H Ramirez is the perfect fit.
 
Let Porcello relax now that the team is out of it.  Treat his last dozen starts as you woulld treat those of a prospect pitcher in the minors, where you concentrate on getting back to basics, and not think about being a "stopper."
 
As for Castillo, we can only hope that his lack of performance is due to his adjustment to the US, his family, and the pressure (and the options!) of making the big money.  I don't know how you evaluate the odds of his recovery in 2016, but looking at his WAR for 30 days of 2015 is surely not the way.

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

Would we still want the FO gutted if they'd finished, say, fourth in 2014? What about 2012, or both?
 
Because remember, they punted - the FO made an apparent decision to ship out veterans, play young guys, and improve draft position (similar to 2012). If they kept the veterans and picked up 7 games and jumped the Rays, what now? The focus on last place seems out of place when it was quasi-intentional in at least one, and probably both, years.
 
If the process is flawed or broken, sure - let's ship them out. But it's so weird to focus on win totals in seasons that had a significant swath dedicated to, well, not winning. 

 
We've gone over this - the losing in 2014 started well before the trade deadline. They were 48-60 on July 31 - .444 winning percentage. Their final winning percentage was .438. Maybe if they'd kept the veterans, they might have won a few extra games, but they were a last-place season well before any apparent decision to punt. 
 
2012, yes, they were a .500-ish team before going on a losing streak shortly after the deadline and the opportunity to unload some money caused an apparent shift in strategy.

 

[grimshaw]

 
You can't make an evaluation in 4 months?  I think it's safe to say at least that the plan for Ramirez to play LF is and will be an unmitigated disaster.  I don't think any amount of time will get him to be an even passable defender in left.  Then you couple that with his disturbing plate discipline deterioration and I think it is safe to be concerned about his future value.  To be worth $22M, Ramirez needs to mash in left (not just be above average) and be at least passable defensively.  That, or he needs to move to DH, but the roster already has a DH and they have no ability to move him.

And I think he's been getting a relative pass on the offense.  His wRC+ is 45th among all OF with 200 PA or more. Just not good enough to make up for everything else. 
 
 

 
Have you watched the team at all in the last six weeks? Hanley has been much better in left field than he was over the first two months of the season. Every fly ball was an adventure to start the year, but he's making all the routine plays now. He's also become significantly better than De Aza at playing balls off the wall at home. If he learns to back up stolen base attempts properly and not to run into walls, he'll be acceptable out there next year.

I'll give you that maybe he's gone from "rancid," to "awful," on the road.
For all the ok plays he makes, he still makes the blunder like he did in Anaheim where he broke completely wrong, and is still no threat to be able to keep a guy from scoring from 2nd due in at least some part to his reputation.
 
And according to inside edge fielding http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=8001&position=SS, he has yet to make one play that an average OF makes 60% or less of the time.

 

[jscola85]

 
Have you watched the team at all in the last six weeks? Hanley has been much better in left field than he was over the first two months of the season. Every fly ball was an adventure to start the year, but he's making all the routine plays now. He's also become significantly better than De Aza at playing balls off the wall at home. If he learns to back up stolen base attempts properly and not to run into walls, he'll be acceptable out there next year.

 
There's still regular, massive mistakes being made, such as the ball that inexplicably got over his head just this week in Anaheim.  Maybe he's gone from "complete butcher" to "Manny in a bad year", but he's still an extremely far way off from competence.  To plucy's point, he displays zero range whatsoever.  Part of that may be tentativeness after getting hurt running into the wall earlier this year at Fenway.  Part may be his hammy.  But a huge part to my eye stems from extremely poor reads off the bat, resulting in him basically freezing in his tracks.  Short of a ball landing within a 10 foot radius around him, there's a very low chance he converts the ball into an out.

 

[grimshaw]

 
You posted a list of salaries, and then the players' WAR, after just 4 months.  Most of those players had a defensive component to WAR, which needs 2+ years to be reliable.  And this is your basis for evaluation?  4-month WAR(s) mean next to nothing.
 

How about his .3 offensive WAR?  He's been shit all the way through.  And if the long term plan is to move him to DH outside of his prime years where does Sandoval go?

 

[nighthob]

Really?  Then explain?  I think dumping Ramriez or Porcello right now is madness.  Absolutely the worst way to manage a club.  Porcello should be better next year, and maybe Ramirez improves in the field with one more Spring Training.  These contracts are not complete wrecks, but expecting to get any value at all, right now, is just not worth discussing.

He can speak for himself, but there's nothing wrong with evaluating the moves they've made after four months, it's not like these guys are under 25 year olds with no track records. They're not likely to do anything now (as in immediately), but they do need to make some decisions about what they're doing in 2016 and how these guys fit long term.

 

[WenZink]

How about his .3 offensive WAR?

 
So you sign a player to a 4 year deal, plus a vesting option for a 5th year, and you make a final evaluation based on his first 335 plate appearacnes?  Really?  Did I just stumble into a game thread?

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

 
You posted a list of salaries, and then the players' WAR, after just 4 months.  Most of those players had a defensive component to WAR, which needs 2+ years to be reliable.  And this is your basis for evaluation?  4-month WAR(s) mean next to nothing.
 
Hanley has said, it is tough for him to take practice in the outfield before a game, because he's worried he won't be able to take the field come game time.  Fine.  If that's the problem, give him every other day off, and have him work on his off-days.  His lack of plate discipline may be to due to pressing, given the fact that the Sox season has just gone down the tubes.  Let him hit the reset button on his Sox career.  But to cut-and-run does the team no good.  Eating salary to move a player means you still carry the money on the cap, and yet, you have no upside.  In a just over a year, the Sox will need a DH.  If they plan to continue the full-time DH system, that they've had since Ortiz arrived, then H Ramirez is the perfect fit.
 
Let Porcello relax now that the team is out of it.  Treat his last dozen starts as you woulld treat those of a prospect pitcher in the minors, where you concentrate on getting back to basics, and not think about being a "stopper."
 
As for Castillo, we can only hope that his lack of performance is due to his adjustment to the US, his family, and the pressure (and the options!) of making the big money.  I don't know how you evaluate the odds of his recovery in 2016, but looking at his WAR for 30 days of 2015 is surely not the way.

 
I agree to an extent that rushing to judgment on some of these players might lead them to make some possibly even worse decisions, and that it isn't super-crazy to think some of those guys might get better. My concern is that they might not have a choice but to at least try to move someone simply because they've got some holes to fill to improve the team and less payroll space than people seem to think. In the event that someone wants to take Sandoval or Porcello off their hands, they have to at least consider it.

 

[jscola85]

 
You posted a list of salaries, and then the players' WAR, after just 4 months.  Most of those players had a defensive component to WAR, which needs 2+ years to be reliable.  And this is your basis for evaluation?  4-month WAR(s) mean next to nothing.
 
Hanley has said, it is tough for him to take practice in the outfield before a game, because he's worried he won't be able to take the field come game time.  Fine.  If that's the problem, give him every other day off, and have him work on his off-days.  His lack of plate discipline may be to due to pressing, given the fact that the Sox season has just gone down the tubes.  Let him hit the reset button on his Sox career.  But to cut-and-run does the team no good.  Eating salary to move a player means you still carry the money on the cap, and yet, you have no upside.  In a just over a year, the Sox will need a DH.  If they plan to continue the full-time DH system, that they've had since Ortiz arrived, then H Ramirez is the perfect fit.
 
Let Porcello relax now that the team is out of it.  Treat his last dozen starts as you woulld treat those of a prospect pitcher in the minors, where you concentrate on getting back to basics, and not think about being a "stopper."
 
As for Castillo, we can only hope that his lack of performance is due to his adjustment to the US, his family, and the pressure (and the options!) of making the big money.  I don't know how you evaluate the odds of his recovery in 2016, but looking at his WAR for 30 days of 2015 is surely not the way.

 
If you want to look at the hitting-only component to WAR for those players it is no better.  As for Hanley's inability to get fielding reps in due to risk of injury, that's something which should be accounted for in his long-term value as well.  Committing $22M a year to a guy who has to be handled with kid gloves due to durability issues is a big risk.  If the plan was for Hanley to be a DH, then that's a really bad plan for two reasons.  One, paying a DH $22M is crazy unless said DH is one of the 3-4 best hitters in the league, and while Hanley is a good hitter, he's not THAT good of a hitter.  Two, the team already had a multi-year commitment to a DH in Ortiz who they have zero leverage to move off the roster until 2017.
 
The plan was likely to play Hanley in LF for 2-3 years then shift him to DH.  I get that, but that plan was also predicated on Ramirez being a competent defender and baserunner, and staying relatively healthy, none of which seems to be the case.
 
I agree Porcello and Castillo need more time, and mentioned as such.  It is the Ramirez and Sandoval contracts in my view that are the potential long-term anchors to the payroll.  Hanley because he has no position on this team plus may be exhibiting deterioration in his health/durability and Sandoval because (a) they just flat-out overpaid for him, (b) his weight issues seem to be hampering him and (c) his peripherals like BB%, hard hit%, pop-up rate, and ISO are all deteriorating, in some cases significantly.

 

[alwyn96]

How about his .3 offensive WAR?  He's been shit all the way through.  And if the long term plan is to move him to DH outside of his prime years where does Sandoval go?

 
Where are you getting 0.3 oWAR? I think you're looking at offense runs - Fangraphs doesn't appear to publish an oWAR.

 

[Plympton91]

Would we still want the FO gutted if they'd finished, say, fourth in 2014? What about 2012, or both?
 
Because remember, they punted - the FO made an apparent decision to ship out veterans, play young guys, and improve draft position (similar to 2012). If they kept the veterans and picked up 7 games and jumped the Rays, what now? The focus on last place seems out of place when it was quasi-intentional in at least one, and probably both, years.
 
If the process is flawed or broken, sure - let's ship them out. But it's so weird to focus on win totals in seasons that had a significant swath dedicated to, well, not winning. 

 
When half of the strategy is to have a $100 million player development machine, I don't think you can totally let them off the hook for the post-white-flag collapses in 2012 and 2014.   At some point, you'd like the kids following in the footsteps of the traded veterans to at least tread water, if not pick up a spot in the standings.  If even one of Ranaudo, Webster, and De La Rosa had lived up to the hype and confidence the front office showed in them, then they wouldn't have finished last, and maybe one of them gets a rotation spot for 2015 instead of wasting $10 million on Masterson.  If Napoli had produced in 2014 after signing his 2-year extension or if they'd realized that they were committed to Jackie Bradley in CF without a plan B for even a medium-term injury let alone season-long poor performance, maybe they are in a position to add at the 2014 deadline rather than cut bait.    If Marerro had been able to hit his way out of a paper bag, then maybe they would've left Bogaerts at 3B and not signed Sandoval.  

 

[jscola85]

 
It's funny.  A couple of years ago, we killed the Red Sox for paying top-dollar contracts to AGon and Crawford; last year; we criticized them for going with the youngsters who obviously weren't ready; and this year, Ben is giving out medium-tier contracts to average or above-average players and that isn't working either.
 
The Red Sox haven't won over 90 games since 2009 (other than 2013 obviously) and between 2009 and 2014, they haven't been able to develop or keep any impact homegrown players, which is particularly noticeable in terms of the lack of power arms in the bullpen.
 
I'm not sure any team other than the MFYs or the current Dodgers could weather such a drought, particularly in the current context where impact FA players are hard to come by.  Maybe the point is that the Red Sox really need to draft and develop better (which it looks like they are doing, Trey Ball notwithstanding).

 
That shows to me it's less the size of the deals that they are signing and more that the pro scouting of this team needs a major overhaul.  It's not just bad signings, they've made bad bets, acquiring Kelly / Craig and getting zero from them, trading for Porcello, Bailey, Hanrahan, trading for and then flipping Melancon only to see him break out for Pittsburgh, etc. etc.  Even Miley is only barely outperforming Rubby de la Rosa, and he's considered one of the modest successes when evaluating the pro scouting moves.
 
With rare exceptions, decisions made on MLB veterans by this org over the last 3-4 years have been a total mess.

 

[jscola85]

 
The lower walk rate is a bummer, but Ramirez has also been a little unlucky in the hit department this year, with a .258 BABIP despite really hitting the crap out of the ball. If you give him a regular .300 BABIP and make all those extra hits singles, he's hitting something like 294/326/504, which is a top 10 hitting OF in the AL. He's also been among the very best hitters in baseball over the past 3 years.
 
Still doesn't make up for the atrocious defense, obviously. It's really amazing just how bad he's been, although he did make a decent catch last night which was a nice surprise.

 
If you want to normalize that, you should probably also normalize his HR/FB rate, which currently sits at 22% vs. 14% for his career.  Perhaps some of that is playing in Boston vs. cavernous LAD / MIA stadiums, but his home/away splits this year are exactly the same and over his career his HR/FB rate is actually higher in his home park than on the road (15% vs. 13%).

 

[Super Nomario]

I should have been more clear - they were unable to stick to such a plan for more than one season. The money eventually burns a hole in their pocket. The time to buy is this coming offseason when there are some top assets. Instead they jumped the gun and bought up mediocre assets at high prices.

Edit: clarity

I think on this score they've been consistent. They jettisoned big money deals to Crawford and Gonzalez and let Lester and Ellsbury walk as FAs. They handed out high price, short commitment contracts to Napoli, Drew, Victorino, Gomes, and Dempster before 2013 (which mostly worked well), and then Pierzynski and re-signings of Napoli and Drew before 2014 (not so good). They don't seem interested in the big money, big commitment contracts, preferring to go high dollars for fewer years. Maybe they will change philosophies, but so far they've avoided "top assets."

 

[grimshaw]

 
So you sign a player to a 4 year deal, plus a vesting option for a 5th year, and you make a final evaluation based on his first 335 plate appearacnes?  Really?  Did I just stumble into a game thread?

What do you suggest they do?  Bring everyone back and hope they all collectively revert to anything close to what they did before coming over?
 
Shockingly, teams make evaluations over the first two months of the season to determine what their strengths and weaknesses are and to improve the roster in June and July based on those decisions.  It would not be impossible for the Red Sox to improve their roster through subtraction if they have determined it has been constructed poorly.  To this point - you would have a tough time suggesting otherwise. 

 

[alwyn96]

 
If you want to normalize that, you should probably also normalize his HR/FB rate, which currently sits at 22% vs. 14% for his career.  Perhaps some of that is playing in Boston vs. cavernous LAD / MIA stadiums, but his home/away splits this year are exactly the same and over his career his HR/FB rate is actually higher in his home park than on the road (15% vs. 13%).

 
Would you want to normalize HR/FB? I always thought that was more of an indicator of skill (rather than luck) for hitters.

 

[WenZink]

 
If you want to look at the hitting-only component to WAR for those players it is no better.  As for Hanley's inability to get fielding reps in due to risk of injury, that's something which should be accounted for in his long-term value as well.  Committing $22M a year to a guy who has to be handled with kid gloves due to durability issues is a big risk.  If the plan was for Hanley to be a DH, then that's a really bad plan for two reasons.  One, paying a DH $22M is crazy unless said DH is one of the 3-4 best hitters in the league, and while Hanley is a good hitter, he's not THAT good of a hitter.  Two, the team already had a multi-year commitment to a DH in Ortiz who they have zero leverage to move off the roster until 2017.
 
The plan was likely to play Hanley in LF for 2-3 years then shift him to DH.  I get that, but that plan was also predicated on Ramirez being a competent defender and baserunner, and staying relatively healthy, none of which seems to be the case.
 
I agree Porcello and Castillo need more time, and mentioned as such.  It is the Ramirez and Sandoval contracts in my view that are the potential long-term anchors to the payroll.  Hanley because he has no position on this team plus may be exhibiting deterioration in his health/durability and Sandoval because (a) they just flat-out overpaid for him, (b) his weight issues seem to be hampering him and (c) his peripherals like BB%, hard hit%, pop-up rate, and ISO are all deteriorating, in some cases significantly.

 
Hanley was never an outfielder, so it's going to take more reps.  Sandoval is having a crappy season, but he's only 28, instead of just looking at 80 games, look at his career.  If you pay to dump Sandoval, you're still going to need a 3rd baseman.  Devers is only 19.   He's an upgrade over Will Middlebrooks and the Sox actually got a good return in trade with Hannigan.  I don't want to see the Sox pull a "Lugo," where they cut and ran from Renteria after a year, and 12 months later were siging Lugo for 4ys/$36 mil.  Unless Renteria was pulling a "Jimmy Piersall" in the clubhouse, they should have just stuck with Edgar.  I want to see Ben C. stick with his initial plan and just "Make it work."  He may not get full return on some of these contracts, but he can salvage a good amount.  They're going to need a DH just over a year from now.  They need a 3rd baseman.  The concept of having a sinker-ball pitcher like Porcello was a good one.   Move these guys, who have a least some track record as major league starters, and you're going to have to replace them, and there's no certainty in the replacements, even with the best of evaluation.
 

What do you suggest they do?  Bring everyone back and hope they all collectively revert to anything close to what they did before coming over?
 
[snip]

 
Yes.  Because what Sandoval, Ramirez and Porcello have done over the previous 5-9 years, is more reliable than what they have done in the past 4 months, while adjusting to a new team.  Certainly, you try to factor in depreciation for age, but you don't discount the careers of players that are 31, 26 and 28 years old.

 

[jscola85]

 
Would you want to normalize HR/FB? I always thought that was more of an indicator of skill (rather than luck) for hitters.

 
I'd feel more confident that it wasn't luck if his hard hit % was stronger this year but in fact it's about the same as last year.  He's also not pulling the ball as much, which is another reason you might think the HR rate would go up (ie, taking advantage of the Monster more).  Hanley has had years in the past where he's been at or near 20% HR/FB but those are the aberrations and not the norm.  His poor plate discipline and BABIP may also be in part due to him swinging for the fences - perhaps he is hacking more and making more "all or nothing" contact, resulting in poor BABIP when he doesn't crush the ball as well as a lower BB rate.  

 

[jscola85]

 
Hanley was never an outfielder, so it's going to take more reps.  Sandoval is having a crappy season, but he's only 28, instead of just looking at 80 games, look at his career.  If you pay to dump Sandoval, you're still going to need a 3rd baseman.  Devers is only 19.   He's an upgrade over Will Middlebrooks and the Sox actually got a good return in trade with Hannigan.  I don't want to see the Sox pull a "Lugo," where they cut and ran from Renteria after a year, and 12 months later were siging Lugo for 4ys/$36 mil.  Unless Renteria was pulling a "Jimmy Piersall" in the clubhouse, they should have just stuck with Edgar.  I want to see Ben C. stick with his initial plan and just "Make it work."  He may not get full return on some of these contracts, but he can salvage a good amount.  They're going to need a DH just over a year from now.  They need a 3rd baseman.  The concept of having a sinker-ball pitcher like Porcello was a good one.   Move these guys, who have a least some track record as major league starters, and you're going to have to replace them, and there's no certainty in the replacements, even with the best of evaluation.

 
Well, for one, they could play Holt at 3rd.  While he had some misadventures at 3rd last year he was no worse than what Sandoval has shown.  If they dump Sandoval, they could also play Ramirez at 3rd, which he did in 2012 at a passable level.  Given the relative overlap in required skills to play 3rd vs. short, and the fact that Ramirez has actually shown competence at that position in the past, I'd much rather find a way to get rid of Sandoval, move Ramirez to 3rd, and open up LF to allow Rusney a spot in the lineup every day.
 
Regarding the team knowing Ramirez would need reps in the OF to become a good defender, he's not a minor leaguer converting positions.  The team should have priced into his contract the risk that he could need a year or longer to learn playing OF, because the only way he's going to take lumps and improve is by hurting the MLB team out on the field.  He's been Adam Dunn-level bad out there, so even if he does improve, it may only go from "atrocious" to "below average", and being below average in LF means you need to mash, which Hanley is not doing.  Frankly, outside of a half season with the Dodgers, he's been what he is this year since 2010 - a 775-825 OPS hitter.  If he's that, great, but a solid bat with below average defense at one of the easiest defensive positions on the field means that he's worth nowhere near $22M/yr.  And that's not even getting into his health issues, which is probably the one thing we can agree on will not be getting better as he ages.

 

[The X Man Cometh]

I'm stunned at how unathletic Hanley appears. Besides the poor defense, his base running is awful (partially mental). Either his hamstring problems have forced him to be les aggressive or his bulked up physique has slowed him down. He looked better last year.

 
I think his instinctual wiring hasn't caught up to his body. He makes decisions on the basepaths relative to the speed he used to have. 2010 Hanley could take that extra base, yoked up 2015 Hanley can't.

 

[Pilgrim]

What do you suggest they do?  Bring everyone back and hope they all collectively revert to anything close to what they did before coming over?

Basically, yes. They don't have a hotshot prospect for either LF of 3B, so you'd have to pay someone a bunch of your limited payroll to take those guys, and then hope that Free Agent du jour works out better.

Obviously hoping these veterans rebound isn't a great option either, but it happens sometimes. They'll still have the ability to get rid of them a year or two from now if they aren't working out.

 

[j44thor]

 
Hanley was never an outfielder, so it's going to take more reps.  Sandoval is having a crappy season, but he's only 28, instead of just looking at 80 games, look at his career.  If you pay to dump Sandoval, you're still going to need a 3rd baseman.  Devers is only 19.   He's an upgrade over Will Middlebrooks and the Sox actually got a good return in trade with Hannigan.  I don't want to see the Sox pull a "Lugo," where they cut and ran from Renteria after a year, and 12 months later were siging Lugo for 4ys/$36 mil.  Unless Renteria was pulling a "Jimmy Piersall" in the clubhouse, they should have just stuck with Edgar.  I want to see Ben C. stick with his initial plan and just "Make it work."  He may not get full return on some of these contracts, but he can salvage a good amount.  They're going to need a DH just over a year from now.  They need a 3rd baseman.  The concept of having a sinker-ball pitcher like Porcello was a good one.   Move these guys, who have a least some track record as major league starters, and you're going to have to replace them, and there's no certainty in the replacements, even with the best of evaluation.
 
 
Yes.  Because what Sandoval, Ramirez and Porcello have done over the previous 5-9 years, is more reliable than what they have done in the past 4 months, while adjusting to a new team.  Certainly, you try to factor in depreciation for age, but you don't discount the careers of players that are 31, 26 and 28 years old.

 
Sure if you want to pay him like a sinker-ball pitcher.  Of course it is worth noting that Porcello was technically not a sinker-ball pitcher in 2014 as his GB% dropped from 55% in 2013 to 49% in 2014.  That should have been red flag #1 to hold off on an extension.  Rather than revert to his career sinker-ball rates he has dropped even further, though not quite as dramatic, this season to 44%. 
 
Now they are committed to someone who may or may not be a sinker-ball pitcher (never good if you don't know what you are), who is being paid as a top 25-30 pitcher in baseball starting next season and is currently among the worst pitchers in baseball.  If he reverts back to his career norms you have a 20M pitcher who historically contributes a shade above 2WAR.  Since when did the cost of 1WAR become 10M?

 

[jscola85]

 
Sure if you want to pay him like a sinker-ball pitcher.  Of course it is worth noting that Porcello was technically not a sinker-ball pitcher in 2014 as his GB% dropped from 55% in 2013 to 49% in 2014.  That should have been red flag #1 to hold off on an extension.  Rather than revert to his career sinker-ball rates he has dropped even further, though not quite as dramatic, this season to 44%. 
 
Now they are committed to someone who may or may not be a sinker-ball pitcher (never good if you don't know what you are), who is being paid as a top 25-30 pitcher in baseball starting next season and is currently among the worst pitchers in baseball.  If he reverts back to his career norms you have a 20M pitcher who historically contributes a shade above 2WAR.  Since when did the cost of 1WAR become 10M?

 
I think this is fundamentally my issue with a lot of the hope of a bounceback for Hanley and Sandoval.  Even if things revert back to what the team hopes, we may still be materially overpaying them.  Sandoval was a 2.5-3 WAR player by and large during his mid-20s, and to be just breakeven on his deal, he needs to be that on average for the 5 years into his early 30's, all while his peripherals are deteriorating and his weight is ballooning.  And if we can assume that Ramirez will at best be a below-average defender in left, that means to be worth the 3+ WAR his $22M salary commands, he needs to be posting a wRC+ in the range of guys like Upton and Holliday (ie, 130+) AND stay healthy for 145+ games a year.
 
I am clearly more pessimistic on many others with respect to these two, but I saw big risks in signing both these guys (Hanley = health + position change, Sandoval = weight issues becoming a problem) and those risks seem to be bearing themselves out.  There's still plenty of time and it's unlikely either is moved in the next 40 days, so the team should have another 70 games to make some more informed decisions.

 

[WenZink]

 
Sure if you want to pay him like a sinker-ball pitcher.  Of course it is worth noting that Porcello was technically not a sinker-ball pitcher in 2014 as his GB% dropped from 55% in 2013 to 49% in 2014.  That should have been red flag #1 to hold off on an extension.  Rather than revert to his career sinker-ball rates he has dropped even further, though not quite as dramatic, this season to 44%. 
 
Now they are committed to someone who may or may not be a sinker-ball pitcher (never good if you don't know what you are), who is being paid as a top 25-30 pitcher in baseball starting next season and is currently among the worst pitchers in baseball.  If he reverts back to his career norms you have a 20M pitcher who historically contributes a shade above 2WAR.  Since when did the cost of 1WAR become 10M?

 
Actually, I think the cost of 1 WAR is closer to $8 mil, so the Sox probably looked at Porcello's age, and path of development and gave more weight to his 4.0 WAR of 2014.
 
But this is still the wrong thread for that argument.  This thread is what the Sox should do, going forward, now that it's garbage time. Porcello may or may not ever be worth his contract, but to just cut and run and dump a crap load of salary, just to make the fans feel better, is an irresponsible way to go.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

 
And if we can assume that Ramirez will at best be a below-average defender in left, that means to be worth the 3+ WAR his $22M salary commands, he needs to be posting a wRC+ in the range of guys like Upton and Holliday (ie, 130+) AND stay healthy for 145+ games a year.

 
I don't understand how anyone who has actually been watching him recently would feel comfortable making that assumption.

 

[jscola85]

 
I don't understand how anyone who has actually been watching him recently would feel comfortable making that assumption.

 
Because I still see a guy with horrendous range and poor instincts.  He's simply gone from a trainwreck to Manny Ramirez.  That would be all well and good if he posted a Manny-like batting line, but he's not.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

 
That shows to me it's less the size of the deals that they are signing and more that the pro scouting of this team needs a major overhaul.  It's not just bad signings, they've made bad bets, acquiring Kelly / Craig and getting zero from them, trading for Porcello, Bailey, Hanrahan, trading for and then flipping Melancon only to see him break out for Pittsburgh, etc. etc.  Even Miley is only barely outperforming Rubby de la Rosa, and he's considered one of the modest successes when evaluating the pro scouting moves.
 
With rare exceptions, decisions made on MLB veterans by this org over the last 3-4 years have been a total mess.

 
Well as SuperNomario says, the signings before the 2013 were almost an unqualified success:  Napoli, Drew, Victorino, Gomes, Dempster, Koji, etc.
 
I think the issue is that the Red Sox have had to acquire too many players and have not been able to develop any.  With all of the holes they have had to fill, there are going to be hits and misses.  It just seems that almost all of the hits were in one year and almost all of the misses in the next two.

 

[jscola85]

 
Well as SuperNomario says, the signings before the 2013 were almost an unqualified success:  Napoli, Drew, Victorino, Gomes, Dempster, Koji, etc.
 
I think the issue is that the Red Sox have had to acquire too many players and have not been able to develop any.  With all of the holes they have had to fill, there are going to be hits and misses.  It just seems that almost all of the hits were in one year and almost all of the misses in the next two.

 
Victorino was not an unqualified success.  He had one great year and then has been completely unable to stay on the field since.  Paying $39M for one great season seems at best fair value.  Dempster had a 4.68 ERA while making $13M - not sure I'm doing backflips over that deal either, especially since he gave them a free out by retiring.  Napoli was great but then they followed that up by signing him to a bad deal, and the same for Drew. Jonny Gomes made $10M and produced one mediocre year and one sub-replacement level year.  Koji was clearly an unqualified success.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

Weren't you just saying that our eyes deceive us when it comes to defense? I think he's been better than he was earlier in the year, which is a low bar to clear. If he's been average, that seems hard to believe....what regular LF are worse?

 
There's a difference between saying he's been average recently and his ceiling defensively is better than "below average." I'm doing the latter, not the former. I'm not going to harp on it, but suffice it to say, I disagree strongly with the description of his defense over the last month and a half or so.
 
As for my comment on biases influencing our appraisal of defense, you might want to reread what I wrote and think about it some more because you are, as usual, off the mark.

 

[The X Man Cometh]

 
Victorino was not an unqualified success.  He had one great year and then has been completely unable to stay on the field since.  Paying $39M for one great season seems at best fair value.  Dempster had a 4.68 ERA while making $13M - not sure I'm doing backflips over that deal either, especially since he gave them a free out by retiring.  Napoli was great but then they followed that up by signing him to a bad deal, and the same for Drew. Jonny Gomes made $10M and produced one mediocre year and one sub-replacement level year.  Koji was clearly an unqualified success.

 
Calling 2013 Gomes a mediocre year seems lacking in context.
 
The hypothetical amalgamation of Daniel Nava and Jonny Gomes that played in LF in 2013 was like an .850 OPS bat, for the sum of their salaries which is fairly paltry. Throw in the value he supposedly had off the field and I'd call that a great value in 2013. We are much worse in LF without the lefty masher, even if he was "just a platoon bat"

 

[jscola85]

 
Calling 2013 Gomes a mediocre year seems lacking in context.
 
The hypothetical amalgamation of Daniel Nava and Jonny Gomes that played in LF in 2013 was like an .850 OPS bat, for the sum of their salaries which is fairly paltry. Throw in the value he supposedly had off the field and I'd call that a great value in 2013. We are much worse in LF without the lefty masher, even if he was "just a platoon bat"

 
Sure, he worth well more than his pay in 2013 - no arguing that.  We then got below replacement-level performance from him for $5M in 2014.  That can't be ignored when evaluating his contract.  Like Victorino, one good year does not absolve complete lack of contribution of the next.  $5M isn't huge in the context of the Red Sox payroll, but it still matters, just like the money the team wasted on Mujica, Masterson, et al.