Red Sox & Pablo Sandoval agree to 5 Year, $100 Millionish Deal
- Thread starter ScubaSteveAvery
- Start date
Anyone who thinks the Red Sox aren't trading for Pitching and/or Signing a big time pitcher is an insane. This is just the first two dominos in a complex puzzle. It's coming. Pitching market is much slower to develop and now with hitting market depleted, Red Sox have the most valuable bat available. Yoenis Cespedes (or even Napoli)
I keep coming back to Ken Arneson great blog recently as I think about this deal
http://ken.arneson.name/2014/11/10-things-i-believe-about-baseball-without-evidence/
Specifically the point about having different type of hitters in a lineup to make it harder on pitchers
"Belief Without Evidence #8: Diversity is Good for Batting Lineups
This belief is related to the belief about the definition of the quality of a pitch, and to the belief of a biomechanical/psychological foundation to all of this. A lineup with too many batters with similar strengths and weaknesses can make it easier for a pitcher to settle into a psychological/mechanical rhythm and mow down such a lineup. A lineup that is diverse (some hit fastballs, some like it inside, or low, some slug, others make contact, etc.) makes a pitcher have to change his approach from at-bat to at-bat. That forces the pitcher to have to make a variety of quality pitches in order to win. Its harder for a pitcher to win if he has to have multiple pitches working well.
So when I praised the Giants for having Pablo Sandoval, I did not mean that an entire team of hitters like Pablo Sandoval would be ideal. But having one or two guys like him in a lineup with some more patient-type hitters is a good thing."
The whole article is great. But that point stuck out to me
http://ken.arneson.name/2014/11/10-things-i-believe-about-baseball-without-evidence/
Specifically the point about having different type of hitters in a lineup to make it harder on pitchers
"Belief Without Evidence #8: Diversity is Good for Batting Lineups
This belief is related to the belief about the definition of the quality of a pitch, and to the belief of a biomechanical/psychological foundation to all of this. A lineup with too many batters with similar strengths and weaknesses can make it easier for a pitcher to settle into a psychological/mechanical rhythm and mow down such a lineup. A lineup that is diverse (some hit fastballs, some like it inside, or low, some slug, others make contact, etc.) makes a pitcher have to change his approach from at-bat to at-bat. That forces the pitcher to have to make a variety of quality pitches in order to win. Its harder for a pitcher to win if he has to have multiple pitches working well.
So when I praised the Giants for having Pablo Sandoval, I did not mean that an entire team of hitters like Pablo Sandoval would be ideal. But having one or two guys like him in a lineup with some more patient-type hitters is a good thing."
The whole article is great. But that point stuck out to me
This thread is reading just like when Pats signed Revis AND Browner. "Just like" as in reading with pants firmly off.
Good luck with that.jacklamabe65 said:
I think Sandoval's agent is trying to help. He said Sandoval is still "weighing" offers. Get it?
And regarding getting pitching, which Cherington acknowledged n October was one of the Sox big needs. does anyone actually, seriously, reallly believe either of these two things: 1)they were so distracted by the Sandoval and other dealings that they were incapable of also addressing pitching?; 2)that they spent money on hitters, saying to themselves, "fuck the pitching."?
As someone who doesn't watch a lot of Giants baseball outside of the playoffs, is there any sens of why most of Sandoval's offensive numbers have declined in each of the last four years? The age says I shouldn't worry but the weight says I should. Has anything changed noticeably in his approach?
I can't wait until this turns into a Kevin Millar situation.
Michael Sandoval, Pablo's brother and agent, said report that Sandoval has deal with Red Sox is "not true"
https://twitter.com/GordonEdes/status/536873447532810240
Michael Sandoval, Pablo's brother and agent, said report that Sandoval has deal with Red Sox is "not true"
https://twitter.com/GordonEdes/status/536873447532810240
I really like this deal. Sandoval has an inside out swing from the left side which is going to play really well at Fenway.
Only time will tell but I think this works out well for the Sox.
As a side note, it should be noted that Panda had a horribly slow start last year. Now I don't know if he made a mechanical adjustment or what, but from 5/10 - the end of the season, he hit .308/.345/.452, which was a 127 wrc+.
I don't know what changed, but I do know that those numbers cover 502 PA, and his BABIP of .322 during that span is pretty consistent with his .313 career babip.
Only time will tell but I think this works out well for the Sox.
As a side note, it should be noted that Panda had a horribly slow start last year. Now I don't know if he made a mechanical adjustment or what, but from 5/10 - the end of the season, he hit .308/.345/.452, which was a 127 wrc+.
I don't know what changed, but I do know that those numbers cover 502 PA, and his BABIP of .322 during that span is pretty consistent with his .313 career babip.
Who knew that Pablo Sandoval and Jonas Gray are the same people?
Sandoval’s representation says that “Pablo is sleeping” and that a decision has not been made yet. #Giantshttps://twitter.com/hashtag/Giants?src=hash #RedSox
https://twitter.com/iamjoonlee/status/536874704146296833
Sandoval’s representation says that “Pablo is sleeping” and that a decision has not been made yet. #Giantshttps://twitter.com/hashtag/Giants?src=hash #RedSox
https://twitter.com/iamjoonlee/status/536874704146296833
Seems like the only source for the Sandoval completion is Heyman (he is the listed source in the Glove story as well). Can anyone find any other confirmation of the deal?
(And Juan Francisco's roller coaster ride of a morning continues...)
(And Juan Francisco's roller coaster ride of a morning continues...)
As for the rumors that Sandoval hasn't yet signed, Gammons has been tweeting as if it is a done deal, which makes me think it's done. I trust Gammons more than all other reporters combined
I'll take visual evidence of Sandoval boarding a plane to Boston. He probably is still sleeping but notice no location is given?
https://twitter.com/iamjoonlee/status/536874704146296833ScubaSteveAvery said:
link to tweet At least his agent isn't at a pickup league hockey game.
There is nowhere in the Gammons tweet that says the deal is confirmed or lists a source. He is probably reacting to Heyman.
At the moment we have Heyman, a 12 year old, and an unnamed MLB insider as sources listed in reports.
Nails would be either Sandoval or the Red Sox confirming the deal.
At the moment we have Heyman, a 12 year old, and an unnamed MLB insider as sources listed in reports.
Nails would be either Sandoval or the Red Sox confirming the deal.
Nothing can be "official" with either, as they'd have to move two guys off the 40-man first. Other moves to be made before these two can become official.
shepard50 said:
Rosenthal did have this this morning:
http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/hanley-ramirez-pablo-sandoval-boston-red-sox-free-agency-112314
I'm sure this has been mentioned somewhere, but re: Giants why wouldn't they scoop up Headley now?
There is no way Cherington is signing Hanely to play SS. Their interest kicked off after Hanley made it clear he would play other positions, all the rumors from legitimate sources suggest he is either 3B, LF, RF, or 1B.NJ_Sox_Fan said:
1. Sandoval is 28 (as of August). A five year deal runs through his age 28 to 32 seasons.PedroKsBambino said:
2. His slash line pre-Boston is VERY similar to Adrian Beltre's. His OPS+ is 123 for his career, Beltre's is 116 and that includes Beltre's huge years over the last five seasons in the AL. Both were up to that point high BA, relatively low OBP, above average power hitters. Beltre had some injury problems, Sandoval has too. In many ways they offer very similar skill sets, but Sandoval is available at 28 while Beltre was acquired at 31.
3. His defense is well above average by most any defensive metric there is. He is, again, only 28, so he is likely to play 3B effectively through the life of the deal. 3B is something of a black hole across baseball, Sandoval's season last year was one of the better for any 3B. It is getting almost as hard to find a good 3B as a good SS, C, or CF. This isn't Carl Crawford where the club is giving big money to a non-premium position.
If Sandoval was a good signing at 5/$90M I can't fault them for throwing another million or two per year to get him signed and get the off-season underway. I think there is legitimate potential that with the added protection, AL-wide more friendly parks, etc. Sandoval ends up with an OPS in the low to mid-800's with above average D at third. That would absolutely make him worth $20M per year.
This is also a one time opportunity to solve 3B with a proven veteran. The fact he's still in his 20's is gravy, but the Sox needed to get a 3B option from this FA class or spend the next several seasons wishing on a star that WMB, Cecchini, Coyle, etc. put it all together. Otherwise it will continue to be a black hole while we all pine after Devers/Chavis. No thanks. Fill the need, it doesn't block Devers or Chavis, the rest of them are trade chips or can be fit in at other positions just fine.
Remember when Adam Schefter reported Darrelle Revis agreed to a deal with the Patriots and his agent came out and said no deal was done... It was done. The team and agents will not comment in the final stages of the contract negotiation until physical is done, pen is put to paper. It's getting done. Don't worry.
Buster Olney @Buster_ESPN 18s19 seconds ago
Giants haven't been told anything definitive, but there is a growing resignation within the organization that Sandoval is going to Boston.
Giants haven't been told anything definitive, but there is a growing resignation within the organization that Sandoval is going to Boston.
Yeah on MLB Network Radio, Steve Phillips mentioned that a lot of times agents will deny a deal until the terms get sent to the MLB and MLBPA, which is kind what I think is happening here. Everything broke overnight, so they are probably doing all the paperwork now and the agent won't confirm until the terms are officially agreed to and sent to a 3rd party, kind of a CYA move, which I would certainly do toomloyko54 said:
Ken Rosenthal @Ken_Rosenthal 18s19 seconds ago
#SFGiants also could pursue SP. Savings on Sandoval could put them in play for Lester, says one person with knowledge of club’s thinking.
#SFGiants also could pursue SP. Savings on Sandoval could put them in play for Lester, says one person with knowledge of club’s thinking.
jose melendez said:
I've mentioned this multiple times too, but no one seems to care. I honestly dont know why he's even being considered.
There seems to be no noise re Headley. What's up with that? Does he have an unannounced deal with the Yankees?bosockboy said:
Boston is not out on Lester....They still have 20 + million to work with as well as a trade of Cespedes. More than likely it's andrew miller who has no chance coming back. Gotta love this time of year!!!
Odd, Speier is saying that the Red Sox are saying they've got a deal, but Pandas side is saying no deal yet.
Still think a deal is done, just some paperwork getting done
Still think a deal is done, just some paperwork getting done
SeoulSoxFan said:
Considering the Pats signings, and Hanley and Sandoval, if we sign Lester and another SP, i'm going to forget what pants are.
johnnywayback said:
This is what really strikes me. More dominoes may fall even while I'm writing this, but right now, the only thing that's obvious is that they have to trade somebody. But they could trade any of Bogaerts, Cespedes, Napoli, or maybe even Betts and have a viable lineup for the next few years. Obviously if they trade Bogaerts or Betts the return has to be astronomical, preferably a cost-controlled frontline SP. But they can do almost anything they want now.
As a bonus, this deal means they don't have to rush Cecchini or Marrero--yet neither of them is really blocked.
The depth chart for the non-C positions now looks like:
1B -- Napoli, Sandoval, Craig, Nava
2B -- Pedroia, Betts, Holt
SS -- Bogaerts, Ramirez, Marrero, Holt
3B -- Sandoval, Ramirez, Bogaerts, Cecchini, WMB, Holt
LF -- Cespedes, Ramirez, Nava, Craig, Cecchini, Holt
CF -- Castillo, Betts, JBJ
RF -- Betts, Victorino, Castillo, Nava, Craig, Holt
The names in red are the only players listed who aren't under team control through 2017. Look at that depth and flexibility, and salivate.
Well, this would be great if we could count on Sandoval being a good hitter for a first baseman.johnnywayback said:
I'm not sure that using OPS+ is even the best way to go about rating his offense considering he hits much better in SF than on the road.
At home career: .853 OPS
On road career: .771 OPS
2014, home / road: .774 / .706
2013: .754 / .761
2012: .874 / .718
There's noise here and maybe he just likes being "at home," wherever his home is (doesn't respond well to travel, etc). But I don't think we can just say "Oh, he'll raise his OPS 50 points playing half his games in Fenway. If he's around a .750 OPS that's a big improvement at third but not that exciting if he moves over to first.
I feel like this has been covered at length in the 3B thread. Here is his season-season wRC+ starting in 2009 (146, 96,149,118,116,111). In any case, he isn't really in decline unless you think 1-8 points of wRC+ are decline. After taking into account the decline in offense in MLB, he's had two early fluke years and has been pretty consistent otherwise.jose melendez said:
I would bet the comfort of home is a big factor for him.Toe Nash said:
Also, the notion of him moving to 1B as soon as his age 31 or 32 season is crazy. He is an incredibly good athlete who is an above average 3B defender at 28. Maybe he'll need to look into playing 1B in his mid-30's, but the Sox aren't buying his mid-30's. They're buying his late 20's to early 30's. He's likely to be a fair bit better defender than WMB, Cecchini, etc. at 3B throughout the length of the deal.
He also has serious offensive rebound potential as he gets further away from his hamate bone surgeries, moves into generally more confined AL parks period, and sees superior lineup protection (he will likely slot between Napoli and Ramirez in some fashion).
I remember putting Bernie Williams into the Sox lineup on Triple Play Basball '98. I played a game and Bernie homered twice. By the time the game was over, Mo was on Anaheim and Bernie was back in the Bronx. I only had Steve Avery to console me.Rasputin said:
BeantownIdaho said:
That of course is assuming the Red Sox hard cap at 189 million which I am not sure they have. The Red Sox could be comfortable going over the Luxury Tax since they would paying a low luxury tax percent.
How many guys who had the best season of their careers at age 25 (as Sandoval did in 2011) were still useful major leaguers at age 32 or 33?
Sandoval's #1 comp through age 25 (using similarity scores) was Richie Hebner, so that's encouraging, but the list of discouraging parallels is longer -- Ruben Sierra, Vernon Wells, Jose Canseco, etc.
I understand what the FO is doing -- they think Sandoval's value (total $$, not AAV) is taking a much bigger hit for his body type than it should, so they're seizing on a market inefficiency. I agree with the reasoning; I'm just not sure I'm sold on it in this particular instance, where there's objective evidence of decline.
Sandoval's #1 comp through age 25 (using similarity scores) was Richie Hebner, so that's encouraging, but the list of discouraging parallels is longer -- Ruben Sierra, Vernon Wells, Jose Canseco, etc.
I understand what the FO is doing -- they think Sandoval's value (total $$, not AAV) is taking a much bigger hit for his body type than it should, so they're seizing on a market inefficiency. I agree with the reasoning; I'm just not sure I'm sold on it in this particular instance, where there's objective evidence of decline.