The Case Against Moving Hanley

TomBrunansky23 · Aug 22, 2015

Before anything rash is done, I think this organization owes it to itself to see if Hanley can play first base at a competent level. There exists an opportunity to fix two problems at once - the LF defense improves exponentially and you fill a hole at a position of relative weakness. If it doesn't work out...then you take pennies on the dollar or at worst DFA him.

Sampo Gida · Aug 23, 2015

Pretty sure DD will not want to be saddled with the mistakes of the previous regime. Hanley is a bad fit like Carl Crawford was before him and Edgar Renteria before him. Team needs to move on. Maybe if there was a spot open at DH, but there isn't. I just can't see him at 1B the way he moves around in LF. An awful defensive 1Bman could be more devastating than a bad LF'er at Fenway. No position except C touches the ball more.

One of two things is likely to happen IMO. Hanley gets traded as a standalone with the Red Sox eating a good part of his salary like they did with Renteria, or he gets moved in a package with a decent player like Crawford was with Agon and the Red Sox being free of more of the salary than with a standalone.

Traut · Aug 23, 2015

TomBrunansky23 said:
Before anything rash is done, I think this organization owes it to itself to see if Hanley can play first base at a competent level. There exists an opportunity to fix two problems at once - the LF defense improves exponentially and you fill a hole at a position of relative weakness. If it doesn't work out...then you take pennies on the dollar or at worst DFA him.

Ramirez has mentioned the toll playing the infield takes on his body. He has specifically mentioned the toll of bending down while playing the infield. The Red Sox management has recognized this and kept him out of the infield.

An injured to Hanley is worse than having him suck in LF in meaningless games. At this point, he's a DH and should be traded to a team that needs one.

Additionally Travis Shaw has been good. Let him continue to get at bats. See how he responds when MLB pitchers get a book on him.

WenZink · Aug 23, 2015

Trautwein's Degree said:
Ramirez has mentioned the toll playing the infield takes on his body. He has specifically mentioned the toll of bending down while playing the infield. The Red Sox management has recognized this and kept him out of the infield.

An injured to Hanley is worse than having him suck in LF in meaningless games. At this point, he's a DH and should be traded to a team that needs one.

Additionally Travis Shaw has been good. Let him continue to get at bats. See how he responds when MLB pitchers get a book on him.

It's hard to find a player, still in his early 30s, that has dropped this much in value, in one year, without incurring a major injury or some, severe, substance abuse issue. If Hanely were to be moved before 2016, he would be a 32 year old DH with an OPS+ of 95, so poor in the field that he would not even be used during inter league games, and has a history of injuries -- probably good for 130 games a year.(btw, Mike Napoli has an OPS+ of 90, and can play in the field.)

He has a 3 year guaranteed contract at $22 million a year, or $66 in total. (and I think we can forget about the vesting option for 2019)

How much is he worth to any team, at this point? Only 14 other teams use a DH, most of them preferring the flexibility of rotating their position players through the position in the batting order. So in essence, your trying to market a 32 year old, RH pinch hitter coming off the bench.

If the Sox trade Hanley this off-season they'd have to eat a huge portion of his contract - even if they eat $50 million of the remaining contract, who is going to guarantee Hanley $16 million and have to deal with him for the next 3 years?

The Sox could swap Hanley and take on another bad contract, in exchange, but it would be a contract just as bad, if not worse -- best case scenario, they swap Ramirez for Verlander, take on the remaining $112 mil guarantee and hope and pray that he becomes a serviceable long-reliever, similar to Darren Oliver

OR, the Sox could work with Ramirez and try to see if he improves in left field (or play 1st base), and hope for his bat to improve in 2016. IMO, they have nothing to lose, except a spot on the 25 man roster, and, if his improvement is seen as a work in progress, they can treat him as a Rule 5 draftee with ample time on the DL.

NDame616 · Aug 23, 2015

WenZink said:
It's hard to find a player, still in his early 30s, that has dropped this much in value, in one year, without incurring a major injury or some, severe, substance abuse issue. If Hanely were to be moved before 2016, he would be a 32 year old DH with an OPS+ of 95, so poor in the field that he would not even be used during inter league games, and has a history of injuries -- probably good for 130 games a year.(btw, Mike Napoli has an OPS+ of 90, and can play in the field.)

He has a 3 year guaranteed contract at $22 million a year, or $66 in total. (and I think we can forget about the vesting option for 2019)

How much is he worth to any team, at this point? Only 14 other teams use a DH, most of them preferring the flexibility of rotating their position players through the position in the batting order. So in essence, your trying to market a 32 year old, RH pinch hitter coming off the bench.

If the Sox trade Hanley this off-season they'd have to eat a huge portion of his contract - even if they eat $50 million of the remaining contract, who is going to guarantee Hanley $16 million and have to deal with him for the next 3 years?

You don't think a team would jump at 3/16M for Hanley?

And I don't see this as a comparison to Renteria. He just stopped hitting. Same with Crawford. We really didn't have a position for Hanley and hoped he could figure it out along the way. Crawford and Renteria had positions here and they didn't work out.

It blows my mind this leadership group thought a guy who told them he can't play a position due to the stress of bending over was a good idea to bring here. I mean, they weren't looking to move him to running back....

WenZink · Aug 23, 2015

NDame616 said:
You don't think a team would jump at 3/16M for Hanley?

And I don't see this as a comparison to Renteria. He just stopped hitting. Same with Crawford. We really didn't have a position for Hanley and hoped he could figure it out along the way. Crawford and Renteria had positions here and they didn't work out.

It blows my mind this leadership group thought a guy who told them he can't play a position due to the stress of bending over was a good idea to bring here. I mean, they weren't looking to move him to running back....

3/$16 million would make Hanley moveable, but even then, there just aren't many teams that utilize a full-time DH. And his OPS+ is currently at 95 and sinking. You'd have to hope that at DH, he'd hit considerably better and stay healthier, but the Sox also had reasonable expectations that a former SS could make the transition to LF and be something approaching "serviceable." So any potential trading partner would be wise to be wary about projecting Mr. Hanley Ramirez to do anything. If you were one of the few teams that wanted a full time RH DH next season, would you rather risk $15 mil on Hanley Ramirez, or offer Mike Napoli a conditional contract of $5 mil if he makes the team by the end of ST -- and maybe a vesting option for 2017, (similar to Ortiz' contract, except that that the dollar amounts top out at $8 mil, rather than $16 mil?)

And Renteria didn't "stop hitting" in 2005. His last year with the Cardinals was very similar to his year with the Red Sox, at least at the plate. Same OPS+, similar BABIP, a few more K's and a few more BB's. It was his fielding that regressed, as well as some lack of adjustment to Boston, or to the AL, that was never made quite clear. And although Renteria and Crawford were disappointments in Boston, there was no conjecture that they might be nearing the end of their useful careers. Edgar was just 29 and Crawford was 30.

And although the Ramirez-deal NOW looks like a huge miscalculation on the part of the Sox FO, Dombrowski raised an interesting angle -- that last winter, on MLB TV, MLB.TV's "Shredder" (their analytical tool) was that going into the 2015 season, Hanley was the top-rated LF in all of baseball. It's also interesting that Dombrowski said his reaction at the time, was, "How can they rate a player #1, when he has never played the position before?" So score one for "old-school" baseball, IF DD is telling the truth.

NDame616 · Aug 23, 2015

Sampo Gida said:
Pretty sure DD will not want to be saddled with the mistakes of the previous regime. Hanley is a bad fit like Carl Crawford was before him and Edgar Renteria before him. Team needs to move on. Maybe if there was a spot open at DH, but there isn't. I just can't see him at 1B the way he moves around in LF. An awful defensive 1Bman could be more devastating than a bad LF'er at Fenway. No position except C touches the ball more.

One of two things is likely to happen IMO. Hanley gets traded as a standalone with the Red Sox eating a good part of his salary like they did with Renteria, or he gets moved in a package with a decent player like Crawford was with Agon and the Red Sox being free of more of the salary than with a standalone.

I think this is the wild card factor. By all accounts DD had his choice of where to go. I'm sure in his talks with ownership he made this clear. If he wants any combo of Sandoval/Hanley moved he had to have gotten the approval of ownership that he can do it no matter the cost to them. Maybe DD for some reason really thinks Sandoval or Hanley can or can't work, but you have to think he's already told Henry what he would do with them, and he signed off on it before he got here.

I can't imagine DD trying to move Hanley and eat, say, $30M and Henry veto'ing it.

Savin Hillbilly · Aug 23, 2015

WenZink said:
3/$16 million would make Hanley moveable, but even then, there just aren't many teams that utilize a full-time DH. And his OPS+ is currently at 95 and sinking.

I don't think we should assume that he's really a 95 OPS+ hitter going forward, let alone "95 and sinking". Chalk up a lot to the stresses of learning a new league and a new position. At the same time, as I said in one of the other threads, I think it's irrational exuberance to imagine we'll see the 140-ish guy again. But I think it's reasonable to hope that some team could be persuaded they're getting a 110-to-125 guy, and that, at DH, is worth $12-15M a year. So if the Sox are willing to subsidize between $20 and $30M of the remaining contract, they should in theory be able to sell him to a team that needs a DH this winter. The problem is that there are only a couple of those, and they may choose to roll the dice on a cheap FA like Steve Pearce instead. So if the Sox deal him this winter they are probably going to have to subsidize close to half the contract and settle for a token return.

It will be a lot easier to deal Hanley next summer if he can first demonstrate that offensive rebound in a Sox uniform. But if they go that route and he continues mediocre at the plate, then they're really stuck and may end up having to treat him the way they treated Craig this year--but much more expensively.

TheReal15 · Aug 23, 2015

Dombrowski is the same guy that put Miguel Cabrera at third and Prince Fielder at 1st right? It wasn't until he had to make a move that he dealt a ton of Fielder's contract for Kinsler.

Hanley has been a disaster in LF, why not slide him further down the defensive spectrum... And put him back in the infield at 1B?

Can't someone go all Ron Washington on him this offseason? Worse comes to worse he's a stop gap while we look for a 1Bman of the future. (Maybe Shaw's that guy, maybe he gets 350 AB next season between 1st and 3rd to make sure)... But ideally he takes to 1B and finds a home. If that happens, we'd have a player who's a former batting champ and has shown flashes of MVP type ability with the stick.

WenZink · Aug 23, 2015

Savin Hillbilly said:
I don't think we should assume that he's really a 95 OPS+ hitter going forward, let alone "95 and sinking". Chalk up a lot to the stresses of learning a new league and a new position. At the same time, as I said in one of the other threads, I think it's irrational exuberance to imagine we'll see the 140-ish guy again. But I think it's reasonable to hope that some team could be persuaded they're getting a 110-to-125 guy, and that, at DH, is worth $12-15M a year. So if the Sox are willing to subsidize between $20 and $30M of the remaining contract, they should in theory be able to sell him to a team that needs a DH this winter. The problem is that there are only a couple of those, and they may choose to roll the dice on a cheap FA like Steve Pearce instead. So if the Sox deal him this winter they are probably going to have to subsidize close to half the contract and settle for a token return.

It will be a lot easier to deal Hanley next summer if he can first demonstrate that offensive rebound in a Sox uniform. But if they go that route and he continues mediocre at the plate, then they're really stuck and may end up having to treat him the way they treated Craig this year--but much more expensively.

If by "we," you mean the Red Sox, then I agree with your viewpoint and your hopes for a rebound. But if I'm a GM of another team I wouldn't be willing to take on the uncertainty, except at a 75% discount -- finding a DH option with an OPS+ > 100 isn't all that challenging a task. The advantage the Red Sox have is that, while Hanley is their problem, he's also their opportunity, and they have inside information to make a more informed projection. Arnie Beyeler may tell management that Hanley is real close to turning the corner, or the Sox may already have an instructor ready to work with Hanley at 1st base all winter, and have Ramirez' "secret" consent to the idea. Or, conversely, Beyeler may feel Hanley is completely hopeless and that in between innings, Hanley is pulling a "Jimmy Piersall" in the clubhouse after trying to negotiate a liner low off the wall.

WenZink · Aug 23, 2015

TheReal15 said:
Dombrowski is the same guy that put Miguel Cabrera at third and Prince Fielder at 1st right? It wasn't until he had to make a move that he dealt a ton of Fielder's contract for Kinsler.

Hanley has been a disaster in LF, why not slide him further down the defensive spectrum... And put him back in the infield at 1B?

Can't someone go all Ron Washington on him this offseason? Worse comes to worse he's a stop gap while we look for a 1Bman of the future. (Maybe Shaw's that guy, maybe he gets 350 AB next season between 1st and 3rd to make sure)... But ideally he takes to 1B and finds a home. If that happens, we'd have a player who's a former batting champ and has shown flashes of MVP type ability with the stick.

That's a valid point about the Cabrera switch to 3rd, which is why I added "IF DD is telling the truth."

Hanley might be better at 1st, but has been pointed out elsewhere, a 1st baseman is involved in a lot more plays than a LF, and if Hanley's problem is not physical, but rather just a lack of focus on defense, then it could really screw the Sox up.

And as for someone going all "Ron Washington" on Hanley, I think the special "problem" with Ramirez is that he reacts adversely to that kind of direct pressure. I know, I know, why do the Sox have to molly coddle a professional athlete that signed an $88 million contract? Answer: Because he's a pro athlete that's signed to an $88 million contract.

Traut · Aug 23, 2015

Let's not forget that Ramirez's OPS+ suffers from running into the wall in early May. Shoulder injuries are difficult to fully recover from without rest. I wouldn't be surprised if we learn in a few weeks that his injury was more severe than has been let on.

WenZink · Aug 23, 2015

Trautwein's Degree said:
Let's not forget that Ramirez's OPS+ suffers from running into the wall in early May. Shoulder injuries are difficult to fully recover from without rest. I wouldn't be surprised if we learn in a few weeks that his injury was more severe than has been let on.

Perhaps you are right, and that goes to the point that the Red Sox have inside information as to projecting Hanley's improvement in 2016. But that's hardly a selling point to a prospective trading partner. They are not (and should not) take that explanation at face value, and, even if they did, telling them that Hanley also is coming off a far more significant injury is not going to increase his value.

Rovin Romine · Aug 23, 2015

WenZink said:
Perhaps you are right, and that goes to the point that the Red Sox have inside information as to projecting Hanley's improvement in 2016. But that's hardly a selling point to a prospective trading partner. They are not (and should not) take that explanation at face value, and, even if they did, telling them that Hanley also is coming off a far more significant injury is not going to increase his value.

Is that how it works now? Back in Ye Olden Days, payers who were going to be traded often had to pass physicals.

WenZink · Aug 23, 2015

Rovin Romine said:
Is that how it works now? Back in Ye Olden Days, payers who were going to be traded often had to pass physicals.

I think the idea was that it was an injury that was incurred in May that hurt his production for most of 2015, but by November he would be healed.. or at least healed enough to pass a physical. Trautwein was using the past tense concerning the shoulder, and the future tense about the discovery of how bad it was.

Rovin Romine · Aug 23, 2015

WenZink said:
I think the idea was that it was an injury that was incurred in May that hurt his production for most of 2015, but by November he would be healed.. or at least healed enough to pass a physical. Trautwein was using the past tense concerning the shoulder, and the future tense about the discovery of how bad it was.

Ah - that makes much more sense than how I had read your comment. Can a trading team disclose past medical records?

WenZink · Aug 23, 2015

Rovin Romine said:
Ah - that makes much more sense than how I had read your comment. Can a trading team disclose past medical records?

With the player's consent, why not? I believe Napoli revealed the records of his degenerative hip condition when the Sox first signed him.

geoduck no quahog · Aug 23, 2015

I thought this thread was for making a case to KEEP Ramirez - not a rehash of 2 other threads.

1. When on, HR is one of the fiercest RH hitters in the league.
2. This team can't rely on Castillo being the only RH power threat in the lineup, assuming he grows into one.
3. Improving the pitching staff won't work if every starter is pressured to throw a shutout each time through, because the offense can't score runs, or runs in bunches.
4. Trading HR at his lowest value to a team competing in the same league or division could come back and bite the Red Sox next year.
5. David Ortiz will not play forever, or play every game forever.
6. An off season training process could re-shape HR without impacting his power. Maybe he goes to Arizona for training instead of some guy in the DR.
7. Every fuck up in LF is remembered and magnified. Everyone assumes LF in Fenway is "easy" when it's just as easy to make the argument that it's hard, harder than most. Assuming no improvement is just pessimism.
8. What's the lineup without HR?

WenZink · Aug 23, 2015

geoduck no quahog said:
I thought this thread was for making a case to KEEP Ramirez - not a rehash of 2 other threads.

...;{snip]

i do want to keep Ramirez. At least until he has regained some of his value.

RetractableRoof · Aug 23, 2015

geoduck no quahog said:
3. Improving the pitching staff won't work if every starter is pressured to throw a shutout each time through, because the offense can't score runs, or runs in bunches.

Ask Barnes about his starts and how he feels about allowing a catchable ball to be hit to left field. Ask him if unearned runs contribute to his losses as well as earned runs. I'm thinking there might be some pressure there as well.

nothumb · Aug 23, 2015

geoduck no quahog said:
I thought this thread was for making a case to KEEP Ramirez - not a rehash of 2 other threads.

1. When on, HR is one of the fiercest RH hitters in the league.
2. This team can't rely on Castillo being the only RH power threat in the lineup, assuming he grows into one.
3. Improving the pitching staff won't work if every starter is pressured to throw a shutout each time through, because the offense can't score runs, or runs in bunches.
4. Trading HR at his lowest value to a team competing in the same league or division could come back and bite the Red Sox next year.
5. David Ortiz will not play forever, or play every game forever.
6. An off season training process could re-shape HR without impacting his power. Maybe he goes to Arizona for training instead of some guy in the DR.
7. Every fuck up in LF is remembered and magnified. Everyone assumes LF in Fenway is "easy" when it's just as easy to make the argument that it's hard, harder than most. Assuming no improvement is just pessimism.
8. What's the lineup without HR?

I actually agree with parts of this, and with the general point of the OP, but I have to push back against the idea that we need Hanley because he's a special bat or because we need a particular type of hitter in the lineup to score runs. Hanley certainly has rare power RHH upside, but his consensus projection this year was around 118 wRC+, he's about to put up his third of the last five seasons under 110 wRC+, and he's on the wrong side of 30.

I think the case for not just rashly dumping him boils down to the fact that there is room for him to contribute or attempt to re-establish his value by 2016, and there's also a possibility that we will need him to DH sooner than later, with "later" still probably being 2017 at the latest. Trying him at 1B, or letting him be an expensive bench player for a year, or waiting until ST to let him show he's healthy and have someone get excited about him... all of these could produce significantly better outcomes than eating half his salary this winter, with little added cost in terms of opportunity or roster construction. Especially with Shaw looking like he at least might be a major league corner IF.

Personally I don't think the case against dumping him relies much on optimism about him being able to play LF. I just don't believe it. And I don't think we need to look at him as a potentially irreplaceable bat to decide not to sell super low on a major investment. It's impossible to know what the market will be for him this winter, but as much as I hate playing him in LF I will be disappointed if they end up eating a huge chunk of money on him and it limits their chances to improve in 2016 in other ways.

Savin Hillbilly · Aug 23, 2015

nothumb said:
Hanley certainly has rare power RHH upside

....for a shortstop. It's really important to complete that sentence, because he isn't a shortstop anymore. Hanley's only hit >25 HR twice, at ages 23 and 24. He's a 20-to-25 HR, .150 to .200 ISO guy now. That's good enough to play anywhere (or would be, if his on-base skills hadn't taken a nosedive), but it's not "rare power RHH upside" for a 1B/DH type.

nothumb · Aug 23, 2015

* delete. wrong thread. sorry

Drek717 · Aug 23, 2015

WenZink said:
That's a valid point about the Cabrera switch to 3rd, which is why I added "IF DD is telling the truth."

Hanley might be better at 1st, but has been pointed out elsewhere, a 1st baseman is involved in a lot more plays than a LF, and if Hanley's problem is not physical, but rather just a lack of focus on defense, then it could really screw the Sox up.

And as for someone going all "Ron Washington" on Hanley, I think the special "problem" with Ramirez is that he reacts adversely to that kind of direct pressure. I know, I know, why do the Sox have to molly coddle a professional athlete that signed an $88 million contract? Answer: Because he's a pro athlete that's signed to an $88 million contract.

This lack of focus shit is absurd. He was a ML shortstop for a decade. Not a good one, but a passable one when considering his bat. He isn't narcoleptic. He sucks at reacting to fly balls. He's literally never had to do it with regularity so it's not exactly surprising. He's also obviously deathly afraid of the wall after blowing up his shoulder early in the season.

Also, 1B is involved in more plays but those plays tend to consist of keeping your foot down and your glove out. He's used to reading the ball from an infield perspective and his biggest issues at SS and 3B weren't related to a hole in his glove, he had poor range and an erratic arm. He can get away with both at 1B. Bigger stiffs than Hanley have manned first before without murdering their teams.

Dombrowski might not want to be saddled with the previous regimes mistakes if he was given the option, but he's not. Either they keep Hanley and find a home or they eat money in a trade. No one else is going to take him at full freight to then find a position for him themselves. Turns out the Red Sox need someone at the last stop down the positional spectrum for Hanley before he's a full-time DH, 1B, and they also project to have an opening at DH in a few years before Hanley's deal has ran it's course. Oh, they also need a RH bat with some pop, which Hanley had been up until he wrecked his shoulder early this year.

Getting Hanley to 1B fixes a lot of problems and comes with a lot of safety nets (Shaw, Sam Travis if he impresses, maybe even Craig if he gets it back together). It makes a ton of sense on paper and I'm sure spending ST taking grounders with 40 year old David Ortiz would provide ample external motivation as Papi is likely going to be fired up for next season.

WenZink · Aug 23, 2015

Drek717 said:
This lack of focus shit is absurd. He was a ML shortstop for a decade. Not a good one, but a passable one when considering his bat. He isn't narcoleptic. He sucks at reacting to fly balls. He's literally never had to do it with regularity so it's not exactly surprising. He's also obviously deathly afraid of the wall after blowing up his shoulder early in the season.

Also, 1B is involved in more plays but those plays tend to consist of keeping your foot down and your glove out. He's used to reading the ball from an infield perspective and his biggest issues at SS and 3B weren't related to a hole in his glove, he had poor range and an erratic arm. He can get away with both at 1B. Bigger stiffs than Hanley have manned first before without murdering their teams.

Dombrowski might not want to be saddled with the previous regimes mistakes if he was given the option, but he's not. Either they keep Hanley and find a home or they eat money in a trade. No one else is going to take him at full freight to then find a position for him themselves. Turns out the Red Sox need someone at the last stop down the positional spectrum for Hanley before he's a full-time DH, 1B, and they also project to have an opening at DH in a few years before Hanley's deal has ran it's course. Oh, they also need a RH bat with some pop, which Hanley had been up until he wrecked his shoulder early this year.

Getting Hanley to 1B fixes a lot of problems and comes with a lot of safety nets (Shaw, Sam Travis if he impresses, maybe even Craig if he gets it back together). It makes a ton of sense on paper and I'm sure spending ST taking grounders with 40 year old David Ortiz would provide ample external motivation as Papi is likely going to be fired up for next season.

In 2012, Hanley was one of the very worst third baseman in the majors, in terms of DRS, when adjusted to a full season. In 2014 he was one of the very worst SS in terms of DRS.

And the point of lack of focus, is that he has difficult time processing the steps in fielding that he's taught and then, in a game situation, putting those steps together in a seamless fashion. It takes a lot of iteration for some to get it down, and citing UZR/150 after his first 90 games in left field is just plain dumb.. or as you would put it, "full of shit."

Playing first base requires judgement -- when to stretch and when to come off the bag and save the throw from going into the dugout, among other things. People keep on insisting that Hanley will be better at 1st, just because they insist it is, and besides, they claim, "it fixes a lot of problems.: It might well be worth a try this off season but it's not a sure thing, and there's no guarantee it fixes any problems, even if you insist.. And giving Hanley another off season and ST of iterations in Left field isn't a guarantee of significantly improving his defense, but it's a better try, IMO.

Buzzkill Pauley · Aug 23, 2015

WenZink said:
In 2012, Hanley was one of the very worst third baseman in the majors, in terms of DRS, when adjusted to a full season. In 2014 he was one of the very worst SS in terms of DRS.

And the point of lack of focus, is that he has difficult time processing the steps in fielding that he's taught and then, in a game situation, putting those steps together in a seamless fashion. It takes a lot of iteration for some to get it down, and citing UZR/150 after his first 90 games in left field is just plain dumb.. or as you would put it, "full of shit."

Playing first base requires judgement -- when to stretch and when to come off the bag and save the throw from going into the dugout, among other things. People keep on insisting that Hanley will be better at 1st, just because they insist it is, and besides, they claim, "it fixes a lot of problems.: It might well be worth a try this off season but it's not a sure thing, and there's no guarantee it fixes any problems, even if you insist.. And giving Hanley another off season and ST of iterations in Left field isn't a guarantee of significantly improving his defense, but it's a better try, IMO.

Do you have any evidence for the bolded part? What I've been reading in the media is that he's been concerned that too much running in the outfield shagging flies will keep him from physically being able to contribute in-game. 1B doesn't have that problem, as there's no significant need to run hard as a corner outfielder.

I have asserted my opinion since May, I think, that Hanley would be better at first. He won't be Youkilis or Gonzalez or Napoli good at 1B, with any likelihood. Rather, he'll probably have much the same problems that Panda and Ortiz do, allowing more balls down the line get past him than a gold-glover would. But there's little reason to think that he'd have much trouble learning the "judgment" required of a 1B that you mention, when he's been catching direct throws from other infielders for basically his entire career.

He hasn't been tracking flyballs for his entire career. And maybe, just maybe, if he relaxes a little, due to more attainable expectations, he'll bounce back at the plate.

Drek717 · Aug 23, 2015

WenZink said:
In 2012, Hanley was one of the very worst third baseman in the majors, in terms of DRS, when adjusted to a full season. In 2014 he was one of the very worst SS in terms of DRS.

And the point of lack of focus, is that he has difficult time processing the steps in fielding that he's taught and then, in a game situation, putting those steps together in a seamless fashion. It takes a lot of iteration for some to get it down, and citing UZR/150 after his first 90 games in left field is just plain dumb.. or as you would put it, "full of shit."

Playing first base requires judgement -- when to stretch and when to come off the bag and save the throw from going into the dugout, among other things. People keep on insisting that Hanley will be better at 1st, just because they insist it is, and besides, they claim, "it fixes a lot of problems.: It might well be worth a try this off season but it's not a sure thing, and there's no guarantee it fixes any problems, even if you insist.. And giving Hanley another off season and ST of iterations in Left field isn't a guarantee of significantly improving his defense, but it's a better try, IMO.

Is anyone arguing he was a good defensive 3B or SS? I mean, I've seen some suggest moving Hanley to 3B and trading Sandoval, which is rather absurd, or even more absurd keeping Sandoval and moving him to 1B. But none of those suggestions started with the statement that Hanley was a good 3B.

He's always sucked defensively, but he sucked defensively at two high ranking positions on the defensive spectrum. They were both infield positions. And while he sucked he didn't suck so much that teams weren't willing to play him there. His defensive failings were more than off-set by his bat and he didn't look completely lost like he does in LF.

He has expressed significant concerns in past interviews about running into walls. He hurt his shoulder running into walls. He's been even more tentative around walls since then. Last I checked Fenway's LF is defined by a very large, very un-padded, and very close wall. So maybe it isn't a great fit for the guy.

Again, you're acting like he's an idiot. No one ever faulted his SS defense based on a lack of awareness, just poor range and an erratic arm. Turning double plays looks like finely choreographed ballet compared to what 1Bs are required to do. How many runs does a poor stretch even cost a team anyway? A great stretch and a bad stretch are separated by less than one stride of the runner.

1B has been the home you hide bad defenders in for time immemorial. The Red Sox are set to go into 2016 without a proven 1B and the best FA market option is Chris Davis who is likely to be rather expensive and will get multiple years. They also currently have three young, promising outfielders and a 4th cutting his teeth in Portland, not to mention far better odds of finding a worthwhile OF from the much larger pool, since the defensive chops of the current trio are such that anyone who is even passable can be the 4th man in the group to break camp.

Unless Dombrowski can work some kind of trade voodoo and move Hanley for someone who legitimately helps the club's pitching, 1B, or LF on their own the best fit here is to get Hanley back in the infield where he's comfortable reading plays, at the position that requires him to cover the least amount of ground, and where he's most likely to cause the least damage. The delta in fielding value between the worst 1Bs and the best is far smaller than any other position for a reason. Daniel Nava picked it up on the fly when he had never played the infield at all and was a generally poor defender himself. Hanley not being able to track fly balls and being afraid of the wall are legitimate unforeseen variables. Assuming that he can't keep one foot on a bag and catch at the same time is a bridge too far for reason.

LostinNJ · Aug 23, 2015

To start with the obvious: Left fielder Hanley Ramirez has been a below-replacement level player this year. He has earned this distinction by fielding his position atrociously, and by hurting himself out there, thus causing a significant decline in his offensive value. Meanwhile, he is being paid (I almost wrote "earning") $22 million. Is there any reason to think that bringing him back to play the same position next year will lead to a better outcome? He'll still be a terrible fielder, and he'll still run the risk of injury. And he'll take playing time from someone else who can actually field the position while contributing positively to the offense. So another year of Hanley in left field is out of the question. What was a disastrous move in 2015 isn't suddenly going to become a smart move in 2016.

Let's say he moves to first base. He might be an adequate fielder there, but it's quite possible he won't be. Maybe his erratic play will upset the equilibrium of the whole infield. Maybe he'll get hurt again stretching for a throw and lose another season offensively. Then what do you do? It just seems really risky to pencil him in at yet another new position. We could very well see a replay of this season's mess. If the goal is to have a reasonable chance of winning in 2016, Hanley at first base is out of the question.

He does have a natural position, of course: designated hitter. He can't undermine the defense there, and he can't hurt himself trying to make a defensive play. DH is the only place for him. But we already have one of those for 2016, and possibly for 2017 as well. So just as Deven Marrero is blocked at shortstop by Xander Bogaerts, Hanley Ramirez is blocked at his position for the next year or two by David Ortiz. Keeping Marrero at Pawtucket as insurance makes some sense; keeping $22 million on the roster for a year or two while waiting for Ortiz to retire (and getting older himself) makes no sense.

There are lots of areas on the team where redundancy is smart. Having more than one closer-worthy reliever is a great idea. Having more than one rotation ace is a great idea. Having more than one center-field-worthy outfielder is a great idea. Having more than one DH is a lousy idea. Ben Cherington was so taken with the prospect of Hanley's value to the 2017 or 2018 team that he sabotaged the 2015 team.

It's true as the original post says that Hanley's trade value is low now. What's even lower than his trade value is his value to the Red Sox. Because we have Ortiz, Hanley hurts the Red Sox -- he hurts them when he plays, and he hurts them when he doesn't play (big salary, wasted roster spot). There are at least a couple of teams out there who don't have an Ortiz and would actually benefit by adding Hanley's skills. If the Orioles, say, or the Angels believe that Hanley the DH can have positive value for them, then it becomes irrelevant that he has had negative value for the Red Sox this year. So I believe that a trade can be swung (maybe even this week!), and that it will be a net plus for the Red Sox.

nothumb · Aug 23, 2015

Hanley has 7 career seasons of 3+ WAR as an infielder, including 2013 and 2014. Why exactly is it "out of the question" for him to play first for a winning Sox team? I mean I agree and have said several times that he could end up being lousy there, and it's possible that he'll end up being of negative value to the Sox in 2016 no matter where he plays, but it's not like you're asking him to speak Korean or take up the unicycle or something. You try him at it - preferably now, but in offseason / ST if need be - and you see if he can do it. You can't just plan to trade him as a DH to one of like 3 teams that could use and afford him, and have no Plan B.

BoredViewer · Aug 23, 2015

Any team that would swap him for a couple of overpriced relievers?

LostinNJ · Aug 24, 2015

nothumb said:
Hanley has 7 career seasons of 3+ WAR as an infielder, including 2013 and 2014. Why exactly is it "out of the question" for him to play first for a winning Sox team? I mean I agree and have said several times that he could end up being lousy there, and it's possible that he'll end up being of negative value to the Sox in 2016 no matter where he plays, but it's not like you're asking him to speak Korean or take up the unicycle or something. You try him at it - preferably now, but in offseason / ST if need be - and you see if he can do it. You can't just plan to trade him as a DH to one of like 3 teams that could use and afford him, and have no Plan B.

And what if he can't do it? You're still stuck with this albatross on your team, and you don't have a first baseman. It's kind of late to find that out in spring training. Working to trade him now means you have time to develop a Plan B if you can't find a taker. And the "can afford him" element is part of the negotiation.

By the way, if they had paid him $22 million this year to learn Korean instead of playing baseball, the team would have been better off.

MikeM · Aug 24, 2015

LostinNJ said:
And what if he can't do it? You're still stuck with this albatross on your team, and you don't have a first baseman. It's kind of late to find that out in spring training. Working to trade him now means you have time to develop a Plan B if you can't find a taker. And the "can afford him" element is part of the negotiation.

So we go from screwed, to at least making the attempt to somewhat unscrew ourselves, and then essentially end up right back where we started. Screwed. At which point you fall back on Shaw, whatever other feasible backup plans we could put in place during the winter, and the potential to make a late spring or early season trade.

We shouldn't end up losing any sleep over some missed opportunity to sign Chris Davis to the mega deal he's going to get either.

twibnotes · Aug 24, 2015

I'm in favor of at least trying Hanley at 1B, but I think some are underestimating the requirements of the job. Not only would Hanley have to bend over (can't believe that's a big thing) and move more often, but he would also inherit a lot more mental responsibilities. At 1B he needs to know several different plays for bunt situations, shift arrangements, when to cut throws home, how and when to hold a runner on, etc. If they do try him at 1B and he tanks, his value may be hurt more. Ideally some teams already think he can handle occasional games at 1B. I wouldn't be surprised if the Sox want to field offers and if nothing is attractive, coach him up at 1B on the offseason.

The Gray Eagle · Aug 24, 2015

LostinNJ said:
And what if he can't do it? You're still stuck with this albatross on your team, and you don't have a first baseman. It's kind of late to find that out in spring training. Working to trade him now means you have time to develop a Plan B if you can't find a taker. And the "can afford him" element is part of the negotiation.

That's why they should be playing him there now. When he missed a week with his injury, they should have put him on the DL until he was healthy, then sent him on a rehab assignment and had him play first base for a while in the minors.

twibnotes said:
I'm in favor of at least trying Hanley at 1B, but I think some are underestimating the requirements of the job. Not only would Hanley have to bend over (can't believe that's a big thing) and move more often, but he would also inherit a lot more mental responsibilities. At 1B he needs to know several different plays for bunt situations, shift arrangements, when to cut throws home, how and when to hold a runner on, etc. If they do try him at 1B and he tanks, his value may be hurt more. Ideally some teams already think he can handle occasional games at 1B. I wouldn't be surprised if the Sox want to field offers and if nothing is attractive, coach him up at 1B on the offseason.

He had more mental responsibilities than that when he was a shortstop his whole life. Some people are talking as if he's never played a more difficult position than left field before. He played the most challenging infield position for years in the major leagues.

The transition to first base would no doubt have some issues and struggles and terrible-looking mistakes. All the more reason to do it now when the games don't count, instead of waiting to next year when the games will be a lot more important.

Other players have changed positions in the middle of the season before. The Red Sox had Brock Holt learn like 4 new positions in the middle of last season. They threw Shaw out there in left field earlier this season. It happens all the time, especially in garbage time.

smastroyin · Aug 24, 2015

As we've said many times, the entire problem is Hanley's willingness to do it, and it seems he is not. This is yet another thing that perhaps should have been vetted before signing him - some kind of plan to figure out what to do with him if he was a disaster in LF.

Idabomb333 · Aug 24, 2015

WenZink said:
If by "we," you mean the Red Sox, then I agree with your viewpoint and your hopes for a rebound. But if I'm a GM of another team I wouldn't be willing to take on the uncertainty, except at a 75% discount -- finding a DH option with an OPS+ > 100 isn't all that challenging a task. The advantage the Red Sox have is that, while Hanley is their problem, he's also their opportunity, and they have inside information to make a more informed projection. Arnie Beyeler may tell management that Hanley is real close to turning the corner, or the Sox may already have an instructor ready to work with Hanley at 1st base all winter, and have Ramirez' "secret" consent to the idea. Or, conversely, Beyeler may feel Hanley is completely hopeless and that in between innings, Hanley is pulling a "Jimmy Piersall" in the clubhouse after trying to negotiate a liner low off the wall.

Sometimes I wonder whether the Sox refusing to play Hanley at 1st is an indication that Ortiz told them he's retiring. Info about Hanley is only part of their inside info.

Drek717 · Aug 24, 2015

smastroyin said:
As we've said many times, the entire problem is Hanley's willingness to do it, and it seems he is not. This is yet another thing that perhaps should have been vetted before signing him - some kind of plan to figure out what to do with him if he was a disaster in LF.

Such as? There was an early season interview where he stated he didn't foresee a return to the IF, that he was now an OF, but that was before he was horrible in LF and not long after he filled in at 3B in a pinch. He also stated within the same interview that he'd do whatever the team asked of him.

People are trying to attribute an attitude problem, a complete lack of intelligence, or both to Hanley that, from what I can see, is pretty unfair. He's clearly mentally and phyiscally wiped out this season. LF has treated him poorly, he feels incredibly uncomfortable out there, and he's already picked up one serious injury in the attempt which is likely still nagging him. Is it any surprise that now with the team out of contention he's mentally checked out? It happens to a lot of guys who have had far less traumatic seasons. The guy thought he signed here for a homecoming party on a title contender with a bunch of his old buddies from when he was in the minors. This might just have been the single worst eight months of his life. Cut him some slack.

It is also entirely possible that giving Hanley the chance to move to 1B would do him (Ramirez) a ton of psychological good, getting back to the IF at a lower stress position, taking grounders in ST with Ortiz, and being able to hit the reset button with the horrors of 2015 firmly in the past. Up until he destroyed his shoulder in the OF he looked like a guy on the verge of a massive season at the plate. That potential is still there if they can find a home for him that keeps him healthy through the year.

This is where Travis Shaw looks like a huge discovery. Maybe he isn't a starting caliber player, that book has yet to be written, but a strong defensive 1B with a LH bat who can also play some 3B or even LF in a pinch is exactly what this club would want to backstop a Hanley to 1B move with anyway. Turns out we already got that guy.

Idabomb333 said:
Sometimes I wonder whether the Sox refusing to play Hanley at 1st is an indication that Ortiz told them he's retiring. Info about Hanley is only part of their inside info.

Except everything Ortiz has said points to exactly the opposite being true, including statements like him having "earned" his vesting option, talking about wanting to get back in contention next year when asked about Dombrowski coming on board, etc.. Also, he's on the doorstep of #500 and might not get across before the end of the season and is having one of the best second halves of his career as well as in the entire league at 39 (1.099 OPS since the break, FYI).

He's basically a lock to come back, which we should all be incredibly grateful for.

Rovin Romine · Aug 24, 2015

Drek717 said:
(snip)

Except everything Ortiz has said points to exactly the opposite being true, including statements like him having "earned" his vesting option, talking about wanting to get back in contention next year when asked about Dombrowski coming on board, etc.. Also, he's on the doorstep of #500 and might not get across before the end of the season and is having one of the best second halves of his career as well as in the entire league at 39 (1.099 OPS since the break, FYI).

He's basically a lock to come back, which we should all be incredibly grateful for.

And yet, eventually, the music will stop. Ortiz may have another good season (or two?) in him, especially as part of a platoon, but he may also struggle mightily as he did early in this season. I don't mean to say we ought to preemptively cut bait with Ortiz, but I think at this point it would be wise, from a roster construction POV, if Ortiz was treated as being likely to fall off a cliff at any moment. (As an aside, I think this is probably one of the most important off-seasons in Ortiz's career; if he hopes to keep going, I suspect that he's basically got to completely commit himself full time during the off-season.) While I think the Sox will bend over backwards to get Ortiz to 500, that does not mean he'll need to be the full time DH for all of next year, especially if he's having significant problems.

Idabomb333 said:
Sometimes I wonder whether the Sox refusing to play Hanley at 1st is an indication that Ortiz told them he's retiring. Info about Hanley is only part of their inside info.

Or maybe it indicates a 1B solution on the horizon for the Sox, plus the indication that Ortiz isn't viewed as a mortal lock to finish the 2016 season as the DH.

In the context of either (or both) it's not a stretch to think the Sox prefer Hanley to try to improve in LF this season (a lost season). If Hanley does become the full time DH for the Sox at some point, they'll still want him to take the field in Interleague games and for any post-season play. They may think that it's better to have Hanely improve incrementally in LF than it is to have him try to learn a completely new position in 20 some odd ML games, which he might end up manning only sporadically anyway. Plus there's the whole issue of whether sporadically playing Hanley at 1B would disrupt the overall infield defense.

If you think about it, it only makes sense for the DH to displace your regular starter if their bat is an enormous upgrade, especially if the downgrade in defense is significant, or potentially significant. Ortiz made sense at 1B since he's decent there and his bat displaced any other 1B we had out there at the time (moving that 1B into a PH/defensive replacement role). Hanley's bat may not be significant enough to displace whatever 1B we end up with over the next 3 years. However, a healthy Hanley can probably outhit our #3 OF at any given time, and certainly should outhit our #4 (or our defacto #3, assuming an injury to an OF, or Betts covering 2B for Pedroia, or the need to rest one of Betts/JBJ/Castillo, etc.). If Hanley is even passible in LF, given this season, the off-season, and at least sporadic games there next year, he'd be much more of an asset, not only for Interleague and post season games, but in terms of his ability to spell some of the OFs.

***
As an aside, it's interesting that ML teams will sign someone like Hanley, who goes and resculpts his body with questionable results. I understand you can't overly contract those kind of things, but I wonder how much coordination there is between players in Hanley's situation and the club.

smastroyin · Aug 24, 2015

I'm not for moving Hanley and I'm not trying to make a treatise on his morality. But if he is not willing to just go to 1B right now that is one explanation for why they haven't done it, right? Do we just assume stupidity or stubbornness on the part of the Red Sox as the reason that he hasn't played there?

In essence I agree that it was not a bad gamble to think that Hanley would be able to handle a corner OF, and I have said this many times. But, it does seem to me that the team was put together without proper analysis of risk and has suffered for it. So consider my criticism of the signing in context with the rest of how the team was built. And among that would be the idea that even if it is not public, the Red Sox should know whether Hanley was going to be strictly a LF. And if they did know that, then the risk is that he can't field the position (which we have seen). It seems to make more sense that they didn't know that, and thought they could slot him around with this "deep depth" idea with Napoli, Craig, Nava, and Vic (even assuming JBJ and Castillo were going to spend the majority of time in Pawtucket) while also having him as emergency backup to Sandoval.

O Captain! My Captain! · Aug 24, 2015

smastroyin said:
I'm not for moving Hanley and I'm not trying to make a treatise on his morality. But if he is not willing to just go to 1B right now that is one explanation for why they haven't done it, right? Do we just assume stupidity or stubbornness on the part of the Red Sox as the reason that he hasn't played there?

In essence I agree that it was not a bad gamble to think that Hanley would be able to handle a corner OF, and I have said this many times. But, it does seem to me that the team was put together without proper analysis of risk and has suffered for it. So consider my criticism of the signing in context with the rest of how the team was built. And among that would be the idea that even if it is not public, the Red Sox should know whether Hanley was going to be strictly a LF. And if they did know that, then the risk is that he can't field the position (which we have seen). It seems to make more sense that they didn't know that, and thought they could slot him around with this "deep depth" idea with Napoli, Craig, Nava, and Vic (even assuming JBJ and Castillo were going to spend the majority of time in Pawtucket) while also having him as emergency backup to Sandoval.

I assume the reason they haven't put Hanley at first is because they don't want to just throw him out there in real life games to do his best when he's never played there before. We've seen how Hanley does defensively at a position he's unfamiliar with, though there is some hope his SS/3b experience and skills would suit him much better at 1b than in the outfield. Whether or not Hanley is an adequate or willing 1b is unknown, but there's a big difference in putting him out there with no practice while banged up already vs after an offseason to acclimate to the position.

Drek717 · Aug 24, 2015

Rovin Romine said:
And yet, eventually, the music will stop.

Or maybe it indicates a 1B solution on the horizon for the Sox, plus the indication that Ortiz isn't viewed as a mortal lock to finish the 2016 season as the DH.

(edited the whole post to save on some thread bloat)

To point one: Yes, of course it will eventually and I think the beginning of this year is a good indication of what that will look like. He was still hitting RHP, he just couldn't hit LHP for a lick. He has made the adjustments and has his stroke back against LHP while mashing RHP the last few months, but this is probably what the inevitable final failure for Ortiz will look like. He'll stop hitting LHP at all, decline a bit against RHP, then at some point after he'll stop hitting RHP as well.

So the backup plan should start with a RHB who can platoon with him and end with either that same person filling the full role or another person picking up the LHB side of the platoon.

Which leads us to point number two. Long term 1B options. Sam Travis is RH, he's doing quite well in AA already this season. Allen Craig is in AAA and doesn't look like a flaming bag of poo like he did at the ML level, but he's off the 40 man roster and can be treated as a viable backup option for the next year or two if he shows any real bounce back in AAA. That's two RHBs, Hanley makes three.

Sam Travis meanwhile is proving himself to be a worthwhile LHB option. Maybe not starter quality, but there's some value to be mined there.

So a path forward where the club starts 2016 with Ortiz at DH, Hanley at 1B, and Shaw as the backup CI is a viable way to kick off the year. The club has protection from any one of those three not hitting before digging into the farm. If two of the three fail to hit the club has a veteran stopgap in Craig and an upcoming prospect they can turn to. Hell, Garin Cecchini is even a darkhorse option.

Then long term the club finds out if one of Travis & Travis are the long term 1B, with Hanley moving to DH when Ortiz does eventually retire/collapse.

To me this is one of the main reasons to find a way to rehab Hanley and keep him around. Subsidizing him to play for someone else is sunk cost with no returns to realize. If Hanley gets back to a ~.800 OPS or better hitter he isn't someone we would likely find a better alternative to on the FA market.

Also, the people running the club have been conservative in roster construction all season. We played the corpse of Mike Napoli for over half the year at 1B before even giving Travis Shaw a real taste of ML pitching. I wouldn't draw any conclusions from the club not trying Hanley at 1B when the manager has now left the team for cancer treatment and FO heads are just starting to roll. Lovullo is just looking to cross the finish line without screwing anything up. He's going to basically photocopy Farrell's lineup cards from the last few weeks and hand those out every day.

Idabomb333 · Aug 24, 2015

Drek717 said:
Except everything Ortiz has said points to exactly the opposite being true, including statements like him having "earned" his vesting option, talking about wanting to get back in contention next year when asked about Dombrowski coming on board, etc.. Also, he's on the doorstep of #500 and might not get across before the end of the season and is having one of the best second halves of his career as well as in the entire league at 39 (1.099 OPS since the break, FYI).

He's basically a lock to come back, which we should all be incredibly grateful for.

I agree with most of this, but I think there's a small chance that Ortiz hits #501 or so this year and then retires. I want him to come back. More importantly I was trying to make the point that there are other kinds of insider info that don't directly relate to Hanley, yet affect the plan for Hanley.

AB in DC · Aug 24, 2015

O Captain! My Captain! said:
I assume the reason they haven't put Hanley at first is because they don't want to just throw him out there in real life games to do his best when he's never played there before. We've seen how Hanley does defensively at a position he's unfamiliar with, though there is some hope his SS/3b experience and skills would suit him much better at 1b than in the outfield. Whether or not Hanley is an adequate or willing 1b is unknown, but there's a big difference in putting him out there with no practice while banged up already vs after an offseason to acclimate to the position.

Didn't Dombrowski basically say as much already?

LostinNJ · Aug 24, 2015

it seems like a big part of the rationale for keeping Hanley is that we'll have a great DH whenever Ortiz retires. So then we have to jump through a lot of hoops to figure out what to do with him for another year or maybe two before he can become the full-time DH. Maybe he can try left field again. Maybe he can switch to first base and not stink up the joint. Maybe he can platoon a little with Ortiz. We're trying really hard to find a way to have him not screw up the team in the short term so that we can reap the full benefit of his offensive awesomeness in the long term. They signed him hoping he could be a $22 million asset to the team as a left fielder. He wasn't. Now we're hoping he can be an asset next year as a left fielder or first baseman. He won't.

It was a mistake to sign him. So let's learn from the mistake.

TomRicardo · Aug 24, 2015

There is absolutely no winning a Hanley trade. No one is giving us anything better than Hanley and we will be paying for a team to reap the benefits of getting him.

He is a bit broken down and still playing which is beyond ridiculous because:

1) Games now are meaningless
2) Red Sox have depth and people they need to watch and see what to do with.

Ramirez is a legitimate RHH power threat in age of dying power.

tomdeplonty · Aug 24, 2015

LostinNJ said:
It was a mistake to sign him. So let's learn from the mistake.

You can hate watching the defensive butchery, and think the contract was a big mistake, and still think it makes more sense to try and recover some value, than to move him now and pay to watch him play elsewhere. Is there a big risk his value will be even lower next trade deadline than it is right now?

Rovin Romine · Aug 24, 2015

TomRicardo said:
(Snip)

Ramirez is a legitimate RHH power threat in age of dying power.

As sort of an aside, while the PED era did fuel a lot of HRs, I often wonder if power is "dying out" or if that will be true 5 years from now. Guys certainly have the physical ability to hit the ball out of a lot of parks. If the strike zone shrinks, or even if some fences get moved in - bingo, we're in a power age again.

I think the point is really what HR will be doing for us over the life of his contract with us, as opposed to any other player we're going to actually be able to get. He's an excellent hitter but has never had "elite" power. And while he's always hit lefties slightly better, he does not have enough of a L/R difference to be viewed as a lefty "masher." He's a pretty balanced hitter in that regard. http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/r/ramirha01.shtml

Drek717 said:
(snip)
So a path forward where the club starts 2016 with Ortiz at DH, Hanley at 1B, and Shaw as the backup CI is a viable way to kick off the year. The club has protection from any one of those three not hitting before digging into the farm. If two of the three fail to hit the club has a veteran stopgap in Craig and an upcoming prospect they can turn to. Hell, Garin Cecchini is even a darkhorse option.
(snip)

While I think Hanley as a passible LF is a better option, I'd be a little surprised if they didn't ask Hanley to practice 1B in the offseason, or in early spring training. If Ortiz had better knees though, the best plan might be to play Ortiz at 1B/DH and LF/DH Hanley, using Shaw et. al. to fill in at 1B/DH. If if if. If Craig had regained his power stroke in AAA. . . If Hanley is able to log the hours in the OF to become passible. . .

FanSinceBoggs · Aug 24, 2015

It was a mistake to sign him. So let's learn from the mistake.

Fortunately the Red Sox learned from the mistake by hiring Dave Dombrowski and taking power away from Cherington.

I would keep Hanley around if he is willing to accept a part time role next year (DH against LHP while getting an occasional start in LF; will not play 1b). But I'm assuming he will not accept that role, thus forcing the Red Sox to trade him. But if he really wants to stay in Boston, wants to play with Papi, and will accept a limited role in 2016 while waiting for the DH spot to open up, I would keep him on the team.

The idea of moving Hanley to 1b is problematic for a couple of reasons. (1) He will probably suck at 1b. (2) The Red Sox may have a capable starting 1b in Travis Shaw and it doesn't make sense to screw around with Shaw's development in order to minimize one of Cherington's dumb decisions. Based on his 2014 performance, Shaw turned into a legitimate starting 1b prospect. I don't know what happened to him in AAA in 2015 -- maybe he got into a few bad habits that were later fixed? While Shaw will not continue to hit at his current pace at the major league level, his performance suggests that his 2014 minor league numbers were a fair representation of the kind of hitter he could be at the major league level.

The Case Against Moving Hanley

Member

Member

Member

lost his degree

New Member

will bailey

New Member

will bailey

loves the secret sauce

New Member

New Member

New Member

lost his degree

New Member

Johnny Rico

New Member

Johnny Rico

New Member

not particularly consistent

New Member

Member

tolerates intolerance

Member

loves the secret sauce

Member

Member

New Member

Member

Member

New Member

Member

Member

New Member

Member

Member

Member

simpering whimperer

Member

Member

Johnny Rico

simpering whimperer

Member

Member

Member

OG Football Writing

New Member

rusty cohlebone

Member

Johnny Rico

seantwo