Who plays 1B next year?
- Thread starter johnnywayback
- Start date
kazuneko said:
I won't belabor the obvious - but you're making an assumption that the Sandoval of 2015 is the best we're going to see from now on. Fine - go that way.
You're also willing to let the Red Sox make the gamble that losing big on Sandoval is worth the risk of getting rid of him. Let another team see if he's cooked - but on the Red Sox dime. Again - assuming that Sandoval brings no quality in trade.
Finally - money aside (it's not relevant to this particular argument), your position is that Shaw, Holt, Marrero, Rutledge (I won't even entertain Ramirez) produce better as a full time 3B than in the roles they currently have - utility (or possibly FT 1B). None of those options push the Red Sox into being a better team in 2016...but all of them remain available if Sandoval continues to suck.
I don't see the "dump Sandoval" scenario that improves the team. It may be out there in the winter - but it's not apparent today. I'd welcome a reasonable discussion of realistic options that don't involve turning utility players into pennant-winning 3rd basemen (and at the same time, thinning out bench).
It isn't that hard to get.kazuneko said:
Sandoval's problems at the plate largely stemmed from an inability to hit LHP at the outset, but he was doing very well against RHP. His offense went entirely in the tank, as did his defense, when he suffered multiple injuries to the same leg (ankle and knee of his left leg) within the span of a month without a DL stint. If you prescribed a 15 day DL stint for each of those periods and removed the related at bats from his offensive totals his numbers jump up pretty dramatically. I'm betting the same is true for his defense since he's been a better defender in the second half (not to mention the third injury to that leg was sustained while making a play in the field).
Did he let his weight get out of control? Pretty obviously. Should he permanently give up switch hitting? I'd say so. But if he didn't drive a foul ball off his ankle, get drilled with a pitch in the knee of that same leg two weeks later, then re-injure the knee making a fielding play about three weeks after that just as his offensive numbers were beginning to rebound he likely has an entirely different statistical outlook for the season.
The goal isn't to replace a -2 WAR player, it's to get something like the +2-3 WAR player Sandoval was the three seasons prior to this past year. A healthy, hopefully more lithe, Sandoval is the best bet for that. The alternative would be covering basically his entire salary for him to play somewhere else. The money is a sunk cost, now it's all about getting the best 3B production possible and that probably comes form a bounce back season from Panda.
I actually agree, it's sunk cost. -2 WAR players owed 75 million for 4 years aren't tradable unless you pay the entire cost of the salary. In that case the Sox might as well hope for the best for another season. It's not as if his value can get much lower, and as you explained, there is some reason to hope he might improve. That said, the idea that Sandoval is the team's "best chance"for having a +2-3 WAR player just seems a bit silly. His decline has been scary and it feels a bit unrealistically optimistic to think he's going to finally take his weight concerns seriously. Meanwhile Shaw just put up a 1.5 WAR in less than half a season and Brock Holt just finished a second straight solid season. Sure there are concerns about Shaw's defense at 3B, but as Sandoval wraps up a league worst fielding performance you'd have to think there are even more concerns about him in this regard.Drek717 said:
Sandoval was an above average defender at 3B just last season and he has lost weight when playing time was at stake before. Is Sandoval a sure thing to bounce back? Not at all, but it is also far from a sure thing that Travis Shaw's bat is going to hold up as a full time starter and defensively at 3B he's probably a worse bet than Sandoval, while Holt has worn down two years in a row when pushed into a full time job and 3B is probably his worst defensive position outside of shortstop.
I'd say right now the Sox have as good a setup at 3B as they can hope for given current contract conditions. As it stands they can go into camp with Sandoval as the 3B, Shaw as the backup CI, and Holt as the super utility and they just need to find one worthwhile guy from the group (two if you want to add Hanley and include 1B). Paying Sandoval to play somewhere else only hurts their odds of finding a good 3B solution.
I'd say right now the Sox have as good a setup at 3B as they can hope for given current contract conditions. As it stands they can go into camp with Sandoval as the 3B, Shaw as the backup CI, and Holt as the super utility and they just need to find one worthwhile guy from the group (two if you want to add Hanley and include 1B). Paying Sandoval to play somewhere else only hurts their odds of finding a good 3B solution.
soxhop411 said:
Putting that out in public is an, uh, interesting management style. Hanley isn't likely to go full Johnny Paycheck, but still...
Considering he talked so much about how he bulked up since he didn't have to play SS anymore, I don't think this is so bad. It's not a matter of being fat or something.
Yeah, I think it's more about becoming more flexible and "athletic" vs. bulking and straight up "strong", and I imagine he knows that and doesn't think they're telling him he's a big, fat, a$$ like Pablo. He bulked up with the mind that he was going to bash the hell out of the ball, and he did, for half a season until he got hurt. Of course, it cost him hugely in the field. I think a 15-20lb lighter Hanley will do a fair job in 120 or so games at 1B.smastroyin said:
Of course Hanley in 120 games at 1B has the potential to be a truly massive overpay, unless he can revert to his offensive peak and also play decent defense. Both of which are, I suppose, theoretically possible, if the embarrassment of 2015 lights enough of a fire under him.
But I guess there's no way around that at this point. We're in sunk-cost-land.
But I guess there's no way around that at this point. We're in sunk-cost-land.
Are you saying Pablo's a big fatass or a big, fat ass. Big difference. I suspect the former. Hanley's listed at 6'2, 225 by BBREF. OK height for a first baseman to stretch for high throws, etc. Napoli's 6'1. Question is his getting down for grounders and low throws. No bad back, hopefully, next year. Range isn't a huge thing for first basemen, and he's got Pedey on one side so I don't think he'll be going after too many balls in the 3 - 4 hole. Pedey growl at you. Not high hopes but moderate ones for Hanley at first.luckysox said:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/10/13/red-sox-still-planning-use-ramirez-first-base/RGqNh6v5CzJy0XjhswiFfL/story.html
No surprise that DD and Hazen are reflecting that they will give Hanley a shot at first next year.
I was a little surprised that they are not having him spend some time at winter ball learning the position. I'm aware that veterans don't normally do that, spring training is indeed quite long and that Hanley isn't exactly known for his work ethic. Still, I would have preferred that he spend a little extra time learning the position. Not a huge thing; just not ideal in my book.
I also thought it was noteworthy that Dombrowski referred to the Sox and Ramirez's representatives as being committed to the plan, and hedged when it came to Hanley by saying that he "believes" Hanley is likewise committed. Admittedly, I may be parsing DD's words too much. But having seen the press conference, it sure looked like an intentional caveat, and I wonder a little why it's not totally clear to DD that Hanley is committed to making this work, as well.
Last, I'm glad that Dave is quite focused on the safety net. To wit:
Not that I'm surprised that the President would be acutely aware of the Travises by now. But as much as I think they are doing the right thing -- and perhaps the only realistic thing -- with Hanley, it's not hard to believe that it simply will not work and I like that the Sox have some internal options in that event.
Last, I'm glad that Dombrowski does not seem to be focused on going outside the organization to acquire a first baseman such as Chris Davis. In a perfect world, it would be nice to consider that. But DD seems to be focused on acquiring pitching and seems content to try Hanley and if that fails, use Shaw or Travis at first. Given that they indeed have a potential solution in Hanley and reasonable fallback options, and that run prevention was a much bigger problem last year than run scoring, I think using possibly limited free agent dollars on pitching instead of first base makes a lot of sense.
Two caveats: One, It's true that they can try to trade for a top of the rotation guy like Sonny Grey. That would be nice. But that's hard to pull off and my present assumption is that they will sign someone instead. I would like that assumption to be wrong. Two, yes, part of run prevention is having a reliable first baseman who can dig out bad throws and otherwise handle the position. I'm not confident that Hanley will be that but, as a former infielder, it's not out of the question, and as noted, there are in house solutions if he fails.
TheoShmeo said:
I don't think winter ball is necessary, but I would hope that the RS hire a private 1B tutor and spend a couple months working with HRam in the off-season.
TheoShmeo said:
I read that more as him just trying not to sound like he can speak for Hanley. Long version: "he's told us he's committed to it, and we believe him."
As for the winter ball thing, with a veteran on a big-ticket contract, all they can really do is suggest and encourage, right? If Hanley goes Bartleby on the idea, they don't really have any recourse.
On top of the highly paid veteran part, it also sounds like they want Hanley to focus on getting in better/different shape during the winter - lose weight, gain flexibility, etc. It's hard to do that while traveling around, playing games. Plus, playing 1B poorly in games, without some position-specific training first, is probably not that helpful, anyway. There really is some unique footwork and glovework at 1st that he'll need to learn and develop some good habits for. Spring Training (or a couple weeks prior) is a good time to do it.
Better question, why would they even want him to play winter ball?Savin Hillbilly said:
He needs to get healthy, drop a dozen pounds, improve his flexibility, then learn how to play 1B. In that order. Skipping steps 1-3 will only worsen his chances at succeeding with #4. Many players (Brock Holt, Daniel Nava, Will Middlebrooks just to name some recent ones) have been inserted at 1B with almost no prior experience during regular season games and comported themselves well at the position. I'd imagine a lifelong infielder given six weeks of spring training would have a pretty solid shot at getting to a competent level if it is at all possible for him.
I'm personally pretty optimistic about it. The outfield experiment failed on an inability to track fly balls and an obvious fear of colliding with walls. He was fundamentally uncomfortable there in a way that wasn't going to be fixed simply by more work pre-game. At 1B he's back to the same reads off of bats he's been comfortable making his entire career. His failures as a SS and 3B stemmed from a lack of range and an erratic throwing arm. At 1B he doesn't need anything close to that range and he won't be making too many throws. He needs to receive and show modest range on grounders and soft liners. I'd like to think anyone who can handle the footwork needed to turn a DP can manage a 1B stretch and scoop.
Hanley with Shaw as the backup/late inning defensive replacement is a pretty solid option. Hanley wouldn't be a bad bet to put up 30+ offensive runs above average and get pretty close being worth his contract, when you consider the scarcity value that should be applied to such a hitter.
Heck, if you just want a defensive replacement, keep Marrero on the roster.
[Edit] by which I mean the 2016 Sox could do much worse than a bench of Holt (of), Marrero (if), Shaw (1b, 3b, lf), and Hanigan.
[Edit] by which I mean the 2016 Sox could do much worse than a bench of Holt (of), Marrero (if), Shaw (1b, 3b, lf), and Hanigan.
What I got from the press conference was that DD wants a new fourth OF, and he sounded interested in a bat-first corner type.Buzzkill Pauley said:
So... New OF, Holt (OF/IF), Hanigan, with Marrero and Shaw optionable depth, up or down as injuries dictate?
The points about using the winter to get in better shape and improve flexibility, before being thrust into games, are well understood and good. So is the point that veterans don't often play winter ball.
That said, I worry a bit about Hanley's attention to an off season plan that might not be as structured as being part of a team. And I worry that when he gets to Spring Training and Exhibition games, he will be under a greater microscope and subject to a bigger media circus than he would have been in the more anonymous winter ball environment. In short, I could see Hanley making faster progress at first base in winter ball, and then carrying that into ST with some mileage under his belt. I also don't know why he can't can in better shape while he participates in winter ball. It's harder to do both at once but it's not impossible and it's a long off season.
And all of that said, I get that winter ball isn't going to happen.
That said, I worry a bit about Hanley's attention to an off season plan that might not be as structured as being part of a team. And I worry that when he gets to Spring Training and Exhibition games, he will be under a greater microscope and subject to a bigger media circus than he would have been in the more anonymous winter ball environment. In short, I could see Hanley making faster progress at first base in winter ball, and then carrying that into ST with some mileage under his belt. I also don't know why he can't can in better shape while he participates in winter ball. It's harder to do both at once but it's not impossible and it's a long off season.
And all of that said, I get that winter ball isn't going to happen.
nvalvo said:
This makes a lot of sense to me. Our three current starting OFs can certainly hold things down defensively. If one gets injured, an average OF combined with the other two would still likely result in a plus OF, defensively. However, if one or two underperform offensively, it would help to get something of a bat into the OF to compensate.
Holt really does not have the bat (unless he's streaking), and while Shaw might do that on an emergency basis, he's not really an OF.
Also, a bat-first corner OF could function as general hitting depth insurance. Basically, I'm worried Hanley may not recover his power/stroke, or that one or more of Hanley, Sandoval, Pedroia, or Ortiz might be injured. Holt/Shaw can be plugged in, but a corner bat-first OF could be very useful in the 1B/DH slot, as needed.
I really think you have to have Shaw on the 25 man roster - which means , given a 12 man staff , no new 4th OF.Rovin Romine said:
This could change if the Hanley to first experiment works. But give the uncertainty over both Hanley AND Panda , I think you have to keep Shaw around as 1b/3b insurance
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Why couldn't Shaw fit with a new 4th OF? The bench could very easily be Shaw (corner IF), Holt (middle IF/5th OF), back-up catcher, and a 4th OF acquired via FA or trade. And they'd have Marrero on the shuttle should a full time need arise for Holt or Shaw.
Because the need for a defensive replacement at 1B will probably trump the need for a LHH pinch-hitter on a day-by-day basis, with Hanley the starter at 1B. And Marrero is likely a better fielder at any infield position than Shaw.Red(s)HawksFan said:
If/when there's an injury to Hanley or Pablo, then Shaw gets the call. But, if the Sox need a LHH PH for Castillo, there's Holt. If they need one for Hanigan, there's Swihart. What other RHH starter would call for a PH?
While I'm sure he'd be good in the role I don't think they'd want to "blight" Marrero's career by making him a UT. I think they'd try to package him in a trade to maximize his value. UT infielders don't cost much and are pretty easy to aquire.Buzzkill Pauley said:
I don't understand this. If they need a defensive replacement at 1B, why would they keep Marerro and option Shaw? Isn't Shaw a good enough defensive replacement at 1BBuzzkill Pauley said:
That might not be blighting his career as much as identifying it. There's a pretty good chance that that's what Marrero is.BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
I'm not disagreeing that that's probably his ultimate job .. But we don't know that yet. There are plenty of light hitting glove wizards with full time jobs in the majors. Unfortunately (for Marrero) there's no full time SS gig in Boston available .. which would be necessary to find out. Which is why a trade is a strong possibility.Bob Montgomery said:
Buzzkill Pauley said:
I think the idea of keeping Marrero over Shaw for the sake of 1B defense is a stretch at best; Shaw has appeared perfectly adequate at 1B, and anyway 1B defense is arguably more a matter of learned skills (where Shaw has the edge) than athleticism (where Marrero would).
A bench of Shaw/Marrero/Holt/Hanigan seems fine to me, but if DD is really intent on a bat-first corner OF, I think the odd man out is pretty clearly Marrero. While Holt may be borderline at SS, he's more than adequate for emergency duty, and now that Bogaerts has established himself as an average-ish defensive shortstop we can afford to have our long-term backup on the shuttle.
If they really decide they need Marrero on the roster, I think that puts Holt's status in more question than Shaw's. While Holt's versatility and decent bat are obviously assets, they also give him some trade value--and the things he can do that Shaw or a "bat-first corner OF" can't do are precisely the things that Marrero does.
Savin Hillbilly said:
To be clear, I'm not saying Shaw isn't good enough to be a decent starter defensively at 1B. He's probably good enough to be a decent enough starter at 3B. He sure looked good enough to be the long-term depth replacement for either Hanley or Pablo, the last few months of 2015.
However, as the Sox enter 2016, the biggest question defensively is "can Hanley play first base" and the expectation should be that he won't be great. So, in the first two months, I expect the Sox will (a. ) be starting Hanley every game they can at 1B to get his bat in the lineup and give him a chance to show what he can do playing the position defensively, and (b. ) be pulling him for a defensive replacement every game where they have a late-inning lead if he's not guaranteed one last at-bat in the 9th inning.
What the Sox should want for the opening roster, is the slickest glove-wizard they can get for that limited role; basically, a dedicated caddy for Hanley. Not necessarily to spell him two games a week, but a Mientkiewicz-type role player. Because if the team commits to Hanley at 1B, we're likely headed back to the days of Cabin Mirror and his cement-block shoes, before the Sox spoiled us with Youkilis, Gonzalez, and Napoli consistently bringing both strong offense and agile defense.
And I think the best player they've got to play that part is Marrero. That he makes a better defensive SS-3B sub than Holt, and therefore could give either Bogaerts or Pablo a day off as well, on a day that Holt is subbing at 2B or the outfield, is just gravy. And it doesn't change the fact that the Sox should keep Shaw stashed in AAA in case Hanley or Pablo gets DL'd.
Plus, starting with Marrero in that bench role doesn't mean the team doesn't evolve its bench after a couple weeks or months of games. There will be a role for Shaw, I think. But unless Hanley gets traded, I think that role involves him starting out optioned to AAA.
Buzzkill Pauley said:
While it's true that Mientkiewicz provided a significant portion of his value through defense, he was still an average MLB hitter throughout his career. While that's below what you'd like from a first baseman, it's considerably higher than any output you could expect from Marrero at first. Unless you're projecting Marrero as a Darrin Erstad-caliber first baseman, I don't see how that works particularly well.
Buzzkill Pauley said:
OK, but you still haven't convinced me that Marrero is in fact likely to be a significantly better (or perhaps, even slightly better) defensive 1B than Shaw. You've said it twice, but you haven't really presented any specific arguments as to why it should be the case. The skills and physical talents that make somebody a "slickest glove-wizard" at shortstop are far less important at 1B, and there are other, position-specific skills that Marrero may or may not possess or acquire quickly, and that Shaw may already have (ability to stretch for wide throws and scoop errant ones--not exactly the same skill as fielding grounders--judgment/communication in working with pitchers on dribblers/bunts/pickoffs, etc.).
Savin Hillbilly said:
I think he's saying he wants someone like Doug M as the backup first baseman, which leaves room for only one of Shaw or Marrero, and that in that case he'd take Marrero's greater versatility.
Plympton91 said:
No, I was actually trying to say I thought the best caddy for Hanley, as an early-season 1B defensive replacement, would be Marrero.
It's because his scouting report consistently grades him above average among shortstops for sure-handedness and lateral quickness. I don't have any data stating that he'd be better than Shaw, but that's pretty much only because no such data exists. Marrero can't hit well enough to play regularly at 1B, and his defense is more than good enough to play MLB shortstop.
I know the paradigm is "don't move prospects down the defensive spectrum until you have to" but Marrero is already 25, three years older than Bogaerts. Instead of trying to extract maximum "value" from another team via trade, why not use his value to fill a hole that the Sox actually have?
Plympton91 said:
I'm having a hard time identifying such a Minky-type 1B right now. Such a player would be a guy who is ok with not being a starter, and thus was either not a starter last year, was injured, or had such a lousy season that they understand a demotion. Such a guy probably wouldn't have a huge reliable sample of defensive stats to draw much of a conclusion from, so I think you'd probably have to go mostly by reputation, and knowing the defensive reputation of the various backup 1B in the league is I think beyond even some of the most diehard fans' knowledge limits.
That said, using an extremely inadvisable and almost certainly useless small sample UZR/150 search criteria over the last couple years at 1B (can you tell how hard I'm trying to avoid doing real work?) Travis Shaw does actually show up as one of the better defensive options. Some other interesting names (I thought) are Steve Pearce, Sean Rodriguez, and Kyle Blanks. Of course, they're all RH, I don't know that any of them are any better than Shaw defensively at 1B, but they have all played at least a few games at positions other than 1B at the MLB level and they have some evidence of being non-terrible hitters in the past.
I really think Steve Pearce might be a good choice, maybe even with Shaw on the roster (like a Holt!/Pearce/Shaw/backup C bench - I don't think you need two backup MI on the same roster, especially if you can stash one in AAA). He had that crazy 2014, and then kind of got jerked around in 2015 by the Os for some dumb reason. He still had quite a bit of pop and a rough BABIP. People seem pretty confident that Shaw can handle LF, but he's only played like 3 games at LF like ever. If say, Betts gets hurt and Bradley turns back into his 2014 self, it would be nice to have a strong 4th OF/1B type who can fake some RF.
EDIT: I also like John Jaso a lot as a value guy, but I'm not sure he really fits onto this team as currently constructed.
Buzzkill Pauley said:
Marrero might not hit enough to be a shortstop. He definitely won't hit enough to be a 1B. Shaw has a small chance to be a productive 1B based on his August performance, although I do think it's more likely he'll be Mike Carpish. By giving at-bats to Shaw, you start to figure out if he will develop or turn back into the pumpkin he was in AAA. Giving 1B at bats to Marrero isn't going to tell you anything except what you should already know: he has no chance to hit well enough to play 1B.
Buzzkill Pauley said:
Because it's not really a hole they actually have?
I think you're exaggerating the difference in value between an average defensive 1B and an elite defensive 1B in the kind of limited bench role we're talking about. It's a good idea to have somebody on the bench who can sub for Hanley and play solid 1B, but the difference between "solid" and "stunning", in that role, isn't worth giving up much offensive capability for.
Mientkiewicz may have been a great add in 2004 (though I think there's room for difference of opinion on that). But some other guy who was a bit less good with the glove and a good deal better with the bat would have been an even better add.
Savin Hillbilly said:
Mientkiewicz was also a great add because it was only for two months plus the playoffs, and except for the month of August, a luxury they could afford primarily because of the lengthened bench in September and the ability to shorten the pitching staff in the playoffs by at least one spot (5th starter) and carry an extra bat/glove. I'm not sure Mientkiewicz has nearly the same value as a full season bench component, particularly when he didn't have another defensive position.
I agree with the others that are saying the defensive difference between an experienced 1B like Shaw and an inexperienced but adept fielder like Marrero is likely indistinguishable, especially if we're only talking 1-2 innings of work a game if that. Also, wasn't it suggested that the Red Sox should have been treating Hanley the same in left field this past season, and getting him out of the field in the late innings for a better defensive OF (even if it was Holt)? I don't recall that actually working out all that well given that the confluence of "one more AB" and "not a big enough lead" was fairly common. I can't imagine the number of right opportunities to replace Hanley defensively is going to outnumber the times where Shaw's bat is more beneficial to the lineup than Marrero's either pinch hitting or giving Hanley and Sandoval days off.
What's a realistic projection for Shaw if he were to be the primary 1b next year, getting 500 ab?
2012 (A+, AA): .287/.397/.517/.915, 19 hr, 85 rbi in 464 ab
2013 (AA): .221/.342/.394/.736, 16 hr, 50 rbi in 444 ab
2014 (AA, AAA): .278/.353/.473/.826, 21 hr, 78 rbi in 490 ab
2015 (AAA): .249/.318/.356/.674, 5 hr, 30 rbi in 289 ab
2015 (AL): .274/.331/.491/.822, 13 hr, 36 rbi in 226 ab
I don't know how to make accurate projections but it appears that Shaw has pretty realistic 20 hr power, and .330-.350 obp potential. If he can be a .340 on base, 20 hr, 75 rbi guy in 500 ab, for the league minimum salary, doesn't that make him a pretty nice player to plug into that spot? And can anyone really see any reason why he couldn't produce like that over 500 ab?
20 homers would have ranked Shaw 15th in all of MLB 1b this past season. And a .340 obp would have placed him 9th among the group of players hitting 20 or more homers at that position. So a .340 obp, 20 hr hitting 1b is a pretty decent offensive player at 1b. Not all-star level, but pretty decent. And that would allow them to put all the money that they save by playing him at first into a stud starting pitcher.
2012 (A+, AA): .287/.397/.517/.915, 19 hr, 85 rbi in 464 ab
2013 (AA): .221/.342/.394/.736, 16 hr, 50 rbi in 444 ab
2014 (AA, AAA): .278/.353/.473/.826, 21 hr, 78 rbi in 490 ab
2015 (AAA): .249/.318/.356/.674, 5 hr, 30 rbi in 289 ab
2015 (AL): .274/.331/.491/.822, 13 hr, 36 rbi in 226 ab
I don't know how to make accurate projections but it appears that Shaw has pretty realistic 20 hr power, and .330-.350 obp potential. If he can be a .340 on base, 20 hr, 75 rbi guy in 500 ab, for the league minimum salary, doesn't that make him a pretty nice player to plug into that spot? And can anyone really see any reason why he couldn't produce like that over 500 ab?
20 homers would have ranked Shaw 15th in all of MLB 1b this past season. And a .340 obp would have placed him 9th among the group of players hitting 20 or more homers at that position. So a .340 obp, 20 hr hitting 1b is a pretty decent offensive player at 1b. Not all-star level, but pretty decent. And that would allow them to put all the money that they save by playing him at first into a stud starting pitcher.
shaggydog2000 said:
Who said anything about giving 1B at-bats to Marrero?
Shaw would be the one getting 1B at-bats, in AAA. Hanley would be getting 1B at-bats with the Red Sox. Marrero would be getting almost no at-bats as a late-inning defensive replacement for Hanley, while the Sox try to figure out whether Hanley's glove isn't a complete liability at 1B.
I'm not trying to turn Marrero into a 1B, I'm trying to turn Marrero from an old AAA shortstop with no path to the big leagues into a MLB glove-first utility infielder helping the Boston Red Sox win games, in the specific role of Hanley's defensive replacement.
The idea at the start of next season absolutely has to be playing Hanley every day, not only to get the needed reps, but also to keep his bat in the lineup. The Sox aren't going to need someone in April good enough with the stick to give Hanley more than one day off at a time. What they'll need, most likely, is someone who can come in during the 8th and/or 9th inning and be able to really pick it so as to avoid giving games away.
Good lord, it's not as though I'm trying to kick anyone's dog here. Shaw's still the obvious choice for a call-up when Hanley needs to miss more than a day. And when that happens, you can send Marrero down to Pawtucket because Shaw doesn't need to be replaced defensively to the same degree Hanley probably will.
And who are the Sox going to PH for? JBJ and Castillo are pretty much it, considering how rarely Farrell ever pinch hit for catcher.
Buzzkill Pauley said:
Hanley is going to need a full day off in April as much as he'll need them in June or August, and I don't think Marrero is the guy you want playing a full game at first if you can help it. Even if Hanley starts every game for two straight months, I think you're overestimating both the frequency of opportunities to use a defensive replacement for Hanley (games where the lead is sufficient and he's not due up in the 8th/9th) and how much better defensively Marrero would be in those brief opportunities than Shaw. The difference between the two is probably negligible over the course of a full game, let alone an inning here and an inning there.
I really don't understand the idea of making Marrero the defensive replacement at 1B. He's not a 1B and just because he's a good SS doesn't mean he'd automatically be a better defensive replacement for Hanley than Shaw, despite what Brad Pitt says. Plus the guy in that role could ideally start at least once a week to give Hanley and Pablo some breaks (or give Ortiz a break and Hanley would DH), and letting Shaw be that guy makes a whole lot more sense to me.
Red(s)HawksFan said:
Has his game at 2B in 2004 (nice DP, nice collision) already been forgotten?
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/595084683/Millar-Cabrera-lead-BoSox.html?pg=all
When I lived in Portland, I used to go to a lot of Sea Dogs games. I saw Marrero once make a defensive play so extraordinary that it was a kind of testament to his general athleticism and defensive cool-headedness, like when you see a power prospect hit a ball 470 feet and you know they have legitimate power.
This must have been early 2014. Man on first. Hard smash hit to third, where I think Heiker Meneses was playing. Meneses got an impossible hop, didn't handle it cleanly, and the ball squirted up off his glove into the air. Marrero sharply changed direction, circled the ball like an outfielder to line up his throw while he waited for it to come down, and caught the ball barehanded in the midst of a smooth throwing motion to get the runner at first from deep in the hole behind Meneses. Just stunning awareness and composure.
So, yeah: the bat has stalled out a bit, but I totally get what the scouts see in Marrero. He actually didn't look that good to me defensively in his small sample at the big league level. I think he was nervous. Nor does he display the balletic smoothness of someone like Iglesias. But I think his optionable years will be really important to the big club.
This must have been early 2014. Man on first. Hard smash hit to third, where I think Heiker Meneses was playing. Meneses got an impossible hop, didn't handle it cleanly, and the ball squirted up off his glove into the air. Marrero sharply changed direction, circled the ball like an outfielder to line up his throw while he waited for it to come down, and caught the ball barehanded in the midst of a smooth throwing motion to get the runner at first from deep in the hole behind Meneses. Just stunning awareness and composure.
So, yeah: the bat has stalled out a bit, but I totally get what the scouts see in Marrero. He actually didn't look that good to me defensively in his small sample at the big league level. I think he was nervous. Nor does he display the balletic smoothness of someone like Iglesias. But I think his optionable years will be really important to the big club.
The problems with your argument:Buzzkill Pauley said:
1. Travis Shaw doesn't need more AAA at-bats. He's had 668 PAs at the level already. In 2014 he hit against RH AAA pitching quite well and scuffled against LHPs. In 2015 he was yo-yo'd a bit between mL and ML rosters but was doing more or less the same thing following a rough first month. He then had almost half a season of VERY GOOD ML ABs. He's done everything you'd ask for in a "graduate" of the farm ready for a ML role of some kind.
2. Deven Marrero is a baseball year younger than Shaw (born in August as opposed to Shaw's April). He has had a similar number of AAA ABs but with far less success. Still, he had a >.800 OPS in AA in 2014 and had a significantly better run in AAA in 2015 than he did in 2014 (.545 OPS in '14 v. .660 OPS in '15). That included a nice little hot streak the last month before his call-up. He could legitimately use to repeat AAA and potentially post an OPS north of .700. A sign that maybe he'll have enough bat to be a defense first starter for someone at short.
3. Hanley Ramirez should not be viewed as an every day player (by that I mean 7 days a week). If Hanley Ramirez can play 120 games with a >.800 OPS at 1B in 2016 the Red Sox should be very happy. He isn't going to "earn" the $22M salary he's got coming but he can make up a good chunk of it if he's available throughout the season and (record willing) the post-season. It's a marathon, not a sprint. Playing Hanley at 1B 4-5 times a week and Shaw 2-3 times a week until one of them establishes dominance is probably a more realistic setup.
4. The frequency with which Farrell would utilize a defensive sub for Ramirez will depend on a lot of factors, not the least of which being the decline in offensive potential. Taking out Ramirez for Marrero is effectively surrendering the lineup spot as a free out. Doing so with Shaw instead keeps a potentially quality bat in the lineup. Close and late Ramirez' bat would be too valuable to give way to Marrero, but not Shaw's. It substantially improves the overall viability of making the move.
5. Marrero is 6'1", right handed, and has never played 1B. Travis Shaw is 6'4", left handed, and has played 1B for his entire career. Travis Shaw has exhibited enough range at 1B for the club to give him more starts at 3B in 2015 than he had seen in his entire mL career since he was fully transitioned to a 1B after a half season in the NYPL shortly after being drafted.
So Marrero might have more range but the club at least thinks Shaw has pretty impressive range for a 1B. Shaw has far more experience at 1B. Shaw is taller (longer stretch) and has the preferred handedness for 1B (the only position other than pitcher where being LH is a distinct advantage). Why is Marrero a lock to be such an amazing defensive sub at 1B that all of this and the offensive gap between them doesn't matter?
In 2016 the big questions on the Red Sox positional roster will be Bradley/Castillo/4th OF comprising two worthwhile starters between them and the rebounds of Pablo Sandoval and Hanley Ramirez. Travis Shaw could be a potential solution to any of those three question areas. If Sandoval can't hit and can't field Shaw is likely an upgrade across the board playing 3B. If Hanley can't stay healthy or can't handle first Shaw is an upgrade. If between Bradley/Castillo/4th OF they only find one good starter who can handle RF then Shaw can at least feign LF competence in Fenway, picking up about half the missing ABs for the club. He'll likely do any of this with a low end OPS in the mid-700's and a high end in the mid-800's. That low end is important. Of late when the Sox have a position fall apart on them they're consistently below a .700 OPS. Having that kind of black hole in your lineup is a killer. Shaw and Holt provide two good options to prevent such a hole from developing.
Also, Shaw is a better compliment to Holt. Holt's lowest defensive value comes from playing 1B, 3B, and LF. He also has worn down twice in two seasons when thrust into an every day role. So with Shaw on the roster his versatility will no longer be used up playing the positions where his defensive value is most restricted.
That said, I'm expecting Holt to be aggressively shopped this winter as he might have real value as a starter for someone else and the Sox can go with a Shaw/Marrero tandem for the infield. If no one places a starter's value on Holt however Marrero is a great bit of depth with two options left. He'll get additional offensive seasoning in AAA and the Sox will have a second utility IF in waiting should more than one guy go down.
The first two points here are our disagreements in principle, then.Drek717 said:
In counterpoint to #3, I believe Farrell will not spell Hanley 2 days a week if he's healthy. Rather, I expect that the first two months of next season, Farrell will write Hanley and Papi into the lineup every day as the team's 3-4 hitters, so long as they are both healthy. Maybe doing what you suggest would keep Hanley fresher, but it's not something I can remember Farrell ever doing. And I believe he will continue to keep attempting to play his team's highest-paid player and greatest RH power threat every game he possibly can.
In counterpoint to #4, we have often seen Farrell use defensive subs and change defensive alignments to pull a far superior bat out of the lineup in the late innings in order to secure a marginal gain in run prevention. For better or worse, I also expect that will continue. And I expect it will mostly continue by pulling the player with the worst defense off the field. That may or may not be Hanley, but fot the first two months, I expect that Farrell will assume that the team's worst defensive player is Hanley.
In counterpoint to #5, you have also just described both Kevin Youkilis and Mike Napoli. Until, you know, they played 1B and did okay.
To be clear, I'd love to keep Shaw around. I also believe he's earned the chance to stay In the bigs. But the tea leaves I'm reading are that DDski's committed to Hanley at 1B rather than trading him. But he's almost certainly not going to excel at it like Youkilis or Napoli did. From media accounts, Hanley appears to think of himself almost exclusively as a hitter, which impression matches the historical facts of his entire career from lackadaisical super-prospect to stone-handed shortstop to atrocious left fielder. He's almost certainly going to need a defensive sub on the active roster. And if that's the case, the Sox may as well use the best defensive sub they've got.
Now, I personally think there's a very decent chance that the Sox are able to unload Sandoval as a "good player but bad fit for Boston" by eating a lot of salary, so that Farrell gets a chance to pencil in Shaw daily at 3B, hitting 5th, instead of the guy they paid $95MM to do just that. But offloading Panda hasn't happened yet, and until it does, (in my mind) Shaw's left as, unfortunately, the odd man out.
Buzzkill Pauley said:
Let's assume for a moment that you are correct that Marrero would be a better defensive first baseman than Shaw. How many more runs would you expect him to save over the course of a season in those limited late inning situations? Now flip it and ask how many more runs Shaw is likely to be worth at the plate. Those two numbers aren't likely to be close and they certainly won't favor Marrero. Even when we include the innings Marrero will have at 2nd, 3rd and short (more likely in giving guys a breather than as a defensive replacement), I don't think the marginal increase in run prevention is likely to come close to the gap I expect to see between them at the plate, and that's after adjusting for the fact that I expect Shaw was hitting a bit over his head last year.
Now factor in the possibility that Marrero won't be appreciably better defensively and ask if he's worth keeping on the roster over Shaw. I think the clear answer is no.
You just kicked Xander's dog...and probably Mookie's tooBuzzkill Pauley said:
Hanley will be an absolute train wreck at 1st base and agree he will need a defensive caddy the first two months (or till we throw in the towel or he breaks down).
Since there is no way Hanley, Panda and Ortiz will be able to physically play everyday in April/May, we will need Shaw to dovetail into those slots 3-4 days a week.
Roster construction/versatility/ability will dictate keeping Shaw and adding a legit #4 OF to the bench.
Your 'outside the box' idea, in regards to Marrero, might work in September during expanded rosters (if Hanley is still playing first). Maybe Deven should get some reps at 1st base at AAA this summer to gain some game experience.
Your question doesn't make any sense from a team-building perspective for anything other than a rotisserie or fantasy league.Snodgrass said:
I would have thought the lessons from the Sox' 2011-2015 seasons would make clear that building a winning team the idea isn't always about having all the best players all the time. Having some great players is a must, especially great two-way players and pitchers. But it's also important to consider what jobs the entire roster of players will be asked to do.
Assume that Brock Holt remains on the roster, and that DDski signs a good-hitting RHH veteran for the bench. Whose bat do you expect Farrell to replace with Shaw's? How many plate appearances do you expect Shaw to get off the bench? How many innings are you going to use a defensive sub for Hanley? What's the total leverage involved and how critical would an error at 1B be?
I expect the following, for the first two months of 2016:
- Farrell will pencil Hanley in at 1B, batting 3rd-5th, each and every game he's physically able, except for one game at the Braves in April when Ortiz will play 1B and one game off vs the A's in May;
- Farrell will replace Hanley with a defensive sub in the bottom of the 8th on the road, and at the top of the 9th at home, in each and every game the Sox have a lead;
- Farrell will substitute for Hanley after the 6th when the score is 8 or more runs in the Sox' favor;
- Farrell will not pinch hit for any of: Ortiz, Hanley, Pedroia, Bogaerts, Sandoval, Betts, Swihart, or Hanigan;
- Farrell will primarily PH for JBJ against a LHP with his RHH veteran bench bat;
- Farrell will primarily PH for Castillo against a RHP with Holt;
- Farrell will tab Holt as the first option sub at all positions except catcher and 1B; and
- Shaw will sub for Hanley in case of day-to-day or DL-worthy injury.
I think these assumptions are pretty well justified based on Farrell's past history of manging the Sox in prior seasons. But they're just my assumptions, in the end. If you disagree, that's cool, but my opinion would be different on this matter, under a different set of facts.
However, under these assumptions, I see the job that's left for the 25th man on the roster has a lot more to do with 1B fielding opportunities than hitting opportunities. So I suggest that the Sox give that role to the best fielder they can, who I believe to be Marrero.
I'm talking up Marrero because over the first two months I think the 25th man will get to play about 50 innings on defense vs. 30 plate appearances, or thereabouts.
Unless Hanley or Ortiz get injured, because then tabbing Shaw would obviously be the right call.
[EDIT] For those saying that Hanley and Ortiz won't play every day, the 2015 game logs show that through 51 games until the end of May, Ortiz played in 45 and Hanley played in 47, even with hurting his shoulder. Sandoval played 46, even with fouling a pitch off his knee.
Assuming all those can be staggered, those 15 games is what, about 75 PA? And then there's Holt who needs to get at-bats also, and whichever RHH bench bat the Sox sign, as well. I think 30 PA sounds about right, and maybe a little high, for the 265th man to pick up through the end of May.
My question has nothing to do with fantasy baseball. It's very simple. Which player is likely to provide more value off the bench? The answer is Shaw because of the fact that the number of opportunities for Marrero's superior athleticism to actually save a run over what they would have gotten out of Shaw in the same play will be extremely small even before considering how much Shaw's superior reach would mitigate that advantage.
You are massively overestimating the value of any defensive advantage Marrero might have based on range and athleticism.
You are massively overestimating the value of any defensive advantage Marrero might have based on range and athleticism.