With a heavily right-handed lineup, the Cubs have also managed to assemble a pretty weak righty bench: Blanco, Cedeño and Johnson.

Johnson isn't terrible against lefties. Besides, they have Murton if they need a bench righty with power.

Dempster as a starter...well, we’ll see how that goes. We’ve discussed this “he’s not capable of doing his job, so let’s promote him” strategy already.

We still have Marshall in the minors, so I'm not too worried about Dempster starting.

whats nice is that this year we have solid options when some of these guys fail. the rotation im not too worried about im sure dempster wont last long. and well the bullpen is going to be solid.

Piggy & Hart on the roster? I don't have a real opinion on the wisdom but it's a surprise to me.

Do the Cubs really need Mike Fontenot more than Matt Murton?

whats nice is that this year we have solid options when some of these guys fail. the rotation im not too worried about im sure dempster wont last long. and well the bullpen is going to be solid.

It only has 1 lefty at the moment (Pignatiello), but it still looks good.

Interestingly, the roster has exactly one switch hitter. Guess who?

I had to think about this because I was thinking of the hitters.

I’m not happy with Dempster and Marquis filling in the back end of the starting rotation

Me neither. I'm not thrilled about Theriot either, especially in the lead-off spot (only 2 walks in over 70 PAs this Spring is discouraging). Maybe a light will come on in Cedeno's head. I will not be holding my breath.

I'm thinking Dempster will either be in the bullpen or on another team by the end of June.

Do the Cubs really need Mike Fontenot more than Matt Murton?

Strangely, I think the answer is sort of yes. Replace Fontenot with Murton and you have one left-handed hitter off the bench. Now, Murton might project to be roughly the same hitter against RHP as Fontenot, but given that Ward really counts more as an OF than an IF, Fontenot's defensive utility is probably more useful to the team.

Mind you, I think this discussion is more a reflection of poor roster construction than anything else. Once again, the Cubs have very little right-handed power off the bench, a problem that has existed for some time now.

Strangely, I think the answer is sort of yes. Replace Fontenot with Murton and you have one left-handed hitter off the bench. Now, Murton might project to be roughly the same hitter against RHP as Fontenot, but given that Ward really counts more as an OF than an IF, Fontenot's defensive utility is probably more useful to the team.

With a 12-man pitching staff, you're limited to a five man bench. You can't avoid having a backup catcher, and if you're a useful hitter you're not a backup catcher, so you really get to pick four players who could perhaps be meaningful off the bench.

Because of how short the bench is, a guy who can do a number of things poorly tends to be more useful than a guy who can do something really well. A team can't afford to carry three outfielders and one infielder on the bench, at least not comfortably.

Now, you're probably correct that having Ronny Cedeno as your biggest right-handed home run threat off the bench is not the best idea. What's really amazing is that the Cubs collected such a punchless bench without managing to get a single guy who can pinch run especially well in the bargain. That's why I really think Eric Patterson was a better fit for this bench than Mike Fontenot.

Someone in my section today said Hill's not starting the year in the rotation. That can't possibly be right, can it?

No.

Didn't think so. And MLB confirms Hill's scheduled to start Friday. (Actually, the person who told me this supposedly heard it from her kids, who supposedly shared a flight from Arizona to Chicago with Hill. Somehow, this gave her statement that Hill wasn't in the rotation even less credence with me than the statement would have standing along. Not sure why.)

I can now go back to viewing my sectionmates with the contempt they deserve...

The Cubs bench is OK by modern standards -- one decent bat! As #9 points out, you have to have a backup C and almost all teams will carry a legit backup SS (probably not that good an idea) and legit backup CF (also probably not that good an idea). So you've generally got at most two guys who can hit at all on your bench. And since many teams seem intent on carrying a second backup MI, most teams have just one decent hitter on the bench. As bench-hitters go, Ward is good. Welcome to 12-man staffs.

I'm not that worried about the Cubs' RH-heavy lineup. As long as that lineup includes Lee, Ramirez, Soriano and Soto, it's not like there are a lot of better LH options available. And we actually do have a lefty MI option to plug in when beneficial.

But yes, Murton should be on the team. He could be there in place of Johnson (with Fukudome sliding over to CF when needed) or Fontenot/Cedeno (with DeRosa shifting to SS for a game or two when necessary if Cedeno was sent down ... and Cedeno called up when there's a real need). Note, I don't know if Cedeno/Fontenot have options left. And presumably the Cubs have decided a full-blown CF platoon is called for and don't want Fukudome shifting on that regular a basis (which is a reasonable decision if you've decided to go with a CF platoon).

The big offseason boo-boo was doing nothing about SS.

So what's the over/under on when the casual fan base turns on Theriot?

We still have Marshall in the minors, so I'm not too worried about Dempster starting.

Why are there people here who still think Marshall can pitch? He sucks. It's my mission to make everyone understand how much he sucks. I can't do that unless he pitches, so I'm hoping everyone just has to take my word on it. (And no, I can't explain the decent ERA from last year). I'd rather have Dempster in the rotation than him. And it's much more likely, IMO, that Marquis is out of the rotation or gone by June.

The bench is ok, not great not terrible. If they had traded for Roberts and De Rosa was the righty on the bench, there'd be nothing to complain about. I think when it's all said and done the Cubs will get above average production from their bench on the season.

Why are there people here who still think Marshall can pitch? He sucks. It's my mission to make everyone understand how much he sucks. I can't do that unless he pitches, so I'm hoping everyone just has to take my word on it. (And no, I can't explain the decent ERA from last year). I'd rather have Dempster in the rotation than him. And it's much more likely, IMO, that Marquis is out of the rotation or gone by June.

Disagree about Marshall. His ERA was probably lower than expected, but he had decent BB and HR rates. These are patterns that reflect his minor league career. His BABIP was right in line with the team's defense.

I'm not saying he's going to be anything great -- in fact, I think he's great trade bait. But I think he's a decent back end of the rotation starter, and a superior option to both Dempster and Marquis, IMO. Seems like most projection systems put his ERA in the high 4's -- I think mid-4's is more reasonable. What I don't like about him is his Jerome Williams-like inability to go deep into a ballgame, but he's still fairly young.

I just can't stand watching him, and I get the impression Lou feels the same way. He doesn't look like he's a good pitcher. He almost never gets anyone to swing and miss. His control isn't that great, his stuff is mediocre. Yes, sometimes looks can be deceiving, but so can the numbers. It wasn't a good reason to go get Trachsel last year, but both Lou and Hendry felt like it had to be done. That should tell us all we need to know about how they feel about him.

I would love to see him traded, but I think most other teams see the same stuff I think I'm seeing.

I think that's exactly right. (Hey, you idiot...)

Carp, Nava, and Gomes rotate through LF/DH - I'd expect Gomes will play mostly DH, with Nava and Carp playing the field more often. I'd still probably rather see Bradley out there - and according to John Farrell, Bradley still has a shot. If Bradley makes the roster, he most likely just replaces Nava, and Carp and Gomes share the DH job. Ryan Sweeney would be entirely superfluous to that roster, but I figure the Sox don't want to let him go, and it's not like Daniel Nava would add much either.

I don't see much of any purpose to Lyle Overbay - if you put him at 1B to upgrade the defense, you either have to downgrade the offense by resting Napoli or hurt the defense even more by playing Gomes in the field. I guess he could play the occasional game with Gomes on the bench and Carp in the outfield, but I'm not really seeing what he brings to this club.

I don't have any problem with Bard proving himself against AAA competition first, and if Tazawa keeps pitching like he did in the fall, he won't be on the shuttle. I think it's more likely that if the Sox had to make a move, they'll have a DL option or they'll try to slip Mortenson through waivers.

I agree about Aceves and a possible trade, though it sure seems that there just isn't a real market for his particular brand of above average pitching combined with bugnuts lunacy.

1B – Mike Napoli
2B – Dustin Pedroia
3B – Will Middlebrooks
SS – Jose Iglesias
LF – Jonny Gomes
CF – Jacoby Ellsbury
RF – Shane Victorino
C – Jarrod Saltalamacchia
1B – Mike Carp
UTIL – Pedro Ciriaco
OF – Ryan Sweeney
OF – Daniel Nava
C – David Ross

Uch. Unless there are big strides forward by youngsters, this lineup needs Ortiz in a bad way.

Hopefully Victorino and Ellsbury get above a 350 obp or almost no one is on base outside of Napoli, Pederoia and Gomes (against lhp).

I'll try to wash away the negativity and be optimistic about the season after this point, but I just want to note that it would be very difficult for me to be less excited about that collection of outfielders (obviously the one way to make it less exciting would be to remove Ellsbury).

BTW, thanks, Jose, for the article.

The outfield will be fine IF Ellsbury and Victorino catch a good portion of their 2011 stats and Gomes sits often against RHP. I still hope Sweeney can be a decent platoon partner.

What about Gomez? What are the chances that they give him at shot at DH to start the year? He's hit well in the minors and was okay in the Majors last year.

Over on SOSH, a smart guy named Div School Something is making a good case for Bradley. He points out that good, contending teams try to win when they have the chance--they don't worry about the theoretical possibility that a player might cost a bit more in six years. So if Bradley is the best option, he should be up playing in Boston in April at least.

Gomez hasn't really hit this spring and has options. I think if the Sox are going to keep a player who has options at the expense of Carp et al it's going to be Bradley.

I was thinking in place of Nava or Sweeney, but he's probably not making it anyway

Gomez makes more sense than Nava, doesn't he? You can platoon Gomez and Carp, with Jonny Gomes moving between LF and DH. I think getting Gomez' bat against LHP over Carp's or Nava's more than balances out the defensive downgrade.

Nava has options, too, so Gomez v Nava is an even fight on that front.

What about Nava v. Sweeney?

I've said it in other threads, and I'll say it here: if Farrell and the coaches think JBJ is ready, then the FO should put him on the 25 man roster. The Red Sox shouldn't be worried about an extra arb year an they can send him down for a few weeks when Ortiz is back to get the extra year before free agency. Let the Rays be the cheap team that sends major league ready prospects to AAA instead of playing them; the Red Sox have enough money to not play those games.

Again that's IF they truly think he's ready. If not then obviously he should be in AAA. Personally I think he's worth a shot, unless he starts getting overpowered by major league pitchers in the last few weeks of camp.

Re JBJ - I tend to think this is more Nava's last chance than it is JBJ's first chance. If Nava proves capable platooning in LF then he can stay and JBJ can continue to improve in the minors. With the upside of JBJ (or his hype at least) he seems to me more of a player that once they make the big club they stay there. That appears to be what the old management team did, with Ellsbury, Pedroia, Middlebrooks, once they were up, they were up. Reddick didn't really follow that pattern, and Lowrie was hurt so much it's hard to say.

Ellsbury was also up and down in his first year, IIRC.

Has Bradley played any left field this spring? I didn't see him out there and while it's not a huge change from being in center it seems like he (or Ellsbury) should play a few games over there sometime soon if the Sox are going to seriously consider having Bradley on the Opening Day roster. "Congratulations, you've made the club. Now go play a position you've never played and we've never seen you play before" seems less than ideal.

I have no doubt that he can do it, but I still think it's a good idea to have him do it before the season starts. As I type this out I feel like that might be the sign that the Sox are seriously considering going down this road.

EDIT: According to RedSox.com Bradley has only played CF this Spring

Ellsbury was also up and down in his first year, IIRC.

Yup. His path was a bit similar to JBJ. Ellsbury had 225 PA at AA in 2006 as a 22 year old (Bradley had 271 last year also as a 22 year old). In 2007 Ellsbury started at AA, tore it up, got promoted to AAA then made his debut June 30 and played for about a week. He came up for one day in August (the day of Buchholz' MLB debut) then returned for good on September 1. I thought he had played more than he actually did pre-September but he actually had just 20 PA prior to September 1.

It's probably worth noting that Ellsbury is an "old" player with a September birthday while Bradley is a "young" player with an April birthday so apples to apples he's 7 months younger than Ellsbury.

Bradley has played in RF several times this spring, though I don't think he's played LF. It's possible that in a Victorino Ellsbury Bradley OF that they play Victorino in LF I guess? I'm not sure why Red Sox.com has him only in CF because he has definitely played RF.

According to BB-Ref Bradley has played 15 games in CF and 3 in RF. How cool is it that they have ST stats now?

Ellsbury was also up and down in his first year, IIRC.

Ellsbury came up for a week, then a day, then the end of 2007, and was then penciled in as the starter in CF for 2008. Not really the same as Nava.

Nice work on the ZIPS projections:

BA OBP SLG G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K SB CS
.297 .349 .392 134 549 87 163 34 3 4 58 37 72 43 6
.280 .336 .394 145 554 98 155 22 7 9 47 41 80 50 11


Sorta coke to Jose

How cool is it that they have ST stats now?

Extremely!

Shoulda mentioned those are Ells's 2008 ZIPS and actual stats

Listened to a bit of the Sox Prospects podcast at lunch and the topic was Jackie Bradley and whether he should start in the Majors or not. In simple terms they were pretty certain he should not. The argument, and it made some sense, was that as good as JBJ has looked in Ft. Myers let's remember it's Spring Training and 40 or so at bats. Bradley faded at Portland last summer (.628 OPS in August and September).

Not convinced they are right but it was an interesting view from guys who follow Bradley as closely as anyone does.

The argument, and it made some sense, was that as good as JBJ has looked in Ft. Myers let's remember it's Spring Training and 40 or so at bats.

That's not an argument: it goes without saying! How can you not be convinced they are right? If Bradley weren't an anointed prospect, if he were say Derek Bell, no one would think he deserved a spot on the roster from 40 AB, no matter how good his BA. Small samples are small samples, and around here, in big samples we trust. Why promote a kid from AA who hasn't even sniffed AAA yet? He has 61 games in AA! This is exactly the definition of a half-baked idea and exactly the thing that mediots love to cook up to give themselves something to write about.

He looks great so far, but he still has much to prove.

He does have much to prove but he's also not Derek Bell. The idea that he's a young player bursting onto the scene is hardly a big leap, he's a top 50 prospect so there is talent there. It seems to me that there are three possibilities;

1. He starts the year with the big club, struggles a bit and is sent down. This is not a catastrophe. If he can't rebound from this then he's probably not an MLB player in 1, 2, 3 or 10 years.

2. He starts the year with the big club and cements his place in the lineup. Obviously this is wonderful.

3. He starts the year in Pawtucket.

This isn't a guy who is going to follow the Roger LaFrancois path. If he's on the roster he's going to be playing and I don't see a downside to taking a shot. If he busts, hey, by May 1st he's playing at Pawtucket. Dustin Pedroia was a disaster for his first two months in the bigs, Mike Trout was overmatched in 2011 and I'm sure I could spend time and come up with a host of other guys who had a bad month at the start of their careers.

That's not an argument: it goes without saying! How can you not be convinced they are right?

Young players often improve in qualitative ways. That's what development is - we count on it happening. It's certainly true that Bradley spring training statistics can't serve as useful evidence of such improvement, but if the Sox' coaches and other evaluators think Bradley has improved, then that's indeed useful evidence that Bradley will play better than projected.

All players are individuals. Most players will develop better with more time in the high minors, but not all of them. The Sox have to both treat Bradley as a statistic (probably he hasn't improved that much) and as an individual (whatever the coaches and scouts are saying. They should certainly err on the side of treating Bradley like a statistic, but you have to be open to seeing the individual doing something unexpected - you don't want to miss out on a significant improvement to your MLB team.

FWIW, qualitative evaluations of progression aside, Bradley already projects as a 2.2 WAR player per ZiPS if he only plays 118 games. There's an argument to be made that even WITHOUT a big jump beyond what his numbers suggest that he's a worthy ML starter. And he certainly looks like he may have progressed more than the typical player with his statistical profile.

Also, Bradley doesn't need to be all that good to be a projected asset to the Red Sox while Ortiz is out.

ZiPS wOBA for Red Sox LF/DH:

.330 - Gomes
.311 - Gomez
.309 - Nava
.308 - Bradley
.305 - Carp

Given defense and baserunning, he might already be the best option. Obviously there's the issue of what will maximize Bradley's development and all that, but there's a good case by the stats for giving the job to Bradley.

EDIT: Coke to Dan.

No harm in starting him in the minors, though. Middlebrooks hit the snot out of the ball for 100 abs in Pawtucket last year, and then was permanently handed 3rd. And Gomes is no Youk.

If Bradley is a 3 or 4 WAR player then

A. It's going to be really obvious really quickly
B. it won't even cost the major league team a win to keep him on the farm for a month.

No harm in starting him in the minors, though. Middlebrooks hit the snot out of the ball for 100 abs in Pawtucket last year, and then was permanently handed 3rd. And Gomes is no Youk.

The difference is that the injury vacancy didn't exist at the start of the year last year, it exists now for Bradley. I don't think anyone here is really anticipating 6 months and 500 PA for Jackie Bradley at the MLB level. What is more likely is he starts the year in Boston, then goes down when Ortiz comes back to play every day and wait for performances (either his or Gomes) or injury to create an opening.

Frankly, if Jackie Bradley spends the entire season in MLB I think that's a very very good thing because it's only going to happen if he sparkles right out of the gate.

So Peter Abraham lays out the details of service time for Bradley in his piece today (Bradford has one too). In simple terms;

If Bradley spends the first 11 days of the season in the minors he's not a free agent until after 2019
If Bradley spends any 20 days of the season in the minors he's not a free agent until after 2019

Like I said I think this makes it a pretty easy decision to keep him to start the year. He's playing well, he's talented and there is a need. Unless he's hitting .320 when Ortiz comes back he goes to Pawtucket for three weeks, no harm, no foul. The "worst" case scenario is he proves he's an MLB regular right now and if that's the case the Sox get a boost and in 2018 they can write him a great big check.

From Extra Bases this is the lineup for tonight's game. Given the left-handed starter (Hamels tonight, Sabathia on Opening Day) this certainly looks like an Opening Day lineup to me. I don't think it suggests anything re: Bradley as I doubt he'd be in there against CC;

Jacoby Ellsbury CF
Shane Victorino RF
Dustin Pedroia 2B
Mike Napoli 1B
Will Middlebrooks 3B
Jonny Gomes LF
Jarrod Saltalamacchia C
Daniel Nava DH
Jose Iglesias SS

Jonny Gomes LF

Daniel Nava DH

Isn't Nava a better fielder than Gomes? Is this just to get Gomes more practice time in LF?

Yeah, that's a bit of an odd one. It may be temporary or it may be a function that they don't want to yo-yo Gomes. Although as I think about it if they take Bradley then presumably Bradley would be in LF on days he played then Gomes would be DH. I can't imagine they are planning a straight Bradley/Gomes platoon with Nava as the nominal starter.

Speier is reporting that Drew has been cleared to play but will not play in any Spring Training games so the Sox will have the option of backdating his DL stint.