Everyone Else in the AL East is Terrible
I figure most of y’all saw that SG did his first run of team projections based on CAIRO and showed a four-team dead heat in the AL East. The Sox at 84 wins trailed ever so slightly the Yankees at 85 and the Rays and Jays at 86. While it’s of course too early, it seems pretty unlikely that anyone’s going to project to run away with the AL East. The Yankees could still remember that they’re the New York Yankees, but they seem pretty locked in to this unnecessary two-year rebuild. The Jays might still have money to burn, but the initial reports after the trade were that they had already spent past the club’s planned budget. Andrew Friedman might hypnotize another GM, but the club doesn’t seem to have the money to pay any more elite talent. Really, the team most likely to make any major additions for 2013 is the Red Sox. Another SP is a given, and I’ll be surprised if there isn’t at least one of a shortstop or a strong side for the LF platoon. And maybe more!
I’ve been saying for a while that the goal for 2013 should be something like 82-86 wins. I figured this gives you a puncher’s chance at an A’s/O’s 2012 season, and puts the Sox in range of 90+ wins for 2014 and the future with another round of offseason improvements. I hadn’t considered that the AL East might be in for a serious two-year lull in competitiveness before the Yankees restore their payroll to Steinbrennerian levels. If the Sox can get the roster to 85 wins this year and 93 next year, they could be strong favorites for 2014 and about as good as anyone in 2013.
The question is, does SG have the numbers right? Obviously “right” has some pretty huge error bars, but I think it passes the smell test. He had the Sox projected to win 78 games before they made any free agent signings. That’s a little bit high, I think. 78 wins is basically the Sox’ 2012 expected wins (75-76 or so) plus regression to the mean (the good kind) in the starting rotation. Since they lost Adrian Gonzalez from that team, and the offense should project to decline a bit after big years from Ortiz and Middlebrooks, I’d probably have pegged the Sox at closer to 74-75 wins to start the offseason. However, as SG points out, these team win projections are structured to decrease as other clubs sign free agents. A few of those initial wins were a sort of inflation, since Greinke and Hamilton and Bourne and Upton remained unsigned and were assigned to no roster at all. So my 74-75 wins is pretty close to the model’s 78 wins when you account for that inflation.
From replacement level baselines at 1B and RF, the Sox have added a pair of 2-3 win free agents, and they improved around the edges with Gomes and Uehara. They should add another 2-3 win starting pitcher, and add talent to the lineup as well. They look to be on pace for an 85 win projection. In the AL East, that may be enough to be quite competitive next year.
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Actually I had them at 75. Jays were at 78.
The Red Sox claimed right-hander Sandy Rosario off of waivers from the Athletics, the teams announced. The move opens up a spot on Boston's 40-man roster, which now includes 39 players.
This is the second time this offseason that the Red Sox have claimed Rosario off of waivers. They claimed him from Miami on October 17th then traded him to Oakland for a player to be named later (later announced as Graham Godfrey) or cash considerations on November 28th. The A's designated Rosario for assignment two days after acquiring him from Boston.
How does claiming a guy open up a spot? What did Oakland have to gain from this series of events?
---
As far as the topic, it is nice for the Sox' 2013 chances that the Rays have seemed to make themselves worse in the short-term with the Shields trade. Also James Loney is their first-baseman...
But even so, if the Sox do add a good starter and swing a deal for a pretty decent SS, they should be in contention for the division. Hooray!
seriously: Does SG have comparison between 'early useless' CAIRO's last 3 yrs predictions and end-of-year standings, to show any possible trends of what teams may be under- or over-rated by this measure?
Robothal is saying they are in "serious discussions" with Ryan Dempster. Color me unimpressed if he's the guy since it seems a 3 year deal is needed.
Dice-K
I'll show myself out.
Greinke and Hamilton are the only top-line players on the free agent market, and Greinke's contract is definitely well above what I'd want to pay him. The trade market has so far appeared quite inhospitable for teams looking to add present talent. Perhaps, as has been argued here, the Sox should have been in on Hamilton. Based on the salaries rumored so far, I think they should have been. We'll see if that's where the market ends up, and obviously the risk with Hamilton are myriad.
I'm still hopeful that the Sox have something super cool left to line up on the trade market. But less hopeful than I was before the price of James Shields and Shin-Soo Choo turned out to be an MLB top 10 prospect apiece.
Marcum was an absolute pleasure to watch when healthy, during his time with the Jays.
Let's judge uselessness at the proper time.
This is a completely fair point, but there is (obviously) not a Manny Ramirez on the market this year.
I think a lot of these deals (and rumored deals, meaning Dempster) make sense in isolation, but I hold out hope, like the rest of you guys, that there is something bigger on the horizon. It's a bit uninspiring so far.
If we acknowledge the first point, we pretty much have to extend the horizon to mid-season or next off-season.
A huge portion of the Sox projection is riding on Lester/Buchholz/Lackey being, as a group, above average. (CAIRO thinks they will be, projecting 8-9 combined WAR, mostly from Buchholz and Lester.)
De La Rosa could get some starts; maybe even Webster.
I've kind of been forgetting we have to convince ourselves to pull for Lackey again this year.
de la Rosa is a bit of a wild card. It's not entirely clear to me where he slots in for 2013 (maybe he doesn't). I think they CAN be a lot better than average. Lester and Buchholz are quite capable of throwing up true Ace-caliber seasons. The problem is that I don't think there is a sure thing (as much as any pitcher is a sure thing). There isn't anyone on that list that I can't see going pffft.
There's like a 15% chance that karlmagnus actually is Duquette, right? Like, I'm not saying it's likely or anything, but it wouldn't totally shock me either.
Nomo, 2001: 198 IP, 100 ERA+
Dempster, avg last three seasons: 197 IP, 102 ERA+
And no alas I've never met Duquette, though it would be fun to do so. It's that having watched him in action in the 90s and again recently, I find his approach attractive and think he's really pretty good, with fewer ugly distortions and PR-related decisions than the current regime or even Theo (the distortions are I suspect Lucchino.)
I think we should call the pope to investigate, because it sounds like a miracle for broke owners with low payrolls to pay first and second class prices.
(Other than that I'd like a pony, of course.)
He's three years younger than Nomo was (you can call that "much" if you like), and came in with a significantly worse recent track record. Dempster's K rate hasn't dropped and his peripherals steady for several years. He's actually a very similar signing to Nomo in some ways.
(Note that the average MLB salary was about 2/3 of what it is today, and league average free agents earned in the range of $6M.)
-0.3 WAR, $6.3M - Mike Lansing (age 33)
0.3 WAR, $7M - Dante Bichette (age 37)
-0.8 WAR, $4.6M - Troy O'Leary (age 31)
0.9 WAR, $7.3M - Carl Everett (age 30)
This is the same club that decided that pure replacement level Shea Hillenbrand deserved a full-time job at third base.
I mean, I like Duquette. But by far the two worst seasons of his general managership were 2000 and 2001, where he failed miserably to surround some of the greatest core talent in Red Sox history with even vaguely acceptable complementary talent. And he certainly didn't refrain from paying well above retail for those guys, either.
Loney was pretty terrible last year, but he was perfectly cromulent the previous 4 years (104 OPS+) and is only 29. Pena last year hit 94. I figure 1B will likely be a push or a slight upgrade.
I was more comparing him to the other 1B in the division. I assume that he projects to be the worst by far (using E.E. for Toronto, Davis for Baltimore, and Napoli for Boston).
post #30 by km, and various others, explained?:
From bbref., Anibal Sanchez's page:
January 3, 2001: Signed by the Boston Red Sox as an amateur free agent.
Gee...now who was the GM in January, 2001?
Who would be likely to be part of the solution for 2015 that is out there? I'll take Hamilton but other than that there isn't anyone I'm that geared up for. Sanchez maybe because of his age but let's not overstate what he is, a durable, low 100s ERA+. That's pretty good and it's also basically what Matt Clement was prior to 2005 (Clement was a year older).
Other than those guys there is no one on the market that looks likely to be a contributor to the 2015 team. I'd have stayed away from Greinke and beyond that it's an uninspiring FA market.
You have a very selective memory about the Duquette years. If anything, Duquette was worse on PR stuff. Those were some pretty miserable teams.
There isn't much on the team now, but the Red Sox have plenty of players in the minors (Bogaerts/Bradley/Barnes/De La Rosa/Webster/Cecchini/other) who should either be ready to contribute by then or can be dealt for someone who will. The short-term deals suggest to me that the Red Sox actually believe in this current crop of prospects.
The future of the Sox, though, does rest on the next generation coming in and forming a new core. To ellsbury's list above, I'd add Middlebrooks (26 in 2015), Lavarnway (27), Doubront (27), and Tazawa (29). The Sox had a few relatively fallow years in the farm at the end of the last decade, compared to the generation currently in AA, but they do have solid young complementary talent (some with real upside) on the major league roster as well.
The boatload of money comes ashore again in 2015.
And the FAs that are inspiring, the Sox don't seem interested in breaking the bank for out of fear.
Gonzalez, Pedroia, Aviles, Youkilis, Crawford, Ellsbury, Reddick, Saltalamacchia, Middlebrooks (figure he's the DH with Ortiz not re-signed)
vs.
Napoli?, Pedroia, Iglesias, Middlebrooks, Kalish, Ellsbury, Victorino, Saltalamacchia, Ortiz
I see downgrades at 1st, short and left with no obvious upgrades. If someone wants to talk me off the ledge I'd be grateful.
EDIT: On the mound the big move is Beckett for Dempster (wash at best).
In my own feelings, I've accepted the 2011-2012 shitshow, and I'm starting with the Punto Trade as my baseline. I think the Sox are slightly better than they'd be for 2013 if they hadn't done the Punto trade, and they're clearly in better shape for 2014-2018.
(Also, DH is a pretty huge downgrade.)
(Also, the Sox could have made Aviles their shortstop if they'd wanted. They chose not to, because he sucks. Iglesias sucks, too, but I don't think that's a significant downgrade for 2013. I also still hope for a better shortstop than Iglesias.)
Pitching depth and age I am ok with, I should have clarified that better in my post. Middlebrooks, Bogaerts and JBJ could be fun, I am just not sold on Lavarnway at all. Big, slow, not good at defense = Napoli upside. Decent I guess, but in no way a team anchor, a caddy is required (in this case, someone who can actually play defense at C).
Other than Bogaerts and maybe Middlebrooks, I don't see anybody all that young who's a particularly good bet to be an impact player for the next good Sox team. The strength of the farm and the young players on the Major league roster is in complementary guys.
This makes the offseason so far rather disappointing to me. They've gone out and signed ... more complementary guys.
If 2014 is the target, then why Gomes? Surely either the system can pump out a Gomes-level player by then or we can grab one in 2014. Why sign a Victorino now? Did we really need to lock in his 2014 age-33 season now?
With so much money available, this is/was a good offseason for something creative. Hamilton on a highly frontloaded deal? A creative salary dump deal involving a real pony? I'd rather go into 2013 with a roster with added impact talent + a few holes than with balanced mediocrity.
I think you're missing Bradley and the pitchers. Bradley (I love this kid) isn't going to be a slugger but looks like a guy who could be a real asset at the top of a lineup and defensively in center. Also, the Sox have some nice young pitching with DLR, Barnes and Webster. What I like is that while I don't expect all of those guys to work out they have enough of those types that they should feel confident that one of their young pitchers will become very good.
I dunno, other than "sign Josh Hamilton for 5/130", I'm not really seeing a plan here. I would have been in favor of a creative trade that nets us an impact player without too high a cost in talent. I remain in favor of a creative trade that nets us an impact player without too high a cost in talent. It's hard for me to criticize the Sox for not doing that, especially given the cost in talent for James Shields and Shin-Soo Choo.
No, I mean in terms of how the 125 is broken up. e.g. 53, 18, 18, 18, 18 instead of 25 each year. If the goal is not to hamstring 2014+, that's one way to do it and still bid on top notch guys.
Well, it's hard to speculate on salary dump trades without knowing what other teams are asking for. If a full plan is required for a critique of the offseason then you're only going to get "sign free agent who fills obvious hole" sorts of things.
There is an interesting question, though, about the Marlins salary dump. Would the Sox be better off if they'd taken on the Blue Jays position? I don't think it's reasonable to think a non-Marlins team will go for a similar salary dump, but there's a fair case the Sox could have gotten Reyes, Buehrle, and Johnson at a price of maybe Doubront and De La Rosa. Do you do that?
I don't think that really fixes the issue. The Sox' don't appear to have a cash flow issue but are concerned about luxury tax. LT is calculated on Annual Average Value of the contract, not on actual payments.
I can buy the pitchers argument, at least in the bulk sense. What I've read about JBJ makes me think more "likely decent MLB contributor" than "big upside guy", although I'll own up to not being a prospects maven.
In that case I really don't understand the "avoid long-term deals" strategy. Shorter deals should be worse on AAV, no?
2) The Sox are relatively safe from the luxury tax threshold in 2013 or 2014, so deals which impact those two seasons primarily don't constrain the Sox from going after other talent that happens to come available.
Isn't his upside basically a healthy Ellsbury?
If you really want me to speculate: the Marlins just dumped a ton of salary and were willing to deal Reyes and Johnson. I know the rumor was that they asked for the sun and moon from the Sox, but we don't actually know what offers and counteroffers were made. The Mets ate most of Bay's contract and were rumored to be shopping Ike Davis. Arizona is perpetually talking about trading Upton the Younger, one can concoct deals to parlay $ into something the D-Backs would want. I'll bet the Angels would deal something decent to get Vernon Wells's contract off their hands.
This is all speculation for us, but not for the actual GM.
I don't think it's correct at all to take as a premise of offseason critique that no impact players are available except through free agency.
My thought today was that Trumbo might be available. With Pujols, Morales, Hamilton, Trout and Bourjos I would at least see what it might take to pry loose Trumbo. If you enticed them with unloading Wells' deal and some kind of minor league piece it might be doable. Maybe that wouldn't have any appeal but I'd at least explore that one. This is particularly true if Napoli's deal falls through.
I give the Sox about an 8% of making the playoffs, and that's only based on the premise here about the rest of the AL East.
Also have the Rays become better today with the Shields trade or worse? And they arn't really going to just stick the Shields/Pena money in their pockets are they?
I'll say 78 wins for the Sox. That's based on pitcher bounceback also and a normal year for injuries.
Not sure it would work but Ellsbury + to Texas, Andrus to Arizona and Upton to Boston seems like a framework at least. I imagine the D-Backs would need more but again I think there are the basic pieces to a deal there.
Well, it never is. And with the savings from the Punto trade, the Sox don't need to find a bargain, they just need to find a better deal than the combined Crawford/Gonzo/Beckett contracts.
Now, maybe this offseason is not the time to do it, maybe midseason is better or next offseason. Or maybe even this $13 million player strategy will work and the Sox will win in 2013. But I understand the frustration.
Adding to that, has there been any study on the issue of whether it matters how you get there. In other words does 10 WAR player + 1 WAR player = Two 5.5 WAR players?
Obviously. But that's a problem w.r.t. to cash flow. Either cash flow is a constraint or not. I'm willing to work under either premise.
Then I guess I don't understand the current plan at all.
--Is it to not sign any long-term contracts for free agents ever again?
--Is it to only sign big free agent contracts in 2015 and thereafter?
The Sox have definitely had a boring offseason. They've purchased wins at market rates. They've improved from a very bad team all the way up to fringe contention. I'm not inspired either. But it's hard for me to see this as a bad offseason. Given what we've been through recently, "not bad" is ok by me.
I don't mean to say I trust the scouts and evaluators. They've not done well recently. But with only two big free agents on the market, and with both having risks making a below-market evaluation entirely reasonable, it's hard for me to extrapolate to any major strategy.
So, you think they'll be significant worse than they were projected before signing Dempster, but it won't be injuries and the pitching will be better?
Lana: "Yyyyyup."
How many teams are they better than right this very second? 4? I think 78 is optimistic.
It may be that he doesn't see this projection as an incontestable fact.
Take on both Nolasco and Buehrle? Some other schlubs who are making more than the minimum? Involve a third team and take on another somewhat overpriced contract? I'm sure there are ways.
In a vacuum, sure. But Bay would be off the books by the time the Sox contend, and Davis is under control until about 2017. Meanwhile Napoli and Victorino will be, respectively, 33 and 34 during this 2015 season whose luxury tax threshold we're working around.
They also get an extra year of whoever they signed, meaning they don't have to pay someone else.
My impression, and it may be wrong, is that generally good free agents would rather sign long term, and that to get a shorter deal a team has to pay a premium. e.g. If Hamilton projects to be worth, in wins, 5, 4.5, 4, 3.5, 3, 2.5, 2 over the next 7 years, he'd rather take the 7 year 147M deal (6M per win) than the 5 year 120M deal (6M per win).
To get the 5 year deal you may have to pay, say, 125 or 130* So the team that signs a 5-year deal pays a higher AAV (EDIT and $/W) in exchange for the safety/flexibility of the shorter deal. They also have 2 more years worth of outfielder to sign. On the whole that's good for flexibility but bad for luxury tax purposes.
*I neglected inflation in all this. Oops. It's just for illustration's sake anyway.
That's not the only info we have about the offseason. They've also signed some 30+ year old slightly above average players to 2 and 3 year deals in lieu of using their $ to acquire an impact player in some other way. That's at least some signal that they think they can be conservative in the short term and still compete -- otherwise why sign a Dempster and a Gomes?
The biggest sale was the Marlins-Jays, and I think that was good for the Jays. I wouldn't exactly call TB the sellers in the Shields trade, they got ML or near-ML talent in return. That's another one where I would have hoped the Sox could beat the offer on the table, especially if it involved taking on contracts (e.g. Bruce Chen) rather than dealing from the minors. Ditto w.r.t. to Bauer in the Indians-Reds-DBacks three-way. The buyers of young talent have fared pretty well this offseason, and the Sox could have gotten in on that.
The point being made is that "some other way" is a trade, and the cost of acquiring major league ready impact players via trade this winter has been extraordinarily high in terms of the prospects going the other way. And that's for guys who are 30+. It would seem that landing a Justin Upton or similar impact player who's still on the young side of his peak would mean shipping out at least two of Boston's top three prospects, as a start.
Money doesn't really come into it unless there's another team out there that wants to jettison a bunch of expensive players like the Marlins did. I'll go on the record as being a little relieved the Sox didn't do that specific deal. If the risks associated with Hamilton and Greinke (from a performance standpoint) scared them off, the risks associated with Johnson and Reyes are pretty scary too. It was a great move for the Jays because they needed a big splash like that to catapult them into any sort of serious postseason relevance. The Sox didn't need to extend themselves that much to have an equally respectable shot at sneaking into the playoffs, I don't think.
The one plausible idea bandied about with respect to Boston using more or less straight-up cash to acquire impact talent was taking Cliff Lee's contract from the Phillies. They could probably still do that, but it's not clear that Amaro views Lee as an albatross at this point. My guess is that if he thinks Mike Young is worth having around--even at a heavily subsidized $6M--then he probably thinks Lee is worth every penny.
If true, the Sox could have played it the other way and used their 2013 $ for potential future impact. For example:
--They could have sweetened the Lester+ deal for Myers, gaining a high upside outfielder
--They could have used Ellsbury and played the role of the Indians in the CIN-CLE-ARI 3-way, gaining a high upside arm
--They could take on some portion of Vernon Wells' contract in exchange for whichever OF the Angels won't be starting, gaining a young OF with some upside
--They could have made a deal based around taking on Bay's contract in exchange for Ike Davis, gaining a young 1B with some upside
These are off the top of my head, and maybe these particular cases wouldn't happen.
The point is, even if they couldn't convert their 2013 payroll flexibility into MLB-level impact talent -- a premise which I dispute -- they could have used their 2013 payroll flexibility to gain potential 2014+ impact talent.
Instead they used a strategy which does neither. By the time the kids are ready the current contracts will be either expired on in the crappy years. In which case they've used their near-term payroll flexibility to be mediocre while waiting. That's much too conservative for my tastes.
If the Sox are out of it near the trade deadline I expect they'll get some calls about Uehara and Dempster, and maybe Gomes if he's pulling a 2012 Cody Ross.
With 2 wildcards, being within 3-4 games of a playoff spot and being mediocre are not mutually exclusive. If that's where the Sox end up, I'll be pretty disappointed with the front office.
Well, how would you define contending? Mediocre teams can contend now. It's a whole new world out there! It sounds like you will only be satisfied with a team that is projected to make the playoffs though, which is a different thing entirely.
I mean, if it's the last week of the season and your team could still feasibly make the playoffs, I'd say you're in contention.
I am growing concerned, a little, about how much room the Sox have to improve for 2014. The team is locked in at most positions, and while there are young guys to integrate, there are also a fair number of 32-year-olds who will project to be 33 years old. It's too early to say the Sox can't win 92 games in 2014 - I mean, they could win 92 games next year if #### breaks the right way - but the signings they've made so far have locked in a lot of money for 2014 without leaving a ton of room to improve that next set of 5-8 games.
This is misleading. They didn't win 69 games and then trade their star 1B. With him, they were on pace for 76 wins... which is also bad.
That's true but I would feel better with Adrian Gonzalez than without him. Obviously he had a terrible year last year but I expect him to bounce back much the same way I expect Lester and Buchholz to bounce back.
I don't think they are that locked in. LF, CF and SS are all likely to be open next winter. That's not exactly a great thing but they are going to have room to make improvements and they should have some decent money to make that happen.
--They could have sweetened the Lester+ deal for Myers, gaining a high upside outfielder
--They could have used Ellsbury and played the role of the Indians in the CIN-CLE-ARI 3-way, gaining a high upside arm
--They could take on some portion of Vernon Wells' contract in exchange for whichever OF the Angels won't be starting, gaining a young OF with some upside
--They could have made a deal based around taking on Bay's contract in exchange for Ike Davis, gaining a young 1B with some upside
These are off the top of my head, and maybe these particular cases wouldn't happen.
Those first two deals involve selling low on guys who could be expected to help the team contend this season (and 2014 in Lester's case). If those guys rebound but the Sox are lousy again, then they could be dealt mid-season for presumably a similar return.
I don't think saddling yourself with Wells is worth Trumbo or Bourjos. Trumbo's power is nice, but he's never demonstrated any ability to consistently get on base. I don't understand the fuss over Bourjos at all. Is he that much more exciting than Iglesias that he's worth handcuffing the team to $42M of deadweight? And why would the Angels be looking to trade away their fourth and fifth outfielders in the first place? They're trying to win now.
On a similar note, why would the Mets have been looking to move Davis just to get rid of the last year of Jason Bay's contract? I don't remember anything more than one or two offhand bits speculation about this.
I appreciate your caveat about "these specific cases", but I don't think deals of that sort really help the Sox all that much. Everybody wants a pony, and I'm sure the Sox have been and are doing their best to get one, but it's hard to criticize them for not producing some magic when the trade market is fairly opaque to us as fans.
Justin Upton was the one guy I thought might work along those lines, but we've seemingly been thwarted by the knock-on effects of Towers' obsession with finding a shortstop worse than the one he was forced to trade away this past summer. And, as mentioned above, the cost of acquiring Upton in this market may have been exceedingly steep.
Fwiw..which is nothing...I had them on pace for 72 wins right before the trade and 70 after.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main