Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Sox Therapy > Discussion
Sox Therapy
— Where Thinking Red Sox Fans Obsess about the Sox

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.

   1. Darren Posted: January 09, 2013 at 08:36 PM (#4343652)
If this is a minor league thread, here are a couple links:

Sickels' Top 20
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

I also like that we got Sutton back as depth.
   2. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: January 09, 2013 at 09:12 PM (#4343683)
Listening to the end of year Sox Prospects podcast at lunch the last couple of days and it's interesting to hear the differing opinions on the 5-9 guys. Once you get past Webster the Iglesias, Brentz, Swihart, Owens, Cecchini ordering was all over the place. If you have time (it's a long one) it's a pretty lively discussion and one worth checking out.
   3. Darren Posted: January 09, 2013 at 09:29 PM (#4343691)
People are higher on Webster than I thought. Hope he can get a touch more control and stick as a starter.
   4. villageidiom Posted: January 09, 2013 at 10:06 PM (#4343716)
   5. Mattbert Posted: January 10, 2013 at 12:47 AM (#4343829)
All of this is a nice reinforcement of my increasingly unrealistic expectations for the farm system. Sickels goes about a dozen deep before getting into the C prospects? That's pretty damn solid.

I'm ready for world domination with a squadron of homegrown talent in 2015!
   6. Nasty Nate Posted: January 10, 2013 at 11:24 AM (#4344042)
The BP link has a list at the bottom which reminds us of the other young players who are not prospects anymore: Middlebrooks, Doubront, and De La Rosa.
   7. Nasty Nate Posted: January 10, 2013 at 11:41 AM (#4344057)
Also not pictured: 26-year old Junichi Tazawa.
   8. Nasty Nate Posted: January 10, 2013 at 01:32 PM (#4344191)
If the 2013 Sox are as bad as the pessimists predict, the minors will probably receive another infusion at midseason when Ellsbury, Hanrahan, Drew, and Uehara are traded.
   9. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: January 10, 2013 at 01:52 PM (#4344215)
More from the Sox Prospects podcast;

Overrated Player in the system - Brian Johnson, Garin Cecchini, Chris Hernandez
Underrated Player in the system - Anthony Ranaudo, Sean Coyle, Brandon Jacobs, Cody Kukuk

Mike Andrews was the guy who had Ranaudo underrated and basically his point was the tools are still there, he's just struggled to stay healthy but if he can stay out there he's still very talented. I don't remember who it was that had Cecchini overrated but the point was effectively that the pitching in the Sally League bites and anyone with any talent at all should be expected to hit.
   10. jmurph Posted: January 10, 2013 at 02:52 PM (#4344292)
If the 2013 Sox are as bad as the pessimists predict, the minors will probably receive another infusion at midseason when Ellsbury, Hanrahan, Drew, and Uehara are traded.


No way. If it's really as bad as the pessimists predict, each of those guys will be traded in turn for Brent Lillibridge, who will promptly be cut, sign on with a new team, and then re-acquired by the Red Sox. Rinse, repeat, etc.
   11. Nasty Nate Posted: January 10, 2013 at 03:14 PM (#4344318)

No way. If it's really as bad as the pessimists predict, each of those guys will be traded in turn for Brent Lillibridge, who will promptly be cut, sign on with a new team, and then re-acquired by the Red Sox. Rinse, repeat, etc.


ha, you are right. I will make a small edit: "...each of those guys will be traded with the Red Sox paying the bulk of their salary in turn for Brent Lillibridge..."
   12. Darren Posted: January 11, 2013 at 12:20 AM (#4344728)
Who is overrating Chris Hernandez? Sox Prospects has him at #34. Sickels gives him a C. Everyone seems to agree that, despite his moderate success, he's not really a prospect.
   13. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: January 11, 2013 at 10:25 AM (#4344876)
Who is overrating Chris Hernandez?


That was my feeling too. I don't remember which guy said it but it was basically a "random people on the internet are all geeked up because he's had a couple of good years statistically and they need to chill out" kind of viewpoint.
   14. Nasty Nate Posted: January 11, 2013 at 11:31 AM (#4344919)
Are many of these guys likely to be called up sometime this season (not including September java)?
   15. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: January 11, 2013 at 11:40 AM (#4344932)
The overrated/underrated guys? The likeliest of that group is certainly Hernandez who was at Pawtucket for awhile last year and should be there in 2013. He's not on the 40 man roster so that puts him behind a few other guys but in an "oh #### we need a starter" situation if he pitches well he probably would get a shot. Of the rest I can see Ranaudo blowing through the system and being August relief help but that's clearly a best case scenario for him. I think Hernandez is probably legitimately on the list of guys the organization is viewing as that 8th-9th starting pitcher.

Right now the 40 man roster has by my count 10 starting pitchers; Lester, Buchholz, Lackey, Dempster, Doubront, De La Rosa, Webster, Morales, Britton, Wright plus guys like Wilson and Aceves who might be in line. I can see Hernandez moving ahead of Britton and Wright so it's not entirely out of the question that he gets a shot like Bowden in 2008 or Abe Alvarez in 2004.
   16. Mattbert Posted: January 11, 2013 at 04:39 PM (#4345198)
If you're in the mood for more encouraging puffery on the kids, look no further than Speier (longer article on Rubby) and Pete Abe (grab bag of short updates).
   17. Nasty Nate Posted: January 11, 2013 at 04:53 PM (#4345211)
...Speier (longer article on Rubby)...


Rubby's grandmother appartently was Ramon and Pedro Martinez's nanny. Ramon and Pedro started with the Dodgers and later pitched for the Red Sox, as did (presumably) Rubby. Pedro was traded to the Sox for Carl Pavano, who was teammates with Josh Beckett who was traded to the Dodgers for Rubby. Pedro supposedly taught Rubby his change-up. //*head explodes~~

Also, Delino SeShields Jr purloined a hundo bags in the minors last year.
   18. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: January 13, 2013 at 01:12 AM (#4345996)
ESPN does some minor league projected lineups as a time-wasting exercise, but it's nice to see the Portland roster so filled with interesting players, and Pawtucket with more than just filler (although there's a good amount of guys with limited upside in there).
   19. dave h Posted: January 13, 2013 at 01:41 AM (#4346004)
Yeah, that Portland team looks like a lot of fun. Looking forward to catching a couple in New Britain when they come early in the year.
   20. Nasty Nate Posted: January 16, 2013 at 12:38 PM (#4348158)
Xander Bogaerts apparently will be on team Netherlands for the WBC. Honkbal!
   21. tfbg9 Posted: January 25, 2013 at 05:09 PM (#4355088)
They're saying Kalish needs surgey again. Sigh.
   22. Nasty Nate Posted: January 25, 2013 at 05:14 PM (#4355091)
red sox OF prospects are cursed...
   23. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: January 25, 2013 at 09:49 PM (#4355231)
And in the realm of very minor help, the Sox signed Ryan Sweeney to a minor league deal.

The worst thing about Kalish is that his problems were preventable. Initially, he injured his shoulder diving for the ball. There were multiple abortive comebacks, multiple missed diagnoses, and new injuries created by rushing back before fully healing. Kalish may be done as a professional ballplayer, and it didn't have to be this way with better medical care.
   24. Darren Posted: January 25, 2013 at 10:25 PM (#4355242)
He's really in that bad a shape?

Sweeney is pretty uninspiring, but that's just the kind of deal he should get.
   25. UnclePab Posted: January 26, 2013 at 11:47 AM (#4355412)
They're saying Kalish needs surgey again. Sigh.

And to think just a few years ago I had visions of a home-grown outfield of Kalish, Westmoreland, and Reddick. That didn't work out so well.
   26. Darren Posted: January 26, 2013 at 05:55 PM (#4355634)
How about Nava, Hassan, Brentz! Ugh.
   27. Mattbert Posted: January 26, 2013 at 11:31 PM (#4355776)
Can't wait for Jackie Bradley Jr. to be felled by gout or scurvy or something.

Or traded to the Indians for Chris Perez.
   28. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: January 29, 2013 at 09:59 AM (#4357221)
So, to break up the gloom with some pre-spring happy tidings, did everyone see this article from a week ago? Cause I missed it. John Farrell impressed with Daniel Bard in winter workouts:
"He looked very good," said Farrell, who along with pitching coach Juan Nieves watched Bard throw in Mississippi. "His arm slot is back to a normal position. He shows the power he previously had as a reliever. His mind-set is more clear and his approach is more simplified."
   29. Dan Posted: January 29, 2013 at 10:06 AM (#4357232)
I actually did see that. I was hopeful that Bard would get back to normal and that he wasn't permanently damaged goods (either physically or mentally), so that gives some extra hope that he very well might show up in 2013 as the same guy he was from 2009 through 2011. I'd feel a bit better if they'd talk about actual velocity rather than "shows the power he previously had as a reliever".
   30. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: January 29, 2013 at 10:58 AM (#4357290)
I think the bullpen is the part of this team I'm most excited to see in action. There are a whole bunch of ifs as there are with most bullpens but I think the realistic upside out there is incredibly high. Bailey, Hanrahan and Bard are all a year away from being elite relievers and Tazawa is a guy worth being excited about.
   31. Nasty Nate Posted: January 29, 2013 at 11:11 AM (#4357308)
I think the bullpen is the part of this team I'm most excited to see in action. There are a whole bunch of ifs as there are with most bullpens but I think the realistic upside out there is incredibly high. Bailey, Hanrahan and Bard are all a year away from being elite relievers and Tazawa is a guy worth being excited about.


Uehara too!
   32. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: January 29, 2013 at 11:14 AM (#4357309)
I knew there was someone I was forgetting.
   33. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: January 30, 2013 at 12:28 PM (#4358195)
Prospect lists should start coming in. MLB.com's is up, and it's good and bad. Good in that the Sox are clearly a top-10 system (see also John Sickels' rankings), bad in that they don't really rate Xander Bogaerts.

20 - Bogaerts
32 - Bradley
38 - Barnes
71 - Webster
94 - Owens
96 - Iglesias

The scouting report on Bogaerts is a long way short of glowing. It's positive of course, but it's just a good report on a good prospect, nothing special. And it's not about his glove - they seem entirely open to the possibility that Bogaerts might handle SS well enough. They're just not that impressed with his overall hitting, and his power tool is rated a current 30 with a 50 ceiling. That's not even plus.
Scouting Grades (present/future): Hit: 4/6 | Power: 3/5 | Run: 5/5 | Arm: 6/6 | Field: 4/6 | Overall: 5/6

The Aruba native and 2012 Futures Game participant has some serious tools and he’s used them to rush up the Red Sox’s organizational ladder, reaching Double-A in 2012 at age 19. He has the ability to make hard contact and can shoot the ball to all fields with excellent bat speed and a smooth swing. He has significant raw power he’s still learning to tap into and he will be a better overall hitter as his plate discipline continues to improve, something that happened in the Carolina League in 2012, but not as much once he moved up a level. His plus arm works just fine from shortstop and while he’s an average runner, he has better range than one would expect for a player his size. If he has to move over to third, his bat looks like it will play just fine there, though Will Middlebrooks is standing in the way there.
   34. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: January 30, 2013 at 12:42 PM (#4358219)
That report on Bogaerts makes no sense to me. A guy with OK power and mediocre plate discipline who might stick at shortstop doesn't sound like anything close to a #20 prospect to me. I guess the optimistic side would argue that the #20 ranking suggests that he IS likely to stick at short. It's just backwards from everything I've read and seen about this guy.
   35. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: January 30, 2013 at 12:47 PM (#4358225)
To be clear, I'm not disputing anything they are saying, just noting that the #20 rank doesn't jibe with the grades.
   36. booond Posted: January 30, 2013 at 01:43 PM (#4358271)
That report on Bogaerts makes no sense to me. A guy with OK power and mediocre plate discipline who might stick at shortstop doesn't sound like anything close to a #20 prospect to me.


I read it a couple times and think you're being overly sensitive. I do agree with Matt that his 3/5 power grade makes little sense in comparison to what he did as a nineteen-year-old. He fits in with Lindor and Baez as SS/3B prospects and behind Profar and Sano. One person might see him as #10 and MLB sees him as #20, it's hardly an exact science. Lets hope he improves his plate discipline and maintains enough range at SS to stay there.
   37. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: January 30, 2013 at 02:33 PM (#4358325)
Like I said in #35, I'm not disputing the report, it's that the scouting report and the #20 ranking don't go together. I'm fine if they have him #20 and I'm not even disputing the 3/5 power, but those two things don't go together at all in my mind. If he's a 3/5 power he's simply not the 20th best prospect in the game, not even close.

I'll backtrack on that a bit and note that maybe they are more convinced of his ability to stay at shortstop than appears from the write up. If that's true then it makes some sense to me but it's not apparent to me from the report.
   38. Darren Posted: January 30, 2013 at 11:58 PM (#4358750)
Gotta be a typo. He's rated as having the same power has Hamilton, who has no power at all.
   39. Dan Posted: January 31, 2013 at 12:46 AM (#4358763)
I don't understand how a 19 year old with an ISO over .200 is a 3/5 on power. Makes little sense.
   40. chris p Posted: January 31, 2013 at 08:29 AM (#4358819)
i figured it out. 3/5 is a range ... they mean 3-5. notice how some of the numbers are /5 and some are /6. if that meant "out of" you would expect a consistent upper bound.

check out some of the other rankings: http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/prospects/watch/y2013/ ... profar's fielding is 7/8 for example.

really confusing presentation, and i still think they're underrating bogaerts' power.
   41. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: January 31, 2013 at 08:41 AM (#4358823)
i figured it out. 3/5 is a range ... they mean 3-5. notice how some of the numbers are /5 and some are /6. if that meant "out of" you would expect a consistent upper bound.
It's not a range - it's "present"/"potential", and both are rated on the traditional scouting 20-80 scale with the second digit cut off (note that no one is above "8" on anything). It's "out of" because players don't have equivalent upper bounds o their tools - some have potential plus or plus-plus fielding, some have upside around average or lower. MLB.com rates Bogaerts' present power below average (30) with a potential for no more than average to above average (50). That's the first time I've seen such a poor rating of Bogaerts' power.

Another 3/5 power rating for a top prospect goes to Francisco Lindor, a glove-first shortstop with potential line drive power. He hit 257/352/355 in the Midwest League last year at 18.

On the other hand, Anthony Rendon rates 4/5. So maybe "5" comprises an extremely wide range?
   42. chris p Posted: January 31, 2013 at 09:45 AM (#4358852)
It's not a range - it's "present"/"potential", and both are rated on the traditional scouting 20-80 scale with the second digit cut off (note that no one is above "8" on anything).

huh. well that makes a little more sense. it's still bogus.
   43. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: January 31, 2013 at 01:51 PM (#4359175)
Just listening to the latest Sox Prospects podcast and they had some interviews from the recent event at Jillian's. The one that jumped at me was Garin Cecchini who if you told me it was Dustin Pedroia talking I wouldn't have doubted it for a second. Similar voice, peppers his conversation with "man" at every chance and just exudes a confidence that is endearing. Just based on that clip I find myself really pulling for him to continue progressing.
   44. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: February 05, 2013 at 04:23 PM (#4363299)
Keith Law's top 100 list is out. Four Sox on the list (subscription required...which I don't have);

#5 - Bogaerts
#40 - Bradley
#61 - Webster
#79 - Barnes

In unrelated news Alex Hassan becomes the latest outfielder to be struck down by the plague. In his case it is a stress fracture in his left foot and he won't be ready for the start of camp.
   45. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: February 05, 2013 at 04:36 PM (#4363315)
From that piece...

-Law says Bogaerts is about even money to remain at shortstop, raves about how the ball comes off his bat, much more power than you'd expect for a kid his size. Says Bogaerts' bat combined with fringe-average shortstop defense would make a 5-win player. About what you'd expect given the #5 ranking.
-Bradley is a potential Gold Glove outfielder not due to his speed, which is merely average, but due to his excellent reads. At a hitter, he has a line-drive swing with doubles power, made better by excellent plate discipline. That's nothing really new.

The new stuff is mostly in Law's analysis of the pitching prospects:

-Loves Webster's raw stuff ("three plus pitches" at times) but says Webster has yet to develop the fastball command to be a useful major league pitcher. His changeup is excellent, his slider "flashes plus" but is too inconsistent.
-Barnes developed excellent fastball command last year, beating lower level hitters by hitting the corners consistently. Ditched his slider for an curve that looks above average, changeup is a work in progress but progressing. Basically, he did it all with the fastball in A-ball, and he'll need to show improvement in his secondary pitches to succeed at higher levels.
-Henry Owens also makes the "just missed" list. Says his 88-92 velocity is unlikely to improve, but he got his big K numbers from deception in his delivery, combined with good secondary stuff. Wants to see Owens' deception work against more advanced hitters before endorsing him as a top prospect.
   46. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: February 07, 2013 at 03:19 PM (#4365107)
Projected Rosters are up at Sox Prospects. Nothing too earth shattering but a nifty snapshot of the state of the system. Nice to see a lot of key prospects in Portland.
   47. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: February 09, 2013 at 03:26 PM (#4366135)
Bryce Brentz will miss spring training after Accidentally shooting himself while cleaning his gun.

Hey moron, take the bullets out before cleaning it.
   48. booond Posted: February 10, 2013 at 09:44 PM (#4366808)
Projected Rosters are up at Sox Prospects. Nothing too earth shattering but a nifty snapshot of the state of the system. Nice to see a lot of key prospects in Portland.


It's not always mentioned but De La Rosa is like an extra prospect. Technically, not a rookie - 60+ IP - but, if healthy, he's as good as Webster, if not better.
   49. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: February 16, 2013 at 10:50 PM (#4370870)
Speier has a nice little write-up of Bradley Jr. I really like what I hear about JBJr.
   50. Darren Posted: February 19, 2013 at 03:31 PM (#4371991)
BA Top 100 is out. For the Red Sox:

8 Bogaerts
31 Bradley
40 Barnes
49 Webster
92 Owens

That's a very nice list. You'd expect an average team to have something like 15/45/75 in the top 100. The Sox have 4 guys who fit well into those first two slots and then another beyond that. I'm happily surprised that there's a consensus that Webster is top 50 to 75. Bogaerts again in the top 10 is also encouraging.
   51. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: February 19, 2013 at 03:37 PM (#4371994)
The biggest thing for Bogaerts over the past year has been an increase in the perceived likelihood that he'll stay at shortstop it seems. I wonder how much of that is Bogaerts and how much is the fact that shortstop is no longer "blocked" by Iglesias but it certainly is good news.
   52. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: February 19, 2013 at 03:39 PM (#4371995)
BA includes scouting grades as well. Bogaerts' power is graded as a 70 and Bradley's defense at 75.
   53. Darren Posted: February 19, 2013 at 04:05 PM (#4372017)
Are the grades behind a pay wall?
   54. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: February 19, 2013 at 04:12 PM (#4372031)
I don't think so. Here's the link.
   55. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: February 19, 2013 at 04:13 PM (#4372033)
Speier sez the Sox and Cards are the only two teams with at least 4 prospects in the top 50.
   56. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: February 19, 2013 at 04:21 PM (#4372043)
There is a bunch of stuff at BA's site, some behind the wall some not but well worth the visit. There is a short blurb behind the wall where Callis calls Webster the best bargain in the top 100. Webster was drafted in the 18th round and signed for $20,000 on the basis of having a live arm but playing primarily shortstop in high school.
   57. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: February 25, 2013 at 12:12 PM (#4375617)
BPro Top 101 is out. Red Sox on the list;

Bogaerts - 12
Bradley - 27
Barnes - 38
Webster - 69

Also on the semi-prospect news according to Nick Cafardo DLR hit 100 in the 9th inning yesterday.
   58. Dan Posted: February 25, 2013 at 05:52 PM (#4375880)
Webster struck out 4 in 2 innings today while hitting 99 MPH on the gun. I didn't realize he had that kind of fastball.
   59. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: February 25, 2013 at 06:20 PM (#4375909)
Neither did I. Between that and DLR yesterday I'm hoping the two of them aren't going to blow out their arms trying to prove they were worth the big package that was traded for them.
   60. Dan Posted: February 25, 2013 at 06:30 PM (#4375919)
De la Rosa is established as an upper 90s guy though. He was sitting 96-97 and touching 100 before he blew out his elbow too.
   61. Darren Posted: February 25, 2013 at 08:49 PM (#4375998)
Hey, did you hear that Webster hit 99 today? Oh.
   62. Dan Posted: March 02, 2013 at 06:40 AM (#4379009)
JackieBradley Jr has been quite impressive so far. How much deeper would a Red Sox lineup look with him batting lead off? Lets have a hypothetical look:

CF JBJ
2B Pedroia
LF Ellsbury
DH Ortiz
1B Napoli
3B Middlebrooks
C Salty
RF Victorino
SS Drew

Against lefties you'd probably shift Ellsbury to CF and play Gomes, or just rotate which one of Ellsbury, JBJ, or Ortiz gets a rest.

Personally I'm a fan, though I don't know how keen Ellsbury would be on playing LF (at least this time it wouldn't be for a 40 year old to play CF nor would it put him in harm's way from charging Beltres).
   63. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: March 02, 2013 at 03:35 PM (#4379212)
Alex Speier is the best of all possible beat writers. New article up on Rubby and Webster.
"The feel he has for offspeed pitches, particularly when you have that type of velocity or fastball you can go to, he's obviously showing us the ability to pitch without being predictable," said manager John Farrell. "A couple of 3-2 counts, right-handed, left-handed, he's not only willing but goes to [the changeup] with confidence and when you combine that with the power, it's really a rare combination. And just with two outings in spring training, he's not been afraid to go to any pitch in any count. It's been very encouraging the way he's thrown the baseball."

De La Rosa's explosive fastball inspires radar (gun) love and scoreboard watching to see how close to triple digits it can come. That pitch alone would make him a significant prospect.

But the fact that his secondary pitches are so good that he sometimes favors them as much as, if not more, than the fastball? That's a bit ridiculous, not to mention unfair to opposing hitters who are trying to gain their timing in spring training.

The 23-year-old right-hander, as Farrell noted, showed three swing-and-miss pitches on Friday, something that suggests not just a starter's arsenal but the potential to pitch in the upper half of a rotation (depending on command and pitch efficiency -- elements that could sabotage not just that ceiling but even could jeopardize a future in the rotation).
That #### is getting plugged into the CFBPS posthaste. And he adds a good discussion of the value of minor league depth.
   64. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: March 02, 2013 at 03:36 PM (#4379213)
Personally I'm a fan, though I don't know how keen Ellsbury would be on playing LF (at least this time it wouldn't be for a 40 year old to play CF nor would it put him in harm's way from charging Beltres).
If the Sox were to jump Bradley all the way to the majors, I'm sure he'd play either right or left, not center. Most likely left. That would be one hell of a defensive outfield.
   65. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: March 02, 2013 at 07:19 PM (#4379304)
Alex Speier is the best of all possible beat writers. New article up on Rubby and Webster.


It's funny, but while I was reading this article I was thinking, this isn't that great of an article. Then I realized that that's how good he's been: his worst article is better than most sportswriters best articles. This article coming from Shaughnessey would have been hailed as some kind of breakthrough.
   66. Dan Posted: March 02, 2013 at 11:09 PM (#4379381)
You think they'd move Bradley to a corner over Ellsbury? I figured they'd play Bradley in CF, but I don't imagine it would make a huge difference. Outside of 2009, Ellsbury has consistently been around 5-10 runs above average in CF according to pretty much all of the advanced metrics. And I don't mind throwing out the shitty year because he was visibly worse on defense that year for whatever reason. Even including the awful 2009 stats, his career UZR/150 in CF is 6.5. So even with the rave scouting reports on his defense, it's hard to imagine JBJ would project as a better CF defender than Ells, other than almost certainly having a better throwing arm.

In any case, an outfield of JBJ, Ellsbury, and Victorino would be incredible on defense, regardless of who plays which spot.
   67. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: March 03, 2013 at 12:59 AM (#4379446)
Regardless of where these guys start the season I'm feeling a hell of a lot Better about the future of the Boston Red Sox than I did about a week ago. In fairness I'm in Florida and drunk so that may be part of it but it feels like its been so long that there was positive news related to this baseball team.
   68. tfbg9 Posted: March 03, 2013 at 01:19 AM (#4379462)
I see the chances of Bradley coming north with the Big Club as really really slim, barring a few injuries.

Agree its fun to have kids to anticipate the debut of...but Lester and Buchholz and Lackey and Dempster's years are what will make or break our season. That and the number of PA's we get from our DH and "1Bman" and Middlebrooks.



   69. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: March 03, 2013 at 08:26 AM (#4379654)
I agree that Bradley won't come north but I think he's playing himself into a situation where he's at the top of the list if someone gets hurt.
   70. villageidiom Posted: March 03, 2013 at 08:46 AM (#4379656)
Regardless of where these guys start the season I'm feeling a hell of a lot Better about the future of the Boston Red Sox than I did about a week ago.
Didn't Webster and de la Rosa come over in the same trade that is being used as evidence that Cherington doesn't know what he is doing?
   71. Dan Posted: March 03, 2013 at 10:38 AM (#4379676)
Who is bad mouthing the Punto Trade? The trades that make Cherington look like an idiot are the Melancon and Bailey trades. You could probably add giving away Youkilis for nothing as well.
   72. TomH Posted: March 03, 2013 at 01:42 PM (#4379738)
I went to the Sox game on Saturday the 23rd. I was telling my dad to watch Iglesias, who came in the game at short in the middle innings; how this guy was a fantastic defensive shortstop, but just could not hit.

So he throws away a ground ball, and then clubs one over the wall in left-center. Good thing Dad does not love me for my brilliant analysis.
   73. Dan Posted: March 03, 2013 at 02:47 PM (#4379773)
JBJ is getting into a lot of games. They've started giving him some innings in the corners too. I still don't expect to see him come north, but I think there is a definite possibility that he will.
   74. Darren Posted: March 03, 2013 at 03:31 PM (#4379796)
I still really enjoy Speier, but has he gotten a little verbose?
   75. Darren Posted: March 03, 2013 at 03:37 PM (#4379799)
Not sure if this means anything, but Bogaerts played 3B in WBC today.
   76. Dan Posted: March 03, 2013 at 03:49 PM (#4379809)
He was always scheduled to play 3B in the WBC. They played him at third a bit before he went too, to give him some reps there. I suspect he'll be back at SS when he comes back to ST.
   77. Darren Posted: March 03, 2013 at 04:29 PM (#4379837)
Who is bad mouthing the Punto Trade? The trades that make Cherington look like an idiot are the Melancon and Bailey trades. You could probably add giving away Youkilis for nothing as well.


Lots of people have badmouthed that deal. The argument is that they gave up talent that, even if overpriced, could not be replaced in the market.
   78. Dan Posted: March 03, 2013 at 04:38 PM (#4379842)
Dale Sams is the only person around here that I can recall hating on that trade.
   79. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: March 04, 2013 at 12:58 AM (#4379968)
JBJ is getting into a lot of games. They've started giving him some innings in the corners too. I still don't expect to see him come north, but I think there is a definite possibility that he will.


He's getting into a lot of games because Victorino is playing for Team USA in the WBC. He'll start the year in AAA. No reason to start his arb clock running until next year. If he performs well, it makes it that much easier to let Ellsbury walk. Maybe, maybe, he gets called up mid-season to replace Ellsbury if he's traded at or near the deadline.
   80. Dan Posted: March 04, 2013 at 02:27 AM (#4379987)
I don't really see JBJ as a reason to let Ellsbury walk. There's room in the OF for both of them, if Ellsbury is worth keeping. If he puts up a season even 75% as good as 2011 was, I'd pay up to keep him, with the intention of moving him to LF when JBJ is ready. This team currently has no major longterm commitments, so they really shouldn't act like they can't afford to keep Ellsbury. The "no contracts past 3 years" plan can't last forever...
   81. villageidiom Posted: March 04, 2013 at 07:32 AM (#4380015)
What if "75% as good as 2011" is the same as 2011 rate stats but misses a month and a half with an injury? Is that who they want to go past 3 years with?
   82. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: March 04, 2013 at 07:55 AM (#4380018)
I'll admit I hated the trade and I still don't like it. Webster and DLR are making me think I might change my tune on that one though.
   83. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: March 04, 2013 at 08:40 AM (#4380026)
What if "75% as good as 2011" is the same as 2011 rate stats but misses a month and a half with an injury? Is that who they want to go past 3 years with?
Certainly the merits of re-signing Ellsbury depends on his performance, his salary demands, the competition, and the medical staff's evaluation of his likely future health. The point that Dan was responding to had to do with whether Bradley's possible emergence as an MLB contributor would be a major factor in the decision, and I agree with Dan that it shouldn't be. I can dream on an Ellsbury-Bradley pairing in the outfield.
   84. villageidiom Posted: March 04, 2013 at 10:16 AM (#4380062)
The point that Dan was responding to had to do with whether Bradley's possible emergence as an MLB contributor would be a major factor in the decision, and I agree with Dan that it shouldn't be. I can dream on an Ellsbury-Bradley pairing in the outfield.
I agree as well with that part: Bradley doesn't have to be part of the calculus. But I was inferring he thought if they need to go beyond 3 years to keep Ellsbury, they should. That's all I was contesting. If Ellsbury can't stay healthy this year, they shouldn't go beyond 3 years with him.

Now, if he can't stay healthy this year, maybe nobody would go three years, in which case my point is moot: they would have the potential to land him, and at no more than 3 years. If he's healthy and performs 3/4 of the way between career norms and 2011, they'd probably have to go beyond 3 years to keep him.
   85. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: March 04, 2013 at 10:30 AM (#4380072)
But I was inferring he thought if they need to go beyond 3 years to keep Ellsbury, they should. That's all I was contesting. If Ellsbury can't stay healthy this year, they shouldn't go beyond 3 years with him.
I don't disagree in general, but nitpick I must. You can't expect any ballplayer to go a full season without taking some small injury. One 15-day DL trip shouldn't disqualify Ellsbury, so long as it's nothing that's expected to linger. At the same time, if the medical staff evaluates that Ellsbury is too much of an injury risk, even after a full 150-160 games in 2013, that has to be a major, if not determinative consideration.

Also, I just want Ellsbury to be part of this club. I really like the kid. I'm not entirely rational on Ellsbury and Pedroia.
   86. villageidiom Posted: March 04, 2013 at 10:49 AM (#4380084)
I don't disagree in general, but nitpick I must. You can't expect any ballplayer to go a full season without taking some small injury. One 15-day DL trip shouldn't disqualify Ellsbury, so long as it's nothing that's expected to linger.
If you must nitpick, then go back to the post I made saying if he missed a month and a half (or, essentially, 25% of the season). Little injuries here and there are part of being a ballplayer, and I agree that it's not really part of the picture.

I think we agree in general, but are attaching qualifiers to each other's qualifiers, which isn't really what I plan to continue with. It's a lot more fun to consider that while we're dreaming about Bradley, Rubby, Webster, and Bogaerts, we have barely talked about Barnes. I think the CFBPS just did a double-take.
   87. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: March 04, 2013 at 10:54 AM (#4380088)
Ooh, Barnes had a good outing? I missed it.
   88. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: March 04, 2013 at 10:57 AM (#4380091)
Also, I want to write up a post about the likely use of the shift defense by the Sox this year. Brian Butterfield was the architect of the Jays shift, and he's going to be running something similar this year. (See this article by Jon Paul Morosi). In order to write something up, though, I really want full season data on the use of the shift. I couldn't find anything in a quick google. Have there been recent studies done about the recent, massive expansion of the shift defense and its effects?
   89. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: March 04, 2013 at 02:10 PM (#4380253)
Bryce Brentz was running drills with the minor leaguers this morning. Didn't seem to have any issues moving of any kind of limp.
   90. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: March 04, 2013 at 05:37 PM (#4380495)
When did Barnes pitch? I can't find any record of it....
   91. villageidiom Posted: March 04, 2013 at 09:06 PM (#4380588)
I didn't say he pitched. I just said we've barely talked about him. Second half of last year he was the only regular bright spot for Red Sox fans, and all our spring training giddiness about other prospects hasn't included much about him.
   92. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: March 05, 2013 at 01:15 PM (#4381117)
Britton, you idiot. How did he not get a DUI?
   93. Nasty Nate Posted: March 05, 2013 at 01:26 PM (#4381128)
How did he not get a DUI?


The report I read said that he did.
   94. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: March 05, 2013 at 01:37 PM (#4381149)
It's only in the headline of Craig C.'s post. I obviously didn't need to comprehend the headline.

EDIT: Again, what an idiot.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Vegas Watch
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 1.1647 seconds
60 querie(s) executed