User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.3612 seconds
42 querie(s) executed

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. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: February 10, 2012 at 09:52 AM (#4057846)It's nice to see guys with some power potential in the Red Sox system, but I wish there was more even remotely interesting pitching.
1) Middlebrooks (ok...)
2) Brentz (huh?)
3) Ranaudo (ok...)
4) Doubront (well, maybe...)
5) Iglesias (wait, what?)
6) Anderson (srsly?)
7) Britton (ok, you're just screwing with me now)
8) Pimentel (really, this isn't a year-old list?)
9) Tejeda (come on, this list is a year old)
10) Vitek (maybe it's a programming error of some sort?)
The player comments were clearly composed after the 2011 season, which is just odd. I mean, I'm not a scout nor have I scouted any of these players, and I guess maybe Mayo could be right and the actual 2011 seasons of most all these players should be massively discounted, and the breakout prospects of 2011 (Bogaerts, Lavarnway, Jacobs) should be treated as flukes. But that's a frickin' weird list.
EDIT: No, the player comments for Britton, Pimentel, Tejeda, and Vitek are clearly vintage 2010. Weirdly the comments on WMB, Brentz, Ranaudo, and Doubront clearly reference 2011. More weirdly, the Iglesias comment was composed after his disastrous 2011 as well. What is that list?
I think there are two issues. One is I think Lavarnway's upside is somewhat limited and two there are still questions about whether he can stay behind the plate. The guys who Callis has in front of him all have a chance to become stars. It is probably unlikely, but it is possible. Lavarnway could very realistically wind up as a Kelly Shoppach type which is good but nothing special. I think he's more likely to succeed than many of the players ahead of him but he's less likely to become a perennial all star also.
That's last year's list; look at the URL. If you change the "2011" to "2012" you will go to this year's list.
http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/prospects/watch/y2012/#list=bos
While I generally agree with this, it also seems like we said this exact same thing last year.
I'm pretty pessimistic overall because I dont really see a sure fire major leaguer in the system at all. The Kalish injury hurts (yes I realize he's not a prospect). I used to be optimistic on Ranaudo.
Basically, it seems like a bunch of these guys could turn into MLB regulars, or none of em could. I wouldnt be betting on any of em, and I certainly dont see any stars. Admittedly I dont follow other organizations farm systems too closely, but if the upside for a farm system is that you have a couple of major league regulars, it sure seems like 18th is being generous.
32 Xander Bogaerts
46 Brandon Jacobs
55 Will Middlebrooks
98 Ryan Lavarnway
Middlebrooks and Lavarnway are about where everyone else has them, but Bogaerts and especially Jacobs are much higher than elsewhere.
A few highlights from the chat:
51. Will Middlebrooks
58. Xander Bogaerts
72. Blake Swihart
Also includes this Yogi-esque gem on former Sox farmhand Casey Kelly:
EDIT: Seems like talking about Carpenter at the ST minor league thread is perfectly reasonable, main board thread or no.
I assume that he has options.
30. Xander Bogaerts
74. Matt Barnes
78. Will Middlebrooks
89. Brandon Jacobs
97. Ryan Lavarnway
114. Garin Cecchini
Interesting that Jacobs is ranked above Lavarnway and Cecchini here, whereas he was below them on Sickels' team-specific list.
Meanwhile, if you pic a guy at AA who's playing well, and he doesn't work out, you have a harder time explaining.
Doesn't sound that good.
Kind of sounds like a right-handed David Murphy to me, with more walks and thus a better OBP. Not a bad player, can be quite useful as a 4th OF and a fill-in for a few months, especially on a team with corner OFs who miss quite a bit of time or who struggle against LHP (looking at you, Crawford).
A right-handed David Murphy is also known as a Matt Murton. Being able to be the strong side rather than the weak side of a platoon can be the difference between a career in MLB and one in NPB. Murton couldn't throw either and was limited entirely to LF, while Hassan apparently has the arm to play right. If you're going to carve out a career as a right-handed OF backup, though, you really should be able to play center.
Or start hitting more - Hassan's projection is good enough that just one step forward could make him a solid MLB contributor.
Five-Star Prospects
1. Xander Bogaerts, SS
Four-Star Prospects
2. Brandon Jacobs, OF
3. Will Middlebrooks, 3B
4. Ryan Lavarnway, C/DH
Three-Star Prospects
5. Blake Swihart, C
6. Bryce Brentz, OF
7. Matt Barnes, RHP
8. Garin Cecchini, 3B
9. Anthony Ranaudo, RHP
10. Jose Iglesias, SS
11. Sean Coyle, 2B
As you can see from the (not paywalled) comment on Bogaerts, Goldstein rates Bogaerts' power as plus-plus, which is the first I've seen of that particular description of our top prospect. Is this a common evaluation of Bogaerts, or a more idiosyncratic Goldstein call? Either way, it's the sort of thing you love to see. He does say that Bogaerts' swing verges on being an uppercut and he's going to struggle with Ks and BA moving up the ladder. So, he's a Red Sox hitting prospect.
Goldstein also rates the Red Sox system 12th, saying:Law, ranking the Sox 18th, said that the system was thin at the upper levels but had a lot of talent at the lower levels. With these system-wide rankings, I think middle-of-the-pack is middle-of-the-pack, and we should take Law and Goldstein to be in general agreement about the state of the system. Law's relative pessimism about the upper levels of the system is more in line with my feelings, Alex Hassan notwithstanding. (And I tend to agree with Law's relative optimism about the lower levels.)
"The Zeppo"
BA described Bogaerts as having "jaw-dropping, precocious power." I don't know if that's better or worse than "plus-plus" but it sounds pretty good.
Also, how do you pronounce his last name?
Looks like the quintessential live A-ball arm to me.
The fans, for some reason, want an arm and a leg for Theo. An MLB-ready reliever AND a live arm ready for AA? I don't see how any executive is worth more than that. There was only a year left on his contract. It's not like he had 10 years left and left. He helped build a good organization, and trained his replacement, after all. The return seems reasonable to me.
It's kind of like the Scutaro deal, its not so much that the value is far above what they got but it seems like they got the least they could have reasonably gotten.
Well, if you're armchair GM, what's more than they could have reasonably gotten? I think it's easy as a fan to look at trades in isolation and say "good" or "bad." If Mike Aviles + Nick Punto can be reasonably expected (and I emphasize reasonably) to replace the production of Scutaro + Lowrie, then how could they have gotten more? Punto is cheap and so is Aviles, and they were both free agents.
I guess what it boils down to for me is this: what kind of trade for Scutaro or return for Theo would have made sense? I can imagine all kinds of fanboyish things, but when it comes down to it, I think we're starting to see that many teams are pretty correctly valuing their own talent and the talent of other teams. It probably means that trades end up being pretty fair for both sides and ultimately--because they're so fair--pretty pointless.
Anyway, I've noticed that I've become something of a Sox apologist around here. It must be an overreaction to all of the pants pissing, or something. In any case, I really want to be educated about this. Why was the return so bad on both of those deals, and what could we have expected back?
I'd forgotten about the dismissal of Shipley. The Red Sox int'l system has been unproductive for nearly a decade. Hopefully Romero will get a few solid hits right from the start. (Speier mentions that the Sox lost out on Carlos Martinez - BA #27 this offseason - because of Shipley's inflexibility on false documentation.)
More than Carpenter/Kurcz, less than Garza? :-)
Seriously what bothers is the how more than the what. What I always liked about Theo is that there seemed to be a process to everything. In this case (and Scutaro) is that the process isn't obvious to me. The foresight and planning that to me we're lynchpins of the Theo Epstein era are not evident in the way the Theo negotiation played out or the handling of Scutaro.
Maybe I'm missing something though.
Or maybe Cherington isn't leaking his process to select reporters.
Dont get me wrong, I think much of what the Sox have done this winter has reflected a plan, in some cases it's a plan I don't agree with, but in those two cases it seemed like the Sox were acting by the seat of their pants.
Aviles is basically the player Scutaro was before he established himself as an every day SS in Toronto at the age of 33. A right-handed utility guy who's had some stretches as a regular at different infield positions but is viewed as a stretch defensively at SS and not a good enough bat to be an everyday 2B/3B. That's exactly the player Scutaro was before his SS defense in Toronto was off the charts and he took over the position full-time in 2009. So the Red Sox have a similar player who is both younger and cheaper, meanwhile the older version of the player had recent injury issues that especially left him with a weak throwing arm for a shortstop. So the team dumped the expensive guy on the only team that was willing to pay the full contract. Seems pretty straightforward to me.
I'm not talking about people on this board, but I have a feeling that the Scutaro situation would have caused less fan backlash if they simply didn't pick up the option ... which would be stupid because it would have been worse for the team.
Why did they change their minds? It's a strange thing.
It's also hard for me to believe that 1/6 for Scutaro is anything other than a very good deal. Scutaro's an average MLB player, so he's underpaid by several million on a short-term deal. If the Sox had planned to shop Scutaro from the beginning of the offseason, rather than waiting until most rosters were set, they should have done quite a bit better than Mortensen.
It's not clear to me that they weren't shopping Scutaro from the beginning of the offseason - we know about as much of "the plan" as the FO wants to know or leaks out. There's just so much that goes on behind the scenes that we will never know about. Usually in order to have a decent bargaining position, you have to have a convincing case that you could just walk away from negotiations at any time and be fine. It's possible that they shopped Scutaro the whole off-season, and held out as long as they could for the best deal they could get. I'm not sure that was actually the case here, but it's consistent with a FO that was always interested in trading Scutaro but trying to maintain a strong bargaining position.
Agreed.
Or maybe the Sox just suffer from a weird case of Puntomania...
But why single out Scutaro's salary as the one causing the luxury tax hit?
Edit: Too bad we didn't wait until the Phillies were overrun by locusts.
Sure, but the cupboard's pretty bare there; not sure they'd have gotten anything much better than they did.
We could have gotten Halladay!
... unless they traded Beckett or someone else. But I see what you mean.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main