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. RB in NYC (Now Semi-Retired from BBTF) Posted: December 06, 2006 at 01:11 AM (#2252148)
Good for Lester.

Also, Sox have apparently signed Drew. Depending on who you believe, this either means Manny is definitely out of town, or definitely staying, or possibly something in between.
   2. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: December 06, 2006 at 01:35 AM (#2252166)
The Jon Lester thing is the best off-season news I've herad yet. The fact that he'll most likley fully healthy and pitching full time probably by 2008 makes me happy happy happy.

5 Years for Veronica Mars makes me cringe, but he's better than GMJ and Pierre... combined.

(Yes, that's my new nickname for him, because he was unfairly being compared to Nancy Drew, when Veronica Mars is the much better and snarkier detective)

And Ironchef's "Unreasonable Demands for a Manny trade", on the record (all with 1/4 of Manny's salary eaten)

Angels: Weaver, Shields, and O-Cab (would settle for Weaver straight up though)
Dodgers: Billingsley, Broxton, one of Laroche/Loney (would settle for first 2 though)
Mariners: Soriano, Putz, Jeff Clement
Mets: Heilman, Milledge, and Pedro
Padres: Peavy and Gonzalez, although I'd settle for Peavy straight up.

Position players are nice, but I'd want one really really good young arm for Manny. That's the baseline for any Manny deal pour moi.
   3. JB H Posted: December 06, 2006 at 02:09 AM (#2252203)
Everyone's expectations for a Manny trade are way overboard. If the Sox can only sign Lugo if they dump Manny then they should be willing to put Manny on waivers because 4 years of Lugo > 2 of Manny. Getting Putz and Adam Jones or something on top of that would have the Sox making out like bandits.

If the Sox are signing Lugo either way then they're right to ask for the moon for Manny because there's nobody left they can buy this offseason. But that means they're unlikely to get a trading partner.
   4. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: December 06, 2006 at 02:10 AM (#2252208)
then they should be willing to put Manny on waivers because 4 years of Lugo > 2 of Manny

No. Just no. No. No. No. No. No. No.
   5. JB H Posted: December 06, 2006 at 02:12 AM (#2252211)
oh
   6. philly Posted: December 06, 2006 at 02:21 AM (#2252220)
Epstein and Sox management have decided, much like their 2003 bullpen philosophy, to piece together a pen of young, home-grown hard throwers mixed in with reclamation projects — the kind of creative thinking that allows the Sox to buy low and sell high in order to avoid the high-priced disappointing Rudy Seanez-type relievers over the last several years. ... [But there is] an admission that their closer might not be in place until Opening Day in Kansas City.

Either the writer screwed up some verb tenses in there or the Sox are wackily delusional.
   7. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 06, 2006 at 02:44 AM (#2252246)
In 2005, by a large margin the best year of Lugo's career, he was 20 runs worse than Manny on offense, adjusted for position. Usually it's more in the 35-45 run range. I like Manny better, and by a lot.
   8. JB H Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:14 AM (#2252284)
Come on, that's a pretty intellectually dishonest comparison. For the next two seasons, I'll bet you that PECOTA will say Lugo is within 3 wins a year offensively of Manny and UZR probably says Lugo is two wins a year better defensively

I don't think Lugo is as good as Manny, but the gap isn't wide enough that I wouldn't rather have four seasons of his than two of Manny's.
   9. Darren Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:23 AM (#2252296)
MCOA, do you think they will keep or trade Manny? Come on, I want you to commit one way or another! :)

On Manny v. Lugo, don't we also have to include the Red Sox specific replacement level? I think that tilts it toward Lugo.

This deadline is stupid. I don't see what it accomplishes. Is anyone going to blink when they know they can just make an offer next week? Why not say "we've got a trade we like and we're making it tomorrow if we don't get blown away!" Then, you say it fell apart or some other BS. AT least that has a chance of working. Whatever the case, make the damn trade or don't--I'm sick of hearing about it, and I started out enjoying hearing about it.

Did I see something that said there was a Dodger offer of Broxtoon and Laroche for Manny that the Sox turned down? That seems like a good haul, I'm a bit surprised. My guess is that Loney/Laroche/Brox/whoever are pretty much available; and the big sticking points are Kemp and Billingsly. Just a guess, though.
   10. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:26 AM (#2252299)
I don't think Lugo is as good as Manny, but the gap isn't wide enough that I wouldn't rather have four seasons of his than two of Manny's.
Won't PECOTA say that Lugo will suck in three years? If you're going to use a heavily regressed projection to make the argument in the first half of your argument, why are you ignoring heavy regression in the second? The pure-stat analysis usually argues that extra years are bad, not good.

I'm really struggling with Manny - Lugo = 1 win. I guess I'm having trouble with averaging out one very good year against a bunch of mediocre ones, becuase '05 felt like a fluke at the time, and looks like one after the fact. Maybe it should get equal weight, but it seems to be doing a lot of heavy lifting.
   11. Repoz Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:28 AM (#2252302)
Lugo should sign with the Sox VERY soon and there doesn't seem to be a Manny deal.

From a Primate at the meetings...Dan Julien..
   12. Шĥy Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:30 AM (#2252303)
This deadline is stupid. I don't see what it accomplishes.

It means that Theo is going to stop proposing crazy three way and four way trades where he rips every team off. He's supposedly only going to let other teams come to him with offers. This way he'll have time to do other things and the entire's team roster won't be based on one of his Manny trade fantasies coming true.
   13. Darren Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:32 AM (#2252305)
Epstein and Sox management have decided, much like their 2003 bullpen philosophy, to piece together a pen of young, home-grown hard throwers mixed in with reclamation projects — the kind of creative thinking that allows the Sox to buy low and sell high in order to avoid the high-priced disappointing Rudy Seanez-type relievers over the last several years. ... [But there is] an admission that their closer might not be in place until Opening Day in Kansas City.

Let's see, how many things in here are just plain wrong? Did 2003's pen include young, homegrown players? No, in fact there was almost no one in that pen who was homegrown. Was Rudy Seanez high priced? Also no--he was on a cheap, short deal. And I don't know who's admitting that they may not have a closer until opening day, but Theo has been quoted as saying he plans to have one by the end of the month.

I'd really like Dotel but I don't see a good fit with Turnbow.
   14. PJ Martinez Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:33 AM (#2252308)
Many reports that Lugo will be on board soon for 4/36. Also many reports that Manny talks are "dead"-- but I am officially agnostic on the whole Manny thing. I have no clue what is going to happen.
   15. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:36 AM (#2252310)
On Manny v. Lugo, don't we also have to include the Red Sox specific replacement level? I think that tilts it toward Lugo.
Not until after the offseason, I don't think. So long as there are non-Lugo FA/trade options, they impact replacement level. It's another black box.

I don't know what the Sox will do at Cl/SS, and I don't know how much money the Sox actually have to spend. I think we're going to have to figure out a lot of the evaluation of this offseason after the fact - right now, we don't know whether any of these moves or non-moves are constraining the Sox in the next few months or not. I want good players at Cl/SS, and I want the Sox to do it without dropping a lot of present-day talent. It's possible that what I want isn't doable, and we'll look back on the offseason at this point and say the Sox screwed themselves either by signing Drew or holding out for so much for Manny, but I'm not ready to assume that's the case just yet.
   16. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:42 AM (#2252318)
I am officially agnostic on the whole Manny thing.
I, the other hand, am a Gnostic.
   17. Darren Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:44 AM (#2252321)
How about on the Manny/Drew comparison? I think that when comparing those two on the Red Sox, replacement level has to come into play too. Hinske seems like the appropriate choice. And though he's not great, he's better than the replacement level assumed in WARP1. So those comparisons that show the two pretty equal might tilt toward Drew, since he loses so much value because he's out of the lineup and replaced by a replacement level guy.
   18. JB H Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:55 AM (#2252332)
Won't PECOTA say that Lugo will suck in three years? If you're going to use a heavily regressed projection to make the argument in the first half of your argument, why are you ignoring heavy regression in the second? The pure-stat analysis usually argues that extra years are bad, not good.
Lugo's not going to be worth the money in the 3rd and 4th years of his contract, but I'm comparing Lugo for 4/36 vs Manny for 2/38, so those extra years still help Lugo's case.


I'm really struggling with Manny - Lugo = 1 win. I guess I'm having trouble with averaging out one very good year against a bunch of mediocre ones, becuase '05 felt like a fluke at the time, and looks like one after the fact. Maybe it should get equal weight, but it seems to be doing a lot of heavy lifting.

As far as I know, everyone who's looked at stuff like this says to weight everything equally. Calling the rest of Lugo's career mediocre is selling him short I think. He's always been a pretty good offensive shortstop and a good defensive one.
   19. OlePerfesser Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:56 AM (#2252334)
This deadline is stupid. I don't see what it accomplishes.

To give the FO the benefit of the doubt, maybe they're trying to bring the situation to a head because they're very, very tired of Manny & his agent monopolizing too much of their time with ultimata wrapped in demands inside an enigma.

I love Manny, but I can see where the FO would just want to throw their hands up after a while and get rid of the guy, even if it costs them a couple wins relative to the alternatives. I know it's natural for agents and players to want it all, but if Manny's really so unhappy in Boston, he needs to reduce the transaction costs associated with his departure by waiving the no-trade and/or pre-approving some destinations.
   20. JB H Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:58 AM (#2252340)

Many reports that Lugo will be on board soon for 4/36. Also many reports that Manny talks are "dead"-- but I am officially agnostic on the whole Manny thing. I have no clue what is going to happen.


Keeping Manny and getting Lugo (and Drew, and Matsuzaka) seems like the best reasonable outcome to the offseason for me. holla.
   21. Шĥy Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:00 AM (#2252346)
According to ESPN News, It's official. Lugo for 4/36.
   22. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:02 AM (#2252352)
Frak
   23. Pleasant Nate (Upgraded from 'Nate') Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:02 AM (#2252353)
Fantastic offseason. They keep Manny, add the best pitcher on the market, and get two other quality players in Lugo and Drew who both upgrade the team. All they need is to sign Gagne for a one year deal and this is the best any Sox fan could have hoped for.
   24. JB H Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:02 AM (#2252354)
Man what a good day for Shaughnessy. JD Drew and a guy who is apparently a real ####### in real life.
   25. Darren Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:03 AM (#2252355)
I love Manny, but I can see where the FO would just want to throw their hands up after a while and get rid of the guy, even if it costs them a couple wins relative to the alternatives. I know it's natural for agents and players to want it all, but if Manny's really so unhappy in Boston, he needs to reduce the transaction costs associated with his departure by waiving the no-trade and/or pre-approving some destinations.

To be fair, Manny may have done this already. Who the hell knows anything anymore?

According to ESPN News, It's official. Lugo for 4/36.

I'm glad they didn't overpay him like that Renteria! Seriously, this looks a like a good deal, but will cost us that choice #20 pick. The Sox have been pretty unlucky with that whole thing over the years.
   26. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:04 AM (#2252356)
Awright. That bumps payroll to ~$125M, expect that to go to $135M with Matsuzaka. This suggests that the Sox will either trade Manny or run their payroll right up the salary cap, posting fee be damned.
   27. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:05 AM (#2252357)
Man what a good day for Shaughnessy. JD Drew and a guy who is apparently a real ####### in real life.


I hope Veronica Mars hits .390/.500 like he's supposed to, but plays 135 games to shut Dan's crackerass up.
   28. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:05 AM (#2252358)
(Yes, that's my new nickname for him, because he was unfairly being compared to Nancy Drew, when Veronica Mars is the much better and snarkier detective)


You're gonna have to work pretty hard on making that stick - a hard-to-follow connection like that based on a little-watched show on a crap-o network may be doomed to failure, if success = adoption by others.
   29. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:06 AM (#2252360)
I'm glad they didn't overpay him like that Renteria! Seriously, this looks a like a good deal, but will cost us that choice #20 pick.

Seriously... Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice... well you can't fool me twice.

FRAK
   30. Darren Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:08 AM (#2252362)
Boy howdy, a five year deal really is very surprising, considering that that seemed to be a non-starter for other negotiations. They must believe the physical will tell them more about his health than his playing history. I guess. Or something.
   31. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:09 AM (#2252364)
You're gonna have to work pretty hard on making that stick - a hard-to-follow connection like that based on a little-watched show on a crap-o network may be doomed to failure, if success = adoption by others.

You know what that show and JD Drew have in common though?

Fanboys. Legions of fanboys. And Haters. Legions of haters.
   32. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:12 AM (#2252367)
Lugo's pretty much Renteria. I was convinced at the time of the Renteria signing that he'd be good, and JBH et al have convinced me once again that Lugo will be good.
   33. Darren Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:12 AM (#2252369)
Man, Lugo's good for ~4-5 WARP. In this market, for $9 mil., that's a steal.


And Veronica Mars is no kind of nickname. It's Brocktoon baby!
   34. karlmagnus Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:13 AM (#2252370)
Lugo had better not cost us Manny; IMHO he's not worth the #20 pick, let alone the $36mm. Move Petunia to SS make Cora 2B and find a good fielder off the scrapheap. With Manny, Drew and Ortiz they don't need the rest to score much, anyway.
   35. karlmagnus Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:14 AM (#2252371)
Also Gonzalez at 3/15 and no draft pick loss HAS to be better value.
   36. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:15 AM (#2252373)
Also Gonzalez at 3/15 and no draft pick loss HAS to be better value]

At least we got a comp pick for A-Gon.

And Veronica Mars is no kind of nickname. It's Brocktoon baby!

Veronica Mars is an awesome nickname. So much good implications and likeness.
   37. karlmagnus Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:16 AM (#2252374)
92vs 78 OPS+ and a downgrade in the field just ISN'T worth $21mm and a draft pick.
   38. tfbg9 Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:22 AM (#2252384)
Lugo at Fenway, 127 PA's: .330 .384 .496 .880, so there's that.
   39. PJ Martinez Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:33 AM (#2252393)
"92vs 78 OPS+ and a downgrade in the field just ISN'T worth $21mm and a draft pick."

92 and 78 are career numbers, though. Lugo hasn't been below 94 since 2002. Gonzalez, meanwhile, was below 78 just last year (at 77).
   40. PJ Martinez Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:36 AM (#2252394)
Given that some of the rumored Manny deals involved SS's (Greene, Lopez, Peralta), this Lugo signing-- whatever. I have no idea.
   41. PJ Martinez Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:37 AM (#2252395)
"Also Gonzalez at 3/15 and no draft pick loss HAS to be better value."

Even if it's a better value, that doesn't mean it makes the team better. If the team has money to spend, then putting together the _best_ roster, as opposed to the most efficient roster, should be the goal.
   42. Darren Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:38 AM (#2252396)
92 and 78 are career numbers, though. Lugo hasn't been below 94 since 2002. Gonzalez, meanwhile, was below 78 just last year (at 77).

karl always uses career numbers for players he doesn't like. It's part of his charm.

We should also consider that Lugo's numbers are more OBP-heavy, and he's been healthier than AGonz.
   43. Шĥy Posted: December 06, 2006 at 04:48 AM (#2252403)
Providence Journal says that there is a vesting 5th year option for Lugo.
   44. villageidiom Posted: December 06, 2006 at 05:22 AM (#2252424)
Fantastic offseason. They keep Manny, <u>add the best pitcher on the market</u>, and get two other quality players in Lugo and Drew who both upgrade the team.

Don't count chickens yet, Nate. But I know what you mean.

On a separate note, I like to see everyone (mainstream) talking about Drew's fragility and how the Sox fans won't like it... without considering that he's replacing Trot Nixon.
   45. Joel W Posted: December 06, 2006 at 05:31 AM (#2252428)
On the draft pick thing:

The Red Sox, who seem willing to draft 'signability' picks later in the draft. I wonder if they've decided to care less about having draft-picks and just decided to go after those guys later.
   46. Xander Posted: December 06, 2006 at 06:03 AM (#2252459)
Eh, signability picks rarely match the talent that you can get with the 20th pick. They're a nice way to mitigate the loss of a pick, but they don't completely fill the void. The Sox do have a nice DFE in Brandon Belt, so maybe he can blow up at San Jacinto and we can get equal value there. That is, of coure, if we don't allow the MLB front office to do our scouting for us and dictate his worth.
   47. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: December 06, 2006 at 06:47 AM (#2252523)
Lugo at Fenway, 127 PA's: .330 .384 .496 .880, so there's that.

The reason for this is because he was teeing off against OUR KRAPPY PITCHERS, which will not happen now.
   48. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 06, 2006 at 02:59 PM (#2252675)
So, it seems like the offseason is practically over. Certainly, it's possible that the Sox have a chunk of payroll to dump before March, and things will get interesting again, but I think it's more likely that it's just about over. I doubt the Sox have any more money to spend.

C Varitek
1B Youkilis
2B Pedroia
SS Lugo
3B Lowell
LF Manny
CF Crisp
RF Drew
DH Papi

C Kotteras?
MI Cora
IF/OF Hinske
OF Pena
UT ??? (maybe 12th reliever)

SP Schilling
SP Matsuzaka
SP Beckett
SP Papelbon
SP Wakefield

RP ???
RP Timlin
RP Delcarmen
RP Okajima
RP Hansen
RP Tavarez
RP Gabbard? Breslow? Snyder? Hansack? 14th positional player?

They may need a backup catcher or a utility man, but really all that's left is the front of the bullpen. They have a pretty good setup corps with Delcarmen, Timlin and Okajima, but they need one more arm, preferably one who stands out above those guys. That's gonna be a very tough get, unless Jon Lester's miracle offseason continues. (If it does, then he's the perfect closer.) My guess is that the Sox will go into the season with a Bullpen-by-Committee (yay!) and hope that one of the young guys has a breakthrough. Manny D, Hansen, and Cox have the upside, in theory, but it could be ugly. Don't know what else the Sox can really do, though.

I frickin' love that bench. Best in baseball if Kotteras doesn't suck?
   49. OlePerfesser Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:13 PM (#2252685)
Maybe they'll sign Monsieur Gagne. Think of the international marketing opportunities in Quebec!
   50. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:14 PM (#2252689)
I'm pretty convinced, looking that over, that the Sox will go with 12 relievers. The Sox have enough multi-positional players that really the only point of a 14th positional player would be for pinch-running. Crisp, Pena, and Drew can all play CF, while Lugo, Pedroia, and Cora can all play SS. Lowell, Youks and Hinske can play 3rd. A utility man would be redundant.
   51. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:21 PM (#2252697)
Maybe they'll sign Monsieur Gagne. Think of the international marketing opportunities in Quebec!
I realize you're just funnin', but I should make clear that my operating assumption is that the Red Sox are out of money, pending hte Matsuzaka signing.
   52. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:30 PM (#2252709)
unless Jon Lester's miracle offseason continues. (If it does, then he's the perfect closer.)

You mean PAPELBON goes back to the pen as the perfect closer, and then Jon Lester comes in in July/August to give us innings at league average.
   53. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:33 PM (#2252712)
I'm pretty convinced, looking that over, that the Sox will go with 12 relievers. The Sox have enough multi-positional players that really the only point of a 14th positional player would be for pinch-running.

Cora is a good baserunner. And Crisp would be a great pinch-runner on the days he's not starting (Wily mo really should be starting)
   54. AROM Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:35 PM (#2252715)
I realize you're just funnin', but I should make clear that my operating assumption is that the Red Sox are out of money, pending hte Matsuzaka signing.

John Henry is far from being out of money. I don't think he'll let a little thing like luxury tax stop him from getting a closer either. You just don't put a team like this together and forget about the 9th inning. What's the big deal about paying an extra million or two in luxury tax for a team willing to pay 51 million just for the rights to negotiate with a pitcher?
   55. PJ Martinez Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:42 PM (#2252723)
That's exactly what I like about Hinske and Cora: not great players, but versatile, freeing you up to stack the bullpen, which will be necessary so Tito can throw us much as possible out at the mound to see what sticks.

Lester's intriguing as a closer. He seemed best in his first couple of innings, IIRC. Did put a lot of guys on, though.

Not crazy about Wily Mo as a bench player. He seems to need a rhythm. But, as we've been saying for a while, there will likely be injuries aplenty in that OF, giving him many chances to start.
   56. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:48 PM (#2252730)
I don't think he'll let a little thing like luxury tax stop him from getting a closer either. You just don't put a team like this together and forget about the 9th inning. What's the big deal about paying an extra million or two in luxury tax for a team willing to pay 51 million just for the rights to negotiate with a pitcher?
Maybe, but what closer? Eric Gagne is not a Theo Epstein kind of acquisition (for good or ill), and he's the only closer out there I can see. All the other guys who might be available are actually relatively cheap - Linebrink's 07 contract is only $1.75M. I don't know what he'd cost to acquire, but I doubt the end result would affect hte Sox' bottom line by much.

If there's a good and expensive closer out there, then that changes my expectations a bit. I still tend to think that the Sox are about maxed out. (And I don't mean by that to make any suggestions about either John Henry's overall finances or the finances of the Red Sox as a business - I'm just talking about the baseball payroll.)
   57. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:51 PM (#2252735)

You mean PAPELBON goes back to the pen as the perfect closer, and then Jon Lester comes in in July/August to give us innings at league average.
And we replace Papelbon in the rotation with Kyle Snyder for three months? No thanks. And if the money were there, I'd rather spend the $10M on Gagne than on 96 ERA+ filler for that last spot.
   58. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:55 PM (#2252742)
Not crazy about Wily Mo as a bench player.

Exactly. Which is why you start Wily Mo, and keep Crisp on the bench. Crisp is much more useful as a bench player than Wily Mo is.

A trade for a closer would require an asset right now. And that would suck.

And we replace Papelbon in the rotation with Kyle Snyder for three months? No thanks. And if the money were there, I'd rather spend the $10M on Gagne than on 96 ERA+ filler for that last spot.

I would be OK for 10 million dollars for Gagne. All he would have to do is hold the fort for Lester's return. If he can stay healthy beyond that, it would be a bonus.
   59. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:58 PM (#2252748)
Oh frak I frakked up the italics
   60. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: December 06, 2006 at 03:59 PM (#2252749)
FRAK
   61. John DiFool2 Posted: December 06, 2006 at 06:25 PM (#2252952)
Cora is a good baserunner. And Crisp would be a great pinch-runner on the days he's not starting (Wily mo really should be starting)


A platoon is in order in CF methinks. WMP should easily get 300 AB, splitting between all 3 OF positions.
   62. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: December 06, 2006 at 06:45 PM (#2252987)
A platoon is in order in CF methinks. WMP should easily get 300 AB, splitting between all 3 OF positions.

That works for me... I'd like to see WMP get more "games started", and Crisp get more "off the bench" appearences.
   63. SoSH U at work Posted: December 06, 2006 at 07:02 PM (#2253008)
I'm pretty convinced, looking that over, that the Sox will go with 12 relievers.


I understand modern bullplen usage has changed, but I think a dozen relievers is excessive.
   64. Kevin Sweet Child Romine (aco) Posted: December 06, 2006 at 07:04 PM (#2253009)
Why does everyone think that Gagne is going to cost real money? He hasn't really pitched in the majors in two years and he's over 30. Granted, he was a much better pitcher than Matt Mantei ever was, but Mantei only had only missed one season- and was very, very good the season before that - when the Red Sox signed him for peanuts. I'm probably greatly underestimating the market for Gagne, but I don't see why any team would want to pay big bucks for a guy that could very well be toast.
   65. AROM Posted: December 06, 2006 at 07:13 PM (#2253017)
Why does everyone think that Gagne is going to cost real money?

Because teams have the money to burn. I would expect Gagne to get at least 5 million guaranteed, plus enough incentives to bring the total to around 10 if he pitches like GAME OVER.
   66. BoSox Rule Posted: December 06, 2006 at 07:47 PM (#2253054)
I have no problem with either J.D. Drew or Julio Lugo. J.D. Drew has the potential to be one of the better players in the league, as he showed in 2004. In 2005 he was well on his way to repeating until he was hit by a baseball, an injury he had no control over. Now, he used to be very injury prone, but I remember just last offseason people were saying this about Roy Halladay after just 275 innings in two years.

Now, Lugo is getting way too much crap. He's a very good player. He was one of the better players in the league in 2005. He had good plate discipline, a good stealng percentage, and excellent defense. In 2005, his VORP was 42.8. He was a notch below Young, Tejada, Jeter and Peralta. He was also the best fielder of those 5 in 2005.

Last year with Tampa Bay, he was also 5th in VORP last year, despite having just 322 PA's in the American League. Here are the top 4 in VORP in 2006, and Lugo's VORP if we project him to the PA's these players had.

Jeter - 80.5 VORP - 715 PA
Lugo with 715 PA: 69.5 VORP

Carlos Guillen - 66.3 VORP - 622 PA
Lugo with 622 PA - 60.5 VORP

Miguel Tejada - 65.9 VORP - 709 PA
Lugo with 709 PA - 68.0 VORP

Michael Young - 46.0 VORP - 748 PA
Julio Lugo with 748 PA - 72.7 VORP

And wasn't he hurt in LA?
   67. BoSox Rule Posted: December 06, 2006 at 07:48 PM (#2253055)
I submitted that without adding this in about Drew (is there an edit post option here?)

2004: 9.8 WARP
2005: A 9.5 pace
2006: 8.6
   68. DLew On Roids Posted: December 07, 2006 at 09:17 PM (#2254565)
JD Drew's new nickname is Velma.
   69. villageidiom Posted: December 07, 2006 at 10:47 PM (#2254704)
I understand modern bullplen usage has changed, but I think a dozen relievers is excessive.

OK, so he meant 12 pitchers, or seven relievers. Some thoughts on that:

1. In 2006 the average MLB bullpen threw 3.17 innings of relief per game. With a six-man pen that's around 85.6 innings per reliever. (Boston's pen was around average.)

2. In 2006 only eight MLB relievers managed to achieve that average. None were with Boston.

Even if they don't have seven in the pen, it's clear that they'll need more than six to get through the season. Someone will break down along the way. And while we can assume that Papelbon/Matsuzaka will be better than Clement/Lester in terms of IP/G, I don't think it's wise to plan for the bullpen workload with that assumption.
   70. PJ Martinez Posted: December 07, 2006 at 10:54 PM (#2254711)
I think seven relievers makes sense with that bench.

On an utterly unrelated subject, what lineups do people want, and what do they expect?

I would like to see Youk/Drew/Manny/Ortiz/Lowell/Varitek/Crisp/Lugo/Pedroia.
I expect to see Youk/Lugo/Ortiz/Manny/Drew/Varitek/Lowell/Crisp/Pedroia.
I fear Crisp/Lugo/Ortiz/Manny/Drew/Varitek/Lowell/Youkilis/Pedroia.

All of this is assuming Crisp starts ahead of Wily Mo, which seems likely.
   71. PJ Martinez Posted: December 07, 2006 at 11:00 PM (#2254721)
Speaking of the bench, though:

"The Sox are trying to see if there's a market for Eric Hinske. The Seattle Mariners are one team which has expressed some interest."

From ProJo via SoSH.

Not sure why they'd do that, since there seems to be room for him, and cutting costs here would seem a little silly given their other deals. I would guess they're trying to see if some team actually values him enough to give up a semi-decent minor league arm or something of that nature.
   72. Toby Posted: December 07, 2006 at 11:02 PM (#2254724)
Tito has already said Lugo will lead off, and Drew will bat fifth. I assume that puts Papi 3 and Manny 4 and I don't know about the rest.

In another thread I posted that I'd like to see Drew/Youk/Papi/Manny/Tek/Lowell/Lugo/Crisp/Pedroia, which is basically a left/right inversion of your "would like to see" list, PJ.
   73. Toby Posted: December 07, 2006 at 11:05 PM (#2254727)
You trade Hinske if Trot has told you he would be willing to come back for Hinske money or less and would bring a first baseman's mitt to camp.
   74. Darren Posted: December 07, 2006 at 11:11 PM (#2254733)
"The Sox are trying to see if there's a market for Eric Hinske. The Seattle Mariners are one team which has expressed some interest."

From ProJo via SoSH.

Not sure why they'd do that,


Well, the Mariners just traded Soriano for Horacio Ramirez, so maybe they think they can get some of that action. How about Hinske for Clement and Jones. Too bad they don't still have Choo, I would have loved to get him and the Mariners seemed to hate him.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
tshipman
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.7238 seconds
41 querie(s) executed