BBTF's Sox Therapy Discussion :: Three Outfielders

Reader Comments and Retorts

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. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: November 03, 2012 at 01:57 PM (#4291725)

I'm not a big believer in Hamilton but I will say two things;

1. If the Sox are going to gamble I'd rather gamble big on the potential impact superstar.

2. I think Hamilton fits the Sox better than Pagan/Victorino do. Hamilton should be expected to be a relatively similar player whether he is in center or left, Pagan or Victorino probably need to be center fielders to be impactful. Given the presence of Ellsbury and potentially Bradley in 2014 and beyond the guy who can carry value to a corner spot or to 1B/DH makes sense.

Despite the numbers I'm wary of 7 years for Hamilton and even 6 has me uneasy. I'd do 5 in a heartbeat though and I can be talked into 6 (all assuming 20-22 per year)

2. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: November 03, 2012 at 02:12 PM (#4291752)

At 20-22 per, I wouldn't do Hamilton for anything more than 4 years.

3. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 03, 2012 at 02:24 PM (#4291767)

The 4-year unweighted average really tilts things against Hamilton. I think that the Dumber-than-Marcel spreadsheet overrates Hamilton by not including 2009 at all (it's a 5-4-3 average with a regression factor), but I think that it gets closer to his relative value than the additive method.

+ 6 Bat + 5 Run + 19 Rep + 1 Pos - 0 Def = +31 RAR (Pagan)
+ 5 Bat + 6 Run + 20 Rep + 1 Pos + 3 Def = +35 RAR (Victorino)

compare to

+27 Bat + 3 Run + 19 Rep - 4 Pos + 1 Def = +47 RAR (Hamilton)

Hamilton's just a way, way better offensive player. Now, he's going to be looking for a lot of money. I'd take him at 5/100, but 7/150 or so is too steep for me. (Dumber-than-Marcels say 7/150 is fair value).

Pagan and Victorino, I'd be hoping to get something like 3/36. I may be running scared a bit of all-around players whose value comes skills less visible in their triple slash lines. (Dumber-than-Marcels say 3/45 or 4/60 is pretty fair value). My problem is that it's hard for me to see Pagan or Victorino overperforming those projections by much, and it's easy for me to imagine Hamilton going nuts for another 8-WAR season. The variance seems better distributed with Hamilton, even though obviously you'll be paying a premium.

4. jmurph Posted: November 03, 2012 at 02:30 PM (#4291772)

Pagan and Victorino rely more on defense for their value than on their bats.

I'm not really excited about bringing Ross back (well, depending on the $), but I'd much rather have him, or someone like him, than more of this. I have zero interest in finding out if Victorino's 2012 is the new normal for him.

I guess I'd prefer the money be spent on pitching and SS if this is what's available in the OF, and for actual quality bats for the outfield to be acquired through trade. But I'm probably a bit over-simplistic in my thinking on this.

5. jmurph Posted: November 03, 2012 at 02:30 PM (#4291775)

MCoA's final paragraph is the smart version of what I was trying to get at.

6. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 03, 2012 at 02:32 PM (#4291777)

Defense is not really the story with Pagan or Victorino. Both project as average center fielders. It's nice, but this isn't Michael Bourn or some other legitimate gold glove guy. The story is baserunning - they're both adding half a win or more on the bases, above an average runner.

7. RB in NYC (Now Semi-Retired from BBTF) Posted: November 03, 2012 at 02:32 PM (#4291778)

I can't tell if #3 is MCoA talking himself into being OK with signing any of the three, or talking himself out of being OK with signing any of the three.

(For the record, I think whoever signs Hamilton is going to get burned in a major, major way. I don't really have a meaningful opinion on Pagan or Victorino.)

8. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 03, 2012 at 02:35 PM (#4291781)

As I said in the other thread, I think if you do commit to Hamilton, you have to make him the left fielder. With 5-7 years of Hamilton's value to maximize, I think the key is to keep him in the lineup. With Hamilton's offensive variance to maximize, I think the key is to keep him from straining himself too much in the field. Just tell him don't run into the wall, terrify runners looking for a double, and come back to the dugout 100% ready to hit.

9. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 03, 2012 at 02:36 PM (#4291782)

I can't tell if #3 is MCoA talking himself into being OK with signing any of the three, or talking himself out of being OK with signing any of the three.

I'm ok with signing any of them at the right price. Obviously determining "the right price" is the hard part.

10. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 03, 2012 at 02:56 PM (#4291811)

The other thing that tilts me more toward Hamilton is thinking about 2014-2016. He could be part of the core of a division-winning Sox team those years, whereas it's hard to see Pagan/Victorino as more than complementary contributors in 2014, let alone 15-16. But of course they'll be a lot cheaper. And for a power hitter, Hamilton is very much a young-player-skills guy, with a high average and good baserunning.

I'd also be fine with signing none of them, so long as the Sox sign or trade for one more good outfielder other than Ross. I am glad that Pagan did not get QO'd - that would have most likely taken him off the table, and he's a good option at the right price if he doesn't cost a pick.

11. Darren

Posted: November 03, 2012 at 03:29 PM (#4291865)

MC, can you walk us through how DtM sees 7/150 making sense? I'm guessing it's starting at +4.7 wins and just subtracting off 1/2 a win a year. So in all about 24.5 wins for $150 mil? I guess that makes sense, accounting for inflation and everything.

The other thing that tilts me more toward Hamilton is thinking about 2014-2016. He could be part of the core of a division-winning Sox team those years, whereas it's hard to see Pagan/Victorino as more than complementary contributors in 2014, let alone 15-16.

My thinking is that they have a lot of slots to fill and therefore spending a reasonable amount on a good player will allow you to a) fill more holes and/or b) have some money left if a superstar is available in 2014. Both of Victorino and Pagan still project to be above average in 2014.

One other thing I didn't include was the draft pick that Hamilton will cost. I think this is a pretty negligible consideration, but others have seemed concerned about it.

12. Darren

Posted: November 03, 2012 at 03:43 PM (#4291891)

Two more things:

Just eyeballing it, I think by adding in 2009 to the mix, you'd get Pagan up to +32, Victorino staying at about +35, and Hamilton dropping to about +42. How much would player type and Hamilton's health concerns level this off?

On defense, I'm very surprised that Pagan and Hamilton are grading out as about equal. DRS does not like Pagan as much I'd though (though TZ does). What stat does DtM use?

13. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 03, 2012 at 03:48 PM (#4291898)

Dumber-than-Marcel method:

I take the component numbers for both Fangraphs WAR and BB-Ref WAR and do a 5-4-3-2 weighted regressed average of their last three seasons' performance. (So a 5/14 weight for 2012, 4/14 weight for 2011, 3/14 weight for 2010, and 2/14 weight for league average as a regression factor). Then I average together the two regressed weighted averages from the Fangraphs and BB-Ref numbers.

The pitching spreadsheet is different because it uses a 3/2/1/2 weighting, but it is otherwise equivalent.

I'm guessing it's starting at +4.7 wins and just subtracting off 1/2 a win a year. So in all about 24.5 wins for $150 mil? I guess that makes sense, accounting for inflation and everything.

Yup, that's exactly how it works.

14. Dan Posted: November 03, 2012 at 04:04 PM (#4291909)

I said this in the other thread, but I like Hamilton because I think he'd be great in RF in Fenway. I know MCoA thinks you put him in LF if you sign him to save his legs, but I don't see playing RF even in an expansive one as too taxing for Hamilton. In either case, it might depend on who else is in the picture for the OF. If it's going to be Hamilton, Ellsbury, and Kalish, then yeah, maybe you stick Kalish in RF and put Hamilton in LF to save his legs/body. But if they re-sign Ross or something, then you're probably better off with Hamilton playing RF rather than experiencing Ross's defense in the expansive RF at Fenway.

15. TVerik Posted: November 03, 2012 at 04:07 PM (#4291911)

The smart money (certainly around here) is that the Sox are likely to struggle in 2013. Given Hamilton's age, I suspect that he knows that if the salad days are to continue, they'll likely continue in the short-term only. Would a team in the Sox's position actually have to overpay him to come to town?

16. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 03, 2012 at 04:10 PM (#4291915)

Would a team in the Sox's position actually have to overpay him to come to town?

You really think that free agents will require a premium price to come to Boston after one season in the bottom half? That seems like fanboy wishcasting to me.

Obviously any individual player might like or dislike Boston for individual reasons, as a categorical, cross-population thing, no way.

17. Dan Posted: November 03, 2012 at 04:15 PM (#4291920)

Personally I think the Sox should sign Hamilton (unless someone else goes crazy and offers him like 7/$150M or something and blows up the market) and either trade for Morneau or sign Swisher to fill the hole at 1B. Maybe re-sign Ross to play LF if he can be had at a reasonable deal (2/14 or something like that?) and then semi-platoon him with Kalish:

CF Ellsbury
2B Pedroia
RF/LF Hamilton
DH Ortiz
1B Swisher or Morneau/Sands platoon
3B Middlebrooks
LF Ross or RF Kalish
C Salty/Lavarnway
SS <somebody>

18. TVerik Posted: November 03, 2012 at 04:16 PM (#4291922)

It certainly could be wishcasting on my part. On the other hand, Boston at this point has a roster bereft of major-league talent (maybe one of the least talented rosters in baseball today.) Two playoff teams came from their division. Their manager has never won a playoff game.

Yes, they have bags of uncommitted money and ownership can point to a track record of recent success. 2007 wasn't that long ago. But I think "one season in the bottom half" is misleading; it makes it sound like a talented team underperformed for awhile.

19. Dan Posted: November 03, 2012 at 04:19 PM (#4291924)

Boston at this point has a roster bereft of major-league talent

It's a bit of a stretch to paint a team with holes at 1-2 rotation spots, 1 corner OF spot, 1B, and SS as "bereft of major league talent".

20. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 03, 2012 at 04:19 PM (#4291925)

"Bereft of major-league talent" is another good sign you're wishcasting.

C Saltalamacchia/Lavarnway - perfectly normal major leaguers
1B Red Sox will acquire a - perfectly normal major leaguer, and even maybe a star
2B Dustin Pedroia - major league star
SS maybe be a below average / replacement level Iglesias, may be a perfectly normal major leaguer
3B Will Middlebrooks - perfectly normal major leaguer
LF Probably Cody Ross plus a LHB caddy, that's a major leaguer
CF Jacoby Ellsbury - perfectly normal major leaguer, perhaps a star
RF Red Sox will acquire a - perfectly normal major leaguer, and even maybe a star
DH David Ortiz - major league star

SP Jon Lester - major league star
SP Clay Buchholz - perfectly normal major leaguer, maybe a star
SP Red Sox will acquire a - perfectly normal major leaguer, and even maybe a star
SP John Lackey - below average major leaguer
SP Felix Doubront - below average major leaguer

RP Andrew Bailey - major league star
RP No one cares after the closer

This club should project in the range of 83-88 wins once the offseason is done.

21. TVerik Posted: November 03, 2012 at 04:24 PM (#4291930)

Step back and look at the roster again, guys. What evidence do you have that Will Middlebrooks is The Answer at third? Ellsbury in center is as likely to put up 0 WAR as 4 next year. I think Pedroia and Ortiz plus Salty are all good players, but if this were the roster of the Royals, how many wins would you predict for them?

22. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 03, 2012 at 04:28 PM (#4291935)

What evidence do you have that Will Middlebrooks is The Answer at third?

His stat line and his age. I expect he'll project as an ~average 3B. Pointless Capitalization.

Ellsbury in center is as likely to put up 0 WAR as 4 next year.

There's a lot of variance on Ellsbury, but I expect he'll project as an average to above average CF, with more upside than downside. I'm just going by the numbers here.

23. Bad Fish Posted: November 03, 2012 at 04:30 PM (#4291939)

I am through with guys whose value is derived from rare coins found in their couch and the deep reds that their heirloom tomato's possess. Hamilton is a better hitter in every single hitting attribute than both the other guys combined. When you finally suck as a baseball player, and for an outfielder that means when you can't hit, you will never be able to exploit your outsized base running skills. Both the other guys are well down the path of sucktitude. If Hamilton can be had for a 4-5 year deal, that is the better deal. An outfield of Ross, Ells, and Hamilton would be a pretty good one.

24. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 03, 2012 at 04:32 PM (#4291943)

Both the other guys are well down the path of sucktitude.

They both project as above average hitters. I agree that the downside risk is concerning, but by this definition, the only free agents who aren't "well down the path of suckitude" are Hamilton and Swisher. I don't think that's what "suckitude" means.

If Hamilton can be had for a 4-5 year deal, that is the better deal.

Five years for Hamilton is the absolute minimum, and even that's pretty wishcasty. Think six or seven years and you'll be much more likely in the ballpark. One of the plusses for Pagan/Victorino is that a three-year deal is plausible.

25. Dan Posted: November 03, 2012 at 04:33 PM (#4291945)

If Swisher and Morneau are both priced above what the Sox are comfortable paying (in years/salary commitment and talent exchange, respectively), I think Napoli at first base could be a nice fallback option as well.

26. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 03, 2012 at 04:35 PM (#4291948)

I think Napoli is much more likely to be available at a good price than Swisher or Morneau. (I've given up on Morneau after talking to Twins fans, they think the Twins have no interest in a salary dump, and that's entirely plausible.)

27. Nasty Nate Posted: November 03, 2012 at 04:36 PM (#4291949)

Given Hamilton's age, I suspect that he knows that if the salad days are to continue, they'll likely continue in the short-term only.

C'mon, the dude is 31 - he's not planning the end game of his career right now.

28. Dan Posted: November 03, 2012 at 04:42 PM (#4291956)

If Hamilton isn't going to happen for RF, I think I'd rather see the Sox sign Melky Cabrera than Pagan or Victorino, honestly. Melky's another guy with a good arm and not-quite-CFer range that would fit well in RF at Fenway, but he has (obvious) concerns about how much of his numbers over the last 2 seasons are for real and how much he'll retain under closer scrutiny and testing. Victorino especially seems like a bad option since he has basically stopped hitting RHP at all over the last few seasons:

2010 vs RHP: .233/.305/.376
2011 vs RHP: .270/.333/.455
2012 vs RHP: .229/.296/.333

He seems like he should honestly consider giving up switch hitting completely, with how much better he's been as a right-handed hitter:

2010 vs LHP: .321/.381/.539
2011 vs LHP: .308/.424/.608
2012 vs LHP: .323/.388/.518

29. Jim Furtado

Posted: November 03, 2012 at 04:52 PM (#4291968)

As much as I love Hamilton as a player, the risk of signing him is way too high. The fact that the Rangers think he's too volatile to bring back to Texas is a huge warning sign. Risking two years for a 37 year-old DH with great intangibles is a risk that you can recover from. Risking 6-7 years at $20-25 million per year for someone with poor intangibles is one that can severely hurt your team. Risking that on Hamilton, in particular, has all the potential to end in catastrophe.

As for Pagan/Victorino, I wouldn't want to sign either one of them to anything more than a two-year contract.

As painful as it might be, we might have to accept that the Red Sox won't be among the best teams next year because there are no great options available to plug in via free agency.

30. TVerik Posted: November 03, 2012 at 04:55 PM (#4291972)

C'mon, the dude is 31 - he's not planning the end game of his career right now.

He's likely to sign a six or seven-year deal. If he's at all smart, he has hired someone to plan for the end game by now.

31. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 03, 2012 at 04:58 PM (#4291976)

Melky's interesting. His Dumber-than-Marcel is only slightly worse than Pagan's.

+ 14 Bat + 2 Run + 18 Rep - 2 Pos - 5 Def = +27 RAR

Obviously that does not take into account performance-enhancing drugs. I have no further comment on this paragraph.

The upside with Cabrera is that he might be crazy cheap, and he might be still the hitter he was in 2011-2012. The downside, well, see the above paragraph. And he can't really too good.

32. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 03, 2012 at 05:00 PM (#4291979)

As painful as it might be, we might have to accept that the Red Sox won't be among the best teams next year because there are no great options available to plug in via free agency.

There won't be many next year either. The Sox absolutely must be division contenders in 2014. So they have to get better at some point - just putting "getting good" off until next year only works when you have a magic phonebooth piloted by George Carlin.

Maybe that means they have to go the trade route, but I think it also means they need to get the best "good options" at fair prices rather than waiting for "great options" that may never come.

33. Nasty Nate Posted: November 03, 2012 at 05:02 PM (#4291981)

He's likely to sign a six or seven-year deal. If he's at all smart, he has hired someone to plan for the end game by now.

Okay, but if he signs a 7-year deal, he isn't going to necessarily try to limit his suitors to those teams that are favorites for 2013 as if the end of his career is fast approaching.

34. Jittery McFrog Posted: November 03, 2012 at 05:43 PM (#4292017)

Looking at the projected 2014 free agents on MLB Trade Rumors, I think some of the RF options there are intriguing. RF might not be a bad spot for the 2013 Sox to simply use a 1-year adequate stopgap and focus their longer-term acquisitions elsewhere (SP,1B,SS).

35. Darren

Posted: November 03, 2012 at 05:56 PM (#4292022)

Maybe (probably) this belongs in a different thread but Youkilis looks like he's project to be about 2.8 WAR. Just sayin'.

36. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 03, 2012 at 06:01 PM (#4292026)

Trading Youkilis for nothing was stupid then and remains stupid now. I do buy the theory that he ain't coming back after the way he was dumped.

37. Jim Furtado

Posted: November 03, 2012 at 06:39 PM (#4292039)

Maybe that means they have to go the trade route, but I think it also means they need to get the best "good options" at fair prices rather than waiting for "great options" that may never come.

Right, that's why only going to two years makes sense. This way, when they are really ready to contend in 2014/2015, they still have the flexibility to make up for the holes that can't be filled by their homegrown players.

They should sign someone to play right field next year from the likes of Tori Hunter/Ross/Victorino with a max two-year contract. 1B and LF should filled in with cheap stopgaps with a hope that one of their young outfielders will be ready for a trial run late in the season.

38. Dan Posted: November 03, 2012 at 06:47 PM (#4292043)

If they're looking for a short term stopgap in RF then I think Melky is the way to go. If they want to go big, sign Hamilton.

For LF, re-sign Ross and platoon him with Kalish.

39. The Ghost of Sox Fans Past

Posted: November 03, 2012 at 07:05 PM (#4292054)

I think plenty of teams are a little bit concerned about Hamilton's substance abuse issues coming back, at least enough to keep the commitment under 6 years.

Swisher seems like a sleeper. I think he'll end up with a more team-friendly deal relative to his expected WAR than Hamilton or Victorino.

40. Bad Fish Posted: November 03, 2012 at 07:17 PM (#4292066)

Too many teams have burned by big-dollar-long-term contracts. Hamilton has many liabilities. I see him getting big money, but not long term.

41. Benji Gil Gamesh Rises Posted: November 03, 2012 at 07:39 PM (#4292088)

I want no part of Hamilton at $20m+ per unless it was 3 years or fewer (which won't happen).

I don't see why it's any harder than: guy is going to be 32, has not been very durable, and has exactly 1 "wow" season, to go with 3 other reasonably complete very good ones.

Run away. (About the only thing I could see, other than a short deal, is if his spray charts suggest he's likely to take extreme advantage of Fenway)

42. tfbg9 Posted: November 03, 2012 at 08:09 PM (#4292112)

Agree with #41. Except I'm not even sure I want the guy for 3 years. Yes he can hit, and he's hit like crazy at Fenway(in 97 PA:.386/.433/.659/1.092). But everything else says "NO!" to me.

43. Nasty Nate Posted: November 03, 2012 at 09:13 PM (#4292172)

and has exactly 1 "wow" season, to go with 3 other reasonably complete very good ones.

That's a lot for a guy who has only played 6 years in the bigs!

44. Dan Posted: November 03, 2012 at 09:26 PM (#4292193)

Hamilton seems like a good fit for Fenway because when he pulls home runs he usually crushes them. If you look at his homers on hit tracker you'll see that he doesn't really project to lose any homers to the deep RF at Fenway, which is pretty rare for a left handed hitter. As post 42 states, he's also been very good at Fenway over his career (in obviously a very limited sample).

45. Darren

Posted: November 03, 2012 at 11:13 PM (#4292294)

If you don't want Hamilton for 3 years, you're being pretty darn risk averse. I mean, what do you think is going to be safer?

46. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: November 03, 2012 at 11:29 PM (#4292312)

Trading Youkilis for nothing was stupid then and remains stupid now. I do buy the theory that he ain't coming back after the way he was dumped.

I think it was stupid too, but I think the dumping was actually done as something of a favor to Youkilis. They traded him to a contending team where he could start instead of making him job-share with a rookie. I didn't get the impression that Youkilis had any hard feelings about it, other than not really getting along with Valentine. The whole situation may have left him just wanting to move on from Boston, but I think that was more the Valentine thing and trade itself than what he was traded for.

47. Benji Gil Gamesh Rises Posted: November 04, 2012 at 03:35 PM (#4292673)

That's a lot for a guy who has only played 6 years in the bigs!

Absolutely. And if he was going to be age 29 instead of 32 I'd feel differently about signing him longterm.

48. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: November 04, 2012 at 03:57 PM (#4292696)

I'm kind of surprised we're talking about Hamilton without getting into his other very well-known issues. He's a great player, but almost based on personality alone I really don't see him fitting in Boston.

49. Joe Bivens, Minor Genius Posted: November 04, 2012 at 04:40 PM (#4292719)

If the money is right, and they promise him 1B, he'll come back. (Youk.)

50. plink Posted: November 05, 2012 at 01:30 AM (#4293042)

I am all for resigning Youkilis at 1B.

51. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: November 05, 2012 at 09:45 AM (#4293113)

I am all for resigning Youkilis at 1B.

Same here.

Re-sign Ross and platoon him with Kalish, either trade for Justin Upton or sign Pagan for the other OF spot (Upton obv more desirable). Try to get Drew for cheap for SS and go with him and Iglesias there. Long term a 1b and 2 OF spots are needed, but this off season just isn't the time to lock in to someone. Hopefully one of the Sox prospects can handle SS for the foreseeable future.

52. jmurph Posted: November 05, 2012 at 10:07 AM (#4293121)

Re-sign Ross and platoon him with Kalish, either trade for Justin Upton or sign Pagan for the other OF spot (Upton obv more desirable). Try to get Drew for cheap for SS and go with him and Iglesias there. Long term a 1b and 2 OF spots are needed, but this off season just isn't the time to lock in to someone. Hopefully one of the Sox prospects can handle SS for the foreseeable future.

I'm comfortable with most of this, but it hinges on them spending money on Anibal Sanchez and/or Edwin Jackson. Preferably both. Those guys are absolutely good enough to be the 3rd and 4th best starters (or better) on a really good team in 2014.

53. Spivey Posted: November 05, 2012 at 10:08 AM (#4293123)

I agree with a lot of the points for Hamilton. One thing about his projection that is worth bringing up - the stats suggest he is an elite defensive LF, but a poor defensive CF - the gap is significantly larger than the different replacement values at each position. Even leaving aside the durability question, I think he's much more likely to beat his WAR projections if he's playing LF instead of CF.

I do think he's a good fit in Boston talent wise. But the Boston fans can definitely be more restless, from what I've seen, and I don't know how he would handle that. He very much seems to be the kind of player that doesn't like pressure.

54. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: November 05, 2012 at 10:21 AM (#4293130)

I'm comfortable with most of this, but it hinges on them spending money on Anibal Sanchez and/or Edwin Jackson. Preferably both. Those guys are absolutely good enough to be the 3rd and 4th best starters (or better) on a really good team in 2014.

Agreed. Lester/Buchholz/Jackson/Sanchez/Doubront/Lackey gets it done. May not have a ton of upside, but that is a solid rotation (and for under $60 mill assuming $24 mill for Jackson and Sanchez).

55. SG Posted: November 05, 2012 at 10:30 AM (#4293137)

Does anyone know if they got rid of the limits to signing free agents that MLB used to have when they were designated as Types A/B/C? It used to be that you were limited to three Type A free agents plus an additional one for any that you lost.

56. Mike Webber Posted: November 05, 2012 at 03:13 PM (#4293510)

SG The Qualifying Offer and You explains the new compensation system. Though it doesn't say anything about limits on number of qualifying offer players you can sign.

57. haffenreffer Posted: November 05, 2012 at 10:34 PM (#4293907)

This is a serious article? You're kidding me, right? Andrew Bailey -- a major league star? When's the last time he's pitched a full season effectively? David Ortiz, the man who quit on his team when they were out of contention and can't field, a major league star? Jon Lester, one of the most self-entitled Red Sox players of the Tito era, a major league star?

The author is an EXCELLENT troll.

58. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: November 06, 2012 at 03:27 AM (#4294125)

Looking over the depth charts, the Red Sox sure have acquired an exquisite collection of tweeners. Between Sweeney, Kalish, Nava, Sands, Linares, Hazelbaker and Brentz, there's a lot of OF who aren't starters for a contending team. I suppose Kalish and Brentz may have some further growth potential, but there's not enough room in Pawtucket for all those guys. With the Red Sox injury issues it's always nice to have depth, but I wonder how many of these guys are still in the system next year.

59. Darnell McDonald had a farm Posted: November 06, 2012 at 08:21 AM (#4294157)

I agree with 57, that is an extraordinarily optimistic assessment of this team's major league talent. Ortiz-Bailey-Ellsbury-Pedroia-Buchholz have all been missing large chunks of time regularly, and all should get red lights in Will Carroll's annual health report if he still does those. Lester has clearly slipped for whatever reason, a bounce back to average would be a wild success story but at least he has been durable. Even if they acquire three legitimate stars, which will be a challenge and more likely to be accomplished by trading prospects rather than via free agency, I have a hard time seeing this team grading out higher than 75 wins unless you are implementing a forecasting system that forgives all the missed chunks of playing time. There is a ton of replacement talent, maybe that's the new market inefficiency.

I also agree with 21, if that was the Royals roster their fans would be talking about next year's #1 draft pick possibilities

60. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: November 06, 2012 at 09:04 AM (#4294174)

Between Sweeney, Kalish, Nava, Sands, Linares, Hazelbaker and Brentz, there's a lot of OF who aren't starters for a contending team. I suppose Kalish and Brentz may have some further growth potential, but there's not enough room in Pawtucket for all those guys. With the Red Sox injury issues it's always nice to have depth, but I wonder how many of these guys are still in the system next year.

I suspect Nava and potentially Sweeney will be gone fairly soon. There is no reason for either guy to be hanging around Boston this summer. Kalish will be in Boston if he's healthy leaving Pawtucket with Brentz, Linares, Hazelbaker and Sands. Between Sands playing 1st base and DH opportunities playing time shouldn't be an issue there.

61. Dan Posted: November 06, 2012 at 09:57 AM (#4294227)

59 replying to his own sock puppet is amusing.

62. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: November 06, 2012 at 01:46 PM (#4294569)

59 replying to his own sock puppet is amusing.

Yeah, there is trolling, and then there is just plain dumb. Those posts most definitely classify as the latter.

63. Petunia inquires about ponies Posted: November 06, 2012 at 02:23 PM (#4294644)

I suppose Kalish and Brentz may have some further growth potential,

Kalish has no growth potential. I am done with Kalish. He is terrible. At this point I am more optimistic about Ryan Westmoreland's future in MLB than Kalish's.

64. Darnell McDonald had a farm Posted: November 06, 2012 at 07:32 PM (#4295143)

haffenreffer and I aren't the same poster, we're two people who disagree with the masses here who think the Red Sox are going to be competitive in 2013 and apparently that has a few panties bunched up. I was on this site last offseason (as mopar) arguing against the 95 win crowd that it looked more like an 80 win team on paper, I even promised to bookmark a few of the more controversial posts and bring them back after the season to make the doubters sniff them but I'm not going to do that. I'm trying to keep it civil. It was a team with several players coming off career years and an injury prone bunch AND no major league ready prospects beyond marginal filler types.

Injuries and lost time is a big deal, this is a team that has bad games played skills. Now after the blowup it is also a team lacking in major league talent. We won't be able to argue about wins on paper until the front office clowns have a chance to redefine the roster but there is no reason for optimism. They have plenty of cash and a poor free agent class on which to spend that cash. They want to rebuild with their own prospects but any new infusion of useful talent in Boston is going to cost prospects.

65. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: November 07, 2012 at 04:54 AM (#4296602)

I was on this site last offseason (as mopar) arguing against the 95 win crowd that it looked more like an 80 win team on paper, I even promised to bookmark a few of the more controversial posts and bring them back after the season to make the doubters sniff them but I'm not going to do that. I'm trying to keep it civil.

Come on, dude. This is some passive-aggressive ########. Either bring that #### up or let it lay. You sound like my ex-girlfriend.

66. Darnell McDonald had a farm Posted: November 09, 2012 at 12:01 AM (#4298629)

Good post, nice work, you made your point and then some

67. Darren

Posted: November 09, 2012 at 12:23 AM (#4298640)

Darnell,

I think the reason that you're rubbing people the wrong way is that you're being kind of rude. You can make your points without calling someone who's been nothing but well reasoned a troll.

68. Darnell McDonald had a farm Posted: November 09, 2012 at 12:38 AM (#4298650)

I haven't called anyone a troll, again I'm not haffenreffer

Can we get a witness?

If I knew how to find my old posts I would but honestly I don't care, it's not that important

69. Darren

Posted: November 09, 2012 at 01:06 AM (#4298662)

You agreed with the post that called him a troll, so I thought you agreed with that assessment.

70. villageidiom Posted: November 09, 2012 at 02:00 AM (#4298675)

I was on this site last offseason (as mopar) arguing against the 95 win crowd that it looked more like an 80 win team on paper, I even promised to bookmark a few of the more controversial posts and bring them back after the season to make the doubters sniff them but I'm not going to do that. I'm trying to keep it civil.

I can sometimes lack civility, so I figured I'd do you a favor and search for your posts so I could handle that for you.

I didn't check the entire site archive, just Sox Therapy from game 162 in 2011 to early June 2012, and the ZiPS projection thread for Boston 2012. In all of that you had one post, suggesting that they got a few career years from players in 2011, and it was likely Gonzalez would be the only one of them to repeat in 2012.

No team projection, no arguing, no promises to bookmark anything. Not really anything to bookmark.

Well, since I had all this incivility stored up to use on your behalf, I might as well use it now. Unless you can prove otherwise we have no reason to assume you have not - in the years since you were called mopar and were fairly reasonable - become a blithering blowhard, suddenly full of retrospective bravado you haven't earned, claiming you're not looking it up because you're being nice when really you're full of ####. It's not that you're a troll; it's that you're trying very hard to be one. Or two, since your apparent dishonesty in #64 shouldn't reassure anyone that you're not giving us a puppet show.

This would be the point where I might tell you in less polite terms to go away, but hey, I'm still holding out hope that you/haffenreffer can cite those claims. I could be wrong. At least I narrowed down the search for you.

71. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 10, 2012 at 11:58 AM (#4299513)

So, um, yeah...

Robothal reports the Red Sox signed David Ross to a two-year deal, pending physical. On the one hand, David Ross is the practically perfect backup catcher, with four consecutive seasons now over 100 OPS+. I've always wondered whether he might be capable of handling more of the job than 50 games a year.

On the other hand, David Ross is a RHB backup catcher. He's a wonderful caddy for Jarrod Saltalamacchia. Why would the Sox sign a wonderful Salty caddy unless they planned on dumping Lavarnway? I don't like that at all.

Or maybe the idea is to make Lavarnway the everyday catcher with Ross as a backup, and screw the platoon split when you can get a backup of Ross' quality. There's a logic there, and I rather like it.

EDIT: Mysterious Robo update:

Ross will be “more than a backup but not a starter” for #RedSox, source says. Team could move Salty or Lavarnway. Plans unclear.

Reports the deal is 2 years, $6M. Can't complain.

72. Dan Posted: November 10, 2012 at 01:58 PM (#4299568)

For whatever it's worth, Ross has virtually 0 platoon split over his career, and has several seasons with a pronounced reverse split. So it wouldn't surprise me if he faced the majority of RHP with Lavarnway being the lefty masher side of a platoon. I definitely wouldn't jump to the conclusion that Lavarnway is the one being replaced here.

73. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: November 11, 2012 at 01:41 PM (#4300057)

Looks like you're right. Reading over at SoSH, Robothal reports the Sox are shopping Salty and Giardi reports Saltalamacchia expects to be traded within the next month or so.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Reader Comments and Retorts

BBTF Partner

Bookmarks

Hot Topics

Syndicate