BBTF's Sox Therapy Discussion :: Kevin Youkilis so far…

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. Dave Cyprian Posted: April 22, 2006 at 04:34 PM (#1981781)

Coco leads off, Youklis 2nd, is what you mean I assume? Loretta has been pretty good, but as long as Youklis keeps this up...

2. Xander Posted: April 22, 2006 at 04:43 PM (#1981798)

Youkilis hitting 8th to turnover the lineup. It's at that point with Alex Gonzalez.

3. Darren

Posted: April 22, 2006 at 06:04 PM (#1982011)

Actually, Loretta's not hitting well at all.

4. Mike Emeigh

Posted: April 22, 2006 at 06:17 PM (#1982056)

Choi might get back before Coco does. He took a ball the other way at the DBAP last night against a lefty pitcher and drilled it over the Blue Monster. His batting eye appears to be intact. Unfortunately, so is his less-than-outstanding defense; he botched a fairly routine play last night on a GB3 which led to Durham's first run.

I'd be tempted, if I were the Sox, to try a lineup Youk at 3B and Lowell at 2B (which he played for a while last year when Castillo were out) to give Loretta a break once Choi gets back.

I'm going to post some observations on Pedroia in my blog later this afternoon. For now - not just to annoy Kevin, although that factors into it somewhat :) - I'll say that in the field he reminds me of David Eckstein.

-- MWE

5. covelli chris p Posted: April 22, 2006 at 09:38 PM (#1982435)

I'll say that in the field he reminds me of David Eckstein.

that's a good thing, right?

6. RobertMachemer Posted: April 23, 2006 at 08:16 AM (#1983366)

Loretta has been pretty good

Through Saturday's game, Loretta had a .300 OBP and a .338 SLG. That's not pretty good.

7. Dave Cyprian Posted: April 23, 2006 at 01:06 PM (#1983404)

Yeah uhm, re: #3 and #6, I was being nice, but uhm, I guess I shouldn't have been.

8. Darren

Posted: April 23, 2006 at 01:21 PM (#1983410)

I do think he'll hit eventually, Dave. But I'd still rather have Nixon and Youks at the top of the lineup. They'd have to flip Manny and Ortiz, and move Coco to 5th or something, though, so that's not happening. It'd just be cool.

9. PJ Martinez Posted: April 23, 2006 at 04:22 PM (#1983575)

So who will go down then, if Choi gets called up? Can the Sox really have Lowell, Youkilis, Snow, and Choi on the same roster?

Snow seems to have been marginalized. So far as I can remember, the last two times he's come in as a defensive replacement have been in 3-run and 4-run games, respectively (both of which became interesting, but that could not have been predicted). That seems borderline to me between "defensive replacement" and "garbage time." Also, in the four-run game, I think, Youkilis made the last out of the previous half-inning, so Snow was guaranteed not to come up for a while.

10. Josh Posted: April 23, 2006 at 04:48 PM (#1983624)

Just a followup to an earlier discussion. I emailed a reporter to get confirmation of his understanding of the Choi/Options discusison. He wrote back ("[" brackets are my additions to make it clear):

That's accurate [Choi must clear waivers]. He cleared [waivers]. They knew he'd clear becuase they were the only team that put a claim in on him when the Dodgers waived him. The only teams that conceivably could have claimed him when the Sox sent him down were the White Sox and Angels, by virtue of better record last year.

So, if I read this right, Choi can be optioned as needed. (Again, thanks for adding in the missing parts. Much appreciated.)

11. Golfing Great Mitch Cumstein Posted: April 23, 2006 at 08:17 PM (#1984163)

I'm going to post some observations on Pedroia in my blog later this afternoon.

Link?

I emailed a reporter to get confirmation of his understanding of the Choi/Options discusison.

I don't think that reporter is correct. Choi has only been in the majors and minors in the same season twice, but players have three option years. I think that he went through waivers so that the Dodgers could get him off the 40-man roster. As long as he is on the 40-man roster, he can be sent up and down this year. Also, if the reporter is McAdam or Buckley, don't put much faith in his understanding. Those two had no idea about FA compensation with regards to draft picks and arbitration when questioned on the radio. I was very disappointed by McAdam's ignorance.

12. Xander Posted: April 23, 2006 at 09:17 PM (#1984264)

Kevin, you aren't going to see him move up as long as Iggy Suarez is hitting .344 hit in Wilmington. Natale is obviously simply too advanced for the level he is at. He actually proved that last year. But hopefully he can use this time to work on his defense.

Chris Turner is hitting .242/.338/.548. That's a much more spectacular line if you realize that Turner was hitting under .100 a week and a half into the season. That's some beautiful IsoP. He's an XBH machine. I know Darren doesn't think much of him, but he is one of the only players in our system who flashes plus power.

13. Mister High Standards Posted: April 23, 2006 at 09:41 PM (#1984298)

back to Youks.

Things I've been impressed with:
1) Defense at 1b. Both his hands, and lateral range has been much better than I expected.

2) Batting performance.

Things I'm concerned with:
1) Lack of opposite field power. If he is hitting .310 it's not an issue, but if he is hitting .270 it maybe.

2) Strike outs.

3) Hitting behind in the count, which ties into number 2.

I'm certainly pleased with his performance to date.

14. Mike Emeigh

Posted: April 23, 2006 at 11:44 PM (#1984414)

Link?

Minor League Diary.

-- MWE

15. OCD SS Posted: April 24, 2006 at 01:14 AM (#1984524)

So who will go down then, if Choi gets called up? Can the Sox really have Lowell, Youkilis, Snow, and Choi on the same roster? Snow seems to have been marginalized...

I really don't see this as that big a deal. Youks looks to be at least as good on defense as Snow. The Sox are putting him in as a "defensive replacement" just so that he gets some playing time. In the long run the roster will likely be Youks at 3B and Choi at 1B.

16. Josh Posted: April 24, 2006 at 01:24 AM (#1984544)

I don't think that reporter is correct. Choi has only been in the majors and minors in the same season twice, but players have three option years.

I'm sure he is correct. Choi reached the the majors more than 3 years ago and now has must pass through waivers (even if he has an option year remaining) to be optioned. It has been explained to me now by two people, both more knowledgable about baseball than I, and both in a position to know more than I do (i.e., to actually read rule 11, which is sadly unavailable publically).

At some point, having no access to the source materials, I just end up trusting those who do.

17. PJ Martinez Posted: April 24, 2006 at 01:29 AM (#1984552)

"I really don't see this as that big a deal. Youks looks to be at least as good on defense as Snow. The Sox are putting him in as a "defensive replacement" just so that he gets some playing time. In the long run the roster will likely be Youks at 3B and Choi at 1B."

I agree with your description of their usage of Snow. And I love the Youks/Choi scenario. But then why would Snow be on the roster? Assuming Cora is still around, that's a lot of IFs, isn't it? Can you really carry a backup 3B, backup SS/2B, and backup 1B? That's not a rhetorical question; I'm really not sure.

Maybe Torre would like veteran defensive presence at 1B. That way we could make room for Choi and block Pena at the same time. Win-win.

18. Josh Posted: April 24, 2006 at 02:32 AM (#1984614)

Sorry, that post sounds a little snippy now that I read it back, and I didn't mean that at all.

Here is what I posted a few days ago before the thread was deleted:

Ok, so I'm now convinced that Choi cannot be optioned to the minors without passing through waivers. This explains his injury, which gives the Sox 35 days to figure out what to do (15 day dl, 20 day rehab).

Choi started in the majors more than 3 years ago, and thus acquired status reqiring waiver prior to options. As it ws explained to me (thanks again, btw):<blockquote>Three years (to the day) after a player first appears on a major league roster, he acquires the "waivers required for option" tag, meaning that he can't be optioned without clearing outright waivers first - *even if he has options remaining* (which Choi does). Service time doesn't come into it until the player has five years of service, at which point he can reject an outright assignment - in other words, even if he clears outright waivers, he can declare himself a free agent.

To see how this effects another team, see this article by Brian Walton.</blockquote>

19. Joel W Posted: April 24, 2006 at 05:55 AM (#1984825)

Can we get a "thoughts on Keith Foulke" thread?

I was only listening to the game on the radio today, driving back to bston from Vermont, and I thought he "sounded" good. He's struck out 10 this season, walked 2, and given up .5 HRs (Wily Mo) over 12 2/3rds innings. That's a really really good line, and the 3.55 ERA is there to go w/ it. I'm not ready to say "he's back" or anything, but I'm getting there.

The thing w/ Foulke is that when he's back, it'll be one of those things that in 30 games we look back and say "huh, he didn't give up many runs." It's not like when we see Schilling, and just say "my god he looks like himself again." And it's not like a power pitcher, where you can see the velocity. With Foulke it's just, "somehow, bats are missing balls and he's not allowing runs." Today sounded like one of those days.

Amazingly, I've been happy so far with everybody's performance who I was worried about: Youks, Lowell, Schilling, Beckett, Papelbon and Foulke...the sox are 12-7, and yet...they have a mediocre RS/RA.

They need Crisp bacck, and jesus f'ing Varitek. I guess Loretta's been pretty bad too save for that HR.

Weird so far. Weird.

20. Dr. Vaux Posted: April 24, 2006 at 06:23 AM (#1984842)

I have no faith in Matt Clement. I think he's going to completely blow up.

21. Mattbert Posted: April 24, 2006 at 08:04 AM (#1984915)

Clement should be fine. He's had two very good starts (his last start against the Rays and dominating the O's for 6+ in his first start before getting hung out to dry), one so-so start (today), and one lousy start (against the Jays at Fenway). His periphs are positive, too. His strikeout rate is pretty solid, and his K:BB is right at 2:1 (18 Ks to 9 BBs).

I feel pretty good about him as our 3rd or 4th best starter. He's definitely not as consistent as some of the other starters; he seems to live and die by how well he can harness his slider on a given day. When he's got command of that thing, though, he can be just about as good as anyone else in the rotation.

22. Dr. Vaux Posted: April 24, 2006 at 08:11 AM (#1984921)

Tito hung him out to dry in the Rays start, too. He's going to do it often enough that Clement's ERA will be way over 4.50 even if he pitches fairly well. He should always be pulled at c. 90-95 pitches, since he collapses at that point invariably. Of course, almost all pitchers do.

23. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: April 24, 2006 at 08:23 AM (#1984933)

Kevin Youkilis is a jew.

You know who else was Jewish?

JESUS

KEVIN YOUKILIS IS THE SAVIOR!!!!

24. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: April 24, 2006 at 10:51 AM (#1984964)

I just woke up to 'EEI. It's a frickin' Youks lovefest.

Topics:

-Why is JT Snow on this team? Youkilis is the best defensive 1B in baseball!
-Youks should remain at the top of the lineup when Crisp comes back, because he's like a right-handed Wade Boggs!
-Sox should stop messing around with Youkilis at 3B because he'll the first baseman for the next 7 to 10, no, 10 to 15 years!

25. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: April 24, 2006 at 11:04 AM (#1984967)

The thing w/ Foulke is that when he's back, it'll be one of those things that in 30 games we look back and say "huh, he didn't give up many runs." It's not like when we see Schilling, and just say "my god he looks like himself again." And it's not like a power pitcher, where you can see the velocity. With Foulke it's just, "somehow, bats are missing balls and he's not allowing runs." Today sounded like one of those days.

I didn't watch the game, but I don't think I agree with this analysis. I loved watching Keith Foulke in 2004. He had the ability to spot his fastball on that part of the strike zone you don't even really notice exists when watching other pitchers, on the high outside corner where a hitter can't even really reach it, or to run it back inside to jam the hitter. And he could seemingly throw that pitch any time he wanted, plus get swings and misses with the changeup. I have seen glimpses of that Foulke this year, but he's missed location, especially with the fastball, a whole bunch more than he did in '04. I don't think Foulke needs to get all the way back to where he was even to be a solid closer, but I think we'll be able to tell when he is.

26. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: April 24, 2006 at 12:09 PM (#1984976)

Chris Turner is hitting .242/.338/.548. That's a much more spectacular line if you realize that Turner was hitting under .100 a week and a half into the season. That's some beautiful IsoP. He's an XBH machine. I know Darren doesn't think much of him, but he is one of the only players in our system who flashes plus power.

It was me what don't think much of Turner.

1) Does he flash "plus power" in the technical sense? I'm skeptical. Turner didn't even crack the BA top 30 this year - if there were particular tools there, I'd think he'd be mentioned. I tend to see him as someone who can hit for power by utilizing all his strength, not as someone with plus power.

2) He's striking out in ~30% of his PAs, in low-A. That's just not gonna cut it. AA pitchers will eat pieces of #### like him for breakfast.

27. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: April 24, 2006 at 12:14 PM (#1984980)

Whoops, I wasn't quite done...

3) Turner is a low-A repeater. His numbers should be downgraded for projection.

Ok, now I'm done. But one more thing anyway, while I'm here. What to do about Jeff Natale? He's like 31, so his numbers in Greenville are pretty meaningless, and he apparently can't play a defensive position. I really should just give up on him. But he hasn't stopped hitting yet - hasn't stopped utterly dominating yet. Basically, I can't give up becuase I think there's some tiny little chance that he's actually an MLB talent, but no one could really tell because he was playing Div III ball all those years. Then again, if that were the case, would he be stuck in low-A as a DH? Nah, probably not.

28. PJ Martinez Posted: April 24, 2006 at 01:34 PM (#1985017)

So, does anyone think we can have Lowell, Snow, Youks and Choi on the roster at the same time?

Anyone worried Youks will wow Francona so much with his 1B glove-work that he'll never get back to 3B?

29. PJ Martinez Posted: April 24, 2006 at 01:40 PM (#1985023)

Oh, and on the Youks love-fest:

There are a lot of reasons for it, but one unmentioned factor, I think, is that he's getting the affection Coco would be getting if he were in the lineup and playing as he did the first several games. Everyone's happy about Schilling, of course, but he's old news to the fans; Beckett's a bit bristly, I think, and I suppose that 8th-inning blowup also might have cooled some ardor.

Fans just have so much love to give. And they want someone new(-ish) to embrace. Without Coco around, Youks is getting it all. Also he's been playing well.

If Loretta continues to struggle, I wouldn't be shocked if Youkilis gets to hit second when Coco comes back-- that successful hit-and-run yesterday probably boosted his chances, anyway.

30. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: April 24, 2006 at 01:41 PM (#1985025)

Anyone worried Youks will wow Francona so much with his 1B glove-work that he'll never get back to 3B?

Better Kevin Youkilis at 1B full time, than Kevin Youkilis on the bench.

Still, against righties it should be Youk 3b Choi 1B, and against lefties Lowell 3B Youk 1B

I wish we had Mueller instead of Lowell

31. Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'.

Posted: April 24, 2006 at 01:46 PM (#1985034)

Natale is an interesting case. He is such an awful fielder that you can't even hide him anywhere. And yet all he does is rake.

He's really small, so it would be hard to play him at 1st Base. I don't think anyone believes he can DH at the Major league level, although in a world wher Ruben Sierra can log DH ab's for a championship aspirant club, who knows? Can he hit enough to try a corner OF spot?

I think I would promote him, anyway. The best thing to do is figure out if he can be a bona fide MLB hitter and worry about the position thing later.

32. covelli chris p Posted: April 24, 2006 at 01:48 PM (#1985037)

Sox should stop messing around with Youkilis at 3B

part of me agrees with this. he doesn't seem to have the arm strength to be a very good 3b. some 3b's make up for lack of arm strength with an uncanny ability to get in a good throwing position (i guess this is their footwork), and youks doesn't seem to have this either.

33. villageidiom Posted: April 24, 2006 at 03:49 PM (#1985297)

If Loretta continues to struggle, I wouldn't be shocked if Youkilis gets to hit second when Coco comes back-- that successful hit-and-run yesterday probably boosted his chances, anyway.

Nah, Ortiz should bat second because he can make use of his excellent bunting abilities.

34. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: April 24, 2006 at 03:51 PM (#1985302)

I haven't seen much of Youkilis at 3B (not that it will stop me from sharing my opinion), but he hasn't looked terrible out there. Mueller and Lowell seemed to be above-avg to avg 3B, and Youkilis seems maybe avg to a little below, and he doesn't exactly exude raw athleticism which I think makes him look worse than he is. If he can play the position and isn't a big liability, I say let him play. He's more valuable at 3B if he can free up 1B for a better hitter, even if 3B defense takes a little hit.

35. Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'.

Posted: April 24, 2006 at 03:56 PM (#1985312)

Lowell has a pretty extreme L/R split since 2003, even though he has a slight reverse split this season. I still contend that it makes the most sense to strict platoon Choi and Lowell, just as Pena and Nixon should constitute a strict platoon as well.

So every day, Choi or Pena - but never both - is in the lineup.

36. PJ Martinez Posted: April 24, 2006 at 04:09 PM (#1985331)

"So every day, Choi or Pena - but never both - is in the lineup."

That would be fun. Would Snow still be on the roster in that scenario?

37. Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'.

Posted: April 24, 2006 at 04:55 PM (#1985428)

Would Snow still be on the roster in that scenario?

No. But what the hell is Snow doing on this team anyway? Youk has shown himself to be an excellent defensive 1st Baseman.

Snow and Flaherty were signed in the awkward limbo faze when Lajoie and Kapstein had input, after Theo left and before Hoyer and Cherington were promoted. Flaherty already forced their hand by making them release Petagine, and now Snow is complicating Choi's situation.

As far as I can tell, the off-season chaos only rears its head in those two scenarios.

38. veer bender Posted: April 24, 2006 at 06:07 PM (#1985556)

One thing I'd like to add is that I'm somewhat optimistic about the higher than expected strikeouts. This may come off as paranoid, but my impression is that a lot of umpires have been giving him a pretty tough time. I think that rookies/young players can get the opposite of the "respect" factor Wade Boggs or Greg Maddux gets.

Also, I have a hard time believing that most umpires are not pretty close to the stereotype of the jeans-sellin' old-schooler that gets picked on by Moneyball and BPro and that they might want to teach the kid a lesson for having the audacity to be overhyped in a popular book.

Youk has hit the ball better than expected so far. Assuming he cools off, he might become a bit of a liability for this year. But I feel that if he keeps a starting job all year he'll start getting the borderline calls next year and look more like the player we expected.

39. Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'.

Posted: April 24, 2006 at 06:17 PM (#1985584)

awkward limbo faze

Good grief being dumb sucks. Phase for crissakes. Phase.

40. Darren

Posted: April 25, 2006 at 12:39 AM (#1986303)

Chris Turner hit another HR today. He's a guy who's never been on my radar at all, for whatever reason. Looking at his track record, he doesn't look like much. His best year, by far, was 05 in Greenville, where he had a 28/85 BB/K ratio. This year, it's been worse at 6/22. A 22-year-old repeater of low A doesn't impress me.

His Soxprospects.com page says this: "Could have been drafted higher if it were not for bonus demands." Do you know where he was supposed to be drafted, Temple?

41. Xander Posted: April 25, 2006 at 01:16 AM (#1986373)

According to Texarkana College coach James Mansinger, Turner had expected to be picked by the fifth round by Boston, but may have priced himself too high.

"I don't think Chris will sign," Mansinger said. "He really doesn't want to leave (TC). He and Chris Hollensworth (also of El Dorado) went to Fenway Park and worked out for the Red Sox last Saturday, but I think he (Turner) told them he wanted $500,000. That's probably why he wasn't drafted until the fifteenth round."

Link
It's hard for me to blame a guy for "repeating" single-A, when he only spent ~80 games there last year. Especially since he should have started the year in Wilmington, but couldn't because of a logjam. It's a repeat out of circumstance, not development. What's more, after a sluggish start, he is tearing the cover off the ball.

42. Xander Posted: April 25, 2006 at 01:39 AM (#1986425)

You speak too soon Kevin. Hansen went 3 tonight and gave up his first minor league run. He hit a batter and then gave up a 2B. It had to happen sometime.

He has a line of indicators fit for a king though:

YTD- 11 IP, 4 H, 0.82 ERA, 13/4 K/BB, 14/7 GB/FB

3-inning stint tonight. I know he's working on the changeup, but it starts to make you think.

43. MM1f Posted: April 25, 2006 at 02:09 AM (#1986501)

"His Soxprospects.com page says this: "Could have been drafted higher if it were not for bonus demands." Do you know where he was supposed to be drafted, Temple?"

Wanted 500k out of JUCO, got 200k...I want to say thats around 7th round money but im not positive

44. Xander Posted: April 25, 2006 at 02:12 AM (#1986509)

In 2003, 200K was mid-5th round money. 500K would have been ~3rd round money.

45. MM1f Posted: April 25, 2006 at 02:18 AM (#1986531)

True, i was thinking what it woudl be in 2005 or 2006, though even then (now that i think of it) 200k would probably be more like 6th round than 7th for a guy with some leverage left.

46. PJ Martinez Posted: April 25, 2006 at 02:36 AM (#1986611)

"3-inning stint tonight. I know he's working on the changeup, but it starts to make you think."

It sure does. There was some discussion of this before: the Sox seem either to have hopes for him as a relief ace, or they're keeping their options open re: starting.

The latter seems more likely to me, though Foulke has been rounding into form lately as a multi-inning guy, so I wouldn't rule out the former entirely.

Of course, both could be true. Maybe they see Hansen as, short-term, a relief ace, and long-term as a starter.

Or maybe he'll just make it to the big leagues as a Closer and collect cheap 3-run, 3-out saves like everyone else. But I'm cautiously optimistic.

47. Xander Posted: April 25, 2006 at 02:46 AM (#1986637)

Obviously I would love the Sox to experiment with Hansen in some type of "relief ace" role. I do think though, because of his hard sinking fastball, a conversion to starter would not take a complete re-tooling of his pitching philosophy or pitch arsenal. He can pitch to contact right now and still get a lot of groundballs. I just worry about his stamina and his lack of starting experience.

48. PJ Martinez Posted: April 25, 2006 at 03:31 AM (#1986804)

What do you think of Papelbon as a starter, Temple? And how long did it take the Sox to convert him? Did they do the same kind of stretching him out midseason, or did they convert him from the get-go?

49. Xander Posted: April 25, 2006 at 04:14 AM (#1986987)

I really don't know PJM. I wouldn't completely give up on it, but I'm not comfortable with him in a starting role. His secondary pitches have looked better this season, so there is a strong possibility he has progressed in that area. But he really seems like a pitcher whose stuff benefits from pitching at max effort. They are going to put him in a position to start eventually, so we will get the chance to evaluate him. FWIW, the Sox had him starting as low as Lowell. Then, he obviously took off in 2004 in Sarasota as a starter and started all last year, except for three games he was used in relief after being sent down from the big team. Intentionally or unintentionally, I am enjoying the fact that the Sox are taking on so many fresh arms:

Papelbon- Went to MSU as a 1B. Three years in relief kept his innings down.
Buchholz- Was a position player at McNeese State until he transferred to Angelina JC and took to pitching.
E-Mart- Converted catcher.
Michael Bowden- Although he had some soreness last year, cold climate pitchers notoriously keep their innings down.
Hansen- Same as Bowden, plus he was a reliever. Not a lot of mileage on the arm.
Hottovy- Reliever at WSU. Converted to starter upon arrival at Lowell.

50. MM1f Posted: April 25, 2006 at 04:34 AM (#1987085)

Man Hansen was NOTHING coming out of HS nwo that i look it up. His St Johns page says the other schools in the running were Hofstra, Columbia and Yale. Sure the north isnt scouted as heavily but when there are talented players the powerhouse teams do come calling to lure them down south. I know hes tall and skinny and sucked as a freshman at St Johns...did he get in the weight room and ramp up the velo from frosh to soph year?

51. Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'.

Posted: April 25, 2006 at 01:50 PM (#1987480)

I wouldn't read too much into Hansen's usage. Because he was a reliever in college, the guy just hasn't pitched all that much. So developmentally it makes sense to stretch him out, not necessarily to prepare for him any special role, but just so that he can pitch more.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Reader Comments and Retorts

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

Bookmarks

Hot Topics

Syndicate