Start, Sit, Trade: Play Along with Dave

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
The Mets would give you Niese for Holt in a cocaine heartbeat. They want out from that contract in the worst way. What would the Sox do with him? They dont need a league average SP making $10M.

You'd have to throw in a mighty good prospect, or quite possibly Bradley if you want Matz.
I don't really like Niese that much and wouldn't want him on our roster but there isn't a ton of difference between him and Leake, who will probably get 14-16 mill per through his age 33 year.

Comparatively - 3yrs 29.5 for Niese through his age 31 is very reasonable and probably not the type of a contract they would have to eat any money for. Especially since two of those years are team options with 500k buyouts.

He is thoroughly unexciting and came off his first tough year, but he had been very reliable until then.
 
Last edited:

Bowlerman9

bitchslapped by Keith Law
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 1, 2003
5,227
I don't really like Niese that much and think his health is iffy but there isn't a ton of difference between him and Leake, who will probably get 14-16 mill per through his age 33 year.

Comparatively - 3yrs 29.5 for Niese through his age 31 is very reasonable and probably not the type of a contract they would have to eat any money for. Especially since two of those years are team options with 500k buyouts.
Reasonable for whom, though? Niese is a league average pitcher and thats not something the Red Sox need right now at a cost of $9.5M.

Over the last 3 years Niese has been worth a grand total of 2.6 fWAR. If someone could guarantee that his next 3 years would be the same as his last 3, would you pay $29.5M for 2.6 WAR? Leake has been worth 4.4 fWAR over the same time frame. Leake probably wont be worth his next contract, but Niese isnt a good bet to be worth his current one (even if you dont pick up the options, he is still owed $9.5M guaranteed).
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
Reasonable for whom, though? Niese is a league average pitcher and thats not something the Red Sox need right now at a cost of $9.5M.

Over the last 3 years Niese has been worth a grand total of 2.6 fWAR. If someone could guarantee that his next 3 years would be the same as his last 3, would you pay $29.5M for 2.6 WAR? Leake has been worth 4.4 fWAR over the same time frame. Leake probably wont be worth his next contract, but Niese isnt a good bet to be worth his current one (even if you dont pick up the options, he is still owed $9.5M guaranteed).
He has averaged 2.1 WAR over the past 5 seasons. He had his first poor season last year. If the going rate is 8mil per win, then yes - that is reasonable.
I don't want him, but that is not a tough contract to trade at all.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,277
Seems like the sox uncovered the Chapman stuff and not the Reds or MLB

So this was a week in which the Diamondbacks looked at what is a really good set of position players, went for the National League West throats and outspent the Dodgers on Greinke and for Millet. Think about that. Now, the Dodgers did think they had a deal for Aroldis Chapman that is now “on hold;” If Rob Manfred’s investigations turn up what only the Red Sox—not the Reds—had heard about Chapman’s Miami incident, most everyone in the game expects harsh punishment (which also applies to Yasiel Puig and Jose Reyes) that could cost him enough days so that Chapman won’t have the requisite six years of service time for free agency next November.


http://www.gammonsdaily.com/peter-gammons-winter-meetings-over-holiday-shopping-continues/
 

pokey_reese

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 25, 2008
16,247
Boston, MA
Not sure where this should go, but...wow. A Marlins official on the Sox trading for Fernandez:

I mean, seriously?
Yeah, holy moly. If you figure that Fernandez is going to be a 5 WAR pitcher for the next three years, that would be worth about 120 million at 8 mil/win, and for ease let's say he gets a round 10 mil per year in arb, so he is delivering 90 million in surplus value over that time. Mookie, as a 3.5 WAR player (conservatively), will cost about 500k for the next two years, then we will assume another 10 mil per year in arb, so 31 million over 5 years of team control from a value of 140 million, or 109 million in surplus value.

Mookie for Fernandez straight up would be a good deal for the Marlins. Adding even a single one of those other guys makes it a bad deal in my mind. Take Mookie out of that list and it's a maybe...
 

PaulinMyrBch

Don't touch his dog food
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2003
8,316
MYRTLE BEACH!!!!
Unless that quote is from a conversation and out of context, that's crazy. Honestly it doesn't sound like he was saying it that way, but is it possible he was talking about a pool of talent that he was interested in, not all of it, but a package deal that included some guys from our list and Fernandez + from his? If not, its nuts.

If he's discussing talent that could be in a deal, I get it, but if he wants it all, he's crazy and shouldn't be running a fantasy team.
 

jimbobim

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2012
1,558
  1. I don't think the Cubs are dying to move Soler, but feeling is Heyward is a much better fit in RF.
  2. Julie DiCaro ‏@JulieDiCaro 2h2 hours ago
  3. Just talking centerpieces due to 140 character limit. Probably talking Soler plus.
    J I @cubs4wsn2012
    @mauro_erik @JulieDiCaro have to be inciarte plus for soler in my mind. Not sure how everyone else values inciarte though.
    0 retweets1 like
    Julie DiCaro ‏@JulieDiCaro 2h2 hours ago
  4. #Cubs looking at Span & teams that may have a CF to trade. Rays' Jennings possible. Believe can get Inciarte from w/ Soler if necessary
Inciarte has two more years of proven/batting average production, but if Sox could snag Soler for JBJ straight up might make sense for both teams. JBJ moves Heyward over to RF where he belongs and perhaps covers the spots Schwarber can't get to in left center .

Soler has a rocket arm and I think the Cubs are selling low on the bat which explains their trepidation. I'd bet on that offensive package and his contract is pretty ridiculous.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
Not sure where this should go, but...wow. A Marlins official on the Sox trading for Fernandez:

“With ERod, Mookie Betts, Christian Vazquez, Yoan Moncada and another pitcher I thought we had something that might work.” Why not?

I mean, seriously?
It would take one of Bogaerts or Betts, one of Moncada or Devers and then probably at least two more top 10 prospects, at least. So, no thanks.
*cough*

I guess I shot a little low.
 

DanoooME

above replacement level
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2008
19,831
Henderson, NV
Inciarte has two more years of proven/batting average production, but if Sox could snag Soler for JBJ straight up might make sense for both teams. JBJ moves Heyward over to RF where he belongs and perhaps covers the spots Schwarber can't get to in left center .

Soler has a rocket arm and I think the Cubs are selling low on the bat which explains their trepidation. I'd bet on that offensive package and his contract is pretty ridiculous.
Do we know Schwarber is still going back to LF? He came up as a catcher, so doesn't it make sense he goes back there? I know they have Montero, but is he really that good?

C- Schwarber
1B - Rizzo
2B - Baez
SS - Russell
3B - Bryant
LF - Zobrist
CF - Heyward
RF - Soler

or

C - Montero
1B - Rizzo
2B - Zobrist
SS - Russell
3B - Bryant
LF - Schwarber
CF - Heyard
RF - Soler
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Do we know Schwarber is still going back to LF? He came up as a catcher, so doesn't it make sense he goes back there? I know they have Montero, but is he really that good?
Montero's under contract for two more years at a pretty fair market price. Which I suppose makes him good trade bait, but unless they trade him, he's their #1 catcher through 2017. And these scouting reports suggest that Schwarber is not destined to be a primary catcher in the long term, even if filling in there in a backup role might be useful right now.
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,405
If anything, I'd think the Cubs would trade Soler for one of those starters people were hoping the Sox would get (Ross, Carrasco, Salazar, etc.) and sign Span or Fowler to push Heyward back to RF.

Believe it or not, I typed all of this before reading this Tweet:
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
There was talk during the winter meetings (wish I could cite it, but it was some of the talking heads on MLB Net) of the Cubs and Rays being a good match-up for a trade. Something along the lines of Alex Cobb or Matt Moore to the Cubs for Schwarber plus.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
There was talk during the winter meetings (wish I could cite it, but it was some of the talking heads on MLB Net) of the Cubs and Rays being a good match-up for a trade. Something along the lines of Alex Cobb or Matt Moore to the Cubs for Schwarber plus.
Yeah, they could sure use a guy like Archer.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
There was talk during the winter meetings (wish I could cite it, but it was some of the talking heads on MLB Net) of the Cubs and Rays being a good match-up for a trade. Something along the lines of Alex Cobb or Matt Moore to the Cubs for Schwarber plus.
Not sure, who you're listening to, but both Cubs guys, Hollandsworth and Memolo have said Schwarber is almost untouchable. Hollandsworth said the only players they'd consider dealing Schwarber for were basically, Archer, Fernandez, or Gray.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
Yeah I'd have to think Schwarber would bring back more than Moore or Cobb. If I were CHC I'd be more willing to offer up Soler for One of those guys and then go after Span of bring back Fowler for CF so Heyward can play RF.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,100
More Jose Fernandez talk: apparently the Marlins are resigned to the fact that they're not going to sign him long term (scroll down about halfway). They plan on keeping him for this year at least (which seems prudent), but of course 2.5 seasons of Fernandez will net them a lot more than 2, so I won't be surprised to see him dealt at the deadline if the Marlins are out of it.


http://miamiherald.typepad.com/sports-buzz/2016/01/dolphins-formula-of-hiring-o-coordinator-to-become-head-coaches-has-produced-far-more-losing-than-wi.html
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
913
"It's worth pointing out that former Sox general manager Ben Cherington saw this change in the free agent market coming when Porcello signed a four-year, $82.5 million extension before the 2015 season. The first year didn't pay off, obviously, but there were extenuating circumstances -- such as a now-fired pitching coach deciding Porcello didn't need to rely on the sinker that earned him his extension in the first place -- and there is still plenty of time for the deal to look as prescient as it was intended to."

Has anyone heard that Nieves directed Porcello away from using his sinker? This is the first mention I've seen of it. Nieves was fired in early May, Porcello pitched pretty poorly through July, then returned in late August with a better performance over his last 8 starts.

Here is the link to the article:
http://www.overthemonster.com/2016/2/4/10915702/red-sox-rotation-joe-kelly-ian-kennedy-royals
 

Dewey'sCannon

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
870
Maryland

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,275
"It's worth pointing out that former Sox general manager Ben Cherington saw this change in the free agent market coming when Porcello signed a four-year, $82.5 million extension before the 2015 season. The first year didn't pay off, obviously, but there were extenuating circumstances -- such as a now-fired pitching coach deciding Porcello didn't need to rely on the sinker that earned him his extension in the first place -- and there is still plenty of time for the deal to look as prescient as it was intended to."

Has anyone heard that Nieves directed Porcello away from using his sinker? This is the first mention I've seen of it. Nieves was fired in early May, Porcello pitched pretty poorly through July, then returned in late August with a better performance over his last 8 starts.

Here is the link to the article:
http://www.overthemonster.com/2016/2/4/10915702/red-sox-rotation-joe-kelly-ian-kennedy-royals
I don't remember having read anything on that and due to the source (I don't believe Marc Normandin has ever broke anything or even claimed to have connections within the Sox organization, think he is just a Sox fan blogger) I think this is speculation or bad wording by Normandin.
 

jimbobim

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2012
1,558
Rosenthal talking about the O's strategy floated them getting Fowler for 2 yrs 25 after Gallardo . Duq has a stated preference to prefer no opt outs.

I may give him that deal with an opt out after the 1rst year. Nice Castillo JBJ insurance IMHO. The draft pick is obviously the big downside but I really want another competent bat and Fowler at that price seems just right...
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
Rosenthal talking about the O's strategy floated them getting Fowler for 2 yrs 25 after Gallardo . Duq has a stated preference to prefer no opt outs.

I may give him that deal with an opt out after the 1rst year. Nice Castillo JBJ insurance IMHO. The draft pick is obviously the big downside but I really want another competent bat and Fowler at that price seems just right...
They signed Chris Young to be "Castillo JBJ insurance". They don't have the roster space to add Fowler at this point.

Besides, there is no world where I give up the #12 pick in the draft for Dexter Fowler, especially on a one year deal (which is what a deal with an opt out is).
 

johnnywayback

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2004
1,421
Rosenthal talking about the O's strategy floated them getting Fowler for 2 yrs 25 after Gallardo . Duq has a stated preference to prefer no opt outs.

I may give him that deal with an opt out after the 1rst year. Nice Castillo JBJ insurance IMHO. The draft pick is obviously the big downside but I really want another competent bat and Fowler at that price seems just right...
Why would we sacrifice a draft pick to -- maybe -- slightly upgrade on Chris Young as our 4th OF? I assume you would be just eating Young's contract before it begins, since Fowler hits lefties a lot better than he does righties. And if you figure you want to keep both of them, and Holt, and a backup catcher, then you don't have room for Travis Shaw.
 

jimbobim

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2012
1,558
Why would we sacrifice a draft pick to -- maybe -- slightly upgrade on Chris Young as our 4th OF? I assume you would be just eating Young's contract before it begins, since Fowler hits lefties a lot better than he does righties. And if you figure you want to keep both of them, and Holt, and a backup catcher, then you don't have room for Travis Shaw.
The reason I give up the draft pick is because Fowler is a more well rounded version of Young( see OBP prowess and it's a hedge against having to overpay from a top heavy system in season if Bradley and Castillo force the Red Sox to play their bench depth more see the last couple years with Nava, Vic, Castillo .)

Shaw starting in Pawtucket is really not objectionable IMHO. Again the price floated by Rosenthal with an opt out would essentially be a more complicated more player friendly version of the pillow contract .

Basically, the interest boils down to Fowler gets on base despite his reverse splits. Castillo and Bradley are ?? in terms of OBP.

Edit:
The draft pick is obviously the killer of value. Just think young is more strict platoon bat than insurance.
 

Fireball Fred

New Member
Jul 29, 2005
172
NoCa Mass.
If the Sox were as worried about Castillo as I think they should be they would have made a bigger move already. They're rolling the dice, perhaps thinking they'll make an in-season trade if he doesn't hit.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
If the Sox were as worried about Castillo as I think they should be they would have made a bigger move already. They're rolling the dice, perhaps thinking they'll make an in-season trade if he doesn't hit.
Or, the Sox expect Young and/or Holt can hit enough at the bottom of the order to hedge the inherent offensive risk of Castillo and/or Bradley not taking the next step forward next season, for a mere $7MM (on top of the $11MM that Betts, Bradley, and Castillo are due).

Considering the $41MM in sunk costs for Hanley and Panda, being able to staff the OF with five players at an outlay of just north of $18MM, with the expectation that three of them will prove good enough to start, isn't that bad an idea.
 

johnnywayback

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2004
1,421
The reason I give up the draft pick is because Fowler is a more well rounded version of Young( see OBP prowess and it's a hedge against having to overpay from a top heavy system in season if Bradley and Castillo force the Red Sox to play their bench depth more see the last couple years with Nava, Vic, Castillo .)

Shaw starting in Pawtucket is really not objectionable IMHO. Again the price floated by Rosenthal with an opt out would essentially be a more complicated more player friendly version of the pillow contract .

Basically, the interest boils down to Fowler gets on base despite his reverse splits. Castillo and Bradley are ?? in terms of OBP.

Edit:
The draft pick is obviously the killer of value. Just think young is more strict platoon bat than insurance.
If Shaw starts in Pawtucket, then the 1B depth chart is Hanley and Brock Holt (who is also our backup 2B, SS, and 3B).

OF depth is a concern. I don't want Young getting 500 AB. But it's a concern I think they have to address at the AAA level -- they have Boesch, but hopefully they can find someone even a little better as rosters shake out. The major league roster is pretty tightly built.

And while Fowler is a better player than Young, given their apparent confidence in Castillo and Bradley, I would have been horrified if they'd given up a draft pick for that marginal improvement.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
If Shaw starts in Pawtucket, then the 1B depth chart is Hanley and Brock Holt (who is also our backup 2B, SS, and 3B).

OF depth is a concern. I don't want Young getting 500 AB. But it's a concern I think they have to address at the AAA level -- they have Boesch, but hopefully they can find someone even a little better as rosters shake out. The major league roster is pretty tightly built.

And while Fowler is a better player than Young, given their apparent confidence in Castillo and Bradley, I would have been horrified if they'd given up a draft pick for that marginal improvement.
Giving up the 2016 12th pick would be terrible, considering how weak the farm looks behind the top 4 prospects, who all finished 2015 in A-ball.

OF depth is a concern, but the team has 5 players with MLB-level defensive tools. Mookie is inked into the leadoff spot, which leaves Farrell four credible MLB options for two lineup spots. Each of these options is able to man either outfield corner if Bradley can't put bat-on-ball enough to hit ninth in the order (thereby allowing Mookie to shift back over to CF). There are enough options already on the MLB club, unless both Bradley and Castillo both don't hit even enough for the bottom of the order AND Pedroia goes onto the DL again long-term. All of which could happen.

But regardless, corner OF isn't the real key to unlocking a productive offense for the 2016 Red Sox; that burden lies squarely on the players paid handsomely to hit in the heart of the lineup: Pedroia, Ortiz, Hanley, and Panda.
 

Dewey'sCannon

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
870
Maryland
I think another factor here is that Benintendi is likely only a year away - perhaps even a mid/late season call-up like Conforto last year (as cited by Keith Law). So even if you're not confident about Castillo and/or JBJ, why blow money on a FA (with the added expense of a draft pick) when there's more help in the pipeline. I'm sure that's why they weren't in on any of the expensive FA OFs, but it's also why they shouldn't be interested in Fowler. Young is enough insurance in the short-run, at a reasonable cost.
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,405
If the Sox were as worried about Castillo as I think they should be they would have made a bigger move already. They're rolling the dice, perhaps thinking they'll make an in-season trade if he doesn't hit.
Glancing over the list of possible half-year rentals, one name jumps out as an obvious, if possibly expensive, candidate should either Castillo or Bradley falter. I agree with the larger point that it isn't worth making a move until they at least have a better idea of how those two will perform, though.
 
Last edited:

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,670
Well Mookie Betts did that, basically, at an even younger age. He was in Lowell his whole age 19 season in 2012 and in Boston in June 2014.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
He's played 19 games above Lowell. Saying he's likely only a year away is a tad aggressive don't you think?
He totally dominated both levels he played at, and he'll turn 22 this year and if all goes well, presumably finish the year in Portland. I would be surprised if he doesn't get his first MLB action in 2017, though whether that's a substantial role or a September callup is another question.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,422
Not here
Well Mookie Betts did that, basically, at an even younger age. He was in Lowell his whole age 19 season in 2012 and in Boston in June 2014.
The only way this is true is if "that, basically" is your way of saying "something else entirely."

Mookie Betts played 71 games in Lowell, 16 in the Arizona Fall League, had an offseason, and played 76 games in Greenville.

Benny Nintendo has played 35 in Lowell and 19 in Greenville. These are not equivalent. By the time Mookie hit Boston, he'd played 313 minor league games. Benintendi has played 54. A full minor league season only gets him to about 200.

Sure, he had college, and sure, it's not impossible, but there is no way in hell it's "likely" that Benintendi is a year away from anything resembling a meaningful contribution.

He totally dominated both levels he played at, and he'll turn 22 this year and if all goes well, presumably finish the year in Portland. I would be surprised if he doesn't get his first MLB action in 2017, though whether that's a substantial role or a September callup is another question.
There is an enormous difference between being a year away and a September callup the following season.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,670
No Ras. Being in Lowell in year X and in Boston in year X+2 is exactly what Mookie did and exactly what Dewey's Cannon proposed for Benintendi. The only reason I said "basically" was because Betts didn't start the year in Boston. I don't think it's at all far-fetched that he could be in Boston at the same pace unless he is blocked.
 

Darnell's Son

He's a machine.
Moderator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,532
Providence, RI
The only problem Ras seemed to have was the word "likely". He's not saying that it can't. But they call them prospects for a reason. He's played a few months of professional ball. He has a ways to go before the bigs. You need to take a step back and perhaps read the argument and not the arguer.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,422
Not here
No Ras. Being in Lowell in year X and in Boston in year X+2 is exactly what Mookie did and exactly what Dewey's Cannon proposed for Benintendi. The only reason I said "basically" was because Betts didn't start the year in Boston. I don't think it's at all far-fetched that he could be in Boston at the same pace unless he is blocked.
One guy doing something that looks kinda like it if you squint just right and the light aint good does not mean it is remotely likely that a different guy with less pro experience is gonna do it and it sure as shit doesn't mean he's going to have one scintilla of an iota on roster decisions made for 2016. Now maybe he starts in Salem, but with 19 games in Greenville, that's pretty aggressive, and maybe he kicks ass and goes to Portland halfway though the season and kicks ass there then maybe he's a third of fourth thought for a mid 2017 promotion pending a kickass season in Pawtucket.

But consider this. If the OF situation in Boston wasn't pretty goddamn dire, they wouldn't have brought Mookie up when they did. It's gonna take a whole heck of a lot things to happen to make him a realistic option on the big club before September 1, 2017. It's within the realm of possibility--heck some of the things are even pretty likely--but that they ALL happen, it aint likely.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,422
Not here
No Ras. Being in Lowell in year X and in Boston in year X+2 is exactly what Mookie did and exactly what Dewey's Cannon proposed for Benintendi. The only reason I said "basically" was because Betts didn't start the year in Boston. I don't think it's at all far-fetched that he could be in Boston at the same pace unless he is blocked.
Of course it's far fetched. List the number of players who have done it. List the number who haven't. Count both lists. Do the math. You're gonna get a number that's greater than zero and a hell of a lot less than likely.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Of course it's far fetched. List the number of players who have done it. List the number who haven't. Count both lists. Do the math. You're gonna get a number that's greater than zero and a hell of a lot less than likely.
Assuming we can agree that "done it" means "made the majors in their second full year after being drafted," you still have to define your denominator. All draftees? 21-year-old draftees? 21-year-old draftees who dominated the lower minors in their first half-season? 21-year-old draftees who were named by Baseball America as closest to making the majors in their draft class?
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,422
Not here
Assuming we can agree that "done it" means "made the majors in their second full year after being drafted," you still have to define your denominator. All draftees? 21-year-old draftees? 21-year-old draftees who dominated the lower minors in their first half-season? 21-year-old draftees who were named by Baseball America as closest to making the majors in their draft class?
I don't know how you define "likely" but it has to be significantly more than a 50% probability and I'm not sure there is a denominator you can find that makes it true.

What I had in mind was top ten picks that went to college and weren't pitchers which I thought was pretty generous.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
What I had in mind was top ten picks that went to college and weren't pitchers which I thought was pretty generous.
If that's the group we're comparing to, then Benintendi has a much better than 50/50 chance of making the majors by 2017, in fact a 75% chance. Unless I'm missing somebody, here are all the top-10 picks who were college position players between 2004 and 2013:

Made the majors by second full year in pros
Kris Bryant
Mike Zunino
Anthony Rendon
Bryce Harper
Dustin Ackley
Pedro Alvarez
Buster Posey
Yonder Alonso
Gordon Beckham
Jason Castro
Matt Wieters
Matt LaPorta
Evan Longoria
Alex Gordon
Jeff Clement
Ryan Zimmerman
Ryan Braun
Troy Tulowitzki

Took longer than that, or haven't made it yet
Colin Moran
Cory Spangenberg
Christian Colon
Michael Choice
Tony Sanchez
Drew Stubbs

In fact, looking at these lists, it almost seems like we can say that if Benintendi is going to have any kind of substantial ML career at all, he'll probably make the big club by 2017.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,422
Not here
If that's the group we're comparing to, then Benintendi has a much better than 50/50 chance of making the majors by 2017, in fact a 75% chance. Unless I'm missing somebody, here are all the top-10 picks who were college position players between 2004 and 2013:

Made the majors by second full year in pros
Kris Bryant
Mike Zunino
Anthony Rendon
Bryce Harper
Dustin Ackley
Pedro Alvarez
Buster Posey
Yonder Alonso
Gordon Beckham
Jason Castro
Matt Wieters
Matt LaPorta
Evan Longoria
Alex Gordon
Jeff Clement
Ryan Zimmerman
Ryan Braun
Troy Tulowitzki

Took longer than that, or haven't made it yet
Colin Moran
Cory Spangenberg
Christian Colon
Michael Choice
Tony Sanchez
Drew Stubbs

In fact, looking at these lists, it almost seems like we can say that if Benintendi is going to have any kind of substantial ML career at all, he'll probably make the big club by 2017.
Well don't I look like an ass? 'Sokay, when I don't do the research myself, I deserve to.

I just took a look at a few of these guys and almost to a man, they played at higher than Low A in their first year.

And to reiterate the larger point, the claim was that the Sox were factoring in his major league readiness when making roster decisions for 2016 and 2017. "Only a year away" was the claim. Not a deep depth option a year and a half down the road. Not a September callup after two full minor league seasons. A roster consideration for the start of 2017. He would have to excel, be promoted aggressively, excel again, be promoted aggressively again, and excel again, plus have other options fail and have the Sox decide not to pick up a depth option and not decide to keep as many resources as possible.

I mean, bully for him if he pulls it off, he looks like he's going to be an exciting player, but if he's anything but a September callup or a deep depth option in 2017, a lot of things have to happen just right and it aint likely.