Hanley DFA'd (5/25 Update)

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,219
Portland
I don't think there is any avoiding the option vesting. He is hitting just well enough where they need him in the lineup even if it is fesh for a 1b. It sucks, but they just don't have another bat that makes sense to replace him right now.

Aside from the Rockies, there aren't many other potential fits barring injuries.

The Mets could probably use a short term 1b upgrade since they have Adrian Gonzalez, but Gonzalez has been close to Hanley's production for a fraction of the cost.

The Angels 1b production is poor but Pujols is on the roster and is probably going to play no matter how poorly he hits.

The Twins are getting nothing from Morrison but are cheap.

Every other contender is set.
 

NDame616

will bailey
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
2,301
In the last month (since April 21st) Hanley has hit .223 with an OPS of .623. With the only other alternative being JBJ and his black hole getting significant starts, the front office is probably not too happy if his option vests. If JBJ was hitting a little more it would be much easier to just bench Hanley
 

nothumb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 27, 2006
7,065
yammer's favorite poster
In the last month (since April 21st) Hanley has hit .223 with an OPS of .623. With the only other alternative being JBJ and his black hole getting significant starts, the front office is probably not too happy if his option vests. If JBJ was hitting a little more it would be much easier to just bench Hanley
With JBJ getting a couple hits last night, I am really hoping he can do enough to justify playing Moreland over Hanley vs RHP most of the time, as I suggested in the lineup thread.
 

NDame616

will bailey
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
2,301
JBJ coming into his insanely 6 week hot stretch would certainly help the "log jam" of suck
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,219
Portland
Between the 50% ground ball rate, and 1/6 of his balls in the air being pop ups, he is hitting into a lot of high percentage outs. His ISO is the second lowest of his career too.

Just a god awful contract situation all around, but at least it's happening when they are winning.
 
Last edited:

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,653
He’s on pace for 634 PAs. He has been worth 0.4 brWAR.

Since 2015, he has put up a 105wRC+ across 1790 PAs. This year, he's at 99 wRC+.

Finding a suitable replacement for this year is one thing — though guys like Steve Pearce, Sean Rodriguez, or David Freese could be fairly easy to acquire. But it remains truly absurd to sink $22M into his 2019 season when we have little to no means for acquiring talent besides money.
 
Last edited:

dbecks

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2010
61
Texas
One more reason tonight - in the 1st damn inning - that he shouldn’t be batting 3rd, much less being undeserving of those 497+ PAs.

Once Pedey comes back, Hanley should be batting 6th (if not outright benched in favor of Moreland) until he ends this current slump.
 

Pinchrunner#2

New Member
Nov 29, 2015
43
I'm just surprised that there is no apparent motivation to limit Hanley's AB because of his option. Especially since the numbers and the player alternatives would perfectly support such a move. Moreland has an OPS of .1000 but Cora sticks with Ramirez even against tough RHP (like tonight). To me it doesn't make sense. It's not like we would be benching a superstar who is going to hit eventually according to his salary. Ramirez hasn't been a 20 million $ hitter for a couple of seasons now. All that being said, there should be multiple motivation to limit his AB and I don't see it. Also putting him in the no. 3 hole only helps his ego but not the team. It's a little bit embarassing imo.
 

NDame616

will bailey
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
2,301
He’s on pace for 634 PAs. He has been worth 0.4 brWAR.

Since 2015, he has put up a 105wRC+ across 1790 PAs. This year, he's at 99 wRC+.

Finding a suitable replacement for this year is one thing — though guys like Steve Pearce, Sean Rodriguez, or David Freese could be fairly easy to acquire. But it remains truly absurd to sink $22M into his 2019 season when we have little to no means for acquiring talent besides money.
We have a suitable replacement already on the roster.
 

pinkunicornsox

New Member
Oct 8, 2017
98
Cora seems like a pretty smart dude and he seems to like utilizing statistics in how he puts together his lineup. That being said I honestly can't understand why Hanley is still in the three hole. Is their a justification for this that I am not realizing? Wouldn't the offense be more productive with Bogey in the three hole and Hanley batting fifth, sixth or seventh depending on if Moreland is playing and if Devers is out of his slump?
 

judyb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
4,444
Wilmington MA
The only logical justification I can think of is he still believes Hanley is going to turn back into the really good hitter he's been for most of his career.
 

SouthernBoSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2005
12,075
Hanley just had one of the worst days he's ever had according to WPA.

He was awful. He's been awful. Mitch Moreland is an upgrade not only in the field, but at the plate.

And oh yea. If Hanley triggers a plate appearances number it's going to costs us 20+ million. While we have Mitch signed up for 2019 for 6mm.

This has to be addressed.
 

Manramsclan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
3,370
The way he is performing, it would be foolish to let Hanley's option vest when the Red Sox don't have a great deal of payroll flexibility.

It's time to cut bait with him.When Pedroia comes back, DFA him, and see who is interested and at what cost. Swihart has present and future value for a bat to replace Hanley or with the current club. At his salary, Hanley actually has negative value. Take whatever salary relief that you can get for him, even it means eating this year's salary to avoid that option vesting.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
I can understand why people might want to get Hanley but to suggest Swihart has actual value and should replace him is absurd.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,653
I can understand why people might want to get Hanley but to suggest Swihart has actual value and should replace him is absurd.
Maybe so, but there’s an opportunity cost wrapped up in Swihart’s value that doesn’t apply to Hanley.

If Blake were to “replace” Hanley in the lineup full-time and puts up a 130 wRC+ through July 15, catching here and there, he becomes a more attractive trade chip, or a more clearly defined MLB asset for us long term. (I’m putting aside Moreland, his obvious replacement, for the sake of this example.)

If Hanley were to do that, we’re no closer to being able to count on his future production, no more able to trade him (given his contract and other contenders’ first base situations), and much closer to paying him roughly 60 percent of our available pre-secondary tax money next offseason.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Maybe so, but there’s an opportunity cost wrapped up in Swihart’s value that doesn’t apply to Hanley.

If Blake were to “replace” Hanley in the lineup full-time and puts up a 130 wRC+ through July 15, catching here and there, he becomes a more attractive trade chip, or a more clearly defined MLB asset for us long term. (I’m putting aside Moreland, his obvious replacement, for the sake of this example.)

If Hanley were to do that, we’re no closer to being able to count on his future production, no more able to trade him (given his contract and other contenders’ first base situations), and much closer to paying him roughly 60 percent of our available pre-secondary tax money next offseason.

That if is bigger than Yabusele's ass. The most likely scenario is he puts up an OPS south of .600. People need to get over their Swihart love, he is a bust.

Even in his one season that people love to cling on to (pre injury, mind you) he hit for no power and had an incredibly high BAbip.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,653
That if is bigger than Yabusele's ass. The most likely scenario is he puts up an OPS south of .600. People need to get over their Swihart love, he is a bust.

Even in his one season that people love to cling on to he hit for no power and had an incredibly high BAbip.
Yeah, I wouldn't bet on it either. But right now, playing Swihart to find that information out doesn't contain the negative future value that playing Hanley does. And there's at least the chance of cultivating an asset where none exist.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Yeah, I wouldn't bet on it either. But right now, playing Swihart to find that information out doesn't contain the negative future value that playing Hanley does. And there's at least the chance of cultivating an asset where none exist.
Right, it only contains more CURRENT negative value than playing Hanley does. Who cares about 2018?
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,653
Right, it only contains more CURRENT negative value than playing Hanley does. Who cares about 2018?
Do you hear me making the argument to tank 2018? Hanley's hitting .171/.210/.316 from the 3-hole in May.
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
13,556
Springfield, VA
DFAing Ramirez is insane, obviously, but Cora has to stop playing him 6 games a week. Moreland has clearly earned a full time starter role at 1B, and that's a hell of a lot more important than giving Swihart a few extra PAs.

Unless someone needs a rest, he should only be in the starting lineup facing LHPs (replacing Benintendi) and possibly behind Porcello (1.43 GB/FB ratio makes JBJ's defense less valuable).
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Do you hear me making the argument to tank 2018? Hanley's hitting .171/.210/.316 from the 3-hole in May.
And Swihart is hitting just as well as Hanley's May and had a sub .600 OPS in AAA last year. Swihart is not the answer, especially when we already have JBJ and Leon/Vaz giving the other team 6 free outs. We don't need to make it 9.

If this teams wants to replace Hanley, fine. You don't replace him with Blake F'n Swihart though.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,653
And Swihart is hitting just as well as Hanley's May and had a sub .600 OPS in AAA last year. Swihart is not the answer, especially when we already have JBJ and Leon/Vaz giving the other team 6 free outs. We don't need to make it 9.

If this teams wants to replace Hanley, fine. You don't replace him with Blake F'n Swihart though.
Well, the point's largely moot, since the bulk of Hanley's PAs in any scenario he's replaced would go to Moreland.

It depends on whether you'd think the team should acquire a guy who can play first base and hits lefties well to pair with Moreland. Maybe that's Holt? (Could work.) Maybe it's Nuñez? (Hope not.) In any case it doesn't seem like a great spot for Swihart, but it's more PAs than he's getting now, and may be preferable to giving up assets for Canha, Pearce, Freese or whomever.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,415
Not here
I'm pretty sure dfaing Ramirez is a non-starter.

Play Moreland more. Drop Ramirez in the order when he does play. Problem solved.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,144
AZ
For those who would have dropped Hanley in the lineup, I’m curious what the lineup would be. What is your lineup construction for a lineup that includes the following: Mookie, JBJ, Beni, Devers, Xander, Nunez, Hanley, Catcher, JDM.

To be clear, I think the time has come for Moreland to have earned a platoon starting role with Hanley being the LOOGY pinch hitter when a RHP starts. But that’s not the question. Everyone has acted all year in gamethreads at least that it’s obvious that Hanley needs to drop but I’m not sure I like the lineups that result any better and think we are talking a very modest change in run production if any.

I also tend to think Managers are more attuned to factors that we can’t know about like the consequence of batting Xander cleanup. Do you mess with a guy OPSin 150 points better than last year by putting him in a spot he never hits? Etc.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,653
For those who would have dropped Hanley in the lineup, I’m curious what the lineup would be. What is your lineup construction for a lineup that includes the following: Mookie, JBJ, Beni, Devers, Xander, Nunez, Hanley, Catcher, JDM.

To be clear, I think the time has come for Moreland to have earned a platoon starting role with Hanley being the LOOGY pinch hitter when a RHP starts. But that’s not the question. Everyone has acted all year in gamethreads at least that it’s obvious that Hanley needs to drop but I’m not sure I like the lineups that result any better and think we are talking a very modest change in run production if any.

I also tend to think Managers are more attuned to factors that we can’t know about like the consequence of batting Xander cleanup. Do you mess with a guy OPSin 150 points better than last year by putting him in a spot he never hits? Etc.
I’d like to see Moreland hitting second. Infields would have to choose between putting the shift on him or playing at double-play depth (with Mookie on) and he’s got relatively low GB and IFFB rates to begin with.

Benintendi should hit before Hanley, maybe at 5-6. Beni’s speed could be better put to use there without concern he’d get thrown out before a JDM
at-bat.

But all that’s in a lineup without JBJ, who should get a chance to rebound, so it doesn’t perfectly answer your question.
 

Bosox1528

New Member
Dec 22, 2017
178
I keep hearing "DFAing Hanley is insane", "DFAing Hanley is a non-starter"

Why?
Hanley was a below replacement level player last year. Hanley is a replacement level player this year. Hanley was a below replacement level player in 2015. Projections have Hanley barely above replacement level for the rest of the year.

Mitch Moreland is a better player than Hanley. As much as he's sucked this year, I'd expect Jackie Bradley Jr. to be a better player than Hanley going forward. Average hitters like JBJ shouldn't be expected to simply drop off to a 49 wRC+ forever at 28 years old, and JBJ has defensive value. Honestly, I don't think a quad A player like Mike Olt or a waiver wire pickup like Seth Smith would be too different than Hanley.

And the biggest difference is that none of these people will cost 22 million dollars next year

I'd like us just to DFA Hanley, run JBJ out there in CF, play Moreland full time, and bring up Olt or sign Smith as a bench player
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
is JBJ an average hitter? He has an interesting track record and there isn't a shortage of players like Jeremy Hermida and Will Middlebrooks who have success and then wash out of the league.

He may rebound, but I wouldn't be shocked if he simply dropped off and/or failed to adjust either.
 

Bosox1528

New Member
Dec 22, 2017
178
is JBJ an average hitter? He has an interesting track record and there isn't a shortage of players like Jeremy Hermida and Will Middlebrooks who have success and then wash out of the league.

He may rebound, but I wouldn't be shocked if he simply dropped off and/or failed to adjust either.
From 2015 to 2017, he had a 109 wRC+. Will Middlebrooks had half a good season. Jeremy Hermida had 70% of a good season.
 

pinkunicornsox

New Member
Oct 8, 2017
98
What I find interesting is that JBJ plays like crap and he gets his playing time reduced in order to work on his swing. Hanley plays likes crap and he continues to bat in the three hole. I don't understand the discrepancy in dealing with players. The only thing I can think of is that Cora doesn't want the headache that might arrive if Hanley is benched and he is not getting the plate appearances he needs to trigger his option.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
From 2015 to 2017, he had a 109 wRC+. Will Middlebrooks had half a good season. Jeremy Hermida had 70% of a good season.
JBJ had a good month in 2015 and was good for about 70% of the season in 2016 before falling off a cliff. Last year, he was good for about a month and a half.

When JBJ is bad, he is f'n terrible and I'm not sure you can keep relying on him to hit like Barry Bonds for 1 month every season.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
58,851
San Andreas Fault
Hanley has 191 plate appearances this year and Mitch has 114. Just looking at OPS, it’s .724 vs. .991, advantage Mitch. A lot of players might be grousing and bitching by now, but apparently Mitch is keeping his mouth shut. Great team guy, Mitch, but Cora is mismanaging this one, IMO. Mitch is a better fielder too, of course.
 

In my lifetime

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
959
Connecticut
I hope it is just Cora giving the players that extra few weeks to get it together before making the change similar to JBJ (who looks like his swing is really broken - instead of bat to the ball precontact and then post-contact elevation; he is is just a looping his entire swing and as a result has a huge hole in his swing). I would expect Cora shortly to move Hanley down in order, sit him for more games and replace him late defensively on a regular basis.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,144
AZ
I’d like to see Moreland hitting second. Infields would have to choose between putting the shift on him or playing at double-play depth (with Mookie on) and he’s got relatively low GB and IFFB rates to begin with.

Benintendi should hit before Hanley, maybe at 5-6. Beni’s speed could be better put to use there without concern he’d get thrown out before a JDM
at-bat.

But all that’s in a lineup without JBJ, who should get a chance to rebound, so it doesn’t perfectly answer your question.
Yeah, I agree that a lineup with both Hanley and Mitch gives more options and is easier to construct and could result in moving Hanley down. Though, you really have to be careful. Mitch is having a good year but traditionally he's been very poor against left handed pitchers, and so he's always susceptible to a LOOGY in a close and late situation. When Hanley is in the game and JBJ is on the bench you're pretty screwed with respect to right-handed hitting off the bench. Batting Moreland second can take the bat out of Mookie's hands in a situation where you'd really rather not. Then again, it's not like Beni is any good against lefties and so maybe it doesn't really change anything. It's hard thinking through all the combinations but my instinct is that Cora is reasonably correct in what appears to be his thinking -- that unless JDM is getting a day off a line up with Hanley and Mitch both starting is probably not ideal.

But my question was more designed toward the "drop Hanley" lineup arguments that you see a lot in gamethreads. I understand the sentiment completely, but when you try to make it happen it just creates a law of unintended consequences problem that leads me to think that maybe Cora is actually playing some chess while we're playing reactive checkers.

To me, it's time for a straight platoon. My instinct is that Hanley's place in the lineup when it's his turn to start against lefty pitchers really isn't all that important and third is not materially worse than anywhere else.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
21,446
Rogers Park
I hope it is just Cora giving the players that extra few weeks to get it together before making the change similar to JBJ (who looks like his swing is really broken - instead of bat to the ball precontact and then post-contact elevation; he is is just a looping his entire swing and as a result has a huge hole in his swing). I would expect Cora shortly to move Hanley down in order, sit him for more games and replace him late defensively on a regular basis.
He looks a lot better to me since his several day sit down, and the results look better, too. He still has some swing and miss, but he's also hitting balls at the top of the zone.
 

pinkunicornsox

New Member
Oct 8, 2017
98
I assume when you refer to people wanting to drop Hanley, you are referring to people who want to DFA him? I will agree that is extreme. I think allowing Moreland to play first for a couple days in a row and allowing Hanley to work on his swing is more realistic. Whatever happens though Hanley should not hit third. Someone like Bogey or Moreland would be much better in that slot, since they can keep the line moving.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,144
AZ
I was referring to dropping him in the lineup.

I can't imagine a circumstance in which he gets cut. Even if moved to a platoon role with Moreland, he's the best righty we have off the bench. The options for right handed hitting off the bench after Pedrioa gets back will be whichever catcher didn't start (and Sandy is a switch), Nunez and Swihart (one of whom likely won't be here; and Swihart is a switch).
 

pinkunicornsox

New Member
Oct 8, 2017
98
I am not sure I understand your argument then. Wouldn't Bogey or Moreland in the three hole extend the lineup, thus making it more productive?
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,219
Portland
I don't think you can justify benching Moreland much longer. Even with him being a frequently marginal overall player, he has still been better than Hanley over the last 4 years.

If you blame Hanley's injuries over his Sox contract on his drop in production, then I think you have to consider that Moreland had a pretty significant one last year too and was hitting really well before it.

I don't expect Moreland to keep up anything close to this, but I do believe it's a better team even if he turns back into Mitch Moreland.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,144
AZ
I am not sure I understand your argument then. Wouldn't Bogey or Moreland in the three hole extend the lineup, thus making it more productive?
Most of the arguments I've see about dropping Hanley want to do it to have JDM higher up. And, again, the question is how our regular base lineup (Hanley in Moreland not) should be constructed if Hanley doesn't bat third. So, your option would be to move Xander up. What's your lineup, then? I'm assuming:

Mookie
Beni
Xander
JDM
Raffi
Hanley
Nunez
Catcher
JBJ

Or

Mookie
Beni
Xander
JDM
Hanley
Raffi
Nunez
Catcher
JBJ

Of the two, I like the second slightly better. Both might be a very modest upgrade, but at the risk of screwing with Xander. And maybe it's time for the move. But I'm thinking that the difference in run production between the lineup Cora has been using and this lineup is rather modest if anything, and I certainly don't have a problem with Cora thinking even up until last night that JDM provides better protection for Hanley than Raffi does.
 

pinkunicornsox

New Member
Oct 8, 2017
98
So it would seem that the logical thing to do at this point would be to put in Moreland. Even though he is due for regressions, it won't be hard for his numbers to be better then Hanely.
 

RIrooter09

Alvin
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2008
7,251
If we're adding Moreland to the lineup on a regular basis he should be replacing JBJ. His bat has been far worse than Hanley's.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,144
AZ
So it would seem that the logical thing to do at this point would be to put in Moreland. Even though he is due for regressions, it won't be hard for his numbers to be better then Hanely.
Right, I agree with this, though as I've said I don't like a lineup that starts both Hanley and Moreland and think it presents some challenges. I recognize that JBJ may be getting to a point where his defense does not warrant his place in the lineup but I'm not ready to declare that yet with a plus defender on a winning team. It's still only May.
 

Adrian's Dome

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2010
4,424
If we're adding Moreland to the lineup on a regular basis he should be replacing JBJ. His bat has been far worse than Hanley's.
Defense matters. Moreland over Hanley straight up improves O and D (and puts a decent situational PH option on the bench,) Moreland over JBJ improves O, but drastically hurts the D as it puts JDM in left and offers you less flexibility.
 

RIrooter09

Alvin
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2008
7,251
Defense matters. Moreland over Hanley straight up improves O and D (and puts a decent situational PH option on the bench,) Moreland over JBJ improves O, but drastically hurts the D as it puts JDM in left and offers you less flexibility.
Fewer balls are being put in play than ever before. I'll take my chances with the ~.200 points of OPS, and JDM playing the smallest corner outfield spot.
 

Adrian's Dome

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2010
4,424
Fewer balls are being put in play than ever before. I'll take my chances with the ~.200 points of OPS, and JDM playing the smallest corner outfield spot.
You're also downgrading CF, which makes the LF's job harder, downgrading the bench as JBJ will pretty much only be a late-inning defensive replacement, and worsening your positional flexibility.

It just doesn't make sense. It'd make more sense if there was a lefty masher on the bench (like a Chris Young) that could play a passable OF, but there isn't. As it stands the thing that makes the most sense is to just drop Hanley in the order and straight up platoon him and Moreland while hoping JBJ hits just enough to turn the bottom of the lineup over.