That's admirably optimistic, but you can just as easily see this as Farrell sending the message that guys will be jerked around based on perceived hotness. And I enjoy Holt, but he is almost certainly not the "best talent" at LF on the team.
Castillo relegated to Pawtucket
- Thread starter kazuneko
- Start date
Wait, it's Farrell's fault that Castillo can't hit? Some of the posts here are simply damned-if-he-does / damned-if-he-doesn't.
(I can only imagine the outcry if Castillo was handed the position and had a .240 April.)
I'm going to go by 2 things:
1. Dumbrowski's interview on the radio this weekend where he stated that Farrell will have all the say over who plays where and when - the only qualification being showcasing someone in Spring training for a possible trade.
2. The Speier piece where it was implied that Cherrington did not give Farrell free reign, but that the manager now has that power
I guess I'm not understanding the criticism. I see it as jasvlm's post above - Farrell is now making decisions based on performance, not contract. So, I'm willing to see how that plays out.
There's a lot to be concerned about, but I don't see how pointing the finger at Farrell has any justification before the season's even started.
(I can only imagine the outcry if Castillo was handed the position and had a .240 April.)
I'm going to go by 2 things:
1. Dumbrowski's interview on the radio this weekend where he stated that Farrell will have all the say over who plays where and when - the only qualification being showcasing someone in Spring training for a possible trade.
2. The Speier piece where it was implied that Cherrington did not give Farrell free reign, but that the manager now has that power
I guess I'm not understanding the criticism. I see it as jasvlm's post above - Farrell is now making decisions based on performance, not contract. So, I'm willing to see how that plays out.
There's a lot to be concerned about, but I don't see how pointing the finger at Farrell has any justification before the season's even started.
I wouldn't have done this but it is what it is. Holt will likely be in a platoon OF role and retain his utility function. (If he's not going to be, say, Bogaerts' backup, they will need to send Castillo down and bring Marrero north). Chris Young will play against LHP with most of that time coming in LF. If Bradley hits reasonably he'll be the everyday CF, if he doesn't Castillo will get some time there.
I don't think Holt will be an everyday player except when he is on one of his red hot streaks.
I don't think Holt will be an everyday player except when he is on one of his red hot streaks.
If Pablo is the starting 3B and Rick Porcello is getting the ball every fifth day, I'm not sure you can really say that about the message. At least not with total conviction.
In fairness, Travis Shaw may have complicated things somewhat with his 0-17 skid, and none of Owens, Johnson or Elias has made a compelling case to replace Porcello,
But still, Pablo and Porcello, much less the Hanley Experiment at first, are arguably not the best the Sox could do if they were truly bound and determined to ignore economics.
All that said, I think going with Holt as the starter against righties for now is the right move. I have no illusions about Holt. But regardless of his limitations, he will almost certainly hit better than Rusney, and whatever gap might exist between them defensively will not overtake the offensive uptick Holt will provide. I also think it's relevant that the Sox desperately want to come out firing this year, and having Rusney's 0-4s in the lineup would not help.
I don't think anyone is clamoring for Castillo to be handed a starting gig (even the weak half of a platoon) -- he hasn't earned that. Those of us who disagree with Castillo being benched want DD to ship him to Pawtucket, which would be consistent with the philosophy you're describing.
Totally agree on Sandoval vs. Shaw. Sandoval was an awfully good ballplayer not that long ago, so I'd like to see him get a chance if he's showing signs of life, but the time to cut bait is drawing near if he isn't -- contract be damned.
The Sox have a problem at SP (Porcello plus the hole left by Rodriguez' injury, which now appears to be more serious than originally thought), 3b (Panda), and LF (Castillo).
I didn't mind the trade to acquire Porcello, given that Cespedes was likely gone anyway. But to give him that massive contract right away was foolish. Yes he performed well in the second half of last year but in some ways it was a bit of smoke and mirrors. His babip, line drive rate, and strike percentages were virtually identical to that from the first half of the season.
The Panda situation has been discussed already at length. As for Castillo, I think it makes sense to try to maximize that asset, especially given the dollars invested in him. He's under contract through 2020 at $11.8m, $11.8m, $11.8m, $11.8m, and $14.3m. That's not much money if he emerges as a legit starting LF. But he's not there yet. And their commitment to him is for a long time. If that money is going to be spent, I'd like for him to become the best baseball player he can be, and for now, I think it's apparent that he stays in AAA until he gets sorted out and improves to the point where he can be a real starter for the major league club. Sitting the bench in Boston will not help matters.
So ideally, aside from Rusney suddenly getting it, the plan should be for him to be in AAA. But what about LF then? Holt will be fine there, and a platoon of him and Young should serve well. Even though Holt has a reverse split, him versus righties is still better than Young versus righties.
Vs. RHP (2015)
Holt: .270/.333/.368/.701
Young: .182/.246/.339/.585
Vs. LHP (2015, Career)
Holt: .312/.394/.413/.807
Young: .327/.397/.575/.972
So a Holt/Young platoon would likely give the Sox about a .790 ops combined from LF, roughly speaking. That .790 ops would have put them 7th in all of baseball, so that would end up being a positive thing.
But Holt is so valuable as a swiss army knife that I wonder what happens against righties when Holt is covering for Bogaerts or Panda or Pedroia. Maybe that's when Shaw plays LF? Because we really do not want Young in there against RHP. But Shaw also has reverse splits (or he did in 2015), putting up an ops of .723 against righties, and .975 against lefties. Still, either way it's better than Young.
So, lineup vs. RHP
C - Swihart/Hanigan
1b - Hanley
2b - Pedroia
3b - Panda
SS - Bogaerts
LF - Holt/Shaw
CF - JBJ
RF - Betts
DH - Ortiz
Lineup vs. LHP
C - Swihart/Hanigan
1b - Hanley
2b - Pedroia
3b - Panda
SS - Bogaerts
LF - Young
CF - JBJ
RF - Betts
DH - Ortiz
Lineup vs. RHP when Holt is playing for someone else
C - Swihart/Hanigan
1b - Hanley
2b - Pedroia
3b - Holt
SS - Bogaerts
LF - Shaw
CF - JBJ
RF - Betts
DH - Ortiz
You could do a lot worse. Shaw's flexibility helps, though I really have no idea how he'd do in LF. I really wish they had come to this conclusion earlier, moved Castillo to AAA, and let Murphy have a shot at the LF job. He's not exactly Ted Williams, but he does have a career ops of .795 against righties and could play a passable LF.
I didn't mind the trade to acquire Porcello, given that Cespedes was likely gone anyway. But to give him that massive contract right away was foolish. Yes he performed well in the second half of last year but in some ways it was a bit of smoke and mirrors. His babip, line drive rate, and strike percentages were virtually identical to that from the first half of the season.
The Panda situation has been discussed already at length. As for Castillo, I think it makes sense to try to maximize that asset, especially given the dollars invested in him. He's under contract through 2020 at $11.8m, $11.8m, $11.8m, $11.8m, and $14.3m. That's not much money if he emerges as a legit starting LF. But he's not there yet. And their commitment to him is for a long time. If that money is going to be spent, I'd like for him to become the best baseball player he can be, and for now, I think it's apparent that he stays in AAA until he gets sorted out and improves to the point where he can be a real starter for the major league club. Sitting the bench in Boston will not help matters.
So ideally, aside from Rusney suddenly getting it, the plan should be for him to be in AAA. But what about LF then? Holt will be fine there, and a platoon of him and Young should serve well. Even though Holt has a reverse split, him versus righties is still better than Young versus righties.
Vs. RHP (2015)
Holt: .270/.333/.368/.701
Young: .182/.246/.339/.585
Vs. LHP (2015, Career)
Holt: .312/.394/.413/.807
Young: .327/.397/.575/.972
So a Holt/Young platoon would likely give the Sox about a .790 ops combined from LF, roughly speaking. That .790 ops would have put them 7th in all of baseball, so that would end up being a positive thing.
But Holt is so valuable as a swiss army knife that I wonder what happens against righties when Holt is covering for Bogaerts or Panda or Pedroia. Maybe that's when Shaw plays LF? Because we really do not want Young in there against RHP. But Shaw also has reverse splits (or he did in 2015), putting up an ops of .723 against righties, and .975 against lefties. Still, either way it's better than Young.
So, lineup vs. RHP
C - Swihart/Hanigan
1b - Hanley
2b - Pedroia
3b - Panda
SS - Bogaerts
LF - Holt/Shaw
CF - JBJ
RF - Betts
DH - Ortiz
Lineup vs. LHP
C - Swihart/Hanigan
1b - Hanley
2b - Pedroia
3b - Panda
SS - Bogaerts
LF - Young
CF - JBJ
RF - Betts
DH - Ortiz
Lineup vs. RHP when Holt is playing for someone else
C - Swihart/Hanigan
1b - Hanley
2b - Pedroia
3b - Holt
SS - Bogaerts
LF - Shaw
CF - JBJ
RF - Betts
DH - Ortiz
You could do a lot worse. Shaw's flexibility helps, though I really have no idea how he'd do in LF. I really wish they had come to this conclusion earlier, moved Castillo to AAA, and let Murphy have a shot at the LF job. He's not exactly Ted Williams, but he does have a career ops of .795 against righties and could play a passable LF.
Really odd that someone who wasn't particularly great statistically in Cuba would have trouble breaking in as an everyday player in the majors. They gambled big on tools, and the early returns are they got an AAAA type.
I can't wait for a whole season of calling the guy that got Price and Kimbrel Dumbrowski.
There's no chance Farrell would be manager of this club if he hadn't had cancer. The team played better during his absence. Obviously, Farrell has proven himself a capable manager with the right players, but I don't think he deserves any benefit of the doubt in the current situation.
I actually thought is was a typo, my bad. I would expect to see Panda sit against LHP if they are going to try to maximize match ups.
Ideally, Holt should play 3B against LHP, while Young plays LF.
However, this is not an ideal world. And this is not an ideal roster.
Exactly. He seems more Wily Mo than Puig. Plate discipline rarely improves at this stage of a players career. They can't afford to deal with a learn on the job type player, since they are in win now mode. He has to face and hit big league pitching, yesterday.
The reasoning could be one or a combination of issues:
1) Perhaps he has maturity issues that are better served being worked on under closer watch, and the message being sent is that he has to earn his playing time.
2) Or -they view him as a useful 4th or 5th OF and feel that role is the best fit for the club and have the luxury to afford that. The big evidence is the fact that the Pawtucket outfield is comprised of three non-prospects and it was a firm "not happening" quote from the Sox source of him being demoted.
3) They don't want to burn an option if they know another team is interested in acquiring him since it makes him more valuable.
4) Or - Farrell knows he's managing for his job and needs to go with the hot hand. I do not believe for one minute that Dombrowski isn't influencing Farrell's decisions either directly or by sitting in the stands. Has there ever been a GM/Management type to own up to that?
5) Or - The clubhouse can't believe their one, by all accounts, very well liked, lone all-star rep has to lose at bats to some zero instinct, rich minor leaguer. People are human and see the paychecks. I and my co-workers can't believe my HR guy makes what he does. Resentment occurs. I think this particular aspect is being underrated. Not saying the inmates run the asylum necessarily, but Farrell hasn't made too many unpopular decisions since he has been here. Holt is the better player and the clubhouse believes it, and the numbers back it up.
I realize some of these guesses are throwing shit around, but there is a good reason we are not privy to that he is not in AAA and I happen to think the option idea is what could be driving this thing. He is good enough to start for someone who is going nowhere this year, and there is certainly a market for him with all the piss poor outfielders out there (see Cleveland and Philly). Especially if the Sox subsidize even 2-3 million. There is no way he doesn't earn that and add to that he is more than just a lottery ticket
Last edited:
Yeah, that's all fine. I assume they are making these decisions holistically and not based on 50 spring training at bats.
I think that my biggest problem at this point isn't that I think they are underestimating Castillo, but that we are overestimating how Holt's strengths will play in this situation. He is, to this point in his career, a slightly below average hitter who is better against lefties, and gets most of his value from playing defensively challenging IF positions well enough, and the fact that he can be your 5th OF in a pinch.
How is that 85-95 OPS+ going to play when it's in the context of the easiest defensive position in baseball, which is Fenway's LF? And platooning him against his slightly weaker side? That seems like a recipe (and FG Depthcharts, ZIPs, Steamer, and PECOTA all agree) for a WAR between 0 and 1, which just so happens to be the same level that they all project Rusney at.
OPS projections (FG Depth Charts/Steamer/ZIPs/PECOTA/average)
Holt: .701/.702/.700/.712/.703
Castillo: .692/.708/.677/.710/.697
And that's just the offensive side of things. While Holt has decent defense for a utility infielder, does anyone actually think that he is a better OFer than Castillo is? Whatever very slight potential advantage (if any) Holt has in offense is going to be wiped out by defense when he is out of position.
So production-wise, I don't see much argument that Holt in his bad platoon side playing LF is likely to be better than Rusney, unless we are going by ST stats, which I don't think anyone is really seriously suggesting. Then you have several huge opportunity costs that seem to come with this, in reducing the value you get from Holt by playing him around the IF (where his offense is much more valuable), the dollar value you lose by benching Rusney, and the potential upside you lose by not giving Rusney regular ABs to see if he can reach the potential that you signed him for.
How is that 85-95 OPS+ going to play when it's in the context of the easiest defensive position in baseball, which is Fenway's LF? And platooning him against his slightly weaker side? That seems like a recipe (and FG Depthcharts, ZIPs, Steamer, and PECOTA all agree) for a WAR between 0 and 1, which just so happens to be the same level that they all project Rusney at.
OPS projections (FG Depth Charts/Steamer/ZIPs/PECOTA/average)
Holt: .701/.702/.700/.712/.703
Castillo: .692/.708/.677/.710/.697
And that's just the offensive side of things. While Holt has decent defense for a utility infielder, does anyone actually think that he is a better OFer than Castillo is? Whatever very slight potential advantage (if any) Holt has in offense is going to be wiped out by defense when he is out of position.
So production-wise, I don't see much argument that Holt in his bad platoon side playing LF is likely to be better than Rusney, unless we are going by ST stats, which I don't think anyone is really seriously suggesting. Then you have several huge opportunity costs that seem to come with this, in reducing the value you get from Holt by playing him around the IF (where his offense is much more valuable), the dollar value you lose by benching Rusney, and the potential upside you lose by not giving Rusney regular ABs to see if he can reach the potential that you signed him for.
I say this because it seems like Farrell clearly plays favorites/lets certain players play through slumps to try and get out of them while burying other players for the same type of slump. It's not uniform but his favorites tend to be veterans (Holt and Young fit the bill but Shaw also seems to be one of his favorites as well).
If JF doesn't trust in a player/a player is not one of his favorites they get jerked around and don't get the same leeway that others do. Bradley and Castillo seem to fall in this category.
Basically, it seems to me that Farrell has a pre-determined plan and he waits for the results (all of which have to come during the normal ebbs and flows of a baseball season) to fit this plan so he can pass it off under the guise of results and playing the best players. I don't like Spring Training determining starters period, the Grady Sizemore experiment taught me that, but I especially don't like it when it seems that some players are being penalized for it while others don't (cough Porcello cough)
I also completely agree with what Buzzkill Pauley posted. I see JF trying to play with those 3 platoons but I wouldn't be surprised if CF is more of a 3 way platoon (JBJ, Castillo and Holt when Young is manning left)
The bolded is utterly false. JBJ was given 384 at bats in 2014, despite putting up an OPS of 0.617 the prior year. Bradley responded with a 0.531 OPS.
Meanwhile, Bogaerts has been given consistent playing time since the start of 2014, and Betts since the latter part of that same season. And JBJ has been essentially named the team's starting CF this season. Brock Holt was all of 26 and only had 120 at bats under his belt when he basically was handed the "every day utility" player role (and rightfully so). Travis Shaw is 26 and has one MLB season under his belt, and may unseat a much more established veteran.
Clearly, reasonable people can disagree on whether naming Brock Holt the starting LF over Castillo was the right move. And we can certainly debate the reasons and the expected outcome. I personally would have preferred that Castillo be given more time in AAA if the team wasn't convinced he was starting LF material. However, we should at least make the effort to be sure the reasons for these debatable decisions are grounded in reality; the "JF plays vets" meme is clearly not so well grounded.
There's a huge piece missing from this analysis, and his name is Chris Young.
The problem with Castillo is dead simple: you can't platoon him with Young, because if you do, then he's no longer a .700-ish hitter, but a .630-ish hitter. Holt may not have a platoon advantage vs. RHH, but Castillo has a distinct platoon disadvantage. A guy who hits righthanders that badly is only useful if he crushes lefthanders. And while Castillo has hit lefthanders respectably, he's fighting for playing time with a veteran who's an established lefty-killer.
If you traded Young tomorrow for a LHH equivalent (say Seth Smith), then Castillo as a platoon starter would make a whole lot more sense. But as it is, he's the jigsaw puzzle piece that just doesn't fit. He had a chance this spring to make that argument irrelevant, but he didn't do it.
But that just raises more questions. Since it was clear all winter that JBJ was going to be in center and Mookie in RF, then why bring in Young knowing that Castillo didn't make sense as a LF platoon partner? It's hard to argue that Castillo's spring was the problem when the guy who you say made him superfluous was brought in months earlier. And that still doesn't explain why the team wouldn't put Castillo back in AAA and keeping Murphy to be the other half of the Young platoon, with Holt staying as super-utility guy.
This is what is puzzling to me as well. If Castillo isn't the starter, then it seems to make more sense to have kept Murphy for the LF platoon, and let Castillo get ABs and hopefully some development at AAA. Better overall use of resources.
I guess JF just really loves Brock Holt, so much so that he wants him in the lineup most every day, rather than just spotting him in as a super-sub. We'll see how that plays out, and for how long.
I think Young was brought in as JBJ insurance as much as for Castillo. If Bradley completely flops and ends up back in AAA then you could live with Castillo in CF.
Mookie all day and night...but Rusney...I'D LOVE TO BELIEVE.
Just haven't seen it from him yet. Young, Murphy, Holt i'd like to see that platoon.
Have Castillo make his case in Pawtucket.
3 out of 4 last pace finishes since 2012?
Outfield needs to be solid no slow starts.
It's hard to untangle Farrell and Ben from some of these outcomes. The starting OF in 2014 was Nava (on fumes), Sizemore (on fumes) and JBJ as a premier defensive OF. Occasionally Gomes (on fumes) or Victorinio (on fumes) would get spelled in.
I don't know if Farrell played JBJ that much because Ben ordered him to, or because Ben had left Farrell few options and JBJ clearly excelled defensively.
I don't see any evidence that Cherington ordered Farrell to play JBJ. As you noted, there were really no other players available to take those at bats until Cespedes arrived in July and Betts in August.
But he did get them. The only time where Farrell made an active decision to not play JBJ was at the start of the 2015 season, when Bradley was sent down to AAA. But that decision was universally applauded as the right move at the time, as it was clear JBJ really needed to work on his swing in Pawtucket if he was ever going to have the chance to stick as a major league outfielder.
I read somewhere in the Glob that HOLT welcomes the move to left as something that will preserve his stamina. It wasn't clear to me if he thinks the outfield is easier than the infield, or if he means that switching positions is in itself tiring.
I mean, that's good and all. But I still think that the highest and best use of Holt is to preserve the stamina of 4-5 other guys in the lineup by spelling them. And he can't do that parked in LF.
Farrell just announced Rusney is headed to AAA. No word yet on who will take his place.
If this should be the first post of a new thread, by all means split it out, but I doubt this move will be controversial enough to generate much new discussion. This is something that obviously had to happen.
If this should be the first post of a new thread, by all means split it out, but I doubt this move will be controversial enough to generate much new discussion. This is something that obviously had to happen.
I think a BP arm. Having two catchers on the roster would be bad roster management IMO
Hembree and Varvaro are off to good starts. Could use another righty reliever with Toronto coming to town.
Or they could bring up Owens, who has been dominant so far, and either move Wright to the bullpen or go with six starters for a while. Starting Friday they enter a stretch of 17 straight game days and 33 out of a possible 34, so beefing up the pitching one way or another certainly seems like a good idea.
Varvaro makes sense. They don't necessarily need a long man as much as they need another arm to alleviate the early-season usage of Taz & Koji.
Not that it would keep them from bringing him up if he's the right guy, but Varvaro's not on the 40 man so they would be losing someone to call him up.
It really should be Hembree or Varvaro -- see if you can catch lightning in a bottle with a reliever and help keep some of the heat off Tazawa until Smith is back.
It's good the team finally rationalized its roster by moving Toolsney and the Panda off the 25-man.
I'm not at all surprised the Castillo move happened right after JBJ pulled his first XBH of the season and yanked a second long fly in the air foul. I always felt like his inclusion on the opening day roster was due to Farrell not being "sold" on JBJ's ability to even hit enough to bat ninth.
I hope Toolsney catches fire in Pawtucket, and ends up being worth something in trade, but he was never getting playing time once Farrell made it obvious that his preferred method of playing the bench involved moving Holt around the diamond in order to get a Shaw/Young platoon at the plate.
With the starters sputtering so badly out of the gate, the first corresponding move might be for a reliever, but I think it would be better to call up another bench sub. Even with BROCKHOLT, the roster is still too thin to give guys a day off with 17 games in a row starting tomorrow and the bench essentially restricted to LF and 2B.
Since Farrell decided on the head-scratching move to add Rutledge back on the 40-man instead of simply calling up the faster and more versatile Hernandez, I have to assume he'll also want to add Maxwell to provide the team that veteran backup RF every great team needs to ride the pine, instead of the faster and more versatile LaMarre (but in any event, finally dropping Coyle off the 40-man).
I'm not at all surprised the Castillo move happened right after JBJ pulled his first XBH of the season and yanked a second long fly in the air foul. I always felt like his inclusion on the opening day roster was due to Farrell not being "sold" on JBJ's ability to even hit enough to bat ninth.
I hope Toolsney catches fire in Pawtucket, and ends up being worth something in trade, but he was never getting playing time once Farrell made it obvious that his preferred method of playing the bench involved moving Holt around the diamond in order to get a Shaw/Young platoon at the plate.
With the starters sputtering so badly out of the gate, the first corresponding move might be for a reliever, but I think it would be better to call up another bench sub. Even with BROCKHOLT, the roster is still too thin to give guys a day off with 17 games in a row starting tomorrow and the bench essentially restricted to LF and 2B.
Since Farrell decided on the head-scratching move to add Rutledge back on the 40-man instead of simply calling up the faster and more versatile Hernandez, I have to assume he'll also want to add Maxwell to provide the team that veteran backup RF every great team needs to ride the pine, instead of the faster and more versatile LaMarre (but in any event, finally dropping Coyle off the 40-man).
Coyle, or maybe Brentz? Coyle is still just 24 and was a good double-A hitter as recently as two years ago. Brentz seems more clearly past his sell-by date as a prospect. OTOH we probably have more upper-minors depth at 2B than OF, so maybe you're right.
Brentz is also on the DL just now.
It honestly doesn't matter much which one would get DFA'd, but I'm sure Coyle would pass through waivers easily enough.
What's odd is that Rutledge was added to the 40-man, when both Hernandez and Marrero were already on it. But, Farrell.
That pitch that JBJ clocked for a triple was an absolute hanger. If decisions are being made after a couple of ABs, this organization is in a heap of trouble.
I do think it's a good idea to keep Castillo around as insurance for JBJ, but he can be that insurance in AAA just as easily as on the MLB roster. Bradley proving he can't hit over the long term is going to take a while. It would be nice to get data about how Castillo can hit in the majors, but that is clearly not going to happen.
But it's an absolute hanger that JBJ would have swung under for a strike or perhaps a weak popup in 2014.
And, frankly, I don't understand how anyone could look at this organization's moves since 2011, and not see that it's in a heap of trouble. There's a lot of promise, too, but that doesn't paper over the big heap of trouble.