Mookie Betts

[Manzivino]

You're moving him from the high end of the defensive spectrum to the low end unnecessarily and lowering his value, especially playing half his games in Fenway. He'll get time at CF/RF in Pawtucket until he proves he can't handle it, and probably SS to see if he can cover it in a pinch.

Edit: What he said.

 

[LondonSox]

I think moving JBJ out of CF long term is kind of nuts, he's a superb CF and Mookie? We have no idea.
 
If he keeps hitting like this screw the move down the defensive spectrum, he just needs to be in the lineup. If he comes back down to earth (which seems probable) but to a still very high level that becaomes a more interesting issue.
At 3B you have WMB and Cecchini and even X if he has to move
At SS you have X and maybe Marrero (who I think if he can hit like this and field like this is going to be a real option)
At 2B you have Pedey
At 1B You have Napoli and ?
At LF you have ? (Nava?) (Not counting Sizemore due to him being a FA next year)
At CF you have JBJ
At RF you have Victorino near term and ? long term
 
So 1B or Outfield all seem options. But as you say other than CF there is a big drop off in value.
Now I'll also note that all these cheap kids mean the team can SPEND to fill pitching (and let's remember the Owens, Barnes, Webster, De La Rosa, Workman etc) or those 3 missing spots (why they didn't try harder on Abreu is still a bit of a surprise to me). Signing a really big contract on a Stanton type if they reach FA seems like a real possibility. Otherwise they will be getting very cheap on payroll.
 
If you have a long term plan for 1B or LF then it might make sense to get Mookie in there for a filler and get his bat in the lineup and see what plays out. Having a guy with that bat able to play all over in case of injury is no bad thing, but I'm not clear that's how you want him to start in the bigs. It's enough pressure without learning a new position and moving all over the place day to day.
 
But get him to the bigs as LF for a year, check he's ready and then move him all over? That could happen.
Post Papi it's a lot easier too, because you can rest players via the DH, and have Mookie in that rotation.

 

[Merkle's Boner]

http://www.milb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20140429&content_id=73765280&fext=.jsp&vkey=news_milb&sid=milb
 
The money quote is from Couch who says, "Nobody knows why he's still here.  He should be in the big leagues."

 

[Manzivino]

I'm not really advocating to move JBJ from CF. I suggest it as a possibility because Mookie played CF in high school, it's an open spot in Pawtucket to break him into the OF for the foreseeable future (Nava's been playing there lately and they have Brentz playing everyday in RF), and JBJ's skill set profiles better in RF if Mookie's arm isn't up to par. Having 2 CF capable defenders is awesome, as we see from having Victorino in RF.

Also OT but Abreu signed with Chicago in mid-October, I'm not that surprised that they didn't push harder to sign Napoli's replacement while he was actively trying to win them a championship.

 

[smastroyin]

I'll reiterate.  There is no rush to move Mookie anywhere because major league ballplayers just don't find it that hard to acclimate to other positions if they are capable of playing them.  I like the idea of trying him at SS where you might need a larger sample to see if he can manage a tougher defensive position.  But LF or RF or really even CF if he has the athleticism, you can give him 5-10 days in the bucket at that position to transition and see if he is overmatched, and it's most likely that he is not.  If you want to move him now because you want him on the team by May 10 or something, well, that's a different thing, of course.
 
This team put Mike Carp in LF for games that count.  I don't think they will be shy about putting Mookie there even if he has little experience.

 

[Lowrielicious]

The alternative is to keep him at 2B , where his bat would be most valuable (assuming he can't handle SS obviously).
If he get anywhere near his current numbers after the jump to AAA then his trade value would be very high. With nowhere to play in the big club you trade him to fill one of any one of the other positions not currently contracted through 2021. Done right you should get an even better bat at a less defensively challenging position.

Moving Mookie off 2B to the outfield devalues his bat immediately.

 

[TheoShmeo]

The alternative is to keep him at 2B , where his bat would be most valuable (assuming he can't handle SS obviously).
If he get anywhere near his current numbers after the jump to AAA then his trade value would be very high. With nowhere to play in the big club you trade him to fill one of any one of the other positions not currently contracted through 2021. Done right you should get an even better bat at a less defensively challenging position.

Moving Mookie off 2B to the outfield devalues his bat immediately.

I don't think it's binary.
 
Mookie will still have great trade value for a team thinking of using him at his natural position even after he spends 10-20 games in the outfield in the minors.
 
If the Sox do that, they can have it both ways. They can test drive him as a possible contributor in Boston and not destroy his potential trade value.  Said differently, having a little bit of positonal versatility should not hurt him and, to the contrary, might help as teams might start to see him as a Zobrist type.

 

[WenZink]

The alternative is to keep him at 2B , where his bat would be most valuable (assuming he can't handle SS obviously).
If he get anywhere near his current numbers after the jump to AAA then his trade value would be very high. With nowhere to play in the big club you trade him to fill one of any one of the other positions not currently contracted through 2021. Done right you should get an even better bat at a less defensively challenging position.

Moving Mookie off 2B to the outfield devalues his bat immediately.

 
It's difficult to evaluate Betts' offensive value when he's in the midst of a .422 streak and when he projects to 50 2B, 25 HR AA season.  He has to slow down a bit and then see if the XBH are the first thing to disappear.  And if he doesn't slow down a whole lot then I guess you have put him on the fast track with AAA by mid-season.  Is he a pull hitter, or more of a spray hitter?  Is his arm strength good enough to be corner outfielder?  With the graduation of some of this year's prospects, he's got to be rated a top-tier kid and maybe his value would enable a Stanton trade without a having to make a 5 for 1 deal.  Revisit in a couple of months, I guess.

 

[Rovin Romine]

 
It's difficult to evaluate Betts' offensive value when he's in the midst of a .422 streak and when he projects to 50 2B, 25 HR AA season.  He has to slow down a bit and then see if the XBH are the first thing to disappear.  And if he doesn't slow down a whole lot then I guess you have put him on the fast track with AAA by mid-season.  Is he a pull hitter, or more of a spray hitter?  Is his arm strength good enough to be corner outfielder?  With the graduation of some of this year's prospects, he's got to be rated a top-tier kid and maybe his value would enable a Stanton trade without a having to make a 5 for 1 deal.  Revisit in a couple of months, I guess.

 
I'm not advocating we trade Betts, but does a hot streak like this still spike a player's trade value in today's more sophisticated scouting/evaluation approach?  
 
(In hindsight, it would have been great if we could have moved Lars Anderson and Lavarnway at their peaks.)  

 

[Eddie Jurak]

It is not at all out of the question that Betts could reach the majors this season, in a role similar to Bogaerts' role from last year. (Remember, after his call up, Bogaerts didn't play a whole lot until the ALCS.)

Betts is almost exactly the same age as Bogaerts (i.e. One year older than 2013 Xander), so the precedent is there with age and moving a guy off of his natural position. And Betts can run, so maybe his playoff role would be backup and PR (with no need to bring in a Quinton Berry).

After his promotion to Salem, in a notorious pitchers' league, Betts hit .341 with some pop. Obviously, he's carried that success with him to Portland. Age aside, his actual production over the past couple of years compares well to Xander.

I think a role can be found for h if he merits it. Some of what is lost in positional value if he moves to the OF is gained in flexibility and injury protection.

It's possible they trade him, but I don't necessarily think it will happen. If you trade for a star nearing free agency, such as Stanton, then you are either trading for a short term rental or having to fork over money for a mega contract. If the Sox see Betts as a potential star, he'a too high a price for a rental, and the team has not had much success with mega contracts in recent years.

 

[WenZink]

 
I'm not advocating we trade Betts, but does a hot streak like this still spike a player's trade value in today's more sophisticated scouting/evaluation approach?  
 
(In hindsight, it would have been great if we could have moved Lars Anderson and Lavarnway at their peaks.)  

 
Not yet, but if he's able to stay around .380 and 1.000+ OPS for another two months then that and his 2013 1/2 season at Salem are fairly undeniable.
 
Lars just had one outstanding season, mostly fueled by 4 months at the launching pad in Lancaster, plus his ability to sustain his offense for 6 weeks in Portland. (I still haven't figured out Lavarnway.) If Betts continues any level of good offense, he'll be ahead of Lars' XBH output with most of it at AA.  But my point was that if Mookie stays hot (and not this hot, of course) then a bump to AAA before the end of June would be advisable to see how he handles the tougher level in order to seal his trade value.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

From what I've read, the question about Mookie at SS is his arm, but it's not a flat out "no, his arm isn't good enough" so much as "his arm probably isn't good enough."  If it's borderline for a short stop, it's probably not untenable for right field.  The Speier article has a quote about his arm being average for the position, even.  I don't think right field would be out of the question, but even if it is, if he has solid range and instincts for a shortstop (again, from that Speier article) then he could be a very good defensive center fielder.  Probably a bit less rangy than Ellsbury, but with a much better arm.  If his bat is forcing the issue, it becomes a matter of resource management and I think Mookie in center with JBJ in right probably makes more sense than JBJ in center and Mookie in right or Mookie in left.
 
In the short term, keeping Victorino in right where he is excellent does make sense, but next year will be the last in his contract and having Mookie in center, JBJ in right and Victorino in left would probably give the Red Sox the best defensive outfield in the game.  We're all obviously getting ahead of ourselves a bit here, just because JBJ is the best defensive center fielder in the organization that doesn't mean the best use of the available players forces us to use him in center.  He appears to have the tools necessary to be a very good center fielder.

 

[Rovin Romine]

 
Not yet, but if he's able to stay around .380 and 1.000+ OPS for another two months then that and his 2013 1/2 season at Salem are fairly undeniable.
 
Lars just had one outstanding season, mostly fueled by 4 months at the launching pad in Lancaster, plus his ability to sustain his offense for 6 weeks in Portland. (I still haven't figured out Lavarnway.) If Betts continues any level of good offense, he'll be ahead of Lars' XBH output with most of it at AA.  But my point was that if Mookie stays hot (and not this hot, of course) then a bump to AAA before the end of June would be advisable to see how he handles the tougher level in order to seal his trade value.

 
Gotcha, but I'm curious about the possible trade bait angle.  Meaning, are there GMs who would look at Betts as having more value, based on his current hot streak at this level?  I suppose the answer depends on how the other GM in a trade evaluates players and/or values risk.  
 
I suppose another question is, would you promote Betts now?  And if he continued his hot streak in AAA, would you dangle him as trade bait, or would it indicate that he really was a blue chip prospect?  I'm curious as to the "trade the flashy player now at highest value" v. the "he's a blue chip and untouchable" dynamic.   Where do we draw the line?  

 

[nvalvo]

I understand why people are downplaying the super-sub idea, but I think it has legs. If we could fill the Alex Cora Memorial Roster Spot currently occupied by Jonathan Herrera with a guy who could A) legitimately hit and B) play a little outfield, too, we would gain a ton in terms of flexibility. 
 
Extension aside, Ortiz will not always be with us, and I imagine his games played will be declining as the years advance. We're now invested in Pedroia for several presidential administrations. Maybe it would make sense for him to play on a 150 game/season pace rather than 160. We have a SS who has a bat to carry 3rd or LF and may or may not have the glove for SS. 
 
Mookie Betts, Utility Man, would also make it easier to carry another specialist on the bench, be he a one-dimensional slugger like Carp or a designated base-stealer or whatever. 

 

[Rovin Romine]

From what I've read, the question about Mookie at SS is his arm, but it's not a flat out "no, his arm isn't good enough" so much as "his arm probably isn't good enough."  If it's borderline for a short stop, it's probably not untenable for right field.  The Speier article has a quote about his arm being average for the position, even.  I don't think right field would be out of the question, but even if it is, if he has solid range and instincts for a shortstop (again, from that Speier article) then he could be a very good defensive center fielder.  Probably a bit less rangy than Ellsbury, but with a much better arm.  If his bat is forcing the issue, it becomes a matter of resource management and I think Mookie in center with JBJ in right probably makes more sense than JBJ in center and Mookie in right or Mookie in left.
 
In the short term, keeping Victorino in right where he is excellent does make sense, but next year will be the last in his contract and having Mookie in center, JBJ in right and Victorino in left would probably give the Red Sox the best defensive outfield in the game.  We're all obviously getting ahead of ourselves a bit here, just because JBJ is the best defensive center fielder in the organization that doesn't mean the best use of the available players forces us to use him in center.  He appears to have the tools necessary to be a very good center fielder.

 
Yes.  But isn't it nice to be able to speculate on moving prospects about the diamond because we have so many of them?   I remember the D.D. days of "Trot Nixon will probably make it here one day and will replace any of our crap outfielders he wants" and "I hope any decent young pitching prospect (Checo/Pavano/Rose ) will catch fire and replace our crappy #5 starter, or #4 starter, or #3 starter. . ."   Seems like the cupboard was always being emptied and we were always picking up some aging slugger.  

 

[JakeRae]

 
Gotcha, but I'm curious about the possible trade bait angle.  Meaning, are there GMs who would look at Betts as having more value, based on his current hot streak at this level?  I suppose the answer depends on how the other GM in a trade evaluates players and/or values risk.  
 
I suppose another question is, would you promote Betts now?  And if he continued his hot streak in AAA, would you dangle him as trade bait, or would it indicate that he really was a blue chip prospect?  I'm curious as to the "trade the flashy player now at highest value" v. the "he's a blue chip and untouchable" dynamic.   Where do we draw the line?  

Betts, objectively, has more value than he did at the end of last season. His current hot streak may not be sustainable, but it's already virtually eliminated concerns about him backsliding this year and presented the possibility that he could vault himself into elite prospect status. He's probably gone from a 50-100 ranking range to being a top 25 prospect.
 
I think the answer to your main question is one of scouting and internal evaluation. In short, you trade the guy that you don't think can sustain it and you keep the guy you think is coming is turning into a true blue chip prospect. That's not a very satisfying answer, but the numbers really aren't able to tell you when a hot streak is a hot streak and when it is a player establishing a new level of performance.
 
But, to keep things focused on Betts, I think he is not the sort of player you trade. Looking back, there were clear question marks with prospects that should've been traded (like Bowden, Lavarnway, and Anderson) that ended up burying them but were always there, even at the apex of their hype. Without too much detail, Bowden had stuff concerns, Lavarnway had age and defense concerns, and Anderson had loft (too many gb) and power concerns. Betts doesn't have a major red flag. He is hitting the ball great, he walks, he does not strike out, he has power, he steals bases, he is very good defensively, he is fast, he looks really quick. Additionally, he was quite raw when drafted and was a tools/upside pick. 
 
I think there are a lot of players in the Red Sox system where a hot start might signal a trade opportunity. I really do not think Betts is one of those players. 

 

[JakeRae]

This will probably be a double post, but the topic is sufficiently different to merit it...
 
As one of the first people to push the super-sub idea, I think it's important to point out that it doesn't necessarily preclude Mookie also being a starter. For example, it could mean that Mookie "starts" in, say LF, with a "platoon" mate. Mookie would play 100+ games as a LF and would fill in at the other 5 non 1B/C positions for about 10 games, assuming perfect health. If someone gets hurt, Mookie might move to that position or a prospect might be called up, depending on organizational depth. This arrangement would mean that instead of a pretty mediocre utility player picking up those rest game appearances, Mookie's platoon mate, who is a half-time corner OF, where there are typically averagish players available at reasonable prices, taking up those games. It also helps build deep depth.
 
But, moving beyond that, watching the link posted earlier to his leaping catch and throw to 1st for the double play, his quickness really stood out. It's been speculated that Cecchini may ultimately need to move to the OF for defensive reasons. If might be that Betts' ultimate home in Boston is 3B, where he looks to have the natural quickness to excel and might be able to help mitigate against some of Xander's defensive weaknesses by providing him a left-side partner with great range. In this world, Middlebrooks is the player who is ultimately trade-bait, ideally for some prospects to help keep the farm system as one of the best in baseball even as they continue to graduate their current crop of prospects.

 

[WenZink]

 
Gotcha, but I'm curious about the possible trade bait angle.  Meaning, are there GMs who would look at Betts as having more value, based on his current hot streak at this level?  I suppose the answer depends on how the other GM in a trade evaluates players and/or values risk.  
 
I suppose another question is, would you promote Betts now?  And if he continued his hot streak in AAA, would you dangle him as trade bait, or would it indicate that he really was a blue chip prospect?  I'm curious as to the "trade the flashy player now at highest value" v. the "he's a blue chip and untouchable" dynamic.   Where do we draw the line?  

 
Outside of some high-lights on my computer screen I haven't seen him play in person.  I was hoping to go up to NH next month to see him play vs the Fisher Cats. (not that I'm a competent scout, but if a player is way above the competition, you notice it.)  But Betts is leading all of organized ball in hitting, and he's been doing for it almost a year, going back to his promotion to Salem last summer.  So if he's promoted to AAA and can sustain anywhere near his offense, then doesn't that make him blue-chip?  I think it was Jim Callis that said Mookie would be a top 30 prospect, and that was a couple of weeks ago.  I think most of the prospect ratings sites have a supplemental list that comes out after the draft in June.  How high will Betts be if he's still raking?  What if he's a consensus top 15 prospect?
 
As far as untouchable, I'd say no one is untouchable if you're talking trade bait for a 24 year old stud like Stanton.  Bogaerts is untouchable, I guess, but Xander is the most highly respected prospect from the system in a long time.  More heralded than Nomar I believe.

 

[WenZink]

.......

.. If might be that Betts' ultimate home in Boston is 3B, where he looks to have the natural quickness to excel and might be able to help mitigate against some of Xander's defensive weaknesses by providing him a left-side partner with great range. In this world, Middlebrooks is the player who is ultimately trade-bait, ideally for some prospects to help keep the farm system as one of the best in baseball even as they continue to graduate their current crop of prospects.

 
Betts is listed at 5' 9", and he looks a little shorter.  Isn't that a little small for 3B.  I'm also not sure about his arm (I have no idea.)  Ultimately, the reason they're talking about moving him to SS and CF is because he doesn't project to have enough power to hold down a corner OF or IF slot, even if he could field the position.  And sure, right now he's slugging over .690 so he could bat cleanup for the 1927 Yankees, but that's only because he's on the tear of his short career.  I don't even know if he's a pull hitter that would tattoo the Monster, but I suspect he's a spray hitter that hits doubles into a lot of gaps past 21 year old outfielders learning to play their positions.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

He did hit .341 in 200 PAs in Salem last year, so he may just be a high BA hitter.

He obviously doesn't project as a power hitter, but it does not seem like a stretch to project him for 2013 Daniel Nava type production, and Nava played a lot of LF for the World Champions last year.

 

[Saints Rest]

Speier's column was, as usual, excellent.  
 
It makes me think that the Sox best and most compelling option would be to try Mookie in LF.  And that they should do that very soon.
 
Between WMB, Xander and Marrero, they appear to be set (and already facing a glut) on the left side for the time being.
 
Moving from second to SS, while not impossible, seems like a bit of a stretch.
 
As noted above, Mookie may not have the arm for RF.
 
CF is the toughest OF position overall.
 
Pedey isn't going anywhere absent injury.  And in that horrendous event, re-learning second is totally manageable.
 
The Sox don't have a star or long term guy for LF right now.  
 
What am I missing?  It seems like a no brainer that they first try him in that spot. 

According to Mookie himself in the Speier article, he has played CF and feels comfortable there.

 

[Merkle's Boner]

He did hit .341 in 200 PAs in Salem last year, so he may just be a high BA hitter.
He obviously doesn't project as a power hitter, but it does not seem like a stretch to project him for 2013 Daniel Nava type production, and Nava played a lot of LF for the World Champions last year.

Where are you coming up with a Nava comp? When Nava was 21 was he even in pro ball?

Mookie will be one of the top 20 prospects in the game if he keeps this up to any degree.

 

[SouthernBoSox]

Betts is listed at 5' 9", and he looks a little shorter.  Isn't that a little small for 3B.  I'm also not sure about his arm (I have no idea.)  Ultimately, the reason they're talking about moving him to SS and CF is because he doesn't project to have enough power to hold down a corner OF or IF slot, even if he could field the position.  And sure, right now he's slugging over .690 so he could bat cleanup for the 1927 Yankees, but that's only because he's on the tear of his short career.  I don't even know if he's a pull hitter that would tattoo the Monster, but I suspect he's a spray hitter that hits doubles into a lot of gaps past 21 year old outfielders learning to play their positions.

No, they are thinking about SS and CF because they are two of the most difficult positions to play and they think he might be able to play them.

You don't move a guy to center because he doesn't hit for power. You move a guy to centerfield because you think he can play center.

 

[SouthernBoSox]

Where are you coming up with a Nava comp? When Nava was 21 was he even in pro ball?
Mookie will be one of the top 20 prospects in the game if he keeps this up to any degree.

He said that projecting 2013 Nava production isn't crazy.

That production was near the tops in the game in the outfield.

 

[LondonSox]

Thanks to you all for joining the bandwagon and exploding the participation in the thread.
 
2/3 with a BB last night, 1R and a CS
 
On base streak continues and at the end of the first month overall line
 
430/ 481/ 688/ 1169
11bb 8K 15 XBH (10 2b 1 3B 4 HR) 10SB 3CS 
22G 30 R
Pretty much the most amazing month you could hope for with the possible exception of avoiding that CS last night to make his steal %age acceptable (though 77% isn't terrible and you're really finding complaints for the sake of it)
 
Also a number of web gems defensively.

 

[Soxfan in Fla]

That is a ridiculously good month regardless of level.

 

[Manzivino]

Just wanted to add that the game story reports Betts had the base stolen but overslid the bag. A CS is a CS but it makes my question in the game thread regarding whether he's getting thrown out more by more advanced catchers silly.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Not really the thread for it, but does Dustin have an NTC? I kid, but if this is the real Mookie why can't he play 2nd?

He probably isn't a 1.000 ops 2b but if he is, keeping him and trading Pedroia would be the way to go.

 

[foulkehampshire]

I have a hard time seeing Pedroia being traded. 

 

[Byrdbrain]

I have a hard time seeing Pedroia being traded. 

This would be what is commonly referred to as an understatement. 
Not going to happen.

 

[WenZink]

This would be what is commonly referred to as an understatement. 
Not going to happen.

And even saying it's an understatement is an understatement.
 
But I have a fear that Pedroia plays the game so hard that he might have a career arc similar to Robbie Alomar -- last good season at 33, retired by 35.  Too many hand injuries for Dustin.
 
Youk played so hard and the end for him came fast and early.  'Course Youk had to play hard to make up for the bad body he was given.

 

[seageral]

as opposed to Pedroia's olympian frame

 

[chrisfont9]

A bit more love for Mookie at Fangraphs today:
 
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/prospect-watch-two-graduates-from-the-fringe-five/
 
Comparisons to Zobrist, which is a good thing.

 

[Lowrielicious]

And even saying it's an understatement is an understatement.

But I have a fear that Pedroia plays the game so hard that he might have a career arc similar to Robbie Alomar -- last good season at 33, retired by 35. Too many hand injuries for Dustin.

Youk played so hard and the end for him came fast and early. 'Course Youk had to play hard to make up for the bad body he was given.

If we want to make random comparisons Craig Biggio would seem more appropriate and he managed to put up 1.1 WAR in his age 41 season. And 2.6 WAR at 40.

 

[Lowrielicious]

A bit more love for Mookie at Fangraphs today:
 
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/prospect-watch-two-graduates-from-the-fringe-five/
 
Comparisons to Zobrist, which is a good thing.

 
No kidding. From that link:
 
"The Zobrist comparison is a compelling one, insofar as (a) Zobrist has recorded the third-highest WAR total in all the major leagues since 2009 and (b) given his youth, Betts might represent what’s possible when an all-around useful player such as Zobrist actually begins his career in earnest before age 28."
 
Emphasis mine. That is a pretty amazing stat.

 

[WenZink]

 
If we want to make random comparisons Craig Biggio would seem more appropriate and he managed to put up 1.1 WAR in his age 41 season. And 2.6 WAR at 40.
 

I wasn't aware that Biggio had suffered from hand injuries.

 

[Lowrielicious]

I wasn't aware that Biggio had suffered from hand injuries.

Did Alomar?
A quick seaarch only shows a finger injury that he missed a little time for.
 
 
edit: to clarify. I meant Biggio would be a more appropriate comparison that Youk.

 

[WenZink]

.....
 
edit: to clarify. I meant Biggio would be a more appropriate comparison that Youk.

 
Ah, I see.  The reason Youk has some relevance is that I watched much of his baseball career and can safely say he played "ultra-hard."  Same with Pedroia, same with Nixon.  it's hard to say with certainty that players from other teams played hard since I didn't see them enough.

 

[WenZink]

Can anyone give me an example of an elite prospect (I assume Mookie is at or near that level) being transitioned to a multi-postional player while still in the minors, let alone at the age of 21? I actually do remember Cesar Tovar 50 years ago.  A small but very good athlete, who was just a so-so infielder, but who had good enough speed to adapt to the OF.  Tony Phillips has been mentioned, but he really just played 2b/ss/3rd in the minors and not really in the elite category as Betts is (or approaching.)  Zobrist transitioned to "all-purpose" in his 3rd year in the majors.
 
Mookie already is making his case to be an everyday MLB 2nd baseman.  All he has to do is to continue to demonstrate plate discipline, make solid contact, and, perhaps show that he can handle the better pitching at AAA.  The Red Sox primary responsibility is to keep him focused on the current track.  He doesn't need to learn to play 2 other positions to make him more versatile in order to find a path to the major leagues.  Just because he is blocked by Pedroia, why distract from his focus? (And I won't even go into how a rookie keeps his sh t together while adjusting to playing different positions every day, in a market like Boston.  Bogaerts is dealing with scrutiny over his fielding at just one position.)
 
What is being suggested (ala Zobrist) is different than shifting him to a new position.  Maybe he could shift to SS full-time, or if the Sox feel confident that, in spite of his arm, he can be a full-time LF,  Although all those options seem doubtful, but those that see him daily may have a different and more valid opinion.
 
Again, it's not like Betts is some prospect that's a "tweener," and needs versatility to attain a large enough skill-set to reach the majors.  Just because he is blocked by Pedroia is not a reason to mess with him.  His best and most rapidly attained value to the Sox organization is as a second baseman who hits the ball consistently and hard and runs the bases.  If there's no place for him in Boston, then you want to maximize his value for a potential trade.  His highest value is to a team that needs a 2nd baseman.  Why the discussion about some experiment to make him into something else?
 
And let's omit the debate about the value of a new kind of deep-depth.  Maybe the Sox should try it with a mid-20s player like Zobrist, or when scouting amateurs if they see a kid that doesn't project at any one position but could be of value if they develop his personality.  But not with arguably the best prospect in their system.  I just think this whole idea is a "make-my-wish" in order to see a prospect that they like stay in the organization.
 
And has anyone in the Sox organization gone on record that they're good with this idea?  Beyond talking up his athleticism, etc?

 

[Eddie Jurak]

Albert Pujols.  A more elite prospect and player than Betts.  
 
He split his rookie year playing time almost evenly between the four corners.  
 
In his second year, he played primarily LF, but logged significant playing time at 3B and 1B.
 
In his third year, he played mostly LF and some 1B.
 
From then on he was a 1B with only spot duty at 3B.  
 
Edit: One could have made the argument that the 2001 Cardinals were well stocked at the corner positions and that Pujols' best value to the organization might have been as trade bait.  

 

[WenZink]

Albert Pujols.  A more elite prospect and player than Betts.  
 
He split his rookie year playing time almost evenly between the four corners.  
 
In his second year, he played primarily LF, but logged significant playing time at 3B and 1B.
........

 
Very interesting rookie year, and a lot of the moving around was because of injuries to JD Drew and the aging McGwire, but a look at his 2000 year in the minors shows that it doesn't appear to be part of a pre-arranged plan.  He only played 125 out of 129 games at 3rd base in his one year in minor league ball in 2000.
 
Another pertinent point is that Pujols didn't become an elite prospect (#41 by BA in 2001) until at least the middle of his one year of minor league ball.  He was drafted in the 13th round of the 1999 draft, and spent most of 2000 in High A+ ball, splitting August between AA and AAA.
 
It is of note that a 21 year old rookie could handle being moved around the corners of the diamond, but he was aleady in the majors when they started moving him.  Remember, my question was, "Can anyone give me an example of an elite prospect being transitioned to a multi-postional player while still in the minors."

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

And let's omit the debate about the value of a new kind of deep-depth.  Maybe the Sox should try it with a mid-20s player like Zobrist, or when scouting amateurs if they see a kid that doesn't project at any one position but could be of value if they develop his personality.  But not with arguably the best prospect in their system.  I just think this whole idea is a "make-my-wish" in order to see a prospect that they like stay in the organization.

 
Why do you get to determine what is and isn't acceptable to bring up in discussing this?  Why is the discussion on "a new kind of deep depth" invalid here?  You do realize that deep depth is exactly the kind of thing people are talking about with Mookie here.  The 2013 squad was great at taking advantage of platoon match ups and positional flexibility to field a strong lineup almost every night while also sending out a solid defensive team.
 
Also, I don't really see a lot of "Mookie needs to start playing SS, LF, CF, RF and 2B right now."  Seems like most of the discussion is about what to do with him if he forces the issue and breaks into the major league roster.

 

[Drek717]

 
It is of note that a 21 year old rookie could handle being moved around the corners of the diamond, but he was aleady in the majors when they started moving him.  Remember, my question was, "Can anyone give me an example of an elite prospect being transitioned to a multi-postional player while still in the minors."

Your question is irrelevant because that isn't how baseball teams handle young players.  Why?  Because all these guys we're talking about are still professional athletes with the greater than average physical skills blind of chosen sport than the average human.  They'll stick somewhere.
 
Pujols was rated low by BA because no one really knew his age or his position.  He also played against scrubs up to that point due to a troubled childhood and not fitting inside the Baseball Pedigree Factory(r) known as organized travel team youth baseball, or go through an established international channel where he was playing DSL games at 15 or 16.  He was basically The Natural come to life walking out of a Missouri field at 16 (or 18 or 20, depending on who you ask) and swatting pitches into seats.
 
How his position was decided is the least unusual part of his story, because like any other exceptional batsman the last thing on anyone's mind was how good the glove was.  I don't think there was much consternation over Ted Williams' 19 errors in 1939 when he was 20 years old and threw up a 160 OPS+ (or in the statistical relevant dialect of the day a .327 batting average, 31 HR, 44 2B, 11 3B, 131 runs and an AL leading 145 RBIs).  He made 19 errors in the OUTFIELD.  In 1940 the team moved him to LF and from then on he played a grand total of 5 games outside LF the rest of his career.
 
Or hell, look at Bryce Harper.  Through amateur baseball he played high defensive value positions like catcher and 3B.  Why is he a corner OF now?  Because Washington wasn't going to hold back an MVP level bat while Harper spent four years learning how to play 3B (and catcher is a threat to his offensive future).
 
No one develops these guys to be utility players until they're at the ML level or they've failed to break in once already.  Why?  Because up until that point it's all about getting the bat ready.  A good hitter will find a home in the field.  A natural athlete like Betts likely winds up pretty high on the defensive spectrum in fact.  But it's an issue you cross either just before the guy makes the ML jump, or just after.  If there isn't a clear hole at his current position you pick the next spot down the defensive spectrum that there is a hole and try him there a few games, and keep going until you find a spot that fits.
 
Just like the club did with Xander last year right before his call up and getting him games at 3B.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

 
Very interesting rookie year, and a lot of the moving around was because of injuries to JD Drew and the aging McGwire, but a look at his 2000 year in the minors shows that it doesn't appear to be part of a pre-arranged plan.  He only played 125 out of 129 games at 3rd base in his one year in minor league ball in 2000.
 
Another pertinent point is that Pujols didn't become an elite prospect (#41 by BA in 2001) until at least the middle of his one year of minor league ball.  He was drafted in the 13th round of the 1999 draft, and spent most of 2000 in High A+ ball, splitting August between AA and AAA.
 
It is of note that a 21 year old rookie could handle being moved around the corners of the diamond, but he was aleady in the majors when they started moving him.  Remember, my question was, "Can anyone give me an example of an elite prospect being transitioned to a multi-postional player while still in the minors."

 
I think you are splitting hairs.  Yes, Pujols moved around largely due to injuries.  No, it wasn't exactly planned in advance (although the Cardinals and Tony LaRussa have a history of shifting guys around the diamond, so at the very least they were open to it).  
 
This is more about thinking about whether Mookie Betts might contribute to the Red Sox in 2015... or even in 2014 (as Bogaerts did last year).  

 

[WenZink]

 
Why do you get to determine what is and isn't acceptable to bring up in discussing this?  Why is the discussion on "a new kind of deep depth" invalid here?  You do realize that deep depth is exactly the kind of thing people are talking about with Mookie here.  The 2013 squad was great at taking advantage of platoon match ups and positional flexibility to field a strong lineup almost every night while also sending out a solid defensive team.
 
Also, I don't really see a lot of "Mookie needs to start playing SS, LF, CF, RF and 2B right now."  Seems like most of the discussion is about what to do with him if he forces the issue and breaks into the major league roster.

 
Because it's my post and my question, and the issue of what kinds of development plans and challenges you present to a prospect, in this case Mookie, is entirely relevant to this thread and this forum.  You, or anyone else, are free to pose questions framed in a different manner.

 

[radsoxfan]

 
 
This is more about thinking about whether Mookie Betts might contribute to the Red Sox in 2015... or even in 2014 (as Bogaerts did last year).  

 
I think this is worth emphasizing.  Most people (I assume) are not advocating that Mookie will be a super utility guy for 15 years.  At some point, assuming he continues to hit, he will slot into a position.  Even Zobrist plays the vast majority of his time at 2nd base now.
 
Mookie's positional flexibility is about a way for him to break into the majors in the next year or two.  If he keeps hitting at AA, once he gets to AAA, he gets some of that flexibility so he can help the big league team (like Xander).  He seems to have the athleticism to play multiple spots, so the Red Sox should use that to their advantage.  
 
Maybe in 2015 he is mostly a super utility guy, while the team figures out what they have in their other prospects and decides which free agents to go after.  Eventually, he will slot in primarily at one spot. The key point is that he doesn't have to be traded just because Pedroia is here.  

 

[Darnell's Son]

 
Because it's my post and my question, and the issue of what kinds of development plans and challenges you present to a prospect, in this case Mookie, is entirely relevant to this thread and this forum.  You, or anyone else, are free to pose questions framed in a different manner.

 
But you can't ask a question and then say "But don't answer like this". Especially when you know that the "this" in this instance is the answer that is likely to be the answer from most posters. By doing that you're making it a one way conversation. 
 
I don't get why you're hung up on finding an example of someone that's done what many posters are suggesting we do with Mookie. If he continues mashing like he is, he is going to need to be on the 25 man roster. It's that simple. The Red Sox will have to figure out how to get his bat into the lineup and because of his athleticism, and the fact that he's a professional athlete, he can probably slide into multiple positions depending on need.

 

[WenZink]

 
I think you are splitting hairs.  Yes, Pujols moved around largely due to injuries.  No, it wasn't exactly planned in advance (although the Cardinals and Tony LaRussa have a history of shifting guys around the diamond, so at the very least they were open to it).  
 
This is more about thinking about whether Mookie Betts might contribute to the Red Sox in 2015... or even in 2014 (as Bogaerts did last year).  

 
Since I framed my question in the context of development of a top prospect, I hardly think I'm splitting hairs.  Pujols' ability to handle 4 positions as a rookie, does have relevance to a larger issue of deep-depth, but not prospect development. I just don't think the Sox are going to place any more tasks in front of Betts, outside of working on what he's already doing well --hit, run and play 2nd, even if it means he's blocked by Pedroia and they have consider trade options to capitalize on his value.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

They placed the task of 3B in front of Bogaerts last year.  Why should they behave any differently with Betts?

 

[Byrdbrain]

 
Because it's my post and my question, and the issue of what kinds of development plans and challenges you present to a prospect, in this case Mookie, is entirely relevant to this thread and this forum.  You, or anyone else, are free to pose questions framed in a different manner.

This is a discussion board you don't get to dictate how people discuss topics. Much of the reason you are getting pushback on this is the fact that you are coming off as extremely arrogant. 
 
Speier wrote an article discussing how he was likely to be used when he was in Pawtucket and he mentioned the fact that he had OF experience and he shagged flies every day. The Sox haven't been on the record saying anything about his future usage but why would they?