The Offense

Minneapolis Millers · May 22, 2015

There's a difference between unexpectedly poor performance and poor roster construction. This team had TWO back-up 1B, both of whom have stunk and one of whom is now in the minors. They had Hanley experimenting in LF, but (a) that's not a bad experiment to try as a move for a poor fielding SS, and (b) they have about 100 other OFs to use as late inning defensive replacements and longer term LF solutions.

They could have refused to sign Hanley as a LF, but most saw that as a good opportunity to get a near-elite bat on short years for a reasonable cost. And if they hadn't signed him, their offense to date would have been even worse (since Castillo was hurt and wouldn't have been an option for half of the first 6 weeks of the season).

Anyway, I agree with others; the offense should normalize over a larger sample size. If it doesn't, well, that's what disappointing seasons are made of. Ben can't fix a half dozen veteran hitters all going in the tank at once.

Al Zarilla · May 22, 2015

Savin Hillbilly said:
The Sox are on a pace to score 67 runs this month. They haven't scored that few in a month with at least 20 games played in my lifetime. Not even in 1968. Even if you go back to the deadball era, in the 1914-20 period the Sox never had a month with >20 games and <70 runs.

The suck has become epic.

You didn't mention the post Ruth and pre Foxx, Williams, etc. era. I though sure that period, which had several, well, five 100+ loss seasons, would have had such a terrible stretch. Nope. I scanned the scores for the 20s and 30s teams, and those teams always managed to put up a double digit, or two or three at least 5+ run games, or something, in any 20 game stretch to avoid such a run drought. And, those teams went years with full rosters of offensive players you never heard of.

Philip Jeff Frye · May 22, 2015

Toe Nash said:
Well, Hanley was hitting for a .949 OPS before he hurt himself playing the field. Even then, much of his offensive contribution was nullified by his poor defense. They're probably a better team with Holt in LF (assuming Holt could contribute defensively) and Hanley at DH than Hanley in LF and Ortiz at DH, unless Ortiz starts hitting well above-average (the average DH has a .738 OPS).

Additionally, with Castillo nearing readiness and Victorino still performing well, Ortiz is absolutely going to be blocking someone very soon. Next year (or if Vic gets hurt) I suppose the problem is solved, but I'm far from confident Hanley will improve very much in LF. And what if we get a return to form from Craig, or JBJ...

But yeah, Papi isn't really the problem...the problem is that they seem to have vastly over-estimated the ability of Ramirez to learn a new position.

This is the Brock Holt who put up a .549 OPS in the second half of last season, and who has contributed to our current malaise with a May OPS of .509 this year? Holt is a good guy to have on the bench because of his versatility and he occasionally has some nice hot streaks, but things have gotten really bad if we think finding a place for Holt to play everyday is part of the solution to our problems.

lexrageorge · May 22, 2015

Toe Nash said:
Well, Hanley was hitting for a .949 OPS before he hurt himself playing the field. Even then, much of his offensive contribution was nullified by his poor defense. They're probably a better team with Holt in LF (assuming Holt could contribute defensively) and Hanley at DH than Hanley in LF and Ortiz at DH, unless Ortiz starts hitting well above-average (the average DH has a .738 OPS).

Additionally, with Castillo nearing readiness and Victorino still performing well, Ortiz is absolutely going to be blocking someone very soon. Next year (or if Vic gets hurt) I suppose the problem is solved, but I'm far from confident Hanley will improve very much in LF. And what if we get a return to form from Craig, or JBJ...

But yeah, Papi isn't really the problem...the problem is that they seem to have vastly over-estimated the ability of Ramirez to learn a new position.

The bolded is a myth that needs to be retired. Defensive statistics are completely unreliable when it comes to measuring defensive runs saved or scored over such a tiny sample.

Hanley in LF and Ortiz at DH is a perfectly workable lineup, assuming HanRam is healthy and Ortiz normalizes against lefties.

glennhoffmania · May 22, 2015

Rudy Pemberton said:
Replacing Ortiz with Bradley isn't going to help the offense, though. It's just a poorly constructed roster- they signed Hanley, yet had nowhere to play him. They have no legitimate backup 1B. They have one backup infielder; and he's basically the team's backup outfielder too. A lot of guys playing out of position, and a lot of flawed players (a guy who can only DH, a few who can't hit lefties at all, a great defensive outfielder who hits like a pitcher (without the ability to bunt), little speed, etc).

Yeah this isn't a roster construction issue at all. I agree with MM. They had too many OFs, they had their super utility guy, they had two guys who could play 1B behind Napoli, and they had what seemed to be at least a decent catching duo. The fact that both Nava and Craig have been horrible doesn't mean they didn't address the 1B issue. An OF of Hanley, Betts, Victorino, Bradley and Castillo should be fine. There are a lot of problems with this team but I don't think you can blame it on roster construction, and I didn't hear any of these complaints during ST.

EricFeczko · May 22, 2015

Toe Nash said:
Well, Hanley was hitting for a .949 OPS before he hurt himself playing the field. Even then, much of his offensive contribution was nullified by his poor defense.

I don't mean to pile on here, but I'd be careful with making this statement. I've definitely made this mistake in the past. Advanced defensive metrics like DRS and UZR try to measure what the true talent level of the player is, they don't actually capture what occurs on the field:

UZR tries to record a player’s likely true talent and estimate his future performance based on the nuances of the batted ball and the player’s response to those nuances. It is not trying to capture exactly what happens on the field according to some arbitrary categories, like most of the offensive metrics (which make no distinction between a lucky ground ball bleeder through the “5-hole” or a clean, line drive base hit to the outfield), even the advanced ones like wOBA or linear weights.

This isn't to say that Hanley is a great defender in LF, rather, we can't use UZR or DRS to argue that we should move him to another position. You'd need at least three years of data to make that argument.

Jnai · May 22, 2015

EricFeczko said:
I don't mean to pile on here, but I'd be careful with making this statement. I've definitely made this mistake in the past. Advanced defensive metrics like DRS and UZR try to measure what the true talent level of the player is, they don't actually capture what occurs on the field:
This isn't to say that Hanley is a great defender in LF, rather, we can't use UZR or DRS to argue that we should move him to another position. You'd need at least three years of data to make that argument.

Weird coming from me, I know, but I just want to come to the defense of common sense here for a second. Even if UZR and DRS didn't exist, we could still look at Hanley in left field and say he was a god awful defender who is likely bleeding out offensive value all over the outfield grass. No need for three years of data to justify that, certainly.

FanSinceBoggs · May 22, 2015

Pedroia: OPS+ 114
Ortiz: OPS+ 112
Hanley OPS+ 118
Panda OPS+ 110
Holt OPS+ 113 (but trending downwards)

Napoli OPS+ 64
Nava OPS+ 36

Betts OPS+ 90
Bogaerts OPS+ 100
Swilhart hasn't produced in almost 50 ABs, suggesting he might not be ready (1 walk and 17 strikeouts). The other catchers haven't hit at all and so the position is a total black hole (offensively). They probably should trade for a C and send Swilhart down if he doesn't turn it around.
Middlebrooks (Padres) OPS+ 79 (2014 Red Sox OPS+ 48)
Bradley Jr. (2014 OPS+ 51)

I would promote Castillo and send Bradley down. I'm tempted to keep Bradley on the roster as a defensive replacement and release Nava, but we want Bradley to continue playing everyday. I might release Nava and promote Q.Berry, who can help the Red Sox in one-run games. Pedroia, Ortiz, Hanley, Panda, and Holt are doing well enough. Nava and Napoli aren't hitting.

When was the last time the Red Sox system produced a really good hitter? Do we have to go back to Pedroia and Ellsbury or am I overlooking someone? The inability of the farm system to produce position players has really hurt the Red Sox. These guys come up, after heralded minor league careers, and don't produce. It has turned into such a dominant trend, makes me wonder if something is going wrong with minor league player development. In retrospect, the Red Sox would be a better team today if they used the farm system for trades. Instead, they held on to a lot of these guys, and many have lost trade value (diminished trade value: Bogaerts and Bradley; Middlebrooks brought back nothing; Cecchini, Brentz, and Coyle are worthless trade pieces at this point).

O Captain! My Captain! · May 22, 2015

FanSinceBoggs said:
When was the last time the Red Sox system produced a really good hitter?

Anthony Rizzo (132 OPS+ his last 3 years, from ages 23-25).

and let's remember he put up a 51 OPS+ (.141/.281/.241) in San Diego in 51 games as a 21 year old. So let's not write the obituaries for Betts, Bogaerts, Swihart yet).

Plympton91 · May 22, 2015

Jnai said:
Weird coming from me, I know, but I just want to come to the defense of common sense here for a second. Even if UZR and DRS didn't exist, we could still look at Hanley in left field and say he was a god awful defender who is likely bleeding out offensive value all over the outfield grass. No need for three years of data to justify that, certainly.

On average, there are, what, four balls a game hit to left field? A couple of those are cans - o - corn that he catches or clean singles/doubles that he picks up and throws to Bogaerts, even if he looks shaky doing it. A couple of those hit the wall 20 feet up. And a couple times he drops the ball and a guy gets a triple instead of a double, which still allows the pitcher to strike out the next two hitters and contain the damage.

On offense, he hits a ball out of the park and it's a run. He has 10 of those or 40 bases. And that's just home runs. Can someone show me the 40 times this season he's played a double into a triple, in order to offset those 40 bases? Then we can move on to the other hits.

Left field defense just isn't hard or important.

FanSinceBoggs · May 22, 2015

Anthony Rizzo (132 OPS+ his last 3 years, from ages 23-25).

Forgot about Rizzo, good one. Rizzo never played for the Red Sox AAA team; his AAA experience came in Tucson in 2011 (and Iowa in 2012) and so the Red Sox weren't the only team involved in his development. Still, Rizzo was very impressive when the Red Sox traded him away. At least we got A.Gonzalez for him; the Padres screwed it up by trading Rizzo to the Cubs (I never understood that deal).

EricFeczko · May 22, 2015

FanSinceBoggs said:
When was the last time the Red Sox system produced a really good hitter? Do we have to go back to Pedroia and Ellsbury or am I overlooking someone? The inability of the farm system to produce position players has really hurt the Red Sox. These guys come up, after heralded minor league careers, and don't produce. It has turned into such a dominant trend, makes me wonder if something is going wrong with minor league player development. In retrospect, the Red Sox would be a better team today if they used the farm system for trades. Instead, they held on to a lot of these guys, and many have lost trade value (diminished trade value: Bogaerts and Bradley; Middlebrooks brought back nothing; Cecchini, Brentz, and Coyle are worthless trade pieces at this point).

Some of this is absurd. Bogaerts is a 22 year old shortstop. How many 22 year old shortstops were league average hitters (or better) in the MLB? Ditto for betts as a CF.

What has happened over the past few years is that expectations for prospects have shot upwards thanks to Trout, Heyward, Harper, Stanton, etc. Rookies typically struggle at the major league level before breaking out. In fact, Rizzo and Pedroia broke out when they were 24 years old. Ellsbury has had only two full above average seasons as a red sox hitter, and only after he was 27 (2011 and 2013).

EDIT: Josh reddick is another example of a good hitter (~pedroia's level, unless he continues hitting at ~900 OPS this season) produced by the red sox.

geoduck no quahog · May 22, 2015

The lineup just can't be this bad. The contagion starts and ends with the 3-6 hitters, with only Sandoval currently performing. No reason to pitch carefully to Ortiz because Hanley isn't hitting. That creates 2 outs in front of Sandoval. No reason to pitch carefully to Sandoval because Napoli isn't hitting. Combine all of that with a lousy OBP by Betts and you've got a recipe for immense suckitude.

I can't imagine things continuing this badly. Maybe a temporary lineup change will help, but this is a pretty good lineup on paper.

As of today, the best OBP belongs to Pedroia (and SSS Victorino). If the Red Sox had a decent lead-off hitter things could change. Maybe Sandoval should be hitting 3rd, since he gets a bat on everything. Maybe Napoli should be hitting 9th (since he's performing like a pitcher) and maybe Bogaerts should be leading off (he has 3 fewer walks than Betts with less plate appearances, albeit there's been no protection behind him)...who knows.

Whatever - lineup changes are only a reactionary fix. Bottom line is this is a good lineup once Ramirez and Napoli get going and Betts starts being a lead-off hitter. I think the only permanent long-term change I'd make is inserting another #2 hitter and moving Pedroia/Ortiz down the lineup, or maybe insert Castillo as #3 and move everyone down, since he's the shiny new toy.

What are the hitting coaches doing? It's pretty bad when the announcers can predict the pitching approach and the hitters can't adjust. Can no one hit the low/away ball to the opposite field?

Plympton91 · May 22, 2015

geoduck no quahog said:
If the Red Sox had a decent lead-off hitter things could change.

It is definitely more of a specialty position than I think statheads credit. Pedroia is significantly worse than his career line there (809 to 724) over almost a full season of plate appearances.

Wherever would the Sox have found a decent leadoff hitter though?

Rovin Romine · May 22, 2015

FanSinceBoggs said:
When was the last time the Red Sox system produced a really good hitter? Do we have to go back to Pedroia and Ellsbury or am I overlooking someone? The inability of the farm system to produce position players has really hurt the Red Sox. These guys come up, after heralded minor league careers, and don't produce. It has turned into such a dominant trend, makes me wonder if something is going wrong with minor league player development. In retrospect, the Red Sox would be a better team today if they used the farm system for trades. Instead, they held on to a lot of these guys, and many have lost trade value (diminished trade value: Bogaerts and Bradley; Middlebrooks brought back nothing; Cecchini, Brentz, and Coyle are worthless trade pieces at this point).

Others have cited Rizzo and Reddick. Lowrie (given his position) also had an excellent run when he was on the field. He's currently on the DL and looking at thumb surgery. Before injury, he played 18 games and produced a .999 OPS.

tedseye · May 22, 2015

Plympton91 said:
It is definitely more of a specialty position than I think statheads credit. Pedroia is significantly worse than his career line there (809 to 724) over almost a full season of plate appearances.

Wherever would the Sox have found a decent leadoff hitter though?

Like Dreamboat -- to be found on the DL?

joyofsox · May 22, 2015

Took a quick look at May's linescores. The Red Sox have played 171 innings.

They have scored more than 1 run in an inning only seven times.

They have scored more than 2 runs in an inning only twice.

Toe Nash · May 22, 2015

Plympton91 said:
On average, there are, what, four balls a game hit to left field? A couple of those are cans - o - corn that he catches or clean singles/doubles that he picks up and throws to Bogaerts, even if he looks shaky doing it. A couple of those hit the wall 20 feet up. And a couple times he drops the ball and a guy gets a triple instead of a double, which still allows the pitcher to strike out the next two hitters and contain the damage.

On offense, he hits a ball out of the park and it's a run. He has 10 of those or 40 bases. And that's just home runs. Can someone show me the 40 times this season he's played a double into a triple, in order to offset those 40 bases? Then we can move on to the other hits.

Left field defense just isn't hard or important.

I mean...really? We have developed complicated metrics to tell us the answer to these things. You have to compare those 40 bases (well, and the rest of his contributions, positive and negative) to the average player who received his number of chances at the plate, just as you compare he defensive contributions, positive and negative, to the average. You can't just say it doesn't matter and spit out a couple guesses.

The defensive metrics are unreliable because they don't represent the player's true skill over a small sample. That is due to a lot of factors outside the player's control. Over a larger sample he will have more chances and the result will be more his true ability. Great. But the metrics give you an idea of what has happened so far and the direction things are pointing.

The problem is you can't look at Hanley and tell me he's fielding well. He may not be 9 runs below average in 40 games bad, but he's not average, and he's probably below average. So his defense is going to offset some of his contrbution at the plate unless he gets way better. How much? Well, DRS has the worst LFers in the league over the last few years as Willingham, Ibanez, Holliday, Quentin, and when adjusted for their PT, probably Quentin is the worst with -18 runs in 1350 innings. That's about one season's worth. So that probably gives you the realm of expectation for Hanley -- if he's about the worst left fielder in the league, he's worth maybe 15 runs below average. If he continues to be much worse than that he will probably get moved off the position.

Last year there were 45 players who produced 15 or more wRAA at the plate. So Hanley needs to be one of the 45 best hitters in the league to provide average value if he's the worst LF in the league. Give or take. Last year he was 34th with 20 wRAA. The year before he put up an awesome 33 wRAA. So he can do it. But he was also not too far below average fielding when he was able to play SS, so his overall contribution was great.

So yes, you can "hide" him somewhat in left. But it does matter. You know where you can really hide someone who's a bad fielder? DH.

geoduck no quahog · May 22, 2015

Only argument against that is the probability that Ramirez improves over time - which I think can be predicted (why not?). Question is - how much?

The only single-season solution to that is putting Ortiz at 1B and DH'g Ramirez - and then calculating the defensive runs saved in LF versus the runs lost at 1B versus replacing the corpse of Napoli with someone who might hit (obviously Castillo).

Toe Nash · May 22, 2015

EricFeczko said:
I don't mean to pile on here, but I'd be careful with making this statement. I've definitely made this mistake in the past. Advanced defensive metrics like DRS and UZR try to measure what the true talent level of the player is, they don't actually capture what occurs on the field:
This isn't to say that Hanley is a great defender in LF, rather, we can't use UZR or DRS to argue that we should move him to another position. You'd need at least three years of data to make that argument.

Jnai said:
Weird coming from me, I know, but I just want to come to the defense of common sense here for a second. Even if UZR and DRS didn't exist, we could still look at Hanley in left field and say he was a god awful defender who is likely bleeding out offensive value all over the outfield grass. No need for three years of data to justify that, certainly.

I mean, I said "much" of his offense was being nullified. I didn't specify an amount; I don't know. I think that is fair. But he very clearly is hurting us defensively and woudln't hurt as much elsewhere.

geoduck no quahog · May 22, 2015

OK, with Castillo on the verge of playing per today's rumors, this is one clam's potential solution. Feel free to trash it.

1. Phantom DL Napoli. Let him try to work his way back into hitting shape with routines he can't exercise during the playing season.

2. Put Castillo in LF and platoon Victorino/Bradley in RF.

3. Ortiz to 1B, Ramirez to DH (he's never played 1B and now is no time for him to learn).

4. Insert Castillo in Naploli's #6 spot for the time being. Bogaerts #7, Swihart #8, JBJ/Victorino #9 (put some speed in front of Betts).

5. Hope that Ramirez starts hitting like Ramirez and that Betts starts seeing things fall in.

EricFeczko · May 22, 2015

Toe Nash said:
I mean, I said "much" of his offense was being nullified. I didn't specify an amount; I don't know. I think that is fair. But he very clearly is hurting us defensively and woudln't hurt as much elsewhere.

I'll agree that he's not an ideal solution for LF. I don't think we have very many good alternatives though. We can't bench Ortiz (PR risk, he's actually hit better than Hanley over the past month, and he'll probably bounce back over the next few months anyways), we certainly can't play Ortiz at 1B (healthwise he won't stay up). So you are either stuck with moving Ramirez to yet another unfamiliar position (1B), and hoping that he's not worse there than he is in LF, or, you can leave him as the default LF starter. Ensure castillo gets his playing time in AAA or call him up as the RF if/once he's ready.

The problem of moving him off LF is that you basically create a black hole at either RF or LF, which only makes sense if you think Napoli won't regress to his career mean (and therefore have a 1B black hole). Furthermore, SS is a more demanding position than fenway's LF, which is a good reason to think Hanley won't be as bad as he's looked moving forward.

Plympton91 said:
It is definitely more of a specialty position than I think statheads credit. Pedroia is significantly worse than his career line there (809 to 724) over almost a full season of plate appearances.

Wherever would the Sox have found a decent leadoff hitter though?

Actually, I think Castillo would fit this bill, had he not been injured in ST. Manuel Margot might also fit in within two-three years. If Castillo is coming up, I'd slot him first in the lineup and put betts fifth or sixth. I'd send down bradley to continue getting him regular at-bats, since he is tearing up AAA right now.

Jnai · May 22, 2015

Just to be clear, Hanley is still a very good player even with bad defense. But it's clearly bad.

I don't think close to all of his value is being lost as a bad defender. But it's probably a significant amount.

Stan Papi Was Framed · May 22, 2015

Jnai said:
Just to be clear, Hanley is still a very good player even with bad defense. But it's clearly bad.

indeed. and with his shoulder bothering him, would be nice to get him rested. which I realize is very hard right now, but not sure what value he is adding right now given that he is pretty clearly not right at the plate

donutogre · May 22, 2015

geoduck no quahog said:
OK, with Castillo on the verge of playing per today's rumors, this is one clam's potential solution. Feel free to trash it.

1. Phantom DL Napoli. Let him try to work his way back into hitting shape with routines he can't exercise during the playing season.

2. Put Castillo in LF and platoon Victorino/Bradley in RF.

3. Ortiz to 1B, Ramirez to DH (he's never played 1B and now is no time for him to learn).

4. Insert Castillo in Naploli's #6 spot for the time being. Bogaerts #7, Swihart #8, JBJ/Victorino #9 (put some speed in front of Betts).

5. Hope that Ramirez starts hitting like Ramirez and that Betts starts seeing things fall in.

All seems fine, except that there's no way Ortiz is gonna play first. It's just not going to happen.

bellowthecat · May 22, 2015

FanSinceBoggs said:
When was the last time the Red Sox system produced a really good hitter?

In addition to those mentioned, how about Hanley Ramirez? He played all of 2 games in the minors after we traded him barring rehab assignments.

And, while the book is still out on him, Jose Iglesias has been a pretty good hitter since 2012 ended.

Sandy Leon Trotsky · May 22, 2015

This is driving me crazy. People here are throwing out Lowrie and Reddick as two examples of above average players (when healthy...of course) that we let go and then complaining about how Betts, Swihart and X aren't producing. This stinks of privlege to me- expecting OUR farm system to produce instantly when the vast majority of prospects take 1-2 years of ML seasoning before they're producing at a competent level. Just hanging out in AAA until they're "ready" doesn't work.
We cut bait on both those two due to slight flaws in their games after short times on the major league roster.
It sucks that the veterans aren't pulling their weight, but Betts and the rest of the young kids are about exactly where I'd expect them to be: Struggling but still contributing. Sending them back down to AAA or platooning them for matchups isn't going to help. The only thing that will help will be for the veterans to start playing how they're supposed to be playing based on LONG samples.

edit- trying to make this coherent, but already 3 drinks in...

Drek717 · May 22, 2015

geoduck no quahog said:
OK, with Castillo on the verge of playing per today's rumors, this is one clam's potential solution. Feel free to trash it.

1. Phantom DL Napoli. Let him try to work his way back into hitting shape with routines he can't exercise during the playing season.

2. Put Castillo in LF and platoon Victorino/Bradley in RF.

3. Ortiz to 1B, Ramirez to DH (he's never played 1B and now is no time for him to learn).

4. Insert Castillo in Naploli's #6 spot for the time being. Bogaerts #7, Swihart #8, JBJ/Victorino #9 (put some speed in front of Betts).

5. Hope that Ramirez starts hitting like Ramirez and that Betts starts seeing things fall in.

So accepting that Ortiz can't play first and I really don't think the club will talk Napoli into a phantom DL stint during a walk year, how about this suggestion:
1. Install Castillo in RF.
2. Against LHP sit Ortiz down, move Hanley to DH, and play Victorino in LF.
3. Send Bradley back to AAA where he can at least see regular ABs.
4. See about trading Reed Gragnani to the Indians for Brandon Moss (Gragnani is a good comp for Joe Wendell, the guy they traded for Moss, the Indians are falling fast in a strong division, and Moss is basically their 4th OF in a LH heavy outfield and blocked by Santana and the very expensive Nick Swisher at 1B and DH respectively).
5. Platoon Moss and Napoli at 1B. If Nap gets it going Moss can be the alternate LF if Victorino isn't getting it done, Castillo or Betts gets hurt, etc..

In lieu of trading for Moss, I really wouldn't be opposed to the club taking a "fuck it" move and calling up one of Shaw or Cecchini to share time at 1B with Nap. Many a good player struggled in AAA only to turn it on once they get to the bigs and Cecchini had a very solid cup of coffee late last year for example. Not like they could hit substantially worse than Nap has so far.

O Captain! My Captain! · May 22, 2015

Ortiz is not moving to 1b. He is adequate at the position, but his knees won't hold up there. As long as he's on the team, he's the near-every day DH.

If Napoli is done (note: I don't believe he is), options at 1b are Hanley (never played there, probably a terrible idea), Sandoval (Holt to 3b), Nava, or Holt.

If Hanley is so bad in LF he needs to be moved off the position, options for him are 3b (Has played there 99g Gin total), SS (probably he'd be a disaster and you'd need to move Bogaerts somewhere, likely 3b, which is itself a terrible idea), 1b (above) and DH (Ortiz to the bench, which is a terrible move and likely a PR disaster).

There just isn't a place to put Hanley where you could expect him to be anything better than abysmal on defense. There's also no outfielder really pushing him out of LF. Castillo/Betts are taking RF and CF, Victorino is fragile, Nava and Bradley aren't hitting, Holt is overexposed and is needed to cover other positions. Maybe Hanley moves to 1b in a year when Napoli's gone and he has an offseason/spring training to adjust to the position.

For what it's worth, he's been looking a little better in LF recently. He obviously isn't good out there, but he has no experience at the position prior to this season, so there's good reason to believe experience alone will help him out there.

benhogan · May 22, 2015

Drek717 said:
So accepting that Ortiz can't play first and I really don't think the club will talk Napoli into a phantom DL stint during a walk year, how about this suggestion:
1. Install Castillo in RF.
2. Against LHP sit Ortiz down, move Hanley to DH, and play Victorino in LF.
3. Send Bradley back to AAA where he can at least see regular ABs.
4. See about trading Reed Gragnani to the Indians for Brandon Moss (Gragnani is a good comp for Joe Wendell, the guy they traded for Moss, the Indians are falling fast in a strong division, and Moss is basically their 4th OF in a LH heavy outfield and blocked by Santana and the very expensive Nick Swisher at 1B and DH respectively).
5. Platoon Moss and Napoli at 1B. If Nap gets it going Moss can be the alternate LF if Victorino isn't getting it done, Castillo or Betts gets hurt, etc..

In lieu of trading for Moss, I really wouldn't be opposed to the club taking a "fuck it" move and calling up one of Shaw or Cecchini to share time at 1B with Nap. Many a good player struggled in AAA only to turn it on once they get to the bigs and Cecchini had a very solid cup of coffee late last year for example. Not like they could hit substantially worse than Nap has so far.

Yep all this works.

Package Nava with Gragnani to get Moss and offset some salary

Philip Jeff Frye · May 22, 2015

Drek717 said:
In lieu of trading for Moss, I really wouldn't be opposed to the club taking a "fuck it" move and calling up one of Shaw or Cecchini to share time at 1B with Nap. Many a good player struggled in AAA only to turn it on once they get to the bigs and Cecchini had a very solid cup of coffee late last year for example. Not like they could hit substantially worse than Nap has so far.

So we see Bradley and Betts and Swihart and Bogaerts youngsters struggling to produce at the Major League level, but you think guys that aren't producing in AAA are going to be the ones to turn things around?

EricFeczko · May 22, 2015

Trotsky said:
This is driving me crazy. People here are throwing out Lowrie and Reddick as two examples of above average players (when healthy...of course) that we let go and then complaining about how Betts, Swihart and X aren't producing. This stinks of privlege to me- expecting OUR farm system to produce instantly when the vast majority of prospects take 1-2 years of ML seasoning before they're producing at a competent level. Just hanging out in AAA until they're "ready" doesn't work.
We cut bait on both those two due to slight flaws in their games after short times on the major league roster.
It sucks that the veterans aren't pulling their weight, but Betts and the rest of the young kids are about exactly where I'd expect them to be: Struggling but still contributing. Sending them back down to AAA or platooning them for matchups isn't going to help. The only thing that will help will be for the veterans to start playing how they're supposed to be playing based on LONG samples.

edit- trying to make this coherent, but already 3 drinks in...

I think you are muddling the posters together. I'd blame the drinks but you've only had three (unless you have low tolerance levels, I guess).
The people who threw out examples (e.g. myself, Rovine, Captain) aren't the ones complaining about the lack of production. In fact, I think we are arguing for patience, at least I am.

EDIT: Well, subjectively low tolerance, I guess. I'm a terrible barometer for these types of things.

Sandy Leon Trotsky · May 22, 2015

EricFeczko said:
I think you are muddling the posters together. I'd blame the drinks but you've only had three (unless you have low tolerance levels, I gue
The people who threw out examples (e.g. myself, Rovine, Captain) aren't the ones complaining about the lack of production. In fact, I think we are arguing for patience, at least I am.

EDIT: Well, subjectively low tolerance, I guess. I'm a terrible barometer for these types of things.

I haven't eaten all day and they were kickass 15% local brews. Good stuff.
And I've probably muddled plenty here with other media stuff. I do worry though if Boegarts and Betts don't turn it on by midseason if we'll see more calls to move on- that they were promoted too soon, that we should start to look elsewhere, that they're AAAA/backup material and they end up dealt for bullpen arms. I feel like I've been down this alley before.

Plympton91 · May 23, 2015

Toe Nash said:
I mean...really? We have developed complicated metrics to tell us the answer to these things. You have to compare those 40 bases (well, and the rest of his contributions, positive and negative) to the average player who received his number of chances at the plate, just as you compare he defensive contributions, positive and negative, to the average. You can't just say it doesn't matter and spit out a couple guesses.

The defensive metrics are unreliable because they don't represent the player's true skill over a small sample. That is due to a lot of factors outside the player's control. Over a larger sample he will have more chances and the result will be more his true ability. Great. But the metrics give you an idea of what has happened so far and the direction things are pointing.

The problem is you can't look at Hanley and tell me he's fielding well. He may not be 9 runs below average in 40 games bad, but he's not average, and he's probably below average. So his defense is going to offset some of his contrbution at the plate unless he gets way better. How much? Well, DRS has the worst LFers in the league over the last few years as Willingham, Ibanez, Holliday, Quentin, and when adjusted for their PT, probably Quentin is the worst with -18 runs in 1350 innings. That's about one season's worth. So that probably gives you the realm of expectation for Hanley -- if he's about the worst left fielder in the league, he's worth maybe 15 runs below average. If he continues to be much worse than that he will probably get moved off the position.

Last year there were 45 players who produced 15 or more wRAA at the plate. So Hanley needs to be one of the 45 best hitters in the league to provide average value if he's the worst LF in the league. Give or take. Last year he was 34th with 20 wRAA. The year before he put up an awesome 33 wRAA. So he can do it. But he was also not too far below average fielding when he was able to play SS, so his overall contribution was great.

So yes, you can "hide" him somewhat in left. But it does matter. You know where you can really hide someone who's a bad fielder? DH.

The Red Sox never paid David Ortiz close to $20 million to DH when he was one of the 10 best hitters in the league the past 2 seasons. If they end up paying Hanley Ramirez $22 million a season to DH and Pablo Sandoval $20 million to be functionally or actually a platoon player then last offseason was even more disastrous than the Jenks, Lackey, Cameron, debacle in 2009-10.

We know, with certainty, that defensive metrics for Fenway LF are complete junk. Both Manny Ramirez--a bad fielder--and Crawford--a good fielder--showed substantial improvement immediately upon leaving Fenway. These thing are as fatally flawed as plus /minus ratios in hockey or RBI for judging offensive contributions. How good a fielder Hanley Ramirez grades out as is determined importantly by how much time Ellsbury misses for the Yankeees. Because if Ellsbury is out, then Gardner moves to CF, and the average for LF declines. That means you can't compare season to season, when the average is affected even more by trades and free agent signings. Yet, people consistent claim that multiple seasons of data are better, when that's not true. It's false precision. It is junk science all the way down.

I'm not arguing Ramirez is good, I'm arguing that the actual number of times his badness matter is minis clue compared to his number of plate appearances.

twibnotes · May 23, 2015

Plympton91 said:
I'm not arguing Ramirez is good, I'm arguing that the actual number of times his badness matter is minis clue compared to his number of plate appearances.

Problem is, badness in the field causes damage whereas badness at the plate is expected ~2/3 of the time even for good players.

geoduck no quahog · May 25, 2015

A couple of good games can really improve the spirit around here. Stand back for a second and think of what this offense was supposed to be and what it could be over the final 2/3 of the season if players just start trending towards their predicted slash lines.

A lineup of Pedroia, Betts, Ortiz, Ramirez, Sandoval, Napoli, Bogaerts, Castillo, Swihart (Holt, Victorino) is, on paper - a lineup with virtually no holes (I'm not sure that would be my construction*, but that's not the point).
If only performing to expectations the rest of the way, that is one nightmare for an opposing pitcher.

The weak spot has been, and remains, the pitching - even though there's been a short-term improvement. Unlike the the offense, the pitching corp can't be projected to scare the competition. It is what it is.

If the offense comes alive, replacing Masterson's spot with a pending free agent (Cueto, Kazmir, one of the Nats...) and finding a third reliable arm for the bullpen can turn this team into a winner.

I'm no longer worried about the offense because dirty water eventually seeks its own level.

* Maybe the guy who apparently doesn't strike out (Bogaerts) should be hitting in a position to move runners along in front of bigger bats, and maybe Betts/Castillo/Victorino should be hitting 9th to (a) limit their appearances (essentially 2 rookies and a walking cast) and (b) put some speed on in front of Pedroia/Bogaerts. In any case, a team with no obvious holes in the lineup can construct it anyway they want.

Stan Papi Was Framed · May 25, 2015

geoduck no quahog said:
A couple of good games can really improve the spirit around here. Stand back for a second and think of what this offense was supposed to be and what it could be over the final 2/3 of the season if players just start trending towards their predicted slash lines.

A lineup of Pedroia, Betts, Ortiz, Ramirez, Sandoval, Napoli, Bogaerts, Castillo, Swihart (Holt, Victorino) is, on paper - a lineup with virtually no holes (I'm not sure that would be my construction, but that's not the point).
If only performing to expectations the rest of the way, that is one nightmare for an opposing pitcher.

The weak spot has been, and remains, the pitching - even though there's been a short-term improvement. Unlike the the offense, the pitching corp can't be projected to scare the competition. It is what it is.

If the offense comes alive, replacing Masterson's spot with a pending free agent (Cueto, Kazmir, one of the Nats...) and finding a third reliable arm for the bullpen can turn this team into a winner.

I'm no longer worried about the offense because dirty water eventually seeks its own level.

I agree in general but would like to see the real Hanley playing--which means getting him some rest, maybe even a DL trip

geoduck no quahog · May 25, 2015

Stan Papi Was Framed said:
I agree in general but would like to see the real Hanley playing--which means getting him some rest, maybe even a DL trip

I could see that happening if Napoli continues to get hot. Right now Hanley protects Ortiz (who will hit better than he has), so even a sub-par Ramirez serves a function. If Napoli becomes scary, Hanley can be given a break without messing up the lineup too much. Wouldn't it be something if Craig actually found himself and a Ramirez could be temporarily replaced by the to-be-traded player formally known as Craig instead of the punchless JBJ or the excruciating Nava. In a perfect world, Victorino would be able to play and there's no issue.

Who would have thought that the team would miss Craig and Victorino so much, and that it would impact how they treat Ramirez?

Papelbon's Poutine · May 25, 2015

In what way do they "miss" Craig? The version of Craig that could possibly provide what you suggest hasn't existed in almost two years at this point and has never been seen wearing a Sox uniform.

geoduck no quahog · May 25, 2015

Papelbon's Poutine said:
In what way do they "miss" Craig? The version of Craig that could possibly provide what you suggest hasn't existed in almost two years at this point and has never been seen wearing a Sox uniform.

They miss the Craig they thought they were getting.

Red(s)HawksFan · May 25, 2015

geoduck no quahog said:
They miss the Craig they thought they were getting.

Not that they thought they were getting, that they hoped they were getting. The Allen Craig they've had (at least thus far) is exactly the guy he was for the three months prior to the trade.

Papelbon's Poutine · May 25, 2015

geoduck no quahog said:
They miss the Craig they thought they were getting.

Ok, gotcha. I also miss the Powerball jackpot I thought I was going to win last week.

geoduck no quahog · May 27, 2015

What can you say.

This can't go on. The hitters are too good for this. Amazing team slump.

Bogaerts, Napoli and Pedroia have all batted over .300 the past two weeks.

Hanley: .269 w/ no power
Holt: .258
Swihart: .233
Betts: .216 w/ a .212 OBP
Nava: .211
Ortiz: .170
Sandoval: .111

38 runs in 13 games...less than 3 runs/game avg with 3 hitters doing well, 3 mediocre and 3 horrific. It still doesn't make sense.

E5 Yaz · May 27, 2015

Sandoval: .111

Pete Abraham @PeteAbe · 3h
3 hours ago

Sandoval will bat lefty. He has said its because of left knee.

Is this the knee that was HBP, or something else?

The Offense

Member

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!

Member

Member

Member

Member

meat puppet

Member

is not worried about sex with goats

Member

seantwo

Member

bubble burster

seantwo

Member

not particularly consistent

Member

bubble burster

Johnny Rico

New Member

empty, bleak

Member

not particularly consistent

Member

not particularly consistent

Member

is not worried about sex with goats

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Granite Truther

Member

Member

Member

Member

bubble burster

Member

not particularly consistent

Member

not particularly consistent

Homeland Security

not particularly consistent

Member

Homeland Security

not particularly consistent

polka king