"This too shall pass" ---- righting the ship for 2016

[MikeM]

They absolutely do, but part of the reason you can't find that soul is because the thought of Hanley moving to LF wasn't even a glimmer in someone's eye. He had a history of resistance to moving off SS to go to 3B, LF wasn't anything any of us imagined. Personally I would have been on that bandwagon because I wouldn't have imagined he could have so much trouble in LF and I still think Pablo will be fine.

 
Had Hanley not signed so early in free agency (or had Ben signed Panda first) and under a circumstance that seemingly developed in full overnight, i think the concept of him playing left would of gone on to get a lot of pre-speculation play here. We needed the offense, and talk of a willingness to play whatever scored him a $100m payday was already beginning to make it's rounds right about the time he was officially declining arby.
 
Not sure how anybody can feel confident Pablo will be fine though. I mean there comes a point when you have to stop over-emphasizing a guy's age and look past the he's only 28 factor. Combined with his over-hyped defense coming in, Pablo's slash line declining for a 4th straight season (which is hardly the shocking development that some have made it out to be btw/imo) seems to suggest "fast ticking time bomb to full blown albatross" more then it does likely rebound candidate. 

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

I can't imagine Ben or John Henry coming into the office and saying 'damn, did you read the Shaugnessey article, we got to do something now"

 
How about Tom Werner, the "win in more exciting fashion" guy? Maybe the conversation wouldn't unfold as crudely as in your example, but I have a hard time believing management isn't aware of the current media/fan buzz and doesn't factor it into decisions. If the fans think the FO isn't trying, that's bad for business. Just ask Ralph Houk.

 

[ArgentinaSOXfan]

I know its not a priority, but anyone else on the "forget Rusney as our starting corner OF for the next season" bandwagon?

 

[Rasputin]

I know its not a priority, but anyone else on the "forget Rusney as our starting corner OF for the next season" bandwagon?

No, why?

 

[foulkehampshire]

I know its not a priority, but anyone else on the "forget Rusney as our starting corner OF for the next season" bandwagon?

 
The guy with a .317/.346/.486 slash line over the 2nd half of the season?

 

[MikeM]

I know its not a priority, but anyone else on the "forget Rusney as our starting corner OF for the next season" bandwagon?

 
Me, and at the end of the day i still think DD is going to want a better and/or more sure thing power bat at one of those corner spots going in to next season.  With Ortiz turning 40, Hanley coming off a shitty year, Xander still growing into his power, and the very real possibility Panda isn't going to be any better (see my post above), adding a bat who can hit 5th in our lineup would make a lot of overall sense imo. 
 
I stated a while back that Bradley was at the reality crossroad where his window of legitimate opportunity had closed here, barring the very very remote possibly that he went Mike Trout on the league the rest of the way. And well.....yeah. He's obviously not playing odd man out now. Even if it's not all real, which it likely isn't, there's just no way DD is going to risk trading that away in his first year here. 
 
Castillo's recent play has probably pushed his trade value into the net positive range, which ultimately just makes the overall execution factor in making the switch out all the more easier. Heck, there might even be a direct match up that could potentially work with Colorado. I wouldn't expect the upside/value hoarding crowd to like it, but adding CarGo to the lineup (at roughly the same LT cost) would look pretty damn sexy to a lot of people. Especially with a FA ace brought in on top of that. 

 

[Darnell's Son]

Funny you should mention Castillo, iayork wrote about him today for .com.

 
 
Rusney Castillo had a slow start for the Boston Red Sox this year. On June 21, he had a pathetic .544 OPS, and he was relegated to AAA Pawtucket for a month. Even there he did not impress, playing 22 games with just a .667 OPS, but he was called back up to the big leagues anyway on July 27. From then until September 7, he had an .830 OPS, looking much more like the player the Red Sox hoped they were signing for 7 years/$72.5 million.

 

[AB in DC]

To echo Rasputin -- why so down on Castillo?
 
More to the point, why worry about the team's offense at all?  The Sox have scored the third-most runs in the majors despite some atrocious hitting in the first half.  If anything, the offense should be even better next year  Out of our three biggest black holes this year, Hanley/Shaw at 1B should be lightyears ahead of Napoli/Shaw; Castillo 2016 should be much better than the Victorino/Nava/rookie Castillo combo was this year; and Swihart/Hanigan/Vazquez will be a huge improvement over Hanigan/Leon/rookie Swihart at C.  Even if JBJ comes back to earth, he should still be an improvement over Hanley 2015 (90 RC+) in LF.  Really, the only position likely to decline next year is Ortiz.

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

I don't think there's anything "wrong" with Castillo per se, but I could see a scenario where Dombrowski would rather spend the $10 million elsewhere, especially if he can't (or doesn't want to) move Ramirez or Sandoval. A Young/Venable platoon could probably replicate his production (although I'm not sure it would be that much cheaper).

 

[smastroyin]

I think Castillo could use some fall instruction on how baseball is played in the US, maybe have Moncada join him, etc.  Because his baserunning seems to be largely on his own and largely terrible, which I think was the point of the post (I suppose I could match up the time stamp to see how soon it was posted after his ninth inning CS).  This is coach-able though, so there's no reason to dump the guy or anything.

 

[In my lifetime]

I don't think there's anything "wrong" with Castillo per se, but I could see a scenario where Dombrowski would rather spend the $10 million elsewhere, especially if he can't (or doesn't want to) move Ramirez or Sandoval. A Young/Venable platoon could probably replicate his production (although I'm not sure it would be that much cheaper).

And a better than league average corner Outfielder is probably not going to cost much less than 10 million per year. Never mind that Castillo is entering his prime years after being out of baseball for an extended period. It is more likely than not that his game will improve and the contract will be team friendly.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

I know its not a priority, but anyone else on the "forget Rusney as our starting corner OF for the next season" bandwagon?

 
No, because the only reason you get rid of Castillo is if you're planning to bring in someone who's likely to be a better player.
 
Why make a lateral move -- a Young/Venable platoon, to use an example already cited -- that might not have the downside (baserunning blunders) but might also not have the upside (plus power and defensive runs saved by playing JBJ in CF instead of RF)?
 
I see three main options worthy of jettisoning Castillo: Carlos Gonzalez, Jason Heyward, or Justin Upton. All are going to be way more costly than keeping Castillo for another $60MM; Gonzalez in terms of his contract + the prospects cost to acquire him + the cost of finding another outfielder for the three additional years after his current contract expires that Castillo would have. And both oth Upton and Heyward will cost a king's ransom in cash + a draft pick.  
 
Other than those guys, why bother making the move?  Is the upgrade expected by paying Heyward or Upton $150+MM, or the cost in prospects for CarGo (that might otherwise go towards acquiring a starting pitcher), really worth it? 
 
Maybe, but IMO it's not -- if only because the Sox already spend their wad on Panda and Hanley last offseason instead.  If DDski can free up another $25MM by trading some overpriced guys (including Castillo), so that the Sox can afford both Upton and a starting pitcher, then it'd be a different story.

 

[smastroyin]

One thing that gets to a reason Ben is gone is the fact that the Red Sox have dumped 4 OF already this season (Cespedes, Victorino, Nava, Craig (essentially)) have also brought one on and let him go (de Aza) and still don't have a place for Hanley.  Even if he were decent, his place would have been blocking JBJ's emergence or Castillo's resurgence.  This gets to the real point of why the off-season was a complete fuckdoodle of trying to overthink long term roster building (Theo did this in 10/11 as well) while also trying a little too hard to re-shape the team.  Whatever this was driven by, it obviously worked out really poorly.
 
The more I think about the Ramirez signing, the less sense it makes to me.  Because even if you are all-in on Hanley the full-time DH to replace Ortiz, it's been too long since he has consistently hit well enough to be a $20 million DH.
 
The Panda signing makes more sense in the planning stage but his performance has just been terrible.
 
I guess what I'm saying is that whatever they do next season, I hope they pick a plan and just go after it instead of having another wishy washy plan that blows up in their face.  Obviously I'm using hindsight, and you can say the plan was fine, the players they chose were not (and blame Allard Baird, et al).  But I still think the plan was wrong, given their payroll and talent pipeline.

 

[lexrageorge]

I think Castillo could use some fall instruction on how baseball is played in the US, maybe have Moncada join him, etc.  Because his baserunning seems to be largely on his own and largely terrible, which I think was the point of the post (I suppose I could match up the time stamp to see how soon it was posted after his ninth inning CS).  This is coach-able though, so there's no reason to dump the guy or anything.

Moncada has 49 stolen bases and has been caught all of 3 times for Greenville.  While it's fashionable to sometimes lump Moncada in with Castillo as being "Cherington busts", the actual stats prove otherwise.  Personally, I'm not convinced either deserve the bust label. 

 

[ALiveH]

The HanRam signing doesn't really make sense from roster construction standpoint.  IIRC he approached the Sox due to familiarity & Ortiz friendship to strike a team-friendly deal that seemed like a good value at the time (coming off of 2 relatively healthy years where he was worth $25M and $38M per fangraphs) and Ben probably thought he could figure out a place to stick him.
 
I don't see a compelling reason to trade Castillo as he's on a reasonable contract and is likely to be a solid player or better.
 
The one expendable asset with real value I see in the organization is Margot.  He's a blue-chipper who is relatively close to the majors and is "most blocked" (Castillo, Betts, JBJ controlled & likely to be good for a while).  Unlike our other blue-chippers (Moncada, Devers, Espinoza) who are further away from the bigs and less blocked positionally.
 
Margot is the guy I'd package for an Ace (along with 1-2 of our ~10 interchangeable starters and/or 1-2 prospects from the next tier).  No reason to move a catcher - given the wear-and-tear at the position & that Swihart and Vasquez are not totally proven I have a feeling we'll end up needing both of them at some point (plus Hanigan).

 

[Al Zarilla]

 
Me, and at the end of the day i still think DD is going to want a better and/or more sure thing power bat at one of those corner spots going in to next season.  With Ortiz turning 40, Hanley coming off a shitty year, Xander still growing into his power, and the very real possibility Panda isn't going to be any better (see my post above), adding a bat who can hit 5th in our lineup would make a lot of overall sense imo. 
 
I stated a while back that Bradley was at the reality crossroad where his window of legitimate opportunity had closed here, barring the very very remote possibly that he went Mike Trout on the league the rest of the way. And well.....yeah. He's obviously not playing odd man out now. Even if it's not all real, which it likely isn't, there's just no way DD is going to risk trading that away in his first year here. 
 
Castillo's recent play has probably pushed his trade value into the net positive range, which ultimately just makes the overall execution factor in making the switch out all the more easier. Heck, there might even be a direct match up that could potentially work with Colorado. I wouldn't expect the upside/value hoarding crowd to like it, but adding CarGo to the lineup (at roughly the same LT cost) would look pretty damn sexy to a lot of people. Especially with a FA ace brought in on top of that. 

Cargo, like Tulo, has a big career home/road split, .989 vs. .755 OPS home/road. Colorado Rocky Mountain High. Pass on him.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

The more I think about the Ramirez signing, the less sense it makes to me.  Because even if you are all-in on Hanley the full-time DH to replace Ortiz, it's been too long since he has consistently hit well enough to be a $20 million DH.
 
The Panda signing makes more sense in the planning stage but his performance has just been terrible.

 
I think what happened was
 
(1) they gambled heavily on Hanley being able to play at least fringey LF while continuing to wield a 120 wRC+-ish bat. If he does, Ben's a genius.
 
(2) Pablo and Porcello were actually supposed to be the high-floor hedge side of the strategy. The Sox must have realized that in both those cases, the ceiling is maybe four wins, and the more likely outcome around three. But they figured--reasonably, given past performance--that the floor was probably not much less than that. So they figured they could count on more or less breaking even in value terms on those deals, keeping the risk part of the offseason strategy confined to Hanley.
 
And really, it should have worked. If Panda is a 105 wRC+ hitter with average defense, and Porcello is a 4.25 ERA guy--which should have been the downside outcomes for both--then even if Hanley shits the bed exactly as he has, last winter is only a modest disappointment, the Sox are probably at least borderline playoff contenders, and Ben may still have his job. Did anybody see the abject suck of Panda and Porcello coming?

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

I think the fact that so many of us are okay with a potential Margot trade probably means we're overrating his trade value. I doubt you could land a cost-controlled stud starting pitcher with him as the centerpiece of a deal. Maybe a tier-two guy, though.
 
Packaging Devers and Margot, on the other hand, could probably land Ross or Carrasco.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

Moncada has 49 stolen bases and has been caught all of 3 times for Greenville.  While it's fashionable to sometimes lump Moncada in with Castillo as being "Cherington busts", the actual stats prove otherwise.  Personally, I'm not convinced either deserve the bust label. 

I see nothing in smas's post suggesting either player is a bust. Just that both could use some additional acclimation to the American game. In Moncada's case it would be pre-emptive to ensure we don't see things like the third base coach having to whitsle to get his attention to deliver signs... twice in an at bat.

 

[The X Man Cometh]

I think the fact that so many of us are okay with a potential Margot trade probably means we're overrating his trade value. I doubt you could land a cost-controlled stud starting pitcher with him as the centerpiece of a deal. Maybe a tier-two guy, though.
 
Packaging Devers and Margot, on the other hand, could probably land Ross or Carrasco.

 
What about Margot and Owens as the primary pieces in a move to get a Tyson Ross? Owens has tendencies (high FB rate but extremely difficult to get hits off of) that would play up in the spacious confines of San Diego's home park, he's a strikeout pitcher and he's going to be 23 next year.

 

[smastroyin]

Moncada has 49 stolen bases and has been caught all of 3 times for Greenville.  While it's fashionable to sometimes lump Moncada in with Castillo as being "Cherington busts", the actual stats prove otherwise.  Personally, I'm not convinced either deserve the bust label. 

 
I didn't call them busts or even imply it.  They are both Cuban, presumably share some similar background in terms of baseball instruction and experience, and both could probably use some instruction in the MLB style game.  Castillo certainly needs some, given comments throughout the year and the fact that he largely missed spring training.  So here is an opportunity to get them together in a situation they can feel comfortable and learn.  I hardly think this is a controversial position.

 

[Hee Sox Choi]

I think the fact that so many of us are okay with a potential Margot trade probably means we're overrating his trade value. I doubt you could land a cost-controlled stud starting pitcher with him as the centerpiece of a deal. Maybe a tier-two guy, though.
 
Packaging Devers and Margot, on the other hand, could probably land Ross or Carrasco.

I think people are OK dealing Margot because we have 3 good CFs already on the roster + Benintendi.  Margot is a top prospect who, at 20, had a good AA season (wRC+113).  
 
BP had Margot at #14 on their mid-season list.  Sickels had him at #41, CBS Sports had him at #24 and Kiley McDaniels rates him a 60FV, and #19 on his mid-season list, so I don't think we are overrating his value in a trade.  (PS - Let's not package up Devers, he's going to be really good).  

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

I think people are OK dealing Margot because we have 3 good CFs already on the roster + Benintendi.  Margot is a top prospect who, at 20, had a good AA season (wRC+113).  
 
BP had Margot at #14 on their mid-season list.  Sickels had him at #41, CBS Sports had him at #24 and Kiley McDaniels rates him a 60FV, and #19 on his mid-season list, so I don't think we are overrating his value in a trade.  (PS - Let's not package up Devers, he's going to be really good).  

 
Right, so any team who would potentially be in the market for Margot to address an organizational weakness at CF would surely rather trade for Betts, Bradley, or Benintendi depending on where they are in the success cycle. Margot, who does a lot of the same things as those guys, only less well, is the consolation prize in any scenario just as he's not likely to displace Betts or Bradley here any time soon. And if your counter is "well, the Red Sox aren't going to trade any of those guys," then the potential trade partner in possession of the starting pitcher some folks here covet will simply pass because, when it comes down to it, there's really no reason for any of those teams to make trades out of desperation or anything like that - in other words, the Padres don't have to trade Ross, the Clevelands don't have to trade Carrasco, etc.  
 
BP/BA/Sickels/Whoever rankings are nice, but they don't really mean much for trade value, ultimately. 

 

[Drek717]

Cargo, like Tulo, has a big career home/road split, .989 vs. .755 OPS home/road. Colorado Rocky Mountain High. Pass on him.

For what it's worth, many players simply have a big home/road split.  Tulo has a .696 OPS since joining Toronto but a .780 OPS at home with Toronto for example.
 
Not to say Colorado hitters shouldn't still be taken with a grain of salt, but if the Rockies would make a reasonable demand for CarGo in order to free up the $17M in payroll he's owed he could fit well with the Sox.  Personally I'd rather see them acquire him while still keeping Betts, Bradley, and Castillo myself, with the four of them sharing OF time and CarGo getting acquainted with 1B so he can be Hanley insurance.
 

I think the fact that so many of us are okay with a potential Margot trade probably means we're overrating his trade value. I doubt you could land a cost-controlled stud starting pitcher with him as the centerpiece of a deal. Maybe a tier-two guy, though.
 
Packaging Devers and Margot, on the other hand, could probably land Ross or Carrasco.

He's a consensus top 100 prospect with current plus defense and speed to go with solid offensive numbers at 20 years old in AA.  If no one views him as a headliner now the Sox would be best suited to hang onto him for another year as his value is likely only going up.
 
Can he get Carrasco straight up?  No way, but then I don't see why Cleveland trades Carrasco and his very friendly deal period.  I mean, I'm assuming they want to be competitive within the next 5 years.  But Margot and another decent piece would be in the ballpark for Tyson Ross who is going to see some pretty rapid salary jumps over his next two arb. years before being a free agent.
 
We also shouldn't rule out Dombrowski aiming for a pitcher who hasn't really broken out yet, Trevor Bauer would be one example, while moving one of the current starters for either bullpen help or prospects at other need positions.  Wade Miley would probably appeal to a lot of clubs as his extension looks pretty team friendly right now, and Buchholz would be enticing to a team with more stability at the front of their rotation looking for a big payoff.
 
Something like FA veteran starter, EdRod, trade acquired young starter, Porcello, Kelly to start 2015 with Johnson and Owens in AAA as depth and Wright as a swing man out of the bullpen.

 

[lexrageorge]

 
I didn't call them busts or even imply it.  They are both Cuban, presumably share some similar background in terms of baseball instruction and experience, and both could probably use some instruction in the MLB style game.  Castillo certainly needs some, given comments throughout the year and the fact that he largely missed spring training.  So here is an opportunity to get them together in a situation they can feel comfortable and learn.  I hardly think this is a controversial position.

My bad.  
 
I incorrectly inferred that you were being critical of both players baserunning.  So I wanted to point out that Moncada's baserunning (at least when it comes to stolen bases) has been quite excellent.  Furthermore, when both Moncada and Castillo were struggling, some posters started to question the team's ability to scout Cuban players, without any regard to the fact that both players had some unique circumstances that would likely result in slow starts for both players.  
 
I would hope that Moncada received daily instruction on the nuances of American baseball when he was at Greenville.  Otherwise, I would question why they have a coaching staff there in the first place. 
 
I'm not opposed to giving both players some additonal instruction, although there does need to be some balance between more playing time and allowing the players to heal during the offseason.  

 

[Drek717]

 
Right, so any team who would potentially be in the market for Margot to address an organizational weakness at CF would surely rather trade for Betts, Bradley, or Benintendi depending on where they are in the success cycle. Margot, who does a lot of the same things as those guys, only less well, is the consolation prize in any scenario just as he's not likely to displace Betts or Bradley here any time soon. And if your counter is "well, the Red Sox aren't going to trade any of those guys," then the potential trade partner in possession of the starting pitcher some folks here covet will simply pass because, when it comes down to it, there's really no reason for any of those teams to make trades out of desperation or anything like that - in other words, the Padres don't have to trade Ross, the Clevelands don't have to trade Carrasco, etc.  
 
BP/BA/Sickels/Whoever rankings are nice, but they don't really mean much for trade value, ultimately. 

1. Benintendi can't be traded until June of next year as he was just drafted.
 
2. Margot is likely the fastest guy in this entire crop, FYI.  He is more comparable to Jacoby Ellsbury than Betts or Bradley really, a very good CF defender who currently projects to be a solid bottom of the lineup bat who supplements his value with a high SB success rate on the lower end, a dynamic lead off hitter on the upper end.
 
3. The Indians probably won't trade Carrasco without getting a king's ransom, his deal is pretty damn team friendly and if they really want to move him they'd be better off trying to get a 200 IP season out of him and then do so.  The Padres are more pressed to move Ross because he's about to start getting real expensive, they have a comparatively tight budget with a lot of it already committed to Kemp, Shields, Kimbrel, etc., and he's only got a few more years of team control before it is out of their power regardless.  The bigger dynamic is whether or not the Padres feel they should be able to staple one of the big contracts on his back without taking serious prospect depletion in the process, not their willingness to just sit on him until he walks.  That has never been the MO of San Diego's ownership.
 
In fact, the Red Sox have no need to move Margot this winter either.  There is a clear hole open in AAA for him to step into and he'd make fantastic insurance in case the last month and change from Rusney and/or Bradley was a mirage.  Most GMs favor action over inaction by their very nature however, so GMs who want to get a young CF of the future are going to see Margot as a damn good option along those lines and the Sox as a willing seller as he isn't expected to displace any of the current outfielders.
 
He is a legit blue chip CF prospect from an organization that has turned out several blue chip OFs of late.  There will be heavy interest if Dombrowski actively shops him.  He isn't going to net Matt Harvey or even Tyson Ross on his own, but he'll be a big step in the right direction.
 
I think we've over-corrected on how we value our prospects on this board.  There is a reason all the prospect watchers are fawning over the current Sox farm system.  It is flush with talent and Margot is one of the jewels of that very rich system.

 

[smastroyin]

The rule on trading draftees was changed this year, so they could trade if they wanted to. I still wouldn't.

 

[Darnell's Son]

1. Benintendi can't be traded until June of next year as he was just drafted.
 
 

They changed this. He can be traded after this year's World Series.

 

[grimshaw]

Cargo, like Tulo, has a big career home/road split, .989 vs. .755 OPS home/road. Colorado Rocky Mountain High. Pass on him.

Not directed at you necessarily, but wanted to mention this somewhere about Coors.  I was listening to Tulowitski talking about the Coors effect earlier this season, and it wasn't so much that the ball wouldn't carry as far on the road, that the "stuff" coming out of a pitchers hand looked a lot sharper after playing at home and there is a readjustment period needed.
 
Here's a (mostly speculative) article, but I think there's something to it.
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/07/colorado-rockies-troy-tulowitzki-carlos-gonzalez-trade-rumors-mlb-road-stats
 
Basically, I think CarGo would mash anywhere.

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

1. Benintendi can't be traded until June of next year as he was just drafted.
 
2. Margot is likely the fastest guy in this entire crop, FYI.  He is more comparable to Jacoby Ellsbury than Betts or Bradley really, a very good CF defender who currently projects to be a solid bottom of the lineup bat who supplements his value with a high SB success rate on the lower end, a dynamic lead off hitter on the upper end.
 
3. The Indians probably won't trade Carrasco without getting a king's ransom, his deal is pretty damn team friendly and if they really want to move him they'd be better off trying to get a 200 IP season out of him and then do so.  The Padres are more pressed to move Ross because he's about to start getting real expensive, they have a comparatively tight budget with a lot of it already committed to Kemp, Shields, Kimbrel, etc., and he's only got a few more years of team control before it is out of their power regardless.  The bigger dynamic is whether or not the Padres feel they should be able to staple one of the big contracts on his back without taking serious prospect depletion in the process, not their willingness to just sit on him until he walks.  That has never been the MO of San Diego's ownership.
 
In fact, the Red Sox have no need to move Margot this winter either.  There is a clear hole open in AAA for him to step into and he'd make fantastic insurance in case the last month and change from Rusney and/or Bradley was a mirage.  Most GMs favor action over inaction by their very nature however, so GMs who want to get a young CF of the future are going to see Margot as a damn good option along those lines and the Sox as a willing seller as he isn't expected to displace any of the current outfielders.
 
He is a legit blue chip CF prospect from an organization that has turned out several blue chip OFs of late.  There will be heavy interest if Dombrowski actively shops him.  He isn't going to net Matt Harvey or even Tyson Ross on his own, but he'll be a big step in the right direction.
 
I think we've over-corrected on how we value our prospects on this board.  There is a reason all the prospect watchers are fawning over the current Sox farm system.  It is flush with talent and Margot is one of the jewels of that very rich system.

 
To clarify, I don't think Margot is a bust or anything like that, I just think he's not quite in the Devers/Moncada/Benintendi/Espinoza tier, although I acknowledge that time is on his side at this point. And I think one of those four guys will probably be necessary to trade for someone like Harvey or Ross (and I don't think Carrasco is going anywhere, either, I only mention him because others have been). And to be clear, I don't know if I think that's a good idea, but I don't want to categorically rule it out, either.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

Abs has part 2 of his look at Dombrowski's options for the off season up, with a look at the lineup and all of the exciting youth we've (and Dave) have gotten to enjoy since the trade deadline.
 
Hint: The future is bright.

 

[Drek717]

 
To clarify, I don't think Margot is a bust or anything like that, I just think he's not quite in the Devers/Moncada/Benintendi/Espinoza tier, although I acknowledge that time is on his side at this point. And I think one of those four guys will probably be necessary to trade for someone like Harvey or Ross (and I don't think Carrasco is going anywhere, either, I only mention him because others have been). And to be clear, I don't know if I think that's a good idea, but I don't want to categorically rule it out, either.

I think you're skewing your perspective of an "elite" prospect too much based on the potentials of the Greenville quartet.
 
Rafael Devers has been referred to as one of the best young hitters in all of organized ball, Robinson Cano with more power potential, the next Manny Ramirez, etc..  If he was born in the U.S. he would have been draft eligible this past summer and likely would have been a top 10 pick.  His upside as a prospect is as a top 10 guy and his ML ceiling is legitimately that of a future MVP.
 
Yoan Moncada has been mythologized by baseball scouts for a few years before he made it to the market, shattered all signing bonus records, was referred to as a top 5 pick in any draft of the last 10 years, and was anointed a top 10-15 prospect by every list that matters basically out of the gate.  He has only confirmed those rankings in the second half.
 
Benintendi was the 7th overall pick in this past draft and as a sophomore won every individual collegiate award worth winning. He promptly torched A ball pitching when switching to wood bats.
 
Anderson Espinoza has been referred to as the only peer on the planet to Julio Urias when talking under-20 pitching talent.  Most say he'd be the #1 pick in next year's draft, the first he'd even be eligible for, if he was American born.
 
These four guys are basically top 10 talents if they stay healthy and produce like everyone projects them to.  That obviously isn't likely to happen, at least one or two will likely crash and burn before or at the ML level.  But when talking prospects with trade value it really doesn't get much higher than those four.
 
Manuel Margot is of comparable pedigree to Anthony Rizzo, only he (Margot) made top 100 lists as a 19 year old before seeing AA while it took a strong age 20 season split between A+ and AA for Rizzo to crack the top 100's, followed by a strong AAA season to push him up into the middle range (30-50's) on those lists.  That AAA season came after his trade.  With Margot already getting mention on mid-season top 50 lists he's likely tracking about a year ahead of Rizzo.
 
Margot and Owens is actually a pretty comparable package to Rizzo and Kelly, but with both players more developed and closer to ML ready.
 
Top 10 guys almost never get traded and that is the track the above four guys are on.  It is the 25-75 guys who make up the real prospect value in big trades.  Teams are more willing to part with them but they've also got the potential to take the next step and out-perform the guys ranking above them on those same lists.  Rizzo is exactly such an outcome.

 

[MikeM]

To echo Rasputin -- why so down on Castillo?
 
More to the point, why worry about the team's offense at all?  The Sox have scored the third-most runs in the majors despite some atrocious hitting in the first half.  If anything, the offense should be even better next year  Out of our three biggest black holes this year, Hanley/Shaw at 1B should be lightyears ahead of Napoli/Shaw; Castillo 2016 should be much better than the Victorino/Nava/rookie Castillo combo was this year; and Swihart/Hanigan/Vazquez will be a huge improvement over Hanigan/Leon/rookie Swihart at C.  Even if JBJ comes back to earth, he should still be an improvement over Hanley 2015 (90 RC+) in LF.  Really, the only position likely to decline next year is Ortiz.

 
I'm not really down on Castillo at all. If the plan still projected to have him as our CF'er of the future, which i'm strongly guessing it did at the time of his signing, i wouldn't have him going anywhere. Plans change though and he's really not even in the current discussion to play center anymore.
 
Does Castillo still project to be a solid RF value? Sure. Again, I ultimately just don't see the new guy coming in and simply going with the previous flow. Total runs in itself also only tells so much of the story there. Without buying so heavily into the recent SSS, I see DD recognizing a potential hole in the middle of our lineup and making the attempt to improve on that (preferably with LHH). With a corner OF spot being the most obvious place to do that now that Hanley is being moved to first.
 
I'm also viewing a trade for CarGo in a different context then most i guess. Improving the pitching is obviously the most pressing concern, but the available upgrades are probably going to be rather limited beyond signing an ace out of free agency. I don't see a trade for the cost controlled 1/2 rotation guy actually happening and i'm dubious on the concept we'll give up what it will likely take for 1 year of Chapman. Leaving a scenario where instead of getting too caught up in how things could/should look, DD ends up upgrading the team wherever and however he can.    

 

[alwyn96]

Not directed at you necessarily, but wanted to mention this somewhere about Coors.  I was listening to Tulowitski talking about the Coors effect earlier this season, and it wasn't so much that the ball wouldn't carry as far on the road, that the "stuff" coming out of a pitchers hand looked a lot sharper after playing at home and there is a readjustment period needed.
 
Here's a (mostly speculative) article, but I think there's something to it.
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/07/colorado-rockies-troy-tulowitzki-carlos-gonzalez-trade-rumors-mlb-road-stats
 
Basically, I think CarGo would mash anywhere.

 
Yeah, people had these same concerns about Matt Holliday, who also had pretty significant Coors/Road splits, but he's been consistently excellent for St Louis. I'm pretty sure CarGo will be fine as long as he's healthy.
 
EDIT: And of course Holliday is mentioned prominently in that article. Nevermind.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

 
Yeah, people had these same concerns about Matt Holliday, who also had pretty significant Coors/Road splits, but he's been consistently excellent for St Louis. I'm pretty sure CarGo will be fine as long as he's healthy.
 
EDIT: And of course Holliday is mentioned prominently in that article. Nevermind.

 
The tricky thing about Rockies home/road splits is disentangling the great home park effect from the crappy road park effect: with unbalanced schedules, Rockies hitters play a disproportionate number of their road games in three of the worst hitters' parks in baseball (along with one that's usually one of the best). So what's probably happening when hitters don't collapse on leaving Coors is that their home performance is declining but their road performance is rising to meet it.
 
Case in point: Dexter Fowler.
 
2012 Rockies: 119 OPS+, .984/.720 home/road split.
2013 Rockies: 102, .874/.678
2014 Astros: 119, .829/.726
2015 Cubs: 114, .815/.755
 
He went from a great home park with bad divisional road parks, to a good home park with bad divisional road parks, to a pretty good home park with an even mix of good and bad divisional road parks--and his splits reflect that perfectly.
 
So, yeah. No need to fear the Coors withdrawal effect, because it's balanced out by the Petco/AT&T/Dodger withdrawal effect.

 

[nothumb]

 
 Without buying so heavily into the recent SSS, I see DD recognizing a potential hole in the middle of our lineup and making the attempt to improve on that (preferably with LHH). With a corner OF spot being the most obvious place to do that now that Hanley is being moved to first.
 
  

 
But why is there a 'hole' in the middle of our lineup for 2016? Obviously JBJ is not going to be Mike Trout forever, but it's also reasonable to project some bounce back from Panda and Hanley. You don't need three 30 HR guys in the middle of the order anymore - in fact it's nearly impossible to get them. The Sox have scored the third most runs in baseball this year, even with all the issues. You could roll with the same position players we have today for 2016 and this would be a top 5 offense.
 
You don't have to win by having power hitters in one place and speedy defenders in another. A deep lineup with average power can score a lot of runs. Combine that with good defense and an improved pitching staff, and it's a complete team. As I've said in a couple places, you can hedge against offensive regression for Rusney (or at the corners generally) by adding a LH bench player with some pop, without nearly the acquisition cost or risk.

 

[MikeM]

 
But why is there a 'hole' in the middle of our lineup for 2016? Obviously JBJ is not going to be Mike Trout forever, but it's also reasonable to project some bounce back from Panda and Hanley. You don't need three 30 HR guys in the middle of the order anymore - in fact it's nearly impossible to get them. The Sox have scored the third most runs in baseball this year, even with all the issues. You could roll with the same position players we have today for 2016 and this would be a top 5 offense.
 
You don't have to win by having power hitters in one place and speedy defenders in another. A deep lineup with average power can score a lot of runs. Combine that with good defense and an improved pitching staff, and it's a complete team. As I've said in a couple places, you can hedge against offensive regression for Rusney (or at the corners generally) by adding a LH bench player with some pop, without nearly the acquisition cost or risk.

 
You may not *need* three 30 HR guys in the middle of the order anymore, but it certainly wouldn't hurt in this instance if/when you can (Hanley likely won't be projected to hit 30+ next year btw, but i still get your overall point). 
 
Again, the name of the game this winter for DD (imo) will be upgrading the team wherever and however he reasonable can. Key word in that being reasonable btw, which tends not to be a strong point in people's speculation this time of year imo when everybody is spitting out their best case scenario projections. Unfortunately for DD though, he probably won't find himself operating in Best Case Scenario Land this winter. 
 
For me Cargo over Castillo is both an upgrade to our current roster construction, and something that actually falls in that realm of reasonable possibilities. Or more specifically...the upgrade that happens when the trade for a cost controlled 1/2 doesn't. Which basically leaves us having a less then ideal but still fairly marketable winter on top of our late season surge:
 
1. Sign a FA ace 
2. Pick up and pray on Buchholz after the 2nd tier FA starter options all end up looking kind of meh
3. Trade for CarGo
4. Find 2 solid bullpen arms to slot behind Koji, one which unfortunately won't be Chapman 
 
Or at least that's more in the neighborhood of what i'm expecting. 

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

Frankly, anyone suggesting that any resources should be spent on anything other than pitching should be given a nice vacation from posting by the mods.

Added to this list are:

- those suggesting we trade Pedroia
- those suggesting we eat 50% (or whatever) of contracts to dump HR or PS
- those suggesting we trade CV or BS because it's some kind of waste to roster two good, young catchers for a year, especially when one may not be back until mid season
- those suggesting players like Sonny Gray, Chris Sale or King Felix are available with nothing but dreams and wishes to support such stances
- those that think a handful of nickels is going to get us a quarter on the trade market


Sign a "#1". Price, Zimm, Greinke or Cueto (I'm weary on him, but if medicals check out, fine).

Sign or trade for two top shelf relievers. This is where the B prospects can be spent best

Wait out the market and if guys like Fister, Iwakuma, Kazmir, Kennedy, Shark, Leake, etc are there for cheap, sign one of them too and worry about logjams later.

Go to battle with the positional players we have and those additions to the pitching staff and take your chances.

That's it.

We don't need to be trading prospects for CarGo to get a slight uptick in LF, we're not getting a premium SP without selling the farm and they're not going to eat a shitload of money to dump players one year into big money contracts.

Then everyone go have a smoke, take a shot and watch some porn or something and chill the fuck out. This team, as bad as their record says, is not that tough to fix. Just get some pitching.

 

[MikeM]

Wait out the market and if guys like Fister, Iwakuma, Kazmir, Kennedy, Shark, Leake, etc are there for cheap, sign one of them too and worry about logjams later.
 

 
What's your projected definition of cheap there? The 2nd tier guys obviously won't be getting Top 4 cash, or probably even Porcello per/year money at that. But the better looking ones of that bunch atm are still likely coming with the condition we offer a long term deal. 
 
I mean maybe we get lucky and snag one willing to sign a one year deal while hoping to get a better contract next winter. If we do..great. But for the most part and given what we already have in place, not adding any more lengthy contracts on still somewhat expensive lower tier talent (on top of the reach we are already making in the process of paying out on an ace) strikes me as a better overall approach then stressing out over the mere possibility we look to upgrade one of our corner OF spots with a higher tier guy (on a very reasonable 2 year deal, as far as LT calculations go).  

 

[grimshaw]

Frankly, anyone suggesting that any resources should be spent on anything other than pitching should be given a nice vacation from posting by the mods.

Added to this list are:

- those suggesting we eat 50% (or whatever) of contracts to dump HR or PS


 

This one I disagree with.  Look at what the Dodgers did with Matt Kemp's contract - in getting back a useful and cheap starting catcher.
Granted, I doubt any other GM falls for that kind of deal again, but I wouldn't doubt Dombrowski could find a taker in the right deal that doesn't hamstring them considerably.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

This one I disagree with.  Look at what the Dodgers did with Matt Kemp's contract - in getting back a useful and cheap starting catcher.
Granted, I doubt any other GM falls for that kind of deal again, but I wouldn't doubt Dombrowski could find a taker in the right deal that doesn't hamstring them considerably.

Exactly. I started out thinking that Hanley was the one going to DDski's chopping block, but the way he'd been brought along so slowly and converted to 1b while on the DL, makes me suspect that it's actually the younger (and super-clutch WS star!) Panda who's headed out the door. If subsidized, and/or packaged with value pieces, he could probably be dealt for some decent return...especially to the NL.

Which likely means DDski would need to find a 1-3 year stopgap for Moncada, as well as pitching.

 

[shaggydog2000]

 
What's your projected definition of cheap there? The 2nd tier guys obviously won't be getting Top 4 cash, or probably even Porcello per/year money at that. But the better looking ones of that bunch atm are still likely coming with the condition we offer a long term deal. 
 
I mean maybe we get lucky and snag one willing to sign a one year deal while hoping to get a better contract next winter. If we do..great. But for the most part and given what we already have in place, not adding any more lengthy contracts on still somewhat expensive lower tier talent (on top of the reach we are already making in the process of paying out on an ace) strikes me as a better overall approach then stressing out over the mere possibility we look to upgrade one of our corner OF spots with a higher tier guy (on a very reasonable 2 year deal, as far as LT calculations go).  

 
I don't see any changes getting made among the position players, except for adding a 4th outfielder.  They all seem to be experienced Vets who performed as expected this year and are unlikely to be upgradable (Pedroia, Hannigan, Ortiz, Holt), players with upside that outstrips their trade value (Betts, Bogaerts, Bradley, Castillo, Shaw, Swihart, Hanley to see if he can figure out first), or an albatross contract that has more potential upside than the relief we would get for trading it (Sandoval).  If we trade Pablo, there aren't many options to put at 3rd that you can be sure would be better, it would cost a lot to do so, and there is a decent chance he returns to at least average production.  I could see Hannigan being moved if Vazquez comes back strong and kills it in spring training.  And maybe they decide Shaw is just filler and they can upgrade from him.  But other than that they seem pretty set.  They seem likely to spend next year figuring out what they have.  Maybe at the deadline they would make moves to upgrade if they're in contention.  
 
Dombrowski has said what everyone else has, they clearly need a new #1, and he certainly seems likely to add one.  It will be interesting to see if any starting depth moves out as part of the new pitcher coming in, but beyond that the rotation seems decent if frustrating.  That bullpen needs a lot of work, and like most others on here I think there are going to be a lot of changes, although a few could come from within.  I think the odds are there is some money/prospects spent there as well.  

 

[Al Zarilla]

Exactly. I started out thinking that Hanley was the one going to DDski's chopping block, but the way he'd been brought along so slowly and converted to 1b while on the DL, makes me suspect that it's actually the younger (and super-clutch WS star!) Panda who's headed out the door. If subsidized, and/or packaged with value pieces, he could probably be dealt for some decent return...especially to the NL.

Which likely means DDski would need to find a 1-3 year stopgap for Moncada, as well as pitching.

You can go back and forth on which of Ben's two "demise acquisitions" could be moved. Right now I'm thinking the jury is in on Panda's weight traverses, that is, all 29 other major league teams see what he becomes when the lard takes over. Who would possibly take a chance on him now? So, he loses 30 - 40 pounds this winter and has a decent 2016, only to balloon up again. Someday, when he's completely done, pictures will show up in the Internet of him sobbing while eating that five pound ice cream sundae that showed up years ago.

 

[nothumb]

 
You may not *need* three 30 HR guys in the middle of the order anymore, but it certainly wouldn't hurt in this instance if/when you can (Hanley likely won't be projected to hit 30+ next year btw, but i still get your overall point). 
 
Again, the name of the game this winter for DD (imo) will be upgrading the team wherever and however he reasonable can. Key word in that being reasonable btw, which tends not to be a strong point in people's speculation this time of year imo when everybody is spitting out their best case scenario projections. Unfortunately for DD though, he probably won't find himself operating in Best Case Scenario Land this winter. 
 
For me Cargo over Castillo is both an upgrade to our current roster construction, and something that actually falls in that realm of reasonable possibilities. Or more specifically...the upgrade that happens when the trade for a cost controlled 1/2 doesn't. Which basically leaves us having a less then ideal but still fairly marketable winter on top of our late season surge:
 
1. Sign a FA ace 
2. Pick up and pray on Buchholz after the 2nd tier FA starter options all end up looking kind of meh
3. Trade for CarGo
4. Find 2 solid bullpen arms to slot behind Koji, one which unfortunately won't be Chapman 
 
Or at least that's more in the neighborhood of what i'm expecting. 

I think your take on what the realistic possibilities are for the offseason is sobering and important. We should be contemplating what happens if our preferred acquisitions aren't possible or advisable.

I just don't think Cargo is a good risk, even in that scenario.

1. His midpoint projection for 2016 is better than Rusney's, but I think it's also more volatile and with less upside. I would guess if you ran it 100 times he would average out to 1 or 1.5 wins better. But I would also guess that at least a third of the time, he would be worse, equal, or the improvement would be negligible.

2. He costs more in terms of dollars and has fewer years of control. The Sox could probably make up the likely value gap for 2016 between Rusney and Cargo simply by adding a LH bench bat with pop for nothing but money, thus hedging against low performance or platoon issues for both Hanley and Rusney.

3. In addition to being a marginal improvement with less long term control and costing more, he will cost prospects. Good ones. We have to spend those somewhere, but I would prefer to focus on pitching or the above-mentioned bench bat.

So, briefly put, my guess is that we add more value by focusing on the bench and pitching staff than by trying to upgrade Rusney with Cargo, even if our first choice pitching moves are unworkable. It seems like a high risk move that trades long term assets for volatile, expensive, short term ones, and the best case payoff is probably less than 2 wins.

Doesn't mean it couldn't work. Particularly if you could get a nice return on Rusney that gives you a needed piece for another move, and/or if the price for Cargo is not too high. All strategies should be on the table. I would listen, but lean away on this one unless I was really bowled over.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

You can go back and forth on which of Ben's two "demise acquisitions" could be moved. Right now I'm thinking the jury is in on Panda's weight traverses, that is, all 29 other major league teams see what he becomes when the lard takes over. Who would possibly take a chance on him now? So, he loses 30 - 40 pounds this winter and has a decent 2016, only to balloon up again. Someday, when he's completely done, pictures will show up in the Internet of him sobbing while eating that five pound ice cream sundae that showed up years ago.

 

DDski was able to get Kinsler for just Fielder and $$.  He's pulled off the fat-guy trade before, and because Fielder hasn't been awful, I think he will be able to do it again.
 
Fielder's rebound will likely have some people around baseball thinking that taking Sandoval could be a great "buy-low" bargain. He's still relatively young, after all, and a recent WS hero.  Could Houston be a fit if their young and inexperienced club falls short this October?
 
Or maybe DDski talks up how much Pablo hated giving up switch-hitting or the AL game in general, maybe he just smooth talks about how the Sox need to make a big splash to show their serious and he doesn't really want to trade Panda because he's so committed to shaping up this offseason.
 
But whatever snake oil needs to peddled or smoke blown, I expect DDski to find a buyer, even if he has to pony up for freight with cash and/or a prospect to make it happen.

 

[nvalvo]

Which likely means DDski would need to find a 1-3 year stopgap for Moncada, as well as pitching.

 
Or just hand that job to Brock Holt, let Shaw back up the corners (Hanley at 1B) and call up Marrero for the bench MI role. That Holt and Betts can play in the infield makes us quite deep, actually — especially if we can add a LF/1B type for the bench, ideally LHH. Brandon Moss or equivalent. I guess we could just give the job to Bryce Brentz, but while he's cheap and more or less disposable, he's also a righty and probably not all that good. 
 
Spend the savings on pitching.  

 

[doctorogres]

I think you're skewing your perspective of an "elite" prospect too much based on the potentials of the Greenville quartet.
 
[...]
 
Benintendi was the 7th overall pick in this past draft and as a sophomore won every individual collegiate award worth winning. He promptly torched A ball pitching when switching to wood bats.
 
[...]
 
Manuel Margot is of comparable pedigree to Anthony Rizzo, only he (Margot) made top 100 lists as a 19 year old before seeing AA while it took a strong age 20 season split between A+ and AA for Rizzo to crack the top 100's, followed by a strong AAA season to push him up into the middle range (30-50's) on those lists.  That AAA season came after his trade.  With Margot already getting mention on mid-season top 50 lists he's likely tracking about a year ahead of Rizzo.
 
Margot and Owens is actually a pretty comparable package to Rizzo and Kelly, but with both players more developed and closer to ML ready.
 
Top 10 guys almost never get traded and that is the track the above four guys are on.  It is the 25-75 guys who make up the real prospect value in big trades.  Teams are more willing to part with them but they've also got the potential to take the next step and out-perform the guys ranking above them on those same lists.  Rizzo is exactly such an outcome.

 
People keep talking in this thread about Benintendi like he's ahead of Margot, or even in a different tier altogether, and I don't think most prospects people would agree. Benintendi had a great year, but it's 54 games with 19 in the SAL. Margot is younger, survived the AA jump and succeeded there, and is on several top prospect lists. There was a recent argument on Twitter with Chris Hatfield of SoxProspects and Mark Anderson of Baseball Prospectus, also a link to a Baseball Prospectus "Ask the Industry" piece:
 

AL Front Office Member: “If [Margot] was in any other system than Boston’s, we’d be talking about this guy a lot more. The hit tool could get to plus, he’s a plus-plus runner and he’s developing some pop with a body that should add some strength. All of the guys in my vote have a chance to be really good outfielders, but Margot is the one I could see becoming a star.”
 

 
I think both are not on the same tier as Devers / Moncada / Espinoza right now, but Margot is ahead of Benintendi at this point and closer to the Show than he is at a younger age. The notion expressed earlier in the thread that Margot will be not as valuable in a trade because we have other good young OFers is silly. The question isn't whether the Red Sox can beat the Red Sox' offer, it's whether other teams can make a better offer.
 
Not trying to single you out Drek, I agree with your main point. Just want Margot to get some love.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

 
Or just hand that job to Brock Holt, let Shaw back up the corners (Hanley at 1B) and call up Marrero for the bench MI role. That Holt and Betts can play in the infield makes us quite deep, actually — especially if we can add a LF/1B type for the bench, ideally LHH. Brandon Moss or equivalent. I guess we could just give the job to Bryce Brentz, but while he's cheap and more or less disposable, he's also a righty and probably not all that good. 
 
Spend the savings on pitching.  

 
Brock Holt does not have the bat or the arm to be a major league starter at third base. And even if you can scrape together an argument that he reaches the minimum threshold for holding down the position offensively, you destroy his value by removing him from the super-utility role and weaken the roster overall by reducing its depth. Dumping Panda and replacing him with Holt makes this a worse team. This idea needs to die. If they move Panda, they need to find a full time replacement for him because there isn't one on the roster currently.
 
And yes, Holt has had a better year at the plate than Panda, but Holt has had the year we expected, Panda has not and if you adjust his season for the dip in BABIP, Sandoval looks a lot more like the guy we expected than his slash line would suggest at first glance. Sandoval is very likely going to bounce back next year and he's a better defender at third than Holt. So no, you can't just hand the job to Holt without hurting the team.

 

[Al Zarilla]

 
DDski was able to get Kinsler for just Fielder and $$.  He's pulled off the fat-guy trade before, and because Fielder hasn't been awful, I think he will be able to do it again.
 
Fielder's rebound will likely have some people around baseball thinking that taking Sandoval could be a great "buy-low" bargain. He's still relatively young, after all, and a recent WS hero.  Could Houston be a fit if their young and inexperienced club falls short this October?
 
Or maybe DDski talks up how much Pablo hated giving up switch-hitting or the AL game in general, maybe he just smooth talks about how the Sox need to make a big splash to show their serious and he doesn't really want to trade Panda because he's so committed to shaping up this offseason.
 
But whatever snake oil needs to peddled or smoke blown, I expect DDski to find a buyer, even if he has to pony up for freight with cash and/or a prospect to make it happen.

Hope you're right, fingers crossed. Whenever I see the young studs doing their thing so athletically, whether hitting, running the bases or fielding, and then see Mr. Fatty, I could get sick. Someone pointed out in a game thread that his "range" at third is one step and fall toward/on the ball. I don't think he can bend over enough to field normally at the weight he's carrying now. I need to back off...broken record.

 

[ALiveH]

I think a lot of people are overrating Benintendi as well.  I believe he's in the tier just below Moncada/Devers/Margot/Espinoza.  He's a great prospect, possibly top-50 in baseball.  But, these other 4 guys are probably all top-25 prospects.  Benintendi has been putting up better stats in ~250 PAs at Lowell/Greenville but he's 1) 3 years older than Devers who's put up solid numbers all year at Greenville; 2) 1 year older than Moncada who's put up great numbers at Greenville after his initial adjustment period and 3) 1 year older than Margot who's put up solid numbers 2 levels up at Portland.