Your 2015 Boston Red Sox

[MakMan44]

Yes, naturally I was talking about a pitcher in the Iwakmura, Latos class.

For the record, it would Vic in instead of Nava. Could he get hurt and miss the season again? Sure. I'm not planning for it and that's another reason Cespedes is probably the most expandable piece on the team.

 

[BarrettsHiddenBall]

I think you're severely underestimating the return that power hitters are getting in this market.

I've noticed this a lot lately. People still think that pitching is the most expensive commodity in baseball (in terms of trades). It's not. Power hitters are. The entire paradigm is shifting from overvaluing pitchers to now overvaluing hitters.

That's what happens when offense is continually suppressed for 3 straight years. Now you've got a Brandon McCarthy who you can sign for 3/42 that will give you results that aren't that much different than a James Shields. The gap between an excellent pitcher and a good pitcher is getting smaller, while the existence of power hitters are diminishing by the year.

Do you realize that, from 2011-2014, there have been 4 hitters who OPS'd over 1.000? Two of those are Miggy, and one is Chris Fluke Davis. Before that? 4 in 2010, 3 in 2009. Now we are lucky to have ONE.

Not only that, in 2014, 20 players hit more than 25 HR. In 2010, just 5 seasons ago, that number was 36. Almost cut in half.

This is simple supply and demand. There is such a small amount of power hitters in the game, and the amount of power hitters availavle in the market is even smaller. A Cespedes type player is going to land you far, far more than you think. It's going to be a Heyward type return.

 
Yeah, power is scarce. Heyward's return reflects his power, both demonstrated (prior to 2014 and potential, and his on-base skills, and his apparently wizard-like defense, and the fact that he's 25, and the comp pick if he leaves after 2015. Just because Cespedes shares one of those attributes doesn't mean teams are going to forget about the rest, even if it's power. Nobody's trading 4 years of Shelby Miller for one year of Cespedes.

 

[BarrettsHiddenBall]

 
It's a familiar story by now (or should be) that he responded to that disappointing first professional season with an intensive winter of woodshedding his swing to keep his bat in the zone longer. He's been destroying pitchers ever since.

Yup. And if folks just acknowledged that rather than launching into hyperbole about how he's been killing it for his entire ml career, there'd be no reason to point it out.

As for the possibility he has a down year, anything can happen, but if you go back and look at comps for the kind of performance he turned in as a 21-year-old rookie, I think the smart money says he'll at least have a substantial career, and quite likely an outstanding one. Players who hit the ground running the way he did at that young an age don't usually just fizzle out. There are exceptions, but not many of them.
 
 

Nobody's talking about his career fizzling out; just a 2015 bump in the road that some folks here seem to think is highly unlikely. 

 

[rodderick]

Yup. And if folks just acknowledged that rather than launching into hyperbole about how he's been killing it for his entire ml career, there'd be no reason to point it out.
Nobody's talking about his career fizzling out; just a 2015 bump in the road that some folks here seem to think is highly unlikely. 

 
Mookie Betts had 1116 ABs in the minor leagues. He struggled for about 250 of them in Lowell (while still posting a stellar .352 OBP), and was ridiculous on every single other level of baseball, including the MLB. It's the definition of meaningless nitpicking to insist that "well, not his entire ml career", when the sample size in which he wasn't brilliant is both small and obviously not indicative of future succes, since it was his first taste of professional baseball and he's raked ever since making adjustments to counter his initial struggles. Those 250 ABs have absolutely no bearing of what Betts is as a prospect or what the expectations of him should be going forward, I have no clue as to why you keep bringing it up.
 
There's obviously a chance Betts doesn't fullfill the expectations placed on him in 2015, but there's nothing in his professional performance thus far to indicate the success he's had is a product of luck, or unrepeatable. If he does indeed struggle, it won't be because those ABs in low A showed us worrying trends that went ignored until the majors proved to be too much for him.

 

[lxt]

So which is a better team

Cespedes Lester and secondary free agent pitcher

Or

Nava Lester and whoever the Sox get for Cespedes.

I'm using Lester as a place holder here but you get the picture. Sure if Cespedes can get Hamels Walker or Iwakmura than you have to listen naturally. But if you want to contend in 2015 outside of that you'll have a better shot with Cespedes than Nava or Craig. If you're going to make the arguement that Nava is a better player than you also have to make the argument that Nava is worth an ace in a trade right now since Cespedes was worth Jon Lester. Which is a flawed argument.

I go back to a statement I made awhile back. Trading Cespedes for a player like Cueto would be a no brainer. The Reds are looking for a power hitting LF and we got one. Now would it take some additional pieces? Yes. What they are is anyone's guess - I'm sure there are plenty on the board to offer up options. What I'm saying is if the trade adds a quality starter who can easily fit behind Lester then go for it. Castillo, Betts, Victorino & JBJ can handle the OF.

 

[sackamano]

The Reds have repeatedly stated for the record that they're not interested in trading Cueto.

 

[BarrettsHiddenBall]

 
Mookie Betts had 1116 ABs in the minor leagues. He struggled for about 250 of them in Lowell (while still posting a stellar .352 OBP), and was ridiculous on every single other level of baseball, including the MLB. It's the definition of meaningless nitpicking to insist that "well, not his entire ml career", when the sample size in which he wasn't brilliant is both small and obviously not indicative of future succes, since it was his first taste of professional baseball and he's raked ever since making adjustments to counter his initial struggles. Those 250 ABs have absolutely no bearing of what Betts is as a prospect or what the expectations of him should be going forward, I have no clue as to why you keep bringing it up.

You must be confusing me with someone else. I brought it up once, in response to a misleading summary of Betts' ml career. Betts is a good enough player that there's no need to embellish; to do so isn't 'meaningless', it undermines the credibility of one's analysis.
 
As you suggest, the fact that he adjusted and improved is encouraging -- all the more reason not to pretend it didn't happen -- and indicates that if he does suffer a slump at MLB, he'll be able to work out of it. 
 
 

There's obviously a chance Betts doesn't fullfill the expectations placed on him in 2015, but there's nothing in his professional performance thus far to indicate the success he's had is a product of luck, or unrepeatable. If he does indeed struggle, it won't be because those ABs in low A showed us worrying trends that went ignored until the majors proved to be too much for him.

You're definitely confusing me with someone else.

 

[rodderick]

You must be confusing me with someone else. I brought it up once, in response to a misleading summary of Betts' ml career. Betts is a good enough player that there's no need to embellish; to do so isn't 'meaningless', it undermines the credibility of one's analysis.
 
As you suggest, the fact that he adjusted and improved is encouraging -- all the more reason not to pretend it didn't happen -- and indicates that if he does suffer a slump at MLB, he'll be able to work out of it. 
 
 
 
You're definitely confusing me with someone else.

 
The problem is, it wasn't misleading. I was merely pointing out I don't know why you think those 250 ABs are worth mentioning. They are as close to meaningless as stats can be, considering the sample size and timeframe.

 

[kazuneko]

The Reds have repeatedly stated for the record that they're not interested in trading Cueto.

Yeah, it looks like Latos -not Cueto- is on the block. That said, with their needs in the OF, a Latos for Cespedes trade could be something that works for both teams.. 

 

[ivanvamp]

 
Mookie Betts had 1116 ABs in the minor leagues. He struggled for about 250 of them in Lowell (while still posting a stellar .352 OBP), and was ridiculous on every single other level of baseball, including the MLB. It's the definition of meaningless nitpicking to insist that "well, not his entire ml career", when the sample size in which he wasn't brilliant is both small and obviously not indicative of future succes, since it was his first taste of professional baseball and he's raked ever since making adjustments to counter his initial struggles. Those 250 ABs have absolutely no bearing of what Betts is as a prospect or what the expectations of him should be going forward, I have no clue as to why you keep bringing it up.
 
There's obviously a chance Betts doesn't fullfill the expectations placed on him in 2015, but there's nothing in his professional performance thus far to indicate the success he's had is a product of luck, or unrepeatable. If he does indeed struggle, it won't be because those ABs in low A showed us worrying trends that went ignored until the majors proved to be too much for him.

 
This prompted me to look at Betts' numbers.  They are jaw-dropping.
 
Betts' numbers:
 
2011 (age 18, Rookie):  1.000, 4 ab
2012 (age 19, A-):  .658, 251 ab
2013 (age 20, A):  .895, 277 ab
2013 (age 20, A+):  .966, 185 ab
2013 (total):  .923, 462 ab
2014 (age 21, AA):  .994, 214 ab
2014 (age 21, AAA):  .920, 185 ab
2014 (total):  .960, 399 ab
2014 (age 21, Major League):  .812, 189 ab
 
He may not end up being great.  Odds are still against him.  But holy crap, his numbers are ridiculously good.  At virtually every level.  Including his short stint in the majors.  
 
He has to be just about as untouchable as they get.

 

[BarrettsHiddenBall]

 
The problem is, it wasn't misleading. I was merely pointing out I don't know why you think those 250 ABs are worth mentioning. They are as close to meaningless as stats can be, considering the sample size and timeframe.

? They're about a quarter of the total sample, of course they're worth considering. 
 
Drek's post was entirely misleading. Besides the Lowell year, he said Betts' performance 'completely blows away' Bogaerts' without acknowledging that (a) the numbers are actually quite comparable, and (b) Bogaerts was a year younger at each level. 

 

[lxt]

Yeah, it looks like Latos -not Cueto- is on the block. That said, with their needs in the OF, a Latos for Cespedes trade could be something that works for both teams.. 

We've already hashed this out earlier ... I wrote in the pitcher I'd like to see added ... nothing more, nothing less ... let's not hash out Cueto trade again.

 

[E5 Yaz]

We've already hashed this out earlier ... I wrote in the pitcher I'd like to see added ... nothing more, nothing less ... let's not hash out Cueto trade again.

 
Then stop bringing him up

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

? They're about a quarter of the total sample, of course they're worth considering.

At least two of us have pointed out that the reason to ignore the 2012 results is not the size of the sample but the fact that we know why he improved after that, and we have reason to think the improvement is (barring injury and, someday, decline) more or less permanent. Your position is like saying that we should give John Lackey's 2011 equal weight with his 2013 and 2014 in projecting his 2015, even though we know exactly why Lackey was so much worse that year, and we know that problem has been solved.
 

Drek's post was entirely misleading. Besides the Lowell year, he said Betts' performance 'completely blows away' Bogaerts' without acknowledging that (a) the numbers are actually quite comparable, and (b) Bogaerts was a year younger at each level.

Fair point about the age-advancement difference, which is easy to track because they are almost exactly the same age. But while the numbers may be "comparable," Betts' are clearly better:
 
wRC+
A+ Betts 166, Bogaerts 144
AA Betts 177, Bogaerts +/- 155
AAA Betts 158, Bogaerts 133
 
Maybe the age difference cancels that out, but it's unmistakable. In terms of familiar major leaguers, it's roughly the difference between Ty Cobb and Willie McCovey.

 

[lxt]

 
Then stop bringing him up

Boring!

 

[BarrettsHiddenBall]

At least two of us have pointed out that the reason to ignore the 2012 results is not the size of the sample but the fact that we know why he improved after that, and we have reason to think the improvement is (barring injury and, someday, decline) more or less permanent. Your position is like saying that we should give John Lackey's 2011 equal weight with his 2013 and 2014 in projecting his 2015, even though we know exactly why Lackey was so much worse that year, and we know that problem has been solved.
 

Fair point about the age-advancement difference, which is easy to track because they are almost exactly the same age. But while the numbers may be "comparable," Betts' are clearly better:
 
wRC+
A+ Betts 166, Bogaerts 144
AA Betts 177, Bogaerts +/- 155
AAA Betts 158, Bogaerts 133
 
Maybe the age difference cancels that out, but it's unmistakable. In terms of familiar major leaguers, it's roughly the difference between Ty Cobb and Willie McCovey.

Do you think it's more accurate to say that they're comparable talents and that the age difference likely 'cancels out' the difference in production, or that Betts has 'completely blown away' what Bogaerts did in the minors?
 
EDIT: w/r/t your first point, I've already said that the timing of that down year and subsequent improvement is a *positive* going forward, in that it indicates he can adjust and improve after struggling. This is all the more reason not to just whitewash it away.

 

[seantoo]

The lesson the Sox should have learned from Beckett (last signing), Lackey, Crawford, and AGon is, "don't give long-term big-money contracts to players who are known to be injured, apparently injured, or coming off injuries."

What he said.

 

[seantoo]

 
It would really help your case if you stopped including crap like what I bolded here.
 
And honestly, you have provided no evidence for your opinions either so although you are right to redirect this discussion to the realm of data and evidence, don't pretend like you've been providing first-rate analysis.
 
First of all SF and DET had exactly league average pitching last year by ERA+, so idk why you refer to those two clubs as if we couldn't possibly pull that off. Lets refer to Baltimore, number 5 last year with an ERA+ of 114 as something to strive for.
 
The bottom 3-6 in the Orioles rotation was comprised of Kevin Gausman, Miguel Gonzalez, Ubaldo Jimenez, and Bud Norris who had FIPs of 3.41, 4.89, 4.67, and 4.22 respectively. Gausman performed well after being called up as a highly touted prospect, not unlike Owens or Rodriguez very well may do this year. Gonzalez was a pretty terrible pitcher who severely outperformed his peripherals to an ERA of 3.23 (FIP 4.89) (although maybe there's something to that as he's done it for three years now). Jimenez performed poorly, but was depended upon down the stretch even on a playoff team like Baltimore. Bud Norris found career lows in the triple / line against, WHIP, TB, babip etc. at the age of 29. None of them had more than 165 IP. This team was 5th in all of the MLB by ERA+, and their top of Tillman and Chen were not Lester caliber. In fact they both pitched very similarly to James Shields, who is very likely to land here as a number two behind a Hamels or Lester.
 
The bar is simply not as high as you think. Yes Buchholz is unpredictable and fragile like Jimenez, yes Kelly is more like a #4 unless he figures things out like Norris and yes, the 5/6 spots are going to be unproven prospects, maybe some damn good ones who could replicate the 113 IP at 3.6 ERA that Gausman if things go right. But Boston has the means to put two aces atop a 3-6 that I think compares pretty well to the 3-6 on the team that was 5th in ERA+ in 2014. 

I'm not making claims that the Sox are going to repeat last to first again. The burden of proof lies with others who think we should expect to contend for the division next year. I've made no claims either way other than I think it's pre-mature to make any claims yet and let's wait and see what happens. That established of course the burden of evidence lies with others. An example of 1 doesn't change anything either and that example is making lots of assumptions too. 
The 'crap' you allude to was to show you where I'm coming from, I'm usually optimistic and not pessimistic. IMHO the bar is high considering we finished in last place and 80% of the rotation was traded and the reliance on rookies/first year players to suddenly blossom in year 1 or 2 of their respective careers next year.
I think I'm very optimistic about the teams ability to seriously contend but that it likely will take a year of two for that to happen. I'm confident the Sox will fill all of their glaring holes this off-season but I question if they'll land their primary target for all/most of them. In what manner is that not realistic?

 

[ivanvamp]

Mat Latos would be a very juicy trade target.  Hurt this past year limited his innings, but the four previous years he pitched 185 or more (well, in 2010 it was 184.2ip).  FIPs of 3.00, 3.16, 3.85, 3.10, and 3.65 the past 5 years, with era+ numbers of 126, 102, 118, 120, 111.  Solid k/9 numbers too (career 8.1).  And good whip as well (career 1.17).  
 
Just entering his age 27 season.  
 
I like Cespedes and don't exactly want to trade him.  But Cespedes for Latos makes sense for both sides.  Sox sign Lester and Panda, trade Cespedes for Latos, and then have the starting OF as Betts, Castillo, and Victorino, with Nava and Craig the backups.  That's pretty solid.  And a serious SP upgrade.

 

[Minneapolis Millers]

Latos or Iwakuma as the sidekick to Lester works for me.

 

[E5 Yaz]

Latos or Iwakuma as the sidekick to Lester works for me.

 
Then they best work at securing Lester first

 

[Hoplite]

Latos or Iwakuma should be our prime trade candidates regardless of what happens with the rest of our rotation IMHO. And I'd be all for signing Shields and McCarthy as well, but I'm afraid our Sandoval offer will make that impossible.

 

[arzjake]

Mat Latos would be a very juicy trade target.  Hurt this past year limited his innings, but the four previous years he pitched 185 or more (well, in 2010 it was 184.2ip).  FIPs of 3.00, 3.16, 3.85, 3.10, and 3.65 the past 5 years, with era+ numbers of 126, 102, 118, 120, 111.  Solid k/9 numbers too (career 8.1).  And good whip as well (career 1.17).  
 
Just entering his age 27 season.  
 
I like Cespedes and don't exactly want to trade him.  But Cespedes for Latos makes sense for both sides.  Sox sign Lester and Panda, trade Cespedes for Latos, and then have the starting OF as Betts, Castillo, and Victorino, with Nava and Craig the backups.  That's pretty solid.  And a serious SP upgrade.

 
There goes the power the Sox said they needed when they obtained Cespedes. I don't see anyone of those OF's hitting 20 plus HR's.. 

 

[rodderick]

 
There goes the power the Sox said they needed when they obtained Cespedes. I don't see anyone of those OF's hitting 20 plus HR's.. 

 
We did just fine in 2013 with no OFs hitting 20 HRs. Sure, Cespedes' calling card is his power and that's why the Red Sox acquired him, but his overall production could be replaced in other ways, especially if trading him would net us a player that filled a position of greater need, such as a number 2 SP. I'd rather have a Nava/Victorino platoon in LF and Latos/Iwakuma in the rotation than Cespedes and Allen Webster/Liriano. I really don't see the Red Sox double dipping in the free agent SP pool, unless it's for Lester and a 3/4 pitcher with some upside like Masterson or Liriano, i.e., someone that would improve the current state of our starting pitching, but not by the amount this team needs, in my opinion.

 

[Minneapolis Millers]

Then they best work at securing Lester first

Aren't they?

 

[E5 Yaz]

Aren't they?

 
They're trying, but we shouldn't be presuming he's a lock to come back and start thinking about who his sidekicks should be

 

[Hank Scorpio]

In terms of ceiling, I think our best outfield for 2015 is Betts/Castillo/Victorino. Cespedes, on the other hand, probably has the highest floor.

Not really sure how you would defensively align Betts/Castillo/VIctorino, but even if you deal Cespedes, Nava is a capable backup LF, so days of rest or an injury to Victorino wouldn't be the disaster it was in 2014. If you can snag a cost controlled #2 or #3 for Cespedes, you do it without thinking twice.

Well, that and Victorino is kind of my binkie. I liked the parts when he was a six win player and batted in the playoffs with the bases loaded.

 

[Minneapolis Millers]

 
They're trying, but we shouldn't be presuming he's a lock to come back and start thinking about who his sidekicks should be

So it's the word sidekick you don't like? No one's presuming anything, just speculating/envisioning.

 

[SoxFanForsyth]

No thanks on Latos and to be honest I don't why anyone would ever want him.

K/9 dropped to 6.5; velocity dropped by 2 mph and now he's a 90 mph pitcher.

If you're trading a nothing prospect for him in a salary dump to be your #4/5, fine. But you absolutely don't give up a middle of the order bat for a guy you hope bounces back from an injury ridden year, have him for 1 season, and count on him as your #2.

Latos is a disaster idea. Makes me want to vomit.

 

[MakMan44]

Because he was pitching through pain all last season, had a surgery to fix it and should be good to go by ST? Not to mention, all things considered, he actually had a pretty good season. 
 
And the reason you trade Cespedes for him is because their both 1 year players. At least with Latos you can offer a QO at season's end if you don't want to resign him. 

 

[SoxFanForsyth]

Because he was pitching through pain all last season, had a surgery to fix it and should be good to go by ST? Not to mention, all things considered, he actually had a pretty good season. 
 
And the reason you trade Cespedes for him is because their both 1 year players. At least with Latos you can offer a QO at season's end if you don't want to resign him. 

He threw to a 3.65 fip and a 3.99 xfip in the NL Central. Park and league adjusted that's a 98 fip- and a 108 xfip-. And you try to rationalize it by saying he was hurt?? Like trading for a guy coming off an injured year is somehow a good thing for a team who already has 0 starters who have thrown 200 IP??

No. No. Uber no. Not even close. Latos would be a horrible loss on a trade for Cespedes. You want to go get Latos for Middlebrooks? Fine. But you sure as hell are going to need a better number 2.

Cespedes for Latos is a disgusting, disgusting overpay.

 

[SoxFanForsyth]

How can you ever justify trading Cespedes for a bounce back candidate?? In this offensive suppressed league and era, you trade a 25-30+ HR bat for a guy who you hope is ready for ST, who has seen severely diminished peripherals and velocity, and that's the guy we are going to set up behind Lester?? Ugh. That just makes such little sense.

 

[MakMan44]

I have no idea where you're getting this 25-30 HR idea from. His career high is 26 and he only hit 22 while playing in a career high 152 games. It's not like Cespedes has the best track record of health either, Latos has clearly been healthier and arguably the more the valuable player throughout their respective careers. I feel like we're hitting a point where the board is starting to OVERVALUE Cespedes. 
 
EDIT: To add to this point, I'm not sure what people think the Sox could get for Cespedes. He's clearly the guy you'd move for pitching and you're not getting a Johnny Cueto for him. 

 

[MakMan44]

His FIP last season would make him the 34th overall starter in the NL last season (100 IP min) and xFIP is a bit more useless because he's always been a low HR/FB pitcher. 
 
He's a very, very good pitcher when he's healthy and 2014 was the first season he failed to go 180 IP or more since his rookie season in 2009. If the medical team looks at his records, determines that everything checks out and signs off, Cespedes for Latos is not a "disgusting, disgusting overpay."

 

[SoxFanForsyth]

I have no idea where you're getting this 25-30 HR idea from. His career high is 26 and he only hit 22 while playing in a career high 152 games. It's not like Cespedes has the best track record of health either, Latos has clearly been healthy and arguably the more the valuable player throughout their respective careers. I feel like we're hitting a point where the board is starting to OVERVALUE Cespedes. 

Cespedes hit 26 bombs while playing in the AL West, his home park of Oakland, where home runs go to die. You stick him at Fenway and his HR totals get up to the 30 range. Beltre is a pretty good example of what happens when a RH power hitter goes from the AL West to Boston.

The Sox need a power hitting outfielder a whole lot more than a reclamation project.

You're sending over a guy who will very likely be in the 25-30 HR mix for a 1-year roll of the dice on a pitcher who was hurt. Latos wasn't the same pitcher. Why would we trade for him based on 2013 and ignoring 2014, and why would you give up your cleanup hitter for that?

 

[MakMan44]

Because there's a very identifiable cause for his 2014 and unless you're predicting a repeat of those injuries, he's pretty likely to bounce back. And no, they really don't need a power hitting OF more than a solid pitcher. 
 
You want to put the best team on the field and a healthy Latos is probably more valuable to the team than Cespedes is. 
 
Now, before we continue this argument, I want to point out that I know very little about Latos's current state of health. My side is completely predicated on an assumption that he'll be healthy and ready to go by ST because the last few things I read suggested that. If you have an article that suggests otherwise, cool, I'd probably rather have Cepedes too but I don't think it's an outlandish suggestion that a healthy Latos is a better fit for the team. 

 

[SoxFanForsyth]

His FIP last season would make him the 34th overall starter in the NL last season (100 IP min) and xFIP is a bit more useless because he's always been a low HR/FB pitcher. 
 
He's a very, very good pitcher when he's healthy and 2014 was the first season he failed to go 180 IP or more since his rookie season in 2009. If the medical team looks at his records, determines that everything checks out and signs off, Cespedes for Latos is not a "disgusting, disgusting overpay."

What about his numbers last year inspire ANY confidence? His drop in K/9 of 1.5? His velocity dropping from 92.5 to 90.2?

Here's a good comp for a couple NL Central pitchers.

Player A: 7.96 K/9, 2.71 Bb/9, 1.22 GB:FB, avg FB velo 89.7
Player B: 6.51 K/9, 2.29 BB/9, 0.94 GB:FB, avg FB velo 90.7.

And player B is usually in the 1.2-1.3 range of GB:FB.

Player A is Dempster before signing w Sox. player B is Latos.

Trading Cespedes for Latos is horrible, I'm sorry, it's just awful.

 

[MakMan44]

I give up. If the medical teams gives him the all clear, I'd be ecstatic to have Mat Latos on next year's team. Agree to disagree I guess. 

 

[ehaz]

Cespedes hit 26 bombs while playing in the AL West, his home park of Oakland, where home runs go to die. You stick him at Fenway and his HR totals get up to the 30 range. Beltre is a pretty good example of what happens when a RH power hitter goes from the AL West to Boston.

The Sox need a power hitting outfielder a whole lot more than a reclamation project.

You're sending over a guy who will very likely be in the 25-30 HR mix for a 1-year roll of the dice on a pitcher who was hurt. Latos wasn't the same pitcher. Why would we trade for him based on 2013 and ignoring 2014, and why would you give up your cleanup hitter for that?

Didn't we say the exact same thing about Adrian Gonzalez?

 

[williams_482]

Home runs are a really weak measure of overall value. 
 
Yoenis Cespedes has show himself to be a roughly 3 win corner outfielder. The fact that he gets a large amount of his value from hitting home runs does not make him inherently more valuable. Fenway might give him a slight boost, but it isn't going to massively boost his value relative to your average player moving to Fenway Park.
 
Mat Latos looks like a roughly 3 win pitcher. There are definitely health and performance related reasons for concern, and Steamer is very pessimistic about his future (projecting him to be worth ~1-1.5 wins in 170 odd innings). If the medical team and the FO are convinced that he will be fine next season (big if? sure) then I would be A-OK trading "our cleanup hitter" for him, or a pitcher of similar talent. 

 

[SoxFanForsyth]

Home runs are a really weak measure of overall value. 
 
Yoenis Cespedes has show himself to be a roughly 3 win corner outfielder. The fact that he gets a large amount of his value from hitting home runs does not make him inherently more valuable. Fenway might give him a slight boost, but it isn't going to massively boost his value relative to your average player moving to Fenway Park.
 
Mat Latos looks like a roughly 3 win pitcher. There are definitely health and performance related reasons for concern, and Steamer is very pessimistic about his future (projecting him to be worth ~1-1.5 wins in 170 odd innings). If the medical team and the FO are convinced that he will be fine next season (big if? sure) then I would be A-OK trading "our cleanup hitter" for him, or a pitcher of similar talent. 

This is incorrect.

value is derived based on market conditions. A power hitting OF is rare right now while a 100 fip- pitcher you can find anywhere.

different skillsets are more and less abundant around Major League Baseball and the demand for those skills changes as the market changes. Right now we are in a offensive weak market, thus making a power bat much more valuable than a slightly above league average pitcher

 

[SoxFanForsyth]

Didn't we say the exact same thing about Adrian Gonzalez?

Adrian Gonzalez hit 27 home runs and 45 doubles in 2011. He was an absolutely outstanding hitter, in large part thanks to Fenway. He didn't have as much loft on his swing as anticipated but he drove the ball off the wall a ton and it helped bump his average tremendously.

At home in 2012 Gonzo hit .347/.413./516. He was so slow though. I remember a ton of wall ball singles from him.

 

[SoxFanForsyth]

 
You are greatly overstating the abundance of SP able to reach this benchmark. There were 48 total 100 FIP-  SP in baseball last year. That's not exactly sitting on the side of the road. 

And there were 20 hitters that popped more than 25 HR, something I fully expect Cespedes to do. So relatively speaking, it's very easy to find a league average pitcher.

Regardless, a league average pitcher isn't who you slot in as your number 2, and you don't trade Cespedes for a pitcher who isn't your number two

 

[williams_482]

This is incorrect.

value is derived based on market conditions. A power hitting OF is rare right now while a 100 fip- pitcher you can find anywhere.

different skillsets are more and less abundant around Major League Baseball and the demand for those skills changes as the market changes. Right now we are in a offensive weak market, thus making a power bat much more valuable than a slightly above league average pitcher

Power hitters are useful because they produce runs. Good pitchers is useful because they take runs away from the other team. It makes no difference if power hitters are more difficult to find than a pitcher who would project to save as many runs as the power hitter would produce. Runs are runs are runs. 
 
Center fielders who can play defense as well as JBJ are very rare right now. Does this make him especially valuable? Obviously not. Why are home runs supposed to be any different?
 
If you are arguing that the replacement levels used for position players in WAR are two low, go right ahead and make your case. Otherwise I don't see what scarcity of this or that skillset has to do with it. 

 

[Spelunker]

Power hitters are useful because they produce runs. Good pitchers is useful because they take runs away from the other team. It makes no difference if power hitters are more difficult to find than a pitcher who would project to save as many runs as the power hitter would produce. Runs are runs are runs. 
 
Center fielders who can play defense as well as JBJ are very rare right now. Does this make him especially valuable? Obviously not. Why are home runs supposed to be any different?
 
If you are arguing that the replacement levels used for position players in WAR are two low, go right ahead and make your case. Otherwise I don't see what scarcity of this or that skillset has to do with it. 

And what's more important than the relative scarcity of skills in mlb is the relative scarcity on the *team*. The Red Sox have a glut of potential outfielders and a scarcity of mlb experienced starting pitching.

I don't know if that would make it a good trade- I don't know enough about him- but the number of home runs isn't really a factor (or, rather, it's only one component in Cespedes' overall worth).

If we trade for a pitcher, it's likely going to come from the outfield pool. That's where we have an abundance of resources.

 

[BarrettsHiddenBall]

Cespedes hit 26 bombs while playing in the AL West, his home park of Oakland, where home runs go to die. You stick him at Fenway and his HR totals get up to the 30 range. Beltre is a pretty good example of what happens when a RH power hitter goes from the AL West to Boston.

Beltre's problem was Safeco, not the AL West (he's currently doing just fine in Texas...), and the fact that Safeco was utterly unsuited to his power alleys. O.co is big, but it suited Cespedes and his pull-power just fine; he hit better there than on the road in general., including for power. Not traveling to safeco 10 times/year might give a tiny boost, but this idea that he'll break out after leaving oakland and the west in general is not supported by evidence.

 

[swingin val]

Regardless, a league average pitcher isn't who you slot in as your number 2, and you don't trade Cespedes for a pitcher who isn't your number two

The issue is that most folks would not consider Latos a league average pitcher. If he didn't have the down year last year there would be little chance a one year rental of Cespedes would net you that quality of a pitcher.

 

[67WasBest]

For your consideration:
 
We have Sandoval with all offers in hand.  We have Lester with an offer in hand, plus an agreement to negotiate further.  We have a Hanley rumor and we have "high interest in Miller" expressed in reports.  .
 
Is it possible BC is asking these guys to hold off on announcements for a few days so he can get through the rest of his shopping and swapping list?  In other words it may well be that  Lester, Sandoval and Hanley are done, Miller is next, then he needs to trade a few outfielders for pitching.  If Hanley's deal were announced, would it weaken BC's position dealing outfielders?

 

[In my lifetime]

Either there are moves coming to clear salary or they will blow by the tax number assuming 
Ramirez ~17
Sandoval ~18
Lester ~22
Miller ~9
 
 
Cespedes - it would seem would be out the door, saving 9.
 
That would put them a little over (~5 M over) and still short a #2 starter, who we would assume is obtained via trade (+15M????).  And other needs requiring smaller financial commitments - back up catcher (+2M).  Are the RS really going to go to a 210M payroll?
 
I find it hard to believe that Miller is heading to the RS, it just seems that the cost seems high for a team with other potential closers.

 

[67WasBest]

Either there are moves coming to clear salary or they will blow by the tax number assuming 
Ramirez ~17
Sandoval ~18
Lester ~22
Miller ~9
 
 
Cespedes - it would seem would be out the door, saving 9.
 
That would put them a little over (~5 M over) and still short a #2 starter, who we would assume is obtained via trade (+15M????).  And other needs requiring smaller financial commitments - back up catcher (+2M).  Are the RS really going to go to a 210M payroll?
 
I find it hard to believe that Miller is heading to the RS, it just seems that the cost seems high for a team with other potential closers.

It's not the closer need that concerns me for 2015, it's the need for a LH setup guy.  And yes the cost is high, but as you noted, even with these added, they are not that many deals away from being back under the LT spending limit.  I'm also thinking they aren't really concerned about that number for 2015, because they know they will easily fall below the number for many years after 2015.  It would seem silly to spend what it appears they migt, and turn over that critical spot to Layne.  I suppose they could, but they seem to be building in significant redundancy on the squad, which makes Layne alone in that role, with Escobar as the fallback seem a risk not worth taking.  I think they are done accepting risks, especially with their 2015 financial situation.
 
I projected this type of team the other day.  Their payroll commitments, assuming the pitchers they bring in are gone next year and replaced by one or two of the lefties, are $141, and going down from there; That $141 should be measured against the 2015 value of $156; a number likely to rise next year.  It seems crazy, but all the financials fit together quite nicely..