277 replies to this topic

[Foulkey Reese]

It's more personal than that even. His mere presence on the roster seems to be an insult to some. It's like Nick Punto shot Ol' Yeller or led a flight of Kates over Pearl Harbour 60 years ago.

The guy will have a role. If he sucks at it he will be replaced but I'm confident he will be a useful utility player. Beyond that I have no expectations.

Nick Punto will have a Buckner type moment in 2012 and may also accidentally kill Jon Lester. His entire existence is an insult to all decent people.

Edited by Foulkey Reese, 30 December 2011 - 12:51 PM.

[Rasputin]

It's more personal than that even. His mere presence on the roster seems to be an insult to some.

That's because he is emblematic of the old school twatwads who say he "plays the game the right way" when we all know that it is actually only the right way if you want to lose. Nick Punto is like a creationist or anti-vaxxer in that sense. He takes all modern research, says it's bunk, and does the opposite. Of course he doesn't actually do it, he just plays to his skills but commentators talk about him as if he's god's gift to baseball when the reality is that he's got one, maybe two skills that aren't actually detrimental to his team.

[No Guru No Method]

Nick Punto will have a Buckner type moment in 2012 and may also accidentally kill Jon Lester. His entire existence is an insult to all decent people.

What are the chances that he may accidentally kill Jon Lester. 1 in 8 ? 1 in 7 maybe ? I think we can roll the dice here.

[mauidano]

The guy will have a role. If he sucks at it he will be replaced but I'm confident he will be a useful utility player. Beyond that I have no expectations.

This could be Sweeney, Aviles, McDonald, half the bullpen, half the team last year. That being said...last year at this time we were peeing all over ourselves with the supreme confidence we would he hoisting the World Series trophy and we all know how that ended. There are NO guarantees. Staying healthy is a LARGE part of it. Stop with the hand wringing. We're moving in a positive direction albeit slower than some would like but the 25 man roster hasn't been set yet. There will be others in the mix obviously. Let's get to Spring Training and see how this plays out. I trust Ben, Larry and others involved are well intentioned and things will work out. We will be competitive. It's not over yet.

[rembrat]

Who says the Yankees didn't get better this off-season? The Blue Jays just signed Darren Oliver.

[Bernard Gilkey baby]

From an emotional standpoint, this off season reminds me of 2002, a strange offseason, which indirectly lead to a great season where we were one bad Grady Little move away from losing the World Series to the Marlins. (snark aside, it was a still a memorably great season, engaging and exciting from beginning to end)

In 2002, we had a talented core of a team that could win. We had a new GM. We were a bit hampered on money, I think, because the transition, while completed, had only just started implementing organization-wide philosophy and new sources of revenue. In 2002, we were recovering from an injury heavy 2001, where all sorts of weird Craig Grebeck types were playing and I think we needed to jettison some clubhouse cancers. SOSH had very long threads examining the supplementary role players that Theo picked up off the scrap heap. And we were picking the movies apart, trying to decipher the new regime's level of commitment, intelligence level, and general approach. In 2002, we weren't concerned with the closer role because it'd eventually get sorted out.

I am reminded a little bit of some of the awkward public reach out, too. Back then, we had Theo talking about being "careful and caring" or something when it came to plucking Cabin Mirror from the Japanese. Now we have them talking about their "careful and deliberate" managerial hiring process. It's really just Red Sox regime just wanting someone and tip toeing around it like a Kristin Wigg character.

I am not saying that we're getting a Mueller, Ortiz, or Millar this offseason. But we are a good team with some holes, and just like in 2002, filling those holes with actual living people could be the key to helping us. I am also happy to watch a team without JD Drew, Lowrie, Reddick and Lackey, I think bad energy is a real thing (I measure it with science). I'd like to see how RF shapes up by June. I'd like to see how Bard does in the rotation. As for Punto, I am counting on him to come up with incredible catch phrases.

Overall, what I liked about 2002 offseason was that after a nasty 2001, I started seeing a team begin to approach things smartly again, showing patience with the marketplace. And yeah, I know you guys hate this, but I like seeing some soul come back. (I measure that with science, too). I wish we could have done this WITH Terry Francona still on board but that just wasn't possible, I do think Theo leaving will ultimately be a benefit. I loved Theo, but it appeared to me that he stopped practicing what he preached when it came to patience. I think Cherington and LL, despite hiccups, have personalities that are more in sync. Cherington seems to be an LL-kind of GM. By that, I mean, not entitled. And thorough. And I have a feeling he's more creative than he's getting credit for.

I am also kind of rooting for the return of the word "disingenuous."

Edited by Bernard Gilkey baby, 30 December 2011 - 03:43 PM.

[The Gray Eagle]

The guy will have a role. If he sucks at it he will be replaced but I'm confident he will be a useful utility player. Beyond that I have no expectations.

No he will not be replaced if he sucks at his role. He has a two-year contract, he will be here at least one full season. If he was here on a one-year deal, he might be replaced if he sucked. But that's not going to happen. They aren't going to eat a year of a guaranteed contract to replace a scrub infielder, even if we really need that roster spot for someone who can hit or pitch.

There was zero need to commit to having him on the roster like that. We already had a backup infielder. I

His taking up a roster spot no matter what is what's so irritating about him. As well as the fact that they invented a special role just for him: "backup to the backup infielder, who plays 8 games a year at SS."

[TomRicardo]

Amen. Theo was a truly great GM from 2003-2007. Frankly, after that, he sucked. We are paying for his suckiness - not Cherrington's (whose moves haven't been bad - to be honest).

Really? I wouldn't say Theo sucked after 2007.

I think he made huge mistakes with Crawford and less of extent with Lackey. Outside of that I really can't think of bad signing or trade. I suppose you go back to Lowell and Schilling. Though if Lowell doesn't get hurt the Red Sox probably repeat in 2008.

[Drek717]

That's because he is emblematic of the old school twatwads who say he "plays the game the right way" when we all know that it is actually only the right way if you want to lose. Nick Punto is like a creationist or anti-vaxxer in that sense. He takes all modern research, says it's bunk, and does the opposite. Of course he doesn't actually do it, he just plays to his skills but commentators talk about him as if he's god's gift to baseball when the reality is that he's got one, maybe two skills that aren't actually detrimental to his team.

How does Nick Punto being a poster boy for consistently reproduced defensive metrics make him spit in the eye of modern research?

If you looked at the utility infielder role in a strictly scientific standpoint you would first evaluate what you want out of that position. You would probably say quality defense is the top priority since he's got to back up three highly important defensive positions. Next would be plate discipline, someone who can at least help you drive up pitch counts when you have to waste ABs on him. Nick Punto by all "modern research" is the idealized answer for the first criteria, having a meaningful sample size of plus defense at all three key infield positions (>2000 innings at each with high positive UZR/150 numbers at all three). He averages just about 4 pitches per PA, which for a guy who can't actually hit is pretty solid, so he meets criteria number two.

You can either spit in the face of all reason yourself and let how the Joe Morgan/Tim McCarver types talk about a player color your own perspective or you can look objectively at a guy like Punto and see that he's a reliable defender who if nothing else doesn't make life harder on the rest of the lineup when you're forced to give him a ABs.

[Rasputin]

How does Nick Punto being a poster boy for consistently reproduced defensive metrics make him spit in the eye of modern research?

If you looked at the utility infielder role in a strictly scientific standpoint you would first evaluate what you want out of that position. You would probably say quality defense is the top priority since he's got to back up three highly important defensive positions. Next would be plate discipline, someone who can at least help you drive up pitch counts when you have to waste ABs on him. Nick Punto by all "modern research" is the idealized answer for the first criteria, having a meaningful sample size of plus defense at all three key infield positions (>2000 innings at each with high positive UZR/150 numbers at all three). He averages just about 4 pitches per PA, which for a guy who can't actually hit is pretty solid, so he meets criteria number two.

You can either spit in the face of all reason yourself and let how the Joe Morgan/Tim McCarver types talk about a player color your own perspective or you can look objectively at a guy like Punto and see that he's a reliable defender who if nothing else doesn't make life harder on the rest of the lineup when you're forced to give him a ABs.

I really meant offensively but you're right, we should look at both and he's a good fielder. He is also abysmal at the plate and offense is more important than defense. I would much prefer a guy who was mediocre on both sides to one who is really good on one side and really atrocious on the other. At least, in a primary backup I would, and maybe Aviles will end up being the primary backup.

If you can pick and choose where you use him with great care a guy like Punto can help because he would almost never bat. Even if he could pinch run and steal a base I'd be kind of okay with it.

As it is, though, the only role in which he helps the team is as a defensive replacement. I haven't looked but I doubt he's better defensively at second than Pedroia. That leaves short and third. In how many situations do you want to take Youks' bat out of the lineup in favor of Punto's defense? We'd have to be ahead, in the late innings, and preferably a long way from getting back around to Youks' spot in the order. The same mostly applies to him replacing Scutaro.

Bottom line, any time Punto comes to bat it's a failure of either game management or roster management.

[No Guru No Method]

No he will not be replaced if he sucks at his role. He has a two-year contract, he will be here at least one full season. If he was here on a one-year deal, he might be replaced if he sucked. But that's not going to happen. They aren't going to eat a year of a guaranteed contract to replace a scrub infielder, even if we really need that roster spot for someone who can hit or pitch.

There was zero need to commit to having him on the roster like that. We already had a backup infielder. I

His taking up a roster spot no matter what is what's so irritating about him. As well as the fact that they invented a special role just for him: "backup to the backup infielder, who plays 8 games a year at SS."

Just no. I'm sure they'll eat most of a $3m commitment if they have to (how much did they eat on the Cameron deal ?) - The # of years don't matter.

[Savin Hillbilly]

His taking up a roster spot no matter what is what's so irritating about him. As well as the fact that they invented a special role just for him: "backup to the backup infielder, who plays 8 games a year at SS."

He's not going to be the backup to the backup infielder. If anything, that'll be Aviles. Punto is the UIF. It's the only thing he's good at and the only reason to sign him. If both stay on the roster, Aviles will play the role of RH bench bat and all-purpose backup (backing up corner OF as well as IF).

[The Gray Eagle]

Just no. I'm sure they'll eat most of a $3m commitment if they have to (how much did they eat on the Cameron deal ?) - The # of years don't matter.

Cameron wasn't released until the second year of his two-year deal. Punto won't be either. He actually won't be released at all, he'll be here two full years, and he'll get too many at-bats.

It's not huge problem, but it's annoying and pointless and not optimal.

[The Gray Eagle]

He's not going to be the backup to the backup infielder. If anything, that'll be Aviles. Punto is the UIF. It's the only thing he's good at and the only reason to sign him. If both stay on the roster, Aviles will play the role of RH bench bat and all-purpose backup (backing up corner OF as well as IF).

Aviles is a decent enough backup IF. We already had him, and we didn't need to add another one, who is 3 years older with a career OPS 75 points lower. Since he was already here, adding Punto is committing to two utility IF on the roster, instead of the decent one we already had and then using the other spot for someone who can actually hit, which would be nice especially looking at our RF situation.

I just think we'd be clearly better off with something like Andruw Jones and Aviles in two bench roles, rather than Aviles and Punto. But we committed 2 years to Punto early on, as if bringing him in was some sort of priority and we didn't want to miss out on him.

Of course, you are right that Punto will probably play more than Aviles now, which makes the whole situation even more annoying.

Again, not a huge problem, but annoying and pointless.

Edited by The Gray Eagle, 30 December 2011 - 06:20 PM.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Punto is very good defensively, though, Aviles is not. Aviles has much more power, but their OBP's are very similar. If Punto can continue to average ~1.5 WAR as he has in the past several years, he'll be a bargain. I think continuing to talk about his weak OPS is the point, he ( and Shoppach and Sweeney) were acquired to be defensively minded backups, and Punto is actually one of the better players at that role.

The lineup doesn't really have anyone you'd want to PH for regularly, with the possible exception of RF, so I think focusing on D is the way to go.

[Hee-Seop's Fable]

Punto is very good defensively, though, Aviles is not. Aviles has much more power, but their OBP's are very similar. If Punto can continue to average ~1.5 WAR as he has in the past several years, he'll be a bargain. I think continuing to talk about his weak OPS is the point, he ( and Shoppach and Sweeney) were acquired to be defensively minded backups, and Punto is actually one of the better players at that role.

The lineup doesn't really have anyone you'd want to PH for regularly, with the possible exception of RF, so I think focusing on D is the way to go.

And even if Punto replaces a better hitter late in a game to hold a lead, the presence of a complimentary skilled second utility infielder allows Valentine to replace Punto with Aviles (or another bench bat if one is available) if games go into extra innings and bunting or anemic hitting isn't the skill needed at that time. Tito got burned by his pinch running and fielding substitutions last year because of the absence of enough complimentary parts on the bench last year.

The regulars are the ones that are supposed to be thoroughly well rounded players. The bench is for players with specific skills to fill specific roles as needs arise. Cherington is building depth with a good mix of parts to it. The turning radius for the overall direction of the team is a very wide one, and the fact that it has been moving back to a good course is hard to discern at first, but I think it has started to happen. If he's mixing a bit more scouting judgement into his choices than before, given his length and breadth of experience, that's a good thing, since we know any team owned by John Henry is not going to be weak on technical analysis.

[Drek717]

I really meant offensively but you're right, we should look at both and he's a good fielder. He is also abysmal at the plate and offense is more important than defense. I would much prefer a guy who was mediocre on both sides to one who is really good on one side and really atrocious on the other. At least, in a primary backup I would, and maybe Aviles will end up being the primary backup.

The team had a utility guy who met your criteria, offensive potential with questionable defense, they traded him to get bullpen help and quickly signed Punto, so while that might be your preference it clearly isn't the preference of the organization. That is nothing new as this team gladly carried Pokey Reese in '04 where he saw 268 ABs and contributed a 46 OPS+. We had Alex Gonzalez as a starter who collected over 400 ABs in 2006 with an OPS+ of 75 (career average is 80, so its not like we should have expected much better).

So knowing that the Red Sox have historically favored defensive minded utility types and defense period if they're forced to choose in the middle infield we know defense will be their top priority.

When shopping the utility backup market you've got a lot of people with wild variance in their skills, especially when it comes to offensive consistency. Guys like Alex Gonzalez where large jumps and dives in BA and SLG are annual events end up as starters and guys with lower ceilings but equally erratic production fill out benches. But while most backup infielders are a coin toss in terms of BA and SLG (Punto included) the general trend for them is shit plate discipline. Punto bucks that trend. He offers a modicum of predictable offense thanks to his high pitches per PA and a solid jump from BA to OBP. We might get lucky and Punto keeps the '11 lightning in the bottle for '12 or we might not and he drops back down to his scraping the Mendoza line BA and barely above .300 SLG. Even if he does though we know we're getting a 0.70 or better jump from BA to OBP and about 4 pitches per plate appearance.

Punto is a combination of two cornerstone philosophies of roster building for this franchise since Epstein first took over. Defense up the middle and plate discipline. We've strayed from the second over the last few years as its become increasingly desireable by other clubs and harder to find in certain roles (like utility infielder for example). But when available we need to take it. His ABs do need to be as limited as possible, but as long as we can do that (which is a Bobby Valentine issue) we'll do just fine on getting our money's worth out of Punto.

[Rasputin]

The team had a utility guy who met your criteria, offensive potential with questionable defense, they traded him to get bullpen help and quickly signed Punto, so while that might be your preference it clearly isn't the preference of the organization.

That isn't really my preference. I prefer it to the defense first guy simply because I think the times when the backup plays to get the starter a day off outweigh the times when a backup comes in for situational reasons. My preference would be for a good baserunner (stealing and other) who is marginally competent on both sides of the ball. That way you get a good situational advantage and don't lose too much in all the other situations.

I don't disagree when you say the team obviously sees it differently.

[Frisbetarian]

FWIW, since 2008, when Lowrie first joined the Red Sox, Punto has an OBP of .340 in 1271 plate appearances. Lowrie, in his 970 PA career, has an OBP of .324. Punto has also seen more pitches per at bat since 2008, 4.06 vs. Lowrie's 3.91. Lowrie's power is certainly better, but Punto appears to have an edge getting on base, and there is no comparison defensively.

With the limited number of at bats Punto will be expected to get, and with the importance of having a back-up shortstop (the most active and important position, imo) that can catch the friggin' ball, turn a double play, and make a throw from the hole, I am perplexed at all the Punto hate.

[redsox2020]

FWIW, since 2008, when Lowrie first joined the Red Sox, Punto has an OBP of .340 in 1271 plate appearances. Lowrie, in his 970 PA career, has an OBP of .324. Punto has also seen more pitches per at bat since 2008, 4.06 vs. Lowrie's 3.91. Lowrie's power is certainly better, but Punto appears to have an edge getting on base, and there is no comparison defensively.

With the limited number of at bats Punto will be expected to get, and with the importance of having a back-up shortstop (the most active and important position, imo) that can catch the friggin' ball, turn a double play, and make a throw from the hole, I am perplexed at all the Punto hate.

When bad TV guys praise a player for being gritty, having intangibles or great character, many of us instantly associate those words with terrible players. And we're often right to do so. But Punto actually seems to have something to offer. I can't decide whether the hate is ironic (Drew doesn't care), ignorance or if people have a legit beef with the guy's performance. I'd love to hear some reasoning as well.

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

Unless you wanted Lowrie to start over Scutaro (and last year was enough to convince me i'd rather have Scutaro), there really isn't much place for him. As mentioned above, RF is the only position you'd possibly pinch hit for, an that's not going to happen regularly, and Lowrie is a butcher in the infield, so having him spell guys there gives me the hives. I'd much rather have a backup that can reliably field and throw than one who may or may not generate some offense, and even then only from one side of the plate really.

[Rasputin]

When bad TV guys praise a player for being gritty, having intangibles or great character, many of us instantly associate those words with terrible players. And we're often right to do so. But Punto actually seems to have something to offer. I can't decide whether the hate is ironic (Drew doesn't care), ignorance or if people have a legit beef with the guy's performance. I'd love to hear some reasoning as well.

How many game situations are there going to be when you can make a good case that it's better to have Nick Punto in the game than whoever is already in the game?

He can pinch run for slow players. He can come in defensively. I suppose if you had to pinch hit for the pitcher in the 15th inning he'd be an option.

Aviles could conceivably pinch hit for Scutaro against lefties. Shoppach could pinch hit for Salty. Sweeney and Darnell McDonald can pinch hit for each other.

Punto can't pinch hit, can't pinch run, and any game where you care about having him in there for defense is a game that's close enough where you'll be kicking yourself if he comes to bat.

The only times I'm going to be comfortable using him is the 8th or 9th inning with a 2-3 run lead. That's where the hate comes from.

[jodyreeddudley78]

My Punto comment was simply an unfunny throwaway line based off an anology that I didn't really understand. I understand what Punto's role is, and that he will most likely fill it just fine. I tend to agree with Ras, I simply don't want to see a Punto PA in a crucial situation.

As far as what that all means to the potential question of "WOE", the FA signing of Punto and the trades to solidify the bullpen aren't (I think) what prompted the opening post. The reason this offseason feels "bad" has, IMO, nothing to do with the acquisition or loss of talent on the field. I realize that the team as it is currently constructed is one of the better teams in MLB. There are questions, primarily with the starting rotation. But that isn't why I am personally bothered. It isn't even the September collapse that continues to bother me.

During the last part of the decade I began to feel that the Red Sox had sort of become the premier franchise in the sport, with the peak being 07-08. You had an owner that was willing to spend, a GM that seemed to make the right moves (with SS being his Achilles' heel), a strong system that was producing talent, smart on-field management, etc. The last couple of years have sort of strayed from that, but I generally still regarded the Sox as the best overall organization when you factored everything in. Then the shitstorm started in September and everyone involved seemed more than willing to trip over themselves to point fingers and avoid blame. It just wasn't what a fan had come to expect.

The offseason hasn't had that "big" move, but that is largely the product of the fact that really wasn't one to be made. In fact, the "big" move was the hiring of Bobby V -- a move that might have been made by ownership, not the GM. That isn't a crime, they sign the checks, I get that. But when that happens on top of the Sept mudslinging, it bothers me.

I'm having a tough time explaining what it is that bothers me exactly about these past three months. I understand that Sox fans are some of the luckiest fans in the sport. It isn't any of the moves either, I actually like the trades. There just seems to be an uncertainty in the air that didn't exist a couple of years ago.

[redsox2020]

How many game situations are there going to be when you can make a good case that it's better to have Nick Punto in the game than whoever is already in the game?

He can pinch run for slow players. He can come in defensively. I suppose if you had to pinch hit for the pitcher in the 15th inning he'd be an option.

Aviles could conceivably pinch hit for Scutaro against lefties. Shoppach could pinch hit for Salty. Sweeney and Darnell McDonald can pinch hit for each other.

Punto can't pinch hit, can't pinch run, and any game where you care about having him in there for defense is a game that's close enough where you'll be kicking yourself if he comes to bat.

The only times I'm going to be comfortable using him is the 8th or 9th inning with a 2-3 run lead. That's where the hate comes from.

Our bench will rake LHP, but they'll occasionally need to hit RHP as well due to injuries & standard rest. Since OBP is Punto's strength (in addition to defense), here's what these guys have done lately. I'm not a huge fan of his, but he clearly brings something to the table.

OBP last 3 years      vsRHP  vsLHP
Punto                 .339   .338
Aviles                .294   .315
McDonald              .278   .360
Shoppach              .264   .372

[Rasputin]

Our bench will rake LHP, but they'll occasionally need to hit RHP as well due to injuries & standard rest. Since OBP is Punto's strength (in addition to defense), here's what these guys have done lately. I'm not a huge fan of his, but he clearly brings something to the table.

OBP last 3 years      vsRHP  vsLHP
Punto                 .339   .338
Aviles                .294   .315
McDonald              .278   .360
Shoppach              .264   .372

The last three years include a 2011 in which he had an OPS+ of 127 which is either inexplicable or due to the utter suckitude of the NL in general and the NL Central in particular.

His lifetime OBP is .325 and doesn't vary much from left to right. You're not going to pinch hit Punto for Youks, Scutaro, or Pedroia and if one of them is getting a day off then you'd pinch hit with them instead of Punto.

But sure, when there are injuries that are insufficiently serious to require a DL trip you could conceivably pinch hit Punto for Aviles against a right handed pitcher in a situation where you know the other manager isn't going to bring in a lefty.

The fact that we have to define his role so precisely is precisely the problem. If he could run like the blazes or just mash right handed pitching it would be different but as it is there are almost no situations where he is clearly the best player to use and in those situations there is always a caveat that stands a reasonable chance of kicking you in the balls.

Compare to Dave Roberts. He was a similarly poor hitter but there are clear cut situations where he is obviously better than the guy already playing. We sat there and watched Millar walk and the instant he took ball four every single one of us knew what was going to happen. Roberts was going to pinch run and try to steal. That situation just doesn't exist for Nick Punto.

He's just never going to be a big advantage over what is already in the lineup ever at anything. The biggest advantage he has is probably over Youks at third and it's not like Youks is a butcher.

[redsox2020]

Red Sox pinch hitters were 13-79 last season, a .165 batting average. Milwaukee was the only MLB team to have a lower pinch hit leverage index (presumably because they're constantly hitting for the pitcher). We already have a stud lineup, so I honestly don't expect to see much pinch hitting. The guys who get playing time will more often be in a platoon situation or spelling guys who could use a day or two off.

[Savin Hillbilly]

His lifetime OBP is .325

Which is .007 better than Aviles' lifetime OBP. For a guy who can play above-average defense at SS, 3B and 2B, .325 is a good OBP.

The fact that we have to define his role so precisely is precisely the problem. If he could run like the blazes or just mash right handed pitching it would be different but as it is there are almost no situations where he is clearly the best player to use and in those situations there is always a caveat that stands a reasonable chance of kicking you in the balls.

But this is true of utility infielders in general. Check out the other guys who filled this role in the AL last year. Even offensively, Punto looks above average to elite in this group, and only a few of them are in his league defensively. I don't necessarily disagree with your assessment of Punto's skills so much as your assessment of the competition. It's the denominator, not the numerator, that I think you're getting wrong.

[thisyearisthe]

This would be the worst offseason ever, but for the free WIFI. Nice save.

[Rasputin]

Which is .007 better than Aviles' lifetime OBP. For a guy who can play above-average defense at SS, 3B and 2B, .325 is a good OBP.

Career slugging Aviles = .419, Punto .327.

Aviles is a good enough hitter to pinch hit in any situation where the starter is getting killed by a lefty.

But this is true of utility infielders in general. Check out the other guys who filled this role in the AL last year. Even offensively, Punto looks above average to elite in this group, and only a few of them are in his league defensively. I don't necessarily disagree with your assessment of Punto's skills so much as your assessment of the competition. It's the denominator, not the numerator, that I think you're getting wrong.

Depth is a good thing but not enough to be a player's only contribution.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Punto's contribution is excellent defense at multiple positions, and an ability to get on base. He has little power.

Sweeney is somewhat similar; excellent defense, good average and OBP, no power.

Shoppach has a lot of power, is very good defensively, lousy average and on-base skills.

Aviles and McDonald mash lefties, are competent in the field.

Seems clear that the organization has built the bench around defense, and with platoon's in mind. With such a strong, and lefty heavy starting lineup, that makes sense to me.

[Savin Hillbilly]

Depth is a good thing but not enough to be a player's only contribution.

Seriously?

Every championship team includes players who are not good enough to be starters but who are good at one or two things that it is useful to have available on the bench. In particular, every team needs a guy who can back up capably at multiple infield positions, especially SS. And guys who can play competent D at shortstop and also hit can usually find starting jobs. So utility infielders with better than mediocre offense are quite rare. Here are the utility infielders for the past ten world champions, with their OPS+ numbers. (If you want to challenge my choice of who is UIF for a particular club, have at it.)

2011 STL -- Nick Punto, 127
2010 SFG -- Edgar Renteria, 93
2009 NYY -- Ramiro Pena, 85
2008 PHI -- Eric Bruntlett, 55
2007 BOS -- Alex Cora, 75
2006 STL -- Hector Luna, 99
2005 CHA -- Pablo Ozuna, 70
2004 BOS -- Pokey Reese, 46
2003 FLA -- Andy Fox, 40
2002 LAA -- Benji Gil, 94

The only guy to fill this role for a champion in the past decade with above-average offense is the guy you're complaining about. Only three other guys came close to providing average offense, and one of them, Renteria, was not really a UIF but a starter sent to the bench by a veteran coming back from injury.

Nick Punto's career OPS+ of 76 fits right in with this crew. That's the caliber of hitter a UIF typically is--for a championship team. Depth may not be good enough to be a player's only contribution in your ideal universe, but in actual baseball, that's what bench players look like.

[The Boomer]

Seriously?

Every championship team includes players who are not good enough to be starters but who are good at one or two things that it is useful to have available on the bench. In particular, every team needs a guy who can back up capably at multiple infield positions, especially SS. And guys who can play competent D at shortstop and also hit can usually find starting jobs. So utility infielders with better than mediocre offense are quite rare. Here are the utility infielders for the past ten world champions, with their OPS+ numbers. (If you want to challenge my choice of who is UIF for a particular club, have at it.)

2011 STL -- Nick Punto, 127
2010 SFG -- Edgar Renteria, 93
2009 NYY -- Ramiro Pena, 85
2008 PHI -- Eric Bruntlett, 55
2007 BOS -- Alex Cora, 75
2006 STL -- Hector Luna, 99
2005 CHA -- Pablo Ozuna, 70
2004 BOS -- Pokey Reese, 46
2003 FLA -- Andy Fox, 40
2002 LAA -- Benji Gil, 94

The only guy to fill this role for a champion in the past decade with above-average offense is the guy you're complaining about. Only three other guys came close to providing average offense, and one of them, Renteria, was not really a UIF but a starter sent to the bench by a veteran coming back from injury.

Nick Punto's career OPS+ of 76 fits right in with this crew. That's the caliber of hitter a UIF typically is--for a championship team. Depth may not be good enough to be a player's only contribution in your ideal universe, but in actual baseball, that's what bench players look like.

If Punto is the career equivalent of 2007 Alex Cora, that's more than decent for his reserve role. Perhaps Cherington perceived that Punto's 2011 offensive spike was the UIF late bloomer equivalent of now regular SS Scutaro.

Edited by The Boomer, 06 January 2012 - 07:44 AM.

[Rasputin]

Seriously?

Yes, seriously. I find it silly that I have to defend this position.

Every championship team includes players who are not good enough to be starters but who are good at one or two things that it is useful to have available on the bench.

Yes, that is what I am looking for, although the implication that I think Nick Punto would prevent someone from winning a championship is absurd. Punto doesn't have one or two things that are useful. He has one thing. He plays good defense at multiple positions. That's a good thing. That's better than playing acceptable defense at multiple positions, which is the minimum standard for a utility infielder slot.

He brings literally nothing else to the table. Except for injuries he can neither pinch run for anyone who isn't ridiculously slow nor pinch hit for anyone who isn't a pitcher.

All I want is one more thing. A platoon split that is better than the starter. An ability to pinch run and steal a base. More OBP in backing up a starter who is more power-centric. Something, anything that makes you want to go to him in some real game situations.

National League teams are obviously different because pitchers come to bat more and the standards are lower.

In 2007 Alex Cora was a better hitter than Julio Lugo.

In 2005 Pablo Ozuna has better lefty splits than Joe Crede and more steals than Juan Uribe and Joe Crede combined.

In 2002 Benji Gil had a reverse platoon split from Adam Kennedy.

Even Pokey Reese in 2004 had an advantage because his defense wasn't merely good but extremely good. That wasn't a big stealing team but Reese still ends up with the third most steals on the team and pinch ran several times.

[redsox2020]

Something, anything that makes you want to go to him in some real game situations.

I 100% get what you're saying, but how often do teams normally go to their utility infielder in real game situations? I'm guessing almost never unless their starter is terrible.

Presumably all our starters can hit right handed pitching & won't need to be lifted late in a game vs a righty reliever. If the opponent brings in a loogy, we have at least 3 other options who can rake lefties. Maybe Punto can't do what you want him to do, but it doesn't appear the team has any intention of asking him to do it.

[Rasputin]

I 100% get what you're saying, but how often do teams normally go to their utility infielder in real game situations? I'm guessing almost never unless their starter is terrible.

One doesn't have to be terrible to have a specific weakness. Kevin Millar wasn't terrible when Dave Roberts pinch ran for him. Ryan Sweeney and Darnell McDonald aren't going to be terrible when they pinch hit for each other.

[Savin Hillbilly]

He brings literally nothing else to the table. Except for injuries he can neither pinch run for anyone who isn't ridiculously slow nor pinch hit for anyone who isn't a pitcher.

I don't know where you're getting this idea that Punto is a base-clogger. He had 4 triples last year in 166 PA. That's a full-season pace of about 15. (And since we're both in agreement that he has little or no power, we can guess that these balls were not crushed to the deepest part of the ballpark.) He was a double-figure base stealer for five straight seasons in Minnesota, though that has ramped down (just one steal last year for LaRussa--then again, nobody on that team was stealing). Fangraphs' speed index, FWIW, shows him consistently about league average, including last year. He's not a speed guy, but he's not slow either. I would pinch-run him for anybody other than the outfielders and Pedroia.

In 2007 Alex Cora was a better hitter than Julio Lugo.

Wait, so the fact that Scutaro is a better hitter than Lugo somehow makes Cora a better hitter than Punto? My brain hurts.

Even Pokey Reese in 2004 had an advantage because his defense wasn't merely good but extremely good. That wasn't a big stealing team but Reese still ends up with the third most steals on the team and pinch ran several times.

Reese is an even better defender than Punto, yes. And Punto is much better at getting on base than Reese. I'd rather have a good defender who is not a total black hole at the plate than a great defender who is one.

Edited by Savin Hillbilly, 07 January 2012 - 10:15 AM.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Again, neither of those guys are utility infielder's. Utility infielders are not usually good hitters AND fielders, or they'd be starting. Punto is an excellent defensive player, I'm not sure why that isn't sinking in. He's unlikely to PH in a non-interleague game (although he could bat for Aviles if a righty is pitching), but your backup utility infielder isn't supposed to PH. He's here for defense. The continued focus on his OPS is really missing the point.

25 men on a roster; the last few (utility IIF, LOOGY / long man) are going to be weak overall players, but ideally guy's who bring some kind of skill necessary, and history has shown that Punto can bring that. Of course, he's not young and his defense could fall off a cliff, but if you look at the past few years this guy has the potential to be a real bargain.

[lexrageorge]

He's a utility infielder that can get on base. His career 0.325 OBP is better than Alex Cora's. Cora had a 0.298 OBP for the Sox in 2007. If you need to insert him into the lineup (either for a game or for a late inning situation), he's at least as likely to keep an inning alive as Jed Bleepin' Lowrie.

Defense and OBP means he at least will add value as the 25th man on the major league roster.

Cry about thin starting pitching if you're going to cry about anything.

[Perpetual Herb Score]

Justin Germano has just saved this offseason, thanks.

[Derek's Friend]

Justin Germano has just saved this offseason, thanks.

The Sox must have won the bidding post on him. He was in Korea for the second half of last season. Was killing in the MLB before he left with a 5.09 ERA. Just the sort of guy we're looking for depth wise. Kidding of course on all account including posting but seriously I'm not following this move.

[reggiecleveland]

Bench player platoon in RF check
Bench player platoon at SS check

[sketz]

At this point, I'd rather just have them cut more salary and get under the cap for this year. They have enough talent to challenge for a playoff spot in 2012 and hopefully, getting under now will allow them to spend in 2013 without a big luxury tax hit.

[502 to Right]

This is the worst offseason of the current ownership--bar none.

[SoxScout]

At this point, I'd rather just have them cut more salary and get under the cap for this year. They have enough talent to challenge for a playoff spot in 2012 and hopefully, getting under now will allow them to spend in 2013 without a big luxury tax hit.

If this isn't what they are doing, people have the right to be pissed. I've been thinking all along that we were definitely going to be under the tax, so I have been fine with the moves (and actually liking the Melancon and Bailey trades.) However, with the reports saying it's now inevitable that we are going over, it's changing the outlook... and we won't even find out until next offseason if we did or not unless Cherington tells us.

Edited by SoxScout, 22 January 2012 - 01:56 AM.

[Soxfan in Fla]

Right now I really am wondering if they even know what they want to do, if there is a consensus if they do and if there isn't a consensus who is overriding who. This is becoming craptastic. They are not better than the MFY or the Rays and I'm not sure they are any better than the Jays. Lets also not forget the Rangers and Angels are both better than them as currently constructed.

[ngruz25]

To me, whether this offseason is an unmitigated disaster depends on one thing: whether Bard sticks in the rotation.

If Bard struggles as a starter and gets moved back to the bullpen, then every single move this offseason will have been fairly pointless. They would have traded two players that they could really use (SS and RF) for two players that aren't nearly as necessary (two relievers). The pen will be stocked but SS and RF will be weaknesses. AND they'll be down a SP, which could have been acquired with the prospects used to land the not-as-necessary relievers.

I hope the FO knows what they're doing. I can easily envision Bard not being able to adjust to being a SP, but I really hope that's a remote possibility.

[bombdiggz]

This is the worst offseason of the current ownership--bar none.

Undoubtedly, if we were to deal out an 80 M+/5 yr+ contract to someone who was past their prime or a bad fit, I would feel much better about this offseason.

As we have seen mega FA deals = winning!

[smastroyin]

You don't win games in the off-season as we have seen.

I think it is the worst (of recent vintage - as mentioned above there have been far darker days) because it is a simple fact of life that like them or not this was a very stable organization under Theo/Tito. I actually don't like Bobby Valentine. Not because I think he is a bad manager in the W-L sense and I get why people who think only in those terms think the rest of us are ridiculous. But I just don't like him and don't look forward to a season of listening to him.

I don't like the general rhetoric of how important they have decided getting under the cap is, and where this caution was when Theo was going after Carl Crawford. If they weren't planning on going over the cap this year then they were banking on the entire rotation being healthy and that Bard could slip into the closer role. This still would have required letting Ortiz walk.

Basically it seems the entire off-season is the aftertaste of September, and that makes it suck, even if you believe (as I do) that this is a team with 90-95 win talent.

[The Boomer]

You don't win games in the off-season as we have seen.

I think it is the worst (of recent vintage - as mentioned above there have been far darker days) because it is a simple fact of life that like them or not this was a very stable organization under Theo/Tito. I actually don't like Bobby Valentine. Not because I think he is a bad manager in the W-L sense and I get why people who think only in those terms think the rest of us are ridiculous. But I just don't like him and don't look forward to a season of listening to him.

I don't like the general rhetoric of how important they have decided getting under the cap is, and where this caution was when Theo was going after Carl Crawford. If they weren't planning on going over the cap this year then they were banking on the entire rotation being healthy and that Bard could slip into the closer role. This still would have required letting Ortiz walk.

Basically it seems the entire off-season is the aftertaste of September, and that makes it suck, even if you believe (as I do) that this is a team with 90-95 win talent.

The worst offseason one year after the best (hyped) offseason. You can only judge these moves in hindsight and clearly they aren't done yet. They needed to shake things up and, in fairness to Cherington, he is regrouping from the hangover after those last few intoxicating (no championship) years under Theo. They are showing some discipline in getting back on track. They need to get younger and trust that they can develop players in their system. Trying to hang with the Yankees financially is always a big mistake. Somebody unexpected almost always surprises in a good way and it remains to be seen who will step up this year to make Cherington look like a genius.

Edited by The Boomer, 22 January 2012 - 06:33 PM.

[Snodgrass'Muff]

They are not better than the MFY or the Rays and I'm not sure they are any better than the Jays. Lets also not forget the Rangers and Angels are both better than them as currently constructed.

This is a fairly ridiculous statement. They're right there in the mix with all of those teams and are clearly better than Toronto. You're talking about a team that was on pace for 100 wins going into September and had to have an historically bad month to drop to 90 wins. Just putting the exact same team out there in 2012 is going to produce 93-95 wins. At worst, they're treading water, but I think there is a credible argument to be made that they're going to bring a better team into 2012. They had to carry 472 innings of 5.74 ERA work from Lackey, Matsuzaka, Wake, Andrew Miller, Weiland, Doubront and Bowden in 2011. Lackey was a huge chunk of that and is not going to pitch next season. Matsuzaka was hurt and is on track to come back some time in the second half and should provide quality innings. Even without signing Oswalt, they have Buchholz back who should be better than league average and could be excellent like he was in 2010. He's a pretty good bet to provide 150+ innings. (If someone disagrees with that statement strongly, we can arrange something in PYMWYMI) Then there's Bard should be able to give them at least 100 innings and could push up toward 140 or 150 depending on how his body reacts to the change in work. At worst, he should still be an improvement on the group effort mentioned above.

They need to address the last spot in the rotation, but even if they don't sign someone, I expect Tazawa to get a chunk of the innings and his recovery from TJ surgery has been encouraging to say the least. He throws a lot of strikes, isn't afraid to challenge hitters and has some decent off speed offerings. Seems like an improvement on tripe that threw those 472 innings in 2011. At the very worst, we're looking at a similar group filling in a much smaller chunk of innings, which improves the rotation on its own. Yes, some of those guys will get starts in 2012. Some of those guys will throw meaningful innings. Some of those guys will suck as much as they did in 2011. But they shouldn't have as many opportunities to do so. Net positive.

They're bringing back essentially the same lineup, minus Marco Scutaro. I'm not worried about replacing Reddick in RF. His season line at the plate wasn't all that impressive and I think a combination of Sweeney, McDonald and Kalish will be able to approximate it without much of a loss in defense. The only real loss is Scutaro and moving on to Aviles is likely a slight downgrade. They'll still be one of the best offenses in baseball, if not the best again. Defensively there won't be much difference between an Aviles/Punto combination and Scutaro/Lowrie from 2011. And the rest of the defense should be similar with a likely improvement from Crawford who will be a year more comfortable with the Monster. And speaking of Crawford, I think he's very likely to improve on what was clearly an outlier year. I don't expect him to be a 7 fWAR player and compete for the MVP, but 4-5 fWAR is not unfair for an optimistic projection. Even an pessamist has to think he'll get back to league average production (2.0 fWAR) if they look at him objectively, which is an improvement. That will likely be offset by a regression from Ellsbury, which brings us back to treading water offensively. Pedroia might slip a bit after an up year, but Gonzalez should see a better power year, again offsetting. Treading water.

The bullpen is likely to be a bit worse off than it was last year, but not by much and I don't think Papelbon is going to come back in 2012 as the dominant guy he was in 2011, so it's a slight step back to 2011 Bailey, but a step back that probably would have happened had he stayed. I'm also not convinced Bailey can't be the guy he was in 2009 and 2010 which would replace 2011 Papelbon just fine. Bard down to Melancon is a loss, no question. But not a huge one. Aceves will be back in the pen, but after that the pen was pretty much a rotating door of question marks, which will largely be true again in 2012. I expect similar overall results, though I can see a slight step back. With the step forward in the rotation, I would argue any loss in the pen is completely offset, though. Treading water.

In short, I see no reason to think that September was an indication of anything other than an extremely unlikely run taking place at a really bad time. I think the 2012 team is much closer to the 100 win juggernaut than the historically bad team we saw in September. And I expect 90 wins to be the low end of what should be expected of this team with 93-95 wins being the happy medium between that low end and a best case scenario of 98 or so.

Edited by Snodgrass'Muff, 22 January 2012 - 06:50 PM.