127 replies to this topic

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Nevertheless, don't think Punto was signed b/c of his bat.

No, it's obvious Punto was signed because he wouldn't bitch about backing up Aviles, like Lowrie would have (and justifiably so).

The trade for Melancon was so bad I was, and remain, convinced the Sox plan wasn't to target him but to dump Jed.

/rage

[JakeRae]

No one expects that Ciriaco will continue to be anywhere near this good, but it's reasonable to expect him to have somewhat better than league average BABIP given his speed. His BABIP with Pawtucket was .351 in 289 PA this year and is .319 in 3234 minor league PAs. Again he's not going to be very good, but as a backup middle infielder he's likely to be more than adequate.

If you credit him with a .310 BABIP, an 18% K rate, a 2% walk rate, a 1% HR rate, and a .100 ISO (all of which are reasonably close to what you would expect based on his AAA numbers, if they translate well to MLB) he is a .264/.279/.364 hitter. That's a reasonably optimistic quick and dirty projection of what you should expect from Ciriaco. As a point of comparison, Punto, in one of the worst seasons of his career, is hitting .204/.307/.278 and is a career 247/.324/.325 hitter (his BABIP luck has been almost as bad as Ciriaco's has been good and is pretty much entirely responsible for his under performance). Does that line from Ciriaco really meet your definiton of adequate and/or not justify paying an extra $1.3 million a year for Nick Punto?

[Plympton91]

If you credit him with a .310 BABIP, an 18% K rate, a 2% walk rate, a 1% HR rate, and a .100 ISO (all of which are reasonably close to what you would expect based on his AAA numbers, if they translate well to MLB) he is a .264/.279/.364 hitter. That's a reasonably optimistic quick and dirty projection of what you should expect from Ciriaco. As a point of comparison, Punto, in one of the worst seasons of his career, is hitting .204/.307/.278 and is a career 247/.324/.325 hitter (his BABIP luck has been almost as bad as Ciriaco's has been good and is pretty much entirely responsible for his under performance). Does that line from Ciriaco really meet your definiton of adequate and/or not justify paying an extra $1.3 million a year for Nick Punto?

I'm with you on Ciriaco likely playing way over his head right now, but I thought it worth noting that coincidentally or not, that hypothetical line you computed for Ciriaco is pretty much what Mike Aviles has given them this year less 30 points of SLG. And, Aviles is a starter people didn't think we needed to upgrade.

[Bucknahs Bum Ankle]

If you credit him with a .310 BABIP, an 18% K rate, a 2% walk rate, a 1% HR rate, and a .100 ISO (all of which are reasonably close to what you would expect based on his AAA numbers, if they translate well to MLB) he is a .264/.279/.364 hitter. That's a reasonably optimistic quick and dirty projection of what you should expect from Ciriaco. As a point of comparison, Punto, in one of the worst seasons of his career, is hitting .204/.307/.278 and is a career 247/.324/.325 hitter (his BABIP luck has been almost as bad as Ciriaco's has been good and is pretty much entirely responsible for his under performance). Does that line from Ciriaco really meet your definiton of adequate and/or not justify paying an extra $1.3 million a year for Nick Punto?

Sure, I'd jettison Punto (if possible) and save the extra money. You are saying they have basically very similar batting value and I don't see how Punto's defense is worth the extra money in such a limited role.

[JakeRae]

Sure, I'd jettison Punto (if possible) and save the extra money. You are saying they have basically very similar batting value and I don't see how Punto's defense is worth the extra money in such a limited role.

Punto has a career OBP .045 better than that line. How on earth is that similar?

I'm with you on Ciriaco likely playing way over his head right now, but I thought it worth noting that coincidentally or not, that hypothetical line you computed for Ciriaco is pretty much what Mike Aviles has given them this year less 30 points of SLG. And, Aviles is a starter people didn't think we needed to upgrade.

The difference is ISO (which is far more relevant than SLG) is .046 this year, .054 based on last year for Aviles. The difference in OBP is .007 this year and .010 last year. Both of those favor Aviles. (Comparisons are to my projected line for Ciriaco. Worth noting is that the projection I created is significantly more optimistic than ZiPS since it assumes Ciriaco will be able to more or less translate all of his AAA skills to MLB with only a slight uptick in K rate and a very slight drop in power and BABIP. It is likely that Ciriaco's true talent is worse than the line I provided.)

As for upgrading Aviles, I'd love to. I'm just not sure how to go about doing it in a value-positive way. I miss Jed Lowrie.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

As for upgrading Aviles, I'd love to. I'm just not sure how to go about doing it in a value-positive way. I miss Jed Lowrie.

So do the Astros, since he's unlikely to be back from the DL until September 1 at the very earliest.

Can't have a starting SS who can't play more than 100 games a year.

[Cellar-Door]

So do the Astros, since he's unlikely to be back from the DL until September 1 at the very earliest.

Can't have a starting SS who can't play more than 100 games a year.

I don't think he could keep that level of performance anyway, he was in a monster slump before he got hurt. His career seems to show a guy who has hot streaks, then goes ice cold or gets hurt, or usually both sometime in the June/July portion of the season.

[Bucknahs Bum Ankle]

Punto has a career OBP .045 better than that line. How on earth is that similar?

Why are you only looking at OBP? Your Ciriaco projection has an OPS of 643. Punto's career OPS is 649. How on earth is that dissimilar?

[Dogman2]

I don't think he could keep that level of performance anyway, he was in a monster slump before he got hurt. His career seems to show a guy who has hot streaks, then goes ice cold or gets hurt, or usually both sometime in the June/July portion of the season.

You can point to this rational as the sole reason Lowrie was traded. He simply was not worth the roster spot for the amount of time he was hurt.

Edited by Dogman2, 07 August 2012 - 03:37 PM.

[JakeRae]

Why are you only looking at OBP? Your Ciriaco projection has an OPS of 643. Punto's career OPS is 649. How on earth is that dissimilar?

i'm not only looking at OBP. However, it being the largest difference and most important aspect of offensive value, I was choosing to highlight it to demonstrate the difference between the two players. OPS is a terrible metric when it comes to measuring the value difference between two players with large differences in BA and the ability to walk that skew in opposite directions dues to its overweighting of slugging. Given the extremely limited nature of my projection of Ciriaco, I don't really have the ability to turn it into any of the more advanced metrics that more accurately measure player value, but the difference is substantial. Based on pushing up the ZiPS RoS projection wOBA marginally (they have him at .265) he's somewhere around a .270 to .275 wOBA player via the line I created. Punto is a career .295 wOBA hitter and is at .276 so far this year despite his .259 BABIP (.296 for his career).

In short, optimistically projecting Ciriaco gets you the offensive production Punto has provided this year. Or, in other words, Ciriaco is a replacement level player. Punto, while he's nothing spectatular, is still substantially better than that.

[Sprowl]

In short, optimistically projecting Ciriaco gets you the offensive production Punto has provided this year. Or, in other words, Ciriaco is a replacement level player. Punto, while he's nothing spectatular, is still substantially better than that.

If the two players were the same age, a team might well prefer Punto because of his experience playing 3B, but Ciriaco is 26 and might raise his ceiling, while Punto is 34 and has seen his best days (such as they are).

I think that Ciriaco has shown enough speed, range, agility, smallball skills, and occasional pop with the bat during spring training and his mid-season cup of coffee to make us wary about taking his projections as gospel.

[JakeRae]

If the two players were the same age, a team might well prefer Punto because of his experience playing 3B, but Ciriaco is 26 and might raise his ceiling, while Punto is 34 and has seen his best days (such as they are).

I think that Ciriaco has shown enough speed, range, agility, smallball skills, and occasional pop with the bat during spring training and his mid-season cup of coffee to make us wary about taking his projections as gospel.

He's always had speed, defensive skill, and smallball skills. That combination might raise him from being a replacement level player to being a useful utility infielder for a team that needs one. The Red Sox already have a really good utility infielder. I know this board has an irrational hatred of Punto deeply embedded in it, but Punto is about as good a utility infielder as you can get and Ciriaco simply is not as good. It pretty much entirely comes down to the fact that Punto is really good at walking and Ciriaco doesn't know what a walk is. When you have the overall offensive skillset of a light hitting middle infielder, it's really hard to make up for the gap between these two guys in walking skill.

Also, I see nothing that leads me to believe Ciriaco has improved. If this guy wasn't having this season in Boston, no one here would disagree with that. Flukey good BABIP years happen and they generally don't repeat themselves.

[Sprowl]

Also, I see nothing that leads me to believe Ciriaco has improved. If this guy wasn't having this season in Boston, no one here would disagree with that. Flukey good BABIP years happen and they generally don't repeat themselves.

And career years for many players happen at age 27, which Ciriaco will be in 2013. Punto will be 35 in 2013. Which one is more likely to fall off a cliff? Granted, for each one the cliff is likely to be pretty low, and they'll never attain terminal velocity, but Punto is a marginal major leaguer rapidly exhausting his shelf life.

Has Ciriaco always had defensive skill? No, not according to prior reputation, which gave Ciriaco's throwing arm from shortstop Lugovian reviews for accuracy. So far he has looked better than his reputation in the field, and better at bat too. He's pretty clearly the faster and more skilled baserunner of the two as well, and Punto will not be getting any faster as he wizens.

[soxfan121]

Pedro is having one glorious season where just about everything is falling in, finding a hole, hit right at him, and slow down the line not requiring a tough throw. His story has been one of the few bright spots of this shitty team this season. He will turn back into a pumpkin someday soon. Ride it while it lasts.

[Cellar-Door]

It's two years, not a seven year deal. I'd much rather have a guy who I know can play three positions well and has a decent OBP with no power for his 34 and 35 y/o seasons than a guy for his 27/28 y/o seasons who is an uncertain fielder and who has no history of being able to get on base with minimal power.

[SydneySox]

... you left out the bit where you then talk about how much they cost.

If Punto was a minor league invitee ... similar to Ciriaco... then it becomes a more interesting conversation. But too much of what you wrote ignores that he wasn't; he's making actual guaranteed money... AND he's coming back next year.

I actually take a lot of stock in the stories around Nick Punto's apparent clubhouse leadership being a factor in his signing as well. Unfortunately I think it's a factor this FO did consider when offering him the job.

[SoxFanPJ]

This thread is hurting my brain.

The Red Sox where looking for a veteran utility IF who would be a positive addition the the club house, that is why Punto was signed. Sure he isn't very good, but he is only making $1.5 this year and the same next year.

If the Sox determine they like Ciriaco better, then you can either release Punto and eat the $1.5 million or a attempt to trade him for PTBNL and kick in a million to a team looking for a utility IF and save yourself $500k.

Pure personal opinion but I enjoy watching Ciriaco play and if I had my druthers I would cut bait on Punto to keep Ciriaco.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Having Ciriaco instead of Punto would be totally irrelevant to the team's performance; they wouldn't have any more wins nor have significant payroll to do anything with. Upgrading the 25th man won't matter when the majority of guys 1-24 are underperforming. Punto and his contract are such a minor issue; it is amazing that it's gotten so much attention. Hopefully they cut him so we can start bitching about some other insignificant player.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

You're right in that it doesn't make a huge difference to the bottom line results. But it's just a sign of poor management around the edges, which can rankle since similar talent was available for free.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Certainly every move has implications, but I'm far more concerned about giving guys like Crawford, Lackey, Cameron, Jenks, etc too much money; and mis-evaluating talent like Reddick, Lowrie, Melancon. Those are the moves that matter and really effect how the team does now and in the future. I think we can all agree that Punto was an OK move at best, and a crappy move at worst. Sadly, it doesn't even make the ten worst moves of the past few years list. Look at it this way; this team is allocating $85M to Crawford, Beckett, Lackey, Matsuzaka, Jenks, Bailey, and Youkilis. Those players have combined for 3.0 WAR; or 1.2 less than Reddick (who makes less than Punto) has done himself; and it was the same deal last year with Cameron, Jenks, Drew, Matsuzaka, Lackey, etc. The players who make a shit ton of money and provide little piss me off far more than the last scrub on the bench who makes and provides little.

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Certainly every move has implications, but I'm far more concerned about giving guys like Crawford, Lackey, Cameron, Jenks, etc too much money; and mis-evaluating talent like Reddick, Lowrie, Melancon. Those are the moves that matter and really effect how the team does now and in the future. I think we can all agree that Punto was an OK move at best, and a crappy move at worst. Sadly, it doesn't even make the ten worst moves of the past few years list. Look at it this way; this team is allocating $85M to Crawford, Beckett, Lackey, Matsuzaka, Jenks, Bailey, and Youkilis. Those players have combined for 3.0 WAR; or 1.2 less than Reddick (who makes less than Punto) has done himself; and it was the same deal last year with Cameron, Jenks, Drew, Matsuzaka, Lackey, etc. The players who make a shit ton of money and provide little piss me off far more than the last scrub on the bench who makes and provides little.

Your bringing up Reddick as a comparison to Cameron and Crawford highlights this problem as a matter of magnitude on the same scale. By which I mean, Reddick and Ciriaco are the same side of the coin. What Reddick is to Crawford's silver dollar, Ciriaco is to Punto's penny.

Ultimately of course, the Sox don't lose out much by being wrong on Punto. But it's still indicative of a larger systemic problem, and that's what's aggravating.

I've said it before -- and sadly I'll probably have to say it again -- but pro scouting for the Sox has trended toward inflating the valuation of veteran players when putting them in context with readily-available minor-league talent who haven't amassed a statistically-significant track record at the MLB level (but whose best days are still ahead). Whether those milb players are within the Sox organization or not.

[sachilles]

That leads me to a question that maybe EV can answer.
Are minor league stats collected reliably? Is there the same wealth of information available at all levels of pro ball?
How does one accurately weight statistical information of younger players in the minors, when there is a constant flux of players going up and down, facing all manor of levels of talent?

[joe dokes]

Certainly every move has implications, but I'm far more concerned about giving guys like Crawford, Lackey, Cameron, Jenks, etc too much money; and mis-evaluating talent like Reddick, Lowrie, Melancon. Those are the moves that matter and really effect how the team does now and in the future. I think we can all agree that Punto was an OK move at best, and a crappy move at worst. Sadly, it doesn't even make the ten worst moves of the past few years list. Look at it this way; this team is allocating $85M to Crawford, Beckett, Lackey, Matsuzaka, Jenks, Bailey, and Youkilis. Those players have combined for 3.0 WAR; or 1.2 less than Reddick (who makes less than Punto) has done himself; and it was the same deal last year with Cameron, Jenks, Drew, Matsuzaka, Lackey, etc. The players who make a shit ton of money and provide little piss me off far more than the last scrub on the bench who makes and provides little.

While much of your point is reasonable, I do think the idea that Cherongton (or whomever) mis-evaluated Lowrie has to be scrapped. The evaluation of Lowrie was dead on: for the half-season he'll give you, he's likely to be an above-average player. Perhaps they mis-evaluated Melancon. Or perhaps no one was willing to give up more for a half-season of probably above-average play at an imprtant position.

[Cellar-Door]

... you left out the bit where you then talk about how much they cost.

If Punto was a minor league invitee ... similar to Ciriaco... then it becomes a more interesting conversation. But too much of what you wrote ignores that he wasn't; he's making actual guaranteed money... AND he's coming back next year.

I actually take a lot of stock in the stories around Nick Punto's apparent clubhouse leadership being a factor in his signing as well. Unfortunately I think it's a factor this FO did consider when offering him the job.

Because certainty is worth $1.5M.
We are having this conversation because Ciriaco came out and had what I think we all agree is unsustainable luck based success. Though they apparently still don't trust him to play 3rd as they have used Punto and Gomez there over him.
The idea that 1.5M was a bad investment because there was an immensely small chance that Ciriaco would have a career year that destroyed his previous numbers and MLE is silly. There was no reason to expect Ciriaco to perform better than Punto, and there is still very little reason to believe he will do so going forward both this year and next.
Yes it is possible to get Punto's production for less, but it involves a high level of risk of getting significantly lower performance. For every guy like Ciriaco who is having a career year there are 20 guys who are still struggling in AAA and there was nothing coming into the year to clearly differentiate between them. The team needed a reliable backup SS and 3B, that wasn't Ciriaco and wasn't available for significantly less than Punto.

Edited by Cellar-Door, 08 August 2012 - 12:04 PM.

[SydneySox]

Because certainty is worth $1.5M.
We are having this conversation because Ciriaco came out and had what I think we all agree is unsustainable luck based success. Though they apparently still don't trust him to play 3rd as they have used Punto and Gomez there over him.
The idea that 1.5M was a bad investment because there was an immensely small chance that Ciriaco would have a career year that destroyed his previous numbers and MLE is silly. There was no reason to expect Ciriaco to perform better than Punto, and there is still very little reason to believe he will do so going forward both this year and next.
Yes it is possible to get Punto's production for less, but it involves a high level of risk of getting significantly lower performance. For every guy like Ciriaco who is having a career year there are 20 guys who are still struggling in AAA and there was nothing coming into the year to clearly differentiate between them. The team needed a reliable backup SS and 3B, that wasn't Ciriaco and wasn't available for significantly less than Punto.

Well... you say $1.5m but you mean $3m because it was, inexplicably, a 2 year deal.

The bolded is the point. In this case they paid for certainty but it's not like paying for Albert Pujols certainty; it's at barely replacement level certainty.

We're having this conversation because Punto sucks, is expensive in context, and is being upstaged by short-sample-size batting-above-his-head-probably Ciriaco. The bigger point though, is at this level, it's not inconceivable you could have found a Ciriaco to replace Punto.. because Punto doesn't really bring anything to the table that you couldn't try to find with AAAA players like Ciriaco. If they don't work, you just get rid of them.

But you can't really do that with Punto... well you can, but you're eating 3 million. Sure, 3 million isn't a lot - but it is to the Sox who were desperate to stay under the threshold this year. Hence, the head shaking at a decision to give that dude that much money.

[Cellar-Door]

Well... you say $1.5m but you mean $3m because it was, inexplicably, a 2 year deal.

The bolded is the point. In this case they paid for certainty but it's not like paying for Albert Pujols certainty; it's at barely replacement level certainty.

We're having this conversation because Punto sucks, is expensive in context, and is being upstaged by short-sample-size batting-above-his-head-probably Ciriaco. The bigger point though, is at this level, it's not inconceivable you could have found a Ciriaco to replace Punto.. because Punto doesn't really bring anything to the table that you couldn't try to find with AAAA players like Ciriaco. If they don't work, you just get rid of them.

But you can't really do that with Punto... well you can, but you're eating 3 million. Sure, 3 million isn't a lot - but it is to the Sox who were desperate to stay under the threshold this year. Hence, the head shaking at a decision to give that dude that much money.

Actually you are eating at most 2.04M since you have to pay whoever is backing up SS and 2B and 3B at least the league minimum.

The idea that you would just collect a bunch of AAAA guys and throw them at the position in a rotation until one stuck makes no sense.

In this year's case, if Ciriaco had been terrible and Punto wasn't on the roster, who was the backup SS? Who backed up 2B? If Aviles blew out his knee in the first homestand who plays SS for the rest of the year?

Sure every year there are AAAA guys who outperform Punto's expected stats, but the vast majority don't, and of the ones who are better on offense, few if any are as good on defense. You can't build a team around the hope you have one of those few in your system because odds are pretty high that you don't.
That's the reason Jamey Carroll got paid considerably more than Punto, same with Ramon Santiago, Clint Barmes, etc. Your primary backup MI has to be somewhat dependable since even with above average injury luck he's still going to play a decent number of games, especially in a situation like ours where Aviles has never played a full season, and could likely benefit from nights off against righties.

I also dispute your assessment of Punto, for a backup IF who can play SS he's not bad at all relative to the league. 2009-present, he's 34th among SS with 300+ ABs in wOBA. It isn't actually all that easy apparently to find a SS who is better than Punto. fWAR has him 27th. For a backup making 1.5M per that is more than acceptable, he's one of the top non-starting SS in the league, which tells you how shitty SS play is around the league.

Edited by Cellar-Door, 08 August 2012 - 07:55 PM.

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Just a nit-pick: Punto has annual bonuses based on the number of days he's on the active roster. His deal is effectively 2/$3.5MM, assuming if he doesn't go on the DL or get DFA'd.

Saving ~$1.25MM per season may not sound especially significant to the Sox, but it's still more than their current clubs are paying Youkilis or Reddick. So it is possible to get real value at that price...you just need to find a sucker team dumb enough to be selling it.

[Plympton91]

While much of your point is reasonable, I do think the idea that Cherongton (or whomever) mis-evaluated Lowrie has to be scrapped. The evaluation of Lowrie was dead on: for the half-season he'll give you, he's likely to be an above-average player. Perhaps they mis-evaluated Melancon. Or perhaps no one was willing to give up more for a half-season of probably above-average play at an imprtant position.

So, should the Red Sox be looking to dump Ryan Kalish and Jose Iglesias, who haven't played a full healthy season ever in their professional careers?

[Savin Hillbilly]

But you can't really do that with Punto... well you can, but you're eating 3 million. Sure, 3 million isn't a lot - but it is to the Sox who were desperate to stay under the threshold this year. Hence, the head shaking at a decision to give that dude that much money.

But you're not eating $3 million, unless you dump him the minute you sign him. At this point we'd be eating about two million. If we dump him over the offseason, $1.5 million.

I was one of the defenders of the Punto signing, but I'll freely admit it's been a disaster, because we've gotten his absolute worst offensive game. We gambled and lost. But one of the things that made the signing defensible in the first place is that it was a very small gamble, and therefore a very small loss.

[JakeRae]

But you're not eating $3 million, unless you dump him the minute you sign him. At this point we'd be eating about two million. If we dump him over the offseason, $1.5 million.

I was one of the defenders of the Punto signing, but I'll freely admit it's been a disaster, because we've gotten his absolute worst offensive game. We gambled and lost. But one of the things that made the signing defensible in the first place is that it was a very small gamble, and therefore a very small loss.

The only problem with his offense is a low BABIP. If you thought the signing was a good one to begin with, you should not be looking to dump Punto now. Dumping players like Punto and buying players like Ciriaco is what bad organizations do and, while doing it with utility infielders won't make a huge difference in the long haul, if this team goes in that direction it will be an incredibly bad indicator relative to the competence of management.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

So, should the Red Sox be looking to dump Ryan Kalish and Jose Iglesias, who haven't played a full healthy season ever in their professional careers?

Jed Lowrie could not be counted upon to remain healthy for any length of time whatsoever. He is, once again, badly injured as of this very moment. He is also 28 years old and was given 5 years' worth of chances in the Sox' organization. After multiple opportunities to stick around with the club, he proved after an extended trial and as he aged that he wasn't capable of doing so. And the Astros are learning that as well.

Ryan Kalish is 24. Jose Iglesias is 22. Both are still prospects. Both are much younger than Lowrie was when he was finally jettisoned. Neither has been given the multiple chances that Lowrie received.

So, no they shouldn't, because that would be pants-on-head retarded. Your point has no merit.

[TomRicardo]

Kalish is approaching Lowrie levels of health.

[Savin Hillbilly]

The only problem with his offense is a low BABIP.

That's a lot of it--using this xBABIP calculator I get a .342, almost 100 points higher than his actual BABIP. No doubt a good deal of that is luck, but anybody who has watched him hit this year would agree, I think, that quite a lot of it isn't. He just hasn't hit the ball hard very much, to understate the matter drastically. Also, he has struck out more than usual (22% K rate, vs. 16.5% career), which is a particular problem for a guy with no power.

The thing about Punto's offense is that even the best case isn't great, and the midline is pretty bad. You accept that, because he's a decent defender at several positions and a guy who can do that on top of plus offense is a starter. But he has no margin for error. If he has a bad offensive year he becomes such a black hole that he is essentially useless, and that's what happened this year. Whether that means we should dump him in favor of Ciriaco for 2013 is a different question--but $1.5M certainly shouldn't prevent us from doing so.

[JakeRae]

That's a lot of it--using this xBABIP calculator I get a .342, almost 100 points higher than his actual BABIP. No doubt a good deal of that is luck, but anybody who has watched him hit this year would agree, I think, that quite a lot of it isn't. He just hasn't hit the ball hard very much, to understate the matter drastically. Also, he has struck out more than usual (22% K rate, vs. 16.5% career), which is a particular problem for a guy with no power.

The thing about Punto's offense is that even the best case isn't great, and the midline is pretty bad. You accept that, because he's a decent defender at several positions and a guy who can do that on top of plus offense is a starter. But he has no margin for error. If he has a bad offensive year he becomes such a black hole that he is essentially useless, and that's what happened this year. Whether that means we should dump him in favor of Ciriaco for 2013 is a different question--but $1.5M certainly shouldn't prevent us from doing so.

The thing about Punto's offense is that, as other's have pointed out many times already, he's pretty much as good an offensive player you can expect for a backup who is a good (or better) defender at up the middle positions. If his offensive ability were any greater, he'd be starting somewhere.

His strikeout percentage has jumped this year and that's a bad sign. But, his walk rate has jumped too. I believe both of these could be largely explained by a change in approach to be more selective because balls aren't falling into play for him. If you just add back in singles for his BABIP deficit versus his career norms (.256 this year, .296 career) you get a line of around .235/.335/.310. That's very good for his role and very similar to his ZiPS RoS projection of .239/.325/.313 (ZiPS adjusts his strikeout and walk rates too and really calculates stuff rather than estimating.) None of these lines is very sexy. But, out of all listed SS on Fangraphs with greater than 100 PA, Punto would rank 27th in OBP with his current OBP for the season. The ZiPS projected .325 OBP ranks him 15th. .335 would put him 13th. On the same list for 2B, he ranks 38th with his YTD performance. A .325 OBP would rank him 26th. Even for 3B, a .325 OBP ranks him 28th and his YTD performance is 39th.

I know OBP isn't everything from an offensive standpoint, but it's the single most important piece and Punto is quite good at it relative to the current offensive climate and his complete lack of power is only slightly worse than most other utility infielders marginal power. This board is far too hung up on the fact that Punto got a 2 year contract and is ignoring the fact that he is getting paid very little for those 2 years and that his skills more than justify the amount that he is getting paid. It's like people immediately reacted to Cherrington mentioning that he was a good clubhouse guy by assuming that he is terrible at everything else and persist in that belief in the face of all evidence to the contrary. Utility infielders are not very good professional baseball players, but Nick Punto is a very good utility infielder.

[Toe Nash]

The only problem with his offense is a low BABIP. If you thought the signing was a good one to begin with, you should not be looking to dump Punto now. Dumping players like Punto and buying players like Ciriaco is what bad organizations do and, while doing it with utility infielders won't make a huge difference in the long haul, if this team goes in that direction it will be an incredibly bad indicator relative to the competence of management.

Signing players like Punto to multi-year deals when guys like Ciriaco can be had for free is what bad orgs do.

Dumping Punto won't undo this mistake but it will give you roster flexibility (since you can have a guy WITH OPTIONS who's making the minimum) which is probably the most important thing for the 25th guy on the roster.

[JakeRae]

Signing players like Punto to multi-year deals when guys like Ciriaco can be had for free is what bad orgs do.

Dumping Punto won't undo this mistake but it will give you roster flexibility (since you can have a guy WITH OPTIONS who's making the minimum) which is probably the most important thing for the 25th guy on the roster.

What value do options have for a utility infielder? You need a backup middle infielder on the roster at all times. The player who is starting the season in that position does not need to have options.

Also, as you point out, players like Ciriaco are available for free. Why would you waste 40-man space on Ciriaco when you could go out and sign next years Ciriaco to a minor league deal?

[Rudy Pemberton]

Frankly, I'm not sure they would want Ciriaco sitting on the bench all year, as Punto has done. Ciriaco is still young enough to have some upside; he should be playing as much as possible, working on developing some patience, improving his defense, etc. Those things are unlikely to happen, for sure, but more likely if he's playing. There's a reason that most teams don't have young players in such a role; a role where the guy is supposed to almost never play, and when he does play, it's for a inning or two at a time.

[Toe Nash]

What value do options have for a utility infielder? You need a backup middle infielder on the roster at all times. The player who is starting the season in that position does not need to have options.

Also, as you point out, players like Ciriaco are available for free. Why would you waste 40-man space on Ciriaco when you could go out and sign next years Ciriaco to a minor league deal?

Well, if the backup middle infielder proves himself completely worthless, then it's easy to ditch him and find a new one.

Edit: Or simply not ready for the majors.

Edited by Toe Nash, 09 August 2012 - 02:32 PM.

[trekfan55]

I believe Pedro Ciriaco does not have options and indeed the man has not been sent down to AAA after his callup.

Cannot seem to find the info for sure.

[Cellar-Door]

Well, if the backup middle infielder proves himself completely worthless, then it's easy to ditch him and find a new one.

Edit: Or simply not ready for the majors.

Except it isn't that easy, and then you have no MIs. Yes guys like Ciriaco happen, but for every AAA guy who has a career year there are 26 other organizations where they don't. The fact that we pulled a lucky ticket in Ciriaco this year doesn't mean we can every year. Punto is a top 5 or so backup SS, he is every year. If he had sucked and we didn't have Punto we would have no backup at 2B or SS, and would have to make a trade to get one. That is a much bigger waste of assets than paying 1M per year extra for Punto's reliability.

This idea which several people have proposed, that you can always find a guy like Ciriaco to put up acceptable numbers in the bigs for the minimum is absolute bullshit with no evidence behind it, and arguing that it is the case simply because in this one rare instance it happened is at best disingenuous.

Edited by Cellar-Door, 09 August 2012 - 03:35 PM.

[pjr]

From his player page at SoxProspects.
Added to 40-man: July 6, 2012
MLB Debut: September 8, 2010 (PIT)
MLB Service Time (through 2011): 118 days
Options Remaining: 0 (2011, 2010, 2009)
Contract (2012): ~League minimum
Trade Restrictions: -

[trekfan55]

From his player page at SoxProspects.
Added to 40-man: July 6, 2012
MLB Debut: September 8, 2010 (PIT)
MLB Service Time (through 2011): 118 days
Options Remaining: 0 (2011, 2010, 2009)
Contract (2012): ~League minimum
Trade Restrictions: -

Thanks, so in his case, he cannot be sent down, has to be DFA'd and since he is doing quite well and is cheap, there is 0 chance he clears.

[Toe Nash]

Except it isn't that easy, and then you have no MIs. Yes guys like Ciriaco happen, but for every AAA guy who has a career year there are 26 other organizations where they don't. The fact that we pulled a lucky ticket in Ciriaco this year doesn't mean we can every year. Punto is a top 5 or so backup SS, he is every year. If he had sucked and we didn't have Punto we would have no backup at 2B or SS, and would have to make a trade to get one. That is a much bigger waste of assets than paying 1M per year extra for Punto's reliability.

This idea which several people have proposed, that you can always find a guy like Ciriaco to put up acceptable numbers in the bigs for the minimum is absolute bullshit with no evidence behind it, and arguing that it is the case simply because in this one rare instance it happened is at best disingenuous.

The reverse of this is that Punto sucks this year too (and 3 of the last 4 years he's had a 71 OPS+ or worse), and so why again are we guaranteeing him two years?

I totally understand the value of a backup IF who knows his role, hit a little bit and who you can count on, I just don't think Punto is that guy, or so special at it that we needed to go out of our way to get him on the club. Some people apparently did, and still do.

Mea culpa on the Ciriaco options thing. Seeing people argue that Punto was a victim of BABIP and that we shouldn't ditch him made me see red.

[JakeRae]

Thanks, so in his case, he cannot be sent down, has to be DFA'd and since he is doing quite well and is cheap, there is 0 chance he clears.

Yeah. Every team in MLB is just dying to add a replacement level SS.

[Sprowl]

Yeah. Every team in MLB is just dying to add a replacement level SS.

A 26-year-old utility infielder with a major-league minimum salary, good baserunning skills, and defense that has been better than projected will get snapped up quickly enough.

[Plympton91]

A 26-year-old utility infielder with a major-league minimum salary, good baserunning skills, and defense that has been better than projected will get snapped up quickly enough.

I think the defensive stability is the key improvment, not the BABIP. If Ciriaco has really become more dependable with his hands and arm, then his range, versatility, and speed are enough to balance the difference in OBP with Punto. Punto got paid for OBP and defensive stability. Ciriaco's assets are speed and range. They're very different skill sets, but in a utility infielder most teams will value the ability to go out to SS and not embarrass yourself. If Ciriaco is no longer an error machine at 2B and SS, then he can be more valuable than Punto despite the likely 40 point difference in OBP once their BABIP are normalized.

[Koufax]

I'm not sure that we have seen effective range out of Pedro, but he does a nice job starting double plays when the grounder to him is not too challenging. He has a nice quick release to second base, and a strong accurate throw.

Most of all, though, he is the Houdini of the cheap hit like the game-winner he hit tonight. Just over the third baseman's head, good enough for a double that drove in the tying and winning runs.

[Koufax]

Now with twice as many home runs as Ellsbury. Go figure.

[Koufax]

Now with 200 at bats, the sample size is growing. He sports a .726 OPS, which is 60 point better than Aviles. He is somewhat erratic on defense, but seems to have some good tools that can be honed when he has a stable situation. So is he in the running for the starting SS position for 2013? It's pretty obvious that Jose Iglesias is not ready, and Xander Bogaerts is probably a year or more away from being ready. So is Pedro the placeholder for whomever comes next?

[Rudy Pemberton]

His approach at the plate is terrible, and his performance is unsustainable. He's been incredibly lucky. It's been a nice story and he can be a utility player, I guess, but under no circumstances can this guy be a starting anything on a major league club.