Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Photo

Sox "closing in on" Jonny Gomes


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
219 replies to this topic

#51 Clears Cleaver


  • SoSH Member


  • 8,540 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 05:57 PM

I was thinking 2/5 or 2/6 was reasonable. 2/10 seems exceptionally high.

As for the Tulo and Cargo thing, has that been seen as something realistic or are you just spitballing? If it's real, I'd be all over. As a spitball, it's no worse than my dream of trading for Rizzo and Starlin Castro.


since he isgning early, I suspect the sox are overpaying. And the Tulo/cargo think is a spitball, nothing else. But there is no way they can get their payroll over $150-$160M in the FA market, they'd have to trade for a couple of big contracts and Tulo/Cargo came to mind

#52 j44thor

  • 4,289 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 05:59 PM

This seems like a signing the early 90's Sox would make. Pay market value for a 1-tool player coming off a career season at age 31.

Signing him for a song in February is one thing. Deciding that Jonny freaking Gomes has to be part of the 25 for the next 2yrs seems a little rushed at this point.

#53 Gash Prex

  • 1,172 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 06:10 PM

Does it really matter when the "overpay" is only for 2 years and probably very little money as compared to the total payroll? Its not a 7 year 142 million dollar contract.

#54 Trautwein's Degree


  • a Connecticut bicycle attorney in General Motor's Court


  • 10,143 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 07:14 PM

Does it really matter when the "overpay" is only for 2 years and probably very little money as compared to the total payroll? Its not a 7 year 142 million dollar contract.


It does matter. Ben should have learned his lesson with Nick Punto. It's not about paying Gomes. The Sox can do that. It is a waste of organizational resources in other ways. Namely, he he's not very good nor is he very useful to the Sox and he's going to occupy a roster spot. He's not going to be on the Pawtucket shuttle. He'll be on the 25 man roster. That means he'll play. Signing him at all is troubling. Signing him for 2 years is Punto level stupid.

#55 Rasputin


  • Will outlive SeanBerry


  • 26,421 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 07:18 PM

It does matter. Ben should have learned his lesson with Nick Punto. It's not about paying Gomes. The Sox can do that. It is a waste of organizational resources in other ways. Namely, he he's not very good nor is he very useful to the Sox and he's going to occupy a roster spot. He's not going to be on the Pawtucket shuttle. He'll be on the 25 man roster. That means he'll play. Signing him at all is troubling. Signing him for 2 years is Punto level stupid.


You're going a bit overboard. Punto was useless. Gomes is merely uninteresting in any meaningful fashion.

#56 Trautwein's Degree


  • a Connecticut bicycle attorney in General Motor's Court


  • 10,143 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 07:32 PM

You're going a bit overboard. Punto was useless. Gomes is merely uninteresting in any meaningful fashion.


Rebuilding this roster does not start with signing Jonny Gomes. How is Jonny Gomes useful to this team? He's a guy you get in August if you're making a playoff run and need a guy to start against a tough lefty or neutralize another team's best LH reliever. Essentially Gomes is the solution to problems the Sox don't have.

It's really a terrible start to this offseason for the front office. They've had the luxury to plan for 2013 since June of 2012. And Ben's opening act is Jonny Fucking Gomes?

Edited by Trautwein's Degree, 21 November 2012 - 07:34 PM.


#57 j44thor

  • 4,289 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 07:36 PM

No the opening act was David Ross, a slightly more useful albeit considerably older player that will also be a part-timer.
This combined with the Gomes signing really leaves one wondering what the "plan" is.

#58 Skiponzo

  • 907 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 07:52 PM

The plan is to be a peripheral wildcard competitor in 2013 and to really compete in 2014. Not to hard to understand really.

#59 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28,704 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 07:52 PM

The thing with Ross and Gomes is that they are both guys coming of solid years that rank among their best, and given their age, are unlikely to be repeated. They are both players that were available for next to nothing not that long ago; I'd like to think that really smart organizations find these kinda of players for cheap, and lets someone else commit multiple years at more money to them (replacing them with similar but cheaper players). For the most part, Ben seems to have a pattern of buying high and selling low; these guys are fine as complementary players on a good team, but what is the immediate future of this team? It's really hard to tell, and the rumors that the Sox are in on everyone doesn't make it any clearer.

#60 Trautwein's Degree


  • a Connecticut bicycle attorney in General Motor's Court


  • 10,143 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 07:52 PM

No the opening act was David Ross, a slightly more useful albeit considerably older player that will also be a part-timer.
This combined with the Gomes signing really leaves one wondering what the "plan" is.


Their plan is to be good in 2015. It used to be to make the playoffs 8 out of 10 seasons. Now it's to make the playoffs in ten seasons.

#61 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28,704 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 07:54 PM

The plan is to be a peripheral wildcard competitor in 2013 and to really compete in 2014. Not to hard to understand really.


That assumes that all of the young talent develops as planned and is immediately ready to make an impact. I mean, who will be on the '14 team but not the '13? Wasn't there a chat on SOSH with some media figure who claimed the Sox brass thought they'd be good in '11 but great in '12?

#62 Skiponzo

  • 907 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 08:03 PM

What are the alternatives? Sign Hamilton, Sanchez and Greinke this offseason to 6+ year deals at high dollars?

I think the idea to fill in the 2013 gaps with value signings (and IF a truely great player becomes available go after him) then wait to see if/when our system produces MLB talent for "The Next Great Red Sox Team" is sound. It just sucks that we've had to deal with 14+ months of crap baseball and were looking at 12+ months more of...OK baseball.

#63 Skiponzo

  • 907 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 08:08 PM

That assumes that all of the young talent develops as planned and is immediately ready to make an impact. I mean, who will be on the '14 team but not the '13?


Bradley, Webster, Barnes, DLR, Brentz, and this guy who plays short who's name escapes me. Are they all going to be impact players in 2014? No...but chances are they will be decent players who will improve as the season progresses. Will they progrss into 2014 post season impact players? Who knows....but it appears to be their plan.

#64 Rasputin


  • Will outlive SeanBerry


  • 26,421 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 08:14 PM

Rebuilding this roster does not start with signing Jonny Gomes. How is Jonny Gomes useful to this team? He's a guy you get in August if you're making a playoff run and need a guy to start against a tough lefty or neutralize another team's best LH reliever. Essentially Gomes is the solution to problems the Sox don't have.


The Sox currently have one outfielder. They need more than that.

It's really a terrible start to this offseason for the front office. They've had the luxury to plan for 2013 since June of 2012. And Ben's opening act is Jonny Fucking Gomes?


It's neither terrible, nor the start.

He's a fucking cog in the whole apparatus and not remotely the most important one. Why you're getting all huffy about it befuddles me.

#65 Savin Hillbilly


  • SoSH Member


  • 11,952 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 08:16 PM

I'd like to think that really smart organizations find these kinda of players for cheap


Do we have contract terms yet? The only thing I've heard that we have to go on is Heyman saying Gomes was looking for $3-4M a year.

#66 Trautwein's Degree


  • a Connecticut bicycle attorney in General Motor's Court


  • 10,143 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 08:19 PM

The Sox currently have one outfielder. They need more than that.



It's neither terrible, nor the start.

He's a fucking cog in the whole apparatus and not remotely the most important one. Why you're getting all huffy about it befuddles me.


How many times can the front office feed you bowls of crap before you stop asking for seconds?

#67 absintheofmalaise


  • too many flowers


  • 11,204 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 08:24 PM

How many times can the front office feed you bowls of crap before you stop asking for seconds?

If you want to have a conversation about this quit acting like a kid who didn't get what he wanted under the tree on Christmas and post rationally please.

#68 j44thor

  • 4,289 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 08:26 PM

The Sox currently have one outfielder. They need more than that.


If they were signing a competent OF I wouldn't have any problem but last time I checked we have our DH for the next 2 yrs.

#69 Cellar-Door


  • SoSH Member


  • 6,318 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 08:26 PM

Johnny Gomes is unexciting, and they probably didn't get a bargain on him, but he is the kind of signing they should make. They need at least 2 OF this offseason, and at least one has to hit lefties well. Gomes does that, he isn't terribly expensive and locking him up now gives you more flexibility going forward with that last OF spot.
You can't rebuild this team into a world series favorite in one offseason there aren't the FA available, and trades would just strip the system bare. They need to get solid major league players on short term deals and target one or two stars in FA and by trade. Would anyone be complaining if we had resigned Cody Ross to this deal? Ross is certainly a better fielder, but is that worth paying more in years and dollars in competition with other teams for your part time left fielder?

#70 Snodgrass'Muff


  • smarter as Lucen


  • 21,375 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 08:26 PM

I think people need to be prepared for a marginal or worse 2013. There is certainly time for the Sox to go out and make a big splash on the free agent market, but it's entirely possible that while they're saying all the right things, that the plan is actually to hang back next season to give the kids another season or so to develop before making any long term changes or additions to the roster.

There is a chance they could have a class of 2005 level influx of talent with the current crop. It's not a great chance, but it's probably worth being merely "competitive" in 2013 to see how that's going to start shaking out before expending those resources on trying to get back to the top of the division in 2013. The free agent class this winter is fairly weak compared to what we've seen in the past. At least at the top. I'm not really all that upset to see them going for short term value signings early in the winter.

Signing Gomes is not a terrible move. It's not the difference between a playoff team and a non-playoff team, it's just a warm body that doesn't flat out suck to keep the bench warm for something better next year or the year after. I mean, it's between 3 and 5 million a year. The team can afford to swallow all of it or part of it to clear that spot for Bradley, Brentz, Ellsbury (if he stays) or a free agent (if Ells leaves). At worst we're looking at 2/10. Seriously... let's step back from the ledge and acknowledge that this might take more than one winter to fix. And that's OK.

#71 j44thor

  • 4,289 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 08:45 PM

I'd much rather they look for the next Pedro Ciriaco than tie up a roster spot on someone with zero upside. Not that Ciriaco is necessarily better but at least there is that possibility.

#72 Corsi


  • isn't shy about blowing his wad early


  • 10,563 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 08:51 PM

2 years / $ 10 million for Gomes

#73 someoneanywhere

  • 3,181 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 08:57 PM

I take it this way: they sign Gomes -- who I think people will like much like they liked Ross: he's a grinder with a dirt-dog attitude -- for one year less than Ross was seeking. He will platoon in left, with a particularly devastating line against LHPs; unlike Ross, he can also do some damage on the road. While this isn't an overly existing signing, it is a competent one. Let's see what they do with RF before we decide this sucks.

#74 Snodgrass'Muff


  • smarter as Lucen


  • 21,375 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 08:57 PM

What's going to stop them from trading or cutting him if something better comes along? The financial flexibility they have allows them to grab filler guys early while still targeting more expensive players later if they want. Would it be the end of the world for Gomes to end up the 4th or 5th outfielder? They likely won't be anywhere near the luxury tax threshold next season, so overpaying for a bench player isn't likely to be a big deal.

There are a lot of reasons to sign guys like Gomes. I really don't get all the outrage. At most it's 2 years at an amount they can afford to swallow.

Edited by Snodgrass'Muff, 21 November 2012 - 08:58 PM.


#75 Seels

  • 1,527 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 09:32 PM

2 years / $ 10 million for Gomes


Jesus christ. How is this better than just signing AAAA filler like Darnell McDonald?

#76 Darnell's Son

  • 4,919 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 09:40 PM

Jesus christ. How is this better than just signing AAAA filler like Darnell McDonald?


Amen.

#77 Yaz4Ever


  • Please hire me!


  • 8,735 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 09:45 PM

2 years / $ 10 million for Gomes


If this is true, I don't see how Ben has learned anything.

#78 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28,704 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 09:52 PM

Jesus christ. How is this better than just signing AAAA filler like Darnell McDonald?


Gomes was filler as recently as last year. The Sox have zero major league ready talent that can play corner outfield so they have to give Gomes 10M. Ridiculous, but as long as they can keep feeding people the belief that hope is right around the corner, they'll sell tickets. At what point so we recognize Cherington is a terrible GM?

These moves, coupled with the rumors of being in on any and very player available, looks to me like a team that is doing just enough to make it look like its trying.

Edited by Rudy Pemberton, 21 November 2012 - 09:55 PM.


#79 Sprowl


  • mikey lowell of the sandbox


  • 21,423 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 09:52 PM

How many times can the front office feed you bowls of crap before you stop asking for seconds?




I'd much rather they look for the next Pedro Ciriaco than tie up a roster spot on someone with zero upside. Not that Ciriaco is necessarily better but at least there is that possibility.


I agree. If the team wants to take a flyer on a long shot, make him a long shot in his twenties, not his thirties, and for the major-league minimum.

At most it's 2 years at an amount they can afford to swallow.


I heard exactly the same argument for Nick Punto. Cody Ross was 1/3m after an off year. Gomes will be be 2/ :gonk: after a career year.

Buy low, not high.

#80 Savin Hillbilly


  • SoSH Member


  • 11,952 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 09:56 PM

Jesus christ. How is this better than just signing AAAA filler like Darnell McDonald?


Jonny Gomes career wOBA: .342. Darnell McDonald career wOBA: .312.
Jonny Gomes career wOBA vs. LHP: .385. Darnell McDonald career wOBA vs. LHP: .343.

That's how it's better.

People, Gomes has his limits, but he's a decent hitter vs. everybody, and an excellent hitter vs. LHP. Can we stop comparing him to people like McDonald and Punto, for Christ's sake?

If this is true, I don't see how Ben has learned anything.


Please explain exactly what it is that you think Ben is supposed to have learned, and exactly how this contract demonstrates he hasn't learned it. Because this "Transaction X means Ben hasn't learned his lesson" meme has already gotten really, really old.

#81 Snodgrass'Muff


  • smarter as Lucen


  • 21,375 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 09:59 PM

I heard exactly the same argument for Nick Punto. Cody Ross was 1/3m after an off year. Gomes will be be 2/ :gonk: after a career year.

Buy low, not high.


The difference is that last year they had a full roster and no money to spend. If anyone actually made that argument they were full of shit. The team has one major league outfielder signed before this deal. One.

#82 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28,704 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:05 PM

Yes, they needed outfielders, but why Gomes? He sucks defensively, which maybe doesn't matter anymore for a franchise that seems to change philosophies suddenly. Would you have given Gomes that deal last year? If not, why now? The stuff about him being a great character guy is what you always hear when a team makes a significant overpay. It is by no means a crippling contract but its really hard to get excited about; and hell, it never would have been necessary had Cherington not botched the Reddick deal last year. Guess its just the beginning and we'll see how the pieces fit, but when you win 69 games and see other teams in the division getting better, these moves look kind of like the moves the Orioles, Royals, and Pirates used to make.

#83 Snodgrass'Muff


  • smarter as Lucen


  • 21,375 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:10 PM

No one is arguing we should be excited about Jonny Gomes. He's roster filler. This contract isn't going to sink the team and if they utilize him well, he could end up an above average producer on the field.

#84 Savin Hillbilly


  • SoSH Member


  • 11,952 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:10 PM

I agree. If the team wants to take a flyer on a long shot, make him a long shot in his twenties, not his thirties, and for the major-league minimum.


The "buy low, not high" argument is well taken, but this one, not so much. If there's one thing Gomes isn't, it's a long shot. He has definite, severe limits. They are bankable. So are his virtues. You can absolutely count on him to mash lefties and suck on defense. His offense vs. RHP is more variable, but you know it won't be great. As long as you're using him primarily as a platoon player, you know what you're getting. And the offense vs. LHP is so good that $5M is at worst a very mild overpay.

#85 ScubaSteveAvery


  • the goats! think of the goats!


  • 7,217 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:10 PM

The outrage here is really perplexing. Ross is stated to want three years at over $20 million. Ross is an average defender who only hits well at Fenway Park. He is absolutely awful on the road. The good is that he's great at Fenway and crushes lefties. But last year that accounted for a grand total of 150 PA (against LHP - no clue about LHP at Fenway Park). The rest of his 378 PA against righties saw a paltry .729 OPS (.308/.422). He is like a quarter time platoon player who wants to play and get paid like a full time player.

Gomes is a player who will hit well at Fenway (though, not Ross well), and hit well on the road. He will get schooled by RHP, but crush LHP. But, the difference is that there is no expectation that he will start, and will most likely be happy with a platoon. He is also being paid like a platoon player to boot. $5 million a year is nothing to fret about.

Some other nice things about Gomes is that he has posted elite walk rates his last two years of 12.9% and 13.2%. One of the troubling trends we've seen in the past three years is the propensity of the FO to shy away from high walk players. There is evidence that this boost in walk rate is because of an adjustment in plate approach:

J Gomes Plate Discipline
Jonny Gomes PitchFX Plate Discipline
Year O-Swing Z-Swing BB%
2008 34.20% 63.60% 8.50%
2009 31.40% 64.50% 8.40%
2010 35.00% 68.50% 6.80%
2011 24.50% 50.40% 12.90%
2012 24.90% 50.50% 13.20%


Starting in 2011 he started swinging a lot less both inside and outside the zone. More selectivity at the plate most likely resulted in more walks, as evidenced by the jump in walk rates. I think one of the big positives is that an aging player adjusted his approach to stay in the league longer. The only thing we don't know is what his true performance is over these last two years. His BABIP was unusually low in 2011 at .259, while unsustainably high in 2012 at .348. I actually think Bill James projections for him are about right, which make Gomes an average player at getting on base - not bad for $5 million a year.

Two things jump out at me as things to be concerned about. The first is his decline in contact rate. The second is his high strikeout rate. Both are concerning, and bear watching. If Gomes is used as a platoon by Farrell then he'll be fine and I like the signing - he gets on base, has good power, and crushes lefties.

Edit: Cleaned up last sentence.

Edited by ScubaSteveAvery, 21 November 2012 - 10:17 PM.


#86 Toe Nash

  • 3,214 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:14 PM

I'd much rather they look for the next Pedro Ciriaco than tie up a roster spot on someone with zero upside. Not that Ciriaco is necessarily better but at least there is that possibility.

This is where I'm at. Aren't there a ton of guys potentially available for little money or value in trade that have the upside of Jonny Gomes or better? If the plan is 2014, then why not look for those guys since it won't really matter if they suck? Particularly, why are you filling up your spots that are low on the defensive spectrum?

If the plan is 2013, they're going to need more than Gomes. And given the FA market, I worry about that prospect.

#87 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28,704 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:15 PM

If they are paying Gomes 5M to play just against lefties, who is playing vs righties, and what are they paying that guy?

Gomes made 1M last year, Ross made 3M. That suggests to me you should be able to find a guy who can do the job for quite a bit less than 2 / $10M (although you probably can't do it in November).

Signing Gomes is better than giving Ross what he wants but that doesn't make it a good move.

#88 wade boggs chicken dinner


  • SoSH Member


  • 7,033 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:16 PM

Yes, they needed outfielders, but why Gomes? He sucks defensively, which maybe doesn't matter anymore for a franchise that seems to change philosophies suddenly. Would you have given Gomes that deal last year? If not, why now?

Why now? Because they have the payroll flexibility to give people more money on a shorter deal. At least, I thought that was last month's meme.

In other words, I think I'd rather have Gomes on a 2-yr/overpay than Ross on a 3-yr/underpay.

#89 Snodgrass'Muff


  • smarter as Lucen


  • 21,375 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:20 PM

This is where I'm at. Aren't there a ton of guys potentially available for little money or value in trade that have the upside of Jonny Gomes or better? If the plan is 2014, then why not look for those guys since it won't really matter if they suck? Particularly, why are you filling up your spots that are low on the defensive spectrum?

If the plan is 2013, they're going to need more than Gomes. And given the FA market, I worry about that prospect.


In one post you argue that there have to be a "ton of guys" better than Gomes available and then that the free agent pool is weak enough that you worry about the team's ability to compete in 2013. You can't have it both ways.

If they are paying Gomes 5M to play just against lefties, who is playing vs righties, and what are they paying that guy?

Gomes made 1M last year, Ross made 3M. That suggests to me you should be able to find a guy who can do the job for quite a bit less than 2 / $10M (although you probably can't do it in November).

Signing Gomes is better than giving Ross what he wants but that doesn't make it a good move.


This is only true if last year's market is the same as this year's market. That there was an option like Gomes available for 3 million last winter does not mean one is available this winter.

#90 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28,704 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:27 PM

He hits lefties and plays shit defense in LF; it's hardly a unique skill set. There will be lots of players who produce more than Gomes at a fraction of the cost, hell I'm sure the A's will find one to replace Gomes. Regardless, I think the organization is hesitant to wait too long to fill the roster out; they have so little major league talent right now that they likely feel pressured to make moves, sell tickets, etc.

#91 ScubaSteveAvery


  • the goats! think of the goats!


  • 7,217 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:33 PM

He hits lefties and plays shit defense in LF; it's hardly a unique skill set. There will be lots of players who produce more than Gomes at a fraction of the cost, hell I'm sure the A's will find one to replace Gomes. Regardless, I think the organization is hesitant to wait too long to fill the roster out; they have so little major league talent right now that they likely feel pressured to make moves, sell tickets, etc.


Do you mind telling us who these cheap players are? Jonny Gomes is an average player at getting on base, which is more valuable than a replacement player "with upside" that you recommend getting. Finding average offensive players for cheap is value. The other side of that platoon can be Nava, which means that LF is covered for about $6 million a year. I'm not sure what is there to hate. I'm not jumping for joy, but I don't see why this move is looked at so negatively.

#92 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28,704 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:42 PM

Why is Gomes worth 5X more now than he was last offseason, for twice as long? That's what I don't get. Because of a high average on balls in play and newly recognized abilities in the clubhouse? This guy has had a lot of lousy years, will it shock anyone of he goes back to being a below average player? Probably overreacting but Ben doesn't get the benefit of the doubt based on his track record.

That being said, this probably isn't a desirable destination right now, and the Sox are in a position where they have to overpay to bring guys aboard, so maybe there's value in bringing in players who have the right mindset to get the clubhouse in order, or something.

Edited by Rudy Pemberton, 21 November 2012 - 10:47 PM.


#93 ScubaSteveAvery


  • the goats! think of the goats!


  • 7,217 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:47 PM

Why is Gomes worth 5X more now than he was last offseason, for twice as long? That's what I don't get. Because of a high average on balls in play and newly recognized abilities in the clubhouse? This guy has had a lot of lousy years, will it shock anyone of he goes back to being a below average player? Probably overreacting but Ben doesn't get the benefit of the doubt based on his track record.


Did you see my earlier post? He has changed his plate approach drastically to be more selective at the plate, resulting in more walks. Those will come in handy especially if his contact rate continues to fall. Bill James projects his BABIP to be .305 which is reasonable, and his wOBA to be .331, which is average. Again, I think that is a fair wOBA to project for Gomes, who is a lower average/high walk player now.

Plus, you didn't answer my question. Who are those available replacement players "with upside" that you wanted Ben to sign on the cheap?

#94 Toe Nash

  • 3,214 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:00 PM

In one post you argue that there have to be a "ton of guys" better than Gomes available and then that the free agent pool is weak enough that you worry about the team's ability to compete in 2013. You can't have it both ways.

Nope. I guess I have to be more clear.

There are likely guys with upside as good or better (including the value of defense) that they could find. Like a Daniel Nava with better D, or you know, a guy like...Jonny Gomes last year who was acquired for $1 mil. Maybe they have a 30% chance of getting one. But if you're not planning to compete in 2013 why not try a few of those guys out?

Or they're trying to compete in 2013 with Gomes as a solid bench guy, which I'm afraid of not because the FA pool is weak but because it's top-heavy. That would mean they're likely to overpay for one of the top prizes, like Josh Hamilton. That wouldn't be good.

Or they just signed a decent bat guy to improve from an 80-win team to an 81-win team. Which doesn't make sense.

Anyway, it's not going to kill the team. I just don't see it as a good move and I don't see why it had to be done today.

#95 Cellar-Door


  • SoSH Member


  • 6,318 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:04 PM

Why are people upset that we got a slightly better hitting, worse defensive Cody Ross?
We don't need to go scrounging for young guys with hypothetical higher ceilings but lower floors, we already have them in Kalish, Sands etc.
What we needed was a guy who we knew wouldn't suck against lefties and could get on base.
The idea that we should go looking for a Daniel Nava (we have him, he's the shittier lefty Jonny Gomes) or Pedro Ciriaco (a AAAA player) Makes no sense to me, those guys best case scenario is as good as Gomes maybe a tiny bit better, their downside is greater. Do we really think with our payroll that it is vital to save the $3-4 million and put a worse team on the field?

Edited by Cellar-Door, 21 November 2012 - 11:05 PM.


#96 ScubaSteveAvery


  • the goats! think of the goats!


  • 7,217 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:10 PM

Nope. I guess I have to be more clear.

There are likely guys with upside as good or better (including the value of defense) that they could find. Like a Daniel Nava with better D, or you know, a guy like...Jonny Gomes last year who was acquired for $1 mil. Maybe they have a 30% chance of getting one. But if you're not planning to compete in 2013 why not try a few of those guys out?


I'll ask the same question that I asked Rudy, because I'm genuinely curious. Who are those players?

#97 LondonSox


  • Robert the Deuce


  • 5,239 posts

Posted 22 November 2012 - 12:23 AM

I live in Petaluma now so the only local player in the bigs playing for my team is nice. He was pretty awesome for helping the little league team and helping the parents get there etc. which makes him a decent human I guess.

Other than that I don't get the price. He's been a platoon/ bench guy for most of his career, I have no issue signing guys like that even for two years but 5 million a year? Huh.

#98 someoneanywhere

  • 3,181 posts

Posted 22 November 2012 - 04:50 AM

Anyway, it's not going to kill the team. I just don't see it as a good move and I don't see why it had to be done today.


This is my point upthread: wait until they solve right field before we rush to judgement. What you pay for a player does not depend on a static market. What you pay depends on when you get into the market. They paid high on Ross to give them flexibilty at catcher. They paid high on Gomes to have certainty with one of their needs. (Once Hunter and those guys signed, the market started moving on the lesser guys. The Sox have no control over that.)

They could dumpster dive in January, but in January you may not get a LH masher.

You buy certainty now, not just the player. And that certainty helps you set the agenda for how you might handle things at the winter meetings.

#99 sfip


  • directly related to Marilyn Monroe


  • 7,524 posts

Posted 22 November 2012 - 06:22 AM

I'll ask the same question that I asked Rudy, because I'm genuinely curious. Who are those players?


It says something that nobody is answering this.

Edited by sfip, 22 November 2012 - 06:22 AM.


#100 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28,704 posts

Posted 22 November 2012 - 07:28 AM

It's hard to say who those guys are- they are more likely to be non-tenders, minor league free agents, or traded targets as opposed to major league free agents, and they are players that will sign in February, not November. Lets revisit this before the year starts, when we see what players sign or are acquired for.