219 replies to this topic

[erfus]

Regarding getting good clubhouse guys, I get it, but isn't it a little scary? I mean, I never heard anything about Gomes presence when he was on crappy Rays teams, not did I hear muh about Ross's presence with his first Red Sox stint. I certainly think you want good clubhouse guys, but I hope the Sox aren't placing a premium on that highly subjective attribute.

Gomes seems like an idiot, but I suppose now that he's our idiot he becomes "colorful" or even more preferably a throwback to the successful Idiots. But, certainly going back to 2008 when he was escalating brawls between the Rays and Sox he wasn't particularly cared for. Gomes has a bit of history of that (especially with Shelley Duncan for some reason). The rumors that he celebrated Adam Wainwright's injury. The Deadspin article: http://deadspin.com/...bag-in-baseball which was quickly followed up by an opposite view: http://deadspin.com/...omes-is-awesome

None of it says he's not a good clubhouse guy. It just indicates he is a bit unstable.

[HangingW/ScottCooper]

For what it's worth, per Fan Graphs Gomes was worth $6.6 million in 2011 and $9.7 in 2012.

[jimbotomy]

Not all role players are created equal. It is entirely worth paying an extra million or so per year to get a role player with the skills you need. The Red Sox have had a well documented suckage in the area of getting on base. Oh hey, look, Jonny Gomes gets on base. When you combine him in a platoon with Daniel Nava, you have a guy who gets on base really, really well.

Breaking that down a bit:

Nava vs. RH last season had 220 PA with a 270/386/416 line.
Gomes vs. LH last season had 196 PA with a 299/413/561 line.

Back in 2011 Dustin Pedroia played 159 games, and had 507 PA versus righties and 215 PA versus lefties. If you assume that's a typical pitcher distribution, assume Nava performs as well versus RH as he did last season and Gomes performs as well versus LH as he did last season, you have the following:

Nava: 507 PA, 115 H, 41 2B, 7 HR, 270/386/416
Gomes: 215 PA, 54 H, 11 2B, 12 HR, 299/413/561
Total: 722 PA, 169 H, 52 2B, 19 HR, 279/394/459

Personally, what I like that Gomes takes over 4 pitches per AB, but that's my idiosyncrasy.

[sachilles]

Keep in mind that it is the pitching distribution but it accounts for relief pitching staff as well. Ideally you have both face pitchers based on their strength. There will have to be occasions where they both have to face pitchers from their weak side. The total PA may remain at 722, but not all from the side of strength. So it is likely those numbers come down in each category.

[someoneanywhere]

I don't think Jonny Gomes and $10 MM are actually a good/bad enough player/contract to worry too much about.

However, I did want to address what I see as a relatively specious argument - the one about how if the Red Sox had signed him late in the off-season noone would care. I think this part is true. But I don't think the logical leap to "so you shouldn't care now" is relevant in any way. Here are the reasons.

First, I want to refer to the Apocryphal story of the college professor and the jar of rocks. You all know it if you have been on the internet. That whole thing where you put the big things in the jar first, and the smallest things last, and that way you don't fill up the jar with little things. To me Gomes is a little thing. So it makes a lot of sense to fill that in at the end. It doesn't make as much sense to make him the first thing in the jar. In this way I think it is perfectly acceptable to bemoan the signing in November even if you would not bemoan it in January.

Second, late off-season signings are typically a lot easier to swallow because the possible moves have been explored, etc. So if you sign Jonny Gomes on January 3 you can probably trust that other things have gone on. Signing him early and to a contract that is at the top of the market for Gomes means that the Sox had targeted him and that he is part of whatever plan they have put together. Putting it another way - I'm sure even the people in hysterics would be far more accepting of Gomes as Plan C than as Plan A.

These two things together get at Rudy's point about other available players. OK if you miss out on Gomes because he found a suitor in November, you should be flexible and smart enough to find value elsewhere in December. Jonny Gomes just isn't the type of player that you *have to have* to make the team work. And the fact that they signed him early and to his market value (maybe a slight overpay) is an indication that they felt he was one of those types of players.

But that supposes a predictable market. We don't know what would have been there in January. I agree it means Gomes was targeted -- I've said all along this was a Gomes v. Ross decision -- but it's fair to assume that he was also targeted by other teams. So waiting until January to get a platoon OF who happens to mash left handers at home and on the road, and who will really mash them at home and perhaps see an uptick in mashing against righties at home, perhaps wasn't a rock on the table.

It also supposes we can see all the rocks. We can't. If this move is prelude to a deal or two at the winter meetings -- and the certainty of filling a need was a necessity before the winter meetings -- we'll know more about why him, and why now, in December. But right now we see only the jar, and not what might go into it.

For all of that, I am more intrigued by board angst over Jonny Gomes than I am by Jonny Gomes.

[jimbotomy]

Of course. You won't get those numbers over a season because if you're up 8-1 and the other team brings in a left hander to mop up, why take Nava out? But if you're down 3-2 in the eighth and a left hander comes in, of course you're going to swap Nava for Gomes. It's a sense of what measure of hitter you'll get on average in meaningful situations. I would guess the only meaningful at bats either Nava or Gomes would take against their weak side would be in extra innings where the swap had already been made, or when one has the day off for some reason. Assuming they both stay healthy.

[smastroyin]

You're completely missing my point, but you're pretty smart so I'm just going to go ahead and assume I'm not making it correctly.

The point isn't whether Jonny Gomes would be available in January. The point is whether a Jonny Gomes equivalent would be available in January. And I don't mean lefty masher (which is more fungible that people credit). I mean a guy who can add 1-2 wins to the back end of the roster. There are a lot of ways to get that if you are smart, and I don't think picking a guy with this specific skill set when there are so many other things to address is really a great way to spend your day.

All of that said, I agree in principle with the idea that he's not going to hurt anything even at $5 million per. I just don't agree with the argument of "if you would not be against this signing in January you can't be against it now."

[redsoxstiff]

Many good points on both sides except fo money...not significant...

There is so much that Gomes lacks and it is so early ..maybe FO still has the collective heads in the dark reachs of the anus...

Edited by redsoxstiff, 25 November 2012 - 02:38 PM.

[Cellar-Door]

You're completely missing my point, but you're pretty smart so I'm just going to go ahead and assume I'm not making it correctly.

The point isn't whether Jonny Gomes would be available in January. The point is whether a Jonny Gomes equivalent would be available in January. And I don't mean lefty masher (which is more fungible that people credit). I mean a guy who can add 1-2 wins to the back end of the roster. There are a lot of ways to get that if you are smart, and I don't think picking a guy with this specific skill set when there are so many other things to address is really a great way to spend your day.

All of that said, I agree in principle with the idea that he's not going to hurt anything even at $5 million per. I just don't agree with the argument of "if you would not be against this signing in January you can't be against it now."

If you know you need a guy who will add a few wins why not get him now though? If you know the top end guys aren't going to sign until after the meetings why not get your pick of the bench guys, A lefty mashing OF is a clear need since most of our OFs under team control can't hit lefties.
Rather than sorting through the scraps late the Red Sox went out and got the best fit for them because they could offer him a million or two more early to get him locked up. It isn't like the Red Sox said "Oh sorry Mike Napoli, we can't talk contracts, we're too busy with Jonny Gomes." You get deals done whenever you can, the front office can look at lots of things at once.

Edited by Cellar-Door, 24 November 2012 - 04:34 PM.

[Papelbon's Poutine]

You're completely missing my point, but you're pretty smart so I'm just going to go ahead and assume I'm not making it correctly.

The point isn't whether Jonny Gomes would be available in January. The point is whether a Jonny Gomes equivalent would be available in January. And I don't mean lefty masher (which is more fungible that people credit). I mean a guy who can add 1-2 wins to the back end of the roster. There are a lot of ways to get that if you are smart, and I don't think picking a guy with this specific skill set when there are so many other things to address is really a great way to spend your day.

All of that said, I agree in principle with the idea that he's not going to hurt anything even at $5 million per. I just don't agree with the argument of "if you would not be against this signing in January you can't be against it now."

2 honest questions for people taking this stance:

1. How much time/resources of Ben and the FO at large do you think were consumed by this signing?
2. What specific move would you have preferred to see made by the same date that would be considerably more impacting?

I ask the first because while we all have little to no knowledge of who worked this deal and for how long, I'm of the mind that it likely did not preclude them from something bigger and better, nor does his presence prevent them from making any other moves. I'd be willing to bet the majority of it was handled by Hazen, Baird or O'Halloran, but that's purely pulled out of my ass. If we have reason to believe that Ben eat, drank and slept Jonny Gomes for three weeks or has had a Lugo-esque infatuation with him for years, then sure, your point is valid and I would agree. But I would seriously doubt either is the case and I fail to see how such a small, simple signing would pull away from bigger matters in any drastic sense.

I ask the second because I genuinely want to know what people want this FO to do? I know there is no consensus but other than signings like this what was expected before the winter meetings? Trades don't happen before that generally. Big signing will be delayed even further this year because team have money to burn, agents know it and they're demands are sky high. $100+ for Sanchez? 6 years for Hamilton? $13 per for Hunter? Did people want one of those? Olney and others predicted exactly this type of development - GMs will wait out the big guys and fill smaller holes now rather than in January. Argue that prediction as you will but it appears Ben is of a similar mindset and if with of them are correct, wouldn't you want to be out ahead of it? He couldn't go to the meetings and shop Salty unless he was comfortable with a replacement - give Ross a little extra and lock him up. Can't have one decent OF on the roster and not get bent over a barrel - give Gomes a little extra. Keep them short.

Fwiw, I don't have particularly strong feelings about Gomes either way but I honestly think the ZOMG!??!!!! Ben has learned nothing!! Reactions are a tad overdone (not aimed directly at you btw) and I just feel this FO can do no right. I don't see this signing deserving such intense scrutiny, but that may be because I don't see him viewed as a key cog and I flinch at thoughts of blockbuster trades and long term deals with this FA market (with the exception of Grienke).

Is it an overpay? Probably, at least empirically, but we don't know what the market was and it doesn't make a difference to anyone here nor the payroll to give him an extra million or two. Could a similar player have been discovered or signed in January? Maybe, maybe not, but at least he is a known quantity. Lefty mashers, I agree are not exactly rare but I disagree that they are fungible and if this team somehow finds a way to contend for a WC next year it will be because all the pieces are working. I'd rather not be wasting half the season trying to discover the $1m version of Jonny Gomes, only to then have to spend assets in trade when that guy doesn't pan out.

In short, to spend 3% of the payroll, and likely ten hours of work locking in a role player, I think is probably worth it when it could conceivably cost less money but a lot more time after the new year or at the deadline to find something you hope to be as good.

[someoneanywhere]

You're completely missing my point, but you're pretty smart so I'm just going to go ahead and assume I'm not making it correctly.

The point isn't whether Jonny Gomes would be available in January. The point is whether a Jonny Gomes equivalent would be available in January. And I don't mean lefty masher (which is more fungible that people credit). I mean a guy who can add 1-2 wins to the back end of the roster. There are a lot of ways to get that if you are smart, and I don't think picking a guy with this specific skill set when there are so many other things to address is really a great way to spend your day.

All of that said, I agree in principle with the idea that he's not going to hurt anything even at $5 million per. I just don't agree with the argument of "if you would not be against this signing in January you can't be against it now."

No, I follow you, smas. My contention is that they had come to focus on the OF issue -- not to the broader one of adding wins, which, as you note, they could do in any number of ways. (They could add wins. But they also need [and still need] outfielders.) Basically, it was Ross or Gomes. And I think they wanted that solved in advance of the winter meetings, when they will do or attempt to do some impactful things to address the other needs you mention.

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

No, I follow you, smas. My contention is that they had come to focus on the OF issue -- not to the broader one of adding wins, which, as you note, they could do in any number of ways. (They could add wins. But they also need [and still need] outfielders.) Basically, it was Ross or Gomes. And I think they wanted that solved in advance of the winter meetings, when they will do or attempt to do some impactful things to address the other needs you mention.

I agree with this, and to follow the point home: Yes, there are many ways to add wins to the ballclub, but there are finite positions at which you can make those additions. You can't get wins (via free agency, and barring a significant trade) with a second baseman, nor a third baseman, nor a DH, nor a center fielder. It would seem catcher is pretty full at this point as well. So, if you feel Kalish, Nava, Hassan, Sands, et al of the internal options are essentially replacement level, then you have at least three opportunities in the outfield to add wins.

Gomes adds 1-2 wins (I'm guessing). There are two other outfield slots for wins adding. Maybe a full season of Sweeney adds wins, or you think Kalish/Nava/Sands will improve and add wins and no longer be replacement level (I haven't actually looked at Kalish/Nava's WAR - I'm just positing that they seem to have been replacement level to me). But maybe you think you're going to fill your entire outfield with free agents, and so Gomes is just the first of three wins additions in the outfield, and why not lock up one of those three pieces now when you know there's still a good bit of work to do?

Further, maybe you've decided that Nava is a real major league player, but only if he has a lefty masher alongside him on the bench. Since Nava is cost-controlled, maybe you see Nava-Gomes as two $3m/yr players, and you think that's finding good value for the outfield. This lets you focus on one last splash outfielder a al Josh Hamilton to play right while not worrying you're totally fucked if he doesn't come through and Gomes signs with someone else.

The free agent class for outfielders is pretty weak, and if your internal scouting says the guys in AAA/Kalish/Nava aren't going to do the trick, I could see more reason to jump on Gomes. I would not necessarily advocate for this course, though. Personally, I think I'd probably punt on 2013 with the likes of Nava/Kalish/Sands, etc. and wait for Bradley and Brentz to be Rice and Lynn in 2014.

[SoxFanPJ]

I think it is easy to diss the Gomes signing in a vacuum. The way I look at it, we are seeing what should be a transformation of the MLB payroll landscape. The infusion of new TV money and additional revenue from MLBAM and other sources is giving more teams the ability to extend themselves financially.

At the same time because the CBA froze the luxury tax at $178 million for '11-13, you have the old guard big spenders like the Red Sox and Yankees trying to cut costs to avoid the punitive repeat offender penalties.

We should see another ratcheting up in 2014 when the Red Sox and potentially the Yankees have reset their luxury tax penalties. In 2014 the limit also climbs to $189 million.

All that to me means we are going to see a very inflated free agent market this off season with very limited talent available.

There is a value in the Red Sox of overpaying in order to lock in one of the pieces they need to fill in their roster because they have so many holes to fill. Sure you may get a much better deal later but you also may be left with a player you like a lot less and who may not be a fit for your team or ballpark.

This also allows them to focus elsewhere and hopefully precludes a long term overpay on any of the other OF free agents.

[SoxScout]

alexspeier: Cherington: Gomes will play a lot of LF, no determination yet of precise role.

[Edelpeddle]

For anyone who's curious, I broke down how many innings AL East teams got from left-handers last year. I was trying to figure out if the AL East has more or less lefthanders since Gomes kills lefties.

Baltimore: 34.2% of innings by left-handers
New York: 25.8% of innings by left-handers
Tampa Bay: 35.9% of innings by left-handers
Toronto: 36.1% of innings by left-handers

Not sure how this compares to the rest of MLB yet. I'm going to try to find an easier way to calculate that than doing it player by player.

[SoxScout]

I'm going to try to find an easier way to calculate that than doing it player by player.

http://www.baseball-...|2012|pitch|AB|
http://www.baseball-...|2012|pitch|AB|

Edited by SoxScout, 01 December 2012 - 06:50 PM.

[jon abbey]

For anyone who's curious, I broke down how many innings AL East teams got from left-handers last year. I was trying to figure out if the AL East has more or less lefthanders since Gomes kills lefties.

Baltimore: 34.2% of innings by left-handers
New York: 25.8% of innings by left-handers
Tampa Bay: 35.9% of innings by left-handers
Toronto: 36.1% of innings by left-handers

Not sure how this compares to the rest of MLB yet. I'm going to try to find an easier way to calculate that than doing it player by player.

NY will be higher next year assuming Pettitte stays healthy, last year he signed late, got hurt, and only ended up making 12 starts in the regular season.

[Edelpeddle]

http://www.baseball-...|2012|pitch|AB|
http://www.baseball-...|2012|pitch|AB|

Awesome, thanks!

[Edelpeddle]

NY will be higher next year assuming Pettitte stays healthy, last year he signed late, got hurt, and only ended up making 12 starts in the regular season.

The smart money would be against Pettitte staying healthy. Next year will be his age 41 season, he hasn't attempted to pitch a full season since 2010 and he hasn't been healthy a full season since 2008.

[jon abbey]

The smart money would be against Pettitte staying healthy. Next year will be his age 41 season, he hasn't attempted to pitch a full season since 2010 and he hasn't been healthy a full season since 2008.

Maybe, but the smart money would also be on him making more than 12 starts next year, which was my point. His injury last year was getting hit by a line drive in the ankle, nothing to do with his arm. And how was 2009 not a healthy full season for him? 32 regular season starts, 5 more in the postseason, including the clincher in each series.

Anyway, not trying to sidetrack, just making the small point that NY's percentage in that list will likely go up this year.