Hot Stove Rumors - The Fenway Edition
- Thread starter absintheofmalaise
- Start date
E5 Yaz said:
Not trying to sound snarky here, but I just figured it was common knowledge. Have you ever heard of a manager getting a huge amount of access on personnel moves? It's not in their job description. I know how SOSH likes every claim to be backed up with the proper annotations but this is the best I could do on short notice: http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2013/03/25/red-sox-have-some-decision-make/9QqUiFqaP2hDr9jN8ms3sM/story.html
Sure he can make recommendations or provide input, but that's pretty much like you or I providing input to our bosses. It's Ben's decision, not Ferrell's.
And he is now a World Series winning manager. There is zero chance that he isn't a part of the process.rembrat said:
BosRedSox5 said:
You're also possibly - there's no definitive here - coming at this the wrong way, guy. Instead of deciding this is Farrell speaking on his own and his opinion is just that, an opinion, it's worth considering that he has, in fact, been intimately involved with the front office in discussions about roster construction and actually is aware of the plan when it comes to playing JBJ.
I would suggest in a case like Bobby Valentine you'd be right - a loudmouth he says whatever pops into his brain - but in this case, Farrell is, as Reverend points out 9 times, the direct choice of the front office. This is likely to be something they have discussed; I find it harder to believe that he isn't aware of the philosophical approach the team is taking and even if you assume he is not necessarily aware of the specific choices the front office is working on, it's likely he knows what it is they are actually trying to do.
In fact, and this may be post-world series euphoria speaking - but I would go so far as to say if John Farrell is saying it then it's far more likely to actually be true. Over the last year he has impressed on me that he does not speak unless it is to say something that is actually the case.
Where Bobby Fucktard would have spewed a whismical nonstarter, Farrell's actual words on subjects are the exact opposite; statements with true meaning.
Where Bobby Fucktard would have spewed a whismical nonstarter, Farrell's actual words on subjects are the exact opposite; statements with true meaning.
My interpretation would mean power at a corner, period. Maybe corner OF, maybe 1B. All depends what the market makes available. They need a guy to bat behind Papi. If Napoli returns they have that guy. If not they need someone else at 1B or at a corner OF job to do the job, whatever way they can get it.geoduck no quahog said:
Absolutely. All throughout the playoffs whenever John Farrell said they were thinking about so-so for this position (Nava, Gomes, Xander, WMB etc) so-so was usually starting in the next game.
Not to derail this thread, but I think his comments and lineup choices throughout the playoffs also suggested that the team understood very well that's the Moneyball/"it will all average out according to the percentages" approach didn't work as well and the playoffs and that with such a small sample size you had the play the "hot hand"/strategy card a lot more than in the regular season.
The guy is a big player in the organization. He's not Art Howe.
Not to derail this thread, but I think his comments and lineup choices throughout the playoffs also suggested that the team understood very well that's the Moneyball/"it will all average out according to the percentages" approach didn't work as well and the playoffs and that with such a small sample size you had the play the "hot hand"/strategy card a lot more than in the regular season.
The guy is a big player in the organization. He's not Art Howe.
Drek717 said:
Why? I don't quite understand this. If you look at a run ike the late nineties Yankees, you see a lot of teams with typically average power. Yet those teams still scored plenty of runs. Obviously, the barometer for offense in that era was very different than it is now.
I didn't have a chance to address this last night, but at the Seminar, all of the Sox guys (Farrell, Tippett, Porter, Quattlebaum and Crockett) said that they work as a team. Scouting, player development, Cherington and Farrell. Trades, FA signings, promotions and demotions all need to make sense from an organizational standpoint. Yes, the final decision is made by Cherington, but he doesn't make them in a vacuum.BosRedSox5 said:
I'd imagine it comes down to the notion of power as superior protection. I'm not arguing in favor of it, I'm just pointing out one interpretation (mine) of what Farrell said, and the likely reasons he's say it. Teams like to have power hitters in the 5 spot to back up their cleanup guy, Farrell liked that setup all last season with Ortiz and Napoli. Sounds to me like they're thinking about ways to keep a similar lineup construction.Devizier said:
Chris Young just signed a one-year contract with the Mets. Really thought he'd be able to get two.
Will be interesting to see how that affects the Sox thinking wrt Ellsbury, Bradley, Beltran, et al. Besides Rajai Davis (and assuming Corey Hart is being considered to play first), there's really no other OF FA that fits.
Will be interesting to see how that affects the Sox thinking wrt Ellsbury, Bradley, Beltran, et al. Besides Rajai Davis (and assuming Corey Hart is being considered to play first), there's really no other OF FA that fits.
I don't think the question of whether or not Farrell has input is exactly on point with respect to the comment about needing corner power for JBJ to take over CF every day. Whatever his level of input -- and I think the discussion here has been great looking at prior comments he's made to get a sense of that -- the issue for me is knowledge. What does he know about what the FO is thinking? I would expect he does in fact know what they are talking about, and it seems unlikely he would go completely off the cuff and give a personal opinion that did not at least reflect what he believes is current thinking.
To me, the most significant part of his statement is that he is envisioning at least a possibility where JBJ is not the starting CF next year. I find that significant because it is some window of insight into whether the Sox have moved on from Ellsbury or continue to be considering both with- and without-Ellsbury scenarios. There was part of me that was sort of expecting they had mostly moved on, just as they seemingly have with the decision to let Drew go and see what they have with Xander on an every-day basis. The sense of the Ellsbury thread seems to be that the Sox should make a bargain basement offer just in case but move on. I read Farrell's comment as suggesting perhaps they mean to keep up in the market at least in a semi-serious capacity -- to the extent this thread is about reading tea leaves or trying to draw meaning from slender reeds, that's my take. Of course, this could also just be the internal workings of a manager who would prefer to go into next year with a proven multi-tool player.
Edit: Typos
To me, the most significant part of his statement is that he is envisioning at least a possibility where JBJ is not the starting CF next year. I find that significant because it is some window of insight into whether the Sox have moved on from Ellsbury or continue to be considering both with- and without-Ellsbury scenarios. There was part of me that was sort of expecting they had mostly moved on, just as they seemingly have with the decision to let Drew go and see what they have with Xander on an every-day basis. The sense of the Ellsbury thread seems to be that the Sox should make a bargain basement offer just in case but move on. I read Farrell's comment as suggesting perhaps they mean to keep up in the market at least in a semi-serious capacity -- to the extent this thread is about reading tea leaves or trying to draw meaning from slender reeds, that's my take. Of course, this could also just be the internal workings of a manager who would prefer to go into next year with a proven multi-tool player.
Edit: Typos
Drek717 said:
It's likely more about reducing variance in clustering events - that is, stringing together double/single (or, even better, HR by its lonesome) is an 'easier' score than single/single/single. It can't account entirely for bad luck in run events, but can help moderate the effects.
guys there is really only a few active threads here right now due to the megathread phenomena so how about if we hear a rumor suggested from any reputable source (we'll leave this up to the individual to determine this) then we just start it in a new thread preceeded by a RUMOR: Matt Kemp trade talks or similar. And let's not get caught up in sources again, if you feel that someone is posting crap then just report it to a dope/mod and it'll be closed.
Rumor: soxhop411 seeking to change username to soxbadenhop411
Fact: Sox acquire Sox acquire Burke Badenhop
edit: whoops, sorry E5 Yaz.
Fact: Sox acquire Sox acquire Burke Badenhop
edit: whoops, sorry E5 Yaz.
Red Sox Stats @redsoxstats1h
In other news, according to Jayson Stark, clubs and agents have been told by the Sox they aren't going more than 2 years on a catcher.
I guess this would mean no McCann?
In other news, according to Jayson Stark, clubs and agents have been told by the Sox they aren't going more than 2 years on a catcher.
I guess this would mean no McCann?
soxhop411 said:
That seems like a pretty safe bet. It would be pretty likely to mean no Salty, too.
I'd hate to see Salty go. I know he's never been a really good defensive player, but I think he's hitting his stride as a hitter. I'd prefer to keep him, as opposed to going with Navarro or someone else. Oh well. If the club sticks to 2 years, he's gone for sure.
Coachster said:
Grady Sizemore isn't getting a guaranteed MLB contract from anyone. He'll be a spring invite hoping to catch on, and the odds are against him.
chawson said:
Franklin Gutierrez could be a nice fit to help ease in JBJ, coming of an injury plagued season you'd think he'd come at a good price, and is an excellent defense center fielder..
Franklin Gutierrez? seriously? He can field, but can he get on base? Not very much he can. Plus theres no reason to add another OF to a Victorino/Gomes/Nava post-ellsbury world. Hes already sitting behind 3 guys, theres no point in adding someone he is already better at.
Bosox4416 said:
Fixed. He would be cheap but he can't get on the field and can't hit when he does. Like Opes said if the Sox needed a fourth outfielder he would be worth a sniff but they don't.
SoxinSeattle said:
I disagree with this. Not that the Sox necessarily need a fifth outfielder (they already have a fourth), it's that if they're only going with four, they need the fourth to be a decent-to-good defensive outfielder, preferably one who can play CF.
Yeah, I know, I know, Victorino can play CF. And it's true, he can, but this appears to be an increasingly borderline thing. He strikes me as a guy who has found a perfect niche as a defensively superior RF, which the Red Sox always need. I would like the Sox roster next year not to be predicated on the assumption that he might be moved out of that perfect niche at any time if Bradley turns out not to be ready after all.
It's kind of analogous to Pedroia and SS. There have been times when people have suggested that we don't need a UIF who can play short because Pedroia can move over there in a pinch. And even now, he probably could. But you don't want him to. And he's earned the right not to be expected to. I feel the same way about Victorino. If we were running a relatively known quantity like Ellsbury out there, it would be different. But if we're putting a rookie in CF, we want a backup outfielder who can play CF, and who is not our starting RF. Can we live without that? Yes. Do I want to? No.
BosRedSox5 said:
I'd also hate to see Salty go. There are three primary things that a catcher does: (1) hit, (2) defend, including blocking bad pitches and throwing out runners, and (3) call a game, be in tandem with the pitcher, know the hitters, etc. How well a catcher does the third is the most difficult for a fan to judge, but that I get the impression that he has begun to do (3) well with the current group of pitchers is one of the primary reasons I want him back. Also, he can hit.
I also fully realize that I have 0.0001% of the information on (3) that the Red Sox do, so I'll have to put my faith in them to do what's right.
edit: I'll be willing to go three years if the AAV is such that they still would be okay paying it for him to be a back up if one of the prospects has earned the starting role. In fact, it may actually be a good insurance policy in case the prospects do not. If they can sign him for 2 yrs at decent money plus either a mutual option or option that vests or something for a third, I'd be very happy.
Savin Hillbilly said:
So you're likening Pedroia's ability to play SS, where he has not played since college and for which no one has ever thought he had enough arm, to Shane's ability to play the position he's played for most of 2008-2012, with three Gold Gloves, and served as a backup for parts of 2013?
At the beginning of the off-season, I did not think it would be wise to got to 3 years with Salty. Now 2 other possible free agent targets are off the market (although I was not high on committing to McCann to a long term deal and it appears the Sox merely kicked the tires here too) and the choices are thinning out. As unlikely as I see the overall team being able to repeat their respective performances, I think they deserve a chance to, especially with the entire rotation returning at the club's discretion. The starters, with the possible exception of Lester, based on their comments enjoyed pitching to Salty too. If a mutual option for a third year is what it takes, now I'm on board with it. Chances are if one of the highly rated catching prospects, say Vasquez for instance, is ready it's unlikely he'd be ready to step in as a starter right away. Also none of the catching prospects appear to be ready for at least a year and more likely a year and a half. So should we resign Salty we would need him for a minimum of two years anyway. A 1 year overlap is a prudent way to go as you break in a rookie catcher as he adjust to the game at the major league level as a back up during the second half of 2015 and takes on a larger role in 2016.dbn said:
My belief that the 2 most important Sox free agents to bring back next year remains Ellsbury and Salty simply because there is nothing in-house (nor on the immediate horizon down at the farm) to replicate their entire game and the cost to replace them from the outside is substantial. While I'd like Napoli back and believe he's the most likely to return, he's more easily replaced than the other 2 previously mentioned and Drew needs no explanation with Xander already showing during his debut what the hype was all about. And even though I've mentioned that expecting more than league average offensively out of players during their first two years is not wise, the bar at SS (in 2013: 254/308/372) is below the league average hitter 253/317/396. Drew hit 253/333/443. Xander should meet these numbers and needs to exceed them to offset the defense we will lose there. The upside of his offense is so high there's a good chance we are better overall at SS next season.
ji oh said:
Likening yes, equating no.
Yes, it's more reasonable to ask Victorino to play CF than Pedroia to play SS at this point. The current situation with Victorino is more analogous (though still not identical) to Pedroia's after 2008, when he had just won an MVP and Gold Glove as a 2B but was still only two years removed from playing the bulk of his games at short*. It would have been quite reasonable then for the Sox to treat Pedroia as the primary backup at SS, but they proceeded on the apparent principle that Pedroia was their 2B and was not, except in an extreme circumstance, going to play anywhere else. Plug in "Victorino" and "RF" and I think they should proceed similarly in 2014, which means acquiring a backup OF who can play center. This seems all the more advisable because their ML-ready CF depth is paper-thin to start with. The presumptive Pawtucket CF for 2014 is a guy who hasn't played as many as 70 games in a season since 2010, didn't play at all last year, and is also probably, at this point, a RF playing out of position.
*It's not true that he hasn't played there since college; he started more games at short than at second for Pawtucket in 2006, the same year he made his debut in Boston (where he played 6 games at short as well). Overall, he split his minor league time evenly between SS (132 games) and second (131).
SoxinSeattle said:
Disagree about Gutierrez's hitting. The guy isn't much for contact but he has pretty good power, He was looking like a pretty great player about four years ago. After that, well:
Despite that, Gutierrez still managed to hit ten bombs in another injury-plagued 1/4 season this year with Seattle. The guy has been a plus-plus defensive centerfielder, arguably the best in the game for a stretch. Like all options, he's worth looking into. I wouldn't exactly break the bank for him, though.
Devizier said:
I think you are overweighting 150 ABs last year. Gutierrez has 2800 PAs in his career with a .391 SLG/.135 ISO. There just is not a lot of power here. GB/FB simlar to rest of career, what happened in those 150 PAs is his HR/FB doubled; I don't think there's a reason to think that's a skills change rather than SSS. At least, I don't really see data suggesting there is legit power here---acknowledging anything COULD happen!
I do think he's an interesting guy as a depth signing in a no-Ellsbury scenario, mostly because we know he's an exceptional glove and he bats from the right, which might fit in some of the scenarios we can imagine.
Well since he gets injured a lot, he'd be the perfect guy to sign to sit on the bench.
Alex castellanos I would rather have called up because of his multi-position versatility.
Unless the Sox are willing to sign a starter like nelson Cruz for 4/60. Offensively, he's produced like clock work since 2009 so you know what you are paying for. Only downside is you sign a known cheater.
All in all, I'd rather have JBJ starting everyday, nava/gomes platoon, victorino in right.
Alex castellanos I would rather have called up because of his multi-position versatility.
Unless the Sox are willing to sign a starter like nelson Cruz for 4/60. Offensively, he's produced like clock work since 2009 so you know what you are paying for. Only downside is you sign a known cheater.
All in all, I'd rather have JBJ starting everyday, nava/gomes platoon, victorino in right.
PedroKsBambino said:
Well, a couple of caveats here.
One thing did change this year: Safeco field. From 2009-2012, Safeco was one of the most extreme pitcher's parks in baseball. The Mariners moved the fences this year, and it rated about neutral. Obviously, the sample size is far too small to draw any meaningful conclusions, especially for a guy like Gutierrez who missed so much time.
Another thing is that we're talking about a center fielder; his power isn't significant for an outfielder, but for the position (especially as a backup) it's pretty good. Gutierrez's career ISO (without park adjustments) puts him in Austin Jackson territory. Not a masher, but above average power for the position.
Lastly, the guy has a pronounced platoon split; career 120 WRC+ against lefties, 75 WRC+ against righties. As a backup, he could be used pretty effectively... IF he's at all healthy. I don't think that is the case at all, but that's why the teams have scouts and physicians. Worth a look, but I would be shocked if the Red Sox bring him in on more than a minor league deal -- especially if they look to him as Bradley insurance.
No, a guy who hasn't cracked a .330 OBP since 2010 and who's terrible defensively kind of sucks, especially for 60 million.CaskNFappin said:
rodderick said:
The number of 2013 Red Sox position players who matched Cruz' 2013 slugging of 506 or even his lifetime slugging of 495 is zero.
27 OFers in mlb had OBPs over 330 in 2013, or about 1 per team.
I wish we wouldn't say people "suck" when what you mean is "not as good as we need/as I'd like". SOSHland is sometimes the reverse Lake Wobegon, where 2/3 of the players are below average.