Hot Stove Wishes

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,392
The wrong side of the bridge....
Devizier said:
The Yankees held Brett Gardner in the minors for five years, keeping him in AAA full-time for two seasons. And he debuted behind a not-very-good Melky Cabrera at age 26.
 
Both of these sentences are just flat-out wrong.
 
1) Gardner only spent three years in the minors (2005-07) before making his major league debut at age 24, not 26, in 2008.
2) He never spent a full season in AAA. He split time between AA and AAA in 2007, at 23, and between AAA and the majors in 2008 and 2009. He never had as many as 450 PA in AAA in any season.
3) Other being about a year and a half older, his path bears a remarkable resemblance to Bradley's. He debuted in 2008 with 42 games and 141 PA (Bradley: 37/107), and stunk up the joint with a 53 OPS+ (Bradley: 69).
 
So naturally, after that crap first season, the Yankees stashed Gardner back in the minors for 2009....oh wait. Actually they made him their Opening Day CF, and he started 15 of the first 18 games there before they benched the horrifically slumping Gardner in favor of Cabrera. After that, the tables were turned, with Gardner getting occasional starts behind Cabrera for the next month or so. Through June and July Gardner and Cabrera were essentially platooning; then the Yankees sent Gardner back down, making Cabrera the primary CF the rest of the year, though Gardner saw some garbage-time starts after the season was essentially over in early September.
 
So the Yankees played Gardner in his second ML season exactly as I'm hoping we'll play JBJ: gave him a shot to take the starting job and run with it, but had a strong plan B on hand in case he faltered, which he did. And that all worked out pretty well; the 2009 Yankees did OK as I recall.
 

nvalvo

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
16,710
Rogers Park
Savin Hillbilly said:
 
Both of these sentences are just flat-out wrong.
 
1) Gardner only spent three years in the minors (2005-07) before making his major league debut at age 24, not 26, in 2008.
2) He never spent a full season in AAA. He split time between AA and AAA in 2007, at 23, and between AAA and the majors in 2008 and 2009. He never had as many as 450 PA in AAA in any season.
3) Other being about a year and a half older, his path bears a remarkable resemblance to Bradley's. He debuted in 2008 with 42 games and 141 PA (Bradley: 37/107), and stunk up the joint with a 53 OPS+ (Bradley: 69).
 
So naturally, after that crap first season, the Yankees stashed Gardner back in the minors for 2009....oh wait. Actually they made him their Opening Day CF, and he started 15 of the first 18 games there before they benched the horrifically slumping Gardner in favor of Cabrera. After that, the tables were turned, with Gardner getting occasional starts behind Cabrera for the next month or so. Through June and July Gardner and Cabrera were essentially platooning; then the Yankees sent Gardner back down, making Cabrera the primary CF the rest of the year, though Gardner saw some garbage-time starts after the season was essentially over in early September.
 
So the Yankees played Gardner in his second ML season exactly as I'm hoping we'll play JBJ: gave him a shot to take the starting job and run with it, but had a strong plan B on hand in case he faltered, which he did. And that all worked out pretty well; the 2009 Yankees did OK as I recall.
 
Also, 4) Bradley has like 80 points of minor league ISO on Gardner.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
10,405
Somewhere
Savin Hillbilly said:
 
Both of these sentences are just flat-out wrong.
 
1) Gardner only spent three years in the minors (2005-07) before making his major league debut at age 24, not 26, in 2008.
2) He never spent a full season in AAA. He split time between AA and AAA in 2007, at 23, and between AAA and the majors in 2008 and 2009. He never had as many as 450 PA in AAA in any season.
 
 
Absolutely right, lazy research on my part. I should have done considerably more legwork before putting that out on the main board. I should have also mentioned that Gardner was 25-26 years old in 2009, which renders him pretty incomparable to Bradley. However...
 
I don't cite your third point because it kind of agrees with my desired +Ellsbury vision for the team. Despite the opening day start, Gardner ended up starting roughly sixty games in center to Cabrera's hundred. Some of that is due to a thumb injury that kept Gardner out from late July through September, but as you pointed out, he spent the remainder of the year as Cabrera's backup. He hardly played in the postseason until Cabrera pulled a hammy in the World Series. This was possible because the Yankees had three solid starters in their outfield and were able to bring Gardner in as quickly or slowly as they needed.
 
Now, I suppose the Red Sox could bring in Rajai Davis, Andres Torres, or Franklin Gutierrez as their veteran CF-eligible alternate, but I'm of the mind that bringing back Ellsbury is still their best option. I happen to think that Steamer is pretty optimistic about Victorino's projected playing time next season, but applying those projections straight up still leaves 43 games open between center and right field next season. If the Red Sox open up playing time in left field (either by letting Napoli walk, or moving one of their three 1B/LF), then there's even more time for Bradley to get innings.
 

Drek717

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2003
2,536
 



Savin Hillbilly said:
 
Wouldn't be it just as accurate to say he needed a big midsummer slump to bring his numbers down to where they ended at? I mean, yeah, he's streaky, we saw that. But treating only the hot streaks as suspect, in terms of what we can expect going forward, seems gratuitously glass-half-empty.
It would be just as accurate, but that's the point with Napoli.  He's a streaky hitter, but a streaky hitter with a range that can land anywhere from a month long OPS of .668 to 1.227.  He isn't David Ortiz where the slumps are about league average and the highs are elite, his slumps have the ability to be prolonged sub-replacement level events.
 
That doesn't mean I wouldn't love to see Napoli back, but only on a reasonable deal.  He isn't the kind of guy who is going to reinvent his game in a few years and tack another 3-4 good seasons on a la Papi.  When he sees a meaningful drop to any one of his 1. limited contact ability 2. strong plate discipline or 3. power he's not going to be an every day first baseman anymore.  The tools he has as a hitter are just too limited to allow him to compensate for decline.  At least that's my view of him.
 
As I've said in other threads, 2 at $32M?  Sure, love to have him on-board.  2 at $36M?  Why the hell not, isn't my money.  But as soon as there is a legitimate guarantee attached to the 3rd year, be that an actual 3 year deal or an easily reached 3rd year vesting option, I'd say it's time to give Corey Hart a call and to make sure that Carp, Hassan, Lavarnway, Castellanos, Nava, and maybe even Middlebrooks have shiny new 1B mitts under the Christmas tree in a touch under a month.
 
I much prefer the 2014 Sox lineup with Napoli behind Ortiz, but the in-house and FA alternatives are numerous enough for me to be realistic about what a 3+ year deal for Napoli will mean for the 2016 club's chances.  Hoping Napoli ages like fine wine is what a team does when there are no other alternatives on the horizon, that is not the Red Sox.

 
Tyrone Biggums said:
 
Would you really feel comfortable with putting all of your eggs in the Carp/Nava basket with zero track record other than last year? Not saying Carp can't be the answer at 1st but you always want to bring in competition. If Napoli doesn't come back then the next logical choice is Hart. If Hart goes elsewhere then you have to decide if Nava/Carp is the answer at 1st or maybe a MLFA such as LaPorta or a possible non tender like Garrett Jones or a trade. Lots of options out there, not many of those are real appealing. The only ones who you can look at as appealing are the players that you know can play in Boston. 
 
You mention lightning striking twice. What happens when Nava regresses next year? Do you bring Hassan up to platoon with Carp? Hassan doesn't have the bat at first. So now all of a sudden you improve the WAR for SS with Xander but you destroy it between the downgrade at catcher and 1st due to wanting to save an extra few dollars. I'm not opposed to them giving Lavarnway a shot worst case at catcher because there is a good chance with catcher being one of those positions where there isn't a whole lot of quality out there he would probably pass for league average. Napoli showed a great glove and his numbers overall were pretty good. I'd like them to bring Napoli and Salty back. Even if you give Salty 1/12 and sell him on going back on the market next year (that way you can rectify the horrid decision to not extend the QO) the Sox end up winning because he will be above league average. 
1. Carp/Nava aren't the only options at first.  Hassan, Castellanos, along with maybe Lavarnway and Middlebrooks are all options as well.  It depends on what FA signings are available.  Also, the only reason the Sox should lose out on Hart (if they want him) is if some team offers him multiple years.  Otherwise they should be splashing the pot on a one year deal.  The argument could be made that Hart is the far better option than Napoli in fact, because of the following reasons:
a. positional versatility.  While not a good defender at 1B or the corner OF he's tolerable at both.  Given the gold glove 2B we'll have next to our 1B (and the gold glove RF we should look to keep behind him) and the tight confines of Fenway's LF the Sox can fit Hart's bat into two different positions without defensive concern.  Napoli is a 1B and only a 1B now.  That broadens the depth into a four guys for two jobs scenario between Nava, Gomes, Carp, and Hart.  Even saying Gomes is just too stiff to play 1B we can easily move the other three about based on who's hitting to find production out of those two positions, using the same number of roster spots we dedicated to them last year.
b. letting Napoli go nets a first round pick, signing Hart to a pillow deal could very possibly result in the same for him.  That's +2 sandwich picks over two years out of the 1B position.
c. no multi-year deal risk.
 
2. Nava might regress, but that is what Carp, Hassan, Castellanos, Brentz, Cecchini if his bat continues to out-pace his glove, Kalish as a dark horse, and Gomes are on the roster for.  Not to mention any 5th OF signing they might make if Carp is the full time 1B.
 
Also, Hassan is an OBP machine who made some swing adjustments last year that improved bat speed and per visual scouting increased his power potential.  If he can maintain anything close to his minor league BA/OBP delta he's got real ML value offensively, even without seeing any kind of power maturation from his new swing and 6'4" frame.  His mL SLG numbers (and his overall offensive skill set really) aren't very different from Kevin Youkilis who did just fine as a 1B bat if I recall.  Is he a lock to be a productive player or make a similar step forward in terms of power?  Of course not.  But his AAA performance last season coupled with his development history (originally scouted as a pitcher) and his AA numbers make him a legitimate piece to add to the 2014 mix.
 
3. If the Sox where ok with giving Salty 1/$12M they probably would have extended him the qualifying offer.  Why do you assume they made a mistake in not doing so?  They clearly think he's worth far less than $14M on a one year deal.  They have far more advanced metrics than us to predict that value.  Also, now that Salty doesn't have the QO attached why in the world would he take a one year deal with the potential of getting a QO and hurting his market next season if he hits like 2013 again, or seeing his market shrink massively if he hits like 2011 and 2012 instead while being one year older?  He'll get 3-5 years from someone this winter, it won't be the Red Sox.  The question now is if the Sox replace him by trading for Hanigan, or roll with Lavarnway.

 
 
Tyrone Biggums said:
 
Its funny that people are taking this approach. Usually after winning a World Series people want to see a repeat. On here we're hoping for an 85 win squad that serves as a bridge year to 2015-2016. 
And usually teams after winning the World Series do exactly what you suggest, overpay across the board to try a repeat, find out that they paid guys based on career years, and then spend several years waiting for those bad deals to expire before they can be competitive again.
 
The difference between the 2012 and 2013 Sox (other than superior management, game planning etc.) was pitching and health.  The pitching staff isn't changing for next season and we can't guarantee health in any meaningful way.  Napoli did well last year but there are ample options to get similar production at 1B with less commitment.  Salty had a career year and the club clearly doesn't value what he does behind the dish very highly.
 
Your argument would have a lot more merit if you were suggesting the Sox say damn it all and give Ellsbury 7/$147M.  He's the real irreplaceable difference maker they're losing.  Corey Hart, Mike Carp, et al might hit just as well as Napoli at 1B.  Lavarnway isn't even a bad bet to out-hit Salty's career norms in 2014.  The gaping hole for 2014 will be lead off and plus CF defense.  Bradley might fix the later, but no one is fixing the former.  That's your offensive regression and it can't be solved without giving out a bad deal of epic proportions.
 
That $34M they have to spend this year isn't the problem.  It's tying up that same $34M for 2014, 2015, etc..  The club can find ways to use short term cash without taking on long term commitments.  Overpay for one year of Corey Hart.  Splash the pot with a big 2 year offer to Beltran.  Those are all better options.  Hell, offer Ellsbury 1 year at $30M and see if he bites.  All better choices than Salty or Napoli o 3+ year deals.

 
CaskNFappin said:
Exactly! The same exact folks are also conveniently forgetting or dismissing that ALL of JBJ, WMB, Nava, Carp, Hassan, and the rest of our unproven commodities could wind up being mediocre at best.

2013 doesn't mean we should take our foot off the gas. Lets see how people feel about .500 in July if we decide to give all the kids a try and they collectively fail. I'd say we focus on a present dynasty knowing we have plenty of room to maneuver compared to the pre-Punto trade. Ortiz won't be here forever and is be willing to bet that his replacement in the lineup will not be as fearsome. We don't have to hand out mega contracts like candy, but lets not get too cute hoping for guys like KottAras to be part of a playoff contender.
If all those players collectively fail in 2014 this won't be a very good team regardless of who else they sign.  This club was specifically designed to have long term contender aspirations.  Letting the intoxication of a World Series title result in go for it now contracts is a great way to be a .500 team for a few years, not just one.
 
There is no "present dynasty".  Dynasties don't exist in baseball if your team works with anything other than financial carte blanche a la the 90's Yankees (who by the way still found that success based largely on a groundswell of in-house talent).  The playoffs are still a crap shoot.
 
What we do know is that the AL East isn't going to suddenly emerge with a powerhouse contender in 2014.  The Red Sox played three games below their pythag W-L last season.  Tampa Bay played 5 games above theirs.  Baltimore was dead even as an 85 win team.  This is what a Red Sox club with good pitching and a healthy Pedroia and Ortiz looks like.  If luck was removed from the equation they would have won the division by 13 games.  I think they can risk some regression in favor of breaking in young guys, just so long as there are layers of depth behind those young guys so that there is no dependence on any one single player for the whole season.
 
I'm more worried about what the club does at 3B and SS than I am 1B and C.  Middlebrooks has good upside, Bogaerts showed in the playoffs it's only a matter of time until he's legit, but right now we have nothing behind either one in case they struggle early or get hurt.  Starting Heiker Meneses for 50 games at SS is more likely to make the 2014 team an 85 win club than starting the best of Carp, Hassan, Castellanos, etc. at 1B.
 

FanSinceBoggs

seantwo
SoSH Member
Jan 12, 2009
937
New York
I would like to see the Red Sox get 4 picks between picks 25 to 40, which is a real possibility.  For that to happen, they will need to keep their own first round pick and refrain from resigning Ellsbury (replace with Bradley), Drew (replace with Bogaerts) and Napoli (replace with Loney, Hart, or Carp).  Out of those three 1b options--Loney, Hart, and Carp--I'm not sure which option is best.  But all three players will be less expensive than Napoli and the draft pick is too appealing to turn down.
 
In other words, I would like to see the Red Sox employ an anti-Yankees strategy.  The Yankees have already lost their first round pick and if they sign another QO free agent like Beltran, the Yankees highest pick might be a second rounder, a problematic strategy for an organization with a weak farm system. 
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
11,064
Maine
FanSinceBoggs said:
In other words, I would like to see the Red Sox employ an anti-Yankees strategy.  The Yankees have already lost their first round pick and if they sign another QO free agent like Beltran, the Yankees highest pick might be a second rounder, a problematic strategy for an organization with a weak farm system. 
 
Don't forget the Yankees have at least one QO compensation round pick coming for Granderson (sure looks like he's gone).  Could get another if they can't hold on to Cano.  So they won't be completely out of the top 50-60 in the draft.
 

FanSinceBoggs

seantwo
SoSH Member
Jan 12, 2009
937
New York
Red(s)HawksFan said:
 
Don't forget the Yankees have at least one QO compensation round pick coming for Granderson (sure looks like he's gone).  Could get another if they can't hold on to Cano.  So they won't be completely out of the top 50-60 in the draft.
 
I haven't forgotten it.  I think the Yankees will resign Cano and Kuroda but will lose Granderson and gain a pick.  But if they sign Beltran, and they are going after him according to reports, they will lose the Granderson compensation pick.
 

Hoplite

lurker
Oct 26, 2013
1,116
I would like us to pick up a backup centerfielder that we could store in the minors. Someone like Lorenzo Cain would make sense (but I can't find if he has an option year remaining). He'll be 28 years old, so he's not much of a prospect anymore. Someone who can just play good defense and could help fill out the depth chart. I don't have much faith in Ryan Kalish or Juan Carlos Linares as backups.
 

Joshv02

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,633
Brookline
Hoplite said:
I would like us to pick up a backup centerfielder that we could store in the minors. Someone like Lorenzo Cain would make sense (but I can't find if he has an option year remaining). He'll be 28 years old, so he's not much of a prospect anymore. Someone who can just play good defense and could help fill out the depth chart. I don't have much faith in Ryan Kalish or Juan Carlos Linares as backups.
Cain was added to the 40 man in Nov. 2009, I believe.  He was optioned in 2010 and 2011.  He doesn't yet have 5 years of ML experience, so the team would need his consent to use his third-option.  But, why wouldn't the Royals just stash him in AAA if they don't want to keep him?  He is an above average defensive CFer with speed, and potentially an option.  They have enough guys at the bottom of their roster to get rid of before Cain, if they just want to clear a 40-man spot.  
 
I agree that I'd like some minor league CF help.  There are some guys who you can sign to minor league contracts if you want someone to add to Kalish and Castellanos -- e.g., Joe Benson, Che-Hsuan Lin, Tony Gwynn Jr., etc.  They'd may sign with a major league invite.
 

FFCI

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2009
204
FanSinceBoggs said:
I would like to see the Red Sox get 4 picks between picks 25 to 40, which is a real possibility.  For that to happen, they will need to keep their own first round pick and refrain from resigning Ellsbury (replace with Bradley), Drew (replace with Bogaerts) and Napoli (replace with Loney, Hart, or Carp).  Out of those three 1b options--Loney, Hart, and Carp--I'm not sure which option is best.  But all three players will be less expensive than Napoli and the draft pick is too appealing to turn down.
 
In other words, I would like to see the Red Sox employ an anti-Yankees strategy.  The Yankees have already lost their first round pick and if they sign another QO free agent like Beltran, the Yankees highest pick might be a second rounder, a problematic strategy for an organization with a weak farm system. 
 
This is where I'm at too.  I'll add to this by saying I want them to bid huge on Tanaka (and win that bid).  The new MLB is making it much more difficult to flex financial muscle (in the interest of competitive balance which while probably the right thing makes it harder to be the Red Sox/Yankees, etc.). 
 
Without PEDs - careers are will likely be shorter and peak years definitely impacted making free agency an increasingly less efficient and effective way to build a team.  Drafting and having the opportunity to draft more players with more dollars available to spend in the draft is way more valuable and effective.
 
The opportunity to add talent like Tanaka without losing a draft pick, without impacting your payroll is a window of opportunity that will probably be closing too in the future.  If your scouts deem him valuable - go get him. 
 
A bonus of winning the Tanaka bid is keeping him from the Yankees and increasing the troubles they are going to have in rebuilding a pitching staff over the next several years.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
11,064
Maine
FanSinceBoggs said:
 
I haven't forgotten it.  I think the Yankees will resign Cano and Kuroda but will lose Granderson and gain a pick.  But if they sign Beltran, and they are going after him according to reports, they will lose the Granderson compensation pick.
 
You don't lose compensation picks.  If they sign Beltran, they lose their 2nd round pick.  They get to keep the compensation pick regardless of who they sign.
 

LeoCarrillo

Do his bits at your peril.
SoSH Member
Oct 13, 2008
7,503
New York City
You don't lose compensation picks. If they sign Beltran, they lose their 2nd round pick. They get to keep the compensation pick regardless of who they sign.


No, it's next highest. Common misconception (Olney even screwed it up), but we've solved it in multiple threads (including put-and-pasted excerpts from the CBA.)

So QO before a second-rounder.
 

Drek717

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2003
2,536
Red(s)HawksFan said:
 
You don't lose compensation picks.  If they sign Beltran, they lose their 2nd round pick.  They get to keep the compensation pick regardless of who they sign.
I'm pretty sure the new compensation rules actually do take away your comp picks if that is your highest pick.
 

Hoplite

lurker
Oct 26, 2013
1,116
lxt said:
 
I thought that was a good article as well. This is hardly the end-all, be-all, but Steamer currently projects our roster to lead the majors in WAR and we don't have a catcher or first baseman/left fielder. Our depth was incredible last year, and assuming we sign or trade for a decent catcher and first baseman, it will be excellent next year as well.
 
Speaking of depth, does anyone know what happened to Kevin Kouzmanoff? No mention of him on rotoworld or MLB Trade Rumors since last spring. Unless he retired, it seems like he'd be a decent guy to give a minor league invite to.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
11,064
Maine
Hoplite said:
Speaking of depth, does anyone know what happened to Kevin Kouzmanoff? No mention of him on rotoworld or MLB Trade Rumors since last spring. Unless he retired, it seems like he'd be a decent guy to give a minor league invite to.
 
Kouzmanoff's going to be 32 next season, was outrighted by the Rockies after the 2011 season, and spent the 2012 and 2013 seasons in the minors without a hint of getting a call-up.  His production in limited (by injury) playing time at New Orleans last year is barely discernible from Brandon Snyder's Pawtucket numbers.  I think having both in the system is redundant, especially since only one of them is likely to get playing time (at 1B).  They're not going to take AAA at bats from Cecchini in favor of either guy.
 

Hoplite

lurker
Oct 26, 2013
1,116
Red(s)HawksFan said:
 
Kouzmanoff's going to be 32 next season, was outrighted by the Rockies after the 2011 season, and spent the 2012 and 2013 seasons in the minors without a hint of getting a call-up.  His production in limited (by injury) playing time at New Orleans last year is barely discernible from Brandon Snyder's Pawtucket numbers.  I think having both in the system is redundant, especially since only one of them is likely to get playing time (at 1B).  They're not going to take AAA at bats from Cecchini in favor of either guy.
 
There's very little downside to an invite to Spring Training. Is it a sure thing that Cecchini will start the season in AAA?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
11,064
Maine
Hoplite said:
 
There's very little downside to an invite to Spring Training. Is it a sure thing that Cecchini will start the season in AAA?
 
True, there is no downside.  But I'd wager that if Kouzmanoff wants steady playing time, there are other teams with the playing time to give.  Not only is it likely to be a limited role available at Pawtucket, but probably a real long shot to get a crack at the big league roster as well.
 
As for Cecchini starting in AAA, I don't think it's an absolute certainty, but I doubt he'll stay in Portland long if that's where he does begin the season.  FWIW, soxprospects.com projects him as the starting 3B in Pawtucket, with Almanzar as the projected starter in Portland.  Obviously not gospel, but they usually have their finger on the pulse.
 

chawson

Member
Aug 1, 2006
1,634
That this cute little Badenhop deal was the first Sox/Brewers trade in fifteen years has me wondering what else might have come up in conversation. Milwaukee's in a very interesting predicament with Braun, Carlos Gomez, Khris Davis and Aoki in their outfield. Davis is 27; his year was SSS but not fluky, and has nothing left to prove in the minors. Aoki is on a very reasonable contract and bizarrely their only LHH position player. Carlos Gomez is an absolute steal at 3/$24M through 2016, and Ryan Braun is Ryan Braun.

Nava and Gomes are nice players, but they're fungible and project to be just about average next year. LF is pivotal. Everywhere else is either a long-term solution rookie or a stable, slowly declining veteran (except 1B and C, where the most likely replacements won't likely improve on 2013 numbers). Unless they resign Ellsbury, LF is the one place they could significantly upgrade.

If they're talking Kemp, they're talking Braun. PEDs aside, it's pretty much the same situation: superstar OF with serious question marks on a mega deal in an overcrowded outfield.

I don't know if they can find takers for him at 7 years and $131M guaranteed money, which makes Khris Davis really intriguing.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,156
Not here
chawson said:
That this cute little Badenhop deal was the first Sox/Brewers trade in fifteen years has me wondering what else might have come up in conversation. Milwaukee's in a very interesting predicament with Braun, Carlos Gomez, Khris Davis and Aoki in their outfield. Davis is 27; his year was SSS but not fluky, and has nothing left to prove in the minors. Aoki is on a very reasonable contract and bizarrely their only LHH position player. Carlos Gomez is an absolute steal at 3/$24M through 2016, and Ryan Braun is Ryan Braun.

Nava and Gomes are nice players, but they're fungible and project to be just about average next year. LF is pivotal. Everywhere else is either a long-term solution rookie or a stable, slowly declining veteran (except 1B and C, where the most likely replacements won't likely improve on 2013 numbers). Unless they resign Ellsbury, LF is the one place they could significantly upgrade.

If they're talking Kemp, they're talking Braun. PEDs aside, it's pretty much the same situation: superstar OF with serious question marks on a mega deal in an overcrowded outfield.

I don't know if they can find takers for him at 7 years and $131M guaranteed money, which makes Khris Davis really intriguing.
 
Haven't we learned that no position is pivotal? 
 
Also, and more importantly, I think you're precisely wrong about LF being the one place the Sox can significantly upgrade. The Red Sox left fielders were 16% better than the league average offensively (by OPS) and improving on that isn't simple and would likely cost a lot of pieces that do bad things to the depth we love so much.
 
The Sox were, in fact, above average at every position (save pitcher, fuck the NL) except third base where the Sox were pretty goddamn terrible. That's where your easy upgrade is, and the beautiful thing is that the incumbent is pretty likely to be the upgrade.
 

chawson

Member
Aug 1, 2006
1,634
Rasputin said:
 
Haven't we learned that no position is pivotal? 
 
Also, and more importantly, I think you're precisely wrong about LF being the one place the Sox can significantly upgrade. The Red Sox left fielders were 16% better than the league average offensively (by OPS) and improving on that isn't simple and would likely cost a lot of pieces that do bad things to the depth we love so much.
 
The Sox were, in fact, above average at every position (save pitcher, fuck the NL) except third base where the Sox were pretty goddamn terrible. That's where your easy upgrade is, and the beautiful thing is that the incumbent is pretty likely to be the upgrade.
That 16% OPS advantage is negated by below-average defense, and Nava could easily regress.

I'm with you in principle, and think the Sox are better for having taken a holistic approach, but LF seems pivotal for 2014 and beyond. We're league-average at the position, with no prospects knocking at the door.

Gomes and Nava are fine, but them being average in LF is a lot more risky when we should expect to be worse at CF, RF, and probably C; could very well be worse at 1B and SS; shouldn't expect to improve at 2B; and are crossing our fingers at 3B.

Nava-Gomes/Bradley/Victorino in 2014 is probably a 6-7 win dropoff from the 2013 outfield. Bogaerts and Bradley shouldn't be expected to have more than league-average years, and Middlebrooks's rebound shouldn't account for that much.

Kinda hate to say it, but a 5-win outfielder, particularly a left fielder whose value can be tied up in offense, is a great fit for this team right now. Strangely, several such players are available in Braun, Kemp, Stanton, Khris Davis (if he's really that good), Choo, and Ellsbury.
 

CoRP

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2007
9,457
The Epicenter
Good stuff. Sarcasm really tickles my funny bone. Sarcasm is something that this board is sorely lacking.Thanks also for pointing out that your post was sarcastic because that's really polite of you. I like polite people. Kudos on the polite and sarcastic sarcasm.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,156
Not here
chawson said:
That 16% OPS advantage is negated by below-average defense, and Nava could easily regress.

I'm with you in principle, and think the Sox are better for having taken a holistic approach, but LF seems pivotal for 2014 and beyond. We're league-average at the position, with no prospects knocking at the door.

Gomes and Nava are fine, but them being average in LF is a lot more risky when we should expect to be worse at CF, RF, and probably C; could very well be worse at 1B and SS; shouldn't expect to improve at 2B; and are crossing our fingers at 3B.

Nava-Gomes/Bradley/Victorino in 2014 is probably a 6-7 win dropoff from the 2013 outfield. Bogaerts and Bradley shouldn't be expected to have more than league-average years, and Middlebrooks's rebound shouldn't account for that much.

Kinda hate to say it, but a 5-win outfielder, particularly a left fielder whose value can be tied up in offense, is a great fit for this team right now. Strangely, several such players are available in Braun, Kemp, Stanton, Khris Davis (if he's really that good), Choo, and Ellsbury.
 
I don't think fielding, especially left field in Fenway Park fielding can really come close to negating a 16% advantage offensively. I expect Nava to regress, but as you might remember from discussions last offseason, a platoon of Gomes and Nava would be more than adequate even using pre-2013 numbers for both.
 
More to the point, it's okay to put together a team that isn't the favorite to win the World Series. It is more important to build a team for long term success than for short term success.
 

chawson

Member
Aug 1, 2006
1,634
Along with everyone else in the league, I'd want to scoop up Ryan Webb. He can walk a few, but has given up only 13 HRs in 278 MLB innings and has a career 57.4 GB%.
 
Maybe he's redundant with Badenhop already on the roster, but he could be as effective out of the bullpen as Workman, which'd allow the Sox to toy with him in the rotation more.
 

CaskNFappin

rembrat's protegé
May 20, 2013
254
Woonsocket, RI
The AJP signing makes me believe that Ells is gonna get a big offer from us…..one that might also require letting Napoli walk (I'm guessing he gets 3/48 in this market).  Therefore my wish is we turn over every stone looking for a deal involving Peavy/Dempster/Doubront + JBJ in return for a legitimate bat that can protect Ortiz this year and replace him when the time comes.  This player can be LF/3B/1B, and depending on which, we shuffle parts around internally to make it fit.  
 
I know JBJ and Ells could theoretically play alongside each other, but I feel like he'd be a great piece to attach to a surplus pitcher in order to make a real splash (my binkie is Eric Hosmer).  
 

xjack

Futbol Crazed
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2000
5,173
New York
Sox and Rocks said:
The most basic metric, WAR, has Fowler valued between 2 and 3 each of the past 3 seasons;  Doubie has never been above 1.  You are seriously underrating Fowler, and, more importantly for this discussion, the Rockies overvalue Fowler, as they do most of their homegrown players (they are perhaps one of the worst franchises in this regard, for better or worse, and it is usually worse).   They value Fowler even more because of his ability to cover the expansive centerfield Coors Field has.
 
An offer of Doubie for Fowler, even with a decent side piece, gets a an immediate hang up from Bill Geivet.
 
For the record, Doubie would have been a much better deal than what the Rockies ultimately accepted for Fowler:
 
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/10074768/colorado-rockies-trade-dexter-fowler-houston-astros-brandon-barnes-jordan-lyles
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
I don't think this deserves its own thread, but can we talk about Granderson for a minute?  He'll be 33 next season, coming off an injury-plagued 2013 campaign.  Doesn't have great OBP skills, but he's not terrible in that regard (lifetime .342 OBP), but has terrific power, and his career ops is .835 (118 ops+).  Solid fielder.  
 
I would think he'd be a really nice fit here in Boston, if the Sox wanted to go that route.  I'm not sure they do, and I sure don't like the thought of the Sox giving the Yanks a draft pick (if I recall, they did tender him a QO, right?).  But re-signing Napoli and adding Granderson would give the Sox a really nice middle of the order consisting of Ortiz, Napoli, and Granderson.  
 
Do the Sox seriously consider him?  And what contract is he likely to fetch?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
11,064
Maine
ivanvamp said:
I don't think this deserves its own thread, but can we talk about Granderson for a minute?  He'll be 33 next season, coming off an injury-plagued 2013 campaign.  Doesn't have great OBP skills, but he's not terrible in that regard (lifetime .342 OBP), but has terrific power, and his career ops is .835 (118 ops+).  Solid fielder.  
 
I would think he'd be a really nice fit here in Boston, if the Sox wanted to go that route.  I'm not sure they do, and I sure don't like the thought of the Sox giving the Yanks a draft pick (if I recall, they did tender him a QO, right?).  But re-signing Napoli and adding Granderson would give the Sox a really nice middle of the order consisting of Ortiz, Napoli, and Granderson.  
 
Do the Sox seriously consider him?  And what contract is he likely to fetch?
 
No, they don't.  He's old and he's going to be seeking a contract befitting a full-time player.  The Red Sox do not have a need for a full-time outfielder at the moment.  At least not one that does not represent a significant upgrade to what they already have on the roster.
 

DanoooME

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2008
15,903
Richmond, VA
ivanvamp said:
I don't think this deserves its own thread, but can we talk about Granderson for a minute?  He'll be 33 next season, coming off an injury-plagued 2013 campaign.  Doesn't have great OBP skills, but he's not terrible in that regard (lifetime .342 OBP), but has terrific power, and his career ops is .835 (118 ops+).  Solid fielder.  
 
I would think he'd be a really nice fit here in Boston, if the Sox wanted to go that route.  I'm not sure they do, and I sure don't like the thought of the Sox giving the Yanks a draft pick (if I recall, they did tender him a QO, right?).  But re-signing Napoli and adding Granderson would give the Sox a really nice middle of the order consisting of Ortiz, Napoli, and Granderson.  
 
Do the Sox seriously consider him?  And what contract is he likely to fetch?
 
Draft picks no longer go from team to team.  The Yankees get a supplemental first rounder and the Sox just lose their first rounder.
 
The latest I just read was that the Mets were sniffing around him.  MLBTR predicted before the FA season began that Granderson would get 3/$45M.
 
I hope they don't sign anyone that got a QO.  I think they value draft picks a lot more highly.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
I would be willing for the Sox to do 3/45 for Granderson.  Hate losing the pick (and thanks for clarifying how it works…still would feel like the Sox would be giving the Yanks a pick, since we'd lose one and they'd gain one), but Granderson would probably be a very nice fit for Boston.  
 

KillerBs

lurker
Nov 16, 2006
812
Granderson is a platoon OFer who would be a barely competent defender at Fenway in CF or RF. He has OPSed over 115 once in the last 5 years. If you could move Nava, I could see the logic of slotting him (or Choo) into LF, but otherwise he doesn't look like a fit.
 

chawson

Member
Aug 1, 2006
1,634
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2013/12/curtis-granderson-had-a-fancy-dinner-with-the-mets/
 
Why wouldn't Granderson be going to the Mets? They have tons of money and their present outfield is Nieuwenhuis-Young-Duda. Plus he seemed to really enjoy their salmon.
 
It has a whiff of the sneaky Victorino deal, but I don't see it happening. If the Sox are going to replace Nava they'll do it with a RHH power bat, otherwise the upgrade isn't worth the $15M+. The Granderson argument requires the same logic as the Choo argument, only it's even worse.
 

LeoCarrillo

Do his bits at your peril.
SoSH Member
Oct 13, 2008
7,503
New York City
If JWH is feeling at all reactive to the Ellsbury buy, he can hurt the MFY by spending his cash on Tanaka (whenever the fee issue gets sorted out).

Yankees still have crap for pitching. A Tanaka riposte keeps him out of the Bronx, isn't primarily a hit to AAV and payroll, and would further deepen our stockpile of arms.

With the arms, eventually you trade for a beast like Stanton.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
LeoCarrillo said:
If JWH is feeling at all reactive to the Ellsbury buy, he can hurt the MFY by spending his cash on Tanaka (whenever the fee issue gets sorted out).

Yankees still have crap for pitching. A Tanaka riposte keeps him out of the Bronx, isn't primarily a hit to AAV and payroll, and would further deepen our stockpile of arms.

With the arms, eventually you trade for a beast like Stanton.
 
I like it.  He won't hurt the AAV, the Sox have cash to spend, and it won't cost them any picks or prospects.  And the thing the Yankees need most is young starting pitching.  Let's say Tanaka costs $50m for a posting fee and then a 5/55 contract on top of that.  Sure, $105 million is a ton, but the team is flush with money, ticket prices are going up, so the posting fee is very doable, and the $11m a year isn't really that bad for a #3 (or better) starting pitcher.  Plus he stays away from the Yankees.
 
Then you have both Peavy and Dempster as trade bait.  Move both of them in separate deals (eating some cash; it's a sunk cost anyway) for prospects, and then use those extra prospects, plus some of your own (and the Sox have plenty) for a real stud masher.  Voila, Sox get better, keep Tanaka away from NY.
 

Puffy

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 14, 2006
1,251
Town
I know the most recent reports had the Padres waiting until mid-season to trade Chase Headley, but I would revisit a potential trade there as a hedge against Napoli leaving. It just seems like a good fit for the Red Sox at this point. With Ellsbury out of the picture, perhaps the Red Sox could eat Cameron Maybin's contract and give him a role as depth under JBJ as a potential bounceback player.
 

koufax37

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
2,463
I am interested in testing the waters on Granderson, but moving from Yankee Stadium to Fenway is likely going to have an impact on his power, which is his most valuable skill now that he has lost a step.  I think another team like the Mets will pay him more than he would be worth to us on value added to Nava/Gomes/JBJ/Victorino.  We have four interesting outfielders on our roster, so the one we add has to bring more of an impact to justify big dollars and a third or fourth year.
 
What is the Choo market right now?  What are people throwing around for his expected contract?  He has enough of a bat that he could be a DH candidate at the back of his contract when Ortiz retires, but as a guy who has stolen 20+ bags four of the last five years and tried CF as a 30 year old, I think he likely has some extended value as a corner outfielder for us with a positional switch possible when he loses a step.
 
I'm still interested in Beltran, but don't like the idea of a third year at his age, so it is up to him to prefer his October glory with us over an extra year with the Royals, etc.  And with the Tigers and Mariners both having money to spend, we can't be money smart with Ellsbury only to overpay in a bidding war for somebody else.
 

KillerBs

lurker
Nov 16, 2006
812
Puffy said:
I know the most recent reports had the Padres waiting until mid-season to trade Chase Headley, but I would revisit a potential trade there as a hedge against Napoli leaving. It just seems like a good fit for the Red Sox at this point. With Ellsbury out of the picture, perhaps the Red Sox could eat Cameron Maybin's contract and give him a role as depth under JBJ as a potential bounceback player.
 
Chris Denorfia is another guy with the Padres who would fit nicely. The Padres need to deal one or more OFers, don't they. 
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,392
The wrong side of the bridge....
koufax37 said:
I am interested in testing the waters on Granderson, but moving from Yankee Stadium to Fenway is likely going to have an impact on his power, which is his most valuable skill now that he has lost a step.
 
Agreed. And he's a fairly extreme fly ball hitter, so the lost HR would mostly translate into outs. His Steamer projection is .233/.326/.442; playing half his games at Fenway, I think that translates to .220/.310/.400. Pass.
 

snowmanny

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
10,401
LeoCarrillo said:
If JWH is feeling at all reactive to the Ellsbury buy, he can hurt the MFY by spending his cash on Tanaka (whenever the fee issue gets sorted out).

Yankees still have crap for pitching. A Tanaka riposte keeps him out of the Bronx, isn't primarily a hit to AAV and payroll, and would further deepen our stockpile of arms.


With the arms, eventually you trade for a beast like Stanton.
I totally agree with this EXCEPT that their number one priority should be signing Jon Lester to an extension. If he was a free agent this year the Yankees would be all over him and I imagine the same will be true next year if
he is on the market.

I'd like them to go after Tanaka.

I'd love an extension for Lester in the 4/72-80 range.
 

PrometheusWakefield

Nasty, brutish, and short
SoSH Member
May 25, 2009
8,920
Boston, MA
Puffy said:
I know the most recent reports had the Padres waiting until mid-season to trade Chase Headley, but I would revisit a potential trade there as a hedge against Napoli leaving. It just seems like a good fit for the Red Sox at this point. With Ellsbury out of the picture, perhaps the Red Sox could eat Cameron Maybin's contract and give him a role as depth under JBJ as a potential bounceback player.
I've been into this idea before, and I'm still into it.  We're clearly not major players in the free agency game this offseason and I'm totally on board with the megadraft offseason, but the other side of that has to be using some of our pitching and prospect glut to improve the 2014 team and make up for the 4 WAR or so we've just lost in Jacoby Ellsbury.
 

Puffy

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 14, 2006
1,251
Town
KillerBs said:
 
Chris Denorfia is another guy with the Padres who would fit nicely. The Padres need to deal one or more OFers, don't they. 
 
Exactly.  Since they have just traded for Seth Smith, I'd imagine they might have one extra OF to deal with between Quentin, Venable, Denorfia, Maybin, and Smith...
 

Puffy

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 14, 2006
1,251
Town
PrometheusWakefield said:
I've been into this idea before, and I'm still into it.  We're clearly not major players in the free agency game this offseason and I'm totally on board with the megadraft offseason, but the other side of that has to be using some of our pitching and prospect glut to improve the 2014 team and make up for the 4 WAR or so we've just lost in Jacoby Ellsbury.
 
Right, Headley seems like a prototypical "bridge" target (to Cecchini) and fits Cherington's recent mold of acquiring players after down years - plus he could return a draft pick with a QO after a good season. If available, this seems like a good approach to address potentially the biggest weakness among position players (3B) and, yes, as you mention, use some of the upper level depth to recover some of the loss of Ellsbury's production.  This might also take some of the pressure off of CF, SS, and maybe 1B depending on who ends up there.
 

Puffy

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 14, 2006
1,251
Town
Puffy said:
 
Right, Headley seems like a prototypical "bridge" target (to Cecchini) and fits Cherington's recent mold of acquiring players after down years - plus he could return a draft pick with a QO after a good season. If available, this seems like a good approach to address potentially the biggest weakness among position players (3B) and, yes, as you mention, use some of the upper level depth to recover some of the loss of Ellsbury's production.  This might also take some of the pressure off of CF, SS, and maybe 1B depending on who ends up there.
 
And, again, I wouldn't be opposed to absorbing Maybin's salary if it helps grease the wheels.  I suppose acquisition cost is the main question.
 

chawson

Member
Aug 1, 2006
1,634
If Quentin is healthy he's interesting. 2/$17.5 (with a $10M option/$3 buyout for 2016) left on his contract; .958 OPS in 388 ABs away from Petco the past two years.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
1,977
Honolulu HI
KillerBs said:
Is Doubront and Middlebrooks for Headley and Denorfia in the ball park?
No way. You want to give up Doubrant and Middlebrooks for a one-year rental of Headley (and Denorfia - but I don't see him as adding tremendous trade value)? Doubront is a good, young, cost controlled left handed starter. I wouldn't do that trade even without Middlebrooks thrown in. Maybe Dempster and Middlebrooks...
I suppose Denorfia could be a lefty mashing platoon partner for Bradley - but that isn't much added value. He doesn't offer much with the bat against RHP. Rajai Davis is similar while also being one of the best base stealers in all of baseball - and the Sox wouldn't need to give up anything but money to sign him. 
 

KillerBs

lurker
Nov 16, 2006
812
kazuneko said:
No way. You want to give up Doubrant and Middlebrooks for a one-year rental of Headley (and Denorfia - but I don't see him as adding tremendous trade value)? Doubront is a good, young, cost controlled left handed starter. I wouldn't do that trade even without Middlebrooks thrown in. Maybe Dempster and Middlebrooks...
I suppose Denorfia could be a lefty mashing platoon partner for Bradley - but that isn't much added value. He doesn't offer much with the bat against RHP. Rajai Davis is similar while also being one of the best base stealers in all of baseball - and the Sox wouldn't need to give up anything but money to sign him. 
You know I think you are right. I like Denorfia and Headley would ease my concerns about WMB next year, but he and Felix have too much cheap upside for this to make sense.
 
The point remains tho that a Middlebrooks + SP for Headley + OFer deal seems like it could make sense, especially given Cecchini knocking on the door for 2015.
 
Nov 10, 2006
104
Rochester, New York
A trade for Headley is one I proposed earlier in this thread. Now, I want this even more because I have a strong suspicion that Headley is in the sights of the MFY and I would love to cut them off at the knees.