I love the video with the Rocky theme music at the end. But he really does look slimmed down and in good shape. Hopefully between that and his shoulder being repaired finally he can give us something next year.
New and Improved--Pablo Sandoval, 3B
- Thread starter Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat
- Start date
Lackey part Deux? Hopefully Panda is also in the starting line up for a World Series clinching victory.
Awesome job PS!
Awesome job PS!
Sandoval has only hit those marks twice in his career, and not since 2011. How about .275/.325/.400 and defense that rises to the level of mediocrity? That would be a huge improvement on what we've gotten so far.
Not only would I take that, I'd do cartwheels to the bank with it. Especially if Farrell could properly play Pablo to his strengths and rest him in unfavorable matchups. 3B isn't a position the 2017 Sox need to be good, they just need it to be not horrible. The line isn't high.
I think he could do a notch better than that - we don't have a good recent baseline since his 2015 season included a lot of nagging injuries. I'd say it was on the high end of the spectrum of possibilities, but something like 280/340/450 could be within reach, if he stays healthy and uses the wall. Much depends on his continuing issues with lefties.
That's the key in my mind. If his repaired shoulder enables him to hit right handed sufficiently (say a ~.700ish OPS), he's going to be fine. I look at the turnaround Hanley had last season once he wasn't favoring his shoulder anymore, and have hope for Sandoval.
That's almost exactly his 2012 season (.283/.342/.447), but that's the last time he slugged better than .420. His ISO by year since 2011: .237, .164, .139, .136, .121.
So that would be a significant comeback not only in terms of 2015 but 2014 and 2013 as well. But hey, if he's In the Best Shape of His Career® and really motivated, who knows.
I would argue -and perhaps this is how you meant it - that numbers like that, if possible at all, are more dependent on his utilization against lefties. And by that I mean he should never start against a LHP. .465 OPS in 2015, .563 in 2014, .686 in 2013. I'd always rather see Rutledge in the game against a LHP.
I like Pablos new attitude and physical condition. No matter how much money and financial security you have, at some point when you embarrass yourself enough pride kicks in (unless drugs or alcohol are involved) . Fortunately he has seen the light and i will be rooting for him. I dont expect him to be an All Star but if he can be league average I will be delighted.
I do wonder if the Red Sox threatened to void his contract to help wake him up but I guess we will never know if that happened or not. Unlike some others here I thought they had a good case if Pablo did not turn it around , and just the idea of it would probably of got his attention since even if he won the arbitration case it would be embarrassing as hell.
I do wonder if the Red Sox threatened to void his contract to help wake him up but I guess we will never know if that happened or not. Unlike some others here I thought they had a good case if Pablo did not turn it around , and just the idea of it would probably of got his attention since even if he won the arbitration case it would be embarrassing as hell.
.725 OPS and mediocre defense is roughly what I would expect out of a Holt / Rutledge platoon, so if we're considering that a win, we might as well try to ship him for salary relief if we can find a willing sucker, errr, taker.
I'd want to see more like a SLG heavy .775 against RHP and average D in order to stop hating him. If he hits lefties at all it's a bonus, but if he doesn't, platoon him ASAP and don't think twice.
The park is an issue, just to be fair. ATT just kills homers. (.704 HR park factor last year, .677 in 2014, Panda's last year in SF).
I'd take a nice uptick in doubles with 15 homers. But I think he clearly needs a platoon partner based on his splits.
He actually has the second highest SLG at AT&T of all the parks he's got 50 or more PA in (only Chase is higher). His home run rate of 33 PA/HR at AT&T is slightly better than his overall career rate of 34.9.
How would they void his contract? Is there a draconian weight provision in there?
I think the emphasis was on the threat more than the ability, without putting words into Sampo's mouth - leverage doesn't require you to be right, legally-speaking, just plausible enough to cajole action.
Right, because I'm sure his agent wouldn't tell him that they couldn't do that. Those guys know nothing about contracts and labor law.
They can, some people just like to read.
7.(b) The Club may terminate this contract upon written notice to the Player (but only after requesting and obtaining waivers of this contract from all other Major League Clubs) if the Player shall at any time:
(1) fail, refuse or neglect to conform his personal conduct to the standards of good citizenship and good sportsmanship or to keep himself in first-class physical condition or to obey the Club’s train- ing rules; or
(2) fail, in the opinion of the Club’s management, to exhibit suf- ficient skill or competitive ability to qualify or continue as a mem- ber of the Club’s team; or
(3) fail, refuse or neglect to render his services hereunder or in any other manner materially breach this contract.
The "I was never in their idea of first class shape to begin with, and before they gave me that contract" defense seems like it would be pretty solid there.
Please show me a case where any one of those clauses have been successfully utilized. I'll wait.
All the steroid busts, domestic violence, DWIs, prostitutes, and other arrests violate 'good citizenship' just as much as getting fat violates staying in first class physical shape. CC left to go to rehab during the playoffs, is that 'first class physical shape'? Josh Hamilton has had multiple issues with alcohol. Plenty of other players have had drug and alcohol problems. Even more have gotten fat. Plenty have been proven to be using illegal substances, like steroids and greenies. Denny Neagle violating a specific morals clause is the best you will find. That ended up in a settlement/buyout.
Why have none of these players been terminated?
Please show me a single contract that was terminated due to these clauses that you think would get them out of Pablo's contract, or could have. You can't, because it hasn't ever happened.
But yes, please keep living in the world of pretending the MLBPA is powerless to stop a team from using an obscure clause to deny their member the guaranteed contract they agreed to. It was fun watching people hang their heads into the wall last time lets do it again!
Last edited:
You said the club can't void a contract, but the CBA says they can. I don't give a rat's ass if the clause has ever actually been exercised. The point is, it could be exercised, or as mentioned upthread, used as leverage.
Thermonuclear weapons have never been used in combat, so they can be safely ignored, right?
Thermonuclear weapons have never been used in combat, so they can be safely ignored, right?
Part 2 there basically says they can terminate your contract because they think you suck. I doubt that will ever be done either.
In your scenario, the thermonuclear weapon doesn't have anything that actually, ya know, explodes. It just kind of looks like a bomb. But good comp man, that's certainly on par. Threatening to use a thermonuclear weapon is definitely analogous to voiding a contract as far as leverage goes.
Do you honestly think no one would have ever done it if it were actually possible? Make a single viable argument why the Yankees - who were whispered to be trying to do it - chose not to.
But yeah man, keep the dream alive.
I see your point, but the chances of successfully invoking the clause are so remote that no competent agent (or player who listens to his agent) would allow the threat to be used as leverage. The fact that Sandoval was already fat when the team signed him torpedoes any chance of convincing an arbitrator that "first-class physical condition" means "don't get fat." At the very least, it would be difficult, if not impossible, for the team to establish the tipping point where Sandoval went from being pleasantly plump to being physically unable to fulfill his contract.
If the Red Sox decide that they want to stop paying Sandoval, they have to make their case to an arbitrator. If North Korea decides to use nuclear weapons, they won't be asking anyone for permission.
There's no doubt in my mind that Sandoval's fitness for duty was called into question by the club at some point during discussions over the past year - with either the player directly or with his reps. I mean how could it not be? Whether or not the club threatened to actually void the contract over his weight isn't the point, but just bringing it up in discussion would underscore the gravity of club's pay/performance concerns very effectively. Nobody's contract ever gets voided because it's too messy, projects poorly to other players, and it's so much easier for the club to remedy the situation by other means.
"Listen Pablo, we could void your contract, but we're not going to do that. We want you to succeed. But if there's no improvement, we're going to have to make a move."
"Listen Pablo, we could void your contract, but we're not going to do that. We want you to succeed. But if there's no improvement, we're going to have to make a move."
Was his weight brought up? Sure, I'm sure it was. Was it even passively aggressively hinted at that they would try to void his contract? No, it wasn't. First because the agent would laugh in their face and would steer any future clients away from them, at least in the immediate future. Second because his physical stature didn't change in a drastic way from twelve months earlier when they put him through a physical, passed him and signed him to his contract. 'Well, you were fat when we signed you, but ten pounds later we think you no longer meet the terms of your contract' isn't winning an arbitration hearing. Especially when team officials were on record saying he was in great shape and at 8% body fat or whatever, during spring training. Third because as soon as they left the room, his agent would be on the phone with Tony Clark about filing a grievance and then it goes public. Then every other player on the league knows the Red Sox try to go back on deals in bad faith. Threats of 'making a move' are 'we are going to pay 75% of your deal and send you to Milwaukee'. Because they have done things like that, many teams have and that actually has teeth.
Last edited:
Well, far short of the threat of trading or ending the contract, there are also social/psychological factors at work. I'm sure there are narcissists and what-not among pro-ball players, and we often see powerful denial at work in declining players, so rational self-evaluation isn't something that's always going to be there. That said, I'm sure the average player does not want to be known as the guy who couldn't hack it, or who got shipped out of town, or the guy who was demoted/lost his job/ended up riding the pine/ate himself out of his position. I'm also sure the average player does not like to be heckled, written about negatively, made into a joke, or be despised by the fan-base and/or the man on the street.
I think it's significant that Pablo didn't try to blame all of this on his shoulder. It would have been easy - "I'm fat, have always been fat, and have always been fat and awesome until my shoulder crumbled." Instead he seems to be really trying to deal with the weight.
We're all shooting in the dark, but I'd guess it's more likely Pablo has undergone some kind of self-reassessment and realized he needs to loose weight to continue as the sort of player he wants to be, than it is that Pablo was somehow "threatened" into a training program. (Though the two are not mutually exclusive.)
***
As an aside, the voiding contract issue is a tricky one because players get underpaid early and overpaid late in their careers, and part of the fundamental approach is that injuries won't void the basic contract. So, if clubs start voiding on "character" and "fitness" issues, players are going to fear getting injured and having the clubs start digging through their trash, hoping to find an issue to void the contract over. I don't think the clubs or the players want that sort of environment - or those sort of constant PR hits. (Pablo's right in the center of that type of dynamic - injury, constant slow decline, and weight. How do you separate one from the other?)
Just for the record on this, one of those clauses was exercised before. A little over a decade ago:
http://www.espn.com/mlb/news/story?id=2053993
No one remembers Denny Neagle?
http://www.espn.com/mlb/news/story?id=2053993
No one remembers Denny Neagle?
While the "Pablo has slimmed down" story was a storied annual tradition in SF, I don't recall him ever getting this light before. Two things:
(1) While the article E5 posted could be written off as typical athlete pablum, Pablo is a sensitive soul, and there's a chance that being written off last year finally made him realize that he needed to pull himself together. His weight had been an issue before, but his athletic ability always managed to let him overcome it -- until last year. Maybe that was the wake-up call?
(2) Keep in mind that, unlike almost any other athlete, Panda tends to gain weight during the season, allegedly because of his love of room service. While it's great that he looks thinner now, the fight is far from over.
(1) While the article E5 posted could be written off as typical athlete pablum, Pablo is a sensitive soul, and there's a chance that being written off last year finally made him realize that he needed to pull himself together. His weight had been an issue before, but his athletic ability always managed to let him overcome it -- until last year. Maybe that was the wake-up call?
(2) Keep in mind that, unlike almost any other athlete, Panda tends to gain weight during the season, allegedly because of his love of room service. While it's great that he looks thinner now, the fight is far from over.
This isn't unique to Panda and strange to read on a Red Sox message board when Josh Beckett said:
Source
Historically Panda's problem was starting the season already in the red but he's in a much better position this time around where gaining a few LBs won't kill his play. I'm optimistic.
It probably is not even so much a love for room service as it is simply a matter of taking him out of the more controllable environment a baseball off season can provide. Which tends to be an across the board problem for anybody when applying the need for a personal trainer approach.
Right now (he's at home I assume) it's simply much easier to schedule daily routines, workouts, every 3 hour ratio meals, ect ect then it is once the constant traveling starts. Guessing the line between what is most ideal and what is most practical in the moment tends to get pretty blurry after that, and for most people the lack of core discipline that wasn't there to begin with just has a way of taking over.
This has been speculated in a number of places, but this is the first confirmation of the Sox interest that I have seen. $3M seems like best case scenario (Plouffe made $7.5M last season but not for a utility role), seems like they could go to $5M (more inline with Young) and still have $10M to play with unless they have another move in mind.............
http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/red_sox/2016/12/red_sox_consider_deal_for_utility_player_trevor_plouffe#.WGH3TPdWrw8.twitter
http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/red_sox/2016/12/red_sox_consider_deal_for_utility_player_trevor_plouffe#.WGH3TPdWrw8.twitter
Last edited:
If they can get him for $2-3MM, just do it. I'd say he'd be worth a long look at twice that.
He looks like a pretty solid fit for a bench-plus role. He hits LHP: even in his injury-plagued shitstorm of a 2016 he managed a 105 wRC+ against them, and he's at 121 for his career. Historically he's a decent (not great) defensive 3B, who has also made spot starts in the outfield and has seen a bit of 1B duty over the past two years. He's just 30, so if he's healthy there's the potential for a genuine rebound.
Certainly he'd be fine as a platoon option/insurance backup to Pablo and Moreland, and a bench of Plouffe/Holt/Young/Vazquez looks very solid, if a bit slow.
He looks like a pretty solid fit for a bench-plus role. He hits LHP: even in his injury-plagued shitstorm of a 2016 he managed a 105 wRC+ against them, and he's at 121 for his career. Historically he's a decent (not great) defensive 3B, who has also made spot starts in the outfield and has seen a bit of 1B duty over the past two years. He's just 30, so if he's healthy there's the potential for a genuine rebound.
Certainly he'd be fine as a platoon option/insurance backup to Pablo and Moreland, and a bench of Plouffe/Holt/Young/Vazquez looks very solid, if a bit slow.
I've been beating the drum for a Moss type and a Prado type to platoon at the corners / rotate at DH. Moreland / Plouffe would be kind of a poor man's version of it, but I would be fine with it - if Plouffe sucks you just trade him or cut him, the couple million it costs is an acceptable risk for a big market team.
Plouffe for <$3M would be a very good value buy. He's likely as good as Moreland over a full season, and we paid twice that for Mitch. I think this would be a done deal if Plouffe were willing to settle for that amount, but I'm guessing he wants to be sure there isn't more money and/or playing time out there before he settles for a platoon role with a good team. As noted above, he's only 30 so I'm sure he still thinks of himself as an everyday player. He's not at the "just sign to get a ring" stage of his career yet. But the market might not be there for him. Wait and see, I guess...
Obviously Plouffe for 3M is good, but do any of us really hate the idea of Plouffe for 5M if it came down to it? Or 2yrs for 7? I mean I'm sure it's an overpay but it's not my money and it's not going to blow them past the cap or crowd out some other spending.
I'll be the guy who objects to Plouffe at $3M or $5M or for multiple years. I don't get the fascination with him as he doesn't strike me as all that much better an option than what they've already got on the roster at a fraction of the cost. Is he better than Rutledge? Sure, but is he $2M better? $4M better? I don't think so.
And especially with them close to the cap. I'd rather see them save any room they still have left for an in season move.
Career vs LHP
Plouffe: .268/.344/.465, .809 OPS
Rutledge: .255/.307/.414, .721 OPS
I mean, that's not a massive difference, but it's not insignificant either, especially if he can spell LF or 1B in a pinch. For 3M? I'd do it.
Plouffe would be an interesting addition. Typically strong against LHP, almost all of his power production is to LF - though he doesn't pull the ball overall as much as you'd expect.
Really streaky hitter. Almost every year he has a couple 900+ OPS months and disappears in the others.
Really streaky hitter. Almost every year he has a couple 900+ OPS months and disappears in the others.
Not a huge fan of Plouffe but he seems a perfect fit for the Sox and they aren't going to do much better. They need depth at 1b/3b and he provides it.
Yeah, basically this. Plouffe has more of a track record and seems to be a better defender as well. I totally agree Rutledge could emerge as a better option ... in which case you play him, and you unload Plouffe. Whereas if you don't have Plouffe, there is a good chance that you are looking to make the same kind of addition in season and take on salary, plus pay prospects for it. I just don't see the money as a big obstacle, they are like 15mm under the tax as of today and they freed up cash in order to be able to make improvements around the edges of the roster. This would be an improvement around the edge of the roster.
If the money is such a big deal we could just dump Abad, I have no idea why we want to pay him 2M to do anything
