Red Sox in season discussion

The Red Industry

New Member
Sep 29, 2017
67
Basically anyone other than Andrelton Simmons.
It would be catastrophic to the team.
The Sox won 92 games and made it to the ALCS last year with JD and his personal views. Simmons might not be peak Simmons anymore but his babip was low for his career last year and as noted above his defense was actually pretty damn good. If he does continue on his offensive downward trend you at least have solid defense. For low-ish money and few years he could be a decent bridge. The steamer projections for next year looks at least decent. (And yes I understand they are just projections)
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
I would guess whether or not they hang onto X (under this line of thinking) would depend entirely on if they’re competitive for a playoff spot. I don’t see Ownership/ Chaim unloading X for roster value if it hinders them making the playoffs while they’re in it (starting the off-season is a different story).
It's a very Tampa move to do exactly this, but I don't think Bloom necessarily follows that script all the time, and Bogaerts is an unusual case as a franchise cornerstone on a team that might not want to keep trading its franchise cornerstones?
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
It's a very Tampa move to do exactly this, but I don't think Bloom necessarily follows that script all the time, and Bogaerts is an unusual case as a franchise cornerstone on a team that might not want to keep trading its franchise cornerstones?
I think you’re missing the context of my post as it relates to the circumstances Beantownidaho posits in the post directly above it. I don't think present circumstances warrant worrying about trading X. If they sign a glove first SS to be a cady, then definitely not. If they sign Story, maybe, but he could also shift to 2B under the plan I thought would work with Baez. If they sign Correa, well, then a lot of things are on the table...

I’m not willing to ascribe any special circumstances to X as a cornerstone, or guess what Bloom's intentions are towards said cornerstones. I would much rather sign Devers to a long-term contract given his age and productivity going forward. For a team coming off a real shot to win the ALCS, the idea of a Devers/ Correa/ X/ 1Bman IF is very appealing (even for 1 season). Add Suzuki as RFer and make a run.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
983
Per Total Zone, he was the best SS in baseball with a +14 for the season. BIS defensive runs saved had him at +15. Fielding Bible had him at +15 also. UZR seems like the outlier.
Simmons very well might not be a great fit (although it is nice to see that he does appear to still be a very good defensive shortstop).

Putting aside whether Xander would accept a big extension and move to 2B (or potentially LF), what other players would fit the profile of a very good defensive SS to play the position next year+ and, potentially bridge the gap to Mayer (full stop: we all acknowledge Mayer is not a sure thing in any sense of the word).

I mentioned J.P. Crawford as a trade target.
It looks like Paul DeJong is likely available after a down year. He'll turn 29 next August and was a good player 2017-2019.
Kevin Newman? He makes the rest of this list look like batting champs.
Miguel Rojas doesn't move the needle much either.
I'm guessing it wouldn't take much to trade for Nick Ahmed... for good reason.
Who else fits the bill?
 

Earthbound64

Member
SoSH Member
Yeah it was a total let down year. They were they supposed to win more games than 92 and make the world series... but you know JD made it even worse.
No, signing Andrelton Simmons would make it even worse.

If your beef is with "even worse" vs. "worse," the person I was replying to was suggesting bad options at a position. So the comment was with regards to making the Shortstop position even worse – versus other available Shortstop options.
 

The Red Industry

New Member
Sep 29, 2017
67
Doesn't mean they should look to make things even worse.
I don't think I was suggesting that Xander to Simmons isn't a down grade at short offensively, of course it is. But it seems to me Yo La Tengo has it right
Which is why I'd rather keep Bogaerts and improve the defense at SS with a lesser offensive player and use the payroll difference to add players elsewhere: sign Suzuki or Schwarber (or both and trade Martinez), sign a good defensive shortstop*, and then extend Bogaerts with a big extension and move him to 2B, with his blessing.
If you think Simmons views outside of baseball would ruin the team I disagree. There are weirdos on any given championship team.
 

Manuel Aristides

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2009
246
If you think Simmons views outside of baseball would ruin the team I disagree. There are weirdos on any given championship team.
A weirdo is one thing, hell, I'm a Manny Ramirez fan, I love a weirdo. Bring me your Julian Taverezes, your Baergas, your Gomeses. And I've rooted for more-than-a-couple professional athletes whose politics are odious to me, we all have: it's part of the deal, like it or not. When I first googled Simmons and found his story of opting out of the end of 2020 because of mental health issues and suicidal thoughts, I thought, that's the kind of mental health awareness I want out of my team's players. But then I found his openly anti-vax tweets. I think it is totally fair to be concerned about adding anti-vax players to the team, and it's not about being "weird".

An anti-vax player presents a specific risk: he is more likely to bring a highly transmissible virus into the closed, close-quarters environments the team exists in (clubhouse, airplane, bus, etc). We saw how badly the team can be affected by a clubhouse COVID outbreak firsthand this August/September; it nearly derailed the season. We're seeing it right now (as in, this week) in all of the other North American team sports: both NBA and NHL teams have had to postpone scheduled games and at at least two NFL franchises are currently fully remote, with critical players unavailable for practices and games both. There's pretty obvious negative value potential in bringing (additional) unvaccinated players into the clubhouse, even more so when those players are loudly anti-vax, because they may influence others on/around the team to become more susceptible to risk (ie, talking them out of boosters). That's without even broaching the 'politics' of it and the type of optics the team does/doesn't want to embrace.

That's what I understood the idea of adding Simmons "making things worse" to mean, and it's a very fair point. Maybe it shouldn't be the first consideration in player evaluation, and certainly it shouldn't be the only one... but it is absolutely fair to weigh it.
 

The Red Industry

New Member
Sep 29, 2017
67
An anti-vax player presents a specific risk
It's been gone over a million times here so we don't need to belabor the point much further do we but really though, do you think these kind of risks are not already on the team? Or that the Sox wouldn't sign someone solely based on that consideration? I'm vaccinated mysefl and I think other people should be. I do, however, recognize that there are going to be professional athletes that don't think like I do no matter how much I wish they would. And it's not going to be a small number of them. Teams should weigh that risk obviously but to what extent I don't know, I'm sure they have more internal info at their disposal for their risk tolerance considerations. The question then is would Simmons as a bridge with resources spent elsewhere make the team short and long term better? I think yes, like Yo La Tengo spelled out. Since you brought up other teams, Aaron Rodgers straight up lied about his status, was down for a week and the Packers are currently about to win the NFC. Simmons is no Rodgers talent wise clearly but these dudes are out there and they are not going away.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
8,205
Boston, MA
Andrelton Simmons hasn't had a better than league average OPS+ in three years and is going to be 32 next season. Talking about him for anything other than a backup infielder role is insane. He could be the magic Covid curing shortstop and I still wouldn't want him getting any at bats over Xander.
 

Daniel_Son

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2021
1,846
San Diego
I know it's been covered up-thread, but I think Brad Miller on a 2-3 year contract makes a lot of sense. He's got experience at all 3 infield positions we need help at, and it wouldn't take a huge financial commitment to get him. I can see him covering 1b/2b in 2022 and SS+2B in 2023-2024. About league-average with the bat, but I think he'd fit comfortably into the bottom half of our lineup.
 

Jack Rabbit Slim

Member
SoSH Member
May 19, 2010
1,305
I know it's been covered up-thread, but I think Brad Miller on a 2-3 year contract makes a lot of sense. He's got experience at all 3 infield positions we need help at, and it wouldn't take a huge financial commitment to get him. I can see him covering 1b/2b in 2022 and SS+2B in 2023-2024. About league-average with the bat, but I think he'd fit comfortably into the bottom half of our lineup.
Brad Miller would fit nicely as a backup/platoon with Dalbec and Arroyo, but he hasn't played more than 35 innings at SS since 2016. Expecting him to play there with any regularity at age 32 seems like a non-starter.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
I think you’re missing the context of my post as it relates to the circumstances Beantownidaho posits in the post directly above it. I don't think present circumstances warrant worrying about trading X. If they sign a glove first SS to be a cady, then definitely not. If they sign Story, maybe, but he could also shift to 2B under the plan I thought would work with Baez. If they sign Correa, well, then a lot of things are on the table...

I’m not willing to ascribe any special circumstances to X as a cornerstone, or guess what Bloom's intentions are towards said cornerstones. I would much rather sign Devers to a long-term contract given his age and productivity going forward. For a team coming off a real shot to win the ALCS, the idea of a Devers/ Correa/ X/ 1Bman IF is very appealing (even for 1 season). Add Suzuki as RFer and make a run.
So there are scenarios where he's a bit more expendable, but absent a Correa signing, he's still a contributor on a contender and they'll be in GFIN mode? Agreed. My Tampa point was that he comes from a line of thinking that is always willing to flip the asset, and also are we sure he's an expiring contract? Technically yes, but he doesn't seem to want to leave and the Sox shouldn't want him to.
 

Daniel_Son

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2021
1,846
San Diego
Brad Miller would fit nicely as a backup/platoon with Dalbec and Arroyo, but he hasn't played more than 35 innings at SS since 2016. Expecting him to play there with any regularity at age 32 seems like a non-starter.
I was envisioning him manning 2B primarily, and serving in more of a platoon role at 1B with Casas/Dalbec + backup for SS be that X or his replacement.

However, the more I think about this, the more I get the feeling that Bloom and co. are right where JM3 was at upthread:

But...I'm also not sure if the shortstop needs to be paid a ton because it's a valuable position archetype is smart modern baseball.

Last year, shortstops as a collective had an OPS of .754 & WAR of 85.9 (all these #s are from Fangraphs).

3B had an OPS of .746 & WAR of 66.5.
2B had an OPS of .723 & WAR of 54.6.
If they wanted to sign an elite talent at shortstop, they'd just extend Bogaerts. Maybe a better use of resources is to maximize defense at SS and try and supplement offense elsewhere on the diamond - a couple power bats in the corner outfield, 1b, dh, etc.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,753
Twin Cities
I’m trying to think of deals that could be just enough to entice X to stick around without committing the team to an 8-10 year deal. How about this: tear up the current deal. Replace it with a 5 year, $155M base deal (more per year than Manny F’n Machado). X gets an opt out after year 2 (so, we delay his opt out by a year, getting us one year closer to Mayer). And let’s add a player option at the back end for two years, $50M if he hits 500 ABs in year 5 (while not finishing on the IL). This is when he might be playing another position.

This is still a hometown discount, but it tells him we want to keep him, we value him, and we want him to have flexibility in the deal.
 

pdub

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 2, 2007
517
I wouldn't worry about that. His agent may have told him to unfollow because it could look like tampering or some kind of favoritism.
 
I’m trying to think of deals that could be just enough to entice X to stick around without committing the team to an 8-10 year deal. How about this: tear up the current deal. Replace it with a 5 year, $155M base deal (more per year than Manny F’n Machado). X gets an opt out after year 2 (so, we delay his opt out by a year, getting us one year closer to Mayer). And let’s add a player option at the back end for two years, $50M if he hits 500 ABs in year 5 (while not finishing on the IL). This is when he might be playing another position.

This is still a hometown discount, but it tells him we want to keep him, we value him, and we want him to have flexibility in the deal.
This is about where I'm at, although I probably wouldn't give him the opt out after year 2. If there's an opt out I'd go with after year 3, although if the 2023 offseason projects to have a much larger class of lower tier SS hitting FA I might be OK with 2 year opt out. I'm not sure we will be confident about Mayer in 2 years, but there's a solid chance that we will have a good sense of what we've got in 3. I'd also be willing to offer an even higher AAV than this most likely, although only after trying to extend Devers first.

A 3 year opt out would have a good sell to it right now as well -- rake in a fat AAV for the next 3 years, and then get something like what Semien just got.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
31,426
A tidbit from Chris Cotillo on the catching situation


Then in his reply, Stats throws out a name -

This makes sense. On one hand, it's pretty unlikely that Bloom doesn't the same deficiencies in Vazquez that we could see. On the other, given the roster and the price tag, they couldn't really *not* pick up the option.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
A tidbit from Chris Cotillo on the catching situation


Then in his reply, Stats throws out a name -

A few times over the past couple of seasons some here have suggested/speculated over a possible deal between the Sox and Padres. The idea behind this is the Sox take on Hosmer's or Meyer's contract in return for one of San Diego's young pitchers. I came across this article a week and a half ago and didn't bother passing it along, but given the quoted post I figured I would share it for discussion.

Possible Trade Scenario
Red Sox receive: Luis Campusano or Austin Nola and Eric Hosmer (take on $20 million of his remaining contract)
Padres receive: Pitching prospect (such as Brayan Bello)

https://www.gaslampball.com/2021/12/10/22820415/padres-possible-catching-trade-partner-boston-red-sox
 

pokey_reese

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 25, 2008
16,367
Boston, MA
A few times over the past couple of seasons some here have suggested/speculated over a possible deal between the Sox and Padres. The idea behind this is the Sox take on Hosmer's or Meyer's contract in return for one of San Diego's young pitchers. I came across this article a week and a half ago and didn't bother passing it along, but given the quoted post I figured I would share it for discussion.

Possible Trade Scenario
Red Sox receive: Luis Campusano or Austin Nola and Eric Hosmer (take on $20 million of his remaining contract)
Padres receive: Pitching prospect (such as Brayan Bello)

https://www.gaslampball.com/2021/12/10/22820415/padres-possible-catching-trade-partner-boston-red-sox
Wait, the Sox would have to take on a bad contract AND give up a top prospect? I'm not sure what this person is saying here:

It wouldn’t be so much about what players they get in return, even though Bello is one of Boston’s best pitching prospects, but more so about the flexibility they get from moving Hosmer and freeing up a roster spot by moving a catcher.
If it's not about the player going back, then it isn't going to be a good one.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
It doesn't HAVE to be what's proposed in the article, in fact that's why I didn't share it a week and a half ago when I first saw it. But if the Sox are indeed think of moving on from Vazquez, San Diego seems to have a surplus and will likely make a deal after bringing in Alfaro. Since there's not much discussion going on due to the lockout and we've had past discussions about the possibility of helping out SD with one of their bad contracts and The Sox might be in the market for a catcher I thought I might try to get a bit of hot stove talk going.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
22,105
Rogers Park
If it's Austin Nola, it's laughable. He's a nice player, but he's also a catcher in his 30s.

The rest depends on what "take on $20m of his remaining contract" means. Hosmer's due about $60m over four years, with an AAV of $18m. If they want us to pick up two thirds of that, they are sure as hell not getting Bello. But if the proposal is Luis Campusano and Hosmer and ~$39m dollars for Bello, that's not terrible. Six years of control of a 23 year old top catching prospect is worth quite a bit, and Hosmer would only have an AAV of $8m in such a deal, making him only a mild drag on the value of the offer. So it's basically a Campusano-Bello swap motivated by the financials with Hosmer.

And that's close enough to par that I am not sure how I would go. The sim thinks it's a pro-Boston deal. But that's also not a ton of salary relief for the Pads.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
If it's Austin Nola, it's laughable. He's a nice player, but he's also a catcher in his 30s.

The rest depends on what "take on $20m of his remaining contract" means. Hosmer's due about $60m over four years, with an AAV of $18m. If they want us to pick up two thirds of that, they are sure as hell not getting Bello. But if the proposal is Luis Campusano and Hosmer and ~$39m dollars for Bello, that's not terrible. Six years of control of a 23 year old top catching prospect is worth quite a bit, and Hosmer would only have an AAV of $8m in such a deal, making him only a mild drag on the value of the offer. So it's basically a Campusano-Bello swap motivated by the financials with Hosmer.

And that's close enough to par that I am not sure how I would go. The sim thinks it's a pro-Boston deal. But that's also not a ton of salary relief for the Pads.
I took it as the Sox being on the hook for 20 M over for years. Meanwhile, Myers has just one year remaining on his contract at 22.5 M. I wonder what sort of relief might come back in a deal for him. Primarily a RF since Hosmer arrived, but has plenty of experience at 1B and a little at 3rd. Fills a need at 2 positions and you'd only be committed to him for a year.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2001
24,951
Why would the Sox have any interest in Hosmer and the four years remaining on his contract when their best prospect (who seems to be ready for the Majors by mid-season) plays first base? I'm not sure whether this passes the smell test.
 

Joe Nation

New Member
Jul 30, 2005
171
Manila, Philippines
Red Sox finalize 2022 coaching staff
The Red Sox have finalized manager Alex Cora’s coaching staff for the 2022 season, announcing Monday that they’ve hired Luis Ortiz and Ben Rosenthal as assistant hitting coaches. As previously reported, they’ve also promoted Peter Fatse from assistant hitting coach to hitting coach. Meanwhile, 2021 quality control coach Ramon Vazquez will move to first base coach, while Andy Fox will be the Major League field coordinator after previously serving as assistant field coordinator. Former bullpen catcher Mike Brenly is now a Major League staff assistant as well.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Why would the Sox have any interest in Hosmer and the four years remaining on his contract when their best prospect (who seems to be ready for the Majors by mid-season) plays first base? I'm not sure whether this passes the smell test.
HUGE if, but if they get Hosmer at somewhere in the neighborhood of 5M per year they may be able flip him or move Dalbec at the trade deadline if Casas is ready.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
25,924
Miami (oh, Miami!)
HUGE if, but if they get Hosmer at somewhere in the neighborhood of 5M per year they may be able flip him or move Dalbec at the trade deadline if Casas is ready.
Let's talk Bats. Assume to compete, we need 3 or 4 core hitters, plus a greater number of more fungible complementary pieces.

Per Cots, it looks like the Sox are estimated to be $3M under the CBT threshold (were it to be reinstated as is.)
View: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WWRsQNsGZkWuJZwlY8--xVBXMJGjh230D45KiHTHuvY/edit#gid=1520401900


2022: In the 1B/DH department, we currently have Dalbec/JD. Casas is due to be called up at some point this year. Our other mainstays are Devers at 3B, Xander at SS.

2023: The plan is likely be for 1B/DH to be Casas/Dalbec in 2023. In 2023, Devers is at 3B for his final year of arb. (Boegarts may opt out at the end of 2022.)

2024(5): We start to see ML bats coming up: Yorke at 2B, Meyer at SS, Jordan at 3B/1B, Binelas at 3B. Dalbec would be in his first year of arb in 2024, Devers is gone or extended, Xander the same.)

My thoughts:

* We are close to the old CBT.

* JBJ is already kind of a mill-stone re: a 2022 in-season Devers/Xander extension and/or the CBT, and the only one they're likely to take on.

*At the end of 2022, we will have to go to the trade/FA well to shore up the club for C, SP, maybe SS.
(FAs at season's end are Vazquez and Plawecki, Hill and Eovaldi, JD and E.Hernandez. Option FA: Xander.)

* 2024 window IF hitting may be a strength to trade from. But we don't actually get club utility until 2024/5. So trading current starting pieces is a bit of an illusion, since it creates a gap that will have to be filled at a cost. IMO, if they believe Dalbec has figured out how to hit, he should be pretty much untouchable, except for a young, cost-controlled, ML ready SP. If JD, Dalbec, and Casas are hitting, JD is the one to trade.

* This smells like last year to me: a quasi-punt with a semi-closing window. If they tank, look for JD, E.Hernandez, and our short term starters to be traded.


In any event, I don't see how acquiring Hosmer (or Schwarber) does anything but create a log-jam, wasting value. Doubly so if there's a reasonable JD extension in the works.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
To be clear, I'm not necessarily advocating this, but thought it interesting given the mention of some folks here in past years of taking on a bad SD contract for the opportunity to get into their young pitching core. There will be a need for a catcher in the not to distant future and it's all pure speculation, but the willingness to take on JBJ's contract for prospects leads me to wonder if Chaim would look at Campusano and see him as being worth taking on either Myers or Hosmer. Myers would create less of a log jam with his ability to play either corner in the OF and 1B. Of course there are other moving parts here, given there's lots of uncertainty about the CBA and player movement due to the lockout as well as the Suzuki possibility.
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
When the Sox take on a player at the end of a deal, it’s usually because the player’s AAV hit is less than his salary and they can pay the difference on the salary while having it count much less in the CBT calculation. It’s a good way to throw around their financial muscle to get talent. Hosmer’s contract is structured so that his salary declines to under his AAV, so even if the Padres include money and talent to get rid of him, it will likely be for less than is with it to the Sox to further gum up 1B.

The time to make this sort of deal for Hosmer was a few years ago, when the Padres were really looking to save money.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
22,105
Rogers Park
When the Sox take on a player at the end of a deal, it’s usually because the player’s AAV hit is less than his salary and they can pay the difference on the salary while having it count much less in the CBT calculation. It’s a good way to throw around their financial muscle to get talent. Hosmer’s contract is structured so that his salary declines to under his AAV, so even if the Padres include money and talent to get rid of him, it will likely be for less than is with it to the Sox to further gum up 1B.

The time to make this sort of deal for Hosmer was a few years ago, when the Padres were really looking to save money.
This is a good post, and the reason that the Myers rumors a few years back made more sense than this one.

Still, I know this trade proposal isn't a real rumor (it's a fake trade from a Padres blog), but I think it warrants discussion, at least during a lockout when we're starved for things to talk about. And the fact that it treated Nola and Campusano as interchangeable is a bit of red flag.

But for all that, it's weird that our discussion is all focused on Hosmer (and the 1B/DH logjam) and not Campusano (and the dearth of viable future catchers in the system). If we can acquire Campusano for a good pitching prospect and taking on the burden of a replacement level first baseman paid like a one WAR first baseman, that could potentially be a good deal for Boston. We're probably not keeping Hosmer in this scenario, or not keeping him past Casas' call up. We're probably dealing him and another few mil to the A's or Pirates or Diamondbacks to be a Firey Veteran Presence and Positive Clubhouse Guy in exchange for a pair of AA relief prospects.

The point is to use our willingness to spend money in a year we're probably going over the cap anyways as a way to buy a cost-controlled core player. Fangraphs has Campusano as a 55 FV player, with this year-old writeup:

TLDR
Built like a linebacker, Campusano's combination of power and contact skills is rare, and while he's no Molina brother, he's good enough to stay behind the plate.
Full Report
Campusano was a bad-bodied catcher on the summer showcase circuit, but then completely remade his body for his senior spring. He showed above-average power, some bat control, and improved agility behind the plate, boosting his stock to the late first/early second round of the draft. He didn't catch much velocity in high school and struggled receiving pro arms at first, but that has improved to an acceptable place. More importantly, he's continued to hit. Though his 2019 High-A statline was aided by the Cal League's hitting environment, Campusano's 11% strikeout rate was the second best rate among qualified, full-season backstops in 2019 (Yohel Pozo was first) and his exit velos (89 mph on average) were great for a 20-year-old. He is rumored to have been the centerpiece of San Diego's negotiations with Boston for Mookie Betts and while young catching has a tendency to take a beating and fall short of expectations on offense because of it, right now Campusano looks like a potential star offensive catcher. The Padres' upper-level catching turnover and a spring 2021 injury to Austin Nola foisted Campusano into a situation for which he wasn't ready, but it has had no impact on my long-term opinion of him, which is that he has All-Star offensive ability at the position. (Alternate site, MLB)
Since that was written he's had 38 terrible MLB PAs (.272 OPS — oof.) and 326 excellent AAA PAs (.295/.365/.541). Again, he's 23, and still has less than a year's service time after two cups of coffee. If he's actually being dangled in salary dumps, we should be very interested. That's all.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Let's talk Bats. Assume to compete, we need 3 or 4 core hitters, plus a greater number of more fungible complementary pieces.

Per Cots, it looks like the Sox are estimated to be $3M under the CBT threshold (were it to be reinstated as is.)
View: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WWRsQNsGZkWuJZwlY8--xVBXMJGjh230D45KiHTHuvY/edit#gid=1520401900


2022: In the 1B/DH department, we currently have Dalbec/JD. Casas is due to be called up at some point this year. Our other mainstays are Devers at 3B, Xander at SS.

2023: The plan is likely be for 1B/DH to be Casas/Dalbec in 2023. In 2023, Devers is at 3B for his final year of arb. (Boegarts may opt out at the end of 2022.)

2024(5): We start to see ML bats coming up: Yorke at 2B, Meyer at SS, Jordan at 3B/1B, Binelas at 3B. Dalbec would be in his first year of arb in 2024, Devers is gone or extended, Xander the same.)

My thoughts:

* We are close to the old CBT.

* JBJ is already kind of a mill-stone re: a 2022 in-season Devers/Xander extension and/or the CBT, and the only one they're likely to take on.

*At the end of 2022, we will have to go to the trade/FA well to shore up the club for C, SP, maybe SS.
(FAs at season's end are Vazquez and Plawecki, Hill and Eovaldi, JD and E.Hernandez. Option FA: Xander.)

* 2024 window IF hitting may be a strength to trade from. But we don't actually get club utility until 2024/5. So trading current starting pieces is a bit of an illusion, since it creates a gap that will have to be filled at a cost. IMO, if they believe Dalbec has figured out how to hit, he should be pretty much untouchable, except for a young, cost-controlled, ML ready SP. If JD, Dalbec, and Casas are hitting, JD is the one to trade.

* This smells like last year to me: a quasi-punt with a semi-closing window. If they tank, look for JD, E.Hernandez, and our short term starters to be traded.


In any event, I don't see how acquiring Hosmer (or Schwarber) does anything but create a log-jam, wasting value. Doubly so if there's a reasonable JD extension in the works.
When the Sox take on a player at the end of a deal, it’s usually because the player’s AAV hit is less than his salary and they can pay the difference on the salary while having it count much less in the CBT calculation. It’s a good way to throw around their financial muscle to get talent. Hosmer’s contract is structured so that his salary declines to under his AAV, so even if the Padres include money and talent to get rid of him, it will likely be for less than is with it to the Sox to further gum up 1B.

The time to make this sort of deal for Hosmer was a few years ago, when the Padres were really looking to save money.
This is a good post, and the reason that the Myers rumors a few years back made more sense than this one.

Still, I know this trade proposal isn't a real rumor (it's a fake trade from a Padres blog), but I think it warrants discussion, at least during a lockout when we're starved for things to talk about. And the fact that it treated Nola and Campusano as interchangeable is a bit of red flag.

But for all that, it's weird that our discussion is all focused on Hosmer (and the 1B/DH logjam) and not Campusano (and the dearth of viable future catchers in the system). If we can acquire Campusano for a good pitching prospect and taking on the burden of a replacement level first baseman paid like a one WAR first baseman, that could potentially be a good deal for Boston. We're probably not keeping Hosmer in this scenario, or not keeping him past Casas' call up. We're probably dealing him and another few mil to the A's or Pirates or Diamondbacks to be a Firey Veteran Presence and Positive Clubhouse Guy in exchange for a pair of AA relief prospects.

The point is to use our willingness to spend money in a year we're probably going over the cap anyways as a way to buy a cost-controlled core player. Fangraphs has Campusano as a 55 FV player, with this year-old writeup:



Since that was written he's had 38 terrible MLB PAs (.272 OPS — oof.) and 326 excellent AAA PAs (.295/.365/.541). Again, he's 23, and still has less than a year's service time after two cups of coffee. If he's actually being dangled in salary dumps, we should be very interested. That's all.
Thanks for the contributions.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
25,924
Miami (oh, Miami!)
It's good to be reminded of Franchy. Has anyone ever done a deep dive on his hitting woes? Fixable or not?

Pretty much day and night: 2021 Major and minor league game logs and splits: https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=corder003fra&type=bgl&year=2021

Baseball Savant: https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/franchy-cordero-614173?stats=statcast-r-hitting-mlb
SSS but his categorial weakness is breaking stuff. . .except for 2018, when he hung in there a bit over 30 ABs
By pitch type, he loves the 4 seamer. . .except for 2021.

Per discipline, in 2021, he swung earlier more often, and chased more out of the zone. His ML splits show this actually paid off somewhat. But once he goes two pitches into a count, he's toast - only more or less burnt is the question.
Compare his 2018 MLB splits: https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.fcgi?id=cordefr02&year=2018&t=b
with his 2021 MLB splits: https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.fcgi?id=cordefr02&year=2021&t=b

It's like his first pitch swinging was good in 2018, so maybe they emphasized it. It was good in 2021, but everything after it completely fell apart. So maybe it was just aggressive swinging they emphasized?

I wish we had Savant for the minors. I'd like to see if he's just using the same approach there and it pays off against a different pitch quality or selection.
 

Niastri

Member
SoSH Member
It's good to be reminded of Franchy. Has anyone ever done a deep dive on his hitting woes? Fixable or not?

Pretty much day and night: 2021 Major and minor league game logs and splits: https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=corder003fra&type=bgl&year=2021

Baseball Savant: https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/savant-player/franchy-cordero-614173?stats=statcast-r-hitting-mlb
SSS but his categorial weakness is breaking stuff. . .except for 2018, when he hung in there a bit over 30 ABs
By pitch type, he loves the 4 seamer. . .except for 2021.

Per discipline, in 2021, he swung earlier more often, and chased more out of the zone. His ML splits show this actually paid off somewhat. But once he goes two pitches into a count, he's toast - only more or less burnt is the question.
Compare his 2018 MLB splits: https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.fcgi?id=cordefr02&year=2018&t=b
with his 2021 MLB splits: https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.fcgi?id=cordefr02&year=2021&t=b

It's like his first pitch swinging was good in 2018, so maybe they emphasized it. It was good in 2021, but everything after it completely fell apart. So maybe it was just aggressive swinging they emphasized?

I wish we had Savant for the minors. I'd like to see if he's just using the same approach there and it pays off against a different pitch quality or selection.
Franchy, like Dalbec, hits the ball so hard when he makes contact that it is hard to ignore. 118.6 Max exit velocity, but only 3.9% barrelling the ball, which explains his low average velocity.

If they could figure out what Franchy's problems are, he could become a monster.

It seems less and less likely as time goes on, but I'm glad they haven't given up on him yet.

I figure it can't be as simple as "Franchy sees AAA breaking balls, but can't seem to see MLB breaking balls" but history is littered with AAA+ players, on both sides of the ball.

Dalbec seemed to figure something out by the second half of the year, maybe Franchy is next?
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,847
Franchy, like Dalbec, hits the ball so hard when he makes contact that it is hard to ignore. 118.6 Max exit velocity, but only 3.9% barrelling the ball, which explains his low average velocity.

If they could figure out what Franchy's problems are, he could become a monster.

It seems less and less likely as time goes on, but I'm glad they haven't given up on him yet.

I figure it can't be as simple as "Franchy sees AAA breaking balls, but can't seem to see MLB breaking balls" but history is littered with AAA+ players, on both sides of the ball.

Dalbec seemed to figure something out by the second half of the year, maybe Franchy is next?
He will soon take off a mask to reveal he actually is Wily Mo Peña?
 

cantor44

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2020
1,674
Chicago, IL
Let's talk Bats. Assume to compete, we need 3 or 4 core hitters, plus a greater number of more fungible complementary pieces.

Per Cots, it looks like the Sox are estimated to be $3M under the CBT threshold (were it to be reinstated as is.)
View: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WWRsQNsGZkWuJZwlY8--xVBXMJGjh230D45KiHTHuvY/edit#gid=1520401900


2022: In the 1B/DH department, we currently have Dalbec/JD. Casas is due to be called up at some point this year. Our other mainstays are Devers at 3B, Xander at SS.

2023: The plan is likely be for 1B/DH to be Casas/Dalbec in 2023. In 2023, Devers is at 3B for his final year of arb. (Boegarts may opt out at the end of 2022.)

2024(5): We start to see ML bats coming up: Yorke at 2B, Meyer at SS, Jordan at 3B/1B, Binelas at 3B. Dalbec would be in his first year of arb in 2024, Devers is gone or extended, Xander the same.)

My thoughts:

* We are close to the old CBT.

* JBJ is already kind of a mill-stone re: a 2022 in-season Devers/Xander extension and/or the CBT, and the only one they're likely to take on.

*At the end of 2022, we will have to go to the trade/FA well to shore up the club for C, SP, maybe SS.
(FAs at season's end are Vazquez and Plawecki, Hill and Eovaldi, JD and E.Hernandez. Option FA: Xander.)

* 2024 window IF hitting may be a strength to trade from. But we don't actually get club utility until 2024/5. So trading current starting pieces is a bit of an illusion, since it creates a gap that will have to be filled at a cost. IMO, if they believe Dalbec has figured out how to hit, he should be pretty much untouchable, except for a young, cost-controlled, ML ready SP. If JD, Dalbec, and Casas are hitting, JD is the one to trade.

* This smells like last year to me: a quasi-punt with a semi-closing window. If they tank, look for JD, E.Hernandez, and our short term starters to be traded.


In any event, I don't see how acquiring Hosmer (or Schwarber) does anything but create a log-jam, wasting value. Doubly so if there's a reasonable JD extension in the works.
How about quasi GFIN now instead of punting, with this very quality core likely breaking up after the season, and a youth-led rebuild to follow. I hope they GFIN because I think patience will be required hereafter as fans (but the good kind of patience with lots of good young ball players to follow).

The way he's going Yorke could be up starting in 2023!
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
25,924
Miami (oh, Miami!)
How about quasi GFIN now instead of punting, with this very quality core likely breaking up after the season, and a youth-led rebuild to follow. I hope they GFIN because I think patience will be required hereafter as fans (but the good kind of patience with lots of good young ball players to follow).

The way he's going Yorke could be up starting in 2023!
I think it is a quasi-GFIN, quasi-punt, sort of like last year. So maybe we'll see a Schwarber like trade if they're in the scrum.

If they were in even a semi-GFIN posture, I think we'd have seen a couple trades for solidity (even if overpaid) at the ML level, instead of mostly question marks.

Like last year, this is a swingy outcome team as it currently stands: Will Sale rebound? Will JBJ and Vazquez not be a black hole? Will Wacha and Hill be effective? Which Bobby Dalbec will we get? Which Matt Barnes?

If all those come up positive, this is potentially a very good team. If not. . .

Less swingy but valid questions include: Will Verdugo lift his game a notch? Will E.Hernandez maintain his level of play? Will we get any call-up contributions from the farm that approaches replacement level, let alone league average?

OTOH, the core of Xander, Devers, JD, seems very solid, something we couldn't be sure about after short season 2020 performances. Likewise, in terms of pitching Eovaldi, Pivetta, Whitlock, Houck, and Taylor seem to be relatively stable/known quantities. We have a bunch of serviceable arms around in the org, so I'm not too worried about the back end of the pen. Barnes and Sale have the highest upsides though - and are the largest question marks.

(Oh, and we have to figure out how to replace the power and speed of Danny Santana. Cora's going to get him hitting any day now. Just you watch!)
 

cantor44

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2020
1,674
Chicago, IL
I think it is a quasi-GFIN, quasi-punt, sort of like last year. So maybe we'll see a Schwarber like trade if they're in the scrum.

If they were in even a semi-GFIN posture, I think we'd have seen a couple trades for solidity (even if overpaid) at the ML level, instead of mostly question marks.

Like last year, this is a swingy outcome team as it currently stands: Will Sale rebound? Will JBJ and Vazquez not be a black hole? Will Wacha and Hill be effective? Which Bobby Dalbec will we get? Which Matt Barnes?

If all those come up positive, this is potentially a very good team. If not. . .

Less swingy but valid questions include: Will Verdugo lift his game a notch? Will E.Hernandez maintain his level of play? Will we get any call-up contributions from the farm that approaches replacement level, let alone league average?

OTOH, the core of Xander, Devers, JD, seems very solid, something we couldn't be sure about after short season 2020 performances. Likewise, in terms of pitching Eovaldi, Pivetta, Whitlock, Houck, and Taylor seem to be relatively stable/known quantities. We have a bunch of serviceable arms around in the org, so I'm not too worried about the back end of the pen. Barnes and Sale have the highest upsides though - and are the largest question marks.

(Oh, and we have to figure out how to replace the power and speed of Danny Santana. Cora's going to get him hitting any day now. Just you watch!)
We know if they bring Santana back, we're in GFIN mode and not punt mode. I just want this lock out to end, so I can read the news he's back!
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
25,924
Miami (oh, Miami!)
Danny Santana has played in the majors for (parts of) 8 seasons. He has a positive WAR in only three of those seasons (956 PAs.) He has a negative WAR in 5 seasons (893 PAs).