Brentz had surgery on his thumb last week and is out at least two months. There will be no "seeing what he's got to offer" with him this year.
Should the FO Pack it in already?
- Thread starter Todd Benzinger
- Start date
It's unfortunate, but the thumb injury to Brentz, when set along side his self-inflicted gunshot wound, means he really has lost his best opportunities.
And then there was the knee injury - unrelated to shooting himself in the leg.Buzzkill Pauley said:
E5 Yaz said:
Of course this is possible, but it seems unlikely given that if the season ended now, there would be three AL East teams in playoffs.
The problem isn't that they need to win the division, the problem is that they need to play substantially better than at least two, more realistically three teams, all of whom also play each other.
This is not altogether implausible if you assume that there is substantial untapped potential in this team as it stands--i.e., if you assume that the team as a whole has significantly underperformed. If that's true, then all that's required for them to stage a plausible comeback run is for them to significantly overperform. If their true talent is that of a .525 team, then an overperformance equal to their underperformance so far would have them playing about .610 ball the rest of the way, or 52-33, for a final record of 86-76.
If they go 52-33 the rest of the way, then to cop a wild card spot they need the other teams in the division, plus Minnesota, to play just a game or two over .500 the rest of the way, and teams like Detroit, the Angels and the Rangers to play no better than about 7-8 games over .500. All of this seems possible, though it would require a ton of luck. The question is really, do they have enough untapped potential to play .600+ ball the rest of the way?
At the risk of being fairly criticized for a lack of analysis - no, no they do not.Savin Hillbilly said:
I don't want to trade long term resources for a short term chance at the wild card.
With Hamels the prime pitching target, that's not necessarily an argument not to buy. It's entirely possible that the Phillies get an offer for Hamels that would take him off the market that the Red Sox would be wise to beat considering all the off season options are going to cost a hell of a lot more in dollars.
Most of the assets the Sox would be inclined to trade aren't going to bring back much but that doesn't mean you don't have those conversations. At the same time, there are going to be assets other teams want that the Sox don't want to trade, but you have those conversations too and who knows, maybe something good comes of it.
I think the difference between packing it in and going for it with the available resources is pretty slim.
With Hamels the prime pitching target, that's not necessarily an argument not to buy. It's entirely possible that the Phillies get an offer for Hamels that would take him off the market that the Red Sox would be wise to beat considering all the off season options are going to cost a hell of a lot more in dollars.
Most of the assets the Sox would be inclined to trade aren't going to bring back much but that doesn't mean you don't have those conversations. At the same time, there are going to be assets other teams want that the Sox don't want to trade, but you have those conversations too and who knows, maybe something good comes of it.
I think the difference between packing it in and going for it with the available resources is pretty slim.
I think the team has the ability to come back and win 90 games, provided that they add some pieces (and asuming Hanleys wrist/hand is not broken). Eduardo and Clay are pitching reasonably well at the front end of the rotation and the offense is showing signs of life. Pieces needed are
Ace like SP'er
1B platoon candidate against RHP'ers
What would it take to get Hamels and Howard (797 OPS vs RHP'ers) a package?. Taking on Howard might reduce the prospect requirement for Hamels depending on how much salary the Phillies eat for Howard. The salary bump might be an issue but JWH has the money since the LT threshold has not kept pace with payroll and revenue inflation and they are paying the lowest tax rate this year . None of the prospects down on the farm is an untouchable IMO, even Moncada (can he be traded? PTBNL until he can?). Heck, even Castillo can be dealt (Red Sox eating most of salary of course).
But they don't have to be limited to Hamels and Howard, there may be better deals out their
They sold off in 2012 and 2014, enough is enough with the waving of the white flag and cries of wait for next year . Can't keep waving the flag every year when things don't go you way. Missing the playoffs 5 of 6 years is just something really hard to do and not acceptable, as is 3 last place finishes in 4 years. How long will fans continue to deal with the highest ticket prices in baseball only to watch meaningless games in August/Sep. This has to be a concern of ownership.
Ace like SP'er
1B platoon candidate against RHP'ers
What would it take to get Hamels and Howard (797 OPS vs RHP'ers) a package?. Taking on Howard might reduce the prospect requirement for Hamels depending on how much salary the Phillies eat for Howard. The salary bump might be an issue but JWH has the money since the LT threshold has not kept pace with payroll and revenue inflation and they are paying the lowest tax rate this year . None of the prospects down on the farm is an untouchable IMO, even Moncada (can he be traded? PTBNL until he can?). Heck, even Castillo can be dealt (Red Sox eating most of salary of course).
But they don't have to be limited to Hamels and Howard, there may be better deals out their
They sold off in 2012 and 2014, enough is enough with the waving of the white flag and cries of wait for next year . Can't keep waving the flag every year when things don't go you way. Missing the playoffs 5 of 6 years is just something really hard to do and not acceptable, as is 3 last place finishes in 4 years. How long will fans continue to deal with the highest ticket prices in baseball only to watch meaningless games in August/Sep. This has to be a concern of ownership.
I wouldn't bank on this for the rest of 2015.Sampo Gida said:
Rodriguez dominated in his first three starts, but has come back to earth in the subsequent three. Perhaps it's the pitch tipping, but it may well also be expected growing pains for a 22 year old.
Buchholz is already at his career seasonal average (since 2008) in Innings Pitched at 93 IP. As mentioned before, he's never made it to 200 IP. There's a good chance he will break down soon.
Sampo Gida said:
Howard is one of the worst contracts in baseball. If the Sox want Hamels, I would think that taking on Howard would greatly reduce the package they'd need to send Philly in return.
Heck, add Papelbon for bullpen insurance and then all you need to give them is a B-level prospect maybe. Philly very much wants to shed big salary.
Of course, Amaro is impossible to deal with, so who knows.
The Howard contact is getting close to over. It's 25 million for 2016 then a ten million dollar buyout for 2017 unless someone feels like picking up a 23 million dollar option.ivanvamp said:
For a team looking to get some production out of what has been a black hole position taking Howard in a Hamels deal wouldn't be ridiculous and if the difference between giving up Margot and keeping Margot is taking on more salary, I'm gonna take the salary.
Are you really sure you're a decent judge of reality?Rudy Pemberton said:
The Phillies might prefer to eat money than get less heralded prospects but that's a common trade off and so far as we know those discussions haven't taken place since the off season.
The proposed deal of Howard, Papelbon and Hamels for a B prospect makes zero sense for either team. The last thing the Red Sox need is to add more high paid, under performing players to the roster. Hamels is a great upgrade for the rotation, but Howard would cost at least 10 million next year, even if he doesn't play for the Sox. Papelbon's option will probably vest, and even if it's not a sure thing, he'll probably insist on it being guaranteed by the Red Sox to waive his no trade clause and his value beyond this year is highly questionable. This isn't a move that is likely to make them a better team overall, even if the cost is virtually nothing as it would make it nearly impossible to get under the luxury tax threshold next year.
Then there's the Phillies who would be giving up their two best trade assets for a B prospect. Hamels shouldn't go anywhere without getting a very good prospect+ in return, and Papelbon is probably worth as much as Koji. Would anyone here be happy if Koji was simply tossed into a trade as salary relief?
There is nothing realistic or logical about that proposal.
Then there's the Phillies who would be giving up their two best trade assets for a B prospect. Hamels shouldn't go anywhere without getting a very good prospect+ in return, and Papelbon is probably worth as much as Koji. Would anyone here be happy if Koji was simply tossed into a trade as salary relief?
There is nothing realistic or logical about that proposal.
Rasputin said:
I agree. If anything, rather than "packing it in," the FO should get emboldened by the lousy results and the chastened state of the players to do things that are not going to be popular but may help the team in the short and long term.
(1) platoon Hanley and Ortiz at DH so that Ortiz does not hit against lefties anymore. Hanley can play LF against righties if the FO insists on continuing that farce.
(2) waive Napoli if things don't improve soon and start auditioning in-house options at first (potentially including Craig and Hanley).
(3) leave ShaneVic on the DL unless he is 100% healthy and raking in AAA. If he does both of those things at any point, bring him up only long enough to showcase him and trade him.
(4) give JBJ and deAza lots of ABs to see what they bring to the table. I'd say this about Castillo as well, but that ship has apparently sailed for the time being and once Pedroia is back, even getting Holt, Mookie, JBJ, deAza and ShaneVic consistent ABs is going to be tough.
(5) continue what they're doing with the 'pen, bringing up youngsters to see what they have (or in the case of Barnes, don't have).
In reality you can't do some of this. Due to the luxury tax, it'll take a ton to bring Craig up. You're talking 4 or 5 injuries and an OPS north of .900 for a long period of time.nattysez said:
Also, Victorino is on a rehab clock in AAA. He wasn't optioned. You can't simply store him down there and see how he hits.
The way I figure, as of now, the only guys who have value that the Sox would be interested in trading are all bullpen guys. Koji, Taz, Layne. I actually think that once deadline season approaches that Taz and Koji could fetch some good prospects and Layne could get a decent one. Bullpen arms always seem fungible in the offseason but once the deadline comes around they always fetch something. (Hello E-Rod)
The hope is that maybe Masterson and Nap start performing and can fetch a lottery ticket.
I don't think Ben and co are interested in trading Holt or Buch. It's unfortunate that Victorino is made of paper macher because he would be the perfect player to ship out and get a little something back.
The hope is that maybe Masterson and Nap start performing and can fetch a lottery ticket.
I don't think Ben and co are interested in trading Holt or Buch. It's unfortunate that Victorino is made of paper macher because he would be the perfect player to ship out and get a little something back.
There is less than no chance the Phillies will package Howard or Papelbon with Hamels, and thereby be willing to take a lesser prospect package for salary relief.
Hamels remains the Phillies one good chance to inject some high-level young talent into the team, and everyone knows it. A couple years of salary relief isn't going to change the fact that what they need is more talent and to become competitive again with the rest of the teams in the NL East with a new core of young stars.
And to the Phillies, the amount remaining on Howard and Papelbon's respective contracts doesn't hamstring them from making any other moves to get there. They're only paying five players $9MM+ annual contracts (contrast with the Sox having 11) and are about $40MM away from the LT threshold. In a very big media market.
Hamels remains the Phillies one good chance to inject some high-level young talent into the team, and everyone knows it. A couple years of salary relief isn't going to change the fact that what they need is more talent and to become competitive again with the rest of the teams in the NL East with a new core of young stars.
And to the Phillies, the amount remaining on Howard and Papelbon's respective contracts doesn't hamstring them from making any other moves to get there. They're only paying five players $9MM+ annual contracts (contrast with the Sox having 11) and are about $40MM away from the LT threshold. In a very big media market.
Why? He's not a rental, so he's exactly the type of guy who should be targeted.Danny_Darwin said:
Interesting that you referenced those somewhat improbable comebacks as I made a list of my one over different time frames for Games Remaining. For example, we could list the '67 Red Sox, '64 Cards but that was a collapse of epic perportions, the 78 Yanks (sorry to bring that up) or more recently the 02 A's and the '07 Rockies.Todd Benzinger said:
So color me naive,ignorant, too overly optimistic but I believe the Sox can make a run and win AL East and I still like to see a trade for Hamels. All the other teams in AL East have specific weak spots too. There's been a change in the Phillies FO and yes I know you have to give away minor league talent. Yet I beleive in going with a proven talent, MVP in '08 WS, rather than assuming some kids can make it to the bigs and really contribute. I've seen a lot of busts to be skeptical of so and so being the future rookie of the year. So I say go for it this season with a Hamels in the rotation.
Snodgrass'Muff said:
Oh I agree. I don't think the Sox should be buyers. They are 7 games out, with four teams in the division within, what, a game of each other at the top? I was just responding to the idea of adding Howard to a proposed Hamels deal.
On the bright side, the Sox are 8-5 (.615) in their last 13 games. 68 runs scored (5.2 per game), 49 runs allowed (3.8 per game). And they've picked up a couple of games in the standings. So this is a nice little stretch they're on.
Mostly I just feel like the topic has been discussed to death, but perhaps more importantly, has there been anything to indicate the Red Sox are still interested at this point? Would he waive his no-trade clause to join a last-place team when there are assuredly going to be contenders vying for his services?Bob Montgomery's Helmet Hat said:
I think it's relevant now because the Phillies were probably always going to wait for the trade deadline, unless they got blown away with an offer sooner.
There are definitely players who have better major league numbers than their minor league numbers would predict - probably, in fact, most players with substantial MLB careers. To me, this looks like selection bias rather than something that should dictate how young players are handled. Players that do better than expected stick around; players that fare worse disappear and we forget about them. It should go without saying that far more players who struggle at AAA fail in the major leagues than find success.Drek717 said:
Moreover, just because some players show real improvement at the major league level, doesn't mean their improvement was because they were at the major league level, which seems to be what you're assuming. Players sometimes have non-linear career paths and improve at different ages and levels. I don't see any reason to believe promoting a struggling player to the majors is more likely to cause him to "turn it on."
Hanley is definitely a guy who was better in MLB than his numbers in the high minors, but since he was 22 at the time he doesn't really seem to inform what to do with guys like Brentz and Shaw. Moss is partially a counter-argument to what you're describing - he made a big leap at AAA, developing power at 26 in AAA that wasn't there in his prior stints in either the majors or the minors, and then continued to improve his pop in his re-emergence with the A's. He was a late bloomer, but he did a lot of his blooming in AAA. Reddick has had kind of a weird up-and-down career in both the majors and minors, but ultimately I think he looks pretty similar at 28 to what we might have predicted at 22 / 23.
I don't get the idea that we can "see what we have" by plugging these guys in and seeing what happens. Will Middlebrooks, for instance, hit .288/.325/.509 when the Sox ran him out there for 286 PA in 2012, but he totally fell off a cliff after that. We didn't find out what we had in 2012 - we were misled by his hot streak. If they call up Brentz or Cecchini and they have a hot 200 PAs, what does that tell us that their 750-1000 mediocre AAA PAs does not? It seems to me that it's as likely to result in overreactions based on small sample size as to provide any meaningful information.Drek717 said:
I don't want Craig up if he is cooked. I didn't mean to suggest otherwise.NDame616 said:
ShaneVic can't play consecutive games yet and his rehab time is almost up. If necessary, they should DL him again until he's actually healthy. They are having enough problems with a short bench and getting youngsters at bats without bringing back a guy who is not ready.
nattysez said:
Victorino's got two weeks of rehab left, so it's not "almost up". Position players get 20 days of rehab, and he started his last Wednesday.
Since starting the rehab assignment, he's played Wednesday (2 AB), Thursday (3 AB), Saturday (4 AB) and Sunday (4 AB). I've seen no reports that he's struggling (hits in each of the last three games) nor that he's ailing. The off days on Friday and yesterday were planned, and he should be in the lineup tonight. Looks like barring set-backs, the latest he will be back is right after the All Star Game.
Danny_Darwin said:
I don't doubt the Sox are absolutely still interested in Hamels, considering how bad their cobbled-together rotation has been this year.
The questions rather should be how many under-21'ers in the low-level minor leaguers the Phillies would be willing to take, think a Colon-for-Phillips-Lee-and-Sizemore type deal, if you will...and whether the Sox should be willing to part with three-to-six potential rising stars to add an aging "ace" whose WS MVP was almost seven years ago now. Because the underperformance by veteran free agents mean that Boston's cost-controlled "prospects" who Philly might have wanted for Hamels, are currently anchoring the MLB club's lineup, defense, and rotation.
So if the Sox dealt Espinoza, Devers, Kopech, and Margot away to get Hamels, for example, I'd be very disappointed. Not because I think the Sox will strike gold on all those players...although they could. Rather, because the club's in last place, has been a cellar-dweller for three of the last four seasons, and gutting the farm for Hamels is unlikely to get the Sox over the hump with this current core group.
That being the case, my opinion is the Sox shouldn't be buyers or sellers this year, unless of course they have a much better plan in place than last year's Pokémon-inspired "gotta catch 'em all" approach to veteran talent acquisition.
I know it appears that the results would falsify the FO's approach to team-building during the offseason. But legit arguments could have been (and were) made for the moves.
Not offseason:
- Lester deal. Who knows if they had a real chance to re-sign him after the season. But they got something useful for him. And that something turned into Porcello, who had been a solid, if unspectacular, pitcher. (The contract extension is another discussion)
- Lackey deal. Craig was worth the gamble, IMO. Hasn't turned out well. Kelly was a young, talented ML arm that could throw 97+, and had a career era of 3.25. And had a tiny salary. Who knows if Lackey was going to pitch in Boston for $500k. We heard many things. Would it be nice to have his steady presence on this staff? Absolutely. But Kelly has gobs of potential.
Offseason:
- Panda. We needed a 3b. Panda is a good one. Not an elite one, but a good one. Solid all around player. And the fact is, there are no good 3b FA after this season. So make the move now to get a quality 3b and fill the spot. Was he worth $20 million? Well probably not, but you're always going to overpay in the free agent market. His 2015 line is eerily similar to his 2014 line:
- 2014: .279/.324/.415/.739
- 2015: .275/.321/.414/.735
His defense is a little worse, but overall, pretty much the player we thought we'd be getting.
- Hanley. Alright, it wasn't crazy to think that he'd at least be a serviceable left fielder. I mean, *Manny* was a serviceable left fielder. The Sox needed right handed power desperately. Hanley was one of the best RH power bats available. Offensively, he's provided just what they need. A 122 ops+, and is on pace for 86 runs, 32 homers and 80 rbi, despite dealing with some injuries.
So obviously the results haven't been there. And it's frustrating. But I think the offseason moves were pretty defensible, certainly at the time, and even in hindsight. It just hasn't worked out like we'd hoped, for a variety of reasons.
Not offseason:
- Lester deal. Who knows if they had a real chance to re-sign him after the season. But they got something useful for him. And that something turned into Porcello, who had been a solid, if unspectacular, pitcher. (The contract extension is another discussion)
- Lackey deal. Craig was worth the gamble, IMO. Hasn't turned out well. Kelly was a young, talented ML arm that could throw 97+, and had a career era of 3.25. And had a tiny salary. Who knows if Lackey was going to pitch in Boston for $500k. We heard many things. Would it be nice to have his steady presence on this staff? Absolutely. But Kelly has gobs of potential.
Offseason:
- Panda. We needed a 3b. Panda is a good one. Not an elite one, but a good one. Solid all around player. And the fact is, there are no good 3b FA after this season. So make the move now to get a quality 3b and fill the spot. Was he worth $20 million? Well probably not, but you're always going to overpay in the free agent market. His 2015 line is eerily similar to his 2014 line:
- 2014: .279/.324/.415/.739
- 2015: .275/.321/.414/.735
His defense is a little worse, but overall, pretty much the player we thought we'd be getting.
- Hanley. Alright, it wasn't crazy to think that he'd at least be a serviceable left fielder. I mean, *Manny* was a serviceable left fielder. The Sox needed right handed power desperately. Hanley was one of the best RH power bats available. Offensively, he's provided just what they need. A 122 ops+, and is on pace for 86 runs, 32 homers and 80 rbi, despite dealing with some injuries.
So obviously the results haven't been there. And it's frustrating. But I think the offseason moves were pretty defensible, certainly at the time, and even in hindsight. It just hasn't worked out like we'd hoped, for a variety of reasons.
I don't get why people keep saying this. I haven't heard a peep out of Lackey about his contract, and even if he did squawk, does he really have any other option than playing?ivanvamp said:
Merkle's Boner said:
Yes. He could have sat out. It would be crazy, of course. But he could have done it. And who knows what conversations were had between Lackey and the FO people. Maybe he said if he didn't get a new contract he'd play for 2015 but there'd be no chance in hell he'd sign beyond that. And maybe they thought, well, let's turn him into a piece or two that could help us for longer than just 2015.
Jared Carrabis on Zo and Beetle: "I'm hearing whispers that the FO is pleased with what De Aza is doing in LF and would be fine going forward without Hanley."
If they did this, that might top Don Sweeney in the dumb move department. De Aza is a bit player who was DFAed earlier this year.
If they did this, that might top Don Sweeney in the dumb move department. De Aza is a bit player who was DFAed earlier this year.
The problem with saying that moves that turned out poorly were "worth the gamble" or "defensible" (e.g it turns out Joe Kelly is not currently a major league pitcher, Alan Craig is a 30 million dollar bust, Sandoval should be platooned but may be paid too much to actually platoon, Hanley can't play the position he was signed to play) is that Ben Cherington is not goofing around on a message board a few minutes a day. He is actually paid a ton of money and given a huge staff to figure all of this stuff out ahead of time. And GMs who end up on the wrong side of multiple defensible big money gambles usually don't last long. Saying "hey who knew Hanley would suck so bad in left?" doesn't inspire much confidence in the team's ability to scout and project, does it?ivanvamp said:
snowmanny said:
To add on to this, all of those moves are defensible in a vacuum, but to me less so in the context of the other moves. I get why you trade for Cespedes. I get why you trade for Craig. I am less sure why you trade for both when you know you have Victorino possibly coming back, you have Betts transitioning to the outfield in the minors (at the front office's request, if I'm not mistaken), and - just speculating here - the results of the Castillo negotiations presumably did not come as a total surprise. I have heard that Hanley basically pitched himself to them and said he was flexible, but I'm not sure why you then go and announce he'll be playing left field when you already had seven plausible outfielders, maybe eight. And of that group, they had to know that the phrase "he needs to play every day" applied to at least five of them, six if you count the veteran deference Farrell is showing to Victorino. This is what I think BP meant by the "Pokemon" mentality.
If you say the plan for Craig was for him to take over for Napoli eventually, then fine, but that doesn't really explain what the plan was for him in 2015. If you say he was the cost of getting Joe Kelly, well... there's a separate thread for Kelly so I will just say I am underwhelmed. And if you say the plan was to flip some of these guys, not only did that not really happen other than Cespedes (and perhaps in that case it was only because he didn't get along with Farrell and company), but it also seems both inefficient and risky.
Wouldn't everyone feel better about this team if we play .610 the rest of the way, though? Given that what we're viewing as 'the core' of the team will still be signed for next year, I feel as though it would change how we approach the offseason if we fall short on an attempted comeback and end up a game or two out rather than just continuing to play sub-.500 ball the rest of the way and be completely out of it.Savin Hillbilly said:
The reason is that inherent in the .610 performance the rest of the way is that some of our more disappointing developments would have to reverse course to conceivably get to that record. Porcello would at least have to pitch somewhere around league average, or Sandoval would have to get hot, or JBJ starts hitting and stays up, or Castillo improves, or some other combination of a lot of these things. Hell something would have to click in our rotation just to get to that record. If we continue to just suck like we have we're not only going to need more players to patch the holes in the lineup/field we're going to be talking about eating salary on some serious failures.
RedOctober3829 said:
E5 Yaz said:
Pretty sure what is meant by "going forward without Hanley" has to do with Hanley's wrist and putting him on the DL. Basically, if Hanley has to go to the DL, they're not going to go looking for a temporary replacement for him because they like what they have in De Aza for the time being.
I'd bet a million dollars that it has nothing to do with future years or the possibility of trading Hanley. Even the most incompetent front office people aren't going to trade away an elite (but injured) hitter based on two weeks of production out of his journeyman replacement.
[SIZE=10.5pt]Nitpick but Sandoval is .270/.316/.407/.723 now. As far as is he a good one, Fangraphs has Sandoval at next to last in WAR, 20th out of 21 qualified third basemen, with Will Middlebrooks 19th. I understand that defensive WAR needs a lot more games to be meaningful, but I don't think there is any question that his defense is significantly worse than it was last year with the Giants. 4 1/2 more years of this guy, and he even has a $17 million team option for 2020 with a $ 5 million buyout. He's not a great hitter and his defense is not getting any better. Ugh.[/SIZE]ivanvamp said:
[SIZE=10.5pt]By the way, on NESN Sports Today last night, they were showing the great play on the popup by Donaldson, and Gary Striewski says something like 'look at him, great shape, hits and fields like that, boy do I wish the Sox had gotten him.' I wonder if some management guy at NESN (do they have management?) gets an email or other message from Sox brass saying we're going forward with the players we got/have. In other words, STFU about other team's players![/SIZE]
Pretty sure they meant if Hanley has to go on the DL they could survive with De Aza for a short period of time without looking for an external replacement. Geeze has Don Sweeney screwed up everyone's opinion of all the local GMs. Ben might be born recently but it wasn't yesterday. Give him a modicum of credit. He is not getting rid of Hanley for De Aza. Wait...Sweeney did trade for Zac Rinaldo so anything is possible but come on...E5 Yaz said:
I don't understand baseball. I never will. And that's a function of really only following one team, not 30.
The 2012 team won 69 games. In 2013 they won 97. Concentrating only on most games by position, these are the net changes:
Gonzalez -> Napoli
Aviles -> Drew
Nava -> Gomes
Ross -> Victorino
Beckett -> Lackey
Cook -> Dempster
And a revamped bullpen:
Albers -> Thornton
Atchison -> Workman
Hill ->
Melancon -> Baily
Padilla -> Wilson
Aceves -> Uehara
Were the Red Sox front office geniuses?
The 2012 team won 69 games. In 2013 they won 97. Concentrating only on most games by position, these are the net changes:
Gonzalez -> Napoli
Aviles -> Drew
Nava -> Gomes
Ross -> Victorino
Beckett -> Lackey
Cook -> Dempster
And a revamped bullpen:
Albers -> Thornton
Atchison -> Workman
Hill ->
Melancon -> Baily
Padilla -> Wilson
Aceves -> Uehara
Were the Red Sox front office geniuses?
Sorry was typing as the other post went through. Anyway why were you and Red October even questioning getting rid of Hanley for De Aza? Some moves are too ridiculous to discuss. Even Ben would not do that so I don't understand why you even contemplated getting rid of Hanley for De Aza.E5 Yaz said:
geoduck no quahog said:
Looking at the difference in wins isn't going to tell you much. The 2012 team played the last two months of the season with a decimated roster due to a combination of injuries and trades. They weren't trying to win games at that point. If they'd kept the roster in tact, they were probably a .500 or slightly better team. Then you had Lester and Buchholz pitching like crap that season and coming back strong in 2013 and Uehara having an historically good run in the second half. That makes up for a lot.
That explains it.
BTW, this team still has the potential to go somewhere (maybe not the playoffs). They can be fun to watch and provide good baseball. Buchholz has shown some ace-like tendencies. Rodriguez brings excitement and potential. Porcello still has potential to take it to the opposition once he figures things out, Miley is serviceable. The batting order could be much better than league average. (The bullpen kind of sucks)
This would be my strategy going forward:
Catcher: Hanigan (4/5 days and against all lefties) / Leon (Buchholz)
1B: Ortiz (RHP - .916 OPS) / Napoli (LHP - .855 OPS)
2B: Pedroia
3B: Sandoval (RHP - .877 OPS) / Holt (LHP - .823 OPS)
SS: Bogaerts
LF: De Aza (RHP - .835 OPS) / Victorino (LHP - SSS) or Castillo
CF: Betts
RF: Bradley Jr (or Victorino)
DH: Ramirez
That's a decent lineup:
Vs RHP
Betts (.800)
Pedroia (.801)
Ortiz (.916)
Ramirez (.775)
Sandoval (.877)
Bogaerts (.719)
De Aza (.835)
Hanigan (SSS)
Bradley Jr (SSS)
Napoli off the bench to PH for Ortiz
Victorino for Bradley
Vs. LHP
Betts (.670)
Holt (.823)
Pedroia (.895)
Ramirez (.899)
Bogaerts (.800)
Napoli (.855)
Hanigan (SSS)
Victorino (SSS)
Bradley Jr (SSS)
Ortiz off the bench to PH for Napoli
De Aza for Victorino
BTW, this team still has the potential to go somewhere (maybe not the playoffs). They can be fun to watch and provide good baseball. Buchholz has shown some ace-like tendencies. Rodriguez brings excitement and potential. Porcello still has potential to take it to the opposition once he figures things out, Miley is serviceable. The batting order could be much better than league average. (The bullpen kind of sucks)
This would be my strategy going forward:
Catcher: Hanigan (4/5 days and against all lefties) / Leon (Buchholz)
1B: Ortiz (RHP - .916 OPS) / Napoli (LHP - .855 OPS)
2B: Pedroia
3B: Sandoval (RHP - .877 OPS) / Holt (LHP - .823 OPS)
SS: Bogaerts
LF: De Aza (RHP - .835 OPS) / Victorino (LHP - SSS) or Castillo
CF: Betts
RF: Bradley Jr (or Victorino)
DH: Ramirez
That's a decent lineup:
Vs RHP
Betts (.800)
Pedroia (.801)
Ortiz (.916)
Ramirez (.775)
Sandoval (.877)
Bogaerts (.719)
De Aza (.835)
Hanigan (SSS)
Bradley Jr (SSS)
Napoli off the bench to PH for Ortiz
Victorino for Bradley
Vs. LHP
Betts (.670)
Holt (.823)
Pedroia (.895)
Ramirez (.899)
Bogaerts (.800)
Napoli (.855)
Hanigan (SSS)
Victorino (SSS)
Bradley Jr (SSS)
Ortiz off the bench to PH for Napoli
De Aza for Victorino