Sox sign Rusney Castillo to 7-year/$72.5M deal (2014-2020)
- Thread starter Corsi
- Start date
- Status
Corsi said:
I'm not sure if it sounds better when read in James Earl Jones' voice or that of Vincent Price.
Montana Fan said:
FWIW, I think this is a perfectly reasonable context for discussing JBJ here, as it relates directly to where and how Castillo would be utilized next season.
My earlier post took issue with the parsing of a bunch of JBJ quotes and whether he was ignoring coaching advice, which is at best only tangentially relevant to a Castillo discussion, and microscopically at that.
I noticed they currently have the 5th worst record in the game. What are the rumors regarding this years' draft class?Montana Fan said:
So we need a major league scout to tell us over and over that he is an athletic specimen and explosive? I hope to God there is a lot more technical analysis of his swing and hitting approach, because that was some weak sauce.
While I agree that he needs to be more than athletic to succeed at the major league level, his kind of athleticism is something the team has sorely missed this season. With Ellsbury departing and Victorino basically missing the entire season, they've lacked any real base running impact players all year. Having an offense built around Castillo's speed could be a major factor in turning the team around quickly. Add in Mookie Betts and hopefully at least a half of a season of Victorino, and they could be one of the better base running teams in 2015.
Also, given the decisions the front office has made recently, I'm coming around to the thinking (as pointed out by several posters already) that they may be shifting away from the high OBP lineups that have succeeded in the last decade in search of a new market inefficiency they can exploit. Perhaps they're giving "pitching and defense" another shot or maybe it's power and speed. Could be a combination of some or all of the four. They are clearly looking for ways to gain an advantage with defense which we can see with all the talk about catcher framing and shifts.
Whatever it is that's driving their decision making process, it does look like there may be a shift in progress. With so many other teams coming around to the high OBP end of the spectrum, that strategy is less effective than it used to be. There's still a huge correlation between high on base percentages and run scoring, of course, but focusing on it above other variables in offensive production is no longer an easy way to get a leg up on the competition. So I can see the appeal in emphasizing Castillo's speed and power in what is released to the media as part of a PR campaign to get the fans to start coming around to whatever the new line of thinking is. Even if it's not a fully conscious choice to change the way we are thinking, it will at least plant the seeds.
Also, given the decisions the front office has made recently, I'm coming around to the thinking (as pointed out by several posters already) that they may be shifting away from the high OBP lineups that have succeeded in the last decade in search of a new market inefficiency they can exploit. Perhaps they're giving "pitching and defense" another shot or maybe it's power and speed. Could be a combination of some or all of the four. They are clearly looking for ways to gain an advantage with defense which we can see with all the talk about catcher framing and shifts.
Whatever it is that's driving their decision making process, it does look like there may be a shift in progress. With so many other teams coming around to the high OBP end of the spectrum, that strategy is less effective than it used to be. There's still a huge correlation between high on base percentages and run scoring, of course, but focusing on it above other variables in offensive production is no longer an easy way to get a leg up on the competition. So I can see the appeal in emphasizing Castillo's speed and power in what is released to the media as part of a PR campaign to get the fans to start coming around to whatever the new line of thinking is. Even if it's not a fully conscious choice to change the way we are thinking, it will at least plant the seeds.
That scouting article reads like it was written by his agent and fed through some free translation software.
That said, remember when the Sox looked back at the HSers they drafted mid-aughts and realized him many they were no longer in a position to draft when the finished college (Pedro Alvarez et al)? They decided to trust their scouts a bit more after analyzing the results, and it's possible that they had similar reports on Cespedes, Puig, and Abreu; seeing how they turned out they would then be willing to be aggressive in Castillio of they also got good report on him.
That said, remember when the Sox looked back at the HSers they drafted mid-aughts and realized him many they were no longer in a position to draft when the finished college (Pedro Alvarez et al)? They decided to trust their scouts a bit more after analyzing the results, and it's possible that they had similar reports on Cespedes, Puig, and Abreu; seeing how they turned out they would then be willing to be aggressive in Castillio of they also got good report on him.
I was a little struck by references to his rigidity, which does kind of come through on the videos. Personally, I find Cespedes to appear kind of stiff as well, particularly in the field, so an unfavorable comparison to Cespedes does kind of raise my eyebrow. I'm curious how "explosiveness" translates to baseball ability.
Puffy said:
Possibly the scouts were watching his "going for the downs" batting practice swing and not his natural stroke which is more line drive-oriented. We'll see if the Sox got what they paid for, though the price of a washout is not super-high.
Harry Hooper said:
Sorry if I'm in broken-record mode on this, but this is only true if you're thinking purely in dollar terms. The risk is much higher on the opportunity cost side than the strictly financial side. Having invested a substantial amount of dollars/years in Castillo they are committed to making him an everyday player unless it is absolutely impossible to make that work. They're not going to DFA him if he turns out to be, say, a .250/.290/.350 guy with trick-or-treat defense. They will probably even be slow to bench him unless he is absolutely horrendous. So while it seems highly unlikely the deal will seriously constrain them financially, it certainly could end up constraining Cherington and Farrell in terms of putting the best possible team on the field.
The defense seems like the part that should have the most certainty from their scouts though, as should the speed. I realize this was probably said a lot when they signed Crawford, so there's always some risk, but it's half the risk of that deal. If he ends up being a solid outfielder with stolen base speed and a .260 / .290 / .360 line, then he's a late career Ichiro and probably tradeable at a highly subsidized price.Savin Hillbilly said:
Savin Hillbilly said:
1) Agree, but I was trying to be optimistic on this move which certainly has some pig-in-a-poke characteristics.
2) The braintrust under H/W/L has been good about swallowing mistakes and moving on, and not hamstringing the lineup out on the field for very long.
Savin Hillbilly said:
Some others have said this already, but I'm just not sure that $10M-$12M a year is a risky opportunity cost. Not in 2015. Even less so as the contract ages. Ellsbury for $20M+, yes. That's a risk. But it sounds like they're getting the Cuban Ellsbury for half the dollars. Base-stealing rangey CF leadoff hitter. He'll have to develop more plate discipline to hit Ells' OBP and maximize himself as a steals and runs threat, for sure. But he's bound to have a better arm. And presuming a world where Reid Brignac subluxed Ellsbury's 30 HR power permanently, then Superfly probably hits more dingers and doubles too.
Plympton91 said:
Crawford's rapid decline still puzzles me. He was already a shell of his former self at age 29 - hell, the year before he hit .307/.356/.495 with 47 SB. There was no reason to think he'd collapse that fast.
I still think he's more of an exception to the norm. Usually athletic speedsters age fairly well.
LeoCarrillo said:
The Cuban Ellsbury. Interesting thought.
Ellsbury:
2014: .277/.341/.399/.741, 109 ops+, 35 sb
Career: .294/.349/.433/.782, 108 ops+, 53 sb per 162 games played
If Castillo can put up .270/.330/.425/.755, 105 ops+, 30 sb, for half of Ellsbury's price tag, holy crap that's pretty nice value right there. Ellsbury is a 3 WAR player, thereabouts. If Castillo can be a 2.8-3.2 WAR player, for $10 million a season (about), that's pretty sweet.
EDIT: FWIW, Ron Gant in his prime was a hell of a baseball player. If Castillo ever becomes *THAT*, holy crap.
Any chance he will be in the lineup Wednesday in Lehigh Valley against the IronPigs or is he still in Florida getting in "shape"?
He needs to acquire a work visa first. I assume that will take a week at least?TimNJsoxfan said:
Or maybe the front office has learned that teams are smart enough right now that any market inefficiencies that currently exist are too small to be exploited for long-term success; that the best way to construct a team is to try to put an above-average player at every position and try to develop the two or three stars/superstars that will carry the team to world championships.
It's amazing that Mike Napoli is currently the highest paid player on the team and even though Buchholz is on the contract that bought out his arb years, he is the highest paid pitcher on the team at $7.95M
wade boggs chicken dinner said:
I think there is enough in the seminar thread to suggest that the bold isn't true. YMMV, however.
Gabe Kapler with 30sbs and good CF defense isn't a bad player. Kapler had a career OPS+ of 92, with some decent seasons early on.
I'm curious why they would go ahead and anoint him the CF'r.
All I can think of is that they were considering Victorino's (or Craig's) mindset. I mean, even if he is the CF'r - what's the point of stating that as a fact before you see him play?
All I can think of is that they were considering Victorino's (or Craig's) mindset. I mean, even if he is the CF'r - what's the point of stating that as a fact before you see him play?
I don't think he has been so anointed.geoduck no quahog said:
In the press conference, Cherington emphatically described him as a CF - but he also noted that the Sox prefer to have a CF-capable player in RF.
geoduck no quahog said:
Because they understand that their "anointment" doesn't mean anything to the actual reality of the games that will be played, except to the tea-leaf readers. And the alternative sounds like "we dont know what we're going to do with this guy," which doesn't sound all that great, IMO. It's probably as simple as "the guy just got here, no reason to start talkking about position changes for him in the middle of a lost season. That's what ST is for."
Where are the Kapler comps coming from? This guy is 3 or 4 inches shorter, 30 pounds heavier and supposed to be way faster, with the reported potential to be a good defensive CF. He's also athletic enough to have played in the IF as well.
The Ron Gant comp makes more sense, though it's unlikely he will ever be as good a hitter as Gant was. Gant wasn't a CF either, much less a solid defensive one. But he was a short fireplug, muscular RH hitter with really good speed who played both IF and OF, low batting average but pop in his bat, and a high energy player, so at least those parts are similar to what Castillo is supposed to be.
There never is a perfect comp for any player, ever. Players are always different. But I don't see much in common between Castillo and Kapler though. Kapler never was a guy who ranged all over the field, put pressure on the defense on the bases and tried to take the extra base whenever possible. Gant or a young Victorino actually seem a lot more similar to what we're being told about Castillo.
The Ron Gant comp makes more sense, though it's unlikely he will ever be as good a hitter as Gant was. Gant wasn't a CF either, much less a solid defensive one. But he was a short fireplug, muscular RH hitter with really good speed who played both IF and OF, low batting average but pop in his bat, and a high energy player, so at least those parts are similar to what Castillo is supposed to be.
There never is a perfect comp for any player, ever. Players are always different. But I don't see much in common between Castillo and Kapler though. Kapler never was a guy who ranged all over the field, put pressure on the defense on the bases and tried to take the extra base whenever possible. Gant or a young Victorino actually seem a lot more similar to what we're being told about Castillo.
From Grantland, unpleasant reading if you're a worrywart (I strongly recommend reading the whole article):
The last time I heard the Sox insist that they had done their diligence was right after they signed Crawford.
The last time I heard the Sox insist that they had done their diligence was right after they signed Crawford.
nattysez said:
I'm pretty sure they do the diligence with every player, they just aren't subjected to questions about it specifically unless it's really big contract. I mean, the first Napoli contract fell apart because they did their diligence. So I'm not sure what your point is here other than to be inflammatory.
I think the Rusney contract signals a turn of strategy toward a more small-ball approach by the Sox. As power numbers continue to drop around baseball, and Ks spike, the station to station approach becomes more and more difficult to score runs with. I think we will see a lineup featuring a large number of fairly speedy, dynamic components (Castillo, Betts, Pedroia, Victorino), where previous teams were more reliant on a mix of OBP and power guys (like Nava, Bellhorn, Mueller supporting Ortiz, Manny, Napoli). When you struggle to feild more than one 20 HR hitter, it becomes imperative to generate offense by other means than the Earl Weaver approach.
The international scouting directors quoted were the ones who lost the bidding. I'm not sure what the point is of focusing on the total dollars vs. the AAV either. They signed him for 6 more years, the other deals were much shorter.
Max Venerable said:
What did trading for Cespedes signal? Because his plus tool is RH power.
This trade is for next season, when, in theory, the Sox will roll out Ortiz, Napoli, and Cespedes on a pretty regular basis--those are 20 HR guys.
I don't think it signals a paradigm shift as much as a chance to secure what they think is a good ballplayer for nothing more than a cash outlay.
I agree with the general assertion that declining power will lead to the resurgence of speedy base stealers all across baseball. I am not sure that this is the path the Sox are taking just yet............Cespedes and Craig do not fit this mold, Pedroia & Victorino run considerably less than years past. Of their upper position prospects (X, JBJ, Mookie), Mookie is the best base stealer and he might end up traded for pitching..........If however, you subscribe to the Moneyball concept (identify undervalued skill) they might feel like the price of steals will be on the rise in the near future, which is why they were willing to spend $72M for Rusney .Max Venerable said:
Snodgrass'Muff said:
Unless I'm missing one, the last five long-term deals on which the Sox "did their diligence" were the second Beckett deal, Pedey, Lackey, Crawford, and Gonzalez. Will even one of those deals have been worth the money by the time it's over? And all of those guys were easy to scout! It was that spotty (to be generous) history that led the team to stop doing long-term deals (and I haven't even mentioned Dice-K). I'm not sure it's being inflammatory in the slightest to say that the team's recent history with long-term deals leaves something to be desired, such that any assertion that they've "diligenced" Castillo is not all that reassuring.
And, to be clear, I think this was probably a risk worth taking, since it cost them nothing but money to sign him, Dombrowski obviously thought a lot of him as well, etc. I'm just saying that defending a long-term Red Sox deal on the ground that they've been looking into the player for a long time doesn't do much for me.
Lackey will likely end up being paid just about in line with his value over his contract by the end of next season. Pedroia has already been worth about a quarter of the value of his 8 year deal in less than his first full season. As for the other 3, while they were clearly overpays, the Red Sox turned them into two young pitchers and will probably come out ahead versus never signing the contracts.nattysez said:
- Status