The future at 3rd
- Thread starter MakMan44
- Start date
- Status
<Crickets> says it all. He got thick in the waist and slow(er) last year. He even kind of lost it as a hitter. He'll only be 31 next April though. But, we're not a bottom salary team and can afford better than him.snowmanny said:
Yanks starting to talk to Headley...
http://www.mlbdailydish.com/2014/11/3/7150135/yankees-start-talks-with-chase-headley
http://www.mlbdailydish.com/2014/11/3/7150135/yankees-start-talks-with-chase-headley
MartyBarrettMVP said:
They'd be insane to go into 2015 with ARod as their regular 3B. Headley could also play a passable RF in the toilet, I assume, which gives them added versatility.
Headley should be their #1 (position player) target, and the bidding war is not going to be worth it for the Sox, I think.
A lot of Lowrie's bad year can be attributed to a terrible season against lefthanders (590 OPS vs 775 career), and that in turn at least partly reflects a 264 BABip vs. a career .291 and .312 vs. lefties.Al Zarilla said:
If the bidding in years or dollars gets too high for Pablo/Headley, bringing back Lowrie at half the years and a little more than half the dollars may not be a terrible choice. A return to career norms against lefties for Lowrie also makes him a nice, albeit expensive, platoon with Cecchini, who has at times struggled against lefties in the minors, if Garin continues to hit like he did last August and September.
With their budget and the need for two top pitchers, I never really saw Headley or Sandoval as options, although I would have loved either.
Luis Valbuena is losing his 3B job for the Cubs to Bryant. He can play 2B, in addition to 3B, but is not an ideal utility guy/ Do a deal with Theo and move on to other needs.
Luis Valbuena is losing his 3B job for the Cubs to Bryant. He can play 2B, in addition to 3B, but is not an ideal utility guy/ Do a deal with Theo and move on to other needs.
Rudy Pemberton said:
I think Hanley would be a good option at 3B, if he's willing to play there.
Can't deny that skillset....he'd absolutely destroy the wall. Injury history and his mercurial disposition are something to consider.
Steamer projects a 104 wRC+ from Lowrie next season. Combine that with decent defense at 3B and you would have a roughly 2.5 win player. He should be in fairly high demand as a 2B option, but if they can sign him for something reasonable he looks like a decent option to start for us.Plympton91 said:
67WasBest said:
I'm still not convinced that Valbuena is a big enough upgrade over Holt to be worth giving up value for. He had an out-of-context offensive year fueled by an unusually high (for him) BABIP and a bit of a late-20s ISO boost. The latter may be legit. But his profile does not sound like a guy whose game will flourish in Fenway. He's basically Stephen Drew Lite.
Valbuena certainly fits, as does Lowrie, as a lefty hitting 3b, who you have good reason to think could be at least league average at the bat. I wonder how willing Theo would be to move him here on a reasonable deal. We did gift him Doubront so the lines of communication are at least open between Cherington and Epstein. I would rather have Lowrie for money alone than Valbuena in exhange for a decent B/B+ prospect.
Re Headley, I see FWIW, that MLBTR predicts him to the BoSox and says he "seems to be in a good position for a 4 year deal," ie taking him thru his age 34 year. I cant see the Sox going to 4 years for Chase Headley, tho 4/40, even 4/44, makes more sense than the good old 3/39 that seems more likely to be up the Sox alley.
On Hanley, MLBTR says a 6 year deal is "likely", possibly 7. I would be gobsmacked if the Sox go anywhere close to that but I suppose if we miss out on Lester, Scherzer, Sandoval, Headley and Shields, the Sox might spend wildly here to ensure making some FA splash.
Re Headley, I see FWIW, that MLBTR predicts him to the BoSox and says he "seems to be in a good position for a 4 year deal," ie taking him thru his age 34 year. I cant see the Sox going to 4 years for Chase Headley, tho 4/40, even 4/44, makes more sense than the good old 3/39 that seems more likely to be up the Sox alley.
On Hanley, MLBTR says a 6 year deal is "likely", possibly 7. I would be gobsmacked if the Sox go anywhere close to that but I suppose if we miss out on Lester, Scherzer, Sandoval, Headley and Shields, the Sox might spend wildly here to ensure making some FA splash.
Good reply, but I've come to enjoy your posts so not surprising.Savin Hillbilly said:
I guess I'm as focused on the money, and the internal options, as I am the on field results for who they obtain. If there wasn't that need to obtain two top of the rotation starters, I'd be more bullish on the FA options. It's the expected price tag for those guys, that has me looking a little further down the list of options. That and the "chance" either of WMB or Cecchini gets it together during 2015. It's funny you mentioned Holt because that's who I saw as a decent trade option, with Weeks or Herrera filling the utility role; Holt would give the Cubs greater flexibility than Valbuena. Certainly wouldn't gain any big headlines, but seemed like a solid move to get us through 2015 with some low cost, stability.and short term commitment.
I wish we had a sense of what they will actually be spending this year. If they re illing to risk a one year overspend, then all this is moot, and they will be shopping for the big names.
Headley has explicitly said he wants to be a team's full-time 3B, not a time share and I'd be willing to bet definitely not playing in the OF.foulkehampshire said:
The Yankees will likely need to throw a big chunk of money his way to talk him out of that stance, as with ARod, Prado, etc. they have no real ability to guarantee a consistent 3B job for him.
Why is this an insane idea? If I had to guess as to who would have a better year next year between Arod and Headley I'm not sure there is a resounding reason to pick Headleyfoulkehampshire said:
No matter how much money the Sox spend on pitching this winter, they aren't going to contend in 2015 if they simply patch the hole at 3B and otherwise stick with the same offense that finished second-to-last in the AL in OPS+ last season. (I realize that a full season of Castillo, Cespedes and Betts will help, as will organic improvement from X, but there's also decline to be expected from the veteran core of Ortiz/Napoli/Pedroia.)
I'm not in love with Headley or Sandoval, but barring a trade for Donaldson (who might not be available), signing one of those two seems like the easiest way to upgrade the offense. What do those who think we should sign a cheaper stopgap like Lowrie think we should do to improve the offense?
I'm not in love with Headley or Sandoval, but barring a trade for Donaldson (who might not be available), signing one of those two seems like the easiest way to upgrade the offense. What do those who think we should sign a cheaper stopgap like Lowrie think we should do to improve the offense?
Well, if Lowrie is league average both offensively and defensively that's a big improvement. Likewise, anything approaching league average offense from CF is a huge improvement over the historically terrible performance of JBJ, though you'll give some back on D there probably.
I don't see decline from Pedroia and Napoli as a given, because they played so few games and what the did play they did so at well below 100%.
I don't see decline from Pedroia and Napoli as a given, because they played so few games and what the did play they did so at well below 100%.
I see gains at all infield positions, even with Valbuena as lowest ranked option. A full offseason of healing and conditioning for both Pedroia and Napoli should provide a better season. A year older for X portends something better, and any breathing LH 3B is better than what we had at 3B last year. I also see gains at all 3 OF positions. DH looks to be a place for a fall, while catcher could go either way. I don't see the need for an uber 3B is as acute as you've defined it.maufman said:
KillerBs said:
I think 3/39 is not even table stakes for Headley. There are exactly two decent free agent 3Bs on the market, before you drop to guys like Ty Wigginton. Headley has put up 7,2, 3.6, and 4.4 fWins in his last three years (brefWins are 6.3, 3.8, 3.5). If the Sox are thinking that 3/39 is a reasonable offer for a 3-win floor player at a premium infield position, who can bat competently from both sides of the plate and demonstrated above-replacement level play in the AL East after moving over from the NL, they have lost touch with the market. I think I predicted 4/56 in a gameday thread a couple of months ago, and with the Yankees committed to being in the mix now, that feels optimistic.
Drek717 said:
I wonder whether the Yankees opening contract talks in fact does mean that they are prepared to give him 120 plus games at 3B and move A-Rod to DH, or at least to make noises that they are going to do it to him. Prado may not be delighted about it, but if anyone has the luxury to pay a utility guy starters money, it's the Yankees.
So let me get this straight: you think Mike Napoli will equal his best career season at age 33, that Pedroia will improve at age 31-32, and that none of the three starters entering their first full big-league season will fail to meet expectations. Oh, and that there won't be a serious injury somewhere in the mix.67WasBest said:
One or two of those things might happen. Planning for them all to happen is crazy. And I'm not picking on you, because it seems to be conventional wisdom around here that the Sox should break the bank on two good-to-great free-agent SPs and hope that the offense magically fixes itself.
I'm bringing this up in the 3B thread because that seems like the easiest position to upgrade without seriously altering the club's long-term core. I would love to see them making a bold offer for Donaldson, but if that doesn't work (or if the price is ridiculous), overpaying for Headley or Panda is a very solid fallback option that would make next year's team a few wins better.
In response to both you and Mauf, I was one of the ones screaming the loudest about the lack of depth on the offense, and particularly in CF last year. But the amount of depth they have this year, combined with the absurdly low bar for improvement out of C, 3B, and CF, leaves me quite confident that the offense can fix itself with just a league average addition at 3B (which may in fact be Cecchini, if worst comes to worst).Rudy Pemberton said:
In particular, Mauf's characterization of needing improvement from Napoli and Pedroia in absolute terms seems off. We need improvement off of their 2014 numbers, which are certainly not Napoli's career best, and represent a year in which Pedroia played the whole year -- again -- with an injured hand. Even Ortiz is coming off a ridiculously low .256 BABip, so projecting at least no further decline is not crazy at all.
I guess it depends on what prism you choose to look through.maufman said:
I see Napoli who played with a severely dislocated finger that impacted his power numbers all year improving
Pedroia is the same thing. With a full offseason of conditioning, I expect him to have a better year than 2014.
I expect Castillo will be an upgrade over JBJ.
I expect a healthy Victorino, or Betts to be an upgrade over Nava and the others who manned RF in 2014.
I expect Cespedes to be an upgrade over Gomes / Nava in LF.
It doesn't seem hard to see improvement, even with many of these guys a year older. The 2014 production was simply that bad.
The entire outfield, C, and 3B were all incredibly bad last year. Very, very far below even average production. If Castillo, Cespedes, and Betts can combine for a 100 wRC+ (an absurdly low bar) it would be a huge improvement for the Red Sox offense.maufman said:
Same at 3B.
Catcher we might not see any improvement because Vaz is really young, defense first, and is likely going to have to learn how to hit MLB pitching next year.
Ortiz is a concern for age related decline, sure. Napoli however isn't that old, had a down year last year due to an injury and lost PT from it, and Pedroia had a significant down year (also likely related to injury) at an age where most players aren't falling off a cliff. I'd argue it is equally likely that Napoli and Pedroia bounce up versus down.
I could absolutely see the Red Sox swinging from a team with 6-7 below average positions on the 2014 club to a team with only two (catcher and 3B) in 2015 with the roster they have right now.
You add someone like Headley or Sandoval and you shore up another position to at least average, making just one real hole in the lineup.
A big part of this is also the greatly improved depth they will likely have for 2015 versus 2014. The ML outfield right now is Cespedes, Castillo, Betts, Victorino, Nava, and Craig fighting for five spots. The AAA team will have Brentz (hit well in limited time during both ST and a late season call up) and Bradley as depth for the ML roster (not to mention Hassan who had a strong second half in AAA and is a solid OBP guy if nothing else). That is far better depth.
Same at 3B. Holt did well enough last year to be a legitimate piece to the puzzle. Middlebrooks is basically where he was to start 2014, so that option held firm. Cecchini had a rough season for much of 2014 in making the AAA jump, but he finished very strong including some quality ML ABs. Coyle held his own at 3B in AA while showing that when healthy his bat is something to take notice of. If he's healthy and hitting like that in AAA next year while playing 2B he'd be a candidate for the 3B job as well if everyone else falls on their faces. So the internal depth has advanced quite well there.
1B will have Travis Shaw as ready and willing depth, having gotten his fist good sample of AAA pitching. Marrero is a hot start away from a mid-season call-up as well if Bogaerts isn't hitting or gets hurt. Swihart will likely start the year in AAA and also be a hot start away from a mid-season call-up himself. This was the year everyone expected the farm to have all these guys ready.
So if you add two legit #1/#2 starter types and a worthwhile starting 3B this club is suddenly looking at very few outright black holes, as opposed to the 2014 team that due to injury, young players falling on their faces, etc. quickly found itself with a lineup primarily composed of black holes night in and night out.
People who think Nap had a "down year" in 2014 need to check his career stats. His numbers weren't wildly off his 2013 numbers (either in GP or production), and 2013 was his best season. I realize that Sciosia stupidly kept him on the shelf in his Angels' days, and perhaps he could have put together another season or two like that back in the day, but expecting that at age 33, with his injury history, is much too optimistic.
maufman said:
He slugged .070 less in 2014, that's a pretty steep decline in production. It was the lowest SLG mark of his career by a good margin. Oh, and 2011 was by far his best season, not 2013.
rodderick said:
.063, to be exact. 11 points of that was a dip in BA (a predictable one because his 2013 BABIP was unsustainable, and actually smaller than it might have been because he improved his K rate). So the ISO drop was only .052--a little less scary than .070, but still a bit concerning, the more so since that ISO has now been dropping for three straight years. 2014 was the first year it went under .200 since he was 25.
So, his power is declining, no shock there. The question is whether the decline is likely to accelerate next year. Anybody have any thoughts on that? I didn't really see anything that looked like a red flag in his swing or his approach. The only thing that jumps out of his batted-ball numbers for me is the notable spike in GB%. He was swinging less often and missing less often, but apparently pitchers were doing a very good job, relative to last year, of not throwing stuff he could hit in the air.
rodderick said:
Both fair points -- especially 2011, which was a total brainfart on my part.
I think Steamer's 244/352/444 projection looks about right, which wouldn't be meaningfully better than last season's 248/370/419 line, but I can better understand now why people are taking the "over" on that projection. Thanks.
Health is the key for next year's team. Napoli and Pedroia could put up worse numbers than this year, but if they manage to stay on the field the offense would still improve. Red Sox 1B put up these numbers last year: 221/337/354. 2B was 274/336/376. After Ortiz, that was the best offensive line of any position. Take a look. The offense was putrid. Seven of the positions had OPS at or below 700.
They have Refsnyder putting up some pretty numbers* in the minors. He has only relatively recently taken up the position, and I doubt they go with him out of the gate, but barring his development stalling or taking a step back he is in the mix for 2015 in the bigs at some stagenattysez said:
*high average and OBP - not heaps of power or stolen bases.
Re: Napoli's drop in power
How about the dislocated finger?
Also, if he changed his approach to strike out less by cutting down on his swing, that would be a potentially positive trade off that would not portend a further drop.
How about the dislocated finger?
Also, if he changed his approach to strike out less by cutting down on his swing, that would be a potentially positive trade off that would not portend a further drop.
The more recent comments are right, I think, about Napoli and Pedey - both could be past their hand woes, and in any case the issue is not so much percentages as counting stats, as both missed a lot of games in '14. I'd be very surprised to see Ortiz repeat last season, but the other two could well contribute more, and I'd bet heavily on Bogaerts improving, along with the outfield no matter who plays. At third ... Sandoval will entail putting a lot of money at risk, same with Hanley, and the Yankees won't lose a player they want to the Sox (never have), so we're probably looking for fairly marginal improvement.
As I see it, the free agents just aren't there, apart from one or two starting pitchers. Further significant upgrades will depend on trade demand for Sox assets.
As I see it, the free agents just aren't there, apart from one or two starting pitchers. Further significant upgrades will depend on trade demand for Sox assets.
This is really for a different post, but why are people so concerned about Ortiz, who, FWIW had a better 2nd half than 1st half? His aging curve is not normal:View attachment 631
View attachment 632
View attachment 633
View attachment 634
There's nothing in his peripherals to suggest that he's dropped a step yet. If you buy into the aging curves for contact and swinging strike rates, Ortiz has bucked the trend. He's reduced his swinging strike rate over the past four years, increased his contact rates. The biggest predictor for wOBA, zone%, has actually trended in the opposite direction. Pitchers are attacking him less in the zone in 2014 than they have ever.
If his BABIP regresses, even if he drops 50 points of ISO, he'll still have a wRC+ of 130 or better.
View attachment 632
View attachment 633
View attachment 634
There's nothing in his peripherals to suggest that he's dropped a step yet. If you buy into the aging curves for contact and swinging strike rates, Ortiz has bucked the trend. He's reduced his swinging strike rate over the past four years, increased his contact rates. The biggest predictor for wOBA, zone%, has actually trended in the opposite direction. Pitchers are attacking him less in the zone in 2014 than they have ever.
If his BABIP regresses, even if he drops 50 points of ISO, he'll still have a wRC+ of 130 or better.
Fireball Fred said:
Cleveland looks to be all set in the outfield with Brantley, Bourn, and Murphy, with their priorities being starting pitching and bullpen help.
KillerBs said:
It was mentioned today on MLB Hotstove that the Angels are looking to trade either Kendrick or Freese to free up some salary to address SP... which begs the question, is Freese an option for the Sox, with our excess of pitching prospects? I don't believe he's been discussed.
JimD said:
He wasn't a free agent.
The Yankees were outbid with Cano last year, but that was a case of a pretty outrageous offer by Seattle. My guess here is that if the Yankees really want Headley, I wouldn't want to make the kind of offer it will take to get him to turn them down.
The Flying Dutchman said:
:rimshot:
Given that (1) he has played exactly one game at 3B, in his rookie year, and (2) he has played LF, CF, and 1B, but never RF, I'm guessing that the Angels don't think much of his arm.
Most likely to be manning 3B for BOS in 2015 - Sandoval, Headley, Lowrie, Holt, Cecchini, Hanley Ramirez, Bogaerts, or Middlebrooks?
Per ESPN, the Giants placed a $15.3 M qualifying offer on Sandoval.
That's no surprise, I guess, but might suppress his market a wee bit. Would the Sox be willing to overpay in dollars and years, and lose a high draft pick at the same time? Are Ben's teeth gnashing right now?
That's no surprise, I guess, but might suppress his market a wee bit. Would the Sox be willing to overpay in dollars and years, and lose a high draft pick at the same time? Are Ben's teeth gnashing right now?
Are the yankees going to offer Headley the chance to play 3B every day? All things being equal, he might take equal or slightly less money if Boston promises he's the starting 3B.
On Sandoval, I don't care about the draft pick as much this year, given our protected pick & the plan to spend money. For example, if we sign 1-2 other QO'd players, then Sandoval might only end up costing an incremental 3rd or 4th round pick. Like others, I am concerned about the weight issues. I'd hope the Sox insist on a weight clause, but my guess is someone else will be willing to give him plenty of years & dollars with no weight clause.
On Sandoval, I don't care about the draft pick as much this year, given our protected pick & the plan to spend money. For example, if we sign 1-2 other QO'd players, then Sandoval might only end up costing an incremental 3rd or 4th round pick. Like others, I am concerned about the weight issues. I'd hope the Sox insist on a weight clause, but my guess is someone else will be willing to give him plenty of years & dollars with no weight clause.
There's a fairly strong possibility that the Yankees will indeed offer him the starting 3rd base job, it's been discussed all over the board.ALiveH said:
On the QO thing, you're forgetting that every pick that they give up also comes with a draft pool hit. That's probably more important than the picks themselves.
Yankees-Sox free agents: Schilling was a trade, remember? Like Martinez, like Gonzalez. Matsuzaka was a one-bid posting fee rather than a back-and-forth auction; I'm pretty sure that's why the Sox made the preemptive bid. If regular free agency worked that way, they probably would have had Bernie Williams, Mussina, Contreras, Texiera. The Yankees have lost players they wanted, notably Cliff Lee, to other teams, but not to Boston, even though the Sox have been willing to spend big.
When people refer to a "weight clause," what are they expecting?
Sandoval might be amenable to a contract where he can earn a bit more if he maintains a good weight. I don't know if he's the sort of guy who'd be motivated by an extra million bucks when he already earns so much, but it's worth a shot.
If people think we're going to negotiate the right to terminate a long-term agreement with Sandoval if he fails to make weight, that's sheer fantasy.
Sandoval might be amenable to a contract where he can earn a bit more if he maintains a good weight. I don't know if he's the sort of guy who'd be motivated by an extra million bucks when he already earns so much, but it's worth a shot.
If people think we're going to negotiate the right to terminate a long-term agreement with Sandoval if he fails to make weight, that's sheer fantasy.
TomRicardo said:
They win every bidding war they're serious about. Daisuke was a blind bid, and I don't think they were ever serious about giving Castillo the outrageous sum the Red Sox gave him, as a RHH in their ballpark he's not as good a fit.
- Status