The Offense

[Savin Hillbilly]

 
A healthy Craig hits right-handed pitching better than Daniel Nava.

 
While this isn't actually true--at least, I don't see it in the numbers, aside from power, which of course Craig is better at than Nava across the board--it's close enough to being true to make it a pretty good question why Nava should make the team given that everything else he does, Craig does about as well (defense) or much, much better (hitting LHP). And he's a year and a half younger. If it comes down to a choice between them it's probably true that Nava's mild superiority at hitting RHP shouldn't be enough to outweigh everything else--if the team is convinced that Craig is healthy and back to something resembling his pre-injury self.

 

[Minneapolis Millers]

If Vic is healthy, he's probably the best defensive RF on the team.  But his health is and will be a significant question going forward.  Plus he's only signed for one more year.
 
The team does not need him to back up RF or CF.  Castillo and Betts can both play both positions, so they back each other up.  Craig (below average) and Holt (probably average) can play RF if needed.  Nava has played there.  Digging deeper, Brentz can play there.  The team has RF covered even without Vic.
 
If Craig is healthy, I can see the team preferring him to Vic given his contract status ($ and years) and the possibility that he would replace Napoli at 1st in 2016.  As for Vic v. Nava, I'd certainly take a healthy Vic based on talent, but a healthy Vic will still cost a lot more and could probably bring back more in a trade (from a team looking to contend this year).  There's some redundancy in Nava and Craig, but there was with Nava and Carp last year as well. 
 
Finally, my sense is that Nava will accept a bench role far more graciously than Vic will.  The team is going to need some players who will accept less P/T, and I'm not sure that's Vic. 

 

[Rasputin]

 
While this isn't actually true--at least, I don't see it in the numbers, aside from power, which of course Craig is better at than Nava across the board--it's close enough to being true to make it a pretty good question why Nava should make the team given that everything else he does, Craig does about as well (defense) or much, much better (hitting LHP). And he's a year and a half younger. If it comes down to a choice between them it's probably true that Nava's mild superiority at hitting RHP shouldn't be enough to outweigh everything else--if the team is convinced that Craig is healthy and back to something resembling his pre-injury self.

 
Daniel Nava's OPS v right handed pitchers 2012-2014 is .797, .894, .769
Allen Craig OPS v right handed pitchers 2012-2014 is .827, .845, .559
 
If Craig is who he looked like in 2014, he's just toast and not better than anyone. If he's anything resembling the hitter he was before, he's better than Daniel Nava against righties because Daniel Nava is never going to get near that .894 ever again.

 

[Lowrielicious]

People keep suggesting that Nava could be on the move, but as he is one of very few LHH on the roster, I don't see it. I'm guessing it actually will be Betts in Pawtucket to start the year, which is semi-defensible, even if it isn't what I would prefer.

 
If he wasn't such a good option as a leadoff hitter then I can see this happening, but with not many other alternatives for the spot I can't see them sending him down.

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

If Craig is healthy and effective, what the hell do we need with Daniel Nava? Betts, Castillo, and a healthy Victorino bring things to the table that Craig doesn't. They've got some speed and the ability to play defense in center and right at a level that isn't just okay, but is actually pretty good.
 
If everyone is healthy, it will be a coaching/scouting decision whether to keep Betts up and in right or to dump Nava, and I suspect that's largely going to be based on what they think Craig can do.
 
 

 
A healthy Craig hits right-handed pitching better than Daniel Nava.
 
 

 
Craig can't really replace Victorino, though. They have different skill sets. Victorino can play good defense in center and right and Craig can't.
 
 

 
I don't get preferring Nava at all. You need a back up OF that can play right and center. If you get rid of Victorino, you don't have one. Meanwhile, Nava's one talent is hitting right handed pitching, which a healthy Craig does better, and Craig can also play first.

Thats not really true .. Both Betts and Castillo can play CF. If one goes down then they play Craig or Nava in RF.

But it's just one year of Vic vs. several for Nava .. And Nava is still dirt cheap. While, if both healthy , Vic is a better player but I think the FO really likes Nava ..

 

[Rasputin]

Thats not really true .. Both Betts and Castillo can play CF. If one goes down then they play Craig or Nava in RF.

But it's just one year of Vic vs. several for Nava .. And Nava is still dirt cheap. While, if both healthy , Vic is a better player but I think the FO really likes Nava ..

 
But we A) don't really want Craig or Nava in right, and B) don't really want Betts and Castillo to have to swap positions. Neither option is really horrible, but neither is particularly good.
 
For that matter, I like Nava. He seems like a hell of a guy, he's a great story, he's just limited by the fact that he really has one thing he's actually better than average at (OBP v RHP) and it's a relatively common skill. He'll be 32 when the season starts and he doesn't have the profile of a guy who's going to have a long career. If everyone is healthy and the Sox make the decision to cut Nava, someone else is going to pick him up and there's every chance that Bryce Brentz is going to be just as good a backup outfielder. Maybe he won't get on base as much, but he's got more power, plays better defense, and is more likely to be in the game three years from now.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

 
Daniel Nava's OPS v right handed pitchers 2012-2014 is .797, .894, .769
Allen Craig OPS v right handed pitchers 2012-2014 is .827, .845, .559

 
I guess how you read this depends partly on how fluky you think Nava's 2013 was. I think it was a best-case scenario year, and almost certainly not repeatable (as much because of age as anything). But I don't think it was fluky in the sense that it was out of context with his true talent. So I think the most you can say is that before getting hurt, Craig was about as good vs. RHP as Nava is--likely to be better one year and worse another, but not too far off either way.
 
Anyway, you don't have to think Craig is a better hitter vs. RHP than Nava to agree that he has no platoon weakness, and that there is therefore no logical reason to prefer Nava over him if their roles are essentially redundant and Craig is the better player overall, both of which seem obviously true as long as Craig is healthy and back on his game.

 

[Saints Rest]

In the world of unicorns and ponies where all players in this equation (not just the 6 OF but also, Napoli, Pedroia and Ortiz) are healthy and productive thru ST, it seems to me that the needs of the trade market (i.e. The relative returns on a trade) will determine who goes.

My guess is that a healthy and productive Craig has the most value to the rest of MLB and would yield the highest return.

 

[Minneapolis Millers]

To Saints' point, unless Craig can be a significant piece in getting something the team really needs (say, a big SP upgrade), it probably isn't worth it to the Sox to trade him.  He's reasonably cost-controlled for 4 years and can replace Napoli next year.  Vic isn't, Vic can't, plus Vic's older.  And again, I think people underestimate the personnel issues that can arise when veterans on your bench think they should be starting.  Victorino has already said that he considers himself the starter if he's healthy.  Getting 200 ABs in 2015 is not going to help him land his next contract.  And while he could start and Betts could be relegated to AAA, I think that would be a decision of last resort, not the preferred route.
 
Craig, under contract, can perhaps be convinced that this is a rebuilding year for him, with a return to starting in his future.  Nava is already accustomed to playing the reliable reserve role.  Keep those two, trade Vic, if healthy.

 

[Corsi]

Red Sox settle w/ Nava
 
Alex Speier ‏@alexspeier  45s45 seconds ago
Nava's 2015 salary is $1.85M

 

[Rasputin]

In the world of unicorns and ponies where all players in this equation (not just the 6 OF but also, Napoli, Pedroia and Ortiz) are healthy and productive thru ST, it seems to me that the needs of the trade market (i.e. The relative returns on a trade) will determine who goes.

My guess is that a healthy and productive Craig has the most value to the rest of MLB and would yield the highest return.

 
But a healthy and productive Craig is also going to have the most value to the team that has him, a first baseman with an explosive hip and a contract that runs out soon, and a DH that's a thousand years old.

 

[Plympton91]

 
But a healthy and productive Craig is also going to have the most value to the team that has him, a first baseman with an explosive hip and a contract that runs out soon, and a DH that's a thousand years old.

If Craig hits like Grady Sizemore in spring training, can we at least wait until the end of April before we proclaim him to be the obvious replacement for Napoli?

Craig has options, and can't refuse to go to Pawtucket. If all the regulars are healthy, then I'd rather have him get at bats every day in April (there's a lot of off days for the regulars already, they don't need more) and prove his readiness to help at the big league level by dominating AAA.

If Craig proves he's back to some semblance of his 2012-2013 form, then I agree you have to keep him around to fill obvious needs for 2016-2017 on a very reasonable AAV contract. In that case, it comes down to Victorino vs. Nava, and I'd trade whichever player brought back more in return rather than the player that seemed a better fit for 2015 and beyond. Victorino isn't coming back, and as others have noted, isn't really needed to cover CF or RF anymore. Nava will likely start declining soon, and getting more expensive if he doesn't.

But, Bryce Brentz is not a better outfielder than Daniel Nava. He's passable, but his best position probably DH.

 

[Rasputin]

If Craig hits like Grady Sizemore in spring training, can we at least wait until the end of April before we proclaim him to be the obvious replacement for Napoli?

Craig has options, and can't refuse to go to Pawtucket. If all the regulars are healthy, then I'd rather have him get at bats every day in April (there's a lot of off days for the regulars already, they don't need more) and prove his readiness to help at the big league level by dominating AAA.

If Craig proves he's back to some semblance of his 2012-2013 form, then I agree you have to keep him around to fill obvious needs for 2016-2017 on a very reasonable AAV contract. In that case, it comes down to Victorino vs. Nava, and I'd trade whichever player brought back more in return rather than the player that seemed a better fit for 2015 and beyond. Victorino isn't coming back, and as others have noted, isn't really needed to cover CF or RF anymore. Nava will likely start declining soon, and getting more expensive if he doesn't.

But, Bryce Brentz is not a better outfielder than Daniel Nava. He's passable, but his best position probably DH.

 
The whole conversation is based on Craig being healthy and productive. If he's not, he's useless.
 
Everything I've read about Brentz suggests he's actually pretty good in the field. Everything I've seen from Daniel Nava says he's passable at best.

 

[behindthepen]

didn't see this posted anywhere seems to fit here.  Edes did a review of the bp WAR forecasts, giving comments on each of the position players.  Also this:

 
 
Betts projects to bat leadoff if he indeed is an everyday player, and would play a big part in what BP sees as a major revival by the team's offense. Boston led the majors in runs scored in 2013, fell to 18th last season, and projects to lead the majors again in 2015 as the only team to score 800 or more runs, according to BP. That's why the Sox are projected by the site to win the AL East with an 87-75 record, a game ahead of the Tampa Bay Rays.

Betts, Pedroia, Castillo, Ramirez and Ortiz all project at >3.0 WAR players next season.  With the rest of the non-catching lineup at 2-3.
 
Encouraging, but a little scary that 3 out of the top 4 will be effectively new to MLB or playing a new position.

 

[geoduck no quahog]

Let's recap depth without Nava or Holt:
 
LF: Ramirez (Craig, Betts)
CF: Castillo (Victorino, Betts)
RF: Victorino (Betts, Craig)
 
3B: Sandoval (Ramirez, ?)
SS: Bogaerts (Ramirez, ?)
2B: Pedroia (Betts, ?)
1B: Napoli (Craig, Ortiz)
 
C: Vazquez (Hannigan)
 
That's 12 players. Room for one more. It's obvious that 
 
a. A good utility infielder is necessary (Holt or someone else)
b. It's either Nava or Craig based on positions
 
I agree with the posters who think that Craig is the better long term investment. He's a proven, cost-controlled commodity.
I agree with the posters who think Craig is an injury risk.
I agree with the posters who think Nava brings another LHB to the table.
I agree it's a tough decision (unless Betts starts in AAA, god forbid)

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

That doesn't really tell the whole story with regards to depth, though. It's more like this.
 
C - Vazquez, Hanigan
1B - Napoli, Craig, Papi
2B - Pedroia, Betts, Holt
3B - Sandoval, Bogaerts, Ramirez, Holt
SS - Bogaerts, Ramirez, Holt
LF - Ramirez, Craig, Victorino, Holt
CF - Castillo, Betts, Victorino
RF - Betts, Victorino, Castillo, Craig, Holt
DH - Papi, Everyone Else
 
This is assuming that Nava is the odd man out, but you could replace Craig with Nava and have very similar results. They have at least three players capable of manning every position except catcher. That's nuts. This roster's flexibility should allow them to keep a strong lineup on the field at all times, even when the inevitable DL stints and nagging injuries not quite worth a 15 day break pop up.

 

[Rasputin]

That doesn't really tell the whole story with regards to depth, though. It's more like this.
 
C - Vazquez, Hanigan
1B - Napoli, Craig, Papi
2B - Pedroia, Betts, Holt
3B - Sandoval, Bogaerts, Ramirez, Holt
SS - Bogaerts, Ramirez, Holt
LF - Ramirez, Craig, Victorino, Holt
CF - Castillo, Betts, Victorino
RF - Betts, Victorino, Castillo, Craig, Holt
DH - Papi, Everyone Else
 
This is assuming that Nava is the odd man out, but you could replace Craig with Nava and have very similar results. They have at least three players capable of manning every position except catcher. That's nuts. This roster's flexibility should allow them to keep a strong lineup on the field at all times, even when the inevitable DL stints and nagging injuries not quite worth a 15 day break pop up.

 
It really is kinda nuts. And the scary thing is, the defense should be pretty good, too. If the pitching just holds together and doesn't completely tank--and there are some options if it does--then this could end up being the best team in baseball.
 
Fuckit, World Series be damned, 100 wins here we come.

 

[tbrown_01923]

 
It really is kinda nuts. And the scary thing is, the defense should be pretty good, too. If the pitching just holds together and doesn't completely tank--and there are some options if it does--then this could end up being the best team in baseball.
 
Fuckit, World Series be damned, 100 wins here we come.

 
I am all in too. I love the collection of talent, and the depth.  Pitching is a crapshoot and with an outside shot at panning out, but they have the assets to set it straight should it not be what they need.  

 

[Fireball Fred]

A lot of depth, a lot of question marks. We hope, and to some extent expect, that Vazquez, Bogaerts, Castillo, and Betts will hit; that Pedroia, Ramirez, Victorino, Napoli, and Craig will be healthy; and that Ortiz won't age out. Most of these things did not happen last year, or did in only a small sample size. The depth is vital, and making good decisions in spring training is too.

 

[koufax32]

It really is kinda nuts. And the scary thing is, the defense should be pretty good, too. If the pitching just holds together and doesn't completely tank--and there are some options if it does--then this could end up being the best team in baseball.
 
Fuckit, World Series be damned, 100 wins here we come.

A Ras projection of 100 wins...this is becoming a tradition like the initial 3 Amigos report from the Fort. Happy spring training all! God bless us everyone!

 

[Rasputin]

A Ras projection of 100 wins...this is becoming a tradition like the initial 3 Amigos report from the Fort. Happy spring training all! God bless us everyone!

 
I'm just happy to be here. I hope I can help the ballclub. I just want to give it my best shot, and the Good Lord willing, it will all work out.
 
And I hope y'all realize that most of the time, I'm joking about the 100 games stuff. It's going to take quite a bit of not sucking from our pitching staff to get anywhere near it.
 
But...the difference between a 90 win team and a 100 win team is two wins a month. a half a win a week.

 

[kieckeredinthehead]

When was the last time the Red Sox legitimately had more players than they needed? Giambi Ortiz and Millar?

 

[Rice4HOF]

When was the last time the Red Sox legitimately had more players than they needed? Giambi Ortiz and Millar?

Spring Training 2006. Bronson Arroyo and 5 other starters. 

 

[reggiecleveland]

 
 
 
Fuckit, World Series be damned, 100 wins here we come.

 Isn't that right up there with "Peace in our time" and "now it's on to Chicago" in terms or portent?

 

[Rasputin]

 Isn't that right up there with "Peace in our time" and "now it's on to Chicago" in terms or portent?

 
It's a long offseason. A very long offseason.

 

[geoduck no quahog]

It's been said before, but assuming each player lives up to his capabilities - this is a lineup 1-8 that is unmatched, regardless of how you sequence them. A bench of Craig, Betts/Victorino, Holt and Hannigan is nothing to sneeze at. Bradley Jr and Swihart (or even Brentz/Cecchini) stashed in Pawtucket is pretty impressive. Am I being too much of a homer?

 

[Rasputin]

It's been said before, but assuming each player lives up to his capabilities - this is a lineup 1-8 that is unmatched, regardless of how you sequence them. A bench of Craig, Betts/Victorino, Holt and Hannigan is nothing to sneeze at. Bradley Jr and Swihart (or even Brentz/Cecchini) stashed in Pawtucket is pretty impressive. Am I being too much of a homer?

 
No, but the "assuming each player lives up to his capabilities" is a rather big caveat and assumes that we have an accurate impression of what their abilities are, which really isn't correct for a fair amount of the lineup.
 
Also, the health factor is big.

 

[Rovin Romine]

 
No, but the "assuming each player lives up to his capabilities" is a rather big caveat and assumes that we have an accurate impression of what their abilities are, which really isn't correct for a fair amount of the lineup.
 
Also, the health factor is big.

  
Not to quibble, but who is difficult to project?  It seems that nearly all the players have health question marks, but there's also something of a track record for most of them.  Castillo and Vazquez and Betts are effectively rookies.   Craig has injury/performance concerns.  So does Victorino.  Nava's a bit of a wild card due to the 2014 slump.  Ditto Xander. And JBJ may or may not hit ML pitching.  But those guys are pretty much all in the OF, barring injury.  
 
We really only need:
Some consistency from Xander
For one of Castillo/Betts/JBJ/Victorino to be effective in CF and, if only one is, for one of Craig/Nava to be effective.  
Vazquez needs to do what JBJ failed to (hit at or above replacement level).  However, Hannigan can spell him, we have Swihart, and can always trade for a journeyman in case of disaster.
 
On the other hand, Ortiz, Pedroia, Napoli, Sandoval, HRam, Hanigan, and Holt (FWIW) are pretty projectable and don't have a lot of uncertainty attached.  In that group, for every negative indicator, there's a positive one.  

 

[Plympton91]

  
Not to quibble, but who is difficult to project?  It seems that nearly all the players have health question marks, but there's also something of a track record for most of them.  Castillo and Vazquez and Betts are effectively rookies.   Craig has injury/performance concerns.  So does Victorino.  Nava's a bit of a wild card due to the 2014 slump.  Ditto Xander. And JBJ may or may not hit ML pitching.  But those guys are pretty much all in the OF, barring injury.  
 
We really only need:
Some consistency from Xander
For one of Castillo/Betts/JBJ/Victorino to be effective in CF and, if only one is, for one of Craig/Nava to be effective.  
Vazquez needs to do what JBJ failed to (hit at or above replacement level).  However, Hannigan can spell him, we have Swihart, and can always trade for a journeyman in case of disaster.
 
On the other hand, Ortiz, Pedroia, Napoli, Sandoval, HRam, Hanigan, and Holt (FWIW) are pretty projectable and don't have a lot of uncertainty attached.  In that group, for every negative indicator, there's a positive one.  

I'm bullish on the offense, but Sandoval and Ramirez are switching leagues (think JD Drew's first year struggles), Ortiz is 39, and Napoli is coming off facial reconstruction surgery. I'd say there's plenty of uncertainty in their performance projections, too.

 

[Rasputin]

  
Not to quibble, but who is difficult to project?  It seems that nearly all the players have health question marks, but there's also something of a track record for most of them. 

 
Keep in mind that we're talking about projecting for 2015 alone, not their entire career. I'm pretty comfortable saying that Betts, Castillo, Vazquez, and Bogaerts individually are going to have good careers. I'm less comfortable saying they all are, and I'm even less comfortable saying they're going to have a good 2015. Plus there are the health questions with Craig and Vic, and both Papi and Napoli have the potential to go from middle of the lineup studs to completely worthless in an instant.
 
I'm pretty confident that we're gong to get enough of these guys performing at a good enough level to be a competitive team, and if we get a little lucky, we're going to be the baddest offensive motherfuckers in the league, but it's not like it's a guarantee.

 

[Reverend]

b. It's either Nava or Craig based on positions
 
I agree with the posters who think that Craig is the better long term investment. He's a proven, cost-controlled commodity.
I agree with the posters who think Craig is an injury risk.
I agree with the posters who think Nava brings another LHB to the table.
I agree it's a tough decision (unless Betts starts in AAA, god forbid)

 
It may be a bit of a nit on the language, but I think it's a significant point: Craig is more than an injury risk--he's basically permanently damaged:
 
 

For what it's worth, I'm planning to talk about microfracture and Lisfranc injuries at the Saberseminar in two weeks.
 
Short version - some guys never really recover from Lisfranc injuries.  The surgical bailout is a midfoot fusion, which is a decent surgery for alleviating chronic pain but isn't really compatible with high-level athletics.
 
Wow, I just dropped a turd in the punchbowl, huh?  Guess I'm not getting $10 for this one...

 
Maybe he can manage to get his swing in order to perform despite said damage, but it is impossible for him to return to what could be considered full health.

 

[lxt]

I'd have to agree with Rasputin in that the offense with its depth will do just fine. There are many variables but the combination seems to indicate a degree of performance and balance that can be maintain throughout the season. The defense will likely shake out the same in that there are some weaknesses but then there are strengths. Again balance. The pitching will do fine. There are no "aces" here but they are a solid group with plenty of depth to cover bad spots and injuries. Please Clay pitch this year for real.
 
If we don't have a Texas happen then I'm conservatively guessing 88 - 91 wins and a playoff spot. If the baseball gods are kind then Rasputin's 100 wins is a possibility. I'd be happy with 94 wins, a guaranteed playoff spot if not the division title.
 
I know reality can be a nasty thing but I think BC has done a good job and we can look upon this season with some optimism. Hey we all thought 2014 would be far less than what it was and we all thought 2014 would be a lot better than it was. Baseball what a game. Boston what a team. Got to love it.

 

[Rasputin]

For the record, whenever this team does in fact, win 100 games, I'm going to take the credit and I don't care if it's twenty years from now.

 

[grimshaw]

 
As a starting point, here are Steamer's wRC+ projections for 2015 as well as how players performed last year.  I will exclude Castillo as he is still an unknown.  I'm aware that Steamer may not be the best way to predict the offense on its own, but feel free to use other metrics.
 
1B - Napoli (2014 - 124) (2015 - 123).  Actual 67
2B Pedey (2014 - 99) (2015 - 113) Actual 126
SS Xander (2014 - 82) (2015 - 106) Actual 80
3B Sandoval (2014 - 111) (2015 - 124) Actual 124
LF Hanley (2014 - 135) (2015 - 134) Actual 126
CF Betts (2014 - 130) (2015 - 120) Actual 102
RF Castillo unknown.  Victorino is projected at 105.  He was at 119 in 2013.  Rusney is N/A and Vic is at 41 in SSS
DH Papi (2014 - 135) (2015 - 127) Actual 93
C Vazquez (2014 - 71) (2015 -90) Obviously he went down, and has been replaced by Hanigan 94 Leon 29 and Swihart -9.
 
Nava (2014 - 100) (2015 - 108) Actual 13
Holt (2014 - 98) (2015 - 95) Actual 130

Bumping.  The bolded is the current wRC+ compared to Steamer so far through 1/5th (already) of the season.
As much as the pitching has taken a beating and under performed, the offense sure as hell is not meeting expectations
 
The only players thus far significantly outperforming projections are Pedey who appears to indeed be fully healed, and Brock Holt! even with his current slide.
What's hurt them most?  Napoli, Papi and the bench.
 
-Napoli has been awful as many of us have noted.  It's hard to tell at 33 if it is age related decline or if it is an extended funk which he usually makes up for with an extended tear.   If Nava was hitting, he could have been spelling him more often.  He obviously is not either.
 
-Papi has not been good.  It's his sole job to hit, and to hit for power. He's got the track record, but this smells like 2009 or worse and he got his contract before they needed to give it to him.  I don't know why this was done, but w/e.
 
-Losing Hanigan has been killer so far.  As it turns out - having a Vazquez type bat would actually be welcome with the awfulness that has replaced them.  Swihart gets a pass as a newbie and should hit a bit.
 
-Bogaerts has been 2014 Xander but with a better glove.  Baby steps.
 
Our projected deep depth at the time of this thread of Craig, Middlebrooks (poor in SD), Coyle, Hassan (bouncing around organizations), Cecchini, Shaw have collectively blown.  JBJ and Marrero have shown some improvement.  Brentz has not.
 
What gives?

 

[kieckeredinthehead]

-Napoli has been awful as many of us have noted.  It's hard to tell at 33 if it is age related decline or if it is an extended funk which he usually makes up for with an extended tear.   If Nava was hitting, he could have been spelling him more often.  He obviously is not either.

 
Napoli has been going to right a lot the past week, during which time he's had an 867 OPS. I think he's about to heat up.

 

[BestGameEvah]

SOME LATE-INNINGS HOPE: 
“The Red Sox have taken to awarding a rubber chicken to any hitter who drives in a run with two outs. The plastic fowl is hung in the player’s locker until the next game. Pablo Sandoval, who had a two-out home run on Sunday, was quite pleased with his chicken and waved it at Mike Napoli.
 
Alex Spier newsletter 108 stitches

 

[Plympton91]

A big problem with the offense has been the insistence on playing Allan Craig, and now Shane Victorino, while once again burying Daniel Nava against righthanded pitching because he had a perfectly normal slump to open the season.  Even if you don't like Nava or think "It's more than a slump" that doesn't absolve them from playing Craig or Victorino over their other option, a hot Brock Holt.  When you don't use your best assets, you lose synergy in the lineup, and that costs runs.
 
They're also stubbornly clinging to the notion that pitch framing, as measured by the current system, is more important than offense, which has them carrying sub-replacement level bats.  Maybe that is helping to prevent runs on defense.  I certainly hope so, because it's definitely costing runs on offense.  Losing Hannigan hurt, as he was hitting decently for a catcher in this environment, but over the long haul I'm not sure he would have kept that up anyway carrying a full-time starting load.

 

[Rovin Romine]

A big problem with the offense has been the insistence on playing Allan Craig, and now Shane Victorino, while once again burying Daniel Nava against righthanded pitching because he had a perfectly normal slump to open the season.  Even if you don't like Nava or think "It's more than a slump" that doesn't absolve them from playing Craig or Victorino over their other option, a hot Brock Holt.  When you don't use your best assets, you lose synergy in the lineup, and that costs runs.
 
They're also stubbornly clinging to the notion that pitch framing, as measured by the current system, is more important than offense, which has them carrying sub-replacement level bats.  Maybe that is helping to prevent runs on defense.  I certainly hope so, because it's definitely costing runs on offense.  Losing Hannigan hurt, as he was hitting decently for a catcher in this environment, but over the long haul I'm not sure he would have kept that up anyway carrying a full-time starting load.

 
Out of 34 games, Craig played in 24.  But he only started 10 games and was subbed in 14 times (20 PA total). 
Out of 34 games, Vic played in 14.  He started 12 games and was subbed in 2 times. 
 
Brock's stared 17 and subbed 4. 
Nava's started 13 and subbed 8 (with a .000 OPS in 7 PA).  No stats on Nava's synergistic effects.  (Until yesterday, Nava was riding an 0-24 streak - which does not really scream "play me somewhere, anywhere.")
 
So I think you're trolling, as usual.  Farrell's been rotating gimp and suck and slump in and out of the lineups.  You can't credibly argue that Farrell ought to "ride out" Nava's slump, but is incorrect in giving Craig and Vic playing time.  He's given everyone a chance, and I'm sure he's balancing that against the once hot-now coolish hand.  (Brock has started more than any of them and has more PA, but he's fallen from a ridiculous 1.113 OPS on April 26 to a .776 today.)
 
***
 
And this: They're also stubbornly clinging to the notion that pitch framing, as measured by the current system, is more important than offense, which has them carrying sub-replacement level bats. 
 
is just idiotic.  Just come out and say which catcher should they be playing, and/or which catcher they should trade for.

 

[jasail]

A big problem with the offense has been the insistence on playing Allan Craig, and now Shane Victorino, while once again burying Daniel Nava against righthanded pitching because he had a perfectly normal slump to open the season.  Even if you don't like Nava or think "It's more than a slump" that doesn't absolve them from playing Craig or Victorino over their other option, a hot Brock Holt.  When you don't use your best assets, you lose synergy in the lineup, and that costs runs.
 
They're also stubbornly clinging to the notion that pitch framing, as measured by the current system, is more important than offense, which has them carrying sub-replacement level bats.  Maybe that is helping to prevent runs on defense.  I certainly hope so, because it's definitely costing runs on offense.  Losing Hannigan hurt, as he was hitting decently for a catcher in this environment, but over the long haul I'm not sure he would have kept that up anyway carrying a full-time starting load.

 
I absolutely agree that JF has been too conservative in lineup construction by sticking to the regulars at the expense of the hot bat or numbers. Typically, I have no problem with this conservative approach when the lineup is clicking and can carry a bat that you want to play in hopes they turn it on. However, this lineup is not clicking and they need a spark. IMO, the best way to do that is to play your hottest hitters and play the numbers. That said, I think this will only have a marginal effect on overall performance. 
 
As for your second paragraph, you lost me. Coming into the season, the Sox went with a 24-yo cost-controlled elite defensive catcher, who was projected to provide offense at or just above league average for C (he also had some potential to grow into an above league average hitter) that could hit 9th. They rightfully decided to roll the dice on him and brought in a guy with similar strengths to help break him in and provide a back up roll. Offensive production at C is the lowest of all positions, there are only a handful of guys that can actually produce at this position and none of them are taking backup or platoon positions. So, I find it extremely difficult to fault the Sox with their off-season approach at C. If we want to gripe about C production to date, gripe about injuries because they are playing their 3rd and 4th options. 3rd and 4th options typically aren't going to be well-rounded productive players regardless of the position, but this is even more true for C b/c of the low offensive bar for production at this position. IMO, of all the things affecting this team's offense, C is way far down on my list. That's not to say their production at C is good, but that it's expected given the circumstances. Moreover, there are bolder causes of this year's offensive struggles.
 
So what are those bolder causes? This team's offense was built on the notion that 2-6 would carry them and let them break in 3 young players and figure out RF. To date, this hasn't happened. Two of the most important hitters in the 2-6 are severely under performing, two others are performing just about at expectations and one slightly above expectations. If Napoli and Ortiz continue to under perform, so will the offense; if they come around, so will the offense. Pointing out other flaws, such as C or RF, is like complaining that there are sub-standard tires on a sports car when the transmission won't get up into the higher gears.

 

[Plympton91]

 
Out of 34 games, Craig played in 24.  But he only started 10 games and was subbed in 14 times (20 PA total). 
Out of 34 games, Vic played in 14.  He started 12 games and was subbed in 2 times. 
 
Brock's stared 17 and subbed 4. 
Nava's started 13 and subbed 8 (with a .000 OPS in 7 PA).  No stats on Nava's synergistic effects.  (Until yesterday, Nava was riding an 0-24 streak - which does not really scream "play me somewhere, anywhere.")
 
So I think you're trolling, as usual.  Farrell's been rotating gimp and suck and slump in and out of the lineups.  You can't credibly argue that Farrell ought to "ride out" Nava's slump, but is incorrect in giving Craig and Vic playing time.  He's given everyone a chance, and I'm sure he's balancing that against the once hot-now coolish hand.  (Brock has started more than any of them and has more PA, but he's fallen from a ridiculous 1.113 OPS on April 26 to a .776 today.)

 
They're obviously trying to get Craig to show any semblance of hitting better than a pitcher, and the decision to let him do that until a few days ago at the major league level rather than at Pawtucket was probably not 100% Farrell's but rather an organizational one.  Likewise the decision to keep Victorino and demote Castillo.
 
That there are "good" reasons to use Craig and Victorino despite mountains of evidence that they are shells of their former selves may alter the "blame game" but not the reality.  They have not been playing their best lineup in any game this season, and the offense is predictably sputtering.
 
As for available catchers, I guess there aren't any 30-year-old catchers who as recently as 2013 carried the bulk of the load for a championship team and was the primary starter for a .500 team in 2014 just out there waiting to be picked up for league minimum, right?  But maybe the Red Sox have measured catcher defense and determined it trumps even sub-replacement level offense.  So, I'm not really arguing that they should make a change, just pointing out that even if that's true, then the offense is going to be handicapped by the decision.
 
So, complaints about the performance of Betts, Bogaerts, Napoli, or Ortiz are misplaced; the real problems in the lineup have been choices by Red Sox organization to give weight to factors other than offense in RF and C.  That's not saying those weights are wrong necessarily, just that they are real factors and correctable if the organization wants to correct them.

 

[Rovin Romine]

 
They're obviously trying to get Craig to show any semblance of hitting better than a pitcher, and the decision to let him do that until a few days ago at the major league level rather than at Pawtucket was probably not 100% Farrell's but rather an organizational one.  Likewise the decision to keep Victorino and demote Castillo.
 
That there are "good" reasons to use Craig and Victorino despite mountains of evidence that they are shells of their former selves may alter the "blame game" but not the reality.  They have not been playing their best lineup in any game this season, and the offense is predictably sputtering.
 
As for available catchers, I guess there aren't any 30-year-old catchers who as recently as 2013 carried the bulk of the load for a championship team and was the primary starter for a .500 team in 2014 just out there waiting to be picked up for league minimum, right?  But maybe the Red Sox have measured catcher defense and determined it trumps even sub-replacement level offense.  So, I'm not really arguing that they should make a change, just pointing out that even if that's true, then the offense is going to be handicapped by the decision.
 
So, complaints about the performance of Betts, Bogaerts, Napoli, or Ortiz are misplaced; the real problems in the lineup have been choices by Red Sox organization to give weight to factors other than offense in RF and C.  That's not saying those weights are wrong necessarily, just that they are real factors and correctable if the organization wants to correct them.

 
Well, it does come down to the hitters hitting, in the end.  
 
Hanley/Betts have delivered (mostly), and it wasn't entirely unrealistic for the Sox to expect that one of Vic/Nava/Craig/Castillo/JBJ could have handled CF/RF.   I don't think the Sox "chose" to hold onto that group to start the season "knowing" that their offensive performance would be what it has been, and that they valued something else about them.  If you do, I'd like to know what it was. 
 
Similarly, I don't think the Sox "chose" Vasquez's injury, or Hanigan's injury, (although the board identified C as an area with less depth than other Sox positions, and the one lineup spot where offense would likely not be league average.)  
 
In terms of not picking up Salty, he's definitively sucked for 460 PA.  Of course he's slumped as badly and for as long in his past.  So he may put it together.  Or not.  But the Sox determined he's not someone to hand the keys of a struggling staff to.  Since they have direct and longstanding experience with Salty, it's hard to fault their decision on that score.  
 
I can see your point as to acquiring a durable "meh" bat at catcher to offset a possible Swihart offensive implosion, but he's only had the 8 games so far.  
 
And, FWIW, in light of Salty's offensive struggles, your argument for Salty:
 
 

 
As for available catchers, I guess there aren't any 30-year-old catchers who as recently as 2013 carried the bulk of the load for a championship team and was the primary starter for a .500 team in 2014 just out there waiting to be picked up for league minimum, right?  

 
 
could easily apply to such '13 luminaries as Craig and Victorino and Nava and Carp.  All then-good/excellent players who have since slumped as badly and for as long.  (Granted, some have injury complications.)  

 

[grimshaw]

They're also stubbornly clinging to the notion that pitch framing, as measured by the current system, is more important than offense, which has them carrying sub-replacement level bats.  Maybe that is helping to prevent runs on defense.  I certainly hope so, because it's definitely costing runs on offense.  Losing Hannigan hurt, as he was hitting decently for a catcher in this environment, but over the long haul I'm not sure he would have kept that up anyway carrying a full-time starting load.

Not true at all - and possibly the opposite. http://www.statcorner.com/CatcherReport.php
The metrics are showing that at best Hanigan has been a slightly above average pitch framer and Leon has been well below average over his career. 
The Leon thing was most likely a scrap heap, band aid type nab to plug a hole asap and buy them time until teams were peddling MLB caliber catchers who wouldn't be available until June.  That Hanigan then got hurt, forced them to bring up Swihart.
 
Good pitch framing would have stolen them more outs which is something they have really needed.  Pitch calling has been the bigger culprit and was criticized by Farrell before our pitching coach was sacked.
 
The catching black hole has been the worst luck they could have.  The other positions I pointed out are just not performing.

 

[Plympton91]

 
could easily apply to such '13 luminaries as Craig and Victorino and Nava and Carp.  All then-good/excellent players who have since slumped as badly and for as long.  (Granted, some have injury complications.)  

 
Other than that Ms. Lincoln...
 
Victorino has given up switch hitting because his body can't take the pounding of hitting lefthanded.  That's a structural change in who Victorino is as a baseball player.  Shane Victorino 2013 no longer exists.  He should now be viewed as at best a platoon player.
 
Craig has been discussed ad nauseum, and Carp is a part time player who will see wide swings in performance as a result.  He's also redundant to Nava so not really part of the discussion.
 
All the same discussions of Nava happened last spring too.  He started off slowly, got benched and/or sent down.  His wishcasted replacements -- Sizemore last year and Craig this year, neither of whom standard projection systems expected to be any better at best -- crashed and burned.  Then he came back and continued to get on base against righthanded pitching at an above average clip, though his power seems to have diminished.  I expect that same thing will happen this year if he starts getting regular playing time again.  His "slumps" really were well within the normal bounds of variation both in performance and length even among superstars, they were very different from Craig's now very extended period of deep distress.   Of course, with Castillo in the wings, the Red Sox do have someone who does legitimately look poised to take Nava's at bats, but they sent him down in favor of Victorino who can't switch hit and Craig who's lost it completely.

 

[lexrageorge]

 
Other than that Ms. Lincoln...
 
Victorino has given up switch hitting because his body can't take the pounding of hitting lefthanded.  That's a structural change in who Victorino is as a baseball player.  Shane Victorino 2013 no longer exists.  He should now be viewed as at best a platoon player.
 
Craig has been discussed ad nauseum, and Carp is a part time player who will see wide swings in performance as a result.  He's also redundant to Nava so not really part of the discussion.
 
All the same discussions of Nava happened last spring too.  He started off slowly, got benched and/or sent down.  His wishcasted replacements -- Sizemore last year and Craig this year, neither of whom standard projection systems expected to be any better at best -- crashed and burned.  Then he came back and continued to get on base against righthanded pitching at an above average clip, though his power seems to have diminished.  I expect that same thing will happen this year if he starts getting regular playing time again.  His "slumps" really were well within the normal bounds of variation both in performance and length even among superstars, they were very different from Craig's now very extended period of deep distress.   Of course, with Castillo in the wings, the Red Sox do have someone who does legitimately look poised to take Nava's at bats, but they sent him down in favor of Victorino who can't switch hit and Craig who's lost it completely.

Castillo was hurt for most of spring training, and so got precious few at bats.  The team figured some seasoning in AAA wouldn't be the worst thing in that scenario.  And Castillo has been hurt all season anyway.  
 
If you think Salty is the answer, you're truly delusional in your hatred of the Sox management. 

 

[glennhoffmania]

 
They're obviously trying to get Craig to show any semblance of hitting better than a pitcher, and the decision to let him do that until a few days ago at the major league level rather than at Pawtucket was probably not 100% Farrell's but rather an organizational one.  Likewise the decision to keep Victorino and demote Castillo.
 
That there are "good" reasons to use Craig and Victorino despite mountains of evidence that they are shells of their former selves may alter the "blame game" but not the reality.  They have not been playing their best lineup in any game this season, and the offense is predictably sputtering.
 
As for available catchers, I guess there aren't any 30-year-old catchers who as recently as 2013 carried the bulk of the load for a championship team and was the primary starter for a .500 team in 2014 just out there waiting to be picked up for league minimum, right?  But maybe the Red Sox have measured catcher defense and determined it trumps even sub-replacement level offense.  So, I'm not really arguing that they should make a change, just pointing out that even if that's true, then the offense is going to be handicapped by the decision.
 
So, complaints about the performance of Betts, Bogaerts, Napoli, or Ortiz are misplaced; the real problems in the lineup have been choices by Red Sox organization to give weight to factors other than offense in RF and C.  That's not saying those weights are wrong necessarily, just that they are real factors and correctable if the organization wants to correct them.

 
So your solution to the problems of having a sub-replacement level catcher and a shitty offensive RF is to sign another sub-replacement level catcher and insert an OF with a wRC+ of 34?

 

[Toe Nash]

As for available catchers, I guess there aren't any 30-year-old catchers who as recently as 2013 carried the bulk of the load for a championship team and was the primary starter for a .500 team in 2014 just out there waiting to be picked up for league minimum, right? 

This is pretty amazing, even coming from P91.
Salty was benched in the World Series for defense.
The Marlins were 77-85 last year, not ".500"
Salty had a .681 OPS for them.
He got cut, even though he's still owed a lot, and cleared waivers. The Diamondbacks picked him up and even though their starting catcher is TUFFY GOSEWISCH, who has a 51 OPS+ and 1 career home run, they sent Salty to AAA, and LaRussa said “there were no promises made” about calling him up.
 
He. Is. Terrible. And. Done. No one wants him on their team even to sit on their bench.

 

[Plympton91]

 
So your solution to the problems of having a sub-replacement level catcher and a shitty offensive RF is to sign another sub-replacement level catcher and insert an OF with a wRC+ of 34?

 
OPS+ is not based on replacement level, it is the average across all players and positions.  Hence a 91 is probably above average offense for a catcher. 
 
Salty's defense may in fact have fallen off a cliff relative to his 2012 and 2013 years here, even at just age 30.  The lack of interest around the league is certainly damning, I can't deny that.  Maybe whatever yips he developed in the 2013 championship round are there to stay.  But, you know, the Red Sox have Sandy Leon, who had a 550 OPS in AAA last year.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Don't worry, Salty's on a minor league deal with Arizona. If he sucks there he'll be available again soon enough.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

The Red Sox are slashing 231/.314/.368 in total, which is bad enough.
 
However, they are slashing .188/.291/.347 against LH pitchers, which is by far the worst in the league, but is kind of weird since Hanley has a 1.300 OPS against lefties; Pedroia a .912; and Napoli a .904.   I guess since we don't expect Sandoval to hit lefties, the lack of production against lefties has primarily to do with Ortiz (.367 OPS); Mookie (.643); Xander (.550); and Swihart (SSS = .375).
 
This weekend would be a good weekend for them to bust up some southpaws.

 

[Curtis Pride]

Matthew Kory at FanGraphs Put up an article today on the Red Sox offense in which he blames BABIP for the Sox' struggles:
 
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/defending-the-red-sox-offensive-approach/