Who is the 2015 SS?

[Rovin Romine]

 
I wonder how much patience the FO has, or how much pressure they feel like they're under. I feel like after watching the 2014 offense struggle, the FO may go with a slightly more veteran-like substance direction with their 2015 additions. I could see a trade for...I don't know, Carlos Quentin, and signing a Lowrie/Panda/Headley on a 1 year, make-good contract. 
 
If they're more patient than I think they are, then I think a lot depends on Middlebrooks. If he can come back and hit in the 2nd half, he may save a job for himself and push Bogaerts back to SS. If he doesn't, then I think he may have to go back to AAA until he forces his way back onto the roster again. 

 
I think the problem is playing time - "make good" guys want to play no matter what, so either you have an underperforming make good backup agitating for playing time so they can "make good," or you have a good one agitating for playing time to pad the stats, or you have an unhappy one (good or bad) displaced by a rookie.  Then you have to deal with the whole trade-the-vet-midseason mess. 
 
If you're committed to rookies, you ultimately want someone who is a decent bet to produce, but won't mind being displaced.  Ideally, you get a guy who is like that but could shift to multiple positions, should one rookie take off and another flag.  Probably someone on the downside of their career.  
 
Thankfully (in a sense) the second half of 2014 is a no pressure environment which is near perfect for evaluating what we have in terms of the young players at the ML level.   Ultimately you have to play the kids to see what they can do. 

 

[alwyn96]

 
I think the problem is playing time - "make good" guys want to play no matter what, so either you have an underperforming make good backup agitating for playing time so they can "make good," or you have a good one agitating for playing time to pad the stats, or you have an unhappy one (good or bad) displaced by a rookie.  Then you have to deal with the whole trade-the-vet-midseason mess. 
 
If you're committed to rookies, you ultimately want someone who is a decent bet to produce, but won't mind being displaced.  Ideally, you get a guy who is like that but could shift to multiple positions, should one rookie take off and another flag.  Probably someone on the downside of their career.  
 
Thankfully (in a sense) the second half of 2014 is a no pressure environment which is near perfect for evaluating what we have in terms of the young players at the ML level.   Ultimately you have to play the kids to see what they can do. 

 
Yeah, I totally agree. I think the toughest decision is probably when to cut bait on a guy, and it's tough whether that guy is a vet or a rookie. There are risks of underperformance both ways. You may play the vet, and he stinks and is gone the next year, so you haven't really gained anything. You may play your kids and they stink, torpedoing your season, and maybe developing further and getting better or reinforcing bad habits and just being overmatched, and you've wasted your time. I tend the think that dumping a vet (if he's short-term) and bringing up the kid is a safer backup plan than playing the kid and having few options if he struggles or gets hurt. Depends on the vet and the kid, of course. 
 
EDIT: I like Eric Chavez as the caddy for 3B, for what it's worth. 

 

[Rovin Romine]

Good call.  Chavez seems like a good bet.  He may not be able to stand in for the whole season, but he can spell someone and be fairly productive (given that he still hits righties well).   He's really only a 3b/DH at this point though.  
 
The Bill Hall of 2010 would be ideal for a club with multiple rookies.  We sort of have our own Bill Hall in BROCKHOLT! though. 
 
***
In the absence of trades, I think the 2015 SS situation looks like: Xander, Backup Vet, Marrero (emergency sub Holt/Pedroia/Mookie/WMB).  Although if Marrero keeps up his hitting in AAA, his glove will be equal to any journeyman SS you could sign.  So he could be called up on an emergency basis and gives you depth if Xander or Backup Vet goes down.
 
If Marrero is ready, X can shift to 3B, and WMB can shift to an OF/1B/sub type of role.  If Marrero isn't ready, X stays at SS and WMB plays 3B.  
 
It seems like Betts is going to be a CF/RF player going forward, who might occasionally spell Pedroia.  JBJ is the other CF/RF.  LF will be Nava/vets/Hassan's for 2015.  
 
Holt's best suited to move around, spelling at various positions unless he plays himself into a fixed role.  
 
In a way, the roster looks a little bit "backwards" to me, since usually you have a player locked into one position and you try to find backup players who can handle multiple positions.  For 2015, we have a lot of potential positional flexibility with our younger players able to shift around.  Should one of the younger players bite the dust in 2014 or suffer some kind of career ending or out for 2015 injury, the overall flexibility of the group might give the front office a lot of leeway in terms of who they sign as a free agent to plug the gap.  Right now we look thinnest at SS.
 
Really a lot depends on WMB figuring it out or not.   
 
Edit - I keep forgetting about Victorino. Mookie looks like the obvious candidate to ride the Pawtucket shuttle.  Perhaps they don't resign Gomes though and go with a Nava/Victorino/JBJ/Mookie/Carp rotation.  Maybe with WMB or Hassan in the mix as well.    

 

[LondonSox]

I think there is a question as to if they wnat to keep moving Xander around, esp if he is impacted by it (which I think he and they will have a better handle on than us after all).
 
If they are really buying into MArrero's bat, it's again the exact same situation as for JBJ and PEdroia. The defense is a pretty known variable, and at a key defensive premium they could potentially go with Marrero. Knwoing his bat may struggle but the defensive skills will still make him useful, and hope he adjusts well.
 
I'm not sure MArrero will be ready for next year. But I could imagine a world where he does well in the second half and they think defensively the Marrero SS X 3B combo is better short and long term, and would rather they get that right and let the players settle in.
But as I say for that Marrero has to produce in AAA. Half a season in AAA isn't impossible.
Frankly even if he's close and needs a little more time in AAA you think about if you really want X to play SS for a while and be moved again.
 
In fact Marrero profiles once again a lot like JBJ, Pedroia (though with less cosntant success in the minors which is not to be ignored). Top level college player at a premium defensive position.

 

[jscola85]

I would really like to see Marrero get 100+ games in AAA before committing him to a job in the majors.  This is a guy who prior to 2014 had the following performances at the plate:
 
2012 (A-): 284 PAs,.268/.358/.374 (122 wRC+)
2013 (A+): 376 PAs, .256/.341/.334 (94 wRC+)
2013 (AA): 85 PAs, .236/.321/.272 (63 wRC+)
 
He has less than 500 PAs above A-ball right now.  It would be great to give him another 500 or so.  I understand his glove could play in the majors right now, but so could Bradley's at the start of 2014.  I think if we could all-redo this offseason we would've found a better CF backup for JBJ so he didn't have to struggle through things in the majors and could've been sent back down to work on a few things.
 
If at all possible, I'd love to find another 1-year stopgap for shortstop (or 3B and play Bogaerts at SS) and allow Marrero to be a midseason call-up in 2015.

 

[DavidTai]

He has less than 500 PAs above A-ball right now.  It would be great to give him another 500 or so.  I understand his glove could play in the majors right now, but so could Bradley's at the start of 2014.  I think if we could all-redo this offseason we would've found a better CF backup for JBJ so he didn't have to struggle through things in the majors and could've been sent back down to work on a few things.
 
If at all possible, I'd love to find another 1-year stopgap for shortstop (or 3B and play Bogaerts at SS) and allow Marrero to be a midseason call-up in 2015.

 
Part of the problem with the 'finding a better CF backup' was finding one who'd be willing to sign for a year.
 
From this list of 2015 SS free agents (grabbed from http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/02/2015-mlb-free-agents.html ):
Mike Aviles (34) – $3.5MM club option with a $250k buyout
Clint Barmes (36)
Asdrubal Cabrera (29)
Stephen Drew (32)
Rafael Furcal (37)
Tyler Greene (31)
J.J. Hardy (32)
Jed Lowrie (31)
John McDonald (40)
Hiroyuki Nakajima (32) – $5.5MM club option with a $500K buyout
Nick Punto (37) – club/vesting option
Hanley Ramirez (31)
Jimmy Rollins (36) – vesting/club/player option
 
 
Which one of these seems likely to sign for a year -and- still be useful as a backup if Marrero advances?
Aviles seems like the best bet to me here. I have a hard time picturing Hardy/Lowrie/Cabrera/Rollins being willing to settle for one year. Barmes might be the other option (didn't the Sox express interest in him last spring as well?)

 

[LondonSox]

I'm not a huge beleiver in the idea you can "work on things" in AAA.
AAA pitchers aren't big league pitchers, learning how to deal with the best players can't easily be done without facing them.
 
The classic generalization is the biggest leap in skill is A+ to AA, far smaller AA to AAA, and then a high leap again from AAA to MLB. Historically pplayers jump from AA to the bigs and stick if they are talented enough, below that is almost unheard of.
 
The Red Sox (and the SoSH apparently) bias of having a full season in AAA is not by any means universal, and I think is partly a factor of the big league team being pretty good over time, and injury or surprise asidfe it rare to have to hurry the kids and have them learn in the bigs using their service time.
 
I perosnally think if you are hitting well in AA and AAA for a season you are ready, and while extra time probably helps, it may be pretty minor.

 

[Stitch01]

Ha, given that list overpaying Drew and his .500 OPS for another year might be the best option if he's willing to play other positions in addition to short.
 
Hope they decide X can mentally handle a position change midseason next year if necessary, seems like a better option.

 

[Super Nomario]

The Red Sox (and the SoSH apparently) bias of having a full season in AAA is not by any means universal, and I think is partly a factor of the big league team being pretty good over time, and injury or surprise asidfe it rare to have to hurry the kids and have them learn in the bigs using their service time.

What are you talking about? Betts, Vazquez, Bradley, Bogaerts, Middlebrooks all had less than half a season at AAA. I'm not seeing a bias towards spending a full year there - if anything, I see the opposite.
 
Other than that, I disagree with almost everything you wrote.

 

[jscola85]

 
Part of the problem with the 'finding a better CF backup' was finding one who'd be willing to sign for a year.
 
From this list of 2015 SS free agents (grabbed from http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/02/2015-mlb-free-agents.html ):
Mike Aviles (34) – $3.5MM club option with a $250k buyout
Clint Barmes (36)
Asdrubal Cabrera (29)
Stephen Drew (32)
Rafael Furcal (37)
Tyler Greene (31)
J.J. Hardy (32)
Jed Lowrie (31)
John McDonald (40)
Hiroyuki Nakajima (32) – $5.5MM club option with a $500K buyout
Nick Punto (37) – club/vesting option
Hanley Ramirez (31)
Jimmy Rollins (36) – vesting/club/player option
 
 
Which one of these seems likely to sign for a year -and- still be useful as a backup if Marrero advances?
Aviles seems like the best bet to me here. I have a hard time picturing Hardy/Lowrie/Cabrera/Rollins being willing to settle for one year. Barmes might be the other option (didn't the Sox express interest in him last spring as well?)

 
It's not just SS's you have to look at, but 3B options too.  They could bring in a guy like Chavez or Alberto Callaspo on the cheap at 3B, and play X/Herrera at short.

 

[LondonSox]

What are you talking about? Betts, Vazquez, Bradley, Bogaerts, Middlebrooks all had less than half a season at AAA. I'm not seeing a bias towards spending a full year there - if anything, I see the opposite.
 
Other than that, I disagree with almost everything you wrote.

Historically I'm talking about.
And in response to people saying that these players needed longer in AAA.

 

[Super Nomario]

Historically I'm talking about.
And in response to people saying that these players needed longer in AAA.

Which historical examples are you talking about? And did those players fare better or worse as rookies than the current crop of barely-dipped-a-toe-in-AAA prospects?

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Which historical examples are you talking about? And did those players fare better or worse as rookies than the current crop of barely-dipped-a-toe-in-AAA prospects?

 
Where better to look for outstanding rookie seasons than the last two rookies of the year, granted one was from the previous regime, but that's historical.
 
Dustin Pedroia logged 162 games and 733 PA in Pawtucket in 2005-2006 before being called up in September and never going back (rehab assignments excluded).
Nomar Garciaparra logged 43 games and 191 PA in Pawtucket in 1996 before being called up for September and never going back (rehab assignments excluded).  It also appears Nomar missed a portion of the 1996 season with an injury.
 
The lesson...there's no magic formula for success.  The only real way to know if a player is ready is to throw him into the fire and see what happens.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Historically I'm talking about.
And in response to people saying that these players needed longer in AAA.

 
I think it's fair to say the Sox are currently operating differently than they have historically.
 
For example -- with today's goal to get "younger" it's impossible to stash a player like Youkilis until he's 27 and has 1118 PA above A-ball before you make him a regular part of the MLB lineup.  Or to give David Murphy 1529 PA between Portland and Pawtucket before giving him a real shot.  
 
But if the post-testing era demands getting younger among position players without contracting teams, then the risk is incurred that there'll be many more players without that sort of lengthy apprenticeship, who will face slumps and failure on the big stage before they can become established big-leaguers.

 

[Super Nomario]

Where better to look for outstanding rookie seasons than the last two rookies of the year, granted one was from the previous regime, but that's historical.
 
Dustin Pedroia logged 162 games and 733 PA in Pawtucket in 2005-2006 before being called up in September and never going back (rehab assignments excluded).
Nomar Garciaparra logged 43 games and 191 PA in Pawtucket in 1996 before being called up for September and never going back (rehab assignments excluded).  It also appears Nomar missed a portion of the 1996 season with an injury.

I'm not sure looking at ROYs is the best plan - they're outliers to begin with, and certainly Pedroia and Garciaparra were both special players. Nomar did have an abridged season in Pawtucket due to injury, but he also slugged .733. I think there's a sliding scale where a dominant performance doesn't need as much time - I had no issue anointing Bogaerts as a starter to begin the year, for instance.
 

The lesson...there's no magic formula for success.  The only real way to know if a player is ready is to throw him into the fire and see what happens.

The lesson I would take is to be conservative. Because the downside of promoting a player who isn't ready is to hurt your major league team, and the downside of not promoting a player who is ready is minimal, as far as I can tell. The other lesson I'd take is that you should have a backup plan. If the Red Sox make Marrero the opening day 2015 SS and he hits poorly, what's their fallback plan? Brock Holt? Shifting Bogaerts back?

 

[DavidTai]

 
It's not just SS's you have to look at, but 3B options too.  They could bring in a guy like Chavez or Alberto Callaspo on the cheap at 3B, and play X/Herrera at short.

 
You could, but I think if you're going into this with a plan of Merrero at SS, it's better to just leave Xander at 3B so that he can focus on it long-term, and use Will Middlebrooks as the backup 3B option.
 
Still, looking at the 3B options (from the same site), you probably -do- have more flexibility because you can move the 3Bman to 1B or LF, so a long-term contract would make more sense, while the good SSs are more likely to just stay at SS (I feel like if you have a SS worth paying, he should stay at SS to be worth the contract he signs):
 
Anyway, 3B options:
 
Yuniesky Betancourt (33)
Alberto Callaspo (32)
Eric Chavez (37)
Jack Hannahan (35) – $4MM club option with a $2MM buyout
Chase Headley (31)
Casey McGehee (32)
Donnie Murphy (32)
Nick Punto (37) – $2.75MM club/vesting option with a $250k buyout
Aramis Ramirez (37) – mutual option
Hanley Ramirez (31)
Pablo Sandoval (28)
Ty Wigginton (37)
Kevin Youkilis (36)
 
Maybe signing Headley on a multi-year contract to play 3B then move him to LF might be a good idea, depending on the terms.  Sandoval at 3B to 1B is an option for a long-term contract.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

The lesson I would take is to be conservative. Because the downside of promoting a player who isn't ready is to hurt your major league team, and the downside of not promoting a player who is ready is minimal, as far as I can tell. The other lesson I'd take is that you should have a backup plan. If the Red Sox make Marrero the opening day 2015 SS and he hits poorly, what's their fallback plan? Brock Holt? Shifting Bogaerts back?

 
Assuming they make no outside acquisitions for the left side of the infield this winter, my expectation is that the Opening Day SS is Bogaerts with either Middlebrooks, Cecchini or Holt at 3B and Marrero in Pawtucket.  If Marrero forces the issue by finishing this season hitting as well as he has been or starting next season hitting the same, that may change the equation.

 

[DavidTai]

The lesson I would take is to be conservative. Because the downside of promoting a player who isn't ready is to hurt your major league team, and the downside of not promoting a player who is ready is minimal, as far as I can tell. The other lesson I'd take is that you should have a backup plan. If the Red Sox make Marrero the opening day 2015 SS and he hits poorly, what's their fallback plan? Brock Holt? Shifting Bogaerts back?

 
 
I think the Red Sox actually agreed with you with regards to having a backup plan... they did QO Stephen Drew to begin with, so they were clearly comfortable bringing him back for a year and letting Xander and Will Middlebrooks duke it out at 3B.
 
It's just that the way the market shook out, Xander ended up being the SS.
 
I think the downside of not promoting a player who is ready is, however, that he's facing major league pitching for the first time, and you still have to have him face it anyway so that he can have an adjustment period at some point. God knows, Xander is going through HIS adjustment period now, and I hope he breaks out of it.
 
I don't think they're likely to let Marrero start out on the major league roster on 2015, though, they're likely going to do the AJP plan again for SS if they don't sign a 3Bman. Hopefully with someone who fits the system / plan better than AJP did.

 

[Plympton91]

 
I don't think they're likely to let Marrero start out on the major league roster on 2015, though, they're likely going to do the AJP plan again for SS if they don't sign a 3Bman. Hopefully with someone who fits the system / plan better than AJP did.

Assuming you didn't want to keep switching Bogaerts back and forth between SS and 3B, isn't that person Brock Holt? He'd be the top utility guy with an infield of Bogaerts, Marrero, Pedroia, Napoli, and with Bradley and Victorino as 2 of the outfielders next year. It seems like Betts would have the inside track for the third slot, with platoon of Nava and Middlebrooks/Brentz/Hassan being the safety net, or Nava being the 4th outfielder if Betts thrives. (TBC, I'd rather a top of the market LF be brought in with Betts and Bradley competing for CF and the loser going back to Pawtucket, with Nava again as the 4th outfielder, backup 1B in that scenario.)

If you want to send Marrero down for the first couple months to consolidate his gains and stall his arbitration and free agency clocks, you could have Holt start at SS with Herrera as the utility infielder. Then when you call up Marrero, you DFA Herrera.

 

[DavidTai]

I just don't like Herrera as the backup SS to Holt in that scenario, as neither Holt or Herrera to my eyes have the glove for SS for a full season. Might as well sign someone who -could- serve as a  SS stopgap for a year in the first place. Add to that as much as I'm enjoying the Brock Holt era, I'm also wanting to hedge my bets against if this is a real breakout or a mirage.
 
If Marrero wins it in the spring training, backing up SS and 3B with Holt might work out better.
 
... then again, having Holt backing up every position but C would probably be even better, leaving you much more flexibility to carry platoons if that's the way to deal with OF.

 

[Rovin Romine]

Assuming you didn't want to keep switching Bogaerts back and forth between SS and 3B, isn't that person Brock Holt? He'd be the top utility guy with an infield of Bogaerts, Marrero, Pedroia, Napoli, and with Bradley and Victorino as 2 of the outfielders next year. It seems like Betts would have the inside track for the third slot, with platoon of Nava and Middlebrooks/Brentz/Hassan being the safety net, or Nava being the 4th outfielder if Betts thrives. (TBC, I'd rather a top of the market LF be brought in with Betts and Bradley competing for CF and the loser going back to Pawtucket, with Nava again as the 4th outfielder, backup 1B in that scenario.)

If you want to send Marrero down for the first couple months to consolidate his gains and stall his arbitration and free agency clocks, you could have Holt start at SS with Herrera as the utility infielder. Then when you call up Marrero, you DFA Herrera.

 
I'm sorry.  
 
Didn't you just have a conniption across 5 threads re: how irresponsible it was for JBJ to be tagged in a starting role without adequate depth behind him?  As a branch of this I seem to recall you insisting that the JBJ decision alone sank the 2014 season.  
 
But now you want to pencil in Marrero, who has 43 AAA ABs?  

 

[jscola85]

Marrero will probably end up with ~225 PAs in AAA to finish this year.  Unless he really tears it up like Mookie or Bogaerts did (ie, wRC+ of 125 or better, while displaying good plate discipline), I just really can't see the Sox giving him a legit chance to start the year as the shortstop with the major league team.

 

[Rovin Romine]

You're wasting your time. I called him on the same thing a couple weeks ago in another thread and his rationale was "context".

So basically - like everything else with him - the answer is because Ellsbury.

 
Ah.  It's like a tic or something. 

 

[Hee Sox Choi]

 
 
I think the Red Sox actually agreed with you with regards to having a backup plan... they did QO Stephen Drew to begin with, so they were clearly comfortable bringing him back for a year and letting Xander and Will Middlebrooks duke it out at 3B.

 
I believe the Sox offered Drew the QO because they knew that there was NO WAY Scott Boras was going to accept it after Drew put up a .284 / .377 / .498 vs. Rs in cavernous Fenway Park RF.  That's Boras Boner Binder Material™ going into free agency.

 

[Plympton91]

You're wasting your time. I called him on the same thing a couple weeks ago in another thread and his rationale was "context".

So basically - like everything else with him - the answer is because Ellsbury.

If Rovin doesn't want to read that answer and you lack the intelligence to comprehend it, that's not my problem. It's not at all about Ellsbury, but thanks for bringing him up again for no reason at all. Remember folks, I'm the troll...

For Rovin's benefit, however, name all the players on the Red Sox roster at the beginning of 2014 who were sitting on the bench waiting for a turn to play when Bradley failed who would be equivalent to having Brock Holt, Will Middlebrooks, and Garin Cecchini on the bench waiting to step in if Marrero fails at the beginning of 2015 (since you could either leave Bogaerts at 3B and put Holt at SS, or move Bogaerts back to SS and put Middlebrooks back at 3B).

For the same reason, I'll have no problem when they hand a rotation spot to a rookie instead of signing a veteran to replace Peavy, because if that rookie fails they can try any of 4 other ones who are nearly identical in MLE space.

It never has been specifically about Ellsbury, it's about having no one other than Bradley. Because, even though Bradley is hitting reasonably well now, he's still a human being, and like all human beings, he could break his leg tomorrow or get hit on the wrist and break it or foul a ball of his foot and miss 8 weeks. They have absolutely no protection, NONE, against either nonperformance or injury to Bradley.

I believe the Sox offered Drew the QO because they knew that there was NO WAY Scott Boras was going to accept it after Drew put up a .284 / .377 / .498 vs. Rs in cavernous Fenway Park RF. That's Boras Boner Binder Material going into free agency.

And, if they actually wanted Drew back, nothing was stopping them from meeting Boras's asking price. A price that dipped as low as $10 million when they bit. Presumably, the had the chance at some prior date probably early in spring training to reextend the QO at a time it would be accepted, were the QO a since expression of a desire to have Drew back.

 

[Rovin Romine]

If Rovin doesn't want to read that answer and you lack the intelligence to comprehend it, that's not my problem. It's not at all about Ellsbury, but thanks for bringing him up again for no reason at all. Remember folks, I'm the troll...

For Rovin's benefit, however, name all the players on the Red Sox roster at the beginning of 2014 who were sitting on the bench waiting for a turn to play when Bradley failed who would be equivalent to having Brock Holt, Will Middlebrooks, and Garin Cecchini on the bench waiting to step in if Marrero fails at the beginning of 2015 (since you could either leave Bogaerts at 3B and put Holt at SS, or move Bogaerts back to SS and put Middlebrooks back at 3B).

For the same reason, I'll have no problem when they hand a rotation spot to a rookie instead of signing a veteran to replace Peavy, because if that rookie fails they can try any of 4 other ones who are nearly identical in MLE space.

It never has been specifically about Ellsbury, it's about having no one other than Bradley. Because, even though Bradley is hitting reasonably well now, he's still a human being, and like all human beings, he could break his leg tomorrow or get hit on the wrist and break it or foul a ball of his foot and miss 8 weeks. They have absolutely no protection, NONE, against either nonperformance or injury to Bradley.

 
Our depth chart (during spring training) for CF was JBJ, Victorino, Sizemore, AAA fodder.  If JBJ couldn't hit, he was at least expected to field.  The offensive production from the OF would rely on Victorino, Nava, Gomes, Carp, Sizemore on the corners.  Or Victorino could take over CF if Bradley's offense was especially bad.  The corners could be manned by the aforementioned plus Brentz or Hassan if necessary.  Sizemore was seen as adequate defensively with offensive upside.  That's adequate depth in my book.  But you disagree, which is fine. 
 
What I don't understand is that you're proposing pretty much the exact same scenario for Morrero, another largely untested, light hitting defensive whiz at a premium position.   The only backup will be Xander, who is currently mired in a horrific slump.  Other players like Holt may or may not be able to field the position adequately, but they're not your first choice to put in the SS slot, much like you wouldn't stick Nava or Hassan in center field.    
 
I'm curious to know what sort of special insight you have that allows you to distinguish the two.  

 

[Plympton91]

 
Our depth chart (during spring training) for CF was JBJ, Victorino, Sizemore, AAA fodder.  If JBJ couldn't hit, he was at least expected to field.  The offensive production from the OF would rely on Victorino, Nava, Gomes, Carp, Sizemore on the corners.  Or Victorino could take over CF if Bradley's offense was especially bad.  The corners could be manned by the aforementioned plus Brentz or Hassan if necessary.  Sizemore was seen as adequate defensively with offensive upside.  That's adequate depth in my book.  But you disagree, which is fine. 
 
What I don't understand is that you're proposing pretty much the exact same scenario for Morrero, another largely untested, light hitting defensive whiz at a premium position.   The only backup will be Xander, who is currently mired in a horrific slump.  Other players like Holt may or may not be able to field the position adequately, but they're not your first choice to put in the SS slot, much like you wouldn't stick Nava or Hassan in center field.    
 
I'm curious to know what sort of special insight you have that allows you to distinguish the two.  

The problem with saying that Victorino could have taken over CF is that 1) he wasn't even healthy at the start of spring training, 2) if you put Victorino in CF you have to put a substandard fielder in RF, 3) Hassan is a LF, not a RF, and 3) I don't see Brentz as a legitimate prospect at this point.

Thus, the only real "depth" was Sizemore, and with the exception of 2 fleeting weeks at the end of spring training and the first week of the regular season, I saw no reason to expect that he would be good, or if he was good that he would stay healthy for longer than a month.

I guess what I see as the difference basically boils down to I have a hell of a lot more faith that one of Brock Holt, Will Middlebrooks, or Garin Cecchini will be competent than I did that either Grady Sizemore or Bryce Brentz would be competent. And, I don't care how long Bogaerts struggles, he stays in the lineup at either 3B or SS through at least the end of 2015 before I start to worry.

 

[Eck'sSneakyCheese]

The problem with saying that Victorino could have taken over CF is that 1) he wasn't even healthy at the start of spring training,

He wasn't supposed to be out long. Unfortunately he has and its one of the many things that turned into "worst case scenario" this season.

2) if you put Victorino in CF you have to put a substandard fielder in RF,

So? The problem has been offense. A healthy Vic in CF can somewhat make up for deficiencies in the defense.

3) Hassan is a LF, not a RF,

Again, so? Outfielders have never changed positions before? That's pretty thin.

and 3) I don't see Brentz as a legitimate prospect at this point.

We'll get to this in a minute.

Thus, the only real "depth" was Sizemore, and with the exception of 2 fleeting weeks at the end of spring training and the first week of the regular season, I saw no reason to expect that he would be good, or if he was good that he would stay healthy for longer than a month.

You saw no reason to expect he would be good except at the beginning of the season when he was good... That's some in-depth analysis right there McCarver.

I guess what I see as the difference basically boils down to I have a hell of a lot more faith that one of Brock Holt, Will Middlebrooks, or Garin Cecchini will be competent than I did that either Grady Sizemore or Bryce Brentz would be competent.

So you have more faith in the oft injured WMB and the .650 OPSing Cecchini than you do in the oft injured Sizemore and the .750 OPSing Brentz. I'm sorry you don't see Brentz as a legitimate prospect anymore. He would have been the first call up if he wasn't injured. His offensive potential is still pretty high. Why leave out Hassan here? Oh, because he's doing well in AAA and would kill your point. Got it.

And, I don't care how long Bogaerts struggles, he stays in the lineup at either 3B or SS through at least the end of 2015 before I start to worry.

Whoa. X gets two years to struggle but JBJ doesn't even get half a year? You are all over the place with your reasoning. Just stop.

 

[reggiecleveland]

 
I think it's fair to say the Sox are currently operating differently than they have historically.
 
For example -- with today's goal to get "younger" it's impossible to stash a player like Youkilis until he's 27 and has 1118 PA above A-ball before you make him a regular part of the MLB lineup.  Or to give David Murphy 1529 PA between Portland and Pawtucket before giving him a real shot.  
 
But if the post-testing era demands getting younger among position players without contracting teams, then the risk is incurred that there'll be many more players without that sort of lengthy apprenticeship, who will face slumps and failure on the big stage before they can become established big-leaguers.

That philosophy is called not being as good. The era when Youks and Murphy lingered in the minors were teams with historically strong offenses. If Manny, Trot and Damon were still in the OF and Muellar, Millar on the corners some of these kids would stay in the minors longer.

 

[alwyn96]

If the Red Sox are looking to improve their offense for 2015 - and I've got to think they are - then I can't imagine Marrero is their starting SS. The more I think about it, the more I think they bring in a more known quantity vet to play either 3B or SS. Of course, a lot will depend on whether Middlebrooks can somehow find himself again in the second half. If he can't recreate something approximating his 2012, then I think he's getting passed over.
 
People will howl about not playing Cechhini/Marrero/Middlebrooks if they bring someone in, but if those guys are really good, they'll force their way onto the team. Truly great players are never really blocked. I see people writing things about guys needing to learn in MLB, but I think that's only for guys who have proved beyond a doubt that they can destroy AA and AAA pitching. To me, a guy with say a 750 OPS in AAA (no one specific, just an example) is doing fine, but that's a guy that still could probably learn stuff in AAA, if he's young. 

 

[mauf]

Whoa. X gets two years to struggle but JBJ doesn't even get half a year? You are all over the place with your reasoning. Just stop.

There's a big difference between X and the club's other current and recently graduated prospects. And I think SoSH tends to miss that -- we overrate our other prospects, but lose sight of what a special talent X is.

The FO's plan for 2015 should be driven by their long-range vision for X. If they think he's a SS, they should bring in a 3B (either a bridge to Cecchini, or signing Sandoval and trading Cecchini for help elsewhere). If they think he's a 3B, they should bring in a SS (either a bridge to Marrero, or perhaps dealing Marrero and Cecchini for Tulowitski). If they think for some reason that X's value would be greatest in the OF, they should pursue that option, even if it means paying Vic to play elsewhere and burying Betts in Pawtucket for a season.

From what I've seen, they seem to lean toward X at 3B, but that might have been driven by short-term considerations (i.e., Drew being available at a time when X was visibly struggling afield and the season wasn't lost yet). By September 1, X should be playing the position the FO envisions him playing on a long-term basis.

 

[Plympton91]

Thanks for explaining that to them Mauf.

As to Hassan, let me be more clear. In Hassan's case, his best defensive position is DH. He can't play right field in Frnway on anything more than an emergency basis. In LF, he's significantly worse than Jonny Gomes. Though he does have a good arm. Brentz is marginally better, he'd still be a "4" in RF in start-o-matric.

 

[Eck'sSneakyCheese]

There's a big difference between X and the club's other current and recently graduated prospects. And I think SoSH tends to miss that -- we overrate our other prospects, but lose sight of what a special talent X is.

I don't think by saying that, I was overrating JBJ. He's not exactly the type of prospect that comes around often though if his bat is for real, which it looks to be getting there. I also think that X deserves as much time as he needs I just found P91's stance to be hypocritical.

I don't want to go too off topic here.

 

[k-factory]

There's a big difference between X and the club's other current and recently graduated prospects. And I think SoSH tends to miss that -- we overrate our other prospects, but lose sight of what a special talent X is.

Who is losing sight of this? I don't agree with this framing at all.
The hypocrisy that is being called out is the disproportion in patience for integrating young players. X's struggles are unfortunately magnified because he is not a plus defender at a premium position. JBJ is arguably already the best fielding CF in the AL. Yet he gets very little leash. That's baffling.
Just as important as figuring out where X fits in the long term picture is figuring out if JBJ can be the CF of the future. 2014 is that proving ground.

 

[Plympton91]

Thanks for explaining that to them Mauf.

As to Hassan, let me be more clear. In Hassan's case, his best defensive position is DH. He can't play right field in Frnway on anything more than an emergency basis. In LF, he's significantly worse than Jonny Gomes. Though he does have a good arm. Brentz is marginally better, he'd still be a "4" in RF in start-o-matric.

You know what, I can respond in a way that talks up the alternatives at SS rather than denigrates the prospects in the outfield. I think fundamentally what I'm saying is that the internal alternative to Marrero at SS is Brock Holt, a player who now has 423 major league plate appearances with a combined .300 / .350 / .400 batting line and 192 games of experience at SS in AA and AAA. As such, Brock Holt represents, by far, a more solid alternative than two players who have yet to master AAA. Behind Brock Holt, they have Will Middlebrooks, a player who has had two short periods of success in the major leagues. Again, that makes him a better option than two players who have yet to master AAA.

So, your focus on Cecchini was a convenient foil, and your point that Hassan and Brentz may in fact be better prepared right now for the majors than he is has significant merit. But, Cecchini is simply the 3rd fallback option for the left side of the infield next season, whereas the first two options are players with various lengths of quality MLB performance that Brentz and Hassan simply lack.

 

[alwyn96]

Who is losing sight of this? I don't agree with this framing at all.
The hypocrisy that is being called out is the disproportion in patience for integrating young players. X's struggles are unfortunately magnified because he is not a plus defender at a premium position. JBJ is arguably already the best fielding CF in the AL. Yet he gets very little leash. That's baffling.
Just as important as figuring out where X fits in the long term picture is figuring out if JBJ can be the CF of the future. 2014 is that proving ground.

 
Do you really think it's baffling? Bogaerts is considered a much better prospect than Bradley (or was, since I guess they aren't really prospects any more). People are generally much more confident that he'll overcome his offensive struggles than Bradley will, because Bogaerts' projected ceiling is much higher. That doesn't seem baffling or hypocritical to me. It's ok to think one player is more likely to succeed than another and to base playing time decisions on those judgments.  

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

 
Do you really think it's baffling? Bogaerts is considered a much better prospect than Bradley (or was, since I guess they aren't really prospects any more). People are generally much more confident that he'll overcome his offensive struggles than Bradley will, because Bogaerts' projected ceiling is much higher. That doesn't seem baffling or hypocritical to me. It's ok to think one player is more likely to succeed than another and to base playing time decisions on those judgments.  

 
The concern isn't about overcoming struggles so much as meeting expectations.
 
Bradley's offensive expectations are -- and should be -- much lower than those which Bogaerts shoulders.  That's okay.  That's exactly the reason that Bradley is and was a lower-hype prospect than Bogaerts.  It's also why Bradley is generally considered more expendable than Bogaerts.
 
But there's one thing that Bradley brings to the MLB team already: his GG-caliber defense in CF.  So what he needs to do at the plate is less than what Bogaerts should need to do, in order to be considered a success and valuable contributor to a winning club, even should his batting line never approach Bogaerts' expectations.
 
And this fact should be in no way baffling or hypocritical.

 

[alwyn96]

 
The concern isn't about overcoming struggles so much as meeting expectations.
 
Bradley's offensive expectations are -- and should be -- much lower than those which Bogaerts shoulders.  That's okay.  That's exactly the reason that Bradley is and was a lower-hype prospect than Bogaerts.  It's also why Bradley is generally considered more expendable than Bogaerts.
 
But there's one thing that Bradley brings to the MLB team already: his GG-caliber defense in CF.  So what he needs to do at the plate is less than what Bogaerts should need to do, in order to be considered a success and valuable contributor to a winning club, even should his batting line never approach Bogaerts' expectations.
 
And this fact should be in no way baffling or hypocritical.

 
I was responding to a sort of "how much rope do you give a guy." Bradley is a great fielder, but for a while I don't think he was even hitting well enough to carry his glove. I think with Bradley, there were some questions of, "can this guy actually hit ML pitching" than there was for Bogaerts. Even with GG-quality fielding, I think there's a limit to how incompetent a guy can be with the bat and not have a negative effect on the team. In the Red Sox case, the question was kind of academic, because Bradley was going to be the CF pretty much no matter what, as he's the only guy who can really play the position. 
 
I hear you on the defense, but even with 'expectations' I think Bogaerts gets more rope, since he's proved himself more in the minors and had some success at the ML level last year. FWIW, I'm not sure we're actually disagreeing on this very much. 

 

[Sprowl]

If the Red Sox are looking to improve their offense for 2015 - and I've got to think they are - then I can't imagine Marrero is their starting SS. The more I think about it, the more I think they bring in a more known quantity vet to play either 3B or SS. Of course, a lot will depend on whether Middlebrooks can somehow find himself again in the second half. If he can't recreate something approximating his 2012, then I think he's getting passed over.in AAA, if he's young.

 
I don't see why a good, even a great offensive lineup is precluded by a minimal-hit SS and C. Playoff-aspirant offensive lineups come in many forms, including asymmetrical lineups with overmuscled DH/1B/LF/3B and glove wizards at C/2B/SS/CF.

Wasting years of talent development on the left side of the infield by blocking one of Bogaerts/Middlebrooks/Cecchini/Marrero by signing a stopgap make little sense. If a Beltre-equivalent is ready to offer a make-good one-year contract, maybe that's worth capitalizing on, but it is by no means worth planning for. 

You know what, I can respond in a way that talks up the alternatives at SS rather than denigrates the prospects in the outfield. I think fundamentally what I'm saying is that the internal alternative to Marrero at SS is Brock Holt, a player who now has 423 major league plate appearances with a combined .300 / .350 / .400 batting line and 192 games of experience at SS in AA and AAA. As such, Brock Holt represents, by far, a more solid alternative than two players who have yet to master AAA. Behind Brock Holt, they have Will Middlebrooks, a player who has had two short periods of success in the major leagues. Again, that makes him a better option than two players who have yet to master AAA.

I wouldn't be counting on Brock Holt to serve as an all-purpose backup. So far he's pretty good in the corner outfield positions, but just tolerable at third base (scattershot arm). His range in the infield does not look good (eye test, small sample). The Red Sox should plan on keeping Herrerror around well into 2015 before they rely on Holt at shortstop.

 

[mauidano]

I'm gonna go with WMB at third and X at SS.  Gotta believe they both get another long hard look the rest of the way.  I'm pulling for both of them and if they can get it going I don't se why they are not incumbents going onto 2015.  Drew will be in the Bronx next year.  Brock Holt though a bit shaky at 3B has grown up playing middle infield.  Much ado about not too much!

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

That philosophy is called not being as good. The era when Youks and Murphy lingered in the minors were teams with historically strong offenses. If Manny, Trot and Damon were still in the OF and Muellar, Millar on the corners some of these kids would stay in the minors longer.

 
Or, that philosophy is called a rational response to PED testing, no greenies, and revenue sharing.
 
Not to say it's always impossible, but creating a free-agent driven offense isn't something that's possible on an every-year basis due to the need to offer free agents guaranteed contracts.  
 
Put another way: to get any hypothetical 2013 Victorino season, there's likely to be a 2014 Victorino season down the line.

 

[Plympton91]

How is that different from, to get any hypothetical Keith Foulke 2004 season, there's likely a Keith Foulke 2005 season?

In each case, had they not taken those calculated risks, they don't win championships.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

How is that different from, to get any hypothetical Keith Foulke 2004 season, there's likely a Keith Foulke 2005 season?

In each case, had they not taken those calculated risks, they don't win championships.

 
No different at all.
 
And to a large degree, that explains why the Sox won the 2004 WS, went 0-3 in the 2005 ALDS, and missed the 2006 playoffs altogether.

 

[Rasputin]

I wouldn't be counting on Brock Holt to serve as an all-purpose backup. So far he's pretty good in the corner outfield positions, but just tolerable at third base (scattershot arm). His range in the infield does not look good (eye test, small sample). The Red Sox should plan on keeping Herrerror around well into 2015 before they rely on Holt at shortstop.

If it bench in 2015 is Holt, Hererra, Carp, and some kind of Crash Davis type, I think we're doing okay.

Also, I don't think we need to chalk Marrero up as an all five, no stick guy. He had an OBP heavy .804 OPS in AA and so far has an OBP heavy .738 in AAA. Meanwhile, AL shortstops are at .672 and sure, that includes scrubs and utility guys, but if Marrero hits for say .725 with a relatively high obpi think we're going to be more than satisfied.

And really, Vazquez, Marrero, Pedroia, Bradley up the middle is going to be fun to watch.

 

[alwyn96]

 

 
I don't see why a good, even a great offensive lineup is precluded by a minimal-hit SS and C. Playoff-aspirant offensive lineups come in many forms, including asymmetrical lineups with overmuscled DH/1B/LF/3B and glove wizards at C/2B/SS/CF.

Wasting years of talent development on the left side of the infield by blocking one of Bogaerts/Middlebrooks/Cecchini/Marrero by signing a stopgap make little sense. If a Beltre-equivalent is ready to offer a make-good one-year contract, maybe that's worth capitalizing on, but it is by no means worth planning for. 

 
Sure, I have no problem with a couple of beefy mashers at DH/1B/LF/3B, but I don't have the imagination yet to see them on the 2015 team - other than Ortiz and Napoli, of course. If they get some hulks at LF/3B, then they can play whatever banjo-hitting guys they want at the more defensive-oriented positions. I'm just not sure where the beef is coming from, and if they start by tying one hand behind their back at a few positions (or a couple fingers, anyway) it makes their job of building a great offense that much harder and that much more dependent on a few players.
 
As far as I'm concerned, Bogaerts is in the mix no matter what, but the rest of the guys I don't think are so far along that a little more AAA seasoning is going to make them wither on the vine (apologies for the mixed metaphors). If the kids tear AAA a new one, then great, Youkilis whatever make-good guy you've got off to the White Sox, and you're all set. I don't think anyone is ever really blocked if they're good enough. Having too many good players is almost never a real problem. 
 
That said, if Middlebrooks goes crazy in the 2nd half, forget I said any of this. 
 
EDIT: Fixed an embarrassing number of grammar and spelling mistakes.

 

[mauf]

If you let Lester walk, Sandoval could be your "beefy masher" at 3B next season, with an eye toward shifting him to 1B/DH in a year or two as Napoli and/or Ortiz walk away and one of the young 3Bs steps up (or X washes out definitively at SS).

This would only make sense if the FO was willing to commit to X next season at SS.

 

[Plympton91]

If you let Lester walk, Sandoval could be your "beefy masher" at 3B next season, with an eye toward shifting him to 1B/DH in a year or two as Napoli and/or Ortiz walk away and one of the young 3Bs steps up (or X washes out definitively at SS).

This would only make sense if the FO was willing to commit to X next season at SS.

Sandoval's OPS for 2011-2014 is 909, 789, 758, 751. I don't want to buy the next numbers in that series.

 

[mauf]

Sandoval's OPS for 2011-2014 is 909, 789, 758, 751. I don't want to buy the next numbers in that series.

I think he'd add 50-100 points to those figures moving from Pac Bell to Fenway, but I share your concern -- his aging curve is precisely what you'd expect from a man 2-3 years older (which could be either a body-type issue or a birth certificate issue).

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

I think he'd add 50-100 points to those figures moving from Pac Bell to Fenway, but I share your concern -- his aging curve is precisely what you'd expect from a man 2-3 years older (which could be either a body-type issue or a birth certificate issue).

Actually he's done OK at Pac Bell -- his home/road split this year is .826/.655.
 
One thing worth noting: the deterioration of his split vs. power pitchers. Here's the trend since 2011:
 
Power/mixed P-F/Finesse
 
2011: .911/.912/.904
2012: .733/.653/.974
2013: .690/.585/.918
2014: .562/.618/.919
 
The league split this year is .674/.691/.733.

 

[JMDurron]

If we are looking for a way to bring some reliable offense to the left side of the infield, without blocking all of Middlebrooks, Cecchini, and Marrero for the long term, trading for a 1or 2-year solution at 3b might make some sense. Someone with the athleticism to change positions to 1B if necessary in 2016, or possibly even to DH post-Ortiz would be even better.

A short-term, veteran solution should also cost less than a Tulowitzki scenario in terms of long-term contract risk and prospect trade acquisition cost. An aging veteran with injury concerns would be mitigated by keeping at least two of Holt, Marrero, Middlebrooks, and Cecchini. A positive clubhouse reputation with a record of being able to play well in Boston would really put a nice bow onto the entire package.

I'd also like to give Bogaerts a full season at SS to see if he can own that position in the medium term. Focusing on a 3B acquisition also enables that goal.

I'd like to see the Red Sox make some calls to the Texas Rangers, to see what it would take to bring Adrian Beltre back to Boston this offseason. If they consider their struggles this season to be entirely due to fluky injuries, the cost might be prohibitive. If they are looking at this season as a wake up call to try to build a younger core around Fielder going forward, then perhaps this idea isn't completely insane.

My answer to the thread's question is Xander Bogaerts.