Who plays 1B next year?

[Al Zarilla]

This is why I would like to see Hanley play some 1B before this season ends, so they can make some informed decisions in the offseason.

I don't think it's that simple. He's never played a game at first, so the Sox probably want him to take hundreds of grounders there and go through all the first baseman defensive plays first in spring training before they let him embarrass himself, and all of us, at a second defensive position this year. I guess that wouldn't matter much though, come to think of it.

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

As far as I know, Evans was never an infielder.  Hanley has much more experience at least at an infield position.  If Hanley has spent his entire career in LF and the talk was moving him to 1B after 10 years as a ML'er and a lifetime prior to ML time as an infielder, then the comparison would be more apt.  Granted, the two are worlds apart in their defensive abilities in the OF.  But comparing the move to 1B between them seems apples to empty milk cartons.

 

[alwyn96]

If we're just spitballing, I don't know how bad he would be at 1B, but it always seemed like John Jaso was a guy who could really hit but just never quite got everything together enough to be considered a star. He seems to fit the Napoli mold pretty well, although health is of course always an issue, and he'd probably need to be platooned against LHB. He had some interesting stuff to say about his PA against Red Sox pitchers last week. He's got his issues, but it seems like he'd be cheapish and a decent placeholder. 
 
As for moving Sandoval/Hanley to 1B, I don't know. It would really hurt their value to the team. Sadly, I think prayer might be one of the better options.  

 

[Plympton91]

Suppose you commit to HR at 1B and he can't or halfway through stops trying to make the transition. What then?

Then you've lost an offseason for him to work on getting better in the OF, you haven't addressed 1B, you have no place for him to play, and you're on yotr way to another lost season.

Either commit to Hanley Ramirez in left field or subsidize to the extent necessary to move either him or Sandoval to a team that needs a DH or a 3B. Don't gamble on HR's work ethic in yet another position switch, unless it's 3B which is close enough to SS and where Sandoval is already playing like a statue.

 

[ArgentinaSOXfan]

The best they can do is to get Hanley ready to play 1B next season. 

 

[nothumb]

Suppose you commit to HR at 1B and he can't or halfway through stops trying to make the transition. What then?

Then you've lost an offseason for him to work on getting better in the OF, you haven't addressed 1B, you have no place for him to play, and you're on yotr way to another lost season.

Either commit to Hanley Ramirez in left field or subsidize to the extent necessary to move either him or Sandoval to a team that needs a DH or a 3B. Don't gamble on HR's work ethic in yet another position switch, unless it's 3B which is close enough to SS and where Sandoval is already playing like a statue.

 

I mean, I agree that there is some uncertainty in this proposed transition, but presumably the Red Sox do have the option of talking to him to assess his perspective, and acting accordingly. I think they need to do everything in their power to get him motivated to make the switch - and that includes having Ortiz lean on him HARD. I'm willing to risk him losing an offseason of work in the OF because at most he's got one more season of playing there, and frankly I don't think he's ever going to be even average at it. Put me in the camp that says moving IF to OF is a bigger issue than moving down the spectrum within the IF, and guys who do it 10+ years into their careers are not going to make it sometimes. Even if Hanley can turn into like a -10 DRS LF over a full year - which would be a huge improvement - his batting and health indicators mean that's likely to be a replacement level player or close to it. The "upside" you risk by moving him off LF is having a $20M guy worth like half a win who is still a constant injury risk. Meanwhile the Sox could be sitting on one of the most dynamic young OF groups in the league.
 
I'd be much more interested in getting rid of Panda. But that's probably impossible at this point, so next best thing is to have him do Biggest Loser in the offseason and pray.

 

[WenZink]

Suppose you commit to HR at 1B and he can't or halfway through stops trying to make the transition. What then?

Then you've lost an offseason for him to work on getting better in the OF, you haven't addressed 1B, you have no place for him to play, and you're on yotr way to another lost season.

Either commit to Hanley Ramirez in left field or subsidize to the extent necessary to move either him or Sandoval to a team that needs a DH or a 3B. Don't gamble on HR's work ethic in yet another position switch, unless it's 3B which is close enough to SS and where Sandoval is already playing like a statue.

 
I agree with your reluctance to trust HR's work ethic to make the transition to 1st base.  But just how much would the Sox have to subsidize Hanley's contract to move him?
 
Even assuming his 2019 option year does not vest, (it requires 1,050 accumulated PA's in 2017-18 AND passing a club physical) he's owed $66 million over the next 3 years.  If he can no longer play in the field, and is strictly a DH, then, even if he is the best DH available, he's only worth 2/3rds of the $22 mil per year -- and with a current OPS+ of 103, he's hardly the "best DH available."  And how many AL teams, want a full-time DH and are in need for one?
 
I think the Sox would have to eat half of the $66 million just to move him.  Unless he's akin to a Carl Everett in the clubhouse, he stays.  What COULD happen in 2016 is that a) He becomes more comfortable in LF and improves to "passable b) His hitting improves c) Hanley volunteers to play 1st and is decent d) David Ortiz suffers an injury that effectively ends his career and the Sox need a DH replacement.  Or nothing could change and the Sox will have to move him and eat half his salary.
 
I know there's a desire to resolve all the issues, so that the Sox can go into the 2016 season with a clean start, but, in reality, the Sox have so many holes to deal with, that they're going to have to hope to catch a break on some of them.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

Where are we getting that HR has a reluctance to work at his game? Has this been established somewhere or are we just bashing the guy because we think playing LF should be easy?

There's plenty of shit to get negative about this year. Projecting shit and trying to create more problems is unnecessary and getting fucking annoying. If someone has first hand knowledge that HR hasn't tried to improve in LF, which I don't even know how you could, offer it up. If you're speculating based off of some kind of reputation you feel he has from previous stops, stfu and go troll elsewhere.

 

[RedOctober3829]

Where are we getting that HR has a reluctance to work at his game? Has this been established somewhere or are we just bashing the guy because we think playing LF should be easy?

There's plenty of shit to get negative about this year. Projecting shit and trying to create more problems is unnecessary and getting fucking annoying. If someone has first hand knowledge that HR hasn't tried to improve in LF, which I don't even know how you could, offer it up. If you're speculating based off of some kind of reputation you feel he has from previous stops, stfu and go troll elsewhere.

Mike Mutnansky said on WEEI that, at least not at home because that's all the games he sees, he does not see Hanley coming out early to take fly balls.  For comparisons sake, he said all of last year he would see Xander Bogaerts come out every day and take many grounders early.

 

[Harry Hooper]

Mike Mutnansky said on WEEI that, at least not at home because that's all the games he sees, he does not see Hanley coming out early to take fly balls.  For comparisons sake, he said all of last year he would see Xander Bogaerts come out every day and take many grounders early.

 
 
Merloni has said the same earlier this season. That MAY have changed in the last month or so, but I haven't heard anything.

 

[O Captain! My Captain!]

Mike Mutnansky said on WEEI that, at least not at home because that's all the games he sees, he does not see Hanley coming out early to take fly balls.  For comparisons sake, he said all of last year he would see Xander Bogaerts come out every day and take many grounders early.

 
Does this mean he's dogging it, or that he's taking it easy on his body since he's been notably banged up for much of the season? Probably he's seeing a lot of time in the trainer's room. This is something the team would know much better than the casual observer.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

So the guy that reads the post game box scores on WEEI, who shows up probably an hour or two before the game, doesn't see him taking extra practice. And this is now gospel. Got it.

 

[WenZink]

Where are we getting that HR has a reluctance to work at his game? Has this been established somewhere or are we just bashing the guy because we think playing LF should be easy?

There's plenty of shit to get negative about this year. Projecting shit and trying to create more problems is unnecessary and getting fucking annoying. If someone has first hand knowledge that HR hasn't tried to improve in LF, which I don't even know how you could, offer it up. If you're speculating based off of some kind of reputation you feel he has from previous stops, stfu and go troll elsewhere.

 
Hanley has said that he can't regularly practice playing LF on game days, since he's afraid of injury/soreness and missing the game itself.  He's also said he didn't want to play 1st base because of all the stretching required.  
 
Given his physical fragility, those might be valid objections, but it is reluctance.  It's only projection if you discount the physical concerns.

 

[RedOctober3829]

So the guy that reads the post game box scores on WEEI, who shows up probably an hour or two before the game, doesn't see him taking extra practice. And this is now gospel. Got it.

I'm not saying it's gospel but way to go over the top to prove whatever point you're trying to make.  The injury prevention is valid as well but that should have been factored in to Ben's decision to sign him.  If he can not take the pounding playing in the field over 162 games then why did Ben sign him when he already has a full-time DH?    

 

[geoduck no quahog]

I'm not saying it's gospel but way to go over the top to prove whatever point you're trying to make.  The injury prevention is valid as well but that should have been factored in to Ben's decision to sign him.  If he can not take the pounding playing in the field over 162 games then why did Ben sign him when he already has a full-time DH?    

 
Because team offense absolutely sucked last year and the front office decided to spend much of their available money on Ramirez and Sandoval, thinking that would substantially improve the lineup.

 

[Al Zarilla]

 
Hanley has said that he can't regularly practice playing LF on game days, since he's afraid of injury/soreness and missing the game itself.  He's also said he didn't want to play 1st base because of all the stretching required.  
 
Given his physical fragility, those might be valid objections, but it is reluctance.  It's only projection if you discount the physical concerns.

The one time Sandoval played 1B for the Giants for a bit of an extended period, he got hurt stretching for a throw. He ended up doing the splits, both legs flat out on the ground, if you want to picture that. I don't think he ever went back to first. Maybe he mentioned that to Hanley and it freaked him out. Message to those two: there are only so many positions available to you. You aren't playing middle infield, CF or RF, C or P. We got a DH.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

So the guy that reads the post game box scores on WEEI, who shows up probably an hour or two before the game, doesn't see him taking extra practice. And this is now gospel. Got it.

 
You asked what the basis for the comments was. You were given two sources, neither of whom may be "gospel" but both of whom have more firsthand knowledge of what's going on with the club than most of us do. You're entitled to decide that you need more evidence to be convinced, but the snark at this point seems a little forced. 

 

[WenZink]

The one time Sandoval played 1B for the Giants for a bit of an extended period, he got hurt stretching for a throw. He ended up doing the splits, both legs flat out on the ground, if you want to picture that. I don't think he ever went back to first. Maybe he mentioned that to Hanley and it freaked him out. Message to those two: there are only so many positions available to you. You aren't playing middle infield, CF or RF, C or P. We got a DH.

 
I remember Harmon Killebrew, playing first 1st for the Royals, at the end of his career, doing a split at Fenway.  I think they had to carry him off the field.  And George Scott, near the end of his second tour of duty with the Sox needed help getting up, once or twice.
 
But although I think Hanley would have little problem at first, fielding off the batted ball, I do have nightmares visualizing him receiving throws, making the stretch and covering the bag.  (And as has been pointed out, Sandoval makes no sense at 1st because he just doesn't have the bat to hold down the position.  Sandoval either plays 3rd base or he's a doorstop.)
 
I don't know why Hanley, who played over 900 innings at SS in 2014, has had so much trouble moving to left field.  It seemed like a great idea at the time, and I give Ben a pass on this one, and I actually expect Ramirez to be better at it next year.  I could be in denial.

 

[NDame616]

First base is a position that Mo freaking Vaughn played 1300 games at. We aren't asking Hanley to learn to do a tightrope act in a circus or become a gymnast.

First base is where a lot of time you put you big oaf and hope for the best. I refuse to believe Hanley can't play a passable 1B, or that playing 1B puts him at any more substantial injury risk.

 

[Plympton91]

I don't worry that much about HR on offense. In addition to adjusting to the new league, he's had injuries to his shoulder and wrist. I would give him a pass on that this season.

 

[Al Zarilla]

First base is a position that Mo freaking Vaughn played 1300 games at. We aren't asking Hanley to learn to do a tightrope act in a circus or become a gymnast.

First base is where a lot of time you put you big oaf and hope for the best. I refuse to believe Hanley can't play a passable 1B, or that playing 1B puts him at any more substantial injury risk.

But according to Wenzink, Hanley has said he doesn't want to play first because of the stretching. I don't know if that's just the rest of this year, or ever. What happened to guys saying "I'll play anywhere, I'll hit anywhere in the lineup."? I have a feeling when the book comes out, we'll find out he's the same bad actor he was for Florida and LA.

 

[smastroyin]

It does seem odd to me that a 32 year old guy is too fragile to practice, and then what does that mean for how well they vetted him before signing him? Just strange.

The Red Sox may be the first team in history to have not one but two guys who say they can't handle the physical demands of 1b.

I love David Ortiz but these are the types of things the FO needed to plan around. I know they had a deep depth plan whatever with Craig and Nava, so this isn't even a 2015 problem, but in terms of long term planning...still not sure they picked the right guys.

 

[nvalvo]

I don't worry that much about HR on offense. In addition to adjusting to the new league, he's had injuries to his shoulder and wrist. I would give him a pass on that this season.

 
This is right, IMO. The idea that Hanley's now a 100 OPS+ hitter going forward ignores a lot of what we know happened this season. He's a 100 OPS+ hitter in a season when he spent a lot of time playing hurt.  
 

But according to Wenzink, Hanley has said he doesn't want to play first because of the stretching. I don't know if that's just the rest of this year, or ever. What happened to guys saying "I'll play anywhere, I'll hit anywhere in the lineup."? I have a feeling when the book comes out, we'll find out he's the same bad actor he was for Florida and LA.

 
I also think we've been way too quick to question Ramirez' character. When I think of a guy not only signing for well below his projected market value and agreeing to play a new position, but also putting in the off-season work to significantly change his body for the new role, I don't see why we'd conclude that player isn't a high effort, team-first type of guy. Now, maybe the bulking up wasn't the right move in retrospect, but it hardly suggests a lack of commitment. 

 

[WenZink]

First base is a position that Mo freaking Vaughn played 1300 games at. We aren't asking Hanley to learn to do a tightrope act in a circus or become a gymnast.

First base is where a lot of time you put you big oaf and hope for the best. I refuse to believe Hanley can't play a passable 1B, or that playing 1B puts him at any more substantial injury risk.

 
I still think LF is an easier position to play "passably" than first base, especially given Hanley's speed which, theoretically, should allow him to mitigate his errors in misjudgment.  Hell, the Yankees put Yogi Berra in LF in his late 30s, after a dozen years of squatting, and Yogi was 5' 7".
 
You have to go back before 1973 to see some really bad first baseman -- the DH has allowed MLB to hide the real stiffs.  I was just a kid, at the time, but I still remember Dick Stuart, aka, "Dr. Strangeglove" trying to play 1st.  In two seasons with the Sox, he made 53 errors.  And that doesn't include all the popups that he never got a glove on.
 
btw, I found the Hanely quote about not wanting to play first.  I was wrong, he didn't say he was averse to "stretching," it was "bending" that he wanted no part of.
 
http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2015/06/10/hanley-ramirez-has-no-intention-of-ever-returning-to-infield/
 

 
Ramirez has routinely cited the need to use his time as an outfielder to save his body, thereby potentially avoiding injury. When asked to elaborate, he said, “I don’t have to bend that much. None of this. None of this. None of this. You have to stay down. It makes a big difference.”
And if he ever did get that urge to abandon the outfield for his old life in the infield, he says the reminder he received when playing third base for four innings on April 16 was enough to not go down that road again. (my emphasis)

 

[MikeM]

I also think we've been way too quick to question Ramirez' character. When I think of a guy not only signing for well below his projected market value and agreeing to play a new position, but also putting in the off-season work to significantly change his body for the new role, I don't see why we'd conclude that player isn't a high effort, team-first type of guy. Now, maybe the bulking up wasn't the right move in retrospect, but it hardly suggests a lack of commitment. 

 
With all due respect, the "Hanley took less to sign here and was even willing to play a different position to do it" narrative was always more feel good/post-signing spin then actual fact imo. In reality his willingness to change positions was already being widely reported before even popping on the radar here, and essentially meeting a guy's initially reported asking price through a rather reasonable vested option isn't exactly "signing for well below his projected market value".
 
Combining Hanley's injury history and the fact he wasn't coming off some highlight year, you could probably even make the stronger overall argument that we slightly overpaid rather then underpaid (I still supported the signing though, fwiw). I mean he did get a hefty $22m/per, which was $7m+ more then Nelson Cruz got after having a better year. None of which is to suggest he's the bad seed some are trying to make him out to be mind you, but yeah. Nothing about Hanley signing the largest per year contract handed out to an offensive player this winter is really screaming "team player". He wanted to get paid and we paid him. Fairly standard free agent stuff going on there.
 
The above said if he can make the transition to first while playing passable defense, and go back to posting a .800+ OPS for the next couple of years, that contract will still go down as a relative win here though imo. Not every signing on a winning $200m baseball team needs to be super cost efficient.

 

[NDame616]

Mike Napoli's hips were too bad to catch so we stuck him at 1B. The notion that bending over makes him likely to get injured really blows my mind. You could make some argument that every single position poses some injury risk.

A lot of you are smarter than I am, so I won't say it with absolute certainty, but I don't think I've heard an objection to 1B because of injury before.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

First base is a position that Mo freaking Vaughn played 1300 games at. We aren't asking Hanley to learn to do a tightrope act in a circus or become a gymnast.

First base is where a lot of time you put you big oaf and hope for the best. I refuse to believe Hanley can't play a passable 1B, or that playing 1B puts him at any more substantial injury risk.

 
Yes, you put a big oaf at first base, but hopefully you put an alert big oaf at first base.
 
We've been over this before, so sorry if this is starting to sound redundant, but I don't think anybody is suggesting that 1B would tax Hanley's physical capabilities too much. Some of us are concerned, based on what we've seen in LF, with the possibility of mental errors and/or a casual approach resulting in needless baserunners and effectively making the whole infield worse. It could very well be that this concern is completely misplaced, but it really doesn't have to do with athletic demands at all. We all understand that left fielders have to run faster and jump higher and throw harder than first basemen do.

 

[Harry Hooper]

Mike Napoli's hips were too bad to catch so we stuck him at 1B. The notion that bending over makes him likely to get injured really blows my mind. You could make some argument that every single position poses some injury risk.

A lot of you are smarter than I am, so I won't say it with absolute certainty, but I don't think I've heard an objection to 1B because of injury before.

 
Cliff Floyd wouldn't play 1B for the Sox because before he was acquired he had hurt his arm/shoulder getting tangled with a runner on an errant throw.

 

[Al Zarilla]

 
I still think LF is an easier position to play "passably" than first base, especially given Hanley's speed which, theoretically, should allow him to mitigate his errors in misjudgment.  Hell, the Yankees put Yogi Berra in LF in his late 30s, after a dozen years of squatting, and Yogi was 5' 7".
 
You have to go back before 1973 to see some really bad first baseman -- the DH has allowed MLB to hide the real stiffs.  I was just a kid, at the time, but I still remember Dick Stuart, aka, "Dr. Strangeglove" trying to play 1st.  In two seasons with the Sox, he made 53 errors.  And that doesn't include all the popups that he never got a glove on.
 
btw, I found the Hanely quote about not wanting to play first.  I was wrong, he didn't say he was averse to "stretching," it was "bending" that he wanted no part of.
 
http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2015/06/10/hanley-ramirez-has-no-intention-of-ever-returning-to-infield/
 

Re Yogi, I guess you could say that he was just a good athlete. 
 
Re Dave Stuart, had seats one game he was playing, maybe 1964, right behind the first base dugout. I was watching Stuart, and, instead of getting set up for each pitch, bending over in case he got a ground ball, weight evenly distributed, glove near the ground, he would stand up straight with what looked like most of his weight on one foot. Then, when he got tired doing that, he'd put all his weight on the other foot. Back and forth during the inning, never getting into a ready position. What a dufus. Speaking of dufus, he had a commercial for one of the local car companies. He was talking about the virtues of the car, then got in and shut the door. He had no microphone on, so, the commercial went completely silent. 

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Davis will cost too much, and if the Sox spend any money at all, it should be on pitching. Good pitching, that is.
 
So if there's no tear-it-down rebuild, then the Sox just need to shift people around.  Between Hanley, Panda, Shaw, and Holt, there's more than enough bodies to cover 1B and 3B on a daily basis.

 

[curly2]

If the Sox could sell Hanley on playing first next year, I think they would need to put him on a different training regimen this year. I think Hanley got to big in the offseason, and just seemed stiff from the start. After the season I think they should focus more on getting lighter and more flexible.
 
That could allow him to move to first, and even if he doesn't move, it should help him in left field. And he still be strong enough to hit it out of any ballpark.

 

[MikeM]

 
Yes, you put a big oaf at first base, but hopefully you put an alert big oaf at first base.
 
We've been over this before, so sorry if this is starting to sound redundant, but I don't think anybody is suggesting that 1B would tax Hanley's physical capabilities too much. Some of us are concerned, based on what we've seen in LF, with the possibility of mental errors and/or a casual approach resulting in needless baserunners and effectively making the whole infield worse. It could very well be that this concern is completely misplaced, but it really doesn't have to do with athletic demands at all. We all understand that left fielders have to run faster and jump higher and throw harder than first basemen do.

 
How much of that perception is being too heavily influenced by a small sample of plays this year though (rather then his complete body of career work as an infielder), and the fact he's now spent time playing LF which he arguably never should have to begin with?
 
There were some pointing out first as the most natural transition for Hanley since day 2 or 3 of this signing. Making it interesting to note just how much the counter debate points have shifted between then and now. Seemed to be a lot more concern back then over min/maxing his potential value, and/or preserving our best win it all chances in 2015, then the widespread "he couldn't possibly play there" notion we see today. 

 

[Sprowl]

Thinking inside the box: platoon Sandoval and Ramirez at 3B. It gets Hanley back to the infield, where he won't have so many flyballs to misjudge, nor such long distances to loaf. His reaction times seem quick enough on balls hit at him.
 
Besides, both players will be spending a lot of time on the DL anyway. Hanley is injury-prone and Sandoval is obese. Neither one of those bodes well for durability.

 

[nvalvo]

With all due respect, the "Hanley took less to sign here and was even willing to play a different position to do it" narrative was always more feel good/post-signing spin then actual fact imo. In reality his willingness to change positions was already being widely reported before even popping on the radar here, and essentially meeting a guy's initially reported asking price through a rather reasonable vested option isn't exactly "signing for well below his projected market value".
 
Combining Hanley's injury history and the fact he wasn't coming off some highlight year, you could probably even make the stronger overall argument that we slightly overpaid rather then underpaid (I still supported the signing though, fwiw). I mean he did get a hefty $22m/per, which was $7m+ more then Nelson Cruz got after having a better year. None of which is to suggest he's the bad seed some are trying to make him out to be mind you, but yeah. Nothing about Hanley signing the largest per year contract handed out to an offensive player this winter is really screaming "team player". He wanted to get paid and we paid him. Fairly standard free agent stuff going on there.
 
The above said if he can make the transition to first while playing passable defense, and go back to posting a .800+ OPS for the next couple of years, that contract will still go down as a relative win here though imo. Not every signing on a winning $200m baseball team needs to be super cost efficient.

 
I hear what you're saying, even if I would doubt that Nelson Cruz was really a reasonable comp before this season. 
 
Hanley had injury questions, but he was coming off a 131 OPS+ season following an injury-shortened 189 OPS+ season, a season which put him in the top ten in MVP voting despite playing a bit more than half the season. Cruz had PED questions and concerns that his offense was dependent on very power friendly home ballparks (he has a moderate home/road split). His superlative year in Seattle has quieted the latter concern. Also, until this season, Cruz hadn't shown Hanley's upside of hitting for both average and power.
 
I really just want to slow our collective roll with regard to character assassination. We know less than we think we do about people's motivations, and the press in Boston can be downright toxic. 
 
edit: grammar.

 

[Rasputin]

I really just want to slow our collective roll with regard to character assassination. We know less than we think we do about people's motivations, and the press in Boston can be downright toxic. 

 
The eagerness of some folks here to assume the worst is really kind of astonishing. Although I suppose it shouldn't come as too much of a surprise considering the willingness of a lot of folks here to draw firm conclusions from almost no data whatsoever. 

 

[MikeM]

I really just want to slow our collective roll with regard to character assassination. We know less than we think we do about people's motivations, and the press in Boston can be downright toxic. 

 
Agreed. I mean even in the article being posted above, the direct answer beyond his own stated preference to whether or not he *would* play first seemed to be this:
 

 
 
I’m just an employee here, so I just want to win. It’s just like where I hit in the lineup. Wherever they think I should be to win, that’s what I’m here for.
 

 
Well, we certainly are not looking like winners atm. 

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

Thinking inside the box: platoon Sandoval and Ramirez at 3B. It gets Hanley back to the infield, where he won't have so many flyballs to misjudge, nor such long distances to loaf. His reaction times seem quick enough on balls hit at him.
 
Besides, both players will be spending a lot of time on the DL anyway. Hanley is injury-prone and Sandoval is obese. Neither one of those bodes well for durability.

That's one expensive box you've thought yourself out of.    Maybe it's a good idea, but if Hanley can play 3rd... shouldn't he be able to deal with 1st?  I know it involves more stretching (and to think!!!!.... some people want to move Panda over there.... NO... SERIOUSLY... Panda.....) than Hanley might be comfortable with but it still seems like it'd be the ideal way to deal with the empty space in the infield next season and the defensive problem in the outfield.  

 

[geoduck no quahog]

Panda stretches/splits all the time. We've seen it. Being fat doesn't make him inflexible. He's more of a natural 1st baseman than Ramirez or Ortiz. If he can react to balls hit sharply to 3rd, he can do the same at first. If there was anything available to play 3B I wouldn't blink if they tried Sandoval out at 1B.
 
There's nothing available at 3B.
 
And Ramirez does not strike one as a typical first baseman...more like a typical DH.

 

[AB in DC]

If the Sox could sell Hanley on playing first next year, I think they would need to put him on a different training regimen this year. I think Hanley got to big in the offseason, and just seemed stiff from the start. After the season I think they should focus more on getting lighter and more flexible.
 

 
I'm thinking that Hanley needs a new regimen anyway.  His extra bulk didn't seem to help him on either offense or defense.

 

[curly2]

 
I'm thinking that Hanley needs a new regimen anyway.  His extra bulk didn't seem to help him on either offense or defense.

 
Absolutely. He was already strong enough to hit it out of any park. With all the bulk he's moving like the Tin Man before they used the oll can on him.
 
And with JBJ already with a homer and a double today, it's got to be Hanley at first in 2016.

 

[Pumpsie]

 
Absolutely. He was already strong enough to hit it out of any park. With all the bulk he's moving like the Tin Man before they used the oll can on him.
 
And with JBJ already with a homer and a double today, it's got to be Hanley at first in 2016.

We're going to have to see how the rest of the season plays out, but if JBJ and Castillo look ready to hit ML pitching, there's no atbats to be had in the outifeld with de Aza around and Brock Holt needing atbats here and there.  Makes no sense to slow the growth of either of the young three outfielders just to give Hanley a break and first base is just sitting there needing a full-time player.  First base should be easier than the outfield for Hanley as well.  No tracking of fly balls required.

 

[Rasputin]

We're going to have to see how the rest of the season plays out, but if JBJ and Castillo look ready to hit ML pitching, there's no atbats to be had in the outifeld with de Aza around and Brock Holt needing atbats here and there.  Makes no sense to slow the growth of either of the young three outfielders just to give Hanley a break and first base is just sitting there needing a full-time player.  First base should be easier than the outfield for Hanley as well.  No tracking of fly balls required.

 
If Hanley works at first base, that's fantastic.
 
There is no need to get Holt or de Aza at bats, and Castillo isn't really that young.
 
Someone in one of the other threads mentioned a five man outfield including Hanley, de Aza, Betts, Castillo, and Bradley. There's awlays someone to replace Ramirez for defense. There's always someone to pinch hit. Betts, Castillo, and Bradley all get a bunch of playing time. It's the kind of deep depth the team is always looking for.
 
I'm not sure it's the ideal situation, but as a backup to Hanley taking first, it'll do.

 

[soxhop411]

Agent Alan Nero believes there will be a ripe market for Korean first baseman Byung-ho Park. “We’re just preparing for the process right now,” Nero said. “We believe there’s going to be a lot of interest as there was with [Jung Ho] Kang. Major league teams certainly covet right-handed power.” The Red Sox have been scouting the Nexen Heroes star for most of the season and Cafardo suggests that they could platoon him with left-handed-batter Travis Shaw. Even though Park could carry a notable price tag via the posting system, that could be cheaper for the Sox than going after the likes of Chris Davis or Justin Morneau on the open market.


Mlbtr

 

[Puffy]

Park has some standout bat flips. Here's a typical example:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJlOjdgZF4o

 

[soxhop411]

Isn’t this the second year in a row we are scouting Byung-ho Park?

 

[pdub]

What do you guys think happens if Shaw produces for the rest of the season? Would be a tragedy to send him back to AAA. 

 

[dynomite]

What do you guys think happens if Shaw produces for the rest of the season? Would be a tragedy to send him back to AAA. 

These are the questions Dombrowski is probably working through right now.

I would imagine the GM candidates will be asked 1) what they would do about Panda and Hanley, and 2) how they'll rebuild the rotation and bullpen, and how the two goals are related.

To answer your question: given the state of affairs on Yawkey Way, I wouldn't be surprised if one or even both of Hanley and Panda are not on the team next season, and the opportunities for 1B and 3B will be wide open. I'm not certain they're ready to hand over 1B to Shaw after a short sample (giving 3B to Middlebrooks in a similar situation didn't work out), but everything will depend upon what happens to Panda and Hanley.

P.S. The quotes article above talks about how expensive Morneau will be. I'm not interested, but how expensive will he really be? He'll be 35 and played 26 games this season. If anything, I could see him retiring.

 

[ArgentinaSOXfan]

Id rather keep Sandoval and get rid of Hanley, no doubt. Hanley either plays 1B or DH (Papi is there), otherwise we are shooting ourselves in the foot. And I cant understand when people bring the "we would be getting nada in exchange for Hanley". So? Anyone cares? If some team takes him, Im fine with it. Of course I wouldnt like him being the DH for another team, since that would be his natural spot at this moment and he could be a good (even for us, of course), but its worse to have him around here especially if it means he is playing the outfield.
Sandoval has won before, has produced in postseason and I think he can get better in every aspect (shape, batting, defence).

 

[reggiecleveland]

So the guy that reads the post game box scores on WEEI, who shows up probably an hour or two before the game, doesn't see him taking extra practice. And this is now gospel. Got it.

And a former player that has a lot of contact with the team. But whatever. All us negative Nellies think we are in last place too.

 

[AB in DC]

What do you guys think happens if Shaw produces for the rest of the season? Would be a tragedy to send him back to AAA. 

 
He'll have all of March to prove that he deserves to stay in the big leagues.
 
And with all of the uncertainty about Hanley playing 1B, he's a whopper of an insurance policy.  Surely, between Hanley and Travis, one of the two will play a competent 1B next year, no?