Red Sox Put in Waiver Claim on Nats SS Guzman

[Dipre]

How much money do you want to sink into shortstop?

 

How much SUCK are you willing to put up with?

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Times you've answered what was actually a legitimate question: 0

What I was doing was making a general point that not caring about what the team spends (and how they spend it) simply because it isn't your money is not smart, because bad signings/purchases/trades can indeed come back and haunt the roster that we root for.

 

I don't have much of a problem with this Guzman idea, because he's better than our other options, by a lot.

[CrespoBlows]

Dojji is making some excellent points. Guzman is a terrible player. He doesn't play the field well, as evidence of his -9 FRAA. His OPS is inflated by his batting average, which is being sustained by an insanely lucky BABIP. However, he is an upgrade over Nick Green, and can platoon with Lowrie when he gets back.

 

Still, I don't like the idea of being stuck paying $8 million for Guzman next season, especially since the Red Sox can use that to get a player of substantially more quality.

[Dojji]

What IS a good predictor of future performance?

 

Future performance, pretty much.

[a700hitter]

And what makes YOU think I'm only talking about this year? $8M is a lot of money to pay for an inconsistent player in a 2010 season in which we'll still be paying $9M for Julio Lugo as well. If he bombs' date=' that's $17M in unproductive shortstops. This is a pretty substantial risk we're taking here.[/quote']At times you have to overpay to prevent damage to the franchise. If the FO is willing to take on Guzman, it's because they view missing the playoffs as a negative for the franchise. Fans who just spent $200 of their hard earned money on tickets don't want to hear that the team with 500 + sell outs doesn't have enough money to take a SS from the lowly Nats. It doesn't fly with the average fan. It looks like greed at the ownership level or worse incompetence in management when a financially rich team like the Sox rolls out the likes of Nick Green to play the most important position on the field. If they overpay for Guzman, they will be doing because they think they have to make a change. They have enough financial strength to overcome Guzman's and Lugo's contract. Your solution is that we paid enough for SS this season and next so let's stand pat? That's a little penny wise and pound foolish don't you think if you are concerned about the reputation of a $1 billion franchise?

[Dojji]

How much SUCK are you willing to put up with?

 

Not so much that I want to add Guzman's.

[CrespoBlows]

At times you have to overpay to prevent damage to the franchise. If the FO is willing to take on Guzman' date=' it's because they view missing the playoffs as a negative for the franchise. Fans who just spent $200 of their hard earned money on tickets don't want to hear that the team with 500 + sell outs doesn't have enough money to take a SS from the lowly Nats. It doesn't fly with the average fan. It looks like greed at the ownership level or worse incompetence in management when a financially rich team like the Sox rolls out the likes of Nick Green to play the most important position on the field. If they overpay for Guzman, they will be doing because they think they have to make a change. They have enough financial strength to overcome Guzman's and Lugo's contract. Your solution is that we paid enough for SS this season and next so let's stand pat? That's a little penny wise and pound foolish don't you think if you are concerned about the reputation of a $1 billion franchise?[/quote']

 

No, but let's not convince ourselves that Guzman is a good enough player to be that big a difference.

[Dojji]

At times you have to overpay to prevent damage to the franchise.

 

If Guzman fails, that DOES damage to the franchise, and pays about $12M for the privilege. And Guzman's pretty fail-prone.

[Dipre]

Dojji is making some excellent points. Guzman is a terrible player. He doesn't play the field well, as evidence of his -9 FRAA. His OPS is inflated by his batting average, which is being sustained by an insanely lucky BABIP. However, he is an upgrade over Nick Green, and can platoon with Lowrie when he gets back.

 

Still, I don't like the idea of being stuck paying $8 million for Guzman next season, especially since the Red Sox can use that to get a player of substantially more quality.

 

Guzman's defensive deficiencies can be somewhat made up by having Pedey and Youk playing beside him.

 

Also, you need to remember, that hiding in the bottom of the Sox lineup can only be helpful to his current performance, not to mention the fact he can also play 3B and 2 B adequately.

 

Not even the Yanks would wanna pay $8M for Guzman.

 

But it's either him, or ultimate suck.

[Dojji]

Holy crap, Crespo and I on the same side of the argument, time to check the basement for icicles.

[a700hitter]

If Guzman fails' date=' that DOES damage to the franchise, and pays about $12M for the privilege. And Guzman's pretty fail-prone.[/quote']Unless he decides to play blind-folded, he'll do better than what we have. The FO is not taking much of a risk in that regard.

[Dipre]

No' date=' but let's not convince ourselves that Guzman is a good enough player to be that big a difference.[/quote']

 

We've also overlooked the fact that the Natinals could probably be convinced to eat some of his salary for a decent prospect.

[a700hitter]

No' date=' but let's not convince ourselves that Guzman is a good enough player to be that big a difference.[/quote']If he helps make the difference in one or two games that might be all they need.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

At times you have to overpay to prevent damage to the franchise.

 

Not true at all. If anything, it's the opposite.

[Dojji]

We've also overlooked the fact that the Natinals could probably be convinced to eat some of his salary for a decent prospect.

 

Yeah, but then we're out slightly less money and a decent prospect. I'd rather lose the money. I'd really much, much rather do neither of the above.

[Rdsxmbnt]

Future performance' date=' pretty much.[/quote']

 

That doesn't even make sense

[Dojji]

If he helps make the difference in one or two games that might be all they need.

 

if Guzman gives us 2 wins over replacement I'll be shocked.

[Dojji]

That doesn't even make sense

 

And yet it does. Since the only way to be sure of the productiion of a ballplayer over a given period of time is in retrospect.

 

the last time Guzman was in the AL he didn't stand a chance, and he was faster then. I just don't see where he's going to be worth $12M, or a portion of that and a prospect, to this franchise, not even with our production provlems at SS (which Guzman provides nothing CLOSE to a guaranteed solution for)

[P3dro1a15]

Guzman's defensive deficiencies can be somewhat made up by having Pedey and Youk playing beside him.

 

Also, you need to remember, that hiding in the bottom of the Sox lineup can only be helpful to his current performance, not to mention the fact he can also play 3B and 2 B adequately.

 

Not even the Yanks would wanna pay $8M for Guzman.

 

But it's either him, or ultimate suck.

I'd go with Guzman over ultimate suck, at least he gives us a chance to improve our team. throwing Green and woodward out there everyday gives us very little chance of success at the SS position, where as Guzman gives us a MLB player who has been in starting lineups before. Nick Green and Chris Woodward have no place in a starting lineup especially the Red Sox. This might not be the ideal way to improve the SS position and yes we will be stuck with his 8 million next year, which might be a little overpriced, but Nick Green and Woodward suck ass and even if Lowrie comes back this year whose to say he won't suck just as bad as he has since coming back the first time. Do you really want to put up with that for the rest of the year?

[Dojji]

I'd go with Guzman over ultimate suck' date=' at least he gives us a chance to improve our team. throwing Green and woodward out there everyday gives us very little chance of success at the SS position, where as Guzman gives us a MLB player who has been in starting lineups before. Nick Green and Chris Woodward have no place in a starting lineup especially the Red Sox. This might not be the ideal way to improve the SS position and yes we will be stuck with his 8 million next year, which might be a little overpriced, but Nick Green and Woodward suck ass and even if Lowrie comes back this year whose to say he won't suck just as bad as he has since coming back the first time. Do you really want to put up with that for the rest of the year?[/quote']

 

And when you're paying $8M for very modest production from the SS spot next year, are you prepared to sustain this position?

 

Our track record on that isn't very good. Ref: Lugo.

[Rdsxmbnt]

And yet it does. Since the only way to be sure of the productiion of a ballplayer over a given period of time is in retrospect.

 

Retrospect is synonymous with past performance. What someone did in the past is the best predictor of what they will do in the future

[CrespoBlows]

Guzman's defensive deficiencies can be somewhat made up by having Pedey and Youk playing beside him.

 

That point has been debunked by BP. There's no solid evidence that a new 3B has any impact on the SS. Besides, even if it were true, Guzman would be losing Ryan Zimmerman and Anderson Hernandez, who are both extremely quality defenders.

 

Also, you need to remember, that hiding in the bottom of the Sox lineup can only be helpful to his current performance,

 

How?

 

not to mention the fact he can also play 3B and 2 B adequately.

 

What? He's never played at inning at either position.

 

Not even the Yanks would wanna pay $8M for Guzman.

 

Of course not, which is the main reason why we should avoid bringing him in. $8 million netted the Rays, Pat Burrell last year. I expect the Red Sox can use the $10 million owed to Guzman, in order to bring in someone who can really impact the standings.

 

But it's either him, or ultimate suck.

 

I'm not convinced that Guzman is in the other category. Especially, since he'll be moving to the tougher league.

[Dojji]

Retrospect is synonymous with past performance. What someone did in the past is the best predictor of what they will do in the future

 

Then the best predictor is poor as crap and extremely undependable.

[Dipre]

I hope the Sox don't land Guzman just so i can rub it in on Doiji's face when Lowrie doesn't come back/contribute and we're stuck with Nick Green and Chris f***ing Woodward in the middle of a pennant race.

[Javier Lopez]

The farmboy has a point.

 

thats more points in one posts than you have had in your whole entire time on this forum. go die you f***ing troll.

[P3dro1a15]

And when you're paying $8M for very modest production from the SS spot next year, are you prepared to sustain this position?

 

Our track record on that isn't very good. Ref: Lugo.

This is why I say it isn't ideal, obviously ideal would be getting Hanley, but i'd take a shot with Guzman as long as it doesn't cost us a prospect. If we stay with Green and Lowrie this year and into next year what is our solution in the offseason?

[Keeper]

Bottom line is Guzman is an upgrade over the current scrubs the Sox are using at SS. Rather than phone it in with Green and Woodward, the Sox at least now have a serviceable SS.

[Dojji]

Point worth considering, perhaps: All but one year of Guzman's American League career were absolutely miserable, with success coming at best in flashes. His overall career OPS is .699. His career OPS in the American League is worse.

 

Guzman has an 81 career OPS+. Nick Green has a 72 career OPS+. Exactly where is the $8M worth of upgrade coming from?

[Dipre]

That point has been debunked by BP. There's no solid evidence that a new 3B has any impact on the SS. Besides' date=' even if it were true, Guzman would be losing Ryan Zimmerman and Anderson Hernandez, who are both extremely quality defenders.[/quote']

 

Zimmerman yes, Hernandez not so much.

 

This is why i don't trust defensive metrics very much.

 

 

What? He's never played at inning at either position.

 

Not in the Majors no, but he has played plenty of 3rd and 2nd in DWL, you might say that's not good enough, but it's not like he couldn't play if the team needed it.

 

He has past experience there.

 

Of course not, which is the main reason why we should avoid bringing him in. $8 million netted the Rays, Pat Burrell last year. I expect the Red Sox can use the $10 million owed to Guzman, in order to bring in someone who can really impact the standings.

 

Still, the SS FA market is completely dry.

 

We need a SS since we can't rely on Lowrie anymore, if you sell me a SS who we can realistically acquire and who's better than Guzman, i'll relinquish my point.

 

I'm not convinced that Guzman is in the other category. Especially, since he'll be moving to the tougher league.

 

He's definitely not in the Woodward/Green category either.

[P3dro1a15]

Point worth considering, perhaps: All but one year of Guzman's American League career were absolutely miserable, with success coming at best in flashes. His overall career OPS is .699. His career OPS in the American League is worse.

 

Guzman has an 81 career OPS+. Nick Green has a 72 career OPS+. Exactly where is the $8M worth of upgrade coming from?

Haven't you been saying that the only predictor of future success is futrue success. You can't say that some numbers that are an upgrade aren't a predictor of future success but the ones that really aren't and upgrade are a predictor