Red Sox 2012/2013 Offseason Thread

[Spitball]

At the start of the year the Nats had Wang targeted to br the #5 starter and Detwiler was a depth or swing option. Wang went down early and Detwiler won the job. That happens at times with the guys who start the season as the depth option.

 

But you said, "Last year Detwiler was a depth option. Wang was in the rotation."

 

At best, it was misleading. At worst, it was plain wrong.

[seabeachfred]

I wouldn't want them near Fenway, not even taking tickets at the turnstiles.

 

Well I feel that way about Mauro Gomez, only 100 thousand times more intensely than you.

[a700hitter]

But you said, "Last year Detwiler was a depth option. Wang was in the rotation."

 

At best, it was misleading. At worst, it was plain wrong.

After working his way back from a devastating shoulder injury, Wang appeared to be 100% in Spring Training in 2012 and he was in a battle for the fifth spot in the starting rotation when he injured his hamstring trying to make it over to first base from the mound in a game against the New York Yankees. The injury, diagnosed as a left hamstring strain, would delay the start of the right-hander's season.

 

With Wang injured, Ross Detwiler ended up beating John Lannan out for the fifth spot in the Nats' rotation behind Stephen Strasburg, Gio Gonzalez, Jordan Zimmermann and Edwin Jackson, but with Detwiler struggling and Wang ready to return in late May, Davey Johnson had a tough decision to make. The Nats' skipper said he would probably keep Wang in the bullpen, but added that it wasn't the best situation with his injury history. "I don't look at him as a reliever," Johnson said, "I look at him as a quality major league starter."

 

When Detwiler continued to struggle, and in Johnson's eyes failed to challenge hitters, the manager made the decision to put Chien-Ming Wang back in the rotation, telling reporters, including the Washington Post's Adam Kilgore that it was, "... a tough decision," but one that he thought was, "... best for the whole ballclub.'" Wang would make four starts between May 30th and June 19th, posting a 6.62 ERA over 17.2 IP in which he allowed 26 hits, 13 runs and 14 walks with opponents hitting .361 off the veteran right-hander.

 

Detwiler returned to the rotation the next time around. Davey Johnson explained at the time that he may have stayed with Wang a little longer out of respect for what the pitcher had accomplished in his career. "The only reason I stayed with him," Johnson said, "[is] because he's made such a great recovery coming back and he's won 19 games a couple times and I felt like I had to stay with him."

 

http://www.federalbaseball.com/2012/10/26/3560648/is-the-washington-nationals-chien-ming-wang-experiment-over

 

It was no secret that Davey Johnson wanted Wang in the rotation. He would have broke camp as the 5th starter, but he got injured. When he returned Johnson, put him back into the rotation even though Detwiller was doing pretty well. I don't know what you feel mislead about. The Nats had tremendous depth in their starting staff last year. They had 3 guys competing for the 5th spot and of the 3, Detwiler had the least experience starting, and he did not have the inside line on the job. That was a nice position for the Nats to be in, and not only didn't they miss a beat when Wang went down, but Detwiler emerged. By looking at Vasquez among others they are looking to build depth similar to what they had last year. That's the point that I was making.

[Spitball]

http://www.federalbaseball.com/2012/10/26/3560648/is-the-washington-nationals-chien-ming-wang-experiment-over

 

It was no secret that Davey Johnson wanted Wang in the rotation. He would have broke camp as the 5th starter, but he got injured. When he returned Johnson, put him back into the rotation even though Detwiller was doing pretty well. I don't know what you feel mislead about. The Nats had tremendous depth in their starting staff last year. They had 3 guys competing for the 5th spot and of the 3, Detwiler had the least experience starting, and he did not have the inside line on the job. That was a nice position for the Nats to be in, and not only didn't they miss a beat when Wang went down, but Detwiler emerged. By looking at Vasquez among others they are looking to build depth similar to what they had last year. That's the point that I was making.

 

I said Detwiler was the fifth starter because he had 27 starts and was very effective. You said, "Last year Detwiler was a depth option. Wang was in the rotation."

 

You did not say "at the start of the year" or "after an injury." You said, "Last year." The context of you statement was incorrect and designed to counter my statement. You can spin this however you want.

[a700hitter]

I said Detwiler was the fifth starter because he had 27 starts and was very effective. You said, "Last year Detwiler was a depth option. Wang was in the rotation."

 

You did not say "at the start of the year" or "after an injury." You said, "Last year." The context of you statement was incorrect and designed to counter my statement. You can spin this however you want.

Yes, and I clarified with additional detail several posts ago.

[a700hitter]

I said Detwiler was the fifth starter because he had 27 starts and was very effective. You said, "Last year Detwiler was a depth option. Wang was in the rotation."

 

You did not say "at the start of the year" or "after an injury." You said, "Last year." The context of you statement was incorrect and designed to counter my statement. You can spin this however you want.

By way of additional detail, Detwiler went to Spring training behind Wang and Lannan on the Nats depth chart. In fact, when Wang went down, it was Lannan, not Ddetwiler, who was named the 5th starter by Davey Johnson, even though that never materialized.

 

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-03-26/sports/35447617_1_washington-nationals-ross-detwiler-john-lannan

[jung]

Biggest news of this off season should be Uncle Bud not just letting the other shoe drop on drug testing but flinging it down.

 

There is clearly a strategy at work with regard to the league and the way it approaches all matters that ultimately become part of the CBA negotiation. The league waits until it has a firm grip on the PA's balls and then it squeezes.

 

While it should be clear that changes this sweeping could not just come out of the blue, it should be equally clear that the inability of the voters to find favor with a single HOF candidate sent a cold shiver up the spine of the PA...the same cold shiver that the owners had already been feeling. Clearly the league had insight into this year's voting and the sentiment of the voters was already known.

 

The result....while Uncle Bud announces sweeping changes to the drug testing program and polices, the PA releases the most self serving milk toast response imaginable....a far cry from the usual call to arms that any MLB drug testing announcement had engendered in the recent past.

 

There is much blame to go around for all parties. The whole PED controversy went from something akin to the military's don't ask don't tell policy to where they are today with individual players having been left pretty much in a lousy situation for much of baseball's sullied history with regard to PED's. Sure the PA as a group thought it was representing its members best interests in the way it positioned itself with regard to PED's and testing but individual players were not well served. IMO, the league and everybody involved veered right into and maybe even over the line of encouraging usage, insisting that the player just not get caught if he was going to use.....that is a lousy spot for individual players.

 

For the owners, it had become much more of an issue as player salaries continued to spiral out of control. While a player caught using could see his reputation, his numbers, his very career jeopardized, baseball organizations faced the very real issue of having an extremely high percentage of its assets tied up in player contracts the value of which was suddenly unknown. Are your players using? If so, all of those multimillion dollar contracts binding the player to the organization for a specific term may not be worth the paper they are written on. Tell the owner of a business that a very high percentage of his perceived assets can not be valued in real terms and might simply crumble under his very feet and watch how quickly he starts developing a nervous twitch that simply won't go away. So while the owners are as guilty as anybody else, maybe even more guilty for having turned a blind eye on the one hand while reaping the benefits of player usage on the other, they were also the first to feel its bite. The amount of money they had tied up in player contracts and the potential for those player contracts to be suddenly deemed valueless really hit home.

 

As for the players, players agents and the union as their representative, much of what happens of late is driven by the desire to enter that exclusive club that sits atop of players generally, the long term, big money contract players. It has of late all become about getting there and then staying there. With baseball organizations already getting gun shy about big contracts, this time around, in the face of wholesale changes in testing policy that in the past would have been fought tooth and nail, the PA was forced to look like it wanted this all along....********....they had no choice but to go along as for once they found themselves in a position much like that of the owners.

 

While it was a heady ride for all of them for a long time, the wreckage left in the wake of what has been a disingenuous effort by all parties involved is whole generations of players who'e numbers will always be deemed suspect.....so much so that it now appears likely that some will never enter the hall. Not more than a few months ago, more likely you would have found most "experts" would have claimed that many of the suspect would enter the hall eventually. There are very few willing to make that claim this morning as the voting numbers are all going the wrong way. As has often been mentioned here, it is easy to talk about "someday" neglecting the fact that a player has got to get enough votes to get in and even has to get enough votes to remain on the ballet in the first place.

 

The recent HOF voting and Uncle Buds actions are a repudiation of the whole era and no amount of posturing by Bud or anybody else is going to change the fact that all were complicit. For a time and maybe for all time everybody got what they wanted......$$$$$$$. Even players that resisted using saw the general level of player salaries rise sharply with PED aided performances a big part of the picture. However this is a stain that is never going away. The way the voting is going and in a game for which the historical numbers are everything, there appears that there will be an era of baseball very much underrepresented in the Hall. That "hole" will only have one explanation.

[Spitball]

Yes, and I clarified with additional detail several posts ago.

 

Clarified? No, you countered without ever admitting you were wrong. In fact, Detwiler was the fifth starter. Your statement, "Last year Detwiler was a depth option. Wang was in the rotation" was misleading. Wang was in the rotation for five games. Detwiler was in the rotation for 27 games. Detwiler was the fifth starter, and the statistical evidence is there. He was far more than a depth option.

[a700hitter]

Clarified? No, you countered without ever admitting you were wrong. In fact, Detwiler was the fifth starter. Your statement, "Last year Detwiler was a depth option. Wang was in the rotation" was misleading. Wang was in the rotation for five games. Detwiler was in the rotation for 27 games. Detwiler was the fifth starter, and the statistical evidence is there. He was far more than a depth option.

I wasn't wrong. I was well aware that Detwiler had many more starts than Wang and in fact, Detwiler had locked down a rotation spot during the season. I just didn't state what I meant clearly enough, and I have since provided sufficient explanation. What is your point? Are you one of those people who is never satisfied until someone capitulates and throw themselves at your feet for forgiveness.:lol:

[a700hitter]

Clarified? No, you countered without ever admitting you were wrong. In fact, Detwiler was the fifth starter. Your statement, "Last year Detwiler was a depth option. Wang was in the rotation" was misleading. Wang was in the rotation for five games. Detwiler was in the rotation for 27 games. Detwiler was the fifth starter, and the statistical evidence is there. He was far more than a depth option.

I don't think that the reply posted below was a "countering. " I agreed with your post and gave an explanation of how things were viewed before the start of the season. That was hardly a contentious reply.

 

Yep those are the stats. He was removed from the rotation early in the season when Wang returned from injury. Wang's return didn't last long and Detwiler returned to the rotation. Wangs was slotted to be the #5 guy going into the season. That's my recollection. Wang blew up, and that is why depth is so important,m

[Spitball]

I wasn't wrong. I was well aware that Detwiler had many more starts than Wang and in fact, Detwiler had locked down a rotation spot during the season. I just didn't state what I meant clearly enough, and I have since provided sufficient explanation. What is your point? Are you one of those people who is never satisfied until someone capitulates and throw themselves at your feet for forgiveness.:lol:

 

Whatever. I will always admit when I am wrong without trying to justify my incorrect statements. After all, this is just a baseball forum among friends.

[a700hitter]

Whatever. I will always admit when I am wrong without trying to justify my incorrect statements. After all, this is just a baseball forum among friends.

And when I am wrong I will admit it. There was no justifying of anything on my part. With all of the fantasy leagues that I participate in, I am up on the latest developments regarding team's pitching rotations. Do you really think that I thought Wang was in the Nats rotation all season? I didn't. I had picked up Detwiler in at least one of my leagues during the season, so I knew what he was doing.

[a700hitter]

Whatever. I will always admit when I am wrong without trying to justify my incorrect statements. After all, this is just a baseball forum among friends.

Whatever, it just seems like you are not satisfied until you extract an admission. I don't think that is being friendly. Do you?

[BSN07]

But why a contender with 5 solid starters? The Nationals' number five (Detwiler) had one of the best ERAs in their rotation. Why not Toronto who have a number 5 with an ERA of 5.77?

 

After his disastrous stints in the AL East why would he want a 3rd shot? He also has a history with the Nats/Expos.

[BSN07]

Kotchman? Nick Johnson? Please no!

 

I wouldn't mind a trade for Smoak.

[a700hitter]

I wouldn't mind a trade for Smoak.

Smoak's still carries the dreaded "P" word. Potential.

[BSN07]

Smoak's still carries the dreaded "P" word. Potential.

 

At least he still has some. I'd like to see what he does outside of Seattle. And he's by far the best defensive option we have discussed recently.

 

His slash line was not good last year. But if you look at his home away splits there seems to be sign of "potential"

 

Home- .198/.270/.289

 

Away- .235/.308/.434

 

I like the big spike in slugging in his away games.

[jopete19]

According to Ken Rosenthal the Red Sox have inquired about Mike Morse. I like this! I like it, I like it a lot. (Dumb and Dumber quote) lol.

[Palodios]

According to Ken Rosenthal the Red Sox have inquired about Mike Morse. I like this! I like it, I like it a lot. (Dumb and Dumber quote) lol.

 

The Red Sox have been looking at an absolute ton of players though. There are reports from the last two days about Nick Johnson, Casey Kotchman, Smoak, and Napoli isn't completely out of the picture yet either.

[Lucienbel]

According to Ken Rosenthal the Red Sox have inquired about Mike Morse. I like this! I like it, I like it a lot. (Dumb and Dumber quote) lol.

 

I like it as well, I just wonder what the cost will be at this point. They didn't want to give up draft picks to sign guys, but at the end of the day if they end up giving up a big haul of guys already somewhat developed that seems like it will actually be worse.

 

MLBTR has it at needing to part with "young talent and possibly a left handed reliever".

 

He has been good the last couple of years though and his bat should play well in Fenway. I wonder what his defense at first ends up looking like after a full year of playing there. I do like the though of a 1B/OF though too, with the way the interleague games are going to be this year he could move into left with Ortiz at 1st, meaning you don't have to sacrifice his bat and that the platoon of Gomes and whoever ends up mattering a little less too.

[Dojji]

The Red Sox have been looking at an absolute ton of players though. There are reports from the last two days about Nick Johnson, Casey Kotchman, Smoak, and Napoli isn't completely out of the picture yet either.

 

Of those options, the only one definitely better than Mauro Gomez is Napoli.

 

Not many options here seem smarter to me than seeing what Salty could do with a year as the everyday first baseman. He has the power, maybe if he wasn't facing the rigors of catching every day he could be that little bit more consistent.

[Palodios]

Of those options, the only one definitely better than Mauro Gomez is Napoli.

 

Not many options here seem smarter to me than seeing what Salty could do with a year as the everyday first baseman. He has the power, maybe if he wasn't facing the rigors of catching every day he could be that little bit more consistent.

 

Dojji, normally I give you the benefit of the doubt. But Salty at 1b? Ugh.

 

Career numbers batting as a 1B .582

Career numbers batting as a DH .630

Career numbers batting as a PH .430

 

The guy flat out sucks.

[a700hitter]

I would be horrified to think Salty is an option at 1B.

[mvp 78]

Dojji, normally I give you the benefit of the doubt. But Salty at 1b? Ugh.

 

Career numbers batting as a 1B .582

Career numbers batting as a DH .630

Career numbers batting as a PH .430

 

The guy flat out sucks.

 

SSS, he's played 2 games at 1b in previous 5 years.

 

I think he could be an ok 1b option for a team like the 'Stros.

[Palodios]

SSS, he's played 2 games at 1b in previous 5 years.

 

I think he could be an ok 1b option for a team like the 'Stros.

 

Most of those stats at 1B come from 2007. Put into perspective, catching didn't seem to hurt his stats that year.

 

47 games in 2007 as C -- .876 OPS

38 games in 2007 as 1B-- .542 OPS.

[mvp 78]

Doesn't change the fact that it's a very SSS to make any real prediction from.

[SoxSport]

Morse is still an option, though their competition is TB and NY. They may have the pieces with Morales, Breslow or Miller plus somebody else. They won't trade front line prospects, however.

[jung]

Salty would give the worst target in baseball to the SS and 3rd basemen trying to throw over.:D

[Palodios]

Doesn't change the fact that it's a very SSS to make any real prediction from.

 

But it doesn't change the fact that he flat out sucks either, does it?

[a700hitter]

But it doesn't change the fact that he flat out sucks either, does it?

Not adequate?