Joe Mauer for Felix Doubront?

[Emmz]

Mauer would be elite at 1B, too bad his cannon/accurate arm would go to waste at 1b...

[wyo-sox]

I would love Joe as our first baseman. Would have to find a way to get MN to eat some salary, or a deal that gets rid of Lackey and his salary. Unfortunately I do not see MN interested in either option.

[Spitball]

Mauer would be elite at 1B, too bad his cannon/accurate arm would go to waste at 1b...

 

When Johnny Bench's days behind the plate were over, he moved to third. I wonder if that would work with Mauer.

 

Btw, I hope Mauer retires a Twin. When I was in Fort Meyers for spring training, virtually every Twins jersey I saw was a number 7.

[rjortiz]

Mauer is a great hitter. He would hit .360 at Fenway with about 20 HRs. I have watched him since he was a kid at Twins Spring Camp in Ft. Myers. He has always been an exceptional hitter. In our lineup with the Monster in LF he would be great.

 

I agree with this. Fenway boosts the average of left handed batters, and Mauer would definitely be hitting for more doubles playing 81 games here. He's also the type of hitter that we had in our lineup during our championship season.

[RedSoxNC84]

Besides the contract, why aren't the Sox interested in this guy?????

[Emmz]

When Johnny Bench's days behind the plate were over, he moved to third. I wonder if that would work with Mauer.

 

Btw, I hope Mauer retires a Twin. When I was in Fort Meyers for spring training, virtually every Twins jersey I saw was a number 7.

 

Mauer is not slow, OF or 3B isn't out of the question if you ask me.

[Bellhorn04]

Besides the contract, why aren't the Sox interested in this guy?????

 

Mauer is a superior hitter for a catcher, but for a first baseman he'd be more like middle-of the-pack. For a big guy with a great-looking stroke, he has minimal home run power. He's hit a grand total of 20 HR over the last 3 seasons. He's only exceeded 13 HR once in his career.

[Orange Juiced]

Mauer would be elite at 1B

 

No he wouldn't. Not at all. If you go back 4 years and look at his MVP season, when he was 26, sure. But look at the last 3 seasons combined:

 

.312/.394/.432/.825, 128 ops+, averages 10 hr, 83 rbi per 162 games

 

We all know he's a very good hitter. I'm not arguing against that. But elite, for a 1b?

 

Here are the guys that I consider to be elite 1b, and their stats over the past 3 seasons:

 

Votto: .321/.429/.572/1.001, 166 ops+, 33 hr, 109 rbi per 162 g

Pujols: .300/.378/.560/.938, 157 ops+, 41 hr, 116 rbi per 162 g

Fielder: .289/.407/.518/.925, 149 ops+, 34 hr, 106 rbi per 162 g

Konerko: .309/.390/.539/.928, 147 ops+, 36 hr, 109 rbi per 162 g

Gonzalez: .312/.385/.511/.896, 141 ops+, 27 hr, 113 rbi per 162 g

 

That's the elite group right there. Those guys, especially considering their power, are much better-hitting 1b than Mauer would be. I would assume that Mauer's numbers would go up some in Fenway, surrounded by a better lineup, but I don't see him in this elite group at all.

 

Plus, he's REALLY expensive, and he'll be 30 next April. I'm not saying I wouldn't love to have the guy on the Red Sox, because he's a terrific baseball player. But at that money, at his age, with the wear and tear already on his body from all that catching, given his relative lack of power for a 1b? No thanks.

 

Now, if Minnesota was willing to pay a good chunk of his salary, we might have something.

[Emmz]

Mauer is a superior hitter for a catcher, but for a first baseman he'd be more like middle-of the-pack. For a big guy with a great-looking stroke, he has minimal home run power. He's hit a grand total of 20 HR over the last 3 seasons. He's only exceeded 13 HR once in his career.

 

134 OPS+ is well above average for all positions. Mark Teixeira had a 120 OPS+ last year, and a 116 OPS+ this year. He is considered to be a top 1B.

[Bellhorn04]

134 OPS+ is well above average for all positions. Mark Teixeira had a 120 OPS+ last year, and a 116 OPS+ this year. He is considered to be a top 1B.

 

Good point. It's Mauer's low home run totals that surprise me.

[Emmz]

He would probably hit 20 in Boston, and besides, he gets on base 41% of the time.

 

Where do you sign me up?

[rjortiz]

Mauer's wRC+ this year is 134. Good enough for 5th among all MLB 1B.

[SoxSport]

As I recall he had a monster contract year, hit a lot of HRs, and the Twins overpaid him to keep him.

With his current output and his injury history, he is overpaid, regardless of his BA and OBP. He's a 12 HR per year guy right now making $20 mil per year for a long time, and he's a first baseman waiting to happen--without the power. He does do nice hair commercials on TV, too.

 

I don't think Henry will be signing anybody for $20 mil per year for awhile. Maybe Ellsbury, but they have cheaper options in the OF. They may be better off trading Ells for a frontline pitcher.

[Orange Juiced]

Mauer would certainly be a terrific fit in this lineup and in this ballpark, make no mistake about it. But again, he'll be on the wrong side of 30, his body has taken a beating, he has very little power for a 1b, and he costs a small fortune. Probably not worth it, despite the obvious talent.

[Behindenemylines]

I guess it doesn't matter anyway because the Sox didn't put a claim on him. The Sox were big on Mauer before the big contract, but with it running to 2018 at big $$$$$ and him not getting any younger BC passed on him.

[Spitball]

 

Plus, he's REALLY expensive, and he'll be 30 next April. I'm not saying I wouldn't love to have the guy on the Red Sox, because he's a terrific baseball player. But at that money, at his age, with the wear and tear already on his body from all that catching, given his relative lack of power for a 1b? No thanks..

 

Right. Mauer is a great player but is at the point in his career where elite players start to lose their elite abilities. I'd rather go with Maura Gomez's or a younger, more affordable option.

 

Now, if Minnesota was willing to pay a good chunk of his salary, we might have something.

 

I agree but would really hate to see the Twins lose their favorite player and be saddled with the salary. That is a great smaller market franchise and that would hurt them.

[a700hitter]

As I recall he had a monster contract year, hit a lot of HRs, and the Twins overpaid him to keep him.

With his current output and his injury history, he is overpaid, regardless of his BA and OBP. He's a 12 HR per year guy right now making $20 mil per year for a long time, and he's a first baseman waiting to happen--without the power. He does do nice hair commercials on TV, too.

 

I don't think Henry will be signing anybody for $20 mil per year for awhile. Maybe Ellsbury, but they have cheaper options in the OF. They may be better off trading Ells for a frontline pitcher.

They didn't lose this season because of the $20 million ballplayers. They lost because the pitching sucked balls. They didn't have the payroll flexibility to rebuild the pitching unless they unloaded some payroll. In order to get rid of Beckett, they had to part with AGon. They forced CC on the Dodgers because they don't need 2 speedy base stealers. The problem wasn't the 20 million dollar guys, so I don't think they will hesitate to spend $ to rebuild.

[Orange Juiced]

They didn't lose this season because of the $20 million ballplayers. They lost because the pitching sucked balls. They didn't have the payroll flexibility to rebuild the pitching unless they unloaded some payroll. In order to get rid of Beckett, they had to part with AGon. They forced CC on the Dodgers because they don't need 2 speedy base stealers. The problem wasn't the 20 million dollar guys, so I don't think they will hesitate to spend $ to rebuild.

 

Agreed. I just hope they spend it wisely.

[Spitball]

They didn't lose this season because They didn't have the payroll flexibility to rebuild the pitching . They lost because the pitching sucked balls. They didn't have the payroll flexibility to rebuild the pitching unless they unloaded some payroll.

 

I'm not sure you meant what you said. This is a contradiction in the same paragraph.

[a700hitter]

I'm not sure you meant what you said. This is a contradiction in the same paragraph.

No, it is not a contradiction. The $20 million dollar players did not hurt the team performance. It was the pitchers who sucked ass. They did not make $20 million.

[Emmz]

If someone proves that players lose their eliteness at 30, I will not discuss the Sox getting Mauer ever again. A player's prime is usually between ages 27-32, this basically kills that theory. Considering that Mauer isn't a power hitter, the skill that diminishes first, I'm not worried about him declining.

 

He has a sweet, smooth swing, and I could see him hitting over .300 well into his 30s. Comparing a player to a position is absolutely foolish, you compare to skill sets. Mauer's skill set translates well going forward IMO.

[Spitball]

If someone proves that players lose their eliteness at 30, I will not discuss the Sox getting Mauer ever again. A player's prime is usually between ages 27-32, this basically kills that theory. Considering that Mauer isn't a power hitter, the skill that diminishes first, I'm not worried about him declining.

 

He has a sweet, smooth swing, and I could see him hitting over .300 well into his 30s. Comparing a player to a position is absolutely foolish, you compare to skill sets. Mauer's skill set translates well going forward IMO.

 

Here is a study done last winter by Jeff Zimmerman on FanGraphs.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/how-do-star-hitters-age/

 

Better players peak earlier in their careers. While the general population peaks at age 27, the group of good players peak at either 25 or 26 years old.

 

At 30, great players begin to see a pronounced decline. The one- and three-year groups peak at age 25. Here is the number of runs lost from ages 25 to 30 and from ages 30 to 35

 

Group: Run Lost from 25 to 30, Runs Lost from 30 to 35

One Great Season: -8 runs, -34 runs

Three Good Seasons: -12 runs, -24 runs

Average Player: -5 runs, -17 runs

 

From 25 to 30, the two groups lost an average of 10 runs. During the next five years, the run decline was between a 25 to 35. This loss is much more than the average player. (To reiterate: the main reason for the above-average decline is that stars have much further to fall.)

 

Hall-of-famers don’t usually peak — instead, they plateau. From ages 24 to 30, their production is generally constant. From then on, it drops at a high rate.

[a700hitter]

If someone proves that players lose their eliteness at 30, I will not discuss the Sox getting Mauer ever again. A player's prime is usually between ages 27-32, this basically kills that theory. Considering that Mauer isn't a power hitter, the skill that diminishes first, I'm not worried about him declining.

 

He has a sweet, smooth swing, and I could see him hitting over .300 well into his 30s. Comparing a player to a position is absolutely foolish, you compare to skill sets. Mauer's skill set translates well going forward IMO.

You are right. Hitters like Mauer could wake from a coma at age 40 and go out and rope 3 hits in a games. Running to first would be the challenge for him. People who have not watched him a lot can't appreciate the kind of hitter that he is. Numbers on paper just don't tell the full story. This guy has had that same sweet swing since he was in the minors. I remember when the Twins had 3 or 4 Mauers in the organization (one was a pitcher I think). I saw the other one play a few innings at 3B in spring training once, but I don't remember seeing him hit. He was a skinny young kid, and I remember wondering if he shared any of his brothers hitting talent. Talent like Joey M's is rare and I never saw or heard of the brother again.

[Emmz]

Here is a study done last winter by Jeff Zimmerman on FanGraphs.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/how-do-star-hitters-age/

Ok, so players have a drop off at 33-35. So I'm right.

[Spitball]

Ok, so players have a drop off at 33-35. So I'm right.

 

"At 30, great players begin to see a pronounced decline."

 

But you are missing this point. There might be a sharper drop 33-35, but the serious decline starts at 30.

[Emmz]

Yeah, that's why many elite players have their best years 30+. That doesn't mean jack diddly squat in anyone's case, because it's just a study. It applies to the sample in only half of the cases most likely.

[RedSoxNC84]

Look at guys like Pierzynski, he's not necessarily elite, but he's having a career year when he's 35.

 

He's batting .285 with an OPS of .854 and a career high 23 homers right now.

[Spitball]

Yeah, that's why many elite players have their best years 30+. That doesn't mean jack diddly squat in anyone's case, because it's just a study. It applies to the sample in only half of the cases most likely.

 

I am guessing here, but I doubt you even looked at the study or didn't understand the graphs.

 

"To generate a list of players who seem headed toward stardom, I selected players since 1980 who had a total of 20-plus WAR during a three-year span. Also, I took the players who generated WAR of 9.5 or more in a single season."

[steelcurtain456]

Yeah, that's why many elite players have their best years 30+. That doesn't mean jack diddly squat in anyone's case, because it's just a study. It applies to the sample in only half of the cases most likely.

True, guys over 30 can have breakout years (Pierzynski, Ortiz, etc.), but they are by far the exception to the rule. After the age of 30, the probability that a player's best year is still ahead of him is slim at best, especially if he's numbers are trending downwards. It can happen, but it's more risky from a productivity standpoint, and even if he does put up big numbers, it's unlikely you'll get a full 160 games out of him. The Red Sox need to be getting younger, not older.

[rjortiz]

I'd tell the Marlins they could have three players from our farm system, and then go trade for Stanton.