Mike Napoli performance thread.

[a700hitter]

To me 1978 was much harder because we hadn't won in so long and what a hell of a come back!!!. Sept 2011 sucked ass big time though. And 2003 ALCS made me cry.

1986 was the most crushing, but the season was great until game 6. It was 2 crushing defeats. September 2011 was 30 straight days. For me, it was like doing time in the hole.

[rjortiz]

The end of 2011 was merciful to me. We would have had Bruce Chen pitch in that one-game playoff, and if by some miracle we won that game, our ALDS rotation would have been Lester, Beckett, and Lackey. Texas would have massacred us.

 

I didn't expect too much in 2012, so it was hard to be that disappointed. We weren't that pathetic until after we dumped all of our players. I loved the trade, so I was pretty indifferent to the late season struggles.

[seabeachfred]

That's one reason I envy lifelong or older fans. I never really cared about baseball. I became a baseball and Red Sox fan in 2002 when my father took me to a game he got free tickets to. I fell in love with it all by the end of the game. The consequence of this, though, was that I had no chance to inure myself to disappointment. Yes, the very next season was an awful blow, but they were still in the ALCS. Last season was the first time in my mere decade of fandom that the Sox finished under .500. They'd missed the postseason in my first year as a fan, and a couple times since, but never as badly as 2012. Most fans had years of s***** or mediocre teams to remember and cushion the blow. I had ten straight seasons of, if not great, at least competitive baseball.

 

Holy sheeeeeeet Youk, I finally found someone on this board who has been a Red Sox fan after I became one. My epiphany came in August of 2000 and maybe that is why some of my friends here and on Sawxheads an STFU give me hell when I complain about how things have gone. Last season was the only one since I came on board when we just plain stunk to high heaven, and like you I think it is fair to say that I've been a little spoiled. What has become obvious to me and hopefully to you as well is that when you take this team into your bosom you become a fanatic to the point of walking the floor at night when they lose a tough series, and, yes, even a tough game. I can tell you this with all the conviction that I possess........Red Sox fans are a breed apart. We are more fanatical, loyal and to a point even nuts about their team. I know plenty of fans of other teams and they support them but not with the same enthusiasm as we have. Many fans of other teams fall by the wayside when their team hits the skids. That doesn't happen with us and I don't think it can.

 

Now damn it, let's see how far we can go this season.

[a700hitter]

Holy sheeeeeeet Youk, I finally found someone on this board who has been a Red Sox fan after I became one. My epiphany came in August of 2000 and maybe that is why some of my friends here and on Sawxheads an STFU give me hell when I complain about how things have gone. Last season was the only one since I came on board when we just plain stunk to high heaven, and like you I think it is fair to say that I've been a little spoiled. What has become obvious to me and hopefully to you as well is that when you take this team into your bosom you become a fanatic to the point of walking the floor at night when they lose a tough series, and, yes, even a tough game. I can tell you this with all the conviction that I possess........Red Sox fans are a breed apart. We are more fanatical, loyal and to a point even nuts about their team. I know plenty of fans of other teams and they support them but not with the same enthusiasm as we have. Many fans of other teams fall by the wayside when their team hits the skids. That doesn't happen with us and I don't think it can.

 

Now damn it, let's see how far we can go this season.

I can see Fred at a game wearing face paint.

[seabeachfred]

I figured there would be some concerns about sitting Vic and Naps yesterday. IMO, we had already won the series and we have some tough games coming up this week. So let them get their rest for the upcoming stretch. I wanted the sweep too but still trying to think about the next 17 games! Only 9 at home.

 

 

Don't get me wrong VA----I would have settled for a split in the Yankee series before it started. No question about that at all, and I was elated beyond words that we took the first three games of that series. It is just that I believed the game yesterday was winnable, and I want to keep the Tampas as far in my rear view mirror as I can. I have conceded that it will be them or us for AL East Champions this season, but the sooner we take care of business the better. The Yankee loss tonight pretty much puts them out of business for any chance of the division title but there is still a small chance Baltimore can make a real move and Tampa is still within striking distance. I'd say we need to win ten or 11 of our remaining 17 games to guarantee ourselves a four day rest and a decent chance to make a run in the Playoffs this year. Just my opinion from where I'm sitting.

[Bellhorn04]

To me 1978 was much harder because we hadn't won in so long and what a hell of a come back!!!. Sept 2011 sucked ass big time though. And 2003 ALCS made me cry.

 

1978 was the worst for me. For one thing I just loved that team. Yaz, Lynn, Rice, Fisk, Dewey, Boomer, Eck, Tiant, Spaceman...what a team, but nothing to show for it.

 

Also for me what made 1978 so crushing was that it was the end of the dream that had started in 1975. Lost the World Series in the 7th game that year but we still had a great team. 1976 just sucked but in 1977 we had another strong team and then in 1978 we added Eck and Torrez and got out to the big lead.

 

Not to mention it was the MFY's who won it all in both 1977 and 1978.

 

And after 1978 the great Sox team was quickly and stupidly dismantled.

[seabeachfred]

I can see Fred at a game wearing face paint.

 

All you have to know my friend is that my wife Linda will NOT go to a Red Sox game with me. When her Angels are playing the Sox out here she encourages me to go and have the time of my life but leave her out of it. She has had some weird experiences in the past with me at Red Sox-Angels games. Well what are you gonna do? The wife says no, so you either go with some friends or by yourself.

[User Name]

I'd say we need to win ten or 11 of our remaining 17 games to guarantee ourselves a four day rest and a decent chance to make a run in the Playoffs this year. Just my opinion from where I'm sitting.

 

The Red Sox could go 4-13 the rest of the way, and the Rays would still have to go 13-7 to tie.

 

No we don't^

[rjortiz]

Don't get me wrong VA----I would have settled for a split in the Yankee series before it started. No question about that at all, and I was elated beyond words that we took the first three games of that series. It is just that I believed the game yesterday was winnable, and I want to keep the Tampas as far in my rear view mirror as I can. I have conceded that it will be them or us for AL East Champions this season, but the sooner we take care of business the better. The Yankee loss tonight pretty much puts them out of business for any chance of the division title but there is still a small chance Baltimore can make a real move and Tampa is still within striking distance. I'd say we need to win ten or 11 of our remaining 17 games to guarantee ourselves a four day rest and a decent chance to make a run in the Playoffs this year. Just my opinion from where I'm sitting.

 

I only started following the team since the 2008 ALCS, and even then I'm not hugely bothered by what the Red Sox do. I guess that's why I don't understand the hysteria sometimes. Baltimore is nine out with 19 to go. We could go 0-17 the rest of the way, and Baltimore would still have to go about .500 to tie, or about what they've been playing at since the end of July. Baltimore is finished.

 

If we went 11-6, Tampa Bay would have to run the table to tie. This race is over. The Paw Sox could hold off the Rays this late.

[Youk Of The Nation]

To me 1978 was much harder because we hadn't won in so long and what a hell of a come back!!!. Sept 2011 sucked ass big time though. And 2003 ALCS made me cry.

 

2003 was terrible. I remember thinking "s***. This is what I signed up for?". Luckily I didn't decide to pussy out and start rooting for another team or give up on baseball. One of my biggest regrets fan-wise is not looking for a Red Sox site to join until 2005. I wasn't really big on the internet before that. I would have loved to have been a member of TalkSox during 2004.

[Palodios]

You should explain why they are relevant to their interest in Stephen Drew.

 

Everyone seems to find it completely ridiculous that small market teams aren't capable of to paying 10 million a year for Drew. It is almost as if no one here has ever watched what happens in free agency every year. Figgins - > Seattle. Willingham -> Twins. Adam Dunn -> White Sox. Martin-> Pirates. Milwaukee-- A-ram. Rockies-> Cuddyer.

 

Houston used to be a 100m team, now they are at 20m. Same with Miami.

 

 

 

The Red Sox situation doesn't really have a parallel next year. In order to apply the Red Sox strategy, a team would have to rank near the top in payroll, have a strong foundation that you wouldn't need a difference maker, and they would have had to recently clear $90 million in payroll that they could reinvest.

 

Next year, every single team in the MLB is getting roughly 25 million dollars from TV contracts, and the luxury cap is also going up. Not every team will re-invest that into players, but added revenue means there will be more spenders, and more spenders means higher bidding.

 

Rays ..... Giants

Shortstops have very recognizable names, but how many of them are good and/or consistent? The majority of the guys you mention OPS in the .600's.

[a700hitter]

1978 was the worst for me. For one thing I just loved that team. Yaz, Lynn, Rice, Fisk, Dewey, Boomer, Eck, Tiant, Spaceman...what a team, but nothing to show for it.

 

Also for me what made 1978 so crushing was that it was the end of the dream that had started in 1975. Lost the World Series in the 7th game that year but we still had a great team. 1976 just sucked but in 1977 we had another strong team and then in 1978 we added Eck and Torrez and got out to the big lead.

 

Not to mention it was the MFY's who won it all in both 1977 and 1978.

 

And after 1978 the great Sox team was quickly and stupidly dismantled.

That was some group of players, but at least they went down fighting. The Yankees were our equal offensively, but they had the X factor in the pen-- Gossage. That was the one piece that we couldn't match, but we left him hanging on for dear life in that 1 game playoff. Their 99 wins is the most that I have seen. 2011 went down like dogs in very embarrassing fashion.

[rjortiz]

Everyone seems to find it completely ridiculous that small market teams aren't capable of to paying 10 million a year for Drew. It is almost as if no one here has ever watched what happens in free agency every year.

 

Remember, we are assuming the Red Sox are going to QO Drew. That means that an interested team in Drew is going to outbid 1/14. Are you saying he's going to get 3/30?

 

Figgins - > Seattle. Willingham -> Twins. Adam Dunn -> White Sox. Martin-> Pirates. Milwaukee-- A-ram. Rockies-> Cuddyer.

 

A couple things are wrong with these comparisons. All of them came before the qualifying offer was established. You cannot compare the contracts for QO'd players and non-QO'd players. They are two different markets.

 

Figgins had a 4.0, 3.1, and a 6.6 WAR when he signed with Seattle. He also played in four straight seasons with at least 115 games. He wasn't near the question mark that Drew was. He also didn't have a QO attached to him.

 

Willingham signed for less than what Drew would have to get. Don't really see how they are similar. Also, no QO attached.

 

Dunn came off a season where he OPS'd over .900. It wasn't a great move by the White Sox, but looking past that, Chicago isn't exactly a small market. They have got their payroll up to $130 million not too long ago. Also, no QO attached to him, although it probably wouldn't have mattered.

 

Saltalamacchia would be a better comparison for Martin, but again Martin didn't receive a QO, (which would have guaranteed him a return to the Yankees) and signed for less than what Drew would get. His total deal is only worth $3 million more than the QO.

 

The Brewers had a huge hole at 3B, and they were desperate to replace Fielder with some sort of production. I believe the Ramirez deal came after they advanced to the NLCS. Beating a dead horse, but there was no QO attached to him. The Brewers did not have to give up a draft pick.

 

Cuddyer's deal was universally panned when it was announced. It would have been even worse if the Rockies gave up a pick for a player like him.

 

You are right, small market teams do make splashes in free agency, but none of these are applicable to Drew if he gets a QO. How many of these teams are going to be after him?

 

Houston used to be a 100m team, now they are at 20m. Same with Miami.

 

Houston was competing for World Series titles with three front of the rotation starters. Makes sense for them to be at $100 million. There's also a good argument that Loria was participating in fraud to get their new stadium. They probably had no intention of sustaining that team. Bringing them up now, just eliminates two more suitors for Drew.

 

 

 

 

 

Next year, every single team in the MLB is getting roughly 25 million dollars from TV contracts, and the luxury cap is also going up. Not every team will re-invest that into players, but added revenue means there will be more spenders, and more spenders means higher bidding.

 

The luxury tax is going to remain at $189. The 1/30 share for player benefits will go up, but not the luxury tax.

 

The $25 million refers to the national TV revenue that is split evenly among all 30 teams. I believe that has been in place for some time. I think the new deal takes into effect in 2014. I think we would have already felt the impact on any TV deals. In fact, some teams are anticipating huge increases in local TV revenues already. The Reds extension of Votto is a good example. They backloaded the deal to take effect when they get a new TV contract. I believe the Pirates have done the same with McCutchen. That's where the biggest impact is being seen. Smaller market teams are extending their stars, which is preventing them from reaching free agency. The free agent market has looked pretty weak. It mainly consists of a few big names, and a bunch of complementary pieces. Small market clubs haven't made any splashes in free agency so far. Unless you count Russell Martin as a big splash, which I don't.

 

Even if you ignored that it still doesn't take away from the point that Stephen Drew has a limited amount of suitors. You really think the Pirates/Rays/Royals are going to invest significant dollars into Stephen Drew? They're going use those funds to lock up Wil Myers, Gerrit Cole, and Eric Hosmer instead.

 

Shortstops have very recognizable names, but how many of them are good and/or consistent? The majority of the guys you mention OPS in the .600's.

 

You mentioned two teams. Hardly constitutes a majority. Escobar has a 3.6 WAR. His bat is decent for a SS, and he's a good defender. He's going to play SS for them in 2014. He's only going to be $5 million. Plus, even if he was complete garbage, the Rays are probably going to trade David Price. Why would they reinvest those savings on Stephen Drew?

 

Brandon Crawford has a 2.5 WAR, and a good track record of defensive ability. Plus, he's making the minimum. The Giants aren't going to use that on Stephen Drew.

 

Who else were you thinking about? Cosart? He's at 1.6 WAR, and he's at the minimum. Drew isn't going to Cincinnati, especially considering they have to fill CF and SP, and extend Homer Bailey.

 

Escobar has been pretty awful with the bat, but he's an elite defender at SS, and hit decently in 2012. Royals aren't going to invest significant money on a SS that may not outproduce their incumbent. Plus, they have a lot of arbitration cases to deal with, and they are losing Ervin Santana. Simmons is a poor hitter, but he's the best defender in the game, so he's going nowhere. Hardy? 3.2 WAR, extended through next year. Starlin Castro sticks out, but the Cubs aren't going to replace him with Drew.

 

That really leaves the three teams I pointed out. I didn't completely shut the door on Drew signing with one of them, but the reality is that he has three somewhat legitimate suitors that all have serious question marks. The Red Sox would be taking a $14 million risk on one of those teams being desperate enough to surrender a draft pick and pay Drew somewhere in the area of $30 million over 3 years. He has enough question marks on his own. He isn't going to get an offer from the Red Sox. When/If that happens, there could very well be more suitors involved, and he could land a 3/30 contract, but with the QO it's going to be a huge longshot.

[mvp 78]

In terms of horribleness: 1986>2003>2011

 

I was still in diapers during 1978 so it couldn't have been that bad to me.

[Palodios]

A couple things are wrong with these comparisons. All of them came before the qualifying offer was established. You cannot compare the contracts for QO'd players and non-QO'd players. They are two different markets.

 

QO'd players are very similar to Type A free agents. Not all the guys I mentioned are Type A's, but some were. My argument is that small teams do spend money on mid-priced free agents. They are not perfect examples, but they are applicable examples. I am not counting out big market teams either.

 

 

The luxury tax is going to remain at $189. The 1/30 share for player benefits will go up, but not the luxury tax.

You are mistaken. http://www.fangraphs.com/library/business/luxury-tax/

 

The $25 million refers to the national TV revenue that is split evenly among all 30 teams. I believe that has been in place for some time. I think the new deal takes into effect in 2014.

 

I would argue that teams are much more willing to spend money that they have than money they will have in the future.

 

 

That really leaves the three teams I pointed out. I didn't completely shut the door on Drew signing with one of them, but the reality is that he has three somewhat legitimate suitors that all have serious question marks. The Red Sox would be taking a $14 million risk on one of those teams being desperate enough to surrender a draft pick and pay Drew somewhere in the area of $30 million over 3 years. He has enough question marks on his own. He isn't going to get an offer from the Red Sox. When/If that happens, there could very well be more suitors involved, and he could land a 3/30 contract, but with the QO it's going to be a huge longshot.

 

Here are the factors I see

1) Stephen Drew has shown he has recovered from his ankle injury and that he can be a very good offensive and defensive shortstop.

2) He won't want to be a glorified backup for Bogaertz.

3) He is represented by Scott Boras.

4) Teams will get atleast 25 million in extra TV revenue. http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/08/28/the-new-tv-deals-are-going-to-be-a-windfall-of-all-30-teams/

5) The luxury tax is going up.

6) He *may* be willing to play 2B.

 

Worst case scenario, the Red Sox get a very good SS for 1 year. Not the end of the world.

[rjortiz]

QO'd players are very similar to Type A free agents. Not all the guys I mentioned are Type A's, but some were. My argument is that small teams do spend money on mid-priced free agents. They are not perfect examples, but they are applicable examples. I am not counting out big market teams either.

 

The new QO also sets a salary at $14 million. Type A used the arbitration system, which produced lower salaries. It also was based on position. The new system takes everyone into account. The old system also produced a lot more designated players, which gave teams a chance to earn back a draft pick. A GM would be more likely to sign a Type A free agent, if one of his ex-players also had that tag. There's three important differences that are being overlooked. An interested team would want to bid higher than 1/14, they'd fall out of the first round completely, and there's no chance of them getting back in. The new system makes for more cautious bidders, and dramatically reduces the amount of players with draft pick compensation on them. They have to be a formidable player in the new system. The old system saw players like Juan Cruz and Ryan Madson get a Type A tag.

 

Also, none of those players are applicable to the new system. Willingham and Cuddyer were modified Type A players. They didn't cost a pick for the Twins or Rockies. Martin would have signed with New York if he got a QO. Ramirez was a Type B. Dunn and Figgins got much larger deals than even the 2014 QO threshold is at. You are comparing two dissimilar markets. Can you name a player that was significantly hurt by the old Elias system? It hurt a few relievers, but that highlighted how ridiculous the old system was. The impact the new system had in 2013 was huge. Lohse, Bourn, LaRoche, and Soriano saw their market evaporate when they got slapped with an offer. This is the biggest distinction between the two system. The impact is obviously greater on those players.

 

4/6 players you mentioned had no draft pick compensation attached to them, and the other two signed for substantially higher salaries. They wouldn't have been affected by either system. Figgins and Dunn were also highly regarded players when they signed. Drew isn't even close to what they were. I really don't understand the point in bringing those players up. Your examples prove that small market teams will sign players with no compensation to them, and that highly regarded players will not be affected by draft pick attachment.

 

We're really getting away from the main point, which is the market for Stephen Drew.

 

 

 

 

 

You are mistaken. http://www.fangraphs.com/library/business/luxury-tax/

 

I assumed it was already at $189 million for 2013. The only team that really affects is the Yankees, and I had already projected their limit at $189 million for both years. It is an effective $177 million, because of the mandatory share for player benefits each team must pay.

 

 

 

I would argue that teams are much more willing to spend money that they have than money they will have in the future.

 

Are we talking about small market clubs? There are numerous examples of star players getting huge contract extensions that don't take effect until they sign new TV deals. Longoria, McCutchen, and Votto are the obvious ones. There's almost no recent examples of them spending huge money up front.

 

 

 

Here are the factors I see

1) Stephen Drew has shown he has recovered from his ankle injury and that he can be a very good offensive and defensive shortstop.

2) He won't want to be a glorified backup for Bogaertz.

3) He is represented by Scott Boras.

4) Teams will get atleast 25 million in extra TV revenue. http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/08/28/the-new-tv-deals-are-going-to-be-a-windfall-of-all-30-teams/

5) The luxury tax is going up.

6) He *may* be willing to play 2B.

 

Worst case scenario, the Red Sox get a very good SS for 1 year. Not the end of the world.

 

1) His injury history and poor three year history will still work against him. Teams don't put 100% stock into just one year. He's also on the downside of his career.

2) OK, so he declines the QO. That still means there has to be an interested party to sign him.

3) So were Lohse and Bourn, and he couldn't protect them from the QO.

4) Which team does this make interested in Drew?

5) Only teams that is really impacted by this are the Yankees and Red Sox

6) Again, which team becomes interested in Drew?

7) $14 million spent on a player that has no spot is a bad allocation of resources. If Drew plays SS in 2014, that probably ends any chance at Bogaerts playing SS long term.

 

I notice you don't mention any potential suitors for Drew. He may very well be all of those things you listed, but you have to convince us that there's a team willing to give a good sized contract, and also willing to lose the draft pick.

[sk7326]

Short answer on Drew: He would almost undoubtedly jump at a Qualifying Offer ... Which is the best reason for the Red Sox not to offer him one.

[jung]

I have to agree. I think Drew would jump at a QO. So if the Sox make one they better not be trying to make some "too cute by a half" play cause they are getting the player.

[Orange Juiced]

Bogaerts needs to be the Red Sox' starting SS next season. He has nothing left to prove in the minors, he's got all the tools to be a wildly successful major-leaguer. Instead of spending $14 million (or whatever the number is) on a SS that will simply block Bogaerts, they should move on from him.

 

Now, I like the idea of getting draft compensation for losing him; I'd rather not lose him for nothing. And it's possible that the Sox could make him a QO, he signs it, and then the Sox deal him to someone for a prospect.

[sk7326]

Bogaerts needs to be the Red Sox' starting SS next season. He has nothing left to prove in the minors, he's got all the tools to be a wildly successful major-leaguer. Instead of spending $14 million (or whatever the number is) on a SS that will simply block Bogaerts, they should move on from him.

 

Now, I like the idea of getting draft compensation for losing him; I'd rather not lose him for nothing. And it's possible that the Sox could make him a QO, he signs it, and then the Sox deal him to someone for a prospect.

 

I am not sure if the new CBA allows sign and trades - I need to read more about that. That is the rub. That said, is $14M a risk worth taking for a sandwich pick? Boras is the game's best agent - he knows that the QO is Drew's best chance to maximize his income in the long term. $14M (and I just use that since last year's QO number was $13.3 so assume the average went up) for a part timer is a lot of money. I think Bogaerts has shown enough in his tour here that they should let him grow into the gig and give him regular ABs. (if anything that has been the disappointing thing about the decision to promote him - although I think Middlebrooks ended up screwing up everyone's plans on that front)

[Dojji]

*sighs that resigned sigh of someone who's watching people make the same mistake over and over again*

 

I don't think we can count on Bogaerts to be a starting caliber fulltime shortstop next year guys. Leaning on a prospect to get it done in a full season just because he's a good prospect who's been effective in a partial season is a trap teams fall into all the time, and when you can manage against that kind of risk you always do it.

[sk7326]

*sighs that resigned sigh of someone who's watching people make the same mistake over and over again*

 

I don't think we can count on Bogaerts to be a starting caliber fulltime shortstop next year guys. Leaning on a prospect to get it done in a full season just because he's a good prospect who's been effective in a partial season is a trap teams fall into all the time, and when you can manage against that kind of risk you always do it.

 

Well what does "get it done" mean? If we are talking about being their best player next season - yeah, that ain't happening. If you are talking about approximating Stephen Drew's production - that is pretty possible, although it might take a while.

 

I agree there is the "good prospect who was effective in a small sample" pitfall. At the same time there is the "guy who has been good at levels he was very young for" thing - which almost never misses. If you are going to bet on a kid to pick stuff up quickly, it's a 20 going on 21 year old who already has a strong track record of figuring out how to play with grownups. Bogaerts is a long bet - but his track record is MUCH more favorable than Iglesias' was.

[mvp 78]

*sighs that resigned sigh that not everyone will agree with me that Drew isn't worth $14M*

[User Name]

For next year alone, i think the Sox could afford Drew at 14 per if Napoli isn't brought back. Move XB to third, WMB to first, and you're set.

 

I'm also big on swapping out JE for Shin-Soo Choo, but that's just me.

[sk7326]

I'd have no problem giving Napoli a QO though ... his production is completely justifiable for the price and a 1-year hitch. Downside is that there might be a superior option on the open market - but no THAT many.

[rjortiz]

*sighs that resigned sigh of someone who's watching people make the same mistake over and over again*

 

I don't think we can count on Bogaerts to be a starting caliber fulltime shortstop next year guys. Leaning on a prospect to get it done in a full season just because he's a good prospect who's been effective in a partial season is a trap teams fall into all the time, and when you can manage against that kind of risk you always do it.

 

You know you sound like a complete douchebag? Why is that first sentence even necessary? When have the Red Sox had a top three prospect about to assume a full time role before? Has that even happened one time?

 

If you want to hedge your bet, give Peralta $5 million for a one year, or sign some other veteran who can back up multiple positions.

[User Name]

I think Peralta could easily do better than 1 x 5 even after the suspension.

[sk7326]

*sighs that resigned sigh of someone who's watching people make the same mistake over and over again*

 

I don't think we can count on Bogaerts to be a starting caliber fulltime shortstop next year guys. Leaning on a prospect to get it done in a full season just because he's a good prospect who's been effective in a partial season is a trap teams fall into all the time, and when you can manage against that kind of risk you always do it.

 

Nomar *cough cough* ... so you get a veteran guy as a hedge. Good news is the team is pretty good - so it's not like he has to be their best player. He just has to be at least as good as Drew - which is not unreasonable.

[mvp 78]

You know you sound like a complete douchebag? Why is that first sentence even necessary? When have the Red Sox had a top three prospect about to assume a full time role before? Has that even happened one time?

 

If you want to hedge your bet, give Peralta $5 million for a one year, or sign some other veteran who can back up multiple positions.

Look, let's not play this Nomar kid. We already have Valentin at SS, Frye at 2b and Naehring at 3b. We don't need him!

[Dojji]

Nomar *cough cough* ... so you get a veteran guy as a hedge. Good news is the team is pretty good - so it's not like he has to be their best player. He just has to be at least as good as Drew - which is not unreasonable.

 

You do know that the Red Sox kept their former starting shortstop on the team for years after Nomar was made the starter right? They had a use for him and no reason to move him so stay he did. John Valentin was with the team all the way up into the early 2000's