Should we resign Jacoby Ellsbury?

[redsoxrules]

And if he'd held those numbers that contract would be defensible.

 

Again, that's a big IF when you sign a player based on speed and no power.

One other thing to look at is that Ellsbury has won a few championships so he might not care anymore if he is on a winning team or not for the future and just wants a pay day and take the highest bidder.

[BSN07]

And if he'd held those numbers that contract would be defensible.

 

Not to me it wouldn't have. But I am of the belief that 20M+ per year commitment should be reserved for middle of the order bat or top 5 MLB SP. Crawfords contract was ridiculous and he was never going to live up to it imo. Unless he dry humped a magic lamp and a genie wished his ass to 25HR+ a year land. I also hated the fact it gave Boras a viable comparison for Ellsbury at that insane price.

[sk7326]

And if he'd held those numbers that contract would be defensible.

 

Pretty much. The industry is doing really well and teams are flush with cash. If they are not spending on the club somewhere (and the draft bonus rules are reducing the options other than big leaguers) you are basically choosing between compensating players more, or having the Judge Smailses owners pocket more moolah. I'd prefer the former. Personally, years is a more interesting discussion than the annual salary - teams have different economic situations, and wins have different marginal revenues. Years ties up your structure and make players hard to trade.

 

Ellsbury was the 3rd best CF in the league this year. Carlos Gomez had better numbers without the track record, and Matt Kemp was hurt. Very or good middle of the field help is the most valuable commodity in baseball this side of starting pitching. Middle of the order boppers are fun - but you can find guys playing the corners who can bop it without a ton of difficulty (the Red Sox were a prime example this season). If he did this for the next 6 years, he'd be a $20M a year player - but I would not bet anything important on that actually happening.

[Behindenemylines]

Read something today with Pedrioa saying he wanted to talk to Ellsbury when he gets back to Arizona. I got the idea from the article that Ellsbury likes his situation in Boston and the players he was playing with. It would have to take a hometown discount and its a long shot, but Ellsbury coming back is not off the table. Granted it is probably less then 5% chance, but who knows stranger things have happened.

[seabeachfred]

Read something today with Pedrioa saying he wanted to talk to Ellsbury when he gets back to Arizona. I got the idea from the article that Ellsbury likes his situation in Boston and the players he was playing with. It would have to take a hometown discount and its a long shot, but Ellsbury coming back is not off the table. Granted it is probably less then 5% chance, but who knows stranger things have happened.

 

It would have to be a really strange set of circumstances if Ellsbury returned to Boston. I wish Pedroia all the luck in the world trying to talk some common sense to Jacoby, but with Boras as an agent and the fact that Ells has already tasted total victory twice in his career his tunnel vision is geared toward the biggest payday he can get. I'd love to have him back. I will not get my wish.

[BSN07]

It would have to be a really strange set of circumstances if Ellsbury returned to Boston. I wish Pedroia all the luck in the world trying to talk some common sense to Jacoby, but with Boras as an agent and the fact that Ells has already tasted total victory twice in his career his tunnel vision is geared toward the biggest payday he can get. I'd love to have him back. I will not get my wish.

 

No it wouldn't. Boras in the end, works for Ellsbury. If he wants to stay with the Sox then he tell's Boras to get the best deal possible from Boston. Boras is great at what he does even tho he's a dick but unless he has some clause with his clients that says they have to accept the largest contract offer regardless of where the offer comes from, then the choice is the players. I don't think JBJ has shown enough to warrant the FO to completely dismissing Ells especially if he is interested in coming back. If he came back JBJ becomes a decent trade chip, injury/regression insurance on Nava/Gomes/Victorino. This is not bizarro world stuff.

 

Don't get me wrong I've been expecting Ells to be gone for sometime now. But Pedroia going out there has to have some kind of effect. Whether its enough to get him to leave 20-30M on the table? Who knows. But it might, we shall see.

[seabeachfred]

No it wouldn't. Boras in the end, works for Ellsbury. If he wants to stay with the Sox then he tell's Boras to get the best deal possible from Boston. Boras is great at what he does even tho he's a dick but unless he has some clause with his clients that says they have to accept the largest contract offer regardless of where the offer comes from, then the choice is the players. I don't think JBJ has shown enough to warrant the FO to completely dismissing Ells especially if he is interested in coming back. If he came back JBJ becomes a decent trade chip, injury/regression insurance on Nava/Gomes/Victorino. This is not bizarro world stuff.

 

Don't get me wrong I've been expecting Ells to be gone for sometime now. But Pedroia going out there has to have some kind of effect. Whether its enough to get him to leave 20-30M on the table? Who knows. But it might, we shall see.

 

Do you really believe that BSN? I wish it were true and we had a chance to get Jacoby back wearing Red Sox RED, but he has given no indication that I know of that he wants to stay in Boston. Hell, he stiffed the writers after the ceremony when he told them to wait for him to come back out when he went into the clubhouse for something. He went into the clubhouse to take another exit out of the place and before long he was on a plane out of town. Doesn't sound like someone who is going to be back even though I wish he was.

[Dojji]

I don't think JBJ has shown enough to warrant the FO to completely dismissing Ells especially if he is interested in coming back.

 

I don't think you have to be a Bradley skeptic to want to keep Ellsbury. Now I amm a Bradley skeptic, but it's hardly required. I just think that it's hard to have too much depth and that any positional controversies tend to sort themselves out in time, and teams are wiser to allow such controversies to sort themselves out organically rather than forcing a player into the position you project him to ultimately play. Same reason I'm all for bring Drew back. So forcing the team to depend on Bradley making process isn't ideal from my standpoint.

[BSN07]

Do you really believe that BSN? I wish it were true and we had a chance to get Jacoby back wearing Red Sox RED, but he has given no indication that I know of that he wants to stay in Boston. Hell, he stiffed the writers after the ceremony when he told them to wait for him to come back out when he went into the clubhouse for something. He went into the clubhouse to take another exit out of the place and before long he was on a plane out of town. Doesn't sound like someone who is going to be back even though I wish he was.

 

I'm on the fence fred to be honest. I could see it going either way.

[User Name]

I don't think you have to be a Bradley skeptic to want to keep Ellsbury. Now I amm a Bradley skeptic, but it's hardly required. I just think that it's hard to have too much depth and that any positional controversies tend to sort themselves out in time, and teams are wiser to allow such controversies to sort themselves out organically rather than forcing a player into the position you project him to ultimately play. Same reason I'm all for bring Drew back. So forcing the team to depend on Bradley making process isn't ideal from my standpoint.

 

Except that this makes zero sense. Not only because your reasons to be skeptic of Bradley are silly, but also because the Red Sox wouldn't be forcing anything. They have enough OF depth to give Bradley a chance while safeguarding against the possibility that he crashes and burns.

 

Drew, in a way, makes more sense because he'd be insurance against the remote chance that Bogaerts can't hack it as a SS, and also further suck from WMB.

[marklmw]

Except that this makes zero sense. Not only because your reasons to be skeptic of Bradley are silly, but also because the Red Sox wouldn't be forcing anything. They have enough OF depth to give Bradley a chance while safeguarding against the possibility that he crashes and burns.

 

Drew, in a way, makes more sense because he'd be insurance against the remote chance that Bogaerts can't hack it as a SS, and also further suck from WMB.

UN is correct ... this critical view of JBJ is unwarranted ... as I said many times ... go look up the stats for Mike Trout. JBJ already showed that he can play CF ... we won games against some really good teams with Drew batting .083. Worse case senario JBJ is our .083 hitter and we still win games. There is absolutely no indication that JBJ will not post an OBP of .340 or higher especially at the back of the order. Why fork over 20M when you can get the job done for 500K. To be honest I do not think that Ellsbury is in the Sox plans ... they will not come out and say it because Ellsbury is very popular with the fan base. If JBJ did not exist well that is a horse of a different color.

[marklmw]

I don't think you have to be a Bradley skeptic to want to keep Ellsbury. Now I amm a Bradley skeptic, but it's hardly required. I just think that it's hard to have too much depth and that any positional controversies tend to sort themselves out in time, and teams are wiser to allow such controversies to sort themselves out organically rather than forcing a player into the position you project him to ultimately play. Same reason I'm all for bring Drew back. So forcing the team to depend on Bradley making process isn't ideal from my standpoint.

Dojji ... go look up Mike Trouts stats and compare them to JBJ's.

[Dojji]

Dojji ... go look up Mike Trouts stats and compare them to JBJ's.

 

Mike Trout outstrips JBJ in every discernable category, both at the major, and especially at the minor league level.

 

Now if you'd told me to use the same measuring stick I've already been holding JBJ up to -- David Dejesus -- then maybe we'd be getting somewhere. I think Dejesus is a pretty solid basis of comparison for JBJ and that Dejesus' peak matches JBJ's potential fairly well, allowing for the fact that no two players are going to be identical. I also happen to think that a normal year from Ellsbury is significantly better than Dejesus at his peak.

[Dojji]

Except that this makes zero sense. Not only because your reasons to be skeptic of Bradley are silly, but also because the Red Sox wouldn't be forcing anything. They have enough OF depth to give Bradley a chance while safeguarding against the possibility that he crashes and burns.

 

Drew, in a way, makes more sense because he'd be insurance against the remote chance that Bogaerts can't hack it as a SS, and also further suck from WMB.

 

you're not looking at the whole picture. Our insurance against a Bradley flop is Victorino, and moving Victorino to center pushes Nava to right fulltime -- that's a vast defensive downgrade going from one of the best defensive rightfielders in the major league to one of the worst overnight. Not to mention that Victorino had his share of injuries this year and moving to a more athletically demanding position as he ages might not be the best way to use him.

 

If we want to take a short term deal on a good player like Carlos Beltran and jettison Nava or Carp, giving us more than adequate depth to cover right field as well as center, that would be another story, but right now I see this as as a situation where we risk downgrading two positions.

Edited November 9, 2013 by Dojji

[User Name]

you're not looking at the whole picture. Our insurance against a Bradley flop is Victorino, and moving Victorino to center pushes Nava to right fulltime -- that's a vast defensive downgrade going from one of the best defensive rightfielders in the major league to one of the worst overnight. Not to mention that Victorino had his share of injuries this year and moving to a more athletically demanding position as he ages might not be the best way to use him.

 

If we want to take a short term deal on a good player like Carlos Beltran and jettison Nava or Carp, giving us more than adequate depth to cover right field as well as center, that would be another story, but right now I see this as as a situation where we risk downgrading two positions.

 

The problem is that you're making two very silly assumptions:

 

1) That Bradley will certainly fail, which is based on a set of very unsupported biased opinions. mark's point on the Trout comparison is that it's normal for kids to come up, struggle for a bit, then adjust. Another notable example of this is a kid named Dustin Pedroia. Keep that in mind.

 

2) That the Sox will not tinker their roster to accommodate for either a possible platoon partner or a timeshare guy as insurance for Bradley in case they decided to hand the position to him.

 

I think you're the one missing the big picture if you think the Sox would be unprepared if they gave JBJ the position.

[marklmw]

Mike Trout outstrips JBJ in every discernable category, both at the major, and especially at the minor league level.

 

Now if you'd told me to use the same measuring stick I've already been holding JBJ up to -- David Dejesus -- then maybe we'd be getting somewhere. I think Dejesus is a pretty solid basis of comparison for JBJ and that Dejesus' peak matches JBJ's potential fairly well, allowing for the fact that no two players are going to be identical. I also happen to think that a normal year from Ellsbury is significantly better than Dejesus at his peak.

 

I am referring to Trouts first partial year of MLB action ... compare to JBJ's first partial year. You cannot take anything from JBJ's first partial year. His minor league numbers have more significance.

[Dojji]

there's no comparison there beyond that relatively small sample size. Trout's tools >>>>>>>> Bradley's tools. Bradley is built around decent plate discipline, solid OBP, good defensive instincts, and no obvious holes. He's a smarts-first ballplayer. That can work, especially if the power plays up at at least the 12-15 HR level, but the results tend to look a lot more like Dejesus than they do like a 5 tool Trout type.

 

Personally I think I'm being moderately optomistic touting Bradley as a Dejesus type. Dejesus was a very, very good CF in his day and at his peak he was around a 3 WAR player. Any one of us would take that from Bradley.

Edited November 9, 2013 by Dojji

[Behindenemylines]

I'm prepared that Ellsbury is leaving, and would be surprised if he comes back. He has been on two championship teams and now will probably looking for the biggest pay day possible. If Seattle is the front runner then they also have an added plus that Ellsbury is from Oregon. I think JBJ will be given every opportunity to win the CF position. Defensively he is on par with Ellsbury, but he isn't a lead off hitter with tons of speed.

[marklmw]

I'm prepared that Ellsbury is leaving, and would be surprised if he comes back. He has been on two championship teams and now will probably looking for the biggest pay day possible. If Seattle is the front runner then they also have an added plus that Ellsbury is from Oregon. I think JBJ will be given every opportunity to win the CF position. Defensively he is on par with Ellsbury, but he isn't a lead off hitter with tons of speed.

 

Many center fielders do lead off. Ellsbury is one of the best lead off hitters in the game today. Stealing 50+ bags with only being caught 4 times isn't a bad thing either. If the Sox did not have JBJ in their organization they would be over-paying to bring him back. I think that JBJ is going to make Dojji eat his words. Bogaerts is the odd's favorite to win Rookie of Year award in 2014. I am telling you now that JBJ may give him a run for the money.

[seabeachfred]

Many center fielders do lead off. Ellsbury is one of the best lead off hitters in the game today. Stealing 50+ bags with only being caught 4 times isn't a bad thing either. If the Sox did not have JBJ in their organization they would be over-paying to bring him back. I think that JBJ is going to make Dojji eat his words. Bogaerts is the odd's favorite to win Rookie of Year award in 2014. I am telling you now that JBJ may give him a run for the money.

 

Two things Mark. Choosing between Ellsbury and a new contract or Bradley as our new CF I would take Ells in a flash. However, I'm not kidding myself. Jacoby wants that big payday and we aren't going to give him what rumors have other teams willing to offer. Maybe a lot of that is hype but there are a lot of teams with a lot of money and some of them will offer the big bucks while we seem to have turned thumbs down on those long contracts and you can't say that is a bad policy considering how the Red Sox finished up this year.

[marklmw]

Two things Mark. Choosing between Ellsbury and a new contract or Bradley as our new CF I would take Ells in a flash. However, I'm not kidding myself. Jacoby wants that big payday and we aren't going to give him what rumors have other teams willing to offer. Maybe a lot of that is hype but there are a lot of teams with a lot of money and some of them will offer the big bucks while we seem to have turned thumbs down on those long contracts and you can't say that is a bad policy considering how the Red Sox finished up this year.

The Crawford contract was really the bad contract of the three. Signing Ellsbury now is more of a need than the signing of Crawford. Re-signing Ellsbury is simply putting him the 1 hole for 150 games. When Crawford was signed the Sox already had the first 5 in the order settled. Do you pay the money that was paid to Crawford for a player batting 6-9. Come on man. btw ... It is quite possible that Ellsbury will not get Crawford kind of money.

[Spitball]

I think the times are changing. We can see the problems that the Yankees have with long term contracts and the luxury tax. It is painful to let Ellsbury, Drew, and Saltalamachia go, but they can be replaced with younger and cheaper alternatives. They might not be as productive at this stage of their careers, but Bradley, Bogaerts, and Lavarnway are reasonably talented enough to fill the holes. The Cardinals let the amazing Albert Pujols walk but are now likely to be contenders for years to come. They have put their confidence in their strong supply of prospects.

 

We will likely have to change our way of thinking to move into this new era. It is no longer wise to tie up aging stars to long term, expensive contracts. The Phillies, Angels, and Yankees missed the playoffs with all their long term, high priced contracts. The Sox are in a position with their prospects to avoid a similar problem.

Edited November 10, 2013 by Spitball

[seabeachfred]

I think the times are changing. We can see the problems that the Yankees have with long term contracts and the luxury tax. It is painful to let Ellsbury, Drew, and Saltalamachia go, but they can be replaced with younger and cheaper alternatives. They might not be as productive at this stage of their careers, but Bradley, Bogaerts, and Lavarnway are reasonably talented enough to fill the holes. The Cardinals let the amazing Albert Pujols walk but are now likely to be contenders for years to come. They have put their confidence in their strong supply of prospects.

 

We will likely have to change our way of thinking to move into this new era. It is no longer wise to tie up aging stars to long term, expensive contracts. The Phillies, Angels, and Yankees missed the playoffs with all their long term, high priced contracts. The Sox are in a position with their prospects to avoid a similar problem.

 

As I said earlier Spitball, the new Red Sox policy paid dividends big time for us this year and rumor has it some teams are going to be following our lead and doing similar signings themselves. Unfortunately, there are a few get rich quick teams who think that throwing a lot of money around will net them a prize in the post-season, but as you pointed out three teams were notorious for doing that recently and they hit a bad bump in the road this season. Still, one thing we all learned this season is that a good clubhouse manned by decent players who are all dedicated to winning and are not blinded by their egos can raise a team to heralded heights. It is up to Cherington to keep finding these types of players and when he does try not letting them get away.....like Napoli and maybe Satalamacchia. As for Drew and Ellsbury, Boras will make certain they go for the dollars no matter how miserable they may wind up in their new surroundings.

[marklmw]

I think the times are changing. We can see the problems that the Yankees have with long term contracts and the luxury tax. It is painful to let Ellsbury, Drew, and Saltalamachia go, but they can be replaced with younger and cheaper alternatives. They might not be as productive at this stage of their careers, but Bradley, Bogaerts, and Lavarnway are reasonably talented enough to fill the holes. The Cardinals let the amazing Albert Pujols walk but are now likely to be contenders for years to come. They have put their confidence in their strong supply of prospects.

 

We will likely have to change our way of thinking to move into this new era. It is no longer wise to tie up aging stars to long term, expensive contracts. The Phillies, Angels, and Yankees missed the playoffs with all their long term, high priced contracts. The Sox are in a position with their prospects to avoid a similar problem.

 

I agree with you Spitball but would like to make an addition. Get Tanaka and dump Dempster. I think that owners realize that without PEDS in the game any longer signing a player to a long term deal that takes the player past age 34 - 35 is a very risky proposition.

A 30 y.o. CF should be signed for 4-5 year max. A 30 y.o. pitcher who has logged a lot of innings might be limited to a 3 year contract. I love Pedroia but I was not a fan of taking him out to age 38. If he wants to finish his career in Boston sign him to age 36. Like Ortiz if his goal is to finish in Boston and he still has the skills then he can do 1 year extensions after that. He is smart to stay with one team ... he will have ample opportunities in Boston for many years after his playing days are over. Not everything in life is about money.

[Palodios]

The best CF I've heard rumors of is Denard Span. Top notch defense, 20 SB, career .350 OBP. The Nationals are shopping him... depends on if they are looking for a real return or just to dump him, but he seems like a perfect fill-in while we wait for Bradley.

[marklmw]

The best CF I've heard rumors of is Denard Span. Top notch defense, 20 SB, career .350 OBP. The Nationals are shopping him... depends on if they are looking for a real return or just to dump him, but he seems like a perfect fill-in while we wait for Bradley.

 

He is a nice player.

[Dojji]

Could stand Span. Would prefer Crisp. Do we know whether the A's picked up that option?

[Palodios]

Could stand Span. Would prefer Crisp. Do we know whether the A's picked up that option?

 

They did.

[sk7326]

The problem is that you're making two very silly assumptions:

 

1) That Bradley will certainly fail, which is based on a set of very unsupported biased opinions. mark's point on the Trout comparison is that it's normal for kids to come up, struggle for a bit, then adjust. Another notable example of this is a kid named Dustin Pedroia. Keep that in mind.

 

2) That the Sox will not tinker their roster to accommodate for either a possible platoon partner or a timeshare guy as insurance for Bradley in case they decided to hand the position to him.

 

I think you're the one missing the big picture if you think the Sox would be unprepared if they gave JBJ the position.

 

The obvious "timeshare" name is Chris Young - righty plus defensive CF with some three outcomes sort of upside. At the end of the day, you have to treat LF as an open job, and RF as at least something you need some mild protection for. (Victorino's comeback at 32 is enough of an oddity to want to be prepared)

[Palodios]

The obvious "timeshare" name is Chris Young - righty plus defensive CF with some three outcomes sort of upside. At the end of the day, you have to treat LF as an open job, and RF as at least something you need some mild protection for. (Victorino's comeback at 32 is enough of an oddity to want to be prepared)

 

Oddity? 2012 was the oddity, not 2013. The guy is a stud, has always been a stud. He had one bad year that people harped about.