2014 Roster Projections

[rjortiz]

Ortiz' resurgent 2013 was eerily close to his 2012 before the injuries - I am not worried there. A .350+ OPB is merely what Bradley has produced in every full time minor league stop he has had. It is reasonable to expect a 24 year old to improve to the level of being able to repeat his minor league performance.

 

Napoli's BABIP was .344 in his amazing 2011. Fact is, his BABIP fluctuations are endemic of any three true outcomes sort of hitter. His on-base manages to stay solid either way.

 

AJ could be a clubhouse cancer - but that assumes chemistry leads performance, which it doesn't. Also, he is low enough risk that you can cut him if it's a problem. All it cost them was money.

 

No, it's not, because he would have a WAR of 7 in his first year.

[Bellhorn04]

Jose Mijares! Can we talk about him?

 

29 years old. Career 3.30 ERA, 8ish K/9, World Series Champion, lefthander with mid 90's fastball. Splits aren't vastly different.

 

He had a rough 2013, but when your BABIP was the highest in baseball, a 4.20 ERA doesn't seem that bad.

 

What a great minor league signing. They can stash him in the minors until someone gets hurt, and you have a serviceable 6th inning option to keep the team afloat. Low ground ball numbers will hurt, but Bradley + Victorino will be solid in the outfield.

 

Yep...our Benny Boy is staying sharp.

[Thunder]

C - Pierzynski makes too many outs, but he's not awful for a catcher. He's also a solid defender. He's a downgrade, but not a complete catastrophic one.

1B - No argument here. The only thing that saved Napoli was that hot September.

2B - Pedroia's probably about the same.

SS - Everyone is going to be disappointed when Bogaerts has a .750 OPS as a 21 year old SS. That would only make him a top 10 SS in MLB. He's got the minor league track record, and he held his own in the postseason. He's going to be good next year, and he's going to be a superstar down the road.

3B - That sounds about right. He's probably an average 3B. Maybe slightly below.

LF - He won't hit that well again, but he can't possibly be that bad defensively again. If he's merely bad instead of only better than Raul Ibanez bad, then it won't be that much of a downgrade. However, Raul Ibanez won't save him from the cellar this year, so if he's repeating that level while declining with the bat, I'll bet the Red Sox look for an upgrade elsewhere.

CF - If Jackie Bradley has a .370 OBP with elite defense, then he'd be an MVP candidate next year. I think only McCutchen and Trout would be the only CF's better than that. That's definitely not happening. I think if he has a .750 OPS with good defense the Red Sox should be ecstatic. As long as his defense doesn't go into the tank they probably could live with a .700 OPS. He's the biggest downgrade from 2013.

RF - Victorino will take a step back to a 3 or 3.5 WAR. No way he's having a defensive year like last year.

DH - A step back wouldn't surprise me, but he's still probably good for at least a 3 WAR.

 

There's some regression for sure, but I still wouldn't project anything less than 91 wins.

 

I'd argue with you at C, LF, and RF. First of all, are you talking about Nava or Gomes for LF? I've probably said this before, but I like Vic going back to CF, Nava in RF, and Gomes in LF with Bradley coming off the bench. I have a hunch that JBJ isn't ready to be an everyday CF yet. If he starts at CF everyday, he'll either get hurt or put up disappointing numbers as the dog days approach. Now, at catcher, AJ can still hit. If he stays healthy, he can be much better than Salty, but of course Ross will still catch for Lester.

[User Name]

On what do you base the idea that JBJ isn't ready for prime time? I'm glad the Red Sox FO isn't running this team based on "hunches".

[mvp 78]

Nava in RF? Might as well put Papi in RF.

[rjortiz]

I'd argue with you at C, LF, and RF. First of all, are you talking about Nava or Gomes for LF? I've probably said this before, but I like Vic going back to CF, Nava in RF, and Gomes in LF with Bradley coming off the bench. I have a hunch that JBJ isn't ready to be an everyday CF yet. If he starts at CF everyday, he'll either get hurt or put up disappointing numbers as the dog days approach. Now, at catcher, AJ can still hit. If he stays healthy, he can be much better than Salty, but of course Ross will still catch for Lester.

 

Nava. Nava was atrocious in RF, which is harder to play in Fenway Park. He'd have a worse year than in 2013, which sounds almost impossible. He'd wouldn't be worth starting, even if he repeated his 2013 season with bat. You'd also be putting Gomes into LF. Nava and Gomes would be the worst corner outfield duo by a good margin. They'd also be forced to hit against pitchers they usually sit against. Gomes' numbers would collapse facing all those righties, and Nava, although not as dramatic would see a decline against more lefties. You also are moving the best defensive RF into CF, which is harder to play. Basically, you want Gomes in the lineup over Bradley Jr. Does Gomes hit that much better than Bradley to justify that move? You couldn't just look at their batting stats to decide that. You have to consider that Gomes is probably about average as a hitter in LF, but he's a pretty terrible defender. That's a below average regular. I don't know what you expect Bradley Jr. to do this year, but given his track record a .700 OPS isn't asking a lot. He probably can do better than that, but he'd be OK hitting that low. Why? Because most scouting reports claim he's a great defender in CF. CF is harder to play, so a great defender in CF is a very valuable asset to have. As long as he doesn't hit as poorly as he did last year, he's an OK player to start. If you want to look for an upgrade, you should probably find someone for Nava.

 

As for the catcher question, it's probably almost a zero percent chance that a 37 year old Pierzynski will better a .806 OPS Saltalamacchia provided. If Pierzynski is just average at C, I'd be OK with that. Ross is a backup catcher, so he probably won't impact the race. I guess he can catch Lester if they want to let him.

Edited January 25, 2014 by rjortiz

[Thunder]

Might also be beneficial to pick up an OF, especially a CF at the deadline. A BJ Upton type would be nice. Not BJ himself though, but he probably won't even be on the market. Stanton is too much of a RF. If we trade for him, Vic would definitely have to move to CF.

[mvp 78]

Might also be beneficial to pick up an OF, especially a CF at the deadline. A BJ Upton type would be nice. Not BJ himself though, but he probably won't even be on the market. Stanton is too much of a RF. If we trade for him, Vic would definitely have to move to CF.

 

That's why they signed Sizemore.

[Behindenemylines]

JBJ and WMB both start on opening day and if they are total busts then the Sox will use their many resources to fix the problems. Sizemore is a nice low risk pickup, but he will not be able to play starter innings. If by some miracle he returns to his old self then it will be another of BC great pickups.

[Thunder]

That's why they signed Sizemore.

 

He's not going to do a whole lot.

[mvp 78]

He's not going to do a whole lot.

 

I'm sure he'll have a higher WAR than 2013 BJ Upton (the player you want).

[Behindenemylines]

I'm sure he'll have a higher WAR than 2013 BJ Upton (the player you want).

 

Still don't know what the Braves saw in BJ. They are usually pretty good in picking the right FAs.

[sk7326]

Still don't know what the Braves saw in BJ. They are usually pretty good in picking the right FAs.

 

28 years old, good on-base skills generally, plus defensive centerfield. Some upside left if you want to see it. Has been a disaster so far, but they have no real choice but to try to ride it out. I get the evaluation.

[sk7326]

No, it's not, because he would have a WAR of 7 in his first year.

 

Bradley has been an OBP machine everywhere he has played professionally. There is no reason not to expect the same. He is a mini-three true outcomes hitter ... so you will have to live with streaks, but that is fine.

 

There were three 7-win players in CF last season - Trout, McCutchen and Gomez. Gomez' defensive metrics were insane enough that you look at the 7 wins a bit skeptically (just from a perspective of how evolved defensive measures are relative to offensive). Trout and McCutchen were >.400 OBP and had excellent power numbers. Andre Ethier was 3 win guy with a .360 OBP. He was also a below average glove defensively. But as you noted - a good to very good defensive center fielder with good on-base skills is a fringy All-Star without considering extra base hits or baserunning. Bradley has a very high ceiling, and even a .250/.340/.400 line is very much within quality starter range if his defense grows as advertised.

[sk7326]

Nava. Nava was atrocious in RF, which is harder to play in Fenway Park. He'd have a worse year than in 2013, which sounds almost impossible. He'd wouldn't be worth starting, even if he repeated his 2013 season with bat. You'd also be putting Gomes into LF. Nava and Gomes would be the worst corner outfield duo by a good margin. They'd also be forced to hit against pitchers they usually sit against. Gomes' numbers would collapse facing all those righties, and Nava, although not as dramatic would see a decline against more lefties. You also are moving the best defensive RF into CF, which is harder to play. Basically, you want Gomes in the lineup over Bradley Jr. Does Gomes hit that much better than Bradley to justify that move? You couldn't just look at their batting stats to decide that. You have to consider that Gomes is probably about average as a hitter in LF, but he's a pretty terrible defender. That's a below average regular. I don't know what you expect Bradley Jr. to do this year, but given his track record a .700 OPS isn't asking a lot. He probably can do better than that, but he'd be OK hitting that low. Why? Because most scouting reports claim he's a great defender in CF. CF is harder to play, so a great defender in CF is a very valuable asset to have. As long as he doesn't hit as poorly as he did last year, he's an OK player to start. If you want to look for an upgrade, you should probably find someone for Nava.

 

As for the catcher question, it's probably almost a zero percent chance that a 37 year old Pierzynski will better a .806 OPS Saltalamacchia provided. If Pierzynski is just average at C, I'd be OK with that. Ross is a backup catcher, so he probably won't impact the race. I guess he can catch Lester if they want to let him.

 

Replacement level at catcher is so low - essentially someone who can walk without falling down - that the dropoff in WAR might actually exaggerate the actual impact to run production. I think the Red Sox looked at this move entirely from a contractual perspective. They did not want to tie up the catcher position because they have some inventory. Pierzynski is a lateral move or drop off - but it is also a bit of a bet that Vasquez can develop his hitting at AAA enough to warrant a big league look. If he could hit at all, he would have a starting gig. IF he had a huge development spike which shows in the first few months, I could see Pierzynski getting Matt Flynn'd out of there.

[rjortiz]

Replacement level at catcher is so low - essentially someone who can walk without falling down - that the dropoff in WAR might actually exaggerate the actual impact to run production. I think the Red Sox looked at this move entirely from a contractual perspective. They did not want to tie up the catcher position because they have some inventory. Pierzynski is a lateral move or drop off - but it is also a bit of a bet that Vasquez can develop his hitting at AAA enough to warrant a big league look. If he could hit at all, he would have a starting gig. IF he had a huge development spike which shows in the first few months, I could see Pierzynski getting Matt Flynn'd out of there.

 

There's no adjustment for position in the offensive component of WAR. That comes by just playing catcher where both players would be rewarded the adjustment. There's a difference because 2013 Saltalamacchia has .100 OPS points on Pierzynski's projection for 2014. If you weigh OBP heavier than SLG, it's even more pronounced. That's not a small drop off. That's a big loss in production at any position.

[rjortiz]

Bradley has been an OBP machine everywhere he has played professionally. There is no reason not to expect the same. He is a mini-three true outcomes hitter ... so you will have to live with streaks, but that is fine.

 

There were three 7-win players in CF last season - Trout, McCutchen and Gomez. Gomez' defensive metrics were insane enough that you look at the 7 wins a bit skeptically (just from a perspective of how evolved defensive measures are relative to offensive). Trout and McCutchen were >.400 OBP and had excellent power numbers. Andre Ethier was 3 win guy with a .360 OBP. He was also a below average glove defensively. But as you noted - a good to very good defensive center fielder with good on-base skills is a fringy All-Star without considering extra base hits or baserunning. Bradley has a very high ceiling, and even a .250/.340/.400 line is very much within quality starter range if his defense grows as advertised.

 

Yeah, that was a bit of an exaggeration. That's obviously a fluke year from Gomez. Although, I'm not surprised that someone like him would do that.

[rjortiz]

Might also be beneficial to pick up an OF, especially a CF at the deadline. A BJ Upton type would be nice. Not BJ himself though, but he probably won't even be on the market. Stanton is too much of a RF. If we trade for him, Vic would definitely have to move to CF.

 

That would be fine provided there were another player that used to play like him, and made around the money he does. That player does not currently exist.

 

As for Stanton, we don't have the right prospects to get a deal done.

[dupree]

That would be fine provided there were another player that used to play like him, and made around the money he does. That player does not currently exist.

 

As for Stanton, we don't have the right prospects to get a deal done.

We currently have 9 players on the Top 100 prospects list, which is the most of any team in MLB. I dont understand your logic on not having the right pieces.

[rjortiz]

We currently have 9 players on the Top 100 prospects list, which is the most of any team in MLB. I dont understand your logic on not having the right pieces.

 

Propose a deal, and I'll tell you why it won't work.

[Thunder]

That would be fine provided there were another player that used to play like him, and made around the money he does. That player does not currently exist.

 

As for Stanton, we don't have the right prospects to get a deal done.

 

He would be a good fit here. RH power hitter, with the capacity of launching 450 ft bombs to left. Realistically, I think the Marlins will hold onto him to rebuild around him. I'm thinking of Austin Jackson.

[Bellhorn04]

He would be a good fit here. RH power hitter, with the capacity of launching 450 ft bombs to left. Realistically, I think the Marlins will hold onto him to rebuild around him. I'm thinking of Austin Jackson.

 

If you're thinking of Austin Jackson, you have to also think of why Detroit would be willing to trade him to us and for what.

[sk7326]

There's no adjustment for position in the offensive component of WAR. That comes by just playing catcher where both players would be rewarded the adjustment. There's a difference because 2013 Saltalamacchia has .100 OPS points on Pierzynski's projection for 2014. If you weigh OBP heavier than SLG, it's even more pronounced. That's not a small drop off. That's a big loss in production at any position.

 

It's a dropoff. And Salty's year was sort of more remarkable considering that he is basically unplayable against lefties. I just think that the loss at catcher is relatively minor and fixable. The general production level at catcher is pretty terrible, after all a 3 win player is still a below average run creator. I tend to rate the Red Sox offseason as a B- or so ... but I am not sure their position in the league has changed a whole lot.

 

On paper, Detroit (that rotation) and Texas (who ended up suffering some unexpectedly poor offensive seasons combined with continuing to have an incompetent manager) are better - but that was the case a year ago too, so hooray.

[sk7326]

We currently have 9 players on the Top 100 prospects list, which is the most of any team in MLB. I dont understand your logic on not having the right pieces.

 

We do - although is Stanton the sort of guy you empty the farm for in our position? That is more interesting. Ball can't be traded (at least not until June although he can be a PTBNL). I'd have hard time trading Betts or Cecchini. The rest we can have conversations definitely.

[SoxSport]

I doubt they'll want to give up their depth in the farm system for Stanton. Not at this point. Last year was more likely, starting from the bottom. But Stanton had a bad year, and his value has diminished. Plus he's aiming for a big extension.

 

The strength of the Red Sox right now is in their depth, and they've been building on that in the pre-season.

[sk7326]

Depth is invaluable, but when you are the Red Sox (as opposed to an A's or Rays), you have to honestly assess your top dozen prospects and evaluate who is really going to impact the big club, and who is thusly spinnable. Obviously each year sees development spikes or Lars Anderson like pratfalls - these are kids after all.

 

Now that being said, I'd probably have Owens, Ball, Cecchini and Betts as my "top tier" (not counting Bogaerts and Bradley who to me are graduates). Yes they are not the top 4, but from the realities of position scarcity combined with top end potential and the Red Sox ability to source the position alternatively. Swihart and Vasquez are potentially competing for one serious big league position. The Barnes-Ranaudo tier gives some solid mid-rotation depth, but I think the Sox would be comfortable paying for that in the market if need be. Flags fly forever, and I think the remaining prospects are a fair price for the fourth title since 2004, assuming that is what it takes.

[Thunder]

If you're thinking of Austin Jackson, you have to also think of why Detroit would be willing to trade him to us and for what.

 

I got that all planned out. Hunter Pence may also be a good fit, but the Giants may hold onto him.

[rjortiz]

We do - although is Stanton the sort of guy you empty the farm for in our position? That is more interesting. Ball can't be traded (at least not until June although he can be a PTBNL). I'd have hard time trading Betts or Cecchini. The rest we can have conversations definitely.

 

Yes. He has massive upside, and might have the best raw power in the game. He's also only 24. Most players at 24 are just breaking into the league. He hit 37 and 34 home runs at 21 and 22. At that age, most players are in AA. He chipped in with 22 in only 400 PA's at 20. Jackie Bradley was still using an aluminum bat at that age. He's also under control for the next three years. How much is he going to get over those years? 3/30? How much would teams pay for a player with that kind of upside, age, power hitting ability, and performance record for just those three years? I wouldn't be surprised to see 3/100 offers for him. Probably higher from some teams as they wouldn't be buying any down years. The team that signs him would also have the opportunity to lock him up long term. He's an extremely valuable asset. Only Bogaerts would bring them to the table.

 

This is where you lose me. No Bradley, no Bogaerts, no Betts, and no Cecchini? What kind of upside do you think the rest of those players have? Ranuado and Barnes are projected 2/3 starters. Webster is most likely a reliever. Swihart just arrived at AA, and he hasn't displayed a lot of power. Workman projects as a reliever or a back-end starter. That's a joke of an offer. Even if you offered all five of them.

 

EDIT* Forgot about Owens. He's a great prospect, but he's got walk problems. They're going to want MLB ready talent with huge upside. The rest of the package is going to be players like these. They are the filler of the deal, not centerpieces.

Edited January 26, 2014 by rjortiz

[User Name]

You essentially just posted my thoughts. Good post.

 

I was about to say that it would take at least two of Bogaerts/Bradley/Cecchini as the centerpieces of the deal, with at least three of the other mid/high tier prospects as the "rest of the package".

[sk7326]

Yes. He has massive upside, and might have the best raw power in the game. He's also only 24. Most players at 24 are just breaking into the league. He hit 37 and 34 home runs at 21 and 22. At that age, most players are in AA. He chipped in with 22 in only 400 PA's at 20. Jackie Bradley was still using an aluminum bat at that age. He's also under control for the next three years. How much is he going to get over those years? 3/30? How much would teams pay for a player with that kind of upside, age, power hitting ability, and performance record for just those three years? I wouldn't be surprised to see 3/100 offers for him. Probably higher from some teams as they wouldn't be buying any down years. The team that signs him would also have the opportunity to lock him up long term. He's an extremely valuable asset. Only Bogaerts would bring them to the table.

 

This is where you lose me. No Bradley, no Bogaerts, no Betts, and no Cecchini? What kind of upside do you think the rest of those players have? Ranuado and Barnes are projected 2/3 starters. Webster is most likely a reliever. Swihart just arrived at AA, and he hasn't displayed a lot of power. Workman projects as a reliever or a back-end starter. That's a joke of an offer. Even if you offered all five of them.

 

EDIT* Forgot about Owens. He's a great prospect, but he's got walk problems. They're going to want MLB ready talent with huge upside. The rest of the package is going to be players like these. They are the filler of the deal, not centerpieces.

 

Upside is spectacular. Also has a worrisome injury history where he has missed 80 games over the last two seasons. I don't doubt he would cost a lot - I am asserting my hesitation to pay it. Marlins should ask for a lot. I see a guy with 80 power who has back problems as a 24 year old and shudder a little. "Productive when he's healthy" is not something I want to describe that sized acquisition.

 

I am more inclined to pay that price for known durability AND quality/upside. If the Mariners had been smart about their offseason and cashed in their best player for some legitimate position relief, that would be the sort of investment that would make sense.

 

The non-Betts/Cecchini whatever level ... that is the stuff you use to plug in holes during the season possibly. Now, as a matter of ideology I am with Danny Ainge - I will talk about ANYBODY, just depends on the offer. But if I were sorting players into guys for us vs guys that will be assets for somebody's big league club ... that's how I'd do it.

Edited January 26, 2014 by sk7326