2014 Offseason Thread

[sk7326]

The sox did the unthinkable in 2012, and dealt off the heart of their club, or so we thought. They actually dealt the decrepit Apple core of a rotting team and filled the team with good baseball guys. Their 2014 problem was that they lost 2 all star caliber talents, replaced them cheaply and expected the career years of 2013 to resume. Instead of making shrewd moves, they go long term with a fat 3b who is an average hitter and defender and sign a SS to play LF at huge money who is known as a loser and a malcontent. Seems like they're repeating 2011 all over again

 

I have absolutely no doubt the Dodgers thought their best position player of the last 2 years was a loser.

 

This is not quite the same as a bloated FA shopping spree while letting your best player leave for nothing.

[User Name]

The sox did the unthinkable in 2012, and dealt off the heart of their club, or so we thought. They actually dealt the decrepit Apple core of a rotting team and filled the team with good baseball guys. Their 2014 problem was that they lost 2 all star caliber talents, replaced them cheaply and expected the career years of 2013 to resume. Instead of making shrewd moves, they go long term with a fat 3b who is an average hitter and defender and sign a SS to play LF at huge money who is known as a loser and a malcontent. Seems like they're repeating 2011 all over again

 

Sandoval is an above-average defender. Stick to the facts, obnoxious Yankee fan. How his offense plays out, who knows? As for Hanley, talk all the s*** you want, you'd love to have that bat on your team. Also, part of the reason they actually accepted his advances (he appproached the Sox, not the other way around) is because he idolizes Papi and they think that will help with his attitude. How that will play out, nobody knows. We know it's your scthick to be an ******* about anything regarding the Sox, but come on.

[User Name]

I have absolutely no doubt the Dodgers thought their best position player of the last 2 years was a loser.

 

This is not quite the same as a bloated FA shopping spree while letting your best player leave for nothing.

 

I see what you did there.

[BSN07]

The sox did the unthinkable in 2012, and dealt off the heart of their club, or so we thought. They actually dealt the decrepit Apple core of a rotting team and filled the team with good baseball guys. Their 2014 problem was that they lost 2 all star caliber talents, replaced them cheaply and expected the career years of 2013 to resume. Instead of making shrewd moves, they go long term with a fat 3b who is an average hitter and defender and sign a SS to play LF at huge money who is known as a loser and a malcontent. Seems like they're repeating 2011 all over again

 

You mean that is what you hope they have done.

[jacksonianmarch]

Guess what Sandoval's average UZR/150 is the past three seasons? -0.4. That's about as average as you get. And yes, Hanley loves Ortiz. But a malcontent is a malcontent. And the Dodgers had the best team entering the post season the last two years and crapped out early both times. He's a coach killing loser

[jacksonianmarch]

Don't worry, the sox and the Yankees will be sharing company in 2015, the company of the bottom of the standings. I'm not optimistic about our 2015 at all.

[Bellhorn04]

Guess what Sandoval's average UZR/150 is the past three seasons? -0.4. That's about as average as you get. And yes, Hanley loves Ortiz. But a malcontent is a malcontent. And the Dodgers had the best team entering the post season the last two years and crapped out early both times. He's a coach killing loser

 

Kershaw has been the major postseason f***up for the Dodgers.

[sk7326]

Guess what Sandoval's average UZR/150 is the past three seasons? -0.4. That's about as average as you get. And yes, Hanley loves Ortiz. But a malcontent is a malcontent. And the Dodgers had the best team entering the post season the last two years and crapped out early both times. He's a coach killing loser

 

Nationals were the best team in the NL this past year. Cards were quite good last year. Kershaw's postseason issues (and Mattingly's poor tactical managing and the Dodgers forgetting to staff a bullpen) were bigger issues.

 

I have issues with the Red Sox postseason thus far - signing two premium free agents, one the best position player, one the safest future investment ... is not one of them

[User Name]

Guess what Sandoval's average UZR/150 is the past three seasons? -0.4. That's about as average as you get. And yes, Hanley loves Ortiz. But a malcontent is a malcontent. And the Dodgers had the best team entering the post season the last two years and crapped out early both times. He's a coach killing loser

 

Why not use the last four seasons? Oh right, because his absolute best defensive season was 2011, and the worse was 2013. Quite convenient.

 

His career UZR/150 is 2.2, which is, you guessed it, above average.

[Bellhorn04]

The funniest part for me is trying to tie Ramirez to the Dodgers' early postseason exits when he put up a fairly respectable 356/453/578 slash line in those games.

[Gringo]

josh donaldson to toronto for scraps.

 

jays have a silly power trio now

 

wish we signed donaldson, not fat panda

[Bellhorn04]

Mibelt Rodriguez ‏@MibeltRodriguez 45s45 seconds ago

Source: The Detroit Tigers has offered SP Rick Porcello to Boston Red Sox in exchange for Yoenis Cespedes. #Redsox #MLB #Tigers

[User Name]

Nope. Porcello's not consistent enough to warrant Cespedes.

[Spudboy]

Nope. Porcello's not consistent enough to warrant Cespedes.

 

Well you probably have a point there. I certainly have not looked at his stats.

 

I have always like Porcello because he throws hard and pitches well against the Sox.

 

He could be a solid upgrade over Buch and Kelly as a #4 or even #3 type.

 

How much do you believe Cespedes is worth? Who do you see the Sox getting straight up? Do they need to add other players to a deal to upgrade?

[Gringo]

i was hoping for iwakuma or zimmerman for cespedes

[User Name]

Cespedes +, but yes.

[Spudboy]

I just looked at Porcello's stats.

 

His past two years have been his best, I believe.

 

He makes 30+ starts each year which is good. His ERA and WHIP have declined the past two seasons but neither is outstanding. His K rate is down for some reason. At least he does not walk too many.

 

Porcello is by no means someone who could be considered a top of the rotation guy but certainly must be viewed as an upgrade over everyone currently on the staff.

 

The Sox need a mid rotation guy regardless of what gets done with the number 1 spot anyway.

 

One could argue that Cespedes could be better used in a multi-player trade to acquire a guy like Cueto. That I would like to see!

 

I'm all for getting rid of this guy since he does not care to be in Boston and will want at least what the Sox paid to get Sandoval. That would be yet another over-pay in my eyes since he brings little to the table other than 20 HR pop ( which is admittedly in short supply ).

 

I just wish these types of moves could be made after Lester signs one way or another. In this way the Sox would be going after their biggest need which is top of the rotation arms.

 

Still, I would like this move better than the two deals from earlier this week.

 

One more thing. Porcello would probably be okay in the clubhouse now that Youk is long gone.

 

Oh. And he is only 25.

Edited November 29, 2014 by Spudboy

[a700hitter]

Whatever they can do to get to that point I'm all in favor of--including finishing last instead of 4th or 3rd.

I am not really in disagreement with this. I can live with occasional last place finishes. I was at game 6 in 2013. I told my friend that i was going to soak it all in, because i told him that i expected a 4th place finish in 2014. I was okay with that. What was really bad about their 2014 strategy wasn't the bad finish but the utter failure of breaking in 3 kids into the lineup. They blew up 3 prospects for which they could have received a king's ransom prior to 2014.

 

What I am saying is that boom or bust strategies are not viable strategies. It' s like being a fan of a bad football team at the end of the season, you find yourself rooting for the team to lose to get the #1 pick. Sometimes you might even get mad at your coach if they win a meaningless game at the end of the season. The players and coaches go out to win and if you have built your team to compete for a playoff spot, you have to have made a lot of bad bets to come in last place. I will distinguish that from rebuilding years where the FO isn't going all out to win but with a gosl of changing over the roster. I get that, and good GMs can still field a competitive team while rebuilding. In 2012, the FO interceded half way through the season to gut the team and rebuild it. 2014 wasn't a tear down and rebuild year IMO. They tried to work 3 new guys into a veteran lineup, but it failed miserably. I just don't think it was the FO strategy to build a wire to wire last place in 2014.

[a700hitter]

Well you probably have a point there. I certainly have not looked at his stats.

 

I have always like Porcello because he throws hard and pitches well against the Sox.

 

He could be a solid upgrade over Buch and Kelly as a #4 or even #3 type.

 

How much do you believe Cespedes is worth? Who do you see the Sox getting straight up? Do they need to add other players to a deal to upgrade?

I think that is a pretty good return for Cespedes straight up. He's a solid back of the rotation guy. If we want to upgrade from Porcello, we will have to sweeten the pot.

[seabeachfred]

The sox did the unthinkable in 2012, and dealt off the heart of their club, or so we thought. They actually dealt the decrepit Apple core of a rotting team and filled the team with good baseball guys. Their 2014 problem was that they lost 2 all star caliber talents, replaced them cheaply and expected the career years of 2013 to resume. Instead of making shrewd moves, they go long term with a fat 3b who is an average hitter and defender and sign a SS to play LF at huge money who is known as a loser and a malcontent. Seems like they're repeating 2011 all over again

 

Jacko, I live only a few miles from Los Angeles and I think I know what's going on here better than most posters on this board because of my locality. Let me tell you all this BS about Ramirez turning a new leaf in LA is a pile of rubbish. He was called out my his manager, called out for loafing on ground balls and not running out grounders and his fielding was abysmal. Red Sox fans are turning handstands because "their Hanley is back". What we got is a loser who the Dodgers were more than glad to discard even though the two guys they have to replace him at short next season don't even chance out as decent utility players. They will have to trade for a shortstop for the next year or two. Hanley is not going to be any answer for the Red Sox unless he hits a ton, keeps his stupid mouth shut, hustles on every play and miraculously turns into an acceptable fielder. Now in the OF, you will see him routinely replaced for a defensive replacement in the seventh inning or even the sixth a lot of times next year which means we won't have his bat the last three innings of every game at home.

[seabeachfred]

Kershaw has been the major postseason f***up for the Dodgers.

 

It doesn't mean s*** what someone on some other team might be in the post-season...What matters is how our guys do....THE RED SOX. Hanley is a problem and cancer waiting to spring. The Dodgers didn't want him anymore, the Marlins couldn't get rid of him fast enough. You think Bell that suddenly he is going to become a choir boy for the Red Sox? This was a very bad move.

[seabeachfred]

I just looked at Porcello's stats.

 

His past two years have been his best, I believe.

 

He makes 30+ starts each year which is good. His ERA and WHIP have declined the past two seasons but neither is outstanding. His K rate is down for some reason. At least he does not walk too many.

 

Porcello is by no means someone who could be considered a top of the rotation guy but certainly must be viewed as an upgrade over everyone currently on the staff.

 

The Sox need a mid rotation guy regardless of what gets done with the number 1 spot anyway.

 

One could argue that Cespedes could be better used in a multi-player trade to acquire a guy like Cueto. That I would like to see!

 

I'm all for getting rid of this guy since he does not care to be in Boston and will want at least what the Sox paid to get Sandoval. That would be yet another over-pay in my eyes since he brings little to the table other than 20 HR pop ( which is admittedly in short supply ).

 

I just wish these types of moves could be made after Lester signs one way or another. In this way the Sox would be going after their biggest need which is top of the rotation arms.

 

Still, I would like this move better than the two deals from earlier this week.

 

One more thing. Porcello would probably be okay in the clubhouse now that Youk is long gone.

 

Oh. And he is only 25.

 

The Red Sox had better not be holding out for a king's ransom for Cepedes because if they do he will be with the team next season and with the outfield as crowded as it is you will have a dissension problem enough to blow up the team from the get-go. The Dodgers had four OF for three positions and it was disquieting out here all summer as that choke-up team tried to lie their way out of it and said all was copasetic. Think of what having six OF demanding to play could cause. Cespedes has one year on his contract and no one gets a draft pick when he goes free agent. Get Porcello for him right now and fit into the No. 3 or 4 slot. They need to shake a few of those OF out of Boston or the clubhouse could be a distraction and fire zone next season.

[Bellhorn04]

It doesn't mean s*** what someone on some other team might be in the post-season...What matters is how our guys do....THE RED SOX. Hanley is a problem and cancer waiting to spring. The Dodgers didn't want him anymore, the Marlins couldn't get rid of him fast enough. You think Bell that suddenly he is going to become a choir boy for the Red Sox? This was a very bad move.

 

Jacko was trying to tell us that Ramirez had something to do with the Dodgers exiting the playoffs early two years in a row. It's horseshit. Ramirez put up great numbers and Kershaw s*** the bed. Those are the facts.

[seabeachfred]

I am not really in disagreement with this. I can live with occasional last place finishes. I was at game 6 in 2013. I told my friend that i was going to soak it all in, because i told him that i expected a 4th place finish in 2014. I was okay with that. What was really bad about their 2014 strategy wasn't the bad finish but the utter failure of breaking in 3 kids into the lineup. They blew up 3 prospects for which they could have received a king's ransom prior to 2014.

 

What I am saying is that boom or bust strategies are not viable strategies. It' s like being a fan of a bad football team at the end of the season, you find yourself rooting for the team to lose to get the #1 pick. Sometimes you might even get mad at your coach if they win a meaningless game at the end of the season. The players and coaches go out to win and if you have built your team to compete for a playoff spot, you have to have made a lot of bad bets to come in last place. I will distinguish that from rebuilding years where the FO isn't going all out to win but with a gosl of changing over the roster. I get that, and good GMs can still field a competitive team while rebuilding. In 2012, the FO interceded half way through the season to gut the team and rebuild it. 2014 wasn't a tear down and rebuild year IMO. They tried to work 3 new guys into a veteran lineup, but it failed miserably. I just don't think it was the FO strategy to build a wire to wire last place in 2014.

 

Let me admit something Ted. I thought the Red Sox would not repeat in 2014 and I was fine with that going forward because I felt that three good young players making the grade could be covered by the solid vets returning. Had Victorino, Napoli, Pedroia, Ortiz, Nava-Gomes done their jobs and played to their ability instead of getting hurt, slumping and falling apart, we might have gotten away with it but we all saw what happened to Vic, how Napoli was injured, now Pedey nursed injuries most of the season, how Nava failed bitterly until the summer and how Gomes just collapsed----well there's most of the story right there. What was worse was that Bradley was a total washout, Middlebrooks couldn't stay in one piece and when he was healthy sucked badly while the fair haired boy Bogaerts was perhaps the worst player in the league trying to hit with men on base. Those three caused the front office to s*** in their pants, possibly ruining chances for young prospects like Swihart, Cecchini, Coyle and a few others to ever break into the Red Sox lineup while they go elsewhere and become perhaps standout players while the ones we counted on just crater. JB and WMB already have done that-----Bogaerts, unless he has a 100% reversal from last year, may be on his way to becoming one of our biggest busts on record.

[Dojji]

Well let's be clear about one thing SBF. Bogaerts' performance in 2014 wasn't really that bad. He needs to bring his average up about 30 points next year. He does that and every other number he put up is acceptable.

 

If the numbers I'm seeing are correct, then the one thing the kid really needs to learn how to do is bat with 2 men out -- figure out how the dynamics of an at bat change when you're the last out of the inning and protect the plate better. With 2 men out last year regardless of other situation concerns (in other words whether there was or was not ROB or RISP) Bogaerts had a very dismal .236 ON BASE PERCENTAGE. The kid does not know how to extend the inning when a pitcher's going after him. Frankly it's a sign IMHO that the kid's a decent hitting talent but is getting overmatched in key situations when the pitcher's fighting for his life. He was brought up quite green and young, that's probably about what you should expect.

 

In other situations he was far more effective. With the bases clean he had a .750 OPS and .350 OBP. Perhaps the best way to keep him going is actually moving him up in the order where, statistically, he'll be in more situations with the bases clear and he has a chance to be a bit more comfortable..

 

One thing is clear, batting him in the middle of the order is a mistake, probably a big part of the reason why the team invested in 2 more hitters to bat around Big Papi so there wouldn't be a need to use Bogaerts there instead.

 

Hopefully he figures it out in the long run anyhow. If not 12 HR's still isn't bad from a shortstop regardless of the slash stats and situational issues. It's a lot better than many teams get out of their shortstop.

 

My real issue with Bogaerts is this: Come on, stop kidding around, that is NOT a shortstop. Kid has very, very mediocre range at short, he's worse than Jeter defensively, and that's saying a lot. And this is when he is a spry 21 year old that has yet to fill out and slow down. You're going to tell me that this kid's future is as a 6? Pull the other one, it's got bells on it. I know the ship sailed a decade ago but I'd really really rather play Pedey at short over 162 than Bogaerts

 

Oh, and good job signing not one but two people to play the only position Bogaerts could naturally move to WHEN you decide to give up on this experiment and go get a defensive guy. I'm not nearly convinced that transferring from the good version of Stephen Drew we got in 13 (at least defensively), to this pylon, has nothing to do with the downturn of several of our pitchers. If you're going to run Bogaerts out as the every day duty starter, do yourselves a favor and get a guy who can play high level LIDR at short. Brock Holt is not that guy. Maybe Marrero? Either way we NEED a high level bench glove and high range at second and third if we're going to carry this guy, and right now we only have one of the three.

Edited November 29, 2014 by Dojji

[dupree]

I know we have a ton of options for the outfield but injuries do happen. I would hope that Ben will hold onto Cespedes until the trade deadline. SBF examples of the Dodgers having 4 outfielders was a jog jam well what if one would went down, then they would have just enough. I think Allen Craig should move for a reliever. And I'd tell Vic if he wants to stay here he needs to hit LH again to balance the lineup.

 

I hope the Jays let got of Dioner Navarro to be the backup cather. He has power and it's obvious weigh issues is not an issue in Boston the bigger the better apparently.

[seabeachfred]

Well let's be clear about one thing SBF. Bogaerts' performance in 2014 wasn't really that bad. He needs to bring his average up about 30 points next year. He does that and every other number he put up is acceptable.

 

If the numbers I'm seeing are correct, then the one thing the kid really needs to learn how to do is bat with 2 men out -- figure out how the dynamics of an at bat change when you're the last out of the inning and protect the plate better. With 2 men out last year regardless of other situation concerns (in other words whether there was or was not ROB or RISP) Bogaerts had a very dismal .236 ON BASE PERCENTAGE. The kid does not know how to extend the inning when a pitcher's going after him. Frankly it's a sign IMHO that the kid's a decent hitting talent but is getting overmatched in key situations when the pitcher's fighting for his life. He was brought up quite green and young, that's probably about what you should expect.

 

In other situations he was far more effective. With the bases clean he had a .750 OPS and .350 OBP. Perhaps the best way to keep him going is actually moving him up in the order where, statistically, he'll be in more situations with the bases clear and he has a chance to be a bit more comfortable..

 

One thing is clear, batting him in the middle of the order is a mistake, probably a big part of the reason why the team invested in 2 more hitters to bat around Big Papi so there wouldn't be a need to use Bogaerts there instead.

 

Hopefully he figures it out in the long run anyhow. If not 12 HR's still isn't bad from a shortstop regardless of the slash stats and situational issues. It's a lot better than many teams get out of their shortstop.

 

My real issue with Bogaerts is this: Come on, stop kidding around, that is NOT a shortstop. Kid has very, very mediocre range at short, he's worse than Jeter defensively, and that's saying a lot. And this is when he is a spry 21 year old that has yet to fill out and slow down. You're going to tell me that this kid's future is as a 6? Pull the other one, it's got bells on it. I know the ship sailed a decade ago but I'd really really rather play Pedey at short over 162 than Bogaerts

 

Oh, and good job signing not one but two people to play the only position Bogaerts could naturally move to WHEN you decide to give up on this experiment and go get a defensive guy. I'm not nearly convinced that transferring from the good version of Stephen Drew we got in 13 (at least defensively), to this pylon, has nothing to do with the downturn of several of our pitchers. If you're going to run Bogaerts out as the every day duty starter, do yourselves a favor and get a guy who can play high level LIDR at short. Brock Holt is not that guy. Maybe Marrero? Either way we NEED a high level bench glove and high range at second and third if we're going to carry this guy, and right now we only have one of the three.

 

You say that Bogaerts was outclassed repeatedly when batting with runners on base......that could be because he was young and was rushed to the Bigs. Perhaps the front office was really taken in buy his performance in the 2013 Playoffs where he really looked outstanding, working the count well and getting some hits and playing third pretty well. Whatever, he didn't do it this season at all, and here's the rub. He didn't look good at short early, he didn't look good at third either and was disjointed on the bases. If he sharpens up next season and lives up to some of his hype he may emerge as a solid player for us.....but I do not think he is a middle of the order hitter yet and he may never be unless he starts driving in runs when they're out there on the bases. A warning, though. If he is having deep problems hitting and fielding next season it better dawn on the Sox to try and peddle him somewhere before his stock craters as it did with Bradley and Middlebrooks who right now couldn't return a crate of oranges for either of them----and I really thought WMB would emerge this past season and didn't.

[example1]

The players and coaches go out to win and if you have built your team to compete for a playoff spot, you have to have made a lot of bad bets to come in last place. I will distinguish that from rebuilding years where the FO isn't going all out to win but with a gosl of changing over the roster.

 

I think the only place we really disagree is with your continual reference to "last place" as representing some particularly bad performance compared to not last place. I wouldn't say they were intentionally trying to finish last all season. They were trying to finish first until it appeared that was unreasonable. At that point they were trying to get into the best position for 2015 and beyond. As you said, 2014 wasn't a complete rebuild year--obviously they entered the year with most of the same players from their WS team. However, when all was said and done on 2014 they dealt away or jettisoned 4 of their 5 top starters from 2013 (Peavy, Doubront, Lackey & Lester), their 2nd best reliever (Miller) and Gomes (among a few others). That may not be a rebuild in the Marlins/Astros sense, but intentionally parting ways with 4 of your 5 starters from the previous year is pretty rebuildish. This conversation has probably jumped the shark, though I'm happy to keep exploring it with you.

 

 

I think 2015 and beyond is a much more interesting topic. I get the concerns about Hanley Ramirez, especially on the heels of Carl Crawford's disastrous tenure in Boston. It's hard not to let Crawford's experience bleed into Hanley, but I think he deserves a fresh look. A 4 year deal at less than 100m is pretty remarkable for a guy with his talent and way less than anyone was anticipating. At what price/length does Hanley's contract become a "must have" despite his supposed attitude issues? I'd say the deal he signed is lower than I would have thought even in my most optimistic view. I acknowledge there's some risk there, but the length of the contract mitigates that somewhat.

 

Panda isn't Mike Schmidt, but he's a very capable and competent MLB hitter. Probably overpaid for him, but he will hold down 3B, can probably transition to 1B when/if Napoli departs, etc., Also, people seem to be feeling like there's a chance these guys will come to Boston and totally flop like untested prospects might. Both of these guys have seen the best that MLB pitching has to offer and handled it well. Go watch Sandoval's playoff history highlights to be reminded that this guy has played in and delivered in huge situations against very good pitchers. I'm not one to put too much weight on small sample sizes, but he's proven he can probably hold his own throughout the season.

[User Name]

Hanley was projected to get 6/137. 4/88 is a bargain by comparison.

[example1]

Hanley was projected to get 6/137. 4/88 is a bargain by comparison.

 

Not that it means anything, but when I listen to the Boston sports radio guys it is constantly "the Red Sox are going against what they said! They said no more longterm, high money contracts". So far, I've seen two contracts at 5 years or under. Yes, the money is high but Crawford and Gonzalez were 7 and 8 years or something, compared to 4 and 5 for Hanley and Panda. Ironically, the guy they are simultaneously saying the Sox HAVE TO GET is Lester, who will probably get 6 years or more.