2016 Red Sox Hot Stove Discussion Thread

[cp176]

Pablo is losing it! Some of it anyway...

 

http://www.csnne.com/boston-red-sox/boston-red-sox-manager-john-farrell-says-pablo-sandoval-has-lost-20-pounds

 

 

I wonder if that could really mean that he has lost 10 pounds which would put him within the 10 pound margin of error?

[Bellhorn04]

I wonder if that could really mean that he has lost 10 pounds which would put him within the 10 pound margin of error?

 

Haha...or it could be 30!

[Station 13]

It's kinda early for in best shape of my life headlines.

[mvp 78]

My factorin might not be that good, but they way I got it figured there is a 20 game margin of error there. Fairly safe bet!

 

Take your common core maths and shove it, buster!

[mvp 78]

It's kinda early for in best shape of my life headlines.

 

Never too early, give or take 10 weeks.

[Kimmi]

I hear you here and I think that we all should stay optimistic. Realistic perhaps just a maybe but optimistic yes. Wherever he has been rumors about his attitude and work ethic have come out. My opinion is that we would be better off without him. I hope that he can prove all of his detractors wrong. It is pretty much up to him I think.

 

Hanley has reportedly lost about 20 pounds this offseason and is reporting to camp with pitchers and catchers to work on his first base defense. Once again, I'm not getting the "lazy" and "bad attitude" accusations.

[Kimmi]

pgammo: "Ryan Kalish HR, single, 2 BB for Caguas Wed., .333 in playoffs, after 2 yrs. injuries, deserves spring non-roster look"

 

 

I'd give him a non-roster invite. I wish him the best.

[Elktonnick]

My factorin might not be that good, but they way I got it figured there is a 20 game margin of error there. Fairly safe bet!

 

Camerons's admission that there is a ten game spread just shows that Fangraph's projections are about as accurate as the average well versed fan. This isn't a criticism of fangraphs but rather a reflection that pre season win projections aren't worth very much. There are just too many variables. As they say that's why they play the games.

[Kimmi]

“When looking at pre-season team projections, it’s probably best to look at them as being something like +/- 10 wins,” David Cameron, managing editor of FanGraphs, wrote in an email yesterday. “An 85-win team should win somewhere between 75-95. That’s obviously a huge spread, but neither 75 nor 95 wins would be all that unusual historically for a team with an 85-win projection. The error bars on these things are very large.”

 

Cameron and the crew at FanGraphs just report the numbers their formulae spit out. They don’t take them as gospel.

 

As Cameron wrote when the projections were released, “It’s hard not to see (the Red Sox) as likely to be a bit better, though I’d take the under on the idea that they’re the second-best team in baseball at the moment.”

 

Cameron expects skepticism about this year’s Red Sox outlook, considering how far off FanGraphs and others were with 2015 preseason projections. They had the Red Sox with 87 wins and a first-place finish in the AL East, with the Royals finishing third in the AL Central with 78 wins. The Red Sox finished in last place with 78 wins, within the 10-win margin of error, while the Royals won 95 games and the World Series.

 

Baseball Prospectus, which has not yet published its highly anticipated 2016 team projections, also had the Red Sox in first place in the AL East with 88 wins last year and the Royals with 73 and fourth in the AL Central.

 

Stat people understand not to take these projections as gospel, and they also understand the margin of error. As I've posted before, it's impossible for projections to be consistently within 6.4 games of the actual wins and that a swing of 16 games around the projection is not uncommon. Sabermetric folk readily admit the shortcomings of any type of standings projections.

 

Here's a good quote from Speier's article today:

 

"Those in the statistical business of projections and forecasts do *not* expect that the season will unfold exactly according to their initial depictions. Forecasts are probabilistic rather than absolute, with sizable swings representing a common occurrence rather than an aberration."

 

That said, the projections give us a pretty good indication of the talent level of the team. On paper, the Sox are the 2nd best team in baseball. That's what Fangraphs projections objectively tell us.

[Kimmi]

Pablo is losing it! Some of it anyway...

 

http://www.csnne.com/boston-red-sox/boston-red-sox-manager-john-farrell-says-pablo-sandoval-has-lost-20-pounds

 

Good for him. Like Hanley, he's another player that has taken the coach's/management's advice to heart during the offseason.

 

I know a lot of people think he's a fat slob who doesn't care because he's getting paid either way, but I don't think that's true. I think most players have a sense of pride and professionalism in themselves and toward the game of baseball, and are not at all happy when they play poorly. I think Pablo is embarrassed by his last season, and will work hard to make amends.

[Kimmi]

But alas, I cannot educate those who choose not to be educated.

[a700hitter]

I'd give him a non-roster invite. I wish him the best.

I'd give him a rake and let him help the grounds crew. He missed his window. Plus, he is not good.

[Bellhorn04]

Stat people understand not to take these projections as gospel, and they also understand the margin of error. As I've posted before, it's impossible for projections to be consistently within 6.4 games of the actual wins and that a swing of 16 games around the projection is not uncommon. Sabermetric folk readily admit the shortcomings of any type of standings projections.

 

Here's a good quote from Speier's article today:

 

"Those in the statistical business of projections and forecasts do *not* expect that the season will unfold exactly according to their initial depictions. Forecasts are probabilistic rather than absolute, with sizable swings representing a common occurrence rather than an aberration."

 

That said, the projections give us a pretty good indication of the talent level of the team. On paper, the Sox are the 2nd best team in baseball. That's what Fangraphs projections objectively tell us.

 

I'm just not sure what the projections tell us that we don't already know. Everyone knows the Sox have a lot of talent - on paper.

 

Look at how far off the projections were on the Royals last year. They completely missed the boat.

[a700hitter]

I'm just not sure what the projections tell us that we don't already know. Everyone knows the Sox have a lot of talent - on paper.

 

Look at how far off the projections were on the Royals last year. They completely missed the boat.

They are purely entertainment, for shits and giggles.

[Kimmi]

I tend to agree that 92 seems a little optimistic. I'm just saying that it's not unrealistic. There are some on this board that think that the 92 win projection is way out of line, and some that think that the Sox won't even be contenders next season.

 

So, if this team is so unlikely to improve by 11 games, I'd like to hear their reasoning for it?

 

Has our rotation not improved by 4 wins with Price? Has our BP not improved by 3-4 wins with Kimbrel and Smith? Are both Hanley and Pablo going to be below replacement level again? And if so, will they be our starters the whole season or will they be replaced with better options?

 

 

For all of those mocking Fangraphs projections, I asked this once and got no response. Cameron acknowledged the margin for error in projections and that the 92 wins might be a little optimistic, but he gave a very good analysis of why that projection is not unrealistic.

 

I haven't seen anything to refute that.

[Kimmi]

I'm just not sure what the projections tell us that we don't already know. Everyone knows the Sox have a lot of talent - on paper.

 

Look at how far off the projections were on the Royals last year. They completely missed the boat.

 

But do they know how much talent the Sox have relative to the other teams?

 

The reason I posted the projection about the Sox having the 2nd best team in baseball was in response to Jacko's claim that the Sox might win the division by default, being in such a poor division, not because they are actually any good. That is simply not true.

 

There are also some here who have stated that the Sox are not good enough as is to be contenders this year. That is simply not true.

[cp176]

Take your common core maths and shove it, buster!

 

That fat bastard needs a dose of Jethro's factorin. give me a few of them double oughts.

[cp176]

Hanley has reportedly lost about 20 pounds this offseason and is reporting to camp with pitchers and catchers to work on his first base defense. Once again, I'm not getting the "lazy" and "bad attitude" accusations.

 

I'm glad that we aren't getting those accusations. What do you suppose the deal has been wherever Hanley has been? You think that everything has just been made up? Everybody just out to get Hanley? I'm ok with you tooting the flute of optimism here believe me but Hanley's play this year has a great bering methinks on the 92 win season. I'm not particularly comfortable with that.

[Bellhorn04]

But do they know how much talent the Sox have relative to the other teams?

 

The reason I posted the projection about the Sox having the 2nd best team in baseball was in response to Jacko's claim that the Sox might win the division by default, being in such a poor division, not because they are actually any good. That is simply not true.

 

There are also some here who have stated that the Sox are not good enough as is to be contenders this year. That is simply not true.

 

I agree, that wouldn't be a very credible opinion at this point.

[a700hitter]

But do they know how much talent the Sox have relative to the other teams?

 

The reason I posted the projection about the Sox having the 2nd best team in baseball was in response to Jacko's claim that the Sox might win the division by default, being in such a poor division, not because they are actually any good. That is simply not true.

 

There are also some here who have stated that the Sox are not good enough as is to be contenders this year. That is simply not true.

Other than the Yankee fan posters?

[mvp 78]

I think the vast majority of us believe there is a great chance for us to be able to watch meaningful baseball this year. Is that really gloom and doom?

[Dojji]

I think we shouldn't expect too much, but ought to be in with a chance this season. That's all I ask in the preseason. We'll see how things go.

[cp176]

I am very excited about this season. Lot more to feel good about going in than last year. Some things still have to work themselves out but overall I think that it looks as though we should compete. I hope that Ramirez gets it done but what concerns me more is if he can't, how long will it take for them to do what needs to be done. I also expect that Brian Johnson will be in our rotation if healthy at some point. Not simply as a spot starter.

[jung]

As long as we keep our championship hopes down to a dull roar internally, this season should be great fun. Much to watch...much to ponder....much to expect as a result for the near term (as in 2017).

 

As for any part of this discussion about a weak AL East and whomever wins it winning by default, the entire notion is nonsense. This is STILL the STEEL of the AL. Take KC out of the rest of the AL and you have just about the same dynamic between the divisions that we have had the past fifteen years or more. The dif is that all of baseball is a bit weaker especially in offense.

 

We have now had eighteen years without expansion....a monstrous long run. Expansion is what drives pitching back into a hole and inflates the offense again. You have to expand at least in twos and coming up with 26 ML ready arms out of thin air plus farm systems is no small task.

 

So we are creeping back to a game that used to be played decades ago...when pitching and defense dominated even more and no amount of PED use can stem that tide. PED's are not steroids. But mistaking this for relative weakness in the AL East is just a misread.

 

As for the dynamics within any division, I look for a team or teams strong enough to go on winning runs. Division races are rarely close even when they seem like they might be. Somebody eventually pulls away more often than not and you have to go on a run or more precisely several streaks or wining runs during the course of the season for that.

 

So when I look at the AL East, the Rays pitching could carry them to winning streaks but I think them a real long shot in that regard. At least they have a tool that could take them somewhere, but i really doubt it. The Yankees have that ridiculous shoe box they play in and as long as they can keep their left handed power upright and out of the old age home they always have a shot at going on streaks. The Jays look like the best regular season team in the division, clearly can go on runs as that is exactly what they did. Post season looks like Stroman and pray though.

 

I view the O's and the Sox as tweeners...least likely this year to be able to go on winning streaks and pull away from anybody. Neither team has enough of anything. Our bullpen is without question the strength of the team especially at the back end. But the only way to make that kind of pen pay off as a wining asset is to hand it leads and that is our problem I would wager. So for my money both we and the O's will only end up able to battle for a second spot and a WC birth.

Edited January 22, 2016 by jung

[a700hitter]

But what about the projections with a margin of error of plus or minus 6 games?

[a700hitter]

Hanley is reportedly down to 234 lbs. How heavy was he last year if he has lost a significant amount of weight?

[jung]

Well that would have put Hanley up at 255 which is Panda's LISTED playing weight which is of course sheer fantasy. I suspect Panda "bounces" (pardon the pun) between a low of 255 and a high of close to 290! Panda's listed playing height of 5'11" if at all close is likely in spikes standing on a cement floor!

 

And

 

if Hanley was 255, do you think there was any chance that Panda even touched 255 at any point last year?? Give me a break.

[Kimmi]

I'm glad that we aren't getting those accusations. What do you suppose the deal has been wherever Hanley has been? You think that everything has just been made up? Everybody just out to get Hanley? I'm ok with you tooting the flute of optimism here believe me but Hanley's play this year has a great bering methinks on the 92 win season. I'm not particularly comfortable with that.

 

I don't think the past rumors about Hanley were made up. I believe that there was some truth to them. But I also believe people can change. Maybe it's maturity, maybe it's being around Ortiz, maybe it's a real desire to play in Boston. Or maybe he hasn't changed and he has a terrible work ethic and a terrible attitude.

 

With no evidence of the latter being the case, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

[Kimmi]

I agree, that wouldn't be a very credible opinion at this point.

 

At the very least, these projections offer a reality check.

[Kimmi]

I think the vast majority of us believe there is a great chance for us to be able to watch meaningful baseball this year. Is that really gloom and doom?

 

Well, that is certainly not the impression that I have gotten from many posters. There has been talk of us hovering around .500. There has been talk of us still being another year away from contending. There has been talk of us needing another top starter in order for us to contend. There has been talk of us having far too many question marks to contend.

 

I'm not getting that warm, fuzzy feeling from a lot of people here.