Looking ahead to 2017

[Nick]

Mods....you need to merge this thread with Moon's 2017, Part I

[oldtimer]

I think JBJ has a better chance of hitting 260/270 .. Leon will be lucky to hit 230 next year. I want Vazquez behind the plate. He's had a year to knock off the rust from his past injury. If he has to play winter ball that's fine as well. I would like Swihart as the back up. When they put him in LF it was a mistake. They both should split the time behind the plate. His value is at catching. If Vazquez hits 230 fine , he's young go with him. I would only trade JBJ in a package with other prospects for a Sale like pitcher. If not he stays which is cool as well. IMO Vazquez/Swihart if healthy and they will be, should catch.

 

I think JBJ could improve his swing. Go away from the long, uppercut he developed during the season) back to a more compact swing where contact is emphasized. If he hits 260 to 270 with reasonable power, we would have a gold glove defensive outfielder who is still a threat at the plate. I would be very reluctant to include him in any trade.

 

Personally, I think Leon reverted to his long term hitting form. He is unable to deal with a curve and often takes third strikes down the middle, seemingly unable to see the pitch well. He is 5'10" and listed at 225 lbs, so is slow. He is a good defensive catcher, but we need an upgrade with someone who can hit a little more. Vazquez is not much of a hitter either but is certainly a fine backup. Swihart may be a deep backup but not an everyday catcher.

[illinoisredsox]

Well, JBJ hit 216/303/387 in August/September, and looked awful in this series. So by your own definition, it's not a 'tiny sample size', so maybe you shouldn't be criticizing other people for getting down on him either.

 

Bradley's numbers outside of his 29 game hitting streak, in IMO, are concerning, especially when viewed with his previous years results in mind:

 

127 G, .232/.317/.416/.733

 

It's hard to say what they have in him at this point. He's been a "regular" for 15 months or so over the past 4 seasons. He's had 2 incredibly hot months, a 3-4 more decent months and the rest very mediocre (with a couple downright putrid). He has been awful in September the last 3 years.

 

Once thing to keep in mind for those ready to give on Bradley. The Sox once had a kid (great defensive player who had some power) who came up and struggled offensively quite a bit his first 6-7 years. He had moments where he looked fine and others where he looked terrible.

 

Dwight Evans ended up playing 19 years for the Red Sox and eventually became a very good hitter. I'm not saying JBJ will become Dewey. That would not be fair. But there's something the Sox brass (and other teams' brass as well) see in Bradley that many of us amateurs don't.

 

I'm not saying they should stick with Bradley come hell of high water. I also don't think you dump him for the sake of just getting rid of him. But neither do I see him as untouchable; if he has to be included as a part of the right deal, fine.

[S5Dewey]

FWIW, and I hate name-droppers, but I have a good friend in his 40's who was a D3 All American and has probably forgotten more about hitting than most of us here will ever know. When we were talking about JBJ last year he was saying, "Trade this guy NOW while his value is high. His swing is too long." and went on to talk about his arm position and his hand placement on the bat, etc. etc. and lots of other things I didn't understand. This guy has coached at the college level and knows hitting.

 

Early this year the topic came up again and he said that he was "amazed" at the difference in JBJ's shorter swing this year. "This guy has turned the corner and is going to be a great hitter." Now JBJ has gone back to his old - but curable - habits during the season. I've often wondered how a player can make substantial adjustments in his swing mid-season with all the other distractions going on. I would not trade that GG until I'd given him another chance to shorten the swing a bit. I'm convinced that there's still a good hitter in there.

[sk7326]

Bradley's numbers outside of his 29 game hitting streak, in IMO, are concerning, especially when viewed with his previous years results in mind:

 

127 G, .232/.317/.416/.733

 

It's hard to say what they have in him at this point. He's been a "regular" for 15 months or so over the past 4 seasons. He's had 2 incredibly hot months, a 3-4 more decent months and the rest very mediocre (with a couple downright putrid). He has been awful in September the last 3 years.

 

Once thing to keep in mind for those ready to give on Bradley. The Sox once had a kid (great defensive player who had some power) who came up and struggled offensively quite a bit his first 6-7 years. He had moments where he looked fine and others where he looked terrible.

 

Dwight Evans ended up playing 19 years for the Red Sox and eventually became a very good hitter. I'm not saying JBJ will become Dewey. That would not be fair. But there's something the Sox brass (and other teams' brass as well) see in Bradley that many of us amateurs don't.

 

I'm not saying they should stick with Bradley come hell of high water. I also don't think you dump him for the sake of just getting rid of him. But neither do I see him as untouchable; if he has to be included as a part of the right deal, fine.

 

You can probably describe a lot of three outcome hitters that way (and yes, I know Bradley does not have Mike Napoli power). The fact is a .317 OBP with good defense is a reasonable starter - not a great one, but a perfectly acceptable one. Have that plus 30 games where he is much more than that and that is what Bradley is - a darn good CF.

[Spudboy]

FWIW, and I hate name-droppers, but I have a good friend in his 40's who was a D3 All American and has probably forgotten more about hitting than most of us here will ever know. When we were talking about JBJ last year he was saying, "Trade this guy NOW while his value is high. His swing is too long." and went on to talk about his arm position and his hand placement on the bat, etc. etc. and lots of other things I didn't understand. This guy has coached at the college level and knows hitting.

 

Early this year the topic came up again and he said that he was "amazed" at the difference in JBJ's shorter swing this year. "This guy has turned the corner and is going to be a great hitter." Now JBJ has gone back to his old - but curable - habits during the season. I've often wondered how a player can make substantial adjustments in his swing mid-season with all the other distractions going on. I would not trade that GG until I'd given him another chance to shorten the swing a bit. I'm convinced that there's still a good hitter in there.

 

It's kind of odd the way he falls back into his old bad habits.

 

I agree, though. I keep him around unless a huge deal can be made. At that point anyone not named Betts can go.

[Dojji]

Mods....you need to merge this thread with Moon's 2017, Part I

 

I don't think that's strictly necessary. Although I do think Moon's thread is extremely premature.

[Dojji]

I wonder what it would take to bring Mike Moustakas to Boston. He's on the last year of his current deal, and thanks to an injury this year he wound up getting replaced at 3B by one of the Royals' top prospects, Cheslor Cuthbert, who... is a bit raw still but showed some promise this year.

 

Moose is good defensively and had made some progress on offense in the last couple years, and of course he has championship experience from the 2015 run. Since the Royals don't seem to be going anywhere and have a talented young replacement, I think common price point could be reached, and if he can play up to the form he did last year, and this year before he got hurt, he'd solve our 3B problems.

[moonslav59]

Bradley's numbers outside of his 29 game hitting streak, in IMO, are concerning, especially when viewed with his previous years results in mind:

 

127 G, .232/.317/.416/.733

 

JBJ just may be a streaky hitter his whole career, so it may not be fair to view his numbers this way.

 

I do admit, I am concerned about his future and how long future slumps may last (or dominate a season).

[moonslav59]

I don't think that's strictly necessary. Although I do think Moon's thread is extremely premature.

 

It's only Part I, which is basically looking at ideas for changes. Part II will be after moves have been made and the roster is pretty much set for opening day.

[Spudboy]

I wonder what it would take to bring Mike Moustakas to Boston. He's on the last year of his current deal, and thanks to an injury this year he wound up getting replaced at 3B by one of the Royals' top prospects, Cheslor Cuthbert, who... is a bit raw still but showed some promise this year.

 

Moose is good defensively and had made some progress on offense in the last couple years, and of course he has championship experience from the 2015 run. Since the Royals don't seem to be going anywhere and have a talented young replacement, I think common price point could be reached, and if he can play up to the form he did last year, and this year before he got hurt, he'd solve our 3B problems.

 

Meh. This would only forestall a needed upgrade at 3rd.

[Spudboy]

Bradley's numbers outside of his 29 game hitting streak, in IMO, are concerning, especially when viewed with his previous years results in mind:

 

127 G, .232/.317/.416/.733

 

JBJ just may be a streaky hitter his whole career, so it may not be fair to view his numbers this way.

 

I do admit, I am concerned about his future and how long future slumps may last (or dominate a season).

 

On the other hand JBJ is young, very athletic, and pretty smart. He could settle in as a good bat.

[moonslav59]

On the other hand JBJ is young, very athletic, and pretty smart. He could settle in as a good bat.

 

I've always been super high on JBJ. I never gave up on him, even through his long slump. I think he could become more consistent, or at least lower or shorten the amount of slumps he has.

 

I'm also okay with up and down players who end up with good numbers at the end. They often carry a team during rough stretches (like Napoli did).

[moonslav59]

Meh. This would only forestall a needed upgrade at 3rd.

 

I'd like to see us get a 1 year player at 3B (like Frazier), so Moncada and Devers have a chance to win the job for 2018 and beyond.

 

I'm also fine with signing Turner to 3-4 years and then either trading Devers or Moncada for something very special, or moving them to a new position (Moncada> LF? and Devers > 1B?)

[oldtimer]

FWIW, and I hate name-droppers, but I have a good friend in his 40's who was a D3 All American and has probably forgotten more about hitting than most of us here will ever know. When we were talking about JBJ last year he was saying, "Trade this guy NOW while his value is high. His swing is too long." and went on to talk about his arm position and his hand placement on the bat, etc. etc. and lots of other things I didn't understand. This guy has coached at the college level and knows hitting.

 

Early this year the topic came up again and he said that he was "amazed" at the difference in JBJ's shorter swing this year. "This guy has turned the corner and is going to be a great hitter." Now JBJ has gone back to his old - but curable - habits during the season. I've often wondered how a player can make substantial adjustments in his swing mid-season with all the other distractions going on. I would not trade that GG until I'd given him another chance to shorten the swing a bit. I'm convinced that there's still a good hitter in there.

 

My feelings as well. What I wonder about is why, with all the expert coaches on the Sox, that his approach wasn't dealt with during the season? Maybe it is hard to do anything on the fly, but I have trouble buying that argument. When a guy doesn't have the innate ability it is one thing ( perhaps Shaw, Leon) but JBJ does have it and wasn't able to stay focussed and that cost the Sox.

 

I sure it will come up along with player changes needed to improve the team, but should we also look at the coaches and manager to see if improvements need to be made there as well.

[S5Dewey]

My feelings as well. What I wonder about is why, with all the expert coaches on the Sox, that his approach wasn't dealt with during the season? Maybe it is hard to do anything on the fly, but I have trouble buying that argument. When a guy doesn't have the innate ability it is one thing ( perhaps Shaw, Leon) but JBJ does have it and wasn't able to stay focussed and that cost the Sox.

 

I sure it will come up along with player changes needed to improve the team, but should we also look at the coaches and manager to see if improvements need to be made there as well.

 

IMO when a player is trying to solve his hitting problems on the fly it's a lot like a golfer with a slice - he's getting all kinds of advice. "Tip the club face in a bit". "Shorten your backswing". "Close your stance up a little". Pretty soon there are too many things to think about and that's ALL you're thinking about.

 

In the case of a baseball player he also has his defense to worry about as well as the mental aspects of the game. It becomes cerebral overload and nothing works. Now he can work on the swing off a tee and off the pitching machine with one-on-one instruction. They can and will look at the video of what he was doing when he was hitting well, compare it with what he was doing recently, and solve his issues. I'm going to be surprised if he doesn't come back on 2017 with a new/old shorter swing and enough repetitions to have his muscle memory forget the things causing the slump.

 

Also, it is worth mentioning that while a lot is being made of the number of K's he picked up during the playoffs, at least two of them that I remember were called third strikes on pitches outside the strike zone. In short, he had too much knowledge of the strike zone and the umpire made a bad call. There's not much a hitter can do about that. Again, things that don't show up in the score book but people like to focus on because it's what the book says.

[moonslav59]

...JBJ does have it and wasn't able to stay focused and that cost the Sox.

 

Not all struggles and slumps can be blamed on lack of focus. Sometimes, it's mechanics gone awry. Sometimes, it's about trying to hard to "focus" and losing the being "in the zone". Sometimes slumps might just be explainable.

 

I sure it will come up along with player changes needed to improve the team, but should we also look at the coaches and manager to see if improvements need to be made there as well.

 

I don't disagree, but I doubt we change any coaches or managers this winter.

[Spudboy]

IMO when a player is trying to solve his hitting problems on the fly it's a lot like a golfer with a slice - he's getting all kinds of advice. "Tip the club face in a bit". "Shorten your backswing". "Close your stance up a little". Pretty soon there are too many things to think about and that's ALL you're thinking about.

 

In the case of a baseball player he also has his defense to worry about as well as the mental aspects of the game. It becomes cerebral overload and nothing works. Now he can work on the swing off a tee and off the pitching machine with one-on-one instruction. They can and will look at the video of what he was doing when he was hitting well, compare it with what he was doing recently, and solve his issues. I'm going to be surprised if he doesn't come back on 2017 with a new/old shorter swing and enough repetitions to have his muscle memory forget the things causing the slump.

 

Also, it is worth mentioning that while a lot is being made of the number of K's he picked up during the playoffs, at least two of them that I remember were called third strikes on pitches outside the strike zone. In short, he had too much knowledge of the strike zone and the umpire made a bad call. There's not much a hitter can do about that. Again, things that don't show up in the score book but people like to focus on because it's what the book says.

 

This definitely happened to JBJ last year.

 

I too have faith that he will have it corrected by spring training.

[Fan_since_Boggs]

A few ideas for 2017.

 

2017 position players:

!b: J.Votto

2b: Pedroia

SS: Bogaerts

3b: Sandoval

C: Vazquez/Leon

LF: Benintendi

CF: Betts

RF: Reddick

DH: Ramirez

Lineup:

Pedroia

Benintendi

Votto

Betts

Ramirez

Reddick

Bogaerts

Sandoval

Vazquez/Leon

 

Trade J.Bradley Jr to upgrade the starting rotation

Sign free agent Josh Reddick (will not require draft pick compensation)

Trade R.Castillo and prospects to the Reds for J.Votto.

 

Votto has an enormous contract, the Reds would like to move it but can't. The Reds will need to pay off a portion of the contract in order to trade Votto and that is why I've included Castillo in the deal to offset 47 million of Votto's contract. The numbers still might not work out for the Red Sox, however.

Votto's contract: http://www.spotrac.com/mlb/cincinnati-reds/joey-votto-228/

Castillo's contract: http://www.spotrac.com/mlb/boston-red-sox/rusney-castillo-15757/

[mvp 78]

It was only a fewweeks ago that people said JBJ was untradeable...

[cp176]

156 games - 26 home runs - 87 RBI's - possible gold glove - .267 ?

Even my old school statistical look shows that he has some value.

[jacksonianmarch]

Rusney for Votto? Lololololol! I've now heard it all.

 

Votto's contract is long. That being said, he's one of the best offensive players in baseball and he's still in his prime. Getting him would cost prospects AND eating his contract

Edited October 12, 2016 by jacksonianmarch

[NativeBostonian]

IMO, Longoria is a solid third baseman, with .272 career BA and presently can be counted on for 30 HR and 100+ RBI's per season. Hitting at home at Fenway Park would be electric. Inserting him in a lineup with Pedroia, Betts, Bogaerts, Hanley, Benintendi, Bradley, Leon, and DH (hopefully Encarcion) would be any opposing pitcher's worst nightmare. His contract runs through 2022 @ just under $10M per year.

 

And Archer would be an excellent addition to the Sox rotation.

 

If you were in Dombrowski's shoes, would you explore the possibility of a blockbuster trade with the constantly-rebuilding Rays for these two players, and if so what would you be prepared to give up?

 

Trading in the division is hard. You'd have to give up a lot to make anything happen. I would imagine the Sox would have to give the Rays Benintendi, Bradly and Moncada. Do you really want to supply the Rays with that much young talent?

[jacksonianmarch]

I think the Yankees should trade Brett Gardner and ARod's expiring contract for Mike Trout....

 

Do you guys see how stupid these proposals sound?

 

Longoria and Archer would cost immense amounts on their own. Then factor in the upcharge to go to a rival and you don't have the prospect capital to get it done. You'd need to impact your big league roster on top of gutting your farm.

 

I think the big fish is Chris Sale. He's going to get dealt this offseason IMO. No upcharge and a single top notch guy. It'll cost you Moncada plus probably Kopech, Groome, Devers etc.

[S5Dewey]

I think the Yankees should trade Brett Gardner and ARod's expiring contract for Mike Trout....

 

Do you guys see how stupid these proposals sound?

 

Longoria and Archer would cost immense amounts on their own. Then factor in the upcharge to go to a rival and you don't have the prospect capital to get it done. You'd need to impact your big league roster on top of gutting your farm.

 

I think the big fish is Chris Sale. He's going to get dealt this offseason IMO. No upcharge and a single top notch guy. It'll cost you Moncada plus probably Kopech, Groome, Devers etc.

 

Archer looks good only if he could be gotten for the right price - which isn't likely. Just as we recognize that his W/L record isn't indicative of who he is, the Rays have to recognize that too.

 

As much as I dislike Longoria (as much as I can 'dislike' someone I've never met), he sure would look good in a Red Sox uni. One would think that a player of his caliber would love to get out of that toxic place called Raysland. However, he's signed with the Rays through 2023 so whether he stays or goes is entirely up to the Rays front office. Since he'll be 37 at the end of that contract and making in the $13M - $14M for the duration of it... no thanks. [Of course, while we're making ridiculous proposals, if the Rays would take on half of Sandoval's contract it would lessen the blow a lot. ].

[mvp 78]

I think the big fish is Chris Sale. He's going to get dealt this offseason IMO. No upcharge and a single top notch guy. It'll cost you Moncada plus probably Kopech, Groome, Devers etc.

 

I would trade Moncada plus Kopech and Groome for Sale. If they wanted Devers too, I'd pass due to questions about Sale's delivery.

[mvp 78]

Archer looks good only if he could be gotten for the right price - which isn't likely. Just as we recognize that his W/L record isn't indicative of who he is, the Rays have to recognize that too.

 

As much as I dislike Longoria (as much as I can 'dislike' someone I've never met), he sure would look good in a Red Sox uni. One would think that a player of his caliber would love to get out of that toxic place called Raysland. However, he's signed with the Rays through 2023 so whether he stays or goes is entirely up to the Rays front office. Since he'll be 37 at the end of that contract and making in the $13M - $14M for the duration of it... no thanks. [Of course, while we're making ridiculous proposals, if the Rays would take on half of Sandoval's contract it would lessen the blow a lot. ].

 

Why are the Rays toxic?

[S5Dewey]

I think the Yankees should trade Brett Gardner and ARod's expiring contract for Mike Trout....

 

Do you guys see how stupid these proposals sound?

 

Longoria and Archer would cost immense amounts on their own. Then factor in the upcharge to go to a rival and you don't have the prospect capital to get it done. You'd need to impact your big league roster on top of gutting your farm.

 

I think the big fish is Chris Sale. He's going to get dealt this offseason IMO. No upcharge and a single top notch guy. It'll cost you Moncada plus probably Kopech, Groome, Devers etc.

 

Sale, OTOH, is an entirely different kettle of fish (since we're talking about fish!) GM's don't operate in a vacuum. Every GM knows that the Sox biggest need is starting pitching and other GM's are going to be willing to line up with masks and guys to rob DD when he makes any proposal for a starting pitcher. And the Sox are in a position to know that they won't be the only bidder.

 

I don't see Sale going early in any trade talks. The CWS are going to be looking out for their own best interest and will be squeezing every GM for all they can get for him, which will take time. The Sox could make a very good offer for Sale that wouldn't involve any of the starting position players, but other teams may offer a starter or two - who aren't as good as our starters - for Sale. At that point the CWS will be playing one suitor against another to get their best deal. Look for any talks regarding Sale to drag on and on.

[S5Dewey]

Why are the Rays toxic?

 

68-94, bad stadium, poor fan support, always having the threat of moving the franchise. The best thing their "fans" have to look forward to is a few more losing seasons to rebuild their franchise through the draft, and by then Longoria will be gone.

 

Why would a guy like Longoria want to play there?

[jacksonianmarch]

The Yankees got 2 top 75 prospects and two big league ready relievers for a 31 yr old reliever. Sale has a LOT more value. It would take 4 major prospects to get him with 2 being big league ready.