A Realistic View at 2017 Part I

[Jasonbay44]

Hanley returned to post solid numbers. You moved him from his initial position to LF and then 1b. Moving him off the diamond altogether forces him to adjust again. And a lot of non players don't understand the difference, but being a DH is VERY hard. You feel disconnected for 90% of the game. It takes time to develop into a DH, and some guys do it better than others. I wouldn't f*** with Hanley, especially with Ortiz leaving. Leave him at 1B, get a guy who is already seasoned at DH or rotate it to keep your kids fresh

 

And I speak from personal experience. I was a college 1b, power hitter. My senior year, our SS, who was our captain, blew out his arm and supplanted me at 1b. I became the DH and it was f***ing miserable. Eventually, my production cost me my position in the lineup entirely. It's a different rhythm, a different role. You've got to balance the feel of not playing with the feel of hitting 3-4 times a game. I was awful at it. Some guys cannot do it. You just got Hanley back, got 30-110 out of him. Don't f*** with him again

 

I completely agree with this.

[bosoxmal]

W

Really - 26 homers, 87 RBI's, 156 games and a possible gold glove in cf. Now don't get me wrong, he might get dealt, but those numbers say that he is a long way from being even close to hopeless.

We'll see. What he did in the spring was fantastic. Then the league finally caught on. One month doth not a season make. I would try like hell to get Chris Sale for him. But, then again, that's a very optimistic hope.

[moonslav59]

Hanley returned to post solid numbers. You moved him from his initial position to LF and then 1b. Moving him off the diamond altogether forces him to adjust again. And a lot of non players don't understand the difference, but being a DH is VERY hard. You feel disconnected for 90% of the game. It takes time to develop into a DH, and some guys do it better than others. I wouldn't f*** with Hanley, especially with Ortiz leaving. Leave him at 1B, get a guy who is already seasoned at DH or rotate it to keep your kids fresh

 

And I speak from personal experience. I was a college 1b, power hitter. My senior year, our SS, who was our captain, blew out his arm and supplanted me at 1b. I became the DH and it was f***ing miserable. Eventually, my production cost me my position in the lineup entirely. It's a different rhythm, a different role. You've got to balance the feel of not playing with the feel of hitting 3-4 times a game. I was awful at it. Some guys cannot do it. You just got Hanley back, got 30-110 out of him. Don't f*** with him again

 

1) I don't disagree with anything you have said here.

2) Hanley wanted to come to Boston so badly, he agreed to play LF. That shows a willingness to "do what it takes".

3) I'd ask hanRam about moving to DH beffore insisting on him going. Maybe he'd love the idea, although that doesn't mean he'll excel as a DH.

4) He's already DH'd 36 times over his career, so he should have some gut feeling on his liking it or not.

5) Small sample size alert:

OPS

as DH 1.014 (155 PAs)

as SS .882 (4759 PAs)

as 1B .845 (569 PAs)

as 3B .762 (422 PAs)

as LF .690 (379 PAs)

as PH .674 (37 PAs)

[illinoisredsox]

Didn't Craig have 5 years?

 

I think you're right.

 

We may have to eat his contract or hope he becomes some sort of use- even if as a platoon DH.

 

Baseball Reference lists Craig's servie time as 4.154 years, which I think means 4 years, 154 days. I'm pretty sure the standard is 180 days = a year of service time (season is about 180 days long), so he is 26 days short of the 5 years.

[a700hitter]

Baseball Reference lists Craig's servie time as 4.154 years, which I think means 4 years, 154 days. I'm pretty sure the standard is 180 days = a year of service time (season is about 180 days long), so he is 26 days short of the 5 years.

The Red Sox are on the hook for this and it is a total loss. A terrible move by Cherries.

[Wade Boggs]

Good point on Kopech.

 

I'm thinking Swihart's best spot might be 1B, but I'm fine with letting have a go at 3B.

 

 

I know I'm crazy, I think his real value is behind the plate. For the Red Sox or a potential trade down the line. I don't think he will hit for enough power to man that spot in the infield. Let's face it , the way Leon came back to being himself and Vazquez being up and down the whole year, I would try and give him one more look behind the plate. IMO

[Wade Boggs]

The Red Sox are on the hook for this and it is a total loss. A terrible move by Cherries.

A horrendous trade. A dumb trade. They had the leverage on Lackey for the league mini at 500,000 to 1M. He blew that one. I think Kelly though might salvage some of the deal.

[a700hitter]

A horrendous trade. A dumb trade. They had the leverage on Lackey for the league mini at 500,000 to 1M. He blew that one. I think Kelly though might salvage some of the deal.

The best outcome for Kelly would be 1 season as a set up man-- still not a good deal.

[oldtimer]

I know I'm crazy, I think his real value is behind the plate. For the Red Sox or a potential trade down the line. I don't think he will hit for enough power to man that spot in the infield. Let's face it , the way Leon came back to being himself and Vazquez being up and down the whole year, I would try and give him one more look behind the plate. IMO

 

We certainly could use a better hitting catcher. The only person that might be available that fills the bill is Wilson Ramos, and to take him in the FA market as an A level at his position would mean us not being able to go after encarnacion from the way I read the FA rules. So with Swihart being an internal source, it is worth consideration.

[Spudboy]

The Red Sox are on the hook for this and it is a total loss. A terrible move by Cherries.

 

Oh hell no!!!!

 

We got a good relief pitching prospect out of it!!!!1!!!

[moonslav59]

Baseball Reference lists Craig's servie time as 4.154 years, which I think means 4 years, 154 days. I'm pretty sure the standard is 180 days = a year of service time (season is about 180 days long), so he is 26 days short of the 5 years.

 

Thanks. That makes sense.

[moonslav59]

A horrendous trade. A dumb trade. They had the leverage on Lackey for the league mini at 500,000 to 1M. He blew that one. I think Kelly though might salvage some of the deal.

 

Kelly was the main man in the trade. Craig was a flyer on filling our 1B need at the time.

 

At least Craig's contract doesn't get taxed at 50%!

[a700hitter]

Kelly was the main man in the trade. Craig was a flyer on filling our 1B need at the time.

 

At least Craig's contract doesn't get taxed at 50%!

And Kelly has been a bust on balance.

[moonslav59]

And Kelly has been a bust on balance.

 

Agreed, but the jury is still out. He still has two years left, which is still more control time than Lackey had.

 

I'm not defending the trade, but I do think 4 years of Kelly was a good gamble.

 

We basically got Porcello for Lester, Kelly (at a high cost when adding Craig's contract) for Lackey and Hembree for Peavy. It seems like other teams get more for these types of guys, but Ben tried to get ML ready players, so that tied his hands to some extent.

 

 

[sk7326]

Hanley returned to post solid numbers. You moved him from his initial position to LF and then 1b. Moving him off the diamond altogether forces him to adjust again. And a lot of non players don't understand the difference, but being a DH is VERY hard. You feel disconnected for 90% of the game. It takes time to develop into a DH, and some guys do it better than others. I wouldn't f*** with Hanley, especially with Ortiz leaving. Leave him at 1B, get a guy who is already seasoned at DH or rotate it to keep your kids fresh

 

And I speak from personal experience. I was a college 1b, power hitter. My senior year, our SS, who was our captain, blew out his arm and supplanted me at 1b. I became the DH and it was f***ing miserable. Eventually, my production cost me my position in the lineup entirely. It's a different rhythm, a different role. You've got to balance the feel of not playing with the feel of hitting 3-4 times a game. I was awful at it. Some guys cannot do it. You just got Hanley back, got 30-110 out of him. Don't f*** with him again

 

Lot of truth here.

 

That said, in the bigs there is at least more tools around so the DH is not just sitting there collecting dust between his appearances. The routine changes, but there is still the chance to watch a little video, take a few cuts. Is it a routine Ramirez can get to? fortunately he is a guy who does have a good approach and whatnot.

[moonslav59]

I could see us using HanRam at 1B vs LH's starters (maybe 35-45 games) and at DH for the rest.

 

We could use Young at DH vs LHPs and let Beni play LF full time.

 

I also think Carlos Beltran is a more likely signing than EE. He's a switch hitter who actually hits both sides close to equally. He won't be getting a 4-5 year deal either. If we do get Beltran, we may DH him FT and use HR at 1B FT. When we play in an NL park, Beltran could play LF. This would probably also cause a Beni-Young LF platoon.

 

[a700hitter]

Agreed, but the jury is still out. He still has two years left, which is still more control time than Lackey had.

 

I'm not defending the trade, but I do think 4 years of Kelly was a good gamble.

 

We basically got Porcello for Lester, Kelly (at a high cost when adding Craig's contract) for Lackey and Hembree for Peavy. It seems like other teams get more for these types of guys, but Ben tried to get ML ready players, so that tied his hands to some extent.

 

 

We should have gotten Kelly merely for taking on Craig's contract. Throwing in 1 year and 2 month of Lackey was an extreme overpay.

[Dojji]

Lot of truth here.

 

That said, in the bigs there is at least more tools around so the DH is not just sitting there collecting dust between his appearances. The routine changes, but there is still the chance to watch a little video, take a few cuts. Is it a routine Ramirez can get to? fortunately he is a guy who does have a good approach and whatnot.

 

I don't see how the reward is worth the risk. Why screw with something that works? Just for the chance to feel clever? This team has ended players' careers prematurely trying to be that "clever."

 

Bring in a full time professional DH like Encarnacion or Morales and call it a day unless you can shape a reasonable deal for a good two way 3B like Moustakas or Frazier.

[moonslav59]

We should have gotten Kelly merely for taking on Craig's contract. Throwing in 1 year and 2 month of Lackey was an extreme overpay.

 

At the time of the deal, it wasn't so obvious. Kelly had a 3.25 ERA with STL over 266 IP. Granted, it was just a 102 ERA+, and his 1.38 WHIP was not pretty, but he was pretty highly regarded. He was just 26 and could/should have been expected to get better.

 

Lackey's value to us was zero for the two months of the year we dealt him, but his next year with us might have had value and his 1.3 years of control to STL was very valuable.

 

Allen Craig had an .839 playoff OPS over 118 PAs. He was coming off a major injury from the 2013 WS vs the Sox and had a terrible half season with the Cards before the trade, but at age 29, I don't think anyone expected a cliff dive on his behalf. Only 22 MLB batters had more PAs AND a higher OPS (.863) from 2011 to 2013.

 

Look, I realize GMs are judged in hindsight. I get the reasoning for that, and I don't necessarily disagree with that realization, but at the time of the trade, it wasn't widely viewed as a gross overpay. 4 years of Kelly and 4 years of Craig at a $6.2M luxury tax cost for 1.3 years of Lackey, of which the 0.3 was useless to us was somewhat reasonable.

 

At the time of the great purge, I argued that we should have gone for more prospect types and not ML ready players/prospects, but the Sox brass was not about to look like they were packing it in for the next year. They wanted to go young but not too young.

 

I thought we could have done better on all three of our SP'er trades at the time, but to me, the Lackey trade looked better than the Lester and Peavy deals. I had high hopes for Kelly and thought Craig would at least be a good platoon player at 1B, LF or DH.

 

[Dojji]

Yet another example of a trade that you'd think would have returned decent value but instead spat in our face and gave us the worst possible outcome. Lots of trades and signings went that way between 2011 and 2016. Amazing that in the middle of all that sourness, the team managed to scrape together the success in 2013.

[moonslav59]

I don't see how the reward is worth the risk. Why screw with something that works? Just for the chance to feel clever? This team has ended players' careers prematurely trying to be that "clever."

 

Bring in a full time professional DH like Encarnacion or Morales and call it a day unless you can shape a reasonable deal for a good two way 3B like Moustakas or Frazier.

 

HanRam is a minus fielder.

HanRam has a better OPS as a DH than any other position, although the sample size is just 36 scattered games.

HanRam has a long injury history, and DH may minimize that risk.

 

I'd ask HR what he thinks about the idea, at least as maybe a DH vs RHPs and 1Bman vs LHPs. Maybe we can pick up a great platoon player who kills righties and flip the 1B-DH role for HR- giving him more time at 1B than DH, but HR has already played 4 positions for more than 350 PAS, so I think he can adjust.

 

Is there some risk? Sure, but so is there a risk putting a sub average fielding, injury-prone player at 1B instead of at DH.

 

EE will cost a lot and get too many years.

[S5Dewey]

HanRam is a minus fielder.

HanRam has a better OPS as a DH than any other position, although the sample size is just 36 scattered games.

HanRam has a long injury history, and DH may minimize that risk.

 

I'd ask HR what he thinks about the idea, at least as maybe a DH vs RHPs and 1Bman vs LHPs. Maybe we can pick up a great platoon player who kills righties and flip the 1B-DH role for HR- giving him more time at 1B than DH, but HR has already played 4 positions for more than 350 PAS, so I think he can adjust.

 

Is there some risk? Sure, but so is there a risk putting a sub average fielding, injury-prone player at 1B instead of at DH.

 

EE will cost a lot and get too many years.

 

I'm from the party that says, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." At least not yet. I don't doubt that HanRam's season numbers make him a minus defender but it's worth remembering that this is a new position for him and his defense has improved greatly since April. In addition, he's "engaged" at 1B and likes it there.

 

If he were failing at 1B I'd say, sure, make a change, but moving him to DH sounds to me like dickin' with something for the sake of dickin' with it.

[moonslav59]

I'm from the party that says, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." At least not yet. I don't doubt that HanRam's season numbers make him a minus defender but it's worth remembering that this is a new position for him and his defense has improved greatly since April. In addition, he's "engaged" at 1B and likes it there.

 

If he were failing at 1B I'd say, sure, make a change, but moving him to DH sounds to me like dickin' with something for the sake of dickin' with it.

 

He did look much better as the year went on, but I still think his brief successful history at DH and his willingness to play wherever we put him makes him a good candidate for DH next year.

 

Again, I'd ask him to see if he's fine with the idea, and if he says no, I'd probably leave him at 1B.

 

I don't like the idea of signing a DH only type player like EE. Even Beltran is a significant minus in LF. Whenever we play at an NL park, we lose a big bat or suffer on defense.

 

I'd prefer to add a 1 year 3Bman, which allows Shaw, Swihart and HanRam to play 1B and platoon with Young at DH.

[oldtimer]

He did look much better as the year went on, but I still think his brief successful history at DH and his willingness to play wherever we put him makes him a good candidate for DH next year.

 

Again, I'd ask him to see if he's fine with the idea, and if he says no, I'd probably leave him at 1B.

 

I don't like the idea of signing a DH only type player like EE. Even Beltran is a significant minus in LF. Whenever we play at an NL park, we lose a big bat or suffer on defense.

 

I'd prefer to add a 1 year 3Bman, which allows Shaw, Swihart and HanRam to play 1B and platoon with Young at DH.

 

I agree that Hanley needs to remain in the lineup as one of our most feared power hitters, something that will be in short supply. His fielding at 1st base did improve during the season so I no longer see him as a liability there. He certainly can play first in national league parks and if we want to slide him to DH to give him a rest, that is okay too.

 

Our real needs for lineup players are at 3rd base, catcher and DH. Whether in the FA or trade market, we need to pick up a good quality two way player at 3rd. Moncada may well come along during the season so that presents a quandry.

 

I agree that we should not go after Encarnacion. It would be a big buck deal and a long term contract and we would be in competition with many for his services. He will be 34 and presumably going in the wrong direction. Maybe Beltran would fit the need as a DH, PH, backup outfielder. He is a very good hitter and has power. If we could get him on a short term lower dollar contract I can't see the damage going in that direction.

 

Catching is still up in the air. We have good defenders in the fold but the hitting is suspect to weak. The only FA worth his salt is another of those big buck long term contract types (Wilson Ramos). Perhaps he is injury prone as well. Internally, we have the possibility of Swihart. Doesn't appear to be a perfect answer at catcher as standing pat also looks bad.

 

We have to trust DD to make the optimum move and getting value for the team while still having resources to bolster the relief and possibly picking up a first rate SP.

 

I agree tha

[moonslav59]

I agree that Hanley needs to remain in the lineup as one of our most feared power hitters, something that will be in short supply. His fielding at 1st base did improve during the season so I no longer see him as a liability there. He certainly can play first in national league parks and if we want to slide him to DH to give him a rest, that is okay too.

 

Our real needs for lineup players are at 3rd base, catcher and DH. Whether in the FA or trade market, we need to pick up a good quality two way player at 3rd. Moncada may well come along during the season so that presents a quandry.

 

I agree that we should not go after Encarnacion. It would be a big buck deal and a long term contract and we would be in competition with many for his services. He will be 34 and presumably going in the wrong direction. Maybe Beltran would fit the need as a DH, PH, backup outfielder. He is a very good hitter and has power. If we could get him on a short term lower dollar contract I can't see the damage going in that direction.

 

Catching is still up in the air. We have good defenders in the fold but the hitting is suspect to weak. The only FA worth his salt is another of those big buck long term contract types (Wilson Ramos). Perhaps he is injury prone as well. Internally, we have the possibility of Swihart. Doesn't appear to be a perfect answer at catcher as standing pat also looks bad.

 

We have to trust DD to make the optimum move and getting value for the team while still having resources to bolster the relief and possibly picking up a first rate SP.

 

I agree tha

 

I seriously doubt we acquire a catcher. We have 3 guys that would probably start for 1/3 of MLB teams. Swihart's offense is fine, so we're not totally down on offense with our catchers. Leon showed a flash, so maybe he can even things out and be a .700 OPS catcher.

 

It only took a .703 team catcher OPS to be 15th in MLB.

 

12 teams were below .667.

 

10 teams below .650.

 

4 teams below .615.

 

We were 18th at .681 and had Swihart on the DL and in LF for most of the season.

 

I get the idea that we'll need all positions to step it up a little to help make-up for Papi's departure, but I don't think Ramos is the answer. We have too many other high need areas without decent in-system options like we have at catcher.

[sk7326]

Really 3B is the only position that needs to be addressed (and that might not even be the case) - pitching will be the priority, both the bullpen and reducing the uncertainty at the back of the rotation.

[Spudboy]

Agreed, but the jury is still out. He still has two years left, which is still more control time than Lackey had.

 

I'm not defending the trade, but I do think 4 years of Kelly was a good gamble.

 

We basically got Porcello for Lester, Kelly (at a high cost when adding Craig's contract) for Lackey and Hembree for Peavy. It seems like other teams get more for these types of guys, but Ben tried to get ML ready players, so that tied his hands to some extent.

 

 

 

No, the jury is not still out. This trade has been a disaster since it happened.

 

The Sox gave up their 2nd best starter for a turd that did not make consistent starts for two years and now is attempting to become a decent reliever.

 

The Sox could have and should have kept Lackey and extended him.

 

Kelly has been of no benefit to this team and the sting of the Craig dead money makes this trade even worse.

Edited October 13, 2016 by Spudboy

[Hugh2]

I think the Sox are committed to HanRam playing 1B next year. Depending on where they go at the DH position I could see someone like Shaw splitting time with him there. I don't see a 3B move, I think they forsee Moncada ready early to mid season and will go with some combination of Sandoval/Shaw/Holt/Hill. In a perfect world Pablo plays well enough to unload at least some of his contract and Moncada takes over.

 

Rotation depth is a concern, and you can never have enough bullpen arms. I would seriously be ok with going after Chapman, even if he gets overpaid we've learned that around the trade deadline teams are more than over willing to pay for bullpen upgrades. Kimbrel was too shaky for me and with Uehara gone and a question mark over Smiths return we could really use a lights out reliever. If Kimbrel/Chapman/Smith are all lights out then awesome......if it looks like someone like Barnes or Kelly really emerge in the bullpen you know you could easily get rid of those guys can probably get back good prospects too.

[moonslav59]

No, the jury is not still out. This trade has been a disaster since it happened.

 

The Sox gave up their 2nd best starter for a turd that did not make consistent starts for two years and now is attempting to become a decent reliever.

 

The Sox could have and should have kept Lackey and extended him.

 

Kelly has been of no benefit to this team and the sting of the Craig dead money makes this trade even worse.

 

I did not like the trade when we made it, and it looks bad in hindsight.

 

However, if Kelly gives us two good years, the deal may not look as horrible as it does now.

 

My point was that at the time of the deal we were looking at giving up 1 year of Lackey for 4 of Kelly and the hope that Craig might return to being close to the top 22 hitter he was from 2011 to 2013 plus the 2013 playoffs.

[moonslav59]

I think the Sox are committed to HanRam playing 1B next year. Depending on where they go at the DH position I could see someone like Shaw splitting time with him there. I don't see a 3B move, I think they forsee Moncada ready early to mid season and will go with some combination of Sandoval/Shaw/Holt/Hill. In a perfect world Pablo plays well enough to unload at least some of his contract and Moncada takes over.

 

I agree that's what management will likely do. Too much talent and money invested in 3B to spend valuable resources at 3B.

 

My opinion is that I'd rather acquire a short term 3Bman that is good enough offensively to also DH rather than sign a DH only for 2-5 years.

 

Rotation depth is a concern, and you can never have enough bullpen arms. I would seriously be ok with going after Chapman, even if he gets overpaid we've learned that around the trade deadline teams are more than over willing to pay for bullpen upgrades. Kimbrel was too shaky for me and with Uehara gone and a question mark over Smiths return we could really use a lights out reliever.

 

Agreed.

 

If Kimbrel/Chapman/Smith are all lights out then awesome......if it looks like someone like Barnes or Kelly really emerge in the bullpen you know you could easily get rid of those guys can probably get back good prospects too.

 

You always end up needing bullpen depth over a long season.