A Realistic View at 2017 Part I

[Kimmi]

There's so much more to it than what's on paper though. As an extreme example, Albert Belle. This guy had a career OPS of >.900 but toward the end he was a keg of dynamite looking to explode. A terrible influence in the clubhouse. An extreme example on the reverse side of the coin is our own David Ortiz. Although he didn't play on the defensive side of the ball IMO he probably contributed more to the clubhouse and the development of our young players than anyone I can remember. But that part of his contribution doesn't show up in the stats. It's something the GM's have to "feel".

 

For a good GM there's much more to it than stats.

 

When I say 'on paper', I don't just mean statistically. I mean it in a looser sense, which includes things like team dynamic, leadership, etc. Again, it was not just the computer projection systems that thought the Sox would be good. It was also the predictions made by baseball analysts who have a very good feel for the human element of the players.

[moonslav59]

And yes, I understand that they are often wrong. But that doesn't change the fact that the team assembled looked good on paper, which means that the GM did his offseason job.

 

Agreede.Did anybody here say they thought the Guardians had a better team and were going to beat the Sox?

 

No.

 

We all thought the Sox had a better team. Some were worried we slumped at the very end (right after a long winning streak, I might add). Some were concerned about the farewell to Papi tour messing us up, but clearly we had what we all thought was the better team.

 

Yes, the Guardians had 2 big pitchers hurt, and we still lost. It's hard to blame the GM, when we all thought we should have won.

 

[southpaw777]

We should have won and we did have a better team at the time. The players kicked the pooch. Farrell had one bad move which was removing Buch too early IMHO. With that said, Farrell was NOT the reason nor was DD. He put together a great team this offseason. The loss is on the players. Yes, Pedey was injured, but overall The team just didn't perform.

[cp176]

There is a lot to be said that for the old adage you are never as good as you look when you are on a hot streak nor are you ever as bad as you look when you are struggling. At some point the winning streak was going to end. it just happened to early for us.

[Dojji]

Agreede.Did anybody here say they thought the Guardians had a better team and were going to beat the Sox?

 

No.

 

We all thought the Sox had a better team. Some were worried we slumped at the very end (right after a long winning streak, I might add). Some were concerned about the farewell to Papi tour messing us up, but clearly we had what we all thought was the better team.

 

Yes, the Guardians had 2 big pitchers hurt, and we still lost. It's hard to blame the GM, when we all thought we should have won.

 

 

The Guardians had other ideas.

 

Let's be clear. the Sox were nowhere near the overall favorites this year. We were probably picked to beat the Guardians, but we weren't the pick to go all the way by any stretch of the imagination.

 

Everyone who's watched baseball for more than about 0.5 nanoseconds knows that in a short season anything can happen. The Guardians were a competitively good baseball team, and we played poorly and they did not. At the end of the day the Guardians have just as much a right to beat us as anyone else. All you can do is show up in the postseason with a good team, try to keep everyone motivated, and see what happens.

 

I consider the season a brilliant success for Mr. Dombrowski under the circumstances, we dispelled a lot of the stink of the last 2 years, got an exciting young core coming together and learning, we went from a disastrous rotation to one that's competitive, if a bit weak on the top end, and we've got plenty of material on hand to improve. If we didn't go all the way, oh well, 28 other teams are going to be saying the same thing and the lion's share of them have less to smile about than we do.

[Kimmi]

Agreede.Did anybody here say they thought the Guardians had a better team and were going to beat the Sox?

 

No.

 

We all thought the Sox had a better team. Some were worried we slumped at the very end (right after a long winning streak, I might add). Some were concerned about the farewell to Papi tour messing us up, but clearly we had what we all thought was the better team.

 

Yes, the Guardians had 2 big pitchers hurt, and we still lost. It's hard to blame the GM, when we all thought we should have won.

 

 

Exactly. I have not been the biggest fan of Dombrowski's philosophy, and was never a fan of the Price contract or the cost of Kimbrel, but Dombrowski cannot be blamed for any disappointment brought about by those two players. They were the best available.

 

If Price becomes an albatross in years 5, 6, or 7, Dombrowski does get some blame for that. But not Price's performance in the first few years of the contract.

[Kimmi]

I consider the season a brilliant success for Mr. Dombrowski under the circumstances, we dispelled a lot of the stink of the last 2 years, got an exciting young core coming together and learning, we went from a disastrous rotation to one that's competitive, if a bit weak on the top end, and we've got plenty of material on hand to improve. If we didn't go all the way, oh well, 28 other teams are going to be saying the same thing and the lion's share of them have less to smile about than we do.

 

The season was actually a brilliant success for Theo and Ben, with Dombrowski swooping in to take more credit for it than he deserves.

 

Henry really should have given Ben the chance to see his plan come to fruition. This is Ben's exciting young core, not Dombrowski's.

[moonslav59]

Let's be clear. the Sox were nowhere near the overall favorites this year. We were probably picked to beat the Guardians, but we weren't the pick to go all the way by any stretch of the imagination.

 

By season's end, I think we had the highest odds for an AL team to win the WS. I seriously doubt, in all honesty, anybody here would have switched rosters with another AL team the day before the first game of the playoffs. If I am right about this, then how can anybody, now in hindsight, blame the GM for constructing a roster we all were pretty much happy with for the 2016 season? Many of us disagreed with some deals, the choice of manager, and other aspects of roster and management building, but the fact is, we looked better than any other AL team. I thought so at the beginning of the year, too. Injuries to Smith and the miserable showing by Pablo gave me some doubts, but clearly, right from the start, we had a deeper bench than anybody in the AL. Shaw did well replacing Pablo, Wright did an amazing job replacing ERod. Porcello picked up the slack for a somewhat disappointing season from Price. Leon took up the slack for a faltering Vazquez and injured Swihart. No other AL team had the in-system bench to fill in the holes that opened up over the year.

[moonslav59]

Exactly. I have not been the biggest fan of Dombrowski's philosophy, and was never a fan of the Price contract or the cost of Kimbrel, but Dombrowski cannot be blamed for any disappointment brought about by those two players. They were the best available.

 

If Price becomes an albatross in years 5, 6, or 7, Dombrowski does get some blame for that. But not Price's performance in the first few years of the contract.

 

Exactly. The deals DD made were to help us win now. He made us the AL faves, but the players and manager did not follow through.

 

I still disagree with the three major moves DD made (Price, Kimbrel & Pomeranz), but not because it lessened our chances to win this year and over the next two year.

[Nick]

The season was actually a brilliant success for Theo and Ben, with Dombrowski swooping in to take more credit for it than he deserves.

 

Henry really should have given Ben the chance to see his plan come to fruition. This is Ben's exciting young core, not Dombrowski's.

 

Theo the GOD.....he'll be given credit for next twenty years of success.....

[Nick]

EE's name is brought up because moving Hanley to DH then begs the question what to do with 1B and yeah don't forget about the worst mlb production at 3B.

 

What is our open day line up? Masking utility player Holt as a starter at another position this year? That worked out well in LF. A mediocre defensive outfielder at best. Gets tired around July 31st. He's nothing more than an utility player.

[Dojji]

Holt is a damn good utility player, one of the best in baseball at what he does, but what he does doesn't involve starting every day. It's not fair of the team to expose him as if he were a starter, but when the team does that it's hardly Holt's fault. He's a very impressive benchie, kind of a luxury but one a championship caliber team should pay to keep around if they can.

[moonslav59]

Holt's lack of ability to play FT at 3B was one of the leading reasons we signed Pablo in the first place, so I do not think we should count on him as our FT 3Bman (not that anyone has here). With Moncada and Devers in the wings, I doubt we look for anything more than a 1 year solution to our 3B need. We may just let the situation play out and address the need at the deadline, if nobody has stepped up to fill the void.

 

Perhaps, we'll see Pablo and Young platoon at DH next year, and Moncada, Shaw, Holt, Rutledge and Hernandez battle for 3B rights. That mean we may try to get by without any major offensive addition. My guess is that at worst, we get some sort of short term vet that can play corner IF and maybe even LF, and use our resources to build up the pitchong staff.

 

[Dojji]

I still say that Mike Moustakas is an option. He's on his last year next year, and the Royals have a top prospect who looks like he's right on the verge of "getting it" playing behind him (Cheslor Cuthbert). The Royals have something we need and can potentially spare him. The question is what we have that they need.

 

Now what the Royals need more than anything is offense. And we have some offensive prospects we can spare. If the Royals don't get stupid (such as demanding Bradley, etc), I think a deal could get done.

Edited October 16, 2016 by Dojji

[moonslav59]

I still say that Mike Moustakas is an option. He's on his last year next year, and the Royals have a top prospect who looks like he's right on the verge of "getting it" playing behind him (Cheslor Cuthbert). The Royals have something we need and can potentially spare him. The question is what we have that they need.

 

Now what the Royals need more than anything is offense. And we have some offensive prospects we can spare. If the Royals don't get stupid (such as demanding Bradley, etc), I think a deal could get done.

 

A lot would depend on how highly KC values our prospects. I think we might be surprised at how much variance there is from GM to GM on placing value of a particular player or prospect.

 

If KC viewed Moncada as a possible OF'er or 2Bman, maybe they'd try really hard to get him.

 

They probably are not in great need of a catcher, so Swihart and Vaz might not be someone we can dangle in front of them.

 

I doubt they'd value Shaw or Holt highly enough to make a big impact on the package we can offer.

 

We may not match up that well due to Moncada and Devers being our best young offensive players, and KC seemingly having a 3Bman waiting in the wings already. Maybe one could be moved to 1B or LF.

 

(Note: KC is reportedly taking offers on Wade Davis. Maybe a bigger deal could be worked out.)

 

Edited October 16, 2016 by moonslav59

[harmony]

A lot would depend on how highly KC values our prospects. I think we might be surprised at how much variance there is from GM to GM on placing value of a particular player or prospect.

 

If KC viewed Moncada as a possible OF'er or 2Bman, maybe they'd try really hard to get him.

 

They probably are not in great need of a catcher, so Swihart and Vaz might not be someone we can dangle in front of them.

 

I doubt they'd value Shaw or Holt highly enough to make a big impact on the package we can offer.

 

We may not match up that well due to Moncada and Devers being our best young offensive players, and KC seemingly having a 3Bman waiting in the wings already. Maybe one could be moved to 1B or LF.

 

(Note: KC is reportedly taking offers on Wade Davis. Maybe a bigger deal could be worked out.)

Kansas City infielder Cheslor Cuthbert is working out at second base in the Arizona Instructional League:

 

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/mlb/kansas-city-royals/article105886017.html

 

I suspect the Royals would have some interest in Rafael Devers.

[Kimmi]

Holt is a damn good utility player, one of the best in baseball at what he does, but what he does doesn't involve starting every day. It's not fair of the team to expose him as if he were a starter, but when the team does that it's hardly Holt's fault. He's a very impressive benchie, kind of a luxury but one a championship caliber team should pay to keep around if they can.

 

^^This.

 

Holt is far more valuable to us as a utility player than he is a starter.

[Bellhorn04]

Holt is under team control, arbitration-eligible, 3 more years.

[moonslav59]

^^This.

 

Holt is far more valuable to us as a utility player than he is a starter.

 

True, but he may be worth more to another team as a starter than to us as a utility player, especially now that we no longer have a DH-only DH.

 

I like Holt a lot and respect the value of someone who is not embarrassed at playing 7 positions, but can anyone name one position where he is clearly our number one back-up next year?

 

1B- HanRam> Shaw/Pablo> Swihart? (Travis this year?)

2B- Pedroia> Moncada> Holt/Hernandez

3B- Shaw/Pablo> Moncada/Holt/Hernandez> Rutledge/Marrero (Devers)

SS- Bogey> Hernandez> Marrero/Holt> (Dubon)

LF- Beni>Young>Holt

CF- JBJ> (Betts/Beni with Young playing LF)> Holt

RF- Betts> (Beni with Young in LF)> Holt

 

[Kimmi]

True, but he may be worth more to another team as a starter than to us as a utility player, especially now that we no longer have a DH-only DH.

 

I like Holt a lot and respect the value of someone who is not embarrassed at playing 7 positions, but can anyone name one position where he is clearly our number one back-up next year?

 

1B- HanRam> Shaw/Pablo> Swihart? (Travis this year?)

2B- Pedroia> Moncada> Holt/Hernandez

3B- Shaw/Pablo> Moncada/Holt/Hernandez> Rutledge/Marrero (Devers)

SS- Bogey> Hernandez> Marrero/Holt> (Dubon)

LF- Beni>Young>Holt

CF- JBJ> (Betts/Beni with Young playing LF)> Holt

RF- Betts> (Beni with Young in LF)> Holt

 

 

I agree that Holt might be more valuable to another team in need of a starter. It all comes down to what we can get back for him.

 

I don't think Moncada will be ready for the big league roster until perhaps midseason. Also, if there's a significant injury to one of our starters, Holt becomes all the more valuable.

 

It might make more sense to look at trading Holt at midseason.

[Dojji]

Holt's the kind of guy that has much more value in FA than he does in trade. I'd sign a guy like Holt if I had a big hole at a position he can play. I wouldn't necessarily deal talent for him if I can fill that roster spot in another way.

[cp176]

EE's name is brought up because moving Hanley to DH then begs the question what to do with 1B and yeah don't forget about the worst mlb production at 3B.

 

What is our open day line up? Masking utility player Holt as a starter at another position this year? That worked out well in LF. A mediocre defensive outfielder at best. Gets tired around July 31st. He's nothing more than an utility player.

 

With respect to Encarnarcion - Hanley won't get to his level of power production.

EE = our dh

 

Hanley = first base next year

[oldtimer]

Holt's the kind of guy that has much more value in FA than he does in trade. I'd sign a guy like Holt if I had a big hole at a position he can play. I wouldn't necessarily deal talent for him if I can fill that roster spot in another way.

 

You might get prospects for him or add him to a package to sweeten an offering for an established player. HIs main value is what he has been doing for us, utility. So he also has that value for us as well.

[moonslav59]

Holt's the kind of guy that has much more value in FA than he does in trade. I'd sign a guy like Holt if I had a big hole at a position he can play. I wouldn't necessarily deal talent for him if I can fill that roster spot in another way.

 

Some teams have multiple needs and no prospect ready to fill them and little money to fill them either. Holt would have enormous value to them, because they'd have the flex to use him at two or three positions, but FT overall. While Holt's splits might not be all that great for the Sox, or his .650 to .700 OPS long stretches might be unacceptable to the Sox, those numbers are better than some teams have as options at numerous positions.

 

Here's a look at what some teams had for OPS at some of the positions Holt plays:

 

2B: OAK .566, LAA .617. KCR .630, ATL .631, CIN .674, LAD .687, PIT .689, CWS .699, SFG & MIA .700, TOR .704

 

3B: CIN .701, ATL .703, SFG & NYY .704, KCR .712

 

There's several teams on both of those lists.

 

LF: PHI .593, LAA .628, HOU .633, LAD .674. KCR .680, WSH .687

 

I could see Holt being possibly more valuable to the Royals, Dodgers, Giants, Reds and Braves.

 

Edited October 17, 2016 by moonslav59

[Nick]

Some teams have multiple needs and no prospect ready to fill them and little money to fill them either. Holt would have enormous value to them, because they'd have the flex to use him at two or three positions, but FT overall. While Holt's splits might not be all that great for the Sox, or his .650 to .700 OPS long stretches might be unacceptable to the Sox, those numbers are better than some teams have as options at numerous positions.

 

Here's a look at what some teams had for OPS at some of the positions Holt plays:

 

2B: OAK .566, LAA .617. KCR .630, ATL .631, CIN .674, LAD .687, PIT .689, CWS .699, SFG & MIA .700, TOR .704

 

3B: CIN .701, ATL .703, SFG & NYY .704, KCR .712

 

There's several teams on both of those lists.

 

LF: PHI .593, LAA .628, HOU .633, LAD .674. KCR .680, WSH .687

 

I could see Holt being possibly more valuable to the Royals, Dodgers, Giants, Reds and Braves.

 

 

I doubt we get anything of value in return for Holt. He's cheap. We should keep him.

[S5Dewey]

I doubt we get anything of value in return for Holt. He's cheap. We should keep him.

 

I agree with this. If Holt is as valuable as some think he is then someone else would be willing to give up someone valuable for him. If he's not as valuable as some think he is then the Sox should hold onto him because he IS valuable to this team.

[moonslav59]

I doubt we get anything of value in return for Holt. He's cheap. We should keep him.

 

It seems strange that he has such high value to us and nobody else.

 

He'd get way more PAs for other teams than with us.

 

We'll have Hernandez and possibly Swihart to fill his shoes on the 25 man roster- both of whom are better options at just about every position Holt plays.

 

I'm not expecting much in return for him, but as part of a larger package, he may save us from having to part with Moncada, Devers or Kopech. For example, maybe a team will take Swihart, Owens and Holt instead of one of our big 3. It would be worth it to me, if that were the case.

[Emp9]

Kansas City infielder Cheslor Cuthbert is working out at second base in the Arizona Instructional League:

 

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/mlb/kansas-city-royals/article105886017.html

 

I suspect the Royals would have some interest in Rafael Devers.

 

I'd rather deal prospects like Devers for SP (Danny Duffy for example), than RP. I would seriously question DD and the rest of the FO I f they did another Kimbrel type deal. That would be a disaster for the long term and has simply no guarantee of paying off in the short term. Especially when there are equally or better options in FA for that caliber of a RP/Closer.

[Emp9]

I doubt we get anything of value in return for Holt. He's cheap. We should keep him.

 

Yeah, but no one is saying "Holt for Sale". Holt would be a nice throw in to sweeten a trade. or....Does anyone think Holt could net us a better RP than Abad? If so, maybe they should explore such an idea.

[moonslav59]

I'd rather deal prospects like Devers for SP (Danny Duffy for example), than RP. I would seriously question DD and the rest of the FO I f they did another Kimbrel type deal. That would be a disaster for the long term and has simply no guarantee of paying off in the short term. Especially when there are equally or better options in FA for that caliber of a RP/Closer.

 

Agreed, and trading for a starting pitcher will also help the pen in more than 2 ways:

 

1) Less inning needed by the pen

2) Adding a SP'er will force one of our other SP'ers (Pom, Buch, Wright?) to the pen.

3) An added starter in the pen allows for multiple innings pitched within games- taking stress off our late inning RP'ers.