Front office Decisions

[a700hitter]

Many felt top of rotation SP'ing was not a top priority last winter.

 

Where would we be now had we signed EE and not traded for Sale?

 

(Not that we couldn't have done both and blew the luxury reset idea up, right?)

 

It should not have been an either/or choice. If DD thought Sale was the last piece for the championship, he was wrong. He neglected the big missing piece on offense. If you are going balls to the wall for the championship, you don't miss a big piece like that.

[moonslav59]

It is not reasonable to expect MVP level performance from Betts year in and year out. That is not reasonable for anyone not named Trout.

 

It's not reasonable to expect all the 22-27 year old players on your team decline from the previous season either. This period is usually on the up curve on the bell.

 

Plus, it's not like 31-33 year old players like HRam, Pedey, Moreland and Young are seriously post-prime, and all should have been expected to decline as well.

 

If just 2-3 of these guys repeated or improved, the whole season could have been way different.

 

Nobody expected everyone to improve.

[bowman]

Thank you.. Once you commit you have to finish it...

[a700hitter]

It's not reasonable to expect all the 22-27 year old players on your team decline from the previous season either. This period is usually on the up curve on the bell.

 

Plus, it's not like 31-33 year old players like HRam, Pedey, Moreland and Young are seriously post-prime, and all should have been expected to decline as well.

 

If just 2-3 of these guys repeated or improved, the whole season could have been way different.

 

Nobody expected everyone to improve.

none of them are having terrible seasons, just not as good as last year when they were all living on Papi's coat tails.

[moonslav59]

none of them are having terrible seasons, just not as good as last year when they were all living on Papi's coat tails.

 

It may look like that now, but I think it's an over simplification to think Papi's presence in the line-up made just about everyone have much better season last year over this year.

 

"Line-up protection" has been largely debunked, but even if it were significant, the drop-offs from 2016 to 2017 are more dramatic than you seem to think they are.

 

Here are the best OPS by season of Sox players from 2016 to 2017:

 

(300+ PAs unless noted)

 

2016 Papi 1.021

2016 Betts .897

2016 HRam .866

2016 Young .850 (227 PAs)

2016 Leon .845 (283)

2016 Beni .835 (118)

2016 JBJ .835

2016 Pedey .825

2017 Betts .818

2016 Bogey .802

2017 Pedey .791

2017 JBJ .790

2017 HRam .783

2017 Beni .762

2017 Bogey .748

2017 Moreland .733

2016 Shaw .726

2016 Moreland .720 (with TEX)

2017 Young .719 (199)

2016 Holt .705

2017 Leon .672

2017 Vaz .620 (203)

2016 Vaz .585 (184)

Edited July 30, 2017 by moonslav59

[a700hitter]

It may look like that now, but I think it's an over simplification to think Papi's presence in the line-up made just about everyone have much better season last year over this year.

 

"Line-up protection" has been largely debunked, but even if it were significant, the drop-offs from 2016 to 2017 are more dramatic than you seem to think they are.

 

Here are the best OPS by season of Sox players from 2016 to 2017:

 

(300+ PAs unless noted)

 

2016 Papi 1.021

2016 Betts .897

2016 HRam .866

2016 Young .850 (227 PAs)

2016 Leon .845 (283)

2016 Beni .835 (118)

2016 JBJ .835

2016 Pedey .825

2017 Betts .818

2016 Bogey .802

2017 Pedey .791

2017 JBJ .790

2017 HRam .783

2017 Beni .762

2017 Bogey .748

2017 Moreland .733

2016 Shaw .726

2016 Moreland .720 (with TEX)

2017 Young .719 (199)

2016 Holt .705

2017 Leon .672

2017 Vaz .620 (203)

2016 Vaz .585 (184)

I am a big believer in that a force like Ortiz in the lineup has a cascading effect for the rest of the lineup.

[moonslav59]

I am a big believer in that a force like Ortiz in the lineup has a cascading effect for the rest of the lineup.

 

I'm a big believer that Chris Sale will have a cascading effect on the whole team.

 

Certainly, it looks like we should have kept Travis Shaw or acquired a big bat instead of Moreland, but there is still time to pullt his team together to win it all this year. I would like to see us pick up a solid hitting 1Bman in the next couple days, but even if we don't, I think we can still win it this year and/or the next 2-3 years as well.

[a700hitter]

I'm a big believer that Chris Sale will have a cascading effect on the whole team.

 

Certainly, it looks like we should have kept Travis Shaw or acquired a big bat instead of Moreland, but there is still time to pullt his team together to win it all this year. I would like to see us pick up a solid hitting 1Bman in the next couple days, but even if we don't, I think we can still win it this year and/or the next 2-3 years as well.

He is having a cascading effect especially on the pitching staff, but on the team as a whole in that he is a true stopper. But Sale will not be enough without some consistent improvement in the offense just as Ortiz was not enough without Sale last year.

[jacksonianmarch]

Thank you.. Once you commit you have to finish it...

 

This is what I've been harping on. I know he sox want to stay below the lux tax, but I don't get it. You've got a 3 year window. You can reset the tax then and deal off your expensive core to reset your farm. If you win now, you're immortal

[cp176]

DD screwed up not getting a decent replacement for Papi, compounded by the Shaw deal. Not good. Just look at that 3 run homer by Mousakas last night. Huge. It's hard for us sox fans to adjust to watching a team morph into a singles and doubles team when we have been used to the fireworks over the years. You have to be well balanced. Our pitching and defense are real good, but the offense has been like watching paint dry too many times this year. Just my opinion but if we didn't do the Shaw trade and signed EE, we would have things well in hand right now. Just frustrating watching good pitched games get waisted.

 

Trading Shaw was not an unpopular move in the eyes of many posters here when it was done. Crying over it now, seems to be what people do .

[cp176]

...and maybe not as bad either.

 

Correct - somewhere in the middle more than likely. I keep hearing though about young players who really haven't been playing that long, playing below their career norms. How long do you have to play in order for them to be called career norms? This could be who they are. Hope not but it could be.

[cp176]

The loss of Papi's offense obviously hurt, but it's more than that. In theory (ad people kept telling me before the season), we could make up that production at various positions, but we were counting on best-case scenarios virtually across the board to do so: the B's had to repeat what they did in 2016, Hanley had to keep mashing like he did in the second half, Sandoval had to at least not be a disaster, etc. -- and by and large, those things have not happened, or have happened only for brief spurts. Having a near-guaranteed 30 HR, .900 OPS masher in the middle of your lineup gives the supporting cast a fair amount of margin for error, but post-Ortiz, we no longer have that.

 

Dombrowki thinking he didn't need a middle-of-the-order bat looks a lot like Cherington thinking he didn't need a top-of-the-rotation starter in 2015: no matter how well it could be rationalized on paper, when the actual games got underway, the absence was glaring from day one.

 

A sensible, reasonable take on things in my book.

[oldtimer]

Trading Shaw was not an unpopular move in the eyes of many posters here when it was done. Crying over it now, seems to be what people do .

 

I'm with those who believed at the time that we could do better than Shaw. The problem is that Sandoval obviously was not that guy so we wound up with the worst situation in the majors at 3rd and there must have been enormous pressure to use Pablo due to his salary considerations. The descision to hold back on Devers appears to have been a bad one at this juncture through. Picking up Nunez is working out. So the FO has made some good and some bad decisions but have left this team a short on power and those that have argued that have been correct.

 

Why are many of the guys we expect to be hitters in slumps? The guys you expect to be hitters don't hit while the new guys swinging against the same pitchers are hitting. Tells you are pitchers aren't overpowering, its the hitters who are in a malaise. Club house atmosphere? Coaching? Exhaustion? Guys aren't as good as we thought?

 

[Bellhorn04]

This is what I've been harping on. I know he sox want to stay below the lux tax, but I don't get it. You've got a 3 year window. You can reset the tax then and deal off your expensive core to reset your farm. If you win now, you're immortal

 

Yeah, like Ben Cherington and John Farrell for winning it all in 2013!

[S5Dewey]

Trading Shaw was not an unpopular move in the eyes of many posters here when it was done. Crying over it now, seems to be what people do .

 

Yes, this.

 

It seems that there's a lot of revisionist history being done here. At the time of the trade Shaw had two back-to-back terrible half-seasons. He had few pitch selection skills and was lunging at outside fast balls. We had every reason to believe that the Travis Shaw we were seeing at the time was the real Travis Shaw so he got traded for a solid (we thought) reliever. Then the Sox signed Sandoval - who was grossly overpaid but at least serviceable (we thought) to fill the 3B slot vacated by Shaw's training.

 

To capsulize, we had every reason to believe that with the exception of Sandoval's salary the right moves were being made but instead we went 0-3. Who would have thought that would happen??

 

IMHO the two biggest mistakes the FO made were agreeing to pay Sandoval what they did, and not having any sniff of a backup plan if things didn't work out at 3B.

[cp176]

I'm with those who believed at the time that we could do better than Shaw. The problem is that Sandoval obviously was not that guy so we wound up with the worst situation in the majors at 3rd and there must have been enormous pressure to use Pablo due to his salary considerations. The descision to hold back on Devers appears to have been a bad one at this juncture through. Picking up Nunez is working out. So the FO has made some good and some bad decisions but have left this team a short on power and those that have argued that have been correct.

 

Why are many of the guys we expect to be hitters in slumps? The guys you expect to be hitters don't hit while the new guys swinging against the same pitchers are hitting. Tells you are pitchers aren't overpowering, its the hitters who are in a malaise. Club house atmosphere? Coaching? Exhaustion? Guys aren't as good as we thought?

 

 

I understand how you feel but how do any of us know if Benintendi is in a slump? Leon or Vazquez - did people really think that they would be any better than they are? I must have missed something - 2 good catchers though. Bogaert's - beaten down - although I would say that people who keep thinking that his power numbers are going to be prodigious might be wrong. Young - really? Betts is not putting up Trout like numbers. Maybe this is more like who he is. I just do not see this great under performing theory that has been projected and no amount of statistical maneuvering is apt to change my mind. We were hoping - all of us - that there would be a progression with many of these young guys but it hasn't happened. I am much more inclined to think that what we are seeing might be what we have in them.

[moonslav59]

This is what I've been harping on. I know he sox want to stay below the lux tax, but I don't get it. You've got a 3 year window. You can reset the tax then and deal off your expensive core to reset your farm. If you win now, you're immortal

 

There are penalties beyond just financial for going significantly over the limit.

 

We will be hitting that wall in 2-4 years. Re-setting the tax level this year (or next) is a high priority but not necessarily 100% necessary, but that all depends on how much Henry wants to commit to the win now vs later philosophy.

 

By re-setting the tax this year, I think the idea is to go up to the higher penalty limit without going over. This would allow a very significant amount of more money to be available for 2018 and 2019 and maybe even 2020.

 

Win now means 2017, 2018 and 2019 (maybe 2020) not just 2017.

[moonslav59]

Trading Shaw was not an unpopular move in the eyes of many posters here when it was done. Crying over it now, seems to be what people do .

 

Yes, and with Devers on the rise and over $10M in cap space, the idea was that we could fix the problem mid season, if we needed to.

 

Our pen has over performed, and I think people forget that we lost Uehara, Ziegler and Tazawa and the belief was we needed a guy like Thornburg to boost our staff. I can just imagine how fans would be reacting, if our pen blew up after great starts by Sale and others. They'd have roasted DD alive for not seeing the need for building up the pen.

[Nick]

Yes, and with Devers on the rise and over $10M in cap space, the idea was that we could fix the problem mid season, if we needed to.

 

Our pen has over performed, and I think people forget that we lost Uehara, Ziegler and Tazawa and the belief was we needed a guy like Thornburg to boost our staff. I can just imagine how fans would be reacting, if our pen blew up after great starts by Sale and others. They'd have roasted DD alive for not seeing the need for building up the pen.

 

Ziegler signed a 2 year, $16M contract. He's given up 24 runs, 40 hits in 29 innings. Tazawa signed a 2 year, $12M contract. Tazawa got off to shaky start and supports a 5.28 ERA. Koji inked a one year $6M deal. He looks to be little more than average.

I AM FREAKING GLAD THAT WE PASSED ON ALL THREE. We dodged a bullett not having $34M tied up to at best mediocre trio.

[moonslav59]

Correct - somewhere in the middle more than likely. I keep hearing though about young players who really haven't been playing that long, playing below their career norms. How long do you have to play in order for them to be called career norms? This could be who they are. Hope not but it could be.

 

Certainly 2016 numbers for some of our younger players might end up being outliers or career highs, but normally players continue to improve from ages 22-26 or 27. Not everyone does, and there are usually some ups and downs along the way.

 

The striking decline from 2016 to 2017 by every single Sox player, except Vaz (who still sucks at the plate) is what is at question. We don't have any hitters older than 33. Even HRam, Pedey, Moreland and Young are not significantly post-prime, and yet all of them, except Moreland who wasn't here last year have declined from 2016.

 

The "career norm" numbers for younger players often skews the total downward due to struggles in the earlier 1-2 years of their career. That is part of the reason we continue to see players do better than their career norms as they progress from year 2 to year 4 or 5. But, the other part is that players normally improve from year-to-year until ages 26-29. Of course, there are players who do not follow the age curve norm. Some have great starts and never come close to those numbers again. Some improve after age 30.

 

Some players moved from one age group to the next, but these numbers are telling for our pre-prime and prime year players:

 

Age group OPS

2016>2017

18-25: .807 (1917)> .769 (1468 PAs)

26-30: .759 (1968)> .658 (1237)

31-35: .796 (1809)> .761 (1335)

36-45: 1.021 (626)> N/A

 

Nobody expected every young player to improve on their 2016 numbers, but I do think it was reasonable to expect a couple to do so, of that the aggregate numbers of our players under 30 would be someplace close to 2016 numbers. The full season from Beni could have made up for some drop-offs by others.

 

[Nick]

Certainly 2016 numbers for some of our younger players might end up being outliers or career highs, but normally players continue to improve from ages 22-26 or 27. Not everyone does, and there are usually some ups and downs along the way.

 

The striking decline from 2016 to 2017 by every single Sox player, except Vaz (who still sucks at the plate) is what is at question. We don't have any hitters older than 33. Even HRam, Pedey, Moreland and Young are not significantly post-prime, and yet all of them, except Moreland who wasn't here last year have declined from 2016.

 

The "career norm" numbers for younger players often skews the total downward due to struggles in the earlier 1-2 years of their career. That is part of the reason we continue to see players do better than their career norms as they progress from year 2 to year 4 or 5. But, the other part is that players normally improve from year-to-year until ages 26-29. Of course, there are players who do not follow the age curve norm. Some have great starts and never come close to those numbers again. Some improve after age 30.

 

Some players moved from one age group to the next, but these numbers are telling for our pre-prime and prime year players:

 

Age group OPS

2016>2017

18-25: .807 (1917)> .769 (1468 PAs)

26-30: .759 (1968)> .658 (1237)

31-35: .796 (1809)> .761 (1335)

36-45: 1.021 (626)> N/A

 

Nobody expected every young player to improve on their 2016 numbers, but I do think it was reasonable to expect a couple to do so, of that the aggregate numbers of our players under 30 would be someplace close to 2016 numbers. The full season from Beni could have made up for some drop-offs by others.

 

 

I'm just opposed to 'extending' players before contract expires. Pay them what they are worth. Find out what the market is willing to pay. With $200M, we should get our share of good players. What if 2016 was their best year? Not saying it is. I'd like to think it was the floor for many of our young players.

 

No need to rush to extend Betts. Pay him what he's worth when he becomes a free agent. There aren't that many Chris Sale type contracts out there.

Edited July 30, 2017 by Nick

[a700hitter]

How many times have I heard here about how these guys are underperforming. i have never bought it at all but that is just me. The plan was to build on the pitching as opposed to signing the significant sluggers to replace Papi. If everyone had remained healthy, perhaps it would have worked and actually still might. As much as I would have loved to have seen EE signed , it didn't happen. All of the people here who have been saying all along that they have an unblinded faith in the fact that these little guys should be raking, should not be criticizing DD for not signing the big power bat. Now as for decimating the farm - really? - who did we lose for whom? Losing Shaw really does look like it hurt but if thornburg had remained healthy not so much I think. You want to give Sale and Kimbrel and Pomeranz back so you can get a do over? For whom? Hindsight hypocrisy at its best! You want them back so you can get a bigger bat - good - I like Sale and Kimbel and Pomeranz right where they are and so would every other ml club if they could get them. Time to relax - there is an adult in charge. This amazingly talented group of professionals that some of you have been slobbering over, might not be quite as good as you think they are.

DD did a great job swapping our prospects for the most important pieces on this year's team. He slipped up trading Shaw and not adding a more potent bat.

[oldtimer]

Certainly 2016 numbers for some of our younger players might end up being outliers or career highs, but normally players continue to improve from ages 22-26 or 27. Not everyone does, and there are usually some ups and downs along the way.

 

The striking decline from 2016 to 2017 by every single Sox player, except Vaz (who still sucks at the plate) is what is at question. We don't have any hitters older than 33. Even HRam, Pedey, Moreland and Young are not significantly post-prime, and yet all of them, except Moreland who wasn't here last year have declined from 2016.

 

The "career norm" numbers for younger players often skews the total downward due to struggles in the earlier 1-2 years of their career. That is part of the reason we continue to see players do better than their career norms as they progress from year 2 to year 4 or 5. But, the other part is that players normally improve from year-to-year until ages 26-29. Of course, there are players who do not follow the age curve norm. Some have great starts and never come close to those numbers again. Some improve after age 30.

 

Some players moved from one age group to the next, but these numbers are telling for our pre-prime and prime year players:

 

Age group OPS

2016>2017

18-25: .807 (1917)> .769 (1468 PAs)

26-30: .759 (1968)> .658 (1237)

31-35: .796 (1809)> .761 (1335)

36-45: 1.021 (626)> N/A

 

Nobody expected every young player to improve on their 2016 numbers, but I do think it was reasonable to expect a couple to do so, of that the aggregate numbers of our players under 30 would be someplace close to 2016 numbers. The full season from Beni could have made up for some drop-offs by others.

 

 

Vaz hit a double and triple last night and had a lot to do with the win.

 

You point out the general malaise in our hitting without attempting to suggest a cause or multiple causes. if people think there are causes then they can look for a remedy. When everyone is suddenly hittig worse than their career norm, and they are younger players, you have to wonder about the hitting coach and the atmosphere in the clubhouse. In addition you have to consider if some of these players should be offered big money extensions.

[notin]

Its all about talent evaluation. You don't trade a young up and comer who can hit for power for a relief pitcher. Remember Bagwell for Larry Anderson. Not saying Shaw is a Bagwell, but that along with rolling the dice for Panda giving him a free pass to the 3b position by trading Shaw. DD has to be held Accountable for that stupid move. And when you lose a guy like Papi, and have a chance to sign EE a guy made for this park and wants to come here.. WTF. We just let Panda walk with 50 million, so if some of us have a problem with talent evaluation and stupid decisions, excuse me. As for Sale, that was a no brainer. You gave up the number one prospect to get one of the best starters in baseball. Have to do it if your trying to win a world series. We are still that power bat away from a serious run.

 

I don't like the Shaw trade as much as anyone, but when you make a sweeping generalization about not trading prospects for relievers and cite Bagwell as the reason, you probably need to also realize you're now advocating for getting Manny Margot back....

[a700hitter]

Certainly 2016 numbers for some of our younger players might end up being outliers or career highs, but normally players continue to improve from ages 22-26 or 27. Not everyone does, and there are usually some ups and downs along the way.

 

The striking decline from 2016 to 2017 by every single Sox player, except Vaz (who still sucks at the plate) is what is at question. We don't have any hitters older than 33. Even HRam, Pedey, Moreland and Young are not significantly post-prime, and yet all of them, except Moreland who wasn't here last year have declined from 2016.

 

The "career norm" numbers for younger players often skews the total downward due to struggles in the earlier 1-2 years of their career. That is part of the reason we continue to see players do better than their career norms as they progress from year 2 to year 4 or 5. But, the other part is that players normally improve from year-to-year until ages 26-29. Of course, there are players who do not follow the age curve norm. Some have great starts and never come close to those numbers again. Some improve after age 30.

 

Some players moved from one age group to the next, but these numbers are telling for our pre-prime and prime year players:

 

Age group OPS

2016>2017

18-25: .807 (1917)> .769 (1468 PAs)

26-30: .759 (1968)> .658 (1237)

31-35: .796 (1809)> .761 (1335)

36-45: 1.021 (626)> N/A

 

Nobody expected every young player to improve on their 2016 numbers, but I do think it was reasonable to expect a couple to do so, of that the aggregate numbers of our players under 30 would be someplace close to 2016 numbers. The full season from Beni could have made up for some drop-offs by others.

 

You admit that some regression was to be expected by some players. You just did not expect across the board regression, especially from the young guys. The young guys across the board in 2016 had very good to excellent seasons. How much more could you realistically expect them to improve in 2017? Was Mookie going to hit 40 HRs, JBJ hit 35 and XB hit 30? Even if they did so, I don't think that makes up for the difference for losing Ortiz. If DD wants to add the "last piece " to win a championship, you don't do that by adding a big piece to run prevention while losing an equally big piece on the run production side. The math is actually that simple, and it is playing out in real time. Even if we win the Division, I don't expect a sweep like last year because we have Sale, but I don't expect a deep run, because our offense is inconsistent and lacks punch. The notion that a full season of Benintendi and adding Moreland would be enough to cover the loss of Ortiz is playing out as I thought it would. It was a ludicrous plan.

[Nick]

Maybe Hanley is hurt. But his power is down. Yeah he still hits hard balls but he drives them into ground.

 

We need to rethink the construction of this team. Trade out some of the pieces for more power. It's unrealistic to think everyone 1-9 having good averages. It's just tough to string together three hits to score a run.

[moonslav59]

Ziegler signed a 2 year, $16M contract. He's given up 24 runs, 40 hits in 29 innings. Tazawa signed a 2 year, $12M contract. Tazawa got off to shaky start and supports a 5.28 ERA. Koji inked a one year $6M deal. He looks to be little more than average.

I AM FREAKING GLAD THAT WE PASSED ON ALL THREE. We dodged a bullett not having $34M tied up to at best mediocre trio.

 

I didn't mean to imply we should have brought them all back, and at the time, I was not for bringing any back at even less than what they ended up getting.

 

My point was we needed to replace their 2016 numbers and guys like Kelly, Barnes and Hembree were not instilling uber confidence in us fans back last winter and spring. We all felt our pen needed additions.

 

S5 was right about our tendencies towards revisionist histories. Here are Shaw's numbers by halves before the trade:

 

'16

.619 MLB

.788 MLB

'15

.839 MLB

.674 AAA (YES, just .674 before his call-up!)

'14

.752 AAA (Again, not very good for AAA.)

.954 AA

'13

.721 AA (Not good)

.744 AA (Not very good)

'12

.781 AA (Okay for first half after promotion)

.957 A+

 

(Note: second half is listed first, and TS had a long history of dropping off in the second half, although several year he was promoted to a higher level mid season.)

 

Let's not pretend that Shaw was a sure bet to have an OPS over .790 this year, let alone over .940. He wasn't even over .790 the first half of 2016. In his 9 half seasons before his trade (all at AA or higher), Shaw had these OPS:

 

2 over .790

4 from .722-.789

1 from .676-.721

2 under .675

 

7 of 9 halves were under .790. He had as many seasons under .675 as over .790, and both were in his last 4 half seasons.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 30, 2017 by moonslav59

[Nick]

Shaw trade was bad because the entire FO misread the Pablo situation. Say what you will, they were trying to recoup some of that $95M. What if Thornburg was pitching the way he did last year?

 

But Shaw was inadequate at 3B last year. I'll need to see what type of adjustments NL pitchers will make to Shaw before I'm convinced he is better than what the stats indicated in 2016.

[a700hitter]

Shaw trade was bad because the entire FO misread the Pablo situation. Say what you will, they were trying to recoup some of that $95M. What if Thornburg was pitching the way he did last year?

 

But Shaw was inadequate at 3B last year. I'll need to see what type of adjustments NL pitchers will make to Shaw before I'm convinced he is better than what the stats indicated in 2016.

If they were trying to recoup some of their investment on Pablow, that was almost as dumb as if I tried to recoup some of my investment on ENRON by buying more of it after the executives were put in handcuffs.

[Nick]

I didn't mean to imply we should have brought them all back, and at the time, I was not for bringing any back at even less than what they ended up getting.

 

My point was we needed to replace their 2016 numbers and guys like Kelly, Barnes and Hembree were not instilling uber confidence in us fans back last winter and spring. We all felt our pen needed additions.

 

S5 was right about our tendencies towards revisionist histories. Here are Shaw's numbers by halves before the trade:

 

'16

.619 MLB

.788 MLB

'15

.839 MLB

.674 AAA (YES, just .674 before his call-up!)

'14

.752 AAA (Again, not very good for AAA.)

.954 AA

'13

.721 AA (Not good)

.744 AA (Not very good)

'12

.781 AA (Okay for first half after promotion)

.957 A+

 

(Note: second half is listed first, and TS had a long history of dropping off in the second half, although several year he was promoted to a higher level mid season.)

 

Let's not pretend that Shaw was a sure bet to have an OPS over .790 this year, let alone over .940. He wasn't even over .790 the first half of 2016. In his 9 half seasons before his trade (all at AA or higher), Shaw had these OPS:

 

2 over .790

4 from .722-.789

1 from .676-.721

2 under .675

 

7 of 9 halves were under .790.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree fully on Shaw. What people forget was the we had both Moncada and Devers in our future plans.