A Realistic View at 2018: Part I

[Kimmi]

A wide range of outcomes are possible for Carson Smith, a 28-year-old righthander with a single, but impressive, full MLB season three years ago.

 

At the time the trade was celebrated as a coup for the Red Sox but the deal has yet to pay noteworthy dividends.

 

I hope Carson Smith has a great career after injuries limited the reliever to 9.1 MLB innings (18 innings overall) the past two seasons.

 

I really liked this trade when it happened.

 

And I do think you have to factor in subsequent trades of players when trying to determine who 'won' the original trade.

[Spudboy]

Hmmm. This gives me a different view of Smith. For some reason I thought he was a fire baller.

 

I had heard that about both Smith and Thornberg.

 

"Hard throwers". Probably hype.

[harmony]

I had heard that about both Smith and Thornberg.

 

"Hard throwers". Probably hype.

Most teams hype their acquisitions.

 

The Mariners tried to hype Wade Miley but many critical M's fans weren't buying it.

[moonslav59]

Hmmm. This gives me a different view of Smith. For some reason I thought he was a fire baller.

 

Smith did have a lot of games where he came close to or touched a 95 mph average, and his 2015 was mostly within 93-95.

 

Maybe I'm reading the charts wrong...

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/pitchfxo.aspx?playerid=13172&position=P&pitch=SI&data=pi

[moonslav59]

Most teams hype their acquisitions.

 

The Mariners tried to hype Wade Miley but many critical M's fans weren't buying it.

 

When we got Miley, I bought into some of the hype based on his away splits with AZ.

 

[harmony]

Smith did have a lot of games where he came close to or touched a 95 mph average, and his 2015 was mostly within 93-95.

 

Maybe I'm reading the charts wrong...

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/pitchfxo.aspx?playerid=13172&position=P&pitch=SI&data=pi

In 2015 Carson Smith's average fastball of 92.9 mph ranked 12th on the Seattle pitching staff:

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=4&season=2015&month=0&season1=2015&ind=0&team=11&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=3,d

 

In 2017 Smith's average fastball of 92.0 mph ranked 15th on the Red Sox:

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=4&season=2017&month=0&season1=2017&ind=0&team=3&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=3,d

[moonslav59]

soxprospects.com...

Mexican Pacific League

 

Hector Velazquez's Navojoa squad came into the playoffs as the number three seed in the 3 vs 4 matchup. Velazquez started game two of the series on Tuesday, throwing 5 1/3 scoreless innings while allowing 3 hits and 2 walks while striking out 3. He also earned the win, while Navojoa won the series 4-1 advancing to the semi-finals.

[mvp 78]

Directly, no.

 

A question: do you think us getting JBJ and Swihart as comp picks for losing Beltre should be factored into judging that decision?

 

(I know it is different. I'm just curious.)

 

No. They coul’ve grabbed JBJ with an alternate pick. Beltre 2011-17 > JBJ 2011-17

[moonslav59]

No. They coul’ve grabbed JBJ with an alternate pick. Beltre 2011-17 > JBJ 2011-17

 

I said does it "factor into judging" not equal or outweigh.

 

Plus, JBJ costs much less than Beltre.

 

My point is losing Beltre might not have been as bad as it looked, if you factor in everything.

 

BTW, we grabbed JBJ with the 40th pick, so sure we could have taken him earlier with the pick we got (Owens) for losing VMart, but would that have then made losing him more palpable?

 

I'm just asking, do you not factor in any of this future considerations that were related to the choice when you judge a decision made in the past?'

 

Yes, I agree, Beltre>> JBJ + Swihart.

[notin]

I said does it "factor into judging" not equal or outweigh.

 

Plus, JBJ costs much less than Beltre.

 

My point is losing Beltre might not have been as bad as it looked, if you factor in everything.

 

BTW, we grabbed JBJ with the 40th pick, so sure we could have taken him earlier with the pick we got (Owens) for losing VMart, but would that have then made losing him more palpable?

 

I'm just asking, do you not factor in any of this future considerations that were related to the choice when you judge a decision made in the past?'

 

Yes, I agree, Beltre>> JBJ + Swihart.

 

Not to mention not getting Sandoval and possibly even keeping Rizzo...

[Bellhorn04]

soxprospects.com...

Mexican Pacific League

 

Hector Velazquez's Navojoa squad came into the playoffs as the number three seed in the 3 vs 4 matchup. Velazquez started game two of the series on Tuesday, throwing 5 1/3 scoreless innings while allowing 3 hits and 2 walks while striking out 3. He also earned the win, while Navojoa won the series 4-1 advancing to the semi-finals.

 

I think I might be catching Velazquez Fever.

[notin]

I think I might be catching Velazquez Fever.

 

That can be cured with a few (line) shots...

[moonslav59]

Not to mention not getting Sandoval and possibly even keeping Rizzo...

 

We should have kept Beltre and traded Youk right before the sudden and steep decline.

[moonslav59]

I think I might be catching Velazquez Fever.

 

Is Velazquez the next Fernando or Abe Alvarez?

 

Probably, somewhere in between.

[Larry Cook]

We should have kept Beltre and traded Youk right before the sudden and steep decline.

 

This is ancient history and I think we handled it properly.

 

It was the Shaw trade that did not make sense. Why trade a starter with lots of control for a broken down reliever with arm issues. And oh by the way, we only had sandavol as a backup!!!! Dave should have been flushed for screwing that up.

[moonslav59]

This is ancient history and I think we handled it properly.

 

It was the Shaw trade that did not make sense. Why trade a starter with lots of control for a broken down reliever with arm issues. And oh by the way, we only had sandavol as a backup!!!! Dave should have been flushed for screwing that up.

 

Really? Forget Beltre but harp on Travis freakin Shaw?

[moonslav59]

Red Sox ownership has given president of baseball ops Dave Dombrowski more autonomy than his predecessors received, writes Evan Drellich of NBC Sports Boston, and it’s been Dombrowski who has primarily driven the Red Sox’ pursuit of J.D. Martinez. Drellich wonders if now is the time for Dombrowski and owner John Henry to begin showing this type of restraint — Boston has reportedly offered Martinez five years but drawn a line there — as New York and Los Angeles both loom as potential big spenders again next offseason. Drellich also takes a look at Dombrowski’s history of splashy moves (some of his own volition and some driven by late Tigers owner Mike Ilitch during Dombrowski’s days in Detroit) as well as his reputation as an executive that is, at times, willing to overpay on the free-agent and trade markets.

[notin]

We should have kept Beltre and traded Youk right before the sudden and steep decline.

 

Or kept Youkilis at first where he belonged

[moonslav59]

Or kept Youkilis at first where he belonged

 

Of course, but in hindsight, he was just about to start his steep and quick decline.

[Kimmi]

I said does it "factor into judging" not equal or outweigh.

 

Plus, JBJ costs much less than Beltre.

 

My point is losing Beltre might not have been as bad as it looked, if you factor in everything.

 

BTW, we grabbed JBJ with the 40th pick, so sure we could have taken him earlier with the pick we got (Owens) for losing VMart, but would that have then made losing him more palpable?

 

I'm just asking, do you not factor in any of this future considerations that were related to the choice when you judge a decision made in the past?'

 

Yes, I agree, Beltre>> JBJ + Swihart.

 

The comp picks that we got for Beltre and the other players that we let walk absolutely factor into the decision to let him go. Theo was all about those comp picks, so much so that I think he signed players with the subsequent comp picks in mind.

 

It goes back to balancing the short term with the long term.

[Kimmi]

We should have kept Beltre and traded Youk right before the sudden and steep decline.

 

What's funny though is that I remember a lot of criticism over signing Beltre in the first place. I'm not saying you specifically, but I do remember a lot of people hating that move.

 

I was against re-signing him for the type of contract that he received. Obviously, I was wrong about that. However, the players that we receive in comp picks do affect the overall rating of that decision.

[Kimmi]

Red Sox ownership has given president of baseball ops Dave Dombrowski more autonomy than his predecessors received, writes Evan Drellich of NBC Sports Boston, and it’s been Dombrowski who has primarily driven the Red Sox’ pursuit of J.D. Martinez. Drellich wonders if now is the time for Dombrowski and owner John Henry to begin showing this type of restraint — Boston has reportedly offered Martinez five years but drawn a line there — as New York and Los Angeles both loom as potential big spenders again next offseason. Drellich also takes a look at Dombrowski’s history of splashy moves (some of his own volition and some driven by late Tigers owner Mike Ilitch during Dombrowski’s days in Detroit) as well as his reputation as an executive that is, at times, willing to overpay on the free-agent and trade markets.

 

It's possible that if Boras and JD wait too long, JD might end up getting burned and have to settle for an Encarnacion type deal. Not likely, but possible.

 

Hold the line, Dave.

[Elktonnick]

It's possible that if Boras and JD wait too long, JD might end up getting burned and have to settle for an Encarnacion type deal. Not likely, but possible.

 

Hold the line, Dave.

 

I think it is more likely than not. JD is already 30 years old. How healthy will he be at 36 and 37? That's why teams are shying away from a 7 year deal. If he were 28 maybe but not at 30 going on 31.

[harmony]

It's possible that if Boras and JD wait too long, JD might end up getting burned and have to settle for an Encarnacion type deal. Not likely, but possible.

 

Hold the line, Dave.

Even if the Red Sox don't have the current best offer?

 

I don't know the current offers, but that could be a reasonable strategy for the Red Sox.

 

As an unrelated side note, a blogger disputes the "cliff":

 

https://www.overthemonster.com/2018/1/10/16871560/red-sox-two-year-window-myth-betts-sale-benintendi-devers-bogaerts

Edited January 10, 2018 by harmony

[mvp 78]

I said does it "factor into judging" not equal or outweigh.

 

Plus, JBJ costs much less than Beltre.

 

My point is losing Beltre might not have been as bad as it looked, if you factor in everything.

 

BTW, we grabbed JBJ with the 40th pick, so sure we could have taken him earlier with the pick we got (Owens) for losing VMart, but would that have then made losing him more palpable?

 

I'm just asking, do you not factor in any of this future considerations that were related to the choice when you judge a decision made in the past?'

 

Yes, I agree, Beltre>> JBJ + Swihart.

 

No, I would rather have had Beltre. The comp picks are just lottery tickets IMO and Sox got lucky.

[Kimmi]

I think it is more likely than not. JD is already 30 years old. How healthy will he be at 36 and 37? That's why teams are shying away from a 7 year deal. If he were 28 maybe but not at 30 going on 31.

 

I completely agree with you about the downside of signing JD to a long contract. I think even 5 years is too long, but I don't think it will get done for less than that. Believe me, I would be thrilled if we could get JD for 3 years. I just don't think it's likely that his market drops below 5 years.

[mvp 78]

Not to mention not getting Sandoval and possibly even keeping Rizzo...

 

If they kept VMart and Beltre, this team wouldn't have had to make any trades to compete in 2011. It would have been a complete alternate reality.

 

VMart signed 4/50 in 2011. Rizzo could have been eased in during 2013 and VMart could've been traded in the following offseason.

 

Beltre signed 6/96 in 2011. He would have been a FA after 2016. They could have signed him to a 2 year deal in 2017 and worked Devers in during 2018.

[Kimmi]

Even if the Red Sox don't have the current best offer?

 

I don't know the current offers, but that could be a reasonable strategy for the Red Sox.

 

As an unrelated side note, a blogger disputes the "cliff":

 

https://www.overthemonster.com/2018/1/10/16871560/red-sox-two-year-window-myth-betts-sale-benintendi-devers-bogaerts

 

I am talking about holding the line in terms of the number of years. I do not want Dombrowski to offer more than 5 years. If he knows that another team has outbid him in terms of dollars, and he's close, I would be okay with him increasing his dollar amount, within reason. Hard to know exactly what 'within reason' is without knowing his or anyone else's bids.

 

But he absolutely needs to hold the line at 5 years.

[mvp 78]

Is Velazquez the next Fernando or Abe Alvarez?

 

Probably, somewhere in between.

 

Abe Alvarez was a young prospect who never really got a shot. Fernando is one of the all time greats. Yeah, he's in the middle I guess...

[mvp 78]

Really? Forget Beltre but harp on Travis freakin Shaw?

 

I don't remember anyone complaining about the Shaw trade last offseason. The Beltre and VMart issues were a big discussion back in the day on here.