Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

Recommended Posts

Community Moderator
Posted
So then how does Sale, who has been on active 40 man roster since 2010, still have an option remaining?

 

According to Fangraphs: MiLB Options: n/a

  • Replies 302
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Old-Timey Member
Posted
According to Fangraphs: MiLB Options: n/a

 

.. which is what I thought.

 

I think the folks at soxprospects.com, who have made massive strides towards excellence over the years, do occasionally drop the ball on the option years thing...

Posted
So then how does Sale, who has been on active 40 man roster since 2010, still have an option remaining?

 

Because once the White Sox added him to their 40 man roster when they called him up in August 2010, he was never sent to the minors again. He never burned even one option year (technically, he has 3 remaining).

 

Any time spent in the minors before you are added to the 40 man are not option years. Any years you spend in the minors after you are added do.

 

There is another provision though, once you have 5 years in the big leagues, you can’t be sent down without your permission. So while Sale has 3 options remaining, they are meaningless. Ditto a guy like Bogaerts.

Community Moderator
Posted
.. which is what I thought.

 

I think the folks at soxprospects.com, who have made massive strides towards excellence over the years, do occasionally drop the ball on the option years thing...

 

I've asked that question before. They said to basically ignore their options years formula and just look at fangraphs. That's what they end up doing during their podcasts when those questions come up. Maybe they do that manually and just stop tracking it for certain players?

Old-Timey Member
Posted
I've asked that question before. They said to basically ignore their options years formula and just look at fangraphs. That's what they end up doing during their podcasts when those questions come up. Maybe they do that manually and just stop tracking it for certain players?

 

I'm just glad they stopped those overly optimistic MLB Comparisons.

 

We all knew Lars Anderson was a good prospect, but to blatantly call him the next Justin Morneau (an MVP, no less) struck me as being beyond hopeful...

Community Moderator
Posted
I'm just glad they stopped those overly optimistic MLB Comparisons.

 

We all knew Lars Anderson was a good prospect, but to blatantly call him the next Justin Morneau (an MVP, no less) struck me as being beyond hopeful...

 

Yeah, that was always ripe for eye rolling. I think sticking with the scouting scale is a better idea.

Posted (edited)
Worst pitch in modern Red Sox history. The official scorer called it a wild pitch, because it almost hit Wilson... and how history could've changed if it did.

 

There are plenty of contenders for worst nightmare: the Leephus to Tony Perez in '75 that tied Game Seven (Yaz called it "that slop curveball by Bill Lee"); Torrez' meatball to Dent; maybe Wakefield's floater to Boone or something by Pedro -- (probably the one Matsui ripped after the mound conference; Posada tied it with a pop-up)... but both those guys are thought of as heroic for their efforts.

 

Stanley's to the backstop had to be the biggest letdown, one out away from a world title. That was worse for me than Buckner's E, because once NY tied it -- and the way they tied it -- we all knew the outcome was inevitable. But I remember my step-father, who was a catcher and a Mets fan, just saying, "That had to be a cross-up."

 

Modern, lol. 1986 was still before I started following the Red Sox regularly, which didn't come until 1988. To me that's still pre-history.

 

Edit: I'd say anything pre-Pedro/Nomar isn't modern Sox history.

Edited by kenmeister
Community Moderator
Posted
Modern, lol. 1986 was still before I started following the Red Sox regularly, which didn't come until 1988. To me that's still pre-history.

 

Edit: I'd say anything pre-Pedro/Nomar isn't modern Sox history.

 

I agree that the modern Sox start with Dan Duquette in 1994, which also coincides with the birth of the Wild Card format.

Posted

Interesting topic.

 

I can see both times as being a valid starting point to the "modern era."

 

One could also argue it all started when Henry took over, but I do think Dan Duquette brought a "modern" outlook and philosophy to a team mired in a structure that prevented real great teams built to win it all. Sure, 3 times we made it to 7 games in the WS to lose, but none of those 3 teams sustained any period of greatness before or afterwards. (Not that having sustained great teams means "modern.")

 

Henry did make a lot of changes that can be considered "modern," but I think Dan D started it all.

Posted
Modern, lol. 1986 was still before I started following the Red Sox regularly, which didn't come until 1988. To me that's still pre-history.

 

Edit: I'd say anything pre-Pedro/Nomar isn't modern Sox history.

 

It's ok, I've never considered myself modern, even when my hair was down to my shoulders; I just used "modern" because if I didn't, someone here would dig up a pitch from a game back when Ruth was a Red Sox. Let's just say, to me, that whole at bat for the Mets' Mookie was the worst ever.

 

I like the saying that the best era of comic books is when you were 13 years old.

Posted
Agree.

 

If the argument is your're buying his age 31 season, it should end right there. Heck, we do not even know if he will have an age 31 season...

 

One more season of a promising pitcher is worth it, no matter what the age, as long as it doesn't mess up another year, too badly.

 

Since he's going to be limited in innings, anyway, what's the harm in gaining another cheap year?

 

If he turns out great, we could save a bundle that last and extra year.

Posted
Except: "it would be inaccurate to say we are going for it with an all-in approach".

 

Sending Houck down because of service time considerations should make Bloom boosters happy, because Tampa doesn't care about using up young guys they know they'll trade before they have to pay them. Of course, Bloom also knows a player with more years of control is a better trade chip...

 

A pitcher with 3 years of team control will not bring back as much as one with 4 years. The Rays knew this and played that game, too.

Posted
Can we close this thread now? If anybody still has "major concerns", you're going to have to go through me first
Posted
Can we close this thread now? If anybody still has "major concerns", you're going to have to go through me first

 

Maybe the Rays should have major concerns.

Posted
Unfortunately ... Noles might be right.

 

LOL :0 After game 1, I might like a mulligan on my 93 win prognostication ...

 

73?

 

Well... right now my unbridled optimism from Game 1 doesn't look quite as crazy!

 

Honestly... I just want to give the Yanks a damned good run for their money, then break their hearts in the ALCS!

 

Still... I'm sticking with 93 wins!

Posted

Definitely Moon. I know I'm over my skis on this prediction, but I still see a great deL of firepower in this lineup to get the job done on any given night.

 

Too many guys still stone cold, but the averages say they should heat up, while other red hot players cool down.

 

Definitely ... still issues with our SR, BP, & D that could get exposed, but nothing 4/4 can't take care of! Let's face it, when irrational mlb superstition takes control of a team, great things are possible. I'm a big believer, so I'm sticking with that until it turns bad.

 

;) 93 is still possible! In fact, given clear statistics on the probabilities behind the statistics of superstition, there is a 100% possibility that we could ride irrational exuberance to 93 wins! Look it up! It's science.

Posted
I'm all for irrational exuberance, but this is not a 159-3 team. Come on, I think realistically they are going to be 158-4. I'll spot them one more loss. :cool:
Community Moderator
Posted
I'm all for irrational exuberance, but this is not a 159-3 team. Come on, I think realistically they are going to be 158-4. I'll spot them one more loss. :cool:

 

Well, of course. They'll use game 162 so that Kiké, Vazquez, Marwin and Danny Santana all get a chance to play each position on the field including pitcher and catcher.

Posted
I'm all for irrational exuberance, but this is not a 159-3 team. Come on, I think realistically they are going to be 158-4. I'll spot them one more loss. :cool:

 

As long as it is not to the Yankees....

Posted
Not so much a major concern, but one for the future. Bryan Mata had Tommy John yesterday.

 

Glad to see he got it right away. Should be ready by 2023.

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

Outfield defense. I know carrying extra pitchers limits the bench to a few multi-positional men, but having one above-average glove for late-innings in the outfield could have helped secure more wins.

 

Cordero and Renfroe are below-average MLB hitters, but at least Renfroe can field his position. Franchy's MLB career may be a small sample size, but he can't be trusted in left. He's faster than JD -- so are most posters here -- but no way either should be on the field when it matters. Verdugo, Kike and Renfroe are the best for now and should close most games.

Posted
The way Arroyo is playing, despite not starting last night, Hernandez should be in CF almost everyday- at least while Arroyo keeps hitting well.
Community Moderator
Posted
The way Arroyo is playing, despite not starting last night, Hernandez should be in CF almost everyday- at least while Arroyo keeps hitting well.

 

With the current roster construction, I think Arroyo at 2b, Kiké at CF and Renfroe/Franchy in LF is their best lineup.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
The Talk Sox Caretaker Fund
The Talk Sox Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Red Sox community on the internet.

×
×
  • Create New...