Red Sox acquire Wilson Contreras From Cardinals

[Hugh2]

I'm not giving you Ohtani, he literally pitches full time too when healthy and it's been said over and over again he is an execellent athlete who would play the field if he wasn't pitching.  But I won't teke him either so lets move onto the Giants. 

Eldridge 55% playing time they did DH Devers a little bit but literally moved him to 1B for 75% of their games.  They also gave time at DH to Heliot Ramos who was their full time LF.  Another rotation  7 out of 10. 

[notin]

11 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Cardinals 6 guys DH'd but it's primarily Herrera so I'll throw that one in the Full time DH pile.  4 out fo 7. 

Cubs 8 Guys DH'd  Ballesteros took the most time at 40% DH also playing a little catcher and 1B. Austin who mostly sat on the bench but did play a little 1B took up 24% of the DH at bats.  WIth Suzuki, and Owen Caisse taking up another 25% of the time at DH and effectively being the full time RF between the two of them.  THat's another heavy rotation.  5 out of 8 teams. 

10 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Cardinals 6 guys DH'd but it's primarily Herrera so I'll throw that one in the Full time DH pile.  4 out fo 7. 

Cubs 8 Guys DH'd  Ballesteros took the most time at 40% DH also playing a little catcher and 1B. Austin who mostly sat on the bench but did play a little 1B took up 24% of the DH at bats.  WIth Suzuki, and Owen Caisse taking up another 25% of the time at DH and effectively being the full time RF between the two of them.  THat's another heavy rotation.  5 out of 8 teams. 

This one is so misleading.  I am not sure it was intentional, but at first glance one might think the author said Ballesteos got 40% of the Cubs’ DH plate appearances and Caissie got another 25%.
 

The reality is Baesteros had 66 PA for the season and Caissie had 27 PA.  These players were barely involved.  Suzuki handled the bulk of their DH, and got some OF time in primarily when Tucker was injured.  Like Devers, Suzuki was unhappy being a full time DH.  Unlike Devers, he did everything his manager asked anyway…

[moonslav59]

1 minute ago, Hugh2 said:

Literally all your examples are "well this guy moved to DH when he got hurt" 

But how many of these teams started the year with a full time DH? which would seem to be a pre-requisite to claim a team doesn't want to rotate the DH and prefers to have a full time player there. 

 

You both can be right on this.

I do think Santander was meant to be the FT DH, so notin is right on that, but Springer became the FT due to injury, so your point is correct, too.

It looks to me, like half or more teams go into the season planning on having one guy DH 140+ games.

Did the Sox plan on Masa DH'ing 140+? Did they end up pivoting to planning on Devers to DH 140+, once Casas got hurt and Masa was on the 60 IL? Who's side is supported by the Sox case? (It looks like both are, to me.)

[Hitch]

55 minutes ago, notin said:

Because you need a DH for all 162 games.

If the Sox used the DH role to fit in their 4 outfielders, Thats the same as having a dedicated DH.  And Theyre still not all gong to play 162 games even if healthy, because Cora doesn’t rest players to get them rest; he rests players to keep the bench players active.  And that will still happen…

Except it's not. At all. And the bench players can still get at bats. You're talking nonsense in reply to my point.

I am not commenting on the wider conservation at large.  

[Hugh2]

I'll simplify it

Guardians - ROtation

Mariners - Rotation

Marlins - Rotation

Mets - Rotation

Nationals - Rotation

Orioles - Rotation

Padres - Rotation

Philles - Rotation.....just kidding. Schwarber is full time DH.  

I'm just going to stop there, I'll look at more later.  The majority of teams do not have a full time DH, and when they do apparently the started the season with a rotatation and a guy got hurt.  

So it really really really really really does not look like teams are looking to employ a full time DH but rather it something that happens when injuries pile up OR you have a guy like Schwarber. 

I mean, just to continually reiterate my point lets look at our team.  The guy who is poised to get the most DH at bats is a person almost every fan would rather not have on this team as it handcuffs us in so many ways. 

[Hugh2]

5 minutes ago, notin said:

This one is so misleading.  I am not sure it was intentional, but at first glance one might think the author said Ballesteos got 40% of the Cubs’ DH plate appearances and Caissie got another 25%.
 

The reality is Baesteros had 66 PA for the season and Caissie had 27 PA.  These players were barely involved.  Suzuki handled the bulk of their DH, and got some OF time in primarily when Tucker was injured.  Like Devers, Suzuki was unhappy being a full time DH.  Unlike Devers, he did everything his manager asked anyway…

Suzuki started 14% of their games at DH.   You don't strike me as a liar who makes things up so you're obviously looking at something wrong. 

[Hugh2]

5 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

You both can be right on this.

I do think Santander was meant to be the FT DH, so notin is right on that, but Springer became the FT due to injury, so your point is correct, too.

It looks to me, like half or more teams go into the season planning on having one guy DH 140+ games.

Did the Sox plan on Masa DH'ing 140+? Did they end up pivoting to planning on Devers to DH 140+, once Casas got hurt and Masa was on the 60 IL? Who's side is supported by the Sox case? (It looks like both are, to me.)

Really???? because it almost NEVER happens that way.  actually if anything, it appears injury forces a guy into a more prominent starting role at DH.  

[Hugh2]

ehhhh **** it I'll keep going

Pirates - rotation

Rangers - full time DH (theres 5!!!!)

Rays - full time DH 6!!! uh you guys are catching up. 

Red Sox - rotation

Reds - rotation

Rockies - rotation

Royals - rotation

Tigers - rotation

Twins - rotation

White Sox - rotation

Yankees - Full Time DH

Dodgers - Full time DH (it's only fair). 

so 8 full time DH's 

My point was, is, and will continually to be MLB teams do not look to employ full time DH's.  It's something that happens when either A.) you have a Kyle Schwarber on your roster or B.) enough guys get hurt that one guy is essentially playing all the games there but as my friend Notin pointed out......a lot of teams often do NOT start off the season that way. 

[Hugh2]

I also find it interesting that many of the full time DH's are not guys that teams went out into free agency and bought them thinking oh yeah!!!! lets go sign that guy and put him at DH full time!!!!.  Obviously that's going to happen with an elite bat like Schwarber. 

But when teams do employ a DH 50% of the time or above the higher end of those guys that are inarguably full time DH's are your Giancarlo Stantons.  Nobody wanted him to be a DH, he fell into that role. 

Lets use the Red Sox as a better example.  We want Duran to be a good outfielder somewhere, we WANT Roman Anthony to be a stud outfielder, we want those players to be all stars at their position.  We wanted Casas to be a first baseman, if he becomes are DH it will be because he hit his way back to being a MLB player NOT because we wanted him to be a DH. 

Does anybody really truly desire Yoshida to be our full time DH?  But yet he'd be ok there, and we would be fine with it if an outfielder is traded and/or Casas never comes back. 

Teams are not LOOKING for DH's the way that they look for a second baseman. 

[Hugh2]

31 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

You both can be right on this.

I do think Santander was meant to be the FT DH, so notin is right on that, but Springer became the FT due to injury, so your point is correct, too.

It looks to me, like half or more teams go into the season planning on having one guy DH 140+ games.

Did the Sox plan on Masa DH'ing 140+? Did they end up pivoting to planning on Devers to DH 140+, once Casas got hurt and Masa was on the 60 IL? Who's side is supported by the Sox case? (It looks like both are, to me.)

I went into this seeing how actually was or was not a full time DH per playing time.  It makes sense that there's some clarification in all this.  Notin was kind enough to provide those details to us.  But as I said, at least in a few of those situations a player was playing the field, got hurt, and came back to DH.  That kind of strengthens my argument that those teams (at least inititally) wanted to rotate the DH spot. 

[moonslav59]

25 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Suzuki started 14% of their games at DH.   You don't strike me as a liar who makes things up so you're obviously looking at something wrong. 

B-R shows Suzuki started 102 games at DH in 2025 and 47 in the OF.

What numbers are you looking at?

[Hugh2]

7 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

B-R shows Suzuki started 102 games at DH in 2025 and 47 in the OF.

What numbers are you looking at?

Fangraphs has playing time broken down by 2025 rosters.  however it's actually a depth chart using 2026 projections I think.  But it explicity says' its for 2025.  That's a mix up on someones part over at that site. 

Still, the fact that they are projecting him for more playing time in the field is a statement.  They had him at DH, but he's viewed more as a fielder.  He wasn't signed and sought after to be a full time DH.  So my point still holds true. 

[moonslav59]

Just now, Hugh2 said:

I went into this seeing how actually was or was not a full time DH per playing time.  It makes sense that there's some clarification in all this.  Notin was kind enough to provide those details to us.  But as I said, at least in a few of those situations a player was playing the field, got hurt, and came back to DH.  That kind of strengthens my argument that those teams (at least inititally) wanted to rotate the DH spot. 

I agree with all of this and almost everything you said on this subject. 

I also think notin is correct in saying half or most teams go into a season thinking they will play one guy at DH for the vast majority of the season, barring injury or some sort of unexpected decline or rise by the player or someone else on the team that warrants a shift in plans.

There are some teams where it's not clear who the best "bench bat" is, or who is clearly the worse or worst player on defense, but who can hit well enough to DH near FT.

The Sox 2025 example was a great one. Masa was the obvious FT DH before the Bregman trade. There was a clear plan for that. Maybe when we signed him, we hoped he'd be a better LF'er than he turned out to be, but we also saw the rise of 3+ better OF'ers that forced him into a FT or near FT role at DH.

Then, we signed Bregman and made the choice to make Devers the FT DH. Did that event support your position or notin's? (I'd say both.) 

Then Casas gets hurt and the DH/1B slot gets thrown into chaos, and we have no FT DH. Hell, it looked like Anthony was going to fill that role, until he got hurt, too.

I think there is too much nuance involved in saying "the plan is _____ is our FT DH." I do think most GMs and managers realize the position will likely be in flux over a season, but they have an idea that one guy fits the role best, if everyone is healthy. (maybe a R-L platoon not one.) No team is ever 100% healthy.

[moonslav59]

1 minute ago, Hugh2 said:

Fangraphs has playing time broken down by 2025 rosters.  however it's actually a depth chart using 2026 projections I think.  But it explicity says' its for 2025.  That's a mix up on someones part over at that site. 

Still, the fact that they are projecting him for more playing time in the field is a statement.  They had him at DH, but he's viewed more as a fielder.  He wasn't signed and sought after to be a full time DH.  So my point still holds true. 

That makes sense. 

On the flip side, I do think Santander was signed to be a FT DH (emergency 4th OF,) but that changed when Springer got hurt and needed to DH, so was notin right on that one?

Plans on who DHs and actual DH time adds further nuances to both of your positions.

[notin]

39 minutes ago, Hitch said:

Except it's not. At all. And the bench players can still get at bats. You're talking nonsense in reply to my point.

I am not commenting on the wider conservation at large.  

Right.

I’m talking nonsense to a guy who presented Miguel Ballesteros and Owen Caissie as taking 65% of the Cubs Dh time desire them only totaling 93 plate appearances for the season.

40 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Suzuki started 14% of their games at DH.   You don't strike me as a liar who makes things up so you're obviously looking at something wrong. 

Suzuki started 102 games at DH per baseball-reference.  What is your source saying 14%?

Suzuki probably would have been there more if Kyle Tucker didnt get hurt.

 

[mvp 78]

7 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Fangraphs has playing time broken down by 2025 rosters.  however it's actually a depth chart using 2026 projections I think.  But it explicity says' its for 2025.  That's a mix up on someones part over at that site. 

Still, the fact that they are projecting him for more playing time in the field is a statement. 

Not a very good one it seems. 

[Hitch]

1 minute ago, notin said:

Right.

I’m talking nonsense to a guy who presented Miguel Ballesteros and Owen Caissie as taking 65% of the Cubs Dh time desire them only totaling 93 plate appearances for the season.

Uh... yeah... you're confusing me with Hugh I assume. Which would explain why your reply to me made zero sense in the first place. 

[notin]

9 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Fangraphs has playing time broken down by 2025 rosters.  however it's actually a depth chart using 2026 projections I think.  But it explicity says' its for 2025.  That's a mix up on someones part over at that site. 

Still, the fact that they are projecting him for more playing time in the field is a statement.  They had him at DH, but he's viewed more as a fielder.  He wasn't signed and sought after to be a full time DH.  So my point still holds true. 

Unless the Cubs bring back Tucker, Suzuki will see his role change in 2026 as he goes back to RF.  That’s not a rotation.

Really the Cubs kill your argument more .  than any other team.  They had 4 good outfielders, like Boston, with Happ, PCA, Tucker and Suzuki.  All four are good defensive outfielders.  PCA won a GG in CF.  Happ has won multiple Gold Gloves in LF.  Suzuki and Tucker both grade out well on multiple defensive  metrics.   But when all 4 were healthy, Suzuki played DH almost exclusively.  His time in the OF giving Happ and Tucker days off occasionally pushed them to DH, but with no greater frequency than any other player.  Less with Happ, who started 3 games at DH.  Tucker started more, but a lot of that was due to shoulder(?) issues.  And Seiya’s vocal objections to being a full time DH. 
 

I don’t see the Sox doing this. Yoshida might be platooned at DH, which makes sense.  DH is the best position for a platoon because differences in defensive abilities don’t matter…

[Hugh2]

All we heard about for months was how Yoshida could swing the bat (and was) but was still on the IL because he couldn’t play the field.

no way the Sox “planned” on Yoshida being their DH.  Devers was the DH

no one has ever “planned” for Yoshida to be their DH

[Hugh2]

1 minute ago, notin said:

Unless the Cubs bring back Tucker, Suzuki will see his role change in 2026 as he goes back to RF.  That’s not a rotation.

Really the Cubs kill your argument more .  than any other team.  They had 4 good outfielders, like Boston, with Happ, PCA, Tucker and Suzuki.  All four are good defensive outfielders.  PCA won a GG in CF.  Happ has won multiple Gold Gloves in LF.  Suzuki and Tucker both grade out well on multiple defensive  metrics.   But when all 4 were healthy, Suzuki played DH almost exclusively.  His time in the OF giving Happ and Tucker days off occasionally pushed them to DH, but with no greater frequency than any other player.  Less with Happ, who started 3 games at DH.  Tucker started more, but a lot of that was due to shoulder(?) issues.  And Seiya’s vocal objections to being a full time DH. 
 

I don’t see the Sox doing this. Yoshida might be platooned at DH, which makes sense.  DH is the best position for a platoon because differences in defensive abilities don’t matter…

Not really at all.  Because the aggregate is the only thing that matters, because exceptions will always exist.

with the caveat of having an elite bat, teams prefer to not have a full time DH.

the fact that someone on a lot of teams grows into that slot during the season is a logic result and not a planned move.

[notin]

25 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I agree with all of this and almost everything you said on this subject. 

I also think notin is correct in saying half or most teams go into a season thinking they will play one guy at DH for the vast majority of the season, barring injury or some sort of unexpected decline or rise by the player or someone else on the team that warrants a shift in plans.

There are some teams where it's not clear who the best "bench bat" is, or who is clearly the worse or worst player on defense, but who can hit well enough to DH near FT.

The Sox 2025 example was a great one. Masa was the obvious FT DH before the Bregman trade. There was a clear plan for that. Maybe when we signed him, we hoped he'd be a better LF'er than he turned out to be, but we also saw the rise of 3+ better OF'ers that forced him into a FT or near FT role at DH.

Then, we signed Bregman and made the choice to make Devers the FT DH. Did that event support your position or notin's? (I'd say both.) 

Then Casas gets hurt and the DH/1B slot gets thrown into chaos, and we have no FT DH. Hell, it looked like Anthony was going to fill that role, until he got hurt, too.

I think there is too much nuance involved in saying "the plan is _____ is our FT DH." I do think most GMs and managers realize the position will likely be in flux over a season, but they have an idea that one guy fits the role best, if everyone is healthy. (maybe a R-L platoon not one.) No team is ever 100% healthy.

Which gives DH ss much flux as any other position except catcher, where starters typically play 120-130 games due to physical strains.  
 

No one would argue the Sox didn’t enter the season without a full time 3b last year, despite Bregman only starting 75% of their games…

[Hugh2]

Don’t confuse this argument with being against getting a big bat to DH when the lineup desperately needs offense.  
 

there’s a reason many of us wanted someone line Schwarber signed or even Alonso

[Hugh2]

Just now, notin said:

Which gives DH ss much flux as any other position except catcher, where starters typically play 120-130 games due to physical strains.  
 

No one would argue the Sox didn’t enter the season without a full time 3b last year, despite Bregman only starting 75% of their games…

You can look at the positions splits.  Guys get hurt but there’s a whole lot of 75% plus across every position.

with the Lone Caveat being DH

[notin]

6 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

All we heard about for months was how Yoshida could swing the bat (and was) but was still on the IL because he couldn’t play the field.

no way the Sox “planned” on Yoshida being their DH.  Devers was the DH

no one has ever “planned” for Yoshida to be their DH

My theory is Breslow, like you, isn’t wild about Yoshida or his contract.  But the Sox most definitely had a full time DH for the first 73 games last year…

[Hugh2]

“Bregman only playing 75% of their games games”

how many teams had one player DH only 75% of the time?

[moonslav59]

6 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

All we heard about for months was how Yoshida could swing the bat (and was) but was still on the IL because he couldn’t play the field.

no way the Sox “planned” on Yoshida being their DH.  Devers was the DH

no one has ever “planned” for Yoshida to be their DH

Before Bregman was signed, Yoshida was the planned FT DH.

After Bregman was signed, they actually told Devers he was going to be the FT DH. That was one reason he got pissed, when later, Casas got hurt and they wanted him at 1B.

 

[notin]

5 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Don’t confuse this argument with being against getting a big bat to DH when the lineup desperately needs offense.  
 

there’s a reason many of us wanted someone line Schwarber signed or even Alonso

I think that’s your entire point, but you’ve tried to argue Yoshida is some sort of singular instance of a player limited to starting DH.  
 

There’s a massive difference between saying teams don’t have full time DHs anymore and Yoshida isn’t a good DH. The former is flat out untrue.  The latter opinion is shared by many.

And your Ohtani argument was specious.  Yes, he pitches, hence his insane salary.  But he’s a full time DH even when he pitches. And has multiple MVP awards, none of which were earned on the mound. Heck, MLB re-wrote the rules to accommodate him in that regard…

[Hugh2]

Just now, notin said:

My theory is Breslow, like you, isn’t wild about Yoshida or his contract.  But the Sox most definitely had a full time DH for the first 73 games last year…

Yeah, a third baseman who they moved because he could hit.  oh wait, he’s a 1b now too actually.

If you have a Rafael Devers who you can plug in at DH you do that.  Most teams don’t have that and aren’t looking to do that until it happens.

no one ever signs a DH and says “yeah he can DH for a while but he might have to slide over to 3B for the last couple years of that contract”
 

[Hugh2]

2 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Before Bregman was signed, Yoshida was the planned FT DH.

After Bregman was signed, they actually told Devers he was going to be the FT DH. That was one reason he got pissed, when later, Casas got hurt and they wanted him at 1B.

 

Oh so we are taking the word of the Sox brass in the offseason as gospel?

Also didn’t they sign him to play LF? They literally don’t want him on the roster so I’m not sure what point this is making.  
 

so teams want full time DH’s because the DH they reportedly planned on being a DH whom they didn’t sign to DH is a guy they don’t even want on the roster?

That’s not exactly a solid argument for teams value and go out and look to have one solid guy at DH

[Hugh2]

4 minutes ago, notin said:

I think that’s your entire point, but you’ve tried to argue Yoshida is some sort of singular instance of a player limited to starting DH.  
 

There’s a massive difference between saying teams don’t have full time DHs anymore and Yoshida isn’t a good DH. The former is flat out untrue.  The latter opinion is shared by many.

And your Ohtani argument was specious.  Yes, he pitches, hence his insane salary.  But he’s a full time DH even when he pitches. And has multiple MVP awards, none of which were earned on the mound. Heck, MLB re-wrote the rules to accommodate him in that regard…

I think the Ohtani point went over your head.  He literally is a 6-8 war player before he even picks up a bat.  That should end that argument BUT he’s only DHing because he pitches.  If Ohtani only hit, he’d be playing in the field