Dojji

Reread what I said and tell me where I said Nava as a regular 1B was a good idea. It's just a better idea than Middlebrooks.

Middlebrooks is not currently a solution at 1B. I'd honestly rather have Nava there. Sure, nava has no power, but you have to be able to win the at bat before power even comes into play, and Middlebrooks' grasp of that fact is profoundly limited.

Who was the last centerfielder you saw in Fenway that you would consider had a great arm? I'm just curious. I mean, Damon notwithstanding, have a theory that the depth of Fenway's centerfield makes outfield arms look worse than they are when they play center regularly. Regardless, just because there's two different defensive tools doesn't mean those tools are equal in signficance. Arm strength in the outfield just comes up so relatively infrequently that it's hard for it to compete with the value of range Ellsbury's range adds a great deal more in value than his arm takes away, that's just the truth. Sure, an extra base here and there, an extra run here and there, can be attributed to a weak arm, but it's nothing comparison to the extra base madness that can erupt if a centerfielder's range tool is mediocre or worse.

And that's almost relevant. there's not a lot of players in this league more valuable than Pedroia, even leaving the intangibles aside. And if Pedroia has a hammy injury, it really impacts his ability to play his position too, even more so than a second baseman of average height, considering the way he throws himself around. Hamstring injuries are just no fun for anyone. I'm sorry, I think you're watching the wrong player. I'm watching Jacoby Ellsbury, and you seem to be watching Jarrod Dyson. Ellsbury has more than his share of extra base pop. And quit making the argument that Ellsbury is one injury away from ineffectiveness, while failing to apply that to literally everyone else in the lineup. Dustin Pedroia has missed his share of time with injuries, besides the ones he plays through. I don't think there's an extremely on his body that Pedroia hasn't fractured at least once. He plays hurt so much because he gets himself hurt so much. that's not an indication of durability on his part, quite the reverse. Since this originally came up about a concern as to how he'll hold up going into his late 30's let me just say that yes, I am in fact concerned. His speed and power are both down each of the last 2 years. Small players age badly, that's a historical fact. it's a risk you have to take to keep a talent like Pedroia in the fold, though, and that being the case, so be it.

This would have been an somewhat intere... Wait, let me rephrase that.. This would have been a barely relevant thread if you'd actually managed to include some sort of reasoning -- why you think the run this year was fluky or lucky. Stating an opinion, and following it by "thought?!" betrays a complete lack of, well, thought, on your part. If you want to take an unpopular opinion, fine, it's what this forum is made of. but show your work.

A good barometer, and the one I've been using since Lars, is if the franchise starts talking about how we shouldn't worry about a given prospect's flaws when those flaws are critical to what they are. For example -- a first baseman with limited power who survived by hitting for a high average in the minors. that wasn't ever going to be trouble down the road. frankly, this is part of the reason I'm a little less than enthusiastic about replacing Ellsbury with Bradley. people seem to be trying to hard to build a narrative where Bradley will step in and everything will be fine and trying very hard to believe it. We heard that with Anderson, and everything wasn't fine. The one thing that stands out to me about bradley is that he strikes out either once in 6, or once in 5, times up to the plate at every stop in the minors so far. That's not awful, but it's also not great, and while strikeouts aren't a huge concern as long as a player's getting on base, they're more of a concern when they proliferate in the minors. Issues making contact on an alleged leadoff type are problematic, look at Lorenzo Cain to see why. Cain's easily as talented as Bradley, but he strikes out so much he can't use his offensive talents to their best potential. Also let's just take a second to discuss Bradley's speed, because I just don't see a lot of evidence of same. His caught stealing rates are hideous for a supposedly fast player. Either his speed is not as advertized, or he has a serious deficiency in timing. Either way, not a good thing for a player who's supposed to be replacing the 1 hitter.

that trade had the benefit of being a win win. Arguably, the trade between Boston and LA put both teams in position to contend. Which is great. It should mean that the next time cherington picks up the phone and calls down to LA, he'll get a good reception.

Everyone screws up occasionally. Something fans tend to need to bear in mind more than they do when rating managers and GM's. The mark of a great executive is more about limiting the damage of his mistakes and maximizing the impact of his successes, then it is about maintaining more than an illusion of infallibility.

The real problem for butler is that the guys he's going to wind up competing directly with for big league backup time also did well. Vazquez didn't hit for any real power, but finished with a .380 OBP. That with his outstanding defensive skills is enough to merit consideration, and as a specialist type, he's a player the team is going to identify as a useful roleplayer that much more easily. And of course, the team is far more familiar with Lavarnway as well, and he's flashed some real offensive potential this year. Butler's problem is that as the jack of all trades, he's the master of none. if the team want offense from their backup they'll go with lavs, if they want Defense, it'll be hard to ignore Vazquez. butler doesn't stand out in either area despite being the best all-rounder, and that's going to hurt him.

Butler's final line in Pawtucket this year: .829 OPS, .350. 14 HR, 23 XBH, .262 AVG Not called up to Boston for September. That's his end of year line. The average is noticeably low, but the combined package is still interesting. This is a kid who's done pretty much everything the team should expect of him. I really hope he isn't squeezed out by the wave of catching talent coming up behind him -- hope a spot is made open for him to compete for this Spring. If the team insists on a veteran backup in the big leagues he's going to have a real dogfight on his hands trying to fend off Lavarnway from one direction and Vazquez and possibly Swihart from the other.

Considering that in the offseason I was calling for a line of .270/.340/.420, and you can verify that, I can safely say that we were all pleasantly surprised by Nava this year. It's hard to say that I'm constantly wrong when a lot of the guys I put forward never get the chance to show one way or the other. The rare times one of my guys gets a shot, they tend to be more hit than miss. I was a big Brandon Moss fan, I backed Josh Reddick over Ryan Kalish, I wanted to see Kottaras to get a shot to back up in Boston, I wanted to see Jed Lowrie continue to get chances, all of those calls were the right ones when they were made. Also very pleasantly surprised by Brandon Workman, although calling him as someone to be effective is far less of a stretch. People have a tendency to overvalue the hyped prospects, these other guys wouldn't be around if the team didn't think they might be able to contribute if called on. if a guy can take a walk and shows enough other skills to be useful at a big league level, you can bet the Boston Red sox have a scenario in which a combination of injuries and struggles means that player will be called up to Boston. I mean heck, I didn't think we'd see as much of Brandon Snyder as we did this year, did anyone else? That alone should tell people something. I have one big whiff named Lars Anderson that I'll take the hit for, learn my lesson, and never back a bigtime prospect the team happens to also be hyping. Think for yourself, don't let the spin doctors do your thinking. Sometimes backing the big prospect is the right move. I'm a confirmed Xander Bogaerts at shortstop fan back when everyone else thought he was our 3B of the future. but never do it just because he's the flavor of the month. Do some analysis with whatever information you have available, and never be afraid to take an unpopular stance if that's what your gut and your information is telling you to do. Kinda hoping Dan Butler or Alex Hassan get their chance either here or somewhere else. They're my next picks to contribute more than the shallow analysts who focus exclusively on baseball's top 100 are prepared to admit them to be capable of. Personally I think that Butler has the talent to start if called on, and Hassan at least has the talent to platoon. We'll see of they get their opportunity to prove that. I have to think Hassan's chances to prove himself are going to be far greater than Butler's if both remain in the system.

there is a talent associated with being able to see the ball and make adjustments at the plate. And there's varying levels of that talent. Just like any other talent, experience can bring it out more. And there are things players can do to compensate for performing poorly in this area, but that by itself does not mean it is not a tool. Not any more than Youkilis taking his above average at best power, and leveraging it into some monster slugging years, means power is not a tool.

I thought you were ignoring me. by all means don't stop. There's an ongoing debate, with proponents on both sides, whether an advanced hitting approach should be considered a 'tool' for those players who naturally have one. it's certainly something that should affect their projectability, and the lack of considering hitting approach is the #1 reason certain advanced players blindside people when they transition successfully into the majors -- Nava is hardly alone here. People tend to forget that Youk did it too.

I just disagree with you. Sure, Middlebrooks has the power, but which one of the two is most likely to clear the .400 OBP mark at the big league level? Which one brings the speed? Cecchini can generate tons of offense if he tops out, he just won't quite be doing as much of it with one swing as Middlebrooks might. And Cecchini has no shortage of power, he's a consistent gap threat which with his speed is fantastic and allows him to generate absolute havoc offensively, and he's exactly the kind of patience first gap hitter that can create Pedroia/Youkilis type line drive bomb power as his career advances. I think Cecchini's ultimate power ceiling isn't as far behind Middlebrooks, as his patience, OBP, speed and baserunning skills are ahead of Middlebrooks, in terms of ultimate upside. If we have a 5 tool prospect in the minors right now, that prospect is Garin Cecchini. it'll come down to whether he can leverage his hitting approach into line drive home run power as he develops, the way Youkilis did. That's the big question but I'd say there's plenty of reason for optimism.

His numbers are off the charts yes, but there's legit concerns in scouting circles about Abreu's batspeed, which would make him a high power, high patience, ???? contact hitter. Exactly what Napoli is.

Solid on base ability is nonoptional for this team and the way its front office thinks the game. They made that clear, among other times, when they traded Iglesias, when they demoted Middlebrooks in the first place, and back in the day when they went through a rotation of shortstops-of-the-year rather than stick with Alex Gonzalez If Middlebrooks can't improve his consistency (which is what OBP really measures, the odds that a guy does something useful when he takes an at bat) then he'll go when Cecchini is ready. Cecchini looks a little Boggsian, consistency is his forte as a prospect, the team loves that kind of player and they will seize an opportunity to replace an all-talent-limited-results guy with the more consistent version. It's one of the reasons I always thought Nava would keep getting chances.

Napoli is what he is, He's a patient hitter who runs into the ball enough times despite his mediocre batspeed that he can maintain good end of year numbers. No one is going to mistake him for a great hitter, but he can atone for his mistakes with raw power most of the time. From what I've heard about Abreu, he's going to be the same type.

With Bogaerts and Cecchini we have the depth potentially to handle things if WMB can't become more consistent. That said, I wouldn't mind investing in some kind of veteran depth at third base, with the understanding that we're mostly looking for a bench type. Someone like Maicer Izturis would be a good pickup there possibly, since while he's not the best hitter ever and is coming off a down year he's a heck of a utility type, he could fill a backup SS role/insurance for Bogaerts, as well as add to the mix at 3B.

You realize that that line is as good or better than a fair number of teams get from their starting 1B? I'd say that a .800 OPS from your 1B is the standard, but that there are definitely teams out there that don't meet that standard (including, laughably enough, the Angels this year)

Not sure I agree with that. Lefties that murder righthanded pitching can start for a team even with the platoon weakness. As long as he continues to be as hard on righthanders as he is this year, Carp could definitely be a starter. I wouldn't polish any MVP awards in anticipation of sending them his way, but a 2-3 WAR 1Bman is something he could probably pull off. What would be interesting, is if we keep Drew finagling it into a Carp/Middlebrooks platoon with Middlebrooks playing third part of the rest of the time. It should be possible, if tricky, to mix and match 4 infielders into regular at bats in 3 roles, and the opportunity to stack the lefthanded Drew and Carp, or the righthanded Bogaerts and Middlebrooks, against the matchups that most favored them would be an interesting option for the manager.

Let's be clear: Drew wouldn't be a "depth option" unless you're making the very mistake I was sighing about upthread. Penning Bogaerts in as next year's starting SS now is premature. Even if it turns out that he not only cracks the roster, he takes over SS by storm, and makes the All Star team and is a WS MVP, it's still premature from this far out. I have little doubt about his viability longterm as a SS option. And he's probably going to dominate right out of the box. It's the PRESUMPTION that he's going to do so I'd rather not see made, even if it turns out that way in the end (which it very well could, I hasten to repeat).

Give it up, Mark, UN has two settings, "flame" and "more flame." He'd be an informative and interesting guy to have in the forum if he wasn't so one-dimensional

Gotta love the notion of the ultimate ur-jerk on the forum using that moniker on anyone else who posts here.

let me put it this way: I don't see a700 being nearly as consistently eager to jump down someone's throat as you. every time I seem to notice you it's because you're in fill on pit bull attack mode. a700 is capable of carrying on a civil conversation. And when he does go to far I do call him on it, so you know where to put that argument.

The Orioles are not a team that can give themselves options the way we can. They're not a poor team, but they're not one of the top 5 markets in the game, and they have to gamble occasionally as a result. Good for them for getting their player development back in gear after a long period of ineptitude but I'm sure that given a choice they would want their rookies competing with established talent for jobs too. The worst case scenario is always season/career ending injury. That's not the issue. The issue is how best to develop the talent this player has. And I've always felt that gift-wrapping a prospect a big league position invites that player to become complacent, while forcing them to compete for and win the job, even if the competition is just a Joe Average guy, forces them to develop better work habits and stay on top of their game a bit longer so as to outmuscle the competition, which helps them when the competition has moved on to greener pastures. I mean for chrissake we're talking about a 21 year old kid. We just saw what happened (or we Bruins fans did) when the team gave Tyler Seguin and Phil Kessel jobs and top billing right out of the chute, it was exciting for awhile but character issues crept in and it ended badly. Meanwhile Tuukka Rask was phenomenal after finally getting a real chance to be the starter, and carried the team as far as a goaltender possibly can. That's hardly without its parallels in baseball, so I'm not anxious to forget those lessons with another top 21 year old on the steam tray and ready to serve. Now certainly there's prospects that would succeed without that kind of forced competition, players with the character and makeup to work hard and succeed regardless of environment. But none of them have any problem succeeding AGAINST that kind of competition, and we've seen a few of the other kind in Boston as well. I just don't see where the gain in taking chances is. And if you keep those veterans around and force the kids to learn their lessons and work hard to keep playing, the legitimate reasons for optimism will be even more legitimate.