sk7326

Clearly it's money and stadium - PawSox don't own McCoy - they'd own the new place, I think it's probably that simple. Well, the Sox (aside from Lucchino) do not own the team, they do have an agreement with them to provide players. I am sure those agreements include some standard share of stuff. If the Sox had a big issue, they could easily switch to another franchise when the affiliation agreement ends. That said, I think this move is just the new owners wanting to make the franchise more valuable by owning the stadium and all related revenue.

Even if Betts and Swihart are still off limits - this move likely puts Devers or Margot into play as a sweetener for a deal that might have less high end big league ready prospect stuff.

The two headed SS monster in 2013 was not at all bad either

Less sure than with Dice-K ... since after all, they did not give Moncada a big league deal.

BTW: I agree with you. I just am more uncertain about the ability of this management to be strong when putting the kiddos into the show. There is some reactiveness which is alarming.

Oh I wouldn't be surprised if Bogaerts is in talks now - this management seems itchy about these sorts of things, when kids do not do exactly what they dreamed of immediately.

Even 2B will be a distant memory - those aren't generally positions you see strong safeties playing. But if you project him to something realistic - 3B/RF ... it means the system has four serious 3B (including Sandoval) ... so you figure that is part of the trade inventory. Let's put it this way - I hope Cecchini is ready to move.

In theory it allows them to talk Betts. And I think the Phillies, for giving up 3 years of control of a good pitcher at a reasonable contract, want to come away with at least one real guy.

Easy there. Kid is 210 lbs already - chances of sticking at SS are very low. Also he's 19. I imagine the Sox - given he is not on a major league deal - will start him in Greenville. You have all season to move him up to Portland if he crushes the levels. But it clearly gives them an embarassment of position prospects which has not been the case in a while.

Question is whether they will put him in extended spring and then wait and start him in Lowell or something ... or do you go right to Greenville. If he can smash his way through full season ball as a 19 year old, that is plenty to get excited about. If he gets to Portland this year - then that is something to really really crow about. (of course this assumes the age is accurate)

It's a good signing. Even with the crazy overinflation of Cuban prospects, this seems like a premium one.

I've read right field is a reasonable projection for him. 6'0" 210 as a 19 year old makes it very possible he will outgrow the position quickly - but apparently the tools and bat project anywhere

It will be interesting - Moncada from what I have read yes is a SS, but given his size and age, almost no chance of staying there. But the bat could/should still be plenty good for RF.

Except the 4 seasons they missed the playoffs were very very different seasons. Nobody wants to repeat 2012 and 2014. But 2010 and 2011 were still a lot of wins.

Pitch clock would not be a bad idea. The measures introduced will help a bit. The batters box thing is the most sensible of them clearly. I am amazed that they did not mandate that the second visit from the mound be eliminated. The manager has a phone, the bullpen has a phone - there is no reason to delay a pitching change. Of course the most important measure would be automating balls and strikes - that is the hugest driver to slow games.

It is the reason more than anything Farrell (even with the questions one can have) got extended, and why Maddon, Francona have been such desirable managers (and why someone like Gabe Kapler seemed so sensible on TV compared to Joe Morgan). Understanding both the old timey baseball things as well as the analytics and being able to work with them both. It is a hard skill set to find these days. And certainly bridging the gap between the analytics types and players is key for success with this stuff.

He has negotiated a career with that body pretty well so far. Ah to still be youngish.

One known case of the new stuff and scouting going hand in hand is the idea of batting eye - which was less emphasized in scouting because it was seen as a coachable skill. But now that is an important part of the package that is scouted because it is so hard to change. But moreover - the analytics, the technical analysis of results - can't exist in a vacuum. All of the orgs use it to some degree or another, but what separates teams is how you take the information and turn it into actionable stuff, how it comes out in your scouting philosophy and the instructions those guys. It also comes out in on-field tactics. How would it not? It would be waste of money if it didn't.

And if you look at the marginal drop off it still did not drive most of the 26 game drop off. SS was a mild drop off. CF was bad but not enough to do on its own. 3B was bad in 2013 too. The drop-offs at catcher, right field and left field were much more difficult to get past. The failure of platoon magic in LF, Victorino's injuries, the gaping hole at catcher. If Bradley had just hit a little better, most likely he would have only been a light drop off from the regression which Ellsbury would have delivered himself.

Nothing more boring than reporting on spring training so you have to write something. Pablo is a danger not to age well indeed. But the counter is that the Red Sox are paying for his 29-33 seasons - so they might not have to worry too much about that.

The two last place seasons warrant skepticism for sure. That is fair. Considering that the team won 179 games in the two other seasons they missed the playoffs it is hard to get THAT fired up about it. Specifically there are legitimate questions about the current regime's ability to handle kids at the major league level. The last two seasons in Cleveland have shown strong evidence that handling young players (or managing a staff doing so) is something Tito is just very good at. The prior GM/Manager seemed to be better at avoiding excessive reactiveness. Put another way - if the Red Sox choose their starting outfield based on spring training stats again I will scream

Well Moneyball is about process improvement and identifying market inefficiencies. So what was an opportunity in 2001 is clearly not there now. The efficiencies moved to defense - the two World Series combatants were known to be very focused on defensive analytics. The advanced use of shifts is a clear nod towards this stuff. The advances move the way technology moves in business. There are early adopters - which are often teams like the A's or Rays who have no choice but to keep looking to stay ahead of the curve to manage meager resources. Teams like the Yanks and Sox can wait for the more proven stuff. Bigger companies do the same thing - if it ain't broke etc etc etc The skills to play the game in a lot of ways haven't changed - but the skills that orgs value sure as hell has, and analytics have been very much part of it. Obviously a decade ago, the discovery that taking pitches is much more nature than nurture changed an area of emphasis for scouting, that plate discipline is something to look for in high schoolers because it is generally difficult to teach to a meaningful degree. (I've mentioned the glaring exception of someone like Sammy Sosa, but that is very very rate) The sorts of players who make the top of org rankings now has a lot to do with improved knowledge on positional value. Scouting still matters a lot, but what they are looking for has changed. And there is still no substitute for scouting as far as determining makeup and such.

Some truth there. Personally, I will decry the new ballpark exactly as long as it takes for a pennant to get there.

And fortunately the Red Sox will be out by then - they did do a solid job mitigating some of this risk

Camden is certainly preferred - for the ballparks I've visited it's still the best