sk7326

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

Moving them out of Fenway would remove the cover for not having a good team - fortunately since 1967 that has largely been a non-issue. I don't know - I get the sense that pink-hat sorts are nostalgic about the old yard, hard core fans a bit less so. Frankly a ballpark with 10,000 more seats and a more affordable bottom tier (and I'm not being a pollyanna here) would not be a bad thing. This brain trust for sure knows how to put together a stadium which would be the equal of Camden or AT&T

I don't think there is a magic bullet here. The adoption of new fangled stuff varies by org, and by where you are in the competitive space. (hell, that's what Moneyball was about) How do you create edges in a competitive space when you have disadvantages in other places. Scouting is interesting - hire the best scouts is fair, but scouting itself has evolved because of the new fangled stuff - so positioning scouting as "other" than the analytical breakthrough is creating a false dichotomy.

Mr Wiki (I know, I know) had Gwynn at 225 and Panda at 240. Neither are ideal, but athleticism was reasonable in both cases. Fortunately Sandoval still has his youth - at least for a bit longer. I never loved the signing - but the reasons for optimism and the case to sign him were defensible.

This sounds cute until you realize that (from both eye test and what has been written by scouting sorts) is that Panda is far, but a good athlete. (I've rooted for Vince Wilfork before, so I am not unfamiliar) Quick hands, feet. He's never going to be Tim Raines or Rickey Henderson or Billy Hamilton ... but like Tony Gwynn, his tubbiness does not mean he can't move.

To me with Panda the larger question is whether there is more power there. His career has always to me seemed to resemble a non-patient Wade Boggs. There is some actual raw power there (the 3 HR world series game) - but his spray charts seem to show a guy who chose going the other way and contact over raking.

It is more information - which is never bad. With analytics, the annoying thing is the fans who seem to think it's eye test or numbers - when they are meant to complement each other. Front offices (Philadelphia) who don't like the other data so much are doing themselves a disservice.

Tom Yawkey wore a pink hat? I know, I know - it was sitting there ...

My Fenway moment - aside from being at a random game where Kevin Romine hit a walk-off, or seeing Roger's 15 K grand return as a Blue Jay ... was probably in 1999. Was at home when one of my parents friends (a season ticket holder) called and said one of their seats got freed up and whether I was up for going - this was about 90 minutes before first pitch ... of Game 4 of the ALDS. Bartolo Colon on 3-days rest trying to close out the Sox ... Red Sox won 22-8 to set up Pedro's heroics the next night in Cleveland. And it all came together by accident.

$20 sounds like a steal - especially considering how captive the driving audience is.