sk7326

That is about what I'd be thinking. I'd be willing to talk a higher level arm (Barnes, Johnson - someone closer to the bigs) if Philadelphia wants to help with the contract.

Napoli also only belongs in the list for health reasons. Statistically he was basically the exact player he always was. He even got on base more. Napoli will always look worse than he is because of the particular "feast or famine" nature of his production.

The conversion to LF will be fine for Ramirez - the orientation to the wall will be tricky, but that is the case regardless. Carl Crawford was by all accounts the best defensive LF in the game and he was ho-ho-horrendous in LF at Fenway. Of course, Jim Rice from days of yore was the reverse. The challenge with LF for Ramirez will not be playing it competently - but whether he it is successful in keeping wear off of him. His bat will play at the more offensively demanding position - no doubt. But will they be able to help him get 600 PAs out of it. I think the outfield glut helps in this pursuit - Ramirez can and will (I'd hope) spot Papi against specific lefties I'd think (just to optimize the pieces they have).

And even so - Porcello is only 26. Nothing about his fundamentals were particularly hokey (you know BABIP, K Rate, FIP etc) and at his age you could at least chock it up to genuine improvement too. Same with Holt although his performance is a bit more of a career outlier. (high BABIP, but he has a high BABIP careerwise, granted not a ton of PAs)

What IS interesting this year - is that the team has almost no regression candidates (aside from Betts maybe - although given his age, I might be wrong). There was a large team wide trend of underachievement.

It will be interesting - the offense was genuinely bad last year - worse than Boston's (granted by a run). There have been no real personnel upgrades on that end - and fewer reasons for positive regression. The pitching moves, especially in the back of the bullpen help. Run prevention is what allowed them to squeeze 84 wins of blood out of a rock.

I don't think he's at AAA for long - but the glut of OF needs to be solved, and putting him or Betts down is the simplest move that doesn't impact the 40. And if you want a baseball reason, nothing Castillo has done warrants bumping Betts.

I am pragmatic here - when in doubt, the odd man out is the one with minor league options. Victorino and HanRam are sufficiently risky healthwise that Castillo will get his chance.

Predicted Depth Chart: I have not looked enough at the pitching staff, so I will defer on that. But assuming we carry a 12 man staff ... the 13 regulars C: Vasquez, Hannigan 1B: Napoli, Craig 2B: Pedroia 3B: Sandoval, Holt SS: Bogaerts LF: Ramirez CF: Betts RF: Victorino, Nava DH: Ortiz Obviously much can change ... and I expect it will

Those are all Bobby V faults - not making the best of a situation where he disagreed with his bosses. He feuded with his own assistant coaches - and the idea that he didn't hire them clearly does not fly - most people don't get to choose their co-workers. I am as sympathetic to the horrible hand Bobby got dealt as anybody - no coach could have won with the injury problems the 2012 Sox had. He did a horrendous job anyway.

Oh I think luck has a lot to do with it - but I do think bullpen quality helps if you are playing a lot of close games. It's not a magic bullet, but could contribute to more positive results than just coin flips.

Spring Training - at least the stuff we see - proves zero. The decisions about who plays in the outfield the last two seasons were pretty strong reflections of that. As far as I can tell, Farrell and Francona did not run spring training like a kiddie camp - they treated the players like bosses treat employees in lots of actual real jobs. What Bobby did was just weird.

To be fair, that we don't know anything is always true - and without idle speculation there'd be no two-bit internet Red Sox forum. You are right of course - there is considerable projection involved in rosy predictions for 2015. Given you are betting on young guys getting better, the projections are a wee bit more likely than betting on old guys getting better. But it's not like 2013 - where you were just hoping nobody got hurt again. This will be a fun season - should reveal more about what sort of boss Farrell really is.

I was spitballing some - frankly if either of them move, it will probably be in the spring. As currently built they have 6 legit starters - and could upgrade the infield potentially a little bit. The 2 wildcards and economic health of baseball don't mean that there won't be sellers - it just means that we can't sit there and pick them out right now (unlike say the NFL or NBA). I've previously noted in my mind there are only 6 teams that can't at least squint hard at their roster and see a playoff team: Minnesota, Houston, Atlanta, Philadelphia, Colorado and Arizona. I'd add Milwaukee too but they probably wouldn't. But we also that 24 teams ain't makin the field. Give some padding for teams who will die trying - and it means there will be another half dozen teams or so who will be selling too (or who will at least pick up the phone if you are buying).

Tigers and Rangers are the best candidates - Tigers specifically, barren system and an old team that could get old fast

Oh I agree to a certain degree- the 2 wild cards makes it harder to cut bait, but not impossible. There are more creative options too maybe - could a package around Cecchini and some additional prospect stuff be able to get Fister or Zimmermann given the Nationals glut of starting pitching ... who knows

Along with the apparently reduced price for pitching. Think about it - when we were wee lads, the Red Sox got two cornerstones for the next decade for a mediocre closer at the deadline. The Rays moved a defending Cy Young Winner WITH A FULL SEASON OF CONTROL for a package which was not all that much better. (and yes, I like Smyly too, but you get the idea) I am sure many wonder what a bunch of good but not great controllable outfielders and a bunch of decent but not superstud prospects could fetch - the answer based on last year's trade deadline could very well be more than you think.

Victorino starts in right. His body can barely handle RF, so CF is a non-starter. Craig toggles between LF, RF and 1B - and the Sox use certain lefty matchups to sit Papi and give Hanley a working rest day at DH.

Rodriguez would hurt me too - but he is decidedly further away from the bigs than Owens or Barnes or Johnson. He showed some real improvement and serious skills - hence his high ranking. But you can make a case for Lee that the O's made for getting Miller (and Lee is obviously a better pitcher) ... if the kid is 2 years away in your heart (along with the added risk of pitchers generally healthwise), and you can help the team now, you have to consider it. While I am more amenable to Rodriguez moving than Margot and Devers, the conundrum is the similar - a guy whose potential you love but don't see making a contribution in the near term.

Scioscia is an ex-catcher who probably was personally offended at the idea of playing a somewhere between "horrendous" and "barely adequate" catcher to keep his bat in the lineup. If you view catcher as a defensive position, that is how you are wired. He is the sort of guy who would have made a similar call with Mike Piazza probably. His affection for Mathis was short sighted as he was not an acceptable offensive player, even with the rock bottom replacement threshhold for catchers. Napoli's hip condition was caught with the Sox' medicals on him - that's why it took so long for the deal to settle, remember? Now, Ron Washington was willing to live with him behind the plate in the World Series to keep his bat in the lineup, and since Napoli would have won the World Series MVP if it wasn't for the miracle in Game 6, that makes sense. BTW: I do share that opinion that a bat can be worth it - it was why Lavarnway as a catcher was exciting. Alas, his hit tool did not justify the poor glove, and when he tried to catch, the hitting suffered.

They did - but I forgot to notice. Craig's emergence if anything will allow them to talk Napoli too - and I am sure they will.

If I were them, I'd be targeting Devers or Margot. If I were us, I'd give them any choice or three from the Barnes, Ball, Rodriguez (yes, I know), Johnson, Cecchini menu ... Devers and Margot are not untouchable. And Lee could be a guy good enough to push me in to the "ok, fine" with one of them. But the way those guys have started, there is a real chance one of them (Devers in particular) will have an explosion, rocket into the industry Top 10 prospect lists and give me an ulcer, which the World Series might only partially address.

Probably - often in these cases, ties get broken by who has options remaining. Betts has options too, but I think he'd have to really spit the bit to not be starting ... unless the Red Sox are going to sign a guy who was good 9 years ago to start the season in CF again (cough cough)

Some random predictions: 1. Allen Craig becomes a good contract again: .280/.360/.440 sort. There will not be enough at-bats here, but he will shake off the stink of the last season plus 2. We will land a starter. He might not be the sexiest name on the market, but he will be a legitimate upgrade. 2a. I'd put a small but not crazy chance on that starter being David Price. The Tigers are dancing on that's knife's edge. Of the contenders they are the team most likely to have the bottom fall out in a sudden, ugly way. And their system is bone dry. 3. Victorino will bounce back - not to the MVP level of 2013, but to playable. It won't be enough to take ABs from Betts. 4. Bradley will have a spring which will at least give some fodder to the talk show callers. It might be enough to spin him to a team before they break camp. 5. Castillo starts the season in AAA. When he comes up, it will be to play RF. 6. When Buchholz suffers his annual injury in June - Owens will come up. Over under on big league starts = 10

Mo was phenomenal. That said, last year was not shabby - and the bullpen hammer is a big contributing factor to the Yankees somehow getting 170 wins the last 2 seasons while being outscored.