sk7326

Right now the planning with Betts is most likely thinking of him in a Zobrist or (if you are old like me) Tony Phillips. The position can be figured out later because he is a good enough athlete (with mature enough beisbol skills) to do a lot of things. The arm is not ideal for RF but the range is (at least for Fenway). I know it is fun to talk about Ramirez being signed to play SS but that is far fetched at best - this is not the 2007 model of Ramirez, and given his recent durability issues, moving off of SS was going to be a natural thing for him to volunteer.r

More like goodbye Cespedes and goodbye Victorino's starting gig. Betts and XB could be had for the right guy (I suspect Hamels alone for one might be it - but not much else). Otherwise they are in firm spots and you arrange the other deck chairs accordingly.

Not a lot of people talk about it in narrative-land, but his breaking down was central to a lot of what collapsed about the Red Sox in general. They have not been able to adequately replace him. He was one of the five or six best offensive players in the league for a couple of years.

All he has to be is what he is already ... an above average defender with good contact rates (which is hard to find) and good makeup. He is also still young enough to have a little bit of projection left. For the $/WAR (which applies more to Boston than other teams because of the market rewards), it is reasonable.

This seems unfair. One of the funny things fans say is "you can only evaluate a move after waiting to see if it works". But really, that is garbage. The only accurate evaluation of these moves is AT THE TIME YOU MAKE THEM, because all you have are percentages. You look at the Pierzynski signing at the time Cherington made it, what was he looking at: - A solid starter who was going to command a multiyear deal - A couple of near big league ready guys who were not quite there, but both looked like better prospects than the solid starter - Almost all free agent catching was some variation of meh What are the choices? Sign a bridge guy or take your shot with the not quite ripe kiddos. I'd have gone with #2, but it was not at all obvious. Cherington's move was one of the two sensible things to do - and it did not work out. Nobody could have expected the AJ signing to be as actively negative as it was.

There is some risk there - but the solution might be moving him off of the physically problematic job.

Indeed - signed to play LF and spot DH. He could play 3B if Sandoval doesn't work out. Also remember, Sandoval's deal (if it is only 5 years) means that the Red Sox will be paying $18M a year for his 29-33 years ... he has less age risk than most FAs. There are teams who would take that contract on.

If the Heyman tweet is accurate, getting Sandoval and Ramirez each for under $20M a year is a very strong haul. Panda in particular remains a trade asset if other stuff doesn't work out (in particular a solid chance that you are only getting a small part of his decline years)

How many of them have physically broken down playing said position - this is pretty clear. This is not asking prime Alex Rodriguez to move to 3B to accomodate an inferior player - this is a guy who will do what it takes to be a 600 PA dude again (and thus someone who can be paid like a guy who contributed 600 PAs). Ramirez in 2014 WAS a dropoff from Ramirez 2013. But Ramirez 2014 was more or less in line with his entire career, it was 2013 that was the outlier.

1. Ramirez' contract is not actually big money by 2014 baseball standards 2. Sandoval is interesting - poorer stats but in mostly pitchers parks. Overweight but a good athlete who is an above average defender and the youngest premium FA. I am conflicted. But this is more sensible than signing Brian McCann's beat up body for the length of time he is hitched up for.

He has told suitors he is ok moving off of SS. He physically cannot do it anymore. But the bat still plays at 3B and even LF. It is a smart first signing - gives a lot of options with the rest of it.

Means Cespedes is in play ... and that the Red Sox don't have to chase Sandoval indiscriminately. I still think the Giants will get Panda back.

Hanley pickup gives them options ... 3B or LF. Very good price for the productivity level - and his defense can only be helped moving off of short.

If Cherington worked magic a year ago, he did not become an imbecile overnight. I was on this board last offseason - most applauded his relatively restrained offseason - although intelligent minds differed on the Ellsbury business. (as it turned out, they were not necessarily wrong in not signing Ellsbury, but Bradley did not hold up his end of the deal) The AJ signing made sense as a contractual stopgap - they did not want to commit to anybody with the kids coming. The Drew re-signing made sense also (basically the bet was Bogaerts was better than any free agent 3B) though intelligent minds could disagree there surely. Mujica was a nothingburger (useful guy for what he is). Indeed the team DIDN'T insist that Bradley be in there hell or high water - that's why they gave Grady Sizemore's entrails a starting job over a good three weeks in Fort Myers. If anything, they should have done that - but they did not have a winning strategy for him. They got weak kneed with Bogaerts too. When you see how hopeless Pedroia was in his cup of coffee in 2006, there was proof that you are better off standing behind your evaluations than, say, listening to what talk show callers say or what a decrepit former MVP-sort did over a random month against future minor leaguers.

I am not sure there was a dollar value that would have gotten Lester to stay - but there was one which would have allowed him to walk away. Assuming the leaks are correct and the Sox offered Lester 6 years, that is enough to keep them in it. Once they committed to the sixth year, it means they will be a viable contender here.

For 1 year of Price? No way - and that is much more than what Detroit paid for 2 years of him. I like the idea, but not at that price.

Congrats - I have a 2 year old. Coolest feeling in the world. Hang in there with the newborn. Somewhere a comedian noted "the newborn thing is rough - and just when you are ready to throw your hands up in the air, she smiles back at you. And then you're hooked."

That they were willing to get to six years makes this a serious offer. One expects it can be bargained up - but the fact that they were willing to get to 6 years is at least an acknowledgment of the reality of his market.

IIRC the Phils offered a higher AAV than the Yanks. More frontloaded. To me something with 5 years and a vesting 6th (something based on a fair innings target) and a team 7th could make sense (a longer version of the Ortiz deal). Ultimately it is Lester's call (duh) assuming the offer is competitive. From most indications Boston can win if the offers are all reasonably close.

From the stories I read, it seems "sources" indicated that Lester was not going to end the search early either way. A lot of teams are being mentioned - but I figure it will still come down to Sox v Cubs.

I dunno. You don't think Lester's people are canvassing everybody at the same time? I don't think that an offer in person (not in writing one figures) precludes that. Put simply, I don't think that Lester went from 0 offers to 1. The numbers have been floating around for a while. All we can conclude now is that the Sox offer was not crazy high.

Frankly it's not really their call. Unless they offered Lester 6/170 or something, any offer was going to be facing competition. He's a grown man with a lot of people wanting to offer him a gig.

I am not sure Hamels would cost all of them. The scouting story indicates due diligence across the board. I'd hope the Sox did not look at it as a 3 for 1 (or at least THAT 3 for 1).

All guys who could be on a Hamels list. Not all of them clearly, but perhaps one. As for the latter question, my guess is take a plunge on a Geo Soto and then wait for Swihart (hopefully).

I think the question of rash promotion has to come down to the kid (and the org who understands their kids - hopefully). Bradley had more to learn at AAA - just cleaning approach, not trying to take and rake - but so much of what Boston did on that front felt like GMing by sports radio caller. What Bogaerts needed to learn (and Betts inevitably will have to as well) is only stuff that big league pitching can teach by fire. Yes there is defense for both to work on, but the Red Sox' best defensive coaching (as is the case with many teams) is with the big club.