sk7326

Oh I think this is fair - although clearly Swihart and Betts were the developmental champs of the org this past season.

Yes - although I could see him being deployed in a Ben Zobrist (or Tony Phillips if you are an older fart like me) kind of way where he will get reps spelling all of the non 1B-C positions.

Well, I think the Cubans have always been shrouded in mystery relative to other internationals. In the days of CBAs of yore, there was just more freedom and money for teams to chase in the DR and Colombia and Venezuela at various times. Since baseball is putting a cap on THOSE FAs, suddenly Cuba has moved up the ladder for FA hype.

Well, in 2013, you were getting a .685 OPS from a right fielder ... without exceptional defense that is generally an unplayable performance level. Victorino was .805 OPS with an exceptional defensive measurement season and that got you a downballot MVP candidate. 2014 Markakis did bounce back. A .342 OBP is value-added especially if the glove adds up. But if his glove is more "ok" than "great", then he needs to deliver more pop. Whatever he did do was good enough to be a 2-3 win guy.

Tricky thing with Markakis is that he has - between his injuries and performance - has underachieved relative to the tools. He was a legit stud in 2008, but has probably been an average guy (and possibly a fantasy team killer if you are into that sort of thing). He does get on base - and last year was an ok bounceback after being replacement level in 2013. But his inability to play CF means his thumpless bat looks much worse.

Hard to have any sort of opinion - in his ESPN Chat, Keith Law took a question on him fwiw: xavier (texas) How serious a prospect is Cuban defector Yoan Moncada? Klaw (1:11 PM) Stud. I believe he'll get $30 million-plus, even with the 100% penalty. Legit power from both sides, plus runner, very physical kid, but sounds like no chance he stays at shortstop. Didn't face live pitching in the workout yesterday, so I imagine some teams will want to see him do that before laying out that kind of cash - but he's going to get paid.

From what Keith Law noted, he did not take live BP at his workout ... the body and tools are there, but nobody has seen him hit since he came over. But there is a ton of market inflation for Cuba. It's an effect of the tons of money in the industry and limited ways to use it.

I think it will come down to the Sox or Cubs for Lester - it's pretty straightforward. Lester is the safest pitching option on the market - he will get 6 years (and that would probably be fair value overall).

Metrically Panda was in the top third of 3B defensively - as someone noted earlier, the range is poor - but the glove is not.

I am not sure a guy who might not be a starting middle infielder is a centerpiece to get a young starting pitcher.

He swings at everything yes, but he also makes contact with everything too. That fans fall out of love with their own guys is not an indicator of anything one way or the other. His contract will come from being a good player at a very thin position industrywide and being the youngest of the top free agents to hit the market. I'd look at Beltre first too. Dave Cameron wrote neatly about this ... players (like any other employee) are bargains early and albatrosses late (ALL OF THEM). So the real question is not whether Sandoval will be worth it in 6 years (he won't) - but whether the overall deal produces what the Sawx want to pay for. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/why-six-years-for-pablo-sandoval-isnt-crazy/

Well that is the way with free agency generally - almost every contract is an "overpay" in the sense that you have to win an auction. As noted earlier, my first call would be to Texas to see what it would take to get Beltre back (short contract, Texas might be rebuilding - or maybe not, but it doesn't hurt to ask). After that there are good reasons to sign (or not sign) any of the three guys on the market. I am genuinely unsure which door I'd step in if I were them.

.712 OPS last year in full go at Pawtucket ... did not crush the level like he did at AA. I haven't quit on him - but I don't see a need to tattoo his spot in the lineup either.

Or not - depends on the guy. I don't love the idea - but Cecchini's plateauing at AAA introduces some uncertainty into his ability to be a starter, enough that a quality veteran option (and not a bridge) is sensible. I am conflicted, but I like Sandoval.

If he comes back with a real third pitch that is one thing ... but the indicators have not been good and the Red Sox org depth here is considerable. De La Rosa, Owens and Barnes are all more projectable - and maybe even the dude we got for Miller (who I have not seen).

6 years would be tough. At the same time, he is the youngest of the premium free agents - the only one which you can really still project a year or two of improvement. He is a low strikeout guy - which might have more value now than it did in the more offense-heavy past, and he is a solid 3B. He is probably the safest investment of the third basemen - or at least the least likely to be a true albatross. The Sabathia comparison is spectacularly unfair to CC, whose fat ass was one of the most reliable starters in the league for 12 seasons. It's not the favorite body type on earth, but CC got a ton of mileage out of it. It is tempting to talk about his portliness, but would be intellectually dishonest without noting that the fact he had been a 180+ inning starter from the time he was 20 has as much to do with his wearing down. Sandoval's body seems problematic - but it has not actually hurt his production too much, improving the body is one of those low hanging fruit things that could get some bonafide improvement - which is not a common thing to get from a 6-year free agent.

Quite a bit. The Cubs are absolutely loaded with bats and shortstops. The Nationals have a job opening in the middle of the infield too. Hell, the Cubs could dangle Starlin Castro if the Nationals are into that sort of thing.

I don't think it's giving up per se - team is trying to optimize the player. It could be Webster's best way to get rich also. Now he might end up being a good starter, but the control issues - both the walks and the somewhat alarming homerun rates for an alleged sinkerballer. Developing that third pitch is something you can figure out relatively quickly.

Really the A's gave up one player who might have been a cornerstone piece (Addison Russell) for seriously upgrading their rotation. Cespedes' loss hurt, but not as much as Brandon Moss forgetting how to hit. Indeed if Bob Melvin (a generally very good manager) had moved a facial muscle or two while Lester was melting down in the playoff game (not a referendum on Lester - it happens to the best of us), nobody is having this conversation or narrative.

Players will sign where they are happy. The Phillies got Cliff Lee back as noted - but they also paid top dollar for him. Money still works quite well.

Yeah that is the interesting question. Was that something an offseason without rehab can fix or a man's tattered remains?

With the starting it's not the command - but the ability to command 3 pitches (and thus turn a lineup over at least 2 times). Webster doesn't have that ability or feel. But give him a role where he doesn't have to throw the 3rd pitch, and his fastball can play up a couple extra mph, and he could be fantastic.

I think the booing would be limited ... there is a ton of good will he has built. Two titles, a no-hitter, classy guy. Lot of big performances. If he falters it becomes a tougher deal, but fans won't boo a guy like him who is still trying and competing. Besides I don't think in the next 5 years he is going to slip to anything worse than a mid-tier starter. It will be a mild overpay, but not for the economic environment.

Masterson as anything other than back end filler is a waste. He is another prime conversion candidate, but somebody will pay him to start.

I think they listen on Napoli. Not because they want to move him, but because he has legitimate value in the market. Also, key to this is the evaluation of Allen Craig. If the assessment is that Craig is not finished, he is probably only really playable at 1B.