sk7326

Another thing to note is the recent changes from the CBA - when you put caps on the draft bonuses and many of the international signing bonuses - where else is the money going to go? With the infusion of TV cash and the reduction in ways to use the money, I think this will be the new normal (a lot of money chasing a smaller timber of guys).

What I'd note is that dWAR is poor for catchers - it is one of the places where defensive measurement is very very limited.

I can see where you are coming from. But he profiles quite a bit like AJ. Good power, poor on base skills and either below average or worse defensively. Trading for him makes sense but I wouldn't offer a ton. Vasquez I like a lot - with his defense he just has to get to adequate on base skills (and last year's .308 is not that far away). Make some more contact, and that is a good player. I also would be worried - with Cespedes and Castillo already you are casting a couple of guys with dicey on-base skills (and I am assuming Bogaerts makes the sort of strides you expect a 23 year old to make) to begin with, and this team is still trying to win with being tough outs.

Lincecum was booted from the rotation which was not actually that good (not up to Giants timber of 2010 or 2012). He got $18M from SF almost entirely as a thank you present for what he did for the club in his cheaper years. I think Lincecum has some real value as a 100 IP relief weapon if a team wanted to try that (and with the success the Giants had with Petit, maybe "long men" might come back into fashion). But he is a back end starter now at best.

Oh we agree on the 4-year hitch. But I do think there is some real development-related improvement, stuff which is more built to last than other things. That said, it does portend to what the Red Sox SHOULD do with the bullpen. Take your Webster, your Workman, maybe throw a few shekels at Brandon Morrow ... take your ex-starters with stuff and make them the next Wade Davis or Andrew Millers.

K-Rod is a 1-inning closer at this point, and can't handle anything higher leverage than that. Last year could be an outlier but the 14 HRs in less than 70 IPs is a major red flag. But I wouldn't want to give 4 years to ANY reliever. That said, the Red Sox saved Miller's career, All reliever numbers are SSS granted, but in the pen he cut his walk rate in half, is striking out over 1/3 of the batters he faces and is a lefty who can pitch to both sides of the plate.

Overpaid relative to teachers and folks who do social good? No doubt. Overpaid relative to an industry that is drowning in cash between TV and taxpayer funded stadiums? Not so much. And in free agency (the winners curse thing) teams will likely overpay just by having to win an auction. 3B is a priority simply because that position has performed so terribly the last 2 seasons. The only decent production we've had there in the last 3 years was a Bogaerts postseason and splashes of Brock Holt and Middlebrooks. For an alleged corner bat position, that is rough. Frankly my first call would be to Jon Daniels to see if Beltre is available - Rangers do need to get younger, Beltre has what looks like a decent contract now (1 year, $16M with a pretty reasonable vest for 2016) and though 35 is still playing at an All-Star level (if not downballot MVP one). But assuming that is a non-starter (simply because the Rangers might still have dreams) - Sandoval is probably the safer of the two between him and Ramirez (between age and defense). Headley is probably a better value. A bridge solution would be nice though - but 3B depth across the league is poor, it's hard to find those guys.

Miller is the best reliever on the market - the capital "C" closer thing is silly (closers are made not born). But that means somebody will could pay him for 4 years - and I'd deeply, sincerely loathe having to give ANY reliever that kind of bread. The Royals approach makes sense - and to be fair, the Red Sox had a game shortening pen last year. But there is an element of luck to find those guys and you have to be good with cycling through a lot of dudes. Personally, I'd move Workman back to the pen and Webster to the pen in this spirit. In particular Webster profiles as the sort of guy who could be dynamite only having to throw 2 pitches.

funny thing with Bradley is, his defense is so good that the offensive threshhold for him to be a real starter is very low. It could be something as simple as shortening his swing and focusing on contact (the sort of adjustment which you can't really make during the season). Sure a .270/.320/.380 slash would not get the heart aflutter, but with his glove that is an average-above average starter. You have to expect it will have to happen somewhere else tho.

Headley is interesting, good on-base skills although the 30 HR season he had in San Diego looks like an outlier. That said, given where the Rangers are - there is actually some reason to knock on their door and see what it would take to land the actual Adrian Beltre. He is not a young man - but still pretty good and only 1 or 2 years left. Headley will be 31 by May of next season. Sandoval does not turn 29 until next August. I think that age difference (and the implied possibility that the younger guy still has some improvement left) is one of the drivers of the market difference. The three third base contestants do sort of line up neatly: Ramirez: Pro: Best bat Con: Most expensive, riskiest glove Sandoval: Pro: Good bat - age Con: Expensive, ok glove Headley: Pro: Best glove, cheapest, Con: Worst bat

I don't love it. That said, he is 28 and will not be 29 until late next season. He is young by free agent standards, and you have a chance to get some improvement out of him (even if it just from a little better conditioning). He is no Manny Machado at 3B, but generally good. (below average range, sure handed with the stuff he can reach) He makes a lot of contact, and given the offensive trends of the last couple of years - that might carry a bit more weight than it used to. 3B is very thin across the league. Personally, I like Hanley better among the 3B free agents in isolation (he's the best position player in this class by a solid margin), but Sandoval is probably a better bet to carry his value through a 5-6 year deal.

2012: 141 games of Pedroia, 90 games of Ortiz, 74 games of Ellsbury, 0 starts of Lackey 2013: 160 games of Pedroia, 137 or Ortiz, 134 of Ellsbury, 29 starts of Lackey Their three best offensive players and their 2nd best starter missed a metric ton of action - it was a personnel problem. When you are dreaming of Pedro Ciriaco, it's a personnel problem.

Key - if Hanley Ramirez is committed to playing 3B, he becomes every bit as interesting as Sandoval. i think he's the better player then due to on-base skills but Sandoval's age (28) has to be considered too.

Lester and Scherzer #1 and #2 in some order clearly. HanRam is the best position player in this class by a good margin - although if he insists on playing shortstop that could knock him below Sandoval in my eyes. VMart is too high in the OP rankings here with his inability to play a position.

It was a cold move by the Cubs but a sensible one. By accounts Renteria did a nice job getting some of the players to take themselves more seriously. Maddon fits with what the org wants to do, good tactically, good with the media. Right there with Showalter and Francona for best working skippers. Still need the horses to win the title - and this being baseball, often that is not enough either. (a 4 week tournament against playing everyday for 6 months) Cubs need to fill out their rotation, they are oozing high level bats. What is interesting is they are building the team opposite of what a lot of other rebuilders have been doing - instead of home grown arms and go into the market for bats, they are doing the oppoosite. Theo is also doing what he did in Boston, building up a LOT of shortstop inventory (since usually that's where your best amateur athletes have played) and figuring it out later.

A couple of the worst (indeed, the only two seasons under this regime where the Red Sox were fewer than 10 games ABOVE .500) and all of the best ... And one of those bad seasons was driven by injuries which would correct itself the next season to great effect. The regime is not perfect, and it hasn't been all positive. It has also been 13 seasons with 3 championships, 7 playoff berths and only 3 seasons where the summah was ruined before the last two weeks of September. Only the Yanks have had as many consistent bites at the apple, and only the Giants have actually won it as often. (and the Cardinals in the middle) Heck, this regime even caught a couple of post-peak but still great Pedro years (if you want the transcendent individual). I have issues with management and I think they pay attention to TV ratings and talk radio too much ... but as Bob Ryan put it once, this era is the "good old days" I'll be ranting about to my daughter when she is a teenager and starting to hate me a decade or so from now.

Nobody is perfect, but the vast majority of the ways you can fill "The best ________________ the Red Sox ever had" involve things which occurred since this ownership bought the team. Tulo's injury history is so rich that it infects his claim to "10 best players on earth". I know we disagree on Bogaerts (or more generally disagree on what a 21 year old's accomplishment says about the next ten), so no reason to rehash that. The need for any sort of 3B and quality starting pitching certainly trumps both. My earlier point on Lester is not to say he is not a #1 pitcher (clearly he is from recent accomplishment) but that the Red Sox were the wire to wire best team in baseball in 2013 on the strength of a balanced rotation and lineup which never gave teams a break - there were no sure outs and there was no starter who was a walkover (even Dempster). The holes in both are significant - but fixable when you have the money the Sox have and the inventory. The team is an interesting bounceback candidate - but it is not turnkey obviously.

They missed on the good chance to climb all over Stanton. Like the Pirates did with McCutchen ... the time to pounce is early, give him more money than the rookie scale would have, and try to buy out his arb raises and (maybe) a year of FA. It will be hard to keep him. Dodgers far and away the most likely match though. One of the quirks about the Marlins is that while the ownership is one of the worst in the game and the management at the (Owner-Survivor Contestant) level is shaky, the baseball operations guys have largely been pretty good. It is a horrible market - so extending Stanton on its own is difficult. To use econ jargon, the marginal value of a win there is really low (comparatively in Boston it is excellent). Historically in these sorts of dumps, the Marlins have wanted power arms. This is the organization that grew Brad Penny, Josh Beckett, AJ Burnett, Anibal Sanchez (of course, they got him for Josh Beckett - but describes the sort they target in trade), Jose Fernandez. The Red Sox have Cuban guys who can help the Miami marketing sure - but the system, while deep with pitching, does not seem to have the fireballer sorts that the Marlins have long chased.

2008-2010 he absolutely was. 2011-2013 he was a distinct step down from that (although 2013 was more one rotten month). 2014 was his best work since 2009. I tend not to go with top 20% only because in general the gap between 1% and 10% is larger than 10% to 20% - just how bell curves and such go. The key question when looking to acquire him is whether he can be his 2011-12 version four years from now. To me that's a safe bet, and for the next 2 or 3 years we'll get something superior to that. His worst case to me is current day John Lackey - durable, compete his arse off and will give you 30 honest starts. To me in this day and age, durability is a big key (granted I am also advocating an upside play on Brett Anderson, but there you go). The teams that have won titles generally have not had much upheaval in their rotation. They did not always have super elite #1s, but they at least 3 or 4 guys who could stare down a lineup and turn it over a couple of times. Take some of those guys with high quality defense and the run prevention is pretty darn good. It's what got Kansas City to within a game of the title, transcending Ned Yost's staggeringly bad tactics.

The Red Sox won the 2013 title without a classic #1. Lester played up to it in spots (as did Lackey) but their numbers were more good #2 than your King Felix/Kershaw rare air. (Lester had a remarkable bounce back this season to that sort of air) What you do need is to keep putting guys out there who give you a chance. Red Sox lineup needs fewer automatic outs ... in 2013 there were basically zero when you got to the end of the season. Sandoval or Ramirez can address that, and that is important. It's not an either-or thing here. I think they are in on Lester, but given his draft compensation status, so will a lot of other teams.

Fair concern and the price has to be right. Personally, I believe relievers are wholly fungible, so if Romo doesn't work - cut your ties. The bullpen will reveal itself if you just collect arms.

My shopping list: 1. Lester (another Lester-like starter would have to be acquired via trade if you want more than 1 - I'd like a trade better than James Shields) 2. Sandoval or Hanley 3. Brett Anderson (value play for a #4 starter) 4. Geovany Soto (if you want to do a real jobshare with Vasquez) 5. Brandon Morrow as a relief conversion option, Sergio Romo as a another (Andrew Miller is better than both but his valuation could spiral out of control) Cueto as the prime trade target ... as noted above I see Workman and Webster prime candidates to move to the pen

I'd prefer Hanley for the price. At the same time, the injury history is less problematic and while Sandoval does not walk much, his high contact rate covers for some of it. Defensively (from most accounts) shaky range but good hands ... if he can reach it, he will not make mistakes.

Lester is the clear toughest get because of the lack of draft pick deterrent. Scherzer clearly will be higher on some boards too - although Lester seems to have better stuff to work through a decline phase. Either way, for me - Lester's durability is enough to be willing to ride out some decline. What is interesting is what to do with the rest of the rotation - Brett Anderson is a fascinating upside play. The health is what it is, but the stuff has not gone away. A flyer on him as a #4 guy you could so a lot worse. Any sort of 3B is tempting if you don't think Cecchini is ready. Obviously Ramirez and Sandoval have qualifying offers - personally Ramirez would make more sense - better on base skills granted some risk moving to a position he has not played. Relief I worry less about - some of that can be addressed by ending the flirations with Workman and Webster as starters, the latter particularly has knockout stuff which probably could play up in a relief role. Miller's return would be nice, but any sort of 4 year commitment to a reliever makes me puke in my mouth a little. It'd be nice if they could convince one of those guys like Branden Morrow to try their thing in the bullpen (Justin Masterson too, although he will get a look as a starter) - dynamite stuff, but has not been able to turn over lineups consistently. Cespdes is a guy to listen to calls on, Napoli is another ... not because we "should get rid of them" but because you trade value for value and if Allen Craig is going to play (and be healthy) it's going to be as a 1B. Even without it, you can figure something out there. Of the guys we auditioned in September only Barnes and De La Rosa looks like somebody who could seriously stick in the rotation significantly.

It is a datapoint. But it is evidence of what folks observe in college, high school, minor league baseball. Players who are competitive (not great, just competitive) at very young ages are excellent bets to have good careers, and also where your extra-special careers come from. I wish Bogaerts were more like a 4-win player than a "somewhat above replacement level" - that would make the projection much much more confident. But he was a competitive big leaguer - better than 2006 Pedroia, better than 2012 Iglesias. When you are his age and able to belong in the big leagues in any reasonable capacity, that is a VERY strong harbinger for a long career playing baseball for a living, with good odds of being a hell of a lot more. For Fred, the 2013 Cardinals made the world series with .330/.402/.463 with RISP. This year, with very similar human beings it was .254/.336/.365. Did those players become dumb or stupid, or have what happened to those dudes in the beginning of "Space Jam"?