sk7326

Betts called up to AAA

Masterson has always had that lefty split ... that 3/4 delivery keeps it hard to get em out consistently

Good point. Forgot about the former.

1. It's about 3B, not SS here. Bogaerts is better than any available 3B alternative. 2. K's don't matter a whole lot. He got on base at a decent clip and was a 3 win player in limited work last year.

It was because of a horrific injury history - that's it. It was going to be hard to give up years for a guy who has had trouble staying healthy. But all around, it was a coin flip between Drew and Peralta ... durability won out.

Farrell will do what makes sense for the team - unless he is bad at his job. Fred clearly is not a fan of Drew - and wants hungry scrappy gamers who eat their vegetables like good Hulkamaniaks. That's fine - and how do you not like what Holt has done. But the probability of it continuing is pretty low. I would have been fine with the Red Sox faking things at 3B until Middlebrooks returns and then riding it out. But there would have been some diminished performance and you are placing a bet on Middlebrooks which is increasingly dicey. However, cutting bait on Middlebrooks is a fair stance - he has regressed badly. Drew-Bogaerts is a solid alignment. Farrell notes that Bogaerts won't be flipping back and forth - but who knows what that means. Ultimately he will do what management tells him, because that's how this thing works. I expect Bogaerts will play SS a significant amount - and frankly, if he is this delicate a flower, he is probably not the guy I thought he was. This team has a chance to repeat - and they owe it to the fans to give it their best attempt (within obvious limits). This absolutely improves the lineup because the upgrade of Bogaerts over a potted plant more than offsets the drop off which Drew represents (if any - he was a Top 10 shortstop last season).

Odds are there won't really be lumps. His track record has shown this - he reaches a level, he learns it quickly. He will probably get another 30-40 starts at SS ... he will be fine. If there was a lot of position depth at 3B in the bigs (even something like "prime" mark reynolds) I'd have a different answer, but there just is not. Middlebrooks when he returns from the DL could do a lot to help this, but there is no indication that he will.

Webster has shown some good stuff at times - but he is also a purported sinkerballer who gave up 7 home runs in 30 innings! (SSS caveat here). He has not shown much pitching IQ in his stops here. He has a lot more "elite reliever" feel to me than a guy who can turn lineups over. De La Rosa clearly showed the potential last night.

I think everything you say here is true about Bogaerts. But none of this has anything to do with the 3B problem. I see Bogaerts as a stud SS too. But we need a stud 3B now. Now if you want to pretend we are in some sort of rebuild - god bless. But this team is not rebuilding - it has a chance to win now, and it charges the fans prices of a team trying to win now. So a win now move is totally defensible. Bogaerts is younger than Cecchini - there is plenty of time for him to get back to SS, and he still going to play there a lot this year. This is clearly the best use of team resources given what is available.

Cameron was an elite defender at CF (one who went down the toilet in his Red Sox time - moving Ells to CF was the right move that did not work). I look at it this way - one of the changes involves 0 people learning new positions and one involves 1.5. I'll take the 0. I agree with you in a vacuum - but without any sort of equivalent way of improving 3B out there, this is your best shot at optimizing the WAR of the 2 positions together, Bogaerts can handle the additional offensive expectation a replacement 3B requires. I think there is a chance that Middlebrooks-Bogaerts 3B-SS could be the best combination, but that involves an improvement on WMB's part when he returns that he has not shown any signs of making. Now if you think Cecchini made more sense than signing Drew ... that makes some sense, although clearly risky and lower probability in the short term than the Drew move.

Bogaerts can "not like" a change optimally. I don't care - as long as he gets into it. I see a hungry player in Holt too, but one who gives no indication this will last. That's fine - you enjoy what you get and he is a solid candidate for an extra infielder. Drew is a good major league SS who frankly got squeezed out of a market because of overestimating how many teams would pay for a SS, even a good one. (and in particular that the Cardinals chose Peralta's healthy track record over Drew, which is defensible)

Oh no - if Drew is going to play, put him at the position where 3B and SS are optimized, and that is with Drew at SS. I agree with you on Bogaerts long term - but this move did make sense. There are just no good quality 3B to go around, and 3B has been such a disaster. Middlebrooks needs to get back to his old approach - whatever he has done since has been a wild overcorrection. I wish he walked more, but not at the expense of the stuff he was good at.

Rubby has the best stuff of the guys considered - really the only one with some #1/#2 level pitches. Command clearly is an issue - but he is the upside play. I am intrigued.

1. 4 for 61 in postseason, yet they could not have won it without him. Go figger. David Ortiz was totally lost in the ALCS. Things happen. 2. Useless against lefties - but there is a contingency to fix that 3. He is forcing us to sit people playing our worst position. As much as I would like to see Bogaerts keep getting reps at SS - and he has been arguably our best position player so far - this team can contend, and 3B is too big a sinkhole not to try to fix it. 4. If you think signing Drew was a mistake because you want to ride out Bogaerts and Middlebrooks - that is a fair point of view. If you want to ride out Brock Holt and turn him into the next Tony Philips, that is completely insane.

You ride the 2014 Ciriaco until he turns back into a pumpkin. He deserves a spot on the roster based on his performance for sure.

I am not worried about that. Farrell handled platoon work last year quite nicely. I suspect the lineup will be worked in that direction more or less with Drew's return. At the same time Bradley really should not be involved too much in the platoon business - the ability to pick it in CF is too valuable to give up on too much.

Keith Law updated Top 25. At #22: Not suggesting it - but if it gets to June-July and outfield is really this bad, his success so far has been too wild to ignore.

I think there was some hubris too. They have some legitimate organizational catching depth - and I don't think they wanted to tie up a ton of years at the position anyway. Also the general horribleness of replacement level for that position gave them some room to just play backup level guys and grin and bear it. Salty had a nice year and had a little bit of upside - but if they did not want to commit to him, then there was no point to give him a QO. I did not like the move, but I understand it. Frankly, Pierzynski has been about what he has always been ...

Here is the thing - flags fly forever, and you need to give your team a chance anytime you can. The question you ask is whether the Sox are in it or not - and the answer to me is decidedly yes. The roster is still good, and the rest of the division has been spinning its wheels. 7 games in the loss column is a haul - but there is still a lot of time. I have a long view about the franchise too - but nobody is poor, I have no interest in Luis Suarez' salary. The team is not absolved from honorably chasing the championship. What the Sox calculated this year is reasonable - some things have not worked so far, but they owe it to the fans to try to turn the ship around at least while there is still a whole 2/3 of a season left.

Oh I agree on Bradley - this Sizemore nonsense was a silly idea from the word go. Bogaerts is a different deal. I agree in isolation, but they had an easy play to improve the team right now. Also Drew becomes the team's best trade asset the second he takes the field - which could be cashed in for something else, especially if it is a place Drew would not mind. Granted the latter is a lower probability, but one that should not be ignored. I believe in a transition year - but in this market, with these resources, a transition year is 2006 or 2010. You don't tell the fans they can't have a reasonable shot at contention. The shot is still reasonable. You don't need to do anything stupid, but you still want to give it your best shot.

When you gouge the public more than any other team - and when you have a chance to make the playoffs (which you do when the entire division is in quicksand and you STILL have the best roster in the division), you play to win. It's a sensitive dance, but one that the franchise owes the fans that help keep a high revenue team a high revenue team.

I think in previous entries I've expressed support for the Drew signing. I find it funny they brought in a SS since SS is the one position which has gone well - but it is clearly the simplest solution to improve an area of weakness. Drew is a significant defensive upgrade and while he is totally useless against lefties - you can wallpaper over that when it pops up. There just aren't many good SS or 3B to go around - so you do what you gotta do. Bogaerts future is at SS to me still - but there is a current problem to solve. There is an opportunity to be had here after all. The division just isn't that good. The Yankees have basically been about what any smart person would have expected - not a hell of a lot different than last year, despite all the deck chair reshuffling - only Toronto has a positive run margin. The Sox record is depressing, but nobody has run away - and nobody has shown much evidence that they will.

Bogaerts has hit better - and his fielding has been nothing special. Not good, not a horrendous travesty - we knew coming in that his value as a SS was going to be about offense + adequate defense. UZR puts him at basically average for instance. He is certainly not Drew's equal defensively (and that combined with the disaster at 3B justifies the signing). But combine what he has done so far with the upwards trajectory he has shown (both recently as well as his career arc when he changes levels), he was well on track to upgrade that position overall from what Drew gave them. (not Drew + Iglesias together, but that is another matter) If you thought that Bogaerts was going to be our best player in April - yeah not much can be done there. But someone who has been one of the top 10 shortstops in the league as a "freshman on the varsity"? He has been good.

Breaking down "what went wrong" by position: C: Down 1B: Same 2B: Worse 3B: Same SS: Better OF: A Lot Worse SP: Worse Bullpen: Same (can quibble about individual performances - but overall has not been a problem) While I understand the Drew signing from a team management perspective (it upgrades 3B while limiting any downgrade at SS) ... it is funny to see their first FA/trade foray in season was for the one position which has actually gone well this year.

26-24 ... good for last place, 2.5 games out. It's a tough road for sure. However, Jays are the only team with a positive run differential. There is no real evidence that any of the other 4 teams are that good. Nothing here that a couple of good healthy weeks can't fix.