sk7326

The Yankees had the chance to go all in on shopping THIS season and chose to let one of the ten best players in the league walk. Do not conflate Hank's willingness to do anything to win with his pop's.

TOTAL coincidence. If Bogaerts is such a delicate flower that this has devastated him - as opposed to just life as a rookie - then he is just not a very good player. Since I am a huge believer in X, I obviously believe that is complete nonsense. I do agree with you on this - I hope that if WMB returns and shows optimistic form (real form, not a statistical oddity) that the team is agile enough to mothball drew and play the lineup of the future. That said, nothing Middlebrooks has done supports this.

I am not a Bradley believer per se - but I am not flushing him down the toilet either. He was an on-base machine at every level of baseball he has played ... friends don't let friends obsess over BA. Bunting for base hits does not increase hit tallies much - just stuff for get off my lawn types to fawn over. Stolen bases is more helpful, but relatively unimportant. I always thought the fair comp for him was Bernie Williams - and it still might be. He has a lot of work to do - and the very low probability experiment the Sox tried increased that workload.

Is it time to "give up" on Peavy? Hard to say. If he is the worst starter on this team, that is a good thing. Run prevention is not our problem. Rotation has largely been fine, and the top of the rotation has been downright very good. Bullpen has been excellent. Having too many starters is something every team would want. Obviously if Doubront can net something in trade that would be awesome - but it is nice to have options. Doubront is the easiest to move of the 3. Peavy is movable with his essentially expiring deal - and he still can be effective.

The Sox are 11-17 in 1-run games, and of all the teams struggling to score are the only ones showing above average on-base skills. There has been a lot of bad luck here. That and corner outfielders turning into pumpkins (or injury cases). The Sox' health has not been as favorable as it was last year. That being said, the run prevention has been pretty good. Peavy has struggled, but if he is the worst starter - that's not bad. The top 2 is as good as any in the league, and the depth might be better than that. There is a run to be had in this team - has been frustrating to not be able to get to it.

Sizemore was a lottery ticket more than a plan. It was a waste of time frankly. What is weird so far is Bradley has been poor with the bat (duh) but outstanding defensively - enough to be (barely) above replacement level so far. He is a kid who has figured out every level as he has hit it - and if he could get himself back to a .310 sort of OBP by the end of the season, his contribution would have been very positive. In reality, it is the sinkholes in LF and RF that have been more of a drag than the CF production. Yes, the dropoff between Ells 2013 and Bradley 2014 is vast, but the dropoff between 2013 Ells and 2014 Ells has been quite substantial also.

Oh I fully expect Lackey to do so - he ain't holding out. I do think that any questions about his durability are answered sufficiently to pay him like an innings eater again.

He has been terrific - and frankly the entire rotation has been just fine. I'd give him the Ortiz treatment ... rip up next season, 2 years, 35-40 million ... one vesting option, one team option.

It can to a certain degree. The Sox led the league in LOBs last year as well. Tigers were 2nd. You put a lot of guys on base, you're gonna leave a lot of guys on base. Now what is fascinating is how few of them they have cashed in - well below what you'd expect. They are the 3rd worst scoring team in the AL, well documented of course. But of the teams in the bottom, they are the only team who is generating baserunners at an above average rate! Now I am not going to say it is a lack of "clutch ability" - that is stupid, there are a lot of the same characters from a year ago. But this is a team direly in need of some 3-run homers ... and more than likely will probably start to get a few of them. 72 games is a lot to keep talking about things regressing - but the Red Sox will start scoring more runs (maybe not enough) just by having some better luck.

What is amazing so far is that the Red Sox fundamentals have largely been good here approachwise. The OBP is not at all bad (.326, above league average, 6th in the AL). The BA has been low - but who cares there. The problem has been almost entirely a lack of extra base hits in general, and homeruns in particular. One can moan about Ellsbury's loss - but the net there is not what has caused the power outage. That has been a team wide scourge.

Given what Lackey has produced - if the Sox offered a 2/35 sort of deal replacing next year, that would be a win for everybody. The contract would be a little less tradeable than at 500K obviously - but a guy as productive as Lackey has been (and as durable) has enough value that a contender would not blink at that short a commitment if they are a starter away.

1. You are choosing the wrong catcher 2. Nava belongs in the outfield mix as long as we have platooners out there. On base skills 3. Better off in the bigs - he has been productive in the minors generally, what he needs to learn, he has to learn with big league ABs. 4. RF is still better value here. 5. Maybe - have a contingency if/when he turns into a pumpkin 6. A bit expired by now 7. Rotation issues have a way of working themselves out. If Peavy is the worst of them, this rotation is doing well. 8. At least today - let's just be happy we have 7 reasonable starters - most teams don't have 4 9. I'd concur, although non-strike throwing relievers make a tear roll down my eye 10. Who cares really.

I admire his attempt - clearly just wasn't good enough. Holt and Bradley just make more sense for the time being. Andres Torres arrival as a platoon partner will be useful also.

Shame Bogaerts hitting confidence has been shattered by the position switch.

LOL - no expectations for me. But when a guy has exploded through the system like he has - when a dude is conquering leagues he is young for, the eyebrow is raised.

It worked out ok in 2007 ... have to be strong with your player evaluations, even in Boston and give the kids you believe in the reps to prove it definitively.

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.