sk7326

LOL - not actually that much, but among the "not quite starters" field, I'd like to have some real upside. Can dream a little more on his talent. If somebody wanted to go cheaper and say Franklin Gutierrez (who was probably the best defensive CF in the league before injuries came along), I would not argue too vehemently.

The mistake here is that if you REALLY think Carp should be part of a platoon - paying Napoli makes no sense ... certainly paying him the going rate to be a Carp did have a small sample size which yes matters. What also matters is that Seattle (though yes, they could have been wrong - we have benefitted for a decade from the Twins mis-evaluation of a 1B/DH sort), one of the most offensively starved systems in the entire league, passed on him. I like what he has given us in a part time role - but I would want some options in case he cannot handle a more involved one.

If there is one position on the field that can be taught (and often is - whether it be Joe Mauer, Buster Posey etc), it's 1B. If there are two positions, it's 1B and LF.

Josh Johnson to Padres - another strong move for both parties. No better way to rehab a career than to go to a hitter's graveyard.

Still a 2-win player as a 37 year old, although some of that will increase moving to an easier position. He is still a reasonable starter, if not an amazing one. I would not judge who the front office values based on the playoff roster. All the 25-man playoff roster was for was to determine who the team thinks can get them through a 1 month tournament in October 2013 - no more, no less. Quintin Berry was on the roster for having precisely one big league skill, but one which is valuable when all 14 of your position spots count. (contrast this to Saint Louis who wasted 2 roster spots on two pitchers they almost never used) But he is by no means ahead of Bradley in the org pecking order. The front office's decisions on players have a much longer time horizon than their decisions on who makes the playoff roster.

Considering that 1B is the home of guys who can't do anything else (save the odd Keith Hernandez-JT Snow types), this is not that big an obstacle. And since Beltran is a better athlete than the usual convert - this is an area I'd be less concerned with. Napoli - with less athletic skill, but yes more training - turned into a solid 1B defensively. So coaching up the skill is not at all unprecedented. This ain't shortstop.

I meant Gomes - and the probability on Beltran is higher in the short run - though yes the platoon is effective, enough that LF is not an urgent priority. That said, if you can get one person to man the spot, that is one less roster spot needed in this age of 85 man pitching staffs

Really, if you want to look at the Red Sox objectively, you'd probably say that LF there is absolutely a job opening, same with C. And that's about it. So Beltran is a totally legitimate short term option to play LF and he'd be an upgrade over Nava/Carp. The quibble would be the price - since he is QO'd. As far as 1B goes - between the general nature of the position and the Sox having Butterfield on their staff (who is reputed to be one of the best fielding instructors around - and fielding being one of the places where pro instruction actually can do a lot), I think they are happy signing the bat and figuring out the glove later there.

8/200 or so sounds right. He has another 2-3 seasons of legitimate MVP level in him, and perhaps a bit more than that given the positional value of 2B. He is a terrific athlete and has good hitting skills - his back end will be overpaid, but more than likely overpaying fringy All-Star level production than overpaying a replacement level stiff. Obviously the risk in a long deal is his ability to avoid injury and such - but the percentages are with him given past and such.

Probably not - and Hart is really more of a 1B look than anything. But LF/1B are similar searches. If the Sox had a full time option in mind for LF they would not have had the Gomes fetish for so long. Now Hart is not an urgent priority but it would be irresponsible not to do the due diligence.

Brandon Phillips is not a good player anymore while Kinsler is good and theoretically available. Cano goes back to the Yanks - he is their best option still. Cardinals - lot of old history, especially before baseball went westward.

It's a perfect pickup if the terms are reasonable - starter upside and there is at least one job opening for somebody to snatch up in LF.

Generally you can ask a team take salary or send an actual player, but not both. Also, if you hate him that much - cut him. Money is already gone.

I'm sorry Brown University North Campus rankles so.

The odds of Ellsbury retaining CF skills are low - although how long that will take is a legitimate question. I actually think "can he stay leadoff" is a far lesser concern. The approach he showed this season would allow him to ride out some of the loss of speed. After all, he is not a slap hitter who leans on bunts or infield hits for production. It is possible he slips from a 50 SB guy to a 20 SB one as he gets older - but one forgets how long Kenny Lofton remained an effective top of the order bat. Obviously as an outfielder as you get older you rely more on your ability to get breaks and positioning (and hopefully coaches who understand it too), The near term valuation of Ellsbury is pretty rock solid - depending on how you factor in the injuries - it is the shape of the performance curve afterwards that is interesting. I like his chances of remaining an effective top of the order bat into his mid-30s ... I would not pay what he is asking for it though.

Well the Yankees have been an outlier for years (as have, to be fair, we). I think the "everybody else" is where the inflation has come from.

I think the Victorino deal was a bit of an overpay too - but it turned out very well thankfully. Comparing Ellsbury to Damon, you basically have a couple of things in Ellsbury's favor: 1. Ellsbury is 2 years younger than Damon was 2. Defensive measurement is light years ahead of where it was in 2005. There are more ways to quantify how Ellsbury is a better player than Johnny Damon (which he is) Now the second thing is a plus and minus ... a plus in that it is a large advantage, but it might not be one that lasts in 3 years. The injuries really affect Ellsbury's valuation ultimately.

With Ellsbury, I think the valuation comes down to basically one question. Is he injury prone, or just caught a couple of freaky breaks. If you can slough off the injuries, then he could be a pretty solid bet for the next 3 years at least as a quality CF, between the athleticism and the approach. But if a team doesn't want to, I get it. I don't think there are 30 HR seasons in his future - between "fluke rule" and the scouting explanation (he just started to feast on a pitch which teams don't throw him much anymore), but he is no slap hitter. The trick is trying to get teams to see his injury history his way.

LMAO ... let's put it this way, the Ryan Howard contract will be the flag bearer for ho-ho-horrendous deals for the next couple of decades

I'll take CYA for $500 - of course if he did not sign off on such a large commitment (even just staying - sign the best guy, which Crawford was in that class by some measures) that is quite derelict.

A really bad re-sign for Philly (a 2 year deal made some sense ... for somebody else, assuming the PED suspension and horrifying 2013 and age did not frighten you). A lot of "GM under pressure" in these moves. Once you realized he was not serious about dealing Lee, it is hard for a Philly fan to have a ton of hope for the near term.

Boras got 14 million a year for an innings soaker upper ... I don't think any of his clients are weeping. Both sides have interest in saying what they say. Generally in a battle of wits between Boras and an average baseball owner, I'd pick Boras. (I don't say GM because on some basic level, the contracts of this ilk are ownership level choices)

Gomes was in because Farrell liked him over Nava for whatever reason. I will refuse the appeal to authority ("Well we don't have the info the manager does" and the like) and say it was somewhat suboptimal, but not by a margin that killed anybody. Ellsbury I think we are just talking about some very large dollar figures - and if ownership is concerned about the luxury tax, which is their prerogative, that is a legitimate concern. The Red Sox are doing some due diligence, and they do have a little bit of leverage here. They have a substitute with potential, a fan base that will not punish them for the short term - winning a title will sell enough pink hats to assure that at last early - and a team without essentially no real holes. Yes, catcher is a problem since you'd get a lot of passed balls without one - but replacement level is so low that being below average there doesn't really hurt you that badly. The number of teams that need a guy like him AND can pay the price is not high - just matching teams with need, I'd put the Rangers at the top of the list, but yes the Yankees are always a factor. That said, some more imaginative options to me might be San Francisco or Anaheim (who is in that arms race with the Dodgers for SoCal moolah). Frankly if I were Pittsburgh, the marginal revenue calculations could favor a high dollar, short offer, although I'd be surprised if that ever happened. (they were a playoff team who got zero from their RF spot for most of the season, the marginal boost Ellsbury could give might actually create a business case).

Tim Hudson to Giants - strong signing after the Lincecum face plant. Hudson going into a division of hitter's graveyards bodes well.

Whether it be McDonald or somebody else, the utility infielder is not a huge deal ultimately. Heck, we might not even need to really deal with landing one in the offseason.