Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

sk7326

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,631

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Boston Red Sox Videos

2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking

Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker

News

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by sk7326

  1. sk7326
    Just a ballpark number as he gets better at stuff - I don't expect him to be a "green light, anytime" guy by any stretch. But opportunistic, has good enough speed - high baseball IQ. It will get better. Doesn't really affect my view that much - steals are awesome to have but not at all essential to good offense.
  2. sk7326
    Strikeouts (from a hitters view, pitchers entirely different) aren't really that much worse than other outs, especially if he is getting on base at a decent clip (you are probably better off just using straight percentage of PAs). And if he's not really compromising his extra base hits, then the ways you get to 1st base are fairly unimportant. Indeed, Rickey Henderson - and no, I'm not saying Bradley is going to be one of the top dozen or so players ever - was not a contact maven by any stretch.
  3. sk7326
    The walks lean in favor of Reynolds - but he also is an absolute disaster in the field. Middlebrooks was good last season, though earlier this year it has not been good (his slump early clearly bled into his whole game). Middlebrooks has the athletic ability (and some past performance) to be a much more valuable asset in the field than Reynolds.
  4. sk7326
    Certainly possible if not probable ...
  5. sk7326
    For me, I see Bradley's peak as good to very good glove, .350 OBP, 20+ steals, double digit homeruns ... while not Trout/McCutchen/Kemp ... at least Michael Bourn which ain't too shabby
  6. sk7326
    The talent evaluation on DiceK was sound - the stuff is still terrific. But his own approach was horrid and never got fixed.
  7. sk7326
    Will Bradley approximate Ellsbury 2013 in 2014? No. Will he be good enough that the Red Sox need not have to look at someone like Marlon Byrd or other marginally above replacement level fodder? Given the defense and approach - like the chances. What you look for is constant improvement - not going to get a finished product certainly.
  8. sk7326
    It's not a sliding scale thing ... it is more that there is a threshold level of OBP where you are not hurting your team. The league average is .320 or so for instance - so it is safe to say .310-.320 is something which can play if you bring other stuff to the table, like legitimate power. This is basically the difference between 2012 Josh Reddick and the Red Sox incarnation of Reddick. He did not become an on-base machine, because that's just not going to happen for him. His on-base got good enough to not be hurting his team, and to let the stuff he did inconsistently (hit the ball very far) and consistently (manage his position) happen.
  9. sk7326
    Crawford was a great athlete coming off of a fringe MVP level season - he was the top free agent position player on the market (or near the top I don't have the list in front of me). The odds he would forget how to play baseball entering his age 30 season more or less completely were extremely low. Really, the big shock was that he fell off a cliff as a defensive player ... for which there was no reasonable explanation.
  10. sk7326
    Sox paid a lot of money for Dice K, got some decent value ... was it a success? No, although it was not a failure of scouting or anything. One always got the sense that it was Matsuzaka himself. His amazing ability to limit BABIP (and it is a skill he seemed to legitimately have) allowed him to be decent at times despite being truly horrid to watch for almost all of his career. His 2008 season was probably one of the most overrated seasons in history. His 2007 was at least as good without the shiny sub 3.00 ERA to show for it.
  11. sk7326
    To be fair, a genius by Ron Washington standards
  12. sk7326
    The NL has closed the gap that has formed over the last 10 years. But it is not shut. Boston and Detroit are the two best teams in baseball and have proven it (Oakland is close). It don't mean a damn thing in October because that's how the game works - but I'd still pick an AL team blindly over an NL team. The ballpark edge an AL team has is profound - although any best of seven is basically coin flip.
  13. sk7326
    The "they are scouting him" stories I think tend to be leverage plays by some source. Teams are getting dimes on everybody. And there is no information advantage in the Nippon league, everybody knows the talent industrywide. I think if they see the stuff and the approach, he'd interest them. With the Japanese guys, the latter is often the problem.
  14. sk7326
    I think they have zero interest in how many times he strikeouts. Clearly that is an area where the team's development is relatively indifferent (and that's fine - strikeouts for a hitter aren't special). It has been the general approach and how long his swing got. He's never going to be an on-base machine but he can do enough to get to his power, which yeah is pretty good.
  15. sk7326
    I doubt I am - I certainly don't think Salty's better. But for the price and the years - sure. Salty has been more durable, has been roughly McCann's equal this year, and projects to be a 120 start guy for longer. Metrics this year on the two were roughly the same - Salty's arm is much inferior for sure, but neither is any sort of Molina here. Let's put it this way - he has made a lot of improvement across the board, enough to be a legitimate starter for the next 3 years - and there are precious few catchers out there who can say that. Trading Salty's next 3 years for McCann's is not a slam dunk at all - especially on a per dollar basis.
  16. sk7326
    Over the career - sure. But he has a lot more miles (despite close in age) - and the results have slipped. Both are probably middle of the pack by now - which is fine. McCann's reputation is stellar, but his ability to catch is on the decline in a way that Salty's ain't.
  17. sk7326
    Throwing he is not good, but he is a solid receiver otherwise - at least as good defensively as McCann - if he just went all Victorino and gave up switch hitting he'd be much more valuable despite the clear developmental leaps forward he has made the last 2 seasons.
  18. sk7326
    Pierzynsi and Ruiz are old ... not multi year solutions ... it's really a 2 man market with a dropoff. If Salty promised to stop pretending he can hit righthanded, I'd be happy to give him 3 years. (at a market reasonable price)
  19. sk7326
    The catcher market is virtually nil - this is why Salty is going to get a very handsome salary from somebody ... and why if the Red Sox were that team I would not be upset. Corner outfielders - you can always find somebody decent, or (like Boston has) cobble together a FrankenLeftFielder platoon which does the job about 85% as well as a true stud at 25-50% of the cost.
  20. sk7326
    Basically what I'd note is - just because you get the odd Lars Anderson or Andy Marte does not mean that ALL prospects (or even most) with those crackerjack traits - conquering levels at a young age - does not mean that the process or the evaluation is not sound. The odds are still with you ... I mean my reaction to missing on Anderson is *shrug* it happens.
  21. sk7326
    The thing to me with prospects is - age + level to me is the simplest way to evaluate them. It's just the principle that anybody who has played sports knows. The kid conquering JV means nothing to me - but the freshman who can get reps, even as a substitute, with the varsity ... THAT is who you bet on.
  22. sk7326
    But what does beating them out mean. It does not reflect in the stats necessarily - it could just be coaching and scouting outcomes. Bradley clearly has shown he can handle CF defensively and at the plate he knows what he is doing, though it has not translated into results fully. Any promotion (like a signing) is a bet - but a bet on a kid with a lot of natural growth remaining. The Lars Anderson sort of regression as a 23 year old is very rare.
  23. sk7326
    I don't think anyone disagrees with this, but "scouting the stat line" is generally a bad way to operate.
  24. sk7326
    You need to have conviction to play Bradley and the ability to not listen to the WEEI callers or Globe writers if/when he struggles (this applies to Bogaerts too). The thing with Bradley is that his defense and his approach will allow him to contribute as long as he is hitting .240 or so (i.e. not a total offensive zero). He will draw enough walks to be able to at least not be an automatic out (the way Napoli was able to still cobble at bats together despite his wicked July swoon) while the other stuff is worked on.
  25. sk7326
    Evidence is a shaky thing on prospects. Lars Anderson's case is very much an exception - one of the weirdest of them all, usually guys who are performing at levels they are young for are very high probability guys. In the long run, betting on guys like that works. (just like, as Tampa would attest, despite the volatility of prospects, drafting very high still works quite well) The Japanese guy is worth signing if he is better than your alternatives in a meaningful way. The history if Nippon league starters would lead you to believe that this is in fact not true - Darvish's style is much more "American" than the guys they have generally produced. The more typical examples have been the Nomos or Matsuzakas, not pitching to contact, wasting a lot of time etc.
×
×
  • Create New...