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
    I am. The AL MVP race is really between Trout and Cabrera again (closer this year than last although Trout has a better chance of actually being voted) with Chris Davis attracting those who genuflect at the HR-RBI altar. Ellsbury has been one of the best dozen or so players in the American League this year. Each voter has to fill out 10 names in the MVP ballot - he absolutely deserves to be named on a ballot that size. Might only end up something like 9th or 10th in the voting - but his season has absolutely justified that level of consideration.
  2. sk7326
    I suspect the fans are actually relatively ok with moving to Jackie Bradley who has flashed promise and a full 7 years younger. I like Ellsbury and can argue that if he could churn out 5 seasons like this - that is an $18-20M a year guy easily. But heading into his age 30-35 years, where he might have to move to an outfield corner, I am not sure the bat will play up enough to justify that sort of salary.
  3. sk7326
    I think it's going to be Boegarts (small chance Middlebrooks) soon enough. I think the Red Sox if they call up Boegarts, it will either be as a September call-up (and he'd be playoff eligible too due to the season ending injuries our relievers have suffered) or they might have him meet them in Kansas City. No fanfare, almost no hype - just drop him in the middle of a road trip without a ton of buzz and give him some low distraction time to break in.
  4. sk7326
    Not with a 30 year old without a track record of durability. But he has been the Red Sox best position player this year - and he should get some MVP consideration (it's a two man race for the award, but Ellsbury should on some ballots). He has done all that he can to make himself a good case - and I think there is a decent chance SOMEBODY will offer him that "mistake" level of contract.
  5. sk7326
    Now what is true is that Shane's value will fall through the floor if his legs (and glove) go. He just is not a good enough hitter to be a reasonable RF without his wonderful defense (CF he could fake). But that might not be something that the Sox have to worry about until his contract is over.
  6. sk7326
    Has been excellent - also a good demonstration as to how silly it is to trawl for bullpen arms and pay $3M for the Jesse Crains of the world ... instead just bring up the guys with actual cheap upside like Britton or De La Rosa, even if these are just apprenticeships before competing for a rotation position. Obviously Britton has some regression etc etc, but he clearly has quality stuff, better than most of the guys in the trade market.
  7. sk7326
    The deal could look bad in a year or so. But a 3 win player is worth a solid price. Defense has been excellent, offense has been ok, and the team has been excellent when he has been able to play. OPS is fun to ruminate over, but he is getting on base at a non-awful rate and has made up for it with the rest of the baseball skills. Ellsbury has been their best position player to date (and probably should appear on some MVP ballots - seeing as MVP ballots are 10-deep), so lots of guys look bad there, and Victorino will have a hard time justifying playing a corner if his glove fades much. But fortunately a short-ish commitment.
  8. sk7326
    Protecting players - that's fine. Tough job for Lavarnway - although he also failed robustly. Wright's stuff had movement - clearly too much for the catcher to handle. That Lavarnway has proven unable to really hit like the monstah he showed in 2011 is tough - hard to see a real big league regular there.
  9. sk7326
    I have not done any real studying - but I do wonder whether a large win "bump" (like if the Royals could get to 83 wins or more) would affect their bottom line enough that the push has some value to them. I don't know. Tells you about the business - the KC owner wants a return on this rebuilding, so his minions have to get him one.
  10. sk7326
    Napoli is effective and frustrating - just one of those "three true outcomes" sort of guys - homerun, walk, strikeout. Not a ton of homeruns, but hitting the ball very hard when he can make contact. I wish he made more contact, but admire how he does not give at-bats away. The big difference offensively from 2012 is how our team has put together a collection of tough outs again - a staple of our best teams. Napoli is definitely "of" that sort of style.
  11. sk7326
    Doubront has evolved into one of the AL's best lefty starters. Nobody would argue he is better than Price, Moore, Sale, Holland whomever at their respective best ... but he has been more consistent than Price and Moore this season (Price's start was particularly lousy) - Moore has not gone deep into games that often and he has had a few stinkers too. He has that occasional agonizing slow, can't find the plate innings out of "Dice-K's greatest hits" ... but it has gotten a lot better.
  12. sk7326
    Iglesias is probably a starter to utility guy, depends on the hit tool. His ceiling is probably a .260 sort of guy without any real side benefits (walk/extra bases). It's a hole in your lineup, but if you can eliminate ground balls on that side of the infield and allow your team to let the league's best hitter waddle around at 3B without killing you - it's a fair trade.
  13. sk7326
    Especially with the additional year of control.
  14. sk7326
    I think Moore was afraid he would be the ex-general manager who didn't make that deal.
  15. sk7326
    Shields has been very good for KC ... Ervin Santana rose from the dead ... imagine if that team could hit?
  16. sk7326
    That is a fair take - Keri is generally excellent. In a vacuum, without external pressures (like a GM's own job security or some need to show fans something for a eleventy million year rebuilding process), the Royals would probably not do the deal. Young, cheap, controllable, all-star talent is extremely difficult to find - and a team like KC needs to hoard as much of that as possible. But all things weren't equal - and a lot of people felt they had to go in for a variety of reasons. For a team like Tampa - who really will never get fan interest, that sort of deal is a much easier proposition.
  17. sk7326
    Royals made the trade as a win now proposition - not saying it was realistic, but I think the GM had some job saving to do. Trading an elite prospect for a very good if not quite elite starter was easy to explain to his fans I'd think. Tampa is ever opportunistic though. I don't think Boston had as attractive a chip as Tampa did - both in present performance and how much they'd have to pay to extend him. Also, we know on our end ownership can't help themselves from time to time on the PR/marketing front.
  18. sk7326
    Crawford and Lackey in consecutive years were - well it was crapping out on a couple of very highly rated FAs. Crawford's decline was particularly stark - his skills looked like things that would age decently (batting approach, good athlete) - still weird to think a guy who was an MVP candidate a year before became replacement level filler (and even after his surgery just a guy).
  19. sk7326
    Well ... the ERA and xFIP are fairly in line - so there is some evidence that this is his true level. But his whole body of work is nothing to sneeze at either - he has given them competitive turns in the rotation most times out, and considering how bad the Sox were in this area in 2012, that has been a huge help. He is getting more groundballs this year, and the flyballs are not going over the fence (a lot of the luck component at work) at nearly the rate of a year ago. Just churning out 6 competitive innings was a chore the last year or so - that turnaround as much as anything has defined this season's team.
  20. sk7326
    It is not how it works for teams without a relatively bottomless source of revenue. The Sox ain't the Rays here. They are just deciding how much profit they want and deciding accordingly. Granted it helps the "scrappy underdog" narrative, and it is good financial judgment. The money is there to make an Ellsbury deal happen - if it doesn't, that is a (completely justifiable) choice.
  21. sk7326
    Obviously Doubront is no Kershaw (or Darvish, or Scherzer or Verlander or whatever). But he has had a very strong stretch. And yes he has shown some of the quality of a legit #3. Granted he did that a bit last year, but also was extremely unlucky. The xFIP is identical - but this year, the results are there. Some of it is good fortune, and some of it is substantial improvement defensively (at RF, SS particularly). What holds him back from the next leap is taking his form into the 8th inning more frequently. He is also still fairly pitch inefficient.
  22. sk7326
    Hooray for TV money
  23. sk7326
    Any list you can appear on with Clayton Kershaw you are doing something right. Doubront is on a great run, and even if this is a bit of a fluke - he has clearly improved and started to harness his real talent.
  24. sk7326
    Most of these long term deals are bad ideas - but to win a bidding war, a team might accept that years 5-7 are worth it for the years 1-4. For the Yankees, flags fly forever - their free agent binge got them a title, so it worked in that sense. What did not work was desperately thin starting pitching. Burnett had been his whole career essentially a rich man's Felix Doubront, but behind Sabbathia there was a lot of "hope". And now with Sabbathia getting older, it looks doubly bad. Being the Yankees you expect some sort of turnover - how I don't know.
  25. sk7326
    Payroll is ALWAYS flexible (the owners can whine all they want, but ballpark is a license to print money and the TV station, better it go into the ballclub) - but not sure the money is best spend on resigning a 30 year old CF with injury history. If they could get him for 3 years, that is one thing - 5 years is a lot tougher. The financial commitment - who cares, not my money. They will need bullpen arms next season - but they always do. But relievers are a dime a dozen, almost none of them are reliable year to year - so you are better off building a bullpen this way. If they wanted to put De La Rosa or Ranaudo in the bullpen, that would be great though low probability. (bullpen a good way to break in future starters) This is an area where Tampa has shown a lot of people - it's a lot more cost effective to sift through other team's garbage and random guys in the farm than expending any sort of long term effort on relievers.
×
×
  • Create New...