sk7326
-
Posts
7,633 -
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
-
Lineup: LF: Benintendi RF: Betts DH: Martinez 1B: Moreland/Ramirez SS: Bogaerts 3B: Devers C: Vasquez 2B: Nunez CF: Bradley Yes, Vasquez at 8 or 9 is conventional. But I think having a decent chance to turn RBI opportunities over to Benintendi and Betts is a good idea. This allows them to be table setters without hampering their RBI opportunities too much.
-
He deserves his day in court. The Red Sox do not share that obligation. If their investigation reveals something then he should be cut.
-
A trade would be ideal of course - but moving Pedroia to the 60 day DL is a reasonable option too.
-
The last 2 years of the Martinez deal are probably not going to be great. At the same time, if it is Dodgers Adrian Gonzalez level (or hell, 2017 HanRam)... we can live with that.
-
Not for anything valuable ... this gives them some really good platoon options there. This core has a couple of years before some decisions have to be made - Martinez clearly will maximize this team's chances to do something special in that time. It's worth the downside risk - even if it comes true in Year 4 of the deal.
-
A Moreland-Ramirez platoon could be one of the most productive 1B positions in the league ... Moreland has never hit lefties. You might give Ramirez more at-bats than a simple L/R platoon. Now I could see Holt not starting the season to give some flexibility early.
-
A 5 year deal was going to be a risk. The odds were that years 4 and 5 were not going to be that good. Any long term deal could be ruined by injury. I used to think that player options stunk because it was all downside for the org. I am less sure these days. I mean, let's say JD does well enough that he will opt out after 2/50. In a sense both sides are getting what they want. I don't think the Sox got a steal here, but this is pretty reasonable for the best slugger on the market. FWIW it probably takes them out of the Bryce Harper derby next season - if that was ever a consideration.
-
It seemed like destiny - the Red Sox hand just got a lot stronger in recent weeks. I'll be curious as to how the deal is structured.
-
But then - you had terrific production from Bogaerts, Betts in 2016 ... a year which also counts on his record. You also have amazing seasons from Victorino and Mike Carp in 2013. The problem with the evaluation is that all of it counts. I am okay with him being replaced with Cora - I am very high on Cora. But it is absolutely possible to do worse. I cite last year as a weird case where nobody over-performed their expectation (except for Vasquez and Devers) ... which usually you get in good seasons. But - aside from Bogaerts (who had injury problems) nobody was BAD either. Everybody was kind of in the middle of the expected range of outcomes (Betts was a dropoff from 2016, but STILL a fringy MVP level season) . Since so much of the core was young, you wish there was a leap from somewhere ... but there is nothing that precludes that from happening this year.
-
I agree. To be fair, 4 years of a guy who, while somewhat inconsistent, has been on the verge of a true #1 pitcher (and sure as heck has the stuff of one) is at least a return which is fair.
-
that'd be neat - but Archer is such a valuable commodity that I think Tampa will want to get as many bidders in as possible.
-
This was the weird thing about last year. There was dysfunction seemingly. It did not read as a fun place to work. It wore some on the kids and veterans (for different reasons). At the same time, the team still won ... and the guys showed a LOT of grit and toughness. They overcame a lot of adversity to pull together a pretty successful season ... unfortunately a non-negligible chunk of that adversity was self-inflicted. Farrell has to have check marks in both columns in that way.
-
nunez is a quality utility guy ... and it is good we have him.
-
Hitting is hard when you can't grip the bat properly
-
He is a contact hitter - and if it's hard it works ... but he has little history of power and he doesn't walk. He is not good defensively - but has value because he can play a bunch of positions.
-
If the team is winning, then it is keeping things loose. If the team does not win, it's a lack of discipline. Outcomes color all of it. It's silly but there you go. The good reporting tries a bit harder than using those symbols.
-
I could see that as a steady state ... (11 pitchers). But will they break camp that way or start with 12?
-
Basically you look at the position players entering the season: Starters: Vasquez, Moreland, Nunez, Bogaerts, Devers, Benintendi, Bradley, Betts, Ramirez Bench Catcher: Leon So if you start with a 12 or 13 man pitching staff ... you are basically down to 2 or 3 players. If we assume a FA signing of some kind (JD, Lomo, whomever) that gets you down to 1 or 2. So you are looking at, what Brentz, Holt, Castillo, Swihart for 2 spots maybe?
-
Not at all - Nunez did not have a hot market because he's not a starter. I mean, his value is almost entirely in BABIP ... and he can play a bunch of positions. (none of them well, but for a utility bench guy, this is not a problem) Signing him is a good move. In the land of 12-13 man pitching staffs, you need your bench players to be super versatile positionally.
-
Put your best hitter 2nd ... the differences in lineup placement are small, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't grab whatever help you can. But batting 2nd has shown to be the best way to balance getting your best hitter more plate appearances while making sure he also gets plenty of RBI opportunities.
-
Farrell tactically was fine. He was not great, but he was not terrible. (like Matt Williams terrible) Tactically he did a pretty good job in the ALDS. (no way to tactically work around 2 horrific starts ... his moves were crucial to winning Game 3, and he did everything right in Game 4) He got respect - and after the Bobby V experience, having a normal human being in that position was a tremendous plus. However, he did not seem to be very good with working with a younger team. He was good in that he played kids - which not all managers do. But - and a lot of the reporting surrounding the firing noted this - the kids the Sox had were all smart, high character guys. But they often were also guys who were very hard on themselves - and Farrell was not the sort of guy who can tell the kids to take it easy or just helping them relax. Can Cora be able to work with a lighter touch - I am excited to find out.
-
Cashner down from 19% to 12% K-rate in 2017. Yuck
-
oh of course - but "buzz" ... whatever. There are a lot of chances to get better, but most of them are internal.
-
I am happy being the boring 90 win team.
-
I suspect the clubhouse was not a fun place to work by the end of 2017 ... and when you have a young team, that can often a problem.