moonslav59

From MLBTR... Latest On David Price By Jeff Todd | March 20, 2017 at 7:48pm CDT Red Sox president of baseball operations Dave Dombrowski provided an update on the health of key lefty David Price, as Evan Drellich of CSNNE.com reports. While the club’s top baseball executive emphasized that there’s still no clear timeline, Drellich explains that the current trajectory makes it seem unlikely that Price will be available before the calendar flips to May. Price has been dealing with a somewhat nebulous elbow issue, though he has already been cleared of the need for surgery. Today’s update comes amid continued uncertainty — publicly, at least — regarding Price’s outlook, and as the organization continues to looking to bolster their depth The club is obviously taking the long view here, with Price set to play an important role in 2017 and for many years beyond. While Dombrowski said that he believes the team “could have pushed [Price] a little bit further at this point,” he stressed the need “to take our time” with the veteran southpaw. That said, the broader news seems to be positive. Dombrowski said he believes that Price “will be fine, based upon what the doctors have told me [and] what David feels.” Though it’s still not quite clear what caused the elbow discomfort, Dombrowski said he suspects that Price was throwing hard early on, owing to offseason workouts that “really loosened up his hip” and left him working “free and easy.” As for the next steps, that remains unclear. But the team could get some answers tomorrow, when Price is slated to be examined by the club’s head orthopedist, Dr. Peter Asnis. “So based on that, on how he feels, what the next phase will become and when that initiates more throwing with some intensity, I don’t have that start date,” said manager John Farrell.

You also have to adjust for park setting. We should score more than most teams even with an equal offense. (We should also allow more runs, if equal.

We benched him last spring, so I don't think a platoon would be a big slap in his face, besides, he knows he sucks vs lefties. Why else would he try to tinker with giving up switch-hitting?

Pablo sucks vs LHPs. I've showed the numbers over the last 3-4 years. He's the league's worst hitter vs LHPs in some sample scenarios and bottom 5 in about all of them. Holt actually hasd a better OPS vs LHPs over his career. Rutledge bats RH'd and I have him above Holt & Hernandez. Hernandez has been over .700 vs LHPs in recent years in the minors. Pablo should not start vs a LH'd starter. Is that enough?

Not much, really, and that's why ST'ing has very little value in any context, except to see if a player has recovered from a previous injury.

It's nice to see all the love pouring out for Marco. I've always been very high on this kid. I had hoped his SS defense would improve more than it has, since 2B is locked up longer than SS and 3B.

I don't think ST'ing numbers mean all that much in any context, except to reveal if a questionable player is healthy or not.

I saw the logic in going for offense that year and thinking the pitchers available in the following year's FA market were much better, but I still think our biggest need was SP'ing. I know Scherzer cost a ton, but he was a better option that HanRam & Pablo combined.... maybe Scherzer & Valbuena would have worked better. Signing both was a clear mistake at the outset. HanRam seemed like a good contract based on projections. Pablo was just plain gross overpay for a declining talent. I'm not sure we could have afforded Scherzer and HanRam.

I have no big beef with JF over line-up choices, but my own personal preference is to move guys up or down based on splits a little more than JF does. I really think Young needs to bat no lower than 5th vs LHPs. 6th is okay, I guess, but the guy is one of MLB's best hitters vs lefties. Last year, he had 27 PAs in the 1-5 slots, 49 in the 6th slot, 114 in the 7th slot and 37 in the 8th or 9 slots. Granted, he started 33 games vs a RH'd starter and only 20 vs a LH'd starter, so these numbers are not as bad as they look. Last year, we faced 37 LH'd starters. Young was injured for some of them, but this year, assuming good health, I'd like to see Young get 37 starts vs LHPs and maybe just 0-15 vs RHPs (to cover injuries only). When he does start vs lefties, bat him 5th. I also think Bogey's career sample size is large enough to make the determination that he hits LHPs much better than RHPs and should be slotted differently based on the numbers: .847 vs LHPs (.800 when a lefty starts) .717 vs RHPs (.728 when a RH'd starter pitches) We should avoid playing Pablo and Moreland vs LHPs. My guess is, JF will start Pablo vs LHPs to begin the season. I wouldn't. He will probably use a Moreland-Young platoon at 1B (Moreland)/DH (Young) with HanRam playing FT at DH vs RHPs and 1B vs LHPs. This seems like a perfect set-up to keep HanRam fresh at 1B, so when we play in NL parks, he'll be ready vs LHPs or RHPs at 1B. Young can spell JBJ and Beni in the OF vs some LHPs, but I'd prefer Holt or Selsky in the line-up vs LHPs over Moreland. If we ever end up with Leon and Swihart as our 1-2 catchers, I'd avoid the personal caddy plan and go with a lefty - righty platoon. Leon is about a hundred points better vs LHPs, and Swihart looks better vs RHPs (by about 50 points). Vaz is about 80 points better vs LHPs, so I guess one could say the same with a Swi-Vaz tandem. Swi and Vaz have almost identical numbers vs LHPs in small sample sizes.

Me too, as well as HanRam, but Pablo much more so. I wonder how signing just hanRam to play 3B would have worked out.

I never said "we should have done nothing", but I am saying it was a viable option. My position was to get a serviceable 5th starter or go for an ace (like Sale or Quintana)... not overpay for something in between. I'd have preferred nothing over the trade we made, and I made that very clear at the time, and when we had the chance to reverse the trade after the trade deadline was past. That is proof that I preferred nothing over this trade. It does not mean doing nothing was my first choice. I posted many times my ideas of what kind of trade I preferred. I'm not sure the CWS were ready for a big trade last summer, and I guess we'll never know, but I think they'd have made the trade with Espi instead of Kopech (or maybe with both going to Chicago with Basabe and Diaz staying here). I actually liked Pomeranz and was happy he had 2.5 years of team control, but I still hated the trade more out of my view that trading a guy like Espi should only occur as part of a larger package to get an ace- not a guy with just a few months of great pitching.

I still think the 15-20 extra PAs per slot in the order is enough to make a bigger difference than you make it out to be. I believe your numbers, but a few runs here and there can make the difference between making the playoffs or not. Maybe it's not as big of a deal as many make it out to be, and the topic is debated much more than it should be, but I still think a manager should do everything he can to improve the chances of scoring more runs or allowing less runs scored against us. Even a little bit can make a big difference.

I'm not so sure Kendrick, Johnson, Owens and Elias are even bottom tier (16 or worse) 7 through 10 starters in MLB. Not many teams have quality deeper than starter 4 or 5. We have maybe one of MLB's best 6th starter (if healthy) and 7 through 10 are probably pretty close to other teams.

Again, it's NOT AFTER THE FACT. I despised the trade from the first minute.

This from SB Nation... 12/2016 6) Marco Hernandez, INF, Grade B-: Age 24, originally signed by Cubs out of Dominican Republic, traded to Red Sox in 2014; hit .309/.343/.444 in 223 at-bats in Triple-A then .294/.357.373 in 51 major league at-bats spread over five separate recalls in ’16; has hit very well for two years, with a .305/.330/.454 mark in Double-A/Triple-A in ’15; line drive hitter with doubles power can surprise with his pop; tools fit best at second base but workable at other positions; projects as super-utility type with better-than-normal bat in the role; doesn’t get as much attention as other Boston prospects but should not be under-estimated. ETA 2017.

Here's my positional depth chart: 3B: vs RHPs: 1) Pablo 2) Hernandez 3) Holt vs LHPs: 1) Rutledge 2T) Hernandez & Holt SS: 1) Bogey 2) Hernandez 3) Holt 2B: 1) Pedey 2T) Hernandez & Holt 1B: 1) Moreland/Ramirez 2) Travis 3) Holt (maybe Swihart after some practice) LF: 1) Beni 2) Young 3T) Selsky & Holt (Moreland in a pinch) CF/RF: Move Beni to position and Young to LF, 3T) Selsky/Holt in LF Once again, as I've brought up several times over the last few months, why not trade the guy with some nice trade value- Brock Holt? Rutledge and Hernandez start the season on the 25 man roster. Selsky and Marrero are extended depth with a positional move by Swihart to 3B or 1B remaining as an option or emergency plan C.

I loved the Porcello extension from day one, but I was on another site defending the extension even through the rough patch of early 2015.

At the time of the trade, we were 50-38 and 2 games up in the division. Seems we were doing pretty good despite the fact that we had these numbers from our 4 through 9 starters: 3-9 5.91 Buch (13 GS) 2-0 8.46 Kelly (6) 1-3 8.59 ERod (6) 2-0 6.75 O'Sullivan (4) 0-0 5.11 Owens (3) 0-1 15.88 Elias (1) No doubt, these numbers were frightening, while Pomeranz had put up great numbers in the first half of 2016, but we didn't "have to" do anything. Pomeranz's second half performance proved we didn't, and yes that is hindsight, but I still think we didn't need to try and find a number 3 type starter. A one year fifth starter rental was an option as well as doing nothing but hope Buch or ERod would rebound.

No. Not "after the fact." I hated the trade at the time, and said so repeatedly. I do think we could have used another starter, but it was not essential. I said that at the time too. When the league offered a give back, I said we should do it, even knowing we were past the trade deadline, and it meant we'd have to finish the season without Pom. Something did not "have to be done", At worst, we could have traded for a 5th starter tyep for less of a bounty/

From the moment we signed Pablo, I viewed him as a platoon player.

I guess I've always been in that 10%.

It didn't "have to be done". Yes, we seemed to need a starter, but one, he wasn't the only starter out there, and two, it turned out we did fine without Pom doing much for us anyway.

True 'nuff!

Personally I've always thought he was a better overall player than the vastly overrated Brock Holt, but I would keep Holt and Rutledge over him in Boston for bench roles. However if the Sox need someone to start in the infield, I'd prefer calling up Hernandez and keeping Holt and Rutledge on the bench. Pretty much sums it up correctly.

Losing Clay you can handle. With Pomeranz being damaged goods is not. I objected? I was one of the most outspoken posters against the Pom trade right from the start.