moonslav59

Where are all the posters who wanted him DFA'd?

I expect adjustments periods will occur. I just hope they don't happen soon or for long periods of time.

I have never advocated a Beni-Young platoon. I see Beni as our FT LF'er too. My whole position has been about Young being our DH vs LHPs next year aand how that squeezes out the need to sign a big bat DH type and may squeeze the corner IF/DH slots open next year, if Moncada wins the 3B job.Beni has never played a long season like this, so if we want him fresh for the playoffs, I do not think sitting him 3-5 games vs the 9-10 lefties we might face down the stretch is such a bad idea. (See my post before on allocating days off when Young starts.) Also, once a righty is brought in, a switch can be made, especially in September once rosters are expanded.

Papi could use a rest here and there, and he has struggled vs LHPs for 2 seasons now. I'm certainly not calling for a platoon of Papi, but he could maybe sit 2-3 games vs lefties once Young returns. Betts and JBJ could maybe get one day off (maybe 2 depending on the race) in September, so that makes 4-6 total. Assuming we might face 9-10 lefties once Young returns, Beni would only need to sit maybe 3-6 games vs lefties. It wouldn't have to be every game, is more of the point.

Chris Young has played a lot of games vs RH'd starts, so it's more than just keeping him from cryogenically being frozen.... A brief history... We signed Cody Ross in 2012 to play primarily against LHPs, but with injuries and his doing okay (.729) vs RHPs that year, he started 84 games vs RH's starters and 42 vs LH'd starters. We signed Jonny Gomes for 2013-2014 to take Cody's original role as a platoon vs LHPs. He ended up wrestling the RH'd job away from Nava in the post season, before being traded mid-season 2014 during the great red purge. Again, things did not work out as planned. Gomes ended up starting vs a RH'd starter 22 times, which I suppose could be viewed as keeping him fresh, but I remember most were due to injuries or slumps by others. He started only 54 games vs RHPs, which seems low, but he was the FT'er by the World Series. His splits were not as wide as expected: .795 vs LHPs and .745 vs RHPs- both acceptable. However, his disparity in games started by a LHP vs a RHPs were stark: .889 vs .697. In 2014, Gomes started just 16 games vs RHPs (.639 in those games) and 37 vs LHPs (.711 in those games) before being traded. His overall splits were .831/.494- a very significant differential. Chris Young was signed for two years to provide a strong bat vs LHPs. He had started 47 games vs LHPs for the Yanks last year (.953 in those games) and 30 vs RHPs (.567). His overall splits were .972/.585- clearly a platoon player if there ever was one. With Castillo flopping and Holt getting hurt and struggling, Young ended up starting more games vs RHPs than probably planned, then he got hurt himself. His numbers this year: 21 GS'd vs RHPs (.830 OPS in those games) 12 GS'd vs LHPs (.877 OPS in those games) Splits: vs RHPs: .734 (not bad) vs LHPs: 1.042 (super great) When Young returns, I feel he needs to start vs ONLY and EVERY LH'd starter. He's been great vs lefties for many years. His career splits are: .884/.705.

Agreed, but once healthy and in stride, he has to be in the line-up every time a lefty starts, and with our OF looking pretty darn good/great, sitting an OF'er so Young can play should not happen very often. That leaves DH as his only available spot to start vs LHPs (more next year than this year, of course, since Papi is still here).

Anybody notice JBj has homered in 4 of his last 6 games? He had a day off before the six.

4 cities in 5 days/ 3 flights in 4 days and we almost won 'em all (4-1)! This team has grit.

They photo-shopped it out of this picture, so ARod wouldn't be embarrassed while on his farewell tour.

...but, at least he can still bend over and tie his shoes.

And, Pedey was older when he "reversed" than every age year of Pablo's contract. I'm not defending Pablo or the choice Sox management made. I hated the choice, but for some to say it was without merit, is not really fair.

I wouldn't really call a drop from .789 to .758 to .739 a clear downward trend, although he drop a lot the year before his last 3 in SF. He was yo-yoing for 4 years prior to thos last 3 years from 847 to 943 to 732 to 909. His worst year was 2010 not 2014. I'm not defending the guy, and I'm not saying he didn't decline in numbers, but he was 27 his last year in SF, and it wasn't clear the decline was something locked in for good. His L-R split differential has been: 2010 -.190 2011 -.238 2012 -.064 2013 -.100 2014 -.161 Career -.162 His splits always worried me as they had with Crawford and HanRam at the time of signing as well. I'd never pay someone that kind of money, when their stats show they deserve to platoon probably from day 1. Again, I'm not defending him, but he had an OPS between .739 and .789 his last 3 years at SF. Those numbers were pretty good when compared to 3Bmen in MLB. His OPS+ was between 111 and 123 those 3 years. His drop off to 76 here was shocking.

At this time our 4-5 slot pitchers when everyone's healthy are Pomeranz and E-Rod, either of which can pitch at a #1-2 level for an extended period of time, or at least have done so in the past. The good part about the Pom trade was that we got a solid #3-4 type pitcher that may end up being a 2. His low cost allows us to spend on upgrading elsewhere. His addition also pushed ERod to the 5 slot. I'm a big fan of ERod and Wright, but I think there is a very strong chance one of Pomeranz, ERod or Wright disappoint us next year. There's no way of knowing which one (if any), so it's hard to choose which one to trade for an upgrade. I'd prefer to keep all and still get an ace or solid #2, but that might be hard to do now that Espi has been traded. I'd still like to have Quintana over any of those three, but the upgrade is not nearly as significant as it would have been over Buch/Kelly. I'm not sure we'll even try that hard to get Sale, Quintana or Gray. Johnson and Owens have looked good recently, as has Kopech, so maybe we will skip a rotation upgrade until next July or winter.

I think we can, but with no big FA pitchers available and some funds available, I think we might sign someone that can help at DH or even become our FT DH. I wouldn't go long term on anyone though. 3B: Shaw, Moncada, Pablo, Hernandez, Holt, Rutledge 1B: Shaw, Ramirez, Pablo, Holt, Travis LF: Beni, Young, Holt DH: whoever doesn't start at 1B, 3B and LF plus maybe Pedey, Leon That's at least 6 quality guys (even as platoons) for 4 slots. I say, use the resources to build up our pen and/or upgrade our 4/5 slot SP'er to a number 1 or 2.

For the last time, my position was for the team to start giving reps at 3B during or after practice to Moncada " sooner rather than later". I never said "move him", but I guess if you guys keep repeating it to yourselves, it becomes fact. Secondly, while I and many felt that 3B was his probable landing spot eventually from his days in single-A, I don't recall ever suggesting he be moved or moved quickly while there. I believe I first suggested he start taking reps at 3B (NOT BE MOVED!) "sooner rather than later" (which is very vague) 2-3 weeks before it actually happened, so maybe it was 3-5 weeks ago. I think Moncada was called up in mid June, so he was probably already in AA for about a month before I suggested we give him reps at some point in the near future. So, I was essentially saying he should start taking reps about 2 months after being promoted to AA. I knew this went against normal protocol. I never argued it was a common practice. I knew the timeline I suggested was even quicker than other past phenoms. I knew that most phenoms that make it to MLB very quickly rarely change positions, but as it turns out, Moncada's situation was unique in that he never really had a set position in Cuba. I had heard he was struggling to learn 2B, but others said he was doing fine. I was worried we might spend 1-2 years waiting for him to master 2B (if he ever did), before deciding on moving him. I was never for abruptly changing his position on a dime. All I said was that at some point in the near future (this was maybe a month ago), he should take extra practice to get some reps at 3B. My God, it was like I was suggesting a mountain be moved. Most baseball players have fooled around at other positions, shagged fly balls as IF'er or pitchers, or taken reps at various positions. Their baseball players, for God's sake. Moncada is so young, he's not that far removed from little league-type situations where players often move around. I'm getting tired of my position being misrepresented. It wasn't a silly idea, whether you agree or not. I wouldn't have called it silly had they kept Moncada at 2B to the end of the year as yoiu almost all insisted should and would happen. On Devers, please stop this nonsense. I don't even know if Moncada will ever become a capable defensive 3Bman. I caught grief for suggesting he may start at DH until he does master a position or at least become good enough to be decent. Of course, I would not move Devers at least until after we know we have found a real 3Bman. Plus, I haven't given up on Shaw at 3B either, but I fear he may end up a platoon corner IF'er. Devers has also showed that he takes time to adjust to new challenges, so I do not see him as the fats riser Moncada and Beni looked to be. It's just speculation on my part on Devers, just like it was on Moncada and Beni. I never pretend to know more than Sox management, and on beni, my position was to toally leave it up to SDox management, but to call him up "the second they felt he was ready". I have suggested I prefer to trade Devers in a large package for an ace due in part to future possibilities of blockage, but I'm not even close to suggesting he start taking reps at 1B.

23 year old Dwight Evans! He was the "vet" of the group after being called up in 1972 as a 20 year old. He won his first GG in 1976, but was a great defender from the start. It took a while for his bat to be a big plus, but in 1975 he managed an .809 OPS. His best hitting years were from 29 years old to 37. 23 year old Fred Lynn had been called up late in 1974 within a year after being drafted. He won MVP, ROY and GG in 1975! 22 year old Jim Rice was called up late in '74 as well. He finished 5th in MVP and 2nd in ROY. As reserves they had WS hero, Bernie Carbo and 25 year old Juan Beniquez with a .760 OPS. Carbo had a great season too with an .892 OPS in 407 PAs.

Pablo has played in 39 post season games and has a .935 OPS. He didn't start off doing well in the post season, but his last 6 series went like this: 2012 NLCS .941 (2 HR and 6 RBI in 7 gms) 2012 W. S. 1.654 (MVP with 3 HRs and 4 RBI inh 4 gms) 2013: NLWC 1.100 (1 gm) 2013: NLDS .513 (1 RBI in 4 gms) 2013: NLCS 1.028 ( RBI inh 5 gms) 2013: W. S. 1.002 (0 HR 4 RBI in 7 games) Career 3 World Series: .426 3 HR 8 RBI in 12 games and 50 PAs (.460 OBP/.702 SLG/ 1.162 OPS 3 NLCS: .333 2 8 (15 games and 63 PAs) .941 OPS WC play-in game is huge with a 1.100 OPS His .677 OPS (4 RBI in 11 gms) is Div series is not good, but it's not horrible either.

I totally agree, but unfortunately I think his post season heroics reminded Sox management of someone on the team who was close to retiring. He was also only 28, when we signed him. Like Porcello, the Sox seemed to put a high priority on age with longer term deals. Pablo's contract paid him to play for us from age 28 to 32. Almost all those years are within normal prime. I know "prime" might be different for fat blobs, but the theory and philosophy was sound. The execution of the theory was a disaster. I can't believe I'm sounding like I'm trying to defend the signing. I'm not. I hated the deal from day one. I'm just trying to explain that to me, the mind-set was right. Pitching was going to be abundant before the 2016 season, and offense was not. It made sense to sign a projected helpful bat to age 32. It is kind of rare to have a FA at age 28 not looking for 6-10 year deals.

lol!

He also had the best postseason numbers of any available 3Bman and perhaps any 3Bman in the history of MLB. I hated the deal, but the philosophy was sound: Load up on offense in 2015. Load up on pitching in 2016, when the FA market was bursting with top quality talent.

It wasn't an issue about being right or wrong it was an issue about player development. You didn't understand why a guy who was far off from the majors and in A/AA ball shouldn't move positions and we were telling you what teams do and why they do it. MLB teams still do that and will continue to do so, nothing has changed. I still don't understand where the argument is here. You're not just disagreeing with us but you're disagreeing with just about every MLB teams philosophy on player development. When we gave you an explanation of why things are that why you rejected it. Once again, you guys keep getting my position wrong and then add on this condescending crap about me "not understanding". Just because someone disagrees, does not mean they don't understand the other position or the reasons for the other position. I totally understand what traditional protocol is for rising prospects. I never claimed there are not very sound reasons why there is such a protocol for just about every player on the rise in minor league baseball. I never claimed I was the first to think Moncada was something special. The experts were saying that long ago. Moncada is a freak. It doesn't matter when each of us realized it, and I don't pretend, nor have I ever, to know it before most. I do think it's comical that the clown just realized it last week, and he chastises others for believing it earlier than he. I wasn't being a braggart; I was reacting to a clown calling me "silly" after the fact. It wasn't some sort of mystical process to think that a player can rise above protocol. It's been done before in MLB- not often, but it has. Moncad's unique situation of being so damn talented and not really having a true position to begin with, made his situation outside the box to begin with. I wasn't even calling for an immediate position shift. I suggested he be given extra practice at 3B "sooner rather than later". My position was never couched as "These guys are dummies for not doing this right now" as the clown implies I was saying, nor was I linking this to the Beni call-up now decision that I wasn't even a part of, as the clown again says I was part of. Also Moncada is a freak, we've known this for a while. But plenty of "freaks of nature" never hit their way out of A ball. Moncada is a freak who is performing and there is zero way of knowing a guy will perform until he is there doing it. Nobody had a crystal ball a month ago and nobody every will. That's exactly what I said, and my position was to get ourselves prepared so we don't end up like we did with Bogey playing in a playoff chase and World Series after just 10 games at 3B in AAA. I stated we may have gotten lucky then, but this time we may not. That was my reasoning for the "sooner rather than later" part of my position. Just because my opinion flies against standard protocol, does not mean I don't understand it, or want every good looking prospect to rise above normal timeline guidelines. Moncada is a freak. He was basically a player who played several positions in Cuba. Sox management thought 2B was his most comfortable or skilled position, and I don't claim they were wrong. I jsut simply wanted Moncada to begin getting ready for 3B sooner. It wasn't the earth-shattering suggestion you guys made it out to be, and when Sox management did start giving him reps at 3B within 3-4 weeks after I suggested it, I didn't expect to still be called "silly" and "wrong". I'm sure the Sox were thinking about giving him reps at 3B long before I even made that post. It's futile to say anyone predicted a guy would turn into a guy because all things considered there are only two main permutations. A guy is a guy....or a guy can't hit at the next level. I never predicted anything. I stated my position that I felt Moncada was very close to ML ready with his bat. I could be way wrong on that, but it's my position based on statements made by scouts and "experts". I felt that if he was so close to MLB ready offensively, it was getting close to the time when he could start taking reps at 3B- not a sudden shift, but just taking reps during or after normal practice hours. You'd think I suggested we convert him to a pitcher and start him in a MLB game the next day. Man, you guys really go way off on mere suggestions for some minor thing to do in practice "sooner rather than later". I think it was you guys who acted "silly".

Very true, but some of us don't continue calling others "silly" and ridicules for expressing ideas that ended up coming true. Some of us don't construct strawmen to beat up in order to look smarter than everyone else. I wasn't even on the "call up Moncada" bandwagon, so how was I pounding my chest about "being right"? My position was that I thought Moncada was very close to ready and the "second Sox management thought he was ready, we should call him up". Clearly that position hold no implication of knowing more than anyone else, especially Sox managment, yet one clown kept linking me to the call him up now crowd and still is today. The "silly" label was placed on me (or my position) that Moncada should start taking reps at 3B "sooner rather than later" based on him being extremely close to being ML ready with his bat and 2B being blocked. I never claimed to be the first one to notice he was special and perhaps above normal protocol, but I wasn't one who just noticed it after they moved him to 3B a few days ago. I wasn't pounding my chest either. I was mostly responding to the clown, who even after Sox management began giving Moncada reps at 3B a couple weeks after I suggested it suggested the idea was still "silly" and "desperate". I'm fine with anyone thinking the Beni and Moncada moves were made out of "desperation". I never claimed they were not, because unlike the clown, I don't pretend to know everything. I never have and never will. I admit my plentiful mistakes often, but apparently some one else not only can't admit he was wrong, but he continues calling himself right and me wrong, even after Sox management did exactly what I suggested and he called silly. Yes, the clown is very knowledgeable, but he's still a condescending clown, a liar and strawman extraordinaire.

I don't pretend I know everything, so stop the incessant sand blatant lies. You are the master of strawman construction. I'm done responding to your condescending bull.

We have a heck of a lot of players on a pace for wonderful seasons. Hopefully, it will continue and make a difference in the race for the playoffs and then a ring. I'd rather have great numbers than bad ones hoping they turn good overnight.

I'd have sent Marrero.