moonslav59

Can he pitch or play LF?

I love Swihart too, but we are stacked at the catching position and Swihart's value is higher as a catcher for another team than as a LF'er fighting for time with Young and eventually Benintendi for the Sox. His value is high, but unlike Moncada and Beni, his skills in LF are not that high. I also love Devers. He's red hot right now. I wouldn't trade these two for squat. I wouldn't trade these two for a rental or even a 2 year wonder. I'd prefer 4+ years of Quintana, but getting 3+ years of Sale could help us not only win this year, but also long into the future.

Not gonna happen.

Let's hope this is the "Beckett Affect". Josh had a 5.28 ERA his first year after the trade then followed it up with one of his best seasons of his career, including a meteoric 4-0 in the playoffs.

One part of the game we really stink at is winning low-scoring games. We are 1-16 in games where we score 2 or 3 runs. Yes, we've lost 8 games in games we score 7 or more runs, and certainly one would expect a better than 16-8 record in games scoring 7-9 runs, but to me the low scoring games are our biggest nemesis. We are 16-6 in games scoring 5-6 runs, which surprisingly is better than our 16-8 record scoring 7-9 runs, but we can't win any low scoring games. We are, thankfully, 13-0 in games scoring 10 or more runs and 1-7 in 1 run scored games.

I understood the Price signing and stated that he looked like the "safest bet" of any big-named SP'er in years, but I still was against the signing. I posted the list of the largest signings over the past few years, and how most failed to meet expectations often even in the first years of the deal.

Yes, and UZR or any other defensive metric is flawed because they're subjective from the 'stringers' who rate each play. And yet, defensive metrics are ...what?...half of WAR? 1)I do not believe the defensive aspect of WAR is 50% of a player's overal WAR score. 2) At least "stringers" are trained to rate the same aspects of the play as other stringers, and the totality of the stringers do actually watch every play of every game-something casual observers like us can never do. Even if we watched every play of every game on TV, it's not the same as watching every game live in person. Of course the system is flawed, but I still think it's better than any one person can do on his own. That does not mean it is close to perfection- only better than mine or your or any single person's observations alone. It's the same with prospects- you basically take the word of the people who have seen them play much more than we have, or they have talked to people who have seen them play often. People they respect and have talked to about several players over time. There's no way any of us know who in MLB is a better fielder than Bogey or catcher than Vazquez by just pure observations. There's no way fielding %, CS% or RF/9 is better than UZR/150, DRS or other metrics, yet that was the traditional way we valued players defensively. Defensive metrics still have a long way to go, but I respect them (with large enough sample sizes) more than any other stat or personal observation. Are there numbers I disagree with? Certainly! This year's JBJ UZR/150 score is baffling to me, but his larger sample size score is +8.7 and his DRS is +20 over about a full 2 season's worth of data and innings. Here are the UZR/150 leaders (in order) from 2013-2016 (2000+ innings): SS- Simmons, Cozart, hardy, Crawford, Iggy, Tulo, A Escobar (Bogey 14/29) CF- Pillar, Hamilton, Lagares, Cain, Pollock, CarGo, Martin, JBJ (8/29) 2B- Pedey (1/26), Barney, Panik, Phillips, Kinsler, Zobrist, LeMahieu, Utley 3B- Uribe, Machado, Donaldson, Arenado, Longoria, Headley, Prado, Beltre (Pablo 25/28) RF- Heyward, Suzuki, Parra, Calhoun, Reddick, Pence, Aoki, Polanco LF- Cespedes, Gordon, Marte, Crawford, de Aza, Yelich, Gardner 1B- Belt, Rizzo, Napoli, Moreland, Pujols, AGon, Miggy, Y Alonso Maybe you may think some of these guys should be slightly shuffled around, but I don't see anyone here that I can say, based on my own observations, is significantly misplaced. WAR is the merging of perfect mathematics (offense) with imperfect subjective rankings (defense) and then passing the total off as a perfect result. They have never claimed to be perfect. Their attempt to merge offense with defense is admirable, IMO, but is not an easy task. When anyone at the water cooler tries to argue about one player being better than another often cites defense or base running as influencing factors beyond hitting. We certainly know we are not perfect and bring personal preferences to the table. Maybe one of us values defense more than the other. Maybe we both agree on the portion defense should hold, but disagree on how good or bad particular players are based on our own limited knowledge, observations and reliance on antiquated statistics or votes from clownish GG voters. The fielding bible at least tries to use several "expert" opinions to determine who is better and who is worse. I value their combined opinions more than GG voters, but they are only individual people who watch an extremely small fraction of all plays made over a season. I respect what UZR/150 and DRS metrics are trying to perfect. I do not value any stat or metric as the be-all-end-all, but I do not discount them as useless either. I'll take UZR/150 or DRS over any single fielding stat out there. BTW, even Fldg & is influenced by home team score keepers. And before anyone says that nobody says WAR is perfect, saying that is a lot like talking out of both sides of one's mouth. People will say in one breath that WAR isn't perfect and in the next breath use WAR to "prove" that one player is better than another. Posters cite WAR to compare players, but anyone who says WAR proves anything is wrong. Saying they are wrong does not also mean WAR is useless. In a world where simplification is often viewed as a virtue, the striving to find one number that encapsulates all aspects of a player's skill sets and proportions those values correctly is an interesting undertaking that is more or less still in its infancy. Since you have to agree that none of us have a clue about how good a fielder some players on other teams really are, how do you propose we rank player's total value? Nothing is definitive. I get that, but I value WAR as much as or more than OPS, ERA-, WHIP, OPS against, UZR/150, BA, OBP, Fldg%, CS% or any other single number alone. Trying to juggle multiple numbers to rank players is equally frustrating and flawed.

My point is that opinions gathered through personal observations are bound to be clouded by perception or tainted by unbalanced sample sized viewing.

Kick the tires on some top starters, but don't grossly overpay. If that means we make no deals, then fine. Our top 4 SP'ers, on paper, look better than most. ERod might turn the corner. The pen injured should return to give us a boost. Our offense is fine. Our defense could do better, but is about average now. Keep Moncada and Beni, see what we can get for Swi and Devers, but don't hand the farm away.

This past winter, I suggested this line-up: vs RHP vs LHPs 1) Betts 2) Bogey 3) Ortiz Pedey 4) Pedey Ortiz 5) HanRam 6) JBJ 7) Pablo Shaw 8) Young Castillo 9) Swi Vaz Of course, much has changed since this, but the general jist of the top 5-6 hitters remains current. I also suggested hitting Pedey 5th with Papi and HanRam flipping 3rd and 4th depending on the arm of the pitcher.

So, what do you do with the "exceptions" to the rule? There are a lot of exceptions, and penalizing them for a lack of Ks is just downright wrong. Thanks for the eye-opening stats. It goes counter to my more individualized research. xFIP is seriously flawed when it ends up placing Price so high in this year's rankings. Price's high K rate this year has been near useless. He has failed miserably to get outs. My point is that WAR relies too heavily on xFIP. Placing Price as the 13th best SP'er this year out of 258 is a joke. Out of 109 SP'ers with 80+ IP this year, Price places 8th in xFIP at 3.24. Here's a look the top 10 SP'er rankings by stat or metric: WAR...... xFIP ........ ERA_ Kershaw .....Kershaw.... Kershaw Fernandez ..Fernandez..Carrasco Syndergaard Synderg..Fulmer Aaron Nola ..J Cueto.... Bumgarner Stasburg.....Kluber...... Hendricks Scherzer......Bumgarner..Fernandez Pineda.........Tanaka....... A Sanchez Price...........Arrieta........ Syndergaard deGrom......Quintana..... C Hamels Kluber....... Strasburg.... J Cueto I still like ERA-, even though I know there are flaws with that as well.

Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post I think, in general, only top 10 or 20 prospects, depending on the strength of each class, are called "can't miss". Am I forgetting someone, or have we had a "can't miss prospect" fail under Henry's watch? I never hear anyone describe our prospects as "can't miss" except for disgruntled fans and media...anyone who actually follows and evaluates prospects for a living would use that term extremely seldom or not at all. Maybe the closest thing we've had would be guys like Bogaerts and Moncada, elite talents who end up ranked among the top 2 or 3 in the game, but with prospects there is always some uncertainty and room for something to go wrong. Even in the current top 10 or 20 there will be a few guys who will end up busting. Agreed. My point was not about how to categorize "can't miss prospects". I happen to agree with your position on that. My point was that even if you widen the criteria to call someone "can't miss", we still have not had a failure by a nationally recognized prospect since Henry took control of the team.

You didn't answer my question. Did you imply you would not trade Swihart, Devers, Owens and Johnson for Sale? I would without blinking. The CWS would laugh at that offer.

The Yanks were on TV more often. Jeter made the ESPN highlights more than west coast players. That one play of him going into the stands warped many people's opinion of his defense. Yes, name recognition was a big part of it, but that is exactly what I'm talking about: personal observations are flawed by prejudice and preconceived notions based on hearsay, previous skills and using "flawed" stats and metric to fill the gaps. Remember Rafael Palmiero won the GG award at 1B one year when he was primarily a DH.

Most fans watch one team regularly (mostly on TV) and maybe a few other games on TV. We may see an NL team play 1-6 times a year. We make judgments about our own players based on comparing them to a woefully inadequate sample size of "the others". We rely on stats and metrics to "fill the gaps". Talk about flawed methodology! UZR/150 attempts to rate players with a standardized methodology that includes personal observations of every ball hit in every game played over a season. Yes, it is flawed, because it involves human observation and maybe a sketchy framework as well, but at least it involves watching every game, not just a tiny percent of them. I have had many debates about Jeter's defense. I feel he was probably never a plus fielder, and I am near certain he was one of the worst fielding SSs over the last 8-10 years of his career due mostly to hius piss-poor range. Several respectable posters argued he was one of the best. Clearly, personal observation is flawed (either by me or more likely those "other guys").

I'm not trying to minimize the fact that our staff has stunk this year, but there is a glimmer or two of hope. 1) Our top 4 RP'ers are or were recently on the shelf with injury. Only one is out all year. When the three return, our run prevention ability should improve immensely. 2) If we make the playoffs, we will only need 3-4 SP'ers to keep advancing. Much of our poor staff numbers are distorted by our 5th starter numbers and pre-Pomeranz 4th starter numbers. Here's a look at how our 4 starters rank in the top 91 MLB qualified starters: WAR 13) Price 2.9 20) Wright 2.6 26) Pomeranz 2.4 28) Porcello 2.3 All 4 SP'ers are in the top third. The Nats have 3. The Cubs and others have 2. ERA- 17) Wright 70 19) Pomeranz 71 28) Porcello 80 57) Price 102 We have 3 in the top third with Price as the unexpected outsider. I'd also like to add that many here are skeptical of metrics and non-traditional stats, but freely float stats like ERA without taking park factors, divisional foe factors (strength of schedule) and playing in a DH league. If you look at ERA-, we place 19th in SP'ers at 106. Despite all the pen injuries, we still have the 12th best RP'er ERA- at 87. Overall, we rank 16th in pitching WAR and ERA- at 100 (just 5 points away from ranking 11th). This revealing stat makes us look average not near the bottom. We rank 15th in WHIP at 1.34 (just 0,05 away from 10th place). We might look re-markedly close to a top third pitching staff with a little uptick with the return of our top RP'ers, the addition of Pomeranz and the possibility of Price getting his s*** together. I'm not saying I'm optimistic. I still think we need a top of rotation pitcher, but I don't view our staff as bottom 5.

Relying on sporadic personal observation is more "putrid". Just look at who have won GG awards, and you can see why defensive metrics were created. All stats and metrics are flawed as are personal observations.

Let's look at road OPS to try and take away park influences: .813 STL .796 CUBS .790 BOS .768 FLA .759 SEA .758 WSH .756 TBR .750 AZ .749 HOU .748 TOR I remember many feeling the Blue Jays had the best offense by far. The Sox place 20th in runs scored on the road, but I'm not sure how many games they have played away vs others ahead of them. We are 3 runs from 17th and 18 runs from 13th away. Away Pitching: 22nd in ERA at 4.56 13th in WHIP at 1.36 18th xFIP at 4.42 However, if you look at SP'ing, the Sox have 3 of the top 19 SP'ers by WAR (120+ IP): 13) Price 2.9 16) Wright 2.6 (before tonight) 19) Porcello 2.3 If you go to 100 IP, there are 90 pitchers. 14) Price 19) Wright 26) Pomeranz 27) Porcello That's pretty impressive. If the pen gets healthy and pitches well, our staff looks okay (on paper) for the post season.

Too many games like this with our starter getting shelled and being left in too soon. I've stayed away from this thread, because I rarely blame the manager. I was one of the last to jump on board the dump Valantine wagon. I thought we should have replaced Farrell last season. Nothing has changed that opinion, but I don't blame him all that much. I'm not one that enjoys playing the blame game.

Let's look at our defense so far this year, position by position (400+ innings): UZR/150 C- Vazquez (16th out of 27) 1B- HanRam -3.4 (20th out of 30) 2B- Pedroia +15.0 (1st out of 25) SS- Bogey -3.0 (16th out of 30) 3B- Shaw +0.1 (15th out of 29) LF- No player with 400+ innings (Holt ranks 20th out of 30 with 300+ inn at -5.9) CF- JBJ -1.7 (18th out of 30) RF- Betts +11.2 (7th out of 27) I expected better defense this year. We are currently 11th in team UZR/150 at +1.8. It's weird that UZR/150 has the Guardians as the best team defensively at +9.0, but they are ranked 16th in DRS at -3. The Sox are ranked 15th in DRS at +2.

I saw him play in Portland long ago. He made a few plays I've never seen a Sox SS ever make. Maybe that clouded my judgment.

What does anyone think we can get in return for an offer of Swihart, Devers, Owens and Johnson? (And, I don't mean a rental.)

LOL. I hear ya.

Agreed. Besides, last year Betts came on strong over the summer, and he has a .402 OBP over the last 28 days. Now is certainly not the time to move Mookie off the 1 slot. Over Betts' career: 1st half: .334 OBP 2nd half: .366 OBP FYI Pedey's career numbers by batting order slot: 1) .341/.412/.753 2) .367/.448/.815 3) .368/.435/.803 4) .430/.654/1.083 Betts is where he belongs. I wouldn't mind seeing Betts up first followed by Bogey 2nd and Papi 3rd, but I'm fine with the line-up as is.

Defensive metrics are certainly argumentative & the farthest thing from definitive, but I'm glad you found some that help him look good. I was just responding to the statement that claimed Iggy did not look good on defensive metrics. I think UZR/150 and DRS are the two most respected defensive metrics around. I didn't cherry-pick the only metrics that make Iggy look good. I picked the only two I know and respect.