Few years? Really?
Until last year the Sox had one of the best offenses in the AL pretty much every year. In fact, even last year the Sox were SIXTH in the AL in sco ring despite being last - and a distant last at that - in home runs. Nine teams outnumbered the Sox BY A LOT and still scored fewer runs.
So clearly this approach is working and has always been working. Why would anyone want to change it? The 0-1 counts have never been a problem..
Over the last 3 years, Porcello has been worth 8.8 fWAR, which is more than any Yankee starter over that stretch except Masahiro Tanaka (9.6 fWAR). Sonny Gray has been worth 7.6 fWAR. Yankee target Gerrit Cole has been worth 11.1 fWAR in that span.
Porcello's 8.8 fWAR ranks him 26th among all starting pitchers in MLB over the last 3 years.
It's the type of change that's easier for a GM to enforce than a manager.
Forcing hitters to swing outside their comfort zone and be productive? It would probably be easier to just go get other hitters who hit the way you want...
Fangraphs ranked him at #45 for trade value. I don't recall if any of the nine ranked ahead of him defensively even made the list, but certainly all nine didn't. ..
Maybe, but his value isn't solely based on defense. How many of the 8higher ranked players are worse hitters? How many make more money? Have more years of control?
Actually Range Factor has none of those flaws. It's simply (putouts plus assists)/games or (putouts plus assists)/(9 innings) for RF/9. Rf/150 is just those numbers over 150 games.
If you meant UZR has flaws, certainly it does. It's based on human observation applied against standard criteria. If you think this negates it and your solo observations are equal or better simply because UZR isn't perfect, that logic is horribly flawed for an abundance of reasons.
But then it's also easy to forget that, despite his long career, Rick Porcello is still only 28 years old (and turning 29 tomorrow).
He's 3 days older than Brentz, a guy who many feel has finally earned a chance...
To the point of bad business.
The Sox really did need and probably would have liked a big splash before tickets went on sale. But that did not happen. And who here bought tickets anyway?
Or fans value him properly because they put more emphasis on defense rather than focusing solely or heavily on the offensive contributions of a player who only bats 4-5 times per game....
Unless the Sox acquire say, Darvish or Arrieta instead of Martinez.
Or unless the Yankees have injuries.
Or unless the Red Sox just get a couple players to have bounce back or career years. The Sox won 93 games without him last year. Since the Yankees aren't going to improve up to winning 110 games or so, exactly how much better do the Sox really need to get? 7 more games? 8 more?
Simply saying "[the Sox] won't survive" this injury or that injury is being overly dramatic about the whole thing. Maybe the Yankees can't survive a season where Sonny Gray doesn't get hurt...
Of course it's ********. But so is Boras' "Mystery Team" tactic that he has employed for years. Saying "my client wants the Sox but prefer not being a DH unless you compensate him for pidgeon-holing his career" is just business as usual for him....
If Martinez only signs if he can play the outfield, then dealing Bradley becomes a very likely option. Unless you think dealing Betts or Benintendi makes more sense.
Or the Sox could tell Martinez he'll be playing the outfield, but NEVER actually put him there. Which should go over really well....
JD Martinez is NOT the reason starting pitcher depth and 2b and minor league free agents and Braves' farm refugees are being ignored.
Maybe the fifth starter hinges on the JD Martinez contract. Maybe...
While I totally get what you're saying about big move withdrawal, I'm at the point of hoping for any move.
Its Christmas Eve and so far the biggest actual addition to the organization is Esteban Quiroz, a guy none of us baseball junkies even heard of 8 weeks ago. I get why a big bat hasn't been added. But is it so necessary to pretend EVERYTHING hinges on that one puzzle piece?
I think "regression" has far and away supplanted "overrated" as the most misunderstood word. And easily the the most misused.
The word means "to revert to a less developed state." So is positive regression returning to a less developed state? Is negative regression growth?
Boone came from a three generation baseball family that supposedly did nothing but talk about baseball.
As for Cora, if you're one of those"pressures of Boston" people, then who really knows what happens to him or how he will react, etc?