notin
-
Posts
55,112 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
54
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
2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by notin
-
Based on last season, it's practically a wash. Moreland was worth 12 DRS more than Hanley, who would shift to 1b. And Bautista was worth 13 Runs Created more than Moreland. However on average Bautista is typically worth about 42 RC over what Moreland was worth last season. While not likely Bautista tops him by so much agsin, it does come down to how much faith Dombrowski would have in Bautista bouncing back. If history is any indication, Dombrowski probably believes in Bautista. He does tend to ignore age for superstar players. ...
-
Exactly. I don't think this idea comes down to Rodriguez vs Abad or Rodriguez vs Hembree. There are plenty of bullpen improvements still available. The Sox could trade or release either or both of Abad or Hembree and sign a body or two from the set of Holland, Storen, Hochevar, Petit, Romo, or David Herandez and still have the same depth...
-
Any interest in Bautista will likely come in late January when he is more desperate. While his agent might be proposing the Stephen Drew/Kendrys's Morales route, both Bautista and hos agent have likely seen how badly that has worked out before...
-
I started a post about Bautista a few weeks back and the response was almost universally"he's not a good fit," which I'm not sure exactly what that means. While he may never be the dominant hitter he was prior to 2016, he is certainly an upgrade over Moreland. Financially the Sox could fit him into tje budget by including an insanely low player (not team) option, as player options are automatically assumed when calculating AAV* However it would still require Bautista to accept a short term pillow contract. The loss of a draft pick is a concern, but less of one as it is a late round pick. If the Sox are "all in" to the point of dealing away Moncada, Kopech, Basabe, Shaw, Diaz and Dubon, why would a late first round pick suddenly be a deal breaker?
-
Because over their careers Wright has been the better starter and Pomeranz has been the better reliever...
-
1. It doesn't mean he is right. Frankly I think its stupid to name your rotation in December. A lot can happen over the next four months. 3. Clearly this topic bothers you on some level. Feel free to start another.
-
This is usually the exact strategy a lot teams employ...
-
Yeah my auto correct sucks sometimes
-
I don't think Travis has much of a chance at a bench spot. I see the 4-man bench as Young (or Moreland), Vazquez, Holt and either Rutledge or Plouffe if the Sox actually sign him...
-
This is also true, especially when all weigh their opinion against a standard or established baseline. ..
-
That's not a straw man. That's a paraphrase of the pro-"eye test" argument, with some intentional sarcasm thrown in. Really it is how many use the eye test, myself included. To say UZR is even remotely equally subjective to the eye test is an error of unfathomable ignorance and arrogance. It simply lacks the data content and any sort of baseline, both of which are the focal points of UZR. Just because UZR isn't perfect isn't the condemnation many want it to be, and its imperfections do not necessarily level the playing field with other defensive metrics, especially the eye test. Sort of like how while air travel isn't perfect - flights get delayed, baggage lost, etc. - that doesn't mean it becomes equal to walking...
-
He spent most of his outings in a Sox uniform performing poorly as a starter. At the end of the year, Buchholz was out-pitching him...
-
True, but the reverse is not necessarily true. Having someone else start the year in the bullpen can very much impede their ability to move into the rotation...
-
That has got to be the WORST criticism of UZR ever. It's subjective because multiple people are involved? Really? As opposed to the "Eye Test" where dome fan who thinks he knows everything about defense but in reality has less knowledge than he realizes and no established baseline instead watches one team play 162 games and all the other teams 6 or 18 times, decides that is equal, and concludes "Hey Player X made more great plays by my proprietary definition of 'great' than any other shortstop so therefore he id the best defensive one in MLB!" No one ever said UZR was the end-all, be-all. But I will positively state it is far more accurate than any individual "eye test"...
-
Then that also kills Soxprospects notion of Kelly in AAA. Teams put players in AAA for reasons other than development and service time. In fact, depth might be the biggest reason for most players in AAA. I do think fans overplayed his success and prefer to marry it to his potential. Wright has been much more successful than Rodriguez at the MLB level, but as he is nearly 10 years older, his bright future has already passed. And its not like putting Rodriguez in AAA in April postpones his debut. He's very likely to be up before May regardless. In fact, history tells us there is a significant chance the Sox don't leave Spring Training without an injured starter...
-
There is a difference between"wanting him" to be a starter and "forcing him" to be a starter....
-
So it's ok to f..k with Wright's head? I don't think putting Rodriguez in AAA is f..king with his head anymore than it was when Lester was handled the same way. I do agree Pomeranz should go to the bullpen. For some reason, that option seems to be off the table, which is another reason why that was a stupid trade. ...
-
It is weird to me that, when i mention the notion of Rodriguez in AAA, I get told that would be "unfair" to him. Yet somehow, a move to the bullpen for 2016 AL All Star Steven Wright is absolutely fair and he should be happy to get even that much. What has Rodriguez earned that Wright hasn't?
-
I said in the rotation. That wasn't a typo. C'mon karp; I've been ranting about the need for 7-10 starters for years back on BDC. I am referring to the guys who pitch when the current starters get hurt, which is inevitable for some. Smart GMs do plan their starters down to the tenth man for this reason. Epstein chastised himself publicly for failing to do so, but luckily for him the Cubs had very few health issues....
-
Hanigan's time in MLB is running out. 7 or 8 years ago, he was an elite defensive backup catcher. Any career he has left might be built solely on experience and lower salary demands...
-
All backup catcher are in the "defense first" category. And a lot of them are now used to handle one starter and give the regular catcher a break from squatting all day. I'm not sure who has more upside between Vazquez and Leon, but I do know Leon fooled a lot of people with the bat last year. I don't expect a repeat of that and neither should anyone else, including Leon himself. It's a shame Swihart missed so much time last year, because Leon was an obvious "Sell high" candidate. (Although if I know this, I would assume 29 other GMs are equally wary.)
-
Plouffe is fine, but the position player roster crunch looks set to the point where having him "spell" a bench guy looks like the tiniest of upgrades. If he signs a minor league deal, that works. There is no such thing as a bad minor league deal. But I anticipate the Angels being interested as well. He's an upgrade over Rutledge, I guess. But a very, very low "wow" factor here. But the 7-10 spots in the rotation are wht needs to be addressed. Granted, Dombrowski needs to sign guys willing to take minor league deals to make this happen. And in this pitching market, maybe no one is willing to just yet...
-
I think soxprospects.com is just squeezing in names wherever they can. But returning Kelly to a starting role in Pawtucket is certainly an option the Sox have and fills a need for the Sox. They aren't going to get through the season with their 6 starters they have now, and the #7 and #8 guys (Owens and Johnson) have yet to inspire any confidence in me...
-
Last spring, you were citing Vazquez as being among the best defensive catcher you ever and how he needed to be handed the starting job immediately. I asked one simple question - "what if he hits .240?" You're answer wasn't "That's OK. We can live with that," Your answer was "He will never hit .240," which as an odd comment because the last time we saw him in MLB, he hit exactly .240. Not to mention, any player is capable of hitting .240, so I'm not sure why anyone would think a .240 hitter would be immune to it. With your obvious Vazquez favoritisms and denials in mind (which isn't a sin), why am I supposed to buy into Swihart "never being able to play catcher" campaign? So,
-
So you're saying you watch every game played by every team? All 2,430 regular season games every year?
