Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

Hugh2

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,725

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

 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

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Hugh2

  1. Hugh2
    Fair, but what is his "true value"? because his value is really low right now. If you could put his value on a 1-10 scale, where 10 is what his value could become and 0 is no value, he's probably at a 2 right now. So his value can't go much lower but it could go sky high. I'm not against trading him by any means but if he slides up that scale by the end of the year then yes he could get you more in a trade than he could right now.......but, why wouldn't we want to protect him at that point and see what we have in him. I suppose the argument I'm trying to make is IF he performs well this year, there is a good argument for protecting him and keeping him. That doesn't make it the solid correct decision by any means only that it's justifiable.
  2. Hugh2
    I think you’re comparing it to an average, there’s probably another extreme too. Really big overweight players decline faster too. Unless you’re all hit first and can play 1B/DH and don’t lose match bat speed, think David Ortiz.
  3. Hugh2
    The problem is when we try a thought experiment we think of individual players. Oh hey player x is short and he played a long time, or I remember player y who was a tall athletic guy and he couldn't do anything after age 29. Exceptions don't make the rule, the whole picture does. I'd like to see a sample size comparing such between thousands of players over the past couple of decades. This I do not have, so until I have this I will withdraw my argument that smaller players age worse, I still believe they do based on what I feel I've read in the past but I can't really make an argument over it right now.
  4. Hugh2
    Heres a good way of looking at it. Jason Groomes trade value now, vs. his potential trade value in the future. Scenario A: Groome is finally healthy, and can string together a full season of development he could restore his status as one of the more promising pitching talents in the minors. His value is sky-high. Scenario B: Groome gets injured again, or never gains back the potential he flashed as the top-ranked prospect in the 2016 draft. He has no value. The difference between value of what Groome is now and scenario A is astronomically high. The difference in value between what Groome is now and scenario B is negligible. At this point, you are better off sticking with him throughout the 2021 season and seeing what he becomes now that it appears he might finally be healthy and actually give you some innings to see what he can become.
  5. Hugh2
    If Groome sucked for 4 years then it’s an easy decision to release him. But he’s had an insane amount of bad luck added to a Missed Covid hear that has delayed his development. At one point he was the top pitching prospect in a draft, with TOTR potential and a workhorse frame you dream on. If he’s showing signs that he can stay healthy you let him pitch for a year and see what he can show you. There’s still a ton of upside there. Outside of a trade for top talent would we want to add to the 40 man right now who has more potential than Groome if he is finally putting it together.
  6. Hugh2
    He walked 2 guys on 8 straight pitches yesterday, the pitching coach came to the mound and he then proceeded to strike out the side. Whatever he was dealing with appears to be fixable. Young pitchers struggling with control is not rare, he’s never had a full season developmentally, so let’s see what happens.
  7. Hugh2
    If he pitches all year and stays healthy they’ll call him up to Portland. If he legit takes a turn for the better he’ll be knocking on the door at some point next year.
  8. Hugh2
    I mean it's a two-way street, how well can a guy who is overweight age? I'd guess if they can hit the offensive production drop off is less because they can move to 1b/DH.
  9. Hugh2
    Why has his ceiling changed? what do we have to go on? it's not like he's sucked, he's literally been injured. I say you give him until the end of the year and why not? he doesn't have to be added right now. Groome is probably the one prospect in the entire Red Sox system whos value can shoot right back up or crater to nothing depending on what he does this year. He was the consensus top talent in the 2016 draft, if he can put it all together and have a good season why not take that chance? or at least entertain it. Groome will not be protected unless he climbs a steep hill, I will admit that, and if he rebuilds some value he can be part of a trade too. But, I don't think keeping him if he starts to show promise is a bad idea either.
  10. Hugh2
    Problem is if you buy into that and put Bogaerts second who leads off? I'm a firm believer in putting a high OBP guy, but here are our leaders for OBP: Bogaerts JDM Verdugo Devers That's literally 4 guys you don't want leading off because there power plays up better in the 2-5 positions, but look there's no silver bullet for this problem outside of acquiring outside talent. So just for argument's sake, I'll go with this lineup. Verdugo Bogaerts JDM Devers Renfroe Dalbec Vasquez Arroyo Kike I thought about keeping Dalbec lower, but his OPS is actually higher than Vas, and Kike and he's been hitting very well lately. I like Kike #9 because it gives you someone with a little bit more consistency to hit in front of Verdugo 2nd time through.
  11. Hugh2
    There are many who say you should bat your best overall hitter second. I share your opinion, I love Cora but I'm not happy with the leadoff issue. Still wouldn't trade him for another manager but I wish he would try something different there. He doesn't want to hurt production in the middle of the lineup? the #1 hitter is going to see more at-bats than anyone else so why put a guy there who isn't that great? I get that you suffer a little in the middle by moving a guy like Verdugo into the #1 hole, but you gain that back at the top of your lineup.
  12. Hugh2
    Another take I took from that fact and the Bogaerts/Betts comparison is the bet that a guy like Bogaerts is going to age better than Betts. He will probably be a better player at 35 than Mookie is. Again, this is a guestimate. But you have decisions to make as a team. Extend Bogaerts, Extend JDM, replace those guys with big money if they walk, extend Devers, you need pay a pitcher if you want to compete in a year or two and no matter how much people want to spend other peoples money the Sox are just not going to go over the luxury tax. Not for more than a year or two at least. If you consider all that, and the reality that hard choices have to be made and you think there's a really good chance Mookie is going to walk in a year you're not competing, you'd be stupid not to trade him.
  13. Hugh2
    There has, I do not remember where I've read it. I've seen it at least in one place maybe more. Fangraphs, BA, Baseball Prospectus, I'll have to look it up, it would be nice to post. I hope I can remember to do so next week. It's my birthday today and I just don't have the ambition to look that deeply into it now. I'll probably spend 5 minutes on google after this seeing what I can find but after that it's work work work and then the wife is taking me and the family to Orlando for a week. But if someone else doesn't have it I'll try to look it up at some point. Remember, there's always an exception to the rule. I'm sure there's plenty of athletic 6'5" guys who fall off a cliff after 30 and little guys who play into their late 30's. Heck if Altuve can put together a few more good seasons he will have defied those odds.
  14. Hugh2
    I remember a long time ago when both Xander Bogaerts and Mookie Betts were very young players (call it 2014) someone was asked who is the better player between Mookie Betts and Xander Bogaerts. I forgot who the scout was and what the platform was, it might have been baseball America or pipeline. But his opinion at the time was that some scouts viewed Betts as the better player now, but saw Bogaerts as the better career. At 5-9, 180 Betts isn't a good bet to be performing in the second 1/2 of his contract. Smaller players tend to hit a cliff sooner and decline faster. I loved Mookie, and would have stood by keeping him here, but I understand the decision. Recently, I've been trying to face another reality about the Mookie trade that I think a lot of Boston fans don't want to consider. Mookie didn't want to resign here, he wanted to go to free agency and get paid (like 99% of other players) and the Sox knew it, so they got something for him.
  15. Hugh2
    Maybe him and Sale can piggyback. Combined they can be a shutdown ace going deeper than they otherwise could alone. Half joking.
  16. Hugh2
    I really have no clue what I’m talking about here and this is 100% conjecture but I’m starting to wonder if he’s pitched SOOO well that they’ve delayed stretching him out so they don’t have to shut him down down the stretch.
  17. Hugh2
    To reiterate my point with less words, Whitlock is not really a pen arm and never has been. They’re nursing him at the MLB level so they can keep him.
  18. Hugh2
    This isn’t like the time when they tried converting Bard into a starter, he had subpar control and no third pitch and it ruined him. Whitlock has always been a starter and is only being used in this role because the Sox have to. They will begin to stretch him out next spring. His stuff is legit, and he’s 1000x more valuable as a starter. His stuff has taken a noticeable tick up post surgery. The fastball is better, and his change up improved a whole grade. He now has 3 plus pitches, and has started to improve his slider as well. I can’t wait to see him throw 7 shut out inning vs the Yankees in 2022. 😜
  19. Hugh2
    Groomed trade value absolutely skyrockets if he can just stay healthy for a year. If he does that, we might even want to keep him.
  20. Hugh2
    I always thought Houck was Barnes 2.0. A guy who might start if he can add a pitch to his arsenal and harness his command. Barnes failed as a starter, I’m very happy he’s owning the closer role. I’m not saying the Sox should give up on Tanner just yet as a starter. But he has the stuff to be a late inning reliever too.
  21. Hugh2
    If you can pitch in the majors there’s a clear path to the majors no matter what team you’re on. Who knows why he wants to go to Boston. He might just want to go to a great competitive organization that can pay him one day. Boston is the best organization in the top of the draft. If your New York Yankees sucked ass like Boston did I could see him trying to go to NY too.
  22. Hugh2
    Who knows, he could just be trying to get more money from a team in front of Boston if they draft him. Hypothetically Boston could offer as much as Pitt but it would blow up our whole draft.
  23. Hugh2
    I think it proves that no one is sure thing.
  24. Hugh2
    Exactly. If you're the team drafting Leiter you show him what happened to Aiken, he lost 2.5 million and fell 17 spots. Appel shot up 7 spots and made millions more, if you're Leiter and his agent that's your example.
  25. Hugh2
    Heck Pitt can go as low as 6.4 million with the first pick. They could easily be shopping the first pick to see who is willing to take 6.4 million, which is below the Sox slot value of 6.6 million. Again, hypothetically you can sign a guy for the above slot too.
×
×
  • Create New...