A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]To follow up, VMART cleaned out a good Paps heater inside. The guy, when on, is a hitting stud. Nice comeback for Paps. No need to retort Katz . I doubt you would anyway, and I don't want any hard feelings. I admire you too much as a poster for that. If you want to think I would forsake a hitter like VMART for seeing Tek play 40 games a year, well go ahead. Nothing I say will alter UR thought process at this point. I believe you are in total denial as to VMART'S effect on a pitching staff. That cornerstones my take on why he is no longer a FT catcher. Since you brought up the similar situation with Tek being inked to 4 years at the same age, aren't you curious as to why it didn't happen for VMART - who wanted to remain a FT catcher? Who's the better hitter?
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]Two points. First I will never argue that Tek isn't seen as a better catcher. But he when he was signed his a .296 hitter with a .872 OPS. Guys like him and Javier Lopez became cautionary tales for any GM. Sign the player until he is 36 and you can expect by the 4th year the player is likely to be a .220 - .670 hitter.

    Now that clearly tempered what the RS were going to pay because they knew they weren't signing a .300 hitting catcher for the life of the contract and that they would have to reduce his workload early in the contract or certainly in his case the primary reason for signing him (his offense) would perish early in the contract and the money would be dead on the back end.

    That all went into the valuation. The Tigers had a more immediate ability to convert VMart into a PT catcher - DH and back-up 1B (though how much 1B anyone will ver get to play behind a sober Miggy Cabrera is pretty much nill). So they were willing to pay more than the RS.

    That doesn't mean the RS weren't willing to pay $40M for 4 years to get 1 -1.5 "bridge years" out of Victor at C and then live with a slightly over priced DH for 3 to 2.5 years. But they had a limit set and when it was exceeded they moved on. But teams don't offer contracts they pull back off the table if the player shocks them and says yes. It is why some guys agents couldn't get Epstein to even return their calls (OCab, Millar, Mueller, Nixon).

    But my point was that they did not let Victor walk because of the Ortiz signing. I am quite sure of all the things they had on their Hot Stove board they never had paying $142M for an OFer so it wasn't Ortiz money that stalled their offer at $40M.

    Perhaps I do give too little credit for the impact a catcher has on a pitcher but the flip side is that taking the pitchers ERA and applying it directly to the catcher would at best be a blunt instrument not a finely tuned scale. 

    I get that Tek having been here so long and his and the team's success means that as his heir apparent(s) arrive they will be scrutinized. But that isn't all good.

    It ends up with people attributing things to the catcher that are just part of the game or the growing process of become the lead catcher. Imagine if Salty had called for two back to back breaking pitches to Reynolds and after Reynolds took the second one deep Aceves spent the rest of the evening shaking of every pitch Salty called? That is not healthy.

    It matters little what we do here but that mentality permeates this market when it comes to Salty. VMart was such a offensive "stud" it muted the buzzard talk in op-ed columns, talking heads on TV and talk radio. Salty has no such luxury. It is not healthy IMO. Everybody should let the kid play and realize that even Tek the player would not have ever been without criticism based on the standards applied.

    Just my take...
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Let me be insufferable for a moment! Cool After all, let's just admit it....quite a few of us are quite often. Some of us are passionate about our positions and others are just having a casual conversation. The only thing I want is to just not have my positions distorted and that hasn't happened for a long time. One thing RS used to do regularly was completely distort things. Lots of us liked him but he just would do anything to justify his position.

    I don't mind the nit pick stuff that much. Someone quoting an 8 game sample as if it were as significant as 2010 stats...etc. Such things are grasping at straws really. At least it's not a lie. If we get to that point though why not just say..."You know, you have a point."
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Moon if your post was already up rather than when I was composing mine I wouldn't have posted mine. You pretty much explained what I think the dynamics were.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    For example, fivekatz just made some great points about the state of flux the off season is for GMs. Theo didn't know just how high the cost would go for VMart or really any of the players he targeted. It was excellent perspective.

    Another salient point though is that if Theo wants someone and the Yankees are not playing on that option, Theo generally gets him and I've gotta add often overpays in a big way. He clearly way overpaid for Crawford. The defensive ability was vastly overated and his fit in Fenway's LF was also. I'm confident he is going to hit but I've come to the conclusion that the park factor in Fenway is not going to help Carl. It just isn't. He's still trying to crank the ball to RF and it's not working. When he does hit it up the middle or to left it is working much better. That's a transition which may take a while to develop though and it may never yield the results Theo expected.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    To Moon: If Theo thought the 4-year Tek deal was "a mistake", then why did he offer (assuming he did offer) the 3-4 year deal for VMART?

    Of course he saw VMART'S value. Perhaps he realized, as Detroit did, that his value is best served in his present capacity. None of us will know what Theo's intentions were for VMART. Would he catch 100+ games for two more years...and then DH? Would he be utilized in his present role? If so, then I can see how it would affect Papi. It becomes clearer.

    The Salty progression - if we can call it that - will take a step forward one day, and half a step back the next. I don't like to get too high on any one game. Buch is a hell of a talent. The trick is to keep his pitches down. He's one of the best when this occurs. Whoever his catcher is needs to be very mindful of Clay staying down in the zone constantly.

    I thought both did a good job tonight. Buch didn't have put-away stuff, as his velocity was down, likely due to the poor grip on the ball. I do think he needs to be a solid 7 innings pitcher. Both he and Salty have to work on pitching more to contact, especially the 2nd time through the order.
    The current state of this BP isn't built to go 3 critical innings.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    You guys are probably tired of talking about Victor but I find it hard to understand how most of you do not see Victor as being a vastly superior catching option than Salty. This year and maybe next he would have been our primary catcher IMO and if anything he has shown an ability to do that more than Salty, who has never really played a full season if I remember correctly. He had 3 injuries last year alone. CERA is just not that important a data point. If Beckett had a bad year in 2010 I really don't think Victor was a significant factor in that. Their relative CERA values, defensive abilities ...etc. are more than compensated for by the extra 200-300 OPS points Victor would have given us.

    It was great to see Salty crank that double tonight but the pitch was a mediocre fastball grooved right down the middle in a clear fastball situation with the pitcher concerned about Crawford stealing. It is unfortunately not much of an indicator of success going forward.  He knew that pitch was coming and he creamed that ball but it was almost batting practice in that situation with that pitch. That is the kind of pitch Salty saw down in A ball when everyone projected him to be a star. If he could get that kind of fat pitch more often he would be a stud right now but this is the majors folks. Bryce Brentz is seeing those same pitches right now in A ball and winning the triple crown so far in the SAL but is there much indication yet that he will even be a starting level mlb player? No. How about Reddick who also creamed those pitches down in A ball. Do you all see what I mean? You guys know this. 

    Salty has never hit mlb level pitching well and he has been trending downward for several years now. The good thing is that he did cream that pitch which would have been out in any other park in baseball. 

    BTW, I was one of the people here who was clamoring to get Salty several years ago. I even liked the trade when it did happen and some of those A ball players we gave up were decent. The difference is that I looked at Salty as a Hermida type project. We shouldn't have gone into the season with him as our primary catcher. We just have to accept the data for what it is now. I've adjusted my projections. It happens if we are true to ourself. Why perpetuate a bad projection forever, like Softy does, when we find we are wrong? I hope to God that Salty does start giving us significant indications of future success. What a find he would be if he does pan out. 


     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Harness, I agree big time on Buchholz keeping the ball down. It is a huge factor to him, keeping the ball in the park.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    A subtle development we are seeing IMO is the impact of Crawford and Ellsbury being on 1st when one of the guys behind them hit doubles. Those guys can score from 1st on a double almost every time. They do it easily. Even Pedroia is pretty good at it. It has helped us win games, as it did again tonight. That very subtle statistical impact is making a big difference in our wins and losses already this year.

    Fenway is a doubles park. A lot of our hitters are big doubles hitters, like Pedroia, Adrian and Youk. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Adrian lead the league in doubles, as Pedroia has done in the past. When those guys come up and Crawford or Ellsbury are on 1st that might be an extra 10-15 runs a year. Look it up. Adrian is a lock for 45 - 50 doubles this year IMO. Pedroia has put up similar numbers also. They are going to drive in a lot of guys even from 1st base.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    A 10-15 run swing in yearly run production due to such a small data point is huge in mlb.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    That's an extra 10 runs from the base running speed attribute alone. If those guys didn't have such speed in their tool set, we score 5-10 fewer runs minimum. 
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Katz: I agree with you that the Tigers were in a far better position to DH VMART.
    But the bottom line is: a .300 hitter with the ability to hit 20 dingers and 100 rbi's who can catch is a no-brainer to be put in the catching capacity. Teams would kill to free up the DH spot like that!

    I'm not disputing the process of what happened. Only the fact that a 31-32 year old catcher who's a positive in the clubhouse - who can hit like he can - would have been very highly sought after and deployed primarily as a catcher if that was all there was to it.

    When VMART turned down Boston's assumed offer, do you think he expected far more elsewhere? If not, being he had a strong oft-stated desire to be a FT catcher, wouldn't he have taken 12 mil a year  to remain in that capacity and stay in Boston?
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    VMart would be catching a lot more right now if Detroit didn't have Avila, who has been solid for them from what little I know about him. And if Avila gets hurt, Victor can step right in. 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Boom, that was an excellent point on the pitch Salty hit. And I do think CC on the bases may have stolen some of the concentration from the mound. This is what I mean by all the tangibles/intangibles of CRAWBURY over the course of a season.

    Calling VMART a vastly better catching option than Salty right now is true.
    That was a given going into the season. The grey area is that Salty has a higher "CERA" ceiling. The debate involves the importance of the disparity.

    For example, as pathetic as Cash was at the plate, he got much more out of the same pitchers both he and VMART caught. And yes, it was enough to compensate for the 200-300 OPS you spoke of. If it wasn't, I never would give this subject matter so much time. A catcher can not make up for a 1.5 runs a game differential by hitting 200-300 OPS higher.

    Now, that was the statistical variance. The actual disparity could have been less - or it could have been more. That's debateable as well.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    You get the last word tonight Harns! I'm tired!
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from majorleague. Show majorleague's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Ellsbury is demonstrably the best hitter of the five Sox outfielders right now--best OPS by almost 100 points, 2d on the team in runs scored, tied for third with Ortiz in rbi's

    It's the middle of May, and Crawford is hitting like a high school player. Cameron almost never play, nor does Mac. That leaves Drew, who has a higher OBP and does not have the benefit of hitting at the top of the lineup with Pedroia and AGon behind him. Your hyperbole is just that.


    He has twice as many SBs as Crawford.  McDonald, Cameron, and Drew can't hit much, won't steal bases, and seldom score runs or bat them in. And Crawford can't get on base.   As for his outfield skills, Ellsbury has very good range thanks to great speed, a so-so arm, and great hands--he has committed 2 errors in 382 games.  He's one of two Sox who have played in every game this season--for good reason. 

    No one, and I mean no one in their right minds would claim that Ellsbury has "a so-so arm". In baseball outfield terms, he has no arm at all. 

    Drews not leading off with Pedroia and AGon behind him.

    Crawford is and will return to form and be the superior player to Ellsbury. 

    Ellsbury is a weak defensive CF'er because he has poor depth perception and runs poor routes and has a short stride with a bobbing upper body. Error totals mean very little in the OF. One could provide a list of scores of OF"ers with low error totals that are in such a tight range that the stat is almost meaningless.

    Ellsbury started slowly and had to be demoted in the lineup. He was swinging for the fences by instruction from his agent, but told to change his approach or sit in the bottom of the lineup. He's played in every game this season by virtue of a promotional design. Given his splits v. LHP and marginal CF defense, there is merit to putting in a pinch/runner/hitter role for a lot of LH starting pitcher games. 

    Lowrie started ahead of Scutaro because he was blasting the ball and Scutaro couldn't hit spit.

    The splits don't support a blanket "blasting the ball" and "couldn't hit spit" meaningless jocular phrases. The role Lowrie was put in spring training is the best role for him. His belly flop that allowed two runs two score is what you get with Lowrie at SS. Few pay any attention to a guy who gives up 30 points and scores 20 points.

     Now that he has cooled down, Scutaro might get to play again if he can just get off the DL.  Funny you should accuse Lowrie of frailty when Scutaro's on the DL. 

    Nothing funny about it. 

    Scutaro Games Played 2008 145
                                   2009 144
                                   2010  150

    Scutaro is really a 2nd baseman/UIF'er, but has the constitution to show up ready for work. Lowrie has issues showing up for work, even though Theo has been trying to launch him since 2008, virtually holding the job open for him. Iglesias should be the end of that experiment, as Theo should know by now that SS is more about top fielding than it is hitting. Lowrie is a 2nd baseman.

     Lowrie's lifetime (203 games) OPS is 60 points higher than Scutaro's and his OPS for 2010 and 2011 is 150 points higher.

    Lowrie hasn't played enough games in a season to merit any OPS to hang a hat on. 203 games is barely one full season, yet that's been chopped up going on 4 years. Lowrie's major issue for any smart GM is that his weak side is v. RHP. If he were truly a SS it wouldn't be a problem, but he's not. His highest and best use is at 2B, and would hope that Theo understands that by now. It's taking him long enough.

      Scutaro has more range, but not a lot more.  Navarro is on the DL, and Iglesias, who is probably a great fielder, can't hit (yet--I hope).  You should be delighted that Lowrie is playing this year. 

    Lowrie platooning v. LHP and backing up 3B and 2B and 1B is fine, which was his role in spring training. If he truly goes through dog days and grinds out the role as the everday SS, it's highly likely he'll never survive without breaking down. As soon as Scutaro returns from the DL, Lowrie should be returned to that role. I doubt that will be the plan. We'll see.

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    posted at 5/18/2011 6:12 PM EDT
    www.boston.com/community/persona.html?UID=14ed542f5c912566ce712bce8b2e5fda&plckUserId=14ed542f5c912566ce712bce8b2e5fda">
    Posts: 112
    First: 9/16/2010
    Last: 5/18/2011
    Ortiz was no more "abominable" v. LHP than Bellsbury, this year. With the exception that he could still crank one and really change the game. 

    2008-2010 Ortiz had 13 HR in 454 ABs v. LHP.  That's one per 35 ABs.  His OBP was just under .300.  In comparison, in 2010 Jed "No Pop" Lowrie had 4 HR in 100 ABs v. RHP (against whom you think he should be benched) ... that's one per 25 ABs.  If you were wondering, Jed's OBP was .353 v. RHP.

    Sample size is too small to compare a big one to a small one that was compiled during a few months at the end of the 2010 seaosn on a team that was in extended spring training mode. Take a look at Lowrie's metrics v. RHP, this year, and compare Ortiz and Lowrie career metrics splits. Pretty silly to even be discussing this.


    I'd still like a full answer from you on the benchmark question ... please provide offensive and defensive benchmarks at your earliest convenience.  I understand your games played criteria, but I think 130 games is a better threshold for 2011 since he has already "missed" 7 games since he wasn't the starter.  Further, it is a good bet that Scutaro will get some games at SS and Lowrie will sit v some RHP ... this will happen whether or not he is "fragile" or "tired."  I have confidence in this since Tito is a good manager.

    Lowrie's career averages tell me what his potential ceiling is. The fact that he didn't play much in the last 2 years should mean that missing the first 7 games should put him in prime position for a young player to play about every game from here on out. We both agree that he should not, for different reasons.

    My benchmark is that he doesn't cut it as an everyday SS, even if he is in that position for the time being. I expect him to end up near the career averages he has had, but even if he exceeds them he will not measure up on the defensive end for the positon of SS. While Scutaro isn't more than a marginal SS on defense, that's a big step up from Lowrie. Sadly, Theo made the mistake of signing Scutaro instead of the one year/option deal he could have had Gonzo for. Foolishly, the OBP thing and offensive SS had him a sucker for a career season for Scutaro on OBP.

    Iglesias should be, without a doubt, the everyday SS for 2012, even if he hits like Crawford is right now. It would appear that the plan is just that, but Theo's track record is quite the butcher on thinking ahead and moving decisvely on the issue. Vacillation is what ruins his approach with such a massive payroll.

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    posted at 5/18/2011 6:18 PM EDT
    www.boston.com/community/persona.html?UID=14ed542f5c912566ce712bce8b2e5fda&plckUserId=14ed542f5c912566ce712bce8b2e5fda">
    Posts: 112
    First: 9/16/2010
    Last: 5/18/2011
    MajorSoft - Since you seem to be focused on Ellsbury's 2011 stats, what is his leadoff OBP this year?  Just wondering.
    It hasn't been a year, yet. His LHP splits are not good, at this early stage. I expect they'll improve to career averages, just as I expect his leadoff OBP to end up around his career averages.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    To Moon: If Theo thought the 4-year Tek deal was "a mistake", then why did he offer (assuming he did offer) the 3-4 year deal for VMART?


    Harness, personally, I think Theo knew VMart would not accept $42M/4, and it was a token offer. My point was that we don't know how Theo viewed the 4 yeard Vtek deal after it was over. Maybe he lowered his deal to VMart because he saw what happened to VTek. Maybe...

    Of course he saw VMART'S value. Perhaps he realized, as Detroit did, that his value is best served in his present capacity. None of us will know what Theo's intentions were for VMART. Would he catch 100+ games for two more years...and then DH? Would he be utilized in his present role? If so, then I can see how it would affect Papi. It becomes clearer.

    He may have offered $42M/4 based on a projected 100 gms as a catcher this year, 70 next and 30-40 after that, and the rest at DH. I do think the Papi option acceptance did lower VMart's value to the team, but I see katz's points about the timing.

    The Salty progression - if we can call it that - will take a step forward one day, and half a step back the next. I don't like to get too high on any one game. Buch is a hell of a talent. The trick is to keep his pitches down. He's one of the best when this occurs. Whoever his catcher is needs to be very mindful of Clay staying down in the zone constantly.

    How was VTek at Salty's current age? I'm glad they gave VTek a chance to improve and preogress.

    I thought both did a good job tonight. Buch didn't have put-away stuff, as his velocity was down, likely due to the poor grip on the ball. I do think he needs to be a solid 7 innings pitcher. Both he and Salty have to work on pitching more to contact, especially the 2nd time through the order.
    The current state of this BP isn't built to go 3 critical innings.

    Great point, especially now that Aceves is a starter.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Their relative CERA values, defensive abilities ...etc. are more than compensated for by the extra 200-300 OPS points Victor would have given us.

    boom, I have no problem with your opinion that CERA-related issues are not as significant as harness and I believe they are, but if we are correct in thinking that VMart was largely or even just half way responsible for the huge ERA differentials with almost every pitcher he caught, then a .300 better OPS would not come close to compensating for a 0 .75 to 1.50 ERA difference on the other end. Secondly, VMart's career OPS is about .840. There was good reason to expect about a .700 to .750 OPS from the platoon of Salty and VTek. That's only, at most, about a .150 differential in OPS.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I thought both did a good job tonight. Buch didn't have put-away stuff, as his velocity was down, likely due to the poor grip on the ball.

    Moon Clay has been up/down in velocity in 2011.  Here are a couple articles about the velocity problems, a bit doom and gloo but he has been better in his last 4 starts. His velocity and control were bad against Oak and Tor, so maybe he was trying for more control.  I think he would not be a no. 1 or 2 starter if he pitched at 91.5 consistently.

    four seamers MPH vs ____:

    Det  92.3
    NYY  92.5
    Min  92.9
    LAA  93.3
    Bal   92.3
    Oak  91.5 
    Tor   91.4
    NYY  92.9
    Tex   92.2
     
     
    May 5 2011 rotographs

    Sticking with the pitch results theme, we come to something very concerning. His fastball velocity has declined from 94.1 MPH last year to just 92.1 this year. Two miles per hour is rather significant and too large to chalk up to “it’s still early, his velocity should improve into the summer”. When you combine his velocity loss with his strikeout rate drop, the warning bells should be soundingIn fact, his strikeout rate graphed would paint a scary picture. It has declined every single season, from a high of 8.7 during his debut year, down to its current 4.5. If that is not enough to illustrate how much dominance he has lost, his SwStk% and Contact% tell a similar story. His SwStk% is also in free fall, landing at just 7.2% so far this year (versus 9.4%-9.9% over his last three seasons), while his Contact% has increased to 83%, well above the 80.7% league average. This is quite a surprise coming from a pitcher with supposedly such a high quality repertoire.

    May 14

    so far Clay Buchholz‘s velocity has not improved and remains well below his average speed last year. It is good to see his strikeout rate improving though, as he has posted a 7.1 mark over his last four starts,
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from --The--Babe--1. Show --The--Babe--1's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]Their relative CERA values, defensive abilities ...etc. are more than compensated for by the extra 200-300 OPS points Victor would have given us. boom, I have no problem with your opinion that CERA-related issues are not as significant as harness and I believe they are, but if we are correct in thinking that VMart was largely or even just half way responsible for the huge ERA differentials with almost every pitcher he caught, then a .300 better OPS would not come close to compensating for a 0 .75 to 1.50 ERA difference on the other end. Secondly, VMart's career OPS is about .840. There was good reason to expect about a .700 to .750 OPS from the platoon of Salty and VTek. That's only, at most, about a .150 differential in OPS.

    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    salty pitched a heckuva game last night, right moonie?

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]Katz : I agree with you that the Tigers were in a far better position to DH VMART. But the bottom line is: a .300 hitter with the ability to hit 20 dingers and 100 rbi's who can catch is a no-brainer to be put in the catching capacity. Teams would kill to free up the DH spot like that! I'm not disputing the process of what happened. Only the fact that a 31-32 year old catcher who's a positive in the clubhouse - who can hit like he can - would have been very highly sought after and deployed primarily as a catcher if that was all there was to it. When VMART turned down Boston's assumed offer, do you think he expected far more elsewhere? If not, being he had a strong oft-stated desire to be a FT catcher, wouldn't he have taken 12 mil a year  to remain in that capacity and stay in Boston?
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE] To answer your question, the RS initial offer was such that any agent in the world is going to advise you go ahead and test the market even if you want to stay. Sort of like Jason Varitek in 2004 or the ill fated decision in 2008 to decline arbitration.

    As for token offers, if the RS left it at the extension offer and never budged that is a token offer. But when the RS kept bidding they did it knowing they might well need to back it up with $42M.

    Why is it so hard to accept that the RS had set a value at which they could live with VMart defensive skills in exchange for his offense and the prospects of either needing to convert his position or live with the diminished offensive performance that catching historically brings to all players not converted from catcher.

    As for the highly sought after stuff only three teams ever actually got into play on Cliff Lee, only two teams ever engaged at all with Crawford and only three with Beltre. How many teams show interest in a player isn't always about the player's perceived abilities but rather teams ability to be buyers for that skill set.

    Now there is no doubt that a 32 year old catcher is a dicey proposition for any team. Their offensive skills will erode faster because of the positions demands and if you press it too far, so will their defense. Jorge Posada is a rare breed indeed in that his offense held up so long and his defense (which was never great) held up so late into his career

    The NYY beginning in 1955 began playing Yogi Berra more and more in LF to extend his career and his offensive prowess. Yogi BTW is considered to be one of the greatest two way catchers that ever lived.

    Joe Mauer will be moved from behind the plate IMHO by the time he is 32 for sure, his contract virtually insures it. And his contract should not be considered a norm. For all people think he left $$$$ under the table it is an extraordinarily risky contract and one without precedent for his position.

    I am judging the situation based on what was reported to have happened (offers from RS and Tigers), you judge the situation in part based on what did not happen (bidding war with teams freeing up their DH spot and creating $42M-$52M of budget space). You basically imply that VMart's departure and role in Detroit are a clear validation that he is a rotten catcher, I believe it refelects an acknowledgement that his offensive prowess is his greater attribute and the two teams set values on that knowing they would need be changing his roles over the life of contract. So be it.

    By now we are boring the readers to death so let's move on.






     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]I thought both did a good job tonight. Buch didn't have put-away stuff, as his velocity was down, likely due to the poor grip on the ball. Moon Clay has been up/down in velocity in 2011.  Here are a couple articles about the velocity problems, a bit doom and gloo but he has been better in his last 4 starts. His velocity and control were bad against Oak and Tor, so maybe he was trying for more control.  I think he would not be a no. 1 or 2 starter if he pitched at 91.5 consistently. four seamers MPH vs ____: Det  92.3 NYY  92.5 Min  92.9 LAA  93.3 Bal   92.3 Oak  91.5  Tor   91.4 NYY  92.9 Tex   92.2     May 5 2011 rotographs Sticking with the pitch results theme, we come to something very concerning. His fastball velocity has declined from 94.1 MPH last year to just 92.1 this year . Two miles per hour is rather significant and too large to chalk up to “it’s still early, his velocity should improve into the summer”. When you combine his velocity loss with his strikeout rate drop, the warning bells should be soundingIn fact, his strikeout rate graphed would paint a scary picture. It has declined every single season, from a high of 8.7 during his debut year, down to its current 4.5. If that is not enough to illustrate how much dominance he has lost, his SwStk% and Contact% tell a similar story. His SwStk% is also in free fall, landing at just 7.2% so far this year (versus 9.4%-9.9% over his last three seasons), while his Contact% has increased to 83%, well above the 80.7% league average. This is quite a surprise coming from a pitcher with supposedly such a high quality repertoire. May 14 so far Clay Buchholz ‘s velocity has not improved and remains well below his average speed last year. It is good to see his strikeout rate improving though, as he has posted a 7.1 mark over his last four starts,
    Posted by tom-uk[/QUOTE]

    Perhaps the decrease in velocity is intentional?

    Or, said another way, he is transforming from a 'thrower' to a pitcher?
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from playball01. Show playball01's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    With regards to V-Mart it is my belief that the Red Sox had less interest in resigning the player than was indicated by the media at the time of the Detroit signing. Clearly, V-Mart's value and fit was more defined by how Detroit planned to utilize the player and the fact that based on our lineup, V-Mart was too expensive an option to become the everyday DH and being our every day catcher wasn't a consideration.

    RS Management clearly had their eye on A-Gon being the heir apparent first baseman and Theo, et al; didn't see V-Mart as the best catcher option moving forward. Regardless of how the negotiations played out I don't believe that V-Mart was being considered as a future part of our team, regardless of the cost, unless the bottom fell out on the player's value and he could have been retained for a relatively cheap amount as a DH, back up catcher profile.

    If anything else was the case then the RS could have retained the player at probable less than what Detroit's offer was. There just wasn't the proper fit for the player from Management's perspective is what I believe was the underlying challenge/concern at the time.

    In fact I came out on here and attacked Management for the handling of the negotiations regarding the player that they clearly didn't want to resign. I didn't favor the player returning but I had issues with the handling of negotiations. The public statements at the time were akin to talking out of both sides of their mouth and I found it disturbing and insulting to the fans and the player.

    I wish V-Mart well in the future and the player is clearly in a better situation then what we could have offered at this point in his career.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from 111SoxFan111. Show 111SoxFan111's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    ML: "Ortiz was no more "abominable" v. LHP [2008-2010] than Bellsbury [is] this year."

    SoxFan: "2008-2010 Ortiz had 1 HR ... per 35 ABs.  In 2010, Jed "No Pop" Lowrie had one per 25 ABs."

    ML :"Sample size is too small to compare a big one to a small one ... Pretty silly to even be discussing this."

    ML: Despite the fact you play the clown on this board, I had credited you with intelligence enough to understand the point I was making through the quotes listed.  The funny thing is, I am not actually sold on Lowrie.  TBH, I just find your entrenched rant so fun to needle that I can't resist.  Yes, Lowrie needs something approaching full season stats before anyone can form an educated opinion (that includes you).  Recent history, however, dictates he should be the starter and Scutaro the utility guy / part time starter.  If Jed's v.RHP #'s dip (or perhaps if they fail to improve along with his fielding) then a platoon is in order.  Instead of rational discussion, though, you choose to defend your opinions and predictions using spurious stats and "meaningless jocular phrases."  I imagine if you said a fire truck was orange, you would stand in the street pointing at it yelling "orange!" until it actually ran you over.

    Oh, and FWIW, you still have not set an objective benchmark for what you would deem success by Lowrie.  I hope you will surprise me by having the fortitude and intellectual honesty to provide an answer.  I will not, however, be surprised if you continue to hide behind sophistry and an ever changing benchmark.


     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]Their relative CERA values, defensive abilities ...etc. are more than compensated for by the extra 200-300 OPS points Victor would have given us. boom, I have no problem with your opinion that CERA-related issues are not as significant as harness and I believe they are, but if we are correct in thinking that VMart was largely or even just half way responsible for the huge ERA differentials with almost every pitcher he caught, then a .300 better OPS would not come close to compensating for a 0 .75 to 1.50 ERA difference on the other end. Secondly, VMart's career OPS is about .840. There was good reason to expect about a .700 to .750 OPS from the platoon of Salty and VTek. That's only, at most, about a .150 differential in OPS.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Respectfully, go to any other significant baseball forum and tell them VMart cost his pitchers up to 1.50 in their ERA last year and you both would be bombarded with catcalls. I've tried to argue a .5 differential. Conventional wisdom is that it is not that big a factor. The pitcher can call off any pitch. It's the pitchers decision. Sometimes guys go through periods of bad luck when the pitching is not good and the catcher in part gets blamed. Posada was a decent CERA guy when his pitchers were studs but when Burnett had some bad days Posada was blamed. It's a significant stat but it's not more than .5 ERA with almost any catcher in baseball over an extended period. IMO. And I had doubts that our catching duo will even reach .700 OPS at the end of this year.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from --The--Babe--1. Show --The--Babe--1's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II : Respectfully, go to any other significant baseball forum and tell them VMart cost his pitchers up to 1.50 in their ERA last year and you both would be bombarded with catcalls. I've tried to argue a .5 differential. Conventional wisdom is that it is not that big a factor. The pitcher can call off any pitch. It's the pitchers decision. Sometimes guys go through periods of bad luck when the pitching is not good and the catcher in part gets blamed. Posada was a decent CERA guy when his pitchers were studs but when Burnett had some bad days Posada was blamed. It's a significant stat but it's not more than .5 ERA with almost any catcher in baseball over an extended period. IMO. And I had doubts that our catching duo will even reach .700 OPS at the end of this year.

    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    boom,

    You are beating your head against the proverbial wall on this one.

    moonie and harness give the credit to tek when the pitchers pitch well but give him none of the blame when they pitch poorly.

     

Share