A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Bard did succumb to an issue which was largely projectable for him. When he has a bad inning it can get real ugly, real fast. And as a starter, they don't want that inning to be in the 2nd or 3rd inning when they may leave him in there longer than if he were a reliever.

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I hope Bowden is in a position to help the pen also. Bowden and Miller could finish it off well and give us some innings. I'm starting to get the feeling Doubront is our #5. Or # 4!
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Bard did succumb to an issue which was largely projectable for him. When he has a bad inning it can get real ugly, real fast. And as a starter, they don't want that inning to be in the 2nd or 3rd inning when they may leave him in there longer than if he were a reliever.

    Good point, but I think most relievers have the same issue: many good to great innings then a few scattered ugly ones.

    In Bard's defense, he did have some incredibly good stretches with no "ugly" innings:

    After his first game in April (.2 IP 4H  4 ER), he 9 outings with 9 IP, 4H & 1 ER. He then had a 1 IP  3 H  1 R (0ER) outing in late April followed by 6 games with 6.1 IP just 1H &  0ER!

    He hit a rough patch in mid-May, but no real "ugly innings":
    4 of 7 outing, he let up 1 or 2 ERs (7IP  6H  5ER).
    .
    From May 24th to July 31st, Bard was awesome for 25 straight appearances:
    He never let up more than 1 hit per outing:
    26.1 IP  10H  0R  0ER  6BB    25Ks
    (If he can translate stretches like this to starting, this is like 4 straight games of 6-7 IP with 2-3 Hits and 0 ERS.)

    On Aug 1st he had an ugly inning (.1 IP 2H 1BB 3 ER) His next outing 5 days later he had 1 IP  2 H  1ER.

    He followed these two games with 8 straight nice games:
    9.2 IP  2H  0R  0ER  1BB  14Ks

    Then came September:
    11 appearances
    6 with Runs allowed and one more with 3BBs in 1 IP but no Runs.
    Sept 7th was ugly (1IP  1H  3BB  1HBP 5R  5ER) 
    Sept14th was ugly (1IP 1H  2BB  3R  2ER)
    Sept 2oth was bad (1.1  2-2-2)
    Sept 27th was bad (1.0 3H 2R 2ER)

    All-in-all, I don't think 2 ERs in an IP is "ugly" for a starter, especially if it is surrounded by several shutout innings. I count only 2 games where Bard let up more than 2 ERs. He had a 2.10 ERA before his 5ER game on Sept 7th.

    If you take away his April 1st, Aug 1st, and Sept 7th games, here are his numbers:
    71 IP
    39 H
    17 R
    15 ER
    19 BB
    71 Ks

    1.90 ERA
    0.816 WHIP

    In short, 3 "ugly" games out of 70.
    He had 4 other games with 2ERs.
    That's just 7 out of 70 bad to ugly outings.

    In contrast, Papelbon had a .40 lower ERA and pitched in 63 games:
    1 game with 3ER (4runs, 3H, 1BB)
    4 games with 2 ER (including 1 with 4H and 1 BB in 1 IP)
    That's 5 bad to ugly outings out of 63.

    Aceves had 51 relief games:
    1 ugly
    3 bad
    4 out of 51.

    In 2010, Bard had no "ugly innings".
    Only 2 games with 2 ERs out of 73 outings!

    I'm not sure how this translates to starter innings, but I am deeply concerned they are messing with a great set-up guy. 

    I know I sound like a broken record, but if we had Floyd for our #4 and Doubront for our #5, our rotation and pen would be solid.


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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Moon, when you are a reliver, they don't generally leave you in long enough to have a truly ugly inning. We have reason to be concerned with Bard as a starter. He is by no means a proven option at that position. 

    He wasn't that dominant as a starter in NC, where there is little indication they know how to develop starters. Neither Miller or Bard have become proven starter level pitchers at any point yet. Both have tremendous raw material to work with but have they used it appropriately yet as starters? in the minors or majors?

    I sincerely hope that Bard proves to be a Cy Young winner but the data indicates he will potentially have real difficulty in this transition. The longer hitters see him, the more exposed he will become. That high heat is straight as an arrow and he can't always control it. Guys with stuff like that often take a long time to harness it ( Randy Johnson? ) and a lot of them never do ( Calvin Schiraldi anyone? ). That was his name wasn't it? I forget! 

    I actually feel better about Doubront at this point. I think Tazawa has more in him then he has shown yet also.

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Don't get me wrong. We've got to give Bard a strong chance, our strongest chance in fact. We just can't count on him. We can't. It's a little more than 50/50 for him to become a strong #4 IMO.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Moon, when you are a reliver, they don't generally leave you in long enough to have a truly ugly inning. We have reason to be concerned with Bard as a starter. He is by no means a proven option at that position. 

    I know, and that is why I have been arguing for him to stay in the pen since the beginning. I know one can not easily translate how a reliever does one inning at a time to a guy who goes 5-8 innings every 5 days, however, your point about releivers not being left in "long enough to have a truly ugly inning" does not really apply to Bard. Almost all of his outings have been 1 full inning.

    He wasn't that dominant as a starter in NC, where there is little indication they know how to develop starters. Neither Miller or Bard have become proven starter level pitchers at any point yet. Both have tremendous raw material to work with but have they used it appropriately yet as starters? in the minors or majors?

    I'm with you, boom. I want Bard staying in the pen, but I just wanted to point out that he really hasn't had that many "ugly innings" over the pas 2 years as a set-up man. He's had 3 "ugly innings" out of his last 143 appearances and 6 "bad ones" for a total of 9 bad to ugly appearances out of 143. There's no way to know if this translates to starter innings, but if he has only one bad inning out of every 15 innings, he'll be more than fine. 

    I sincerely hope that Bard proves to be a Cy Young winner but the data indicates he will potentially have real difficulty in this transition. 

    What data? His college numbers? This is unknown territory for Bard, and no data will prove anything until we see him in action.

    The longer hitters see him, the more exposed he will become. That high heat is straight as an arrow and he can't always control it. Guys with stuff like that often take a long time to harness it ( Randy Johnson? ) and a lot of them never do ( Calvin Schiraldi anyone? ). That was his name wasn't it? I forget! 

    Bard has proven he is a highly effective pitcher. The only thing he hasn't proven is can he do it for long, in game stretches.

    I actually feel better about Doubront at this point. I think Tazawa has more in him then he has shown yet also.

    I agree. 

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    At 11:00 AM, this thread didn't have a single poster comment since last night. There has to be a better use of server space than this echo chamber.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I guess the clown bumped the thread.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    It's only the best thread on the forum. And some of us have a life softy! 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I think I'll start Part II the day ST ends or the 25 man roster is set.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from 111SoxFan111. Show 111SoxFan111's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    "2 - While that bullpen would be outrageously good, having it THAT stacked with talent probably means you aren't getting good value from someone.  

    I totally disagree. There is plenty of innings to go around for the top 4 releivers: Bailey, Bard, Aceves and Melancon. "

    Sure, they will all get their innings, but a lot of those innings will be junk innings just to keep their arms in use.  With the offense this team has, we aren't going to see 240+ high leverage innings.   The prospect of them trotting one of these guys out there every other day to pitch into a 5 run lead to "get him some work" is what I mean but not getting good value.  

    Now, if you are arguing that Bard is too valuable in the pen vs. an uncertainty as a starter, I could agree with you.  However, saying Ace is too valuable in long relief I think is short-sighted.  There is a reason there isn't a reward for best long reliever in the MLB.  I think Padilla and Cook are both great options for long relief / spot starts (assuming Doubront is #5).  Personally, I think the Bard experiment is good because: a) he wants it; b) if it works out the reward is very great. But there are reasonable arguments against it.  At the end of the day, I think if Ace can be reasonably expected to pitch 150+ innings of sub 5 ERA, that + keeping Middlebrooks, Bowden and _________ is a better value.  
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    "2 - While that bullpen would be outrageously good, having it THAT stacked with talent probably means you aren't getting good value from someone.   I totally disagree. There is plenty of innings to go around for the top 4 releivers: Bailey, Bard, Aceves and Melancon.  " Sure, they will all get their innings, but a lot of those innings will be junk innings just to keep their arms in use.  With the offense this team has, we aren't going to see 240+ high leverage innings.   The prospect of them trotting one of these guys out there every other day to pitch into a 5 run lead to "get him some work" is what I mean but not getting good value.   Now, if you are arguing that Bard is too valuable in the pen vs. an uncertainty as a starter, I could agree with you.  However, saying Ace is too valuable in long relief I think is short-sighted.  There is a reason there isn't a reward for best long reliever in the MLB.  I think Padilla and Cook are both great options for long relief / spot starts (assuming Doubront is #5).  Personally, I think the Bard experiment is good because: a) he wants it; b) if it works out the reward is very great. But there are reasonable arguments against it.  At the end of the day, I think if Ace can be reasonably expected to pitch 150+ innings of sub 5 ERA, that + keeping Middlebrooks, Bowden and _________ is a better value.  
    Posted by 111SoxFan111

    I just spent 20 minutes writing an in depth reply to this and it got erased.

    I basically found that we had over 200 PAs in late & Close situations covered by Albers, Morales, Jenks, Wheeler, Oki and other relievers not named Paps, Bard and Aceves. Giving Bailey all of Papelbon's PAs (even though Bailey has had not more than 50 IP the past 2 years), we'll still have plenty for Melancon and some left over beyond the big 4.

    My main idea was to trade for Floyd to be our #4 and Doubront to be our #5, and we'd be solid from top to bottom.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from 111SoxFan111. Show 111SoxFan111's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]I just spent 20 minutes writing an in depth reply to this and it got erased.

    My main idea was to trade for Floyd to be our #4 and Doubront to be our #5, and we'd be solid from top to bottom.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Yeah, sure, your dog ate your homework ;)

    I totally agree.  My argument is that the current strategy, while having more risk and not producing a better team, produces more value and gives them more flexibility.  As a fan, I say go for it, get Floyd and let's win this thing.  As an arm chair GM, I guess I just can't see giving up prospects plus decent $$$ for someone who you expect to give you 200IP of 4.x ERA ... kinda like Lackey v2.0.  

    I'm an optimist, I say let the kids play :)
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Boom, can you get me a name here?  #3 catcher in the Giants system, Latino, hitting about .330 over the last year, blocked by Posey and someone in between, played a little fall/winter ball and did well, with them this spring...can you offer up a name?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Boom, can you get me a name here?  #3 catcher in the Giants system, Latino, hitting about .330 over the last year, blocked by Posey and someone in between, played a little fall/winter ball and did well, with them this spring...can you offer up a name?
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I : Yeah, sure, your dog ate your homework ;) I totally agree.  My argument is that the current strategy, while having more risk and not producing a better team, produces more value and gives them more flexibility.  As a fan, I say go for it, get Floyd and let's win this thing.  As an arm chair GM, I guess I just can't see giving up prospects plus decent $$$ for someone who you expect to give you 200IP of 4.x ERA ... kinda like Lackey v2.0.   I'm an optimist, I say let the kids play :)
    Posted by 111SoxFan111[/QUOTE]

    1) ERA is not everything. Plus, he's been under 4.08 in 3 of the last 4 seasons.

    2) He just turned 29. That's the beginning of prime for a starter.

    3) 5 starters per team/30 MLB teams equals 150 starters. Out of the top 150 starters by IP (300+) since 2008, Floyd places...
      19th in WAR at 15.1
      70th in ERA at 4.08 (close behind Beckett) and including NL starters.
      38th in WHIP at 1.25 (close behind Lester).
      19th out of 68 AL Starters in WHIP.
      23rd out of 68 AL starters in SIERA.
    These numbers show Floyd has pitched like a 1 or 2 starter (at worst, a very good 3 starter) for 4 years combined at ages 26-29.

    4) The Lackey argument has merit, but not all starters lose it as quickly as John did, and it now appears that it might have been injury related. As far as I know, Floyd has no history of arm trouble like Lackey did before we signed him. Lackey did have good numbers for the 4 years before we signed him to over $15M a year. He was 8th in WHIP (1.24) out of 58 AL starters and 16th in SIERA at 3.95. However, there are 2 big differences here besides the injury issue (remember the Sox forced an injury clause in the deal):
      A) $15+M to $3.9M against the cap.
      B) 31 years old (Lackay at the signing) to 29 years old (Floyd now).

    As for "letting the kids play". I have been a big advocate of playing Lava and Iggy FT from day 1.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Guys, just read an interesting article by Abraham giving impressions of Sox camp. 
    Says Bard has to come up with another good pitch--he flattens out after a few innings and/or batters get more comfortable with him, thus he gives up a lot of foul balls.  Says Bard will figure this out as he's smart.  He believes Bard should have moved to closer and Sox rounded up a starter.  Just passing it along. 

    Boom, can you tell me about the catchers behind Lava in our system and how they are projected, just the next couple?
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I thought Bard was going to close too, but am OK with Bailey. I think Bard should stay our set-up guy and be ready to close if Bailey gets hurt. That makes Melancon the 7th inning guy. Nice!

    Swihart is moving up fact as the top catching prospect behind Lava. He's 19, but is our #10 prospect according to Soxprospects. I'll let boom tell you all the goodies.

    We still have 25 y/o Luid Exposito who fell from #30 to 46.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Crit!

    I think you might be talking about this guy but he's the #3 catching prospect in their farm system ( hard to believe! ):


    Regarding our system, I like Christian Vasquez quite a bit but the mega stud behind Lavarnway is Swihart who I have as my # 3 overall redsox prospect for 2012. The kid just has a tremendous bat and great athleticism. He reminds me of Chipper Jones. How's that for going out on a limb with a kid who has 6 professional AB so far!

    Lavarnway just keeps getting better. I have him at #1 now, Bogaerts #2. Swihart #3, Iglesias #4. 

    What the heck. Here's my full list:

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I may be the only one thinking about it but the impact of blood testing on league players could have a huge impact on some teams, including ours. I wonder which decisions were made with that in mind, and who is slipping through the cracks unnoticed. To me, this could be a season of realignment. Teams we haven't thought of as great will probably rise some this year and some top fight teams might nosedive a little. We will see.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]Crit! I think you might be talking about this guy but he's the #3 catching prospect in their farm system ( hard to believe! ): http://www.sbnation.com/mlb/players/106904/hector-sanchez Regarding our system, I like Christian Vasquez quite a bit but the mega stud behind Lavarnway is Swihart who I have as my # 3 overall redsox prospect for 2012. The kid just has a tremendous bat and great athleticism. He reminds me of Chipper Jones. How's that for going out on a limb with a kid who has 6 professional AB so far! Lavarnway just keeps getting better. I have him at #1 now, Bogaerts #2. Swihart #3, Iglesias #4.  What the heck. Here's my full list: 1. Ryan Lavarnway C/DH 2. Xander Bogaerts, SS 3. Blake Swihart, C  4. Jose Iglesias, SS 5. Garin Cecchini, 3B  6. Matt Barnes, RHP 7. Jackie Bradley, Jr., OF 8. Will Middlebrooks, 3B 9. Bryce Brentz, OF 10. Felix Doubront, LHP  11. Sean Coyle, 2B  12. Anthony Ranaudo, RHP 13. Junichi Tazawa, RHP  14. Brandon Jacobs, OF 15. Henry Owens, LHP 16. Alex Wilson, RHP 17. Jose Vinicio, SS 18. Brandon Workman, RHP 19. Ryan Kalish, OF 20. Alex Hassan, OF 21. Chris Hernandez LHP 22. Lars Anderson, 1B 23. Drake Britton, LHP 24. Henry Ramos, OF 27. Stolmy Pimentel RHP 28. Williams Jerez, OF  29. Cody Kukuk, LHP 30. Noe Ramirez, RHP 31. Jeremy Hazelbaker, OF 32. Frank Montas RHP 33. Christian Vasquez C 34. Oscar Tejeda, 2B 35. Sergio Gomez, RHP 36. Kendrick Perkins OF 37. Matt Marquis OF 38. Jordan Weems 39. Kolbrin Vitek 3B 40. Ryan Westmoreland OF  
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    Good list. I like Cecchini #5 as well (ahead of Middlebrooks).

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

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    It's a pretty controversial list though and I understnad that. I call them as I see them!

    For example, Lin is not on the list at all. He's probably better than those guys down around #30 but I've waited 4 years for him to hit muc over .260 and I'm tired of waiting!

    For example, Vitek is way lower than most lists. He hit what 3 Dingers last year? Not happening!

    Ranaudo bought a house in Louisianna with Drake Britton. I'm sure those two are down there working out constantly, near the LSU campus probably. What would most of us do if we were 22 years old and millionaires? Until I see a velocity increase or good conditioning. an indication of improvement they aren't in the top 10.

    Middlebrooks sure looks like a player but is he ever going to hit as a mlb level guy. I think so but he's not my #1.

    I think the world of Ryan Kalish but the guy goes all out TOO MUCH. He's officially sanke bit IMO. Too many injuries and they are not trivial injuries.

    I think the top 15 on this list are all potential studs!






     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    It's a pretty controversial list though and I understnad that. I call them as I see them!

    For example, Lin is not on the list at all. He's probably better than those guys down around #30 but I've waited 4 years for him to hit muc over .260 and I'm tired of waiting!

    For example, Vitek is way lower than most lists. He hit what 3 Dingers last year? Not happening!

    Ranaudo bought a house in Louisianna with Drake Britton. I'm sure those two are down there working out constantly, near the LSU campus probably. What would most of us do if we were 22 years old and millionaires? Until I see a velocity increase or good conditioning. an indication of improvement they aren't in the top 10.

    Middlebrooks sure looks like a player but is he ever going to hit as a mlb level guy. I think so but he's not my #1.

    I think the world of Ryan Kalish but the guy goes all out TOO MUCH. He's officially sanke bit IMO. Too many injuries and they are not trivial injuries.

    I think the top 15 on this list are all potential studs!

    I like your list and think you know your stuff. I don't pretend to know more than you in this area, but here are my adjustments to your list:

    1. Ryan Lavarnway C/DH  Lava
    2. Xander Bogaerts, SS      Bogaerts
    3. Blake Swihart, C              Iglesias
    4. Jose Iglesias, SS             Cecchini
    5. Garin Cecchini, 3B           Barnes
    6. Matt Barnes, RHP            Swihart
    7. Jackie Bradley, Jr., OF   Middlebrooks
    8. Will Middlebrooks, 3B     Doubront
    9. Bryce Brentz, OF             Tazawa
    10. Felix Doubront, LHP     Coyle
    11. Sean Coyle, 2B              Kalish
    12. Anthony Ranaudo, RHP  Ranaudo
    13. Junichi Tazawa, RHP     Brentz 
    14. Brandon Jacobs, OF      Jacobs
    15. Henry Owens, LHP         Bradley
    16. Alex Wilson, RHP            Hassan
    17. Jose Vinicio, SS               Owens
    18. Brandon Workman, RHP  Tejada
    19. Ryan Kalish, OF               Vinicio
    20. Alex Hassan, OF             Wilson
    21. Chris Hernandez LHP     Workman
    22. Lars Anderson, 1B          Ramos
    23. Drake Britton, LHP          Lin
    24. Henry Ramos, OF            Hernandez
    27. Stolmy Pimentel RHP     Vitek
    28. Williams Jerez, OF          Britton
    29. Cody Kukuk, LHP             Ramos
    30. Noe Ramirez, RHP          Hazelbaker
    31. Jeremy Hazelbaker, OF  Kukuk
    32. Frank Montas RHP          Jerez
    33. Christian Vasquez C      Ramirez
    34. Oscar Tejeda, 2B            Montas
    35. Sergio Gomez, RHP        Pimental
    36. Kendrick Perkins OF      Balcom-Miller
    37. Matt Marquis OF               Perkins
    38. Jordan Weems                  Weems
    39. Kolbrin Vitek 3B                Vazquez
    40. Ryan Westmoreland OF  Linares


     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I like your evaluation too Boom.  Guys, this is not strictly on topic but living in the Bay Area, sometimes a player comes to notice, and I like to share it with you.  I know we had a dearth of C's in our system until the last couple of years with Tek blocking everyone, and then we got busy drafting some young guys.
    Here is a name for you.

    Giants Catcher Hector Sanchez, 22, 5'11" and 235 pounds hitting 7 for 14 this spring with (3) HR's and (8) RBI's.  Played A ball last year in San Jose and projected AAA ball this year.  Has hit .295 in 319 minor leage games and .302 last year with 11 HR's and and 58 RBI's in 52 games.  Coaches want him right now for his bat but still raw defensively.  Working hard before and after practice each day on defensive skills.  Posey blocks and two other guys are
    between him and posey ready defensively but hitting at Mendoza line who the pitchers like; once last week he let a wild pitch get by which scored a run so of course the pitcher got upset.  Later in the game he stopped the same pitch.  This guy sounds like he can hit lights out.  I wish we could keep him on the radar and try to pick him up.  I think the Giants make a good trading partner for us--they have lots of young and coming and ready pitching.  Right now they need a 2nd basemen as theirs is injured to start the season and they are always looking for hitting.  With Posey blocking and no DH I would love to have this guy.  If we ever do anything with SF I would love to see this guy thrown in.  By the way, their first baseman had a lousy year last year too--how about Anderson, Punto, and Bowden for one of their almost ready starters and Hector?  Should I keep teaching English?
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]I like your evaluation too Boom.  Guys, this is not strictly on topic but living in the Bay Area, sometimes a player comes to notice, and I like to share it with you.  I know we had a dearth of C's in our system until the last couple of years with Tek blocking everyone, and then we got busy drafting some young guys. Here is a name for you. Giants Catcher Hector Sanchez, 22, 5'11" and 235 pounds hitting 7 for 14 this spring with (3) HR's and (8) RBI's.  Played A ball last year in San Jose and projected AAA ball this year.  Has hit .295 in 319 minor leage games and .302 last year with 11 HR's and and 58 RBI's in 52 games.  Coaches want him right now for his bat but still raw defensively.  Working hard before and after practice each day on defensive skills.  Posey blocks and two other guys are between him and posey ready defensively but hitting at Mendoza line who the pitchers like; once last week he let a wild pitch get by which scored a run so of course the pitcher got upset.  Later in the game he stopped the same pitch.  This guy sounds like he can hit lights out.  I wish we could keep him on the radar and try to pick him up.  I think the Giants make a good trading partner for us--they have lots of young and coming and ready pitching.  Right now they need a 2nd basemen as theirs is injured to start the season and they are always looking for hitting.  With Posey blocking and no DH I would love to have this guy.  If we ever do anything with SF I would love to see this guy thrown in.  By the way, their first baseman had a lousy year last year too--how about Anderson, Punto, and Bowden for one of their almost ready starters and Hector?  Should I keep teaching English?
    Posted by Critter23[/QUOTE]

    I think we want Punto even if Iggy starts. I'm not sure how much SF evaluates Anderson as a possible replacement, but who knows.  Not a bad starting point offer, but 3 for 1 deals cause roster issues.

     

Share