A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    I don't see any major trades until the deadline. I hope we are not sellers at that point.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Who knows how BV will see things when the time comes.  After Dice-K does his re-hab starts, I would like to see him "lengthen out his arm" in the pen for a while.  Maybe Doubie will have to go to the pen "for the good of the team"  but I really don't like him going to the pen if he's doing great as a starter--and I believe he has done great.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II:
    Who knows how BV will see things when the time comes.  After Dice-K does his re-hab starts, I would like to see him "lengthen out his arm" in the pen for a while.  Maybe Doubie will have to go to the pen "for the good of the team"  but I really don't like him going to the pen if he's doing great as a starter--and I believe he has done great.
    Posted by Critter23
    I really like Felix as a starter too. His curveball borders on unhittable. I'm not opposed to Cook in the Pen and keeping Felix in the rotation. Bob Stanley had some pretty good years as a sinkerballer out of the Sox pen.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliamsjr. Show hankwilliamsjr's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    his option is a question for this off-season.

    Youk's option isn't a question at all. It will not be picked up.

    Too many other absurdities to waste time over.

    A. This team is still a playoff spot contender
    B. This team, status quo, will not be a title contender
    C. Nearly 30 million a year on Ellsbury and Crawford is the ultimate in idiocy
    D. A superstar RH bat will eventually be acquired from a position of weakness
    E. This GM is as inept a sell low buy high bean counter as InEpstein, without a clue about selling high
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II : I really like Felix as a starter too. His curveball borders on unhittable. I'm not opposed to Cook in the Pen and keeping Felix in the rotation. Bob Stanley had some pretty good years as a sinkerballer out of the Sox pen.
    Posted by carnie

    I like having Doubront as the starter as well.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Has anyone looked closely at Clays actual pitching form. It seems a bit off from the beginning of last year. Is it plausible to think that the surgery he had have permanently affected his mechanics? It doesn't seem as easy going as it once did. I have not read any scouting reports on his delivery so far this year.

    If this is in fact a very good possibility, then what was considered a strength (Starters 1-3) doesn't actually exist. And that also changes how Boston may have to look at the next few months.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II:
    Has anyone looked closely at Clays actual pitching form. It seems a bit off from the beginning of last year. Is it plausible to think that the surgery he had have permanently affected his mechanics? It doesn't seem as easy going as it once did. I have not read any scouting reports on his delivery so far this year. If this is in fact a very good possibility, then what was considered a strength (Starters 1-3) doesn't actually exist. And that also changes how Boston may have to look at the next few months.
    Posted by jesseyeric

    He does seem to have a different motion, but it may not be permanent.

    Buch was one reason why I felt we needed to make a strong move in trade for a quality starter (like Floyd). Relying on our top 3 starters to all be 100% healthy to have any chance at all was too wishful. The top 3 have never been "top" at the same time for a full season.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    I like having Doubront as the starter as well.

    No, you like having Wastefield as the starter.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Buch didn't have any surgery did he? the way I understood it he had a stress fracture, which has no surgical procedure to correct it. It simply needs to be allowed to heal. That being said Buch doesn't look the same. Smoltz on the MLB network telecast of the 100th anniversary game said that all Buch's pitches seemed to lack the late movement they normally have. His theory is that will come back once Buch builds his arm strength back up to what it was.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Buch didn't have any surgery did he? the way I understood it he had a stress fracture, which has no surgical procedure to correct it. It simply needs to be allowed to heal. That being said Buch doesn't look the same. Smoltz on the MLB network telecast of the 100th anniversary game said that all Buch's pitches seemed to lack the late movement they normally have. His theory is that will come back once Buch builds his arm strength back up to what it was.

    I hope that happens sooner rather than later.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II:
    Buch didn't have any surgery did he? the way I understood it he had a stress fracture, which has no surgical procedure to correct it. It simply needs to be allowed to heal. That being said Buch doesn't look the same. Smoltz on the MLB network telecast of the 100th anniversary game said that all Buch's pitches seemed to lack the late movement they normally have. His theory is that will come back once Buch builds his arm strength back up to what it was. I hope that happens sooner rather than later.
    Posted by moonslav59
    You and me both.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Although Ross has fielded like Hermida and Nava so far, his bat has been better than all but a few of us expected... so far.

    In 60 PAs

    .283  5  13

    OBP .350
    SLG  .623
    OPS .973

    At 660 PAs, he'd be at .283  55  143

    Remember, he's only getting paid $3M/1. 

    It's small samples here, but this is a list of all the FA OF'ers who got more than $3M a year this past winter: 

                                  (PA) BA  HR  RBI  OBP/SLG/OPS
    Beltran $26/2      (57)  .298  5  8  .403/.561/.964
    Cuddyer $31.5/3 (57) .345  2  11 .368/.636/1.005
    J. Kubel  $15M/2  (47) .255  1   5  .340/.362/.701
    Wilnghm $21M/3 (67) .328  5  12  .435/.655/1.090
    C. Crisp $14M/2   (48) .156  0   3   .208/.156/.364
    L. Scott $6M/1     (40) .275  3  14  .310/.600/.910
    DeJesus $10M/2  (60) .265  0   1   .400/.306/.706
    Sizemore $5M/1   (0)
    J. Rivera $4.5M/1 (57) .255  0  7  .298/.314/.612





     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Ross really looks like a good pick up so far. He really came through tonight.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    He's got great attitude too.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Ross seems to have a knack for making things happen when needed. And he only cost around $3 mil wasn't it. Who needs a stinking OF when we have Cody!
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Ross was a good projection on your part, Moon.  I was surprised at first because he was off last year, but he was fantastic two years ago for the Giants.  And he does have a knack for rising at the right moments.  He was a great team guy out here.

    Carnie, I wouldn't mind seeing Cook in the pen either.  I just have a feeling about him that he's going to do well in the pen or as a starter.  I hope Dice-K comes back strong, it's about time, it might be his year, and I think he and Bi-Valve will do well together.  BUT I'm a little done with him.  I know he's a starter, but if he reverts to form, then I'd put Cook into the rotation and send him to the pen.  I'm with some poster, Boom? who said in the last several days, this mess is best at the beginning of the year.  We have time to work this out and I hope we do.  I sort of like the fact the owner went into the clubhouse after the game the other day and talked to the manager and GM.  To me this shows he is involved and concerned.

    I want to make a final comment about Paps.  I know some are saying, not necessarily here, that "What a mistake we made, blah, blah..."  I see this as being the same as past situations when we've let big players walk.  We made a calculated decision that 50 million was too much and we could spend it better in other areas.  I don't think the premise was wrong.  But we spent the money on making Papi happy (I could go either way on this...), not getting a strong starter, and cobbling up the pen.  I would really like to know who was behind the CC signing.  Maybe I'm naive, but I don't think it was Theo.  I think it was an owner driven decision.  I can't believe just how much it's crippled us.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Crit,

    I wasn't the first to mention Ross, but I may have been the second on the bandwagon.

    I had hoped one of the projects would work out, and it does seem like Cook has the best chance at this point. I was a bit disheartened by this tactic after the Penny/Smoltz experiment.

    I don't think management planned on spending the Paps money on Papi. I think they thought Papi would walk and we'd have the comp pick to show for it and the Paps money to spend elsewhere. The nice start by Papi has helped cover up their "mistake" for now, but I think the plan was to spend the money on pitching (maybe via trade for Floyd or Wandy). 
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    I like Sweeney also. If Crawford and Ellsbury come back strong, and we add Lavarnway in a month, the lineup will be decent. I have no idea what they will do with Middlebrooks but he is as hot as about anyone in the high minors right now. We could get a lot for him in a trade. More than we could get for Youk right now. I'm confident youk will work things out. He just got married. He's probably sore!

    We have other real solid 3rd base prospects coming up the pike. Cechinni and Bogaerts both look real solid. We could move Aviles to 3rd also, with Iglesias to SS. Middlebrooks is one heck of a trade chip potentially. If we get a solid return I think we should consider it. MLB ready 3rd base prospects like Middlebrooks are extremely valuable. The guy is an excellent fielder and a decent hitter with apparently a lot of pop, including opposite field pop. He should be worth another blue chip guy and we can retain Youk for close to 2 years time if we want. Youk probably comes back with decent offensive numbers at least. 

    An unlikely scenario as most teams do not trade their top prospects but look what Hanley was worth! 

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II:
    I like Sweeney also. If Crawford and Ellsbury come back strong, and we add Lavarnway in a month, the lineup will be decent. I have no idea what they will do with Middlebrooks but he is as hot as about anyone in the high minors right now. We could get a lot for him in a trade. More than we could get for Youk right now. I'm confident youk will work things out. He just got married. He's probably sore! We have other real solid 3rd base prospects coming up the pike. Cechinni and Bogaerts both look real solid. We could move Aviles to 3rd also, with Iglesias to SS. Middlebrooks is one heck of a trade chip potentially. If we get a solid return I think we should consider it. MLB ready 3rd base prospects like Middlebrooks are extremely valuable. The guy is an excellent fielder and a decent hitter with apparently a lot of pop, including opposite field pop. He should be worth another blue chip guy and we can retain Youk for close to 2 years time if we want. Youk probably comes back with decent offensive numbers at least.  An unlikely scenario as most teams do not trade their top prospects but look what Hanley was worth! 
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom

    With Cecchini, Bogaerts and Aviles available to play 3B over the next few years, trading Middlebrooks might not be as far-fetched as many might think.

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II : With Cecchini, Bogaerts and Aviles available to play 3B over the next few years, trading Middlebrooks might not be as far-fetched as many might think.
    Posted by moonslav59
    Call me a pessimist, but I'm not sure Youk will be able to hold down the hot corner until one of those guys is ready.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from 111SoxFan111. Show 111SoxFan111's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    I'm with you Carnie.  I don't think we will see Middlebrooks going anywhere soon.  Youk is too much of an injury risk and the other kids aren't close enough yet.  Plus I think Aviles is their SS for the year ... they aren't banking on Iggy forcing that issue this year.  Not to mention I suspect the current regime is going to be more focused on keeping the kids unless they are getting a long term deal for a predictable commodity (AGon) and won't be trading any potential blue chips for 1 year rentals.  
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    Would you go along with this deal?

    Crawford 12:$19.5M, 13:$20M, 14:$20.25M, 15:$20.5M, 16:$20.75M,17:$21M
    Lackey 12:$15.25M, 13:$15.25M, 14:$15.25M, 2015 club option at Major League minimum salary if Lackey misses significant time with surgery for pre-existing elbow injury in 2010-14
    Middlebrooks

    For:
    D Wright 12:$15M, 13:$16M club option ($1M buyout)
    Santana 12:$24M, 13:$25.5M, 14:$25M club option ($5.5M buyout)

    The Mets save $5M this year and $6M next, we start saving much much more after that and get 2 players that can help us now.

    (I'm not saying I am for this deal, but it is an example of a type of deal that could happen.)
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II:
    Would you go along with this deal? Crawford  12 :$19.5M,  13 :$20M,  14 :$20.25M,  15 :$20.5M,  16 :$20.75M, 17 :$21M Lackey  12 :$15.25M,   13 :$15.25M,   14 :$15.25M,  2015 club option at Major League minimum salary if Lackey misses significant time with surgery for pre-existing elbow injury in 2010-14 Middlebrooks For: D Wright  12 :$15M,  13 :$16M club option ($1M buyout) Santana  12 :$24M,  13 :$25.5M,  14 :$25M club option ($5.5M buyout) The Mets save $5M this year and $6M next, we start saving much much more after that and get 2 players that can help us now. (I'm not saying I am for this deal, but it is an example of a type of deal that could happen.)
    Posted by moonslav59
    It looks somewhat interesting. I'd like it a lot better if Wright and Santana had better recent health histories.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II : It looks somewhat interesting. I'd like it a lot better if Wright and Santana had better recent health histories.
    Posted by carnie

    But so are CC and Lackey.



     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II:
    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2012: Part II : But so are CC and Lackey.
    Posted by moonslav59
    Middlebrooks would be the sticking point for me. But honestly, if the Mets would bite on that deal I'd probably go for it, and pray Bogaerts is ready for the next time Wright breaks down. Santana is probably better than anyone in our rotation not named Doubront right now, although I figure Lester will pick up his pace now that April is over. And Wright is a very good ballplayer, a significant upgrade on Youk,esp. defensively.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share