A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    I'm not trying to fabricate drama.  I'm just stating my opinion.

    Regarding Youkilis, wasn't he considered a hero while he was here?  The same holds true for Papelbon.  Then, because they're playing for different teams, all of a sudden they're bigmouths or troublemakers...or whatever.

    Heaven forbid what would be said aboud Pedroia if he were to leave.

    The fickleness of fans.  It's amazing.

     

    I loved Youk. What's not to like about that OBP.

    He still has the 6th best OPS vs LHP since 2007 and 5th best OBP at .426.

     

    I have never been a big fan temper tantrums, breaking bats after K's, and whatever. At the time of the scrape with Manny, I took Manny's side, so it's not like I jumped ship after he was traded.

    Besides, I was one of the few that argued that the Youk trade was bad, and that we'd need him as a sub. Shortly afterwards, AGon got hurt- then Middlebrooks & Papi.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    I'm not projecting that Ell's comes back. I'm saying he could well get a $100 mil deal, even in a 6 year time frame, and it is certainly possible he comes back to the Redsox.

    I hope to God they don't even offer him $40M/3.

     

    They have said they like him.

    Boom, when's the last time any GM said they didn't like a player under contract?

     

    He has stayed in shape and worked hard to improve his game.

    I know it's 2 small sample sizes, but 2012 and 2013 ST have not looked good.

     

    He is in many ways exactly the type of player you want on a team.

    Not for $100M/6 or 7. Why choose this profile to break theself imposed longterm deal moratorium?

     

    He is clearly more suited for Yankee stadium or a team like Philadelphia. He may just be more valuable for another team. He hit 31 HR when it's not easy to hit HR in Fenway's RF. Imagine how he would do in Philly all other factors being equal, with that short RF area.

    He is clearly more valuable to another team.

     

    I just hope he gets off to a fast start for once at the major league level because, if he does, something special could result from it. We probably end up getting a pick in my opinion and Ellsbury probably gets his money.

    I think he'll get close to Bourn or BJ Upton money.



    Again I AM NOT PROJECTING ELLS WILL RESIGN WITH THE REDSOX. I'm saying he probably has a great year in 2013 and I bet he puts himself in the $100 mil discussion over 6 years.

    Is it PROBABLE? Maybe not considering all the factors. He could get hurt. He could go back to being a 10-12 HR guy. He could have a slump year...etc. What do I think he will do though? I think in his contract year, being currently healthy and in his prime, after showing his potential in 2011 as 2nd in the league MVP race with tremendous numbers, that Ellsbury is not going to be the $40 ml guy which seems to be consensus around here. To be completely honest, I can't even believe I am hearing that sort of projection. 

    It assumes 2011 is an aberration. It assumes that Ellsbury is injury prone when it doesn't appear that way to me at all. He had major injuries which were for real. Both involving collisions with other players. He's not a guy with constant hamstring issues or oblique injuries...etc. He got hurt for sure, in collisions. Major injuries. He's a CF who gets into a lot of action. He stole a lot of bases. The probabilities were high. If he is more careful, I bet he stays on the field.

    And he has a lot of reasons to be careful. As in $100 mil of them. 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    I'm not projecting that Ell's comes back. I'm saying he could well get a $100 mil deal, even in a 6 year time frame, and it is certainly possible he comes back to the Redsox.

    I hope to God they don't even offer him $40M/3.

     

    They have said they like him.

    Boom, when's the last time any GM said they didn't like a player under contract?

     

    He has stayed in shape and worked hard to improve his game.

    I know it's 2 small sample sizes, but 2012 and 2013 ST have not looked good.

     

    He is in many ways exactly the type of player you want on a team.

    Not for $100M/6 or 7. Why choose this profile to break theself imposed longterm deal moratorium?

     

    He is clearly more suited for Yankee stadium or a team like Philadelphia. He may just be more valuable for another team. He hit 31 HR when it's not easy to hit HR in Fenway's RF. Imagine how he would do in Philly all other factors being equal, with that short RF area.

    He is clearly more valuable to another team.

     

    I just hope he gets off to a fast start for once at the major league level because, if he does, something special could result from it. We probably end up getting a pick in my opinion and Ellsbury probably gets his money.

    I think he'll get close to Bourn or BJ Upton money.

     



    Again I AM NOT PROJECTING ELLS WILL RESIGN WITH THE REDSOX. I'm saying he probably has a great year in 2013 and I bet he puts himself in the $100 mil discussion over 6 years.

     

    Is it PROBABLE? Maybe not considering all the factors. He could get hurt. He could go back to being a 10-12 HR guy. He could have a slump year...etc. What do I think he will do though? I think in his contract year, being currently healthy and in his prime, after showing his potential in 2011 as 2nd in the league MVP race with tremendous numbers, that Ellsbury is not going to be the $40 ml guy which seems to be consensus around here. To be completely honest, I can't even believe I am hearing that sort of projection. 

    It assumes 2011 is an aberration. It assumes that Ellsbury is injury prone when it doesn't appear that way to me at all. He had major injuries which were for real. Both involving collisions with other players. He's not a guy with constant hamstring issues or oblique injuries...etc. He got hurt for sure, in collisions. Major injuries. He's a CF who gets into a lot of action. He stole a lot of bases. The probabilities were high. If he is more careful, I bet he stays on the field.

    And he has a lot of reasons to be careful. As in $100 mil of them. 


    +1

    people misuse the term "injury prone". A nagging knee issue or chronic elbow/shoulder problems for pitchers means you are injury prone.. Breaking bones when colliding with other players (no matter whos "fault" it is) does not mean you are injury prone. I've said it before and unfortunately i'll probably have to say it agian. Ells has been extremely durable when other players aren't hurting him. Aside from 2010 and 2012 he has missed less than 30 games total (including time missed when he was splitting time with Coco Crisp). He has been on the DL TWICE IN HIS CAREER. does that sound like injury prone to you?

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In 2011, according to Fangraphs, Ellsbury was worth MORE THAN $40 million in that year alone.

    $40.7 mil to be exact. For the past 2 years he has been a plus defender in CF, even in his injury year in 2012. 

    We are talking about a guy who is potentially of more value than Crawford was when he signed if he can come anywhere near his 2011 numbers. 

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    Maybe I am exaggerating somewhat, but it just seems to me that it doesn't take much 'wind' to change the direction of the sentiment some fans have for a player.  If someone goes into a slump, a lot of fans just take that as an opportunity to call for a benching etc..  Look at the negative ovation that Damon got when he went to the Yankees...after what he did playing for us!

    To be honest, if I were in his shoes and another team offered me millions more, I probably would have taken it too.  The shelf-life of most players is very short.  Can you blame them for following the money?

    Because of the rediculous amount of money Boras will ask for Ellsbury, I'll bet the farm that the Sox don't sign him.  Heck, Victorino, Gomes, Drew are strictly bridge-gap fillers(for which I thought were grossly overpaid) until Bradley, and/or some other stud, comes out of the woodwork from the farm for a fraction of the cost.

    Personally, I'd much prefer cheering for a group of hungry kids giving it their all than a bunch of overpaid, underproducing veterans.  And, if they eventually want the super bucks, let them go and nurture another group of home-grown talent.

     

     

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to ampoule's comment:

    Maybe I am exaggerating somewhat, but it just seems to me that it doesn't take much 'wind' to change the direction of the sentiment some fans have for a player.  If someone goes into a slump, a lot of fans just take that as an opportunity to call for a benching etc..  Look at the negative ovation that Damon got when he went to the Yankees...after what he did playing for us!

    To be honest, if I were in his shoes and another team offered me millions more, I probably would have taken it too.  The shelf-life of most players is very short.  Can you blame them for following the money?

    Because of the rediculous amount of money Boras will ask for Ellsbury, I'll bet the farm that the Sox don't sign him.  Heck, Victorino, Gomes, Drew are strictly bridge-gap fillers(for which I thought were grossly overpaid) until Bradley, and/or some other stud, comes out of the woodwork from the farm for a fraction of the cost.

    Personally, I'd much prefer cheering for a group of hungry kids giving it their all than a bunch of overpaid, underproducing veterans.  And, if they eventually want the super bucks, let them go and nurture another group of home-grown talent.

     

     



    I'm with you on this one Amp. That approach seems to work out pretty well for Tampa Bay and other teams. I'd do a large contract deal once in a while for a Verlander type guy though. To get a Cabrera level bat. The true studs. It is so common for the big bucks to get offered and then see the guy tank. I think the Sox are trying to do that now, with short term fill in deals being their norm only when they feel they have to, and often just as insurance. It looks like they are giving Iglesias and Bradley a real shot this year and I wouldn't be surprised at all to see Webster coming up I95 within a few months also.

    It's kind of a hybrid approach. They have the money to do the fill in the gaps / insurance type approach with lots of depth also but they are not rolling out many $100 mil contracts for anyone currently on the market.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

    In response to ampoule's comment:

     

    Maybe I am exaggerating somewhat, but it just seems to me that it doesn't take much 'wind' to change the direction of the sentiment some fans have for a player.  If someone goes into a slump, a lot of fans just take that as an opportunity to call for a benching etc..  Look at the negative ovation that Damon got when he went to the Yankees...after what he did playing for us!

    To be honest, if I were in his shoes and another team offered me millions more, I probably would have taken it too.  The shelf-life of most players is very short.  Can you blame them for following the money?

    Because of the rediculous amount of money Boras will ask for Ellsbury, I'll bet the farm that the Sox don't sign him.  Heck, Victorino, Gomes, Drew are strictly bridge-gap fillers(for which I thought were grossly overpaid) until Bradley, and/or some other stud, comes out of the woodwork from the farm for a fraction of the cost.

    Personally, I'd much prefer cheering for a group of hungry kids giving it their all than a bunch of overpaid, underproducing veterans.  And, if they eventually want the super bucks, let them go and nurture another group of home-grown talent.

     

     

     



    I'm with you on this one Amp. That approach seems to work out pretty well for Tampa Bay and other teams. I'd do a large contract deal once in a while for a Verlander type guy though. To get a Cabrera level bat. The true studs. It is so common for the big bucks to get offered and then see the guy tank. I think the Sox are trying to do that now, with short term fill in deals being their norm only when they feel they have to, and often just as insurance. It looks like they are giving Iglesias and Bradley a real shot this year and I wouldn't be surprised at all to see Webster coming up I95 within a few months also.

     

    It's kind of a hybrid approach. They have the money to do the fill in the gaps / insurance type approach with lots of depth also but they are not rolling out many $100 mil contracts for anyone currently on the market.




    I couldn't agree more. I've been saying for a while now that if you're going to roll out a big money long term deal it had better be for a Manny Ramirez or Pedro type player. Otherwise if the player is going to get a long contract let some other team assume that albatross. I firmly believe that most FA contracts should be limited to a maximum of 3 years in length, unless you're getting a can't miss stud. I also reckon that if the Red Sox and Yankees adhered to this philosophy the market would soon follow. As for Ellsbury I don't think he's injury prone but he sure seems to take a long time to get back on the field when he does get hurt. So if he's going to get $100M I say let him get it somewhere else.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

     

    The market has probably changed a lot since the Crawford deal but we don't really know the true situation with a lot of these guys. A lot of people assumed Sweeney was going to be on the team but he never once got a tryout at 1st. It seemed that possibly they always looked at him as deep depth in case they needed it. It appears to me that just maybe he didn't work out much in the weight room or something because that warning track power wasn't getting it done. They bailed.

    Regarding Ellsbury, it is pure speculation on my part but I think the guy is probably going to put up great numbers this year but probably will not be anxious to steal bases or dive for balls at inappropriate times. He's trying to stay on the field, as he did his first few years in the minors and in mlb at first. I really think the guy can put up great numbers this year. He is our best shot to do that. He's done it before and he is in his prime. If he can get his timing back and stay on the field he is capable of a plus .900 OPS. 

    The main question is do the Yanks want him or the dodgers...etc. He might be in the same situation as Bourne and that didn't work out that well for him. Didn't Wainright just get $97.5 mil today though? Over 5 years from the Cardinals.

    It could absolutely happen for Ellsbury.

     




     

    The team to watch for regarding Ellsbury won't be the Yanks as they are doing everything they can to get under cap for 2014, if they spend any $ it will be on pitching as most likely they need to replace Mo / Pettite / Kuroda, and they have some up and coming OF's in the system.

    The team to watch would be the Mets. They have a ton of $ coming off the books Bay/Santana after this year. They have a nice young and talented young Infield Wright/Tejada/Murphy/ Davis, they have a young core of starters in Harvey/Niese/Wheeler/Montero, a future all star in D'Arnaud @ C. But have no OF's on the roster. If they add Ellsbury could see them in playoffs very shortly. Heard Ells name come up a few times in NY media w/ Mets being very interested = makes sense.

     and remember Mets were going to make play for Bourne but didn't want to lose high pick as they felt Bourne was not worth it, tried to get out of it. Don't think they'll feel that way about Ells if he has a good yr this yr. 

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from garyhow. Show garyhow's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to garyhow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    If not happy with the 25 game sample @ MLB. Could always look at his 3 yrs in minors and a TOTAL of 38 XBH's in those 3 yrs or the .300 slg % or 600 ops in the minors. Look he shown vast improvement this spring, but if your not willing to accept 25 MLB games, why should we think 30 ST games is enough evidence to say he's ready when most of those AB's have been against minor league pitching?

    When have I ever come close to even hinting at the slightest possibility that his ST offense has changed my position at all?

    I have repeatedly said I don't think he needs to have even a .600 OPS to be a plus over Drew, and that OBP is more important than SLG%.

    Look offensively there is no comparision. Drew had more XBH's in [1] year @ MLB level than Iglaesias had in [3] years in the minors COMBINED. While Iglesias is the better fielder hands down, its not like Drew is terrible like you try to make it out, he makes all the plays just doesn't have the range of of Iglesias, lets not try to make Drew out to be Eduardo Nunez of the Yanks. I like to think of Drew as more a Jeter @ SS and Iggy as Ozzie Smith before he learned to hit and hopefully Iggy will become a decent hitter just as Ozzie did. But must prove it IMO.

    Drew does have a far better offensive record and 2013 projection than Iggy. I have never argued otherwise, in fact, I have hardly even praised Iggy for a decent ST this year. Iggy's offense has never been part of my argument on why he should play, other than to say something like, "I'm OK with a .600 OPS from him.

    As for Drew's offense, I think he is a top 5-10 offensive SS when playing. He had a great SS offensive production year in 2008 and a decent one in 2010. He's still young enough to expect he can repeat that type of output or even better. I do not feel his .680ish OPS over the last 2 years is indicative of what we will see in 2013. If he plays, I expect him to be over .750, but probably not much higher than .825. His OPS will be heavily influenced by SLG% not OBP, so to me, the value is a bit inflated, but still an good to excellent SS number. I happen to think Iggy can and would save 60-100 hits (almost all singles) over 150 games. I'm OK with people disagreeing on that number, but I will continue to argue with anyone who accepts Iggy probably will make 80 more plays, but still thinks Drew and his .150 to .200 OPS disparity (but only maybe .50 in OBP) is enough to make him the better overall SS.

    Think your 60- 100 # might be a bit of a stretch to say the least, Like I have previously stated watch a lot of Yankee games here in CT on a week I might see 1 or 2 plays that Jeter does not make that I feel a Iggy type SS would have made. If Drew hits 50 more just XBH's in just a season not to mention how many more base hits, how many TOTAL bases is that on the offensive side?

     

    Just think he should go back to AAA when Drew is healthy and prove to everyone that he can hit better than he's shown in the past, and prove he's ready for the bigs. He does that then I don't care if they put Drew on the bench or trade, Iggy must prove he's ready first IMO and he has not done that as yet.

    Yes, I understand your point. I get it. It has merit. However, you are misrepresenting my position. 

    Your position is strictly defense w/ very little emphisis on offense. If that were true than every team should just put out there best defensive players at every position. What makes a player great or a 5 tool player is that they can do evrything well not just defense. The best teams are the ones that can find the best combination of both.

    No, I have been very specific about what the defense saves vs what I project the offensive disparity is likely to be. I think if they both got 500 PAs in 2013, Drew would likely get on base 40 more times and we could assume they would all be 40 XBHs. That's a huge disparity. Iggty will certainly snuff out many more rallies than Drew. Iggy might gain a little back with speed, but not significant enough to make a dent in that disparity. To me, saving 80 singles on defnse will greatly improve our pitching staff and have a rippling effect not easy to quantify (pitchers go deeper in a game, less pen stress, higher pitcher confidence, etc...). It outweighs 40 XBHS Drew gains on offense. 

    It's not a clear choice, but to me I'd go with Iggy for 150 games and look to trade Drew in June.

    Look I love what I've seen from Iggy this ST, its just IMO needs to go to AAA prove not only to us, but himself that he can hit mlb pitching. If you make him the starter this yr and he fails miserably again, confidence wise might lose him forever. I'm not willing to take that chance, make him prove he is ready, thats all.

     

    By the way Drew has proven to be better than league avg MLB SS when healthy. Might explain why he had a lot of interest this offseason.

    Where's the proof? Fldg%?

    The fact then when healthy his 6 seasons @ AZ he was a +12 WAR player not bad for a SS. The fact that he played very well for A's 2nd half last season as he finally recovered from horrific ankle injury. This notion that just because you have a pin in your foot your going to be a terrible defender? many players in all sports play w/ similar from past injuries, otherwise probably wouldn't have any players in NFL

    I asked for proof he has "proven to be a better than league average SS when healthy". The only "proof" I see is the antiquated FLD% stat (6th out of 21 from 2007-2010, his healthy years). His WAR number is a reflection of his offense. His offense does not make him a plus defender.

    I'm not saying the pin will make him terrible or even worse, but it should not help him improve to the plus side in 2013. I'm not sure how many NFL have pins in their ankles without losing a step.

    Many athletes have come back from injuries even worse to perform even better than previous, did anyone think Adrian Peterson would come back from his injury to perform the way he did last yr.

     

    He's bottom 3rd at best on UZR.

    You know my feelings on defensive metrics, very judgemental. Someone sits in stands and determines if another would have made that play. Already talked about JJ Hardy and his great defensive play against RS on Sun as perfect example. He's the metrics guru?

    He's only got votes on the Fielding Bible 2 times in his career: once he finished 17th and the other 12th.

    and Jeter has won Gold Glove how many times. What does this prove?

    That voters are insane. 

    anything that trusts the human eye can be judgemental, why I don't trust fielding metrics 100%

    I trust the guys on the Fielding Bible panel more than those who vote for GG after seeing some players play maybe 1-3 games a year. They once voted a GG to a player who played something like 15 games at the position that year.

    Name one Fielding Bible winner who was not a top 3 fielding player at his position that year.

     

     

    Now, he has a pin in his foot. He is not top 15.

    I know just because you have a pin in your foot might as well retire. You might be surprised if you knew how many athletes are playing w/ similar from previous injuries thru HS/College/minors. My son just finished his college football career and played 4 yrs w/ metal plate in his forearm from HS injury. Amazing what doctors can do these days? Wonder if you would think if Iggy had to get a pin in his foot would he suddenly become a terrible defensive player because of it?

    Stop exxagerating my claim. All I have said is that we should not expect improvement from a 30 year old player with a relatively new pin in his ankle, who previously had very limited range at the most important range position at all levels of the game of baseball.

    I'm sure the teams that were bidding for his services this offseason scouted him quite a bit at end of last season and were convinced he was not a liability as you make him out to be. Think the A's were pretty happy w/ what he did for them the 2nd half of last season, enough so to try and resign him.

    If Iggy had a severe ankle injury, I'd expect less range, probably enough to make the Drew-Iggy call a toss-up or leaning to Drew. An ankle to a SS is pretty darn important for that first step, pivot plays, etc...

    and no one though Adrian Peterson would rush for 2,000 yds last season coming off a MUCH MORE severe injury. Like I said I'm sure teams scouted him pretty well at end of last yr and were convinced he was not a liability in the field.

     








     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    I seem to remember he ignored the L-R splits on several opening days, then reverted back to them right after that game.

    I can't remember who was available on each of those years to go back and figure it out. I think one was Salty vs CC instead of VTek.

     



    That would have been 2011, but there was no opener vs CC in 2011. 

    Our opening game in 2011 was against CJ Wilson and Salty started.  So maybe that's the one you're thinking of.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    Ells has to be looking over both shoulders come opening day. I want to think the competition is good thing, & I predict he'll have a great year. If he stays healthy all year he's definitely getting his payday w/ some team, just not w/ the Sox. I like him, but He's expendable. I hope he stays the year because this is panning-out to be a very interesting team. 

    Moon? You really think 40/3 is too much? Or is that based on how often hes not playing due to injury? 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to emp9's comment:

    Ells has to be looking over both shoulders come opening day. I want to think the competition is good thing, & I predict he'll have a great year. If he stays healthy all year he's definitely getting his payday w/ some team, just not w/ the Sox. I like him, but He's expendable. I hope he stays the year because this is panning-out to be a very interesting team. 

    Moon? You really think 40/3 is too much? Or is that based on how often hes not playing due to injury? 



    I agree on Jacoby having a good year but not the fact hes really expendable just yet.  Bradley and a healthy Jacoby could make for a great L & CF combination.  If Ells has a good year and the price is reasonable enough to resign him, its still possible.  We don't have many major league ready OF's besides Bradley for the near future. 

    However I do agree chances are, Ells will probably be playing somewhere else next season. 

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to emp9's comment:

    Ells has to be looking over both shoulders come opening day. I want to think the competition is good thing, & I predict he'll have a great year. If he stays healthy all year he's definitely getting his payday w/ some team, just not w/ the Sox. I like him, but He's expendable. I hope he stays the year because this is panning-out to be a very interesting team. 

    Moon? You really think 40/3 is too much? Or is that based on how often hes not playing due to injury? 




    If Ells has productive season this year 3 / 40 mil isn't even in the rear view mirror. He will probably be looking at some where near 17 mil per / 5 yrs or quite possibly more. Remember Yanks gave J.Damon 12 mil per and that was 10 yrs ago. Ells better player, but Damon at least stayed on the field.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to carnie's comment:

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

     

    In response to ampoule's comment:

     

    Maybe I am exaggerating somewhat, but it just seems to me that it doesn't take much 'wind' to change the direction of the sentiment some fans have for a player.  If someone goes into a slump, a lot of fans just take that as an opportunity to call for a benching etc..  Look at the negative ovation that Damon got when he went to the Yankees...after what he did playing for us!

    To be honest, if I were in his shoes and another team offered me millions more, I probably would have taken it too.  The shelf-life of most players is very short.  Can you blame them for following the money?

    Because of the rediculous amount of money Boras will ask for Ellsbury, I'll bet the farm that the Sox don't sign him.  Heck, Victorino, Gomes, Drew are strictly bridge-gap fillers(for which I thought were grossly overpaid) until Bradley, and/or some other stud, comes out of the woodwork from the farm for a fraction of the cost.

    Personally, I'd much prefer cheering for a group of hungry kids giving it their all than a bunch of overpaid, underproducing veterans.  And, if they eventually want the super bucks, let them go and nurture another group of home-grown talent.

     

     

     



    I'm with you on this one Amp. That approach seems to work out pretty well for Tampa Bay and other teams. I'd do a large contract deal once in a while for a Verlander type guy though. To get a Cabrera level bat. The true studs. It is so common for the big bucks to get offered and then see the guy tank. I think the Sox are trying to do that now, with short term fill in deals being their norm only when they feel they have to, and often just as insurance. It looks like they are giving Iglesias and Bradley a real shot this year and I wouldn't be surprised at all to see Webster coming up I95 within a few months also.

     

    It's kind of a hybrid approach. They have the money to do the fill in the gaps / insurance type approach with lots of depth also but they are not rolling out many $100 mil contracts for anyone currently on the market.

     




    I couldn't agree more. I've been saying for a while now that if you're going to roll out a big money long term deal it had better be for a Manny Ramirez or Pedro type player. Otherwise if the player is going to get a long contract let some other team assume that albatross. I firmly believe that most FA contracts should be limited to a maximum of 3 years in length, unless you're getting a can't miss stud. I also reckon that if the Red Sox and Yankees adhered to this philosophy the market would soon follow. As for Ellsbury I don't think he's injury prone but he sure seems to take a long time to get back on the field when he does get hurt. So if he's going to get $100M I say let him get it somewhere else.

     



    Exactly, then add to the fact that JBJ should be the CF'er- now we'd have to move one to LF.

    to MEf429: I get your argument about "injury prone", but many players know hos to avoid collisions- they actually do what little leaguers are taught: they call for the balls that they can catch and have a better angle at catching.

    I do not label Ells "injury prone", but so much missed time and longer than usual recovery times have become frustrating and bothersome. 

    He had a fantastic 2011 season, and there is every reason to think he can do it again (and again), but many players have one singular great season mixed in with many mediocre to decent seasons, and there is every reason to think this may be the case as well.

    If he comes close to 2011 numbers this year, he may get close to $100M/6 or 7, but I would not come close to that offer. The CC deal should be warning enough. Ells is not the guy to put all your eggs in the basket over.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsoxProspects. Show RedsoxProspects's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to carnie's comment:

     

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

     

    In response to ampoule's comment:

     

    Maybe I am exaggerating somewhat, but it just seems to me that it doesn't take much 'wind' to change the direction of the sentiment some fans have for a player.  If someone goes into a slump, a lot of fans just take that as an opportunity to call for a benching etc..  Look at the negative ovation that Damon got when he went to the Yankees...after what he did playing for us!

    To be honest, if I were in his shoes and another team offered me millions more, I probably would have taken it too.  The shelf-life of most players is very short.  Can you blame them for following the money?

    Because of the rediculous amount of money Boras will ask for Ellsbury, I'll bet the farm that the Sox don't sign him.  Heck, Victorino, Gomes, Drew are strictly bridge-gap fillers(for which I thought were grossly overpaid) until Bradley, and/or some other stud, comes out of the woodwork from the farm for a fraction of the cost.

    Personally, I'd much prefer cheering for a group of hungry kids giving it their all than a bunch of overpaid, underproducing veterans.  And, if they eventually want the super bucks, let them go and nurture another group of home-grown talent.

     

     

     



    I'm with you on this one Amp. That approach seems to work out pretty well for Tampa Bay and other teams. I'd do a large contract deal once in a while for a Verlander type guy though. To get a Cabrera level bat. The true studs. It is so common for the big bucks to get offered and then see the guy tank. I think the Sox are trying to do that now, with short term fill in deals being their norm only when they feel they have to, and often just as insurance. It looks like they are giving Iglesias and Bradley a real shot this year and I wouldn't be surprised at all to see Webster coming up I95 within a few months also.

     

    It's kind of a hybrid approach. They have the money to do the fill in the gaps / insurance type approach with lots of depth also but they are not rolling out many $100 mil contracts for anyone currently on the market.

     




    I couldn't agree more. I've been saying for a while now that if you're going to roll out a big money long term deal it had better be for a Manny Ramirez or Pedro type player. Otherwise if the player is going to get a long contract let some other team assume that albatross. I firmly believe that most FA contracts should be limited to a maximum of 3 years in length, unless you're getting a can't miss stud. I also reckon that if the Red Sox and Yankees adhered to this philosophy the market would soon follow. As for Ellsbury I don't think he's injury prone but he sure seems to take a long time to get back on the field when he does get hurt. So if he's going to get $100M I say let him get it somewhere else.

     

     



    Exactly, then add to the fact that JBJ should be the CF'er- now we'd have to move one to LF.

     

    to MEf429: I get your argument about "injury prone", but many players know hos to avoid collisions- they actually do what little leaguers are taught: they call for the balls that they can catch and have a better angle at catching.

    I do not label Ells "injury prone", but so much missed time and longer than usual recovery times have become frustrating and bothersome. 

    He had a fantastic 2011 season, and there is every reason to think he can do it again (and again), but many players have one singular great season mixed in with many mediocre to decent seasons, and there is every reason to think this may be the case as well.

    If he comes close to 2011 numbers this year, he may get close to $100M/6 or 7, but I would not come close to that offer. The CC deal should be warning enough. Ells is not the guy to put all your eggs in the basket over.



    A real solid series of articles have been coming out on Ellsbury. Like this one:

    http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/alex-speier/2013/03/29/jacoby-ellsbury-and-gap-between-perception-and

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to garyhow's comment:

    In response to emp9's comment:

     

    Ells has to be looking over both shoulders come opening day. I want to think the competition is good thing, & I predict he'll have a great year. If he stays healthy all year he's definitely getting his payday w/ some team, just not w/ the Sox. I like him, but He's expendable. I hope he stays the year because this is panning-out to be a very interesting team. 

    Moon? You really think 40/3 is too much? Or is that based on how often hes not playing due to injury? 

     




     

    If Ells has productive season this year 3 / 40 mil isn't even in the rear view mirror. He will probably be looking at some where near 17 mil per / 5 yrs or quite possibly more. Remember Yanks gave J.Damon 12 mil per and that was 10 yrs ago. Ells better player, but Damon at least stayed on the field.



    I am certain he will get more than $39M/3, but that doesn't mean I think he's worth it. Technically, if he gets it- that's his "worth" to someone, but that someone is not me, and hopefully not Ben either.

    When we signed CC, I said we overpaid by more the $50M. 

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    Think your 60- 100 # might be a bit of a stretch to say the least, Like I have previously stated watch a lot of Yankee games here in CT on a week I might see 1 or 2 plays that Jeter does not make that I feel a Iggy type SS would have made. If Drew hits 50 more just XBH's in just a season not to mention how many more base hits, how many TOTAL bases is that on the offensive side?


    If Drew has an OBP of .330 (generous) and Iggy .250 (harsh), that's Drew getting on base  40 more times than Iggy over 500 PAs. Let's say 10 of those are HRs and 30 are 2Bs. He'd have roughly 100 more total bases. To me, that is the max we could expect, and it would more likely be 40-70, assuming they bot stay heaalthy enough to give 500 PAs in 2013.

    As to the Jeter vs Iggy plays made, my guess is we might see 1-2 more plays made  by Iggy every game. That's easily 150 per season over 150 games.

     

     

    Look I love what I've seen from Iggy this ST, its just IMO needs to go to AAA prove not only to us, but himself that he can hit mlb pitching. If you make him the starter this yr and he fails miserably again, confidence wise might lose him forever. I'm not willing to take that chance, make him prove he is ready, thats all.

     I get your point. Just repeating it over and over is not making me "understand it" any better. I have said your point has merit, but I disagree. I think Iggy's defense more than makes up for his possible offensive weaknesses.

     

    Many athletes have come back from injuries even worse to perform even better than previous, did anyone think Adrian Peterson would come back from his injury to perform the way he did last yr.

     I think you are missing my point. I am not saying Drew can't come back to form with a pin in his foot, but I am noit expecting him to improve over the Drew prior to the pin. I think he'd need to improve on his defense to change my equation between the two. Is it possible? Sure. Is it likely? I think, no.

     

    That voters are insane. 

    anything that trusts the human eye can be judgemental, why I don't trust fielding metrics 100%


    Do you trust your own eyes?

    The people who do the judging for UZR are trained, rotated, and watch thousands more plays than we do. It is flawed for sure, but it to be better than us, who watch 162 games by the Sox and maybe 3-20 by any other specific SS from another team.

    Over the years, I have seen what seems like 1-2 plays per game made by the opponent's SS against us. Maybe it just seems that way, but I am certain it has been near 120 or more. The data does show that some SSs make 120+ more plays than others in teh same amount of innings, and those numbers stay pretyy consistent from year to year. even as some of these SSs change teams and parks.

     

     

     

    I'm sure the teams that were bidding for his services this offseason scouted him quite a bit at end of last season and were convinced he was not a liability as you make him out to be. Think the A's were pretty happy w/ what he did for them the 2nd half of last season, enough so to try and resign him.

    I have never said Drew is a bad SS not worthy of some team trying to sign him. I think because you feel so badly about Iggy, that you assume if I think he is better than Drew, I must think lowly of Drew. That's not true. I think Iggy can be a top 15 overall SS in MLB in 2013. That doesn't mean I think Drew is useless, when I have said my equation puts them pretty close.

     

     

    If Iggy had a severe ankle injury, I'd expect less range, probably enough to make the Drew-Iggy call a toss-up or leaning to Drew. An ankle to a SS is pretty darn important for that first step, pivot plays, etc...\

    and no one though Adrian Peterson would rush for 2,000 yds last season coming off a MUCH MORE severe injury. Like I said I'm sure teams scouted him pretty well at end of last yr and were convinced he was not a liability in the field.

    Did he get better? Maybe a select few can and do, but my guess is that most 30+ year old players with major injuries do not improve after they return.

     

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    I refigured the luxury tax budget amount and went to enter and it erased.

    The total was about $166M including the player pension amount and the Dodger payment.

    That leaves us about $12M under the limit. In theory, we could trade for salary dump players at the deadline with contracts worth $36M for the full season. (.33 x 36 = 12).

    Something to think about.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    I refigured the luxury tax budget amount and went to enter and it erased.

    The total was about $166M including the player pension amount and the Dodger payment.

    That leaves us about $12M under the limit. In theory, we could trade for salary dump players at the deadline with contracts worth $36M for the full season. (.33 x 36 = 12).

    Something to think about.



    thanks for the calculations moon. interesting info. that definitely leaves us wiggle room to bolster our team at the deadline if need be.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to craze4sox's comment:

    In response to emp9's comment:

     

    Ells has to be looking over both shoulders come opening day. I want to think the competition is good thing, & I predict he'll have a great year. If he stays healthy all year he's definitely getting his payday w/ some team, just not w/ the Sox. I like him, but He's expendable. I hope he stays the year because this is panning-out to be a very interesting team. 

    Moon? You really think 40/3 is too much? Or is that based on how often hes not playing due to injury? 

     



    I agree on Jacoby having a good year but not the fact hes really expendable just yet.  Bradley and a healthy Jacoby could make for a great L & CF combination.  If Ells has a good year and the price is reasonable enough to resign him, its still possible.  We don't have many major league ready OF's besides Bradley for the near future. 

     

    However I do agree chances are, Ells will probably be playing somewhere else next season. 



    Ellsbury should have been traded in a package with some position player prospects in return for some good pitching prospects. Bradley could then be in CF (after April 12). Cherington is still not all in on planning for a run at a ring in 2015.

     

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    Ellsbury should have been traded in a package with some position player prospects in return for some good pitching prospects. Bradley could then be in CF (after April 12). Cherington is still not all in on planning for a run at a ring in 2015.

    I agree and said it long ago. Now, many are seeing the wisdom of that idea as JBJ, the better fielder, may be forced to play LF. 

    Dumb.

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    All due respect, but I think moonslav is overstating how many plays Iglesias will make--specfically, 1 or 2 per game--that ordinary shortshops like Drew would not make.  If he is right, the Sox would not even have bothered to get Drew in the offseason.    If you add the criterion that the exceptional play also saves a run, I think a more realistic number would be no more than 1 or 2 plays a week.  I still prefer Iglesias over Drew because to me as a fan great defense is more fun to watch.  Plus I do agree the pitchers like to know they are being backed up by a superb SS.   Plus it's always great to see a young player come up thru the system. 

     

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    The SI.com 2013 MLB Experts' Picks mention only one Red Sox player:

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/mlb/news/20130325/mlb-preview-staff-predictions/

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

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    All due respect, but I think moonslav is overstating how many plays Iglesias will make--specfically, 1 or 2 per game--that ordinary shortshops like Drew would not make. 

    No, I said it "seemed like" opposing SSs were making 1-2 more plays per game than our SS could make. Then, I said the number is more like 120+ per season, which is about 0.75 per game.

    I do not think it is an exaggeration at all. Every year the same SSs make 80-130 more plays than other SSs with about the same innings at SS. I am not certain that Iggy is as great as I have heard he is and as I have seen in a small sample size, but nobody has ever denied his great range. The issue seems to be my projection of Drew as a below average-ranged SS or "average at best" as I have called him. I admit I may be wrong here as I was with Aviles last year.

     

    If he is right, the Sox would not even have bothered to get Drew in the offseason.   

    That's assuming Ben assumes I am right. He could be wrong.  I don't think Theo or Ben values great SS range as much as I do. I am not pretending to know more than them or anyone else, but it is my opinion, and I have some facts and data to back it up.

     

     If you add the criterion that the exceptional play also saves a run, I think a more realistic number would be no more than 1 or 2 plays a week.  I still prefer Iglesias over Drew because to me as a fan great defense is more fun to watch.  Plus I do agree the pitchers like to know they are being backed up by a superb SS.   Plus it's always great to see a young player come up thru the system. 

    So, if we assume 1.5 plays per week, that would make it about 40 plays over 162 games. If you added 40 singles to Iggy's offense, it would convert his BA over 500 PAs from this to that:

    .200 to .280

    .220 to .300

    .240 to .320

    .260 to .340

    .275 to .355

    His OBP could go up from...

    .260 to .340

    .270 to .350

    .280 to .360

    .290 to .370

    .300 to .380

    His SLG% also goes up, making his OPS very close if not better than Drew's projected OPS, even with your conservative defensive differential number.

    I'd like you and others to watch Iggy closely as he starts for the first few games, and ask yourself, "would Aviles, Scutaro, or Lowrie have made that play?" Count how many you see per game, and let's compare notes after Drew returns.

    Like I said, I did this last season with Aviles and stopped counting after April. Mike was much better ranged than I thought he was. I hope Drew is as well.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: A Realistic View at 2013: Part II

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Ellsbury should have been traded in a package with some position player prospects in return for some good pitching prospects. Bradley could then be in CF (after April 12). Cherington is still not all in on planning for a run at a ring in 2015.

    I agree and said it long ago. Now, many are seeing the wisdom of that idea as JBJ, the better fielder, may be forced to play LF. 

    Dumb.



    There is still hope that the trade will be made in July. And that would be fine too, except that Bradley really should be with the club all year except for the first 12 days.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share