Boras and Drew

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to S5's comment:

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    Frankly, I think Iglesias' glove has been fetishized a bit.  Yes, beautiful (I don't use that term lightly) hands, footwork, coordination.  Nice range (not amazing, just nice).  Good arm.  Not great, good.  I get the desire for a great shortstop.  Its the best, and arguably most crucial, position in baseball.  It is a joy to watch someone who is so deft at it.

    Much of what makes the game interesting, and what we argue endlessly over on this board, is that, despite the metrics and diagnostic tools that have developed around the game, there is still much mystery and and so many angles to the prisms of performance.

    In this respect, I don't see him through the side of the prism that others do.  I see a developing defensive whiz.  But not the second coming of Ozzie Smith.  I get the sense that, with all the hype around the kid, many people made up their mind about his SS-Godliness long before they ever saw him actually play.  From what I have seen, I think he is really good defensively.  But that prowess did not blind me from the fact that stephen Drew played a really nice SS last year.  From my subjective standpoint, I am not sure I have ever seen a smoother, more intuitive doubleplay combo in Sox unis than Drew and Pedey.  And he made some real clutch plays in the post season (and, converesely, young Iglesias made some decidedly uncluth plays).  And FWIW, though I haven't seen him play much SS, Boegarts played a pretty nice 3B, an unfamiliar position for him.  Gotta think the nice reflexes, good hands, and cannon carry over to SS too if that is where the Sox are going.  

    I don't discount the importance of a great shortstop, but in observation, I just think Iglesias has been overvalued by many.

     


    Ya know... in spite of being one of Iggy's biggest supporters, I agree with this post.  He may not be the next coming of Ozzie Smith - but on the other hand he might be too. Sooner or later someone will be and why not him?  He has all the tools.  But even being mentioned in the same breath as Ozzie says a lot about him.

    If he were currently on the Red Sox he'd be the best defensive SS on the team, and I'd want to be darn sure he's NOT the next Ozzie before I'd have traded him.  Given the fact that the FO knew they were going to need a SS next year I see that trade as being shortsighted.

     

     




    But, they don't NEED another SS this year.

    They have one, in Bogaerts.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:

    In response to S5's comment:

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    Frankly, I think Iglesias' glove has been fetishized a bit.  Yes, beautiful (I don't use that term lightly) hands, footwork, coordination.  Nice range (not amazing, just nice).  Good arm.  Not great, good.  I get the desire for a great shortstop.  Its the best, and arguably most crucial, position in baseball.  It is a joy to watch someone who is so deft at it.

    Much of what makes the game interesting, and what we argue endlessly over on this board, is that, despite the metrics and diagnostic tools that have developed around the game, there is still much mystery and and so many angles to the prisms of performance.

    In this respect, I don't see him through the side of the prism that others do.  I see a developing defensive whiz.  But not the second coming of Ozzie Smith.  I get the sense that, with all the hype around the kid, many people made up their mind about his SS-Godliness long before they ever saw him actually play.  From what I have seen, I think he is really good defensively.  But that prowess did not blind me from the fact that stephen Drew played a really nice SS last year.  From my subjective standpoint, I am not sure I have ever seen a smoother, more intuitive doubleplay combo in Sox unis than Drew and Pedey.  And he made some real clutch plays in the post season (and, converesely, young Iglesias made some decidedly uncluth plays).  And FWIW, though I haven't seen him play much SS, Boegarts played a pretty nice 3B, an unfamiliar position for him.  Gotta think the nice reflexes, good hands, and cannon carry over to SS too if that is where the Sox are going.  

    I don't discount the importance of a great shortstop, but in observation, I just think Iglesias has been overvalued by many.

     


    Ya know... in spite of being one of Iggy's biggest supporters, I agree with this post.  He may not be the next coming of Ozzie Smith - but on the other hand he might be too. Sooner or later someone will be and why not him?  He has all the tools.  But even being mentioned in the same breath as Ozzie says a lot about him.

    If he were currently on the Red Sox he'd be the best defensive SS on the team, and I'd want to be darn sure he's NOT the next Ozzie before I'd have traded him.  Given the fact that the FO knew they were going to need a SS next year I see that trade as being shortsighted.

     

     




    But, they don't NEED another SS this year.

    They have one, in Bogaerts.


    I fully understand that sometimes a rookie becomes the regular player, but it's usually because the person who had the job at the beginning of the season proved he couldn't play it.  Then they bring in the rookie, and kazow!  The rookie becomes the regular. 

    But how does the defending WS champion go into the next season with TWO unproven rookies up the middle, telling both of them, "Here it is and it's yours until you prove you can't do it."?  This is something a 2nd division team does, not the defending WS champion.

    What's done is done, smart or stupid, it's done. Now minimize the damage by signing Drew.  Start Bogarts at SS.  At least there's a back-up plan in place if  he proves he can't do it - which is more than we have now.  That is, unless you consider Jonathan Harrerra to be someone you want to count on as your regular SS if Bogarts can't cut it there.   

     

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to S5's comment:

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:

    In response to S5's comment:

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    Frankly, I think Iglesias' glove has been fetishized a bit.  Yes, beautiful (I don't use that term lightly) hands, footwork, coordination.  Nice range (not amazing, just nice).  Good arm.  Not great, good.  I get the desire for a great shortstop.  Its the best, and arguably most crucial, position in baseball.  It is a joy to watch someone who is so deft at it.

    Much of what makes the game interesting, and what we argue endlessly over on this board, is that, despite the metrics and diagnostic tools that have developed around the game, there is still much mystery and and so many angles to the prisms of performance.

    In this respect, I don't see him through the side of the prism that others do.  I see a developing defensive whiz.  But not the second coming of Ozzie Smith.  I get the sense that, with all the hype around the kid, many people made up their mind about his SS-Godliness long before they ever saw him actually play.  From what I have seen, I think he is really good defensively.  But that prowess did not blind me from the fact that stephen Drew played a really nice SS last year.  From my subjective standpoint, I am not sure I have ever seen a smoother, more intuitive doubleplay combo in Sox unis than Drew and Pedey.  And he made some real clutch plays in the post season (and, converesely, young Iglesias made some decidedly uncluth plays).  And FWIW, though I haven't seen him play much SS, Boegarts played a pretty nice 3B, an unfamiliar position for him.  Gotta think the nice reflexes, good hands, and cannon carry over to SS too if that is where the Sox are going.  

    I don't discount the importance of a great shortstop, but in observation, I just think Iglesias has been overvalued by many.

     


    Ya know... in spite of being one of Iggy's biggest supporters, I agree with this post.  He may not be the next coming of Ozzie Smith - but on the other hand he might be too. Sooner or later someone will be and why not him?  He has all the tools.  But even being mentioned in the same breath as Ozzie says a lot about him.

    If he were currently on the Red Sox he'd be the best defensive SS on the team, and I'd want to be darn sure he's NOT the next Ozzie before I'd have traded him.  Given the fact that the FO knew they were going to need a SS next year I see that trade as being shortsighted.

     

     




    But, they don't NEED another SS this year.

    They have one, in Bogaerts.


    I fully understand that sometimes a rookie becomes the regular player, but it's usually because the person who had the job at the beginning of the season proved he couldn't play it.  Then they bring in the rookie, and kazow!  The rookie becomes the regular. 

    But how does the defending WS champion go into the next season with TWO unproven rookies up the middle, telling both of them, "Here it is and it's yours until you prove you can't do it."?  This is something a 2nd division team does, not the defending WS champion.

    What's done is done, smart or stupid, it's done. Now minimize the damage by signing Drew.  Start Bogarts at SS.  At least there's a back-up plan in place if  he proves he can't do it - which is more than we have now.  That is, unless you consider Jonathan Harrerra to be someone you want to count on as your regular SS if Bogarts can't cut it there.   

     



    From what I've seen of JBJ and Bogearts in the field, I have no problem with starting them both. I don't recall either of them having a dificult time in the field.

    It's their performance at the plate, that gives me pause.

     

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:

    In response to S5's comment:

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:

    In response to S5's comment:

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    Frankly, I think Iglesias' glove has been fetishized a bit.  Yes, beautiful (I don't use that term lightly) hands, footwork, coordination.  Nice range (not amazing, just nice).  Good arm.  Not great, good.  I get the desire for a great shortstop.  Its the best, and arguably most crucial, position in baseball.  It is a joy to watch someone who is so deft at it.

    Much of what makes the game interesting, and what we argue endlessly over on this board, is that, despite the metrics and diagnostic tools that have developed around the game, there is still much mystery and and so many angles to the prisms of performance.

    In this respect, I don't see him through the side of the prism that others do.  I see a developing defensive whiz.  But not the second coming of Ozzie Smith.  I get the sense that, with all the hype around the kid, many people made up their mind about his SS-Godliness long before they ever saw him actually play.  From what I have seen, I think he is really good defensively.  But that prowess did not blind me from the fact that stephen Drew played a really nice SS last year.  From my subjective standpoint, I am not sure I have ever seen a smoother, more intuitive doubleplay combo in Sox unis than Drew and Pedey.  And he made some real clutch plays in the post season (and, converesely, young Iglesias made some decidedly uncluth plays).  And FWIW, though I haven't seen him play much SS, Boegarts played a pretty nice 3B, an unfamiliar position for him.  Gotta think the nice reflexes, good hands, and cannon carry over to SS too if that is where the Sox are going.  

    I don't discount the importance of a great shortstop, but in observation, I just think Iglesias has been overvalued by many.

     


    Ya know... in spite of being one of Iggy's biggest supporters, I agree with this post.  He may not be the next coming of Ozzie Smith - but on the other hand he might be too. Sooner or later someone will be and why not him?  He has all the tools.  But even being mentioned in the same breath as Ozzie says a lot about him.

    If he were currently on the Red Sox he'd be the best defensive SS on the team, and I'd want to be darn sure he's NOT the next Ozzie before I'd have traded him.  Given the fact that the FO knew they were going to need a SS next year I see that trade as being shortsighted.

     

     




    But, they don't NEED another SS this year.

    They have one, in Bogaerts.


    I fully understand that sometimes a rookie becomes the regular player, but it's usually because the person who had the job at the beginning of the season proved he couldn't play it.  Then they bring in the rookie, and kazow!  The rookie becomes the regular. 

    But how does the defending WS champion go into the next season with TWO unproven rookies up the middle, telling both of them, "Here it is and it's yours until you prove you can't do it."?  This is something a 2nd division team does, not the defending WS champion.

    What's done is done, smart or stupid, it's done. Now minimize the damage by signing Drew.  Start Bogarts at SS.  At least there's a back-up plan in place if  he proves he can't do it - which is more than we have now.  That is, unless you consider Jonathan Harrerra to be someone you want to count on as your regular SS if Bogarts can't cut it there.   

     



    From what I've seen of JBJ and Bogearts in the field, I have no problem with starting them both. I don't recall either of them having a dificult time in the field.

    It's their performance at the plate, that gives me pause.

     



    Why does Boegart's performance at the plate give you pause?  He was so poised when the lights were shining brightest, despite having very little run in the majors.  His pitch recognition and patience were a revelation to me.  He showed he has pop too.  Yes, that was his cup o coffee and he is still a rookie, and rookies will be rookies.  But, the scouts look like they had it right with Xander.  Now, JBJ, sure, he looked lost at the plate and we have to hope that experience was a stepping stone to growth over the winer.  I am not worried about Boegarts though.  I am pretty confident he will outperform both Iglesias and Drew, wherever they are, at the plate in 2014.

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:

    In response to S5's comment:

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:

    In response to S5's comment:

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    Frankly, I think Iglesias' glove has been fetishized a bit.  Yes, beautiful (I don't use that term lightly) hands, footwork, coordination.  Nice range (not amazing, just nice).  Good arm.  Not great, good.  I get the desire for a great shortstop.  Its the best, and arguably most crucial, position in baseball.  It is a joy to watch someone who is so deft at it.

    Much of what makes the game interesting, and what we argue endlessly over on this board, is that, despite the metrics and diagnostic tools that have developed around the game, there is still much mystery and and so many angles to the prisms of performance.

    In this respect, I don't see him through the side of the prism that others do.  I see a developing defensive whiz.  But not the second coming of Ozzie Smith.  I get the sense that, with all the hype around the kid, many people made up their mind about his SS-Godliness long before they ever saw him actually play.  From what I have seen, I think he is really good defensively.  But that prowess did not blind me from the fact that stephen Drew played a really nice SS last year.  From my subjective standpoint, I am not sure I have ever seen a smoother, more intuitive doubleplay combo in Sox unis than Drew and Pedey.  And he made some real clutch plays in the post season (and, converesely, young Iglesias made some decidedly uncluth plays).  And FWIW, though I haven't seen him play much SS, Boegarts played a pretty nice 3B, an unfamiliar position for him.  Gotta think the nice reflexes, good hands, and cannon carry over to SS too if that is where the Sox are going.  

    I don't discount the importance of a great shortstop, but in observation, I just think Iglesias has been overvalued by many.

     


    Ya know... in spite of being one of Iggy's biggest supporters, I agree with this post.  He may not be the next coming of Ozzie Smith - but on the other hand he might be too. Sooner or later someone will be and why not him?  He has all the tools.  But even being mentioned in the same breath as Ozzie says a lot about him.

    If he were currently on the Red Sox he'd be the best defensive SS on the team, and I'd want to be darn sure he's NOT the next Ozzie before I'd have traded him.  Given the fact that the FO knew they were going to need a SS next year I see that trade as being shortsighted.

     

     




    But, they don't NEED another SS this year.

    They have one, in Bogaerts.


    I fully understand that sometimes a rookie becomes the regular player, but it's usually because the person who had the job at the beginning of the season proved he couldn't play it.  Then they bring in the rookie, and kazow!  The rookie becomes the regular. 

    But how does the defending WS champion go into the next season with TWO unproven rookies up the middle, telling both of them, "Here it is and it's yours until you prove you can't do it."?  This is something a 2nd division team does, not the defending WS champion.

    What's done is done, smart or stupid, it's done. Now minimize the damage by signing Drew.  Start Bogarts at SS.  At least there's a back-up plan in place if  he proves he can't do it - which is more than we have now.  That is, unless you consider Jonathan Harrerra to be someone you want to count on as your regular SS if Bogarts can't cut it there.   

     



    From what I've seen of JBJ and Bogearts in the field, I have no problem with starting them both. I don't recall either of them having a dificult time in the field.

    It's their performance at the plate, that gives me pause.

     


    My take is somewhat different.  I like Bogarts bat but I think he's suspect defensively - lacking the tools to be an outstanding SS.  I'm not saying he's going to be a BAD SS once the learning curve is over, but he lacks the tools to be outstanding.  But he'll make up for some of that with his bat. (And sorry, but I AM comparing him with Iggy defensively).

    I feel the opposite with JBJ - I think he'll be ok in CF other than that nasty learning curve thing but he has a history of not being able to hit - or even know when to take - the low and inside pitch.  That was his demise last year and it will be again unless he gets over it.  Even then I don't see him providing what Ellsbury did offensively in any meaningful category.

    Ultimately I see Bogarts as being better than adequate at SS and JBJ being maybe better than Ellsbury in CF once he learns the position.  My fear is having two players up the middle in the midst of a defensive learning curve at the same time. 

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    My take is somewhat different.  I like Bogarts bat but I think he's suspect defensively - lacking the tools to be an outstanding SS.  I'm not saying he's going to be a BAD SS once the learning curve is over, but he lacks the tools to be outstanding.  But he'll make up for some of that with his bat. (And sorry, but I AM comparing him with Iggy defensively).

    I feel the opposite with JBJ - I think he'll be ok in CF other than that nasty learning curve thing but he has a history of not being able to hit - or even know when to take - the low and inside pitch.  That was his demise last year and it will be again unless he gets over it.  Even then I don't see him providing what Ellsbury did offensively in any meaningful category.

    Ultimately I see Bogarts as being better than adequate at SS and JBJ being maybe better than Ellsbury in CF once he learns the position.  My fear is having two players up the middle in the midst of a defensive learning curve at the same time. 

    I feel the same way to a large extent.  I do feel pretty confident about JBJ's defense on day one, but Bogey's defense is a huge question mark to me. I do not think Middy will offer much defensive support to our SS this year, but Pedey at 2B is an advantage.

    Pierzynski will be fine, but he too might have a short learning curve with our staff.

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    I feel the same way to a large extent.  I do feel pretty confident about JBJ's defense on day one, but Bogey's defense is a huge question mark to me. I do not think Middy will offer much defensive support to our SS this year, but Pedey at 2B is an advantage.

     

    The consensus of scouts is that Jackie Bradley Jr. is a fine defensive outfielder despite the UZR/150 of a negative 12.4 he posted last season in the small sample of 242 innings in the outfield (including a UZR/150 of a negative 16.3 in 146 innings in centerfield).

    http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=12984&position=OF#fieldingadvanced

    The Red Sox should be comfortable defensively with Bradley in centerfield, but let's not get carried away with the expectations.

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    Farrell loves the ,guy and that enough for me. Our manager is the best judge of talent today, as Salty can prove

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to hill55's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    I feel the same way to a large extent.  I do feel pretty confident about JBJ's defense on day one, but Bogey's defense is a huge question mark to me. I do not think Middy will offer much defensive support to our SS this year, but Pedey at 2B is an advantage.

     

    The consensus of scouts is that Jackie Bradley Jr. is a fine defensive outfielder despite the UZR/150 of a negative 12.4 he posted last season in the small sample of 242 innings in the outfield (including a UZR/150 of a negative 16.3 in 146 innings in centerfield).

    http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=12984&position=OF#fieldingadvanced

    The Red Sox should be comfortable defensively with Bradley in centerfield, but let's not get carried away with the expectations.



    I feel very comfortable with JBJ despite his shaky small sample size numbers and my observations that he looked a little like a "deer in the headlights" last year. I'm not projecting top 5 defensive CF'er this year, but maybe some year in the near future, maybe.

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    Hill - I'll ask you again. If WAR was so important, why wouldn't teams with SS's who have WARs a lot less than Drew not make room, etc and try and sign him?

    Equating WAR and salary doesn't mean anything other than to WAR geeks. Teams would be wanting to sign him if it was so important.

    He has no market and the Red Sox should let him go bye bye.

    He had a chance to make $14.1M, yes $14.1M for one year and he rejected it.

    Oops.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from slasher9. Show slasher9's posts

    Re: Boras and Drew

    S5 - why does Bogaerts need to be an 'outstanding' defensive SS?  i will take good all day long.....

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to ADG's comment:

    Hill - I'll ask you again. If WAR was so important, why wouldn't teams with SS's who have WARs a lot less than Drew not make room, etc and try and sign him?

    Equating WAR and salary doesn't mean anything other than to WAR geeks. Teams would be wanting to sign him if it was so important.

    He has no market and the Red Sox should let him go bye bye.

    He had a chance to make $14.1M, yes $14.1M for one year and he rejected it.

    Oops.



    I can answer this.  First of all, you're wrong about WAR not being important.

    Drew has 2 problems on the market:

    1) His projected WAR for 2014 is a lot lower than his 2013 WAR.  The reason is that a lot of his above-average offensive production in 2013 came at Fenway - .859 OPS at home, .687 on the road.

    2) Signing him will cost a draft pick, and draft picks have a significant value.

    I do agree with you on one thing - he should have taken the 14.1 million.

     

     

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to ADG's comment:

    Hill - I'll ask you again. If WAR was so important, why wouldn't teams with SS's who have WARs a lot less than Drew not make room, etc and try and sign him?

    Equating WAR and salary doesn't mean anything other than to WAR geeks. Teams would be wanting to sign him if it was so important.

    He has no market and the Red Sox should let him go bye bye.

    He had a chance to make $14.1M, yes $14.1M for one year and he rejected it.

    Oops.

     

    For all we know, Stephen Drew has a standing one-year, $15 million offer from the Red Sox or another team.

    The 2014 season has not started. When Drew signs, many will assume that Drew lowered his demands. Chances are that would be true. However, chances are the signing team increased its offer as well. That's how negotiations work by finding a middle ground.

    In 2013 the World Series champion Red Sox posted a WAR of 0.0 in thirdbase and 3.8 at shortstop, including 3.4 from Drew. I would not exclude the Red Sox from Drew's market.

    On this date two years ago, many thought Scott Boras had misjudged the market for Prince Fielder before Fielder landed a nine-year, $214 million contract with the Detroit Tigers.

    I'll reserve judgment until Drew signs.

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:


    Why does Boegart's performance at the plate give you pause?  He was so poised when the lights were shining brightest, despite having very little run in the majors.  His pitch recognition and patience were a revelation to me.  He showed he has pop too.  Yes, that was his cup o coffee and he is still a rookie, and rookies will be rookies.  But, the scouts look like they had it right with Xander.  Now, JBJ, sure, he looked lost at the plate and we have to hope that experience was a stepping stone to growth over the winer.  I am not worried about Boegarts though.  I am pretty confident he will outperform both Iglesias and Drew, wherever they are, at the plate in 2014.

     



    You are right, Space.

    It was more a commentary on JBJs offensive performance.

    Bogearts looks pretty good, considering his limited ABs.

    I hope you're right about him, this year.

    Even if neither of them are outstanding this year, the Sox should be fine up the middle.

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    Why does Boegart's performance at the plate give you pause?  He was so poised when the lights were shining brightest, despite having very little run in the majors.  His pitch recognition and patience were a revelation to me.  He showed he has pop too.  Yes, that was his cup o coffee and he is still a rookie, and rookies will be rookies.  But, the scouts look like they had it right with Xander.  Now, JBJ, sure, he looked lost at the plate and we have to hope that experience was a stepping stone to growth over the winer.  I am not worried about Boegarts though.  I am pretty confident he will outperform both Iglesias and Drew, wherever they are, at the plate in 2014.

    I have high hopes that Xander Bogaerts will be a productive MLB hitter.

    However, I would note that 23 of his 34 postseason plate appearances came in the World Series where Bogaerts posted a .238/.261/.333/.594 line with with eight strikeouts and only one walk. A strikeout rate of 34.8 percent in this statistically minute sample is not evidence of poise "when the lights were shining brightest."

    Nevertheless, Bogaerts remains among the most promising hitting prospects in baseball.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Boras and Drew

    However, I would note that 23 of his 34 postseason plate appearances came in the World Series where Bogaerts posted a .238/.261/.333/.594 line with with eight strikeouts and only one walk. A strikeout rate of 34.8 percent in this statistically minute sample is not evidence of poise "when the lights were shining brightest."



    His WS stats look poor at first glance, but considering that no one on the Red Sox hit much in that series besides Big Papi -- Xander was third on the team in OPS behind Ortiz and Ellsbury (who had a whopping .599) -- I'd say the just-turned-21 year-old more than pulled his weight.

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to hill55's comment:

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    Why does Boegart's performance at the plate give you pause?  He was so poised when the lights were shining brightest, despite having very little run in the majors.  His pitch recognition and patience were a revelation to me.  He showed he has pop too.  Yes, that was his cup o coffee and he is still a rookie, and rookies will be rookies.  But, the scouts look like they had it right with Xander.  Now, JBJ, sure, he looked lost at the plate and we have to hope that experience was a stepping stone to growth over the winer.  I am not worried about Boegarts though.  I am pretty confident he will outperform both Iglesias and Drew, wherever they are, at the plate in 2014.

    I have high hopes that Xander Bogaerts will be a productive MLB hitter.

    However, I would note that 23 of his 34 postseason plate appearances came in the World Series where Bogaerts posted a .238/.261/.333/.594 line with with eight strikeouts and only one walk. A strikeout rate of 34.8 percent in this statistically minute sample is not evidence of poise "when the lights were shining brightest."

    Nevertheless, Bogaerts remains among the most promising hitting prospects in baseball.



    Yes, I stand corrected, his WS run was not without the ugly.  However, his offense was integral in getting past the much tougher Tigers.  As a whole, his post season, especially considering how little experience he had in the majors prior, was very promising.  Not without its rookie-ness, but promising.

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to ADG's comment:

    Hill - I'll ask you again. If WAR was so important, why wouldn't teams with SS's who have WARs a lot less than Drew not make room, etc and try and sign him?

    Equating WAR and salary doesn't mean anything other than to WAR geeks. Teams would be wanting to sign him if it was so important.

    He has no market and the Red Sox should let him go bye bye.

    He had a chance to make $14.1M, yes $14.1M for one year and he rejected it.

    Oops.



    I can answer this.  First of all, you're wrong about WAR not being important.

    Drew has 2 problems on the market:

    1) His projected WAR for 2014 is a lot lower than his 2013 WAR.  The reason is that a lot of his above-average offensive production in 2013 came at Fenway - .859 OPS at home, .687 on the road.

    2) Signing him will cost a draft pick, and draft picks have a significant value.

    I do agree with you on one thing - he should have taken the 14.1 million.

     

     



    ...and one more thing, most teams cannot afford him, even if his value was $8-12M in 2014.

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    But, they don't NEED another SS this year.

    They have one, in Bogaerts.

     

    In my opinion, we would not be signing Drew to replace Bogey. We'd be signing him to replace Middy (by moving Bogey to 3B- either at the start of the season or after he passes the date where he gains another year of team control).

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    Still a lot of misunderstanding about the iglesias trade it seems.  The trade was neither about Iglesias for Peavy nor about Iglesias vs. Drew.  The context for the move was Xander Boegarts.



    I think that's the bottom line.  The Sox obviously felt that Iglesias was expendable.

    The FO is very protective of its draft picks and rookies.  IMO, even if our need for starting pitching were more dire than it was, the FO would not give up a cost-controlled player like Iglesias if they felt he was the shortstop of the future.  They would have held on tight to him, and found another way to fill the pitching need, probably internally.  I don't think that Iglesias was as big a part of the Red Sox future as some people think he was.

     

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    Still a lot of misunderstanding about the iglesias trade it seems.  The trade was neither about Iglesias for Peavy nor about Iglesias vs. Drew.  The context for the move was Xander Boegarts.



    I think that's the bottom line.  The Sox obviously felt that Iglesias was expendable.

    The FO is very protective of its draft picks and rookies.  IMO, even if our need for starting pitching were more dire than it was, the FO would not give up a cost-controlled player like Iglesias if they felt he was the shortstop of the future.  They would have held on tight to him, and found another way to fill the pitching need, probably internally.  I don't think that Iglesias was as big a part of the Red Sox future as some people think he was.

     



    I think most of us Iggy fans knew all along that Sox management did not view Iggy in the same light as us. We went with Aviles in 2012and then signed Drew last winter. 

    Personally, I am not being critical of Ben. I understand the Iggy-Peavy trade, but I'd rather have had Iggy at SS and Bogey at 3B going forward than 1.3 years of Peavy. Most of you know I am a big fan of great defense at SS, so I may be biased on this issue, but I have said numerous times over the last few years, if we weren't going to give Iggy the FT job, then we should look to trade him. I think 1.3 years of a quality SP, including 2 possible playoff cycles, was a pretty good haul.

    Since Iggy was probably never going to be a FT player for the Sox, we basically traded our utility IF'er for a very good SP. One can argue about Ben and John's perception of Iggy as not being worthy of a FT job, and I think they (we) have a valid argument, but I really believe Iggy was never going to be handed the job.

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    I think Ben is big on positive attitude and team-first guys, and didn't see what he liked on that score from Iggy.  Hard to argue with that preference of his right now, at least after what happened in 2013.

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to soxnewmex's comment:

    I think Ben is big on positive attitude and team-first guys, and didn't see what he liked on that score from Iggy.  Hard to argue with that preference of his right now, at least after what happened in 2013.



    It could also have been more about liking Peavy and Bogey than disliking Iggy.

    Trading someone does not always mean you don't value them highly. Peavy was a pretty nice catch for a back-up infielder.

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    As I've mentioned numerous times before, I believe the Iggy trade was due more to personality and attitude rather than talent.

    From last years team, it's obvious that Ben C. puts tremendous emphasis on team chemistry.  Iggy didn't fit the mold.  The same can be said about the Hanley R. trade.  Remember, it was donw while Epstein did his gorilla act and Ben C. was running the show.

    Ben C. puts a little more emphasis on intangibles than Epstein did.

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

    Re: Boras and Drew

    In response to ampoule's comment:

    As I've mentioned numerous times before, I believe the Iggy trade was due more to personality and attitude rather than talent.

    From last years team, it's obvious that Ben C. puts tremendous emphasis on team chemistry.  Iggy didn't fit the mold.  The same can be said about the Hanley R. trade.  Remember, it was donw while Epstein did his gorilla act and Ben C. was running the show.

    Ben C. puts a little more emphasis on intangibles than Epstein did.



    I agree, Amp. I think the Red Sox were willing to trade Iggy because of his "intangibles". That's why it wasn't a hard decision for them, and why posters don't understand it. Some of the Tigers weren't happy about his "intangibles" as well. I think we dodged a bullet. It may become more apparent as he continues his career. He may have been a god too soon.

    And is $2,060,000 really a normal salary for a prospect? I didn't know that. That was his Red Sox salary for 2011, 2012, and 2013. Incredibly, he's making less this year to stay with the Tigers in 2014. Things have changed when he actually started playing, and I believe it has nothing to do with his actual talent.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share