In response to mef429's comment:

It's the walk rate that distinguishes Mark Reynolds from Will Middlebrooks (not the strikeout rate).

In response to hill55's comment:

 

Of course, the slash line is not cumulative. We can compare the slash line for Middlebrooks' 75-game season to the slash line for the first 75 games, and last 75 games, of Mark Reynolds' rookie season:

Because of the small MLB samples, in the past I've relied heavily on the 1,706 minor league plate appearances of Will Middlebrooks and the 1,402 minor league plate appearances of Mark Reynolds.

[/QUOTE]

Dr. Hill, I have been unable to convince you that the MR comp is moot, but I will try again.  The following is a conversation between you and your boss Ben C. (Please provide your real answers).

BC   Any good ideas Hill?

Hill   I think we should sign or trade for a 3B because WM will need AAA time in 2013.

BC  Despite a slow start WM had a positive UZR, his fielding got better as the year went on and he was 23 yo, plus he started baseball late.  Boggs developed as a fielder in the bigs.

Hill   Yeah but he strikes out like MR, but walks less.

BC  Unlike WM, MR can't even play 1B, he was the worst fielder AT ANY POSITION IN MLB when he was a 3B.

Hill Yeah, but MR had similar numbers to WM as a rookie.

BC Who cares, I doubt WM will be a star because of the walk rate, but Ks are almost irrelevant.

Hill Yeah but MR had better numbers in the minors.

BC Bill James projections for 2013 wOBA  MR .344  WM .345

Hill See, MR = WM

BC  At the plate maybe, but if MR could field like WM he would not be getting non-tendered.

Hill Yeah but MR had better  numbers in the minors.

BC  The average 3B in the AL for 2012 was .739 OPS.  MR career in .807.  Bill James has both around .800 for 2013.

Hill Yeah but MR had better numbers in the minors.

BC  You're fired, have you considered blogging?  Can you believe that  Carfardo actually gets paid to write about baseball?

Well done, tom-uk ... you have a future in fiction. ;-)

hill55 could find a way to to explain why winning a million dollars won't help you.......

This post has been removed.

In response to hill55's comment:

1-Reading is not fundamental to Softlaw.

2-I can find mistakes in judgement for anyone that ever posted an opinion.  If Softy can only point to one opinion, however badly he mis-read it, out of the universe of your opinions, then you are having a phenominal year.

3-I recollect Softie saying Cameron should start and Ellsbury should be on the bench during his historic 9.0 year.

4-I remember Softy saturating this site with his Hanley mancrush, saying we had to trade the farm for someone without a position with a questionable attitude.

5-I remember him advocating for Cameron, as I did.  Cam was for ages 37-38, but apparently, Napoli and Vic are too old at ages 32-34.

And just to watch people minds blow up, I would give Bogaerts some reps at 3B, and if successful, I would give serious consideration to trading WMB for young pitching and promoting Bogaerts.  He had a great start, but a weak K/W, and from 6/24 thru YE, he had a 33/6 K/W with a corresponding .692 OPS.  Remember too a BABIP of .335 is likely unsustainable.

This post has been removed.

In response to Joebreidey's comment:

Joe there is a major flaw in this plan IMO.  Bogaerts is 20 yo, using up his controlled years makes no sense until he is ready.

WM has earned a shot if he can stay anywhere near his 2012 OPS+ of 120 and play above average D how many 3B would be better?  Why do you think think WM can't maintain an above average BABIP given his history?

WM BABIP 

2008   .380

2009  .372

2010   .348

2011 AA   .363

2012 AAA  .335

2012 MLB  .333

The Mariner's Kyle Seager in 2012 had a 108 wRC+ (WM 121 wRC+) and was a bit above average with the glove, and that made him the 8th highest at 3B in WAR.

The Sox should keep both and wait to see if both pan out, one can move to 1B or get traded after they both prove themselves.

The Sox should keep both and wait to see if both pan out, one can move to 1B or get traded after they both prove themselves.

I think Bogaerts will end up at 1B, unless the Wil-da-beast doesn't pan out.

In response to moonslav59's comment:

i suggested this a few weeks ago and was flamed over it

In response to carnie's comment:

carnie = meaningless posts.

In response to mef429's comment:

Those stats mean nothing.

In response to EnchiladaT's comment:

Post of the day (at least)

In response to moonslav59's comment:

LF, I hope.  They should start the conversion now.  Enough with this pipedreaming that he is a SS.  Get him experience at a position where he will actually play.

Although, Im curious to know what kind of pitcher a Middlebrooks centered package will return (I think Boegarts best positions is 3B; however, I am considering 3B blocked at this time)

In response to Drewski5's comment:

That's a great question, but I'll try to sit this one out.

According to Peter Gammons, the Marlins wanted Will Middlebrooks, Xander Bogaerts and Felix Doubront in exchange for Josh Johnson and Jose Reyes:

https://twitter.com/pgammo/status/268763576569831424

In response to ADG's comment:

ADG = crybaby

This post has been removed.

In response to hill55's comment:

  Either Peter Gammons got fished in or somebody in Marlinville is really stupid.

I said, in 2010, that the Red Sox should acquire Hanley "not for the farm as you prevaricate", but for Ellspuff and Lowrie and 2 other blocked prospects. I remember you claiming that the Marlins would never trade him because he was such a great bargain for the Marlins. I remember you singing the praises of Lowrie and Ellsbury and how they were the foundation of the Red Sox future.

You remember nothing.  You need to study forensics in order to lie correctly, otherwise, nothing comes out sounding right.  Surely you should know by now that I don't like buying the tail-end of someone else's contract. Hanley's value ended after 2010, when he stopped being dirt cheap.  So why would I think he was such a bargain for the Marlins?  Once he jumped to $11M and grew out of SS, he stopped being a bargain.

And, of course, that's exactly when you fell in love with him.  His salary jumped to $11M, couldn't play SS, we had a 3B, so your genius idea was to play Hanley in LF (unless you want to lie about that also).

IRT Lowrie, I said when he came up that it was either him or Pedroia plays 2nd, and the loser gets traded.  You cam on the bandwagon a mere 2 years later.

 

5-I remember him advocating for Cameron, as I did.  Cam was for ages 37-38, but apparently, Napoli and Vic are too old at ages 32-34

. Not that you care about such matters since you were a cheerleader for Crawford and 142M and Jenks and 12M. Inesptein never had a clue how to use OF'ers and what their value and fit was. Cherry doesn't, either.

I was never a fan of the Crawford signing.  I said at the time that half his defensive value was wasted in Fenway, and having a guy that probably slots 6/7 in the lineup devalues him by 10%.

If you recall, which apparently you no longer can, I wanted Willingham on fit, value, and a Type A comp when he left.

In response to mef429's comment:

Dont forget that a platoon of Gomez and Loney would produce more than napoli...

In response to hill55's comment:

Time in Pawtucket for what?? Are you saying hes not quite ready?

Other than injury rehab, I would be very surprised if he spent ANY time down there.

In response to Drewski5's comment:

I say LF . We could easily have a .300avg 30-40HR 120 RBI guy out there again.

In response to Joebreidey's comment:

I remember softy arguing that Cam was better than Ells in CF even vs RHPs. He most certainly wanted Ells sitting on the bench, and even called him the "4th OF'er".

His lies are getting bigger and more common as his streak of wrong positions is nearing 400 straight.

In response to moonslav59's comment:

I clearly remember him saying this.