napoli...

  1. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: napoli...

    12M/yr for Naps is a steal. If we have to go four years, then we'll go four years.

    If he's such a steal at $12 mil a year, it leads me to wonder why the Rangers did not make a qualifying offer to him.  

    And since they weren't willing to make him a qualifying offer, I can't imagine that they would beat the Red Sox supposed 3 year offer.

    Memo to Ben:  Stand pat at 3 years!

     

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

    Re: napoli...

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

    12M/yr for Naps is a steal. If we have to go four years, then we'll go four years.

    If he's such a steal at $12 mil a year, it leads me to wonder why the Rangers did not make a qualifying offer to him.  

    And since they weren't willing to make him a qualifying offer, I can't imagine that they would beat the Red Sox supposed 3 year offer.

    Memo to Ben:  Stand pat at 3 years!

     



    I think that was a mistake by TX.  They offered him $33M/3 last year.  They will have to offer that much again, so why not offer $13.3M/1?

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

    Re: napoli...

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

    12M/yr for Naps is a steal. If we have to go four years, then we'll go four years.

    If he's such a steal at $12 mil a year, it leads me to wonder why the Rangers did not make a qualifying offer to him.  

    And since they weren't willing to make him a qualifying offer, I can't imagine that they would beat the Red Sox supposed 3 year offer.

    Memo to Ben:  Stand pat at 3 years!

     



    I think that was a mistake by TX.  They offered him $33M/3 last year.  They will have to offer that much again, so why not offer $13.3M/1?



    He will say, "NO!"

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

    Re: napoli...

    In response to Drewski5's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to tom-uk's comment:

    I say avoid Napoli!

    OPS+ 2006 -2012:   110  107  148  120  115  173  110

    Looks to me like he had two great years.

    I agree with Dave Cameron's take:  Napoli’s not exactly a sure thing himself.



    a) How many sure thing players are there.

    b) How many of them are available.



    Moon's list should tell you everything you need to know!  Miggy no longer qualifies, as he's a 3B.  Konerko is 37 so the drop off is coming.  Youk is in free fall.  Berkman is 100.

    So you can expect the production of these three to plummet.  Also cross Miggy off the list so he no longer qualifies as a 1B.

    Lets see the adjusted list:

    1. Votto

    2. Pujols

    3. Fielder

    4. AGON

    5. Napoli

    6. Tex

    Out of the six best hitting 1B in the league, one has put up the numbers despite having to deal w/ the riggors of catching.  one can be had for less than 20M/yr.  one can slide into the C spot during interleague games.  one absolutely rakes at Fenway.  one has never had any lineup protection in his life.

    People dont want to give this guy 12M/yr?  Just turned 31 (young for a FA), wont take any prospects (or draft picks) to acquire.  All comparables are 20M+ guys!!  Naps is a righty pull hitter who draws a ton of walks.  He's a positive clubhouse guy.

    12M/yr for Naps is a steal.  If we have to go four years, then we'll go four years.



    Drew, you have made a great case, and to me the clincher is the fact that Naps can slide over to catcher at NL parks, so Papi can play at 1B. It sure beats sliding AGon to RF, or benching a high-priced 1Bman like LaRoche, Morneau, or Butler.

    I'd really try to hold to 3 years ($33M/3), but my guess is it will take at least $36M/3 or $44M/4.

    If Hunter gets $26M/2, I gotta think Naps will get more than what I just said above. Although Naps makes a lot of sense on several levels, I really think we should be looking more towards competing in 2014 or more likely 2015 and beyond. That's the one drawback I see to Naps. Yes, he is young enough to still be able to contribute 2-4 years from now, but chances are he may decline some. His rise in the K rate is scary. His low BA this year is as well.

    Although I do not think an offer of $36M/3 or $46M/4 is too high, I wouldn't bash Ben for offering it. And, since I do not think he will sign for that low, I guess I am saying either naps won't be here, or we will have overpaid by too much for my liking if he does end up here.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: napoli...

    In response to Drewski5's comment:

    I see 2 great years, and 5 good years.  If you saw 5 great years, then we would be talking about a Mauer contract. 

    Mauer signed whan he was still a "great" catcher.  Napoli is a poor defender at catcher and first:

    Fangraphs:

    Is Mike Napoli as bad at catcher defense as it seems?
     -thrown out a below-average rate of would-be base-stealers over his career.

    -blocked a below-average rate of blockable pitches. 

    What is the deal with Mike Napoli'™s pitch-framing effectiveness?
    That depends on how you feel about pitch-framing studies. But, Mike Fast found Napolito be pretty strongly negative. Matthew Carruth found Napoli to be pretty strongly negative, after 2012. According to Carruth’s numbers, Napoli had his then-worst framing season in 2011, then he followed that up with an even worse 2012. We don’t know anything about pitch-framing aging curves, because we hardly even know anything about pitch framing, but Carruth found that, in 2012, Napoli was nearly two pitches below average per game.

     

     

    I find it much more likely that a well documented hamstring injury that lingered through the season was the reason for the K spike.  He was 30 years old last year.

    A history of hamstring problems in a 30+ catcher sounds ominous.

     

    From 2008-2011, his OPS was top 5 among firstbaseman.  Thats with the wear and tear of catching.  He's one of the best power hitters in the league and he's 31 years old.  He draws a ton of walks.  There's a reason why he's target #1.

    There is a reason Texas didn't make MN a qualifying offer.  They weren't willing to risk $13.3/ one year deal despite a compensation pick coming to them if he went elsewhere.

    I'm not as against signing MN as much as say I was about Werth/Crawford/Bay/Lackey deals, but my take  is that signing MN has the strong potential for paying for past performance for a player with old-player skills.  (I was pro Cameron signing, oops)

    I'd rather stick to one or two year contracts ( like Beltre ) and trade Lester/Ells to stock prospects.  Then hope a CC Sabathia type comes up for FA and get him after 2013 or '14.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: napoli...

    OPS+ 2006 - 2012

    Napoli    24 to 30yo    110  107  148  120  115  173  110

    Youkilis  27 to 33yo    106  117  144   146  157  123   99 

    Youk was a great defender at first.  Will MN, the poorer defender, age well?

     

     



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

    Re: napoli...

    Drewski5

    "Lets see the adjusted list:

    1. Votto

    2. Pujols

    3. Fielder

    4. AGON

    5. Napoli

    6. Tex

    Out of the six best hitting 1B in the league, one has put up the numbers despite having to deal w/ the riggors of catching.  one can be had for less than 20M/yr.  one can slide into the C spot during interleague games.  one absolutely rakes at Fenway.  one has never had any lineup protection in his life."

     

    [/QUOTE]


     

    Um every player on that list aside from NAPOLI is a player a team would or has built their entire offense off of. Napolis has not had "protection" because he is not the player you go get protection for.... the other players on your list are the ones you go get protection for.

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

    Re: napoli...

    I wouldn't be nearly as high on Napoli if he didn't have such great numbers at Fenway, Yankee Stadium and other AL East parks.  We don't just need good players, we need players who are suited to Boston.  We've gotten burned on some good players who weren't comfortable here for whatever reason.

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

    Re: napoli...

    Again 24 games means nothing. That is all the Fenway games he has ever played.

     

    I recall years gone by that entire teams were built to win in Fenway yet somehow the team never won a WS in the 1970's or 80's or 90's. Thye finally decided it would be cool to get more well-rounded players.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re: napoli...

    Good point, Enchilada.  Building the team to win at Fenway is a tried and true method, and it has never worked.  They won when they had a team that coudl win as well on the road.  Defense and speed are more necessary skills outside Fenway. Napoli brings neither, but encourages the speed in the opponent, if he is used as catcher at all.

    Youk is the better gamble at 1B for a short term solution, IMO, too, Tom-uk.  Far less money, better defense, and has as good OBP skills, just not quite as much power.

    JUST SAY NO!!!

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

    Re: napoli...

    In response to EnchiladaT's comment:

    Again 24 games means nothing. That is all the Fenway games he has ever played.

     

    I recall years gone by that entire teams were built to win in Fenway yet somehow the team never won a WS in the 1970's or 80's or 90's. Thye finally decided it would be cool to get more well-rounded players.




    It's not just Fenway, it's Yankee Stadium, Tropicana and Rogers Centre.  He has put up solid numbers in all these parks and gone deep multiple times in all of them.  He's got 19 HR's in 238 AB's in AL East parks.  That's a little less than half a season's worth.  Call it a small sample if you want-that's usually all you have to go on when you acquire a player from another team.  I call it an extremely encouraging trend.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: napoli...

    In response to EnchiladaT's comment:

    Drewski5

    "Lets see the adjusted list:

    1. Votto

    2. Pujols

    3. Fielder

    4. AGON

    5. Napoli

    6. Tex

    Out of the six best hitting 1B in the league, one has put up the numbers despite having to deal w/ the riggors of catching.  one can be had for less than 20M/yr.  one can slide into the C spot during interleague games.  one absolutely rakes at Fenway.  one has never had any lineup protection in his life."

     




     

    Um every player on that list aside from NAPOLI is a player a team would or has built their entire offense off of. Napolis has not had "protection" because he is not the player you go get protection for.... the other players on your list are the ones you go get protection for.



    Exactly, all the other players on the list are guys that have had the luxury of lineup protection.  Napoli has similar production without thisluxury.  All of the other guys are 20+m/yr guys, Napoli can be had for 12.

    Napoli can catch, is a positive clubhouse guy, is about the average age of the other players on the list.  

 
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: napoli...

    In response to parhunter55's comment:

    Good point, Enchilada.  Building the team to win at Fenway is a tried and true method, and it has never worked.  They won when they had a team that coudl win as well on the road.  Defense and speed are more necessary skills outside Fenway. Napoli brings neither, but encourages the speed in the opponent, if he is used as catcher at all.

    Youk is the better gamble at 1B for a short term solution, IMO, too, Tom-uk.  Far less money, better defense, and has as good OBP skills, just not quite as much power.

    JUST SAY NO!!!



    It worked w/ Beltre, Lowell, C. Ross. 

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: napoli...

    In response to tom-uk's comment:

    OPS+ 2006 - 2012

    Napoli    24 to 30yo    110  107  148  120  115  173  110

    Youkilis  27 to 33yo    106  117  144   146  157  123   99 

    Youk was a great defender at first.  Will MN, the poorer defender, age well?

     

     

     



     First of all going from 123 to 99 is an abberation , no the norm.  I dont know what happened w Youk but thats a freak drop off.  

    Look at your age diff.  Youk posted 157 at age 31, 123 at age 32.  Naps will be 31 and 32 in the first two years of the deal.  Its very possible that Naps regression, starting in yr 3 is much more normalized.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: napoli...

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to Drewski5's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to tom-uk's comment:

    I say avoid Napoli!

    OPS+ 2006 -2012:   110  107  148  120  115  173  110

    Looks to me like he had two great years.

    I agree with Dave Cameron's take:  Napoli’s not exactly a sure thing himself.



    a) How many sure thing players are there.

    b) How many of them are available.



    Moon's list should tell you everything you need to know!  Miggy no longer qualifies, as he's a 3B.  Konerko is 37 so the drop off is coming.  Youk is in free fall.  Berkman is 100.

    So you can expect the production of these three to plummet.  Also cross Miggy off the list so he no longer qualifies as a 1B.

    Lets see the adjusted list:

    1. Votto

    2. Pujols

    3. Fielder

    4. AGON

    5. Napoli

    6. Tex

    Out of the six best hitting 1B in the league, one has put up the numbers despite having to deal w/ the riggors of catching.  one can be had for less than 20M/yr.  one can slide into the C spot during interleague games.  one absolutely rakes at Fenway.  one has never had any lineup protection in his life.

    People dont want to give this guy 12M/yr?  Just turned 31 (young for a FA), wont take any prospects (or draft picks) to acquire.  All comparables are 20M+ guys!!  Naps is a righty pull hitter who draws a ton of walks.  He's a positive clubhouse guy.

    12M/yr for Naps is a steal.  If we have to go four years, then we'll go four years.



    Drew, you have made a great case, and to me the clincher is the fact that Naps can slide over to catcher at NL parks, so Papi can play at 1B. It sure beats sliding AGon to RF, or benching a high-priced 1Bman like LaRoche, Morneau, or Butler.

    I'd really try to hold to 3 years ($33M/3), but my guess is it will take at least $36M/3 or $44M/4.

    If Hunter gets $26M/2, I gotta think Naps will get more than what I just said above. Although Naps makes a lot of sense on several levels, I really think we should be looking more towards competing in 2014 or more likely 2015 and beyond. That's the one drawback I see to Naps. Yes, he is young enough to still be able to contribute 2-4 years from now, but chances are he may decline some. His rise in the K rate is scary. His low BA this year is as well.

    Although I do not think an offer of $36M/3 or $46M/4 is too high, I wouldn't bash Ben for offering it. And, since I do not think he will sign for that low, I guess I am saying either naps won't be here, or we will have overpaid by too much for my liking if he does end up here.



    I dont know Moon, I'm starting to think that 4 yr / 44 gets it done.  I'd be nervous of going too far north of 46/4 as well.  

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: napoli...

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

    12M/yr for Naps is a steal. If we have to go four years, then we'll go four years.

    If he's such a steal at $12 mil a year, it leads me to wonder why the Rangers did not make a qualifying offer to him.  

    And since they weren't willing to make him a qualifying offer, I can't imagine that they would beat the Red Sox supposed 3 year offer.

    Memo to Ben:  Stand pat at 3 years!

     



    I think that was a mistake by TX.  They offered him $33M/3 last year.  They will have to offer that much again, so why not offer $13.3M/1?



    TX is kicking themselves right now.  They arent serious bidders for him, and they cost themselves draft picks.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: napoli...

    I wonder where his OPS would be had he played in more than 114 games more than once in his career. Tell me how many games a year Pujols or Tex average.  Napoli stats are terrible. He has nev er driven in more than 75 runs and often strikes out 100 + times a year .... 

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

    Re: napoli...

    1 draft pick only.

    Yes, it seems starnge that they did not want to pay $13M/1, which Naps surely would have refused, to get the comp pick.

    Why would TX now offer $36M/3 of $44M/4 when they refused $13M/1? 

    I think the Sox will get Naps. 

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: napoli...

    In response to Drewski5's comment:

    In response to EnchiladaT's comment:

    Drewski5

    "Lets see the adjusted list:

    1. Votto

    2. Pujols

    3. Fielder

    4. AGON

    5. Napoli

    6. Tex

    Out of the six best hitting 1B in the league, one has put up the numbers despite having to deal w/ the riggors of catching.  one can be had for less than 20M/yr.  one can slide into the C spot during interleague games.  one absolutely rakes at Fenway.  one has never had any lineup protection in his life."

     




     

    Um every player on that list aside from NAPOLI is a player a team would or has built their entire offense off of. Napolis has not had "protection" because he is not the player you go get protection for.... the other players on your list are the ones you go get protection for.



    Exactly, all the other players on the list are guys that have had the luxury of lineup protection.  Napoli has similar production without thisluxury.  All of the other guys are 20+m/yr guys, Napoli can be had for 12.

    Napoli can catch, is a positive clubhouse guy, is about the average age of the other players on the list.  



    ops goes down if he ever managed tom play in more than 114 games in a season... he has had the luxury of having 48 plus games off more than Pujols or Tex or Konerko or AGon. Fewer at-bats

  •  
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: napoli...

    In response to EnchiladaT's comment:

    In response to Drewski5's comment:

    In response to EnchiladaT's comment:

    Drewski5

    "Lets see the adjusted list:

    1. Votto

    2. Pujols

    3. Fielder

    4. AGON

    5. Napoli

    6. Tex

    Out of the six best hitting 1B in the league, one has put up the numbers despite having to deal w/ the riggors of catching.  one can be had for less than 20M/yr.  one can slide into the C spot during interleague games.  one absolutely rakes at Fenway.  one has never had any lineup protection in his life."

     




     

    Um every player on that list aside from NAPOLI is a player a team would or has built their entire offense off of. Napolis has not had "protection" because he is not the player you go get protection for.... the other players on your list are the ones you go get protection for.



    Exactly, all the other players on the list are guys that have had the luxury of lineup protection.  Napoli has similar production without thisluxury.  All of the other guys are 20+m/yr guys, Napoli can be had for 12.

    Napoli can catch, is a positive clubhouse guy, is about the average age of the other players on the list.  



    ops goes down if he ever managed tom play in more than 114 games in a season... he has had the luxury of having 48 plus games off more than Pujols or Tex or Konerko or AGon. Fewer at-bats



    Catchers dont play more than 114 games / yr.  Up until now, he's been a C.  If you are implying that he is fresher from playing fewer games, I would counter that 115 as a C equals 160 as a 1B.  

  •  
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: napoli...

    In response to EnchiladaT's comment:

    I wonder where his OPS would be had he played in more than 114 games more than once in his career. Tell me how many games a year Pujols or Tex average.  Napoli stats are terrible. He has nev er driven in more than 75 runs and often strikes out 100 + times a year .... 



    Yes top 6 among MLB in OPS is terrible.  RBI's are a reflection of your spot in the batting order. Most power hitters strike out 100+ times / yr.

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

    Re: napoli...

    Being number 5 or 6 among the top 1Bman is certainly a good thing. I don't buy the protection argumnet. If they want to walk Papi to face Naps-- great! It's certainly better than walking Papi to face C Ross or Middlebrooks or Salty or...

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: napoli...

    114 catching games equates to 150 fielders games? Really? Was he not in a league with the DH? You are going to the mat for a player who really is not very good. When I said his OPS would go down had he played in 150 games it is because he would not be able to keep up the level he has in 114 games for 150+ games. You are using an average stat which means nothing when the player has played in 400 games less then most of the players you are comparing him to.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: napoli...

    In response to EnchiladaT's comment:

    114 catching games equates to 150 fielders games? Really? Was he not in a league with the DH? You are going to the mat for a player who really is not very good. When I said his OPS would go down had he played in 150 games it is because he would not be able to keep up the level he has in 114 games for 150+ games. You are using an average stat which means nothing when the player has played in 400 games less then most of the players you are comparing him to.




    That's not true.  The .863 isnt based on a 114 at bat sample, its based on a 2,270 at-bat sample.  2270 at bats is a statistically valid sample.  Thus, the law of averages applies. 

    If you flip a coin 10 times the chances that it comes up heads5 times isnt that high.  (This is because 10 flips isnt a stastically valid sample size).

    If you flip a coin 1,000 times, the chance that it comes up heads ~50% is very high (99.9% at least).  This is due to the law of averages.  If you flip a coin 2,000 times, it is 99.9% likely to come up heads 50% of the time.  (The difference between 1000 flips and 2000 flips is moot because 1000 is already a stastically valid sample).

     
  • Sections
    Shortcuts

    Share