What the "play the rookies every day now" advocates are forgetting . . .

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

    What the "play the rookies every day now" advocates are forgetting . . .

    Right now, today, of course, makes sense.  Middlebrooks and Victorino are on the DL, and Ellsbury is nursing a groin pull.  So this is about later when Ellsbury, Victorino, and Middlebrooks are back in business.

    So the first thing not to forget is what happened last year when Youkilis was dumped to make room for Middlebrooks.  After the Sox sent him to the White Sox and paid a big chunk of his salary, they badly needed not only a thirdbaseman to replace Middlebrooks on the DL, but also a firstbaseman to replace AGon who was traded, and even a DL to replace Ortiz, also on the DL.  Nothing says Bradley and/or Iglesias is exempt from injury.  If that happens, wouldn't it be nice to have Ellsbury and/or Drew? 

    Second thing is the Sox have played well with Ellsbury and Drew in the lineup because both are contributing.  Ellsbury is second on the team in hits, and third in runs scored and total bases, plus he has 21 SB's.  Drew has had one error at SS in 34 games, which is spectacular.  Yes, Iglesias would get more chances, but there is real value in a SS who can be counted on to make the plays the should make.  And his hitting seems to be turning around.  This is a veteran team that really pulls for each other and plays hard.  This might change if the FO dumps two veterans who were playing well and contributing to make way for two rookies, no matter how good.

    Third thing is there should be no rush.  It is now pretty obvious both Iglesias and Bradley will be starting next year--at SS and CF.  Ellsbury and Drew are both on one year contracts and cost a lot more than Bradley or Iglesias.  Better to keep both rookies playing every day either in Boston or at Pawtucket--and preparing to be regulars next year.  If Ellsbury, Drew, or Middlebrooks is injured or badly injured, a capable replacement ready to go. 

    None of the above should be interpreted as in any way saying Iglesias and Bradley aren't already pretty darn good and a lot of fun to watch.  Especially Iglesias, who is no doubt hitting over his head, but who also is playing 3B like he was born there.  He deserves to play every day just for the sheer entertainment value.  The Sox signed him for $10M when he was a teenager, and it sure looks like a good investment. 

    A small addendum as of June 5.  Read Peter Abraham on extra bases today because he basically agrees with me.  Having lots of good players--and not dumping them as bill-806 and softlaw and some others want to do--on a team is good, not bad.  He also provides the UZR and OPS stats that show Drew is an above average SS on defense and offense. 

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

    Re: What the

    Do you remember Rice & Lynn?

    I do.

    Sox4ever

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: What the

    Iggy and JBJ are NOT Rice and Lynn

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from MadMc44. Show MadMc44's posts

    Re: What the

    Okay Mr. Softy Law GM--Asdrubal Cabrera gets injured last night at the Stadium, you are the Ambulance Chaser--let's say he's out for a couple of 4 weeks with a knee strain--should BenC be on the phone to the Indian GM--we have  four SS--I'll offer you one--it's SD--too much money for a fill in, we've got a lower priced one in Pedro Ciriaco or Holt---no questionnable fielding--I want Iggy--how much???Asdrubal as a PTBNL when he's healthy??? Is that what you're thinking OR Trade Iggy while his ceiling is highest and get the best return.

    Trade Iggy, then there's no controversey. Same concept as last year, trade Youk--BV wanted him gone, everybody wanted the new model--WMB. Then WMB and Ortiz go down and the Sox get two players--now gone, no suitable replacement at DH or 3 B (Youk would have been perfect--we were paying his salary to help the White Sox).

    Trade Ciriaco or Holt unless the other team pays full price for SD and a good prospect or Iggy and Gomes for Brantley or a pitcher or some other decent player.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: What the

    Youth is good !!!!  It's the same old tired Baseball unwritten law, the VET can not be replaced by a "new fresh youngster" untill management says so.......  Happend to me as an 8 year-old "all world 2nd baseman" in the 1950's ..... Just saying !!!

     
  7. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: What the

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    Iggy and JBJ are NOT Rice and Lynn



    Never even implied they were.

    My point is, rookies often help teams to varying degrees. Iggy and JBJ are net gains at their positions. Trading the guy blocking them would not net a big drop off, if any, but the return in trade would easily outweigh any drop off there might be.

    It's not a far-fetched idea, just because Ben might not even be considering it, or because a few posters think that success after 55 games or so demands a locked-in roster. This team has some serious weak links. During our next poor stretch (and there will be one or more), you will all see them on display.

    I get the point about money being free'd up this winter after these guys walk. That is great! However, trading 1-2 of them does not change that at all, but actually keeps it the same AND adds a prospect or longer controlled player for future years.

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

    Re: What the

    Overall, Max is on target. It is great to have low cost injury back up sitting in AAA when needed. It is very important to have guys you can send back and forth between the minors without losing control. For example we can't send Drew down without effectively losing him if he is not injured. but we can send Iglesias up and down all year long with impunity.

    Therefore we better have some players ready to step in if needed, at the AAA level, no matter what we do or this will become an issue.

    To me, we probably have that with Brock Holt now. We can jetison Ciriaco and keep Iglesias in his slot and still have Brock Holt or even Bogaerts in a worst case scenario ready to fill in for injuries. I think we are ok there.

    We can move JBJ to the big club and trade a current outfielder and still have Brentz available as a fill in back up.

    We can trade a catcher and bring up Lavarnway and still have Vasquez for injury back up.

    The problem with all of this is that we disrupt a winning team. It is a little risky in that regard but:

    1) It does save money

    2) It does potentially improve the team if done judiciously

    3) It does phase in young talent to further develop these players

    4) It does add to fan involvement and excitement. For those players who prove to not cut it at the mlb level, we get rid of. For those which turn out to be good, we keep them and move forward.

    If we don't clear space on the big club for good young players it can affect their performance and development long term. It's a balencing act. Overall I think they have made good choices. We aren't going to get much by trading a Salty or Ross, a Ciriaco, a Mike Carp. It's not really about them. It's about improving the team and the organization long term. Bundle together some players which can be replaced as per the above, and make deals accordingly. Maybe even deals for  several secondary prospects and a guy like Carp for a better prospect or to fill a need. for example for a stud 1st base prospect or a slugging prospect for left field.

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

    Re: What the

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    My point is, rookies often help teams to varying degrees. Iggy and JBJ are net gains at their positions. Trading the guy blocking them would not net a big drop off, if any, but the return in trade would easily outweigh any drop off there might be.

    It's not a far-fetched idea, just because Ben might not even be considering it, or because a few posters think that success after 55 games or so demands a locked-in roster. This team has some serious weak links. During our next poor stretch (and there will be one or more), you will all see them on display.

    I get the point about money being free'd up this winter after these guys walk. That is great! However, trading 1-2 of them does not change that at all, but actually keeps it the same AND adds a prospect or longer controlled player for future years.



    I don't totally disagree with this concept but at the same time, people are inherently paranoid.  They tend to go with what's working for fear that the change they make won't work as well.  Right now what's working is having Iggy as UIF and JBJ in Pawtucket to be on the shuttle as needed.  That makes Ciriaco "odd man out" and since he's out of options let's hope he clears waivers after he's DFA'd.

    The balance within a division has always given me pause because the top teams are so closely matched. It's not unusual for a division champion to be only a game or two ahead of the second place team.  That's one or two losses over a 162 game season being the difference between playing baseball or golf in October.

    Right now the Sox are in the thick of things and IMO it would be a mistake to create what might be a "minor drop-off".  At this point we have Ells in CF, we're in the middle of a race, and we all know what Ells contributes when he's healthy.  I say hold on to him until either the Sox fall out of the race <shudder> or the season is over. Drew is a perfectly servicable SS so he stays too, until he proves he can't do the job - or the season ends. 

    As I said, right now we're in a race and both of those guys (Ells & Drew) will be gone next year so that problem will take care of itself. 

    One thing I have learned is that when you're in a race you should do everything you can to maximize your chances this year because you never know what's going to happen NEXT year.   

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

    Re: What the

    In response to RedsoxProspects' comment:

    Overall, Max is on target. It is great to have low cost injury back up sitting in AAA when needed. It is very important to have guys you can send back and forth between the minors without losing control. For example we can't send Drew down without effectively losing him if he is not injured. but we can send Iglesias up and down all year long with impunity.

    Therefore we better have some players ready to step in if needed, at the AAA level, no matter what we do or this will become an issue.

    To me, we probably have that with Brock Holt now. We can jetison Ciriaco and keep Iglesias in his slot and still have Brock Holt or even Bogaerts in a worst case scenario ready to fill in for injuries. I think we are ok there.

    We can move JBJ to the big club and trade a current outfielder and still have Brentz available as a fill in back up.

    We can trade a catcher and bring up Lavarnway and still have Vasquez for injury back up.

    The problem with all of this is that we disrupt a winning team. It is a little risky in that regard but:

    1) It does save money

    2) It does potentially improve the team if done judiciously

    3) It does phase in young talent to further develop these players

    4) It does add to fan involvement and excitement. For those players who prove to not cut it at the mlb level, we get rid of. For those which turn out to be good, we keep them and move forward.

    If we don't clear space on the big club for good young players it can affect their performance and development long term. It's a balencing act. Overall I think they have made good choices. We aren't going to get much by trading a Salty or Ross, a Ciriaco, a Mike Carp. It's not really about them. It's about improving the team and the organization long term. Bundle together some players which can be replaced as per the above, and make deals accordingly. Maybe even deals for  several secondary prospects and a guy like Carp for a better prospect or to fill a need. for example for a stud 1st base prospect or a slugging prospect for left field.



    Let's assume we trade Ellsbury and Drew for prospects that will not help this year. Of course, it's hard to argue that we will be better in 2013 with Holt/Ciriaco vs Drew and Ellsbury/JBJ vs JBJ/??? (Shane to CF if JBJ gets hurt and Brentz to RF???).

    Personally, I like Iggy at SS over Drew as everyone knows. I think he's a better SS and his defensive net gain outweighs his possible offensive net loss when compared to Drew. However, keeping Drew as a utility IF'er is problematic. But, so is playing Iggy out of position. The injury to WMB does show one reason to keep Drew.

    The basic trade off is this: if you think we have a good chance to win it all this year, you are going to want to do every little thing to improve our chances. It's hard to argue Holt gives us a better chance than Drew, or that Brentz gives us a better chance than Ellsbury. The who is the better starter issue (Iggy vs Drew or Ells vs JBJ) is a big part of this decision, but so is looking to our future and trying to improve our odds of winning for 4-5 more years not just 2013.

    To me, if we don't improve our starting rotation, one big step would be to improve the one we have by playing Iggy at SS and JBJ in CF. Those two moves alone would save many runs (earned or unearned) over the next 105 games. Ending innings earlier would allow starters to go deeper, and the pen to be more rested. Pitcher confidence improves. Maybe they aren't so afraid to pitch to contact knowing their fielders have their backs.

    I love our prospects and farm system, but it can be improved upon, and we have some gaps at certain positions on the farm.

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

    Re: What the


    The Sox success so far this season has not been because of an infusion of youth. Talent and performance on the field is the only measure. Salary and age are irrelevant. This year's kid is next year's veteran.





    "Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
    - Thomas Jefferson

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

    Re: What the

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    To me, if we don't improve our starting rotation, one big step would be to improve the one we have by playing Iggy at SS and JBJ in CF. Those two moves alone would save many runs (earned or unearned) over the next 105 games. Ending innings earlier would allow starters to go deeper, and the pen to be more rested. Pitcher confidence improves. Maybe they aren't so afraid to pitch to contact knowing their fielders have their backs.



    Ok.  But I don't think it's an "and", I think it's an "or". 

    I don't see a whole lot of difference in the total value of Drew vs. Iggy at SS.  What you gain in offense you lose in defense with Drew and the opposite with Iggy.  I still don't think Iggy's as good offensively as his numbers show now (Duh!) just as I don't think Drew is as weak offensively as HIS numbers show.  So that's a wash.  I can support that either way.

    I DON'T see JBJ being as good either offensively or defensively as Ellsbury.  Remember that when we're talking about Ellsbury we ARE talking about an elite player, a veteran, a game-changer, and to assume that JBJ is going to be the same is asking a lot.  IMO th eonly reason to play JBJ in CF is to unload Ells, and it's not something I'd do as long as the Sox are in contention.

    If I'm in Farrell's seat I keep Iggy and DFA Ciriaco after Middy gets back.  I may even "rehab" Middy a bit to give Iggy more time at 3rd.  Then Iggy becomes the UIF for the remainder of the year KNOWING that our UIF could probably start for most teams.   That's quite a luxury.

    I then buy a pocketful of bus tokens for JBJ and recommend that he not buy a home in Pawtucket. 

     

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

    Re: What the

    In response to S5's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    To me, if we don't improve our starting rotation, one big step would be to improve the one we have by playing Iggy at SS and JBJ in CF. Those two moves alone would save many runs (earned or unearned) over the next 105 games. Ending innings earlier would allow starters to go deeper, and the pen to be more rested. Pitcher confidence improves. Maybe they aren't so afraid to pitch to contact knowing their fielders have their backs.

     



    Ok.  But I don't think it's an "and", I think it's an "or". 

     

    I don't see a whole lot of difference in the total value of Drew vs. Iggy at SS.  What you gain in offense you lose in defense with Drew and the opposite with Iggy.  I still don't think Iggy's as good offensively as his numbers show now (Duh!) just as I don't think Drew is as weak offensively as HIS numbers show.  So that's a wash.  I can support that either way.

    I DON'T see JBJ being as good either offensively or defensively as Ellsbury.  Remember that when we're talking about Ellsbury we ARE talking about an elite player, a veteran, a game-changer, and to assume that JBJ is going to be the same is asking a lot.  IMO th eonly reason to play JBJ in CF is to unload Ells, and it's not something I'd do as long as the Sox are in contention.

    If I'm in Farrell's seat I keep Iggy and DFA Ciriaco after Middy gets back.  I may even "rehab" Middy a bit to give Iggy more time at 3rd.  Then Iggy becomes the UIF for the remainder of the year KNOWING that our UIF could probably start for most teams.   That's quite a luxury.

    I then buy a pocketful of bus tokens for JBJ and recommend that he not buy a home in Pawtucket. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Agreed.

    As long as the Sox are in contention, compromising the depth of the team is not a good move.

    A couple of injuries and we'd be wishing Drew and Ellbury were back on the team.

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

    Re: What the


    moonslav,

    You have a lot of good points, but I just don't buy the thesis that the simple fix for a weak rotation is replacing Ellsbury and Drew with Iglesias and Bradley. For three reasons. 

    First, the rotation ain't that weak when the Sox team ERA is tied for second best in the AL, and that's despite all the lost time from injuries. 

    Second, as much as I like Bradley, it's Ellsbury who has the Gold Glove and the blazing speed.  I have yet to see Bradley make a run-saving grab this season that Ellsbury would not have made.  Bradley has a much better arm, but I haven't seen it make a difference.   I think a better case can be made for Iglesias, but Drew has actually been pretty darn good out there albeit with less range. 

    Third, you are saying dumping two good veterans and replacing them with rookies will be good for team morale, and I strongly disagree.  Chemistry is a big part of this team's success.  Right now the rookies are welcome when they are playing for injured veterans, but will be less so when the veterans are dumped.  Relatedly, you are missing my other point that dumping Drew and Ellsbury becomes a bad move whenever Bradley or Iglesias is hurt.  See Youk in 2012. 

    I think I like both the kids, Iglesias and Bradley, as much as you do.  But the point of the OP is to say that their time will come--maybe even this year because of injuries--but in the meantime the team is doing pretty good after a very bad year which followed the worst September collapse in MLB history.  I think you are too easily captured by your vast store of statistics which prevent you from seeing the forest for the trees.

    And the forest is that this team is leading the very competitive AL East by 2 games, and you are desperately trying to find ways to fix what ain't broke.  You are no different from bill-806 or softlaw. 

     

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

    Re: What the

    See:  pitching.  clay & lester getting W's is the biggest difference.

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

    Re: What the

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Do you remember Rice & Lynn?

    I do.

    Sox4ever



    Yes, I do.  All the more reason to not feel pressed to rush Iggy or Bradley.  Promising futures?  Yes.  But the Gold Dust Twins DEMANDED, by their play alone, that they go to the show. 

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

    Re: What the

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Do you remember Rice & Lynn?

    I do.

    Sox4ever

     



    Yes, I do.  All the more reason to not feel pressed to rush Iggy or Bradley.  Promising futures?  Yes.  But the Gold Dust Twins DEMANDED, by their play alone, that they go to the show. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    See the paragraph I added to the OP.  Peter Abraham agrees with us. 

     

Share