Once Again, David Ortiz Wants Another Power Bat
by Randy Booth on Nov 19, 2009 4:44 PM EST
in News
Email
PrintDavid Ortiz is already singing the same story from last season:
The best stuff came when David was asked about the Sox needing more power in their lineup beyond retaining Jason Bay.
"I said that like a year ago and everybody was looking at me like I was a (expletive) clown. You know? I said we needed another 30-home run hitter. Everybody was talking trash. There you go. Now what?" he said.
"Everybody always will welcome a 30-home run hitter at any time, any day, any situation. You want to compete with those guys across the street? You better bring it. Period.
Ortiz said last season the Sox need another 30 home run hitter because Manny was gone. The answer was Jason Bay. He did that and more. He filled the void. Now Ortiz wants another 30 home run hitter in the lineup.
How 'bout you, Papi?
(Ouch. Stings. He was close, but not quite...)
If the Sox do try to acquire another 30 home run threat, where are they going to put him? Who are they going to get? Adrian Gonzalez is an option, which would push Kevin Youkilis to third base and send Mike Lowell packing. That would be losing 20 home runs from the lineup. So would we then have to make that up too, Papi?
We need a power bat, sure, but we also need defense and some more pitching. We also need our designated hitter to hit more than one home run between April and May. That'd be a nice boost to the offense.
60 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
pitching?
Our offense needs more help than our pitching. We should add some pitching depth to prepare for the inevitable injury, but nothing major is necessary. Apart from the ridiculous amount of injury that required Penny to be our #3 starter, the pitching wasn’t bad. With Matsuzaka in shape and Buchholz looking good, our rotation is looking pretty solid until Wake needs time off, so some depth is needed but offense was a much bigger issue.
I think if we can get Holliday, that will help a lot offensively, just because he is not as streaky as Bay and though productive, Bay seemed to slump for long periods of time at the wrong time.
I don’t think that getting Adrian and not having lowell every day would end up costing us 20 home runs… more like gaining us 20 home runs and saving us a ton of rally destroying GIDPs.
Defense is the issue? well a gonzalez/youk corner infield looks a lot better defensively these days than a youk/lowell one does.
Obviously those are ideals and it would be wonderful if they could happen, but may be too costly, but he does have a point. Look at how the Yankees offense just destroyed everything- the Sox don’t need to build a good team, they need to build a team that’s actually capable of taking on a powerhouse like the current yankees.
Agreed
The only thing I can say though is next year the Yankees will not be hitting as well as this year. Think of how many players had career years last year. I don’t think the Yankees will come crashing back to earth but they will not be as good as this year.
There pitching still lacks luster outside of CC and there defense is not great either.
How on earth is offense an issue?
We scored 872 runs last year, good for 3rd in the majors.
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 19, 2009 5:20 PM EST up reply actions
When
It depends on when the runs are scored. Winning one day 12 to 7 then losing the next day 5 to 2? You still average 7 runs per game. The Sox need hitters that hit well with RISP, in close games. Can you spell clutch?
Theo
I don’t think Theo’s action this offseason is looking for “clutch” players. He puts together a team that scores runs; he can’t necessarily control in which games they do that. He just puts the puzzle pieces together to get 95 wins…
Exactly
The problem wasn’t run production, it was consistent run production. The second half it looked like either everyone was on or everyone was off. In fact, the only player the sox had in 2009 who I would say had consistent good offense was ellsbury.
by wolf9309 on Nov 19, 2009 6:06 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
well over the year yes
There was just one fairly long period when he was hurt and couldn’t hit, which seemed like when everyone else was slumping too. But yeah, in general he’s very consistent. Last year was just poor for consistency which is hopefully somewhat a fluke.
Std.Dev.
Sounds like you guys are looking for some kind of standard deviation in a batters hits per week or something like that (where lower deviation means more consistent on a weekly basis). I took a pretty basic statistics class so don’t look at me for a formula for this. But somebody smart out there ought to be able to figure it out, eh?
Who’s up for it?
So which players do you think will be "clutch" in the future?
It is impossible to predict.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
you can't completely predict
But you can get an idea- some players just play better under pressure than others which doesn’t mean that they’ll get every clutch hit, but you can use stats in different situations to identify if a player will have a tendency to hit when under a lot of pressure.
Bill James has never found a stat that is predictive of “clutchness.” Hitting well with RISP or close and late in one year has not been shown to correlate with a player doing the same the next season, as far as I know. I would love to read these stats that you speak of.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
it's not one stat
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?n1=youklke01&year=2009&t=b look at the clutch stats, particularly with RISP and 2 out for various years.
It doesn’t work for everyone, you certainly can’t predict who won’t be clutch, but there are a few players out there who are reliably good in high-pressure situations. It’s an analysis tool, not a solution, I don’t believe there is a probably stat for everyone that will judge how clutch they will be, just that for certain players you can expect them to be good in high pressure situations. I’ll say again, it’s a weak statistic because it doesn’t work for everyone and you can’t predict who WON’T hit in clutch situations, but it helps get an idea.
I know there are stats that show who has been clutch in the past, but there is very little evidense that these stats are predictive. David Ortiz, for example, was intensely clutch for a few years, but just like everybody else, he has not proved to be clutch for an extended period. There very well could be players that are clutch, but you and everyone else has no idea who they will be.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
No I agree
it’s not something I would sign a player based on, but I DO think it’s something worth looking at (in combination with scouting) to see how they deal with high stress situations. Just something worth looking at. I think it is predictive for few players, but scouting + situational stats can give a good idea of how players handle different situations. I think form the patterns I’ve seen players drastically lose clutch hitting when they go through slumps, because they’re losing confidence in themselves, which hurts their batting abilities- for one example. Like I said, not something to sign a player based on, but I DO think it’s something very worth a team like Boston to be looking at for players they are scouting (they may be playing very well for 7 people in a single A ballpark, but will they perform as well 81 games a year for an overly boisterous sold-out Fenway?
There's always Clutchy McClutcherson
But I would avoid Chokey McFreakout
Rock me, sexy Jesus...
by nuthinboutnuthin on Nov 20, 2009 12:23 PM EST up reply actions
but clutchy mcclutcherson
never shows any emotion. I’d much rather see chokey mcfreakout get pissed off and punch the ump because he didn’t think that last strike was in the zone.
Clutchy McClutcherson = J.D. Drew
Chokey McFreakout = Jonny Gomes? Or would that be Ragey McSteroid?
Rock me, sexy Jesus...
by nuthinboutnuthin on Nov 21, 2009 5:32 AM EST up reply actions
That's Rogah.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
Yes, I can.
L-U-C-K
R-A-N-D-O-M C-H-A-N-C-E
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 19, 2009 6:21 PM EST up reply actions
A couple of points
The problem is, where are you going to insert more offense? The starters for six of our nine offensive spots are locked in. That’s assuming third base/first base is a question mark, plus shortstop and left field. I think it’s unlikely we get anything less than Bay/Holliday in left, meaning the offensive production should be the same or better in ‘09. At short, how many great hitting shortstops are available? I’d rather take a great defensive shortstop.
A Gonzo/Youk corner infield looks great, but the key word there is “looks.” I could say a Albert Pujols/Ryan Zimmerman corner infield looks great to, but the Red Sox will never see that. If we do bring in Gonzo, Youk isn’t the greatest defender at third. It’s still better than Youk/Lowell, but not by too much.
Pitching is a concern because while our bullpen was strong last year, there are holes now. Saito and Wagner are free agents, while Manny D. had a horrible second half. How good will RamRam be after finishing the season on a sour note? What’s going to happen with Papelbon this offseason? (I think nothing, but it should be at least asked).
The rotation seems set with Buchholz’s emergence, but there needs to be depth.
Of course pujols Zimmerman looks good
I mention Gonzalez because there’s a decent chance they’ll let him go. Youk is not the greatest defender at 3rd, bit miles better than Lowell these days, and Gonzalez is a good defender. I also do think if youk goes into ST preparing to mostly play 3rd, he’s going to perform better than he was with no preparation outside of MLB.
I agree about a defensive ss, I’ve had enough ss that couldn’t field the position.
From what I’ve seen from the sox and saito, I’ll be shocked if he’s on a different team next year. We do need another lefty in the pen bit that hardly precludes getting a bat (who will likely cost prospects more than $)
MDC and ramrams issues seemed pretty clearly to be a result of exhaustion over the year- both did better after a few days rest. I think they’ll be fine in April, I think Tito probably has to reexamine how often he uses them (if saito comes back the fact that he won’t be restricted to every other day should help quite a bit.
by wolf9309 on Nov 19, 2009 6:19 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Gonzalez
I see about a 5% chance of us landing Gonzalez, and that’s being generous. Padres have no reason to move him, so they’ll ask a lot. He’ll cost Buchholz plus others, so that would just create a hole in our rotation. The gap between Buch and Bowden/Tazawa is much greater than the gap between Gonzo and Lowell (Which is essentially the trade-off).
No reason?
They’re gonna lose him before they can contend. They need to get a legitimate return on him. Honestly, any franchise that doesn’t trade Gonzalez in this situation is just being run wrong. (I am, of course, assuming there’s no chance they can pony up for him in a couple years).
Unless you’re considering the fan reaction. If fans are foolish enough to need to keep a player at the cost of their future chances to win…
Of course, he’s in high demand, so they get a high return, but it’s not because they have no reason to move him. Still, I’m not sure it would take Buchholz necessarily. A package built around Kelly, Bowden, and Anderson could work.
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 20, 2009 4:22 AM EST up reply actions
They originally asked the world for Peavy
Wasn’t the final package not all that great? Sometimes it seems that the asking price depends on who another team has that the other team wants.
ok
This is the third time I’ve tried to response to this, but my browser is on your side and keeps closing.
They will absolutely trade Gonzalez, because keeping someone like him on your team when you can’t contend costs you a boatload of prospects and makes him unhappy (because players want to win).
This doesn’t mean he’ll go to us, but we have a decent shot.
I agree he will probably reasonably cost Buchholz+ more, but the consistency and great playing he provides outweighs that in my mind. Right now, looking at our rotation, we reasonably have 2 #1 starters, 2 #3 starters, and a #5 starters. There are players available for fairly cheap who could provide great value- and some of them like Duke, Harden seem to be coming off injuries that don’t seem chronic- I wouldn’t trust Bedard because his issues seem like they might be longer lasting. Buchholz would be a blow, but you have to give value to get value, and Gonzalez has amazing potential.
I would much prefer something centered around Kelly than Buchholz, partly because Hoyer is familiar with our prospects and his potential and partly because he still wants to play shortstop. I think even at this young age and inexperience, Kelly hasalmost as much value as Buchholz so would make it doable.
-1
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
-2
What sort of power? Despite playing in a HR neutral park, the Sox were third in the AL in HR. They were also second in the AL in doubles, and had the second-best team SLG in the AL.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Nov 20, 2009 11:49 AM EST up reply actions
2009
Red Sox were 3rd in baseball in runs scored, and 16th in team ERA.
That is pretty telling. I’d say the bigger issue is run prevention, not scoring runs.
Yup.
Though we should probably compare by league, which puts us at 7th for team ERA and still 3rd for runs scored.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
well it's a little bit silly for this guy to be saying anything
after his 2009 on and off the field.
Release Jason Varitek before ST is over !
Do not pay Jason Bay !!
Trade Buchholz !!!
Off the field?
He did nothing wrong off the field. And from June on, he was one of the most productive players in baseball. You think he’s gonna let himself have an opening in 2010 like he did in ‘09? Not gonna happen. He’s too smart and too good to let himself slip into that, Mark my words, I see a huge year from him next year, and it will be awesome.
Papi rocks. Still explosive. (Namely when mixed with soda :-D)
I know it's early, but it's never too early for a little optimism and hope. All I know is that Soxtober is the best month of the year.
His little steroid adventure soap opera was a distraction. And the part about having a good season June on is not the best point considering games are played in April and May. I doubt we see such a drastic bounce back, but hope I am wrong.
Release Jason Varitek before ST is over !
Do not pay Jason Bay !!
Trade Buchholz !!!
blame NESN
not Ortiz. He didn’t control that. He handled it fantastically.
FWIW I think that the player’s Union lawyer in his press conference told some very telling statistics. But this isn’t the thread for that…
That lasted maybe a week
and in any case he handled the situation pretty well. About as well as you could expect. And I know he was terrible over the first two months but being the hottest hitter possible after that signals he’s figured out whatever was wrong and it won’t repeat. I think a realistic number to expect is between 35-40 home runs this year but I’d love to see more.
I know it's early, but it's never too early for a little optimism and hope. All I know is that Soxtober is the best month of the year.
Except that Ortiz has started slow in both of his last 2 seasons.
And there’s no reason to expect a sudden change in that trend aside from optimism.
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 20, 2009 12:07 AM EST up reply actions
I'm not sure.
Is there some reason that he has been starting slowly? It hasn’t really been a trend until the last two years. And in 2008 he was great in May (but terrible in 2009). I know he is generally trending down as a player, but I would not be surprised if his best month next season is April (or if its his worst).
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
Adjustments
we just need to bring in Bay and Holiday…..and go NYY and bring in Lackey as well.
Problem solved!!!
Ohh yea we need to pay them……..Sorry big papi!!!
by Saintsfan4life on Nov 20, 2009 12:08 AM EST reply actions
It would go a long way if Papi were to retire and give up his last year's salary.
Stick Bay at DH, Holliday in left.
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 20, 2009 12:13 AM EST up reply actions
Oh, I don't know...
…they can do marvelous things with hormone therapy and surgeries these days.
Rock me, sexy Jesus...
by nuthinboutnuthin on Nov 20, 2009 12:25 PM EST up reply actions
I got you, Papi.
Let’s see, Vic will be playing a lot more than Tek this season, so that should net us at least 7-8 more homers. And the difference in non-homer production will count just as much.
And then there’s going to be some consistency at SS this season; Bill James is projecting a combined 15 homer season from Gonzo and Jed, which would be 3 more than all SS combined last season. [Of course, Jed could hit more than 9 homers, especially since James is projecting him at only 384 ABs.]
Youk should hit a few more homers if he avoids getting hit and reacting violently towards pitchers. Dusty might hit a few more too. So we’re at roughly 20 more homers so far… I wonder where we could find 10 more homers…
OH WAIT. Papi won’t have eye issues for two months to start the season. There’s another 10 homers, at least. So yeah, no worries, Papi. Now, about that positive PEDs test investigation you were looking into…
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
I'm far too trusting of Papi.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
Well, we do need to sign someone.
Preferably Bay or Holliday.
And I imagine that Bay and Holliday will sign first, and the second- and third-tier guys.
If we lose out on Bay and Holliday, we have to consider the alternatives – Cameron, Vlad, Damon, Matsui, Thome, Tejada, Beltre, Dye, Sheffield, etc., will wait for the market to develop.
I’d be intrigued by Vlad, but I think his days in the field are over. My first choice as a second choice would be Cameron.
As for signing two bats, there’s really no one on the market who’s enough of an upgrade over our existing lineup to make it worthwhile.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
Actually, I wouldn't mind signing Cameron to a 2 year deal if Ells could help a potential trade.
We have better options coming up in the minors (Reddick, Lin, Manifest, Kalish, etc.). Not sure if the teams that would be interested in Ells are the same teams that we need to look at for solutions to our issues though.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
But it wouldn't help them.
They could use the help a lot more later on.
@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Over the Monster
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Josh Hamilton on public relapse: ‘It was just wrong. That’s all it comes down to.’
- Photo: The Marlins’ ridiculous-looking home run sculpture is almost complete
- Yankees GM Brian Cashman lures alleged stalker into police dragnet
- Report: Josh Hamilton had a relapse with alcohol
- Happy Birthday Boy! Wes Ferrell, the best-hitting pitcher of all-time, would be 104
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
