Red Sox Sign Adrian Beltre To One-Year Deal With Player Option
The Red Sox have reached a one-year deal with free agent third baseman Adrian Beltre, according to multiple sources.
The deal will pay Beltre a base salary of $9 million in 2010. It includes a $5 million player option for 2011 and a $1 million buyout, and is contingent upon Beltre passing a physical exam, the sources said.
It seems like a done deal. If the money is true, this is a great deal for the Red Sox as it was being reported Beltre and agent Scott Boras wanted something in the range of three years for $10 million per season.
This is obviously a sign that Beltre wants to prove he can hit -- at the least. He'll come to the Red Sox for a year and try to make his big pay day for after the 2010 season. If he struggles, he can take the easy cash and give another season to the Red Sox.
I really love this deal. It's short and cheap. I can't decide which I like better of those two. This keeps the Red Sox's options very open down the line, depending what opens up.
With Beltre slotted in at third base, it seems like the Sox will continue to try to trade Mike Lowell. Word is the Sox may be sending him to the Mets in return for Luis Castillo.
0 recs |
211 comments
|
Comments
Randy, Ben, are there any draft picks involved?
Was he a type A or B? Also another pick for us next offseason I believe…..
"Hating the New York Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers and cheating on your income tax." -- Mike Royko
by sox-inda-south on Jan 4, 2010 8:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Nope. Our draft picks are basically set-in-stone now.
Type-B, so they get compensation, but not from us.
He should maintain his Type-B status next year if he leaves, at least. If not type-A. So we should get a draft pick next year.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 8:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That's nothing but good news.
Thanks.
"Hating the New York Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers and cheating on your income tax." -- Mike Royko
by sox-inda-south on Jan 4, 2010 8:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Let me make an addendum to that:
He was in with a good 10 or so “points” to spare, even with his awful performance last year. Since Elias rankings are based on a 2-year period, he would need to return to his 2008 numbers this year to at least ensure he’s in at Type-B when he leaves. He would need to have a very good year for him to make it to Type-A.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 8:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ehh.....I can still live with that.
"Hating the New York Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers and cheating on your income tax." -- Mike Royko
by sox-inda-south on Jan 4, 2010 9:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
re "they get compensation, but not from us"
Please explain. Who do they get compensation from? Would it be a sandwich pick? I don’t understand how it works. I thought (obviously incorrectly) that Type A FA’s got a 1st round draft pick or 2 non-first-round draft picks. I also thought that Type B FAs got 1 non-first-round draft pick. Again, I’m not being a smartass – I’m legitimately asking the question.
by rmarx on Jan 4, 2010 11:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They would get our second rounder but we’ve already given it up to sign either Scutaro or Lackey. They would get a sandwich comp pick between rounds 2 and 3 I believe.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Jan 5, 2010 12:00 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They get a Compensation Pick from thin air, essentially.
Type A gives you a first (or second if the pick is protected) round pick AND a supplemental pick that is found in the Supplemental Round, between the 1st and 2nd rounds.
Type B only gives you a Supplemental Round pick that comes from no other team, it’s really just an extra pick you got that’s slotted into the Supplemental Round
DFA Beckett
by South Coast Ghost on Jan 5, 2010 12:11 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This
So technically all our post first-round picks are 1 pick later.
But so are everyone else’s.
So yeah.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 5, 2010 12:13 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I like the deal, not sure if I love the deal
I thought he would get something along the lines of 3/$25M. Unless he falls flat on his face in ‘09, it’s a 1 year deal for $9M. It provides roster flexibility and doesn’t prevent them from acquiring someone like Cabrera or Gonzalez at the deadline. However, I would have preferred a true 2/$14M but that’s just being a bit greedy on my part.
by mg050369 on Jan 4, 2010 8:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
$10 million with the buy out....
I don’t see a spot for A-Gon or Miggy with this deal. Unless you are cutting into the DH realm….
"Hating the New York Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers and cheating on your income tax." -- Mike Royko
by sox-inda-south on Jan 4, 2010 8:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
its 1 yr
if agon becomes avail mid season, grab him and let beltre at end of year. Ortiz may not b doin good. DH youk put agon @ 1st
by Pl1166 on Jan 4, 2010 8:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Youk is a better defensive 1B than AGon.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 8:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Gold gloves are awful ways to determine defensive fielding ability.
A-Gon has UZR/150s varying from 6.2 to 6 over the last 4 years. Last year, he was good. Overall, he was average. The eye test will tell you he’s a pretty good 1B, but not great. Bill James’ +/ put him at a +11 last year, but negative for most of his career before.
Youkilis has UZR/150s varying from .9 to 15.2 over the last 4 years. Last year, he was remarkably good. Overall, he was very good. The eye test will tell you he’s an elite defensive 1B. Bill James’ +/- put him at a +6 to a +14 over the last 4 years.
Basically, both metrics and just plain watching him show that Youkilis is better.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 9:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Less likely but still possible
If Beltre struggles offensively and/or we see the early 2009 Ortiz all season, there would be room for Gonzo or Miggy. However, it’s more likely that either arrived, it would be after the 2010 season.
by mg050369 on Jan 4, 2010 8:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
hes a type B
If they lowell 4 castillo and send lowerie 2 AAA who backs up ss
by Pl1166 on Jan 4, 2010 8:40 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Castillo/Pedroia
Not ideal, but if Scutaro ever ends up on the DL we’ll just call up Lowrie, so it will be at most a very occasional game off.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 8:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't understand this deal at all
10 million guaranteed for a guy who has only hit over .290 once and has only had an OPS over .835 once. Can someone explain to me how this makes sense?
Say yes to 10 teams in a division and 6 teams in the playoffs.
by RhodeIslandRoxfan on Jan 4, 2010 8:57 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Its not about the batting......
Its about Beltre’s damn near perfect glove and his potential. Although his stats are depressed at Fenway, they may improve since he is moving from spaceous Safeco Field to tiny Fenway park.
"Hating the New York Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers and cheating on your income tax." -- Mike Royko
by sox-inda-south on Jan 4, 2010 9:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This
We shift from a cripple at 3rd to a defensive stud at 3rd. Last year’s offense was bad due to injuries and park, but overall we can expect something a lot closer to Beltre’s .829 away OPS over the last few years. It’s a short deal, so we don’t get stuck long-term with a bad deal. And it fills a need for the time we do have it.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 9:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Out of curiousity, he wasn't roiding.....right?
How in God’s name did he smash 48 home runs for the Dodgers?
"Hating the New York Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers and cheating on your income tax." -- Mike Royko
by sox-inda-south on Jan 4, 2010 9:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Very likely
But if that was a determinant in who we signed, we couldn’t field a team.
by BigRedDog42 on Jan 4, 2010 9:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm full of shit
It’s just easier to make blanket statements about that whole era.
by BigRedDog42 on Jan 4, 2010 9:11 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Roiding for 1 year? Seems unlikely.
Massive HR/FB% spikes happen from time to time. Look at Aaron Hill last year. Now imagine if he was a strong guy to begin with (Beltre tends to hit 20+). It happens.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 9:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I guess that would be the only way to explain it....
The fact it is only one year is what reassures me that this guy was clean.
"Hating the New York Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers and cheating on your income tax." -- Mike Royko
by sox-inda-south on Jan 4, 2010 9:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Roiding for a contract.
He wouldn’t be the first, and I wouldn’t blame him.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Jan 4, 2010 10:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i wouldn't absolutely rule out PEDs, but ...
Stepping back for a sec, Beltre’s career ratio of extra base hits / hits is 36.7%.
In his 2004 season, it jumped to 40%. A significant jump (3.3%), but not completely out of this world.
For comparison, in 2007, he was even higher at 42.1% – yet at 26 HRs no one would think it was a ‘roid’ year. And in 2008 he hit 25 HRs … but his ratio was only 37.2%.
So, basically his 2004 ‘power ratio’ was sort of within the noise of his career averages. That doesn’t mean he wasn’t (or isn’t) using PEDs. Just that it isn’t really a strong clue that he was.
by mmmmm on Jan 4, 2010 11:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
not looking too much into career numbers, but...
a single season that great compared to his career numbers – I find it EXTREMELY hard to believe that he had no ‘support’
by rmarx on Jan 4, 2010 11:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and by 'support'
of course I mean roids
by rmarx on Jan 4, 2010 11:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
A single season that great compared to his career numbers makes me skeptical.
It’s a one-year period. That’s not what Steroids look like unless you stop taking them immediately after. I suppose you could formulate a theory that he started roiding a few months into the previous season, got all set for the contract year, and then dropped them as soon as the season ended to “get rid of the evidence” as it were. But I find that a lot more suspect than “he had a career year”.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 11:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They did start more rigorous testing in 2005.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Jan 4, 2010 11:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
When did they announce it?
He would’ve had to have stopped pretty early for it to have not affected his 2005 numbers.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 11:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
that article was early january
but the writing was on the wall well before that. the congressional hearings were March 2004, i think it was foregone that they’d step things up in 2005…
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Jan 5, 2010 12:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
initial (weak) testing started in 2002
but after the hearings and the 2003 survey, they significantly upgraded the program in 2005.
by mmmmm on Jan 5, 2010 12:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yes exactly
once you stop taking steroids, it’s not like the muscle you’ve built up suddenly immediately disappears. It’s built on and will stay for a while- a long while if you keep up conditioning like a ballplayer does. If it was a couple of amazing years that declined fairly quickly, it would be believable, but I don’t think it looks like roids.
by wolf9309 on Jan 5, 2010 3:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
steroids
wasn’t Beltre suspected or perhaps even caught using roids??
by gojohn99 on Jan 5, 2010 8:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There was suspicion after his monster year in 04 and decreased production in 05 and 06 but he has never tested positive.
Or at least not that I know of.
I surrender
by RhodeIslandRoxfan on Jan 5, 2010 8:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Random speculation from having a career year.
That’s a pretty common phenomena, though. Cases in point: Carlos Pena, Aaron Rowand, Garrett Atkins, Ryan Ludwick, etc.
It’s just that in today’s day-and-age, everyone looks at a sudden change in numbers and cries foul. It gets worse when fans of the team that just shelled out are unhappy with the production. There’s no good reason to expect that Beltre took steroids other than 1 year he was really good. And really that doesn’t match the pattern of a steroid user’s numbers.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 5, 2010 8:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I would not pay a career .270 hitter
10 million for his glove.
Say yes to 10 teams in a division and 6 teams in the playoffs.
by RhodeIslandRoxfan on Jan 4, 2010 10:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Why not?
And why would you value his offense based on career batting average, of all things?
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 10:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
While his career OPS is just .779 and his OPS + is just 105
Last year his wOBA was just .305. I just don’t think he’s anything special offensively. And I wouldn’t pay him 10 mil because I would have spent the money differently. Instead of committing about 17 million to Cameron and Beltre this year why not sign Matt Holliday with that money? So much is coming off the books after 2010 anyway.
Say yes to 10 teams in a division and 6 teams in the playoffs.
by RhodeIslandRoxfan on Jan 4, 2010 10:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think folks need to look past his 2009 numbers a bit.
First, he was injured in a way last year that affected his play – no one seems to think these are recurring problems and prior to that he has no history of being injury prone.
HIs lifetime OPS is weighed down heavily by having spent half his career in Dodger Stadium and the other half in SafeCo.
His road splits are a much, much better indicator of what kind of hitter Beltre is. And they tell us he is a very good hitter. His career road OPS is .826, compared to his career home OPS of .727.
He’s going to do very well in Fenway, imho.
Great signing. 9.5 for 1 or 15ish for 2 is just the right price, too.
by mmmmm on Jan 4, 2010 11:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting Argument
The argument would be is
Holliday + Lowell at 30 mil > Beltre + Cameron at 17 mil
Beltre/Cameron Pros
Not signed long term – What if Holliday is a bust in the AL ala the A’s??
Defensive upgrades at 2 positions, potentially 3 if Ellsbury slides to LF
May lose a pick with Holliday signing (? not sure on this)
Beltre/Cameron Cons
Potential slackening of overall offense
Must get rid of Lowell and potentially eat some salary
by BobZupcic on Jan 5, 2010 12:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
WAR
WAR may be a bit flawed but using the last full season for the players mentioned. I’m using Beltre’s 08 because his injury was fluke and not inherent to his age/breaking down and Lowell’s 09 because he has chronic type injuries and is breaking down.
Cameron – 09 – 4.3
Beltre – 08 – 4.1
WAR Total – 8.4
Holliday – 09 – 5.7
Lowell – 09 – 1.2
WAR Total – 6.9
by BobZupcic on Jan 5, 2010 12:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You can't put Lowell + Holliday at 30 million and then not include him in the other side's salary.
He’s either a sunken cost or he isn’t.
But I think that dodging a 5+ year contract makes it all worth it in a big way.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 5, 2010 3:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Holliday was going to take 6-8 years at $18M.
That is a lot different than one year.
"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
by BTLove on Jan 5, 2010 1:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We just paid 82.5m
for a pitcher who’s only had more than 15 wins once. We don’t pay people because of BA or wins, we pay them because they’re actually good, which can’t be captured by those stats.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
by Sean O on Jan 4, 2010 10:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think Lackey is good
I don’t think Beltre is that good
Say yes to 10 teams in a division and 6 teams in the playoffs.
by RhodeIslandRoxfan on Jan 4, 2010 10:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good thing we're paying half as much for 1/5th the years then.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 10:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That's the saving grace
They don’t have to pay him for years if he’s a total bust.
Say yes to 10 teams in a division and 6 teams in the playoffs.
by RhodeIslandRoxfan on Jan 4, 2010 10:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
re bust
and if he’s not a bust, then we get screwed after this year. I agree that $10M guaranteed ($9M + $1M buyout) is too much for a defensive specialist. I I can’t see any possible world that Beltre should be making more than Figgins.
by rmarx on Jan 4, 2010 11:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Years are a significant factor.
If Beltre does poorly again this year, then he’ll make less over the 3-year period.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 11:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
years
if he does poorly, then we get stuck with him next year. if he does well, then to keep him we have to pay a lot for him next year. the deal isn’t horrible for this year (though I still think it’s too high for him), but nothing good can come of this next year.
by rmarx on Jan 4, 2010 11:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If he does well, we let him walk unless he's at a price we're willing to pay.
1-year deals are coups for the team, not the player. Sure, if we want to keep him we’d have to play a lot for him. But there are other options out there. The only time you ever want to sign someone to more years is when they’re young and you’re buying them out long term including some arb years.
Sure, we’re unable to stumble upon some miraculous comeback story and have him for 4 years for pennies on the dollar but, uh, that simply doesn’t really happen in baseball. Much better to have protection from a bad contract.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 11:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yup.
rmarx’s logic is way off. He seems to think more risk is better than less risk.
"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
by BTLove on Jan 5, 2010 12:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
its pretty incredible
that beltre is this years “low risk high reward” signing. and at one year 9 mil, he certainly is.
by revived0103 on Jan 5, 2010 12:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Over the past 4 years,
Figgins has a total WAR of 11.5 and Beltre has a total of 14. So in the world of objective analysis, Beltre should be paid more.
"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
by BTLove on Jan 5, 2010 12:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
One of the best 3rd base defenders
of the last 20 years as well as a history of very good offensive numbers before a disappearing act in the caverns of safeco. In fact, there are only two players all decade to ever have a season WAR over 10, Beltre and Bonds. So the potential for greatness is there.
by BigRedDog42 on Jan 4, 2010 9:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He really was not that good offensively
in LA either. He had that one moster year but that’s it. I just think it’s a lot to pay for a glove.
Say yes to 10 teams in a division and 6 teams in the playoffs.
by RhodeIslandRoxfan on Jan 4, 2010 10:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Pst...
Dodger Stadium is also a big ass park.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 10:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agree
But I don’t think it’s enough to make up for his mediocre offense.
Say yes to 10 teams in a division and 6 teams in the playoffs.
by RhodeIslandRoxfan on Jan 4, 2010 10:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He has an away OPS of .819 over the last 3 years.
And that includes last year’s injury ****fest. Is it great? No. But it’s basically the sort of stuff we’ve been getting from Ortiz, and Beltre is absolutely top-of-the-line at 3rd.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 10:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If when you're reffering to Otiz you are only talking about 09 than yes but
Ortiz’s OPS was way above that before last season. I just would have gone a different direction with the money this offseason but hey, time will tell.
Say yes to 10 teams in a division and 6 teams in the playoffs.
by RhodeIslandRoxfan on Jan 4, 2010 10:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I am so excited for this year
the AL East is going to be an absolute boodbath! The Yankees are awesome, and the Rays are damn good. Think about how much better our defense and rotation might be than in 07. That year we had a lights out Beckett, 150 innings of a decent Schilling, so-so Dice-K, typical Wake, and a lot of decent fill in out of the 5 (Tavarez, Stiffler, Buch, an up and down Lester). Offensively we had only 2 surprisingly good performances: Ortiz and Lowell (a decent but supar Manny who missed a bunch of time). Otherwise we had crap production from RF, CF, SS, decent from 1b, C, etc. Overall we scored fewer runs than last year, but the combination of pitching/defense and offense was good enough to have an 101 W-L record by Pythag. This year our defense is probably as good or better at every position, and our rotation is stacked (Lester, Beckett, Lackey, Dice-K, Buch). We could easily prevent more runs. Offensively while we will not have the classic Manny/Ortiz combo, we will not have the sure Lugo/Crisp/Tek outs in the lineup. Youk/Drew should be better, and we will not have a single totally easy out. We could match or surpass that team’s offense. If that team was an 101-level win team, it is damn exciting to consider the possibilities in 10.
by Buzzy on Jan 4, 2010 9:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
You think this year will be a bloodbath?
Wait till the Oriole and Blue Jay prospects crash the party in 2011 and 2012
"Hating the New York Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers and cheating on your income tax." -- Mike Royko
by sox-inda-south on Jan 4, 2010 9:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
especially the Os
Tillman, Matusz…have a lot of talent there…
by Buzzy on Jan 4, 2010 9:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wieters will improve as Markakis, Jones, Reimold enter their primes.....
They will not be pushover like this past year.
Toronto has TONS of young pitching. Like over 7 pitchers to choose from like Marcum, McGowan, Romero, etc….. They also have Drabek following suit.
I’m sure the Blue Jays have bats in the minors too, I can only name the recently acquired Brett Wallace.
"Hating the New York Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers and cheating on your income tax." -- Mike Royko
by sox-inda-south on Jan 4, 2010 9:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yes
I agree on both fronts. With both teams it will be interesting to see if FO F-s it up…
by Buzzy on Jan 4, 2010 9:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They'll have a hard time doing that.
Imagine the f’n AL East…..any one of those teams (if treated properly) could rule the f’n National League……
"Hating the New York Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers and cheating on your income tax." -- Mike Royko
by sox-inda-south on Jan 4, 2010 9:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
God this division needs to be broken up.
We could be 5 of the 8 teams in the playoffs come 2012, if things worked that way.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 9:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Five might be a stretch
but could see at least three if that happened.
Say yes to 10 teams in a division and 6 teams in the playoffs.
by RhodeIslandRoxfan on Jan 4, 2010 10:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We're already at 3.
The Rays are better than the Rockies and Twins were. No doubt.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 10:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I might give you the Twins but not the Rockies
I mean the Rockies finished with 8 more wins than the Rays. Thats quite a bit. Also the Rays only went 23-29 in their last 52 games.
Say yes to 10 teams in a division and 6 teams in the playoffs.
by RhodeIslandRoxfan on Jan 4, 2010 10:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Because they sold at the deadline.
Start of the year, the Rays were better than the Rockies.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 10:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
At the start of the season (or at least two months into it)
everyone but the Nats was better than the Rockies. (When they were 20-32) I think you have to measure the season as a whole and not take pieces of it. Otherwise you can create numbers for any team you want.
Say yes to 10 teams in a division and 6 teams in the playoffs.
by RhodeIslandRoxfan on Jan 4, 2010 10:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Also the Rays and Rockies had identical records of
56-47 at the deadline last year. After that the Rockies went 36 and 23 to end the season. The only team to win more games after that point was the Yankees. The Rockies would have had a better record than the Rays either way.
Say yes to 10 teams in a division and 6 teams in the playoffs.
by RhodeIslandRoxfan on Jan 4, 2010 11:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Rays are playing the Sox and Yanks all the time. The Rockies are not.
"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
by BTLove on Jan 5, 2010 12:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But
The Rays were 40-32 against the east and 44-46 against everyone else.
I surrender
by RhodeIslandRoxfan on Jan 5, 2010 1:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
dude, why are you posting on here?
you’re a rockies fan.
by revived0103 on Jan 5, 2010 12:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Because I hate the Yankees and
didn’t love the Beltre signing for the Red Sox. I wanted to see what the Red Sox fans here thought.
I surrender
by RhodeIslandRoxfan on Jan 5, 2010 1:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
all right
it seemed like you were getting dangerously close to trolling is why i ask
by revived0103 on Jan 5, 2010 1:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry if I crossed a line
I just like AL/NL debate. I know it’s a hot button issue so I’ll stop.
I surrender
by RhodeIslandRoxfan on Jan 5, 2010 1:09 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Out of curiosity what do you think the Red Sox lineup will be next year now?
I surrender
by RhodeIslandRoxfan on Jan 5, 2010 1:11 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'll give it a shot.
Ellsbury
Pedroia
Drew
Youkilis
Martinez
Ortiz
Cameron
Beltre
Scutaro
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 5, 2010 2:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That looks right
Thanks
I surrender
by RhodeIslandRoxfan on Jan 5, 2010 8:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I like it
But I doubt it will happen.
Tito likes the lefty/righty thing too much for the Cam-Adrian-Scoot sequence. He’ll probably stick Drew down there and put VMart at 3. I.E. something like:
Ells
Ped
VMart
Youk
Ortiz
Cam/Beltre
Drew
Beltre/Cam
Scut
I’m not saying that’s the right thing to do (personally, I’d put Drew at 1 or 2 and move Pedroia to #5) but I expect that’s what Tito will do. And its not bad by any stretch so I’m not going to stress over it.
I’m just glad we don’t have glaring automatic outs anywhere in that lineup (assuming nobody slumps as bad as Papi did last year!).
by mmmmm on Jan 5, 2010 10:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Huh. Damn good comparison.
This is a lot like the 2007 team. Better defense, maybe slightly worse offense, better starting, worse bullpen.
But really close in makeup.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 9:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bullpen
one interesting thought-Wake could be a swing starter long man. We had absolutely no long guy last year. However, no that VMart is the primary C, Wake can enter at any time. Really lengthens the pen. If MDC can get his shit together, and Bard continues to grow, this pen can be as good as 07s…
I am not even sure about the offense being worse. We could score 860 or so runs (by projection we are only 10-15 runs below last year)…
by Buzzy on Jan 4, 2010 9:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If MDC and RamRam get their shit together, we're fine.
But with Oki being a question mark again, I see 2 guys in our pen that make me feel secure: Paps, and Bard.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 9:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
in 07
our pen was great in the first half, and bad enough in the second half that we thought we needed….Gagne.
by Buzzy on Jan 4, 2010 9:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, Gagne was expected to be huge.
He wasn’t.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 9:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
HE WUZZ HUGE!!!
OMGZZZ HE WUZ A HUGE DISAPOINTMENT!!!!!!
"Hating the New York Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers and cheating on your income tax." -- Mike Royko
by sox-inda-south on Jan 4, 2010 9:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Okay what did that mean? I'm a little slow coming off winter break....
"Hating the New York Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers and cheating on your income tax." -- Mike Royko
by sox-inda-south on Jan 4, 2010 9:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Haha! Gotcha! Haha!
"Hating the New York Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers and cheating on your income tax." -- Mike Royko
by sox-inda-south on Jan 4, 2010 9:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Though we do have the potential, with those 3 guys, to have a much better bullpen.
But MDC was really good in ’07, as was Oki. I felt like we had a really definite 7-8-9. This year, we only have a definite 9, though I expect 8 will fall into place nicely.
I love Bard, if that wasn’t obvious by now.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 9:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe we can find another relief pitcher named Ramirez
Back to being serious though..
Our pitchers’ collective ERA/OPS-against will drop with the far improved defense this year.
by dsharp on Jan 4, 2010 10:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So long as he's not named Ramon.
That would just be silly.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 10:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Pedroia was also surprisingly good, IIRC.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Jan 4, 2010 10:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, you mean offensively. Well, let's put it this way:
2007:
Elite – DH
Very Good – LF, 3B
Good – 1B, 2B
Average – RF, C
Below Average – CF
Bad – SS
2010:
Elite – 1B
Very Good – RF
Good – C, LF, 2B, DH
Average – SS, 3B, CF
Now, those are my projections at least. I’d say anything in the .800-.850 range is good. .750-.800 is average. .700-.750 below average. If you’re in .900+, you’re elite. Obviously this isn’t exactly a mathematical process, but still.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 11:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Of course, it's worth considering that guys really stepped up in the postseason.
But that’s a crapshoot. Ellsbury had an OPS of .902. Anything is possible!
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 11:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
OK, but.........
How does Drew go from average in 2007 to very good in 2010?
Good to “Elite” for Youk?
May have to put Manny in to the Very Good to Elite for LF in 2007.
VMart at C will have to be rated at more than just “good”
DH (papi) in 2010 is a huge question; could go anywhere from very good to bad
All in all, one cannot deny the fact that the lineup is weaker every year since 2007. Some is envitable with the aging and antics of Manny and the decline of Papi, one of the best 3/4 combos of all time, albeit a short time.
by Scoop1981 on Jan 5, 2010 12:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
someone will certainly bring up the argument
that the red sox scored more runs 09 then 07
by German Red Sox Fan on Jan 5, 2010 12:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
How does Drew go from average to good?
Simple: In 2007 he was preoccupied with off the field issues and OPSed under 800. Since then he has raked for us.
Youkilis has continued to develop to the point he’s at now. Where in 2007 he was simply a solid offensive player, he is now an MVP candidate.
Manny was only an .881 OPS in 2007. That’s not elite.
I’m being conservative with VMart, much as I am with Papi.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 5, 2010 3:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
YESSSSSSSSS
oh my god, this is amazing. I am seriously stoked about this.
It’s not the Adrian we thought we were getting, but it’s an Adrian I’m thrilled to have
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
by Sean O on Jan 4, 2010 9:11 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Not terribly thrilled
I like the length of the deal, Beltre’s defense and the potential for his hitting to improve now that he’s getting away from Safeco, but isn’t Beltre kind of a pain in the clubhouse?
A bullhorn, a bottle of whiskey and a dream. GobblerCountry.com
by furrer4heisman on Jan 4, 2010 9:12 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
A Mariners blogger commented in the other thread
saying he plays his ass off every game and wishing him well. Doesn’t sound like a bad clubhouse guy. He’s probably pretty vanilla like most Boras clients.
by BigRedDog42 on Jan 4, 2010 9:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Apparently Lowell wasn't that great in the clubhouse after all the Tex mess either.....
…..just a rumor of course……
"Hating the New York Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers and cheating on your income tax." -- Mike Royko
by sox-inda-south on Jan 4, 2010 9:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
As I understood it
Beltre is a perfectly good guy who doesn’t get along terribly well with Ichiro. But Ichiro doesn’t have the best reputation, so I’d venture a guess that he’s the instigator.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 9:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Glad I'm wrong
Welcome aboard and hopefully playing in Fenway leads to a productive year. I just know my friends who live in Seattle and are Mariner die-hards weren’t fans of Beltre and were hoping he signed elsewhere.
A bullhorn, a bottle of whiskey and a dream. GobblerCountry.com
by furrer4heisman on Jan 4, 2010 9:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, he never performed as well as he was expected to offensively.
And defense is undervalued, especially by fans.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 9:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Isn't Drew hated by like half of Red Sox fans?
Doesn’t make him any less valuable.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
by Sean O on Jan 4, 2010 9:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
And also doesn’t make him a clubhouse issue. In fact, have you ever once heard a negative story about Drew in the Sox clubhouse? Sure, you don’t hear many positive ones, but I can’t think of any negative ones either. Sort of like his game. Very even keel.
Really, the Sox are remarkably good at keeping things professional, but not stiff. Which kind of makes you realize how out there Manny was. I think Beltre will fit in really well here. We’ve got a bunch of guys who tend to stand behind eachother so long as everyone does their job. And Beltre is a guy who’ll do his best to do his job.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 9:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Didn't he knife Sean Casey?
Rock me, sexy Jesus...
by nuthinboutnuthin on Jan 4, 2010 11:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm gonna go with a strong "Wut?"
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 11:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Kidding
Rock me, sexy Jesus...
by nuthinboutnuthin on Jan 5, 2010 12:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Some fans appreciate defense
There is a strong, almost cult-like, following in seattle because adrian beltre is a wizard with the glove and has a thousand strange, but entertaining, idiosyncrasies like pointing to the first base ump to appeal his own check-swings. Please don’t hate him like a lot of M’s fans did because he didn’t mash like his fluke year
by jruss22 on Jan 5, 2010 3:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Few of us will.
Though if he gets called out on strikes when he appeals his own check-swing in a big moment…
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 5, 2010 3:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh god - I forgot about that. Its actually kinda hilarious.
But yeah, Red Sox fans will not be forgiving if that happens.
by mmmmm on Jan 5, 2010 10:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Basically, the Mariners fans who know how to evaluate a player absolutely love him and are extremely sad to see him go
While the fans who base their evaluation on home runs and RBI think he was overpaid and have more of a “good riddance” attitude about him.
My Mariners blog - SodoMojo, Twitter Feed, Fuck the fucking Angels!
by gregrabble on Jan 6, 2010 12:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
JD Drew, anyone?
A very familiar story around here.
by mmmmm on Jan 6, 2010 12:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Mariners fan here
No idea where this rumor came from, but absolutely not. In Beltre’s time in Seattle there’s not a single club house issue that I can ever recall, and not only does he play the game harder and with more heart than almost any player I’ve ever had the privilege of watching, but from what I’ve heard he’s also served as somewhat of a mentor for the rest of the Latino players on the team.
My Mariners blog - SodoMojo, Twitter Feed, Fuck the fucking Angels!
by gregrabble on Jan 6, 2010 12:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The man finished a game
AFTER tearing his testicle.
by danhutz on Jan 6, 2010 12:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Closing the gap?
I updated my 2010 AL East WAR worksheet with the signing of Beltre. I have the Red Sox now within two wins of the Yankees with both teams hovering right around the 100 win mark.
vr, Xei
by Xeifrank on Jan 4, 2010 9:21 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
What are your numbers based off of?
2009 numbers? Or projections for 2010 ala Bill James & Fans?
If the previous, then I like our chances, given all those career years in NY.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 9:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
based off of
Projections for 2010, which come from a combination of Fangraphs and my own projections.
vr, Xei
by Xeifrank on Jan 4, 2010 10:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh well. Then I suppose I cannot discount the differences.
I should try that sometime. Projecting, that is.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 10:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
wow
you think BJ Upton will be a 5.1 WAR player next year? not only will he bounce back from the horrible ’09 he will play his best season so far? I call that pretty optimistic.
by German Red Sox Fan on Jan 5, 2010 5:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough
Upton may be a little high for a WAR projection. Fangraphs is projecting him at 5.0 WAR, probably based off what he did when he was healthy and adding a little based on where he is on the “age” scale. Perhaps around 4.5 is a better number for him. Thanks for the thoughtful replies everyone.
vr, Xei
by Xeifrank on Jan 5, 2010 12:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bill James has a much different interpretation of BJ Upton's offense next year.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 5, 2010 3:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't put too much stock
in Bill James’ player projections. If both Zips and Chone have him at 2.5 WAR then I’d be a little more impressed.
vr, Xei
by Xeifrank on Jan 5, 2010 4:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks.
I bet the total team numbers make sense. On the individual scale, it is hard to know. For example, Crawford has only had one year in his career where he has bested 5 WAR, and Upton has never done it. Alex Rodriguez in his last year as a healthy player (08) was 6 WAR, had a hip injury that led to horrible fielding numbers last year, and will be 35 this year. Unless that hip magically loosens up, he is going to have to put up a .470 wOBA to be a 7 WAR player. Either way, I bet it all evens out. It is going to be a fun year…
by Buzzy on Jan 5, 2010 8:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The way I see it
There’s no way someone can be against the Beltre signing but for the Scutaro one.
Scutaro is a player who has never done anything particularly well, he was just able to do more things less poorly for the last few years. Beltre is an elite glove with a potential to be an above-average bat, for a one-year commitment. Meanwhile we have Scutaro for 3 years when we know he’s not really going to be good at anything.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
by Sean O on Jan 4, 2010 10:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Eh. Mentally speaking, we expect so little from SS that I can see it.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 10:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
With Scutaro's career line
I’d say we expect shockingly little.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
by Sean O on Jan 4, 2010 10:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
With his discipline numbers last year
I expect a .340-.350 OBP. That’s not nothing after Julio Lugo, Nick Green, and Alex Gonzalez.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 10:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
The organizational options at 3B before Beltre (healing Lowell, or effectively Kotchman) were far superior to the options at SS (one-handed Jed or Plummeting-to-Earth-Nick).
Rock me, sexy Jesus...
by nuthinboutnuthin on Jan 4, 2010 11:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
thought scutaro signed 4 2yrs
He hits well plays D well and will bat 9th.
by Pl1166 on Jan 4, 2010 10:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There's no way anybody would sign him
for more than 3m in 2012. It’s a 3 year deal.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
by Sean O on Jan 4, 2010 10:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
At about 4 million per year.
That’s not much.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 10:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
it wasn't too bad when we were way under the tax
but now that we’re over, it’s looming larger. The draft pick loss is essentially meaningless now, but it’s still too much to pay for a backup shortstop.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
by Sean O on Jan 4, 2010 10:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So, when's truck day?
Lets sign some bullpen arms and get it on!
"Is everyone in my life freakin' bananas?" - Tony Soprano
by OH-FOUR on Jan 4, 2010 10:22 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Just about a month to go!
I wish we hadn’t spent on a nobody like Bonser. Better to double the salary and get at least a reasonable arm.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 10:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
dont get it
What do they see in Bonser, sux. what did we pay him
by Pl1166 on Jan 4, 2010 10:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Minimum.
But a guarantee is a guarantee. And a trade is a trade.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 10:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Go get Kiko Calero
Haven’t heard anything on him in a while. Had a great season with Marlins. Won’t repeat it, but could be good for little money.
DFA Beckett
by South Coast Ghost on Jan 4, 2010 11:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
what a deal for us.
We got him surprisingly short term by overpaying slightly this year and giving him the option next year. he’s obviously an elite glove and a solid hitter, and with him we officially have a defense with no holes and a fantastic pitching staff, especially if we shore up the bullpen.
by the way, barring injury this completely closes the door on jed lowrie as a starter for this team. either he’ll be a utility man for the next couple years or he’s traded. kinda too bad, but things seem to be working out for the best.
by revived0103 on Jan 4, 2010 10:27 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Not so fast
If one of Beltre or Scutaro falters badly during their first few months in Boston, Lowrie could get another shot at being a starter. (The Sox have learned not to be too forgiving in their expectations.)
Personally, I wouldn’t mind seeing competition for the starting SS spot between Scutaro and Lowrie.
by lone1c on Jan 4, 2010 10:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Lowrie is basically a super insurance policy.
He’s also our backup, but likely playing AAA to stay ready.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 10:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Y high on Lowrie
did nothing last yr (hurt) in 2008 hit .258 with little power and no speed. Played his position well which to me makes him a util player
Last yr Scutaro was 4th in runs scored and 4th in OBP @ the ss pos. I dont expect him to repeat that but he’ll be better than what we had or Lowrie
by Pl1166 on Jan 4, 2010 10:52 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
He was supposed to be an offensively plus, defensively suspect shortstop coming through the minors.
When he made it to the MLB, though, he fielded his position very well and was a strong offensive player, too. The problems came when he fractured his wrist, which led to awful lefty righty splits. As a righty, he KILLED lefties. But since his left wrist was injured, he was all-but-helpless against the majority of pitchers. However, those splits didn’t appear until after the injury, and he never showed any sort of problem batting lefty in the minors, so there’s no reason to believe that he won’t be able to hit righties well when he’s fully healed.
The problem is that the Red Sox handled the situation poorly, by having him play through the injury due to their SS difficulties in ‘08, and then trying to bring him back too early in Spring. They’ve never let the injury completely heal. With all this rest time, though, and some rehab time in Pawtucket, he’s still got all the potential he ever had in the minors—except with the added bonus that we know he can play defense!
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 10:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
what he do in the minors
I dont remember him ever being considered one of bos top prospects
by Pl1166 on Jan 4, 2010 11:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He was for a while. Hasn't been mentioned as one the last couple years because he's considered "graduated".
.877 OPS in Lowell his first year
.911 OPS in Portland in his third year.
~.830 OPS in first stint in Pawtucket over his 3rd and 4th years.
He’s always been a good OBP guy. Works counts. He’s even shown flashes of pop early on, though it didn’t translate to AAA yet. Really, though, since he was called up and injured, Lowrie has never been allowed to really get back to just playing baseball consistently. If they give him a few months at AAA, fully healed, and then bring him back up, he should have a good shot at reclaiming his former glory.
His last ranking at Sox Prospects was #3. In 2008, he was ranked #73 in all of baseball (for comparison, Daniel Bard was #71 in 2007).
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 11:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
During the second half of the 2008 season
The Sox basically threw everything you could throw at a rookie at him all at once. I don’t think there are many rookies that have to play every day while injured, and then adjust to batting in five different spots in the order (2, 6, 7, 8, and 9), as well as playing at three different positions (2B, 3B, and SS)—and sometimes more than one position during the same game.
His glovework was excellent, he shows some power with the bat—plus he seems to be one of the few Sox in 2008 that understood the concept of the “sacrifice fly.” And given that he didn’t crack at all under the pressure, he’s pretty sharp mentally, too. So, injury aside, it’s hard not to root for a player with that kind of profile.
by lone1c on Jan 5, 2010 9:09 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I can finally say I like the 2010 Red Sox
What a great deal. I’m surprised you all are not more enthused.
Scutaro, Lackey, Cameron, Beltre. Nice prime additions to the team.
Defense is going to be absolutely STELLAR.
Hitting will keep pace or even exceed last year.
As long as Ortiz and Drew cowboy-up the 2010 Sox are looking pretty darn sweet in my book.
by Snowball on Jan 4, 2010 11:38 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I really doubt hitting will keep pace.
But the defensive improvements are going to outweigh those losses by quite a bit. We went from the bottom of the pile to the top these last few months.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 4, 2010 11:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hitting should be close
Got VMart all year over Veritek . Should get more production out of SS even batting 9th should be around 350 OBP had 90 walks last year I think we’ll get more out of 3rd with Beltre 25-30 hr’s @ fenway Cameron should be around 25hr’s. Ellsbury seems to be improving a little every yr, finished on a tear. Ortiz is a ? mark, but I’m hoping he can turn it around and have a better yr than last
by Pl1166 on Jan 4, 2010 11:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think the overall offense will be at least on par with 2009
What have we lost? A full season of Bay. Elsewhere I see only pluses.
Offensively, going by position,
Catcher: Mostly VMart >>>> Varitek/VMart mix
1B: Youk >> Youk/VMart/Kotchman mix
2B: Pedroia == Pedroia
SS: Scutaro >>> the mess that they had last year at SS
3B: Beltre >= Lowell / Youk mix
LF: Ells <<<<< Bay
CF: Cameron >>> Ells
RF: Drew == Drew
DH: Papi ???? Papi
Yes, Ellsbury is no where near the offensive player that Bay is. And no single player they’ve added is. But the many individual upgrades almost certainly, imho, will add up to more than they’ve lost offensively in Jason Bay.
A big question is Papi. I certainly don’t expect Ortiz to return to his .990 OPS days. But I can’t believe he’ll have the same bizarre slump he started last year with. If he gives us just ‘mostly like’ how he hit last year after the slump, he should give us around a .840 OPS or so (I think James is predicting .850). If he does, then I like our chances to produce more runs than last year.
by mmmmm on Jan 5, 2010 12:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hm. You might be right. I might just write a story on this.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 5, 2010 12:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
please do!
I’d love a detailed projection analysis in terms of expected run creation for the new lineup.
by mmmmm on Jan 5, 2010 12:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
even with losing bay, i think we added power this offseason.
25 from cameron will help, so will 25 from beltre and 12 from scutaro. we’ll lose lowell’s 15 or 17, but thats a gain of ten or so home runs.
by revived0103 on Jan 5, 2010 1:16 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and pitching
add in Lackey, improvement for Buchholz and a full season of Dice-K
by BobZupcic on Jan 5, 2010 12:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
this is starting to feel a lot like christmas
that’s all i’ll contribute for now, more later.
by wolf9309 on Jan 5, 2010 12:25 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Thank god for OTM
I really cant appreciate this community enough, whenever I have finished reading the comments over here and still got some freetime left, I might look up comments on other sites like: mlbtraderumors, espn, cbssports, boston herald, boston globe etc. So i just did that regarding the beltre signing. The amount of just plain stupid comments on most of these other sites is just mind-boggling. You gotta read comments along the lines of: “Lowell is a gold glover too and he hits for a much higher average, SOX JUST GOT WORSE”. I am not gonna say everybody here is a genius (let alone myself) but the quality of discussion is really special over here. Sorry for the ass-kissing, but after some shocking minutes on some other sites I kinda had to say that.
by German Red Sox Fan on Jan 5, 2010 5:46 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
no need to apologize
I completely agree with you, I read some of the stuff on other sites and it was so mind-boggling that I refused to post comments.
by cthunder on Jan 5, 2010 6:11 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm with you all the way.
I used to consider OTM my backup Red Sox conversation. Not anymore at all. Of course, not all of us agree with the new-fangled stats, but that’s not the problem at all. The problem is the misinformed stuff. The idea that Lowell is still a gold glove defender when even the most basic of eye tests say “not anymore”.
I think there’s too much bias elsewhere. Obviously here we’re almost all Sox fans. And that sort of dispels a need to tow the party line. We can be critical of the Sox without being accused of trolling, or the like. And just the same we can realistically evaluate, say, the Yankees without being accused of being Yankee fanboys.
Not that any of us would be confused for that given the copious usage of “MFY”, but still.
Beyond that, though, it’s just how the community develops. Most of our posts are from a sizable population of regulars, which will always tend to result in a higher level of discourse.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 5, 2010 6:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If everyone agreed on everything
then we’d have nothing to talk about.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Jan 5, 2010 7:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Last night on 'Sport Tonight'
Lou Merloni was trying, with a lot of futility, to explain the case for Theo’s moves to Felger and Tanguay. He was actually spot on, without bombarding them with numbers, in stating the basic points that we are all familiar with here. I was pretty proud of him for a moment.
They were unyielding in their defiant adherance to ignorance. Sigh …
Then this morning, John Meter-Perel (sp?) tried to explain the same concepts to those idiots Dennis and Callahan on WEEI. He tried to explain how Lowell ended up with a -10 UZR150 and how that cost us a win and that …. well, it just bombed. More defiant “I don’t wanna unnerstand all dat crap!” ignorance.
by mmmmm on Jan 5, 2010 11:00 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I've said it before and I'll say it again
If you’re ever on the fence about a move, just listen to the mouthbreathers on talk radio. Whatever side they come down on, you go with the opposite.
DFA Beckett
by South Coast Ghost on Jan 5, 2010 1:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Every time one of the stats arguments bombs
They should just mention “Hey, assholes, it’s adherence to these stats that has brought us 2 world series titles in 4 years’ time! Theo uses them, and they work, so stop trying to criticize him from the view of the drunk guy in a sports bar!”
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 5, 2010 3:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Brownie Points
add Brownie Points to that list
by BobZupcic on Jan 5, 2010 12:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good Deal
This deal should please just about all Sox fans, except the real Mike Lowell fans. Really, what’s not to like? The Sox upgraded the position for 2010 with a solid player on a one year deal, $10mil. commitment. This also plays right into the bridge year, roster flexibility plans. The $5 mil player option is a joke, just insurance for the player in case he gets hurt or really tanks. Hell, if is is that bad the Sox could just cut him a check next year and send him on his way.
by Scoop1981 on Jan 5, 2010 7:02 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
yeah, the max they are committed to is 15M
if he tanks this year ($9 M) and exercises his option for next year ($5 M) they can exercise the buyout ($1M) and we’re done.
I expect though, that he’ll be fine, have a great year and will not exercise his option so our total expenditure will just be the $9 M.
by mmmmm on Jan 5, 2010 11:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
max commitment is $10M
If he excercises his option and we don’t want him, it is only a $1M buyout. So $9M this year and $1M (if he doesn’t play for us) next year.
"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
by BTLove on Jan 5, 2010 11:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm.... that seems to the detriment of the player
What good is his ‘$5M player option’ if the team can buy it out for $1M?
by mmmmm on Jan 5, 2010 11:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
isnt that some sort of cbt trick?
his contract now counts as 2y/14M concerning cbt or am i wrong? so 7m this year.
by German Red Sox Fan on Jan 5, 2010 11:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good deal?
The more i think about this deal the less i like it. I understand Beltre is an upgrade from Lowell (defensively), but the problem is Beltre is not cheap. 9 million may seem like a good deal but think about this. Now that we got Beltre we will more than likely move Lowell who being payed 12 mil this year. Even if a team signs him chances are the sox will pay the bulk of the salary (they settled for 9 mil from texas). This makes Beltre basically 18 million dollars
by cnubsbl16 on Jan 5, 2010 11:55 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Not cheap
Sure, not cheap, but that is the market for a good, veteran player. I’m not a huge Beltre fan, but this is a one year patch deal, not some big commitment. Rember, this is the Red Sox were talking about, they have money, they just don’t want to make bad deals, especially long-term bad deals, see Lugo. Smoltz, Penny, Gage, etc. were all largely thought to be good deals at the time. None of them worked out, but at least they could just cut and run without having to eat some huge contract (Renteria, Lugo, Lowell coming), they could just move on.
by Scoop1981 on Jan 5, 2010 12:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Beltre does not cost $18MM
They tried moving Lowell and his contract back during the Winter Meetings. His Almost Trade to Texas just proved that the FO was determined to get rid of him at almost any cost. The Mike Lowell trade would be completely separate, in my mind, from a Beltre acquisition. It’s not fair to say Beltre costs his contract PLUS Lowell’s.
DFA Beckett
by South Coast Ghost on Jan 5, 2010 1:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
we all know they were talking to Beltre during this time. If beltre was not available they would be keeping Lowell around
by cnubsbl16 on Jan 5, 2010 2:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This is one of the biggest fallacies of all.
A player does not take on the bad contract of the player they replace. Mike Lowell is a sunken cost who would take 12 million out of payroll regardless of whether or not we signed Beltre. It’s actually a lot more accurate to say that Beltre makes them more able to shift Mike Lowell and hopefully recover some of his salary. You could take a few million OFF of Beltre’s salary by that logic.
You COULD say that the improvement from Lowell to Beltre isn’t worth Beltre’s contract, but I’d say that’s not the case given that this was money to be spent this year which we managed to dump into a 1-year deal.
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 5, 2010 3:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If Lowell goes all the money we have left to spend on him is just a sunked cost exactly. But if Beltre would not have been acquired we would have just stuck with Lowell (which i dont think would have been a bad idea)
by cnubsbl16 on Jan 5, 2010 4:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I doubt we would have stuck with Lowell
with this defense-centered offseason, the guy who cannot play defense anymore was not going to end up in the hot corner.
by wolf9309 on Jan 5, 2010 7:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If Beltre wasn't available
we probably would’ve been players for Figgins.
Manny ain't the only bad man.
by tommy.otm on Jan 6, 2010 7:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You are absolutely wrong.
The Sox did not want to play Lowell at 3B at all this year. They knew they needed someone else, so his contract (as Ben says) became a sunk cost. It means the Sox made a mistake in extending Lowell, but it says nothing about the Beltre signing.
I know I’ve pulled out the econ terms before, but again, economic decisions are based on marginal costs, not total costs.
"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
by BTLove on Jan 5, 2010 7:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Love from the Stat Geeks
Dave C. over at fangraphs
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/beltre-to-boston
by BobZupcic on Jan 5, 2010 12:21 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
No kidding.
I think some of that bears repeating:
"[Beltre is] clearly the best [third baseman] I’ve ever seen in person," said Tampa Bay Rays manager Joe Maddon. "I think [Evan Longoria] is good, I used to think Scott Brosius was really good. … [Eric] Chavez was good, but Beltre was stupid good. I think Beltre is the best who I’ve ever seen with my two eyes – defender, not just third baseman, but defense."
and [from the Dave Allen article]:
You can see Beltre’s power is to left, typical pull power for a RHB, and that he gets more power in away parks through much of left and left-center field. The differences look slight, but many flies and lines to left over the course of a season makes up for the big difference. Interestingly, he also gets more power in away parks to extreme right field, where I had thought Safeco was a little more generous.
Sounds good to me…
Rock me, sexy Jesus...
by nuthinboutnuthin on Jan 5, 2010 1:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Defense
With this move the Sox took arguably one of the weaker defensive leftsides in the AL to arguably the top
08: Lowell (3B), Bay (LF), Green/Gonzalez (SS), Ellsbury (CF)
09: Beltre (3B), Ellsbury (LF), Scutaro (SS), Cameron (CF)
Balls will be hard pressed to get through or fall in anywhere. Beltre immediately makes Scutaro a better defensive player because he’ll have less ground to cover and can position closer to 2B.
by BobZupcic on Jan 5, 2010 12:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

by 


















