Victor Martinez Leaving Boston, Going Back To AL Central
by radiohix on Nov 23, 2010 12:00 PM EST
Email
Print
Earlier today, ESPN Deportes' Ignacio Serrano reported from Venezuela that the Detroit Tigers and Victor Martinez were close to a 4 year, $50 million deal.
Ken Rosenthal would later confirm the report. The Red Sox weren't comfortable in giving that kind of years to the switch-hitting catcher as they offered him a 2 year contract during the season.
The Red Sox will get the 19th Pick of the 2011 Draft (a really deep one) and a Supplemental rounder as long as the Tigers don’t sign Lee, Jeter, Rivera, Werth or Soriano before the arbitration deadline. The 19th pick will be the 2nd highest Pick of the Epstein Era.
Good luck to V-Mart: A classy player.
518 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Best of luck to him, indeed.
He’ll be missed.
Also:
@#$%!!! @#$%!!! @#$%!!! @#$%!!! @#$%!!!
VMart for 12.5 per? Goddammit, that should have been us.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
According to mlbtraderumors
He turned down a 3 year $48 mil contract offer from chicago, so he went to the team he wanted to instead of where the money is
He probably wanted the years
He was very comfortable in Boston.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
Right.
So I’m saying, we should have been the one to offer it.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
Well if the plan was to only catch him for two more years
then I wouldnt want any part of him in 2013. By then he would be a below average DH or 1st baseman who is getting paid 12.5 mil.
I still subscribe to the theory
that because he was converted to catcher from IF, there is no reason to believe he couldn’t catch into the 4th year of that contract.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
Front Offices have some data (medical, bio-mechanical, etc) that we don't have access to
So I’m willing to trust Theo and his crew on that one.
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
Agreed
However, FOs do make mistakes. And Theo has fallen in love with project players like Salty before (Pena and Hermida). Hopefully, the Sox acquire a legit catcher. Time will tell if letting VMart walk was the right move.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Nov 23, 2010 12:54 PM EST up reply actions
Good point
I’ll be very uncomfortable with Salty as the every day Catcher: We need a legit RH catcher.
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
Of course they do
But on the whole, they are much more informed and have access to better sources than fans do, so there is a certain amount of trust involved. I trusted them on Bay, I’ll trust them on Victor.
And despite what the FO says, I’m not convinced they see Salty as the starting catcher for next year. In 2012 if things go well? Sure, absolutely, but I think he’ll be a back-up catcher or a platoon guy at best next year, so I expect some kind of catcher acquisition to come.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 1:20 PM EST up reply actions
I trusted them on Bay
I’m highly skeptical on VMart.
In Theo We Trust isn’t exclusive for me.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
Nor should it be
I know Lester and Buchholz both like him, but I’m skeptical of his game calling/receiving abilities, and to me that’s a big part of being a catcher. Just IMO of course, and I’m not the one making decisions.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 1:28 PM EST up reply actions
Napoli, who a lot of people here now seem to want, has a poor defensive reputation
And Salty is a huge question mark.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Nov 23, 2010 1:53 PM EST up reply actions
People keep bringing up Napoli's defensive problems.
He’s not that bad. I’ve seen him plenty and I’d certainly take his glove above VMart’s.
Mike Soscia is kind of an idiot. Mathis is roughly Napoli’s equal defensively in every way we can measure. There’s certainly not some huge gap between the two defensively as Soscia seems to think.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:01 PM EST up reply actions
That link has
-Mathis as worse than Napoli
-VMart as worse than Napoli
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
True
But he is “that bad” defensively.
You’ll never here me arguing that Mike “Should-have-been Career Suicide Squeeze” Scoscia is not an idiot.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:08 PM EST up reply actions
That's true.
Napoli is certainly not any great shakes behind the plate… but I’d definitely take it for that bat.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
Agreed, just not at Victor's cost.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:12 PM EST up reply actions
Napoli would cost a lot less though.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 1:56 PM EST up reply actions
But, we're not talking about just one organization here
The Tigers also are more informed than we are.
I think Theo is a good GM. But he has made mistakes in the past. I’m not saying letting VMart walk is necessarily a mistake. Time will tell.
The Jason Bay analogy isn’t necessarily a good one. The Sox have organizational strength in the OF. They are weak at catcher. Last year and this year there are many more FA OF options than there are catchers. Also, the Mets clearly overpaid for Bay. It’s less certain that VMart’s contract is necessarily a bad one.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Nov 23, 2010 1:52 PM EST up reply actions
They aren't really that weak
Lavarnway, Ibarra, and Expo are all decent high-level catchers.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 1:57 PM EST up reply actions
None are sure bets to be starters in the majors
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Nov 23, 2010 1:58 PM EST up reply actions
Neither are there outfielders.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 1:58 PM EST up reply actions
The OFs have higher ceilings
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Nov 23, 2010 1:59 PM EST up reply actions
That's debatable.
Kalish may be a better defender/hitter than any of them, but he plays the outfield. Positional adjustments would probably put a successful Lavarnway/Expo/Ibarra around the same level as a successful Kalish.
Only Westmoreland has a cieling worth going crazy over.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:00 PM EST up reply actions
Their
God I need Thanksgiving sleep.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 1:59 PM EST up reply actions
This ignores the fact the Tigers reportedly don't plan to even use VMart as a catcher that much.
So who cares about our organizational depth at a position the guy won’t be able to play full time in a year anyway?
I think most people would wager this contract is going to work out poorly (especially at the end) for the Tigers.
Personally, I think this is EXACTLY like the Bay situation. We MAY regret this in 2011 slightly. After that… no way.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
That's because the Tigers have a great defensive catcher already
On the Sox, VMart would start.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Nov 23, 2010 2:00 PM EST up reply actions
Who do the Tigers have?
Are you talking about godawful Gerald Laird? Probably not gonna be back? Avila sucks defensively.
Flat out, no way VMart is a full time catcher by 2014. No way. No one sees him as one, even the team that signed him. The Red Sox obviously didn’t. His fringy defense is going to get worse as he slows down – and he’s now reaching the age where catchers break down. It would only be a question of whether we pull him from behind the plate because we can’t suffer the defense anymore OR whether he breaks down physically. Either way we’re stuck with a below average 1B (both offensively and defensively) for a couple more years at least on the decline. AND we’d be paying him 13(?).
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
Why do you say Avila sucks defensively?
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 23, 2010 2:04 PM EST up reply actions
b/c he's not that good defensively.
“sucks” might be a little strong, sure, but I was refuting the assertion he’s “a great defensive catcher.”
he’s not athletic, even for a catcher. He’s slow to the point of being a base-clogger, he doesn’t move well behind the plate, and he needs to improve his receiving skills.
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=9796
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
Stats say he's decent. Can't block pitches, but makes up for it with his arm.
-20 strikes in catcher framing metric, which is just “below average” and not into awful territory.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:09 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, I overstated this.
You guys are right… I was worked up by the logic above w/ regards to VMart.
Still not sure he’s even talking about Avila… i think he meant Laird.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
Hmmmmm...
Well, at least I love the bat.
Not sure if I buy anything that KG says but I will pay attention to Al’s D next time I see him.
Expect a big uptick in offensive production from Avila either next year or the following season.
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 23, 2010 2:10 PM EST up reply actions
How can you love that bat?
He had 60 nice ABs in 2009 and hasn’t replicated it at any other time.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:11 PM EST up reply actions
He doesn't even have 400 ABs in the Majors.
My love is based on what he did in the upper minors a year removed from college and video (I see a .200+ IsoP year-in-and-year-out with good plate discipline.
Those wrists…
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 23, 2010 2:18 PM EST up reply actions
.275/.355/.480
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 23, 2010 2:20 PM EST up reply actions
He's had decent-good AA numbers, not great A numbers.
Never put up a .200 IsoP, strikes out a ton…
I’m just saying that for every bit he hasn’t had a chance to prove himself in the majors, he also hasn’t really proven himself elsewhere. Hell, Ryan Lavarnway has a better track record than he does.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:22 PM EST up reply actions
A-ball was the season he was in college.
Those stats usually aren’t too telling.
He was a year out of college in AA…definitely not peak power output.
Wait and see!
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 23, 2010 2:24 PM EST up reply actions
True enough on A-Ball.
But he was 22 in AA. Not peak power output necessarily, but it’s not like he was a kid.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:26 PM EST up reply actions
Ehhh, we'll see.
It really boils down to scouting for me.
Looking at his swing and seeing what kind of power it could lend itself too.
I did the same thing with Ian Desmond…it’s a hit or miss approach in itself but lethal combined with sabermetrics.
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 23, 2010 2:29 PM EST up reply actions
To my recollection he was always considered an offensive minded catcher prospect who would be "ok" defensively...
Maybe I’m remembering it wrong.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
He's fallen in love with project players like Pena and Hermida.
Oh come on.
Those two weren’t even supposed to start games.
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 23, 2010 2:01 PM EST up reply actions
Agreed
Hermida only lasted as long as his RISP luck.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:02 PM EST up reply actions
I'm going to guess
that the Chicago deal was misreported. Haven’t seen that echoe anywhere else besides that Venezuelan report and it seems way out of left field.
Platooning Napoli and Salty at the C position could give us a better offensive production and equal defense.
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
Like it!
I really like Napoli. He can catch Lackey – another plus. He would smash doubles off the Green Monster!
Cameron quote
@radiohix
What was the context for Dave Cameron’s quote
He was opposed to a trade rumor sending Papelbon AND Lester for....Ryan Church!
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
Sending them to M's
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
Hagadone and Price
We recouped that “loss” of value with 2 Top 2011 Draft Picks.
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
Jury is still out on what we gave out in Hagadone (1st RD, '07) and Price (1st RD, '08).
The big lefty was missing bats but also struggled to find the plate in A+, AA in ’10.
85.2 IN, 89 SO, 63 BB
Price, as a reliever, missed bats but had much better control in AA.
69.1 IN, 69 SO, 22 BB
We do get good picks in ’11 but Masterson, Hagadone, and Price may prove to have been a solid trade by Cleveland.
Quick thoughts...
1) We figured this would happen.
2) I wonder what position V-Mart will be playing in years 3 and 4 of the contract.
3) We get two draft picks as compensation (after offering arbitration).
4) Now catching – Salty and ??? Tek?
Didn't even have a chance to offer him arbitration
We would have, of course, but the Tigers didn’t even wait until that formality, and signed him before the arb. deadline (tonight) and we get the picks automatically.
Oh, and it’s the 19th Pick and a Supplemental Round Pick, not a 2nd rounder
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 12:14 PM EST up reply actions
You're right: Supplemental!
/Brain fart
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
V-Mart (4.1) and Varitek( 0.7) produced 4.8 fWAR in '10.
Who platooning with Salty will match this or where else will the wins come from?
Good luck back in the Central. Your bat will be greatly missed.
we certainly aren't going to match Vmart's WAR from the catcher position
but there are other areas we can, fortunately.
Probably won't match up the same in terms of WAR
Although WAR for catcher’s isn’t exactly the reliable science it is for other positions.
But if you get an upgrade in other areas, it could offset it, and you’d probably save money to boot.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 12:37 PM EST up reply actions
That's a luxury
from the catcher spot – can be made up elsewhere – like an outfield that produces more than 4 as a group
Pedrioa, Youkilis, Ellsbury, Cameron
And rebound years by Beckett and Lackey.
That’s where the wins will come from.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
Umm - were we not counting on those things anyway?
Those don’t ‘make up’ for a decrease on offense from the C position unless we replace some of those assumed WARs with something shiny and new.
The only deal I liked so far that had V-Mart leaving was the dreamy Iannetta one that Ben liked. I’m not sold on Salty or Martin or Napoli or any of the alternatives proposed so far.
I have to assume that Theo has something lined up. The thing is, I don’t want them to go spend a fortune on Crawford or Werth – I like both players, but I think THEY are going to cost way too much and certainly way more than their marginal value over cheaper alternatives.
I don't know about him
But I need more than Salty/Tek
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
Maybe you do, maybe you do
I’d like a bit but would more be concerned with having a competent game-caller, pitch-framer and defensive backstop. I think the offense will easily take care of itself.
They were most definitely NOT 2nd in runs
during the period when both V-Mart and Tek were out.
And Bob, you know better than to use that sort of stat – I could easily argue that the season total included having the best offensive catcher platoon for at least most of the year.
Frankly, I call “Shenanigans!” on a lot of the statements made on this thread about catcher defense. It is so tenuously measured that no one can really say quantitatively a) just who is good or bad nor b) just how valuable it really is.
Yes, we have lots of subjective opinions floating around – but its all noise. Until someone comes up with some objective, quantitative stats to measure the value of catcher defense I think most of this is a crock just put out to rationalize whether you want a player or not.
The only real, extensive analysis of catcher defense I am aware of, from a year or so ago, put Victor, overall, as mediocre. Not good, not bad – mediocre. I have no reason to believe he isn’t just that.
But offensively, his value was measurably way, way, way above mediocre for a catcher. That means he has zero defensive value and its all offensive.
Yes, we can replace V-Mart with a subjectively, unmeasurably better defensive catcher. How many WAR do you think that will be worth? .1? .2? Come up with a GREAT argument if you think its going to be worth much more than that. Great. Now let’s pick up the rest of his ~4.0 WAR … where?
One final thing on V-Marts defense – you can definitely say that most if not all the credit goes to the guys throwing the ball, but the fact is, V-Mart has sat behind the plate for some very, very good pitchers, both here and Cleveland, and has not hurt them. If he was truly the crappy backstop that some are implying, I just don’t see how that works.
I guess I’m just asking for something substantive that truly shows that a) Victor was a really bad defensive catcher and b) that that even mattered.
THANK YOU:
the fact is, V-Mart has sat behind the plate for some very, very good pitchers, both here and Cleveland, and has not hurt them. If he was truly the crappy backstop that some are implying, I just don’t see how that works.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
Just because the metrics makers haven't proven their numbers are accurate
Doesn’t mean catcher defense isn’t incredibly valuable.
How many WAR would replacing him with a subjectively, unmeasurably better defensive catcher be worth? Maybe .1, maybe .2, maybe 6. Unmeasurable doesn’t equate to worthless. It means we don’t know.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:13 PM EST up reply actions
We don't know their exact value.
But looking at the metrics themselves we can draw different conclusions on their accuracy, and generally from what I see I think there’s plenty of evidence saying that Victor’s defense is below average and that changing that to a good defender can make a noticeable difference in results.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 7:05 PM EST up reply actions
There's a lot in here
And there’s some you’re right about (no completely accurate way to measure catcher defense), but I can’t really agree. Even if he’s Mediocre now, as he catches more and more games, how will he be by the end of 4 years? I see Martinez as having his defensive value degrade, especially as he gets older. We already have a great 1B, and I’m sure we can find a DH who can put up V-Mart #‘s for less than $12.5M. So we’re really talking about overpaying in the back end of that contract to get a great hitting but mediocre-at-best defensive catcher in the first half.
Clearly, Theo doesn’t think it’s worth it, and I would lean towards his opinion at this point, but let’s see.
Also, find out which catchers who are worse than V-Mart offensively but supposedly better defensively, then find out how much WAR they’re worth. Most likely, they’re worth more than .1 or .2. That’s a bad argument to make.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 5:21 PM EST up reply actions
He’s 114/120 per BtBS, by the way.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:24 PM EST up reply actions
Again
Tell me some numbers that make the ‘defense’ argument worth even discussing.
To address your last paragraph – WAR values at fangraphs use UZR for the defensive part of WAR, even for catchers. And I would hope that we agree that to be pretty much worthless as a measure of catcher defense. If we DID accept it, you can go look and you’ll see that overall, it doesn’t factor in very much to the WAR value for catcher.
But I have a hard time believing that catcher defense is worth more than about +/-.5 WAR between the best and the worse defensive catchers. I.E. at most about a 1.0 WAR swing between best and worse. And that’s probably giving it too much weight. I toss that out there as my purely subjective, qualitative opinion – worth no more no less than any other on that.
If i am even remotely close that means it is basically negligible compared to catcher offensive value.
And that’s why I really don’t give much credo to all the claims about catcher defense on this thread.
On his defensive value degrading – see above, lets say he drops from a ‘mediocre’ defensive catcher to a ‘bad’ defensive catcher, what is that? A half WAR drop in defensive value at most? Chances are good his bat will STILL be way better than catcher-average in 4 years.
Give me an argument that not only supports the idea that V-Mart will actually degrade – and not just degrade, but to the point where it outweighs the positives of his bat at the C position.
There are factors to suggest that Victor will not degrade substantially in the next few years. His total games at catcher is modest for his age (he was late starter at the C position) and he has never really shown a tendency to fade in the second half.
I’m not going to say that letting V-Mart walk is a bad move. It all depends on what we do with the money not spent. I’m willing to give Theo the benefit of the doubt that this is just one move (or ‘non-move’) among many this winter that hopefully will add up to a strong team.
But I just don’t buy the ‘his defense isn’t good enough’ argument as presented so far.
There are a number of good arguments as to what it's worth a lot more than +/- .5 WAR
WAR is, after all, a measurement of runs.
And we know how many runs come out of certain situations.
So we have a decent idea of the difference between having a man on any base with having him on the next base given the same number of outs, so we know the value of blocking an extra ball in the dirt.
We also have an idea on the value that comes from changing one ball into a strike from framing.
The information and arguments are out there. They’re unproven, but still good arguments.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 7:09 PM EST up reply actions
My personal idea on this
We also have an idea on the value that comes from changing one ball into a strike from framing.
…is slim to none.
Most umps seem to have their eyeballs tuned to what they see is a strike and catcher “framing” never seems to have much to do with it.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
And yet the results showed some pretty decent consistency from 2008-2009.
Year to year consistency is considerable. I broke both pitchers and catchers into quartiles (as well as top half for catchers) based on average called pitches per year, 2008-9, and calculated the correlation coefficient, and its standard error for each. Then, using the formula r = X/X+c, calculated the number of called pitches necessary to produce r=0.5. I performed the same calculation for r + 2 standard errors and r – 2 standard errors to construct a 95% confidence interval on c.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 7:16 PM EST up reply actions
I have no idea what any of that means
What is “r”?
What is “X”?
What is “c”?
WHAT THE @#$%?
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
link please?
That quote is kinda useless without context.
Sorry
Forgot where this comment thread started
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 7:36 PM EST up reply actions
Yet, amazingly
good pitching and bad pitching almost certainly dominate any affect from the catcher.
Else how do we explain the results of having a ‘bad catcher’ catching for a CY winner, or a ‘great catcher’ working with an absolute suck pitcher.
These arguments are reaching for feathers floating in the breeze. Give me something substantive. Otherwise saying something ‘contributes tangibly’ could mean either 1 WAR or .01 WAR.
I totally disagree that these are ‘good arguments’. There are far too many little pieces that make up ‘catcher defense’ and no one to my knowledge has begun to properly track all of them in order to both value each and as importantly assign it it’s proper weight.
A catcher may suck at one thing – say blocking balls in the dirt – so bad that everybody notices it and says, “Jeeze, he’s a lousy defensive catcher!”. But that is worthless unless we know just how important blocking balls in the dirt is compared to everything else a catcher has to do. Suppose that is worth -.1 WAR for that guy, but he is so supremely talented at framing the pitch and we decide through analysis that framing the pitch is far more important that for that guy it is worth +.5 WAR. Then the popular notion that he sucks defensively would be wrong (ignoring all the dozens of other factors, of course).
If we have sufficient data and analysis to really say much at all here about catcher defense and its worth, I haven’t seen it. Nothing I’ve seen suggests it is remotely as important as offense.
Can you perhaps post links that give us sufficient data that catcher offense is as important as defense?
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 7:35 PM EST up reply actions
touche'
All I can truly say is that catcher offense is important and measurable, in the same way that offense from other positions.
For that, I’ll point you to www.fangraphs.com.
Now – could you please provide something that measures and weights catcher defense in a similarly useful fashion?
No, I can't
Not as definitively as offense of course. There are #‘s like passed balls and % of runners thrown out, but I’m guessing they’re not what you’re asking for.
And that’s your point, that there isn’t the same reliability related between catcher offense and defense. I could put forth the idea that the difference between the best defensive catcher and the worst is more like 2-3 WAR, but there aren’t studies to back that up. Of course, that also means there aren’t studies that negate that, so you could be as right as I am.
Defense does matter though, as there are obvious reasons why a team doesn’t just take a player like Adam Dunn and put him behind the plate. We talk about Lavarnway and he’s currently listed as a catcher, but there are serious doubts about his ability to stay at that position. Do you think they should just keep him there? The offense is clearly there from the position, but the question has always been defense. I’m guessing you think that it’s clearly more valuable to just keep him at that position.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 8:50 PM EST up reply actions
True - "team offense"
Meaning that if your catcher spot is down a bit then you make ground up in other areas. A good to above-average hitting catcher is a luxury – just ask the Rangers – who somehow made the WS with a combo of Matt Treanor/Max Ramirez/Bengie Molina. The Sox were not willing to bet on that luxury over the offered contract.
VMart’s offense can be replaced at other positions – my point
mostly true
You can replace total runs produced over a year with production from other spots in the order, but you can’t fill a gaping auto-out in a lineup that steals ABs from the team.
And its harder than you think to replace production from the C spot. The reason is if you replace a +20 Run catcher with, well, an average catcher, you look around and find that its harder to find +20 runs at most of the other positions because you already tend to have decent output from those positions.
So you have to upgrade multiple spots to pick those 20 runs back up. And then you aren’t really better and how much money did you spend?
We have to be careful how we look at our outfield production because last year was massively anomalous with the injuries that we had. If healthy, you have to think that Ellsbury and Cameron would have produced notably more than our replacements did. So when we talk about how player X might produce as much WAR as our whole OF did last year, is that really the right basis for comparison? The ‘upgrade’ player X represents should be compared to what you expect out of the alternatives going forward and assuming no new injuries to anyone.
Rebound years by Beckett and Lackey...
Lackey was decent in the second half – I hope he he sustains that
Beckett – if I remember correctly – after his return from inury that his last several starts he looked good through five and then usually just fell apart with the big inning???
SO, I think Lackey will be solid but Beckett and DiceK will need to pick up the tempo. And, we make the assumption that Lester is his usual beast and Buch continues to impress…otherwise we will be crying in our wheaties…
"Man that ball got outta here in a hurry, you know anything that travels that far oughta have a damn stewardess on it, don't you think?" - Crash Davis
I know Lackey himself wasn't happy with his season
and it wasn’t a dynamite debut in Boston or anything… but the guy was a 4 win pitcher this year. 215 innings of 4.32 xFIP. That’s $16mm of value.
If he improves on that just a little (and there’s plenty of reason for optimism on that front) then we’re really in business.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
4. Chris Iannetta
Unlikely, but I still want him.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 12:39 PM EST up reply actions
Actually, with Victor gone
Almost 0% chance. Sigh.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 12:39 PM EST up reply actions
I'll take Martin.
Decent on both sides of the plate.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 12:43 PM EST up reply actions
Yes on Martin.
The Dodgers really burned him out but if he’s sharing the load with Salty, I think he’ll get his legs back under him and hit at Fenway.
Napoli got $3.6m in ’10 and will be in his 3rd yr of arb, so add 20% and think $4.3m for 2011.
I'll take Napoli
Vs LHP: .287/.391/.537
Salty
Vs RHP: .273/.343/.422
We claimed him of waivers last season, so I guess in the interest is there. plus he’s cheap and under team control for 2 more years: It can free up space so we could put a competitive offer for Beltre.
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
Be careful of platoon splits
Especially with Salty. The sample sizes aren’t very large.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Nov 23, 2010 1:17 PM EST up reply actions
Those are the career stats (570 PAs versus LHP)
Also the scouting reports that I’ve read say that he’s a better hitter from the left side.
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
Salty?
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Nov 23, 2010 1:37 PM EST up reply actions
Yes
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
In the majors?
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Nov 23, 2010 1:54 PM EST up reply actions
Yes
2007: 206 PAs
2008: 148 PAs
2009: 205 PAs
2010: 11 PAs
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
Yes
Still have 2 more years of team control: Cot’s Link
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
I am really starting to think my sign Crash Davis Course of Action sounds pretty good - we get coaching, comedy, defense and power not to mention some good old fashioned heckling
Here is the other problem (and I am ranting what we all pretty much know, dont know or think we know)- if Beltre departs we do have two BIG holes in our lineup.
I am in the camp to resign him even if we eat the back end. But, if he departs we would see Lowrie at 3b (maybe??) he does not have to power of Beltre (but we think he is for real)
And, it also looks like our catcher position will not have a bat now either…
So, assuming (grrr) we lose Beltre too that probably means we are going hard after a power OF – in that case I hope we get young Upton and not the aging Werth or Crawford – (of course I know the problem of a trade cost versus just FA)…yet, he has many years of team control so it is not all downside
Here is a thought – Maybe the FO is just trying to get ythe team younger? Dunno just guessing; however, I think this would be true if:
1. Ortiz offered arb (yes)
2. V-Mart departs (yes)
3. Beltre departs (?)
4. Salty starts in April (?-OMG – that hurts to type and probably not likely)
5. Lowrie starts at 3b (?)
6. Upton is acquired (???)
I know there are many more options (I did not list the mythical A-Gon trade for instance) but it is really too early to tell. So, there are still more questions than answers but at least we know what we know, what we do not know, and all the rest is our best estimate on what we think we know…
"Man that ball got outta here in a hurry, you know anything that travels that far oughta have a damn stewardess on it, don't you think?" - Crash Davis
Olivo?
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 1:56 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Is awful, awful, awful.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 1:58 PM EST up reply actions
I don't see how anyone could want Miguel Olivo over anyone, much less Chris Iannetta.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:19 PM EST up reply actions
simple
Miguel has a stronger arm and a better bat than Chris Iannetta.
Olivo has a horrible bat, and catching runners is relatively unimportant.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:23 PM EST up reply actions
Really?
First off Olivio is a career .250 hitter, Iannetta is a career .237 hitter with a weak arm. And if catching runners is relatively unimportant. Then why didn’t the Sox resign Martinez?
Because Martinez couldn't do anything well defensively.
As for your batting average comment: Why Chris Iannetta is a good offensive player
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:37 PM EST up reply actions
Hell, I'll C/P the relevant part.
Do his numbers look as good on the surface? No. At least not recently. In 350 plate appearances in 2009, Iannetta hit .228/.344/.460. Good not great. Then in 2010, he managed only a .197/.318/.383 line. Far below the Victor baseline.
The caveat, as I’m sure most of you have heard before, is his BABIP. At .212 in 2010 compared to a career .271, that is almost unfathomably low. Chris Dutton’s xBABIP calculator actually puts him at a .320 figure given his batted ball profile. That’s a pretty huge discrepancy. If we accept that this is where his BABIP should be, or even just around his career .271 (though it, too, is pulled well down by having quite-so ridiculous luck so early in his career), we have one real example of what Iannetta can be: 2008, the year his power emerged, allowing him to hit .264/.390/.505.
If I gave you that line alone, or even a .250/.370/.480 if you think he may have been lucky that year, suddenly losing Victor Martinez doesn’t seem so bad.
But how is he behind the plate? To be fair to Martinez, Iannetta is just as bad—possibly even worse. He’s not particularly good at blocking, can’t catch runners, and can’t frame pitches. But if we were willing to stick with Victor’s defense, we should be willing to deal with Iannetta’s.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:38 PM EST up reply actions
The way I see it
Cons
(a) Do not have a starting level catcher on the roster – yet
(b) potential drop in offense from the catcher spot
Pros
(a) Did not sign another lengthy albatross contract
(b) #19 pick plus supplemental
© Money to be spent elsewhere – Werth, Relievers
It's time to move to plan B
which actually may have been the FO plan A all along. They had the opportunity to grab V-Mart during the ‘10 season and never moved forward. Like radiohix stated, they may have data saying it’s best to move the whole team forward without V-Mart.
He was fun to watch from either side of the box and I will miss his bat in our line up.
the contract was the problem
Look, we don’t want VMart behind the plate, watching Rays and Yankees turn every single into a triple. I know his bat is much better than average for a catcher, but it’s not so for 1B/DH. I think that’s way too much money to pay for a serious defensive liability.
And no, I don’t think Salty is the answer. Are there any unclaimed Molina brothers floating about?
As a 1B, his bat is fine
VMart has a career mid 800s OPS as a 1B. VMart threw out a greater percentage of runners than either MFY catcher. Also, unless the Sox’ starters hod runners better, it won’t matter who is behind the plate.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Nov 23, 2010 1:19 PM EST up reply actions
VMart improved greatly as the year went on
catching runners.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
Mid 800 OPS from a mediocre defensive 1B is not really OK on the Red Sox.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 1:37 PM EST up reply actions
+1
Defensively at 1B he really wouldn’t be able to cut it.
Think about how spoiled we’ve been as fans the past several years. Even Mikey Lowell held his own at 1B.
"Common sense is quite rare." - Voltaire
The Artist Formerly Known as PacoL250
Resident Psychologist and Tech Support at Over the Monster: SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Web Site
VMart was better than Lowell at 1B
Vic grades out around average.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Nov 23, 2010 2:00 PM EST up reply actions
Not per the SSS stats.
Obviously not reliable for predicting, but at the same time, you can’t say definitively V-Mart was better, and V-Mart has 1,000 innings of slightly negative defense at first.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:04 PM EST up reply actions
Yup. Looked pretty awful to me.
He does not move well. I thought Lowell moved better, too, and he’s got a bad hip!
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
Hmm...
I’ll take your word for it, but I’m curious to see the numbers.
Then again, Mikey probably didn’t have enough of a sample size say anything either way.
"Common sense is quite rare." - Voltaire
The Artist Formerly Known as PacoL250
Resident Psychologist and Tech Support at Over the Monster: SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Web Site
Lowell was prob better at 1B but whatever.
It’s 1B for crying out loud.
My dead grandmother could play an adequate 1B.
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 23, 2010 2:05 PM EST up reply actions
No she couldn't.
Let’s not get carried away. :)
"Common sense is quite rare." - Voltaire
The Artist Formerly Known as PacoL250
Resident Psychologist and Tech Support at Over the Monster: SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Web Site
Time to Get Some Catching Staff
Well that totally sucked. Granted, he wanted the years, and we weren’t willing to do it. Though I wonder if Theo & Co. made a 3 year offer with an option for a 4th as a club option depending upon how he was doing health and performance-wise.
Well let’s see how the cookie crumbles…I’m all for Napoli, but it depends on what the Angels want.
Definitely like the pick though. 19th?! WOO!
"Common sense is quite rare." - Voltaire
The Artist Formerly Known as PacoL250
Resident Psychologist and Tech Support at Over the Monster: SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Web Site
Let's remember this guy couldn't even throw out a ceremonial first pitch.
much less major league base runners. A 4+ WAR at C is terrific, and he’s a great guy, but he did have his problems behind the plate and they won’t get better with age.
I’m hoping for a trade, too. Salty and Tek are a little too risky in the injury department. Need I repeat those two frightening words – KEVIN CASH.
HUSH !
never say that name again !!! ……………good luck v mart
by RED SOX are #1 in my heart on Nov 23, 2010 2:05 PM EST up reply actions
Watch your langage...
We had 4 catchers on the DL at the same time plus Gustavo Molina before we got to Cash, who just can not hit MLB pitching.
BANNED!
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
I was gonna say that...
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:22 PM EST up reply actions
Good job by Theo
I don’t want 4 years of Vic. I don’t think anyone does.
Defense doesn’t cut it at catcher and I think we can do better at DH moving forward.
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
Since It's Been Brought Up
Informal poll: If the trade chips are right, who would you rather see? Napoli or Martin?
IMHO, Martin.
"Common sense is quite rare." - Voltaire
The Artist Formerly Known as PacoL250
Resident Psychologist and Tech Support at Over the Monster: SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Web Site
Mikey Nap
Martin hasn’t hit for 2 years in a row nao.
Napoli would make the Green Monster his bitch.
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 23, 2010 2:12 PM EST up reply actions
Perhaps.
But the Dodgers pretty much ran Martin into the ground.
I’d say Martin would be a much lower risk.
"Common sense is quite rare." - Voltaire
The Artist Formerly Known as PacoL250
Resident Psychologist and Tech Support at Over the Monster: SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Web Site
No guarantee he recovers from that at all.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:15 PM EST up reply actions
How badly was he injured.
Do remember: the Dodgers were and are an absolute mess. Plus Torre loved to over-use his guys. We should know that.
"Common sense is quite rare." - Voltaire
The Artist Formerly Known as PacoL250
Resident Psychologist and Tech Support at Over the Monster: SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Web Site
Cautiously Napoli
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:15 PM EST up reply actions
Whoops, no, changing to Martin
He has INSANE framing abilities according to the metrics. I think Martin provides the perfect safe opportunity to test another undervalued market.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:18 PM EST up reply actions
Interesting.
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 23, 2010 2:21 PM EST up reply actions
The math is a little questionable based on its results alone
But it has him as +3 wins from framing.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:23 PM EST up reply actions
I Knew You'd See the Light. :-)
"Common sense is quite rare." - Voltaire
The Artist Formerly Known as PacoL250
Resident Psychologist and Tech Support at Over the Monster: SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Web Site
We can break this down a hundred ways
tbh, Im fine with either… all comes down to the acquisition cost.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
And medical records on Russell Martin
Martin did tear his right hip labral 8/04/10 and moved onto the 60day.
Ah. I was not aware of that.
Disappointing… but increases the chances of a non tender one would think and may make him an even better fit for us, no? MiLB deal w/ a has to be place on 25 man by June 1 or something like that, maybe?
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
Yeah, that could be a deal breaker easily.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:49 PM EST up reply actions
Oh, and he's ready to play to start the year I'm pretty sure, just to clear that up.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:58 PM EST up reply actions
Martin
even when he slumped he put up 2.1 WAR in 97 games. I think he just got overused by the Dodgers. Even in his last 2 seasons he had decent OBP with .352 and .347. I think he has tremendously more upside than Napoli and is a good defender at C. The last 2 season he also suffered a bit by BABIP while actually increasing his LD% while lowering his FB %
by German Red Sox Fan on Nov 23, 2010 2:15 PM EST up reply actions
Valid points but I'll take Napoli because:
- He has less mileage under his knees because of the limited playing time.
- His wOBA against LHP in the last 3 years was: .401 in 08 .435 in 09 .416 in 10. That’s extremely valuable in a division where you have to face Sabathia, Lee, Price, Romero and Matsuz.
- From what I saw his defense is not worst than V-Mart.
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
also very good points
I’m fine with either one i guess. Martin would be one of the Theo reclamation projects i would have really high hopes for. I trully believe he just got extremly mishandled by the Dodgers. The guy catched over 150 games in back to back season and then 143 in the 3rd year.
Sidenote the Lefty splits and that the majority of elite pitchers in our divsion are lefties make me prefer Werth over Crawford.
by German Red Sox Fan on Nov 23, 2010 3:17 PM EST up reply actions
There's also the fact that Werth, because of his arm strength, could be moved to RF when Drew contract is up.
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
Is Werth's contract
going to be worth the marginal difference in value he’ll bring over our existing OF options?
You have to factor in that his 5.0 WAR came off of 652 PAs AND playing in the NL.
If we could get 2-3 WAR out of a full season of someone like Kalish, are the additional $$ that Werth or Crawford would cost worth the difference?
Kalish is our 2nd OF next year.
It’s the WAR of the third guy you have to consider. Who is that?
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:28 PM EST up reply actions
Er, in 2012
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:28 PM EST up reply actions
Any Werth contract will span multiple years.
So when I said ‘like Kalish’ I meant really any of the multiple OF bodies that we could already potentially field both next year and the following years without putting out any extra $$.
Healthy Ellsbury. Healthy Cameron, numerous minor-league prospects …
I’m not saying spending on Werth wouldn’t be worth it. I’m asking if he would be worth it.
Folks seemed awful happy not to spend $13M per on a catcher we KNOW will bring 2-3 WAR more than the best replacements that we are talking about in this thread.
Will Werth bring at least enough WAR value over our cheaper alternatives to justify the cost?
Who's the 3rd cheaper alternative in 2012 though?
And what if Kalish doesn’t make it?
We’re paying as much for peace of mind as skill over the projected Kalish.
2011 we have Kalish maybe, and Ellsbury. These are your replacement options.
I don’t even see many 3 WAR players in there realistically. Maybe Jose Bautista will keep it up. Maybe.
Keep in mind that with the monster out there, there’s also only two positions which can realistically rely on defense for a significant portion of their value. At least one needs to include big offense.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 7:13 PM EST up reply actions
So, your answer is that Werth WILL be marginally worth big $$
over our cheaper alternatives.
Is Kalish suddenly our only OF prospect? Didn’t we use to have a fairly long list of guys ready to break through in a couple of years (i.e. 2012-2013)?
Do we think Cameron won’t come back at all next year?
We have:
Kalish
Lin
Maybe Reddick
Lin still hasn’t shown an ability to hit for power or average, though Hix will tell you it’s only a matter of time. Meanwhile Reddick is a pretty big longshot by this point. So that leaves us with hoping that both Kalish and Lin can make it in the big leagues for sure. If one flairs out, we’re kinda screwed unless they decide Lavarnway’s a left fielder all-of-a-sudden.
Everyone else is really young and unproven. Westy’s injury was a huge hit, since he’d presumably be at the top of the conversation for 2012-2013 otherwise.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 7:47 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, Westy's surgery really was unfortunate.
It’s exciting that he is taking batting practice again, though!
If he is able to play next year, he could be back in the 2013-2014 conversation.
Fuentes is also sort of far out there.
I don’t want to completely give up on Reddick yet, but yeah.
I like Lin a lot. I think he will develop into a stud.
For 2011 we have whatever’s left of Ells, Cam & Drew. After that, its farm products plus whatever we sign or trade for.
Sigh … yeah, we might need some help.
Justin Upton would be my preference over Werth or Crawford, though I agree the cost in prospects could be too high.
Either way, I’m not enamored of paying through the roof for marginal gain.
Of Course Lin will hit
I saw him lately in Asian Olympics Game Versus Choo and South Korea: He was soooo smooth out there in the OF (2 easy plays no more but the ease with which he runs is Cameron-in-his-prime like).
At the plate, the exaggerated high leg kick that he had 2 years ago is gone, he shorted his swing (Which I think was the reason for his Pedroia like contact rate): He went 2-5 with a 2B of Chang-Yong Lim (A guy that I WANT the Red Sox to take a flyer on: The guy throws in the high 90s for Pedro sake).
His line for the whole tournament was: .368/.454/.421 in 22 PAs with 3 BB and 2 Ks.
I’ll keep some good stuff for my “Lin should be in the Top 5 Prospects” campaign :)
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
Well 2010 WARs
Werth 5.0 vs. Drew (Sox top OFer) 2.6
Drew had a down year, but will he get any better with age?
In fact the entire Sox OF last year had a WAR less than 5!!
Drew is probably in his last year before retirement
after 12 years so he’s entitled to start to finally decline after a stellar career.
Werth is not young, but closer to his more recent peak years. Overall, I’ll take Drew’s career numbers over Werth’s. But that’s legacy. Werth obviously had a better year than Drew and likely will have a better 2011 as well.
Some cautions on Werth’s numbers, though.
Although his WAR looks consistent, posting 5.1, 4.9 & 5.0 over the last 3 years, there are some caveates to think about.
In 2008 he posted that 5.1 WAR in only 482 PAs and on the strength of a very good defensive year. In each of the next two years, his WAR declined ever so slightly, despite getting 676 PAs and 652 PAs, respectively. His defense in each year declined in a fairly large step. His offensive value picked up partly because of slightly better hitting but also simply because of the increased PAs. Overall, his UZR150 went from fantastic, to avg, to below avg in the last three years.
That should throw a note of caution out there before folks get too excited.
Given a choice, I’d prefer Werth over Crawford. But little things like that make me hesitate on spending big bucks on a long-term contract.
Agree
Crawford has a lifetime 0.697 OPS vs. Lefties against an 0.817 vs. Righties. With Sabathia, Lee (most likely), Price……
Russel Martin
Are the Dodgers willing to trade him? What do you guys think it will cost?
by German Red Sox Fan on Nov 23, 2010 2:10 PM EST reply actions
There are rumors they'll straight-up non tender the guy.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:15 PM EST up reply actions
If that's true.
Then he’s worth the very low-risk if Theo & Co. can grab him.
Plus isn’t part of his family from Quebec? He’d be much closer to home, LOL.
"Common sense is quite rare." - Voltaire
The Artist Formerly Known as PacoL250
Resident Psychologist and Tech Support at Over the Monster: SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Web Site
Do you think we could get them to take Lackey instead of the non-tender?
Fenway: "An alternate and better universe, disguised as a ballpark." --Thomas Boswell
but what am i missing?
what was he on the DL for? if he catches the “normal” 120 games he would have ended up roughly around 3 WAR and that is without his good D at the position. Why would you nontender a guy like that?
by German Red Sox Fan on Nov 23, 2010 2:23 PM EST up reply actions
Because they see a sub-.700 OPS in comparison to what he's done in years past and it looks ugly.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:27 PM EST up reply actions
Not saying he will be non-tendered, just that it's possible.
We should make them an offer.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:28 PM EST up reply actions
That is fine.
Now it is just time to bring Beltre back or go get Adrian Gonzalez. I wasn’t expecting both Beltre and Martinez back. I also wasn’t extremely comfortable having V-Mart catching our main guys all year.
Napoli wold be a nice little replacement.
That isn't going to happen
Theo and the Owner’s know if they don’t make a big move this summer then they are just going to continue to lose fan support like they did last year.
Letting Martinez and Beltre walk and not making a big trade would basically be the Red Sox throwing in the towel for another “bridge year.” Ain’t going to happen.
They can make big moves in the OF.
The infield is a much more dangerous place to make a move with a career year 3B, a catcher who might not catch, and a 1-year loan before having to shell out $20 million 1B
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:19 PM EST up reply actions
If the Sox make a move for Gonzo
You can be damn sure they know they are going into it and going to shell out the money for an extension. It would hardly be a 1 year rental.
No, but having Gonzo at $20mm per is basically breaking even.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:28 PM EST up reply actions
Look I don't know much about advanced statistics
But adding Adrian Gonzalez at 1st, Youk at 3rd and hopefully a decent platoon guy at catcher like Martin or Napoli along with Werth or Crawford is certainly an improved team IMO. Even at 20 mm for Gonzo.
Maybe some advanced statistics somewhere say otherwise but using the eyeball test that is how I feel.
And you'd better hope none of them go the DL
Because the farm system would have been emptied out of almost every decent prospect to buy Gonzo for 2011.
Fenway: "An alternate and better universe, disguised as a ballpark." --Thomas Boswell
4 guys will empty the farm system?
bc there has never been a single rumor about dumping the entire farm system for Gonzo.
Ellsbury + 3 prospects gets it done.
And Gonzo is worth 10 prospects.
Remember that Gonzalez just went under the knife
for his non throwing right shoulder (clean up the labrum).
It may show up in his swing this year. We’ll see.
1 year and a leg up on paying him a ton of money isn't.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 3:42 PM EST up reply actions
Advanced statistics all say Adrian Gonzalez is incredible.
They also all say that $20 million is a ton of money, and that we shouldn’t consider A-Gonz’ future contributions in trade talks, because we’re going to have to pay for them a second time.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:38 PM EST up reply actions
That is my point.
I think Adrian Gonzalez, albeit expensive, is worth that kind of money and prospects.
Wait until he's on the free agency market
Or closer to the trade deadline, when the return expectations have to be lowered.
Fenway: "An alternate and better universe, disguised as a ballpark." --Thomas Boswell
then you wont get gonzo bc of Beltre
Its either a trade for Gonzo or sign Beltre…Both wont happen. So either you sign Beltre now or he moves on.
Waiting does nothing for both the Red Sox and the Padres (since they will get a lower return from waiting).
Waiting keeps the Sox from having to give up more than a 1st round pick.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 3:22 PM EST up reply actions
I know its inefficient...
But you could always have Youk, Beltre and Gonzo at DH, 3B and 1B. It’s wasting Youk’s defense, but he doesn’t get paid way out of scale for a ~ .900 OPS DH.
Wait 'til next/this year?
"Laser show. So relax."
by nuthinboutnuthin on Nov 23, 2010 5:35 PM EST up reply actions
He can potentially be worth it.
But there’s little real upside to the deal. It’s mostly a solid “get your money’s worth” deal, and that depends on the years.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:53 PM EST up reply actions
I like Napoli
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 2:19 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Martin
I think he’d be solid in a platoon. Hopefully the Dodgers will be open to a reasonable trade offer.
As much as I hate it, its the right move.
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 2:17 PM EST via mobile reply actions
I think that would be why Beltre doesn't come back
Not why VMart wouldn’t be back. . . .
Fenway: "An alternate and better universe, disguised as a ballpark." --Thomas Boswell
Vmart
Why do we always let the class acts walk?????
Yeah, that damn Theo!
Why isn’t Jason Bay still a Red Sox??? JBay come home!
Also, let’s resign Bill Mueller!
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
If we could have had JBay's 2009 bat, I'd have organized the parade to welcome him back.
Fenway: "An alternate and better universe, disguised as a ballpark." --Thomas Boswell
If we could have Bill Mueller's 2003 knees and bat I would welcome him back, as well.
Sadly we don’t have a time machine to bring us back to when VMart was a good catcher.
Time machines don’t go to Imaginationland.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
When was V-Mart a good catcher?
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:29 PM EST up reply actions
And then I read your second line.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:29 PM EST up reply actions
Because we don't need a $13MM/yr catcher as a DH in 2013 and 2014.
Fenway: "An alternate and better universe, disguised as a ballpark." --Thomas Boswell
Like Nomar and Pedro?
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 23, 2010 2:26 PM EST up reply actions
Unless you're referring to earlier this year
Nomar didn’t walk out—he was shown the door.
Fenway: "An alternate and better universe, disguised as a ballpark." --Thomas Boswell
OT: Yankees offered 140M and 6 years to Cliff Lee
talk about a bad contract!
by German Red Sox Fan on Nov 23, 2010 2:35 PM EST reply actions
Lee apparently wants a 7th year to match Sabathia's contract.
At that price, the Yankees can have him. Sheesh.
What’s next, 5/125 each for Jeter, Posada and Rivera?
Fenway: "An alternate and better universe, disguised as a ballpark." --Thomas Boswell
I wonder why are the Yanks outbidding themselves so hard?
CC the 2nd highest offer was 5/100 from the Brewers if I’m not mistaken, I cant believe anybody offering Lee more than 120 even that seems a stretch.
by German Red Sox Fan on Nov 23, 2010 2:39 PM EST up reply actions
Bc their entire future is dependent on them signing
Cliff Lee. True or not the Yankees believe Lee is their only options and they will go 7 years and break the bank for Lee.
But they're still bidding against themselves
But they have done it before… I honestly don’t understand how ARod didn’t get less money than what he was making when he opted out.
WOW
Way too much money.
And to anyone who says, ’DURRRR. Yankees have liek limitless spending ability."
I say, “No. No, they do not. Every team operates under a budget. Even the Yankees.”
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 23, 2010 2:38 PM EST up reply actions
And then I reply "Then how do you explain them always signing everyone?"
and you reply “I didn’t realize they signed Matt Holliday and John Lackey* last year.”
*Hey, he was considered to be good at the time.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:40 PM EST up reply actions
That would have actually been my exact response, haha
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 23, 2010 2:45 PM EST up reply actions
I just thought I'd get it out of the way, in case.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:47 PM EST up reply actions
L
O
L
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:38 PM EST up reply actions
And we have some people complaining that we didn't offer
4 years, $50 million to V-Mart.
Thank god we don’t have Cashman as our GM.
Just look at what the Yankees will be paying the likes of Lee, A-Rod and Jeter to ride the bench in a few years.
If Cashman ran a small market team they would win 40 games a year.
He’s a pretty bad GM although he has done well with Swisher, Cano, and got lucky with Gilbert Grape Gardner.
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 23, 2010 2:46 PM EST up reply actions
Worry about Yankee payroll all you want
If they are making the playoffs with a billion dollar payroll, do you think their fans will complain? Who the hell cares!
MAKE IT HAPPEN CASHMAN!
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
Win win for us at this point.
I still hope Texas matches, though!
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
but bro he's get liek all teh saves bro!
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 23, 2010 2:46 PM EST up reply actions
I'd almost be willing to give him that to play in Boston.
ALMOST. But not quite.
Fenway: "An alternate and better universe, disguised as a ballpark." --Thomas Boswell
I like the idea, but it could make things even uglier.
But yeah, getting the MFYs to pony up an extra $10 million or so over two years couldn’t hurt. And, worst case, we have their legendary closer and do some big damage to their bullpen.
Fenway: "An alternate and better universe, disguised as a ballpark." --Thomas Boswell
And then he finally flares out the second we put him on the mound.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:54 PM EST up reply actions
Of course, that's the risk we run.
But again, the MFY’s still don’t have him, either. And I’d hope the Sox would get his contract insured against injury. . . . Right?
Fenway: "An alternate and better universe, disguised as a ballpark." --Thomas Boswell
But not against sucking.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 2:57 PM EST up reply actions
Total BS
I can’t believe the Red Sox would not pony up this money for V-Mart. This contract is at all the lower end estimates of what he would get. I believe most were thinking $15mil + per year at 4-5 years.
I hope it works out that Theo and the team are the smartest guys in the room again, but if the catching sucks next year they deserve all the blame. Once again the Red Sox are acting more like the A’s than the Red Sox. Does anybody really think V-Mart is going to be a bad player in 3-4 years? What is the goddamed risk here? Remember, not all players the Sox cut loose suck. See Lowe vs. Clement, Damon vs. Crisp, etc. They don’t always get it right.
Wait so you want to pay $12.5 a year for a 1B/DH in 2 years
That hits 14 homeruns and only knocks in 60 RBIs? Because that is what V-Mart gave us since we got him and it will only get worse.
If there is one position in the game of baseball that you can go cheap on it is catcher. Not to mention the fact that this isn’t a “low end” projection here. This is the 4th largest contract a catcher has ever received in the MLB.
Where does the 14 HRs and 60 RBI come from?
I can’t process those numbers. He had 28 HRs and 120 RBI in 183 games for the Sox.
Fenway: "An alternate and better universe, disguised as a ballpark." --Thomas Boswell
Oh, I see, you just took the total and averaged it in half
Which is bad statistics, because you didn’t take into account that he didn’t play 2 full seasons:
8 HR/41 RBI in 56 games
20 HR/79 RBI in 127 games
Fenway: "An alternate and better universe, disguised as a ballpark." --Thomas Boswell
Well you siad “That is what V-Mart gave us since we got him” and that wasn’t true, he’s given us 28 HRs and 120 RBI since he got here.
But to answer your question, no catcher plays 162 games a year but VMart was an excellent offensive catcher.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
More importantly
Adding the 1.5 seasons together and dividing by 2 is a gross misuse of statistics.
In the first year in a third of a season he was good for 8 HRs and 41 RBI, that projects to 24 HR and 123 RBI HOLY CRAP.
In the second year in 3/4 of a season he hit 20 HR and 79 RBI, that projects to 27 HR and 105 RBI HOLY CRAP.
See what I did there? Used bad statistics and made him look awesome.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
and one should also not that the reason he played 'only' 127 games this year
was a freak broken bone – hardly indicative of wearing down.
Sans that, he likely would have given us at least 140-145 games this year.
DH?
Where is it written in stone that Victor can’t play catcher for 3-4 more years? Look at Posada, Fisk, Pudge Rodriguez. Why not Victor? Do you know something?
He sucks catching now, is he going to improve as he gets older?
Jesus when did bsaseball fans forget about the catcher as a defender (or maybe I’m just an old sot)
It isn't written in stone
And honestly, I know nothing about the general upkeep of a catching body, I’m not a doctor and I’m not a catcher but when just about everyone in baseball says the same thing, you sort of buy into it. He could very well catch until he’s the Jamie Moyer of catching but there is a large amount of risk, moreso than many other positions involved with viewing a guy as a catcher as he moves into his deeper 30s.
And honestly, he isn’t that good of a catcher now, even a small change in the negative direction of his ability might be enough for him to no longer be considered a legitimate catching option.
At what point do you stop being a catcher and start being some guy they put behind the plate so they can squeeze your bat into the lineup? I mean, we could chose to play Ortiz at 1B and move Youk to third, who’s to say that Papi can’t play 1B anymore? He’s bad enough at 1B that we don’t do it except for the odd interleague game or two.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
Batting
Players don’t earn the big bucks for their defense. The best defensive SS that can’t hit north of .220 won’t get paid like a mediocre SS that can hit a hundred points higher. Same with catchers. Remember, V-Mart hit #3 for the Sox. The man can HIT.
Didn’t all you guys say last year the loss of Bay would be largely offset by a full season of V-mart? Why did you say that?
Because Bay was a god-awful defender too.
You’re running on the antiquated view that defense isn’t important. It is.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 3:47 PM EST up reply actions
Because it was true
But if you sign say a Jayson Werth – it can offset the loss of a VMart. Team offense can be made up at other positions.
Winning games can be done by scoring runs
Or keeping runs off the board.
VMart was good at adding runs, but his defense didn’t do much to keep runs off the board, and his lack of throwing cost a decent number, too. Bay was the same: extremely good bat, but on the whole a subpar LF.
Fenway: "An alternate and better universe, disguised as a ballpark." --Thomas Boswell
VMart hurt the Red Sox?
Are you saying that VMart gave up more runs with his epically bad defense than he helped create with his bat?
No
Just that there are players out there who can make up for their deficiencies with the bat by providing better defense than Martinez. Both will be good players for the team, just in different ways.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 7:21 PM EST up reply actions
Then you are claiming that their defensive value is on a par with offensive value
for the Catcher position.
Again – based on what?
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 7:39 PM EST up reply actions
Not owned
Because they’re not as well peer-reviewed as things like offensive statistics.
But I, at least, have certainly not been going on nothing. But we talk about other fielding metrics a lot more firmly than we did a few years ago, so. . .
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 8:10 PM EST up reply actions
Those articles doesn't necessarily support that point, though.
Ignoring questions about how things are weighted and even bigger questions of completeness lack of prorating, the ranges on the very extreme look to be still less than +10 to 10 runs from the absolute best defensive catchers to the absolute worst. And the vast majority are bunched in the + 5 range.
That is not as significant as the range you get in offensive output with Catchers – where the range is several times that. For catchers who actually qualified with 500 PAs, you are looking at a range of some 36 runs between Mauer and Pierzynski.
I would say that those articles might get you to the same order of magnitude, but not on par.
And there are so many caveates to both the framing study and btb ratings – we should be very, very cautious about really thinking those are useable numbers.
The framing metric was valuing catchers in WINS, not runs.
You end up with a reasonable 2 win spread within the outliers w/ regards to passed balls, caught runners, and errors.
Then things get crazy with framing, which has a spread of as much as 11 wins per year. Again, this is knocking out the crazy outliers.
And, logically, it kind of makes sense,
Every other defensive position is involved in only a small fraction of pitches and plays over the course of a game. Each one has its easy plays—a pop fly or a weak ground ball—and it’s impossible plays like the line drive through the hole that lands on the outfield grass about a second after it leaves the bat. These are plays where the fielder’s defensive abilities are pretty much made useless.
These are basically the “right down the middle” / “10 feet outside” pitches for catchers.
On every other pitch that isn’t swung at, though, the catcher has a chance to be involved by framing a close one well enough that it’s called a strike. Often this has to do with framing in such a way that the umpire doesn’t even notice it. The consistency in the study is fairly strong evidence that such an ability exists, whether it be due to reputation, dirt the catcher has on umpires, or just actual skill.
Now consider that more than half of all pitches thrown aren’t swung at, and that a strike can be immensely valuable and we start to see where these massive numbers come from. Look at Kevin Youkilis: he sees a .400 point dip in OPS on 0-1 compared to 1-0. Imagine being able to change two Josh Hamilton at bats in a game into David Murphy at bats.
It just seems to make a fair deal of sense that it could have such importance.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 24, 2010 3:37 AM EST up reply actions
Oh, hey, actually, there you go...
This is a very inexact science since, actually, Youk is pretty good at hitting behind in the count and 0-1 vs. 1-0 is actually one of the least impactful ball-strike counts.
David Murphy: +.026 batting runs/PA
Josh Hamilton: +.097 batting runs/PA
.071 * 240 (around Martin’s level in 2008) = 17.04
Then flip that around for the worst catchers, and you get at least a 3 win spread from catcher defense. So just to set a reasonable baseline to say that, yeah, catcher defense is worth at least as much as other defense.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 24, 2010 3:46 AM EST up reply actions
Er, at least a 3 win spread from catcher framing.
2 win spread from other defense
5 win spread overall
That’s actually a little more than the greatest spread in fielding.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 24, 2010 3:47 AM EST up reply actions
You are an evil man, Ben Buchanan
Making me sit and re-read the framing study in detail again.
If I am interpreting it correctly, the basic methodology is to geometrically divide up the zone into sections and measure the probability of it being called a strike. This is a reasonable approach but the article linked (“A First Pass …”) very specifically admits (Step 7) that they have no method in place for separating out catcher and pitcher affects.
As of now, the metric has no mechanism for making these adjustments.
This leaves me questioning just what we are measuring here. Is it the catcher? Or really his pitchers? Is the year-by-year consistency simply an artifact of year-by-year having the mostly the same pitchers in a staff?
The numbers reported for catchers in that particular article do not separate out pitching staff effects and so you cannot truly say that the framing effect numbers are ‘of the catchers’ listed. All you can say is that those were the framing effect numbers when that catcher was catching. But the dominant contributors could be the pitchers, “getting the call” (or not) and not the catchers at all.
And actually, it looks like park effects (or more correcly the way the PitchFX strike zone is defined in each park) may be a huge factor in this study:
http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2010/4/19/1305172/how-much-do-we-really-know-about
Basically there are so many questions hanging open here , I would implore you to NOT put much faith in the magnitude of the ‘framing effect’ just yet. Is there likely a catcher effect? Sure. Probably. But is it really worth THAT much?
That is simply not established yet. As Dan Turkenkopf himself writes:
My major issue at the time was the magnitude of the effect – … completely failed the smell test.
Part of the ‘smell test’ is that effects this huge should show up in start to start battery pairings. A pitcher paired up one day with a ‘good’ catcher and then a ‘bad’ catcher in another start should show that effect. And it would now seem that park effects need to be accounted for in that as well.
There is a lot of work still to be done – I think it is WAY too soon to put any stock in those huge win variances.
by mmmmm on Nov 26, 2010 12:58 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Please quantify.
For Bay, we know fairly well how many runs he gave up versus how many runs he created.
For V-Mart – what numbers are you assuming and where did they come from?
Are you saying V-Mart nets out as subpar C overall in this calculation? That he gave up more runs than he created?
Sorry, my point was
That Martinez’s value was almost entirely from the offense; other catchers who can provide a bit of defense can accordingly offset some of the loss of production with their bat.
Fenway: "An alternate and better universe, disguised as a ballpark." --Thomas Boswell
And the loss of VMart
Will be offset by full years of Pedrioa, Youkilis, Ellsbury and Cameron.
That was easy enough.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
All players
With not a lot of injury history between them. I’m putting more faith on the side of “they’ll be fine” than on the side of “we should find replacement for those injury prone bastards”
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
I’ll try and be reasonable and go somewhere in between…..
Youk amd Cameron will be injured.
Ellsbury and Pedrioa will be okay
The only one who is at all likely to be injured is Cameron due to age.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 3:59 PM EST up reply actions
It's not written in stone
Not sure why you’re so offended by some of our opinions.
Pudge’s offense has gotten worse and worse, and Posada should have been moved off of C a year or two ago, so I don’t think they’re the best examples.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 3:43 PM EST up reply actions
The goddamned risk is Mike Lowell 2.0
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 3:08 PM EST up reply actions
The risk is you may end up paying a mediocre DH/1B over $12m a year for a year or two.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 3:11 PM EST up reply actions
Mediocre
Sure, we all know that VMart is about to fall off some cliff and won’t be able to get out of bed in 2 years. When has he been mediocre? OK, to play along, if he is a DH in year 4 hitting 25 homers and producing runs near his average over the past few years, is $12 mil. too much? Do you really think it will prevent the Sox from signing somebody else or put the franchise in financial trouble? I don’t.
He WILL be mediocre if he has to play 1B or DH.
His bat is only decent at 1B and DH. Plus, if he’s playing 1B in the back 2 years, he’s older, less mobile, and will probably suck even worse at defense.
This next part isn’t totally directed at you, more of a statement for everybody. Watch put with who you use as examples as catching longevitybecause Posada is God awful right now. He cost his team at least 1-2 runs in the ALCS because of bad D. Just because a player plays a position doesn’t mean he should. Sometimes there’s just nobody else.
embrace the martian
Twitter: @BoldandBrash
by BoldandBrash on Nov 23, 2010 9:41 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I’m not saying Vic can’t catch for umpteen more years, I’m saying that at a certain age and skill level, it just isn’t practical. BTW, was Posada better than Vic at 32? Because if Vic is significantly worse, then Vic at 35 could be Posada at 39.
embrace the martian
Twitter: @BoldandBrash
by BoldandBrash on Nov 24, 2010 6:01 PM EST up reply actions
We're about to find out.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
YES YES YES
Yes, I am happy when a player on the team I follow hits 25 homers and 80RBI’s. Yes, that is a good season for me. Yes it is.
+1
It’s not.
embrace the martian
Twitter: @BoldandBrash
by BoldandBrash on Nov 24, 2010 6:03 PM EST up reply actions
Well, okay
I would not be happy if we were paying $12.5m for that kind of production from our DH.
Yes, we could very much be doing that this year, and if so I won’t be happy.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 24, 2010 5:31 PM EST up reply actions
Damon was barely worth his contract in NY. Likely only because of that big wind-tunnel HR season.
Lowe was an NL wonder.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 3:25 PM EST up reply actions
Give me a break
Fine, you think the Sox can do no wrong. I think they make mistakes from time to time. The Sox missed Damon, Lowe was good in the AL East and got paid about 5 mil more that the disaster named Clement. I believe they will miss V-Mart. Oh, and were do I pick up my refund for the money saved on V-Mart?
Jerry Saltimaccccchia is the starting catcher for the 3rd place Red Sox now, OK?
I never said the Sox can do no wrong.
But you’ve got mediocre examples. Lowe was inconsistent in the AL East. Damon was barely worth his contract. Clement was awful, sure, but this is a conversation about the ones let go, not the ones they replaced them with.
You can pick up your refund for Martinez when we haven’t spent it by the end of the offseason and Salty is still the starting catcher. Until then, stop acting like it’s March.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 3:49 PM EST up reply actions
Give me some bad moves
Where did the Sox management actually mess up? And don’t include “overspending” on contracts, just moves. I’ll help you out – Wily Mo for Arroyo.
But most bad moves are overspending on contracts.
Either way, as for moves Theo made that were poorly thought out (so not moves that ended poorly), the Wily Mo trade, Gagne trade, and Julio Lugo signing are obvious stand outs. Beckett and Lackey remain to be seen, but are off to very poor starts. Lowell extension is kind of a toss up for me, and I don’t really think we know enough about the information they had on Daisuke to blame Theo and co. for it. Possible they deserve it, but equally possible it’s just Daisuke inexplicably collapsing on them.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 7:30 PM EST up reply actions
OK, here's a switch
I will defend Theo on Gagne. That deal was alomst universally praised, including me.
And it was wrong.
Gagne had missed two straight seasons and had a 4.06 xFIP with Texas.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 24, 2010 9:18 AM EST up reply actions
Lowe wasn't just inconsistent. He was the WORST starter in baseball in 2004.
Any real fan who watches games would have slit their wrists if he was resigned.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
Damon and his fielding wouldn’t have lasted long in our outfield with his “fielding ability” and made most of his money in NY off of their little league park. I’ll say it right now, he would not have been good in Boston through that contract. And Clement, you’re going to pick out a guy who was an All-Star and then got hit in the head with a line drive and then was never the same? I don’t think Theo is considering line drive injuries when he makes these deals.
The season doesn’t start tomorrow and besides the two bullpen moves we haven’t even begun to get to work on the team yet, calm down.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
Massive Head Wound Harry
doesn’t get enough “credit” for taking a liner off his skull. Everyone says he sucked. He was good…until he collected a baseball to his brain.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
"Our Outfield"
Sure, Damon is about done now. But the Sox had to bench his replacement, Coco Crisp, for a untested rookie in the postseason. Thank god Ellsbury came through. It all worked out, but Damon was missed and it took a number of moves to replace him.
Crisp injured himself
And never returned to form.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
He was a 4 WAR player that year, too.
While being paid about $5 million?
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 7:31 PM EST up reply actions
Plus, there was the fight with Big Game Shields
That was awesome.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
The "catching" is likely to be better next year
The offense out of the catchers spot may take a dip, but that can easily be replaced
Better catching?
Sure, lose an all-star catcher and replace him with a AAAA Saltilamaccciaaaa has been never been and a 50 year old Varitek.
He was an all-star due to his bat
I was arguing that the “catching” – you know the part of the game where you “catch” the ball, frame the ball, block the ball, throw out runners (or hold them honest at least), etc.
Its November and you’ve already pegged Tek/Salty as a replacement??
When has anyone said it's going to be Salty/Tek?????
Yes that’s what we have right now, but going into the offseason the Tigers had Avila penciled in as a starter, how the hell did that work out for them? Oh right they got VMart.
Right now we’ve got Tek and Salty, we could end up with someone else entirely, Detroit gives us all the evidence we need for that.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
That sucks guys.
Tigers got a nice deal for him.
Big D believes - One game at a time, Have a great Day.
Get Dezzled!
The only thing that makes me wonder
Is why did he turn down a 3 year $48 million deal? Does he think he might not play after this contract?
Russel Martin
31% career avg. Last year in 93 game 39% cs
by German Red Sox Fan on Nov 24, 2010 2:39 AM EST up reply actions
what we need at catcher
is somebody who can throw out baserunners and works well with the pitching staff.
VMart didn’t do either of these things noticeably well.
The money not spent on the catcher could instead be spent on, god forbid, an outfielder that is an elite hitter, something the Sox haven’t had since Manny left.
To be fair
He actually did good work with Buchholz when he came back. Maybe not so much with the other pitchers, though. But the improvement in Buchholz alone was definitely worth the investment back then.
Fenway: "An alternate and better universe, disguised as a ballpark." --Thomas Boswell
Correlation does not necessarily imply causation, of course.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 3:58 PM EST up reply actions
Of course not.
But I think Martinez’s presence had an impact. Most of the work was Buchholz’s, obviously, but having a new catcher—who didn’t have any preconceived notions of working with him—seemed to help things as well. He could just pitch.
Fenway: "An alternate and better universe, disguised as a ballpark." --Thomas Boswell
awesome! now with the saved $$$ the Henry’s and Co. can build a great team in Liverpool!
buy up those season tickets everyone! The lads of liverpool are counting on you!
Again, when did they announce the season starts tomorrow? That would be useful information to have.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 3:59 PM EST up reply actions
Damn, I was hoping the Liverpool>Sox overreactions wouldn't happen so quickly.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 4:00 PM EST up reply actions
Sarcasm is impossible to tell on the Internet
Especially since there are people out there who seriously believe it.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 4:02 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, it's not like we have a way to tell.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:03 PM EST up reply actions
I have always wondered: How do you do that?
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:05 PM EST up reply actions
Thanks
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:11 PM EST up reply actions
Must...remember...sarcasm...tags...
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
That is sexy & here I always thought it was reserved for the guys at the bottom of the page!!
"Man that ball got outta here in a hurry, you know anything that travels that far oughta have a damn stewardess on it, don't you think?" - Crash Davis
hahahah true.
but for clarification’s sake, i was joking more about the ticket prices more than the V-mart move.
I’m still shocked every year that they charge these prices and get away with it and still make roster moves like they have no money.
The Red Sox had the 2nd highest payroll last year, increased by about $20-30 million.
This year, wait and see.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:10 PM EST up reply actions
John Lackey wasn't a "no money" move
And I’m guessing we’ll get another one of those this offseason as well.
They paid Beltre pretty well for one year as well.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 4:21 PM EST up reply actions
"make roster moves like they have no money" ???
Are you on drugs? 2nd highest payroll last year. Highest non-Yankee payroll ever. Signed the best CF, SS, 3B and SP on the free agent market!
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
Three strike rule on the word Liverpool
with relation to the Sox payroll.
After three in the offseason, it becomes bannable;-)
I'll wait until Beltre doesn't sign with us to make my next one......
and hopefully there won’t be a third! =P
I say under…..not just because of their Liverpool acquisition but because I think Tom Werner is a stinking liar hahah
Over
I think a big move is coming.
Hoping for Werth.
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:15 PM EST up reply actions
Werth is overrated around here (IMO; good player but ridiculously hyped in these neck of the woods) and our team is saturated at OF
I’d rather see them go for someone else that would have a bigger positional impact.
did i seriously just use the possessive word"our" when i meant the red sox?
wow. i never do that. i need to go home and sleep.
I have broke that habit finally
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:19 PM EST up reply actions
I will do that until I die.
Or until I’m employed in sports writing that is not expressly from a fan’s perspective.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:20 PM EST up reply actions
That's why I am trying to break that habit
On my show I too often almost say “we” reffering to the Red Sox or Bruins or something.
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:24 PM EST up reply actions
Ok, then who do you have in mind?
Someone who would not cost prospets?
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:19 PM EST up reply actions
funny you should mention, because i just posted a small rant about how we hold onto our toys a bit too much lately.
i say go for someone good who DOES cost prospects.
Ok, who?
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:25 PM EST up reply actions
/facepalm
I thought you wanted to trade prospects? What’s the fun in this?
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:29 PM EST up reply actions
Um...
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:31 PM EST up reply actions
We're saturated now.
Next year we’re down to Ellsbury and maybe Kalish.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:21 PM EST up reply actions
Exactly. I see no problem with Werth.
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:25 PM EST up reply actions
How many years is it gonna take?
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 23, 2010 6:40 PM EST up reply actions
At 5 I have a problem.
At 4 I don’t.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 7:31 PM EST up reply actions
One thing that would make me okay with a 4-year deal
is the fact that Werth just recently became a full-time starter.
He simply doesn’t have the “wear and tear” of your typical high profile 31 year-old free agent.
He could maintain a high level of production for a while.
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 24, 2010 7:13 PM EST up reply actions
I don't get that we are "saturated" at the OFspot
are you seriously comfortable Cameron/Ells and Drew with Kalish the 4th?
Under $170m
At opening day. Over 170 when we pick up AGon at the trade deadline and give him a 5-6 yr contract extension.
push
I could see ~165, 160. Something like that.
Bullpen Banter
www.bullpenbanter.com
twitter: @alskor
liverpool, liverpool, liverpool
;)
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:11 PM EST up reply actions
...just say payroll 3 times
and radiohix will be called in for enforcement.
He carries a big hammer.
Ha
I am unbannable here. ;)
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:17 PM EST up reply actions
Can someone ban her PLEEAASEEE?
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
Banned
Everyone
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:46 PM EST up reply actions
I assume that is sarcasm
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:48 PM EST up reply actions
Yes.
You were asking for it.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
I've been busy all day and I now have some time to weigh in
Here we go: I love Victor and hate seeing him go. However, I understand signing him for 3yrs+ would have been a mistake. I have seen Lavarnway and Expo first hand and know they can be good catchers in the future.
I like Salty, but have not seen enough of him. I would like to bring back tek to be the backup, and either go with Salty or a veteren free agent (Pierzynski, Olivo, etc)
Now, as for Beltre: DO NOT RESIGN HIM
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
pretty much off subject, but i feel like ranting a little bit:
my only issue with the moves this team makes is the fact they are ridiculously conservative with moving prospects. i understand we have pretty good depth in the farm and whatnot and that we have several excellent players that came from there (we all know their names) but how many prosepcts didn’t pan out? obviously the majority of them
sometimes you need to let go of your nice toys for better ones. sure, those vintage hot wheels sure like nice sitting up on that banister, but are you ever going to play with them? no. didn’t you want that extra cash for that new ps3 game? yeah.
see what i’m getting at here? keeping prospects is all well and good but you can’t always have your cake and eat it too. i’m usually all for holding onto prospects because look at the results we’ve got thus far.
sometimes though, there are some borderline prospects that would be excellent trading bait. you gotta give something to get something and i don’t mind dumping casey kelley or whoever we’ve got down there for an awesome mid-reliver.
You may be waiting a while if you're hoping for a Casey Kelly for a Mid-reliever swap
I think Kelly only gets shopped for an impact player, not a reliever, if he even gets shopped at all.
We are building a good amount of prospect depth, and I expect that depth will be used eventually.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 4:25 PM EST up reply actions
We readilly trade the borderline prospects.
Thus getting Victor Martinez in the first place.
It’s the top ones you gotta hold on to. Let me just restructure your last paragraph for two and four years ago:
sometimes though, there are some borderline prospects that would be excellent trading bait. you gotta give something to get something and i don’t mind dumping Clay Buchholz or whoever we’ve got down there for an awesome mid-reliver.
sometimes though, there are some borderline prospects that would be excellent trading bait. you gotta give something to get something and i don’t mind dumping Jon Lester or whoever we’ve got down there for an awesome mid-reliver.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:26 PM EST up reply actions
Yep
I remember when everyone wanted Lester gone with Santana. Best trade never made.
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:27 PM EST up reply actions
Why do you say that?
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:31 PM EST up reply actions
...and this is relevent how?
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:33 PM EST up reply actions
it’s relevent because a pitcher needs run support.
kind of like a goalie needs a lead to win a game?
So you are going off wins...
And not other stuff, because wins only win you Cy Youngs (Felix Hernandez)
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:36 PM EST up reply actions
It was sarcasm
He won with only 13 wins.
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:40 PM EST up reply actions
I just taught you the code!
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:43 PM EST up reply actions
I realized that after I posted it.
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:45 PM EST up reply actions
Who cares about wins?
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:36 PM EST up reply actions
Wins as a pitching stat, not as a whole.
If Lester has three losses giving up two runs is that the Red Sox’s fault or his?
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:41 PM EST up reply actions
that’s what i was getting at about Santana. he was in situatuons like that all the time.
i was referring to team wins not necessarily the pitching stat.
I was talking of who is better right now, Lester or Santana
Lester has had the better stats, wins or not.
Because Felix was on Seattle, is he a worse pitcher?
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:45 PM EST up reply actions
Actually, Johan does have a better ERA.
But the situations could not be any more difficult. Santana should be killing it in that park/league.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:46 PM EST up reply actions
just curious….what pitchers have killed it at citi?
seriously though, i wanna see some numbers because i can’t think of any off the top of my head right now
R.A DICKEY!!!!!
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
Pitching in the NL is worth almost up to a run off the ERA
Because the pitcher has to bat, and because the NL lineups tend not to be as deep in general. Lots of “cheap outs.”
Fenway: "An alternate and better universe, disguised as a ballpark." --Thomas Boswell
Everyone kills it in Citi field.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:53 PM EST up reply actions
Are you seriously going to argue that wins are a pitching statistic?
Johan Santana’s wins might have been better in Boston, but that doesn’t make him a more valuable pitcher, which seems to have been your argument.
The problem with Johan is that he’s been around Lester’s numbers (except for his strong 2008) despite playing in a pitcher’s park in the NL for a ton more money and occasional injury problems. Not that he only has 40 wins in the same time. He needs to be absolutely destroying the league ala Roy Halladay to live up to expectations.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:43 PM EST up reply actions
Also factor in him constantly facing AL East teams
In AL East ballparks.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 4:33 PM EST up reply actions
Yep
He would have dominated the National League.
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:37 PM EST up reply actions
No, just no.
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 23, 2010 6:41 PM EST up reply actions
And it would have still been a horrible, horrible trade.
Lester costs relatively little money, and wouldn’t have been the only one in a trade.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:32 PM EST up reply actions
Who's to say he wouldn't be worse?
Better question is, would he have been better and returned as much value as Lester has? Also include other prospects in there.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 4:32 PM EST up reply actions
I believe Masterson, Ellsbury and Lowrie were in that deal
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:33 PM EST up reply actions
Yup
It was Lester + Masterson + Ellsbury + Lowrie, or Buchholz + Masterson + Lowrie IIRC.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:34 PM EST up reply actions
everyone has this clay buc love affair around here….i see the talent, i see the potential.
I would’ve traded him for roy halladay in a heartbeat.
Plus Bard, Ellsbury, Kelly and others?
I think anyone would trade Halladay for Buchh staright up
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:32 PM EST up reply actions
Not a fan of the low-2 ERA?
I know the peripherals weren’t quite as impressive, but neither were Lester’s in 2008.
This isn’t people talking about what maybe he could be anymore. He’s done plenty.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:33 PM EST up reply actions
not a fan of the high 5 ERA he had a couple seasons ago.
he put that behind him, i understand that and it’s paying off for the red sox. i just think roy’s immediate impact on the team that year would have been HUGE.
You mean, three years ago
when he had just come back and was 23?
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:35 PM EST up reply actions
Isn't the word couple the definition of the word two?
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:36 PM EST up reply actions
OK, then go back to my point
He was coming back from cancer and at 23. What are you looking for?
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:39 PM EST up reply actions
uhhhh i think you are talking about lester and i am talking about buc.
as i said before:
but as for lester, yeah you got me there.
i’ve always liked jonny. i wouldn’t have traded him.
Oh, I missed that
Ok, on Buchholz… He sure seemed good last year. Maybe he needed time to develop.
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:42 PM EST up reply actions
In 2009?
We lost in the postseason because we couldn’t hit. Half a year’s rental isn’t worth Buck anyways.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:36 PM EST up reply actions
"we"
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:37 PM EST up reply actions
SB Nation:
News, Scores, and Fan Opinion
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:40 PM EST up reply actions
I was kidding
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:42 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe now, but not later
Watch The Internet Sport Show
Help get Lacrosse on SBN. Join the lacrosse community at The Lacrosse Blog
"This team loves to lose in the fourth quarter" - Phil Jackson
by Marisa Ingemi on Nov 23, 2010 4:42 PM EST up reply actions
Roy would've had to have held the Angels to -1 runs in game 1 or 0 in game 2.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:45 PM EST up reply actions
Except, for all the peripherals didn't pan out...
Buchholz did somehow manage results just as good, basically.
So, no, subtract Buchholz, and Halladay, and the Red Sox are still out of the playoffs.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:56 PM EST up reply actions
Something tells me you started following baseball like a week ago.
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Nov 23, 2010 6:42 PM EST up reply actions
At Fangraphs, they are already calling this an overpay
but I don’t think it really is. I think the problem for Boston is that in year four they couldn’t really play him anywhere. They will likely have A-Gon and Youk (possibly Werth) by then needing some of that DH time and I really doubt he will be much use behind the plate by then (everyone doubts that actually). I think Salty and a TBD vet (maybe Tek, maybe someone else) will see most of the time at catcher in 2011 now. Only Russell Martin looks like an option via trade right now (I would LOVE Ianetta, as an RI guy, but that never seems to work out for us).
- Matt Sullivan
"I would change policy, bring back natural grass and nickel beer. Baseball is the belly-button of our society. Straighten out baseball, and you straighten out the rest of the world." Bill "Spaceman" Lee
www.overthemonster.com
www.spacemanspancakes.wordpress.com
Been waiting for this comment.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 4:58 PM EST up reply actions
What can I say, I'm happy
Victor could prove to be a catcher for them until his mid 30s, I just didn’t want our money on the line.
Other thought to throw out there:
Yorvit Torrealba
Been OK offensively the last few years, and a great defender.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
Actually, 2 big BABIP feuled years. Retracted.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:02 PM EST up reply actions
Haha
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:06 PM EST up reply actions
In my mind by far the best FA option out there
which says very, very little. At least he defends well.
I think it's clear
That we need a trade now. Give up the farm for Gonzo and/or Upton. Then sign whoever makes the most sense from FA (Crawford or Werth) and finally get a team built for the future.
I'd say no for giving something significant for Gonzo.
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
Why wouldn't Gonzo require something significant?
And why shouldn’t we want that? Protect Lester, Buckles and Pedroia. Everyone else is up for grabs, including Bard.
Because we're only trading for 1 year of Gonzo and, ostensibly, a "leg up" in free agency.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:18 PM EST up reply actions
I see no reason
Why we would not immediately, like Schilling, extend. And if we actually think we have a chance at October this season, we need something.
But it's still only the 1 year we're getting for the prospects.
The rest we’re getting for our massive 7/140 investment.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:25 PM EST up reply actions
But then he's no longer some cheap option
Padre’s want you to give up a ton because they’ll say you’re getting him for however long you’re extending him for, but you shouldn’t pay them that way.
You’re getting one year and essentially first dibs on Free Agency negotiating rights. And I would bet that’s worth less than what the Pad’s want for him.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 5:25 PM EST up reply actions
If Gonzo gets traded this offseason
He’s gone, he will immediately be signed by whoever gets him long-term. I would expect a window to be a part of the negotiation, like it was for Santana.
Like who?
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
But why is spending $20 million on a guy worth $20 million such a privilege that we should give up prospects?
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:28 PM EST up reply actions
Because we get him?
And otherwise, we take the risk. Every other team in baseball goes for it with players they want, except us.
When we do go for it with players we want, you get angry about how they're not worth it at the end.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:29 PM EST up reply actions
We always decide that the best course of action is spending money on crap like Lowell and Lugo instead of getting someone good. The other teams trade for the Lees and Sabathias, etc.
And have nothing
to show for it at the end of the year because the Lees and Sabathias are just one year mercenaries. I rather have Lowell on my team.
Also,
they’re mercenaries for the ownerless Rangers and small market Brewers, not for us who can sign people.
Yeah
But no one predicted Lowell to never fully recover from his hip injury. Trading for Lee or Sabathia would cost us in the long run because of the lost prospects. Same with trading for Gonzo now, not really worth it.
The alternative
Is to continue to overpay for mediocrity, who break down or otherwise suck for over half of the contract. Paying for a non-solution is what sinks franchises.
At the time
The Lowell resigning outweighed trading for Lee or signing CC. And a million bucks says you loved the resigning of Lowell.
You just lost a million bucks.
You don’t know Sean O.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:41 PM EST up reply actions
I stand corrected.
But I am against trading for 1 year rentals.
He isn't a rental
He is a player we get cheap for a season and then sign for 5 at the same time. Just like Santana, just like Schilling.
Assuming they will sign
Remember the Sox had a done deal for Tex. But in the 12th hour he signed with the Yankees for more money.
This is the problem
with V. Martinez. He was comfortable in Boston but wanted to get that last pay day.
It's a part of the trade deal
If a negotiation isn’t completed, the trade doesn’t go through, just like Santana’s one week.
the thing is
I wouldn’t even want to commit the money he’d get to him until he proved he can still swing the bat just as well after his surgery
well they don't really gain anything too much by letting him go cheap
if they think they can re-establish his value over the season. Or if they can’t, just take the draft picks. Either way, I think now’s when it makes the least sense for them to trade him.
And the least sense for us to trade for him.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:56 PM EST up reply actions
ok so let me ask you this
Do you think it’s wise for the Sox to trade for Gonzo?
Depends on who we'd give up
I think getting a masher entering his prime is a good idea. I’d give up Kelly straight up, plus a few other prospies.
I’d prefer Upton.
Unfortunately
It will cost more than just Kelly. But I would definitely dump high profile prospects for Upton.
Basically
I’d rather have two guys worth $12-15 million at $10 million a pop than 1 guy worth $20 million costing me $20 million.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:30 PM EST up reply actions
Wouldn't it be nice
To actually have a player worth $20m in the first place? When was the last guy we got who was that good?
Adrian Beltre
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:33 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Youk was on pace for that
Past two years for him. Pedroia too. Drew, roughly, last year.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 5:35 PM EST up reply actions
Youk and Pedroia weren't acquired
They were ours. Drew was a great deal I was behind from the beginning. Everyone else? Rough.
Well, we got them in the draft
You never specified how we got them.
Oh hey, you’ll love this…Fangraph’s says Josh Beckett in several of his years here was worth $20m.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 5:39 PM EST up reply actions
Do you have a reason why
Or do you just say that because you disagree?
B-Ref had him close a few seasons as well, FYI.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 5:40 PM EST up reply actions
It's ridiculous
it goes against everything that we know about baseball reality. WAR is fine, WAR valuation is idiocy.
It's not like it's doing anything other than multiplying, is it?
Just saying.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:51 PM EST up reply actions
I think it's foolish
To assign a hard dollar value, thus equating it to the economic realities of the game. And I think it’s both misunderstood and poorly handled, because “what would this person get in FA today” is a nothing statement.
I don't get it
You say WAR valuation is idiocy, yet just a few lines above asked why we can’t get players “worth” $20m. Please tell me how you determine the monetary “worth” of a player.
by South Coast Ghost on Nov 23, 2010 7:43 PM EST up reply actions
And lest you think this is part of the anti-Beckett thing
Nobody is a bigger fan of Julian Tavarez on the planet than I, and the 6.8m value for 2007 is BS.
Beckett and peripherals are an interesting thing.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 5:40 PM EST up reply actions
But what two guys?
We got outfield options in Werth and Crawford, along with Upton who will cost as much or more than Gonzo via prospects.
Then what corner infield options do we have for that other guy?
Gonzo vs Upton
Gonzo would be a 1 year rental vs Upton who still has 3 years left on his contract. They could trade for Upton, sign Werth and resign Beltre for the other infield option
What those gentelmen said
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
Well this certainly sucks losing him.
But wow, that’s a lot of money to pay him. I think we are better off without at that price.
The certified ambassador of all things good and great, here at OTM.
DO NOT OVERPAY FOR BELTRE !!!
TRADE ELLSBURY THIS WINTER !!!
One of the many, proud OTM'ers that cannot stand Josh Beckett.
what should we do... oh great one..... dicek, ellsbury and salty for suzuki???
Hoping to became a Stud!
OT but this one here is full of greatness
PPinstripes Sean P
Driving listening to WFAN, man is in tears about how ‘Wayne’ Cashman is treating Jeter, he’s never coming back to Yankee stadium, CYAAAAA
Twitter | "Almost every organization has a guy like Papelbon or Lester" - Dave Cameron 12/29/2005
Please bring him back, Cash.
I want to see you spending $20 million on a replacement player. I desperately do.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Nov 23, 2010 7:32 PM EST up reply actions
Russel Martin
just plugged in Martin’s batted ball profile into a xBABIP calculator and with his high LD% he should have had a BABIP of .322 last season while it was only .287.
So another positive on Martin
by German Red Sox Fan on Nov 24, 2010 6:11 AM EST reply actions
I read somewhere that the Tigers are going to use Vic at primarily DH.
talk about a waste of money
embrace the martian
Twitter: @BoldandBrash
probably is but
probably means he’ll be able to catch at the end of the contract (if he’s just catching part-time), and also a DH who can be your backup catcher has a lot more value to me just because it frees up a roster spot that’s usually wasted on a bad catcher.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Over the Monster
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Pitcher Clayton Richard gets key pinch single in 13th after coming in 0 for 16
- Livan Hernandez welcomes ballboy to the bigs with shower of sunflower seeds (VIDEO)
- Man beaten by four others in Dodger Stadium parking lot
- Lance Berkman’s knee injury creates a lot of questions for Cards but also his career
- Next generation: Scott Van Slyke, son of Andy Van Slyke, hits first career homer
