Register now to remove this ad

Page 243 of 299 FirstFirst ... 143193233241242243244245253293 ... LastLast
Results 3,631 to 3,645 of 4478

Thread: A Realistic View at 2017 Part I

  1. #3631
    Major Leaguer
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    407
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    You're not getting it. Again, how many guys in the Majors can do what Holt does? Maybe 3 or 4? How many guys can give you his 2nd base production over a full season? Maybe 30?

    I "get" the value of a super sub, but if he's not even the first sub off the bench in 5 or 6 of the 7 positions he plays, then that value should diminish somewhat.

    We were arguing on the assumption that Holt would start at 2B on 10 teams, so you're not "getting it" when you say there are 30 guys who can give you his production. There are 20- for argument's sake.

    If he wouldn't start on 10 teams, then of course the value changes.




    I'll explain it this way. Think "supply and demand." Do you think 25 teams contacted the Sox because of his value as a 2nd baseman? The answer is no. He's been exposed. You've said yourself a thousand times that he breaks down in the 2nd half every year. You don't think other teams are aware of this?

    No, I never said he'd play 140-150 games only at 2B. I was careful not to even imply that much.

    To me, he's a Zobrist light, and we all know how valuable Zob is.

    I know very well how much "other teams know this".

    My point is, it seems clear to me that Holt playing 140-150 games for another team (at any or mostly one position- it doesn't matter) has more value than playing 90-120 with us.

    I'm not sure why that's a hard concept to understand, even if you don't agree.


    There's a reason why so many teams are trying to create their own "Brock Holts" in the minors, but are realizing that it's not easy at all. Most guys want an opportunity to "play everyday." Very few have the ability and the mindset to do what he does with any kind of consistency.

    Agreed. And, there's a reason many GMs want Holt.
    Fair enough. Holt's value doesn't reside with his production or "games played." I can't explain it any other way. Let's just disagree and move on.
    Last edited by Eddy Ballgame; 02-23-2017 at 12:03 PM.

  2. #3632
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Eddy Ballgame View Post
    Fair enough. Holt's value doesn't reside with his production or "games played." I can't explain it any other way. Let's just disagree and move on.
    We don't disagree. He has enormous value to the team in more ways than just playing. Just having him on the roster allows JF to make other moves not involving him, because he knows he's there if needed, of if something happenes suddenly- like an injury.

    Really, I don't think I am undervaluing Holt. I understand why many GMs ask about him. He's very valuable.

    However, a team that is likely to need to use him more often should, in theory, value him even more. In general, a starter has more value than his sub. In a sport like basketball, some subs end up playing more minutes than the starters, because they sub for multiple players. Holt has even ended up leading our team in innings at a particular position some years, like LF last year. He finished 5th in PAs in 2014, although he did not get more innings than others at one particular player. I'd have no problem saying he was the 5th most valuable non-pitcher that year.

    When we had a DH-only DH, I think Holt's value was greatest, even if he didn't play as often some years. Now that we will be using HanRam and Young at DH, we have more flexibility than before, even if by just a little more. We won't want to move our DH to the field mid-game, so having Holt eases those worries to some extent.

    I do think our bench has gotten much better, and to some extent, it has pushed Holt down on the depth chart at some of those 7 positions he plays.

    1B: HanRam/Moreland- Travis would be called up in case of major injury- Holt is #4 at best.
    2B: Pedey- I think this is the only clear position where Holt is the first sub, but Hernandez would probaly be pretty close.
    3B: Pablo- I think Rutledge is slightly but clearly better vs LHPs and Holt is vs RHPs.
    SS: Bogey- I think Hernandez would be called up in case of injury, but Holt is close to Hernandez.
    LF: Beni- Young would move to LF full time, if any OF'er got hurt. I suppose they might decide to keep Young at DH vs LHPs and use Holt in LF those games, but I'd prefer Young in LF FT and Travis or Swihart getting called up for 1B/DH platoon duty. We could also just use Moreland FT at 1B and HR full time at DH.

    I still value Holt a lot, but I think he was the clear number one sub at more positions before this year, and the loss of a DH only DH might mean his value elsewhere is now greater than his value here.




  3. #3633
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Dojji View Post
    Well look at the fatsnfigs. Last year he had a concussion, both years before that he had 2+ WAR. With his level of offense, 2+ WAR is pretty impressive if we're being honest. And this year in half a season with concussion problems and all, he was still good for 1.2 WAR

    Dude is getting us value. He's doing it by providing average level production wherever we happen to really need an average player. That's a level of value disproportionate to his averageness since he's singlehandedly plugging our worst black hole in any given season with an average guy. He's stop loss insurance against excessive suckitude, in other words, and that has a value all by itself.

    Replacing a negative-WAR guy with a 2 WAR guy is good for more than 2 WAR to the team, that's just math. He can take anyone other than a catcher or pitcher who's being a detriment to the team, out of the lineup immediately and replace it with a solid roster filler, without having to shed assets in trade. He's done that for us for 3 years now whenever the plan didn't work at various positions.


    And that's before you factor in the roster assets he's saved us. IF a big acquisition flops it a player falls off the cliff, lot of teams have to make trades to plug holes that Brock can just fill with no muss, no fuss and play at an average level. That stability has probably kept a handful of prospects in-system over the last few seasons. There's a good reason that Gm's love guys like him
    Again, I am not claiming his value is low for us.... just maybe lower than before and maybe higher for another team that would use him more.

    You are using WAR to measure value, and we all know a big component of WAR is playing time. the more you play- the higher the value.

    Now, we all knwo about Holt's propensity to decline in production after playing more and more, but his defense and better-than-some on other teams production, even when struggling would give him more value to a team with a much weaker bench than ours or with more question marks at positions Holt is best at playing (2B, 3B and LF).

  4. #3634
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    Again, I am not claiming his value is low for us.... just maybe lower than before and maybe higher for another team that would use him more.


    You are using WAR to measure value, and we all know a big component of WAR is playing time. the more you play- the higher the value.

    Now, we all knwo about Holt's propensity to decline in production after playing more and more, but his defense and better-than-some on other teams production, even when struggling would give him more value to a team with a much weaker bench than ours or with more question marks at positions Holt is best at playing (2B, 3B and LF).

    Saying a player might have more value on another team is not diminishing his current value on our team.

    Thinking of trading someone does not mean I value them less than anyone else.

    I loved Moncada and Kopech, but I love Sale more.

    I'm not for handing Holt away, but I could see him being part of a mid-summer trade to upgrade at a position of need by more value than the downgrade from Holt to Hernandez would be.

    Maybe I value Hernandez more than I should or more than some of you guys. I get that, but it's just my opinion.

  5. #3635
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    MLB pipeline's top 30 Sox prospects rankings:

    http://m.mlb.com/prospects/2017?list=bos

    Dalbec #5!

    More on prospects...

    http://m.mlb.com/news/article/216472...rospects-list/


  6. #3636
    Legend Nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    6,997
    Other teams want Holt because he is cheap. You are not going to get much of value in return.....that's what the market value means.

    You may think you live in a nice house in a good neighborhood, but if there are no buyers at your asking price, then your house is worth more to you to keep it than sell it.

  7. #3637
    Legend Nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    6,997
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    MLB pipeline's top 30 Sox prospects rankings:

    http://m.mlb.com/prospects/2017?list=bos

    Dalbec #5!

    More on prospects...

    http://m.mlb.com/news/article/216472...rospects-list/

    Chatam and Ockimey at #7 & #9. This is why to me I'd sign Betts, Sale, Bradley Jr and Porcello in that order. Xander is my 5th guy. If Xander costs more than $25M, I'd pass. Our OF depth is very thin in our organization. Dalbec and Ockimey can take over for Hanley when that time comes.

    For 2020 season

    3B Devers
    SS Chatam
    2B Pedy
    1B Travis
    DH Dalbec
    C Vazquez/Leon
    LF Beni
    CF Bradley JR
    RF Betts

    SP Price
    SP Porcello
    SP Sale
    SP E Rod
    SP Wright

    If we need to, we can insert Swihart in LF, move Beni to CF, Betts in RF.

    It's not unreasonable to believe Boras will oversell Bradley Jr......I can live with Sale, Porcello, Betts extensions.

    If Groome is ready in 2020, then I suppose we can pass on Porcello.

    Don't get me wrong, I want Xander, Bradley Jr and Porcello along with Betts/Sale (two must gets), but I have a feeling we won't be able to sign them all.
    Last edited by Nick; 02-23-2017 at 01:58 PM.

  8. #3638
    Legend
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    5,426
    Homers from Mitch Moreland and Sam Travis against Northeastern:

    https://twitter.com/PeteAbe?ref_src=...Ctwgr%5Eauthor

    Pete AbrahamVerified account
    ‏@PeteAbe

    Rusney Castillo jogged out a double play grounder. But, hey, $72.5 million.
    https://twitter.com/PeteAbe/status/834837912034406400

    Boston Globe beat reporter Pete Abraham suggests a Rusney Castillo solution:

    https://twitter.com/PeteAbe/status/834870735483129856
    Last edited by harmony; 02-23-2017 at 04:11 PM.

  9. #3639
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    Other teams want Holt because he is cheap. You are not going to get much of value in return.....that's what the market value means.

    You may think you live in a nice house in a good neighborhood, but if there are no buyers at your asking price, then your house is worth more to you to keep it than sell it.
    Yes, his contract is one reason many teams want him- many non contenders.

    There are also some teams , mostly non contenders, who do not have a sure thing at 2-3 positions of which Holt might play 2 or 3. They'd love to have a low cost guy like Holt knowing that at least one of the 3 big question mark guys might need to be replaced. Holt offers them a one cost guy that is insurance for 3 spots. He could also platoon against RHPs at one position and against LHPs at another position and basically play FT, since his L-R splits are nearly identical.

    Now, a .705-.710 OPS is not enough to win a FT job on the Sox, except as a catcher, those numbers blow away what several teams had last year at multiple positions. Even some competitive teams had 2-3 non catching positions with sub .700 offense or even much worse.

    Here's a few examples:

    KC:
    2B .611
    SS .642
    LF .690

    SFG:
    2B .682
    3B .713
    CF .715
    LF .720

    WSH:
    SS .681
    1B .673
    LF & CF .705


  10. #3640
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    Chatam and Ockimey at #7 & #9. This is why to me I'd sign Betts, Sale, Bradley Jr and Porcello in that order. Xander is my 5th guy. If Xander costs more than $25M, I'd pass. Our OF depth is very thin in our organization. Dalbec and Ockimey can take over for Hanley when that time comes.

    If Shaw doesn't pan out at 1B, we can always move Pablo there after HR moves on. Devers should be ready for ML 3B by then.

    I'm not sure Chatham offers a solution to replace Bogey, but I get your point and don't disagree.

    I'm not sure I'd put extending Porcello over Bogey, since Porcello will be near the end of prime when his contract expires. Bogey will not.

  11. #3641
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    Don't get me wrong, I want Xander, Bradley Jr and Porcello along with Betts/Sale (two must gets), but I have a feeling we won't be able to sign them all.

    Agreed.

    I order extension value this way (assuming Beni is too far away to worry about now):

    1. Betts
    2. Sale
    3T. Bogey
    3T. JBJ
    5. ERod
    6. Porcello



  12. #3642
    Legend Nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    6,997
    In reality, Pablo and Hanley's contract ends at same time, assuming 1 Hanley does not get hurt next two years and 2 Sox does not pick up option year on Pablo.

    They are both with us for next 3 years.

  13. #3643
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    In reality, Pablo and Hanley's contract ends at same time, assuming 1 Hanley does not get hurt next two years and 2 Sox does not pick up option year on Pablo.

    They are both with us for next 3 years.
    HanRam is here two more years and then has a vesting option for 2019.

    Chances are he will meet the criteria, but it's not a certain 3 years. The club physical could be subjective.

    Cots:

    19:$22M vesting option, guaranteed if Ramirez has 1,050 plate appearances in 2017-18 and passes club physical after 2018 season

  14. #3644
    Resident Old Fart Spudboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    24,394
    Quote Originally Posted by Kimmi View Post
    I disagree that it is an overdue change. I will go on record as saying that I disapprove of this change. And yes, it will have a very minor impact on the length of the games.
    I agree fully. This change is just a placebo in the effort to speed up the pace of the game.

    Plus I like to see pitchers IBB batters. Some of them fuck up or come close to fucking up. That ads a little drama and skill to the game. It's minor and possibly inconsequential but it is part of the game.
    "Hating the Yankees like it's a religion since 94'" RIP Mike.


    "It's also a simple and indisputable fact that WAR isn't the be-all end-all in valuations, especially in real life. Wanna know why? Because an ace in run-prevention for 120 innings means more often than not, a sub-standard pitcher covering for the rest of the IP that pitcher fails to provide. You can't see value in a vacuum when a player does not provide full-time production."

  15. #3645
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    26,666
    Quote Originally Posted by Slasher9 View Post
    well, i liked the signing when it happened so my love isn't really "sudden".
    i really, really, really like the work that he has put in this past year after showing up as a disgrace last spring. i honestly believe he learned his lesson and has fully committed himself to being as best a ballplayer as he can. the past few months he has been training daily with miggy and i am sure some of his stardust has rubbed off onto our lovable 3bman.
    personally i am not going to over react on Spring training results...whether he is mashing the ball or on the flipside a disaster. i will hold my initial judgement until May and go from there.
    I did not particularly like the signing when it happened, but beyond that, I agree with this post.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •