EagleOutsider.com

angrychicken {l Wrote}:

claver2010 {l Wrote}:

bignick33 {l Wrote}:

claver2010 {l Wrote}:From New York Post Mets beat writer a couple of minutes ago: A Mets official tells me the club feels Igarashi's signing is "going to happen," but still in talks and nothing is imminent.

No clue what's going on.

It would actually be kind of funny of the Sox and Mets got into a mini-bidding war over this guy.

Signed with the mets today, 2 yrs ~1-2 mill/year

Is the McElroy bookstore open?

No, but later today Tiger Woods is scheduled to meet this chick http://bad-girls-club.oxygen.com/meet-t ... c/kate-bio in the MA's bathroom.

Looks like Beltre is happening:

http://sports.espn.go.com/boston/mlb/ne ... id=4795915

Great defensively, but I seriously question his ability to hit on a team that already is going to have issue scoring runs. The contract is ideal though only 2 years and a 5 mil player option being the second year. It's a good deal, not because I even remotely like Adrian Beltre's offense, but his defense is great and the contract is acceptable.

Ellsbury, Pedroia, Martinez, Youkilis, Ortiz, Beltre, Drew, Cameron, Scutaro

Varitek
Kotchman
Hermedia
Lowrie

Decent offense, but Theo has created the same problem as last year as this team will go into prolonged offensive droughts which I thought was what we were trying to avoid here. Move Buchholtz, Kelly and two other mid-level prospects to San Diego for Adrian Gonzalez and then you have a WS offense.

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:Great defensively, but I seriously question his ability to hit on a team that already is going to have issue scoring runs. The contract is ideal though only 2 years and a 5 mil player option being the second year. It's a good deal, not because I even remotely like Adrian Beltre's offense, but his defense is great and the contract is acceptable.

Ellsbury, Pedroia, Martinez, Youkilis, Ortiz, Beltre, Drew, Cameron, Scutaro

Varitek
Kotchman
Hermedia
Lowrie

Decent offense, but Theo has created the same problem as last year as this team will go into prolonged offensive droughts which I thought was what we were trying to avoid here. Move Buchholtz, Kelly and two other mid-level prospects to San Diego for Adrian Gonzalez and then you have a WS offense.

I wasn't enthused about Beltre at first but a one year $10 million deal isn't bad. I don't think an Adrian Gonzalez deal is ever happening. I think the Sox will make a run at Pujols after next season and if they don't get him, Gonzalez after the 2011 season. With the Yankees tied to Teixeira, the bidding competition is slimmer although it looks like the Angels will always be in the picture. I heard about there being some dischord between Pujols and the Cards.

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:Move Buchholtz, Kelly and two other mid-level prospects to San Diego for Adrian Gonzalez and then you have a WS offense.

I'm sure they'd jump on that that if San Diego let them. While they're at it they should trade Mike Lowell's thumb to the Brewers for Prince Fielder.

Adrian Gonzalez makes the Red Sox a nasty team to beat.

Add one Kooban and you may be the favorites.

Beltre allows the Sox to keep Youkilis at 1st base where he's a better defender. The one year deal also gives Theo the flexibility to make a big trade for a Gonzalez, Fielder, etc. should one become available. Theo lusted after Beltre in the 2004 offseason. It's amazing how he always gets "his" guy. Of course, in the case of Lugo, that's not always a good thing.

postiives for Red Sox: Their defense and pitching will be 2nd to none in the MLB.

negatives for Red Sox: 1) Ortiz is a huge question mark. I'd say he's on a 3-month trial, and if he doesn't turn it around he will be replaced in June/July.
2) V-Mart is not a 140-game catcher. Will this hurt his offense? One would think so. And Sox can't afford V-Mart to have an off-year offensively.

Two stats people seem to have forgotten:

1. The Red Sox were 2nd in the league in runs last year. This notion that they have a shitty offense is way off. The deowngrade from Bay to Cameron/Hermida is offset by the upgrade from Nick Goddamn Green/Alex Gonzalez to Marco Scutaro.

2. David Ortiz was top 3 in the AL in HRs and RBI from June 1st on. Any chatter suggesting he is "done" is foolish. Throwing April and May out the window, the guy had like 30 HR and 85 RBIs in 100 games.

auggiebc {l Wrote}:postiives for Red Sox: Their defense and pitching will be 2nd to none in the MLB.

negatives for Red Sox: 1) Ortiz is a huge question mark. I'd say he's on a 3-month trial, and if he doesn't turn it around he will be replaced in June/July.
2) V-Mart is not a 140-game catcher. Will this hurt his offense? One would think so. And Sox can't afford V-Mart to have an off-year offensively.

V-Mart won't catch 140 games. Probably closer to 100-115 with other time spent at 1B and DH.

flyingelvii {l Wrote}:

auggiebc {l Wrote}:postiives for Red Sox: Their defense and pitching will be 2nd to none in the MLB.

negatives for Red Sox: 1) Ortiz is a huge question mark. I'd say he's on a 3-month trial, and if he doesn't turn it around he will be replaced in June/July.
2) V-Mart is not a 140-game catcher. Will this hurt his offense? One would think so. And Sox can't afford V-Mart to have an off-year offensively.

V-Mart won't catch 140 games. Probably closer to 100-115 with other time spent at 1B and DH.

which is exactly my point.

buconvict {l Wrote}:Two stats people seem to have forgotten:

1. The Red Sox were 2nd in the league in runs last year. This notion that they have a shitty offense is way off. The deowngrade from Bay to Cameron/Hermida is offset by the upgrade from Nick Goddamn Green/Alex Gonzalez to Marco Scutaro.

2. David Ortiz was top 3 in the AL in HRs and RBI from June 1st on. Any chatter suggesting he is "done" is foolish. Throwing April and May out the window, the guy had like 30 HR and 85 RBIs in 100 games.

I'd much rather have an offense that can score 4-6 runs more consistently than an offense that scores 15 runs one game but gets 1-3 runs / game over the next 3 games. Last year, the Red Sox offense sucked ass on the road and couldn't hit above-average pitching very well, especially on the road. I don't see that changing much with this lineup. Just because the Sox lineup can score a shit ton of runs against the Kansas City Royals in Fenway in June doesn't make me excited about the prospects of the lineup against real teams in Sept/Oct.

auggiebc {l Wrote}:

flyingelvii {l Wrote}:

auggiebc {l Wrote}:postiives for Red Sox: Their defense and pitching will be 2nd to none in the MLB.

negatives for Red Sox: 1) Ortiz is a huge question mark. I'd say he's on a 3-month trial, and if he doesn't turn it around he will be replaced in June/July.
2) V-Mart is not a 140-game catcher. Will this hurt his offense? One would think so. And Sox can't afford V-Mart to have an off-year offensively.

V-Mart won't catch 140 games. Probably closer to 100-115 with other time spent at 1B and DH.

which is exactly my point.

I'm confused. He's not a 140 game catcher but will still probably play about 140 games, barring injury. Are you asserting that the extra load on Martinez will hurt the offense? I honestly have no idea.

branchinator {l Wrote}:

buconvict {l Wrote}:Two stats people seem to have forgotten:

1. The Red Sox were 2nd in the league in runs last year. This notion that they have a shitty offense is way off. The deowngrade from Bay to Cameron/Hermida is offset by the upgrade from Nick Goddamn Green/Alex Gonzalez to Marco Scutaro.

2. David Ortiz was top 3 in the AL in HRs and RBI from June 1st on. Any chatter suggesting he is "done" is foolish. Throwing April and May out the window, the guy had like 30 HR and 85 RBIs in 100 games.

I'd much rather have an offense that can score 4-6 runs more consistently than an offense that scores 15 runs one game but gets 1-3 runs / game over the next 3 games. Last year, the Red Sox offense sucked ass on the road and couldn't hit above-average pitching very well, especially on the road. I don't see that changing much with this lineup. Just because the Sox lineup can score a shit ton of runs against the Kansas City Royals in Fenway in June doesn't make me excited about the prospects of the lineup against real teams in Sept/Oct.

This raises a good point- looking at runs scored can be deceptive based upon a team's home ballpark. Is there a site with sortable batting stats like this. This is a good misleading example. This is just as true for the Yankees given the bandbox they play in. Ironically, however, the cold weather and lack of pitching their 4 and 5 starters lead to a relatively low scoring WS.

EagleNYC {l Wrote}:

branchinator {l Wrote}:

buconvict {l Wrote}:Two stats people seem to have forgotten:

1. The Red Sox were 2nd in the league in runs last year. This notion that they have a shitty offense is way off. The deowngrade from Bay to Cameron/Hermida is offset by the upgrade from Nick Goddamn Green/Alex Gonzalez to Marco Scutaro.

2. David Ortiz was top 3 in the AL in HRs and RBI from June 1st on. Any chatter suggesting he is "done" is foolish. Throwing April and May out the window, the guy had like 30 HR and 85 RBIs in 100 games.

I'd much rather have an offense that can score 4-6 runs more consistently than an offense that scores 15 runs one game but gets 1-3 runs / game over the next 3 games. Last year, the Red Sox offense sucked ass on the road and couldn't hit above-average pitching very well, especially on the road. I don't see that changing much with this lineup. Just because the Sox lineup can score a shit ton of runs against the Kansas City Royals in Fenway in June doesn't make me excited about the prospects of the lineup against real teams in Sept/Oct.

This raises a good point- looking at runs scored can be deceptive based upon a team's home ballpark. Is there a site with sortable batting stats like this. This is a good misleading example. This is just as true for the Yankees given the bandbox they play in. Ironically, however, the cold weather and lack of pitching their 4 and 5 starters lead to a relatively low scoring WS.

Park Adjusted stats are available, and still support the idea that the Yankees and Red Sox had the two best offenses in the league in 2009. If you're looking for a site, fangraphs is the premier one, but can go over some heads.

fangraphs also says that Zach Grienke was worth 42 million dollars this year, so take it for what it's worth.

Kotchman moving, makes sense because they have too many infielders.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4798541

Yes, obviously the Red Sox have a good offense when compared to the rest of the league. The "runs scored" stat can be misleading for reasons already stated. I will say that if the rotation stays healthy and the bullpen pitches solidly, then having a devastating lineup won't be needed. Against the Yankees, the Sox lineup is inferior. Against basically everyone else, it's not. If the Sox had a Teixeira type in the middle of the order, I'd be about as confident as a fan could be entering a season. Everything else is pretty much there. The lineup, however, right now has some question marks. But it also has some upside as well. We pretty much know what we're going to get from Ellsbury/Pedroia/Youkilis/Victor/Drew. It's the other 4 (Papi, Beltre, Scutaro, Cameron) that are wild cards. If 2 of them exceed expectations, the lineup will be fine, barring injury.

branchinator {l Wrote}:Yes, obviously the Red Sox have a good offense when compared to the rest of the league. The "runs scored" stat can be misleading for reasons already stated. I will say that if the rotation stays healthy and the bullpen pitches solidly, then having a devastating lineup won't be needed. Against the Yankees, the Sox lineup is inferior. Against basically everyone else, it's not. If the Sox had a Teixeira type in the middle of the order, I'd be about as confident as a fan could be entering a season. Everything else is pretty much there. The lineup, however, right now has some question marks. But it also has some upside as well. We pretty much know what we're going to get from Ellsbury/Pedroia/Youkilis/Victor/Drew. It's the other 4 (Papi, Beltre, Scutaro, Cameron) that are wild cards. If 2 of them exceed expectations, the lineup will be fine, barring injury.

I believe the Thinking in the FO is: Best pitching staff + best defense + 2nd best offense > 2nd/3rd Pitching staff + middling defense + best offense.

Whether that works remains to be seen.

buconvict {l Wrote}:1. The Red Sox were 2nd in the league in runs last year. This notion that they have a shitty offense is way off. The deowngrade from Bay to Cameron/Hermida is offset by the upgrade from Nick Goddamn Green/Alex Gonzalez to Marco Scutaro.

Do you really think Scutaro's offensive numbers from last year will hold up? His OPS was nearly 100 points higher than any other year of his career, his total bases were about 50 higher than the two other years of his career where he played at least 130 games, and his slugging was was 35 points above his career average.

I know he'll have a better lineup around him and his 35 doubles should go up with the Monster in play, but if the Sox are counting on him to be a main cog in the lineup, I have to wonder if they're going to be sorely disappointed.

buconvict {l Wrote}:

branchinator {l Wrote}:Yes, obviously the Red Sox have a good offense when compared to the rest of the league. The "runs scored" stat can be misleading for reasons already stated. I will say that if the rotation stays healthy and the bullpen pitches solidly, then having a devastating lineup won't be needed. Against the Yankees, the Sox lineup is inferior. Against basically everyone else, it's not. If the Sox had a Teixeira type in the middle of the order, I'd be about as confident as a fan could be entering a season. Everything else is pretty much there. The lineup, however, right now has some question marks. But it also has some upside as well. We pretty much know what we're going to get from Ellsbury/Pedroia/Youkilis/Victor/Drew. It's the other 4 (Papi, Beltre, Scutaro, Cameron) that are wild cards. If 2 of them exceed expectations, the lineup will be fine, barring injury.

I believe the Thinking in the FO is: Best pitching staff + best defense + 2nd best offense > 2nd/3rd Pitching staff + middling defense + best offense.

Whether that works remains to be seen.

In a playoff scenario, the advantage the Sox have in the pitching staff shrinks because you don't need a 5 man staff.

eaglesmith {l Wrote}:

buconvict {l Wrote}:1. The Red Sox were 2nd in the league in runs last year. This notion that they have a shitty offense is way off. The deowngrade from Bay to Cameron/Hermida is offset by the upgrade from Nick Goddamn Green/Alex Gonzalez to Marco Scutaro.

Do you really think Scutaro's offensive numbers from last year will hold up? His OPS was nearly 100 points higher than any other year of his career, his total bases were about 50 higher than the two other years of his career where he played at least 130 games, and his slugging was was 35 points above his career average.

I know he'll have a better lineup around him and his 35 doubles should go up with the Monster in play, but if the Sox are counting on him to be a main cog in the lineup, I have to wonder if they're going to be sorely disappointed.

The sucktitude of Nick Green is tough to articulate. If Scutaro regresses to his mean, the improvement is still significant, especially from that position where Scutaro plays well above average.

pick6pedro {l Wrote}:

buconvict {l Wrote}:

branchinator {l Wrote}:Yes, obviously the Red Sox have a good offense when compared to the rest of the league. The "runs scored" stat can be misleading for reasons already stated. I will say that if the rotation stays healthy and the bullpen pitches solidly, then having a devastating lineup won't be needed. Against the Yankees, the Sox lineup is inferior. Against basically everyone else, it's not. If the Sox had a Teixeira type in the middle of the order, I'd be about as confident as a fan could be entering a season. Everything else is pretty much there. The lineup, however, right now has some question marks. But it also has some upside as well. We pretty much know what we're going to get from Ellsbury/Pedroia/Youkilis/Victor/Drew. It's the other 4 (Papi, Beltre, Scutaro, Cameron) that are wild cards. If 2 of them exceed expectations, the lineup will be fine, barring injury.

I believe the Thinking in the FO is: Best pitching staff + best defense + 2nd best offense > 2nd/3rd Pitching staff + middling defense + best offense.

Whether that works remains to be seen.

In a playoff scenario, the advantage the Sox have in the pitching staff shrinks because you don't need a 5 man staff.

Theo's philosophy is to make the playoffs and go from there because, more often than not, the playoffs are a crapshoot and whichever team gets hottest wins.

eaglesmith {l Wrote}:

buconvict {l Wrote}:1. The Red Sox were 2nd in the league in runs last year. This notion that they have a shitty offense is way off. The deowngrade from Bay to Cameron/Hermida is offset by the upgrade from Nick Goddamn Green/Alex Gonzalez to Marco Scutaro.

Do you really think Scutaro's offensive numbers from last year will hold up? His OPS was nearly 100 points higher than any other year of his career, his total bases were about 50 higher than the two other years of his career where he played at least 130 games, and his slugging was was 35 points above his career average.

I know he'll have a better lineup around him and his 35 doubles should go up with the Monster in play, but if the Sox are counting on him to be a main cog in the lineup, I have to wonder if they're going to be sorely disappointed.

The Sox certainly aren't counting on Scutaro to be a "main cog" in the lineup. All they're probably looking for is a .340-.350ish OBP and good defense. Nick Green, on the other hand, gave the Sox about a .300 OBP and shitty defense. Unless Scutaro falls off a cliff, he'll be an upgrade over what we had last year.

flyingelvii {l Wrote}:Theo's philosophy is to make the playoffs and go from there because, more often than not, the playoffs are a crapshoot and whichever team gets hottest wins.

I'd take the top 3 Sox starters every year, it provides a very steady core and proven post-season performance. In large degree though, as you pointed out, it is very much a crap shoot. Atlanta had Smoltz, Maddux and Glavine for nearly a decade, paired with a potent offense, and only won one title. The A's had Mulder, Zito and Hudson and never won a playoff series (blowing several in nearly mythical fashion). Last year the Sox had outstanding starters and still got the broom.

Not surprisingly, the Sox announced that Ellsbury will play LF and Cameron will play CF.

flyingelvii {l Wrote}:

pick6pedro {l Wrote}:

buconvict {l Wrote}:

branchinator {l Wrote}:Yes, obviously the Red Sox have a good offense when compared to the rest of the league. The "runs scored" stat can be misleading for reasons already stated. I will say that if the rotation stays healthy and the bullpen pitches solidly, then having a devastating lineup won't be needed. Against the Yankees, the Sox lineup is inferior. Against basically everyone else, it's not. If the Sox had a Teixeira type in the middle of the order, I'd be about as confident as a fan could be entering a season. Everything else is pretty much there. The lineup, however, right now has some question marks. But it also has some upside as well. We pretty much know what we're going to get from Ellsbury/Pedroia/Youkilis/Victor/Drew. It's the other 4 (Papi, Beltre, Scutaro, Cameron) that are wild cards. If 2 of them exceed expectations, the lineup will be fine, barring injury.

I believe the Thinking in the FO is: Best pitching staff + best defense + 2nd best offense > 2nd/3rd Pitching staff + middling defense + best offense.

Whether that works remains to be seen.

In a playoff scenario, the advantage the Sox have in the pitching staff shrinks because you don't need a 5 man staff.

Theo's philosophy is to make the playoffs and go from there because, more often than not, the playoffs are a crapshoot and whichever team gets hottest wins.

That's fine. I'm evaluating the team on paper and mentioning that the edge in pitching is diminished in a playoff series. Baseball playoffs series are generally a crapshoot as you note. Play 162 games and still the best teams win about 60% of their games and the worst 40%...that basically means a terrible team could still win a 7 game playoff series almost half the time. Baseball is a crazy game that way.

Sox trade Kotchman to Seattle for Bill Hall and a minor leaguer, with the Mariners paying most of Hall's salary. Very nice.

Endless Mike {l Wrote}:Sox trade Kotchman to Seattle for Bill Hall and a minor leaguer, with the Mariners paying most of Hall's salary. Very nice.

Good position versitility. Unfortunately, he'll hit about .250 and fit right in along with Beltre, Cameron and Scutaro. At least Scutaro takes walks unlike the other three hackers. I wonder how many ABs Hall will get this season coming off the bench.

eaglesmith {l Wrote}:

buconvict {l Wrote}:1. The Red Sox were 2nd in the league in runs last year. This notion that they have a shitty offense is way off. The deowngrade from Bay to Cameron/Hermida is offset by the upgrade from Nick Goddamn Green/Alex Gonzalez to Marco Scutaro.

Do you really think Scutaro's offensive numbers from last year will hold up? His OPS was nearly 100 points higher than any other year of his career, his total bases were about 50 higher than the two other years of his career where he played at least 130 games, and his slugging was was 35 points above his career average.

I know he'll have a better lineup around him and his 35 doubles should go up with the Monster in play, but if the Sox are counting on him to be a main cog in the lineup, I have to wonder if they're going to be sorely disappointed.

He's going to bat 9th.

Sox and PapelSmear agree to terms to a one year deal in the mid 9 mil range. They avoid arbitration.