The Red Sox Should Trade for Another Hitter

After a promising start to the season, the Red Sox pitching staff is starting to again resemble the disaster that sank the 2015 season. Over the last two weeks, the starting rotation has put up a 6.89 ERA, as David Price‘s disappointing debut season in Boston has continued, Steven Wright’s knuckleball-magic has started to show signs of wearing off, and Clay Buchholz and Eduardo Rodriguez just took turns throwing batting practice. The Red Sox continue to hit well enough to stay in contention, but with the pitching staff imploding once again, even the team’s manager is admitting that it’s “obvious” that the pitching needs upgrading. Despite a thin supply of available arms, it seems pretty clear that Dave Dombrowski is going to be among the most active executives in scouring the market for a starting pitcher over the next month.

But as the team looks to load up for a playoff push, there’s a case to be made that the Red Sox biggest move this summer should be to add another bat to the line-up instead.

Back in May, when looking for landing spots for Ryan Braun, I noted that perhaps there was room for the Red Sox to make a big trade with the Brewers, bringing in Milwaukee’s slugging left fielder, but also acquiring catcher Jonathan Lucroy in the deal as well. The idea of the team bringing in Braun looks less necessary now that Andrew Benintendi is crushing Double-A pitching and is looking big league ready; Steamer already projects him for a 109 wRC+ if called up right now, and so the team is probably better served just calling him up to be this year’s Michael Conforto rather than bringing in a veteran to block his path.

But the team’s incentives for acquiring Lucroy have only grown since May. Blake Swihart’s experiment in the outfield is on hold while he recovers from a “severe” ankle sprain, and the odds of him catching for the Red Sox again this season appear low. Christian Vazquez hit just .226/.278/.305 before getting optioned back to the minors over the weekend, as even with potentially elite defense, he didn’t hit enough to hold down a starting job. So now the team’s catchers are Sandy Leon and Ryan Hanigan, a pair of career backups who aren’t likely to be much of an offensive improvement over Vazquez for the remainder of the season.

Lucroy is an obvious answer to a real problem the team faces, and unlike with the pitching market — where demand far outstrips supply — the team probably won’t have that many competitors bidding for Lucroy’s services.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

The Mets have been rumored as a potential landing spot for Lucroy, but Travis d’Arnaud is at least holding his own as a hitter since returning from the DL, and hit well last year, so it’s not entirely clear that the Mets want to relegate him to the bench. The Indians could acquire Lucroy to replace the struggling Yan Gomes, but giving up on a guy signed to a low-cost long-term deal doesn’t really seem like the Indians way, especially since most of his struggles are tied to his .204 BABIP. The Rangers were often mentioned as the most likely landing spot for Lucroy over the winter and into the spring, but Robinson Chirinos keeps hitting home runs, and with their pitching staff getting crushed by injuries, they seem more likely to look for arms instead.

There are other teams besides the Red Sox where Lucroy would fit, but no other contender is really in a position where they’re likely to feel they have to trade for a backstop this summer; everyone else could probably talk themselves into making due with their internal options if the price on Lucroy proves prohibitive. So while the Brewers aren’t going to give Lucroy away, the price has at least a chance of being reasonable, unlike what sellers are going to ask for their pitchers this summer.

And despite the commonly-accepted wisdom that a team should only try to improve by upgrading on its weakest link — in Boston’s case, that would clearly be the pitching staff — the Red Sox would actually benefit quite a bit from the addition of another quality hitter. Yes, they already lead the majors in runs scored, so some will claim that the team has “enough offense”, but there is no truth to the idea that there are diminishing returns on adding good hitters to an already-good offense. In fact, the inverse is actually true.

Because hitters perform better with men on base than the bases empty, upgrading an offense that is already performing well will actually result in a larger increase in run scoring than adding a good hitter to a weak line-up, assuming both are replacing the same equally poor hitter. I went into some depth about the effects of a line-up on a hitter’s value last year, but the short version is that Lucroy is more valuable to the Red Sox than he would be to a team with a struggling offense because his hits are more likely to come when there are runners on base in a good line-up, and having good hitters behind him means he’s more likely to be driven in when he reaches base himself.

In baseball, offense begets more offense, and a strong hitting team gets a larger return from upgrading a weak line-up spot than a weak hitting team gets from swapping out a bad hitter for a good one, which is counter to the notion that a slugging team like the Red Sox have “enough” runs and need to figure out how to prevent them. While it’s easy to point to the Red Sox rotation and say that their pitching is the real problem, every baseball teams goal should be to outscore their opponents, not reach some nebulous ideal balance of runs scored and runs allowed. And runs scored don’t count any less than runs prevented, even if you’ve already scored five, six, or seven runs that day.

This isn’t to say that the Red Sox shouldn’t upgrade their pitching staff; they certainly should try, and if they can get a quality starter or two, then definitely do that too. But the Red Sox — and other contenders in similar positions — should not box themselves into simply identifying their pitching staff as the place to upgrade because its the weakest part of the roster. It would be ideal if the supply of available talent matched up with a team’s weakest options, but this year, there simply aren’t enough acquirable arms to fill all the spots that contenders will be looking for.

Reinforcing a strong offense can be just as effective at winning games as replacing poor pitchers. It might not be as aesthetically pleasing to keep beating your opponents 9-7, but it still counts as a win, and given the way offense scales up in a non-linear way, it’s actually going to be easier for a team like the Red Sox to make a larger improvement by adding a good-hitting catcher than it will be to upgrade the rotation in a similar manner. Instead of forcing themselves to shop in a barren pitching market with few good options, the Red Sox could likely make a bigger impact on their team by acquiring Lucroy and accepting that they’re going to go as far as their offense can carry them.

If they can land Lucroy and a pitcher or two, even better. But they shouldn’t avoid making a substantial upgrade to their roster simply because Lucroy isn’t a pitcher. In baseball, runs are runs, and you don’t need to limit yourself to just improving the side of the ball that you’re weakest at.





Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.

131 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
estone
10 years ago

Also, adding Lucroy would obviously be a positive boon for the pitching staff as well. I know Vazquez was, and still is, a highly-touted defensive catcher but I’m sure a veteran like Lucroy could handle this staff and the pressure of a playoff push more so than a young, unproven catcher.

southie
10 years ago

I’m amazed they didn’t have to amputate Swihart’s foot. That was ugly.

Richie
10 years ago

Real good article. Thank you!

Of course, what are the odds the Red Sox actually will do so? And the local media would flay them. “But we need a pitcher!!”

redsoxu571
10 years ago
Reply to  Richie

I’m pretty sure the justification would focus on how great Lucroy is at calling a game.

acherluckMember since 2020
10 years ago

I wonder if the Tigers could be considered to follow this same approach. Their starting pitching is an absolute monstrosity, but it may be cheaper and less harmful (to the already seriously harmed) to the long term future for the Tigers to go after Lucroy. Then they could send McCann to the minors to try to work out the kinks in his bat.

Les Vegetables
10 years ago

Would the logical thing be to send Swihart as the primary piece for Lucroy? Or has his trade value diminished enough that he couldn’t be the centerpiece of the deal?

grandbranyanMember since 2017
10 years ago
Reply to  Les Vegetables

Most Brewers fans would be pretty upset if Swihart was the primary piece for Lucroy. A catcher that is a work in progress defensively & has yet to hit in AAA or the majors is a pretty underwhelming return for a currently top 3 catcher in baseball who is getting paid like a 1 WAR player next year.

I think most Brewers fans know Moncada & Benintendi are off the table but would be hoping for at least Espinoza/Devers as potential headliners with maybe Swihart or Vasquez thrown in on the back end.

Brock244
10 years ago
Reply to  grandbranyan

Seems like a logical take. Although, something to note, Lucroy only has 1.5 yrs of control. If we think he is a 4 win player, that means he provides about +6 wins to team trading for him if he is traded this deadline. If we factor in salary, that means he has roughly +4 wins of surplus value.

Obviously, Benny/Moncada should be off limits, but someone like Devers is a nice cemeterpiece ( as you said).

What im nit picking at is that Swihart has provided + 2 WAR and 93 wRC+ in 103 games in the majors. He’s a former 60 FV prospect with 6 yes of control. I think his value is on par with Devers/Espinoza and could act as a centerpiece (he definitely has more value than Vazquez as a secondary piece)

grandbranyanMember since 2017
10 years ago
Reply to  Brock244

I think the two things holding down Swihart’s value for me would be the current injury (If MKE builds a package for their most tradeable asset around a currently injured player they will be roasted) & the fact that his WAR doesn’t reflect his negative catcher defense. UZR doesn’t grade catchers but his DRS is -10 in 740 career innings, which would cut that career WAR number in half (b-ref.com has him at 0.7 in those same 103 games).

Les Vegetables
10 years ago
Reply to  grandbranyan

Lucroy is precisely the type of player that I have difficulty gauging their trade value. ZiPS pegs him for 1.6 more WAR for the rest of the season, making his full season projection 4 WAR. I think it would probably be reasonable to say his full season projection for 2017 would be somewhere around 3.5 WAR. That’s a total of 5 WAR he’s still under contract for, and will be paid around $6 million in total during that timeframe, which equates to 4 wins in surplus value. What’s a reasonable return for 4 wins in surplus value?

Brock244
10 years ago
Reply to  Les Vegetables

Swihart, on the flip side as provided 2 WAR in 103 games. He obviously has nice upside too given he was a top 25 prospects (actually was compared to Lucory as a prospect)

I think a Swihart-forLucory centerpiece makes a lot of sense with more pieces added. I think the perception of Swihart has not matched his prospects pedigree and production at the major league level. The redsox putting him in LF in favor of Vaz to help the pitching was a very questionable move

Les Vegetables
10 years ago
Reply to  Brock244

I still think Swihart will have a nice major league career, but there is no denying his value is at an all time low right now between the injury, him being moved to the OF, and him struggling to hit in AAA this year. So it’s really tough to say what his value looks like right now.

redsoxu571
10 years ago
Reply to  grandbranyan

That is a rather wretched look at Swihart’s current outlook. It reminds me of how people looked at Bogaerts’s 2014 season as a whole, ignoring that the bad line was mostly the result of maybe the worst 3-month stretch I have ever seen, bordered by an excellent first two months (the awful stretch showed up overnight and was entirely mental, not the result of pitchers doing anything different to him) and then fixed in time for September. People didn’t see a human player who lost his hitting for three month after NEVER failing at hitting before and then got his act together…instead, they WRONGLY saw a player who “struggled for 6 months”. I said it was wrong then, and then Bogaerts showed how wrong it was in 2015 and now 2016. Next.

Well, Swihart is next. His 2015 line is artificially deflated by his first 15 MLB games, when he was god-awful and understandably so given he wasn’t ready for the majors and was an emergency callup. Well, after 15 games that terrible bit VANISHED. If you actually count those 15 games for anything, you’re a fool on the level of pretending Bogaerts struggled all 6 months of 2014. Once you realize that, you see that Swihart was darn solid (or better) for the rest of the season, and actually trended up as the weeks went along. Basically, a player whose hitting has developed about as rapidly as it does for any mortal catcher (i.e. not Mauer or Posey) was doing just that, making adjustments and improving on the fly.

Now it’s 2016. The biggest criticism of Swihart going into the year was his plate discipline, especially his low BB rate. Well, check out what he’s done in that area this season. One offseason, problem literally solved. He was from a poor BB% to a really good one. That’s impressive.

Sadly, Boston overreacted to some bad pitching, a few good hitting games from Vazquez, and a few passed balls from Swihart, and swapped the two, foolishly sending Swihart to the minors. He is basically the most promising young catching piece in the game right now, and the team sent him down despite his succeeding in being called up a year before he was ready to the majors. He survived trial by fire and actually flourished, and the front office said “meh, whatever”. Gotta love that Vazquez defense, I suppose (I like Vazquez plenty and if I were a fan of any team I would be happy to have him, but Swihart is simply significantly better now and more promising for the future).

Swihart is not a “work in progress” defensively. He is just fine there, nothing great, but it has come along as well as could be asked for given his inexperience come draft day and timeline so far. And you have to really fail at actually following the narrative and development of young players to not see the HEFTY amount of hitting success Swihart has seen (especially for a catcher) at a very young age.

If Swihart were to simply be swapped for Lucroy, one for one, Milwaukee would make out like bandits, basically getting the next Lucroy (exchanging some of Lucroy’s excellent defense for a likely better hitting Swihart in a couple of years and going forward) at a young, cost-controlled age. And the Brewers making out wouldn’t mean Boston got screwed, as it would see immediate improvement with a high-end player. It would actually be pretty win-win (though I would hate it like the Dickens, because I understand how valuable Swihart likely will be going forward and would rather he just be behind the plate in Boston as he should be).

I would never begrudge a team asking for different players – aim for the guys you like best and think you can get – but to think Swihart would not be a worthy return in a Lucroy deal is misguided and reveals a fundamental lack of understanding of player development and projections. Then again, I thought other teams would be brilliant to target Jackie Bradley from Boston after the 2014 season, seeing a SUREFIRE decade-long starter with elite defense and enough offensive skills that just had yet to develop, but everyone just insisted “eww, he’s failed so far, he’s garbage, eww”, ignoring the high floor that his defense provided and how accelerated his minor league promotions had been. In the end, the Mariners wouldn’t even take him in return for Charlie Furbush, so there you go.

Odds are you’ll laugh at me for saying that Swihart is just as promising a piece as ever, but I know my own track record (most prospects I don’t have a feel for, but when I do have a feel it works out pretty well), and the fact is that every prospect is an unique individual with a unique profile. Too often, they’re treated as “plug the past numbers into a spreadsheet and process a projection” and that’s it, and that’s just not good enough. It makes some people think it’s actually fair to ask for Betts for Cole Hamels, that Bogaerts isn’t as good as projected, that Bradley is pretty worthless…and that Swihart is a failed prospect. Okay, you keep doing that, if you insist.

jorgesca
10 years ago
Reply to  redsoxu571

Written like a true fan.

redsoxu571
10 years ago
Reply to  jorgesca

Written like a true internet troll, all ad hominem and no substance.

Did it every occur to all you losers that someone can form an objective opinion about players on teams he roots for? Did it ever occur to you that I form similar opinions about players on other teams too? No?

I suppose it doesn’t matter that I presented a similarly positive outlook for Bogaerts back after 2014 (because he had a positive outlook, if you cared to see it) and was precisely correct on it. for example. Nope, it has to be all bias, no substance.

Your losses. I’ll be owed 31 or so apologies a few years from now when Swihart is a good, productive catcher, but I won’t be holding my breath waiting to actually receive any apologies.

I’m rather disheartened that I took the time to write something that I honestly project to be true, free of blinders, and “blah blah blah ad hominem” and the good old multi-translation recycler were the only things anyone had to respond with. Anyone actually have a worthwhile response or retort to make to my comment that was full of substance, or are most of you really this pathetic?

CosmoMember since 2024
10 years ago
Reply to  redsoxu571

Nope… were all just pathetic. Thanks for pointing that out.

Manute Bol sings better than this
10 years ago
Reply to  redsoxu571

It is now one of the strongest view of Swihart. Asked how people (and), in 2014, according to Berger, is spending a great deal of change, is probably the worst of the recession was the last person to see talents in the first two months of the boundary (nights of terrible card, if you want to grow your own Cup a lot of research), everybody is in September. Warning lose they managed to grab three months ago, so it can work. They see a book “fighting last half a year. I say it’s not right, Berger said, how it was in 2015 and 2016 …

OK, the next Swihart. 2015 the United States Baseball League in the 15th row, he has not prepared well shy of the crisis, to understand, to go. After a disastrous 15 games away. If you’re 15, you are more stupid than others, pretending the war of 2014 iceberg level once every six months. If you realize that you can see the entire winter Swihart is another factor in hell (or better) and can grow a few weeks later. In fact, this person as soon as possible to the catcher (if not Moore’s law or the Western half of) the introduction, so a little bit of care and treatment is illegal;

Now, it is the year 2016 Swihart, the biggest criticism of his plate discipline, especially the BB from time to time. So, let us look at him in the winter in this area has been completed. Off season is a problem. Maybe BB’s bad respectively. This is impressive.

Is sadly, Swihart Boston pitchers to play some good ball Basque bad, is part of the goal of two students, and sends Swihart. Now, it is the young catchers in the game, and put them in the team, although he, however, managed to call a year ago. It is clear that with regard to employment, will make millions, and said: Oh, wait. “Congratulations to Vazquez defenses, I think (I think Vazquez, is a fan of the team, I’m happy for him, but it is n predicted Swihart easier).

No special Swihart’s assets. This is great, but it is likely to be the date and time of the draft. You’re not supposed to, diseases and, in fact, young players recognized Swihart employment growth (crop vary) children.

If Lucroy Swihart Milwaukee key, stop armed variant, it could be the next Lucroy (Lucroy professionals in other cities who do not do so, it will play in the next year Swihart), older than smaller prices. Beer does not mean, in Boston, where he found a player immediately improved. (Although I don’t want to do, like Dickens because I understand Swihart, Boston is just an essay, it should be), the Committee should consider the very true win-win situation.

Don’t be afraid to give the team should have a lot of players-as a man, you see, it has-but I think Lucroy Swihart tax payment protocol error, they don’t seem to understand that people who just make a prediction. Therefore, more than once, thought for a moment, AW chenglongbuladeli goals in 2014 in Boston, more than 10 years from the professional elite team suspended power, not only in development, but only a “bad, we are not so far, this is rubbish, there is,” he ignores experts understand how the floor houses and promotions is rarely mentioned. Finally, the sailors didn’t choose it Charlie Furbush, you have.

Well, when he smiles, I think Swihart, but EMA, but I know, I know (often in the future, we must not only one, but your generosity), which, in fact, in each of which the contours of. In most cases, they found that “the projection of the higher number of tables and supporting” obviously, this is not good enough. That might make some people think only a hero can be found beicikeer, Berg, rather than waiting for Bradley

johnforthegiants
10 years ago

The assumption here is that the Red Sox are already a very good hitting team, but this seems questionable. They have a team BABIP of .336, 35 points above the league average, and 31 points above their own BABIP in 2015, in spite of the fact they don’t have the peripherals to support anything much above average (19th in ld%, 26th in iffb%, 8th in ifh%, 4th in hard%, basically average). They’re getting extremely lucky, their BABIP should be 30 or so points lower, and that would take a huge chunk out of their wRC+. With average batted-ball peripherals and home run power (15th in the majors), the only things making them above average at hitting are having the 7th most walks and the 4th least strikeouts. That’s something but let’s not get carried away.

Brock244
10 years ago

I disagree. Steamer projections for their hitters:

Betts: 126 wRC+
Pedroia: 109 wRC+
Bogaerts: 116 wRC+
Ortiz: 146 WRC+
Ramirez: 120 wRC+
Bradley: 111 wRC+
Shaw 102 wRC+

So the redsox consists of 7 above average hitters, as well as two average ish hitters in CY and Brock. They’re a great offensive team, probably one of the 5 best offensive teams in the game, that can be that much better with an upgrade from Vaz

johnforthegiants
10 years ago
Reply to  Brock244

Um, we’re halfway through the season, don’t you think it’s a little more realistic to base expectations on how they’ve actually performed?

HenduforKutch
10 years ago

Did you seriously just ask that question in a reply to your statement that we should ignore how they’ve actually performed? Your goalposts are actually moving along multiple axes at this point

johnforthegiants
10 years ago
Reply to  HenduforKutch

The performance I’m talking about is the Red Sox hitters’ ld%, iffb%, ifh%, and hard%. That’s performance this year. Brock is referring to projections before the year.

Brock244
10 years ago

but that makes them look even better, which totally goes against the false narrative of the mediocre offense, so I opted for the middle ground steamer projections.

Manute Bol sings better than this
10 years ago

Here, the carbon from the red man, he spoke. They have a team BABIP. 336, 35 in the league than the average, 31 percentage points higher than in 2015 BABIP more, even if they continue to support the latest (19% LD% 26% 8 Tian EIFF iffb Bahamas, weight%, an average of 4). They are celebrating their BABIP about 30 community + form. Average equipment accessories and home runs (15), otherwise they noted 47. Most of the slow average. This is nothing, but we survived.

Damaso
10 years ago

Obviously true for anyone unbiased.

In fact, their babip has already come back down to earth, around .300 over the last month and a half, and their offense has been mediocre as a result.

The .350 team babip they posted over the first month and a half was obviously ridiculously unsustainable, and covered up a whole bunch of roster holes.

Brock244
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

This is such a false narrative lol. Sure, they may not be AS good as they were at the beginning of the season (they were literally on a historic pace) but that absolutley does not mean they are simply a “mediocre” offensive team. As stated above, according to steamer projections they have 7 above average hitters. That’s a REALLY good offense, and among one of the better ones in the game.

The redsox don’t have their combo of Donaldson/EE/Bats but where they shine is depth. Other than Vazquez, they don’t have a hole in thee lineup. They have 8 above average hitters according to steamer (I thought 7 , but Chris Young is better than I thought)

Damaso
10 years ago
Reply to  Brock244

unfortunately we only have monthly splits, and iirc the decline started the last week or 2 of may…..but if you look at June, when they posted a still high but not ridiculous .308babip, they ended up with a league average 101wrc+. That’s after posting around a 125wrc+ thanks to a .340babip the first 2 months. (Though really that was more of a 130wrc+ with a .350babip the first month and a half, and about league average wrc+ with a more normal babip since). The point being that without the crazy babip, they’re just ok offensively.

And their current babip would still easily be the best team babip since the 1800s…which means it’s not likely even close to sustainable.

Brock244
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

All I read is cherry picking “hey if you look at their offense from this date to this date they suck!”

The matter of the fact is, they have 8 players with above average wRC+ and 8 players that are projected to have above average wRC+ according to steamer. That’s holds about 100x more weighb than cherry picked stats from a particular set of games

johnforthegiants
10 years ago
Reply to  Brock244

The peripheral data are from the entire year.

Do you even know what xBABIP is? Do you even understand what I mean by peripherals? It doesn’t look like it. You need to learn some very basic things before you can participate intelligently in discussions like this.

HenduforKutch
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

There’s an article from yesterday on Rotographs that shows each lineup’s wRC+ over the past 30 days. Boston ranks 4th at 110. If you took just this past 30 days of “mediocrity” and stretched it out over the full season, they’d still be ranked #1 in MLB.

http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/roto-riteup-july-5-2016/

Try again.

johnforthegiants
10 years ago
Reply to  HenduforKutch

As Damaso and I have written, the Red Sox were extremely lucky until mid-May, then had normal luck for a money, and then have gotten extremely lucky again. The recent string of luck is why their wRC+ has been pretty high recently.

johnforthegiants
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

They did start lucking out again in the last few weeks (BABIP=.355 in the last 14 days). It happens.

Clutch Narrative
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

Red Sox June 2016 BABIP = .308
Red Sox June 2016 xBABIP = .320

johnforthegiants
10 years ago

(a) Let’s see the numbers for that. I find it hard to believe that with an iffb% of 16.9% (by far the worst in the majors), they’re going to have an xBABIP of .320.
(b) Who cares? Maybe they got a little unlucky in June. It just makes the extent to which they got lucky before that even more extreme. The peripherals I was talking about are for the whole year and I was comparing that to their BABIP for the year. Damaso only mentioned the June statistics in order to give some kind of idea as to what their wRC+ for the whole year would be like without BABIP luck.

Clutch Narrative
10 years ago

I used Chamberlain’s xBABIP calculator for both June (above, in response to Damaso) and for the season to date (in response to you). If you doubt the numbers I posted, calculate them yourself.

johnforthegiants
10 years ago
Reply to  Brock244

They’re above average, offensively, this is certainly true, I wouldn’t say they’re ‘mediocre’. Why is the world would you rely in projections about how they’ll do this season as opposed to simply seeing how they have done in terms of peripherals? Do you think that Steamer is reality whereas the actual games are just a fiction?

Brock244
10 years ago

If you want to simply use he games, then the redsox offense looks even better than the projections

isavage
10 years ago

What are you talking about? Those are rest of season projections. They take into account what the guy has done to date, this year.

Beer
10 years ago
Reply to  Brock244

I am so drunjk right now. Itsa good thing I didn’t do a damasso dringing game.

johnforthegiants
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

Well it’s due to come back to earth much much more. I checked back 20 years, .336 is the highest since then at least, and there’s only one team within 10 points (.329). Plus this year’s Red Sox team has peripherals which suggest they shouldn’t even be above average in BABIP.

sabrtooth
10 years ago

It’s fine to expect some regression, but Boston teams are always going to have a higher-than-expected BABIP due to the dimensions of Fenway Park. They were in the upper-third of teams four of the last five years and have the highest BABIP across the last five seasons: http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2016&month=0&season1=2011&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0

Expecting a Boston team to regress solely because of inflated BABIP isn’t enough unless the Green Monster’s about to get pushed out. A park factor-influenced stat would be a better choice for this analysis.

Clutch Narrative
10 years ago

Red Sox 2016 BABIP = .336
Red Sox 2016 xBABIP = .328

johnforthegiants
10 years ago

Where are these numbers from? What formula are you using? Let’s see some numbers and a reference to the formula.

Clutch Narrative
10 years ago
johnforthegiants
10 years ago

I got .321, not .328 (.1975- .4383x.03841-.0914x.29559+.2594x.206+.1822x.337+.1198x.26+
.0042×5.2). That is better than average but they’re still hitting 15 points higher than that on BABIP.

Clutch Narrative
10 years ago

My spreadsheet implementation incorrectly calculated TruFB%. After fixing that error it agrees, .321.

Johnston
10 years ago

Is there any way to put this guy on ignore here?

sabrtooth
10 years ago
Reply to  Johnston

I’ve created a Chrome extension that silently removes comments from Damaso and other repeat FG comment section trolls. If you install it, their comments just disappear.

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/bangraphs/jbklgbooodaeiefiamgacpccjbfelpaj

Spartacus
10 years ago
Reply to  sabrtooth

Damaso isn’t bad, but johnforthegiants is such an asswipe. The guy has no social skills.

redsoxu571
10 years ago

For the record:
Bogaerts (all levels of more than a handful of games) BABIP- .353, .291, .353, .373, .378, .320, .323, .296, .372, .380
Betts- .298, .322, .346, .366, .380, .327, .310, .302
Pedroia (sine ’11)- .325, .300, .326, .307, .308, .335

When your lineup includes a number of hitters whose BABIP floor seems to be “average”, perhaps you shouldn’t be surprised in a “good year” that the team BABIP is so good. It isn’t as if EVERY MLB hitter regresses to an average BABIP eventually, after all.

Damaso
10 years ago
Reply to  redsoxu571

most all decent prospects put up high babip in the minors. that’s not really relevant.

the hope that these red sox are somehow the specialist babip team in mlb history is probably not a solid one.

redsoxu571
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

You’d be right, but the above included MLB results too. As you can see, it’s pretty much above average BABIP results for all three, pretty much all the time (hence my line that the floor for these three appears to be an average BABIP). I included the ML numbers to show the consistency for these three, especially because two of them have less of a track record.

So yes, between a ballpark that promotes a high BABIP and a lineup that contains players who appear (emphasis on appear) to have a higher-than-average BABIP baseline, it would make sense for Boston’s BABIP baseline as a whole to be higher than league average.

So while the early season BABIP numbers were unsustainably high, these two major factors would seem to indicate that the overacheivement wasn’t AS high as it appeared.

Damaso
10 years ago
Reply to  redsoxu571

This same group of players:

2016 .336babip
2015: .304babip
2014: .299babip

If they have this innate team skill, where was it before this year?

Green Mountain Boy
10 years ago

Hey… Christian Vazquez… Good Riddance!!!

redsoxu571
10 years ago

I wouldn’t say that, but clearly he needs more time to figure out his hitting.

I would, however, be ready to say “good riddance” to the numbskull who decided to demote Swihart for no good reason. That was one of the dumbest baseball moves of the past decade.

Mahoney
10 years ago
Doug LampertMember since 2016
10 years ago
Reply to  Mahoney

But no one expects a career 2.37 guy who had a negative WAR prior to this year to keep hitting .500, Leon is doing very nicely right now, maybe it’s a breakout and he’s stopped being Sandy Leon, but that’s putting a lot of weight on 45 plate appearances.

Mahoney
10 years ago
Reply to  Doug Lampert

Which is why I ended the comment with a “;)” 😉

Roger McDowell Hot Foot
10 years ago

I’m confused because this talks about the nonlinearity in the run value of adding a hitter, but then doesn’t talk about the nonlinearity in the win value of adding those runs.

johnforthegiants
10 years ago

Are your really confused or do you realize that this is inconsistent and are being ironic? This is Fangraphs, where a 7-3 win counts 4 times as much as a 4-3 win. The goal is Run Differential, not Wins.

rockbardMember since 2016
10 years ago

I believe the goal of the article is to mantain that achieving a balance between run scoring and run prevention it’s more of an ideal than a practical concept. The Red Sox would benefit from adding a couple of runs each game, so that they win 8-7 instead of losing 6-7, with those extra runs providing more actual wins, not just more Base Runs Wins. I do think it’s a hard concept to grasp, very counter-intuitive, but with merit in the math and definitely worth a shot given the low supply of quality starting pitchers.

Damaso
10 years ago

Whole lotta holes to fill on this roster. None of C, LF, 3B, 1B, SP4, SP5 are filled convincingly.

First month and a half of team .350babip looked good, but covered a whole bunch of bad.

Brock244
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

LF: CY/Holt (projected 103 and 93 WRC+)
1b: Ramirez (projected 120 wRC+)
3b: Shaw (projected 103 wRC+)

But holes! Dude seriously, stop trolling.

Damaso
10 years ago
Reply to  Brock244

there’s no trolling. After a hot babip start for the first month and a half, the red sox have been a sub 500 team for their last 45gms. There are reasons for this.

redsoxu571
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

Yes, but it isn’t really the offense, that’s for sure.

Rotation issues.
(Un)timely defensive mistakes.
A few bad bullpen meltdowns.
Injuries to team depth leading to playing time by very bad replacement players.

Teams don’t always play to their best. There are good and bad stretches. Also, you might want to factor the schedule in too.

Mark Davidson
10 years ago
Reply to  Brock244

Did I catch a ‘but holes’ in there?

FrancoeursteinMember since 2025
10 years ago

Good point, Dave. Most of the time, people don’t think upgrading an asset is necessary when there are glaring weaknesses elsewhere on the roster. However, the more runs you score, the more likely you are to win… It’s such a simple concept that gets overlooked. I also think that Lucroy will help their struggling staff with his presence and solid framing.

Also, how on earth does Sean O’Sullivan still have a job!?

Owen G
10 years ago
Reply to  Francoeurstein

Because he’s better than Clay Buchholz

Chill
10 years ago
Reply to  Owen G

The ultimate damnation by faint praise. Taking a fan at random from the stands and popping them in a uniform and trotting them out to the bump might give Clay a run for his money in 2016. He has been truly wretched this season.

mattMember since 2023
10 years ago

Matt Kemp for Yoan Moncada, Anderson Espinoza, and Josh Ockimey seems like a fair deal beneficial to both sides. Padres pick up 2.5 million per year of Kemp contract. This would make it a team friendly deal, thought Devers could fit too but that maybe a little too much for the Red Sox, this fits.

Darren_Dreadfort
10 years ago
Reply to  matt

Lmfao

Brock244
10 years ago
Reply to  matt

Are the padres throwing in Myers, Pomeranz, and prospects too?

Buo
10 years ago
Reply to  matt

So the Red Sox surrender 2 absolutely exceptional prospects and a 20 y/o who’s mashing in AA to get a guy on an huge contract with a sub-100 wRC playing some the worst outfield defence in the major leagues.

3/10, got me to reply.

LHPSU
10 years ago
Reply to  Buo

Why trade for Matt Kemp when you can have Melvin Upton Jr. instead?

Kemp: .258/.275/.461, 16 HR, 0 SB, 92 wRC+, -6 DRS/-8.2 UZR, -0.6 BsR -0.5 WAR
Upton: .262/.311/.434, 13 HR, 19 SB, 101 wRC+, +9 DRS/+3.8 UZR, 3.1 BsR, 1.5 WAR

redsoxu571
10 years ago
Reply to  matt

Why are you guys taking that joke comment seriously?

Chill
10 years ago

A truly excellent suggestion! Not only would Lucroy help by piling on runs at an even more prodigious clip than to date, his pitch framing metrics are off the chart! Lucroy could well have a double edged effect. Deepening an already potent lineup while helping the pitching staff steal a few more strikes a game! Now if the RS could swing a deal that didn’t involve one or more of their top 4 prospects, Red Sox nation would be over the moon! I’m not optimistic but fingers crossed.

rounders
10 years ago

A) The knuckleball magic has shown no signs of wearing off. Wright can’t throw it in rain or day games in Texas, which amount to the same thing to him. Otherwise his ERA is well under 1.50.
B) Was this column written two weeks ago? Yes, Leon is a 238 career minor league hitter. But career .238 hitters with no pop also don’t suddenly go 20 for 40 with eight doubles in the show either. Ergo, Leon has found something, and from both sides of the plate. If you find a gold bar cleaning out your garage, keep it, even if it’s brass.
C) Timing could not be worse for acquiring starters. This is a team that will have to acquire relievers and straighten out Rodriquez to make hay in October.
D) Acquiring Braun would make a lot of sense if the price is right.

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago
Reply to  rounders

“But career .238 hitters with no pop also don’t suddenly go 20 for 40 with eight doubles in the show either. Ergo, Leon has found something, and from both sides of the plate.”

Umm what?! *OF COURSE* career .238 minor league hitters occasionally catch lightning in a bottle and have hot stretches over 40 AB’s. It’s a 40 AB sample! You can quite easily find 40 AB samples where Rey Ordonez or Neifi Perez looked like a god at the plate. Please don’t take a 40 AB sample as evidence of much of *anything*. Lawd.

rounders
10 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

The fact is that Leon never caught lightening in the bottle in the minor leagues. He has found an approach to hitting under Davis that will allow him to be a league average catcher.Unless you choose to believe it is solely his sudden and brief success that has convinced the team to make him their primary catcher and send Vasquez down.

Owen G
10 years ago

I’m a huge fan of Cameron and all things FanGraphs, and articles like this are the main reason. So this is meant genuinely as constructive criticism. I felt like the last two paragraphs were unnecessary and re-stating an already well-stated argument. I get that it’s the standard “essay” structure to write your conclusion this way, but it felt onerous, which is a shame for an otherwise outstanding piece of work.

Ivdown
10 years ago

Is Yan Gomes going to be the most obvious candidate to fall out of the top 50 for the trade value series? It was a head scratcher then and now it’s just ouch worthy.

Alice Cooper
10 years ago

“The idea of the team bringing in Braun looks less necessary now that Andrew Benintendi is crushing Double-A pitching and is looking big league ready; Steamer already projects him for a 109 wRC+ if called up right now”

Austin Meadows truly did crush AA EL pitching to the tune of 162 wRC+, 9 months younger to boot, and he has struggled in his first taste of AAA. I would bet the under on that Steamer projection.

wobatusMember since 2024
10 years ago
Reply to  Alice Cooper

Meadows actually has a 123 wRC+ in AAA, so not struggling too badly. The OBA hasn’t been there but he’ll get acclimated. And speaking of acclimated, Benintendi has a 160 wRC+ in AA since June 1, with a 10.1%/10.9% bb/K ratio. But sure, he may need time at each level to make the adjustment.

redsoxu571
10 years ago
Reply to  Alice Cooper

You’re really going to use the developmental path of a 2013 draftee to “counter” a projection made about a guy who was drafted little over a year ago? I’m not saying anything about comparing who they’ll turn out to be eventually, but there is reason to believe that Benintenti will find the majors a bit easier to deal with than Meadows (that difference being his outrageously strong and consistent success so far in his meager time as a pro).

Dominikk85Member since 2020
10 years ago

I believe swihart still will become a decent hitter for a catcher but there are doubts he is a catcher. It was a mistake to move him to lf, he won’t be a centerpiece before he is established as a catcher again. If he can catch he is a top 25 caliber prospect but as an of he isn’t.

The brewers either want a top 25 prospect or 2 top 100 prospects. Not sure the red Sox are a natch with benitendi and Moncada off the table (as they should be).

redsoxu571
10 years ago
Reply to  Dominikk85

1) Swihart is already a “decent” hitter. He was called up prematurely in an emergency in 2015 and struggled as he was supposed to…for 15 games. His 15 game line? .176/.192/.235. Wretched, because he wasn’t ready. Then overnight he adjusted, and went the ROS for 69 games at .295/.345/.426, which power coming on as the season progressed. 69 games post adjustment erase 15 games when a hitter who wasn’t ready struggled as he was supposed to. I knew the early callup would give him trouble. I had no idea he would adjust so fast.

2) Swihart IS going to be much better than “decent”. Besides what he did in 2015, it should be noted that he has always been a rapid developer with the bat (rare for a catcher) despite his youth and attention to his defense. Case in point: throughout his time in the minors, his BB% would be around 7, and was just 5.8 in the majors in 2015. Then came 2016, with a 13.9 in AAA and 14.9 in the majors. He overhauled his BB% from a weakness to a strength in just a single offseason. That’s pretty amazing.

3) There are no “doubts” about his catching ability. He already answered the doubts in A+ and AA ball. Then in his 84 MLB games in 2015 (with Vazquez and his elite defense out of the picture) there wasn’t a complaint to be had. He wasn’t any big plus with the glove, he was was perfectly solid. Then a few passed balls to open 2016 and a front office slobbering over Vazquez later, and an excuse was needed to send Swihart down, and so the “doubts about defense” lie was born. Then the team needed LF help and moved him there FOR JUST THIS SEASON so he could contribute there FOR JUST THIS SEASON.

Swihart isn’t a “top 25 prospect”; he’s at least a “solid MLB catcher”. Right now. With “annual all star” potential. And I don’t say this in an attempt to paint him as a good match in a Lucroy deal, as I want NOTHING TO DO with a Lucroy for Swihart swap. The latter should be behind the plate in Boston for years to come, if DD doesn’t let his silver hair run the show too much.

P.S. If the Brewer want “a top 25 prospect”, then a deal wouldn’t need to involve Benintendi or Moncada, because there are two other prospects of that type (and other top 100 prospects) to discuss as well. Since when did Boston’s minor league system turn into “Benintendi, Moncada, and a bunch of garbage”? And no, those two should NOT be on the table, because they should be untouchable (unless a true mega ace magically falls out of the sky and onto the trading block, which I don’t think will be the case).

Damaso
10 years ago
Reply to  redsoxu571

weird take.

he’s been a subpar hitter despite a hugh babip, and his team have up on him being able to catch.

redsoxu571
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

Damaso, I told you why the team “gave up” on him catching. First, it DIDN’T “give up” on him catching, but wanted an in season upgrade in LF and felt he could provide it (and felt he wouldn’t help at catcher because it had already locked Vazquez in that spot…oops on them).

Second, it was basically front office politics. A number of Boston front office members LOVE Vazquez’s defense (not the worst idea in the world), so much so that they really wanted any reason to slot him in there. So after just a handful of games with pitching struggles and only a couple minor defensive miscues, the team rushed to called Vazquez up (even though he hadn’t proven to be fully recovered yet…a issue that has since been validated).

It was a bad idea then, but the F.O. was committed to it, and compounded the mistake by moving Swihart to left TEMPORARILY in order to try and put him to major league use in 2016.

He’s also not a “subpar” hitter, especially for a C, but go ahead and think he is if you want. Clearly nobody is interested in actually responding to my evaluations with substance, just unsubstantiated broad claims.

Damaso
10 years ago
Reply to  redsoxu571

you don’t convert a subpar mlb bat to LF from C unless you are giving up on him at C.

Green Mountain Boy
10 years ago
Reply to  redsoxu571

I have no idea why you’re getting voted down so much. Must be simply because you obviously know your Red Sox.

Anyway, your ongoing analysis of Swihart, which I’ve enjoyed immensely, is right on. The only thing I see him needing to work on are his ABs from the right side of the plate.

But as much as I believe in Swihart, I don’t believe in Vazquez The Sox, NESN, the Globe, and their announcing teams ALL anointed Vazquez as the second coming of Pudge Rodriguez. They praised whatever tiny thing he did right and ignored what he didn’t. The “agenda” was obvious. Equally obvious to me after watching him was that a) he can’t hit – specifically, I don’t know if he’ll EVER learn to hit a halfway decent breaking ball, and b) his defense is nowhere near what they made it out to be.

The job should have been Swihart’s all along. He earned it last year. His superior bat FAR outweighs any minor (being generous) defensive advantage Vazquez might have. Theo had it right in 2003-2004. You ALWAYS take the bat over the glove. See David Ortiz, Todd Walker, and Kevin Millar (Manny was not Theo’s acquisition).

My working theory is that Dombrowski, hoping to catch lightning in a bottle, really, really wanted Vazquez to succeed in the short term so he could trade him for a #4-5 pitcher. Unable to do so and with everyone now knowing Vazquez can’t hit, back to AAA he goes. If my theory is INcorrect, I have to believe DD is way stupider than I give him credit for. If I can see with my own two eyes that Vasquez can’t hit, but DD with his 30+ years in the game can’t, the Sox have a way bigger problem than any of us thought.

redsoxu571
10 years ago

I’m getting voted down so much because people see my username and simply assume that I’m biased, even though my claims are backed with a ton of stats and other forms of evidence. Apparently these comments are becoming populated by ad hominem losers, and that’s sad. Oh well, life goes on, and they’re missing out on tons of good information on Swihart now.

I think you’re too harsh on Vazquez. I view him the same way I viewed Bradley before the 2015 season…his glove is a sure thing (don’t underrate it just because he’s still getting back up to speed this year), and that alone means at a minimum he would be a fine defense-first starter buried later in the order on an NL team (or an AL team with a good lineup). As with Bradley too, he has enough offensive potential that the bat could eventually become at least serviceable, so that’s a solid piece to have on your roster. I keep saying I would LOVE to be 100% committed to Vazquez in Boston as the long-term catcher…if Swihart, a very superior piece, weren’t also around.

As for what Swihart needs to do next, he clearly worked on (and succeeded at) improving his on base skills, but it also came at the expense of his power (see his weak ISO numbers this season). His next step, along with getting better from the right side, is to build the power back without losing his OB gains. Of course, his VERY next step will be to come back from his injury and the rust that comes with it, and that might be a bigger issue over the next year. You never know what it can take to rebound from that kind of pain AND missed time.

Johnston
10 years ago

A lot of people commenting, and only three of us are members.

If you’re going to actively be part of FanGraphs then help to support it.

OddBall Herrera
10 years ago
Reply to  Johnston

We are all helping support it, in our case in the form of watching our browsers slowly choke as they try to load advertisements

Johnston
10 years ago

The freeloading you guys are doing is the exact opposite of support.

Damaso
10 years ago
Reply to  Johnston

I pay in amazing, thought-provoking comments.

OddBall Herrera
10 years ago

Should Moncada *really* be untouchable? He’s run 20%+ K rates at every stop in the low minors, and the power is just projection at this point. I agree that the Red Sox should talk up his value by acting like he’s a can’t miss prospect, but there’s a lot of miss potential there in reality.

Not only does Milwaukee have Lucroy, the also have a switch hitting infielder who could do 10+ HR and steal 40 with a decent walk rate and a few too many strikeouts (i.e. he is playing exactly how Moncada might play one day) in Villar they may be willing to part with in exchange for ‘the next big thing’. Boston has at least a chance of landing these guys, and if they could I don’t think they shold let losing Moncada stop them.

redsoxu571
10 years ago

Moncada has the upside of a high-level #1 overall pick, and that’s what makes him “almost untouchable” (nobody is ever fully untouchable). You say he’s being talked up, but you’re really just talking him DOWN. A high K rate “at every level”? He’s only had significant playing time at TWO levels (he’s basically a played ONE pro season so far). Not much of a sampling there, and not much development time.

Also, a higher K rate is more acceptable (and more likely) when it comes with BB%s of 11.6 and 15.8. You have to work the count to draw walks.

Sure, Moncada isn’t perfect, and yes, he is definitely not a lock for stardom, but his ceiling is as high as anyone’s, his odds of reaching stardom high as well, and he’s done perfectly well enough for his time so far.

Meanwhile, you betray yourself with the glowing talk of Villar, who you treat as some kind of star. I hope he holds on to his big gains so far this season (I’ve always like him), but there is a reason he was swapped straight up for Cy Sneed in the offseason. Now he should help pry away the “next big thing”? Yeah, okay.

OddBall Herrera
10 years ago
Reply to  redsoxu571

Villar was traded for Sneed off of a down season, and I am in no way advocating that he should ve traded for Moncada straight up, but your response is precisely the problem with prospect valuation these days.

I think we could all agree that .300 12/40 with 10% Bb and 25% K rates would be an acceptable but admittedly non-ceiling outcome for Moncada. That is exactly what Villar is doing right now, but we’ve written the latter off because he didn’t come with the hype and didn’t achieve it immediately. Can he keep it up? I don’t know, but you price that in.

It’s absurd to valuate a commodity solely by ceiling worth, and all I am saying is that if the market has him priced at his ceiling, you sell, particularly if you value the present

redsoxu571
10 years ago

Your last line might be the biggest problem at all. Smart teams value both the present and the future, no matter the sport (unless the competitive window is clearly about to slam shut).

You’re peddling Villar as if he is going to continue doing this for years to come (hence why you’re justifying it as comparable to Moncada’s reasonable non-ceiling projection once he reaches the majors). The trouble with Villar is precisely that no reasonable person is going to price him with that expectation, given his prior track record. It would be the same as buying on Jean Segura’s 2013 (which would have been an unwise buy), expect that Segura at least came with a MUCH stronger offensive track record than Villar. You also forget that Villar is a pretty bad defender.

And that isn’t to say that Villar’s gains won’t hold. But you’re taking a mega prospect, whose reasonable downside is basically Villar’s breakout season (and not sure to continue in the coming years) with an upside of star and a further upside of a superstar, and hand-waiving him as all-or-nothing. Just because Moncada’s upside is HUGE doesn’t mean he either hits it in full or falls short. He could end up ANYWHERE in between, and he is more advanced towards that upside than most prospects. Now, if you want to note the risk in Anderson Espinoza, I’m 100% with you…he could end up being nothing at all, and I wouldn’t be surprised.

Moncada isn’t being valued by his ceiling. He is being valued as a prospect whose service time clock hasn’t starter (making him cheap as heck going forward) who comes with a higher floor than most similarly cheap prospects AND an upside that few prospects come with. If he were being valued at his upside, you could trade him straight up for Jose Fernandez+other pieces (because in that case he would basically be Mike Trout halfway through his rookie year, when he was clearly already an MVP and had a full slate of control ahead of him). VERY clearly, that is not how he is being valued.

jdbolickMember since 2024
10 years ago

The hype train on Moncada is running too hot in my opinion, having seen him in person several times between last season and this one. He very much looks the part physically, so between that and the production it’s easy to see why people get so excited, but I agree that there is more risk in his profile than is generally acknowledged. In addition to the swing and miss elements, I have concerns about his focus and consistency based on what I saw of him on the field. You still don’t trade him for anyone outside the top 25 on the trade value list because the ceiling is so high, but I agree that he could end up being viewed as a disappointment with some early struggles once he’s finally called up.

OddBall Herrera
10 years ago
Reply to  jdbolick

I can’t help but think we are living Moncada’s future struggles in the form of Byron Buxton. These guys have remarkably similar scouting reports and projections, and it should be a cautionary tale that rolling the tape forward too far on particularly power projections is a dangerous game.

redsoxmaniac
10 years ago

Beware the ides of James Loney.

jdbolickMember since 2024
10 years ago

Buxton is a good example that even the top prospects can struggle, but I don’t agree about his scouting report being very similar to Moncada’s. Moncada is much more physically developed and not quite as athletic. I think Wil Myers is a better comp.

redsoxu571
10 years ago
Reply to  jdbolick

I think your assessment is right on point. Some prospects burn hot because you can tell they just are baseball freaks, and it’s hard to see them being anything less than a “good” player. Moncada is more about his physical potential than his pure feel for baseball, and he lacks some polish (though time away from the game factors into that too).

Not only is his range of outcomes in terms of future value very wide, but also his range of TYPE of player is very wide. What position will he settle into? How much will his speed hold? Will he develop power? Will he continue to get on base, or will that fade against advanced pitching?

But I disagree that the hype train is running too hot. It isn’t as if he is getting the Griffey/Harper treatment, and being assumed for superstardom. He is viewed as an elite prospect with perhaps no ceiling, and that’s basically what he is.

Damaso
10 years ago

Red Sox

First 38gms: 24-14, .632, +59 rundiff (~.350babip)
Last 44gms: 21-23, .477, -1 rundiff (~.315babip)

Should they really be buyers?

OddBall Herrera
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

That totals to eight games over .500, a +58 run differential (the best in the division), 2 games back in the division and the lead in the WC.

So yeah, probably buyers. Blah blah, long season arbitrary end points and all that. Also, think about that…a +58 run differential after they lost a game 21-2

Darren_Dreadfort
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

Umm… yes? What a dumb question.

Damaso
10 years ago

I think it’s the smart question.

redsoxu571
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

Should you grow up and get a life? Ah, such are the unanswerable questions in life, yours and mine. But I like my query more than yours, as it’s a bit more interesting.

Damaso
10 years ago
Reply to  redsoxu571

hey if you’re comfortable trading away top prospects to bolster a team that may not be a contender anyways, that’s fine.

Darren_Dreadfort
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

Yea you pretty much have to be sellers when you’re two games back. Meanwhile they should probably contract the Jays franchise for being an unprecedented 2.5 games back.

Atreyu Jones
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

Teams that are not guaranteed to be contenders are the teams that need bolstering.

Spartacus
10 years ago
Reply to  Atreyu Jones

Why do they have to either sell or buy? I don’t think they should mortgage the future, but why not ride this out?

Chill
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

In Big Papi’s final season? The answer is an unequivocal yes. The team that ran so hot those first 38 games didn’t pack up and leave town. Between injuries, strength of schedule and an inevitable regression from a historically unprecedented offensive pace, a downturn in team record and run differential was inevitable. If the Red Sox can get anything, emphasize anything, out of the back end of their rotation, they will be in the hunt for the post season all year long. If they make the playoffs they will be as dangerous as any team in the AL. In short, yes the Red Sox should be buyers, but hopefully at not too steep a price. Frankly, I think they make the post season even if they stand pat, but that puts me in the minority view I suspect.

Damaso
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

Update:

First 38gms: 24-14, .632, +59 rundiff (~.350babip)
Last 45gms: 21-24, .467, -6 rundiff (~.315babip)

Sooted72
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

not to feed the trolls, but i watch this team every day and i just feel like theyre not very good. all the pitchers in the rotation and bullpen are pretty much awful. regardless, thanks to the hot start theyre in there now and theyre going to have to make moves. you go for it when youre a couple games out; you dont pack it in. i just hope dumbo doesnt part with benitendi to chase a title this year. id be fine with like a smaller smith/braun/lucroy for vazquez/devers/x type of deal though. it hurts to agree with damaso but this team really doesnt feel like a contender despite the fact that i really really want to believe.

Chill
10 years ago
Reply to  Sooted72

The question you must ask yourself is did you feel the same way mid May? The Red Sox have looked decidedly mediocre for the past month and a half, no doubt, but they are closer to figuring it out and getting it together than they are to falling apart. If they can get any kind of consistency out of their pitching staff, I think they will start looking like contenders again. And help is on the way! #FreeBeni

Sooted72
10 years ago
Reply to  Chill

in mid may obv i felt much better about the team, though i think we all expected some regression. and sure after watching your team play bad baseball for a month and a half youll feel bad about them. the problem with the ‘if we get good starting pitching we’ll be great’ approach is that theyre behind two teams who can both say that as well and the red sox dont have baltimores shut down bullpen or torontos non-babip driven offense. but, needless to say, i hope youre right.

Paul22
10 years ago

Red Sox need help in the bullpen as well, but so do many teams. Braun and Lucroy would be serious upgrades over Holt and Hannigan, but Sandy Leon is batting 500 and Red Sox are sensitive to the PR implications of trading for a steroid user.

I think they can land Rick Hill (expand the deal and land Reddick as well) or Drew Pomeranz, and probably a RP’er not on most teams radar. Going to have to pay a large price, but we all know prospects are no sure things. I probably don’t let Benintendi or Moncada go, maybe not even Travis, but anyone else is fair game.

GameofRedemption
10 years ago

This reminds me of last year, when the Blue Jays picked up Tulo. Most people questioned the decision, and wanted them to improve their pitching instead. I believe this was the exact same argument made to support the Blue Jays’ decision, as supported by that Mark Trumbo/Mariners article. It’s fun to picture a lineup with Lucroy (and even Braun) hitting around Papi, Mookie, JBJ & Co., but the bullpen would need to be absolutely lights-out for them to survive the playoffs without a strong rotation.

Sn0wman
10 years ago

Do you even know what BABIP is, man? It’s a measure of a team’s bloop hits. A guy with a .290 BABIP had 290 bloop hits, and thus should have had a negative 130 hits on the season! What a bum!

The Boston Red Cubs don’t know any of these things anymore, because they fired Bill Epstein, and now he’s going back to publishing his almanacs every year.

Johnston
10 years ago
Reply to  Sn0wman

BABIP = Bloops And Bunts In Play. It’s a counting statistic.

Ruben Amaro Jr.
10 years ago
Reply to  Johnston

That’s why it’s worthless, you don’t get many RBI’s from BABIP’s. Glad I didn’t waste my time trying to nerd out on this.

JamesFanMember since 2018
10 years ago

Yes. Trade for Lucroy would be brilliant. (6 WAR rest of contract).

Second, I’d trade for JJ Reddick. Final year of contract. Can hold down the fort in left and then be the perfect platoon partner for Chris Young. Move Brock back to super utility role. That would be a great depth move for non-elite prospect (between 1 and 1.5 WAR rest of year)

Target an SP. Depending upon whom, might give up a lot. Teheran? Shoemaker? Pomeranz (backup the truck)? Cashner or Ross?

Then they’d pretty much be done shopping unless they want more depth at SP or RP.

OrangeJoos
10 years ago

I would like to send Rich Hill and Josh Reddick to the Redsox for a fair return. Both have Comp picks attached and neither will accept a qualifying offer so the return will need to outweigh two comp round picks which is quite valuable.

Sn0wman
10 years ago
Reply to  OrangeJoos

I’m not sure if I’m correctly understanding you here…No one has comp round picks attached until a QO is made, and you can’t make a QO to a player unless they spend the entire season with you. So any team to whom those guys were traded would get nothing when they leave as FAs.

Sn0wman
10 years ago
Reply to  Sn0wman

Ah, hell, ignore me. It finally dawned on me what you meant. That a team would need to give up more than the A’s could get by just keeping them and making a QO for the picks. I’m slow today.

Waldan
10 years ago

Would Jay Bruce not make sense as a lower cost option that boosts the offense while they wait for their minor leaguer to advance to AAA?

Also is there a world in which a 3-way trade or direct trade could happen to get McCann? I doubt that Lucroy gets traded for less than Benditti and I dont think DD is willing to trade him or Moancada.

Sooted72
10 years ago
Reply to  Waldan

you are 100% correct. DD will def not trade either Benditti or Moancada.

tramps like us
10 years ago

Wouldn’t Lucroy be a great fit for the Dodgers? And they have the prospects in spades to be a great fit for Milwaukee, too. Why no mention of that?