Our Defense is Still Bad

[caulfield12]

How many accurate Eaton throws...to either the cutoff man, the correct base or on a line...have we actually seen?

 

Plus, for some reason velocity always seems to be inflated on low throws into the ground or waist high compared to the typical Cespedes or Puig type of lofted throw. Where does Yoenis rate?

Edited March 1, 2016 by caulfield12

[bmags]

6.

[SoxAce]

Yeah, Lawrie at 2b scares me.

 

I still believe sox were better off with Sanchez there and upgrading the SS position. Been saying that all winter.

[GreenSox]

I still believe sox were better off with Sanchez there and upgrading the SS position. Been saying that all winter.

They likely traded for him to play 3rd; then they work out a deal for Frazier. That trade, modest cost that it was, really was unnecessary once Frazier was here. (aside from obvious preference for veterans).

Sox FO reacts with no real plan; they just aren't creative.

 

I wanted to trade Eaton (to shore up 3rd or some other position) because I think we saw a career offensive year and his defense isn't good and the rest of our OF defense is bad. And we had a more than capable CF on the roster.

Edited March 1, 2016 by GreenSox

[elrockinMT]

I feel faint and ready to give up. By all accounts the season is lost and we haven't even made it through game one of the Spring Training schedule

[OmarComing25]

They likely traded for him to play 3rd; then they work out a deal for Frazier.

Sox FO reacts with no real plan; they just aren't creative.

 

I wanted to trade Eaton (to shore up 3rd or some other position) because I think we saw a career offensive year and his defense isn't good and the rest of our OF defense is bad. And we had a more than capable CF on the roster. Eaton + prospect could have brought in a good 3B or whatever.

Oh yeah? Which 3B? And now you have opened up a hole at CF. sounds like a real "creative" move. Also you say it's a career year on offense yet Eaton's wRC+ in 2015 (118) was almost exactly the same as his 2014 season (117).

Edited March 1, 2016 by OmarComing25

[Rowand44]

I definitely agree with the overall theme of the original post but I think Lawrie will be fine at 2b.

[GreenSox]

Oh yeah? Which 3B? And now you have opened up a hole at CF. sounds like a real "creative" move.

 

I don't know. Maybe Frazier if we threw in another prospect. (and yes, we would have had to bring in another team). Or maybe a better LF or RF.

Thompson was no hole in CF. Try again.

Edited March 1, 2016 by GreenSox

[Chicago White Sox]

They likely traded for him to play 3rd; then they work out a deal for Frazier. That trade, modest cost that it was, really was unnecessary once Frazier was here. (aside from obvious preference for veterans).

Sox FO reacts with no real plan; they just aren't creative.

 

I wanted to trade Eaton (to shore up 3rd or some other position) because I think we saw a career offensive year and his defense isn't good and the rest of our OF defense is bad. And we had a more than capable CF on the roster.

Lawrie > Sanchez and trading Eaton would have been a terrible idea.

[ChiSox59]

I don't know. Maybe Frazier if we threw in another prospect. (and yes, we would have had to bring in another team). Or maybe a better LF or RF.

Thompson was no hole in CF. Try again.

 

Take a look at Thompsons career minor league numbers. He was a bum w a good glove. He'll be a 4th outfielder in the big leagues, or be out of the game. The Sox sold high on him.

 

Trading one of the few good offensive peices we had last year (Eaton) is not the way to improve the offense.

[GreenSox]

Lawrie > Sanchez and trading Eaton would have been a terrible idea.

Lawrie was a .6 WAR player; I think there's a reasonable chance Sanchez could well exceed that.

But of course that's the crux of my disagreement with the philosophy of people on this board and the Sox FO. I'll take the chance with the young player over the proven veteran mediocrity.

I had no objection to Lawrie though -the price was modest. Hopefully he'll do better.

[OmarComing25]

I don't know. Maybe Frazier if we threw in another prospect. (and yes, we would have had to bring in another team). Or maybe a better LF or RF.

Thompson was no hole in CF. Try again.

You would have rather traded Eaton than Thompson? Is that a joke? If Thompson is such a sure thing, then why don't the Dodgers play him or trade him for a piece they could use? I'll never understand why you hate Eaton so much yet love Avi so much. It makes no sense.

[Balta1701]

Lawrie was a .6 WAR player; I think there's a reasonable chance Sanchez could well exceed that.

But of course that's the crux of my disagreement with the philosophy of people on this board and the Sox FO. I'll take the chance with the young player over the proven veteran mediocrity.

I had no objection to Lawrie though -the price was modest. Hopefully he'll do better.

But Brett Lawrie has also been a 2.6, 2.3, 1.4, and 1.8 win player...so I think there's a reasonable chance Brett Lawrie could exceed that also.

 

If you really want to make the "young player over the proven veteran mediocrity" case, I think you've got a better chance at doing so 1 position to the left.

[ptatc]

They likely traded for him to play 3rd; then they work out a deal for Frazier. That trade, modest cost that it was, really was unnecessary once Frazier was here. (aside from obvious preference for veterans).

Sox FO reacts with no real plan; they just aren't creative.

 

I wanted to trade Eaton (to shore up 3rd or some other position) because I think we saw a career offensive year and his defense isn't good and the rest of our OF defense is bad. And we had a more than capable CF on the roster.

Not creative? They upgraded half of the lineup without increasing the budget and not trading away any of their top prospects.

[greg775]

I feel faint and ready to give up. By all accounts the season is lost and we haven't even made it through game one of the Spring Training schedule

I'm just glad people are being realistic.

[chitownsportsfan]

Given how bad the projections were the past two seasons -- well under 80 wins on all the major sites -- and now there's some that actually have the Sox winning the division and most have the floor at 80 wins -- I'd think there'd be some optimism around the club. Every season is its own entity. The Sox certainly don't deserve the benefit of the doubt but if you can't get excited for the season on March 1st then I personally don't even know why you follow the team and sport.

 

You can be optimistic and realistic, it's not some false duality. I'm realistically expecting around 80 wins, better but not enough. That said, I'm optimistic that with some internal improvement during the year the Sox could give us a pennant race, or at least a WC2 race. I'd love that.

[chitownsportsfan]

Also, I've come around on Austin Jackson given that other targets have moved on and that Jackson's price certainly won't be more than 1 year 7 million at this point. His defense in CF won't be elite, it probably won't even be good, but it will probably be about the same as Eaton's and obviously you eliminate the worst of the bunch in Avi by moving Eaton to LF. In theory LF would be less taxing on Eaton's body than CF as well and that would another benefit.

Edited March 2, 2016 by chitownsportsfan

[Thad Bosley]

Hawk said we had one of the best defensive outfields last year so don't worry about it.

He also says many times that the #1 rule in all of baseball is to "catch the ball". He's right about that. Which is why the configuration of Cabrera in left, Avi in right, last year's Rollins at short, and the uncertainty of what we are going to get at second and in center (not to mention, catcher), is cause for concern.

[GreenSox]

You would have rather traded Eaton than Thompson? Is that a joke? If Thompson is such a sure thing, then why don't the Dodgers play him or trade him for a piece they could use? I'll never understand why you hate Eaton so much yet love Avi so much. It makes no sense.

 

I want to trade Eaton because he would bring far more in trade than Thompson (esp off of a career year). Also, Thompson would be a competent replacement (for sure he can handle it defensively) and would have addressed a big need: defense.

I don't want to dump Avi because we would get zero for him.

I don't hate Eaton nor love Avi. Trading only players you hate is "selling low", a philosophy I consistently reject.

 

Why don't the Dodgers play him or trade him? Maybe they don't think that baseball ends in 2017 like you and KW do. Otherwise, I have no idea what their plans are for him.

Let me ask you: Why did the Dodgers take Thompson/Montas/Johnson instead of Frazier???????

 

I didn't like out 73 win team making short term deals 2 years ago and I don't like this 76 win team (which, with pythag 72, may have been worse than the 73 win team) doing it either.

If this were a legit 80-82 win team and then you make those deals? Yes it makes sense (the Frazier deal would; the Samardizja trade was inane on all levels).

 

Edited March 2, 2016 by GreenSox

[Dick Allen]

I want to trade Eaton because he would bring far more in trade than Thompson (esp off of a career year). Also, Thompson would be a competent replacement (for sure he can handle it defensively) and would have addressed a big need: defense.

I don't want to dump Avi because we would get zero for him.

I don't hate Eaton nor love Avi. Trading only players you hate is "selling low", a philosophy I consistently reject.

 

Why don't the Dodgers play him or trade him? Maybe they don't think that baseball ends in 2017 like you and KW do. Otherwise, I have no idea what their plans are for him.

Let me ask you: Why did the Dodgers take Thompson/Montas/Johnson instead of Frazier???????

 

I didn't like out 73 win team making short term deals 2 years ago and I don't like this 76 win team (which, with pythag 72, may have been worse than the 73 win team) doing it either.

If this were a legit 80-82 win team and then you make those deals? Yes it makes sense (the Frazier deal would; the Samardizja trade was inane on all levels).

the Dodgers didn't need a 3B and are looking to cut payroll. As to Eaton, your story on him has changed from a few months ago

[greg775]

The Sox certainly don't deserve the benefit of the doubt but if you can't get excited for the season on March 1st then I personally don't even know why you follow the team and sport.

Well, it's because a lot of us have been optimistic before every season since 2005. The Sox finally beat me down enough to where I see very few improvements in the offseason and management is banking on bounceback and or career years from a batch of players. If they kick ass, wonderful, but I'm finally skeptical. Also the defense appears incredibly shaky, we've got two no-name catchers in a division with Salvy Perez for gosh sakes and absolutely no shortstop.

Yikes!

 

But we do have starting pitching again and on paper, possibly a good bullpen. You can be a fan and be extremely skeptical.

Edited March 2, 2016 by greg775

[Y2Jimmy0]

I want to trade Eaton because he would bring far more in trade than Thompson (esp off of a career year). Also, Thompson would be a competent replacement (for sure he can handle it defensively) and would have addressed a big need: defense.

I don't want to dump Avi because we would get zero for him.

I don't hate Eaton nor love Avi. Trading only players you hate is "selling low", a philosophy I consistently reject.

 

Why don't the Dodgers play him or trade him? Maybe they don't think that baseball ends in 2017 like you and KW do. Otherwise, I have no idea what their plans are for him.

Let me ask you: Why did the Dodgers take Thompson/Montas/Johnson instead of Frazier???????

 

I didn't like out 73 win team making short term deals 2 years ago and I don't like this 76 win team (which, with pythag 72, may have been worse than the 73 win team) doing it either.

If this were a legit 80-82 win team and then you make those deals? Yes it makes sense (the Frazier deal would; the Samardizja trade was inane on all levels).

 

 

Eaton is a 3-3.5 WAR CF. Trayce Thompson is a 4th OF. This is absurd.

[Chicago White Sox]

Eaton is a 3-3.5 WAR CF. Trayce Thompson is a 4th OF. This is absurd.

And for all the b****ing about not selling high, the Sox were able turn a guy with a spotty minor league track record into a main piece for an all-star 3B. The Sox sold ridiculously high on Thompson, not sure why GreenSox can't see this.

[Dick Allen]

And if you want to win, what kind of strategy is selling high? Should the Sox trade Sale, Abreu, Quintana? How will their trade value be any higher? Unless you like perpetual rebuilds, you build around good players. Eaton is a good player.

[southsider2k5]

And if you want to win, what kind of strategy is selling high? Should the Sox trade Sale, Abreu, Quintana? How will their trade value be any higher? Unless you like perpetual rebuilds, you build around good players. Eaton is a good player.

 

Selling high is a terrible strategy for winning.