Jump to content

Dominikk85

Members
  • Posts

    2,427
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Dominikk85

  1. I would not trade for Murphy but go into the season with grandal. Sure he was bad in many regards but I think a lot of it was injury, if he can get healthier and his legs under him more again he might also hit the ball a little less on the ground again and hit 230 with good obp and 15-20 homers. The question is whether the sox believe he can get healthy again or whether his body is just ruined from the years of catching and he never will get reasonably fit again physically.
  2. In the end it was the right decision to let jose go. Partly he is victim of the roster construction of rick and kenny, they drafted and traded for a ton of DH types in the last 5 years (eloy, burger, vaughn, collins, sheets) and at some point that roster needed some cleaning and jose just was the oldest and most expensive guy and at some point he will decline.
  3. I think part of the homer decrease was also that the ball was more dead. Regarding launch angle it is important what the reason was. It could be just a small mechanical tweak and the astros coaches are great at that. However it also could be physical and age related issues. For example instability and pain in the front leg can lead to a weaker "blocking" and thus body drifting through instead of staying behind the back leg which can cause grounders. Also the attack angle of the bat gets more upward more out front so if he is late due to declining batspeed his launch angle also could get lower (unless he were to slice the bat under oppo hit balls - which of course wouldn't be a good strategy). Regarding exit velo staying the same that could be a good sign but also consider usually low liners are the hardest hit balls so less fly balls could help his average EV a bit. If you look at his peak EV it is still good at 113 but lowest of his career and 2 ticks down from last year. He could be already in rather steep decline.
  4. 3 years is a pretty big commitment to an aging slugger. Usually I would give the astros the benefit of doubt as they are one of the smartest orgs but I don't know who actually currently runs the astros since click was let go and I read that crane has become a bit sceptical of new school analytics after the disaster with the luhnow regime. So maybe this was a gut driven decision by crane himself? I think abreu on a 1 year deal would have been great but in 3 years a lot can go wrong with a mid 30s guy. I guess the astros hope that he is at least average (110 wrc+ for a first baseman) for 2 out of the 3 years.
  5. The rays are always a good source to get soon rule 5 eligible players because their player dev is really good. Question is what the sox can give up for that. It either would need to be an mlb piece or a young prospect who is still 2+ seasons away from rule 5.
  6. I think sports science basically hasn't made any progress in injury prevention. There are a lot of theories and methods but especially on the pitching side nothing has worked. Sometimes a team will have a period of 2-3 years with good health and people think they have the code cracked and then everyone gets injured in 3 months, I think that is more pure coincidence. Evidence for that is that even the smart teams like the dodgers and rays have tons of injuries, nobody has cracked the code. Sure there are factors like player age and injury history affecting injuries but there is really nothing yet that can be done that really works. Baseball really just is having depth and then also hoping for some luck in the injury department, every team loses players but you hope to be it on the lower side
  7. I don't think he is so bad, at least he is at an age where he likely isn't senile and while he hasn't managed at the big league level he has minor league management and a lot of other pro baseball experience. We don't know if he is better than renteria but at least there is no worry he is forgetting to fill out the lineup card:)
  8. Yeah it definitely is more complicated on the amateur side and it is more subjective too due to the level of competition like doug also mentioned in the podcast. I do think he is a good traditional scout and he found some great players over the years but I still think ideally there should be more collaboration with the data guys. From what Doug said he did that and sometimes the data people won but I think it would be better if your scouting director is a bit more positive on the data stuff. Also interesting that he expressed a pretty strong preference for college guys saying that HS guys don't necessarily have more upside. Not criticizing that aspect as many teams are doing that but still interesting.
  9. That's why they can get away with low offers. The pay is low but you will find enough young data scientists who say "who cares, I'm 25, I don't need money, let's work for 3 years in pro ball and then make money in other industries" just so he can brag all his live he worked in pro ball. Btw I don't want to talk badly about this, if I'm a young data scientist who doesn't have a family yet why not do it, it sounds like a cool experience. A friend of mine works as an analyst with the mariners. Politically he is a communist (not in the way right wing people use it to insult democrats but an actual communist who believes many industries should be communized:)) so he is critical of that form of labor exploitation but he still enjoys it very much but he acknowledges that this model mostly attracts privileged young people from well off families who can afford to do this for a couple years as a hobby while for example a young data scientist from a poor black (and of course also poor white) background might not be able to afford that. That is one of the reasons that hurts diversity in those positions. Still I think if you are from such a privileged position it is a great opportunity to try it, sure it is a lot of hours and bad pay but who cares if you are young and don't have a family to feed yet. Many come back a little disillusioned from those jobs though and report there isn't really much creative freedom and you might end up all year trying to solve some pain in the but technical problem instead of feeling a great connection to the baseball side but that also might be different from org to org. My friend who works in pitching development in seattle feels that he is very involved in the pitching development where they use a ton of modern tech but in another org you might work on a data import technical problem all year.
  10. Doug was the director of sox scouting and the last years had more of an advisory role. He drafted some great players like sale, anderson and rodon but also a lot of big failures. Apparently this also was his last year and he will go into retirement this winter. He seems to be a good guy but there also was some stuff that was pretty shocking -he has heard about spin rate and EV and isn't totally opposed to it but he basically said he doesn't need the numbers and can see it with his eyes already. He also has very rudimentary and vague understanding of those analytical concepts -he said numbers guys always want to be right and if they are wrong they will later pull out a number that they still were right. -he said he needs to only see a player once and in fact often even not that saying usually seeing him walk and move in warm up is enough in many cases. On the good side he seems to be a great guy and you can also sense he has a big wealth of baseball knowledge but you can sense why the sox are behind if you listen to that, it seems to be very traditional and feel based. There seem to be numbers guys in the org but they don't necessarily have the final say in many cases.
  11. I heard that there has been some friction between the astros owner and dusty (and also the GM). https://abc13.com/houston-astros-dusty-baker-jim-crane-manager-james-click/12290974/ Maybe both click and dusty are available next year even if they win it all:)
  12. I'm not against an experienced manager but please not an oldhead who had been out of the game for years. Girardi fits the latter mold, he is not as old as TLR and should be more mentally fit than him but still he had been a TV commentator the last couple years before he was with the phillies this year. Of course there have been cases recently where it worked (baker, showalter) but overall I think the risk is pretty high, just like it is with young rookie managers too who often struggle the first 1 or two seasons before getting better (like gabe kapler for example in philly before he was very successful in SF). This is an experienced team about at the mid point of its competitive window so I think ideal would be an experienced manager who is not super old, ideally a guy under 55 with 5+ years experience of managing at the mlb level.
  13. Ah I forgot that. Would suck to lose him with no compensation but priority should be keeping Eloy and Vaughn who have a better long term outlook. But of course that 120-130 wrc+ bat would need to be replaced if you just lose Jose and keep Eloy and Vaughn the lineup is weaker. But of course they could also get a really good outfield defender with a 110 wrc+, weaker lineup but same war effect as you get Eloy and Vaughn out of the outfield more
  14. I think they should keep both eloy and vaughn. Abreu still was good and had a career high walk rate but power was at a career low and at some point he will decline. He might have one good year left but it could also go downhill fast like with konerko in his last year. One year abreu might have a bad April like he always does but unlike the other years never turn it around. Eloy of course is a risk but his value is at an all time low. If you want to trade him it would need to be after at least a somewhat healthy season (130 games) or you don't get enough. And vaughn has been a good hitter despite some flaws and might still get better if he lowers his chase rates and pulls the ball more. Btw does the qualifying offer still exist w the new cba? If it does I hope hahn Doesn't make the same mistake like he did with rodon and gives him the QO. At a 1 year deal abreu is still attractive and if he doesn't take it you get a pick.
  15. The teams you mentioned do not have a manager opening.
  16. Jerry is definitely a turn off for high performers but I think overall the sox are still an attractive destination as they have issues but they still have a good core in a very winnable divison and in the end that is what matters for a manager, if you win it will help your career. I don't think many other open destinations will be as attractive as the sox. Sure the rangers have a solid farm system but they are also in a division with the astros and the recently emerged mariners and they still lack pitching, getting past third will be hard in that division. And the tigers are just a mess in every regard, their new gm in scott harris might be good but fixing all the mess will probably take a couple years and maybe even a second tear down where they trade the young guys (probably not next season but if 2023 fails too they might). Not a great situation there either for a good manager who wants to win now.
  17. The abreu decision is a tough one. He was the sox best player in 2022 but at some point he probably will start to decline plus vaughn in left was so bad that despite a solid 115 wrc+ he had 0 fWAR so he basically loses everything he gains with the bat with his glove. On the other hand losing abreu and plugging vaughn at first means you weaken the offense because even if vaughn can replicate most of abreus value at first you have to fill that LF spot with a productive player. Maybe colas could be that player but there is risk with him too (he is an extreme free swinger like many sox players).
  18. I think hahn deserves another chance. Yeah some stuff didn't go well but he also had a lot of stuff going against him 1. A manager asleep at the wheel. A good manager alone should be able to add 1-3 wins 2. Bad health by the core hitters. If they can get 130+ games instead of 80-100 out of robert, tim, eloy moncada and grandal (plus better performance out of the latter two) that could add another 5-7 wins or so if not more. A new hitting coach maybe could add another 1-2 wins. I'm not saying everything went well but if you add let's say 8-12 wins that team would still be in the mix.
  19. I don't think core players will or should be traded. The core is still good but depth is bad and only a little help underway from the minors (colas should be ready) so really what you have to hope for that you get more than 80-100 games (and a performance bounce back for some too) from the core hitters Robert, anderson, eloy, grandal, moncada. The rotation is still good, you just need enough production from the core hitters.
  20. I think you give grandal another offseason and spring to get more healthy, he still has elite plate discipline and if his legs get healthy he might be able to drive the ball again. Sure it also could be the end but not reason to not give him the offseason and evaluate again next may or so. If he sucks in spring and the first 6 weeks of the season you can still release him but a good catcher isn't easy to find.
  21. Not all injuries are equal, the guys I mentioned are basically all among the top 10 players on the roster. I know other teams have more injuries but who cares about the injury to a middle reliever or 6th starter? Sox as I mentioned lost 5 of their top7 hitters for 40-50% of the season and two of their top3 starters also for significant time. I don't care if the sox rosterspots 18-25 stayed more healthy than other teams, what matters is losing so much playing time that all their best hitters except for jose stayed below 100 games and two war. What's true is that the sox pen and back of the rotation stayed pretty healthy but the lineup was a mess.
  22. Sox only have 3 hitters qualified for the batting title and so far that is the game count of some of the stars (probably not more than 4-5 will be added at max): Robert 98 Eloy 77 Tim 79 Moncada 97 (and reduced performance) Grandal 94 (and reduced performance) That's 5 of their projected top 7 hitters missing a huge chunk of time (40-50% of the season). Also injuries to giolito and lynn missing significant innings (both about 30 less than last season) but that is something you have to expect from pitchers of course. But the hitters should all have significantly more playing time next year, maybe not 145+ plus games but at least more than 130 or so (and maybe one of them missing 50 plus games).
  23. Sure, some of them are injury prone, older or both but still they got injured more often than expected. You have to expect anderson, robert and some others to have a DL stint but not 3 or 4 stints or even more. Maybe you shouldn't project them for more than 130 games but if you only get 80-100 (and some of them like grandal with reduced performance due to injury too) that is almost impossible to compensate, no matter how good your depth is. Even the astros,braves or yankees would have struggled if 4 of their top 9 hitters miss more than 60 games, only the dodgers are able to cover such a loss.
  24. There definitely have been mistakes: -not great on field management and coaching (TLR, menechino) -free agent signings and trade acquisitions not all working well (for example pollock) -general lack of activity by front office in off season and deadline -lack of minor league development showing up in organizational depth However still even with TLR, menechino and the lack of activity this team likely would have won 90 games in that weak ass division if not for dozens of DL stints to key players like lynn, Anderson, robert, moncada, grandal, eloy and others as the sox are a top heavy team who needs it's stars on the field (but even a team with better depth would have had a tough time with that many injuries). That means next season definitely should be better, especially if TLR will really retire like those rumors are saying. Sure, parts of the core are aging and at some point it will get tough due to the lack of minor league development (albeit it seems to get a little better, at least Montgomery looks like a future star) but I expect more health by those core players and the sox competing for the division again next year even without changes to the front office and huge new player acquisitions.
  25. The question is how much a new GM could actually do. Kyle boddy wrote about that a lot on twitter, the challenge is not to hire a biomechanics or an analytics guy but to force the old school baseball lifers to listen to them, old school guys are actively fighting that stuff and sometimes delete emails by analytics without reading them. So the key is to force the coaches to use that stuff and if needed fire them. So if you hire a new GM and he wants to force the coaches to use more modern development and analytics stuff and they say no and run to jerry and then jerry supports those tenured guys over the new GM then that GM can't do much. This is an issue in many companies. A CEO has more power than an individual employee but if the middle management collaborates against a new CEO and says "this is how we always did it and we will continue like that" then often the new CEO can't do much and there won't be change. I have experienced that in a company and the newly brought in ceo quit after half a year because the middle management refused to change.
×
×
  • Create New...