Re: Looks like Kemp is our if
posted at 12/6/2013 1:09 PM EST
In response to redsoxriteofspring's comment:
With Victorino now hitting RH almost as well against LP or RP, and with Bradley, and with Nava, the Red Sox don't need to waste a roster spot on a Lefty OF/1B. Davis is the way to go.
Davis gives the Red Sox a real weapon starting v. LP where has a better OPS than Ellsbury, and coming off the bench as a pinch hitter and pinch runner. With Davis and Bradley, the Red Sox actually improve over Ellsbury. Bradley would start in CF against nearly all RP (about 120 to 130 starts) but could be brought along more slowly like Ellsbury was in 2008. Davis would get the starts vs. most LP starters, with Davis also taking the rest days for Victorino in RF.
Davis would be starting about 100 games or more, depending upon how slow they want to bring Bradley alone. Davis becomes an oustanding late innings defensive LF OF substitute for Gomes or Nava.
This OF would be as good or better defensively than 2013 OF.
Hart slugs career better than Nava v. RP, and slugs at .478 career v. RP and is almost as good as Nava's career year in 2013 slugging .484, so Hart simply needs a rest days backup which should be Nava. For the few games that Nava plays backup 1st aginast RP starters (Ortiz takes NL games of course).
So far, so good, with the smart AJ one year deal signing to bridge to the farm and team up with Ross.
The Red Sox are getting wiser with those words of Henry, and if they sign Rajai Davis and Hart and take the 3 draft picks then they get an A+ for this off season. Getting deeper on the young talent and finding great value and complimentary fits on the short term veteran FA market.
Having done the obvious and taken the pick on Ellsbury, and they should absolutely follow that up with the same inaction on Drew and Napoli, the Red Sox will have no prima donna contracts for overrated veteran players and will get younger and better and provide more value and better teams under the leadership of Pedroia through the next years to come.
The Red Sox have Brentz and should resign Kalish on the non-tender rebound for the 2014 OF depth.
Unless they can get a highly rated A prospect for Peavy's last year (slim and none chance), they should simply keep Peavy for pitching staff depth. Ditto on Dempster who has almost no stand-alone trade value. Better to keep the depth into dog days and then deal from a position of trade market strength in the chance that the young pitching talent has stepped up and the lack of injuries and good market offers are such that Peavy's last half contract payments are expendable. This provdies the best value and flexibility. It's likely that either Peavy or Dempster pitch well enough for a few months that other playoff contending teams with injuries and non-performance pitching staff holes will make Peavy or Dempster trade values go up substantially from the low point it is in now over the winter and spring.
The Red Sox need to take care of business and sign Davis and Hart and define the roles early and begin the process of letting the rest of MLB and the Yankees know that simply handing out prima donna FA contracts to veterans isn't going to stamp in AL East ticket. While the Yankees injury front to Tex was the final blow to the 2013 Yankees, and, thus they will obviously be a lot better, one need look no farther than the Angels and the left coast to see the foolishness of the old CBA way of doing business.
It's almost laughable to think that the low key winter moves of signing AJ, Davis and Hart will make the Red Sox a media perceived underdog for 2014. While injury front luck or misfortune is the most important factor in season performance, it most certainly isn't a major factor on sustained team value and performance over the long term. It appears the owner of the Red Sox is making the adjustment which defines performance more than one season in 6 years.
Davis has a lifetime .698 OPS, NO POP, fragile, & getting worse every year!
& this would improve the sox over Ells huh????
Brilliant! Trying to hit .999 again in 2014 are we Stiffy? ;)