Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter1. Show parhunter1's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    The difference between a .200 and .240 hitter is just 20 hits over 500 ABs.
    If Scutaro bats .280, he'd get about 40 more hits than iggy at .240. Are you saying Iggy will only make about 40 more plays than Scutaro over a full season on defense? (Making them even in your eyes)

    Did you mean "than Iggy at .200?"  Just as the difference between .200 and .240 is 20 hits, so is the difference between .240 and .280.

    I happen to agree with you on playing Iggy over Scutaro, btw.  But your comparison of hits allowed to hits made cannot be accurately assessed.  Almost all of those hits allowed will be singles.  Not all of Scut's hits will be singles; some will be doubles, some triples and some HRs.  Iggy has singles power at best right now.  He doesn't even make solid enough contact to hit the gaps and get a lot of doubles.  What hurts this team is that it is spending 8.1 million on SS and not getting a complete player out of it.  Complicating the assessment further is the question of how many of those hits allowed turn into defacto doubles because of stolen bases or throwing errors.  And then you have to ask this question:  how many of the hits allowed led to runs vs. how many of the hits made led to runs?  The argument is, in the end, about run differential.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter1. Show parhunter1's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    In Response to Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...:
    [QUOTE]Here's a breakdown of the best and worst SSs (by range) in 2011 (SSs with 1300+ innings)  Plays Made S. Castro    338  (1399) +74 A. Cabrera 264  (1327) (with 1200-1299 innings) Rollins          300  (1207) +42 Bartlett         300   (1211) Peenington  258  (1272) (with 1100-1199 inn) Hardy          300  (1133) +51 Escobar       249  (1121) (with 929-1087) Cedeno       292   (1050) +102 Jeter           210   (1047) Scutaro       190   (929) If we projected Scutaro's 2011 season to 1400 innings, he'd have made 285 plays. If we projected Cedeno to 1400 innings, he'd have made about 405 plays. That's over 115 more plays!
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Your numbers here are accurate, and impressive.  I just have trouble believing that 115 more hits happen if Scutaro is playing instead of Cedeno given precisely the same circumstances.  Something else is contributing to the disparity between the two SSs, IMO.  Perhaps it is the groundball percentage rate of all the pitchers who were pitching while each of the players was in the field?  More accurately, how many groundballs were hit to SS during those innings pitched while each player was in the field playing SS?
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    In Response to Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million... : I'm also not about to given up significant pieces for Gavin Floyd either though.  quality, cheap pitching is at a premium on the trade market right now.  I'm not that impressed with Floyd, although he would certainly fit in our budget with an AAV under $4M.  I see him putting up numbers similar to Lackey's 2010, but with about 30 fewer innings.  Not great, but helpful.  It would really come down to the asking price.  Garza would cost a kings ransom and still be over budget.
    Posted by JB-3[/QUOTE]

    Floyd truns 29 soon: that's prime for a starting pitcher (29-31ish). 
    He's started 30+ games for 4 straight years.
    His BB/9 rate has fallen steadily as his K/BB has improved as well.
    His career WHIP (1.326) is rather high, but last year was at 1.162.
    His record vs NYY & Tor are scary, but he has done well in Fenway.

    He's not the only guy like this out there. 

    I still think trading is the best way to improve our staff.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from stodknocker. Show stodknocker's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    The dollar bill should read " In Moonslav59 We Trust"
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    I don't understand all the love for Iglesias. How do you really know he's a great defensive player? Who here has really seen enough of him to draw such a conclusion?

    Judging a prospects fielding is much easier than judging how they will transfer pitching or hitting skills to the major league level.

    Iggy is way better than Scutty at SS, even if he is an average MLB fielder.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    Trading Scutarto at 35 is still a viable option. At 36, forget it. If he is not traded before or at the TD, we will be stuck with him next year.
    Scutaro is a FA after this year.
    He would have cost us $1.5M to let him walk this winter, so the differential to keep him was $4.5M. If we traded him and paid $1.5M of his $6M deal, we'd break even with choosing to let him walk and we'd have a prospect to show for it, even if mid-level.
    We need salary space now...right now. If we look realistically at who we can deal and not take a big step down at that position, to me that is Scutaro (replaced by Iggy/Aviles/Punto) or Salty (replaced by Lavarnway). Scutty would free up $6M, Salty only $2.5M. Those are our two best options at freeing up salary space.


     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    The difference between a .200 and .240 hitter is just 20 hits over 500 ABs.
    If Scutaro bats .280, he'd get about 40 more hits than iggy at .240. Are you saying Iggy will only make about 40 more plays than Scutaro over a full season on defense? (Making them even in your eyes)

    Did you mean "than Iggy at .200?"  Just as the difference between .200 and .240 is 20 hits, so is the difference between .240 and .280.

    Yes, I meant to say "40 hits between .200 and .280." Someone said Iggy needs to hit .240 to be worth it, but I am trying to show that he could hit .200 or even .180 and still win more games for us than scutaro hitting .280, but making 60-100 less plays than Iggy. 

    I happen to agree with you on playing Iggy over Scutaro, btw.  But your comparison of hits allowed to hits made cannot be accurately assessed.  Almost all of those hits allowed will be singles.  Not all of Scut's hits will be singles; some will be doubles, some triples and some HRs.  Iggy has singles power at best right now.  He doesn't even make solid enough contact to hit the gaps and get a lot of doubles.  

    I mentioned this point earlier, and it is valid, but also think about how many runners will not try to score on Iggy as the cut-off man ve Scutty, and how many might be thrown out at the plate. These are huge factors in close games as well. Also, turning DPs makes a difference.

    About 35% of Scutaros hits are for extra bases. Iggy might be about 15%-20% with less HRs. I still think Iggy making 80-100 plays more than Scutty on defense makes up for 40 less hits, even if all 40 of those hits are 30 doubles, 3 triples and 7 HRs.

    What hurts this team is that it is spending 8.1 million on SS and not getting a complete player out of it.  Complicating the assessment further is the question of how many of those hits allowed turn into defacto doubles because of stolen bases or throwing errors.  And then you have to ask this question:  how many of the hits allowed led to runs vs. how many of the hits made led to runs?  The argument is, in the end, about run differential.

    I agree, but also consider the dejected feeling of pitchers who induce a slow roller to SS, only to see the player reach base. Or when a players scores on a cut-off throw by a few inches. 

    Having a great fielding SS improves a pitcher's pyche (confidence) as well as his numbers.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    Your numbers here are accurate, and impressive.  I just have trouble believing that 115 more hits happen if Scutaro is playing instead of Cedeno given precisely the same circumstances.  Something else is contributing to the disparity between the two SSs, IMO.  Perhaps it is the groundball percentage rate of all the pitchers who were pitching while each of the players was in the field?  More accurately, how many groundballs were hit to SS during those innings pitched while each player was in the field playing SS?

    Yes, it is not an exact science. A team's pitching K rate also effects how many "plays" are available to its fielders, but when Scutty comes out near the bottom of the pack year after year no matter what team he plays for, you can pretty much say, he has very poor range. I used the number 115 as a pro-rated 2011 differential, but I was not saying we could expect that differential on the Sox in 2012. I was saying we could expect a 60-100 play differential. Even if it is only 60, it's worth it to me. The $6M spent elswhere would make up for any loss that might occur.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    In Response to Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...:
    [QUOTE]2.5 mil is a steal for Salty...take that extra cash saved and sign Oswalt please
    Posted by georom4[/QUOTE]

    100% agree - Salty signing is a good one.

    And Oswalt looks to be the best option to shore up the rotation.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    I think that's too much money for him.  I was thinking about half that amount.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    In Response to Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million... : Trading Scutarto at 35 is still a viable option. At 36, forget it. If he is not traded before or at the TD, we will be stuck with him next year.
    Posted by Alibiike[/QUOTE]

    Trading Scutaro at age 35 is indeed still a viable option assuming the Red Sox have access to a time machine, or some sort of a de-oldinater.

    What's his value at 36 and 3 months versus his value mid-season at 36 and 8 months?
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    In Response to Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...:
    [QUOTE]The dollar bill should read " In Moonslav59 We Trust"
    Posted by stodknocker[/QUOTE]

    How about "With Softy the floor Moonslav wipes"?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    In Response to Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...:
    [QUOTE] I agree, but also consider the dejected feeling of pitchers who induce a slow roller to SS, only to see the player reach base. Or when a players scores on a cut-off throw by a few inches.  Having a great fielding SS improves a pitcher's pyche (confidence) as well as his numbers.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Moon, solid analysis and reasonable conclusion as usual but if Iglesias really did hit .200 or .180 (and with no power is probably certain) there would be immense attention and pressure on him regardless of the saves he made with his glove which would very possibly damage his overall game.  Maybe permanently.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    In Response to Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...:
    [QUOTE]I don't understand all the love for Iglesias. How do you really know he's a great defensive player? Who here has really seen enough of him to draw such a conclusion? We do know that he can't hit AAA pitching, let alone major league pitching. We also know that Scutaro is a very consistent, solid offensive contributor, and one of the few true professionals on a team of brittle self-entitled miscreants. While he lacks the defensive range of some of the other shortstops mentioned, he still makes the occasional great play deep in the hole. He's not a butcher at shortstop, in the way Carl Crawford was in left field. I like Marco Scutaro on my team. He's not going to be the problem. I'm more worried about the health of Beckett, Lester and Buchholz. There will be enough depth at the 4-5 spots to make it through the season successfully.
    Posted by davidap[/QUOTE]

    Typical Moonslav absurdity with these stats - Anyone who has WATCHED the games last year (and the prior year) knows that Scut was one of the hardest working and consistent Red Sox players the past 2 years..he has more heart than anyone on the team and plays a decent shortstop....I have no idea why anyone would advocate Inglesias over Scut at this point in time....The only impression I got of our wunderkind as SS was that he couldnt hit, was ok fielding, and perhaps the most overrated Sox prospect since Lars....
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter1. Show parhunter1's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    Georom,

    In the small sample I saw, Iggy seemed unseasoned in the field, and over matched at the plate.  And still, I'd rather see the Sox trade Scoot and $1.5 million in cash for a decent relief prospect.  Why?  Becuase I'd rather have Oswalt, Iggy and a relief prospect, than Scoot and Iggy (with their combined $8.1 million in salary) on my 2012 roster.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    In Response to Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...:
    [QUOTE]Georom, In the small sample I saw, Iggy seemed unseasoned in the field, and over matched at the plate.  And still, I'd rather see the Sox trade Scoot and $1.5 million in cash for a decent relief prospect.  Why?  Becuase I'd rather have Oswalt, Iggy and a relief prospect, than Scoot and Iggy (with their combined $8.1 million in salary) on my 2012 roster.
    Posted by parhunter1[/QUOTE]

    dont get me wrong about Moon, he is a bright guy and a real gentleman from what i read, but he has stated a few times that Iggy will prevent 100 hits a year as SS based on UZR or whatever nonsense stat he is spouting now...

    i would prefer to keep Scut, season Iggy some more as backup ss/2b, and trade Youk/Beckett to free up money and bad attitudes....Scutaro is the last guy on the 2011 team who should be traded imho
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from JB-3. Show JB-3's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    In Response to Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million... : dont get me wrong about Moon, he is a bright guy and a real gentleman from what i read, but he has stated a few times that Iggy will prevent 100 hits a year as SS based on UZR or whatever nonsense stat he is spouting now... i would prefer to keep Scut, season Iggy some more as backup ss/2b, and trade Youk/Beckett to free up money and bad attitudes....Scutaro is the last guy on the 2011 team who should be traded imho
    Posted by georom4[/QUOTE]

    Moon isn't using any advanced stats in his pro-Iggy argument.  All he's using is simple counting stats for plays made by top defensive shortstops compared to what Scoot made.  He uses the simple assumption that Iggy would be a top 5 defender at SS, which is in line with what Scouts say.  I'm on board with you for moving Youk if we can get something decent in return, but Beckett is simply to valuable to this club with such a thin rotation (no pun intended).
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    Typical Moonslav absurdity with these stats - Anyone who has WATCHED the games last year (and the prior year) knows that Scut was one of the hardest working and consistent Red Sox players the past 2 years..he has more heart than anyone on the team and plays a decent shortstop....I have no idea why anyone would advocate Inglesias over Scut at this point in time....The only impression I got of our wunderkind as SS was that he couldnt hit, was ok fielding, and perhaps the most overrated Sox prospect since Lars....

    First, I'll respond to this: I never said he would save 100 hits, and I didn't use UZR. I used the simple stats of plays made and innings in the field. I said if you prorated Scutty's 2011 numbers to a full season (1400) innings, he'd have made about 115 less plays than a pro-rated Cedeno. I then went on to say that I believe Iggy could save 60-100 plays over Scutty over a full season comparison. 

    Scutaro is a gutsy player who seems to rise to the occcasion, but he has been far from one of our most "consistent" players. He missed several games last year, and was no help during our April team slump (.189 BA/.510 OPS). His 2010 season was a rollercoaster:
    (OPS by months) 717-693-801-724-571-833

    No doubt, Scutty is a better hitter and has shown character in times of need. Wether you want to believe it or not, we are not going to go over the tax limit this year (by much anyway). I notice you keep advocating for spending big. I'd love to keep Scutty and spend big too, but it is not going to happen. Once you accept that fact, you'll see our hands are tied. We need pitching badly... very badly. We could use a RH'd RF'er as well. We could use some defense on our left-side. The only way we can make salary room to get a quality player is to trade top prospects for low cost talent or to trade an established player who makes a significant amount of money, use that money to upgrade pitching, and try not to lose much production at the slot we trade away. To me, the only kids we have that can step in and not cause a huge loss are Lavarnway (DH/C) or Iggy (SS). Scutaro makes $6M while Salty makes $2.5M. Other options might be to trade Papi (DH) or Youk (3B), but trading them would cause a bigger drop off than we'd see at SS or C.

    dont get me wrong about Moon, he is a bright guy and a real gentleman from what i read, but he has stated a few times that Iggy will prevent 100 hits a year as SS based on UZR or whatever nonsense stat he is spouting now...

    I said I  think Iggy would save 60-100 hits and turn more DPs, make more cutoff throws for outs, and prevent runners from even trying to score on him over a full season (maybe 150-155 games). Even if it is just 60 saved, that outweighs the 40 less hits he'd likely have vs Scutty. At worst, we'd be even, but we'd have $6M to play with and maybe a prospect to show in the deal.

    i would prefer to keep Scut, season Iggy some more as backup ss/2b

    pay him $2.1M to stay in AAA while we pinch pennies ?

    , and trade Youk/Beckett to free up money and bad attitudes....

    We'd never get equal retrun for these guys. I think you are
    1) assuming Beckett is a cancer
    2) teams will give equal value for high priced players

    I had mentioned trading Youk, but trading Beckett will never make us better in 2012.

    Scutaro is the last guy on the 2011 team who should be traded imho

    He may have the best attitude on the team, but attitude only gets you so far. I guess if you were a Yankee fan in the 70's, you'd have been calling for trading Reggie too.


     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter1. Show parhunter1's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    If you could trade Beckett in a deal for Garza, you could make the team better in 2012, if that is what it took to sign Oswalt at his price.  Garza and Oswalt are better for the team than just Beckett.  Beckett may win 20 games and pitch 200 innings, if he has a stellar year, as he had in 2007.  Garza and Oswalt will easily win 20 games between them and pitch 300+ innings, even if neither has even an average year.

    I am not saying it will happen, but trading Beckett this year could in fact be good for the 2012 team's chances.  So would trading Lackey, of course, but no team is going to take that contract.  It is somewhat plausible that you could find a taker for Beckett and still find 7-8 million in salary relief, while getting a decent middle of the rotation type starter.

    And you don't even consider any of this unless Oswalt passes a physical and looks ready to pitch like its 2010, not 2011!
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from JB-3. Show JB-3's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    In Response to Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...:
    [QUOTE]If you could trade Beckett in a deal for Garza, you could make the team better in 2012, if that is what it took to sign Oswalt at his price.  Garza and Oswalt are better for the team than just Beckett.  Beckett may win 20 games and pitch 200 innings, if he has a stellar year, as he had in 2007.  Garza and Oswalt will easily win 20 games between them and pitch 300+ innings, even if neither has even an average year.
    Posted by parhunter1[/QUOTE]

    And they'll both lose far more games than Beckett and they'll give up more hits, and walk more people and throw more innings.  That's typically how numbers work out when you double the number of starts for 1 group and try to compare them evenly.  Win's from a SP really don't matter by themselves.  Win Percentage matters a great deal though, which is where Beckett would have the edge.

    I like the idea of a Beckett/Garza swap from the Sox perspective, but why would the Cubs go for it?  It's only 1 extra year of control at market rate for all 3 years instead of below market for at least 1 year with Garza.  
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter1. Show parhunter1's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    Because the Theo gets Ranaudo (whom he drafted) and Bekcett (whom he extended).  And he retires the compensation issue. 

    May not be enough incentives, but you don't know unless you ask.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    I seriously think Theo is not looking to win a ring in 2012. He's not looking to add a lot of salary by taking on Beckett. He's looking to get prospects for Garza, which means he wants to cut salary not add it.

    Perhaps we could trade Beckett for prospects and then flip them to the Cubs for Garza, but I don't see that as improving our team, even if we can use the "saved money" to sign Oswalt.

    The Sox went 20-10 in Beckett's 30 starts last year. The Sox were 21-14 in Wake/Miller starts last year. That's 41-24. I'm not saying Bard, Aceves, Doubront, Miller, Silva, and or Cook is going to go 21-14 in 2012, but they could go 17-18. If Beckett goes 20-10 again that would give us 37-28. I'm not so sure Garza and Oswalt would do the same. If Oswalt gets hurt, it would be very difficult for Garza to ourdo Beckett.

    I'd rather see us trade Scutaro for a low prospect (save $6M) and then trade Middlebrooks (The draftee), Ranaudo (Theo draftee), and Bowden for Garza or Gavin Floyd. 

    Isn't 
    Beckett, Lester, Garza, Buch, Bard/Aceves
    better than
    Lester, Garza, Buch, Oswalt, Bard/Aceves
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    m
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from pinstripezac32. Show pinstripezac32's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    test
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: Saltalamacchia signs for $2.5 million...

    n
     

Share