MAY 15: Red Sox GM Ben Cherington says there’s no truth to that trade proposal, Edes tweets. He adds that a member of one of the involved clubs was the source on his info.
MAY 14: The Mariners turned down a trade offer from the Red Sox in the spring that would’ve seen outfielder Jackie Bradley Jr. go to Seattle in exchange for left-handed reliever Charlie Furbush, ESPN Boston’s Gordon Edes reports (Twitter link).
Moving Bradley would’ve helped clear up the outfield surplus that the Sox are still dealing with, though there’s been less of a logjam for playing time than expected given some injuries and a few underperforming players. Furbush has posted solid numbers since 2012 and you have to think he would’ve upgraded a Boston bullpen that entered today with the second-lowest fWAR of any relief corps in the game. That said, Furbush’s 1.86 ERA this season is belied by some shaky peripherals numbers (.185 BABIP, 4.37 xFIP, 3.89 SIERA) so perhaps he might’ve struggled at Fenway Park. Furbush is on a one-year, $1.3MM deal and still has two remaining years of arbitration eligibility.
Offering Bradley for a good-but-not-elite setup reliever would’ve seemed unthinkable a year ago, when the outfielder was considered one of the consensus top prospects in the game. Over 530 MLB plate appearances in 2013-14, however, Bradley hit a measly .196/.268/.280, posting the second-lowest wRC+ (51) of any player in that stretch with at least 500 PA. The Sox have already seemed to have moved on to Mookie Betts as their center fielder of the future and signed Rusney Castillo to a $72.5MM contract.
It’s hard to see Bradley’s hitting numbers improving with a move to the notoriously pitcher-friendly Safeco Field, and clearly the Mariners had enough concern about his bat that they weren’t willing to pull the trigger on an ex-top prospect who is controllable through 2019. Bradley has shown himself to be a phenomenal defender, and could’ve potentially been a long-term answer in center with Austin Jackson scheduled for free agency after the season.
Wow. How badly that guy’s stock has fallen. From being one of the game’s “top prospects” to suddenly be requested in exchange for a relief pitcher, and denied!
Though he did hit well this year in AAA which was after the trade proposal, but still…
He’s always hit well in the minors.
Good point
In the pitching friendly International league and without the benefit of California league stats in A ball also. Not saying he’ll ever hit for even league average over his MLB career, but his superb glove will make him useful for several seasons for awhile.
If he hits at least okay. Or he can become the Brendan Ryan of the OF! Which would make him a bust :/
“One of the games top prospects”
28th ranked in 2013, is the highest I could find for Bradley (granted I only searched for a couple of mins). In fact, Gary Sanchez was the 27th ranked player in that same list, and he hasn’t exactly set the world on fire either.
28th is a pretty high ranking, considering there are 30 teams in baseball and he’d likely be every team’s #1 or #2 prospects. And nowhere did I mention anything about Gary Sancez, but I can bet his trade value is way higher. I can also bet he wouldn’t be the 2nd worst hitter in baseball in a 2 year span.
“His trade value way higher” very unlikely. Sanchez doesn’t even make FGraph’s Top 200 prospects list. The only place he is still talked fondly of are on Yankee based websites, similar to Bradley only being talked up in RSox sites right now.
JBJ lost his rookie eligibility and so is no longer considered a prospect. That is why he is not on Fangraphs top 200.
I’m speaking of Sanchez. I’ll edit the “he” to Sanchez.
Not like he’d be on it anyway
Sanchez would have higher trade value because at least there’s hope he could translate his bat into the Majors. No such hope with JBJ. Neither fetches a crazy return anyway.
You’re assumption is that JBJ is washed up, I’m not going to concede that, yet.
no, but Sanchez most likely has more trade value than Charlie furbish
Find this entire topic amusing. dicing on JBJ’s bat, while ignoring Sanchez’s, who has never really hit at the MiLB level and then the head scratcher of stating that wouldn’t trade Sanchez for Furbush? Other than Seattle already has a superior catcher to Sanchez as it is.. Furbush is worth more than either JBJ, or Sanchez. other than just taking a look at his numbers for those here that normally do nothing BUT judge players in that manner. Furbush is a pretty good Loogy and has been for the last 3y.
Hard to find those types, that throw 92-95mph for defensive catchers who don’t hit and have 2 and a half years of control left. he reminds me of what Boston got from Miami in Andrew Miller, except Miller was a wreck and had to be fixed 1st by the coaching staff, Furbush just needs some finer tuning.
Sanchez has hit at the MiLB level though
“Sanchez’s, who has never really hit at the MiLB level” Sanchez has a .789 OPS at the minor league level…
Well East Coast Biased pretty much summed up my response to this.
I do agree with you however that A Lot of top prospects don’t pan out. No one said otherwise.
Why does Gary Sanchez matter here?
My point being: lots and lots of players don’t pan out. I was going to put a few prospects, who didn’t pan out, but when I saw Sanchezs name there I thought it was a nice comparison. He plays for a big market east coast team, was ranked one place higher than Bradley, and has completely fallen off every national prospect list (he doesn’t show up on FGraph Top 200, or Baseball Amer Top 100). Yet, hasn’t received 1/100th the scrutiny of Bradley.
There is a very simple answer to this, and it is not exactly “fair” to say.
People have seen what JBJ can do, or not do, at the major league level. They have not seen what Sanchez can do, yet, and therefore, they hold out hope that he can translate his once success to the major league level.
Prospects are often ranked based on potential. There is still potential for Sanchez. JBJ is no longer afforded that same luxury.
#28 does make you one of the game’s top prospects. Hey, some players make it and some people don’t. That’s how it is with prospects.
It will only be a matter of time until the MSM realize that the last Red Sox prospect that has been hyped up that has actually turns into anything is currently playing CF for the Yankees.
…ouch.
As a Red Sox fan, Bradley has been a frustrating watch, but even as a defensive substitute he has some value and he’s still young. Mariners might regret passing up an opportunity to buy low. I’d say Mookie Betts is the most exciting young player the Red Sox have right now though.
I agree, the Mariners would have gotten good value. The Jays got Devon Travis for a similar player (.474 BABIP notwithstanding).
Bradley would be a very helpful fourth OF on almost any team. If he was a RHH, he would be a great platoon partner. But he’s a LHH, so he would probably warm the bench unless something came up.
As much as his stock has fallen, he has been destroying AAA this year.
And even Betts is hitting terrible this year.
Betts is doing fine. Decent power and speed, solid BB%, and tolerable K rate, nothing to be alarmed about. That .241 BABIP is bound to improve.
That close to sub 300 OBP is fine to you?
That’s an incredibly flawed way of judging him. OBP is tied to BA, since his BA is being held down by an abnormal BABIP, his OBP is also being dragged down. Once his BABIP normalizes so will his OBP.
His BB% is 9% that’s solid which is why his OBP is .70 higher than his BA.
Furbush would have been a massive overpay for Bradley. A decent middle reliever for a 5th outfielder? No way!
Does this mean the Ronnie Ross Jr. era is over? Cherington’s record in trading for or signing relievers is about zilch. There’s Uehara (excellent) and then there’s Andrew Bailey, Hanrahan, Melancon (at least he brought Brock Holt in a trade), Mujica, Bobby Jenks, Ross, Varvaro, Thornton, and on and on it goes. Maybe I missed one or two more clunkers.
Like Andrew Miller for Dustin Richardson? Helping to bring in Tazawa from Japan for a lowly sum of 3.5m?
That was a great trade. Tazawa has been a find…. Too bad Ben didn’t OK the fourth year ($9 million) and get Andrew Miller back. Too busy blowing $9.5 mil on Mujica, $4.5 million on Breslow, Many more millions on Ross, Varvaro, and the biggest waste of money since Theo’s Carl Crawford binge — Andrew Bailey and Jake Peavy (lost Reddick and Iglesias in the process). Not a Big Ben fan here.
Good, Furbush is one of our best RP. Although I would take Craig and some of his salary of that if Boston takes Ackley and a pitcher in triple a
You can have Craig any day of the week. Don’t know Furbush. Bradley Jr. needs a batting coach who can help him with his swing. Sox coaches aren’t good at that sort of thing.
There’s no way Seattle makes that deal in a year they’re trying to contend cause Furbush is their only solid lefty reliever able to come in an neutralize LH hitters late in games.
Beimel can also do that job
When the trade was likely proposed, Biemel was in Rangers camp during the spring, and he had like a 35.00 ERA. I wouldn’t call Charlie a lights out reliever, but he is younger and has better stuff than Biemel.
I didnt read the tweet so I just assumed it just happened. But in spring Tyler Olsen was dominating
Re: Olson: that was less than 20 innings of spring training and he’s already back in the minors because he got smacked around once the regular season began. Solid left-handed relievers that do it every year have a ton of value. Its not like the M’s could have just replaced Furbush with some random guy off the waiver wire and expect him to do the same job. Do you realize what experienced lefty relievers were getting paid on the free agent market last winter? Zach Duke got 3 years, $15 mil…Andrew Miller, 4 years, $36 mil (and he wasn’t expected to be the closer).
You have to account that the trade was proposed during spring. So Olsen performance at the time was relevant to when the offer was made. That is also to much to offer relievers given how much they can change year to year
Sox could add Breslow and Robbie Ross to the trade and pay their salaries.
His defense is insane, perennial gold glove candidate. If only JBR could hit…….
I wonder if this deal was truly proposed in the Spring (when are Spring deals ever made?) or during the offseason. I’d say it was during the offseason, before they shipped Ranuado to Texas for Ross Jr.
That makes sense
Charlie Furbush is a S. Portland, ME kid. If the Sox could have gotten him for JBJ and BenC didn’t pull the trigger he should be reprimanded by ownership. With a plethora of OF’ders and the opportunity to get a shut down Lefty specialist;
you pull the trigger.
Try again Ben while you’re in Seattle.
It says that the Mariners turned the deal down, not Ben Cherington. The M’s, though not that great of a team, are in fact an MLB team and do have some say in trades. They’re not just a stockpile for the better teams.
Fascinating. Gives you a window into just how different the private evaluations of front offices are as compared to their public stance. And certainly shows how divergent they can be when compared to a home-town media that are often boosters and fans, who always have to hope.
I thought JBJ was just about worthless in the eyes of everyone at this point. The guy can’t hit his way out of a wet paper bag.
He could turn into a Paul Blair type. But he could also be Brendan Ryan.
Print media must mince and parcel quotes to fit column length, and fits a story to whatever preconceived narrative the writer wishes to stress…way too often. It’s either laziness or worse an agenda. Not that they’re all bad.
I wonder how many other trade offers exchange hands in the off season which fans are not aware of. I don’t see what is so special in this Bradley for Furbish try.
I doubt we here more then 5%-10% of actual proposals. Not proposals that a front office discusses but actual contact between clubs. It seems most are usually kept private even after they are negotiated.
bradley is a 4 a player great in ml cant hit mlb pitchers
Any one want to bring up a JBJ for Cole Hamels trade proposal now?
Blake Bench and Mookie Mays for Trout and Kershaw, separately of course
Why are you trying to fleece the Red Sox? Geeze….
Dang, would have been cool to see Furbush (South Portland native) pitching for the Sox.
This is exactly why I laugh at the fact that the Red Sox won’t give any top prospects up for Cole Hamels. Yes, I understand there is always an occasional exception, but odds are heavily in favor that the Phillies would lose the deal. History shows that’s the case. But apparently half of the Red Sox farm system is untouchable.
That’s why I always laugh at Phillies fans who think a guy is done because of one bad season and that refusing to part with a few players equates to “half the Red Sox farm system.”
Normally, one in Four players actually make in majors and way less become Stars, If Hamels is pitching effectively come July Phil’s will Reap the proper haul for their Star.
There’s the math that people seem to forget. Phils get 3 or 4 prospects and probably 1 will have any impact at the major league level. While the other team gets a proven commodity in Hamels. The chances that the prospect that they get back comes even close to Hamels’ value is very low. Yet the Sox don’t want to take that gamble? Seems silly to me. People rip on RAJ for having traded away the farm a few years ago. Out of all the prospects the Phillies traded away (some more than 5 years ago now), who has had any success in the big leagues? Jared Cosart has had moderate success I guess. So the Phillies traded away Cosart, and while receiving Lee, Halladay, Oswalt, and Pence. I’d do those trades 1,000 times over every time. If they HADN’T made those trades, the same people would be complaining that the Phillies didn’t go all in when they had the chance. Prospects are prospects in my opinion.
Yea look at the Cliff Lee trade, none of those guys have had any impact in the majors. The Phillies want a better package this time around.
What does this have to do with that? And really only two guys in the farm were untouchable and one of them is in the MLB. Very rarely do pitchers keep performing at high levels into their mid 30’s and Hamels is already on a big contract. Not much plus value to be had.
Do you think Zimmermann,Price or Cueto is going to be cheaper than Hamels, Money wise? The problem is those guys will be on big contracts for 7 years not 4 like Hamels. Saying Hamels has not much value is absurd.
Bingo
The problem is that Hamels is gonna cost top prospects too. The Red Sox have decided that they are going to pursue a strategy that involves not giving up large value for pitchers past their prime. The Red Sox are better off trading for rentals and hoping one of their lefties will become an ace. Beside the fact that I’d much rather have Cueto or Price then Hamel, It is not absurd to say that with the 125 million he’s owed and the fact that he will likely cost at least two top 100 prospects + that he has little added value for the acquiring team.Look at how much Moncada got. Top prospects are worth big bucks.
Philles said they’d eat money. I imagine if they got top prospects they would definiley eat some but Hamels contract is still below market value. Also signing one of Zimmermann, Price or Cueto will cost a draft pick since they will all probably get QO.
Yea but Amaro also is said to have only offered to cover 35 million of Howards so who knows the amount. A mid to late round draft pick is worth no where near the players who the Phillies reportedly wanted ( Swihart, Betts).
The Red sox strategy of not giving up large value for pitchers past their prime leaves them with only two options. 1) Develop their own Ace pitcher. Possible, but hard to do. 2) Pay for possibility to young starters who have approached Free Agency (Porcello). Teams with solid young “aces”, i.e. Kershaw, Ventura, Kluber, aren’t trading them. The Red Sox policy just seems impractical if trying to build a winner.
Right now they have two guys who could be aces (EROD and Owens) but they are more likely 2-3’s. Its not really impractical if you look at how often pitchers go from greatness to being bad. Its best not to add in the risk of over 30 and $100 million +. Look at the all the pitchers who were really good and then fall off.
The only thing that matters is that you win the WS before they fall off.
Not really. They are trying to win for a sustained run. If they wanted to cash in on this farm they could be the best team in baseball for 2-3 years but this is their strategy. Pitchers fall off very fast. ( Willis, Webb, Lincy)
No one is asking them to cash in the farm. it’s just their strategy of waiting til they give up on a prospect to trade them is only providing them with nominal value. Since signing a Free Agent pitcher, to the contract it would take, is technically against their policy, how will they assemble the rotation if they also don’t use some prospects as trade material?
The policy is just not to give aging pitchers 100 million + contracts. Every team should do this beside super rare cases like Kershaw. They very well might trade prospects for pitching as the year goes on. The Phillies just want more then any team has been wiilling to pay. I think they are waiting for guys like Cueto or Kazmir to come up for trade and then they will still have some top pitching prospects to insert in the rotation. EVERY team has tons of prospects that bust. Most do. Its not just a Red Sox problem. The Phillies want a guy like Seeger, Gaillo, Betts. They probably wont get that. I would assume the Red Sox would be wiling to build a trade around Owens and Margot which seems very fair.
Cueto and Kazmir will still cost a top prospect, and will only be a rental. After seeing what rentals went for last year, it doesn’t seem like its that much more for a non-rental.
Seeger, Gaillo, Betts, Swhart are ALOT more then what Cueto and Kazmir will get. I’m not sure what rentals you are referring to? I really doubt that 2-3 months of Scott Kazmir is gonna get a top prospect. He was almost out of baseball a few years ago and got lit up in the Alantic League.
Addison Russell was the cost for Oakland to rent Smardj and Hammells. Boston should have given Kazmir a chance 2 years ago if they wanted him cheap. Oakland did. Now they will profit from it. Again, I never said they should cash in the farm. I just think they can afford to trade a couple prospects. I wouldn’t recommend they trade them for a rental though.
I don’t understand what you want? They would be willing to trade guys like Owens and Margot who are top prospects. They don’t really have to many untouchables. Contending teams rarely trade major pieces from the majority league rooster. The Russel trade was not a rental because he had over a year left and that trade can’t really be used since the A’s could not have got a pitcher like that without giving up russal because they didn’t have any other top prospects. It was the Indians that gave him that chance and he will get a nice little return but not an elite prospect.
I don’t want anything. I admit I am not a BoSox fan. I am a baseball fan, though. I am just looking at their team and seeing what I, as an armchair quarterback, find to be a flaw in the way they are conducting their business. When Boston went into the season with so many outfielders, and relying on mid-range starters, I saw a problem, like so many others. When I see them trading prospects, after the stock has fallen, for little value, when I see them signing a mid range starter for $20MM/year, when I see them signing a SS and saying they will play him in the OF, when the OF is already a traffic jam, I see a poorly run team.
As to Russell, yes, it was all they had to offer, but it will have an effect on the asking price in future trades.
As to Kazmir, yes the Indians signed him from the scrap heap, but they never traded him. Oakland signed him, and IF they trade him, they will be asking for what a healthy Kazmir is worth.
You make it seem like the Red Sox are the only team that has prospects that bust. I forget the stat but most prospects fail. The Red Sox are trying to build a core of good young players. They have probably the deepest farm team at this point and only two players in the minor leagues are at this point most likely untouchable ( Castillo and Moncada). I think its a good strategy not to give huge contracts to pitchers as they fall off so fast. Look at the best pitchers of the last 10 years and it seems like there is always a cliff. LIncy, Webb, Willis, Lee, Hailday. The only players that reports say the Red Sox wouldnt trade was (beside players signed to large bonus) was Betts and Swihart. Betts was a part of the plan this year and has absurd upside and Swihart is the number one catching prospect in baseball. I doubt many teams would trade him if they had him. They have prospects like Owens who is a top 20-40 prospect and Margot is a top 100. Plus other major league ready guys who could be traded. It is super rare that a young pitcher is almost a free agent. Rick Porcello has looked really nice. I think he is a good number 2 starter and is young. Thats probably what he would have got on the open market. The whole Hanley thing was probably not in the plans. He wanted to be a Red Sox and took less money. He will DH once Ortix retires. The pitching has done a lot better the last week and they are ahead of the Blue Jays and O’s. I worked in the Alantic League. It is pretty much unheard of to get a guy like Kazmir in that league at his age. Its a huge warning sign and I doubt a team gives a top prospect for two months of him. Its not 2006 Kazmir anymore. The Russal trade was an outlier in a season that Billy Beane was going all in and didnt have anyone else to trade. He did get two pitchers back. It was a weird trade that probably wont effect the future.
All teams have prospects fail. Only the Red Sox have waited to have their prospects fail for them before considering a trade. The things you are saying about Mookie look familiar. The same was being said about JBJ last year. Now JBJ is being shopped for a LOOGY, according to reports, while Mookie is untouchable in a Hamels deal. Mind you, I am not saying to trade him. I’m just saying stick to a plan. If Mookie struggles, don’t bury him like they did JBJ. If they are going to trade him, do it before he hits .220 for them. Don’t expect value when you play a player enough to cause questions about his ability and then replace him in the lineup, enhancing your lack of faith in him. If you have excess players at one position, and have need at another, make a trade. Standing pat didn’t work.
“Only the Red Sox have waited to have their prospects fail before considering a trade” Thats an unfounded and absurd claim. All teams trade prospects too early or too late. It happens. JBJ was given a large chance to win that spot. He failed. They arent going to just stick with him forever. Betts has peformed very well so far so hes nothing like JBJ. Why would they trade a starter thier mlb team to get Hamels? That just opens up a whole. And lets not lie to ourselves here. Its not like the Phillies wanted a one for one deal. Come on. You are clearly biased towards the Sox.
Who is the last Red Sox prospect to be traded before they tried him?
What’s wrong with trying out your prospects? That’s the whole point. The Red Sox are trying to build a young core. I’m not sure what your agueing? Who do you want the Red Sox to trade for and what would you want them to give up? In your mind what would a fair trade for Hameils look like?
I don’t like Hamels, myself. Pitches well but doesn’t win. Always seems the other guy pitches better. Compared to Porcello, though, he’s a bargain. My argument is that to fully utilize their assets, no team can sit on all their prospects. Most will fail. The best way to optimize the assets of the team is to use some of the prospect hype to their advantage, by trading them while still an untested prospect. Not all of them, some of them. Trade for a “sure thing” and let the prospect succeed or fail for the other team. Betts would be the guy to trade, because he still has value. He is showing flaws but the promise is still there. The Sox wont move him to 2B, because of Pedroia, (and Pedroia’s contract hurts his trade value). JBJ has no trade value, but could replace Betts in the lineup, and at least provide excellent defense. Boston has some depth at OF. Castillo could also be used.
Could Betts end up being an All Star caliber player? Yep. Could you get a young starting pitcher with years of control, who has already proven himself at the ML level? Absolutely! Toronto has been hurting in the OF. How about working a trade of Betts and Daniel Norris.
Pitches well but doesn’t win? Dude was a World Series MVP. Porcello is six years younger and is owed 40 million less. Not that big of a bargain. Betts has just as much if not more value as a CF then a 2nd basemen. But wait Daniel Norris hasn’t proved himself so I don’t know what that even means and they are in the same division. Why would the Blue Jays trade from their already depleted rotation?
umm… to improve the team. Isn’t that why trades are made.
Look at Hamels w-l record in relationship to the teams record. Not a lot of surplus in the winning percentage. I wasn’t aware that Hamels was making $30mm/ year, which is what he would have to be based on your comparison with Porcello. Both have 4 years, and Porcello is at 20 per.
You don’t want a veteran with a proven track record because he’s expensive. You don’t want a highly rated young pitcher with control who is cheap, because he’s unproven. I guess my question is : What do you want?
Win/Lose means nothing for pitchers. Hamels is owed 40 million more, and chances are his last couple years that deal will be very bad. Porcello is SIX years younger and didn’t cost prospects. You clearly stated that Betts could get back a young pitcher who has proven himself. Then you went on to say Norras. He has not proven himself at all! It is almost unheard of for two devisor rivals to trade two super young players to each other. I want my team to continue to build around a young core and when the time is right ( Ie they start winning enough where 1 or two deals isn’t useless) then go out and move prospects that are not a big part of the MLB this year such as Owens, Margot, Marreo, Coyle, Cecchnini. Those five prospects are pretty much blocked or redundant for the Sox and could bring back something great with out moving Betts.
Don’t think the Red Sox would agree with you that they are rebuilding.
They think the time is RIGHT NOW.
I never said this is a rebuild. They are off to a tough start. The overall strategy is to attempt to achieve a sustained term of winning like 2003-2009. That is the goal. They think they can win this year but they are not gonna sell the farm. If they cashed in on this farm they could get a ton.
Again, you refer to cashing in the farm. It is not an all or nothing choice. You can trade some prospects, while keeping some prospect. Being that they finished in last place, and currently do not have the roster needed to be a “legitimate” contender (the East is Weak!), this should be a rebuilding year. In order for them to contend this year, it will require trading some prospects. Contract dumping won’t help this year.
They have been playing well and are in 3rd place. They will probably trade prospects this summer. Owens would be the best one they will part with.
we’ll see.
Will there be dead money at the end of Hamel’s contract? Sure, possibly. A lot less than if you’d sign a FA pitcher like Price, Zimmerman, etc. for 7 years + for a ton more money than Hamels is still owed. But aren’t the Sox in it to win it now? Why wouldn’t you want Hamels on a shorter term deal with less money owed if that’s your current situation? That seems right up their alley based on the Porcello contract. Yes, I understand Porcello is younger. But personally if I’m trying to win now (and that would be my assumption based on their signings of Pablo and Hanley), I’d take Hamels and his remaining contract in exchange for a few prospects over what they gave Porcello. That’s just me though. Clearly not everyone feels the same way.
The Red Sox are trying to win now and in the future. The phllies seem not to be open to a deal unless it includes a name like Betts. Red Sox simply don’t want to trade young players at prime positions for aging pitchers on huge contracts. Id rather them trade much less to get Cueto or Kazmir and then hopefully at least one of the three lefties will become a good pitcher at the MLB level. If I were the Phillies Id try to revamp that farm system which they could do with the Red Sox. I mean the Red Sox would probably willing to offer a top 20 prospect in baseball for him ++
Too much fuss for so little.
Boston has had like most organizations ,over rated and hyped it prospects. One can see that Philly wants Real Quality for a proven Major League All-star , World series MVP.
Ah, the great Jackie Bradley Jr….I remember in spring 2014 some Sox fans told me he’d hit better than Gardner
Then saying he was better than Ellsbury as well.
Sox fans won’t admit it but that lineup isn’t the same without Ellsbury, Boston has yet fill the #1 hole with a true leadof hitter. It was a mistake to put Betts there in his rookie year, I guess they expected him to hit the ground running but his OBP has been below .300 all season, they lost their number one base stealing threat also. They thought Sizemore was going to take over CF like a piece of cake. They maybe have replaced Ellsbury’s defense but certainly haven’t filled that number one hole in the lineup. Betts should have had more seasoning before they started letting him hit leadoff, that really surprised me but shows they still have no true leadoff hitter since Ells left.
Mookie Betts OBP is .302 despite his completly unlucky .241 BABIP. He has a good walk rate, a low K rate, and good speed/power combo. Once the BABIP gets up to .320 he will have a .350 OBP + and be a fantastic leadoff hitter.
Well hopefully his “luck” will pick up before the Sox fall more behind in the division race. Him leading off thus far is a failed experiment. In my opinion he should be hitting lower in the lineup. It would definitely put less pressure on him.
Well if you were watching ever game you would know different. 30 games is no failed experiment.
Interestingly enough there was a post here on the website saying that Betts should be dropped from the leadoff spot. Boston is trying to compete, if you were a manager how long would you let him bat leadoff? Until he hits. 270ish or when you fall out the division or wild card race? Boston doesn’t have the luxury of waiting on him to turn it around.
He’s going to be fine. Mookie Betts is not whats wrong with the Sox.
Him hitting leadoff is one problem, the Sox have too many issues to single it down to one player.
We are 30 games into the season and He is gonna be fine. The Red Sox have played better of late. Way to early.
Whos the last Sox prospect that’s even turned into anything good? Ellsbury?
Depending on your standards if not him then Josh Reddick.
What about Anthony Rizzo.
They may have drafted him but he was never on their AAA or major league club.
He was still a Red Sox prospect.
Mookie Betts has 2.7 career fWAR in 87 games..
He may be one of those guys who develops later in his career, like Nelson Cruz or Corey Kubler.
It’s officially been denied. That means it must be true!
Tigers wanted JBJ. Red Sox price tag was way high. So Detroit got Anthony Gose instead.
They are happy they did. OPS of .894 with Gold Glove level defense. I suppose Dombrowski should thank Cherington for being so stubborn.
I never heard anything about JBJ to Detroit. What is your source?
I always figured that Gose was the receipt because all the Tigers had to trade was Travis (being he was blocked by Kinsler). Toronto was the team that needed a 2B. Considering they were planning on Pompey to jump to the majors, I was surprised they parted with Gose, as he would have been the backup plan. Glad they did though.