Comments on: Does Beltre Make Sense to Boston at $10M?

By: Bobo

Bobo — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 14:20:33 +0000

I don’t think they are all that concerned with countering the Phils, whom had a very very good defense last year, and should have a good defense this year with the Polonco for Feliz swap. The Red Sox, like most well managed teams, looked for areas where they could improve, and do so, in a cost effective way. While I think they overpaid for Lackey, I’m just not a big fan of 5 year deals for pitchers over 30, they made a hugely effecient signing in Cameron+Beltre, got some draft picks for a 2 month rental in Wagner, and did not overpay Bay. I think the last of that list is the most postive from a RedSox fan perspective, because they moved in a different direction immediately after infering that Bay would not sign a deal that was either fair or team friendly.

By: Parker

Parker — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 02:50:53 +0000

I laughed out loud when I read the $9 million number.
Lucky and good, I think.
Well done.

By: Joel

Joel — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 01:27:57 +0000

Well, you nailed it.

One year for $9 million with a $5 million PO.

By: joser

joser — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 22:23:12 +0000

But only if those are four leaf gold clovers.

By: Gray

Gray — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 19:39:01 +0000

If the sox sign Beltre, they would have potential gold clovers at all positions except ellsbury in center who should be average or better. This is how you counter the yankees and the phillies.

By: joser

joser — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 17:20:35 +0000

When Beltre got into one of his bouts of swinging at anything outside and rendered himself an automatic out for a few games, you heard grumbling. Not to mention the times his routine appeal to first on a checked swing actually got him called out on strikes. But then he’d make up for it with some outrageous barehanded catch on a ball corkscrewing down the line and/or an impossible cannon throw to first for an out while falling backwards towards the dugout, and all would be forgiven.

By: Kevin S.

Kevin S. — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 04:54:57 +0000

My thoughts exactly. Well played, sir.

By: Kazinski

Kazinski — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 22:07:05 +0000

“shares quite a bit with Beltre in the means of unfair criticism and a sentence to perennially underrated purgatory.”

Maybe among national writers, but Beltre was always well appreciated in Seattle. I can’t ever remember a single boo coming from the stands when he came up. And while of course any ball player gets criticized from time to time, none of the local writers ever made Beltre a pet project for criticism.

I think Mariner fans would like to see him back and have move Figgins to 2B. Not at 10m of course, but if Beltre’s price drops, the Mariners may get back into the discussions.

In terms of health Beltre is not risk free, the testicle thing was a freak injury, but he also has shoulder surgery last year, for the second time.

By: Steven Ellingson

Steven Ellingson — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 20:16:17 +0000

The more I think of it, the less I think this type of analysis works. You need to take into account chaining. It’s not like Kotchman would get 0 PA’s if they signed Beltre. He would take PA’s from some poorer player. So Beltre would probably be taking some PAs from a replacement level player, and some from Kotchman. We do need to consider depth when looking at transactions, not just the starting 8.

By: Steven Ellingson

Steven Ellingson — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 20:13:43 +0000

I understand what you’re saying. If they can trade the player that he’s replacing then you end up with the total value for that player. This makes sense if you have a 2 WAR or something player that you can trade. If you have something like a 0.5 to 1 WAR player, you may or may not be able to get anything back for this person. In this case, the “R” of WAR is just a little higher than normal.

Anyway, the whole point of my post was to say that if you do this with the Red Sox, you can’t use 3.5 mil because you just assumed they were replacing replacement-level players for every other signing.