Sheesh
Are things really this bad for the Sox? Am I missing something? Ken Rosenthal, a great reporter for Fox Sports and typically a decent writer, contributes this piece entitled New-Look Red Sox Could Use a Makeover.
It’s a tough piece to slug through as he contradicts himself numerous times. One assumption that he seems to hold self-evident is that although the Sox have retained much of their pitching and bolstered their bullpen, they now have question marks on offense. I couldn’t disagree more. I think this offense is well on its way to another 900 run season. Anyway, here is what the Sox lost for contributors last season with their 2005 numbers in parentheses…
Edgar Renteria (.276/.335/.385)
Johnny Damon (.316/.366/.439)
Second Base: (.254/.333/.396)
Bill Mueller (.295/.369/.430)
Doug Mirabelli (.228/.309/.412)
Kevin Millar (.272/.355/.399)
John Olerud (.289/.344/.451)
Their replacements and their ZIPS projection for 2006:
SS: Alex Gonzalez (.253/.305/.406, in Florida mind you), Alex Cora (.269/.334/.368), Dustin Pedroia (.275/.343/.403)
CF: Coco Crisp (.303/.353/.448 in Cleveland)
2B: Mark Loretta (.320/.387/.441)
3B: Mike Lowell (.283/.356/.489)
Back-up C: Josh Bard (.260/.323/.393)
1B: Kevin Youkilis (.268/.400/.417), JT Snow (.267/.346/.378…ugh)
I don’t know. You net out the upgrades, clear defensive improvements and the potential bounce-back seasons, even while factoring in some age regression, and I think this team looks improved.
January 24th, 2006 at 12:26 pm
I felt like you, Sully, when I read Ken’s column.
Under the Department of You Can’t Always Have It All: To the extent that the Red Sox have improved in this area or that, it seems that slight declines elsewhere could still produce a similar record from one year to the next.
Like the Cubs with Prior and Wood, the health of Beckett and Schilling are probably two of the upside and downside variables to Boston’s season. However, as the Sox currently stand, they have more depth in the ranks of starting pitchers than most, if not all, teams.
My only caveat is to be sure that you don’t double count Loretta’s and Lowell’s increased production by listing ZIPS projections rather than last year’s actual stats *and* “the potential bounce-back seasons.” (By the way, I’ll take the unders across the board on their ZIPS rate stats.)
January 24th, 2006 at 5:32 pm
I probably should have been more clear. I meant potential bounce-back seasons from hold-overs. Trot, Schill and Foulke to be exact.
January 24th, 2006 at 11:24 pm
Ahh, that makes sense. Yes, if Nixon and Foulke return to form, the Red Sox could be even better than last year. Boston probably has as much upside as ever. They just have a bit more downside risk, too.
January 25th, 2006 at 7:50 am
Yeah, those ZIPS projects look seriously optimistic, I mean, does anyone really think Lowell is going to get an 850+ OPS this season? I would freaking love it, and having that from a gold glover at third would be hot, but I picture him as all-glove, occasional power, not much average this year.
As for Crisp… don’t even know what to think about it anymore.