John lackey takes physical in Boston: deal may be imminent!

[Fan from VT]

I too thought this team was going to go with the frugal approach this winter.

I WAS WRONG.

They have already spent close to $100 million on free agents. Once Cameron signs it will be over $100 million. The thing is, they have positioned themselves through free agency to be frugal in their approach in the outfield. Me, I believe it's because they are preparing an all out blitz for next year on a player they have admired and coveted for years, Carl Crawford. They will spend like crazy next year for Mauer and Crawford, if they are there, going so far as to try to outspend the Yankees.

But they won't be able to do that next year if they spend everything this year on Bay or Holliday. Crawford is twice the player than either of those guys and a much better long term investment. Stop the gap this year and spend next.

Besides, they have also positioned thenselves perfectly fo a huge trade. With Lester, Lackey, Beckett, Matzusaka, Wakefield and Buchholz as the starters, the Sox have the future set in their rotation for at least the next two to three years(more if they resign Beckett) and now can use Buccholz, Kelly, Bowden, Tazawa, Pimental and the other pitching prospects they have as bait in a trade for a power bat for the infield. I say expect Cabrera or Gonzalez playing for the Sox next year.

I agree nick. I don't think it was wrong to brace yourself for a frugal offseason. And there's a balance to spending money because you have it and handcuffing yourself from making other moves. I'm fine with the sox spending money when they have it but not overpaying for an ok player just because he's the best one available.

[yall hate]

Pretty interesting article using statistics to show that Cameron is a 'better' player then Bay (and it was written before Cameron was signed...)

http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/8EPruE/www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/bay-vs-cameron

[Roy Hobbs]

Pretty interesting article using statistics to show that Cameron is a 'better' player then Bay (and it was written before Cameron was signed...)

http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/8EPruE/www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/bay-vs-cameron

I'd submit that this is one of those cases of lies, [dang] lies, and statistics.  Cameron is an okay player, but I don't think he's nearly as good as Jason Bay.

[nickagneta]

Pretty interesting article using statistics to show that Cameron is a 'better' player then Bay (and it was written before Cameron was signed...)

http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/8EPruE/www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/bay-vs-cameron

I'd submit that this is one of those cases of lies, [dang] lies, and statistics.  Cameron is an okay player, but I don't think he's nearly as good as Jason Bay.

I hand to stop reading that article after the second sentence of the second paragraph:

Did you know that, since 2002 (the first year we calculate WAR for), Mike Cameron has been worth +29.6 wins, or about the same as David Ortiz, Aramis Ramirez, and Jim Thome?

Any sabermetric stat that shows that Mike Cameron has been responsible for as wins for his team as Big Papi has been for the Sox since 2002 needs to be instantly reworked or ignored.

[yall hate]

That's the thing, people who watch baseball dont generally account for defensive matrix.  they comment on that later in the article.  They further suggest if you take his defensive matrix and cut them in half, you will get a player in cameron who is worth about as much as Bay. 

it makes sense that less fly balls/line drives accounting for hits will help the team win.  Bay is  pretty horrible defensively.  the logic seems there...

I guess we'll see, I am not saying I necessarily agree with everything in the article, but we know the Sox are very interested in advanced statistics...

[Roy Hobbs]

That's the thing, people who watch baseball dont generally account for defensive matrix.  they comment on that later in the article.  They further suggest if you take his defensive matrix and cut them in half, you will get a player in cameron who is worth about as much as Bay. 

it makes sense that less fly balls/line drives accounting for hits will help the team win.  Bay is  pretty horrible defensively.  the logic seems there...

I guess we'll see, I am not saying I necessarily agree with everything in the article, but we know the Sox are very interested in advanced statistics...

Regardless of the plebian minds of those who watch baseball, what about those people who evaluate baseball for a living?  There are some pretty savvy GMs out there besides just Theo. What about Cameron's agent?  If Cameron truly was as good -- or better -- than Bay, why is he getting $7 million per season, while Bay will be getting $16 million+?  Shouldn't one of the other GMs said "hey, wait, we can get a $16 million player at $7 million; why aren't we all over this?"

I'm sure Cameron's agent couldn't demand Bay-like money with a straight face, and Cameron was smart enough not to ask for it. 

[yall hate]

That's the thing, people who watch baseball dont generally account for defensive matrix.  they comment on that later in the article.  They further suggest if you take his defensive matrix and cut them in half, you will get a player in cameron who is worth about as much as Bay. 

it makes sense that less fly balls/line drives accounting for hits will help the team win.  Bay is  pretty horrible defensively.  the logic seems there...

I guess we'll see, I am not saying I necessarily agree with everything in the article, but we know the Sox are very interested in advanced statistics...

Regardless of the plebian minds of those who watch baseball, what about those people who evaluate baseball for a living?  There are some pretty savvy GMs out there besides just Theo. What about Cameron's agent?  If Cameron truly was as good -- or better -- than Bay, why is he getting $7 million per season, while Bay will be getting $16 million+?  Shouldn't one of the other GMs said "hey, wait, we can get a $16 million player at $7 million; why aren't we all over this?"

I'm sure Cameron's agent couldn't demand Bay-like money with a straight face, and Cameron was smart enough not to ask for it. 

First, it wasnt a comment about 'plebian' minds.  when I watch a baseball game, I am not sitting there watching an of fail to get to a ball saying, oh man, another guy may have gotten there, whereas I can see a player hit a home run.  the point was that offense in baseball seems to resonate and produce tangible results, whereas defense (not including obviuos errors) could easily go either unnoticed, or not given much weight.

Second, as the article notes, Cameron is 36 (will be 37) while Bay is 31. 

Third, not all baseball evaluators believe in the advanced metrics.

I guess we will see, it's all a moot point if in game one of the season, Bay breaks his leg.  or Cameron does.  we'll have to wait and see what the statistics come out as.  there is at least an argument that the team as a whole could perform better based on the increase in defense then what it would do with a breaking down Jason Bay (part of the reason that the offer at midseason with bay fell apart, based on the sox fears about bay's shoulder)

[Roy Hobbs]

Second, as the article notes, Cameron is 36 (will be 37) while Bay is 31. 

That accounts for the number of years on a contract, not the average annual value.  If Cameron was nearly as valuable as Bay, I'd expect him to be getting offers like 2 years, $30 million or so.

Third, not all baseball evaluators believe in the advanced metrics.

No, but enough of them do that they're not going to pass up a player as good or better than Jason Bay for $7.5 million per season.

Defense matters, sure.  However, I don't think Cameron's defense is nearly good enough (especially at 37 years old) to account for the major gap in offensive production.

[yall hate]

Defense matters, sure.  However, I don't think Cameron's defense is nearly good enough (especially at 37 years old) to account for the major gap in offensive production.

there is certainly an offensive gap, no one is denying that.  but of the runs Bay's offense gives you, how many does he give back defensively? 

It is fair enough to disagree about what that defensive gap is...you and I clearly have a difference there.  I tend to 'buy into' the defensive matrix the article quotes...you dont.   

Which also happens to be why I wouldnt be that upset with Beltre (at the right price).  because of his defensive skills and the hopes that he helps keep runs scored down. 

[Donoghus]

Defense matters, sure.  However, I don't think Cameron's defense is nearly good enough (especially at 37 years old) to account for the major gap in offensive production.

Totally agree with this.  

[Vermont Green]

Those same defensive ratings (UZR) that say Bay is a bad fielder also say that Elsbury is a bad fielder.  When I watch the games, I just don't see it that way.  I don't see a bad fielder when I watch Bay.  Of course, I don't see a 5yr/$17M per player either.

Our OF is going to be kind of average next year but better than the OF that won the WS this year.  I like Lackey, Cameron is fine, and there will probably be a trade (I am still holding out hope for a trade for Mauer).

[nickagneta]

Runs produced = runs scored + RBIs -HRs

Bay's runs produced 2009= 103 + 119 - 36 = 186

Bay's runs produced per game 2009 = 186/151 = 1.23 runs per game

Cameron's runs produced 2009 = 78 + 70 - 24 = 124

Cameron's runs produced per game 2009 = 124/149 = 0.83 runs per game

Now most full time outfielders get about 300-450 chances to make an out or using 375 as the average number and 155 games as an average full time outfielder without injury time out, that comes out to about 2.5 chances a game to make a play.

Does anyone who believes in defensive metrics in baseball really believe that Cameron is so much better defensively than Jason Bay, that in the 2-3 chances that each gets to make a play per game, Cameron will make more plays to compensate for producing almost an entire half run per game less offensively? Let's remember, Bay only made 2 errors and he plays 81 games a year in Fenway where his range factor is mitigated.

I just don't see it. Cameron would have to be making a defensive play once every two games that saves a run that Bay wouldn't be making to overtake and eradicate Bay's obvious offensive superiority to the tune of 0.4 runs per game, which is significant.

Again, I don't see that happening. Defensive metrics in baseball are extremely over rated and often, just plain wrong.

[Fafnir]

RBIs and runs scored aren't what you want to look at when comparing offensive prowess Nick. Too much of those depends on your team.

[Bankshot]

Those same defensive ratings (UZR) that say Bay is a bad fielder also say that Elsbury is a bad fielder.  When I watch the games, I just don't see it that way.  I don't see a bad fielder when I watch Bay.  Of course, I don't see a 5yr/$17M per player either.

Our OF is going to be kind of average next year but better than the OF that won the WS this year.  I like Lackey, Cameron is fine, and there will probably be a trade (I am still holding out hope for a trade for Mauer).

I definitely see it when I watch the games.  Ellsbury is not a bad defender, but is mediocre.  Bay is a bad fielder.  Those amazing catches that Ellsbury makes?  Well they wouldn't be amazing catches if he gets a proper jump on the ball, but he doesn't.  He makes what could be a routine catch into a spectacular play because he has to and sometimes he doesn't get to it and it drops right in front of him when it should have been a routine catch.  Ellsbury is not the great defender some make him out to be.  Coco Crisp was a much superior defender.

As far as Bay, he's a pretty bad defender, especially at Fenway which surprises me.  He is terrible at playing the wall.  I'd say Manny was a much better defender AT FENWAY than Bay.  Remember Manny would get the ball off the wall and get it to second base in record time?  Well Bay would let the ball bounce of the wall and go back over his head.  I was shocked that after a year and a half with the Sox he didn't get better at playing the wall. 

[yall hate]

RBIs and runs scored aren't what you want to look at when comparing offensive prowess Nick. Too much of those depends on your team.

this is true.

The sox were a better team offensively then the Brewers, thus Bay likely had more opportuinities for Rbi's...(not doubting Bay is a better offensive player)

also, Cameron gives the sox the option of putting Ellsbury in lf rather then cf, thus mitigating the damage from ellsbury's weak arm.