A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I gotta wonder if the team wouldn't have a 3-4 game lead right now had Tito thought for himself instead of staying withing the limited framework of what's "accepted". I've started a few threads on this subject matter, and mentioned it in several posts.

    In any sport, you stay with a hot hand. Regarding baseball, when a starter is in a good groove, you don't mess with him.

    When a hitter is hot, stick with him.

    Yet, when a reliever has it out of the gate and is in sync, managing a reasonable pitch count, he is removed in favor of role definition.

    When is this idiocy going to end??????????????????????????????
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I honestly don't think Crawford kept the Rs from signing a catcher, the market was pretty darn bare. There was Ramon Hernandez but that might not have even hit the radar fast enough for the RS to do anything about it. It is rather surprising that Jocketty went through not picking up the team option to turn around days later and sign the player for $250K savings. Buck went quickly too and for terms greater than the RS were willing to entertain. All that happened by November 18th while the RS "weren't" talking to VMart. Vmart signed 5 days later. Pierniski and Torebella signed a week later while the RS were in full court press with SD on A-Gon. And this was what was left:

    Brad Ausmus LAD
    Rod Barajas LAD
    Josh Bard SEA
    Henry Blanco NYM
    Ramon Castro CWS
    Reed Johnson LAD
    Gerald Laird DET
    Jason LaRue STL
    Chad Moeller NYY
    Jose Molina TOR
    Miguel Olivo COL *
    Matt Treanor TEX
    Jason Varitek BOS

    I honestly don't think the thought these guys were that much better than Salty and Tek. They may be very wrong but I just don't think Crawford or Ortiz are why we have the catching tandem we do.

    As for the Manny comparison, I'll take a 2001 Manny to start my team and you can take Carl Crawford in 2011.

    I am sure it will get better but Carl Crawford isn't doing anything well. If it wasn't for the investment the RS have in him he'd be fighting off a 38 year old Mike Cameron for playing time versus LH for sure and if it weren't for Tek and Salty hitting so badly he'd be batting 9th. It is so bad that tonight they walked Jed Lowrie to get to him. I don't think anybody would be walking a Jed Lowrie profile in 2001 to get to Manny and if they did they would have paid dearly. I don't think they'd have done ever but they sure has heck wouldn't when Manny was 29. And it isn't confined to the plate. He has been on ineffective base stealer in the rare moments he gets on and his fileding so far has been more Bay than Yaz in LF, home or the road.

    Keep hoping I am wrong because that contract will be dead weight. One more player gets hit with a catastrophic injury and the dead money will weigh the team down for years. 

    BTW that game was truly ugly, with plenty of dumb play to go around. If it hasn't happened yet the prince of darkness is sure to show up soon to tell us all about 'no pop (out catch) Jed Lowrie. 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Moon, you are probably the only analyst I know who seems to think that stealing bases at a high success rate is basically worth nothing. Ellsbury steals 70 bases and gets caught 10 times and you want to reduce his OBP and then compare it to Youk or someone who rarely even steals a base. Same thing with Crawford.

    Stealing bases at a high rate of success is a good thing...stealing bases at a high rate of success is a good thing...repeat after me! Cool

    Regarding UZR/150 numbers, you know I understand the spec. I read the entire blog written by the authors of the spec. I'm fully aware of the spec and how much data is required for it to be near definitive; i.e. statistically relevant within a reasonable standard deviation ( maybe +- 5% ). I actually doubt seriously if even 3 years of data is all that definitive but it is one of the best data points we have so I use it. It's better than no data. 

    1) For Ellsbury to be  a plus 23 in roughly 290 innings of baseball in RF is a positive indicator. No one is awarding him a gold glove yet but there is no indication that he would be a bad RF from the data so far. It doesn't mean nothing. It's just not within a low standard deviation number. it doesn't prove anything but it certainly is a positive indicator. Correct?

    2) Ellsbury clearly has more speed than Drew. Correct? Fenway's RF is expansive and having significantly more speed to cover that territory is good.

    3) Ellsbury has made a total of 2 errors in his entire time as an OF in mlb. In the same time period, Drew has made 8, in a less difficult position. Roughly factoring in for service time issues for both players ( Ellsbury missing almost an entire year plus Drew's many work absences due to one thing or another ). 

    4) Ellsbury has 9 assists during the same period as compared to Drew's 15.

    5) My own observation shows me that Ellsbury consistently throws the ball on a line, long distances, directly to the cut off guy. I know what a weak arm looks like, such as Johnny Damon's. Ellsbury's arm makes Damon's look like a 10 year old girls. Watch what he does, rather than the many nay sayers looking to dump on Ellsbury defensively. His arm is decent. On a line for long distances and he rarely misses the cut off guy.

    *** If we find a better CF next year, I have no problem whatsoever putting Ellsbury in RF. He probably would be a better overall solution out there than Drew has been for years. Better offensively. Better defensively. Ellsbury has IMO, reached near all star status. If he keeps doing what he is doing right now he will soon be an all star level player. He's on pace for roughly 45 doubles, 13 HR, 50 + high percentage steals, a .360 OBP and if he were our RF I think he would give us better defense than Drew.

    I have generally been a supporter of Drew. The numbers are on his side in terms of the value of his contract. He has almost been worth it, contray to most people's opinion. At the same time, Drew absolutely milks his numbers to the detriment of the team. How many times have we seen him get up with men on base and he does everything possible to earn a walk. He doesn't drive in a run. He goes out of his way to earn the easy walk. You can slap another .30 on his OBP totals just from him working the walk in clear RBI situations. 
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Moon, getting back to our CC discussion, it's still way too early make a call on CC's contributions. But I do think that his intangibles result in more games won than you can imagine, directly or indirectly.

    Tonight would have been a good example were it not for ...

    CC scored on a shot by Jake. The ball was hit hard enough to keep Tek at 2nd. Manny never scores on that play. The inning ends with the team up 3-1. This insurance run could have been huge.

    The bigger question is how CC's total game skills equate to a more one-dimensional hitter like Manny. In time, they might, but it can't be measured through normal channels. As I see it, two pretty smart FO's valued CC at 20 mil per year. And I think they took everything into consideration.

    As for the gamble on Salty, I honestly don't know what went into that decision - or the one which kept Theo from attaining a veteran presence. I don't think they value the position as much as I do. But I also don't believe it was a matter of a few million per year. They obviously felt the offense could be made up elsewhere, so they may have felt that if Salty tanks, a good defensive receiver could be had cheaply - and easily assessable.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Boom I have to chime in on the RF idea and as an every day RF Ellsbury is not a great option. The arm alone is to big an issue. His arm is better than Damon's. It is adequate for CF who makes the vast majority of his throws to a cutoff man any way. But in RF and in particular Fenway's RF he'd be exposed. He is IMO a pretty good athlete which is why when Crisp was here in 2008 he could bounce from OF position to position and had little trouble with the reads which are radically different. I always felt that the whole thing with CF play was a bit of a red herring, he doesn't play CF like Coco Crisp did but who has aside from Lynn who was maybe better getting what was hit in front of him and had better mechanics on his throw but just couldn't go get the ball over his head like Coco.

    But let's put it this way if Carl Crawford is worth $142M Jacoby Ellsbury is going to be a rich man.



     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I hate saying it but I have personally witnessed at least 7 or 8 "deer in the headlights" moments in regard to Crawford so far this year. In the OF. Running the bases...etc. Pedroia gives him the slide sign and he runs through the base. The ball gets hit to him and it's the keystone cops sometimes. Tonight Ellsbury hits a screaming liner to RF which landed 30 feet from anyone and he actually stops between 2nd and 3rd after the ball hits the dirt in the OF apparently to see if it were caught. 

    Pedroia makes the right decision every time. Crawford's instincts are wrong a lot.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    RF at the Fens can be a pretty tough position to play.
    I don't think Jake is up to the demands.
    Kalish/Reddick are better suited.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Well Katz: The prince of darkness has returned - as SoxSoldRed.
    He should be visiting a thread near you...all to soon.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxSoldRed. Show SoxSoldRed's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    But let's put it this way if Carl Crawford is worth $142M Jacoby Ellsbury is going to be a rich man.

    I thought million dollar contracts would make him a rich man, arleady? It would take a foolish GM to go long term and top dollar for Ellsbury. Theo's made one massive mistake, why not make it two by extending Ellsbury............
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]Well Katz : The prince of darkness has returned - as SoxSoldRed. He should be visiting a thread near you...all to soon.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]You just knew the RS provided too much material tonight to pass up.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxSoldRed. Show SoxSoldRed's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Lowrie's material was priceless. As was your material on "Ellsbury is going to be a rich man" if Crawford is hitting Mendoza and getting paid over 20 million for this year's work of art.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Moon, you are probably the only analyst I know who seems to think that stealing bases at a high success rate is basically worth nothing. Ellsbury steals 70 bases and gets caught 10 times and you want to reduce his OBP and then compare it to Youk or someone who rarely even steals a base. Same thing with Crawford.

    1) My childhood favorite player of all time was Tommy Harper. When I played Baseball I was fast and loved stealing bases and scoring runs and using my speed to make defensive plays. I love the speed game.

    2) I was responding to harness's poiunt about counting CC's reach on errors and FCs that allow his speed to come into play, and in a sene up his OBP. I responded to that with a reduction due to CSs. I didn't mention the times he is wiped off the basepaths by other player's FCs.

    3) It is widely believed that a player needs a 70-80% SB rate to make his SBs a plus. CC is 415/508 is 81.7%. That is very good indeed. It helps create runs as does his taking the "extra base". However, we cn not discount the fact that he runs into some outs and that lessens the chances of scoring at times. (single-CS-HR)

    Just because I mention the negative aspect of trying to steal bases, does not mean I think his speed is a negative. I merely said it was not enough to overtake what guys like Youk, AGon, Manny and others produce on offense.

    Stealing bases at a high rate of success is a good thing...stealing bases at a high rate of success is a good thing...repeat after me! Cool

    See above.

    Regarding UZR/150 numbers, you know I understand the spec. I read the entire blog written by the authors of the spec. I'm fully aware of the spec and how much data is required for it to be near definitive; i.e. statistically relevant within a reasonable standard deviation ( maybe +- 5% ). I actually doubt seriously if even 3 years of data is all that definitive but it is one of the best data points we have so I use it. It's better than no data. 

    But you keep quoting super tiny sample sizes of a metric that is flawed (but valuable) even at a 3 year sample size.

    1) For Ellsbury to be  a plus 23 in roughly 290 innings of baseball in RF is a positive indicator. No one is awarding him a gold glove yet but there is no indication that he would be a bad RF from the data so far. It doesn't mean nothing. It's just not within a low standard deviation number. it doesn't prove anything but it certainly is a positive indicator. Correct?

    No, not correct. The sample size is too small to even be an indicator. His arm is known to be weak. He is not a RF'er. I don't even think he is a very good CF'er. He still gets slow breaks.

    Here's a larger sample size (366 innings) than you are using:
    Ellsbury's 2011 CF UZR/150 rating: -6.6

    You still haven't answered why you want to move Ells to RF. Why dont we just get a RF'er this winter, not a CF'er, or let Kalish and Reddick (better fielders than Ells) fight for RF?


    2) Ellsbury clearly has more speed than Drew. Correct? Fenway's RF is expansive and having significantly more speed to cover that territory is good.

    It's not all about speed, as CC has shown thus far in LF. Drew positions himself well and normally gets great initial breaks on hit balls his way. He has slipped some, but he is still way better than Ellsbury as a RF'er. I think Theo and Tito agree or else they'd have moved Drew to LF last year and Ells or Cam to RF.

    3) Ellsbury has made a total of 2 errors in his entire time as an OF in mlb. In the same time period, Drew has made 8, in a less difficult position. Roughly factoring in for service time issues for both players ( Ellsbury missing almost an entire year plus Drew's many work absences due to one thing or another ). 

    Errors in the OF are largely a joke. Misjudged balls are not errors if you dont drop it. Late breaks or bad routes to the ball are not counted. Fldg % is one of the worst indicators of fielding ability, especially in the OF.

    4) Ellsbury has 9 assists during the same period as compared to Drew's 15.

    Are you really saying Ells has as good an arm as Drew? Ae you really saying a handful of throwing errors by Drew outweighs all the times the opps stopped on 2nd or 3rd?

    5) My own observation shows me that Ellsbury consistently throws the ball on a line, long distances, directly to the cut off guy. I know what a weak arm looks like, such as Johnny Damon's. Ellsbury's arm makes Damon's look like a 10 year old girls. Watch what he does, rather than the many nay sayers looking to dump on Ellsbury defensively. His arm is decent. On a line for long distances and he rarely misses the cut off guy.

    Comparing his arm to the girly arm of Damon is proving nothing. He has at best, an average arm, but below avg for a RF'er for sure. 

    Soxprospects:
    Arm strength is below average.
    *** If we find a better CF next year, I have no problem whatsoever putting Ellsbury in RF. He probably would be a better overall solution out there than Drew has been for years. Better offensively. Better defensively. Ellsbury has IMO, reached near all star status. If he keeps doing what he is doing right now he will soon be an all star level player. He's on pace for roughly 45 doubles, 13 HR, 50 + high percentage steals, a .360 OBP and if he were our RF I think he would give us better defense than Drew.

    I couldn't disagree more on the defensive part of this.

    I have generally been a supporter of Drew. The numbers are on his side in terms of the value of his contract. He has almost been worth it, contray to most people's opinion. At the same time, Drew absolutely milks his numbers to the detriment of the team. How many times have we seen him get up with men on base and he does everything possible to earn a walk. He doesn't drive in a run. He goes out of his way to earn the easy walk. You can slap another .30 on his OBP totals just from him working the walk in clear RBI situations. 

    I guess you want him to swing at balls out of the K-zone.
    I guess you haven't realized he usually ges up with little "line-up protection" behind him, so pitchers often pitch around him with men on base.

    Besides:

    RISP
    Drew: .275/.407/.484/.891 (very respectable)
    Ellsb:  .298/.372/.372/.744 (Yes, better BA, but worse OPS)

    Late and Close
    Drew: .243/.377/.418/.795
    Ellsb: .231/.316/.276/.592

    High Leverage:
    Drew: .274/.381/.478/.859
    Ellsb: .270/.339/.341/.680

    If you're goingto use these stats to bash Drew, then at least look at the guy you say is better's same stats as well.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II


    Carl Crawford's numbers, mainly hitting 2nd in the Rays lineup in 2010:

    Games: 154
    AB:        663
    RS:        110 Runs
    RBI:        90
    Average:.307
    OBP       .356 
    OPS:      .895
    SB:         47

    Youk's Numbers ( His last full year - 2009 - hitting in the middle of the lineup ):

    Games: 136
    AB:         588
    RS:         99
    RBI:        94
    Average:.305
    OBP:      .413
    OPS:      .961
    SB:          7

    It is relatively close. The bottom line is who is the guy you want to get on base and who is the guy you want to drive him in. The most important slot to me is 4th, with 5th and 3rd being of equal value. Youk has a large advantage in OBP, and about a 6.7% advantage in OPS. Crawford has a large advantage in SB ability, overall base running ability;i.e... distraction quotient to the pitcher, ability to score on a double from 1st, single from second, from 3rd on a sac fly...etc. Crawford's base running ability goes a long way towards negating Youk's OBP advantage. Youk's small OPS advantage can be better utilized to drive in runs in the #4 or 5 slot. 

    To me, the best lineup is probably below ( factoring only from past performance, not this year, and not factoring for a LH or RH pitcher ):

    Ellsbury
    Crawford
    Youk
    Gonzalez
    Pedroia
    Ortiz
    Lowrie
    Drew
    Salty

    The combination of Crawford and Ellsbury at the top of the lineup is uniquely capable of driving opposing pitchers nuts. About 70% of the time one, the other or both are on base in front of Youk and Adrian, insuring more fastballs to the meat of the order. There are lots of reasons why Crawford should be near the top of the order ( not factoring for his slump this year ).





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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Moon, getting back to our CC discussion, it's still way too early make a call on CC's contributions. But I do think that his intangibles result in more games won than you can imagine, directly or indirectly.

    Again, I am not "making a call" based on 40+ games. I have said this repeatedly. I have said I think he will come back to his norm. I have held this position long before the season began.

    Tonight would have been a good example were it not for ...

    CC scored on a shot by Jake. The ball was hit hard enough to keep Tek at 2nd. Manny never scores on that play. The inning ends with the team up 3-1. This insurance run could have been huge.

    The bigger question is how CC's total game skills equate to a more one-dimensional hitter like Manny. In time, they might, but it can't be measured through normal channels. As I see it, two pretty smart FO's valued CC at 20 mil per year. And I think they took everything into consideration.

    Please do not call Manny a "one dimensional hitter". He is one of the greatest hitters of our era. He has an incredible BA, OBP, Slg%, everything a hitter can be. And, he did it as a RH'd hitter facing way more righties than lefties.

    Yes, he was a negative on the basepaths, but he was NOT a one dimensional hitter.

    As for the gamble on Salty, I honestly don't know what went into that decision - or the one which kept Theo from attaining a veteran presence. I don't think they value the position as much as I do. But I also don't believe it was a matter of a few million per year. They obviously felt the offense could be made up elsewhere, so they may have felt that if Salty tanks, a good defensive receiver could be had cheaply - and easily assessable.

    That wasn't my point. I agree that they looked at other positions (including CC in LF) to "make up" for the poor hitting from our catchers. My point was that if they had signed a lesser LF'er or used Cam/Kalish/Reddick, they would have seen the need to have better offense at the catcher position. katz made some great points about the timing of some catcher's deals, but Theo could have picked up someone else and I think he would have had we not signed CC. i'm not saying they woul have been great, but it would have given us another option at C, and another 7/8th inning relief guy as well.

    Do you want me to list the times we could have used good reliever to save us a loss as you did with how often CC could have used his speed to win us games?

    Again:
    Better catcher.
    Better 1-2 relievers.
    Slightly worse LF'er(s).
    Way less longterm risk
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Carl Crawford's numbers, mainly hitting 2nd in the Rays lineup in 2010:

    Games: 154
    AB:        663
    RS:        110 Runs
    RBI:        90
    Average:.307
    OBP       .356 
    OPS:      .895
    SB:         47

    Youk's Numbers ( His last full year - 2009 - hitting in the middle of the lineup ):

    Games: 136
    AB:         588
    RS:         99
    RBI:        94
    Average:.305
    OBP:      .413
    OPS:      .961
    SB:          7

    It is relatively close.

    A 66 point OPS differential is huge from the 3/4 slot.

    Getting on base is big for a #3/4 guy when you got guys like AGon and Papi behind you.

    Speed is better utilized at the 1/2 slot of end of line-up.

    I don't think we are getting anywhere boom. It seems like you have come full circle from this earlier statement:

    The whole issue with Crawford batting 3rd just corroborates the idea that he was not an ideal fit:

    1) No clear logical spot in the order ( I consider this a small issue )

    2) His bat actually is not currently optimized for Fenway. Some guys come in and are benefited by Fenway immediately ( Lowell, Gonzalez...etc.) but others are hurt by it. He is in transition mode right now. He will eventually hit more to LF and to CF and maybe benefit from the park but he is a work in progress in that regard. It's hard to hit it out in RF and he is going to continue to degrade if he focuses on pulling the ball. The recent changes are encouraging though. He is making some progress.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]Moon, you are probably the only analyst I know who seems to think that stealing bases at a high success rate is basically worth nothing. Ellsbury steals 70 bases and gets caught 10 times and you want to reduce his OBP and then compare it to Youk or someone who rarely even steals a base. Same thing with Crawford. 1) My childhood favorite player of all time was Tommy Harper. When I played Baseball I was fast and loved stealing bases and scoring runs and using my speed to make defensive plays. I love the speed game. 2) I was responding to harness's poiunt about counting CC's reach on errors and FCs that allow his speed to come into play, and in a sene up his OBP. I responded to that with a reduction due to CSs. I didn't mention the times he is wiped off the basepaths by other player's FCs. 3) It is widely believed that a player needs a 70-80% SB rate to make his SBs a plus. CC is 415/508 is 81.7%. That is very good indeed. It helps create runs as does his taking the "extra base". However, we cn not discount the fact that he runs into some outs and that lessens the chances of scoring at times. (single-CS-HR) Just because I mention the negative aspect of trying to steal bases, does not mean I think his speed is a negative. I merely said it was not enough to overtake what guys like Youk, AGon, Manny and others produce on offense. Stealing bases at a high rate of success is a good thing...stealing bases at a high rate of success is a good thing...repeat after me!  See above. Regarding UZR/150 numbers, you know I understand the spec. I read the entire blog written by the authors of the spec. I'm fully aware of the spec and how much data is required for it to be near definitive; i.e. statistically relevant within a reasonable standard deviation ( maybe +- 5% ). I actually doubt seriously if even 3 years of data is all that definitive but it is one of the best data points we have so I use it. It's better than no data.  But you keep quoting super tiny sample sizes of a metric that is flawed (but valuable) even at a 3 year sample size. 1) For Ellsbury to be  a plus 23 in roughly 290 innings of baseball in RF is a positive indicator. No one is awarding him a gold glove yet but there is no indication that he would be a bad RF from the data so far. It doesn't mean nothing. It's just not within a low standard deviation number. it doesn't prove anything but it certainly is a positive indicator. Correct? No, not correct. The sample size is too small to even be an indicator. His arm is known to be weak. He is not a RF'er. I don't even think he is a very good CF'er. He still gets slow breaks. Here's a larger sample size (366 innings) than you are using: Ellsbury's 2011 CF UZR/150 rating: -6.6 You still haven't answered why you want to move Ells to RF. Why dont we just get a RF'er this winter, not a CF'er, or let Kalish and Reddick (better fielders than Ells) fight for RF? 2) Ellsbury clearly has more speed than Drew. Correct? Fenway's RF is expansive and having significantly more speed to cover that territory is good. It's not all about speed, as CC has shown thus far in LF. Drew positions himself well and normally gets great initial breaks on hit balls his way. He has slipped some, but he is still way better than Ellsbury as a RF'er. I think Theo and Tito agree or else they'd have moved Drew to LF last year and Ells or Cam to RF. 3) Ellsbury has made a total of 2 errors in his entire time as an OF in mlb. In the same time period, Drew has made 8, in a less difficult position. Roughly factoring in for service time issues for both players ( Ellsbury missing almost an entire year plus Drew's many work absences due to one thing or another ).  Errors in the OF are largely a joke. Misjudged balls are not errors if you dont drop it. Late breaks or bad routes to the ball are not counted. Fldg % is one of the worst indicators of fielding ability, especially in the OF. 4) Ellsbury has 9 assists during the same period as compared to Drew's 15. Are you really saying Ells has as good an arm as Drew? Ae you really saying a handful of throwing errors by Drew outweighs all the times the opps stopped on 2nd or 3rd? 5) My own observation shows me that Ellsbury consistently throws the ball on a line, long distances, directly to the cut off guy. I know what a weak arm looks like, such as Johnny Damon's. Ellsbury's arm makes Damon's look like a 10 year old girls. Watch what he does, rather than the many nay sayers looking to dump on Ellsbury defensively. His arm is decent. On a line for long distances and he rarely misses the cut off guy. Comparing his arm to the girly arm of Damon is proving nothing. He has at best, an average arm, but below avg for a RF'er for sure.  Soxprospects: Arm strength is below average. *** If we find a better CF next year, I have no problem whatsoever putting Ellsbury in RF. He probably would be a better overall solution out there than Drew has been for years. Better offensively. Better defensively. Ellsbury has IMO, reached near all star status. If he keeps doing what he is doing right now he will soon be an all star level player. He's on pace for roughly 45 doubles, 13 HR, 50 + high percentage steals, a .360 OBP and if he were our RF I think he would give us better defense than Drew. I couldn't disagree more on the defensive part of this. I have generally been a supporter of Drew. The numbers are on his side in terms of the value of his contract. He has almost been worth it, contray to most people's opinion. At the same time, Drew absolutely milks his numbers to the detriment of the team. How many times have we seen him get up with men on base and he does everything possible to earn a walk. He doesn't drive in a run. He goes out of his way to earn the easy walk. You can slap another .30 on his OBP totals just from him working the walk in clear RBI situations.  I guess you want him to swing at balls out of the K-zone. I guess you haven't realized he usually ges up with little "line-up protection" behind him, so pitchers often pitch around him with men on base. Besides: RISP Drew: .275/.407/.484/.891 (very respectable) Ellsb:  .298/.372/.372/.744 (Yes, better BA, but worse OPS) Late and Close Drew: .243/.377/.418/.795 Ellsb: .231/.316/.276/.592 High Leverage: Drew: .274/.381/.478/.859 Ellsb: .270/.339/.341/.680 If you're goingto use these stats to bash Drew, then at least look at the guy you say is better's same stats as well.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    RISP Drew: .275/.407/.484/.891 (very respectable) Ellsb:  .298/.372/.372/.744 (Yes, better BA, but worse OPS) Late and Close Drew: .243/.377/.418/.795 Ellsb: .231/.316/.276/.592 High Leverage: Drew: .274/.381/.478/.859 Ellsb: .270/.339/.341/.680 If you're goingto use these stats to bash Drew, then at least look at the guy you say is better's same stats as well.

    Moon, the data I've quoted is absolutely accurate and pertinent:

    Drew's OPS 2010: .793
    Drew's OPS 2011: .757

    Ellsbury's OPS 2009: .770
    Ellsbury's OPS this year: .798

    How is Drew's career OPS more pertinent than the last few years? I'm talking about now, not several years ago.

    I don't want to bash Drew but look at the guys RBI numbers since he has been with the Redsox. And he has hit in premium spots in this lineup with high OBP guys like Manny, Ortiz and Youk in front of him. Look at these numbers:

    2007: 64 RBI
    2008: 64 RBI
    2009: 68 RBI
    2010: 68 RBI

    Compare those numbers to any #6 hitter in baseball over a very large sample size. The guy is a good player but he plays for stat success. He would help us more if he would do his primary job to drive in runs. Lowell drove in 120 RBI one year hitting 5th. Beltre was over 100 RBI last year hitting 5th. Drew's numbers are skewed a lot by his desire to draw walks no matter what the situation. It's not like he didn't have tons of OBP on in front of him.

    Ellsbury is a better hitter than Drew is this year, and probably going forward. What Drew did years ago is less pertinent than what he has done recently IMO.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II



    I've always believed that right-fielders needed and had great arms...Drew, Evans, Colavito, Kaline etc. to throw guys out on sacrifice flies, preventing the advance from first to third advance etc.  But, the more I think about it, I'm not so sure anymore.

    How many times REALLY does a right fielder throw out a guy at the plate on a sacrifice fly?...rarely.  How many times will it REALLY make a difference preventing the runner from taking the extra base?

    Perhaps Boomer has something here.  Ellsbury's speed could possibly compensate in a positive way.  Quickly hitting a cutoff man or preventing a ball from going to the gap could outweigh the rocket arm.

    I agree with Harness.  Why not go with the hot hitter or pitcher?  Why lock into a routine?
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Moon, I never wanted to even consider signing Crawford last winter. I don't think he was a good match for us. I agree that he wasn't worth 142 mil. I think he would be better suited in the 2 slot, where he was with the Rays for many years. I didn't even want to sign Crawford at 100 mil. 

    Nonetheless, if looking at last year's data and recent year's data only, Crawford and Youk would be projected as roughly equivalent performers in the number 3 slot. The base running ability of Crawford encourages Crawford being the run scorer and Youk's OPS advantage encourages Youk to be selected as the guy driving in runs. The difference is not HUGE. It just isn't.

    I get called on citing small sample sizes but how many times have you said things like "But Ellsbury has a .328 OBP from the lead off spot so he is not a good lead off guy". As if someone has a .356 OBP for the year but if 150 of those AB are from the lead off spot it is more important than his yearly OBP rate. As if the lead off spot data is more salient than the overall OBP in the same year.

    Regarding Ellsbury in RF, I'm looking at his arm and it's not that bad. And I would take overall fielding ability as a skill set over a strong arm in RF any day. The ability to catch balls is also important  ( more important than his arm ). When was the last time you saw Drew dive for a ball? And the whole thing of "Drew never needs to dive for a ball because he gets such good reads" is BS. I hear that from some here, not necessarily you. Throwing arm accuracy is also important. Drew has thrown out roughly 5 more runners than Ellsbury since Ellsbury started with the team, while committing 3-4 times as many errors presumably in trying to get those assists. If Drew had a lot better arm wouldn't the assist difference be greater? Especially since he commits a lot more errors?

    I'm fully aware that the forum doesn't share my opinion. I'm just calling it as I see it and I think the data supports my view regarding all the above issues. Read what I said. I'm paraphrasing here: IF we get a better center fielder next year I have no problem with Ellsbury moving to RF. I'm not suggesting they move Reddick to CF, or Kalish in his place...etc.
     
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]I've always believed that right-fielders needed and had great arms...Drew, Evans, Colavito, Kaline etc. to throw guys out on sacrifice flies, preventing the advance from first to third advance etc.  But, the more I think about it, I'm not so sure anymore. How many times REALLY does a right fielder throw out a guy at the plate on a sacrifice fly?...rarely.  How many times will it REALLY make a difference preventing the runner from taking the extra base? Perhaps Boomer has something here.  Ellsbury's speed could possibly compensate in a positive way.  Quickly hitting a cutoff man or preventing a ball from going to the gap could outweigh the rocket arm. I agree with Harness.  Why not go with the hot hitter or pitcher?  Why lock into a routine?
    Posted by ampoule[/QUOTE]

    My point exactly. If it were that big a factor, Drew would have 10 - 15 assists per year and it's more like 3-5 per year. We live in a new world, with new metrics, and the new data indicates that range is far more important than throwing arm in Fenway's RF. And the limited comparable data available to us indicates that Ellsbury has significantly better range than Drew currently. 

    For example, when Crawford was a CF he was pretty mediocre. Take that same fielding ability and put him in LF and he's a gold glove left fielder. The same is true in RF. Take an average CF and put him in RF and he will almost definitely have a better UZR/150 compared to the pool of right fielders in mlb. CF is a more competitive position to play than RF.

    I bet Ellsbury would put up a PLUS 20 UZR/150 in Fenway's RF. Last year Drew was a PLUS 2.7.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Moon: My bad on calling Manny a "one-dimensional hitter".
    I meant to say he was more of a one-dimensional player...with baggage.
    I never underestimate his hitting - only how much of it was juiced.

    I do agree CC's not a #3 hitter for Boston. 

    I do think the pen has depth, even with the injuries. Adding another arm isn't as important as how it's being mis-managed.
    The shaky bridge to Paps isn't being addressed nearly as well as it should be.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Moon, the data I've quoted is absolutely accurate and pertinent:

    Drew's OPS 2010: .793
    Drew's OPS 2011: .757

    Ellsbury's OPS 2009: .770
    Ellsbury's OPS this year: .798

    This year is only 43 games old, boom.
    Drew was better last year than Ellsbury's best career full season. That is pertinent.

    How is Drew's career OPS more pertinent than the last few years? I'm talking about now, not several years ago.

    boom, you really wat to use 40 games to judge by after you have bashed Drew for his long history of walking too much when it counts. Choose a strategy and tck to it.

    You are wrong on recent numbers as well if you go beyond just these 43 games. Look:

    2010-2011
    Drew  .254/.348/.438/.786 (+3.4 WAR)
    Ellsb  .265/.319/.383/.702 (+1.1 WAR)

    2009-2011
    Drew  .265/.367/.475/.842 (+8.2)
    Ellsb   .291/.344/.406/.752 (+3.8)
    I don't want to bash Drew but look at the guys RBI numbers since he has been with the Redsox. And he has hit in premium spots in this lineup with high OBP guys like Manny, Ortiz and Youk in front of him. Look at these numbers:

    2007: 64 RBI
    2008: 64 RBI
    2009: 68 RBI
    2010: 68 RBI

    RBI's? Come on.
    Why don't I just argue Jacoby should have scored more runs with the awesome guys behind him?
    2008: 98
    2009: 94
    2010: 10

    I showed you Drew's numbes with RISP s comapred to Jacoby. Would Jacoby had helped us score more runs with worse numbers? Walking with RISP, is not a bad thing. It often leads to one more run or pushes another runner up into scoring position to score later.

    Recent numbers:
    RISP  2008  2009  2010  2011
    Drew  .979  .862   .838   .517 (37 gms)
    Ellsb   .682  .784   .368  .730

    Look, of course I would have hoped Drew got more hits and RBIs with RISP, but I enve holda BB against anyone. He shouldn't swing at balls. Nobody should. 
    Compare those numbers to any #6 hitter in baseball over a very large sample size. The guy is a good player but he plays for stat success. He would help us more if he would do his primary job to drive in runs. Lowell drove in 120 RBI one year hitting 5th. Beltre was over 100 RBI last year hitting 5th. Drew's numbers are skewed a lot by his desire to draw walks no matter what the situation. It's not like he didn't have tons of OBP on in front of him.

    Who did Lowell hve up after him? How often did they pitch arounf Miky like they did to Drew?

    In 2008 he got most ofhis PAs batting 6th,7,8 and 1st combined.
    7th: VTek, Lowrie and Crisp had the most PAs here.
    8th : Vtek and Crisp had the most PAs.

    In 2009: he had a 2:1 ratio of PAs from the 6,7,8,9,1,2 slots: not all RBI slots. (over 205+ PAs 8,9.1 or 2 and 270+ PAs:7, 8,9,1,or 2)

    In 2010: he had 164 PAs up 1 & 2 and over 200 PAs up 6-9. With all the injuries last year, we hada hodg-podge of players up after Drew...most were not very good.
    Ellsbury is a better hitter than Drew is this year, and probably going forward. What Drew did years ago is less pertinent than what he has done

    So far, yes. In 40+ gmes, Jacoby has don better at the plate. Drew will be gone next year. Jacoby will not be our RF'er next year.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Moon, I never wanted to even consider signing Crawford last winter. I don't think he was a good match for us. I agree that he wasn't worth 142 mil. I think he would be better suited in the 2 slot, where he was with the Rays for many years. I didn't even want to sign Crawford at 100 mil. 

    Nonetheless, if looking at last year's data and recent year's data only, Crawford and Youk would be projected as roughly equivalent performers in the number 3 slot. The base running ability of Crawford encourages Crawford being the run scorer and Youk's OPS advantage encourages Youk to be selected as the guy driving in runs. The difference is not HUGE. It just isn't.

    65 points in OPS is enormous at the 3 slot. Having a high OBP is crucial to allowing your number 4 and 5 hitters and to get up or not. SBs are very nice, but not as crucial from the 3 slot. He'd probably hardly ever try steal bases anyways with Youk, Agn or Pai at the plate.

    Youk has been trending upwards his whole career: Crawford has been up and down. You hits LHPs and RHPs extremely well, Crawford stinksvs LHPs and would very often see a lefty specialist late in games when it counts. That's a huge drawback to batting CC 3rd.

    I get called on citing small sample sizes but how many times have you said things like "But Ellsbury has a .328 OBP from the lead off spot so he is not a good lead off guy". As if someone has a .356 OBP for the year but if 150 of those AB are from the lead off spot it is more important than his yearly OBP rate. As if the lead off spot data is more salient than the overall OBP in the same year.

    Jacoby has almost 1,400 PAs batting in the one slot and a .335 OBP there. That worries me. It's not a small sample size, but it is trending upwards fast. I ws not one of those guys who wanted Crawford up first, except vs some RHPs. I'd keep jacoby up 1st this year, unless he has a prolonged slump. I love Jacoby as an offensive player. You and I both went toe-to-toe vs softy for a whole summer supporting Jacoby.  I don't like his positioning on defense. I don't like his slow breaks on hit balls to his area, and I was highly concerned about him keeping a high OBP in the one slot. It's not an easy thing to do. He has done well this year up first...very well.

    Regarding Ellsbury in RF, I'm looking at his arm and it's not that bad. And I would take overall fielding ability as a skill set over a strong arm in RF any day. The ability to catch balls is also important  ( more important than his arm ). When was the last time you saw Drew dive for a ball? And the whole thing of "Drew never needs to dive for a ball because he gets such good reads" is BS. I hear that from some here, not necessarily you. Throwing arm accuracy is also important. Drew has thrown out roughly 5 more runners than Ellsbury since Ellsbury started with the team, while committing 3-4 times as many errors presumably in trying to get those assists. If Drew had a lot better arm wouldn't the assist difference be greater? Especially since he commits a lot more errors?

    A lot more erros? He's had 3 since 2009.
    Look we have disagreed on jacoby as a defensive CF'er. I have said all I can about it. Nobody from the Fielding Bible has ever had him on their top 10 defensive CF'er list. His UZR/150 is nearing the point of a large enough sample size in CF. His RF/9 is notgood. He plays way way way too deep! He was moved to LF last year. I have focused on his fielding since softy called him out on it in 2009. He gets late breaks. You may believe otherwise. That's OK, but I will never believe he can be an average RF'er. He's barely an average CF'er now.

    I'm fully aware that the forum doesn't share my opinion. I'm just calling it as I see it and I think the data supports my view regarding all the above issues. Read what I said. I'm paraphrasing here: IF we get a better center fielder next year I have no problem with Ellsbury moving to RF. I'm not suggesting they move Reddick to CF, or Kalish in his place...etc.

    You don't think a poor UZR/150 in CF over way more innings than the RF sample size is daa that can be used to judge him as a fielder? Can you find one scouting report that says he has an above average arm? Is he going to play very deep positioning in RF as well? If so, add a lot of singles in that huge area in front of him.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Stats aside, personal observation indicates Drew is not the guy I want up there in a must RBI situation. He's more geared to patience.

    The RF position is historically one where the player has some power and a good arm. The arm is necessary to deter would-be runners from taking the extra base.
    Jake isn't a power hitter. He may hit some unexpected dingers, but I wouldn't put him in a category of being able to drive in runs with ever-present gap/HR power. He's where he belongs.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    boom, more on Youk vs CC at the 3 slot:
    I wont use a short 40 game sample size of 2011 like you did with Ells vs Drew, but you know how that would look.

    2009-2011:
    Youk: .301/.411/.552/.963
    Craw: .297/.347/.450/.797
    A huge huge huge .166 differential.


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

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Moon: My bad on calling Manny a "one-dimensional hitter".
    I meant to say he was more of a one-dimensional player...with baggage.
    I never underestimate his hitting - only how much of it was juiced.

    I started my response intending to ask if you mistakenly wrote "one-dimensioanl hitter" instead of "player", but got carried away and forgot.

    I do agree CC's not a #3 hitter for Boston. 

    Vs, LHPs, he's not even a 1 through 9 hitter.
    Vs, RHPs, he can be a good #1, but not at this time the way Ells is getting OBP recently. He could be a good #2, but not unless we move Pedey to 5 or 6. He could move up to 6th behind Papi as long as Papi keeps raking lefties.

    If he hits and runs like 2010 and everyone else hist to their expectations, where would you put him?

    I do think the pen has depth, even with the injuries. Adding another arm isn't as important as how it's being mis-managed.
    The shaky bridge to Paps isn't being addressed nearly as well as it should be.

    I agree with your "hot hand leave em be" philosophy, but we'd have been better off with Downs or Crain/Guerrier combo. An, that's just one part of the equation as I stated before.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share