Double Standard

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

    Double Standard

    It's right here on our forum.  Sox fans have begun to accept the twin notions that Bradley is inadequate because he can't hit and Bogaerts because he can't field.  Both notions are untrue if you believe in the only current stat, Wins Above Replacement (WAR) that attempts to measure the whole player. 


    Right now, for example, Bogaerts has a WAR of .7, which ranks him the 5th best SS in the American League.  That's right, 5th best.  But that is not good enough for the carping critics.  FWIW, his defensive WAR is 0.0, which puts him at 7th best among AL SS's.


    And we all know that the Yankees stole away the best CF in the history of MLB and left the poor Sox with a totally inadequate CF named Bradley.  But wait a minute.  Ellsbury's WAR is .8, which does rank him as the 4th best CF in the AL.  But Bradley's WAR is .5, good enough for 9th place.  Moreover, if you think "wins above replacement" means exactly that, so far Ellsbury's vast superiority has netted the Yankees .3 of a win net over the Sox stuck with Bradley.  How is this possible, you say?  Well it turns out that Bradley's defensive WAR is .4, which ranks him the 3d best defensive CF in the AL.  And Ellsbury?  His defensive WAR is -.3, which makes him the 10th best fielding CF in the AL. 


    Is it worth mentioning that Bogaerts is a 21 year old rookie and likely to improve?  Of course not.  Andrewmitch, among many others, has assured us he is playing the wrong position and needs to be moved.    What about Bradley being a 24 year old rookie?  Also irrelevant.  He is what he is and will never hit. 


     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    Bogaerts & Bradley deserve to STAY & PLAY  !!!

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    It's right here on our forum.  Sox fans have begun to accept the twin notions that Bradley is inadequate because he can't hit and Bogaerts because he can't field.  Both notions are untrue if you believe in the only current stat, Wins Above Replacement (WAR) that attempts to measure the whole player. 


     


    Right now, for example, Bogaerts has a WAR of .7, which ranks him the 5th best SS in the American League.  That's right, 5th best.  But that is not good enough for the carping critics.  FWIW, his defensive WAR is 0.0, which puts him at 7th best among AL SS's.


     


    And we all know that the Yankees stole away the best CF in the history of MLB and left the poor Sox with a totally inadequate CF named Bradley.  But wait a minute.  Ellsbury's WAR is .8, which does rank him as the 4th best CF in the AL.  But Bradley's WAR is .5, good enough for 9th place.  Moreover, if you think "wins above replacement" means exactly that, so far Ellsbury's vast superiority has netted the Yankees .3 of a win net over the Sox stuck with Bradley.  How is this possible, you say?  Well it turns out that Bradley's defensive WAR is .4, which ranks him the 3d best defensive CF in the AL.  And Ellsbury?  His defensive WAR is -.3, which makes him the 10th best fielding CF in the AL. 


     


    Is it worth mentioning that Bogaerts is a 21 year old rookie and likely to improve?  Of course not.  Andrewmitch, among many others, has assured us he is playing the wrong position and needs to be moved.    What about Bradley being a 24 year old rookie?  Also irrelevant.  He is what he is and will never hit. 


     


     


    [/QUOTE]

    Methinks you rely too much on WAR. I prefer a CF who can hit the baseball. Ellsbury ranks third in the AL in OPS for CFs; Bradley ranks 12th, .220 below Ellsbury. Bradley's OPS of .657 is simply not good enough, no matter what kind of defense he plays. He might improve his offensive production, but if he cannot, I would not want him as my regular CF. Love his defense, but overall, he is not good enough right now.


    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE


     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    At the end of the day, April 2014 was the first full month of regular playing time in the major leagues for both Bradley and Bogaerts. One just turned 24 and the other will not turn 22 until October. The idea that neither of them can ever improve upon what they are right now, either offensively or defensively, seems ludicrous to me.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    At the end of the day, April 2014 was the first full month of regular playing time in the major leagues for both Bradley and Bogaerts. One just turned 24 and the other will not turn 22 until October. The idea that neither of them can ever improve upon what they are right now, either offensively or defensively, seems ludicrous to me.


    [/QUOTE]

    Of course they can, and most likely will, improve. What if Bradley can't get his OPS above .657 where it is now? Is his defense an adequate offset for his poor offensive contribution? I say no.


    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE


     

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

    Re: Double Standard

    Have to give them an extended opportunity to succeed. I don't put any stock in the WAR stat, but just going by what I see , they have the needed skills and the right attitude. The talent is there. It is all about making the necessary adjustments. Give them a chance. Besides, what alternative do we have? 


    Stabbed by Foulke.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from jete02fan. Show jete02fan's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    they both are kind of doing this on the fly, both young enough to put it all together, it's not like they are in say San Diego, they are trying to get it done in one of the most glaring media markets in MLB...i don't think it's fair to cast Ellbury's shadow over Bradley, i get that Boston is in the business of winning, but while the Sox are still competitive, i say give Bradley and Bogaerts a chance to be who they're going to be..

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    From WEEI.com


     


    "Before Sunday’s series finale against the A’s, Bradley was hitting .393 with a .452 OBP, five doubles and 12 RBIs in 31 plate appearance with runners in scoring position. On a team that collectively has hit .224 a little over a month into the season with runners in scoring position, Bradley has been among the few who have come through at the plate with men on base."


     


    Bradley's overall numbers may not be all that right now.


    But, he's hardly a liability.


    He's not hitting a lot, but he's hitting when it counts.


    The hits for average will come...


     




    I love the smell of asphalt in the morning.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from illinoisredsox. Show illinoisredsox's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:



    Of course they can, and most likely will, improve. What if Bradley can't get his OPS above .657 where it is now? Is his defense an adequate offset for his poor offensive contribution? I say no


     


    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE






    Depends on what's around him.  If the reports prove true, Bogaerts OPS should be above that of a typical shortstop, which could allow a defensive first guy at another position.  Bradley reminds me a lot of Rick Miller, who eventually turned into an adequate hitter as he got older.  To those who say he'll be better than Miller, I won't disagree; but he's going to be much more Miller than Fred Lynn.


    What I would like to see both of them do is learn to foul off those tough 2 strike pitches rather than taking them for strike 3 so often.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    WAR is no good because it doesn't support our preconceived notions that Bradley can't hit and Bogaerts can't field.  Right, got it.  Just yesterday we saw Bradley make a play Ellsbury could not make and it clearly saved a run.  Nope, doesn't count because runs only count when you score them, not prevent them.  Oh, and at the same time Bogaerts offense doesn't count at all because he isn't fielding well enough to suit us--and we can forget the run he saved yesterday with a very good play. 


    Funny thing is, I do like the notion of a lineup in which everyone can hit, and I do believe that scoring runs is crucial for the Sox, who are currently ranked like 8th in the AL in runs scored and OPS.  So why then doesn't anyone want to give Bogaerts some credit for hitting?  Oh, and what about these numbers for Bradley?  He has 18 fewer at bats than Ellsbury, but has batted in one less run, 13 vs. 14, and scored 4 fewer runs, 13 vs. 17, despite batting in the bottom of the order.   I am, FWIW, in favor of using OPS, but it too is not the only statistic.  I think WAR does have some meaning. 

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    It's right here on our forum.  Sox fans have begun to accept the twin notions that Bradley is inadequate because he can't hit and Bogaerts because he can't field.  Both notions are untrue if you believe in the only current stat, Wins Above Replacement (WAR) that attempts to measure the whole player. 


     


    Right now, for example, Bogaerts has a WAR of .7, which ranks him the 5th best SS in the American League.  That's right, 5th best.  But that is not good enough for the carping critics.  FWIW, his defensive WAR is 0.0, which puts him at 7th best among AL SS's.


     


    And we all know that the Yankees stole away the best CF in the history of MLB and left the poor Sox with a totally inadequate CF named Bradley.  But wait a minute.  Ellsbury's WAR is .8, which does rank him as the 4th best CF in the AL.  But Bradley's WAR is .5, good enough for 9th place.  Moreover, if you think "wins above replacement" means exactly that, so far Ellsbury's vast superiority has netted the Yankees .3 of a win net over the Sox stuck with Bradley.  How is this possible, you say?  Well it turns out that Bradley's defensive WAR is .4, which ranks him the 3d best defensive CF in the AL.  And Ellsbury?  His defensive WAR is -.3, which makes him the 10th best fielding CF in the AL. 


     


    Is it worth mentioning that Bogaerts is a 21 year old rookie and likely to improve?  Of course not.  Andrewmitch, among many others, has assured us he is playing the wrong position and needs to be moved.    What about Bradley being a 24 year old rookie?  Also irrelevant.  He is what he is and will never hit. 


     


     


    [/QUOTE]


    WAR <flush>


    the fact that you cite Ellsbury/Bradley being equal because of this useless stat shows how idiotic it is

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    Haha...I was waiting for a "WAR, FLUSH" from Geo.


     


    @Pumpsie,


    If a .657 OPS turns out to be the best Bradley can do, then yes, I would consider that a big disappointment and probably inadequate for a starter. He may not ever be a star offensively, but his minor league numbers would suggest a player who can hit. This is precisely why more time is needed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from slasher9. Show slasher9's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    #2 Red Sox jersey will be the top selling jersey for years and years to come.

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

    Re: Double Standard

    georom, I never said Ellsbury and Bradley are equal.  Nothing of the kind.  I did say Ellsbury is the better hitter and the better overall player, but Bradley is the better fielder--which at this point is incontestable--and overall a decent centerfielder.  I miss Ellsbury, but I sure as heck don't miss is $22M/year salary, which might have had to have been higher for Ellsbury to stay.  Meanwhile, I was delighted that Sizemore might be the fix, but so far he isn't.  Bradley, on the other hand, is clearly a good defensive CF and just might be able to hit MLB.  So far, with 18 fewer at bats, he has one fewer rbi's than Ellsbury and three fewer runs scored despite the big difference in OPS's.  Close enough in my book to say Bradley may prove to be adequate.  I will agree that an OPS under .700 ain't going to cut it long term despite Bradley's superior defense. 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from steven11. Show steven11's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    Jacoby is gone so I could care less about comparisons to him.  Xander and JBJ are both gifted with curable flaws.  JBJ has nice swing but needs more confidence at the plate.  Xander seems to have the offense part under control and looks good on defense 75 percent of the time.  But his defensive errors have been costly so he is under the scope.


    Both are here for the rest of the year.  The way JBJ plays center, he cannot be sent down.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    In response to steven11's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Jacoby is gone so I could care less about comparisons to him Xander and JBJ are both gifted with curable flaws.  JBJ has nice swing but needs more confidence at the plate.  Xander seems to have the offense part under control and looks good on defense 75 percent of the time.  But his defensive errors have been costly so he is under the scope.


    Both are here for the rest of the year.  The way JBJ plays center, he cannot be sent down.


    [/QUOTE]



    Good post...the bolded portion is particularly refreshing.


    Whining because JBJ is not Ellsbury makes little sense when Ellsbury was not going to be back no matter what (unless one thinks we should have been willing to pay upwards of $150 million for him, as well as topping any subsequent Yankee bids).

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from steven11. Show steven11's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    In response to steven11's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     


    Jacoby is gone so I could care less about comparisons to him Xander and JBJ are both gifted with curable flaws.  JBJ has nice swing but needs more confidence at the plate.  Xander seems to have the offense part under control and looks good on defense 75 percent of the time.  But his defensive errors have been costly so he is under the scope.


     


    Both are here for the rest of the year.  The way JBJ plays center, he cannot be sent down.


     


    [/QUOTE]



     


    Good post...the bolded portion is particularly refreshing.


     


    Whining because JBJ is not Ellsbury makes little sense when Ellsbury was not going to be back no matter what (unless one thinks we should have been willing to pay upwards of $150 million for him, as well as topping any subsequent Yankee bids).


    [/QUOTE]


    Thanks.  When players move on I think we should as well.  After some of them retire, then we can get sentimental. Hitting it right with prospects is exciting and we have a couple who may pan out just right. JBJ and Boggie are exciting to watch.  The bunting situation was not his fault yesterday, he should have been given the green light to swing away.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Haha...I was waiting for a "WAR, FLUSH" from Geo.


     


     


     


    @Pumpsie,


     


    If a .657 OPS turns out to be the best Bradley can do, then yes, I would consider that a big disappointment and probably inadequate for a starter. He may not ever be a star offensively, but his minor league numbers would suggest a player who can hit. This is precisely why more time is needed.


    [/QUOTE]

    I am not hearing anyone suggest that we should start looking for a replacement for Bradley. That said, if this hitting performance continues into the summer I will change my mind. 


    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE


     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    If JBJ is not good enough.


    Was Paul Blair good enough?


    LOVE my  Red Sox, Bs, Cs, Pats and enjoy the ride every year. 

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    In response to JimfromFlorida's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    If JBJ is not good enough.


     


    Was Paul Blair good enough?


     


    LOVE my  Red Sox, Bs, Cs, Pats and enjoy the ride every year. 


    [/QUOTE]

    Blair's OPS for his career was a pretty poor .684, but his career OPS+ was 96 for his career. JBJ now has an OPS+ of just 74 for his career, and he is probably not as good defensively as Blair was either. I think OPS+ is the single best indicator of offensive contribution. Blair played in pitcher's parks; Bradley plays at a hitter's park. Apples and oranges.


     


    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE


     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from seabeachfred. Show seabeachfred's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    It's right here on our forum.  Sox fans have begun to accept the twin notions that Bradley is inadequate because he can't hit and Bogaerts because he can't field.  Both notions are untrue if you believe in the only current stat, Wins Above Replacement (WAR) that attempts to measure the whole player. 


     


    Right now, for example, Bogaerts has a WAR of .7, which ranks him the 5th best SS in the American League.  That's right, 5th best.  But that is not good enough for the carping critics.  FWIW, his defensive WAR is 0.0, which puts him at 7th best among AL SS's.


     


    And we all know that the Yankees stole away the best CF in the history of MLB and left the poor Sox with a totally inadequate CF named Bradley.  But wait a minute.  Ellsbury's WAR is .8, which does rank him as the 4th best CF in the AL.  But Bradley's WAR is .5, good enough for 9th place.  Moreover, if you think "wins above replacement" means exactly that, so far Ellsbury's vast superiority has netted the Yankees .3 of a win net over the Sox stuck with Bradley.  How is this possible, you say?  Well it turns out that Bradley's defensive WAR is .4, which ranks him the 3d best defensive CF in the AL.  And Ellsbury?  His defensive WAR is -.3, which makes him the 10th best fielding CF in the AL. 


     


    Is it worth mentioning that Bogaerts is a 21 year old rookie and likely to improve?  Of course not.  Andrewmitch, among many others, has assured us he is playing the wrong position and needs to be moved.    What about Bradley being a 24 year old rookie?  Also irrelevant.  He is what he is and will never hit. 


     


     


    [/QUOTE]



    Nice try Max, but you carry WAR to a ridiculous extreme and forget that Bradley is hitting only 215, and his weak hitting has created a ripple effect that effects the whole lineup.  Between last season's weak showing, his disastrous hitting in ST and what he has done so far, all leads to a pretty good sample size that the guy simply cannot hit Major League pitching---certainly not as the present time and there is no way a team struggling to score runs as we are can carry a 215 hitter in the lineup who also can't worth worth a da#n and doesn't run fast enough to steal a base when he does get on.  As for Bogaerts my criticism of him at the present time is not that he cannot field or hit but t hat when he hits he does so with no one on base.  He is hitting an abysmal 210 or thereabouts with runners on base and in over a month's worth of play batting mostly in the sixth position he has a paltry five runs batted in.  You might look at the number of runners he has left on the bases in his futile performances with those runners there.  I proposed on another board that we get Xander out of the sixth spot and put him at No. 2 where his type of hitting and walks would serve us better---put Vic at leadoff and Pedroia back at third with Papi and Nap in the 4th and 5th slots.  That might work better for us.  As for Bradley, the sooner we move Betts to CF and get him off second base the sooner we will have a real leadoff man who can hit and steal bases.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Have to give them an extended opportunity to succeed. I don't put any stock in the WAR stat, but just going by what I see , they have the needed skills and the right attitude. The talent is there. It is all about making the necessary adjustments. Give them a chance. Besides, what alternative do we have? 


     


    Stabbed by Foulke.


    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]


    I think, at this point, JBJ is a better all-around player than Bogaerts.  I can't tell you just how impressed I've been.

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

    Re: Double Standard

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:


     


    It's right here on our forum.  Sox fans have begun to accept the twin notions that Bradley is inadequate because he can't hit and Bogaerts because he can't field.  Both notions are untrue if you believe in the only current stat, Wins Above Replacement (WAR) that attempts to measure the whole player. Right now, for example, Bogaerts has a WAR of .7, which ranks him the 5th best SS in the American League.  That's right, 5th best.  But that is not good enough for the carping critics.  FWIW, his defensive WAR is 0.0, which puts him at 7th best among AL SS's. And we all know that the Yankees stole away the best CF in the history of MLB and left the poor Sox with a totally inadequate CF named Bradley.  But wait a minute.  Ellsbury's WAR is .8, which does rank him as the 4th best CF in the AL.  But Bradley's WAR is .5, good enough for 9th place.  Moreover, if you think "wins above replacement" means exactly that, so far Ellsbury's vast superiority has netted the Yankees .3 of a win net over the Sox stuck with Bradley.  How is this possible, you say?  Well it turns out that Bradley's defensive WAR is .4, which ranks him the 3d best defensive CF in the AL.  And Ellsbury?  His defensive WAR is -.3, which makes him the 10th best fielding CF in the AL. Is it worth mentioning that Bogaerts is a 21 year old rookie and likely to improve?  Of course not.  Andrewmitch, among many others, has assured us he is playing the wrong position and needs to be moved.    What about Bradley being a 24 year old rookie?  Also irrelevant.  He is what he is and will never hit.  

     [object HTMLDivElement]


     


    What would Bogey's WAR be like at 3B?


    Fangraphs has Bogey ranked 14th in WAR at +0.5.


    On the value page, they him ranked 6th out of 29 in SS batting at +2.7 and 27th out of 29 in fielding at -2.9.


    His UZR/150 places him 25th out of 31 at -15.2.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Javi60. Show Javi60's posts

    Re: Double Standard

    Both need to play, they are on the right track, but lets be fair the Ells vacum is and will be unfilled unless a good trade comes along... My gut feeling is that top brass has its eyes on 2015... That hurts... It shows  that winning culture is still way behind yanks and cards...dont argue pls that sox have won 3 out of ten... Great... But far way from Huggins, Mccarthy, stengel or torre...furthermore, sox bigest problem  are the Carps, Gomes, Wmb, Sizemore, Nava etc...with these players u win once, but to repeat never... The off season fiasco is the main cause of this non productive offense... With Nelson Cruz and Beltran it would be another story

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

    Re: Double Standard

    In response to Javi60's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Both need to play, they are on the right track, but lets be fair the Ells vacum is and will be unfilled unless a good trade comes along... My gut feeling is that top brass has its eyes on 2015... That hurts... It shows  that winning culture is still way behind yanks and cards...dont argue pls that sox have won 3 out of ten... Great... But far way from Huggins, Mccarthy, stengel or torre...furthermore, sox bigest problem  are the Carps, Gomes, Wmb, Sizemore, Nava etc...with these players u win once, but to repeat never... The off season fiasco is the main cause of this non productive offense... With Nelson Cruz and Beltran it would be another story


    [/QUOTE]

    Beltran has a .752 OPS and his fielding is awful.  At his price he would have been a terrible signing.


     

     

Share