Ellsbury and Bradley

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

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    In response to trouts' comment:

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

     

    It's not so much about replacing the player as much as it is what is the overall product. 

    Yup, I don't really get the whole 'replacement' thing.  Ells is leaving, and by most measures, JBJ will make a fine replacement at minimum wage.

     


                   What about the measure of Major League hitting? What has Bradley done with Boston that has impressed you so much? And you make it sound as if the money is coming out of your pocket. Yeah, let's load up on cheap minimum wage players and see how far that gets us!

     



    Are you talking about JBJ's tiny MLB offensive sample size?

    Look, if JBJ hits .220, he can be replaced by Victorino or Brentz. My guess is, we will sign a 4th OF'er type that can play excellent CF defense for a couple million. The rest of the money will be used to fill some pretty big holes:

    1) Catcher

    2) 1B (or 3B) Power hitter who can kill lefties

    3) P

    4) P

    5) P

     

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

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley


    moonslav,

    Normally, usually, the last thing I would want to do is disagree with our resident expert, especially on statistical matters.  However, as much as we would all like to think a big righty bat is the sine qua non for scoring success, I am just not as sure as you that's true. 

    Consider.   The Sox led MLB in scoring in 2004 and 2005 in large part because they had both Manny and Papi knocking the cover off the ball.   That's a very good righty and lefty bat.  But they had the same guys in 2007 plus Lowell as an extra added attraction righty bat, and they finished 4th in MLB in runs scored and a full 100 runs fewer than the Yankees. 

    In 2011 the Sox had no righty bat worth speaking of other than Pedroia.  But they had three pretty good lefty bats that year in AGon, Ortiz, and some guy playing centerfield, maybe it was Ellsbury.  And guess what?  They led MLB in runs scored.  This year, the same thing, a bunch of pretty good lefty bats (I count Nava and Salty as good lefty, not so good righty)--Ortiz, Ellsbury, etc--and not too many good righty bats.  Pedroia and Iglesias both have very good OBP's, but I think you are looking for a power guy, a basher, and neither of them is that.  Napoli is the basher, but ain't bashing a lot lately.  I do agree that the shortfall in good righty bats means the Sox are vulnerable to lefty starters and lefties out of the bullpen, as we saw yesterday. 

    To repeat.  I am OK with Ellsbury leaving because I agree he will be overpriced.  I am just saying I think the Sox are going to feel the loss of Ellsbury's bat and footspeed more than you seem to think. 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from crazyworldoftroybrown. Show crazyworldoftroybrown's posts

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    Walks are great, if you have guys that knock them around. A lead-off batter that just walks, and doesn't have the threat of stealing will tell in the long run. Better hit .300+. Pitchers will take their chances on just throwing strikes. Batters behind him will have to produce.
    Bradley is a good ballplayer, lead-off batter is suppose to get on, but the threat of stealing makes them unique.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    Ellsbury may take the the tender and see if he could hit for more power and cash in. I think that would be the best for the Red Sox.

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

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    Ideally , we would sign Ellsbury and promote Bradley. No reason why they could not both play in the same outfield.  Will that happen?  It is possible but not probable. The most likely scenario is Ellsbury leaving and Bradley taking his place. Will this make us a better team ?  Again, possible but not probable. It is a risk. I think Bradley will definitely improve his hitting, but Ellsbury is already a proven commodity. Bradley may or may not become as good or better than Ellsbury. Only time will tell. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

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

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    All I can go by is Double AA, Ellsbury was head and shoulders above Bradley. Hitting, Speed and Defense.

    2006-2007 You dont go from High Single A to Triple AAA unless your special. Then the World Series.

    He'll get over 200 hits this season.

    Sox pay the man.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:


    moonslav,

    Normally, usually, the last thing I would want to do is disagree with our resident expert, especially on statistical matters.  However, as much as we would all like to think a big righty bat is the sine qua non for scoring success, I am just not as sure as you that's true. 

    Consider.   The Sox led MLB in scoring in 2004 and 2005 in large part because they had both Manny and Papi knocking the cover off the ball.   That's a very good righty and lefty bat.  But they had the same guys in 2007 plus Lowell as an extra added attraction righty bat, and they finished 4th in MLB in runs scored and a full 100 runs fewer than the Yankees. 

    In 2011 the Sox had no righty bat worth speaking of other than Pedroia.  But they had three pretty good lefty bats that year in AGon, Ortiz, and some guy playing centerfield, maybe it was Ellsbury.  And guess what?  They led MLB in runs scored.  This year, the same thing, a bunch of pretty good lefty bats (I count Nava and Salty as good lefty, not so good righty)--Ortiz, Ellsbury, etc--and not too many good righty bats.  Pedroia and Iglesias both have very good OBP's, but I think you are looking for a power guy, a basher, and neither of them is that.  Napoli is the basher, but ain't bashing a lot lately.  I do agree that the shortfall in good righty bats means the Sox are vulnerable to lefty starters and lefties out of the bullpen, as we saw yesterday. 

    To repeat.  I am OK with Ellsbury leaving because I agree he will be overpriced.  I am just saying I think the Sox are going to feel the loss of Ellsbury's bat and footspeed more than you seem to think. 



    It's not essential to get a big RH'd bat to win a ring, but the best way to improve your chances (to me) is to identify your weaknest link and then try to upgrade at that area. Our weakest link need not be a terrible player or even below average.

    I agree that we will feel the loss of Jacoby. His speed and decent leadoff OBP is not easy to replace. I'm not sure JBJ can come close to his leadoff ability in 2014. We will probably have to go with Victorino vs LHPs and Nava vs RHPs. Then that opnes their slots to be filled as well.

    I do think we can improve next year, if we spend the money the same or better than this past winter. I figure we will have about $40-45M to spend. We may drop a notch at leadoff, but gain at the 5 and 6 slots and the pitching staff. Let's see.

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

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    In response to crazyworldoftroybrown's comment:

    All I can go by is Double AA, Ellsbury was head and shoulders above Bradley. Hitting, Speed and Defense.

    2006-2007 You dont go from High Single A to Triple AAA unless your special. Then the World Series.

    He'll get over 200 hits this season.

    Sox pay the man.



    Ellsbury was in single A at age 21, A & AA at age 22, AA, AAA and MLB at 23.

    In 2006 he had 225 PA in Portland and went .308/.387/.434/.821 with 16 SB and 8 CS. I'm not sure how you know he was "head and shoulders" better than JBJ at that time, but I'll choose to believe otherwise on that one area.

    JBJ was in single A at age 21 (same as Jacoby), a and AA at age 22 (same as Jacoby), and AAA and MLB at age 23 (same as Jacoby).

    At age 22 in Portland, JBJ hit .271/.373/.437/.809 in 271 PAs. I don't see a .013 advantage in OPS by Jacoby as being "head and shoulders better", but it was better in somewhat small sample sizes. JBJ had 8 SB and 3 CS in AA, but he had 24/9 overall in 2012 (A+ and AA combined). Again, Jacoby  was better with 41/17 (combined), significantly better. 

    I'm not trying to say JBJ will break into MLB like Jacoby did. They are two different players, but I felt I had to respond to your AA statement, since I don't see that big of a disparity between the two at age 22.

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

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to crazyworldoftroybrown's comment:

     

    All I can go by is Double AA, Ellsbury was head and shoulders above Bradley. Hitting, Speed and Defense.

    2006-2007 You dont go from High Single A to Triple AAA unless your special. Then the World Series.

    He'll get over 200 hits this season.

    Sox pay the man.

     



    Ellsbury was in single A at age 21, A & AA at age 22, AA, AAA and MLB at 23.

     

    In 2006 he had 225 PA in Portland and went .308/.387/.434/.821 with 16 SB and 8 CS. I'm not sure how you know he was "head and shoulders" better than JBJ at that time, but I'll choose to believe otherwise on that one area.

    JBJ was in single A at age 21 (same as Jacoby), a and AA at age 22 (same as Jacoby), and AAA and MLB at age 23 (same as Jacoby).

    At age 22 in Portland, JBJ hit .271/.373/.437/.809 in 271 PAs. I don't see a .013 advantage in OPS by Jacoby as being "head and shoulders better", but it was better in somewhat small sample sizes. JBJ had 8 SB and 3 CS in AA, but he had 24/9 overall in 2012 (A+ and AA combined). Again, Jacoby  was better with 41/17 (combined), significantly better. 

    I'm not trying to say JBJ will break into MLB like Jacoby did. They are two different players, but I felt I had to respond to your AA statement, since I don't see that big of a disparity between the two at age 22.



    • You omit the fact that in 2007 Ellsbury hit.452 , with an OPS of 1,162 at Portland, forcing his promotion to Pawtucket and then to Boston, where he continued to produce at a high level. If you want to rely on stats, then you have to look at all of them. I have high hopes for Bradley, as you do. He has plenty of potential. However, he has not shown the production that Ellsbury did at a similar age. Bottom line: Despite your denials, you have a problem being objective when it comes to Ellsbury. I might also add that the same thing is evident in your evaluation of Doubront. You are considered the voice of authority on the forum. In my opinion , you have to do a better job of being totally honest and objective.  A good GM has to do that, and not have personal favorites or personal non- favorites. For someone who loves their stats, you tend to fall into that biased category. I know you will not agree with this, but think about it. 
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    In response to Archer1's comment:

    I think the Sox will make an attempt, albeit a weak one, to retain Ellsbury. They will likely make an offer on 5/75 or thereabouts and he will hit the market and find someone to overpay 7/120.

    Bradley will step in and offer excellent defense and plate discipline while showing an average stick and above average speed (think .275/.365/8HR/65RBI/20STL) at a paltry $400K. I don't expect him to step right into the leadoff spot and to be honest he doesn't have to (hello Daniel Nava), but eventually he will earn his spot there.

    No doubt though, Sox will miss Ellsbury's offense and baserunning.



    Pls identify a team that you think in giving 30 years old Ellsbury 7 years and $120 when any team could have had Bourn for less than half of that numb? 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from tph2004. Show tph2004's posts

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    Think Angel Pagen or Michael Bourn, he is in many ways the same type player. Better with the glove, slightly less offensive production. Once you put park factors into play they are probably pretty close. He got $13M per season. Would you pay him $13M age 30 - 36? 

    Probably not. The difference with Bourn is he has stayed healthy and Ellsbury has not. It is pretty rare for guys without power to get paid $15+M over 4 - 8 years.     

    Ellsbury is at his peak, he is a speed guy about to turn 30 who other than 2011 has never driven the ball. Speed guys tend to fall off quickly in 30's and if your into stats, his ops+ basically shows he is a average player, he has only finished above 100 once in his full seasons. He is a good but very replaceable player. He may have 1 or 3 more years like this year then he will start a downward trend and be out of the game or a pinch runner type 36/37.

    Check out his BB Ref page and see the compareables that speaks for itself.   

    As for JBJ, my guess is everyone killing him here were the same people in April putting him in Cooperstown. I recall a young secondbaseman who Peter Gammon's said would never be a Major Leaguer. That guy is half way to Cooperstown now, won Rookie of Year, MVP, Gold Gloves and is heart of your Red Sox. I would not give up on JBJ he is a top talent. As for Homeruns, I think combined he has 9 hrs already this season.

    Last note on the comparable minor league careers:

    Ellsbury was a .816 OPS guy

    JBJ is at .903

    That is a huge difference in production. 

    Other than batting average and Steals which Ellsbury held a slight edge in BA I am not sure where he had a better minor league career to this point over JBJ. 

     

     

     

     

     

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from tph2004. Show tph2004's posts

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to crazyworldoftroybrown's comment:

     

     

     

    All I can go by is Double AA, Ellsbury was head and shoulders above Bradley. Hitting, Speed and Defense.

    2006-2007 You dont go from High Single A to Triple AAA unless your special. Then the World Series.

    He'll get over 200 hits this season.

    Sox pay the man.

     

     



    Ellsbury was in single A at age 21, A & AA at age 22, AA, AAA and MLB at 23.

     

     

    In 2006 he had 225 PA in Portland and went .308/.387/.434/.821 with 16 SB and 8 CS. I'm not sure how you know he was "head and shoulders" better than JBJ at that time, but I'll choose to believe otherwise on that one area.

    JBJ was in single A at age 21 (same as Jacoby), a and AA at age 22 (same as Jacoby), and AAA and MLB at age 23 (same as Jacoby).

    At age 22 in Portland, JBJ hit .271/.373/.437/.809 in 271 PAs. I don't see a .013 advantage in OPS by Jacoby as being "head and shoulders better", but it was better in somewhat small sample sizes. JBJ had 8 SB and 3 CS in AA, but he had 24/9 overall in 2012 (A+ and AA combined). Again, Jacoby  was better with 41/17 (combined), significantly better. 

    I'm not trying to say JBJ will break into MLB like Jacoby did. They are two different players, but I felt I had to respond to your AA statement, since I don't see that big of a disparity between the two at age 22.

     



     

    • You omit the fact that in 2007 Ellsbury hit.452 , with an OPS of 1,162 at Portland, forcing his promotion to Pawtucket and then to Boston, where he continued to produce at a high level. If you want to rely on stats, then you have to look at all of them. I have high hopes for Bradley, as you do. He has plenty of potential. However, he has not shown the production that Ellsbury did at a similar age. Bottom line: Despite your denials, you have a problem being objective when it comes to Ellsbury. I might also add that the same thing is evident in your evaluation of Doubront. You are considered the voice of authority on the forum. In my opinion , you have to do a better job of being totally honest and objective.  A good GM has to do that, and not have personal favorites or personal non- favorites. For someone who loves their stats, you tend to fall into that biased category. I know you will not agree with this, but think about it. 



    http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=bradle000jac

    Your right, Bradly is better. Compare the two, Ellsbury ops 816, Bradly 903, most runs in a season - Ellsbury 82, Bradly 90, hits 146 to 141, JBJ . . . I am missing where the big difference in talent is. Frankly if JBJ ended up with same career I would view that as a disappointment. Ellsbury is a pretty average MLB CF when you look at his entire game. If he stays here for 12/13M for 3 years and $40M that would be fine but anything beyond 3 years with club options for 4 and 5 would be a mistake. 

      

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

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to crazyworldoftroybrown's comment:

     

     

     

    All I can go by is Double AA, Ellsbury was head and shoulders above Bradley. Hitting, Speed and Defense.

    2006-2007 You dont go from High Single A to Triple AAA unless your special. Then the World Series.

    He'll get over 200 hits this season.

    Sox pay the man.

     

     



    Ellsbury was in single A at age 21, A & AA at age 22, AA, AAA and MLB at 23.

     

     

    In 2006 he had 225 PA in Portland and went .308/.387/.434/.821 with 16 SB and 8 CS. I'm not sure how you know he was "head and shoulders" better than JBJ at that time, but I'll choose to believe otherwise on that one area.

    JBJ was in single A at age 21 (same as Jacoby), a and AA at age 22 (same as Jacoby), and AAA and MLB at age 23 (same as Jacoby).

    At age 22 in Portland, JBJ hit .271/.373/.437/.809 in 271 PAs. I don't see a .013 advantage in OPS by Jacoby as being "head and shoulders better", but it was better in somewhat small sample sizes. JBJ had 8 SB and 3 CS in AA, but he had 24/9 overall in 2012 (A+ and AA combined). Again, Jacoby  was better with 41/17 (combined), significantly better. 

    I'm not trying to say JBJ will break into MLB like Jacoby did. They are two different players, but I felt I had to respond to your AA statement, since I don't see that big of a disparity between the two at age 22.

     



     

    • You omit the fact that in 2007 Ellsbury hit.452 , with an OPS of 1,162 at Portland, forcing his promotion to Pawtucket and then to Boston, where he continued to produce at a high level. If you want to rely on stats, then you have to look at all of them. I have high hopes for Bradley, as you do. He has plenty of potential. However, he has not shown the production that Ellsbury did at a similar age. Bottom line: Despite your denials, you have a problem being objective when it comes to Ellsbury. I might also add that the same thing is evident in your evaluation of Doubront. You are considered the voice of authority on the forum. In my opinion , you have to do a better job of being totally honest and objective.  A good GM has to do that, and not have personal favorites or personal non- favorites. For someone who loves their stats, you tend to fall into that biased category. I know you will not agree with this, but think about it. 



    No I did not omit 2007. I compared apples to apples- something you try hard not to do.

    At age 22, Ellsbury was certainly not "head and shoulders" better on defense than JBJ, and he was only slightly better on offense. Of course, Ellsbury had a much better 2007, but what you left out of your numbers wwas the fact that his .452 AA number in 2007 was a tiny sample size of 83 PAs. I will admit that .452 is head and shoulders better than JBJ, but unlike you, I would not use an 83 PA sample size to say he was that much better in AA.

    My main point about Ellsbury was his fielding- not his hitting. It was clear what my point has been. I have never come close to saying JBJ will replace jacoby's offense, but you prefer to take my statements out of context, and then bring in Doubront as some sort of proof that I am using numbers selectively to show some sort of prejudice against certain players. You are just plain wrong. Period.

    I was talking about Ellsbury not having a good arm. Do you dispute that? I was talking about Ellsbury getting poor breaks and taking wrong angles on hit balls to CF early in his career and not being great in that area right now. Do you dispute that? Observations and the numbers back me up. I have always used WHIP equally with ERA (more so with RPs). I have done that since Doubront wasn't even born. You may disagree with my use of that stat so prominently, but I'm not just flinging whatever I can find against Felix. I am consistent in my use of stats and larger sample sizes when juding player's skill sets. I have never once questioned Doubront's skill set, except for the high WHIP. I have many times said he "throws nasty stuff" and has "great potential". I have never advocated, as you claimed, to trade him for "nothing better than a used bag of balls". Some of my trade suggestions (like for Brett Anderson or Justin Upton- as part of bigger packages) have turned out bad so far, but those trade ideas do not suggest I think Doubront stinks- on the contrary, they show the exact opposite. 

    Get off your high horse. I have been highly critical of Doubront's WHIP, attitude and motivation. He has made great strides this year on WHIP. The other two need more time to judge if I was right or wrong. I'll be happy to admit I was wrong when that time comes. I'm still waiting for your simple admition that you were wrong on my valuing Doubront equally to a "used bag of balls". Your "bias" shows a lot more than mine.

    I have no bias towards Ellsbury, in fact, I have bent over backwards to support his offense. I have posted hundreds and hundreds of posts defending him. I happen to think he is a very good defensive CF'er not counting his arm, but because I do not think he is one of the best in this area, you label me with a "bias" against him. I was a huge Doubront his rookie year, until he showed up to camp grossly out of shape for the biggest moiment of his life. We could have won in 2011, had he been in top shape. I do not blame just him. Yes, I had a "bias" against him from that point on. His climbing WHIP fueled that bias. Coming to camp out of shape again stoked the fire even more, but he has done a fantastic job this year after a little rough start. A pitcher does not have to be in great shape to be great, but until a pitcher proves he can be great without being in shape, I question why they do not do everything they can to improve the odds of making the bigs and being as good as they can be. It was my dream to play MLB, and it kind of irks me to see some players not (apparently) do the best they do to make that happen. I admit I have a bias towards Doubront based on what I just stated. I do not have a bias against Ellsbury. 

    I know you will not agree with this, but think about it.

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

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    ...and by the way...

    You omit the fact that in 2007 Ellsbury hit.452 , with an OPS of 1,162 at Portland, forcing his promotion to Pawtucket and then to Boston, where he continued to produce at a high level.

    You omitted this:

    Age 23 AAA stats (larger sample sizes than your chosen AA stats at age 23 of 83 for Ellsbury and 0 for JBJ who was actually called up to AAA earlier than Jacoby)

    AAA at 23:

    Ellsbury: (401 PAs) .298/.360/.380/.740  33 SB/6 CS

    JBJ:         (215 PAs) .297/.393/.530/.922  4 SB/3 CS

    When responding to an earlier poster, who said Ellsbury was "head and shoulders" better than JBj in every area of the game at AA, I did not bring up 2007 vs 2013, but I fail to see the huge minor league dominance that poster was hinting at when comparing Ellsbury to JBJ on the defensive aspect of their games. On hitting, they are pretty close, but with an edge to JBJ. On SBs, Ellsbury wins hands down.

    To me, it looks like JBJ was at MLB and AAA at the start of his 3rd season in professional baseball, while Ellsbury started his 3rd season in AA and ended in MLB. A point missed by that poster who claimed, 2006-2007 You dont go from High Single A to Triple AAA unless your special. Then the World Series. Well, what does that make JBJ? Why aren't you calling that poster out for being "biased"? Could it be that you have the same bias as him, so you are too blind to see it?

    Being objective and unbiased, I saw it. You missed it.

    Hmmmm....

     

    Sox4ever

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

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    In response to tph2004's comment:

    Think Angel Pagen or Michael Bourn, he is in many ways the same type player. Better with the glove, slightly less offensive production. Once you put park factors into play they are probably pretty close. He got $13M per season. Would you pay him $13M age 30 - 36? 

    Probably not. The difference with Bourn is he has stayed healthy and Ellsbury has not. It is pretty rare for guys without power to get paid $15+M over 4 - 8 years.     

    Ellsbury is at his peak, he is a speed guy about to turn 30 who other than 2011 has never driven the ball. Speed guys tend to fall off quickly in 30's and if your into stats, his ops+ basically shows he is a average player, he has only finished above 100 once in his full seasons. He is a good but very replaceable player. He may have 1 or 3 more years like this year then he will start a downward trend and be out of the game or a pinch runner type 36/37.

    Check out his BB Ref page and see the compareables that speaks for itself.   

    As for JBJ, my guess is everyone killing him here were the same people in April putting him in Cooperstown. I recall a young secondbaseman who Peter Gammon's said would never be a Major Leaguer. That guy is half way to Cooperstown now, won Rookie of Year, MVP, Gold Gloves and is heart of your Red Sox. I would not give up on JBJ he is a top talent. As for Homeruns, I think combined he has 9 hrs already this season.

    Last note on the comparable minor league careers:

    Ellsbury was a .816 OPS guy

    JBJ is at .903

    That is a huge difference in production. 

    Other than batting average and Steals which Ellsbury held a slight edge in BA I am not sure where he had a better minor league career to this point over JBJ. 

     




    It's obvious to me who the biased posters are.

    I rarely bring up minor league stats to make a point or to compare 2 players. I know minor league numbers are usually a good indicator of what can be accomplished in MLB, but I've seen too many Wily Mo Pena's to take much stock in it.

    I was merely responding to a poster's claim that Jacoby was "head and shoulders" better than JBJ at the same age in AA. The only time they were both in AA at the same age was 2012 (JBJ) and 2006 (JE), but if you look at their entire minor league careers by age and level, I just don't see the jacoby dominance. The starnge part about it, is that because I do not see something that is not there, I was called "biased" by my opwn personal stalker.

    Age/Level           ELLS                                        JBJ

    21 A-   (165) .418/.432/.850   21 A-/A  (40) .325/.361/.686 * note: tiny sample size

    22 A+  (281) .379/.418/.797   22    A+ (304) .480/.526/1.006 *note similar samples

    22 AA  (225) .387/.434/.821   22   AA  (271)  .373/.437/.809 * note similar samples

    23 AA    (83) .518/.644/1.162  23  AA   n/a  jumped to MLB then AAA

    23 AAA (401).360/.380/.740    23 AAA (215) .393/.530/.933  *JE larger sample size

    Even if you combine Jacoby's AA and AAA in 2007 and compare to JBJ's only AAA numbers at age 23:

    Jacoby: .387/.424/.811

    Jackie:  .393/.530/.922

    Clearly, age 22-23 combined, JBJ's numbers are better on offense, but I guess I am just "biased" for stating the obvious.

    Total minors combined (ages 21-23):

    Jacoby .390/,426/.816

    Jackie  .415/.488/.903

     

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

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    I think I am more critical of players and management than are most posters. But I have no favorites or scapegoats. I try to remain objective. I have no biases , and certainly not towards Bradley. If it were up to me , he would be in the lineup every day. When I read your posts, I just get the impression that you are not always objective. You love your stats, except when some stats don't mesh with your opinions. When Ellsbury got off to a slow start this year, ( a " small sample size " ) compared to his career numbers, you called for him to be dropped to ninth against right handers and benched vs. lefties. This would seem to be more to embarrass one of your best players than to actually help the team. Ellsbury quickly rebounded from the slow start. Recently , you wondered if he sat out a game with " Felixitis" . Implying that he was afraid to face Hernandez. This despite the fact that he has pretty good numbers vs. Felix, and as a left hand hitter, he is never platooned and faces all the toughest lefties in the league. You also revived the injury prone and injury milking accusations. Unfairly, in my view. He has had two major injuries in seven years with the Sox. These have accounted for the vast majority of games missed. Look around baseball. There have been a ton of guys on the DL this year. It seems every time you turn around, someone is going down, sometimes for the year. But somehow, Ellsbury still has to have this stigma. As for Doubront, you are down on him for coming to training camp overweight. I am not excusing this, but you did not seem to have much of a problem with guys like Beckett, Lackey, Lester, Wakefield and Albers being overweight and out of shape DURING the season. Something that possibly cost us the pennant. You speak highly of Britton as a prospect despite his problems. Now, I have nothing against Britton, but it is not likely that he will ever be as good as Doubront. Yet , you continually call for Felix to be traded. This despite the fact that talented young left handers do not exactly grow on trees. Moonslav, maybe it is just me, but you do seem to have certain biases that get in the way of your objectivity. Maybe other posters don't see it that way. That is fine. No problem. Have a nice vacation. If I was in Maine, I would go to a Sea Dogs game and buy you a beer. 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    I think I am more critical of players and management than are most posters. But I have no favorites or scapegoats. I try to remain objective. I have no biases , and certainly not towards Bradley. If it were up to me , he would be in the lineup every day. When I read your posts, I just get the impression that you are not always objective. You love your stats, except when some stats don't mesh with your opinions. When Ellsbury got off to a slow start this year, ( a " small sample size " ) compared to his career numbers, you called for him to be dropped to ninth against right handers and benched vs. lefties. This would seem to be more to embarrass one of your best players than to actually help the team. Ellsbury quickly rebounded from the slow start.

    I admitted I was wrong, buts Ellsbury was struggling for a pretty long sample size against LHPs when I made that statement. It had nothing to do with my opinion of Ellsbury. I suggested moving Papi, one of my favorite players, down in the line-up vs LHPs several years ago, when he was struggling too. (He hit under .600 that year in the games I had him moived down.) I have been wrong many times in my calls. When you state thousands of suggestions and ideas over a season, you are bound to be wrong sometimes.

    Recently , you wondered if he sat out a game with " Felixitis" .

    I said that was a joke. I have never been critical of Jacoby's injuries like many here have, even though him missing so many games has hurt us. I have never called him "injury prone". I did blame him for not calling off Beltre while others blamed Beltre of Tito for jacoby's rib injury.

    Implying that he was afraid to face Hernandez. This despite the fact that he has pretty good numbers vs. Felix, and as a left hand hitter, he is never platooned and faces all the toughest lefties in the league.

    You also revived the injury prone and injury milking accusations.

    I did not.

    Unfairly, in my view. He has had two major injuries in seven years with the Sox. These have accounted for the vast majority of games missed. Look around baseball. There have been a ton of guys on the DL this year. It seems every time you turn around, someone is going down, sometimes for the year. But somehow, Ellsbury still has to have this stigma.

    I project Ellsbury will not miss more than the normal amount of games over the next 4 years. Does that make you happy? Does that prove I do not think he is injury prone or milks injuries?

    As for Doubront, you are down on him for coming to training camp overweight. I am not excusing this, but you did not seem to have much of a problem with guys like Beckett, Lackey, Lester, Wakefield and Albers being overweight and out of shape DURING the season. Something that possibly cost us the pennant.

    How do you know I never had issues with them being overweight? Besides, most of them proved they could pitch with a bit of a belly, while Doubie had not. I mentioned that factor before. Doubront is now proving he can pitch with a belly, so I am adjusting my feelings towards that part of his game as the sample size becomes large enough to matter. His WHIP is falling, and that is the best sign I can see. I am very happy he is doing well.

    You speak highly of Britton as a prospect despite his problems.

    I've mentioned trading Britton as much as Doubront. I don't get this claim.

    Now, I have nothing against Britton, but it is not likely that he will ever be as good as Doubront.

    All I said was, he was a possible starter like Wright, Workman, Webster...

    Yet , you continually call for Felix to be traded. This despite the fact that talented young left handers do not exactly grow on trees. Moonslav, maybe it is just me, but you do seem to have certain biases that get in the way of your objectivity.

    It's not just you. Others are as mistaken as you. 

    I told you my gripe against Doubront: high WHIP and Motivational issues in the offseason. I have said countless times he has great talent, and have defended him against those who doubt he does.

    On Ellsbury, I have defended him more than you and half the board mebers combined. Only boom has defended him more than I over the years. 

    I have been critical of his breaks on balls and arm on defense, but have said repeatedly that he has improved in thiose areas and is above average now on breaks (not arm). For that, I am labelled a Jacoby basher. It's absurd! Really, it is! You say I am biased? For being critical of just certain aspects of some of our player's skillset?

    Fatc: Ellsbury has a terrible arm.

    Fact: Doubront has walked too many batters.

    Fact: Ellsbury has tremendous speed, but is not a top ranged CF'er. Why? There's only one possible reason, in my opinion. I did not usually look at stats to form my opinions. I watch every play of every game. I go to many home and road games by the Sox. When defending Ellsbury to the hilt back in 2007-2009, I began to watch his fielding closer, because many posters (led by softy) were questioning his breaks and angles. I found that I had been wrong. It could have been easy to keep my original opinion on Ellsbury's defense so as to not admit I was wrong, but my observations told me otherwise. Then I looked at the UZR/150 numbers, particularly the range factors, and I changed my opinion. Since then, he has improved, and I have changed my opinion again with that imporvement. I guess saying anything less than he is the best at everytahing he does, will bring charges of bashing by someone on this site.

    I guess we have the best 25 players in MLB and all of them are the very best at every part of their game. That wouldn't be biased at all. Right?

    I responded to your statement that Ellsbury was "heads and shoulders" better than JBJ in AA. I showed that at ages 22 and 23 combined, JBJ had better numbers in the minors, except for SBs. I asked how you thought Jacoby was much better on defense at those ages than JBJ. I'd like to know how this is biased, and what you said was not.

    Maybe other posters don't see it that way. That is fine. No problem. Have a nice vacation. If I was in Maine, I would go to a Sea Dogs game and buy you a beer. 

    Thanks, but I don't drink.

     

    Sox4ever

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

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    I think I am more critical of players and management than are most posters. But I have no favorites or scapegoats. I try to remain objective. I have no biases , and certainly not towards Bradley. If it were up to me , he would be in the lineup every day. When I read your posts, I just get the impression that you are not always objective. You love your stats, except when some stats don't mesh with your opinions. When Ellsbury got off to a slow start this year, ( a " small sample size " ) compared to his career numbers, you called for him to be dropped to ninth against right handers and benched vs. lefties. This would seem to be more to embarrass one of your best players than to actually help the team. Ellsbury quickly rebounded from the slow start.

    I admitted I was wrong, buts Ellsbury was struggling for a pretty long sample size against LHPs when I made that statement. It had nothing to do with my opinion of Ellsbury. I suggested moving Papi, one of my favorite players, down in the line-up vs LHPs several years ago, when he was struggling too. (He hit under .600 that year in the games I had him moived down.) I have been wrong many times in my calls. When you state thousands of suggestions and ideas over a season, you are bound to be wrong sometimes.

    Recently , you wondered if he sat out a game with " Felixitis" .

    I said that was a joke. I have never been critical of Jacoby's injuries like many here have, even though him missing so many games has hurt us. I have never called him "injury prone". I did blame him for not calling off Beltre while others blamed Beltre of Tito for jacoby's rib injury.

    Implying that he was afraid to face Hernandez. This despite the fact that he has pretty good numbers vs. Felix, and as a left hand hitter, he is never platooned and faces all the toughest lefties in the league.

    You also revived the injury prone and injury milking accusations.

    I did not.

    Unfairly, in my view. He has had two major injuries in seven years with the Sox. These have accounted for the vast majority of games missed. Look around baseball. There have been a ton of guys on the DL this year. It seems every time you turn around, someone is going down, sometimes for the year. But somehow, Ellsbury still has to have this stigma.

    I project Ellsbury will not miss more than the normal amount of games over the next 4 years. Does that make you happy? Does that prove I do not think he is injury prone or milks injuries?

    As for Doubront, you are down on him for coming to training camp overweight. I am not excusing this, but you did not seem to have much of a problem with guys like Beckett, Lackey, Lester, Wakefield and Albers being overweight and out of shape DURING the season. Something that possibly cost us the pennant.

    How do you know I never had issues with them being overweight? Besides, most of them proved they could pitch with a bit of a belly, while Doubie had not. I mentioned that factor before. Doubront is now proving he can pitch with a belly, so I am adjusting my feelings towards that part of his game as the sample size becomes large enough to matter. His WHIP is falling, and that is the best sign I can see. I am very happy he is doing well.

    You speak highly of Britton as a prospect despite his problems.

    I've mentioned trading Britton as much as Doubront. I don't get this claim.

    Now, I have nothing against Britton, but it is not likely that he will ever be as good as Doubront.

    All I said was, he was a possible starter like Wright, Workman, Webster...

    Yet , you continually call for Felix to be traded. This despite the fact that talented young left handers do not exactly grow on trees. Moonslav, maybe it is just me, but you do seem to have certain biases that get in the way of your objectivity.

    It's not just you. Others are as mistaken as you. 

    I told you my gripe against Doubront: high WHIP and Motivational issues in the offseason. I have said countless times he has great talent, and have defended him against those who doubt he does.

    On Ellsbury, I have defended him more than you and half the board mebers combined. Only boom has defended him more than I over the years. 

    I have been critical of his breaks on balls and arm on defense, but have said repeatedly that he has improved in thiose areas and is above average now on breaks (not arm). For that, I am labelled a Jacoby basher. It's absurd! Really, it is! You say I am biased? For being critical of just certain aspects of some of our player's skillset?

    Fatc: Ellsbury has a terrible arm.

    Fact: Doubront has walked too many batters.

    Fact: Ellsbury has tremendous speed, but is not a top ranged CF'er. Why? There's only one possible reason, in my opinion. I did not usually look at stats to form my opinions. I watch every play of every game. I go to many home and road games by the Sox. When defending Ellsbury to the hilt back in 2007-2009, I began to watch his fielding closer, because many posters (led by softy) were questioning his breaks and angles. I found that I had been wrong. It could have been easy to keep my original opinion on Ellsbury's defense so as to not admit I was wrong, but my observations told me otherwise. Then I looked at the UZR/150 numbers, particularly the range factors, and I changed my opinion. Since then, he has improved, and I have changed my opinion again with that imporvement. I guess saying anything less than he is the best at everytahing he does, will bring charges of bashing by someone on this site.

    I guess we have the best 25 players in MLB and all of them are the very best at every part of their game. That wouldn't be biased at all. Right?

    I responded to your statement that Ellsbury was "heads and shoulders" better than JBJ in AA. I showed that at ages 22 and 23 combined, JBJ had better numbers in the minors, except for SBs. I asked how you thought Jacoby was much better on defense at those ages than JBJ. I'd like to know how this is biased, and what you said was not.

    Maybe other posters don't see it that way. That is fine. No problem. Have a nice vacation. If I was in Maine, I would go to a Sea Dogs game and buy you a beer. 

    Thanks, but I don't drink.

     

    Sox4ever



    The head and shoulders statement was not mine. See my reply to the " Lock up Ellsbury " thread for the injury prone reference. You brought it up while not necessarily endorsing it. How about a Pepsi and a hot dog ?  

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

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    The head and shoulders statement was not mine. See my reply to the " Lock up Ellsbury " thread for the injury prone reference. You brought it up while not necessarily endorsing it. How about a Pepsi and a hot dog ?  

    Sorry. That wasn't you who made the comment. I was mistaken.

    I do not recall saying Jacoby was injury prone, but when comparing him to Bounr, I believe I mentioned that Bourn was more reliable over recent years.

    Sox4ever

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

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to crazyworldoftroybrown's comment:

     

     

    All I can go by is Double AA, Ellsbury was head and shoulders above Bradley. Hitting, Speed and Defense.

    2006-2007 You dont go from High Single A to Triple AAA unless your special. Then the World Series.

    He'll get over 200 hits this season.

    Sox pay the man.

     

     



    Ellsbury was in single A at age 21, A & AA at age 22, AA, AAA and MLB at 23.

     

     

    In 2006 he had 225 PA in Portland and went .308/.387/.434/.821 with 16 SB and 8 CS. I'm not sure how you know he was "head and shoulders" better than JBJ at that time, but I'll choose to believe otherwise on that one area.

    JBJ was in single A at age 21 (same as Jacoby), a and AA at age 22 (same as Jacoby), and AAA and MLB at age 23 (same as Jacoby).

    At age 22 in Portland, JBJ hit .271/.373/.437/.809 in 271 PAs. I don't see a .013 advantage in OPS by Jacoby as being "head and shoulders better", but it was better in somewhat small sample sizes. JBJ had 8 SB and 3 CS in AA, but he had 24/9 overall in 2012 (A+ and AA combined). Again, Jacoby  was better with 41/17 (combined), significantly better. 

    I'm not trying to say JBJ will break into MLB like Jacoby did. They are two different players, but I felt I had to respond to your AA statement, since I don't see that big of a disparity between the two at age 22.




    WHAT??????????????

    You know what your talking about dude? Ellsbury blew out JBJ in Double AA .308 then .452 COME ON!!! He was so good they had to promote him after 17 games. Then he goes to Pawtucket bats .298, then kicks but in Sept for the parent club. Then had outstanding WS.

    I'm sure Farrell would be starting him as lead-off hitter if he was better. Sox were smart they would lock him up.

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

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    The best strategy is to replace with younger players, accept a small drop in performance until they learn the ropes, then compliment that drop with an expected bump somewhere else. If we drop in CF with JBJ, can we get a little better at 1B? Probably. Let the total be greater than it's individual parts. Look at the teams that go with "great" players like Jose Reyes. If he was on your team, you'd never think to replace him, because he's so good. Meanwhile, you're wiped out when he gets injured. Don't let the team get old, ala the Celtics and their "big three". Bird, McHale, Parrish or Garnett, Pierce and Allen, same story, different eras.

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

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    In response to crazyworldoftroybrown's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to crazyworldoftroybrown's comment:

     

     

    All I can go by is Double AA, Ellsbury was head and shoulders above Bradley. Hitting, Speed and Defense.

    2006-2007 You dont go from High Single A to Triple AAA unless your special. Then the World Series.

    He'll get over 200 hits this season.

    Sox pay the man.

     

     



    Ellsbury was in single A at age 21, A & AA at age 22, AA, AAA and MLB at 23.

     

     

    In 2006 he had 225 PA in Portland and went .308/.387/.434/.821 with 16 SB and 8 CS. I'm not sure how you know he was "head and shoulders" better than JBJ at that time, but I'll choose to believe otherwise on that one area.

    JBJ was in single A at age 21 (same as Jacoby), a and AA at age 22 (same as Jacoby), and AAA and MLB at age 23 (same as Jacoby).

    At age 22 in Portland, JBJ hit .271/.373/.437/.809 in 271 PAs. I don't see a .013 advantage in OPS by Jacoby as being "head and shoulders better", but it was better in somewhat small sample sizes. JBJ had 8 SB and 3 CS in AA, but he had 24/9 overall in 2012 (A+ and AA combined). Again, Jacoby  was better with 41/17 (combined), significantly better. 

    I'm not trying to say JBJ will break into MLB like Jacoby did. They are two different players, but I felt I had to respond to your AA statement, since I don't see that big of a disparity between the two at age 22.




    WHAT??????????????

    You know what your talking about dude? Ellsbury blew out JBJ in Double AA .308 then .452 COME ON!!! He was so good they had to promote him after 17 games. Then he goes to Pawtucket bats .298, then kicks but in Sept for the parent club. Then had outstanding WS.

    I'm sure Farrell would be starting him as lead-off hitter if he was better. Sox were smart they would lock him up.



    I just showed you the numbers. You can cherry pick all you want, but these are the facts:

    JBJ didn't even need to start his 3rd year in AA like Jacoby, yet you are bragging that Ellsbury was so much better, he got called up to AAA after 17 games. Like that makes him better! Total foolishness. You don't even get how absurd your point is.

    They promoted JBJ to MLB in April of his 3rd year. That's ahead of Ellsbury's promotion, but you weren't talking about the MLB numbers, you were talking about AA and how Jacoby was "head and shoulders" better than JBJ in all areas of the game.

    1) He was not better defensively not even counting the arm differential.

    2) He was not "head and shoulders" better hitting  at the same age and year of pro experience.

    3) Ellsbury was head and shoulders worse in AAA (.743 OPS in 427 PAs to JBJ's .922 OPS in 215 PAs), but you glossed over that fact without mention.

    4) I never said JBJ was better than Ellsbury right now. I was comparing their numbers at the same ages as a response to your outlandish statement, so you have missed my whole message. Talking about who Farrell should bat leadoff now like there is any dispute, is a construct of your imagination.

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

    Re: Ellsbury and Bradley

    In response to youkillus' comment:

    The best strategy is to replace with younger players, accept a small drop in performance until they learn the ropes, then compliment that drop with an expected bump somewhere else. If we drop in CF with JBJ, can we get a little better at 1B? Probably. Let the total be greater than it's individual parts. Look at the teams that go with "great" players like Jose Reyes. If he was on your team, you'd never think to replace him, because he's so good. Meanwhile, you're wiped out when he gets injured. Don't let the team get old, ala the Celtics and their "big three". Bird, McHale, Parrish or Garnett, Pierce and Allen, same story, different eras.



    BINGO!

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share