Iglesias

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

    Iglesias

    If he really can be a top-five defender, an AL team, Boston or another club, will sooner or later install him at SS and not care if he takes to the plate a soggy newspaper for a bat, at least to start with. ( The team that makes this move will have confidence in its offense otherwise. ) Hyped pitchers and hyped hitters are more likely to fail than are hyped defenders. In fact, I can't think of one who was at Iggy's supposed level. If he really does have the goods to be a "once in a generation shortstop" ( as the cliche goes ), someone will say, "Here's the job. Don't worry about hitting. it will come." ( It has for others. Tom and I gave examples. )  Then it will be his responsibility.
    Some of us ( Moon, Boom, JB, others ) would like to see him at SS for Boston sooner than later. He would do much better than Scutaro now at snuffing out hits, making the relay throw ( he's the relay man, not the cutoff man ), and turning the double play. All that singing in the shower would come from pitchers. A great fielding SS makes an enormous difference to them. Believe me.
    I can't quantify run differential between a guy like Iglesias and a guy like Scutaro, nor do think it can be computed with anything close to accuracy. But, on balance, the great defender gets my vote. He's the guy who puts the stake in the heart of the opposing offense -- just when it's needed most.
    This issue will be worth watching closely. 
    No, I would not trade Iglesias if his glove is as gold as reported.

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

    Re: Iglesias

    Great post, ex.

    I did provide some data to show what the differential in plays made might be, but I know it is not even close to an exact science. I do think Iggy could make at least 50 more plays based on his range than Scutty over 150 games. Add to that more DPs turned, more players thrown out on relay throws, and more players holding up at 3rd, and I think the differential on defense more than makes up for the 40 or so less hits he might get on offense (100 hits by Iggy vs 140 hist by Scutty in 500 ABs). This doesn't even address the areas you have touched on, such as the mental aspect of improving a pitcher's performance when he gets out of a tough inning due to a great play at SS. Less pitches thrown by our pitchers. Less pen taxing. Keeping momentum on our side and so on...

    Even if the Scutty to Iggy move was a slight loss overall, the players we get for Scutty's $6M should more than make up for the difference. Also, we'd have Aviles and Punto to PH for Iggy and play decent SS if needed late in games or against particularly tough pitchers.
     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BOSOX1941. Show BOSOX1941's posts

    Re: Iglesias

    In Response to Re: Iglesias:
    Great post, ex. I did provide some data to show what the differential in plays made might be, but I know it is not even close to an exact science. I do think Iggy could make at least 50 more plays based on his range than Scutty over 150 games. Add to that more DPs turned, more players thrown out on relay throws, and more players holding up at 3rd, and I think the differential on defense more than makes up for the 40 or so less hits he might get on offense (100 hits by Iggy vs 140 hist by Scutty in 500 ABs). This doesn't even address the areas you have touched on, such as the mental aspect of improving a pitcher's performance when he gets out of a tough inning due to a great play at SS. Less pitches thrown by our pitchers. Less pen taxing. Keeping momentum on our side and so on... Even if the Scutty to Iggy move was a slight loss overall, the players we get for Scutty's $6M should more than make up for the difference. Also, we'd have Aviles and Punto to PH for Iggy and play decent SS if needed late in games or against particularly tough pitchers.
    Posted by moonslav59


    You should be able to document those 50 balls that Scutty didn't get to that Iggy would have turned into outs. Of course you should document how many of the 50 actually had a negative affect on the outcome of that particular game. I would think documenting the DPs that would have been turned with Iggy instead of Scutty. It should be simple enough to document all the relay throws were a run scored that wouldn't have scored if Iggy was the relay man. Also documenting the runners that ran past third on Scutty and scored, that wouldn't have run and scored if Iggy was the relay man. I wonder just how many game or run saving plays an average SS makes during a season? I wonder how many more they'd get out of Uggy than they get out of any of their short stops?  Hmmmm maybe the pitchers could bat instead of Iggy !!
    Don't get me wrong, I don't think there is any more beautiful work of art than a SS going deep into the hole and throwing out a runner.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from RickyHussle. Show RickyHussle's posts

    Re: Iglesias

    I agree with most of what was said here.  I would like to trade Scutaro, in order to play Iggy and save money.  I like the way the Sox have built up their pitching depth.  For me, Oswalt would be the icing on the cake.  He would be on a one-year-deal as a 4th or 5th starter with major upside (I imagine more upside then Kuroda).
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Iglesias

    You should be able to document those 50 balls that Scutty didn't get to that Iggy would have turned into outs. Of course you should document how many of the 50 actually had a negative affect on the outcome of that particular game. I would think documenting the DPs that would have been turned with Iggy instead of Scutty. It should be simple enough to document all the relay throws were a run scored that wouldn't have scored if Iggy was the relay man. Also documenting the runners that ran past third on Scutty and scored, that wouldn't have run and scored if Iggy was the relay man. I wonder just how many game or run saving plays an average SS makes during a season? I wonder how many more they'd get out of Uggy than they get out of any of their short stops?  Hmmmm maybe the pitchers could bat instead of Iggy !!
    Don't get me wrong, I don't think there is any more beautiful work of art than a SS going deep into the hole and throwing out a runner.

    If you watched all the games, you'd not need any documentation.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxu571. Show redsoxu571's posts

    Re: Iglesias

    Omar Vizquel started his career with OPS+'s of: 50, 66, 66, 95, 67, 70, and 78 before settling into about a slightly below-average offensive player (with very good speed, solid enough OBPs, and little power). Career high was 14 homers (followed by 9, then 7).

    Ozzie Smith started his career with OPS+'s of: 82, 48, 71, 62, 84, and 82 before settling into a roughly average offensive player with a very similar profile to Vizquel's. Career high was 6 homers (followed by 3).

    Is there any doubt that these players were very much worth having on their respective teams? If we knew for sure that Iglesias would have a similar career to these two, I'd want him starting on the Red Sox yesterday.

    They say that Iglesias is as "MLB ready" a defensive SS as you'll see, but that doesn't mean for certain that he has the HOF level defense of this pair. But if the Sox scouts see that level of defense in him, it would make sense to give him a shot as soon as he has enough high-level minor league experience. Given that he only had two partial AA seasons before playing almost a full AAA season last year, he probably needs to at least start the year in AAA, but he could show up in Boston during 2012 and should arrive by 2013 if he shows any offensive potential at all.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BOSOX1941. Show BOSOX1941's posts

    Re: Iglesias

    In Response to Re: Iglesias:
    You should be able to document those 50 balls that Scutty didn't get to that Iggy would have turned into outs. Of course you should document how many of the 50 actually had a negative affect on the outcome of that particular game. I would think documenting the DPs that would have been turned with Iggy instead of Scutty. It should be simple enough to document all the relay throws were a run scored that wouldn't have scored if Iggy was the relay man. Also documenting the runners that ran past third on Scutty and scored, that wouldn't have run and scored if Iggy was the relay man. I wonder just how many game or run saving plays an average SS makes during a season? I wonder how many more they'd get out of Uggy than they get out of any of their short stops?  Hmmmm maybe the pitchers could bat instead of Iggy !! Don't get me wrong, I don't think there is any more beautiful work of art than a SS going deep into the hole and throwing out a runner. If you watched all the games, you'd not need any documentation.
    Posted by moonslav59


    I watched every game and I honestly don't think there were 20 balls that Iggy would have made a play on that Scutty didn't. Of those 20, how many were game changing? 3,4,5,6---10? And for that we get an automatic out 4 or 5 times a game??? Maybe you think that makes sense, I don't. So I respectfully disagree with you on this topic.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from phxvlsoxfan. Show phxvlsoxfan's posts

    Re: Iglesias

    Can't argue the improved D would be nice, but 2 concerns.  First, it seems like an assumption that trading Scuts will be practical.  His value to many teams would be as an experienced, utility infielder and maybe a starter at 2nd or even SS for some.  How many teams are so desperate at these spots that they will give up talent and pay $4.5 - 6.0 mil?  The market will not be very large, and to move him you may either have to take another team's excess salary or pay 50 - 75% of his salary.  Second, the impact of a very weak hitter in the 9 spot is being downplayed.  Unless CC has a rebirth, 6 - 9 in the order will be boarderline weak with him, Sweeney/RH RF, Salty/Shoppeck and Iggy.  Scuts' extra hits and walks will help keep innings going and have men on for Jake and Pedey at the top of the lineup.  A near automatic out in the 9th spot can be a killer (see many NL games).
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from JB-3. Show JB-3's posts

    Re: Iglesias

    In Response to Re: Iglesias:
    Can't argue the improved D would be nice, but 2 concerns.  First, it seems like an assumption that trading Scuts will be practical.  His value to many teams would be as an experienced, utility infielder and maybe a starter at 2nd or even SS for some.  How many teams are so desperate at these spots that they will give up talent and pay $4.5 - 6.0 mil?  The market will not be very large, and to move him you may either have to take another team's excess salary or pay 50 - 75% of his salary.  Second, the impact of a very weak hitter in the 9 spot is being downplayed.  Unless CC has a rebirth, 6 - 9 in the order will be boarderline weak with him, Sweeney/RH RF, Salty/Shoppeck and Iggy.  Scuts' extra hits and walks will help keep innings going and have men on for Jake and Pedey at the top of the lineup.  A near automatic out in the 9th spot can be a killer (see many NL games).
    Posted by phxvlsoxfan


    The difference between a .280 hitter and a .200 hitter is only 40 hits over the course of 500 AB's.  We aren't talking about a guy who's going to be batting .000 replacing Scoot.  We also have PH options on the bench for Iggy in key, late inning situations.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Iglesias

    In Response to Re: Iglesias:
    Can't argue the improved D would be nice, but 2 concerns.  First, it seems like an assumption that trading Scuts will be practical.  His value to many teams would be as an experienced, utility infielder and maybe a starter at 2nd or even SS for some.  How many teams are so desperate at these spots that they will give up talent and pay $4.5 - 6.0 mil?  The market will not be very large, and to move him you may either have to take another team's excess salary or pay 50 - 75% of his salary.  Second, the impact of a very weak hitter in the 9 spot is being downplayed.  Unless CC has a rebirth, 6 - 9 in the order will be boarderline weak with him, Sweeney/RH RF, Salty/Shoppeck and Iggy.  Scuts' extra hits and walks will help keep innings going and have men on for Jake and Pedey at the top of the lineup.  A near automatic out in the 9th spot can be a killer (see many NL games).
    Posted by phxvlsoxfan
    Your concerns are legitimate.  
    Crawford can reasonably be expected to do better. How much remains to be seen. Sweeney has no power but figures to do better than did Reddick down the stretch. So 6 and 7 should be ( should be ) at least decent and maybe better than last season, if we omit Reddick's early numbers. Not much can be expected in the way of OBP from Salty/Shoppach, but Salty is still breaking in.
    You're right. A blank in #9 can be deadly, but so can a great glove at SS, for all the reasons that have been given. 
    The Sox or another club will ultimately have to calculate the balance, depending, as you say, on the composition of the entire lineup. And on how good a SS really is. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsox47steelers. Show redsox47steelers's posts

    Re: Iglesias

    Boston 1941 You left out the affect of pitcher. More inning & lower pitch counts.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BOSOX1941. Show BOSOX1941's posts

    Re: Iglesias

    In Response to Re: Iglesias:
    Boston 1941 You left out the affect of pitcher. More inning & lower pitch counts.
    Posted by redsox47steelers


    I'm not a proponent of pitch counts.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Iglesias

    In Response to Re: Iglesias:
    In Response to Re: Iglesias : I watched every game and I honestly don't think there were 20 balls that Iggy would have made a play on that Scutty didn't. Of those 20, how many were game changing? 3,4,5,6---10? And for that we get an automatic out 4 or 5 times a game??? Maybe you think that makes sense, I don't. So I respectfully disagree with you on this topic.
    Posted by BOSOX1941


    Bosox, I am really loving your post-Tito posting.  I find myself liking your way of thinking and your baseball knowledge.  Its a shame its been so well masked for all these years behind your endless one-note disparaging of Francona.  i had no idea you were such a baseball man. 
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Iglesias

    In Response to Re: Iglesias:
    In Response to Re: Iglesias : I watched every game and I honestly don't think there were 20 balls that Iggy would have made a play on that Scutty didn't. Of those 20, how many were game changing? 3,4,5,6---10? And for that we get an automatic out 4 or 5 times a game??? Maybe you think that makes sense, I don't. So I respectfully disagree with you on this topic.
    Posted by BOSOX1941
    First, no one with a bat in his hand is an automatic out four or five times a game. Second, you and Moon, as observers, are at odds about how many balls that Iggy would have got to. That'a two problems with arithmetic, one loaded in one direction, the other largely unsettled in the other direction, and perhaps beyond settlement. Your case with numbers is highly slanted. It is, in effect, no case.
    You also ignore all the other variables that have been introduced into this discussion.

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

    Re: Iglesias

    In Response to Re: Iglesias:
    In Response to Re: Iglesias : The difference between a .280 hitter and a .200 hitter is only 40 hits over the course of 500 AB's.  We aren't talking about a guy who's going to be batting .000 replacing Scoot.  We also have PH options on the bench for Iggy in key, late inning situations.
    Posted by JB-3
    Of course.

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

    Re: Iglesias

    There are variables on the offensive side as well - having a weak hitter with no power or plate discipline at the nine hole takes the bat out of the hands of guys like Crawford, Aviles, Salty, Lavarnway, etc.  Scutaro's offense made Ellsbury's power surge more meaningful - with Iglesias hitting ninth, what is Ellsbury's RBI total?  What's going to happen in interleague, when we have back-to-back easy outs.

    The difference between a Scutaro and Iglesias might only be 40 hits, but add in another 15 - 20 walks, and the fact that some of those hits are doubles and homers, and you have close to a hundred total bases.  Scutaro is not a gold glove candidate, but he's not horrible.  And though Iglesias has good range, it is not tremendous, at least as far as the statistics have born out thus far - maybe he looks better than he is because of his short stature.  Give him time to figure things out at Pawtucket.  There's no sense rushing this kid before he's ready.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from JB-3. Show JB-3's posts

    Re: Iglesias

    In Response to Re: Iglesias:
    In Response to Re: Iglesias : I'm not a proponent of pitch counts.
    Posted by BOSOX1941


    While I respect that, just because you don't like something doesn't mean that it isn't an integral part of the game.  Should it have a significant impact?  No.  But it certainly does because of today's management practices (for better or worse).
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Iglesias

    In Response to Re: Iglesias:
    There are variables on the offensive side as well - having a weak hitter with no power or plate discipline at the nine hole takes the bat out of the hands of guys like Crawford, Aviles, Salty, Lavarnway, etc.  Scutaro's offense made Ellsbury's power surge more meaningful - with Iglesias hitting ninth, what is Ellsbury's RBI total?  What's going to happen in interleague, when we have back-to-back easy outs. The difference between a Scutaro and Iglesias might only be 40 hits, but add in another 15 - 20 walks, and the fact that some of those hits are doubles and homers, and you have close to a hundred total bases.  Scutaro is not a gold glove candidate, but he's not horrible.  And though Iglesias has good range, it is not tremendous, at least as far as the statistics have born out thus far - maybe he looks better than he is because of his short stature.  Give him time to figure things out at Pawtucket.  There's no sense rushing this kid before he's ready.
    Posted by slomag

    Scutaro may not be "horrible" ( no one has said that he is ), but he's weak at SS and in combination with Youkilis constitutes a highly suspect defense on the left side. 
    Nothing is "borne out" by defensive stats in their current state. OTOH, maybe all the scouts and coaches who have seen him and call his range excellent are fooled by an optical illusion. They just think they see where that little guy starts and gets to on a ground ball. Who knows, he might even be the first guy that size they have ever seen play shortstop. 
    All the time in the world in Pawtucket will not add .25 of an inch to the man's stature. Or add to his zone numbers. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Iglesias

    In Response to Re: Iglesias:
    In Response to Re: Iglesias : While I respect that, just because you don't like something doesn't mean that it isn't an integral part of the game.  Should it have a significant impact?  No.  But it certainly does because of today's management practices (for better or worse).
    Posted by JB-3
    Indeed, some people seem to think that if they don't like something it will go away.

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

    Re: Iglesias

    In Response to Re: Iglesias:
    In Response to Re: Iglesias : Scutaro may not be "horrible" ( no one has said that he is ), but he's weak at SS and in combination with Youkilis constitutes a highly suspect defense on the left side.  Nothing is "borne out" by defensive stats in their current state. OTOH, maybe all the scouts and coaches who have seen him and call his range excellent are fooled by an optical illusion. They just think they see where that little guy starts and gets to on a ground ball. Who knows, he might even be the first guy that size they have ever seen play shortstop.  All the time in the world in Pawtucket will not add .25 of an inch to the man's stature. Or add to his zone numbers. 
    Posted by expitch
    Quite apart from the difficulty Iglesias would have trying to figure out how to grow to a height at which he can be properly evaluated, please explain how a weak batter in the 9 hole "takes the bat out of the hands" of batters two slots ahead of him. A team might walk the 8th slot, but it's not going to start walking people higher in anticipation of getting to a patsy in the 9th slot. Maybe in a specific situation late in a game but not regularly. Even then, the other manager must also anticipate that his pitcher will not face an Igelsias type but rather a pinch hitter -- with all those guys on base. 

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from AL34. Show AL34's posts

    Re: Iglesias

    problem is Iglesias cannot hit well and Scuttaro makes $6 million a year, kind of high for a utility guy. the Sox could have saved themselves some money if they had signed Jason Bay instead of Crawford who hit well in the playoff games he was in and was tailored made for our park.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Iglesias

    Scutaro had a 2.9 WAR despite missing despite missing 49 games.  If a guy that absolutely can't hit yet can replace someone with a 2.9 WAR, then you could make a case for most of the minor league SS's with good gloves being able to replace most of the major league SS's.

    Scutaro had a UZR/150 of 1.0.  That makes him middle of the pack defensively.  And he's middle of the pack offensively.  If we're saying he can replace Scutaro, he can theoretically replace half the SS's in the league.

    But that's only half the problem.  We have 6 controllable years.  And we are going to use one of the controllable years watching him learn to hit?

    Or put yet another way.

    He had a .555 OPS in the minors.  No one in the pros starts with those types of offensive numbers.  If a SS's fielding is that important, why aren't there any .555 SS's in the league?

    For that matter, why not just start Punto?
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Iglesias

    In Response to Re: Iglesias:
    Scutaro had a 2.9 WAR despite missing despite missing 49 games.  If a guy that absolutely can't hit yet can replace someone with a 2.9 WAR, then you could make a case for most of the minor league SS's with good gloves being able to replace most of the major league SS's. Scutaro had a UZR/150 of 1.0.  That makes him middle of the pack defensively.  And he's middle of the pack offensively.  If we're saying he can replace Scutaro, he can theoretically replace half the SS's in the league. But that's only half the problem.  We have 6 controllable years.  And we are going to use one of the controllable years watching him learn to hit? Or put yet another way. He had a .555 OPS in the minors.  No one in the pros starts with those types of offensive numbers.  If a SS's fielding is that important, why aren't there any .555 SS's in the league? For that matter, why not just start Punto?
    Posted by Joebreidey
    Theoretically ( which is your side of the street ), almost anything can be said if one gets to choose the numbers and thereby validate the methodology on which they are based. And then, as you do, reduce the argument to the absurd.
    We've had this argument before, and are repeating ourselves. Why not let these two posts stand, For What They Are Worth on the Board. Everyone here knows what you reject about my position and what I reject about yours.
    The answer to your question is simple: Iglesias may be exceptional.

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

    Re: Iglesias

    The answer to your question is simple: Iglesias may be exceptional.

    He may be.  I'm a big fan, beleive he'll start next year, and beleive he'll hit a respectable amount in the bigs.  I also don't beleive he is anywhere close to ready.  If he comes up in 2013 and gives us better than a .600, I'll be pleased.

    I mostly object to the idea that a good glove can play in the pros with virtually no hitting ability at this point.  If that was the case, most of the SS's in the league would be 22 y.o.'s.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share