JBJ may be an offensive liability

  1. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: JBJ may be an offensive liability

    I have said we should trade Gomes, but it's not happening. He is farrell's favorite.

    (I disagree, on the trading Gomes part. His trade value stand alone is near zero. He is a good positive guy in a support role. I would put him exclusively in a bench PH OF go in and play after PH role in scome PH spots)

     

    I have said we need a good defensive CF'er who hits lefties well to compliment JBJ. (OK)

    Davis only fills half that need, and at $10M/2, he was not even close to the answer.

    (Not true, Davis in a part-time CF and roaming the OF like ellsbury in 2008 is good defensively, and has the metrics to prove it)

    He is not good defensively and he stinks vs RHPs. That would be exposed, if he had to play RF FT or on defesne in CF vs lefties.

    (False, see above on defense. On vs. RHP, his role isn't to play RF FT. If he comes in for defense, there is no exposing factor at all, as he comes in late for defense to preserve a lead.)

    His not good on defense. A tiny sample size in CF over 2012-2013 does not change the facts, no matter how hard you try to spin them.

    You want to use his 2012-2013 CF sample size of 148 innings combined to convince me he is decent. He is not. And, if you do go by just recent small sample sizes, here are some just as recent and even larger sample sizes:

    UZR/150

    LF: 

    '13  -4.4 in 381 innings

    '12 -12.5 in 856 innings

    '11 -15.0 in 36 innings

    '10 -20.7 in 320 innings

    career -10.6

    RF:

    '13 -24.2 in 227 innings

    career -1.5

    And, you want to bring this guy in as a defensive re[placement? Yeah, maybe for Nava or Gomes, but he's not good on defense. Just face it and move on.

     

     

    I think it was a mistaken opportunity lost, and make my case as well as the case I made for AJ.  The difference is that what Davis brings to the team is actually more important than AJ. It's not about cumaltive steals, it's about a guy who can steal from off bench or starting vs. LP and complimenting bradley and being his Ellsbury 2008 training wheels with the exception that Bradley will start in CF most of the time because Davis is true compliment. What Bradley can do well, hit RP, Davis can't. What Bradley can't do, hit LP well and steal bases when on base, on demand, Davis can. Thiis all in the context of a CF profile on the offensive metrics.

    He would be a good offensive compliment, but at $10M, I want defense as well.

     

    but that ship has sailed.

    Yes, and so has yours.

     

    So, what are your ideas for a defensive CF'er to compliment Bradley, who is going to be worst case decent in CF defensively in his first year on the major league roster (call-ups and downs don't cout).

    I don't see anyone out there, but I'm not an expert on the other 29 teams' rosters or unproven players with great defensive skills, but I'm pretty sure there is someone out there.

    I'd rather just bite the bullet with JBJ FT and use Shane in emergencies, than to pay $10M for a poor fielder.

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from 37stories. Show 37stories's posts

    Re: JBJ may be an offensive liability

    Bradley is the starting Cf next year.

    I would say that is rather obvious.

    The Red Sox won a WS which buys them enough goodwill to go with Bogaerts and Bradley as full timers. They are both going to be very good players. They will let them play.

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

    Re: JBJ may be an offensive liability

    In response to 37stories' comment:

    Bradley is the starting Cf next year.

    I would say that is rather obvious.

    The Red Sox won a WS which buys them enough goodwill to go with Bogaerts and Bradley as full timers. They are both going to be very good players. They will let them play.



    Absolutely. 

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

    Re: JBJ may be an offensive liability

    In response to wvwc61's comment:

    Although it was a small sample size, didn't JBJ struggle offensively possibly because pitchers

    adjusted to his weaknesses? How can they just hand him the position until he shows that he can hit major league pitching. They should have gone after Granderson and give JBJ more time to develop hoping that he would be the starter when Shane's contract is up. The Sox did nothing to make up for the loss of JE. BC said it's difficult to replace JE's skills but we can do it by finding a player with more power. Their only chance now to replace JE  is to make a trade either now or during the season. Right now the Sox offensively are not as good as they were last year. No one is asking them to repeat as champs. But at least put a team out there offensively that will able to score a lot of runs. With JBJ in center, ZB at short, and Middy at third it appears as if 2014 mqy be a bridge year and that ain't good enough for the prices they charge and the budget they have to work with. Oh yes, we are thrilled they were champs, but don't rest on your laurels. Put a team out their that will compete for the playoffs. 




    Guess with thinking this Pedroia should still be in the minors? Remember when Pedey 1st came up and struggled like crazy and many fans like yourself wanted to send him down, Francona was smart enough to listen to his baseball people and they all told him he will hit at the MLB level. Think its possible that the scouts and everyone that has been watching JBJ play are telling Farrell and Ben the same thing, he will hit at this level? Think the RS are smart enough to trust their baseball people. The idea of bringing in a decling Granderson in for 15 mil a yr, at that point might has well matched the Yankee offer to Ells. This is how the RS do things, there not going to overpay to keep anyone whether its Pedro / Damon / or Ells. 3 WS titles in last 10 yrs should tell us something this organization has a pretty good idea what it is doing.

     

     
  6. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: JBJ may be an offensive liability

    Fact: Davis in LF defensively is better than Gomes. 

    Davis cannot play CF for JBJ vs LHPs and take Gomes' place in LF vs LHPs as well. Besides, being better than Gomes is not saying he's a good fielder. Stop moving the goalposts. You have gone from saying he is a plus defensive OF'er to being better than Gomes in LF and Nava in RF... tow of the worst fielders in MLB.

     

    Fact: Davis in RF defensively is better than Nava. 

    That's a big vote of confidence.

     

    Fact: Davis sample size in part-time CF role is 2012 and 2013 is outstanding

    34 and 114 innings vs over 2000.

     

    Fact: Part-time role in CF and other OF is what he would be in

    And he'd stink on defense at all 3, and if forced to play vs RHPs would stink there as well. We face about 40-45 LH'd starters each year. He can't play 40 games in CF vs a LHP, 40 games in LF vs a LHP, and 40 games in RF vs a LHP. 

    He should never play vs a RHP, and he should not be viewed as a decent fielder based on some tiny sample sizes from one OF slot over the last 2 years.

    OF UZR/150

    2013: -3.6 (59th out of 89 or about bottom third)

    2012: -8.0 (72nd out of 93 or about bottom 4th)

    2011: -13.6 (86th out of 91 or about bottom of the bottom)

    He is not good on defense.

    Period.

     

     

     

     

     
  8. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: JBJ may be an offensive liability

    He is good on defense, period.

     

    Doesn't surprise me that the facts can't make you admit you are wrong.

    You yourself said the UZR numbers showed he was a good defensive OF'er.

    They don't.

    Not last year.

    Not 2012.

    Not 2011.

    Not 2010.

    Not, not, not, not.

     

    Yes, Davis utilizes his speed, but his poor OBP and poor fielding does not outweigh the baserunning plus or make him a good buy at $10M/2, especially since it would put us over the limit. 

    BTW, I thought SBs were overrated when judging our previous CF'er.

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

    Re: JBJ may be an offensive liability

    Napoli isn't good on defense, period, based on your earlier years sample size, period.

    You'll never get the sample size logic, will you?

    Napoli career 2137 innings at 1B : +4.9

    (He learned the position late in life.)

    Besides, I never claimed he was a great fielding 1Bman. I just said he had a great fielding season. The distinction is lost on clowns like you.

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

    Re: JBJ may be an offensive liability

    I can live with Napoli based off the reality... 2 year deal, adequate numbers all around. I cannot live with Drew coming back unless somehow we have flipped Middy for Stanton or Carlos Gonzales or one of that caliber.

    Aaron Hicks is the worse case scenerio for JBJR's 2014 season... and that would be horrible. I still roll him out there with the hope he will be much better than Hicks - hopefully his bat will improve and so long as he doesn't start dropping routine fly balls he has until July 1 to show the team he is for real.

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

    Re: JBJ may be an offensive liability

    I can live with Napoli based off the reality... 2 year deal, adequate numbers all around. I cannot live with Drew coming back unless somehow we have flipped Middy for Stanton or Carlos Gonzales or one of that caliber.

    Agreed, and we'd have to dump a high-priced arm as well.

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

    Re: JBJ may be an offensive liability

    In response to solareclipse's comment:

    Huge Earl Weaver fan, and we don't disagree. Weaver changed players in groups, not just one guy or the other, and time wasn't divided based on the Lefty or righty factor alone. He used to go with the hot hands. Weaver is a great study, but he'd be run out of baseball by today's facist media and politicians and community organizers. 

    Let's talk Weaver, I like that subject.




    I can talk Weaver.  Earl Weaver would not have wanted Rajai Davis.  Period.  Not for how you think he should be used.

     

    Weaver was ahead of his time in many ways.  His trademark “pitching, defense, and 3-run homers” emphasized all the important aspects of what we now know as WAR.  “3-run homers” was his sneaky way of letting us know he loved hitters who get on base a lot.  However, he did not like patient hitters and wanted his batters to hit away.  He also had a very odd predilection for LHH catchers.  No one knows why.   

    Weaver, like Bill James, eschewed such strategies as bunting, hit-and-run, and stolen bases.  Weaver instead preferred to combine the SB with the hit-and-run in a play he called “run and hit,” the main difference being the runner was attempting to steal, and the hitter would ignore this and hit anything he felt he could.  Again, he liked aggressive hitters.  (Former Sox 1B Coach Al Bumbry did steal 81 bases for a Weaver-lead team in 1979-1980, but this is not as impressive as it looks at first glance.  The late 1970’s and early ‘80s were the heyday of the stolen base in MLB.  That total placed him tenth in MLB over that stretch, and very far from leader Ron LeFlore, who had 175.  LeFlore, Omar Moreno, and Willie Wilson all had double or more of Bumbry’s modest total.)   

    Weaver also hated bringing the infield in on defense, as he felt it gave too much advantage to the hitter.  He preferred his chances with standard defensive alignments.

    He was behind in his reluctance to accept pitch counts and his constant overworking of pitchers.  Granted, this was in the days before heavily-specialized bullpens.  But he also preferred a 4-man rotation over a 5-man rotation, with very simple logic - it’s easier to find 4 good pitchers than to find 5.  However, he probably burned out a few arms a little bit earlier than need be with this logic, and his reluctance to accept that pitching in fact hurts pitchers.  He did eventually use a 5-man rotation, but I am sure it bothered him on some level.

    And, per our topic, Weaver was well known for his use of platoons, the most effective being his left field platoon of John Lowenstein (LHH) and Gary Roenicke (RHH).  Lowenstein was a long-haired, gangly, bespectacled fellow who simply did not look like an athlete, but rather resembled a middle school science teacher - granted, a science teacher who could crush RHP.  He was all but was useless against southpaws, however.  From 1981 through 1984, Lowestein played in 432 games, but made only 8 starts against LHP.  His counterpart, Gary Roenicke (older brother of Milwaukee manager Ronand father of Twins RHRP Josh) was a RHH powerhouse, but a horrendous fielder and could best be described as a lummox with a bad mullet.  He was less graceful than a car accident, a nightmare in the field, and among the slowest runners in MLB.  Roenicke once grounded into a triple play in Oakland where he was out at first by about 40 feet, causing A’s first baseman Dave Revering to remark  “We could have gotten 4 outs if there was another man on base.”  This complete lack of agility, dexterity and speed relegated Roenicke, despite his prolific power, to a reduced role of starting only vs. LHP.  From 1983 through 1985, Roenicke played on over 350 games, but only started 60 times against a RHP. (Hot hand?) He did come into numerous games if teams tried to expose Lowenstein with a left-handed reliever. 

    Given the chance to sign Rajai Davis, I think Weaver passes.  Weaver did not believe in platooning rookies for “confidence” so much as he believed in using platoons to cover weaknesses, such as Lowenstein’s inability to hit LHP and Roenicke’s inability to play the OF.  Weaver would start Bradley full time, knowing that even if he does not hit 3-run homers, he still helps with defense.  I believe Weaver would have pegged Bradley as the equivalent to the CF he inherited when he took over the helm of the Orioles – Paul Blair. 

    Those are my recollections and opinions about Earl Weaver.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from 808soxfan. Show 808soxfan's posts

    Re: JBJ may be an offensive liability

    In response to 37stories' comment:

    Bradley is the starting Cf next year.

    I would say that is rather obvious.

    The Red Sox won a WS which buys them enough goodwill to go with Bogaerts and Bradley as full timers. They are both going to be very good players. They will let them play.



    +1

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: JBJ may be an offensive liability

    In response to notin's comment:

    In response to solareclipse's comment:

    Huge Earl Weaver fan, and we don't disagree. Weaver changed players in groups, not just one guy or the other, and time wasn't divided based on the Lefty or righty factor alone. He used to go with the hot hands. Weaver is a great study, but he'd be run out of baseball by today's facist media and politicians and community organizers. 

    Let's talk Weaver, I like that subject.




    I can talk Weaver.  Earl Weaver would not have wanted Rajai Davis.  Period.  Not for how you think he should be used.

     

    Weaver was ahead of his time in many ways.  His trademark “pitching, defense, and 3-run homers” emphasized all the important aspects of what we now know as WAR.  “3-run homers” was his sneaky way of letting us know he loved hitters who get on base a lot.  However, he did not like patient hitters and wanted his batters to hit away.  He also had a very odd predilection for LHH catchers.  No one knows why.   

    Weaver, like Bill James, eschewed such strategies as bunting, hit-and-run, and stolen bases.  Weaver instead preferred to combine the SB with the hit-and-run in a play he called “run and hit,” the main difference being the runner was attempting to steal, and the hitter would ignore this and hit anything he felt he could.  Again, he liked aggressive hitters.  (Former Sox 1B Coach Al Bumbry did steal 81 bases for a Weaver-lead team in 1979-1980, but this is not as impressive as it looks at first glance.  The late 1970’s and early ‘80s were the heyday of the stolen base in MLB.  That total placed him tenth in MLB over that stretch, and very far from leader Ron LeFlore, who had 175.  LeFlore, Omar Moreno, and Willie Wilson all had double or more of Bumbry’s modest total.)   

    Weaver also hated bringing the infield in on defense, as he felt it gave too much advantage to the hitter.  He preferred his chances with standard defensive alignments.

    He was behind in his reluctance to accept pitch counts and his constant overworking of pitchers.  Granted, this was in the days before heavily-specialized bullpens.  But he also preferred a 4-man rotation over a 5-man rotation, with very simple logic - it’s easier to find 4 good pitchers than to find 5.  However, he probably burned out a few arms a little bit earlier than need be with this logic, and his reluctance to accept that pitching in fact hurts pitchers.  He did eventually use a 5-man rotation, but I am sure it bothered him on some level.

    And, per our topic, Weaver was well known for his use of platoons, the most effective being his left field platoon of John Lowenstein (LHH) and Gary Roenicke (RHH).  Lowenstein was a long-haired, gangly, bespectacled fellow who simply did not look like an athlete, but rather resembled a middle school science teacher - granted, a science teacher who could crush RHP.  He was all but was useless against southpaws, however.  From 1981 through 1984, Lowestein played in 432 games, but made only 8 starts against LHP.  His counterpart, Gary Roenicke (older brother of Milwaukee manager Ronand father of Twins RHRP Josh) was a RHH powerhouse, but a horrendous fielder and could best be described as a lummox with a bad mullet.  He was less graceful than a car accident, a nightmare in the field, and among the slowest runners in MLB.  Roenicke once grounded into a triple play in Oakland where he was out at first by about 40 feet, causing A’s first baseman Dave Revering to remark  “We could have gotten 4 outs if there was another man on base.”  This complete lack of agility, dexterity and speed relegated Roenicke, despite his prolific power, to a reduced role of starting only vs. LHP.  From 1983 through 1985, Roenicke played on over 350 games, but only started 60 times against a RHP. (Hot hand?) He did come into numerous games if teams tried to expose Lowenstein with a left-handed reliever. 

    Given the chance to sign Rajai Davis, I think Weaver passes.  Weaver did not believe in platooning rookies for “confidence” so much as he believed in using platoons to cover weaknesses, such as Lowenstein’s inability to hit LHP and Roenicke’s inability to play the OF.  Weaver would start Bradley full time, knowing that even if he does not hit 3-run homers, he still helps with defense.  I believe Weaver would have pegged Bradley as the equivalent to the CF he inherited when he took over the helm of the Orioles – Paul Blair. 

    Those are my recollections and opinions about Earl Weaver.



    Nicely done. Good post.

    I certainly didn't get the "change players in groups" remark. As I recall Weaver's Orioles teams, the Lowenstein-Roenicke platoon was one of the rare positions where there wasn't an established starter. As I recall his teams, for the most part, the Orioles had normal regulars at most, if not all, positions.

    To add, I remember in 1975, ther were games late in the year when he started Royle Stillman  at SS on road games, giving him an at-bat in the first inning, which took an at-bat away from Mark Belanger, then put Belanger in at SS in the bottom of the first and went with him the rest of the game.

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

    Re: JBJ may be an offensive liability

    To me when I first heard of the 3-run HRS quote, it said Pitching, and Defense, will keep the game close enough, to win it on One Clutch swing.

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

    Re: JBJ may be an offensive liability

    I'm just glad we have that punch & judy hitter to crank those three-run jobs when needed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share