Jose Iglesias starting?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from iamme17. Show iamme17's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    if iggy makes this year's starting lineup the sox won't even smell a playoff spot.Let's not forget that a couple of other players are gonna have slumps like papi had for a couple of years..... could be papi or whoever is our catcher but 3 dead bats in the lineup is something only a team like the rays can handle with their pitching staff.The sox pitching isn't gonna be good enough to compensate for 3 dead everyday bats
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from TBSHBT1969. Show TBSHBT1969's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to  Re: Jose Iglesias starting? : Not a chance. The dude couldn't hit his way out of a wet paper bag. And the nonsense that he will make up for his lack of a bat with his glove is laughable at best.  I guess it means nothing to you that the best-ranged SSs in MLB make over a hundred more plays a season over the worst.  100 extra outs given to the opps is meaningless. Yes, guys like your Jeter can make up for their lousy range by hitting exceptionally well and having a good arm, but the flip side can be true as well. Some weak hitting SSs can and will make up for the lack of hits by saving an equal or greater amount on defense. Simple math. Posted by moonslav59 Take away a hit every three games is equivalent to getting ( 54 hits ) and will raise a .220 BA to .300. Simple math.  ...and I wouldn't be at all surprised if Iggy would make 108 more plays than Scoot would have had he still be here this year. If Iggy is all that he is made out to be defensively, I'd take .190 and 80 saved hits.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    There's now way he would stay in the lineup long enough to "save" 80 hits if he's batting .190 for an extended time.

    You guys are ridiculous.

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

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting?:
    [QUOTE].240 and 15 jacks. If Iggy put up those numbers, people would accept that with stellar def. thats pretty much what they had with alex gonzalez twice and let him go. Never could figure that one out. What a treat to watch that guy play d.
    Posted by feelec[/QUOTE]

    If I thought Iglesias could hit .240 with 5 jacks I'd be driving the bandwagon, but as he hit .235 with 1 jack at Pawtucket in 2011.....
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    I don't understand what the rush is to call Iglesias up.  I'm a big fan of defense, and would prefer a great defender/weak hitter at SS over a weak defender/strong hitter any day.  That said, I think Aviles/Punto will be fine at SS, and hence, I think it would be in the team's and Iglesias' best interest to give Iglesias more time to develop at AAA.   From the team's standpoint, it makes sense business wise as well.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from TBSHBT1969. Show TBSHBT1969's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting? : Why are you starting at .150 instead .220?
    Posted by lowelll[/QUOTE]

    Why are you starting at .220 instead of .150?

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    In response to "Re: Jose Iglesias starting?": [QUOTE]I understand the argument, agree with it generally, and have posted it earlier in this very thread.  But extend the logic:  if Iglesias' glove "raises" a .150 BA (with no power or walks, which is likely) to .230 - which doesn't seem impossible to me, though perhaps a bit pessimistic - we have a 22-year old virtually automatic out that some people abuse and others laugh at. He'd have to be made of stone for that not to affect his fielding, development and temper. Let him continue to develop in the shadows unless/until Aviles/Punto fail. With respect to in-game planning, elite defense does not compensate for negative offense. You can't predict when a great defender will prevent a hit. You can predict when a poor hitter will make an out. Consequently, teams can target a weak hitter by pitching around the batter or two before him. This effectively renders 2-3 hitters useless almost every time they come up to the plate (unless there are two or more men on base). A great defensive player does not hold a similar in-game tactical advantage. A manager can't tell his plus defender to save a hit in any one situation. The ball still needs to be hit to that fielder. The number of hits prevented will be evenly distributed throughout the course of a game because you can't predictably control when the ball will be hit in a certain direction. Conversely, the number of pitch arounds to hitters in front of an automatic out will be situation-dependent, meaning they occur at the most critical times of a game. In other words, a great fielder is just as likely to prevent a hit in the 3rd inning with no one on base in a 7-0 game, as he is during the 9th inning of a 2-1 lead with runners on second and third. A weak hitter is far more likely to hurt a team in the latter scenario than the former. Teams won't have to pitch around anyone in a 7-0 game, whereas they'll definitely target a weak hitter in the 9th inning of a 2-1 game. Thus, while I don't dispute the mathematics involved in adjusting a poor batting average for an excellent defense, I don't think you can weigh each statistical instance equally. A weak hitter will be more conspicuous than a plus defender because of the much greater situational control in pitching to a weak hitter. Posted by davidap[/QUOTE] Nice post...you really can't have an automatic out in an AL lineup, which is why the Sox didn't bring back Alex Gonzalez or Mark Loretta. Gonzalez had an OBP under .290 which sealed his fate, while Loretta had under 40 extra base hits in over 700 plate appearances, and despite a solid average, wasn't being considered for '07. That worked out pretty well. Iglesias is so good defensively, he may be a rare exception, though...
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting? : Bill, we all know you will be calling for an end to the Iglesias era if he goes 0-4 on opening day. You repeatedly showed last year you are the epitome of the reactionary irrational fan.
    Posted by Thesemenarecowards[/QUOTE]WHY ARE YOU SO NEGATIVE ???   THE PITCHERS ARE GOING TO LOVE THIS GUY.......  I DON'T CARE IF HE BUNTS OR HIT/RUN EVERY TIME UP !!!!   HAVE YOU BEEN AROUND BASEBALL LONG ?????
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chilliwings. Show Chilliwings's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting? : Why are you starting at .150 instead .220?
    Posted by lowelll[/QUOTE]

    I wrote "though perhaps a bit pessimistic", and maybe that's very pessimistic.  But I'm not anti-Iglesias, I really want him to do well!  But how likely is a .235/.285/.269/.554 guy with a 58/21 K/BB rate in AAA to hit .220 in Teddy Ballgame's MFL the next season?  Then add in the pressure of the Show....the impatient/abusive "fans" that will boo him at the drop of a ball....the fact that his career high games in a season was 2011's 101....my assumption that his English is not stellar....his youth....

    I think there's a very strong chance his BA would be sub-Mendoza with no power or OBA if he plays all 2011 and, as I and others have stated repeatedly, my concern is not his lack of contribution to MLB's highest octane offense, but the damage to his long term prospects if he becomes a figure of fun and abuse for the sort of people that have been gratuitously abusing Wake, Tek, Ells, Beckett, etc. on a daily basis here and elsewhere.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortMeade. Show FortMeade's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting? : WHY ARE YOU SO NEGATIVE ???   THE PITCHERS ARE GOING TO LOVE THIS GUY.......  I DON'T CARE IF HE BUNTS OR HIT/RUN EVERY TIME UP !!!!   HAVE YOU BEEN AROUND BASEBALL LONG ?????
    Posted by Bill-806[/QUOTE]

    Hey Bill, Rusty over on the Patriots Forum says that you are a Giants Troll. What do you think of that? Is it true? That forum is also tired of your friend Babe. Birds of the same feather fly together. The ultra Conservative act does divert somwhat from the Redsox and Patriots hate. Aren't there any NYC forums for you to go to?
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortMeade. Show FortMeade's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting? : I wrote "though perhaps a bit pessimistic", and maybe that's very pessimistic.  But I'm not anti-Iglesias, I really want him to do well!  But how likely is a .235/.285/.269/.554 guy with a 58/21 K/BB rate in AAA to hit .220 in Teddy Ballgame's MFL the next season?  Then add in the pressure of the Show....the impatient/abusive "fans" that will boo him at the drop of a ball....the fact that his career high games in a season was 2011's 101....my assumption that his English is not stellar....his youth.... I think there's a very strong chance his BA would be sub-Mendoza with no power or OBA if he plays all 2011 and, as I and others have stated repeatedly, my concern is not his lack of contribution to MLB's highest octane offense, but the damage to his long term prospects if he becomes a figure of fun and abuse for the sort of people that have been gratuitously abusing Wake, Tek, Ells, Beckett, etc. on a daily basis here and elsewhere.
    Posted by Chilliwings[/QUOTE]

    I guess that we will have to wait and see. Who knows the makeup of those who spout abuse and criticism on this forum. Are they fans, perpetual cynics, or trolls, your guess is as good as mine. I doubt if their charade affects the players or is even read by them. This forum only numbers 200 people out of a RSN of 20 mil. The 50 trolls come in here to annoy the other 150. That is a pizzhole in a snowbank. We need not exaggerate its effect.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chilliwings. Show Chilliwings's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting? : There's now way he would stay in the lineup long enough to "save" 80 hits if he's batting .190 for an extended time. You guys are ridiculous.
    Posted by TBSHBT1969[/QUOTE]

    Aha!  BA is so 1997....what if his OBA was .210 and he was slugging .205?  I bet you'd be singing a different tune then!  ;-)
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chilliwings. Show Chilliwings's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting? : Why are you starting at .220 instead of .150?
    Posted by TBSHBT1969[/QUOTE]

    This is long-listed for post of the year.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting?:
    [QUOTE]Valentine is the perfect manager for Iglesias. They should start Iglesias, and have Valentine prep him to take a lot of pitches and become adept at the sacrifice and the bunt for a hit. Iglesias can be pinch hit for in close games the Red Sox trail late, and be given days off as defensive late innings substitute against the toughest pitching matchups for Iglesias and the better v. SP histories for Avilies and Punto. Valentine should go with the Youth, as much as possible, and prepare the youth to mature and rise up at season end to provide energy and enthusiasm and compliment the veterans. Worse case, it sets the table for dividends in 2013. Best case, it dovetails late in the season and the team goes on a post season run. 
    Posted by hankwilliamsjr[/QUOTE]

    I'd start him in AAA, but you have an otherwise sound approach.  A bad hitter at #9 isn't overly damaging as long as you control his exposure.  Pedroia was handled the same way, particularly with Cora taking the ABs v tough righties.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting? : Since your trolling started this week on these boards, you and your bald head have proven to know very little about sports. Enjoy making yourself look dumb on a continual basis.
    Posted by RustyGriswold[/QUOTE]

    If Babe didn't come in to announce his ignorance, how would anyone know he existed?

    His motto is 'I don't think, therefore I am.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting?:
    [QUOTE]I understand the argument, agree with it generally, and have posted it earlier in this very thread.  But extend the logic:  if Iglesias' glove "raises" a .150 BA (with no power or walks, which is likely) to .230 - which doesn't seem impossible to me, though perhaps a bit pessimistic - we have a 22-year old virtually automatic out that some people abuse and others laugh at. He'd have to be made of stone for that not to affect his fielding, development and temper. Let him continue to develop in the shadows unless/until Aviles/Punto fail. With respect to in-game planning, elite defense does not compensate for negative offense. You can't predict when a great defender will prevent a hit. You can predict when a poor hitter will make an out. Consequently, teams can target a weak hitter by pitching around the batter or two before him. This effectively renders 2-3 hitters useless almost every time they come up to the plate (unless there are two or more men on base). A great defensive player does not hold a similar in-game tactical advantage. A manager can't tell his plus defender to save a hit in any one situation. The ball still needs to be hit to that fielder. Therefore the number of hits prevented will be evenly distributed throughout the course of a game because you can't predictably control when the ball will be hit in a certain direction. Conversely, the number of pitch arounds to hitters in front of an automatic out will be situation-dependent, meaning they occur at the most critical times of a game. In other words, a great fielder is just as likely to prevent a hit in the 3rd inning with no one on base in a 7-0 game, as he is during the 9th inning of a 2-1 lead with runners on second and third. A weak hitter is far more likely to hurt a team in the latter scenario than the former. Teams won't have to pitch around anyone in a 7-0 game, whereas they'll definitely target a weak hitter in the 9th inning of a 2-1 game. Thus, while I don't dispute the raw computational mathematics involved in adjusting a poor batting average for an excellent defense, I don't think you can weigh each statistical instance equally. A weak hitter will be more conspicuous than a plus defender because of the much greater situational control in pitching to a weak hitter.
    Posted by davidap[/QUOTE]

    You really want to go with that argument?

    If Iglesias is due to come up in the 9th inning of a 1 run game, expect a pinch hitter.  This is not rocket science...
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from J-Bay-Fan. Show J-Bay-Fan's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    IGLESIAS WILL BE OUR STARTING SHORTSTOP... YOU LIKE OR NOT..
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting? : You really want to go with that argument? If Iglesias is due to come up in the 9th inning of a 1 run game, expect a pinch hitter.  This is not rocket science...
    Posted by notin[/QUOTE]
    A crisp, correct rebuttal.

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

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    There's now way he would stay in the lineup long enough to "save" 80 hits if he's batting .190 for an extended time.

    You guys are ridiculous.

    I never said the Sox would continue playing him if he was hitting .190 at the halfway point, I said I'd be happy with .190 and 80 saved hits on defense over a full season. Do you see the difference?

    Are you so locked into these established paradigms that you can't see the merit in 80+ saved hits? (I actually think Iggy might save over 100 hits over low-ranged SSs like Scutaro and Lowrie of the 2011 Sox. 

    Iggy will not play 162 games, even if he is given the FT job. Hw ill be pinch hit for late in close games, and we have 2 capable SSs (Aviles/Punto) to take over after Iggy is PH for. My guess is he might get about 500-550 PAs as our FT SS batting 9th everygame he starts. If you equate 80 saved hits to 80 singles added to Iggy's offense, he could go from hitting .190 (105 for 550) to .336 (185 for 550). This doesn't take inot consideration a better cut off arm and more DPs. Yes, a saved single does not equal a 2B, 3B or HR by Scutaro or Lowrie, but would you be saying a SS who hits .336 BA SS and is an average fielder, but only hit singles be sent to the minors?

    What if Iggy can hit .240? What if Iggy saves 120 hits? What if he can do both?

    What's the chance Aviles or Punto will double their range this year and save 80+ hits over what Iggy would do?

    Just because great range and defense are hard to quantify and prove, does not mean it does not exist and have a great impact on game results. Ask any pitcher what the value of an exceptionally great fielding SS is to his chances of getting a win vs having a .285 average fielding SS. I think I know their answer. 

    BTW, why not ask expitch?


     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from TBSHBT1969. Show TBSHBT1969's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting?:
    [QUOTE]There's now way he would stay in the lineup long enough to "save" 80 hits if he's batting .190 for an extended time. You guys are ridiculous. I never said the Sox would continue playing him if he was hitting .190 at the halfway point, I said I'd be happy with .190 and 80 saved hits on defense over a full season. Do you see the difference? Are you so locked into these established paradigms that you can't see the merit in 80+ saved hits? (I actually think Iggy might save over 100 hits over low-ranged SSs like Scutaro and Lowrie of the 2011 Sox.  Iggy will not play 162 games, even if he is given the FT job. Hw ill be pinch hit for late in close games, and we have 2 capable SSs (Aviles/Punto) to take over after Iggy is PH for. My guess is he might get about 500-550 PAs as our FT SS batting 9th everygame he starts. If you equate 80 saved hits to 80 singles added to Iggy's offense, he could go from hitting .190 (105 for 550) to .336 (185 for 550). This doesn't take inot consideration a better cut off arm and more DPs. Yes, a saved single does not equal a 2B, 3B or HR by Scutaro or Lowrie, but would you be saying a SS who hits .336 BA SS and is an average fielder, but only hit singles be sent to the minors? What if Iggy can hit .240? What if Iggy saves 120 hits? What if he can do both? What's the chance Aviles or Punto will double their range this year and save 80+ hits over what Iggy would do? Just because great range and defense are hard to quantify and prove, does not mean it does not exist and have a great impact on game results. Ask any pitcher what the value of an exceptionally great fielding SS is to his chances of getting a win vs having a .285 average fielding SS. I think I know their answer.  BTW, why not ask expitch?
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    I hardly think he would be at .300 at the break and tail off to hit .190.

    And how many games of iggy's have you actually watched that leads you to believe he would save an additional 100 hits. I don't care how good he is, that sounds like an awful lot to me. No, actually, it sounds like wishful thinking.

    As far as "What if he hits .240?" and "What if he saves 120 hits".

    Well, what if he hits .175 and doesn't save 120 hits?

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

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    Did you know that there were MLB SSs that made 100-130 more plays than Scutaro last year? If you prorate to make the innings even (add 250-350 innings to Scutaro), the numbers still are 75-90 more plays. 

    It's real.

    Fluke, you say?

    2010:
    2 guys had 80 or more plays than Scoot.

    It's real.

    Iggy will save hits. How many is certainly debateable. I'm not even sure Iggy is as great as many say he is. I trust Bobby V will know, but he might not have the final say. A .190 BA is hard for modern day managers and GMs to defend.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    I don't think the difference that Aviles's defense is as bad as Igelias offensive. However They maybe better suited using Aviles at 5 position then just one.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from TBSHBT1969. Show TBSHBT1969's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting?:
    [QUOTE]Did you know that there were MLB SSs that made 100-130 more plays than Scutaro last year? If you prorate to make the innings even (add 250-350 innings to Scutaro), the numbers still are 75-90 more plays.  It's real. Fluke, you say? 2010: 2 guys had 80 or more plays than Scoot. It's real. Iggy will save hits. How many is certainly debateable. I'm not even sure Iggy is as great as many say he is. I trust Bobby V will know, but he might not have the final say. A .190 BA is hard for modern day managers and GMs to defend.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    So I'm guessing since you didn't answer my question that you really haven't watched iggy much or at all, save for maybe a few youtube videos. Therefore kinda tough to really take your opinion that he will save 100+ hits with much weight.

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

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    You really want to go with that argument?

    If Iglesias is due to come up in the 9th inning of a 1 run game, expect a pinch hitter.  This is not rocket science...

    I picked an extreme example for purposes of illustration. What if it's the 6th inning of a close game? Are you going to pinch hit for him with 3-4 defensive innings left? How about if it's the 4th inning? Even in the 9th inning scenario, are you sure you want to pinch-hit with a one run lead and risk butchering a defensive play in the bottom of the inning? Is it more important to stretch the lead or preserve it? Normally managers want their best defensive alignments late in games unless you want to be 1986'd. Or are you going to carry three shortstops, so that you can pinch-hit for Iglesias in the middle of a game, go with someone like Aviles for an at-bat or two, and then switch back to a defense-first fielder late?
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    In Response to Re: Jose Iglesias starting?:
    [QUOTE]You really want to go with that argument? If Iglesias is due to come up in the 9th inning of a 1 run game, expect a pinch hitter.  This is not rocket science... I picked an extreme example for purposes of illustration. What if it's the 6th inning of a close game? Are you going to pinch hit for him with 3-4 defensive innings left? How about if it's the 4th inning? Even in the 9th inning scenario, are you sure you want to pinch-hit with a one run lead and risk butchering a defensive play in the bottom of the inning? Is it more important to stretch the lead or preserve it? Normally managers want their best defensive alignments late in games unless you want to be 1986'd. Or are you going to carry three shortstops, so that you can pinch-hit for Iglesias in the middle of a game, go with someone like Aviles for an at-bat or two, and then switch back to a defense-first fielder late?
    Posted by davidap[/QUOTE
    In the middle of a close game, there are several offensive innings left. Managers are paid to make the choice you pose for the 9th inning. It depends upon the circumstances of the moment.
    Do you really think that managers would pitch around two batters in order to bring up Iglesias, when they know that, say, in the 9th inning he will be hit for?

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

    Re: Jose Iglesias starting?

    I think Iglesias has a shot. They are encouraging him now, getting his head in the competition, letting him taste mlb in ST, and making it real. It's good policy. Probably he starts in AAA but why approach it that way from the start? This is proper management. This is the approach they should be taking. As the Mets used to say...."ya gotta believe". I think Valentine is familiar with that approach. Good for him.

    Iglesias really has only suffered as a hitter last year. He was ok before that and last year he got hit in the head and had a concussion. Concussions are not a good thing. Lots of issues there and he did hit a lot better in the 2nd half. In AAA ball this year he probably starts off hitting well over .250 IMO.

    The Rangers brought up Andrus from AA ball when he was 20 folks. When Iglesias was 20 he put up similar numbers to Andrus in AA ball. Not quite as good but in less of a hitters league. Iglesias is potentially our guy this year. He has been playing age advanced. He did finish the year better than he started and this was after he was beaned and had the concussion. Look at Middlebrook's numbers on the same team and he is our #1?

    Iglesias:

    Middlebrooks:

    Something to consider. Do we want him when he is at maximum range value for 6 years or after he has slowed down some? Do we want him when the team is optimized to win now or when the team maybe is rebuilding? I think he's at least a 50/50 chance to stick by the all star break. 
     

Share