"No pop" Lowrie

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    "No pop" Lowrie

     He played with a displaced fracture hurting his LHH numbers in 2008-09, and then he was hitting well in 2011 when he colidied with Crawford and then stunk.  I pointed out he had even splits in the minors and even Joe B. and Moon "didn't buy" that as the sample grew he would hit RHP again.  I said at the time he was a poor man's Jeter and over his prime years he would hit enough to make up for his poor range, even at SS.

    Since the trade:

    WAR  6th SS in MLB at 6.0  (I don't count Peralta)

    Red Sox SS WAR 4.6 ('12 + 13)

    Slg  .439  4th at SS in MLB ('12 +  '13)

    LHH   .804

    RHH   .720

    Home  .785

    Road   .771

    XBH  57 22nd in MLB (2013) Votto 54 Fielder  54 Beltre 56  Napoli 59  Cano  59 Pedroia 48

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

    Re:

    The one that got away.  I liked Lowrie too.  Not that good a fielder (although one year he played SS and made very few errors--like Drew), but a good hitter. 

    In the larger scheme of things, I honestly think the Sox have done pretty well despite that loss.  Scutaro was pretty decent and still is.  Avilas not so bad.  This year Iglesias and Drew, not to shabby.  And the Sox have won more games than anyone else in MLB despite the absense of the great Lowrie. 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re:

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

    The one that got away.  I liked Lowrie too.  Not that good a fielder (although one year he played SS and made very few errors--like Drew), but a good hitter. 

    In the larger scheme of things, I honestly think the Sox have done pretty well despite that loss.  Scutaro was pretty decent and still is.  Avilas not so bad.  This year Iglesias and Drew, not to shabby.  And the Sox have won more games than anyone else in MLB despite the absense of the great Lowrie. 



    I agree with you, Max.  Jed is a Money Ball Exhibit A example of deceptive pop.  

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

    Re:

    our problem is not finding decent shortstops, it is keeping them

    As always - 100% correct!

     
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from stillallbost08. Show stillallbost08's posts

    Re:

    In response to georom4's comment:

    our problem is not finding decent shortstops, it is keeping them

    As always - 100% correct!

     




    who didnt they keep that they should have??

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from proftom2. Show proftom2's posts

    Re:

    Followed Jed since high school. He is destined to play great baseball. Very happy for him. Sox, let him go too soon. 

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

    Re:

    tom,

    Good to see you revive an old thread title of mine that mocked softy's position that Jed had "no pop" based on his low HR total. My position was that he did have pop, especially for a SS, and that vs LHPs, he was a stud. It nearly killed softy that Jed almost beat out B Hall's HR% that year. The guy he said had 'pop". I alsways liked Jed, but just not as a SS. I had hoped he'd be a platoon 3Bman and utility IF'er combo. 

    Jed finally got over the 600 PA mark this year and has 57 XBHs, including 12 HRs. Last year, he had 16 Hrs and 34 XBHs in less than 400 PAs with Houston.

    I don't recall being overly harsh on Lowrie vs RHPs, but I do recall saying he should not start vs RHPs. I'm not sure if this year's better OPS vs righties than lefties is for real or an outlier, but I tend to think the latter, since his numbers vs LHPs is way below his norm.

    The fact remains: softy was wrong again.

    Sox4ever

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from stillallbost08. Show stillallbost08's posts

    Re:

    softy was wrong about soooo many things

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re:

    I don't recall being overly harsh on Lowrie vs RHPs, but I do recall saying he should not start vs RHPs. I'm not sure if this year's better OPS vs righties than lefties is for real or an outlier, but I tend to think the latter, since his numbers vs LHPs is way below his norm.

     

    Moon, I think Jed shows that even with limited range a slugging SS can be the better option over a singles saving SS.

    Jed's splits:

                '10 ,      11,      12,     '13


    LHH    .826    .582      819    787

    RHH    1.03   .876      693     775

    I don't think a clear trend is evident, other than he was even in the minors and probably would be in the majors if he didn't play with a fracture.

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

    Re:

    In response to tom-uk's comment:

    I don't recall being overly harsh on Lowrie vs RHPs, but I do recall saying he should not start vs RHPs. I'm not sure if this year's better OPS vs righties than lefties is for real or an outlier, but I tend to think the latter, since his numbers vs LHPs is way below his norm.

     

    Moon, I think Jed shows that even with limited range a slugging SS can be the better option over a singles saving SS.

    Jed's splits:

                '10 ,      11,      12,     '13


    LHH    .826    .582      819    787

    RHH    1.03   .876      693     775

    I don't think a clear trend is evident, other than he was even in the minors and probably would be in the majors if he didn't play with a fracture.



    Just seems easier to play him at 3B or 2B.

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

    Re:

    Lowrie-for-Melancon is definitely one I'd like back. Throw in the Bailey and Hanrahan deals, and trades for RP haven't exactly worked out in our favor of late. If we can come up with some reliable relievers out of our current group of prospects (Workman, Britton, RDLR...) so much the better.

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

    Re:

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:

    Lowrie-for-Melancon is definitely one I'd like back. Throw in the Bailey and Hanrahan deals, and trades for RP haven't exactly worked out in our favor of late. If we can come up with some reliable relievers out of our current group of prospects (Workman, Britton, RDLR...) so much the better.



    We basically traded Lowrie for Holt.

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

    Re:

    I tried to tell softy and many others that Lowrie was the reason Hanley was being sent to the OF.  Lowrie's number in the minors were equal to HR.  Always knew Lowrie would be a good SS.  Softy was wrong once again.  As we're many others.......

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

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

    Re:

    The Lowrie for Melancon deal would not have been all that bad had we held on to Mark.

    1.10 ERA  0.903 WHIP in over 65 IP with the Pirates this year.

    Sox4ever

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    The Lowrie for Melancon deal would not have been all that bad had we held on to Mark.

    1.10 ERA  0.903 WHIP in over 65 IP with the Pirates this year.

    Sox4ever



    there is no telling Melancon would have replicated those numbers if he stayed in boston. It seems he is a small market guy. Having said that though, in hindsight, the Hanrahan trade is one i would take back..

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

    Re:

    Lowrie is a good fit in Oakland but to me he is really a 2nd baseman or a heck of a utility infielder. You can move him all around the infield and he can cover for injuries and give guys a breather. No doubt he has shown that he can start but if he gets 600 AB who cares whether those AB are spread out all around the infield oor not, with maybe his primary spot still at 2nd. Ideally, that is his slot to me but we had Pedroia...

    He doesn't have the ideal range at SS but he sure hits well enough to play there. Oakland is ideal for line drive gap hitters. They remain a really smart baseball FO.

     

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re:

    The Red Sox gave up on Lowrie not so much for lacking in ability, but because he couldn't be relied upon to stay healthy and remain in the lineup.  2013 is the first season in which he has played in over 100 games.

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

    Re:

    Give it up Softy. "the Stork" turned out to be a decent ball player. In fact, one of the best hitting SS in the AL this year. A wRC+ of 118 as compared to the next best qualifying SS at 104. 2 guys with very limited AB beat him. PED infested Peralta and the all world Jose Reyes.

    43 doubles isn't bad. He always could produce solid contact rates but we had Pedroia so that is how it goes.

     

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

    Re:

    In response to mef429's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    The Lowrie for Melancon deal would not have been all that bad had we held on to Mark.

    1.10 ERA  0.903 WHIP in over 65 IP with the Pirates this year.

    Sox4ever

     



    there is no telling Melancon would have replicated those numbers if he stayed in boston. It seems he is a small market guy. Having said that though, in hindsight, the Hanrahan trade is one i would take back..

     

    [/QUOTE]

    No, you are right, we don't know if Melancon would have pitched well had he stayed here this year, but I tend to think the whole small market thing is usually blown out of proportion.

    He's a good pitcher.

    Lowrie probably would have never won a FT spot on this team had he stayed.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from stan17. Show stan17's posts

    Re:

    In response to Sheriff-Rojas's comment:

    The Red Sox gave up on Lowrie not so much for lacking in ability, but because he couldn't be relied upon to stay healthy and remain in the lineup.  2013 is the first season in which he has played in over 100 games.



    This is exactly correct. I think management liked Lowrie but just felt they couldn't depend on him health-wise. Did they give up on him to soon maybe but maybe he needed a change of scenery also.  

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re:

    In response to BurritoT-'s comment:

    Team headed to the play-offs.... and people are talking about Lowrie. Sad. Lowrie was never anything to hold onto.... he and we are better off with him in Oakland. 



    Well, we may have a more legitimate reason to discuss Lowrie if the Red Sox play the A's in the playoffs. 

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share