|
Post by dmaineah on Dec 19, 2014 14:43:32 GMT -5
Is Castillo a better CF or RF? Or is it still TBD? Most people here seem to have Castillo in CF with Betts in RF where I think if they are both in the line up it would be Betts in CF and Castillo in RF.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 19, 2014 15:38:18 GMT -5
Is Castillo a better CF or RF? Or is it still TBD? Most people here seem to have Castillo in CF with Betts in RF where I think if they are both in the line up it would be Betts in CF and Castillo in RF. TBD I'd say. Betts has played outfield for a little over half a season and Castillo has played a handful of games, period, since defecting. They really could go either way. I'm guessing that's a question they'll try to answer in ST. As for why most people have Castillo in CF, my understanding is that was where he played most of his games in Cuba after moving to the OF full-time.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Dec 19, 2014 15:47:19 GMT -5
Is Castillo a better CF or RF? Or is it still TBD? Most people here seem to have Castillo in CF with Betts in RF where I think if they are both in the line up it would be Betts in CF and Castillo in RF. Also - Castillo only played CF in his short time with the Red Sox while Betts played some RF. But agree that it's probably TBD considering we still don't know how good a RF or CF either of them could be.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 21, 2014 9:02:42 GMT -5
Not sure about the accuracy here but...
Peter Gammons ?@pgammo 40m40 minutes ago with his 3-for-4(and SB) Saturday for 1st place Caguas, Rusney Castillo's Dec. slash line is .382/.389/.471
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,702
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Dec 21, 2014 9:20:22 GMT -5
Not sure about the accuracy here but... Peter Gammons ?@pgammo 40m40 minutes ago with his 3-for-4(and SB) Saturday for 1st place Caguas, Rusney Castillo's Dec. slash line is .382/.389/.471 That's a pretty bad slash to be honest. Not being selective or hitting for power if that's accurate.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Dec 21, 2014 9:31:10 GMT -5
Not sure about the accuracy here but... Peter Gammons ?@pgammo 40m40 minutes ago with his 3-for-4(and SB) Saturday for 1st place Caguas, Rusney Castillo's Dec. slash line is .382/.389/.471 That's a pretty bad slash to be honest. Not being selective or hitting for power if that's accurate. No it isn't. Low ISOd/High AVG lines in a small sample are generally not representative of future low ISOds. A lot of players when they are hot will see a dip in ISOd.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Dec 21, 2014 9:46:17 GMT -5
That's a pretty bad slash to be honest. Not being selective or hitting for power if that's accurate. No it isn't. Low ISOd/High AVG lines in a small sample are generally not representative of future low ISOds. A lot of players when they are hot will see a dip in ISOd. Exactly. And .471 is not hitting for power? If you're going to use SLG as the measure (not sure what else you're using), his .471 would have been 13th in the AL last year, just ahead of Adam Jones, Albert Pujols, and Josh Donaldson. But yeah, SSS. I'm not counting him having that kind of power in Boston. But there's no reason to be discouraged by that triple slash. Quite the opposite.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,702
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Dec 21, 2014 9:57:10 GMT -5
No it isn't. Low ISOd/High AVG lines in a small sample are generally not representative of future low ISOds. A lot of players when they are hot will see a dip in ISOd. Exactly. And .471 is not hitting for power? If you're going to use SLG as the measure (not sure what else you're using), his .471 would have been 13th in the AL last year, just ahead of Adam Jones, Albert Pujols, and Josh Donaldson. But yeah, SSS. I'm not counting him having that kind of power in Boston. But there's no reason to be discouraged by that triple slash. Quite the opposite. His SLG is driven by his .380 BA. He has one XBH (a HR though) in 9 games. I will give you that its a SSS for sure but he isn't slugging in that sample.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,962
|
Post by jimoh on Dec 21, 2014 10:10:06 GMT -5
Exactly. And .471 is not hitting for power? If you're going to use SLG as the measure (not sure what else you're using), his .471 would have been 13th in the AL last year, just ahead of Adam Jones, Albert Pujols, and Josh Donaldson. But yeah, SSS. I'm not counting him having that kind of power in Boston. But there's no reason to be discouraged by that triple slash. Quite the opposite. His SLG is driven by his .380 BA. He has one XBH (a HR though) in 9 games. I will give you that its a SSS for sure but he isn't slugging in that sample. Yeah it'd be awful if he hits only 1 hr every 9 games
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Dec 21, 2014 10:14:31 GMT -5
Exactly. And .471 is not hitting for power? If you're going to use SLG as the measure (not sure what else you're using), his .471 would have been 13th in the AL last year, just ahead of Adam Jones, Albert Pujols, and Josh Donaldson. But yeah, SSS. I'm not counting him having that kind of power in Boston. But there's no reason to be discouraged by that triple slash. Quite the opposite. His SLG is driven by his .380 BA. He has one XBH (a HR though) in 9 games. I will give you that its a SSS for sure but he isn't slugging in that sample. Then don't make any judgements about a 9 game sample size
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,702
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Dec 21, 2014 10:26:24 GMT -5
His SLG is driven by his .380 BA. He has one XBH (a HR though) in 9 games. I will give you that its a SSS for sure but he isn't slugging in that sample. Then don't make any judgements about a 9 game sample size My original point was that it isn't a particularly encouraging sample. That isn't that outlandish. I never said he's a bust or that it would carry over into next year. Relax.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Dec 21, 2014 11:53:41 GMT -5
Fun with 35 SS PA's: If Rusney had not destroyed Mayaguez pitching (Tomas Santiago in particular) thrice in his 9 games with Caguas, his entire winter league experience, to date, would be very pedestrian. Then again, in another SS of games in Boston he greatly impressed.
I would rather he be destroying in WL action, but I'm not concerned he is not.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 21, 2014 12:48:18 GMT -5
SSS MLB UZR150 25 MLB WAR/150 13.5 MLB VALUE/150 $72m
Obvious 3 teamer: Trout & Kershaw plus a lot of dollars for Rusney.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Dec 21, 2014 13:38:00 GMT -5
Then don't make any judgements about a 9 game sample size My original point was that it isn't a particularly encouraging sample. That isn't that outlandish. I never said he's a bust or that it would carry over into next year. Relax. I think the point here is that any running sample of 9 games would show extreme variability. You'd be constantly "encouraged" and "discouraged". The reason he was booked for the winter leagues is just to get him some time with a bat in his hand. Remember, he hadn't played in Cuba for a few seasons. Nice to see the power, and that he's making contact. Beyond that, I wouldn't place any emphasis at all on the numbers, at this point.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 21, 2014 15:02:07 GMT -5
"The power" is a single home run.
The reason I bring this up is not to poo-poo anyone excited about his line. I bring this up to point out that the sample size is so small that a single home run is enough for a .089 ISO.
Seriously, it's better than him going 0-fer, and it's not as good as him hitting .500 with seven bombs. It's fine - he's playing well and shaking the rust off. That's about it.
-----
It is kind of funny (and nothing more) that 9 of his 13 hits have come against Mayaguez. But it's not one pitcher, as insinuated above. He had three hits in one game against Santiago, but that's it. He had three hits in his first Mayaguez contest against Jorge Lopez, and his three hits in the middle game came against three relievers because Santiago was chased in the first.
9 for 13 against Mayaguez, 4 for 21 against the other three teams.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,702
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Dec 22, 2014 22:42:20 GMT -5
Rusney told me to f**k myself today
@redsoxstats: Tweet about Rusney's lack of walks and power earlier, tonight he goes 2/3, 2 2B, BB. Now hitting .405.
Christian Vazquez went 2/4 HR.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 22, 2014 23:04:34 GMT -5
Rusney told me to f**k myself today @redsoxstats: Tweet about Rusney's lack of walks and power earlier, tonight he goes 2/3, 2 2B, BB. Now hitting .405. Christian Vazquez went 2/4 HR. 2/5 with a HR but whose counting.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Dec 23, 2014 10:26:07 GMT -5
Clay Davenport is noted for having the best projection system last year. Is he really projecting an .892 OPS for Rusney here?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 23, 2014 10:28:02 GMT -5
Clay Davenport is noted for having the best projection system last year. Is he really projecting an .892 OPS for Rusney here? Not sure where you're seeing that. I see .779. Nevermind, I see it. This is why I don't put any stock into projections for guys like Castillo.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Dec 23, 2014 10:41:17 GMT -5
What does this mean?
..if he hits to the 90th percentile of his upside he's a stud? and at the 50th percentile he's also a stud (.779)?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 23, 2014 11:28:25 GMT -5
The baseline is 38 plate appearances last season so pay attention to it if you want. I'm not.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Dec 23, 2014 12:30:41 GMT -5
The baseline is 38 plate appearances last season so pay attention to it if you want. I'm not. No, Clay tries to translate Serie Nacional league stats. Ignore it if you wish, but Clay Davenport has been doing this long enough that you should pay attention. Of course everyone -- including Clay I'm sure -- would agree that the error band is large, but the baseline is not "38 plate appearances last season." For a somewhat recent blog post by Clay on Cuban stats: claydavenport.com/archives/259
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 23, 2014 12:33:52 GMT -5
My mistake then, thanks.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,702
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Dec 23, 2014 13:28:36 GMT -5
That high projection is the 90th percentile, so pretty much his ceiling. The six year projections are the 50th percentile projection for a player on a given year. They're obviously safer, more realistic projections. I'll take either from Castillo this year though.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,911
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 23, 2014 13:43:47 GMT -5
That 50th percentile projection, with its .272 TAv, is completely in accord with scouting reports. If he does that and plays a plus defensive OF, that's a darn good player, one who can hit 7 or 8 in a stacked lineup like ours and be a force relative to what other teams get from there.
Some broad comps from last year: Ellsbury at .275, Lorenzo Cain at .269.
|
|