SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Rusney Castillo (source: will sign for $72.5mm thru 2020)
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
|
Post by nomar on Dec 23, 2014 14:11:19 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. Yeah I agree that it's plenty good for us, but it still may be optimistic to project him at 3.7 WARP next year. Hope Clay's right.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Dec 23, 2014 18:05:56 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. Heck yeah. If he puts up an ~.800 OPS his 1st year, after being away from the game for as long as Arod has, that is one fine addition made by BC. Damn, if Rusney, Mookie and Xander deliver... wow, that's some serious impact.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Dec 23, 2014 18:20:26 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. I'm taken by this kid so, I am
Edit: My bad. For some reason I thought Rusney's day was in dispute, but I see now '2/5' is all about Vasquez. Carry on.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 24, 2014 7:24:36 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. Yeah I agree that it's plenty good for us, but it still may be optimistic to project him at 3.7 WARP next year. Hope Clay's right. Is Davenport's (BP's I assume) WARP more similar to bWAR, fWAR or neither ?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 24, 2014 7:42:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 24, 2014 7:53:39 GMT -5
Great chart thanks but how is BP's WARP viewed by the saberguys when compared to fWAR and BWAR for batters. I'm under the impression that for batters the overall vague general opinion is that bWAR is superior but I haven't read anything subjective comparing WARP to either of those.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 24, 2014 9:49:27 GMT -5
For batters, the three major WAR variants are pretty similar in terms of the pure hitting component. The biggest difference is the defensive component (fWAR uses UZR, bWAR uses DRS, WARP uses FRAA), which can occasionally disagree significantly about a particular player-season.
Back to your original question, though, you shouldn't worry about what metric a projection uses to project any given player. The difference between the various WAR variants is far, far less than the error bars on any given projection.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 24, 2014 23:32:43 GMT -5
Thanks, I'm a light duty stats reader and see a thread here that seems to imply that the difference is a major issue. I'm guessing now that it is relative to the degree for which you wish to analyze something and exactly which you want to know about. In my case, I'm just looking for the general idea and understand the error bands and how they relate to the final number. Therefore, the way I use them, taking any of them is comparatively equal.
In this particular case, I was wondering if Castillo's WARP would be an acceptable general substitute for the FanGraph's no answer and it appears that it would be. Also bWAR for Hanigan since fangraphs eliminated their Hanigan projection as of the trade (it was 1.8). Looks like we are now way ahead in total projected team WAR.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Dec 25, 2014 3:54:59 GMT -5
Thanks, I'm a light duty stats reader and see a thread here that seems to imply that the difference is a major issue. I'm guessing now that it is relative to the degree for which you wish to analyze something and exactly which you want to know about. In my case, I'm just looking for the general idea and understand the error bands and how they relate to the final number. Therefore, the way I use them, taking any of them is comparatively equal. In this particular case, I was wondering if Castillo's WARP would be an acceptable general substitute for the FanGraph's no answer and it appears that it would be. Also bWAR for Hanigan since fangraphs eliminated their Hanigan projection as of the trade (it was 1.8). Looks like we are now way ahead in total projected team WAR. With position players, they all tend to be very close. So yeah, using any of the 3 systems should be about the same, but the small sample size makes any statistical projection system an 'educated guess' as much as anything (very wide error 'bands'). When you switch over to pitchers, the fWAR and bWAR tend to disagree on many as fWAR is more based on peripheral/predictive statistics (FIP) and bWAR is driven by result based statistics (ERA+). Debates about pitchers who out-pitch or under-pitch their peripherals is usually what leads to the arguments (e.g. Hamels). Red Sox definitely look good - but there's a lot of offseason left.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 25, 2014 6:40:32 GMT -5
Thanks, I'm a light duty stats reader and see a thread here that seems to imply that the difference is a major issue. I'm guessing now that it is relative to the degree for which you wish to analyze something and exactly which you want to know about. In my case, I'm just looking for the general idea and understand the error bands and how they relate to the final number. Therefore, the way I use them, taking any of them is comparatively equal. In this particular case, I was wondering if Castillo's WARP would be an acceptable general substitute for the FanGraph's no answer and it appears that it would be. Also bWAR for Hanigan since fangraphs eliminated their Hanigan projection as of the trade (it was 1.8). Looks like we are now way ahead in total projected team WAR. With position players, they all tend to be very close. So yeah, using any of the 3 systems should be about the same, but the small sample size makes any statistical projection system an 'educated guess' as much as anything (very wide error 'bands'). When you switch over to pitchers, the fWAR and bWAR tend to disagree on many as fWAR is more based on peripheral/predictive statistics (FIP) and bWAR is driven by result based statistics (ERA+). Debates about pitchers who out-pitch or under-pitch their peripherals is usually what leads to the arguments (e.g. Hamels). Red Sox definitely look good - but there's a lot of offseason left. For reference, Davenport's numbers for Castillo aren't based on the small sample size, it's derived from his career numbers in Cuba.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 27, 2014 19:31:32 GMT -5
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Dec 27, 2014 20:07:45 GMT -5
I read that as “The report we got that was he was raw baseball-wise. But he’??s not Alex Cora". Confused me until I read it.
Great to read that he should be a strong fielder.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater on Dec 29, 2014 9:45:57 GMT -5
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the PR winter league like really low level competition? like A ball maybe? I'm excited like everyone else, but lets not get too carried away with his performance down there. It's easy to get star struck when a man is playing amongst boys.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 29, 2014 12:09:24 GMT -5
PR league is actually pretty decent. I was looking at Vazquez team and noticed that he's one of three catchers on a 40 man and that all the teams have a significant amount of upper level players. Not the majors but significantly better than A ball.
Still SSS but a pretty decent showing at every level he's played at including the majors.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Dec 29, 2014 13:42:08 GMT -5
Puig played in Puerto Rico to shake off the rust after he signed in 2012. He slashed .232/.308/.333 with 4 XBH (1 HR) and a 19/7 K/BB in 20 games. Castillo is better than Puig... Just kidding, just kidding I just remembered that Puig played there so I went and checked how he did.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 29, 2014 13:47:43 GMT -5
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the PR winter league like really low level competition? like A ball maybe? I'm excited like everyone else, but lets not get too carried away with his performance down there. It's easy to get star struck when a man is playing amongst boys. I wouldn't say it was that low, but I would say it's probably not as good as the DWL at least. The PR league was revived a couple years back after being dormant for a while. One team (Ponce - which is the team Henry Ramos used to play for) had to fold for a year for financial reasons, so things like that are still happening (although the San Juan team was revived after not being part of the league, I think, since it started back up). There is just a lot of variance in the winter leagues. If you look back, Ramos has been a starter in that league since he was 20, but meanwhile there are a bunch of AAA guys there too. I would say, though, that it's much higher than A ball on an averaged-out basis. It's not like the VZ Liga Paralela, for example, where you can't really get excited about the fact that Mario Alcantara was awesome because it's a mostly GCL/DSL crowd (I recall we were all pumped about Almanzar hitting well there back in 2011 before realizing that all rookie ball guys and him.)
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Dec 29, 2014 14:00:30 GMT -5
Time is also a factor. Early in the season you are likely to see more A-Ball players but as the season goes on veterans (AA/AAA guys) start to get more involved. Perhaps thats one of the reasons the Red Sox waited until December.
As Chris noted the PRWL has been relaunched after years of trouble, at one point it missed an entire season, so compared to D.R or Venezuela it lags a bit behind. Just by the sheer volume of Dominicans and Venezuelans in pro-ball it will be difficult for Puerto Rico to catch up.
As far as not getting carried away...Yes its 10 games so lets not get carried away.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Dec 29, 2014 14:58:17 GMT -5
Rusney's eventual status is pretty key to the next 3/4 years. If he flames out (which honestly seems unlikely at this point), the Sox are back to having a hole in their outfield, with a lot depending on Margot's development or JBJ finding his way (there's really no other outfielder with projection in the pipeline in the medium-term, and precious few conversion candidates like Betts). But if he's above average or better, the Sox have a very good core of players for the next 4-5 years at a reasonable total cost ...
So, you know, a little background to saying that it's good to see the initial returns be so positive. Yippee.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater on Dec 29, 2014 15:01:36 GMT -5
Puig played in Puerto Rico to shake off the rust after he signed in 2012. He slashed .232/.308/.333 with 4 XBH (1 HR) and a 19/7 K/BB in 20 games. Castillo is better than Puig... Just kidding, just kidding I just remembered that Puig played there so I went and checked how he did. wow, that's actually kind of surprising about puig. Then again Puig comes across as a guy who just does not care... so he could very well have been just goofing off. But based on what Chris said, overall it seems like there's a mixture of stars and bums. I remember reading somewhere (can't even begin to remember where, so I won't try to link) that the pitching is a complete wild card with some 95+ flame throwers and then some guys that sit low 80s if that. If anything this suggests that Castillo is able to adapt well to who he's facing. Maybe his pitch recognition is a bit better than I am set to expect. Then again this is all just probably SSS.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater on Dec 29, 2014 15:04:49 GMT -5
Rusney's eventual status is pretty key to the next 3/4 years. If he flames out (which honestly seems unlikely at this point), the Sox are back to having a hole in their outfield, with a lot depending on Margot's development or JBJ finding his way (there's really no other outfielder with projection in the pipeline in the medium-term, and precious few conversion candidates like Betts). But if he's above average or better, the Sox have a very good core of players for the next 4-5 years at a reasonable total cost ... So, you know, a little background to saying that it's good to see the initial returns be so positive. Yippee. You can argue two years ago no one outside of a few on this website had Betts on their radar. Not saying Betts type talent will jsut pop out of the woodwork all the time. It definitely doesn't. But this kind of stuff is very fluid obviously and it's hard to gauge what the Sox roster or farm system will really look like 4 years down the road.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Dec 29, 2014 15:33:42 GMT -5
Rusney's eventual status is pretty key to the next 3/4 years. If he flames out (which honestly seems unlikely at this point), the Sox are back to having a hole in their outfield, with a lot depending on Margot's development or JBJ finding his way (there's really no other outfielder with projection in the pipeline in the medium-term, and precious few conversion candidates like Betts). But if he's above average or better, the Sox have a very good core of players for the next 4-5 years at a reasonable total cost ... So, you know, a little background to saying that it's good to see the initial returns be so positive. Yippee. You can argue two years ago no one outside of a few on this website had Betts on their radar. Not saying Betts type talent will jsut pop out of the woodwork all the time. It definitely doesn't. But this kind of stuff is very fluid obviously and it's hard to gauge what the Sox roster or farm system will really look like 4 years down the road. Yeah, I've thought of that more than a few times when looking at the A- and AA-level Red Sox. But, like you said, a Betts-like explosion just doesn't happen that often. It's *possible* someone like Rijo could do it, and he seems athletic enough to make the switch to the outfield (he was the guy I was thinking about when I said "precious few conversion candidates") ... but it's a remote enough possibility that it's not worth focusing on, and I just don't think there are enough guys who could even possibly do it to matter in the next 3 years or so. The Sox seem to be setting up the Next Great Red Sox Team with the current group of position guys (plus Swihart) as the core, and Cecchini/Marrero/JBJ as AAA assets to incorporate or trade wherever they bring the most value. The next wave of prospects is a few years away, coming out of the Devers, Chavis, Guerra, Longhi, etc level of guys. Not much outside of Margot in between. Maybe someone like Sam Travis moves quickly, but we'll see, and I'm starting to get off topic here ... Incidentally, this is another reason to wait to trade for anyone ... if Castillo pans out, it gives you the depth to possibly deal Margot as a centerpiece.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Dec 30, 2014 12:27:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 30, 2014 12:34:17 GMT -5
Hoping that he's perfectly average in spring training. Nothing is worse than getting hyped then.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Dec 30, 2014 18:01:03 GMT -5
Hoping that he's perfectly average in spring training. Nothing is worse than getting hyped then. Boy is that the truth. It might be worse than being on the SI cover....just ask Bradley. I think the Sox tried to dampen expectations with Rusney... in fairness. The Yankees did the same with Tanaka...calling him perhaps a number three starter....when in-house expectations were likely much greater. Bradley was an apparent organizational wake-up call. Still, I don't think anyone could look at Castillo in CF last year and not think that, minus the arm, he was another Bradley. If anything, he looked like 'this is so easy'. While perhaps not prime time, he did not look overmatched at the plate either. An outfield of Castillo, Betts and Ramirez gives Sox fans as much anticipation as any Boston outfield in recent memory. For once though I would like us to take a true step back to get the panoramic view...not fully engage the dominant, perhaps myopic, 'win now' eye. Let's augment the bullpen and let the rest play out until say 8/1 when what we have and what we may need come into greater focus.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Jan 9, 2015 19:51:01 GMT -5
|
|
|