|
Post by rafael on Nov 17, 2015 7:31:36 GMT -5
If JBJ hits .230 he is more valuable than 95% of the relievers in baseball. Now that the Red Sox have the back of the bullpen set (Kimbrel/Uehara/Tazawa), it doesn't make any sense to open a hole in the OF to get another reliever.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Nov 17, 2015 8:47:55 GMT -5
If JBJ hits .230 he is more valuable than 95% of the relievers in baseball. Now that the Red Sox have the back of the bullpen set (Kimbrel/Uehara/Tazawa), it doesn't make any sense to open a hole in the OF to get another reliever. Agree...We don't exactly have a logjam in the OF especially with Margot gone. As it is, we still need to sign/trade for a 4th OF. I think we need to roll out the BBC unless one of them is traded for another OF....I don't like signing Heyward or Gordon. That $$$ needs to go toward a SP.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,787
|
Post by nomar on Nov 17, 2015 9:01:51 GMT -5
If JBJ hits .230 he is more valuable than 95% of the relievers in baseball. Now that the Red Sox have the back of the bullpen set (Kimbrel/Uehara/Tazawa), it doesn't make any sense to open a hole in the OF to get another reliever. This. At this point, there is no reliever I would give JBJ up for. The only situation where I trade JBJ is for a #2 or #1 starter where JBJ is a significant part of a package. If not, it's a much better idea to hold onto him. We could be heading into his prime years at a very small price. He's a lot more valuable than a reliever.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 17, 2015 12:01:52 GMT -5
So you got me thinking.... Can a team support two guys successfully like Bradley and Vazquez assuming both were great gloves but lineup drags. Absolutely. Plus defense up the middle. (and in Fenway, in right). I mean, are we even debating this? Jackie Bradley had a 2.4WAR in 74 games last year. Christian Vazquez appeared in 55 games in 2014 and had a 0.6WAR, and his bat is capable of more. These guys are assets, not anchors around our necks. We trade Margot over JBJ because JBJ's elite defense (Margot is not elite) makes him a worthwhile player without his bat. No there's no debate if you think one player in the lineup or field doesn't affect the others and if you think all 3 WAR players are equal in how they fit with a particular team. If you believe that then there is no discussion. If you are open to the idea (cough reality), that how a team is constructed goes beyond individuals WAR then it's very much a discussion.
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,660
|
Post by gerry on Nov 17, 2015 12:42:50 GMT -5
Absolutely. Plus defense up the middle. (and in Fenway, in right). I mean, are we even debating this? Jackie Bradley had a 2.4WAR in 74 games last year. Christian Vazquez appeared in 55 games in 2014 and had a 0.6WAR, and his bat is capable of more. These guys are assets, not anchors around our necks. We trade Margot over JBJ because JBJ's elite defense (Margot is not elite) makes him a worthwhile player without his bat. No there's no debate if you think one player in the lineup or field doesn't affect the others and if you think all 3 WAR players are equal in how they fit with a particular team. If you believe that then there is no discussion. If you are open to the idea (cough reality), that how a team is constructed goes beyond individuals WAR then it's very much a discussion. Why would JBJ not be a perfect fit with this team? He cen play CF, RF and LF more perfectly than anyone I can think of. In fact this is likely true even when compared to JH, who might cost more than J. Cueto or J..Zimmerman, or most of David Price's contract.. It has been discussed that one of those SP's + JBJ's glove and arm in RF/CF + preserving the top prospect haul it would take to trade for a SP is a more perfect fit for this team than that scenario. Or, is starting a Cbris B Young a better fit in RF? This has been discussed interminably, and the end of the discussion is usually that JBJ's superior defense (routes, glove and arm) is a perfect fit for the Sox and its OF, as is his age and years of control. The only question has been will he hit more closely to his hot August, his strong mlB line, or the disaster that occured when he was brought up too soon. The consensus Continues to be if he can hit somewhere in the middle, he will be a perfect fit. So, other than fitting into CF or RF, what is left to (cough) discuss?
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 17, 2015 13:37:15 GMT -5
Lets not forget the Royals just carried Alcides Escobar along with Infante and Rios getting significant AB's. Of their nine players with the most PA's on the season, four had a sub .300 OBP, and of those four Salvador Perez was by far the best while doing his best Saltalamacchia impression (with more contact and less patience). A team can clearly be successful with a couple of elite defenders who are below average hitters. The Royals had five above average hitters that turned into six once Zobrist was acquired, so as long as the Red Sox can have the same type of mix it can absolutely be successful.
EDIT: I'd also like to note that the Royals had only three players hit 20+ home runs, and none hit more than 22. You can win a championship in a variety of ways.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 17, 2015 14:05:36 GMT -5
No one said he wasn't a good fit for this team.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 17, 2015 14:08:23 GMT -5
Absolutely. Plus defense up the middle. (and in Fenway, in right). I mean, are we even debating this? Jackie Bradley had a 2.4WAR in 74 games last year. Christian Vazquez appeared in 55 games in 2014 and had a 0.6WAR, and his bat is capable of more. These guys are assets, not anchors around our necks. We trade Margot over JBJ because JBJ's elite defense (Margot is not elite) makes him a worthwhile player without his bat. And depending how much weight you put into framing, it's safe to say Vazquez was probably closer to 1.6 than 0.6. Depending on how much weight you put into framing, Christan Vazquez is actually Jesus, as we've seen here on the forums. (I keed, I keed)
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 17, 2015 14:35:15 GMT -5
Depending on how much weight you put into framing, Christan Vazquez is actually Jesus, as we've seen here on the forums. (I keed, I keed) Actually, Jesus Montero was a terrible pitch-framer, so I'm not sure he's the right compari... Oh, I see what you did there. No points for you.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Nov 17, 2015 20:48:26 GMT -5
Clearly if you slot two guys into the starting 9 that are expected to be below average hitters, your margin for error on the other 7 guys is smaller.
No argument from me about having them both, but it could make offensive declines from say Sandoval, Pedroia, etc. more pronounced if you already have 8/9 hitters who are mediocre hitters.
That said, I think there's a decent chance that Bradley develops into at least a league average bat. Even Vazquez at multiple levels has shown close to league average bat ability. If either of them are anywhere close to 90 WRC+ or better, they could become elite players in essence, though not necessarily "known elite guys"
|
|
|
Post by blizzards39 on Nov 17, 2015 22:48:52 GMT -5
Clearly if you slot two guys into the starting 9 that are expected to be below average hitters, your margin for error on the other 7 guys is smaller. No argument from me about having them both, but it could make offensive declines from say Sandoval, Pedroia, etc. more pronounced if you already have 8/9 hitters who are mediocre hitters. That said, I think there's a decent chance that Bradley develops into at least a league average bat. Even Vazquez at multiple levels has shown close to league average bat ability. If either of them are anywhere close to 90 WRC+ or better, they could become elite players in essence, though not necessarily "known elite guys" This could all become mute if Swihart is catching and Vazquez is backing up/traded/AAA. Blake should be an above average hitter for a C
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Nov 17, 2015 23:31:47 GMT -5
Bradley's value may never be higher than this offseason, but I can not see dombrowski moving him.
I think we should move betts to left field and leave Bradley in centerfield.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 18, 2015 0:28:29 GMT -5
I think they see a little Alex Gordon in JBJ. (Gordon survived with the Royals by his elite defense while his bat was all over the place for the first 4 years of his career).
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater on Nov 18, 2015 9:11:07 GMT -5
I believe Gordon had a much higher offensive ceiling as a prospect than JBJ though. But I could be wrong. He was also a 3B.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Nov 18, 2015 9:33:36 GMT -5
I think they see a little Alex Gordon in JBJ. (Gordon survived with the Royals by his elite defense while his bat was all over the place for the first 4 years of his career). Shows how much patience KC use to have by sticking with a player that long, especially @ 3B. Boston doesn't have that luxury.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Nov 18, 2015 9:52:41 GMT -5
I think they see a little Alex Gordon in JBJ. (Gordon survived with the Royals by his elite defense while his bat was all over the place for the first 4 years of his career). Shows how much patience KC use to have by sticking with a player that long, especially @ 3B. Boston doesn't have that luxury. Of course they do, they just did it with Bradley for two and a half years. All they have to do is ignore the bogus GMs with the mics, the ones who live in an echo chamber. Coming to you from the great Northwest
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Nov 18, 2015 10:38:14 GMT -5
I think they see a little Alex Gordon in JBJ. (Gordon survived with the Royals by his elite defense while his bat was all over the place for the first 4 years of his career). Shows how much patience KC use to have by sticking with a player that long, especially @ 3B. Boston doesn't have that luxury. Maybe that mindset is an actual problem. Often fans and GM sometimes to base everything on the past season. It appears we are more interested in other players bouncing back then accepting our own players can too, because we witnessed the down year the past year.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Nov 18, 2015 11:14:43 GMT -5
Shows how much patience KC use to have by sticking with a player that long, especially @ 3B. Boston doesn't have that luxury. Of course they do, they just did it with Bradley for two and a half years. All they have to do is ignore the bogus GMs with the mics, the ones who live in an echo chamber. Coming to you from the great Northwest 2 1/2 years of sticking with Bradley IMO is different from Gordon....Bradley played an elite defensive CF/RF, while Gordon played 3B. Apples to oranges.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,787
|
Post by nomar on Nov 18, 2015 12:29:21 GMT -5
All the interest in Bradley is certainly adding to the confidence I have in him heading into next year. If this many teams want him, they must think he breaks out this year.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Nov 18, 2015 12:44:27 GMT -5
Bradley isn't going anywhere. DD believes in him and they need his lower salary.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Nov 18, 2015 13:41:06 GMT -5
Bradley isn't going anywhere. DD believes in him and they need his lower salary. Agreed.....seems the ML is leaning towards defense quality......I remember a few games last year which the cameras showed DD's expressions when he saw some of Bradley's catches. He seemed to be "in awe".
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,644
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 18, 2015 14:01:44 GMT -5
Bradley isn't going anywhere. DD believes in him and they need his lower salary. Agreed. Either JBJ was going to be part of a trade with the Sox getting a stop gap OF until Margot was ready or they were going to deal Margot. We got our answer. The only stop gap help they'll get now is for if JBJ totally doesn't hit or Castillo flops. Eventually Benintendi will be the answer as to who goes along with Betts and JBJ in the outfield.
|
|
|
Post by jiant2520 on Nov 18, 2015 16:02:13 GMT -5
Unless it takes Bradley to get Harvey or Sale... we should keep him, in my opinion.
By the way.... were probably not getting either of these two, lol.
|
|
|
Post by chrisfromnc on Nov 19, 2015 13:25:40 GMT -5
I am going to just admit being in Fanboy mode on JBJ. He is just so purely fun to watch playing baseball that I will be crushed if he is traded.
Do yourself a favor and go look at one of the YouTube videos that string together a bunch of his defensive highlights. He is brilliant defensively and more fun to watch that Jose Iglesias IMO. I'm hopeful that the Kimbrel trade is the major trade move of the off season and in 2016 Red Sox fans can just enjoy watching this guy play the sport we all love.
If we have to give up an outfielder I'd advocate moving Castillo rather than Bradley even if the return coming back is slightly less.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,644
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 19, 2015 13:40:15 GMT -5
I am going to just admit being in Fanboy mode on JBJ. He is just so purely fun to watch playing baseball that I will be crushed if he is traded. Do yourself a favor and go look at one of the YouTube videos that string together a bunch of his defensive highlights. He is brilliant defensively and more fun to watch that Jose Iglesias IMO. I'm hopeful that the Kimbrel trade is the major trade move of the off season and in 2016 Red Sox fans can just enjoy watching this guy play the sport we all love. If we have to give up an outfielder I'd advocate moving Castillo rather than Bradley even if the return coming back is slightly less. I would think the return from dealing Castillo would be significantly less, not slightly less. Castillo isn't as good defensively, is a few years older, has accomplished very little offensively in the majors, doesn't have Bradley's ability to draw a walk, and makes a helluva lot more $ than JBJ does. Bradley could extract a significant return. I would say Castillo wouldn't.
|
|