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.
Travis Shaw named Starting 3B
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on May 2, 2016 8:19:16 GMT -5
They went straight to the player who was performing the best. It was obvious to pretty much every poster that was watching the games. The people that were arguing against were the people who were looking at their histories. It wasn't so much that we thought Shaw would be great, that was a major surprise to everyone, it was more a case where none of us could see anything but a negative WAR player whenever the fat one appeared on a baseball diamond. I seriously doubt if stats had anything whatsoever to do with it, particularly because their stats histories generated a better projection for Panda, not the other way around. Sorry, I believe what Henry said, they're deemphasizing analytics. Same situation with Castillo who looked bad all spring. Bill James, et al, are no longer driving the bus. I say that being a long time James follower (I had his first 8 or 9 books). What exactly is the analytical argument for Castillo? He's been awful statistically; if anything the best case for him is made on tools/scouting. Maybe you could say the defensive numbers like him, but I don't really see what Shaw, Sandoval, or Castillo really have to do with this team using or not using stats/analytics. It seems like they're all pretty much cases of better players winning jobs over worse players. I don't see why there needs to be a narrative for these moves beyond that.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on May 2, 2016 8:24:33 GMT -5
Yea Norm I think your stretching there to say they went with spring training numbers therefore it was analytics. Regardless, the right guy was given the job. As for the turning point thing. I don't think they were handing Shaw the job as a permanent thing out of spring training. I think the turning point had been Sandoval hurting his shoulder for being fat and Shaw just playing well. Travis Shaw has arrived and the Red Sox couldn't be more fortunate. Regarding the third base depth... The good news is Shaw is young and has shown to be durable so it's less of an issue. If there were an injury then Holt can play there. Is it ideal? Not really but it's not terrible either. I don't know when the Sox decided it but when I was pretty sure it would happen was when right in the middle of the contest, David Ortiz came out and talked about what a great swing Shaw had and how well he made adjustments. When a team veteran takes the side of the newbie over another veteran, the writing was pretty much on the wall.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on May 2, 2016 8:27:18 GMT -5
They went straight to the player who was performing the best. It was obvious to pretty much every poster that was watching the games. The people that were arguing against were the people who were looking at their histories. It wasn't so much that we thought Shaw would be great, that was a major surprise to everyone, it was more a case where none of us could see anything but a negative WAR player whenever the fat one appeared on a baseball diamond. I seriously doubt if stats had anything whatsoever to do with it, particularly because their stats histories generated a better projection for Panda, not the other way around. Sorry, I believe what Henry said, they're deemphasizing analytics. Same situation with Castillo who looked bad all spring. Bill James, et al, are no longer driving the bus. I say that being a long time James follower (I had his first 8 or 9 books). What exactly is the analytical argument for Castillo? He's been awful statistically; if anything the best case for him is made on tools/scouting. Maybe you could say the defensive numbers like him, but I don't really see what Shaw, Sandoval, or Castillo really have to do with this team using or not using stats/analytics. It seems like they're all pretty much cases of better players winning jobs over worse players. I don't see why there needs to be a narrative for these moves beyond that. Because the narrative was brought up by John Henry before spring and reiterated by Farrell a few days ago. Different regime, different approach. ADD: The entire discussion is pretty much a followup from a few pages ago when I said I view Shaw as the poster boy for the new way of doing things. Were pretty much now discussing how we think decisions are being made and how that differs from how things were done under Ben. (For Castillo, DD brought up Castillo/Holt in one of the articles I linked).
|
|
|
Post by mandelbro on May 2, 2016 8:41:40 GMT -5
What exactly is the analytical argument for Castillo? He's been awful statistically; if anything the best case for him is made on tools/scouting. Maybe you could say the defensive numbers like him, but I don't really see what Shaw, Sandoval, or Castillo really have to do with this team using or not using stats/analytics. It seems like they're all pretty much cases of better players winning jobs over worse players. I don't see why there needs to be a narrative for these moves beyond that. Yeah, since when did a team making decisions that aren't based on Steamer mean that they are "de-emphasizing analytics"? Sandoval was a very good hitter in the past. The projections would lend weight to Sandoval's past. The Red Sox can see that he's obviously unfit to play baseball so they don't play him. That's not a sign of "de-emphasizing analytics", that's just exercising common sense. "Something's different and exciting so go watch NESN!" - the gist of pretty much anything JWH says
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on May 2, 2016 8:59:13 GMT -5
What exactly is the analytical argument for Castillo? He's been awful statistically; if anything the best case for him is made on tools/scouting. Maybe you could say the defensive numbers like him, but I don't really see what Shaw, Sandoval, or Castillo really have to do with this team using or not using stats/analytics. It seems like they're all pretty much cases of better players winning jobs over worse players. I don't see why there needs to be a narrative for these moves beyond that. Yeah, since when did a team making decisions that aren't based on Steamer mean that they are "de-emphasizing analytics"? Sandoval was a very good hitter in the past. The projections would lend weight to Sandoval's past. The Red Sox can see that he's obviously unfit to play baseball so they don't play him. That's not a sign of "de-emphasizing analytics", that's just exercising common sense. "Something's different and exciting so go watch NESN!" - the gist of pretty much anything JWH says "Red Sox principal owner John Henry revealed a major shift in organizational philosophy Wednesday when he said the team was de-emphasizing its reliance on analytics in making major decisions." .yada .yada .yada "We have made significant changes." Feb 24 Boston Globe He forgot to mention NESN
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on May 2, 2016 10:07:48 GMT -5
Right, because JH is going to tell you everything going on with org philosophy and will be completely truthful and forthcoming.
He's going to tell you what he wants you to hear (or what he thinks you want to hear).
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on May 2, 2016 10:34:22 GMT -5
At the start of spring training, manager John Farrell recalled Thursday, “[Boston president of baseball operations] Dave [Dombrowski] said to put the best team on the field that we have, and he’s right. At first, I was like, ‘Are these words, or are these going to be able to be actions?’ And we’ve been able to put it into action.”
“I think it sent a positive message that we’re going to play the best guys,” said Dombrowski, who joined the Red Sox last August after being let go by Detroit. “Same thing with Brock Holt playing a lot in left field.”
I see now. It's just a giant conspiracy because the average Red Sox fan wants to hear it. Thanks for clarifying with such incredible insight.
|
|
|
Post by costpet on May 2, 2016 10:45:22 GMT -5
I think their philosophy now is who ever plays the best plays, not whoever we pay the most plays. That's the big change.
This team is starting to be really exciting. Even Hanley has bought into it. Love the home grown dominance. By September, Bennie might be the starting left fielder. Then it would be entirely home grown. No one else can say that.
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on May 2, 2016 10:59:56 GMT -5
I think their philosophy now is who ever plays the best plays, not whoever we pay the most plays. That's the big change. This team is starting to be really exciting. Even Hanley has bought into it. Love the home grown dominance. By September, Bennie might be the starting left fielder. Then it would be entirely home grown. No one else can say that. Hanley is more home grown that Holt? Ditto Papi??
|
|
|
Post by mandelbro on May 2, 2016 11:08:23 GMT -5
At the start of spring training, manager John Farrell recalled Thursday, “[Boston president of baseball operations] Dave [Dombrowski] said to put the best team on the field that we have, and he’s right. At first, I was like, ‘Are these words, or are these going to be able to be actions?’ And we’ve been able to put it into action.”
“I think it sent a positive message that we’re going to play the best guys,” said Dombrowski, who joined the Red Sox last August after being let go by Detroit. “Same thing with Brock Holt playing a lot in left field.”
I see now. It's just a giant conspiracy because the average Red Sox fan wants to hear it. Thanks for clarifying with such incredible insight. I hear Pablo Sandoval might not actually be 17% body fat too.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on May 2, 2016 11:08:43 GMT -5
Wow, you get beligerent about this stuff, dude. I thought you were retired and chillin' in Manilla. I never said anything about a conspiracy.
|
|
|
Post by costpet on May 2, 2016 11:22:54 GMT -5
I was talking about who plays in the field. Holt came from Pittsburgh. We groomed Hanley before we traded him.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on May 2, 2016 12:26:42 GMT -5
I think it goes something like this:
Analytics, surveying last year: Looking at the evidence, Rusney Castillo sucked against fastballs, that was his big problem. Scouting, this spring: Yeah, Rusney Castillo still sucks against fastballs, look at his swing against the high velocity stuff Management: Pawtucket!
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,787
|
Post by nomar on May 2, 2016 12:39:13 GMT -5
The only metric that helped Castillo was a SSS UZR in LF. Aside from that, he was a hitter who couldn't touch righties, high velocity, nor get the ball off of the ground.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on May 2, 2016 13:40:14 GMT -5
Wow, you get beligerent about this stuff, dude. I thought you were retired and chillin' in Manilla. I never said anything about a conspiracy. I'm sorry, there was an intelligent conversation going on and I thought you and mantlebro just put it into the dumpster.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 2, 2016 14:23:30 GMT -5
I really dislike how much identity politics has permeated so many discussions on these forums-- as if every single move is a referendum on who is winning a culture war that, quite frankly, only exists in people's heads. I fully admit that I've contributed to it, but it's made this place more hostile/bitter and less fun. I'm going to try to tone down some of the antagonism and will ask other posters to try and do the same. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 2, 2016 16:36:37 GMT -5
At the start of spring training, manager John Farrell recalled Thursday, “[Boston president of baseball operations] Dave [Dombrowski] said to put the best team on the field that we have, and he’s right. At first, I was like, ‘Are these words, or are these going to be able to be actions?’ And we’ve been able to put it into action.”
“I think it sent a positive message that we’re going to play the best guys,” said Dombrowski, who joined the Red Sox last August after being let go by Detroit. “Same thing with Brock Holt playing a lot in left field.”
I see now. It's just a giant conspiracy because the average Red Sox fan wants to hear it. Thanks for clarifying with such incredible insight. "We're very happy with the work Sandoval put in this winter." "He has lost 20-22 pounds." "We didn't ask Pablo to lose weight." "Pablo's body fat % is down to 17%." It seems pretty obvious to me that they aren't going to do either all A or all B, but a combination that doesn't use 100% analytics and 0% scouting in the decision making process. So far it looks like they've done just that.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on May 2, 2016 18:56:25 GMT -5
What exactly is the analytical argument for Castillo? He's been awful statistically; if anything the best case for him is made on tools/scouting. Maybe you could say the defensive numbers like him, but I don't really see what Shaw, Sandoval, or Castillo really have to do with this team using or not using stats/analytics. It seems like they're all pretty much cases of better players winning jobs over worse players. I don't see why there needs to be a narrative for these moves beyond that. Yeah, since when did a team making decisions that aren't based on Steamer mean that they are "de-emphasizing analytics"? Sandoval was a very good hitter in the past. The projections would lend weight to Sandoval's past. The Red Sox can see that he's obviously unfit to play baseball so they don't play him. That's not a sign of "de-emphasizing analytics", that's just exercising common sense. "Something's different and exciting so go watch NESN!" - the gist of pretty much anything JWH saysExactly. What other motivation does he even have to make these kind of statements publicly? Regardless of what changes they have or haven't made internally, it's not in their interest to tell anyone about it, other than to influence public perception of a team that's made a habit of disappointing people in recent years. For the record, I don't think the Red Sox's recent troubles have had much if anything to do with the use or non-use of analytics. I think they have had everything to do with a lack of cohesive plan, organizational structure, and a destructive win-now mentality. For example, trading John Lackey for MLB pieces as opposed to prospects. I don't think there's any analytical reason to do that. Fangraphs and Prospectus aren't preaching that strategy. The Cubs and the Rays aren't doing it. It seems far more likely to me that BC went that way because he was worried that one more losing season would cost him his job (which was indeed the case), and whatever prospects he could get for Lackey weren't going to be ready in time to save him. I suspect it was the same with Sandoval, he was signed not because of a misplaced faith in projection systems, but just because they needed to put a winning team on the field immediately and he was the best 3B option available at the time.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on May 2, 2016 22:34:18 GMT -5
Yea Norm I think your stretching there to say they went with spring training numbers therefore it was analytics. Regardless, the right guy was given the job. As for the turning point thing. I don't think they were handing Shaw the job as a permanent thing out of spring training. I think the turning point had been Sandoval hurting his shoulder for being fat and Shaw just playing well. Travis Shaw has arrived and the Red Sox couldn't be more fortunate. Regarding the third base depth... The good news is Shaw is young and has shown to be durable so it's less of an issue. If there were an injury then Holt can play there. Is it ideal? Not really but it's not terrible either. I believe that's your stretch on my words? Spring training was just the exclamation point for last year's performance by Shaw - those numbers again. Shaw was worth a lot more than Sandoval by any measure. But the real difference between this year and last has little to nothing to do with analytics versus scouting. The overriding factor in what's gone down is Dombrowski's position as the head of baseball ops, and his decisiveness. It was obvious from his arrival, and the performance of the players he watched at the end of last season, that the leash would be short, even shorter than I suggested at the time. That has to do with ownership's willingness to hand over control of the team to Dombrowski. He says what he means, and means what he says.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on May 2, 2016 23:02:15 GMT -5
I think their philosophy now is who ever plays the best plays, not whoever we pay the most plays. That's the big change. This team is starting to be really exciting. Even Hanley has bought into it. Love the home grown dominance. By September, Bennie might be the starting left fielder. Then it would be entirely home grown. No one else can say that. Well, technically the Sox didn't draft and develop Holt, but they did finish his development from AAA to MLB. And Hanley...well, I'm not sure they can take full credit for him, although he did basically finish with MiLB as a Red Sox. Strange to think that they could field an all-homegrown starting (defensive) team on days that Buchholz or Owens pitch, with Benintendi in LF, should that happen this year. Who knows, both he and Moncada may be up by Sept (although Moncada's K rate is a bit concerning). And to think that they may add those two, Devers, Espinoza, Kopech, Travis, Light, Marrero, Lakins, and this year's 12th overall pick (if it's a college player) within the next 2-3 years. Even so, and semi-non-sequitur that it is, man am I going to miss Papi.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on May 16, 2016 0:08:39 GMT -5
Going by BR, Shaw has been good for 2.2 WAR so far. If he keeps it up, his production should be worth Sandoval's salary in no more than a week or two.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Jun 19, 2016 13:32:14 GMT -5
The Shaw streak update. The number is TAv estimated from OBP and SA, and the AAA figures are raw, not MLE.
.204 AAA, 137 PA, 33 G .317 AAA, 108 PA, 25 G recalled by the Red Sox for 1 G, back to Paw for 2, back to Bos where he had 6 PA in 6 days, back to Pawtucket .202 all, 92 PA, 27 G, recalled again .380 MLB, 72 PA, 18 G .139 MLB, 45 PA, 12 G .362 MLB, 66 PA, 14 G .174 MLB, 49 PA, 12 G --- .328 MLB, 160 PA, 39 G .172 MLB, 95 PA, 23 G .318 MLB, 18 PA, 5 G
That his hot streak this year was way less hot than last year's (but still terrific) can be explained by pitchers respecting him. That it's still way better than his AAA MLEs can now be credibly explained by his using all the scouting resources.
This year's slump was exactly as bad as his end-of-season swoon, and there's every reason to think that the slumps are all one thing. The previous 4 slumps averaged 21 games, although if we assume that the end-of-year one would have continued, that number is more like 23 ... which is also the mid-point between the shortest and longest slumps ... and the length of this year's. So that was a completely typical slump.
The good news is that he stayed hot for 39 games, very impressive for a guy who was averaging 18 or 19.
Like all streaky hitters, his final numbers will vary unpredictably, not as a function of his skill, which should remain unchanged, but due to the varying hot/cold proportion. Being hot for 39 and cold for 23 is better than we expected, and it amounted to a 106 wRC+: ordinarily a good player and a first-division starter, and only below-average because we're in a golden age of 3B.
However, if he can reduce the slump duration in the direction of 12 (which is very typical for a hitter who's good at ending them), he starts to become a very good player indeed. Note that the three slumps in MLB have averaged about 17, versus 30 in AAA; that may well be Chili Davis.
|
|
|
Post by pokeefe363 on Jun 19, 2016 16:17:10 GMT -5
Shaw's slump could very possibly be attributed to no days off. Farrell has given the regulars almost no rest compared to most years.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Aug 20, 2016 11:50:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by patford on Aug 20, 2016 11:56:24 GMT -5
The best possible scenario for third base is Sandoval returning healthy and in the best physical shape of his career.
|
|
|