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.
The Big Bad Mookie Betts Thread
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Apr 26, 2014 11:29:36 GMT -5
There was a time when baseball was considered a blue collar sport. Most of the players did not attend college at all, and many came from rural areas where the school systems were not very good. So, consequently, baseball players had the reputation of not being very smart - or at least fairly ignorant. Shoeless Joe Jackson, one of the greatest players ever, also was one of the most ignorant and naive, at least according to contemporary accounts of the Black Sox scandal. Some of the sports writing, especially baseball fiction, in the early part of the 20th Century provided accounts of the poor education and ignorance of many players. That does not mean they were not intelligent, but they didn't get much credit for it. No one linked intelligence to good ball playing. That is a much later development, and it really came after the draft became so important and scouting became much more scientific. Still, you don't see any 40-80 scale for intelligence in scouting reports. I think the Orioles were the first team to start giving personality tests to prospective draftees. I believe, but I am not sure, that some other teams do it now. Intelligence and personality have become factors in assessing a player, but not, as far as I know, controlling ones. The major factors still are skills and raw talent. But they aren't everything, and great skills and talent don't always produce a great player if the player is lacking in some other traits. That kid with the Nationals is a great example of this. Are you talking about Bryce Harper? 21 year old Bryce Harper? The Bryce Harper that averaged 4.2 fWAR in his age 19 and 20 seasons? He is the exact same age as Bogaerts. Are you really a.) Saying he hasn't been good and b.) Saying it is because of some character flaw rather than the fact that he is 21 (!) years old?
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Apr 26, 2014 11:50:29 GMT -5
Are you talking about Bryce Harper? 21 year old Bryce Harper? The Bryce Harper that averaged 4.2 fWAR in his age 19 and 20 seasons? He is the exact same age as Bogaerts. Are you really a.) Saying he hasn't been good and b.) Saying it is because of some character flaw rather than the fact that he is 21 (!) years old? Not running all-out to first base on a play where you will be out anyway 99.9999% of the time when you've been dealing with a left quad injury is a REALLY SERIOUS character flaw.
|
|
|
Post by feez732 on Apr 26, 2014 11:54:42 GMT -5
Not to pile on but that is a pretty terrible comment. We're talking about the kid that had the drive to get his GED at 16 and head to Junior College just so that he could be drafted a year earlier. Also, unless I'm remembering incorrectly didn't he have the greatest age 19 season of all time by WAR? Even with the injuries he dealt with last year, he was still above average for his position and light years ahead of how most 20-year-olds would fare. That was just an overwhelmingly terrible example.
And more to the discussion of intangibles in general. I think the problem that a lot of us have with these discussions about intangibles is not necessarily that we think that they don't exist and/or aren't import. The issue is that players are characterized as having good/poor intangibles very often by people who've never met the player and furthermore are basing their opinion on such a narrow view of the player that the whole discussion is often absurd.
edit: To be clear, I was also responding to danr, not mgoetze's obviously sarcastic post.
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Apr 26, 2014 12:58:31 GMT -5
I'm guessing "4.2 fWAR" isn't going to resonate much with someone who refers to him as "that kid on that Nationals."
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Apr 26, 2014 16:24:34 GMT -5
I didn't say he couldn't play, but from what I am hearing from friends who follow the Nationals closely, he has an attitude problem and does some dumb things on the field. Some fear that his antics may cause injuries that will shorten his career. He's already had some. He still is a kid, and there's plenty of time for him to grow up a bit.
There probably are better examples than him, but he just came to mind because of something I read about him the other day.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Apr 26, 2014 16:48:30 GMT -5
I was thinking about some catchy chants for Mookie I summit it to the floor for deliberation:
"Oh Mookie, you're so fine you're so fine you blow my mind, hey Mookie, hey Mookie"
"The Mook, the Mook is on fire"
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Apr 26, 2014 17:24:21 GMT -5
I was thinking about some catchy chants for Mookie I summit it to the floor for deliberation: "Oh Mookie, you're so fine you're so fine you blow my mind, hey Mookie, hey Mookie" "The Mook, the Mook is on fire" Ok, I get it. You are in reality John Sterling! ..who probably would say "The Mookman delivers!"
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Apr 26, 2014 17:27:07 GMT -5
Just saw the results of the 15-inning game, where he tied it in the bottom of the 14th with two outs on a home run to dead center. I'm sort of at a loss at this point. It's a small sample of at bats, but man what a sample. He just keeps raking.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Apr 26, 2014 17:49:12 GMT -5
I was thinking about some catchy chants for Mookie I summit it to the floor for deliberation: "Oh Mookie, you're so fine you're so fine you blow my mind, hey Mookie, hey Mookie" "The Mook, the Mook is on fire" Ok, I get it. You are in reality John Sterling! ..who probably would say "The Mookman delivers!" On the Mark, Texeira.
|
|
|
Post by zil on Apr 26, 2014 17:54:28 GMT -5
I was thinking about some catchy chants for Mookie I summit it to the floor for deliberation: "Oh Mookie, you're so fine you're so fine you blow my mind, hey Mookie, hey Mookie" "The Mook, the Mook is on fire" I kinda feel like "Moo-Kie! Moo-kie!" or "Mooooooooooooooooook" will win out if it gets to that point.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Apr 26, 2014 18:12:59 GMT -5
Ok, I get it. You are in reality John Sterling! ..who probably would say "The Mookman delivers!" On the Mark, Texeira.
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Apr 26, 2014 18:38:40 GMT -5
I was thinking about some catchy chants for Mookie I summit it to the floor for deliberation: "Oh Mookie, you're so fine you're so fine you blow my mind, hey Mookie, hey Mookie" "The Mook, the Mook is on fire" "BOYCOTT SAL'S!"
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Apr 26, 2014 20:42:43 GMT -5
Jmei, we can agree to disagree but at no point did I ever give priority to the intelligence attribute or overrate it in any way in my opinion. I prefer to look at all the data, and things like coach ability, intelligence, proven track record of success, lack of an alcohol problem, lack of a criminal record, ability to process visual information, ability to track a ball in flight to estimate the end point, visual acuity, team attitude, propensity for injury, hustle, ability to deal wit failure, psychological profile, career focus etc, etc, etc… are all factors as we'll as the conventional evaluation criteria. And I don't underestimate the value of the primary evaluation criteria of speed, power, bat speed, arm strength, defensive skill, hand/eye coordination, wrist strength…etc.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Apr 26, 2014 21:05:25 GMT -5
I think it was Philsbosoxfan who said recently that Mookie doesn't miss much when he swings. I was at today's game today and had to leave after the 10th but I don't think Mookie fouled off a single ball until that point or swung and missed at all as of the 10th. His swing is flat and smooth and he made consistent hard contact. This guy is going to put the ball in play a lot and mlb level pitchers are not going to want to walk him. I think he is going to have to hit for a high average to succeed. He makes hard contact but God knows where the pop is coming from. He's real small and thin looking. With a little luck though today he could have had 4 hits. He consistently hits the ball hard.
When comparing him to top flight guys though it is hard to imagine him keeping these numbers up, particularly the power numbers. Watching the Yanks Gary Sanchez, another top prospect, and it was like night and day. Sanchez hit the ball hard consistently, one over the fence just foul and late in the game smacked Celestino's fastball like it was nothing. He looks for real.
Coyle and Swihart had excellent games also. Swihart seems to be able to put the ball right on the 2nd base bag consistently. The 2 steals against him in the first 10 innings today, were clearly on the pitcher. Swihart knocked a double off the wall left handed ( opposite field double ) and hit a HR as well. It is real encouraging to see Swihart with that much opposite field power. Coyle looks like he wants to crush everything to LF but did go to RF once late in the count. If they could just get him to hit it up the middle more he would be better, IMO, as his bat speed is fine.
Ramos has some value. That is about it of the people who played today. Heiker didn't even want to take ground balls much between innings and looks too squat to be a SS to me. Also, I think Bett's could play SS but there is probably little reason to move him there permanently. His arm is not that strong to be there full-time. I doubt his range would be that good even with his speed and the arm is not making that throw from the hole very often. He might be a Victorino replacement in Fenway's RF, but he is probably a better fit in CF to me, but 2nd base looks ideal for him.
|
|
|
Post by quintanariffic on Apr 27, 2014 0:43:07 GMT -5
Jmei, we can agree to disagree but at no point did I ever give priority to the intelligence attribute or overrate it in any way in my opinion. I prefer to look at all the data, and things like coach ability, intelligence, proven track record of success, lack of an alcohol problem, lack of a criminal record, ability to process visual information, ability to track a ball in flight to estimate the end point, visual acuity, team attitude, propensity for injury, hustle, ability to deal wit failure, psychological profile, career focus etc, etc, etc… are all factors as we'll as the conventional evaluation criteria. And I don't underestimate the value of the primary evaluation criteria of speed, power, bat speed, arm strength, defensive skill, hand/eye coordination, wrist strength…etc. If you like to look at "all the data", please show us the data you're looking at for Mookie's coachability, intelligence, team attitude, hustle, ability to deal with failure, psychological profile, and career focus. Show us your work or, failing that, your sources. Surely your opinions and perspectives are based on a strong foundation of data and observation, right?
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Apr 27, 2014 6:36:18 GMT -5
The point, which some of you guys are intentionally trying not to see, is that all of us should consider every shred of data we have when considering a prospect. Abstractly. And the Redsox have resources to do that and it is their job to find out every relevant detail they can about a prospect which doesn't impose upon the prospects rights to privacy. I am not a scout and at no point did I ever say I was one. I don't work for any team. The point was in the abstract. I have spent some time and will be spending 2 days this weekend observing the Seadogs players for what little perspective I can, even though all it does is consistently get me grief here FOR NO REASON WHATSOEVER, other than some of you feeling threatened or whatever the damm reason is for the response. All I'm doing is trying to contribute in a positive manner here.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Apr 27, 2014 7:08:30 GMT -5
From watching Mookie play this weekend, I think they should leave him mainly at 2nd base, and even trade him if they have to, because he is a 2nd baseman mainly. I don't think he has tremendous speed or a good enough arm to be more than a good defensive SS at best, or will have the major league level pop to be a good corner OF. For what little it's worth (my perspective here), the guy is probably a plus defensive 2nd baseman though and he will work the count and put the ball in play with solid contact skills. I think the world of the kid, but this is my assessment at this point. He has above average speed ( better than JBJ probably but nowhere near Ellsbury type speed). He could play CF, but would not be a great defensive CF in my opinion.
In the interest of giving him PT at the mlb level though they may have to bring him up at some point as a sub at first until he establishes his value. I don't think he is going to scout well in the conventional way. He is just too small to project much outside of 2nd base, and even there a little more size would probably help him. Other teams are not going to believe he is real. They are going to look at the numbers and just wonder how. Which is why this guy is so interesting. The numbers are incredible though so of course he has substantial value already.
It does appear to me that the guy's main strengths are a solid fundamental swing, smooth and level through the zone, and he seems to be able to wait longer on pitches before swinging and picks his pitches to swing at extremely well. His bat speed is quite good and his ability to square up the ball is exceptional. There is no doubt about that. Possibly his small size helps him in one other area. His strike zone makes it a little more difficult to get off speed pitches and curveballs in the strike zone with him. Maybe he is going to get a few more fastballs in life specifically for that reason. It is MY OPINION that this kid is something special in a way which just doesn't scout well in the conventional sense. He looks to me like an overachiever. A perfect storm MAYBE of plus intangibles, squeezing every last once of ability out of his body.
I worry a little bit that his body will eventually take a toll which will effect his performance if he keeps playing non stop as he has in the past year. They need to be careful with his body. Look at Coyle, who looks like he has a more sturdy body but is on the DL quite often. Mookie even looks a little sore out there to me already, with all the wear and tear he has taken already. It was a very tough day to play yesterday though, with the temperature between 40-50 degrees much of the day.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 27, 2014 8:03:24 GMT -5
I agree with the keeping him at second base but totally disagree that he would not be seen as a prototypical perfect second baseman and lead-off hitter by others. It's not like as if his tools and skills aren't obvious. He'll be a top ten prospect soon as a second baseman. Keep or trade, he has significant value. You assume evaluators from other organizations are blind.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Apr 27, 2014 8:14:43 GMT -5
I agree with the keeping him at second base but totally disagree that he would not be seen as a prototypical perfect second baseman and lead-off hitter by others. It's not like as if his tools and skills aren't obvious. He'll be a top ten prospect soon as a second baseman. Keep or trade, he has significant value. You assume evaluators from other organizations are blind. No, I'm assuming they may not see as much value in Mookie as we do. I've been touting Mookie as possibly our top prospect for over a week now. The numbers alone are very difficult to object to at this point. I'm saying he's so small he may not be perceived of by others at the same level we see, from watching him a lot in the org. If he's blocked by Pedroia, which is a pretty good assumption probably if we both think he is primarily a 2nd baseman, I want to make sure we get proper value from him in any trade. And if we can't get that value from him we should bring him up for a while as a sub to help him prove his value in mlb. No doubt Mookie is going to scale the charts this year. I went into yesterday's game with him as probably our number one at year end. I left thinking maybe it's Swihart instead, who has all the tools, and the size and athleticism to be an excellent mlb catcher. Swihart moved up after seeing him.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 27, 2014 8:47:29 GMT -5
Yes, I'm pretty sure the average talent evaluators for major league clubs are going to be less in tune than the average poster at SP.
Whether or not his success is driven by intangibles is not important, it's only a debate topic. It's the results. The results are that he has base running acumen as demonstrated by his SB%, speed as demonstrated by his times from contact to first base, pitch recognition as demonstrated by his K/BB rates, bat speed which is measurable, a compact swing which is observable and no holes in his batting which are also measurable by fx data and contact rates. His value is in the tangible results from whatever makes Mookie Mookie tangible or not.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Apr 27, 2014 8:54:35 GMT -5
Yes, I'm pretty sure the average talent evaluators for major league clubs are going to be less in tune than the average poster at SP. We're not talking about the average poster at SP here, we're talking about THELAVARNWAYGUY!!!
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 27, 2014 8:59:16 GMT -5
Yes, I'm pretty sure the average talent evaluators for major league clubs are going to be less in tune than the average poster at SP. We're not talking about the average poster at SP here, we're talking about THELAVARNWAYGUY!!! Being fair, he said "as we do" Also note that Mookie is now our #3 prospect and has a 7 ceiling.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Apr 27, 2014 9:21:26 GMT -5
Here's a prospect review for a similar player:
PROSPECT was signed by TEAM. PROSPECT hit .284/.320/.433 in 40 games IN ROOKIE BALL. He returned to ROOKIE BALL AT AGE 19 and hit .302/.387/.451 with 28 steals in 66 games. He began LOW-A BALL AT AGE 20, hitting .301/.357/.448 with 42 steals and 15 homers in 125 games IN LOW-A AND HIGH-A BALL. Returning to HIGH-A BALL AT AGE 21, he hit a stunning .408/.451/.606 with 19 steals in 52 games. He continued his hot hitting after being promoted to DOUBLE-A, hitting .361/.388/.569 in 35 games, before being called up to TEAM.
Overall, in 382 minor league games, PROSPECT hit .327/.386/.481.
His statistical performance is obviously outstanding, but PROSPECT presents a quandary for scouts. He's just 21 years old, and normally a player that age with these kinds of numbers would be all over prospect lists. But PROSPECT is a small guy, listed at [OMITTED]. He's a good athlete, with average speed but terrific instincts on the bases. Although he's not a walk machine, he makes contact, shows surprising power to all fields, and seems to have few weaknesses at the plate, laying off pitches he can't hit and punishing mistakes. He has plenty of bat speed and is not easy to overpower, contrary to the stereotype for smaller players.
PROSPECT is also a more-than-solid defensive player at second base, unusually reliable for his age. He doesn't have the range for shortstop, but his arm is strong enough that the TEAM have given him some innings at third base. He plays with polish and enthusiasm, and scouts love his makeup.
The only negative for PROSPECT, and the only reason he didn't rank higher on pre-season prospect lists, is his size.
***
Mookie is 21 years old, has a career split of .310/.400/.459 in 217 minor league games.
Betts was signed by the Red Sox. Betts hit .267/.352/.307 with 20 steals in 71 games IN ROOKIE BALL AT AGE 19. He began LOW-A BALL AT AGE 20, hitting .314/.417/.506 with 38 steals and 15 homers in 127 games IN LOW-A AND HIGH-A BALL. He began DOUBLE-A BALL AT AGE 21 and, in 18 games, is hitting a stunning .418/.455/.658 with 8 steals and 3 homers.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Apr 27, 2014 9:30:44 GMT -5
We're not talking about the average poster at SP here, we're talking about THELAVARNWAYGUY!!! Being fair, he said "as we do" Also note that Mookie is now our #3 prospect and has a 7 ceiling. Please share your reading comprehension level with about 20% of the forum. It is sorely needed.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Apr 27, 2014 9:40:37 GMT -5
I don't think I undervalue Mookie. I think I was the first one here to start talking about him as our potential #1 here, even slightly before Speer brought it up on WEII ( who I don't listen to generally since I live in California ). I don't think I am undervaluing Mookie. I am simply stating that if he is blocked at 2nd, and we can't get equal value for him in a trade, we might have to use him as a sub in order to get value from him and build value in him if we truly believe in him. When you look at him physically it's hard to see him as a top 5 type guy, but the numbers may indicate he is in fact a top 5 type guy. So what do you do then if you can't get equal value in a trade? My guess is you bring him up and have him sub at the mlb level or slot him somewhere in a position of need, which probably isn't going to be at 2nd base any time soon.
|
|
|