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 jmei on Sept 11, 2014 7:26:51 GMT -5
Moved off-topic posts to DIPS thread.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Sept 11, 2014 17:24:39 GMT -5
So the plan is to have Mookie play 2B full time the rest of the way. Sure, it's out of necessity, but if they aren't going to focus on him playing exclusively outfield, I really wish they'd give him a look at SS or 3B.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Sept 11, 2014 17:31:59 GMT -5
So the plan is to have Mookie play 2B full time the rest of the way. Sure, it's out of necessity, but if they aren't going to focus on him playing exclusively outfield, I really wish they'd give him a look at SS or 3B. Agree, and it blows what they said till now out of the water. Wanting him to play outfield only. Enough guys here who can play 2b. They should try him at 3b.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Sept 11, 2014 18:26:19 GMT -5
Yeah, noone thinks you should regress all hitters' BABIPs to a league-average mark. There are certainly skill-sets which everyone agrees generally produces sustainable above-average BABIPs for hitters: speed, the ability to barrel the ball up and hit an above-average number of line drives (and, conversely, the ability to minimize weak contact), the ability to hit to all fields, the ability to minimize pop-ups, etc. (Pitchers are a slightly different story.) It would seem that Mookie would have every one of these attributes. Each of the characteristics you list which indicate plus OBP. If he had more power he would have virtually all the characteristics of plus OBP. I don't want to come across that Mookie is Ichiro or any other hall of fame player. My point is that statistically, and I would think even from a scouting perspective to a degree, Mookie profiles as a better prospect than Ellsbury was when he came up, as better than Damon when he came up...etc. Just from the minor league numbers and the fact that he is better than both of them were defensively when they came up, at least in his 2nd base slot as compare to their defensive abilities when they came up. We have no idea how all this shakes down but if we look at the numbers we should project this guy as a potential all star, possible HOF capable athlete. There, I said it.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Sept 12, 2014 1:11:27 GMT -5
By the way, Farrell has just about dismissed the possibility of playing Mookie at 2B this year. This presumably also rules out the possibility of him getting any reps at 3B (or SS) this year as well. His logic:Perfect example as to why we shouldn't read anything into direct quotes from Farrell and dismiss certain possibilities from posters that make sense based on them. He's done this on numerous occasions. I'm not suggesting he's a liar, but it proves he's not either truthful or he's not making the decisions or simply that things can change that quick.
|
|
|
Post by kman22 on Sept 12, 2014 7:44:56 GMT -5
Yeah, noone thinks you should regress all hitters' BABIPs to a league-average mark. There are certainly skill-sets which everyone agrees generally produces sustainable above-average BABIPs for hitters: speed, the ability to barrel the ball up and hit an above-average number of line drives (and, conversely, the ability to minimize weak contact), the ability to hit to all fields, the ability to minimize pop-ups, etc. (Pitchers are a slightly different story.) It would seem that Mookie would have every one of these attributes. Each of the characteristics you list which indicate plus OBP. If he had more power he would have virtually all the characteristics of plus OBP. I don't want to come across that Mookie is Ichiro or any other hall of fame player. My point is that statistically, and I would think even from a scouting perspective to a degree, Mookie profiles as a better prospect than Ellsbury was when he came up, as better than Damon when he came up...etc. Just from the minor league numbers and the fact that he is better than both of them were defensively when they came up, at least in his 2nd base slot as compare to their defensive abilities when they came up. We have no idea how all this shakes down but if we look at the numbers we should project this guy as a potential all star, possible HOF capable athlete. There, I said it. Betts also debuted 2 years younger than Ellsbury, so for the sake of comparison, he has that working in his favor.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 12, 2014 8:21:06 GMT -5
By the way, Farrell has just about dismissed the possibility of playing Mookie at 2B this year. This presumably also rules out the possibility of him getting any reps at 3B (or SS) this year as well. His logic:Perfect example as to why we shouldn't read anything into direct quotes from Farrell and dismiss certain possibilities from posters that make sense based on them. He's done this on numerous occasions. I'm not suggesting he's a liar, but it proves he's not either truthful or he's not making the decisions or simply that things can change that quick. Point well taken. At the same time, you can't just ignore what Farrell says. I've never suggested that what he says is conclusive, but I do think it generally reflects that the coaching staff/front office is thinking at the time. This incident shows how quickly that thinking can change, and so you're right that we shouldn't read too much into his quotes. But at the same time, they're still a factor worth considering.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Sept 12, 2014 9:07:31 GMT -5
Farrell said that "in an emergency situation" he could see playing Betts in the infield. Pedroia had surgery yesterday and is out for the season. He may see that as just such a situation. It also opens up a spot for Castillo if they wan't to check out what they have in that guy.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 12, 2014 9:17:48 GMT -5
Perfect example as to why we shouldn't read anything into direct quotes from Farrell and dismiss certain possibilities from posters that make sense based on them. He's done this on numerous occasions. I'm not suggesting he's a liar, but it proves he's not either truthful or he's not making the decisions or simply that things can change that quick. Point well taken. At the same time, you can't just ignore what Farrell says. I've never suggested that what he says is conclusive, but I do think it generally reflects that the coaching staff/front office is thinking at the time. This incident shows how quickly that thinking can change, and so you're right that we shouldn't read too much into his quotes. But at the same time, they're still a factor worth considering. There are many things it seems you can ignore. Remember Farrell saying that Bogaerts would play SS vs LHP after they signed Drew?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 12, 2014 9:39:04 GMT -5
Point well taken. At the same time, you can't just ignore what Farrell says. I've never suggested that what he says is conclusive, but I do think it generally reflects that the coaching staff/front office is thinking at the time. This incident shows how quickly that thinking can change, and so you're right that we shouldn't read too much into his quotes. But at the same time, they're still a factor worth considering. There are many things it seems you can ignore. Remember Farrell saying that Bogaerts would play SS vs LHP after they signed Drew? He said this would happen after an adjustment period where Xander got used to 3B. By that point, Brock Holt had emerged and stole most of the SS reps.
|
|
alnipper
Veteran
Living the dream
Posts: 618
|
Post by alnipper on Sept 12, 2014 11:27:20 GMT -5
Mookie is an on-base machine. He is at 8 again. I have no problem having Mookie play a few games at second. If he plays it well it will up his value and keep him fresh if needed to play 2nd in an emergency.
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Sept 12, 2014 11:45:52 GMT -5
I agree that if they aren't playing mookie in the OF, they ought to try him at 3B, just to see. But mostly I still think that they can get an idea if he can make the throw in practice. And I'm guessing they don't think so.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Sept 12, 2014 15:06:23 GMT -5
You certainly can't dismiss what they say, but it's more about not dismissing people for suggesting things that go against what they say.
I can't think of a logical reason why Farrell would lie about their intensions of not playing Mookie at second so I don't think that was what he was doing. I think it's more of a case they don't discuss maybes in public and need to answer the question.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Sept 12, 2014 15:09:42 GMT -5
Farrell said that "in an emergency situation" he could see playing Betts in the infield. Pedroia had surgery yesterday and is out for the season. He may see that as just such a situation. It also opens up a spot for Castillo if they wan't to check out what they have in that guy. I don't think the Pedey surgery was a surprise to them or an emergency situation. Emergency was just a poor word choice. Mookie playing second is simply about keeping the bats they want in the lineup in the lineup for the rest of this year. Mookie getting MLB ABs is of more importance than him getting a read on fly balls. They don't have anyone else important to get ABs at second so it's best to put Mookie there and then use the other guys including Castillo in the OF.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 12, 2014 21:12:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Sept 13, 2014 9:39:27 GMT -5
Moving Betts back to 2nd base isn't equivalent to trying him at third, for reasons I hope would be obvious.
|
|
|
Post by JackieWilsonsaid on Sept 16, 2014 19:43:49 GMT -5
Mookie comes in second on klaw prospects of the year ( to Bryant)
Starting Betts in Double-A this year seemed aggressive, as he had just 51 games in high-A in 2013 and would play all of 2014 at age 21. But he destroyed two levels on his way to the majors, hitting .346/.431/.529 with 33 steals in 40 attempts between the Eastern and International leagues and all but forcing the Red Sox to call him up to the majors in July. He lost his rookie status this year but performed so well that he must have a regular job somewhere at Fenway in 2015, even with the signing of Cuban outfielder Rusney Castillo.
Actually runners up are in alpha order....
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Sept 16, 2014 19:51:12 GMT -5
Mookie comes in second on klaw prospects of the year ( to Bryant) Starting Betts in Double-A this year seemed aggressive, as he had just 51 games in high-A in 2013 and would play all of 2014 at age 21. But he destroyed two levels on his way to the majors, hitting .346/.431/.529 with 33 steals in 40 attempts between the Eastern and International leagues and all but forcing the Red Sox to call him up to the majors in July. He lost his rookie status this year but performed so well that he must have a regular job somewhere at Fenway in 2015, even with the signing of Cuban outfielder Rusney Castillo. Actually runners up are in alpha order.... Which is exactly where I had them both. I don't think that is unreasonable at all. Bryant is clearly a step above and there are a lot of potential studs out there but Mookie's defense and floor are huge factors. He may not end up as good as several others but he is a heck of a lot more likely to achieve all star status than most of them in my book. Kudos to Klaw.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 18, 2014 13:14:41 GMT -5
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,881
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 18, 2014 15:48:09 GMT -5
I keep on trying to make sense of such comments, and hence discern their 3B plan. Does the following make sense? It's an elaboration on an idea I tossed out earlier, though without any detail or justification. As others have pointed out, they probably have seen Betts at 3B in infield practice. Imagine that they have tentatively concluded that he would be OK there, but not what you'd call good. IOW, he'd be a much better stopgap than Holt, but he would be a much better defensive OF than 3B, making his value in RF a bit higher than at 3B, as jmei has argued, and his value at CF quite a bit higher. Because of Cecchini (and also Coyle, a possible WMB surprise, and even the possibility that this trial assessment of Mookie at 3B underrates him), they really want to grab a 1-year stopgap at 3B. And maybe they're open to what they feel would be a super-reasonable 3-year deal for Headley. But they are well aware that they may not be able to acquire a 3B who makes sense. With Cecchini looking like he may have made a major positive adjustment late in the year, the last thing you'd want to do is give a market-value deal to a guy who turns out to be not as good -- even more so if it costs you a draft pick. In which case, Mookie at 3B for four months or for a year is a plan B they're comfortable with. I think all of that makes sense and is consistent with Cherington's statements. Speaking of acquiring guys who turned out to be not as good as an internal option, Cherington was director of player development back in 2003 when they traded Freddy Sanchez for Jeff Suppan (and Scott Sauerbeck, ultimately) at the deadline. At the time, Suppan did not project to be as good as a guy they had in AAA named Bronson Arroyo. Nor did he prove to be. That was a classic case of incorrectly coveting "established" talent instead of trusting the farm. So Cherington has at least one memorable counter-example to what happened this year in CF. Not dealing Lester and Ellsbury for Santana probably counts as another.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Sept 18, 2014 17:08:10 GMT -5
Mookie at 3rd has been basically obvious for months now. But consider Cherington's position. Does he come out and throw Mookie into that fray in the press at this time or earlier? Upsetting Middlebrooks, Holt, Cechinni...etc. Discouraging all of them when he really doesn't have to at this point?
I think he is only addressing it now because it is so obvious that people would start complaining if he didn't. It's clearly time to consider moving Mookie to 3rd next Spring, unless they sign Headley/ the Panda...etc. It's a decision which will be made over the winter. These guys manage the press like crazy. Everyone in the entire org. It's one cliche after another. If someone comes up with a unique response to a question they probably will have 6 memos on their desk by morning.
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Sept 24, 2014 10:02:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Sept 24, 2014 10:12:12 GMT -5
If we could get Strasburg, I would pack Betts' bags for him
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,436
|
Post by nomar on Sept 24, 2014 10:34:16 GMT -5
If we could get Strasburg, I would pack Betts' bags for him I wouldn't. He's only two seasons away from free agency and has already had TJS.
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Sept 24, 2014 10:37:13 GMT -5
If we could get Strasburg, I would pack Betts' bags for him I wouldn't. He's only two seasons away from free agency and has already had TJS. Call me crazy, but I prefer the guys who have already had TJ surgery over the guys that are ticking time bombs, like Sale. 2 seasons of an ace is pretty solid, especially for the price they would be getting him at. It would easily allow you to get a guy like Shield, who I am admittedly not high on, but I sure as heck like him a lot better if he's a number 3 instead of a 2.
|
|
|