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.
Sox considering keeping Iglesias up as UTL player
|
Post by ray88h66 on Jun 2, 2013 11:05:00 GMT -5
Good to see more folks getting on the Iggy bandwagon. I've been on and will stay on even if he hits 200 or so. I think he'll do better than that though. If he has to be the UTL guy for now to stay in the bigs , so be it.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jun 2, 2013 11:11:50 GMT -5
What's funny is that Drew has actually been a decent player. I don't even mean correcting his numbers for BABIP flukery, but just in terms of his actual output. He's hitting .218/.322/.381, which doesn't sound good. But among the 20 shortstops with at least 170 PAs this season, that's the eighth best OBP and the 11th in slugging. He's also got the sixth-highest ISO and the highest walk percentage. He's been better than Starlin Castro. He's been way better than Elvis Andrus, and that guy was apparently worth a bazzillion dollars to a team alleged much smarter than the Red Sox. Hell, I'd probably rather have Drew as my shortstop than Jed Lowrie, and trading him was history's greatest crime.
Meanwhile, the worst hitting shortstop on that list is Rubin Tejada, at .209/.267/.262. I think that given enough playing time, Iglesias could do worse than that. It could be the Jeff Mathis experience. People can argue about the exact significance of BABIP, but there's no arguing a .524 mark. He's clearly been lucky, which has also been obvious just watching the games. So with a potential Drew trade, you're basically talking about giving up a guy who's got a decent chance to be a slightly above average shortstop for a guy who's got a decent chance to challenge moder records for offensive suckitude if given enough ABs.
I like the idea of transitioning Iglesias to a utility roll at this point. Given that defense peaks early and it's still very much an open question if he'll ever hit enough to start, they might as well start getting some major league value out of him now. I also wonder if his bat might play better in a part time roll. He's had injury issues, and there's a pretty clear connection between those and his small size and aggressive play. Maybe if you take him out of a full-time roll, he keeps his health/strength up better and he can drive the ball a little more when he makes contact.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Jun 2, 2013 11:20:08 GMT -5
Although it will never happen, this is an ideal scenario where WMB can spend some extended time rehabbing and working on pitch selection outside of the spotlight of Boston. He does have options, and clearly has a large hole in his offensive approach that was hurting the team. That would allow Iglesias to stay up without having to rush a decision, doesn't sacrifice any depth and continues to put out a team that is fully capable of winning games. Is this truly unrealistic? It does seem that Jose has more to learn / gain at MLB speed, and given his athletic talents that makes sense. You don't make the math wiz sit in the remedial arithmetic class. WMB does appear to be in need of a little remedial work, and might benefit from completing the AAA course he left early last year. It's no insult for him to spend the time in Pawtucket, and his power is wasted if he isn't swinging at the right pitches. After he returns from the DL how much time does Cherrington give Middlebrooks to figure it out and quit waving at pitchers a mile outside the strike zone, before he sends Middlebrooks back to Pawtucket?
|
|
|
Post by terriblehondo on Jun 2, 2013 11:33:32 GMT -5
I would keep Jose up and DFA Pedro. Pedro's defense has been horrible. I have no idea if Jose will hit or not but from what I have seen of his swing he should hit enough. Of course I place more value on defense than offense in my utility infielders. Jose should be able to learn the pivot. It will also allow them to evaluate whether or not they think he can be the starter next year. Drew has done a good job so far at SS. He has not hit as much as I would like but I have been more than happy with his defense.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jun 2, 2013 11:36:27 GMT -5
I am thinking that the left side of a future Red Sox team, 2014 or 2015 at the latest, has Iglesias at SS and Bogaerts at 3B. With Pedroia at 2B it could become the best IF in baseball.
|
|
|
Post by sdiaz1 on Jun 2, 2013 11:50:50 GMT -5
I think I'm going to have to pump the brakes a little bit here. Iglesias has hit really well, but there's no chance in hell he sustains anywhere close to his current .524 BABIP. Remember, he's had only 55 PAs in the major leagues, and in a sample that small, his BABIP and BA (which are driving his current triple-slash of .431/.455/.529 )have almost zero predictive value. It may be instructive to compare the peripherals of Iglesias, Ciriaco, and Drew so far in 2013: Name | PAs | BB% | K% | ISO | BABIP | Jose Iglesias | 55 | 1.8% | 18.2% | .098 | .524 | Pedro Ciriaco | 53 | 11.3% | 18.9% | .152 | .278 | Stephen Drew | 171 | 13.5% | 25.1% | .163 | .277 |
Note that Iglesias is worse than Ciriaco in pretty much every offensive peripheral aside from an insignificantly better strikeout rate. And while Iglesias strikes out less than Drew, Drew's far superior plate discipline and power is more than enough to bridge the gap and make him the better offensive player. Granted, Iglesias' defense is obviously magical, but we shouldn't assume that Iglesias' offensive has suddenly improved enough to even sniff Drew's offensive production. I think Iglesias' career marks to date (.256/.309/.336, .320 BABIP) represent an optimistic projection for him going forward. I'm fairly happy to have him replace Ciriaco as the utility infielder if Iglesias can sustain that triple-slash, but that's not good enough for me to confidently trade away Drew, especially considering Iglesias' injury history. Sure, Ben should take any inquiring calls and if someone wants to overpay for Drew, I would consider it, but I certainly wouldn't go out and shop what is, by a fair margin, the best SS on the roster just because he's a FA at year's end. While I do agree with your general premise (that 55 plate appearance have no predictive value and that if you took away .200 points from his BABIP we would still expect some regression) I would like to point out that in his 130 PA's in AAA (still a small sample but much better than 55) he had shown very good discipline 6.8% BB and 13.5 K% and a respectable ISO of .118. His slash line however was pretty awful, but unlike his miracle BABIP so far in the Majors, his AAA BABIP was barley .200. I will admit, that I do not know how long it takes for ISO to mormalize and that his .118 mark may have been sample size noise, but his K and BB rates follow a trend that he started last season in 370 PA where he posted a 6.8 BB % and a 11.5 K%. Additionaly I would note that a +10-15 run short stop with .256/.309/.336 slash line is a 2-2.5 Win player (aka Brendan Ryan).
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Jun 2, 2013 12:10:06 GMT -5
It would be interesting to see a detailed analysis of the potential impact a SS like Iglesias, with his plus 25 - 45 UZR/150 so far in mlb, upon WINNING. Not ERA. Not runs saved but actually winning games.
It seems that pitching is always the key to winning championships. And defense seems to be extremely important to winning baseball. Teams like SF win with outstanding pitching...etc but if you can achieve a team which consistently has quality starts what sort of winning percentage can be obtained even by a mediocre hitting team? For example, the starting staff of St. Louis currently has an ERA of about 2.23 and they just happen to have by far the best winning percentage in baseball with 37 wins. If a team could achieve a total run prevention mark of a little more than 2 runs a game would they not probably set a record for wins that year?
I think back to the days of Maury Wills and the dodgers. They won with near zero offense.
Maybe a team like Oakland or SF would construct a team based on top defenders and pitching and establish new moneyball parameters.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jun 2, 2013 12:28:26 GMT -5
Maybe a team like Oakland or SF would construct a team based on top defenders and pitching and establish new moneyball parameters. Tampa Bay is probably about as pitching and defense heavy as a good team can realistically be. Seattle has tried the pitching-and-defense thing in recent years two, and ended up with some pretty awful teams. Winning a lot of 2-1 and 3-2 ballgames is not a viable strategy no matter who your pitchers are.
|
|
|
Post by terriblehondo on Jun 2, 2013 12:35:40 GMT -5
San Fran won 2 World Series with that formula. They have won a lot of low scoring games
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Jun 2, 2013 12:36:10 GMT -5
Tampa Bay stays in it just about every year. With the new CBA it seems that their approach has a lot of merit in today's environment. It sure helps to have some offense and they have achieved enough offense to win generally. But I think their pitching and defense approach is a near ideal model for most mlb teams now.
Seattle has a ton of park factor in their numbers. I'm not seeing them as that dominant from a pitching perspective.
We should take the TB approach, which we seem to largely have done, and we have the money to supplement it with judicious FA signings. It seems that farm talent is even more important now, and pitching. I think we are absolutely on target. Moving in the right direction.
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Jun 2, 2013 13:26:49 GMT -5
I wonder if he could play some outfield too? I think he's got the athleticism, quickness, and arm to play any of the outfield spots, or am I wishcasting here? Come on. I can tolerate 3B or even 2B but putting him in the outfield is the equivalent using your Lamborghini to carpool your kids to and from school.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jun 2, 2013 13:54:51 GMT -5
San Fran won 2 World Series with that formula. They have won a lot of low scoring games The 2012 team had the fourth best OPS+ in baseball. Even the 2010 team was above average offensively, and better than that once they reached october, when Posey had jointed the team and noted defensive luminaries Pat Burell and Aubry Huff were enjoying the last 250 good ABs of their careers. Their reputation as a pitching/defense club has more to do with their home park than anything.
|
|
|
Post by mainesox on Jun 2, 2013 18:16:08 GMT -5
I wonder if he could play some outfield too? I think he's got the athleticism, quickness, and arm to play any of the outfield spots, or am I wishcasting here? Come on. I can tolerate 3B or even 2B but putting him in the outfield is the equivalent using your Lamborghini to carpool your kids to and from school. Why? If he can do it well (and I think he can) and it gets him more ABs (and gives the Sox more depth) I don't see any reason not to do it.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Jun 2, 2013 18:39:34 GMT -5
Come on. I can tolerate 3B or even 2B but putting him in the outfield is the equivalent using your Lamborghini to carpool your kids to and from school. Why? If he can do it well (and I think he can) and it gets him more ABs (and gives the Sox more depth) I don't see any reason not to do it. Iglesias? I would never do that. His offensive stats are great and all, but they are a fluke. If the guy hits .270 over a MLB season with his beyond stellar infield defense, that would be incredible. If you put him in the outfield, he could probably be solid defensively (although for a guy like him, learning the OF is going to be far more difficult than transitioning over to 2B or 3B), but he'd be a below average player. His value is centered around incredible defense on the left side of the infield that not many players can come close to. I would keep Iggy up at this point. I don't see the AAA development via everyday at-bats argument applying to him the way it does with many other young players. His defense is where his value is, and Ciriaco simply can't provide even a steadily-average glove around the infield. If you play Iggy over Drew against most left handers and spell Middlebrooks 1-2 times a week against righties (barring him breaking out and sustaining it), I think it'd be worth it for all parties involved. If Drew and WMB had no injury issues, that'd be one think, but you know they're going to already need games off regardless of their performance.
|
|
|
Post by mainesox on Jun 2, 2013 18:58:57 GMT -5
Why? If he can do it well (and I think he can) and it gets him more ABs (and gives the Sox more depth) I don't see any reason not to do it. Iglesias? I would never do that. His offensive stats are great and all, but they are a fluke. If the guy hits .270 over a MLB season with his beyond stellar infield defense, that would be incredible. If you put him in the outfield, he could probably be solid defensively (although for a guy like him, learning the OF is going to be far more difficult than transitioning over to 2B or 3B), but he'd be a below average player. His value is centered around incredible defense on the left side of the infield that not many players can come close to. I would keep Iggy up at this point. I don't see the AAA development via everyday at-bats argument applying to him the way it does with many other young players. His defense is where his value is, and Ciriaco simply can't provide even a steadily-average glove around the infield. If you play Iggy over Drew against most left handers and spell Middlebrooks 1-2 times a week against righties (barring him breaking out and sustaining it), I think it'd be worth it for all parties involved. If Drew and WMB had no injury issues, that'd be one think, but you know they're going to already need games off regardless of their performance. Maybe, if they platoon him with Drew and spell Middlebrooks 1-2 times a week then I wouldn't bother, but I honestly don't see that happening; I don't think they'll turn a $10M Drew into a platoon player, or sit Middlebrooks that often regardless of his struggles. If you're going to make him a utility player (maybe he'll get a few more ABs than a straight utility player, but I don't see him getting nearly as many as you suggest), I say go all the way and get him to play every position he's capable of playing (and getting as many ABs as possible). If he wouldn't be capable in the OF that would be a different story.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Jun 2, 2013 19:16:25 GMT -5
It's not a matter of getting him to play every position he's capable of playing, but rather where he can play and be a positive contributor. The way I see it, the only way for him to do so is play at SS and 3B. Putting him in the OF to get him in the lineup doesn't make sense. I would play Gomes, Carp, JBJ, etc. over him out there any day. His capability in the OF doesn't matter, only an opening that makes sense in the infield. If no such opening exists, then yes, he should return to Pawtucket.
Drew may be getting $10M, but he's on a one-year deal. I'm a much bigger Drew fan than most people, but he's OPS'ing .504 against lefties (.799 vs. RHP's). The same reason we'd consider keeping Iggy up is the same reason why I'd say Drew should sit against some lefties, and WMB against tough righties: We want to put the best team on the field. Playing Iggy over Drew against LHP's would most likely achieve that, when you consider the defensive boost, Drew's splits, the removal of Ciriaco's glove and nonexistent plate discipline, etc.
|
|
|
Post by mainesox on Jun 2, 2013 19:35:43 GMT -5
I agree that that would be the best thing to do, I just don't see them doing it.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Jun 2, 2013 19:36:30 GMT -5
I like Matt's idea of sitting Drew against lefties and giving Iggy one or two games a week at third. No way would I play him in the outfield.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Jun 2, 2013 21:32:35 GMT -5
Step to the rear. Plenty of room left on the bandwagon. Don't be the last to believe your eyes over past stats.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jun 2, 2013 21:45:51 GMT -5
mainesox, the problem with putting him in the outfield is that the goal at the major league level is not to get Iglesias as many at-bats as possible. It's to use him in a way that puts the team in the best position to win. His best tools are his hands and range (aided by great instincts, rather than just pure quickness), not speed in the fast runner sense, so I don't think he'd even necessarily be a good outfield defender. His tools translate to him being otherworldly in the infield, and THAT is where his value comes from. Moving a guy to the OF to get him at-bats would be something you do with a player like Bogaerts in this kind of situation, where you want his bat in the lineup.
Iglesias has the second-lowest LD% on the team, ahead of only Carp. He's got the second-highest GB%, behind only Bradley. His BABIP is .512!!!! His numbers at the plate are going to regress in a big way, and soon. He's having success because he's not striking out a ton (18.2% is respectable), but he's not walking at all (1.8%), so he's putting a bunch of balls in play and they're falling in at a disproportionate rate.
Keeping him up as a utility player is basically an admission by the Red Sox that he's got nothing more to learn in Pawtucket and that he's a better option than Ciriaco. I agree with both statements. Again, the goal isn't to get him at-bats anymore. He's not Bradley who has 271 PAs in AA and 95 in AAA, for whom getting at-bats in AAA could still be quite beneficial. He's got 236 in AA and 916 in AAA.
With Holt starting to turn it around in AAA finally, there's still depth in Pawtucket if something happens to Iglesias, and they could probably use Ciriaco's 40-man spot to add an outfielder given how thin they are there (although Pawtucket is kind of thin there as well with Bermudez hitting the DL and Maier only easing back in to playing again).
|
|
|
Post by godot on Jun 2, 2013 22:18:28 GMT -5
Nice discussion on Jose, and good points made by all, one way or another. I usually shy away from boards, but this one is so informative and civil on a subject I love dearly. Also, don't have much of a life.
|
|
|
Post by mainesox on Jun 2, 2013 22:19:43 GMT -5
That's fair - if his tools don't translate well to the OF there's no reason to do it, I just figured that if they would translate, and if Boston is set on making him a utility player, it would make sense to make him a super-sub who could play anywhere.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,988
|
Post by jimoh on Jun 3, 2013 5:33:27 GMT -5
I would think the idea of Iglesias in the OF would be to improve roster efficiency, to avoid those few days last week where I think Ciriaco or Nava was the backup CF, esp. if Ciriaco is gone. I honestly don't know whether he would be good in the OF, but it's possible his instincts and OK speed would translate well.
I also think he would be a preposterously good defensive 2b, turning the DP in such a way that it would be hard to see him actually touch the ball. Unfortunately, as various parts of Pedroia's body start to fall off, I can see an IF of Cecchini-Bogaerts-Iglesias-PTBNL at some time
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Jun 3, 2013 8:59:24 GMT -5
mainesox, the problem with putting him in the outfield is that the goal at the major league level is not to get Iglesias as many at-bats as possible. It's to use him in a way that puts the team in the best position to win. His best tools are his hands and range (aided by great instincts, rather than just pure quickness), not speed in the fast runner sense, so I don't think he'd even necessarily be a good outfield defender. His tools translate to him being otherworldly in the infield, and THAT is where his value comes from. Moving a guy to the OF to get him at-bats would be something you do with a player like Bogaerts in this kind of situation, where you want his bat in the lineup. With Holt starting to turn it around in AAA finally, there's still depth in Pawtucket if something happens to Iglesias, and they could probably use Ciriaco's 40-man spot to add an outfielder given how thin they are there (although Pawtucket is kind of thin there as well with Bermudez hitting the DL and Maier only easing back in to playing again). Can Brandon Snyder play the outfield? Her is quietly having quite the year at AAA playing third.
|
|
|
Post by hammerhead on Jun 3, 2013 9:45:48 GMT -5
There is no way that Iglesias displaces Middlebrooks at third and he won't displace Drew at SS either. He's making the most of his AB's he's pumped up , happy and very focused. Can he maintain that level of focus? Probably not. If I'm Ben C. and Farrell , I keep trying to maximize his defense while keeping his bat healthy. Once Middlebrooks comes back you start shopping Iggy. Listen I love Iggy, I like watching the cool plays, but his value may never be higher. Everyone always complains that this org. waits till a player bottoms out to trade him, well this is the opportunity to trade from strength. You have a player with flashy numbers and flashy skills that you assume is a lot of smoke and mirrors. Take advantage of some other teams desperation. Try and get a top tier prospect for him...
There may only be this chance to maximize this asset. If you can't get some team to overspend on Iggy , then DFA Ciriaco (maybe do that anyway... he sucks)and make iggy your utility guy/defensive replacement/pinch runner. He could be a very useful piece in that role and it seems he'd be happy with it.
You have Bogaerts starting to tear up AA , he'll have a 1.000 OPS by mid July. Hand him the starting SS job next season.
|
|
|