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.
Recent Posts
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 30, 2021 7:19:16 GMT -5
Another old timer making a reappearance! I missed this place ❤️ Weirdly, I now work with Mike A’s excolleague. Small world.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 30, 2021 5:32:33 GMT -5
He has 1 game with 0 innings played. Defensive replacement in the bottom of the 9th or extras, and a no-outs walkoff?
Not quite ... April 7, 2017, Cubs at Brewers, who have the bases loaded with 1 out in the bottom of the 11th. Maddon decides to move Rizzo to LF and Schwarber to 1B! And Mike Montgomery throws an 0-2 walk-off wild pitch.
Where do you find this info? If I asked you if Schwarber's second cousin's dog had puppies recently you could probably find it haha. www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=schwaky01&t=f&year=2017
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Dec 19, 2016 10:03:48 GMT -5
Players in the top 20 (other than Benintendi) who could help in 2017 without an expectation of meteoric rise (i.e., excluding Cosart types): 4 6 7 14 15 20
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Dec 9, 2016 8:03:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Aug 25, 2016 21:27:22 GMT -5
I believe they didn't burn an option if the brink hook up with less than ten days left in his season. This came up a few years ago, though I forget the player It's not an option question, it's a service time question. Unless things have changed, players called up for roster expansion don't get service time. That in turn shortens the time that the Sox can call him up next year without accumulating a year's service time. He'd be a super-two but the Sox would still have the extra year of control. If the Sox called him up before roster expansion, they'd have to wait 30 or so days extra next year to bring him up. That's why historically, players called up before roster expansion, like Benintendi, almost always break camp with the big club and top prospects not called up before expansion almost never do. I don't believe that was changed in the last CBA but I could be wrong. ADD: A few years ago there were two plyers association complaints with a small difference. As minor leaguers, Polonco and Goldshmidt were offered long term contracts. Both declined. The players association filed complaints but only the Diamonbacks were forced into calling up Goldschmidt before the three weeks to save a years time. The difference in the two situations was that only Goldschmidt was offered a 25 man spot. Because of the wording, Goldshmidt ended up with a year's service time and Polonco (and Betts) weren't called up until after super two day. Right sorry that's what I meant. Same point
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Aug 25, 2016 20:33:23 GMT -5
It would make no sense for the Sox to call him up the day before roster expansion because first time callups after expansion don't count towards a player's service time. That in turn means the Sox could wait 3 weeks next year before calling him up and get his entire age 28 season under control. If you are thinking so that he's eligible for the playoffs, that's not an issue. Any player on the DL for the playoffs (Smith, Swihart for example) can be replaced by any player on the 40 man. The Sox have one major advantage here, Sandy Leon. Since he's a good batter, it's unlikely the Sox will carry three catchers into the playoffs. That's pretty common when you have two catchers that can't hit. That allows for in game pinch hitting. I believe they didn't burn an option if the brink hook up with less than ten days left in his season. This came up a few years ago, though I forget the player
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Aug 7, 2016 20:29:35 GMT -5
JBJ is the 3rd best defensive CF . . . in his own division You're doing UZR wrong. I can see pillar being better. But he is possibly the best best in baseball so that is no indictment. But the three year sample doesn't show Ellsbury is better than Bradley, and looking at one year unregressed UZR is pointless. Read MGL's comments in the subject.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Aug 6, 2016 6:27:59 GMT -5
It's a single week where they are trying to get him used to travel, media, routine, and ml talent.
It's just not a big deal. But this board is bow dominated by hyperbole.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Aug 3, 2016 22:37:58 GMT -5
Very few players on an intelligently run major league team truly are untouchable. A smart and opportunistic GM will trade almost anyone if he sees a chance to significantly improve his team without wrecking its future. I have been fine with the Espinosa trade because the odds are much greater that Pomeranz will be an asset to the Sox than they are that Espinosa will even make it to the majors. So yes, there almost always is the possibility of the right deal for any player. The really good GMs know one when they see it. I think the Pomeranz deal was one of those. But I could be wrong and it wouldn't be the first time. Well, I'm not sure that that's entirely accurate, but top pitching prospects end up busting at a fairly high rate: www.royalsreview.com/2011/2/14/1992424/success-and-failure-rates-of-top-mlb-prospectsWhat really makes sense is that the Sox held on to their top position players, who bust relatively infrequently, and become above-average players nearly 2/3 of the time. Based on the latest rankings, Espinoza has about a 1/5 shot of being very good or better, and a 3/5 shot of washing out. Then again, I'm not sure what I'd put the odds at of Pomeranz having any real value to the Sox. Maybe 2/3? 50-50? TINSTAAPP TINSTAAPP TINSTAAPP
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Aug 3, 2016 9:53:14 GMT -5
People with that K-BB rate tend to have lower than 15% BB rates b/c pitchers with 15% BB rates don't tend to pitch in the major leagues. Or... People with high rates of hard contact tend not to pitch in the major leagues. And people with low rates of hard contact have their BB rate normalize. There is no evidence for that proposition, while there is a ton of evidence that pitchers with a 15% walk rate don't pitch in the majors, and it is extremely counter intuitive to accept your proposition without evidence (plus, there is little evidence to understand "hard contact" in the minors; you dismiss babip but accept what amounts to a doubles rate, but with little good reason as to why). I think much of this is nonsense as a statistical reckoning of a pitcher with so little track record is pointless, but I'm a Kopech believer anyway. But your use of statistics and how you argue from evidence is shoddy at best.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Aug 3, 2016 9:36:02 GMT -5
People with that K-BB rate tend to have lower than 15% BB rates b/c pitchers with 15% BB rates don't tend to pitch in the major leagues.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 31, 2016 13:29:23 GMT -5
Sad to see the Yankees out of the playoff race and the Red Sox in it? Interesting take. Especially since our future still looks much better than that of New York's....Not signing Miller the offseason after we traded him was a huge mistake. Our team would have a comfortable lead atop the division if he were back in a Boston uni. I get where you're coming from but would it be all that shocking if New York's farm system rated above Boston's during the next round of system rankings? I don't think it is. Consider there is likely still a Beltran deal coming and perhaps a Nova or McCann deal. But Boston's immediate future at the big league level is certainly brighter over the next few seasons. I'd bet against it, but even if so, they have none of the under 25 talent already under the majors.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 31, 2016 13:28:12 GMT -5
The Yankees have a truly bad team, with only moderate help on the farm system even with these trades. They'll need to replace two thirds of their line up, much of they rotation, and now their bullpen.
But sure, they got some good prospects to go with their ****ty ones.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 31, 2016 9:10:27 GMT -5
Great haul by the Yankees. I wonder what a Kimbrell deal would fetch. It is definitely a sellers' market. Hopefully Dombroski, Hazen and Wren are working to phones to gauge the market for Kimbrell, Ross, Kelly, Hanigan, Holt, Buchholz, and Pomeranz. Are you joking or just trolling? Have you read Red Sox boards before? If they have anything short of the best record in baseball, or at times when they do, they should trade it all.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 29, 2016 7:43:11 GMT -5
Encarnacion easily provides enough value with the bat that National League teams will be interested in him as a first baseman. He's not a disaster there, either. He's not good by any means but he's easily okay enough that an NL team will want his bat. He's ranked 101st out of 146 players in UZR/150 with 100+ innings at the position since 2013, right ahead of Tyler Moore and Greg Bird. Hanley Ramirez got 4/$88M two years ago. I'm not sure what you view as a 4/$80 player. I haven't followed closely recently. What does uzr do for 1b? It used to essentially only measure range, which misses 3/4s of what they do.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 29, 2016 7:24:35 GMT -5
If you are prone to such in the moment thinking, how can your heart take a 162 game season? I'd think football is more your speed.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 26, 2016 14:47:26 GMT -5
My point was that every team could have gotten him for pennies on the dollar. It's hard to show less of an awareness of economics than this sentence.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 24, 2016 5:23:49 GMT -5
Since we're SSS anyways, let's make it SSSer. Take out the first inning and 1/3 after over a month layoff between Lowell and Salem and you take off 3 walks. Indeed, he walked 3 of his first 6 hitters (including the first two) versus 4 of the subsequent 49. That would happen maybe once in 1000 times in a random simulation. He ended up walking 3 of the next 6 batters after this post. That fact should indicate that looking at the cherry pitched sets its silly. But even if it didn't, people can think about it more generally before yesterday's start to realize the mistake. Prior to this year, he walked 40 of 350 batters, or just under 1out of every 8. Assume that is his true walk rate until you learn otherwise. He has a stretch where he was walking 1 of 12 batters over 49 batters faced. Sounds like he turned a corner! But then he walks 3 of the next 6 (in real life he did this first) and His walk rate is the expected 1 out of 8... There really is a 0.1% chance of that story being true? You assume what you story you like then test for randomness rather than assume the null and test for consistency. It's been pointed out for at least 15 years.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 23, 2016 23:38:37 GMT -5
Carson Smith could never pitch and that probably win that war exchange.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 23, 2016 23:12:09 GMT -5
Devers is playing out of his mind right now. He hit his home run quite a long way, over the batters eye just to the left of straight away center. Fence is 400 feet away there, so he must've hit it at least 430-440 feet. Kid's got some power. Kopech wasn't quite as much fun to watch, though, labored through most of his outing. Chris had a better vantage point than I did to actually see the pitches, but there were a lot of guys walking to first during Kopech's time in the game, some of them shaking various appendages in pain. Couple other items of note from the game: there were monkeys riding border collies herding goats between innings, although really the goats spent the whole time trying to get back to their trailer-pen on their own. Also, at one point there was a pop up in foul ground about halfway down the third base line. Keys catcher drifts over holding his mask, looking up with the ball descending, and, as they teach you, fires the mask right into the third baseman's groin as the poor third baseman settles under the ball. In an act of true heroism, the third baseman still manages to catch the pop up, an act not sufficiently cheered by the crowd, in my opinion. Why - why gawd - can I only like this post one time?
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 22, 2016 14:17:03 GMT -5
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fooled_by_RandomnessEDIT: Also, if lavarnwayguy had claimed the Rodriguez had pitched poorly because Latinos love to party in LA, he'd have been crucified. It shouldn't be any different just because there are cherry-picked numbers alongside improvable presumptions. I've read enough van to not want to go down that rabbit hole, but I should point out that Talib is a wonderful story teller, and very interesting, and even though some of his work is incomprehensible I actually really liked Fooled by Randomness, but in the end he is a complete jerk on Twitter and in all the interviews I see him. Beyond jerky, really. He loves to pick a weird fight. I've never met him, of course. (His views on Labenese cultural are really beyond interesting, too.)
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 18, 2016 9:50:35 GMT -5
When you say "its not really all that close," but you are basing it off of a scouting take without having actually seen one of them other than HS youtube videos, and you rank them next to each other while also saying that the big drop off comes a few spots after them, I'm not sure what to make of it <emoticon>.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 15, 2016 9:33:21 GMT -5
MLB BB% average for SP this year is 7.8% Right, but his SO rate is 28%, which is 40% better than average. (While his BB rate is about 28% worse than average.) He SO/BB rates are (looking holistically) better than average by a enough to be very good. Meanwhile, his BABIP will undoubtedly increase, while his strang rate will likely go down. But all of this (and more) is captured in xFIP; his is about 11% better the average for NL starters (4.13). After adjusting for hr/FB rate inherent in xFIP, the three stats do not appear to change negatively when adjusted for park/league, and so his xFIP- is roughly the same (88). So, we've now learned that Pomeranz's 2016 when adjusting for league/park, and when looking at his ominous BB% along with other stats, has pitched like a good #3 and borderline #2. Now what? I don't see how Anderson Espinoza is the best pitching prospect in a generation. If we are talking about the best "Red Sox" pitching prospect in a generation (to limit the universe and make it an easier proposition to defend), I guess he is the best pitching prospect since Buchholz but probably is inferior. Buchholz was the #4 prospect (BA, behind the immortal Joba Chamberlain, and before Kershaw, Franklin Morales, and Price, in that order) a decade go, threw high 90s in AA (which was then considered his second, third, or even fourth best pitch), and had stats that are out of a video game. If we are talking about in all of baseball, I don't know how that is close to defensible. All that said, I'm not sure I love this deal. It isn't a home run. It could be an awful deal. I don't like the fact that Pomeranz doesn't have a sustained track record of success, though I do like 2.5 years of team control (albeit at rates approaching, though not meeting, market value). But that said, someone with a long track record AND years of team control during their prime years costs more than Espinoza by himself. And I found AE a fun prospect to follow.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 15, 2016 7:34:23 GMT -5
Steamer and ZIPS basically don't buy the Pomeranz breakout: 3.3/3.4 and 3.7/3.9 ROS respectively (career 3.6/3.9) the 10% BB rate is ominous It's ominous as in indicates he is a good but not great pitcher? He has a unsustainably depressed babip and a slightly high strand rate. Normalized, he is still having a very good year.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 14, 2016 22:35:00 GMT -5
For the 500th time. He has the POTENTIAL. To be a future ace. ITS NOT A GUARANTEE. He could flame out like many other prospects. Or he could make it to the bigs as a back end starter. Or. He could be an ace. all these possibilities have an equal chance of happening. No, they don't. Agreed, but order if likelihood: reliever/back-end to average starter (moderate MLB career); flame out; country singing start; Jesus reincarnated; ace.
|
|
|