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.
Letting Ellsbury and Drew go...Is it worth it for the picks?
|
Post by ramireja on Sept 10, 2013 15:12:55 GMT -5
Last post on this: This is becoming a sea of logical fallacies and misappropriation of concepts. All that has been shown is that Victorino's performance improved significantly a couple of weeks after he basically abandoned switch hitting. It was so much better that it cannot be explained by a random event such as a hot streak or facing weak pitching. I think it's a fair conclusion that giving up switch hitting helped Victorino become a better player than he was previously based upon the evidence presented. I don't think that anyone has presented a fair counter-argument either. "Hot streaks happen all the time", "someone always wins the powerball", "you can use statistics to prove anything", are not credible counter arguments. Arguing something that wasn't argued. Finally, I was most surprised by the suggestion by one poster that I should not be allowed to post my analysis and defend it. Posting my analysis violates no ground-rules and is in fact encouraged. I would hope that all posters respect this. P.S.- If you flip a fair coin and get heads 8 times in a row, odds are that it's not really a fair coin. Shane Victorino after August 19th and previous to that, are not the same player either. If you're referring to me, my apologies. I wasn't trying to say that you shouldn't post your analysis and attempt to defend it, as much as I was trying to say that this type of analysis (chi-square) may not be suitable for this type of dataset. Obviously, I probably didn't word it as such so apologies if I offended you.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Sept 10, 2013 15:27:32 GMT -5
P.S.- If you flip a fair coin and get heads 8 times in a row, odds are that it's not really a fair coin. Shane Victorino after August 19th and previous to that, are not the same player either. Both of these comments are drivel. If you flip a fair coin and get heads 8 times in a row -- it's still a fair coin on the 9th. In fact, Shane Victorino is a different hitter against RHP based on whether he hits LH or RH. Based on his comments and his actions, he's currently better hitting RH vs RHP likely due to a lingering injury or discomfort as a LHH. It's also (separately) possible he could be better off giving up hitting left-handed for good.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Sept 10, 2013 15:45:32 GMT -5
P.S.- If you flip a fair coin and get heads 8 times in a row, odds are that it's not really a fair coin. Not if it had already been flipped 4700 times.
|
|
|
Post by jchang on Sept 10, 2013 15:54:25 GMT -5
I will take one more stab at this. lets suppose our batter is 0.277 over 4000 AB that is 1108 hits, for which the expected variation is +-33 hits so our confidence level is +- 3%, or .277 +- .008, now something happens that he becomes .320 hitter (ultimately proven over several years). Over 100 AB, we expect 32 hits +- 5.66 hits for a 17.7% confidence level, or 0.320 +- 0.056. but if nothing happened, then he is still a .277 hitter, we expect 27.7 hits +- 5.26 over 100 AB (don't ask how one gets a fractional hit) for 19% expected error or 0.277 +- 0.052. So basically, within a standard deviation, we cannot tell if the event has occurred. Over 400 AB (4X), the variation is reduced by half, and we could have some confidence that the .277->.320 event has occurred.
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Sept 10, 2013 19:56:13 GMT -5
Ok then moonstone: if you believe that Victorino's newfound ability to hit better is a true reflection of a change in his abilities then how do you explain it? I don't believe that it's sustainable for the reasons I stated earlier.
|
|
|
Post by jchang on Sept 10, 2013 20:10:55 GMT -5
Can people take more of this topic? I loaded up Victorino's entire career 1186 gamelog. then I generated a rolling 80 game window for his BA/OBP, which after career game 180 or so tended to correspond to 360ish PA. Game window is easier for me to generate rolling avg. OK, I probably should have used a 90 game windows to get close to 400 PA. Anyways, for the first 500 games, the rolling BA and OBP is fairly flat at 275/330 range. Then there 2 periods around career game 590 and 820 that BA/OBP experiences a surge similar to the current one. Immediately after each of the two previous surges, it falls below average before recovery. If any one would like the Excel, let me know below is a rolling 25 game windows, a little more than 100 PA after game 120ish (correction: 120 PA is his prime years the Excel file is here, let me know if it works, I may have to zip it. edit: recall that over 100 AB - 110 PA, we might expect 27 hits for a variation of +- 5 hits, or 20%, or 50 points of BA or OBP. Over 400 AB, the expected variation is half, or +- 25 point of BA/OBP
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Sept 11, 2013 10:31:13 GMT -5
Jchang, I think you may be talking to yourself.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,016
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 12, 2013 2:17:37 GMT -5
People debating the statistical likelihood of Victorino's RHB vs. RHP numbers are, I think, missing the point completely.
If you take his recent or career RHB vs. LHP numbers and then project a set of RHB vs. RHP numbers by giving him a typical large split for a RHB batter, you end up with much better numbers than his recent LHB vs. RHP numbers, and hence a much more valuable player.
So there was, coming into this season, a pressing argument that he should largely abandon switch-hitting.
But there was a serious question as to whether a guy who had been switch-hitting for many years could even do that. To a lot of baseball minds, this is getting into left-handed catcher territory. Good on paper, never going to happen.
Well, it's happened, and we have learned that Shane Victorino can do this. Doubtlessly his current numbers have been juiced up by an insane hot streak and/or pitchers not quite knowing how to pitch him yet, but he can do this.
I think the best way to project him as a RHB vs. RHP would be to find the distribution of RHB platoon splits (which some have claimed to be random, anyway) and give him about 1.5 standard deviations worse than typical. I'm pretty sure he ends up as pretty darn good, and considerably more valuable than the guy we thought we were signing.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuizzy on Sept 12, 2013 7:06:27 GMT -5
If you want to make a thread about QO's then you would almost have to put Napoli on here now. As he is sure to get a deal elsewhere since he has shown that he can still hit in the 2nd half albeit very streaky. I would tender an offer to all three. It really can't hurt and the worst case scenario is that you get all three back on expensive one year deals. Napoli's salary would be roughly the same at 13 million FWIW. Drew will get a multi year deal, most likely from the Cardinals A's or Yankees. He won't be accepting the QO and the lack of depth around baseball up the middle shows that this provides zero risk. Ellsbury is a no brainer. I would prefer that the Sox only bring back Napoli out of the three but I could live with Carp as my 1st baseman. Might not be the sexiest names but neither are guys like Gomes and Nava who have helped this team out tremendously. Also as an added bonus if you let Ellsbury and Drew walk you not only get the picks but you clear the deck for future pursuits such as David Price.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 28, 2013 13:42:43 GMT -5
Hunter Pence just got 5/90 from SF.
Anyone left who thinks that Ellsbury is going to sign for less than that?
|
|
|
Post by bighead on Sept 28, 2013 14:09:14 GMT -5
Hunter Pence just got 5/90 from SF. Anyone left who thinks that Ellsbury is going to sign for less than that? Take into account that Pence was not on the open market, the pool of free agent OFs is now smaller and Ellsbury plays a premium defensive position...Ouch
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Sept 28, 2013 14:10:57 GMT -5
Hunter Pence just got 5/90 from SF. Anyone left who thinks that Ellsbury is going to sign for less than that? I don't, but I'd rather have Pence. 5/90 sets the floor for Jacoby and Choo (at least in Boras' mind).
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 29, 2013 9:46:01 GMT -5
Hunter Pence re-signs with San Fran for 5/90. Until I read about this yesterday, I was holding onto a shred of hope that somehow the Sox would get Ells to sign a 5 year deal in the $110M range. Now I'm resigned to the fact that he will get $140M+ from some moronic owner. And if it's Seattle, NYM, SF, or ChiC Of course someone can sell the t-shirts that say, "We Lost Jacoby Ellsbury to Free Agency and All We Got was a Lousy 2nd Round Pick." As long as he's not a Yankee.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Sept 29, 2013 10:45:30 GMT -5
Hunter Pence re-signs with San Fran for 5/90. Until I read about this yesterday, I was holding onto a shred of hope that somehow the Sox would get Ells to sign a 5 year deal in the $110M range. Now I'm resigned to the fact that he will get $140M+ from some moronic owner. And if it's Seattle, NYM, SF, or ChiC Of course someone can sell the t-shirts that say, "We Lost Jacoby Ellsbury to Free Agency and All We Got was a Lousy 2nd Round Pick." As long as he's not a Yankee. They have such pressing needs in both their rotation and infield that I can't imagine them prioritizing their money on Jacoby. It would truly be a dumb move on their part. That being said, I'm still frightened by the thought that it could happen.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Sept 29, 2013 11:30:34 GMT -5
Hunter Pence just got 5/90 from SF. Anyone left who thinks that Ellsbury is going to sign for less than that? I don't, but I'd rather have Pence. 5/90 sets the floor for Jacoby and Choo (at least in Boras' mind). So if 5/90 is the floor, do the Sox even make a play for Ellsbury outside of the QO?
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Sept 29, 2013 11:59:34 GMT -5
Hunter Pence re-signs with San Fran for 5/90. Until I read about this yesterday, I was holding onto a shred of hope that somehow the Sox would get Ells to sign a 5 year deal in the $110M range. Now I'm resigned to the fact that he will get $140M+ from some moronic owner. And if it's Seattle, NYM, SF, or ChiC Of course someone can sell the t-shirts that say, "We Lost Jacoby Ellsbury to Free Agency and All We Got was a Lousy 2nd Round Pick." As long as he's not a Yankee. Why wouldn't the sox offer 20, 21, 22, 23 X 4 plus incentives for keeping healthy with an option triggered by that? Would that be enough to keep him?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 29, 2013 13:09:20 GMT -5
Moved some Ellsbury-related posts into this thread.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Sept 29, 2013 18:26:52 GMT -5
Until I read about this yesterday, I was holding onto a shred of hope that somehow the Sox would get Ells to sign a 5 year deal in the $110M range. Now I'm resigned to the fact that he will get $140M+ from some moronic owner. And if it's Seattle, NYM, SF, or ChiC Of course someone can sell the t-shirts that say, "We Lost Jacoby Ellsbury to Free Agency and All We Got was a Lousy 2nd Round Pick." As long as he's not a Yankee. Why wouldn't the sox offer 20, 21, 22, 23 X 4 plus incentives for keeping healthy with an option triggered by that? Would that be enough to keep him? The Sox 'wouldn't' offer that because he may not be worth that cost 2-3 years from now. On a 1-year contract they should pay that, but It's the years that make it difficult. Shin Shoo Choo anyone?
|
|
|
Post by terriblehondo on Sept 29, 2013 19:02:59 GMT -5
I never thought they could keep Els anyway. It always seemed as if he wanted to go to the West Coast. You give him the qualifying offer. Then you give him your best offer to try and keep him. Then you let him walk. I have been a huge fan of JBJ since he was in college and I believe he will be in Center next year. That being said there is going to be a pretty big drop off offensively even in the best case scenario. That being he can fix the massive hole he has on inside pitches.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 2, 2013 18:47:28 GMT -5
I think we could make a strong case for the Choo option, rather than Ellsbury . That .424 OBP sure fits in well and he probably has more pop and could slot in RF quite well. Victorino and / or JBJ in CF is a good option then and Nava/Carp/Gomes in LF.
Ellsbury has more even splits which could help us more against LH pitching, which is a concern.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Oct 2, 2013 19:01:28 GMT -5
I just can't see them paying a massive contract to Choo when he can only hit against righties. He's horrendous against LHP, and that's already one of the weaknesses with the current roster. The platoon options aren't very favorable if he's your RF and you already need to platoon guys in left
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on Oct 2, 2013 19:17:18 GMT -5
I just can't see them paying a massive contract to Choo when he can only hit against righties. He's horrendous against LHP, and that's already one of the weaknesses with the current roster. The platoon options aren't very favorable if he's your RF and you already need to platoon guys in left I'm not so sure this seasons struggles vs lefties will automatically translate to 2014. Drew will likely be replaced with Bogaerts which almost certainly will help, plus there is no guarantee Salty will still be your catcher next year. He may be replaced by a RHH too.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 2, 2013 19:30:41 GMT -5
Choo's splits have been a real problem for the last 2 years but before that they were not as pronounced. Regardless, collectively this year the guy has a .424 OBP. That is huge for this team.
It is interesting that he has hit only 2 HR against LH pitching in the last 2 years though. In well over 400 AB. The guy has nonmexistant pop against LH pitching.
Not that we would normally platoon them but his splits fit perfectly with what Victorino had been doing until recently. With the current outfield talent pool we have though it's yet another LH bat when we could probably use a better option in the OF against LH pitching. Ellsbury was pretty decent against both RH and LH pitching.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Oct 2, 2013 19:31:38 GMT -5
The more I look at the off-season landscape, the more I think the Sox will only get a 2nd round pick for Ellsbury. Mets-Phils-Mariners-Jays-Cubs (last two less likely but possible) are all players. If Ells is only about the cash and not whether he thinks one of those teams will win any time soon, they are possibilities. Otherwise, Texas, SF, Sox, maybe even Orioles would be in play.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Oct 2, 2013 19:36:25 GMT -5
The more I look at the off-season landscape, the more I think the Sox will only get a 2nd round pick for Ellsbury. Mets-Phils-Mariners-Jays-Cubs (last two less likely but possible) are all players. If Ells is only about the cash and not whether he thinks one of those teams will win any time soon, they are possibilities. Otherwise, Texas, SF, Sox, maybe even Orioles would be in play. Get with the new CBA! The Red Sox will receive a compensation round pick (between the first and the second round) regardless of who signs Ellsbury this offseason. The only advantage of having a team with an unprotected pick signing Ellsbury is that it bumps up Boston's first round pick (and its comp round pick) by one slot.
|
|
|