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.
Jackie Bradley Jr. - does the glove outweigh the bat?
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,842
|
Post by wcp3 on Aug 18, 2015 10:57:56 GMT -5
Even if we're being relatively conservative with projections (.250ish hitter with good OBP and elite D), you'd have to pay a good amount in free agency to get a guy with his ability. Millions more than what they have him locked up for for the foreseeable future. So yeah, I'd say the Sox just keep the guy. I mean, obviously Bradley has surplus value. No one is arguing that he doesn't. But there's always the potential that you trade him for a player with more surplus value, and so the operative question is how much surplus value you think he provides (and thus how willing to move him you might be). Highly doubt they'd get surplus value, especially from such a SSS of offensive success. Keep the dude.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,015
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 18, 2015 11:03:00 GMT -5
The question of whether you would be willing to sell high on Bradley is a tough one because the answer should always be "it depends on the return." The more interesting and illustrative question to me is, in terms of your willingness to give him up in a trade, where would you rank Bradley as compared to the rest of the top prospects in the system? Keeping in mind the fact that he has one+ year less of team control than the other top prospects in the system (and, depending on his service time this year and next, may qualify for super two status), I think I'd rank him essentially on par with Margot, behind Devers and Moncada (and Rodriguez and Swihart) but ahead of Owens, Johnson, and Guerra. Think somewhere in the 30-50 range of an offseason top 100 list. My top 12 25 and under: 1a. Bogaerts 1b. Betts 3. Vazquez 4. Bradley 5. Swihart 6. Moncada 7. Rodriguez 8. Devers 9. Margot 10. Espinoza 11. Benintendi 12. Owens Edit: And, BTW, 1 through 4 (plus the Brockstar!) will go down as the greatest one-team rookie crop in MLB history. (And Allen Webster will be the answer to the trivia question, who was the 6th guy to have his rookie season for that team?). Edit #2: Added Benintendi
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Aug 18, 2015 13:18:33 GMT -5
The question of whether you would be willing to sell high on Bradley is a tough one because the answer should always be "it depends on the return." The more interesting and illustrative question to me is, in terms of your willingness to give him up in a trade, where would you rank Bradley as compared to the rest of the top prospects in the system? Keeping in mind the fact that he has one+ year less of team control than the other top prospects in the system (and, depending on his service time this year and next, may qualify for super two status), I think I'd rank him essentially on par with Margot, behind Devers and Moncada (and Rodriguez and Swihart) but ahead of Owens, Johnson, and Guerra. Think somewhere in the 30-50 range of an offseason top 100 list. My top 10 25 and under: 1a. Bogaerts 1b. Betts 3. Vazquez 4. Bradley 5. Swihart 6. Moncada 7. Rodriguez 8. Devers 9. Margot 10a. Espinoza 10b. Owens Edit: And, BTW, 1 through 4 (plus the Brockstar!) will go down as the greatest one-team rookie crop in MLB history. (And Allen Webster will be the answer to the trivia question, who was the 6th guy to have his rookie season for that team?). Strong words ... not sure what the full range competition is, and are we talking "guys who exhausted their rookie eligibility in the same year" instead of just "guys who debuted the same year"? Because if it's the latter, the '25 A's with Jimmie Foxx, Lefty Grove, and Mickey Cochran would be nearly impossible to beat. Three top-shelf Hall of Famers. But Jimmie Foxx only had something like 10ABs that year, iirc (as a 17 year-old!!).
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,015
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 18, 2015 13:34:25 GMT -5
My top 10 25 and under: 1a. Bogaerts 1b. Betts 3. Vazquez 4. Bradley 5. Swihart 6. Moncada 7. Rodriguez 8. Devers 9. Margot 10a. Espinoza 10b. Owens Edit: And, BTW, 1 through 4 (plus the Brockstar!) will go down as the greatest one-team rookie crop in MLB history. (And Allen Webster will be the answer to the trivia question, who was the 6th guy to have his rookie season for that team?). Strong words ... not sure what the full range competition is, and are we talking "guys who exhausted their rookie eligibility in the same year" instead of just "guys who debuted the same year"? Because if it's the latter, the '25 A's with Jimmie Foxx, Lefty Grove, and Mickey Cochran would be nearly impossible to beat. Three top-shelf Hall of Famers. But Jimmie Foxx only had something like 10ABs that year, iirc (as a 17 year-old!!). Guys who exhausted their rookie status. And no, I haven't done any research to to see what the competition is! It is a great question.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Aug 18, 2015 13:39:09 GMT -5
The question of whether you would be willing to sell high on Bradley is a tough one because the answer should always be "it depends on the return." The more interesting and illustrative question to me is, in terms of your willingness to give him up in a trade, where would you rank Bradley as compared to the rest of the top prospects in the system? Keeping in mind the fact that he has one+ year less of team control than the other top prospects in the system (and, depending on his service time this year and next, may qualify for super two status), I think I'd rank him essentially on par with Margot, behind Devers and Moncada (and Rodriguez and Swihart) but ahead of Owens, Johnson, and Guerra. Think somewhere in the 30-50 range of an offseason top 100 list. My top 10 25 and under: 1a. Bogaerts 1b. Betts 3. Vazquez 4. Bradley 5. Swihart 6. Moncada 7. Rodriguez 8. Devers 9. Margot 10a. Espinoza 10b. Owens Edit: And, BTW, 1 through 4 (plus the Brockstar!) will go down as the greatest one-team rookie crop in MLB history. (And Allen Webster will be the answer to the trivia question, who was the 6th guy to have his rookie season for that team?). Isn't there a Paisan missing from your list?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 18, 2015 13:39:34 GMT -5
Can we talk about prospects over 4 years? In that case, I'm going Evans/Fisk/Rice/Lynn/Burleson. Damn their pitching though.
|
|
|
Post by nexus on Aug 18, 2015 14:07:57 GMT -5
I know Barnes has been traveling back and forth, but has there ever been a Sox team with 6 active regulars from the same Rule 4?
|
|
|
Post by foreverred9 on Aug 20, 2015 23:41:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by m1keyboots on Aug 21, 2015 0:11:49 GMT -5
I've been waiting 4 months for this dream to come true so someone can give me the reason why Mookie needs to be playing center / Jackie Bradley. Yes movie is good, but Jackie is doing what movie did at the end of last year and that is lighting on fire. With the sublime the fence to go with it. If this keeps up or even tells off or even bottoms out at 650 to 700 ops how can you not start JBJ and center?
|
|
|
Post by m1keyboots on Aug 21, 2015 0:15:52 GMT -5
Please call me out if I'm sounding completely biased. In my opinion Jackie Bradley is completely raking, feasting on mistake pitches, going with pictures with velocity on the outer corner, knowing his strengths, being aggressive, not giving away a pass, and not being passive like he was last year. I truly am ecstatic had his breakthrough and hope it continues. If he happens to hit at this level, which is probably not likely. But if he happens to hit at a level close to this with his defense he has to be considered one of the top center fielders in the game at the moment. And I mean from his breakthrough until now
|
|
|
Post by jchang on Aug 21, 2015 8:50:23 GMT -5
this is really great for JBJ, I am hoping he will continue to bat well however, Travis Shaw needs only 6 singles in his next 32 AB to reach 100AB and 888 OPS
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 21, 2015 9:34:52 GMT -5
I'm nowhere near as ready to buy into JBJ as many of you are, but hey, success is always better than failure. I hope he keeps it up as pitchers work to find his weaknesses.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 21, 2015 9:47:30 GMT -5
I'm nowhere near as ready to buy into JBJ as many of you are, but hey, success is always better than failure. I hope he keeps it up as pitchers work to find his weaknesses. That triple he yanked down the line last night was super encouraging regarding his trouble with inside pitches.
|
|
|
Post by azblue on Aug 21, 2015 10:05:44 GMT -5
I'm nowhere near as ready to buy into JBJ as many of you are, but hey, success is always better than failure. I hope he keeps it up as pitchers work to find his weaknesses. We should never forget one of the rules of Sox Prospects: Hot streaks are simply SSS blips while slumps are clear indicators that a player should be traded, demoted or DFA's.
|
|
|
Post by nexus on Aug 21, 2015 10:31:17 GMT -5
I'm nowhere near as ready to buy into JBJ as many of you are, but hey, success is always better than failure. I hope he keeps it up as pitchers work to find his weaknesses. We should never forget one of the rules of Sox Prospects: Hot streaks are simply SSS blips while slumps are clear indicators that a player should be traded, demoted or DFA's. But Bradley's been streaking since April. This isn't the Travis Shaw story. Bradley's new stroke was introduced to us in ST and he's been hitting ever since with the exception of a few sprinkled MLB PAs the first couple months of the season.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 21, 2015 11:09:28 GMT -5
I'm nowhere near as ready to buy into JBJ as many of you are, but hey, success is always better than failure. I hope he keeps it up as pitchers work to find his weaknesses. We should never forget one of the rules of Sox Prospects: Hot streaks are simply SSS blips while slumps are clear indicators that a player should be traded, demoted or DFA's. No wonder I argue with everyone. I'm the complete opposite and think SSS hot streaks are indicative of what they're capable of.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Aug 21, 2015 11:48:48 GMT -5
Personally, for me that's too low and I would not trade him at that value. If he was still prospect eligible, he'd probably be in that 20-30 range, so I don't think it's far off, but you just don't get much talent back for those guys alone. Closest recent example I could think of is Norris in the Price trade. It was Norris (#18 on BA) plus 2 C+ level (my guess) pitching prospects for half a season of Price. Since it would be an offseason trade, I'd make a lazy comp to be a lesser pitcher who's controllable for the whole year. Closest I could see for the offseason would be Strasburg, followed by Cashner, and then Nova, Hellickson, Danks. Strasburg is clearly on a different tier and would be the only player I'd consider out of that group, but still I think I'd prefer to hold onto JBJ. I'll categorize it this way, for me to trade JBJ I'd want a player back who A) is reasonably projectable to a 2 WAR with some upside, B) is controlled for at least 3 years, and C) would fill an area of need for the Red Sox in 2016. I don't see them finding that player for JBJ, so I'd default to not trading him. We're seeing a glimpse of what JBJ might be capable of in the majors, unlike with other prospects who are a few years away. I guess his floor and ceiling are a lot more certain than other prospects. His floor is what he did last year (which was still above replacement) and his ceiling is what he's done for the last few weeks - or more likely what he's done in AAA this year at the major league level. For all we know, major league pitchers discover some huge flaw with other higher rated prospects who are further away like they did with JBJ last year and then they can't adjust like JBJ has. Maybe they crater like Cecchini did when he got to AAA. JBJ really has a major league regular floor IMO, especially in the huge outfields of the NL. Don't be so quick to dismiss Cecchini. He spent a few year here on the top 10 list peaking at#3, after an awful year he did rebound to hit .293 .366 .354 .719 in July although his August doesn't look so hot, he's 24 and in AAA. He's the age when most prospects who make it graduate to MLB. This has been his first big setback. Does he bounce back? Next year very well could define him.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 21, 2015 12:08:19 GMT -5
We're seeing a glimpse of what JBJ might be capable of in the majors, unlike with other prospects who are a few years away. I guess his floor and ceiling are a lot more certain than other prospects. His floor is what he did last year (which was still above replacement) and his ceiling is what he's done for the last few weeks - or more likely what he's done in AAA this year at the major league level. For all we know, major league pitchers discover some huge flaw with other higher rated prospects who are further away like they did with JBJ last year and then they can't adjust like JBJ has. Maybe they crater like Cecchini did when he got to AAA. JBJ really has a major league regular floor IMO, especially in the huge outfields of the NL. Don't be so quick to dismiss Cecchini. He spent a few year here on the top 10 list peaking at#3, after an awful year he did rebound to hit .293 .366 .354 .719 in July although his August doesn't look so hot, he's 24 and in AAA. He's the age when most prospects who make it graduate to MLB. This has been his first big setback. Does he bounce back? Next year very well could define him. He started to struggle in 2013 when he was promoted to AA and stopped hitting for power. 2014 was terrible for him and the power was still gone. He has not rebounded this year. He has been even worse. There are glimpses every once in awhile, but his hit tool has gone backwards and his walk rate continues to go down as pitchers aren't afraid to throw him strikes. I wouldn't even have him in the top 20 anymore.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Aug 21, 2015 13:13:55 GMT -5
The question of whether you would be willing to sell high on Bradley is a tough one because the answer should always be "it depends on the return." The more interesting and illustrative question to me is, in terms of your willingness to give him up in a trade, where would you rank Bradley as compared to the rest of the top prospects in the system? Keeping in mind the fact that he has one+ year less of team control than the other top prospects in the system (and, depending on his service time this year and next, may qualify for super two status), I think I'd rank him essentially on par with Margot, behind Devers and Moncada (and Rodriguez and Swihart) but ahead of Owens, Johnson, and Guerra. Think somewhere in the 30-50 range of an offseason top 100 list. My top 12 25 and under: 1a. Bogaerts 1b. Betts 3. Vazquez 4. Bradley 5. Swihart 6. Moncada 7. Rodriguez 8. Devers 9. Margot 10. Espinoza 11. Benintendi 12. Owens Edit: And, BTW, 1 through 4 (plus the Brockstar!) will go down as the greatest one-team rookie crop in MLB history. (And Allen Webster will be the answer to the trivia question, who was the 6th guy to have his rookie season for that team?). Edit #2: Added Benintendi I am a big Bradley guy and have been claiming for two years that he should be at worst a .250 hitter in the majors and with his on base skills and D that's a nice player. One hot streak and you think he's better then Swihart and Rodriguez? I think that's crazy talk, as his current power is not something he will continue.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 21, 2015 13:22:57 GMT -5
My top 12 25 and under: 1a. Bogaerts 1b. Betts 3. Vazquez 4. Bradley 5. Swihart 6. Moncada 7. Rodriguez 8. Devers 9. Margot 10. Espinoza 11. Benintendi 12. Owens Edit: And, BTW, 1 through 4 (plus the Brockstar!) will go down as the greatest one-team rookie crop in MLB history. (And Allen Webster will be the answer to the trivia question, who was the 6th guy to have his rookie season for that team?). Edit #2: Added Benintendi I am a big Bradley guy and have been claiming for two years that he should be at worst a .250 hitter in the majors and with his on base skills and D that's a nice player. One hot streak and you think he's better then Swihart and Rodriguez? I think that's crazy talk, as his current power is not something he will continue. Obviously his current power won't continue, but we're talking about the difference between a 4 WAR player and an 8 WAR player. He really doesn't have to hit much to get to 4. Maybe a 100 wRC+.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Aug 21, 2015 13:53:03 GMT -5
Given the defense, a lot of people on the board pointed out that the bar would be lower for Bradley's hitting. But that's only part of the story. He's always maintained his OBP high enough that it's typically 100 points over his average. If that's the case, and even if his slugging were to drop 100 points - likely in my opinion - that's a near .800 OPS centerfielder with elite defense, the jumps, the routes, the arm, all of it. It's hard to overstate how valuable such a player is. The on-base and slugging skills elevate him way beyond the average. And that's assuming that's the ceiling for him. It may not be.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 21, 2015 14:04:15 GMT -5
I believe he was at -0.1 fWAR at the end of July. He has acquired 1.1 fWAR in 16 games in August. Can we extrapolate that to an 11 fWAR season yet?
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Aug 21, 2015 15:05:06 GMT -5
I think we are all getting a little too carried away due to his mega hot streak. For me it confirms what I knew all along he can hit enough that you will have to play him because his D is so great. But saying things like he's a 4 to 8 WAR player and he's near an .800 ops player is going a little over the top.
If I had to predict numbers for a full season I'm thinking like .250 .325 .425 with a .750 ops. He could have a higher average and on base %, but he could also have a lower slugging %.
3 weeks ago you would have traded him for a reliever, now we are predicting him to have numbers of a young hall of famer.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Aug 21, 2015 15:18:48 GMT -5
I think we are all getting a little too carried away due to his mega hot streak. For me it confirms what I knew all along he can hit enough that you will have to play him because his D is so great. But saying things like he's a 4 to 8 WAR player and he's near an .800 ops player is going a little over the top. If I had to predict numbers for a full season I'm thinking like .250 .325 .425 with a .750 ops. He could have a higher average and on base %, but he could also have a lower slugging %. 3 weeks ago you would have traded him for a reliever, now we are predicting him to have numbers of a young hall of famer. I can't trade him for anybody, and if I could it wouldn't be for a reliever this week, last week, last month, or last year. If he were to hold at .750, with that defense he's an all-star and probably more than once.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 21, 2015 15:27:09 GMT -5
I think we are all getting a little too carried away due to his mega hot streak. For me it confirms what I knew all along he can hit enough that you will have to play him because his D is so great. But saying things like he's a 4 to 8 WAR player and he's near an .800 ops player is going a little over the top. If I had to predict numbers for a full season I'm thinking like .250 .325 .425 with a .750 ops. He could have a higher average and on base %, but he could also have a lower slugging %. 3 weeks ago you would have traded him for a reliever, now we are predicting him to have numbers of a young hall of famer. And if he had that .750 batting line, he'd be a 4 win player. He'd be an 8 win player if he hit like he is now all the time.
|
|
|