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?
|
Post by brendan98 on Aug 17, 2015 13:34:48 GMT -5
I know this is small sample magic right now, but the swing is different from last year. Shorter to the ball, and a little more compact. I will stand by my dream of a Mookie-JBJ-Castillo OF with JBJ in center. With JBJ's excellent arm he would certainly be better suited for RF than Mookie, would that come close to outweighing the fielding difference having Mookie in CF rather than JBJ?
|
|
|
Post by ethanbein on Aug 17, 2015 13:48:40 GMT -5
Going to play Devil’s Advocate for a minute: Is it time to sell high on Bradley? Has his recent hot streak raised his value enough that he might be a valuable chip in a trade before the waiver deadline? Not saying I’d do it, but what if he tanks down the stretch, and hits like he has his entire career? It would be foolish to forget the fact that other than a 5 game stretch where he had 13 hits in 22 at-bats, JBJ has never hit at the MLB level. In 564 AB’s he’s hitting .204, take out his 5 game hot streak and he has batted .188 over 542 career at-bats. Honestly, I think JBJ has turned a corner in his career, but logically it is tough to put more stock in a 5 game hot streak, than the previous 189 games over the previous 3 seasons. Food for thought. Regardless of whether or not you think it would be a good idea, he would get claimed by the first team who could claim him if he were put on waivers, so it's not really an option until the offseason.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 17, 2015 13:53:12 GMT -5
Going to play Devil’s Advocate for a minute: Is it time to sell high on Bradley? Has his recent hot streak raised his value enough that he might be a valuable chip in a trade before the waiver deadline? Not saying I’d do it, but what if he tanks down the stretch, and hits like he has his entire career? It would be foolish to forget the fact that other than a 5 game stretch where he had 13 hits in 22 at-bats, JBJ has never hit at the MLB level. In 564 AB’s he’s hitting .204, take out his 5 game hot streak and he has batted .188 over 542 career at-bats. Honestly, I think JBJ has turned a corner in his career, but logically it is tough to put more stock in a 5 game hot streak, than the previous 189 games over the previous 3 seasons. Food for thought. Well he couldn't be traded now as Ethan mentioned above. I wouldn't trade him even if he could be unless a team is paying for him as if he's an All-Star. The reward is worth a lot more than the risk for me. I doubt any team would be willing to pay that price though. If one did this winter, I'd listen.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Aug 17, 2015 14:07:43 GMT -5
He could be traded to the team that claims him, likely Oakland.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Aug 17, 2015 14:13:05 GMT -5
While he's been stinging the ball for a while, it was just the last 10 days that they really started falling in (or jumping out!). I'm certain that would factor into any trade value he'd have at this point if you're the buyer. There just isn't that much of an ML track record with this sort of hitting. Leaving aside the fact that he'd never make it through the waiver filter, that makes the reward for the Sox not worth the risk that it's his true talent level he's currently showing - just as JimEd lays out. You'd take the chance of selling for less, maybe quite a bit less, than he might actually be worth.
I think the idea, here, is to let this play out for the additional 40 or so games as fogey suggested. That probably cements his status if he keeps hitting at a decent clip. He's certainly not going to keep the last week going. But he has a long way to fall back and still maintain something like his current slash line. If he does that, he'll be worth quite a bit, both to other teams and to the Red Sox.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Aug 17, 2015 14:18:53 GMT -5
Going to play Devil’s Advocate for a minute: Is it time to sell high on Bradley? Has his recent hot streak raised his value enough that he might be a valuable chip in a trade before the waiver deadline? Not saying I’d do it, but what if he tanks down the stretch, and hits like he has his entire career? It would be foolish to forget the fact that other than a 5 game stretch where he had 13 hits in 22 at-bats, JBJ has never hit at the MLB level. In 564 AB’s he’s hitting .204, take out his 5 game hot streak and he has batted .188 over 542 career at-bats. Honestly, I think JBJ has turned a corner in his career, but logically it is tough to put more stock in a 5 game hot streak, than the previous 189 games over the previous 3 seasons. Food for thought. I don't think they should trade Bradley, but if I could put it this way, the only reason they should trade Bradley, is if a team really over values him. I've been saying for years we shouldn't trade him because we wouldn't get much compared to his true value. I'd re-evaluate trading him 2-3 years from now (along with every young player including Betts and Bogaerts, but that is a discussion for another thread) With JBJ's excellent arm he would certainly be better suited for RF than Mookie, would that come close to outweighing the fielding difference having Mookie in CF rather than JBJ? I'm starting to think along these lines too. Bradley is truly a special CF as he has great range and reads coupled with an outstanding arm you don't typically find in CF. Betts is a good CF, mostly due to his range which comes from his speed. In RF, which in Fenway almost plays as big as CF, Bradley will have plenty of opportunities to throw runners out (or intimidate runners to stay put), runners going first to third/second to home on ground balls, and runners tagging up on second on fly balls. I'm not sure if that gives him more chances than he would get in center, but he still has opportunities to add a ton of value from RF. With Mookie being a good CF based on his speed, I'd be OK with a Castillo 7, Betts 8, Bradley 9 defensive configuration. One things for sure, playing Bradley in LF for any reason should be a punishable crime. There's no combination of two outfielders in the league that would make me bump him to left defensively.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 17, 2015 14:24:10 GMT -5
I've said this quite a few times, but the argument to have the best defensive outfielder in CF is because more balls are hit there than to either LF or RF. It's why the best defensive players are always up the middle. It's difficult to figure out if JBJ's arm in RF would outweigh the difference.
Castillo's arm and range seem pretty good, so I'd personally put Mookie in LF and count on him mastering the wall with his endless work ethic.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 17, 2015 14:30:02 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.
|
|
|
Post by jchang on Aug 17, 2015 14:48:05 GMT -5
as of today, on the MLB 2015 Prospect Watch, #1-3 are grade 70, 4-10 grade 65, 11-26 grade 60. the rest are grade 55, which is surprising because the lower third or so have been 50 in the past. I am of the opinion that Bradley should be solidly in the grade 60 group with upside of being 65. So I would want either a 65 prospect or a 60 + 50
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,840
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Aug 17, 2015 14:54:36 GMT -5
I've said this quite a few times, but the argument to have the best defensive outfielder in CF is because more balls are hit there than to either LF or RF. It's why the best defensive players are always up the middle. It's difficult to figure out if JBJ's arm in RF would outweigh the difference. Castillo's arm and range seem pretty good, so I'd personally put Mookie in LF and count on him mastering the wall with his endless work ethic. This is how it should be played. The ground he covers in left center and right center is amazing. Center in Fenway by itself can be tough. Can't see him playing right on the road. He is as good as it gets in center. Take advantage of it. Certainly right field is huge and difficult in Fenway. Castillo probably has the 2nd best arm of the three. I would believe after 40 more games in right we should have a good idea about Rusney in right. He won't be Victorino, but eventually he should be pretty good. He has good speed and a good arm. Certainly earlier we saw a few "reads" that were poor, but repetition should handle that. I understand about putting someone like Mookie in left, but he could be outstanding in that position. On the road, he would give us the coverage of 3 center fielders. I certainly expect, what we've seen from him, that he will work his tail off (more than someone we know) mastering the wall.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Aug 17, 2015 14:57:56 GMT -5
I know this is small sample magic right now, but the swing is different from last year. Shorter to the ball, and a little more compact. I will stand by my dream of a Mookie-JBJ-Castillo OF with JBJ in center. With JBJ's excellent arm he would certainly be better suited for RF than Mookie, would that come close to outweighing the fielding difference having Mookie in CF rather than JBJ? More balls hit to CF than RF. His range also brings him into right-center and left-center to a greater percentage than most other CFs. Up the middle is a better use of his defensive talents than the corners will ever be.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Aug 17, 2015 15:06:13 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. 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.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 17, 2015 15:21:02 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. 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.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Aug 17, 2015 16:00:35 GMT -5
If you were buying you would use the devils advocate point you made and make a low-ball offer hoping you get the proverbial dime for a penny. You can't have your cake and eat it too. If he's turned a corner (I don't think he would be at this corner if they handled him right to begin with) and I also believe he has he'd have to prove it longer for other teams to pay appropriately and at that point what's the point?
|
|
|
Post by arzjake on Aug 17, 2015 16:01:27 GMT -5
Pitchers will now adjust to his adjustments. The next few weeks will tell if JBJ will adjust to the adjustments..
|
|
|
Post by cologneredsox on Aug 17, 2015 17:39:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Aug 17, 2015 19:24:14 GMT -5
I don't want to move JBJ because "his value is high", of course all players are tradable if the deal is right. Sox moved Iggy at what they thought was his highest value. That was with a pennant on the line. Hang on to him and see what happens. If he's a bust , so what, happens all the time. D like his doesn't happen all the time.
|
|
|
Post by ethanbein on Aug 17, 2015 19:35:59 GMT -5
Bradley projects as a 2-3 win player with some upside, with 5 years of team control remaining. Yeah, he might hit Super 2, but his best skill doesn't get paid in arbitration. Nobody is untouchable, and if somebody sees him as a future star go ahead and trade him, but he's a pretty valuable asset right now, and I think I would hold on to him.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 18, 2015 0:45:59 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. 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. Atlanta inquired about him last year. If he finishes out the season close to his current line (say he goes .250/.340/.420), would you trade him with a prospect in the 7-11 range and one in the mid-teens for Shelby Miller?
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Aug 18, 2015 7:03:09 GMT -5
The two clips of his swing really show the difference ... I wish I could embed them next two each other, but watch how the extra toe tap/hip cock completely stalls out his swing and takes away forward momentum in his older swing. Makes his swing much longer and saps all power. Then in his new swing his lower body is smooth toward the ball and much quicker.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,846
|
Post by wcp3 on Aug 18, 2015 7:35:11 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.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 18, 2015 7:41:15 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).
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 18, 2015 7:43:52 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. Atlanta inquired about him last year. If he finishes out the season close to his current line (say he goes .250/.340/.420), would you trade him with a prospect in the 7-11 range and one in the mid-teens for Shelby Miller? Shelby Miller looks a bit overrated to me, but I'd still probably do that trade. Doubt they would though. 2.43 ERA/3.94 SIERA
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,531
|
Post by nomar on Aug 18, 2015 10:16:20 GMT -5
Shelby Miller would have a lot more trouble in the AL East.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,840
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Aug 18, 2015 10:27:54 GMT -5
Shelby Miller would have a lot more trouble in the AL East. Maybe. What is the thing about the Braves considering moving Julio Tehran?
|
|
|