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.
|
Post by dewey1972 on Sept 27, 2012 21:18:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Sept 28, 2012 8:29:22 GMT -5
On the other hand, not a good idea to groove a thigh-high anything to him middle-in.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Sept 28, 2012 13:52:37 GMT -5
You'll want to take this one with a dose of salt, dewey. We're talking a relatively small sample size here, what with one full year of play. To be clear, this is the number of fastballs he's successfully put into play so let's do some back-of-the-envelope calculations. Left unsaid in the article is what percentage of the four pitch types they catalog that he actually hits into fair territory. But let's assume it's proportional to what he sees at the plate - 59% fastballs. He has 649 PAs so that's all of 383 PAs to make this call with. You'll want to reference Tom Tango's The Book here, page 47 of my copy (it's also online). After that many PAs, and on the assumption that the wOBAs are drawn from a standard normal distribution, a player with an actual wOBA of .330 still has a 32% chance of finding himself between .300 and .360. Five percent of players will be lower than around .270 or higher than around .385. If he's put fewer than 383 PAs worth of fast balls into play, then the chance of having a wOBA outside the box only increases. Sample size wasn't mentioned anywhere in the article, but it should be. A few more seasons of data would have helped this analysis. As it is, the writer's not saying much. And the recommendation to throw a guy who's already hit 31 HRs more fastballs may be a mistake.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Sept 28, 2012 14:50:13 GMT -5
And the recommendation to throw a guy who's already hit 31 HRs more fastballs may be a mistake. The article points out that pitchers are pounding Reddick with fastballs away. Considering that he's a dead pull hitter incapable of going the other way, the easiest conclusion is that he tries to pull outside fastballs, and unsurprisingly fails miserably. Whereas he can turn around the softer stuff. Based on his second half results, the scouting report has gone out and he hasn't figured out how to adjust. Even the two HR he hit yesterday were on pitches that missed location badly and ended up in his wheelhouse.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Sept 28, 2012 15:17:45 GMT -5
There's no doubt he likes to pull the ball. And he does need to stop chasing pitches on the outer part of the plate, that's always been a weakness. It is one he was successfully working on before the trade, and I watched him stay away from just those pitches the day before when he broke out of the slump with a walk and two hits. I still wouldn't recommend throwing the guy a steady diet of fastballs. I think that's asking for trouble.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Sept 28, 2012 15:33:23 GMT -5
It all comes down to plate discipline. If he can do what you suggest, based on the number of major league pitchers who can successfully locate three good fastballs on the outer third in one at-bat, he should be all right.
|
|
|
Post by dcri on Sept 29, 2012 5:53:54 GMT -5
It sure would have been nice if those 31 HRs had been hit in a Sox uniform. The thing about Reddick that I think was under-appreciated was how he worked to improve himself. Too many judgments were based on his performances when he still was raw. They won't keep getting him out on outside fastballs.
Unfortunately, this is one of those trades that will be ranked among the worst in Sox history.
|
|
|
Post by jioh on Sept 29, 2012 7:55:31 GMT -5
..... Unfortunately, this is one of those trades that will be ranked among the worst in Sox history. Way too early to say that. He would have helped the 2012 Sox, but only because our outfielders were hurt or bad, and only during his good first half: his second half was miserable. I was a (cautious) fan when he was here, and kept pointing out that he had no platoon split, which continues to be true and is very valuable in a LHH. But when a player with poor plate discipline is terrible for the second half of the season, it doesn't bode well for the future. And we have to see what Andrew Bailey does in 2013. Reddick was not dumped; he was traded to fill the gaping hole left by Papelbon. If Reddick and not Bailey had bumped into the 1b and hurt his thumb, would it be a better trade?
|
|
|
Post by ancientsoxfogey on Sept 29, 2012 8:35:25 GMT -5
And how much could Josh Reddick really have helped? At most, he might have given us enough wins so that we would not be in the great position we are in to get a protected draft pick.
I realize that this "protected draft pick" thing has taken on a life of its own, but it isn't really THAT big of a deal. It's only one player, and protected status means it's really only the difference between one first-round player and one second-round player. If we were really worried about keeping the first round pick we could always not sign a Type A free agent from among a crop that most feel is not at all distinguished.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Sept 29, 2012 8:54:47 GMT -5
I think its more than that, fogey. This team struggled to find adequate outfielders this season, using Marlon Byrd, Darnell McDonald, Scott Podsednik, Dan Nava et al. But its not just this season we're looking at here with Reddick. We still have no RF for next year, though Ross could be re-signed to fill it. Kalish is a big ?. Reddick would have filled that position for us for several years.
|
|
|
Post by marti427 on Sept 29, 2012 10:58:08 GMT -5
And it still may go down as the worst and its not even just about what Reddick does but also Miles Head
|
|
|
Post by jioh on Sept 29, 2012 12:55:48 GMT -5
And it still may go down as the worst and its not even just about what Reddick does but also Miles Head so you're not only banking on the tubby Head meeting his full potential, but upping the ante from "among the worst" to "the worst". Really? You think trading Josh Reddick and Miles Head for Bailey is going to rank ahead of getting almost nothing for Cecil Cooper, Jim Lonborg, Freddie Sanchez, Sparky Lyle, Fred Lynn, Jamie Moyer, Bobby Ojeda, Bernie Carbo, Bill Lee, Tris Speaker, Jeff Bagwell, and Babe Ruth?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 29, 2012 14:32:16 GMT -5
Andrew Bailey has already given the Red Sox more value than Eric Gagne ever did, and Reddick would have to improve dramatically and have pretty good longevity to match David Murphy, so it's definitely not the worst, at least.
Bailey's under club control for two more years. Way too early to judge this yet.
|
|
|
Post by remember04 on Sept 29, 2012 15:32:31 GMT -5
Andrew Bailey has already given the Red Sox more value than Eric Gagne ever did, and Reddick would have to improve dramatically and have pretty good longevity to match David Murphy, so it's definitely not the worst, at least. Bailey's under club control for two more years. Way too early to judge this yet. And keep in mind this is coming from somebody who had a pic of Reddick for his avatar at one point. Also just because he did what he did in Oakland doesn't mean he would've had similar success here.
|
|
|
Post by dcri on Sept 30, 2012 6:00:40 GMT -5
All fair comments on my earlier post. Time will tell us more.
Not only is Reddick leading the A's in HRs and RBIs, he also is leading in Ks, and, believe it or not, walks. His 55 walks are the most on the team.
Brandon Moss probably is a bigger story, with 21 HRs in 254 ABs, and an OPS of .949. I don't think anyone saw this coming. Coco Crisp also has had a pretty decent season. An ex-Red Sox trifecta taking the A's to the post-season.
Of course, having phenomenal pitching helped a bit..
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Sept 30, 2012 12:22:41 GMT -5
The A's are an object lesson for posters who talk about all the "holes" the team has, and how there's some star power out there that could start to fill them up. Beane makes fools of us all, year after year, after year. He's an absolute master at roster construction and, above all, he understands the value of young pitchers. When he pawns off post-arb players it's usually for younger talent and, more often than not, for kid pitchers, though pickups such as Crisp, Cespedes, Carter, Reddick, and Moss are also part of the calculations.
Much of this is, of course, impossible in an environment such as Boston's. The ever-hovering often poorly informed media waits to pounce on any and every word anyone utters. They squeeze all the content they can out of it, then they stuff it with their own. Beane by comparison works in a near vacuum when it comes to the Bay Area. That may change with the move to San Jose. It wouldn't surprise me at all if he's celebrated by all the silicon valley types for his business acumen.
Billy Beane would have been hung in effigy a thousand times over. He's ruthless when it comes to evaluating players and getting rid of them at the right time. Buy low and sell high is the mantra he lives by and he does it time and again.
We need a serious evaluation of where the needs are, not the endless discussions about trading away young pitching for old pitching, or adding bats on the downside and what their real worth is - not what they're asking for. That's hard to come by with the sort of atmospherics that pass for sports journalism in the media centers of the East.
This board, above all, should hew to that. We either believe in the young talent or we don't. To me, Doubront is considerably more valuable than just about all the names that were thrown around at the beginning of the season. All they had to do was let him pitch and they did.
And just in case no one caught it, Speier, who always does his homework, got a quote from someone about Allen Webster. They compared him to Kevin Brown so filthy is his hard-boring 96+ mph sinker. That he doesn't have complete control of it just yet only makes it more tantalizing. The team is building up its pitching resources. We should trust that move and celebrate it.
|
|
|
Post by dewey1972 on Sept 30, 2012 12:59:32 GMT -5
Norm, you make some good points, though the numbers are extreme enough (just on the edge of one standard deviation if you ran the numbers right), and the fact that the power is not there make me think it's worth at least exploring.
I was more looking for someone (especially someone who remembers scouting Reddick extensively) to comment on the general idea. Does anyone remember whether he struggled against any particular type of pitch coming up?
|
|
|
Post by dewey1972 on Sept 30, 2012 13:02:45 GMT -5
On the last post, Norm, I have to disagree with your comments on Beane. "year after year after year?" The A's have been above .500 since 2006. I don't think he's terrible by any means, but it's hard to look at the A's recent track record and praise him to the heavens.
Andrew Friedman and the Rays, on the other hand, make your point well.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Sept 30, 2012 15:25:16 GMT -5
Norm, you make some good points, though the numbers are extreme enough (just on the edge of one standard deviation if you ran the numbers right), and the fact that the power is not there make me think it's worth at least exploring. I was more looking for someone (especially someone who remembers scouting Reddick extensively) to comment on the general idea. Does anyone remember whether he struggled against any particular type of pitch coming up? As a matter of fact I scouted him for a week in A+ when he was playing for Lancaster, though we watched him in San Jose and Visalia which are tougher parks (San Jose is much tougher). I pointed out his strengths (bat speed, base running, power, ability to hit pitches outside the zone) and his weaknesses (how the latter killed him in one game with a pitcher who knew how to set him up). I also predicted at the time that he would probably hit 25-30 home runs if given the chance. Some of the posters thought that was unlikely, but it was obvious to me he had that kind of power. Remember, this was four years ago. The question was then, and it's always been, his ability to stay off the pitches he couldn't drive, or to learn how to temper the swing and take them the other way. It's been an effort for him. From what I saw, it wasn't so much that he can't hit fastballs, but that he gets lured into swinging at pitches outside the zone and that generates weak contact, something you alluded to. Given that he oscillates between blistering hot streaks and falling back to his old ways, I don't think feeding him one type of pitch is a good idea. The reason he gets himself out is he gets setup with a lot of breaking stuff and fed fastballs on the edge of the plate. Back then He could get wood on them in the low minors, but that's much harder as you move up the ladder.
|
|
|
Post by remember04 on Sept 30, 2012 16:47:59 GMT -5
Beane makes fools of us all, year after year, after year. He's an absolute master at roster construction Andre Ethier and Carlos Gonzales would sure look good in A's uniforms. I agree with his philosophy and he is pretty good at what he does but he's no god.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 30, 2012 19:40:11 GMT -5
On the last post, Norm, I have to disagree with your comments on Beane. "year after year after year?" The A's have been above .500 since 2006. I don't think he's terrible by any means, but it's hard to look at the A's recent track record and praise him to the heavens. Andrew Friedman and the Rays, on the other hand, make your point well.When Billy Beane had the best young rotation in baseball, he was clearly the smartest GM in the game. Now that Tampa Bay has the best young rotation in the game, Friedman is obviously much smarter. (I think we far overrate the differences between GMs. These guys control a lot of things, but there's also a hell of a lot of dumb luck in the GMing business, no matter how smart you are)
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 30, 2012 20:51:39 GMT -5
I would trade the whole Red Sox front office for Andrew Friedman.
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Oct 1, 2012 8:16:19 GMT -5
On the last post, Norm, I have to disagree with your comments on Beane. "year after year after year?" The A's have been above .500 since 2006. I don't think he's terrible by any means, but it's hard to look at the A's recent track record and praise him to the heavens. Andrew Friedman and the Rays, on the other hand, make your point well.When Billy Beane had the best young rotation in baseball, he was clearly the smartest GM in the game. Now that Tampa Bay has the best young rotation in the game, Friedman is obviously much smarter. (I think we far overrate the differences between GMs. These guys control a lot of things, but there's also a hell of a lot of dumb luck in the GMing business, no matter how smart you are) Beane's entire rotation right now is Rookies. The WHOLE thing! That could very well be the best young rotation in the majors.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Oct 1, 2012 8:26:15 GMT -5
Oregonnorm, I recall seeing (and reporting) Reddick take spring training batting practice with the then much-heralded Lars as well as Kalish. The ball was flying off Reddick's bat...high, far, majestic shots with seeming ease. Lars was not generating much pop with a languid swing and Kalish, altho he did , looked like he had a lot more effort into it. Reddick reminded me of Nomar physically.... lithe, wiry, quick bat. I know that Josh has faltered a bit in the second half, but he is still dangerous. I expect that he will continue to improve. Let's hope that this is not Bagwell redux.
Agree also on Beane. Classic situation where he saw value when others did not. What a story Moss is too!! Certainly some success of a GM can be attributed to luck...but to paraphrase..."luck" is also the product of design.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 1, 2012 8:37:42 GMT -5
Let's hope that this is not Bagwell redux. It isn't. Jeff Bagwell should be in the Hall of Fame. Through his age-25 season, Bagwell had compiled a .295/.380/.464 career line. It's a totally unfair comparison to both players.
|
|
|