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.
9/16-9/18 Red Sox @ Pirates Series Thread
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
|
Post by nomar on Sept 17, 2014 8:58:23 GMT -5
I always thought it would be easy and interesting if fangraphs would add a WAR/PA stat. Obviously incredibly easy to figure out yourself, but if they wanted to do the work for everyone, I'm not complaining.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Sept 17, 2014 9:40:25 GMT -5
And by the eye test, have they really been 3rd best in defense? JBJ & Pedroia, no question well above average. SS and 3B, and AJP below average. Drew and Napoli average, Nava, Gomes/Cespedes slightly below average. If the above is 3rd best in the AL, then the rest of baseball must be horrible. Or maybe, just the defensive metrics that make up the fWar is flawed -- as everyone says over a sample of a season, but then they cite the fWar.
|
|
|
Post by godot on Sept 17, 2014 9:40:47 GMT -5
Random thought: Red Sox are 9th in pitching fWAR and 19th in offensive fWAR and have the 5th worst record in all of MLB. How is that possible? Just bad luck? They've been almost exactly in the middle of the pack in the AL by most pitching metrics and have played good defense, but rank 14/15 in wOBA, wRC+ and BsR. We're deadlast in slugging. Somewhat interestingly, we're also last in swing% and z-swing%, yet first in zone% (meaning we see the highest rate of strikes thrown yet have the lowest rate of swinging at strikes). The bad luck has been from injuries and regression from nearly everyone performing terrifically last year and taking significant steps backwards in 2014. You also need to keep in mind the young guys we slotted into everyday roles who struggled to perform close to their projected levels (JBJ, Bogaerts). The team BABIP is slightly below average, but it's still a fairly normal .295. Bad luck or poor decisions and policies? Regardless, found interesting what many suspected,- lowest slugging and taking pitches, suggesting a policy of working the count more so than "selective aggressive". Sometimes ' luck' is used when you don't have an explanation or making excuses. Not saying it does not exist , but get suspicious when some used the concept to explain. A good mechanic does not blame his tools. All teams have injuries, but some go on and get good replacements. Must admit though that the "minor" injuries to Dustin and Napoli were different in kind and hard to address. As many have said though, their decision to replace the middle of the field with questionable replacements got the ball going downhill. This has been hashed out before, so take it or leave it. The decision on Lester was just stupid. If they weren't such jerks, they could have signed him earlier. If teams wait and players approach FA, more than likely you will lose them if. like the Sox, you do not want to pay "market rates" Furthermore, there weren't any replacements for him, and their pitching stock was thin ( again overestimating or believing the hype about "prospects'). Would like to see though what they do this winter. If you think you can lay some stats out on the table and come up with an "answer", good luck and eat a banana a day. Human decisions and polices matter, believe it or not.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Sept 17, 2014 10:38:16 GMT -5
They've been almost exactly in the middle of the pack in the AL by most pitching metrics and have played good defense, but rank 14/15 in wOBA, wRC+ and BsR. We're deadlast in slugging. Somewhat interestingly, we're also last in swing% and z-swing%, yet first in zone% (meaning we see the highest rate of strikes thrown yet have the lowest rate of swinging at strikes). The bad luck has been from injuries and regression from nearly everyone performing terrifically last year and taking significant steps backwards in 2014. You also need to keep in mind the young guys we slotted into everyday roles who struggled to perform close to their projected levels (JBJ, Bogaerts). The team BABIP is slightly below average, but it's still a fairly normal .295. Bad luck or poor decisions and policies? Regardless, found interesting what many suspected,- lowest slugging and taking pitches, suggesting a policy of working the count more so than "selective aggressive". Sometimes ' luck' is used when you don't have an explanation or making excuses. Not saying it does not exist , but get suspicious when some used the concept to explain. A good mechanic does not blame his tools. All teams have injuries, but some go on and get good replacements. Must admit though that the "minor" injuries to Dustin and Napoli were different in kind and hard to address. As many have said though, their decision to replace the middle of the field with questionable replacements got the ball going downhill. This has been hashed out before, so take it or leave it. The decision on Lester was just stupid. If they weren't such jerks, they could have signed him earlier. If teams wait and players approach FA, more than likely you will lose them if. like the Sox, you do not want to pay "market rates" Furthermore, there weren't any replacements for him, and their pitching stock was thin ( again overestimating or believing the hype about "prospects'). Would like to see though what they do this winter. If you think you can lay some stats out on the table and come up with an "answer", good luck and eat a banana a day. Human decisions and polices matter, believe it or not. I understand your sentiment with Lester, but I don't think it was as stupid of them as you make it sound. Before the final 3 months of 2013, Lester was a guy I wanted no part of paying anywhere near a top of the rotation market rate to in a 5 or 6 year deal. Even after his terrific run down the stretch last season, he still hadn't convinced me it was worth it. After all, it was a starter reaching the age of 30, and, before the 2013 rebound, coming off 4 straight seasons of a worsening ERA, xFIP, WAR and K-BB%. Even a 90/5 contract would have made me hesitate, only to see him go on to pitch at an elite level this season, making that type of deal look like an absolute steal in hindsight. Yes, their low-ball offer before this season was a bit perplexing and insulting, but it's not like they should have been unquestionably offering him 120/6, either.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Sept 17, 2014 10:41:41 GMT -5
They've been almost exactly in the middle of the pack in the AL by most pitching metrics and have played good defense, but rank 14/15 in wOBA, wRC+ and BsR. We're deadlast in slugging. Somewhat interestingly, we're also last in swing% and z-swing%, yet first in zone% (meaning we see the highest rate of strikes thrown yet have the lowest rate of swinging at strikes). The bad luck has been from injuries and regression from nearly everyone performing terrifically last year and taking significant steps backwards in 2014. You also need to keep in mind the young guys we slotted into everyday roles who struggled to perform close to their projected levels (JBJ, Bogaerts). The team BABIP is slightly below average, but it's still a fairly normal .295. Bad luck or poor decisions and policies? Regardless, found interesting what many suspected,- lowest slugging and taking pitches, suggesting a policy of working the count more so than "selective aggressive". Sometimes ' luck' is used when you don't have an explanation or making excuses. Not saying it does not exist , but get suspicious when some used the concept to explain. A good mechanic does not blame his tools. All teams have injuries, but some go on and get good replacements. Must admit though that the "minor" injuries to Dustin and Napoli were different in kind and hard to address. As many have said though, their decision to replace the middle of the field with questionable replacements got the ball going downhill. This has been hashed out before, so take it or leave it. The decision on Lester was just stupid. If they weren't such jerks, they could have signed him earlier. If teams wait and players approach FA, more than likely you will lose them if. like the Sox, you do not want to pay "market rates" Furthermore, there weren't any replacements for him, and their pitching stock was thin ( again overestimating or believing the hype about "prospects'). Would like to see though what they do this winter. If you think you can lay some stats out on the table and come up with an "answer", good luck and eat a banana a day. Human decisions and polices matter, believe it or not. So the team that won 97 games (tied for most in the majors) and won the World Series the previous year now has a poor philosophy because this year was a disaster? The players they had regressed horribly and their replacements failed miserably. Nothing would have saved this team this year with all of the under-performers and injuries they sustained. Yes, every team has injuries, but not every team has not only key pieces go down, but have just about virtually every key component perform well below expectations. Nava and Gomes were the best LF combinations last season and they were both dreadful Victorino went down for most of the season and was one of the best RFers last season Sizemore and JBJ were unfathomable disasters (well, Sizemore was predictable, but JBJ was surprisingly bad) and Ellsbury was great last season (though mediocre this season) Napoli was good, not great Pedroia poor BA to start the year and continued declining slugging Xander under-performer (though growing pains should be expected for a 21 year old rookie) Stephen Drew - Could not return to form when he eventually re-signed. Was as bad as he was in the playoffs at the plate. Middlebrooks - Injured yet again and looks like he'll be out of baseball in a year or two Pierzynski - A steeper than expected decline at the plate (he is also the "anti-" Red Sox philosophy) Ortiz - Decline in BA, especially early on, but power was better than expected. They were a disaster from top to bottom. They went from everything breaking right to everything going wrong. They rebuilt the offense and if they can go out and get a 3B, I'll be very happy. Not locking Lester early was a mistake, but I do like Cespedes and if they can re-sign Lester for "above market value" then I will be very content with how everything played out. If they can dump Victorino's contract they'll have a lot of wiggle room this off-season.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 17, 2014 10:55:12 GMT -5
And by the eye test, have they really been 3rd best in defense? JBJ & Pedroia, no question well above average. SS and 3B, and AJP below average. Drew and Napoli average, Nava, Gomes/Cespedes slightly below average. If the above is 3rd best in the AL, then the rest of baseball must be horrible. Or maybe, just the defensive metrics that make up the fWar is flawed -- as everyone says over a sample of a season, but then they cite the fWar. Here are their defensive leaderboards for the Red Sox. I think it's entirely conceivable, even by the eye test, that they're one of the better defensive teams in baseball. Bradley and Pedroia being the best defensive players at their respective positions (which passes the eye test) helps a great deal, and Vazquez has been excellent since he's come up. Nava has put up elite defensive marks in right field, which is likely just small sample size noise (he's only played 464 innings there, which means he has really only encountered maybe a couple dozen really up-in-the-air plays; it's likely that he just happens to have flukily made more of them than his true talent level), but may also represent some improvement. For what it's worth, both DRS and TZ really love Nava's defense this year, too. This is the only case which is really inconsistent with the eye test/recent history, IMO. UZR has Cespedes ranked as above-average, which is not that inconsistent with his career marks (he doesn't look pretty doing it, but his speed compensates for his bad routes; his arm also gives him a pretty sizable boost). Drew and Napoli are also ranked as above-average, which alines with their play in recent years. It also has Bogaerts ranked as average at SS but terrible at 3B, which I can buy (his SS defense has improved considerably in the second half of the season). Middlebrooks comes out average as well. Because he played small samples at a bunch of positions, Holt's marks at individual positions are all over the place, but he's slightly above-average on the whole, which seems right. It has Gomes, Sizemore, and Pierzynski as well below-average, but all those guys only played less than a half-season (due to being moved and not playing full-time when they were here).
|
|
|
Post by tonyc on Sept 17, 2014 11:28:52 GMT -5
Regarding Lester, sure in hindsight it looks mistaken. However, in addition to the declining metrics he had, I again refer to an article early in the season where several GMS felt Ben needed to hold off on a long term signing as he had to asess the quality of his multiple pitching prospects. So he deliberately made a lowball offer so that there would not be a response to buy time.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,933
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 17, 2014 12:37:17 GMT -5
Bad luck or poor decisions and policies? Regardless, found interesting what many suspected,- lowest slugging and taking pitches, suggesting a policy of working the count more so than "selective aggressive". Sometimes ' luck' is used when you don't have an explanation or making excuses. Not saying it does not exist , but get suspicious when some used the concept to explain. A good mechanic does not blame his tools. All teams have injuries, but some go on and get good replacements. Must admit though that the "minor" injuries to Dustin and Napoli were different in kind and hard to address. As many have said though, their decision to replace the middle of the field with questionable replacements got the ball going downhill. This has been hashed out before, so take it or leave it. The decision on Lester was just stupid. If they weren't such jerks, they could have signed him earlier. If teams wait and players approach FA, more than likely you will lose them if. like the Sox, you do not want to pay "market rates" Furthermore, there weren't any replacements for him, and their pitching stock was thin ( again overestimating or believing the hype about "prospects'). Would like to see though what they do this winter. If you think you can lay some stats out on the table and come up with an "answer", good luck and eat a banana a day. Human decisions and polices matter, believe it or not. I understand your sentiment with Lester, but I don't think it was as stupid of them as you make it sound. Before the final 3 months of 2013, Lester was a guy I wanted no part of paying anywhere near a top of the rotation market rate to in a 5 or 6 year deal. Even after his terrific run down the stretch last season, he still hadn't convinced me it was worth it. After all, it was a starter reaching the age of 30, and, before the 2013 rebound, coming off 4 straight seasons of a worsening ERA, xFIP, WAR and K-BB%. Even a 90/5 contract would have made me hesitate, only to see him go on to pitch at an elite level this season, making that type of deal look like an absolute steal in hindsight. Yes, their low-ball offer before this season was a bit perplexing and insulting, but it's not like they should have been unquestionably offering him 120/6, either. This ^. Oh, and this ^, as well as this ^. Let's add that Cherington saw Theo get completely burned by a similar extension to Beckett. Furthermore, by mid-season, the current scenario presented itself. The one where they end up acquiring one year of Yoenis Cespedes plus a pick at the end of the second round for what war is good for according to Edwin Starr. That's why I don't buy the thought that they won't try to re-sign Lester because they haven't tried very hard so far. Hamels may well be better and he''ll certainly be cheaper, but Lester is free, whereas Hamels will cost you a boatload of prospects that might be used to acquire Jason Heyward, Giancarlo Stanton, a long-term 1B to succeed Napoli, a long-term third baseman should all the in-house candidates wash out, and / or a second ace should we get disappointing returns from the young pitchers and/or the space aliens fail to return Clay Buchholz the next time they abduct him temporarily. Yes, I've twice said that Lester costs nothing, when he will in fact cost a boatload of cash. But cash this team has. This team should be looking to turn cash into talent. If they build a team entirely out of prospects and by trading prospects, and end up well shy of the tax threshold, they've probably done it wrong.
|
|
|
Post by nexus on Sept 17, 2014 13:18:56 GMT -5
Bad luck or poor decisions and policies? Regardless, found interesting what many suspected,- lowest slugging and taking pitches, suggesting a policy of working the count more so than "selective aggressive". Sometimes ' luck' is used when you don't have an explanation or making excuses. Not saying it does not exist , but get suspicious when some used the concept to explain. A good mechanic does not blame his tools.A good mechanic would also never compare his tools to baseball outcomes.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Sept 17, 2014 14:43:00 GMT -5
@sean_McAdam: SOX v PIT: Betts 2B; Bogaerts SS; Cespedes LF; Napoli 1B; Craig RF; Middlebrooks 3B; Castillo CF; Vazquez C; Buchholz P"
|
|
|
Post by godot on Sept 17, 2014 14:59:45 GMT -5
Interesting chit chat on the Sox and luck. A few things. Soxfan, if we can't say that decisions and policies were (in part) responsible for their fall this year. and it was bad luck or "things just did not work out"; then how can we say polices and decisions were sound and responsible for the year before. Wouldn't 2013 just be a matter of luck also, and the 'luck' ran out this year.
Matt, agree on the stupid stuff. I can go overboard, surprise. It was more decisions and policies that make some sense, but also are very questionable. Eric's logic on resigning is sound. They may bite the bullet as the replacement cost may counterproductive ( losing prospects they need) or cost as much as signing Lester to market value (Shields). Then again they may try and build around not having a front line pitcher like Lester as Ben suggested.
Again, no doubt injuries played a part in this years fall, but I suggest that their policy of not paying market value and believing they can build through the farm system has its holes, especially when their judgment on their prospects is questionable, and they haven't filled holes with prospects, including pitchers for 2015. Building from within is uneven, regardless of how good their farm system is (and I do not rate their system as highly as many on the board, as if that matters). Good prospects are often few and far between, and their development is usually not in a straight line. You have to supplement with shrewd trades and free agents, and unless you go bottom fishing and thus need luck, you have to pay close to market rates for the good players, often knowing that you may eat some years in the contract. Besides baseball seems to be rolling in the bucks, and so what if players enjoy the fruits of their labor. Nobody goes to a ball game to watch John Henry hold court. I guess players are not suppose to play the free market game.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 17, 2014 15:03:39 GMT -5
Bad luck or poor decisions and policies? Regardless, found interesting what many suspected,- lowest slugging and taking pitches, suggesting a policy of working the count more so than "selective aggressive". Sometimes ' luck' is used when you don't have an explanation or making excuses. Not saying it does not exist , but get suspicious when some used the concept to explain. A good mechanic does not blame his tools.A good mechanic would also never compare his tools to baseball outcomes. If the torque wrench snapped I bet the good mechanic wouldn't be blaming the person holding it.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Sept 17, 2014 15:29:46 GMT -5
Looking forward to seeing more of Castillo. He's done well after such a long time off. He's going to be in the line up next year so I hope he's the real deal.
Godot made some good points but he's so abrasive about posting I don't care to point out the ones I agree with.
Love the park and city of Pittsburgh. Only been to the ballpark once , but it's a beautiful place. The city has come a long way from it's days of steel and smog.
|
|
|
Post by godot on Sept 17, 2014 16:42:10 GMT -5
ray88, sorry about being abrasive, but I am actually trying to tone down, believe or not.
|
|
|
Post by nexus on Sept 17, 2014 16:43:28 GMT -5
Again, no doubt injuries played a part in this years fall, but I suggest that their policy of not paying market value and believing they can build through the farm system has its holes, especially when their judgment on their prospects is questionable, and they haven't filled holes with prospects, including pitchers for 2015. Building from within is uneven, regardless of how good their farm system is (and I do not rate their system as highly as many on the board, as if that matters). Good prospects are often few and far between, and their development is usually not in a straight line. You have to supplement with shrewd trades and free agents, and unless you go bottom fishing and thus need luck, you have to pay close to market rates for the good players, often knowing that you may eat some years in the contract. Besides baseball seems to be rolling in the bucks, and so what if players enjoy the fruits of their labor. Nobody goes to a ball game to watch John Henry hold court. I guess players are not suppose to play the free market game. Really? I would state the exact opposite as true. You need luck anytime you're making a long term commitment to a player in their 30's. I mean, let's just take the consensus top 5 free agents from last offseason as an example: 1. Cano - Has outperformed his AAV YTD 2. Ellsbury - Underperformed 3. Choo - Already one of the worst contracts in baseball 4. McCann - Underperformed 5. Tanaka - Underperformed due to an injury that will eventually require missing at least one more season These were supposed to be the 'good' players you could count on... and we're talking about year 1 of their long term contracts. Go back to 2013 and guys like Hamilton, Bourn, and BJ Upton are the 'good' players leading the pack. I am not saying the Red Sox should all together abandon free agency, but I much prefer the Napoli/Drew/Victorino/Dempster-type risks (who combined don't add up to Crawford's guarantees) over the flashy name who's likely 1. under a more intense microscope now that he's likely paid a ton 2. in a race against the physiological clock and 3. living/working in a new, unfamiliar environment which can bring a whole new subset of issues that didn't previously exist.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Sept 17, 2014 16:47:15 GMT -5
ray88, sorry about being abrasive, but I am actually trying to tone down, believe or not. Fair enough. You clearly watch and know the game.
|
|
|
Post by redsox4242 on Sept 17, 2014 17:00:09 GMT -5
Excited to see Rusneys debut!
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Sept 17, 2014 17:49:50 GMT -5
Excited to see Rusneys debut! I am especially glad to see Bradley on the bench.!
|
|
|
Post by godot on Sept 17, 2014 18:15:53 GMT -5
Boy is Betts quick and aggressive. Interesting to compare his abats to Xanders'. Betts is usually balanced and centered with a short quick swing. Xander can be very off balanced and loopy.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Sept 17, 2014 18:16:27 GMT -5
Bradley and Pedroia being the best defensive players at their respective positions (which passes the eye test) helps a great deal, and Vazquez has been excellent since he's come up. Can't argue with Pedroia, but do you think JBJ could be better than Lagares at CF? I watched a couple of Mets games and the dude is just unreal out there. If Bradley could be just as good that would help him a great deal.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Sept 17, 2014 18:22:47 GMT -5
All of Liriano's stuff moves. Hope they get to him early before he starts locating.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Sept 17, 2014 18:28:59 GMT -5
Boy is Betts quick and aggressive. Interesting to compare his abats to Xanders'. Betts is usually balanced and centered with a short quick swing. Xander can be very off balanced and loopy. I really think Bogaerts will be a good player, but you're right. No comparison at this point. Betts does not look like a 21 year old with the bat. He looks like a professional hitter.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 17, 2014 18:40:59 GMT -5
Bradley and Pedroia being the best defensive players at their respective positions (which passes the eye test) helps a great deal, and Vazquez has been excellent since he's come up. Can't argue with Pedroia, but do you think JBJ could be better than Lagares at CF? I watched a couple of Mets games and the dude is just unreal out there. If Bradley could be just as good that would help him a great deal. You're probably right that Lagares is right up there or maybe even better (I don't see a lot of Mets games). Was just making the point that, ordinal ranking aside, Bradley as one of the best CFs in the game seems right to me.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 17, 2014 18:49:44 GMT -5
Boy is Betts quick and aggressive. Interesting to compare his abats to Xanders'. Betts is usually balanced and centered with a short quick swing. Xander can be very off balanced and loopy. Yeah, lot of Xander's occasional swing-and-miss tendencies were camouflaged by the fact that he just hit the ball so hard when he squared it up. Xander's hit tool has certainly looked worse than advertised.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Sept 17, 2014 19:07:38 GMT -5
Liriano could be one of the front offices's targets next year. Especially if he doesn't get a QO. I think he's a target even if he does get a QO.
|
|
|