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.
Red Sox outfield discussion
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Nov 21, 2012 16:37:39 GMT -5
You really wouldn't want Desmond Jennings? ? Also, ftr, Morrison was playing hurt for a lot of the year. If I have a whole in CF then Jennings would be nice to try out (but I'm not sold on him ever reaching his upside). In LF at Fenway he would be as bad of a fit as Crawford - so the value would be far less than the cost. Morrison is a bit of a reclamation project and still isn't the BIG bat the team would like to have out there. Everyone else is just not good IMO. If the Red Sox are going outside of the organization to fill LF they should get a + player (Hamilton/trade for Gordon)
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Nov 21, 2012 21:31:17 GMT -5
My guess is the Outfield will be Gomes/Sweeney platoon, Ellsbury, Hamilton. With Nava, Kalish & Hassan in AAA. Sands could also be in AAA or on the bench as a back up 1B/ OF If Hamilton signs, Sands might be getting serious playing time at first base.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2012 21:58:21 GMT -5
By W/OBA he falls to 24th if you screen for 300 PA Min.
No he's not Manny Ramirez, few are. But that doesn't make him an average LF either. However, Nava is below average with the bat. To be valuable he has to add something as a fielder he doesn't.
The problem with this assumption is that LF is on the right of the defensive spectrum. That means when looking at potential LFs you have to examine RFs and CFs including those we already have, like Kalish and Sweeney both of whom I'd take over Daniel Nava. OF is the deepest position in free agency this year, and I refuse to believe that there won't be an every day RF or LF AND a right handed platoon option available at a very fair price.
I should probably clarify this. I don't see Hazelbaker as an every day major leaguer, he's just a better bench player than Nava because he brings power and athleticism to the table while Nava does not.
Any analysis of Nava that includes his average minor league line is inherently flawed. It includes 379 PAs at Lancaster, an unfair hitters park that made non-prospects like Aaron Bates look like future stars.
Further, for some players, minor league statistics do not have predictive value. In my opinion older minor league players who have strong plate discipline yet poor physical skills fit that mold.
Anyways...good debate....I just think that Red Sox fans won't be terribly impressed if Daniel Nava is plays a significant amount.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 21, 2012 23:40:56 GMT -5
By W/OBA he falls to 24th if you screen for 300 PA Min. Read closer. That fangraphs list includes anyone who has played innings in LF. I went through and removed the players like Trout and Hamilton who played the vast majority of their defensive innings at another position, and Nava comes out either 18th or 19th depending on how you count a few guys. No he's not Manny Ramirez, few are. But that doesn't make him an average LF either. However, Nava is below average with the bat. To be valuable he has to add something as a fielder he doesn't. I've already cited statistics a few posts ago that Nava is offensively average compared to every player who has had ABs while playing LF defensively in 2012. This is really an indisputable fact if you assume Nava's past MLB performance is predictive of his future MLB performance, which I believe you're comfortable with. A pessimist about his defense might think that makes him a slightly below-average player for his position overall, which is fair, but a 1.5 bWAR player is still pretty valuable. The problem with this assumption is that LF is on the right of the defensive spectrum. That means when looking at potential LFs you have to examine RFs and CFs including those we already have, like Kalish and Sweeney both of whom I'd take over Daniel Nava. OF is the deepest position in free agency this year, and I refuse to believe that there won't be an every day RF or LF AND a right handed platoon option available at a very fair price. I dispute the bolded statement above. I posted the list of free agents in my last post; here it is again: www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/04/2013-mlb-free-agents.htmlAmongst LFers on the above list, the only ones unambiguously better than Nava for a left-handed platoon bat are Hamilton, Ludwick, and Victorino. Extend that to CFs and RFs and you add in Bourn, Pagan, Upton, Ichiro, and Swisher. Depending on how you value defense, you could make an argument for Nyjer Morgan or Austin Kearns. But really, that's it. Look at the list and show me who I've overlooked. This FA class of outfielders has some good starting-level CFs and two good corner outfielders, but really terrible depth, especially with Hunter and Cabrera signed already. Sweeney is an interesting case: he is a worse hitter (last three years, Sweeney is a 92 wRC+ and Nava is at 100), but they have comparable overall value due to Sweeney's superior defense (both at 1.2 fWAR per 600 PAs over the last three years). This one is probably a toss-up, but I'd rather have the guy making the minimum with more years of team control (which is Nava). I also think by virtue of playing half your games in Fenway, you can make do with a less-skilled defensive LF, but reasonable minds may disagree on both of the above. Regardless, there's no reason there isn't room for both of them on the roster though, so I'm not sure if Sweeney alone is grounds for cutting Nava. Kalish certainly has upside, but he's had two lost seasons in a row. Unless he really impressed in Spring Training, I start him in AAA and see what happens. If he's tearing it up down there, I'm more than happy to have him replace Nava (Nava has an option left, so the two can basically trade places). But at this point in the offseason, it's hard to argue that Nava should be cut because of Kalish. I should probably clarify this. I don't see Hazelbaker as an every day major leaguer, he's just a better bench player than Nava because he brings power and athleticism to the table while Nava does not. Why are power and athleticism necessary attributes for a bench bat? Wouldn't you rather just have the better overall player? I could see an argument for defensive flexibility, but keep in mind we're mainly looking for a pseudo-starter here-- whatever player fills this position would get 250+ PAs as the everyday starter versus RHP, so positional flexibility is less important. Yes, I would obviously prefer if a player better than Nava was the left-handed platoon bat. But the fact remains that no superior FA will be available for a reasonable price and the other options in the organization are comparable at best. Nava as the left-handed platoon bat in LF is not a terrible option and probably the best one available at this time.
|
|
|
Post by sdsoxfan on Nov 22, 2012 1:56:56 GMT -5
Nava is a good 4th or 5th outfielder who can grind at bats and provide decent production in short spurts for injured starter. We don't want Nava getting 400 at bats if we want to contend.
Hamilton, Ells, Sweeney/Gomes/Nava would provide top 10 outfield production and would along with Napoli and Haren give us a chance to compete next 2 years while we wait for next crop of top prospect. Lets try to spend available money on an elite player like Hamilton.
If we punt on 2013, lets sign Ross, trade Ells and let Sands/Brentz and Bradley show what they can do.
Please do not try for Hamilton (legitimate elite middle of order hitter) and settle for Swisher who is a #2 or #6/7 hitter and not worth more than $7-8m AAV on 2-3 year deal and will cost a #2 pick and the accompanying slot money.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2012 4:01:45 GMT -5
I don't agree that this is a "fact".
Your argument basically rests upon the idea that Nava is a wRC 100 player and is a good bet do that going forward over a 450 PAs. A better bet to do that than many of the other players. Now we can argue if wRC 100 is a good enough for 450 PAs from a LF who doesn't run and doesn't add value on defense, but that's beside the point.
Essentially I don't agree that Nava will put up wRC 100 if given 450 PAs.
The problem is that each of his two major league campaigns has featured 150-200 PAs of strong performance followed by a huge drop off supported by an associated fall in peripheral performance. To argue that he's going to be a wRC 100 player is to argue that these drop offs are either just aberrations or due to non-recurring factors. I don't agree that either is true.
When I watched the games, I saw a player that started to become more and more overmatched as time went on especially against good fastballs. The more ABs he's given the faster pitchers will adjust to him, which will suppress his numbers and keep him from being an adequate big league player, which in my opinion he barely is even at wRC 100.
As part of your argument you debated my contention that Sweeney is at least comparable to than Nava based on a lower career w/RC. Yet Sweeney's w/RC is based on nearly four times as many plate appearances. I have much more confidence that if he's healthy Sweeney will perform at a mid 90s w/RC than I do Nava.
I still think that the best option here is hoping that Kalish is healthy and if he is, making him the platoon LF taking the bulk of the PAs versus right handed pitching. He already has a much stronger tool set than Nava and would likely outperform him if healthy.
However even if he isn't, in my opinion Daniel Nava's numbers over a full season will begin to represent his second half 2012 numbers, and there are many many OFs better than that and many of them younger than Nava too.
|
|
|
Post by welovewally on Nov 22, 2012 4:59:02 GMT -5
There isn't anything that I have read in all these posts with all these stats that convinces me that a team with Nava getting significant playing time along with a Napoli & Swisher signing and Lavarnway & Iglesias also playing regularly will produce a competitive team or compete for a record of over 82 wins. It just doesn't seem like a team that could hit enough to get it done. Lester, Buchholz & Lackey would each have to stay healthy and make big improvements + the team would need to add a legitimate #1 to the mix in my opinion to try to get to 82. Now I'm not saying that this isn't a bad short term plan or to trade away all our prospects, I just don't think that it brings the wins like some have stated.
This team obviously needs a couple of middle of the order hitters and Napoli & Swisher don't fit that mold + Swisher cost a pick. But if the Red Sox sign Hamilton and somehow trade for another bat to hit 3rd/4th THEN Napoli could be signed and be a good addition, and if the team was to also sign Grienke, then that could end up being a team that would get to compete for 90 wins.
Adding ABs & playing time to Nava in the OF isn't an Outfield Discussion that I believe The Red Sox should be considering even as a last resort. There has to be better options.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Nov 22, 2012 9:07:09 GMT -5
It's hard to credit an argument that says Nava's production falls off every year when pitchers figure him out. It's not like they don't have scouting reports from the previous year! The obvious reason for his dropoff in 2012 was injury. An injury to Nava's wrist could also help to explain the left fielder's struggles in the past month. After maintaining an OPS of around .900 for his first two months with the team, Nava struggled through July, hitting just .133/.257/.217 in 60 at bats. www.overthemonster.com/2012/8/1/3213641/ryan-lavarnway-boston-red-sox-news-call-up-daniel-nava-injury-disabled-list
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 22, 2012 11:38:47 GMT -5
Essentially I don't agree that Nava will put up wRC 100 if given 450 PAs. The problem is that each of his two major league campaigns has featured 150-200 PAs of strong performance followed by a huge drop off supported by an associated fall in peripheral performance. To argue that he's going to be a wRC 100 player is to argue that these drop offs are either just aberrations or due to non-recurring factors. I don't agree that either is true. When I watched the games, I saw a player that started to become more and more overmatched as time went on especially against good fastballs. The more ABs he's given the faster pitchers will adjust to him, which will suppress his numbers and keep him from being an adequate big league player, which in my opinion he barely is even at wRC 100. First, as guidas points out, Nava's cooling down period after the hot start happened at the same time that he suffered wrist and thumb injuries. He had a .896 OPS through June but then got injured. I'm not sure that was him getting "solved" by the league as much as just not being able to drive the ball because of his wrist-- even in his terrible July, his walk and strikeout rates were pretty consistent with earlier months, but his BABIP collapsed to .152. Second, you characterize Nava as being beat by good fastballs, which I'm not sure is the case. He has a positive value against fastballs over his MLB career and he's never had bat speed problems as far as I can remember. For instance, I remember his getting a key hit off a 100 mph Verlander fastball, although we shouldn't overvalue anecdotal evidence. I'm not finding many scouting reports on him, but I think Nava was always projected to hit for a decent average, but might struggle with power given his size and relative lack of strength. So far, it's played out like that in the big leagues. Moreover, I think the type of player that pitchers typically "adjust" to are no-discipline hackers like Delmon Young or Pedro Ciriaco, where pitchers just learn not to throw strikes and/or fastballs and they'll get themselves out. Nava isn't a Che-Hsuan Lin-type who lacks bat speed altogether and he has excellent pitch recognition, so I'm not sure what adjustments pitchers can make to expose him. Third, I actually think Nava is a slightly better player than he's shown so far. The 2013 Bill James projections have him as a .266/.367/.414 (.339 wOBA) player in 2013, which is a notch up from his career .328 wOBA performance. I think that's certainly possible if he stays healthy and gets ABs. Finally, with Gomes signed, Nava should face mostly (if not entirely) right-handed pitching, and Nava has shown an excellent ability to hit righties across his major-league and minor-league career. In 374 PAs, he's hit .261/.369/.399 (110 wRC+) versus righties. That's a tiny sample size, but he has had similar splits in the minors. In 74 PAs in 2012, he hit .324/.424/.577 against righties in AAA, hit .262/.372/.386 against righties in 2011, and hit .294/.384/.467 in 2010.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Nov 22, 2012 19:02:34 GMT -5
I've watched Nava during both his minor and major league career and his approach has always been off the charts. That and a decent amount of slugging have made him valuable. No reason to think that won't hold true going forward - if he can stay healthy that is.
That's probably the biggest concern. He's been working his way up the baseball food chain for a very long time: high school, JuCo, and independent leagues before the Sox signed him; five years in the minors after that. He'll be 30 this year and he could be starting to breakdown.
If he does stay healthy I think he could be the larger part of a very useful platoon. Don't underestimate this guy. He's produced at every level, getting better at each step along the way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2012 0:20:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Nov 23, 2012 1:26:30 GMT -5
Delmon Young was mentioned in this thread. Well Delmon Young despite being 2 years younger has earned nearly 3000 more major league PAs than Daniel Nava. The reason for this is and it's not that the decision makers are idiots. Despite this, Delmon Young has a lower career WAR than Nava. Evaluation of tools is great for projecting development & potential, but in the end it all comes down to performance. And your response to several posts pointing out that Nava's dropoff in 2012 directly correlated to his injury? .........
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Nov 23, 2012 2:37:59 GMT -5
Extend Ellsbury, sign Hamilton, make do with Kalish, Sweeney, Sands until Brentz arrives. Or sign Ross for 2yrs & platoon him with Kalish or Sweeney until Brentz arrives. There are reports that Ross is asking for a minimum 3 year contract at $10 million per.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 23, 2012 12:05:11 GMT -5
Pitchers will successfully adjust to ALL types of hitters who show any exploitable weakness in their game, not just hackers. If the player is unable to respond for any reason they won't be a successful major league player. A hitter who shows a significant fall off overtime therefor is indicative of a player who has such a weakness and for whatever reason can't respond. This is especially true if the player has an obvious weakness such as lack of tools in the case of Nava, or lack of plate discipline in the case of Ciriaco. So the crux of your argument is that Nava has an obvious lack of tools and will thus be exposed in the major leagues. Sorry, you're going to have to come up with some more nuanced analysis for this, since it's not really self-evident. He's always had excellent plate discipline, a good hit tool, and a little bit of power. Perhaps one of our resident scouts can chip in, but Nava has never been a guy like Che-Hsuan Lin who just can't make hard contact but gets by on good plate discipline. His swing can admittedly be on the longer side, but he's quick to the ball and generates good bat speed, at least to my amateur eye. What are these "exploitable weaknesses" in Nava's game? Here are some scouting report excerpts: SoxProspects profile: ( link) Nava is a well-rounded player - he has a great bat with a little bit of pop, excellent plate discipline, average speed, and an average to above-average arm. BA, 2007: ( link) The switch-hitting Nava showed an advanced mindset at the plate with a good two-strike approach. Although his lefthanded swing is a little smoother than his righthanded swing, he has power from both sides. You're probably implicitly assuming he lacks tools because he wasn't drafted out of high school, had to walk onto a JuCo team, played in indy ball, etc. However, the obvious explanation for his long and winding path to professional baseball is his size-- he was 5-5, 100 lbs when he graduated high school and while he's generously listed at 5-10, 200, he's probably not much taller than 5-8 in socks. Scouts have a long record of having height unnecessarily bias their recommendations-- it's the same reason Pedroia was perpetually overlooked and why the Dodgers let the best pitcher of our generation (Pedro) slip out of their fingers. Older minor league players with strong plate discipline are fools gold. Their strong approach and age advantage over their competition, can cause them to seem better than they really are. Their route to success is one that is not sustainable against major league competition and advance scouting. Message board denizens, however, always declare these players minor league statistics to be predictive of their major league performance, while scouts dismiss their lack of tools. There has been a parade of these types of players over the years and with very few exceptions, none of them have had any major league success. Daniel Nava at age 30, has yet to show that he can perform at a league average level over one full season of 450-500 PAs. Yet some of you are acting as if he's a lock to do just that. If you look you'll find that very few if any players have their first significant full major league season at age 30. Delmon Young was mentioned in this thread. Well Delmon Young despite being 2 years younger has earned nearly 3000 more major league PAs than Daniel Nava. The reason for this is and it's not that the decision makers are idiots. The lesson of Moneyball should be that plate discipline is a very nice thing, but it is NOT a substitute for athletic ability. If a player has a good approach but doesn't have significant tools, he will fail as a major league player. First, citing Delmon Young as an example of why tools are the end-all be-all is probably not the right approach. Why he has gotten as many ABs as he has is precisely because some front offices are still run by idiots. Second, there are plenty of examples of players that scouts weren't high on and yet made long, successful major league careers on the back of strong plate discipline (Kevin Youkilis, for instance). More importantly, you've made a lot of arguments that mitigate Nava's minor league statistical performance, which is not at issue. Yes, he's old for his league, is not a scout's darling, etc., but that's why we agree that he won't put up an .877 OPS in the major leagues. But he's already had 505 PAs of league-average offensive performance without any BABIP-related red flags, and I think that's reasonably predictive of his performance going forward. The only argument you've made mitigating that major league performance is that his decline over time and his lack of tools means pitchers have figured him out and so he won't maintain that performance. In response: -It's a tiny sample size. Don't go reading narratives into 317 PAs without stronger evidence than "pitchers figured him out" -He doesn't completely lack tools. See above. -He was injured in 2012, which explains his decline. His peripherals continued to be strong, but his BABIP fell off because of his wrist and thumb injuries. If he was "figured out", you'd expect a rise in his strikeout rate and/or a decline in his walk rate, which are not evidence in his month-to-month splits.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2012 21:45:14 GMT -5
In my opinion Nava doesn't have a major league quality hit tool. His exploitable weakness, is a long swing and lack of bat speed that make him unable to hit good fastballs on the inner half with any consistency. Over two seasons, Nava has been able to overcome this for short periods of time with his strong plate discipline, overall intelligence, and a little bit of luck. Twice in my view pitchers have responded by throwing him more inside fastballs, to keep him from getting into obvious fastball counts and twice he didn't respond.
With regards to the comparison to Pedro, Pedroia and later Youkilis, you are missing one important difference. All of those players were established major league stars by the time they were 30. Daniel Nava at age 30 has yet to establish himself as a major league regular. No one is saying that scouts as a group are infallible. But I would say that players who are able to overcome the disadvantages you site are able to do so by the time they are 30. You have stated that there are several players who overcame poor scouting reports to establish themselves as major league regulars, but can you name any that did so in their 30s?
For all of Delmon Young's obvious faults he has a W/RC of 96 during those 3600 PAs. Besides an, adhominim attack, you've presented no evidence that Nava would have achieved this had HE been given 3600 PAs to date.
I'm not sure where you are getting this and it's not even correct. Daniel Nava's walk rate DID decline substantially in 2012 AND in 2010 in the back half of the season.
I find that the principal of regression to the mean can be used as an incredibly powerful predictive tool. However I also read many articles, not just in baseball, where the principal is misused and I think you are doing so here.
One of the main mistakes people make with mean regression is assuming that future conditions will be similar to historical conditions. If this assumption is broken then you can't use mean regression as a forecasting tool.
Nava has had two seasons of 200 and 300 PAs respectively which isn't the same as one 500 PA season. A 500 PA season better tests a player's physical endurance, and more importantly, tests the players ability to respond to opponent adjustments made under the scrutiny of advance scouting and video. In a full season there is more time for such adjustments to be fully reflected in the data.
Daniel Nava has never been able to perform at an acceptable major league level for longer than 170 PAs. He's not going to suddenly do that at the age of 30, just because you think that you are smarter than people in front offices.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2012 21:54:01 GMT -5
This does not mean that Nava is a better player.
The main difference between the two fWARs is fielding and base running. The creator of fangraphs fielding metric has said that three years of performance is needed for an accurate reading. Nava barely has one and it's over two different seasons. From a hitting standpoint alone, Young has 6 career FWAR compared to Nava's, 1.3.
Further, you can't assume that over the 3100 PA difference that Nava would have been a replacement level hitter. In my opinion if he did, his w/RC would be far lower than Young's.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Nov 23, 2012 22:23:41 GMT -5
The creator of fangraphs fielding metric has said that three years of performance is needed for an accurate reading. Nava barely has one and it's over two different seasons. From a hitting standpoint alone, Young has 6 career FWAR compared to Nava's, 1.3. You're cherry-picking numbers left and right here. Delmon Young is a proven poor fielder and below average baserunner, based on a large sample. Nava's sample so far says average baserunner and a little below average fielder, consistent with scouting and observance. And your response to several posts pointing out that Nava's dropoff in 2012 directly correlated to his injury? ......... So far you've avoided the question even when you quote it in your posts. How far are you going to take this -- do you deny that Daniel Nava suffered an injury in 2012?
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 23, 2012 23:36:10 GMT -5
Honestly, I find the signing of Gomes to be confounding.
The Sox are committing 2 years and $10 million for a guy best used as a DH masher against lefty pitching.
What I worry about with Gomes is that the Sox are going to try to make a regular LF out of him. This guy might be worse defensively than Adam Dunn.
And he is not a good offensive player against righties, which comprise about 3/4 of the league.
So now the Sox are committed to either starting a guy who shouldn't be starting or are now committed to a two year platoon situation in LF. For a year, I can see that, but I'd hope the Sox wouldn't need to platoon by 2014 in LF.
And if the Sox find a regular LF in the next two years and it isn't Gomes, then the Sox have Gomes as an expensive pinch-hitter against lefties.
In his niche, Gomes is a decent player, but for what the Sox needs are, I don't really understand this too much.
I guess the best the Sox can do is platoon Nava and Gomes in the outfield? Maybe it can work perhaps this season yielding a high OBP and a good slugging average courtesy of Gomes, the way John Lowenstein and Gary Roenicke worked out well for the Orioles in the olden days, but I'd be surprised if that's the arrangement in 2014 as I think platoons normally don't have a tendency to last too long.
It makes me hope all the more that the Sox can come away with Hamilton for RF as it seems to me the Sox have four main choices for two spots and Hamilton by far would give them the best impact middle of the order bat.
Swisher is the most likeliest guy in my opinion to sign as he could wind up at 1b if they don't want to commit to Napoli, and they could still fetch either Hamilton if the deal is reasonably palatable (which is doubtful) or they could settle on giving Ross what he wants, which wouldn't break the bank, but would be more than he's worth and wouldn't impact the Sox over the next three seasons as much as they'd need.
Or they could give Napoli what he wants and figure that would be more palatable that what Hamilton or even Ross wants and then sign Swisher for RF. That seems to be where they're headed.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 24, 2012 1:38:53 GMT -5
In my opinion Nava doesn't have a major league quality hit tool. His exploitable weakness, is a long swing and lack of bat speed that make him unable to hit good fastballs on the inner half with any consistency. Over two seasons, Nava has been able to overcome this for short periods of time with his strong plate discipline, overall intelligence, and a little bit of luck. Twice in my view pitchers have responded by throwing him more inside fastballs, to keep him from getting into obvious fastball counts and twice he didn't respond. Daniel Nava's career split versus power pitchers (defined as those in the top third of the league in strikeouts) is equivalent to his overall performance, per Baseball-Reference's splits page ( link). Moreover, he has a positive value against fastballs over his career per fangraphs' two pitch values sections ( link). Finally, per Texas Leaguers, Nava's whiff rate (percentage of swings which are swings-and-misses) versus four-seam fastballs is 15%, which is below the league average of 16.4% ( link). All the evidence I can possibly find shows no indication of any particular susceptibility to fastballs, although your general small sample size concerns apply and there is no way to isolate performance against high-velocity or inside fastballs. With regards to the comparison to Pedro, Pedroia and later Youkilis, you are missing one important difference. All of those players were established major league stars by the time they were 30. Daniel Nava at age 30 has yet to establish himself as a major league regular. No one is saying that scouts as a group are infallible. But I would say that players who are able to overcome the disadvantages you site are able to do so by the time they are 30. You have stated that there are several players who overcame poor scouting reports to establish themselves as major league regulars, but can you name any that did so in their 30s? Daniel Nava made his major league debut at age 27 in 2010. Youkilis made his major league at age 25 and didn't get regular at bats until 2006, when he was 27. Mike Aviles made his major league debut at the age of 27 in 2008 and has established himself as a useful major league regular despite wacky swing mechanics. Nyger Morgan was also a 27-year-old rookie who noone thought would hit enough to utilize his speed. A bunch of catchers, including guys like Carlos Ruiz and A.J. Ellis have made their debuts at 27 or older, although they are special cases since catchers take longer to develop. Again, I'm not saying he'll ever be an All-Star, but there are players who make late debuts and still have reasonably successful careers. I'm not sure where you are getting this and it's not even correct. Daniel Nava's walk rate DID decline substantially in 2012 AND in 2010 in the back half of the season. This is right-- my mistake, I must have misread something. Still, the trend is basically only that his walk rate declines in September (it stays pretty steady from May through July), which may or may not be noise based on a tiny sample. Nava has had two seasons of 200 and 300 PAs respectively which isn't the same as one 500 PA season. A 500 PA season better tests a player's physical endurance, and more importantly, tests the players ability to respond to opponent adjustments made under the scrutiny of advance scouting and video. In a full season there is more time for such adjustments to be fully reflected in the data. Daniel Nava has never been able to perform at an acceptable major league level for longer than 170 PAs. He's not going to suddenly do that at the age of 30, just because you think that you are smarter than people in front offices. Nava's has stretches of 188 and 317 PAs where he's performed at or near the major league average despite injuries and spotty playing time. He's never performed at that level over a full season's worth of PAs because he's never had the opportunity to do so. As noted by others, it's not like scouting reports are tough to come by-- if Nava had exploitable holes, pitchers should have been well aware of them a few hundred at bats ago. I just don't buy this argument that pitchers will suddenly only throw him inside fastballs and he'll just fall apart completely. No offense, but I'd rather trust (a) a very good minor league statistical track record, (b) decent to good scouting reports, (c) 505 PAs of past performance, (d) a statistical projection system, and (e) some quantum of concurrence by the Boston Red Sox front office (who keeps Nava on the roster despite ample opportunity to get rid of him) over one person's opinion that because he's old and has a long swing which can't catch up to inside fastballs (despite contrary statistical evidence), pitchers will figure him out and he can't maintain at least league-average offensive performance over a full season.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 24, 2012 1:48:58 GMT -5
The main difference between the two fWARs is fielding and base running. The creator of fangraphs fielding metric has said that three years of performance is needed for an accurate reading. Nava barely has one and it's over two different seasons. From a hitting standpoint alone, Young has 6 career FWAR compared to Nava's, 1.3. That's not true, by the way. WAR is comprised of wRAA, UBR, and UZR adjusted based on replacement level and defensive position. The raw hitting component is wRAA. Delmon Young's career wRAA is -7.2, whereas Nava's is 4.3. It looks like you just subtracted Young's fielding component from with WAR, which is not how you derive the offensive component of WAR. By doing what you did, Delmon gets seven seasons' worth of replacement level adjustments added while Daniel only gets two. By the actual measure, in just two seasons Nava has added much, much more offensive value than Young has over his career.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,907
|
Post by nomar on Nov 24, 2012 2:40:29 GMT -5
Nava should be headed in his prime years as long as injurie dont derail that.
|
|
|
Post by welovewally on Nov 24, 2012 5:10:07 GMT -5
Nava is a good 4th or 5th outfielder who can grind at bats and provide decent production in short spurts for injured starter. We don't want Nava getting 400 at bats if we want to contend.@ Please do not try for Hamilton (legitimate elite middle of order hitter) and settle for Swisher who is a #2 or #6/7 hitter and not worth more than $7-8m AAV on 2-3 year deal and will cost a #2 pick and the accompanying slot money. I am in agreement with your thoughts on Nava. Looks like Swisher wants 4yrs $70 mil. www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/11/al-east-notes-swisher-kuroda-orioles.htmlI think that's to much for the Red Sox to give to Swisher for ages 32-35
|
|
|
Post by Pete Morrison on Nov 24, 2012 20:31:09 GMT -5
I know he isn't a good defender but I have to figure Ryan Ludwick on a 1 year deal to play RF would seem like a good move for 2013.
He started 120 games in RF in '09 and again in '10, 13 games in '11 and was full time in LF in '12.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2012 4:26:30 GMT -5
Exactly all of the statistics used by fangraphs and BR are very nice but they don't replace watching the players play. This is especially true of a player who has so few overall major league plate appearances. They neither prove nor disprove what I saw from Nava in two separate major league campaigns.
To repeat from what I saw, Nava was able to start out well versus virtually any type of pitcher on two separate occasions, likely by cheating on the fastball and accurately guessing when one was coming. But pitchers adjusted to that and were able to overwhelm him with fastballs as time went on.
There are certainly players who debut at older ages, but by and large they establish themselves as major league regulars by the age of 30 if they are going to do so at all. No matter how many ways you try to spin it, the fact remains, Daniel Nava is not an established regular and has never put up a single season of 500 PAs or more. In fact he was cut at age 28, passed through waivers and spent the entire year at AAA.
Take your examples, Youkilis was an established star at 30, Morgan had two seasons as a full time player. In fact in every single player you cited, other than Ellis, had substantially more major league plate appearances by the age of 30 than Daniel Nava did. I am going to ask you again. Name a non-catcher who despite not having 1000 major league PAs by the age of 30, still managed to become an established regular after age 30. Find me one that was cut and passed over by every major league team.
He's never had the opportunity to do so because he isn't a major league quality player. There is simply no evidence that Nava would have been anywhere near adequate had he ever been given a full season worth of PAs. It bears restating but Daniel Nava was cut by the Red Sox in 2011, and passed over by every major league team. That means that every team in the majors had the opportunity to give Nava a full season of at bats and declined to do so. So either you think that all 30 teams are stupid, or as recently as a year ago, Daniel Nava really wasn't any good.
Well pitchers DID exploit him in 2010 which is why he was DFA'd at the end of the year. When he was recalled in 2012 there was likely very little scouting information on him, because he wasn't on the 40 man and thus didn't appear in major league spring training.
Which is probably why this discussion should end. In rereading my post, I'm mostly just restating things that I've already stated in a different way. You clearly aren't going to be convinced in November that Daniel Nava won't be a major league regular. The only things that might convince you is if he's not given the job in April, he's cut, of if he's given the job and fails and mark my words one of those three things happen.
In the end I don't see how a player can go from a 28 year old whom nobody wanted to one year later a "virtual lock" to be an average major league regular, at age 30. I don't think that Daniel Nava is suddenly a different player because of two good months in the majors, which is essentially the end conclusion of your argument.
In my opinion, I don't see too many players on the roster that I'd rather cut than Nava and I hope the Red Sox do the right thing and DFA Nava when the Gomes signing becomes official.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 25, 2012 10:33:16 GMT -5
Agreed, we've reached our points of disagreement. We'll see how it plays out. Good discussion.
|
|
|