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 telson13 on May 12, 2016 10:19:59 GMT -5
I'm willing to bet that JBJ is the first person in MLB history to be in the top 7 in the league in OPS as of May 11 or later while batting 9th 70% or more of the time. Granted, he's only 8th in the league in wRC+ (Trout is 12th), but I think that being the 8th best hitter in the league should get you to at least the 5 spot in your own batting order. Yeah, what's hilarious to me is that people on this site are actually advocating that a hitter with an ISO of well over .250 in his last 300 or so AB, who's posting an OBP around .340 and SA over .500 during that time, and is currently hitting .323, should bat ninth. And they're dead serious. If the Sox traded for a guy like that and Farrell batted him ninth, most of those people would go absolutely apoplectic.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on May 12, 2016 11:01:46 GMT -5
I know we would not do it (and would ne insane to), but what would JBJ bring in a trade right now? I think we're getting a little beyond the SSS.
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on May 12, 2016 11:19:18 GMT -5
Batting order doesn't matter.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,525
|
Post by radiohix on May 12, 2016 11:19:24 GMT -5
I was a big believer in JBJ through the Minors (I remember drooling about his High BB% and relatively low K% in A+) and was happy to see them let Ells leave so that JBJ can take over and then 2014 happened: Man, his defense was so good that lots of us were asking just for a .640 OPS, but he looked so overmatched to the point where I lost confidence...'till he get demoted to AAA where he put the same numbers and one of the mods here (or maybe James? Certainly not Jmei hehe) made this observation saying that he was "happy" the numbers in AAA were identical to those in MLB which means that something was wrong with his swing. It was a glimmer of hope! 'cause yeah, if he went to AAA and ripped the competition off, it meant that he's an AAAA type of talent but if the struggles were the same, something could be fixed. So, dear mod/writer THANK YOU for restoring my faith in JBJ
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on May 12, 2016 11:49:11 GMT -5
I was skeptical that JBJ could hit in the major leagues, and I consider JBJ to be one of the things I've been most right about in all my time here. That's because I was skeptical that he could hit *with the swing he had then* ... that thing was ugly, with all the toe tapping and hip cocking, made him late on just about everything at the big league level. But he has completely overhauled the load in his swing, so he's really a different hitter now. And he's really only had it down since about early June of last year, so I'm enormously optimistic about him going forward. Because since then he's been pretty awesome.
Of course, I'm taking credit for things that happened in a certain order by ascribing the causality that makes me correct all along. But that's ok! Yay, me!
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on May 12, 2016 12:03:33 GMT -5
I always liked him a lot but it's hard to have faith in a dude when he's the worst hitter in baseball for 500+ PA.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,962
|
Post by ericmvan on May 12, 2016 12:26:11 GMT -5
I'm willing to bet that JBJ is the first person in MLB history to be in the top 7 in the league in OPS as of May 11 or later while batting 9th 70% or more of the time. Granted, he's only 8th in the league in wRC+ (Trout is 12th), but I think that being the 8th best hitter in the league should get you to at least the 5 spot in your own batting order. Maybe Billy Mueller in 03. Didn't start a single game hitting 9th.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,962
|
Post by ericmvan on May 12, 2016 12:39:06 GMT -5
Right because no free agents will be signed and all the lineup slots will filled in house by guys reaching their full potential. That's how things always work right? Anyways... Sarcasm aside. Why would you change this years lineup AT ALL? Do you want to screw with the top scoring offense in baseball? Messing with it probably has a better chance of making it worse than it does better. A couple reasons why the lineup is so good is because everybody is engaged, not giving away any at bats and the bottom half of the lineup (despite our catchers) is producing. Why are we going to weaken that? You think moving Hanley from 5th to 7th is going to sit well with him? First, he's producing and second he's a finicky guy. Right now he's doing well on both sides of the ball and has a good attitude. Changing anything there is reckless. Changing the lineup at all would be over managing. But if you do change it because Betts is struggling and Bradley is on fire then all you do is flip them and leave the rest the same. For team psych factors, no, you don't make any kind of dramatic change now. But you do move JBJ up to 6 or 7 and Holt down to 9. Eventually, you make a change to one of these: Pedroia* Bradley Betts, Bogaerts, or Ramirez Ortiz Betts, Bogaerts, or Ramirez Betts, Bogaerts, or Ramirez Shaw Catcher Holt or Bogaerts or Betts Pedroia Ortiz Betts, Bogaerts, or Ramirez Bradley Betts, Bogaerts, or Ramirez Shaw Catcher Holt *He's still probably one of the two or three best hitters on the team, he's hit better leading off an inning than otherwise in his career, and he's hit better 1st than 2nd or 3rd his last three seasons. And he's a guy that opposing pitchers hate to face. It'll help to have another month or so of performance to figure out how best to arrange the RHB. And you might tweak them one more time before the year is out. BTW, the whole "batting order doesn't matter" is a weird cognitive pseudo-myth. Sabermetrics has shown that it doesn't matter nearly as much as people thought. Those estimates, though, assume that hitters hit the same no matter where they bat (they don't), and they also do not take into account the changed platoon opportunities caused by different opponent bullpen usage. I'd put the actual impact as around 2 wins. Hey, we have the opportunity to trade a 2.0 WAR player even-up for a 4.0 WAR player! Would you do it, or say it doesn't matter?
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on May 12, 2016 12:42:17 GMT -5
So Bradley's batting average on balls in play is .386 right now. That's not as insane as it was last year, and he is hitting the ball hard, but it will drop back. When I'm back home and I have access to the server where I store this stuff, I'll update and re-post the chart from last year that tracks that, along with his K rate (which is down below 24% at this point) and the walk rate which is down also.
I don't think he's going to slug .610 over the entire season, but I can see him being (well) over .500 and keeping it there. He did show power in the minors outside of his down year in Pawtucket, typically in the .470 SLG range, and he is approaching his prime having just turned 26 so it should continue to climb.
Right now, pitchers are still throwing him mistake pitches and he's not missing any of those (Axford, Surkamp). But he's also hit some very good pitches such as the slider he went down to get for the home run a few games back.
What is surprising is that opposing teams are still willing to pitch him inside (Surkamp HR, Rzepczynski 2B) at all, and that they keep bringing in left handed pitchers to face him. It may be a small sample size, but he's just destroying them at a .370/.419/.630 clip. I may be naive but I can't believe they'll continue to challenge him that way if he continues.
At this point his timing is so good that he's getting in front of the secondary stuff away and turning on the hard stuff inside, just driving the hell out of pitches. I'm sure he'll cool off but in the meantime opposing teams would be wise to try to avoid allowing him to make solid contact if they hope to keep their pitching staffs intact. If that doesn't happen, then let it rip!
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 12, 2016 12:54:33 GMT -5
I'm willing to bet that JBJ is the first person in MLB history to be in the top 7 in the league in OPS as of May 11 or later while batting 9th 70% or more of the time. Granted, he's only 8th in the league in wRC+ (Trout is 12th), but I think that being the 8th best hitter in the league should get you to at least the 5 spot in your own batting order. Yeah, what's hilarious to me is that people on this site are actually advocating that a hitter with an ISO of well over .250 in his last 300 or so AB, who's posting an OBP around .340 and SA over .500 during that time, and is currently hitting .323, should bat ninth. And they're dead serious. If the Sox traded for a guy like that and Farrell batted him ninth, most of those people would go absolutely apoplectic. For me its not about Bradley as much as it is the rest of the team. They are the best offense in baseball, the only guy you can really move is Betts and if you want to do that then fine. Or yes you can swap him with Holt at 7. My major contention with the lineup posted is moving Hanley. These are people not robots. Hanley has been the best version of him attitude wise and he's performing so moving him is foolish. Also, can we let this stuff with Bradley play out. So far we have 2 ridiculous hot streaks sandwiched around a terrible stretch at the plate. The guy gets insanely hot for long stretches. Maybe that's the way he will be, or maybe he will be more consistent. At this point the only thing im confident in is we don't need to worry about him being a major league caliber hitter. Beyond that, I don't know if he's a stud hitter, good hitter or average hitter. We need to see. Super encouraging though. However, let's say he is streaky. Then the bottom of the order is perfect. He doesn't hurt the lineup at the top or middle when he's slumping bad and gets so hot get can carry it no matter who's around it. Sounds like a wet dream for a bottom third hitter on a great offensive team.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on May 12, 2016 12:54:47 GMT -5
Batting order doesn't matter. This, plus maybe the dude just likes batting low in the order? Why mess with something that's working?
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,525
|
Post by radiohix on May 12, 2016 12:58:34 GMT -5
I think his BABIP will drop eventually, but they'll start pitching him carefully and he's shown through his career willingness to take walks when given to him so the OBP won't suffer from that BABIP drop.
|
|
art
Veteran
Posts: 364
|
Post by art on May 12, 2016 13:07:31 GMT -5
Batting order doesn't matter. Batting order does matter. On average, the leadoff hitter gets nearly 1 plate appearance more per game than the #9 hitter. Actually .89 plate appearances to be precise. And the #3 hitter gets .67 more PAs per game than the #9. Etc., etc. I think you want to maximixe the # of PAs of your best hitters.
|
|
|
Post by congusgambler33 on May 12, 2016 13:14:16 GMT -5
Batting order doesn't matter. If it works why mess with it. My only suggestion would to be putting Pedey in at leadoff because of his propensity of hitting into DP's in back of Mookie.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,962
|
Post by ericmvan on May 12, 2016 13:18:59 GMT -5
Yeah, what's hilarious to me is that people on this site are actually advocating that a hitter with an ISO of well over .250 in his last 300 or so AB, who's posting an OBP around .340 and SA over .500 during that time, and is currently hitting .323, should bat ninth. And they're dead serious. If the Sox traded for a guy like that and Farrell batted him ninth, most of those people would go absolutely apoplectic. For me its not about Bradley as much as it is the rest of the team. They are the best offense in baseball, the only guy you can really move is Betts and if you want to do that then fine. Or yes you can swap him with Holt at 7. My major contention with the lineup posted is moving Hanley. These are people not robots. Hanley has been the best version of him attitude wise and he's performing so moving him is foolish. Also, can we let this stuff with Bradley play out. So far we have 2 ridiculous hot streaks sandwiched around a terrible stretch at the plate. The guy gets insanely hot for long stretches. Maybe that's the way he will be, or maybe he will be more consistent. At this point the only thing im confident in is we don't need to worry about him being a major league caliber hitter. Beyond that, I don't know if he's a stud hitter, good hitter or average hitter. We need to see. Super encouraging though. However, let's say he is streaky. Then the bottom of the order is perfect. He doesn't hurt the lineup at the top or middle when he's slumping bad and gets so hot get can carry it no matter who's around it. Sounds like a wet dream for a bottom third hitter on a great offensive team. Actually: .310 / .375 / .603, 64 PA, 14 G in AAA after being sent down at the start of July .111 / .238 / .111, 21 PA, 5 G in AAA just before his call-up .107 / .278 / .107, 36 PA, 10 G playing regularly in MLB .446 / .489 / .952, 90 PA, 25 G .138 / .247 / .263, 94 PA, 25 G .222 / .271 / .315, 59 PA, 16 G .406 / .449 / .859, 69 PA, 17 G and counting It's tempting to speculate that his end-of-season swoon last year dragged on an extra 10 games because of fatigue. If he can keep the slumps to 15 games, that's pretty typical for streaky players. Manny's very well-defined funks were 12 - 15 games long. The next data point will be how long he can stay hot here. Let's hit him 6 or 7 until we find out how long that is, and how long and severe the subsequent slump is. Then you'll know whether he needs to be the #2 hitter or not.
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on May 12, 2016 13:29:53 GMT -5
OK, philisophical lineup construction question. Where does putting your speed make the most sense? I've always figured that having speed on right AFTER your big boppers was the most valuable becuase the guys on second or third were more likely to be driven in by one of your lighter-hitting players. Not to mention they might distract the pitcher at a time that the hitter could really use the help. But then there's also something to be said for stacking the lineup so that your most productive hitters get the help of your fastest runners being on base for them.
This is relevant to the JBJ conversation because you might want one of JBJ or Betts (or both) to bat 6th/7th if you subscribe to my above formula. That would allow them to run rampant on the base paths without the fear of taking the team out of a big inning. (I understand that JBJ isn't really a base-stealing threat, so really I guess we're talking about Betts.)
ADD: Regardless of the importance of line-up construction, it makes too much sense to flip-flop Bradley and Holt right now. Holt needs less pressure on him in his first season as a regular, not more.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 12, 2016 13:30:25 GMT -5
BTW, the whole "batting order doesn't matter" is a weird cognitive pseudo-myth. Sabermetrics has shown that it doesn't matter nearly as much as people thought. Those estimates, though, assume that hitters hit the same no matter where they bat (they don't), and they also do not take into account the changed platoon opportunities caused by different opponent bullpen usage. I'd put the actual impact as around 2 wins. Hey, we have the opportunity to trade a 2.0 WAR player even-up for a 4.0 WAR player! Would you do it, or say it doesn't matter? I'm not that concerned about the batting order because I think it's hard to mess up too much given the current composition of the lineup. Ortiz is easily their best hitter and LF and catcher are their worst, but the other six project reasonably similarly enough that it shouldn't be that big of a swing if it's not totally optimal. I have a pretty hard time ranking Betts, Ramirez, Bogaerts, Pedroia, Bradley and Shaw (though that's probably my current ranking of them), and if they're all pretty similar hitters, you can't mess up too much when you're putting them in a lineup. That said, for posterity, my current lineups are: vs. L: Betts, Pedroia, Bogaerts, Ortiz, Ramirez, Shaw, Young, Bradley, [catcher] vs. R: Betts, Pedroia, Bogaerts, Ortiz, Ramirez, Shaw, Bradley, [catcher], Holt Rationale: For the above reasons, I think keeping guys happy with the batting order is more important than pure optimization. I think my above lineups do a good job of balancing those two factors (you could switch Bradley and Shaw and I wouldn't complain).
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on May 12, 2016 13:53:43 GMT -5
I know they can't keep it up, and that Bradley is unlikely to, but man this is a lot of fun right now. I was hoping that they could recapture the buzz from the end of last season, and here it is. It would be great if it lasts a while longer.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 12, 2016 14:14:06 GMT -5
Batting order doesn't matter. It certainly doesn't matter when everyone is hitting like they are now.
|
|
|
Post by 0ap0 on May 12, 2016 14:55:59 GMT -5
BTW, the whole "batting order doesn't matter" is a weird cognitive pseudo-myth. Sabermetrics has shown that it doesn't matter nearly as much as people thought. Those estimates, though, assume that hitters hit the same no matter where they bat (they don't), and they also do not take into account the changed platoon opportunities caused by different opponent bullpen usage. I'd put the actual impact as around 2 wins. Hey, we have the opportunity to trade a 2.0 WAR player even-up for a 4.0 WAR player! Would you do it, or say it doesn't matter? I wonder, though, if this is one of those things where almost all of the extra wins comes from not doing something really stupid, and then the rest of the fretting and worrying is negligible. Is this known?
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,962
|
Post by ericmvan on May 12, 2016 15:01:48 GMT -5
OK, philisophical lineup construction question. Where does putting your speed make the most sense? I've always figured that having speed on right AFTER your big boppers was the most valuable becuase the guys on second or third were more likely to be driven in by one of your lighter-hitting players. Not to mention they might distract the pitcher at a time that the hitter could really use the help. But then there's also something to be said for stacking the lineup so that your most productive hitters get the help of your fastest runners being on base for them. This is relevant to the JBJ conversation because you might want one of JBJ or Betts (or both) to bat 6th/7th if you subscribe to my above formula. That would allow them to run rampant on the base paths without the fear of taking the team out of a big inning. (I understand that JBJ isn't really a base-stealing threat, so really I guess we're talking about Betts.) ADD: Regardless of the importance of line-up construction, it makes too much sense to flip-flop Bradley and Holt right now. Holt needs less pressure on him in his first season as a regular, not more. Speed (both the SB and running the bases great, like Bogaerts does) is least valuable in front of guys who hit a lot of homers (and triples) and draw a lot of walks (and get HBP), and most valuable in front of guys who hit a lot of single and doubles. So you're more or less correct. And note that hitting a lot of doubles is equivalent to having speed. I think I have a formula somewhere (that I used for the Sox) that weights each of these, but maybe not; maybe I took the straight number of events. Here's (1B + 2B - HR - 3B - UBB - HBP) / PA for each of our hitters, 2015-16. The higher the number, the more useful speed is when he's up at the plate. Name Score Xander Bogaerts .211 Blake Swihart .148 Christ. Vazquez .145 Pablo Sandoval .119 Dustin Pedroia .114 Brock Holt .112 Mookie Betts .112 Hanley Ramirez .098 Travis Shaw .080 Ryan Hanigan .065 David Ortiz .017 Jackie Bradley .016 If only Bogaerts could bat behind himself ...
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on May 12, 2016 15:48:04 GMT -5
Those estimates, though, assume that hitters hit the same no matter where they bat (they don't) I've not seen the proof that they do hit differently, a citation would be appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by shorething on May 12, 2016 16:40:54 GMT -5
BTW, the whole "batting order doesn't matter" is a weird cognitive pseudo-myth. Sabermetrics has shown that it doesn't matter nearly as much as people thought. Those estimates, though, assume that hitters hit the same no matter where they bat (they don't), and they also do not take into account the changed platoon opportunities caused by different opponent bullpen usage. I'd put the actual impact as around 2 wins.Hey, we have the opportunity to trade a 2.0 WAR player even-up for a 4.0 WAR player! Would you do it, or say it doesn't matter? Sure, but if you "put the actual impact as around 0 wins" there is no trade. Why "2 wins"?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 12, 2016 16:53:05 GMT -5
Right because no free agents will be signed and all the lineup slots will filled in house by guys reaching their full potential. That's how things always work right? Hmmm, Betts, Pedroia, Bogaerts, ..., Hanley, Shaw, Holt, Vazquez, JBJ Yeah it seems to be working almost like that.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on May 12, 2016 17:10:41 GMT -5
I was skeptical that JBJ could hit in the major leagues, and I consider JBJ to be one of the things I've been most right about in all my time here. That's because I was skeptical that he could hit *with the swing he had then* ... that thing was ugly, with all the toe tapping and hip cocking, made him late on just about everything at the big league level. But he has completely overhauled the load in his swing, so he's really a different hitter now. And he's really only had it down since about early June of last year, so I'm enormously optimistic about him going forward. Because since then he's been pretty awesome. Of course, I'm taking credit for things that happened in a certain order by ascribing the causality that makes me correct all along. But that's ok! Yay, me! This is just: see results, search for cause. His mechanics are largely the same
|
|
|