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 wcsoxfan on Mar 8, 2016 17:01:06 GMT -5
If Pablo doesn't start looking better - how long until Shaw takes his job?
Anyone think Farrel would have the cahones to bench Pablo opening day?
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Mar 8, 2016 17:14:29 GMT -5
If Pablo doesn't start looking better - how long until Shaw takes his job? Anyone think Farrel would have the cahones to bench Pablo opening day? I'm not so sure the leash is that short. Shaw's not exactly Machado at third.
|
|
|
Post by Coreno on Mar 8, 2016 17:24:58 GMT -5
Gonna go out on a limb and assume 8ABs is a bit too soon to start placing bets on that. I mean, sure, if Pablo looks terrible all spring and goes 1-53 or something, he might not be in the lineup opening day. Although that probably means he's not on the bench either as they would probably say there's something wrong and DL him to work on conditioning and mechanics.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Mar 8, 2016 17:35:17 GMT -5
Gonna go out on a limb and assume 8ABs is a bit too soon to start placing bets on that. I mean, sure, if Pablo looks terrible all spring and goes 1-53 or something, he might not be in the lineup opening day. Although that probably means he's not on the bench either as they would probably say there's something wrong and DL him to work on conditioning and mechanics. It's sad, but honestly I think Pablo's bat is a secondary thought at the moment. They know their in-house 3b options (Shaw and Holt) aren't great. They simply need him to pick it, even if he's the same .700 ops hitter as last year.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,501
|
Post by nomar on Mar 8, 2016 18:33:41 GMT -5
Gonna go out on a limb and assume 8ABs is a bit too soon to start placing bets on that. I mean, sure, if Pablo looks terrible all spring and goes 1-53 or something, he might not be in the lineup opening day. Although that probably means he's not on the bench either as they would probably say there's something wrong and DL him to work on conditioning and mechanics. It's sad, but honestly I think Pablo's bat is a secondary thought at the moment. They know their in-house 3b options (Shaw and Holt) aren't great. They simply need him to pick it, even if he's the same .700 ops hitter as last year. .658 / 75 wRC+. Sadly his bat was worse than his glove somehow. Spring training stats don't really worry me, but the guy has to get better in every facet.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Mar 8, 2016 18:45:49 GMT -5
Pablo is not losing his job before opening day.
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 3,014
|
Post by mobaz on Mar 9, 2016 8:25:54 GMT -5
I think there's no way they don't start talking contingency plans until Mid-May (beyond a few days off "to get his head right"). Unless DD's influence or John Farrell's post-cancer outlook change things, the veterans have always gotten the chance to fail spectacularly before anything changes. And I think it's not unfair to give him the month of April to look competent or better.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Mar 9, 2016 15:28:50 GMT -5
Pablo is not losing his job before opening day. It's amazing on a number of levels that this statement needed to be made.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,501
|
Post by nomar on Mar 10, 2016 12:13:30 GMT -5
Pablo is not losing his job before opening day. It's amazing on a number of levels that this statement needed to be made. And with Farrell at the helm, he could put up a 50 wRC+ and not get taken out until June or July. He's not quick with he hook. If Sandoval doesn't start cold at the plate, I think he'll be fine this year (by that I mean a 2 WAR, avg starter). He's going to face a ton of micro scrutiny though and I'm not sure he's too good at handling it.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,015
|
Post by ericmvan on Mar 10, 2016 15:07:45 GMT -5
From the Shaw thread: I think with Sandoval, you might get a .270 BA, a .300 OBP and a .400 SA with acceptable defense, and I have that as his best case scenario at this point. I don't see him approaching his early career numbers. From 2012 to 2014 he averaged .280 / .335 / .424 while playing in a pitcher's park, and furthermore, one he seems to have been badly suited for. Just translating that line to Fenway, without factoring in his fit to either park, gives you a .348 OBP and .451 SA. You should think back to the last time the Sox picked up a 3B who had played nearly all of his career in that park, and what he did when he came to Fenway. I think that the expectation of an extra-large Fenway boost had to be part of the big contract. That boost should at least offset two years of age decline. So if he's really done the work to get in excellent muscular shape, a .350 OBP and .450 SA is a not even a best-case scenario; it's an entirely reasonable hope. And in fact that's more or less PECOTA's 65th percentile projection, and PECOTA does not know about the good-fit-to-park factor. They have that as 2.3 WAR plus or minus defense.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 10, 2016 15:14:47 GMT -5
From the Shaw thread: I think with Sandoval, you might get a .270 BA, a .300 OBP and a .400 SA with acceptable defense, and I have that as his best case scenario at this point. I don't see him approaching his early career numbers. From 2012 to 2014 he averaged .280 / .335 / .424 while playing in a pitcher's park, and furthermore, one he seems to have been badly suited for. Just translating that line to Fenway, without factoring in his fit to either park, gives you a .348 OBP and .451 SA. You should think back to the last time the Sox picked up a 3B who had played nearly all of his career in that park, and what he did when he came to Fenway. I think that the expectation of an extra-large Fenway boost had to be part of the big contract. That boost should at least offset two years of age decline. So if he's really done the work to get in excellent muscular shape, a .350 OBP and .450 SA is a not even a best-case scenario; it's an entirely reasonable hope. And in fact that's more or less PECOTA's 65th percentile projection, and PECOTA does not know about the good-fit-to-park factor. They have that as 2.3 WAR plus or minus defense. I think I'd bet an entire paycheck that Pablo finishes with a lower than .800 OPS.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,501
|
Post by nomar on Mar 10, 2016 15:32:15 GMT -5
It's tempting but you're still looking at a 10+% chance of losing it all. As someone who spends their work week analyzing risk, I think I'd pass unless I got like a 9 or 10:1 payout.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 10, 2016 15:49:46 GMT -5
It's tempting but you're still looking at a 10+% chance of losing it all. As someone who spends their work week analyzing risk, I think I'd pass unless I got like a 9 or 10:1 payout. Yeah, it would probably be the year that he has a .400 BABIP. Do they have SIERA for hitters?
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Mar 10, 2016 15:59:38 GMT -5
I think I'd bet an entire paycheck that Pablo finishes with a lower than .800 OPS. He's only done it twice in his career, and last time was 2011. Seems like a pretty save bet It's tempting but you're still looking at a 10+% chance of losing it all. As someone who spends their work week analyzing risk, I think I'd pass unless I got like a 9 or 10:1 payout. Maybe I'm misreading what you're saying, but that sounds like some pretty bad analysis. If someone gave me even odds for a bet I had a 90% chance of winning, I would take it every time. Every two weeks I would reup that bet with my paycheck if I could.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 10, 2016 16:07:08 GMT -5
It's tempting but you're still looking at a 10+% chance of losing it all. As someone who spends their work week analyzing risk, I think I'd pass unless I got like a 9 or 10:1 payout. Yeah, it would probably be the year that he has a .400 BABIP. Do they have SIERA for hitters? Sandoval has always been a high-average, low-strikeout hitter, and even last year, he had just a 14.5% strikeout rate. He has a career .288 batting average despite "just" a career .307 BABIP. I'm less worried about the batting average and more worried about the power. He won't sniff an .800 OPS without a major power bounceback (think .160+), and I don't know how reasonable a projection that is, even once you take into account park effects.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Mar 10, 2016 16:14:48 GMT -5
From the Shaw thread: From 2012 to 2014 he averaged .280 / .335 / .424 while playing in a pitcher's park, and furthermore, one he seems to have been badly suited for. Just translating that line to Fenway, without factoring in his fit to either park, gives you a .348 OBP and .451 SA. You should think back to the last time the Sox picked up a 3B who had played nearly all of his career in that park, and what he did when he came to Fenway. I think that the expectation of an extra-large Fenway boost had to be part of the big contract. That boost should at least offset two years of age decline. So if he's really done the work to get in excellent muscular shape, a .350 OBP and .450 SA is a not even a best-case scenario; it's an entirely reasonable hope. And in fact that's more or less PECOTA's 65th percentile projection, and PECOTA does not know about the good-fit-to-park factor. They have that as 2.3 WAR plus or minus defense. I think I'd bet an entire paycheck that Pablo finishes with a lower than .800 OPS. I'm not betting anything, just agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 10, 2016 16:17:58 GMT -5
Yeah, it would probably be the year that he has a .400 BABIP. Do they have SIERA for hitters? Sandoval has always been a high-average, low-strikeout hitter, and even last year, he had just a 14.5% strikeout rate. He has a career .288 batting average despite "just" a career .307 BABIP. I'm less worried about the batting average and more worried about the power. He won't sniff an .800 OPS without a major power bounceback (think .160+), and I don't know how reasonable a projection that is, even once you take into account park effects. Yeah, I'd probably still be safe with a .400 BABIP. His low K-rate is probably due to swinging at just about every pitch. I don't know why any pitcher throws him strikes. He's worse than AJP. But least we have this: m.mlb.com/video/topic/6479266/v211780983/bostor-dickey-retires-panda-on-a-headhigh-pitchm.mlb.com/video/topic/6479266/v211780983/bostor-dickey-retires-panda-on-a-headhigh-pitch
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Mar 10, 2016 16:20:29 GMT -5
Panda has been in straight decline for 4 years now. His career has gone exactly how you'd expect an obese baseball player's career to go. His basically peaked super early, and cut out his entire prime years.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 10, 2016 16:34:18 GMT -5
His low K-rate is probably due to swinging at just about every pitch. I don't know why any pitcher throws him strikes. He's worse than AJP. Yes, he swings at a lot of bad pitches. But he also makes contact (and good contact) on a lot of those bad pitches. Pitchers have thrown him lots of pitches outside the zone his entire career (he has the eleventh-lowest zone% of qualified hitters last year, and the lowest among qualified hitters over the last three years), and despite that, he's been an above-average hitter in just about every season prior to last year. These aren't new things, and he's been a good offensive player in years past despite really bad plate discipline. Offensively, here are his wRC+s in chronological order: 118, 117, 112, 75. In other words, three immaterial technical declines, and one collapse year. If you looked at at just his stats on a page, you'd absolutely predict a big bounce-back year, and the narrative that he's been on a downwards trajectory is severely exaggerated.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Mar 10, 2016 17:18:27 GMT -5
The projection systems think that he's the same player coming off a down year. As he's 29, there's reason to believe he will rebound since he's still within his peak.
But given the defensive falloff i'm concerned that he isn't the same athlete he once was. Until i hear/see that he has rebounded defensively to play league average defense at 3B, I'm going to prognosticate his offense won't reach the computer projections. (if he were a patient/power/bad-ball type hitter I'd have more confidence)
I saw he made a solid play a couple of days ago. Any more word on how he's looking in the field?
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Mar 10, 2016 18:21:19 GMT -5
From the Shaw thread: I think with Sandoval, you might get a .270 BA, a .300 OBP and a .400 SA with acceptable defense, and I have that as his best case scenario at this point. I don't see him approaching his early career numbers. From 2012 to 2014 he averaged .280 / .335 / .424 while playing in a pitcher's park, and furthermore, one he seems to have been badly suited for. Just translating that line to Fenway, without factoring in his fit to either park, gives you a .348 OBP and .451 SA. You should think back to the last time the Sox picked up a 3B who had played nearly all of his career in that park, and what he did when he came to Fenway. I think that the expectation of an extra-large Fenway boost had to be part of the big contract. That boost should at least offset two years of age decline. So if he's really done the work to get in excellent muscular shape, a .350 OBP and .450 SA is a not even a best-case scenario; it's an entirely reasonable hope. And in fact that's more or less PECOTA's 65th percentile projection, and PECOTA does not know about the good-fit-to-park factor. They have that as 2.3 WAR plus or minus defense. This might be where scouting can disagree with statistical projections. I see an out-of-shape player in sharp decline offensively and defensively at an earlier point that would normally happen to a ballplayer. A statistical projection see a statistical blip and a return toward the norm. It certainly can happen and happens quite a lot. But dropoffs like Allen Craig do happen, too. So what do your eyes tell you? What have you been watching? I think Hanley is much more likely to bounce back than Sandoval. It was clear he had two major thinks hampering his numbers last year, a very stressful and unnatural transition to LF and a collision with the LF wall that messed him up physically. I get that Sandoval was supposed to get some sort of boost from going from SF to Boston, but we have yet to see it and I don't know that it will materialize enough to make him an asset. We're going to have to agree to disagree here. I'm not very certain that Sandoval is a better option at 3b than Shaw right now and yeah, this could look like a silly statement down the road, but right now if it were up to me, Sandoval would be playing for his job and wouldn't get much more than a month or two worth of rope before I turn to Shaw if he isn't needed at 1b.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Mar 10, 2016 18:45:25 GMT -5
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,015
|
Post by ericmvan on Mar 10, 2016 19:24:30 GMT -5
From the Shaw thread: From 2012 to 2014 he averaged .280 / .335 / .424 while playing in a pitcher's park, and furthermore, one he seems to have been badly suited for. Just translating that line to Fenway, without factoring in his fit to either park, gives you a .348 OBP and .451 SA. You should think back to the last time the Sox picked up a 3B who had played nearly all of his career in that park, and what he did when he came to Fenway. I think that the expectation of an extra-large Fenway boost had to be part of the big contract. That boost should at least offset two years of age decline. So if he's really done the work to get in excellent muscular shape, a .350 OBP and .450 SA is a not even a best-case scenario; it's an entirely reasonable hope. And in fact that's more or less PECOTA's 65th percentile projection, and PECOTA does not know about the good-fit-to-park factor. They have that as 2.3 WAR plus or minus defense. This might be where scouting can disagree with statistical projections. I see an out-of-shape playerIf you can really tell how strong a person's muscles are by looking at them (as opposed to noticing some extra weight around the gut), you shouldn't be wasting your time posting here. You should be outside, wearing spandex and fighting crime.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,015
|
Post by ericmvan on Mar 10, 2016 19:28:24 GMT -5
I think I'd bet an entire paycheck that Pablo finishes with a lower than .800 OPS. He's only done it twice in his career, and last time was 2011. Seems like a pretty save bet Fenway adds 40 or more OPS points. So now you've got '09, '11, '12, and probably '13.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,501
|
Post by nomar on Mar 10, 2016 20:19:40 GMT -5
I think I'd bet an entire paycheck that Pablo finishes with a lower than .800 OPS. He's only done it twice in his career, and last time was 2011. Seems like a pretty save bet It's tempting but you're still looking at a 10+% chance of losing it all. As someone who spends their work week analyzing risk, I think I'd pass unless I got like a 9 or 10:1 payout. Maybe I'm misreading what you're saying, but that sounds like some pretty bad analysis. If someone gave me even odds for a bet I had a 90% chance of winning, I would take it every time. Every two weeks I would reup that bet with my paycheck if I could. I just can't lose my year's salary right now lol.
|
|
|