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.
Benintendi traded to KC in 3-way deal w/ NYM
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on May 8, 2021 19:19:32 GMT -5
I look at a GM and compare it to other GMs. Example the Betts trade, I have a very hard time right now saying he murdered it. Heck he did his best to almost destroy it trying to get a pitcher versus just taking the best deal. I don't for a second think DD couldn't get Verdugo and Downs for Betts or a bunch of other GMs. You trade the second best player in Baseball you better get a darn good return. We don't know what else he could have gotten from the Dodgers. Even if Downs becomes a good player, at best it's a good solid trade. You traded Mookie Betts. Every GM is taking Verdugo. I mean maybe DD doesn't get Wong, okay if that turns out awesome give Bloom the credit. Now the Benintendi trade is crazy interesting and how he does in this trade will tell you a lot more about Bloom than the Betts trade. He didn't have to trade him and choose a creative trade while selling a player at far and away his lowest value ever. You can't judge it right now, heck it likely takes years and years. It could look horrible than crazy good years from now. Yet for me this is the trade that tells you a ton about how good Bloom is. This is a trade DD never makes or a bunch of other GMs. On the above, maybe, but I do like how the Sox played hardball after Graterol failed his physical. I almost wonder if the Red Sox knew he was going to and just called their bluff by agreeing just to create more leverage that a deal needed to get done. Baseless speculation on my part, but I think it helped get Jeter Downs from the Dodgers. Andrew Benintendi has seemingly returned to form of being an everyday regular. Even if every piece of the Sox fails, it's not that horrible of a loss if he continues having around a .745 OPS. I think there was a real chance Benintendi could have flamed out so the fact they're getting higher upside kids is fine by me. Why are the players PTBNL?
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,981
|
Post by jimoh on May 8, 2021 19:35:57 GMT -5
I look at a GM and compare it to other GMs. Example the Betts trade, I have a very hard time right now saying he murdered it. Heck he did his best to almost destroy it trying to get a pitcher versus just taking the best deal. I don't for a second think DD couldn't get Verdugo and Downs for Betts or a bunch of other GMs. You trade the second best player in Baseball you better get a darn good return. We don't know what else he could have gotten from the Dodgers. Even if Downs becomes a good player, at best it's a good solid trade. You traded Mookie Betts. Every GM is taking Verdugo. I mean maybe DD doesn't get Wong, okay if that turns out awesome give Bloom the credit. Now the Benintendi trade is crazy interesting and how he does in this trade will tell you a lot more about Bloom than the Betts trade. He didn't have to trade him and choose a creative trade while selling a player at far and away his lowest value ever. You can't judge it right now, heck it likely takes years and years. It could look horrible than crazy good years from now. Yet for me this is the trade that tells you a ton about how good Bloom is. This is a trade DD never makes or a bunch of other GMs. On the above, maybe, but I do like how the Sox played hardball after Graterol failed his physical. I almost wonder if the Red Sox knew he was going to and just called their bluff by agreeing just to create more leverage that a deal needed to get done. Baseless speculation on my part, but I think it helped get Jeter Downs from the Dodgers. Andrew Benintendi has seemingly returned to form of being an everyday regular. Even if every piece of the Sox fails, it's not that horrible of a loss if he continues having around a .745 OPS. I think there was a real chance Benintendi could have flamed out so the fact they're getting higher upside kids is fine by me. Why are the players PTBNL? Probably because with no minor large season last year, they are interested in some young players but have not seen them play enough. The Mets and Royals agreed with the Sox on a set of names, and the Red Sox get to scout them for a while this year, perhaps a month or so, and decide which two from the Royals and one from the Mets they want. It's a good thing.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on May 8, 2021 19:48:55 GMT -5
On the above, maybe, but I do like how the Sox played hardball after Graterol failed his physical. I almost wonder if the Red Sox knew he was going to and just called their bluff by agreeing just to create more leverage that a deal needed to get done. Baseless speculation on my part, but I think it helped get Jeter Downs from the Dodgers. Andrew Benintendi has seemingly returned to form of being an everyday regular. Even if every piece of the Sox fails, it's not that horrible of a loss if he continues having around a .745 OPS. I think there was a real chance Benintendi could have flamed out so the fact they're getting higher upside kids is fine by me. Why are the players PTBNL? Probably because with no minor large season last year, they are interested in some young players but have not seen them play enough. The Mets and Royals agreed with the Sox on a set of names, and the Red Sox get to scout them for a while this year, perhaps a month or so, and decide which two from the Royals and one from the Mets they want. It's a good thing. See, that's what I thought and it makes sense, but what's to stop the teams from not playing players they prefer or not putting them in the position to thrive? Maybe I'm just being cynical.
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on May 8, 2021 20:06:21 GMT -5
Probably because with no minor large season last year, they are interested in some young players but have not seen them play enough. The Mets and Royals agreed with the Sox on a set of names, and the Red Sox get to scout them for a while this year, perhaps a month or so, and decide which two from the Royals and one from the Mets they want. It's a good thing. See, that's what I thought and it makes sense, but what's to stop the teams from not playing players they prefer or not putting them in the position to thrive? Maybe I'm just being cynical. If I was a Mets fan I would absolutely want them to play games with this process.
Let's say 19 year old Robert Dominguez, who has never played stateside and is expected to play in the GCL this year, is on the list. If he comes to ST looking like the next Pedro, I'm hiding him from scouts and definitely not assigning him to a team playing games until the PTNBL is announced.
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on May 8, 2021 21:36:00 GMT -5
To me it seems ppl cannot grasp the concept that we traded ONE year of mookie, which turned into a shortened season for verdugo, downs and wong. If you get that general concept saying bloom killed that trade is an understatement. As of today mookie and verdugo have the same war. At the end of the season that will most likely not be the case but we received cost controlled talent for a 60 game stint of mookie. Anyone that sees the mookie trade different is grading off of personal interest and not value.
|
|
|
Post by dyoungteach on May 9, 2021 2:27:54 GMT -5
To me it seems ppl cannot grasp the concept that we traded ONE year of mookie, which turned into a shortened season for verdugo, downs and wong. If you get that general concept saying bloom killed that trade is an understatement. As of today mookie and verdugo have the same war. At the end of the season that will most likely not be the case but we received cost controlled talent for a 60 game stint of mookie. Anyone that sees the mookie trade different is grading off of personal interest and not value. That’s assuming mookie wouldn’t have agreed to sign with us ( which I agree probably would be correct but it’s still an assumption). In a results oriented game, for a results oriented franchise, right now it’s hard to complain about much. The Red Sox are sitting in first place, with best record in baseball, 7 months after having the 4th worst record in baseball while making no major free agents signings. That’s a pretty dang good accomplishment for any general manager to make.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 9, 2021 7:33:16 GMT -5
No. We're not doing the Mookie trade again here. C'mon y'all.
If you really feel the need, there's a thread for that.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on May 9, 2021 11:52:39 GMT -5
See, that's what I thought and it makes sense, but what's to stop the teams from not playing players they prefer or not putting them in the position to thrive? Maybe I'm just being cynical. If I was a Mets fan I would absolutely want them to play games with this process.
Let's say 19 year old Robert Dominguez, who has never played stateside and is expected to play in the GCL this year, is on the list. If he comes to ST looking like the next Pedro, I'm hiding him from scouts and definitely not assigning him to a team playing games until the PTNBL is announced.
See, and this makes sense to me, but then is there any recourse or protection for teams not playing their prospects in order to try and save them from being selected and/or stunting their development?
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on May 9, 2021 11:58:20 GMT -5
No. We're not doing the Mookie trade again here. C'mon y'all. If you really feel the need, there's a thread for that. Guilty as charged. I'll do my best to not bring it up again.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on May 9, 2021 12:01:08 GMT -5
If I was a Mets fan I would absolutely want them to play games with this process.
Let's say 19 year old Robert Dominguez, who has never played stateside and is expected to play in the GCL this year, is on the list. If he comes to ST looking like the next Pedro, I'm hiding him from scouts and definitely not assigning him to a team playing games until the PTNBL is announced.
See, and this makes sense to me, but then is there any recourse or protection for teams not playing their prospects in order to try and save them from being selected and/or stunting their development? But if there is a list of, say, 5-7 guys who are good prospects, wouldn’t you have to stunt the development of all of them to prevent one from being picked? It seems ultimately self-defeating. If there is one guy mixed in prospects, say, 10-20 that you feel this strongly about, wouldn’t you just negotiate him out of the trade?
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 9, 2021 12:29:52 GMT -5
I would say that’s part of the unwritten rules crap of Baseball. Do crap like trying to hide guys you agreed to on a list and good luck in making future trades. You put guys on a list, you have to be ready to lose them. If you didn't want too, them you shouldn't have included them in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by Soxfansince1971 on May 10, 2021 8:23:46 GMT -5
To me it seems ppl cannot grasp the concept that we traded ONE year of mookie, which turned into a shortened season for verdugo, downs and wong. If you get that general concept saying bloom killed that trade is an understatement. As of today mookie and verdugo have the same war. At the end of the season that will most likely not be the case but we received cost controlled talent for a 60 game stint of mookie. Anyone that sees the mookie trade different is grading off of personal interest and not value. Yes, only 60 games of Mookie (at prorated $30 million per year) and Price (decreases from $48 to $32 million because he did not play). Also 5 years of Verdugo and 7 years of Downs and Wong were a big get. Price was not even good enough to start this year in the rotation....they have a $16 million reliever.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 10, 2021 9:05:46 GMT -5
No. We're not doing the Mookie trade again here. C'mon y'all. If you really feel the need, there's a thread for that. I'm going to just start deleting posts.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on May 10, 2021 12:48:13 GMT -5
See, and this makes sense to me, but then is there any recourse or protection for teams not playing their prospects in order to try and save them from being selected and/or stunting their development? But if there is a list of, say, 5-7 guys who are good prospects, wouldn’t you have to stunt the development of all of them to prevent one from being picked? It seems ultimately self-defeating. If there is one guy mixed in prospects, say, 10-20 that you feel this strongly about, wouldn’t you just negotiate him out of the trade? That's true, but perhaps there's a guy or two who shows up to camp and just "pops" or you just have some buyers remorse on player x, y, z. It's not about them protecting 7 guys, it's about protecting 1 or 2 you have 2nd thoughts on.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on May 12, 2021 10:07:27 GMT -5
One thing I hadn't really thought of when spinning Lee to the Mets: he was on the Royals 40 man roster, so it would have been tough to add two OFs to the Red Sox 40 man (especially with Duran waiting in the wings and not on 40 man). On top of turning Lee into two prospects, that is also a factor they almost assuredly considered.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on May 12, 2021 12:21:30 GMT -5
There is talk of the trade in the game thread, but I’ll keep this here.
I wonder if expectations for the remaining pieces are too high? I look at Lee on the Mets and think... the Royals gave two ML outfielders for one. How much more value will they give up? And the Mets have already sent a ~25 prospect for a single guy. Might they not just send two more ok guys? I guess I think Winckowski is too much to be a second piece if the first piece is close to the level of Lee... that is, why give a top-10 guy, a top-25 guy AND another guy for a single top-10 guy? It seems more likely to give 3 ~25-30 guys.
This isn’t a complaint... I just wonder if this is far more a depth trade than anything of greater consequence.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on May 12, 2021 12:37:01 GMT -5
There is talk of the trade in the game thread, but I’ll keep this here. I wonder if expectations for the remaining pieces are too high? I look at Lee on the Mets and think... the Royals gave two ML outfielders for one. How much more value will they give up? And the Mets have already sent a ~25 prospect for a single guy. Might they not just send two more ok guys? I guess I think Winckowski is too much to be a second piece if the first piece is close to the level of Lee... that is, why give a top-10 guy, a top-25 guy AND another guy for a single top-10 guy? It seems more likely to give 3 ~25-30 guys. This isn’t a complaint... I just wonder if this is far more a depth trade than anything of greater consequence. Not disagreeing, but I look at it this way. It's not like rankings are static. They can be dynamic, particularly with kids in A ball. The Sox could be getting some young kid who with future performance could rocket up the rankings. It's a risk, sure, but that's where scouting comes in, especially with these players to be named later who didn't play last year. The Sox are going to get somebody in the teens from the Mets. That could be a player who can have helium, or at least I'd hope so. Of course, there is less certainty in a player further away from the majors. But that's why the Sox got five of these guys, to mitigate the risk, and that's also the hope of Duran being ready or hoping that Santana has a bounce back in him.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on May 12, 2021 12:49:22 GMT -5
There is talk of the trade in the game thread, but I’ll keep this here. I wonder if expectations for the remaining pieces are too high? I look at Lee on the Mets and think... the Royals gave two ML outfielders for one. How much more value will they give up? And the Mets have already sent a ~25 prospect for a single guy. Might they not just send two more ok guys? I guess I think Winckowski is too much to be a second piece if the first piece is close to the level of Lee... that is, why give a top-10 guy, a top-25 guy AND another guy for a single top-10 guy? It seems more likely to give 3 ~25-30 guys. This isn’t a complaint... I just wonder if this is far more a depth trade than anything of greater consequence. Not disagreeing, but I look at it this way. It's not like rankings are static. They can be dynamic, particularly with kids in A ball. The Sox could be getting some young kid who with future performance could rocket up the rankings. It's a risk, sure, but that's where scouting comes in, especially with these players to be named later who didn't play last year. The Sox are going to get somebody in the teens from the Mets. That could be a player who can have helium, or at least I'd hope so. Of course, there is less certainty in a player further away from the majors. But that's why the Sox got five of these guys, to mitigate the risk, and that's also the hope of Duran being ready or hoping that Santana has a bounce back in him. Agreed. I guess I mean now... that I suspect when names get announced people who are listing desiderata might feel let down come announcement time. I bet the *best* outcome could be two guys no one has heard of who are way down the system and get looked at again in three years. I stress: I’m not complaining. If they get, say, a top-50 guy and two more ~25 guys for Beni who, I think, is what he is.... that is fine. I don’t see it as an undersell or an injustice. I just see this as closer to a Pomeranz trade than even an Andrew Miller trade — much less something more.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on May 12, 2021 15:04:26 GMT -5
There is talk of the trade in the game thread, but I’ll keep this here. I wonder if expectations for the remaining pieces are too high? I look at Lee on the Mets and think... the Royals gave two ML outfielders for one. How much more value will they give up? And the Mets have already sent a ~25 prospect for a single guy. Might they not just send two more ok guys? I guess I think Winckowski is too much to be a second piece if the first piece is close to the level of Lee... that is, why give a top-10 guy, a top-25 guy AND another guy for a single top-10 guy? It seems more likely to give 3 ~25-30 guys. This isn’t a complaint... I just wonder if this is far more a depth trade than anything of greater consequence. It's two separate trades announced as a three way deal, yet Royals say they weren't involved. The Red Sox just shipped Lee to the Mets for Winckowski and a player to be named. Lee is #7 in the Mets system per MLB.com, Winckowski isn't ranked in our top 30. So the prospect to be named should be a rather good player. I'm looking at Robert Dominguez. Also reports the Mets GM really liked Lee, so add that in however you want. I expect a rather good prospect back from the Mets. Royals sent Cordeo, Lee and two prospects to be named for Benintendi. So yeah I'd assume lower guys here. Younger upside guys.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,069
|
Post by cdj on May 12, 2021 16:43:58 GMT -5
There is talk of the trade in the game thread, but I’ll keep this here. I wonder if expectations for the remaining pieces are too high? I look at Lee on the Mets and think... the Royals gave two ML outfielders for one. How much more value will they give up? And the Mets have already sent a ~25 prospect for a single guy. Might they not just send two more ok guys? I guess I think Winckowski is too much to be a second piece if the first piece is close to the level of Lee... that is, why give a top-10 guy, a top-25 guy AND another guy for a single top-10 guy? It seems more likely to give 3 ~25-30 guys. This isn’t a complaint... I just wonder if this is far more a depth trade than anything of greater consequence. Could be the case I will say this though- we know from what’s been said that the Mets (or at least Zack Scott) really liked Lee a lot as a prospect. I think that should be factored in here. I don’t think it will be a prospect comparable to Lee but it wouldn’t shock me if it’s one of their low A/rookie ball guys that have great upside I expect the Royals guys to be lotto tickets
|
|
|
Post by dyoungteach on May 12, 2021 20:29:48 GMT -5
There is talk of the trade in the game thread, but I’ll keep this here. I wonder if expectations for the remaining pieces are too high? I look at Lee on the Mets and think... the Royals gave two ML outfielders for one. How much more value will they give up? And the Mets have already sent a ~25 prospect for a single guy. Might they not just send two more ok guys? I guess I think Winckowski is too much to be a second piece if the first piece is close to the level of Lee... that is, why give a top-10 guy, a top-25 guy AND another guy for a single top-10 guy? It seems more likely to give 3 ~25-30 guys. This isn’t a complaint... I just wonder if this is far more a depth trade than anything of greater consequence. It's two separate trades announced as a three way deal, yet Royals say they weren't involved. The Red Sox just shipped Lee to the Mets for Winckowski and a player to be named. Lee is #7 in the Mets system per MLB.com, Winckowski isn't ranked in our top 30. So the prospect to be named should be a rather good player. I'm looking at Robert Dominguez. Also reports the Mets GM really liked Lee, so add that in however you want. I expect a rather good prospect back from the Mets. Royals sent Cordeo, Lee and two prospects to be named for Benintendi. So yeah I'd assume lower guys here. Younger upside guys. I truly wonder based on NOTHING but just trying to be subjective..... I truly wonder if Ginn or Vientos might be on that list also. Dominguez could also. Or let me rephrase to be clear... I HOPE they are
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on May 18, 2021 14:21:24 GMT -5
Without reiterating what so many of you have covered from top to bottom. The Sox should get a prospect from the Mets that would break our top 15.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,932
|
Post by ericmvan on May 23, 2021 12:08:47 GMT -5
Here are the batting stats, actual and expected, for all the Sox regulars when Franchy Cordero was in the game, starting May 5, through Friday's game. Xander, JDM, Marwin, and Devers are exact comps, as is the combined line for the catchers. The * are slightly inexact comps; Verdugo and Renfroe missed one game each (Arroyo and Kiké starting instead) and Dalbec three (Chavis twice and Kiké once). Anyone who saw the Sox lose a game because Eovaldi gave up 3 runs on back-to-back hits of 67 and 68 mph should understand that the expected stats are what you look at in sample sizes this small. In this case, all of Franchy's hits, actual and expected only, had EV's of 100+. Name PA BA OBP SA wOBA xBA xOBP xSA xwOBA Bogaerts, Xander 35 .319 .457 .529 .417 .356 .499 .549 .450 Cordero, Franchy 33 .182 .242 .303 .248 .300 .358 .461 .366 *Verdugo, Alex 37 .225 .270 .387 .292 .273 .310 .504 .348 Martinez, J.D. 40 .225 .300 .300 .280 .282 .350 .423 .347 Gonzalez, Marwin 40 .229 .275 .358 .268 .276 .322 .499 .342 Catchers 38 .206 .290 .355 .281 .213 .312 .450 .329 Devers, Rafael 36 .333 .389 .732 .468 .240 .300 .467 .324 *Dalbec, Bobby 23 .290 .304 .638 .377 .216 .243 .556 .319 *Vázquez, Christian 28 .161 .214 .304 .231 .170 .232 .331 .253 *Renfroe, Hunter 29 .138 .138 .310 .188 .189 .189 .403 .249 The Sox did put up a .345 xwOBA in these games, so the perception in the discussion in the game threads that the opposing pitching was somewhat weak is accurate. But the Sox xwOBA is .337 versus MLB .320 (including pitchers hitting; Statcast search doesn't have any filters for that), so the .345 allowed by opposing pitchers is just .008 worse than average.
There hasn't been any real change in his O-Swing% (.325 to .321 including yesterday), which is 15th percentile (based on the 251 guys with 90+ PA). But his Z-Contact has gone from .701 to .822, which is 6th worst (Dalbec is actually 4th worst) to 37th percentile. Plenty of successful sluggers in this neighborhood: JDM is .824. His O-Contact has gone from .366 to .444, a modest improvment, but that's not a stat that correlates that strongly with success.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on May 23, 2021 12:26:23 GMT -5
Here are the batting stats, actual and expected, for all the Sox regulars when Franchy Cordero was in the game, starting May 5, through Friday's game. Xander, JDM, Marwin, and Devers are exact comps, as is the combined line for the catchers. The * are slightly inexact comps; Verdugo and Renfroe missed one game each (Arroyo and Kiké starting instead) and Dalbec three (Chavis twice and Kiké once). Anyone who saw the Sox lose a game because Eovaldi gave up 3 runs on back-to-back hits of 67 and 68 mph should understand that the expected stats are what you look at in sample sizes this small. In this case, all of Franchy's hits, actual and expected only, had EV's of 100+. Name PA BA OBP SA wOBA xBA xOBP xSA xwOBA Bogaerts, Xander 35 .319 .457 .529 .417 .356 .499 .549 .450 Cordero, Franchy 33 .182 .242 .303 .248 .300 .358 .461 .366 *Verdugo, Alex 37 .225 .270 .387 .292 .273 .310 .504 .348 Martinez, J.D. 40 .225 .300 .300 .280 .282 .350 .423 .347 Gonzalez, Marwin 40 .229 .275 .358 .268 .276 .322 .499 .342 Catchers 38 .206 .290 .355 .281 .213 .312 .450 .329 Devers, Rafael 36 .333 .389 .732 .468 .240 .300 .467 .324 *Dalbec, Bobby 23 .290 .304 .638 .377 .216 .243 .556 .319 *Vázquez, Christian 28 .161 .214 .304 .231 .170 .232 .331 .253 *Renfroe, Hunter 29 .138 .138 .310 .188 .189 .189 .403 .249 The Sox did put up a .345 xwOBA in these games, so the perception in the discussion in the game threads that the opposing pitching was somewhat weak is accurate. But the Sox xwOBA is .337 versus MLB .320 (including pitchers hitting; Statcast search doesn't have any filters for that), so the .345 allowed by opposing pitchers is just .008 worse than average.
There hasn't been any real change in his O-Swing% (.325 to .321 including yesterday), which is 15th percentile (based on the 251 guys with 90+ PA). But his Z-Contact has gone from .701 to .822, which is 6th worst (Dalbec is actually 4th worst) to 37th percentile. Plenty of successful sluggers in this neighborhood: JDM is .824. His O-Contact has gone from .366 to .444, a modest improvment, but that's not a stat that correlates that strongly with success. It feels like more and more obscure “w” or “yw” stats are the last refuge of a bad hitter. Franchy was 3-5 May 6th. Then... 0 for his next 16. One could look at that day and say “progress!” Or... maybe he hit some hard shots in that Ohfer stretch. But nonetheless, since May 6, he is 4-28. .143/.200/.250. Compare that line to his last 2 years: 49 games, 130 ABs, .185/.243/.300. In short, he has been bad recently, and he has been bad since calendar year 2019. Maybe he can’t get a rhythm with injuries, Covid etc. But he needs to go down and play well at *any* level to show he *can.* Maybe as much for himself.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,932
|
Post by ericmvan on May 23, 2021 13:35:53 GMT -5
Here are the batting stats, actual and expected, for all the Sox regulars when Franchy Cordero was in the game, starting May 5, through Friday's game. Xander, JDM, Marwin, and Devers are exact comps, as is the combined line for the catchers. The * are slightly inexact comps; Verdugo and Renfroe missed one game each (Arroyo and Kiké starting instead) and Dalbec three (Chavis twice and Kiké once). Anyone who saw the Sox lose a game because Eovaldi gave up 3 runs on back-to-back hits of 67 and 68 mph should understand that the expected stats are what you look at in sample sizes this small. In this case, all of Franchy's hits, actual and expected only, had EV's of 100+. Name PA BA OBP SA wOBA xBA xOBP xSA xwOBA Bogaerts, Xander 35 .319 .457 .529 .417 .356 .499 .549 .450 Cordero, Franchy 33 .182 .242 .303 .248 .300 .358 .461 .366 *Verdugo, Alex 37 .225 .270 .387 .292 .273 .310 .504 .348 Martinez, J.D. 40 .225 .300 .300 .280 .282 .350 .423 .347 Gonzalez, Marwin 40 .229 .275 .358 .268 .276 .322 .499 .342 Catchers 38 .206 .290 .355 .281 .213 .312 .450 .329 Devers, Rafael 36 .333 .389 .732 .468 .240 .300 .467 .324 *Dalbec, Bobby 23 .290 .304 .638 .377 .216 .243 .556 .319 *Vázquez, Christian 28 .161 .214 .304 .231 .170 .232 .331 .253 *Renfroe, Hunter 29 .138 .138 .310 .188 .189 .189 .403 .249 The Sox did put up a .345 xwOBA in these games, so the perception in the discussion in the game threads that the opposing pitching was somewhat weak is accurate. But the Sox xwOBA is .337 versus MLB .320 (including pitchers hitting; Statcast search doesn't have any filters for that), so the .345 allowed by opposing pitchers is just .008 worse than average.
There hasn't been any real change in his O-Swing% (.325 to .321 including yesterday), which is 15th percentile (based on the 251 guys with 90+ PA). But his Z-Contact has gone from .701 to .822, which is 6th worst (Dalbec is actually 4th worst) to 37th percentile. Plenty of successful sluggers in this neighborhood: JDM is .824. His O-Contact has gone from .366 to .444, a modest improvment, but that's not a stat that correlates that strongly with success. It feels like more and more obscure “w” or “yw” stats are the last refuge of a bad hitter. Franchy was 3-5 May 6th. Then... 0 for his next 16. One could look at that day and say “progress!” Or... maybe he hit some hard shots in that Ohfer stretch. But nonetheless, since May 6, he is 4-28. .143/.200/.250. Compare that line to his last 2 years: 49 games, 130 ABs, .185/.243/.300. In short, he has been bad recently, and he has been bad since calendar year 2019. Maybe he can’t get a rhythm with injuries, Covid etc. But he needs to go down and play well at *any* level to show he *can.* Maybe as much for himself. No, no, no. If you hit the ball 102 mph with a 6 degree launch angle, that's not good, that's fucking great. If you happen to hit it directly at a fielder, that does not make it bad, that makes it unlucky.
I do not cherry-pick this stuff. Everyone is raving about how hot Dalbec is now and I've pointed out that he's been lucky.
The great tragedy for teams like the Red Sox is that there are now virtually no teams that think the way you do, and look only at results instead of the quality of the action. Because the teams that look at quality of action instead of results kicked the old-schoolers asses all the way to the trash heap.
If Nick Pivetta had been this unlucky in his first few games this year, you'd be saying precisely the same things.
|
|
|