|
Post by elguapo on May 29, 2013 14:34:23 GMT -5
Made sense to me to have him up at the beginning of the season, cause who else would you have grabbed. Not to reignite that debate, but JBJ was filling in for David Ortiz. Any healthy stiff on the 40-man (not actually a big selection at the time, but let's say Lavarnway) - or not on the 40-man - could have been chosen. Thankfully at least the histrionics over JBJ's lost year of contractual control are at an end - right?
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on May 29, 2013 15:24:49 GMT -5
What if JBJ kicks ass and they chose not to send him down? Is Gomes's lifetime .242 BA in mlb all that attractive? And his .170 or so average this year in his supposedly dominant split against LH pitching? He has well over 100 AB now this year. Everyone wrote JBJ off as "not ready" after 31 or so AB. Can we not expect better performance than that from Gomes after something like 111 AB?
It would be a shame to essentially write off Gomes's contract since it's for 2 years at $5 mil and I recognize that the probability of doing that is very low but at what point do we bail? I'm confident JBJ will perform. Yeah, I said it. I will live with the consequences. The kid has been consistent overall. He will at least get on base and play solid defense.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2013 16:05:51 GMT -5
How is he going to kick ass if he's starting twice at best? The problem with replacing Gomes with him isn't that he's a better player it's that you are basically making him a platoon player playing him in the majors 1/3 of the time. Much better to have him play every day in the minors than 1/3 of the time in the majors.
I swear this is my last post on this because JBJ's supporters don't seem to grasp the 40 man roster issue that his promotion caused. I'll try one last time using the example above.
Lavarnway was already on the 40 man roster at the time. Putting him on the roster would not have required creating another spot. In this case, the team could have fungibly used that 40 man spot to fill a need or to go get a player they liked. They can't do that now, because JBJ occupies that spot whereas he otherwise would not. Now they have to interrupt a groove JBJ is in and call him up to sit on the bench as opposed to having some AAAA player or fungible bench guy do that.
Is it the end of the world? No. But it's still something I'd prefer the Red Sox didn't do.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on May 29, 2013 16:22:10 GMT -5
What if JBJ kicks ass and they chose not to send him down? Is Gomes's lifetime .242 BA in mlb all that attractive? And his .170 or so average this year in his supposedly dominant split against LH pitching? He has well over 100 AB now this year. Everyone wrote JBJ off as "not ready" after 31 or so AB. Can we not expect better performance than that from Gomes after something like 111 AB? It would be a shame to essentially write off Gomes's contract since it's for 2 years at $5 mil and I recognize that the probability of doing that is very low but at what point do we bail? I'm confident JBJ will perform. Yeah, I said it. I will live with the consequences. The kid has been consistent overall. He will at least get on base and play solid defense. Johnny Gomes has had SIXTY-SIX plate appearances against lefties this season. He has 1166 career PAs against lefties with an accumulated .880 OPS. And I know people are sick of hearing me bitch about small sample sizes. Well, if you don't like it, feel free to stop making arguments based on incredibly small sample sizes.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on May 29, 2013 16:39:34 GMT -5
What do you think JBJ's small sample size in mlb was this spring? 31 AB folks. It's been one argument after another stating that he isn't ready. Maybe he isn't but then maybe he is. Why not see. And be hopeful. And give him a real chance. We are giving Gomes one heck of a chance this year and that sample size is 4 times as large with little in return so far.
We don't live in a world where everyone needs the same amount of time in AAA. Sometimes it may just make sense to bring the kid up and let him play.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on May 29, 2013 16:45:16 GMT -5
There is some value to giving rooks some playing time in mlb also, rather than a guy you know is going nowhere in his career. Those accumulated mlb AB help him phase into mlb also. If you are going to largely waste playing time why not have it go towards developing a player, even a player who is already on the payroll. We find out more about what we have and it should actually help their development sometime. It depends upon the player.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on May 29, 2013 17:04:23 GMT -5
What do you think JBJ's small sample size in mlb was this spring? 31 AB folks. It's been one argument after another stating that he isn't ready. Jackie Bradley doesn't have thousands of MLB PAs that say he's a good hitter. He had a few hundred minor league PAs that said he wasn't ready.
|
|
|
Post by widewordofsport on May 29, 2013 17:26:48 GMT -5
"You could have kept Mike Sweeney on the team as a backup"
I don't think calling a first baseman out of retirement is going to solve the OF issues.
|
|
|
Post by widewordofsport on May 29, 2013 17:30:07 GMT -5
I do think Ryan Sweeney should have been kept, and part of the reason I hated the JBJ addition so much. Somehow the Red Sox FO keeps making idiotic moves "hey I think a player with 1 year pro experience and 200 ABs at AAA is ready" and but this year they've gotten away with it.
For JBJ now, I don't really care too much, but if he's up, I hope he gets playing time, otherwise leave him down and trade for C.H. Lin if you really need a late-inning defensive replacement.
|
|
|
Post by bighead on May 29, 2013 17:48:55 GMT -5
It makes sense to bring him up at this time. I was against it at the start of the season. But with Shane on the DL the next 2 games in a NL park and then the big left field in Yankee stadium it makes sense to me. It would be a better fit if he hit right handed though. When Shane gets back next week you send JBJ back down. Agree. This is the way I envisioned they'd use him, instead of the silly $h!t at the beginning of the year driven largely by the media. He can get his feet wet spelling players who are down in short stints, get that under his belt, and learn the pitchers also. Having all the klieg lights focused on him, so that the sports writers and talking heads can get one or two no-brainer columns and a few sessions of mindless chatter in, is a disservice to the team, the fans, and to him. Not that that's a huge concern for the chattering class. This sums up EXACTLY how I saw this at opening day. Ideally this should be his first MLB stint after carrying the confidence he had going in spring training into AAA and hopefully continued to produce. He could have, if everything fell just right, hit the ground running and possibly be in better position to succeed. But since the media needed lay up columns and the lemming fans swallowed the story hook, line and sinker he is now yo-yoing back and forth and potentially delaying his development. How long before this thread is closed since it picked up right where the old one left off???
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on May 29, 2013 17:56:35 GMT -5
What do you think JBJ's small sample size in mlb was this spring? 31 AB folks. It's been one argument after another stating that he isn't ready. Jackie Bradley doesn't have thousands of MLB PAs that say he's a good hitter. He had a few hundred minor league PAs that said he wasn't ready. He has tremendous minor league numbers and an excellent track record in college also. No one is saying he can definitely contribute to the mlb league club. But the rules of "what have you done for me lately" apply to mr. Gomes just as the rules of small sample size apply to mr Bradley. No question Gomes is going to keep getting AB ok. I'm aware. I just don't like it. I hope JBJ goes up and tears it up and makes that decision a lot more difficult.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2013 18:45:10 GMT -5
"You could have kept Mike Sweeney on the team as a backup" I don't think calling a first baseman out of retirement is going to solve the OF issues. I always mix those two up for some reason. As it turns out, with Buccholz now out for Friday they may need to call up Webster or Wright to fill out the bullpen. In that case, it's Bradley going back. For those who hope for the thread to be closed, hope for a long game tonight.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 30, 2013 7:28:16 GMT -5
Can everyone please stop talking in absolutes regarding JBJ and how he's been handled?
Norm, love your posts, but to say the decision to promote JBJ at the beginning of the year was media driven is nonsense and something that drives me crazy. There were plenty of media writing about the value of keeping him down and why it may be the right move to at least wait the 11 days. It was overall well covered in my opinion. Please don't change the narrative to it was driven by the fans as that's equally nonsensical. There were baseball reasons to bring him up, a lot of people just disagree. That doesn't mean they weren't baseball decisions.
Big head, why is it ideal tat this is his first stint? Each payer is different and you have no way of knowing if the stint early in the year was important to him. Maybe getting a taste of MLB life on and off the field at the beginning of the year will be instrumental in accelerating his MLB success. Perhaps, his experiences this year allow him to hit the ground running next year when they know tere is a chance es a starter or then with Jacoby possibly leaving. If he wasn't added to begin with, then he wouldn't be up now for the short term.
The organization needs to look short an long term. There's plenty of reason to believe exposing someone to a new level is helpful in the player adaptation to that level. The FO may have figured it was better for JBJ to play the role of the shuttle outfielder for this season to better prare him for next. Worst case scenario is he tore it up and they had a tough time sending him down for 20 days.
Losing Ryan Sweeney is a nonissue. Bradley can fill his role as a shuttle player (Sweeney can't be shuttled back and forth) and gain valuable experience. Mentally he's very mature and can most likely handle it. If not, then what we think we know of him isn't true.
|
|
|
Post by hammerhead on May 30, 2013 8:19:55 GMT -5
I'm not sure what in gods name you guys are talking about? ? We need to sign another outfielder??? Who can be DFA'd ? JBJ won't start unless they are facing a lefty??? JBJ is a bad choice because he's doing so well??? Like gregblosser said this is a 6 game call up . The 40 man doesn't need to be touched and this Org has PLENTY of outfielders. Why on earth would they go out looking for more fungible depth when they are having trouble finding AB's for who they have. Wow, the sky is falling , because JBJ gets a handful of major league AB's over the course of a week. It won't phase him one iota.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2013 9:42:33 GMT -5
This was a mistake as JBJ is a left handed hitter. JBJ probably won't start AT ALL.
Actually it maybe less. Webster's turn to start was last night and he was held back. He's not scheduled to start tonight either. I assume that this was done to insure his availability for the Yankee series if needed. If he does come up, Bradley would likely go down.
Unfortunately it appears that the points I made aren't being responded to as is to be expected. It should be noted that just because I note something as a negative doesn't mean I think the "sky is falling". Hyperbole is unnecessary.
|
|
|
Post by bighead on May 30, 2013 20:47:38 GMT -5
Can everyone please stop talking in absolutes regarding JBJ and how he's been handled? Norm, love your posts, but to say the decision to promote JBJ at the beginning of the year was media driven is nonsense and something that drives me crazy. There were plenty of media writing about the value of keeping him down and why it may be the right move to at least wait the 11 days. It was overall well covered in my opinion. Please don't change the narrative to it was driven by the fans as that's equally nonsensical. There were baseball reasons to bring him up, a lot of people just disagree. That doesn't mean they weren't baseball decisions. Big head, why is it ideal tat this is his first stint? Each payer is different and you have no way of knowing if the stint early in the year was important to him. Maybe getting a taste of MLB life on and off the field at the beginning of the year will be instrumental in accelerating his MLB success. Perhaps, his experiences this year allow him to hit the ground running next year when they know tere is a chance es a starter or then with Jacoby possibly leaving. If he wasn't added to begin with, then he wouldn't be up now for the short term. The organization needs to look short an long term. There's plenty of reason to believe exposing someone to a new level is helpful in the player adaptation to that level. The FO may have figured it was better for JBJ to play the role of the shuttle outfielder for this season to better prare him for next. Worst case scenario is he tore it up and they had a tough time sending him down for 20 days. Losing Ryan Sweeney is a nonissue. Bradley can fill his role as a shuttle player (Sweeney can't be shuttled back and forth) and gain valuable experience. Mentally he's very mature and can most likely handle it. If not, then what we think we know of him isn't true. Um, I don't know. Maybe not promoting a prospect with barely more than 200 ABs above single A on the basis of spring training success? Possibly weighing the risk of hurting or delaying his development against the reward of playing openning day for a 12 game stint? Could be because he hadn't sufficiently proven himself against advanced pitching? Might have been the the possibility of not getting consistent ABs during an important stage of his development? How about unrealistic expectations, hype and pressure amped up by the media? Take your pick.
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on May 30, 2013 21:43:26 GMT -5
Going back to 2010, here are NOTABLE players who have had <500 AB's at AA/AAA before making their MLB debut:
Marcell Ozuna/Marlins - 47 Buster Posey/Giants - 151 Jose Altuve/Astros - 153 Jason Heyward/Braves - 208 Anthony Rendon/Nationals - 230 Starlin Castro/Cubs - 243 Jackie Bradley Jr./Red Sox - 271 Ike Davis/Mets - 275 Eric Hosmer/Royals - 329 Oswaldo Arcia/Twins - 351 Alex Avila/Tigers - 387 Manny Machado/Orioles - 459
Just saying, while Bradley did debut quickly, it's not like he's the only one. And I'm with rjb here, not all players development curves are identical. Not everyone needs ~2 years in the high minors before debuting. Heck, look at Jose Fernandez and Rick Porcello...ZERO innings pitched in AA/AAA before getting the call. Would love to see this board if Boston pulled off a move like that...
|
|
|
Post by bighead on May 30, 2013 22:19:59 GMT -5
Going back to 2010, here are NOTABLE players who have had <500 AB's at AA/AAA before making their MLB debut: Marcell Ozuna/Marlins - 47 Buster Posey/Giants - 151 Jose Altuve/Astros - 153 Jason Heyward/Braves - 208 Anthony Rendon/Nationals - 230 Starlin Castro/Cubs - 243 Jackie Bradley Jr./Red Sox - 271Ike Davis/Mets - 275 Eric Hosmer/Royals - 329 Oswaldo Arcia/Twins - 351 Alex Avila/Tigers - 387 Manny Machado/Orioles - 459 Just saying, while Bradley did debut quickly, it's not like he's the only one. And I'm with rjb here, not all players development curves are identical. Not everyone needs ~2 years in the high minors before debuting. Heck, look at Jose Fernandez and Rick Porcello...ZERO innings pitched in AA/AAA before getting the call. Would love to see this board if Boston pulled off a move like that... How does the list look of players who had less than 500 and never made it at the ML level?
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Jun 27, 2013 5:07:40 GMT -5
Let's not overlook what JBJ is doing right now. It's easy to take him dominating AAA for granted given that he had a shot in the big leagues this year, but remember 6 months ago if anyone here had suggested he'd start the year in the big leagues they'd have been pilloried and mocked. If you pretend he had an unspectacular spring training and none of that had happened, what you would be saying right now about a GG center fielder with 315/410/524 line in AA in what is essentially his second year in pro ball?
Yeah yeah I know it's only ~140 PA but his K/BB/power numbers are right in line with what he did in Portland last year and the kind of performance we would hope to see in his peak MLB years.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Jun 27, 2013 9:57:36 GMT -5
Personally I'm just marking time until he gets to the majors for good.
I think there would have been serious consideration of JBJ starting in CF if we had traded Ellsbury.
|
|
|
Post by awall on Aug 2, 2013 10:01:13 GMT -5
I'm a little concerned to see JBJ on the DL for the right elbow again. Hope there isn't something worse going on in there than inflammation.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Aug 2, 2013 11:24:40 GMT -5
I'm a little concerned to see JBJ on the DL for the right elbow again. Hope there isn't something worse going on in there than inflammation. Now that everyone seems to want to dump Ells they can all go to worrying about "what ifs" for next couple of years!!! Come on guys give Boras his 90 million and keep Ells for protection of JBJ's pending DL stints for 2+ years!!!
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Aug 2, 2013 12:10:25 GMT -5
I assume this sarcasm
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Aug 2, 2013 12:21:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jchang on Aug 2, 2013 12:47:34 GMT -5
no sarcasm, I would say Ells is worth 14-16M per year, which would temporarily put him over Pedroia, but Pedy had security whereas Ells is at risk of health and performance. I don't have a problem with Bradley, Ells, Vict in the outfield with Nava, Gnomes on the bench. Heck, Nava could learn a few more infield positions as utility too.
|
|