|
Post by okin15 on Jun 20, 2013 8:45:52 GMT -5
I could see Xan being a starting util player like Lowrie was. Play every day, but when Drew plays, move him off of SS. I always thought the way to set up that situation was have one guy play SS/3B, and the other guy do SS/2B, but what do I know.
Could just as easily be that Xan is playing 3B most of the time, with the occasional switch to SS when you want to rest Drew and play WMB. Point stands, that you would call Xan a utility guy who starts. Semantics!
|
|
|
Post by semperfisox on Jun 20, 2013 9:21:26 GMT -5
I could see Xan being a starting util player like Lowrie was. Play every day, but when Drew plays, move him off of SS. I always thought the way to set up that situation was have one guy play SS/3B, and the other guy do SS/2B, but what do I know. Could just as easily be that Xan is playing 3B most of the time, with the occasional switch to SS when you want to rest Drew and play WMB. Point stands, that you would call Xan a utility guy who starts. Semantics! The most important thing for Xander when he eventually gets called up is that he plays every game. Having him sit doesn't do him any good when he could be getting at bats every game in AAA.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jun 20, 2013 10:05:27 GMT -5
It's not even the BABIP, it's that he's still only got about 100 plate appearances. Hey, remember when Will Middlebrooks had 100 good plate appearances? The Red Sox have been paying for it ever since. And he's a guy who had a hell of a lot more success in the minors than Iglesias did. Teams didn't have a book on Middlebrooks to throw pitches off the plate outside because he'll swing every time and try to pull it. Iglesias already has a much better approach than Middlebrooks ever has had. SSS and all. I don't think his approach is going to regress a lot. I know his BAPIP will go down, but I'm seeing enough from him right now to believe he'll be a close to .700 OPS guy at the worst. Pitchers already have the book on him from last year and the minors but he adjusted already by making the pitcher throw him the pitch he wants to hit. I don't think that is just going to go away. But I don't really want to compare those two because I think Middlebrooks will adjust eventually. He had similar problems when making jumps in the minors but he always adjusted. Really? Because all winter all I heard was that Will Middlebrooks actually had a pretty good approach. Look at how many pitches per plate appearance he had! I can look up swinging strike rate on Fangraphs, I'm a qualified scout now! I'm assuming the book is pretty well out on Vernon Wells, but he managed to go crazy for a month. Hey, remember when the Yankees got Ichio Suzuki out of Seattle and it totally revitalized him? They now have a two year commitment to a .650 OPS corner outfielder who's 783 years old. For that matter, did we not JUST go through this with Pedro Ciriaco? He had a good month last year. Let's make him our shortstop. Again, this isn't about BABIP. It's about the fact that a player can show all kinds of actual skills over a short period of time without those skills being real or sustainable. Anyone can have a month.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Jun 20, 2013 15:42:11 GMT -5
I think Bogaerts is our Opening Day shortstop next year. I'm not dumping Iglesias. I want to keep him around as insurance in case Xander doesn't work out. I'm disappointed in WMB's season. The questions about his approach appear to be warranted. He probably has another year to work things out. But, I think Cecchini is the 3b in the long run. He's got a great approach to hitting. Exactly, what the Red Sox preach. If his HR total is a little low, but he has a high OBP. That can be off-set by plus power from our shortstop. If WMB shows he can hit 30hr or so, maybe a switch to 1b is in the cards for him. Probably in the NL though.
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Jun 20, 2013 16:04:15 GMT -5
I don't get this whole "Teh NL Suckz" attitude. Yes it can be a little easier for pitchers but what makes it easier for hitters?
NL 2013 (without pitchers) BB% K% ISO BABIP AVG OBP SLG wOBA wRC+ Fld BsR WAR 7.9% 19.0% .147 .298 .257 .321 .404 .316 100 23.8 8.6 125.9
AL 2013 BB% K% ISO BABIP AVG OBP SLG wOBA wRC+ Fld BsR WAR 8.1% 19.8% .153 .296 .255 .319 .407 .317 99 -25.3 3.3 126.4
Middlebrooks need to show that he can lay off pitches off the plate he'll be fine. I'm as big a backer of him as anyone here, but he hasn't show that ability yet. Hopefully he will.
Humorously, attached the FTWH's comments above about OZone %s and Zone %s, etc. Middlebrooks has almost identical rates this season as last. The only real differences are that he's hitting home runs a lot less frequently and he's not hitting singles at all.
|
|
|
Post by widewordofsport on Jun 20, 2013 16:12:47 GMT -5
All this position talk. I think at some point you have to get your three best players in the lineup. I wouldn't trade any of them. I can't see the return being anything that helps the team enough to offset how great it is to have depth in case of injury. I really don't want Troy Brown starting a playoff game at SS because Xander got dinged and we traded away Iggy for a set-up man currently in high-A ball.
Except Almanzar - too many 40 man spots needed, and he's trade bait. He's had a nice 18 months, but something about him I just can't buy yet.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jun 20, 2013 16:28:15 GMT -5
Really? Because all winter all I heard was that Will Middlebrooks actually had a pretty good approach. Look at how many pitches per plate appearance he had! I can look up swinging strike rate on Fangraphs, I'm a qualified scout now! [/quote] Napoli currently "sees" the most pitches per plate appearance on the team. So maybe he's closing his eyes when he swings?... I can't remember if it was Tim Britton or Alex Speier who did a very long story on plate approach this spring and Middlebrooks was a large part of it. It all sounded great, but he was chasing out of the K zone quite a bit before he hit the DL. Actually seemed most disciplined when he was playing with the sore ribs before the DL, perhaps because he had to be so selective with his swings as a result of the pain factor. I still can't figure out why they made public pronouncements of leaving him down til he got squared away and showed offensive consistency, then brought him back after roughly 20 plate appearances.
|
|
|
Post by mainesox on Jun 20, 2013 21:55:55 GMT -5
Napoli currently "sees" the most pitches per plate appearance on the team. So maybe he's closing his eyes when he swings?... I can't remember if it was Tim Britton or Alex Speier who did a very long story on plate approach this spring and Middlebrooks was a large part of it. It all sounded great, but he was chasing out of the K zone quite a bit before he hit the DL. Actually seemed most disciplined when he was playing with the sore ribs before the DL, perhaps because he had to be so selective with his swings as a result of the pain factor. I still can't figure out why they made public pronouncements of leaving him down til he got squared away and showed offensive consistency, then brought him back after roughly 20 plate appearances. He actually sees the most in the majors, and it's not even particularly close.
|
|
|
Post by colombianrsox on Jun 21, 2013 5:45:05 GMT -5
As I said, depending on results, Cecchini may be heading for a cup of coffee in the bigs at the end of next year. So far, he looks like a sure thing. That is why, I think Boston brings its prospects little by little and a utility role for XB around this time next year doesn't sound crazy.. I am honestly sold on WMB readjusting and Iglesias at SS at this time. I may be wrong of course.. Lol.. Just my opinion.. Plenty of depth, that's for sure.. Remember the 2 closers?
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Jun 21, 2013 6:03:38 GMT -5
I could see Xan being a starting util player like Lowrie was. Play every day, but when Drew plays, move him off of SS. I always thought the way to set up that situation was have one guy play SS/3B, and the other guy do SS/2B, but what do I know. Could just as easily be that Xan is playing 3B most of the time, with the occasional switch to SS when you want to rest Drew and play WMB. Point stands, that you would call Xan a utility guy who starts. Semantics! The most important thing for Xander when he eventually gets called up is that he plays every game. Having him sit doesn't do him any good when he could be getting at bats every game in AAA. And I just outlined two possible plans where that would be the case... but I guess reading a guy's post before arguing isn't necessary? This is bush league man.
|
|
|
Post by colombianrsox on Jun 21, 2013 6:17:39 GMT -5
And Almanzar.. Interesting perspectives for this deep prospect pool.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 21, 2013 9:28:59 GMT -5
The most important thing for Xander when he eventually gets called up is that he plays every game. Having him sit doesn't do him any good when he could be getting at bats every game in AAA. And I just outlined two possible plans where that would be the case... but I guess reading a guy's post before arguing isn't necessary? This is bush league man. Okin, the problem is your referring to him as a utility guy when in your situation he's your starting 3b or SS, but you want to give him games at the other here and there. It's not going to happen anyways. He's a top 5 prospect in baseball, you give him a position and let him play it. Comparing a guy of his pedigree to Lowrie is way off base, plus Lowrie was that guy because he couldn't stay healthy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2013 10:17:53 GMT -5
Yet baseball decisions often have to be made based upon a small sample size. Fans thus should be able to discuss such sample sizes as well. The key question is evaluating a small sample size is if there is an actual difference that can explain the increased performance. If the player with increased performance is really doing what he's always been doing you would have to assume that eventually he'll regress to the results he's always gotten.
In Iglesias' case though I certainly see a lot of lucky hits, there are some real changes. First off it was mentioned on the TV broadcast last night that he seems to have more upper body strength. From a personal perspective it seems as though he has more of a plan at the plate than he did before.
This is quite different than from Ciriaco last year who seemed to be hacking away and making good contact. That kind of approach isn't sustainable and will clearly lead to the player regressing to his old results, which is kind of what happened.
There are many on this site who were brought up in this game on sabermetrics as I was and are very good at examining a players numbers. But any good analyst asks why the numbers are they way they are and how the player is able to achieve them. In any sample size no matter the size there is a baseball reason as to why the player is able to achive them. It's up to us as fans to discuss if that reason is sustainable or will disappear over time.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jun 21, 2013 16:46:14 GMT -5
Yet baseball decisions often have to be made based upon a small sample size. Fans thus should be able to discuss such sample sizes as well. The key question is evaluating a small sample size is if there is an actual difference that can explain the increased performance. If the player with increased performance is really doing what he's always been doing you would have to assume that eventually he'll regress to the results he's always gotten. In Iglesias' case though I certainly see a lot of lucky hits, there are some real changes. First off it was mentioned on the TV broadcast last night that he seems to have more upper body strength. From a personal perspective it seems as though he has more of a plan at the plate than he did before. This is quite different than from Ciriaco last year who seemed to be hacking away and making good contact. That kind of approach isn't sustainable and will clearly lead to the player regressing to his old results, which is kind of what happened. There are many on this site who were brought up in this game on sabermetrics as I was and are very good at examining a players numbers. But any good analyst asks why the numbers are they way they are and how the player is able to achieve them. In any sample size no matter the size there is a baseball reason as to why the player is able to achive them. It's up to us as fans to discuss if that reason is sustainable or will disappear over time. www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/money-earnin-vernon-wells-back-on-the-fantasy-map/You know, there were some very tangible reasons why David Ortiz was awful for the first two months of the 2009 season. But a couple of months doesn't define a ballplayer, regardless of what's driving their performance. I don't care if they've changed their swing, put on weight, taken off weight, copied Roy Halladay's mechanics (remember that?), whatever. It's not real until it's sustained.
|
|