Edes: JBJ down to AAA, Betts up

[soxhop411]

Alex Speier ‏@alexspeier  28m
However, Farrell also noted 'reports mixed' on whether Bradley has been able to work on what Sox outlined for gun when sending him down
 
Alex Speier ‏@alexspeier  29m
Farrell said 'nothing has changed' regarding expectation to bring Bradley back up in Sept.
 
Scott Lauber ‏@ScottLauber  29m
Farrell said reports from Pawtucket on Bradley have been "mixed." Offense remains "work in progress" #RedSox
 
Jason Mastrodonato ‏@JMastrodonato  30m
Farrell says he's received mixed reports on Jackie Bradley Jr.'s progress in AAA. Still "a work in progress."

 

[ivanvamp]

 
Yes, but the question is what will be his line at the plate next year when he is 31 going on 32 and what will it be in 2016 when he is 32 going on 33? And he is signed through 2021.

 
I'm sure the overall trend will be downward.  And by the end of the contract he may not be worth what he's getting paid.  But he'll end up with about 5 WAR this year.  That's "worth" about $25 million.  Now nobody would pay him that.  But I bet by 2021 he'll still produce about 1 WAR, and that'll be worth, by then, about $6.5 million. And he'll be getting paid $12 million.  So it will be an overpay.  But right now he's making $12.5 million, so he's getting underpaid massively.
 
And I bet even though the decline will be the trend, he may have one or two more years where he bucks that trend.
 
I also hope that when he gets to the point where he's not worth that much, that the Sox don't Jeter him and stick him out there anyway, even if they have better options.  Consider it a sunk cost and have him be the veteran IF sub.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

If Pedroia passes his concussion protocol tests, just what kind of long-term health risks are we talking about here? 
 
Now saying that, I believe that the Sox should be showcasing all month, and that the kids should be looked at every position, including Betts at 2b.

Here at SOSH we specialize in overrating high level prospects, regardless of all logic. The example of this is the growing need to trade Pedroia because Betts has to be the second baseman and Pedroia is "done" because he's now over 30. It's pretty interesting really. Pedey is going to come back next year, hit outstanding, and hopefully help the Sox win another ring. Pedroia is the Sox version of Jeter, for better or worse.

Around this time two years ago fans on the board were dreaming of Lester + prospects for Wil Myers. Good thing fans are not GM's. Otherwise the Red Sox would trade Pedroia for a few prospects that might play half as well as he has. Betts will be here if the organization feels he will be a great long term fit.

Oh and by the way, since high end prospects are all can't miss I'm looking forward to seeing the Donnie Sadler and Michael Coleman HOF inductions next July. Should have some great stories about Greg Blosser too!

 

[HillysLastWalk]

So if one or two lunatics throw stuff around, that represents the collective wisdom and opinion of SOSH?

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

So if one or two lunatics throw stuff around, that represents the collective wisdom and opinion of SOSH?

Not quite. But the bigger message was that a prospects ranking does not indicate future success. It's been more than one or two that are throwing around the Pedroia stuff.

 

[Hee Sox Choi]

Not quite. But the bigger message was that a prospects ranking does not indicate future success. It's been more than one or two that are throwing around the Pedroia stuff.

I think it's just been OttoC.  I was about to say Plympton also but I went back and re-read the last 2 pages and he's saying don't count on Betts quite yet, which is a fair point to make.  So, as far as I can tell, it's just one guy - OttoC.  Maybe one other person?  So it's just a vocal minority with everyone else behind Pedroia.

 

[soxhop411]

So....
Bill Burt ‏@BurtTalksSports  1h
According to Sox source, Jackie Bradley Jr. wasn't open to "fixing" his swing, which is key reason plans changed + he was sent to Pawtucket.
 
https://twitter.com/BurtTalksSports/status/506909726308073472
 
 

 
 
Executive sports editor, Eagle-Tribune 

 

[EricFeczko]

 
Yeah, I had the same question myself.  Not sure.
 
Though, to echo NotK, Mookie already has a 1.0 bWAR and a 0.5 fWAR.  In 27 games.  And in a majority of the games, Mookie was just learning a new position (his call-ups before this recent one), and he still is (so the defensive component may be skewed negatively at this moment).
 
Also bear in mind that when discussing Pedroia, a lot of his value is tied to his defense.  Dustin Pedroia has a 103 OPS+ this year, with this slash line: 280/340/379.
 
Don't get me wrong, my bias believes he's the best defesive second baseman in baseball.  But I'm also smart enough to realize that WAR relies on shaky defensive components.  I believe I was reading in one of Keith Law's recent chats that someone was throwing out a +/- 2.0 margin of error, which would make the WAR stat useless.
 
Also, don't look at Pedroia's 5 year projections (he ceases being a 5 WAR player!)

It makes absolutely zero sense to evaluate Mookie's progress in terms of WAR. WAR is great statistic for determining what someone has done in the past, independent of the year/baseball team/era. In other words, its a great way to start off an HOF debate, or as a launching point for discussing who should be the MVP in a year.
WAR in and of itself tells us very little about how a player will perform in the future. It barely even measures what a player did in a small sample size.
A great example from this year is Xander himself. I can't find the stat right now, but I'm pretty sure Xander had ~0.5 WAR after the first month of the season; he's at -0.2 WAR now.

As I've stated, the exciting thing about Betts is that he is producing value in ways that may be projectable. Apart from his walk/swing rates, Xander has not done so at the major league level yet.
 

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

I think it's just been OttoC.  I was about to say Plympton also but I went back and re-read the last 2 pages and he's saying don't count on Betts quite yet, which is a fair point to make.  So, as far as I can tell, it's just one guy - OttoC.  Maybe one other person?  So it's just a vocal minority with everyone else behind Pedroia.

I've read SeanToo and a few other people. Point still stands to not overreact on prospects because of what they could be.

 

[HillysLastWalk]

It makes absolutely zero sense to evaluate Mookie's progress in terms of WAR. WAR is great statistic for determining what someone has done in the past, independent of the year/baseball team/era. In other words, its a great way to start off an HOF debate, or as a launching point for discussing who should be the MVP in a year.
WAR in and of itself tells us very little about how a player will perform in the future. It barely even measures what a player did in a small sample size.
A great example from this year is Xander himself. I can't find the stat right now, but I'm pretty sure Xander had ~0.5 WAR after the first month of the season; he's at -0.2 WAR now.

As I've stated, the exciting thing about Betts is that he is producing value in ways that may be projectable. Apart from his walk/swing rates, Xander has not done so at the major league level yet.
 

 
re:WAR; In my defense, I was just following the discussion where people questioned Mookie being a 5 WAR player or not, and responded with such.
 
Though, question: Are we talking about the offensive or defensive component of WAR?  And would the offensive component be fine to reference?
 
Regardless, I was unclear and sloppy.  And for the record, I do think people here throw around WAR way too liberally, in fact I got caught up in the discussion and am now guilty too.  I think WAR relies too much on faulty defensive statistics.  It's the type of stat that makes you think paying Carl Crawford 142M/7 years is a good idea.

 

[EricFeczko]

 
re:WAR; In my defense, I was just following the discussion where people questioned Mookie being a 5 WAR player or not, and responded with such.
 
Though, question: Are we talking about the offensive or defensive component of WAR?  And would the offensive component be fine to reference?
 
Regardless, I was unclear and sloppy.  And for the record, I do think people here throw around WAR way too liberally, in fact I got caught up in the discussion and am now guilty too.  I think WAR relies too much on faulty defensive statistics.  It's the type of stat that makes you think paying Carl Crawford 142M/7 years is a good idea.
 
To digress ... from same Keith Law chat, someone brought up the -- "well, was Trout then overvalued and Cabrerra undervalued?" line of thinking.

My apologies, I had read several posts in the thread before deciding to comment, so but you are certainly not the only one who did so.
My memory is faulty here, and I can't find a splits page document the WAR by months. However, if I recall correctly it was predominantly driven by his offensive contributions, but his offensive contributions were driven by a high walk rate, and an extremely high BABIP. He showed very little power, a below-average contact rate, and a high strikeout rate.
 
I wouldn't call the defensive statistics faulty. They have their flaws, but they are better than nothing, and remain reliable over large sample sizes. However, they are certainly near-useless with only a month of data. Of course, so is the offensive component, because it too is extremely unreliable over 100 PA.

 

[The Mort Report]

I live in Colorado now (my lovely little town gets to host Bud Light's Whatevertown, USA this weekend), so I dont watch nearly as often as I use to, but I got watch Betts homer tonight.  One thing that stood out to me on that HR was the ease and acceleration with which he gets through the strike zone and how he took such a direct path to the ball.  He didnt look like he was swinging hard but the ball took off like a rocket.  He seems to generate so much bat speed with such ease I cant think of a batter that swings like that yet generates so much power.

 

[foulkehampshire]

I live in Colorado now (my lovely little town gets to host Bud Light's Whatevertown, USA this weekend), so I dont watch nearly as often as I use to, but I got watch Betts homer tonight.  One thing that stood out to me on that HR was the ease and acceleration with which he gets through the strike zone and how he took such a direct path to the ball.  He didnt look like he was swinging hard but the ball took off like a rocket.  He seems to generate so much bat speed with such ease I cant think of a batter that swings like that yet generates so much power.

Andrew McCutchen. Albeit shorter.

 

[Adrian's Dome]

So....
Bill Burt ‏@BurtTalksSports  1h
According to Sox source, Jackie Bradley Jr. wasn't open to "fixing" his swing, which is key reason plans changed + he was sent to Pawtucket.
 
https://twitter.com/BurtTalksSports/status/506909726308073472
 
 

 
Is this actually a thing? Because if so, an unwillingness to work on his mechanics given his massive failures at the plate is...concerning.

 

[The Mort Report]

Andrew McCutchen. Albeit shorter.

 
Very true.  I'm sure there are a few more, and I'm not trying to compare him to one of the best hitters in the game, but to have a similar hit skill to him is impressive, especially at such a young age

 

[pantsparty]

Is this actually a thing? Because if so, an unwillingness to work on his mechanics given his massive failures at the plate is...concerning.

 
From a few weeks ago - http://www.providencejournal.com/sports/pawtucket-red-sox/content/20140822-pawsox-journal-bradley-tired-of-swing-advice.ece
 

Bradley isn’t quite buying all the criticism. He feels like his swing is “very similar if not the same as in the past,” and thus “there’s nothing saying that it can’t work.

“I’m continuing to make adjustments and just doing it. Stop trying to make it so much more complicated than what it really is — mechanical this, mechanical that,” Bradley said. “I’m getting back to just doing it, what I’ve always done my whole life and when I was successful. You don’t need to think. You don’t have time to think when you play this game. You just do it.”

 

[Hee Sox Choi]

I've read SeanToo and a few other people. Point still stands to not overreact on prospects because of what they could be.

Of all people, Tyrone Biggums should know the consequences of taking away our PROSPECT CRACK!  We're addicted and the high is oh-so-good.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

 
Is this actually a thing? Because if so, an unwillingness to work on his mechanics given his massive failures at the plate is...concerning.

 
It's hard to tell from what we're reading whether it's generalized inflexibility or a specific trust/communication failure with Colbrunn or whoever else on the current ML staff has been working with him. He may feel that they've messed him up and he needs to stop listening to them to get back on track. He may even conceivably be right. But if so, then a trade might be the best thing for all parties.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

BTW, Mookie's current line is gaudy enough in itself, but it includes his so-so pre-ASB stint. If you look at only his performance since rejoining the team on August 1, his line in 70 PA is .311/.400/.525 -- with a highly sustainable .320 BABIP and a 9:8 BB/K.
 
Yeah, the sample is still dinky, but for a 21-year-old who was in Greenville 14 months ago, that's pretty awesome.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

 
re:WAR; In my defense, I was just following the discussion where people questioned Mookie being a 5 WAR player or not, and responded with such.
 
Though, question: Are we talking about the offensive or defensive component of WAR?  And would the offensive component be fine to reference?
 
Regardless, I was unclear and sloppy.  And for the record, I do think people here throw around WAR way too liberally, in fact I got caught up in the discussion and am now guilty too.  I think WAR relies too much on faulty defensive statistics.  It's the type of stat that makes you think paying Carl Crawford 142M/7 years is a good idea.

We need to be more careful about responding to a discussion by simply reusing or just adjusting the stat bring used, especially with WAR, which gets abused regularly. Besides, looking for other ways to make a point can lead to a greater understanding of the issue as other stats or evidence will often provide greater context and may help to highlight weaknesses in some of what's already been offered as evidence in the thread to that point.

To answer your question about the offensive component of WAR, it's probably best to just use the components you are referencing with offensive WAR so that people don't mistake it for the full version of WAR. For example, at fangraphs you could just use wOBA or wRC+ to support most offensive arguments.

WAR can be a useful stat, but it is not the magical catch all stat that some people think it is. Until you get the defensive component to a stable sample size, it's tough to trust. So even in MVP discussions, chances are that citing WAR isn't the best way to make your point.

 

[HillysLastWalk]

Yes, you said exactly what I'm saying.  And yes, WAR is thrown around way too liberally, especially with a faulty defensive component.  And like it or not, if the rumors of a 2 pt Margin of Error are founded, WAR is a useless stat.
 
As I mentioned, someone questioned Mookie being a 5 WAR player.  And if we are going to use WAR (and ignore the problems with using WAR), yes, he might be.  The projections are aggressive.  He's failed to struggle since May 2013.  He's replicating his AAA success right now in the majors.  He's a stud.  As I've mentioned countless times, I'd have a hard time giving up Mookie Betts right now.  Even for Giancarlo Stanton (well, maybe).  But think about it, I'd consider an overpay on Lester and give up no prospects than to get a guy who you are going to have to shell out 9 figures for and give up 4 or 5 prospects.  Shouldn't the idea of playing X and Betts the next five years allow for an overpay every now and then?  But I don't want to digress ...  this is all about Mookie!

 

[ivanvamp]

I wonder if Mookie is getting to the point where they view him as pretty much untouchable.  I mean, if they think he'll end up being a 20 hr, 30 sb, .800 ops, 7-8 WAR guy who can play multiple positions when he hits his prime, isn't that pretty much a guy you cannot trade?

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

Okay Hilly, let me try this again, a little less gently. I'm not saying the same thing as you. I'm saying that it doesn't matter if people are framing a discussion with WAR, we should be a whole lot more conservative in using it, perhaps to the point that we stop all together. Using a single season of WAR (fangraphs or b-r) is almost always a bad idea. Extrapolating a full season projection from one month of WAR should be a bannable offense.

In using WAR the way you just did, even in responding to someone who has started the conversation off by using WAR, you have done nothing but demonstrate ignorance. Stop it. 1 WAR in a month does not support the claim that Mookie is a 5 WAR player.

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

I wonder if Mookie is getting to the point where they view him as pretty much untouchable.  I mean, if they think he'll end up being a 20 hr, 30 sb, .800 ops, 7-8 WAR guy who can play multiple positions when he hits his prime, isn't that pretty much a guy you cannot trade?

 
You're talking about one of the five best position players in baseball, so obviously you wouldn't trade that kind of player.  But projecting him that high is crazy.
 
I do think that Mookie is getting toward untouchable, or should be at least.  Stanton has never broken 6 fWAR in a season, and he'll come at a cost of 20+ million per year.  If we think the distribution of fairly likely outcomes with Mookie involves averaging somewhere between 2.5-6 fWAR per season over the next six years at very little cost, I'm not very enthusiastic about including him in a big trade package.

 

[Pumpsie]

I think that when it comes to prospects, you pretty much DON'T trade the one guy who shows he's the genuine thing on the big stage.  As far as finding a position for him, well, you eventually FIND a position for him, especially a guy who can play so many positions. In the meantime, you have yourself an incredibly valuable super-sub who you can move around without disturbing his bat, it seems, and get him 450 at bats, or more, a year.  Plus, the fans love him.  Mookie is the keeper.  Everyone else can be traded.

A lineup of Cespedes, Castillo and Betts pretty could pretty much settle the outfield issues for the near future with Betts possibly ending up the star of that group. Again, the kid is 21. 

Trading Betts would be like discovering oil on your property and then giving the drilling rights away to someone else.  Doesn't make sense.

 

[threecy]

I'm amazed by Pedroia.  Let's face it:  his hitting has been a huge disappointment this year.  But even still, he's put up this line:  .280/.340/.379/.719, with an ops+ of 103 and a 4.2 fWAR (4.9 bWAR).
 
So he's still an incredibly valuable player for this team, even if he never again reaches MVP-level.

One of the complaints is that he's not driving the ball as well as during his big seasons.  I haven't heard anything about it in awhile, but he did suffer a knee injury early in the season (they sent him to Boston for tests if I recall correctly).  That may be robbing him of some power...it could be a bit premature to pronounce a steep offensive decline.

 

[Hagios]

so will have a higher total WAR over the next five years: Betts or Pedroia?
 
Pedroia has been good for 5 WAR per season, but he's going to decline. So over the next 5 years lets say he goes 5,4,3,2,2 for a total of 16 WAR.
 
Mookie Betts has 0.7 WAR in 28 games (yes, SSS) which projects to 3.5 WAR over 150 games. So let's say he goes 4,4,4,4,4, for a total of 20 WAR.
 
Betts will be much cheaper.
 
Just sayin'

 

[Plympton91]

Pedroia SLG 2010 - 2014 (age 26 - 30)

493
474
449
415
379

But you know the last two numbers in that series are contaminated by acute, somewhat freak injuries, at least one of which required offseason surgery. And the underlying downward trend adjusting for injuries is consistent with everything else in baseball. I think concerns about further imminent deterioriation in his skills are overblown. Prior to the latest mishap, wasn't he having a pretty good second half?

If I had to write down a projection for next year I'd have no trouble betting on .290 / .350 / .430 and I wouldn't need long odds to take the over.

 

[rodderick]

so will have a higher total WAR over the next five years: Betts or Pedroia?
 
Pedroia has been good for 5 WAR per season, but he's going to decline. So over the next 5 years lets say he goes 5,4,3,2,2 for a total of 16 WAR.
 
Mookie Betts has 0.7 WAR in 28 games (yes, SSS) which projects to 3.5 WAR over 150 games. So let's say he goes 4,4,4,4,4, for a total of 20 WAR.
 
Betts will be much cheaper.
 
Just sayin'

 
There's no reason the Red Sox can't find a place for both. It's not an either/or situation.

 

[Hagios]

 the underlying downward trend adjusting for injuries is consistent with everything else in baseball. I think concerns about further imminent deterioriation in his skills are overblown. 

 
Are you sure about that? My understanding is that second basement, particularly small second basemen, do not age very well. 
 
 

 
There's no reason the Red Sox can't find a place for both. It's not an either/or situation.

 

 
True, but Betts is an above average defensive second basement, but he's a below average defender in center field. So either we're hoping he becomes an above average center fielder in a hurry or accept that his value to us is 1 or 2 WAR lower than it is to a team that can play him at second base.

 

[LondonSox]

The smart purely theoretical move (assuming someone gives you a meaningfully interesting return) is to trade Pedroia and start Betts at 2B for the next decade.
 
But, given the person, the leadership, the home town discount, the marketing impact and the potential disaster if it went south makes it very very unlikely. If not impossible.
But if you could get s young star in the making back you'd really have to think about it (I mean in theory if they offered you Haywood for Pedroia and one of the AAA starters ....)? One problem being the Sox cannot IMO investigate the trade without being set on it. If the story (when?) gets out it could be a disaster. But if a team called with an offer that looked great I'd personally seriously think about it.
 
Betts is very very similar to Pedroia statistically but he's younger to reach MLB and faster than Pedroia ever was. The danger with Pedroia was always (IMO) a steep decline. The reason scouts were dubious on him was that swing. He doesn't need to lose much to make that a potential issue. And if he can't swing from his heels and still adjust any more then either the power goes or the Ks explode. Note that this is by some way the worse BB:K ratio (and the only other one where he really had more Ks than BB was 2012). 
 
Now I love Dustin. I don't see this happening. But unemotionally, it is probably the smart play. Trade him now and he has value. This year repeated with a further slip? People might not take that contract period. 

 

[LesterFan]

Jackie Bradley Jr. @JackieBradleyJr

Say what you want about me as a ball player but trying to tarnish my character or my work ethic isn't going to fly..truth will reveal itself

 

[genoasalami]

 
Jackie Bradley Jr. @JackieBradleyJr

Say what you want about me as a ball player but trying to tarnish my character or my work ethic isn't going to fly..truth will reveal itself

 

Oh boy .....one of the truths is that you are immature. 

 

[nvalvo]

Oh boy .....one of the truths is that you are immature. 

 
Really? I think he's handled his bad season pretty well, all things considered. 

 

[Hagios]

The smart purely theoretical move (assuming someone gives you a meaningfully interesting return) is to trade Pedroia and start Betts at 2B for the next decade.
 
But, given the person, the leadership, the home town discount, the marketing impact and the potential disaster if it went south makes it very very unlikely. If not impossible.

 
I've been arguing for Betts but I think you're right. That's why they need to trade Betts. He's a young cost-controlled player who's proven himself at the major league level and. His current value is almost as high as X's was after last season. They've got a log jam in the outfield and that's not his natural position. Betts is to good too be a super-sub. Sell high on Betts and accept that Pedrioa is an underpay now but will probably be an overpay in a few years.

 

[HillysLastWalk]

Okay Hilly, let me try this again, a little less gently. I'm not saying the same thing as you. I'm saying that it doesn't matter if people are framing a discussion with WAR, we should be a whole lot more conservative in using it, perhaps to the point that we stop all together. Using a single season of WAR (fangraphs or b-r) is almost always a bad idea. Extrapolating a full season projection from one month of WAR should be a bannable offense.

In using WAR the way you just did, even in responding to someone who has started the conversation off by using WAR, you have done nothing but demonstrate ignorance. Stop it. 1 WAR in a month does not support the claim that Mookie is a 5 WAR player.

 
Snod, we are saying the same thing.  Really, we are.
 
Here is what I said:
 

And for the record, I do think people here throw around WAR way too liberally, in fact I got caught up in the discussion and am now guilty too.

 
That to me is very similar to:
 

, we should be a whole lot more conservative in using it, perhaps to the point that we stop all together.

 
Seriously, what's the difference?  I'm saying the same thing as you.  In fact, I'm the one mentioning the margin of error, and the fact that this may be a useless stat (if so).  I am at least trying to point out flaws with that stat, even if you don't think it sounds exactly like what you are saying.
 
But then you follow it up with this, as if I'm some simpleton:
 

In using WAR the way you just did, even in responding to someone who has started the conversation off by using WAR, you have done nothing but demonstrate ignorance. Stop it. 1 WAR in a month does not support the claim that Mookie is a 5 WAR player.

 
Seriously, one, who made you message board police?  And two, what kind of tone is this to even take with someone?  How does this promote discussion when you stoop to this level?  The snark, or choose a better word, around here should be a bannable offense.
 
And it's like if you missed this entirely:
 

...in fact I got caught up in the discussion and am now guilty too.

 
As if I hadn't already spoke on this subject.  But you *still* had to come in and show-off.  Why?
 
It's not as if I said this as to why I think Mookie shouldn't be traded:
 

The projections are aggressive.  He's failed to struggle since May 2013.  He's replicating his AAA success right now in the majors.  He's a stud.

 
Where am I mentioning WAR here?  And why aren't you "going after" others?  Why are you chiming in now?  TomRicardo is the one that even led us all down this path.  Why didn't you chime in then and explain it to him "less gently"?
 
I'm struggling to figure out what you are doing right now.  It's odd, and you should probably "stop it".  There's better ways of having a discussion then trying to talk down to me, which I suggest you shouldn't do.  Again, I'm not upset, just puzzled by you trying to show off.  If you want to have a discussion about this - PM me.  Thanks.

 

[genoasalami]

 
Really? I think he's handled his bad season pretty well, all things considered. 

I think his tweet screams immature ....or at least sensitive, but he is only 24 and is going through a tough time ...it would probably serve him well to do all he can to improve and that includes embracing his coaching in PAW.

 

[HillysLastWalk]

But you know the last two numbers in that series are contaminated by acute, somewhat freak injuries, at least one of which required offseason surgery. And the underlying downward trend adjusting for injuries is consistent with everything else in baseball. I think concerns about further imminent deterioriation in his skills are overblown. Prior to the latest mishap, wasn't he having a pretty good second half?

If I had to write down a projection for next year I'd have no trouble betting on .290 / .350 / .430 and I wouldn't need long odds to take the over.

 
Is Pedroia injured this year?  Has that come out as factual?  I know people are hoping/guessing that this is the case, but I haven't heard of any freakish injuries this year.  But I might be missing information, or misunderstanding what you are saying.

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

I think his tweet screams immature ....or at least sensitive, but he is only 24 and is going through a tough time ...it would probably serve him well to do all he can to improve and that includes embracing his coaching in PAW.

 
I think it screams "Fuck off and leave me alone - you don't know what you're talking about"
 
OTOH - this is Twitter - from which professional athletes - and movie stars - should be banned for life

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

 
Is Pedroia injured this year?  Has that come out as factual?  I know people are hoping/guessing that this is the case, but I haven't heard of any freakish injuries this year.  But I might be missing information, or misunderstanding what you are saying.

 
I believe his thumb injury is still a day to day annoyance.

 

[8slim]

I assume you guys know he's not just tweeting out of the blue, but rather he's responding to something:
 
http://www.overthemonster.com/2014/9/3/6099315/jackie-bradley-demotion-triple-a-mookie-betts

 

[smastroyin]

I think Farrell's public comments questioning JBJ's stubbornness and ability to follow instruction are more concerning than anything that JBJ says, given that Farrell is a middle aged man who is already in an established career and not fighting for his professional life.
 
If this is going to be an organization that wants to break in 3-5 young players per year or whatever the stated goal was, you absolutely have to figure out how to get through and help guys that are slumping, not throw them under the bus when they are understandably frustrated that things that have been working for them for years and years stop working.  

 

[normstalls]

 
Is Pedroia injured this year?  Has that come out as factual?  I know people are hoping/guessing that this is the case, but I haven't heard of any freakish injuries this year.  But I might be missing information, or misunderstanding what you are saying.

Didn't he hurt his wrist during the home opener and he hurt his knee back in June...  My guess is people are just hoping/thinking these nagging injuries are dragging his production down.  The only problem is I think there will always be nagging injuries, hence at some point your production is what your production is.

 

[HillysLastWalk]

 
I believe his thumb injury is still a day to day annoyance.

 
To clarify: Last year's injury?
 
If so (or even not), does anyone happen to have any link that mentioned anything about the thumb for this year?  I really haven't heard anything about any type of injuries (other than normal maintenance) for this year.
 
The last thing I've read on this subject was in July: http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2014/07/23/john-farrell-on-dh-dustin-pedroia-playing-at-100-percent-as-far-as-i-know/
 
Now, of course, I'm sure Dustin wouldn't be pleased if some type of injury information did leak.  Sure.  But as of July 23rd, they were proclaiming him 100% (other than day-to-day maintenance that everyone goes through).

 

[HillysLastWalk]

Didn't he hurt his wrist during the home opener and he hurt his knee back in June...  My guess is people are just hoping/thinking these nagging injuries are dragging his production down.  The only problem is I think there will always be nagging injuries, hence at some point your production is what your production is.

 
This is what I'm thinking too.  There's been a lot of "well, he has to be injured" scuttlebutt on these boards.  I have a feeling it's taking a life of his own and is now being quoted as truth.  And maybe there is truth to it, and we will find out in the off-season the real issues, but then again, maybe not.  The SLG decline may be more age-related decline than injury.  Hopefully not (of course).

 

[Hagios]

 
This is what I'm thinking too.  There's been a lot of "well, he has to be injured" scuttlebutt on these boards.  I have a feeling it's taking a life of his own and is now being quoted as truth.  And maybe there is truth to it, and we will find out in the off-season the real issues, but then again, maybe not.  The SLG decline may be more age-related decline than injury.  Hopefully not (of course).

 
Or the age-related decline makes him more injury prone. Those hard swings and stingers inflame the joints more and it takes longer to heal. Getting old sucks and nagging injuries is a big part of it.

 

[geoduck no quahog]

1 basement is enough.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

The smart purely theoretical move (assuming someone gives you a meaningfully interesting return) is to trade Pedroia and start Betts at 2B for the next decade.
 
But, given the person, the leadership, the home town discount, the marketing impact and the potential disaster if it went south makes it very very unlikely. If not impossible.
But if you could get s young star in the making back you'd really have to think about it (I mean in theory if they offered you Haywood for Pedroia and one of the AAA starters ....)? One problem being the Sox cannot IMO investigate the trade without being set on it. If the story (when?) gets out it could be a disaster. But if a team called with an offer that looked great I'd personally seriously think about it.
 
Betts is very very similar to Pedroia statistically but he's younger to reach MLB and faster than Pedroia ever was. The danger with Pedroia was always (IMO) a steep decline. The reason scouts were dubious on him was that swing. He doesn't need to lose much to make that a potential issue. And if he can't swing from his heels and still adjust any more then either the power goes or the Ks explode. Note that this is by some way the worse BB:K ratio (and the only other one where he really had more Ks than BB was 2012). 
 
Now I love Dustin. I don't see this happening. But unemotionally, it is probably the smart play. Trade him now and he has value. This year repeated with a further slip? People might not take that contract period. 

So if Betts doesn't do well and Pedroia rebounds then you're in a situation where you overpay a free agent to replace his bat or wait until the next big thing comes through the system...the Sox don't have to choose between the two.

 

[threecy]

 
Is Pedroia injured this year?  Has that come out as factual?  I know people are hoping/guessing that this is the case, but I haven't heard of any freakish injuries this year.  But I might be missing information, or misunderstanding what you are saying.

I could have sworn he hurt his knee early in the season, but there is also this:
 
"Pedroia initially injured the wrist against the Brewers on April 4 and has struggled mightily since. The soreness became great enough that he reportedly couldn't get through hitting drills Sunday. Now he's on his way to Boston while his team travels from New York to Chicago for a three-game series against the White Sox."
 
http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/eye-on-baseball/24526273/%3Ca%20href=
 
 
Regarding Pedroia and Betts, if Pedroia's no longer able to play 2B daily in the future, I imagine they could move him to something like left field.  Biggio and Carew, offhand, moved around a bit later in their careers.

 

[DJnVa]

 
I'm struggling to figure out what you are doing right now.  It's odd, and you should probably "stop it".  There's better ways of having a discussion then trying to talk down to me, which I suggest you shouldn't do.  Again, I'm not upset, just puzzled by you trying to show off.  If you want to have a discussion about this - PM me.  Thanks.

 
Jesus, yes. PM each other.