JBJ: Elite Defender With Some Pop

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
21,510
Rogers Park
The competition for defense in CF is amazing right now, which means the replacement level is high. Value that used to be over and above a typical roster is now more like an ante — you need a good defensive CF just to be league average in terms of OF defense.

Bradley's tremendous, we know. But there's also: Leonys Martin, Billy Hamilton, Lorenzo Cain, Ender Inciarte, Kevin Pillar, Michael Taylor, Jarrod Dyson, Manuel Margot, Kevin Kiermaier, Ramon Laureano, Byron Buxton...

That level of defensive talent at a position lowers the WAR a player can accrue, if I understand things right. (Is that right? It's hard to keep that stuff straight. There are fewer Denard Span/Adam Jones types out there playing a barely competent CF.

It could just be noise. Don't defensive metrics need like 3 year sample sizes?
And his three year sample is +10, +6, +11 runs. That's pretty great. That makes him 21st among defensive players at all positions over that span. The top of the list is your rangey, sure-handed shortstops: Simmons, Lindor, Iglesias, Crawford. Then Betts, then a bunch of high end defensive catchers, mixed in with a few more shortstops. Kiermaier and Hamilton are above Bradley, and Pillar is level with him. What I'm saying is that his numbers aren't underwhelming. They indicate that he is indeed one of the best defensive players in the game at any position.
 

SirPsychoSquints

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
5,013
Pittsburgh, PA
Here's Jackie's and Mookie's fangraphs pages, if you want to compare them:

https://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=12984&position=OF
https://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=13611&position=OF

Scroll down about 3/4ths of the way and you find Advanced Fielding and a column headed DRS, for Defensive Runs Saved. Like I said, Mookie has 15, OK, but Jackie has only 3, only 1 as a CF. I looked up fangraphs definition of DRS and I still don't understand why JBJ's DRS numbers aren't higher, which they have been in his prior years. Maybe because he has just average speed in getting to balls? But didn't he have approximately the same speed in prior years, or is he slowing down. That can't be it, except remember the incredible catch he made that they rated as 44% or something catchable? All the commentators were saying had to be <10% catchable and give us a break.

http://fieldingbible.com/Fielding-Bible-FAQ.asp

Oh well, JBJ's defensive WAR component is a strong 11.3, in spite of his only average DRS. I think he wins the gold glove.
A couple things - see BS79's comment - these are small samples for fielding, unfortunately. They're saying he's essentially been an average CFer - and they're saying Betts has been a spectacular RFer. These numbers, I think, are based around the position they're playing, so JBJ is being compared to CFers and Betts is being compared to RFers.

fWAR appears to use UZR, not DRS, for their WAR calculations - UZR has him at 8.9 runs above average for CF, which is a 13.7 pace over 150 games, which is higher than his career numbers.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
21,510
Rogers Park
But....it's just not happening for him. An entire season of mostly bad luck. Maybe that will turn around here in September and October.
It is happening, though.

He's raised his OPS .200 points since Cora benched him for a few days in mid-May, by posting an entirely respectable .252/.327/.444 line. The full season numbers still sucked, of course, because his early slump dug such a deep hole.
 
It could just be noise. Don't defensive metrics need like 3 year sample sizes?
I could be wrong about this, but I'm pretty sure that they need multi year samples to be predictive. If their system of quantification is solid, the numbers they produce in a small sample size should still at least vaguely approximate what the eye test tells you about that same set of plays. If there is a large discrepancy between what the eye test and what the statistic say, then one of three things is happening:

  • There is an error in the way the statistic's computation is receiving data
  • There is a problem in the way the statistic's computation is processing the data
  • The statistic is detecting some data that is important that the eye-test tends to either miss or mischaracterize
I don't understand the guts of advanced defensive metrics to comment on the first two, but the third possibility is at least worth considering. As spectators we are going to have an understandable bias in the way we acquire and process data about defensive plays. We tend to pay the most initial attention to the final part of defensive plays -- from when the ball is close to being fielded to when the play ends. If the play was good enough to warrant a replay we might pay attention to other aspects of the play like positioning, reaction time, routes etc. but by then we've probably already anchored on an initial opinion on the quality of the play and probably won't adjust sufficiently for new information.

Consider the following hypothetical outfielder who has these qualities:

  • Generational speed
  • Generational glove work and acrobatics
  • Mediocre to poor reaction time
  • Mediocre to poor route selection
Because of the way we tend to experience defensive plays, spectators would see a lot of dramatic plays that would certainly give the impression of extreme defensive prowess and probably miss the fact that some of those plays were dramatic because the player reacted a bit more slowly than average or took a worse than average route. Unless commentators created a narrative about the reaction time issues and route selection, most spectators probably wouldn't notice. Also, because of simple variance the player would occasionally make genuinely spectacular plays when taking a good route with a quick reaction (for him). The presence of these plays would likely create further bias, reinforcing the impression of quality on other plays that might not really deserve that rating.

Now, there is also the possibility for problems in the way a metric calculates defensive ability. Let's say the above player tends to be lazy on easy plays, taking bad routes and with a slow reaction but still recording the out at the same or better rates as expected. One could imagine a defensive metric still giving a minor penalty for that poor reaction time and poor route taking despite the fact that the outcome was actually fine. Since routine plays are much more common, a player could be legitimately way above average (particularly if they are able to "turn it on" for difficult plays consistently) and still have their stat dragged down by a big pile of harmlessly sloppy routine plays.

If you imagine two different statistical analyses, one that places a greater weight on outcomes (out or not given a degree of difficulty based on batted ball profile and starting fielder position) and another that places a greater weight on raw components (acceleration, footspeed, route taken, reaction time, etc.) you can easily see how they might come up with radically different assessments of the aforementioned hypothetical player.
 

Dewey'sCannon

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
870
Maryland
My impression is that his depressed BABIP is attributable, at least in part, to defensive shifts, and therefore may be more than what we would think of as simply bad luck. But it also seems to me that part of the improvement in his numbers since May is based on greater success in going the other way to beat the shift. But I'm not sure where or how to look for the data to back this up.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
My impression is that his depressed BABIP is attributable, at least in part, to defensive shifts, and therefore may be more than what we would think of as simply bad luck. But it also seems to me that part of the improvement in his numbers since May is based on greater success in going the other way to beat the shift. But I'm not sure where or how to look for the data to back this up.
Fangraphs' splits tool is what you're looking for.

Here's his basic batted-ball data by month for 2018:

https://www.fangraphs.com/splitstool.aspx?playerid=12984&position=OF&splitArr=&strgroup=month&statgroup=3&startDate=2018-3-1&endDate=2018-11-1&filter=&statType=player&autoPt=true&players=&pg=0&pageItems=30&sort=-1,1

And here's the batted-ball data vs. the shift:

https://www.fangraphs.com/splitstool.aspx?playerid=12984&position=OF&splitArr=82&strgroup=month&statgroup=3&startDate=2018-3-1&endDate=2018-11-1&filter=&statType=player&autoPt=true&players=&pg=0&pageItems=30&sort=-1,1

Actually he's been hitting the ball the opposite way less in his hot 2nd half than his cold first half. But he's also been pulling it less; he's just been hitting the ball up the middle a ton. And hitting it much harder. Maybe focusing too much on going the other way was messing with his swing mechanics, his head, or both.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Just to add more context and to show how extreme it is. When he's on, he's essentially a HOF. A .900 OPS bat with generational defense at CF. When he's off, he's worse than Darren Lewis.

2018:
First 251 PA: .178/.275/.288 .232 BAbip
Last 155: .294/.354/.525, .366 BAbip.

2017:
First 292 PA: .290/.363/.490, .319 BAbip
Last 249 PA: .204/.277/.302, .265 BAbip

2016:
First 387 PA: .306/.385/.556, .349 BAbip
Last 249 PA: .206/.293/.376, .246 BAbip

2015:
First 71 PA: .121/.254/.172, .146 BAbip
Last 184 PA: .294/.366/.613, .375 BAbip

Pretty remarkable. Over 2400 PA and we still aren't really sure what we'll get from JBJ next year. If you remove his first 2 years of play due to him being rushed, he's slashed .249/.330/.441 in 1878 PA. I used to be ok with ignoring those 2 seasons because when you follow his career trend, it fit the narrative. The last 2 seasons have shown he's perfectly capable of hitting like 2013/14 JBJ for 200+ PA samples at any given time tho.

I wish all his cold streaks were more in line with his 2nd half of 2016. That's still at least a somewhat productive player and is a lot easier a hole to dig yourself out of. I'm really curious how he ages and to see if his streaks become shorter or more prolonged. Signing JBJ long term would be an interesting proposal. He could easily be a steal or overpaid depending on their evaluation of his offense.

I could easily see JBJ hitting .270/.350/.510 or .215/.320/.370 next season. The variance is huge.
Or, as has been his wont, both!
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,049
Fangraphs' splits tool is what you're looking for.

Here's his basic batted-ball data by month for 2018:

https://www.fangraphs.com/splitstool.aspx?playerid=12984&position=OF&splitArr=&strgroup=month&statgroup=3&startDate=2018-3-1&endDate=2018-11-1&filter=&statType=player&autoPt=true&players=&pg=0&pageItems=30&sort=-1,1

And here's the batted-ball data vs. the shift:

https://www.fangraphs.com/splitstool.aspx?playerid=12984&position=OF&splitArr=82&strgroup=month&statgroup=3&startDate=2018-3-1&endDate=2018-11-1&filter=&statType=player&autoPt=true&players=&pg=0&pageItems=30&sort=-1,1

Actually he's been hitting the ball the opposite way less in his hot 2nd half than his cold first half. But he's also been pulling it less; he's just been hitting the ball up the middle a ton. And hitting it much harder. Maybe focusing too much on going the other way was messing with his swing mechanics, his head, or both.
Does anybody calculate BABIP on hard hit balls v. medium etc., the way some of the teams do?
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Does anybody calculate BABIP on hard hit balls v. medium etc., the way some of the teams do?
You can get that info from the splits tool, though I can't find an explanation on FG of how the categories are defined, whether they're using somebody else's definitions or this is their own parsing of raw exit velocity data.

So this one, for instance, gives you their "Advanced" tab on hard hit balls broken down by month--surprise, surprise, Jackie's BABIP on these is near .600 for this past month and was under .400 for April and June. (MLB average is .449.)

https://www.fangraphs.com/splitstool.aspx?playerid=12984&position=OF&splitArr=18&strgroup=month&statgroup=2&startDate=2018-3-1&endDate=2018-11-1&filter=&statType=player&autoPt=true&players=&pg=0&pageItems=30&sort=-1,1
 

SirPsychoSquints

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
5,013
Pittsburgh, PA
Does anybody calculate BABIP on hard hit balls v. medium etc., the way some of the teams do?
So here's a way to get it for JBJ - I'll look to see if I can get it league-wide:

Soft, .167 this year - a couple months with zero, one with .750 - these are tiny sample sizes
https://www.fangraphs.com/splitstool.aspx?playerid=12984&position=OF&splitArr=16&strgroup=month&statgroup=2&startDate=all&endDate=all&filter=&statType=player&autoPt=true&players=&pg=0&pageItems=30&sort=-1,1

Medium, .203 this year, weak in Mar/Apr, June & July, stronger elsewhere
https://www.fangraphs.com/splitstool.aspx?playerid=12984&position=OF&splitArr=17&strgroup=month&statgroup=2&startDate=all&endDate=all&filter=&statType=player&autoPt=true&players=&pg=0&pageItems=30&sort=-1,1

Hard, .452 this year, weak in Mar/Apr & June, stronger elsewhere
https://www.fangraphs.com/splitstool.aspx?playerid=12984&position=OF&splitArr=18&strgroup=month&statgroup=2&startDate=all&endDate=all&filter=&statType=player&autoPt=true&players=&pg=0&pageItems=30&sort=-1,1

Edit: to make it the monthly splits
 

bellowthecat

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2010
589
Massachusetts
Just want to add a bit more context to the defensive part of the conversation. Typical small sample size caveats apply here as always when discussing fielding evaluations.
I set the innings minimum to 500 innings at CF and this is where JBJ currently ranks out of the 24 players with enough innings in 2018:

2nd by UZR with 8.9, built largely on the back of a 6.7 ARM component.
14th by DRS with 0.
9th in Real Zone Rating with a .940.

If I also include the data from 2017 (min 1000 innings at CF) we get a list of 28 players:

3rd by UZR with 12.6.
6th by UZR/150 with 8.7.
13th by DRS with 10.

I know we don't need numbers to know that Jackie is a good defender, but the numbers certainly help to highlight how stacked the competition for CF GG has been and continues to be.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,049
OK, so this is cool... so why do they make it so hard?

Couldn't they put together a tool that made a little three by three table with Soft/Medium/Hard along the X-axis and GB/LD/FB down the Y-axis and then maybe a 4th row/coum for group aggregates, and then you'd have all of this info in space. And you could do it for BA/OBP/SLG/wOBA or whatever.

Seems like people would have a blast poring over them looking for correlations--maybe player specific ones that tell us something. I dunno.

Thanks for letting me know it's there, though!
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
21,510
Rogers Park
In the ballpark last night, they threw a stat on the board that was actually, for once, interesting. The jumbotron noted that JBJ's SB success rate for his career, 43 SB against 6 CS or 87.8%, is the best among active players, presumably clearing some threshold.

So I just downloaded some data and checked: lo and behold, for active players with more than two attempted SB, the career leaderboard goes:

1 Jackie Bradley, Jr, 87.8% on 49 attempts
2 Cody Bellinger, 87% on 23 attempts
3 Andrew Benintendi, 85.4% on 48 attempts
4 Josh Donaldson, 85% on 40 attempts
5 Mike Trout, 84.9% on 219 attempts (!!!)
6 Zack Cozart, 84% on 25 attempts
7 Mookie Betts, 83.5% on 127 attempts
8 Tim Anderson, 83.3% on 60 attempts
9 Jacoby Ellsbury, 82.9% on 414 attempts (!!!)
10 Trea Turner, 82.6% on 138 attempts

People here are going to be familiar with the idea that if you can only steal bases at about a 75% clip, you're basically giving away in outs all the value you're accruing by swiping bags, so a good percentage is maybe even more important than high absolute totals. The league's rate is 73.4, FWIW.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,049
In the ballpark last night, they threw a stat on the board that was actually, for once, interesting. The jumbotron noted that JBJ's SB success rate for his career, 43 SB against 6 CS or 87.8%, is the best among active players, presumably clearing some threshold.

So I just downloaded some data and checked: lo and behold, for active players with more than two attempted SB, the career leaderboard goes:

1 Jackie Bradley, Jr, 87.8% on 49 attempts
2 Cody Bellinger, 87% on 23 attempts
3 Andrew Benintendi, 85.4% on 48 attempts
4 Josh Donaldson, 85% on 40 attempts
5 Mike Trout, 84.9% on 219 attempts (!!!)
6 Zack Cozart, 84% on 25 attempts
7 Mookie Betts, 83.5% on 127 attempts
8 Tim Anderson, 83.3% on 60 attempts
9 Jacoby Ellsbury, 82.9% on 414 attempts (!!!)
10 Trea Turner, 82.6% on 138 attempts

People here are going to be familiar with the idea that if you can only steal bases at about a 75% clip, you're basically giving away in outs all the value you're accruing by swiping bags, so a good percentage is maybe even more important than high absolute totals. The league's rate is 73.4, FWIW.
I want to know what other people look like to JBJ.

What does he see?
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
In the ballpark last night, they threw a stat on the board that was actually, for once, interesting. The jumbotron noted that JBJ's SB success rate for his career, 43 SB against 6 CS or 87.8%, is the best among active players, presumably clearing some threshold.

[snip]

People here are going to be familiar with the idea that if you can only steal bases at about a 75% clip, you're basically giving away in outs all the value you're accruing by swiping bags, so a good percentage is maybe even more important than high absolute totals. The league's rate is 73.4, FWIW.
So no one is 3 for 3?

I'd have lost that bet
 

SirPsychoSquints

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
5,013
Pittsburgh, PA
Yeah - he said more than 2 SB attempts. There are a bunch of players with perfect sb percents, including Lane Adams who is 10 for 10.
Quintin berry is 29 for 31.
Byron buxton is 46 for 51.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,049
Yeah, I posted the B-Ref link because it had discrepancies from this too. I dunno.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
21,510
Rogers Park
I guess the Fangraphs data I was looking at was using a definition of “active players” that excluded a few guys. Buxton, Berry and Adams are all in the minors right now, for instance.
 

The Needler

New Member
Dec 7, 2016
1,803
I guess the Fangraphs data I was looking at was using a definition of “active players” that excluded a few guys. Buxton, Berry and Adams are all in the minors right now, for instance.
In any event, if you’re using fangraphs, you may as well use wSB rather than SB success percentage. You’re correct that up to the break even point (which varies depending on game situation, e.g., a 2-out steal of Second has a much lower break even percentage than a 0-out steal of third), the success percentage matters more than raw totals, but it should go without saying than stealing 9 out of 10 bases is much, much less valuable than stealing 89 out of 100. Fangraphs has done much of that work with its wSB statistic. Bradley is very good, but not close to top of the league (over his career).
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
My impression is that his depressed BABIP is attributable, at least in part, to defensive shifts, and therefore may be more than what we would think of as simply bad luck. But it also seems to me that part of the improvement in his numbers since May is based on greater success in going the other way to beat the shift. But I'm not sure where or how to look for the data to back this up.
Or it could be just that HIS HITS LEAVE THE FREAKING PARK!!!
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Someone noted in a game thread, maybe even after his double in Game 2, that if this is the start of one of JBJ’s insanely hot streaks, then the Astros are screwed.
His playoffs stats are wacky:
— more doubles than singles
— more HRs than singles
— 5 hits in 24 AB, but 4 of those 5 are for extra bases.
— more walks than hits (6 to 5)
— .208/.387/.542 for a .929 OPS
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,390
JBJ as an all-time elite defensive CF that hits .225 is still a plus asset.

JBJ as an all-time elite defensive CF that is raking is a dominant baseball player.

Let's hope that he's launching into that latter category for the playoffs.
 

brandonchristensen

Loves Aaron Judge
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2012
38,187
What do we do with him going forward?

He's a Boras client, he's 28, and he's heading into his first Arb year. Do we try and sign him to a team friendly deal to retain the Killer B's outfield? He made 6.1M this year, I have no idea what to expect out of Arb1 for him.

It's wild that him, Bogaerts, EdRo, Holt, Wright, Workman, Barnes, Hembree, Swihart and Betts are all hitting Arb next year.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
What do we do with him going forward?

He's a Boras client, he's 28, and he's heading into his first Arb year. Do we try and sign him to a team friendly deal to retain the Killer B's outfield? He made 6.1M this year, I have no idea what to expect out of Arb1 for him.

It's wild that him, Bogaerts, EdRo, Holt, Wright, Workman, Barnes, Hembree, Swihart and Betts are all hitting Arb next year.
Didn't Jackie hit arb 1 this year? At least, he only has two years of arb left. So I think we're wondering about arb 2.

I tend to suspect that a pre-emptive deal won't happen, because of his age. He'll be hitting FA for his age-31 season. There's not much incentive for him to accept a contract that buys out, say, two FA years, because then he hits FA at 33, and that's getting into the territory where clubs won't want to give multiple years, unless he's blossomed into a superstar in the meantime (and in that scenario, he'd be better off going for the age-31 payday). So the only kind of deal I would think he'd accept would be something pretty long -- at least 6 years, buying out 4 years of FA and effectively becoming his one and only big contract. And I don't think the Sox will want to do that.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
21,510
Rogers Park
Didn't Jackie hit arb 1 this year? At least, he only has two years of arb left. So I think we're wondering about arb 2.

I tend to suspect that a pre-emptive deal won't happen, because of his age. He'll be hitting FA for his age-31 season. There's not much incentive for him to accept a contract that buys out, say, two FA years, because then he hits FA at 33, and that's getting into the territory where clubs won't want to give multiple years, unless he's blossomed into a superstar in the meantime (and in that scenario, he'd be better off going for the age-31 payday). So the only kind of deal I would think he'd accept would be something pretty long -- at least 6 years, buying out 4 years of FA and effectively becoming his one and only big contract. And I don't think the Sox will want to do that.
He's a "super two," due to his early accrual of service time. So this season was actually his second out of what will be four arbitration years. Just to clarify.

But your reasoning about the incentives seems correct. Unless he decides that this is where he wants to be — and I don't really see why he would, given that the media here must be kind of a nightmare for a guy whose career has taken the path his has — I don't see the teams coming together for an extension.

I would imagine that he's looking at Lorenzo Cain's contract (5/$80), and thinking he should get something like that.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
Also just saw this article posted by Chris Mason. It talks about JBJ’s work this offseason to retool his swing. It also talks about JBJ meeting with JD’s hitting savant Craig Wallenbrock

FORT MYERS — Jackie Bradley Jr. had more to give. Far more.

He was sure of it.

As the All-Star Game approached last summer, Bradley was hitting just .210. He’d toyed with the Mendoza Line — .200 — throughout the first half, averaged almost a strikeout per start and his .642 OPS was lower than that of Sandy Leon and since jettisoned Hanley Ramirez.

During one particularly bad slump Bradley struck out 22 times in 40 at-bats, and after one of those May punch outs, the normally reserved center fielder spiked his bat in frustration. When he did manage to hit the ball it was hard, but seemingly always right at somebody.

After three full months of frustration, he was fed up.

“I wanted to see a change,” Bradley said. “Yeah, I can hit the ball as hard as anyone, but that doesn’t matter if it’s on the ground or if it’s in the shift. I want to be able to impact the baseball and get extra-base hits. Not only that, but be consistently able to make contact.”

So Bradley sought out J.D. Martinez.

The Triple Crown threat was preaching the gospel of launch angle and gathering more disciples in the Red Sox clubhouse by the day.

“I was like, listen, you can do this,” Martinez said. “You can try it out for a couple days, then it doesn’t work and then you’re going to go back, but I believe in this.”

That wouldn’t be the case. Bradley was committed to the change.

“He bought into it,” Martinez said. “He said, ‘I have nothing right now and let’s do it.’ He really dove into it, man.”
Martinez had plenty on his plate — in addition to his own swing, he’d taken Mookie Betts under his wing — and hitting coaches Tim Hyers and Andy Barkett only have so many hours they can devote to each player.

So Martinez suggested Bradley call Craig Wallenbrock, a 72-year-old hitting savant that had helped him rebuild his own swing.

Wallenbrock is essentially the Dr. Frankenstein that turned Martinez into a baseball-bashing monster. He’s also a close confidant of hitting coach Tim Hyers, so everybody in the Red Sox clubhouse was on board.

“We share ideas like mad scientists working together,” Hyers said. “It’s really fun. For a hitting coach, we love doing that.”

“(Martinez) was finding that he was trying to help so many of his teammates out that he wasn’t able to do the drills he likes to do,” Wallenbrock said. “So he gave Jackie my number. Said, ‘By phone isn’t the best way to do it, but maybe you can start sending Craig some film and he can talk to you, exchange thoughts, and maybe he can make a little video from time to time that might help you.’”

Wallenbrock certainly had some thoughts and Bradley kept his phone close by, eager to listen.
https://www.eagletribune.com/sports/local_sports/mason-the-inside-scoop-on-jackie-bradley-jr-s-new/article_59b4befd-8c20-55d8-91d0-388f97d2d5ed.html


Read the rest at the link.
 

teddywingman

Looks like Zach Galifianakis
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2009
11,173
a basement on the hill
Cool article. Interesting to read the inside stories of how hitting coaches work and interact with others who aren't on the payroll.

I anticipate a great season from JBJ. We know he has it in him, but this confirms a scientific approach and focus like JDM.
 

CarolinaBeerGuy

Don't know him from Adam
SoSH Member
Mar 14, 2006
9,539
Kernersville, NC
For those that have watched closely, is JBJ still using his "new and improved" swing? I loved the fact that he was working with JDM and I know he is a streaky hitter. The results definitely aren't there yet (SSS caveat) - .184/.205/.211 with a .269 BABIP. Just curious to know if his swing looks retooled.
 

SouthernBoSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2005
12,085
For those that have watched closely, is JBJ still using his "new and improved" swing? I loved the fact that he was working with JDM and I know he is a streaky hitter. The results definitely aren't there yet (SSS caveat) - .184/.205/.211 with a .269 BABIP. Just curious to know if his swing looks retooled.
It looks to me that in an effort to flatten his swing and get level with the ball, it's resulting in a lot of pop ups. It makes sense. His eye is trained to adjust to the ball in a completely different path, that path now is much lower then in the past, thus he's under the ball.
 

Granite Sox

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2003
5,057
The Granite State
JBJ explained in a Globe note yesterday that he feels he's "in between" with his changes, in other words some of his old habits are interspersed with his updated mechanics. He feels he needs to tweak a couple of things to refine his new/updated swing mechanism.
 

MuppetAsteriskTalk

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2015
5,398
On the radio broadcast today they mentioned he was toe tapping in the batters box. I thought I had read or heard he had worked to eliminate this. I wonder if that's what he means about old habits?
 

FanSinceTed

Charley Lau Jr.
May 11, 2018
7
My annual JBJ comment : ) He continues to cock his hands vertically just prior to triggering swing. Nothing new. It will remain his albatross, as it has since he came up. All the $$ they spend on video, and all the experts ..... and they just do not see it. Devers: same thing. Nunez, Benny - occasionally. Moreland ( when he is going bad ). It is straight out of youthful wiffle ball. Cock the hands and take a huge swing. ( JBJ is now even hitting with eyes partially closed - if you watch the slo-mo, head bobbing all over the place. ) There was a bit of promise when people talked about JBJ going to Miami to work with JDM. That, obviously, did not happen. JBJ is poster person for the old school of hitting. JDM is new school. ( the hands go back, but do NOT cock upwards with bat straight up and/or inverted back to pitcher ). I would hazard an early season guess that a big part of the Sox problems thus far are the old school hitting approach that many are allowed to do - thus creating holes in the lineup - and the fact that other teams are now hitting " new school " - hands back to go forward without distinctive cock and maximizing travel time through zone at upward angle. Call it " launch angle " if you will, but it is not really so new. Opponents are also ALL now doing proper prep on JBJ ( as was the case with the AL East teams; but not the other teams for the past several years. Remember that all of JBJ's " hot streaks " came against non-AL East segments of the Sox schedule ). Fastballs IN; slightly up with breaking stuff and changes away - away. He can't adjust. Too bad. All he has to do is simplify: hands a bit lower, back to go forward, left palm coming up to face the sky ..... easy. But seriously doubt we will ever see it. OK - back to anonymity. I still really like the guy and think he has a great competitive spirit. But, somehow, it just doesn't click for him.
 

MuzzyField

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
JBJ is the problem... not.

Maybe the focus should be on ALL the pitching not worth a shit. How many damaged arms and shoulders are being protected?

I can't wait until the arm saving "plan" unloads with a dominating August and September.
 

edoug

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
6,007
JBJ is the problem... not.

Maybe the focus should be on ALL the pitching not worth a shit. How many damaged arms and shoulders are being protected?

I can't wait until the arm saving "plan" unloads with a dominating August and September.
I'm not blaming Jackie for the Sox bad start. To put it nicely, the starters have been less than good. And you're right it's too early to give up on them.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
OPS wise, JBJ just had his worst full month as a pro, slashing .148/.224/.182 in 99 PA with 9bb/30k.

In April 2013, he hit .097/.263/.129 in his first 38 career MLB PA with 6bb/12k. In August of 2014, he hit .143/.205/.143 in 39 PA with 2bb/15k. He followed that up by hitting .028/.028/.028 in 36 PA in September. Anyone remotely following JBJ knows how he goes in prolonged slumps and hot streaks but this is either the worst or 2nd worst 100 PA stretch of his career.

I don't recall a player more Jekyll and Hyde than JBJ. His streaks last for 250-300 PA stretches too. it's not like he's hot and cold one month to the next. It's half season to half season.

2014
1st half: .227/.305/.311, 306 PA, 27bb/82k, 8.8% BB, 26.8% K, .319 BAbip
2nd half: .126/.162/.153, 117 PA, 4bb/39k, 3.4% BB, 33.3% K .192 BAbip

2015
1st half: .133/.229/.233, 35 PA, 4bb/10k, 11.4% BB, 28.6% K, .150 BAbip (too small a sample to mean anything really, still fits the trend though)
2nd half: .267/.352/.539, 220 PA, 23bb/59k, 10.5% BB, 26.8% K, .336 BAbip

2016
1st half: .296/.378/.548, 344 PA, 35bb/70k, 10.2% BB, 20.3% K, .342 BAbip
2nd half: .233/.315/.412, 292 PA, 28bb/73k, 9.6% BB, 25.0% K, .274 BAbip

2017
1st half: .280/.363/.490, 292 PA, 31bb/58k, 10.6% BB, 19.9% K, .319 BAbip
2nd half: .204/.277/.302, 249 PA 17bb/66k, 6.8% BB, 26.5% K, .265 BAbip

2018
1st half: .210/.297/.345 in 320 PA, 27bb/78k, 8.4% BB, 24.4% K, .265 BAbip
2nd half: .269/.340/.487 in 215 PA 19bb/59k, 8.8% BB, 27.4% K, .352 BAbip

2019
To date: .149/.236/.181 in 107 PA, 10bb/32k, 9.3% BB, 29.9% K rate, .222 BAbip

I don't know if it's an actual thing, but if it is.. it's going to be an ugly 2 months. It looks like he gets unlucky and then starts to press, walking less and striking out more which makes it even worse.