Betts to 2nd

[Snodgrass'Muff]

Yes, he hasn't proved it over a 162 game season.
 
So what I am doing is taking the leap.  No one said anything about "safely".  At this point, I can only go on my gut.  That's what I'm declaring when I say he's a 5 WAR player.  I've seen enough of his minor league track record and his seamless transition to the majors to feel this way - that over 162 games, you will see 5 WAR.  So now that you understand this, can I not get reprimanded?

 
No reprimanding. Just disagreeing with your thought process. No hard feelings, and apologies if you thought I was talking down or anything. I just don't think you can really support the claim that he's a 5 WAR player, even if you are saying it's just your opinion. The data just isn't there.
 
Is his sample size larger the Xanders? Yeah, if you limit it to just the stretch run of the 2013 season. If we include his playoff games and his good start this year, however, we get to 337. That's 50 in the regular 2013 season, 34 in the post season and 253 through June 7th, 2014 before he got cold. We may have to agree to disagree, but I just don't buy into the idea that Mookie is a safer bet than Bogaerts was before he got cold and spent the majority of the season looking lost.
 
Mookie has better contact skills, which helps, but 186 PAs just isn't enough to be making any kinds of declarations with any significant degree of confidence, IMO, opinions or not. Maybe your guess will be proven right next year, but I wouldn't be comfortable putting any substantial money on it.

 

[gryoung]

Really? On the Betts to 2nd thread your concern is... David Ortiz?
 
You know thats just wrong, you're talking about Big Papi here, a little respect.   The 'whine' stuff is the type of crap hyped up by asses like CHB and makes you sound like an ungrateful whiny fan.  Every contract the Sox have given to Ortiz has been great value for the Sox, and if he has mentioned this to the press, then he's right.
 
Ortiz was BY FAR our best hitter this year and really doesn't appear to be slowing down (see Baltimore series) at the moment.  There are much bigger fish to fry on this thread, Papi isn't one of them.

 
I think you didn't understand the original post intent.
 
Although I'm not a big Ortiz fan - mostly due to his public whining about contracts - of course I appreciate his on-field performance.
 
My point was - having a DH who is pretty much limited to that role is a problem when the team has multiple players vying for positions.  Having the flexibility to rotate players into the DH role would solve the issue at hand ----- where to play everyone, especially Mookie. 
 
Please don't associate me with CHB - he's a stooge who I stopped reading years ago.
 
And I'm far from an ungrateful fan - been a season ticket holder for 25 years.  Have seen lots of good and bad baseball ......and lots of players.  Ortiz is one of the greatest clutch hitters in Sox history.  He's been a key contributor to three WS.  But, he conducts his contract negotiations in a very public manner, which has always turned me off.
 
And stop being so angry. Sheesh.

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

Right.  14 position players and 11 pitches = 25 roster spots.  
 
EDIT:  And if they keep Layne maybe they don't need another lefty FA acquisition.

When was the last time the Sox went with an 11 man pitching staff? 20-30 years ago? (not that I wouldn't want then to)

 

[smastroyin]

 
I think you didn't understand the original post intent.
 
Although I'm not a big Ortiz fan - mostly due to his public whining about contracts - of course I appreciate his on-field performance.
 
My point was - having a DH who is pretty much limited to that role is a problem when the team has multiple players vying for positions.  Having the flexibility to rotate players into the DH role would solve the issue at hand ----- where to play everyone, especially Mookie. 
 
Please don't associate me with CHB - he's a stooge who I stopped reading years ago.
 
And I'm far from an ungrateful fan - been a season ticket holder for 25 years.  Have seen lots of good and bad baseball ......and lots of players.  Ortiz is one of the greatest clutch hitters in Sox history.  He's been a key contributor to three WS.  But, he conducts his contract negotiations in a very public manner, which has always turned me off.
 
And stop being so angry. Sheesh.

 
Your tenor is important.  It is clear you do not like David Ortiz.  You'll pardon those of us who enjoy watching the Red Sox play baseball more than we enjoy sitting around moralizing about how players should act if we don't think highly of your opinion.
 
In regard to your thesis, you haven't yet explained why on the team as it is currently constructed, having David Ortiz is a problem for Mookie Betts.  First, suggesting that the only way to get him at bats is to eliminate a player at the bottom of the defensive spectrum implies that you have good players at every position that Betts is capable of playing.  This means that to come to the conclusion that eliminating David Ortiz is the best solution to this "problem" you think that:
 
- The Red Sox will move Xander Bogaerts to 3B and find a replacement SS who is better (combined contribution) than just putting Mookie there.  OK, I can buy that, SS is hard and we don't know if Mookie can play it.  Then again we let Brock Holt play it.
- The Red Sox will leave Xander Bogaerts at SS and find a replacement 3B (or WMB) who is better (combined contribution) than just putting Mookie there.  3B skills are different than 2B skills but I think Mookie could probably pick it up if you left him there a while.  But OK.
- Dustin Pedroia 2B + Mookie Betts DH > Mookie Betts 2B + David Ortiz DH
- The Red Sox will find a CF (even JBJ or Castillo) such that (? CF+Mookie Betts DH) > (Mookie Betts CF + David Ortiz DH)
- Yoenis Cespides LF + Mookie Betts DH > Mookie Betts LF + David Ortiz DH
- Shane Victorino RF + Mookie Betts DH > Mookie Betts RF + David Ortiz DH
- Allen Craig + Daniel Nava > David Ortiz
 
Now, I know you are not saying to put Mookie as full-time DH, but you are talking about rotating all of those guys through the DH position, and value wise the math largely comes out the same (and may come out worse if you believe that playing multiple positions will keep Mookie from getting good at any of them).  
 
The problem I am having with your thesis is that if the Red Sox magically got rid of David Ortiz because he is a whiner and who cares how he hits, but hey, let's say they do it...the most obvious solution to their remaining logjam is not a DH rotation, but to put post foot injury Allen Craig there until he shows that he is a sub 650 OPS player for real now.  He doesn't have a ton of defensive value.  He is not going to displace Mike Napoli at 1B.  So if you solve this problem by simply getting rid of Ortiz (I know you are now saying that you would let him play out his current contract, fine, but your original post noted that David Ortiz DH is a problem for this team) you keep all of the problems you already have, and lose the most productive bat in your already weak lineup.  
 
to me the answer is clear - if there is some imperative to have Mookie Betts on this team, you can't also have Castillo and Craig on the 25 man roster.  I am not a believer in Craig, though I do think he will rebound somewhat, it's not going to be enough to make any personnel decisions around him.  And frankly I could see leaving Castillo in Pawtucket for 50 games as well.  And by then you will have a lot more information about the other OF on the roster.
 
I also think the Sox could benefit from flipping Cespedes (who I think has more trade value than performance value) but the optics on that are probably too bad for them to consider right now, unless he was part of a package for another star (Hamels, Stanton).

 

[HillysLastWalk]

No reprimanding. Just disagreeing with your thought process. No hard feelings, and apologies if you thought I was talking down or anything. I just don't think you can really support the claim that he's a 5 WAR player, even if you are saying it's just your opinion. The data just isn't there.
 
Is his sample size larger the Xanders? Yeah, if you limit it to just the stretch run of the 2013 season. If we include his playoff games and his good start this year, however, we get to 337. That's 50 in the regular 2013 season, 34 in the post season and 253 through June 7th, 2014 before he got cold. We may have to agree to disagree, but I just don't buy into the idea that Mookie is a safer bet than Bogaerts was before he got cold and spent the majority of the season looking lost.
 
Mookie has better contact skills, which helps, but 186 PAs just isn't enough to be making any kinds of declarations with any significant degree of confidence, IMO, opinions or not. Maybe your guess will be proven right next year, but I wouldn't be comfortable putting any substantial money on it.

The reprimand part was just a jokey-joke.

I do understand the point you are making, and its not lost on me at all. But really, how could anyone project, or guess, any player - I suppose then. We could eliminate all threads on all rookies and established major leaguers! Look at Allen Craig, for example, Im sure some would have projected a WAR around 2.5 before the start of this season. In all seriousness, I earlier just wanted to clarify that I wasnt taking his current WAR and extrapolating it over 162 games. Instead, Im using his minor league stats, his current major league stats, his Oliver projections, his walk, strikeout, swing, and contact rates, comparisons to other players with similar rates, and my own eyes from watching him in person and on TV. From that, Im making an educated guess (you say guess, I say educated guess!).

Back to Xander for a second, when he made that run at the beginning of the season (highpoint on June 3rd), he did that with an unsustainable 382 BABIP. Mookie is doing what he is doing, now, with a maintainable 316 BABIP (in fact thats his exact 2014 Oliver projection). And anecdotedly, just look at these at bats. He had that amazing 11 pitch single the other day in Baltimore, where he fouled off six two strike pitches (three splitters) - thats the type of stuff you see from him on the regular. Great contact rates, swings at strikes, makes easy adjustments, uses all fields, just great, great at bats. And he really was just a much, much better hitter than Xander was in the minors.

Im not down on Xander, hes going to be great, but Mookie. Man I dont want that guy traded.

 

[flymrfreakjar]

Not to break up the Big Panda discussion, but Dave Cameron has a nice write-up about Mookie today, and advises the Sox to hold on to him. http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/just-a-bit-outside/story/mookie-betts-boston-red-sox-trade-092414

He's also been very bullish on him throughout his chat today. Nice to see!

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Im not down on Xander, hes going to be great, but Mookie. Man I dont want that guy traded.

 
Dave Cameron agrees with you:
 
Red Sox Shouldn't Trade Mookie Betts
 
EDIT: Blast you, flymrfreakjar!

 

[HillysLastWalk]

Great Dave Cameron article, thanks.  He's written one earlier this year, as well.  That's part of the reason why a lot of the concepts he throws around, I've been throwing around (I stand on the shoulders of giants!).
 
EDIT: here is the article I mentioned: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/what-might-mookie-betts-be/
 
It's good to see Keith Law and now Dave Cameron super-excited about this guy (and I'm sure there are others).  And that's where I was kind of getting at earlier in this thread (without mentioning Zobrist).  I don't think he has to have a defined role, you keep him in the outfield, second base, and DH mix.  I'm also not sure if that could potentially expand to say the left-side of the infield.  Someone always gets injured, or has a down season, or something.  A guy like Betts is really useful.  Plus, even if he doesn't get a full 700 Plate Appearances next year, remember, after 2015, Victorino (final year of contract) and Cespedes (final year of contract), if they are kept this offseason, might not either.  And if Cespedes continues to regress (OBP/AVG wise), and Castillo turns into a bust, the Sox have insurance: Betts.  Heck, even Pedroia is likely to break something and be out for long periods of time.
 
This guy is way too valuable.
 
And just to throw in a splooge, my god that at-bat last night:
 
 Speed Pitch Result
1 95 Fastball (Four-seam) Called Strike
2 95 Fastball (Four-seam) Called Strike
3 94 Fastball (Four-seam) Foul
4 94 Fastball (Four-seam) Foul
5 81 Changeup Ball
6 95 Fastball (Four-seam) Foul
7 94 Fastball (Four-seam) Ball
8 80 Changeup Foul
9 94 Fastball (Four-seam) Foul
10 94 Fastball (Four-seam) Foul
11 80 Changeup Ball
12 80 Changeup In play, no out (double)
 
The guy see's this mid-90's reliever for the first time (well, last night anyway), takes a pitch, then gets down 0-2, and from there puts up that ridiculous pitch-spoiling at-bat.  And even when the reliever throws something off-speed, Mookie is not fooled.  He either spits on it, fouls it off, or eventually ropes a double.  And this is coming on the heels of that 11-pitch at-bat against the Orioles this weekend.  I think Dave Cameron should also look at pitches per plate appearance when evaluating this guy.  He's going to be one of those Napoli types.  I think we could also look at his hit charts too.
 
Mookie Betts. The best thing about this season for me. 

 

[67WasBest]

That Cameron article sealed it for me.  I want Mookie playing 3B next year until one of the trio of WMB, Cecchini or Marrero forces a change.  I'll accept his slightly underpowered arm, and his youthful transgressions to keep his bat in the lineup.  If the time comes that a true third baseman has arrived, or Marrero has moved Bogaerts to 3B, then we have the luxury of trading talent from the outfield.
 
If this becomes the FO reality, the team still needs LH bats, but I'm OK with how this lineup looks to start the year:
 
Betts or Castillo
Pedroia
Ortiz
Cespedes
Napoli
Victorino
Bogaerts
Betts or Castillo
Vazquez

 

[TomRicardo]

That Cameron article sealed it for me.  I want Mookie playing 3B next year until one of the trio of WMB, Cecchini or Marrero forces a change.  I'll accept his slightly underpowered arm, and his youthful transgressions to keep his bat in the lineup.  If the time comes that a true third baseman has arrived, or Marrero has moved Bogaerts to 3B, then we have the luxury of trading talent from the outfield.
 
If this becomes the FO reality, the team still needs LH bats, but I'm OK with how this lineup looks to start the year:
 
Betts or Castillo
Pedroia
Ortiz
Cespedes
Napoli
Victorino
Bogaerts
Betts or Castillo
Vazquez

I would definitely bat Napoli ahead of Cespedes (OBP)

 

[67WasBest]

I would definitely bat Napoli ahead of Cespedes (OBP)

Sure, I would agree.  Just laid it out as Farrell has been deploying them this year, but I hope he does flip them.  Cespedes is a more true #5 with the power and lower OBP

 

[Sprowl]

Isn't Hanley's injury history worse than Pablo's though?


And maybe a mod could split out the Panda talk?

 
Done: Panda Thumb Wrestling

 

[nattysez]

Heck, even Pedroia is likely to break something and be out for long periods of time.
 

 
If Pedroia can start getting a day off once a week and can be shipped to the DL when he develops nagging injuries, we might see a resurgence in his rate numbers.  Even he has to realize that a little rest would do him some good.   

 

[geoduck no quahog]

Can we stop with the Betts to 3B fantasy please. The guy hasn't made a single appearance there in his minor/major league career.
 
Wishing that something was true doesn't make it so.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Can we stop with the Betts to 3B fantasy please. The guy hasn't made a single appearance there in his minor/major league career.
 
Wishing that something was true doesn't make it so.

And until this year he hadn't made a single appearance at CF/RF in his minor/major league career.

 

[Sprowl]

Can we stop with the Betts to 3B fantasy please. The guy hasn't made a single appearance there in his minor/major league career.
 
Wishing that something was true doesn't make it so.

And until this year he hadn't made a single appearance at CF/RF in his minor/major league career.

 
I don't think Betts' arm will play well at 3B or SS. On the Red Sox 2015 he is an all-purpose outfielder, second baseman and emergency fill-in. On some other team, he is the stuff that dreams are made of.
 

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Farrell says he's an OF and has ruled out 3b to fwiw. The he never played it before argument is weak though.

 

[SLC Sox]

Farrell says he's an OF and has ruled out 3b to fwiw. The he never played it before argument is weak though.

 
Here's the link the Speier article where Farrell said that.
 

 
“We moved Mookie to second base when Dustin went down for the year. We moved Mookie to center field initially because of Dustin’s presence. With Dustin coming back, we see Mookie as an outfielder — not on the left side of the infield,” said Farrell.

 
Sure it's enticing to see him fill that open 3B spot, but the team must feel pretty strongly against it based on all of their internal information.  I expect Betts to play all three OF positions next year, fill in at 2B and DH from time to time, and get a full season's worth of ABs.

 

[nvalvo]

Farrell says he's an OF and has ruled out 3b to fwiw. The he never played it before argument is weak though.

 
It's not weak when you consider that he was moved off of shortstop at the beginning of his professional career due to his erratic arm.
 
He made 9 errors in 78 chances at short. That's... remarkable. 

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

Dave Cameron's chat a few days ago descended into an orgy of Mookie-related questions (mainly hypothetical trades), largely with the conclusion that Mookie is awesome and Cameron doesn't think the Red Sox would or should trade him for hardly anyone (including straight up for Josh Donaldson).

 

[benhogan]

Dave Cameron's chat a few days ago descended into an orgy of Mookie-related questions (mainly hypothetical trades), largely with the conclusion that Mookie is awesome and Cameron doesn't think the Red Sox would or should trade him for hardly anyone (including straight up for Josh Donaldson).

after reading that thread, is Mookie > Xander?  
 
I think so, but if there was a poll on SoSH I think it would be pretty split.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

after reading that thread, is Mookie > Xander?  
 
I think so, but if their was a poll on SoSH I think it would be pretty split.

 
The quick and simple way to put my thoughts is that I think Xander may have the higher ceiling of the two, but I'm sure Mookie has the higher floor.

 

[TigerBlood]

after reading that thread, is Mookie > Xander?  
 
I think so, but if there was a poll on SoSH I think it would be pretty split.

 
Obviously one would feel that way after reading that thread, Cameron is practically deifying Mookie in there.
 
In terms of future performance, its still impossible to rank one ahead of the other for me. But in terms of trade value, I think Mookie has a definitive edge. He has shown defensive versatility and has yet to have a slump at any level. On the other hand, opposing GMs can point to Xander's shaky defense and his prolonged midseason slump this season when they are negotiating with Cherington and co. if they are trying to knock the price tag down. Bogaerts is certainly still a highly coveted young prospect that could be the center piece in a major deal, but it really comes down to the (silly) fact that Bogie has shown that he's human and Mookie still feels invincible.

 

[foulkehampshire]

Mookie's ability to contribute highly over every aspect of the game edges him over Xander for me.
 
If Xander's not hitting bombs, he's just a mediocre SS. 

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

after reading that thread, is Mookie > Xander?  
 
I think so, but if there was a poll on SoSH I think it would be pretty split.

It wouldn't surprise me if Xander ended up with the better career but I think the totality of the evidence right now pretty clearly suggests that Mookie is more likely to be the better player. Especially given the well-documented struggles of young hitters across the league, to do what he did at age 21 is simply remarkable. That's not to say he's a lock to be a great player or anything close but there is a reason, for example, that Steamer projects him to be 21st among position players in fWAR next year - and that's with his OBP and SLG both declining somewhat from his 2014 numbers (largely due to a slightly regression in BABIP).  That's also a projection that is driven almost entirely by offense and baserunning, not defensive stats that we may or may not really believe for various reasons).
 
Anyway, its great to even be able to have this discussion.  I hope we're debating Mookie v. Xander (in a good way) for years to come.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

Mookie's ability to contribute highly over every aspect of the game edges him over Xander for me.
 
If Xander's not hitting bombs, he's just a mediocre SS. 

 
This is just flat out wrong. Part of what made Xander so appealing as a prospect was his ability to get on base at a significantly higher than average rate. His plate discipline and patience were highly touted and struggling in his rookie season does not undo his entire minor league track record. We'd all love to see him start "hitting bombs" but he can be an above average short stop with 10-15 home run power.

 

[geoduck no quahog]

Agree. So much rush-to-judgment here about both Bogaerts and Betts.
 
All I know is that Bogaerts has been loved by scouts for years now, and it's premature to judge him on 4 months shitty performance. His being a SS also makes him incredibly coveted.
 
Betts is also loved - but it's way too early to say that Betts > Bogaerts in potential performance. He may be better as trade bait, but who gives a shit about that?
 
They're both highly rated kids (in a universe of highly rated kids). I hope both stay healthy and wear red socks for a long time to come.

 

[foulkehampshire]

 
This is just flat out wrong. Part of what made Xander so appealing as a prospect was his ability to get on base at a significantly higher than average rate. His plate discipline and patience were highly touted and struggling in his rookie season does not undo his entire minor league track record. We'd all love to see him start "hitting bombs" but he can be an above average short stop with 10-15 home run power.

 
If he can stop striking out. His K% (as is) severely caps his ability to make enough contact to hit for a good BA. I know he's had good plate discipline in the minors, but we've seen what pitchers do to a guy with a hole in his swing (JBJ). All the patience in the world isn't going to make a difference if he can't make pitchers pay for throwing strikes. It seemed like he was making progress on this the last month, I hope he carries it into 2015. 

 

[snowmanny]

Bogaerts has a year of service time already spent and is a Boras client, so the odds of an extension are pretty low. If it's pretty even otherwise I'd say that's a tie-breaker for Betts.

 

[Sprowl]

If he can stop striking out. His K% (as is) severely caps his ability to make enough contact to hit for a good BA. I know he's had good plate discipline in the minors, but we've seen what pitchers do to a guy with a hole in his swing (JBJ). All the patience in the world isn't going to make a difference if he can't make pitchers pay for throwing strikes. It seemed like he was making progress on this the last month, I hope he carries it into 2015.

At 14% in 2014 and less than 10% in the lower minors, Betts' K-rate doesn't look bad to me. Bradley's K-rates have always been much higher, usually exceeding 20%. I don't think they project the same abilities to make contact, and there's no reason to assume that Betts will have a hole in his swing: At 21 years of age, Betts is already showing a league-average eye (per BrooksBaseball), and has a high whiff rate only when he chases low and outside -- which he very rarely does.

 

[foulkehampshire]

At 14% in 2014 and less than 10% in the lower minors, Betts' K-rate doesn't look bad to me. Bradley's K-rates have always been much higher, usually exceeding 20%. I don't think they project the same abilities to make contact, and there's no reason to assume that Betts will have a hole in his swing: At 21 years of age, Betts is already showing a league-average eye (per BrooksBaseball), and has a high whiff rate only when he chases low and outside -- which he very rarely does.

 
I was referring to Xander. 

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

 
If he can stop striking out. His K% (as is) severely caps his ability to make enough contact to hit for a good BA. I know he's had good plate discipline in the minors, but we've seen what pitchers do to a guy with a hole in his swing (JBJ). All the patience in the world isn't going to make a difference if he can't make pitchers pay for throwing strikes. It seemed like he was making progress on this the last month, I hope he carries it into 2015. 

 
If he walk rate returns to normal, he can be an above average shortstop with a strikeout rate in the 22-25% range, even if his power is mostly doubles and something like 10-15 home runs per year. I don't think you appreciate just how low the bar is for that position. To suggest that without him "hitting bombs" (what does that mean? 20 per year? 30?) he will be mediocre is ridiculous. The MLB average for OBP this year out of shortstops was .310 with a .368 SLG. If we assume a drop of 20-30 points of OBP from his minor league average of .373 or even his 2013 run in Pawtucket, .369, he's still significantly better than average even if he ends up a mediocre home run hitter for his position. His defense would have to grade out at well below average to bring him down to mediocre for a shortstop and I don't think there is nearly enough evidence to make a credible case that he's a well below average defender at short long term.

 

[Sprowl]

 
I was referring to Xander. 

 
Ah, that makes more sense. For Xander the issue is not so much a hole in his swing, but difficulty hitting sliders and changeups up and away or down and away (ie, just about wherever they are usually thrown). Based on 2014 data, Xander can hammer anything on the inside edge, especially up and in, but just about everything else is a weakness. Bogaerts is certainly a candidate to fail if he can't learn to handle sliders.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

 
Ah, that makes more sense. For Xander the issue is not so much a hole in his swing, but difficulty hitting sliders and changeups up and away or down and away (ie, just about wherever they are usually thrown). Based on 2014 data, Xander can hammer anything on the inside edge, especially up and in, but just about everything else is a weakness. Bogaerts is certainly a candidate to fail if he can't learn to handle sliders.

After seeing JBJ and WMB fail to adjust to the book on them it would be ignorant on my part to not be extremely concerned with X. 4 weeks is a slump.....4 months is a trend. At this stage for the purpose of internal ranking it has to be Betts by a decent margin since he hasn't been fully tested yet. Either way, 2015 is a huge year for X......IF he goes WMB on us he's pretty useless as a poor defensive SS that can't hit simply isn't a good prospect.

 

[Plympton91]

After seeing JBJ and WMB fail to adjust to the book on them it would be ignorant on my part to not be extremely concerned with X. 4 weeks is a slump.....4 months is a trend. At this stage for the purpose of internal ranking it has to be Betts by a decent margin since he hasn't been fully tested yet. Either way, 2015 is a huge year for X......IF he goes WMB on us he's pretty useless as a poor defensive SS that can't hit simply isn't a good prospect.

At age 21, JBJ was in college and WMB was at Salem. Bogaerts will be fine. Did people stop throwing change ups and sliders to him in September?

 

[iayork]

Xander OPSed .660 as a 21-year-old.  On average, players who debut at 21 peak over .150 OPS points higher than their rookie year.  The highest OPS for a shortstop this year was Hanley at .817, just about 150 OPS points higher than Xander.   A significant number of players who debut at 21  (the first quartile) peak about .200 points higher than their rookie year. That would put Xander at .860, 15th in all of baseball, just ahead of Nelson Cruz.
 

Spoiler

(Players who had at least 150 AB at least once, and who played for at least 3 seasons, since 1950)

 
He's 21.  He'll be fine.
 
(And then there's Barry Bonds, who peaked at .676 OPS points higher than the .746 he hit during his 21-year-old debut.) 

 

[chrisfont9]

 Either way, 2015 is a huge year for X......IF he goes WMB on us he's pretty useless as a poor defensive SS that can't hit simply isn't a good prospect.

I'd say 2015 is a huge year for the organization's approach to Xander. Either he's great, and everyone is happy, or he isn't great, and it'll be up to the Sox to not overreact. He'll still be 22.

 

[Joshv02]

 
He's 21.  He'll be fine.

I should put this in backwash, but the visual presentation here is gorgeous. We'll done.

 

[Minneapolis Millers]

Iayork's chart is the prettiest I've ever seen on this site.  Excellent.  And interesting.  I realize we live in instant gratification times, but maybe we should give X a couple more years before declaring him a bust.

 

[jscola85]

Xander OPSed .660 as a 21-year-old.  On average, players who debut at 21 peak over .150 OPS points higher than their rookie year.  The highest OPS for a shortstop this year was Hanley at .817, just about 150 OPS points higher than Xander.   A significant number of players who debut at 21  (the first quartile) peak about .200 points higher than their rookie year. That would put Xander at .860, 15th in all of baseball, just ahead of Nelson Cruz.
 

Spoiler

(Players who had at least 150 AB at least once, and who played for at least 3 seasons, since 1950)

 
He's 21.  He'll be fine.
 
(And then there's Barry Bonds, who peaked at .676 OPS points higher than the .746 he hit during his 21-year-old debut.) 

 
This also bodes extremely well for Betts.  He debuted at 21 and posted an .812 OPS.  So he'd have a similar ~150 point jump to peak performance.  If Mookie may eventually be a 950+ OPS hitter, we'd be completely insane to trade him.
 
EDIT - Mookie actually debuted at 21, not 22!

 

[mfried]

 
This also bodes extremely well for Betts.  He debuted at 21 and posted an .812 OPS.  So he'd have a similar ~150 point jump to peak performance.  If Mookie may eventually be a 950+ OPS hitter, we'd be completely insane to trade him.
 
EDIT - Mookie actually debuted at 21, not 22!

I really like Mookie but OPS 950+ is an improbable target.  We should be happy if he averages 850 in the next few years.

 

[geoduck no quahog]

iayork (or others): What do you call that type of chart? It's really intuitive and impressive.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

I really like Mookie but OPS 950+ is an improbable target.  We should be happy if he averages 850 in the next few years.

We should also keep in mind that if you include the playoffs and the start of 2014, Xander managed to be just as impressive at the plate for just as long before his struggles began. Bogaerts had a little over 320 plate appearances at the major league level before he went into a major slump for the first time. Mookie has a little under a third of a season under his belt.

People need to ease up on both the Mookie love and the Bogaerts concern a bit. Both are exciting young players with plenty of time left in front of them to succeed. Both are more than likely to struggle going forward, as well.

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

We should also keep in mind that if you include the playoffs and the start of 2014, Xander managed to be just as impressive at the plate for just as long before his struggles began. Bogaerts had a little over 320 plate appearances at the major league level before he went into a major slump for the first time. Mookie has a little under a third of a season under his belt.

People need to ease up on both the Mookie love and the Bogaerts concern a bit. Both are exciting young players with plenty of time left in front of them to succeed. Both are more than likely to struggle going forward, as well.

 
While some of the Mookie love goes overboard, I actually disagree that he's "more than likely to struggle" in the future.  I think a guy with that kind of amazing command of the strike zone at an early age, coupled with a diverse repertoire of other skills that add value (speed, some power, defense), is probably the best bet you can find not to struggle.  That doesn't mean he'll be incredible or ever OPS .950 (although I think that's a possibility) but its hard for me to imagine Mookie having a season like Xander just did or going through such a long period of prolonged suck.  That only happens if pitchers are just killing you over and over in important parts of the zone in ways that you can't counter and I just don't see that happening with Mookie.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

MMS: That you consider your response to be tempered is exactly what I'm talking about. Mookie has all of 213 major league plate appearances. I will be shocked if he doesn't have at least one prolonged slump next year. Hell, even Pedroia had a bad slump in his first full season. I'm not suggesting Mookie is likely to struggle for months on end, but this idea that his skill set makes him likely to avoid any prolonged slump is sort of silly. Even the best hitters in the game struggle and most of them had adjustment periods when they were young.

And I'm not even going to touch the .950 OPS comment.

 

[iayork]

Geoduck -the top one is a beeswarm chart, the bottom one is a violinplot.

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

MMS: That you consider your response to be tempered is exactly what I'm talking about. Mookie has all of 213 major league plate appearances. I will be shocked if he doesn't have at least one prolonged slump next year. Hell, even Pedroia had a bad slump in his first full season. I'm not suggesting Mookie is likely to struggle for months on end, but this idea that his skill set makes him likely to avoid any prolonged slump is sort of silly. Even the best hitters in the game struggle and most of them had adjustment periods when they were young.

And I'm not even going to touch the .950 OPS comment.

 
I'm not saying he won't slump.  I'm saying he is very unlikely to ever struggle nearly to the extent that Xander did and it seems like you agree.
 
There's a middle ground between putting Mookie in the Hall of Fame after only 213 major league PAs and just throwing up your hands and saying, "Hey, both are promising guys that are likely to struggle at times in the future.  Who knows which one has a higher chance of being better?"  There are relevant differences between their skill sets and the fact that Xander had the season he did is an important data point in forecasting their futures. 

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

 
I'm not saying he won't slump.  I'm saying he is very unlikely to ever struggle nearly to the extent that Xander did and it seems like you agree.
 
There's a middle ground between putting Mookie in the Hall of Fame after only 213 major league PAs and just throwing up your hands and saying, "Hey, both are promising guys that are likely to struggle at times in the future.  Who knows which one has a higher chance of being better?"  There are relevant differences between their skill sets and the fact that Xander had the season he did is an important data point in forecasting their futures. 

The problem is that we don't have a relevant data point from Mookie yet. The fact that anyone is throwing a .950 OPS around with any measure of sincerity is evidence enough that people are too focused on small sample sizes and early performance. (A .950 OPS would have tied him with Stanton for 4th in the majors this year.) Young players struggle. Almost without exception. The kinds of posts being made about Mookie now were being made about Xander this time last year. The cognitive dissonance at play here is more than a little amusing.

There are always justifications for over rating our young guys to be found, whether it be patience and discipline or great contact skills and hand eye coordination. In the end, however, we just don't have enough data on Mookie to be making statements about him being a .950 OPS player or that he may be the rare exception who doesn't have a sizeable adjustment period to the majors.

My entire point is that many posters are jumping ship on Xander to the new shiny, Mookie and aren't taking the time to consider if they are making the same mistake many of us made last year, myself included. Have patience... with both of them. Xander will probably improve and Mookie will probably go through a slump that makes us question our exuberance about him in retrospect. I would be willing to bet that both guys end up being above average major leaguers, though.

After the disaster of a season we just had, I understand the desire to latch on to something positive and I've made my point, so I'll bow out now.

 

[Plympton91]

You're being somewhat obtuse. To read your posts, one might think that you view minor league performance as basically random and noninformative about big-league outcomes.

Both Betts and Xander have minor league track records from which we can draw inference in addition to their major league sample sizes. Indeed, if you are saying that their current big league samples are insufficient, then we should still be putting a large amount of weight on those minor league projections.

Within that record, we can look at things like walk and strikeout rates that tend to be more predictive than balls in play stats (favors Betts in both, and on K rates quite significantly so), the extent to which they sustained their production as they moved up levels (hard to interpret due to difference in age), and whether there is evidence in their minor league record of prolonged slumps (don't know).

We also have to incorporate what we know about the very real and observable trait of speed, in which Betts crushes Xander. Speed mitigates slumps both through the ability to leg out extra infield hits and turn singles into doubles, while also providing additional value through stolen bases and advancing on batted balls when slumps do hit.

Finally, the rut that Xander got into this season is almost a historically bad outlier. If Betts struggles, I bet his slump is significantly shorter and less deep simply based on what a normal rookie slump looks like independently of how you view his skill set relative to Xander.

They're both great young players who will have their ups and downs on offense and probably frustrate us on defense next year for different reasons.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

You're being somewhat obtuse. To read your posts, one might think that you view minor league performance as basically random and noninformative about big-league outcomes.

 
Not at all. I'm not saying we can't project them. I'm resisting the idea that Betts' major league start over ~200 plate appearances is enough to start drooling over the possibility that he might be a .950 OPS player at his peak as well as the idea that we have enough of a major league track record to be comparing the two directly. The jump between AAA and the majors is as big as it's ever been. That breeds a certain amount of uncertainty when looking forward, perhaps more than we've ever had before. Said differently, I don't see any reason to be picking one over the other because...
 

They're both great young players who will have their ups and downs on offense and probably frustrate us on defense next year for different reasons.

 
This, exactly. I know it's bordering on silly season, but the .950 OPS talk is just absurd and the amount of poster who are jumping onto the Betts bandwagon while questioning whether Bogaerts is as good as we were hoping he'd be is amusing to me. In another thread we had a poster suggesting that if Xander isn't "hitting bombs" he's a mediocre short stop. It's silly.
 
Edit: I know I said I was bowing out, but I thought it was worth clarifying.