Bradley: Deal with It.

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Savin Hillbilly said:
 
As a gloss on this: It seems like he has, until this recent breakout, had two main problems as a hitter:
 
1) Pitch recognition/selection issues--swinging at pitches he shouldn't or vice versa.
2) Quality of contact issues--having trouble hitting the ball hard with any consistency even when he did swing at the right pitch.
 
(1) is almost a given for young hitters; you expect to see it, and you hope it gets better with time and experience. It's (2) that has felt like the potential deal-breaker for JBJ, and it's (2) that he seems to have solved, or at least made major progress on, this year.
 
So while the recent breakout doesn't guarantee anything, it has removed what seemed (to me, anyway) like the main obstacle to projecting any kind of ML success for him. It feels like the question has shifted, in the past month, from "will he ever hit major league pitching well enough to stick?" to "how good a major league hitter can he be?". Even if the answer to the latter is far from certain, it's a nice question to be asking.
My first thought was that #2 was likely to be a result of #1.  But wouldn't it be possible, if not likely, that it is #2 that might be a contributiing factor to #1.  Perhaps it's a chicken/egg thing.
 
Wouldn't issue #1 show up all along his climb?  I understand that ML pitchers are better than mL pitchers and that opposition scouting would be a great factor, but it seems like most of those issues would be part of the algorithm that create the ML/mL equivalent ratings.  

#2, on the other hand, seems like the one that could very well be caused by the quality of pitching.  In other words, he hadn't changed as much as the opposition had.  That then caused him to adjust which corrected #2 and then will lead (if it hasn't already) to improvement on #1?

 
 

jscola85

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
1,305
Was pitch selection really an issue for Bradley?  His O-Swing% is no different than prior years, and his Swinging Strike rate is not different either (in fact a bit worse).  Nothing actually stands out right now about his plate discipline profile or his Hard/Soft hit rate, though he has swapped a points of weak hit balls for medium/hard hit balls.  What he has done is swap some ground balls and pop-ups for more flyballs, which is probably a good thing for him, and he's doing a way better job at punishing fastballs when he does make contact with them than before (+6.8 wFB this year vs. -5.7 last year).  It's anecdotal, but I also feel like he's doing a better job at fouling off pitches that are not "his pitches", rather than weakly putting them into play or missing them entirely.  Bogaerts made a huge improvement in this aspect as well this year, eliminating weak grounders to the left side and flailing misses at sliders for Jeter-like opposite-field fliners just out of the grasp of infielders.
 
I suspect JBJ's improvement on fastballs is a direct result of fixing that toe-tap, as it has allowed him to shorten his swing and drive the ball with more power.  Pitchers have certainly noticed, as they've dropped their fastball rate against him from 60% to just a tick under 50%, trying to throw him more sliders and changeups to keep him off-balance.
 

MyDaughterLovesTomGordon

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
9,461
DrewDawg said:
Relax dude.
 
My post was a take off of yours---you asked if one hot day could skew things and if he was still hitting well. I expanded by showing what 5 hot days can do in such a SSS.
 
And I was making fun of EV, which I thought was always fair game. 
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
jscola85 said:
Was pitch selection really an issue for Bradley?  His O-Swing% is no different than prior years, and his Swinging Strike rate is not different either (in fact a bit worse).  Nothing actually stands out right now about his plate discipline profile or his Hard/Soft hit rate, though he has swapped a points of weak hit balls for medium/hard hit balls.  What he has done is swap some ground balls and pop-ups for more flyballs, which is probably a good thing for him, and he's doing a way better job at punishing fastballs when he does make contact with them than before (+6.8 wFB this year vs. -5.7 last year).  It's anecdotal, but I also feel like he's doing a better job at fouling off pitches that are not "his pitches", rather than weakly putting them into play or missing them entirely.  Bogaerts made a huge improvement in this aspect as well this year, eliminating weak grounders to the left side and flailing misses at sliders for Jeter-like opposite-field fliners just out of the grasp of infielders.
 
I suspect JBJ's improvement on fastballs is a direct result of fixing that toe-tap, as it has allowed him to shorten his swing and drive the ball with more power.  Pitchers have certainly noticed, as they've dropped their fastball rate against him from 60% to just a tick under 50%, trying to throw him more sliders and changeups to keep him off-balance.
 
I agree, the numbers don't jump out and support the "better contact" thesis, though my eyes sure tell me that's happening.
 
Here's an interesting tidbit: while overall his soft/medium/hard numbers don't look very different, when you split them by batted ball type, you notice that he's hitting about 3 percent more of his FB Hard this year, and all of those are at the expense of last year's Soft flies. Specifically, Hard flies this year have been 17% of his total balls in play, compared to 14% last year. Not a huge difference, but maybe enough.
 
Certainly his ISO on FB this year has spiked: .700 compared to .187 last year. (.187 is a pretty pathetic ISO on FB, since that's where most of your ISO should come from; AL average is .431. Probably some luck there on both sides of the difference, but still.)
 

soxhop411

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
38,460
“@IanMBrowne: Dombrowski/Lovullo made it sound like decision could come soon whether Mookie or Jackie is the CFer going forward.”

“@PeteAbe: In listening to Dombrowski and Lovullo, sounds like #RedSox want to see Bradley in CF more.”
 

MyDaughterLovesTomGordon

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
9,461
This Dombrowski fellow seems like a bright man. I would also like to see Jackie in center more because I quite enjoy seeing a spectacular catch every time I turn on my television machine.
 

buzzard21

lurker
Jul 15, 2005
125
NW CT
I agree, it seems like he makes one wherever he plays. That catch in left last night was tougher than it looked with the wall coming into play at full speed. His body control is great to watch.
 

iayork

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 6, 2006
639
Savin Hillbilly said:
 
I agree, the numbers don't jump out and support the "better contact" thesis, though my eyes sure tell me that's happening.
 
The biggest difference is just that he couldn't hit the inside fastball before, and now he can.  Here's his hit chart before and after Aug 9.  (This is updated from the more detailed ones at A Jackie Bradley Jr Renaissance.)
 

(Charts are from the umpire's viewpoint, so JBJ stands to the right of each charts.)  Notice how many of his hits post-breakout are on the inside half, while 4 of his 7 pre-breakout hits were on the outside half.  It seems likely that changing his batting mechanics is what's driven this surge, allowing him to catch up to pitches he was missing before.
 
The question, of course, is what will happen when pitchers adjust to the new and improved JBJ.  Checking his pitch chart today shows that they're already changing: In his past five games, he's seen far fewer inside strikes from LHP.  Instead they're throwing fastballs way inside (outside the zone); fastballs at the bottom third of the plate (note how few hits he's had in there); and more offspeed and breaking stuff (which he hasn't hit at all -- no hits vs. 22 strikes).  (The offspeed and breaking stuff is also much more cautious -- right at the edge of the zone instead of down the middle.)  RHP are also treating him with much more respect, and he's seeing much less in the middle than he was before.
 
The good news is that in spite of this new approach, JBJ still has a .980 OPS in his past five games, so pitchers haven't found the magic bullet for him yet.  It will be interesting to see what other changes come and how he deals with them.
 

Fireball Fred

lurker
Jul 29, 2005
172
NoCa Mass.
It may be as simple as Bradley realizing he was approaching his last shot, and accepting coaching to fix his hitting. His old approach worked fine through AAA, so reluctance to change it was perhaps natural before MLB inadequacy was established.
 
My own guess is that this is, at least in part, a showcase: if the Sox have two good, young, cheap centerfielders, one of them (presumably JBJ) becomes a valuable piece in a trade. A value heavily based on fielding can be realized only in CF, though -- for RF/LF, the offense needs to be better established.
 
Incidentally, have a look at Gary Pettis's record (majors and minors) with Bradley in mind. He's the only CF I ever saw whom I'd rate as clearly at least as good as JBJ. 
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Fireball Fred said:
Incidentally, have a look at Gary Pettis's record (majors and minors) with Bradley in mind. He's the only CF I ever saw whom I'd rate as clearly at least as good as JBJ. 
 
Well, he struck out and walked quite a bit, so he's like JBJ in that respect, but very much unlike him in that he (1) was a prolific base stealer, and (2) had near-zero power, even in the minors. Also, his early career arc was the opposite of what we're hoping JBJ's will be: he hit well in early short stints before settling into offensive mediocrity in his third year.
 

Heating up in the bullpen

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 24, 2007
307
Pittsboro NC
Since August 16 (the day after his monster 5-for-6, 3 doubles, 2 dingers game; even since he has "normalized" he's still locked in), JBJ has started 11 games and pinch hit in 1 other. His line over those 12 games is 13/39 with 5 doubles, 1 triple, 2 homers, 4 walks, 14 strikeouts, 9 runs, 9 rbis: .333/.395/.667/1.062. (Overall for August he slashed .329/.409/.711/1.120.)  All of that hitting out of the bottom of the lineup. Meanwhile, over that same timeframe hitting out of the 2-hole, Pablo Sandoval has played 13 games. His line is 10/56 with 6 doubles, 2 walks, 11 strikeouts, 5 runs, 3 rbis: .179/.207/.286/.493.
 
I'm wondering if it's time to move JBJ up in the lineup. Because if he is an .800ish OPS hitter, he can't stay buried in the 9-hole.  One school of thought says he's comfortable, leave him where he is to finish the season strong. Another says, let's see if he can handle the switch in the relatively pressure-free last month of a lost season.
 
What would you do?
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
Leave him where he is and allow him to gain as much confidence in the new mechanics as possible. No need to start putting any more pressure on him than there already is.
 

Average Reds

Dope
Staff member
Dope
V&N Mod
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
31,296
Southwestern CT
Was in the car for the first 6 innings or so of the game and finally saw the Bradley play.
 
He was throwing somewhat flat-footed and still fired a BB to home.  Very impressive.
 

jscola85

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
1,305
JBJ has a pretty legit argument for the AL Player of the Month. Half a dozen highlight reel catches and a line of .354/.429/.734 with 5 HR, 23 RBI and 23 runs scored. It probably goes to Encarnacion but Bradley has been an absolute revelation this month.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
12,698
Miami (oh, Miami!)
I'm glad we didn't ship him to ATL for a reliever when his stock was low.  It would have been too painful to watch if he'd made these adjustments on another club.  
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
7,751
MyDaughterLovesTomGordon said:
The throw is here:

http://m.redsox.mlb.com/news/article/146532230/jackie-bradley-jr-throws-out-runner-at-home

92 mph, 246 feet. Just beautiful. How many players can do that? 10? 15?
 
From the article:
 


It was Bradley's 10th assist on a double play since the start of 2014, leading the Majors over that span. In fact, no other outfielder has been part of that many double plays in the last three years.
 
That is 10 assists on double plays in what, less than a season's worth of full-time play?  And teams are still trying to run on him?
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,845
The broadcast crew last night showed footage (from yesterday's practice, I believe) showing Castillo being introduced to the wall.  They were suggesting that the plan for 2016 is to but JBJ in right and Castillo in left because right field at Fenway is so spacious and requires great throws.  It makes sense to me.  Someone is going to be underutilized in left field, and the degree of underutilization is less with Castillo there.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
19,710
The broadcast crew last night showed footage (from yesterday's practice, I believe) showing Castillo being introduced to the wall.  They were suggesting that the plan for 2016 is to but JBJ in right and Castillo in left because right field at Fenway is so spacious and requires great throws.  It makes sense to me.  Someone is going to be underutilized in left field, and the degree of underutilization is less with Castillo there.
 
 
I'm assuming that JBJ goes to RF and not CF because of his arm.  So I ask.....is his arm *that* important in RF considering he might be the best CF in MLB?  OTOH--Maybe he'll also be the best RF in MLB.  And it's not like Betts is sub-standard in CF (and would probably be pretty good in RF, too.) It's a nice problem to have, but I have a hard time with not having the best CF the Sox have had in ????? in another position.
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,845
I think JBJ goes to right because of his range.  Castillo also has an arm.
 
The broadcast crew was suggesting that JBJ is the better outfielder than Betts, but that Betts is still quite good and right field at Fenway is the more demanding position, one that will take full advantage of JBJ's skills.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
19,710
The broadcast crew was suggesting that JBJ is the better outfielder than Betts, but that Betts is still quite good and right field at Fenway is the more demanding position, one that will take full advantage of JBJ's skills.
 
 
That makes sense. 
Do they switch them on the road, or is that overthinking it?
 
Its nice to have problems like *this* and not, "I wish we had more major league ballplayers around here."
 
Nov 15, 2006
565
Aarhus, Denmark
No matter WHERE they put everyone, that's gonna be one hell of a defensive outfield. Too bad we can't say the same about the infield corners. Btw, Hanley... your ass just got Pipped.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
Koufax said:
I think JBJ goes to right because of his range.  Castillo also has an arm.
 
I think the Sox introduce all three fielders to all three positions, so they can make the best judgment about how to deploy them during the offseason.
 
I hope it goes (7) Betts, (8) Bradley, (9) Castillo because that makes the most sense from the strengths and weaknesses each of the three players, to my observations. But it would be unfortunate if the Red Sox didn't do their due diligence.

 
 

Drek717

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2003
2,540
Koufax said:
The broadcast crew last night showed footage (from yesterday's practice, I believe) showing Castillo being introduced to the wall.  They were suggesting that the plan for 2016 is to but JBJ in right and Castillo in left because right field at Fenway is so spacious and requires great throws.  It makes sense to me.  Someone is going to be underutilized in left field, and the degree of underutilization is less with Castillo there.
I think the concept of under-utilization in the OF is something of a red herring for this club.
 
1. The Red Sox haven't had three good starting outfielders from the end of 2013 until the start of August 2015.  Good outfielders do not grow on trees in today's MLB.  If the Sox truly have three good ones in JBJ, Betts, and Castillo the last thing we should do is break that up, even if we might theoretically be losing some small portion of their total value to fielding dimensions v. range arguments.
 
2. Every park has different dimensions.  None as unique as Fenway, but having three guys who can go get it isn't a bad thing.  The only time it really becomes a negative if all three cover so much ground that they're constantly overlapping and only lasers shot into the gaps land in the OF.  I don't think we're quite there yet.
 
3. I think we oversell the opportunity cost of playing CF versus the corners.  Jackie Bradley has been playing primarily in the corners this month and seemingly steals at least an out from the opposing team every single night.  Having two corner OFs who can cover far more than their presumed "zone" isn't a bad thing.  In some ways it might be an unexpected boon as opposing clubs won't be truly ready for just how few hits can land in that OF, leading to poor base running decisions.  Bradley's double plays are a great example of this.  People test his arm because the 1st and 3rd base coaches know Bradley has a strong arm, sure, but when a fly ball is caught in the back half of the OF everyone thinks their guy can make it home from third.  On Bradley they just can't.  The only way to correct for that is to over-correct and give up runs to save outs.
 
4. It's crazy to think all three of these guys will be healthy for all of 2016 and Fenway's RF demands pretty near CF range.  I'd rather have and not need than need and not have when it comes to guys who can provide plus defense in CF and Fenway's RF.
 
 

Wake's knuckle said:
No matter WHERE they put everyone, that's gonna be one hell of a defensive outfield. Too bad we can't say the same about the infield corners. Btw, Hanley... your ass just got Pipped.
Sandoval has turned a corner defensively in the second half and has been far better.  Hanley is likely a far better fit at 1B than LF and if he puts in the work you'd have to assume a guy who was playing shortstop just over a year ago would have plus range as a 1B.  On top of that Travis Shaw probably would be at best an average 3B backup but so far he looks like a very capable defender at 1B, so they have some insurance and/or an in-house Doug Mientkiewicz type (probably not quite that good but with a better bat).
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
3,543
Portland
joe dokes said:
 
I'm assuming that JBJ goes to RF and not CF because of his arm.  So I ask.....is his arm *that* important in RF considering he might be the best CF in MLB?  OTOH--Maybe he'll also be the best RF in MLB.  And it's not like Betts is sub-standard in CF (and would probably be pretty good in RF, too.) It's a nice problem to have, but I have a hard time with not having the best CF the Sox have had in ????? in another position.
I could see him being like an Ichiro out there where teams are hesitant to go 1st to 3rd on him.  Guys don't go 1st to 3rd as often on hits up the middle.
Still - it probably depends on the ballpark.  He would be wasted in Yankee stadium in RF, for instance.
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,845
Drek, I agree with you about Sandoval's defense.  He's pretty good, but his bat is disappointing.
 
By referring to underutilization of talent I did not mean to suggest that one of them should be traded because of it, only that it is an embarrassment of riches.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Koufax said:
I think JBJ goes to right because of his range.  Castillo also has an arm.
 
The broadcast crew was suggesting that JBJ is the better outfielder than Betts, but that Betts is still quite good and right field at Fenway is the more demanding position, one that will take full advantage of JBJ's skills.
 
I really don't buy this. It's overstatement. Right field is more demanding at Fenway than in most places, but that doesn't mean that it's more demanding than center. CF at Fenway is also quite demanding in itself. You have the triangle and the Monster, with walls of three different heights and angles to be navigated.
 
Beyond that, being the best defender in the outfield isn't just a question of dimensions, it's a question of role. The CF is supposed to be the alpha dog out there. When he calls for it, it's his. He's supposed to have the best instincts, the best jumps and routes, the best ability to finish plays. And that's JBJ.
 
Beyond that, of course, half the games are played in other parks around the league where it's pretty unambiguous that you want your best defender in center.
 
Put it this way: if JBJ doesn't crap the bed so entirely at the plate last year, I don't think we're even having this discussion. Mookie seized the opportunity, jumped into the breach, and is doing fine out there. And maybe you keep him there because they're all good and it really doesn't matter all that much who's where. But if you're starting from scratch, with no history--if you're the manager and you're given these three guys to deploy, and you get to watch them for a while before you make your decision--it just doesn't seem to me like there's any question who goes in center.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Savin Hillbilly said:
 
I really don't buy this. It's overstatement. Right field is more demanding at Fenway than in most places, but that doesn't mean that it's more demanding than center. CF at Fenway is also quite demanding in itself. You have the triangle and the Monster, with walls of three different heights and angles to be navigated.
It's debatable. The left-center alley is kinda nonexistent. In RF you have big spaces on both sides of you, as well as a weird-angle sidewall that can make you look really bad and very short walls in all directions that don't stop you from crashing into the crowd or the bullpen.  Finally you have the long throws to 3B. The CF role is a greater responsibility, but otherwise I think RF is tougher.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
52,402
San Andreas Fault
Drek717 said:
 

Sandoval has turned a corner defensively in the second half and has been far better.  Hanley is likely a far better fit at 1B than LF and if he puts in the work you'd have to assume a guy who was playing shortstop just over a year ago would have plus range as a 1B.  On top of that Travis Shaw probably would be at best an average 3B backup but so far he looks like a very capable defender at 1B, so they have some insurance and/or an in-house Doug Mientkiewicz type (probably not quite that good but with a better bat).

 
Not last night, and I wouldn't say far better. Just because he dives for a grounder and gets it doesn't mean a quicker third baseman doesn't get it without a dive. Last night he blew a DP ball, albeit hard hit in the first inning that cost a run, and later he actually over-dove for a grounder near the 3B bag. There are four of five full time rookie third basemen in MLB this year that are all fielding better than Sandoval.
 

derekson

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2010
4,399
Regardless of the dimensions of the fields, CF simply sees more balls than either corner OFer does. And your OFer with best range should be the guy who plays that position, period. And with the deep parts of Fenway's CF, JBJ's arm would be a big asset at that position as well. 
 
In MLB in 2015, there have been 8046 balls hit to the CF zone, compared to 5984 to RF zone and 5419 to LF zone. You want the guy with the most range in the position that fields more balls in play.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
29,945
Melrose, MA
derekson said:
Regardless of the dimensions of the fields, CF simply sees more balls than either corner OFer does. And your OFer with best range should be the guy who plays that position, period. And with the deep parts of Fenway's CF, JBJ's arm would be a big asset at that position as well. 
 
In MLB in 2015, there have been 8046 balls hit to the CF zone, compared to 5984 to RF zone and 5419 to LF zone. You want the guy with the most range in the position that fields more balls in play.
This is my take as well. And it is not as though JBJ's arm is wasted in CF.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
derekson said:
In MLB in 2015, there have been 8046 balls hit to the CF zone, compared to 5984 to RF zone and 5419 to LF zone. You want the guy with the most range in the position that fields more balls in play.
 
In fairness to the JBJ-to-RF position, though, isn't using the zone numbers to determine who belongs where kind of begging the question, since the zone definitions are themselves based on the results of previous decisions about who belongs where? If you always put the guy with the most range in CF, then CFs will get to the most balls, and that will determine assumptions about the size of the area that a CF should cover.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
derekson said:
Regardless of the dimensions of the fields, CF simply sees more balls than either corner OFer does. And your OFer with best range should be the guy who plays that position, period. And with the deep parts of Fenway's CF, JBJ's arm would be a big asset at that position as well. 
 
In MLB in 2015, there have been 8046 balls hit to the CF zone, compared to 5984 to RF zone and 5419 to LF zone. You want the guy with the most range in the position that fields more balls in play.
Not so sure. The real goal is to allow the fewest hits. Logic says that having your best fielder in the most active area is the way to do that, but since you have two highly and differently-skilled fielders for two demanding positions, matching their skills to those positions might be more efficient than simply assuming that Bradley, being better, should be in center. Your numbers are significant, so maybe after analyzing all that you land on Bradley in CF for the reason you say. I'm simply suggesting it may not be that simple.
 
Damn. It was all so much easier to figure out where to play Lynn, Rice and Evans.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
52,402
San Andreas Fault
E5 Yaz said:
Fun with numbers:
 
Peter Gammons ‏@pgammo  10h
10 hours ago
Jackie Bradley w/out toe tap and w/still head:19 G .426/.470/.918
MLBN on its MLB Central segment, 7 - 9 am Pacific, Cliff Floyd talking, did an eye opening piece on the difference between JBJs toe tap and his current leg kick. Wish I had a video of it, but they pointed out that with the toe tap, his front leg (foot) was extended too much toward the pitcher, leg too much of an angle with the vertical, and he had nothing left for weight transfer to put into the swing. Leg lift is drastically different as doesn't step toward the pitcher too much and he gets hips, the whole thing behind the ball. Whoever said a picture is worth a thousand words...
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
20,557
Al Zarilla said:
MLBN on its MLB Central segment, 7 - 9 am Pacific, Cliff Floyd talking, did an eye opening piece on the difference between JBJs toe tap and his current leg kick. Wish I had a video of it, but they pointed out that with the toe tap, his front leg (foot) was extended too much toward the pitcher, leg too much of an angle with the vertical, and he had nothing left for weight transfer to put into the swing. Leg lift is drastically different as doesn't step toward the pitcher too much and he gets hips, the whole thing behind the ball. Whoever said a picture is worth a thousand words...
 
I wish that you could find that clip's URL and then email it to Felger and Mazz's in-box every five minutes until one of them publicly admits that they were full of shit about Bradley being on PEDs. 
 

MyDaughterLovesTomGordon

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
9,461
Here's the slo-mo of the toe-tap. The big difference is that he no longer does that truly strange twist backward on the ball of his foot. I've never seen anyone swing like that, I don't think. He always had a bit of a kick, it's just that now he's simplified it considerably and doesn't have further movement after landing.
 
Really, it's a "toe-twist" he's removed, I think:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZCfLf53YQg
 
You can see it here, in 2013, on his first home run, too:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUMAO1NXQnQ
 
Now contrast with his swings here on August 19 - no twist:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vg1PBot7sa8
 
Edit: Not sure why the third one won't embed...
 

shaggydog2000

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2007
8,113
MyDaughterLovesTomGordon said:
Here's the slo-mo of the toe-tap. The big difference is that he no longer does that truly strange twist backward on the ball of his foot. I've never seen anyone swing like that, I don't think. He always had a bit of a kick, it's just that now he's simplified it considerably and doesn't have further movement after landing.
 
Really, it's a "toe-twist" he's removed, I think:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZCfLf53YQg
 
You can see it here, in 2013, on his first home run, too:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUMAO1NXQnQ
 
Now contrast with his swings here on August 19 - no twist:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vg1PBot7sa8
 
Edit: Not sure why the third one won't embed...
 
Yeah, I have previously seen it described as a tap instead of a leg kick, but that first clip clearly shows it is pretty much a leg kick with a rotation in it that I would think would just get one part of you moving in the wrong direction/timing and prevent you from shifting your weight forward.  But I've never been able to hit a baseball, so what do I know?
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
MyDaughterLovesTomGordon said:
Here's the slo-mo of the toe-tap. The big difference is that he no longer does that truly strange twist backward on the ball of his foot. I've never seen anyone swing like that, I don't think. He always had a bit of a kick, it's just that now he's simplified it considerably and doesn't have further movement after landing.
 
Really, it's a "toe-twist" he's removed, I think:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZCfLf53YQg
 
You can see it here, in 2013, on his first home run, too:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUMAO1NXQnQ
 
Now contrast with his swings here on August 19 - no twist:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vg1PBot7sa8
 
Edit: Not sure why the third one won't embed...
That youtube video led me to this compilation of some of his incredible defensive highlights.  It might include all 10 of the aforementioned DPs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dp8qJAonaE
I tried every single suggestion in the "Posting Youtube videos" to no avail.  Grr.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
43,561
Be interesting if someone could find both swings and super-impose them over each other to see how quickly the bat is reaching the hitting zone now. I really have no idea if someone can figure out how to do that, but that would probably be a cool view.