Daniel Nava, DRS hero?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Heating up in the bullpen

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 24, 2007
1,082
Pittsboro NC
Did anyone else notice the chart of Most Defensive Runs Saved by AL Outfielders 2014 in the ESPN SweetSpot piece by Mark Simon, "Defensive Storylines for the ALCS"? (http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/52446/defensive-storylines-for-the-alcs)
Daniel Nava was third on the list with 17 DRS, behind Alex Gordon (27) and Lorenzo Cain (24).  Nava comes out with +14 DRS in about 500 innings in RF, and +3 in 273 LF innings, His +17 total ties Pedroia for the team lead this year.
Where did this come from? SSS?  In 2013, Nava earned -4 outfield DRS, with -1 in 493 RF innings, -1 in 469 LF innings, and -2 in 8 CF innings.  In 2012, he was +3 in 611 LF innings.
Did our eyes tell us that Nava looked pretty good in RF this year?
 

Hee Sox Choi

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 27, 2006
6,133
Heating up in the bullpen said:
Did our eyes tell us that Nava looked pretty good in RF this year?
My eyes are usually closed when a ball is hit to Nava and then I peek through my fingers to see if he caught it.  I would guess the TomTango ratings for Nava's OF play would be a better measure than this stat.  Nava being the 3rd best is ridiculous.
 

jscola85

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
1,305
Nava seems to get crappy reads off the bat but typically fields the ball well enough and has a fairly accurate, if not cannon arm.  Perhaps there's some sort of reverse-effect in RF at Fenway to what happens to defensive metrics for Fenway LFs?  Victorino posted a massive UZR/DRS last year, though at least the eye test suggested he was a GG-caliber right fielder last year.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
Heating up in the bullpen said:
Did anyone else notice the chart of Most Defensive Runs Saved by AL Outfielders 2014 in the ESPN SweetSpot piece by Mark Simon, "Defensive Storylines for the ALCS"? (http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/52446/defensive-storylines-for-the-alcs)
Daniel Nava was third on the list with 17 DRS, behind Alex Gordon (27) and Lorenzo Cain (24).  Nava comes out with +14 DRS in about 500 innings in RF, and +3 in 273 LF innings, His +17 total ties Pedroia for the team lead this year.
Where did this come from? SSS?  In 2013, Nava earned -4 outfield DRS, with -1 in 493 RF innings, -1 in 469 LF innings, and -2 in 8 CF innings.  In 2012, he was +3 in 611 LF innings.
Did our eyes tell us that Nava looked pretty good in RF this year?
Does Jackie Bradley make everyone around him better? The corner OFs can play a step or two toward the line and a step closer in, thus they look better than they are?
 

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
34,452
Haiku
Split off from the 2015 Red Sox thread...
 
***
 
Any outfielder worth his salt will gain from playing in Fenway's right field, just because it's so large. Many more balls are hit in play to RF than to LF.
 
Nava made a few bonehead plays this season on careless throws back to the infield, but I don't think that those are reflected in DRS evaluations.
 
On the whole, Nava has improved as an all-purpose corner outfielder (which is one more reason that the RHB-heavy 2015 Red Sox will keep him around), but I think the 2014 DRS data significantly overvalue his improvement. In right field he's good enough, but he's not good: he's slow afoot, reasonably sure-handed, and accurate but not overpowering with his throws. He's the non-Cespedes.
 

Heating up in the bullpen

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 24, 2007
1,082
Pittsboro NC
Just for fun while listening to the Orioles-Royals game, I compared Nava's RF 2014 to Victorino's RF 2013. For kicks I added in JBJ's CF 2014 and Nava's RF 2013.
What jumps out of the numbers is that - based on the zone coding - Nava was very efficient this year at turning batted balls into outs.  That and his arm showed up as something of a weapon - with 8 assists, compared to Vic's 9 in 2013 (in almost twice as many innings).
Is it repeatable? History says no:  his previous UZR scores for full outfield seasons were -15.9, +0.2 and -17.0.
 
[tablegrid= Nava RF 2014 vs. Victorino RF 2013 ] Nava 2014 (RF) Victorino 2013 (RF) JBJ 2014 CF Nava 2013 (RF) UZR/DRS         Innings 501.2 913.1 949 493.2 rARM (Outfield Arm Runs Saved Above Average) 3 4 4 0 rGFP (Good fielding plays runs saved above average) 1 1 0 1 rPM (Plus/Minus runs saved above average) 10 19 10 -2 Defensive Runs Saved 14 24 14 -1 Balls in Zone 87 169 227 75 Plays 82 159 208 66 Revised Zone Rating (RZR) 0.943 0.941 0.916 0.88 Plays Made Out of Zone (OOZ) 40 105 85 22 UZR 11.7 25 15.9 -4.6 UZR/150 28.2 35.3 22.6 -15           Inside Edge         Impossible (0%) 0.0%    (0/25) 0.0%    (0/80) 0.0%    (0/48) 0.0%    (0/41) Remote (1-10%) 0.0%      (0/5) 0.0%      (0/3) 6.7%    (1/15) 0.0%      (0/2) Unlikely (10-40%) 0.0%      (0/2) 100.0%      (3/3) 22.2%      (2/9) 66.7%      (2/3) Even (40-60%) 66.7%     (4/6) 57.1%     (4/7) 100.0%     (7/7) 0.0%     (0) Likely (60-90%) 100.0%      (8/8) 93.3%    (14/15) 84.6%    (11/13) 100.0%      (2/2) Routine (90-100%) 100.0%  (110/110) 99.2%  (242/244) 99.6%  (272/273) 98.8%    (84/85)           Other         Assists 8 9 13 3 Double Plays Started 1 3 8 0 Fielding Errors 2 2 1 1 Throwing Errors 0 1 0 0 [/tablegrid]
 

mfried

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 23, 2005
1,680
Heating up in the bullpen said:
Just for fun while listening to the Orioles-Royals game, I compared Nava's RF 2014 to Victorino's RF 2013. For kicks I added in JBJ's CF 2014 and Nava's RF 2013.
What jumps out of the numbers is that - based on the zone coding - Nava was very efficient this year at turning batted balls into outs.  That and his arm showed up as something of a weapon - with 8 assists, compared to Vic's 9 in 2013 (in almost twice as many innings).
Is it repeatable? History says no:  his previous UZR scores for full outfield seasons were -15.9, +0.2 and -17.0.
 
[tablegrid= Nava RF 2014 vs. Victorino RF 2013 ] Nava 2014 (RF) Victorino 2013 (RF) JBJ 2014 CF Nava 2013 (RF) UZR/DRS         Innings 501.2 913.1 949 493.2 rARM (Outfield Arm Runs Saved Above Average) 3 4 4 0 rGFP (Good fielding plays runs saved above average) 1 1 0 1 rPM (Plus/Minus runs saved above average) 10 19 10 -2 Defensive Runs Saved 14 24 14 -1 Balls in Zone 87 169 227 75 Plays 82 159 208 66 Revised Zone Rating (RZR) 0.943 0.941 0.916 0.88 Plays Made Out of Zone (OOZ) 40 105 85 22 UZR 11.7 25 15.9 -4.6 UZR/150 28.2 35.3 22.6 -15           Inside Edge         Impossible (0%) 0.0%    (0/25) 0.0%    (0/80) 0.0%    (0/48) 0.0%    (0/41) Remote (1-10%) 0.0%      (0/5) 0.0%      (0/3) 6.7%    (1/15) 0.0%      (0/2) Unlikely (10-40%) 0.0%      (0/2) 100.0%      (3/3) 22.2%      (2/9) 66.7%      (2/3) Even (40-60%) 66.7%     (4/6) 57.1%     (4/7) 100.0%     (7/7) 0.0%     (0) Likely (60-90%) 100.0%      (8/8) 93.3%    (14/15) 84.6%    (11/13) 100.0%      (2/2) Routine (90-100%) 100.0%  (110/110) 99.2%  (242/244) 99.6%  (272/273) 98.8%    (84/85)           Other         Assists 8 9 13 3 Double Plays Started 1 3 8 0 Fielding Errors 2 2 1 1 Throwing Errors 0 1 0 0 [/tablegrid]
Runners try vs. Nava whereas they hesitate vs. Vic.
 

Rough Carrigan

reasons within Reason
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Defensive stats are erratic.  The same guy can play pretty much the same way from year to year but one year he gets lucky that an unusual proportion of fly balls is hit juuuust within his reach (See Coco Crisp 2007 when he looked like the greatest centerfielder ever) and the next year he gets unlucky and an unusual proportion of fly balls is hit just beyond his reach (See Coco Crisp 2008).  You can't rely on single year defensive stats.
 
And, yeah, I thought he was the same Daniel Nava out there as last year.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Fair point about single-year defensive metrics, and I agree that Nava was not (and never will be) as good as this year's numbers make him look. But I really think he has grown defensively over the past couple of years. He's making up for his lack of foot speed with quicker reads and better routes, and he's finishing plays better. Overall, he's less tentative out there. And he has a pretty good arm: accurate and respectably strong.
 
He was a mediocre outfielder when he arrived, and has grown to the point where I think you could reasonably call him average. Certainly he's good enough to fill the defensive half of a LHH backup OF role on the Sox' 2015 bench. In fact, in the wake of 2014 I'm almost more inclined to worry about Nava's bat than his glove, something I couldn't have imagined saying two years ago.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,751
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Savin Hillbilly said:
Fair point about single-year defensive metrics, and I agree that Nava was not (and never will be) as good as this year's numbers make him look. But I really think he has grown defensively over the past couple of years. He's making up for his lack of foot speed with quicker reads and better routes, and he's finishing plays better. Overall, he's less tentative out there. And he has a pretty good arm: accurate and respectably strong.
 
He was a mediocre outfielder when he arrived, and has grown to the point where I think you could reasonably call him average. Certainly he's good enough to fill the defensive half of a LHH backup OF role on the Sox' 2015 bench. In fact, in the wake of 2014 I'm almost more inclined to worry about Nava's bat than his glove, something I couldn't have imagined saying two years ago.
 
Nava still had very respectable numbers against RHP, even considering his putrid start. I wouldn't worry about his ability to hit righties going forward.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
rodderick said:
 
Nava still had very respectable numbers against RHP, even considering his putrid start. I wouldn't worry about his ability to hit righties going forward.
 
Respectable, maybe, but way down from 2013, particularly in the power column. A .103 ISO against opposite-side pitching doth not a strong platoon option make. His walk rate and K rate vs. RHP also moved a bit in the wrong direction. He was basically livin' la vida BABIP, which is fine as long as it keeps working.
 

williams_482

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 1, 2011
391
Savin Hillbilly said:
 
Respectable, maybe, but way down from 2013, particularly in the power column. A .103 ISO against opposite-side pitching doth not a strong platoon option make. His walk rate and K rate vs. RHP also moved a bit in the wrong direction. He was basically livin' la vida BABIP, which is fine as long as it keeps working.
Steamer projects a .267/.348/.392 overall line for him, with a 108 wRC+. Throw in his usual platoon split and he seems like a better bet against righties than most other players we could find who would be willing to ride the bench. 
 

Drek717

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2003
2,542
Savin Hillbilly said:
 
Respectable, maybe, but way down from 2013, particularly in the power column. A .103 ISO against opposite-side pitching doth not a strong platoon option make. His walk rate and K rate vs. RHP also moved a bit in the wrong direction. He was basically livin' la vida BABIP, which is fine as long as it keeps working.
I'd say Nava works in a platoon where the LHP half is Allen Craig, who obviously we're all hoping will bounce back to his 2011-2013 form, possibly one of Betts or Victorino as the 5th OF, and Brentz, Hassan, and Bradley all down in AAA.  That seems to be the approach to the 2015 OF, have too many guys to run into the same problem as last year and let them sort out the three starting jobs themselves based on play.  Saving all the money and trade assets for pitching and third base.
 

Mighty Joe Young

The North remembers
SoSH Member
Sep 14, 2002
8,401
Halifax, Nova Scotia , Canada
Drek717 said:
I'd say Nava works in a platoon where the LHP half is Allen Craig, who obviously we're all hoping will bounce back to his 2011-2013 form, possibly one of Betts or Victorino as the 5th OF, and Brentz, Hassan, and Bradley all down in AAA.  That seems to be the approach to the 2015 OF, have too many guys to run into the same problem as last year and let them sort out the three starting jobs themselves based on play.  Saving all the money and trade assets for pitching and third base.
Betts as a 5th OF??? I think the OF is going to be Betts/Castillo/Cespedes. .. Positions to be determined later. I don't see Victorino, Craig and Nava all on the 25 man roster. Can't have 6 OFs and 12 pitchers.
 

Frisbetarian

♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 3, 2003
5,261
Off the beaten track
+14 runs above average in 500 innings and change equates to +37 over 150 games. It is rare to see a player average more than 10 runs above average at any position on a long term basis. Does anyone really think Nava was an all time great defensive right fielder last year? 
 
In a small sample size, experienced observation is almost always better than stats.
 
If the Red Sox have options, and they almost certainly will, Nava will not play a single inning in right field next season. 
 

BornToRun

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2011
17,340
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Betts as a 5th OF??? I think the OF is going to be Betts/Castillo/Cespedes. .. Positions to be determined later. I don't see Victorino, Craig and Nava all on the 25 man roster. Can't have 6 OFs and 12 pitchers.
------------------quote

It'll be interesting to see what happens with Victorino. I think Craig hangs around because of his contract and potential as well as Nava because he's cheap and decently versatile. I'm not sure about Shane, though.
 

Jack Rabbit Slim

Member
SoSH Member
May 19, 2010
1,304
BornToRun said:
------------------quote

It'll be interesting to see what happens with Victorino. I think Craig hangs around because of his contract and potential as well as Nava because he's cheap and decently versatile. I'm not sure about Shane, though.
 
I could definitely see starting Craig or Betts in AAA to preserve depth while they gauge Vic's health.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Drek717 said:
I'd say Nava works in a platoon where the LHP half is Allen Craig, who obviously we're all hoping will bounce back to his 2011-2013 form, possibly one of Betts or Victorino as the 5th OF, and Brentz, Hassan, and Bradley all down in AAA.  That seems to be the approach to the 2015 OF, have too many guys to run into the same problem as last year and let them sort out the three starting jobs themselves based on play.  Saving all the money and trade assets for pitching and third base.
If Craig bounces back to 2011-2013 levels, he gets 600 ABs and is probably the second best hitter on this team.
 

Stan Papi Was Framed

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 5, 2012
2,924
Jack Rabbit Slim said:
 
I could definitely see starting Craig or Betts in AAA to preserve depth while they gauge Vic's health.
I'd be pretty surprised as of now to see Betts in AAA to start the year
 

williams_482

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 1, 2011
391
I don't have much commentary to add (I though rough's post was spot on) but if anyone is interested/unaware Fangraphs has breakdowns of the balls hit into Nava's "zone" and BIS's approximation of their difficulty in table form here and in spray chart form here. The spray charts in particular can be interesting to play around with, but this information makes it possible to take a slightly more in depth look at where these numbers actually came from. 
 
The remainder of this post will consist of me screwing around with these numbers.
 
To summarize the data, in 2013 DRS had Nava at -2 runs for "Plays made" (rPM) and +1 runs for "Good fielding plays" (rGFP) in 493.2 innings in RF (I do not know the difference between these two categories). Broken down by specific plays, he was 0/41 on "impossible" plays (plays the scorers believe he had a 0% chance at converting), 0/2 on "remote" plays (1-10%), 2/3 on "unlikely" plays (10-40%), 0/0 on "even" plays (40-60%), 2/2 on "likely" plays (60-90%), and 84/85 on "routine" plays (90-100%). 
 
In 2014 DRS had Nava at +10 rPM and +1 rGFP in 501.2 innings. Broken down by category he was 0/25 on impossibles, 0/5 on remotes, 0/2 on unlikelies, 4/6 on evens, 8/8 on likelies, and a perfect 110/110 on routines. 
 
If we assume, for illustration purposes only, that the average difficulty of the plays in each bucket is the median of the given range (so 5% for remotes, 25%% for unlikelies, etc), Nava made 4.9 more plays than expected in 2013 and 7.8 more than expected in 2014. If we play around with the percentages some and assume that routine plays actually average out to 99%*, we get +1.5 plays in '13 and +3.4 in '14. This does suggest that Nava was better in '14 than he was in '13, but certainly not 12 runs apart. 
 
Continuing to play with the numbers, I will assume for each play that the actual expected conversion percentage was the most favorable value to DRS's conclusion that Nava was bad in 2013 and good in 2014. Specifically, I will assume that every play in 2013 was as easy as is allowed by it's categorization, and any play in 2014 was as difficult as possible. For example, an "even" play in 2013 will be assumed to be a 60% play, while an even play in 2014 will be assumed to be a 40% play. This gives -0.2 plays for 2013 and +15.6 for 2014. If I leave "routine" plays as 99% for both seasons, we get +0.7 and +5.7. 
 
Another potential source of variance is the type of hits a ball in play is expected to become. I am not going to advance further into hypotheticals to examine the potential impact there, but as the difference in linear weights values between a single and a double is 0.3 runs it probably isn't going to be terribly large. 
 
In conclusion, while the more in depth information given to us about the inner workings of DRS does suggest that Nava was better in right field in 2014 than he was in 2013, the 12 run gap is still difficult to figure out. 
 
*based off of MGL's comments on measuring defense in the past, this may be more accurate.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,423
Not here
Saints Rest said:
If Craig bounces back to 2011-2013 levels, he gets 600 ABs and is probably the second best hitter on this team.
 
Stan Papi Was Framed said:
I'd be pretty surprised as of now to see Betts in AAA to start the year
 
I agree with both of you and that's a bit of a problem. The only way I see a spot for Craig in the everyday lineup is if he somehow magically becomes able to play third, or if Cespedes goes bye bye. Of course there is a lot of time for injuries and/or trades, but we'd kinda like to have a bit more confidence in Craig than we do now before we make any trade.
 

Drek717

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2003
2,542
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Betts as a 5th OF??? I think the OF is going to be Betts/Castillo/Cespedes. .. Positions to be determined later. I don't see Victorino, Craig and Nava all on the 25 man roster. Can't have 6 OFs and 12 pitchers.
As a 5th OF when of the other four you have:
Craig - dubious to return to former offensive production.
Vic - dubious health.
Nava - runs hot and cold, saw a big ISO drop this year from 2013 and lived off BABIP and plate discipline.  He won't get to spent an entire month as cold as he started 2014.
Cespedes - Only one year left on his contract, can't offer a QO, good power but poor discipline and hot and cold defense bring down the total package.  I could see him being flipped this off-season if he won't take a reasonable extension.
Castillo - nice first sample but a lot of question marks still abound.
 
It is entirely possible that we only find three worthwhile OFs from that entire group.  Hell, it's quite possible we don't find that many.
 
Also, I don't see how they get too many of them off the 25 man roster.
 
Craig and Vic would basically have to be salary dumps.  Nava has little value and as the only LHB in the group, good plate discipline, and improving OF defense of particular value to the Sox versus other teams.  Castillo just signed a big deal and isn't getting traded.
 
So that leaves Cespedes and Betts.  The later's long term value is too much to give up in a trade for anyone short of Stanton, the former has power which is becoming increasingly rare to find, plus the Sox only just traded for him last July.  There is one hell of a log jam to solve and Betts riding the shuttle is the easiest way to solve it.
Unless of course the FO goes way outside the box and tries Betts or Cespedes at 3B.
 
 

 
Rasputin said:
 
 
I agree with both of you and that's a bit of a problem. The only way I see a spot for Craig in the everyday lineup is if he somehow magically becomes able to play third, or if Cespedes goes bye bye. Of course there is a lot of time for injuries and/or trades, but we'd kinda like to have a bit more confidence in Craig than we do now before we make any trade.
I think if you view Nava/Craig as a platoon where the resurgence of Craig's bat has the potential to eat up all the LF playing time you would have enough backup to roll with it.  Here's the possible scenarios you'd be dealing with and the options for each:
 
1: Craig rakes - Nava is the 4th OF subbing for a bunch of RHH across the OF.
2: Nava hits, Craig is mediocre - if this is the case Craig would likely exhibit a platoon split, making him an acceptable platoon partner.  Status quo maintained.
3: Nava Hits, Craig doesn't - Craig is optioned to AAA, Brentz steps up as Nava's new platoon partner with the upside of Brentz out-hitting Nava and taking the job.  After Brentz they'd have Hassan for the platoon role as well, and maybe Middlebrooks if they start getting him OF time like they mentioned last year.
4: Both Nava and Craig fail to hit - the loser of Betts/Vic have a clear shot at taking over LF, if they can't JBJ, Brentz, and Hassan all factor in as potential pieces to find one good player or a JBJ/Brentz platoon, etc..
 
There are enough pieces to mix and match the club into a solution for the 3rd starting OF job if the club is confident in Castillo and one of Betts/Victorino holding down CF and RF respectively.  The real question is long term power in the lineup.  I don't think Cespedes was added simply to fill a 2015 hole but rather to provide a long term answer to where power comes from post-Ortiz/Napoli.
 

The Gray Eagle

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
16,725
Regarding Cespedes or Betts at 3b, neither one has ever played an inning there.

On the other hand, Craig played 246 games at third in the minors, and Castillo played there in Cuba, and worked out there for teams before he signed. Both would probably be poor defensively at third, but if they consider moving an OF there, Craig and Castillo would be more likely candidates.

Cespedes doesn't seem to like changing positions, as he's never even played an inning in RF in his career, much less the IF.

Back to thread topic, Nava has improved a bit as an OF but was never as bad as a lot of people here used to say. He is not fast, but he gets to everything a guy his speed could be expected to get to and seems to position himself well. He played mostly RF in 2013 and did okay with a huge amount of ground to cover.

He's worked on his throwing and improved it, and overall seems to have gone from a slightly below average outfielder to a slightly above average outfielder. He is really a useful player for the Red Sox, and no one is going to trade enough for him to make it worth moving him. He fits well as a bench player here.
 

jscola85

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
1,305
While Cespedes hasn't played RF before, didn't Cherington say after the trade that he sees him as a right fielder in the long run?  I would imagine they played him in LF this year because they were worried about him learning how to field the RF corner at Fenway without much time to practice.  If he can gain comfort, his arm becomes an even bigger weapon over there than at LF.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,423
Not here
Drek717 said:
 

I think if you view Nava/Craig as a platoon where the resurgence of Craig's bat has the potential to eat up all the LF playing time you would have enough backup to roll with it.  Here's the possible scenarios you'd be dealing with and the options for each:
 
1: Craig rakes - Nava is the 4th OF subbing for a bunch of RHH across the OF.
2: Nava hits, Craig is mediocre - if this is the case Craig would likely exhibit a platoon split, making him an acceptable platoon partner.  Status quo maintained.
3: Nava Hits, Craig doesn't - Craig is optioned to AAA, Brentz steps up as Nava's new platoon partner with the upside of Brentz out-hitting Nava and taking the job.  After Brentz they'd have Hassan for the platoon role as well, and maybe Middlebrooks if they start getting him OF time like they mentioned last year.
4: Both Nava and Craig fail to hit - the loser of Betts/Vic have a clear shot at taking over LF, if they can't JBJ, Brentz, and Hassan all factor in as potential pieces to find one good player or a JBJ/Brentz platoon, etc..
 
There are enough pieces to mix and match the club into a solution for the 3rd starting OF job if the club is confident in Castillo and one of Betts/Victorino holding down CF and RF respectively.  The real question is long term power in the lineup.  I don't think Cespedes was added simply to fill a 2015 hole but rather to provide a long term answer to where power comes from post-Ortiz/Napoli.

 
 
Why would we do that, though? As it stands now, the starting outfield is Cespedes, Castillo, and Betts. If we were to trade Cespedes, we still couldn't look at a Nava/Craig platoon in left because we're not carrying three backup outfielders, one of them has to be a CF backup, and neither Nava nor Craig really are. I suppose we could have Betts back up CF and have Nava in right, but that's pretty far from ideal and requires doing something with Vic.
 

swingin val

New Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,162
Minneapolis
Why is Betts backing up CF,if he is the everyday RF (or LF), not ideal? Isn't that what the Sox did in 2013 with Victorino? Seems like a good use of resources rather than carrying strictly a backup CF.
 

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
34,452
Haiku
jscola85 said:
While Cespedes hasn't played RF before, didn't Cherington say after the trade that he sees him as a right fielder in the long run?  I would imagine they played him in LF this year because they were worried about him learning how to field the RF corner at Fenway without much time to practice.  If he can gain comfort, his arm becomes an even bigger weapon over there than at LF.
Heating up in the bullpen said:
Edes in a Sept 30 piece, "Red Sox exit polls: Assessing the roster situation for 2015: Who stays, who goes?" (http://espn.go.com/boston/polls?id=11582983) says in his blurb on Cespedes, "Move to RF is expected."
I'd be interested to hear from Ben/Ferrell if they're still planning that.
Cespedes has the tools (speed, range, arm) for RF, and he seems more than usually baffled by the Monster (not a Red Sox leftfielder).

Nobody wants Allen Craig's leaden feet in Fenway's RF, so if his bat recovers, the switch is clearly beneficial. At least they'll have a full spring training in JetBlue's faut Fenway to figure it all out.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
swingin val said:
Why is Betts backing up CF,if he is the everyday RF (or LF), not ideal? Isn't that what the Sox did in 2013 with Victorino? Seems like a good use of resources rather than carrying strictly a backup CF.
Because the question Ras is trying to answer isn't, "What are the potentially rational alignments of the Red Sox roster?" He's trying to answer the question, "What outfield alignment gets Daniel Nava off the team?" :)
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
21,510
Rogers Park
Plympton91 said:
Because the question Ras is trying to answer isn't, "What are the potentially rational alignments of the Red Sox roster?" He's trying to answer the question, "What outfield alignment gets Daniel Nava off the team?" :)
 
 
I'll state the obvious: our team is now very right-handed. Pedroia, Cespedes, Bogaerts, Napoli, Betts, Castillo, Vazquez, Craig, Middlebrooks, Victorino, Ross... 
 
From the left, we have Ortiz, Nava, Holt, Cecchini and Bradley. 
 
It's worth noting that Bradley and Cecchini could solve this problem in a hurry by emerging as legitimate big leaguers. But while we're waiting, getting rid of Nava to keep Victorino makes little sense in the absence of a total roster reconfiguration. And it also suggests why the team is reportedly pursuing bringing in a LHH (or else a switch hitter strong from that side) to play third. 
 

Mighty Joe Young

The North remembers
SoSH Member
Sep 14, 2002
8,401
Halifax, Nova Scotia , Canada
nvalvo said:
I'll state the obvious: our team is now very right-handed. Pedroia, Cespedes, Bogaerts, Napoli, Betts, Castillo, Vazquez, Craig, Middlebrooks, Victorino, Ross... 
 
From the left, we have Ortiz, Nava, Holt, Cecchini and Bradley. 
 
It's worth noting that Bradley and Cecchini could solve this problem in a hurry by emerging as legitimate big leaguers. But while we're waiting, getting rid of Nava to keep Victorino makes little sense in the absence of a total roster reconfiguration. And it also suggests why the team is reportedly pursuing bringing in a LHH (or else a switch hitter strong from that side) to play third.
If Victorino is a better player than Nava - and a healthy Victorino is a better player - then, of course, it's Nava that should be moved. All this talk of LH vs RH should not trump a player's basic value. That's just a luxury.

IMO, this is my OF pecking order

Betts
Cespedes
Castillo
Victorino
Nava
Craig

Bradley
Brentz

I don't mind Nava .. He's a nice guy to have on the team .. But they can't carry six outfielders. I don't think they get much for Craig or Victorino. And if both those guys recover their previous form you don't want to move them. So it looks like Nava's the odd man out - and he should return something useful.

But I don't see anyone moved until ST .(unless it's Cespedes) I think they want to see Victorino and Craig play in the spring before making those kinds of decisions.

And I'm not considering Bradley at this point. He's going to have to spend at least 2-3 months at Pawtucket recovering his hitting skill before you could even consider him.
 

threecy

Cosbologist
SoSH Member
Sep 1, 2006
1,587
Tamworth, NH
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
If Victorino is a better player than Nava - and a healthy Victorino is a better player - then, of course, it's Nava that should be moved.
Age 32 healthy Victorino was a better overall player.  But part of the question is, how will age 34 Victorino be?
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
I don't mind Nava .. He's a nice guy to have on the team .. But they can't carry six outfielders. I don't think they get much for Craig or Victorino. And if both those guys recover their previous form you don't want to move them. So it looks like Nava's the odd man out - and he should return something useful.
 
Obviously there's a range of opinions around here about the importance of platoon balance. I don't necessarily think it's terribly important to have X number of lefthanded hitters in your starting lineup, but if your starting lineup is 89% righthanded then you'd at least better have a predominantly lefthanded bench. For that reason I think it's overwhelmingly likely Nava is on the 25-man to start next year (it could be JBJ instead, but that would mean throwing in the towel on his offensive development and committing to a backup/defensive replacement role for him, which I doubt they're quite ready to do yet).
 
Starting with that assumption, I can't seem to come up with a realistic scenario in which at least one of the following doesn't happen:
 
1) Betts is optioned
2) Victorino, Cespedes or Napoli is traded
 
They could also option Craig, but that by itself only works if they're willing to make Betts a bench player, which makes no sense, or pay Victorino $13M to be one, which seems unlikely.
 

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
34,452
Haiku
The Red Sox have a surplus of one outfielder with a full trading season and spring training ahead before decisions must be made. That sounds like the same problem as having Too Much Pitching. I see each of the following outcomes as more likely than a forced trade or optioning Mookie Betts (who looks like an excellent leadoff hitter for the next decade), in order of likelihood:

One outfielder might get injured or not recover from surgery. Back injuries are balky, and Victorino may ride the DL for large parts of 2015.

Another might be cooked. Optioning Craig until he recovers his power stroke may be the least unattractive choice. Judging by the medical opinion on Lisfranc injuries on this board, the odds seem to be against full recovery.

Another might not be ready for prime time. Castillo had a big splash of power in his ten-game cameo, but the league will soon develop a book on him -- probably that he will chase sliders off the plate.
 

phenweigh

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2005
1,379
Brewster, MA
The Gray Eagle said:
Regarding Cespedes or Betts at 3b, neither one has ever played an inning there.

On the other hand, Craig played 246 games at third in the minors, and Castillo played there in Cuba, and worked out there for teams before he signed. Both would probably be poor defensively at third, but if they consider moving an OF there, Craig and Castillo would be more likely candidates.

Cespedes doesn't seem to like changing positions, as he's never even played an inning in RF in his career, much less the IF.

Back to thread topic, Nava has improved a bit as an OF but was never as bad as a lot of people here used to say. He is not fast, but he gets to everything a guy his speed could be expected to get to and seems to position himself well. He played mostly RF in 2013 and did okay with a huge amount of ground to cover.

He's worked on his throwing and improved it, and overall seems to have gone from a slightly below average outfielder to a slightly above average outfielder. He is really a useful player for the Red Sox, and no one is going to trade enough for him to make it worth moving him. He fits well as a bench player here.
 
Is Nava to 3B a totally insane idea?  As discussed upthread he has a reasonably strong and accurate arm from the outfield, which could play well at 3B.  He's a marginal major league player and has demonstrated a willingness to play other positions, and has worked to improve his defense when given new assignments.  He has infield experience across the diamond.  Craig could be his platoon partner at 3B, and the limited PT may allow Allen's feet to handle the assignment.  Nava may suck at 3B defense, but asking him to work on it during the off-season and see how it plays out in spring training is only a waste of Daniel's time if it doesn't work out. 
 

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
34,452
Haiku
phenweigh said:
 
Is Nava to 3B a totally insane idea?  As discussed upthread he has a reasonably strong and accurate arm from the outfield, which could play well at 3B.  He's a marginal major league player and has demonstrated a willingness to play other positions, and has worked to improve his defense when given new assignments.  He has infield experience across the diamond.  Craig could be his platoon partner at 3B, and the limited PT may allow Allen's feet to handle the assignment.  Nava may suck at 3B defense, but asking him to work on it during the off-season and see how it plays out in spring training is only a waste of Daniel's time if it doesn't work out. 
 
It would be a novel and stimulating approach to turn a left-handed throwing outfielder into a 3B (or a SS or 2B, for that matter).
 
By novel and stimulating, I mean utterly crazy. :blink:
 

williams_482

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 1, 2011
391
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
If Victorino is a better player than Nava - and a healthy Victorino is a better player - then, of course, it's Nava that should be moved. All this talk of LH vs RH should not trump a player's basic value. That's just a luxury.

(snip) 
I don't mind Nava .. He's a nice guy to have on the team .. But they can't carry six outfielders. I don't think they get much for Craig or Victorino. And if both those guys recover their previous form you don't want to move them. So it looks like Nava's the odd man out - and he should return something useful.
Why would Nava be worth more in trade than Victorino (and worth relatively more to us as a trade chip than Victorino would be) if Victorino is the better player and Nava's platoon split would be disproportionately useful to the Red Sox compared to most clubs?
 

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
34,452
Haiku
williams_482 said:
Why would Nava be worth more in trade than Victorino (and worth relatively more to us as a trade chip than Victorino would be) if Victorino is the better player and Nava's platoon split would be disproportionately useful to the Red Sox compared to most clubs?
 
Nava is dirt cheap while Victorino costs 13m.
 
I don't think either one of them is worth much in trade at this point. We've already seen his ceiling in 2013. His power isn't coming back from the wrist injury, and his value is as a complementary LH bat, a skill not that hard for any MLB team to find in its farm system or on the waiver wire.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
williams_482 said:
Why would Nava be worth more in trade than Victorino (and worth relatively more to us as a trade chip than Victorino would be) if Victorino is the better player and Nava's platoon split would be disproportionately useful to the Red Sox compared to most clubs?
 
Not that Nava has much trade value, but Victorino has negative trade value.  
 
No chance the Red Sox could give Victorino away for free given what he went through last season, so by default Nava is worth more in a trade. 
 
Edit: beaten by Sprowl
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
Sprowl said:
 
Nava is dirt cheap while Victorino costs 13m.
 
I don't think either one of them is worth much in trade at this point. We've already seen his ceiling in 2013. His power isn't coming back from the wrist injury, and his value is as a complementary LH bat, a skill not that hard for any MLB team to find in its farm system or on the waiver wire.
Then how come the major league average OBP for a left fielder is so low?

Nava is still cheap. Any GM without his head up his ass should be trying to fleece the Red Sox for him this winter. If they get a real 3B, Holt as a sub makes Nava is a bit redundant (though not the other way around). Nevertheless, given Cherington is not a Neanderthal GMAIL, I bet he either extracts real value or holds onto him.

The Reds, who gave Chris Heisey and Skip Schumacker 570 sub 600 ops sub 290 OBP plate appearances and paid Ryan Ludwick $8 million to OPS 683 with a 308 OBP, could use a cheap productive LF, and they have pitchers the Sox need. You're not going to get Latos for Nava, but I'd be trying to sell him as part of the value going to the Reds in that deal.
 

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
34,452
Haiku
Plympton91 said:
Then how come the major league average OBP for a left fielder is so low?

Nava is still cheap. Any GM without his head up his ass should be trying to fleece the Red Sox for him this winter. If they get a real 3B, Holt as a sub makes Nava is a bit redundant (though not the other way around). Nevertheless, given Cherington is not a Neanderthal GMAIL, I bet he either extracts real value or holds onto him.
 
Because GM's are backward looking, just like fans, and expect the LF to be part of the power lineup. They are also forward looking IMO, because left fielders won't be so inept for long. David Murphy correctly identified corner outfielder as the best place for a marginal major leaguer to eke out a decade-long career as a platoon player.
 
Nava will be 32 in 2015, and his ceiling drops a notch every month. He's not the kind of trade target any GM seeks out, although he could be throw-in on a much larger deal involving a package of young Red Sox pitchers.
 
I agree that Cherington holds on to him, and I love the GMAIL auto-correct.
 

phenweigh

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2005
1,379
Brewster, MA
Sprowl said:
 
It would be a novel and stimulating approach to turn a left-handed throwing outfielder into a 3B (or a SS or 2B, for that matter).
 
By novel and stimulating, I mean utterly crazy. :blink:
 
Well, that was a brain fart ... carry on.
 

williams_482

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 1, 2011
391
Sprowl said:
 
Nava is dirt cheap while Victorino costs 13m.
Yes, but there is nothing stopping the Red Sox from subsidizing his contract if they feel Nava will help the team more than Victorino would. If they have to pay Victorino's 13M regardless, they should make sure they are keeping the best players on the field. 
 

MyDaughterLovesTomGordon

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
14,205
It's really hard to put value into a system that has JBJ as zero good fielding plays above average. If what we saw this last year from him is what the average center fielder is doing in MLB, then it is a golden era, indeed, of center field play. 
 

williams_482

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 1, 2011
391
MyDaughterLovesTomGordon said:
It's really hard to put value into a system that has JBJ as zero good fielding plays above average. If what we saw this last year from him is what the average center fielder is doing in MLB, then it is a golden era, indeed, of center field play. 
They do have him at +10 for "plays made," which ranked 6th in MLB. They certainly don't think he's a scrub out there. Based off of the name "good fielding plays" could be basically anything, and I would guess that it is essentially a "miscellaneous" category. The league leader in "rGFP" is Jonathan Lucroy with +11. Four of the top five and 11 of the top 30 are catchers, and the other end of the leaderboard looks fairly similar which catchers taking up 14 of the bottom 30 spots. DRS has no explicit category for blocking, pitch framing, or any other aspect of catcher defense outside of stolen bases. 
 

jscola85

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
1,305
I think people are getting a little too infatuated with Brock Holt.  I loved the hot streak he was on to start the season, but the reality is he has a fairly mediocre minor league track record and his performance last year was very heavily driven by BABIP luck.  He K's almost 20% of the time up there and doesn't draw a ton of walks.  When his BABIP dropped from the .400 range in the first half of the year to a more normalized .280's level, he posted a wRC+ of 53.
 
Simply put, if I had to bet on a guy performing to his 2013 numbers, I'd lay heavy money on Nava over BROCKHOLT!  He's a fun guy to root for, but there's a very good chance if the Sox give him another 400 PAs next year that he posts a line of something like .265/.315/.360.  Jemile Weeks would likely put up about the same line as that if given 400 PAs, if not better given his career walk rates are vastly better than Holt's.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.