nvalvo said:
Nava's biography is not the point.
The point is that Hideki Matsui, had he been born to a hypothetical family of Japanese-American Matsuis ...
Glad to se that someone here is down with the multiverse.
nvalvo said:
Nava's biography is not the point.
The point is that Hideki Matsui, had he been born to a hypothetical family of Japanese-American Matsuis ...
KillerBs said:Jungle Jim Rivera and Dale Long are decent (postive) comps for Nava too.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/l/longda02.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/r/riverji01.shtml
I would certainly bet on Nava's future production over Sizemore's.
Bradley is a strong favourite to be a better overall CFer than Sizemore this year and every year for the rest of his life.
Sizemore was just plain bad over his last 450 PAs, and then missed two full years due to chronic injury. Smacks of a "sexy" Lucchino signing, to divert attention from the loss of Ells and to spice up a drab off season, which Farrell bought into b/c of his past ties to Grady.
nvalvo said:Nava's biography is not the point.
KillerBs said:Smacks of a "sexy" Lucchino signing, to divert attention from the loss of Ells and to spice up a drab off season, which Farrell bought into b/c of his past ties to Grady.
KillerBs said:Smacks of a "sexy" Lucchino signing, to divert attention from the loss of Ells and to spice up a drab off season, which Farrell bought into b/c of his past ties to Grady.
Good analogy, except I'd say it's more like the quality of John Smoltz but much younger. The difference is, nobody had to be traded for John Smoltz to get a roste spot. The solution peole are using to get Sizemore on the roster would be like people suggesting the Red Sox should have traded Clay Buchholz (who disappointed in 08 like Carp did in 2012) after Smoltz had a couple good rehab starts.Red(s)HawksFan said:He is a scrap-heap flyer more comparable to Brad Penny and Aaron Cook than a "sexy" marquee player. Sizemore is not going to put the proverbial butts in the seats on reputation alone.
Trlicek's Whip said:
Agreed. Nothing more ho-hum than going worst-to-first and winning a world championship in spectacular, cathartic, nail-biting fashion.
This reads like "guy in the car/long-time listener/love your show's" out-of-office message.
Smoltz took a roster sport in the same way Sizemore should. When Smoltz was signed someone was sent to AAA. If Grady works out then Bradley should be sent to AAA. There is no difference.Plympton91 said:Good analogy, except I'd say it's more like the quality of John Smoltz but much younger. The difference is, nobody had to be traded for John Smoltz to get a roste spot. The solution peole are using to get Sizemore on the roster would be like people suggesting the Red Sox should have traded Clay Buchholz (who disappointed in 08 like Carp did in 2012) after Smoltz had a couple good rehab starts.
Reverend said:
I have a question: did Sizemore have lots of nagging injuries that held him up or did he just blow up at times? I mean, I know he blew up at times, but what I mean is, if he blow up, he goes on the DL and doesn't cost a roster spot, whereas if he gets hamstrung by nagging injuries, that's more complicated.
joe dokes said:
Actually, in his last 300 PA's he was pretty near league average (96 OPS+). But pretty shitty in the 150 PAs before that. But I do wonder if maybe, just maybe, the things that made him miss 2 full seasons had anything to do with his fall from OPS+ seasons of 123, 133, 123 and 133 (which Ellsbury has reached once is his MLB career) to missing two seasons. (my guess is "yes," the two are quite related.)
Trlicek's Whip said:
Agreed. Nothing more ho-hum than going worst-to-first and winning a world championship in spectacular, cathartic, nail-biting fashion.
This reads like "guy in the car/long-time listener/love your show's" out-of-office message.
MalzoneExpress said:Why are we discussing the possibility of sending Nava to the minors?
They're also based on wild conjecture you pulled out of your ass.Rasputin said:
Because sending Nava down is the way to take the best roster north while keeping the talent.
If you take Sizemore, Victorino, Gomes, Nava, and Bradley from most talented to least talented, Gomes is probably the worst considering his strong split is against the hand with which pitchers throw less frequently but he's being paid five million and can't be sent down. Next from the bottom is Daniel Nava. Good OBP against righties, not too much in the way of power, terrible against lefties, sub par defense. Victorino, Sizemore, and Bradley all have good to great defense. Sizemore has power. Bradley, from what I understand, doesn't have much of a platoon differential.
And did I mention all those rankings of Nava are based on a .352 BABIP.
Overall I have no real complaints with the more or less stand pat off-season other than the Sizemore signing, which I think was a mistake, in the guise of a risk free upside-only deal.
Agree that the only sensible thing to do if they keep Sizemore is to send Bradley down. You just can't give up any depth for a guy who is probably less than 50/50 to be both healthy and productive.Rudy Pemberton said:
Because the issue with Sizemore has always been health. This is a guy who was a top 25 MVP candidate 4 consecutive years while playing fantastic defense, who is still "only" 31. If he's healthy, which is obviously a huge if, he could be an incredibly valuable player. Granted there aren't many cases of guys like him, but if you can flip Carp for a prospect to make room for him, I don't see a ton of risk. Carp had a nice year last year, but I don't really see his long term role on the team, he's not great defensively, and he's probably not going to have a 385 BABIP again. Or you just send Jackie down for a month and see how things shake out.
Well said.Drek717 said:They're also based on wild conjecture you pulled out of your ass.
1. Last I checked Fenway still has the monster in LF, greatly diminishing the importance of defensive range there.
2. Nava hasn't played enough ML OF to have an accurate prediction of his defensive ability. UZR hates him, but DRS had him at +3 in the corners for 2012 and -2 in the corners in 2013 (with the same -1 for both RF and LF). From an observational standpoint I see nothing sub-par about his LF defense. His range and arm are both stretched to their limits in Fenway's RF, but in LF he does a pretty solid job.
3. His wRC+ of 128 was 4th best among regulars, 3rd if you exclude Mike Carp, and only one point shy of Mike Napoli. That's from both sides of the plate. Against righties only he had a wRC+ of 146. A line pretty comparable to Matt Holliday's 148 for last year, and David Ortiz only outpaced that by all of 6 points. His numbers against RHP alone would have made him the 14th best offensive player in all of baseball last year, so if the club can actually truly implement a platoon between he and Gomes (i.e. Victorino staying healthy) his productivity will only improve.
Meanwhile all the negatives you cite against Nava with the exception of power are equally true for Carp and Gomes. Victorino can't stay healthy for a whole season and up until a late season switch paired with absurd HBP luck his career trends suggest almost as serious a split favoring lefties as Nava's split favoring righties (the later of course being the side most pitchers throw from, which is kind of important to how those splits are valued).
And Bradley hasn't shown the ability to hit at the ML level. Hell, Bradley only has 550 ABs above A ball to his credit so far.
It's entirely possible that Daniel Nava's 2014 production will be closer to David Ortiz than Jackie Bradley's production will be to Daniel Nava's, and yet you want to send down the 31 year old who's proven he can out-hit every other OF against RHP over the LHB 23 year old who hasn't proven he can hit ML pitching at all.
The Nava/Gomes LF platoon was a match made in baseball heaven, especially one wherein half the games are played in Fenway with the small LF.Drek717 said:They're also based on wild conjecture you pulled out of your ass.
1. Last I checked Fenway still has the monster in LF, greatly diminishing the importance of defensive range there.
2. Nava hasn't played enough ML OF to have an accurate prediction of his defensive ability. UZR hates him, but DRS had him at +3 in the corners for 2012 and -2 in the corners in 2013 (with the same -1 for both RF and LF). From an observational standpoint I see nothing sub-par about his LF defense. His range and arm are both stretched to their limits in Fenway's RF, but in LF he does a pretty solid job.
3. His wRC+ of 128 was 4th best among regulars, 3rd if you exclude Mike Carp, and only one point shy of Mike Napoli. That's from both sides of the plate. Against righties only he had a wRC+ of 146. A line pretty comparable to Matt Holliday's 148 for last year, and David Ortiz only outpaced that by all of 6 points. His numbers against RHP alone would have made him the 14th best offensive player in all of baseball last year, so if the club can actually truly implement a platoon between he and Gomes (i.e. Victorino staying healthy) his productivity will only improve.
Meanwhile all the negatives you cite against Nava with the exception of power are equally true for Carp and Gomes. Victorino can't stay healthy for a whole season and up until a late season switch paired with absurd HBP luck his career trends suggest almost as serious a split favoring lefties as Nava's split favoring righties (the later of course being the side most pitchers throw from, which is kind of important to how those splits are valued).
And Bradley hasn't shown the ability to hit at the ML level. Hell, Bradley only has 550 ABs above A ball to his credit so far.
It's entirely possible that Daniel Nava's 2014 production will be closer to David Ortiz than Jackie Bradley's production will be to Daniel Nava's, and yet you want to send down the 31 year old who's proven he can out-hit every other OF against RHP over the LHB 23 year old who hasn't proven he can hit ML pitching at all.
Saints Rest said:The Nava/Gomes LF platoon was a match made in baseball heaven, especially one wherein half the games are played in Fenway with the small LF.
In my mind, the issue is how do you back up CF/RF, as I don't really love seeing Nava, Gomes or Carp in RF (god forbid CF). In that magical place where no one is ever hurt, A trio of Sizemore/Victorino/JBJ would be the ideal RF/CF complement to Nava/Gomes in LF.
glennhoffmania said:For those who have watched the games, is JBJ hitting the ball well but just having bad luck? Or are his stats indicative of how's he truly hitting? With such a small sample size a couple of line drives right at someone or a couple of great plays on grounders by infielders could obviously skew the numbers.
I agree with the bolded about trading Carp, but it seems to me that if they demote JBJ to start the season in Pawtucket, it will increase Ben's leverage in trying to parlay Carp into something better. I would almost be tempted to send JBJ down to minor-league camp now for that very reason.koufax37 said:We have one too many guys right now.
The differences aren't significant enough right now to amount to real expected wins differences over a month or two, so we are talking about development and roster construction down the road, not our record on May 1st.
In terms of "earning it" and the negative impact of excluding from the opening day roster, JBJ is coming up short this year, just like he came up big last year. He is being outhit by Carp, Nava, and Sizemore, and while Spring Training stats are not very indicative, I don't think he is really showing signs that he ready to outperform those guys at the plate to start the season. Another struggle could hurt confidence, so I would like to see him earn his roster spot and be in a hot streak when he gets into the lineup.
JBJ also is the youngest, is the one who can benefit the most from triple-A ABs (although Sizemore is probably in that camp too if it were possible), is the one who has the most future cost controlling advantages to starting in the minors.
So if the options are DL/DFA of Sizemore, DFA/Send Down of Nava, and sending down JBJ, I think sending down JBJ is the obvious move to start the season, knowing that he will get an injury opportunity during the course of the season, and might also just take someone's roster spot if he performs and somebody struggles.
I still think option #4 is the best for our team, which is trading Carp for something of value, and I would pursue that aggressively in the meantime, both before we break camp and if JBJ is demoted continuing after. But that option isn't clearly available and takes a partner and a useful return.
So Jackie, we will keep an eye on the performance and health of Sizemore, we will make sure Nava keeps up his offensive value, we will wait for Victorino to run into something, and we will see if we can get someone to offer something good for Carp. But in the meantime please take your .623 spring training OPS to Pawtucket, get locked in, and tear things up for a while and force our hand. We look forward to having you in Boston, and maybe you can drive up for the ring ceremony, but you aren't quite a member of our opening day roster by either merit or strategy.
Saints Rest said:I agree with the bolded about trading Carp, but it seems to me that if they demote JBJ to start the season in Pawtucket, it will increase Ben's leverage in trying to parlay Carp into something better. I would almost be tempted to send JBJ down to minor-league camp now for that very reason.