Why Not JBJ?
- Thread starter Todd Benzinger
- Start date
- Status
geoduck no quahog said:
Thanks for doing that. It would be great if you or someone else kept track.
JBJ's problem right now is RH potching, where he is 3-39. His heat map below is not encouraging, but the funny thing is that he's been better against RHs in the past - for example, he had a .900+ OPS against them in Pawtucket this year.
Jackie Bradley Jr. AVG/P vs R
[SIZE=10pt]Season: 2015 | Count: All | Total Pitches: 181 | Viewpoint: Batter[/SIZE]
edit: couldn't get heat map to copy but it's here: http://www.fangraphs.com/zonegrid.aspx?playerid=12984&position=OF&ss=2015&se=2015&type=4&hand=R&count=all&blur=1&grid=10&view=bat
If Hanley goes to 1B and JBJ is going to wind up in the OF as a starter, it should be in CF. The only reason to prefer Mookie in CF seems to be to hide his arm there. For purposes of looking at the ideal defensive alignment (and therefore leaving aside JBJ's offensive struggles) is Mookie's arm enough of a hinderance in RF that he should be playing LF with Castillo in right? The idea would be to have Mookie in a "Carl Crawford" like roll (hopefully with better offense as he matures).
It's obviously looking ahead and requires everything to break just right (for the record Benintendi replaces Castillo in this fantasy world of mine), but the overarching point is that if JBJ is going to play regularly, why wouldn't it be in CF?
Edit: punctuation
It's obviously looking ahead and requires everything to break just right (for the record Benintendi replaces Castillo in this fantasy world of mine), but the overarching point is that if JBJ is going to play regularly, why wouldn't it be in CF?
Edit: punctuation
OCD SS said:
Given the configuration of Fenway, having a CF-caliber defender with a good arm in RF is a good thing (see Evans, Dwight; Drew, JD; Victorino, Shane) so playing JBJ there wouldn't be the end of the world. Assuming an outfield that included all of Betts, JBJ, and Castillo, I don't think they'd be wrong to go (L to R) Castillo, Betts, JBJ or Betts, JBJ, Castillo. Either way, that's a rangey set of outfielders.
HomeRunBaker said:
I hope you're wrong. Because really, if we need somebody who's going to focus on making "a dramatic move to win next season" instead of building a solid multi-year contender, then why even bring in new people? That's the current group's MO.
Also, calling the Sox "a still somewhat talented team" glosses over their very real and serious issues, especially when it comes to the pitching staff, which is a train wreck. The bullpen is anchored by a 40-year-old closer and a setup guy who has recently shown signs of wear, and the rotation is full of mystery meat. Yes, there's talent to build around, but there's a lot of building--and a lot of growing--still to do. It seems unlikely it can all be done in one winter.
I would say it's absolutely imperative, at the press conference introducing the new baseball ops president, for Henry to emphasize that a serious rebuilding effort is needed and that while the club hopes to field a competitive team in 2016, they think the rebuilding job will take at least a year or two to complete.
OCD SS said:
In theory I agree with you, and I used to bang this drum pretty hard when putting Betts in CF and JBJ in RF was hypothetical. But now that Betts has spent a whole season in CF and established that he's solid there, I don't feel as strongly about it. Especially since the most likely deployment of the three, as long as Hanley is still our LF, is a full-time gig for Mookie and a modified platoon for Rusney/JBJ. In that scenario I think Mookie in CF and Rusney/JBJ in RF makes the most sense. When/if Hanley moves to 1B or DH, then maybe you move Mookie and JBJ leftward.
This is a great point. No way John Henry goes forward with a $200 million luxury tax payroll in a year that he thinks there's no chance to compete. If those of you who wish for a rebuilding year in 2016 got your way, it would come with trading Pedroia, trading Uehara and Tazawa, sitting Ortiz the rest of the way to keep his option price as low as possible and get him to accept a trade or retire. Then start packaging prospects with bad contracts to make Pablo, Hanley, and Porcello attractive to someone. If you're going to rebuild, you lower the payroll commensurate with NESNs collapsing revenues.RedOctober3829 said:
Red(s)HawksFan said:
I've been advocating for this for a lot longer than this. The pitching will be better with fewer hits dropping in. Somebody who understands advanced metrics might be able to quantify this but my gut feeling is that the runs saved defensively probably outweighs JBJ's offensive limitations. JBJ will be fine in the long run offensively (hitting at the bottom of the order). The rest of this season is a good no pressure situation to bolster his confidence. Benintendi ultimately replaces Castillo (or JBJ). His floor seems like Trot Nixon or JD Drew but his ceiling is exciting.
Will someone offer some insight into why Bradley is struggling at the major league level whereas his numbers in AAA are respectable. I don't expect him to hit at the same level but he looks completely lost at times...
The thing is that with a payroll like ours will be it is possible to do both. I'm certainly not advocating unloading our prospects although we do have enough depth to include a non-untouchable prospect or two as part of a larger deal to acquire a Carrasco for example. I do agree that our growth is going to come primarily from our younger and newer players (I'll include "newer" to include Wright who is actually still "young" in knuckleballer terms) and particularly those who can solidify our rotation. I also don't expect Porcello and Kelly to suck as much next year as their track record doesn't indicate such awfulness. Yeah I know i'm drinking the Kool-Aid here but baseball is one sport where your fortunes can turn from one season to the next especially when you have our resources.Savin Hillbilly said:
Here's my position on this. JBJ was handed the CF job last year, he failed and opened the door for Betts to earn the job.....which he did. IF JBJ takes advantage of a similar opportunity (whatever, let's assume) to where your OF is going to include both players then at that time I make the move to switch Betts to RF where he can utilize his speed (Betts in LF is a waste of his athleticism). I never ever ever take a player who has EARNED his job out of that position to willingly give his competition a chance to outplay him. Betts didn't do anything to deserve losing his CF job......professional sports doesn't work this way.
Aside from Ortiz, perhaps yes. But the only trade chip left on the Red Sox now, who could definitely be dealt for quality young pitching, is Pedroia. Uehara is old and only has one year left; Tazawa is a set-up guy, and not even a shut-down one like 2010 Bard or 2014 Miller.Plympton91 said:
Unfortunately, the baseball ops group turned Peavy, Lester, and Lackey into Porcello, Kelly, the corpse of Allen Craig. That book is closed, though, and the only thing worth doing now is to look forward.
Getting EdRo last season looks like pure luck, or at least was due to the FO's acceptance that all trading a reliever could bring back is "just" a prospect...and not those established MLB players who the first, second, and (considering payroll as a factor) third most successful clubs of the last decade had targeted as expendable to their continued success.
Luchhino stepping down, and Cherington's inactivity at the deadline suggests that Henry is In fact willing to accept that his high-priced, last-place ballclub might need more than just one more quick fix.
Shedding payroll is definitely possible, though for the most part unlikely to do more than free up future obligations. But should moving Pedroia and shifting Betts back to 2B be necessary In order to restock the pitching staff, then that option must be left on the table during the offseason.
The Sox need to build now for a new window to open starting in 2017, and not just wait 'till next year.
I don't think there is much problem playing JBJ in either position. I'd probably leave Mookie for now because he is used to reading the ball off the bat from CF and why give him something else to think about. JBJ can play either. And of course he has the arm for it.
Even as one of the JBJ advocates here, there seems to be not enough chance that he will force his way into the lineup next year that Mookie should be displaced now.
Also as one of the fiercest advocates of Ortiz on the team in 2016, I will admit it would be nice if he was injured instead of say Pedroia because it would be nice for all three of Mookie, Rusney, and JBJ to be full-time here on out. I'm going to beat my forest and trees drum here and say this is where Ben really fucking hugely missed with the Hanley signing. Yes, as a player he is can be very good, and his power is a rare commodity, but as a succession plan for Ortiz he is fine not great. In a vacuum you can defend that signing all day. But, when you have a bunch of guys already for the position (even assuming Cespedes was a lock to be traded), fitting a square peg into a round hole seems completely inappropriate. It is something you do for the last piece of your championship puzzle, not in a year that you have so many question marks. And, yes, I am a person who not only liked the signing on its own, but thinks Hanley will be better in the future. For probably half the teams in the league he was a great signing. Unfortunately the 2015 Red Sox aren't one of those teams.
Even as one of the JBJ advocates here, there seems to be not enough chance that he will force his way into the lineup next year that Mookie should be displaced now.
Also as one of the fiercest advocates of Ortiz on the team in 2016, I will admit it would be nice if he was injured instead of say Pedroia because it would be nice for all three of Mookie, Rusney, and JBJ to be full-time here on out. I'm going to beat my forest and trees drum here and say this is where Ben really fucking hugely missed with the Hanley signing. Yes, as a player he is can be very good, and his power is a rare commodity, but as a succession plan for Ortiz he is fine not great. In a vacuum you can defend that signing all day. But, when you have a bunch of guys already for the position (even assuming Cespedes was a lock to be traded), fitting a square peg into a round hole seems completely inappropriate. It is something you do for the last piece of your championship puzzle, not in a year that you have so many question marks. And, yes, I am a person who not only liked the signing on its own, but thinks Hanley will be better in the future. For probably half the teams in the league he was a great signing. Unfortunately the 2015 Red Sox aren't one of those teams.
The Boomer said:
Did you just say Benintendi's *floor* is JD Drew? Drew had a 13 year career worth 45 WAR.
(That's more than twice Nixon's career value, FYI. They're not similar players!)
I'm pretty excited about Benintendi, too — it's always great to see a draftee hit the ground running like he has — but I don't think *any* prospect in low A, even a Bryce Harper type, has that kind of career as a floor.
Let's assume Betts, Bradley, Castillo is the outfield for 2016 - with Ramirez either splitting DH with an aging Ortiz, or (always a possibility) Ortiz retiring. One benefit of Ramirez as part time DH is his "ability" to slide into LF if necessary.
Who is the best fielder of that bunch? JBJ.
I'm sorry, you put your best fielder into CF - 1/2 the games are played away from Fenway. The classic Evans/Lynn scenario is fine as far as it goes, but Evans was never a Center Fielder (edit: he played 32 games in CF).
That leaves Castillo or Betts in RF. Castillo has the better arm and some speed. Betts is (ironically) the better fielder. Turn it around - who's the most likely to acclimate to the Wall? I don't know the answer to that question, but logic seems to say Castillo in RF and Betts in LF.
This is obviously speculation considering either or both of JBJ/Castillo could be off the team next year.
Who is the best fielder of that bunch? JBJ.
I'm sorry, you put your best fielder into CF - 1/2 the games are played away from Fenway. The classic Evans/Lynn scenario is fine as far as it goes, but Evans was never a Center Fielder (edit: he played 32 games in CF).
That leaves Castillo or Betts in RF. Castillo has the better arm and some speed. Betts is (ironically) the better fielder. Turn it around - who's the most likely to acclimate to the Wall? I don't know the answer to that question, but logic seems to say Castillo in RF and Betts in LF.
This is obviously speculation considering either or both of JBJ/Castillo could be off the team next year.
Wait--Hanley as a platoon DH next year? Can you clarify? Because if I've read you correctly, you're in favor of DLing him for the rest of this season and then being the weak half of a DH platoon next season.geoduck no quahog said:
Neither of those is going to happen, and Papi isn't retiring, but I want to see if I'm missing something.
Forget it; he's rolling.Bob Montgomery said:
For a significant fraction of SOSH, nothing is more important than creating a starting OF spot for Jackie Bradley. Nothing.
I'm not certain that Papi won't retire if he gets to 500 homers this year. That's no lock, but I could see him retiring if so. That would open DH up for Hanley and the outfield configuration geoduck envisions. I love Papi as much as anyone here, but as a Sox fan that would be the best thing for the team in 2016, imho.Bob Montgomery's Helmet Hat said:
No it would not. David Ortiz is the only player on the team to have an OPS above 0.800 right now (not counting De Aza). Losing him is a big blow to this offense's limited capabilities.Yaz4Ever said:
Yup. That post couldn't have been a better illustration of the JBJ toxin infecting a majority of this forum.Laser Show said:
Imagine if somebody said the best thing that could happen to the Red Sox would be if Xander Bogaerts suffered a season ending injury and he would be replaced by Deven Marrero.
That's the equivalent trade off when someone says they want to replace David Ortiz with Jackie Bradley.
Yaz4Ever said:
Ortiz may very well retire if he gets to 500, but there's absolutely no way that is a good thing for the 2016 Red Sox. Oh, so it solves a potential logjam in the outfield. But they're also losing 34+ HR (his total if he reaches 500) and an .800+ OPS from the lineup. No way a healthy Ramirez + JBJ/Castillo entirely make up for that.
Yea, I'm not sure forcing retirement on the guy who leads the team in HR's, BB's, and RBI's is step one on any program to fixing the team. Ortiz is the hitting half of a position that doesn't require defense, so we're supposed to slot in a shitty fielder who isn't as good a hitter into his slot because we want to slot a shitty hitter who is a great fielder into his slot. If we keep with this logic pretty soon we'll be slotting guys who can't do either (but might one day) into slots for guys who are shitty fielders but in a slump. Hell, all of our phones would ring eventually.
BTW, Pedroia is a career 1117 OPS guy when he bats in the 4 hole, which he's done enough to satisfy the sample requirements of some on this board (139 PA's). So on the list of "Things that aren't happening next year", put "Pedey batting 4th" right under "Ortiz retires"
BTW, Pedroia is a career 1117 OPS guy when he bats in the 4 hole, which he's done enough to satisfy the sample requirements of some on this board (139 PA's). So on the list of "Things that aren't happening next year", put "Pedey batting 4th" right under "Ortiz retires"
it's great that Ortiz is hitting now, but he killed them in the first half when they were, in theory, still in the race and only now has the numbers of a passable DH, if 40th in slugging is worth an every day clean up spot. Please dear God, hit number 500 this year.
At this point I'm fine with Bradley just being a 4th OF. If he's a Darren Bragg type, then so be it. It's still pretty valuable If a starter goes down, he won't kill the team in the short term. If he plays well, and another team wants him, then make a deal.
I've been a huge supporter of his, but the fact is, he has to yet to force the fact and have a hot streak at the major league level. He may yet learn how to hit, but most likely not here in Boston. At some point, the small sample size of this year has to be added to last year's lost season.
At this point I'm fine with Bradley just being a 4th OF. If he's a Darren Bragg type, then so be it. It's still pretty valuable If a starter goes down, he won't kill the team in the short term. If he plays well, and another team wants him, then make a deal.
I've been a huge supporter of his, but the fact is, he has to yet to force the fact and have a hot streak at the major league level. He may yet learn how to hit, but most likely not here in Boston. At some point, the small sample size of this year has to be added to last year's lost season.
PaulinMyrBch said:
You're correct - and there's no way I'm advocating for an Ortiz retirement - but there's a couple of things we know (or think we know):
1. Ortiz will someday retire (he will never be forced out)
2. Ortiz has been quoted as saying he rejects a "farewell tour", and will spring his retirement notice to the public on his own terms
3. Ramirez, if he remains a Red Sock (assume, yes) will someday be the DH. The argument against that is his moving to 1B - which could be the topic of another thread. I go with future DH.
4. It's possible (though unlikely) that Ortiz will actually want to diminish his own playing time - not necessarily in a pure platoon, but as an aging icon who gets time off on his own terms. This is a stretch.
Before puking all over the post, my guess is that Ramirez as Left Fielder is not in the Red Sox' future (whether in 2016, 2017 or 2018). It doesn't matter whether he's at 1B or DH. If that's true - 3 outfielders are still required and my hope is that it's Betts, Bradley and Castillo.
The argument against is that Hanley remains in LF, or that a dream of the B-B-C outfield makes me an asshole. I'm an asshole, but not for that reason.
Mookie Betts and Jackie Bradley are both developing players. We know there is a very solid chance Betts can have a good career as an above average hitting center fielder. But he still needs to play center to develop his defense there. Bradley has shown a lot of evidence that he can play great center field, and be an historically bad hitter. Is his defense good enough that I'd like to give him another chance to see if he can hit in the majors? Does minor league success this year give me some hope he can figure out how to hit MLB pitching? Yes to both. But I wouldn't interrupt the development of the player who is clearly far more certain to be an MLB player at this in favor of the guy who looks far more likely to be a defensive sub or minor leaguer. The games don't matter at this point, Bradley can play in right part time with Castillo until he proves he's not a terrible hitter. If he develops then maybe next year you move Betts to RF and let Jackie play CF. But that's a lot of at-bats away. It's like divorcing your wife because the cute barista smiled at you. Don't be that dude.
At season start, I did not imagine that Ortiz would be leading the team in those categories. And I agree with the long term prognosis of Hanley, I just don't see it next year.geoduck no quahog said:
And I wasn't taking a crap on your post, just having some fun in mine. Slow Saturday night down here. MLB TV keeps cutting out.
The thing is, you're just pulling it put of your ass. You look at him being terrible in the field, declare it unacceptable, and assume that the Red Sox not only share your opinion, but also think that he can't improve and assume that means he's never playing left after this season.geoduck no quahog said:
Moving him to first base makes a lot of sense from where we sit, but it's only going to work if Ramirez works hard on it in the off season. That's in the context of a guy who already has to work real hard on the position he's currently playing.
What if he concentrates on first base, comes in to camp and sucks? You can't have a terrible defensive first baseman, he touches the ball too much. That puts you in the position of having to ask him to move back to left even though he didn't work on it all off season.
I just find it hard to believe JBJ is not going to hit well enough to justify being in the lineup everyday at CF given his defense. Have him hit 9th and play him everyday. They should go to an OF next year with Betts in LF, JBJ in CF and Castillo RF. Bit short on power there, but the defense will be ok, and you look elsewhere for power.
Hanley, I would like to deal. Much like Edgar Renteria it was something that looked good on paper but did not work out. Cut your losses, eat some salary and trade him to a team needing a DH. I cant imagine Hanley being agile enough to play 1B. Seriously. If you cant play LF in Fenway you cant play anywhere. Maybe 3B, but we have Pablo and is even more untradeable than Hanley. The new President of baseball ops, or whatever they call it won't have a problem getting rid of Ben and Larry's mistake. Non-performing assets are written off all the time in business so that improvements can be made, so JWH would likely be on board
Pablo needs to be put on a treadmill in the off season and not let off until he loses 50 lbs. Or send him to API. Get him some girls to like to motivate him while he works out.
IMO Papi is not leaving money on the table and retiring, unless he has an injury that prevents the options from vesting. Had some troubles with LHP'ers this year, but at worst he platoons at DH and gets 70% of the PA there.
That leaves the Red Sox immediate needs this offseason as 1B and SPing, and beefing up the bullpen.
Hanley, I would like to deal. Much like Edgar Renteria it was something that looked good on paper but did not work out. Cut your losses, eat some salary and trade him to a team needing a DH. I cant imagine Hanley being agile enough to play 1B. Seriously. If you cant play LF in Fenway you cant play anywhere. Maybe 3B, but we have Pablo and is even more untradeable than Hanley. The new President of baseball ops, or whatever they call it won't have a problem getting rid of Ben and Larry's mistake. Non-performing assets are written off all the time in business so that improvements can be made, so JWH would likely be on board
Pablo needs to be put on a treadmill in the off season and not let off until he loses 50 lbs. Or send him to API. Get him some girls to like to motivate him while he works out.
IMO Papi is not leaving money on the table and retiring, unless he has an injury that prevents the options from vesting. Had some troubles with LHP'ers this year, but at worst he platoons at DH and gets 70% of the PA there.
That leaves the Red Sox immediate needs this offseason as 1B and SPing, and beefing up the bullpen.
And he doesn't sound like a man ready to hang up his spikes, 500 or no.
David Ortiz Taking Pride In Earning 2016 Contract Option With Red Sox
David Ortiz Taking Pride In Earning 2016 Contract Option With Red Sox
Red(s)HawksFan said:
I personally am of the belief that the team is better off with Ortiz at DH in 2016, and would rather see them try Hanley at 1B if anything. However, unless I am severely fucking up in my understanding of the stats, it's not impossible to make the case that the defensive improvement could potentially make up for the projected drop in offense.
Based on JBJ's 2014 and Hanley's DRS so far in 2015, the difference in defense (with Hanley at DH, not 1B) could easily be 30 runs. Ortiz will probably finish this year around 120 wRC+. If we guess that Hanley could be good for, say, +5 wRC+ over a full-season at DH relative to this year, and if JBJ could manage around a 75 wRC+ (likely around a .635 OPS), then on paper they save a few more runs on defense than they lose on offense. Although I'm not sure if the wRC -> wRC+ chart I'm using is current (and no way to know the exact offensive environment next year anyway).
Now, there's no evidence that JBJ can manage that, and Hanley could get better in LF, and Ortiz could rebound to a 130 wRC+ or more in 2016, and lots of other things could scuttle this scenario. And even if it breaks as described above, it's close. But it's not a completely crazy idea.
You mean the AB which he dogged out of the box, watching the ball hit off the center field wall, and then narrowly making it to second....
Sampo Gida said:
I find it hard to believe he will.
JBJ is now 3-for-28 since his recent call-up, on top of 4-for-30 in limited time earlier in the year. Those are 5th OF numbers, not starting OF numbers.
rlsb said:
Not very far? The difference between JBJ's average (.121) and Evans's average above is the same as the difference between the Red Sox's best hitter (Bogaerts at .313) and their worst (Hanigan at .246). That's a huge difference.
Put it another way: think of how much you'd lose replacing the best hitter in your lineup with the worst. Then lose that same amount again. Then lose it a third time. Only then would would you reach JBJ's hitting level. That's how bad he's been at the plate.
Yeah, but since you already have good fielders in CF and RF, even if you move Hanley to DH wouldn't you be better off with a LF who can hit and just not be a butcher in the field?nothumb said:
Why would they be better off with JBJ than say even DeAza who is basically at 0 DRS, but a career 101 wRC+?
No, on the AB I'm thinking about he grounded out. The one you're thinking about is the leadoff 420' double where he eventually scored giving us a 1-0 lead. That was actually 2 AB's before he hit a HR to give us a 3-2 lead, and 3 AB's before he stroked a 2 RBI single to give us a 6-5 lead.Green Monster said:
But go ahead and smartass hate on the one guy that will likely be the easiest to project for 2016.
BTW, JBJ came up with men on 1st/2nd and no outs twice tonight. Care to guess how those AB's went?
Cellar-Door said:
I think you're right, was more just trying to illustrate that the specific swap being proposed, the gap is not as large as some might think. I very much doubt that the Sox' best option next year would involve playing JBJ over Ortiz. I think the analysis mostly shows how bad it is to have Hanley in LF.
Green Monster said:
He hasn't had a triple since 2013, and wasn't going to have one on that ball, either. He made it to second safely, took third on a ground ball and scored on a sac fly.
Next time, leave the smartass remarks to the professionals.
Sampo Gida said:
Where and who though?
For all the talk of Hanley being expendable and Ortiz retiring, those two and the recently departed Napoli account for over 50% of the homeruns we've hit as an already bottom half of the AL team this year. A team which is also essentially locked in at every infield position other then first, while looking ahead at winter market that isn't exactly projecting to offer a surplus of offensive options (do you really want us to be the team that pays top dollar on Chris Davis?)
The wish casting on Bradley as a future starter here is really starting to reach Allen Craig levels imo. Sounds great by itself in paper theory, but with a surrounding reality that has already seen the window of opportunity close. I just can't see any way at this point that Ben (or whoever) walks out of a full off-season of "we need to turn this around" preparation slating him as the starting OF on a $200m baseball team. If Betts' performance this year in center alone didn't slam that window shut in Bradly's face, Castillo's contract commitment surely has.
MikeM said:
Well, you don't usually get power from CF, the biggest drop off here is Betts in LF and he has other offfensive attributes.
1B is the only open position, and all you have next year on the FA market is Chris Davis, or they need to make a trade and art with some prospects.
A healthy Pedey gives you some more Fenway power, and XB's power should develop a bit more than it has, and perhaps a better conditioned Pablo, a better year from Papi against LHP'ers, and.thats it.
I don't really think we have a handle on what Castillo can do. Too small a sample, huge adjustment for him in year 1. Obviously, you have to give him (Castillo) a shot and have a backup plan for JBJ. If both fail, you make a move at the trade deadline.
The decreased run production due to moving away from Hanley and giving JBJ more AB's will be offset by runs saved due to pitching and defense.
Yeah, that's really unlikely unless he hits much better.Sampo Gida said:
There is only so much defensive value you can get out of a LFer.
Even if not having Hanley in LF is a massive gain, there are lots of players who are much much better hitters than JBJ that you can put in the OF to get more overall value from the 3 spots.
JBJ needs to learn to hit. If he does he can be part of the OF, if he doesn't no amount of defensive skill is going to offset his hitting in an OF that already has a good defensive CF.
The problem with every iteration of the "JBJ wouldn't be that much worse than Hanley because of the defense" argument is that most of the value you are gaining defensively isn't because of how good JBJ is, it is from how terrible Hanley has been. That may be a good argument for moving Hanley out of LF, but it isn't a good one for JBJ being the one to move into the OF.
I think the main culprit is his unorthodox swing, complete with the double tap and hitch. In another thread, some are suggesting that the Red Sox rushed him to the majors based upon his big spring training a few years back, but it may well have been an important part of his development, in that he appears to get away with that swing in the minors, but hits reality vs. regular season MLB pitching. He's cut back on some of the noise in his swing in 2015, but last I saw, the hitch is still there. He's already partially committed before the pitch is anywhere near him, which can make it easy to mess him up with changing speeds or location vs. what he's expecting to see.75cent bleacher seat said:
There are three issues here:nothumb said:
1) The standard shouldn't be net neutral moves - this team is terrible. Sacrificing some offense for some defense will just make us bad offensively and mediocre defensively rather than the other way around.
2) It's unlikely Bradley is 30 runs better in LF, and it doesn't make a lot of place to play him in left field. So you still have to find a left fielder, or you have to play Bradley in CF and move Betts, which will have its own effects, good and bad.
3) There's already an OF spot open for next year, in RF. Opening a second spot in LF greatly increases your chances of failure, because both Bradley and Castillo have pretty wide error bars on their performance and now you have to play both of them. With one spot, the Sox can play just the best of them and make the other a bench / AAA player; with two spots, they have to play both even if one of them is terrible. Moreover, a fourth OF typically gets in ~100 games, so they still need to find one of those.
One thing to be careful of in that calculation is to not compare JBJ in CF to HR in LF. You have to compare JBJ/Castillo in CF:RF to Betts/Castillo in CF/RF. The LF comparison is a world where JBJ and Castillo start is Betts to HR. And you have to remember that even Carl Ctawford was a 0 in LF for Boston, so that's probably the best you could hope for the defensive systems to spit out for Betts.nothumb said:
You can afford to start Bradley if you have a powerhouse offense and good pitching. Since the latter two elements are missing it seems that Bradley is doomed to 4th-5th outfielder status, or should be used as part of a deal to bolster rotation or bullpen.
Mookie Betts, in his first year in center at the age of 22, is ALREADY one of the best-hitting centerfielders in the game. His stats, at the break, were very close to AS game starter Lorenzo Cain's. The question with Mookie is will he just be an All-Star a few times over his career or have an even better career than that? Mookie's greatest value is as a centerfielder. If he can field center well enough, and he's shown that he can, then that's where he stays and you find people who can hit for the other outfield spots....which was Ben's idea with putting Hanley in left. Unfortunately, Hanley has been a ridiculously bad outfielder which has created a problem.shaggydog2000 said:
Actually, the question, with Betts, should be: where will his bat play, where he won't keep getting his bell rung.Pumpsie said:
Even a young player can't keep smacking his noggin into walls and the ground, without it causing recurrent damage.
Betts plays at full tilt, which is great. But he's had two of the most horrific head impacts this year that I can remember (the worst being Damon/Jackson '03 ALCS). That can't continue, not if he wants to have any kind of career longevity.
Watching the kid have such a great day only a few weeks after the Lucchino news made me wonder how much JBJ's delayed/lack of development has messed up the Sox plan and overall approach to developing youngsters. The last few years the team has obviously tried to start folding in the kids where possible – and while there's been a fair amount of success on the offensive side of the ball, it hasn't been without its hiccups, from Xander's underwhelming 2014 to Swihart's slow start this season.
And obviously, JBJ is the poster child for those who wonder whether the Sox have a "development problem" – to the point that he played so badly for so long at the dish that the team went from thinking JBJ was the centerfielder of the future as late as July 2014 to openly questioning whether he had any place in the organization at all when they shipped him to Pawtucket a few weeks later.
But the repercussions are real. Thankfully they didn't let the JBJ issue mess up how they approached Betts this year. But if JBJ even shows a little offensively in 2014, does the team even bid on Castillo? And now that they have Castillo, Hanley, Betts, and Panda can they even afford to find out what they have in JBJ?
Combined with the ill-fated Stephen Drew Experiment last year, the more I think about it, the more I think that Cherington's biggest problem hasn't been player evaluation but rather rather one of the oldest problems at Fenway: trying to field a competitive team at the same time they have tried to develop players like Xander and JBJ.
Feeding the Monster, indeed.
And obviously, JBJ is the poster child for those who wonder whether the Sox have a "development problem" – to the point that he played so badly for so long at the dish that the team went from thinking JBJ was the centerfielder of the future as late as July 2014 to openly questioning whether he had any place in the organization at all when they shipped him to Pawtucket a few weeks later.
But the repercussions are real. Thankfully they didn't let the JBJ issue mess up how they approached Betts this year. But if JBJ even shows a little offensively in 2014, does the team even bid on Castillo? And now that they have Castillo, Hanley, Betts, and Panda can they even afford to find out what they have in JBJ?
Combined with the ill-fated Stephen Drew Experiment last year, the more I think about it, the more I think that Cherington's biggest problem hasn't been player evaluation but rather rather one of the oldest problems at Fenway: trying to field a competitive team at the same time they have tried to develop players like Xander and JBJ.
Feeding the Monster, indeed.
Pete Abraham @PeteAbe 25m25 minutes ago
Of note: Farrell left open the idea of Betts playing a corner OF spot. So Bradley could play some more in CF. Under discussion.
Of note: Farrell left open the idea of Betts playing a corner OF spot. So Bradley could play some more in CF. Under discussion.
- Status