The 2018 Lineup

Merkle's Boner

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2011
3,760
http://apps.bostonglobe.com/sports/graphics/2018/01/launch-angle/

A nice piece of work from Alex Speier with compelling graphics. If they successfully adjust their swings to the launch angle revolution, we could see big improvements in JBJ and X performance.
I was coming here to post the same article. Pretty amazing data on how poor the Sox were last year on launch angle on hard hit balls. Xander was the extreme, with a 1.2% launch angle on balls hit over 100mph. He doesn't need to hit balls harder, he just needs to get them in the air more often.

Great use of graphics and data in the article.
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
8,681
No surprise that the Red Sox hitters were bystanders to the offensive revolution in 2017, based on Chili Davis's recent comments:

Davis did seem to take a shot at the Red Sox' heavy reliance on analytics.

"Well, I don't know if I can teach Dustin Pedroia launch angle, or Christian Vazquez, launch angle," he said. "I don't know if that's going to help them or hurt them. I think I worked with my hitters from what works best for them. We try to add to that. The launch angle thing is not something I'm opposed to, but if you're not a home run hitter, why would you be hitting fly balls? You're just going to make outs."
https://www.weei.com/blogs/ryan-hannable/former-red-sox-hitting-coach-chili-davis-responds-john-henrys-criticism

I wonder what Theo Epstein's thought process was in hiring Davis as the Cubs new hitting coach - maybe he thinks the launch-angle techniques can be better taught by other instructors and his hitting coach doesn't need to focus on that?
 

David Kaiser

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 13, 2017
30
My new book, Baseball Greatness: Top Players and Teams According to Wins Above Average, 1901-2017, was published earlier this month. You can listen to me discuss it on a podcast here, if you wish--note there are several ways to reach the podcast--and it's available here, where you can also see prepublication comments from Rob Neyer and others.

Let me quickly summarize what it had to say about the 2017 Red Sox and what it implies for the 2018 Red Sox.

The focuses on the metric Wins Above Average (WAA, not WAR). It shows that it's very difficult to win a pennant without at least one player with at least 4 WAA, which is defined as a superstar season. 2-3 WAA is defined as a star season. The Red Sox of 2017 were unusual. They did not have a single everyday player that good, although Mookie Betts just missed that level with 3.9 WAA., after reaching it in the previous two seasons.Not a single other player in the lineup earned as much as 2 WAA and the lineup as a whole was about three wins below average. The pitching staff carried the team, earning a remarkable +15 WAA--a very unusual figure--led by Chris Sale, of course, with 4.9, followed by Drew Pomeranz (3.1) and Craig Kimbrel (2.8). It will be surprising if the pitching staff can sustain that level of performance for another year, putting pressure on the lineup to improve.

Devers, and perhaps Benintendi, could advance to the star or even superstar level, although I think it's unlikely that both of them will. People won't want to hear this, but Bradley and Bogaerts have already proven that they are not going to be the kind of major asset that gets you into postseason. As for J. D. Martinez, he had his best year ever last year with 2.7 WAA, only the second time that he has had 2 or more. It would not be surprising if he slipped a little this year because average hitting performance is higher in the AL than the NL.

As many of you recall, the Red Sox' 94 wins last year represented their true level of ability, while the Yankees' run differential should have given them 101 wins. Giancarlo Stanton figures to be better than J. D Martinez, suggesting that their superiority may increase. The reason we watch and write about baseball is that you never know what will happen until the game is played, and no one knows how the AL East will turn out. It seems most likely to me, however, that the Yankees will win it comfortably while the Red Sox fight for a wild card slot.
 

Jerry’s Curl

New Member
Feb 6, 2018
2,518
Florida
My new book, Baseball Greatness: Top Players and Teams According to Wins Above Average, 1901-2017, was published earlier this month. You can listen to me discuss it on a podcast here, if you wish--note there are several ways to reach the podcast--and it's available here, where you can also see prepublication comments from Rob Neyer and others.

Let me quickly summarize what it had to say about the 2017 Red Sox and what it implies for the 2018 Red Sox.

The focuses on the metric Wins Above Average (WAA, not WAR). It shows that it's very difficult to win a pennant without at least one player with at least 4 WAA, which is defined as a superstar season. 2-3 WAA is defined as a star season. The Red Sox of 2017 were unusual. They did not have a single everyday player that good, although Mookie Betts just missed that level with 3.9 WAA., after reaching it in the previous two seasons.Not a single other player in the lineup earned as much as 2 WAA and the lineup as a whole was about three wins below average. The pitching staff carried the team, earning a remarkable +15 WAA--a very unusual figure--led by Chris Sale, of course, with 4.9, followed by Drew Pomeranz (3.1) and Craig Kimbrel (2.8). It will be surprising if the pitching staff can sustain that level of performance for another year, putting pressure on the lineup to improve.

Devers, and perhaps Benintendi, could advance to the star or even superstar level, although I think it's unlikely that both of them will. People won't want to hear this, but Bradley and Bogaerts have already proven that they are not going to be the kind of major asset that gets you into postseason. As for J. D. Martinez, he had his best year ever last year with 2.7 WAA, only the second time that he has had 2 or more. It would not be surprising if he slipped a little this year because average hitting performance is higher in the AL than the NL.

As many of you recall, the Red Sox' 94 wins last year represented their true level of ability, while the Yankees' run differential should have given them 101 wins. Giancarlo Stanton figures to be better than J. D Martinez, suggesting that their superiority may increase. The reason we watch and write about baseball is that you never know what will happen until the game is played, and no one knows how the AL East will turn out. It seems most likely to me, however, that the Yankees will win it comfortably while the Red Sox fight for a wild card slot.
As for your pitching analysis, you omitted what a healthy season of David Price will do for the pitching staff which is a difference maker, IMO. Sale should be as good as 2017 and even with a Pomeranz regression I think the pitching can very well repeat last year.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,243
No surprise that the Red Sox hitters were bystanders to the offensive revolution in 2017, based on Chili Davis's recent comments:



https://www.weei.com/blogs/ryan-hannable/former-red-sox-hitting-coach-chili-davis-responds-john-henrys-criticism

I wonder what Theo Epstein's thought process was in hiring Davis as the Cubs new hitting coach - maybe he thinks the launch-angle techniques can be better taught by other instructors and his hitting coach doesn't need to focus on that?

"I think I worked with my hitters from what works best for them." So no teaching of new things.

"The launch angle thing is not something I'm opposed to, but if you're not a home run hitter, why would you be hitting fly balls? You're just going to make outs."
Yes. better for a speedster like Vazquez to hit grounders. And Pedroia? Never swings hard anyway, so why bother.

Even referring to "launch angle" as "analytics" is dumb.

This is the key refutation to Davis's point:
Major league average, you hit the ball on the ground, it’s .239, .240. You hit the ball in the air, it’s only .209, but the value is the slugging percentage. If you hit the ball in the air and have the right exit speed with it, with the right angles, that’s where home runs come in.”
Thats 18 hits over 600 PAs.
 

Dewey'sCannon

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
870
Maryland
I wondered all last season why Chili wasn't on the hot seat with the way the offense was struggling, particularly with regard to power. There certainly have been a lot of cases where hitting coaches get fired (fairly or not) in-season when teams are struggling, instead of (or as a prelude to) a managerial firing.

I'm happy to have a new staff in place this year.
 

phenweigh

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2005
1,379
Brewster, MA
As for your pitching analysis, you omitted what a healthy season of David Price will do for the pitching staff which is a difference maker, IMO. Sale should be as good as 2017 and even with a Pomeranz regression I think the pitching can very well repeat last year.
FWIW, on NESN this morning Jerry Remy choose Price as the player who he picks to have a great season, because he is healthy. I hope it comes to fruition.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,243
I wondered all last season why Chili wasn't on the hot seat with the way the offense was struggling, particularly with regard to power. There certainly have been a lot of cases where hitting coaches get fired (fairly or not) in-season when teams are struggling, instead of (or as a prelude to) a managerial firing.

I'm happy to have a new staff in place this year.
In a sense, Davis wasn't *that* bad at doing what he did. They were 6th in runs, etc. etc. I think that when the team wants to do a serious shift in philosophy, its probably tough to do it mid season. And its also possible they had Hyers in mind and had to wait.

Maybe its not all that different from Farrell. Success or not, they were changing their philosophy about what they needed in a manager. And thats a better move to make in the offseason.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,487
Santa Monica, CA
Devers, and perhaps Benintendi, could advance to the star or even superstar level, although I think it's unlikely that both of them will. People won't want to hear this, but Bradley and Bogaerts have already proven that they are not going to be the kind of major asset that gets you into postseason. As for J. D. Martinez, he had his best year ever last year with 2.7 WAA, only the second time that he has had 2 or more. It would not be surprising if he slipped a little this year because average hitting performance is higher in the AL than the NL.
.
Bogaerts is 25. He's proven that he can't be a "major asset that gets you into the postseason" (whatever that means)?

What had J.D. Martinez done by age 25?
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,243
Bogaerts is 25. He's proven that he can't be a "major asset that gets you into the postseason" (whatever that means)?
Hasn't he already proven the opposite?
They made the post-season in 2016, when Bogaerts was, at worst, a top 10 MLB SS. Strikes me as "major asset-ish".
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
My new book, Baseball Greatness: Top Players and Teams According to Wins Above Average, 1901-2017, was published earlier this month. You can listen to me discuss it on a podcast here, if you wish--note there are several ways to reach the podcast--and it's available here, where you can also see prepublication comments from Rob Neyer and others.
one knows how the AL East will turn out. It seems most likely to me, however, that the Yankees will win it comfortably while the Red Sox fight for a wild card slot.
Just ordered a sample of your book on Amazon, which will remind me later when I get home to buy it.

If there are some internal rules against promoting this, I can understand, but I wouldn't have found this otherwise. Maybe make exceptions for published books? That should minimize the damage.
 

NDame616

will bailey
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
2,315
Bogaerts is 25. He's proven that he can't be a "major asset that gets you into the postseason" (whatever that means)?

What had J.D. Martinez done by age 25?
The same can be said about the assessment of JBJ. 2 years ago he was an All Star and second in the AL CFs in OPS (behind some Trout guy) and we made the playoffs. So, by definition he's already been an important offensive player on a playoff team
 

effectivelywild

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
466
The same can be said about the assessment of JBJ. 2 years ago he was an All Star and second in the AL CFs in OPS (behind some Trout guy) and we made the playoffs. So, by definition he's already been an important offensive player on a playoff team
But...but....they regressed last year! Clearly they are done. Maybe we can trade them for some other team's ace....maybe James Shields?
 

Jerry’s Curl

New Member
Feb 6, 2018
2,518
Florida
I don't have a specific link, but I think I've seen a couple of references to Leon catching today.
If so, Sale must have convinced Cora he’s more comfortable with Sandy. It will be hard to sit Vazquez in other games though unless it’s a day game after a long night game.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Vazquez has hit well since the second half of last season and continued in the spring. Would you rather have Leon get more ABs?
Vazquez' offense last year was goosed by an unsustainable BABIP, and still was just average-ish. It's great to see him becoming the not-too-easy-an-out-for-a-catcher guy that his minor league record promised, but he's still unlikely to be ever be a guy whose bat you look for ways to get in the lineup.

And as for your question--of course I wouldn't rather have Leon get more ABs, if by that you mean more than Vazquez. I was just reacting to your implication that we should expect Vazquez to play every day. Only three catchers in MLB had more than 113 starts at the position last year, and nobody had more than 133. Catchers sit. A lot. It's what they do.
 

NDame616

will bailey
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
2,315
Vazquez' offense last year was goosed by an unsustainable BABIP, and still was just average-ish. It's great to see him becoming the not-too-easy-an-out-for-a-catcher guy that his minor league record promised, but he's still unlikely to be ever be a guy whose bat you look for ways to get in the lineup.

And as for your question--of course I wouldn't rather have Leon get more ABs, if by that you mean more than Vazquez. I was just reacting to your implication that we should expect Vazquez to play every day. Only three catchers in MLB had more than 113 starts at the position last year, and nobody had more than 133. Catchers sit. A lot. It's what they do.
He was 8th in the AL among catchers (min 300 PAs) in OPS and first in batting average.

I don't think we are ready to fit him for his hat in Cooperstown just yet but offensively last year he was in the top half or third of catchers, offensively. He certainly proved he should be the starter
 

Dewey'sCannon

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
870
Maryland
I would like to see Vazquez get about 60% of the starts, with Leon and Swihart splitting the rest relatively equally. At least to start, and then adjust based on how they are doing.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
He was 8th in the AL among catchers (min 300 PAs) in OPS and first in batting average.
8th of 15, to be exact. In other words, average-ish, like I said.

I don't think we are ready to fit him for his hat in Cooperstown just yet but offensively last year he was in the top half or third of catchers, offensively. He certainly proved he should be the starter
I don't think anyone (certainly not me) is questioning that he should be the starter, if by that you mean getting the majority of the starts. If you mean that he should be getting starts at a mid-career Jason Kendall clip--i.e., starting every game aside from exceptional situations, which is what JC's language suggested--then we don't agree.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
But...but....they regressed last year! Clearly they are done. Maybe we can trade them for some other team's ace....maybe James Shields?
Depends what he means by "major asset." If his threshhold for major piece is 4 WAA, he's probably not wrong. At one point, we all thought Xander was going to be a middle of the order bat.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,348
Depends what he means by "major asset." If his threshhold for major piece is 4 WAA, he's probably not wrong. At one point, we all thought Xander was going to be a middle of the order bat.
Honestly that always seemed ridiculously optimistic for me. I love X and think he's going to bounce back... but I can't imagine anyone REALLY thought he would ever hit for more than 25 HR's- which at least to me is not where you want a "middle of the order bat"*

*I mean that in the 3,4,5 "slots" in the lineup. And yes... he has hit in one of those spots throughout his career. The phrasing is of course vague and subjective, but regardless... I don't think anyone really thought he could be that. Possibly one of the top 5 hitting SS's across MLB with average defense? Yes. I still do.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Honestly that always seemed ridiculously optimistic for me. I love X and think he's going to bounce back... but I can't imagine anyone REALLY thought he would ever hit for more than 25 HR's- which at least to me is not where you want a "middle of the order bat"*

*I mean that in the 3,4,5 "slots" in the lineup. And yes... he has hit in one of those spots throughout his career. The phrasing is of course vague and subjective, but regardless... I don't think anyone really thought he could be that. Possibly one of the top 5 hitting SS's across MLB with average defense? Yes. I still do.
He hit 16 HRs in half a season as an 18 year old in A ball. He followed that up with a monster year in A/AA+. Here is one scouting report saying he would approach 30 HRs a season. https://www.baseballprospectus.com/prospects/article/21559/the-call-up-xander-bogaerts/ Here is another saying AT LEAST 25 a season http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1742827-why-xander-bogaerts-is-hyped-as-the-next-great-boston-red-sox-star

There are plenty more if you do a quick google search. The guy was the number 2 prospect in all of baseball heading into the 2014 season and this was with everyone predicting he would move off of SS and to 3b. He was ranked so highly because of his bat. He has been a disappointment to date.
 

Adrian's Dome

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2010
4,424
He hit 16 HRs in half a season as an 18 year old in A ball. He followed that up with a monster year in A/AA+. Here is one scouting report saying he would approach 30 HRs a season. https://www.baseballprospectus.com/prospects/article/21559/the-call-up-xander-bogaerts/ Here is another saying AT LEAST 25 a season http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1742827-why-xander-bogaerts-is-hyped-as-the-next-great-boston-red-sox-star

There are plenty more if you do a quick google search. The guy was the number 2 prospect in all of baseball heading into the 2014 season and this was with everyone predicting he would move off of SS and to 3b. He was ranked so highly because of his bat. He has been a disappointment to date.
When you start labeling consistently above-average players at premium positions "disappointments" your expectations are out of whack.

Not every good (or even great) prospect ends up as Mike Trout or Kris Bryant.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
6,348
He hit 16 HRs in half a season as an 18 year old in A ball. He followed that up with a monster year in A/AA+. Here is one scouting report saying he would approach 30 HRs a season. https://www.baseballprospectus.com/prospects/article/21559/the-call-up-xander-bogaerts/ Here is another saying AT LEAST 25 a season http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1742827-why-xander-bogaerts-is-hyped-as-the-next-great-boston-red-sox-star

There are plenty more if you do a quick google search. The guy was the number 2 prospect in all of baseball heading into the 2014 season and this was with everyone predicting he would move off of SS and to 3b. He was ranked so highly because of his bat. He has been a disappointment to date.
Yeah, I'm aware of the hype..... but seriously- I really don't think anyone took those highest projectables to heart. He was a disappointment last year because he was injured. More than 25HR's from him seemed really optimistic. Clay Buchholz was going to be the next great Sox starter back in '06-'07. While he had some great moments and good seasons.... if you were really buying into the hype machine and eating up prospect humping reports then sure, you were disappointed. If you adjusted your expectations to reality then Clay... well... maybe still a disappointment.... but not so much.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
When you start labeling consistently above-average players at premium positions "disappointments" your expectations are out of whack.

Not every good (or even great) prospect ends up as Mike Trout or Kris Bryant.
I'm guessing most people were expecting Xander to be better than slightly above average and to sport an ISO better than .126. It's not like he's particularly good playing SS either. There is a lot of room between Xander and Mike Trout. To date, he's been basically a noodle bat.

I think he'll have his best season to date in 2018 and that his ISO will be closer to .200 than .100 but we'll see. Everything else is there, and power usually comes last.

edit: He also hasn't been consistently above average. I guess if last year was above average, then yes. Otherwise, 2 of his 4 seasons were below average.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Yeah, I'm aware of the hype..... but seriously- I really don't think anyone took those highest projectables to heart. He was a disappointment last year because he was injured. More than 25HR's from him seemed really optimistic. Clay Buchholz was going to be the next great Sox starter back in '06-'07. While he had some great moments and good seasons.... if you were really buying into the hype machine and eating up prospect humping reports then sure, you were disappointed. If you adjusted your expectations to reality then Clay... well... maybe still a disappointment.... but not so much.
There is no such thing as a pitching prospect.
 

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
3,620
I have zero confidence in Hanley and hope Xander or devers steps up to take the three spot
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,051
Florida
Whether or not The Book is adding up for this specific lineup aside, I'd personally at least like to see Cora stop reaching so hard on Hanley and bump Xander/Devers up to 3rd/5th respectively.
 

tonyarmasjr

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2010
1,120
Red Sox offense: 55-for-240 (.229)
And in one game they went from .240/.315/.368/.683 to .245/.323/.400/.723.

Martinez raised his OPS from .656 to .804 on a day where he had 1 hit. Devers raised his OPS by 185 points today. Yesterday, I thought he was a fringe-average starter with his suspect defense. But today - he's an MVP candidate! I wonder what tomorrow will bring...
 

tonyarmasjr

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2010
1,120
And another full 16 home at bats later, they're now at .259/.341/.421/.761 - good for 3rd in the AL in OPS and runs scored.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,785
La Mancha.
And another full 16 home at bats later, they're now at .259/.341/.421/.761 - good for 3rd in the AL in OPS and runs scored.
Sure, but that's heavily influenced by the innings in which they scored runs. If you take those out, they look awful.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,958
Saskatoon Canada
"I think I worked with my hitters from what works best for them." So no teaching of new things.

"The launch angle thing is not something I'm opposed to, but if you're not a home run hitter, why would you be hitting fly balls? You're just going to make outs."
Yes. better for a speedster like Vazquez to hit grounders. And Pedroia? Never swings hard anyway, so why bother.

Even referring to "launch angle" as "analytics" is dumb.

This is the key refutation to Davis's point:


Thats 18 hits over 600 PAs.
This is overly simplistic and dismissive. The idea that you can't change everyone's swing, the problems it would create are valid points. A technique change runs the risk of messing up a player, if it is too drastic, or they are set in their ways. Some players may not have enough talent, or the right talent for particular techniques.


I see both players as excellent choices to make this point. Pedroia has in a well documented fashion, carved out his own unique niche, his own unique way. Cilli was not about to tell him to change. I doubt he is referring to Vasquez' speed, but the fact that a glove first guy actually developed a swing that makes him hit enough to be a starter, a development that seemed unlikely, was not a guy he wanted to change. Vasquez struggled developing as a hitter, so I expect Chilli may be consider his swing a bad choice for alteration.
 

tonyarmasjr

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2010
1,120
I see both players as excellent choices to make this point. Pedroia has in a well documented fashion, carved out his own unique niche, his own unique way. Cilli was not about to tell him to change. I doubt he is referring to Vasquez' speed, but the fact that a glove first guy actually developed a swing that makes him hit enough to be a starter, a development that seemed unlikely, was not a guy he wanted to change. Vasquez struggled developing as a hitter, so I expect Chilli may be consider his swing a bad choice for alteration.
This is a little off topic, and I know it's the general narrative that it's a shock that Vazquez (ever) hit enough to be a starting C, but I find fault with it.
2010 - 19 yrs - A - .665 OPS - 92 wRC+
2011 - 20 - A - .863 - 133
2012 - 21 - A+ - .756 - 114
2013 - 22 - AA - .771 - 119
2014 - 23 - AAA/MLB - .721 - 98 / .617 - 70 (201 PA)
2015 - 24 - Injured
2016 - 25 - AAA/MLB - .713 - 107 / .585 - 52 (184 PA)
2017 - 26 - MLB - .735 - 93

So, basically he's been an average-ish hitter other than the jump to the bigs as a 23 year old catcher and then when he tried to make that leap again after missing an entire year in between. For reference, zero 23yo catchers reached 200 PA last year. Sanchez and Austin Hedges were the only 24yo to do so. His defense has always been advanced, which has helped foster the notion that he can't hit. But he was pushed to the majors because of it and understandably struggled as a hitter a little bit when he got there. But his MLB experience prior to last year was comprised of a total of 385 PA. And that relatively short sample in which he struggled was not in line with the rest of his professional career, but it gave us the idea that he can't/won't ever hit. He's not Buster Posey, but it shouldn't be a surprise that he is or will be an adequate hitter.

From soxprospects:
Hit: Short, compact swing. Simple swing mechanics. Average bat speed. Has worked to quicken swing load. Extends on offerings middle-to-away well. Can get tied up by higher velocity fastballs on inner third. Can be fooled by sharp breaking balls. Rarely strikes out, contact oriented approach. Potential average hit tool.
Power: Below-average power potential. Capable of driving balls into the gap hard. Will show occasional over-the-fence power, but projects to hit 10-14 home runs a year in his peak.
Summation: Potential to be one of the best defensive catchers in baseball who can also add enough value with his bat. Has the arm to shut down the running game. Receiving and framing will also add significant value. Gold Glove-caliber defender. Student of the game, really works hard at his craft. Potential to hit .260 with 10+ home runs a year in his peak.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,958
Saskatoon Canada
I stand by the major points of my statement that considering that Davis had a specific reason to use Vasquez as a poor choice to tinker with. His hitting is, was his weakness. If does not need to hit 25 homers to be valuable. The scouting report on his short compact swing, with the potential to be an average hitter does nothing to alter my point.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,849
NYC
Betts led the team in OPS last year at .803. Players OPSing better than that so far this year...

Lin 1.238
Bogaerts 1.111
Betts 1.059
Hanley .955
Swihart .844
Benintendi .829
JDM .824
Nunez .814
Moreland .811

Look forward to guys getting healthy, the weather getting less horrible, and the bats warming up.
 

SouthernBoSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2005
12,084
Betts led the team in OPS last year at .803. Players OPSing better than that so far this year...

Lin 1.238
Bogaerts 1.111
Betts 1.059
Hanley .955
Swihart .844
Benintendi .829
JDM .824
Nunez .814
Moreland .811

Look forward to guys getting healthy, the weather getting less horrible, and the bats warming up.
I think this year will prove 2017 was an incredibly unfavorable regression year and 2018 will be the flip side of that trade.