102 replies to this topic

[satyadaimoku]

Here

Jonathan Papelbon voted 8th most likely rookie to contribute in 2006, Crisp voted 3rd most likely to have a breakout season, Lowell 8th most likely to have the biggest comeback.

On Paps:

In his second full pro season -- and second as a starter -- Papelbon shot right up to Fenway Park and was a major contributor to the Red Sox bullpen down the stretch. The organization wants him to start, to see him as a 700-out-a-year horse, and at 25, he is ready to step in and do it now. The Red Sox love his bring-it-on makeup, but one Boston official warns, "The worst thing would be to start comparing him to Roger Clemens. No one else in modern baseball history is as good as Clemens. Why should we ask a rookie to try?"

On Coco:

"He has gone to the right place -- big crowds, pressure," says one NL GM. "He will love the attention, and as one of the best fastball hitters in the game, he will prosper in front of Manny and Ortiz." Here's his career track over the last three years: 15-24-42 doubles, 3-15-16 homers, .655-.730-.810 OPS.

Question: is there anything that really justifies this comment:

8. Matt Murton, OF, Cubs: The Red Sox could not have won the 2004 World Series without including him in the Nomar Garciaparra trade, but they wish they had him back. Murton jumped from Double-A, had a .907 OPS and showed the Cubs that not only can he hit, but he can run and has makeup that's off the charts.

I've never understood why Murton was necessary in the Garciaparra deal. Beyond the talent discrepency in that deal, wasn't Theo quoted somewhere saying that we could have gotten Cabrera for Garciaparra straight up, but we included Murton in order to get Mientkiewicz included in the deal? If so, I don't see how Mientkiewicz was necessary to win the 2004 World Series. The only memorable thing I remember him doing in the 2004 season was stealing the game ball in Game 4 of the World Series. Am I forgetting some key defensive play along the way?

Hindsight is 20/20 of course, and I'm not trying to blast Theo for a minor mistake in a deal that ultimately brought us a World Series championship. But in retrospect, it's hard to say that the inclusion of Murton helped our franchise. Murton would be a nice player to have right now and half of a season of Mientkiewicz wasn't much of a return for him.

Edited by satyadaimoku, 12 February 2006 - 09:35 PM.

[Bowlerman9]

I've never understood why Murton was necessary in the Garciaparra deal. Beyond the talent discrepency in that deal, wasn't Theo quoted somewhere saying that we could have gotten Cabrera for Garciaparra straight up, but we included Murton in order to get Mientkiewicz included in the deal?

I guess its possible, but Minnesota never received a second player in the deal. So either Chicago pulled one over on Theo, or there was more to the deal than we knew.

And yes, I know Minn was supposed to get someone else but never figured out who. But they still only got 1 player back, and it wasnt Murton, so assuming Murton alone got us Minky is a bit of a stretch.

[TheoShmeo]

Here

The only memorable thing I remember him doing in the 2004 season was stealing the game ball in Game 4 of the World Series. Am I forgetting some key defensive play along the way?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can't remember one particular play that Minkiewicz made that was in itself pivotal -- though I do remember a low throw by Mueller that Minky dug out with Timlin on the mound in, I think, the top of the 8th of one of the Yankee or Cardinal games that seemed very big at the time. But, apart from any specific individual plays, just the fact that they were able to bring in a strong defensive first baseman in place of Millar for late inning defense played a role, I think. It had to be comforting to the pitchers and the other infielders that Minky was over there, and that may have had an impact on how they collectivley played. And I do remember several times after August 1 when I thought that Millar never would have made a play that Doug made which, if true, shortened innings and played a role -- who knows how important -- in the great run they went on in August/September and the playoffs thereafter.

All that said, I'd like to have Murton in the system right now and was very pissed off that he'd been included. [Addition/clarification: Not that I'd do ANYTHING -- if it were possible -- to undo any element of the sequence of events in 2004 that lead to October 27.]

Edited by TheoShmeo, 12 February 2006 - 10:35 PM.

[Deweys New Stance]

I can't remember one particular play that Minkiewicz made that was in itself pivotal -- though I do remember a low throw by Mueller that Minky dug out with Timlin on the mound in, I think, the top of the 8th of one of the Yankee or Cardinal games that seemed very big at the time. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It was the bottom of the eighth of game 7 of the ALCS, on a ground ball hit by Jeter to lead off the inning. Even with the Sox leading 9-3 at the time, and only needing six more outs, keeping Jeter off the bases to lead off the inning felt like a pretty big play, because it allowed Timlin to get through a relatively easy inning and get into the ninth with an even bigger lead. Tough to say that play alone was worth giving up Murton, though.

edit: Bowlerman9 makes a very good point below about that Millar play a year earlier, although I'm not convinced that Pedro would have made it through the eighth unscathed even without the extra 25 pitches. And if he had, Grady would have probably just thrown him out there for the ninth. But it certainly wouldn't have hurt to have the firstbaseman make that play cleanly on Wilson to end the 7th.

Edited by Deweys New Stance, 12 February 2006 - 10:27 PM.

[Bowlerman9]

Watch the 7th inning of Game 7 in 2003. Then imagine what would have happened if Pedro didnt have to throw an extra 25 pitches that inning.

Then imagine October 27th in 2004.

Thank you Minky. Goodbye Murton.

[Harry Hooper]

DM as starting 2B and backup C in August games of '04 enabled the Sox to get through some risky roster hijinks.

[reggiecleveland]

I expect the "you can't prove this with numbers" guys to jump on this, but I will always beleive Millars hot streak in part came because he had a little pressure on him. At any rate Millar had stunk most of the year. The fact he went on a tear kept Minky on the bench, but his hot steeak was not a guarantee so having a legitmate option was a good move.

[Hobson's Choice]

CUBS
Nomar Garciaparra
Matt Murton
cash

RED SOX
Orlando Cabrera
Doug Mientkewicz

EXPOS
Alex Gonzalez
Francis Beltran
Brendan Harris

TWINS
Justin Jones


Hendry (Cubs GM) had the leverage here; in essence, the Cubs acquired O-Cab and Mientkiewicz from the Expos/Twins, and had an arrangement to move them to Boston for Nomar and cash. Theo was obliged to add a prospect or have the trade fall through, which is Hendry doing his job. Theo did a lot better with Henri Stanley...

[Rough Carrigan]

I expect the "you can't prove this with numbers" guys to jump on this, but I will always beleive Millars hot streak in part came because he had a little pressure on him. At any rate Millar had stunk most of the year. The fact he went on a tear kept Minky on the bench, but his hot steeak was not a guarantee so having a legitmate option was a good move.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The biggest part of Millar's hot streak in 2004 ocurred before EyeChart ever got here. Millar had 3 homers against the mfy's on July 23, a couple hits (IIRC) in the fight game on July 24, and a homer off Adebisi, um, Contreras on July 25. If anything, Millar cooled off a bit when Eyechart came to the team on August 1

[Grubbery]

I seem to recall at least two games where Minky's glove was HUGE in the regular season. He was a late inning replacement in at least one, and may have started the other.

In one, a rocket was hit up the line where Minky turned, made two or three lonnng steps into the outfield, laid out and snagged off the bag with his back to the infield, got up and ran to make the tag. KFK might make that grab, but I can't see him making it back to the bag.

The other was a shot to his right that Minky caught falling back, kept his foot on the bag, and caught the runner at second for a DP. I can't see Millar making a play like that to his right, much less a throw from his knees with any mustard.

Both cases were inning killers with runners in scoring position that would have at least tied the game.

Additionally, there were also any number of OC/Bellhorn DPs that he dug out with that ridiculous leg split he can do (and would have sent KFK to the DL for two weeks if he tried).

Obviously they don't impact the ALCS or WS directly, but they did factor into that terrific August/Sept when the team finally came together. Perhaps it's easy to forget how frustrating that team was until that streak, but it was plays like those that made all the difference between the .500 team that played from May-July and what happened in the Fall.

That said, my single concern was that Murton could come back to bite us. He was on the verge of coming up here to Portland just prior to the trade, and at the time, the Sea Dogs were kind of dead, prospect-wise (Hanley came up later that season).

Edited by Grubbery, 13 February 2006 - 11:23 AM.

[LateRally]

I'll pile on with more anecdotal evidence. As one of many avid game-threaders on this site, I can say for sure that there were many instances in the latter half of '04 when folks would collectively be in awe over a Mientkiewicz defensive gem. And the consensus was almost always that Millar wouldn't have had a prayer in hell of making many of those plays. I have no idea how many runs or games those plays may have saved, but there's no question in my mind he was a noticeably signficant upgrade with the glove.

[yecul]

Boston got good return and had a fantastic outcome to that trade. Both Cabrera and Mientkalphabet complemented the team nicely and clearly the end result makes us all happy.

However, in terms of actual value in a vacuum, Boston does not come out on top in this trade. Perhaps I overvalue Nomar and undervalue the players they got, but Murton is definitely a player they'd still like to have in the system who may already have made a ML impact for them with all the injuries last year.

Sometimes you have to give value to get what you need. This was certainly the case and a comparison could be drawn to the Crisp-Marte deal. If Crisp is a quality contributor for Boston and they win the Series in the next few years, is it as big of a deal if Marte goes on to great success as well? We can always play the "what if" game, but, even though I do not like adding Murton to that deal, it's pretty clear that it was the only way that deal was going to happen. Putting the deal together last minute (according to reports it was right at the deadline) probably didn't help in that respect.

[smastroyin]

Hi guys, this is your friendly neighborhood moderator reminding you that we have already had a thank you doug Mientkiewicz thread as well as at least three threads discussing this trade. I realize this is the most boring time of the baseball year (except for the truck leaving), but I think we can come up with something better, like maybe discussing the actual Red Sox players that Gammons was talking about.

Thanks

Edited by smastroyin, 13 February 2006 - 12:01 PM.

[anaxamandr]

One thing Gammo pointed out, and I know it has been discussed elsewhere, is that the Angels have multiple very capable players at SS, a position of need for the Sox in the coming off season. I do not expect Alex Gonzalez is any more than a one year solution who can deliver replacement level offense (if we are lucky...) and average to above average defense. At this point, I think it is reasonable to believe Pedroia will continue his career at 2B replacing Loretta next year and getting some playing time this year. This status of Dustin's future position, I suppose, will be somewhat clarified at the start of spring training, when the Sox make a decision to work him out at SS now that Hanley is gone or continue to play him at 2B.

Orlando Cabrera is signed until '06 at 06:$6.5M, 07:$7.5M, 08:$9M according to Cots Baseball Contracts, effectively blocking both Brandon Wood and Eric Aybar. That means the Red Sox should be in a position to obtain one of these two players for a relatively reasonable pachage, probably using one or two of their young minor league pitchers. A move like this could potentially lock up a very talented player at a skill position on the cheap.

A brief break down:
Brandon Wood, AAA Salt Lake Bees the California League's Most Valuable Player, led the league in home runs (43), RBI (115, tied), doubles (50), slugging percentage (.668), extra-base hits (97), and runs scored (109). Set an Angels minor league record with 43 homers in 2005.

Eric Aybar, AA Cedar Rapids Kernels hit .303, slugged .445 w/ an obp of only .339, since he apparently, never walks ever.

Neither is a slouch. For comparison, I provide Hanley Ramirez hit .271 with 6 HRs 52 rbis w/ 39 walks.

The Sox could stand to give up something pretty good to get one of these guys. Two problems:
1) the Angels don't seem too keen to give up either one of these guys.
2) I don't see the Angels as a great match for Wells, Clement or Graffanino, or obvious trade bait

One question: can the Sox trade Jed Lowrie to get one of these guys or is he off limits because he has just been drafted?

Edit: cleaned up.

Edited by anaxamandr, 13 February 2006 - 07:01 PM.

[Pumpsie]

Orlando Cabrera is signed until '06 at 06:$6.5M, 07:$7.5M, 08:$9M according to Cots Baseball Contracts, effectively blocking both Brandon Wood and Eric Aybar. That means the Red Sox should be in a position to obtain one of these two players for a relatively reasonable pachage, probably using one or two of their young minor league pitchers. A move like this could potentially lock up a very talented player at a skill position on the cheap.

You're completely ignoring the fact that there are 28 other ML teams besides the Angels and Sox. If just ONE of those teams is interested in one of these players (and trust me, at least one will be), the price gets blown way up past "one or two minor league pitchers." The Angels will probably keep both Wood and Aybar, unless someone blows them away for one of them. The only player you mentioned who is going to go "reasonably" is Cabrera. They're already shopping him.

[The Gray Eagle]

Also, minor league SS get moved to other positions all the time. Most likely, if Wood is for real, he'll eventually take over the job and Cabrera will be ditched for as little damage as possible. Then they can move Aybar to second base or even the OF, or trade him for full value.

At any rate, what I'm clumsily trying to say is that if one of the young guys eventually wins the SS job, the other could change positions or be traded to any number of teams.

[anaxamandr]

Pumpsie, I am sorry if i didn't make it clear. Obviously there is no way to get either of these guys w/o giving up something substantial. The Sox have pieces we would like to move in the majors plus minor league pitchers. I feel like if they made a push and offered a good package sooner rather than later, they could go get this thing done and be set for the future at SS.

Anyway, here is a list of all mlb teams and their starting shortstops. I have starred teams that are likely going to be looking for better talent there. I haven't checked each teams minor leagues, but I imagine some of them will also have talent approaching the mlb level at SS. There just aren't a whole lot of teams that are as desperate at short as the Sox.

AL:
BALTIMORE   Miguel Tejada
*BOSTON     Alex Gonzalez
NY YANKEES  Derek Jeter
TAMPA BAY   Julio Lugo
*TORONTO     Russ Adams	
CHICAGO     Juan Uribe
CLEVELAND   Jhonny Peralta
DETROIT     Carlos Guillen
KANSAS CITY Angel Berroa
MINNESOTA   Jason Bartlett
LOS ANGELES Orlando Cabrera
OAKLAND     Bobby Crosby
SEATTLE     Mike Morse
TEXAS       Michael Young
     
NL:
ATLANTA       Edgar Renteria
FLORIDA       Hanley Ramirez
NY METS       Jose Reyes
PHILADELPHIA  Jimmy Rollins
*WASHINGTON    Cristian Guzman
CHICAGO       Ronny Cedeno
CINCINNATI    Felipe Lopez	
HOUSTON       Adam Everett
MILWAUKEE     J.J. Hardy
PITTSBURGH    Jack Wilson
*ST. LOUIS     David Eckstein
*ARIZONA       Craig Counsell
COLORADO      Clint Barmes
LOS ANGELES   Rafael Furcal
SAN DIEGO     Khalil Greene
*SAN FRANCISCO Omar Vizquel

For completeness, here is a list of the free agents to be at short. It doesn't look like many teams are going to be losing their starters next year either.
SS Free Agent in 06-07:
Tomas Perez (club option)
Kazuo Matsui (can opt for either free agency or arb.)
Craig Counsell
Julio Lugo
Chris Gomez
Rich Aurilia (Mutual Option)
Deivi Cruz
Lou Merloni
Manny Alexander
Alex Gonzalez
Jose Vizcaino
Jose Valentin

So, Sox FO, my point is, why not try to get this done before one or both of these guys explodes on the scene any more than they have already.

(Thanks to mlb4u.com for all this info.)

Edit: you can't bold inside code tags.

Edited by anaxamandr, 13 February 2006 - 09:02 PM.

[Pumpsie]

Pumpsie, I am sorry if i didn't make it clear. Obviously there is no way to get either of these guys w/o giving up something substantial. The Sox have pieces we would like to move in the majors plus minor league pitchers. I feel like if they made a push and offered a good package sooner rather than later, they could go get this thing done and be set for the future at SS.

Well, that's a valid point. Perhaps they want to see Adrian Gonzalez and Pedroia up close first. Then, if they don't think either is going to be a good long-term solution, early in the season might be a good time to try to make a deal for one of these guys, ...but it won't be cheap.

[Nomars Last Twitch]

I feel like if they made a push and offered a good package sooner rather than later, they could go get this thing done and be set for the future at SS.

Wood could possibly be included in a Manny deal. But if the Angels aren't willing to part with him for Manny, a deal for him is highly unlikely.

The rumor is that it (Manny trade) would more likely be for Ervin Santana, Figgins and pitching prospects (like Adenhart, and maybe Jared Weaver as a PTNL)

Edited by Nomars Last Twitch, 13 February 2006 - 10:10 PM.

[example1]

St. Louis is going to be looking for an upgrade at SS?  Why?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Cause if you can get someone better than Eckstein then go for it. However, I don't think St. Louis would be as desperate as other teams... they have Eckstein until the end of the 2007 season I believe.

[Gambler7]

Cause if you can get someone better than Eckstein then go for it. However, I don't think St. Louis would be as desperate as other teams... they have Eckstein until the end of the 2007 season I believe.

David Eckstein was 10th among SS in VORP last year, 5th in the NL. He had a 5.6 WARP. Unless Young, Tejada, Jeter, Peralta, Rollins, Furcal, etc become available at a decent price, who would they get that is better?

[anaxamandr]

Corsi, didn't mean to imply anything directly about other teams actively pursuing an upgrade at SS, i only meant to point out that, looking down the list, only a handful of teams would even be remotely open to an upgrade at SS.
But yes, I believe the Cards would consider dealing for a top flight SS prospect. Eckstien is signed for the next two years: 06:$3.25M, 07:$4.5M. I don't know about their minor leagues but they will need someone after Eckstien. The players the Angels have at SS are likely at least a year away from the majors. I could see the Cards going out and acquiring an solid SS to put in AA for this year, maybe moving up to AAA and then getting some time in the bigs in 07 learning from/splitting time w/ Eckstien.

Edit: Corsi, great point I missed Bartlett on the Twins. he should definitely be starred.

I had heard the Manny rumors, both on this board and on ESPN etc... but don't believe a trade like that could ever happen. IMHO, the Angels would be more likely to deal one of thier SS prospects (Gammo seems to think they like Wood better, so fine, lets say they deal Aybar) for a package of cheaper minor league talent, assuming there is a something substantial there. I am not suggesting Pedroia or Lester or Paps, but perhaps some permutation or combination of the names Graf, Wells, Clement, Lowrie (if he can even be dealt), AMart, Meredith or even MDC could induce them into a trade. God knows we have a lot we could deal, even when you don't include Manny.

Edited by anaxamandr, 13 February 2006 - 10:23 PM.

[MikeGreenwell]

Anyway, here is a list of all mlb teams and their starting shortstops. I have starred teams that are likely going to be looking for better talent there.

AL:
BALTIMORE   Miguel Tejada
*BOSTON     Alex Gonzalez
NY YANKEES  Derek Jeter
TAMPA BAY   Julio Lugo
*TORONTO     Russ Adams
CHICAGO     Juan Uribe
CLEVELAND   Jhonny Peralta
DETROIT     Carlos Guillen
KANSAS CITY Angel Berroa
MINNESOTA   Jason Bartlett
LOS ANGELES Orlando Cabrera
OAKLAND     Bobby Crosby
SEATTLE     Mike Morse
TEXAS       Michael Young
   
NL:
ATLANTA       Edgar Renteria
FLORIDA       Hanley Ramirez
NY METS       Jose Reyes
PHILADELPHIA  Jimmy Rollins
*WASHINGTON    Cristian Guzman
CHICAGO       Ronny Cedeno
CINCINNATI    Felipe Lopez
HOUSTON       Adam Everett
MILWAUKEE     J.J. Hardy
PITTSBURGH    Jack Wilson
*ST. LOUIS     David Eckstein
*ARIZONA       Craig Counsell
COLORADO      Clint Barmes
LOS ANGELES   Rafael Furcal
SAN DIEGO     Khalil Greene
*SAN FRANCISCO Omar Vizquel

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Morse isn't Seattle's SS anymore -- they've moved him to the OF and Betancourt is taking over the job. And there's no way the Twins are thrilled to have Barlett as their starting SS -- but he is a better starting SS than their starting 3B (Batista) so they probably aren't focusing much at SS right now. Houston and the Mets should also probably be on your list. The fact is there are probably at least 6-8 teams that would be in the market for a good young SS, which is more than plenty to create a robust trade market.

[smastroyin]

  Houston and the Mets should also probably be on your list. The fact is there are probably at least 6-8 teams that would be in the market for a good young SS, which is more than plenty to create a robust trade market.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And Stoneman is proving that he has a Tampa Bay Devil Rays approach to his prospects.

I had been giving him pretty good credit for building that team, but it patently ridiculous that with his major league team so close last year, he has done nothing to improve it despite having one of the three best minor league systems in baseball. Maybe in two or three years Angels fans will thank him, but right now I'd be pretty pissed to think that he's essentially treating 2006 as a "wait and see" type year.

[5belongstoGeorge]

The only memorable thing I remember him doing in the 2004 season was stealing the game ball in Game 4 of the World Series. Am I forgetting some key defensive play along the way?

I doubt that this play was the difference between the Sox winning the World Series or not, but I remember a 3-2-4 double play late in the year that was positively spectacular by Minky, 'Tek, and Pokey... If I recall correctly Minky fielded a bunt and got the force at home and then 'Tek gunned down the guy bunting with Pokey flying accross the bag at first. It was sweet, and not possible for Millar to execute.

Thanks for reminding me of that one.

The buzz Mr. Gammons relates pertaining to Paps and Coco sounds promising.

Edited by 5belongstoGeorge, 14 February 2006 - 01:48 PM.

[BTownBeckett]

I'm all for going after a stud SS prospect to take over, the question is are we prepared to pay the price. A player like Wood (who has crushed AAA even moreso than Marte did) would very likely cost us two of our pitchers (if the Angels were even interested) and the fact that the Angels hate having Cabrera at SS makes it even more likely that they will fleece whoever tries to move on Wood. Yes they are stuck with the terrible contract they gave Cabrera (and don't we all thenk God that they did?) but I believe they would rather start getting Wood ABs and possibly push the very expensive Cabrera to the bench before trading away a SS with such offensive upside.

Do the Sox do a Hansen and EMartinez for Wood deal? My guess is probably.

[SoxFanPJ]

I'm all for going after a stud SS prospect to take over, the question is are we prepared to pay the price.  A player like Wood (who has crushed AAA even moreso than Marte did) would very likely cost us two of our pitchers (if the Angels were even interested) and the fact that the Angels hate having Cabrera at SS makes it even more likely that they will fleece whoever tries to move on Wood.  Yes they are stuck with the terrible contract they gave Cabrera (and don't we all thenk God that they did?) but I believe they would rather start getting Wood ABs and possibly push the very expensive Cabrera to the bench before trading away a SS with such offensive upside.

Do the Sox do a Hansen and EMartinez for Wood deal?  My guess is probably.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Boston would do that deal without blinking, Anahiem would never go for that deal.

Cabrera's contract while bad is moveable if Anahiem is willing to absorb some of the money.

It would take something closer to Lester/Hansen to pry wood away, though I think he is untouchable right now.

If Mcpherson struggles this season, my guess is that Wood is the starting 3B in 2007, if McPherson does well, then Cabrera will be traded after this season or at mid season and we Wood goes to SS.

[Steve Dillard]

A player like Wood (who has crushed AAA even moreso than Marte did) would very likely cost us two of our pitchers (if the Angels were even interested) and the fact that the Angels hate having Cabrera at SS makes it even more likely that they will fleece whoever tries to move on Wood. 

Wood has not played AAA. He crushed Single A, at Rancho Cucomango, and the AFL, but not AAA.

http://www.minorleag..._pbp&pid=457420

As such, he's less of a sure thing than even Marte.

Do the Sox do a Hansen and EMartinez for Wood deal?  My guess is probably.

Conceptually, perhaps, but I doubt it. The Sox have shown that they value pitching prospects more than hitters. They seem to feel they can buy hitting talent in Free Agency without overpaying, but that FA pitching is overpriced, so they want to grow their own. Anyway, Hansen can't be traded til August, so not relevant.

Edited by Steve Dillard, 14 February 2006 - 09:12 PM.

[PedrosRedGlove]

The Salt Lake Stingers are a AAA club, so he has played at AAA, but only for 4 games. I don't think some of you realize how huge a prospect Brandon Wood is right now. If we called LA and offered Hansen and EMart for him they'd laugh in our face and tell us to call back when we can at least add Lester to the deal. The only two youngsters in all of baseball that are more untouchable than Wood right now are probably Delmon Young and Felix Hernandez.

[LahoudOrBillyC]

The Salt Lake Stingers are a AAA club, so he has played at AAA, but only for 4 games. I don't think some of you realize how huge a prospect Brandon Wood is right now. If we called LA and offered Hansen and EMart for him they'd laugh in our face and tell us to call back when we can at least add Lester to the deal. The only two youngsters in all of baseball that are more untouchable than Wood right now are probably Delmon Young and Felix Hernandez.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I suspect the Red Sox would trade our top three prospects, Angels get to choose, for Brandon Wood. Of course, the Angels would not do this, nor should they.

[smnookin]

The new Gammo is an occasionally inscrutable discussion of "The Fielding Bible." To wit:

Which brings me to one of the most interesting books of the spring. John Dewan, the CEO of STATS, Inc. who moved on to found Baseball Info Solutions, has written "The Fielding Bible," with contributions from Bill James. We have all struggled with quantitative analysis on defense, but this isn't some statshead thing created in a cellar at MIT. James explains that Dewan's aides "watched video from every major league game and had recorded every ball off the bat by the direction in which it was hit [the vector], the type of hit [ground ball, fly ball, line drive, popup, mob hit, etc.] and how hard the ball was hit."

Some interesting stuff in there, but without reading the book and knowing how exactly they're quantifying info, it's hard to tell what to make of it. Some of interest to the RS:
* ARod worst 3B when it comes to fielding bunts
* Nomar worst SS at turning DPs over last 3 yrs
* GG winner Mike Lowell ranks 21st at 3rd b/c of poor range to left
* Coco ranked tops in left; Manny, Dunn, Matsui worst
* and most surprisingly for me: Christopher Nixon and Casey Blake rank as top RF, with Trot, Ichiro, and JD Drew tops for past three years. Sheff worst in '05.

[templeUsox]

Other interesting notes:

Cano was the worst 2B in 2005. This actually isn't a surprise. I can't remember seeing someone look worse at the position than him. Counsell was the best.

Mike Young and Jeters were two of the three worst SS's over last three years. No surprise again.

David Bell was the best defensive 3B last year.

Edited by templeUsox, 25 February 2006 - 02:19 PM.

[Paradigm]

* Interesting that neither of the Red Sox touted defensive shortstops, Edgar Renteria or Alex Gonzalez, are on the shortstop list.

* I like the note that Coco Crisp was the best defensive LF. It eases some of the tension as he moves to a full-time CF.

Strange disparity between researching a ball's vectors and a scout/fan eyeballing a game.

the Golden Sombrero -- updated in glory

[smnookin]

* Interesting that neither of the Red Sox touted defensive shortstops, Edgar Renteria or Alex Gonzalez, are on the shortstop list.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What are you talking about? Gammons doesn't include the SS's from last year; he just says Everett came out on top last year and that Everett, Jack Wilson, Jimmy Rollins and Rafael Furcal came out on top collectively over the past 3 years. That doesn't mean Gonzalez wasn't in the top 3 last year, or that ER wasn't in there in 2004 or 2003. (They might not be, but this article doesn't say anything about it one way or another.)

Mike Young and Jeters were two of the three worst SS's over last three years. No surprise again.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This actually does surprise me, as at least some of the most advanced defensive metrics -- mainly unpublished -- had Jeter more towards the middle of the pack; the thinking in those circles has been that he's been unfairly marked down for a while because of crappy zone readings from whomever's been hired to do the ZR in Yankee Stadium. He's not great, and clearly not a Gold Glover, but I am surprised to see what should be a pretty sophisticated analysis be so at odds with some other pretty sophisticated analyses.

[templeUsox]

What are you talking about? Gammons doesn't
This actually does surprise me, as at least some of the most advanced defensive metrics -- mainly unpublished -- had Jeter more towards the middle of the pack; the thinking in those circles has been that he's been unfairly marked down for a while because of crappy zone readings from whomever's been hired to do the ZR in Yankee Stadium. He's not great, and clearly not a Gold Glover, but I am surprised to see what should be a pretty sophisticated analysis be so at odds with some other pretty sophisticated analyses.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

MGL made the comment somewhere that after his aberrant year in 2004, he returned to his previous form in 2005.

Edited by templeUsox, 25 February 2006 - 02:44 PM.

[SoxFanPJ]

Even better then the fielding discussion was the blog before it, talking about Rick Ankiel.

Gotta pull for that guy.

[OCD SS]

This is really one long commerical for the Feilding Bible; Gammo must've said "just go buy it" 6 times.

I expect a lot of talk when the book finally reaches all of us. I'm not thrilled with Lowell's measured defense, but we should check how he compares to Mueller before getting too worked up (and the fact that Nixon is the top RF by their estimation might point to their methodology needing a tweak here and there).

[SaveBooFerriss]

According to Gammons, NYY last year had the worst or among the worst at 2b, SS, LF, CF & RF.

They have improved only at CF & Giambi will be among the worst at 1b I assume.

They won despite their defense last year and I expect they will win despite their defense this year.

[normstalls]

This is really one long commerical for the Feilding Bible; Gammo must've said "just go buy it" 6 times.

I expect a lot of talk when the book finally reaches all of us.  I'm not thrilled with Lowell's  measured defense, but we should check how he compares to Mueller before getting too worked up (and the fact that Nixon is the top RF by their estimation might point to their methodology needing a tweak here and there).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Its interesting to me how SoSHers love their numbers and stats, and yet when it comes to Trot Nixon playing defense almost everyone here trusts their eyes. Often I have read how terrible people here think trot is yet numbers begin to surface to dispute that....so rather than trusting the numbers in this case (like everyone does in virtually every other case) people think the system needs tweaking.

Maybe, just maybe, Trot is a pretty decent Right Fielder. Its possible isnt it?

[glennhoffmania]

Its interesting to me how SoSHers love their numbers and stats, and yet when it comes to Trot Nixon playing defense almost everyone here trusts their eyes.  Often I have read how terrible people here think trot is yet numbers begin to surface to dispute that....so rather than trusting the numbers in this case (like everyone does in virtually every other case) people think the system needs tweaking. 

Maybe, just maybe, Trot is a pretty decent Right Fielder.  Its possible isnt it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree. I've always thought Trot was a better fielder than many people give him credit for. He's not great, and he clearly doesn't have much speed, but I think he's been more than adequate. Obviously RF at Fenway isn't the easiest place to play, but if he can stay healthy, I think he'll continue to be fine.

[philly sox fan]

This is really one long commerical for the Feilding Bible; Gammo must've said "just go buy it" 6 times.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Here's a glowing review of the book.

Fielding Bible Review

This allows for unprecedented depth of analysis of player and team defense. We learn very quicly that Derek Jeter’s strengths lie in charging softly-hit balls and chasing down fly balls, but that he’s easily the worst shortstop in baseball in every other measure of range.

That kind of detail on players may yield some fascinating insight about players. A single number or overall assessment of a player is only intersting up to a point. The ability to breakdown the strengths and weaknesses that produce the overall defensive assessment is far more interesting.

[The Gray Eagle]

"Its interesting to me how SoSHers love their numbers and stats, and yet when it comes to Trot Nixon playing defense almost everyone here trusts their eyes."

A lot of people here love stats, but not many love fielding stats. While some posters throw around UZR runs as if they were actual events, most are very skeptical of fielding stats. Wisely, I think.

Personally, I often go by my eyes. I look at the numbers when I can get them, but always with a huge grain of salt. I look at fielding percentage along with the others, because it can tell you something about the guy's hands, if nothing about his range. But all of the defensive numbers get "salted" heavily by me.

I sometimes also give a little credence to a player's defensive rep, depending on the source, if the comments are recent. A lot of times the rep and the numbers are completely opposite, so I discount both and go by my eyes in those cases. And of course realize that I am just as biased and probably incorrect as anyone else. But at least I admit it.

Nixon's certainly got good hands-- what he can reach, he usually catches, except for a couple of rollers that he lost concentration on. He's also good at diving, he usually hangs on when he dives for a ball. Maybe these numbers are a hint that he tracks fly balls well and/or that his positioning is really good. Because I still don't buy that he has much mobility out there, and I am really unimpressed with his arm, especially for a RF. I think Nixon is a guy who makes diving catches that faster guys get on the run. But at least he catches them, however he does it. I have no idea how many flies he doesn't get to that a faster player would. Maybe not that many.

If he was a LF, I would believe that he could be one of the best, since most left fields are smaller and arm strength isn't as important as in RF.

[bowiac]

A lot of people here love stats, but not many love fielding stats. While some posters throw around UZR runs as if they were actual events, most are very skeptical of fielding stats. Wisely, I think.

I suspect just the opposite regarding the wisdom of this. Fielding stats, the advanced ones at least, seem to have gotten to the point that they capture a pretty good picture of what's going on. I feel defensive stats are pretty severely underrated around here.

How do we know that a stat has merit? Well, first of all, is it reproducable? Does it correlate well for players from year to year. In the case of UZR, yes, it does. It has a similar correlation from year to year as OPS does. It's about as indicatative of a skill as OPS is.

The other thing we need is to know what that stat correlates to in the real world. If we look at a team's OPS, we can figure out with a reasonable degree of accuracy, how many runs it will score. The question thus for UZR would be what it correlates to. The obvious thing to test would be how well it correlates to defensive efficiency. How well can UZR predict a team's BABIP rate? That's a tougher and less certain measure, given that there's stilll some doubt regarding exactly what a team's BABIP means, and to what extent it's luck/defense, and to what extent it's pitching. Regardless, we find that a team's UZR does in fact give us a pretty good estimate of what the team's BABIP is going to be. (I can't track down the link right now showing exactly what that correlation is. If I remember however, it was like .75 or so. That is, 75% of a team's BABIP variation from random can be explained by UZR.)

Which is all to say, that good defensive stats, for all their flaws, seem to be doing a pretty good job of capturing things.

Personally, I often go by my eyes.

No disrespect meant, but this is the single worst defensive measure there is as far as I can tell. It's just not possible for a fan to tell how good a player is defensively by watching. You can't do these evaluations by watching them on TV, simply because the camera follows the ball, and doesn't show you how the player reacted to the ball. You only see half the play, and there's a lot to suggest that the first half is the more important part of defensive play. It's where range really shows itself.

So unless you're watching every game in person, and you're not paying attention to the game, but paying attention to a specific fielder in order to see how they react to the ball being hit, you're not getting much in the way of an complete impression of the guy's defensive play. The reality of not being a professional scout precludes most people from being capable of doing good defensive evaluations.

This isn't even getting into the training involved. That even if you were doing all the things that a pro scout were doing, that you still need to know what to look for. What exactly is good range, positioning before the ball is hit into play, etc...

Both these factors, but I'd guess primarily the first one, prevent fan's defensive evaluations from being worth just about anything to me.

Scouting can be pretty helpful, but fan scouting is just fundamentally so flawed that I question what it can possibly ever hope to tell us.

[OttoC]

[...]No disrespect meant, but this is the single worst defensive measure there is as far as I can tell. It's just not possible for a fan  to tell how good a player is defensively by watching. You can't do these evaluations by watching them on TV, simply because the camera follows the ball, and doesn't show you how the player reacted to the ball. You only see half the play, and there's a lot to suggest that the first half is the more important part of defensive play. It's where range really shows itself.[...]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What you can tell from watching fielders ,as opposed to reading the stats, is whether they get to balls and whether they hang on to balls they get to. There are balls that fielders chase down, then drop, that aren't scored as errors because of the difficulty involved. Some fielders have hands of stone in these situations; others, hands of velvet.

While you may not be able to see the entire field on a play while watching television, you certainly can tell when an outfielder gets a bad jump on a ball, has trouble coming in or going back. You also can tell which outfielders have more trouble with balls hit directly at them. There is a great deal that can be told by eye if you know what to look for and how to look for it.

[xjack]

Wow, I'm dumbfounded about Nixon. Every time Gabe Kapler has been in right field, I'm thinking there's no way Nixon gets whatever ball Kapler just tracked down.

[bowiac]

While you may not be able to see the entire field on a play while watching television, you certainly can tell when an outfielder gets a bad jump on a ball, has trouble coming in or going back. You also can tell which outfielders have more trouble with balls hit directly at them. There is a great deal that can be told by eye if you know what to look for and how to look for it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In some cases you can tell when the outfielder gets a bad jump, but in a lot of other cases, the camera doesn't go the outfielder until he's already in motion.

As I said above, you can generally get the 2nd half of the defensive play. The first half, the part more associated with range, appears to be exceptionally important however.

That's why you get things like Jeter being rated as a tremendous defensive shortstop by a lot fans, while the stats show otherwise.

Wow, I'm dumbfounded about Nixon. Every time Gabe Kapler has been in right field, I'm thinking there's no way Nixon gets whatever ball Kapler just tracked down.

This could very easily be a positioning issue. What Bill James termed invisible range. If Nixon is 10 feet closer to where the ball was heading when it was put into play, then his good plays look rather routine. Kapler meanwhile might have to run a lot of those balls down, leading to running plays which Nixon doesn't get as many of.

Positioning I suspect to be the hardest to gauge, and thus the most underappreciated defensive skill. Moreso than anything else, it's why I'm a fan of defensive stats over even good scouting opinions in a lot of cases.

[xjack]

This could very easily be a positioning issue.

It's not just that.... We've had season tickets along the right field line -- not too far from the tarp -- for a long time. Based the vantage point from which we watch the games at Fenway, I usually have a decent sense for which balls hit to right are likely to be caught and which should fall in. Now maybe I was spoiled by all those years watching Dewey, but with Nixon, I've always felt there were more negative surprises (i.e. balls that seemed catchable but fell in) than positive ones. Obviously, my perception was very wrong.

Edited by xjack, 26 February 2006 - 12:05 AM.