Bradley: Deal with It.
- Thread starter shaggydog2000
- Start date
Rough Carrigan said:
I am in general agreement with you about the need for some more comprehensive data, but I am not sure Yaz is the best example as he might be an exception due to years of being a switch hitter. (If I recall correctly he didn't give up switch hitting until well into high school, and opted to bat lefty because he was an overall better hitter from that side of the plate.)
nighthob said:
Also Yaz had a pretty unique swing - especially in his early MVP years (well - should have been years) with his penchant for holding the bat so high.
and
HR moving away from LF opens up a non-Brockholt position for 4th outfielder - which may be critical if (a) JBJ's ability to hit was a mirage dissipated by the book on his weaknesses, or (b) one of the outfielders (Castillo, Bradley, etc.) is traded (which I assume would mean a high level replacement is acquired. Is de Aza the long term solution for outfielder number 4?
geoduck no quahog said:
De Aza played well enough here and is continuing to play well enough in San Francisco that he will probably draw interest from teams willing to offer him a better chance to be a starter than the Red Sox can. While it would be nice to be able to sign someone of his capabilities to a back-up role (not even a role with a chance to platoon, but a strict back-up role), I imagine the pickings will be slim at that level.
I would expect that unless an Upton or Heyward is involved, Dombrowski is likely going to stand pat with the outfield he has. With Rutledge and Marrero in house, as well as Shaw, Holt could serve as the primary 4th OF for the team, with Brentz and Cecchini and maybe a free agent or trade pick-up in the mix as well.
geoduck no quahog said:
With the uncertainty/upside combo that Bradley and Castillo represent, it would be a very good idea to have a solid above average hitting corner outfielder as insurance. Betts could slip back into center if Bradley falters. The 4th outfielder would move to left in either case, so his defense isn't hugely important. I think Shaw provides enough insurance for Hanley transitioning to 1st. Neither are a sure thing, but between the two of them I'm not as concerned, there is a decent percent chance one will work out. Holt can fill in for a bit at 3rd if Sandoval continues his injury/underperformance, and then a trade would need to be made. So it looks like they only need one more position player, and he'd be a relatively available type of dude. de Aza could be the guy, but there are probably going to be others available.
And then it's just a starter and a lot of bullpen rejiggering. Lot of work to be done on that side.
If Bradley & Castillo can replicate what they've done over their careers so far, that should be adequate (if unspectacular) production at a cheap price. Given their age / MLB experience, the bias should be towards expecting improvement off of that:
Bradley - 228 career games; 2.5 bWAR (1.8 annualized); 0.637 OPS; 75 OPS+
Castillo - 84 career games; 1.6 bWAR (3.1 annualized); 0.703 OPS; 88 OPS+
Given projected payroll levels and how the roster is setup with depth & solid-to-good position players at every position, and lots of depth but basically no elite arms in the rotation or bullpen, I don't think there is much room to add more than a couple elite pitching arms this offseason.
Bradley - 228 career games; 2.5 bWAR (1.8 annualized); 0.637 OPS; 75 OPS+
Castillo - 84 career games; 1.6 bWAR (3.1 annualized); 0.703 OPS; 88 OPS+
Given projected payroll levels and how the roster is setup with depth & solid-to-good position players at every position, and lots of depth but basically no elite arms in the rotation or bullpen, I don't think there is much room to add more than a couple elite pitching arms this offseason.
I haven't been watching the games lately. For those that have, how has JBJ looked at the plate? I know the numbers have been abysmal lately. Does he look lost at the plate like he did before the hot streak?
I have reapeted myself over many times during the last month or so, but I sure hope DD finds a taker for Rusney. And his contract aint cheap at all. He makes around 10M/per for the next several seasons.
ji oh said:
ArgentinaSOXfan said:
$10m season is pretty reasonable for what I would expect him to produce over a full season. At current prices, he only has to be worth a bit more than one win to break even.
But I'm curious to hear you make the case that he should go. Who do you want to see in the non-Mookie corner spot? What do you think you could get back?
Just box score watching... but it seems like he's been cutting way back on his strikeouts. Maybe he's working on something with the batting coaches?
He went 4 games without a strikeout (as well as without a hit), however he's back at it again with 1K in 3AB on Friday and 3K in 3AB on Saturday.Wake's knuckle said:
He has 65K on the season...23% of those Ks come in hitless games in which he struck out 3 times. When he's bad, he's bad.
Good gawd this kid drives me nuts! I really want to trust in JBJ as a full time starter next season, but his extended periods of just epic horridness are difficult to get past. It's so hard to believe that someone can have as great a month as he had not at least find some consistency..... More and more I'm now feeling like DD and Hazen have to at least bring back a De Aza type of guy. A "4th OF" that can rotate through but be a quality starter if JBJ can't find consistency. Meanwhile Castillo has also been offensively trending downward
So...in light of his two awesome plays in LF at the Toilet last night and how Lovullo has been using the OF the last few weeks, it is becoming increasingly clear that not only can JBJ play all 3 OF positions but that the Sox should at least be exploring the idea of moving him around depending on the field they're playing in to maximize his generational defensive talent.
What are the odds this team goes into 2016 utilizing four OF—JBJ, Betts, Castillo, and Holt—with no real "set positions"? Assuming none of them are moved for pitching, whoever the manager is will have incredible flexibility to be mixing and matching guys depending on who the opponent is pitching (RHP or LHP) and what the dimensions of the field are.
What are the odds this team goes into 2016 utilizing four OF—JBJ, Betts, Castillo, and Holt—with no real "set positions"? Assuming none of them are moved for pitching, whoever the manager is will have incredible flexibility to be mixing and matching guys depending on who the opponent is pitching (RHP or LHP) and what the dimensions of the field are.
Also, Cafardo brought this point up today:
Would add that this isn't really about Bradley – it's about the ability and willingness of the other three guys. Betts may not be JBJ in the field or have his arm strength, but he's hardly chopped liver out there with the glove and has a decent (even plus) arm. Castillo, while raw, may not be a guy you want to rely on in CF (has he played there yet for the Sox?) but has shown he can handle the Monster and LF pretty well in recent weeks.
Despite Lovullo's comments, I have to think they would at least explore it.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/09/28/jackie-bradley-outstanding-his-any-field/Vz9I7W798NWPafGfI1OxkM/story.html
Would add that this isn't really about Bradley – it's about the ability and willingness of the other three guys. Betts may not be JBJ in the field or have his arm strength, but he's hardly chopped liver out there with the glove and has a decent (even plus) arm. Castillo, while raw, may not be a guy you want to rely on in CF (has he played there yet for the Sox?) but has shown he can handle the Monster and LF pretty well in recent weeks.
Despite Lovullo's comments, I have to think they would at least explore it.
Van Everyman said:
Castillo played exclusively in CF during his first stint with the team last September, and he's played there in six games this year. It is the outfield position he's played the least so far in the bigs, so the numbers are definitely not reliable, but statistically it's been his weakest spot. If they went for a rotation of the outfielders, it's likely Castillo wouldn't be needed all that much in center anyway unless Bradley and Betts were hurt or otherwise unavailable. Even if he did have to play there on a short-term basis though, I doubt he'd hurt the team in any significant way.
If everyone was up for it, I guess it would be fine, but I doubt you could properly really leverage this to a huge advantage beyond just keeping your best OF in CF and using positioning to maximize his effectiveness.
Someone posted that the CF'er handles 40%+ of balls hit to the outfield. That ended the discussion of where JBJ should play for me. I want him involved in as many plays as possible. The other 3 can bounce around if necessary.
Montana Fan said:
Of course, this is a bit of a circular argument; CFs handle 40% of balls hit to the outfield at least partly because teams tend to put their best OFs in CF. It's just square footage, after all. Is any inherent reason why it needs to be divvied up the way it traditionally has been? Supposing you had a fairly slow OF who was comfortable in CF, and range gods who could play the corners, is there any reason why that couldn't work? An arrangement like that would presumably result in a more equitable distribution of balls fielded. I suspect the 1978-80 Brewers OFs, with Hisle/Oglivie and Lezcano in the corners and Gorman Thomas in center, might have fit that pattern to some degree; I'm sure other examples could be found.
Another thing adding to the bias is the CF being the Captain of the OF - he is expected to catch any "disputed" balls.Savin Hillbilly said:
That being said I'm pretty sure Batted Ball data would show a higher percentage of balls being hit to CF
When you think about it, an even distribution is 33% each. So if the CF picks up an extra 3% from each other OF he gets to about 40%. I would venture that much of that 3% from each OF comes from being the "captain" on plays at the boundry, which are mostly caught anyway when one guy calls off another. So while 40% vs 33% seems like lot it may not really have a difference in terms of run prevention if we are talking about easy plays anyway.
That being said, playing your best guy in CF simply gives him more territory to work with no matter what stadium you are in since he can venture to both LF and RF whereas in a corner spot he is restricted by the foul lines / stands.
That being said, playing your best guy in CF simply gives him more territory to work with no matter what stadium you are in since he can venture to both LF and RF whereas in a corner spot he is restricted by the foul lines / stands.
Power alleys are bigger than foul lines. Put another way, corner OFs have to spend some of their range overlapping 'unnecessary' foul/stands areas by virtue of positioning, because they still need to guard against the screamer down the line. From a purely square footage perspective, the natural distribution of fair balls is probably a lot closer to 40/30/30 than 33/33/33.
It would be interesting to look at hit f/x data because I think you would have a lot more difficult chances in CF. On top of the foul coverage, you have to remember that the CF has more territory behind him to cover.
I also think when we have loads of hit f/x data we will find that more hard hit catch-able balls go to CF. However this is obviously anecdotal on my part.
I also think when we have loads of hit f/x data we will find that more hard hit catch-able balls go to CF. However this is obviously anecdotal on my part.
If Bradley were left alone in CF, he'd be a Gold Glove player. However, is Betts as good in a corner as he is in CF, where he's made amazing strides over the course of the 2015 season. I like JBJ's defensive chops as much as the next fellow, but if this is about maximizing assets, Betts' comfort level in RF should be taken into account as they plan for 2016. Mookie came up as an infielder, and he's had very few reps in RF (or LF, for that matter) in the minors and/or majors. He's proven to be a plus defender in CF. Bradley is a plus defender no matter what OF slot he plays. I'm not saying I know the answer, but I think an argument could be made that JBJ in CF with Castillo in LF and Betts in RF might be best for optimizing JBJs skills as a defender, but it might not be the best team OF alignment. IF Betts is a stronger defender in CF than on a corner, an OF with Betts in CF and JBJ in RF, Castillo in LF, might just be a better overall unit. In the end, it should be about what is best for the team defense, and I believe Betts might be better suited to excel in CF than in RF.
Just speculating. Would love for JBJ to get hot this week and finish strong. His month has been very quiet at the plate.
Just speculating. Would love for JBJ to get hot this week and finish strong. His month has been very quiet at the plate.
For September, JBJ has hit 220/316/463. If he can do that for a full season, whether through streaks or more consistency, he will be a really valuable player (though I would expect the AVG and OBP to increase with a drop in ISO longer term, even if he stays at a production rate like this).
As I mentioned above, I'd like a bit more consistency as well, but while his month has been cool compared to August, it's not too far different from what we should expect long term.
As I mentioned above, I'd like a bit more consistency as well, but while his month has been cool compared to August, it's not too far different from what we should expect long term.
And I'd like to think anyone who watched (or saw the highlights from) the Cards/Pirates game last night knows the importance of fielding priority. Consistent positioning establishes a clear hierarchy and makes for more instinctive call-offs, preventing collisions like what happened to Piscotty last night.BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
If healthy they can go Betts - Bradley - Castillo or Castillo - Bradley - Betts, probably the later with how comfortable Castillo has looked so early in LF. Just lock them in and forget about it other than giving guys rest.
Drek717 said:
Well .. if they really wanted to take this to the extreme they could start shifting in the OF - move Bradley to whichever OF position the hitter is mostly likely to hit the ball.
Or not ..
The whole thing strikes me as very Little League (or a Stratomatic game where you aren't at risk of being punched out by your opponent)
Put Bradley in CF and leave him there . I'm agnostic on the other two positions - I can see arguments for both
smastroyin said:
Good point--a little more in some parks (e.g. Dodger), a lot more in others (e.g. Minute Maid). So maybe the #1 criterion for a CF should be the ability to read depth well off the bat and make plays on balls in front of you and over your head, with lateral range a slightly lower priority, especially if you have good speed at all three spots, as the Sox currently do. Who does that indicate? JBJ is just transcendent on balls hit over his head. But Mookie's pretty great at it too, and I've also seen him make some great diving/sliding grabs on balls in front of him.
I'd keep Bradley in center and go with Betts in left and Castillo in right.
Betts has a strong enough arm to pile up assists from left field in Fenway, but I don't think strong enough from right field to keep runners from going first to third.
Castillo has enough speed to cover right field in Fenway and the arm strength to keep runners at second or make the throw home when needed.
Betts has a strong enough arm to pile up assists from left field in Fenway, but I don't think strong enough from right field to keep runners from going first to third.
Castillo has enough speed to cover right field in Fenway and the arm strength to keep runners at second or make the throw home when needed.
smastroyin said:
True. But isn't the concern that the "new book" on Bradley may now be out? The first week of September was part of his torrid streak and he hit .500/.542/1.045/1.587 over those six games. The last 19 games, he posted a .117/.239/.250/.489 line.
So the question is, is he just streaky as hell, or have pitchers figured him out again.
There is no Rev said:
Interesting. It does make me curious exactly how the lateral zones for each OF are defined for purposes of determining where a ball was hit. Is it a strict 30/30/30 pie slice thing?
E5 Yaz said:
Or the Haters just continue to Hate
Which is a bit of hyperbole but I think hides a kernel of truth. It seems Bradley's struggles last year seems to have instilled a sense of eternal pessimism. Folks made up their minds last year and no amount of counter data will make up for that bias. Part of the problem is that Bradley can still look absolutely terrible at times - even in the midst of a hot streak.
There is no Rev said:
Sure, but the specific comment was that his month was very cool at the plate, when, if you look at it, it seems to be about what you might reasonably expect longer term.
I have to admit, it would be fairly amazing to me that minor league pitchers would, as a group, be so awful and uninformed that they wouldn't be able to exploit a "book" that takes a guy from the best player in the league to the worst. The difference between the two leagues just isn't that high. So I would assuming a combination of effects.
I can't imagine AAA teams are doing that much opposition scouting/research; I would think their primary scouting/research focus is on their own talent.smastroyin said:
He has amazing raw talent, but it appears he may be very slow to adjust at the plate. His hot streak was reminiscent of the one that prompted his acceleration to the big leagues a few years ago; unfortunately that one occurred during spring training.
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
I kind of want to see them do something like this just to totally break UZR. He would rack up a lot of putouts.
threecy said:
The point is that this is a (speculated) hole in his plate coverage that turns him from Bryce Harper to Bryce Dallas Howard. You don't need sophisticated advanced scouting to find these things, and yes, AAA has plenty of scouts in the stands looking at players for the other teams, even if just for trade possibilities. Given that JBJ was a top ranked prospect I'm sure these things have been scouted.
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Well it is hard to argue against the viewpoint that a large amount of incredibly negative information needs more than a small sampling of positive information to offset it. That is just very reasonable. I do feel Bradley has shown offensive ability he has never shown on this level before, and I'm encouraged by it. But personally, I'd still have to assume there is a decent chance he is going to fail again next year and have some sort of backup plan for that in place when constructing the roster.
Bradley has been more vulnerable to offspeed stuff during the last 3 weeks, and his k rate has elevated over the previous period. Over the last few games, he's made a concerted effort to lay off most breaking pitches, and he's worked his share of walks as pitchers try to get him to chase, which is a good sign. His minor league pedigree was always about good pitch recognition, and his year at AAA showed a reasonable walk rate and above average power. I think he's capable of becoming a guy who hits .270/350/450, with 20 HRs/year during his prime. He's just starting to demonstrate a handle on major league pitching, and the adjustments he's made with Chili with his leg lift are real, with positive results. Like every other major leaguer, he'll have to learn to adjust as the pitchers adjust to him, but he's shown the ability to do that at the highest levels before. Hopefully, he'll find consistency and, perhaps as importantly, confidence, and he'll put to rest any questions about his ability to stick in the majors as an every day player.
shaggydog2000 said:
The Sox have at least three backup plans already, named Brock Holt, Manuel Margot, and Andrew Benintendi, depending on how many years out we're talking.
Aside from DH and SS, the outfield presents the least concern in terms of of constructing the roster this offseason. Even the question of "how many games can Pedroia play" is more worrisome from a contingency-planning standpoint than the outfield situation (though it's close).
Buzzkill Pauley said:
I was clearly talking about next year, so Margot and Benintendi are nowhere close to being solutions to a Bradley flop. Holt could be, but he brings his own issues like putting up a .651 OPS the second half this year, reminding us that he put up a .548 OPS in the second half of last year. So is every day player a situation you can put him in and expect him to succeed? Is he wearing down, or is it something else? So I'd like to see him stay a super-sub and bring in a good 4th outfielder. Because Castillo has a certain chance of flopping or being injured as well, the need for a good backup seems pretty apparent. This also eliminates the Grady Sizemore situation where you have to keep playing a slumping Bradley and worsening his funk, instead of sending him down to work on his game and keeping his development on track.
There is no Rev said:
Well, pitchers clearly drastically changed their approach to him as his hot streak continued. They used to pound the inside of the zone, because he couldn't hit anything there. Then he adjusted and started destroying everything inside, but not hitting things in the bottom of the zone, so over a period of about a month they started pitching him low and outside.
But there are a couple major differences between Before and After. One is that the weak zone is now smaller than it was -- one corner, instead of two-thirds of the zone. And other is that Bradley has shown that he can still destroy things that miss that weak zone. So pitchers have a smaller target, and much less tolerance for error.
If Bradley turns into a pure mistake hitter, that's not the best possible outcome, but it's not that bad. Even major-league pitchers make plenty of mistakes.
I listed Margot and Benintendi not only because the possibility exists that one or both of them may be ready by mid- to late-2016, but also because if you only think about next year too many times, you end up with the 2015 Phillies. Or stuck owing $180+MM to the worst two "proven" players in baseball.shaggydog2000 said:
You say you want a "good backup" but there is no player who is a better backup than all-star Brock Holt. Because if that player were better, he wouldn't be a backup.
Buzzkill Pauley said:
We'll just have to differ over the value of playing Brock Holt every day then. And your suggestion that paying a bit for a 4th outfielder is roughly equivalent to the Phillies drafting terribly over a long period of time and signing Ryan Howard to a 5 yr/$125 Mil extension about two seasons before he blew out his Achilles tendon and was never the same is a bit ludicrous. I get what you're going for, but the difference between the two situations is kind of glaring. And the suggestion that a player who ended this year in AA or low A ball is going to make a meaningful contribution starting in the middle of next year is a bit of a stretch to me as well. You never know, but it seems unlikely and not something to go into the year counting on.
I only saw his first at bat tonight, but what struck me is that his swing seems a bit long. On the plus side, it looks like the lower body hitch is pretty much all gone.
Wait, so now you want to acquire a 4th OF that can play everyday at a higher level than Brock Holt?shaggydog2000 said:
You know what those guys are called? Here's a hint: it's not 4th OF.
Who are these mystery 4th OFs who will be better than both Brock Holt and Jackie Bradley? How much will they cost, do you think? Why do you think they'll be better?
Buzzkill Pauley said:
Do you mean better than Brock Holt the first half of this year and Jackie Bradley in August? Not getting that guy on a two year contract, no. But a guy better than 2nd half Brock Holt and 2014 Jackie Bradley? Yeah, I think we can find that guy for a reasonable amount. We actually have that dude on the roster right now, and I doubt he'd take a 5 year contract to sign. David Murphy could be available. Gerardo Parra. That is the viable 4th OF I'm talking about. Not an above average player, but a guy who could step in for a complete flop by Bradley or Castillo while Betts plays center, and not be a black hole. 1 or 2 years, about 6-8 mil per seems to be the going rate for that guy. Think that will kill the Sox somehow? And you'd still have Holt to be the best roster spackle on the market. Because he's a lot better as that than as a structural element.