Centerfield: 2020 and Beyond

Jack Rabbit Slim

Member
SoSH Member
May 19, 2010
1,083
Throughout various threads discussing possible ways to reduce payroll, I have heard a lot of people say JBJ should be traded/non-tendered. I have also read numerous articles recently where the author brings up getting rid of JBJ as a foregone conclusion. What I haven't heard much of is the plan for who would man CF absent JBJ. While I agree that JBJ is likely not worth his projected arbitration salary (especially for a team trying to pinch pennies), the free agent options for centerfielders are bad to non-existent. So I am curious who people think is the CF of the future or at least 2020. Some options I can think of:

  1. Betts - Move Mookie back to CF and sign a better bat/worse defender than JBJ to man RF. I actually think if they are able to extend/re-sign Mookie this should be the plan for the future.
  2. Benintendi - While Beni came up as a CF, my memory is that he was mediocre as a CF in previous years and this year was pretty meh in LF, possibly due to bulking up over the offseason. Perhaps with a different offseason training regime he can get back to being an option for CF but I tend to doubt he would be anything close to JBJ out there. Would open up LF for a hitter.
  3. Starling Marte - Certainly the top option on the trade market. Unlikely the Sox have the prospect capital to pull this off.
  4. Ender Inciarte - I believe it was Steve Adams from MLBTR that suggested an Inciarte-JBJ swap. I haven't delved too deep into the numbers but they look like pretty similar players. The Braves would save some money by trading $16.4M over two years (plus a $1M buyout in 2022) for the final year of JBJ at around $11M. Sox would cut the AAV down to $6M and hold a reasonably priced $9M option for 2022 if they haven't found anyone better by then.
  5. Brett Gardner - Just kidding
  6. Shogo Akiyama - Obviously big question marks as to how his numbers would translate offensively, but gets good grades for his defense. May not be a bad gamble if the offers stay low.
  7. Cameron Maybin - Career mediocrity that just put up great numbers over half a season with MFY. Seems like a good bet to fool someone into giving him too much money.
  8. Extend JBJ - While I don't think the Sox can afford JBJ at $11M, he is still a starting caliber player. Perhaps they could offer to "extend" JBJ with a multi-year contract that lowers the AAV (2/12?). JBJ would probably reject this but I doubt he would get much more if he were a FA.
 

Mueller's Twin Grannies

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 19, 2009
5,189
I see very few scenarios where JBJ is non-tendered. He has trade value, even if the book on him as a hitter (starts slow, turns into a force some time in June, cools off a little near the end) has been written. He has one of their best trade chips, though, as he won't command any salary relief and is a good enough player that what they get in return shouldn't be just an also-ran. But without knowing what is going to happen with Betts and/or JDM, moving him first makes little sense. If he goes and they both stay, I think the obvious choice is to find someone who can play a decent CF or RF and just put Mookie wherever that player isn't. They could be a number 9 hitter so long as they can catch the ball.

The in-house options, right now, are Castillo (been covered to death), Marcus Wilson, and Tate Matheny at AAA and Jarren Duran in AA. Wilson's expected arrival is in 2021 but Duran's is late next year. I could see them giving him a shot at cracking the Opening Day roster and seeing if he can make the jump, then making a small move to get someone else in uniform if he doesn't. And that doesn't even take into account the idea of a 4th OF, which will likely be a free agent signing. Unless they want to fully convert Sam Travis or Tzu-Wei Lin to the OF, that is.
 

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
2,639
Eh Wilson and Durran were not doing terribly well in AA. They cant be realistic options to be the starting CF of the Sox to start the season
 

The Allented Mr Ripley

holden
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 2, 2003
11,742
South Shore, MA
Wilson started the season poorly in AA, was demoted to high-A for half of May, all of June, and some of July, then returned to Portland where he played well (.811 OPS in 43 games).
 

Jack Rabbit Slim

Member
SoSH Member
May 19, 2010
1,083
I think the obvious choice is to find someone who can play a decent CF or RF and just put Mookie wherever that player isn't. They could be a number 9 hitter so long as they can catch the ball.
This is the point of this thread. When this topic comes up, I see a lot of handwaving away the issue with phrases like the one above. Who is this person and how much do they cost? How bad of a hitter are you willing to accept? Game threads are full of complaints about JBJ's hitting but he still managed a wRC+ of 90 last year, tied for 11th among CF. It seems to me that the number of players that a) can cover CF or Fenway's RF, b) can hit as well or better than JBJ, and c) are available and cost less than JBJ, is exceedingly small.

I considered including Duran and Wilson as options, but I don't think either are far enough along to open the season with.
 

Mueller's Twin Grannies

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 19, 2009
5,189
Fangraphs has Wilson in AAA as a projection, so that's my bad.

In light of that, if not Castillo it's going to be someone outside of the organization which, to me, increases the chances of it being someone outside of the organization to basically 100%. I can see a scenario where they just say eff it and give Rusney a callup, but that's only if they've sold off everything else and have the extra money to create a spot for him. Otherwise, no chance in hell, as Vince McMahon used to say.
 
Aug 11, 2019
166
then returned to Portland where he played well (.811 OPS in 43 games).
The only problem is that he played 42 games after his return to Portland on July 15th and if you subtract two games, August 2nd at Bowie and August 9th vs. Akron, his numbers for that period drop substantially. He went 6 for 9 with 3 doubles and 2 home runs, 15 total bases, 6 RBI, and a walk in them. Taking that into consideration, his numbers for that period would drop from:

.250/.325/.486/.811 to
.222/.301/.401/.708
 

Lose Remerswaal

Leaves after the 8th inning
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Fangraphs has Wilson in AAA as a projection, so that's my bad.

In light of that, if not Castillo it's going to be someone outside of the organization which, to me, increases the chances of it being someone outside of the organization to basically 100%. I can see a scenario where they just say eff it and give Rusney a callup, but that's only if they've sold off everything else and have the extra money to create a spot for him. Otherwise, no chance in hell, as Vince McMahon used to say.
Rusney will cost them more in terms of the tax threshholds than JBJ will, so again, THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN
 

Mueller's Twin Grannies

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 19, 2009
5,189
Rusney will cost them more in terms of the tax threshholds than JBJ will, so again, THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN
Which is pretty much what I said. He only comes up if they've traded away Betts, JBJ, Price, Eovaldi, and JDM, and even then it's highly unlikely.

MLB put out its list of under-the-radar free agents and a few of them could be good gets for Boston on cheap deals, especially guys like Neshek and Anderson. The Calhouns, Dickersons, Avilas, and Floreses of the world seem to be around where Boston should be looking for low-cost guys who could turn out to be real steals. Neshek on a minor league deal sounds especially good considering he'd likely win a spot in the bullpen out of camp and would be easy to move on from if he stinks out the joint.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,082
There will likely be other CF that are nontendered as well, so the full spectrum isn’t out there yet.

as long as they have Mookie, it doesn’t need to be a CF either. They could see if the price drops below Bradley’s arb number on some of the corner outfielders out there.
 

Rich Garces Belly

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2009
261
I would take a flyer on Juan Lagares, his defense looks good (especially his arm) and he is coming off a down year so he could be had pretty cheap.

Jarrod Dyson is also someone I would take a look at, although he is going to get more money than Lagares he will make much less than Bradley. Dyson would be a good 4th outfielder if he comes cheap enough or could play center or right for a season.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,383
The wrong side of the bridge....
So we go from an outfield defense being the biggest strenth to a horrible weakness behind a flyball pitching staff
I'd want to see what Chavis can do in the OF before we say "horrible weakness". Beni isn't JBJ, obviously, but he should be within spitting distance of average out there. Chavis could be good in LF for all we know. Infielders move to the OF all the time, and it often goes well, HanRam notwithstanding.

Also, the Sox were almost exactly league average in both FB% and GB% last year, so not especially a "flyball pitching staff".
 

JimBoSox9

will you be my friend?
SoSH Member
Nov 1, 2005
16,572
Mid-surburbia
I’d rather put Chavis in LF and move Benintendi to CF.
So we go from an outfield defense being the biggest strenth to a horrible weakness behind a flyball pitching staff
You can survive subpar LF defense with 81 games in Fenway even with a fly ball-heavy staff. If the dual #1 priorities are the luxury tax and re-signing Mookie, the obvious step after trading JBJ is trying to fill his role with players already on the roster. I'd prepare yourself for a Chavis/Martinez LF platoon with Benny in CF and Mookie in RF (I'm tempted to reverse the two, but I think the Sox trust Benny in center more than I do, and if he gets back to his 2018 weight it should be fine).
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
10,769
St. Louis, MO
You can survive subpar LF defense with 81 games in Fenway even with a fly ball-heavy staff. If the dual #1 priorities are the luxury tax and re-signing Mookie, the obvious step after trading JBJ is trying to fill his role with players already on the roster. I'd prepare yourself for a Chavis/Martinez LF platoon with Benny in CF and Mookie in RF (I'm tempted to reverse the two, but I think the Sox trust Benny in center more than I do, and if he gets back to his 2018 weight it should be fine).
If they can resign Holt between him and Chavis they should be able to fill LF and a lot of 2B innings pretty affordably.
 

chawson

Member
Aug 1, 2006
1,634
Marisnick is actually kind of interesting. He seems like a player the Rays would trade for, and tweak into becoming a full-time 2.5-3 win guy.

He’s got a big frame (6’4”) that should produce more power than he does. Really good barrel rates and exit velocity across 2017-18, yet it produced very meager exit velocities. Seems like a guy who could benefit from some of JDM’s tutelage. His defense is also very good, and he’s only turning 29.
 
Aug 11, 2019
166
Like it or not, there are defensive metrics that rate both Jackie Bradley Jr, and Xander Bogaerts as far below average fielders for 2019. Unfortunately, I don't have the formulae for them to compare them to other methods. The SABR Defensive Index (SDI) is part of the determinant for Rawlings Gold Gloves and is based on batted ball location metrics (70%) in comparison to his peers (Defensive Runs Saved from Baseball Info Solutions, Ultimate Zone rating by Michael Lichtman, Runs Effectively Defended by Chris Dial) and play-by-play data (Defensive Regression Analysis by Michael Humphreys, Total Zone Rating). https://sabr.org/content/details-new-rawlings-gold-glove-awards-selection-process-sabr

Defensive Regression Analysis (DRA) by Michael Humphreys 2019

Jackie Bradley Jr. -- Runs Saved Above Average: -6.1, Next to last out of 87 MLB
https://thebaseballgauge.com/history.php?tab=fld_dra_ss&first=2019&last=max&lgID=AL&division=All&pos=CF&age_low=16&age_high=59&results=100&page=1&sort=Runs_a

Xander Boegarts -- Runs Saved Above Average: -12.7, Last out of 71 MLB
https://thebaseballgauge.com/history.php?tab=fld_dra_ss&first=2019&last=max&lgID=AL&division=All&pos=SS&age_low=16&age_high=59&results=100&page=1&sort=Runs_a

SABR Defensive Index (SDI) 2019
https://sabr.org/sdi/2019-final
Jackie Bradley Jr.
-6.6 (14th out of 15 -- AL)

Xander Bogaerts
-9.7 (13th out of 13)
 

nvalvo

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
16,710
Rogers Park
Like it or not, there are defensive metrics that rate both Jackie Bradley Jr, and Xander Bogaerts as far below average fielders for 2019. Unfortunately, I don't have the formulae for them to compare them to other methods. The SABR Defensive Index (SDI) is part of the determinant for Rawlings Gold Gloves and is based on batted ball location metrics (70%) in comparison to his peers (Defensive Runs Saved from Baseball Info Solutions, Ultimate Zone rating by Michael Lichtman, Runs Effectively Defended by Chris Dial) and play-by-play data (Defensive Regression Analysis by Michael Humphreys, Total Zone Rating). https://sabr.org/content/details-new-rawlings-gold-glove-awards-selection-process-sabr

Defensive Regression Analysis (DRA) by Michael Humphreys 2019

Jackie Bradley Jr. -- Runs Saved Above Average: -6.1, Next to last out of 87 MLB
https://thebaseballgauge.com/history.php?tab=fld_dra_ss&first=2019&last=max&lgID=AL&division=All&pos=CF&age_low=16&age_high=59&results=100&page=1&sort=Runs_a

Xander Boegarts -- Runs Saved Above Average: -12.7, Last out of 71 MLB
https://thebaseballgauge.com/history.php?tab=fld_dra_ss&first=2019&last=max&lgID=AL&division=All&pos=SS&age_low=16&age_high=59&results=100&page=1&sort=Runs_a

SABR Defensive Index (SDI) 2019
https://sabr.org/sdi/2019-final
Jackie Bradley Jr.
-6.6 (14th out of 15 -- AL)

Xander Bogaerts
-9.7 (13th out of 13)
To the extent I can tell — the articles that spell out the methodology in detail are no longer available — DRA is linear-weights style stat made out of play-by-play data, whose chief advantage is the ability to compare players across eras. Even its creator, in the piece at the link, is mostly lauding that it generally produces results that align with ZR, the predecessor to UZR.

But in an age of defensive shifts, I'm not sure how well it would perform. I see no indication that it has been adjusted for that issue. And in general, it seems weird to use a 15 year old statistic based on play-by-play data to evaluate defense for a single season in 2019.

That said, Bogaerts I can believe could be the worst regular defensive SS in the AL. That's what DRS thinks, although UZR has him around average. He is (rather famously) the player with the largest persistent split between those two statistics.

It seems clear that JBJ had a bad defensive year this season by his standards. He was right around average by both UZR and DRS. His Statcast-based OAA — the stat that generally likes him best — ticked down to +6, lower than he recorded in past years. But the other major stats having him around average in one season of data is hard to square with DRA's ranking of 14th of 15 in the AL.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,383
The wrong side of the bridge....
The thing about Jackie is that he was always a bit of a Gorman Thomas CF. I'm exaggerating on purpose, but the point is that Gorman Thomas was a guy with below-average speed who was a respectable CF because he knew how to play the position and executed efficiently and fearlessly. Plug "pretty good speed" and "outstanding" into that sentence and you have JBJ. But now, as he nears 30, that "pretty good speed" is declining to "average-ish speed", and his performance is declining with it. I think he's still a better fielder than last year's metrics indicate, but I don't think he's likely to be an outstanding fielder going forward. And JBJ's roller-coaster offense + no-longer-outstanding defense = a guy who certainly merits a job in a big-league lineup, but would probably not earn as an FA what he's likely to get in arbitration this year.

Which means his trade value is likely near zero. Not negative, but near zero. If the Sox trade him to save money, I think the best they can hope for is either (a) a meh prospect haul -- one or two lottery tickets or low-ceiling, C.J. Chatham types, or (b) a respectable part-time player or middle reliever who's paid a little too much, but not as much as JBJ.

Is my glass too half empty here?
 

Rough Carrigan

reasons within Reason
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
The thing about Jackie is that he was always a bit of a Gorman Thomas CF. I'm exaggerating on purpose, but the point is that Gorman Thomas was a guy with below-average speed who was a respectable CF because he knew how to play the position and executed efficiently and fearlessly. Plug "pretty good speed" and "outstanding" into that sentence and you have JBJ. But now, as he nears 30, that "pretty good speed" is declining to "average-ish speed", and his performance is declining with it. I think he's still a better fielder than last year's metrics indicate, but I don't think he's likely to be an outstanding fielder going forward. And JBJ's roller-coaster offense + no-longer-outstanding defense = a guy who certainly merits a job in a big-league lineup, but would probably not earn as an FA what he's likely to get in arbitration this year.

Which means his trade value is likely near zero. Not negative, but near zero. If the Sox trade him to save money, I think the best they can hope for is either (a) a meh prospect haul -- one or two lottery tickets or low-ceiling, C.J. Chatham types, or (b) a respectable part-time player or middle reliever who's paid a little too much, but not as much as JBJ.

Is my glass too half empty here?
I don't think so.
The perception that JBJ is a good centerfielder seems to be based on him make a few excellent catches going back to the track/wall each year. Well, other centerfielders, even average ones make a few of those every year, too. The fielding bible hasn't really liked him since 2014 giving him slightly above average ratings 2015-17 and then slightly worse last year. It also notes that a lot of guys successfully took extra bases on his arm last year.
 

teddywingman

Looks like Zach Galifianakis
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2009
8,201
a basement on the hill
Bradley in 2019

2nd in outfield assists
3rd in putouts
1st in double plays (tied)

Something doesn't seem to line up. I know there's a ton of variables that go into those stats, but you don't make the top 3 in each if you're below average.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,383
The wrong side of the bridge....
Bradley in 2019

2nd in outfield assists
3rd in putouts
1st in double plays (tied)

Something doesn't seem to line up. I know there's a ton of variables that go into those stats, but you don't make the top 3 in each if you're below average.
Also 1st in innings played in CF. Did he come in 2nd in OF assists because he's great at throwing runners out, or just because he got more chances to do it than anyone else?

Using counting stats like outfield assists or DP to gauge a fielder's effectiveness is like using RBI to gauge a hitter's effectiveness: it's as much about playing time as anything else, and it's heavily context-dependent. That's why we have the advanced metrics, with all their flaws.
 

teddywingman

Looks like Zach Galifianakis
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2009
8,201
a basement on the hill
Also 1st in innings played in CF. Did he come in 2nd in OF assists because he's great at throwing runners out, or just because he got more chances to do it than anyone else?

Using counting stats like outfield assists or DP to gauge a fielder's effectiveness is like using RBI to gauge a hitter's effectiveness: it's as much about playing time as anything else, and it's heavily context-dependent. That's why we have the advanced metrics, with all their flaws.
Yeah, that's why I mentioned variables. He also finished 5th in fielding %. And so yeah he played marginally more innings than some other CFs, but to finish that high in 4 categories now, well, wouldn't that indicate that it's more than random coincidence?

Edit to add: If he actually was a below average CF last year, wouldn't that be reflected in at least some traditional statistics?
 

chawson

Member
Aug 1, 2006
1,634
Also 1st in innings played in CF. Did he come in 2nd in OF assists because he's great at throwing runners out, or just because he got more chances to do it than anyone else?
That’s ‘cause his health also is a skill. Good center fielders throw their bodies around a lot, and spend a lot of time on the DL for it (look at Kiermaier).

After finally winning a Gold Glove, I wouldn’t be surprised if Jackie intentionally reeled in the theatrics a bit this past year so as to avoid a lengthy DL trip so close to free agency.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
47,004
I see him way way less than you guys, but I would be happy to not see him in CF for BOS anymore if that is what ends up happening, he seems to steal two extra base hits per game against NY.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
26,182
FWIW, watching him play I thought 2019 was clearly his worst defensive season.
 
Aug 11, 2019
166
A problem with trying to measure defensive statistics is determining how far a player has to go to make a play and the time he has to make it. This should be overcome with StatCast data but one problem here is that it is not available to the general public as was PITCHf/x data. For a long, long time the measure of fielding ability was fielding average but as the Society for American Baseball Research developed, analysts spent more time trying to build better metrics. One thing that was done was using a map of a generalized baseball field divided into zones. This link shows an example of a STATS Zone Chart that was used by STATS and Baseball Info Solutions but they didn't necessarily assign values in the same fashion. Readily observable problems are that sizes of zones in a given sector change as the zone gets farther from home plate and the field outline used is generalized. I recall thinking that if players were perfectly positioned for each batted ball, they wouldn't show any range (foul balls aside).

People tend to remember the great play and only remember the bad ones if they lead to poor results (two outs, no one on and an infielder blows a grounder...if it doesn't lead to a run, it's quickly forgotten).

I think the shift and Devers (sometimes in conjunction) had some impact on Bogaerts in 2019. Benintendi's fielding went downhill in the second half. Bradley Jr. blew some plays that mostly were overlooked. Overall, I thought the throwing by B, B, and B in the outfield could have been better; there were a lot of throws off the bag or missing the cut-off (again, usually overlooked).
 

nvalvo

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
16,710
Rogers Park
FWIW, watching him play I thought 2019 was clearly his worst defensive season.
I remember reflecting to myself after these two plays in consecutive games that he was not going to have the sparkling statistics we were accustomed to.

... which prompted this comment from Sprowl in the gamethread:

Jackie booted that like a little leaguer.

And this from Mystic Merlin the next day:

JBJ with some serious lapses

Luckily it was the Tigers, and we won both games. But was he not sleeping or something?
 
Last edited:

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,383
The wrong side of the bridge....
Yeah, that's why I mentioned variables. He also finished 5th in fielding %. And so yeah he played marginally more innings than some other CFs, but to finish that high in 4 categories now, well, wouldn't that indicate that it's more than random coincidence?
OF assists are tricky to evaluate, because opportunities can be inversely correlated with perceived ability. However, in JBJ's case I don't think that's what's happening; there's lots of eyeball evidence that he has a plus arm, and the components of DRS/UZR that incorporate this were still positive this past year. It's the range numbers that took a big step backward. And I think that matches eyeball evidence too. He's lost a bit of speed, not surprising for a 29-year-old.

As for fielding percentage, the best way to sum up its usefulness for judging outfielders is to point out that Jason Bay tied for the MLB lead in 2009 with a perfect 1.000. On the meaningfulness scale, outfield FPCT ranks somewhere south of pitcher wins.
 

teddywingman

Looks like Zach Galifianakis
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2009
8,201
a basement on the hill
Look. You can pick apart any defensive statistic. I get it.

My argument is that he wouldn't be at or near the top of every single category if he was a below average CF, which is what the defensive metrics are trying to say. That's where I call bullshit.

Like when he makes one of his amazing catches going back to the wall in left center and they say the probability of that ball being caught was like 80%. I've watched enough baseball to know it's bullshit.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,383
The wrong side of the bridge....
My argument is that he wouldn't be at or near the top of every single category if he was a below average CF, which is what the defensive metrics are trying to say. That's where I call bullshit.
But he's not "at or near the top of every single category." He's only at or near the top of three traditional counting-stat defensive categories, which have serious limitations as measurements of ability, and one of which in particular (DP) is absurd to use as a yardstick of anything, since the difference between the leader and the trailer is all of three or four plays over the course of over 1000 innings and hundreds of chances.

If you normalize everybody's assist and putout totals to JBJ's innings played, out of 29 players with 600+ innings, he's fourth in assists, but only 22nd in putouts.

Even if we were to take fielding percentage seriously for the sake of argument, he's exactly MLB average in that category.

Statcast Outs Above Average? There were 22 OFs, 12 of them CFs, above him in that category.

He's just not an outstanding CF anymore. Or at least he wasn't in 2019. Maybe this was just an off year and he can return to some semblance of his earlier form, but that remains to be seen.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,082
Look. You can pick apart any defensive statistic. I get it.

My argument is that he wouldn't be at or near the top of every single category if he was a below average CF, which is what the defensive metrics are trying to say. That's where I call bullshit.

Like when he makes one of his amazing catches going back to the wall in left center and they say the probability of that ball being caught was like 80%. I've watched enough baseball to know it's bullshit.
Yeah, I remember that play. It was a clear example of how Fenway Park messes up even the advanced fielding metrics. It was a ball that, based on exit velocity and launch angle, would be caught 80% of the time in a cookie cutter ballpark. But the algorithm didn’t “see” the wall get in the way and require a spectacular leaping grab. Dumb dumb computers.

Bradley’s poor scores this year reflect in some degree the two brain farts noted above in early July. That also says it all about what a farce the way some people worship the so-called advance fielding stats is. They are all small sample size noise, much like relief pitcher ERA or splits against left handed pitchers. Two hanging curveballs in mid-August and suddenly you’re a lefty masher. A dropped pop up and a one-hop throw that gets by the catcher and suddenly you’re a bad outfielder. They go hand in hand.
 

Rough Carrigan

reasons within Reason
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
The fielding bible has these numbers for JBJ in the last 4 years for the number of opponents trying to take an extra base on him and how many were successful. More tried to take extra bases on him last year and a greater percentage were successful.

2016 -- 114 tried and 55 were successful, 48%
2017 -- 76 tried and 43 were successful, 57%
2018 -- 97 tried and 43 were successful, 44%
2019 -- 107 tried and 68 were successful, 64%

So, he was off by his standards. But how did he compare to other centerfielders?
Kiermaier at Tampa hasn't played as many innings the last few years so he's not a perfect comparison but the % successful in taking extra bases against him the last 4 years were 42, 59, 52 and 52, except for last year, comparable with the noisiness of stats.

All of the centerfielders' numbers seem to bounce around like this. The bottom line is that JBJ's throwing last year seemed to suck pretty badly. Even Brett Gardner's time in CF in new york he had one year with a % successful taking extra bases against him worse than JBJ last year. Hicks hasn't had one that bad.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
47,004

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
47,004
Also I thought earlier that the Mets would be an ideal spot for JBJ, but it turns out they are looking for a RHH CF if possible because all of their other outfielders hit lefty.
 

Gold Dust Twin 19

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2001
53
The only problem is that he played 42 games after his return to Portland on July 15th and if you subtract two games, August 2nd at Bowie and August 9th vs. Akron, his numbers for that period drop substantially. He went 6 for 9 with 3 doubles and 2 home runs, 15 total bases, 6 RBI, and a walk in them. Taking that into consideration, his numbers for that period would drop from:

.250/.325/.486/.811 to
.222/.301/.401/.708
I'm curious why one would remove two good games, but not take away two bad games? Not being sarcastic, I'm just unsure of the reasoning behind it.
 

Byrdbrain

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,507
He played those 2 games, you can’t just randomly remove games good or bad for no reason.
They don’t make up for the other 40 they are part of the entire sample.
 

Gold Dust Twin 19

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2001
53
Why? Because the remaining 40 games of the 42 were played at .222/.301/.401/.708 pace. Do you really think that two hot games in 42 games makes up for those 40 games?
I'm sure he had a couple really bad games that are below the .222 line, right? I'm just curious why two really bad games are not removed also, that would seem more fair. But to be honest, I don't really care that much, just genuinely curious.