Edes: JBJ down to AAA, Betts up
- Thread starter RedOctober3829
- Start date
- Status
:bravo: Outstanding synopsis someoneanywhere, but that's typical of your excellent contributions..
There just isn't time to process all the advice when things are right, never mind when they're wrong. Start over, find your swing again and come back. I believe in the kid and unlike many here, am nowhere close to dispatching him elsewhere. That glove is so exceptional that waiting for his offensive maturity is a worthwhile exercise.
There just isn't time to process all the advice when things are right, never mind when they're wrong. Start over, find your swing again and come back. I believe in the kid and unlike many here, am nowhere close to dispatching him elsewhere. That glove is so exceptional that waiting for his offensive maturity is a worthwhile exercise.
Great stuff indeed. Thanks for sharing this perspective.
I've never played sports at any advanced level, but many of us have had a time where we've been stuck in the weeds on the job or in college. From the outside or in hindsight the solutions seem so obvious but wheh you're in the middle of the morass it can be so frustrating. You can so easily begin to feel that the struggle is never going to end. I can't help but wonder if the end of the season might be just what Jackie needs - an opportunity to stop struggling in front of the entire baseball world, clear his head and start fresh. If he's had the confidence to climb to the top of the minor league ladder, he should have the mental wherewithal to be able to see his position more clearly and hopefully find an approach to make the necessary adjustments. I'm certainly rooting for him.
I've never played sports at any advanced level, but many of us have had a time where we've been stuck in the weeds on the job or in college. From the outside or in hindsight the solutions seem so obvious but wheh you're in the middle of the morass it can be so frustrating. You can so easily begin to feel that the struggle is never going to end. I can't help but wonder if the end of the season might be just what Jackie needs - an opportunity to stop struggling in front of the entire baseball world, clear his head and start fresh. If he's had the confidence to climb to the top of the minor league ladder, he should have the mental wherewithal to be able to see his position more clearly and hopefully find an approach to make the necessary adjustments. I'm certainly rooting for him.
The only thing I would nitpick, a bit (and it gets into his frustration I am sure) is that he did have success against AAA pitchers last year. I know that someoneanywhere does not feel this way, but I have gotten the vibe from many other posts that JBJ's 2013 was something of a disappointment too. But, he did manage to hit 275/374/469 last year in 374 AAA PA's, after only 615 PA in his previous professional career. And while he didn't set the world on fire in his September callup, he also wasn't overmatched. (Yes, I know there is a larger mix of competition in September on top of the regular sample size issues).
As for him being traded, the only reason I would endorse such is that Farrell himself doesn't seem to believe in him, and because he is now redundant with Castillo. I like JBJ more than most, I think that is apparent. I'm not a huge fan of the money they gave Castillo, but what's done is done. If Castillo is as good in CF as he would have to be to justify the investment, then he'll play there (obviously there is some question as to whether he will be worth that, and while I seem to be implying that Castillo be given the job just because of the contract, I don't mean that I would do that, just that it seems to be the Red Sox path right now). So now you are asking JBJ really, to be even better with the bat because you are moving him down the defensive spectrum.
I don't really know. I do know that the whole business with all of the coaching and the struggles and everything else is kind of a problem. As a team that is trying to develop young talent it is at least somewhat concerning that their top bats have all receded heavily at the major league level (even BROCK HOLT has a 583 OPS in his last 28 days). It's not like they have successfully molded a generation of hitters and then ran into a problem with JBJ. That said, young players all around the league are struggling, so it also isn't specific to the Red Sox. There are quotes about how much tougher the jump from AAA to the majors is getting all around the league. The big question from a development standpoint is going to be how you develop major league players if AAA isn't challenging enough to prepare them for the majors. Understanding, of course, that this could be a short-term correction based on available talent, etc.
As for him being traded, the only reason I would endorse such is that Farrell himself doesn't seem to believe in him, and because he is now redundant with Castillo. I like JBJ more than most, I think that is apparent. I'm not a huge fan of the money they gave Castillo, but what's done is done. If Castillo is as good in CF as he would have to be to justify the investment, then he'll play there (obviously there is some question as to whether he will be worth that, and while I seem to be implying that Castillo be given the job just because of the contract, I don't mean that I would do that, just that it seems to be the Red Sox path right now). So now you are asking JBJ really, to be even better with the bat because you are moving him down the defensive spectrum.
I don't really know. I do know that the whole business with all of the coaching and the struggles and everything else is kind of a problem. As a team that is trying to develop young talent it is at least somewhat concerning that their top bats have all receded heavily at the major league level (even BROCK HOLT has a 583 OPS in his last 28 days). It's not like they have successfully molded a generation of hitters and then ran into a problem with JBJ. That said, young players all around the league are struggling, so it also isn't specific to the Red Sox. There are quotes about how much tougher the jump from AAA to the majors is getting all around the league. The big question from a development standpoint is going to be how you develop major league players if AAA isn't challenging enough to prepare them for the majors. Understanding, of course, that this could be a short-term correction based on available talent, etc.
I don't really know why there has to be either a camp where JBJ is shipped out of town or he is given the keys to a starting position eventually. There is value in the majors for a Darren Lewis-type player. You don't want to pay that kind of player a lot of money, but on pre-arb salaries, using a great defender and solid pinch runner as your 5th OF has real value. Now, there's clearly a logjam for that 5th OF spot with Betts and Holt (and perhaps Victorino next year), but JBJ seems to be the worst candidate to trade to clear up that space, given how far his stock has fallen of late.
Well, it's mostly because if you work at it you can find the Darren Lewis among AAAA players and the waiver wire. I think you are overestimating the value here. I would probably rather whatever JBJ would get in trade this off-season than 5 years of Darren Lewis. At least, that's my answer.
Bradley seems like a good deep depth candidate to ride the shuttle in 2015.
He's established this year that even with a minimal offensive contribution, his glove makes him at least a replacement level OF. fWAR and bWAR both have him at 1.5 for the season. That's good. If an OF gets hurt, it will be great to have a player with that kind of floor to call on, especially with the defensive demands of the Sox' home park.
His minor league track record with the bat tells us that this is a player with tremendous upside. And the fact that he's scuffling so hard in AAA right now suggests that if/when he gets his plate approach back together, we'll know.
I wouldn't trade him while he still has options, unless the trading partner accepts a valuation close to the top-50 prospect he was entering the year.
He's established this year that even with a minimal offensive contribution, his glove makes him at least a replacement level OF. fWAR and bWAR both have him at 1.5 for the season. That's good. If an OF gets hurt, it will be great to have a player with that kind of floor to call on, especially with the defensive demands of the Sox' home park.
His minor league track record with the bat tells us that this is a player with tremendous upside. And the fact that he's scuffling so hard in AAA right now suggests that if/when he gets his plate approach back together, we'll know.
I wouldn't trade him while he still has options, unless the trading partner accepts a valuation close to the top-50 prospect he was entering the year.
The main thrust of my point is that if Castillo is your 600 PA per year CF, that detracts so much of JBJ's value to this team (not in general) that you can probably extract more value by trading him. The core reason being that there is only one CF to play and accumulate that value.
Now, of course, the counterargument I'll make to myself is that the gap between CF and RF offensively is not as big as it has been at other times, and that the Red Sox have that big RF to patrol, so they can get some more value out of JBJ that way.
Now, of course, the counterargument I'll make to myself is that the gap between CF and RF offensively is not as big as it has been at other times, and that the Red Sox have that big RF to patrol, so they can get some more value out of JBJ that way.
If JBJ is MLB-ready, wouldn't the optimal alignment be JBJ in CF and Castillo in RF? Or is Castillo's arm not viable there? Does the investment in Castillo require that he play the more glamorous position?
If Castillo plays up to his more optimistic projections, there's nothing that prevents him from playing RF, or even LF for the Red Sox. One interpretation of the upside of Castillo might be something like Daniel Nava's overall career line (.270 / .350 / .400), but with significantly better defense and baserunning, that's also known as "Shane Victorino." You could more than live with that in RF in Fenway, or even put up with it in LF if you have power from other positions, like a fully adjusted Xander Bogaerts at SS and a living up to the hype Blake Swihart at C.
Doesn't Castillo have surprising pop for a guy his size? Obviously there's a difference between hitting in an exhibition in front of scouts and game-usable power, but I wouldn't be terribly surprised if peak Castillo hit for more power than even 2013 Nava.
If JBJ and Castillo can become 750 OPS hitters and Mookie can get into the 850 OPS territory, is that enough OF offense to put them all out there? The Sox could very reasonably let Cespedes walk after next year and shift Craig to 1B/DH if he ever gets back to his previous levels.
O Captain! My Captain! said:
I don't see why. He sold himself throughout this process as a multi-position talent, after all. He seems like Betts in that he's a good enough athlete that he should be serviceable almost anywhere, but probably not extraordinary anywhere. He's going to earn that contract (or not) with his offense.
As I've said before, I think playing JBJ in RF would be absurd--you could do it, and he'd handle the position fine, but it's a colossal waste of a generational talent at the more difficult position. If he's in the lineup at all, he should be in center.
Is it still true that you want the better fielder in CF in Fenway Park? Even with the Wall taking away a lot of opportunities in LCF? Perhaps you could play JBJ in RF at Fenway Park and in CF on the road.Savin Hillbilly said:
Jack Rabbit Slim said:
I think the problem with this is that David Ortiz is old.
Which is to say, if the infield does its job, I'm fine with that outfield but we'd need to either retain Napoli or have Papi still producing for me to feel comfortable letting Cespedes go.
We could have Betts, Bradley, Castillo, Cespedes all get 120 starts or so.
I'd say that depends on how deficient a LF you want to get away with. Bradley has ranged pretty damn far into LF at times this year for example, likely at least in part due to how many games he's played with Gomes/Craig/Nava in LF, none of whom are good range candidates.Plympton91 said:
In today's MLB? That woudl be pretty awesome I'd think. Obviously that depends on distribution, SBs, etc. but if it's a case where JBJ is a .280/.370/.380 guy with 15 SBs on 20 or fewer attempts, Castillo is a .290/.350/.400 guy with 30 steals on 40 or fewer attempts, and Betts is a .300/.380/.470 guy with 20 steals on 30 or fewer attempts that isn't just good enough, that would be an elite OF offensively and a swarm of locusts defensively.Jack Rabbit Slim said:
I don't think the Sox would feel that way. They've paid >$13M a year for the majority of this decade to staff RF. They view it as a high dollar position, at least in Fenway. Castillo is supposed to have a strong arm (but then so is everyone from Cuba). I could definitely see him in RF long term should Bradley put it together. He's a CF for now because the rest of the guys log jamming the OF can't play CF for various reasons (other than Betts). Vic, Cespedes, Craig, and Nava fill up the corners so Castillo's value in 2015 is in center. The real question is how that value adds up in 2016 when Vic is definitely off the books, Cespedes might not have been retained, and Bradley/Betts will have had some level of additional resolution on their careers to factor in to the equation.O Captain! My Captain! said:
Personally though, I really don't get why they aren't talking about Castillo at 3B. He reportedly played there in Cuba (as well as 2B), he's supposedly an amazing athlete with a strong arm. He was supposed to have shown solid infield skills during his workouts. 3B isn't much of a downgrade compared to CF in terms of offensive value in MLB today and it would let Betts and Bradley fight over 2B, reducing some of the OF log jam along the way.
Rasputin said:
While that also seems plausible, the question that comes to my mind is just how good of an offensive player is Cespedes? While the power is nice, his low OBP 750 OPS doesn't scream Papi/Nap replacement to me. If the young OF's work out as I posited earlier, it seems to me the 15-18M AAV that it would require to resign Cespedes would be better spent on a less defensively adept slugger to man DH. Cespedes is a good resign if they still need a LF but I think his bat accents the middle of the order rather than being truly a part of it.
As to Drek's comment, do you think the numbers I provided are unreasonable expectations? I know JBJ looks like a long shot right now, but just looking at their success in other levels/countries, those numbers don't strike me as asking for too much.
Mookie with an .850 OPS and the 30+ steals at a high percentage in CF/RF is probably one of the 10 most valuable positional players in the league.
Maybe he can do it, but that's optimistic. I'm all in on Mookie though, so I fully expect it.
Maybe he can do it, but that's optimistic. I'm all in on Mookie though, so I fully expect it.
With Cespedes, Castillo, Betts and Vic all ahead of him I hope he can reside in Pawtucket for at least the first 60 games and hopefully longer. My read on Someone's post is that he needs a big reset and I don't see that happening in the majors. And he's called up today. <br />
<br />
Who's up for a Castillo, JBJ, Betts game? That'd be must see TV.
<br />
Who's up for a Castillo, JBJ, Betts game? That'd be must see TV.
Maybe I am just optimistic, but Betts has put up a near 800 OPS (SSS) at 21 years old against major league pitchers at full strength (rather than in early spring) in the middle of fighting for the playoffs. He has also put up OPS's over 900 at nearly every stop despite being very young and the Oliver projections for 2016 are .365/.465/.830. I know he still has to prove it long term in the majors but 850 doesn't seem like much of a leap, plus we have all of 2015 to watch Betts/JBJ/Castillo before making a decision on Cespedes.
PS - I don't know anything about Betts' base stealing ability so I didn't say anything about 30+ SB, and he would be playing LF in this scenario (Castillo with the better arm in RF)
He has elite stealing ability based on his minor league numbers. I don't need convincing, I think he's our number one piece. Still, the player you describe is like a 135-145 OPS+ bat.
Plympton91 said:
The wall reduces range requirements, perhaps, but increases judgment/coordination requirements. And the triangle is a unique and tricky feature. It's a field that calls for skills and instincts--which JBJ has in abundance--as well as speed. So I would say you could make an argument for putting the faster outfielder in RF in Fenway, but the better OF probably belongs in CF, perhaps even more so in Fenway than most places.
Besides, you really want your best defender in CF on the road .. And you don't want to be flipping fielders back and forth depending on H/RSavin Hillbilly said:
I'll echo that this is a great post and I hope you are right. But the other possibility - and I'll be the first to admit that I've not watched Bradley much at all and even if I did, I wouldn't bring any kind of expertise to this endeavor - is that Bradley has a hole in his swing that hasn't been exploited up until now because pitchers either weren't good enough or didn't face him enough times as he didn't stay in any league for long. I say this for a couple of reasons. (1) He's always had good strike zone recognition and it doesn't seem like he would lose that this fast. (2) As of early August, he had something like 80+ strikeouts swinging and only 18 looking. (3) It was mentioned early in the year that he kept missing on inside fastballs; he made an adjustment; but then was getting beaten on outside fastballs. (4) There apparently is a book on him as he is OPS'ng .593 versus TOR; .574 vs. TB; and .259 vs. NYY, the three teams he has faced the most. (5) A few people have mentioned that he has a hole or holes in his swing.
Again, hopefully I am wrong and he can keep his swing and adjust his approach and be the guy everyone thought he was going to be. Or maybe if he just changed his approach with two strikes and just made contact, his results would be much better. It's just strange how many strikeouts he has had.
If there was a book on JBJ, it got written really fast. He didn't have the WMB-esque hot period before pitchers figured out how to pitch him, and whatever adjustments he made didn't serve him very well before pitchers adjusted back. I'm not sure you could even Eric Van this up and find a short period where JBJ hit very well, unless you included the tiniest of sample sizes. Ultimately whatever swing problems he has or had don't seem to be problems of adjustment, because there aren't any signals that any of these adjustments matter very much. Unless you believe his swing just absolutely doesn't translate between AAA and MLB, the problem is way more in his head than in his arms.
Jimy Williams used to platoon Darren Lewis. He'd play CF against RH with Trot Nixon in RF and then play Lewis in RF against left handers with Damon Buford in CF.BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
And your point is? Jimy Williams was good at running pitching staffs .. But his greatest deficiency was lineup construction. And you're citing this as something to be emulated?Plympton91 said:
Don't you think young players like JBJ or Castillo will have enough to do learning to be major leaguers without having to learn two positions as well?
That's not really true and EV has nothing to do with it. It's been widely reported that JBJ opened up his stance on July and in the 19 games following, he's hit .308/.357/.369 in 70 plate appearances and during that entire stretch, Bradley only struck out nine times, or 13 percent of the time.
http://www.overthemonster.com/2014/7/15/5897997/jackie-bradley-red-sox
Again, I hope you and SA are right that JBJ can make the necessary adjustments and succeed because I amrooting for him.
I am sorry this may not be the place but is there any hope for Allen Craig? He looks fucking awful at the plate and it's not much better in the field. Is there any reason to be optimistic about him other than pie in the sky reasoning? That trade looked like a dumpster fire from the start and nothing since has made it look better
tbb345 said:
C'mon, lets try and put a little bit of effort into our posts. There is an Allen Craig thread that is on the first page of the main board.
Allen Craig Thread
A college coach of mine used to have a saying that "you can't fix the wheels on the bus while you are driving the bus". This is kind of my take on JBJ. While he is caught up in the season it's going to be hard for him to make the adjustments, especially the mental ones. He needs to pull that bus over this offseason and reset his mental approach. Some time off does wonders for your mental state after struggles.
Very much agree. Maybe we can send WMB, JBJ, Craig, Bogaerts, and Koji on a bus trip with Clay driving. That would make for one helluva gif.Rsox4life said:
Firebrand had interesting post on JBJ - trying to see how many position players since 1901 had on-base percentage and slugging percentage less than .300 in their first 500 major league plate appearances andstill made an All-Star roster at some point in their careers.
As you can imagine, the list is pretty short but there are some interesting names.
List here: http://firebrandal.com/baltimore-orioles/jackie-brady-jr.html
As you can imagine, the list is pretty short but there are some interesting names.
List here: http://firebrandal.com/baltimore-orioles/jackie-brady-jr.html
Hee Sox Choi said:
No. It was pretty commonly assumed that he was, but calling it knowledge is putting way too much faith in assumptions.
Which is to say, knowledge is justified true belief. The belief that Anderson roided up, regardless of truth, has not been justified.
1. Supposedly, but then every jacked up guy in the 90's is accused of being a 'roider. If using juice is what got Anderson to hit 50 HRs however, it begs the question why he would have suddenly stopped at a time when MLB wasn't doing any real testing for it. His big single year power surge isn't wildly out of line with what has happened throughout baseball. Hell, Ellsbury's big 2011 season is pretty comparable in that he went from a single digit HR guy to 34, whereas Anderson was a 15-20 HR guy who jumped to 50.Hee Sox Choi said:
2. Also, it isn't the real point to the comparison, because Anderson was a valuable player for four years before that with slash lines pretty comparable to what Bradley was projected as being (though likely with more steals, but really only by a wide margin in his big 1992 campaign), .260/.360/.420 or thereabouts with 15-20 HRs and 15-20 steals.
Brady Anderson took over 1000 MLB ABs and his 7th year of being called up to the majors before breaking through, so there is a legitimate comparison to be made between him and Bradley.
That said, if Bradley takes >1000 ABs and 7 years to break through he almost definitely won't break through with the Sox when it does happen.
Who says he stopped? Brady was injured most of the next two seasons then bounced back with 24 HR's at age 35.Drek717 said:
Suggesting he wasn't a user simply because he wasn't convicted in a court of law reminds me of the old Bonds debates (where's the proof?!?!?). No, Brady wasn't proven guilty.....I suppose Ray Lewis wasn't either.
Yeah, and when did you stop beating your wife, HRB?
I mean, I bet he probably did. But if what you're arguing for is relying on, for instance, your ability to read circumstantial information and draw a sound conclusion on it, I'll stick to my comfortable "I don't really know either way without any actual evidence." Admitting you don't/ can't actually know something either way is not reflective of an inability to understand a situation.
I mean, I bet he probably did. But if what you're arguing for is relying on, for instance, your ability to read circumstantial information and draw a sound conclusion on it, I'll stick to my comfortable "I don't really know either way without any actual evidence." Admitting you don't/ can't actually know something either way is not reflective of an inability to understand a situation.
Personal attack? Very classy sir.JohntheBaptist said:
You must have defended Bonds, McGuire, OJ, et al. Was Aaron home with his fiancé that night too? Gee whiz.
wade boggs chicken dinner said:
He is almost Ozzie Smith good in the CF. Great range, amazing instincts, and a ridiculous arm.
He has consistently claimed that it was good nutrition and "massive" amounts of creatine. I remember back at the time him throwing that out there and thinking I got to get some of that. I don't think anyone not died in Oriole orange has taken that claim at face value after the full extent of steroid usage in MLB came out, but there has never been anything directly or indirectly linking him to roids.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/sun-magazine/bs-sm-brady-anderson-profile-20120324,0,5234789.story?page=3
HomeRunBaker said:
Wait, where did I attack you personally? Did you not read where I said "I bet he used"? I was advocating not pretending like you know something definitive without any kind of evidence--unless I'm mistaken there was absolutely evidence where Bonds, McGwire, Simpson and Hernandez are/ were concerned. I'm not saying Brady Anderson did use steroids, but I'm also not saying he didn't. I'm saying "of course I don't know," because of course I don't know. Neither do you.
JohntheBaptist said:
I inferred that he was unfamiliar with the "have you stopped beating your wife?" trope and took it literally.
Wife comment. I thought that was meant to be literally. If not my apologies.JohntheBaptist said:
Fair enough--apologies if that's how you took it HRB, that would be way over the line and never somewhere I'd go on here. Just a rhetorical device that, frankly, reading over again, not sure it really applies all that well anyway.Savin Hillbilly said:
In any event, on the steroid thing, to each his own. I'd probably guess BA used if I had to put money down, for instance, so it's a moot point. Apologies for the hijack.
- Status