Mike Napoli Back in the Fold - 2/32

Montana Fan

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Oct 18, 2000
8,066
Twin Bridges, Mt.
syoo8 said:
Steamer projects JBJ's triple slash line as: .256/.337/.402 for a .739 OPS.  With good D and good plate discipline, he'll be fine next year.  
 
In six years the Yankees can give him a 9 year contract.
 
Yup, plug him into the 9 hole and give him til Memorial Day or ASB to show what he can do.  Cherington said today that he's not seeking a backup CF'er which I took to mean he already has one in Victorino.
 

curly2

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2003
3,990
Montana Fan said:
 
Yup, plug him into the 9 hole and give him til Memorial Day or ASB to show what he can do.  Cherington said today that he's not seeking a backup CF'er which I took to mean he already has one in Victorino.
It would be nice if Kalish is healthy and willing to be insurance at Pawtucket. But he might have a better chance to get MLB playing time somewhere like Pittsburgh, which needs someone to platoon with Jose Tabata until Gregory Polanco is ready.
 

Manramsclan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
2,608
No Guru No Method said:
Now is the off-season of my content, made glorious summer by these sons of George
Fixt

The Napoli signing leaves no major holes positonally on the roster. I am very comfortable rolling with Xander at SS, JBJ in CF and the rest of the lineup intact. I would not have been comfortable had Napoli not signed even though I have some faith in Carp. RH power was a need and it's filled.

If no more moves are made it will be interesting to see how the order is constructed. I'd be ok with Gomes/Nava as the .OBP platoon leadoff machine, leaving Xander and JBJ at the bottom of the lineup until they get their feet under them.
 

Kid T

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
793
San Francisco
knucklecup said:
While I feel this way as well, what does the story imply about Saltalamacchia or Ellsbury as teammates / key cogs on the 2013 roster? Why didn't teammates go out of their way to influence the front office to sign them?
Maybe they didn't think they had to.  I remember reading stories about how Pedrioa was texting Ellsbury and putting pressure on him to sign with Boston.  Also remember an article saying that the players were "floored" (or something to that effect) when they heard Ellsbury signed with the Yankees.  Maybe that signing precipitated the reaction for Napoli. 
 
syoo8 said:
Steamer projects JBJ's triple slash line as: .256/.337/.402 for a .739 OPS.  With good D and good plate discipline, he'll be fine next year.  
 
In six years the Yankees can give him a 9 year contract.
 
I'm high on JBJ also.  I think at worst, he'll be a very good CF'er next year with league-average OBP.  My only concern with him is that he didn't seem to adjust to the inside fastball last year.  I wonder if he is still as vulnerable to the pitch - I'm sure he will be tested early and often. 
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
My initial reaction was that 16 million was too high of an AAV, but the 2 years means it's like the contracts they signed last winter.  Higher AAV, lower years to minimize the risk.  Plus, Fangraphs has him pegged at 19.2 last year.  When we take into account that their value metric uses WAR and needs to be regressed a bit and that Napoli had a 13.3 UZR/150 last year as part of that WAR, that probably means his value for last year comes up something a little lower than 16 million, but not much lower so this contract is probably right on the nose.
 
Also, having the beard back in Boston will be awesome.  I'm curious to see if he'll keep letting it go or finally start trimming it.
 

pjheff

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2003
469
curly2 said:
It would be nice if Kalish is healthy and willing to be insurance at Pawtucket.
Kalish seems more likely to be selling insurance in Pawtucket at this point.
 

seantoo

toots his own horn award winner
Jul 16, 2005
1,308
Southern NH, from Watertown, MA
syoo8 said:
Steamer projects JBJ's triple slash line as: .256/.337/.402 for a .739 OPS.  With good D and good plate discipline, he'll be fine next year.  
 
In six years the Yankees can give him a 9 year contract.
I have no problem with those projections. He should be able to do that and with his command of the strike zone, he MAY be able to do better than that. The problem is the difference between Ells #'s and added value running the bases that will not be replaced this year. I have no problem letting Ellsbury walk for the silly deal he landed. I'm merely pointing out that the hardest free agent to replace for the Sox is/was Jacoby Ellsbury. Using WAR 2013 #s, ESPN, not as an end all be all but merely a barometer to compare one free agent to another.
Ellsbury was 5.8 (second highest of career)-4th best at CF (third best on the team right behind Victorino). Career best was 8.0-2011
Napoli was 4.1  (second highest of career) -7th best at 1st. Career best was 5.3 -2011
Drew was 3.1 (second highest of career)-10 best at SS. Career best was 3.7-2010
Salty was 2.9 (Career best)-tied for 9th best at C.
 
Edits: typo's ect.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
10,389
Somewhere
Interestingly, the projection systems don't love Bradley's defense as much as fans-eye reports do.

Because of that, he looks to be in the A.J. Pollock, Aaron Hicks range, despite the fact that he is projected to outhit both those guys.
 

Joshv02

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,633
Brookline
Devizier said:
Interestingly, the projection systems don't love Bradley's defense as much as fans-eye reports do.
Because of that, he looks to be in the A.J. Pollock, Aaron Hicks range, despite the fact that he is projected to outhit both those guys.
Projection systems have no data to make any projections about Bradley's defense.  Minor league pbp data generally isn't used (and is unreliable) and there is no data from the major leagues to really make any projection.  So, he'd basically be regressed to zero.  
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
10,389
Somewhere
Joshv02 said:
Projection systems have no data to make any projections about Bradley's defense.  Minor league pbp data generally isn't used (and is unreliable) and there is no data from the major leagues to really make any projection.  So, he'd basically be regressed to zero.  
 
Which is why OLIVER has Hicks as a projected +10.7 and Bradley as a +5.0?
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,383
The wrong side of the bridge....
Joshv02 said:
Projection systems have no data to make any projections about Bradley's defense.  Minor league pbp data generally isn't used (and is unreliable) and there is no data from the major leagues to really make any projection.  So, he'd basically be regressed to zero.  
 
It's interesting to look at the differences between the two systems currently showing on FG. Steamer is pretty clearly doing exactly what you say--taking what data there is, and regressing it pretty ferociously. Oliver, though, is making defensive projections that don't seem directly correlated to the ML UZR or DRS numbers to date, regressed or otherwise. In the absence of further explanation it sure looks like they're projecting based on reputation. Or else on the basis of minor league numbers of some kind.
 

Joshv02

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,633
Brookline
Devizier said:
 
Which is why OLIVER has Hicks as a projected +10.7 and Bradley as a +5.0?
Want to walk me through the math?
 
Savin Hillbilly said:
 
It's interesting to look at the differences between the two systems currently showing on FG. Steamer is pretty clearly doing exactly what you say--taking what data there is, and regressing it pretty ferociously. Oliver, though, is making defensive projections that don't seem directly correlated to the ML UZR or DRS numbers to date, regressed or otherwise. In the absence of further explanation it sure looks like they're projecting based on reputation. Or else on the basis of minor league numbers of some kind.
Yeah, Steamer is straight forward Marcel-like.  But, Oliver uses the old HBT's guys ratings changed into runs, I think.  The way the intro articles read a few years ago it was basically just a set of opinions by the dude who created it.  I have to admit, I haven't paid attention to it since reading about it years ago, so I didn't realize it still existed.  I'd pay more attention to something like Tango's scouting report data.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
13,364
Manramsclan said:
Fixt

The Napoli signing leaves no major holes positonally on the roster. I am very comfortable rolling with Xander at SS, JBJ in CF and the rest of the lineup intact. I would not have been comfortable had Napoli not signed even though I have some faith in Carp. RH power was a need and it's filled.

If no more moves are made it will be interesting to see how the order is constructed. I'd be ok with Gomes/Nava as the .OBP platoon leadoff machine, leaving Xander and JBJ at the bottom of the lineup until they get their feet under them.
 
Not sure where else to put this, but since you mentioned X and the battting order . . . . .
 
The last time the Sox had a rookie stud SS who had gotten his feet wet at the end of the previous season, they batted him leadoff the entire season:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=garcino01&year=1997&t=b
 
I think I recall a convoluted-sounding Jimy Williams explanation of why there was *less* pressure batting leadoff. (Then again, I liked Jimy . . . .)
 
So why not Bogaerts batting leadoff?
 

Kilgore A. Trout

likes his pussy outside
May 30, 2009
17,395
in my pants...
joe dokes said:
 
So why not Bogaerts batting leadoff?
 
I would be okay with this.  Whatever pressure he might feel batting leadoff can't be more than starting in the World Series.
 
EDIT:  That being said, I don't know if I see him as a leadoff hitter. 
 

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
Jun 27, 2006
31,779
Haiku
joe dokes said:
 
Not sure where else to put this, but since you mentioned X and the battting order . . . . .
 
The last time the Sox had a rookie stud SS who had gotten his feet wet at the end of the previous season, they batted him leadoff the entire season:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=garcino01&year=1997&t=b
 
I think I recall a convoluted-sounding Jimy Williams explanation of why there was *less* pressure batting leadoff. (Then again, I liked Jimy . . . .)
 
So why not Bogaerts batting leadoff?
 
He has one of the prerequisites for leadoff: a willingness to leave the bat on his shoulder, even on close pitches. It helps that he has power enough to make the starter wary of throwing strikes.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,779
La Mancha.
According to the MLB Red Sox page, he's not yet on the 40-man.  By when do they need to add him?  Or, if they already have, is there a better place to keep up on the roster?