September callups (Travis, Swihart, Elias, Maddox, LIN, Marrero, Velazquez)

Status
Not open for further replies.

The Gray Eagle

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
16,725
Brentz's spot was basically taken by Rajai Davis. When Bradley got hurt, they decided they'd rather have a pinch-runner type who can cover CF than a RH corner OF with power.

I want Brentz up too, but when they picked up Davis, that took his spot and that's just how it's going to be.

Young is a popular, respected veteran who they aren't just going to cut with a few weeks left in the season.
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
Brentz's spot was basically taken by Rajai Davis. When Bradley got hurt, they decided they'd rather have a pinch-runner type who can cover CF than a RH corner OF with power.

I want Brentz up too, but when they picked up Davis, that took his spot and that's just how it's going to be.

Young is a popular, respected veteran who they aren't just going to cut with a few weeks left in the season.
It shouldn't have taken his spot. Right now we see that Davis can't hit. Let him play defense and pinch run in the 9th. But in some 9-0 or 8-1 games etc. Davis is not needed. As for CY- Young can be "respected" while the Sox "try out" BB. You don't need to cut CY. You should see what BB can do. I'm not talking about "cutting" CY in 2017. I'm talking about possibly letting the better hitter vs lefties step up to the plate.

BB has hit lefties and he has power and he had a better year than Travis.
 

Cuzittt

Bouncing with Anger
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2001
20,301
Sinister Funkhouse #17
Who gets moved off the 40-man roster for Brentz? Until you answer that, your point is moot.

In order for Brentz to be called up, someone needs to be moved off the roster. Which is why Brentz isn't up. It is really that simple and is not that baffling.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using SoSH mobile app
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
It shouldn't have taken his spot. Right now we see that Davis can't hit. Let him play defense and pinch run in the 9th. But in some 9-0 or 8-1 games etc. Davis is not needed. As for CY- Young can be "respected" while the Sox "try out" BB. You don't need to cut CY. You should see what BB can do. I'm not talking about "cutting" CY in 2017. I'm talking about possibly letting the better hitter vs lefties step up to the plate.

BB has hit lefties and he has power and he had a better year than Travis.
In some 9-0 and 8-1 games you don't need Brentz or Davis. You can "try out" Brentz in spring training.

Who gets moved off the 40-man roster for Brentz? Until you answer that, your point is moot.

In order for Brentz to be called up, someone needs to be moved off the roster. Which is why Brentz isn't up. It is really that simple and is not that baffling.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using SoSH mobile app
He ignored that question last time it was raised. My guess from his posts is he'd but Young, but as has been mentioned here, you don't cut a veteran in September to make room for a minor leaguer to "try him out" in blow outs.
 

Todd Benzinger

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2001
4,400
So Ill
There are two questions. First and foremost, who do you cut from the 40?

Secondly, if the goal is to win a few extra games with homers against lefties from BB... Who does he PH for or send to the bench?

Does anyone really think the Sox would be better off benching Benny or JBJ for Brentz vs a LHP starter? If so, you are confused.

Who does he PH for against a lefty RHP? JBJ, Moreland or Leon? But guess what, it's September... If BB homering off a LHP in a late inning PH AB is a potential game winner, the opposing manager probably has 4 extra RHP he can call in to neutralize BB's (imaginary automatic) homer against the LH reliever.

Sent from my Moto G Play using SoSH mobile app
 
Last edited:

jasail

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,189
Boston
Who gets moved off the 40-man roster for Brentz? Until you answer that, your point is moot.

In order for Brentz to be called up, someone needs to be moved off the roster. Which is why Brentz isn't up. It is really that simple and is not that baffling.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using SoSH mobile app
I'm not advocating bringing up Brentz, but Boyer is a fairly decent candidate to move off the 40 man roster. He's a 36 year old journeyman with a 4+ ERA and behind nearly everyone in a bullpen where there is a lot of fringe depth. With Kelly, Barnes, Hembree, Maddox, Workman and Velazquez he's not going to be missed. So, they can make room if they want to.

I think the bigger issue is that JBJ is actually playing really well against LHP this year. If both he and Benny were struggling against LHP, it may be different. But with only Benny struggling against LHP, I think that they prefer to (1) give the young player the opportunity to work through his struggles; and (2) use the respected veteran in the platoon role and keep him sharp for the post-season.

Plus, ABs for Brentz would likely be very limited. So, why not end his season on a good note, give him some time off before the AFL and see if he can't come into ST and win the CY spot. IMO, the decision has more to do with their plan for the player and the roster construction than it does with the value of the 40th man.
 
Last edited:

Cuzittt

Bouncing with Anger
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2001
20,301
Sinister Funkhouse #17
Brentz isn't going to the AFL and if not added to the 40-man, will be a minor league Free Agent. The Red Sox may very well feel that he is NOT in their plans for next year... which would be very similar to Chris Marrero last season.

Additionally, Boyer is still in the same older veteran category as Young. And has pitched in 28 games despite injuries. He may not be great... he may even be disposable. But, he's no Panda and frankly, that's who you have to be to be moved off the roster as a veteran on a league leading team in September.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using SoSH mobile app
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
Can Brian Johnson could be DL'd? Secondly, Ben Taylor. What's Ben's long term outlook? A 6th inning reliever?

Point 2, I would have called up BB in early September. So in some of the blowouts he could have played after the game was decided to see how he is. In the 19 inning game he could have pinch hit instead of Travis Even recently in the blowout games he could have played or pinch hit. Hanley Ramirez since early September could use some rest. Hanley Ramirez is hitting .191/309/415 vs lefties.

If any of these blowouts and pinch hit games he shows something - absolutely I'd give him a look while giving Hanley a rest. What do you think the problem is with Hanley? Just not very good any more or is hurt? Either way - if BB shows something in pinch hit and in blowouts, why not give him a shot? No way should Hanley run the table unless he is hot.

Third-- the question you say about benching JBJ or Beni -- and ask "Does anyone really think the Sox would be better off benching Benny or JBJ for Brentz vs a LHP starter? " Can you please offer who has made the red sox better with these two guys benched? Certainly you can't say CY has made them better, can you? If so, you are confused (other than an extremely rare game. VS lefties, CY has been a disaster.).

4th-- can you please provide the quote where I said BB is an automatic homer machine?
 
Last edited:

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,252
honestly, it smells like to me internally they think Brentz is a AAAA player and there's still a major hole in his swing to be exploited by ML pitching.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
2 Options not sure if Brian Johnson could be DL'd. Secondly, Ben Taylor. What's Ben's long term outlook? A 6th inning reliever?
Can't put a guy on the 60-day DL if he's not injured. Brian Johnson finished Pawtucket's season healthy and is slated to go to the Arizona Fall League.

Ben Taylor is a middle reliever who has been decent in his brief stints in the big leagues and he has two minor league options left. Every team needs pitchers who can be stashed in the minors and ride the shuttle during the year. Not every player needs to have a super high ceiling to provide value to a team.

O for two so far in finding a roster casualty useless enough to sacrifice for Brentz.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
Can't put a guy on the 60-day DL if he's not injured. Brian Johnson finished Pawtucket's season healthy and is slated to go to the Arizona Fall League.

Ben Taylor is a middle reliever who has been decent in his brief stints in the big leagues and he has two minor league options left. Every team needs pitchers who can be stashed in the minors and ride the shuttle during the year. Not every player needs to have a super high ceiling to provide value to a team.

O for two so far in finding a roster casualty useless enough to sacrifice for Brentz.
Honestly, the only two good options, now that Martin-for-Smith is done, would be Young -- who you'd be banking on Brent directly replacing --or Holt -- who you'd be banking on Lin directly replacing.

I'm not saying it would be a bad decision, and in fact I think it would make a good deal of sense for the Sox to go into 2018 having made both of these decisions, rather than picking up Rajai or another veteran RHH corner OF, or to pay for Holt's second arbitration-eligible raise.

But shit-canning a veteran bench and clubhouse guy to call up anything other than a "can't miss" prospect is a hard sell at this time of year. And pretty much unfathomable in context of a pennant race.
 
Last edited:

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
People do know how small of a sample size they are working with when it comes to Vs L, don't they? Sometimes I feel everyone should be forced to play 1 million hands of online poker to learn about random variance.

edit: Or just variance, because it's all random.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
honestly, it smells like to me internally they think Brentz is a AAAA player and there's still a major hole in his swing to be exploited by ML pitching.
Even before adding the toe tap he had an 800 OPS vs lefties in the major league action he has seen.

But, people still advocating for Brentz need to go back a few pages and reread the excellent brewakdown of his season by bosox79. It looks like AAA pitchers had adjusted to the toe tap. He struck out in 1/3 of his final 160 plate appearances.
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
People do know how small of a sample size they are working with when it comes to Vs L, don't they? Sometimes I feel everyone should be forced to play 1 million hands of online poker to learn about random variance.

edit: Or just variance, because it's all random.
As a counter, people do know that some seasons players have ups and downs, don't they? In 2013, 2014 and 2017 CY has been awful vs lefties. This isn't Mike Trout or some HOF player we're dealing with here.
 

jasail

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,189
Boston
You sure have a funny way of showing it
Was it? Granted it was long winded, but my point was pretty straight forward. The 40-man roster isn't the issue. If the Sox thought there was a role for Brentz or Brentz could contribute, moving on from Boyer isn't going to be a problem. I retrospect, I should have decided to be more concise before I hit post.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
Additionally, Boyer is still in the same older veteran category as Young. And has pitched in 28 games despite injuries. He may not be great... he may even be disposable. But, he's no Panda and frankly, that's who you have to be to be moved off the roster as a veteran on a league leading team in September.
Young spent the last 2 years on our MLB roster making $6.5m as the primary backup OF. Boyer was picked up mid-April on a minor league flyer after getting released by Atlanta in ST. Putting them down as being in the same veteran category atm is quite the stretch. As is the Panda comparison at that, which I'm sure even now and had he remained would of have generated a much bigger in-house impression then dumping a minor league depth guy would.

Preferring Boyer to Brentz is a perfectly defensible position, but beyond the pile on desire to agree with DD is anybody honestly going on record to state that they'd be here complaining about it had it gone the other way?
 

Cuzittt

Bouncing with Anger
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2001
20,301
Sinister Funkhouse #17
Let me put it another way. Boyer has been with the team for the majority of the season. He has contributed to the team for the majority of the season.

The Red Sox are (and were) leading their division (as September broke). Teams do not move players who have put them into playoff position for a player like Brentz. It doesn't happen.

This isn't about agreement or disagreement with the front office. It's about understanding why one fungible piece was not moved for another fungible piece.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using SoSH mobile app
 

tonyarmasjr

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2010
1,120
Why do people keep asking who should be moved off the 40 man for Brentz and then act as if Young is the only feasible option? Back-end MRs are the most fungible assets in baseball. Mitch Moreland can fill the same role a Boyer, Hembree, Maddox, or Taylor should on this team. None of those guys should be sniffing high leverage innings from here on out. In the unlikely event of another 19 inning affair, Elias and Velazquez are stretched out. Bryce Brentz may or may not be able to help this team in 2017. But the 12th best reliever on the team shouldn't even be put in a position where he possibly can.

My personal opinion is that I'd like to see Brentz as the cost-saving 5th OFer next year, and I think he ought to be given a chance to replace/improve upon Young's performance this year. It's a shame that it appears the FO is prepared to let him walk as a ml FA. If they really don't think he can cut it as a ML hitter, though, then there's no point in adding him to the 40 man.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,049
Florida
If they really don't think he can cut it as a ML hitter, though, then there's no point in adding him to the 40 man.
Yeah, I've pretty much made my peace with the idea that we will indeed be doing some backup outfielder shopping in free agency this winter.
 

tonyarmasjr

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2010
1,120
Yeah, I've pretty much made my peace with the idea that we will indeed be doing some backup outfielder shopping in free agency this winter.
And that's what makes me shake my head. The bar for a 5th OFer isn't all that high. I don't think there's much wrong with what we've gotten from Young this year even, other than he's supposed to be hitting lefties better than righties. I'm pretty confident we'd see a .700+ OPS from Brentz in a similar role for $6M less. What's not to like?
 

sean1562

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 17, 2011
3,620
maybe there are bigger plans to the OF in the offseason? maybe DD has his eyes on a FA that could fill that role that he loves?
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
As a counter, people do know that some seasons players have ups and downs, don't they? In 2013, 2014 and 2017 CY has been awful vs lefties. This isn't Mike Trout or some HOF player we're dealing with here.
And in 2015 and 2016, he destroyed them. He also wasn't awful against lefties in 2013. The fact that he goes from "great" to "awful" from season to season should show you just how random it is and how much variance is in a sample size that is 100ish.

Chris Young has 1595 career PA against LHP with a slash line of .262/.361/.466. He has 3568 career PA vs R, with a slash line of .227/.296/.415. From year to year, those splits may flip but we know what we are getting with Chris Young. When the sample size is 100 AB, replace 3 outs with 3 doubles and you get .030 points of batting average and .060 points of slugging percentage. It's not indicative of skill level, it's randomness and luck.

edit: Plus at this stage, it's pretty obvious who should be cut and it's not Chris Young. It's Brock Holt.
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
And in 2015 and 2016, he destroyed them. He also wasn't awful against lefties in 2013. The fact that he goes from "great" to "awful" from season to season should show you just how random it is and how much variance is in a sample size that is 100ish.

Chris Young has 1595 career PA against LHP with a slash line of .262/.361/.466. He has 3568 career PA vs R, with a slash line of .227/.296/.415. From year to year, those splits may flip but we know what we are getting with Chris Young. When the sample size is 100 AB, replace 3 outs with 3 doubles and you get .030 points of batting average and .060 points of slugging percentage. It's not indicative of skill level, it's randomness and luck.

edit: Plus at this stage, it's pretty obvious who should be cut and it's not Chris Young. It's Brock Holt.
Yes and in 2017 he is reverting back to his lousy hitting of lefties in 2013 and 2014. He absolutely WAS awful vs lefties in 2013. Here is his 2013 slash:
.209/.320/.392 -- that is lousy.

And I disagree with going back to career numbers. Career numbers would show Panda and Hanley as very good players. Age wears down players.I don't agree in one breath we don't look at career numbers vs old or reg season players like Pablo and Hanley then in the next breath we look at career numbers of CY. CY has gone through awful season vs lefties. Players do have off years. There is no reason to consistently keep banging our head against the wall and throw him out there consistently when a lefty appears. This isn't fantasy baseball. Some years bench players don't perform well. There are reasons why they are bench players.

Sure you want to dump Holt. I'd be okay with that. I do not feel sox should bring him back next year.
 
Last edited:

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
And in 2015 and 2016, he destroyed them. He also wasn't awful against lefties in 2013. The fact that he goes from "great" to "awful" from season to season should show you just how random it is and how much variance is in a sample size that is 100ish.

Chris Young has 1595 career PA against LHP with a slash line of .262/.361/.466. He has 3568 career PA vs R, with a slash line of .227/.296/.415. From year to year, those splits may flip but we know what we are getting with Chris Young. When the sample size is 100 AB, replace 3 outs with 3 doubles and you get .030 points of batting average and .060 points of slugging percentage. It's not indicative of skill level, it's randomness and luck.

edit: Plus at this stage, it's pretty obvious who should be cut and it's not Chris Young. It's Brock Holt.
I also want to add - I never said or close to implied CY should be cut. All I said was give BB a shot. A poster exaggerated my prior posts as if I was suggesting BB was "automatic." I NEVER suggested that. I also believe I used words such as "maybe" BB can give the sox a lift.

I just hope you aren't implying that I suggested CY be cut this year. Next year I would cut him. Yes.
Not this year.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Yes and in 2017 he is reverting back to his lousy hitting of lefties in 2013 and 2014. He absolutely WAS awful vs lefties in 2013. Here is his 2013 slash:
.209/.320/.392 -- that is lousy.

.

How is .209/.320/.392 absolutely awful when the league average that year was .253/.318/.396? It looks "average" to me unless you are a slave to batting average or don't bother adjusting for hitting climate. He was not lousy in 2013. Plus he's hitting righties very well so the notion that he is cooked doesn't pass the sniff test.

edit: CY has 14bb/15k in 107 PA vs L this year with a BAbip of .213. I'm 100% convinced it's just bad luck.
 
Last edited:

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
How is .209/.320/.392 absolutely awful when the league average that year was .253/.318/.396? It looks "average" to me unless you are a slave to batting average or don't bother adjusting for hitting climate. He was not lousy in 2013. Plus he's hitting righties very well so the notion that he is cooked doesn't pass the sniff test.

edit: CY has 14bb/15k in 107 PA vs L this year with a BAbip of .213. I'm 100% convinced it's just bad luck.
Would you take a .209 hitter with a .712 OPS for next year? How many .209 hitters with a 712 OPS are we looking for - for next year? A .209 hitter with a .712 OPS is a lousy hitting season.
I'm convinced this year he is having a lousy season hitting lefties.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
No one here is calling for Young to be back next year. And no one is arguing that he is having a bad year.

I'm not sure why you're still posting about this in this thread when all have agreed that you aren't cutting veterans in September to bring up an AAAA player.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Would you take a .209 hitter with a .712 OPS for next year? How many .209 hitters with a 712 OPS are we looking for - for next year? A .209 hitter with a .712 OPS is a lousy hitting season.
I'm convinced this year he is having a lousy season hitting lefties.

Except it wasn't a lousy hitting season in 2013. Keep ignoring that little fact. He was literally an average hitter. A .712 OPS in 2018 is not equal to a .712 OPS in 2013. Context matters. I'm done arguing this when you can't even admit you were wrong when the numbers are laid out in front of you. He was not lousy in 2013. You've just forgotten how bad hitting was 4 years ago.
 

Todd Benzinger

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2001
4,400
So Ill
I also want to add - I never said or close to implied CY should be cut. All I said was give BB a shot. A poster exaggerated my prior posts as if I was suggesting BB was "automatic." I NEVER suggested that. I also believe I used words such as "maybe" BB can give the sox a lift.

I just hope you aren't implying that I suggested CY be cut this year. Next year I would cut him. Yes.
Not this year.
My sarcasm was too oblique; sorry for that.

My point was specifically that if the Sox called up BB and made him the top PH option off the bench vs LHP, he would have very very few opportunities, given the personnel of the team.

Even if he was an automatic HR against LHP, when those very few opportunities came up opposing managers could simply sub in an RHP.

The notion that has been loosely kicked around that BB would have a shot at winning a few extra games for the Sox by being the top PH vs LHP is ludicrous, even assuming he hit would like 2017 Stanton every time he faced an LHP. Because: vanishly few opportunities, unlikely to occur in game-changing spots, unlikely not to be countered by opposing team.... and as we all agree, in reality, he wouldn't hit LHP so much better than CY in a few ABs that we would be able to tell.
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
No one here is calling for Young to be back next year. And no one is arguing that he is having a bad year.

I'm not sure why you're still posting about this in this thread when all have agreed that you aren't cutting veterans in September to bring up an AAAA player.
Can you identify the post that said I wanted to cut CY this September?
Where are some of you coming up with this type of stuff?
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
My sarcasm was too oblique; sorry for that.

My point was specifically that if the Sox called up BB and made him the top PH option off the bench vs LHP, he would have very very few opportunities, given the personnel of the team.

Even if he was an automatic HR against LHP, when those very few opportunities came up opposing managers could simply sub in an RHP.

The notion that has been loosely kicked around that BB would have a shot at winning a few extra games for the Sox by being the top PH vs LHP is ludicrous, even assuming he hit would like 2017 Stanton every time he faced an LHP. Because: vanishly few opportunities, unlikely to occur in game-changing spots, unlikely not to be countered by opposing team.... and as we all agree, in reality, he wouldn't hit LHP so much better than CY in a few ABs that we would be able to tell.
There is much I don't agree with you on here. First off there have been 5 blowouts in the 9 games since Sept 1st. Granted the 6-1 game you may not give him an at-bat. But the 19 inning game, sure you would.

Secondly, this Sox team is much different than many very good teamsof the past. They have great pitching but go into scoring funks. One lucky swing means a lot to this powerless - not so good Red Sox hitting team. There is a good chance the Yanks will be breathing down the Sox throat, don't you think? One game -- one home run can make a difference. Two home runs even more. Because they certainly aren't getting crap from Young vs lefties other than decent babip, right?

Third I don't think the Sox will lose much in performance from at bats vs lefties from CY (.187/566) and HR (.191). There's a reason why we read posts from many that no one is clamoring for CY to return, and many want HR gone. WHy do you think that is? Maybe quite a bit from HR is his contract but he also has been awful, hasn't he? Anyhow, what are the Red Sox "losing" when they give a few at bats to BB (a small number) vs the "high-powered" .187 BA with a the "mighty" .566 OPS from Chris Young?

Fourth, unless the game is tight, it would be extremely rare for a team to bring in righty vs BB, right? Those first few at bats, you're seeing what he can do. If in 6/7 scrub at bats he blasts a home run and hits a little, there is no way you don't try him for a few more at bats. IT would be highly - extremely unusual for a team to deliberately bring in a righty (if a lefty is in) in blowout. For what purpose?

Fifth, just want to add -- I have not said BB is going to replace anybody long term during this short stretch run. I have said it is POSSIBLE or have used the word he MIGHT do something --(I did NOT say he would "run the table smacking home run after home run thru Oct 1st.). For ONE WEEK he MIGHT have been MAYBE "DECENT" (or better for a short stretch) vs lefties which CY has NOT BEEN,and Hanley has been pretty bad too. These two lousy hitters that can't HIT ABOVE .200 vs lefties. As a result, thus far THEIR LOUSY HITTING CAN BE REPLACED for an occasional game WITHOUT MUCH LOSS TO THE TEAM. Because they have been pretty LOUSY ALL YEAR, what are you losing? A decent babip?

**FOR A GAME OR TWO if BB was hot or at least "pretty good" in prior blowout at-bats, the Red Sox will not miss CY's mighty left-handed splits THIS YEAR.
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
Remind me who you are removing from the 40 man roster to add Brentz?


I' wouldn't have put Ben Taylor on the DL, I would have just released him. Or I don't think this would work but put Brian Johnson on the DL. But I'm not sure that could do anything. I asked a question on that before. But I'm not sure.
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
*sigh*. As mentioned before, BenTaylor has value to the Sox down the line. Brentz does not. And you were told you can't DL a healthy player like Johnson.
I don't share your optimism - though BB could be out of baseball in a year. But BT is also extremely extremely extremely limited.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,470
Somewhere
Just for shits and giggles, and almost entirely worthless, here are Steamers' ROS projections:

Brentz 252/306/439
Young 256/334/459
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
1) Doesn't understand when a stat has predictive value and when it does not

2) Thinks a mid 20s reliever who throws upper 90s and has 2 options remaining is worth less than a 5th outfielder with no remaining options

3). Is ignoring the fact that Brentz struck out in more than 1/3 of his final 160 PA in AAA.

Next.
 

soxeast

New Member
Aug 12, 2017
206
1) Doesn't understand when a stat has predictive value and when it does not

2) Thinks a mid 20s reliever who throws upper 90s and has 2 options remaining is worth less than a 5th outfielder with no remaining options

3). Is ignoring the fact that Brentz struck out in more than 1/3 of his final 160 PA in AAA.

Next.
I think I'll look at say soxpropsects analysis of BT rather than seek your opinion on BT. And yeah guys like Judge who strikeout a lot-- real relevant point you made there. I guess when I hear how teams now pack their lineup with power and don't care as much about strikeouts, I'm supposed to care about your analysis? For example, ofc we know Steamers is accurate for predicting every player (sarcasm). HAs Steamers predicted CY's current folly? SO we're supposed to think it is somehow valid now? Especially when I said "give BB a try for a short term," but I didn't say I'd cut CY?

Thanks!
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
Like i said, "doesn't understand when a stat has predictive value and when it does not"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.