Wombat Returns!

plucy

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2006
426
a rock and a hard place
pokey_reese said:
His BABIP is a bit low at .250, and his LD/GB/FB rates are about normal (and healthy), so the numbers that really jump out are his infield pop up rate (23.5%, compared to a career average of 7%), and his HR/FB rate (11.8%, compared to a career rate of 18.3%).  Both of his "problem" numbers scream small sample size, so those normalize a bit he should see his BABIP come up as well.
I noticed the IFFB rate earlier when checking his stats. Is there any correlation with his increased discipline? His bat isn't slowing down, but his trigger might be delayed as he works on pitch recognition.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
WenZink said:
He cause me great anxiety, since his success/failure is critical as to how the Red Sox build a lineup over the next couple of years, unless David Ortiz continues to perform past 40.
 
I hope Middlebrooks turns it around (though I'm on record as being skeptical), but I don't find his progress particularly critical at all.  Sure, for this year it's important because he is going to get a lot more at bats and if he keeps hitting poorly that's bad for the 2014 season.
 
But long term, it's not all that important to me.  Fortunately the Red Sox have a solid prospect in Cecchini in AAA, plus Mookie is still looking for a position.  There is also the question of Xander possibly being best suited for 3B down the road.  Overall, I have very little concern about finding a 3B of the future with this team. There are very solid insurance policies in the pipeline. 
 
The only reason anyone should be very worried long term is if they have an irrational desire to have a prototypical "power hitter" in the middle of the lineup.  We've obviously been down that road in another thread, but it shouldn't be a concern.  If one of Cecchini or Betts turns out to be a better overall 3B than Middlebrooks, one of them should get the job without hesitation. I think both of them have plenty of upside, even without big power numbers.  If the lineup is missing someone who "strikes fear" in opposing pitchers, so be it. 
 

WenZink

New Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,078
radsoxfan said:
 
I hope Middlebrooks turns it around (though I'm on record as being skeptical), but I don't find his progress particularly critical at all.  Sure, for this year it's important because he is going to get a lot more at bats and if he keeps hitting poorly that's bad for the 2014 season.
 
But long term, it's not all that important to me.  Fortunately the Red Sox have a solid prospect in Cecchini in AAA, plus Mookie is still looking for a position.  There is also the question of Xander possibly being best suited for 3B down the road.  Overall, I have very little concern about finding a 3B of the future with this team. There are very solid insurance policies in the pipeline. 
 
The only reason anyone should be very worried long term is if they have an irrational desire to have a prototypical "power hitter" in the middle of the lineup.  We've obviously been down that road in another thread, but it shouldn't be a concern.  If one of Cecchini or Betts turns out to be a better overall 3B than Middlebrooks, one of them should get the job without hesitation.  I don't care at all if neither of them is likely to have .500+ SLG upside, or if the lineup is missing someone who "strikes fear" in opposing pitchers. 
 
If Middlebrooks isn't an option then the Sox have to look for high-performance power elsewhere.  If he produces, then others in the system become expendable.  Right handed, high wOBA power is rare in the post(reduced)-PED era.  If WMB isn't the answer then they'll try and go get with prospects like Cecchini and Betts as bait, perhaps.  Nothing is static, and just about everything is inter-related.  Oddly enough, if WMB produces, then he may become a long-term alternative at 1st, which allows the low-slg Cecchini to eventually play 3rd.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
WenZink said:
 
If Middlebrooks isn't an option then the Sox have to look for high-performance power elsewhere.  If he produces, then others in the system become expendable.  Right handed, high wOBA power is rare in the post(reduced)-PED era.  If WMB isn't the answer then they'll try and go get with prospects like Cecchini and Betts as bait, perhaps.  Nothing is static, and just about everything is inter-related.  Oddly enough, if WMB produces, then he may become a long-term alternative at 1st, which allows the low-slg Cecchini to eventually play 3rd.
 
If Betts or Cecchini turn into 4 win players, I don't care if they get there with an OBP heavy wOBA and good defense/baserunning.  That's just as good to me as a 4 win power hitting right handed 3B with a low OBP, elite SLG, and decent defense. 
 
WMB's power is intriguing if he is going to turn into an elite hitter because of that power.  But he is not that young, and has a career .297 OBP/.451 SLG/.322 wOBA in 732 PA. Unless he makes some serious strides soon, the fact that he (maybe) has elite upside due to his power will be dwarfed by the fact that he isn't very good. 
 
The Sox certainly need some elite players going forward, and I hope Middlebrooks turns into one.  But it's an unlikely scenario at this point, and getting less likely every day. I'm just glad the Red Sox have some other good options to potentially fill the 3B slot in the near future. 
 

Year of Yaz

Banned
May 1, 2014
45
Allthough he is not considered a prospect, Brock Holt is playing well at Pawtucket and was good during his time at Boston. He might be the best alternative for the remainder of the year if WMB doesn't figure it out by the All-Star break.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
To expand on my prior post, I don't see a ton of upside from WMB, despite the power. He wasn't that highly touted, he's not that young, and besides a few hot streaks in the majors, he's been pretty bad.

Even if he "pans out", I think that's more likely to mean he's a 2-3 win player because his power is good enough to make up for his deficiencies elsewhere. Even a good outcome feels a lot closer to Mark Trumbo than any significant difference maker. Seems highly unlikely he actually turns that power into elite overall production.

Certainly a 2-3 win player is very useful (especially while cheap), but given the other options in the system, I'm not too worried long about WMB being the long term solution. The fact that his relative strength is RHH power doesn't affect my outlook on his overall value.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
I would think Cecchini would replace Carp not Herrera, and then you'd need Nava back as the backup 1bman, necessitating a decision on Bradley, unlikely, or Sizemore.

If Cecchini is progressing well at Pawtucket, and they remain on the cusp of playoff spots, perhaps that makes them more patient and they just wait for the roster expansion on September 1st. Then they could platoon Middlebrooks and Cecchini for a month and decide what to do for October when and if necessary.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
I don't know why you'd need Nava back. Cecchini and/or WMB could back up 1b, one would assume. Cecchini could probably play the OF as well.
 

WenZink

New Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,078
radsoxfan said:
 
If Betts or Cecchini turn into 4 win players, I don't care if they get there with an OBP heavy wOBA and good defense/baserunning.  That's just as good to me as a 4 win power hitting right handed 3B with a low OBP, elite SLG, and decent defense. 
 
......
 
We had this discussion, last week, in the "Trade for Stanton" thread.  a high wOBA is very rare without power.  A high wOBA where your OBP is higher than your slugging avg is extremely rare.  Cecchini's OBP > SLG at both AA and AAA, so I think he works in the Sox lineup only if they have a power (high wOBA) component.  Betts is a different case, and it remains to be seen how he hits above AA.  But no one can tell me what position he plays if he makes the Red Sox.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
WenZink said:
 
We had this discussion, last week, in the "Trade for Stanton" thread.  a high wOBA is very rare without power. A high wOBA where your OBP is higher than your slugging avg is extremely rare.
 
 
 
A high wOBA is also very rare when you aren't a good hitter.  Unfortunately, this seems to be WMB's biggest problem. 
 
 


WenZink said:
 
Cecchini's OBP > SLG at both AA and AAA, so I think he works in the Sox lineup only if they have a power (high wOBA) component.  
 
 
 
Cecchini works in the Sox lineup if he is good.  He doesn't work if he is bad.  The desire to balance him with some power component is far outweighed by the importance of just getting the best players on the team. Get the best overall players you can (hitting, fielding, and baserunning) at each position and figure out the lineup later.  If you can work out a platoon or two for some of your cheaper positions, all the better.  It's not really that complicated. 
 

WenZink

New Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,078
radsoxfan said:
 
 
A high wOBA is also very rare when you aren't a good hitter.  Unfortunately, this seems to be WMB's biggest problem. 
 
 
Cecchini works in the Sox lineup if he is good.  He doesn't work if he is bad.  The desire to balance him with some power component is far outweighed by the importance of just getting the best players on the team. Get the best overall players you can (hitting, fielding, and baserunning) at each position and figure out the lineup later.  If you can work out a platoon or two for some of your cheaper positions, all the better.  It's not really that complicated. 
 
In 2012, WMB's first stint with the Red Sox he posted a wOBA of .357, with an OBP of just .325.  Cecchini has a wOBA of .363 in AAA, so we're talking about trying to get Middlebrooks back to his rookie form and then build from there.  STEAMER projects Cecchini to have an MLB of .316, which may or may not be low
 
And it is complicated to piece together a lineup without traditional components.  On a 25 man roster, you have, typically 12 pitchers, 9 starters (including in the Sox' case a dedicated DH), and one backup catcher.  That leaves, at maximum, the ability to platoon with 3 bench players, and optimally, at least 2 of those must be able to play in the OF.  When constructing a lineup, a "dime is worth more than two nickels."  If you can get OBP + SLG in one player (high wOBA), it gives you more flexibility throughout the rest the lineup.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
WenZink said:
 
And it is complicated to piece together a lineup without traditional components.  On a 25 man roster, you have, typically 12 pitchers, 9 starters (including in the Sox' case a dedicated DH), and one backup catcher.  That leaves, at maximum, the ability to platoon with 3 bench players, and optimally, at least 2 of those must be able to play in the OF.  When constructing a lineup, a "dime is worth more than two nickels." 
 
If you can get OBP + SLG in one player (high wOBA), it gives you more flexibility throughout the rest the lineup.
 
You significantly overestimate the complexity of putting together a good team.  It's not the intertwined Rubik's cube you want it to be. It sounds like you are discussing basketball roster construction.
 
Sure, ideally you want your roster to have some left/right balance, and some positional flexibility (particularly on the bench) is nice.  If you can create a platoon or two to make up for a couple positions you don't have established high paid guys, that's a good idea.  But much more importantly, it's just about getting good players within the confines of your budget.  Having a high OBP/SLG guy on your team doesn't have a big effect on the rest of your roster construction, or give you more flexibility.  It just means one of your players is a really good hitter (and likely a good player).  Try to find 8 more of them that can play the 8 other positions.
 
It's looking unlikely that Middlebrooks is going to be a very good player. If he turns it around, that would be great.  If he doesn't, fortunately the Red Sox have a few other places they can turn at 3B.   But the fact that his relative strength is power compared to OBP, speed, or defense, really doesn't matter much. 
 

WenZink

New Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,078
radsoxfan said:
 
You significantly overestimate the complexity of putting together a good team.  It's not the intertwined Rubik's cube you want it to be. It sounds like you are discussing basketball roster construction.
 
Sure, ideally you want your roster to have some left/right balance, and some positional flexibility (particularly on the bench) is nice.  If you can create a platoon or two to make up for a couple positions you don't have established high paid guys, that's a good idea.  But much more importantly, it's just about getting good players within the confines of your budget.  Having a high OBP/SLG guy on your team doesn't have a big effect on the rest of your roster construction, or give you more flexibility.  It just means one of your players is a really good hitter (and likely a good player).  Try to find 8 more of them that can play the 8 other positions.
 
It's looking unlikely that Middlebrooks is going to be a very good player. If he turns it around, that would be great.  If he doesn't, fortunately the Red Sox have a few other places they can turn at 3B.   But the fact that his relative strength is power compared to OBP, speed, or defense, really doesn't matter much. 
 
So you think I overestiimate the complexity?  Then you must have plenty of examples where teams have constructed top offenses without high wOBA guys OR high wOBA guys that don't have power as a component.  So why don't you list at least a couple of examples and it would be great if one of those examples included a Red Sox team-year?
 
Or am I not allowed to ask that question and spoil all the fantasy-tun?
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
WenZink said:
 
So you think I overestiimate the complexity?  Then you must have plenty of examples where teams have constructed top offenses without high wOBA guys OR high wOBA guys that don't have power as a component.  So why don't you list at least a couple of examples and it would be great if one of those examples included a Red Sox team-year?
 
Or am I not allowed to ask that question and spoil all the fantasy-tun?
 
Again, you are completely missing the point (so badly in fact I'm not sure if you are trolling or not).
 
Good teams have very good players. Very good players are usually good hitters with high wOBAs (or at least decent hitters and great defenders).  What about Middlebrooks makes you think he is likely to be a very good player?  Just because his best quality is his power?  His power is more likely to keep him afloat and in the majors than it is to propel him to be an elite player.  He can't get on base, and hasn't been a very good defender or baserunner.  At this point, a Mark Trumbo type of career is probably on the optimistic side.  
 
Do you honestly think Middlebrooks has a decent chance to turn into Giancarlo Stanton or something just because he happens to have power? I don't see much reason to be overly concerned long term about Middlebrooks panning out or not, since even my optimistic projection for him isn't that high.  There is no need to check off the "power box" on the "good team checklist"?  That's not how it works.  
 
The only reason to be nervous is if you think his power is going to turn him into an elite player somehow.  But that's just not realistic for WMB in my opinion. Fortunately the Red Sox have some other options at 3B in the upper minors that can potentially provide some solid production at 3B if WMB continues to stink. 
 
If we want to talk about prospects the Red Sox need to pan out, I'd be much more nervous about JBJ.  Not much in the upper minors in the outfield who could replace him if he flops (though Betts is a wildcard there too fortunately).  
 

ScubaSteveAvery

Master of the Senate
SoSH Member
Jul 29, 2007
8,329
Everywhere
I'm not the biggest Middlebrooks fan, but it is clear that he has made an adjustment at the plate this year to be more selective:
 
[tablegrid= Will Middlebrooks Career Plate Discipline Stats ]Year BB% 1st Pitch Swing % % of 3-1 Counts Seen K Looking % O-Swing % 2012 4.5% 23.8% 8.7% 28.6% 27.1% 2013 5.3% 26.2% 7.5% 26.5% 30.4% 2014 9.2% 18.4% 14.5% 40.0% 25.2% [/tablegrid] 
 
His K% rate hasn't really changed, but he's made adjustments in two key areas: cutting down on first pitch swings, and swinging at pitches outside the zone.  I see the spike in K Looking % to be a result of him trying to be more selective and letting certain pitches go by that he normally would have swung at.  He still has been frustrating to watch, but its possible the Sox are waiting to see if his new approach will pay off before making any decisions about what to do about him. 
 

The Talented Allen Ripley

holden
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 2, 2003
12,723
MetroWest, MA
Interesting in that his key hit yesterday was on the first pitch. Obviously you can't take on every first pitch, I imagine the difference between a lot of AAAA players and a major leaguers is recognizing/reacting to the appropriate opportunity.
 

WenZink

New Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,078
radsoxfan said:
 
Again, you are completely missing the point (so badly in fact I'm not sure if you are trolling or not).
........
 
 I suggest that you are missing the point and that you might be the troll.  While discussing the importance of WMB's success (as it relates to the potential of his power and a high wOBA in the Sox lineup) you opine that it doesn't matter, since there are alternatives to a good lineup without a power component, but have no way to back it up or show an example of it actually working, outside of suggesting that the Sox just get "good players.
 
 
radsoxfan said:
 
....  What about Middlebrooks makes you think he is likely to be a very good player?  Just because his best quality is his power?  His power is more likely to keep him afloat and in the majors than it is to propel him to be an elite player.  He can't get on base, and hasn't been a very good defender or baserunner.  At this point, a Mark Trumbo type of career is probably on the optimistic side.  
 
....  
 
 

WMB's 2012 wOBA of .357 in 268 MLB plate appearances, or his wOBA of .461 at AAA in 2012 before he was brought up to the major leagues are better than anything Cecchini has in his resume.  The question is can WMB make the proper counter-adjustments to what MLB pitchers are offering him.  If he can the payoff is huge, and if he can't then the Sox have to look for alternatives.  But Cecchini has yet to show he is a satisfactory alternative.  In about a quarter season at AAA he's posting a wOBA of around .375 fueled by a very unusual situation where his OBP > than his SLG.  That doesn't translate very well to MLB.  In another thread, it was found that it was very hard to find hitters with consistently high wOBA at the ML level.  Eddie Yost, from the 1950's was the only one I could find. 
 
At the MLB level pitchers with just 10% better command aren't going to give Cecchini as many opportunities to walk, since, even if he hits the ball, it's likely to be a single (Just 7 or 8 XBH in a quarter of a season.)  So, as Cecchini stands now,  he has to increase his power (or his SB rate) in order for the Sox to "afford" a hitter of his profile at 3B, OR beefo up the rest of the lineup.  (30 less walks per season might result in 10 more hits of which 8 would be singles and 2 would be doubles. (if a hitter can sustain a .333 BAPIP)   and 20 more outs,  And using the average coefficients of any given yearly wOBA forumula (0.69-BB, 0.885-1B, 1.25-2B), a hitter with Cecchini's offensive components is going to see a lower wOBA EVEN if he is able to sustain his full set of batting skills moving from AAA to the MLB level.) So, unless Cecchini is the type of LH hitter that can drive balls off the Green Monster, or projects to maturing into having more power, he's not anywhere near what the Sox hope WMB can be, based on his 2012 season.  That doesn't mean that WMB can make the adjustments necessary, but he's still a far more attractive bet at 3rd base than Cecchini.
..........
 

KillerBs

New Member
Nov 16, 2006
906
Middlebrooks is obviously at a very critical stage in his career over the next few weeks/months. The Sox have given him the job, cleared out the competition and given him the best opportunity to prove he is at least an average ML 3B. As things, currently stand, admittedly only after 80 PAs, he is falling short, though the increased patience is encouraging in isolation. I can't conceive that the Sox don't stick with him to the ASB, but if he doesn't get it going by then, they may need to pull the plug. 
 
If it comes to that, and I surely hope it doesn't, what then?
 
Cecchini's AAA performance (SSS of course) is not exactly forcing the issue, but if he continues to put up something in the 800 OPS range into July/August, I could support trying him over a still badly struggling WMB. If the Sox think GC can OBP at .360+ in the ML, it doesn't take a lot of "power" to be better than what we have been getting from Wil.
 
Holt? Ryan Roberts? Marrero to SS and X to 3b? Betts to 3b? (noting that the "3b" now plays a lot of short RF). All of these options are dubious, but what else is there?
 
As tired as we are all of the topic, the Sox have to be internally mooting the Drew option again. I hope/expect that they will stick to their guns, leave X at SS and give WMB the job, without internal competition, well into the summer. 
 

WenZink

New Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,078
KillerBs said:
Middlebrooks is obviously at a very critical stage in his career over the next few weeks/months. The Sox have given him the job, cleared out the competition and given him the best opportunity to prove he is at least an average ML 3B. As things, currently stand, admittedly only after 80 PAs, he is falling short, though the increased patience is encouraging in isolation. I can't conceive that the Sox don't stick with him to the ASB, but if he doesn't get it going by then, they may need to pull the plug. 
 
If it comes to that, and I surely hope it doesn't, what then?
 
Cecchini's AAA performance (SSS of course) is not exactly forcing the issue, but if he continues to put up something in the 800 OPS range into July/August, I could support trying him over a still badly struggling WMB. If the Sox think GC can OBP at .360+ in the ML, it doesn't take a lot of "power" to be better than what we have been getting from Wil.
 
...
 
If WMB is still struggling by mid-July, why would the Sox call up Cecchini over Brock Holt?  Holt has an OPS of .868 in Pawtucket this year.
 
Also, what does Middlebrooks have to show at the plate over the next two months to keep his job?  I'd venture a guess is an OPS of..750 over the next 225 plate appearances.  Of course the Sox will be looking at the details as well.
 

Puffy

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 14, 2006
1,263
Town
WenZink said:
 
If WMB is still struggling by mid-July, why would the Sox call up Cecchini over Brock Holt?  Holt has an OPS of .868 in Pawtucket this year.
 
Also, what does Middlebrooks have to show at the plate over the next two months to keep his job?  I'd venture a guess is an OPS of..750 over the next 225 plate appearances.  Of course the Sox will be looking at the details as well.
 
I agree. At this point, they'd probably be thrilled to get something close to his career line (.249/.296/.449), rather than the .223/.278/.410 type player he's been over his last 454 PA (2013 - 2014).
 
Another question is what kind of performance is necessary for him to keep his job in 2015. If his ceiling is something like a slugging heavy .750 OPS, I'm not sure he sticks around. This talk of him being a potential option at 1B is kind of a joke at this point, given what we have observed about his offensive skill set over the past 12+ months.
 

WenZink

New Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,078
Puffy said:
 
I agree. At this point, they'd probably be thrilled to get something close to his career line (.249/.296/.449), rather than the .223/.278/.410 type player he's been over his last 454 PA (2013 - 2014).
 
Another question is what kind of performance is necessary for him to keep his job in 2015. If his ceiling is something like a slugging heavy .750 OPS, I'm not sure he sticks around. This talk of him being a potential option at 1B is kind of a joke at this point, given what we have observed about his offensive skill set over the past 12+ months.
 
As far as keeping his job going forward to 2015+, I think it lies in the details of his hitting and what the Red Sox can be improved as opposed to those weaknesses that they view as chronic.  If he hits at an OPS rate of .750, the rest of the season, by running into a few homers, but reverts back to chasing crap low-and-away, then they might give up on him and sell low in a trade.  But if he has the same OPS, and he is a little too patient, then the Sox may find that correctable and expect improvement.  But I still think he remains Plan A for a while longer, as the Sox look past the end of 2015 and the expiring contracts of the, then, 40 year old Ortiz and Mike Napoli.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
WenZink said:
 
 WMB's 2012 wOBA of .357 in 268 MLB plate appearances, or his wOBA of .461 at AAA in 2012 before he was brought up to the major leagues are better than anything Cecchini has in his resume.  The question is can WMB make the proper counter-adjustments to what MLB pitchers are offering him.  If he can the payoff is huge, and if he can't then the Sox have to look for alternatives.  But Cecchini has yet to show he is a satisfactory alternative.  In about a quarter season at AAA he's posting a wOBA of around .375 fueled by a very unusual situation where his OBP > than his SLG.  That doesn't translate very well to MLB.  In another thread, it was found that it was very hard to find hitters with consistently high wOBA at the ML level.  Eddie Yost, from the 1950's was the only one I could find. 

 
At the MLB level pitchers with just 10% better command aren't going to give Cecchini as many opportunities to walk, since, even if he hits the ball, it's likely to be a single (Just 7 or 8 XBH in a quarter of a season.)  So, as Cecchini stands now,  he has to increase his power (or his SB rate) in order for the Sox to "afford" a hitter of his profile at 3B, OR beefo up the rest of the lineup.  (30 less walks per season might result in 10 more hits of which 8 would be singles and 2 would be doubles. (if a hitter can sustain a .333 BAPIP)   and 20 more outs,  And using the average coefficients of any given yearly wOBA forumula (0.69-BB, 0.885-1B, 1.25-2B), a hitter with Cecchini's offensive components is going to see a lower wOBA EVEN if he is able to sustain his full set of batting skills moving from AAA to the MLB level.) So, unless Cecchini is the type of LH hitter that can drive balls off the Green Monster, or projects to maturing into having more power, he's not anywhere near what the Sox hope WMB can be, based on his 2012 season.  That doesn't mean that WMB can make the adjustments necessary, but he's still a far more attractive bet at 3rd base than Cecchini.
..........
 
 
I think you're either not reading all the threads where Cecchini is being discussed or completely misremembering the number of comparables that are in those threads. The list is certainly longer than Ned Yost.  Below, I will repeat two additional very close comparables that I found and posted about earlier, in case you missed those the last time.   
 
But before those anecdotes, the bigger picture.  In my opinion, you are using far too narrow of a screen in focusing on OBP > SLG for 2 reasons. 
 
First, Cecchini's OBP is only greater than his slugging for the half season of AA and first 1/4 of a season of AAA.  His career minor league SLG is .449, and his highest slugging percentage was at high-A Salem, in a pitchers' league, at an age-appropriate 22 years old.  Thus, his SLG has not steadily declined as he moved up the levels of A ball as you might expect if better pitchers were going to expose him.  Moreover, McCoy is not a hitters' park, and it's been freakin' cold and wet all spring.  See Dustin Pedroia's lack of power over the first 6 weeks.  So, the entire basis of your discussion could easily be a small sample size fluke.
 
Second, Cecchini's OBP in his 3/4 of a season of AA and AAA is FOUR-FIFTEEN.  So, by employing a screen of OPB > SLG, you're starting from a huge OBP.  If Cecchini had a still lofty and exciting OBP of .395 in AA as a 22-year old, then his OBP would have been lower than his slugging and you wouldn't be having this discussion.  Moreover, at least to date, there has been no dropoff in OBP from AA to AAA, whereas for a player like, David Eckstein, his OBP dropped from .440 in AA to .356 in AAA. He also then basically maintained that ~.350 OBP throughout his major league career.
 
Therefore, I would say a better way to go about your screen is to say, "What has been the typical dropoff from minor league to major league OBP of players who had  ~.390 SLG in AA/AAA."
 
And, now for the anecdotes.  At a minimum, I suggest you update your list of comparables to include Dave Magadan, who had a an OBP/SLG split of .441/.356 in AA as a 22 year old, and a .411 / .412 split in AAA as a 23 year old, then had a 15-year major league career ending with a .390 / .377 split.  And he had no speed at all, whereas Cecchini looks like he will be guy with decidedly positive baserunning WAR.
 
Looking up Magadan's list of comparables, brings up Steve Braun, who as a 22-year-old in A+ ball had a  397 / 377 split, then jumped all the way to the majors and posted 5 seasons of with an average OPS+ of about 119 from age 24-28 with an OBP/SLG split that was roughly equal.  For his major league career, his split was .371/.367; an OPS+ of 109
 

Adrian's Dome

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2010
4,424
http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2014/05/01/will-middlebrooks-ditched-the-contacts-but-the-difference-making-contact-keeps-coming/
 


“I’m not even wearing them,” said Middlebrooks, who said that at some point he’d try wearing prescription Oakleys to mirror the improvement he sought in the contacts from 20/30 vision in his left eye and 20/25 in his right to 20/15 in both eyes. “I didn’t like them. … [But] it’s not a big difference. I might be able to see things a little finer, but I can see fine without them.”
 
This was touched on in the game thread a couple of days ago. 20/30 and 20/25 isn't something that would slow you down much in everyday life, but as a major league ballplayer, whose two biggest issues are pitch recognition and contact, don't you think it'd be logical for Middlebrooks to treat it as a slightly bigger deal? I can understand disliking and finding contacts distracting or uncomfortable, but shouldn't he at least be trying prescription sunglasses or clear goggles? Seeing the rotation on the ball is a huge part of pitch recognition, and even slightly impaired vision can be a big hamper.
 

WenZink

New Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,078
Plympton91 said:
 
I think you're either not reading all the threads where Cecchini is being discussed or completely misremembering the number of comparables that are in those threads. The list is certainly longer than Ned Yost.  Below, I will repeat two additional very close comparables that I found and posted about earlier, in case you missed those the last time.   
 
But before those anecdotes, the bigger picture.  In my opinion, you are using far too narrow of a screen in focusing on OBP > SLG for 2 reasons. 
 
First, Cecchini's OBP is only greater than his slugging for the half season of AA and first 1/4 of a season of AAA.  His career minor league SLG is .449, and his highest slugging percentage was at high-A Salem, in a pitchers' league, at an age-appropriate 22 years old.  Thus, his SLG has not steadily declined as he moved up the levels of A ball as you might expect if better pitchers were going to expose him.  Moreover, McCoy is not a hitters' park, and it's been freakin' cold and wet all spring.  See Dustin Pedroia's lack of power over the first 6 weeks.  So, the entire basis of your discussion could easily be a small sample size fluke.
 
Second, Cecchini's OBP in his 3/4 of a season of AA and AAA is FOUR-FIFTEEN.  So, by employing a screen of OPB > SLG, you're starting from a huge OBP.  If Cecchini had a still lofty and exciting OBP of .395 in AA as a 22-year old, then his OBP would have been lower than his slugging and you wouldn't be having this discussion.  Moreover, at least to date, there has been no dropoff in OBP from AA to AAA, whereas for a player like, David Eckstein, his OBP dropped from .440 in AA to .356 in AAA. He also then basically maintained that ~.350 OBP throughout his major league career.
 
Therefore, I would say a better way to go about your screen is to say, "What has been the typical dropoff from minor league to major league OBP of players who had  ~.390 SLG in AA/AAA."
 
And, now for the anecdotes.  At a minimum, I suggest you update your list of comparables to include Dave Magadan, who had a an OBP/SLG split of .441/.356 in AA as a 22 year old, and a .411 / .412 split in AAA as a 23 year old, then had a 15-year major league career ending with a .390 / .377 split.  And he had no speed at all, whereas Cecchini looks like he will be guy with decidedly positive baserunning WAR.
 
Looking up Magadan's list of comparables, brings up Steve Braun, who as a 22-year-old in A+ ball had a  397 / 377 split, then jumped all the way to the majors and posted 5 seasons of with an average OPS+ of about 119 from age 24-28 with an OBP/SLG split that was roughly equal.  For his major league career, his split was .371/.367; an OPS+ of 109
 
First of all, you're using OPS to prop up Magadan and Braun, while I'm using wOBA.  Will Middlebrooks posted a wOBA of 357 in his 2012 rookie season, and that, plus improvement past his rookie year, is what the Sox are chasing. I think they project (or projected) WMB as a .380 wOBA hitter.  That would be an improvement over Magadan and Braun, but not over Eddie Yost in his prime. (Eddie Yost averaged around a .380 OPS for a dozen years.) In the "Trade for Stanton" thread, we were looking for elite players that had an OPS>SLG.  Magadan and Braun had value but they didn't possess the up-side of WMB.  The question is whether or not that up-side is obtainable.  But I understand why the Sox are waiting for it. 
 
Secondly, I never said that Cecchini had no future as an MLB player, but that he has yet to show that he deserves more of a shot than Middlebrooks.  If Cecchini develops more power or more success on the basepaths, then he becomes a more valuable option.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,238
FWIW--Youkils's minor league OBP consistently outpaced his SLG% until he was in his age 25 season.
 

MakMan44

stole corsi's dream
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2009
19,363
Adrian's Dome said:
http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2014/05/01/will-middlebrooks-ditched-the-contacts-but-the-difference-making-contact-keeps-coming/
 
 
 
 
This was touched on in the game thread a couple of days ago. 20/30 and 20/25 isn't something that would slow you down much in everyday life, but as a major league ballplayer, whose two biggest issues are pitch recognition and contact, don't you think it'd be logical for Middlebrooks to treat it as a slightly bigger deal? I can understand disliking and finding contacts distracting or uncomfortable, but shouldn't he at least be trying prescription sunglasses or clear goggles? Seeing the rotation on the ball is a huge part of pitch recognition, and even slightly impaired vision can be a big hamper.
It's just illogical to me. My question is why the trainers and Farrell are okay with this if he's so public about the issue. 
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,026
teddywingman said:
One positive is that his pitch recognition seems improved. Less hacking at outside pitches.
 
 
ScubaSteveAvery said:
I'm not the biggest Middlebrooks fan, but it is clear that he has made an adjustment at the plate this year to be more selective:
 
[tablegrid= Will Middlebrooks Career Plate Discipline Stats ]Year BB% 1st Pitch Swing % % of 3-1 Counts Seen K Looking % O-Swing % 2012 4.5% 23.8% 8.7% 28.6% 27.1% 2013 5.3% 26.2% 7.5% 26.5% 30.4% 2014 9.2% 18.4% 14.5% 40.0% 25.2% [/tablegrid] 
 
His K% rate hasn't really changed, but he's made adjustments in two key areas: cutting down on first pitch swings, and swinging at pitches outside the zone.  I see the spike in K Looking % to be a result of him trying to be more selective and letting certain pitches go by that he normally would have swung at.  He still has been frustrating to watch, but its possible the Sox are waiting to see if his new approach will pay off before making any decisions about what to do about him. 
 
The O-Swing% is obviously down and the BB% is up, so obviously there's improvement in the plate approach. I'm having trouble seeing where it's coming from.
 
And yeah, smas was correct earlier about my pithiness about discussion versus micro=analysis. Here's Scub's post from last year on WMB's development, complete with heat charts. I'm going to post the same ones in the same order because I've been looking at them back and forth and I can't figure out where the improvement is coming from.
 
One thing that is clear is that "the book on WMB" has definitely been disseminated and pitchers are pounding him low and away. HIs swing and whiff tendencies, though, don't seem to be radically different with one major exception: he's laying off the ones way down and away and out of the zone. This is obviously good, but it doesn't help him when he faces a pitcher who can hit the spot in the zone.
 
Anyway, here are the charts for this year courtesy of the inestimable jnai via BrooksBaseball:
 
OK, so maybe I won't post them until Photobucket starts working again. Blerg. But you can go to BrooksBaseball and pull Middlebrook's card and look at them pretty easily if you want.  <_<
 
I think it's also worth remembering how different his performance was before and after his sting in Pawtucket last year:
 
[tablegrid= Tale of Two WMBs: 2013 ]Name G PA  BB% K%  ISO  BABIP  AVG  OBP  SLG  wOBA  wRC+  WMB 1.0 53 216 4.2% 27.8% .197 .221 .192 .228 .389 .267 60 WMB 2.0 41 158 7.0% 24.1% .200 .320 .276 .329 .476 .344 114 [/tablegrid]
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,026
WenZink said:
 
First of all, you're using OPS to prop up Magadan and Braun, while I'm using wOBA.  Will Middlebrooks posted a wOBA of 357 in his 2012 rookie season, and that, plus improvement past his rookie year, is what the Sox are chasing. I think they project (or projected) WMB as a .380 wOBA hitter.  That would be an improvement over Magadan and Braun, but not over Eddie Yost in his prime. (Eddie Yost averaged around a .380 OPS for a dozen years.) In the "Trade for Stanton" thread, we were looking for elite players that had an OPS>SLG.  Magadan and Braun had value but they didn't possess the up-side of WMB.  The question is whether or not that up-side is obtainable.  But I understand why the Sox are waiting for it. 
 
The bolded would have made him one of the top 25 hitters in the major league baseball by wOBA last year among players with at least 350 PAs. Is that a typo or is that what you really think their projection for him is?
 

smastroyin

simpering whimperer
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2002
20,684
Here is WMB's career raw wOBAs for every player season in which he had at least 100 PA.
 
.306, .350, .344, .382, .461, .357, .300, .356, .293  (Bold is major leagues)
 
For the record, without all of the context these are not all that meaningful, but I just wanted to make a point about projecting him as a .380 wOBA regular.  The .461 is an obvious outlier and I hope the Red Sox did not treat it as real development though I suppose some guys have that kind of stratospheric rise.  Regardless, with a season and a half of data since then, it seems more likely to be an outlier.  The .382 in AA the previous year is also starting to look out of place.  What happened to WMB in 2013?  Did anything happen to him?  Was 2011 and 2012 just a couple of good years with a guy who will consistently be in the .350 range?  Even so, he needs to get back on track this year to show he's not on a negative trend from that peak, and has instead just picked up his previous trendline.
 
However, if indeed you are projecting him as a .380 wOBA player, then sure, it's hard to say Cecchini has that upside.  Or is it?
 
.420, .380, .464, .383, .367  
 
Poor year for Cecchini so far, by his standards, but his standards are higher than you might think.
 

glennhoffmania

meat puppet
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
8,411,591
NY
Is it me or all the last two posts 100% bold?  I was trying to figure out the distinctions referenced by the bolding but it's not really possible when everything looks bold.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,026
glennhoffmania said:
Is it me or all the last two posts 100% bold?  I was trying to figure out the distinctions referenced by the bolding but it's not really possible when everything looks bold.
 
It's you. I think you're losing your mind.
 

glennhoffmania

meat puppet
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
8,411,591
NY
Could be, but everything starting with post 78 is bold, including sigs.  Weird stuff.
 

WenZink

New Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,078
Reverend said:
 
The bolded would have made him one of the top 25 hitters in the major league baseball by wOBA last year among players with at least 350 PAs. Is that a typo or is that what you really think their projection for him is?
 
I think a .380 projected wOBA was what the Sox saw as his ceiling after his 2012 season.  And a top-25 hitter projection would not be/is not out of the question.  And with the prospects of a lineup eventually without Ortiz and/or Napoli, why wouldn't the Sox try to find a .top 25 hitter at one of the corner IF positions?  And if WMB is not that hitter, then the Sox will look for one.
 
 
smastroyin said:
Here is WMB's career raw wOBAs for every player season in which he had at least 100 PA.
 
.306, .350, .344, .382, .461, .357, .300, .356, .293  (Bold is major leagues)
 
For the record, without all of the context these are not all that meaningful, but I just wanted to make a point about projecting him as a .380 wOBA regular.  The .461 is an obvious outlier and I hope the Red Sox did not treat it as real development though I suppose some guys have that kind of stratospheric rise.  Regardless, with a season and a half of data since then, it seems more likely to be an outlier.  The .382 in AA the previous year is also starting to look out of place.  What happened to WMB in 2013?  Did anything happen to him?  Was 2011 and 2012 just a couple of good years with a guy who will consistently be in the .350 range?  Even so, he needs to get back on track this year to show he's not on a negative trend from that peak, and has instead just picked up his previous trendline.
 
However, if indeed you are projecting him as a .380 wOBA player, then sure, it's hard to say Cecchini has that upside.  Or is it?
 
.420, .380, .464, .383, .367  
 
Poor year for Cecchini so far, by his standards, but his standards are higher than you might think.
 
We'll find out if the great seasons were an outlier or not.  But one way for a hitter to improve is to mature and add power.  The other way is a hitter to have power, early and then improve plate discipline and as pitchers start to respect his power the hitter improves his OBP.  And in the case of some hitters, they have power early and it improves even more along with the OBP -- so you get improvement in both components. 
 
The issue with Cecchini is whether or not he can show some improvement in power.  Currently in AAA (after only a quarter of a season, so it's early), Cecchini projects to a season of only 28 XBH (24 doubles, 4 HRs), so he has to show something more the rest of the way to be considered more than a potentially, nice complementary piece to a lineup..  Someone brought up Youkilis earlier, and Youk is a good comp, in some ways.  Youk went from being a nice piece in the lineup to an integral part of the lineup as his power increased.  
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,238
And some are red. Has someone changed the SoSH default font to "maybe Middlebrooks can see *this*"?
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,276
joe dokes said:
And some are red. Has someone changed the SoSH default font to "maybe Middlebrooks can see *this*"?
and the "users viewing this topic" is all bold
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,026
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Nope. .. Not just you .. They 're all bold
 
Now that you mention it, there are some pretty bold claims in this thread.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
WenZink said:
 
I think a .380 projected wOBA was what the Sox saw as his ceiling after his 2012 season.  And a top-25 hitter projection would not be/is not out of the question.  And with the prospects of a lineup eventually without Ortiz and/or Napoli, why wouldn't the Sox try to find a .top 25 hitter at one of the corner IF positions?  And if WMB is not that hitter, then the Sox will look for one.
 
 
Here is the major disconnect.  Why on Earth, especially after his last 1+ year in the majors, would the Red Sox think a realistic projection for WMB is a .380 wOBA (even if they are being optimistic)? Even if they thought this in 2012 (which I very much doubt), there is no reason to think that now.  He is 25 years old, not 21. 
 
You think his power could propel him to be an elite hitter.  If that's the case, I agree his development would be key because there are not a lot of elite hitters in the system (or any system). And having elite hitters is a great way to build a good team.  But I don't think thats a realistic projection at all.  
 
His power might propel him to be an average 3B.  This has value too, especially while he is cheap.  But the Red Sox have pretty good prospects in the system that have a good shot to be average. Possibly better.  That's the much more realistic territory for Middlebrooks to end up, if he pans out at all.
 
In 2013 and 2014 over 114 games, in 454 PA, WMB has a -0.3 WAR (via ESPN).  Useless replacement level player is still on the table for him as well. 
 

pokey_reese

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 25, 2008
16,247
Boston, MA
I loved WMB and beat the drum pretty hard for him to be given the job heading into this year, but even I am starting to have my doubts.  The main issue you see in prospect writers who are discussing power hitting prospects is whether or not their hit tool will allow the raw power to show up in game situations.  Will has been making some adjustments in his selectivity, and I already mentioned that I expect some upwards regression in his batted ball profile as the sample grows, but none of that has convinced me that his pure hitting ability will allow the power to play up.
 
WenZink, serious question, do you have any reason to believe that a guy with good raw power but a marginal hit tool is more likely to become a high wOBA hitter than a player with a good hit tool but marginal raw power?  My understanding is that the "conventional wisdom" (which I know is something to be avoided, but is occasionally borne out in the numbers) is that power is the latest thing to develop, and so most talent evaluators will choose the hit tool.  However, I haven't seen a statistical breakdown of this using minor/major league numbers.
 
I guess the question is, given their respective current abilities, what is more likely:
 
a.) That Cecchini ends up as a .290/.390/.435 hitter in the majors?
or
b.) That WMB ends up as a .275/.325/.500 hitter over the rest of his career?
 
I think that the thing that worries me the most about Will now is that his one tool that should be earning him the chance to reach his potential, his power, hasn't appeared.  Normally the guys who fit his offensive profile strike out a lot and struggle at the plate, but still run into fast balls once in a while and hit some dingers.  He is not failing to hit for average right now, but even when he does hit it's mainly ground ball singles finding their way through the holes.
 

williams_482

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 1, 2011
391
WenZink said:
 
In the "Trade for Stanton" thread, we were looking for elite players that had an OPS>SLG. 
 
There is a big difference between "good hitters without power" and "good hitters with OBP>SLG." An OBP of .420 elite and probably unsustainable unless the player is a hall of fame level talent, while a slugging percentage of .420 is modestly above average. What matters to the discussion of the value of balanced or unbalanced OBP/SLG players and whatever else is how good the player is at OBP/SLG relative to some reasonable baseline, not which absolute value is larger. 
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Would we rather have a right-handed guy who gets on base at a .300 clip with the ability to hit 25-30 homers, or a left-handed guy like Cecchini who might put up a .370 OBP but only hits 5-8 homers?  Just in theory, assuming the defense and base running are roughly equal.
 

williams_482

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 1, 2011
391
We want whichever one is the better hitter, and OBP and HR totals on their own don't tell us that. It is really that simple. 
 

mfried

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 23, 2005
1,680
ivanvamp said:
Would we rather have a right-handed guy who gets on base at a .300 clip with the ability to hit 25-30 homers, or a left-handed guy like Cecchini who might put up a .370 OBP but only hits 5-8 homers?  Just in theory, assuming the defense and base running are roughly equal.
Wombat epitomizes "...the ability (read potential) to hit 25-30 homers", but the reality that he may very likely hit 10-15.  In the latter case a .370 OBP with 5-8 is undoubtedly better.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
I think I agree with that.  So I'd rather move Middlebrooks to a power-needy team that has a hole at 3b, and slide Cecchini up to the majors.  I'm sure the Sox are exploring every option.
 

WenZink

New Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,078
pokey_reese said:
WenZink, serious question, do you have any reason to believe that a guy with good raw power but a marginal hit tool is more likely to become a high wOBA hitter than a player with a good hit tool but marginal raw power?  My understanding is that the "conventional wisdom" (which I know is something to be avoided, but is occasionally borne out in the numbers) is that power is the latest thing to develop, and so most talent evaluators will choose the hit tool.  However, I haven't seen a statistical breakdown of this using minor/major league numbers.
 
I guess the question is, given their respective current abilities, what is more likely:
 
a.) That Cecchini ends up as a .290/.390/.435 hitter in the majors?
or
b.) That WMB ends up as a .275/.325/.500 hitter over the rest of his career?
...
I'm not sure what you mean by "marginal hit tool."  WMB may only have had a .331 OBP in the minors, but it was closer to .350 at AA and AAA ball, so that's better than marginal.  And there have been kids that show power early, but not plate discipline when they first get to the big leagues... Killebrew, Albert Belle, Mo Vaughn, Richie Sexson, Chris Davis... etc. And they all turned it around in 1,,2 , 3 or more seasons.  And their improvement as hitters was reflected in both OBP and SLG, so it's always a question of whether or not it was the improved plate discipline that improved the SLG, or whether the improved SLG brought more respect from the pitchers and that had a factor in raising their OBP.  Of course, both are probably true for hitters with power.
 
As to your question of a) or b), I'd say that if WMB can maintain his SLG over .500 then his OBP will be higher than .325, but if he can't maintain his OBP over .325, than it will be hard to keep his SLG at .500 -- at least over a sustained 4-5 year peak.  And I don't know what the odds are, but Jenny and I think WMB could be the big ticket.
 
And I can't really evaluate Cecchini, since he's still early in his AAA season, but I don't see anything YET in his numbers that project to a  .290/.390/.435 career.  if Cecchini doesn't develop more power, then why would MLB pitches walk a singles hitter?  So how does a hitter like Cecchini maintain anywhere near 100 BB per season and a .390 OBP?  He's going to see more pitches in the zone, and his wOBA is guaranteed to drop, unless he shows more power, which will encourage pitchers to walk him more often. ( Again, if Cecchini projects to be a doubles-off-the-wall hitter, or if the Sox see his body filling out to be more powerful, then that's another story.)
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
WenZink said:
Albert Belle, Mo Vaughn, Richie Sexson, Chris Davis... etc. And they all turned it around in 1,,2 , 3 or more seasons.  And their improvement as hitters was reflected in both OBP and SLG, so it's always a question of whether or not it was the improved plate discipline that improved the SLG, or whether the improved SLG brought more respect from the pitchers and that had a factor in raising their OBP.  Of course, both are probably true for hitters with power.
 
Taking your contemporary guys..... why exactly does Middlebrooks belong in this group?
 
Minor League career #s;
 
Belle:      .298/.361/.533/.894
Vaughn:  .284/.378/.490/.869
Sexson:  .278/.344/.474/.818
Davis:     .318/.374/.596/.970
 
WMB:     .274/.331/.453/.787
 
 
The only one you could maybe consider a reasonable comp would be Sexson, and even he was clearly better in the minors than WMB.  I suppose Sexson might not be a bad super optimistic projection for Middlebrooks, but even he was never an elite guy. More like a 2-3 win player in his prime (though admittedly he was hurt worse by his D than WMB would be). Again, not a bad player to have around while he's cheap, but not a crucial piece of the future either.