What if we went all-out on D? (warning: Dojji is thinking, read at own risk)

[ORS]

All accurate, but the point at the moment being, you clearly have not seen much of Lin. I haven't seen a ton either but everything I have seen puts him right among the top defenders at the centerfield position.

 

(incidnetally, Gameday Audio package gives you access to a lot of minor league stuff, including some video of the occasional live game on milb.com. It's an interesting perk, especially considering the original package was so cheap, and can fill a lot of dead time).

Seriously, you are going to make an assessment that puts him among "the top defenders" at his position because you've watched some highlight reels?

 

You only make an assessment like that if have extensive experience watching the game. If you know what to look for when the ball makes contact with the bat and you can see his reaction and route to the ball, something the cameraman rarely gets in the shot. And, ultimately, even if you are present and look for these things and like what you see, if you don't have a whole lot of experience watching others do this with the same critical eye, you lack the basis to categorize what you saw.

 

Seriously, right now you are in the same group of people that thinks Jeter deserved those Gold Gloves because he made a few of his jump-throws from the hole.

 

EDIT: And, whether or not I have seen him extensively is irrelevant. I'm not the one trying to get others to accept any assessment of his skills. I'm not a scout. I realize my shortcomings in making such assessments, and, as such, I choose to accept the scouts opinion due to my lack of exposure and experience.

[a700hitter]

OK, let me ask you this directly:

 

Have you seen Che-Hsuan Lin in action in a regular game?

I know that you didn't direct this question at me, but I have seen him play. He's a good defender, but he is not Paul Blair or Steve Finley. I'm not even sure that he is as good as Ellsbury, who brings a bat to the game. Lin is never going to start in anyone's outfield, so I reiterate that don't know how this could be a discussion when the premise is far fetched at best.

[Dojji]

Amusingly enough, Soxprospects recently amended their projected roster to show Lin on the bench of the big league team. Most likely what they have in mind is a temporary replacement for Crawford who gets sent down when Carl is ready to go. It would be interesting though if Lin broke camp with the team.

 

That space might be needed for Iglesias, and the Sox brass seems impressed with Iggy's spring so far, so YMMV I guess.

[SoxSport]

On Scutaro, I suspect somebody in the FO woke up one day and said: Scutaro's a year older at 36, and is an average SS. He might be a little worse this year, and we're paying him $6mil. We have decent replcement in Aviles who is a better hitter, younger, and we're paying him less. We also have a kid we're paying $2mil to play in AAA who is all-world defensively. Colorado calls us up and says we'll take Scutaro off your hands, pay his salary, and put him at 2B. So they effectively dropped Papi's salary $6mil by making the deal. Sounds like a good business decision to me.

 

Seems like the Red Sox have had a persistent problem in recent years of holding onto aging, over-the-hill players and blocking younger players. I'm thinking of catcher, pitching and RF. Not to mention the Ellsbury fiasco. In that sense, the Scutaro move is a breath of fresh air. They got younger and cheaper.

[Dojji]

Seriously' date=' you are going to make an assessment that puts him among "the top defenders" at his position because you've watched some highlight reels? [/quote']

 

Are you going to dispute that claim despite literally admitting that you haven't seen him any more than I have? Cuts both ways ORS.

 

And numberswise, minor league numbers are pretty incomplete but Lin's been a little better than Ellsbury in CF all the way along in putouts per game (which indicates range) and in fielding percentage. Ellsbury is no slouch, so there is something to what I'm saying just in the numbers alone.

 

And of course, Lin's arm beats Ellsbury's cold.

[ORS]

Are you going to dispute that claim despite literally admitting that you haven't seen him any more than I have? Cuts both ways ORS.

It doesn't cut anything, Dojji. I'm saying your opinion and mine of his defensive ability mean very little when compared with the opinion of scouts who have watched people play CF pretty much every day of their lives for the last 20 years. Get it?

 

And of course, Lin's arm beats Ellsbury's cold.

It does. But, as silly as it is to bring Lin into the starting lineup given his woeful offensive ability, you topped that silliness earlier in the thread when the subject of Lin's arm came up. The general point you make in bringing Lin up is to field the best possible team at preventing runs, but then you s*** all over your own idea when someone suggested putting Lin in RF because of his superior arm, and your reason was to shelter him from fan reaction to his weak offense. If the point is to put the best defensive roster out there, then go all in. At least be consistent.

[Dojji]

That was one of two reasons. The other reason was that while you might put your strongest arm in right and call that smart, it's even more important to have your rangiest OF in center. Range > Arm IMHO. Lin has better range than Ellsbury.

[ORS]

That was one of two reasons. The other reason was that while you might put your strongest arm in right and call that smart' date=' it's even more important to have your rangiest OF in center. Range > Arm IMHO. Lin has better range in CF.[/quote']

Ellsbury's MLB CF range factor/game is 2.49. Lin's MiLB CF range factor/game is 2.49.

 

Looks like their range is very similar, to me. Their arms are not. If Lin were to be in the starting roster, the best position for him with this group of outfielders is RF.

[Dojji]

In the last 2 seasons between AAA and AA, Lin's minor league CF range factor is an average of about 2.68. Your average on Lin includes stuff when he was a teenager in the Gulf League.

 

Bear in mind -- this is Lin outdoing a pretty freaking good defender in Ellsbury, who was earning plaudits all the way along his career path for his own glove. I am not screwing around with people, Lin has all-world defensive potential. I dunno if he'll reach it, or even get a chance to with his weak bat, but it's definitely there.

[a700hitter]

Ellsbury's MLB CF range factor/game is 2.49. Lin's MiLB CF range factor/game is 2.49.

 

Looks like their range is very similar, to me. Their arms are not. If Lin were to be in the starting roster, the best position for him with this group of outfielders is RF.

and not to be snide, but that stat confirms my first hand observation.

 

BTW, speaking of defense. I have been impressed with this kid Ciriaco at SS. He's made some plays and he seems to have an idea with the bat.

[ORS]

In the last 2 seasons between AAA and AA, Lin's minor league CF range factor is an average of about 2.68. Your average on Lin includes stuff when he was a teenager in the Gulf League.

 

Bear in mind -- this is Lin beating a pretty freaking good defender. I am not screwing around with people, this kid has all-world defensive potential. I dunno if he'll reach it, or even get a chance to with his weak bat, but it's definitely there.

It's range factor, Dojji. The more data you include, the better your conclusion. Given what the stat measures, put outs/game, you get more accurate results with more data because you wash out more of the inherent flaw in the stat, the assumption that everyone is getting an equal distribution of chances. Quit it with the selection bias.

 

Ellsbury, 5 years in MLB, RF/G of 2.49. Ellsbury, 4 years in MiLB, RF/G of 2.51. Lin, 5 years in MiLB, RF/G of 2.49. These guys pretty much have equal ability in terms of range as measured by RF/G.

[Dojji]

It's range factor, Dojji. The more data you include, the better your conclusion. Given what the stat measures, put outs/game, you get more accurate results with more data because you wash out more of the inherent flaw in the stat, the assumption that everyone is getting an equal distribution of chances. Quit it with the selection bias.

 

Ellsbury, 5 years in MLB, RF/G of 2.49. Ellsbury, 4 years in MiLB, RF/G of 2.51. Lin, 5 years in MiLB, RF/G of 2.49. These guys pretty much have equal ability in terms of range as measured by RF/G.

 

You're comparing big league stats and minor league stats. The more years backward you add to minor league numbers the more peaches, pears, bananas and kumquats you add to the original apples and oranges comparison.

 

Is the fact that Lin had a RF/G of only about 1.7 as a teenager in the Gulf Coast League really relevant to what you'd expect of him next year? Since weighting the minor league stuff to weed out the early stuff isn't a level of statistical complexity that's compatible with message board discussion, comparing based on the last 2 years is a pretty bogstandard way to go.

 

BTW Ellsbury in 06 and 07 had about a 2.4 RF/G in centerfield, which compares roughly to his 2.49 big league numbers. One would expect Lin's roughly 2.7 high minors average (between AA and AAA) to translate about the same way. There's only so many different ways a baseball can spray off a bat so that a centerfielder has to make a play on it.

[Dojji]

Just for the record, I'm really enjoying this discussion. It's forced me to refine my thinking a lot, and I've been surprised to dive frantically back into the numbers only to find my gut sense of Lin's performance again and again confirmed by what I see. I've been needing an excuse to really get in there and analyze the way I think about defense and this has obliged.

 

Usually by about the third retreat back to Baseball-Reference and/or Fangraphs i have to bow out, but this kid's been there for me. Everything I see from him and everything I have seen, and the numbers, suggest that this kid could drop the jaws on a lot of skeptics if he could just get the right chance.

 

In my mind that chance involves playing in center, because a few stereotypes play in his favor as a CF that really don't if he's a "corner outfielder." People like to pretend that emotions don't enter into it, but this ownership has proven in the past that they do, repeatedly. He'll have a better chance to stay in the majors if he's a centerfielder than if he's a right fielder and we all know that.

 

The kind of athleticism and defensive ability I've observed from both the numbers and my limited time seeing him in action suggests very strongly that he will be an elite defensive centerfielder -- much better than the usual guy you promote and play in center just because he happens to be fast. The trick is, he's got to hit at least a little. He can't be out there hitting .120. That's gonna be the question with Lin, which is why he's probably going to wind up traded to a team more willing to take a risk on a centerfielder. Hopefully he hits well enough in the minors to bring something useful back when he goes.

[ORS]

You're comparing big league stats and minor league stats. The more years backward you add to minor league numbers the more peaches' date=' pears, bananas and kumquats you add to the original apples and oranges comparison.[/quote']

No, not when we are talking about fielding. Once the ball comes off the bat, there is no change in the level of difficulty in making a play at different levels. The ball spins the same, it tries to find the same gaps, the player has to cover the same distance to get to it regardless of level.

 

Is the fact that Lin had a RF/G of only about 1.7 as a teenager in the Gulf Coast League really relevant to what you'd expect of him next year? Since weighting the minor league stuff to weed out the early stuff isn't a level of statistical complexity that's compatible with message board discussion, comparing based on the last 2 years is a pretty bogstandard way to go.

Says who? This is what you want to do to conveniently support your position. His GCL performance was only 28 games. It caries little weight in his overall number. His Lowell performance the same year, a 3.00, also carries little weight, it was only 11 games. These aren't propping him up or pulling him down. It's 2008/2009, where he played about 200 games worth of innings in the field, and averaged about 2.30 as a 19/20 year old in A/A+ that you really want to throw away. Why? Because they are inconvenient to the point you are trying to make. Sorry, not buying it.

 

BTW Ellsbury in 06 and 07 had about a 2.4 RF/G in centerfield, which compares roughly to his 2.49 big league numbers. One would expect Lin's roughly 2.7 high minors average (between AA and AAA) to translate about the same way. There's only so many different ways a baseball can spray off a bat so that a centerfielder has to make a play on it.

Sure, one would expect that if they were foolish enough to throw away 200 games worth of data. Just don't expect me to.

[Dojji]

No' date=' not when we are talking about fielding. Once the ball comes off the bat, there is no change in the level of difficulty in making a play at different levels. The ball spins the same, it tries to find the same gaps, the player has to cover the same distance to get to it regardless of level. [/quote']

 

But there is a big difference between the athletic development of an 18 year old in the Gulf Coast League and a 21 year old in AA ball. In fact, there's a very big difference indeed. It would really pay you to recognize that Ellsbury was drafted out of college, and Lin signed as an international free agent, and that their developmental arcs -- and thus their minor league numbers as a whole -- are going to be wildly different as a result. Lin had to do a lot of developing in the minors that Jacoby did in college. As a result, his early numbers are more likely to drag his totals down. As in fact we observe.

 

Again, compare only the last 2 years of Ellsbury's minor league career (06 and 07) which includes his standout defensive season in 2006, with Lin in 2010-2011, which is the closest thing to a straight apples to apples comparison Ellsbury's different career track makes possible, and Lin has the advantage in range over a player who was an award-winning elite top defensive CF prospect.

 

Ellsbury is not by any means a rubbish defender. In fact he's very very good defensively with elite potential.

 

Lin is better.

 

 

 

Says who? This is what you want to do to conveniently support your position. His GCL performance was only 28 games. It caries little weight in his overall number. His Lowell performance the same year, a 3.00, also carries little weight, it was only 11 games. These aren't propping him up or pulling him down. It's 2008/2009, where he played about 200 games worth of innings in the field, and averaged about 2.30 as a 19/20 year old in A/A+ that you really want to throw away. Why? Because they are inconvenient to the point you are trying to make. Sorry, not buying it.

 

Also because we have 2 large samples more recently at a higher level from a player who more closely resembles the Che-Hsuan Lin we see today, at a level of competition that more closely resembles the majors. Those two years are the two most compelling samples of data we have if we want to judge based solely on the numbers -- and I know you know that.

 

You do not do your argument any favors when you try to make these points just for the sake of making them.

[ORS]

Also because we have 2 large samples more recently at a higher level from a player who more closely resembles the Che-Hsuan Lin we see today, at a level of competition that more closely resembles the majors. Those two years are the two most compelling samples of data we have if we want to judge based solely on the numbers -- and I know you know that.

 

You do not do your argument any favors when you try to make these points just for the sake of making them.

The level of competition is irrelevant once the bat has put the ball in play. The act of reaction, route, and making the play is no different at any level. You fail to recognize this every time you bring up what level the performance occured at. This is why throwing out what happened in A/A+ is nothing more than convenient cherry picking. You can do it all you want, but I do not accept any analysis of yours that does this. I do not know that these two years are the most compelling, because I do not have all the information needed to make such a judgment. For example, what type of pitchers were predominant when Ellsbury and Lin were at their respective levels in the minors? GB pitchers would limit outfielder opportunities and FB pitchers vice versa. That's important information with a stat that has a known flaw of assuming an equal distribution of opportunities.

 

Think about what you are saying. You are saying that one offseason, when Lin went from age 20 to 21, Lin improved in his ability to field his position enough to account for a jump from 2.24 in RF/G to 2.81 RF/G. What's more likely, that this development indeed occurred, or that the known inherent flaw in the stat was demonstrated? I think it is safer to assume the latter without all information handy.

 

That you are hanging your hat so confidently on such a flawed stat, and cherry picking it to boot, shows how out of your element you are in this discussion. Don't accuse me of making points for the sake of making them. I disagree lock-stock-and-barrel with your reasoning, since the focus of your argument relies on cherry picking, and you've done little to change my mind. I'm open to being shown some credible reason why we should just throw away half the data, but you haven't done that yet. The scouting of Ellsbury vs Lin doesn't suggest a clear favorite in range and neither do the stats if you use them correctly.

 

You'll have to do better than, "the last two years are the most important", when using something like RF/G. I mean, UZR is essentially an attempt to remove the flaw from RF/G, as each opportunity is graded on the likelihood of making the play, and performance is measured relative to the probability of the average player making a play on a ball hit to that location, and even the creator of UZR says there can be funny results with less than 3 years of data under consideration. You want to take the lesser measure, use less of it, and call it a day. No thanks.

[Dojji]

Think about what you are saying. You are saying that one offseason, when Lin went from age 20 to 21, Lin improved in his ability to field his position enough to account for a jump from 2.24 in RF/G to 2.81 RF/G. What's more likely, that this development indeed occurred, or that the known inherent flaw in the stat was demonstrated? I think it is safer to assume the latter without all information handy.

 

Think about what YOU'RE saying. Which is more reasonable to suppose, that you're exactly what you are at 18 forever, or that significant development in a kid's second full season and progress in a prospect's game occurring roughly when he hits 21 is reasonable to presume?

 

Considering that he followed up that progress with another solid year in Pawtucket (at age 22 no less) that resembled the age 21 season far more closely than the age 20 campaign, you have the choice of assuming that the outlier is the one year at age 20 in Salem, or the two full subsequent seasons at ages 21 and 22 in which the numbers were consistently far better..

[ORS]

Think about what YOU'RE saying. Which is more reasonable to suppose' date=' that you're exactly what you are at 18 forever, or that significant development in a kid's second full season and progress in a prospect's game occurring roughly when he hits 21 is reasonable to presume?[/quote']

Read it again. I'm not placing him at 18 forever. I'm looking at the 5 months of offseason between his 20/21 seasons. This is where you are suggesting something just "clicked". Given the measure being used, the more reasonable assumption is that we are witnessing a manifestation of the flaw.

 

Considering that he followed up that progress with another solid year in Pawtucket (at age 22 no less) you have the choice of assuming that the outlier is the one year at age 20 in Salem, or the two full subsequent seasons at ages 21 and 22 in which the numbers were consistently far better..

You are leaving something out. With the flawed nature of the stat, none of them are outliers, none get thrown away, you take the average. That's what I'm suggesting. You are the only one supporting throwing anything away.

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

Why is this discussion still going on?

[Dojji]

I'm suggesting throwing it out because AA and AAA are the two seasons Ellsbury and Lin had most in common defensively, being the starting CF of their teams at the same levels.

 

You're suggesting not throwing it out because the Salem campaign artificially lowers Lin's number and makes your argument easier.

 

You have 2 full seasons of numbers that suggest that Lin has improved on where he was when he was in Salem. I refuse to permit you to pretend that that progress was not made.

[a700hitter]

Why is this discussion still going on?

I know. It's Lin-sanity!

[Dojji]

I know. It's Lin-sanity!

 

 

I deserved that.

[ORS]

I'm suggesting throwing it out because AA and AAA are the two seasons Ellsbury and Lin had most in common defensively' date=' being the starting CF of their teams.[/quote']

He was the starting CF in Greenville and Salem too. Misfire.

 

You're suggesting not throwing it out because the Salem campaign artificially lowers Lin's number and makes your argument easier.

This is funny. I'm for inclusivness, considering everything, and I get accused by trying to make an artificial result by the guy who wants to cherry pick. Earth to Dojji, this doesn't look good for your argument.

 

You have 2 full seasons of numbers that suggest that Lin has improved on where he was when he was in Salem. I refuse to permit you to pretend that that progress was not made.

By accepting the average, 2.49, which is higher than what he did at Salem (and Greenville), I do accept that progress was made. I also know the stat is very flawed. These two things are not mutually exclusive. I accept that he got better. I don't think he got 0.5 better overnight, though.

 

The only one pretending is you by suggesting that I'm engaging in artifice when you are the one throwing away information that is useful in getting a clearer picture.

[SCM33]

Amusingly enough, Soxprospects recently amended their projected roster to show Lin on the bench of the big league team. Most likely what they have in mind is a temporary replacement for Crawford who gets sent down when Carl is ready to go. It would be interesting though if Lin broke camp with the team.

 

That space might be needed for Iglesias, and the Sox brass seems impressed with Iggy's spring so far, so YMMV I guess.

 

Dojji, the problem I have in your analysis Redsox prospects......is that you think that SoxProspects is like some holy grail scouting tool that nobody in the world knows about which requires secret clearance to access.

 

Its an incredibly biased website and one of the creators/moderators over there is actually a former member of talksox. He was a homer who thought every sox prospect was gold and they used to talk about the Redsox prospects/farm system the same way you do. His name was jsinger. There is a reason why baseball america grades our system much lower than the guys over at soxprospects......its because baseball america knows that Che-Hsuan Lin sucks and doesn't have a chance.

 

The same way that Nava, Tim Federowicz, Yamaico Navarro, Jorge Jimenez, George Kottaras, and Argenis Diaz.....all of whom you've advocated for, never had a chance. They just aren't that good. Just because they were good in college or high school does not mean they are going to make the major leagues. Every single guy who is drafted was the best of the best on their college team or high school team. When was the last time a high school backup RF who hit .230 got drafted?

 

I think BA has a better feel for the talent in our system than a couple of fans over at soxprospects.

[Emmz]

BA uses legit scouting. Soxprospects is well, you said it as good as it could be said. "Some dude".

[Dojji]

He was the starting CF in Greenville and Salem too. Misfire.

 

But Ellsbury is not. I'm trying to compare the two players in ability, so the most comparable samples matter the most. Do you or do you not understand this? As it is we haven't really gotten into the fact that Lin is two years younger than Ellsbury all the way up the line, which matters more on the offensive side but does have an impact on both sides of his game. But do you at least recognize that comparing players at the same level of development can make some sense over trying to compare a college draftee's whole minor league career with an international free agent's?

 

By accepting the average, 2.49, which is higher than what he did at Salem (and Greenville), I do accept that progress was made. I also know the stat is very flawed. These two things are not mutually exclusive. I accept that he got better. I don't think he got 0.5 better overnight, though.

 

OK, bear with me for a second. If this was one year, one standout campaign at the AA level and nothing else changed, I'd be inclined to go along with this manner of thinking, but you have a follow on year where the made progress was by and large retained. That year more closely resembles Portland than Salem, and again, these are the two most recent seasons in which he's played ball.

 

Why are we pretending that these two most recent samples only matter as much as a sample from 3 years ago when Lin wasn't even legal drinking age? Because in trying to use a straight up average, that's exactly what we're doing.

 

I can get behind the idea that these stats are flawed, but they're also the best we have at the moment since the advanced stuff isn't calculated for minor leaguers. I also don't believe that "flawed" and "meaningless" are synonyms if you know what I'm saying.

[mvp 78]

and not to be snide, but that stat confirms my first hand observation.

 

BTW, speaking of defense. I have been impressed with this kid Ciriaco at SS. He's made some plays and he seems to have an idea with the bat.

 

Your boy just hit a walkoff. Thanks to a sick kid, I got to see it.

[seabeachfred]

The run prevention year was a cover up for "bridge year".

 

SCM and Sox Sport----the front office tried to sell us on that "run prevention" crap which was, as SCM said, a bridge year. Many of us didn't buy it then and I'm surprised our friend Dojji is buying it now. Most definitely you need solid defense but how many teams can put three weak bats in a lineup in the AL East and expect to go very far? Hell, we couldn't even be sure that the other six in the batting order would all be doing their job. We've seen enough of the off years like Crawford and Youkilis and Drew last year, and it isn't as if we're weak in CF as it is. Ellsbury not only had a solid season with the bat last year in both the average and power and run producing department but unless my memory is shaky didn't he also win a Gold Glove with an errorless season in the field?

 

I'm told Dojji comes up with something like a phantom prospect every year, and if he wanted to succeed in getting us involved in a thread like this, he did just that. If, OTOH he tried to sell us Lin as a starting outfielder, he pretty much came up empty.

[SCM33]

SCM and Sox Sport----the front office tried to sell us on that "run prevention" crap which was, as SCM said, a bridge year. Many of us didn't buy it then and I'm surprised our friend Dojji is buying it now. Most definitely you need solid defense but how many teams can put three weak bats in a lineup in the AL East and expect to go very far? Hell, we couldn't even be sure that the other six in the batting order would all be doing their job. We've seen enough of the off years like Crawford and Youkilis and Drew last year, and it isn't as if we're weak in CF as it is. Ellsbury not only had a solid season with the bat last year in both the average and power and run producing department but unless my memory is shaky didn't he also win a Gold Glove with an errorless season in the field?

 

I'm told Dojji comes up with something like a phantom prospect every year, and if he wanted to succeed in getting us involved in a thread like this, he did just that. If, OTOH he tried to sell us Lin as a starting outfielder, he pretty much came up empty.

 

This team still has a very good chance to be good. A couple of things just need to work out for us.

 

I was pissed all off-season that they did little and possibly got worse, but last years team was much better than they showed, and this years team still has a damn good chance to play well.

[seabeachfred]

I'll tell you this SCM....The old has-been coach or coach emeritis (take your pick) got his blood really running in the ninth inning when Atchison blew that 1-3 play and sent the game into extra innings. I got so pissed I shut off the TV and went out and read the paper. For that alone I would consider sending that guy down. I noticed the relay plays BV worked on this ST has payed off pretty well, but he should send one of his coaches out with a shagger to catch balls and a IB to catch throws and hit that bum 1000 balls tomorrow on the side field. How the hell can a guy blow a play like that anyway?

 

What made it worse is that I missed Ciriaco's bomb to end the game.