Should Jackie Bradley Jr be traded?

[Larry Cook]

We are less than a dozen games into the season. The temperature of the games at Fenway has been barely north of freezing.

 

Let’s pay closer attention to what is working than what is not at this early part of the season.

 

Let’s revisit trading Bradley in June.

[cp176]

I like JBJ and don't want him to be traded. Need to get that out of the way. But - Do people really not think that what he brings to us is replaceable? He is a very good center fielder for sure but is he so good that he would not be replaceable? Sale - Price (if healthy)- Kimbrel- Betts - Devers - probably Bogaerts. I am not trying to argue with anyone - I like the guy once again - but what about him am I missing here?

[Bellhorn04]

I like JBJ and don't want him to be traded. Need to get that out of the way. But - Do people really not think that what he brings to us is replaceable? He is a very good center fielder for sure but is he so good that he would not be replaceable? Sale - Price (if healthy)- Kimbrel- Betts - Devers - probably Bogaerts. I am not trying to argue with anyone - I like the guy once again - but what about him am I missing here?

 

Well, I guess the real question is whether his fielding is replaceable.

[cp176]

Well, I guess the real question is whether his fielding is replaceable.

 

Well, I'm not going to quote anybody and once again I'm satisfied with him out there - I think that he is damn good. What confuses me is that when our illustrious analytic experts seem to say that he isn't at the top of his class so to speak. I certainly don't know who he would be replaceable by but if he isn't at the very top of the fielding list, sorry but at some point in his career I could certainly see him being moved. I think that he is a very good center fielder but some have indicated that his defense although good is surpassed by others. Kind of messes with my (I really don't care too much about what the analytics say about him) mind.

[Bellhorn04]

Well, I'm not going to quote anybody and once again I'm satisfied with him out there - I think that he is damn good. What confuses me is that when our illustrious analytic experts seem to say that he isn't at the top of his class so to speak. I certainly don't know who he would be replaceable by but if he isn't at the very top of the fielding list, sorry but at some point in his career I could certainly see him being moved. I think that he is a very good center fielder but some have indicated that his defense although good is surpassed by others. Kind of messes with my (I really don't care too much about what the analytics say about him) mind.

 

Well, let's assume that there are some better center fielders out there.

 

The next question is whether any of them are available and at what price.

[Sox75]

It's pretty clear that Cora has been asked to shuffle JDM into the outfield lineup, as I'm quite sure there were promises made in contract negotiations. It's already CRYSTAL CLEAR what a difference JBJ makes in CF. There is no denying that his D saves runs. I'm worried that promises 'could have been made' to slot JDM permanently into this OF, which would of course mean trading JBJ, or relegating him to the OF sub role?

 

Sure! There is also no denying that JBJ is streaky. Hell . . . Beni is also pretty streaky. It's been easy slotting in JDM so far, but against good teams, there have already been clear instances where JDM does not get to balls either Mookie would get to in RF, JBJ would get to in CF, and Beni would make in LF. It's tough to watch. So far, no games have been lost due to the shuffle, but that will change against teams capable of making you pay for these missed plays.

 

I wish knew what the end game is, but it appears that we will be dealing with this often cringe-worthy experiment for the forseeable future.

 

In my mind, this experiment is preferable to outright trading JBJ. I THINK Cora's hands are tied on this, so there is no sense bashing him for shuffling the OF. Promises appear to have been made, and those promises are being kept.

[moonslav59]

See, that's the great thing about sarcasm. It overstates a point in order to make another point. Sometimes it's worthwhile to ignore that it's sarcasm in order to point out the ridiculousness of the original point.

 

My head's spinning!

 

 

[S5Dewey]

My head's spinning!

 

 

 

Then my work here is done!

[moonslav59]

Well, I guess the real question is whether his fielding is replaceable.

 

There are other great defensive CF'ers in MLB, so I'd have to say, yes, he is replaceable. Certainly, his offense is replaceable.

 

We might have signed Jarrod Dyson to $4M/1 and traded JBJ & Wright for a 3rd starter, but I'm happy with JBJ in CF full time.

 

I get that JMart wants to play the OF, but he's a clown out there. We have to do what's best for the team. If he doesn't get it, just show him the film. If he pouts, it was a bad signing.

[S5Dewey]

I have to wonder how much weight these "guarantees" carry when it comes down to winning and losing.

 

It appears that he thinks he can still play the OF and wanted the guarantees to prove it. Instead he's proving that he can't play the position, which means that no other team is going to want him in their OF either.

 

He's essentially screwed. He'd do well to accept the fact that he's a full time DH here and embrace it. Then he can wait and exercise his opt-outs if he so chooses - and if he wants to play for considerably less money.

[jacksonianmarch]

You can get Lagares from the Mets for free and he’s a damn good CFer defensively. If Bradley puts up a mid .800s OPS, he gets into rarified air. When he’s low .700s, he’s easily replaceable. I think teams will overpay for the history and potentially just get the defense.

[jacksonianmarch]

If Hanley’s option doesn’t vest, then there’s a reasonable chance JBJ makes it to FA as a Red Sox.

[moonslav59]

If Hanley’s option doesn’t vest, then there’s a reasonable chance JBJ makes it to FA as a Red Sox.

 

There are other players we can choose to let walk away over JBJ, and if JMart is to go on being a FT DH, then we'll need JBJ in our OF.

 

Brannen is somewhat of a long shot and my be 2-3 years away. Castillo would add too much to the budget (maybe more than JBJ's last 2 arbs).

 

We have nobody else to play OF, except non-OF'ers like Nunez, Holt, Swihart and Moreland, and some of them won't be around for JBJ's last arb year anyways.

[mvp 78]

You can get Lagares from the Mets for free and he’s a damn good CFer defensively. If Bradley puts up a mid .800s OPS, he gets into rarified air. When he’s low .700s, he’s easily replaceable. I think teams will overpay for the history and potentially just get the defense.

 

JBJ at his worst offensively is better than Lagares at his best. Lagares has a glove, but none of the upside.

[cp176]

There are other players we can choose to let walk away over JBJ, and if JMart is to go on being a FT DH, then we'll need JBJ in our OF.

 

Brannen is somewhat of a long shot and my be 2-3 years away. Castillo would add too much to the budget (maybe more than JBJ's last 2 arbs).

 

We have nobody else to play OF, except non-OF'ers like Nunez, Holt, Swihart and Moreland, and some of them won't be around for JBJ's last arb year anyways.

 

He is going to have to hit.

[moonslav59]

He is going to have to hit.

 

Of course, there is a minimum offensive level JBJ has to reach to remain a plus.

 

To me, he's probably still a slight plus at around a .525 to .575 OPS. He looks like our best choice now while hitting .399.

 

I see no reason to think JBJ will end the season below .650. To me, he's a significant plus at .650-.700.

[sk7326]

Bradley is in a slump - obviously. Ultimately he should be able to get on base enough to play - just have to ride the current stretch out.

[notin]

See, that's the great thing about sarcasm. It overstates a point in order to make another point. Sometimes it's worthwhile to ignore that it's sarcasm in order to point out the ridiculousness of the original point.

 

I guess, if you're trying to completely ignore someone else's point in order to substitute your own.

 

He made a clear point that fielding percentage is not a good defensive metric. Because, you know, it isn't. ...

[moonslav59]

I guess, if you're trying to completely ignore someone else's point in order to substitute your own.

 

He made a clear point that fielding percentage is not a good defensive metric. Because, you know, it isn't. ...

 

I know it's a tiny sample size, but if our first 9 games don't prove that Fldg% is as near as useless as a stat can be, then nothing will convince those who believe it's better than any defensive metric.

 

And, if "it's what I observed is all that matters" argument is pulled out, I will ask, what have you all observed over these 9 games?

 

Great D?

Good D?

Decent D?

Bad D?

Horrible D?

 

If anyone chooses one of the first 2, I'm going to suggest an eye exam.

 

If anyone chooses "decent", I'm going to disagree.

 

Can we all agree to just throw fldg% into the trash, once and for all?

 

(I expect it's impossible to get 100% consensus on anything, but WTH!)

[sk7326]

Team is off to a slow start on that side of the field. But then the team led the world in DRS last year - so there is some evidence that this will get better. Of course replacing Pedroia with Nunez hurts a lot. Martinez is a terrible LF too - although Fenway seems to have a way of making good LF metric seasons very difficult.

[FredLynn]

Bradley is in a slump - obviously. Ultimately he should be able to get on base enough to play - just have to ride the current stretch out.

 

Funny....you could also say that Bradley has been in a "slump" for his last 600 PAs. Or you can say that he isn't a very good offensive player. Never mind: I will say it. The only debate is whether or not his shortcomings with a bat are compensated for by his defensive prowess.

[Thunder]

Funny....you could also say that Bradley has been in a "slump" for his last 600 PAs. Or you can say that he isn't a very good offensive player. Never mind: I will say it. The only debate is whether or not his shortcomings with a bat are compensated for by his defensive prowess.

 

To me, they definitely are. I personally don't think he is that bad of an offensive player, but even if I look at it from your point of you, I come to the conclusion that world class defense like his is so much more valuable. If there's a stat that measures how many hits/runs per game any one particular outfield, I would love to see where he ranks on that. Think about how many runs he saved last year, and compare that to where the team would be if all those runs had scored. I think we would be hovering right around .500, if not below it.

[sk7326]

Funny....you could also say that Bradley has been in a "slump" for his last 600 PAs. Or you can say that he isn't a very good offensive player. Never mind: I will say it. The only debate is whether or not his shortcomings with a bat are compensated for by his defensive prowess.

 

Last year's production ... below average with a decent OBP considering (.323) with his glove is a 2 win player ... which is a decent starter. I am frustrated too, and given his age and the in-house alternatives, he is the most expendable of the kiddos. But - he has shown this will get better.

[moonslav59]

Team is off to a slow start on that side of the field. But then the team led the world in DRS last year - so there is some evidence that this will get better. Of course replacing Pedroia with Nunez hurts a lot. Martinez is a terrible LF too - although Fenway seems to have a way of making good LF metric seasons very difficult.

 

We also had Marrero at 3B for a big chunk of last year, so 150 games of Devers will see a loss there as well.

 

It looks like HRam will play more 1B than last year- another drop off.

 

The more JMart plays the OF, the more drop off there.

 

I don't think we'll be that close to last year's team, defensively, but I do think we're better than 23rd.

[OH FOY]

Take out his Hot June last year he hit .217 for the year. But I take out his High and Low last year, he hit .228. I mean he better save 50+ runs for the year, for all the Runners left on base.

I guess it could be done.

At this point he is 0-5 with RISP.

If he could just hit with RISP, I'll live with low average.

Edited April 9, 2018 by OH FOY!

[FredLynn]

Last year's production ... below average with a decent OBP considering (.323) with his glove is a 2 win player ... which is a decent starter. I am frustrated too, and given his age and the in-house alternatives, he is the most expendable of the kiddos. But - he has shown this will get better.

 

Last year, of the 62 AL OF with at least 200 PAs, Bradley ranked 44th in OPS. On the other hand, he ranked 15th in WAR. I do not value WAR as much as more objective data since WAR relies too much on subjective defensive metrics. Still, its obvious that Bradley is a very good defensive OF. There has to be a floor below which he should be removed from the lineup. So far this year his OPS is .399 with an OPS+ of 15. That is clearly below that floor. I have seen little evidence that he, as you put it, "will get better" so far. Where that floor is is the fodder for debate.

[moonslav59]

Last year, of the 62 AL OF with at least 200 PAs, Bradley ranked 44th in OPS. On the other hand, he ranked 15th in WAR. I do not value WAR as much as more objective data since WAR relies too much on subjective defensive metrics. Still, its obvious that Bradley is a very good defensive OF. There has to be a floor below which he should be removed from the lineup. So far this year his OPS is .399 with an OPS+ of 15. That is clearly below that floor. I have seen little evidence that he, as you put it, "will get better" so far. Where that floor is is the fodder for debate.

 

You think he'll end up at .399?

 

I agree, here is a floor.

 

Defense does matter, and as far as "subjective defensive metrics" go, I think JBJ is even better than they indicate, so maybe he was a 2.3 or 2.4 WAR OF'er last year.

[moonslav59]

Take out his Hot June last year he hit .217 for the year. But I take out his High and Low last year, he hit .228. I mean he better save 50+ runs for the year, for all the Runners left on base.

I guess it could be done.

At this point he is 0-5 with RISP.

If he could just hit with RISP, I'll live with low average.

 

It's how many runners he leaves on base as compared to the average CF'er. Then that number can be compared to how many runs he saves with his defense.

 

(BTW, JBJ is also a plus base-runner, so he gains a few runs that way.)

[FredLynn]

You think he'll end up at .399?

 

I agree, here is a floor.

 

Defense does matter, and as far as "subjective defensive metrics" go, I think JBJ is even better than they indicate, so maybe he was a 2.3 or 2.4 WAR OF'er last year.

 

No doubt he will improve on .399. Last year I think he was at .726.

I don't think you can take those number in vacuum. If the team already has guys who cannot hit the baseball then we are going to need a CF who can hit better than .726. If the team is already hitting we can afford someone like Bradley who is basically inept with a bat in his hands but defensively is a genius. I am sure that management is going to consider the context in which JBJ is performing rather than his numbers in isolation.

[moonslav59]

2017

 

Late and close:

 

RBIs per AB

 

19/99 Betts

15/104 Moreland

14/110 Beni

13/82 Pedey

11/59 Leon

11/105 Bogey

9/87 HRam\

8 103 JBJ

7/60 Vaz.

 

It looks to me like JBj was "short" about 3-6 RBIs whn "it counts" last year.

 

He more than makes up 6 runs with his defense and base-running, IMO.

 

 

RISP opportunities and RBIs

RBI/AB

74/138 Betts

70/134 Beni

54/160 Moreland

53/76 Pedey

47/131 Bogey

42/128 JBJ

36/139 HRam

35/66 Leon

23/54 Devers

22/77 Vaz

 

How many is he "short" here?

 

10-12 RBIs?

 

Does he save or add runs by more than that with his D and running?

 

I'd say, "YES and then some."