Should Jackie Bradley Jr be traded?

[devildavid]

SLG is not a flawed stat. I greatly prefer it to batting average, which is about as flawed as it gets.

 

BA tells you that basically every hitter in MLB gets a hit in 20 to 30% of their at-bats. THat's not exacty a wide range despite how fans like to treat it. Get a hit 28% of the time, you need to be starting. Get a hit 24% of the time? Go to the bench.

 

SLG is the offensive stat that does allow for seperation, SLG can run a much bigger range, with most of the league falling between .300 to .600. It does favor XBH hitters, but then isn't this another advantage over BA, where a single and a home run are equal?

 

SLG is very flawed. It assigns over simplified values to hits. BA is a fine indicator of hitting safely and that's all I want from it. Its simplicity makes it reliable. SLG is wrong in assigning its values to hits. ISO is a much better measure of power.

[notin]

SLG is very flawed. It assigns over simplified values to hits. BA is a fine indicator of hitting safely and that's all I want from it. Its simplicity makes it reliable. SLG is wrong in assigning its values to hits. ISO is a much better measure of power.

 

ISO is SLG minus batting average. It assigns the exact same value to hits as SLG does. It's based on SLG and could not exist without it...

[jacksonianmarch]

How is slugging flawed? It’s total bases divided by at bats. It’s a good measure of power.

[Kimmi]

We can't really use any numbers to rank players across different time eras. We also can't use it across leagues because the NL doesn't have the DH.

 

Why not? WAR is adjusted for those things, very similar to the way many stats are park adjusted.

[Kimmi]

OPS sucks. I try very hard to ignore it. It is now fashionable to use it but it is a lousy measure. I don't look at BA to correlate with runs scored, I look at it to evaluate one specific aspect of hitting ability. OPS is a statistical nightmare. SLG sucks too and contributes heavily to the suckiness of OPS.

 

I will have to respectfully disagree. Not only does it correlate well with runs scored, it also gives one a very good idea of who the good hitters are, despite its flaws.

[Kimmi]

So it doesn't really help me in evaluating the specific skills of a player, which is all I am concerned with. I don't care about their worth, whatever that means.

 

That's fair enough if you're not interested in a player's worth. However, I don't think WAR is misguided. It serves a very good purpose, though it might not be what you care about.

[notin]

SLG is very flawed. It assigns over simplified values to hits. BA is a fine indicator of hitting safely and that's all I want from it. Its simplicity makes it reliable. SLG is wrong in assigning its values to hits. ISO is a much better measure of power.

 

I think batting average might be the most overrated stat. Not only does it tell you all hitters fall into a very tight range, but think about what it is. It’s the percentage of times a player gets a hit when he does not walk,get hit by a pitch, voluntarily give himself up or manage to hit a deep fly ball with a runner on third and less than 2 outs.

 

Pretty specific stuff, but I do have to use it as it is easily the most recognizable stat in baseball...

[Kimmi]

I think batting average might be the most overrated stat. Not only does it tell you all hitters fall into a very tight range, but think about what it is. It’s the percentage of times a player gets a hit when he does not walk,get hit by a pitch, voluntarily give himself up or manage to hit a deep fly ball with a runner on third and less than 2 outs.

 

Pretty specific stuff, but I do have to use it as it is easily the most recognizable stat in baseball...

 

It also treats an infield single the same as a triple or a HR. Not to mention many 'hits' are at the discretion of the team's official scorer.

 

I use BA all the time, as I do ERA, RBIs, and other traditional stats. They have their value.

[Slasher9]

Jackie Bradley Jr. should not be traded.

[S5Dewey]

Jackie Bradley Jr. should not be traded.

 

I don't see why this is even an issue. Of course he shouldn't be traded. Something we should have learned by now is that the outfield is weaker in two positions every day he's being rested. We may be able to get away with that against weaker teams but when the playoffs come I want our regular outfield out there.

 

Now that he's hitting I don't understand why this thread is even up.

[notin]

Jackie Bradley Jr. should not be traded.

 

The only reason to even think about this would be if the Sox had another outfielder coming up they needed to find a place for.

 

The Sox don’t have that guy, not even in Rusney Castillo.

[notin]

 

Now that he's hitting I don't understand why this thread is even up.

 

Ironically the thread makes more sense now that he is hitting. When he wasn’t hitting, it was nothing more than a multi-page argument to sell low on him.

 

I say don’t just keep Bradley - extend him...

[notin]

It also treats an infield single the same as a triple or a HR. Not to mention many 'hits' are at the discretion of the team's official scorer.

 

I use BA all the time, as I do ERA, RBIs, and other traditional stats. They have their value.

 

Not to mention a player’s batting average can get worse if a slower runner gets thrown out at home on a sac fly attempt. If the speed of another runner makes you look like a better or worse hitter, that is a flaw..

[S5Dewey]

Ironically the thread makes more sense now that he is hitting. When he wasn’t hitting, it was nothing more than a multi-page argument to sell low on him.

 

I say don’t just keep Bradley - extend him...

 

ya. And the sooner the better, because if he starts to hit like he might we'll never be able to afford him.

[Bellhorn04]

Possibly worth noting in connection with this thread is that Twins center fielder Byron Buxton, winner of the 2017 Gold Glove and Fielding Bible awards, has been struggling so badly on offense this year that he's been optioned to AAA.

[cp176]

The only reason to even think about this would be if the Sox had another outfielder coming up they needed to find a place for.

 

The Sox don’t have that guy, not even in Rusney Castillo.

 

Who is to say that any replacement for JBJ would come from our system? I think just about everybody would favor keeping JBJ but I would highly doubt that he would accept the kind of extension that he would likely be offered. If DD makes an offer based on what he has done for us, I don't see JBJ happy with what he might be offered. JBJ is a very valuable player for us right now doing what he does. I'm happy everytime he hits but we all know that it is his defense that gives him value. We do not currently need his bat and if we don't in the future all is good. If we do happen to need his bat, sorry but his value drops dramatically I think. I really do like him but with out the complete package, he isn't going to get the money he might want from Boston. I'm done with this topic primarily because I can see it turning in to those that see no weaknesses in his game and I guess people like me. I really am trying to be realistic but I would also say that right now he presents a big old "no problem".

[vegasbob]

Given the odd quirks and big open spaces of Fenway's CF for 81 games a year, a superb fielding OF'er with speed and good instincts tyo the ball is a huge benefit fr this team. Betts in RF is the best of both worlds with ++ defense and a good bat. With a JDM type in LF carrying the big bat , as with TSW, Yaz, Rice, Manny over the decades, you can afford a lighter bat in CF. If you can get Fred Lynn then so much better.

 

It would be interesting to get an honest poll of Red Sox pitchers on this topic. Would they want to keep JBJr or go for a lesser fielder who could hit .275+ ?

 

With the FA markets possibly changing their trend , JBJr may not find a huge payday out there when the time comes. Certainly not a 7-10 year deal. He will be a mulyi-millionaire in any case, Boston extension or otherwise so don't lose too much sleep worrying about his feelings.

[Bellhorn04]

It would be interesting to get an honest poll of Red Sox pitchers on this topic. Would they want to keep JBJr or go for a lesser fielder who could hit .275+ ?

 

Option 1 would be a landslide winner there.

[OH FOY]

At 28 years old Damon or Ellsbury would be starting over JBJ in CF.

[dgalehouse]

For the love of God , can we please terminate this thread ? The repetiveness and redundancy of the pro and con arguments is mind numbing. No more , please. We get it.

[cp176]

For the love of God , can we please terminate this thread ? The repetiveness and redundancy of the pro and con arguments is mind numbing. No more , please. We get it.

 

Start a new one!

[Jasonbay44]

Possibly worth noting in connection with this thread is that Twins center fielder Byron Buxton, winner of the 2017 Gold Glove and Fielding Bible awards, has been struggling so badly on offense this year that he's been optioned to AAA.

 

I feel like he really didn't get much of a chance this year. After an awesome year last year, he gets injured this year, only gets 90 AB's before being sent to minors? Seems harsh.. but then again, Twins did send 2017 All Star Miguel Sano to Single-A, so who really knows what they're doing.

[Spudboy]

Jackie Bradley Jr. should not be traded.

 

Thank Gawd for this post.

[Sox75]

Jackie Bradley Jr. should not be traded.

 

Jackie rising back to norm? I think so???

 

Last 25 games

 

25 80 9 18 3 0 4 13 8 19 3 0 .225 .319 .413 .732

 

Or just a hot streak?

 

If we could just get this, I'm 100% good with JBJ

[Kimmi]

Jackie Bradley Jr. should not be traded.

 

End of story.

[Kimmi]

Not to mention a player’s batting average can get worse if a slower runner gets thrown out at home on a sac fly attempt. If the speed of another runner makes you look like a better or worse hitter, that is a flaw..

 

That too.

[Kimmi]

For the love of God , can we please terminate this thread ? The repetiveness and redundancy of the pro and con arguments is mind numbing. No more , please. We get it.

 

It's what we do here. We debate things ad nauseam because we have nothing better to do.

[S5Dewey]

It's what we do here. We debate things ad nauseam because we have nothing better to do.

 

Think about this if you will - This Red Sox team is doing so well that we have nothing to debate here other than whether to trade our GG-caliber Center Fielder who isn't hitting well.

 

Isn't that almost called an embarrassment of riches?

[dgalehouse]

It's what we do here. We debate things ad nauseam because we have nothing better to do.

 

130 pages ?

[cp176]

Think about this if you will - This Red Sox team is doing so well that we have nothing to debate here other than whether to trade our GG-caliber Center Fielder who isn't hitting well.

 

Isn't that almost called an embarrassment of riches?

 

yes I think that it is an embarrassment of riches. The popularity of this great game seems to be in decline. There are lots of reasons for this for sure but one of them might certainly become that there are so many pathetically poor teams playing these days if something doesn't change going forward. I'm ok with it because our team is what one of the best 4 out there. I really do think that it is and embarrassment of riches that we can be so damn good with a starting center fielder who struggles to hit .200 whether he is gold glove calibre or not. But - I think that everybody is ok with it as long as we continue to be one of the most dominant teams in the game. It is all good.