Jackie Bradley

[moonslav59]

Not a chance and I also love the guy .He can’t hit for months at a time .

 

That's not how managers decide who to play or not. They look at the total package.

 

Plus, you do realize, JBJ hit pretty well for a much longer stretch than his slump.

 

OPS

.406 April

.810 May-Oct.

(.846 after May 20th- 109 games/38 games at .421)

 

2018

.738 first 17 games

.286 next 21 games

.793 last 106 games

 

We're talking 38 and 21 game horrid slumps.

 

We're talking 109 and 123 game nice stretches- not great but pretty good, especially with the defense and plus base running.

 

How about 2017?

.637 in 28 games

.821 in 80 games

.512 last 25 games

(2 bad slumps but still a longer hot streak than the 2 slumps combined.)

 

2015-2016 combined

.834 in 230 games total.

 

[Bellhorn04]

Two of the guys JBJ often gets compared to are Kiermaier and Pillar.

 

2019 OPS

 

JBJ .738

Pillar .735

Kiermaier .676

[Slasher9]

Two of the guys JBJ often gets compared to are Kiermaier and Pillar.

 

2019 OPS

 

JBJ .738

Pillar .735

Kiermaier .676

 

thank you.

[notin]

He will be the FT starting CF'er for a good team all 2020 long. Book it.

 

If he is in Boston, sure. If they deal him or non-tender him, he could wind up starting for anyone...

[moonslav59]

If he is in Boston, sure. If they deal him or non-tender him, he could wind up starting for anyone...

 

Yes, I could be wrong on the "good team" part of my projection, but he will be a FT starter for somebody- all year long.

[notin]

Yes, I could be wrong on the "good team" part of my projection, but he will be a FT starter for somebody- all year long.

 

Of course he will be a started if he gets his $10-12 million. No one is going to pay him that to be a fourth outfielder when those guys typically sign for $1-5 million tops.

 

And if Boston tenders him a contact, as expected, that's what he gets...

[Jack Flap]

Two of the guys JBJ often gets compared to are Kiermaier and Pillar.

 

2019 OPS

 

JBJ .738

Pillar .735

Kiermaier .676

 

Yeah, and it's not like those guys are struggling to find MLB jobs or playing time. I don't know why we often act as if JBJ's offensive numbers are unacceptably, unplayably bad for a terrific defensive CF, because they aren't. If he had Sandy Leon's batting line or something, I would understand it, but with what he provides with the glove, you can sign me up for his .700+ OPS with 10-20 HR any time. I know many disagree.

[Nick]

He won't play in Boston for $10M+ because

Price $31M

Sale $26M

Betts $28+M

Xander $20M

Pedroia $13M, collecting on unemployment

[notin]

He won't play in Boston for $10M+ because

Price $31M

Sale $26M

Betts $28+M

Xander $20M

Pedroia $13M, collecting on unemployment

 

I would agree with that, but the thread was started because MLBTR posted an article about their plans to tender him. I think if they do, they won't be able to deal him.

 

And as much as it bothers me, I am not so sure the $28mill you have committed to Betts is a guarantee to be on the Sox roster...

[notin]

Yeah, and it's not like those guys are struggling to find MLB jobs or playing time. I don't know why we often act as if JBJ's offensive numbers are unacceptably, unplayably bad for a terrific defensive CF, because they aren't. If he had Sandy Leon's batting line or something, I would understand it, but with what he provides with the glove, you can sign me up for his .700+ OPS with 10-20 HR any time. I know many disagree.

 

Not to mention, it's not like he is batting in the 3 thru 5 spots. He's the 8th or 9th spot hitter...

[Nick]

I would agree with that, but the thread was started because MLBTR posted an article about their plans to tender him. I think if they do, they won't be able to deal him.

 

And as much as it bothers me, I am not so sure the $28mill you have committed to Betts is a guarantee to be on the Sox roster...

 

Does the opt out/in for JD occur before we tender offers to our arbitration eligible guys? I think that will have some impact downstream.

[Bellhorn04]

Does the opt out/in for JD occur before we tender offers to our arbitration eligible guys? I think that will have some impact downstream.

 

The opt out/in date for JD is 5 days after the WS ends.

[Slasher9]

the opt out/in date for jd is 5 days after the nats beat the astros to win the ws.

 

ftfy

[Kimmi]

JBJ is still my favorite player, but I seriously doubt he's back next year, unless we non tender him, and he agrees to come back at a lower than arb cost.

 

Porcello will cost too much to bring back to a team looking to reset.

 

We can't afford either of them, especially, if as you said, we will be contenders in 2020, and we reset.

 

I don't really disagree. I think there's a very good chance that Jackie will not be back next year, though the speculation is that he'll be tendered, then traded. The chances of Porcello being re-signed are very slim.

 

I'm just saying I would be pleased if they both return next year.

[moonslav59]

I don't really disagree. I think there's a very good chance that Jackie will not be back next year, though the speculation is that he'll be tendered, then traded. The chances of Porcello being re-signed are very slim.

 

I'm just saying I would be pleased if they both return next year.

 

I don't think you would. We'd have to pay too much for Porcello, and you'd say it was too much.

 

I do think teams will trade for JBJ, and he won't be non tendered, but I've been moving towards the non tendering position, of late.

[Kimmi]

I don't think you would. We'd have to pay too much for Porcello, and you'd say it was too much.

 

I do think teams will trade for JBJ, and he won't be non tendered, but I've been moving towards the non tendering position, of late.

 

You are right that I probably wouldn't be pleased with the cost, but that is a different matter than being pleased with having Porcello on the team. It is rare that I'm pleased with the cost of acquiring players these days.

[Larry Cook]

I don't think you would. We'd have to pay too much for Porcello, and you'd say it was too much.

 

I do think teams will trade for JBJ, and he won't be non tendered, but I've been moving towards the non tendering position, of late.

 

I would be very surprised if we can trade Bradley.

 

And I would equally surprised if we did not tender him.

[moonslav59]

The Red Sox could save $8 million by throwing in about $3 million in a trade of Jackie Bradley Jr. ... without getting much in return.

 

Or not.

 

Unless it helped us get a nice return we wouldn't have gotten otherwise, I can't see tendering JBJ a contract and then paying part of his salary (arb) to dump him for scraps.

[harmony]

Unless it helped us get a nice return we wouldn't have gotten otherwise, I can't see tendering JBJ a contract and then paying part of his salary (arb) to dump him for scraps.

Valid point.

[SoxnCycles]

You are right that I probably wouldn't be pleased with the cost, but that is a different matter than being pleased with having Porcello on the team. It is rare that I'm pleased with the cost of acquiring players these days.

 

I'm not sure that teams will be lining up to sign Porcello and he has said more than once that he's like to stay.

If the cost is reasonable, He could be back.

[moonslav59]

I'm not sure that teams will be lining up to sign Porcello and he has said more than once that he's like to stay.

If the cost is reasonable, He could be back.

 

I think people will be surprised how much he gets from somebody... maybe us.

[Kimmi]

I'm not sure that teams will be lining up to sign Porcello and he has said more than once that he's like to stay.

If the cost is reasonable, He could be back.

 

I am hopeful that he will take an incentive based type deal for one year, in the hopes of improving his value for next offseason.

 

The fact that he wants to stay should work in our favor.

[notin]

I am hopeful that he will take an incentive based type deal for one year, in the hopes of improving his value for next offseason.

 

The fact that he wants to stay should work in our favor.

 

Yeah but it's all about the budget and if they can get under the tax limit...

[Kimmi]

Yeah but it's all about the budget and if they can get under the tax limit...

 

Maybe, maybe not. I know it's a goal, but I'm not convinced that they are committed to that yet.

[Slasher9]

Springer sucks. Jogged after that pop fly. This is the ALCS ffs....

[S5Dewey]

If JH is willing to go over the upper limit the question is... how far will he go over? Does he go a little over in the hope of making a run this year and trending downward for 2021? Or will he go 'whole hawg' and pull out all the stops?

[oldtimer]

Maybe, maybe not. I know it's a goal, but I'm not convinced that they are committed to that yet.

 

I think your grasping at straws if you think gooing over the limit will make them competitive with the best AL teams. The straws I think you hope for are that Sale, Price and Eovaldi all have much better years. I think the probability of that happening is low, so would instead stick to the idea of a reset in 2020, taking the hit next year with the hope of recovering during the 2021 and 2022 seasons. A strong pitching staff is paramount in competing at the highest level and there is a low probability the Sox will be good in that regard. If there is anyway to clear the starting pitching logjam in 2020, I would head in that direction.

 

I got back to my home in Florida and start playing softball again today. My goal is to lose the extra weight I gained on the European Cruise. Hope to be more successful than I think the Sox will be resetting while remaining competitive.

[jad]

I am hopeful that he will take an incentive based type deal for one year, in the hopes of improving his value for next offseason.

 

The fact that he wants to stay should work in our favor.

 

I've heard this argument a couple of times. But it seems wishful thinking. Why would a veteran give up MLB's guaranteed money on a long-term deal for a one-year contract demanding that he 'prove himself'?

[notin]

Maybe, maybe not. I know it's a goal, but I'm not convinced that they are committed to that yet.

 

Kennedy admitted they are not...

[notin]

I've heard this argument a couple of times. But it seems wishful thinking. Why would a veteran give up MLB's guaranteed money on a long-term deal for a one-year contract demanding that he 'prove himself'?

 

Players do it all the time. The idea is to get a much bigger contract one year later.

 

The bigger question is - why would a pitcher do it in Boston? Go to San Diego or Oakland...