The 1B Predicament

[Old Red]

1 minute ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Not that it matters at this point, but if Sale hadn't been traded and if he pitched as well for the Sox as he did for the Braves, he'd be with us this year because of the vesting option in his contract.  

Something most likely would have happened to Sale if he would have stayed in Boston last year. He had to get away from the bad injury juju in Boston.

[Bellhorn04]

1 minute ago, Old Red said:

Something most likely would have happened to Sale if he would have stayed in Boston last year. He had to get away from the bad injury juju in Boston.

Could be.  One thing we know for sure: Grissom wasn't much of a get!

[ChiTown BoSox Fan 1983]

Now Campbell is the solution???!  Do they really feel that a guy hitting under .200 with amassing strikeout totals over the last 3 weeks is the answer?   This organization is toxic.  Top to bottom they are not accountable and the play on the field shows.  Crochet and Bregman (who will opt out for sure) were window dressing to stem the tide of dwindling attendance. The bullpen is a joke, the Story contract looks worse and worse as time goes on and Cora coddles these players too much.   The long term contracts to Rafaela and Campbell are plays out of the White Sox play book.  Lock up “prospects” on the cheap and hope they become bonafide big leaguers.  In any business hope  is not a strategy.  

[notin]

18 hours ago, Old Red said:

Like I said earlier just, because KC is working out at 1B doesn’t mean anything is imminent. My question all along to is why the Red Sox hasn’t had a reliable actual 1B in the system not only for now, but the past 3-4 years as well. Flintstone Schwarber, Franchy Strange Glove, Arroyo, and the ones they have tried now shouldn’t have to be the answers. It like throwing things against the wall to see what sticks.The Red Sox used 11 different 2B last year, so the same thing there.

They could have signed some Rowdy Tellez type to a minor league deal.  It might have been better, but players like that aren’t much of an upgrade over Romy Gonzalez.  Most MLB first basemen are players who move there because they can hit but not field another position.  Actual first base prospects are usually players learning that role as well and many fall into this category.  

[Brock Beauchamp]

31 minutes ago, ChiTown BoSox Fan 1983 said:

Now Campbell is the solution???!  Do they really feel that a guy hitting under .200 with amassing strikeout totals over the last 3 weeks is the answer?   This organization is toxic.  Top to bottom they are not accountable and the play on the field shows.  Crochet and Bregman (who will opt out for sure) were window dressing to stem the tide of dwindling attendance. The bullpen is a joke, the Story contract looks worse and worse as time goes on and Cora coddles these players too much.   The long term contracts to Rafaela and Campbell are plays out of the White Sox play book.  Lock up “prospects” on the cheap and hope they become bonafide big leaguers.  In any business hope  is not a strategy.  

Welcome to Talk Sox!

[notin]

9 hours ago, TedYazPapiMookie said:

If you watched today's game you got to see why Devers can't be the 1B.  The play where Campbell caught a routine ground ball to his left and the 1B took one too many steps to his right to get back to 1B but then decided to try and messed up the pitcher who was supposed to cover the base.  That confusion represents what it's like to use a non 1B at 1B.  The whole situation is ridiculous.  

Cora stated boldly that Devers can retire his gloves and he was correct in saying that.

Breslow just minutes before that in an interview said Devers would move to 1B.

Cora has the owners in his corner and Breslow needs to listen to Cora.  Words I NEVER thought I would say.

Breslow needs to make another excellent trade for a young high ceiling 1B who will replace Casas as the long term solution by giving them the injured Casas and a significant pre-arb player like Abreu who is a platoon player that could be used full time by other teams without as much depth as the Red Sox.

Also, the goofy stat cast defensive numbers need to be banned from baseball for their inaccuracy.

The highest fielding percentage in the infield is Campbell.  The faulty DRS number for Campbell is -6 and he has made 3 errors in 136 chances.  Bregman has 5 errors in 129 total chances, Story has 5 in 162 total chances and Hamilton has 2 errors in just 74 total chances.  Fielding percentages in 2025 includes Campbell at .978, Gonzalez at .977, Hamilton at .973, Story .969 and Bregman at .961.  Since historically Story is the best SS with Campbell the second best, it makes sense to leave Campbell at 2B and Story at SS with Campbell next up at SS should something happen to Story.  Mayer has played bad defense in the minors but has improved in 2024 at hitting so why not move Mayer to 1B since he's a power hitter, 6'3", lacks defensive skills at SS compared to Story and Campbell and no place to play until Story's contract is up at the end of the 2028 season if the team option makes sense in 2028. 

The log jam goes away except for Casas if Mayer trains to be the 1B of the future for the Red Sox.  Mayer is said to be athletic so he might become an outstanding 1B faster than other internal alternatives.  Also, there is lots of depth at SS in the farm system so why not promote Mayer at 1B as soon as they can get him ready?  That way you can have Anthony be the full time right fielder, Rafaela the full time CF and Duran the full-time left fielder and Mayer at 1B, Campbell at 2B, Story at SS and Bregman at 3B.  Abreu becomes the 4th outfielder/late inning pinch hitter since he's by far the weakest defender of the outfielders listed above and he's significantly worse facing left handed pitchers..

If the team needs more pitching going forward they have Casas, Yoshida and Abreu to trade for improved pitching.  They might not have great value now except for Abreu but teams would be lucky to add Casas and Yoshida as depth.  Abreu clearly would command the most value in the group.  I believe the window for Mayer at SS has passed based on his bad defense and his injuries.  Maybe he can refocus at 1B and see if he can maintain his power hitting status for the power hitting position.  That would be best for the ballclub.  

 

Yeah fielding percentage!  The most useless stat in MLB! It’s so bad it makes batting average look good!

[Nick]

It's time to play the 'ultimate' lineup we're trying to get to.

Campbell, Anthony, Mayer and Rafaela in the lineup.

It appears we found a catcher better than Wong as a bonus.

Sit down Story. Remaining lineup should be Devers, Bregman, Abreu and Duran.

Give Refsnyder as much bats as possible in the outfield. You can sit/rest three left handed outfielders. 

You have to give up something to get every rookie in the line up. 

This should be the core group right now. A starting point.

Sorry, we all knew we wasted money on Yoshida and Story. Both moves were to cover up losing Betts and not wanting to retain Xander.

[notin]

2 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

It's an amazingly awkward roster situation, with the contracts certainly playing into it.

Sitting/benching/ignoring contracts is becoming a common situation in MLB these days.  Most teams that have players on 8 digit AAVs have at least one either benched or in a reduced role…

[notin]

48 minutes ago, ChiTown BoSox Fan 1983 said:

Now Campbell is the solution???!  Do they really feel that a guy hitting under .200 with amassing strikeout totals over the last 3 weeks is the answer?   This organization is toxic.  Top to bottom they are not accountable and the play on the field shows.  Crochet and Bregman (who will opt out for sure) were window dressing to stem the tide of dwindling attendance. The bullpen is a joke, the Story contract looks worse and worse as time goes on and Cora coddles these players too much.   The long term contracts to Rafaela and Campbell are plays out of the White Sox play book.  Lock up “prospects” on the cheap and hope they become bonafide big leaguers.  In any business hope  is not a strategy.  

Campbell is hitting under .200 now?

Actually locking up younger players early is an excellent strategy (and not one done by the White Sox as often as other teams).  If Campbell becomes a good player, you have him cheap.  But if he doesn’t work out or is just average, his contract actually isn’t prohibitive.  Hes paid like a league average to bad player already.  
 

Where in Chicago?  I’m out here too…

[Bellhorn04]

28 minutes ago, notin said:

Yeah fielding percentage!  The most useless stat in MLB! It’s so bad it makes batting average look good!

But the Red Sox having the most errors and worst fielding pct. in MLB is probably not a good thing.

Range metrics are obviously very important, but the impact of muffing simple plays (for a major leaguer) shouldn't be dismissed either, IMHO .

[Bellhorn04]

7 minutes ago, notin said:

Sitting/benching/ignoring contracts is becoming a common situation in MLB these days.  Most teams that have players on 8 digit AAVs have at least one either benched or in a reduced role…

I'd like to see some data on that.

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, Nick said:

It's time to play our 3 rookies plus Rafaela. Screw Story. He is becoming another Yoshida.

 

How? Mayer at SS, Rafaela at 2B, Campbell at 1B, Anthony in LF and Duran in CF?

Bench: Story, Ref/Abreu platoon, Wong and DHam (To AAA: Sogard.)

I thought I was the master position shuffler. You got me beat.

[moonslav59]

10 hours ago, TedYazPapiMookie said:

Also, the goofy stat cast defensive numbers need to be banned from baseball for their inaccuracy.

You think how errors are subjectively called is accuracy?

You think only errors and Flg % matter? There is very little in baseball philosophy I disagree with more. To me, range matters way more, and simple basic numbers support my position.

Let's take 2009-2010:
Jeter was third in Flg% at .982- just .004 from #1.  He played SS for 1260 innings.  13 other SSs played within 100 or so innings as he did. Here are the amount of plays each made:

689 Tejada 21 Errors

686 OCab 25 E

668 Y Escobar (less innings than Jeter) 13 E

648 Tulo 9 E

630 A Ramirez  20 E

617 Theriot 15 E

618 E Aybar (less innings) 11 E

616 Furcal 20 E

611 Scutaro 10 E

601 Rollins 6 E

570 HanRam 10 E

552 Betancourt (100 less innings) 18 E

546 Jeter 8 ERRORS! Yup, he's the best!

There are serious flaws in this argument, I know, just as there is with any single measurement or metric, but seriously: Jeter made between 1- 20 less errors than everyone on this list, but he also made way fewer plays than everyone, and the differentials were staggering with some others

140 less plays than the leader!  20 less errors trumps 140 more plays? This is absurd!

He made 120 less plays than a guy who played less innings than him!

Making plays is what defense is about. Jeter made 98% of the ones he got to, which was 2-3% better than most others. Y Escobar made 20% more plays in less innings!

These are not metrics or anything fancy. It's plays made and erros. That's as basic as defense ratings gets.

 

 

[notin]

1 hour ago, Bellhorn04 said:

But the Red Sox having the most errors and worst fielding pct. in MLB is probably not a good thing.

Range metrics are obviously very important, but the impact of muffing simple plays (for a major leaguer) shouldn't be dismissed either, IMHO .

But comparing the fielding percentage of a SS to a 1b or even a 3b to determine the better fielder will always be misguided, which is what was being done.

The Sox do muffle simple plays, but would they be a better fielding team if players didn’t move at all to make plays? Or didn’t throw the ball at all?  They’d have fewer errors and a much better fielding percentage. 

One of, if not the biggest problem with fielding percentage is they’re always some misconception that all errors are obviously errors.  In the end, they’re just some guy’s opinion.

These are generic statements not directly applicable solely to the 2025 Red Sox.  Safe bet most metrics would corroborate the sentiment that they’re not a good fueling team…

[Bellhorn04]

10 minutes ago, notin said:

But comparing the fielding percentage of a SS to a 1b or even a 3b to determine the better fielder will always be misguided, which is what was being done.

The Sox do muffle simple plays, but would they be a better fielding team if players didn’t move at all to make plays? Or didn’t throw the ball at all?  They’d have fewer errors and a much better fielding percentage. 

One of, if not the biggest problem with fielding percentage is they’re always some misconception that all errors are obviously errors.  In the end, they’re just some guy’s opinion.

These are generic statements not directly applicable solely to the 2025 Red Sox.  Safe bet most metrics would corroborate the sentiment that they’re not a good fueling team…

To say that errors are just opinion is oversimplifying IMO.  Most of them are obvious, and the bad calls should even out.  And they do review the calls and change some of them.

[mvp 78]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

How? Mayer at SS, Rafaela at 2B, Campbell at 1B, Anthony in LF and Duran in CF?

Bench: Story, Ref/Abreu platoon, Wong and DHam (To AAA: Sogard.)

I thought I was the master position shuffler. You got me beat.

Moving Rafaela to 2b is a waste. His only value is CF defense.

[TedYazPapiMookie]

2 hours ago, notin said:

Yeah fielding percentage!  The most useless stat in MLB! It’s so bad it makes batting average look good!

Not a baseball fan.  Why use this website if you don't understand the game?

[mvp 78]

3 minutes ago, TedYazPapiMookie said:

Not a baseball fan.  Why use this website if you don't understand the game?

Batting average, wins, fielding percentage and saves don’t have a lot of value anymore. Notin is THE baseball fan here. The rest of us just collect ice cream mini batting helmets.

[notin]

48 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

To say that errors are just opinion is oversimplifying IMO.  Most of them are obvious, and the bad calls should even out.  And they do review the calls and change some of them.

They are and always have been opinions. In fact, the MLB rule book defines them as opinions.
 

Not to mention, plenty of “obvious errors” are and have always been ruled as hits.  Take your standard pop up that lands between 3 fielders untouched, an almost daily occurs in MLB.  Fielding percentage calls this a hit.  But is it harder to catch a pop fly than make a throw to first base from 10 feet behind the third base bag without sailing it or bouncing it?

[Old Red]

56 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

To say that errors are just opinion is oversimplifying IMO.  Most of them are obvious, and the bad calls should even out.  And they do review the calls and change some of them.

Official scorers are a lot more favorable towards the hitters then they used to be IMO.

[illinoisredsox]

2 hours ago, notin said:

They are and always have been opinions. In fact, the MLB rule book defines them as opinions.
 

Not to mention, plenty of “obvious errors” are and have always been ruled as hits.  Take your standard pop up that lands between 3 fielders untouched, an almost daily occurs in MLB.  Fielding percentage calls this a hit.  But is it harder to catch a pop fly than make a throw to first base from 10 feet behind the third base bag without sailing it or bouncing it?

I always liked the concept of a team error for situations like that.  Another example would be the outfielder making an accurate throw attempting to nail a runner that ends up hitting the runner and bouncing away, allowing another base.  The outfielder did nothing wrong, the infielder did nothing wrong, but the extra base has to be accounted for.

[illinoisredsox]

9 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Official scorers are a lot more favorable towards the hitters than they used to be IMO.

 A hit pisses off less people.

If you give an error, the pitcher is happy but the hitter and fielder are not; you give a hit, and the later two are happy and the pitcher is mad.

[notin]

3 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

I'd like to see some data on that.

Just once I’d like to see you type “I think I’ll get some data on that.”

 

https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/rankings/player/_/year/2025/sort/cap_total

 

Per sportrac, there are 174 active contracts in MLB of $10,000,000 AAV or more.  Think all 174 are starting?  I got as far as number 4 and found that not to be true.

There are multiple players out of action for multiple reasons, including benched, injured, “injured”, suspended, being Marcus Stroman, etc.

Frankly I’d rather the Sox bench the expensive non-performer than play him and hope he justifies his salary one day…

[notin]

1 hour ago, TedYazPapiMookie said:

Not a baseball fan.  Why use this website if you don't understand the game?

Oh no! My baseball acumen was challenged by a random person on the Internet!

Not my fault you like fielding percentage, but it’s a useless stat.  If it was worthwhile, no one would have bothered with other fielding metrics.  But fielding percentage has some massive, gaping flaws that no one takes it seriously. That’s not my fault and not yours. But that doesn’t change the facts…

[notin]

28 minutes ago, illinoisredsox said:

 A hit pisses off less people.

If you give an error, the pitcher is happy but the hitter and fielder are not; you give a hit, and the later two are happy and the pitcher is mad.

Plus it used to be, if you scored a play E6, the scorer got a phone call mid game from an angry Orlando Cabrera…

[mvp 78]

3 minutes ago, notin said:

Plus it used to be, if you scored a play E6, the scorer got a phone call mid game from an angry Orlando Cabrera…

Or an Ortiz visit after the game. Papi needs his RBI!

[notin]

33 minutes ago, illinoisredsox said:

I always liked the concept of a team error for situations like that.  Another example would be the outfielder making an accurate throw attempting to nail a runner that ends up hitting the runner and bouncing away, allowing another base.  The outfielder did nothing wrong, the fielder did nothing wrong, but the extra base has to be accounted for.

The problem with Team Errors is the rule book defines them as attributable to a single player.  Should they exist? Absolutely.  Especially for plays like I described, which happen almost daily in MLB.  (And happen daily on days the White Sox play.)

Another “team error” you see a lot in games pitched by Eduardo Rodríguez is “runner safe on routine grounder  because pitcher didn’t cover first.”  How is FAILING to cover the base not an error?

[notin]

2 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Or an Ortiz visit after the game. Papi needs his RBI!

Or both if Cabrera muffs a grounder off the bat of Ortiz…

[notin]

5 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Could be.  One thing we know for sure: Grissom wasn't much of a get!

He still has a chance to be better than Jeter Downs or Stan Papi…

[TedYazPapiMookie]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

You think how errors are subjectively called is accuracy?

You think only errors and Flg % matter? There is very little in baseball philosophy I disagree with more. To me, range matters way more, and simple basic numbers support my position.

Let's take 2009-2010:
Jeter was third in Flg% at .982- just .004 from #1.  He played SS for 1260 innings.  13 other SSs played within 100 or so innings as he did. Here are the amount of plays each made:

689 Tejada 21 Errors

686 OCab 25 E

668 Y Escobar (less innings than Jeter) 13 E

648 Tulo 9 E

630 A Ramirez  20 E

617 Theriot 15 E

618 E Aybar (less innings) 11 E

616 Furcal 20 E

611 Scutaro 10 E

601 Rollins 6 E

570 HanRam 10 E

552 Betancourt (100 less innings) 18 E

546 Jeter 8 ERRORS! Yup, he's the best!

There are serious flaws in this argument, I know, just as there is with any single measurement or metric, but seriously: Jeter made between 1- 20 less errors than everyone on this list, but he also made way fewer plays than everyone, and the differentials were staggering with some others

140 less plays than the leader!  20 less errors trumps 140 more plays? This is absurd!

He made 120 less plays than a guy who played less innings than him!

Making plays is what defense is about. Jeter made 98% of the ones he got to, which was 2-3% better than most others. Y Escobar made 20% more plays in less innings!

These are not metrics or anything fancy. It's plays made and erros. That's as basic as defense ratings gets.

 

 

I grew up in an era with Sandberg and Ripken and I played infield so my perspective is different than yours.  I never thought Jeter was a good defender, I preferred AROD and thought Jeter should have played 2B due to AROD being a better athlete with a better arm, better range and a willingness to be less conservative in his actions while playing the infield.  Your example is an excellent one because of who you chose and his fielding philosophy.

Sandberg and Ripken were very smart students of the game.  They used all the information they had to determine prior to the pitch the likeliness where the ball would be hit.  They were not right every time but they were right most of the time.  The impact of knowing the pitch was a low inside curveball to a righty allowed him to start in a spot that was a neutral position at SS and move forward as the pitcher was preparing to throw his pitch and then move to the most likely location for the ball to go, in this case, he would cheat to his right.  Ripken did not have the footspeed of an Ozzie Smith but he got to balls that Smith might not have gotten to because of his understanding of the game.

Now fast forward to today when a bunch of nerds who don't get the game of baseball but like measuring things took it upon themselves to measure every aspect of the game of baseball out of context.  Also, have them misuse the statistical concept of averaging to try to create an index to evaluate players.  Poof you have statcast the guru of mismeasuring events in baseball. 

Defensive measures are probably the least effective in their set of estimates.  I use the word estimate because a statistic doesn't involve guessing.  It can involve incorrect measurements like a financially incented score keeper who ignores errors but the data still gets recorded and remains the facts about a baseball game.  The estimates generated by statcast are inaccurate because they measure ONE TIME events that get inaccurately summarized across all of baseball so they can try to create an index representing a measuring system that simply doesn't apply to baseball.

Example - The fielding percentage STATISTIC measures the success rate of a player fielding a baseball.  Score keepers may not be 100% accurate which is a huge deficiency in the game today that should be fixed by the commissioner by making all error/non-error decisions reviewed in slow motion with a standard set of rules to evaluate errors but regardless of the minor inaccuracies the error/non error data gets recorded as part of the game.  If a player fields at a rate of .970 and the league average is .965 then they have been more effective doing their job than the average player at the position.  When you consider range to evaluate a player the concept of range does nothing but add inaccuracy.  One - the distance of the range recorded for the play is just like the decision of whether it's an error, there is lots of accuracy in the data and the concept.  

Lets take one play.  A ball is hit 15 feet to the right of a player.  Does the player have ANY control over where the ball is going?  NO.  Is the player measured from the same point to where the ball meets his glove?  NO  Do players get positive results from shortening the distance to the ball by using some of that Sandberg and Ripken pre-pitch logic to shorten the distance they need to run for the ball?  NO, just the opposite.  Their range gets dinged due to their baseball acumen being applied.  If a player is able to reduce his distance to the baseball by 5 feet using his baseball acumen as an average on all balls played during a seasons, does he get rewarded as a great fielder?  No, he gets downgraded by statcast estimates.  What if in a season the ball is hit 8 feet away from him then the next year the average is 6 and the last year of three years it's 10 feet but his fielding percentage stays at .970 each of the three years?  Fielding percentage suggests this player is a consistent performer and his skill in fielding is .970 to be compared with others.  With statcast they estimate the player by creating an indexed number for season.   His first year the index includes a range of 8 feet.  In year two his range drops to 6 feet and he's downgraded.  Is he a worse fielder that year?  No.  Circumstances out of his control led to his downgrade.  Is that worse than a score keeper cheating a bit?  Absolutely because the key words are circumstances out of his control.  The good news is by year three his range goes to 10 and he's suddenly a much better defender and could possibly win a gold glove.  The fact is his defense never changed, the circumstances defining the statcast numbers did.  Now, add the averaging across all players of the circumstances that are out of the control of the player.  Does that improve or deteriorate the results shown by statcast?  Yep, it makes those numbers even farther from the truth and virtually irrelevant because they don't reflect reality, they are normalized numbers using poor normalizing techniques.

So, despite score keepers making bad judgements a percentage of the time I'll take that number over the completely contrived statcast number.  The concept of considering the range of the player is theoretically a good idea but it simply can't be measured effectively due to the myriads of factors that contribute to the actual measurement of the distance.  Think about the fact that surfaces vary across the league, rain or no rain impact the distance, distance between players impact the measurement.  The list could go on and on.  All that is taken into account by fielding percentage because it's a binary result.  Either you did your job and caught the ball and got the out or you didn't.  That's so much more effective than incorporating artificially created parameters that are inconclusive or maybe just irrelevant due to their inaccuracy. 

The art of fielding is all about the binary result because that impacts the pitcher and the team's chances of winning which is what the game is all about.  I think of Belichick and his do your job quote.  The fielding percentage shows how well you did your job, it may not measure athleticism, but it does allow you to fairly compare players and then build in the athleticism for selecting the preferred result.  Wider range or surer hands?  I'll always take the surer hands unless the wider range is ridiculously greater.  Then the trick is to weigh added runners from the shorter-range guy versus added runners from the less effective fielder.  Statcast completely fails to provide the details necessary to pick the better player among two teammates.  Also, stat cast's focus on athleticism creates speed bias and power power bias.  More importantly the measures are often irrelevant to the event they are measuring.  Statcast suggests the player that hits the ball 100 mph directly at a player is better than the player who hits it at 95 mph at the player.  The result is all that matters so they are comparable as their batting average shows.  Statcast emphasizes the importance of velocity off the bat.  Again, like most statcast data.  The data only suggests potential for better results.  Actual performance tells you if that skill was actually meaningful and it's clearly not meaningful universally across all players but statcast does not distinguish or acknowledge the insignificance of that distinction.

Statcast is irrelevant data that is assembled with a lack of understanding about the game of baseball.  It gets jammed down the fans' throats as facts and their data is NOT factual.  The data is an estimate with respect to past events and a fabricated estimate if you try to use it to predict the future.   Statcast counts on young people who grew up in the computer game world to buy into their BS about the accuracy and relevance of their data.  They teach fans who don't get the game to discredit the actual facts produced by the game.  In a world where Democrats and Republicans claim their ideas are right constantly, stat cast uses similar techniques to disparage the true statistics of baseball. 

Average is not meaningless if you truly know the game.  Fielding percentage is not meaningless if you truly know the game.  How far a home run travels IS MEANINGLESS.  What only matters is that it was a HR.  That impacts the score and the outcome of the game and that's WHY you play the game.  To win. 

The purpose of statistics as opposed to estimates is to measure the success of the players and teams.  ESTIMATES are attempts at guessing the results of what MIGHT have happened in the past or in the future.   Fans should stay grounded in the facts and enjoy the estimates as colorful anecdotes asking what-if.