ORS

Yes, but one is legit competition, the other is scripted. I think similarity of moves goes out the window when you have that kind disparity in the outcome of a match.

Calm down, I'm not starting anything. Don't be so defensive. I just noticed some funny answers to the questions and pointed them out. Come out of your shell, Dojji. Tell us a little about youself without worrying so much about being perceived as unoriginal or hateful.

I think you suffer from overthinking, and/or misinterpretting, the questions in a couple of spots. So what? The question wasn't about identifying which current Sox player would make you look original if you listed him as your favorite. It was, "Who is your favorite current Sox player?" There's no shame in loving the little guy's approach to life and the game. If he's your favorite, he's your favorite. You weren't asked to hate anyone, just who your least favorite is.

How long have you been a fan? Since '86. How did you become a Red Sox fan? I grew up in DC, and I was 12 in 1986. Let me preface by saying that I was kind of an Orioles fan at that point, them being the most local team, and from getting to watch Ripken come up and play with Eddie Murray every day on TV. Dad was a Sox fan that loved Yaz and Freddy Lynn, even patterned my stance/swing after Lynn (who was an Oriole in '85). My grandfather was a Sox fan, too. At the time, getting together, all three generations, to watch sports on the weekends was a regular thing, and we never missed Sox/O's games when they were on. The '86 team grabbed me with Boggs, Hendu, Evans, Rice, Oil Can, and of course, the red hot young pitcher Roger Clemens. Who is your favorite current Red Sox player? Pedroia Who is your favorite all-time Red Sox player? Pedro Who is your least favorite Red Sox player ever? Clemens, not for leaving, but for everything he's become after leaving the Sox. What state/country do you live in (to see how spread out the fan base is here)? San Antonio, TX What is your favorite memory being a Red Sox fan? The championships are certainly up there, but this is my favorite Sox moment, and greatest memory... Simon says, PUT YOUR HANDS UP! http://confessionalpoet.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451c4ea69e200e553e84ba18834-800wi When was the first time you ever went to Fenway Park? http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/BOS/BOS200508100.shtml Who is your least favorite Yankee player of all-time? All of them, when they are wearing the uniform.

Oh, hyperbole? Maybe I should put in my signature, and a couple of days later when nobody notices, increase the font size and bold part of it? Just saying.

Very good sequence to Martin for Doubront. Dropped a curve in for a called strike, made him go around with a weak check swing on another curve out of the bottom of the zone, then froze him with a painted fastball.

His speed is not "maybe above average". It's good, as is his glove, routes to the ball, and batting eye. His problem is that he struggles to make good contact, and that's facing minor league pitching. He'd get murdered by big league pitchers right now. And this is not a case like Reddick where you could suggest he'd improve in the bigs. Reddick was actually hitting the ball hard in AAA, but getting unlucky. The book on Lin is that he can't put the fat part of the bat on the ball.

Read his post again. Although it is worded a bit awkward, he's essentially saying that they look worse on paper going into the season than they did last year, but since the production was so low that they are bound to be better. In other words, he's agreeing with me, not you. No contradiction.

Sounds good on paper, but all parties combined to hit for a .233/.299/.352 line last year while playing RF. Sweeney and Ross don't need to light the world on fire to top that.

How in the world can you say that with a straight face?

He's still rehabilitating. He's not expected to engage in full baseball activities until the season starts.

This entire post suggests he needs time to develop. No argument there. This thread is about starting him this year. Big argument there.

Nobody is doubting his ability to play defense. The sidebar discussion we had was a hypothetical.....IF he did make the starting lineup which position should he play? All signs point to RF, IMO, where his superior arm prevents the weakness of having Ellsbury's weak arm there. Drop the hypothetical, and his big wart, his lack of an ability to hit the ball with any authority, still remains. You are spinning your wheels touting his defense. What you need to do to instill any change of opinion is defend his offensive ability, which is not at all acceptable right now at the major league level. Soxprospects tends to favor the optimistic side of things, and even they project him as a bench outfielder to be used as a defensive replacement/pinch runner. Of course, you tend to make Soxprospects have as negative an outlook on prospects as a700 looks to the rest of us (no offense intended a700).

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. 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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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? 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.

I forgot about capital improvement expenditures being a shelter from revenue sharing. That's a good point. It could also provide incentive to go the compromise route I suggested, since it would not ulitimately add to the amount of money going out with the benefit of an improved facility for the fans. I agree that they won't add expenditure without a corresponding revenue gain, but if the money it costs for the capital improvement doesn't add to expenditures, there is a gain in the quality of the facility and fan experience (more repeat customers). Plus, they could also add those profitable luxury boxes with expanded super-structure.

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.

Have you? And, more importantly, even if you have, do you have years of scouting service to make an accurate evaluation of his skillset? You are an admitted new-ish fan of the team, and one on a rather constrained budget. I think it is safe to assume, with what you have shared here, that you do not have extensive experience watching the Sox minor leaguers in action, and certainly not enough to make credible assessments of their skill level in a general sense (ie how their speed grades relative to the other talents out there).