moonslav59

Shaw had that big game, just before being benched. I'm not one to over-react on a one game sample size, but I thought it was strange that Moncada was pretty much handed the FT job (or at least a platoon vs RHPs) right out of the box. I'm waiting for the "we're going to bruise his [Moncada's] fragile ego" arguments to begin.

I'm betting the 3 starters in Toronto will be Porcello, ERod, and Buchholz, which would explain the 87 pitches last night. Buch looked confident last night and minimized the walks (0) and the pauses between pitches. Pomeranz has been steady for 7 straight starts: 1 ER- two times 2 ER- four times 3 ER- one time 4+ ER- zero times I doubt they mess with his routine. Give everybody the one extra days rest and keep the rotation in the same order.

If he's off to a great start in 2017, we won't trade him, but I share your opinion. I'd actually sign him and trade him before the season starts, but I seriously doubt that happens.

Just saw the ending to the Yanks-Jays game- a snow cone catch against the wall to defeat Toronto. Let's hold this lead fellas!

Glad to see you expanding your horizons, oldtimer. It's not a perfect method, but it sure beats Fielding % which is also flawed by hometown scorers assigning errors with subjectivity.

Could be true, but pressure, in and of itself, does not necessarily bring a negative impact. Some players do better under pressure. Bogey sure did great in the post season of 2013.

So, with all this talk of UZR/150, where do our players stand? 2014-2016 & 2,000+ innings (to get a true sample size): CF (23 qualified): JBJ +11.9 (6th behind Kiermaier, Pillar, B Hamilton, Cain and Lagares) OF (71 qualified) 10) JBJ +13.5 14) Betts +7.1 41) Ellsbury -0.3 SS (25 qualified) 19.8 Lindor 19.2 Simmons 14.6 JJ Hardy 13.3 Cozart 11.0 Crawford #15 Bogey -2.3 2B (21 qualified) 13.5 Pedey 8.3 Kinsler 6.9 Panik 5.0 Phillips 4.1 Utley 3.1 LeMahieu 2.6 Gordon

There's a big difference between subjective and voodoo. By that definition an umpires strike zone is voodoo, I think all non cynical baseball fans would agree that while umpires can have a bad day and be a little off a strike zone is subjective. It might vary but it's pretty darn close, and like Moon said they have trained observers. Even though we know umpires are imperfect we trust them enough to never blame the umpire for a pitcher with bad control. No one would ever say that we can't trust Henry Owens WHIP, and BB/9 because umpires strike zones are voodoo....you just wouldn't. Defensive metrics are very similar in this sense, people just don't see it that way because it's new and what is new scares people. Yes, very well said. The payed and trained observers who analyze each play in person are trained and rotated, unlike hometown scorekeepers. Sure, there's some subjectivity and imperfections involved but the idea is rather simple. Most fans get to see their own player every game or nearly every game. They see other team's players on defense rarely, some very rarely. If we did get a chance to see every play made and not made by every player over a season, we'd have a better understanding of how our players are on defense- good or bad. (That's assuming we can stay objective.) The observers with UZR/150 are probably more objective than us, and you'd think with all the observations they make, they'd be better than we are at determining what play was makeable or not. . I don't totally trust their numbers, and even they say we should only look at large sample sizes (sometimes larger than a full season) to make any definitive judgments on a player's defensive ability. UZR/150 is not perfect, but it beats Flg% and RF/9. It beats the two combined. It takes into account how many balls are hit to a player, how many were easy, medium hard and in-between. It beats my own personal observations by themselves, because I don't know jack about how good the Colorado Rockies SS is defensively through observations and looking at Fldg% and RF/9 only. If I don't know how good he is, how can I rank Bogey comparatively?

I don't think it's the pressure that's bringing Bogey down. I think it's more fatigue or just a plain ole slump.

That was age 17 & 18. I read somewhere he played 3B at age 16. What was that? Semi-pro ball or something?

Certainly the high K rate at AA is a warning. It can't get much higher at the big league level to not have an affect on his OBP and SLG. If you miss contact that much with AA pitchers, I can see the concern at the MLB level. I'm just saying, until I see a poor OBP and SLG, I'm overlooking the K rate.

I agree, but I'm not sure I'd call Shaw "solid" on defense at 3B. He's okay at best, IMO. Shaw wasn't "getting it done", so I understand the move. Too bad they benched him after one of his best games of the season.

Not me, for sure. It's amazing how well our rotation has done in the second half with our best first half guy, Wright, on the shelf or being unproductive! Our future rotation also looks encouraging. Although Owens has fallen in my eyes, I still hold out hope for Johnson. Kopech and Groome are farther away, but with all of our starters under team control for at least 2 more years, we look to be set at our starting 5 until then. Price 2 or 6 more years. ERod 4-5 years Wright 4 years Porcello 3 years Pomeranz 2 years Johnson 4-5 years Owens 4-5 years Elias 4 years Kelly 2 years

114 BBs in in 854 minor league PAs is pretty darn good! (13.3%) It's actually better than Napoli's 12.4% BB MLB rate. (Mike's minor league rate was 14.7%.)

Yeah, 64 Ks in 177 ABs is not good, but he did still put up a .379 OBP and .531 SLG at AA, so until he shows me the Ks interfere with his production, I'll be fine with a high K rate.

I just don't get the whole fixation on Ks. I never have. If Moncada K's 50% of the time, but gets on base 37% of the time, I'll take that over Shaw K'ing 35% of the time and getting on base at a .325 clip.

Obviously, you missed the obvious. You are oblivious to what is obviously obvious! LOL

No, we have only won one series all year where we were outscored and won. We have been outscored way more than 5 times. Compare the ratios, if you want to get a truer sense.

Obviously, a team with s solid 9 starters and 3 other capable and versatile subs needs a guy like Holt less than teams that do not have that luxury.

Obviously with a DH who only plays DH, the need is greater.

Once Papi retires, the need for a widely versatile player like Holt diminishes, even if slightly. Even if Pablo does not make the 25 man roster next year, there's no room for Holt and Hernandez. Yes, it would be nice to keep Hernandez in AAA as injury insurance, but that may not be a luxury we can afford. The debate on these two is related to what Swihart's role will be as well. If we have Swihart on the 25 man roster as a back-up LF'er, catcher and maybe 1Bman, there's even more of a squeeze next year. Somebody will likely be traded out of Holt or Swihart, but I guess it could be Hernandez. I'd argue against that, because I see Hernandez as a better fielding SS and 3Bman than Holt. Holt's versatility is a big plus, but he's really not a plus fielder anywhere except maybe 2B, where he should never play due to Pedey and Moncada being on the roster. Holt will be our 5th/6th string OF'er behind the 3 Bs, Young and maybe Swihart. Holt will probably not play any at 1B next year (HanRam, Shaw, Pablo, Swihart? and Travis) Holt will be the 4th string 3Bman, at best (Moncada, Shaw, Hernandez, Rutledge) Holt may be our 3rd string SS behind Bogey and Hernandez and 2Bman behind Pedey and Moncada. He's not the second option at any position. He will barely be the 3rd option anywhere next year. I'm not saying we will trade him. I doubt we do. His value to a manager cannot always be captured by how much he plays. Just having someone like him on the bench allows others to be used more often. I get that. Here's the roster squeeze I see, even assuming Pablo does not make it. Betts, Bogey, Bradley, Pedey HanRam, Shaw, Leon, Young Beni, Moncada these 10 + 3 more... Vazquez or Swihart as the #2C Holt or Swihart as the #3 LF'er Holt or Hernandez as the #2 SS Swihart's value as a 3rd catcher, 3rd LF'er and possibly the 3rd 1Bman is highly versatile. We don't need Holt in the OF, if Swihart is on the roster. We don't need Holt at 3B or 1B anymore. With Moncada, he's now 3rd at 2B. Only SS is important, and he's not a good fielder there, so I'd rather have Hernandez. We likely will not trade Holt or Swihart, but if we did, I'd trade Holt.

Agreed. But they should. Just like they should have last winter.

We have beaten some really good pitchers this year. We're 43-40 vs teams with a winning percentage. We have an .804 OPS in our 83 games against winning teams. We have an .837 OPS in our 54 games against teams with a losing record. I do share your concern about losing close games, making key errors and misplays when it counts, and not getting many clutch hits lately. Things can change on a dime come playoff season. Clutch hitting is not a sustainable skill set that players either have or don't have. Even if it is, it's not something that is consistent and can be projected.

Marco Level Age OPS A 19-20 .604 (614 PAs) A+ 21 .667 (486) AA 22 .832 (294) AAA 22-23 .752 (427) MLB 23 .780 (50) Holt A 21 .810 (285) A+ 22 .848 (218) AA 23-24 .777 (1011) AAA 25-28 .756 (586) MLB 25-28 .704 (1424) Maybe you're seeing something I'm not seeing, but Marco was... better in AA (when 1 & 2 years younger) about the same in AAA (when 3-5 years younger) better at MLb level in a tiny sample size. You're right, Marco is not in the same stratosphere. He's one level higher and at a younger age. Yup, those 50 AB's show that he's definitely better than former All Star Brock Holt! Do they show he's not in the same stratosphere? How about the 427 PAs at AAA with about the same OPS as Holt? How about the 294 PAs at AA that show him higher than Holt and at a younger age? Do they count? Do they show him as lower than Holt? If you want to look back at his single A numbers when he was 19 and Holt wasn't even in professional baseball at those ages, then you lost me.

Marco is a better fielder too.