notin

Bradley is the only one playing CF in Boston, but the other teams have not had that luxury. Bradley has played 737 innings in CF. TB’s Kiermeier is the only other AL East CF with as many as 600 innings in centerfield, and he still has fewer innings than Bradley by about 48. But he is crushing Bradley in OOZ plays - 61 to 40. Being flanked by players like Austin Meadows and Avisail Garcia is certainly a factor. More OOZ plays in fewer innings should at the very least contribute to a better rating, right? Now if Bradley was in Tampa and Kiermeier was in Boston, it’s very likely those numbers would be reversed...

I think fans think a player’s defense doesn’t fluctuate from year to year, but since for most our baseball-watching lives no one measured it, it was really just an assumption. Overall, his bad years listed above were also the years he made the fewest plays. Now they are not all distinctly different from the good ones, but they might be on a per inning basis relative to the rest of the league...

Is that the point? I don’t think it is. The point is actually that the Red Sox wouldn’t be any different with an AAAA centerfielder playing defense than they are with Bradley. And the reason is - stay with me here - hardly anything is being hit out there. If the Sox promoted, say, Cole Sturgeon to play CF, it would make very little difference defensively, because Bradley is one of the least involved centerfielders in the league. Not because he can’t get to anything, but because there just isn’t all that much to get to compared to his counterparts around the league...

The point was about the invention and acceptance of “new stats.” All conventional stats were new stats at one point. But even hits are somewhat subjective. A certain percentage do fall into the opinion of an official scorer. Defense in baseball has always been difficult to measure. And this system tries to standardize it as much as possible. Nothing is more subjective than the Eyeball Test. Nothing. Too often the Eyeball Test turns into “I saw that guy make an error once.” The defensive metrics try to mitigate a lot of the subjectivity by measuring balls hit into defined zones aka “the part of the field a player should cover.” Some things are difficult to account for, such as height of a flyball, etc. After all, the zone system was created for infielders, where some of these types of flaws are inherently accounted for. But not all. Is it perfect? No. Is it better than heavily weighted eyeball testing? Yes, in the same way that a car is better than a horse...

One of my favorites. Or Davey Lopes upon learning Gary Pettis and Rickey Henderson we’re minor league teammates. “They didn’t need a third outfielder.”

Almost all stats were invented by sportswriters, and all of them were created to try and separate the abilities and performances of players to some degree. Beach Rickey concocted slugging percentage because batting average didn’t distinguish between a 3 for 10 hitter with 3 singles from a 3 for 10 hitter with 2 home runs and a double. Many were skeptical and it took the BBWAA about 40 years to make it an official stat. This is all nothing new...

So... you want Jackie to get more credit for waiting? This type of discrepancy is handled when both fielders have a ball hit 70 feet to their left and Jackie gets to it on the run while CF X chases it to the wall. The bottom line for Bradley’s rating: 3rd in innings in CF 8 in plays made in zone 14th in plays out of zone The plays in zone and innings is the key. While he’s out there in CF more than nearly everyone else, 7 other center fielders, many with fewer innings, are making more routine plays. His balls in zone/inning within the zone are very low, probably among the worst in the league. This means Jackie is simply less involved defensively. If he is less involved defensively, the CFs making plays are getting (and deserve) more credit. Jackie’s Out Of Zone plays - the ones he has to run 50 or whatever feet to make - are 14th in the league. Now as we have already seen Bradley to be less involved within the zone, it’s not hard to grasp that the OOZ opportunities/inning are probably also low. And since Betts (4th in OOZ) is probably taking a few himself - and can only take them from Bradley - that diminishes his opportunities even more. So basically Bradley is not seeing the chances he needs to get the better UZR. Not his fault, but also not a flaw...

Actually what his WAR is saying this year is that since not as many balls are hit to CF against Boston, and because Betts is taking command of many plays, Bradley might be defensive overkill for this year’s Sox team. If the Sox had Kiermeier in CF, his defensive rating would suffer, too, due to the limited opportunities...

Well, hitting is enhanced by repetition. Which is one reason why we dismiss a player who is 3 for 10 as less than a hitter who is 30 for 100 with the caveat of “small sample size.” Now certainly it could be the case - one lucky hit, etc. But we don’t know if the hitting abilities are different. And we then resort to using past accomplishments in the form of statistics to draw a conclusion...

It’s not a flaw. If Bradley is less involved defensively, why should he receive more credit? It’s not his fault. It’s not necessarily a reflection of his ability. But how is it a flaw? If a hitter is on the bench, does it mean he’s a bad hitter? Example - Victor Caratini can hit. He’s shown it at every level. But he sits behind Willson Contreras and rarely plays. Does his lack of opportunity make him a worse hitter?

Jackie Bradley ranks 3rd in MLB in innings played in CF this season. In that time, he ranks 8th in Balls in Zone and 8th in plays. So right away, his opportunities are limited compared to other center fielders. Defensive metrics like UZR and dWAR also give significant credit to plays made out of zone. With 40 OOZ plays, Bradley ranks 14th out of 17 qualified center fielders. The man standing in RF ranks fourth in OOZ plays, taking a significant amount away from Bradley. As several other center fielders don’t have the “handicap” of an elite defender in RF taking their plays, they benefit. It’s not a flaw. It’s a measure of accomplishments, not ability. What JBJ’s reduced defensive metric is saying is that he has not been as involved in CF as many others around the league. His innings are high, but his opportunities relative to those innings to make routine plays are below average, and his opportunities to make elite defensive plays are very low. Again, these stats are measures of accomplishments, not ability. Basically Bradley isn’t getting any credit for standing in CF while other fielders make plays. If you are a believer in lineup protection, and that certain hitters get pitched around and it negatively affects their offensive stats, it’s a similar concept - reduced opportunity. If a hitter struggles while getting pitched around, is he a worse hitter than one who repeatedly crushes meatballs? Again, this is not a flaw...

Well, that and neither seem to excel over the long haul...

Bogey’s meltdown? Velasquez created his own mess, including that careless obstruction call...

If the Sox need a RHH left fielder, I can understand that. But that the best internal answer is Sam Travis, it’s a loud statement about how weak this farm system is. Travis has logged all of 74 games in LF in the majors and minors combined. I’d actually have preferred bringing up Cole Sturgeon, who is left-handed (making for a bad platoon partner) and extremely likely to struggle vs MLB pitching. But at least he’s a superior defensive outfielder. So back to my calls this March for an actual fourth outfielder on this team. Somewhere, Rusney Castillo is crying for a pay cut...

Why was it the right thing to do? The Sox used his roster spot to promote Sam Travis and his sub-.400 OPS. Sam Travis is “Mr. March”. (I would also accept “Mr. Florida” or “Mr. Grapefruit”.) Crushes in spring training, but once the regular season starts, his inability to hit MLB pitching is on full display. And it’s not like he brings any defense or versatility to the Sox here either. No idea why, during the most baseball-intensive stretch of the season when depth is vital, Dombrowski clears out an actual versatile (albeit limited) Major League player and promotes one of the least useful minor leaguers in the entire organization...

I honestly don’t get this move. Like Nunez or not, there was no need to clear him out to make room for Sam Travis...

The root of the problem!

Wait until they hire their new “Special Assistant” Mike Trout...

... which in turn brings down his price in free agency, as he will have a QO attached...

Are you suggesting they have a bunch of former Major Leaguers on staff whose sole duty is to be put up for stud?

They could be unveiling their new Sons of Infield soon. They just need to call up Bo Bichette and somehow get their hands on one of the Cron brothers or Travis Shaw. Or apparently they could also call up Griffin Conine (son of former Marlin Jeff) to play 1b. How many MLB legacies does this organization have?

But Johnson is setting the bar at new levels for fragility...

A “proven closer” doesn’t fix the bullpen. But letting two late inning, high leverage arms go and replacing them only with Colten Brewer and wishful thinking was a bad idea. I do wonder if there was some MASSIVE miscommunication here. Dombrowski built a team expecting it to be carried by the rotation, with the bullpen merely wrapping up the ends of games.. But Cora is managing the team in a way that emphasizes resting the rotation and relying more heavily on the bullpen. Not exactly coinciding plans here...

Eh. I think half the hitters in the Blue Jays lineup have numbers like that against Boston this year...

Probably not. If DD was counting on Wright to help fix the bullpen (which he’s talked about since January and would partially explain his complete lack of bullpen attention), why bury Wright when Velasquez and Taylor still have options?