Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Sox Therapy > Discussion
Sox Therapy
— Where Thinking Red Sox Fans Obsess about the Sox

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2
   101. PJ Martinez Posted: June 02, 2007 at 03:19 PM (#2388872)
Maybe your acquaintance is just not that bright? No offense.
   102. Darren Posted: June 02, 2007 at 03:34 PM (#2388883)
That's a possibility for sure. But it's still surprising that a player like Pedroia is disliked, isn't it? He's hitting over .300 with power and good defense. He's also of the scrappy red-ass nature that fans seem to go crazy for.

I think the constant whining by Remy and the studio guys has soured people on Pedrioa. Even now as Remy warms up to him, he makes it sound like Pedroia is only succeedy because he has changed his approach.
   103. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 02, 2007 at 03:47 PM (#2388906)
I think the constant whining by Remy and the studio guys has soured people on Pedrioa. Even now as Remy warms up to him, he makes it sound like Pedroia is only succeedy because he has changed his approach.
They've been really weird on Pedroia. They were also talking about how when a ballplayer gets to the big leagues, he often needs to get comfortable and realize that he should just play ball the same way he's always played. Then Remy started talking about going the other way more.

In Remy's defense, it sure does seem like Pedroia and Youkilis are hitting liners to right field more often than they were last month and last year, respectively. It's hardly only this adjustment that's caused their hot streaks, but I don't think it's wrong.

They've almost entirely gotten off the "big swing" thing. Remy seems to have switched to "go the opposite way", which is much more reasonable. I still think Pedroia will get his credit soon enough. The big issue, I think, are these numbers: a .320 BA and 12 RBI. That's just weird, and once it catches up with typical distribution, and he starts putting in more clutch hits like last night, he'll get his respect.
   104. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: June 02, 2007 at 03:51 PM (#2388910)
The big issue, I think, are these numbers: a .320 BA and 12 RBI. That's just weird, and once it catches up with typical distribution, and he starts putting in more clutch hits like last night, he'll get his respect.

It's not all that surprising to me... he's been batting behind Crisp a lot and Crisp doesn't get on base, or alternatively Crisp makes the last out of an inning.
   105. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 02, 2007 at 03:54 PM (#2388914)
He's tearing up the minors but they aren't bringing him up. Why not bring him up now that they have a huge lead, let him adjust and by Aigust, he'll have an .800+ OPS and play stellar defense?
Like Pedroia in 2006, he's not consistenting tearing up the minors. Ellsbury has struggled since his promotion to Pawtucket, with just a 725 OPS. He still has a combined 900+ OPS, but he's had a slow month.

The Sox don't like to give up on players, especially players who aren't very bad. The don't like to call up prospects unless they're going to be regular contributors. To call up Ellsbury, the Sox would have to commit to benching Crisp and doing something with Wily Mo. Even if there's an injury in the outfield - say, to JD Drew - it will be difficult to explain to Wily Mo that the best thing for the team is a callup for Ellsbury. I'm not saying it'd be the wrong thing to do, I'm just laying out all the difficulties involved.

I think there's a very reasonable criticism to be leveled that the Sox have been too worried about the difficulties and not focused nearly enough on the upside and necessity of promotions, but I'm not totally sold in this particular case, especially because I love Coco's defense and still believe irrationally that there's a .290 hitter there.
   106. Darren Posted: June 02, 2007 at 03:54 PM (#2388916)
Pedroia had a good June in AAA: 0.324 0.380 0.463. That was his first good month in AAA after 3-4 bad ones. So they left him there in July, and he tore it up, then cooled down in August and then was called up. I can't see the case that he was held back.

Much like Pedroia, Ellsbury tore up AA but has not done anything special at AAA. If Drew is out for a while, I could see the case for bringing him up, although I imagine they'll go with Murphy and let Ellsbury keep playing full time at AAA.
   107. Darren Posted: June 02, 2007 at 03:56 PM (#2388918)
Yeah, maybe it's the RBI thing on Lugo v. Pedroia.
   108. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 02, 2007 at 03:59 PM (#2388920)
Pedroia had a good June in AAA: 0.324 0.380 0.463. That was his first good month in AAA after 3-4 bad ones. So they left him there in July, and he tore it up, then cooled down in August and then was called up. I can't see the case that he was held back.
Well, the case is that month-to-month splits are heavily random, and the Red Sox should have known that he was a major league ballplayer at the time, splits or no. It's unprovable, but it's defensible. I think it's a lot more defensible in the case of Ellsbury, who has a great pedigree as the sort of guy who can be a major league ballplayer quickly, unlike Pedroia whom all the scouts expected to need a lot of adjustment if he could play at the highest level at all. Again, I really quite agnostic on this, but that's the other side as I see it.

It's worth noting that Youkilis was completely dominant in AAA in 2005, and the concerns over Pedroia and Ellsbury's more spotty records don't apply to him.
   109. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 02, 2007 at 04:06 PM (#2388924)
If Drew is out for a while, I could see the case for bringing him up, although I imagine they'll go with Murphy and let Ellsbury keep playing full time at AAA.
Well, I figure they call up Murphy if they want a fourth outfielder, and they call up Ellsbury if they want a right fielder. I have just about given up on Wily Mo - I see no end to the strikeouts in sight, and he's a truly awful fielder - and so I'd kinda like them to go with Ellsbury, but I understand why they probably won't.

I guess I shouldn't assume that Drew is headed for the DL, but I do assume exactly that.
   110. covelli chris p Posted: June 02, 2007 at 04:26 PM (#2388938)
kevin, they're going to let ellsbury show that he can handle AAA pitching before they call him up. his ops is still under 800.
   111. Xander Posted: June 02, 2007 at 04:35 PM (#2388951)
Can we replace Lugo with Lowrie while we're at it? What a terrible signing.
   112. Darren Posted: June 02, 2007 at 05:01 PM (#2388980)
Well, the case is that month-to-month splits are heavily random, and the Red Sox should have known that he was a major league ballplayer at the time, splits or no.


They should have known that he was a major league ballplayer even though he had spent the last 4 months (2 in 05 and 2 in 06) not hitting at AAA? How would they have known this? Would their scouts, who in general don't seem to like Pedroia to begin with, should have been telling them that? And then when he got to the big leagues, would he have hit better than the .191 average that we saw at the end of last year?

It sounds like you're advocating completely ignoring actual performance in the minors. I know you're all scouty these days, but even for you this is going way too far.
   113. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 02, 2007 at 05:05 PM (#2388986)
Ellsbury's combined MLE is 318/383/423, with 16 steals and 4 CS.
   114. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 02, 2007 at 05:09 PM (#2388990)
It sounds like you're advocating completely ignoring actual performance in the minors. I know you're all scouty these days, but even for you this is going way too far.
Pedroia's MLE performance was quite solid, in the 350/380 range. (Better than Loretta, for instance.) What I'm not advocating, but merely defending as defensible, is smoothing out month-to-month splits and not worrying about whether a player has been hitting great for the most recent period of time.

As I said above, I don't see the case particularly strongly for Pedroia. He really was struggling to begin, and his early numbers weren't good.

Ellsbury's numbers are very, very good, they're just distributed a bit weird.
   115. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 02, 2007 at 05:10 PM (#2388992)
Also, I bet if you added up Pedroia's 05 MLE and his early 06 MLE, you'd get numbers that looked about as good as Mark Loretta's.
   116. Darren Posted: June 02, 2007 at 05:11 PM (#2388993)
MLE? That's two months of playing time. Month-to-month splits (and presumably 2 month stints) are heavily random, and the Red Sox should know if Ellsbury's a Major League ballplayer aside from those.

If we are going on this tiny sample, though, shouldn't they consider that he's struggled when moved 1 step closer to the majors?
   117. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 02, 2007 at 05:12 PM (#2388994)
On the other hand, there were significant concerns about Pedroia's fitness in spring 2006. I think he was probably both being punished for coming to camp out of shape, and really struggling because he had to play himself into shape. I'm back around - Sox did the right thing with Dustin.
   118. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 02, 2007 at 05:16 PM (#2389002)
If we are going on this tiny sample, though, shouldn't they consider that he's struggled when moved 1 step closer to the majors?
I guess, but that's a qualitative question, not a quantitative one. Basically the best we can do quantitatively is add everything up. I agree that shouldn't be our only mode of analysis, but now I think you've come around to my side without quite meaning to. The question of how a player does based on a level jump is a question about whether he's actually struggling due to a qualitative change in league as opposed to normal variation. It doesn't get answered statistically.

I guess you can argue with Ellsbury that we need to add his 2006 single-A stats in, and then he looks pretty mediocre. Minor league stats never give you the level of confidence you want in order to make the moves htat always must be made. You can't wait for the numbers to reach significance.
   119. Darren Posted: June 02, 2007 at 05:20 PM (#2389007)
Pedroia's AAA:

Late 05: .255 .356 .382
April 06: 0.255 0.364 0.383
May 07: 0.263 0.346 0.347

Total: ~255/355/380.

Here's what Loretta was hitting while Pedroia, who was recovering from an injury:

Loretta, April-May 06: .314 .365 .400

I don't see any way that you could argue, even given the benefit of hindsight, that the Red Sox should have called up Pedrioa to replace a guy who outhit him during those 2 months. The Sox likely thought that Pedroia needed time to either recover from his injury or to adjust to the higher level, and it looks like they were right.

If you think the Red Sox should have known that Pedroia would turn it around exactly at the beginning of June 06, then you're giving scouts a ton more credit than they deserve. They let him actually succeed for 1.5 months at AAA before promoting him. They must have foolishly thought that Loretta was going to continuing hitting as he did in the first 2 months of the season, which were almost exactly his career averages.

It seems to me that you have to jump through a lot of hoops and set impossible standards to think that the Red Sox held Pedroia back.
   120. Darren Posted: June 02, 2007 at 05:30 PM (#2389023)
I guess, but that's a qualitative question, not a quantitative one. Basically the best we can do quantitatively is add everything up.


But you're not adding everything up. You're only using his 07 numbers. If you figure in his 06 numbers, his MLE is going to be a lot worse. I see you've already addressed that though.

Minor league stats never give you the level of confidence you want in order to make the moves htat always must be made. You can't wait for the numbers to reach significance.


Who says they tell everything? Kevin made the claim that Pedroia was held back. From our vantage point as fans, which means basically just stats, there's no evidence of that. Pedroia was not performing so well that you can definitively say that he belonged in the majors the way you could have said it about Brian Giles or someone. In fact, the statistical record shows that he was really struggling in the minors and was brought up very shortly after having some success. And even then, he initially struggled in the majors.

In the case of Ellsbury, if they bring him up now, the numbers would show some defense for that (he's generally done well this year), but they'd also show reason for concern (he's not done as well since moving to AAA and his record last year, etc).
   121. Darren Posted: June 02, 2007 at 05:31 PM (#2389025)
I said they should have called him up in June, when it was obvious that Pedroia had recovered and that Loretta just wasn't cutting it.


But June was the first time that he showed any evidence of having recovered.
   122. Darren Posted: June 02, 2007 at 05:43 PM (#2389043)
When in June? At the end of June, Loretta was hitting .320 .362 .405. Pedroia had had his first good month in AAA. There was no good reason to think that he would greatly outperform Loretta at that point.
   123. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: June 03, 2007 at 04:57 AM (#2390207)
In the case of Ellsbury, if they bring him up now, the numbers would show some defense for that (he's generally done well this year), but they'd also show reason for concern (he's not done as well since moving to AAA and his record last year, etc).


I'd let Jacoby tear up AAA, have the Pantawket people fine-tune his game, build confidence, and then bring him up to the Majors. No way I just hand him a MLB starterjob, but try to get him into games as Pinch-runner/defensive subs as much as possible, and then get him at bats here and there for the first couple of months.

Baby steps, baby steps.
   124. Darren Posted: June 03, 2007 at 10:00 PM (#2390625)
Pedroia is now hitting: .333 .411 .465. Career is up to .275 .350 .399. The guy is uncanny.
   125. Darren Posted: June 04, 2007 at 04:56 AM (#2391872)
Latest #s:

.336 .411 .478

Yowza. If that liner to right-center gets down, he's pushing .500 in SLG.
   126. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: June 04, 2007 at 05:03 AM (#2391877)
Woudl have won the frakking game too. Why did Abreu had to sack up all of a sudden for this series?
   127. covelli chris p Posted: June 04, 2007 at 02:00 PM (#2391965)
david wright's ops+: 124
petunia's ops+: 135

good call, kevin!
   128. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: June 04, 2007 at 02:38 PM (#2391992)
dwright was in one of the worst slumps i've ever seen to start the year. he didn't look absolutely terrible because he walks a lot, but he wasn't anything like the player he was his first 2 years. i like pedroia a lot, but i'd be surprised if those numbers weren't reversed by seasons end.
   129. SoSH U at work Posted: June 04, 2007 at 02:59 PM (#2392010)
dwright was in one of the worst slumps i've ever seen to start the year. he didn't look absolutely terrible because he walks a lot, but he wasn't anything like the player he was his first 2 years. i like pedroia a lot, but i'd be surprised if those numbers weren't reversed by seasons end.


True, though his numbers were actually better than Pedroia's in April.

Not that I doubt you're overall point that Wright will have better offensive numbers by year's end, though at this point Kevin's claims look a whole lot less ridiculous than they did a year ago.
   130. covelli chris p Posted: June 04, 2007 at 03:11 PM (#2392017)
Does anybody else get the feeling that the reason guys like Lugo and Crisp and Pena are doing so poorly is because they have developed an inferiority complex after watching the advanced approach guys like Manny and Papi and Youks and pedroia bring to the plate and have been thrown off-stride trying to emulate something they aren't ready to emulate yet?


no.
   131. Darren Posted: June 04, 2007 at 04:51 PM (#2392078)
Props says Pedroia's hitting way over his head right now--it puts him around 800 OPS. I'm inclined to think he is a little over his head, as many of his grounders seem to find their way through the infield.

Here's the comparison that I made in game chatter the other day:

.333 .407 .461
.336 .411 .478

One of these guys is a future first ballot HOF middle infielder. The other one is Jeter.
   132. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 04, 2007 at 05:05 PM (#2392094)
Props says Pedroia's hitting way over his head right now--it puts him around 800 OPS. I'm inclined to think he is a little over his head, as many of his grounders seem to find their way through the infield.
Not that I think Pedroia's this good, but doesn't PrOPS say that everyone is over their head? The stat regresses BABIP entirely to batted ball type, which is surely not descriptively correct. Dunno if Pedroia is necessarily one of the weird ones, but I'm skeptical of PrOPS generally.
   133. Darren Posted: June 04, 2007 at 05:08 PM (#2392098)
Props usually says that speedy guys are over their heads and that slow guys under their heads. Overall, of course, it averages out to everyone being in the middle of their heads. I'm not certain how predictive it is, but it anecdotally, it seems like when there's a big disparity, it's a warning sign.

I wouldn't put too much stock in it except that it matches what I've been observing in Pedroia. That is, a lot his grounders are getting through lately.
   134. villageidiom Posted: June 04, 2007 at 07:56 PM (#2392258)
Does anybody else get the feeling that the reason guys like Lugo and Crisp and Pena are doing so poorly is because they have developed an inferiority complex after watching the advanced approach guys like Manny and Papi and Youks and pedroia bring to the plate and have been thrown off-stride trying to emulate something they aren't ready to emulate yet?
Lugo in each of the last 5 years:
[u]   Through May 31   [/u]    [u]Total[/u]
YEAR AVG
/OBP/SLG OPS     OPS

2003 248
/328/310 638     743
2004 254
/291/435 726     734
2005 270
/315/358 673     765
2006 260
/288/370 658     762
2007 230
/291/340 631      


His average is pretty low this year (~.210 BABIP!), but his slumpiness through May in OBP and SLG is hardly unprecedented. I think he'll be fine.

Crisp will probably bounce back, but not to the Damonesque levels many people seem to expect. My latest theory is that he has developed some power, but that it has manifested in turning slow IF grounders into faster IF grounders that he can't beat out. Just a guess.

Pena? You might have a point. From BB-ref (as are the above numbers):
1st-pitch  of PA w/count of
YEAR   Pit
/PA StrikeSwingContactswinging      3-0    3-1
2006    3.54    66
%    55%     64%       51%         4%     5%
2007    4.04    59%    45%     57%       37%         6%    13

Pena is seeing more pitches, swinging less (esp. on the first pitch), and getting to some good counts more often. It's a small sample size, so I'm not sure how much is his effort vs. just a worse sample of pitching. But all of those would suggest he's giving it a try. The contact rate is down, though, so the swings he's taking are not panning out. Perhaps he's showing more patience early in the count, sometimes letting hittable pitches go by? I don't know.

It could be that he's trying some pieces of the patient approach, but isn't ready. I wouldn't dismiss the notion just yet. I wouldn't go so far as to say he has an inferiority complex; rather, he just might simply be inferior.
   135. villageidiom Posted: June 04, 2007 at 07:58 PM (#2392260)
What? Can't edit comments in ST? Oh, well, I can try to re-post the tables...

Through May 31    Total
YEAR AVG
/OBP/SLG OPS     OPS

2003 248
/328/310 638     743
2004 254
/291/435 726     734
2005 270
/315/358 673     765
2006 260
/288/370 658     762
2007 230
/291/340 631      


and

1st-pitch   of PA w/count of
YEAR   Pit
/PA StrikeSwingContactswinging       3-0    3-1
2006    3.54    66
%    55%     64%       51%          4%     5%
2007    4.04    59%    45%     57%       37%          6%    13
   136. villageidiom Posted: June 04, 2007 at 07:59 PM (#2392262)
Damnit!

.     Through May 31    Total
YEAR AVG
/OBP/SLG OPS     OPS

2003 248
/328/310 638     743
2004 254
/291/435 726     734
2005 270
/315/358 673     765
2006 260
/288/370 658     762
2007 230
/291/340 631      


and

.                                     1st-pitch   of PA w/count of
YEAR   Pit
/PA StrikeSwingContactswinging       3-0    3-1
2006    3.54    66
%    55%     64%       51%          4%     5%
2007    4.04    59%    45%     57%       37%          6%    13
   137. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: June 05, 2007 at 04:24 PM (#2393671)
Dammit see what happens when we pimp somebody?

We pimp Pedoria, and he gets thrown out at home.
   138. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: June 05, 2007 at 07:59 PM (#2393881)
I have to hand it to Francona, I think he's managed the 2B situation about as well as he could have so far. When Pedroia was struggling a little he was able to get a hot Cora some extra at-bats, and now Pedroia's come into his own a bit more, he's clearly the every day starter at 2B. Not every manager would have done so well.
   139. PJ Martinez Posted: June 06, 2007 at 04:44 PM (#2395001)
"Debbie Pedroia... bristled at some of the criticism her son heard when he was struggling in April. 'Tell Jerry Remy to ease up, would you?' she said."

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2007/06/05/pedroia_isnt_small_town_news/?page=2
   140. philly Posted: June 09, 2007 at 03:11 AM (#2398011)
Do we still believen in prOPS with respect to Pedroia?

Was just looking through the Sox team numbers and noted that Pedroia is now way over his prOPS reversing last year's big underperformance.

prOPS of 765 vs OPS of 850.

Youk and Ortiz are way over too, but still good.

Drew, Belli, Lugo, Hinske are all way under, but still suck.
   141. Darren Posted: June 17, 2007 at 12:15 PM (#2406846)
Do we still believen in prOPS with respect to Pedroia?


Pedroia's gotten a lot of groundballs through the infield. I think Props is right that his numbers are better than his performance so far. (Maybe not by 100 points though.)
Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Tuque
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.4460 seconds
52 querie(s) executed