A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    That's a good point, and in some respects puts the CERA argument for debate. If you take a catcher and say you get to catch Hall of Famer Steve Carlton every start and then you catch 10 other games, the regular starting catcher now is minus his starts with the best pitcher on his staff and may have his entire CERA affected due to never getting to catch a team's premier ace or No. 2. That doesn't take away from bulpen, other starters, but it does adversely affect a CERA one way or the other for the 2 catchers. If I'm caddying Verlander every start and someone else is catching 4 other starters, I'm going to get a 100 percent chance that my CERA is better than the other catcher. On Salty, you're right, moon, really by him not getting opportunities to catch Beckett, it did hurt him. 

    That's why the best way to use CERA is not by looking at the overall CERA, but rather take each individual pitcher and compare how each catcher did with them. Some sample sizes are too small to compare, so that is why the stat is highly restrictive and only useful to use when 2 catchers catch certain pitchers close to an equal amount of innings.

    See how Salty did when he caught the same pitchers VTek caught. I did a pitcher by pitcher analysis and found that 8 pitchers did better VTek, 4 were close to even, and 4 did better with Salty. 

    At the same time, Salty may have sped the Wakefield can't be relied talk as people really have no idea how much the basically rookie catcher hurt Tim's performances with his inability to catch him, especially in the 2nd half of t.he season. 

    It's not easy for even some veteran catchers to catch Wake, but Salty was about the worst next to maybe Bard.

    Forget about CERA for a moment, and realize that catchers can be poor enough to really throw a pitcher's chance to win or chance to be fully effective for a loop. A good catcher, a mistake-free type catcher, can enhance the same. As for calling games, maybe the best SPs in baseball can throw to anyone, but most of the starters in MLB need some help behind that dish--whether it's a strong throwing arm to cut down runners stealing, calling a game that reflects advanced scouting reports, or simply blocking the plate better.

    Even some of the beat pitchers do way better with certain catchers.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]When Lugo played SS, Lowell was there to scoop up everything at 3b during a time where his mobility, range was still at the top of his game. When Cabrera played SS, he still had a pretty decent guy in Mueller at 3b, and Orlando's range and play was at the top of his game. When Boggs was at 3b, it cut down the need for Spike Owen to have more range in 86. Gold Glove Beltre was at 3b thus allowing Scutaro/Lowrie to be adequate enough. What's my point? Well, Youkilis is clearly a guy who has lost his range a bit (or never really was cut out to play 3b) and is now injury-prone, and Scutaro is that much older as a guy who has some range, but not really that much and certainly can't make plays to Youks' hole side.  So it's imperative the Sox need to either get a new SS or get a new 3B. The Sox defense on the left side is about as poor a combo as ever allowed to start a season if things go the way it is going for 2012. Not talking offense. Solely this is about infield defense. The right side is conversely one of the best out there with Pedroia and AGON.
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

    I agree. Remember, Lugo was not a good fielder, but he had very good range his first year here, then injuries cut into the best part of his D.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]When Lugo played SS, Lowell was there to scoop up everything at 3b during a time where his mobility, range was still at the top of his game. When Cabrera played SS, he still had a pretty decent guy in Mueller at 3b, and Orlando's range and play was at the top of his game. When Boggs was at 3b, it cut down the need for Spike Owen to have more range in 86. Gold Glove Beltre was at 3b thus allowing Scutaro/Lowrie to be adequate enough. What's my point? Well, Youkilis is clearly a guy who has lost his range a bit (or never really was cut out to play 3b) and is now injury-prone, and Scutaro is that much older as a guy who has some range, but not really that much and certainly can't make plays to Youks' hole side.  So it's imperative the Sox need to either get a new SS or get a new 3B. The Sox defense on the left side is about as poor a combo as ever allowed to start a season if things go the way it is going for 2012. Not talking offense. Solely this is about infield defense. The right side is conversely one of the best out there with Pedroia and AGON.
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

     Jim Palmer, at the end of the season was talking up the fast surface at Fenway, and the fact that a ball had to be hit right at a fielder in order to make a play, then they played at Baltimore and guys looked like Ozzie Smith out there.
     Maybe it doesn't matter at home who the infielders are. A typical 3B only has 3 chances per game, so this is not thaaaaat big a deal.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I :  Jim Palmer, at the end of the season was talking up the fast surface at Fenway, and the fact that a ball had to be hit right at a fielder in order to make a play, then they played at Baltimore and guys looked like Ozzie Smith out there.  Maybe it doesn't matter at home who the infielders are. A typical 3B only has 3 chances per game, so this is not thaaaaat big a deal.
    Posted by YOUKILLUS20[/QUOTE]
    Huh? Cabrera, Gonzalez, Beltre, and Lowell ( before injuries ) made many plays on balls that were not hit right at them. Any one of those three chances could in fact be a big deal. What do numbers have to do with what kind of play is required?

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Yes, look at total plays by SSs every year. The disparity between the best and worse is amazing. I'm not exaggerating when I say a great ranged SS can make 50-100 more plays a year over an average or slightly below average one.

    That's like adding 50-100 singles to that SS batting average. How good would Iggy look with 100 more singles over 500 ABs?
    (Hint: it would bring a .200 BA to .400)
    Would you guys want him starting at SS if he hit .400, but made 100 less plays at SS?

    FYI: (SSs with 1300+ innings) 
    Plays Made
    S. Castro    338  (1399)
    A. Cabrera 264  (1327)

    (with 1200-1299 innings)
    Rollins          300  (1207)
    Bartlett       300   (1211)
    Peenington 258  (1272)

    (with 1100-1199 inn)
    Hardy          300  (1133)
    Escobar       249  (1121)

    (with 929-1087)
    Cedeno      292   (1050)
    Jeter           210   (1047)
    Scutaro      190   (929)




     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    RF/9 at SS in 2011

    Hardy     4.88
    Andrus  4.65
    Castro   4.59

    Scutyy    4.03
    Jeter       3.61

    As you can see, some SSs make a play more a game than the worst.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Goofywocky. Show Goofywocky's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    other than catching, starters, bull pen, right fielder, short stop, third base...things look great
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]When Lugo played SS, Lowell was there to scoop up everything at 3b during a time where his mobility, range was still at the top of his game. When Cabrera played SS, he still had a pretty decent guy in Mueller at 3b, and Orlando's range and play was at the top of his game. When Boggs was at 3b, it cut down the need for Spike Owen to have more range in 86. Gold Glove Beltre was at 3b thus allowing Scutaro/Lowrie to be adequate enough. What's my point? Well, Youkilis is clearly a guy who has lost his range a bit (or never really was cut out to play 3b) and is now injury-prone, and Scutaro is that much older as a guy who has some range, but not really that much and certainly can't make plays to Youks' hole side.  So it's imperative the Sox need to either get a new SS or get a new 3B. The Sox defense on the left side is about as poor a combo as ever allowed to start a season if things go the way it is going for 2012. Not talking offense. Solely this is about infield defense. The right side is conversely one of the best out there with Pedroia and AGON.
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]
    Also on the left side, Crawford has yet to get the hang of it in Fenway and has a limp arm. 

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    ex, my vilification of CC's defense in LF is quite legendary. Ask moon how many times I harped on him for his defense, not his offense and his clearly poor fit for the Monster. He was horrific with the Rays as a defender in LF in games at Fenway, so much so that it was laughable. So, naturally, the Sox sign him longterm to take LF at Fenway. Pathetic.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I can verify his early position.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    How's this...

    Trade:
    Youk:  12:$12M, 13:$13M club option ($1M buyout)
    Craw: 12:$19.5M, 13:$20M, 14:$20.25M, 15:$20.5M, 16:$20.75M, 17:$21M
    Jenks: 12: $6M

    $37M 2012 total

    to SF

    For:
    Matt Cain: 12:$15M (Free agent after 2012)
    Barry Zito: 12:$19M, 13:$20M, 14:$18M club option ($7M buyout)
    Brandon Belt

    $34M 2012 cost
    (We save $3M in 2012)

    The Zito addition is a salary dump to offset the cost of Crawford, basically $46M/2. (Crawford is owed $121/6) In effect, Crawford would cost them $75M/6. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Some posters ( boom amongst them, I think ) dragged their feet when Theo let Beltre walk and traded prospects for Gonzalez.  I was in that camp -- and still am.
    I would have preferred the Sox infield in 2012 to be Youkilis, Pedey, Iglesias, and Beltre. Three players who can hit and all four who can defend at their positions.
    I can think of objections to and reservations about this arrangement, but, on balance, I think the Sox would have been better off with it than what they will start in April. And they would still have the prospects. 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    And it looks like one of those prospects ( Rizzo ) might be key to landing Matt Garza soon.

    Look at Moon's numbers regarding range factor and Jeter / Scutty. The Yanks probably signed up for several players long term who are really going to be negatives going forward. The more I look at baseball, the more I see decisions being made for the turnstiles and media revenue rather than to win. Examples, Arod, Ortiz and Jeter.

    That left side D is going to really hurt us going forward until Iglesias arrives. It's interesting that mlb.com still considers Iglesias our top prospect.

    Castro's numbers stick out also. Young SS often have the best range ( Andrus, Castro ... ). Iglesias?

    If Iglesias even hits .265 they should bring him up. And he will hit better this year.

    If necessary they could still trade Scutaro at the break for a decent return.

     
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    I was not aware of how slow the infield was in Baltimore. Those are tremendous defensive numbers for Hardy. That's an outlier stat for him historically.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Some posters ( boom amongst them, I think ) dragged their feet when Theo let Beltre walk and traded prospects for Gonzalez.  I was in that camp -- and still am.
    I would have preferred the Sox infield in 2012 to be Youkilis, Pedey, Iglesias, and Beltre. Three players who can hit and all four who can defend at their positions.
    I can think of objections to and reservations about this arrangement, but, on balance, I think the Sox would have been better off with it than what they will start in April. And they would still have the prospects.

    I'll admit I liked the AGon deal over keeping Beltre, due mostly to age and chances of regression in later years, but I did mention there was one hidden value to keeping Beltre: Youk playing at 1B instead of 3rd would likely lessen his chances of injury and keep his vital RH'd bat in the line-up more.

    Now, we wish Youk didn't have to play 3B, but could play 1B or DH. Well, he's blocked there now.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]And it looks like one of those prospects ( Rizzo ) might be key to landing Matt Garza soon. Look at Moon's numbers regarding range factor and Jeter / Scutty. The Yanks probably signed up for several players long term who are really going to be negatives going forward. The more I look at baseball, the more I see decisions being made for the turnstiles and media revenue rather than to win. Examples, Arod, Ortiz and Jeter. That left side D is going to really hurt us going forward until Iglesias arrives. It's interesting that mlb.com still considers Iglesias our top prospect. Castro's numbers stick out also. Young SS often have the best range ( Andrus, Castro ... ). Iglesias? If Iglesias even hits .265 they should bring him up. And he will hit better this year. If necessary they could still trade Scutaro at the break for a decent return.  
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    If Iggy can save 60-90 hits over using Scutty, I'd take a .200 BA from Iggy as the minimal cutoff.

    As for Hardy's range numbers: he's always had good range. His last year in MN, his RF/9 was 4.60 (just 0.28 below 2011).

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from titletownfan. Show titletownfan's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In other news, ESPN Boston is reporting that Jerry Royster will be the Red Sox new third base coach, and Tim Bogar will be promoted to Bench Coach.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Anybody but Bogar at 3rd could give us 2-3 more wins.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from adam4522. Show adam4522's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    Anybody want to place odds on the FO/ owners saying screw it...We need oswalt/saunders/kuroda, Cordero/Madsen, and Beltran/Ross....we spend the extra 25-30m and get it done.  They might just say we will not be successful unless we do.  That could make for a decent team

    jake
    peddy
    agon
    youk
    ortiz
    ross/beltran with reddick/kalish
    crawford
    salty/shoppach
    scuttaro

    beckett
    lester
    buch
    saunders/kuroda/oswalt
    aceves

    bard
    melancon
    cordero/madsen
    jenks
    morales
    albers
    bowden/dubront

    shoppach
    aviles
    kalish/reddick


    Will they give in and spend the $...we shall see.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]Yes, look at total plays by SSs every year. The disparity between the best and worse is amazing. I'm not exaggerating when I say a great ranged SS can make 50-100 more plays a year over an average or slightly below average one. That's like adding 50-100 singles to that SS batting average. How good would Iggy look with 100 more singles over 500 ABs? (Hint: it would bring a .200 BA to .400) Would you guys want him starting at SS if he hit .400, but made 100 less plays at SS? FYI: (SSs with 1300+ innings)  Plays Made S. Castro    338  (1399) A. Cabrera 264  (1327) (with 1200-1299 innings) Rollins          300  (1207) Bartlett       300   (1211) Peenington 258  (1272) (with 1100-1199 inn) Hardy          300  (1133) Escobar       249  (1121) (with 929-1087) Cedeno      292   (1050) Jeter           210   (1047) Scutaro      190   (929)
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Wow.  Great post.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    Yes, look at total plays by SSs every year. The disparity between the best and worse is amazing. I'm not exaggerating when I say a great ranged SS can make 50-100 more plays a year over an average or slightly below average one. That's like adding 50-100 singles to that SS batting average. How good would Iggy look with 100 more singles over 500 ABs? (Hint: it would bring a .200 BA to .400) Would you guys want him starting at SS if he hit .400, but made 100 less plays at SS? 
    FYI: (SSs with 1300+ innings)  
    Plays Made S. Castro    338  (1399) A. Cabrera 264  (1327) 
    (with 1200-1299 innings) Rollins          300  (1207) Bartlett       300   (1211) Peenington 258  (1272) 
    (with 1100-1199 inn) Hardy          300  (1133) Escobar       249  (1121) 
    (with 929-1087) Cedeno      292   (1050) Jeter           210   (1047) Scutaro      190   (929)
    Posted by moonslav59


    Wow.  Great post.

    The SS position is by far the most important defensive position (unless you want to count how a catcher calls a game and gets the most out of his staff "defense").

    Too many people just look at BA, OPS and Fldg%. Range can more than make up for 10-20 more errors made. Scutty and Jeter make most of the plays they are supposed to make, but they have never done much more--and won't in 2012 either. 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    You are right on Hardy Moon. I didn't realize that he was consistently a top Range factor guy the past 3-4 years. He was a heck of a pick up for the Orioles. Wish we had him!
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    In Response to Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I:
    [QUOTE]You are right on Hardy Moon. I didn't realize that he was consistently a top Range factor guy the past 3-4 years. He was a heck of a pick up for the Orioles. Wish we had him!
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

     Once he got healthy, from June 1 to the end of the year; 28HR 68 RBI and raised his BA 30 points to finish at .269. Oriole announcers had him as O's MVP, and one of the very best players in the AL.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    J.J. Hardy ss
    1 year/$5.85M (2011) avoided arb.
    3 years/$22.25M (2012-14)

    vs.

    Marco Scutaro ss
    3 years/$18.5M (2010-12)
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: A Realistic look at 2012: Part I

    you have to launch "Part II" for January 1st.
     

Share