Maybe not, but the guy sucked against lefties, even when he was doing well with SF. (He was at .708 vs LHPs in SF.)Originally Posted by Slasher9
Why at this point of his career, is he suddenly going to learn how to hit lefties?
Maybe not, but the guy sucked against lefties, even when he was doing well with SF. (He was at .708 vs LHPs in SF.)
Why at this point of his career, is he suddenly going to learn how to hit lefties?
I don't think anyone is worried about "hurting Sandoval's feelings." You posted that Rutledge and Sandoval should platoon at 3rd, completely forgetting about Brock Holt, who will definitely be in the 3rd base mix barring injury. Maybe it's because you had him in 100 different trade proposals in the offseason that you forgot he was on the team. 😳
I didn't forget about Holt. Rutledge is considerably better vs LHPs than Holt and Rutledge fields 3B better than Holt.
In my opinion, Rutledge should platoon with Pablo.
I understand that Brock Holt doesn't resonate with "stat guys." There's a reason why DD said that as many as 25 teams contacted the Sox about Holt, and it's not because there are 25 teams that think he'd be a better starting 2nd baseman than the one they have. That's not where is greatest value is at all.
Stats represent what Holt and Rutledge do on the field. I don't choose an inferior offensive and defensive player out of loyalty or some need to "get one guy some time" over another, better player.
Brock Holt is a high energy guy who shows up to the ballpark everyday completely prepared to play any one of 7 positions. He doesn't bitch when he doesn't play and he always gives you 100%. You can count on one hand how many players that can do that with any kind of consistency in Major League baseball, and THAT'S where his greatest value is, not as a starter for another team, where he'll likely get exposed.
Good, he won't bitch when we play Rutledge over him.
Holt will play SS, 2B and LF. He might get some time at 3B, but I would not play him vs LHPs over Rutledge. \
Note: that's not the same as saying JF won't do it.
That makes no sense.
We'll disagree, and you're right, Farrell will likely disagree as well. Maybe they should start training robots how to spit sunflower seeds and stick them in the dugout. Perfect example of stats not fully quantifying "value."
Rutledge is a .721 vs LHP. i'll go with Panda.
obviously when Panda needs a blow it will be when LHP is starting. but i dont think he should be strict platoon.
IMO.
other names i have posted under: none
It actually makes perfect sense. As I mentioned, there are a handful of guys who can do what Holt does, yet there are probably 40 guys who can give you his 2nd base production over a full season. How does this not make sense to you?!
Makes perfect sense. No team without a star level 2B would have a problem starting a guy like Holt at the position. Pedroia has spoiled us for years. Middle infield offense is not so easy to come by.
If history tells us anything, the path to redeption for any bad baseball team is marked with a deep rotation of durable starters, a world class defense in both infield and outfield, a lineup that can generate runs in more than one way, a bullpen that won't steal defeat from the jaws of victory, and a top end catcher to hold the whole package together. These are the conditions by which victory is achieved, anything that does not accomplish these objectives is a waste of resources.
I meant it makes no sense that his value as a supersub exceeds his value as a starting 2Bman on 10 clubs.
I agree, he could start nearly every game on 10 clubs or more.
If a another team would start him 140-150 games, his value is more for them than us starting him 60-90 games depending on injuries or not.
This in no way discounts his value to us.
It's just higher with another team that would use him much more often.
Why the sudden love for Pablo?
I'll take .721 over this...
Pablo vs LHPs as a RHB:
2015: .142 OPS (He was 2 for freakin 41! 43 PAs)
2014: .563 OPS in 205 PAs
2013: .686 in 167 PAs
Plus, Rutledge has been over .748 for two straight years and can be expected to do better than .721 going forward.
There's no reason to expect Pablo to do BETTER than his career norm, let alone his recent large sample size of 3-4 years.
well, i liked the signing when it happened so my love isn't really "sudden".
i really, really, really like the work that he has put in this past year after showing up as a disgrace last spring. i honestly believe he learned his lesson and has fully committed himself to being as best a ballplayer as he can. the past few months he has been training daily with miggy and i am sure some of his stardust has rubbed off onto our lovable 3bman.
personally i am not going to over react on Spring training results...whether he is mashing the ball or on the flipside a disaster. i will hold my initial judgement until May and go from there.
other names i have posted under: none
You're not getting it. Again, how many guys in the Majors can do what Holt does? Maybe 3 or 4? How many guys can give you his 2nd base production over a full season? Maybe 30?
I'll explain it this way. Think "supply and demand." Do you think 25 teams contacted the Sox because of his value as a 2nd baseman? The answer is no. He's been exposed. You've said yourself a thousand times that he breaks down in the 2nd half every year. You don't think other teams are aware of this?
There's a reason why so many teams are trying to create their own "Brock Holts" in the minors, but are realizing that it's not easy at all. Most guys want an opportunity to "play everyday." Very few have the ability and the mindset to do what he does with any kind of consistency.
He's going to have to become better than he was before 2013.
I think he should have to prove it first and not be handed a job he has failed at for 3 years and much of his career before 2013 as well.
You're not getting it. Again, how many guys in the Majors can do what Holt does? Maybe 3 or 4? How many guys can give you his 2nd base production over a full season? Maybe 30?
I "get" the value of a super sub, but if he's not even the first sub off the bench in 5 or 6 of the 7 positions he plays, then that value should diminish somewhat.
We were arguing on the assumption that Holt would start at 2B on 10 teams, so you're not "getting it" when you say there are 30 guys who can give you his production. There are 20- for argument's sake.
If he wouldn't start on 10 teams, then of course the value changes.
I'll explain it this way. Think "supply and demand." Do you think 25 teams contacted the Sox because of his value as a 2nd baseman? The answer is no. He's been exposed. You've said yourself a thousand times that he breaks down in the 2nd half every year. You don't think other teams are aware of this?
No, I never said he'd play 140-150 games only at 2B. I was careful not to even imply that much.
To me, he's a Zobrist light, and we all know how valuable Zob is.
I know very well how much "other teams know this".
My point is, it seems clear to me that Holt playing 140-150 games for another team (at any or mostly one position- it doesn't matter) has more value than playing 90-120 with us.
I'm not sure why that's a hard concept to understand, even if you don't agree.
There's a reason why so many teams are trying to create their own "Brock Holts" in the minors, but are realizing that it's not easy at all. Most guys want an opportunity to "play everyday." Very few have the ability and the mindset to do what he does with any kind of consistency.
Agreed. And, there's a reason many GMs want Holt.
Well look at the fatsnfigs. Last year he had a concussion, both years before that he had 2+ WAR. With his level of offense, 2+ WAR is pretty impressive if we're being honest. And this year in half a season with concussion problems and all, he was still good for 1.2 WAR
Dude is getting us value. He's doing it by providing average level production wherever we happen to really need an average player. That's a level of value disproportionate to his averageness since he's singlehandedly plugging our worst black hole in any given season with an average guy. He's stop loss insurance against excessive suckitude, in other words, and that has a value all by itself.
Replacing a negative-WAR guy with a 2 WAR guy is good for more than 2 WAR to the team, that's just math. He can take anyone other than a catcher or pitcher who's being a detriment to the team, out of the lineup immediately and replace it with a solid roster filler, without having to shed assets in trade. He's done that for us for 3 years now whenever the plan didn't work at various positions.
And that's before you factor in the roster assets he's saved us. IF a big acquisition flops it a player falls off the cliff, lot of teams have to make trades to plug holes that Brock can just fill with no muss, no fuss and play at an average level. That stability has probably kept a handful of prospects in-system over the last few seasons. There's a good reason that Gm's love guys like him
Last edited by Dojji; 02-23-2017 at 12:06 PM.
If history tells us anything, the path to redeption for any bad baseball team is marked with a deep rotation of durable starters, a world class defense in both infield and outfield, a lineup that can generate runs in more than one way, a bullpen that won't steal defeat from the jaws of victory, and a top end catcher to hold the whole package together. These are the conditions by which victory is achieved, anything that does not accomplish these objectives is a waste of resources.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote