Re: It's Ellsbury time!

On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 04:38:20 GMT, "Bob-Nob" <bobnob15@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Dave Bismo venit, vidit, et dixit:

<snip>

This is my biggest pet peeve when people talk about Ellsbury. Yes,
he's not a power hitter. But there are very few "5-tool" players out
there, and I don't know why people seem to expect Jacoby to be Rickey
Henderson or Bobby Bonds. Ellsbury is a kid who can get on base,
steal bases, and play Gold Glove-caliber defense at a tough position.
That's a very valuable combination, whether he hits no homers or
thirty. I really think people are too focused on his OPS (or really,
his slugging). If Ellsbury is going to be a leadoff man, and he gets
on base at a good clip, and terrorizes pitchers/catchers once he
reaches, then any power he hits for is just a bonus, IMHO.

I strongly disagree with this. Yes, Ellsbury can have value as a
hitter if he gets on base at a decent rate. But just as we shouldn't
say "Hey, so long as he plays decent defense, it doesn't matter what
he hits," so should we also not say, "Hey, so long as he has a decent
OBP, it doesn't matter if he hits for any power." It all counts.
A team would do better batting the guy with the .340 OBP and the
.500 SLG leadoff than it would batting the guy with the .360 OBP and
the .360 SLG. And if they wouldn't, then fine, bat someone else
leadoff.

I'm not suggesting that Ellbsury cannot be a valuable contributor
to a big league team. But I don't care whether he's a gold glove
fielder and a mediocre hitter or a silver slugger and a mediocre
fielder, so long as his net contribution to the team is greater
than whoever the Sox could replace him with. Right now, he isn't
hitting for enough power (from what I can tell from his obviously
limited time in AAA) to warrant a callup.

I still don't see why that one skill--which is by far his weakest
tool--would override his other contributions. He's not going to
suddenly become a 30-HR guy, or a .500 SLG guy. I also feel that
Ellsbury's ability to make contact--which is much better than
Moss'--and his ability to beat out infield grounders will make his
particular skill set transition a lot easier to the majors. I believe
that players like this can continue to hit for average and steal
plenty of bases on every level, since so much of what they do is
contact/speed based, and isn't necessarily easier to do at lower
levels of the minors.

I also respectfully disagree about this "Gestalt" method of just
assigning one number to a player (say runs for versus against, akin to
a +/- in hockey). I just don't think that in the real world, you can
just build a team purely on who has the highest plusses. I can't
really explain it, but it just seems to me to be something scientists
would do in a vacuum, but that there must be other factors in
selecting a team/lineup. Put simply, I just can't buy that a team of
nine Manny Ramirez types would be nearly as good in real life as
they'd appear to be on paper--nor would a team of nine Ozzie Smiths.
I just think somehow that a more diverse team works best.

I've heard that a decent rule of thumb on minor league translations
if 82% of the lower level. I.e., multiply a AAA guy's numbers by
.82 and you've got a decent idea of what he'd do in the majors.
(It isn't perfect, but it's a decent quickie measure). Right now,
that'd put Ellsbury at a .311 OBP and a .306 SLG. That's better
than Crisp, but it's still lousy.

See, again, I just can't buy that you automatically multiply a number
and magically arrive at a projection. For one thing, I question the
math of multiplying both stats by the same .82. Would that really be
right, especially for a guy who doesn't hit for power? For another,
as I said above, I find it hard to believe that a contact/speed/beat
out lots of grounders and bunts/slash the ball around the yard kind of
guy, who's getting on base at a .380 clip in AAA, would dip *that*
precipitously. If you said he'd go from .380 to .350, maybe I'd buy
that, but ,380 to .311 is a major dip. You're talking about going
from a top leadoff man to a horrible one, even though he'd be playing
the same speed/contact type game. I just can't believe the difference
would be quite so stark.

Note also that Ellsbury has hit basically the same at every level he's
played: .317/.418/.432 in low-A. .299/.379/.418 in high-A.
..308/.387/.434 in his first AA stint. Then he had the blip,
..452/.518/.644 in 17 AA games, IMHO repeating a level he shouldn't
have been at in the first place. And in Pawtucket, .299/.380/.388.
Take away this year's AA stats, and he's hit between .299 and .317,
with OBPs between .379 and .418, at every level. I know each jump has
not been the same as what going to the majors would be, but his BA/OBP
have remained very constant. Again, IMHO, while many statheads
dismiss baserunning altogether, when you have a kid who can steal tons
of bases at an over 90% success rate, that's some added value.

Perhaps that's too much of an adjustment. Make it 90% then.
That puts Ellsbury at a .341 OBP and .336 SLG. Again, better
than Crisp, but still pretty bad. And it's roughly the same
as what Crisp hit last year.

Crisp hasn't even shown that he can approach last year's numbers, so
at this point I wouldn't even use that as a measuring stick. If
Ellsbury had a .341 OBP--which is basically what Damon had in 2003,
"igniting" the historically great Red Sox offense--and stole lots of
bases, and played Gold Glove defense, I'd be okay with it. I think
he'd give the team some real spark, and it would be a good stepping
stone for what I feel will be an excellent career.

Could he rise to the occasion? Sure. Or he could be another
"exciting" Sox prospect who got pushed too quickly beyond what
he was ready for, and being just as useful as the vivisected
goose that laid golden eggs. Why risk it? Why not give him
a chance to enjoy some success at AAA before the Sox ask him
to succeed at MLB?

I believe his .299 BA, .380 OBP, and 17-19 SB rate are a success, but
we have to agree to disagree on that point. I know you're making a
Sadler comparison, but I don't think it's close to being fair.
Ellsbury's minor league career has been far more successful than
Sadler's was; Donnie lived off one very good year in low-A, and
regressed after that. Ellsbury's been good-to-excellent at three
higher levels than that.

And let's not forget another "exciting" prospect that the Prospectus
crowd loved to tear down--a kid in Florida name of Hanley Ramirez. A
pretty fair country ballplayer he became.

Also, it's not like Jacoby is a 19-year-old kid from high-A. He
played major college baseball and has performed at every level of the
Red Sox chain except the Rookie League. I can understand saying he
needs a little more time in AAA, but I don't think there's *that* much
danger in "rushing" him.

As for rising to the occasion, I believe with every fiber of my being
that this kid is special and has fire in his belly. His makeup is off
the charts. He's got Pedroia's moxy and heart, but a heck of a lot
more skill. Not Hanley skill, but skill nonetheless.

Now, I know I'm Ellsbury's #1 fanboy, and I'm not in any way knocking
Brandon Moss, who's gone from an okay prospect to a good one (though I
still have *some* skepticism, particularly about his power, since he's
yet to put together a consistently strong season above low-A). I
reiterate that I'd gladly take either ballplayer over the dreadful
Crisp and the frightening Peña.

FWIW, his SLG is now higher than his OBP (.299/.380/.388, with 29 runs
and 17-for-19 stealing in 35 games). I think those are really fine
numbers for a kid in his AAA debut. Yeah, I'd rather he did show more
pop, but I'll take that BA, OBP, and SB/CS rate any day of the week.

Sure, if I knew he'd do exactly that at the MLB level. But I don't.
And I think the numbers suggest that, for right now, he wouldn't
get on base nearly often enough to steal bases especially often.

And personally, I think the value of stolen bases is overstated.
The only study I've ever seen of the matter suggested that stolen
bases are more likely to "rattle" the hitter at bat than the
pitcher -- i.e., hitters hit worse in at bats in which stolen
bases are attempted, on average.

How about the fact that you gain a base? Ellsbury's ridiculously fast
and seems to have really gotten his technique down, so his success
rate is now outstanding. I'd agree with you on a player who steals 12
or 15 or even 30 bases, but Ellsbury could be a 50-SB guy, with very
few caught stealings. I'll take that any day and twice on Sunday.

I agree with you (in a part that I snipped) that he looks like a
young Brett Butler, and I agree that a young Brett Butler has
value. I'd love to have the young Brett Butler playing for the
Sox. I just don't think Ellsbury is there yet. I don't think
a .400 SLG at AAA is too much to ask for.

What's 12 points between friends? .388 is good enough for me.

-Bismo.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Ellsbury becoming indispensable
    ... In that all important first AB of the game Ellsbury hasn't walked once ... There is nothing positive about NOT hitting with power. ... Here's a list of players who hit the ball on the ground more than ... Suzuki 60% ISP .106 ...
    (alt.sports.baseball.bos-redsox)
  • Re: Pierre to Yanks for Proctor/Henn ?
    ... I also was not aware that having power especially on a team ... >>> hitter for that matter. ... They don't need to hit for a lot of power, ... > it is hardly a necessary skill for a centerfielder especially if he is ...
    (alt.sports.baseball.ny-yankees)
  • Re: Snow?
    ... >The problem is that he can't hit at a position that requires a hitter. ... If it's power, that true, ... Prev by Date: ...
    (alt.sports.baseball.bos-redsox)
  • Re: One Inch Punch
    ... >>If you hit something and tighten all the muscles at that moment.. ... acting like the mucles tightening. ... its not adding anymore power to the collision. ... target, it goes too slow to keep up a shockwave effect. ...
    (rec.martial-arts)
  • Re: MMA is just mindless brutality
    ... a technique WC uses is the stomp kick to ... So instead of only using your leg power.. ... You ever have a bag hit you back? ... Im simply arguing the case of brutality. ...
    (rec.martial-arts)
Loading