Jacoby to left...
StanTheMan_Stasiak
Things continue to change at Fenway Park [map]. On the heels of the news
that the Sox have agreed to a one-year deal with free agent third baseman
Adrian Beltre, comes this: They're also getting a new left fielder. No, not
Jason Bay, who was introduced as a New York Met today. And no, it's not Matt
Holliday, who the Sox coveted early in the free agent period. It's Jacoby
Ellsbury [stats]. In a not-so-unexpected move, the Sox have asked Ellsbury
to play left field next season and allow newcomer Mike Cameron to take over
center field, manager Terry Francona said today. Francona said he asked
Ellsbury about making the move before Christmas. The move to left field,
especially with half the games at Fenway, should mean some less wear and
tear on Ellsbury's base-stealing legs. Cameron, who signed a two-year free
agent deal with the Sox on Dec. 16, has played primarily center field since
his career began in 1995. There have been indications since the offseason
began that this move was in the works, and there were clear signals during
Cameron's introductory press conference last month that the move was being
strongly considered. If all goes as planned, the Sox will start this season
with a vastly different alignment than they did a year ago. With Beltre and
newly signed shortstop Marco Scutaro entrenched on the left side of the
diamond, Kevin Youkilis [stats] will be able to solely concentrate on first
base. Victor Martinez will start his first full season with the Sox behind
the plate, and Ellsbury and Cameron will join J.D. Drew in the outfield.
The Venerable Sarge
> http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/baseball/red_sox/view.bg?articleid...
Makes sense to me. Gotta make do with the cards your dealt.
Dan C
> http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/baseball/red_sox/view.bg?
I like it.
--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".
"Bother!" said Pooh, as he wiped the vomit from his chin.
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
Wayback1918
>
> - Show quoted text -
This should end the debate about Ellsbury's defense.....
He should become one of the best LF in the game, but for whatever
reason he just didn't do well in CF.
Gary
<wayba...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>This should end the debate about Ellsbury's defense.....
>
>He should become one of the best LF in the game, but for whatever
>reason he just didn't do well in CF.
I don't it does at all. Ellsbury is playing left because he has more
experience playing a corner position. Cameron hasn't played much left.
Also, having Ellsbury in left preserves Ellsbury's legs.
Wayback1918
> On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 03:17:45 -0800 (PST), Wayback1918
>
>
> >This should end the debate about Ellsbury's defense.....
>
> >He should become one of the best LF in the game, but for whatever
> >reason he just didn't do well in CF.
>
> I don't it does at all. Ellsbury is playing left because he has more
> experience playing a corner position. Cameron hasn't played much left.
> Also, having Ellsbury in left preserves Ellsbury's legs.
You left the word 'think' out of your post.....how appropriate.
The Red Sox have moved a 26 year old CF to left for a 37 year old CF
(albeit a very good 37 year old). They did so for the same reason
they have made every other move this off-season....to improve their
defense.
Steve Robbins
One thing not mentioned anywhere I have seen is that it will help hide
his weaker arm. Another plus-up.
--
The Unofficial a.s.b.b-r Reference Page
http://redsox.robbins-ut.com/index.html
McDuck
Only at Fenway (on the arm issue). And my understanding, perhaps
incorrect, is that Cameron is not noted for a strong arm. He does not
have many assists over his career.
Wayback is partly correct that the move of Ellsbury to LF was done for
defensive reasons. Does not mean that one or the other is better at
center. All it means is that the sum of the parts is greater, in the
view of management, with Ellsbury in LF and Cameron in CF. That is,
Ellsbury may just be viewed as the better LF.
Nevertheless, I agree with the case made by Wayback that Ellsbury had
a disappointing year in CF in 2009 for some reason. So, it may well be
that Cameron moves to CF because of perceived deficiencies in
Ellsbury. Probably the case, but not clear. There are other possible
explanations, one noted above and a couple noted below.
One explanation is team management. Cameron is an elite defender and
has been for well over a decade (we can start this decade whenever we
want <g>). Ellsbuy is, relatively speaking, the new guy. It is a LOT
easier for a manager to keep Ellsbury happy in LF than Cameron happy
in LF. So I was expecting the "formal" assignment of Cameron to CF
once he was signed (I did fear/expect a trade of Ellsbury, but that's
a different matter and may still happen, but I doubt it will happen
soon, given the Beltre signing).
Also, if we want to talk crass money matters, Ellsbury is less
valuable in LF and will be able to claim less in arbitration when he
becomes eligible for it. Not saying this factor was considered by the
RS.
One more point --- this assignment is not set in stone. Cameron has
poor L/R splits and may sit some against tough RHP, assuming that the
RS get or "find" (In Jeremy Hermida or Josh Reddick) a good 4th LHB
outfielder. So Ellsbury will slide over when that happens. I'd hope
for 30 games or so for the 4th outfielder replacing Cameron, assuming
a good one is found. We may even see a little of Youk in LF (at
Fenway) when Victor is playing first. The hope is that Tek would play
mostly against LHP, so I'd guess that Ellsbury would more to RF and
Drew would sit.
OceanView
news:i869k597hm3av03dc...@4ax.com:
One downside is that left is a pretty significant adjustment at Fenway.
Bay did well, but not great. It could a challenging first year out there.
--
-------
Golf is a good walk spoiled.- Mark Twain
Wayback1918
> McDuck <wallyDELETEMEMcD...@comcast.net> wrote innews:i869k597hm3av03dc...@4ax.com:
Polarhound
> He should become one of the best LF in the game, but for whatever
> reason he just didn't do well in CF.
Ellsbury has had documented issues trying to gauge the ball's flight
path from a head-on view. If you look closely, he often starts with a
step or two in the WRONG direction then used his speed to make up for it.
Being in the shorter left field, especially when the ball is more likely
to have side spin coming off the bat giving a bit of curve to the arc,
should help hide that deficiency.
Dano
"Wayback1918" <wayba...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:49eff054-80fd-4373...@l30g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
----------------------------------------------------------
Gee. Didn't you just do the very thing you just so snidely accused Gary of?
I "think" you left the word "think" out of your own post as well. <g> None
of us "knows" for sure why Tito made this move. I think we all make our
guesses and assumptions.
I THINK this was simply a face saving device for Ells used by Tito as
reasoning for the move. To think you need to preserve a 26 year old players
legs, while a 37 year old vet covers the larger field is ludicrous. Tito is
softening this for Jacoby, who in turn will possibly lose some value in
future salary negotiations. As a left fielder, any lack of offense will be
viewed in a harsher light. Here's hoping it helps him raise his game
offensively. Bottom line is I agree with you. I think Tito moved Ells in
order to put his best defensive alignment on the field. I understand fully
why he wouldn't just say that.
Wayback1918
> "Wayback1918" <wayback1...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
> news:49eff054-80fd-4373...@l30g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 6, 6:42 am, Gary <golfera...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 03:17:45 -0800 (PST), Wayback1918
>
> > <wayback1...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > >This should end the debate about Ellsbury's defense.....
>
> > >He should become one of the best LF in the game, but for whatever
> > >reason he just didn't do well in CF.
>
> > I don't it does at all. Ellsbury is playing left because he has more
> > experience playing a corner position. Cameron hasn't played much left.
> > Also, having Ellsbury in left preserves Ellsbury's legs.
>
> You left the word 'think' out of your post.....how appropriate.
>
> The Red Sox have moved a 26 year old CF to left for a 37 year old CF
> (albeit a very good 37 year old). They did so for the same reason
> they have made every other move this off-season....to improve their
> defense.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Gee. Didn't you just do the very thing you just so snidely accused Gary of?
> I "think" you left the word "think" out of your own post as well. <g> None
> of us "knows" for sure why Tito made this move. I think we all make our
> guesses and assumptions.
No. Gary actually did leave the word "think" out of his post.
In response to my post he wrote, "I don't it does at all."
>
> I THINK this was simply a face saving device for Ells used by Tito as
> reasoning for the move. To think you need to preserve a 26 year old players
> legs, while a 37 year old vet covers the larger field is ludicrous. Tito is
> softening this for Jacoby, who in turn will possibly lose some value in
> future salary negotiations. As a left fielder, any lack of offense will be
> viewed in a harsher light. Here's hoping it helps him raise his game
> offensively. Bottom line is I agree with you. I think Tito moved Ells in
> order to put his best defensive alignment on the field. I understand fully
> why he wouldn't just say that.
...there's hope for you yet.
Dano
I think the arm issue is much worse in RF.
Dano
Yeah. I know. I just thought it deserved pointing out anyway. You made
your point as if you knew for certain. You don't. Gary left out a word he
clearly intended to use. You would do well to include it more often your
own self.
>>
>> I THINK this was simply a face saving device for Ells used by Tito as
>> reasoning for the move. To think you need to preserve a 26 year old
>> players legs, while a 37 year old vet covers the larger field is
>> ludicrous. Tito is softening this for Jacoby, who in turn will
>> possibly lose some value in future salary negotiations. As a left
>> fielder, any lack of offense will be viewed in a harsher light.
>> Here's hoping it helps him raise his game offensively. Bottom line
>> is I agree with you. I think Tito moved Ells in order to put his
>> best defensive alignment on the field. I understand fully why he
>> wouldn't just say that.
>
> ...there's hope for you yet.
Gee thanks. It means so much coming from you. <g>
Dano
I think that is clearly something he could improve on given time and
experience. It is the one reason I have a bit of reticence about the move.
I still think Ellsbury could improve greatly as a centerfielder. Many have
improved over time.
Wayback1918
Who?
McDuck
Dano
Who?
------------------------------------------
I thought Rice improved over time pretty well...as did Greenwell. You may
not share that opinion. I don't think all of these advanced defensive
matrices were invented yet. <g>
Gary
What's wrong with that? Plus Cameron has played all of three games in
LF.
Gary
Other than in a dire emergency, I doubt will see Youk ever again in
the OF.
Ellsbury will not have to adjust to playing left, he has played left
before. Cameron would have a bigger adjustment.
Gary
wrote:
>Gee. Didn't you just do the very thing you just so snidely accused Gary of?
>I "think" you left the word "think" out of your own post as well. <g> None
>of us "knows" for sure why Tito made this move. I think we all make our
>guesses and assumptions.
>
>I THINK this was simply a face saving device for Ells used by Tito as
>reasoning for the move. To think you need to preserve a 26 year old players
>legs, while a 37 year old vet covers the larger field is ludicrous. Tito is
>softening this for Jacoby, who in turn will possibly lose some value in
>future salary negotiations. As a left fielder, any lack of offense will be
>viewed in a harsher light. Here's hoping it helps him raise his game
>offensively. Bottom line is I agree with you. I think Tito moved Ells in
>order to put his best defensive alignment on the field. I understand fully
>why he wouldn't just say that.
>
>
While you disregard the idea that playing left will preserve
Ellsbury's legs, I have heard it from a number of observers, including
Merloni. It was referenced that it was a reason why Henderson didn't
remain a centerfielder.
Dano
"Gary" <golfe...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:9mcak5h3a4vik17o9...@4ax.com...
None of which has much if anything to do with anything. Ellsbury has a
grand total of 80 games in LF...12 in the minors. The best, fastest
fielders are nearly always put in center...unless there is someone even
better on the same team. All it means is they are both very good. Any
centerfielder at any level ought to be able to handle left with ease.
Personally I don't really care. If we are to take Cameron at his word,
neither does he. Ells on the other hand, would have reason to not be
pleased as he's trying to establish himself as a centerfielder, which will
increase his value. Why wouldn't he? We'll see how it plays out, but it
bears consideration.
Wayback1918
> On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:28:14 -0500, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com>
>
> - Show quoted text -
The reason Henderson was in LF is Dwayne Murphy.
OceanView
news:ercak5l98pqnt8kua...@4ax.com:
He will have a few moments out, I guarantee it. People forget that both
Yaz and Rice had to adjust to the wall. He does have an advantage having
played it from center.
JeffH
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> This should end the debate about Ellsbury's defense.....
>
> He should become one of the best LF in the game, but for whatever
> reason he just didn't do well in CF.
Didnt do well in center?!?!
What the hell are you talking about ? He's a great center fielder
Gary
>He will have a few moments out, I guarantee it. People forget that both
>Yaz and Rice had to adjust to the wall. He does have an advantage having
>played it from center.
And he has played it from left as well.
Gary
<redsoxpa...@aol.com> wrote:
>idnt do well in center?!?!
>
>What the hell are you talking about ? He's a great center fielder
Maybe not. At least last season, he is regarded as not being great or
even good.
Wayback1918
> On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 19:00:06 -0800 (PST), JeffH
>
> >idnt do well in center?!?!
>
> >What the hell are you talking about ? He's a great center fielder
>
> Maybe not. At least last season, he is regarded as not being great or
> even good.
....another convert. Welcome to the light.
Wayback1918
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > This should end the debate about Ellsbury's defense.....
>
> > He should become one of the best LF in the game, but for whatever
> > reason he just didn't do well in CF.
>
> Didnt do well in center?!?!
>
> What the hell are you talking about ? He's a great center fielder
There's always one guy who doesn't get the memo.......
Wayback1918
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > This should end the debate about Ellsbury's defense.....
>
> > > He should become one of the best LF in the game, but for whatever
> > > reason he just didn't do well in CF.
>
> > Didnt do well in center?!?!
>
> > What the hell are you talking about ? He's a great center fielder
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
I'm actually excited about Ellsbury playing LF.
On day-one of season the probably becomes the second best player at
that position in the AL.....behind Tampa's Crawford.
His is far and away the fastest guy to play in front of the monster in
the last 70 years (with the possible exception of Tommy Harper in
1973) and probably the most athletic (sorry Yaz).
I hope he plays shallow and challenges the line drive over the
infield. Defensive matrices show he his better at going back at ball
hit over his head.
Learning to play the wall is a non-issue. That's something that
mediocre fielders need to address.....or visiting players who have
never played there before. Ellsbury is well passed that point.
Contratulations to the Red Sox for turning a negative (Ells in CF)
into a positive (Ells in LF).
Dano
It's either we see the light or don't get the memo. Ever consider there
simply is a disagreement of opinion? Have you always had these feelings of
superiority? You seem to make a lot of absolute pronouncements as if you
are incapable of being wr-wr-wrong about anything. Positively Gnork-like.
Or is it Gnork-lite?
On Ellsbury...I suspect the answer lies somewhere around the middle. He is
neither as great as some think or as pathetic as others do. He is a young
and somewhat inexperienced player who had his flashes of both brilliance as
well as growing pains. He'll be fine in the long run. That's my
pronouncement.
Wayback1918
That's an amazing accusation from someone who attacks people that
disagree with him viciously on a daily basis.
>
> On Ellsbury...I suspect the answer lies somewhere around the middle. He is
> neither as great as some think or as pathetic as others do. He is a young
> and somewhat inexperienced player who had his flashes of both brilliance as
> well as growing pains. He'll be fine in the long run. That's my
> pronouncement
At any rate your opinion of Ellsbury is the exactly the same as mine.
I don't think he is as great as some...and I have certainly never used
the word pathetic (or anything similar) to discribe him
I have been posting over and over that he is a young (inexperienced)
player who has not yet developed into a star and that the hope is he
will become the (brilliant) player we saw in late 2007.
I have also said...repeatedly... he is the Red Sox player with the
best chance to have a breakthrough season in 2010. So I guess that
means I believe he'll be fine.....even in the short run.
The difference between us is that my opinion of Ellsbury has been
consistant.....but I'm glad you finally got the memo.
Wayback1918
> Wayback1918 <wayback1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > infield. Defensive matrices show he his better at going back at ball
>
> are you trying to say 'defensive metrics' or is there a matrix
> of stuff? Not being snarky, I've assumed the former but would like
> to know if there is indeed a defensive matrix and I don't know about it :)
I am usually refering to UZR/150 (fangraphs), RZR (Harball Times) and
the Fielding Bible (Bill James on line).
I could well be mis-using the plural of matrix....
McDuck
Giovanni Wassen
> Gary <golfe...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Maybe not. At least last season, he is regarded as not being great or
>> even good.
>
> FWIW, last season the numbers showed that he was *awful*, not just "not
> being great or even good"
And yet he was the best defensive player according to some stupid poll on
mlb.com. He made some spectacular catches in center.
--
Gio
http://www.watkijkikoptv.info
http://watkijkikoptv.info/animeblog
Gnork
> On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 10:05:47 -0600, OceanView <F...@chance.org> wrote:
Define dire emergency. I think you overstated it.
Dano
> wrote:
>
>> Gary <golfe...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> Maybe not. At least last season, he is regarded as not being great
>>> or even good.
>>
>> FWIW, last season the numbers showed that he was *awful*, not just
>> "not being great or even good"
>
> And yet he was the best defensive player according to some stupid
> poll on mlb.com. He made some spectacular catches in center.
Stupid polls...stupid stats...
<shrug>
Wayback1918
> >>> Maybe not. At least last season, he is regarded as not being great
> >>> or even good.
>
> >> FWIW, last season the numbers showed that he was *awful*, not just
> >> "not being great or even good"
>
> > And yet he was the best defensive player according to some stupid
> > poll on mlb.com. He made some spectacular catches in center.
>
> Stupid polls...stupid stats...
>
> <shrug>
You're half right.....good start on your day.
Giovanni Wassen
> Giovanni Wassen <ext...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> FWIW, last season the numbers showed that he was *awful*, not just
>>> "not being great or even good"
>> And yet he was the best defensive player according to some stupid
>> poll on mlb.com. He made some spectacular catches in center.
>
> I'm going to trust raw numbers over "some stupid poll". I've seen
> enough idiots out in the world to not trust the wisdom of the masses
> on these sorts of things.
That was actually my point :)
> Hypothetically, let's assume that he actually is subpar in CF - just
> for the sake of argument. I've seen it argued pretty well that those
> spectacular catches were due to him getting bad reads on balls and
> having the speed to catch up, IOW a better player would have made it
> look a lot less spectacular. That sort of thing happens a lot.
Yeah, I know. I once made a catch which was applauded by the 20 people
attending the game (small city, small sport, awful level of play) but in
reality I simply reacted too late and had to make a difficult catch because
of that. Oh well.
Dano
Put's me one up on you.
Gary
wrote:
>> Other than in a dire emergency, I doubt will see Youk ever again in
>> the OF.
>>
>> Ellsbury will not have to adjust to playing left, he has played left
>> before. Cameron would have a bigger adjustment.
>
>Define dire emergency. I think you overstated it.
If there is no other outfielder available. Otherwise, I believe
(opinion) Youk's outfield days are over.