PDA

View Full Version : What type of numbers can we expect from Jay Bruce?



icehole3
04-02-2010, 07:50 AM
Im a optimist so I'll go .290 BA, 39 HRs, 90 RBIs and great defense http://www.sternfannetwork.com/forum/images/smilies/Happy/HappyWave.gif

mth123
04-02-2010, 08:13 AM
Im a optimist so I'll go .290 BA, 39 HRs, 90 RBIs and great defense http://www.sternfannetwork.com/forum/images/smilies/Happy/HappyWave.gif

A sad comment about the rest of the team if .290 and 39 HR only nets 90 RBI. Not sure it was on purpose, but I think its right on.

hebroncougar
04-02-2010, 09:21 AM
I'm going .274, 27 HR, 96 ribbies.

Degenerate39
04-02-2010, 09:32 AM
.275 BA 30 homers 90 RBIs

reds1869
04-02-2010, 09:57 AM
Well duh, he'll wear number 32 all year long. What a silly question. ;)

I think he will go around .280, 35, 101.

medford
04-02-2010, 10:12 AM
OK, call me an opptomist and pray I'm close to being right:

.305, 33 HRs, 112 RBI

Degenerate39
04-02-2010, 10:14 AM
OK, call me an opptomist and pray I'm close to being right:

.305, 33 HRs, 112 RBI

I really hope your predictions right

membengal
04-02-2010, 10:38 AM
.255/.340/.490 for an .830 OPS.

21 HR. 10 SB. 71 RBI.

Degenerate39
04-02-2010, 10:59 AM
.255/.340/.490 for an .830 OPS.

21 HR. 10 SB. 71 RBI.

Probably the most likely of the predictions

bucksfan2
04-02-2010, 11:09 AM
After seeing Bruce play last season I don't see anyway he hits anywhere near .300.

.265/.360/.490

RedsManRick
04-02-2010, 11:21 AM
.285/.360/.540, 35 hr, 95 rbi

_Sir_Charles_
04-02-2010, 11:21 AM
.311 37 hr 113 rbi's

Marc D
04-02-2010, 12:22 PM
150+ games
25-30 HR
85-90 RBI
.820ish OPS

dougdirt
04-02-2010, 12:29 PM
,285/.355/.535

icehole3
04-02-2010, 01:08 PM
,285/.355/.535

how many longballs?

dougdirt
04-02-2010, 01:23 PM
how many longballs?

30-35.

Scrap Irony
04-02-2010, 01:38 PM
265/352/520

Mario-Rijo
04-02-2010, 02:23 PM
I've been super optimistic all off season about Jay because I felt like he learned something sitting on the bench when he was injured and I'm sure he did but not necessarily what he should have watching a few S/T PA's. He still seems to be getting under the ball and again due to not sitting back waiting on the pitch but jumping at it. However what he said he done (30 clubs in 30 Days) was eliminate his double tap so that he "could wait longer on the pitch" so I would imagine he will at least do better than last year. I'm cautiously optimistic he will stop jumping at the pitches at some point this season so I'll just stick with the same neighborhood of my previous predictions .270/.360/.520/.880 Ops with 30+ HR's.

Oh and defense doesn't slump a whole lot I think he is a legit candidate for a GG.

CTA513
04-02-2010, 02:38 PM
.255 AVG, 29 HRs, 79 RBIs

OnBaseMachine
04-02-2010, 04:45 PM
.280/.355/.525 - .880 OPS with 34 home runs.

reds44
04-02-2010, 04:48 PM
I'll take anything about .250 and 25+ homers. Just show some improvement.

KronoRed
04-02-2010, 05:03 PM
.255/.340/.490 for an .830 OPS.

21 HR. 10 SB. 71 RBI.

I'll second (third?) these numbers, seems in line with what we've seen.

RedEye
04-02-2010, 06:29 PM
.255/.340/.490 for an .830 OPS.

21 HR. 10 SB. 71 RBI.

I think the percentages could be about right... but I think Jay will hit 21 HR by accident. Heck, he hit over that many last year when he was in a slump! I'll go with this:

.265/.335/.500 with 32 HR and 105 RBI

membengal
08-04-2010, 02:05 PM
I wish more people had weighed in on this thread, as I suspect a lot of the unhappiness has to do with people's expectations of what Jay would do in his age 23 year.

Ghosts of 1990
08-04-2010, 02:39 PM
It's becoming so evident that the career of this kid has reached rock bottom or at least it's low point.

membengal
08-04-2010, 03:09 PM
I didn't bump this for more hysterics. It was to make the point that perhaps expectations for a 23-year-old were out of whack.

There reaches a point where the act of certain people makes following the team less enjoyable. That went for Marty B when Dunn was on the team, and it goes for certain posters and Jay Bruce now.

westofyou
08-04-2010, 03:39 PM
It's becoming so evident that the career of this kid has reached rock bottom or at least it's low point.

Rock bottom is getting released, a slump, a bad year, month, stretch for a 23 year old is only rock bottom to some who lofted him so high in the first place.

This too will pass.

jmcclain19
08-04-2010, 03:50 PM
Jay Bruce at rock bottom? You honestly believe that? Do people seriously forget how young this kid is?

He's same age as Reds top prospect Yonder Alonso and younger than Todd Frazier.

Younger than last year's ROY Chris Coghlan, younger than current CF Drew Stubbs, younger than Cubs rookie RF Tyler Colvin.

Younger than Indians rookie super catcher Carlos Santana. The same age as Tigers Rookie Austin Jackson, Gordon Beckham, Justin Smoak, Buster Posey, Travis Wood, Brett Wallace and Brian Matsuz.

Maybe with his 1200 Career PA shades people's opinion of him, but he's got a long, long career in front of him. And a bright future.

osuceltic
08-04-2010, 04:21 PM
Jay Bruce at rock bottom? You honestly believe that? Do people seriously forget how young this kid is?

He's same age as Reds top prospect Yonder Alonso and younger than Todd Frazier.

Younger than last year's ROY Chris Coghlan, younger than current CF Drew Stubbs, younger than Cubs rookie RF Tyler Colvin.

Younger than Indians rookie super catcher Carlos Santana. The same age as Tigers Rookie Austin Jackson, Gordon Beckham, Justin Smoak, Buster Posey, Travis Wood, Brett Wallace and Brian Matsuz.

Maybe with his 1200 Career PA shades people's opinion of him, but he's got a long, long career in front of him. And a bright future.

No one is arguing he's young. The issue is that he isn't improving. Youth is a legitimate excuse for his performance, and I think everyone would accept it if we just saw signs of Bruce getting better. We aren't. I even think we'd have more patience if this were a typical August in Cincinnati -- playing out the string with the only reason to pay attention being individual performances. But we're in a pennant race, and we can't afford to shrug our shoulders and dismiss Bruce's continued struggles. Personally, I think that's one of the best things about being in contention -- the team is motivated to make moves to win now and not just use the "development" excuse.

I'm not at all convinced there are better options available, but I'm also unwilling to turn a blind eye to his struggles just because he's 23.

bucksfan2
08-04-2010, 04:30 PM
No one is arguing he's young. The issue is that he isn't improving. Youth is a legitimate excuse for his performance, and I think everyone would accept it if we just saw signs of Bruce getting better. We aren't. I even think we'd have more patience if this were a typical August in Cincinnati -- playing out the string with the only reason to pay attention being individual performances. But we're in a pennant race, and we can't afford to shrug our shoulders and dismiss Bruce's continued struggles. Personally, I think that's one of the best things about being in contention -- the team is motivated to make moves to win now and not just use the "development" excuse.

I'm not at all convinced there are better options available, but I'm also unwilling to turn a blind eye to his struggles just because he's 23.

Well said. I couldn't agree with this more.

I am not writing off Bruce but his struggles are hurting this team right now. If, and its a big if, Bruce can get his swing back he would be a huge upgrade for the Reds. I just don't see him doing that in Cincy. I don't see anything wrong with sending him down to AAA for 10 days right now. He would be back mid-August hopefully ready for the stretch run. And one more caveat, how many days does he need to spend in AAA not to reach super 2 status?

Ghosts of 1990
08-04-2010, 04:56 PM
Maybe with his 1200 Career PA shades people's opinion of him, but he's got a long, long career in front of him. And a bright future.

I want to believe tihs. But how do we know this or what evidence do we have that this is likely?

Chip R
08-04-2010, 06:17 PM
Well said. I couldn't agree with this more.

I am not writing off Bruce but his struggles are hurting this team right now. If, and its a big if, Bruce can get his swing back he would be a huge upgrade for the Reds. I just don't see him doing that in Cincy. I don't see anything wrong with sending him down to AAA for 10 days right now. He would be back mid-August hopefully ready for the stretch run. And one more caveat, how many days does he need to spend in AAA not to reach super 2 status?

Louisville may do him a world of good. But I think he's already a Super 2 whether he's sent down or not.

westofyou
08-04-2010, 06:21 PM
I want to believe tihs. But how do we know this or what evidence do we have that this is likely?

What evidence do we have that it's unlikely?

Other than his last 100 ab's which somehow have started to mean more than his first 288 this year?

RedsManRick
08-04-2010, 06:24 PM
I want to believe tihs. But how do we know this or what evidence do we have that this is likely?

The track record of guys like him who have come before is a very strong evidence point. Look at Baseball Prospectus's top 10 comps for Bruce coming in to 2010:



Rank Name Year TAv
1 Tom Brunansky 1984 .268
2 Sid Bream 1984 .273
3 Manny Ramirez 1995 .318
4 Ruben Sierra 1989 .314
5 Eric Anthony 1991 .244
6 Chili Davis 1983 .251
7 Frank Robinson 1959 .326
8 Danny Tartabull 1986 .282
9 Ellis Burks 1988 .303
10 Rafael Palmeiro 1988 .298

TAv = True Average. It's Baseball Prospectus's updated version of equivalent average, sort of like wOBA over at fangraphs. Same idea, slightly different model. (wOBA is on the OBP scale)

Here's how they describe it:

Here's the skinny: it's the expression of how many runs a player created per plate appearance, translated to the familiar and easy-to-understand scale of batting average.

A .350 mark is outstanding; last year Albert Pujols (.368) and Joe Mauer (.346) led their respective leagues. A .300 mark is very good; last year Justin Upton and Jorge Posada both put up .301 EqAs. A .260 EqA is the definition of league-average figure; Rafael Furcal (.262) and Stephen Drew (.259) were both right around that mark. A .230 mark is replacement-level, the caliber of what a waiver-wire pickup or a Class AAA player could provide; a team has almost nothing to lose by trying something different than a player at this level. Note that the Rockies' Garrett Atkins (.230) and the Marlins' Emilio Bonifacio (.228) both lost their starting jobs last year.

There's a lot of sausage grinding involved in turning hits, walks, total bases, stolen bases, caught stealing and other data into this batting average-like form. We even build park and league adjustments into the formula, so that a .300 EqA in hitter-friendly Coors Field has the same impact on scoring as it does in pitcher-friendly Petco Park, and a .300 today has the same impact as it did in the low-scoring 1960s or the high-scoring 1930s. It's all worthwhile, because EqA does a much better job of predicting scoring levels than batting average, on-base percentage, slugging percentage, OPS (on-base plus slugging), OPS+, and more complicated run estimators.

This spring, we at BP have chosen to rebrand EqA as True Average (abbreviated TAv). Why? Because we feel strongly that the new name underscores our ability to get a "True-r" grasp on the quality of a hitter than the aforementioned traditional or more modern stats do. Quite frankly, we're hopeful that this simple, easy-to-remember name can reach a wider audience.

Coming in this year, his PECOTA projection had him as a 4 win player for the next decade. That's basically a regular all-star. And let's not forget, even with his struggles this, he's still on pace for about 2.0 wins -- league average. He's still put up a .730 OPS and has played gold glove caliber defense.

As baseball players go, samples of a guy's last 100 PA simply aren't very predictive. If you want to guess at what his next 100 PA hold, his last few years worth of production are a better guide. Yes, he's struggling right now. But players, especially ones as talented as Bruce, tend to adjust and rebound.

Obviously the projections are going to come down a bit given this year's struggles. But the bottom line is that guys who do what Bruce has done at his age tend to work out pretty darn well. Sure, he could be an exception. He could flame out. Nobody as a crystal ball. It's really to get lost in the weeds, trying to tease out every variable -- every adjustment we think he needs to make. But based on our best methods for projecting how a guy is likely to do, the picture still looks pretty bright.

If he's not going to play every day, I wouldn't mind seeing him sent down to AAA for a few weeks to work himself out of this (for Dickerson). When he's either fixed the apparent mechanical issue, bring him up (before Sept 1 so he ca be on the playoff roster) for Nix (DFA).

osuceltic
08-04-2010, 06:59 PM
What evidence do we have that it's unlikely?

Other than his last 100 ab's which somehow have started to mean more than his first 288 this year?

Of course, they all count -- we've been told that every time we suggest his first magical week in the bigs maybe shouldn't carry as much weight as the hundreds of at-bats since.

I think the answer to the question about the 288/100 depends on how you ask the question. If you're asking what they mean for Jay Bruce's career, then you're right -- these last 100 at-bats shouldn't mean any more than the previous 288. If you're asking what they mean for the 2010 Cincinnati Reds, that's another question entirely. Because the 2010 Reds are in a pennant race. And while I'm sure the 2010 Reds will be pleased to know Jay Bruce still projects, using historical comparisons, to be a good major league hitter, I'm also sure they're concerned that his last 100 at-bats have been disastrous with no signs of a turnaround in sight -- and we're heading into the stretch run.

The 2010 Reds have one priority right now -- making the playoffs. Not on-the-job training for Jay Bruce (or anyone else, for that matter). I don't think Chris Heisey's future is as bright as Jay Bruce's and I don't think Chris Dickerson's is as bright as Drew Stubbs'. But if Heisey and Dickerson can help the Reds make the playoffs more than Bruce and Stubbs, then ride them for the next two months. We can worry about development later. Hopefully much later.

westofyou
08-04-2010, 07:05 PM
Of course, they all count -- we've been told that every time we suggest his first magical week in the bigs maybe shouldn't carry as much weight as the hundreds of at-bats since.

I think the answer to the question about the 288/100 depends on how you ask the question. If you're asking what they mean for Jay Bruce's career, then you're right -- these last 100 at-bats shouldn't mean any more than the previous 288. If you're asking what they mean for the 2010 Cincinnati Reds, that's another question entirely. Because the 2010 Reds are in a pennant race. And while I'm sure the 2010 Reds will be pleased to know Jay Bruce still projects, using historical comparisons, to be a good major league hitter, I'm also sure they're concerned that his last 100 at-bats have been disastrous with no signs of a turnaround in sight -- and we're heading into the stretch run.

The 2010 Reds have one priority right now -- making the playoffs. Not on-the-job training for Jay Bruce (or anyone else, for that matter). I don't think Chris Heisey's future is as bright as Jay Bruce's and I don't think Chris Dickerson's is as bright as Drew Stubbs'. But if Heisey and Dickerson can help the Reds make the playoffs more than Bruce and Stubbs, then ride them for the next two months. We can worry about development later. Hopefully much later.
Agreed, if he can't carry the load currently then that has to be addressed, it also applies to Gomes and Stubbs both.

My only caveat is the hyperbole dragged around concerning his July performance, 23 year old Frank Robinson had this line in the 1st half of 1958

.249/.320/.402/.722

Sometimes good, even great players have issues, if they didn't I'd worry that they were not human.

HokieRed
08-04-2010, 08:07 PM
Agreed, if he can't carry the load currently then that has to be addressed, it also applies to Gomes and Stubbs both.

My only caveat is the hyperbole dragged around concerning his July performance, 23 year old Frank Robinson had this line in the 1st half of 1958

.249/.320/.402/.722

Sometimes good, even great players have issues, if they didn't I'd worry that they were not human.


I am a 100% Jay Bruce supporter but for the sake of larger historical accuracy and context, Frank Robinson had already put up full seasons prior to this of .936 and .905.

westofyou
08-04-2010, 08:55 PM
I am a 100% Jay Bruce supporter but for the sake of larger historical accuracy and context, Frank Robinson had already put up full seasons prior to this of .936 and .905.

True, he must have felt "rock bottom" at the AS break, so perhaps a .722 1/2 a season OPS from one of the greatest players ever was even a bigger fluke than Jay Bruce's July numbers

jmcclain19
08-04-2010, 09:20 PM
To add a little bit to WOY's point on June 25, the 23 yr old Jay Bruce, the 24 yr old Carlos Gonzalez, the 24 yr old Delmon Young & the 22 yr old Justin Upton had the following slash lines

CG - .304BA/.331OBP/.486SLG/.817OPS
JB - .282BA/.358OBP/.467SLG/.825OPS
DY -.305BA/.340OBP/.495SLG/.835OPS
JU - .262BA/.341OBP/.461SLG/.802OPS

A few bad weeks does not a season make. And I didn't hear any of the clamoring about Bruce hitting "rock bottom" when he was performing just fine a month ago.

HokieRed
08-04-2010, 09:21 PM
True, he must have felt "rock bottom" at the AS break, so perhaps a .722 1/2 a season OPS from one of the greatest players ever was even a bigger fluke than Jay Bruce's July numbers

What Robinson had done previously gave much more serious evidence that it was a "fluke" in his case than what Jay Bruce has done thus far does in his.

WVRedsFan
08-05-2010, 12:25 AM
I think he will be alright, but not as he is being used now. He needs some serious instruction. Since he is only 23, his confidence is shot and, as I've said before, his body language shows it. I think a little time off in the minors with some instruction could do him so much good.

As for who would replace him, the multitudes cry for Dickerson in center and Heisey in left or right, but who is the other outfielder who is better than Jay? I don't have an answer to that question, so there is the delimna. If you don't send him down, bat him early the order or in the 8th position and take some of the pressure and make Brooks Jacoby earn his living.

And yes. The same goes for Stubbs. You can bench the veteran Gomes.

kaldaniels
08-05-2010, 12:46 AM
Jay Bruce is hopefully my RF in Cincy for years to come. That said, the notion that Bruce has been "unlucky" is now dead to me.

Ron Madden
08-05-2010, 04:38 AM
The Cincinnati Reds are in First Place in the NL Central on Aug 5th.

Let's stop and think about that for a moment.

We have been blessed with a very talented and entertaining ball club.

There's no doubt Jay Bruce has been in a terrible slump of late but he has contributed to the success of this team. Sure he is struggling right now but I have a feeling he'll be okay.

LoganBuck
08-05-2010, 08:15 AM
The Cincinnati Reds are in First Place in the NL Central on Aug 5th.

Let's stop and think about that for a moment.

We have been blessed with a very talented and entertaining ball club.

There's no doubt Jay Bruce has been in a terrible slump of late but he has contributed to the success of this team. Sure he is struggling right now but I have a feeling he'll be okay.

Jay Bruce has been a notoriously hot September hitter. Fix him. The Reds need him.

I don't know what it takes, a trip to Louisville, extra BP, whatever. The Reds need his bat.

Dan
08-05-2010, 09:24 AM
Looking at his numbers in the minors, especially his bb/k ratios, I've been comparing him to this guy (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/j/jenkige01.shtml) for years now.

Quality, but not hall of fame level. Of course Bruce has a couple years on him, so his counting numbers will likely be higher, and he'll probably peak just a bit better, but overall pretty similar.