PDA

View Full Version : Slumping Bruce and Votto



Pages : [1] 2

powersackers
05-24-2012, 11:38 PM
1 - 30ish for Bruce
3-18 for Votto (5 BBs)

Yet we win 6 in a row and 7 out of 10. This team is just full of surprises. And the latest surprise... First Place, Cardinals just went down!

reds44
05-24-2012, 11:50 PM
3-18 is not a slump lol.

1-30 is though.

powersackers
05-24-2012, 11:54 PM
3-18 is not a slump lol.

1-30 is though.

Shall I change the thread title to Slumping Bruce, and Votto?

lol

WVRedsFan
05-25-2012, 12:04 AM
Bruce will always be like this. His mechanics at the plate regularly get messed up and he has trouble breaking the habit. Get used to it, because he will always be that way. Votto worries me because they are giving him nothing to hit. Only when they get someone in the four hole to protect and our one-two hitters get on base more, it's easier to walk him than pitch to him.

Ghosts of 1990
05-25-2012, 12:22 AM
Agree Bruce is a finished product. I'm not even frustrated about it anymore. In a few seasons the Reds will allow his team friendly contract to expire in a few years and he'll move on elsewhere. I have given up dreams of him winning an MVP award, piling up All-Star appearances or having Larry Walker numbers in this offensive friendly park. He is maddeningly inconsistent and while still 'young' by baseball definition and a solid guy to have on your club this is who he is and who he will always be. This year is in no way special for him. He has a ton of blemishes offensively and just isn't advanced like scouts said he was

RED VAN HOT
05-25-2012, 12:31 AM
It seems to me that the way out of these slumps in the past has always been to hit to left field. It puzzles me why it takes so long to figure this out.

cincyinco
05-25-2012, 12:32 AM
Agree Bruce is a finished product. I'm not even frustrated about it anymore. In a few seasons the Reds will allow his team friendly contract to expire in a few years and he'll move on elsewhere. I have given up dreams of him winning an MVP award, piling up All-Star appearances or having Larry Walker numbers in this offensive friendly park. He is maddeningly inconsistent and while still 'young' by baseball definition and a solid guy to have on your club this is who he is and who he will always be. This year is in no way special for him. He has a ton of blemishes offensively and just isn't advanced like scouts said he was

While you may be right, need I remind everyone its still only May. There's a lot of ball to be played yet, and players slump. Its not likely, but maybe he heats up and gains some consistency throughout the rest of the season.

Not trying to pick on you, but there's so many absolutes thrown around here anymore, it just kind of drives me crazy. Baseball is a funny game. I try to stay humble in my knowledge of how this game works and its many quirks. The more I assume to know, the more I learn I don't know squat.

corkedbat
05-25-2012, 12:32 AM
Ahhh unfortunately, when it comes to Jay Bruce anymore I don't consider 1-30 a slump, but instead just approaching the valley of one of his down cycles. As bi-polar (baseball-wise) as any player I've ever seen. This time next month, he'll be carrying the club and terrorizing opposing pitchers.

Just another chapter of 'How the Bruce Turns' (or is that 'Days of Our Jay'?). Like it or not, its something that we'll just have to live with. It's one reason that I've been saying (for three years now) that Walt needs to add another solid consistent bat to the lineup to help JV. Longterm, it's the reason they need to seriously start stocking the farm with corner OF prospects.

Joey? I never worry about Joey.

westofyou
05-25-2012, 12:39 AM
"My goal is to minimize those downswings and maximize the more positive times during the season," he said. "I definitely think my new approach and routine will help me do that."


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/joe_lemire/05/21/jay.bruce.reds/index.html

Tom Servo
05-25-2012, 01:05 AM
Agree Bruce is a finished product. I'm not even frustrated about it anymore. In a few seasons the Reds will allow his team friendly contract to expire in a few years and he'll move on elsewhere. I have given up dreams of him winning an MVP award, piling up All-Star appearances or having Larry Walker numbers in this offensive friendly park. He is maddeningly inconsistent and while still 'young' by baseball definition and a solid guy to have on your club this is who he is and who he will always be. This year is in no way special for him. He has a ton of blemishes offensively and just isn't advanced like scouts said he was
Just because he's not Larry Walker doesn't mean he isn't a good contributor or guy to have manning right field.

Superdude
05-25-2012, 01:17 AM
"My goal is to minimize those downswings and maximize the more positive times during the season," he said. "I definitely think my new approach and routine will help me do that."


Sure jay. :thumbup:

It really is a spectacle at this point. You watch a guy like Heisey run into a glut of hanging off speed stuff every once in a while and appear "hot", but it looks just like that: a hot streak. Jay Bruce ravages the league for weeks, even months. Every at bat he looks like a runaway MVP candidate. How do you display that level of skill, and then the next month fall for every feeble trick in the pitcher's handbook and swing the bat like Juan Castro? Just amazes me.

Ghosts of 1990
05-25-2012, 01:21 AM
I said he is solid. But he will not ever be a star which is what he should have been. He will never OPS .900 over a full season. We have seen his best. Just shows you scouts know little and miss all the time ; though they didn't completely miss on Bruce as he has been productive through stretches

reds44
05-25-2012, 01:29 AM
I said he is solid. But he will not ever be a star which is what he should have been. He will never OPS .900 over a full season. We have seen his best. Just shows you scouts know little and miss all the time ; though they didn't completely miss on Bruce as he has been productive through stretches
He's in the middle of a 1-30 stretch and he's OPSing .840. Would you like to wager he OPSes .900 this year?

He's a pure power hitter, a lot of times those guys are streak hitters. He'll be fine. He is fine.

Vottomatic
05-25-2012, 06:04 AM
Votto could walk 4 times a game. His first two at-bats last night, I saw one pitch that would have been a called strike. The rest were balls and he was swinging at bad pitches.

Giancarlo Stanton batting cleanup, anyone?

Kc61
05-25-2012, 06:51 AM
Reds are about to face the Rockies. Two lefty starters in three games. Could be time for Bruce, or even Votto, to get a day off.

On the other hand, when you look at the high ERAs of the Rockies pitchers, could be the time to let Bruce play.

By the way, I thought the Braves did a great job on Votto, pitched him well, set up their defense against him well. But he is just fine. Bruce, though, needs to avoid these deep slumps somehow if he's going to improve.

edabbs44
05-25-2012, 07:16 AM
I was wondering how long it would take for this to be brought up. His ups and downs are astonishing. Can anyone still believe that this is some sort of random distribution?

Do I still want the guy on the team? Sure. 100%. He is productive and still has upside. But I think the expectations can be reeled in a bit and we shouldn't be crying for him to be providing any sort of protection for Votto. Keep him at the 5th spot for now and let him do his thing.

dougdirt
05-25-2012, 07:26 AM
I still think Bruce is the only guy who is going to be able to 'protect Votto'. Pitchers don't fear Phillips. Ever. Pitchers fear Bruce quite a bit of the time. Maybe not right now, but there are plenty of times they do. No pitcher goes to the mound thinking 'man, I really need to be careful pitching to Brandon Phillips'.

puca
05-25-2012, 07:34 AM
I still think Bruce is the only guy who is going to be able to 'protect Votto'. Pitchers don't fear Phillips. Ever. Pitchers fear Bruce quite a bit of the time. Maybe not right now, but there are plenty of times they do. No pitcher goes to the mound thinking 'man, I really need to be careful pitching to Brandon Phillips'.

Certainly true when it comes to RH pitchers - who are even more inclined to pitch around Votto to begin with.

Raisor
05-25-2012, 08:11 AM
If Bruce ends up with a .850+ OPS I really don't care how he gets there. His bad streaks are horrible to watch, but in the end it doesn't overly matter if he has a bad 50 PA's in a row or spread out. The pythag tells us that.

OesterPoster
05-25-2012, 08:56 AM
By the way, I thought the Braves did a great job on Votto, pitched him well, set up their defense against him well. But he is just fine. Bruce, though, needs to avoid these deep slumps somehow if he's going to improve.

Seemed like Votto had some unlucky BABIP the last few days. He scorched one off Venters' knee, and the Braves had the perfect shift on him up the middle one day too. He's started every single game so far, so I could see Dusty giving him the day off on Sunday perhaps...just to get him rested for the road trip.

PuffyPig
05-25-2012, 09:02 AM
We've won 6 in a row and gotten into first palce with little contribution from Votto and Bruce.

Isn't that what we always wanted, geting some offensive contribution from other players, and also getting shut down pitching?

This is fabulous news, because we all know Votto and Bruce will hit shortly.

westofyou
05-25-2012, 09:07 AM
I said he is solid. But he will not ever be a star which is what he should have been. He will never OPS .900 over a full season. We have seen his best. Just shows you scouts know little and miss all the time ; though they didn't completely miss on Bruce as he has been productive through stretches

Since you can tell the future so well can you let me know what promotions the team will have next year?

bucksfan2
05-25-2012, 09:13 AM
I still think Bruce is the only guy who is going to be able to 'protect Votto'. Pitchers don't fear Phillips. Ever. Pitchers fear Bruce quite a bit of the time. Maybe not right now, but there are plenty of times they do. No pitcher goes to the mound thinking 'man, I really need to be careful pitching to Brandon Phillips'.

How is a guy who can go 1-30 the best bet to protect Votto?

IMO the best bet for protecting Votto is to get runners on base in front of him. I don't think Votto is in a slump. Remember when he was in a HR slump and then all of a sudden he started cranking HR's out left and right? As long as he is getting on base at a high clip he really won't slump.

jhu1321
05-25-2012, 09:18 AM
We've won 6 in a row and gotten into first palce with little contribution from Votto and Bruce.

Isn't that what we always wanted, geting some offensive contribution from other players, and also getting shut down pitching?

This is fabulous news, because we all know Votto and Bruce will hit shortly.

Great news for the Reds.:beerme:

WildcatFan
05-25-2012, 09:24 AM
He's in the middle of a 1-30 stretch and he's OPSing .840. Would you like to wager he OPSes .900 this year?

He's a pure power hitter, a lot of times those guys are streak hitters. He'll be fine. He is fine.

This. His downswings are bad, but his hot streaks are so good, that you're still going to get your 30-40 home runs and .820-.880 OPS every year, along with Gold Glove defense, no questions asked. How many of those guys are in the league, particularly at Bruce's pay scale?

CySeymour
05-25-2012, 09:48 AM
Giancarlo Stanton batting cleanup, anyone?

I wish, but very much a pipe dream.

westofyou
05-25-2012, 09:50 AM
I wish, but very much a pipe dream.

A ridiculous notion, the Reds weren't going to trade Bruce when he popped, the thought that Stanton could be had is a chat board wet dream.

Tony Cloninger
05-25-2012, 09:57 AM
There is no excuse for his downswings to be this bad by now. Like Stubbs......he seems to be stubborn to just change his mindset and say I am just going to left field and up the middle to get myself going. Stubbs could look at Votto and easily say...if he can choke up with the bat, especially with 2 strikes ....I should at least try to make that adjustment.

powersackers
05-25-2012, 11:12 AM
Great news for the Reds.:beerme:

The win streak despite much Joey and Jay production is the primary thing I meant to bring up when starting this thread. But I like the debate about Jay's Streaks and Joey's protection as well. Nice SI article link too. Thanks.

pedro
05-25-2012, 11:22 AM
I said he is solid. But he will not ever be a star which is what he should have been. He will never OPS .900 over a full season. We have seen his best. Just shows you scouts know little and miss all the time ; though they didn't completely miss on Bruce as he has been productive through stretches


You sure do know a lot. Personally I wouldn't be surprised if he did it this year.

dougdirt
05-25-2012, 11:25 AM
How is a guy who can go 1-30 the best bet to protect Votto?

IMO the best bet for protecting Votto is to get runners on base in front of him. I don't think Votto is in a slump. Remember when he was in a HR slump and then all of a sudden he started cranking HR's out left and right? As long as he is getting on base at a high clip he really won't slump.

Isn't my opinion on that explained in what you quoted?

jhu1321
05-25-2012, 11:31 AM
There is no excuse for his downswings to be this bad by now. Like Stubbs......he seems to be stubborn to just change his mindset and say I am just going to left field and up the middle to get myself going. Stubbs could look at Votto and easily say...if he can choke up with the bat, especially with 2 strikes ....I should at least try to make that adjustment.

The SI article referenced in this thread quoted Jay as saying he recommitted himself to going up the middle and to left in the offseason. I personally haven't seen or heard anything that should lead to comparison of Bruce to Stubbs.

Kc61
05-25-2012, 11:36 AM
This. His downswings are bad, but his hot streaks are so good, that you're still going to get your 30-40 home runs and .820-.880 OPS every year, along with Gold Glove defense, no questions asked. How many of those guys are in the league, particularly at Bruce's pay scale?

30-40 home runs, no questions asked? He's hit 30 one time, it was 32 last year.
Not exactly a repeating phenomenon.

I like Bruce, he was a great minor league prospect and is definitely an above average major league long ball hitter and defensive player.

But I'm disappointed that he's not a steadier hitter and doesn't hit for a higher batting average. I wish he hit to the opposite field more and was less dependent on long balls for success.

It's hard to discuss Bruce on this site because many posters take offense if one suggests he's not a superstar.

traderumor
05-25-2012, 12:47 PM
Bruce will always be like this. His mechanics at the plate regularly get messed up and he has trouble breaking the habit. Get used to it, because he will always be that way. Votto worries me because they are giving him nothing to hit. Only when they get someone in the four hole to protect and our one-two hitters get on base more, it's easier to walk him than pitch to him.His OPS is over 1.000.

IslandRed
05-25-2012, 12:47 PM
I still think Bruce is the only guy who is going to be able to 'protect Votto'. Pitchers don't fear Phillips. Ever. Pitchers fear Bruce quite a bit of the time. Maybe not right now, but there are plenty of times they do. No pitcher goes to the mound thinking 'man, I really need to be careful pitching to Brandon Phillips'.

Phillips walked four times in the last two games. Sure looked to me like the Braves knew who might beat them that day and who wasn't likely to. It's not like other teams are unaware of when Bruce is in one of his funks.

(Disclaimer -- this is not an argument for Phillips as a cleanup hitter)

dougdirt
05-25-2012, 12:52 PM
Phillips walked four times in the last two games. Sure looked to me like the Braves knew who might beat them that day and who wasn't likely to. It's not like other teams are unaware of when Bruce is in one of his funks.

(Disclaimer -- this is not an argument for Phillips as a cleanup hitter)

Phillips also walked 4 times over the previous 22 games. He was walked due to randomness, sans the IBB with a LOOGY. His entire career suggests he walks just as often as he does with men on as he does when they aren't. Bruce on the other hand walks a whole lot more when men are on than when they aren't. Pitchers pitch to Bruce more carefully with guys on base because they know he can make them pay. That doesn't happen with Phillips because pitchers don't care to be careful to him because they know he isn't all that likely to hurt them.

oregonred
05-25-2012, 12:59 PM
His OPS is over 1.000.

slacker

IslandRed
05-25-2012, 01:05 PM
I don't believe that the timing of every baseball event is completely random, especially when the other team has the initiative. Not worth hijacking a Bruce/Votto thread to have that discussion for the 537th time, though.

What's more interesting is that this is a pretty stats-oriented board and we're talking about "protection" as if it's settled science, and it isn't.

oregonred
05-25-2012, 01:16 PM
Looking at the NL player stats, Bruce is #25 in the NL with a .833 OPS, but shocked to see Bruce is 72nd (out of 87 qualified) NL position players in OBP at .301. Ouch!

RedsZone whipping boy Drew Stubbs is now at .304. Cozart is .301 and Phillips is .314

League average is .317

It's really HRs (in bunches) for Bruce or bust.

dougdirt
05-25-2012, 01:20 PM
Looking at the NL player stats, Bruce is #25 in the NL with a .833 OPS, but shocked to see Bruce is 72nd (out of 87 qualified) NL position players in OBP at .301. Ouch!

RedsZone whipping boy Drew Stubbs is now at .304. Cozart is .301 and Phillips is .314

League average is .317

It's really HRs (in bunches) for Bruce or bust.

So far, yes. If Bruce doesn't end the season with a .340+ OBP I will be shocked.

oregonred
05-25-2012, 01:41 PM
So far, yes. If Bruce doesn't end the season with a .340+ OBP I will be shocked.

His career OBP is 329.

It really is incredible how much of a black hole the #1 and #4 spots are for the Reds. Being in first place is unbelieveable when you consider;

Leadoff Spot. .208/.275 vs. .298/.343 for NL league average
Cleanup Spot .298/.343 vs. .346./442 for NL league average

The leadoff OPS is unfathomably horrific. Great news if the Reds can improve on this record setting level of pitifulness the rest of the way (would almost be mathematically impossible not to get to at least 90% of league average worst case at leadoff).

dougdirt
05-25-2012, 01:58 PM
His career OBP is 329.

Could really care less about his career OBP. Over the last two years it's .346.

Tony Cloninger
05-25-2012, 02:13 PM
The SI article referenced in this thread quoted Jay as saying he recommitted himself to going up the middle and to left in the offseason. I personally haven't seen or heard anything that should lead to comparison of Bruce to Stubbs.

Yet he has not done it much...has he. The comparison was in the Approach of each hitter to their AB's and not being too stubborn to change what is not working. It has nothing to do with their Individual numbers or talent.

KC61 is right....You have to walk on eggshells with fine china in your hands just to try and dare say anything negative about some players.

kaldaniels
05-25-2012, 02:16 PM
It is certainly comforting (and frankly exciting) that Jay's slump has not affected the Reds in the W-L column. A bit of luck on our side is always nice.

RedlegJake
05-25-2012, 02:32 PM
Only a bit tongue in cheek, if ever a hitter needed his own personal coach, a guy whose only job was to watch him and work with his mechanics every single game its Jay Bruce. I forget now the Hall of Famer, who, when in a slump, would phone his high school coach to watch him and he would always see immediately some little thing and he'd break out of his slump. Maybe Bruce needs someone like that who really knows him because its clear Jacoby nor Baker seems to be able to help.

WildcatFan
05-25-2012, 03:01 PM
30-40 home runs, no questions asked? He's hit 30 one time, it was 32 last year.
Not exactly a repeating phenomenon.

I like Bruce, he was a great minor league prospect and is definitely an above average major league long ball hitter and defensive player.

But I'm disappointed that he's not a steadier hitter and doesn't hit for a higher batting average. I wish he hit to the opposite field more and was less dependent on long balls for success.

It's hard to discuss Bruce on this site because many posters take offense if one suggests he's not a superstar.

I think so. 2010 was his first full year as a starter, and he hit 25, so I'd expect him to improve in subsequent years. He hit 32 last year and his on pace for around 40 this year, which includes this extended slump. So I absolutely think 5-6 consecutive seasons of 30-40 HRs, barring injury, is a reasonable expectation.

Redhook
05-25-2012, 08:43 PM
If we flipped their names around the complaints would turn into a whisper.

Bruce was supposed to be the current Votto.

Votto was supposed to be a pretty a good player.

The results from these two are great and similar to what was expected from them. The names are just switched. Overall, the Reds are lucky. I guess, really lucky that Votto turned into what Bruce was supposed to be.

reds44
05-25-2012, 09:01 PM
Votto now 6 for his last 21 with 5 walks lol

Tony Cloninger
05-25-2012, 09:06 PM
Votto does not slump....he merely looks mortal for a few games or maybe a week. Stay thirsty my friend.

Ghosts of 1990
05-25-2012, 09:27 PM
Dusty is a huge reason for Bruce's problems.... he started this slump to begin with sitting him against Santana; and now he sits him again tonight.

Why does Dusty not know the guy destroys pitching at GABP and is fine against LHP and I do? It makes me very annoyed.

Tony Cloninger
05-25-2012, 09:32 PM
Dusty is a huge reason for Bruce's problems.... he started this slump to begin with sitting him against Santana; and now he sits him again tonight.

Why does Dusty not know the guy destroys pitching at GABP and is fine against LHP and I do? It makes me very annoyed.

Are you freaking kidding me with this? Talk about going out on a stretch....now it's Baker's fault he has gone 1 for 30 beacuse he sat him against Santana. Bruce is a Faberge egg now?

DGullett35
05-25-2012, 09:44 PM
I was thinking after the 3rd game in the Braves series that Dusty should give Bruce a complete day off. No BP no nothing. He did that for Votto once last year and it seemed to work as I recall

_Sir_Charles_
05-26-2012, 10:13 AM
I was thinking after the 3rd game in the Braves series that Dusty should give Bruce a complete day off. No BP no nothing. He did that for Votto once last year and it seemed to work as I recall

From what Jaime Ramsey posted, Bruce took infield practice and played 1st, short and third. Apparently made a spectacular play at third too. He got a round of applause from teammates. Cool. We found Rolen's replacement. :O)

Whether he hit or not, I don't know.l

dougdirt
05-26-2012, 11:06 AM
From what Jaime Ramsey posted, Bruce took infield practice and played 1st, short and third. Apparently made a spectacular play at third too. He got a round of applause from teammates. Cool. We found Rolen's replacement. :O)

Whether he hit or not, I don't know.l

They said on FSN that he was told not to take BP yesterday.

corkedbat
05-26-2012, 11:50 AM
They said on FSN that he was told not to take BP yesterday.

And I have no problem with that approach

westofyou
05-26-2012, 12:13 PM
Why does Dusty not know the guy destroys pitching at GABP and is fine against LHP and I do? It makes me very annoyed.

Dusty has more knowledge about Jay Bruce than any of us keyboard jockeys, he actually works with the guy and has a lifetime of real experience in between the lines.

Learn that, live that and enjoy the game(s)

You'll find your annoyance level plummeting

RedsManRick
05-26-2012, 12:47 PM
Dusty has more knowledge about Jay Bruce than any of us keyboard jockeys, he actually works with the guy and has a lifetime of real experience in between the lines.

Learn that, live that and enjoy the game(s)

You'll find your annoyance level plummeting

:thumbup:

I have and will continue to take issue with Dusty's tactical decision making, but the guy seems to be very good at handling his players. Letting Bruce have a day to get out of his own head makes perfect sense to me.

westofyou
05-26-2012, 12:57 PM
:thumbup:

I have and will continue to take issue with Dusty's tactical decision making, but the guy seems to be very good at handling his players. Letting Bruce have a day to get out of his own head makes perfect sense to me.

Tactical situations are always fair game, they deal in data

How a player is managed is soiled by the human factor that none of us have sufficient data on

To pretend we do is doing disservice to the many layers of the game we have no insight on, there are tons of things happening in an organization, clubhouse and dugout that never make it to our world. We are getting more than ever but there is still a gap there.

Ghosts of 1990
05-27-2012, 10:08 PM
Thread to bed :)

powersackers
06-28-2012, 03:00 PM
Thread to bed :)

Wake it back up. :)

Bruce has hit in the .220's for consecutive months. He's Slugged under .500 for consecutive months.

He looks more and more like Rob Deer / Pete Incaviglia as this year ( hopefully not his career) progresses. .220's pull hitters with power and lots of K's is what they were and that's what he is.

Glad he's still young and listening to Votto a bit. But he goes right back into his pull everything mentality pretty quickly. Ground outs to first and second are the majority of his outs besides K's.

Vottomatic
06-28-2012, 03:08 PM
I stopped listening when someone mentioned Dusty. :D

Raisor
06-28-2012, 03:40 PM
Bruce is currently 22nd in the NL in OPS. He is literally one good game away from bein 17th.

Listing someone's slash line without providing context isn't fair to anyone.

RichRed
06-28-2012, 04:04 PM
Bruce is currently 22nd in the NL in OPS. He is literally one good game away from bein 17th.

Listing someone's slash line without providing context isn't fair to anyone.

He also has a .260 BABIP despite a pretty good LD rate at 22%. I expect some nifty correction pretty soon.

Kc61
06-28-2012, 04:22 PM
Bruce has a .322 OBP and a .521 SLG for a total OPS of .843. Very good, wish the OBP was twenty points higher.

So many Reds have relatively low OBPs (some lower than Bruce) and high slugging percentages. Bruce, Ludwick, Cozart, are the most obvious examples. Frazier with .329 and .541. Phillips with .330 and .452.

I guess it's the type of hitter these guys are, although sometimes I wonder if hitting at GABP contributes. Long ball approach seems prevalent.

Kc61
06-28-2012, 04:50 PM
He also has a .260 BABIP despite a pretty good LD rate at 22%. I expect some nifty correction pretty soon.

Here, I take issue with you.

On batted ball statistics, Bruce has always suffered. This is because his fly ball rate is always excessively high. This year, he's at 47.7 percent fly balls. This is the fifth highest fly ball percentage in MLB among qualifiers.

Nor is 22 percent line drive rate that good. The leaders are in the 30 plus percent area.

This has always been one of Jay's problems, which I attribute to playing in GABP. Way too many fly balls.

Fly balls, when in play, are the easiest to convert to outs.

So if Jay's BABIP is low, in part it's likely because he hits catchable fly balls too much. I believe he has an uppercut swing designed to hit homers at GABP.

He's still an effective long ball hitter, but if he would hit fewer fly balls in play, he would be much more successful.

Just as a comparison, Joey Votto has a 32.6 percent fly ball rate, a 32 percent line drive rate, and a 35.4 percent ground ball rate. My guess is that this is near perfect and contributes to his BABIP of .415.

edabbs44
06-28-2012, 06:25 PM
Bruce is currently 22nd in the NL in OPS. He is literally one good game away from bein 17th.

Listing someone's slash line without providing context isn't fair to anyone.

One good game and he will leapfrog Adam LaRoche, AJ Ellis and Jed Lowrie. Sweet.

reds44
06-28-2012, 06:29 PM
Bruce has an .843 OPS and is in the middle of a typical Bruce slump. Imagine his numbers when he tears the cover off the ball for a few weeks like you know will happen.

dougdirt
06-28-2012, 06:37 PM
Jay Bruce sucks and Dusty Baker is good. What kind of alternate universe has Redszone turned into?

Jay Bruce
06-28-2012, 06:38 PM
[QUOTE=Kc61;2644167]Here, I take issue with you.

Nor is 22 percent line drive rate that good. The leaders are in the 30 plus percent area.

QUOTE]

Since 2007, the highest sustained LD% over an entire season was 27.5%, by Joey Votto last year. 22% is a very good LD%.

edabbs44
06-28-2012, 06:47 PM
Bruce has an .843 OPS and is in the middle of a typical Bruce slump. Imagine his numbers when he tears the cover off the ball for a few weeks like you know will happen.

Last year he had one monster month and the rest were pretty status quo. Why would we expect anything different this year?

edabbs44
06-28-2012, 06:48 PM
Jay Bruce sucks and Dusty Baker is good. What kind of alternate universe has Redszone turned into?

Who is saying that Jay sucks? Why do some get so sensitive about this guy?

reds44
06-28-2012, 06:59 PM
Last year he had one monster month and the rest were pretty status quo. Why would we expect anything different this year?
Bruce had 3 months of 800+ OPS hitting last year (one of which was a monster 1.140) and 3 of .725 or less. He was pretty up and down.

This year his OPS by month is .954, .754, .824. In June he's only hitting .225 but he's walked 14 times and struck out 17. Even in April he only walked 6 and struck out 21.

Me thinks Jay is due for a hot streak.

reds44
06-28-2012, 07:01 PM
Here, I take issue with you.

On batted ball statistics, Bruce has always suffered. This is because his fly ball rate is always excessively high. This year, he's at 47.7 percent fly balls. This is the fifth highest fly ball percentage in MLB among qualifiers.

Nor is 22 percent line drive rate that good. The leaders are in the 30 plus percent area.

This has always been one of Jay's problems, which I attribute to playing in GABP. Way too many fly balls.

Fly balls, when in play, are the easiest to convert to outs.

So if Jay's BABIP is low, in part it's likely because he hits catchable fly balls too much. I believe he has an uppercut swing designed to hit homers at GABP.

He's still an effective long ball hitter, but if he would hit fewer fly balls in play, he would be much more successful.

Just as a comparison, Joey Votto has a 32.6 percent fly ball rate, a 32 percent line drive rate, and a 35.4 percent ground ball rate. My guess is that this is near perfect and contributes to his BABIP of .415.
I'm all for people as strong as Jay hitting fly balls in GABP as much as possible. And people need to stop comparing Bruce and Votto.

edabbs44
06-28-2012, 07:03 PM
Bruce had 3 months of 800+ OPS hitting last year (one of which was a monster 1.140) and 3 of .725 or less. He was pretty up and down.

This year his OPS by month is .954, .754, .824. In June he's only hitting .225 but he's walked 14 times and struck out 17. Even in April he only walked 6 and struck out 21.

Me thinks Jay is due for a hot streak.

If he is, then me thinks he will be due for an equal cold streak. Jay has proven to be an .800-.850 OPS bat. Until we see otherwise, I don't know if we can consider him to be anything else.

reds44
06-28-2012, 07:04 PM
If he is, then me thinks he will be due for an equal cold streak. Jay has proven to be an .800-.850 OPS bat. Until we see otherwise, I don't know if we can consider him to be anything else.
Why on earth would we expect a 25 year old to improve? Clearly a players 21-24 aged seasons are his prime.

Kc61
06-28-2012, 07:29 PM
I'm all for people as strong as Jay hitting fly balls in GABP as much as possible. And people need to stop comparing Bruce and Votto.

Then you obviously like low OBP, high slugging, home run type hitters. That's fine, those guys can be productive and Jay certainly is.

But hitting 47.7 percent fly balls will not make Jay a better all around hitter.

As for his 22 percent line drive rate, there are many NL players with higher line drive rates than Bruce right now. Just go through the list on Fangraphs.

Nobody is saying Bruce is bad, I'm not. He is a very good long ball hitter. I thought he would be more of an all around hitter, he isn't, but he still is a very valuable guy.

Have to be real careful around here talking about Bruce.

Raisor
06-28-2012, 07:42 PM
Its because we've all been through this before with Dunn. Be happy with what we actually have in Bruce, being in the top 25 hitters in the league is a Really Good Thing. He isn't Votto. He's never going to be Votto. But he IS one of the best players in the league 25 years old an younger.

reds44
06-28-2012, 07:43 PM
Then you obviously like low OBP, high slugging, home run type hitters. That's fine, those guys can be productive and Jay certainly is.

But hitting 47.7 percent fly balls will not make Jay a better all around hitter.

As for his 22 percent line drive rate, there are many NL players with higher line drive rates than Bruce right now. Just go through the list on Fangraphs.

Nobody is saying Bruce is bad, I'm not. He is a very good long ball hitter. I thought he would be more of an all around hitter, he isn't, but he still is a very valuable guy.

Have to be real careful around here talking about Bruce.
Bruce hitting fly balls has nothing to do with his ability to walk.

Kc61
06-28-2012, 07:53 PM
Bruce hitting fly balls has nothing to do with his ability to walk.

It has to do with his ability to get base hits.

Superdude
06-28-2012, 07:56 PM
Why on earth would we expect a 25 year old to improve? Clearly a players 21-24 aged seasons are his prime.

Just for another perspective, Bruce looked like a star in the making after a solid 2010 at 23 years old, but after watching his numbers pretty much level off the last 1,300 at bats, it's starting to look to me like he was just an above average bat all along that developed extremely early.

Not saying I'm right, but something tells me Jay is who he is unless he makes a change in approach. Obviously not complaining about the .850 OPS bat, but I'm no longer expecting him to turn into Ryan Braun all the sudden.

reds44
06-28-2012, 07:58 PM
I would be willing to wager Jay finishes this year with an OPS north of .900.

Redhook
06-28-2012, 08:07 PM
I would be willing to wager Jay finishes this year with an OPS north of .900.

I'd bet anything I have against that, including kids ;). He's good but he's not close to the all around hitter I had hoped he would be.

dougdirt
06-28-2012, 08:12 PM
Who is saying that Jay sucks? Why do some get so sensitive about this guy?

I was being a little bit sarcastic.

edabbs44
06-28-2012, 08:25 PM
Its because we've all been through this before with Dunn. Be happy with what we actually have in Bruce, being in the top 25 hitters in the league is a Really Good Thing. He isn't Votto. He's never going to be Votto. But he IS one of the best players in the league 25 years old an younger.

The issue is that the bar continues to be lowered for him. He is a special talent and top 25 shouldn't really be the goal.

jojo
06-28-2012, 08:34 PM
Bruce has been a good player-above average bat and above average glove it's hard to complain about that. His development is a home run for the Reds.

That said, while at one time I thought of him as untouchable, his name being mentioned by another GM probably shouldn't elicit an automatic click.

Ghosts of 1990
06-29-2012, 10:53 AM
Have to be real careful around here talking about Bruce.


To say the least.

RANDY IN INDY
06-29-2012, 11:10 AM
Bruce has been a good player-above average bat and above average glove it's hard to complain about that. His development is a home run for the Reds.

That said, while at one time I thought of him as untouchable, his name being mentioned by another GM probably shouldn't elicit an automatic click.

I tend to agree with this.

kaldaniels
06-29-2012, 11:11 AM
To say the least.

So says this guy.


He is Ben Grieve II. He will be no more than that as a Major Leaguer. Remember I said that.

Believe me, I remember.

Plus Plus
06-29-2012, 11:24 AM
To say the least.

There is also a distinct difference between realistic criticism and excessive criticism.

Tom Servo
06-29-2012, 01:00 PM
Its because we've all been through this before with Dunn. Be happy with what we actually have in Bruce, being in the top 25 hitters in the league is a Really Good Thing. He isn't Votto. He's never going to be Votto. But he IS one of the best players in the league 25 years old an younger.
Precisely. Reds fans have this thing about a guy having to be a flawless superstar. Bruce isn't what some prognosticated him to be, but that doesn't mean he isn't very valuable to the Reds.

jhu1321
06-29-2012, 01:22 PM
Precisely. Reds fans have this thing about a guy having to be a flawless superstar. Bruce isn't what some prognosticated him to be, but that doesn't mean he isn't very valuable to the Reds.

.... and locked up for relatively cheap through 2016. Yes, please.

edabbs44
06-29-2012, 05:05 PM
Precisely. Reds fans have this thing about a guy having to be a flawless superstar. Bruce isn't what some prognosticated him to be, but that doesn't mean he isn't very valuable to the Reds.

Most arent saying that he isnt a valued member of the team. But why can't it be both? He can't be criticized that he isn't living up to his potential?

Tom Servo
06-29-2012, 05:54 PM
Most arent saying that he isnt a valued member of the team. But why can't it be both? He can't be criticized that he isn't living up to his potential?
Sure. There's valid criticism, like the type you generally provide, and then there's hyperbolic hot air like Ghosts of 1990 generally gives us.

Kc61
06-29-2012, 06:00 PM
Precisely. Reds fans have this thing about a guy having to be a flawless superstar. Bruce isn't what some prognosticated him to be, but that doesn't mean he isn't very valuable to the Reds.

Yeah, I think the opposite. Many Reds fans are unwilling to face up to the shortcomings of certain players, particularly home grown guys.

They are unhappy unless everyone declares these players to be flawless superstars.

I guess it's a "half empty" and "half full" difference in perspective.

Raisor
06-29-2012, 06:32 PM
I haven't seen anyone say that Bruce is perfect.

edabbs44
06-29-2012, 08:45 PM
Sure. There's valid criticism, like the type you generally provide, and then there's hyperbolic hot air like Ghosts of 1990 generally gives us.

Thx, but I think some get hypersensitive because of that one poster. We need to extract previous threads from our thoughts.

VR
06-30-2012, 01:22 AM
5-6 vs. the likely ASG starter for these two knuckleheads tonight.

Tom Servo
06-30-2012, 01:25 AM
5-6 vs. the likely ASG starter for these two knuckleheads tonight.
Couple of Ben Grieves out there.

RANDY IN INDY
06-30-2012, 06:34 AM
Hope it's another hot streak!

Redhook
06-30-2012, 07:44 AM
Hope it's another hot streak!

That would be awesome. If Bruce gets hot over the next week leading into the All-Star break, it could really set the tone for the rest of the season. Not counting the playoffs, it'd be the perfect time for one of his scorching hot streaks.

Raisor
06-30-2012, 07:51 AM
Bruce is currently 22nd in the NL in OPS. He is literally one good game away from bein 17th .


June 30, 2012 7:48am eastern time.

Jay Bruce NL Rank OPS

17. 258/328/530/858

I'm also really good at the "guess your weight" attraction at the state fair.

;)

Dan
06-30-2012, 08:04 AM
June 30, 2012 7:48am eastern time.

Jay Bruce NL Rank OPS

17. 258/328/530/858

I'm also really good at the "guess your weight" attraction at the state fair.

;)

Only 17th? What a terrible player! Trade him for CarGo now before he gets any worse! :D

Here's the thing that is so frustrating about Bruce. He seems to have a very low "baseline of performance." That is, when he stops one of his hot streaks, he seems to drop off the face of the baseball world for awhile. For instance, Votto can be having a terrible day at the plate and he'll still end up going 1-4 with a walk. Bruce goes 0-4 with 3 strikeouts and a ground out to second. And he'll go like that for weeks at a time. Then suddenly everything clicks and he's like his old self again and during those times he has the ability to match whatever streak Votto might be on. But Votto keeps his overall stats higher by having that higher baseline of performance.

Raisor
06-30-2012, 08:16 AM
Only 17th? What a terrible player! Trade him for CarGo now before he gets any worse! :D

Here's the thing that is so frustrating about Bruce. He seems to have a very low "baseline of performance." That is, when he stops one of his hot streaks, he seems to drop off the face of the baseball world for awhile. For instance, Votto can be having a terrible day at the plate and he'll still end up going 1-4 with a walk. Bruce goes 0-4 with 3 strikeouts and a ground out to second. And he'll go like that for weeks at a time. Then suddenly everything clicks and he's like his old self again and during those times he has the ability to match whatever streak Votto might be on. But Votto keeps his overall stats higher by having that higher baseline of performance.

I'll agree with every word of that, but once again, he's not Votto. He'll never be Votto. As soon as we can all come to terms with that, we'll be able to enjoy what he actually is at this point.

oh, and he's only 25.

edabbs44
06-30-2012, 08:25 AM
I'll agree with every word of that, but once again, he's not Votto. He'll never be Votto. As soon as we can all come to terms with that, we'll be able to enjoy what he actually is at this point.

oh, and he's only 25.

Next for him to pass...Yadi Molina and Aaron Hill.

_Sir_Charles_
06-30-2012, 10:30 AM
I haven't seen anyone say that Bruce is perfect.

He was last night. :thumbup:

powersackers
06-30-2012, 01:15 PM
June 30, 2012 7:48am eastern time.

Jay Bruce NL Rank OPS

17. 258/328/530/858

I'm also really good at the "guess your weight" attraction at the state fair.
;)

Awesome. Pick another player and do it again! X player will move up to Y rank with a good game!

reds44
06-30-2012, 01:20 PM
Last year he had one monster month and the rest were pretty status quo. Why would we expect anything different this year?
With one game left to play, Bruce is OPSing .870 in June.

edabbs44
07-18-2012, 09:04 PM
Interesting and ironic tidbit, Jay has fallen behind Alfonso Soriano in the OPS rankings as of close of business last night.

Reds/Flyers Fan
07-18-2012, 10:30 PM
Jay's first two at-bats tonight were sky-high pop-ups that wouldn't have been home runs in a grain silo. He's going to really have to pick up his production if this team is going to hang in this thing for the next month. And, so far, not so good.

OldXOhio
07-18-2012, 11:54 PM
Interesting and ironic tidbit, Jay has fallen behind Alfonso Soriano in the OPS rankings as of close of business last night.

And after tonight, he's behind Ryan Ludwick.

Kc61
07-18-2012, 11:58 PM
Jay's first two at-bats tonight were sky-high pop-ups that wouldn't have been home runs in a grain silo. He's going to really have to pick up his production if this team is going to hang in this thing for the next month. And, so far, not so good.

Jay's fly ball rate is too high, has been since he came to the bigs. If he hit more line drives and ground balls he'd be better off. Glad he hits homers, but too many of his batted balls are high in the air.

Jay has a .318 OBP and a .489 SLG. Not sure if these numbers include tonight.

While this adds up to an OPS above .800, it shows the limitations of the OPS stat. OPS includes two very different components. In Jay's case, one component, the SLG part, is very strong, but the other, OBP, is not very strong. Ludwick has the same issue.

Bruce could be such a fine hitter if he would hit line drives and hard ground balls to the opposite field more often. I've often said that GABP may hurt Jay, he just seems to be aiming for the right field seats so often.

Still young, maybe things will click for him soon.

Tony Cloninger
07-19-2012, 12:56 AM
Jay's fly ball rate is too high, has been since he came to the bigs. If he hit more line drives and ground balls he'd be better off. Glad he hits homers, but too many of his batted balls are high in the air.

Jay has a .318 OBP and a .489 SLG. Not sure if these numbers include tonight.

While this adds up to an OPS above .800, it shows the limitations of the OPS stat. OPS includes two very different components. In Jay's case, one component, the SLG part, is very strong, but the other, OBP, is not very strong. Ludwick has the same issue.

Bruce could be such a fine hitter if he would hit line drives and hard ground balls to the opposite field more often. I've often said that GABP may hurt Jay, he just seems to be aiming for the right field seats so often.

Still young, maybe things will click for him soon.


I think he really does not think he is doing anything wrong by trying to hit fly balls in this park. He is not that young in terms of not understanding that the way he tries to hit in this park....is hurting him.
He knows what he needs to do.....and maybe he just cannot do it or is just too stubborn. Another player who needs to start realizing it is not working as well as it should for him is Stubbs.

His power is not that great ...that it would not hurt him to try and shorten his swing and just make contact.

lollipopcurve
07-19-2012, 07:12 AM
I think Bruce knows what he needs to do -- use the entire field -- but he hasn't been able to do it very well. They've started shifting on him a lot, and that seems to be complicating things for him. He looked so good at the beginning of the year, so it's discouraging to see him tailing off. I get the sense that some of these guys may need to hear some new voices coaching them. Very little positive development from the young hitters on this team.

Redhook
07-19-2012, 07:28 AM
I think Bruce knows what he needs to do -- use the entire field -- but he hasn't been able to do it very well.

Is this a Bruce issue or a coaching issue? Probably a little bit of both, but I find it hard to believe a better hitting coach wouldn't have Bruce hitting it both ways more effectively.


They've started shifting on him a lot, and that seems to be complicating things for him. He looked so good at the beginning of the year, so it's discouraging to see him tailing off.

It is discouraging, but not suprising in the least. He does it every year.


I get the sense that some of these guys may need to hear some new voices coaching them. Very little positive development from the young hitters on this team.

I agree 100%. I have no idea what the coaches are telling these guys, but whatever it is, it's failing big-time. Most of the young hitters have gotten worse or aren't improving at all. You can't blame everything on coaching, but the approaches at the plate by Bruce, Heisey, and Stubbs are all pititful. Bruce has no plan, Heisey swings too much, and Stubbs doesn't swing enough. They're all over the place.

I'd really like to see this team take a different approach and hire a different, more qualified, hitting instructor. It might not help, but it certainly wouldn't hurt.

mth123
07-19-2012, 08:03 AM
Is this a Bruce issue or a coaching issue? Probably a little bit of both, but I find it hard to believe a better hitting coach wouldn't have Bruce hitting it both ways more effectively.



It is discouraging, but not suprising in the least. He does it every year.



I agree 100%. I have no idea what the coaches are telling these guys, but whatever it is, it's failing big-time. Most of the young hitters have gotten worse or aren't improving at all. You can't blame everything on coaching, but the approaches at the plate by Bruce, Heisey, and Stubbs are all pititful. Bruce has no plan, Heisey swings too much, and Stubbs doesn't swing enough. They're all over the place.

I'd really like to see this team take a different approach and hire a different, more qualified, hitting instructor. It might not help, but it certainly wouldn't hurt.

I think the regression of the young hitters is more on the talent of the players involved. The league adjusts and water eventually seeks its level. Stubbs was never a good hitter and, now that the league has adjusted to him, its showing. Heisey was a 17th round pick for a reason. He's playing to his talent level. Bruce is frustrating because our expectations are high. He's still pretty good, streakness and all. Frazier is actually exceedng expectations. Cozart is about as expected, smooth at SS, some pop and extra base ability and woeful OBP skills (but still the best all around SS here since the Hall of Famer). Mesoraco probably needs more PT to get in a groove.

Tony Cloninger
07-19-2012, 09:04 AM
I think the regression of the young hitters is more on the talent of the players involved. The league adjusts and water eventually seeks its level. Stubbs was never a good hitter and, now that the league has adjusted to him, its showing. Heisey was a 17th round pick for a reason. He's playing to his talent level. Bruce is frustrating because our expectations are high. He's still pretty good, streakness and all. Frazier is actually exceedng expectations. Cozart is about as expected, smooth at SS, some pop and extra base ability and woeful OBP skills (but still the best all around SS here since the Hall of Famer). Mesoraco probably needs more PT to get in a groove.

I agree with all your analysis. Problem is.....now Bruce has to be looked at as the guy with the talent to try and carry this team with Votto gone.....but yet who knows when he will start getting hot again, plus he always looks stressed and tight up there.

jhu1321
07-19-2012, 09:14 AM
I agree with all your analysis. Problem is.....now Bruce has to be looked at as the guy with the talent to try and carry this team with Votto gone.....but yet who knows when he will start getting hot again, plus he always looks stressed and tight up there.

I like Bruce a lot as a person and right fielder but I think it's time we lowered our expectations of what he will produce in a full year. Unless something changes he's going to be a .250ish/30-35HR/80-100RBI guy. I'd be happy with these numbers if they didn't come in such extreme highs and lows. I hope somehow he can level out his play.

RichRed
07-19-2012, 12:29 PM
I think Bruce knows what he needs to do -- use the entire field -- but he hasn't been able to do it very well. They've started shifting on him a lot, and that seems to be complicating things for him. He looked so good at the beginning of the year, so it's discouraging to see him tailing off. I get the sense that some of these guys may need to hear some new voices coaching them. Very little positive development from the young hitters on this team.

I agree with this. Also, I think I read that Jay Bruce and Joey Votto are pretty tight and talk about hitting a lot, so I'm sure he's getting at least some good advice. Alas, the one weakness Joey Votto has is that he can't turn other players into Joey Votto. You can lead a horse to water, and all that.

DGullett35
07-19-2012, 12:29 PM
I like Bruce a lot as a person and right fielder but I think it's time we lowered our expectations of what he will produce in a full year. Unless something changes he's going to be a .250ish/30-35HR/80-100RBI guy. I'd be happy with these numbers if they didn't come in such extreme highs and lows. I hope somehow he can level out his play.

I 100% agree. I know Ive lowered my expectations of Bruce and I did so before the season started. I has hoping for .240-.260 33HR and hopefully a 100 RBI. Sometimes the shift gets in a players head. David Ortiz has said when its happened to him it can put him in a funk. Maybe thats what its done for Bruce. Heck they even shifted on him at the All-Star game and that was coming from an AL manager. I just don't see why he doesn't lay down a bunt down the 3rd base line every now and then. Teach the defense a lesson. Heck if I was struggling I would at least try it.

RedlegJake
07-19-2012, 06:22 PM
It seemed to me on the west coast he was trying to go the other way for a few at bats when they used the shift and he even got a hit or two doing it (to left). He looked awkward and uncomfortable at the plate but he was trying. Now, though, he's given that up and is back to pulling everything into the shift. For a couple games I was thinking hey - he's actually hitting the other way!

I just wonder if that was accidental, or if he felt so uncomfortable he decided to quit, or if he only did that because it was Petco?

Ghosts of 1990
07-19-2012, 06:32 PM
Bruce hit the ball to left field more often (and with more authority) in 2008.

edabbs44
07-20-2012, 08:24 PM
Perspective. Last 2 months OPS numbers:

Cozart - .681
Stubbs - .720
Phillips - .850
Bruce - .715
Ludwick - .923
Hanigan - .715

Jay's either seriously overdue or he is in trouble. But I am surprised that he is still getting somewhat of a free pass still while guys like Stubbs are basically ridiculed every at bat.

mth123
07-20-2012, 08:28 PM
Perspective. Last 2 months OPS numbers:

Cozart - .681
Stubbs - .720
Phillips - .850
Bruce - .715
Ludwick - .923
Hanigan - .715

Jay's either seriously overdue or he is in trouble. But I am surprised that he is still getting somewhat of a free pass still while guys like Stubbs are basically ridiculed every at bat.

Because Bruce will get hot and put up a month of .950. Stubbs probably won't ever have another month is his career over .750 unless he becomes a platoon guy who plays only against LHP.

Mario-Rijo
07-20-2012, 08:31 PM
Perspective. Last 2 months OPS numbers:

Cozart - .681
Stubbs - .720
Phillips - .850
Bruce - .715
Ludwick - .923
Hanigan - .715

Jay's either seriously overdue or he is in trouble. But I am surprised that he is still getting somewhat of a free pass still while guys like Stubbs are basically ridiculed every at bat.

What's surprising about it? Jay has had some degree of sustained big league success, Drew hasn't. Since the league had a chance to get a book on Drew (about a season give or take a little) he's been a sub .700 OPS bat.

edabbs44
07-20-2012, 08:53 PM
What's surprising about it? Jay has had some degree of sustained big league success, Drew hasn't. Since the league had a chance to get a book on Drew (about a season give or take a little) he's been a sub .700 OPS bat.

What you have done in the past is wonderful and all, but at some point he has to stop going into the tank for months at a time. We can talk about Drew's struggles and the point is valid, however Drew also wasn't a #1 prospect in all of baseball.

Mario-Rijo
07-20-2012, 08:56 PM
What you have done in the past is wonderful and all, but at some point he has to stop going into the tank for months at a time. We can talk about Drew's struggles and the point is valid, however Drew also wasn't a #1 prospect in all of baseball.

Expectations is your strawman? Bottom line Jay Bruce still is an .800+ OPS bat and GG level RF, Stubbs has potential to be better but isn't/hasn't yet been.

SirFelixCat
07-20-2012, 08:56 PM
Is the "he's still so young" tagline still being used? Because I'm exhausted by waiting for him to find some modicum of consistency. How many more years do we have to wait until people give up on the excuses?

eta: Don't get me wrong, he's a decent player, but he simply has not lived up to what we all hoped for and many said was just around the corner.

mth123
07-20-2012, 08:59 PM
What you have done in the past is wonderful and all, but at some point he has to stop going into the tank for months at a time. We can talk about Drew's struggles and the point is valid, however Drew also wasn't a #1 prospect in all of baseball.

How they compare to their prospect status doesn't really matter now. One has been pretty effective compared to the league and has earned All Star status. The other is playing by default at this point and would be a 5th OFer on a team with options.

As far as their prospect status goes, they've both disappointed.

Mario-Rijo
07-20-2012, 09:01 PM
Personally I think alot have underperformed. Bruce, Stubbs, Heisey (Cozart eventually will disappoint), etc. Brook Jacoby should have been in the unemployment line a long time ago.

Mario-Rijo
07-20-2012, 09:02 PM
Speaking of Bruce, YARD! :beerme:

edabbs44
07-20-2012, 09:07 PM
Expectations is your strawman? Bottom line Jay Bruce still is an .800+ OPS bat and GG level RF, Stubbs has potential to be better but isn't/hasn't yet been.

57 players had OPSs .800 or above going into tonight. That isn't a milestone level or anything. And Jay isn't really a GG RFer, that has become an urban legend due to an insanely high UZR one year.

edabbs44
07-20-2012, 09:08 PM
Speaking of Bruce, YARD! :beerme:

Maybe tonight's posts woke him up a bit. ;)

edabbs44
07-20-2012, 09:11 PM
Personally I think alot have underperformed. Bruce, Stubbs, Heisey (Cozart eventually will disappoint), etc. Brook Jacoby should have been in the unemployment line a long time ago.

Yet he has overseen the maturation of one of the best hitters in baseball. BP has also seen success under his watch.

Mario-Rijo
07-20-2012, 09:14 PM
57 players had OPSs .800 or above going into tonight. That isn't a milestone level or anything. And Jay isn't really a GG RFer, that has become an urban legend due to an insanely high UZR one year.

I'd say that milestone would be called "belongs" and is a legit Major Leaguer. We can dicker about his defense all day without any decent metrics available so I'll concede GG just for the sake of debate (though I still believe it) but there is no doubt he is better than most RF's defensively.

redsmetz
07-20-2012, 09:15 PM
Personally I think alot have underperformed. Bruce, Stubbs, Heisey (Cozart eventually will disappoint), etc. Brook Jacoby should have been in the unemployment line a long time ago.

Exactly why is it your opinion that Cozart will disappoint? I'm always fascinated by the generally expectations of failure (other than the normal 30% failure rate expected of the best ballplayers).

Mario-Rijo
07-20-2012, 09:15 PM
Yet he has overseen the maturation of one of the best hitters in baseball. BP has also seen success under his watch.

I can't give him that credit, that goes to Ted Williams and Votto himself.

Tom Servo
07-20-2012, 09:16 PM
Bruce is what he is. He's not a complete all around player, the Larry Walker comp that everyone hoped for. But he definitely has a good amount of value and is not a guy who I think the Reds should just throw out in favor of more playing time for Chris Heisey or whoever Reds fans prefer.

Personally, I've never subscribed to 'hating' or disliking a guy because his performance in the minors made you expect better in the majors. It's one thing if you get pissed that your teams signs a guy like Jason Bay and he turns into a pumpkin, but for me any draft pick is a crap shoot when it comes to major league performance.

But I would still like to know how anyone considers his age of 25 not to be 'young'.

wolfboy
07-20-2012, 09:19 PM
But I would still like to know how anyone considers his age of 25 not to be 'young'.

A freakin' men.

edabbs44
07-20-2012, 09:20 PM
Bruce is what he is. He's not a complete all around player, the Larry Walker comp that everyone hoped for. But he definitely has a good amount of value and is not a guy who I think the Reds should just throw out in favor of more playing time for Chris Heisey or whoever Reds fans prefer.

Personally, I've never subscribed to 'hating' or disliking a guy because his performance in the minors made you expect better in the majors. It's one thing if you get pissed that your teams signs a guy like Jason Bay and he turns into a pumpkin, but for me any draft pick is a crap shoot when it comes to major league performance.

But I would still like to know how anyone considers his age of 25 not to be 'young'.

Young in what sense? Wasn't there an analysis published basically saying that, for the most part, you are what you are at some age like 24?

westofyou
07-20-2012, 09:23 PM
Walker didn't OPS above .860 until he was over 27.

While he had a OPS + of 149 one of those years in his early years he wasn't the machine that is used to measure Bruce against

Mario-Rijo
07-20-2012, 09:24 PM
Exactly why is it your opinion that Cozart will disappoint? I'm always fascinated by the generally expectations of failure (other than the normal 30% failure rate expected of the best ballplayers).

Poor approach to hitting. He'll take a pitch and then hack at almost anything else near the zone. The mistakes he hits will become less available. I would call him J.J. Hardy like but Hardy has more holes in his swing. He's Wily Taveras like but with some power. He will just never find consistency with that approach. Though he hits with enough contact and power, plays good enough defense that he'll likely never be so low to HAVE to make an adjustment to keep his job. Basically he needs to learn what guys like Scott Rolen always knew, not every strike is a good one to swing at, short of 2 strikes anyway.

westofyou
07-20-2012, 09:26 PM
57 players had OPSs .800 or above going into tonight. That isn't a milestone level or anything. And Jay isn't really a GG RFer, that has become an urban legend due to an insanely high UZR one year.

What's the average PA?

Or is that everyone who qualifies for batting title?

edabbs44
07-20-2012, 09:39 PM
What's the average PA?

Or is that everyone who qualifies for batting title?

Just went into ESPN and ranked them by OpS, so whatever they use as their default I guess.

dougdirt
07-20-2012, 09:40 PM
Just went into ESPN and ranked them by OpS, so whatever they use as their default I guess.

So if every hitter in baseball were to be drafted in order, Bruce would be the 2nd hitter taken by his team?

edabbs44
07-20-2012, 10:11 PM
So if every hitter in baseball were to be drafted in order, Bruce would be the 2nd hitter taken by his team?

Yep. That isn't as impressive as you make it sound.

westofyou
07-20-2012, 10:14 PM
FWIW I like to place greater context on things like "rankings"

As far as OPS among qualified players

Bruce is 44th in all of MLB
Bruce is 27th in the NL
Bruce is 7th in guys under the age of 26
Bruce is 1st in guys that are named Jay Bruce

PuffyPig
07-20-2012, 10:19 PM
Bruce is 1st in guys that are named Jay Bruce

What website are you using?

I see him listed as last?

dougdirt
07-20-2012, 10:23 PM
Yep. That isn't as impressive as you make it sound.

How impressive did I make it sound and how impressive would it have to be to impress you?

Brutus
07-20-2012, 10:27 PM
Career OPS+

Jay Bruce (111)
Jonny Gomes (107)

edabbs44
07-20-2012, 10:33 PM
FWIW I like to place greater context on things like "rankings"

As far as OPS among qualified players

Bruce is 44th in all of MLB
Bruce is 27th in the NL
Bruce is 7th in guys under the age of 26
Bruce is 1st in guys that are named Jay Bruce

According to ESPN (for qualified players), up to the minute:

Jay is 50th in MLB out of 155.
24th in the NL (out of 74).
10th in MLB under the age of 26, 7th in the NL (just clairfying)
Still first, and last, for guys named Jay Bruce.

Drop the minimum PA to 200, and Jay drops to 64th in the majors out of 243.

dougdirt
07-20-2012, 10:33 PM
Career OPS+

Jay Bruce (111)
Jonny Gomes (107)

One guy has been through what should have been his prime. One guy hasn't.

Gomes has had 500 PA's in a season once.

Bruce had 1400 PA's in the Majors by the age of 24. Gomes had 31.

edabbs44
07-20-2012, 10:40 PM
How impressive did I make it sound and how impressive would it have to be to impress you?

You made it sound kind of impressive, but you'd need to do a little more to impress me. Jason Kubel, the guy who scored a 2 year deal last year on the open market, would be the first player selected on a team in your draft. Same with Paul Goldschmidt. David Freese would be drafted ahead of Jay. AJ Pierzynski. Ian Desmond. Ben Zobrist. Alfonso Soriano.

Brutus
07-20-2012, 10:43 PM
One guy has been through what should have been his prime. One guy hasn't.

Gomes has had 500 PA's in a season once.

Bruce had 1400 PA's in the Majors by the age of 24. Gomes had 31.

That would be a valid point if this were about what Bruce might later be rather than what he is now. But it's not.

The discussion is what Bruce is or isn't doing (right now), and whether it's justified to give him a pass for the team's offensive struggles, so whether he's yet in his prime is irrelevant. It goes to show he hasn't really done much on a large scale, considering his career park-adjusted OPS is no better than one of the absolute all-time biggest Redszone whipping boys.

Nonetheless, I can't help get the impression in another 8 years, people are going to be saying about Bruce "he's only 33" to mitigate why he never fully lived up to his potential.

Make no mistake, the all-around Jay Bruce is a good player and he's worth the money, right now, they're paying him. But he's certainly absolutely not the hitter people make him out to be... at least yet. Maybe he will in a few years. But at this point, I'm starting to doubt it. I'm thinking this is what he'll always be... for better and worse.

IslandRed
07-20-2012, 11:14 PM
Make no mistake, the all-around Jay Bruce is a good player and he's worth the money, right now, they're paying him. But he's certainly absolutely not the hitter people make him out to be... at least yet. Maybe he will in a few years. But at this point, I'm starting to doubt it. I'm thinking this is what he'll always be... for better and worse.

I agree with you for the most part. I've said this before and I'll say it again: he's not the same hitter he was coming out of the minor leagues. He didn't become the #1 prospect because he was the best slugger to come along in years; he was a hitter. A high-average hitter smacking line drives all over the yard, a number of which happened to clear the fence with the promise of more in the future. Within a year of reaching the majors, more or less, he'd become a dead-pull fly-ball hitter. I don't know if he was seduced by the siren song of the short right-field fence at GABP or what, but I don't believe the metamorphosis has been to his benefit.

And to that end, I produce this stat: his career OPS away from Cincinnati is .726. That's plain ol' mediocre.

Nonetheless, we play half our games at home, and his production in Cincinnati counts too. On balance, he's a good ballplayer. Not a great one, but a good one. I've seen it argued that Bruce is what we thought Votto would be and Votto is what we thought Bruce would be, so maybe it all evens out.

westofyou
07-20-2012, 11:31 PM
Since 1900 219 players have had at least 2000 PA's before they turned 26

Here's their rank in OPS vs their league



CAREER
MODERN (1900-)
AGE < 25
OWP displayed only--not a sorting criteria
RUNS CREATED/GAME displayed only--not a sorting criteria
TOTAL AVERAGE displayed only--not a sorting criteria
BPA displayed only--not a sorting criteria
PLATE APPEARANCES <= 10000

OPS DIFF PLAYER LEAGUE OWP RC/G TA BPA PA
1 Ted Williams .363 1.123 .759 .833 13.38 1.316 .694 2613
2 Joe Jackson .301 .990 .689 .821 10.58 1.139 .639 2556
3 Jimmie Foxx .281 1.056 .776 .750 10.42 1.172 .678 3268
4 Ty Cobb .265 .910 .644 .807 9.39 1.067 .633 3735
5 Albert Pujols .264 1.037 .773 .763 9.49 1.090 .637 2728
6 Mickey Mantle .234 .972 .738 .792 9.44 1.063 .627 3493
7 Dick Allen .223 .938 .715 .752 7.86 .959 .591 2039
8 Tris Speaker .219 .887 .668 .765 8.45 1.000 .595 2624
9 Joe DiMaggio .219 1.019 .800 .735 10.02 1.086 .656 2544
10 Mel Ott .193 .959 .766 .718 8.68 1.051 .619 3974
11 Eddie Mathews .193 .947 .754 .742 8.25 1.008 .616 3142
12 Ken Griffey Jr. .190 .920 .729 .700 7.48 .933 .582 3606
13 Vladimir Guerrero .189 .971 .782 .669 7.90 .959 .601 2373
14 Arky Vaughan .186 .925 .738 .743 9.02 .996 .569 3181
15 Rogers Hornsby .186 .851 .666 .738 6.91 .859 .534 2903
16 Frank Robinson .183 .932 .749 .666 7.52 .955 .590 3156
17 Eddie Collins .175 .828 .652 .759 7.47 .952 .575 2310
18 Joe Medwick .172 .909 .737 .669 7.60 .871 .551 2728
19 Jimmy Sheckard .170 .859 .688 .743 9.03 .996 .601 2126
20 John Olerud .161 .886 .725 .684 7.22 .907 .535 2186
21 Jim Rice .158 .866 .708 .598 6.09 .812 .521 2022
22 Miguel Cabrera .153 .929 .776 .671 7.46 .929 .562 3072
23 Hank Aaron .152 .908 .756 .694 6.96 .872 .547 3173
24 Alex Rodriguez .152 .934 .783 .668 7.78 .970 .608 3515
25 Darryl Strawberry .145 .863 .718 .668 6.38 .899 .586 2107
26 David Wright .144 .921 .777 .685 7.73 .960 .585 2312
27 Ross Youngs .140 .836 .696 .699 6.58 .837 .515 2386
28 Hal Trosky .137 .927 .790 .630 7.86 .935 .598 2753
29 Sam Crawford .135 .806 .670 .681 6.87 .803 .520 2811
30 Bob Horner .135 .852 .718 .585 5.86 .806 .529 2277
31 Orlando Cepeda .131 .881 .750 .641 6.43 .839 .545 3218
32 Hanley Ramirez .129 .906 .777 .672 7.64 .959 .609 2101
33 Prince Fielder .127 .903 .776 .636 7.08 .924 .573 2085
34 Al Kaline .126 .863 .737 .638 6.66 .832 .517 3777
35 Sherry Magee .125 .771 .646 .697 6.51 .835 .540 3445
36 Tony Conigliaro .123 .827 .704 .583 5.67 .784 .517 2613
37 Larry Doyle .122 .790 .668 .663 6.03 .839 .532 2606
38 Adam Dunn .121 .893 .772 .643 7.13 .960 .596 2112
39 Vern Stephens .119 .816 .697 .623 6.10 .765 .493 2452
40 Greg Luzinski .117 .832 .715 .614 5.97 .791 .504 2449
41 Boog Powell .115 .832 .716 .641 5.93 .808 .518 2629
42 Johnny Bench .114 .822 .708 .600 5.50 .774 .505 3228
43 Juan Gonzalez .114 .850 .736 .605 5.76 .800 .531 2440
44 Cal Ripken .110 .838 .728 .617 5.79 .777 .495 2855
45 Eddie Murray .109 .839 .730 .645 5.96 .800 .507 2726
46 Vada Pinson .109 .847 .738 .622 6.40 .821 .532 3551
47 Jack Clark .107 .833 .726 .626 5.86 .807 .520 2381
48 Jose Canseco .107 .841 .735 .633 5.87 .830 .545 2436
49 Cesar Cedeno .103 .820 .717 .633 5.86 .817 .541 3491
50 Scott Rolen .103 .876 .772 .610 6.96 .905 .562 2011
51 George Brett .102 .806 .705 .632 5.80 .740 .480 2556
52 Goose Goslin .101 .876 .775 .642 7.07 .873 .548 2451
53 Carlos May .101 .804 .703 .605 5.70 .775 .479 2337
54 Del Ennis .100 .839 .739 .621 6.42 .803 .518 2479
55 Duke Snider .098 .850 .752 .592 6.39 .827 .537 2232
56 Justin Upton .094 .845 .750 .577 6.15 .838 .539 2402
57 Joe Torre .094 .814 .720 .593 5.43 .737 .466 2487
58 Jeff Burroughs .092 .795 .703 .623 5.48 .767 .488 2227
59 Grady Sizemore .091 .857 .766 .635 6.78 .881 .561 2364
60 Harlond Clift .091 .882 .791 .570 7.43 .936 .566 2613
61 Troy Glaus .088 .869 .780 .575 6.48 .885 .564 2199
62 Ed Konetchy .088 .737 .649 .634 5.26 .745 .484 2268
63 Vic Saier .088 .782 .694 .616 5.54 .813 .529 2628
64 Harry Heilmann .085 .760 .675 .606 5.23 .729 .478 2275
65 Carl Yastrzemski .084 .818 .734 .565 5.67 .766 .478 2676
66 Barry Bonds .084 .804 .720 .614 5.79 .824 .547 2388
67 Joe Sewell .081 .853 .772 .610 6.95 .869 .516 2104
68 Ben Chapman .081 .852 .771 .621 6.67 .866 .555 2562
69 Curt Blefary .081 .764 .684 .621 5.16 .753 .488 2249
70 Tommy Davis .080 .813 .733 .592 5.63 .741 .477 2191
71 Chet Lemon .079 .799 .719 .581 5.42 .738 .478 2210
72 Johnny Callison .079 .810 .731 .605 5.81 .782 .507 2426
73 Ron Santo .079 .808 .729 .556 5.49 .756 .486 3089
74 Stuffy McInnis .078 .762 .685 .619 5.43 .716 .464 3028
75 Tim Raines .078 .792 .714 .681 6.65 .910 .577 2559
76 Gary Sheffield .076 .797 .720 .579 5.47 .750 .486 2419
77 Rickey Henderson .073 .798 .726 .689 6.59 .921 .585 2891
78 Ellis Valentine .071 .798 .727 .551 5.12 .728 .487 2104
79 Sixto Lezcano .071 .777 .707 .580 5.16 .727 .470 2106
80 Eric Chavez .070 .844 .774 .583 6.16 .824 .536 2276
81 Jason Thompson .068 .787 .719 .564 5.32 .755 .483 2392
82 Travis Fryman .062 .788 .725 .564 5.35 .739 .485 2279
83 Billy Butler .062 .816 .754 .549 5.52 .747 .464 2188
84 Freddy Lindstrom .062 .843 .781 .580 6.44 .825 .523 3662
85 Ben Grieve .061 .845 .784 .572 6.00 .822 .510 2019
86 Joe Cronin .060 .835 .775 .571 6.39 .829 .519 2362
87 Frankie Frisch .059 .804 .744 .589 5.90 .787 .517 2641
88 Carlos Baerga .059 .784 .725 .583 5.43 .719 .460 2388
89 Ruben Sierra .058 .785 .727 .540 5.07 .727 .486 3130
90 Ted Simmons .058 .773 .716 .539 4.91 .687 .436 2888
91 Jay Bruce .057 .805 .748 .531 5.28 .762 .509 2076
92 Tom Brunansky .056 .784 .728 .521 5.02 .743 .491 2476
93 Ryan Zimmerman .052 .825 .773 .548 5.64 .774 .495 2625
94 Gary Carter .051 .774 .723 .551 5.21 .735 .478 2168
95 Hank Blalock .046 .809 .763 .508 5.53 .760 .494 2205
96 Doc Hoblitzell .044 .739 .694 .573 5.03 .730 .480 3282
97 Roberto Alomar .044 .756 .712 .574 5.31 .742 .481 3349
98 Lloyd Waner .044 .828 .784 .564 6.55 .794 .486 2403
99 Andruw Jones .044 .824 .781 .536 5.78 .812 .538 3312
100 Joe Vosmik .043 .811 .768 .528 6.17 .764 .490 2291
101 Jim Fregosi .042 .755 .712 .580 4.90 .700 .456 2837
102 Gus Bell .041 .794 .752 .515 5.58 .727 .485 2278
103 Rusty Staub .040 .740 .700 .580 4.77 .679 .432 3306
104 Eddie Murphy .040 .713 .674 .593 4.76 .695 .451 2166
105 Bobby Tolan .039 .754 .715 .546 4.97 .702 .475 2130
106 Harold Baines .037 .762 .725 .520 4.68 .685 .460 2137
107 Robin Ventura .037 .754 .717 .557 4.95 .702 .442 2022
108 Greg Gross .037 .754 .717 .571 5.11 .679 .418 2058
109 Fred Merkle .036 .734 .699 .549 4.98 .761 .507 2683
110 Whitey Lockman .035 .784 .748 .560 5.82 .735 .471 2749
111 Lee Mazzilli .035 .766 .731 .582 5.41 .746 .486 2023
112 Les Mann .034 .703 .669 .535 4.49 .662 .451 2860
113 Max West .034 .762 .728 .576 5.31 .726 .470 2122
114 Marty McManus .033 .806 .772 .503 5.71 .761 .495 2310
115 Andre Dawson .033 .763 .730 .526 4.85 .718 .499 2002
116 Red Kress .032 .807 .775 .489 5.57 .735 .485 2623
117 Gregg Jefferies .031 .744 .713 .534 4.76 .688 .452 2538
118 Carney Lansford .031 .755 .724 .553 4.97 .689 .454 2320
119 Derek Jeter .031 .809 .779 .568 6.02 .780 .489 2147
120 Bobby Doerr .031 .799 .769 .490 5.56 .730 .475 3166
121 Ken Keltner .030 .811 .780 .526 5.71 .756 .502 2520
122 Ryne Sandberg .029 .745 .716 .535 5.11 .709 .477 2092
123 Pete Rose .027 .734 .706 .537 4.85 .648 .424 2010
124 Lloyd Moseby .026 .748 .722 .506 4.83 .705 .474 2667
125 Clyde Milan .023 .676 .653 .582 4.81 .705 .463 2527
126 Harry Hooper .021 .698 .678 .543 4.96 .731 .473 2268
127 Garry Templeton .020 .747 .727 .515 4.80 .650 .445 2764
128 Richie Ashburn .020 .770 .751 .595 6.06 .755 .470 2640
129 Travis Jackson .017 .777 .760 .520 5.21 .722 .480 2999
130 Delino DeShields .017 .740 .722 .561 5.11 .743 .485 2406
131 Lou Boudreau .016 .770 .755 .529 5.23 .715 .455 2249
132 Buddy Lewis .014 .804 .789 .544 6.08 .762 .485 4103
133 George Kell .014 .721 .707 .496 4.59 .609 .393 2402
134 Darrell Porter .012 .709 .697 .523 4.42 .678 .448 2009
135 Tim McCarver .011 .725 .714 .495 4.62 .646 .429 2092
136 Terry Puhl .010 .732 .722 .577 4.94 .691 .456 2586
137 Max Carey .010 .714 .705 .534 4.59 .724 .487 2557
138 Elbie Fletcher .009 .746 .736 .560 5.22 .714 .449 2558
139 Willie Davis .009 .735 .726 .527 4.56 .681 .468 2347
140 Claudell Washington .009 .722 .713 .490 4.25 .634 .435 2840
141 Cecil Travis .009 .802 .793 .537 6.18 .747 .467 2845
142 Eddie Yost .008 .759 .751 .541 5.56 .748 .461 3158
143 Harvey Kuenn .008 .745 .737 .523 5.04 .644 .417 2178
144 Dick McAuliffe .007 .737 .730 .488 4.63 .686 .450 2172
145 Milt Stock .006 .664 .658 .495 3.95 .603 .414 2416
146 Delmon Young .004 .760 .756 .483 4.64 .661 .434 2464
147 Roy Howell .004 .710 .707 .489 4.30 .627 .413 2040
148 Buddy Bell .002 .696 .694 .481 4.00 .589 .395 2945
149 Donie Bush .001 .674 .672 .510 4.69 .766 .484 2696
150 Billy Herman -.001 .732 .733 .509 4.86 .662 .425 2020
151 Willie Randolph -.002 .718 .720 .543 4.74 .703 .447 2472
152 B.J. Upton -.002 .762 .764 .527 5.24 .760 .498 2180
153 Woody English -.003 .783 .786 .505 5.63 .765 .478 3078
154 Dick Bartell -.005 .777 .782 .450 5.31 .745 .478 2823
155 Ivan Rodriguez -.005 .753 .759 .460 4.69 .658 .433 2868
156 Phil Cavarretta -.006 .731 .737 .496 4.91 .674 .442 2498
157 Jerry Browne -.006 .719 .725 .493 4.59 .662 .428 2089
158 Carl Crawford -.006 .760 .766 .534 5.40 .753 .512 2950
159 Bill Buckner -.012 .702 .714 .511 4.28 .600 .401 2086
160 Chuck Knoblauch -.013 .715 .728 .521 4.97 .690 .437 2026
161 Larry Parrish -.013 .707 .720 .421 3.89 .604 .410 2254
162 Bob Bailey -.016 .693 .709 .463 3.90 .605 .404 2779
163 Alan Trammell -.017 .707 .723 .471 4.35 .638 .417 2743
164 Robin Yount -.017 .699 .715 .476 4.15 .607 .415 4142
165 Curt Flood -.017 .732 .749 .418 4.44 .637 .418 2215
166 Chris Speier -.018 .693 .711 .453 4.13 .626 .412 2522
167 Jose Reyes -.020 .756 .776 .528 5.37 .758 .520 2722
168 Johnny Evers -.020 .643 .663 .479 4.24 .623 .428 2166
169 Lou Whitaker -.021 .701 .721 .475 4.41 .653 .416 2074
170 Sammy Sosa -.021 .704 .725 .413 3.83 .641 .458 2052
171 Rennie Stennett -.024 .692 .715 .456 3.94 .567 .380 2422
172 Jose Cardenal -.024 .661 .685 .477 3.74 .586 .419 2213
173 Rafael Furcal -.026 .749 .776 .510 5.34 .728 .480 2328
174 Ray Schalk -.026 .642 .669 .471 3.64 .602 .413 2450
175 Jeff Francoeur -.029 .746 .775 .437 4.51 .656 .443 2308
176 Butch Wynegar -.030 .690 .720 .459 4.23 .632 .405 2920
177 Joe Tinker -.031 .636 .667 .474 4.20 .624 .437 2191
178 Adrian Beltre -.031 .748 .779 .474 4.68 .689 .462 3161
179 Charlie Grimm -.032 .709 .741 .456 4.39 .610 .420 2681
180 John Knight -.037 .596 .633 .426 3.43 .541 .384 2047
181 Zoilo Versalles -.040 .692 .732 .415 4.01 .607 .422 2661
182 Cass Michaels -.040 .699 .739 .455 4.40 .628 .403 3147
183 Brooks Robinson -.041 .698 .739 .429 3.90 .585 .384 2420
184 Ed Kranepool -.042 .662 .704 .417 3.55 .562 .382 3165
185 Buddy Kerr -.043 .679 .722 .405 4.01 .591 .395 2480
186 Johnny Damon -.043 .735 .778 .454 4.95 .691 .466 2006
187 Rick Manning -.044 .670 .714 .440 3.84 .581 .391 2672
188 Nellie Fox -.047 .700 .747 .457 4.44 .598 .394 2199
189 Roberto Clemente -.047 .706 .753 .423 4.03 .583 .392 2560
190 Rabbit Maranville -.048 .627 .674 .435 3.43 .582 .408 2683
191 Tony Kubek -.049 .688 .737 .456 4.02 .578 .392 2901
192 Melky Cabrera -.050 .716 .765 .438 4.42 .651 .426 2148
193 Steve Sax -.050 .665 .715 .435 3.79 .586 .408 2140
194 Aurelio Rodriguez -.053 .647 .700 .383 3.26 .539 .376 2922
195 Buck Weaver -.058 .622 .679 .394 3.11 .518 .378 2347
196 Mark Koenig -.058 .714 .771 .446 4.53 .622 .421 2341
197 Joe Dugan -.058 .667 .725 .381 3.91 .571 .401 2031
198 Jimmy Rollins -.059 .712 .772 .452 4.43 .666 .457 2169
199 Bill Mazeroski -.060 .691 .750 .420 3.98 .590 .399 3175
200 Frankie Gustine -.060 .648 .708 .381 3.61 .558 .373 2468
201 Bill Wambsganss -.061 .603 .663 .374 3.19 .534 .374 2059
202 Glenn Hubbard -.062 .655 .716 .382 3.67 .572 .390 2041
203 Edgar Renteria -.062 .716 .778 .411 4.32 .653 .430 3587
204 Jose Lopez -.065 .701 .766 .412 3.99 .594 .402 2324
205 Bill Knickerbocker -.065 .719 .785 .373 4.45 .601 .411 2198
206 Howard Freigau -.065 .695 .761 .409 4.22 .620 .424 2015
207 Derrel Thomas -.077 .637 .714 .416 3.57 .553 .382 2201
208 Cristian Guzman -.090 .685 .775 .357 3.96 .596 .419 2329
209 Jimmy Bloodworth -.091 .664 .755 .330 3.53 .549 .379 2013
210 Granny Hamner -.098 .651 .749 .355 3.54 .536 .367 2623
211 Sonny Jackson -.099 .604 .703 .384 3.18 .524 .362 2043
212 Dick Schofield -.101 .637 .738 .374 3.51 .584 .405 2070
213 Charley O'Leary -.104 .529 .633 .287 2.47 .444 .326 2079
214 Everett Scott -.104 .559 .663 .328 2.51 .449 .332 2010
215 Alfredo Griffin -.109 .618 .727 .294 2.99 .484 .348 2429
216 Ozzie Guillen -.114 .622 .736 .322 3.18 .502 .350 2300
217 Tim Foli -.143 .571 .714 .268 2.69 .459 .317 2538
218 Roy McMillan -.144 .612 .755 .289 3.17 .507 .349 2098
219 Ed Brinkman -.144 .567 .712 .261 2.47 .458 .328 2310

powersackers
08-08-2012, 05:07 PM
I think Bruce has been in a perpetual slump since May 15. He certainly hasn't been hot for any extended period since then. Maybe it's not a slump. This is just what he is.

Kc61
08-08-2012, 05:40 PM
Some Bruce stats. Over his career, he tends to slump in June and July but has a lifetime .850 in August and .928 in September, OPS. Actually September/October is his best month overall.

Pretty big OPS split hitting against righties (.841) and against lefties (.733). Huge home and away split lifetime. Home .893, away .723. The home/away split bothers me.

Interesting, in wins lifetime he is .960, in losses .638.

He has a lifetime .255 BA and lifetime .332 OBP. The OBP is really not terrible, he does get on base at a reasonable clip for a power man.

The last three seasons have been pretty similar. OPS .846, .814, .823. OBP .353, .341, .332. OPS+ .124, 118, 115 so far this year. BA has regressed, was .281 in 2010, then .256, now .248. Hopefully he still has a growth spurt in him and this is not his ultimate level of offense.

I still maintain that playing at GABP has seriously impaired this player's development. He has become a fly ball hitter who swings for the short right field fence at GABP. He has not adjusted to bigger ball parks on the road. He's become a GABP hitter, not optimal.

Based on his career numbers, there's a chance Bruce could catch fire soon, particularly when the Reds go home next week. Wouldn't mind if he starts his resurgence in Chicago tomorrow.

WVRedsFan
08-08-2012, 06:09 PM
I think Bruce has been in a perpetual slump since May 15. He certainly hasn't been hot for any extended period since then. Maybe it's not a slump. This is just what he is.

I fear that your last statement is the story. Outside of a few hot streaks, he has become a black hole in the lineup most games, and with his talent, that's a shame. It's probably in his head. Maybe KC is right. And maybe Jacoby can straighten him out. Big maybe.

Redhook
08-08-2012, 09:13 PM
with his talent, that's a shame. It's probably in his head. Maybe KC is right. And maybe Jacoby can straighten him out. Big maybe.

Yep, it's a damn shame. He's actually getting worse and it doesn't make any sense. While he's still and always will be a good slugger, he's turned into a pretty bad hitter.

While Bruce has certainly lost some confidence, I think his flaws are more physical. I obviously don't have a clue what Jacoby is telling Bruce, but whatever it is, it isn't working. There's still a flaw in his batting stance and a major hole in his swing. I really believe a competent hitting coach would've straightened him out by now.

I'm crossing my fingers that someone can lead him towards becoming the player he could and should be.

REDREAD
08-09-2012, 12:05 AM
I agree 100%. I have no idea what the coaches are telling these guys, but whatever it is, it's failing big-time. Most of the young hitters have gotten worse or aren't improving at all. You can't blame everything on coaching, but the approaches at the plate by Bruce, Heisey, and Stubbs are all pititful.

I think we just need to accept that these three guys are as good as they are ever going to get.
It seems like Stubbs has tried to change his approach at the plate, but it pretty much just robbed him of his power.
We've seen Jay try to go to the opposite field.. I don't think it's lack of effort or coaching.. maybe he just can't do it consistently.

I'm not saying these three guys are bad. They are decent players. I just really don't expect any of them to step it up to the next level at this point though.
Even if they stay at this level, still 3 big victories for the farm system, IMO.

RedsManRick
08-09-2012, 12:01 PM
There is a lot of evidence supporting the "Bruce is who he is" argument:


Swing% Contact% BB% K% ISO LD% GB/FB HR/FB% BABIP AVG/OBP/SLG
2010 47.0 74.0 10.1 23.7 .212 20.1 0.83 15.3 .334 281/353/493
2011 48.7 74.5 10.7 23.8 .217 16.8 0.78 16.0 .297 256/341/474
2012 45.8 75.4 10.9 22.4 .240 21.1 0.74 16.0 .270 245/329/486

Ignore for a minute his slash stats. Ignore that he seems to run very hot and cold. This is a guy who's core skill set has been remarkably consistent over the past few years. He's a below average contact hitter who has good power and will take a walk. He's at least average and probably above average in the field. What does that add up to? About 3.5 wins.

His 5+ WAR in 2010 was deceiving for two big reasons:

First, his BABIP was not in line with his skill set. He's not an extreme line drive hitter and he's not super fast; a .330 BABIP was not sustainable.

Second, his UZR number was off the charts. That doesn't mean it was wrong (and it bugs me to no end when people disparage the stat based on single year UZR outliers). It's very possible that Bruce had an awesome year in the field. But you have to consider that UZR measures performance, not skill. And because players have fewer fielding opportunities than plate appearances (and because of the nature of those opportunities), a year of UZR is like 2 months of batting data. Think of his insanely great 2010 defensive year as one of his offensive hot streaks -- a defensive hot streak. It was a huge boon to the club. But it wasn't enough information for us to assess his defensive ability (and thus likely performance in the future).

So where does that leave us? It leaves us saying that Bruce is a solid, above average regular (~3.5 WAR -- .825 OPS, solid D) who will sometimes put up all-star caliber performances (5 WAR) and sometimes be sort of mediocre (2 WAR) depending on the variances of both luck and inherent, natural fluctuations in performance. It's absolutely possible, maybe even likely, that he doesn't get much better than this. But he's also 25 years old. Players often take another step forward in their late 20s.

Should we expect Bruce to become a consistent all-star level performer? Nope. It's not uncommon for guys who come up to the majors young to max out their talent quickly. Should we give up hope that he might take another step forward? No way. Guys with his power are always a tweak away from busting out. We know he's capable of it.; we've seen it in bursts when he starts laying off those high fastballs and low sliders and stops being quite so pull happy. But while he may never get the consistency in his approach we all want, the possibility that he might is still very real.

In the meantime, let's enjoy that we have a solid, productive RF locked up at a reasonable price for the next 5 years and stop worrying about the fact that between him and Votto we only got one solid player and one MVP instead of two MVPs.

(Quick note on Stubbs vs. Bruce:

How good a player is at making contact on pitches in the zone is very strongly correlated to contact out of the zone. In short, players have the ability to make contact when they swing, period. They also have an approach (driven in part by their pitch recognition ability) which determines what pitches they swing at.

Drew Stubbs is a horrible contact hitter, among the worst in baseball - period. Jay Bruce is a poor contact hitter, below average, but not horrible.

Drew Stubbs swings at pitches out of the zone 22% of the time, showing among the best discipline in baseball -- comparable to Votto, Dunn and Mauer. Jay Bruce swings at pitches out of the zone 29% of the time, showing completely average discipline.

So what? In short, in means Jay Bruce has room to grow and Drew Stubbs doesn't. If Stubbs changes his approach, it won't involve getting better pitches to hit. It will involve shortening his swing to increase contact on the pitches he does get at the expense of some power. This is not generally a recipe for increased production, just different production. By contrast, if Bruce just lays off more of those pitches out of the zone that he can't hit well, he's going to get more good pitches to hit without having to change his swing (and thus his power output), resulting in a spike in production.

On top of that,Stubbs is also 2.5 years older than Jay Bruce and is obviously more reliant on speed. He's closer to having maxed out his physical tools and has had more time to refine his approach, leaving less room for growth.

Yes, both Stubbs and Bruce have plateaued. But treating them similarly would be a mistake.)

traderumor
08-09-2012, 01:08 PM
Bruce has been very frustrating, moreso this week when we finally need his production, yet he keeps on struggling. But then I think "let's not have Paul O'Neill part deux here." So, I refreshed my memory on O'Neill, thinking he made a very good comp. O'Neill had about half a season at 24, first full season at 25, which is just now Bruce's age. As a Red, he showed those spurts of stardom, but confounded the masses with a whole lot of blah in between. Paul carved out a very nice career with someone else as a late bloomer for zero return.

I hope this management team is smart enough to wait it out, I think everyone would be very happy if Jay gave the Reds that type of production in his best years and worry about some other roster holes that will need filled over the years.

Kc61
08-09-2012, 01:56 PM
Bruce has been very frustrating, moreso this week when we finally need his production, yet he keeps on struggling. But then I think "let's not have Paul O'Neill part deux here." So, I refreshed my memory on O'Neill, thinking he made a very good comp. O'Neill had about half a season at 24, first full season at 25, which is just now Bruce's age. As a Red, he showed those spurts of stardom, but confounded the masses with a whole lot of blah in between. Paul carved out a very nice career with someone else as a late bloomer for zero return.

I hope this management team is smart enough to wait it out, I think everyone would be very happy if Jay gave the Reds that type of production in his best years and worry about some other roster holes that will need filled over the years.

I really don't think the issue with Bruce is management trading him off. Highly doubt that happens. Particularly given his age and good contract, I think he is here for awhile.

Issue I see is that, if Jay continues to hit below .250 with other current numbers, it creates the need for the Reds to seek out another major bat. IMO, if Votto/Bruce were BOTH high average power hitters, team could get away with Ludwick and Frazier types backing them up. Not sure that is true with Bruce's current numbers.

Put another way, a Votto/Bruce tandem with some good role players might be another offense if Jay is an all around threat. As things now stand, maybe not, perhaps creating the need for another major offensive player.

RedsManRick
08-09-2012, 02:05 PM
I really don't think the issue with Bruce is management trading him off. Highly doubt that happens. Particularly given his age and good contract, I think he is here for awhile.

Issue I see is that, if Jay continues to hit below .250 with other current numbers, it creates the need for the Reds to seek out another major bat. IMO, if Votto/Bruce were BOTH high average power hitters, team could get away with Ludwick and Frazier types backing them up. Not sure that is true with Bruce's current numbers.

Put another way, a Votto/Bruce tandem with some good role players might be another offense if Jay is an all around threat. As things now stand, maybe not, perhaps creating the need for another major offensive player.

Bruce's BABIP and career performance suggest that he's something like a .265 hitter. That obviously isn't great from an average standpoint, but his "production" would look a whole lot better with some real table setters and a healthy Votto.

mdccclxix
08-09-2012, 02:33 PM
Bruce's BABIP and career performance suggest that he's something like a .265 hitter. That obviously isn't great from an average standpoint, but his "production" would look a whole lot better with some real table setters and a healthy Votto.

RedsManRick, awesome break down again. I wonder what you make of Bruce's home/road splits? The road splits are dragged a lot by his first two seasons, but still well below his home splits. He is a .540 slugger at home and a .412 slugger on the road. Also interestingly, his BABIP is .270 at home and .307 on the road. Does this point to a high number of GABP-only type home runs? In that sense, I find Bruce to possibly be quite replaceable and possibly an inefficiency on future payrolls. He's also very likely to be at least a wash or better. I just think if we're going to explore and except that Bruce isn't a top tier player, he can be discussed as replaceable. His role on the team, community, and defense notwithstanding.

traderumor
08-09-2012, 03:06 PM
I really don't think the issue with Bruce is management trading him off. Highly doubt that happens. Particularly given his age and good contract, I think he is here for awhile.

Issue I see is that, if Jay continues to hit below .250 with other current numbers, it creates the need for the Reds to seek out another major bat. IMO, if Votto/Bruce were BOTH high average power hitters, team could get away with Ludwick and Frazier types backing them up. Not sure that is true with Bruce's current numbers.

Put another way, a Votto/Bruce tandem with some good role players might be another offense if Jay is an all around threat. As things now stand, maybe not, perhaps creating the need for another major offensive player.I was looking three or four years ahead, I think I saw today he's signed through 2016. That's about the age they gave up on O'Neill, also.

Of course, if he becomes what most want him to be, we are having the "can we afford to extend Bruce" conversation at that stage.

BuckeyeRedleg
08-09-2012, 03:26 PM
Since 1900 219 players have had at least 2000 PA's before they turned 26

Surpised to see Roberto Clemente so far down that list. I had no idea how much he struggled (offensively) that early in his career (first 5 full seasons).

westofyou
08-09-2012, 03:30 PM
Surpised to see Roberto Clemente so far down that list. I had no idea how much he struggled (offensively) that early in his career (first 5 full seasons).

Compare Clemente's first 10 years with Vada Pinson's first 10 seasons and Pinson is the better player, after that opposite directions.

Bruce has a RC/27 of 6.00, since the AS game his slugging is down but his OB% is up.

Fact is he'll never be the hitter that the guys the last 20 years were, the worm has turned, all around athletes are more in vogue and I believe that will freak out millions of fans as they expect the game to not change, and thus they'll miss out on appreciating players for who they are.

nate
08-10-2012, 09:32 AM
There is a lot of evidence supporting the "Bruce is who he is" argument:

Astute analysis, Rick.

High five!

RedsManRick
08-10-2012, 12:44 PM
RedsManRick, awesome break down again. I wonder what you make of Bruce's home/road splits? The road splits are dragged a lot by his first two seasons, but still well below his home splits. He is a .540 slugger at home and a .412 slugger on the road. Also interestingly, his BABIP is .270 at home and .307 on the road. Does this point to a high number of GABP-only type home runs? In that sense, I find Bruce to possibly be quite replaceable and possibly an inefficiency on future payrolls. He's also very likely to be at least a wash or better. I just think if we're going to explore and except that Bruce isn't a top tier player, he can be discussed as replaceable. His role on the team, community, and defense notwithstanding.

Well, first we should recognize that, given a reasonable sample size and after adjusting for park effects, nearly every hitter hits better at home than on the road. Reds hitters are going to have particularly large home/road splits. Not only do they have a hitter's park for their home park boosting their stats, but unlike the rest of the NL, they don't have GABP boosting their road numbers. And on top of that, as a flyball hitter, Bruce is going to be helped more by GABP than average.

But yeah, that BABIP split plus the park effects pretty much explain everything. His AVG is 44 points higher at home and his OBP is 45 points higher. If anything, GABP should suppress BABIP due to their being less room in the OF for hits to fall in. It's possible there's something there in terms of Bruce being particularly affected in some way by the road -- I'd want a scout's understanding of his pre-game preparation, any visual things that might be going on ,etc. It's also likely a healthy amount of variance. BABIP takes a notoriously long time to stabilize.

In short, I just don't pay much attention to splits. You're not going to platoon the guy home/road and you're always going to have equal numbers of games in both places. Lots of players have interesting splits (like Heisey) and unless there's some obvious issue at play like a hole in the guy's swing that explains the split, it's probably just noise. Give me the guys who produce the most over 162 games and I really don't care what their splits are -- be that seasonal, home/road, etc. Outscore your opponents over the course of 162 games and you're going to be in pretty good shape; the rest is just details (yes, details are important, but we sometimes get lost in them and lose the big picture).

As for Bruce being replaceable, there is no such thing in the sport of baseball as an irreplaceable player. The closest you might get is to somebody like Evan Longoria who can give you MVP production for dirt cheap. That's hard to replace. Otherwise, there are many ways to skin a cat. The very best players in the game still only account for about 20% of the 50+ wins above replacement you need to make the playoffs. That said, my point is that I'm not sure I understand why we would want to replace Bruce. He's an above average player sign to a below market deal through his prime years. Those are the kinds of players you want acquire, not find ways to replace. If we sought replacements for every guy who had flaws we'd be looking for 24 new players.

Ghosts of 1990
08-11-2012, 08:52 PM
Anyone catch Dusty Baker's "this is the last resort" remark in regards to Jay Bruce and sitting him during this slump?

What do you make of that quote?

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/8256193/cincinnati-reds-manager-dusty-baker-giving-slumping-jay-bruce-days-off

Or what Dusty? You going to bench the guy for good in favor of.... ? Request him traded in the offseason? Send him to the minors?

That's a weird quote to say the least.

cincrazy
08-11-2012, 08:56 PM
Anyone catch Dusty Baker's "this is the last resort" remark in regards to Jay Bruce and sitting him during this slump?

What do you make of that quote?

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/8256193/cincinnati-reds-manager-dusty-baker-giving-slumping-jay-bruce-days-off

Or what Dusty? You going to bench the guy for good in favor of.... ? Request him traded in the offseason? Send him to the minors?

That's a weird quote to say the least.

I wouldn't read too much into it. I think all he's saying is, "I don't know what else I can do to help him out of this slump, he needs to do it on his own." I don't think Dusty meant that to be taken in a "We're going to give up on him" kind of way. He's just stating a fact. Benching him is a last resort option. It's unfortunate it's come to this.

Tony Cloninger
08-11-2012, 08:59 PM
Anyone catch Dusty Baker's "this is the last resort" remark in regards to Jay Bruce and sitting him during this slump?

What do you make of that quote?

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/8256193/cincinnati-reds-manager-dusty-baker-giving-slumping-jay-bruce-days-off

Or what Dusty? You going to bench the guy for good in favor of.... ? Request him traded in the offseason? Send him to the minors?

That's a weird quote to say the least.



You have been one of the biggest gripers about Bruce for a few years now....even when he has not been as bad ...as he has been these last few months...and NOW you are questioning Baker's heavy hand comments?

Obviously he is not going to the minors......nice hyperbole there.

Maybe he needs a firmer hand and is tired of coddling him.

Raisor
08-11-2012, 09:15 PM
Darn you Jay Bruce! Darn you and your Top 25 in the NL OPS!

Darn you for being 11th as an OFer!

Darn you for being the 9th best LHB in the NL!

Darn you for being the 6th best offensive player 25 years old or younger!

Look, he hasn't been great since the All Star Break, but he's still OPSing in the 700s since then. I really have a hard time believing a benching is in order.

His last seven days, five games, have been AWFUL. His last 14 days, 12 games, have been very good 362/475, so I'm not sure why the need to bench him.

Ghosts of 1990
08-12-2012, 12:02 AM
You have been one of the biggest gripers about Bruce for a few years now....even when he has not been as bad ...as he has been these last few months...and NOW you are questioning Baker's heavy hand comments?

Obviously he is not going to the minors......nice hyperbole there.

Maybe he needs a firmer hand and is tired of coddling him.

I've been one of his biggest supporter when he's going well, too. I think my assessment of him is a fair one. I just don't get the logic of benching him. Then again I'm not a big league manager. I just think a guy with Bruce's age, contract, and skill set combined with Votto's missing bat and lack of left handers (Paul sat today again) and in a great hitters park like Wrigley where Jay has raked; YES I have ever reason to question Baker's move to sit Jay Bruce.

He didn't even bring him in late in the game to play defense the last two days with the game close. It's just so Dusty Baker. He's lucky it worked out and resulted in two wins and to a degree Bruce is too. Then no more discussion needs to be done on the subject.


Darn you Jay Bruce! Darn you and your Top 25 in the NL OPS!

Darn you for being 11th as an OFer!

Darn you for being the 9th best LHB in the NL!

Darn you for being the 6th best offensive player 25 years old or younger!

Look, he hasn't been great since the All Star Break, but he's still OPSing in the 700s since then. I really have a hard time believing a benching is in order.

His last seven days, five games, have been AWFUL. His last 14 days, 12 games, have been very good 362/475, so I'm not sure why the need to bench him.

He's been good the last five days. But let's be honest here.... something's amiss with Bruce if we look at the big picture. You just don't sit your big bats in a lineup that hasn't been lighting up the scoreboard and doesn't have a wealth of LH hitting to begin with unless the manager feels like something is really off.

mth123
08-12-2012, 05:43 AM
I've been one of his biggest supporter when he's going well, too. I think my assessment of him is a fair one. I just don't get the logic of benching him. Then again I'm not a big league manager. I just think a guy with Bruce's age, contract, and skill set combined with Votto's missing bat and lack of left handers (Paul sat today again) and in a great hitters park like Wrigley where Jay has raked; YES I have ever reason to question Baker's move to sit Jay Bruce.

He didn't even bring him in late in the game to play defense the last two days with the game close. It's just so Dusty Baker. He's lucky it worked out and resulted in two wins and to a degree Bruce is too. Then no more discussion needs to be done on the subject.



He's been good the last five days. But let's be honest here.... something's amiss with Bruce if we look at the big picture. You just don't sit your big bats in a lineup that hasn't been lighting up the scoreboard and doesn't have a wealth of LH hitting to begin with unless the manager feels like something is really off.

Cubs started a lefty. Sitting Bruce made sense. Until he gets hot he should sit against all lefty pitching.

Tony Cloninger
08-12-2012, 11:03 AM
I've been one of his biggest supporter when he's going well, too. I think my assessment of him is a fair one. I just don't get the logic of benching him. Then again I'm not a big league manager. I just think a guy with Bruce's age, contract, and skill set combined with Votto's missing bat and lack of left handers (Paul sat today again) and in a great hitters park like Wrigley where Jay has raked; YES I have ever reason to question Baker's move to sit Jay Bruce.

He didn't even bring him in late in the game to play defense the last two days with the game close. It's just so Dusty Baker. He's lucky it worked out and resulted in two wins and to a degree Bruce is too. Then no more discussion needs to be done on the subject.



He's been good the last five days. But let's be honest here.... something's amiss with Bruce if we look at the big picture. You just don't sit your big bats in a lineup that hasn't been lighting up the scoreboard and doesn't have a wealth of LH hitting to begin with unless the manager feels like something is really off.




There is no more discussion to be had? Says who? Does this mean I am violating something if I continue to discuss it?
The guy is NOT being benched...he is taking 2 games off against LHP...that he has had trouble hitting. IF there is someone who has stuck with this player it is Baker.
He is not one of the big bats in the lineup the way he has been hitting since the AS Break. Maybe the sitting and some talking to...like Stubbs.... will do him some good for at least a week or 2.

Cooper
08-12-2012, 11:54 AM
Not to throw off the post, but WOY is the one who brought it up so you can blame him....i looked at Vada Pinson post 27 yo career .vs Roberto Clemente's post 27 yo career: I don't know enough about babip to state with conviction that this makes up for the differnce in their careers -but i would think there's something to it. I didn't do the math because it's sunday morning and my head hurts from using my brain all week -i would guess Clemente's babip post 27 yo to be .360 and Pinson's to be .270.

edabbs44
08-12-2012, 01:31 PM
Darn you Jay Bruce! Darn you and your Top 25 in the NL OPS!

Darn you for being 11th as an OFer!

Darn you for being the 9th best LHB in the NL!

Darn you for being the 6th best offensive player 25 years old or younger!

Look, he hasn't been great since the All Star Break, but he's still OPSing in the 700s since then. I really have a hard time believing a benching is in order.

His last seven days, five games, have been AWFUL. His last 14 days, 12 games, have been very good 362/475, so I'm not sure why the need to bench him.

You have been using these rankings for a while but when you add context those rankings lose their luster. For example, Jay is #27 in OPS when using rankings for qualified batters. However, there are only 64 qualified hitters, making Jay not all that special. Drop the min PAs to 250 and Jay is 38th.

traderumor
08-12-2012, 06:20 PM
Cubs started a lefty. Sitting Bruce made sense. Until he gets hot he should sit against all lefty pitching.I'm glad that he played today.

Raisor
08-12-2012, 06:26 PM
I use the rankings because its not what he does in a vacuum, its what he does compared to the rest of the league. And if you want to use 250 PAs as the baseline that's fine, percentage wise that works out better for Bruce anyway.

edabbs44
08-12-2012, 06:34 PM
I use the rankings because its not what he does in a vacuum, its what he does compared to the rest of the league. And if you want to use 250 PAs as the baseline that's fine, percentage wise that works out better for Bruce anyway.

I just don't know why we should be excited that he is top 25 in the NL out of 64.

mth123
08-12-2012, 06:41 PM
I'm glad that he played today.

Me too.

Tony Cloninger
08-12-2012, 07:40 PM
So right now he is like how most must have felt about Pauly O back in 1989-90.

At least he is not injury prone like Kearns.....and is trying to work at his game and learn.

OldXOhio
08-13-2012, 09:38 AM
At least he is not injury prone like Kearns.....and is trying to work at his game and learn.

I can appreciate that and the fact that we're talking about a human being here and not a machine....even as he learns he's still going to have ups and downs. The thing that I don't understand is what happened to the Jay Bruce from the last two months of 2010? Some have said it was the Edmonds effect and his renewed understanding of hitting to all fields. I would have thought that was was a huge building block in his development. Instead, his approach less than two years later seems to reflect something else.

mdccclxix
08-13-2012, 10:34 AM
Bruce does strike the ball to all fields, it's just that when it goes to left field it's normally exactly where the LF is standing. It's uncanny. And the trajectory is very simple and light to catch. I would love to see a spray chart, but my impression is that he's had 3 or 4 hits drop on the left side of the field all year. I don't see how that approach is helping him.

mdccclxix
08-13-2012, 12:13 PM
Well, first we should recognize that, given a reasonable sample size and after adjusting for park effects, nearly every hitter hits better at home than on the road. Reds hitters are going to have particularly large home/road splits. Not only do they have a hitter's park for their home park boosting their stats, but unlike the rest of the NL, they don't have GABP boosting their road numbers. And on top of that, as a flyball hitter, Bruce is going to be helped more by GABP than average.

But yeah, that BABIP split plus the park effects pretty much explain everything. His AVG is 44 points higher at home and his OBP is 45 points higher. If anything, GABP should suppress BABIP due to their being less room in the OF for hits to fall in. It's possible there's something there in terms of Bruce being particularly affected in some way by the road -- I'd want a scout's understanding of his pre-game preparation, any visual things that might be going on ,etc. It's also likely a healthy amount of variance. BABIP takes a notoriously long time to stabilize.

In short, I just don't pay much attention to splits. You're not going to platoon the guy home/road and you're always going to have equal numbers of games in both places. Lots of players have interesting splits (like Heisey) and unless there's some obvious issue at play like a hole in the guy's swing that explains the split, it's probably just noise. Give me the guys who produce the most over 162 games and I really don't care what their splits are -- be that seasonal, home/road, etc. Outscore your opponents over the course of 162 games and you're going to be in pretty good shape; the rest is just details (yes, details are important, but we sometimes get lost in them and lose the big picture).

As for Bruce being replaceable, there is no such thing in the sport of baseball as an irreplaceable player. The closest you might get is to somebody like Evan Longoria who can give you MVP production for dirt cheap. That's hard to replace. Otherwise, there are many ways to skin a cat. The very best players in the game still only account for about 20% of the 50+ wins above replacement you need to make the playoffs. That said, my point is that I'm not sure I understand why we would want to replace Bruce. He's an above average player sign to a below market deal through his prime years. Those are the kinds of players you want acquire, not find ways to replace. If we sought replacements for every guy who had flaws we'd be looking for 24 new players.

If there's a payroll/roster crunch in 2014 or 2015 with the likes of Cueto and Chapman and Latos and Bailey and Leake, etc, I don't think Bruce's current production would be worth what he'll be making then. If the thinking now is, 'hey, he's an .800 OPS bat, pretty good for the Reds farm system to develop a guy like that' (faint praise, really), and provided that his home/road split really is a dramatically imperative aspect to his overall production, we really aren't talking about a high dollar type of player.

On the other hand, what we can all agree has gotten the Reds much further in the last 3 years is pitching. It's the ingredient that ruined some great offensive teams in the aughts. Now, I know it's not ultimately fair to draw comparisons to Ludwick's two month tear, but considering he's on pace to blow by Bruce's production soon, can we ask how easy it might be to OPS .800 playing 80 games in GABP? Is GABP the Petco Park for hitters? If so, the preference for quality pitching should outweigh quality hitting. I don't know if that's fully the case, though.

In all, admittedly, this is a reaction to this fantastic run by the Reds with Bruce hitting poorly and Votto on the DL. Meanwhile, erstwhile bench players Ludwick and Frazier are carrying the team. Makes you wonder. It's a small part of the season that we're in and it sort of paints a small picture of how things could be organized differently. If the Reds find a player they want on the trade market, where Bruce was once un-tradeable (because of his yearly salary mainly), I think in the future he may be more likely to be discussed. Not as a first resort at all. I also don't think the Reds culture is given to turning on their own players. They're a great organization now and that has MUCH to do with it. That said, if Bruce could bring a great return AND payroll flex in the future, it wouldn't be the craziest thing ever.

Kc61
08-13-2012, 01:50 PM
Bruce does strike the ball to all fields, it's just that when it goes to left field it's normally exactly where the LF is standing. It's uncanny. And the trajectory is very simple and light to catch. I would love to see a spray chart, but my impression is that he's had 3 or 4 hits drop on the left side of the field all year. I don't see how that approach is helping him.

It's not uncanny. His fly ball percentage is high. He hits a lot of fly balls to outfielders. It's good if he's going to left field, but he needs to hit more line drives and hard grounders and fewer fly balls to become a well balanced hitter. Non-homer fly balls are very frequently outs.

Jay Bruce has 45 singles this year in 449 PAs. I think this ratio is extremely low for starting MLB hitters. It's 10 percent.

Phillips has 83 singles in 433 PAs. Just under 19%. Hanigan also is about 19% singles in his 266 PAs. The power guys are a bit lower. Votto is 14%. Frazier 13.5%. Stubbs also is 13.5%. Cozart 14%.

The only Red regular with a 10% ratio besides Bruce is Ludwick. I would argue that Ludwick has compensated with his extra base hit ratio, which has been pretty remarkable this year for his 335 PAs. Over time, Ludwick too would probably be better off getting a few more singles.

To be clear, I don't want to replace Bruce's extra base hits with singles. I want to ADD singles to his extra base hits.

kaldaniels
08-13-2012, 02:06 PM
If there's a payroll/roster crunch in 2014 or 2015 with the likes of Cueto and Chapman and Latos and Bailey and Leake, etc, I don't think Bruce's current production would be worth what he'll be making then. If the thinking now is, 'hey, he's an .800 OPS bat, pretty good for the Reds farm system to develop a guy like that' (faint praise, really), and provided that his home/road split really is a dramatically imperative aspect to his overall production, we really aren't talking about a high dollar type of player.

On the other hand, what we can all agree has gotten the Reds much further in the last 3 years is pitching. It's the ingredient that ruined some great offensive teams in the aughts. Now, I know it's not ultimately fair to draw comparisons to Ludwick's two month tear, but considering he's on pace to blow by Bruce's production soon, can we ask how easy it might be to OPS .800 playing 80 games in GABP? Is GABP the Petco Park for hitters? If so, the preference for quality pitching should outweigh quality hitting. I don't know if that's fully the case, though.

In all, admittedly, this is a reaction to this fantastic run by the Reds with Bruce hitting poorly and Votto on the DL. Meanwhile, erstwhile bench players Ludwick and Frazier are carrying the team. Makes you wonder. It's a small part of the season that we're in and it sort of paints a small picture of how things could be organized differently. If the Reds find a player they want on the trade market, where Bruce was once un-tradeable (because of his yearly salary mainly), I think in the future he may be more likely to be discussed. Not as a first resort at all. I also don't think the Reds culture is given to turning on their own players. They're a great organization now and that has MUCH to do with it. That said, if Bruce could bring a great return AND payroll flex in the future, it wouldn't be the craziest thing ever.

With the whole Ludwick/GABP thing, I would be very cautious in assuming that it is no big thing to find an .800 OPS bat for the Reds.

In 40 less AB's than Ludwick, Heisey is sporting a .706 OPS.
Last year, in the same # of AB's Heisey has this year, Gomes had a .735 OPS.

Not saying GABP doesn't help, but we've got something good here with Ludwick and I don't think it will be that easy to replace.

Tom Servo
08-13-2012, 04:23 PM
Ludwick's OPS as well as his batting average and on-base percentage are higher on the road than at home...

Scrap Irony
08-13-2012, 04:49 PM
Bruce would have to pull a major, major hot streak to reach a 3.5 WAR this season. He's at 1.5 WAR with a .342 wOBA that ranks 15th among qualified RFers and 21st among those with at least 300 ABs (34 players).

In 2011, he was a 3.3 player, 11th among RF. His wOBA ranked 15th among RFers.

If you put the two seasons together, he's 17th in WAR among all those who play RF and 24th in wRC+.

I don't know, at this point, if I'd characterize Bruce as an above average player. Despite his tools and youth, if Bruce is who he is, he's certainly more than replaceable, IMO.

reds44
08-21-2012, 02:29 AM
Jay Bruce is now hitting .261/.338/.521/.860 on the season.

On pace to hit 33 HRs and drive in 103.

Yeah, he's 25 too.

Wonderful Monds
08-21-2012, 02:31 AM
Jay Bruce is now hitting .261/.338/.521/.860 on the season.

On pace to hit 33 HRs and drive in 103.

Yeah, he's 25 too.

It's nice and all. I'm just waiting for him to do that now in a season in which he does not OPS almost right at .700 for a 2+ month stretch.

The fielding and base running stuff is a bit concerning as well.

reds44
08-21-2012, 02:33 AM
Fun stat: Jay Bruce hasn't OPSed lower than .756 in a month this season.

Tom Servo
08-21-2012, 02:36 AM
Fun stat: Jay Bruce hasn't OPSed lower than .756 in a month this season.
Yup. That's more than some other 'elite' players can say.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=97534

gilpdawg
08-21-2012, 02:37 AM
Ah, Jay Bruce, will you always be our lovable Redszone lightning rod?:D

Wonderful Monds
08-21-2012, 02:39 AM
Fun stat: Jay Bruce hasn't OPSed lower than .756 in a month this season.

Let's put it this way. At some point a couple weeks ago, a stat was cited here showing Jay's production over a couple month period of time prior to that date, and at that point the stat was that he was OPSing close to .700 over that time.
I don't know how his August stats looked at the time of that post. But it wasn't long ago that his OBP was dropping below .320 and his SLG around the high .470s.

reds44
08-21-2012, 02:52 AM
Who cares? Not every player is Joey Votto. Jay is about to post back to back 30 HR, 95+ RBI seasons and has a good chance of putting in the best offensive season in his career and you're going to say "it's nice and all" and focus that he OPSed .765 and .756 in May and July? It's silly. Jay Bruce is the youngest position player sans Mes on the roster. Younger than Frazier, younger than Cozart.

You're talking about a player who is going to average an OPS in the .830's, 26-28 HRs, and 85-90 RBIs as a 22-25 year old and despite some issues this year has been a strong defender over the course of his career. He's not in his prime yet, he's probably a year or two away still.

It's like people can't get over the fact he's not Joey Votto and appreciate the fact he's a really good player.

reds44
08-21-2012, 02:55 AM
Jay also has a career .877 OPS in August (he's way north of that in 2012) and a career .906 OPS in September. Next to May, they're his two best months.

Wonderful Monds
08-21-2012, 02:59 AM
Who cares? Not every player is Joey Votto. Jay is about to post back to back 30 HR, 95+ RBI seasons and has a good chance of putting in the best offensive season in his career and you're going to say "it's nice and all" and focus that he OPSed .765 and .756 in May and July? It's silly. Jay Bruce is the youngest position player sans Mes on the roster. Younger than Frazier, younger than Cozart.

You're talking about a player who is going to average an OPS in the .830's, 26-28 HRs, and 85-90 RBIs as a 22-25 year old and despite some issues this year has been a strong defender over the course of his career. He's not in his prime yet, he's probably a year or two away still.

It's like people can't get over the fact he's not Joey Votto and appreciate the fact he's a really good player.

I'm not saying he has to be Joey Votto. I'm saying he should be better than late model Scott Rolen for extended periods of time and not be a complete black hole in the lineup for considerable times too before I'm going to champion him as the king of Reds OF or whatever anyone here is ostracized for suggesting he is anything less than. I don't think he is a "really good" player, I think he is a useful player and marginally above average, but his ice cold streaks he is prone to fall into are a serious problem. This is not something RedsZone posters have made up, this is something Jay himself had pointed out as an area of improvement for himself as well.

So no, it's not like that at all.

reds44
08-21-2012, 03:02 AM
Of course he could improve on his slumps. Nobody is saying otherwise. His slumps are what is keeping him from being a great player. However, odds are he hasn't tapped out on his offensive potential at age 25.

His offensive numbers as a whole speak for themselves no matter how people may try to manipulate them.

Wonderful Monds
08-21-2012, 03:08 AM
Of course he could improve on his slumps. Nobody is saying otherwise. His slumps are what is keeping him from being a great player. However, odds are he hasn't tapped out on his offensive potential at age 25.

His offensive numbers as a whole speak for themselves no matter how people may try to manipulate them.

I'm not trying to manipulate the numbers per se, I just want to offer some perspective on why I think the slumps are something to be heavily considered with Jay. I don't expect him to be Joey Votto, but I would like for the months where he bottoms out and hits in the low .200s average wise or just starts rolling over on everything thrown up to the plate, for those months to be a little closer to his career averages rather than 100+ OPS points away. With as high as his peaks go, he'd probably add .50 to .100 points in OPS if he just cut out how low his valleys go.

Homer Bailey
08-21-2012, 10:11 AM
So we're back to the "Jay Bruce's high OPS isn't as valuable as other high OPS's because he has cold streaks". Fun.

westofyou
08-21-2012, 10:12 AM
So we're back to the "Jay Bruce's high OPS isn't as valuable as other high OPS's because he has cold streaks". Fun.

The circle of life.

I wish I knew the ball player who always exceeded his value whenever he stepped on the field, he must be sumthin

RedEye
08-21-2012, 10:25 AM
I'm not saying he has to be Joey Votto. I'm saying he should be better than late model Scott Rolen for extended periods of time and not be a complete black hole in the lineup for considerable times too before I'm going to champion him as the king of Reds OF or whatever anyone here is ostracized for suggesting he is anything less than. I don't think he is a "really good" player, I think he is a useful player and marginally above average, but his ice cold streaks he is prone to fall into are a serious problem. This is not something RedsZone posters have made up, this is something Jay himself had pointed out as an area of improvement for himself as well.

So no, it's not like that at all.

That's a bit hyperbolic. I don't think anyone has claimed him as the king of the Reds OF or ostracized folks for suggesting the contrary. There are some who hope he gets better, yes. I suppose we could debate the adjectives, but I think the evidence clearly suggests that he is better than the "useful" or "marginally above average" player you claim -- especially when his age and career arc are taken into account.

Nasty_Boy
08-21-2012, 12:37 PM
Since BP's bat has been pretty non-existent for the last 3 weeks, does he count as being streaky? Maybe we should start a thread... Or is Bruce the only that ever has a cold streak and struggles for 60-70 ABs during a 6 month season?

Just my opinion, but Bruce's slumps seem magnified because his hot streaks are so impressive. There doesn't seem to be as big of a gap between bad and good production.

Wonderful Monds
08-21-2012, 01:11 PM
So we're back to the "Jay Bruce's high OPS isn't as valuable as other high OPS's because he has cold streaks". Fun.

Yeah, and I don't think it's all that ridiculous that it should be immediately dismissed.

edabbs44
08-21-2012, 01:13 PM
So we're back to the "Jay Bruce's high OPS isn't as valuable as other high OPS's because he has cold streaks". Fun.

Does Jay Bruce have a "high" OPS?

Wonderful Monds
08-21-2012, 01:16 PM
That's a bit hyperbolic. I don't think anyone has claimed him as the king of the Reds OF or ostracized folks for suggesting the contrary. There are some who hope he gets better, yes. I suppose we could debate the adjectives, but I think the evidence clearly suggests that he is better than the "useful" or "marginally above average" player you claim -- especially when his age and career arc are taken into account.

Does it though? Jay, if anything, has trended downward since his so far career year in 2010. He's on pace for right around 3 WAR, which pretty fairly paints him as a useful or marginally above average player.

westofyou
08-21-2012, 01:23 PM
Does Jay Bruce have a "high" OPS?

Sure he does... not enough for some though.

21st of 105 for NL batters with 300 AB's (2.23 per game)

Now go ahead and dilute the water by bringing in guys with less ab's or from the other league.

reds44
08-21-2012, 01:25 PM
Does Jay Bruce have a "high" OPS?
You're seriously questioning if .860 is a high OPS? He's 29th in baseball in OPS. He's 14th in the NL.

Patrick Bateman
08-21-2012, 01:42 PM
We've had this discussion before.

I don't think it's debatable that Bruce is an above average player.

I don't think it's debatable that Jay Bruce is not an elite player.

Jay Bruce is 25 and will likely improve to some degree going forward, but likely not to an elite level like some had hoped.

Jay Bruce provides his offense in a way that is not very attractive to some, can be maddening to watch at times, however, is still valuable.

Can't we just leave it there? Do we really need to start pulling random stats from random months that have no real context? Do we really need to start pulling in the stats from random players that have not proven themselves over long periods of time?

Seriously, we already figured all of this out, like 2 years ago.

PuffyPig
08-21-2012, 02:03 PM
Does it though? Jay, if anything, has trended downward since his so far career year in 2010. He's on pace for right around 3 WAR, which pretty fairly paints him as a useful or marginally above average player.

A 3 WAR is quite a bit better than a "useful" or "marginally above average" player.

Otherwise, last year there were only 34 players in the NL who were rated higher than "marginally above average".

Patrick Bateman
08-21-2012, 02:09 PM
A 3 WAR is quite a bit better than a "useful" or "marginally above average" player.

Otherwise, last year there were only 34 players in the NL who were rated higher than "marginally above average".

Also, I think it's been well discussed in the past that Jay Bruce's WAR in that season appears to have been inflated by the defensive component in WAR. As UZR takes around 3 years to regress to the mean, everyday Bruce is looking more and more like an average fielder in right, and not the defensive stud he was once believed to be.

He's not really regressing, certainly not with the bat, he appears to be a comparable bat, maybe even getting slightly better over time, and his defense likely hasn't changed as much as the stats indicate, he just is not an elite fielder.

RedsMan3203
08-21-2012, 02:20 PM
Also, I think it's been well discussed in the past that Jay Bruce's WAR in that season appears to have been inflated by the defensive component in WAR. As UZR takes around 3 years to regress to the mean, everyday Bruce is looking more and more like an average fielder in right, and not the defensive stud he was once believed to be.

He's not really regressing, certainly not with the bat, he appears to be a comparable bat, maybe even getting slightly better over time, and his defense likely hasn't changed as much as the stats indicate, he just is not an elite fielder.

Because a "number" can tell me how well someone can play defense? Sometimes, you just gotta throw them out the window and do the old eye test...

Good Range? Check
Good Arm? Check
Throwing Accuracy? Check

When is the last time someone tried to stretch a single into a double or go 1st to 3rd on him?

Still don't know how you can put someones defensive skill set and put them into a formula and magically produce a rank...

Wonderful Monds
08-21-2012, 02:24 PM
I don't think it's debatable that Jay Bruce is not an elite player.

:eek:

Patrick Bateman
08-21-2012, 02:27 PM
Because a "number" can tell me how well someone can play defense? Sometimes, you just gotta throw them out the window and do the old eye test...

Good Range? Check
Good Arm? Check
Throwing Accuracy? Check

When is the last time someone tried to stretch a single into a double or go 1st to 3rd on him?

Still don't know how you can put someones defensive skill set and put them into a formula and magically produce a rank...

Are you able to give me a summary comparing him to all other rightfiedlers in baseball this year?

That's why stats might help in that regard, as we have no way of comparing to every other player as we don't watch enough, and our brain is not able to process such information.

I would argue that Bruce has not showed great range this year. I have memory of a number of very catchable balls within what appears to be a reasonable range that he has not caught. I think he's likely above average by a fairly insignificant amount.

dougdirt
08-21-2012, 02:28 PM
You're seriously questioning if .860 is a high OPS? He's 29th in baseball in OPS. He's 14th in the NL.

So you are saying that if every team in baseball took one of the top 30 hitters in terms of OPS and labeled them #1 hitters (you know, kind of like #1 pitchers), that Jay Bruce would be a #1 hitter for one of the 30 teams in baseball?

PuffyPig
08-21-2012, 02:48 PM
So you are saying that if every team in baseball took one of the top 30 hitters in terms of OPS and labeled them #1 hitters (you know, kind of like #1 pitchers), that Jay Bruce would be a #1 hitter for one of the 30 teams in baseball?

He would be in terms of OPS.

dougdirt
08-21-2012, 02:49 PM
He would be in terms of OPS.

I know. And I would never go on that alone because of park factors and all, but it makes a nice narrative.

reds44
08-21-2012, 03:03 PM
So you are saying that if every team in baseball took one of the top 30 hitters in terms of OPS and labeled them #1 hitters (you know, kind of like #1 pitchers), that Jay Bruce would be a #1 hitter for one of the 30 teams in baseball?
Yes.

AtomicDumpling
08-21-2012, 03:18 PM
If a player goes into a slump on the 1st of the month and he gets hot starting the 1st of the next month it will get a lot more attention than a player who started his streaks on the 15th of the month. I don't think Jay Bruce has been much streakier than most other players. He just had the misfortune of his streaks coinciding exactly with the calendar months last year and the talking heads noticed it and harped about it all season. It became an ongoing narrative that was blown out of proportion.

Once a player gets a reputation as being streaky then people will forever after search to find the starting points and ending points of his cycles to confirm their perception. If only they would scrutinize the game logs of every player in the same manner they would see that most players are similarly streaky to Jay.

Homer Bailey
08-21-2012, 03:20 PM
If a player goes into a slump on the 1st of the month and he gets hot starting the 1st of the next month it will get a lot more attention than a player who started his streaks on the 15th of the month. I don't think Jay Bruce has been much streakier than most other players. He just had the misfortune of his streaks coinciding exactly with the calendar months last year and the talking heads noticed it and harped about it all season.

Once a player gets a reputation as being streaky then people will forever after search to find the starting points and ending points of his cycles to confirm their perception. If only they would scrutinize the game logs of every player in the same manner they would see that most players are similarly streaky to Jay.

:thumbup:

edabbs44
08-21-2012, 03:20 PM
Sure he does... not enough for some though.

21st of 105 for NL batters with 300 AB's (2.23 per game)

Now go ahead and dilute the water by bringing in guys with less ab's or from the other league.

How would the addition of AL players dilute the water?

Also, I don't know if the fringe of the top 20% is all that great, and that is w/o the dilution.

edabbs44
08-21-2012, 03:24 PM
So you are saying that if every team in baseball took one of the top 30 hitters in terms of OPS and labeled them #1 hitters (you know, kind of like #1 pitchers), that Jay Bruce would be a #1 hitter for one of the 30 teams in baseball?

He wouldn't. Because by using that logic both Votto and Kemp are ineligible. He'd be more like a mid #2. Using that logic.

Brutus
08-21-2012, 03:24 PM
If a player goes into a slump on the 1st of the month and he gets hot starting the 1st of the next month it will get a lot more attention than a player who started his streaks on the 15th of the month. I don't think Jay Bruce has been much streakier than most other players. He just had the misfortune of his streaks coinciding exactly with the calendar months last year and the talking heads noticed it and harped about it all season. It became an ongoing narrative that was blown out of proportion.

Once a player gets a reputation as being streaky then people will forever after search to find the starting points and ending points of his cycles to confirm their perception. If only they would scrutinize the game logs of every player in the same manner they would see that most players are similarly streaky to Jay.

While you make some good points, unless someone actually did scrutinize the game logs and did some sort of running deviation of OPS, wOBA, or whatever other metric there is to measure performance, it's not possible to say Jay is or isn't more streaky than other players. He could well be more streaky, as streaks don't usually coincide with calendar months. But one can't say definitively that is or isn't the case without doing extensive research in comparing all players.

My suggestion to such a study would be doing rolling 15-day averages throughout a season for all players to measure differences from the norm. But that would be a lot of work.

Homer Bailey
08-21-2012, 03:35 PM
Jay Bruce is now hitting .261/.338/.521/.860 on the season.

On pace to hit 33 HRs and drive in 103.

Yeah, he's 25 too.

http://www.hlntv.com/sites/default/files/2012/08/10/mckayladisappointed.jpg

HeatherC1212
08-21-2012, 03:39 PM
http://www.hlntv.com/sites/default/files/2012/08/10/mckayladisappointed.jpg

I'll be stunned if anyone else in this thread actually understands why this is all kinds of awesome, LOL :laugh:

:beerme:

AtomicDumpling
08-21-2012, 03:44 PM
I'll be stunned if anyone else in this thread actually understands why this is all kinds of awesome, LOL :laugh:

:beerme:

Yeah it is appropriate here because she just won an Olympic medal (meaning she is one of the best gymnasts in the world) yet she is not satisfied at all because she didn't get the gold.

Jay Bruce is a very good hitter, but some people are not satisfied at all and think Jay Bruce is a problem.

reds44
08-21-2012, 03:45 PM
You can think Jay Bruce can be better and still be able to appreciate what he's doing.

Tom Servo
08-21-2012, 03:49 PM
http://i.imgur.com/WmhHG.jpg

westofyou
08-21-2012, 03:49 PM
http://i.imgur.com/WmhHG.jpg

Ughh can't believe that meme has made it to the Reds dugout

Tadasimha
08-21-2012, 03:50 PM
Ughh can't believe that meme has made it to the Reds dugout

Can't believe someone used "meme" in Redszone!

_Sir_Charles_
08-21-2012, 03:59 PM
Can't believe someone used "meme" in Redszone!

I'm still trying to understand what a "meme" is. I've seen my daughter use the word, no clue what it means. Man...I'm old. :(

powersackers
08-21-2012, 04:35 PM
Nope. He's a number two on a lot of teams. Worse than two on several. Number 1 on very few. Would be fun to lay it out but no thanks.

dougdirt
08-21-2012, 04:38 PM
Nope. He's a number two on a lot of teams. Worse than two on several. Number 1 on very few. Would be fun to lay it out but no thanks.

Except that in an even distribution of talent, he would be at worst a #2 on every team.

Wonderful Monds
08-21-2012, 05:09 PM
Except that in an even distribution of talent, he would be at worst a #2 on every team.

He's only a 4 on his own team.

westofyou
08-21-2012, 05:15 PM
He's only a 4 on his own team.

Not everyone can be the belle of the ball every year.

Just thank gawd he ain't Gordon Beckam

dougdirt
08-21-2012, 05:17 PM
He's only a 4 on his own team.

And there isn't a distribution of talent. Roy Halladay/Cole Hamels/Cliff Lee are all #1's, but one of them is a #3 on their own team. So what? That isn't what anyone was saying.

Brutus
08-21-2012, 05:19 PM
Not everyone can be the belle of the ball every year.

Just thank gawd he ain't Gordon Beckam

Remember how upset people were when the Reds didn't draft Beckham?

Instead they got Alonso and turned him into Latos.

Patrick Bateman
08-21-2012, 05:41 PM
He's only a 4 on his own team.

You could argue that based on larger samples he is pretty clearly the number 2. Let's just be happy that we were fortunate enough to have 2 somewhat random guys decide they were going to be monsters this year.

cincrazy
08-21-2012, 06:57 PM
Jay Bruce is a good player. But if this team is going to win a World Series, he needs to be a consistent force. He can't disappear in October and swing at horrible pitches, or make stupid baserunning mistakes, or misplay balls in the field.

He's an asset to this team, yes. But I don't think there's anything wrong with expecting better from him. He's a good player that could be a great player.

reds44
08-21-2012, 06:59 PM
I'll take Jay Bruce over Ryan Ludwick and Todd Frazier every day of the week.

westofyou
08-21-2012, 07:04 PM
Jay Bruce is a good player. But if this team is going to win a World Series, he needs to be a consistent force. He can't disappear in October and swing at horrible pitches, or make stupid baserunning mistakes, or misplay balls in the field.

He's an asset to this team, yes. But I don't think there's anything wrong with expecting better from him. He's a good player that could be a great player.

Like Gil Hodges or Joe DiMaggio in 1949... unacceptable!!

Tom Servo
08-21-2012, 07:05 PM
Not to mention Bruce played perfectly okay in the 2010 playoffs.

dougdirt
08-21-2012, 07:08 PM
Like Gil Hodges or Joe DiMaggio in 1949... unacceptable!!

Dimaggio had a postseason OPS .210 points lower than his career OPS. That ain't good. Probably should go ahead and remove him from the Hall.

reds44
08-21-2012, 07:09 PM
Jay Bruce of the career 1.025 career postseason OPS variety.

edabbs44
08-21-2012, 07:17 PM
Not to mention Bruce played perfectly okay in the 2010 playoffs.

To be fair, he had a huge gaffe in the field.

westofyou
08-21-2012, 07:21 PM
To be fair, he had a huge gaffe in the field.

Yes lost the ball in the lights, a hangable offense evidently

reds44
08-21-2012, 07:27 PM
Ahhh yes, losing the ball in the lights: a true test of a players worth.