Printable View
It's only more relevant if you are looking at them in a vacuum and assuming all the factors affecting his performance are the same, which in Bruce's case they weren't. If you think they were, and you believe 2014/15 to be more relevant to Bruce's performance you're not calling about him anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by RedsManRick
Apparently over the winter Bruce made extensive changes to his swing. I haven't seen anything that's indicated he's just on another hot streak this year. Really looks like the changes have brought him that elusive consistency.Quote:
Originally Posted by lollipopcurve
Did it ever get leaked who the prospects we were going to get in the Reds/Blue Jays/Angels swap were?
One of my good friends was in Cle bullpen, just got sent down today because he has one last option. Been shoving and has one of the better fastballs in baseball. Austin Adams.Jay Bruce for him and Naquin unless they were willing to part with Frazier or Zimmer.
Adams would really help out our bullpen as well and they dont seem to value him.
Why would they pay the buy out and then decide on a QO? The QO is way higher than the option is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kc61
I don't think you give away Bruce but putting a pitcher or two with him that isn't named Stephenson, Reed or Garrett might net a high end prospect and give the Reds far more flexibility (roster as well as cash) for the rebuild. Walt rarely loses trades and I expect the last two trades of both Bruce and Cozart could just be the last ones that he ever makes in his career. No pressure but I expect him to land the next Johnny Bench and Joe Morgan. :)
There is a debate because advanced defensive analytics are still in their infancy. Teams have access to the cutting edge defensive statistics, but we are using less advanced defensive statistics. I think it is justifiable to question the defensive stats that many are citing to say Jay is a terrible defender because those statistics have not been verified to the degree that the advanced offensive statistics have. I buy that Jay Bruce is not a good defender anymore. In fact, I will buy that Jay is a below average defender. But, I am very skeptical that Jay is such a bad defensive player that it wipes away all of the good his bat has done with a .280/.332/.591 line.Quote:
Originally Posted by paulrichjr
I see people say the Reds should re-sign Bruce to a long-term contract and I can't tell if they're being sarcastic. I'll just assume they are.
Re-signing Bruce would go against everything the Reds are trying to do with this rebuild. His value is high. Now is the time to trade him. (By "now" I mean anytime between right this moment and the 2016 trade deadline.)
If the Reds would re-sign Bruce and his numbers then went into the tank, everyone would be saying, "See, should have traded him at the 2016 deadline." It won't be hindsight 20/20 for me when I say that though. I'm saying it right now. It makes 100 percent sense from the Reds' standpoint to trade Bruce as soon as they get a good offer for him. I'm certainly not saying the Reds should trade Bruce for a poor return. If a team isn't willing to pony up at least one legit prospect, forget about it. Reds can just hold on to him and pick up his 2017 option at the very worst. But I have to think with all the injuries we're seeing around MLB, plus more importantly the fact that Bruce is putting up excellent offensive stats, there will be/is a good market for him. If the Reds play their cards right here, they'll get a nice prospect in return for Bruce. That's a long way from the "salary dump" we were led to believe they were trying to pull off during the offseason.
Again, Bruce playing well offensively is one of the best things that has happened to the 2016 Reds because suddenly a guy who didn't have much trade value entering the season ... has a lot of trade value IMO. I also think his defensive metrics won't be nearly as important to AL teams because of the DH and because offense is valued over defense in general in that league.
Steve Selsky was just recalled... :o
I realize this means nothing.
I think the way some look at it is that save for the first week of the season and last week, the Reds haven't played well. One of the reasons for that was the loss of players like Frazier, Cueto and Chapman. All homegrown players and all popular. They seem to feel that if Bruce and/or Cozart are traded the team loses its most productive - not to mention popular and homegrown - players and will get even worse. Pretty much every Reds fan knew they would be bad but they don't want to be 1962 Mets bad. If either or both are traded, they think this team could live in infamy along with the 62 Mets and the 1899 Cleveland Spiders.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuckie
I still think he will be traded before the all-star break. I think teams like SF, KC, and the White Sox are looking at OF or DH help. They will want the extra month to be able to stay in the playoff hunt. Ironically all 3 of these teams farm systems have been scouted by us in the past. Of the 3 SFrans is the weakest. I would target the best players I could get regardless of position.
With Cuthbert hurt, KC is in need of an IFer, too.
I don't think many dispute this. It's just a question of whether that will happen. If it doesn't, I wouldn't completely rule out an extension.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuckie
After a player has two seasons of basically replacement level production, it really makes older data irrelvant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon
Your theory is that an injury created bad habits.. Yet Bruce had a long streak in the first half of last year when he seemed to be healthy.. I think it was 10 weeks of good production, give or take a week or two. So did he get hurt again or did he fall back into bad habits.. He had almost no walks in the second half.
Why would teams be asking about Bruce in the first place? Well, we are assuming teams are asking about him now (which I don't know).. My guess is that it's similiar to the Reds last year, when they asked about Byrd.. They wanted a reasonably priced stopgap for LF to help them be competitive. They believe the Reds will eat some of Bruce's salary (which was offered in the spring) and only expect a modest prospect in return. That's attractive to teams that are willing to roll the dice on offense, and get the fans excited that they are going for it..
Sorry, but I can almost guarantee you that if Bruce is traded, you are going to be extremely disappointed in the return.
Based on what we know (which may not be 100% accurate), the Reds were willing to basically give away Phillips and Bruce for salary relief. They backed off their hard position on Chapman to cut payroll. They probably had an urgency to trade Fraizer too.. Not much has changed. We have to assume that if a semi-palatable offer for Bruce is made, the Reds will jump on it.. And for Bruce, I really can't blame them, given the position this club is in.. As KC says, they are retooling with youth.. A 30 year old Bruce next year on the last year of his contract isn't helping that.
An extension for Bruce is really out of the question and would be unwise, IMO.
Do you really think that 200 abs by Bruce this year has significantly changed other GM's opinion of him? Maybe that's the crux of our disagreement.
Because the Reds couldn't give Bruce away last spring, despite willing to eat 8 million of his contract. He's not suddenly worth a top 100 prospect after 200 ABs.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/what-...ce-is-missing/
If teams are (including the Reds) are shortsighted enough to think that the knee surgery didn't affect his production in 14/15 then I'm just fine with keeping him. He'll continue to hit very well when healthy, and the ability is there for him to improve in the field again. I'm definitely not on board with giving him away for a cut price because he had a couple down seasons after knee surgery when his history and pedigree suggest the Jay Bruce we're seeing now is more 'real' than the 14/15 version.
Funny the article mentioned "bad habits" because Jay said the same thing in an extended version of his quote about feeling like himself again the other day.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon
"I feel like Jay Bruce. Not 2014 and 15, those were miserable years. I was injured and I think some of that stuff carried over and had some bad habits that I got rid of."
Yep.Quote:
Originally Posted by RedsManRick
My go-to back of the napkin way is to look back at the past 3 years. That's it. And I weight them 3,2,1 starting at the most recent year barring any unusual circumstances.
Smoking. Hanging out at the pool hall. Staying up late playing Guitar Hero.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
Bruce has been consistently spotty throughout his career. He'll have monstrous streak in both the front and back halves of the season where he can carry the whole team for a couple of weeks, but then he goes on arid streaks where he contributes next to nothing on offense. True, his current hot streak seems to be extending longer than any we've seen from him for a while.Quote:
Originally Posted by WrongVerb
Man, a heel Jay Bruce would be so cool. Imagine him with his babyface and dad hair wearing a leather jacket with a Dusty chewing stick in his mouth?Quote:
Originally Posted by marcshoe
The people calling for Bruce's contract to be extended dispute it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
Might happen, but I'm more inclined to believe that if they keep him, he reverts to norm and finishes lower than last years totals in most categories. Even if he does finish strong, what are you keeping him for? This club's going no where until 2018 at the earliest.Quote:
Originally Posted by OGB
2018 Bruce will still only be 31, and he's a power hitter who seems to be maturing a bit in his approach. He could still be useful for another few years after that even.Quote:
Originally Posted by corkedbat
http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/fiv...ng-their-xoba/
Here is an article that mentions Bruce and it does not project a rosy picture going forward.
"Bruce has not been able to keep a stable exit velocity or launch angle. He has lost 1.3 degrees off his vertical launch angle, dropping from 12.7 to 11.4 degrees. Worse yet, he has fallen from 90.4 to 88.2 mph average exit velocity."
"Jay Bruce’s batted ball quality is very similar to what he produced last season, which was below league average and probably the second worst season of his career. This year his batted ball quality has actually been a slight tick lower than last season. His in game production has benefited greatly from registering a bunch of low probability hits, and, probably, boosted by a very hitter friendly home ball park as well. Since 2012, when he peaked in value as a player, he has slowly descended in value, to the point where his offense may no longer make up for his very poor defense. Anyone looking to buy him should be wary, he could regress pretty badly, especially if he leaves Great American Ball Park. Unless something changes, you should expect him to put up roughly the same numbers as last season."
Basically the article is saying he has been lucky this year. His production has out preformed what one would expect.
If Reds can't trade Bruce for good value, then I could see a buy out after the year. Maybe with a Qualifying Offer. I could even possibly see the Reds picking up his option for one year. Unlikely, but possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
An extension? Can't see that happening. Reds would need very short memories to sign Jay Bruce long term for $13-15MM per year.
That's why I think trading him is the right move.Quote:
Originally Posted by corkedbat
Some of this is where advanced metrics lose me (xBACON?). Specifically this:Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneinthBrame
Here's a HR we are told Bruce should be dinged on because it "had less than 1% chance of clearing the fences", from 5/5/16:Quote:
Here is a table of ten of Bruce’s more unlikely hits so far this season. Two those batted balls pop off the screen: two homers that had less than 1% chance of clearing the fence. He also landed on third base with a triple on a ball that only had a 0.5% chance of being three bases. Those three hits alone represent a large shift in his stats, if they had landed for singles instead, his slugging percentage would drop 46 points. If they were outs, his slugging would drop 63 points.
Come on.
The is no such thing as "only 31." This club has no business talking extensions with anyone 30 or over - especially someone as up and down as Bruce. Sign guys to extensions in their mid-to-late 20's, buy out a couple of Arb years and a couple of FA years and thenm with virtually no exceptions, deal them when they get into their early 30's. Bruce is by no means someone for which you make an exception.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon
Bruce is Lucy holding the football and begging the Reds to kick it. "You can trust me this time ... I promise!"
No thanks.
Yeah, I don't know much about the numbers that guy is using in his article, but his batted ball profile and contact rates are some of the best of his career to this point. I don't see in any way why that would point to regression.
LD % - 23.5, 2nd best behind 2013's 23.9.
GB % - 36.2, 2nd lowest behidn 2012's 35.4.
IFFB % - 5.0, lowest of his career.
HR/FB % - 21.7, highest of his career.
Hard contact % - 39.0, highest of his career.
Swing % outside of the zone - 26.3, lowest of his career.
Contact % - 78.3, highest of his career.
Swinging strike % - 10.3, lowest of his career.
So basically he's swinging less at bad pitches, making more contact on good pitches, making harder contact, hitting less balls on the ground, and hitting more line-drives. He's pulling the ball at about his career rate, but going middle more than opposite compared to his career rates. He's not being inflated by a ridiculous HR/FB, nor does he have a BABIP that is out of the norm for his batted ball profile (if anything his BABIP is low compared to it).
This far into the season the batted ball profiles and plate discipline are generally normalized. So this version of Jay Bruce is no fluke, and he really isn't outperforming his peripherals at all.
I don't think he would come cheap, if he keeps hitting and the Reds keep him he will price himself right out of town, if he slumps again the Reds will get less in a trade.Quote:
Originally Posted by kpresidente
Lose/lose...trade him before the chasm.
What the heck does that even mean? Would be interesting to see how this "study" worked for other players. Seems like a LOT of noise at first glance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
His whole career points to regression.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon
Again, the qualifying offer would be more $ than Bruce's 2017 team option. It would make no sense to pay the buyout and then make a qualifying offer. What if Bruce pulls a Colby Rasmus and accepts the offer? The Reds don't want that. They need to trade him ASAFP, IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kc61
Well according to this, Bruce said the knee was 100% in 2015 spring training, and he sure had a nice first halfQuote:
Originally Posted by Cannon
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/reds...ring/22157203/
There is also a blurb about Jay adjusting his mechanics last year, and that was given credit to his positive start
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/spor...reds/82764780/
Quote:
“He’s [Bruce] put a lot of work in,” manager Bryan Price said. “You know how proud he is, and he puts a lot of expectation on his own shoulders to do the job that he’s paid to do.”
Much of that work has been fine-tuning his mechanics, a change that Bruce hopes will help him keep his bat in the strike zone longer. He’s always been focused mentally on using the whole field, but now he feels better equipped physically do to so as well.
Through three games, it seems to be paying off. Last year, 45 percent of his hits went up the middle. He’s hit five of six that way through the first three games of 2016
And here is a nice article about Bruce candidly talking about his approach last year during his hot streak.. I dont want to quote it all, but
its worth reading..
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/reds...alks/28522531/
So the point is.. Im glad Bruce is working hard, and trying to make adjustments.. But heres a guy clearly not looking for walks (and his second half showed that, he hardly got any).. He makes various tweaks to his swing.. I dont have proof, but it seems he tweaks it a lot, it works, then the pitchers adjust and he is sub replacement level again.. I just really doubt that this year he has fixed it for real, but obviously, I could be wrong.Quote:
"I'm not trying to walk more, that's for certain," Bruce said before Thursday's game. "I think it's the simple fact that I'm not getting myself out as much. I don't know what my contact rate is — it might be a little higher."
Bruce is right — he had a 76.3 contact rate going into Thursday's game, better than he has had in any single season of his career (of course, this is one quarter of the season, so it's not exactly fair to compare them).
"I don't know what's sustainable, what isn't, but over the past three weeks, I've been feeling good at the plate," Bruce said. "I've been getting results, seeing the ball well, not getting myself out a ton. I think if I put together a full season of that, things will be where they're supposed to be."
I dont wish him any bad will, but is definitely not someone I want on the team beyond this year.
- - - Updated - - -
Well according to this, Bruce said the knee was 100% in 2015 spring training, and he sure had a nice first halfQuote:
Originally Posted by Cannon
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/reds...ring/22157203/
There is also a blurb about Jay adjusting his mechanics last year, and that was given credit to his positive start
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/spor...reds/82764780/
Quote:
“He’s [Bruce] put a lot of work in,” manager Bryan Price said. “You know how proud he is, and he puts a lot of expectation on his own shoulders to do the job that he’s paid to do.”
Much of that work has been fine-tuning his mechanics, a change that Bruce hopes will help him keep his bat in the strike zone longer. He’s always been focused mentally on using the whole field, but now he feels better equipped physically do to so as well.
Through three games, it seems to be paying off. Last year, 45 percent of his hits went up the middle. He’s hit five of six that way through the first three games of 2016
And here is a nice article about Bruce candidly talking about his approach last year during his hot streak.. I dont want to quote it all, but
its worth reading..
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/reds...alks/28522531/
So the point is.. Im glad Bruce is working hard, and trying to make adjustments.. But heres a guy clearly not looking for walks (and his second half showed that, he hardly got any).. He makes various tweaks to his swing.. I dont have proof, but it seems he tweaks it a lot, it works, then the pitchers adjust and he is sub replacement level again.. I just really doubt that this year he has fixed it for real, but obviously, I could be wrong.Quote:
"I'm not trying to walk more, that's for certain," Bruce said before Thursday's game. "I think it's the simple fact that I'm not getting myself out as much. I don't know what my contact rate is — it might be a little higher."
Bruce is right — he had a 76.3 contact rate going into Thursday's game, better than he has had in any single season of his career (of course, this is one quarter of the season, so it's not exactly fair to compare them).
"I don't know what's sustainable, what isn't, but over the past three weeks, I've been feeling good at the plate," Bruce said. "I've been getting results, seeing the ball well, not getting myself out a ton. I think if I put together a full season of that, things will be where they're supposed to be."
I dont wish him any bad will, but is definitely not someone I want on the team beyond this year.
Thankyouverymuch.Quote:
Originally Posted by corkedbat
Right. Dudes need to put down their iPads or step away from the PC for a while and actually watch baseball.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
I don't mind signing players who are approaching or in their 30s to extensions. My adage is that you don't pay a player in his 30s for the production he gave in his 20s.
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2016/06/...ay-bruce-next/
Quote:
When the teams discussed a deal in spring training, the Reds were adamant about the White Sox taking at least $11 million of the $12.5 million due on Bruce’s contract. The chances of Chicago giving up shortstop Tim Anderson or right-hander Carson Fulmer, their top prospects, are close to zero this season.
Sorta disappointing that they wouldn't be looking to eat more salary to get a better prospect. Just another avenue to invest in the farm.Quote:
Originally Posted by 757690
Pretty sure there was a report stating the Reds were gonna eat a whole bunch of his salary in the trade to the Jays that fell through.Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman