Deep Impact: Xander Bogaerts
The future position of Xander Bogaerts has become a hot button issue this season. Baseball Prospectus’ prospect guru Kevin Goldstein cited a potential move down the defensive spectrum, possibly even out of the infield, as a reason the 19-year-old didn’t make his mid-season top 50 prospect list.* Goldstein’s rationale drew the ire of many despite the commonly overlooked fact that Kevin is far more connected and knowledgeable than just about everyone who hurled accusations at him. Why does Boegarts’s future position rile up so many? Rabid Red Sox fans and the fantasy implications.
*To be fair to Kevin, he also cited Bogaerts’s streakiness as a hitter and noted he would have been 51st on his list and that Xander is “wonderful”.
Of course, we all know the implications in leagues that uses the standard 5×5 categories. Third base is more offensively demanding. In the important team-independent fantasy statistics the 2012 league average third baseman is batting .262 with 7 stolen bases and 20 homeruns per 162 games whereas the average shortstop is batting .258 with 15 stolen base and 12 home runs. Wait what? In this extremely rough look at the two positions in 2012 they come out practically even. A similar comparison can be made from the statistics in the two prior years. In 2011 third baseman averaged .253 BA/7 SB/15 HR against shortstops’ .263/16/11 line and 2010 was similar. Those at hot corner hit .263/6/18 verses .262/13/10 for the captain of the infield. Sure, home runs produce more RBI and thus the league’s third baseman have a sizeable lead in that category but there are also far fewer stolen bases annually than homeruns, increasing their value. It’s practically a wash.
When I began writing this piece I assumed my conclusion would be that a move to third would hurt Bogaerts’s fantasy value. And it may, but certainly not as much as we often convince ourselves it would. Of course, a move to the outfield is another story entirely. If Goldstein’s inclination to view Bogaerts as an outfielder is correct, that would be quite the hit to his value. At short and third there is an intuitive trade off between power and speed. Consider why an shortstop moves to third. Less range due in large part to less speed, thus the correlating offensive profile. Statistics show there is no power speed trade off in the outfield. Bogaerts , who doesn’t project to steal bases, would need to be a nightmare with the bat to make up for lack of steals. Even if he does reach his ceiling, a move to the outfield from the infield would be a drastic hit to his fantasy value because of the ability of his peers.
So will he move? Obviously Goldstien anticipates it. My Bullpen Banter colleague Al Skorupa saw him on Tuesday and came away impressed with his current ability at short, noting he made every play whether it be in the hole or charging the ball. His largest concern – which I share from my looks at Xander earlier in the year – is that despite being a great athlete with a”well proportioned” body he could outgrow the position. In his chat yesterday, Keith Law of ESPN said something similar, “I think he ends up at third but there is some sentiment he could stay at short at least a few years; he’s a good athlete and while he’s going to get bigger he’s not huge yet.” Our own Mike Newman told me that Bogaerts has a 35% chance to stick at shortstop. However, because his bat is so dynamic Newman feels the presence of Will Middlebrooks and Jose Iglesias could push him elsewhere on the diamond because their value is heavily tied to their defensive ability. Obviously opinions are split but let’s not concern ourselves with a shift to the outfield until the young Sox plays himself off short or third.
Prospect Video of the Week: While Al was watching Bogaerts I was down in Trenton watching Jameson Taillon. Here is the video I shot of the Pirate right-hander and, if you’re interested, the scouting report too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N91gMy4HHdY
Formerly of Bullpen Banter, JD can be followed on Twitter.
It wasn’t the projected positional change that made his list questionable. He put Xander in the top 50 last year, and noted that he wouldn’t stick at SS. Then Xander put together an even better season this year in an even more age advanced setting, yet he dropped down in the rankings. Perhaps the field improved THAT much, but seeing other easily inferior Red Sox prospects ahead of him (Bradley Jr, Barnes) made the decision fair to criticize imo.
It’s absolutely fair to criticize. But I think Kevin’s earned the right to voice his opinion without being tarred and feathered.
Is there any evidence that minor league (or major league) “streakiness” is a concern at all?
I’m not sure there is evidence that he’s any more streaky than the average player. It’s just what Kevin said. I assume he had a basis for the opinion. I know our own Bill Petti did some work on volatility at the major league level, but nothing at the minor league level.
To answer your your question, no. Past steakiness is not predictive of future streakiness.
Can’t see the Goldstein omission as anything but a dumb oversight, especially given how highly he placed in Keith Law and Baseball America’s lists. He should be a consensus top 10 guy by the end of 2013 if not sooner.
It’s possible, but then why not correct the oversight? If that was the case he’s been forced to defend a position he doesn’t agree with. That’s silly. Especially because he has another list that’s going to come out in a few months. Is he going to hold onto a position he doesn’t agree with because he simple forgot to include XB in his top 50?
Seems unlikely to me.
Just saying, I wouldn’t be surprised if he just overthought things a little re: the streakiness or possible position change, and/or for whatever reason put other considerations (getting some exposure for/making a statement on more obscure players like Chris Owings, Matt Adams, Jorge Bonifacio, Daniel Norris, etc.) above actually putting the top 50 prospects in order as best he could. Like SchoolboyQ, I’m finding it hard to wrap my mind around how Bogaerts’ stock possibly could have slipped this year.
Oh, I agree. In fact, the reason why Kevin & I were taking was because I disagreed. I had XB in my top 15 & I don’t buy his argument either. But, it’s a defensible position. Prospects are subjective.
Also, acting like a move to RF would be disastrous for his fantasy value doesn’t seem so smart to me. Dude’s bat profiles anywhere and he should be part of a great lineup in a hitters’ park for the foreseeable future. Last time I checked 4-cat contributing OFs get picked in the first few rounds all the time. I have heard nothing but good things about his power potential and approach from a scouting perspective, and the stats he’s been putting up as one of the youngest guys in each league he’s played in have been ridiculous. Be happy that he even has a shot at being a megastar SS for a couple years.
It’s not even an arguable point, really. Assuming he puts up the same statistics as a RF as he would at SS, his net gain over the population of SS is always going to be greater than his net gain over the RF. So while his bat may be elite at both positions, he’ll always have more value as an SS.
Agree?
Yeah, I totally agree. I apologize, I think I read too fast–all that looks totally reasonable. Just making the point that it’s well within the range of possibility that Bogaerts could be an early-round pick as an OF, so his possible change of position should probably only scare off people in the shallowest of keeper leagues.
Didn’t Xander Bogaerts play quidditch for the gryffindor team at Hogwarts?
“Goldstein’s rationale drew the ire of many despite the commonly overlooked fact that Kevin is far more connected and knowledgeable than just about everyone who hurled accusations at him.”
He also has a third grade understanding of statistics. You failed to mention his citation of Bogaerts’ “streaky” season.
Like many of you I too think KG made a mistake on Xander. Bogaerts has had a great season, and is more than holding his own in AA. KG however has been in the prospect biz for a while, so while I don’t agree with his view this time, I do still respect his opinion. That said the only reason I can see him dropping Xander out of the top 50 is bc he was nitpicking on Xander more than most other top prospects.
“It’s possible, but then why not correct the oversight? If that was the case he’s been forced to defend a position he doesn’t agree with.”
Because Goldstein is a child.
Listen to his podcast sometime. Literally every point he and his little Gilligan buddy make amounts to, “This is something other people believe, and here’s why it’s wrong.”