PDA

View Full Version : Anderson On Chances


Lip Man 1
01-16-2009, 07:18 PM
Here you go:

http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090116&content_id=3747222&vkey=news_cws&fext=.jsp&c_id=cws

Lip

FedEx227
01-16-2009, 07:28 PM
I think he hit it perfect. No matter how good he does in Spring Training Jerry Owens will be our CFer because of his amazing skill of being "fast".

Merkin even said Owens is a prototypical leadoff hitter? How so? By being fast. He doesn't get on base at a decent rate, doesn't even steal bases all that well.

Also as Merkin mentioned as well, we don't have a whole lot of strikeout pitchers, defense is going to be very important in the continuing growth of Gavin Floyd as well as the futures of Richard/Broadway/Marquez.

champagne030
01-16-2009, 07:31 PM
Here you go:

http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090116&content_id=3747222&vkey=news_cws&fext=.jsp&c_id=cws

Lip

QFT :shrug:

tm1119
01-16-2009, 07:52 PM
I think he hit it perfect. No matter how good he does in Spring Training Jerry Owens will be our CFer because of his amazing skill of being "fast".

Merkin even said Owens is a prototypical leadoff hitter? How so? By being fast. He doesn't get on base at a decent rate, doesn't even steal bases all that well.

Also as Merkin mentioned as well, we don't have a whole lot of strikeout pitchers, defense is going to be very important in the continuing growth of Gavin Floyd as well as the futures of Richard/Broadway/Marquez.

UZR (ultimate zone rating)= The number of runs above or below average a fielder is in both range runs and error runs combined.

Anderson's UZR in 06(106 games startedin CF)= 9.4
Anderson's UZR in 08(94 games total)= 1.4

Jerry Owens' UZR in 07(81 games started in CF)= 6.6

All this talk of how much better Anderson is in the field than Owens in completely overblown and based on nothing. Give Owens the chance to start and be our leadoff hitter. If he fails, he fails. We pretty much know what we are going to get with Anderson already, so why not see what Owens can do?

Daver
01-16-2009, 07:54 PM
UZR (ultimate zone rating)= The number of runs above or below average a fielder is in both range runs and error runs combined.

Anderson's UZR in 06(106 games startedin CF)= 9.4
Anderson's UZR in 08(94 games total)= 1.4

Jerry Owens' UZR in 07(81 games started in CF)= 6.6

All this talk of how much better Anderson is in the field than Owens in completely overblown and based on nothing. Give Owens the chance to start and be our leadoff hitter. If he fails, he fails. We pretty much know what we are going to get with Anderson already, so why not see what Owens can do?

I can find meaningless stats to back up any statement I want to make, what's you point?

Dan Mega
01-16-2009, 07:55 PM
BA nailed it. Nice.

FedEx227
01-16-2009, 07:59 PM
I can find meaningless stats to back up any statement I want to make, what's you point?

I will usually back most stats, but I don't really like any defensive metrics out there. Anderson destroys Owens in the overall fielding, Owens is faster, but Anderson has much better instincts and a light-years better arm.

Overall, I'm not a huge fan of UZR, I like Zone Rating a little bit better. There are no defense metrics that tell the whole story, but you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone around the league both stat-heads or scouts that think Jerry Owens is a better CF than Anderson.

tm1119
01-16-2009, 08:12 PM
I can find meaningless stats to back up any statement I want to make, what's you point?

Please explain to me how that is a meaningless stat? And my point is that the difference between their defensive abilities isnt big enough to give it to 1 player over the other. So if you look past the D you pick the guy who has the most to offer to the team and that is in my opinion Owens.

KRS1
01-16-2009, 08:17 PM
Please explain to me how that is a meaningless stat? And my point is that the difference between their defensive abilities isnt big enough to give it to 1 player over the other. So if you look past the D you pick the guy who has the most to offer to the team and that is in my opinion Owens.

Not to take steal Daver's thunder, but...

Because it is a meaningless stat. I'll just keep it simple, if your eyes tell you that JO compares to BA even the slightest bit, and if there is a stat that makes their D look even the slightest bit close, then both your eyes and your stat are worthless.

munchman33
01-16-2009, 08:22 PM
Not to take steal Daver's thunder, but...

Because it is a meaningless stat. I'll just keep it simple, if your eyes tell you that JO compares to BA even the slightest bit, and if there is a stat that makes their D look even the slightest bit close, then both your eyes and your stat are worthless.

The stat measures range. And it says Anderson has slightly better range than Owens. Which is true. It doesn't include arm strength at all, nor was it meant to.

Something isn't meaningless because you can't interpret it's results correctly.

BadBobbyJenks
01-16-2009, 08:26 PM
Guillen has said that he doesn't need a Rickey Henderson or Vince Coleman-type player at the top of the order. He values on-base percentage as much as flat-out speed and stolen-base potential.

Since when?

Daver
01-16-2009, 08:28 PM
The stat measures range. And it says Anderson has slightly better range than Owens. Which is true. It doesn't include arm strength at all, nor was it meant to.

Something isn't meaningless because you can't interpret it's results correctly.

It measures nothing, range is not how many flyballs you catch, it is how you read the ball off the bat in the first place, which is why speed does not equal range.

tm1119
01-16-2009, 08:29 PM
Not to take steal Daver's thunder, but...

Because it is a meaningless stat. I'll just keep it simple, if your eyes tell you that JO compares to BA even the slightest bit, and if there is a stat that makes their D look even the slightest bit close, then both your eyes and your stat are worthless.

Ha. Ok so I can present stats and you present merely your opinion and you are right? I'm not saying Owens is better than BA, but BA's defensive ability is so overblown around here its not even funny. The fact is that he is good in CF and nothing more, not a game changing CF by any means. And when you factor in that he is a complete black hole in the lineup should indicate that he should be nothing more than a defensive replacement for this team, or any other one for that matter.

KRS1
01-16-2009, 08:29 PM
The stat measures range. And it says Anderson has slightly better range than Owens. Which is true. It doesn't include arm strength at all, nor was it meant to.

Something isn't meaningless because you can't interpret it's results correctly.

It's a made up stat using made up numbers, that (to take a line from Daver) have no basis on reality. Jerry's speed doesn't equate to range, becaus ehe takes horrible routes, gets horrible jumps, and looks hilarious reading the ball. It's just another bull**** nerd stat that people use to try and prove points. If they actually watched a player on the field and not on paper, they would see the fault in their crappy little sabr system.

KRS1
01-16-2009, 08:32 PM
Ha. Ok so I can present stats and you present merely your opinion and you are right? I'm not saying Owens is better than BA, but BA's defensive ability is so overblown around here its not even funny.

The fact is that he is good in CF and nothing more, not a game changing CF by any means. And when you factor in that he is a complete black hole in the lineup should indicate that he should be nothing more than a defensive replacement for this team, or any other one for that matter.

My opinion and that of any sane person who has watched the two in the field. Present all that garbage stats you want, it doesn't change the reality of the situation on the field.

And JO has about as much pop in his bat, and whip to his swing as a t-baller. Yet you insist his offense is somehow more valuable than Brian's D and equally bad O.

munchman33
01-16-2009, 08:35 PM
It measures nothing, range is not how many flyballs you catch, it is how you read the ball off the bat in the first place, which is why speed does not equal range.

It's a made up stat using made up numbers, that (to take a line from Daver) have no basis on reality. Jerry's speed doesn't equate to range, becaus ehe takes horrible routes, gets horrible jumps, and looks hilarious reading the ball. It's just another bull**** nerd stat that people use to try and prove points. If they actually watched a player on the field and not on paper, they would see the fault in their crappy little sabr system.


How you get there isn't nearly as important as getting there. Whether it's your jump or your speed, getting there is the most important thing. Jerry gets there slightly less often than Brian does.

KRS1
01-16-2009, 08:37 PM
How you get there isn't nearly as important as getting there. Whether it's your jump or your speed, getting there is the most important thing. Jerry gets there slightly less often than Brian does.

I'll just leave this one to stand out all by itself.

Daver
01-16-2009, 08:42 PM
How you get there isn't nearly as important as getting there. Whether it's your jump or your speed, getting there is the most important thing. Jerry gets there slightly less often than Brian does.


File under munch's gems of misknowledge that lead to hilarity.

tm1119
01-16-2009, 08:42 PM
My opinion and that of any sane person who has watched the two in the field. Present all that garbage stats you want, it doesn't change the reality of the situation on the field.

And JO has about as much pop in his bat, and whip to his swing as a t-baller. Yet you insist his offense is somehow more valuable than Brian's D and equally bad O.

Since when does a leadoff hitter need pop? Owens gets on base at a higher rate than Anderson and steals plenty of bases to impact the offense. And its clear that you are ignorant and wont acknowledge stats because "nerds" make them, so im just gonna stop arguing with you because you're not gonna change your stance no matter what i say. Guess we'll see whos right when the season starts.

Daver
01-16-2009, 08:44 PM
Since when does a leadoff hitter need pop? Owens gets on base at a higher rate than Anderson and steals plenty of bases to impact the offense. And its clear that you are ignorant and wont acknowledge stats because "nerds" make them, so im just gonna stop arguing with you because you're not gonna change your stance no matter what i say. Guess we'll see whos right when the season starts.

Owens steal percentage last season was what?

He was not called up in Sept. for what reason?

munchman33
01-16-2009, 08:47 PM
File under munch's gems of misknowledge that lead to hilarity.

You know what Daver, you're right. I'd rather have the guy with tremendous instincts just barely miss the ball instead of the guy with normal instincts and tremendous spead who'll make the play. Because no part of range is your speed. :rolleyes:

Craig Grebeck
01-16-2009, 08:54 PM
You know what Daver, you're right. I'd rather have the guy with tremendous instincts just barely miss the ball instead of the guy with normal instincts and tremendous spead who'll make the play. Because no part of range is your speed. :rolleyes:
I don't really think Owens is that much faster in the outfield than Anderson.

munchman33
01-16-2009, 08:57 PM
I don't really think Owens is that much faster in the outfield than Anderson.

It's a bad example. :D:

Owens isn't that lost instinctively in the outfield.

tm1119
01-16-2009, 08:58 PM
Owens steal percentage last season was what?

He was not called up in Sept. for what reason?

And Anderson's career avg. rbi, hr, steals, obp%, slg%, and any other offensive stat you think of are?

And Owens was plagued by injuries last year.

FedEx227
01-16-2009, 08:58 PM
You know what Daver, you're right. I'd rather have the guy with tremendous instincts just barely miss the ball instead of the guy with normal instincts and tremendous spead who'll make the play. Because no part of range is your speed. :rolleyes:

I love me stats. I'm a stat-whore until the end, but you're kidding right?

Have you ever played OF yourself? Doesn't have to be majors, minors... it could be little league, it could be with friends, etc. Fast doesn't equal good in the outfield. I'd consider myself decently fast and I have a lot of trouble playing in the OF. Now I have a friend, that may be a co-host of a certain radio program, that is less fat but 20 times the outfielder I am or probably ever will be. I am speedy, but I'm not that great at reading the ball. Yeah I sometimes make some pretty good plays in gaps that maybe my friend can't get to, but he is a much better consistent fielder than me. There are reasons why Joey Gathright and Carl Crawford aren't world class outfielders.

You can have guys with seemingly below average speed still make great plays in the outfield if they can read a ball's sound and path off the bat.

Again, I love stats, you know me, I'll use them to no end but defensively there are little nuances that just don't show up in numbers. I think you can quantify most aspects of baseball both pitching and offense, but you can't do it with defense, you just can't, there are good little talking points, but nothing solid. Zone Rating isn't bad, but it tells only 20% of the story.

KRS1
01-16-2009, 08:58 PM
You know what Daver, you're right. I'd rather have the guy with tremendous instincts just barely miss the ball instead of the guy with normal instincts and tremendous spead who'll make the play. Because no part of range is your speed. :rolleyes:

Let me know when we get that guy.

KRS1
01-16-2009, 09:00 PM
And its clear that you are ignorant

Says the man who uses stats to measure one outfielder against another.

Craig Grebeck
01-16-2009, 09:00 PM
And Anderson's career avg. rbi, hr, steals, obp%, slg%, and any other offensive stat you think of are?

And Owens was plagued by injuries last year.
How many twenty eight year olds with Owens' skill-set turn into good players out of nowhere? He's shown nothing for, well, pretty much forever (one fantastic outlier of a AA season stands out).

Daver
01-16-2009, 09:06 PM
And Anderson's career avg. rbi, hr, steals, obp%, slg%, and any other offensive stat you think of are?


I don't give a rat's ass, I don't use stats to judge talent, only a fool would do that.

JB98
01-16-2009, 09:06 PM
I really wish the Sox would go outside the organization to get a legit CF and end this silly debate once and for all.

Marqhead
01-16-2009, 09:06 PM
This offseason has been great.

Rocky Soprano
01-16-2009, 09:06 PM
How you get there isn't nearly as important as getting there. Whether it's your jump or your speed, getting there is the most important thing. Jerry gets there slightly less often than Brian does.

You can not honestly believe that!
:?:

Daver
01-16-2009, 09:07 PM
I really wish the Sox would go outside the organization to get a legit CF and end this silly debate once and for all.

I'd rather they just trade Anderson so I can continue to be amused by the arguments over which crappy left fielder should play center.

FedEx227
01-16-2009, 09:08 PM
I don't give a rat's ass, I don't use stats to judge talent, only a fool would do that.

Hey now, I finally agreed with you on something. So let's cool it. :D:

FedEx227
01-16-2009, 09:09 PM
I'd rather they just trade Anderson so I can continue to be amused by the arguments over which crappy left fielder should play center.

=White Sox Baseball.

Rocky Soprano
01-16-2009, 09:11 PM
I'd rather they just trade Anderson so I can continue to be amused by the arguments over which crappy left fielder should play center.

But then you would have threads about how we should bring Anderson back ala the billion garland/garcia threads.

Domeshot17
01-16-2009, 09:12 PM
I really wish the Sox would go outside the organization to get a legit CF and end this silly debate once and for all.

There is the million dollar answer. We are picking between Brian Anderson (who I don't care what your stat says is 10x the OF Owens is when looking at the total package) and Jerry Owens (who pathetically is the superior offensive player).

Brian Anderson sucks at offense. He hits well off minor league pitchers in spring training, but he doesn't do much at the big league level. He is an amazing defensive CF, one of the best in baseball. Jerry Owens is a soft hitting lead off man who has no clue how to get on base at a good clip isn't a great base stealer for his speed and doesn't understand the art of bunting or how to do it. He is much closer to Willie Harris in CF then he is to Pods in LF.

Neither guy should be the answer.

JB98
01-16-2009, 09:19 PM
There is the million dollar answer. We are picking between Brian Anderson (who I don't care what your stat says is 10x the OF Owens is when looking at the total package) and Jerry Owens (who pathetically is the superior offensive player).

Brian Anderson sucks at offense. He hits well off minor league pitchers in spring training, but he doesn't do much at the big league level. He is an amazing defensive CF, one of the best in baseball. Jerry Owens is a soft hitting lead off man who has no clue how to get on base at a good clip isn't a great base stealer for his speed and doesn't understand the art of bunting or how to do it. He is much closer to Willie Harris in CF then he is to Pods in LF.

Neither guy should be the answer.

CF has been a sore point for three years now. IMO, neither Brian Anderson nor Jerry Owens is a long-term solution.

If I had to choose between the two, I would pick Anderson. He is the superior defender, and CF is a defensive position. But the organization is going to give Owens every opportunity because they want a basestealer leading off.

I really wish the Sox would forget about these two mediocre-at-best players and find somebody else.

DaveIsHere
01-16-2009, 09:23 PM
I really wish the Sox would forget about these two mediocre-at-best players and find somebody else.

ROWAND, We had him and let him GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I admit I am a Rowand fanboy, wouldn't have this issue if he was still around.:D:

Daver
01-16-2009, 09:31 PM
ROWAND, We had him and let him GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I admit I am a Rowand fanboy, wouldn't have this issue if he was still around.:D:

Yeah, we'd have a left fielder playing center.

jabrch
01-16-2009, 09:34 PM
I really wish the Sox would forget about these two mediocre-at-best players and find somebody else.

The hope is that Jordan Danks is that player. The question is what we do for the next two-four years while we wait.

JB98
01-16-2009, 09:36 PM
The hope is that Jordan Danks is that player. The question is what we do for the next two-four years while we wait.

The list of OF free agents isn't great, either. I was looking it over, and there isn't anyone there I would want as the Sox CF this year.

jabrch
01-16-2009, 09:42 PM
The list of OF free agents isn't great, either. I was looking it over, and there isn't anyone there I would want as the Sox CF this year.

Worse news - it isn't any better next year. Ankiel is probably the best of the bunch.

tm1119
01-16-2009, 09:42 PM
I don't give a rat's ass, I don't use stats to judge talent, only a fool would do that.

Oh ok so lets just sign Anderson to a life long contract and let him play CF the entire time then. Who cares if he continuously fails year after year like he already has. Talent that doesnt show up in any aspect whatsoever on the baseball field is the only thing that matters.

jabrch
01-16-2009, 09:48 PM
Oh ok so lets just sign Anderson to a life long contract and let him play CF the entire time then. Who cares if he continuously fails year after year like he already has. Talent that doesnt show up in any aspect whatsoever on the baseball field is the only thing that matters.


I missed where that was proposed. Can you show me? I also missed the part where people asked for BA to be given sainthood. I missed where people claimed JO is the next Ricky Henderson. And I missed where Dewayne Wise's bust is being made in Cooperstown.

So returning to reality... We have a few options on the roster, none a sure thing, but certainly there is some talent and potential there. ST will give them a chance to prove themselves. And it is still only 1/15, so the roster is not set yet.

Daver
01-16-2009, 09:49 PM
Oh ok so lets just sign Anderson to a life long contract and let him play CF the entire time then. Who cares if he continuously fails year after year like he already has. Talent that doesnt show up in any aspect whatsoever on the baseball field is the only thing that matters.


Where did I say Anderson should play?

MarkZ35
01-16-2009, 09:51 PM
You can compare some stats but there are other stats that you can't compare on paper. Such as that outfield range. Scouts are often out early to watch outfielders track fly balls not watch them hit. Same with infielders. Just because one infielder has a better fielding percentage doesn't make one better then the other. Like Hawk would always say about Crede, he would never win a gold glove because he gets to too many balls. Where other infielders don't get to as many balls or ones that are routine for Crede are web gems for others. I just think this discussion is pointless because neither of them have proven they deserve to start so let the bast one in spring training win the job.

turners56
01-16-2009, 10:17 PM
UZR (ultimate zone rating)= The number of runs above or below average a fielder is in both range runs and error runs combined.

Anderson's UZR in 06(106 games startedin CF)= 9.4
Anderson's UZR in 08(94 games total)= 1.4

Jerry Owens' UZR in 07(81 games started in CF)= 6.6

All this talk of how much better Anderson is in the field than Owens in completely overblown and based on nothing. Give Owens the chance to start and be our leadoff hitter. If he fails, he fails. We pretty much know what we are going to get with Anderson already, so why not see what Owens can do?

Jerry Owens throws like a girl. At least BA has an adequate arm.

The fact that BA had a 9.4 rating two years ago but had a rating of 8 less last year doesn't seem to make any sense. BA's not losing a step, he's too young for that. If anything, that just proves that the UZR stat isn't that accurate.

Tragg
01-16-2009, 10:23 PM
Give Owens the chance to start and be our leadoff hitter. If he fails, he fails.
Owens has had a chance - a longer unabated chance than Anderson ever had, and he flunked. (Ozzie put him at leadoff and, despite his poor play, left him there for 2 months; Ozzie wouldn't let Anderson play 2 days in the 9 hole without yanking him). Why should he get another chance when his skills are so limited? And to suggest his D is similar to Anderson's is laughable.
Owens shouldn't be on the 40 man, much less start.

FedEx227
01-16-2009, 10:31 PM
Jerry Owens throws like a girl. At least BA has an adequate arm.

The fact that BA had a 9.4 rating two years ago but had a rating of 8 less last year doesn't seem to make any sense. BA's not losing a step, he's too young for that. If anything, that just proves that the UZR stat isn't that accurate.

The stat does seem to be a bit weird.

Grady Sizemore's UZR
05: 3.3
06: 12.3
07: 5.3
08: 11

Torii Hunter's UZR
02: -3.6
03: 11.3
04: -2.2
05: 1.3

:scratch::scratch:

I think it's back to the drawing board with UZR. There should not be such extreme peaks and rises. Are we to believe Grady was average in 05, got really good in 06, then back to average in 2007, only to rise again in 2008 all in his mid-late 20s?

WhiteSox5187
01-17-2009, 03:50 AM
Owens has had a chance - a longer unabated chance than Anderson ever had, and he flunked. (Ozzie put him at leadoff and, despite his poor play, left him there for 2 months; Ozzie wouldn't let Anderson play 2 days in the 9 hole without yanking him). Why should he get another chance when his skills are so limited? And to suggest his D is similar to Anderson's is laughable.
Owens shouldn't be on the 40 man, much less start.
I think the reason Owens got more of a chance to start was because of the fact that by the time he first came up, we were done. With Anderson we were in the middle of a pennant race and with Pods just not gettig on base and Uribe being, well, Uribe, he couldn't afford to give away offense in the nine spot.

Anyways, I really cannot overstate how much I want to avoid Owens in CF. Let Getz or Lillebridge leadoff. ANYONE BUT OWENS!

Ranger
01-17-2009, 04:46 AM
How you get there isn't nearly as important as getting there. Whether it's your jump or your speed, getting there is the most important thing. Jerry gets there slightly less often than Brian does.

Correct. For the most part. If Owens weren't as fast as he is, it would be a problem. But he is, so it's not. BA's instincts are certainly better, but Owens is able to cover ground. I've read a few posts hear that have used evidence from "scouts" that he is not...therefore, I must be talking to the wrong talent evaluators because they tend to think he can. He's not great -- nobody will argue that he is -- but he's good enough. Jerry Owens' deficiencies do not lie in his ability to chase down fly balls...they lie in his bat.

Lillian
01-17-2009, 06:16 AM
What we forget is that B.A. is a kid with talent, albeit still unrealized. This was a 5 tool prospect, and a good athlete coming out of college.
Some of you know that I often refer to the Ted Williamsī quote about young players needing about 1,000 at bats in the Big Leagues just to figure it out.
Well Brian has still only had about 600 at bats.

Moreover, Iīd take his last yearīs stats projected over a full season, which would have given him about 40 doubles, 25 homers and 80 RBIs.
For a Centerfielder who plays great defense, Iīd be satisfied with that, wouldnīt you?
Oh, I know, his average and OBP were terrible. Yes, but he didnīt have regular playing time, he faced way too many lefties for a right handed hitter, who seems to actually hit righties for a better average, and he still produced at a pretty decent rate.
He still doesnīt solve the lead off problem, but his speed on the bases is fine.

I really wish that we could see what he could do playing a full season, and fill the lead off spot with a second baseman. There is still a chance that Lillibridge could win that competition over Getz and Nix. I know that he is a SS, but donīt you think that he could handle Second, if he can hit and steal bases? Heīs probably a better baseball player than Jerry Owens, and Second is less important defensively than CF.

Iīd like to see Lillibridge lead off, and TCM bat in the number two hole. Alexei is an aggressive, fast ball hitter who makes enough contact to hit well in that spot. His speed would make him a hard guy to double up, which would help keep him from hitting into too many rally killing double plays.

pistolesatdawn
01-17-2009, 07:39 AM
I really wish the Sox would go outside the organization to get a legit CF and end this silly debate once and for all.

I'll agree with this 100%. BA's by far the better defensive center fielder, but it's like pulling your own teeth out with your bare hands watching him at the plate sometimes, well, most of the time actually and Owens isn't that much better IMO. And anybody who thinks Owens is a comparable CF needs to lay down the pipe. Don't we all remember that painful two months at the end of 2007 when it seemed like anything that was a catchable fly ball to the gaps, Owens for the life of him couldn't call off the corner outfielders? It seemed to me at least that there were several times it looked like JD was about to lay him out right there on the field.

Lillian
01-17-2009, 07:56 AM
Iīd like to add that anecdotally, it seemed to me that every time B. A. played last year, he did something to contribute.

Frater Perdurabo
01-17-2009, 07:57 AM
If the choice is between the two, give me BA.

Of course I'd like to find a high-quality defensive CF who can also lead off. Unfortunately, those guys aren't available because their current teams find them so valuable and don't want to lose them.

Ultimately I'd like to find a different position player to lead off (via trade), and go with BA's defense in CF, batting ninth.

Noneck
01-17-2009, 10:01 AM
Jerry Owens' deficiencies do not lie in his ability to chase down fly balls...they lie in his bat.
How about his glass arm?

EMachine10
01-17-2009, 11:49 AM
What we forget is that B.A. is a kid with talent, albeit still unrealized. This was a 5 tool prospect, and a good athlete coming out of college.
Some of you know that I often refer to the Ted Williamsī quote about young players needing about 1,000 at bats in the Big Leagues just to figure it out.
Well Brian has still only had about 600 at bats.

Moreover, Iīd take his last yearīs stats projected over a full season, which would have given him about 40 doubles, 25 homers and 80 RBIs.
For a Centerfielder who plays great defense, Iīd be satisfied with that, wouldnīt you?
Oh, I know, his average and OBP were terrible. Yes, but he didnīt have regular playing time, he faced way too many lefties for a right handed hitter, who seems to actually hit righties for a better average, and he still produced at a pretty decent rate.
He still doesnīt solve the lead off problem, but his speed on the bases is fine.

I really wish that we could see what he could do playing a full season, and fill the lead off spot with a second baseman. There is still a chance that Lillibridge could win that competition over Getz and Nix. I know that he is a SS, but donīt you think that he could handle Second, if he can hit and steal bases? Heīs probably a better baseball player than Jerry Owens, and Second is less important defensively than CF.

Iīd like to see Lillibridge lead off, and TCM bat in the number two hole. Alexei is an aggressive, fast ball hitter who makes enough contact to hit well in that spot. His speed would make him a hard guy to double up, which would help keep him from hitting into too many rally killing double plays.
I agree with you when it comes to Anderson.

slavko
01-17-2009, 11:50 AM
How about his glass arm?

Batting eye bad, ability to read fly balls bad. Maybe he needs eye glasses? To go with the glass arm. Throws a ball and swings a bat like a girl (sorry, girls). He's in a fortunate spot because of the leadoff situation, the solution to which is most likely to come from the second base position. If it does, Owens should be dumped. If it doesn't, Anderson should be released for the guy's own sake.

Such is the outcome of a system and a front office that can't produce or trade for a real leadoff man.

pearso66
01-17-2009, 03:43 PM
Correct. For the most part. If Owens weren't as fast as he is, it would be a problem. But he is, so it's not. BA's instincts are certainly better, but Owens is able to cover ground. I've read a few posts hear that have used evidence from "scouts" that he is not...therefore, I must be talking to the wrong talent evaluators because they tend to think he can. He's not great -- nobody will argue that he is -- but he's good enough. Jerry Owens' deficiencies do not lie in his ability to chase down fly balls...they lie in his bat.


That's the problem, both of our CFers problems are with the bat. With that being the case, I'd give the job to BA. In a perfect world, Lillibridge would win out at 2nd, and be a good leadoff hitter, and they could put BA in CF. Knowing Ozzie though, even if Lillibridge won and leadoff, Owens would probably be starting in CF over Anderson because he's a left handed bat.

veeter
01-17-2009, 04:00 PM
I don't really think Owens is that much faster in the outfield than Anderson.I don't either. And comparing their outfield play isn't even a fair fight. Brian is also VERY fast around the bases. He's not a base stealer, but who is? Owens may be very lucky to get through spring training healthy. By June, Owens may be an after-thought once again.

CLR01
01-17-2009, 04:44 PM
I ST will give them a chance to prove themselves. And it is still only 1/15, so the roster is not set yet.


No it won't. If it comes down to Anderson and Owens when spring training rolls around Owens will be your starting CFer on opening day. Sure Ozzie will talk about there being a competition and everything but unless BA hits 1.250 he won't have a chance, just like the last two years of supposed competitions.

Ranger
01-17-2009, 04:50 PM
How about his glass arm?

The arm isn't nearly as bad as some people make it out to be. He's not Vlad or anything, but let's temper the over exaggeration. His arm is adequate enough to play that position. The Sox could still win with him playing CF, but if he can't do the things they need him to do at the plate then there is a better in-house option.

The only reason Owens is getting consideration is because he has the potential of being a leadoff hitter. Anderson does not. He's definitely not my first choice to play CF, but this is why he's being so strongly considered.

jabrch
01-17-2009, 05:01 PM
His arm is adequate enough to play that position.

Can you name 3 CFs with worse arms? Pierre...Damon...I can't think of any more.

Ranger
01-17-2009, 05:09 PM
Can you name 3 CFs with worse arms? Pierre...Damon...I can't think of any more.

I believe in trying to disprove my point you've actually supported it. Juan Pierre and Johnny Damon were crucial to teams that won championships. You can win with poor arms in centerfield if those players provide something else for you...which is exactly the argument I'm trying to make with Owens:

His defense is not what would hold the Sox back...it's his offense. And I'm not convinced he can give them the type of offensive numbers they need. If he did, however, his defense would not be an issue.

jabrch
01-17-2009, 05:16 PM
I believe in trying to disprove my point you've actually supported it. Juan Pierre and Johnny Damon were crucial to teams that won championships. You can win with poor arms in centerfield if those players provide something else for you...which is exactly the argument I'm trying to make with Owens:

His defense is not what would hold the Sox back...it's his offense. And I'm not convinced he can give them the type of offensive numbers they need. If he did, however, his defense would not be an issue.

Wait a sec buddy...You said his arm wasn't that terrible. You didn't say that you could win with a terrible arm. Of course you can. We can list all the crappy players that have been a part of a winner til we are blue in the face.

I'm not trying to disprove your point at all. I'm fine with Owens in CF if he beats out BA, and we have no other options brought in - for exactly the reason you were saying. But you specifically said his arm is "adequate" I'm asking your opinion - can you tell me who has a worse arm than him? I listed the guys I know for sure. Any others?

Ranger
01-17-2009, 05:22 PM
"Wait a sec, buddy"? What are you, a hall monitor? jabrch, read this again:

He's not Vlad or anything, but let's temper the over exaggeration. His arm is adequate enough to play that position. The Sox could still win with him playing CF, but if he can't do the things they need him to do at the plate then there is a better in-house option.


I never said his arm was great, I said it was good enough to play the position if he were able to provide offense. "Good enough" is the definition of "adequate".

Daver
01-17-2009, 05:24 PM
"Wait a sec, buddy"? What are you, a hall monitor? jabrch, read this again:



I never said his arm was great, I said it was good enough to play the position if he were able to provide offense. "Good enough" is the definition of "adequate".

Your definition of adequate and my definition of adequate are mutually exclusive.

Ranger
01-17-2009, 05:31 PM
Your definition of adequate and my definition of adequate are mutually exclusive.

As I've been saying, my definition of adequate exists with a condition. If he can't give them the necessary offense for his spot in the order, the Sox can do much better in CF. If he can, then the total package of Owens' defense is adequate enough to play CF.

However, like most other people, I am not convinced he can do that.

The bottom line for me is that I'm not worried about his play in the field, I'm concerned with what he does at the plate.

russ99
01-17-2009, 05:43 PM
C'mon, let's be honest here. While Owens isn't a gold glover by any stretch of the imagination, he's not any worse than Swisher and far and above gimpy Ken Griffey Jr, the two guys who held down starting CF last season.

So his defense isn't a drastic drop over we've had last year, in fact it could be a little bit better.

Offensively, despite what some people claim, he can hit the ball on a line and he can hit it out of the infield. Those who think otherwise weren't watching the games in 2007, and smack of anti-slap hitting (or carryover anti-Pods) bias. Not every player on the Sox roster has to be a power hitter...

Where Owens is valuable is in his 32 of 40 succcessful steals in 93 MLB games in '07 vs. MLB pitchers and MLB catchers. Demean him with accusations of leg injuries and ineffectiveness along with mediocre AAA numbers, but in reality the guy is a proven base-stealer at the big league level, and his success in 2009 solely will be determined by how often he can get on base.

It also seems some of you are carrying the Anderson torch a bit too closely and are blinded to the fact that Owens (if healthy) is at least deserving of a shot at batting leadoff for the Sox.

Besides, BA has been given lots of chances, so why deny Owens his??

Daver
01-17-2009, 05:43 PM
The bottom line for me is that I'm not worried about his play in the field, I'm concerned with what he does at the plate.

Baseball is not an offensive sport, just look at the Sox throughout the nineties, they had stacked line up and couldn't win a playoff game.

chisoxfanatic
01-17-2009, 05:54 PM
I really wish the Sox would go outside the organization to get a legit CF and end this silly debate once and for all.
I do too. I actually talked about this very topic with the guy sitting next to me at the Blackhawks game. Like me, he too is a big Brian Anderson fan; but, we both agree that it would be nice to have a true CF starting about 90% of the games with BA being used sparingly as a starter and in defensive substitution situations in the late innings.

If Jerry Owens even cracks the opening day roster, we are going to have problems here.

Ranger
01-17-2009, 05:59 PM
Baseball is not an offensive sport, just look at the Sox throughout the nineties, they had stacked line up and couldn't win a playoff game.

Daver, at some point it has to be offensive. We're not talking about all 9 players on the field...you have to take it position by position. If your centerfielder happens to leadoff and gives a .300 AVG, .370 OBP, and steals 50+ bases, his offensive production will far outweigh any benefit you'll get from a a guy with a good arm that gives you 10 assists per season. The odds of a leadoff hitter making a significant difference for his team on a daily basis are greater than those of a guy in CF with a good arm making a daily difference.

You can afford to do that at the CF position (like the '03 Marlins and '04 Red Sox did) if those players make an impact on the batting order.

Craig Grebeck
01-17-2009, 06:00 PM
Daver, at some point it has to be offensive. We're not talking about all 9 players on the field...you have to take it position by position. If your centerfielder happens to leadoff and gives a .300 AVG, .370 OBP, and steals 50+ bases, his offensive production will far outweigh any benefit you'll get from a a guy with a good arm that gives you 10 assists per season. The odds of a leadoff hitter making a significant difference for his team on a daily basis are greater than those of a guy in CF with a good arm making a daily difference.

You can afford to do that at the CF position (like the '03 Marlins and '04 Red Sox did) if those players make an impact on the batting order.
Jerry Owens is not capable of such production. The AL is not the Frontier League.

Ranger
01-17-2009, 06:03 PM
Jerry Owens is not capable of such production. The AL is not the Frontier League.

Read what I've been writing. I'm not saying he can. If he were able to, though, I'm just saying his defense would be sufficient. But this conversation is useless if he can't provide offense.

Craig Grebeck
01-17-2009, 06:05 PM
Read what I've been writing. I'm not saying he can. If he were able to, though, I'm just saying his defense would be sufficient. But this conversation is useless if he can't provide offense.
So, this conversation is useless.

Daver
01-17-2009, 06:16 PM
Daver, at some point it has to be offensive. We're not talking about all 9 players on the field...you have to take it position by position. If your centerfielder happens to leadoff and gives a .300 AVG, .370 OBP, and steals 50+ bases, his offensive production will far outweigh any benefit you'll get from a a guy with a good arm that gives you 10 assists per season. The odds of a leadoff hitter making a significant difference for his team on a daily basis are greater than those of a guy in CF with a good arm making a daily difference.

You can afford to do that at the CF position (like the '03 Marlins and '04 Red Sox did) if those players make an impact on the batting order.

The Chicago White Sox have already traded offense for defense at catcher, it is very likely they are going to have a third baseman that fields the ball with his face, a second baseman that is average at best, a rightfielder that has declining range, and a left fielder that is about average, throw Owens in center and you have one of the worst defensive outfields in all of baseball.

I pity the starting rotation.

Tragg
01-17-2009, 06:33 PM
I believe in trying to disprove my point you've actually supported it. Juan Pierre and Johnny Damon were crucial to teams that won championships. You can win with poor arms in centerfield if those players provide something else for you...which is exactly the argument I'm trying to make with Owens:

There is no question that leadoff hitter is crucial. The problem is that there is little evidence that Owens can do that capably.
Damon drives the ball - Owens cannot. Damon creates his own hits and Damon has plate patience; Owens depends on his ground balls sneaking between infielders. The two aren't in the same class.

Can owens come up with a PIerre-like freak year? Maybe....once or twice. But the odds aren't very good (they aren't good for Pierre doing it either). Pods couldn't replicate 2005 and he was useless when he couldn't....and his obp in 2005 was only .350 as it is.

So why put a lousy defender out there who has marginal hitting skills just because he can steal bases - and we dont' really need steals with Quentin, Thome, Konerko and Dye hitting behind him.

Getz or Missle should lead off. Anderson, who is no worse a hitter than Owens (and who didn't get the benefit of 2 months unabated at leadoff) should play CF, given the current roster and current lack of range in the outfield.

JB98
01-17-2009, 07:51 PM
I do too. I actually talked about this very topic with the guy sitting next to me at the Blackhawks game. Like me, he too is a big Brian Anderson fan; but, we both agree that it would be nice to have a true CF starting about 90% of the games with BA being used sparingly as a starter and in defensive substitution situations in the late innings.

If Jerry Owens even cracks the opening day roster, we are going to have problems here.

I would be fine with Anderson playing the role you describe, fourth outfielder, late-inning defense, etc.

The problem is right now he's the best CF option on the roster, and I don't think he's good enough to play everyday.

cards press box
01-17-2009, 08:16 PM
Daver, at some point it has to be offensive. We're not talking about all 9 players on the field...you have to take it position by position. If your centerfielder happens to leadoff and gives a .300 AVG, .370 OBP, and steals 50+ bases, his offensive production will far outweigh any benefit you'll get from a a guy with a good arm that gives you 10 assists per season. The odds of a leadoff hitter making a significant difference for his team on a daily basis are greater than those of a guy in CF with a good arm making a daily difference.

You can afford to do that at the CF position (like the '03 Marlins and '04 Red Sox did) if those players make an impact on the batting order.


To win, a team needs balance. So, it isn't all offense but it isn't all defense, either. Winning teams, like the 2005 Sox, usually have the ability to do everything to at least some degree of proficiency. If the Sox could field nine Willie Mays (and excell at all aspects of the game), then great. But that's not realistic. No one does that.

The Sox may have help on the way in the outfield and infield with Jordan Danks and Gordon Beckham. But that is probably down the line. As for 2009, I still expect the Sox to add another outfielder. The recent Cuban emigre, Yasser Gomez, is intriguing. Gomez is reported to be fast and he has a career average of .331 in Cuba. Maybe the Sox sign him and he is the Sox starting center fielder.

Another Cuban emigre, pitcher Yadel Marti, is also intriguing. Marti has a career ERA of 3.23 and, last year, went 4-2 with a 3.15 ERA in 15 games. Could Marti be in the mix for the Sox rotation?

Ranger
01-17-2009, 09:12 PM
There is no question that leadoff hitter is crucial. The problem is that there is little evidence that Owens can do that capably.
Damon drives the ball - Owens cannot. Damon creates his own hits and Damon has plate patience; Owens depends on his ground balls sneaking between infielders. The two aren't in the same class.

Can owens come up with a PIerre-like freak year? Maybe....once or twice. But the odds aren't very good (they aren't good for Pierre doing it either). Pods couldn't replicate 2005 and he was useless when he couldn't....and his obp in 2005 was only .350 as it is.

So why put a lousy defender out there who has marginal hitting skills just because he can steal bases - and we dont' really need steals with Quentin, Thome, Konerko and Dye hitting behind him.

Getz or Missle should lead off. Anderson, who is no worse a hitter than Owens (and who didn't get the benefit of 2 months unabated at leadoff) should play CF, given the current roster and current lack of range in the outfield.

We agree, except I don't really know about Alexei in that spot. At least not yet. His OBP isn't really high enough (doesn't walk much). He did a good job of getting on base for about a two month stretch, but he regressed in August and September. He might be better in the middle of the order.

Getz may be able to do the job, though. By all accounts, he is a perfect #2-type hitter and there have been plenty of winning teams to use a #2 hitter to leadoff.

Noneck
01-17-2009, 09:27 PM
"Wait a sec, buddy"? What are you, a hall monitor?

That cracked me up.

jabrch
01-17-2009, 10:30 PM
"Wait a sec, buddy"? What are you, a hall monitor? jabrch, read this again:



I never said his arm was great, I said it was good enough to play the position if he were able to provide offense. "Good enough" is the definition of "adequate".


Sorry if I was being to casual with you...

Sir - in no way is his arm "adequate" as you claim it is. I'm just asking who you think has an arm as bad or worse than JO. I can name 2. I struggle after that.

I'm not saying I can't live with him in CF. I'm not saying we can't win a WS with him in CF. All I am saying his he throws a baseball only slightly better than Daver's ass chews gum.

HBaines03
01-17-2009, 10:41 PM
What is more important to this team? Jerry Owens as our missing leadoff hitter who doesn't play defense well and struggles to get on consistantly. Brian Anderson who struggles mightly with the bat but provides about as solid a defense in centerfield as anyone in baseball. In my opinion, Jerry Owens is getting the nod due to offensive needs but I don't think what Owens offers on offense outways what Anderson brings on defense to a pitching staff that is young and will not strike guys out alot.

jabrch
01-17-2009, 10:46 PM
If your centerfielder happens to leadoff and gives a .300 AVG, .370 OBP, and steals 50+ bases, his offensive production will far outweigh any benefit you'll get from a a guy with a good arm that gives you 10 assists per season.

Get me that guy - and I'll take him even if he throws the ball like Daver's ass chews gum. Get me a guy hitting .260/.320/.320 - and he damn well better field the position at least at a Top 15ish level. JOs arm would be fine on a great hitter. It's not fine on JO.

Don't get me wrong - if it is JO, and he's the best option we have, I'm fine with it. I'm behind it all the way. Go JO. But I'll walk into it acknowledging that it is a weak link. That's ok. You can win with guys like that. No reason to piss and moan and make it sound like the end of the world. But there is also no reason to not look at JO objectively - specifically in the case of his thorwing arm.

Tragg
01-17-2009, 11:21 PM
. His OBP isn't really high enough (doesn't walk much). He did a good job of getting on base for about a two month stretch, but he regressed in August and September. He might be better in the middle of the order..

His OBP isn't near good enough.....i just can't think of anyone else. He's a good hitter and is probably the best baserunner on the team.

If you have one of those .370 OBP guys, bring him on...haven't seen that since Tim Raines.

Daver
01-17-2009, 11:32 PM
His OBP isn't near good enough.....i just can't think of anyone else. He's a good hitter and is probably the best baserunner on the team.

If you have one of those .370 OBP guys, bring him on...haven't seen that since Tim Raines.

A.J. Pierzynski is easily the best base runner on the team, base running has nothing to do with speed.

Tragg
01-17-2009, 11:53 PM
A.J. Pierzynski is easily the best base runner on the team, base running has nothing to do with speed.
I get that. Usually I can only see highlights, but Missle scored from first on a lot of doubles. - and even one single, if I recall.

It's Dankerific
01-18-2009, 05:13 AM
This discussion is hilarious. How some of you can even pretend that BA has a CHANCE of winning the job in ST is astounding. BA will be starting in CF (for the White Sox) about the time that Ozzie and Jay are blogging together.

Our only hope is that JO takes another injury for the team.

Ranger
01-18-2009, 06:27 AM
Get me that guy - and I'll take him even if he throws the ball like Daver's ass chews gum. Get me a guy hitting .260/.320/.320 - and he damn well better field the position at least at a Top 15ish level. JOs arm would be fine on a great hitter. It's not fine on JO.

Don't get me wrong - if it is JO, and he's the best option we have, I'm fine with it. I'm behind it all the way. Go JO. But I'll walk into it acknowledging that it is a weak link. That's ok. You can win with guys like that. No reason to piss and moan and make it sound like the end of the world. But there is also no reason to not look at JO objectively - specifically in the case of his thorwing arm.

I'm absolutely looking at him objectively. Has speed and can play the field at an adequate level. May not be able to reach base consistently and doesn't drive the ball. That's on objective analysis of Owens.

Tragg, a .370 OBP is wishful. I would settle for .340, to be perfectly honest.

tick53
01-18-2009, 12:12 PM
Alas, the can of worms again has been opened.

JB98
01-18-2009, 01:05 PM
This discussion is hilarious. How some of you can even pretend that BA has a CHANCE of winning the job in ST is astounding. BA will be starting in CF (for the White Sox) about the time that Ozzie and Jay are blogging together.

Our only hope is that JO takes another injury for the team.

How do you figure? I think there is wide agreement here that - barring an acquistion from outside the organization - it is Owens' job to lose.

kittle42
01-18-2009, 01:25 PM
I really wish the Sox would go outside the organization to get a legit CF and end this silly debate once and for all.

Amen. Nothing better than this continued "My sack of **** stinks less than yours" argument involving Anderson and Owens.

kittle42
01-18-2009, 01:26 PM
but provides about as solid a defense in centerfield as anyone in baseball.

Anderson = the new Rowand. A solid CF whom White Sox fans like to make into someone on par with the best in the game.

FedEx227
01-18-2009, 01:34 PM
Anderson = the new Rowand. A solid CF whom White Sox fans like to make into someone on par with the best in the game.

Please let me know where anyone has ever said that?

Why does that bull**** come up in every single Brian Anderson argument?

"Oh yeah I forgot Anderson was the new Willie Mays"

He's not, as people have said, it's pretty much a tallest midget contest, yet for 3 years now the tallest midget has been lied too and messed around with all the while starting gigs have gone to clearly undeserving people.

Quentin would not have been on the major league roster last year if not for Owens getting hurt, realize that, and see how messed up the White Sox outfielder personnel decisions have been over the past few years.

Ozzie can mention the word competition all he wants, but when it's all said and done barring injury Jerry "My Tool is Fast" Owens will be our starting CFer.

That's the point of the article and the point of this discussion. No, Anderson is not great, if we had a good CFer on this team I wouldn't even mention the name Brian Anderson, however between Owens and Anderson there is very few ways you can make a case for Owens outside of "fast". Yet, he will start while Anderson will again see limited, inconsistent roles on this team because he had a bad 4 months in 2006.

jabrch
01-18-2009, 01:54 PM
I'm absolutely looking at him objectively. Has speed and can play the field at an adequate level.

I'm going to agree to disagree with you. Other than being fast, he is below average in any way you'd measure a CF. And back to the original point, which I still haven't heard you answer, since you say his arm is adequate, can you name guys who have worse CF arms than Owens, besides Pierre and Damon? I can not.

HBaines03
01-18-2009, 02:18 PM
Anderson = the new Rowand. A solid CF whom White Sox fans like to make into someone on par with the best in the game.
Anderson gets a better jump, covers more ground, and has a better arm than Rowand.
Yes, I am a Brian Anderson fan because I'm tired of watching lazy, slow guys sauntering all over in CF allowing flyballs to drop for base hits that Anderson could get to. I watched Jerry Owens get booed viciously, in a spring training game, because he didn't hustle over to cutoff a double and allowed the runner to get a triple due to a weak arm.
Guillen's man love for JO has to end!

tm1119
01-18-2009, 02:33 PM
Please let me know where anyone has ever said that?

Why does that bull**** come up in every single Brian Anderson argument?

"Oh yeah I forgot Anderson was the new Willie Mays"

He's not, as people have said, it's pretty much a tallest midget contest, yet for 3 years now the tallest midget has been lied too and messed around with all the while starting gigs have gone to clearly undeserving people.

Quentin would not have been on the major league roster last year if not for Owens getting hurt, realize that, and see how messed up the White Sox outfielder personnel decisions have been over the past few years.

Ozzie can mention the word competition all he wants, but when it's all said and done barring injury Jerry "My Tool is Fast" Owens will be our starting CFer.

That's the point of the article and the point of this discussion. No, Anderson is not great, if we had a good CFer on this team I wouldn't even mention the name Brian Anderson, however between Owens and Anderson there is very few ways you can make a case for Owens outside of "fast". Yet, he will start while Anderson will again see limited, inconsistent roles on this team because he had a bad 4 months in 2006.

Please, the guy has had 600 AB's and has yet to show that he can even be anywhere close to average. He's been pathetic at the plate his whole career and wouldn't even be on most teams major league roster.

Madscout
01-18-2009, 04:04 PM
Please, the guy has had 600 AB's and has yet to show that he can even be anywhere close to average. He's been pathetic at the plate his whole career and wouldn't even be on most teams major league roster.
Bull****. There are plenty of teams in the NL who would have him on their roster. A couple in the AL, too.

kittle42
01-18-2009, 04:43 PM
Please let me know where anyone has ever said that?

Why does that bull**** come up in every single Brian Anderson argument?

"Oh yeah I forgot Anderson was the new Willie Mays"

1. Willie Mays is not Aaron Rowand.
2. I was quoting the post I was responding to: "but provides about as solid a defense in centerfield as anyone in baseball."

Thus, he is saying Anderson is about as good in CF on defense as anyone in baseball, which is an exaggeration akin to what people here used to say about Rowand's defense.

Have I explained myself well enough?

kittle42
01-18-2009, 04:44 PM
Anderson gets a better jump, covers more ground, and has a better arm than Rowand.
Yes, I am a Brian Anderson fan because I'm tired of watching lazy, slow guys sauntering all over in CF allowing flyballs to drop for base hits that Anderson could get to. I watched Jerry Owens get booed viciously, in a spring training game, because he didn't hustle over to cutoff a double and allowed the runner to get a triple due to a weak arm.
Guillen's man love for JO has to end!

Agreed, man, but Anderson isn't the answer. A real offensive and defensive CF is the answer. Sadly, the Sox do not seem to be interested in acquiring one since Hunter fell through last offseason.

FedEx227
01-18-2009, 04:49 PM
1. Willie Mays is not Aaron Rowand.
2. I was quoting the post I was responding to: "but provides about as solid a defense in centerfield as anyone in baseball."

Thus, he is saying Anderson is about as good in CF on defense as anyone in baseball, which is an exaggeration akin to what people here used to say about Rowand's defense.

Have I explained myself well enough?

Not really because a lot of scouts and people around baseball would definitely agree that he's one of the better defenders in baseball, he hits like **** nobody will argue that. I doubt that's too much of an exaggeration to say he's one of the top defenders in the game.

Anybody who said that about Rowand was watching it through a pipe dream of a few dives in New York and a wall crash in Philadelphia but could see through that fascade to see a guy who let balls bounce behind him plenty of times and who missed cutoff men on throws with regularity.

The best defensive SS in the game might be Adam Everett and John McDonald they've stuck on MLB rosters despite being completely offensively inept.

Daver
01-18-2009, 05:12 PM
The best defensive SS in the game might be Adam Everett and John McDonald they've stuck on MLB rosters despite being completely offensively inept.

The best defensive SS in the game plays third base for the Yankees.

kittle42
01-18-2009, 05:16 PM
Not really because a lot of scouts and people around baseball would definitely agree that he's one of the better defenders in baseball, he hits like **** nobody will argue that. I doubt that's too much of an exaggeration to say he's one of the top defenders in the game.

Now that's a much better response. :D:

tm1119
01-18-2009, 06:24 PM
Not really because a lot of scouts and people around baseball would definitely agree that he's one of the better defenders in baseball, he hits like **** nobody will argue that. I doubt that's too much of an exaggeration to say he's one of the top defenders in the game.

Anybody who said that about Rowand was watching it through a pipe dream of a few dives in New York and a wall crash in Philadelphia but could see through that fascade to see a guy who let balls bounce behind him plenty of times and who missed cutoff men on throws with regularity.

The best defensive SS in the game might be Adam Everett and John McDonald they've stuck on MLB rosters despite being completely offensively inept.

Please show me some kind of evidence to back up that statement, because I'm fairly sure you just made that up in order to stand behind your blind love of Anderson.

Daver
01-18-2009, 06:43 PM
Please show me some kind of evidence to back up that statement, because I'm fairly sure you just made that up in order to stand behind your blind love of Anderson.

Please post more often, this stuff is hysterical.

kittle42
01-18-2009, 06:49 PM
Please show me some kind of evidence to back up that statement, because I'm fairly sure you just made that up in order to stand behind your blind love of Anderson.

Does anyone read anymore? He clearly was stating an opinion - "Not really because a lot of scouts and people around baseball would definitely agree that he's one of the better defenders in baseball,"

He thinks a lot of scouts WOULD agree. It's his opinion. He can't "make up" his opinion.

areilly
01-18-2009, 06:51 PM
Please show me some kind of evidence to back up that statement, because I'm fairly sure you just made that up in order to stand behind your blind love of Anderson.

This is actually one of the funniest posts I've read in a long time. Thank you, tm, for brightening up my Sunday.

If Anderson is so lousy defensively, why did OG keep turning to him as a late-inning defensive substitute? If he's such a non-spectacular centerfielder, why put him in for Griffey or Swisher 70 times in 2008?

kittle42
01-18-2009, 06:59 PM
If Anderson is so lousy defensively, why did OG keep turning to him as a late-inning defensive substitute? If he's such a non-spectacular centerfielder, why put him in for Griffey or Swisher 70 times in 2008?

This is easily answered.

First, tm didn't say Anderson was horrible defensively. He simply seemed to agree that some here overrate him.

Second, he was brought in for Griffey/Swisher because there is no question he was better defensively than either of them, and is the best defensive OF on the roster.

Can everyone please start reading posts before attacking?

russ99
01-18-2009, 07:23 PM
What we forget is that B.A. is a kid with talent, albeit still unrealized. This was a 5 tool prospect, and a good athlete coming out of college.
Some of you know that I often refer to the Ted Williamsī quote about young players needing about 1,000 at bats in the Big Leagues just to figure it out.
Well Brian has still only had about 600 at bats.

Moreover, Iīd take his last yearīs stats projected over a full season, which would have given him about 40 doubles, 25 homers and 80 RBIs.
For a Centerfielder who plays great defense, Iīd be satisfied with that, wouldnīt you?
Oh, I know, his average and OBP were terrible. Yes, but he didnīt have regular playing time, he faced way too many lefties for a right handed hitter, who seems to actually hit righties for a better average, and he still produced at a pretty decent rate.
He still doesnīt solve the lead off problem, but his speed on the bases is fine.

I really wish that we could see what he could do playing a full season, and fill the lead off spot with a second baseman. There is still a chance that Lillibridge could win that competition over Getz and Nix. I know that he is a SS, but donīt you think that he could handle Second, if he can hit and steal bases? Heīs probably a better baseball player than Jerry Owens, and Second is less important defensively than CF.


I had to respond to this, as this post is the classic pro-Anderson stance that he'll somehow put it together if he's given a real chance...

As I recall the Sox had a another guy with "5-tool" potential, and can't miss status and he couldn't put it together at the major league level either: one Joe Borchard. Brian's going down his career route as well...

Some guys can cut it at the mental side of the game and some guys can't - and nothing has shown me that BA with his attitute (that hasn't changed much, I'm sorry to say-read the article) and mentality at the plate that he can take that step even with 3 years and 2000 at-bats of chances.

I have no problems with the Sox keeping him for defensive purposes, but as we've seen over 3 year's now, he's useless at the plate against quality pitching and is way too often the rally-killer.

I hope he does end up with another club that's willing to take nothing but a homer every once in a while from a spot in the order in return for above-average (not gold-glove) defense, so he can prove once and for all if he can cut it or not. My money's on the not.

Ranger
01-18-2009, 07:27 PM
I'm going to agree to disagree with you. Other than being fast, he is below average in any way you'd measure a CF. And back to the original point, which I still haven't heard you answer, since you say his arm is adequate, can you name guys who have worse CF arms than Owens, besides Pierre and Damon? I can not.


I'm really not sure why this discussion continues because I thought what I said was pretty clear. I never said Owens had a good arm, I said it's sufficient to play that position if he were to produce offensively. Owens doesn't have the arm to play RF, but he can play CF...his arm is below average, but it isn't terrible. I think it is better than Pierre and Damon, but not quite to Crisp, Granderson, Baldelli, etc. If he's in between those two groups, that makes him adequate to play centerfield.

There are very few guys that have very good to excellent CF arms (Ichiro, Upton, Wells, Rios, Jones), but you don't have to have that in center. You need someone to cover ground. The baseball people I've talked to about him tend to agree that Owens can do that (at least at this point in his career while he still has speed to make up for any poor reads he might make) and believe his arm is good enough to play the position. Translation: adequate.

In discussing Owens with anyone that evaluates talent, the only disagreement I've ever heard regarding him is what his offensive ability will be. Some people believe that he can someday be offensively productive, the others don't think he can. That is apparently an ongoing debate.

Daver
01-18-2009, 07:29 PM
I'm really not sure why this discussion continues because I thought what I said was pretty clear. I never said Owens had a good arm, I said it's sufficient to play that position if he were to produce offensively. Owens doesn't have the arm to play RF, but he can play CF...his arm is below average, but it isn't terrible. I think it is better than Pierre and Damon, but not quite to Crisp, Granderson, Baldelli, etc. If he's in between those two groups, that makes him adequate to play centerfield.

There are very few guys that have very good to excellent CF arms (Ichiro, Upton, Wells, Rios, Jones), but you don't have to have that in center. You need someone to cover ground. The baseball people I've talked to about him tend to agree that Owens can do that (at least at this point in his career while he still has speed to make up for any poor reads he might make) and believe his arm is good enough to play the position. Translation: adequate.

In discussing Owens with anyone that evaluates talent, the only disagreement I've ever heard regarding him is what his offensive ability will be. Some people believe that he can someday be offensively productive, the others don't think he can. That is apparently an ongoing debate.

Speed does not equal range. Any baseball person that told you it did is not very good at his job.

Ranger
01-18-2009, 07:34 PM
Speed does not equal range. Any baseball person that told you it did is not very good at his job.

I'm perfectly aware of that, but because of his speed he is still able to make up for bad reads and still is able to cover ground. With all due respect, I'm gonna go with their assessments over yours.

munchman33
01-18-2009, 07:35 PM
Speed does not equal range. Any baseball person that told you it did is not very good at his job.

Speed would come in handy in extending range. If you don't want to admit that, it's fine. But you just sound stubborn.

It's Dankerific
01-18-2009, 07:39 PM
Please, the guy has had 600 AB's and has yet to show that he can even be anywhere close to average. He's been pathetic at the plate his whole career and wouldn't even be on most teams major league roster.

On most teams roster? He'd start in CF for a few teams. You know, ones who gave a damn if defensive plays were made and willing to give a guy a fair chance with consecutive games to play offense.

Whats the count down? one year till BA can tell the White Sox, thanks for wasting some of my prime years?

Ranger
01-18-2009, 07:41 PM
Speed would come in handy in extending range. If you don't want to admit that, it's fine. But you just sound stubborn.

Seems logical, doesn't it? Some guys are great at covering ground because they know where the ball is going off the bat. Some guys are great at it because their foot speed makes up for a less-than-perfect read. Munch, like you, I don't see why that is difficult to understand.

Daver
01-18-2009, 07:43 PM
I'm perfectly aware of that, but because of his speed he is still able to make up for bad reads and still is able to cover ground. With all due respect, I'm gonna go with their assessments over yours.

Yeah, he has the speed to make up for his lousy talent most of the time, sounds like a fine way to build a ballclub.

Ranger
01-18-2009, 07:54 PM
Yeah, he has the speed to make up for his lousy talent most of the time, sounds like a fine way to build a ballclub.

I don't even know what that is supposed to mean, which indicates it's time to end the discussion.

By the way, having speed is a talent.

kittle42
01-18-2009, 07:58 PM
Yeah, he has the speed to make up for his lousy talent most of the time, sounds like a fine way to build a ballclub.

I don't even know what that is supposed to mean, which indicates it's time to end the discussion.

By the way, having speed is a talent.

It's probably the closest Daver has ever come to admitting someone has had a point, but he still needed to get a shot in against a position you weren't even taking (re: speed and building a ballclub).

Today has not been a banner day for argument.

Daver
01-18-2009, 08:07 PM
By the way, having speed is a talent.

Yeah, he has one tool, it would be nice if he could actually use it on the basepaths.

soxinem1
01-18-2009, 08:11 PM
On most teams roster? He'd start in CF for a few teams. You know, ones who gave a damn if defensive plays were made and willing to give a guy a fair chance with consecutive games to play offense.

Whats the count down? one year till BA can tell the White Sox, thanks for wasting some of my prime years?

I just get such a kick out of the BA detractors and Guillen as well (in regards to BA, I think he just does not like him).

How can you grade this guy when he has NEVER been given the chance? Even during the season, when BA would start a game once a week, his detractors would say he sucked just because he went 0-4.

For years I've been hearing Guillen talk about the importance of defense, then trot out some pretty outrageous defensive lineups.

Case in point. Griffey played RF for CIN, who kept Corey Patterson and his .200 average in CF and never even considered putting Griff back. Sure, they finished last, but they knew his days as a CF were over.

Ditto Swisher. Sure, in a pinch he was adequate, but it never should have been allowed to go on.

And this is just the latest in the anti-BA incidents since 2006.

If Wise, Owens, Dye, and TCQ all got hurt, Guillen would probably ask KW to pick up Darrin Erstad to play CF and avoid putting BA there.

And the stat-heads can digest this: In addition to Colon being back on the team, we are loaded with fly-ball pitchers. There is sure not a lot of mobility or arms in the starting OF. This does not show up in box scores, but those of us who watch the games know it.

IF BA got the chances like Uribe, Erstad, Cotts, Logan, and other stiffs got, the argument would hold up. But a half season as a semi-regular is a joke. Especially for a guy like Owens to be considered a shoo-in for CF two years in a row. Nothing against him, but BA brings a lot more to the table.

But then they are afraid to trade him because he might prove them wrong.

Bottom line: The team has not had anything resembling a real lead-off hitter since Ray Durham was here. Sure, Pods ran wild for four months in 2005, but he was a one dimensional offensive weapon in LF.

This saga has gone on way too long. Play the ****ing guy or let someone else have him.

Tragg
01-18-2009, 08:38 PM
This is easily answered.

First, tm didn't say Anderson was horrible defensively. He simply seemed to agree that some here overrate him.

Way above he said he was the equal of Owens defensively.
If Owens outproduced Anderson offensively, this might be an interesting debate.

kittle42
01-18-2009, 09:00 PM
Way above he said he was the equal of Owens defensively.

My bad, then. I definitely do not agree with that statement.

2906
01-18-2009, 09:11 PM
I don't even know what that is supposed to mean, which indicates it's time to end the discussion.

By the way, having speed is a talent.

It's pretty simple Chris. Certain know-it-all posters on this site have well known biases against certain players. They'll move the goalposts in any discussion about those players because ... well ... because ... they're right, they're always right, that's why. After all, they know a Minnesota Twins scout and hang out at Providence High School games. That means they know everything.

LOL at anyone who believe in what posters like that say.

Craig Grebeck
01-18-2009, 09:14 PM
Sweet lord this is a pointless argument. If Jerry Owens wasn't terrible at offense, his defense would suffice. That's the argument being presented?

If the sun was as close to the earth as the moon, we'd all be burnt to a crisp. Impossible hypotheticals are irritating.

Frater Perdurabo
01-18-2009, 09:17 PM
:mg:

:stirpot:

:popcorn:

2906
01-18-2009, 09:23 PM
Impossible hypotheticals are irritating.
You say it's impossible, therefore it is?

I suggest you wait and see what happens before yet another of your definitive "I'm right" posts.

This will all play out in due time.

While I tend to agree with you on Owens' talent level or lack thereof, funny things can happen in baseball and often do.

AZChiSoxFan
01-18-2009, 10:28 PM
Ha. Ok so I can present stats and you present merely your opinion and you are right? I'm not saying Owens is better than BA, but BA's defensive ability is so overblown around here its not even funny. The fact is that he is good in CF and nothing more, not a game changing CF by any means. And when you factor in that he is a complete black hole in the lineup should indicate that he should be nothing more than a defensive replacement for this team, or any other one for that matter.

Great, another stathead comes to WSI. :rolleyes:

What's the stat on getting bunts down, after a rain delay, during a full moon, in May, when the gametime temp was over 72.685 degrees, in a 1-0 game? Oh, I remembered. That would be the ASOFEFNFSDFNRKJG stat.

AZChiSoxFan
01-18-2009, 10:31 PM
Please, the guy has had 600 AB's and has yet to show that he can even be anywhere close to average. He's been pathetic at the plate his whole career and wouldn't even be on most teams major league roster.

Please explain to me why BA went 2-4 on opening day in 2006, then didn't start in game 2?

Konerko05
01-18-2009, 10:35 PM
I just get such a kick out of the BA detractors and Guillen as well (in regards to BA, I think he just does not like him).


Guillen does indeed dislike Brian Anderson. I've had confirmation of this by someone very close to Guillen.

I'm not going to repeat the exact words, but there were some very harsh statements spoken.

People can believe that if they want. I've never been one to start any crazy rumors.



Edited to make post less personal.

tm1119
01-18-2009, 10:37 PM
Way above he said he was the equal of Owens defensively.
If Owens outproduced Anderson offensively, this might be an interesting debate.

Nope never said that. BA is the better defender, but his D is so completely overrated around here that it is laughable. Please go somewhere outside of Chicago and present the idea that Brian Anderson is one of the best defensive CF's in the game and see what kind of reaction you get.

TornLabrum
01-18-2009, 11:25 PM
How many days until opening day...Oh, gawd, make it come soon!

Tragg
01-18-2009, 11:31 PM
All this talk of how much better Anderson is in the field than Owens in completely overblown and based on nothing. Give Owens the chance to start and be our leadoff hitter. If he fails, he fails. We pretty much know what we are going to get with Anderson already, so why not see what Owens can do?

And again, he had his chance and he failed and he can't drive the ball, so there's little hope for improvement.

Nellie_Fox
01-19-2009, 02:14 AM
Here's an honest question: Why haven't other teams made an effort to get Anderson via a trade? There hasn't even been a whisper of a rumor of any other team being interested in him.

PalehosePlanet
01-19-2009, 02:29 AM
Here's an honest question: Why haven't other teams made an effort to get Anderson via a trade? There hasn't even been a whisper of a rumor of any other team being interested in him.

Rumor has it that The Reds wanted him in the Griffey deal but KW stated that he would be our starting CF in '09 and therefore wouldn't trade him.

Also, supposedly, The Marlins were interested in him back in '07 before he was DL'd with the arm injury.

Either way, I'd definitely start BA over Owens in CF. Owens should not be on our 25 man roster even as a bench player because Wise can do everything he can except a little better.

Maybe, if they'd have him, we can sell Owens to Japan?

It's Dankerific
01-19-2009, 03:32 AM
Here's an honest question: Why haven't other teams made an effort to get Anderson via a trade? There hasn't even been a whisper of a rumor of any other team being interested in him.

Any talk of who Kenny did and didn't try to get is generally shot down because of our lack of information, I'd think that would apply that to BA too.

Who knows who's asked about BA or what Kenny wants for him, or who wouldn't trade for him but would sign him as a FA.

DaveFeelsRight
01-19-2009, 04:56 AM
a little squib about anderson over at white sox examiner:

" To make a 2005! reference, the White Sox won the World Series with Juan Uribe (http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=454&position=SS) hitting ninth. That year, Uribe had a .301 OBP, a .712 OPS, 16 home runs, and 58 RBI. That's not exactly good, but when you factor in his defense at SS that year (8.9 UZR), he played a big role in the team's success. I can see Anderson putting up a similar offensive line as a starter, and with his great defense factored in he'd have about the same impact Uribe had in '05."

Frater Perdurabo
01-19-2009, 08:16 AM
Please explain to me why BA went 2-4 on opening day in 2006, then didn't start in game 2?

Because Ozzie "makes the ****ing lineups," that's why.

Frater Perdurabo
01-19-2009, 08:27 AM
BA has always been a "plus" defender and is a pretty good baserunner. In addition, he has been able to hit consistently well at every level of the minors, in college, in high school, etc. He also has shown some flashes at the plate in the majors, especially against hard-throwing RHP, and hits a lot of doubles per plate appearance. Only his batting average and walk rate in his inconsistent MLB playing time have disappointed us, and a lot of that has been accumulated against LHP, against whom BA has always (throughout his days as an amateur and in the minors) hit worse than he hits RHP.

Jerry Owens has always been able to run fast.

So which of these two scenarios is more likely?

Scenario 1. Owens becomes a better overall ballplayer by:


improving his fielding instincts
improving his throwing arm
learning to drive the ball harder
learning to walk more
learning to bunt
learning to become a better baserunner


Scenario 2. Anderson improves his batting average and walk rate to what he's been able to do at all previous lower levels

Lillian
01-19-2009, 08:36 AM
BA has always been a "plus" defender and is a pretty good baserunner. In addition, he has been able to hit consistently well at every level of the minors, in college, in high school, etc. He also has shown some flashes at the plate in the majors, especially against hard-throwing RHP, and hits a lot of doubles per plate appearance. Only his batting average and walk rate in his inconsistent MLB playing time have disappointed us, and a lot of that has been accumulated against LHP, against whom BA has always (throughout his days as an amateur and in the minors) hit worse than he hits RHP.

Jerry Owens has always been able to run fast.

So which of these two scenarios is more likely?

Scenario 1. Owens becomes a better overall ballplayer by:


improving his fielding instincts
improving his throwing arm
learning to drive the ball harder
learning to walk more
learning to bunt
learning to become a better baserunner
Scenario 2. Anderson improves his batting average and walk rate to what he's been able to do at all previous lower levels

Well put. Thank you.

NLaloosh
01-19-2009, 09:24 AM
Jerry Owens sucks.

Repeat.

ode to veeck
01-19-2009, 11:27 AM
a little squib about anderson over at white sox examiner:

" To make a 2005! reference, the White Sox won the World Series with Juan Uribe (http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=454&position=SS) hitting ninth. That year, Uribe had a .301 OBP, a .712 OPS, 16 home runs, and 58 RBI. That's not exactly good, but when you factor in his defense at SS that year (8.9 UZR), he played a big role in the team's success. I can see Anderson putting up a similar offensive line as a starter, and with his great defense factored in he'd have about the same impact Uribe had in '05."

a caveat about Uribe at the plate in '05: he was the only guy in the lineup who would hit heavy breaking stuff with any consistency in a lineup otherwise overly heavy with fastball hitters; this often came into play in key game situations against pitchers with Contreras type of stuff, one of those little things lost in all the sabremetrics BS

kittle42
01-19-2009, 12:07 PM
This may be one of the worst Anderson discussions ever.

Anderson is better than Owens because Owens sucks immensely. I really don't understand how anyone can question that. Think what you will about Anderson (and you all know I don't think he should be starting at all), but Jerry Owens is just bad, bad, bad.

Nevertheless, Ozzie Guillen, whom I like but who couldn't make a wise lineup decision if his life depended on it, will play Owens because Owens is fast, which in Ozzie's world means he's Vince Coleman.

We would be much better off without either Owens or Anderson starting in CF for the 2009 White Sox. However, this is unlikely to happen, in my opinion, based on the direction I believe the team to continue to take through the offseason.

Lillian
01-19-2009, 12:35 PM
This may be one of the worst Anderson discussions ever.

Anderson is better than Owens because Owens sucks immensely. I really don't understand how anyone can question that. Think what you will about Anderson (and you all know I don't think he should be starting at all), but Jerry Owens is just bad, bad, bad.

Nevertheless, Ozzie Guillen, whom I like but who couldn't make a wise lineup decision if his life depended on it, will play Owens because Owens is fast, which in Ozzie's world means he's Vince Coleman.

We would be much better off without either Owens or Anderson starting in CF for the 2009 White Sox. However, this is unlikely to happen, in my opinion, based on the direction I believe the team to continue to take through the offseason.

You may be right, but itīs probably all academic as I really expect the Sox to sign Yasser Gomez. Itīs just too good a fit not to happen. If they get him, he would likely be the top candidate to leadoff and play CF.

Has anyone heard anything more on this lately?

jabrch
01-19-2009, 12:49 PM
You may be right, but itīs probably all academic as I really expect the Sox to sign Yasser Gomez. Itīs just too good a fit not to happen. If they get him, he would likely be the top candidate to leadoff and play CF.

Has anyone heard anything more on this lately?


Is he expected to have his paperwork done so to be ready that quickly? I heard he may not be ready to get into the US for a while. (Not sure where...)

jabrch
01-19-2009, 01:00 PM
This saga has gone on way too long. Play the ****ing guy or let someone else have him.

The only logical explanation I can think of is that nobody has offered them enough to make it worth it to give him up. We have no idea who calls KW about him, but we do know that KW is not shy about making a move. So we can logicly conclude that if he got an offer that was sufficient, he'd pull the trigger. That may be false...but I don't think it is an outrageous conclusion to draw.

Either way, it will be interesting watching how this plays out.

It's Dankerific
01-19-2009, 02:34 PM
The only logical explanation I can think of is that nobody has offered them enough to make it worth it to give him up. We have no idea who calls KW about him, but we do know that KW is not shy about making a move. So we can logicly conclude that if he got an offer that was sufficient, he'd pull the trigger. That may be false...but I don't think it is an outrageous conclusion to draw.

Either way, it will be interesting watching how this plays out.

No, if we are being consistent, the only logical explanation is that today, and for the last few years, KW thinks the White Sox are a better team with BA on the roster.

KW gets rid of players he doesn't want, even if it means taking it on the chin a little. BA has no ability to block or control anything that KW wants to do, so obviously KW wants BA on the roster this 19th day of January, 2009.

thedudeabides
01-19-2009, 03:06 PM
No, if we are being consistent, the only logical explanation is that today, and for the last few years, KW thinks the White Sox are a better team with BA on the roster.

KW gets rid of players he doesn't want, even if it means taking it on the chin a little. BA has no ability to block or control anything that KW wants to do, so obviously KW wants BA on the roster this 19th day of January, 2009.

You and jabrch bring up good points. BA has had his attitude questioned in the past, but obviously not to the point where Ozzie and Kenny feel he needs to go.

They may also feel he has good value to the team as a 4th or 5th outfielder. Maybe, that's all he'll be and every team needs those type of players. They can use him that way with the hope he realizes his full potential.

I agree, with other posters, that Owens will get every chance to be the starting CF, but I also think he will be on a short leash. I don't think Ozzie is as in love with him as some posters seem to think.

jabrch
01-19-2009, 03:11 PM
They may also feel he has good value to the team as a 4th or 5th outfielder. Maybe, that's all he'll be and every team needs those type of players. They can use him that way with the hope he realizes his full potential.


The question is the relative worth of him as a 4th/5th OF vs the relative worth of what they could get for him. I have no idea what other team's value BA as. Given that Pie just got them a legit pitching prospect and a throw in arm, I would imagine BA would have some value. All I can assume is they the feel he is worth more than they'd get for him. And frankly, I'm fine with that.

russ99
01-19-2009, 06:30 PM
BA has always been a "plus" defender and is a pretty good baserunner. In addition, he has been able to hit consistently well at every level of the minors, in college, in high school, etc. He also has shown some flashes at the plate in the majors, especially against hard-throwing RHP, and hits a lot of doubles per plate appearance. Only his batting average and walk rate in his inconsistent MLB playing time have disappointed us, and a lot of that has been accumulated against LHP, against whom BA has always (throughout his days as an amateur and in the minors) hit worse than he hits RHP.

Jerry Owens has always been able to run fast.

So which of these two scenarios is more likely?

Scenario 1. Owens becomes a better overall ballplayer by:


improving his fielding instincts
improving his throwing arm
learning to drive the ball harder
learning to walk more
learning to bunt
learning to become a better baserunner


Scenario 2. Anderson improves his batting average and walk rate to what he's been able to do at all previous lower levels

Seriously...

Scenario 1:


X - We accept that Owens defense won't be league average, but it will be adequate.
X - Owens will never drive the ball farther, but we need a leadoff guy, not a slugger. Don't believe the "can't hit it out of the infield" hype..
OK - Not learning to walk more, but get on base more often is the key to his making an impact on the Sox, that's the only valid point you had in your post.
X - Jerry already knows how to bunt, bunting for hits is another thing entirely. If he can get on base regularly, this won't matter so much.
X - Jerry's already an above-average MLB-level baserunner.

Let me add one:
Jerry will hit between .260 and .280, and can steal up to 50+ bases at the MLB level.

Scenario 2:


Anderson stops crying about playing time and all-of-a-sudden has a game plan and a good mentality at the plate and can hit major league pitching (other than a few doubles and homers) despite what we've seen the last 3 years.

Count me in for Scenario 1.

Daver
01-19-2009, 06:39 PM
Seriously...

Scenario 1:


X - We accept that Owens defense won't be league average, but it will be adequate.
X - Owens will never drive the ball farther, but we need a leadoff guy, not a slugger. Don't believe the "can't hit it out of the infield" hype..
OK - Not learning to walk more, but get on base more often is the key to his making an impact on the Sox, that's the only valid point you had in your post.
X - Jerry already knows how to bunt, bunting for hits is another thing entirely. If he can get on base regularly, this won't matter so much.
X - Jerry's already an above-average MLB-level baserunner.

Let me add one:
Jerry will hit between .260 and .280, and can steal up to 50+ bases at the MLB level.

Scenario 2:


Anderson stops crying about playing time and all-of-a-sudden has a game plan and a good mentality at the plate and can hit major league pitching (other than a few doubles and homers) despite what we've seen the last 3 years.

Count me in for Scenario 1.

Your scenario 1 is a pipe dream at best.

Tragg
01-19-2009, 08:42 PM
BA has always been a "plus" defender and is a pretty good baserunner. In addition, he has been able to hit consistently well at every level of the minors, in college, in high school, etc. He also has shown some flashes at the plate in the majors, especially against hard-throwing RHP, and hits a lot of doubles per plate appearance. Only his batting average and walk rate in his inconsistent MLB playing time have disappointed us, and a lot of that has been accumulated against LHP, against whom BA has always (throughout his days as an amateur and in the minors) hit worse than he hits RHP.

Jerry Owens has always been able to run fast.

So which of these two scenarios is more likely?

Scenario 1. Owens becomes a better overall ballplayer by:


improving his fielding instincts
improving his throwing arm
learning to drive the ball harder
learning to walk more
learning to bunt
learning to become a better baserunner
Scenario 2. Anderson improves his batting average and walk rate to what he's been able to do at all previous lower levels

Pretty accurate post. Well-done.
Owens needs to walk more to get his obp up to acceptable levels - but to do that, he has to have balls thrown to him, which doesn't happen often enough because he can't hurt anyone with his bat.
We don't need a slugger, but if you can't drive the ball you won't get on base much with any consinstency. Once in a while he will slap it on the sweet spot, but drive the ball he cannot. Owens isn't remotely close to a decent leadoff hitter. We're far better off just putting a good hitter, albeit not a leadoff hitting type, in the 1 hole.
As for Anderson, it remains funny almost that Guillen platoons Anderson against the hitters he hits worse against. I fully expect the winner of the Owens/Wise duel to start....(Wise being given a contract for his .280 obp and lousy defense is another issue).
Remember, Erstad was a ".400 quality hitter"

ode to veeck
01-19-2009, 09:55 PM
As for Anderson, it remains funny almost that Guillen platoons Anderson against the hitters he hits worse against.

it's not funny, its pathetic, but don't looko for Ozzie to apologise to anyone ever

russ99
01-20-2009, 03:41 PM
Your scenario 1 is a pipe dream at best.

What part of what I put there is a pipe dream? I said the key to Owens success in 2009 is getting on base. There may be a difference of opinion on how "adequate" his defense is, but everything else is spot on as far as what we've seen from him on the field.

Owens hit .267 with 32 SB in a little over a half season, so I don't see how my projected numbers are that much of a stretch.

Konerko05
01-20-2009, 03:54 PM
Owens hit .267 with 32 SB in a little over a half season, so I don't see how my projected numbers are that much of a stretch.

A .267 average with only 12 extra base hits in 356 at bats is pretty awful. The production is bad no matter what spot in the lineup you force it into.

With Jerry Owens, the Sox are getting below average offense, and below average defense. Is speed really worth that sacrifice?

NLaloosh
01-20-2009, 05:11 PM
The point of starting Jerry Owens is run production, correct? I mean Anderson has a better glove,right?

Unfortunately, Owens has never been a big run producer at any time or place in his career. He knocks in almost no runs and doesn't score a lot of runs.

What that tells me is that he is damn waste of time and space.

ode to veeck
01-20-2009, 05:21 PM
The point of starting Jerry Owens is run production, correct? I mean Anderson has a better glove,right?

Unfortunately, Owens has never been a big run producer at any time or place in his career. He knocks in almost no runs and doesn't score a lot of runs.

What that tells me is that he is damn waste of time and space.


with all his speed he ain't the greatest baserunner either. BA's a lot smarter on the paths.

FedEx227
01-20-2009, 06:12 PM
with all his speed he ain't the greatest baserunner either. BA's a lot smarter on the paths.

Exactly. His big plus is he's FAST. That's it, not that good at stealing bases, no he's just FAST. :scratch:

russ99
01-22-2009, 02:03 PM
Exactly. His big plus is he's FAST. That's it, not that good at stealing bases, no he's just FAST. :scratch:

That's a complete misconception. While he may not have the baserunning sense of A.J., here's his steals/times stealing rate:

Minors - 162/228 - 71%, Majors 35/44 - 80%

Sorry, while you can interpret all kinds of bad things about Owens' game, he's pretty good at stealing bases...

ode to veeck
01-22-2009, 02:09 PM
That's a complete misconception. While he may not have the baserunning sense of A.J., here's his steals/times stealing rate:

Minors - 162/228 - 71%, Majors 35/44 - 80%

Sorry, while you can interpret all kinds of bad things about Owens' game, he's pretty good at stealing bases...

baserunning is not only stealing bases

FedEx227
01-22-2009, 02:11 PM
Well, that's understood, I just said I didn't think he was all that great at stealing bases, yeah he's at 80% which is definitely above average, but that wasn't the point of his post.

pczarapa
01-24-2009, 11:07 PM
It measures nothing, range is not how many flyballs you catch, it is how you read the ball off the bat in the first place, which is why speed does not equal range.

I don't know anything about some of the stats being thrown around, but from my perspective I would say BA is light years beyond JO in the field but JO has more pop to the bat. Would love to see JO come off the bench, but have BA every day in CF.

EMachine10
01-24-2009, 11:17 PM
I don't know anything about some of the stats being thrown around, but from my perspective I would say BA is light years beyond JO in the field but JO has more pop to the bat. Would love to see JO come off the bench, but have BA every day in CF.
:o:

Frater Perdurabo
01-25-2009, 07:23 AM
:o:

That's my reaction, too.

Madscout
01-25-2009, 10:56 AM
I don't know anything about some of the stats being thrown around, but from my perspective I would say BA is light years beyond JO in the field but JO has more pop to the bat. Would love to see JO come off the bench, but have BA every day in CF.
You are right about the conclusion, but it is a wash as long as Ozzie fills out the lineups. He doesn't like BA for whatever reason, and that isn't going to change, no matter what BA hits or how poorly JO does either.

jabrch
01-25-2009, 01:02 PM
He doesn't like BA for whatever reason, and that isn't going to change, no matter what BA hits or how poorly JO does either.


That's your opinion. If BA worked hard and played well, I can't see why OG wouldn't play him. I don't believe for a second that OG or KW would do that.

It's Dankerific
01-25-2009, 02:30 PM
That's your opinion. If BA worked hard and played well, I can't see why OG wouldn't play him. I don't believe for a second that OG or KW would do that.

Since when does history = opinion?

In most circles, history = fact.

Nellie_Fox
01-26-2009, 01:49 AM
Since when does history = opinion?

In most circles, history = fact.But you were predicting the future, and that's an opinion.

bradchifan3
03-03-2009, 11:19 PM
The point of starting Jerry Owens is run production, correct? I mean Anderson has a better glove,right?

Unfortunately, Owens has never been a big run producer at any time or place in his career. He knocks in almost no runs and doesn't score a lot of runs.

What that tells me is that he is damn waste of time and space.


I agree. I don't see an positives coming from having Owens in the lineup.

Britt Burns
03-04-2009, 12:03 AM
I really want to believe an Owens/Anderson platoon situation will be adequate for the year. I just don't see it happening, and if Ozzie insists on leading owens off it will be murder. I don't know what the answer is this close to the season, but this hole in the lineup is going to hurt.

voodoochile
03-04-2009, 12:13 AM
I agree. I don't see an positives coming from having Owens in the lineup.

I see, the old BA thread got closed, so you dug up this one from a month ago to rekindle the discussion...

Nope...