PDA

View Full Version : Aaron Rowand


bc2k
09-11-2002, 10:53 PM
Aaron Rowand is a stud. This kid is one hell of a baseball player and I'm sick of hearing him called an at-best fourth outfielder.

Rowand's swing is short and quick, beautiful to watch. The man uses that swing to hit in the clutch. His focus with men in scoring position reminds me of Herbert Perry's. Rowand, like Perry, sees many pitches, concentrates and comes up big with runners on.

Of course he runs out every play and ran into a wall again tonight. He has hit a homer in two consecutive games and just drove in two more runners with a double.

He is the anti-superstar, so unlike Manny Ramirez by running full speed and unlike Thomas by hitting in the clutch.

Rowand is not in the category of untouchables like Buehrle, Konerko, and Magglio, but he's in the category just below. This kid needs to start everyday in center. Aaron better be batting second in 2003. As long as Thomas doesn't clog up the 3 hole, Rowand is going to come around to score many runs in 2003.

bc2k is a Fan of Rowand.

Chisox_cali
09-11-2002, 10:55 PM
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh Here we go again............. BOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!! :angry: :angry:

doublem23
09-11-2002, 10:55 PM
Does anyone here honestly believe this guy would be a starting outfielder on any contending team?

If we let him keep on starting, expect some of this garbage for years to come.

I dare the Sox to get a REAL center fielder.

Daver
09-11-2002, 10:56 PM
And the FOC adds another member.......

Jerry_Manuel
09-11-2002, 10:57 PM
Originally posted by doublem23
Does anyone here honestly believe this guy would be a starting outfielder on any contending team?

If we let him keep on starting, expect some of this garbage for years to come.

I dare the Sox to get a REAL center fielder.

No.

They'll be bad anyway.

They dare us to show up to the park 40,000 strong every night.

bc2k
09-11-2002, 11:08 PM
Originally posted by Chisox_cali
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh Here we go again............. BOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!! :angry: :angry:

Why am I being booed for cheering a member of the White Sox.

Originally posted by doublem23
Does anyone here honestly believe this guy would be a starting outfielder on any contending team?


I do. He's a .300+ hitter and even better with men in scoring position. He gives good at bats and draws walks. He doesn't swing for the fences either. I'll take AROW in the #2 spot over pop up Durham any day.



Originally posted by daver
And the FOC adds another member.......

Daver, he impressed me last year. You could say I was a FOC since then.

Daver
09-11-2002, 11:13 PM
Thats fine,a lot of people here have backed Rowand while ignoring his low OBP and his low BA for a position that needs to produce those numbers,as well as his erratic arm.Put Borchard out there and watch him develop into a star would be my choice.

Chisox_cali
09-11-2002, 11:19 PM
Originally posted by bc2k
Why am I being booed for cheering a member of the White Sox.






Oh Sorry I wasn't booing you. I was booing the absolutely pointless argument that will sure ensue. I think it's stupid to get yelled at for rooting for a member of the sox too. And to get classified as a member of the "Fans of Crash." I'm sure that the next classification will be FOS. Which is "Fans of the Sox" because people get yelled at for doing that too.

doublem23
09-11-2002, 11:27 PM
Originally posted by Chisox_cali
Oh Sorry I wasn't booing you. I was booing the absolutely pointless argument that will sure ensue. I think it's stupid to get yelled at for rooting for a member of the sox too. And to get classified as a member of the "Fans of Crash." I'm sure that the next classification will be FOS. Which is "Fans of the Sox" because people get yelled at for doing that too.

We're statheads. Simply ignoring the overwhelming statistical evidence that shows that guys like Aaron Rowand and Josh Paul will more than likely never be decent starting big leaguers in favor of empirical evidence (like insanely running into walls magically transforms you into a solid fielder... I'm still trying to understand that one) really will get you into an argument here.

I want the Sox to win... that's precisely why I DON'T want to see Rowand trot out there day-in-and-day-out.

I don't understand why we get so god damn attached to these average to mediocre (at best) players. Sure, I'd like to see them step up and succeed (because it obviously helps the team), but realistically, the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the opposite happening.

And only JM answered my question. Look at the OFs of every contending team in baseball. How many do you really think Aaron Rowand would threaten to break into? Don't even bother with centerfield, because he's probably in the lower 1/2 of starting AL center fielders.

Chisox_cali
09-11-2002, 11:31 PM
Originally posted by doublem23
We're statheads. Simply ignoring the overwhelming statistical evidence that shows that guys like Aaron Rowand and Josh Paul will more than likely never be decent starting big leaguers in favor of empirical evidence (like insanely running into walls magically transforms you into a solid fielder... I'm still trying to understand that one) really will get you into an argument here.

I want the Sox to win... that's precisely why I DON'T want to see Rowand trot out there day-in-and-day-out.

I don't understand why we get so god damn attached to these average to mediocre (at best) players. Sure, I'd like to see them step up and succeed (because it obviously helps the team), but realistically, the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the opposite happening.

And only JM answered my question. Look at the OFs of every contending team in baseball. How many do you really think Aaron Rowand would threaten to break into? Don't even bother with centerfield, because he's probably in the lower 1/2 of starting AL center fielders.

I understand that, but stats don't make the complete man though, you never really know. But I'm saying it's pointless to argue because you know it won't change, JM has already said they are sticking with Aaron, so your stuck with it, so I would start rooting for him to suceed because he's more than likely not going anywhere. I mean most of you were 100% sure that they were gonna strike, but we saw how that worked out, so you just never know.

doublem23
09-11-2002, 11:39 PM
Originally posted by Chisox_cali
I understand that, but stats don't make the complete man though, you never really know. But I'm saying it's pointless to argue because you know it won't change, JM has already said they are sticking with Aaron, so your stuck with it, so I would start rooting for him to suceed because he's more than likely not going anywhere. I mean most of you were 100% sure that they were gonna strike, but we saw how that worked out, so you just never know.

Well, I'm still living in my little imaginary world where just maybe someday someone in the Sox front office will figure out that the point of baseball games is to win the majority of them.

It's not like everytime Aaron Rowand hits a homer I say, "Damn! That rat bastard is helping the team win!"

I just want the Sox to put a solid centerfielder in centerfield.

cheeses_h_rice
09-11-2002, 11:50 PM
Rowand may someday be a 25/80/.285 guy.

But please don't try and tell me he is anything but AT BEST a 4 out of 10 defensive center fielder.

Jerry_Manuel
09-11-2002, 11:50 PM
Originally posted by doublem23
And only JM answered my question. Look at the OFs of every contending team in baseball. How many do you really think Aaron Rowand would threaten to break into? Don't even bother with centerfield, because he's probably in the lower 1/2 of starting AL center fielders.

The Yankees are willing to give anyone shot in LF. Mariners can't seem to find an outfielder either. So I think he could play there just not start there.

Jerry_Manuel
09-11-2002, 11:53 PM
Originally posted by Chisox_cali
JM has already said they are sticking with Aaron, so your stuck with it, so I would start rooting for him to suceed because he's more than likely not going anywhere. I mean most of you were 100% sure that they were gonna strike, but we saw how that worked out, so you just never know.

Manuel doesn't make the decisions.

I won't root for him to suceed. If he does well that's fine, and when he continues to put up eh numbers, I'll pound him.

bc2k
09-11-2002, 11:54 PM
Originally posted by doublem23
We're statheads. Simply ignoring the overwhelming statistical evidence that shows that guys like Aaron Rowand and Josh Paul will more than likely never be decent starting big leaguers in favor of empirical evidence (like insanely running into walls magically transforms you into a solid fielder... I'm still trying to understand that one) really will get you into an argument here.

I want the Sox to win... that's precisely why I DON'T want to see Rowand trot out there day-in-and-day-out.

I don't understand why we get so god damn attached to these average to mediocre (at best) players. Sure, I'd like to see them step up and succeed (because it obviously helps the team), but realistically, the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the opposite happening.

And only JM answered my question. Look at the OFs of every contending team in baseball. How many do you really think Aaron Rowand would threaten to break into? Don't even bother with centerfield, because he's probably in the lower 1/2 of starting AL center fielders.

Look at the DH's of every contending team in baseball. Do you think we can contend with that production in the lineup? What do your stats say about Thomas' 2003 numbers? You don't need glasses and a statbook to tell Rowand has a much better swing than Thomas.

Jerry_Manuel
09-11-2002, 11:55 PM
Originally posted by doublem23
Well, I'm still living in my little imaginary world where just maybe someday someone in the Sox front office will figure out that the point of baseball games is to win the majority of them.

It's not like everytime Aaron Rowand hits a homer I say, "Damn! That rat bastard is helping the team win!"


Not as long as Reinsdorf runs the team.

I say that, well, I really cringe because I know this crap is coming.

kermittheefrog
09-11-2002, 11:59 PM
Originally posted by bc2k

I do. He's a .300+ hitter and even better with men in scoring position. He gives good at bats and draws walks. He doesn't swing for the fences either. I'll take AROW in the #2 spot over pop up Durham any day.


So you call a guy hitting .245 a .300+ hitter?

Hmmmm...

I've got $245 I'll sell to you for $300. Deal?

OfficerKarkovice
09-11-2002, 11:59 PM
The one thing that bothers me the most is everybody ripping Aaron and all like he's Royce Clayton or something. I don't think anybody here thinks he's any Andruw Jones or even Joe Borchard for that matter. What gets me tho is Aaron has been the model teammate and is the EXACT kind of ballplayer that you want to have on your team. He has never once complained, taken his lumps, sat on the bench, and when it has been asked of him he absolutely busts his ass out their on the field. These are the kind of guys that all winning teams have. Maybe he isn't a starting OF but I for one hope he is on the Sox for years to come.

kermittheefrog
09-12-2002, 12:02 AM
Originally posted by bc2k
Look at the DH's of every contending team in baseball. Do you think we can contend with that production in the lineup? What do your stats say about Thomas' 2003 numbers? You don't need glasses and a statbook to tell Rowand has a much better swing than Thomas.

Ya know I never was convinced that bc2k isn't a troll after he showed up on the board with it out for RPS for no apparent reason.

kermittheefrog
09-12-2002, 12:05 AM
Originally posted by OfficerKarkovice
The one thing that bothers me the most is everybody ripping Aaron and all like he's Royce Clayton or something. I don't think anybody here thinks he's any Andruw Jones or even Joe Borchard for that matter. What gets me tho is Aaron has been the model teammate and is the EXACT kind of ballplayer that you want to have on your team. He has never once complained, taken his lumps, sat on the bench, and when it has been asked of him he absolutely busts his ass out their on the field. These are the kind of guys that all winning teams have. Maybe he isn't a starting OF but I for one hope he is on the Sox for years to come.

When you aren't very good you don't have much leverage to complain. I will give Rowand some credit, unlike some people (Jeff Liefer, Royce Clayton) Rowand knows how to play the game. If he keeps his mouth shut, plays hard and isn't too horrible he'll keep getting a major league check and benefits. He'll even get a raise when arbitration comes around. Hell if you were Aaron Rowand and you knew that the team had at least 3 more talented outfielders than you, would you be running your mouth? Hell no. Smart man that Aaron Rowand. Crappy ballplayer though.

RichH55
09-12-2002, 12:08 AM
Originally posted by OfficerKarkovice
The one thing that bothers me the most is everybody ripping Aaron and all like he's Royce Clayton or something. I don't think anybody here thinks he's any Andruw Jones or even Joe Borchard for that matter. What gets me tho is Aaron has been the model teammate and is the EXACT kind of ballplayer that you want to have on your team. He has never once complained, taken his lumps, sat on the bench, and when it has been asked of him he absolutely busts his ass out their on the field. These are the kind of guys that all winning teams have. Maybe he isn't a starting OF but I for one hope he is on the Sox for years to come.


Cant we do both? I never questioned Rowand as a 4th OF, but I would simply rather have LTP in center over him. I think everything you say is true, so saying that I dont want him starting doesnt mean I'm ripping him.....The two arent mutually exclusive here

PaleHoseGeorge
09-12-2002, 02:20 AM
Originally posted by doublem23
....I don't understand why we get so god damn attached to these average to mediocre (at best) players....

My guess would be we're Sox Fans, and we have no point of reference for what fielding a championship caliber team would be. It's hardly our fault; it's been like this for years.

:comiskey
"This Reinsdorf character is my kind of owner!"

:reinsy
"Charging them for cleaning their dirty uniforms? I luv you, man!"

doublem23
09-12-2002, 02:26 AM
Originally posted by bc2k
You don't need glasses and a statbook to tell Rowand has a much better swing than Thomas.

If your HONESTLY comparing Aaron Rowand to Frank Thomas, you're succeeding at making me take your claims even less seriously.

Career-threatening injuries. They do affect baseball swings (*gasp*!)

Of course, no mention of his recent surge. I wonder why.

:hurt
The best player in franchise history gets a little lee-way every now and then.

hold2dibber
09-12-2002, 09:02 AM
Originally posted by doublem23
We're statheads. Simply ignoring the overwhelming statistical evidence that shows that guys like Aaron Rowand and Josh Paul will more than likely never be decent starting big leaguers in favor of empirical evidence (like insanely running into walls magically transforms you into a solid fielder... I'm still trying to understand that one) really will get you into an argument here.

I want the Sox to win... that's precisely why I DON'T want to see Rowand trot out there day-in-and-day-out.

I don't understand why we get so god damn attached to these average to mediocre (at best) players. Sure, I'd like to see them step up and succeed (because it obviously helps the team), but realistically, the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the opposite happening.

And only JM answered my question. Look at the OFs of every contending team in baseball. How many do you really think Aaron Rowand would threaten to break into? Don't even bother with centerfield, because he's probably in the lower 1/2 of starting AL center fielders.

The getting attached to mediocre players is an affliction that often besets Sox fans. I remember people thinking that Lyle Mouton was a sure .285/25/100 guy if he got enough playing time, and that Grebeck was a legitimate starting SS at the MLB level.

With that said, I have been impressed with Rowand's play of late. He's an easy guy to root for because he plays so hard all the time. But that can't disguise the fact that his OBP is under .300 and he gets lousy jumps on virtually every fly ball hit his way. I root for Crash and I do enjoy watching him play, but I still don't believe he's good enough to be a starting outfielder at the MLB level outside of Tampa Bay.

voodoochile
09-12-2002, 09:54 AM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
The getting attached to mediocre players is an affliction that often besets Sox fans. I remember people thinking that Lyle Mouton was a sure .285/25/100 guy if he got enough playing time, and that Grebeck was a legitimate starting SS at the MLB level.

With that said, I have been impressed with Rowand's play of late. He's an easy guy to root for because he plays so hard all the time. But that can't disguise the fact that his OBP is under .300 and he gets lousy jumps on virtually every fly ball hit his way. I root for Crash and I do enjoy watching him play, but I still don't believe he's good enough to be a starting outfielder at the MLB level outside of Tampa Bay.

King Xerxes pointed out a while ago that one of the reasons all this hype surrounds Sox youngsters is Hawk constantly hyping them. I have to agree. Hawk is notorious for talking up the kids. All part of JR's spin team to convince the public he really does care and that the team is only minutes away from winning the championship on the strength of a bunch of can't miss kids...

:hawk
"Yessir that Chris Snopek was a real player. He could hit the ball a mile and I truly mean a mile. Then there was that Jeff Leifer guy... woooweee... what a hitter. I'm telling you Sox fans, this team is as good as any I have ever seen, and I've seen a few..."

:reinsy
"Tell it like I want you to... er like it is, Hawk... (giggles)"

Randar68
09-12-2002, 10:56 AM
Originally posted by bc2k
Aaron Rowand is a stud. This kid is one hell of a baseball player and I'm sick of hearing him called an at-best fourth outfielder.

Rowand's swing is short and quick, beautiful to watch. The man uses that swing to hit in the clutch. His focus with men in scoring position reminds me of Herbert Perry's. Rowand, like Perry, sees many pitches, concentrates and comes up big with runners on.

Of course he runs out every play and ran into a wall again tonight. He has hit a homer in two consecutive games and just drove in two more runners with a double.

He is the anti-superstar, so unlike Manny Ramirez by running full speed and unlike Thomas by hitting in the clutch.

Rowand is not in the category of untouchables like Buehrle, Konerko, and Magglio, but he's in the category just below. This kid needs to start everyday in center. Aaron better be batting second in 2003. As long as Thomas doesn't clog up the 3 hole, Rowand is going to come around to score many runs in 2003.

bc2k is a Fan of Rowand.


:whoflungpoo

yyz
09-12-2002, 07:43 PM
Aaron Rowand has a .773 OPS post-all-star break. This is the relevant number, since he has only been getting regular playing time since then. He just turned 25 two weeks ago, so he still has time to improve his plate discipline. He is an adequate fielder, and is attitude is great.

We're statheads. Simply ignoring the overwhelming statistical evidence that shows that guys like Aaron Rowand and Josh Paul will more than likely never be decent starting big leaguers in favor of empirical evidence (like insanely running into walls magically transforms you into a solid fielder... I'm still trying to understand that one) really will get you into an argument here.

If you're a stathead, let's see some stats. Where is this 'overwhelming evidence' we are ignoring? Offensively, I would say that with a .773 OPS, he is *already* a 'decent starting big leaguer' and he is still young. Defensively, you can pooh-pooh the empirical evidence, but the bottom line is that defensive abilities are not as easily assessed with stats as hitting, and empirical evidence still has a big role to play.

Does anyone here honestly believe this guy would be a starting outfielder on any contending team?

Look at the OFs of every contending team in baseball. How many do you really think Aaron Rowand would threaten to break into? Don't even bother with centerfield, because he's probably in the lower 1/2 of starting AL center fielders.

In 2000, we made the playoffs with Chris Singleton and a .683 OPS in center. Here are the OPSs of the CFs of every team contending for a playoff spot:

STL - Jim Edmonds - .958
NYY - Bernie Williams - .911
MIN - Torii Hunter - .867
ARI - Steve Finley - .865
ATL - Andruw Jones - .855
SFG - Kenny Lofton - .738
LAD - Dave Roberts - .711
OAK - Terrence Long - .704
ANA - Darrin Erstad - .704

Offensively, he's about in the middle of the pack of CFs on contending teams. And he's a hell of a lot cheaper than any of them. So your argument must be with his defense alone.

MisterB
09-12-2002, 08:52 PM
Originally posted by bc2k
Look at the DH's of every contending team in baseball. Do you think we can contend with that production in the lineup? What do your stats say about Thomas' 2003 numbers? You don't need glasses and a statbook to tell Rowand has a much better swing than Thomas.

Designated hitter stats thru 9/12/02:

RBIs (team) - White Sox (92) - Rank: 1st
RBIs (individual) - Thomas (81) - Rank: 1st
Walks (t) - White Sox (77) - Rank: 1st
Walks (i) - Thomas (75) - Rank: 1st
HRs (t) - White Sox (25) - Rank: 2nd
HRs (i) - Thomas (23) - Rank: 2nd
Runs (t) - White Sox (71) - Rank: 6th
Runs (i) - Thomas (64) - Rank: 2nd

Despite his low average, Thomas is wrestling Ellis Burks for the 1 and 2 spots among DH's. No doubt if Edgar Martinez was healthy all season, he'd be up there too, but he wasn't (so nyah!). Frank Thomas at his worst is still better than a lot of ML hitters.

hold2dibber
09-12-2002, 09:19 PM
Originally posted by yyz
Aaron Rowand has a .773 OPS post-all-star break. This is the relevant number, since he has only been getting regular playing time since then. He just turned 25 two weeks ago, so he still has time to improve his plate discipline. He is an adequate fielder, and is attitude is great.



If you're a stathead, let's see some stats. Where is this 'overwhelming evidence' we are ignoring? Offensively, I would say that with a .773 OPS, he is *already* a 'decent starting big leaguer' and he is still young. Defensively, you can pooh-pooh the empirical evidence, but the bottom line is that defensive abilities are not as easily assessed with stats as hitting, and empirical evidence still has a big role to play.





In 2000, we made the playoffs with Chris Singleton and a .683 OPS in center. Here are the OPSs of the CFs of every team contending for a playoff spot:

STL - Jim Edmonds - .958
NYY - Bernie Williams - .911
MIN - Torii Hunter - .867
ARI - Steve Finley - .865
ATL - Andruw Jones - .855
SFG - Kenny Lofton - .738
LAD - Dave Roberts - .711
OAK - Terrence Long - .704
ANA - Darrin Erstad - .704

Offensively, he's about in the middle of the pack of CFs on contending teams. And he's a hell of a lot cheaper than any of them. So your argument must be with his defense alone.

Great post, very good points. But I still think he's playing over his head right now. I hope I'm wrong because I really do like the kid and I love watching him play.

hold2dibber
09-12-2002, 09:21 PM
Originally posted by MisterB
Designated hitter stats thru 9/12/02:

RBIs (team) - White Sox (92) - Rank: 1st
RBIs (individual) - Thomas (81) - Rank: 1st
Walks (t) - White Sox (77) - Rank: 1st
Walks (i) - Thomas (75) - Rank: 1st
HRs (t) - White Sox (25) - Rank: 2nd
HRs (i) - Thomas (23) - Rank: 2nd
Runs (t) - White Sox (71) - Rank: 6th
Runs (i) - Thomas (64) - Rank: 2nd

Despite his low average, Thomas is wrestling Ellis Burks for the 1 and 2 spots among DH's. No doubt if Edgar Martinez was healthy all season, he'd be up there too, but he wasn't (so nyah!). Frank Thomas at his worst is still better than a lot of ML hitters.

Thank you - do you know where he ranks in terms of OPS?

yyz
09-12-2002, 09:28 PM
But I still think he's playing over his head right now. I hope I'm wrong because I really do like the kid and I love watching him play.

Yeah, he's the kind of guy that makes you want to root for him. I really hope he keeps it up.

delben91
09-12-2002, 09:39 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
:whoflungpoo

I jump on here and see this thread, the first thought I have, "wonder how long it took randar to reply". It's good to see some things never change.

Here's one for everyone, and here's to the college life, despite the damn engineering curriculum.
:gulp:

MisterB
09-12-2002, 09:49 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
Thank you - do you know where he ranks in terms of OPS?

That's a little tough - very few teams have gone with one full-time DH and only 10 players have over 200 ABs as a DH, and of that 10 Frank would rank 9th in OPS.

I had given both team and individual DH ranks to give some comparison of Frank vs. every other teams' total DH production. But here's a more direct comparison:

Frank Thomas vs. Other Teams' total DH production:

HR: 2nd (CLE - 30)
RBI: 4th (SEA - 91)
Runs: t-11th (CLE - 94)
Walks: t-3rd (NYY - 76)

kermittheefrog
09-13-2002, 03:10 AM
Originally posted by Randar68
:whoflungpoo

Randar I agree with you but you're really running that tag into the ground.

Randar68
09-13-2002, 03:01 PM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
Randar I agree with you but you're really running that tag into the ground.

It's easier than wasting my time trying to explain something to a brick wall.

kermittheefrog
09-13-2002, 04:02 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
It's easier than wasting my time trying to explain something to a brick wall.

Sometimes it's fun to try and explain things to brick walls. Plus, a lot of times they reward you by saying something stupider than what they started with and then you can laugh it up.

yyz
09-13-2002, 04:28 PM
Sometimes it's fun to try and explain things to brick walls. Plus, a lot of times they reward you by saying something stupider than what they started with and then you can laugh it up.

Maybe you're just expressing a general sentiment that's not specifically directed at this thread, but no one has really responded to my post suggesting that since the all-star break, he's been playing solid major league ball. Those who disagree insist that there is overwhelming evidence that he sucks and that anyone who likes him is dropping poo or is a brick wall. You have been asserting things to the brick wall, but not explaining things to the wall or engaging in a discussion with the wall. Apologies if you've done this elsewhere and I've missed it. Sure Borchard has bigger upside, but I see no reason why Rowand couldn't be an average to above-average CF for the Sox until Borchard is completely ready.

Randar68
09-13-2002, 05:14 PM
Originally posted by yyz
Maybe you're just expressing a general sentiment that's not specifically directed at this thread, but no one has really responded to my post suggesting that since the all-star break, he's been playing solid major league ball.

Because the sample space is small. A couple of good games is the difference between a .600 OPS and a .750 OPS. In addition, he still gets aweful breaks on balls and takes terrible routes, continuing to run into walls because he STILL doesn't know where they are.

Originally posted by yyz
Those who disagree insist that there is overwhelming evidence that he sucks and that anyone who likes him is dropping poo or is a brick wall.

Yeah, it's called his Minor League Career.

hold2dibber
09-13-2002, 05:19 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
Because the sample space is small. A couple of good games is the difference between a .600 OPS and a .750 OPS. In addition, he still gets aweful breaks on balls and takes terrible routes, continuing to run into walls because he STILL doesn't know where they are.



Yeah, it's called his Minor League Career.

I agree that there is ample reason (e.g., minor league career) to be skeptical of Rowand's ability to perform consistently on a long-term (i.e., whole season) basis at the MLB level. But I still hold out hope that perhaps Rowand has simply matured and learned better plate discipline. Shea Hilldebrand did it and I'm guessing there are others who have figured it out as well. Maybe Rowand's one of them. But I agree that it is too early to tell and that the odds are against him.

yyz
09-13-2002, 05:53 PM
Yeah, it's called his Minor League Career.

You can keep saying 'he projects to suck' for a while longer, but at some point, if he keeps it up, you have to acknowledge his actual stats. Just because you bought a copy of Baseball Prospectus and it said he was going to suck doesn't mean he currently *does* suck. He had an 816 OPS last year, and currently has a 733 OPS in 384 career major league ABs.

People keep questioning his fielding, saying running into walls doesn't make you great. I don't think stats capture fielding all that well, but for you stat guys, here's what he has done at CF this year - .989 fielding percentage, 3.02 range factor and .936 zone rating. If you compare him to the 22 major league center fielders who are 'qualified' (ie, have played 2/3 of their team's games at center), he would be:

14th in fielding %, between Corey Patterson and Jim Edmonds

3rd in range factor between Erstad and Shinjo

Tied for 1st in zone rating, with Erstad

Sure, maybe he'll crap out, but his actual performance has been quite good, and you would think a bunch of Sox fans wouldn't be insisting that it isn't happening just so somebody's minor league projection system can be vindicated.

Randar68
09-13-2002, 06:12 PM
Originally posted by yyz
14th in fielding %, between Corey Patterson and Jim Edmonds

3rd in range factor between Erstad and Shinjo

Tied for 1st in zone rating, with Erstad



I'm not much of a fan for stats when it comes to fielding. It is not an area of the game that lends itself to such as easily. Kermit is the big stat-head.

Me, I watch him play CF and could count numerous kids in 13-14 year old baseball leagues who get better jumps and take better routes.

He went almost 100 AB's this year without taking a walk. He NEVER took walks in the minors. He has WAY over 1000 minor league at-bats to judge him by, and there are 384 pro AB's. For someone supporting statistics, that is beyond significant in terms of sample size.

Could he hit 20 HR's in the majors? Possibly. Could he do it with an OBP over .300 or an average well above .250? I find it extremely unlikely.

I am a bigger fan of the "Tools" system of scouting, and he is average at best in all fields. Does that make a good Major Leaguer? Almost never.

Randar68
09-13-2002, 06:14 PM
Originally posted by yyz
You can keep saying 'he projects to suck' for a while longer, but at some point, if he keeps it up, you have to acknowledge his actual stats. Just because you bought a copy of Baseball Prospectus and it said he was going to suck doesn't mean he currently *does* suck. He had an 816 OPS last year, and currently has a 733 OPS in 384 career major league ABs.


I rarely offer an opinion on a prospect I have not seen play in person unless I have info from reliable first-hand sources. So you can put your "Baseball Prospectus" comment in your pipe and smoke it.

PaleHoseGeorge
09-13-2002, 07:44 PM
Rowand has played marginally better than I expected, just like Lofton played marginally worse than I expected before him.

Thinking either of these guys is the solution to our CF problems is a pipe dream . The Sox haven't had even an average CFer since the glory days of Lance Johnson.

:reinsy
"And we never will until you Sox Fans start buying tickets."

:KW
"That's right, boss. It's not our fault. Huh-huh, huh huh!"

:jerry
"Getting fired by these two imbeciles might be a blessing."

yyz
09-13-2002, 07:45 PM
I rarely offer an opinion on a prospect I have not seen play in person unless I have info from reliable first-hand sources.

Because the sample space is small. A couple of good games is the difference between a .600 OPS and a .750 OPS.

How big is the sample size on your first-hand prospect scouting?

yyz
09-13-2002, 08:12 PM
Well, I appear to have jinxed him.

bc2k
09-13-2002, 08:50 PM
Originally posted by yyz
Well, I appear to have jinxed him.

I was thinking the same thing. Although he did put the ball in play that allowed two runs to score. Soriano knew he wasn't going to get the double play since Rowand was buring down the line, maybe Rowand forced that error. But what a play by Magglio. Looks like he got a little Valentin baserunning in him.

Randar68
09-13-2002, 11:06 PM
Originally posted by yyz
How big is the sample size on your first-hand prospect scouting?

About 10 games in the minors and quite a few in Chicago.

In general, I was referring to your statistical arguement in reference to his #'s in his minor league AB's, which outnumber his major league at-bats by at least 5:1.

You should have known this, or I am wasting my time...

You don't need a real large sample size to evaluate talent, tools and abilities. You do for stats. If this is not plainly obvious, then this is pointless.

kermittheefrog
09-14-2002, 08:09 AM
Wow things have gotten interesting here.

I don't believe in Aaron Rowand because his minor league numbers were mediocre. To anyone who says he may have learned plate discipline in the majors look at his 10 walks and 50 strikeouts in 266 ABs this year. That's abysmal. If you narrow it to the second half of the season since thats when he's gotten regular PT it's still 9 bb 33 k in 179 ab. Guys with solid plate discipline walk in at least 10% of their plate appearances. Rowand isn't even close this year.

As for his defense in centerfield. Most importantly throw range factor out because it's useless. Until you adjust for tendencies on the pitching staff you can't do anything with range factor. I'm not the biggest zone rating fan in the world but it seems relatively accurate based on who the scouts say is a good fielder and who more accurate (and more difficult to calculate) stats say is a good fielder. So while I don't think Rowand can hit and there is plenty of evidence he can't, I'm starting to think there is a chance he may be able to play a better than average centerfield but I'm still skeptical. It's still a small sample size and it's still fielding statistics which aren't nearly as reliable or accurate as batting statistics.

Everytime I think about Roand in center I have to ask, if Rowand has the skills to play center why hasn't he been there all along? Every outfield prospect that has a reasonable shot at playing center gets put there to start off because it's the most demanding position physically. There is a reason he was a corner guy, it's rare to find a player who plays several hundred games (minor league or major league) at position X and then moves to a more difficult position.

kermittheefrog
09-14-2002, 08:12 AM
Originally posted by Randar68


You don't need a real large sample size to evaluate talent, tools and abilities. You do for stats. If this is not plainly obvious, then this is pointless.

Come on Randar you're getting a little extreme in your defense here. You know as well as I do that while you don't need as large of a sample size to evaluate tools it helps to watch a guy as much as possible.

Joel Perez
09-14-2002, 10:50 AM
Rowand is playing the only spot that's available for him. Something tells me he's being scouted for another team next year or 2004.

It's safe to assume that this web site does not believe that Rowand will stay as the long-term answer to CF for the Pale Hose. Contrary to popular belief, the same can also be said for Joe Borchard--just because he played QB at Stanford does not mean that he will instantly become a CF here in the Bigs.

Both Rowand and Borchard are future "corner guys". The Sox have to make up their minds between the four of these guys who they want patrolling their outfield for the next five years: Lee, Rowand, Borchard and Ordonez. You can pretty much cross Jeff Liefer's name out because he inserted his size 13 foot in his mouth this summer about non-playing time.

And what about Frank? If he goes, maybe one of the four outfielders can slide into the DH spot, then most of the OFs would be happy...most of them.

Willie "Hollywood" Harris has some experience at CF, but since he can't hit a lick now, the Sox has one of several new problems to address before 2003. Just plugging in stopgaps will not help a team in the long run, and the Sox have yet to figure this out.

Damn that Tony Tavarez! Darrin Erstad should be wearing Sox pinstripes right about now.

PaleHoseGeorge
09-14-2002, 11:00 AM
Originally posted by Joel Perez
Rowand is playing the only spot that's available for him. Something tells me he's being scouted for another team next year or 2004.

It's safe to assume that this web site does not believe that Rowand will stay as the long-term answer to CF for the Pale Hose. Contrary to popular belief, the same can also be said for Joe Borchard--just because he played QB at Stanford does not mean that he will instantly become a CF here in the Bigs....

I can think of five million reasons Joe Borchard will be given every opportunity to play somewhere everyday for the Chicago White Sox.

As for Rowand, nobody this side of Tampa Bay would consider him for anything more than a #4 outfielder role--same as the Sox.

:reinsy
"I don't cough up those sorts of signing bonuses unless I intend to get my money's worth!"

maurice
09-16-2002, 02:48 PM
Crash's defensive shortcomings are obvious. He regularly gets bad jumps. However, his competition on the Sox probably isn't any better defensively. Harris is a second baseman, and LTP is a rightfielder. In any event, Sox management obviously thinks that a player's defensive ability is irrellevant, and they're not going to trade for an Andruw Jones or a Bernie Williams in my lifetime.

In terms of offensive production, Rowand has been an average or slightly below average AL centerfielder. Only four regular AL centerfielders have posted an 800+ OPS while playing CF this year (Williams, Beltran, Hunter, and Winn). Six (including Crash) fall between 700 and 800. The rest (including Erstad and Long -- starters on contending teams) are below 700.

In sum, Rowand is a perfectly servicable starting major league centerfielder at this stage of his career. Championship teams are not made up of eight great position players. Some are only average or below average (e.g., Chuck Knoblauch with the yanks), and could not start for many other major league clubs.

The issue the Sox clearly need to address to contend in 2003 is starting pitching. The rest will sort itself out.

RichH55
09-18-2002, 04:58 PM
Originally posted by maurice
Crash's defensive shortcomings are obvious. He regularly gets bad jumps. However, his competition on the Sox probably isn't any better defensively. Harris is a second baseman, and LTP is a rightfielder. In any event, Sox management obviously thinks that a player's defensive ability is irrellevant, and they're not going to trade for an Andruw Jones or a Bernie Williams in my lifetime.

In terms of offensive production, Rowand has been an average or slightly below average AL centerfielder. Only four regular AL centerfielders have posted an 800+ OPS while playing CF this year (Williams, Beltran, Hunter, and Winn). Six (including Crash) fall between 700 and 800. The rest (including Erstad and Long -- starters on contending teams) are below 700.

In sum, Rowand is a perfectly servicable starting major league centerfielder at this stage of his career. Championship teams are not made up of eight great position players. Some are only average or below average (e.g., Chuck Knoblauch with the yanks), and could not start for many other major league clubs.

The issue the Sox clearly need to address to contend in 2003 is starting pitching. The rest will sort itself out.

I agree with almost all of this post.....However I still think LTP, Lee, and Mags gives you a better option....if pitching is a problem then putting a guy whose defense you question and whose hitting isnt anything to write home about out in CF is counterproductive at best. Lee can be dealt, but we dont have and simply should not deal him unless we get a good deal

SI1020
09-18-2002, 05:29 PM
Down through the years I thought Floyd Robinson, Fred Talbot, Kevin Bell, Ken Kravec, Craig Grebeck, Greg Norton and Chris Singleton among others would make it big with the Sox. Only Floyd Robinson in the above list amounted to much. I was really big on Kravec. OK I admit I like Aaron Rowand too. More for his attitude and syle of play than anything. We all have our particular prejudices. Borchard probably has more potential. That being said Rowand and his supporters really took a beating here, I hope he hangs on and has a decent career.

maurice
09-19-2002, 02:52 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
I still think LTP, Lee, and Mags gives you a better option.

You may be right, and that could be the direction this team is headed. In all likelihood, you'd get similar defense and more offensive production. My only point is that the alternatives, namely:

RF - Maggs
CF - Crash
LF - Lee
DH - Thomas

or

RF - Maggs
CF - Crash
LF - Borchard
DH - Lee

or

RF - Maggs
CF - Crash
LF - Borchard
DH - Thomas

do not necessarily eliminate the Sox from contention. The first alternative allows the Sox to start Borchard at AAA next year (to try to cut down on his Ks and get a longer look in CF). OTOH, a rotation that includes four starting pitchers with ERAs over 4.70 does necessarily eliminate the Sox from contention.