PDA

View Full Version : ESPN says


oldcomiskey
01-12-2003, 11:10 AM
on one the message board a poster claimed he knew what Montreal wanted for Colon and Vasquez----I thought it was a good deal.. Crede and Lee and Rauch and somebosy else that escapes My memory----then I thought He may be making this up because I didnt know we were going after both

Anybody else heard anything about this?

voodoochile
01-12-2003, 11:37 AM
Originally posted by oldcomiskey
on one the message board a poster claimed he knew what Montreal wanted for Colon and Vasquez----I thought it was a good deal.. Crede and Lee and Rauch and somebosy else that escapes My memory----then I thought He may be making this up because I didnt know we were going after both

Anybody else heard anything about this?

I thought that was Crede Garland and Rauch. I don't want to trade Crede and only want to give up two of our MLB ready starters IF we get two in return. Lee instead of Crede and I do this trade in a heart beat...

gosox41
01-12-2003, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by oldcomiskey
on one the message board a poster claimed he knew what Montreal wanted for Colon and Vasquez----I thought it was a good deal.. Crede and Lee and Rauch and somebosy else that escapes My memory----then I thought He may be making this up because I didnt know we were going after both

Anybody else heard anything about this?

If KW does this he should be hung by his balls. Colon has injury problems and odds are won't be signed for a long term deal. It's actually a smart move because I don't seem him being as good in 2-3 years as he was in 2002. Of course, by that perverse logic it means that KW will sign him to a long term deal for more money then he gave Belle.

I like Crede. Trading him creates a hole in the infield and offensively. I don't think Tony G is an everyday player 3B or SS. I think Lee is do for a breakout year. Looks like he's finally learned the strike zone. If he lives up to the hype this year (and the next few) it would be a steal for the Expos to get Lee straight up for Colon.

Bob

TornLabrum
01-12-2003, 12:47 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
I thought that was Crede Garland and Rauch. I don't want to trade Crede and only want to give up two of our MLB ready starters IF we get two in return. Lee instead of Crede and I do this trade in a heart beat...

Maybe to sweeten the pot Prof. Chaos will throw in Buehrle!

The one person you don't give up is Crede for one simple reason. Who are you going to replace him with? Valentin and put Graffanino at SS?

WinningUgly!
01-12-2003, 12:56 PM
The only way I'd be willing to involve Crede in this would be if Vidro were thrown in as well. We would then have Vidro at 2nd, slide Jimenez over to SS & Valentin over to 3rd. Not sure I'd want to see this happen.

Lip Man 1
01-12-2003, 01:18 PM
Don't worry....Sox fans will get NOTHING and like it!

Lip

Brian26
01-12-2003, 02:12 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
I think Lee is do for a breakout year. Looks like he's finally learned the strike zone. If he lives up to the hype this year (and the next few) it would be a steal for the Expos to get Lee straight up for Colon.

Bob


My gut tells me the opposite. I think we've seen the best from Lee. I think he's got Lyle Mouton talent, and he's just been lucky over the past 3 1/2 years to have had a ton of playing time to put up decent numbers, but not great. At this point in his career, if he can't catch, run the bases, doesn't know the strike zone and seems to have his head in the game 50% of the time tops, I don't think he's going to develop any more. He's expendable. I'd trade Lee much quicker than Crede or Rauch.

Huisj
01-12-2003, 02:38 PM
Take a look at Lee's on base percentage and his walk totals last year and then say again that he hasn't learned the strike zone. because from what i see on his stats he learned the strike zone. and his fielding wasn't super last year but he wasn't much worse than lots and lots of other left fielders in baseball. why does everyone still hate this guy so much.

PaleHoseGeorge
01-12-2003, 02:51 PM
Originally posted by Brian26
My gut tells me the opposite. I think we've seen the best from Lee. I think he's got Lyle Mouton talent, and he's just been lucky over the past 3 1/2 years to have had a ton of playing time to put up decent numbers, but not great. At this point in his career, if he can't catch, run the bases, doesn't know the strike zone and seems to have his head in the game 50% of the time tops, I don't think he's going to develop any more. He's expendable. I'd trade Lee much quicker than Crede or Rauch.

Learning to be patient at the plate is not luck. Lee is drawing walks, and that's not a skill he is likely to lose. That's one of the biggest reasons Lee is already one of the best leftfielders in the game.

Unregistered
01-12-2003, 03:08 PM
I think you guys forget that had Florida not backed out on the deal, the Expos would have ultimately traded Colon for Relief pitcher Blaine Neal, minor league pitcher Luke Hudson (from Cincy) and two unnamed minor leaguers. If we turn around and give up Lee, already an established, productive player and one of our highly touted prospects (Borchard, Rauch, Crede) we will once again look like the suckers... now if we're talking about Colon and Vasquez, well thats another story... but still, it looks like Montreal is just trying to stock up on prospects, not really players with a heck of a lot of playing experience in the majors...

Brian26
01-12-2003, 03:46 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Learning to be patient at the plate is not luck. Lee is drawing walks, and that's not a skill he is likely to lose. That's one of the biggest reasons Lee is already one of the best leftfielders in the game.

Wow, that's some high praise. When you say "one of the best", where does that rank him in your opinion? Top 5 or Top 10?

I'd put Manny Ramirez, Garret Anderson, Shannon Stewart and Jacques Jones above him in the AL without thinking twice.

In the NL, I'd rank Barry Bonds, Brian Giles, Chipper Jones, Albert Pujols, Pat Burrell, Luis Gonzalez, Adam Dunn and Brian Jordan over him in the NL.

That puts Carlos at #13 out of 30, not even considering guys that would come in pretty close like Higgenson, Kevin Millar, or a healthy Catalanotto.

I stand by my position, Carlos is an average left-fielder, middle-of-the-pack.

PaleHoseGeorge
01-12-2003, 04:08 PM
Originally posted by Brian26
Wow, that's some high praise. When you say "one of the best", where does that rank him in your opinion? Top 5 or Top 10?


As somebody here previously posted, the statheads at DiamondMind rated Lee #3 among all everyday A.L leftfielders at the conclusion of the 2002 season. By comparision, Paul Konerko rated a #7 among everyday A.L. firstbasemen.

Lee walks a lot compared to his peers. He also gets to more balls than we give him credit for. I'm not sure he would rate #3 in my book, but I feel he is definitely the most underrated ballplayer amongst Sox Fans. It seems like we never go more than a week before somebody else declares he is expendable and needs to go.

PaleHoseGeorge
01-12-2003, 04:14 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
As somebody here previously posted, the statheads at DiamondMind rated Lee #3 among all everyday A.L leftfielders at the conclusion of the 2002 season. By comparision, Paul Konerko rated a #7 among everyday A.L. firstbasemen.

Lee walks a lot compared to his peers. He also gets to more balls than we give him credit for. I'm not sure he would rate #3 in my book, but I feel he is definitely the most underrated ballplayer amongst Sox Fans. It seems like we never go more than a week before somebody else declares he is expendable and needs to go.

Just to further clarify, Diamond Mind rated the Sox #3 in left field in the American League. This includes everybody who played there, even Josh Paul. As the everyday leftfielder, I ascribed the rating to Lee, even though there were several games he didn't play there.

:jerry
"I did my part to bring down the team's rating!"

:versatile
"If I can't make the team as catcher, maybe Jerry will let me play left field instead!"

:liefer
"Hey, that's my job!"

:ohno
"Oh no, it isn't!"

Brian26
01-12-2003, 04:16 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
As somebody here previously posted, the statheads at DiamondMind rated Lee #3 among all everyday A.L leftfielders at the conclusion of the 2002 season. By comparision, Paul Konerko rated a #7 among everyday A.L. firstbasemen.

Lee walks a lot compared to his peers. He also gets to more balls than we give him credit for. I'm not sure he would rate #3 in my book, but I feel he is definitely the most underrated ballplayer amongst Sox Fans. It seems like we never go more than a week before somebody else declares he is expendable and needs to go.

Well, I'll give Caballo credit for improving in the outfield a little last year, even though he still made Steve Kemp look like f***in' Willie Mays. His baserunning was awful. Carlos bailed us out during the Cubs series. I'd just like to see his head in the game a little more. He looks lost out there sometimes.

WinningUgly!
01-12-2003, 04:19 PM
According to CBS/Sportsline (http://cbs.sportsline.com/mlb/playerrankings/LF), C-Lee is top 5 in the AL.

Brian26
01-12-2003, 04:26 PM
Yeah, they rank him #4 in the AL, and #12 overall. Not bad. Only thing is- they don't consider defense in those rankings. Still, offensively, 12 out of 30 is better than average, but not top of the game.

idseer
01-12-2003, 04:43 PM
i still don't see jr signing either colon or vasquez to long term contracts. he simply won't afford it!

now do you want either or both of these pitchers for one or 2 years tops? or have crede (our ONLY 3rd baseman ... and please don't tell me jose is a 3rd baseman), rauch ... unlimited potential, garland ... only now maturing and much potential .............. all three for years to come?
anyone who would consider this trade needs their head examined.

PaleHoseGeorge
01-12-2003, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by Brian26
Yeah, they rank him #4 in the AL, and #12 overall. Not bad. Only thing is- they don't consider defense in those rankings. Still, offensively, 12 out of 30 is better than average, but not top of the game.

His fielding average was .996. He has more total chances than average and an above-average Zone Rating.

Mind you, left field is a position where what you do with the stick is far more important than the glove, but pointing this out seems futile. All anybody ever seems to care about are the exceptional games that stick in their memory. For Lee, those are the games he was thrown out on the bases. It's like Valentin and his errors at shortstop. Nobody can make a convincing case that he is losing games, but they feel better knowing he isn't around to make them upset.

I would be willing to trade Paul Konerko far more than Carlos Lee, because the numbers show Lee is far more difficult to replace than Konerko. That includes defense, even though neither 1B or LF are very demanding with the glove.

TornLabrum
01-12-2003, 05:28 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
His fielding average was .996. He has more total chances than average and an above-average Zone Rating.

Mind you, left field is a position where what you do with the stick is far more important than the glove, but pointing this out seems futile. All anybody ever seems to care about are the exceptional games that stick in their memory. For Lee, those are the games he was thrown out on the bases. It's like Valentin and his errors at shortstop. Nobody can make a convincing case that he is losing games, but they feel better knowing he isn't around to make them upset.

I would be willing to trade Paul Konerko far more than Carlos Lee, because the numbers show Lee is far more difficult to replace than Konerko. That includes defense, even though neither 1B or LF are very demanding with the glove.

I'm sure lots of fans felt a whole lot better when Prof. Chaos, on the recommendation of fans and writers decided to shore up the defense at shortstop by trading for Royce Clayton. That really improved the defense up the middle.

Now Lee has taken the place of Valentin as club scapegoat. The real problem, however, is we have one of the youngest (and therefore lowest paid) starting rotations in baseball. The problem ain't Lee, folks.

gogosoxgogo
01-12-2003, 06:06 PM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
I'm sure lots of fans felt a whole lot better when Prof. Chaos, on the recommendation of fans and writers decided to shore up the defense at shortstop by trading for Royce Clayton. That really improved the defense up the middle.

Now Lee has taken the place of Valentin as club scapegoat. The real problem, however, is we have one of the youngest (and therefore lowest paid) starting rotations in baseball. The problem ain't Lee, folks.

The problem is not that they're young (look at Oakland), it's that they're unproven and haven't developed into anything.

oldcomiskey
01-12-2003, 07:39 PM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
I'm sure lots of fans felt a whole lot better when Prof. Chaos, on the recommendation of fans and writers decided to shore up the defense at shortstop by trading for Royce Clayton. That really improved the defense up the middle.

Now Lee has taken the place of Valentin as club scapegoat. The real problem, however, is we have one of the youngest (and therefore lowest paid) starting rotations in baseball. The problem ain't Lee, folks.

Nobody is trying to place the blame on Caballo--but he is our most marketable player--I mean youre not trading Ordonez or Konerko and Thomas makes too much money

RedPinStripes
01-12-2003, 07:48 PM
Originally posted by oldcomiskey
on one the message board a poster claimed he knew what Montreal wanted for Colon and Vasquez----I thought it was a good deal.. Crede and Lee and Rauch and somebosy else that escapes My memory----then I thought He may be making this up because I didnt know we were going after both

Anybody else heard anything about this?

**** that! COlon is a f\a after this season. Crede and Rauch for that. No way.

jeremyb1
01-12-2003, 09:39 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
His fielding average was .996. He has more total chances than average and an above-average Zone Rating.

Mind you, left field is a position where what you do with the stick is far more important than the glove, but pointing this out seems futile. All anybody ever seems to care about are the exceptional games that stick in their memory. For Lee, those are the games he was thrown out on the bases. It's like Valentin and his errors at shortstop. Nobody can make a convincing case that he is losing games, but they feel better knowing he isn't around to make them upset.

I would be willing to trade Paul Konerko far more than Carlos Lee, because the numbers show Lee is far more difficult to replace than Konerko. That includes defense, even though neither 1B or LF are very demanding with the glove.

you make a great point. it seems to be personal for the majority of the fans who are anti-carlos. its somewhat natural because certain losses and certain mistakes are more painful that others. however, you have to take the good with the bad. that said i still don't always understand how incredibly upset and offended some are with carlos. he makes mistakes and they're sometimes costly but he seems to play hard to me. some people's feelings toward him almost seem to border on hatred.

if you want to win the most games (which is the goal, right?) you have to look at the big picture. the key to that in my mind is learning to appretiate aspects of the game such as walks which aren't flashy yet have a large effect on winning games. the reverse of this is also true. while the occasional mistake by a player like carlos in a key situation in a game can be incredibly frustrating, in the long run you have to let go and toss it aside. you have to understand that there were a lot of other plays that contributed to a loss. while one particular play may be the most apparent, that doesn't mean there weren't a number of other factors that led to a loss.

a great example of this can be found in all of the games we lost last season when the offense temporarily collapsed for about 15 games. its easy to blame a blown save or a base running mistake for the loss in a game we lost 1-0 or 2-1. however, what's really the problem here? why did we lose the game? was it giving up to runs to lose 2-1 in the 9th or the fact that we only scored one run against a guy who shouldn't even be starting in the majors such as may on kc or bernero on detroit when we have a team that is based on offense? you have to be realistic and look at the big picture. i think carlos has won us considerably more games than he's lost for us.

Lip Man 1
01-12-2003, 10:26 PM
Just something to consider...

For at least the past three years the Sox have tried to win by overpowering the opposition from a hitting standpoint. At BEST the results have been mediocre.

Maybe they need to go back to their roots, pitching, speed and defense and see what happens.

As for me I'd rather win a game 3-2 then lose one 10-8.

Lip

voodoochile
01-13-2003, 01:09 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Just something to consider...

As for me I'd rather win a game 3-2 then lose one 10-8.

Lip

That's too deep for me...

:D:

Improved defense is always a good idea, which is the main reason I don't want to trade Crede either. But, given the choice between improved defense or imporved starting pitching, I want the pitching.

I think people are more willing to trade Carlos, because there is "Bazooka" Joe Borchard waiting in the wings. Yes, Joe is slated for CF, but realistically, he is going to end up in a corner slot one of these days. Thus Lee is deemed more expendable than Konerko. If you plug Lee's stats into the firstbasemen's ratings, where does he rate? Konerko seems to be a more productive hitter to me, but their stats appear very similar.

Of course no one has to be traded at all, but odds are that unless the Sox want to give up more pitchers than they get back, they are going to have to throw in some other talent to land a big name or two from the Montreal rotation or elsewhere.

MisterB
01-13-2003, 01:38 AM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Just to further clarify, Diamond Mind rated the Sox #3 in left field in the American League. This includes everybody who played there, even Josh Paul. As the everyday leftfielder, I ascribed the rating to Lee, even though there were several games he didn't play there.

Diamond Mind's Position Rankings (http://www.diamond-mind.com/articles/batdef02.htm) had the White Sox LF 8th in the AL and 18th overall.

I attribute the indifference to Caballo on the fact that he backslid on all fronts in '01 and that he just now has returned to the level he was at at the end of 2000, basically setting his development back 2 years. Fans looked at his numbers at age 24 and thought 'wow, think of what he'll do when he hits his prime'. Now he's going on 27 and his ceiling is looking lower than we'd hoped. Chalk it up to the perennial disillusionment of Sox fans.

kermittheefrog
01-13-2003, 03:32 AM
Originally posted by MisterB
Diamond Mind's Position Rankings (http://www.diamond-mind.com/articles/batdef02.htm) had the White Sox LF 8th in the AL and 18th overall.

I attribute the indifference to Caballo on the fact that he backslid on all fronts in '01 and that he just now has returned to the level he was at at the end of 2000, basically setting his development back 2 years. Fans looked at his numbers at age 24 and thought 'wow, think of what he'll do when he hits his prime'. Now he's going on 27 and his ceiling is looking lower than we'd hoped. Chalk it up to the perennial disillusionment of Sox fans.

Carlos just had the best season of his career and considering normal development he's about where he should be looking at his numbers at age 23 and 24. If anything he's better than he could have been expected to be because he's learned the strike zone. I think Carlos Lee is victim of expectations much too high. I remember some people going as far as comparing Carlos to Manny Ramirez. Yet Ramirez reached the majors sooner than Carlos and Ramirez was more productive than Carlos is now from day one. Realistically Carlos Lee is as good as anyone should have expected, maybe better.

jeremyb1
01-13-2003, 04:00 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile
That's too deep for me...

:D:

Improved defense is always a good idea, which is the main reason I don't want to trade Crede either. But, given the choice between improved defense or imporved starting pitching, I want the pitching.

I think people are more willing to trade Carlos, because there is "Bazooka" Joe Borchard waiting in the wings. Yes, Joe is slated for CF, but realistically, he is going to end up in a corner slot one of these days. Thus Lee is deemed more expendable than Konerko. If you plug Lee's stats into the firstbasemen's ratings, where does he rate? Konerko seems to be a more productive hitter to me, but their stats appear very similar.

Of course no one has to be traded at all, but odds are that unless the Sox want to give up more pitchers than they get back, they are going to have to throw in some other talent to land a big name or two from the Montreal rotation or elsewhere.

i would say the offensive production at 1b and lf is pretty comperable. there may be slightly more offense at 1b, but not a ton more. also, clee's stats were at least close to as good as konerko's last season. if we were to trade paully we could just as easily slide carlos into 1B and play borchard in left. i don't think which position the two are currently playing makes all that much of a difference. also, borchard isn't really pushing anyone right now so lets see how he does in AAA this season.

harwar
01-13-2003, 08:29 AM
I've been saying for 3 seasons that C.Lee is about to have a breakout year.This year i'm sure i'm right.I see improvement in all facets of his game,save baserunning,and that will come.I still think that he reminds me of a young manny ramirez.I wouldn't touch Lee or Crede.I'd include Rauch in a deal with others tho,i have a feeling that hes' going to end up a middle reliever.

mrwag
01-13-2003, 08:39 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile

Improved defense is always a good idea, which is the main reason I don't want to trade Crede either. But, given the choice between improved defense or imporved starting pitching, I want the pitching.

I wouldn't give up defense for one pitcher who MIGHT win 15-20 games. Good defense would help EVERY pitcher who goes out to the mound. If everyone who goes on that mounds knows that he has the defense behind him, he'll be so much more comfortable and able to compete with his stuff. Otherwise, we trade Crede for Colon and we may actually be set back.

Trade offense - our's is mediocre and inconsistent at best anyway (if not underachieving).

soxtalker
01-13-2003, 09:05 AM
Originally posted by mrwag
I wouldn't give up defense for one pitcher who MIGHT win 15-20 games. Good defense would help EVERY pitcher who goes out to the mound. If everyone who goes on that mounds knows that he has the defense behind him, he'll be so much more comfortable and able to compete with his stuff. Otherwise, we trade Crede for Colon and we may actually be set back.

Trade offense - our's is mediocre and inconsistent at best anyway (if not underachieving).

I agree that we should avoid trading defense. One thing that has plagued the Sox for years is their shoddy defense. (How things have changed since the 60's, when the Sox were known for their pitching and defense!)

PaleHoseGeorge
01-13-2003, 09:32 AM
Originally posted by soxtalker
I agree that we should avoid trading defense. One thing that has plagued the Sox for years is their shoddy defense. (How things have changed since the 60's, when the Sox were known for their pitching and defense!)

Sorry, but I think you and Wag have it backwards. Defense starts with pitching. The pitcher handles the ball more than everybody else on the field combined. There is no debating this fact.

You can only expect to win when your team scores more runs than it gives up. Given that position players (with the possible exception of catchers) have a far greater role to play scoring runs at the plate than preventing them in the field, it simply follows that pitchers who can pitch and players that can hit ought to be priority #1 and #2 in that precise order. Fielding is #3 at best.

PaleHoseGeorge
01-13-2003, 09:45 AM
Originally posted by MisterB
Diamond Mind's Position Rankings (http://www.diamond-mind.com/articles/batdef02.htm) had the White Sox LF 8th in the AL and 18th overall....

You're right. My memory failed me. The two-highest ranked positions for the Sox were RF (Ordonez) with a #1, 2B (Durham) with a #4, and DH (Thomas) with a #4.

Most telling was the Sox pitching staff getting a #7. That's a perfect fit for a team that won 81 and lost 81. #7 is as close to mediocre as you can get in a field of 14 teams.

mrwag
01-13-2003, 02:01 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Sorry, but I think you and Wag have it backwards. Defense starts with pitching. The pitcher handles the ball more than everybody else on the field combined. There is no debating this fact.

My point is, why downgrade defense to upgrade for 1 pitcher? That one pitcher, who pitches once every 5 days, for 1/2 to 2/3 of a game. Defense plays behind EVERY pitcher, EVERY game of the year.
How many games did we lose last year by stupid plays? No pitcher can routinely overcome shoddy ball handling behind him. Plus, I think Crede's batt is a major improvment (based upon what he showed last year) over anything else we can put at 3rd base.

I'd rather trade offense (something we thought would get us to the promised land and hasn't). Pitching and defense wins POST-SEASON games. You don't clobber your way to the World Series.

voodoochile
01-13-2003, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by mrwag
My point is, why downgrade defense to upgrade for 1 pitcher? That one pitcher, who pitches once every 5 days, for 1/2 to 2/3 of a game. Defense plays behind EVERY pitcher, EVERY game of the year.
How many games did we lose last year by stupid plays? No pitcher can routinely overcome shoddy ball handling behind him. Plus, I think Crede's batt is a major improvment (based upon what he showed last year) over anything else we can put at 3rd base.

I'd rather trade offense (something we thought would get us to the promised land and hasn't). Pitching and defense wins POST-SEASON games. You don't clobber your way to the World Series.

Depends on how much defense you are giving up and how good the pitcher is you acquire. For example: Trading Konerko and Wirght for Colon (don't rip on the trade, it's an example) and forcing Frank to play 1B on a daily basis would be worth it, because the defense wouldn't be hurt that badly and the pitching would take a major jump.

On the other hand, trading Crede and Wright for Colon (again, it's an example) and thus forcing Valentin back to 3rd and Jimenez back to SS is a bigger issue, because it tears up the defense and turns what could be a strong infield into a weak one.

Hoever, everything is relative and if the BoSox offered the ChiSox Pedro Martinez for Crede straight up, only an idiot would say "no."

Nellie_Fox
01-13-2003, 02:51 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
As for me I'd rather win a game 3-2 then lose one 10-8.

Lip If you win 3-1, then lose one 10-8, you're .500.

Oh, you mean you'd rather win a low-scoring game than lose a high-scoring one.

gosox41
01-13-2003, 03:03 PM
Originally posted by mrwag
My point is, why downgrade defense to upgrade for 1 pitcher? That one pitcher, who pitches once every 5 days, for 1/2 to 2/3 of a game. Defense plays behind EVERY pitcher, EVERY game of the year.
How many games did we lose last year by stupid plays? No pitcher can routinely overcome shoddy ball handling behind him. Plus, I think Crede's batt is a major improvment (based upon what he showed last year) over anything else we can put at 3rd base.

I'd rather trade offense (something we thought would get us to the promised land and hasn't). Pitching and defense wins POST-SEASON games. You don't clobber your way to the World Series.

Pitching is much more important then defense. And of course offense should be looked at in addition to just defense. Too bad there's not a stat. that looks at the whole package of player. Take Valentin and Clayton at SS. There's no doubt Clayton is a better defensive player, but who produced more runs for the Sox total. Valentin had a much better bat and probably made up for most of his defensive lapses with his bat. I doubt Clayton's stellar defense would make up the difference in the amount of runs Valentin produced offensively.

Just my 2 cents on the importance of defense.

Bob

Nellie_Fox
01-13-2003, 03:14 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
Take Valentin and Clayton at SS. There's no doubt Clayton is a better defensive player, but who produced more runs for the Sox total. Valentin had a much better bat and probably made up for most of his defensive lapses with his bat. I doubt Clayton's stellar defense would make up the difference in the amount of runs Valentin produced offensively. Great googly-moogly, the guy's gone. Don't start the Valentin/Clayton debate again, please!