PDA

View Full Version : rowand: get him in


SoxFanDan
07-28-2003, 05:02 PM
i love rowand offensively and defensively. I think the sox are crazy to not use him in the series against kc. the man should be our center fielder of the future

Steve Bartman
07-28-2003, 05:04 PM
He is looking better than Borchard, but I think Jeremy Reed or Brian Anderson might fill that spot in a few years.

Randar68
07-28-2003, 05:06 PM
Originally posted by SoxFanDan
i love rowand offensively and defensively. I think the sox are crazy to not use him in the series against kc. the man should be our center fielder of the future

:chunks

Gumshoe
07-29-2003, 12:08 PM
Why have you been against this guy, Randar?


Guys, I've posted for some time that this man can hit, he plays HARD, and he's the best defensive CF that we have. He's shown it the last 2 months. Everett looks like an old man? Rowand hit the 2-run bomb against the Cubs, and since, we havent played him (but when we did he KEPT hitting).

Rowand keeps saying suck it to WSI naysayers but they won't listen ...

Gumshoe

MHOUSE
07-29-2003, 12:29 PM
He has great hustle and work ethic and he gets the most out of the talent he has. He was hitting terribly to start the season, but mostly I think because he hadn't had many reps in ST with his shoulder injury. The trip to Charlotte straightened him out and now he's red-hot. His average is way back up there and he's hitting for power too. I know he's not going to be our CF for years to come, but he's a solid 4th outfielder and when he's hot then GET HIM IN (much like Graffanino). I like having him in the #2 hole and Robbie Alomar leading off.

LASOXFAN
07-29-2003, 12:42 PM
I agree, I think Rowand really screwed himself dirt biking over the winter. It cost him a shot at every day play. Had he been healthy I don't think we ever would've traded for Carl because I think he'd be hitting close to a .300 click and driving in runs. He's always impressed me in clutch situations. He has good at bats, even if he fails to come through. That's a good sign in a young player.

Randar68
07-29-2003, 01:10 PM
Originally posted by LASOXFAN
because I think he'd be hitting close to a .300 click and driving in runs.

You can't be serious. He never did that in the minor leagues, but he will suddenly turn into a .300 hitter?

As an everyday player, Aaron Rowand would be lucky to hit .260.

Next, you'll start telling me about how he is going to walk a ton and have a .400 OBP.

This is silly.

FOC unite!

Gumshoe
07-29-2003, 01:18 PM
Randar, I just think you are WAY off here. How do you explain his play recently? The Sox 8-1 record with him hitting 2nd? it's not like he did NOTHING those games ... he's hitting like .390 since June ... come on man, give the guy his due credit. He's never hit consistently at the major league level because he has never played consistently here. 300 AB's ONCE in his career in one season. Give the guy a chance. All Everett has right now are seemingly bad instincts and one hit against Cleveland for 2 runs.

Gumshoe

kermittheefrog
07-29-2003, 01:19 PM
I'm actually starting to come around with Rowand. His defense has been a lot better than I expected. His numbers are ridiculously good, gold glove quality. And his offense has been passble when he's in the lineup regularly. At the very least Rowand should be a defensive replacement and platoon partner for Carl Everett. It might be worth it to trade Lee if we can get a decent hitting catcher in return.

Randar68
07-29-2003, 02:04 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
Randar, I just think you are WAY off here. How do you explain his play recently? The Sox 8-1 record with him hitting 2nd? it's not like he did NOTHING those games ... he's hitting like .390 since June ... come on man, give the guy his due credit. He's never hit consistently at the major league level because he has never played consistently here. 300 AB's ONCE in his career in one season. Give the guy a chance. All Everett has right now are seemingly bad instincts and one hit against Cleveland for 2 runs.

Gumshoe

Nowhere have I said Carl Everett was a passable CF'er.

MisterB
07-29-2003, 02:47 PM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
His defense has been a lot better than I expected. His numbers are ridiculously good, gold glove quality

Come on, Kermy. You know defensive statistics are mostly meaningless. Even using the words Gold Glove and Rowand in the same paragraph strain your credibility.

I think Gumshoe has been using his Jedi mind powers on you.

maurice
07-29-2003, 03:16 PM
http://images.usatoday.com/news/health/spotlight/_photos/darth.jpg
"Welcome to the DARK SIDE, Kermie. I am your FATHER."



:rowand
"Just call me Crash Skywalker! Or is it Luke Wallcrasher?"

Gumshoe
07-29-2003, 03:18 PM
You guys have your opinions, I know. But even before Rowand was playing well this year I told all of WSI on a few threads that he was the guy that should do it. We never give guys chances! Singleton never hit in the minors but he hit .298 for us during a full year, 2001. He finally got his chance only because Simmons had the worst luck in the history of baseball. Crazy.

Rowand is the man. Play him.

Gumshoe

ps- I like being known as a Jedi. Hhahahahaha

bobj4400
07-29-2003, 03:21 PM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
I'm actually starting to come around with Rowand. His defense has been a lot better than I expected. His numbers are ridiculously good, gold glove quality. And his offense has been passble when he's in the lineup regularly. At the very least Rowand should be a defensive replacement and platoon partner for Carl Everett. It might be worth it to trade Lee if we can get a decent hitting catcher in return.


Gold glove?????????? Let's be serious here.

jeremyb1
07-29-2003, 04:20 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
You can't be serious. He never did that in the minor leagues, but he will suddenly turn into a .300 hitter?

As an everyday player, Aaron Rowand would be lucky to hit .260.

Next, you'll start telling me about how he is going to walk a ton and have a .400 OBP.[/COLOR]

there's no reason a player can't hit .300 simply because he never did it as a minor leaguer. many players don't hit for a lot of average in the minors because they're being moved up levels. rowand hit around .280 in AAA, and AA, if he were to spend more time at those levels his average would've climbed as crede did when he repeated AAA last season. rowand still hasn't played a lot of time in the majors and is still relatively young. suggesting, he'd hit .300 the year after he hit .280 in AAA might be a stretch but saying that further along on his development curve he may be a .300 hitter at the major league level would not be.

rowand hit .280 as an every day player in the second half of last season, better than that when he played full time in '01, and he's hitting better than .260 as a part timer so i fail to see how he's a .260 hitter if he plays every day.

WinningUgly!
07-29-2003, 04:23 PM
Originally posted by SoxFanDan
i love rowand offensively and defensively. I think the sox are crazy to not use him in the series against kc. the man should be our center fielder of the future

Rowand should be in the starting lineup tonight. He's 3-7 against May, with 3 HRs. :o:

PaleHoseGeorge
07-29-2003, 06:07 PM
Originally posted by WinningUgly!
Rowand should be in the starting lineup tonight. He's 3-7 against May, with 3 HRs. :o:

:jerry
"All the more reason to keep him out of the lineup. I bet Tony Pena will be going NUTS trying to figure out how I'm going to use my secret weapon off the bench! Come to think of it, Frank and Magglio could use a day off, too. My God, how can we possibly lose!!!"

Gumshoe
07-29-2003, 09:48 PM
Rowand showing yet again that he deserves to be in there ... and only in 1 at bat tonight!

Gumshoe

Daver
07-29-2003, 09:51 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
Rowand showing yet again that he deserves to be in there ... and only in 1 at bat tonight!

Gumshoe

I'll give you some credit,your loyalty to mediocre at best ballplayers is unwavering.I see you make no mention of the flyball that he misread off the bat that sailed over his head to the wall.......

doublem23
07-29-2003, 09:52 PM
Let's see... We can either use Rowand as a mediocre/average starting centerfielder... Or we can use him as an effective defensive replacement/4th outfielder.

This is about the time where I need a smiley guy doing the "scales" thing with his hands going up and down.

doublem23
07-29-2003, 09:53 PM
Originally posted by daver
I'll give you some credit,your loyalty to mediocre at best ballplayers is unwavering.I see you make no mention of the flyball that he misread off the bat that sailed over his head to the wall.......

Of course not, that would hurt his argument. :cool:

FarWestChicago
07-29-2003, 10:15 PM
Hey, an FOC thread!! These are always amusing. :bandance:

doublem23
07-29-2003, 10:16 PM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
Hey, an FOC thread!! These are always amusing. :bandance:

Yeah, but the FOVs were by far more entertaining.

:versatile
Chicks still dig the versatility.

Daver
07-29-2003, 10:34 PM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
Hey, an FOC thread!! These are always amusing. :bandance:

This is the reason I sent you that request.

baseballboy
07-29-2003, 10:38 PM
Good CF defensive replacement? Damn, he had to be moved to left because he misplayed a ball in center. Willie Harris who Gumshoe hates as a defensive player had to come in as a defensive replacement for our defensive replacement. WOW, DOES GUMSHOE EVER KNOW BASEBALL!

Plus the double Rowand hit should have been a 2 base error. Guiel was just floating with the ball. The ball was clearly slicing away from him and a good right fielder would have read that and had it. Terrible play. Rowand's defensive misplay could have really hurt us (led off a three run inning) and the "double" did nothing for us. He is not any better than a 4th outfielder. Get that through your thick skull! Yeah Singleton hit .298 one year for us! Big deal! He hasn't done crap before that or since then besides get us a decent prospect in Willie Harris.

Looks like the guy that we received for his boy D'ummy Jimenez helped us get another damn good option in the bullpen. I love the Schoenweis move!

I don't understand all you people like Gumshoe that fall inlove with these backup mediocre players. Reminds me of everyone that calls for the Bears backup QB 3 games into the season. DAMN! GO WHITE SOX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Randar68
07-29-2003, 10:49 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy
Good CF defensive replacement? Damn, he had to be moved to left because he misplayed a ball in center. Willie Harris who Gumshoe hates as a defensive player had to come in as a defensive replacement for our defensive replacement. WOW, DOES GUMSHOE EVER KNOW BASEBALL!

Plus the double Rowand hit should have been a 2 base error. Guiel was just floating with the ball. The ball was clearly slicing away from him and a good right fielder would have read that and had it. Terrible play. Rowand's defensive misplay could have really hurt us (led off a three run inning) and the "double" did nothing for us. He is not any better than a 4th outfielder. Get that through your thick skull! Yeah Singleton hit .298 one year for us! Big deal! He hasn't done crap before that or since then besides get us a decent prospect in Willie Harris.

Looks like the guy that we received for his boy D'ummy Jimenez helped us get another damn good option in the bullpen. I love the Schoenweis move!

I don't understand all you people like Gumshoe that fall inlove with these backup mediocre players. Reminds me of everyone that calls for the Bears backup QB 3 games into the season. DAMN! GO WHITE SOX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You said it. Prepare to continue banging your head against a wall, this will only incite them.

kermittheefrog
07-29-2003, 10:50 PM
Okay here's the thing. I know defensive stats aren't perfect but the ones that are most trustworthy IMO (range factor and Prospectus Fielding runs) are glowingly in support of Crash. I'm sold that he's a good defender. I know he doesn't look great in the field but my eyes have fooled me about players before.

As for his offense, it's improving. He's been terrific since he was called back up to the majors and he held his own in the second half of last season when he was a regular. I'm almost sold on Rowand being a positive in center field.

Randar68
07-29-2003, 10:58 PM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
Okay here's the thing. I know defensive stats aren't perfect but the ones that are most trustworthy IMO (range factor and Prospectus Fielding runs) are glowingly in support of Crash. I'm sold that he's a good defender. I know he doesn't look great in the field but my eyes have fooled me about players before.

As for his offense, it's improving. He's been terrific since he was called back up to the majors and he held his own in the second half of last season when he was a regular. I'm almost sold on Rowand being a positive in center field.

I am still waiting for Rowand to beat a ball to a spot or to set his feet before making a throw.

I'm guessing Hell will freeze over first. You can throw your stats out the window. Don't look into the beast's eyes, Kermit.

baseballboy
07-29-2003, 11:01 PM
That is very dangerous to take such a small sample out of a person's career and say you are sold on him. I really don't like that stuff. I think Carl Everett is just as good in center NOW. He looked terrible when we first got him, but he looks a lot better in center since playing for a while. Everett also balances out the lineup much better with his lefthanded bat. We don't need a line-up of all righties going up there. That may have hurt us early in the season and it may be why we have been hitting lately. A much better balanced lineup.

So who will you take out? Carlos Lee? I doubt it! Magglio? Yeah ok!

I would love to see someone like Rowand get a chance, however I would also like to win. Now is not the time to start fooling around and give an average mediocre player a chance to prove himself. I mean we are trying to win the damn division. I like the fact that we went out and traded for proven veterans to make a run at this thing and I would be f'n pissed off if we started fooling around and giving players chances just to see what they can do. He is a 4th outfielder, so lets leave it at that.

southsidegirl
07-29-2003, 11:22 PM
yes.....aaron is the answer

:rowand

kermittheefrog
07-29-2003, 11:41 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy
I would love to see someone like Rowand get a chance, however I would also like to win. Now is not the time to start fooling around and give an average mediocre player a chance to prove himself. I mean we are trying to win the damn division. I like the fact that we went out and traded for proven veterans to make a run at this thing and I would be f'n pissed off if we started fooling around and giving players chances just to see what they can do. He is a 4th outfielder, so lets leave it at that.

Yeah you're right. Carlos Lee's mediocre hitting and mediocre defense is irreplaceable.

jeremyb1
07-30-2003, 12:13 AM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
I know he doesn't look great in the field but my eyes have fooled me about players before.

i feel like fans suffer from the same afflication they did in evaluating rowand that they did in evaluating jimenez. most fans view an act such as breaking in on a ball that goes over one's head - as rowand has done twice in many, many games in center this season, i didn't even see tonight as i was at work but i'll take everyone's word for it - as an incredibly poor play and are therefore extremely frustrated by such a play. since fans are so upset by this play, their memory recalls this play above all others and therefore forms the majority of their impression of aaron rowand as a fielder. these fans are confusing the severity of the mistake in their mind with the frequency with which the mistake actually occurs, ie a fan remembers rowand running in on a ball over his head twice much more than carl everett simply failing to get to a playable ball because he hesitates or lacks the speed to get to the ball dozens of times.

the same problem occured with jimenez, since fans find baserunning mistakes incredibly frustrating, the fact that jimenez got on base and was stupidly thrown out a few times was much more frustrating than the fact that willie harris wasn't on base often enough to make those mistakes. jimenez's base running mistakes will stick out in one's memory much moreso than the fact that harris doesn't get on base since watching jimenez being thrown out is much easier to recognize than the fact that harris is not on first base.

another prime example of people's eyes misleading them is how often randar complains about how rowand has to run to the ball and doesn't beat the ball to the spot. despite how pretty it looks if he makes the play, the out is recorded and all else is moot.

kermittheefrog
07-30-2003, 12:32 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
i feel like fans suffer from the same afflication they did in evaluating rowand that they did in evaluating jimenez. most fans view an act such as breaking in on a ball that goes over one's head - as rowand has done twice in many, many games in center this season, i didn't even see tonight as i was at work but i'll take everyone's word for it - as an incredibly poor play and are therefore extremely frustrated by such a play. since fans are so upset by this play, their memory recalls this play above all others and therefore forms the majority of their impression of aaron rowand as a fielder. these fans are confusing the severity of the mistake in their mind with the frequency with which the mistake actually occurs, ie a fan remembers rowand running in on a ball over his head twice much more than carl everett simply failing to get to a playable ball because he hesitates or lacks the speed to get to the ball dozens of times.

the same problem occured with jimenez, since fans find baserunning mistakes incredibly frustrating, the fact that jimenez got on base and was stupidly thrown out a few times was much more frustrating than the fact that willie harris wasn't on base often enough to make those mistakes. jimenez's base running mistakes will stick out in one's memory much moreso than the fact that harris doesn't get on base since watching jimenez being thrown out is much easier to recognize than the fact that harris is not on first base.

another prime example of people's eyes misleading them is how often randar complains about how rowand has to run to the ball and doesn't beat the ball to the spot. despite how pretty it looks if he makes the play, the out is recorded and all else is moot.

Same thing happens with Carlos Lee. He's nothing special but he isn't terrible like some people make him out to be. It's about catching the ball not looking pretty. This isn't ballet.

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 07:30 AM
So Kermit you want to replace a mediocre Carlos Lee, who at least has some pop with a mediocre Aaron Rowand? That is kinda wierd thinking.

The fielding is not the same as Carlos Lee. Has he improved? Yes. Is that saying much? NO!

The reason being is he doesnt get to half the balls he should if he was a good fielder. He plays so damn far back. If you go to the game you can see all the miscues he makes and bad breaks he gets on balls which on television you cant see at all. I am not complaining about his defense as many left fielders are not good at their position. However, he is not a good or even decent fielder. That is a fact. I am sure Rowand would be a better left fielder than Lee defensively, but Carlos is a much better hitter at this point.

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 07:36 AM
Jeremy I remember Carl Everett's mistakes, however he seems to have improved greatly since first coming over here. Rowand has been a CF for as long as I can remember, so what is his excuse?

Everett was on a new team playing with different fielders and getting used to center field once again. Will he be a great defensive center fielder? HELL NO! However, is he as good as Rowand. I believe so. Plus he is a much better hitter than Rowand and a lefty.

delben91
07-30-2003, 07:40 AM
I've always been on Randar, Daver's (and now Baseballboy's) side of the argument on this.

However, just as I was for riding Graffy when he was smoking the ball (and seems to still be doing if last night is any indication), I'm all for riding Rowand's hot streak.

I still don't think he's got the tools to be more than a 4th outfielder in the long term, but if he's hitting the **** out of the ball now, I'm all for him playing.

This guy however---->:versatile

Now that's another matter.

jeremyb1
07-30-2003, 08:27 AM
Originally posted by baseballboy
Jeremy I remember Carl Everett's mistakes, however he seems to have improved greatly since first coming over here. Rowand has been a CF for as long as I can remember, so what is his excuse?

i would argue that carl everett has mysteriously become a good centerfielder in the last week after years in the big leagues. to tie this into my argument from before, since everett hasn't made any mistakes you feel are completely abominable, they don't stick in your memory as well if he looked really bad on some plays. since a mistake of having poor range is not ingrained in your memory like other mistakes you've already chosen to forget what you saw everett do two weeks ago while many fans are still judging rowand's fielding on what he did a month and a half ago when he misplayed a ball against the giants. additionally, since rowand's (apparently) misjudged a ball last evening, that is fresh in your mind and contributes to your evaluation of him moreso that it otherwise would. since it happened recently, you recall that information much more easily. as i've said before, personally, i can count on one hand the number of times rowand has badly misplayed balls resulting in what would otherwise be an out yet people claim it happens all the time? examples?

Randar68
07-30-2003, 08:48 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
i would argue that carl everett has mysteriously become a good centerfielder in the last week after years in the big leagues. to tie this into my argument from before, since everett hasn't made any mistakes you feel are completely abominable, they don't stick in your memory as well if he looked really bad on some plays. since a mistake of having poor range is not ingrained in your memory like other mistakes you've already chosen to forget what you saw everett do two weeks ago while many fans are still judging rowand's fielding on what he did a month and a half ago when he misplayed a ball against the giants. additionally, since rowand's (apparently) misjudged a ball last evening, that is fresh in your mind and contributes to your evaluation of him moreso that it otherwise would. since it happened recently, you recall that information much more easily. as i've said before, personally, i can count on one hand the number of times rowand has badly misplayed balls resulting in what would otherwise be an out yet people claim it happens all the time? examples?


OK. Rowand ran into another wall last night because he didn't know exactly where it was as he was FLOATING with that late HR.

RUN TO THE DAMNED SPOT! Not only that, but if he had any athletic ability, he may have been able to make a play on that ball, as it only cleared the wall by a couple of feet. Singleton or Willie may have made that play.

Randar68
07-30-2003, 08:50 AM
Originally posted by delben91
I've always been on Randar, Daver's (and now Baseballboy's) side of the argument on this.

However, just as I was for riding Graffy when he was smoking the ball (and seems to still be doing if last night is any indication), I'm all for riding Rowand's hot streak.

I still don't think he's got the tools to be more than a 4th outfielder in the long term, but if he's hitting the **** out of the ball now, I'm all for him playing.



I can't argue with playing him while he's hot, but enough of this fatuation with him being a real MLB quality starter in CF.

Gumshoe
07-30-2003, 10:23 AM
Jeremy, you've got it all right with you synopsis on people remembering only bad things. Now they won't even acknowledge guys like Rowand and how they are tearing the cover off the ball!

First off, baseball boy, Lee was a bad outfielder 3 years ago. He's a winner; he worked on it and I have seen MANY MANY plays where he stretched out and caught a ball that was a huge play for the Sox (Toronto double play earlier in the season, ie). Not too long ago he laid out on the foul line to catch one. I don't buy the argument that Carlos is a bad outfielder or even average. I think he is an above average defensive LF at this point.

Also, Jeremy is right again about the Rowand thing. I think you guys just don't like the guy and you pick out instances that you'll never forget. Like that ball against SF which he would not have caught ANYWAY, no one would have ... but he got a bad break on it because it was a line drive shot STRAIGHT to the wall. No chance. Just admit it, Everett is no where near Rowand defensively. He's gotten better? He's caught about 10 balls out there and he camped under every one of them. What about the ball against Tampa Bay to center? He got smoked on that one, I didn't hear you complaining about how he didn't run to that "spot"

Come on man, obviously you just don't like the guy. Quite honestly, what more can a man do to get into the lineup? This sounds like a Keith Foulke situation -- "We don't like him, so don't let him play or trade him" mentality --- remember that Rowand, as Jeremy says, has been FAR better many times than the few times he has looked bad.

Gumshoe

Randar68
07-30-2003, 10:31 AM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
Come on man, obviously you just don't like the guy. Quite honestly, what more can a man do to get into the lineup? This sounds like a Keith Foulke situation -- "We don't like him, so don't let him play or trade him" mentality --- remember that Rowand, as Jeremy says, has been FAR better many times than the few times he has looked bad.

Gumshoe

I have not supported Carl as the "answer" in CF.

Rowand is simply not a good defensive CF'er. He is not only physically limited, but he has terrible instincts and almost never get's a good read on the ball.

It is as simple as that. These are fundamental flaws you can see even in most plays he ends up making. I have seen him play from AA to the majors, and it's the same thing that made him an AVERAGE LF'er in the minor leagues. He has never hit higher than .300 at ANY FREAKING level while playing regularly, and he has no plate discipline.

I know, I know, you are all voting him to next year's All-Star game, but this is absolutely rediculous.

If you know anything about scouting or judging talent, you can see the obvious flaws in his game. I have repeatedly cited the physical and mental flaws and given intances that support them, as well as the historical proof of this in his career.

If you all can't see the water for the river, fine, but this is getting old. Your soap-box is worn out.

maurice
07-30-2003, 12:33 PM
It's amazing how one innocuous backup OF regularly polarizes this board.

Originally posted by baseballboy
Good CF defensive replacement? Damn, he had to be moved to left because he misplayed a ball in center. Willie Harris . . . had to come in as a defensive replacement for our defensive replacement.

Actually, Harris was brought in to play CF because he's never played LF. He didn't "replace" Rowand. It's extremely unlikely that Harris (or especially Everett) catches the ball Rowand misplayed. It really was a neutral event.

I remember Carl Everett's mistakes, however he seems to have improved greatly since first coming over here. Rowand has been a CF for as long as I can remember, so what is his excuse?

Actually, Everett was a CF long before Rowand. He used to be decent defensively but since has dropped off. Currently, Everett has virtually no range. It probably has something to do with his knees.

Now for my monthly reminder: It's all relative. Rowand is not a real good defensive CF, but he's the best defensive CF on the club. Heck, until (and unless) Everett heats back up, he's the best offensive CF on the club also. Dissing Rowand's play in CF is a shot at KW for not acquiring a better defensive replacement. I would think that this venom would be better served focused on other, less useful members of the Sox organization.

:jerry :reinsy :bkoch: :rwhite: :everett: :weewillie
"Did somebody call our names?"

Gumshoe
07-30-2003, 01:44 PM
As Maurice said, he's the best CF on the club. That's all that matters. He's better offensively and defensively, until proven otherwise.

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 08:13 PM
Better offensively and defensively until proven otherwise? HA HA that was a good one! First off Gumshoe, you must not go to many games, becuase if you did you would notice how far back Lee plays AND the bad jumps he gets on balls. You will only notice this at the game, not something you notice on TV replays. Diving plays and shoelace grabs are great, however if he didnt get such bad jumps on them they would be stand up catches and chest high grabs. I dont think you understand that, have you ever played baseball or even watched enough to understand that? I have my doubts.

I love Rowand, I think he is a hell of a hustler and brings a lot of energy to his game. I am far from a hater of Rowands. I also brought up many times that Everett was terrible when we first got him in CF. However, it does seem that he has gotten much better lately the more he has played. It is not something he has played much of the last few years. When was the last time he played CF consistently Maurice? I realize he played there early in his career. But he has not played there consistently for a long time. Rowand has played it just about his whole career! He has no excuse, this is his position! Willie Harris had to replace him in CF. Harris was in fact a defensive replacement last night. Why else did they bring him in? He wasnt playing the inning before, there was no one that was pinch hit for in the 9th. When we came out to play defense in the 9th Jerry Manuel moved Rowand over to Left and put Willie Harris in center AS A DEFENSIVE REPLACEMENT! Carlos Lee just batted. And if he is such an above average defensive player as Gumshoe says then why else would you make that move rather than to replace Rowand in center? Anyone can play left, if you can play center then you can play left, have you ever played baseball? You should know left is the easiest OF position to play. Trust me Willie Harris would have no problem playing over there. And just because you don't think Harris would have made that play over Rowand's head doesnt mean he wouldn't have. Just your opinion, however it is fact that it went over Rowand'd head, our great defensive CFer.

I never said Everett was great, but I did say he has gotten better and much better since the All-Star break. Plus he has gotten about 3-5 big hits for us since the All-Star break. And he has done nothing for us? Wow! Keep falling in love with these great mediocre players Gumshoe. D'ummy, Rowand, Carlos Lee. Build a team of these guys and see what you get. A BIG PIECE OF ****!

And what the hell makes Carlos Lee a winner? What the hell has this guy ever won? Jeeze! Unless he won something over in Panama that I dont know about he has definately not proven to be a winner. What a wierd f'n statement that was.

Daver
07-30-2003, 08:18 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy
When was the last time he played CF consistently Maurice? I realize he played there early in his career. But he has not played there consistently for a long time. Rowand has played it just about his whole career!

Rowand was a corner outfielder for almost all of his minor league career,he was moved to CF at the major league level.

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 08:26 PM
I think the last couple years he has been playing striclty CF. Even when he is sent down, unless Borchard or Harris has been playing there when he is down there.

Daver
07-30-2003, 08:32 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy
I think the last couple years he has been playing striclty CF. Even when he is sent down, unless Borchard or Harris has been playing there when he is down there.

What does that have to do with the fact that he spent four years in minors playing a corner outfield position,in the last two years he has been sent down exactly once.

The point is,don't belittle someone else's knowledge of the game by bringing up points that are equally wrong,in the long run you end up looking dumber than the person you are trying to belittle.

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 08:34 PM
Hey Daver I would like to know where you get this information about him playing the corner OF spots. I would like to see that information for myself. I dont like to hear just opinions and here say and then have someone call me wrong. Please let me know where I can view this information. Thank you. And hey, be nice, what the hell did I do to you?

Daver
07-30-2003, 08:38 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy
Hey Daver, be nice, what the hell did I do to you?


Nothing that I know of,I was simply offering a little friendly advice.Do with it what you will.

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 08:40 PM
Well the advice could have been more friendly put if that is how you meant it. Plus you never answered my question about the information.

Daver
07-30-2003, 08:48 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy
Well the advice could have been more friendly put if that is how you meant it. Plus you never answered my question about the information.

Let me get this straight,you came here and started picking fights with other posters on the forums I run,and you accuse me of being unfriendly?

As far as the info,do your own homework,the same as I did.

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 09:58 PM
If having a different opinion than another member and hating pessimstic attitudes is picking a fight then yes I am doing that. If that is not picking a fight then no I am not picking a fight.

I am accusing you first of being a liar. You told me it was friendly advice so I should do with it what I will. If that advice was not meant to be friendly then you are a liar. If the advice was meant to be friendly then there is a nicer way to put it, dont you think? That is all I am saying about the situation. If you have anymore input on the situation then let me know.

Until you show me proof that he was strictly a corner outfielder in the minors for four years I don't believe you. I remember him being moved around to all outfield positions in the minors, but never strictly the corner. Show me some numbers and where you got them from, cause I really don't believe you, it is all just hearsay to me. As far as I can see there was no homework involved, just an opinion with nothing to back up, no numbers, no site that this information can be found at.

Take it anyway you want, but just because you run this board doesnt mean you know more about the Sox than everyone else here. Quite frankly I hate how everyone backs down from you just because you run the board. Plus Ted Nuggent is overrated, I can name 100 guitarists better than him, and the NRA sucks big monkey balls.

Daver
07-30-2003, 10:09 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy


Take it anyway you want, but just because you run this board doesnt mean you know more about the Sox than everyone else here. Quite frankly I hate how everyone backs down from you just because you run the board. Plus Ted Nuggent is overrated, I can name 25 guitarists better than him, and the NRA sucks big monkey balls.

LMAO!!!!

I will rank that reply as one of the most pathetic arguments I have ever seen posted here,and trust me I have seen a lot of them.

This is a classic case of when you can't defend yourself,go on the offensive,and hope it works.I got news for you,it don't work here.

Maybe you should try calling into sports radio shows,they love people that can make statements based on no facts whatsoever.

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 10:18 PM
About which? The opinions of the NRA? People backing down from you? You being a liar? 100 better guitarists than your precious Ted Nuggent? or Aaron Rowand being strictly a corner outfielder? As far as I can see we are both using the same facts about Rowand. NONE!! Your answer was just as pathetic my friend! By the way quote me right, I clearly stated 100, not 25. 25 is too easy.

Daver:

Let me get this straight,you came here and started picking fights with other posters on the forums I run,and you accuse me of being unfriendly?

How pathetic is that? Grow up!

voodoochile
07-30-2003, 10:24 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy
About which? The opinions of the NRA? People backing down from you? You being a liar? 100 better guitarists than your precious Ted Nuggent? or Aaron Rowand being strictly a corner outfielder? As far as I can see we are both using the same facts about Rowand. NONE!! Your answer was just as pathetic my friend! By the way quote me right, I clearly stated 100, not 25. 25 is too easy.

Daver:

Let me get this straight,you came here and started picking fights with other posters on the forums I run,and you accuse me of being unfriendly?

How pathetic is that? Grow up!

You edited it after or while he had posted it. I saw the original, so don't start claiming people are misquoting you when you are changing post content after the post has been quoted.

Don't want to make this 2 on one, but just a friendly piece of advice. You might want to tone it down a bit. You have been antagonistic since you joined the site, IMO and I have sent you a private message asking you to tone down the behavior before. Now would be a good time to take that advice.

Daver
07-30-2003, 10:31 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy
About which? The opinions of the NRA? People backing down from you? You being a liar? 100 better guitarists than your precious Ted Nuggent? or Aaron Rowand being strictly a corner outfielder? As far as I can see we are both using the same facts about Rowand. NONE!! Your answer was just as pathetic my friend! By the way quote me right, I clearly stated 100, not 25. 25 is too easy.


How pathetic is that? Grow up!

I think you are the one that needs to grow up,and I did quote you correctly,don't blame the quote feature for you editing your post after the fact.

For the record,I am not a fan of Ted Nugent's music(yes there is only one G,but we won't quibble over details).

As far as the rest of your post,I give a rat's ass over your opinion of the NRA,Ted,or your perception of what position Aaron Rowand played in the minors.


The fact is,you would rather go on the attack mode instead of doing the research required to prove your point,either because you know you can't prove your point,or because you would rather resort to name calling as opposed to intelligent debate.You would be better suited to the ESPN boards,where you will be among your kind.

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 10:33 PM
I respect your advice voodoo and I like this board and you. You seem to be a cool person. However, I never check that email address that I use for this forum, so I never received that information. I thought this board was supposed to be for fun, I mean if certain people take what I say to heart or too seriously is it really my fault? I mean we all have our own opinions and I am not the only one that expresses them this way. I have seen many others try to shove their opinions down our throats, such as gumshoe. But I dont think anything is ever said to him. Is there a certain way we should have to express our opinions? should one try to be a little more optimistic (gumshoe) and others less antagonistic (myself)?

Sorry voodoo, maybe I just need better guidelines to follow. Plus I edited that response way before Daver responded to me. I know this as fact. Maybe he cant write that little comment that he made fast enough (types with 2 fingers maybe? or one hand? *****!!!) Whatever the case it was edited very fast because I thought about it and 25 was way too easy to do.

I will try to tone down my behavior, thank you for the advice voodoo!!! I really do appreciate it and thank you for being considerate to me.

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 10:38 PM
Daver, why put something on you little signature if you dont like it? Isnt that wierd? Just a little bit. My point being you have nothing to back you up, just the same as me. Just previous recollection. I recall him playing all of positions as you recall him only playing the corners, so who is right? prove me wrong! Come on, dazzle me!

Daver
07-30-2003, 10:47 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy
Daver, why put something on you little signature if you dont like it? Isnt that wierd? Just a little bit. My point being you have nothing to back you up, just the same as me. Just previous recollection. I recall him playing all of positions as you recall him only playing the corners, so who is right? prove me wrong! Come on, show me something.

The image in my sig is the banner for TNUSA,it has nothing to do with his music.


And do your own homework,four years worth of videotape is enough for me.


You might want to take Voodoo's advice to heart.

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 10:52 PM
I took it to heart and I appreciate his advice. My 4 years worth of tape for me says he played all outfield positions in the minors, just not the corners. You would be wrong sir. They started converting him to center before they brought him up if you would remember correctly, because they had no where else to play him. Lee in left and Maggs in right. They needed a CF and he also played CF in winter ball. So I would say for the last 3 years he has an advantage over Carl Everett playing CF more consistently as that has been his position. Where as Everetts has been left and occasionally moving to center and right. Yet Rowand is just as poor as Everett. That was my point in the beginning where this all started and you decided to add your own two cents, no matter how wrong it was. I think you need to research your 4 years worth of tape.

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 10:56 PM
By the way how can you like TNUSA (Ted Nugent United Sportsmen of America) and not like him or the NRA? That again in itself is strange. Sorry but that really doesnt make sense.

Daver
07-30-2003, 11:00 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy
I took it to heart and I appreciate his advice. My 4 years worth of tape for me says he played all outfield positions in the minors, just not the corners. You would be wrong sir. They started converting him to center before they brought him up if you would remember correctly, because they had no where else to play him. Lee in left and Maggs in right. They needed a CF and he also played CF in winter ball. So I would say for the last 3 years he has an advantage over Carl Everett playing CF more consistently as that has been his position. Where as Everetts has been left and occasionally moving to center and right. Yet Rowand is just as poor as Everett. That was my point in the beginning where this all started and you decided to add your own two cents, no matter how wrong it was. I think you need to research your 4 years worth of tape.

Your wrong again,Carlos Lee was a third baseman when he was called up,and played third for a few games before being moved to LF.

He played CF in winter ball after being added to the 25 man roster,to try and acclimate him to the position change,and just prior to Singleton being traded,leaving the Sox without a CFer.

WSCR is looking for people just like you to call in and spew their knowledge.

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 11:04 PM
You are wrong Daver. Carlos Lee was already playing left by the time Aaron Rowand was training for CF. Sorry bud.

Daver
07-30-2003, 11:10 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy
By the way how can you like TNUSA (Ted Nugent United Sportsmen of America) and not like him or the NRA? That again in itself is strange. Sorry but that really doesnt make sense.

Did I say I disliked the NRA,or are you putting words in my mouth?

Did I say I disliked Ted,or are you again putting words in my mouth?

Do not put words in my mouth,I don't do it to you.

Daver
07-30-2003, 11:11 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy
You are wrong Daver. Carlos Lee was already playing left by the time Aaron Rowand was training for CF. Sorry bud.

This is the perfect chance for me to say,show me some proof,got a link?

This is a two way street.

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 11:12 PM
Carlos Lee was up in 99 playing LF. Aaron Rowand was switched to CF in the middle of the 2000 season because the organization knew there wasnt a position available for him in right or left. In 2000 Rowand was splitting time between CF and LF. In 2001 with the sox he played 32 games in CF and 34 in left because Singleton and Lee were both there. Total he has a career 281 putouts in CF compared to 24 in left.

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 11:14 PM
The strange thing is Daver, you never showed me a link. I guess I just watch a lot of tape and keep a great log. I know this stuff as fact. Your turn to do your research.

Daver
07-30-2003, 11:15 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy
Carlos Lee was up in 99 playing LF. Aaron Rowand was switched to CF in the middle of the 2000 season because the organization knew there wasnt a position available for him in right or left. In 2000 Rowand was splitting time between CF and LF. In 2001 with the sox he played 32 games in CF and 34 in Left. Total he has a carrer 281 putouts in CF compared to 24 in left.

What does this have to do with his minor league career?


How many games did Lee play at 3b?

Tragg
07-30-2003, 11:18 PM
Boy

When I first started posting on this board, I got into a long argument with about 5 posters. I was abrasive, but I was right (early 2001- they were defending the ROYCE CLAYTON acquisition!). Yet I was wrong because I wasn't being friendly. I'm still called an idiot now and then (if not directly, implied) and sometimes I am.
Point is this - a)don't take comments personally; b)don't return comments you find abrasive with personal attacks; c)there are a lot of fans who are both enthusiastic and have a lot of knowledge and who are dogmatic about their opinions - appreciate that for what it is - it deepens the enjoyment of the Sox and this great messageboard and let some of the abrasion that occurs at times fall off of your shoulder.
Welcome aboard.

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 11:19 PM
WHAT THE! You have to be kidding me? Was that my point? My point was that Rowand should be better because he has been playing CF on a more consistent basis than Everett. I dont know where the hell you were going with this. I know Lee played 3rd in the minors. I never questioned that. I questioned your "facts" on Rowand only playing the corner positions in the minors. Those "facts" sir are wrong. Lee was up for a year and a half before Rowand got here. Where did I question you about Lee playing third? Everyone already knew that he sucked so bad at third that they had to move him to left. I believe he only had a month of training in lft field in the minors before they brought him back up. Just because they need his bat so badly.

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 11:19 PM
Thank you Tragg. I will take your advice, very nice to meet you.

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 11:26 PM
Daver if you want to know how many games Lee played at third in the majors then the answer is zero. In his career (1999 - 2002) he has played 521 games in LF, 37 as DH and 5 at 1B. I know he played just about his entire minor league career as a 3rd baseman, however I don't know why you want to know that as that has nothing to do with anything.

doublem23
07-30-2003, 11:27 PM
All this talk of Aaron Rowand? The man is a 4th outfielder. Why tinker?

baseballboy
07-30-2003, 11:28 PM
Thank you double m, that was also my point. Manuel loves to tinker. We complain about his tinkering. Yet we want to make this move? Why? That makes no sense!

Randar68
07-30-2003, 11:57 PM
Originally posted by Tragg
Boy

When I first started posting on this board, I got into a long argument with about 5 posters. I was abrasive, but I was right (early 2001- they were defending the ROYCE CLAYTON acquisition!). Yet I was wrong because I wasn't being friendly. I'm still called an idiot now and then (if not directly, implied) and sometimes I am.
Point is this - a)don't take comments personally; b)don't return comments you find abrasive with personal attacks; c)there are a lot of fans who are both enthusiastic and have a lot of knowledge and who are dogmatic about their opinions - appreciate that for what it is - it deepens the enjoyment of the Sox and this great messageboard and let some of the abrasion that occurs at times fall off of your shoulder.
Welcome aboard.

For example, if you think Rowand is a MLB quality CF'er or that JImenez was a valuable asset, keep you mouth shut because you'll be calkled an idiot (rightfully so) by just about everyone.

maurice
07-31-2003, 01:39 PM
Boy, this thread took a left turn.

Since BB asked so nicely, ESPN indicates that Everret broke into MLB as a CF in 1993. He has played 626 games in CF, has played 33+ games in CF every year since 1997, and played 90% of his games in CF as recently as 2001. Like I said earlier, I believe he has played the corners more fequently in recent years because of his knees.

WARNING: non-stat-heads should skip this next paragraph

Everett's career numbers in CF are .980 FPCT, 2.36 RF, and .884 ZR. Crash has played 152 games in CF (24% of Everret's total) after playing the corners in the minors, and posted a .989 FPCT, 2.88 RF, and .952 ZR. That's pretty good.

Even assuming for the sake of argument that Rowand is a bad defensive CF, criticizing him for his defense in CF is like criticizing Crede for his inability to play SS. As Jimmy Piersall explained on the radio the other day, a good defensive CF is not necessarily a good defensive LF and vice versa. I suppose he's not a sufficient authority on OF defense, though.

As for the relative contributions of Lee, Rowand, and Everret to the Sox in 2003:

Player - OPS
Lee - .792
Rowand - .744
Everret - .675

None of them have hit consistently well, but Lee leads the team in RBI and SBs, while Everret has been stone cold (not Steve Austin).

Gumshoe
07-31-2003, 02:33 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
For example, if you think Rowand is a MLB quality CF'er or that JImenez was a valuable asset, keep you mouth shut because you'll be calkled an idiot (rightfully so) by just about everyone.

Randar, you're never going to get it, are you? Rowand is the best CF this team has. He should be playing there, END of story. You'll see that Jimenez would have been a huge help next year, unless they sign Alomar, and the odds of that are really LOW. There is no way that this was in the plans. It was a good, NOW-move.

As for baseball boy, I'm sick of your vitriolic attitude. I've been to as many or MORE games than you have. I watch the Sox every day. Lee is fine in LF. That is all I said, and I also said he's above average as a LF. By the way, have you seen Lee's power numbers lately? They speak for themselves. I watch what he does to contribute every day, and he seems to score runs, bat them in, and contribute to the winning cause EVERY time.

and by the way, I played baseball for my whole life, so don't pull that on me. I've got any money that I was/ am / will be better than you, any day of the year. Period.

Gumshoe

Randar68
07-31-2003, 03:04 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
and by the way, I played baseball for my whole life, so don't pull that on me. I've got any money that I was/ am / will be better than you, any day of the year. Period.

Gumshoe


Congratulations, hope that made you feel better. In the world of player evaluation, that means as much as 10 cents in your pocket.

How many GM's or effective hitting/pitching coaches were stars or "better" than someone else?

Rowand may be the best all-around option at this time, but that does not make him:
1) Good
2) any better than a AAAA player
3) "The Future", as you have stated in some moment of utter stupidity.

The fact that Rowand receives regular playing time in CF is a statement of the fact that this team has a serious hole there.

BTW, I don't want Jimenez anywhere near this team. You apparently know something about him that all the players he's played with and team's he's played for do, because I haven't heard ANYONE say one nice thing about him. Lazy, lathargic, stupid, all adjectives I've seen, however.

I'm amazed you aren't running a team somewhere.


Do you like Jethro Tull???? "Thick as a Brick" comes to mind, and I am referring to more than just Jimenez.

voodoochile
07-31-2003, 03:11 PM
Okay, I REALLY don't want to split this thread into the parking lot, so can we all just take a step back from the ledge and realize that a little civility goes a long way.

I realize the contribution or lack thereof of Rowand is of earth-shattering import (on par with seeing world peace, in our lifetime), but really... maybe it's better for everyone if ALL of us just calm down...

Gumshoe
07-31-2003, 03:58 PM
Randy, I don't understand your problem with everything. I don't care if you think he's not "major league material"

Is Carl Everett major league material? A lot of people would say so. I'm saying Rowand is a better option to put in CF. Give him a chance until he proves that you CANNOT win with him. All this crap about "up the middle" stuff is overrated. I'm not saying it's unimportant. I'm saying that the White Sox can WIN with Aaron Rowand playing there. Just like they CAN win with CE if he starts doing the right things to win. Rowand is the "future" in that we can win with him, and we decide to spend money on other guys. Yes, all of us would LOVE to have guys like Bernie Williams or Carlos Beltran, etc. That's not realistic. Let's play who gives us the best chance. To say that a team "is not going to win teh pennant or world series with so-and-so at this particular position" is a totally ludicrous statement to make when guys around him are good players as well. Rowand isn't THAT bad where they can't win with him. If you continue to believe that a guy like Aaron makes the Sox incapable of beating teams, fine. I just think that's a lot of crap.


Gumshoe

Randar68
07-31-2003, 04:08 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
To say that a team "is not going to win teh pennant or world series with so-and-so at this particular position" is a totally ludicrous statement to make when guys around him are good players as well. Rowand isn't THAT bad where they can't win with him. If you continue to believe that a guy like Aaron makes the Sox incapable of beating teams, fine. I just think that's a lot of crap.


Gumshoe


I have never said, "is not going to win teh pennant or world series with so-and-so at this particular position", so I don't know who you're referring to there.


A guy like Rowand costs you games. Teams run on his arm at every opportunity. Not only that, but he get's bad reads on balls and doesn't knwo where on the field he is.

For the "FUTURE", I want no part of a .250 hitting CF'er with mediocre range, arm, fundamentals who can't steal you bases or take walks.

That, Gum, is the crux of my arguement. You have not refuted any of the above. There is little that can be done at this point, for this season. I dread the thought of a fly ball to CF with a guy on 3rd in a clutch situation in the playoffs.

I have never said, "We can't win with Aaron Rowand in CF", but I will say we can lose because of him being in CF. He is not a CF'er and I don't blame him for being put in that position. He is a 4th outfielder. He is not the most versatile of players and has not shown to be a good part-time/pinch-hit player when he has been put in those situations.

At this point, there are little-to-no other options. He and Carl will split time there the rest of the year. We shall see. Something has to be done about CF for next season. Another season of Rowand in CF might kill me.

Gumshoe
07-31-2003, 04:20 PM
Originally posted by Randar68

A guy like Rowand costs you games. Teams run on his arm at every opportunity. Not only that, but he get's bad reads on balls and doesn't knwo where on the field he is.

For the "FUTURE", I want no part of a .250 hitting CF'er with mediocre range, arm, fundamentals who can't steal you bases or take walks.

That, Gum, is the crux of my arguement. You have not refuted any of the above. There is little that can be done at this point, for this season. I dread the thought of a fly ball to CF with a guy on 3rd in a clutch situation in the playoffs.

I have never said, "We can't win with Aaron Rowand in CF", but I will say we can lose because of him being in CF. He is not a CF'er and I don't blame him for being put in that position. He is a 4th outfielder. He is not the most versatile of players and has not shown to be a good part-time/pinch-hit player when he has been put in those situations.

At this point, there are little-to-no other options. He and Carl will split time there the rest of the year. We shall see. Something has to be done about CF for next season. Another season of Rowand in CF might kill me.

This last paragraph is the only legit thing you say, IMHO ("little options"). I understand the crux of your argument, but how can I refute what you believe, when I believe the opposite is true. Rowand has a bad arm? "Teams run on his arm at every opportunity"? What is that nonsense? He has a strong arm, I've seen it. Furthermore, CF hardly EVER have any type of chance of throwing someone out at home unless guys make stupid mistakes running bases. I've seen Rowand hold guys to bases with his arm. I guess this is where we differ. Can anyone else back me up here? Randar says Rowand has a poor arm. I just do not agree AT ALL .

Also, you know it's hard to be a pinch hitter. I just want Aaron to get the chance to play, because it is my opinion that he would be fine out there, and possibly better than CE, from what I've seen. If we win with CE, fine. I'm all about results. I just think that more of Rowand is better right now.

Gumshoe (still perplexed over the insanity that Randar says Rowand has a bad arm)

ps - I'm sure you think Johnny Damon is a great CF. Does he have a better arm than AR?

voodoochile
07-31-2003, 04:29 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
This last paragraph is the only legit thing you say, IMHO ("little options"). I understand the crux of your argument, but how can I refute what you believe, when I believe the opposite is true. Rowand has a bad arm? "Teams run on his arm at every opportunity"? What is that nonsense? He has a strong arm, I've seen it. Furthermore, CF hardly EVER have any type of chance of throwing someone out at home unless guys make stupid mistakes running bases. I've seen Rowand hold guys to bases with his arm. I guess this is where we differ. Can anyone else back me up here? Randar says Rowand has a poor arm. I just do not agree AT ALL .

Also, you know it's hard to be a pinch hitter. I just want Aaron to get the chance to play, because it is my opinion that he would be fine out there, and possibly better than CE, from what I've seen. If we win with CE, fine. I'm all about results. I just think that more of Rowand is better right now.

Gumshoe (still perplexed over the insanity that Randar says Rowand has a bad arm)

ps - I'm sure you think Johnny Damon is a great CF. Does he have a better arm than AR?

I won't argue the arm issue. Call it a moot point in the light of all of the rest of Randar's argument. You want the arm. You got the arm. What about the rest of it? :D:

Randar68
07-31-2003, 05:11 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
Gumshoe (still perplexed over the insanity that Randar says Rowand has a bad arm)

ps - I'm sure you think Johnny Damon is a great CF. Does he have a better arm than AR?

Here is a problem with saying he has a "great arm". He NEVER puts himself in position to use it when he has to because:
1) He never get's his body in a stable position to make the catch moving forward
2) Never get's his feet in a good position to throw accurately.

It doesn't matter if you have Andre Dawson's arm if you never know where the ball is going to go. On most of Rowand's throws home, the ball is half way up either line.

Earlier this year there was a line drive a little to Rowand's right, he got to what he thought was "position", and as the ball came to him, he had to jump back and farther right to catch it, then made a rediculous throw falling away. That play sums up Aaron Rowan succinctly. He can't judge the ball in the air, he can't get his body or feet in a position to do anything with it even if/when he does catch it. Guess what, that was a very makable throw home, and that run was the go-ahead/winning run. So, surprise, it can cost you games.

Having a great arm but no fundamentals is akin to being a great 5:30 hitter. Can do it all day in practice on lazy fly balls (or Batting Practice), but when the lights come on, you can't do what's needed.

Damon is better at everything in the game of baseball than Aaron Rowand, except maybe effort and arm strength.

I can't put it more simply than I have. If you still can't see that Rowand has the footwork of a Clydesdale, and the instincts of a mole, I don't know what else I can do.

You have your opinion, and I have mine. If you can watch Rowand play CF and be happy with it, I have some beautiful swamp land in Florida I'm trying to unload.

maurice
07-31-2003, 05:20 PM
I feel like I'm stuck on a ferris wheel.

Originally posted by Randar68
I have never said, "We can't win with Aaron Rowand in CF"

Well, you have said (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=19423&perpage=&pagenumber=2):

[Rowand] should not be a platoon or everyday player on a major league team with thoughts of division championships.

I think we have a very good chance of winning this pathetic division with Rowand platooning in CF. I understand that you feel he has a bad arm, but everyone else who has chimed in on the subject (including some major league scouts) disagree.

I do agree, however, that a player such as Rowand who is unlikely to get on base at a high clip or hit for power or steal lots of bases or play gold glove defense at a key position is not particularly valuable. I'm in favor of upgrading ANY position, if the deal makes sense. The Sox will have lots of scary ??? up the middle going into next season, and I don't think KW will be looking to add OFs.

:o:

Randar68
07-31-2003, 05:41 PM
Originally posted by maurice
I understand that you feel he has a bad arm, but everyone else who has chimed in on the subject (including some major league scouts) disagree.

Who? You and Gumshoe? He can throw fantastic when he's in good position, which he NEVER is.


Originally posted by maurice
I do agree, however, that a player such as Rowand who is unlikely to get on base at a high clip or hit for power or steal lots of bases or play gold glove defense at a key position is not particularly valuable. I'm in favor of upgrading ANY position, if the deal makes sense. The Sox will have lots of scary ??? up the middle going into next season, and I don't think KW will be looking to add OFs.

Whether or not we do something or the likelihood of it actually happenning has never been a part of my arguement. This team does not have to have a new CF'er next week, but it is one of the 2 or 3 weakest positions or roles on this team. You should upgrade your weaknesses whenever possible.

This all started out because Gumshoe started arguing that Rowand was "the future" and the he was such a great player. I have been extra critical of him in trying to make my point, which I feel I have to go to an extreme to do, because every time Rowand hits .300 for a week, Gumshoe is trying to yell at everyone that Rowand is some kind of savior and should play every day, blah blah blah.

Rowand is a 4th outfielder. I feel bad he's been put in this position, but he isn't a good enough hitter to be an everyday LF'er, and he isn't a good enough runner or pinch-hitter to fill that role.

It just-so-happens that CF is this team's biggest (IMO) weakness, and he is the (maybe) lesser of all evils.

Randar68
07-31-2003, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by maurice
Well, you have said (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=19423&perpage=&pagenumber=2):

"[Rowand] should not be a platoon or everyday player on a major league team with thoughts of division championships."


I stand by that statement 110%. It does say "should", does it not?

baseballboy
07-31-2003, 06:40 PM
You know what Gumshoe, as soon as you change your pessimistic attitude towards the White Sox and stop rooting for mediocre players (ie Rowand and D'ummy) when they don't deserve to be anymore than what they are, then I will change my vitriolic attitude. Do we have a deal? I doubt you could do that.

Look at Kenny's imprint on this team:

traded for Olivo
signd Alomar Jr.
traded for Willie Harris
traded for Roberto Alomar
traded for Bartolo Colon
signed Esteban Loaiza
signed Tom Gordon
traded for Damaso Marte
traded for Schoenweis

Those are some pretty good acquisitons and if we win the central I better hear you give KW his proper respect Gumshoe. However, you will probably be doing more whining because we traded Jimenez and dont play Rowand everyday.

Plus I would love to see you play some day, where are you at? Is there a field near you? Maybe we can hit the cages sometime or if you have a team we can set up a scrimmage, we are always looking for scrimmage games.

MarkEdward
07-31-2003, 06:48 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy

Look at Kenny's imprint on this team:

traded for Olivo
signd Alomar Jr.
traded for Willie Harris
traded for Roberto Alomar
traded for Bartolo Colon
signed Esteban Loaiza
signed Tom Gordon
traded for Damaso Marte
traded for Schoenweis


You forgot Koch for Foulke, Ritchie for Wells and Fogg, and Clayton for Myette.

baseballboy
07-31-2003, 06:54 PM
Is clayton on this team anymore? How about Ritchie? I have noticed that Myette, Fogg, and Lowe are just tearing the major leagues up though. While Wells is just an absolute stud! I mean damn, why did he trade those guys away! Foulke is a bad trade at the moment, but lets see what happens with Cotts and maybe next year Koch can turn it around.

MarkEdward
08-01-2003, 12:03 AM
Originally posted by baseballboy
Is clayton on this team anymore? How about Ritchie? I have noticed that Myette, Fogg, and Lowe are just tearing the major leagues up though. While Wells is just an absolute stud! I mean damn, why did he trade those guys away! Foulke is a bad trade at the moment, but lets see what happens with Cotts and maybe next year Koch can turn it around.

Royce Clayton threw our clubhouse (not to mention our offense) into shambles. We are just now recovering from it. True, Lowe and Myette haven't done anything worthwhile since being traded. Fogg hasn't done much this year, but he'd make a great number five starter for us. Kip Wells, if he were on the Sox, would be our third best starter (according to SNWAR). Finally, we didn't acquire Koch to see if he would become valuable in 2004. We acquired him to contribute in 2003. If we didn't want to win this year, then the Foulke-Koch trade would be fine. If we're trying to win this year, it's not a very good deal. Foulke we be great in our pen right now.

Gumshoe
08-01-2003, 11:38 AM
Originally posted by maurice
I feel like I'm stuck on a ferris wheel.



Well, you have said (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=19423&perpage=&pagenumber=2):



I think we have a very good chance of winning this pathetic division with Rowand platooning in CF. I understand that you feel he has a bad arm, but everyone else who has chimed in on the subject (including some major league scouts) disagree.

I do agree, however, that a player such as Rowand who is unlikely to get on base at a high clip or hit for power or steal lots of bases or play gold glove defense at a key position is not particularly valuable. I'm in favor of upgrading ANY position, if the deal makes sense. The Sox will have lots of scary ??? up the middle going into next season, and I don't think KW will be looking to add OFs.

:o:

A few points to set the record straight, my friends. I think Maurice is the only one that understands me, because he presents the most cogent thought of all, included in this post above. His crucial point is what I've said all along --- I TOO am in favor of upgrading positions, but at what cost? Other positions???! You act like we can go out and get a gold glove CF that he have five tools and keep the same team! That is the only reason why I referred to AR as a future player with the Sox. He can do enough to help us win given a) our payroll b) the other guys surrounding him c) he plays hard. Maurice furthers my point in his last sentence, which is an extension of what I've been saying. That is the reason why I went on my DJ diatribe. It just wasn't smart management. It would have cost us very little to keep DJ. Period. I won't talk about it anymore, OK?

On to baseball boy. I live within a 10 minute walk of Comiskey. I'll play anytime you want. Please don't disrespect me, because I know for a fact that you cannot be a bigger Sox fan than I am. You can equal me, sure. But you aren't bigger. I want them to win more than anything, I'm sure you are the same way.

On top of that, I'm not pessimistic, I'm realistic. What reason has KW given me to believe that we WILL in fact do it? 2 years of expectations and ZERO in results. MarkEdward understands this point.

As for KW, do you know what the money line on the Sox was to win the AL Central? I was in Vegas right before the start of the season. It was -120. If you don't know what that means, it means we were the FAVORITES. Now, I'll give him proper respect for makign some moves to win the division. That respect will be because he will deserve it if he brings results. However, there is different respect for a team that wins 95 from a team that wins 88. Now, if we go to the ALCS, I'll give KW his full due. Win the division and win the first series, that's all I ask. I thought we would do this this year. If we do, you'll hear some praise out of me. If we win the Pennant, I'll compliment him till the cows come home. As my quote below says, none of it really means jack sh*t unless we win the Pennant.

Gumshoe

baseballboy
08-02-2003, 12:17 AM
I dont know the area so well around Comiskey. If you still play ball lets get our teams out there and scrimage. It could be fun Gumshoe. Sorry if you think I am disrespecting you, I just hate negative attitudes, especially towards a team you are supposed to like. Call it realistic if you like. I still see it as negative. Again let me know where we can play some ball. Thanks.

baseballboy
08-02-2003, 01:09 AM
Mark Edward,

Clayton hardly threw our offense into shambles, we were still one of the leading run producing offenses while he was here. And if you think this clubhouse needed Clayton to through it into shambles I think you are wrong. He didnt even speak out that much to throw it into shambles. I am not saying he helped the clubhouse atmosphere, but he surely wasnt the only one that did that. And if we are still recovering from him for this long then that would be very strange. I mean it has been more than half a baseball season without him, I dont think the clubhouse thinks twice about him. We are still recovering from Royce Clayton? What a strange comment that is.

Fogg is below average in the National League, that would make him a very poor American League pitcher. I don't think he would be any better in the American League than porzio/Wright. I may be wrong, but unless he gets traded to this league we will never know. As far as Wells goes, he sucked here. What makes you think he is able to pitch in the American League? While he was here he was pathetic and I hated hearing his damn whiny voice after the game. I don't care what SNWAR says, you, I, and everyone else knows he would not be our third starter. Colon, Loaiza, and Buerhle would all be ahead of him. I still have my doubts about Wells in the American League anyway, but he would definately not be our 3rd starter.

Here is Kenny Williams' quote after the trade:

"I've been after Billy Koch for a couple of years now," White Sox general manager Kenny Williams said. "We felt good about our bullpen for 2003 (before the trade). Now we feel good about it for 2003, 2004 and 2005."

If you want to look at it as a trade for this year then go ahead. As you can see from that quote Kenny Williams didn't. So lets see how Koch bounces back. Foulke would not be with us after this year and he is 2 years older than Koch. Plus don't forget that we received Cotts in the deal as well. Cotts could be a stud lefty for us in the near future.

You should wait and see how the deal pans out more than a half year before you judge it. Last year it looked like the Scrubs stole Clement and Alfonseca from the Marlins. It doesn't look like that anymore.

MarkEdward
08-02-2003, 02:50 AM
Originally posted by baseballboy
Mark Edward,

Clayton hardly threw our offense into shambles, we were still one of the leading run producing offenses while he was here.

Runs scored:
2000 White Sox: 978, 1st in AL
2001 White Sox: 798, 6th in AL
2002 White Sox: 856, 3rd in AL

While we were still one of the better run-scoring clubs, our offense did suffer with Clayton on the team.

And if you think this clubhouse needed Clayton to through it into shambles I think you are wrong. He didnt even speak out that much to throw it into shambles.

Are you sure about that? From what I remember, Clayton was always speaking out about a lack of playing time (this when he was hitting under the Medoza line), the fans booing him, stuff like that.

And if we are still recovering from him for this long then that would be very strange. I mean it has been more than half a baseball season without him, I dont think the clubhouse thinks twice about him. We are still recovering from Royce Clayton? What a strange comment that is.

Our offense is only now beginning to produce runs like we did in 2000, pre-Clayton.

Fogg is below average in the National League, that would make him a very poor American League pitcher.

SNWAR adjusts for league, park, etc. And according to SNWAR, Fogg is a league average pitcher.

As far as Wells goes, he sucked here.

Really? True, 2000 was not a very good year for Kip, but by 2001 he was a league average pitcher (96 ERA+). And he was only 24 during the 2001 season.

My point is that you don't trade two young pitchers with good track records in the majors or high minors (which Wells and Fogg both had) for a player like Todd Ritchie.

I don't care what SNWAR says, you, I, and everyone else knows he would not be our third starter. Colon, Loaiza, and Buerhle would all be ahead of him. I still have my doubts about Wells in the American League anyway, but he would definately not be our 3rd starter.

I'll give you Colon over Wells (though I can make the argument that Wells has been better this year), but I'd take Wells over Buehrle this year. Aside from having the better SNWAR by a pretty large margin (2.3 to 1.4), Wells also has the higher K rate. Buehrle has the better BB and home run rate. He's also had the better defense behind him. Wells is also playing in a worse pitchers' park.

Here is Kenny Williams' quote after the trade:
"I've been after Billy Koch for a couple of years now," White Sox general manager Kenny Williams said. "We felt good about our bullpen for 2003 (before the trade). Now we feel good about it for 2003, 2004 and 2005."
If you want to look at it as a trade for this year then go ahead.

If you, before the season, considered this year to be a re-building year, then yes, we did make this trade to help our future. However, I was under the impression that we were trying to win this year. If we're trying to win this year, than the Foulke-Koch deal has been bad because, this year, Foulke has been the better pitcher.

Foulke would not be with us after this year and he is 2 years older than Koch.

Who says Foulke wouldn't come back to the Sox? He seemed to like it in Chicago, and with the new economics of baseball, relief pitchers will no longer be rewarded gigantic contracts.

Plus don't forget that we received Cotts in the deal as well. Cotts could be a stud lefty for us in the near future.

True. Cotts does give credence to the fact that Kenny made this trade to help us in the future. But he also gave up Joe Valentine, another piece to our future.

You should wait and see how the deal pans out more than a half year before you judge it. Last year it looked like the Scrubs stole Clement and Alfonseca from the Marlins. It doesn't look like that anymore.

IIRC, both Baseball America and Baseball Prospectus thought giving up Willis for Clement and Alfonseca was, at that time, a joke.

baseballboy
08-02-2003, 12:26 PM
White SOx dropped all the way to 6tgh in the league in runs scored? Yeah our offense is really in shambles.

So clayton speaks about playing time and that throws the clubhouse in shambles? Wierd, I didnt know that is all it took. Wow!

Our offense is just starting to produce NOW because of clayton not being here? How about Paulie wasnt hitting, Crede wasn't hitting, Valentin wasn't hitting, no leadoff hitter, Frank wasn't hitting, Daubach wasn't hitting. Manuel was tinkiering with a new lineup every damn day! What are you smoking? Clayton was the reason that we dropped to a whopping 6th in the league in runs scored and why we got off to such a bad start this year? WOWIE! That is the strangest argument I have ever heard.

If your argument is that we gave up too much then I agree. If your argument is that these two guys would make a huge difference on this team then I would disagree. Neither of these pitchers were that great in the American League. I don't care how they pitched in the minors, Wells proved to be horrible in the American League. HORRIBLE! I don't care what SNAR says, it cant possibly tell you how a pitcher will pitch in another league. I never like getting a pitcher from the National League. Kip Wells proved he sucked here in the American League, he goes to the National the NEXT YEAR and succeeds. I'm glad for him, but I don't want him. When Wells was here he posted ERAs of 6.02 and 4.79 with WHIPS of 1.87 and 1.55. That is absolutely horrible! He is not an American League pitcher! Wells is playing in a hitters park compared to Wells? What? PNC park is known as a great pitchers park! The Cell is known as a pitchers park, however since the stadium was built the walls have been moved in and it has been one of the leagues highest scoring stadiums. I think you need to rethink that logic. You are very wrong my friend.

Fogg is below average to me. Last year when he had this great year his ERA was a whopping 4.35 and had a WHIP of 1.38. In the American League that may be average, in the National I would find it hard to believe that it is average. This year 5.42 ERA and a 1.5 WHIP. IN THE NATIONAL LEAGUE! THAT IS AVERAGE!?!?!?! He sucks! He would make a great 5th starter for us? You are on crack!

Here is Kenny Williams' quote after the trade:
"I've been after Billy Koch for a couple of years now," White Sox general manager Kenny Williams said. "We felt good about our bullpen for 2003 (before the trade). Now we feel good about it for 2003, 2004 and 2005."
Going by this quote alone, I don't care what direction you thought we were going in, it was obviously made not only for this year but for the years ahead. We were not going to pay Foulke his asking price, that is why he wouldnt be here. It has nothing to do with him wanting to be here, we wouldnt have paid what he wanted. Obviously KW knew that, so he made this trade.

I didn't realize Valentine was such a huge part of our future. Yeah he may turn out to be ok, but the A's don't have him any longer either. He was dealt to the Reds for Jose Guillen. We will see how great he turns out. Why would Beane give him up for Guillen if he was all that? There is something there dont you think? I mean Guillen isn't al that great. efore this year he was waived by, what? 3 diferent teams. Pittsburgh, Arizona, Tampa Bay come to mind. He doesnt have the greatest track record of someone that is going to be a star. He is 27 years old, it is not like he is smoe young prospect.

ANd what did baseball America think of the Wells/Sirotka trade? How about the Marte trade? Olivo trade? Point being that they are not the end all be all. My point is that you can't judge a trade by half a year no matter who you are. That is very dangerous to do as you can look like a complete moron. So I am glad you can say after half a season that the Koch/Foulke trade was one of the worst ever. Lets wait and see what happens. We have Koch for 3 more years and hopefully he comes back. We also have Cotts. Lets hope he pans out. If those two things happen and all the A's get out of it is one season out of Foulke then I think we would be the winners.

Thank you Marc Edwards.

MarkEdward
08-02-2003, 02:22 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy
White SOx dropped all the way to 6tgh in the league in runs scored? Yeah our offense is really in shambles.

So clayton speaks about playing time and that throws the clubhouse in shambles? Wierd, I didnt know that is all it took. Wow!

So maybe the word 'shambles' was a bit too strong. He certainly didn't help our offense or clubhouse, did he?

For what it's worth, did you like the Clayton trade? Do you think Clayton helped or hurt our team in the long run?

Our offense is just starting to produce NOW because of clayton not being here? How about Paulie wasnt hitting, Crede wasn't hitting, Valentin wasn't hitting, no leadoff hitter, Frank wasn't hitting, Daubach wasn't hitting. Manuel was tinkiering with a new lineup every damn day! What are you smoking? Clayton was the reason that we dropped to a whopping 6th in the league in runs scored and why we got off to such a bad start this year? WOWIE! That is the strangest argument I have ever heard.

It is a pretty bad argument. Here's my point: in 2001 and 2002, we declined in offensive production. At least part of that decline can be attributed to Royce Clayton. Clayton isn't responsible for this year, but he was (partly) responsible for the two prior years.

If your argument is that we gave up too much then I agree. If your argument is that these two guys would make a huge difference on this team then I would disagree.

Well, I'd rather see a rotaion of Loaiza, Colon, Buehrle, Wells, and Garland over Loaiza, Colon, Buehrle, Garland, Wright/Porzio.

Neither of these pitchers were that great in the American League. I don't care how they pitched in the minors, Wells proved to be horrible in the American League. HORRIBLE!

He wasn't exactly horrible as an ALer, like I said. He had one bad year and one average year.

I don't care what SNAR says, it cant possibly tell you how a pitcher will pitch in another league.

I wouldn't be able to explain support-nuetral stats correctly, but here's a good article on it:
http://www.stathead.com/bbeng/wolverton/snwlexpl.htm

I never like getting a pitcher from the National League. Kip Wells proved he sucked here in the American League, he goes to the National the NEXT YEAR and succeeds. I'm glad for him, but I don't want him. When Wells was here he posted ERAs of 6.02 and 4.79 with WHIPS of 1.87 and 1.55. That is absolutely horrible!

Remember, he posted those numbers at ages 23 and 24. As a pitcher, to have an average year at age 24 (especially in the AL) shows that the pitcher may become more than a bottom-of-the-rotation starter.

He is not an American League pitcher! Wells is playing in a hitters park compared to Wells? What? PNC park is known as a great pitchers park! The Cell is known as a pitchers park, however since the stadium was built the walls have been moved in and it has been one of the leagues highest scoring stadiums. I think you need to rethink that logic. You are very wrong my friend.

Since PNC's creation, it has either been a neutral or hitter's park. This year, it's the third-best hitter's park in the NL (behind Arizona and Colorado) according to Baseball Prospectus. Comiskey/US Cellular Field hasn't been a pitcher's park since '99 (even then it was pretty neutral).

Fogg is below average to me. Last year when he had this great year his ERA was a whopping 4.35 and had a WHIP of 1.38. In the American League that may be average, in the National I would find it hard to believe that it is average. This year 5.42 ERA and a 1.5 WHIP. IN THE NATIONAL LEAGUE! THAT IS AVERAGE!?!?!?! He sucks! He would make a great 5th starter for us? You are on crack!

Well, he is pitching in a hitter's park, so that has inflated his ERA. I'd still take him over Wright or Porzio though.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on the AL pitcher vs. NL pitcher debate.

Here is Kenny Williams' quote after the trade:
"I've been after Billy Koch for a couple of years now," White Sox general manager Kenny Williams said. "We felt good about our bullpen for 2003 (before the trade). Now we feel good about it for 2003, 2004 and 2005."
Going by this quote alone, I don't care what direction you thought we were going in, it was obviously made not only for this year but for the years ahead.

So we weren't trying to win this year? Then why sign Daubach, Rios, Sandy Alomar, and Colon before the season started?

We were not going to pay Foulke his asking price, that is why he wouldnt be here. It has nothing to do with him wanting to be here, we wouldnt have paid what he wanted. Obviously KW knew that, so he made this trade.

What was his asking price?

I didn't realize Valentine was such a huge part of our future. Yeah he may turn out to be ok, but the A's don't have him any longer either. He was dealt to the Reds for Jose Guillen. We will see how great he turns out.

I didn't say Valentine will turn out to be a future. But if we're making the Koch trade to help our future, why trade a player who could be a part of that future?

ANd what did baseball America think of the Wells/Sirotka trade? How about the Marte trade? Olivo trade? Point being that they are not the end all be all. My point is that you can't judge a trade by half a year no matter who you are. That is very dangerous to do as you can look like a complete moron.


In my opinion, you have to analyze a trade based on current evidence. Hindsight is always 20/20.

Gumshoe
08-03-2003, 10:04 PM
With all due respect, baseball boy, just quit arguing this scenario. Foulke is BY FAR better now and has always been better than Koch. With the way that Koch looks right now and with the success % of minor leaguers being where it is, you are going out on a HUGE limb by saying that Cotts and Koch might someday be up at the big league level helping us.

As Mark has said, the impression was that we were trying to win this year. This more than anything else has contributed to more losses for the Sox. Obviously we're hitting now, but our downfall if we have one will be the bullpen, and nothing else.

gumshoe

baseballboy
08-03-2003, 10:43 PM
All I am saying Gumshoe and ME is this. You guys keep saying how bad a trade this is and if you take this 3/4 of a year then yes it would be. But you should never ever judge a trade on 3/4s of a year. Wait a couple of years and then go from there. Both of you seem like Kenny haters to me and no matter what he does you will not like it.

How any of you "experts" can judge a trade on half a season is beyond me. Remember when the scrubs got clement and alfonseca for Willis? Everyone thought the scrubs got them for nothing. However, look at that trade now? What? A year later? Willis looks like a stud left handed pitcher. One of the reasons the Marlins are contending this year. Notice I said ONE, not a major reason, not the only reason, but ONE of the reasons. You should wait a year or two before you judge any trade. ANY TRADE! Koch can bounce back and make you look like fools. Cotts can turn out to be AWESOME! Plus he is a lefthander. I really don't understand you guys.

Foulke was not a great CLOSER last year. So in the last few years of his great CLOSING, he missed a year. He is one of the reasons we sucked so bad last year. He is the major reason our bullpen was in shambles and we had to go out and get people this year. Yeah he bounced back to save his year in ERA an WHIP, but every time he was put in a closing situation, even when he was "back to form" he sucked!!!!!!! HE SUCKED LAST YEAR AS A CLOSER!!!!! I dont care how he pitched outside of that role, as a CLOSER he sucked major donkey balls. Thats all. Wait a year or two and see how this trade pans out, all you guys may look like total fools.

As far as PNC being a hitters park I really don't buy it ME. That is by far one of the best pitchers parks in the league. Up there with Dodger stadium. If there is any runs being scored up there it is because of the horrible Pirate pitching and fielding, not the ballpark.

Hey gumshoe you still havent told me if you would like to scrimmage. Please let me know.

MarkEdward
08-04-2003, 01:58 AM
Originally posted by baseballboy
All I am saying Gumshoe and ME is this. You guys keep saying how bad a trade this is and if you take this 3/4 of a year then yes it would be. But you should never ever judge a trade on 3/4s of a year. Wait a couple of years and then go from there. Both of you seem like Kenny haters to me and no matter what he does you will not like it.

I'll ask this again: were the Sox trying to win this year? If not, this seems like a perfectly acceptable trade. However, considering Kenny's other signings and trades, it appears as though we are trying to win this year.

So yes, trading Keith Foulke to help our future was a good move. We got a good minor league pitching prospect and a bad reliever for a lot longer than we would've been able to keep Foulke. But if we are trying to win this year, Keith Foulke would've been a great help in our pen.

How any of you "experts" can judge a trade on half a season is beyond me. Remember when the scrubs got clement and alfonseca for Willis? Everyone thought the scrubs got them for nothing. However, look at that trade now? What? A year later? Willis looks like a stud left handed pitcher. One of the reasons the Marlins are contending this year. Notice I said ONE, not a major reason, not the only reason, but ONE of the reasons. You should wait a year or two before you judge any trade. ANY TRADE! Koch can bounce back and make you look like fools. Cotts can turn out to be AWESOME! Plus he is a lefthander. I really don't understand you guys.

Again, I chalk that up to hindsight. Let me give you this situation: General Manager X trades a 25 year old pitcher struggling in A ball for a future Hall-of-Famer. Future HOFer gets injured and doesn't play another game. 25 year old pitcher goes on to pitch like Greg Maddux the rest of his career. Now, was this a bad trade? In hindsight, yes. However, given the evidence at that time, the trade was acceptable.

I'll say it again: you have to analyze a trade based on current evidence.

Foulke was not a great CLOSER last year.

What metrics did you use to come to that conclusion?

So in the last few years of his great CLOSING, he missed a year. He is one of the reasons we sucked so bad last year. He is the major reason our bullpen was in shambles and we had to go out and get people this year.

Actually, our pen wasn't that bad last year (6th in the AL).

As far as PNC being a hitters park I really don't buy it ME. That is by far one of the best pitchers parks in the league. Up there with Dodger stadium.

I hate to sound rude, but where did you come up with that? Going back to 1989, PNC/Three Rivers has never been an extreme pitcher's park (I'm using baseball-reference.com for the park factors, btw). Is there something I could be missing?

Edit: Woohoo! Tomato award!

WhiteSox = Life
08-04-2003, 03:00 AM
Originally posted by MarkEdward
Edit: Woohoo! Tomato award!

Actually, it's 100 replies, not posts. Excluding the original post, your just typed in the 99th.

WhiteSox = Life
08-04-2003, 03:01 AM
Originally posted by WhiteSox = Life
Actually, it's 100 replies, not posts. Excluding the original post, your just typed in the 99th.

Hey! Well, lookey here! The 100th reply!

:tomatoaward

:)

baseballboy
08-04-2003, 07:33 AM
Firts of all PNC i a new ballpark. It wasnt around in 1989. April 9, 2001 was the first game played there. So why you are going back to 1989 is beyond me. Hate to sound rude dude, but if you pay attention to baseball you would have known that. If you go by baseball-reference's park factors then you would realize they do very little to incorporate runs scored at that ballpark. They take teams wins/losses. What that team does on the road compared to at home. It is a very odd calculation and I would not base my argument on it. As far as I know it is one of the hardest places to hit a home run out of. If someone knows more then please correct me on this people. For the record Wells only was able to pitch in PNC and not riverfront, so again there was no reason to look all the way back to 1989 at a dead ballpark.

Going by Kenny Williams comments about this trade it obviously wasn't meant for JUST THIS YEAR and we would not have kept Foulke after this season. Everyone here except for you seems to know this. I don't know what his asking price was but that was part of the reasoning of the trade. Again looking at Kenny Williams' comments you can see that is what he meant. You choose to just look past his comments I guess.

6th in scoring runs is bad, but 6th in bullpen average is not? Wierd.

I remember last year how bad he was closing, if you don't then that is your problem.

Again, you should not be analyzing the trade until there is something to analyze. Cotts hasnt pitched in the majors yet and Koch has had a bad year. We traded for the 2002 fireman of the year. I don't think he is a bad reliever. He only had one year with a bad ERA beside this year. 2001 he had an ERA of 4.80. Other than that he has not had an ERA above 3.39. He is relatively young. It is wierd how you give Wells the excuse of being in the league only 2 or 3 years before he started to produce and with Koch (this only being his 5th year) had his best year last year and was obvioulsy only getting better, but you choose not to see that. Maybe he did throw too many innings last year. I would love to see him bounce back next year and make all you people eat crow.

Gumshoe
08-04-2003, 10:12 AM
I understand your sentiment, BB, because it is similar to what I think about KW. YOu cannot say he's done a good job, YET, unless the Sox do something this year. Who cares about "effort"?

So, we'll wait and see what happens. But I don't think you'd disagree with the fact that we have the best chance to win this year. Not in 2 years, not in 5, not when Koch gets it back (when Hell freezes over, jeez his ERA keeps going up and up!)

As such, I think that the trade can be judged fairly now, because there are MANY things that can happen that will make us a team with a smaller probability to win in the future (ie. division gets better, we lose Colon, Alomar, Loaiza in 2 years, whatever) ... that's why we are saying it was a bad trade ---> because KW is going for it this year!

G

ps- BBoy, I'll take you to school any day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

MarkEdward
08-04-2003, 12:32 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy
Firts of all PNC i a new ballpark. It wasnt around in 1989. April 9, 2001 was the first game played there. So why you are going back to 1989 is beyond me. Hate to sound rude dude, but if you pay attention to baseball you would have known that.

That's why I specifically typed PNC/Three Rivers in my previous post.

If you go by baseball-reference's park factors then you would realize they do very little to incorporate runs scored at that ballpark. They take teams wins/losses.

While it is true that they take win-loss records into account, it is a very small part of a much larger equation.

For the record Wells only was able to pitch in PNC and not riverfront, so again there was no reason to look all the way back to 1989 at a dead ballpark.

Correct, and I apologize about that misunderstanding. But when you made this comment: "[PNC] is by far one of the best pitchers parks in the league," I wanted to verify that, post-1988, PNC/Three Rivers was never a pitcher's park. I was just trying to understand your comment, that's all.

Going by Kenny Williams comments about this trade it obviously wasn't meant for JUST THIS YEAR and we would not have kept Foulke after this season. Everyone here except for you seems to know this. I don't know what his asking price was but that was part of the reasoning of the trade. Again looking at Kenny Williams' comments you can see that is what he meant. You choose to just look past his comments I guess.

I understand this trade was made in order to help our future (sort of). But if Kenny was planning on re-building (as shown by the Koch trade), why did he go out and get Colon, Daubach, and Gordon in the off-season?

6th in scoring runs is bad, but 6th in bullpen average is not? Wierd.

I didn't say sixth in runs was bad. I said our offense suffered under Royce Clayton (which it did; I'd call going from 978 runs to 798 runs suffering).

I remember last year how bad he was closing, if you don't then that is your problem.

Well, unless you have anything to back that up, I guess it will remain my 'problem.'

We traded for the 2002 fireman of the year.

... who was worse than Foulke.

I don't think he is a bad reliever. He only had one year with a bad ERA beside this year. 2001 he had an ERA of 4.80. Other than that he has not had an ERA above 3.39.

But he also had a high walk rate. That was some cause for concern.

He is relatively young. It is wierd how you give Wells the excuse of being in the league only 2 or 3 years before he started to produce and with Koch (this only being his 5th year) had his best year last year and was obvioulsy only getting better, but you choose not to see that.

First, it only took Wells one year to adjust to the majors. Second, it wasn't obvious that Koch was going to get better. His walk rate continued to increase. His K rate did rise also, though. Even before this year, though, Foulke was the better bet to have the better year.

I would love to see him bounce back next year and make all you people eat crow.

If he bounces back, than I'd love to eat crow.

baseballboy
08-04-2003, 04:35 PM
So you are saying that Foulke was better than Koch last year? How is this possible? He was terrible in the closers role last year. What other pitcher had double digit wins and 40+ saves? Was there ever another? He had one of the best years ever as a closer. Foulke was better than him last year as a closer? Are you insane?

Here is what ESPN writer Graham Hays writes about Koch's year last year:

Only 58 pitchers had more wins than Koch in 2002. That sounds like a lot until you consider 122 pitchers started at least 20 games. That's why Koch earns a place on the list despite the only ERA above 3.00, and one of only three above 2.00. Other closers have won double-digit games -- Doug Jones won 11 with a 1.85 ERA in 1992 and Mitch Williams won 12 in 1991 -- but neither cracked the 40-save barrier. Add up Koch's wins, saves and strikeouts and it's easy to overlook a merely decent ERA and WHIP.

I really don't think Foulke had a better year last year AS A CLOSER! Foulke's walk rate also increased up until last year when he was no longer a closer. Wierd huh?

It only took Wells 1 year to adjust to the majors? Do you even watch the Sox play? He pitched 2.5 years for us and sucked! Horrible! And every time after the game we had to listen to this whiny little voice explain crap. I was so sick of him, as most Sox fans were. Please, he did not only take him one year. He was horrible in the American League, he is merely decent in the National League.

The park rating you are going by is not something to base your argument on. It is really a bunch of nonsense. I am glad you love numbers so much, but there is a lot more to baseball than just numbers. Are you an accountant or something? If you went strictly by numbers then Jimenez would actually be a pretty decent player. Try watching the game more and pay less attention to statistics.

baseballboy
08-04-2003, 04:37 PM
Gumshoe, I really don't care if you take me to school or not. If you can then I would love to learn from you. I just love the game of baseball, play, watch, whatever. If you want let me know where to go and we can get a scrimmage game going. Sounds like fun to me.

kempsted
08-04-2003, 05:11 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy
So you are saying that Foulke was better than Koch last year? How is this possible? He was terrible in the closers role last year. What other pitcher had double digit wins and 40+ saves? Was there ever another? He had one of the best years ever as a closer. Foulke was better than him last year as a closer? Are you insane?

Here is what ESPN writer Graham Hays writes about Koch's year last year:

Only 58 pitchers had more wins than Koch in 2002. That sounds like a lot until you consider 122 pitchers started at least 20 games. That's why Koch earns a place on the list despite the only ERA above 3.00, and one of only three above 2.00. Other closers have won double-digit games -- Doug Jones won 11 with a 1.85 ERA in 1992 and Mitch Williams won 12 in 1991 -- but neither cracked the 40-save barrier. Add up Koch's wins, saves and strikeouts and it's easy to overlook a merely decent ERA and WHIP.

I really don't think Foulke had a better year last year AS A CLOSER! Foulke's walk rate also increased up until last year when he was no longer a closer. Wierd huh?

It only took Wells 1 year to adjust to the majors? Do you even watch the Sox play? He pitched 2.5 years for us and sucked! Horrible! And every time after the game we had to listen to this whiny little voice explain crap. I was so sick of him, as most Sox fans were. Please, he did not only take him one year. He was horrible in the American League, he is merely decent in the National League.

The park rating you are going by is not something to base your argument on. It is really a bunch of nonsense. I am glad you love numbers so much, but there is a lot more to baseball than just numbers. Are you an accountant or something? If you went strictly by numbers then Jimenez would actually be a pretty decent player. Try watching the game more and pay less attention to statistics.

No he is not crazy he is right and it is what almost every baseball person was saying. Baseball Prospectus pointed out that in every statistical category (except saves - which is explained bellow) Foulke was better than Koch last year. In fact Smoltz and Foulke did almost exactly the same thing at the begining of the season - had a couple of blown saves. The difference is Cox let Smoltz continue and Manuel took Foulke out of the closer role. But if you look at his numbers he deserved the job back and Manuel never gave it to him.

For the end of the season Foulke had a .78 ERA. His WHIP has always been 1 or less. Koch is always about 1.3.


Here is what Baseball Prospectus said back when the trade was made.


> Billy Beane rides again: Billy Koch, Proven Closer, has been wrapped
> up with two minor leaguers we haven't heard about yet and traded to
> the White Sox for Keith Foulke, Mark Johnson, Joe Valentine, and cash.
>
> Keith Foulke rules. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise -- the line
> that he "was a closer who lost his job for most of the year" overlooks
> entirely the fact that he was taken out of the role not because he
> sucked, but because he had a couple of bad outings in a row and his
> manager was stupid. He's been one of baseball's best relievers since
> 1999 (and he threw 105 innings that year!). Koch... Koch hasn't.

baseballboy
08-04-2003, 05:30 PM
Ok fine wonderful year. However, how did he perform as our CLOSER last year? I also remember Manuel giving him save opportunities after taking his role away and he was terrible then too. Do you remember this guy in any pressure games? How about against the Twins? The Yankees? The Mariners in the playoffs? He was terrible in those situations. Why is that? That is why a lot of people say he doesn't have the make up for the job. Remember last year when they took him out of that role as a closer and the reporters asked him about it? He said I never wanted the job, I never asked to be the closer. That is another reason why they thought he didnt have the makeup for the role. Plus he is right, he never wanted to be the closer and he still doesn't. He still wants to be a starter. He was absolutely terrible as a starter. Why doesn't he understand that?!?!

MarkEdward
08-05-2003, 11:55 AM
Originally posted by baseballboy
So you are saying that Foulke was better than Koch last year? How is this possible? He was terrible in the closers role last year. What other pitcher had double digit wins and 40+ saves? Was there ever another? He had one of the best years ever as a closer. Foulke was better than him last year as a closer? Are you insane?

By almost every statistical measure, Foulke was better than Koch last year (I can go over the numbers again if you'd like). Saves aren't a real good measure of a pitcher's value. Closers' wins are even worse. In order to get a win, the closer must blow the save (usually).

Here is what ESPN writer Graham Hays writes about Koch's year last year:
Only 58 pitchers had more wins than Koch in 2002. That sounds like a lot until you consider 122 pitchers started at least 20 games. That's why Koch earns a place on the list despite the only ERA above 3.00, and one of only three above 2.00. Other closers have won double-digit games -- Doug Jones won 11 with a 1.85 ERA in 1992 and Mitch Williams won 12 in 1991 -- but neither cracked the 40-save barrier. Add up Koch's wins, saves and strikeouts and it's easy to overlook a merely decent ERA and WHIP.

Well, you know you're a good closer when you're being compared to Doug Jones and Mitch Williams...

I really don't think Foulke had a better year last year AS A CLOSER! Foulke's walk rate also increased up until last year when he was no longer a closer. Wierd huh?

Yes, his walk rate did increase. But it has been consistently low (lower than Koch's).

It only took Wells 1 year to adjust to the majors? Do you even watch the Sox play? He pitched 2.5 years for us and sucked! Horrible!

In 1999, his ERA was 4.04, where the league average was 4.77 (granted, he only pitched 36 innings). In 2000, his ERA was 6.02, where the league average was 5.17. In 2001, his ERA was 4.79, where the league average was 4.62. Remember, Kip was pitching in a hitters' park too. By those numbers, I'd say Kip had one good year, one bad year, and one average year.

The park rating you are going by is not something to base your argument on. It is really a bunch of nonsense.

Well, I'm sorry you feel that way. It is a very useful tool.

If you went strictly by numbers then Jimenez would actually be a pretty decent player.

Um, he is a pretty decent player.

Try watching the game more and pay less attention to statistics.

I tend to think I watch a good amount of baseball (with the whole MLB Extra Innings subscription).

baseballboy
08-05-2003, 11:08 PM
Im sorry, but you and Gummy should throw a party. You think Jimenez is a decent player. The ballpark ratio is not a very useful tool at all. Saves does mean a lot to me as a reliever. I have told you why and until you can prove to me that Foulke was a better CLOSER than Koch was last year then I will continue telling you that Koch was a much better CLOSER than Foulke was last year. Find those numbers and lets see. I want to know how Foulke did in CLOSING situations. Show me his numbers for 2002 closing situations, compare them to Koch's and we can go from there. Until then I don't care what numbers you show me becuase they mean nothing. It is comparing apples to oranges.

Comiskey was not a hitters park and still isnt really. The fences were moved in recently. It was not a hitters park and I really don't think it is now. The only reason there are a lot of runs scored here is because the Sox have an awesome lineup. So no, Wells never pitched in a hitters park. Wells is not having a good year this year and he IS IN A PITCHERS PARK! Call someone that knows and watches baseball and ask what they think about PNC. Trust me they will tell you it is a pitchers park. That is one of the reasons everyone was predicting more power numbers for Errormis Ramirez, coming from a pitchers park in Pitt to a hitters park in Wrigley. I would not want Wells back and as you can see by your numbers he had 3 bad years in a pitchers park in the American League.

I really don't think you watch enough baseball if you believe some of this crap that you are writing. You can tell me all you want about having the season ticket, I really don't believe you. As far as I can see you don't watch enough and only care about statistics. That is not all there is to the game.

doublem23
08-05-2003, 11:23 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy

Foulke was not a great CLOSER last year. So in the last few years of his great CLOSING, he missed a year. He is one of the reasons we sucked so bad last year. He is the major reason our bullpen was in shambles and we had to go out and get people this year. Yeah he bounced back to save his year in ERA an WHIP, but every time he was put in a closing situation, even when he was "back to form" he sucked!!!!!!! HE SUCKED LAST YEAR AS A CLOSER!!!!! I dont care how he pitched outside of that role, as a CLOSER he sucked major donkey balls. Thats all. Wait a year or two and see how this trade pans out, all you guys may look like total fools.


That's because he never got another chance to close after he started to work things out. Anyone who pays attention to baseball as much as you say you do should know that Keith Foulke is/was way better than Billy Koch. Basing a whole argument on save is pretty ridiculous (like using starters' wins/losses as means of saying whether or not they are effective pitchers).

baseballboy
08-06-2003, 12:38 AM
That is no thte same at all. Some releivers are beter at closing than others. Just because you are a good reliever does not mean you will be a good closer. You are comparing apples to oranges. Plus Manuel did give him opportunities after that later in the season and he still sucked at closing. It was like something got to his mind.

jeremyb1
08-06-2003, 12:39 AM
baseballboy, if you'd talked to billy beane when he made the koch-foulke deal, he would've told you that saves as a statistic are meaningless and highly overrated, that by every statistical evaluation that carries meaning foulke is a much better pitcher than koch, and that koch carried a significant risk coming into the season due to his very large workload last season. judging from every measurement possible of the two pitchers, billy beane was completely correct and your argument is therefore incorrect.

doublem23
08-06-2003, 12:39 AM
Originally posted by baseballboy
That is no thte same at all. Some releivers are beter at closing than others. Just because you are a good reliever does not mean you will be a good closer. You are comparing apples to oranges.

I never said that all good relievers make good closers. But Keith Foulke is a good closer. I fail to see what point you just tried to make?

:?:

baseballboy
08-06-2003, 07:13 AM
Well you said the last few years of great closing. You are not the only one to say this. You also said he was better than Koch last year. You are also not the only one to state that. However, Foulke was not our closer last year for the majority of the year. So not only did he miss ONE WHOLE YEAR of this great closing, but he was also not a better CLOSER than Koch last year. Just being a better reliever does not mean he is or was the better CLOSER. That is my point.

And thank you for agreeing with me that a good reliever does not mean you are or can be a great closer. Saves do matter when you compare relievers, wins dont always matter when comparing starters. Simply becuase the closer role/situation is completely different and has more pressure than just a regular reliever. You can't compare all relievers. However, you can compare all starters as they are put in the same situation. So you can break down a starters stats other than just wins.

baseballboy
08-06-2003, 07:16 AM
Jeremy again, let me restate this. A good pitcher does not always make a good closer. Last year Koch was a much better CLOSER than Foulke last year. Foulke was horrible as our closer. Period. Koch was fireman of the year. All of you that say he had all these years of great closing forget to realize he missed a year. Last year he sucked as the CLOSER. I don't care what he did when he wasn't in that situation last year. The fact remains as a CLOSER he was piss poor and Koch was fireman of the year.

kempsted
08-06-2003, 11:29 AM
Jeremy again, let me restate this. A good pitcher does not always make a good closer. Last year Koch was a much better CLOSER than Foulke last year. Foulke was horrible as our closer. Period. Koch was fireman of the year. All of you that say he had all these years of great closing forget to realize he missed a year. Last year he sucked as the CLOSER. I don't care what he did when he wasn't in that situation last year. The fact remains as a CLOSER he was piss poor and Koch was fireman of the year.

Basballboy I am not sure what part of this you don't get. He was NOT our closer last year because Manuel refused to use him as a closer. How could he have sucked as our closer? He had 14 save opps all year and converted 11 of them. He and Smoltz had almost identical starts of the year with each of them getting a couple of blown saves early. Manuel took him out and never really let him go again and Cox with Atlanta stuck with Smoltz. Foulke had had 42 saves and 34 the previous 2 years and has 28 so far this year.

So from 2000 til now Foulke 115 of 130 save opps = 88%
Koch 124 of 147 save opps = 84%. So even by saves Foulke is better. Now look at their ERA, WHIP and SO/BB and it is no contest.

voodoochile
08-06-2003, 11:32 AM
DIE THREAD, DIE! :D:

Man, we SO need a tag that says that...

Steve Bartman
08-06-2003, 11:34 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile
DIE THREAD, DIE! :D:

Man, we SO need a tag that says that...

LMAO!!!

Gumshoe
08-06-2003, 12:19 PM
I don't care what baseball boy says about the mentality of the situation. This is my last post concerning this thing. In no way has Koch EVER been better, and this year he proved that the Foulke trade was one of the worst in our history, if not the worst of the modern era. There is just no way to deny it.

Baseball boy, the proof is in the pudding (or the stats) ...

I'm done and OUT

gumshoe

MarkEdward
08-06-2003, 06:25 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
DIE THREAD, DIE! :D:

Man, we SO need a tag that says that...

I *really* wanted to replay to baseballboy again, but as a courtesy to others, I'll be happy to refrain.

Let me just say this: we seem to be on two totally different levels. He believes Kip Wells was a horrible pitcher with the Sox even though his ERA was near league average with us. He believes PNC is a pitcher's park, although the evidence points to PNC being mostly a hitter's park.

Again, I'm sorry for the length of the thread.

PaleHoseGeorge
08-06-2003, 06:53 PM
No! No! No!

I INSIST THAT THIS THREAD GO ON FOREVER!!!

I won't be satisfied until this thread reaches double-tomato status, or--dare I even dream it--triple-tomato status!

I say we merge this thread with the Rick White and D'Angelo Jimenez threads and rename the whole thing the "Beating a Dead Horse" thread.

:b&b
"Heh... heh. He said 'beat'!"

Daver
08-06-2003, 06:58 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge


I say we merge this thread with the Rick White and D'Angelo Jimenez threads and rename the whole thing the "Beating a Dead Horse" thread.


You could use this then.


http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/daver/deadhorse.gif

SoxOnTop
08-06-2003, 07:00 PM
That Beavis and Butthead pic RULES!!! It will now be my wallpaper for the rest of the season.

jeremyb1
08-06-2003, 07:07 PM
Originally posted by baseballboy
Jeremy again, let me restate this. A good pitcher does not always make a good closer.

what's the support for that argument though? i see no reason a good reliever does not equal a good closer. beane used this same logic in acquiring foulke. you would've said in the offseason that foulke was a huge risk because he didn't have what it took to be a closer anymore, right? he couldn't win in the big game situations and he couldn't pitch well in the 9th inning. billy beane would've told you that that was little more than superstition and that if foulke could pitch as well as he did in the second half of last season, there was no reason he couldn't pitch the ninth effectively. well the results are in and billy seems to have been correct.

while i won't deny that its theoretically possible for a very good reliever to buckle under stress and develop a psychological condition where he cannot pitch effectively under pressure, i don't believe this is a very common occurance. if you can pitch in a one run game in the 7th or 8th inning without falling appart, you can most likely do the same in the 9th inning. furthermore, a stress related psychological disorder is purely an issue of makeup as opposed to "the ability to close" and personally i'm guessing it is quite rare and would pop up long before a pitcher ever reaches the majors.

blackjack
08-07-2003, 02:36 PM
Although I was happy to see the Robby Alomar deal, I was less enthused about the amount of talent we sent to get Carl Everett, a player I never really liked. I was also starting to really like Rowand's production and didn't see a need to replace him. After seeing balls drop in front of Everett at an alarming rate, I am even less enthused, especially when his bat has not been much to speak of. Rowand is batting over .400 since his recall June 11th, while Everett is batting about .225 over that same time frame. Although the Sox gave up a lot for Everett, this should be a platoon situation, with Rowand getting pinch hit at bats late in games against lefties, but not vice-versa.