PDA

View Full Version : A Poll for jeremyb1 & Sox Management (Hi, Kenny)...


voodoochile
08-14-2003, 05:38 PM
Which would you rather see?

RKMeibalane
08-14-2003, 05:44 PM
Jeremy loves his numbers. Well, the numbers say that people on this board prefer the regular lineup. Advantage: voodoochile.

voodoochile
08-14-2003, 05:49 PM
Originally posted by RKMeibalane
Jeremy loves his numbers. Well, the numbers say that people on this board prefer the regular lineup. Advantage: voodoochile.

I just want to find out what the board feels is the best answer. Then hopefully we can just drop the debate forever. It is starting to get nasty...

Hangar18
08-14-2003, 05:49 PM
I want to see a REGULAR LINEUP, and that doesnt mean same Players, different batting orders either. Let LEE bat 2nd.
and put Thomas at 1B IMMEDIATELY !! that said, man...I dont LIKE CARL EVERETT IN CF. I dont I DONT I DONT

voodoochile
08-14-2003, 05:52 PM
Originally posted by Hangar18
I want to see a REGULAR LINEUP, and that doesnt mean same Players, different batting orders either. Let LEE bat 2nd.
and put Thomas at 1B IMMEDIATELY !! that said, man...I dont LIKE CARL EVERETT IN CF. I dont I DONT I DONT

Yes, I agree. The set lineup is as important as anything. You want to see Everett/Lee at DH, Rowand in CF and Frank at 1B, correct?

FarWestChicago
08-14-2003, 05:53 PM
Originally posted by RKMeibalane
Jeremy loves his numbers.I wish he loved his capital letters... :cool:

Jerko
08-14-2003, 05:55 PM
I long for the days when teams had an "everyday lineup". That phrase exists for a reason, let's try it and see what happens.

pudge
08-14-2003, 05:57 PM
I have huge problems with Manuel, but even I must admit that Valentin and Everett are BRUTAL as right-handed batters. Honestly, what I'd vote for, is to keep Valentin and Everett as left-handed batters even against left-handed pitchers... I think platooning totally blows, but honestly, I'd rather see Graff and Rowand than a right-handed batting Valentin and Everett.

Jerko
08-14-2003, 05:59 PM
I see Jeremy and Manuel voted

LauraJ14
08-14-2003, 06:11 PM
I don't want to see Frank Thomas at first base.
I can live with Graffy and Rowand playing once or twice a week.
Just not necessarily on the same day.
But I like Lee #2 and Everett at #5

Paulwny
08-14-2003, 06:36 PM
Add to your poll, bottom of the 9th, 7th game of the ws, sox trailing by 1 run, 2 out, a lefty on the mound, bases loaded, whom do you want hitting, Rowand or Everett?

jabrch
08-14-2003, 06:44 PM
is that we ask this question next year to Wally Backman... Manuel doesn't seem to be listening much.

RKMeibalane
08-14-2003, 06:49 PM
Who the hell voted for "more tinkering?" Sheesh! I'm beginning to think that some people don't want the Sox to reach the playoffs.

FJA
08-14-2003, 06:52 PM
Originally posted by RKMeibalane
Who the hell voted for "more tinkering?" Sheesh! I'm beginning to think that some people don't want the Sox to reach the playoffs.

I hope whoever did had the color "teal" in mind when they voted.

voodoochile
08-14-2003, 07:06 PM
Originally posted by RKMeibalane
Who the hell voted for "more tinkering?" Sheesh! I'm beginning to think that some people don't want the Sox to reach the playoffs.

Well, we do have some Twins and Royals fans who post here...

PaleHoseGeorge
08-14-2003, 07:14 PM
Originally posted by RKMeibalane
Who the hell voted for "more tinkering?" Sheesh! I'm beginning to think that some people don't want the Sox to reach the playoffs.

I admit it. I was one of them. We need tinkering. If not for tinkering, bandwith needs around here would be halved, and West would be stuck with underutilized servers. Can't have that.

:bandance:

voodoochile
08-14-2003, 07:20 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
I admit it. I was one of them. We need tinkering. If not for tinkering, bandwith needs around here would be halved, and West would be stuck with underutilized servers. Can't have that.

:bandance:

It's that kind of selfish attitude which has NO PLACE in this group of fans... :D:

jeremyb1
08-14-2003, 10:07 PM
you guys got me again. you've said so many times that using any kind of platoon is tinkering and demonstrated that many people on this board are not in favor of playing graffanino and rowand against left handed pitching so i guess you must be correct.

seriously, is there a point here outside of trying to badger me because i've used hardline evidence to prove you're completely wrong and yet you're so obsessed with disliking manuel and his "tinkering" that you can't take it?

face it, in your attempts to find terrible mistakes at the hands of your scapegoat for the struggles of '01 and '02, you've blamed everything on manuel's tinkering. you've built the tinkering up to be so large that any ripple in the lineup is a catastrophic event. managers use their bench. that is how baseball works.

jose valentin hits below .200 against left handed pitching. this is not conducive to winning baseball games any single way you look at it. team leadership and consistency in the lineup doesn't make jose valentin hit .100 points better against lefties no matter how you look at it.

everyone at wsi can advocate doing the lineup anyway they want but when you stare in the face of evidence like this and call for manuel's job, i don't know how seriously anyone can reasonably take the "tinkering concepts". manuel is undeniably putting better hitters in the lineup against lefties and he's being castigated for it.

hit me with the verbal attacks all you want: that i'm obsessed with being right not with winning, that i'm in fantasy baseball land, that i don't capitalize the first letter of my sentences. the reason its being resorted to is because i've shown you why the platoon is the best system and no one can argue otherwise or deal with that reality.

RKMeibalane
08-14-2003, 10:13 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
jose valentin hits below .200 against left handed pitching. this is not conducive to winning baseball games any single way you look at it. team leadership and consistency in the lineup doesn't make jose valentin hit .100 points better against lefties no matter how you look at it.

Putting a future Hall-of-Famer at DH instead of 1B, where he is more effective, is not conducive to winning either, jeremy. How do you explain that?

Face it. Jerry Manuel is an idiot. Until he's fired, the Sox won't be going anywhere near the World Series.

voodoochile
08-14-2003, 10:15 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
you guys got me again. you've said so many times that using any kind of platoon is tinkering and demonstrated that many people on this board are not in favor of playing graffanino and rowand against left handed pitching so i guess you must be correct.

seriously, is there a point here outside of trying to badger me because i've used hardline evidence to prove you're completely wrong and yet you're so obsessed with disliking manuel and his "tinkering" that you can't take it?

face it, in your attempts to find terrible mistakes at the hands of your scapegoat for the struggles of '01 and '02, you've blamed everything on manuel's tinkering. you've built the tinkering up to be so large that any ripple in the lineup is a catastrophic event. managers use their bench. that is how baseball works.

jose valentin hits below .200 against left handed pitching. this is not conducive to winning baseball games any single way you look at it. team leadership and consistency in the lineup doesn't make jose valentin hit .100 points better against lefties no matter how you look at it.

everyone at wsi can advocate doing the lineup anyway they want but when you stare in the face of evidence like this and call for manuel's job, i don't know how seriously anyone can reasonably take the "tinkering concepts". manuel is undeniably putting better hitters in the lineup against lefties and he's being castigated for it.

hit me with the verbal attacks all you want: that i'm obsessed with being right not with winning, that i'm in fantasy baseball land, that i don't capitalize the first letter of my sentences. the reason its being resorted to is because i've shown you why the platoon is the best system and no one can argue otherwise or deal with that reality.

*****! He honestly believes it too... Wow... too funny...

You should have put the whole post in teal...

Daver
08-14-2003, 10:18 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
*****! He honestly believes it too... Wow... too funny...

You should have put the whole post in teal...

I give credit to anyone that bothers to read those posts,I can't bring myself to read those solid blocks of lower case letters,it makes my eyes hurt.

sox_fan_forever
08-14-2003, 11:18 PM
Originally posted by daver
I give credit to anyone that bothers to read those posts,I can't bring myself to read those solid blocks of lower case letters,it makes my eyes hurt.

Same here. I haven't read one of Jeremy's posts in at least a year.

TornLabrum
08-15-2003, 12:16 AM
Originally posted by sox_fan_forever
Same here. I haven't read one of Jeremy's posts in at least a year.

The bad part is that they are always at least 3-4 paragraphs long. I don't read them if they are over 1 sentence.

I guess we should be thankful that he at least uses punctuation.

Mammoo
08-15-2003, 12:45 AM
The time for experimentation is over. Put your best out there and let it ride.

FarWestChicago
08-15-2003, 01:05 AM
Originally posted by daver
I give credit to anyone that bothers to read those posts,I can't bring myself to read those solid blocks of lower case letters,it makes my eyes hurt. I get a headache...

FarWestChicago
08-15-2003, 01:11 AM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
I admit it. I was one of them. We need tinkering. If not for tinkering, bandwith needs around here would be halved, and West would be stuck with underutilized servers. Can't have that.

:bandance: We used over 45 gigs last month. And that's with virtually every page on the site gzipped. :o:

Good thing we have lots of bandwith available. :cool:

kermittheefrog
08-15-2003, 01:17 AM
Put me down in the platoon camp. Valentin and Everett are abysmal against lefties. I haven't paid much attention to the debate. What's wrong with a platoon if we know they can't hit lefties?

lowesox
08-15-2003, 01:43 AM
I'm not so sure about Rowand over Everett. And that's not anything against Rowand, its just I think Everett's been huge for us in clutch situations.

I do, however, like Graf over Valentin occasionally. Lets face it Valentin isn't really a switch hitter and Graffanino has had some huge games for us.

I like to see the same lineup 3 games out of 5. But I think we have a good bench so its good to keep everybody fresh sometimes.

MarkEdward
08-15-2003, 02:04 AM
I've been a mild advocate for Manuel throughout this year, but I haven't posted much pro-Manuel stuff in a while (mostly because I've agreed with many of Jeremy's points). Anyway, I do agree that Valentin shouldn't hit against lefties. Ever. Graffanino should be getting those ABs. Thomas should be playing first. I'd like to see Konerko and Daubach platoon at DH. Rowand and Everett hit lefties about the same (.730 OPS to .670 OPS), so there's no need for a platoon there.

This may seem like over-platooning, but I think it could work out well for the Sox.

kermittheefrog
08-15-2003, 03:05 AM
Originally posted by MarkEdward
I've been a mild advocate for Manuel throughout this year, but I haven't posted much pro-Manuel stuff in a while (mostly because I've agreed with many of Jeremy's points). Anyway, I do agree that Valentin shouldn't hit against lefties. Ever. Graffanino should be getting those ABs. Thomas should be playing first. I'd like to see Konerko and Daubach platoon at DH. Rowand and Everett hit lefties about the same (.730 OPS to .670 OPS), so there's no need for a platoon there.

This may seem like over-platooning, but I think it could work out well for the Sox.

A sixty point swing in OPS is a big difference. I'd much rather have Rowand out there. I also think he might be better than that 730 OPS versus lefties whereas we know we're going to get something around 670 from Everett. Rowand is also a much better defender.

jeremyb1
08-15-2003, 03:15 AM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
Put me down in the platoon camp. Valentin and Everett are abysmal against lefties. I haven't paid much attention to the debate. What's wrong with a platoon if we know they can't hit lefties?

that's what i'm trying to figure out. i think the argumnent is that altering the lineup against lefties throws the rest of the lineup out of whack so much that it negates the improvement created by the platoon.

jeremyb1
08-15-2003, 03:16 AM
Originally posted by RKMeibalane
Putting a future Hall-of-Famer at DH instead of 1B, where he is more effective, is not conducive to winning either, jeremy. How do you explain that?

Face it. Jerry Manuel is an idiot. Until he's fired, the Sox won't be going anywhere near the World Series.

that has nothing to do with what we're talking about though. i'm talking about platoons and how others view that as being related to "tinkering".

i more or less agree with you on thomas but that's a completely different issue.

jeremyb1
08-15-2003, 03:19 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile
*****! He honestly believes it too... Wow... too funny...

You should have put the whole post in teal...

more well thought out argumentation. call me an idiot, make sarcastic remarks, make fun of me, laugh at me, whatever floats your boat but its not strengthening your position, its becoming quite obvious you can't explain why a platoon won't work so its all personal attacks from here on out. whatever you need to do.

PaleHoseGeorge
08-15-2003, 09:03 AM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
Put me down in the platoon camp. Valentin and Everett are abysmal against lefties. I haven't paid much attention to the debate. What's wrong with a platoon if we know they can't hit lefties?

Where I come from, a platoon isn't based on who starts. A platoon is based on which hand the opposing pitcher uses to throw the ball.

You can be all for a platoon, Kermie. Unfortunately, that's not what Jerry Manuel is doing. Rowand and Everett are facing both types of pitchers. Calling this a "platoon" is akin to Don Zimmer saying, "I had a hunch..." In fact, Manuel himself isn't calling it a platoon. Rowand plays because he went to school near Edison Field, remember? jeremy really needs to get his story in synch with Manuel's.

BTW, have you seen Everett's numbers at the dish recently? A stathead like you ought to be questioning why anyone would bench such a ballplayer, least of all for Rowand.

We tolerate jeremy who has trouble communicating coherently and understanding what others say. Don't fall into his trap.

voodoochile
08-15-2003, 11:09 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
that's what i'm trying to figure out. i think the argumnent is that altering the lineup against lefties throws the rest of the lineup out of whack so much that it negates the improvement created by the platoon.

Well, that's part of it. We also disagree on the platoon in general. I don't mind the graff/Val platoon. That horse has left the barn, but I just don't buy that whatever "extra" Rowand brings to the table offensively offsets all of the intangibles that Everett brings to the table.

voodoochile
08-15-2003, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
that has nothing to do with what we're talking about though. i'm talking about platoons and how others view that as being related to "tinkering".

i more or less agree with you on thomas but that's a completely different issue.

The part I was laughing at was the part about you saying that you've "showed why the platoon is the best system". I don't think you've made that point at all. You believe you have and that is what I find funny...

MarkEdward
08-15-2003, 01:16 PM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
A sixty point swing in OPS is a big difference. I'd much rather have Rowand out there. I also think he might be better than that 730 OPS versus lefties whereas we know we're going to get something around 670 from Everett. Rowand is also a much better defender.

I suppose you're right. Checking out their three year splits, Rowand has an .850ish OPS against lefties, while Everett hovers around .700.

RKMeibalane
08-15-2003, 02:04 PM
Someone thinks that Rowand and Graffanino should be the everyday starters. Gumshoe, is that you?

jabrch
08-15-2003, 02:12 PM
when the starters need rest or just to keep them fresh. But that means that I want a regular lineup. Make one change to it a night to substitute players, and I am fine with it. But to constantly, from day to day, move regular players to different batting order slots, play them positions of DH them, and have no consistency is terrible. Players get into rythms...they do this based on how much they can play. We need to put our players in a consistent order to try and achieve this.

I hope Wally Backman learned this while managing in the minors.

kermittheefrog
08-15-2003, 03:03 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Where I come from, a platoon isn't based on who starts. A platoon is based on which hand the opposing pitcher uses to throw the ball.

You're right about that. I never said Manuel is doing a platoon correctly though, I just said I'm in favor of one. This thread implies that something is inherently wrong with a platoon. Like a real platoon not a Manuel one.

Oh and by the way, a stathead like me doesn't obsess about keeping Everett in the lineup. A stathead like me isn't easily persuaded by small sample sizes and sticks to looking at the larger picture. That being Everett doesn't hit lefties, Rowand should be in the lineup against them.

JRIG
08-15-2003, 08:00 PM
There's nothing wrong about a platoon system. In fact, there's a lot of things right with it. Valentin, let's face it, sucks against left-handed pitching. Always has. There's nothing wrong with playng Graffanino against lefties. He will outproduce Valentin.

In the outfield, Everett doesn't hit lefties very well historically. What's wrong with starting Rowand when you know he'll give you better defense and probaby hit the ball better. I'm just not understanding the argument against sitting these guys against RHP.

jeremyb1
08-15-2003, 08:31 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Where I come from, a platoon isn't based on who starts. A platoon is based on which hand the opposing pitcher uses to throw the ball.

You can be all for a platoon, Kermie. Unfortunately, that's not what Jerry Manuel is doing. Rowand and Everett are facing both types of pitchers. Calling this a "platoon" is akin to Don Zimmer saying, "I had a hunch..." In fact, Manuel himself isn't calling it a platoon. Rowand plays because he went to school near Edison Field, remember? jeremy really needs to get his story in synch with Manuel's.

BTW, have you seen Everett's numbers at the dish recently? A stathead like you ought to be questioning why anyone would bench such a ballplayer, least of all for Rowand.

We tolerate jeremy who has trouble communicating coherently and understanding what others say. Don't fall into his trap.

1) a platoon is a situation where two players trade off starts at a position based on whether a lefty or a righty is on the mound since theoretically one hits lefties but not righties well while the opposite is true for the other. i've never heard any other definition. i don't exactly understand your argument here, when are rowand/everett hitting against players their platoon splits favor?

2) this is the upteenth post where you've failed to explain why everett's hot hitting would carry over when he switch hits when this has not been the case throughout the rest of his career.

3) the quote from the trib was along the lines of "rowand who played baseball at cal fullerton will be in the lineup tonight" not "rowand will be in the lineup tonight because he played at cal fullerton". rowand has started every game against lefties except for one since the break, why would you assume he was starting simply because he went to school nearby. despite this blatant twisting of the facts on your part, you accuse me of misunderstanding others.

jeremyb1
08-15-2003, 08:32 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Well, that's part of it. We also disagree on the platoon in general. I don't mind the graff/Val platoon. That horse has left the barn, but I just don't buy that whatever "extra" Rowand brings to the table offensively offsets all of the intangibles that Everett brings to the table.

rowand hits better. you haven't really explained how intangibles such as leadership can carry such tremendous value, demonstrated that everett posseses these values, and that rowand does not possess the same values.

jeremyb1
08-15-2003, 08:33 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
The part I was laughing at was the part about you saying that you've "showed why the platoon is the best system". I don't think you've made that point at all. You believe you have and that is what I find funny...

i believe my wording was more along the lines that i've demonstrated firm evidence which demonstrates that the platoon is best. you seem to be saying you at least agree with me that the valentin/graffanino platoon is a good idea and you conceed that rowand does outproduce everett against lefties so i don't see how i'm so far off in your opinion that its laughable.

jeremyb1
08-15-2003, 08:36 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
when the starters need rest or just to keep them fresh. But that means that I want a regular lineup. Make one change to it a night to substitute players, and I am fine with it. But to constantly, from day to day, move regular players to different batting order slots, play them positions of DH them, and have no consistency is terrible. Players get into rythms...they do this based on how much they can play. We need to put our players in a consistent order to try and achieve this.

I hope Wally Backman learned this while managing in the minors.

i still don't understand the problems with a regular lineup against lefties and a regular lineup against righties. i recall numerous posts asking for at least one lineup against righties and one against lefties to put an end to the tinkering. where are all those people now?

it wouldn't really make sense that by hitting well from the left side everett would get in a rhythm that would allow him to hit well from the left side. he has a different view of the pitcher, he's using different muscles in his body, etc. if anything it would seem as though if he were to bat righthanded it might throw off his rhythm when we next face a righty.

RKMeibalane
08-15-2003, 10:24 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1

Do you know how to use the "Shift" key or "Caps Lock?"

RKMeibalane
08-15-2003, 10:34 PM
Everett hit against a lefty and took him deep, jeremy. What do you have to say now?

voodoochile
08-16-2003, 12:11 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
i believe my wording was more along the lines that i've demonstrated firm evidence which demonstrates that the platoon is best. you seem to be saying you at least agree with me that the valentin/graffanino platoon is a good idea and you conceed that rowand does outproduce everett against lefties so i don't see how i'm so far off in your opinion that its laughable.

Because those qualities cannot be quantified. You admit as much yourself, but the only thing you have said on the subject is that if they matter as much as I think they do, you will shoot yourself in the face. Spoken like a person who really doesn't understand the human side of the game and think numbers can explain the world...

Also, I don't care what your numbers show about Rowand and Everett. Anyone who cannot see that Everett is a better all around player than Rowand isn't watching the game. They are relying on ESPN to tell them what to think, IMO...

jeremyb1
08-16-2003, 12:34 AM
Originally posted by RKMeibalane
Everett hit against a lefty and took him deep, jeremy. What do you have to say now?

hahahahahaha. well if he had a good at bat against a lefty i guess my entire argument is out the door. i'm glad to see my explanation of significant sample sizes was taken to heart...

jeremyb1
08-16-2003, 12:39 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Because those qualities cannot be quantified. You admit as much yourself, but the only thing you have said on the subject is that if they matter as much as I think they do, you will shoot yourself in the face. Spoken like a person who really doesn't understand the human side of the game and think numbers can explain the world...

Also, I don't care what your numbers show about Rowand and Everett. Anyone who cannot see that Everett is a better all around player than Rowand isn't watching the game. They are relying on ESPN to tell them what to think, IMO...

see, where we disagree here is i don't think you should have the benefit of the doubt. since i am able to quantify my findings, its unfair for you to argue that your unquantifiable characteristics trump my evidence. there's no limit to what you could argue since you're not even attempting to quantify your argument. again, i'm not arguing "numbers explain the world" or that statistics are all that matter, simply that you seem to be placing a near limitless amount of value on "leadership" without even trying to provide reasons and examples of how carl everett makes everyone around him hit much better. the goal of the game is still to score more runs that your opponents right? so if the numbers show that everett's presence on the field does not directly increase the amount of runs we score vs. lefties compared to rowand i think you need to attempt to explain how everett helps the team win.

as far as everett vs. rowand on an all around level, personally i think its pretty clear that rowand hits better against lefties, has much more range than everett in centerfield, has a stronger arm than everett that is at least as accurate, less base running instincts most likely but equal or greater speed on the basepaths. i'm not really understanding everett's huge all around impact compared to rowand. i still don't understand how everett's intangibles are in any way more valuable than rowand's.

voodoochile
08-16-2003, 01:24 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
see, where we disagree here is i don't think you should have the benefit of the doubt. since i am able to quantify my findings, its unfair for you to argue that your unquantifiable characteristics trump my evidence. there's no limit to what you could argue since you're not even attempting to quantify your argument. again, i'm not arguing "numbers explain the world" or that statistics are all that matter, simply that you seem to be placing a near limitless amount of value on "leadership" without even trying to provide reasons and examples of how carl everett makes everyone around him hit much better. the goal of the game is still to score more runs that your opponents right? so if the numbers show that everett's presence on the field does not directly increase the amount of runs we score vs. lefties compared to rowand i think you need to attempt to explain how everett helps the team win.

as far as everett vs. rowand on an all around level, personally i think its pretty clear that rowand hits better against lefties, has much more range than everett in centerfield, has a stronger arm than everett that is at least as accurate, less base running instincts most likely but equal or greater speed on the basepaths. i'm not really understanding everett's huge all around impact compared to rowand. i still don't understand how everett's intangibles are in any way more valuable than rowand's.

I was talking about the leadership abilities as much as anything else, but if you want to talk about the other things, then I guess we disagree on those topics also. I don't see the huge advantage in Rowand's arm - neither one is spectacular. I think Everett is faster and has better base running instincts, but those cannot be quantified again, so it is a matter of opinion. Rowand my be a step faster, but if he cannot steal bases then what difference does it make? I think Everett is much smoother in CF, but his age and lack of speed do hurt him. I don't think he is some amazing defensive force, but he is the best the Sox have, IMO.

If Rowand can keep up his recent numbers for the next few years, then you have a point, but Rowand hasn't proven he can do that, IMO. He just doesn't have the length of service that Everett has and I am skeptical that over the course of 300 AB's he will continue to do the things he has. He swings for the fences on a regular basis and he almost never walks. The team doesn't need another homerun hitter. I don't doubt that his numbers for his brief career are better over Everett's recent production - I'll take your word for it, but still doubt that Rowand will ever have as good of a career as Everett has had to date and will have from this point forward. That is my opinion and it too cannot be quantified.

You keep asking for numbers. Do you actually watch the games? Just curious, because that is where I get most of my personal insight from. I use numbers as a tool to prove what I see, not as the end all of what I believe. Everett is a team leader as has been widely discussed in the press, by Hawk and DJ and evidenced by his reminders to other players of game situation. He cannot do that during the games he doesn't play in and Rowand doesn't do it at all. Maybe it would be a smaller factor on another team, but the Sox have no one on the team who does that other than him - thus it has a bigger impact. That's what I see. Doesn't make me right, but it is still, what I believe. Your numbers won't convince me otherwise just as my beliefs won't convince you. You say that whatever intangibles Everett brings won't offset this amazing difference in numbers that Rowand generates. I say that Rowand's minimal difference in numbers can't compensate for Everett's intangibles. I guess we disagree and that is the end of it...

jeremyb1
08-16-2003, 04:02 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
I was talking about the leadership abilities as much as anything else, but if you want to talk about the other things, then I guess we disagree on those topics also. I don't see the huge advantage in Rowand's arm - neither one is spectacular. I think Everett is faster and has better base running instincts, but those cannot be quantified again, so it is a matter of opinion. Rowand my be a step faster, but if he cannot steal bases then what difference does it make? I think Everett is much smoother in CF, but his age and lack of speed do hurt him. I don't think he is some amazing defensive force, but he is the best the Sox have, IMO.

If Rowand can keep up his recent numbers for the next few years, then you have a point, but Rowand hasn't proven he can do that, IMO. He just doesn't have the length of service that Everett has and I am skeptical that over the course of 300 AB's he will continue to do the things he has. He swings for the fences on a regular basis and he almost never walks. The team doesn't need another homerun hitter. I don't doubt that his numbers for his brief career are better over Everett's recent production - I'll take your word for it, but still doubt that Rowand will ever have as good of a career as Everett has had to date and will have from this point forward. That is my opinion and it too cannot be quantified.

You keep asking for numbers. Do you actually watch the games? Just curious, because that is where I get most of my personal insight from. I use numbers as a tool to prove what I see, not as the end all of what I believe. Everett is a team leader as has been widely discussed in the press, by Hawk and DJ and evidenced by his reminders to other players of game situation. He cannot do that during the games he doesn't play in and Rowand doesn't do it at all. Maybe it would be a smaller factor on another team, but the Sox have no one on the team who does that other than him - thus it has a bigger impact. That's what I see. Doesn't make me right, but it is still, what I believe. Your numbers won't convince me otherwise just as my beliefs won't convince you. You say that whatever intangibles Everett brings won't offset this amazing difference in numbers that Rowand generates. I say that Rowand's minimal difference in numbers can't compensate for Everett's intangibles. I guess we disagree and that is the end of it...

first of all, i disagree that everett has the stronger arm. rowand has had some struggles with accuracy at times but his arm strength is phenominal. you're correct that its not an exact science and we can't perfectly measure arm strength but my hunch is that nine out of ten scouts would grade rowand's arm as significantly stronger than rowands. everett may appear to be smoother, ie he may look better playing center, but as you mentioned he's had knee problems and i don't think he gets to as many balls as rowand does. watching the large number of balls that drop in front of everett because he simply doesn't have the foot speed makes this pretty clear in my opinion. personally, i don't see how its possible that everett is better than rowand in centerfield outside of the fact that perhaps he looks prettier making plays which is of no concern to me personally.

i agree with you that rowand doesn't walk enough and you may be right that he swings for the fences but these are reasons he should not be productive and yet clearly he is productive against left handed pitching. 300 at bats isn't a huge sample size but its stretching over three different seasons so its not as though he's been riding a hot streak against lefties since '01. the one sample size you can't disagree with is everett's which demonstrates quite clearly he does not hit well against lefties.

the problem with your personal insight on issues such as leadership is that there's an incredibly large margin of error there due to the fact that its more or less impossible for people to be completely objective, this is a problem for some moreso than others. for instance the statement that rowand has no leadership qualities is clearly completely biased on your part. you've never met rowand, been in the white sox club house, talked to the sox players about his leadership qualities or probably even read an article discussing his leadership qualities yet you're positive he has none. why? because that's what you want to believe since it helps your argument.

you're basically asking me to take your word - or at least hawk harrelson's - that everett is a great leader and then asking me to take some leap of faith that leadership trumps production because you feel that the team lacks leadership - also not proven - and that leadership is important. then you're asking me to give you the benefit of the doubt and accept to rowand possesses no leadership skills merely because you say so. in the end i'm just supposed to take your word that you're right and i'm wrong across the board and i can't think of any reason why it would make sense to do that when i can look at completely objective data that neither you nor i can skew toward's one person's point of view.

RKMeibalane
08-16-2003, 04:07 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1

Use. Capital. Letters.

voodoochile
08-16-2003, 04:56 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
the problem with your personal insight on issues such as leadership is that there's an incredibly large margin of error there due to the fact that its more or less impossible for people to be completely objective, this is a problem for some moreso than others. for instance the statement that rowand has no leadership qualities is clearly completely biased on your part. you've never met rowand, been in the white sox club house, talked to the sox players about his leadership qualities or probably even read an article discussing his leadership qualities yet you're positive he has none. why? because that's what you want to believe since it helps your argument.

you're basically asking me to take your word - or at least hawk harrelson's - that everett is a great leader and then asking me to take some leap of faith that leadership trumps production because you feel that the team lacks leadership - also not proven - and that leadership is important. then you're asking me to give you the benefit of the doubt and accept to rowand possesses no leadership skills merely because you say so. in the end i'm just supposed to take your word that you're right and i'm wrong across the board and i can't think of any reason why it would make sense to do that when i can look at completely objective data that neither you nor i can skew toward's one person's point of view.

The reason I say Rowand has no leadership abilities, is that it would be highly unusual for a player with his tenure, playing time and experience to be considered a team leader. I also haven't read a single comment in the press that makes me think so. I have read several on Everett that point to him being a team leader, including his comments about not caring about personal stats and the comments on his reminding Frank about the number of outs in an inning after Frank forgot the day before.

You want objective data on a concept like leadership? Fine, just tell me how to measure it and I'll do my best, but come on. Not my fault you don't read the same articles I do, or listen to Hawk when he talks on the TV (I don't either because of my hearing loss, but when I get captions, Hawk has talked about it several times, DJ too).

You accuse me of not paying attention to your objective data, but when I tell you something I have read and seen discussed on a regular basis, you basically call me a liar. Yes, I hope you do take my word for it, not because I hate Rowand (which I don't - I just believe Everett is better), but because I have no reason to lie to you. What would be the point? I'm not here to win arguments, I am here to talk Sox baseball. Is winning the argument that important to you? I don't mind being wrong (ask anyone, it happens all the time :D: )and like to learn new things, which happens regularly on this board, so to say that I am skewed in my perception and making stuff up to win an argument with you is just plain silly...

jeremyb1
08-17-2003, 05:40 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile
The reason I say Rowand has no leadership abilities, is that it would be highly unusual for a player with his tenure, playing time and experience to be considered a team leader. I also haven't read a single comment in the press that makes me think so. I have read several on Everett that point to him being a team leader, including his comments about not caring about personal stats and the comments on his reminding Frank about the number of outs in an inning after Frank forgot the day before.

You want objective data on a concept like leadership? Fine, just tell me how to measure it and I'll do my best, but come on. Not my fault you don't read the same articles I do, or listen to Hawk when he talks on the TV (I don't either because of my hearing loss, but when I get captions, Hawk has talked about it several times, DJ too).

You accuse me of not paying attention to your objective data, but when I tell you something I have read and seen discussed on a regular basis, you basically call me a liar. Yes, I hope you do take my word for it, not because I hate Rowand (which I don't - I just believe Everett is better), but because I have no reason to lie to you. What would be the point? I'm not here to win arguments, I am here to talk Sox baseball. Is winning the argument that important to you? I don't mind being wrong (ask anyone, it happens all the time :D: )and like to learn new things, which happens regularly on this board, so to say that I am skewed in my perception and making stuff up to win an argument with you is just plain silly...

well i think the larger issue is does doing things like reminding frank how many outs there are have a huge impact on whether we win or lose a game. if everett hit .200 against lefties would it still be worth putting him out there? i think that since you're not willing to even attempt to quantify how much of an impact you think leadership makes in the game, its a slippery slope, there's no limit to the extent to which you can claim leadership is more important than other quantifiable factors.

that said, for the sake of argument, i don't think that simply because rowand is young he's incappable of a leadership role. he's a fiery, energetic player who makes flashy plays capable of giving the team momentum in a game. the fact that you'd assume rowand has absolutely no leadership abilities simply because you haven't heard that he does have good leadership skills is completely illogical in my opinion.

i don't deny that people such as hawk, state that everett has good leadership skills or even that everett appears to have good leadership skills to most observers but i still maintain human perception is often highly flawed. a lot of conventional baseball wisdom has been proven to be worthless and to accept that everett makes amazing contributions to the team by shouting out motivational phrases throughout the game isn't something i'm willing to accept just because hawk harrelson who doesn't believe in era or pitch counts says so.

there certainly isn't objective data on leadership for the most part. however, i think if everett's leadership was as incredible as you seem to think it is, the other eight guys on the field would hit better when he played or the team would make fewer errors when he's in the lineup. any leadership which renders the difference between everett's ops vs. lefties compared to rowands meaningless would be quite visible in my opinion. as i said earlier in the post, what is your opinion on leadership? what is the difference between a player with mediocre leadership skills and a player with strong leadership skills in terms of offense production in terms of a ball park figure? by not quantifying it, your argument has virtually no limits. we could trade maggs for joe mcewing if he has good leadership skills.

i think you misunderstand my argument from before. at no point do i accuse you of lying on the subject. my argument is simply that the human mind is almost always incapable of perfectly objective, rational thought. there are volumes of psychological literature that detail the irrational shortcuts taken by people.

i don't think you're trying to lie to me and tell me that rowand has no leadership skills when you believe he does have leadership skills but i think that if you believe manuel is a bad manager because he tinkers and you're ridgid in that view or if you simply just believe in consistency in the lineup because it makes you more comfortable knowing what's ahead, you're going to look for ways to justify keeping everett in the lineup everyday to uphold the assumption that manuel is a terrible manager which is highly important to you at this point. if you choose leadership as your reason for keeping everett in the lineup and you've collected (unobjective) information that everett has good leadership skills while you have next to no information on rowand, you're going to assume that rowand either does or does not have good leadership skills so that you can evaluate your argument. since assuming rowand lacks leadership skills upholds your assumptions, you're going to assume he has poor leadership skills.

its not a malicious lie, its simply that you unconsciously evaluate information based on previous assumptions and leanings which is a strong reason why its better to go with powerful purely objective evidence since its undisputable that rowand has hit lefties better while the only thing that truly indicates everett's leadership qualities are stronger than rowands (without even touching on the importance of leadership) are the unobjective word of several men that he has leadership skills, the unsupported assumption that what is viewed as traditional leadership skills truly have a meaningful impact on other players' performance, and finally the assumption without any evidence either way that rowand does not have leadership skills simply because he hasn't played as long as everett has. the only support of the majority of these arguments - that young players aren't leaders, that leadership is a key component to the game - are simply that conventional baseball wisdom says they are true which is again more or less the equivalent of "because i say so" evidence except that these arguments happen to have been passed down throughout the years so they're viewed as having greater credibility when in reality this is not the case.

ChiSoxBobette
08-17-2003, 11:14 AM
You've got to go with your starters this platooning crap now is only going to lead to loses. Besides it seems idiot Mnauel sits guys down when thye're in a hot spell. Six years of this guy making wrong decsions is enough , even if the Sox can pull this out and take this division Manuel has got to go. As far as playing Graffino and Rowand , Graffy is great coming off the bench to play 2nd or SS 3rd base is another story- NO! Rowand you never know what Aaron is going to do at the plate and we have to have a bigger bat in the lineup and Everett is it, do I want him playing C.F. well I would have rather had the guy that the A's got from the Reds but we go Carl and I think opposing teams think he's more of the threat than Rowand is at bat. Its down to the nitty gritty now and these are the guys we traded for . Also theres no doubt we have to have Robby in the lineup everyday leading off when he's hot there is nobody on our team that makes it go like him.

adsit
08-17-2003, 12:58 PM
{jeremyfilter}
long impenetrable run-on blocks of text with no discernible use of capital letters even when using acronyms such as "ops" which when written in all lower case letters almost looks like oops, in spite of numerous polite pleadings from many (well, certainly more than a couple) of jeremyb1's readers to observe some posting etiquette. one wonders why jeremyb1 would insist on continuing the e e cummings thing when a measurable statistical sample of readers, presumably those whom jeremyb1 is writing to and for, have registered an objection to same.
{/jeremyfilter}

Why do you do this? Is it style, is it stubbornness, an effort to be different, an effort to be "cool?" Does skipping the shift key saves you 13.58 seconds per post when trying to put a stream of consciousness onto the wire that you'd otherwise lose? What is it, jeremy?

The conventions of writing style usually aren't my domain... I prefer to leave that to the cap punct and speling police that live on every forum in cyberspace. I read here recreationally and can easily forgive people who aren't great typists or well spoken writers as long as they are able to get their point across. I've tried to read through some of your posts in this thread and others, but I've often had to give up. It takes way too much of my time and attention.

You seem bright and willing to defend your unpopular viewpoints with research and attribution. I give you credit for that. I'm sure it takes you a great deal of time and effort to come up with a string of response posts that are in the neighborhood of 60 lines long. Maybe somewhere in there, there's something you say I hadn't quite thought about before and might bring me closer to agreement with you. But i won't see it because I get a ruddy headache every time I try to plunge into your writing.

I'll ask you this... if you're not going to post in a public forum in a manner which many of the forum's readers expressly prefer, why bother posting at all? And I think that's a fair question... not asked because I don't like you or what you say, or because I want to score points off you... but because if you're determined to keep this up, who are you writing for, besides yourself?

kermittheefrog
08-17-2003, 08:18 PM
I agree with Jeremy's side of the platoon issue. Against left handed pitching there's no sane argument to Everett and Valentin's field performance being more valuable than Rowand and Graffanino's. When it comes to intangibles. I don't think intangibles can make up the significant difference between the field performances of Everett and Rowand. Rowand is a better hitter and a better fielder. Everett might be a better baserunner (I'm not sure) but he's lost most of his speed to age and injuries anyway.

In my world the guy who is a better hitter and a better fielder goes out on the field. If Everett is a good leader he can understand the situation and be a good leader from the bench. Voodoo, you said Everett is a better player overall. I agree with this, it's true. If you said who would you rather have on your team in the year 2003 I Aaron Rowand or Carl Everett? I would have to pick Everett but Everett happens to have weaknesses (can't hit lefties, bad defense). Aaron Rowand is pretty much the perfect bench player to compliment Everett's weaknesses. Rowand hits lefties and plays good D. If these guys are used in tandom well it's a great centerfield situation.

On the well publicized issue of Jeremy not using capital letters. I am going to offer yet another plea for Jeremy to make some use of the shift key. I usually enjoy what you have to say dude but sometimes I just can't read it.

Also if you're reading this and you are one of those people who doesn't ever hit return a couple times to make a ****ing paragraph then you really need to consider what you're doing to people as well.

Lip Man 1
08-17-2003, 10:00 PM
Interesting stat in The Sporting News this week (page 36)

"He (Robbie Alomar) has also improved dramatically as a right handed hitter. With the Mets, Alomar hit .171 against left handers...but he has a .286 average versus lefties with the White Sox."

If he's hitting that well from BOTH sides of the plate why is he even being platooned?

Lip

RKMeibalane
08-17-2003, 10:09 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
If he's hitting that well from BOTH sides of the plate why is he even being platooned?

Because Manuel likes to tinker, even though it usually doesn't work.

kermittheefrog
08-17-2003, 10:28 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Interesting stat in The Sporting News this week (page 36)

"He (Robbie Alomar) has also improved dramatically as a right handed hitter. With the Mets, Alomar hit .171 against left handers...but he has a .286 average versus lefties with the White Sox."

If he's hitting that well from BOTH sides of the plate why is he even being platooned?

Lip

Sample size... Sample size... Sample size...

Dadawg_77
08-17-2003, 10:54 PM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
Sample size... Sample size... Sample size...

The thing there are no truly good sample sizes in baseball because the total population sizes are small. How many ab does everyone vs left/right hand pitchers?

jeremyb1
08-17-2003, 11:39 PM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
On the well publicized issue of Jeremy not using capital letters. I am going to offer yet another plea for Jeremy to make some use of the shift key. I usually enjoy what you have to say dude but sometimes I just can't read it.

Coming from someone who's not hostile I'll see what I can do, but I'm guessing it won't last.

jeremyb1
08-17-2003, 11:41 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
The thing there are no truly good sample sizes in baseball because the total population sizes are small. How many ab does everyone vs left/right hand pitchers?

It is true that when you're looking at splits in baseball, the sample sizes are never huge, however there's a world of difference between 200 at bats and 35 at bats as far as significance goes.

In this case, Alomar has sat quite a few games against lefties with us. I'm guessing he has less than 30 at bats against left handed pitching with us and in one of those games he had three or four hits so that game could be entirely responsible for the difference between his paltry hitting against lefties with the mets and his success against lefties with us. Clearly, I think everyone can agree that one game doesn't demonstrate Alomar can suddenly hit against lefties again.

TornLabrum
08-17-2003, 11:57 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
It is true that when you're looking at splits in baseball, the sample sizes are never huge, however there's a world of difference between 200 at bats and 35 at bats as far as significance goes.

In this case, Alomar has sat quite a few games against lefties with us. I'm guessing he has less than 30 at bats against left handed pitching with us and in one of those games he had three or four hits so that game could be entirely responsible for the difference between his paltry hitting against lefties with the mets and his success against lefties with us. Clearly, I think everyone can agree that one game doesn't demonstrate Alomar can suddenly hit against lefties again.

Correct, it could be attributable to the quality of the lefties he has faced in the AL, or that there is a difference in quality between NL and AL lefties, that there is a halo effect resulting from his trade to a "contender" from a team that was definitely out of it, etc. All kinds of variables there.

(And please notice, jeremy that when you capitalize, I actually do read your posts.)

jeremyb1
08-18-2003, 02:56 AM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
Correct, it could be attributable to the quality of the lefties he has faced in the AL, or that there is a difference in quality between NL and AL lefties, that there is a halo effect resulting from his trade to a "contender" from a team that was definitely out of it, etc. All kinds of variables there.

(And please notice, jeremy that when you capitalize, I actually do read your posts.)

Those factors are all possible reasons why Alomar would hit lefties better but the bottom line is that based on the sample size we have we don't know that his ability to hit lefties has improved or that he will continue to hit lefties better in the future.

maurice
08-18-2003, 11:28 AM
Alomar really should not be a part of this debate. If Graff should platoon with Valentin (and he should), he can't platoon with Alomar also. The only other option at 2B (currently) is Harris who: (a) sucks, and (b) bats lefthanded.