PDA

View Full Version : Will we lead the AL in homers all year?


Bisco Stu
05-02-2004, 11:16 PM
Hope so, I'd like to see a little of that '77 swagger/striking fear in opposing teams, except with a first place finish this time.

On a related note, Maggs needs to up his BA--pronto, the solo Frank shots are getting old.

batmanZoSo
05-02-2004, 11:23 PM
Originally posted by Bisco Stu
Hope so, I'd like to see a little of that '77 swagger/striking fear in opposing teams, except with a first place finish this time.

On a related note, Maggs needs to up his BA--pronto, the solo Frank shots are getting old.

You just contradicted yourself. You like home runs, but the reason Frank is hitting solo shots is because everyone is a power hitter in this lineup and no one knows how to get on base. It's cool to win home run titles, but you don't all those home runs in the playoffs.

SoxxoS
05-02-2004, 11:28 PM
Originally posted by batmanZoSo
You just contradicted yourself. You like home runs, but the reason Frank is hitting solo shots is because everyone is a power hitter in this lineup and no one knows how to get on base. It's cool to win home run titles, but you don't all those home runs in the playoffs.

He singled out Maggs...and I agree with him...Maggs hits for power AND average. That's why he wants 14 million per.

Bisco Stu
05-02-2004, 11:34 PM
Not a contradiction at all. Of course, I don't expect EVERY HIT to be a dinger. I just want max men on base when the homers come.

Then again, if Maggs hit one, then Frank did, that'd still be two runs, so maybe I will contradict myself.

batmanZoSo
05-02-2004, 11:38 PM
Originally posted by Bisco Stu
Not a contradiction at all. Of course, I don't expect EVERY HIT to be a dinger. I just want max men on base when the homers come.

Then again, if Maggs hit one, then Frank did, that'd still be two runs, so maybe I will contradict myself.

Okay, I misread your second paragraph, but you're still saying that you're hoping for the home run title, yet sick of low batting averages (edit mistake). Those two things go hand in hand.

Randar68
05-02-2004, 11:46 PM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
He singled out Maggs...and I agree with him...Maggs hits for power AND average. That's why he wants 14 million per.

Unfortunately, his OBP does not make him deserving of such a salary given he has never even hit 40 HR's.

Bisco Stu
05-03-2004, 12:07 AM
Maggs is so "underrated," he's overrated...

I want to see a .330 average and not so many DP's before he's given $14 mill.

batmanZoSo
05-03-2004, 12:11 AM
Originally posted by Bisco Stu
Maggs is so "underrated," he's overrated...

I want to see a .330 average and not so many DP's before he's given $14 mill.

They're already paying him 14 million. He's the same old Maggs. He's gonna hit .315 with 30 homers. I think we're paying for that consistency. He's a sure-thing.

SoxxoS
05-03-2004, 12:17 AM
Originally posted by batmanZoSo
They're already paying him 14 million. He's the same old Maggs. He's gonna hit .315 with 30 homers. I think we're paying for that consistency. He's a sure-thing.

It's only 14 million this year b/c the contract was back-loaded.

This debate is going to rage on until he is signed or leaves, but I think 14 million for Maggs is too much, by about 2-2.5 million per.

I don't know about you guys, but wouldn't you seriously rather have Renteria manning SS (where we have NO minor league ready talent) for the next 5-6 years, with Jeremy Reed in RF...rather than just Maggs in RF and Reed in CF? That way you have Reed playing his more natural position, AND fill a need with the best SS in the A.L. and probably second best in the majors (now that AROD moved over).

That just seems to make much more sense to me.

MRKARNO
05-03-2004, 12:31 AM
Originally posted by SoxxoS

I don't know about you guys, but wouldn't you seriously rather have Renteria manning SS (where we have NO minor league ready talent) for the next 5-6 years, with Jeremy Reed in RF...rather than just Maggs in RF and Reed in CF? That way you have Reed playing his more natural position, AND fill a need with the best SS in the A.L. and probably second best in the majors (now that AROD moved over).

That just seems to make much more sense to me.

I am no longer in favor of spending a huge chunk of payroll on Renteria. I see Uribe as the franchise shortstop for years to come. Now if we could get a Jose Vidro or at least a decent 2b....

munchman33
05-03-2004, 12:39 AM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
It's only 14 million this year b/c the contract was back-loaded.

This debate is going to rage on until he is signed or leaves, but I think 14 million for Maggs is too much, by about 2-2.5 million per.

I don't know about you guys, but wouldn't you seriously rather have Renteria manning SS (where we have NO minor league ready talent) for the next 5-6 years, with Jeremy Reed in RF...rather than just Maggs in RF and Reed in CF? That way you have Reed playing his more natural position, AND fill a need with the best SS in the A.L. and probably second best in the majors (now that AROD moved over).

That just seems to make much more sense to me.

While you're definately in the minority of thought around here with that statement, I've thought the same thing quietly to myself for quite some time now. Definately been waiting to see if St. Louis makes a pitch to Renterria.

batmanZoSo
05-03-2004, 12:49 AM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
It's only 14 million this year b/c the contract was back-loaded.

This debate is going to rage on until he is signed or leaves, but I think 14 million for Maggs is too much, by about 2-2.5 million per.

I don't know about you guys, but wouldn't you seriously rather have Renteria manning SS (where we have NO minor league ready talent) for the next 5-6 years, with Jeremy Reed in RF...rather than just Maggs in RF and Reed in CF? That way you have Reed playing his more natural position, AND fill a need with the best SS in the A.L. and probably second best in the majors (now that AROD moved over).

That just seems to make much more sense to me.

I know why he's making 14 mil this year. The point is, he IS making that and we're affording it. We can afford it even easier if we get cut the fat this offseason.

We have Uribe. I agree with Karno, he's gonna be here a while. I'll go on record saying that. It would be nice to put Ribe at second and Renteria at short, but I don't trust Renteria at 15 million or whatever he's commanding. We're talking about a .348 on base guy career wise and doesn't hit but 13 homers a year. He was excellent last year, I'll give him that, but I'm just not to into banking on him. Above all else, it's not realistic that we'll go after him. The Yankees will put him at second :smile:

If we get rid of Maggs and assuming Valentin and Koch, we should get Vidro for 8 or 9 mill (or whatever he's lookin for, not sure) Juan Pierre, and an ace starter. We're looking at about a wash money-wise and a better ballclub. Oh....to dream.

I do NOT want to replace Maggs with a guy that'll eat up his whole salary void or eclipse it, like the Beltran talk that's been going on.

Mickster
05-03-2004, 11:25 AM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
I am no longer in favor of spending a huge chunk of payroll on Renteria. I see Uribe as the franchise shortstop for years to come. Now if we could get a Jose Vidro or at least a decent 2b....

I'm a huge proponent of Renteria. Have been since day 1. I am reserving judgment on Uribe until the middle/end of the season. Thankfully, St. Louis will not be in a position where they have to unload Renteria at the trade deadline so we should get a full season of looks at Uribe to see if this guy is really the *bing*. If he has a solid YEAR, by solid meaning batting .300, good OPB, 18-20 HR's, and his defense continues to improve, we might have next years starting SS on our team already...

If not, Renteria will be available come October/November.