PDA

View Full Version : Rowand takes bad routes?


Randar68
05-13-2004, 10:39 PM
Sheeesh, how many more times is he going to have to make routine plays look like web gems before some ofo these people admit to what I've been saying for well over a year? Ironically happenned right after they showed Reed on the scoreboard...LOL!

made 2 plays in the first half of the second game after taking terrible first couple steps... BARELY! man...

i was in the RF corner and even Maggs was smirking it was so bad...

nasox
05-13-2004, 11:31 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
Sheeesh, how many more times is he going to have to make routine plays look like web gems before some ofo these people admit to what I've been saying for well over a year? Ironically happenned right after they showed Reed on the scoreboard...LOL!

made 2 plays in the first half of the second game after taking terrible first couple steps... BARELY! man...

i was in the RF corner and even Maggs was smirking it was so bad...

As long as he makes Web Gems, it lessens the impact he could have. Seriously, he is weak up in CF, the most important outfield position and necessary for a good defense. He is detrimental to this defense and this team because his hitting does not make up for his lack of defensive skills. Routine balls should be caught as they are, like routine balls. But I guess Rowand does not agree.
And KW, admit you made a mistake with Rowand and tell Ozzie the experiment is over. Swallow your pride for once.

Was Maggs really smirking? *****!

On the plus side though, more web gems means more media coverage (and a happy Hangar) which means 2 extra tickets sold per game! :D:

:reinsy
"A hundred dollars from two extra tickets sold? Where? GIMME! GIMME! GIMME!"

batmanZoSo
05-13-2004, 11:33 PM
Originally posted by nasox
CF, the most important outfield position and necessary for a good defense.

Yeah, so why don't we have a center fielder? There isn't ONE on this roster!

Is that Rowand's fault?

SoxxoS
05-14-2004, 12:28 AM
Paging Mr. Reed...seriously now.

SEALgep
05-14-2004, 12:31 AM
The results are there. Every play tonight he was there with time to spare.

Cubbiesuck13
05-14-2004, 12:34 AM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
Paging Mr. Reed...seriously now.



yeah reed has done so well for the sox so far.... wait NO HE HASN'T! jeeze i think you should just start 'the sky is falling' thread and be done with it. I say you give Rowand his fair shot, and by fair shot i mean more than two months.

SoxxoS
05-14-2004, 12:43 AM
Originally posted by Cubbiesuck13
yeah reed has done so well for the sox so far.... wait NO HE HASN'T! jeeze i think you should just start 'the sky is falling' thread and be done with it. I say you give Rowand his fair shot, and by fair shot i mean more than two months.

Since I'm sure Randar is sick of explaining this to people...

ROWAND HAS GOT HIS FAIR SHOT. People act like he is 19 and didn't go through the motions in the minors...we know what the guy can do. He is a great 4th outfielder. Just not a starting CF. He has played in the majors before. He has had over 400 at bats at the ML level (I believe). You can't throw all that out the window. His defense is OK, but it isn't nearly as good as some make it out to be. Basically, he makes the routine plays look difficult.

You are right, Reed hasn't done very well for the Sox thusfar...but UNLIKE Rowand...he HASN'T got his shot in the majors...but he hit .380 in the minors last year. I think he deserves it.

FarWestChicago
05-14-2004, 12:46 AM
Originally posted by batmanZoSo
Yeah, so why don't we have a center fielder? There isn't ONE on this roster!

Is that Rowand's fault? Again, nobody is blaming Crash. Randar is just trying to enlighten the FOC's. :smile:

PaleHoseGeorge
05-14-2004, 08:18 AM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
Again, nobody is blaming Crash. Randar is just trying to enlighten the FOC's. :smile:

You must admit, there is a certain Quixotesque charm about the futility of it all.

:)

DaveIsHere
05-14-2004, 08:27 AM
Honestly I don't care what it looks like as long as he catches the ball. I do have to say he does go all out on every ball which is good to see, but he just looks uncoordinated and not very smooth. As long as he gets the job done.

Randar68
05-14-2004, 08:58 AM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
You must admit, there is a certain Quixotesque charm about the futility of it all.

:)

yeah. It is a futile conquest. The masochist in me wanted to see if people are still defending his defense... and low and behold... :?:

Randar68
05-14-2004, 09:00 AM
Originally posted by nasox
And KW, admit you made a mistake with Rowand and tell Ozzie the experiment is over. Swallow your pride for once.


huh? Kenny went out and got Timo Perez as a stop-gap insurance policy, undoubtedly because of his lack of confidence in Rowand.

TheBull19
05-14-2004, 09:07 AM
FOC - friend of crash?

BTW, if they call up Reed, we still won't have a Cf'er on the roster. And some people say KW is a good GM.

Randar68
05-14-2004, 10:22 AM
Originally posted by TheBull19
FOC - friend of crash?

BTW, if they call up Reed, we still won't have a Cf'er on the roster. And some people say KW is a good GM.

"Fans of Crash" or "Friends of Crash"

And some people like to bitch about anything.

joecrede
05-14-2004, 11:02 AM
Originally posted by Randar68
yeah. It is a futile conquest. The masochist in me wanted to see if people are still defending his defense... and low and behold... :?:

Nah, you just won't allow for the possibility that you may just be wrong on this point.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-14-2004, 12:27 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Nah, you just won't allow for the possibility that you may just be wrong on this point.

This has me wondering. Of the 8 everyday position ballplayers on the Sox, which position are the Sox the weakest? Also, which position could we most obviously upgrade WITHOUT making a trade, simply by benching the current everyday ballplayer and filling the role with somebody else, either on the current 25-man roster or somebody in the Sox minor league organization.

If replacing Rowand in center field isn't the obvious answer to both these questions, then he is still ranked #2, just behind benching Konerko and playing Frank at first base.

Randar68
05-14-2004, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Nah, you just won't allow for the possibility that you may just be wrong on this point.

I'm sorry, but AGAIN, yesterday, Rowand took TERRIBLE routes to balls hit right at him, barely making both plays basically due to luck. He had no right making those plays after taking first-steps a little-leaguer would have been corrected on...

The FOC won't allow for the fact that they've been wrong for months, if not longer, or the fact that Rowand is not competent in CF, let alone "good" as many STILL suggest.

The only logical explanation outside of an inability to admit they were wrong, is that the FOC are also members of the "Blind White Sox Fan Club."

Baby Fisk
05-14-2004, 12:33 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
If replacing Rowand in center field isn't the obvious answer to both these questions, then he is still ranked #2, just behind benching Konerko and playing Frank at first base.

Is there really a groundswell of support for playing Frank at first? I say leave him be at DH. At least that way he won't injure himself reaching for errant throws (Suddenly I sound like his mother!).

As for Rowand, I stick by my wildly misguided theory that he's trying to make circus catches to impress chicks. :D:

SoxxoS
05-14-2004, 12:34 PM
He's married, Baby...

Baby Fisk
05-14-2004, 12:36 PM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
He's married, Baby...
Thx, SoxxoS. Marital status is one of those stats I never bother with.

sas1974
05-14-2004, 12:39 PM
As poorly as A-Row as looked this year on D, I think it would be tolerable if he was batting .300 instead of .221.

SoxxoS
05-14-2004, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by Baby Fisk
Thx, SoxxoS. Marital status is one of those stats I never bother with.

Yeah, I just remember hearing he has a hot wife.

CHISOXFAN13
05-14-2004, 12:40 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
I'm sorry, but AGAIN, yesterday, Rowand took TERRIBLE routes to balls hit right at him, barely making both plays basically due to luck. He had no right making those plays after taking first-steps a little-leaguer would have been corrected on...

The FOC won't allow for the fact that they've been wrong for months, if not longer, or the fact that Rowand is not competent in CF, let alone "good" as many STILL suggest.

The only logical explanation outside of an inability to admit they were wrong, is that the FOC are also members of the "Blind White Sox Fan Club."

Either that or they just love to argue with you Randar :D:

I'm placing the over/under on how long you wait to start another Rowand bad route thread to three days!!!

PaleHoseGeorge
05-14-2004, 12:40 PM
Originally posted by Baby Fisk
Is there really a groundswell of support for playing Frank at first? I say leave him be at DH. At least that way he won't injure himself reaching for errant throws (Suddenly I sound like his mother!). ...

Dave Wills on ESPN seems to think the lads at WSI all want Frank at first base.

:wills
"That's White Sox Interactive... totally biased, utterly petty, completely unobjective, Laddie! Or maybe you call it 'FlyingSock.com?'"

Granted, we have lots of people who are convinced Frank hits better when playing 1B rather than DH and there is plenty of empirical evidence to support this point of view. However it is obvious Frank is doing just fine playing DH this season and we really don't need to start experimenting with new things to fix what isn't broken.

Unless Konerko breaks out of his annual May funk, we have better options than Frank playing 1B everyday to replace Konehead.

As for Rowand, the "he'll be fine" crowd will never eat the crow they'll be served for being so wrong. It still doesn't make them right no matter how much they deny it.

sas1974
05-14-2004, 12:45 PM
Originally posted by Baby Fisk
Is there really a groundswell of support for playing Frank at first? I say leave him be at DH. At least that way he won't injure himself reaching for errant throws (Suddenly I sound like his mother!).

I wouldn't mind him getting a few reps out there before interleague play begins. We're going to need him in the lineup.

Randar68
05-14-2004, 12:49 PM
Originally posted by CHISOXFAN13
Either that or they just love to argue with you Randar :D:

I'm placing the over/under on how long you wait to start another Rowand bad route thread to three days!!!

I'll take the under, assuming he get's ANY starts in CF in the Minny series.

All he has to do is play there one day, and I'm sure he'll hand me due cause on a silver platter....

Baby Fisk
05-14-2004, 12:49 PM
Originally posted by sas1974
I wouldn't mind him getting a few reps out there before interleague play begins. We're going to need him in the lineup.
...for the World Series. Good point! :cool:

Dub25
05-14-2004, 03:17 PM
Originally posted by TheBull19
FOC - friend of crash?

BTW, if they call up Reed, we still won't have a Cf'er on the roster. And some people say KW is a good GM.

Good call especially since Brian Anderson is the one who is supposed to be the centerfielder of the future.

If Reed comes up anytime soon I hope he tears the cover off the ball otherwise we will have the read the same old threads over and over about how he sucks and about him drifting with the ball(oh wait when the ball drifts your supposed to drift with it because if you stand still then the ball will be somewhere you're not, but hey I don't know anything about playing OF) and about how we need a CF.

FarWestChicago
05-14-2004, 03:42 PM
Originally posted by TheBull19
FOC - friend of crash?

BTW, if they call up Reed, we still won't have a Cf'er on the roster. And some people say KW is a good GM. Hey, no hijacking a perfectly good FOC thread into a KW thread. There are plenty of the latter. :D:

Randar68
05-14-2004, 03:52 PM
Originally posted by Dub25
If Reed comes up anytime soon I hope he tears the cover off the ball otherwise we will have the read the same old threads over and over about how he sucks and about him drifting with the ball(oh wait when the ball drifts your supposed to drift with it because if you stand still then the ball will be somewhere you're not, but hey I don't know anything about playing OF) and about how we need a CF.

HUH?

Rowand "drifts" with every ball. He almost never runs to a spot. That means he ends up looking over his shoulder at the ball the whole way, slowing him up. That leads to bad ROUTES.

I guess this sentence: "but hey I don't know anything about playing OF" must have been the most accurate thing you typed.

Don't even get me started about not getting himself in position to throw. Next you're going to tell me that it's best to be moving laterally or backwards when catching the ball because that gives you "momentum".

I'm not concerned about Reed. I have seen him play. Baseball instincts are hard to teach, and some never learn.

PS> If Reed hits less than .250, I'll stand naked at the corner of Clark and Addison and give you 30 minutes to draw a crowd.

RedPinStripes
05-14-2004, 04:10 PM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
He's married, Baby...

And he's got some real issues if he cheats on his wife. Damn she's hot! Too bad she's married to a jagoff.

Gumshoe
05-14-2004, 04:11 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Nah, you just won't allow for the possibility that you may just be wrong on this point.


I can say with relative certainty (yes, I'll admit I'm human), that Rowand is a good CF. Guys like Randar et al THINK he is bad, subjectively. Guys on my side (an equal amount, from what I've seen on these boards), THINK he is good/very good CF, subjectively. The problem for the former is that the latter is supported by every single statistic by every single source in baseball.

That means, most likely, the latter is correct. It's just a new BS syndrome that states that you HAVE TO HAVE an All Star playing center (or "oustanding D up the middle" to win, combined white pure White Sox fan love of complaining, that guides guys like Randar.

They won't stop. Even relatively smart baseball guys like Reynolds, Kurkjian, and Ravesh still consider us to have poor defense. HA! If they watched the games seriously (hint hint Randar) and without bias, they'd see it much differently.

gumshoe

I win, again. there is no way to refute those points. none.

Randar68
05-14-2004, 04:14 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
I can say with relative certainty (yes, I'll admit I'm human), that Rowand is a good CF. Guys like Randar et al THINK he is bad, subjectively. Guys on my side (an equal amount, from what I've seen on these boards), THINK he is good/very good CF, subjectively. The problem for the former is that the latter is supported by every single statistic by every single source in baseball.

That means, most likely, the latter is correct. It's just a new BS syndrome that states that you HAVE TO HAVE an All Star playing center (or "oustanding D up the middle" to win, combined white pure White Sox fan love of complaining, that guides guys like Randar.

They won't stop. Even relatively smart baseball guys like Reynolds, Kurkjian, and Ravesh still consider us to have poor defense. HA! If they watched the games seriously (hint hint Randar) and without bias, they'd see it much differently.

gumshoe

I win, again. there is no way to refute those points. none.

Ignorance is bliss, huh Gummy. Don't confuse the FOC vocal minority being representative of this site's demographics on this matter. The "Majority" are tired of banging their heads against this wall of ignorance.

TheBull19
05-14-2004, 04:16 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
,PS> If Reed hits less than .250, I'll stand naked at the corner of Clark and Addison and give you 30 minutes to draw a crowd.

I'll be looking for you after he debuts 0 for 1 w/ a sacrafice and a couple walks.

TheBull19
05-14-2004, 04:18 PM
Originally posted by Dub25
Good call especially since Brian Anderson is the one who is supposed to be the centerfielder of the future.



Lot of good that does us now. I'm all for calling up Reed and sticking him CF though.

FarWestChicago
05-14-2004, 04:24 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
I can say with relative certainty (yes, I'll admit I'm human), that Rowand is a good CF. Guys like Randar et al THINK he is bad, subjectively. Guys on my side (an equal amount, from what I've seen on these boards), THINK he is good/very good CF, subjectively. The problem for the former is that the latter is supported by every single statistic by every single source in baseball.

That means, most likely, the latter is correct. It's just a new BS syndrome that states that you HAVE TO HAVE an All Star playing center (or "oustanding D up the middle" to win, combined white pure White Sox fan love of complaining, that guides guys like Randar.

They won't stop. Even relatively smart baseball guys like Reynolds, Kurkjian, and Ravesh still consider us to have poor defense. HA! If they watched the games seriously (hint hint Randar) and without bias, they'd see it much differently.

gumshoe

I win, again. there is no way to refute those points. none. My god, are you still at work? I hope you are NOT operating heavy equipment. And do you have a ride home? Seriously, you should not be driving in your condition. :gulp:

Randar68
05-14-2004, 04:30 PM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
My god, are you still at work? I hope you are NOT operating heavy equipment. And do you have a ride home? Seriously, you should not be driving in your condition. :gulp:

LOL! Classic! :gulp: to you, FWC!

FarWestChicago
05-14-2004, 04:35 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
LOL! Classic! :gulp: to you, FWC! Well come on, no sober person could actually post that. Disagreements are fine, but that was like a bad PCP joint post. :smile:

Randar68
05-14-2004, 04:44 PM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
Well come on, no sober person could actually post that. Disagreements are fine, but that was like a bad PCP joint post. :smile:

LOL! I agree. Unfortunately, I think reading all the FOC posts like that one has me on a second-hand PCP trip.

joecrede
05-14-2004, 04:54 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
This has me wondering. Of the 8 everyday position ballplayers on the Sox, which position are the Sox the weakest? Also, which position could we most obviously upgrade WITHOUT making a trade, simply by benching the current everyday ballplayer and filling the role with somebody else, either on the current 25-man roster or somebody in the Sox minor league organization.

If replacing Rowand in center field isn't the obvious answer to both these questions, then he is still ranked #2, just behind benching Konerko and playing Frank at first base.

FWIW, I'm not an advocate of Rowand being the everyday CF'er. All I'm saying is he's a good-to-very good defensive CF'er and he hits left-handers well. He can be a very effective player if utilized properly.

Randar68
05-14-2004, 04:56 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
FWIW, I'm not an advocate of Rowand being the everyday CF'er. All I'm saying is he's a good-to-very good defensive CF'er and he hits left-handers well. He can be a very effective player if utilized properly.

This is our fundamental disagreement, then:

IMO:

Rowand is a below average defender who still make mistakes I'd bench a HS kid for making.

Rowand can hit fastballs and may be effective in a platoon situation, but he'd only play ~20% of the time if he were to only face lefties.

SEALgep
05-14-2004, 06:36 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
HUH?

Rowand "drifts" with every ball. He almost never runs to a spot. That means he ends up looking over his shoulder at the ball the whole way, slowing him up. That leads to bad ROUTES.

I guess this sentence: "but hey I don't know anything about playing OF" must have been the most accurate thing you typed.

Don't even get me started about not getting himself in position to throw. Next you're going to tell me that it's best to be moving laterally or backwards when catching the ball because that gives you "momentum".

I'm not concerned about Reed. I have seen him play. Baseball instincts are hard to teach, and some never learn.

PS> If Reed hits less than .250, I'll stand naked at the corner of Clark and Addison and give you 30 minutes to draw a crowd. All those supposed bad routes lead to a caught ball.

SEALgep
05-14-2004, 06:39 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
Ignorance is bliss, huh Gummy. Don't confuse the FOC vocal minority being representative of this site's demographics on this matter. The "Majority" are tired of banging their heads against this wall of ignorance. Don't speak for others, especially since the ones you speak of supposedly agree with you but are silent. I have 2.3 million people agree with me, but they aren't talking right now. What's your point? Either get these people to speak up for your argument or stop using them as part of your argument. Majority? The majority of the people on this forum have no problem stating how they feel.

Randar68
05-14-2004, 08:32 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Don't speak for others, especially since the ones you speak of supposedly agree with you but are silent. I have 2.3 million people agree with me, but they aren't talking right now. What's your point? Either get these people to speak up for your argument or stop using them as part of your argument. Majority? The majority of the people on this forum have no problem stating how they feel.

why do you insist on making yourself dumber by the post?

Rowand is so fantastic he can't keep Timo Per-freakin-ez out of the line-up...


Aaaaaaand..... I'm spent. Have fun with the rowand circle-jerk.

SEALgep
05-14-2004, 09:08 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
why do you insist on making yourself dumber by the post?

Rowand is so fantastic he can't keep Timo Per-freakin-ez out of the line-up...


Aaaaaaand..... I'm spent. Have fun with the rowand circle-jerk. I'm stupid because I disagree with speaking for other people? You can't just make things up. When you do that, I'm afraid you're the one who looks dumb.

CLR01
05-14-2004, 09:27 PM
Can you guys please discuss this without questioning each others intelligence? If not I will gladly close the thread.

SEALgep
05-14-2004, 09:30 PM
Originally posted by CLR01
Can you guys please discuss this without questioning each others intelligence? If not I will gladly close the thread. Did you just call Dave Wannstedt a moron. :D:

CLR01
05-14-2004, 09:33 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Did you just call Dave Wannstedt a moron. :D:


No a picture did. But that is a fact accepted by everyone. :smile:

raul12
05-14-2004, 09:47 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Don't speak for others, especially since the ones you speak of supposedly agree with you but are silent. I have 2.3 million people agree with me, but they aren't talking right now. What's your point? Either get these people to speak up for your argument or stop using them as part of your argument. Majority? The majority of the people on this forum have no problem stating how they feel.

I'll speak on the side of Randar. That now makes me, Randar and FWC plus countless others vs. you and Gumshoe. We're in the majority! :D:

Randar68
05-14-2004, 10:27 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
I'm stupid because I disagree with speaking for other people? You can't just make things up. When you do that, I'm afraid you're the one who looks dumb.

I've been here since the beginning and have had this discussion for well over a year with many people on this site. Mr. January 2004, why don't you spend some time doing just that instead of making inane posts without factual basis?

Randar68
05-14-2004, 10:30 PM
Originally posted by raul12
I'll speak on the side of Randar. That now makes me, Randar and FWC plus countless others vs. you and Gumshoe. We're in the majority! :D:

I know you can add PHG and Daver to that list as well as many many others.

you have to love the vocal minority. they love to make it out as if the people who don't participate in the 'banging head on the wall" argument have no opinion on the matter as opposed to not willing to rehash the long-since-widely-accepted reality.

CLR01
05-14-2004, 10:41 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
I know you can add PHG and Daver to that list as well as many many others.

you have to love the vocal minority. they love to make it out as if the people who don't participate in the 'banging head on the wall" argument have no opinion on the matter as opposed to not willing to rehash the long-since-widely-accepted reality.




I believe I am one of the original members of the SFAARS club.

voodoochile
05-14-2004, 10:43 PM
Originally posted by raul12
I'll speak on the side of Randar. That now makes me, Randar and FWC plus countless others vs. you and Gumshoe. We're in the majority! :D:

even idseer gave up the argument. He basically admitted he was wrong about Rowand's ability tonight in chat and this is the best game Rowand has had in a while...

Daver
05-14-2004, 10:50 PM
I know nothing about baseball.

Fungo
05-14-2004, 10:56 PM
For the record...I side with Randar on this one. Rowand is not a very good outfielder.

CHISOXFAN13
05-14-2004, 11:05 PM
I'm also with Randar. Only thig I'm questioning is hus knack for starting an anti-Rowand thread after every time he misjudges a ball.

I think the majority agrees with you. Time to start a new campaign.

FarWestChicago
05-14-2004, 11:08 PM
Originally posted by CHISOXFAN13
I'm also with Randar. Only thig I'm questioning is hus knack for starting an anti-Rowand thread after every time he misjudges a ball.

I think the majority agrees with you. Time to start a new campaign. Well, the FOC's are a lot of fun. They are much less obnoxious than the FOB's were. You can't blame a guy for wanting to have a little fun. :smile:

SEALgep
05-14-2004, 11:19 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
I've been here since the beginning and have had this discussion for well over a year with many people on this site. Mr. January 2004, why don't you spend some time doing just that instead of making inane posts without factual basis? Where are your facts?

SEALgep
05-14-2004, 11:22 PM
I could care a less if people dislike Rowand. However, if you are going to state your opinion about him over and over again, then so will I. Why is that a problem for you? You are the one who keeps bringing it up. Is this the Randar hour or can we all contribute to a discussion?

pearso66
05-15-2004, 01:22 AM
I'm going to have to agree with Randar also. I was fine with giving Rowand a chance, but he has had it, and yes its been a month and a half into the season, but he has had playing time before. Did we have a FOL (friends of Leifer) back in the day? or a FOG (friends of graffanino)? Those 2 guys were decent backups, just like rowand, but were not starters. Actually I'd rather Timo be our 4th OF, he's at least a left handed bat, and can hit a breaking ball, at least i havnt been shown he cant. If Rowand was hitting .280-.300 it would be ok, but he cant hit anything but a fastball, it's amazing he even sees any.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-15-2004, 07:14 AM
Originally posted by pearso66
I'm going to have to agree with Randar also. I was fine with giving Rowand a chance, but he has had it, and yes its been a month and a half into the season, but he has had playing time before. Did we have a FOL (friends of Leifer) back in the day? or a FOG (friends of graffanino)? Those 2 guys were decent backups, just like rowand, but were not starters. Actually I'd rather Timo be our 4th OF, he's at least a left handed bat, and can hit a breaking ball, at least i havnt been shown he cant. If Rowand was hitting .280-.300 it would be ok, but he cant hit anything but a fastball, it's amazing he even sees any.

You're on to something, pears. At one time or another WSI has been home to a "Friends" club for practically every undertalented utility bench player and every overmatched everyday ballplayer, too. It's inevitable. Some people honestly believe the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence, even ignoring the giant pile of steaming dung the rest of us can smell and see from 20 paces.

Friends of Crash follow in the fine tradition of Friends of Graffanino, Friends of Liefer (later Friends of Maple Liefer), Friends of Jimenez, and of course the late great Friends of Buddy [Lee], the unofficial Royce Clayton fan club.

:buddylee
"The sneaker incident pretty much dried up the last of my support."

Friends of Crash is more an amusement than anything else. There really isn't anything his supporters can do except repeatedly deny reality. I only argue with them to see how much further they're made to look silly defending their guy's latest misadventures. It's sport, sort of like shooting fish in a barrel.

:)

Paulwny
05-15-2004, 09:16 AM
There was also the Fans of Mr. Versatility.

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by pearso66
I'm going to have to agree with Randar also. I was fine with giving Rowand a chance, but he has had it, and yes its been a month and a half into the season, but he has had playing time before. Did we have a FOL (friends of Leifer) back in the day? or a FOG (friends of graffanino)? Those 2 guys were decent backups, just like rowand, but were not starters. Actually I'd rather Timo be our 4th OF, he's at least a left handed bat, and can hit a breaking ball, at least i havnt been shown he cant. If Rowand was hitting .280-.300 it would be ok, but he cant hit anything but a fastball, it's amazing he even sees any. The only problem with this analysis is that it focuses on hitting. Randar and I disagree whether or not Rowand can play the field. I think he does a good job whereas Randar thinks he's a liabililty in CF. I've always been in favor of playing Reed when he's ready. I just don't think Rowand is a defensive liability.

OEO Magglio
05-15-2004, 11:03 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
The only problem with this analysis is that it focuses on hitting. Randar and I disagree whether or not Rowand can play the field. I think he does a good job whereas Randar thinks he's a liabililty in CF.
SEAL, I was all for giving rowand his chance. But his chance is up he can't hit and randar is right he's a bad cf. Willie is a better cf and jose, uribe and willie are all better hitters then rowand, to me it makes sense to put willie in cf, but yesterday ozzie said that putting willie in cf isn't an option yet. But, eventually ozzie is going to have to do something in cf, and to me that's the best way to handle it.

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 11:05 AM
Originally posted by OEO Magglio
SEAL, I was all for giving rowand his chance. But his chance is up he can't hit and randar is right he's a bad cf. Willie is a better cf and jose, uribe and willie are all better hitters then rowand, to me it makes sense to put willie in cf, but yesterday ozzie said that putting willie in cf isn't an option yet. But, eventually ozzie is going to have to do something in cf, and to me that's the best way to handle it. The best way is to put Reed there when he's ready, in probably June. Right now Rowand isn't hitting, but his defense is there.

FarWestChicago
05-15-2004, 11:58 AM
Originally posted by Paulwny
There was also the Fans of Mr. Versatility. Who can forget the FOV's? :D:

FarWestChicago
05-15-2004, 11:59 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Right now Rowand isn't hitting, but his defense is there. Yeah, his defense is "there". The problem is the ball is someplace else. :smile:

pearso66
05-15-2004, 11:59 AM
We still have FOJ (friends of Jimenez) here. I remember at even the beginning of this year they were complaining that we got rid of him. Its been 1/2 a year, he's gone. They must have blocked out all of his baserunning blunders, and fielding mishaps to still want him around. Although that crowd finally seems to have dimmed because willie and uribe are both playing well now.

voodoochile
05-15-2004, 12:06 PM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
Yeah, his defense is "there". The problem is the ball is someplace else. :smile:

I don't even know where some of these FOC comments come from. How anyone can actually be watching the games and not see the defensive problems Rowand has 2-3 times a week is beyond me.

pearso66
05-15-2004, 12:08 PM
Yeah, his defense is "there". The problem is the ball is someplace else.

I have to nominate that for post of the week. That sums up the whole Rowand problem.

joecrede
05-15-2004, 12:33 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
I don't even know where some of these FOC comments come from. How anyone can actually be watching the games and not see the defensive problems Rowand has 2-3 times a week is beyond me.

It's something called independent thought.

FarWestChicago
05-15-2004, 12:36 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
It's something called independent thought. Or ignoring the data. :smile:

voodoochile
05-15-2004, 01:00 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
It's something called independent thought.

The sky is green, the grass is blue, the weather last night in Chicago was balmy and perfect for baseball, Rowand is a good defensive player....

Hey look, independent thought... :?:

OEO Magglio
05-15-2004, 01:02 PM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
Yeah, his defense is "there". The problem is the ball is someplace else. :smile:
LOL, great post.

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 01:37 PM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
Or ignoring the data. :smile: Would you please post your data.

pearso66
05-15-2004, 02:28 PM
I don't need data, I can watch the game and see that rowand makes routine plays look difficult.

FarWestChicago
05-15-2004, 02:36 PM
Originally posted by pearso66
I don't need data, I can watch the game and see that rowand makes routine plays look difficult. That is data. :smile:

pearso66
05-15-2004, 02:37 PM
That is data.

My bad FWC I thought he wanted stats to back us up, :)

joecrede
05-15-2004, 02:46 PM
I just found the data that makes everyone believe Rowand's a poor defensive CF'er: .222/.284/.432

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 03:07 PM
Originally posted by pearso66
I don't need data, I can watch the game and see that rowand makes routine plays look difficult. I watch the games too, and he makes the plays with ease. I've also seen him make some very good plays that wouldn't be easy for anyone. I'm just going by what I see as well.

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 03:07 PM
Originally posted by pearso66
My bad FWC I thought he wanted stats to back us up, :) That's exactly what I meant. You said I was ignoring the data. What data? Did you mean your own observations as facts?

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 03:08 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
I just found the data that makes everyone believe Rowand's a poor defensive CF'er: .222/.284/.432 I was unaware that batting average was attained in the field, which is what the discussion is about. There is no doubt that if Reed continues to produce on offense, that he will be a much welcome addition. Although this is not a concern of mine, I only hope he plays as well defensively as Rowand.

voodoochile
05-15-2004, 03:35 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
That's exactly what I meant. You said I was ignoring the data. What data? Did you mean your own observations as facts?

Can you share the data that proves he is a good defender?

FarWestChicago
05-15-2004, 03:50 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
That's exactly what I meant. You said I was ignoring the data. What data? Did you mean your own observations as facts? You said watching Crash fail around lost in the outfied and concluding he was a good defensive outfielder was independent thinking. I mentioned it could also be be ignoring the data, in this case observational data of the aforementioned flailing. Observational data is perfectly legitimate and indeed valuable. When walking across a street one doesn't carry a stat sheet about traffic patterns on the street. One observes there is a car coming and waits for it to pass before crossing...or ends up a hood ornament. :smile:

joecrede
05-15-2004, 04:13 PM
5 errors in 1,400+ innings in CF.

SoxxoS
05-15-2004, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
5 errors in 1,400+ innings in CF.

Please don't tell me you are going to evaluate an outfielder on number of errors commited.

joecrede
05-15-2004, 04:29 PM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
Please don't tell me you are going to evaluate an outfielder on number of errors commited.

Yeah, you're right.

Sox pitching finished third in the A.L. last year in ERA and hits allowed.

This year they are third and fourth in those categories.

Where are all these plays he's not making?

SoxxoS
05-15-2004, 04:31 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Yeah, you're right.

Sox pitching finished third in the A.L. last year in ERA and hits allowed.

This year they are third and fourth in those categories.

Where are all these plays he's not making?

First off, how much did Rowand play Center last year? I remember us acquiring Everett in late June...

Second, that is the biggest broad generalization of all-time... to say that Aaron Rowand is the reason why the sox have successful earned runs and hits allowed averages.

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 04:47 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Can you share the data that proves he is a good defender? Innocent until proven guilty.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-15-2004, 04:48 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
5 errors in 1,400+ innings in CF.

The Friends of Buddy Lee couldn't have stated it any better.

Quick! Somebody start sizing up Crash for his hall of fame plaque. :smile:

:buddylee
"I set a fielding record here that will probably last forever... now where did I misplace my sneakers... I've got a plane to Milwaukee to catch!"

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 04:50 PM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
You said watching Crash fail around lost in the outfied and concluding he was a good defensive outfielder was independent thinking. I mentioned it could also be be ignoring the data, in this case observational data of the aforementioned flailing. Observational data is perfectly legitimate and indeed valuable. When walking across a street one doesn't carry a stat sheet about traffic patterns on the street. One observes there is a car coming and waits for it to pass before crossing...or ends up a hood ornament. :smile: This makes no sense. Just say you don't have the data. Saying your observations are more astute than mine doesn't prove a thing. If observational data is legitimate, then mine are just as informative as yours. Data is factual evidence.

voodoochile
05-15-2004, 04:51 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Innocent until proven guilty.

Oh, I must be mistaken. I thought this was a message board discussing Sox players and not a court of law. I must have missed that part of the Code of Conduct where no poster would ever have to justify their stance because the US Constitution gives us the right to not be convicted of crimes until we are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Tell you what. I will post a poll and we can settle this once and for all. Once 75%+ of the posters tell you that Rowand is a crappy defender, THEN will you post the stats?

joecrede
05-15-2004, 04:51 PM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
First off, how much did Rowand play Center last year? I remember us acquiring Everett in late June...

Second, that is the biggest broad generalization of all-time... to say that Aaron Rowand is the reason why the sox have successful earned runs and hits allowed averages.

If he were as bad a defensive CF'er as many think Sox pitching would be worse than fourth in hits allowed and third in ERA I guarantee it.

Sox pitching has allowed the fourth most flyballs in the league too.

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
Please don't tell me you are going to evaluate an outfielder on number of errors commited. Please don't tell me you're going by him making plays look closer than they need to be. That argument is weak, especially when taking into consideration that the plays were obvioulsy made.

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 04:55 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Oh, I must be mistaken. I thought this was a message board discussing Sox players and not a court of law. I must have missed that part of the Code of Conduct where no poster would ever have to justify their stance because the US Constitution gives us the right to not be convicted of crimes until we are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Tell you what. I will post a poll and we can settle this once and for all. Once 75%+ of the posters tell you that Rowand is a crappy defender, THEN will you post the stats? I'm not the one who said the data was being ignored. If I'm ignoring data, provide it so it can no longer be ignored. Why is it up to me to provide factual evidence when others seem to have it? Are they not willing to share? I was told that observations serve as data, so I guess my evidence to you is that I observed Rowand as a good CF. Case closed.

voodoochile
05-15-2004, 05:00 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
5 errors in 1,400+ innings in CF.

How many chances? What's his ZR? How about a range factor?

That's 5 errors in roughly one full season. That is hardly a stunning stat for CF'ers. Didn't OneDog used to have 1 a season on a regular basis? Didn't Lee only have a couple last year? Are you arguing that Lee is a good defender in LF based on that stat?

Oh, one other thing, does he get bonus points for doing flips when his footwork sucks and he overthrows the baseball or loses himself on the field and crashes into a wall?

FarWestChicago
05-15-2004, 05:00 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
This makes no sense. Just say you don't have the data. Saying your observations are more astute than mine doesn't prove a thing. If observational data is legitimate, then mine are just as informative as yours. Data is factual evidence. You make no sense.

Initial voodoo post:

Originally posted by voodoochile
I don't even know where some of these FOC comments come from. How anyone can actually be watching the games and not see the defensive problems Rowand has 2-3 times a week is beyond me.

FOC response:

Originally posted by joecrede
It's something called independent thought.

There is no FOC denial of seeing defensive problems. joecrede simply says seeing them and concluding Crash is a good defender is "independent thought". I simply pointed out it could also we viewed as "ignoring the data" since there was no FOC denial of the observed defensive problems. That makes perfect sense. I'm sorry if you can't see that. :smile:

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 05:01 PM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
You make no sense.

Initial voodoo post:



FOC response:



There is no FOC denial of seeing defensive problems. joecrede simply says seeing them and concluding Crash is a good defender is "independent thought". I simply pointed out it could also we viewed as "ignoring the data" since there was no FOC denial of the observed defensive problems. That makes perfect sense. I'm sorry if you can't see that. :smile: Your looking at the wrong posts.

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 05:03 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
How many chances? What's his ZR? How about a range factor?

That's 5 errors in roughly one full season. That is hardly a stunning stat for CF'ers. Didn't OneDog used to have 1 a season on a regular basis? Didn't Lee only have a couple last year? Are you arguing that Lee is a good defender in LF based on that stat?

Oh, one other thing, does he get bonus points for doing flips when his footwork sucks and he overthrows the baseball or loses himself on the field and crashes into a wall? Lee is a pretty solid left fielder as well. Rowand has thrown the ball well this year as well. He's hit the cut off guy everytime he's needed to, and also already has gunned down a guy at home.

FarWestChicago
05-15-2004, 05:04 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Your looking at the wrong posts. No, you are. That is what I read and what I wrote. This was actually between voodoo, joecrede and I. You just appeared and got all wound up. FOC's are supposed to be fun. You're starting to act like a FOB. :o:

:buddylee

My guys always had my back!!

voodoochile
05-15-2004, 05:05 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
I'm not the one who said the data was being ignored. If I'm ignoring data, provide it so it can no longer be ignored. Why is it up to me to provide factual evidence when others seem to have it? Are they not willing to share? I was told that observations serve as data, so I guess my evidence to you is that I observed Rowand as a good CF. Case closed.

Okay, nice and slow...

There
Are
Lots
of
Posters
Telling
You
He
Sucks
Not
Just
Me.

So
Far,
Only
you
and
JoeCrede
have
come
to
his
defense.

So, when you and joe decide to swim upstream, maybe the burden of proof lies on you. In addition, when 2 people say, "good defender" and 20 others weigh in with, "he sucks" maybe the scale slips slightly to the "he sucks" side of the argument.

Or are you now claiming that there is a large silent majority who aren't talking?

joecrede
05-15-2004, 05:12 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile

So, when you and joe decide to swim upstream, maybe the burden of proof lies on you. In addition, when 2 people say, "good defender" and 20 others weigh in with, "he sucks" maybe the scale slips slightly to the "he sucks" side of the argument.

Safety in numbers voodoo.

voodoochile
05-15-2004, 05:15 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Safety in numbers voodoo.

Multiple people observe the same event.

Most of them agree on one way of viewing that event.

A few do not.

Which version is more likely to be correct?

joecrede
05-15-2004, 05:19 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
How many chances? What's his ZR? How about a range factor?

That's 5 errors in roughly one full season. That is hardly a stunning stat for CF'ers. Didn't OneDog used to have 1 a season on a regular basis? Didn't Lee only have a couple last year? Are you arguing that Lee is a good defender in LF based on that stat?

Oh, one other thing, does he get bonus points for doing flips when his footwork sucks and he overthrows the baseball or loses himself on the field and crashes into a wall?

The only argument on the other side is the nebulous "bad routes" and shouts of "look, he almost didn't make that play!" Hillarious stuff if it didn't go on and on.

His ZR and RF's are not consistent with a poor defensive CF'er. Look 'em up.

jabrch
05-15-2004, 05:21 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Please don't tell me you're going by him making plays look closer than they need to be. That argument is weak, especially when taking into consideration that the plays were obvioulsy made.

Rowand catches the cans o' corn

Rowand makes a lot of easy plays look hard.

He makes hard many plays look spectacular.

He makes hardly no spectacular plays - cuz those all become hits. If he was a better CF, he'd be making more of the spectaculr plays, instead of having to take a hard play and make it into a spectacular one.

That's my problem with Rowand defensively. He is a pretty poor hitter too - but that's another story.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-15-2004, 05:25 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
The only argument on the other side is the nebulous "bad routes" and shouts of "look, he almost didn't make that play!" Hillarious stuff if it didn't go on and on.

His ZR and RF's are not consistent with a poor defensive CF'er. Look 'em up.

Kudos to JoeCrede for being first to reach for the heavy artillery of the STATS, INC defensive numbers war arsenal... the ZR and RF factors!

LMAO! I'm out. Have fun with this one. Nobody will make a nickel's worth of progress advancing their argument in this one.

Please mark my words below.

Rowand will get benched before this season is over. Why? Because we already have better options than him on the Sox roster right now. Ozzie will eventually admit it and the Friends of Crash will be reduced to a mere guerrilla campaign, fighting from the hills and sniping from the trees on behalf of a ballplayer who had every opportunity and couldn't hack it, a shadow at the end of the bench, lucky to even be wearing a major league uniform -- at least for this season. Another flavor-of-the-month will replace him.

Ah what a lovely war this is.

:)

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 05:25 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
Rowand catches the cans o' corn

Rowand makes a lot of easy plays look hard.

He makes hard many plays look spectacular.

He makes hardly no spectacular plays - cuz those all become hits. If he was a better CF, he'd be making more of the spectaculr plays, instead of having to take a hard play and make it into a spectacular one.

That's my problem with Rowand defensively. He is a pretty poor hitter too - but that's another story. What about the plays where he throws out guys at home or robbing homeruns. I've seen him do it on more than one occasion.

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 05:27 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Kudos to JoeCrede for being first to reach for the heavy artillery of the STATS, INC defensive numbers war arsenal... the ZR and RF factors!

LMAO! I'm out. Have fun with this one. Nobody will make a nickel's worth of progress advancing their argument in this one.

Please mark my words below.

Rowand will get benched before this season is over. Why? Because we already have better options than him on the Sox roster right now. Ozzie will eventually admit it and the Friends of Crash will be reduced to a mere guerrilla campaign, fighting from the hills and sniping from the trees on behalf of a ballplayer who had every opportunity and couldn't hack it, a shadow at the end of the bench, lucky to even be wearing a major league uniform -- at least for this season. Another flavor-of-the-month will replace him.

Ah what a lovely war this is.

:) Guillen will most likely replace him, but the question what reason will it be for. All I'm saying is that it will be offensive related, not that he isn't a good fielder. I'm excited as any to give Reed his chance. I have no problem with that. I'm just arguing that he plays the field well. That's my only argument.

john2499
05-15-2004, 09:24 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
What about the plays where he throws out guys at home or robbing homeruns. I've seen him do it on more than one occasion.

He has 2 outfield assists, and I have not seen him rob one home run !!

He is a below average center fielder. If he were hitting near .300 he might be acceptable, but since he is near .200 he is not.

tstrike2000
05-16-2004, 09:55 PM
Randar68, the big KW supporter, and I don't agree about the job KW is doing, but I do agree with him on Rowand. The guy is not a center fielder. On offense, he's just another slow, right handed hitter. We need to have someone else start out there on a nightly basis. Harris in CF with Uribe at 2B is the way to go. Every once in a while play Perez and try to trade Rowand for some pitching if possible.

Cubbiesuck13
05-16-2004, 10:09 PM
are you anti-crash guys saying that perez is a better CF and all around ball player than rowand? i can see why you would want to make yourself feel better and say reed would do a better job, seeing how he is unproven with loads of talent and all; but perez has been known for not being able to keep his mind on the game and for making baserunning goofs (this reminds me of jiminez).

on the roster, it is hard to look further than rowand for the best CF. Reed is hitting against minor league pitchers and does not seem to tear it up when it comes to defence. Rowand is not an all star or a great player. but he is an average to above average at best player and when you are not the yankees or the red sox, that has to do. I don't see reed being better than rowand right now.

jabrch
05-16-2004, 10:43 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
What about the plays where he throws out guys at home or robbing homeruns. I've seen him do it on more than one occasion.

16 assists in 330 games. That's one ever 21 games. Nothing to hang your career hat on is it? As far as the homerun robbing, I don't recall ANY of those by Crash. Thats not to say that he hasn't done it - he very well may have. But you can't tell me he is Jones/Hunter who do it on a regular basis. Rank him amongst AL starting CFs defensively and he is, IMHO, dead last.

Randar68
05-16-2004, 11:09 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
It's something called independent thought.

"It's something called ignorant thought."

There, that looks better. I knew it was a typo...

Randar68
05-16-2004, 11:19 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
What about the plays where he throws out guys at home or robbing homeruns. I've seen him do it on more than one occasion.

Rowand couldn't even reach the top of the wall in 80+% of the stadiums in the AL without an extension ladder

SEALgep
05-16-2004, 11:21 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
Rowand couldn't even reach the top of the wall in 80+% of the stadiums in the AL without an extension ladder Then it's amazing he's done it then.

SEALgep
05-16-2004, 11:22 PM
Originally posted by john2499
He has 2 outfield assists, and I have not seen him rob one home run !!

He is a below average center fielder. If he were hitting near .300 he might be acceptable, but since he is near .200 he is not. I'm not talking about just this year.

Randar68
05-16-2004, 11:22 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Guillen will most likely replace him, but the question what reason will it be for. All I'm saying is that it will be offensive related, not that he isn't a good fielder. I'm excited as any to give Reed his chance. I have no problem with that. I'm just arguing that he plays the field well. That's my only argument.

I guess we know what the FOC will try to proclaim when Rowand is all but permanently benched. It was only dure to his offense..

Hey, but I'm probably 'illegally' trying to speak for all those silent others again.


BLA!

SEALgep
05-16-2004, 11:24 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
16 assists in 330 games. That's one ever 21 games. Nothing to hang your career hat on is it? As far as the homerun robbing, I don't recall ANY of those by Crash. Thats not to say that he hasn't done it - he very well may have. But you can't tell me he is Jones/Hunter who do it on a regular basis. Rank him amongst AL starting CFs defensively and he is, IMHO, dead last. If you read the entire thread, you would see that I surely don't compare him to those players. He robbed a homer in Anaheim last year with Buerhle on the mound. Also threw out a runner at the plate in that game.

Randar68
05-16-2004, 11:24 PM
I'm glad I missed the couple days of this thread. Darwinism certainly has a few future targets here...

Watching the FOC argue this is like watching a puppy run out into a busy intersection OVER AND OVER AND OVER!

SEALgep
05-16-2004, 11:27 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
I'm glad I missed the couple days of this thread. Darwinism certainly has a few future targets here...

Watching the FOC argue this is like watching a puppy run out into a busy intersection OVER AND OVER AND OVER! Do I need to remind you who rekindled this discussion. Don't be a hypocrite.

Randar68
05-16-2004, 11:37 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Do I need to remind you who rekindled this discussion. Don't be a hypocrite.

LOL. You need to look up the word hypocricy.