PDA

View Full Version : Rowand Poll


SEALgep
05-15-2004, 05:07 PM
Is Rowand a good defending CF?

PaleHoseGeorge
05-15-2004, 05:19 PM
The mere fact he doesn't know where he is on the playing field is proof enough he is a terrible outfielder. He wouldn't have earned his nickname "Crash" around here if he wasn't. Furthermore he is known as "Robocop" by his teammates for this exact same deficiency. But I'm guessing the Friends of Crash won't believe the opinions of major league ballplayers either, so what's the point.

Jousting at windmills with this crowd...

:)

idseer
05-15-2004, 05:19 PM
it's clear that the haters let hitting cloud their judgement.
statistically (i hardly EVER see him play) he's as good as most cf's.

idseer
05-15-2004, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
But I'm guessing the Friends of Crash won't believe the opinions of major league ballplayers either, so what's the point.


i'm certainly willing to entertain some qoutes of teammates that think he's a poor fielder.

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 05:24 PM
Originally posted by idseer
i'm certainly willing to entertain some qoutes of teammates that think he's a poor fielder. As would I. You certainly won't get any from Frank Thomas.

voodoochile
05-15-2004, 05:29 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
As would I. You certainly won't get any from Frank Thomas.

Okay, now what does Frank ahve to do with this subject?

Just for the record, would you guys who want to hear teammate quotes, please reference the last time you heard ANY MLB player rip on a current teammate for anything in public?

If you can actually find one of those, can you go one step further and mention when you heard a player rip on his current teammate for actions performed ON the field (hitting, defense, etc.) and not for off the field behavior.

I would love a link if you can find one.

I edited the poll just slightly to put the word "Center" in front of "fielder" as that is what we are actually discussing.

I will now delete my poll...

PaleHoseGeorge
05-15-2004, 05:32 PM
Originally posted by idseer
i'm certainly willing to entertain some qoutes of teammates that think he's a poor fielder.

The "Robocop" nickname was attributed to Sox teammates of his back in 2001 when he got his first auditions with the Sox. I believe the quotes came from Paul Sullivan in the Cubune, a reliable source in my book.

I haven't been repeating it around here for 3 years because I invented it. Maybe the Friends of Crash haven't been paying attention?

idseer
05-15-2004, 05:32 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Just for the record, would you guys who want to hear teammate quotes, please reference the last time you heard ANY MLB player rip on a current teammate for anything in public?

If you can actually find one of those, can you go one step further and mention when you heard a player rip on his current teammate for actions performed ON the field (hitting, defense, etc.) and not for off the field behavior.

I would love a link if you can find one.

the accusation was made that mlb players say he's a lousy fielder. i'd just like to find where that thought came from.

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 05:33 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Okay, now what does Frank ahve to do with this subject?

Just for the record, would you guys who want to hear teammate quotes, please reference the last time you heard ANY MLB player rip on a current teammate for anything in public?

If you can actually find one of those, can you go one step further and mention when you heard a player rip on his current teammate for actions performed ON the field (hitting, defense, etc.) and not for off the field behavior.

I would love a link if you can find one.

I edited the poll just slightly to put the word "Center" in front of "fielder" as that is what we are actually discussing.

I will now delete my poll... No problem with the change. I only said Frank because it was mentioned that even his own players could say something negative about him and that wouldn't suffice me. Idseer said he would love to entertain those quotes, which I agreed. I mentioned Frank only because the two are pretty good friends and I doubt he would be included if any exist.

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 05:35 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
The "Robocop" nickname was attributed to Sox teammates of his back in 2001 when he got his first auditions with the Sox. I believe the quotes came from Paul Sullivan in the Cubune, a reliable source in my book.

I haven't been repeating it around here for 3 years because I invented it. Maybe the Friends of Crash haven't been paying attention? Robocop is a bad ***. I wouldn't take that as an insult. Besides, that along with crash doesn't suggest to me that he is just out of control. It says to me that he gives up his body for the ball, which pitchers and teammates appreciate as far as I am aware.

idseer
05-15-2004, 05:36 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
The "Robocop" nickname was attributed to Sox teammates of his back in 2001 when he got his first auditions with the Sox. I believe the quotes came from Paul Sullivan in the Cubune, a reliable source in my book.

I haven't been repeating it around here for 3 years because I invented it. Maybe the Friends of Crash haven't been paying attention?

well, i'm not sure what robocop has to do with fielding.
and suddenly we're believing writers who make accusations on behalf of players?

as far as i understand, the nickname 'crash' comes from his running into a wall going after a ball a few times. i fail to see how that is an indictment of his fielding. in fact it would seem more a compliment to me.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-15-2004, 05:39 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Robocop is a bad ***. I wouldn't take that as an insult. Besides, that along with crash doesn't suggest to me that he is just out of control. It says to me that he gives up his body for the ball, which pitchers and teammates appreciate as far as I am aware.

Sullivan didn't give names. He was specific mentioning the nickname was borne by the general laughter in the dugout from his teammates about Rowand's fielding style. You may recall he ran into quite a few walls those first few weeks with the team. That's what made the "Sox Beat" tidbit newsworthy.

Laughing at him, not with him? That's what Sully said.

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 05:40 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Sullivan didn't give names. He was specific mentioning the nickname was borne by the general laughter in the dugout from his teammates about Rowand's fielding style. You may recall he ran into quite a few walls those first few weeks with the team. That's what made the "Sox Beat" tidbit newsworthy.

Laughing at him, not with him? That's what Sully said. Laughing at him, not with him? I don't buy that. Besides, the guy was on the team for a limited time with no relations with anyone, and left first chance he got. I don't put too much stock into what that joker says.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-15-2004, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Laughing at him, not with him? I don't buy that. Besides, the guy was on the team for a limited time with no relations with anyone, and left first chance he got. I don't put too much stock into what that joker says.

Of course you don't buy it. That's the most obvious post of this entire thread.

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 05:54 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Of course you don't buy it. That's the most obvious post of this entire thread. Regardless, do you have any quoted sources confirming this?

PaleHoseGeorge
05-15-2004, 05:56 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Regardless, do you have any quoted sources confirming this?

I just gave it to you, Seal. Don't believe it. I don't care.

SEALgep
05-15-2004, 06:01 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
I just gave it to you, Seal. Don't believe it. I don't care. Alright then, I choose not to. But as I said, it really wouldn't matter anyway. The guy has no relations with the Sox. He was barely on the team for half a season and now is gone. If you have a quote from a guy who actually knows him and has played with him, then I would be interested in seeing it. However, unlike your Sully "quote", I would actually like to see what was said in the context of the article.

john2499
05-15-2004, 09:11 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Regardless, do you have any quoted sources confirming this?

Here's one for you. " Aaron Rowand sucks" attested john2499.

SEALgep
05-17-2004, 03:45 PM
Originally posted by john2499
Here's one for you. " Aaron Rowand sucks" attested john2499. At least this quote can be looked up. :D:

jlh0023
05-17-2004, 04:24 PM
this thread is ridiculous.....whether or not rowand is a sufficient fielder or not is debateable. i think he is myself......but arguing over what players and reporters allegedly said is stupid. i guarantee that no white sock insulted rowand publicly and his nicknames mean nothing definitive. you guys can vote on one of those stupid rowand polls. besides taht all this thread is ''rowand sucks'' ''no he doesn't'' '' yes he does''......

OEO Magglio
05-17-2004, 04:35 PM
Seal, give it up. Rowand is not a good centerfielder and you keep bringing up this argument. You keep saying I have my opinion and you have yours, but the problem is this isn't really an opinion question, it's a fact he's a bad centerfielder. Idseer, if you don't watch a lot of games you can't make an argument on rowand. His stats are fine, but that's cause he's takes so many bad routes to ball he can't get to any balls a normal centerfielder would easily get to.

SEALgep
05-17-2004, 05:07 PM
Originally posted by OEO Magglio
Seal, give it up. Rowand is not a good centerfielder and you keep bringing up this argument. You keep saying I have my opinion and you have yours, but the problem is this isn't really an opinion question, it's a fact he's a bad centerfielder. Idseer, if you don't watch a lot of games you can't make an argument on rowand. His stats are fine, but that's cause he's takes so many bad routes to ball he can't get to any balls a normal centerfielder would easily get to. I actually didn't bring this up again. It was brought up to me, and I made this poll in order to show what I felt was an accurate portrayal of how people feel about his defense. If you're sick of it, it's very easy to avoid the thread, as it says Rowand Poll on it. It's not like I was hiding what is being discussed here. And if it is a fact, then would you mind proving it to me. That would help a lot.

OEO Magglio
05-17-2004, 05:10 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
I actually didn't bring this up again. It was brought up to me, and I made this poll in order to show what I felt was an accurate portrayal of how people feel about his defense. If you're sick of it, it's very easy to avoid the thread, as it says Rowand Poll on it. It's not like I was hiding what is being discussed here. And if it is a fact, then would you mind proving it to me. That would help a lot.
Fine Seal I'll prove it to you, WATCH TONIGHTS GAME!!

SEALgep
05-17-2004, 05:11 PM
Originally posted by OEO Magglio
Fine Seal I'll prove it to you, WATCH TONIGHTS GAME!! Of course.

maurice
05-17-2004, 05:26 PM
Originally posted by OEO Magglio
His stats are fine, but that's cause he's takes so many bad routes to ball he can't get to any balls a normal centerfielder would easily get to.

:?:

There're good reasons to think that Rowand's been bad in many respects this season, but this is not one of them. If consistently bad routes caused him to miss balls caught by a normal CF, it should be clearly reflected in his range factor and zone rating.

His most obvious defensive problem this season has been when he tries to field balls that fall directly in front of him, not because he took a bad route, but because he pulled a Valentin and thought about throwing the ball before fielding it cleanly.

A. Cavatica
05-17-2004, 08:28 PM
The nickname Crash stems from his motorcycle accident. Duh!

voodoochile
05-17-2004, 08:29 PM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
The nickname Crash stems from his motorcycle accident. Duh!

No, it was from before that. He kept running into walls.

FarWestChicago
05-18-2004, 12:54 AM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
The nickname Crash stems from his motorcycle accident. Duh! Wrong, read voodoo's post above this. :D:

SpartanSoxFan
05-18-2004, 01:36 AM
Is he a good defender? Maybe...

Is he a good hitter? Gimme a break...

SSN721
05-18-2004, 06:54 AM
Is Randar's computer broken or something? :cool:

SSN721
05-18-2004, 06:57 AM
I have tried to watch him field a little more since this became a huge topic on this website, and it is hard to judge when the camera doesnt always cut to him soon enough to see his reads, and they dont always show replays, and I am not a scout either. SO I guess my opinion is relatively meaningless. I have see him make a few bad plays, he seems to have taken an occasional bad route or jump on the ball. I would say he is adequate to slightly good fielding. I knwo that is what the poll is about but honestly I dont want to see him in the lineup much anymore because he is not hitting on nearly the level I thought he was capable of and hurts the team much more that way then his occasional misreads and mistakes.

SEALgep
05-18-2004, 10:11 AM
Originally posted by SpartanSoxFan
Is he a good defender? Maybe...

Is he a good hitter? Gimme a break... No one is arguing that, this is about his defensive abilities.

Randar68
05-18-2004, 10:18 AM
Originally posted by SSN721
Is Randar's computer broken or something? :cool:

My head hurts. There are 2 or 3 FOC left out there who are now just completely off their rockers, and it really isn't worth it except for their occassional outlandish remark that I just can't help but trash...

SEALgep
05-18-2004, 10:26 AM
Originally posted by Randar68
My head hurts. There are 2 or 3 FOC left out there who are now just completely off their rockers, and it really isn't worth it except for their occassional outlandish remark that I just can't help but trash... Good thing we have you around to tell us all how it is.

idseer
05-18-2004, 10:57 AM
Originally posted by OEO Magglio
Idseer, if you don't watch a lot of games you can't make an argument on rowand. His stats are fine, but that's cause he's takes so many bad routes to ball he can't get to any balls a normal centerfielder would easily get to.

i disagree. he gets to his share of balls.
i am so sick of this myth aaron doesn't get to balls. will you concede tori hunter is a great fielder? let's look at something:

over his career tori hunter gets 3.02 chances per game.
over his career aaron rowand gets to 2.96 chances per game

over a 162 game schedule that means tori will average 489 chances ..... aaron - 476.
aaron gets to 13 fewer balls than tori. does that sound like a guy who doesn't get to balls?

while i haven't checked it, i would bet that aaron is way above average getting to his share of balls compared to all the other cf's in the game. and his fldg % is better than average so you can't say he gets chances but doesn't convert.

now if you actually had this dope who goes the wrong way all the time after balls do you actually think he'd be anywhere near average in total chances?

you people listen to a few (or one) in here who drills it in to you that aaron has no clue out there. THEY'RE WRONG! figure it out for yourselves!

Randar68
05-18-2004, 11:09 AM
Originally posted by idseer
you people listen to a few (or one) in here who drills it in to you that aaron has no clue out there. THEY'RE WRONG! figure it out for yourselves!


All you had to say was that you based it off a bunch of absolutely worthless defensive statistics...

SEALgep
05-18-2004, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by Randar68
All you had to say was that you based it off a bunch of absolutely worthless defensive statistics... It's as worthless as observational data is.

KingXerxes
05-18-2004, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by idseer
i disagree. he gets to his share of balls.
i am so sick of this myth aaron doesn't get to balls. will you concede tori hunter is a great fielder? let's look at something:

over his career tori hunter gets 3.02 chances per game.
over his career aaron rowand gets to 2.96 chances per game

over a 162 game schedule that means tori will average 489 chances ..... aaron - 476.
aaron gets to 13 fewer balls than tori. does that sound like a guy who doesn't get to balls?

while i haven't checked it, i would bet that aaron is way above average getting to his share of balls compared to all the other cf's in the game. and his fldg % is better than average so you can't say he gets chances but doesn't convert.

now if you actually had this dope who goes the wrong way all the time after balls do you actually think he'd be anywhere near average in total chances?

you people listen to a few (or one) in here who drills it in to you that aaron has no clue out there. THEY'RE WRONG! figure it out for yourselves!

While this is an interesting take, I would like to know what the definition of a "chance" is? Is it a "chance" of catching the ball for an out (where you #s would then mean something) or is it simply the "chance" to field a ball (which then renders the analysis meaningless)? You can't compare Torii Hunter tracking a ball down in the gap as being on a statistical par with Rowand fielding a clean single.

Randar68
05-18-2004, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
It's as worthless as observational data is.

*****...

FOC circling the wagons, just like their hero...

idseer
05-18-2004, 12:09 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
While this is an interesting take, I would like to know what the definition of a "chance" is? Is it a "chance" of catching the ball for an out (where you #s would then mean something) or is it simply the "chance" to field a ball (which then renders the analysis meaningless)? You can't compare Torii Hunter tracking a ball down in the gap as being on a statistical par with Rowand fielding a clean single.

if we were talking about a short period these stats wouldn't be worth too much.

a chance is a ball that a play is made on ... either a putout or an error. it's a statistical fact, not someone's observation of whether a player should have been able to get to a ball.
over a long sample you have to grant me that similar cf's should get roughly the same amount of chances. if one is very fast and one is very slow (or goes in circles aimlessly as is suggested here), the fast one should get to more chances. it will show up in the stats. one who is not as fast could still get the same amt of chances if he positions himself better than the fast guy. in any case, if fielders get to approximately the same amount of balls then you can't say one is great and the other one stinks! there are also other factors in being a good fielder like the arm, for instance. being able to double up more runners or getting more assists. in both these cases aaron is above average.

but my original point was to comment about 'getting to balls'.
the facts prove aaron get's to balls as well as anyone.

snide remarks notwithstanding ... aaron is an above average defender in center field.

KingXerxes
05-18-2004, 12:22 PM
Got it.

I looked up Baseball-Reference.com, and they have a stat which they refer to as "Range Factor" on a player's fielding statistics. On this site, Torii Hunter has a career range factor of 2.78 while playing centerfield, while the league average over this period is 2.68.

Aaron Rowand has a centerfield range factor of 2.27 while the corresponding league average for his tenure is 2.76.

This would leave me to believe that Rowand is somewhat lacking out in centerfield.

I'm not a huge backer of statistics for this very reason. One can usually find some sort of statistical calculation in order to make their point.

idseer
05-18-2004, 01:18 PM
edit:Originally posted by KingXerxes
Got it.

I looked up Baseball-Reference.com, and they have a stat which they refer to as "Range Factor" on a player's fielding statistics. On this site, Torii Hunter has a career range factor of 2.78 while playing centerfield, while the league average over this period is 2.68.

Aaron Rowand has a centerfield range factor of 2.27 while the corresponding league average for his tenure is 2.76.

This would leave me to believe that Rowand is somewhat lacking out in centerfield.

I'm not a huge backer of statistics for this very reason. One can usually find some sort of statistical calculation in order to make their point.


that is all very interesting. if your figures were correct you'd have a wonderful point.

HOWEVER ......

as a centerfielder over his career, rowand has a range factor of 3.08!

defensive innings divided by (putouts + assists).

very interested in your reply.


edit: i think i did that backward. it's putouts + assits divided BY innings x 9 which would then equal 2.84 ... still better than hunter's.


2nd edit: the espn site says pououts + assists x9 divided by innings ... which would work out to 2.92 ....still
better that hunter.

Gumshoe
05-18-2004, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by idseer
if we were talking about a short period these stats wouldn't be worth too much.

a chance is a ball that a play is made on ... either a putout or an error. it's a statistical fact, not someone's observation of whether a player should have been able to get to a ball.
over a long sample you have to grant me that similar cf's should get roughly the same amount of chances. if one is very fast and one is very slow (or goes in circles aimlessly as is suggested here), the fast one should get to more chances. it will show up in the stats. one who is not as fast could still get the same amt of chances if he positions himself better than the fast guy. in any case, if fielders get to approximately the same amount of balls then you can't say one is great and the other one stinks! there are also other factors in being a good fielder like the arm, for instance. being able to double up more runners or getting more assists. in both these cases aaron is above average.

but my original point was to comment about 'getting to balls'.
the facts prove aaron get's to balls as well as anyone.

snide remarks notwithstanding ... aaron is an above average defender in center field.


Idseer flat out destroyed you in this very post. Defense is all about getting to balls. As has been said, if Aaron gets to (almost) as many balls, it has to do with two things: either he has good closing on balls or he positions himself better. Either way, both are defensive skills. Over a long set of data, Idseer is absolutely correct-- a good fielder will make a play on MORE balls. It's simple. And as he put, it deals only with errors or putouts, so it's not subjective, or virtually objective (if you argue that there are tons of hits that should have been errors over huge sample sizes you are insane, which is the only criticism).

I dont' remember anyone calling Torii Hunter a bad CF in last year's first home game vs. the twins at the end of the season when he flat out missed a fly to CF over his head. (remember that?) I believe Lohse was pitching. It basically costed the Twins the game.

In any case, Randar, there IS NO REPLY to what Idseer is saying, because you CAN'T say anything that makes sense in rebuttal. So don't bother trying.

Another easily pointed out phenomenon that will be disagreed with because of lack of baseball perception AND stubborness. Lose your pride, you are absolutely wrong on this issue, and all you can say is "I think he takes bad routes and is a bad DEFENSIVE CF."

Crazy

Gumshoe

bobj4400
05-18-2004, 01:38 PM
Originally posted by idseer
he's as good as most cf's.

which?? I want a list.

Better than Crash:

A Jones
K Griffey
C Patterson
K Lofton
R Baldelli/C Crawford
C Beltran
M Cameron
J Pierre
J Edmonds
L Ford/T Hunter
L Matos
V Wells
A Sanchez
S Podsednik
M Kotsay
S Finley

This is a quick list off the top of my head. Remember this is only defensively better, although it isnt hard to be offensively better as well.

idseer
05-18-2004, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by bobj4400
which?? I want a list.



i'm not going to make you a list. all the players you mentioned are your opinions unless YOU can provide ME with proof that they all have a better range factor than 'crash'.

Randar68
05-18-2004, 01:53 PM
Originally posted by idseer
i'm not going to make you a list. all the players you mentioned are your opinions unless YOU can provide ME with proof that they all have a better range factor than 'crash'.

Yes, because RF "defines" a good OF'er...



BLAH!

idseer
05-18-2004, 01:57 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
Yes, because RF "defines" a good OF'er...



BLAH!

is rf the only criteria i used, randar? i've used a bunch of facts to show my point. you've shown NOTHING to support yours.

i think you're perilously close to trolling on this issue.

DaveIsHere
05-18-2004, 02:00 PM
SOMEONE PLEASE CLOSE THIS THREAD IT SUX



:prozac

maurice
05-18-2004, 02:06 PM
- C. Beltran and V. Wells are two of the best all-around players in the game.
- M. Cameron is much better than Rowand.
- T. Hunter is much better (but made a very bad play drifting back on a ball yesterday).
- A. Jones is much better (but made a bad play the other day that cost the Braves their starting 2B).
- K. Griffey is much better (when he actually plays).
- R. Baldelli is better now and potentially much better.
- A. Sanchez, while a relative unknown, has ridiculous range.
- K. Lofton, S. Finley, and J. Edmonds used to be better, but their skills have deteriorated with age. I haven't seen enough of them lately to make a determination, but I suspect that Finley and Edmonds are still better. Lofton's D with the Sox was pretty bad.
- I haven't seen enough of any other player to conclusively determine that they're better.

Randar68
05-18-2004, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by idseer
is rf the only criteria i used, randar? i've used a bunch of facts to show my point. you've shown NOTHING to support yours.

i think you're perilously close to trolling on this issue.

LOL. Yep, that's what I do. I've stated his deficiencies, which have been acknowledged and accepted by almost all of the former FOC, for 9 months, probably several hundred times.

I'm supposed to rehash them any time someone tweaks some crappy and useless defensive statistic to try to conclude that he's good?

*****.

Randar68
05-18-2004, 02:09 PM
Originally posted by DaveIsHere
SOMEONE PLEASE CLOSE THIS THREAD IT SUX



:prozac

I think you were looking for this...


:threadsucks

idseer
05-18-2004, 02:13 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
LOL. Yep, that's what I do. I've stated his deficiencies, which have been acknowledged and accepted by almost all of the former FOC, for 9 months, probably several hundred times.

I'm supposed to rehash them any time someone tweaks some crappy and useless defensive statistic to try to conclude that he's good?

*****.

all you've done for 9 months is say you don't like him, you think he gets bad jumps, etc. you think that by convincing yourself you've convinced everyone.
problem is you have no grounds to stand on.

g M afb!

Randar68
05-18-2004, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by idseer
all you've done for 9 months is say you don't like him, you think he gets bad jumps, etc. you think that by convincing yourself you've convinced everyone.
problem is you have no grounds to stand on.

g M afb!

I've offered more complete and precise criticisms of exact parts of his game. Much more descriptive of the problems then as simply as you state it.

If you have to go back and read it, fine. However, if you don't see the games, shut yer yapper about it, because no statistic like RF is going to convince anyone but Gummy and SEAL.

It's patently obvious IF YOU WATCH THE GAMES. (sorry to sound like bmr31 here, but this is borderline insanity)

idseer
05-18-2004, 02:29 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
I've offered more complete and precise criticisms of exact parts of his game. Much more descriptive of the problems then as simply as you state it.

funny ... that's what you just tried to do to me. suggesting range factor was my only argument. "i've offered more complete and precise" reasons i think aaron is a good fielder. much more descriptive of his ability than as you simply state it.

Originally posted by Randar68
If you have to go back and read it, fine. However, if you don't see the games, shut yer yapper about it, because no statistic like RF is going to convince anyone but Gummy and SEAL.

It's patently obvious IF YOU WATCH THE GAMES. (sorry to sound like bmr31 here, but this is borderline insanity)

yeah, i'm gonna research all your posts to find where you 'proved' aaron sucked.

and i will not shut my yapper either. the great thing about baseball is that it's a statistical game. one need NEVER see a single game to know what it's all about and who was good and who wasn't. you've done the opposite imo. you've IGNORED the defensive facts and rest solely on you supreme judgement about who's good and who isn't. how many players were traded because someone totally misjudged them on how they 'looked'.


BLAH!

Randar68
05-18-2004, 02:30 PM
Originally posted by idseer
funny ... that's what you just tried to do to me. suggesting range factor was my only argument. "i've offered more complete and precise" reasons i think aaron is a good fielder. much more descriptive of his ability than as you simply state it.



yeah, i'm gonna research all your posts to find where you 'proved' aaron sucked.

and i will not shut my yapper either. the great thing about baseball is that it's a statistical game. one need NEVER see a single game to know what it's all about and who was good and who wasn't. you've done the opposite imo. you've IGNORED the defensive facts and rest solely on you supreme judgement about who's good and who isn't. how many players were traded because someone totally misjudged them on how they 'looked'.


BLAH!

:prozac

enjoy

idseer
05-18-2004, 02:32 PM
Originally posted by Randar68


enjoy

yeah ... good comeback.

Frater Perdurabo
05-18-2004, 02:37 PM
To the FOC club:

If Rowand is such a good CF, then why did the Sox trade for Carl Everett last season?

idseer
05-18-2004, 02:39 PM
Originally posted by Frater Perdurabo
To the FOC club:

If Rowand is such a good CF, then why did the Sox trade for Carl Everett last season?

cause rowand has no stick?

SEALgep
05-18-2004, 02:58 PM
Originally posted by Frater Perdurabo
To the FOC club:

If Rowand is such a good CF, then why did the Sox trade for Carl Everett last season? Because Everett has a much better bat and also was a switch hitter. It wasn't for his defensive range in CF if thats what your getting at.

SEALgep
05-18-2004, 03:00 PM
Originally posted by Randar68


It's patently obvious IF YOU WATCH THE GAMES. (sorry to sound like bmr31 here, but this is borderline insanity) Disagree with Randar? That's insane!

KingXerxes
05-18-2004, 04:45 PM
Originally posted by idseer
edit:


that is all very interesting. if your figures were correct you'd have a wonderful point.

HOWEVER ......

as a centerfielder over his career, rowand has a range factor of 3.08!

defensive innings divided by (putouts + assists).

very interested in your reply.


edit: i think i did that backward. it's putouts + assits divided BY innings x 9 which would then equal 2.84 ... still better than hunter's.


2nd edit: the espn site says pououts + assists x9 divided by innings ... which would work out to 2.92 ....still
better that hunter.

I went back and checked baseball-reference.com, and it shows Rowand to have a sub-par range factor as a centerfielder. Are you sure that you're not including stats from other positions?

voodoochile
05-18-2004, 04:54 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
I went back and checked baseball-reference.com, and it shows Rowand to have a sub-par range factor as a centerfielder. Are you sure that you're not including stats from other positions?

That's because the overall totals were generated using games played while the individual seasons were genrerated using innings played. I'm not a fan of Aaron Rowand in CF, but it is more a case of badly generated stats than over all performance.

Check the individual seasons at your site, all of them have RF well above that 2.27 figure. It probably has to do with him playing an inning here and an inning there as defensive substitute which won't hurt him when calculated by innings played, but will crush his average when calculated by games.

idseer
05-18-2004, 05:09 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
I went back and checked baseball-reference.com, and it shows Rowand to have a sub-par range factor as a centerfielder. Are you sure that you're not including stats from other positions?

i'm using espn's numbers at centerfield only.

they show 1437 innings, 454 po's, 13 a's

454+13=467x9=4203 divided by 1437 = 2.92

i haven't checked elsewhere for his stats so if espn is wrong then so am i. if not, rowand should have just taken a big leap in your opinion.

Mickster
05-18-2004, 05:16 PM
Originally posted by idseer
i'm using espn's numbers at centerfield only.

they show 1437 innings, 454 po's, 13 a's

454+13=467x9=4203 divided by 1437 = 2.92

i haven't checked elsewhere for his stats so if espn is wrong then so am i. if not, rowand should have just taken a big leap in your opinion.

He still sucks!

Randar68
05-18-2004, 05:39 PM
Originally posted by idseer
i'm using espn's numbers at centerfield only.

they show 1437 innings, 454 po's, 13 a's

454+13=467x9=4203 divided by 1437 = 2.92

i haven't checked elsewhere for his stats so if espn is wrong then so am i. if not, rowand should have just taken a big leap in your opinion.

Because RF will certainly change an opinion formed by watching him circle the wagons out in CF.

If anything, it proves how worthless most defensive statistics are.

idseer
05-18-2004, 05:52 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
Because RF will certainly change an opinion formed by watching him circle the wagons out in CF.

If anything, it proves how worthless most defensive statistics are.

you're becoming a bore randar. i believe our conversation was at an end. i was answering a question by someone else. do you mind?

kevingrt
05-18-2004, 05:54 PM
I believe he is a good defender in CF, but he doesn't deserve a starting position because he can't hit. He can field okay, yeah he has more mind lapses then most and boots his fair share of balls but he gets good jumps and is nice and quick. However his hittin has been so boring that he doesn' deserve to start.

Randar68
05-18-2004, 09:46 PM
Originally posted by idseer
you're becoming a bore randar. i believe our conversation was at an end. i was answering a question by someone else. do you mind?

LOL. Sorry, it was a pre-emptive strike. Every convo I have with anyone around here about anything, SEAL and joecrede can't help but pot-shot from afar. If you are wanting to join those 2, help yourself, because i can and will be merciless.

OEO Magglio
05-18-2004, 09:53 PM
Originally posted by kevingrt
I believe he is a good defender in CF, but he doesn't deserve a starting position because he can't hit. He can field okay, yeah he has more mind lapses then most and boots his fair share of balls but he gets good jumps and is nice and quick. However his hittin has been so boring that he doesn' deserve to start.
I disagree about his jumps, he takes the absolute worst routes to balls and a lot of times he'll break the wrong way causing him to get a worse jump.

SEALgep
05-18-2004, 09:58 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
LOL. Sorry, it was a pre-emptive strike. Every convo I have with anyone around here about anything, SEAL and joecrede can't help but pot-shot from afar. If you are wanting to join those 2, help yourself, because i can and will be merciless. Pot-shot from afar? Anything you wish to discuss, I'm right here. As long as you can behave respectfully of course.

joecrede
05-19-2004, 09:40 AM
Originally posted by Randar68
LOL. Sorry, it was a pre-emptive strike. Every convo I have with anyone around here about anything, SEAL and joecrede can't help but pot-shot from afar. If you are wanting to join those 2, help yourself, because i can and will be merciless.

Merciless? I thought we were just discussing baseball. I don't understand your intent to take it to another level.

Thoughts on Harris' latest misadventure in center last night?

idseer
05-19-2004, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by joecrede
Merciless? I thought we were just discussing baseball. I don't understand your intent to take it to another level.



kinda tells you something, doesn't it?

DaveIsHere
05-19-2004, 11:23 AM
CAN WE PLEASE CLOSE THIS DAMN THREAD............................................ ..WE HAVE BETTER THING TO TALK ABOUT THEN ROWAND SHEESH

idseer
05-19-2004, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by DaveIsHere
CAN WE PLEASE CLOSE THIS DAMN THREAD............................................ ..WE HAVE BETTER THING TO TALK ABOUT THEN ROWAND SHEESH

what? it bothers you that it's here?
solution ... go read a comic book and don't open this thread anymore.

A. Cavatica
05-19-2004, 08:15 PM
Originally posted by Frater Perdurabo
To the FOC club:

If Rowand is such a good CF, then why did the Sox trade for Carl Everett last season?

To put fannies in the seats. It was a stupid move and the Sox would've been better off sticking with Rowand.

voodoochile
05-19-2004, 08:27 PM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
To put fannies in the seats. It was a stupid move and the Sox would've been better off sticking with Rowand.

*****!

Based on what exactly? Rowand's amazing defense? The stunning offense he provides?

:whoflungpoo