PDA

View Full Version : Captain Chaos is at it again


Pages : [1] 2

gosox41
06-03-2004, 07:24 PM
Let's take a journey into one of the most empty spaces I can think of: KW's mind.

So Magglio is going on the DL and will most likely miss 7 weeks. Now let's analyze this some. Last I checked Magglio played RF. I may not be a smart man, but it would seem logical to me that the Sox would do well to replace Ordonez's bat with an OF to avoid having to watch the offensive juggernaut of Lee, Rowand and Perez in the OF.

So what does the genius KW do? He brings up a third catcher in Jamie Burke. Burke is hitting .224 in AAA with a whopping 2 HR's. Meanwhile the Sox have two top prospects in AAA that are made to play RF: Reed and Borchard. Reed is hitting .293 with 11 SB and 2 homers (I don't have OPS info) but I'm betting Reed has a higher OPS then Burke. Borchard is hitting .275 with 8 home runs. Both are considered part of the Sox future and I can make an argument to call up either one of them.

Now, let's break this move and Capt. Chaos' logic down another level. Both Borchard and Lee are considered top prospects. Capt. Chaos speaks highly of these guys. Capt. Chaos has said that he does not want to trade them to get a good starting pitcher, something this team desperately needs. Fine. I can understand now wanting to trade top prospects that you're high on. But why not bring one of them up when there's an injury to an OFer on the team? Does Capt. Chaos know something about them not being as good? Does Capt. Chaos really intend on trading one or both of them? Does Capt. Chaos wish to not give a hard working minor leaguer a true shot at 2 months with the big club? Does Capt. Chaos not think they're ready and wishes to develop them some more?

So let's break this down even further. KW has not hesitated to call up 2 minor league pitchers to fill in the 5th starters spot only to send them right back down after not winning. He even put Diaz in very unfair circumstances. After losing his first start, the Sox decide to pitch Diaz on 3 days rest after he's been pitching in a 5 man rotation all year in the minors. When he goes out and gets hit in that start he is sent on the Charlotte Shuttle. Up comes Rauch. He had his cup of coffee and in the process pissed everyone off and was sent back down. But don't you think he would have been sent back down after that start anyways? What was different from Diaz and Rauchs 3 starts this year? Not very much.

So the logic of Capt. Chaos is to bring up 2 young touted pitchers for a limited tour risking their development and confidence because Capt. Chaos has not found 5 adequate starters since he's been with the team.

But take away one of the Sox top 2 hitters for 7 weeks and up comes a catcher hitting .224 in AAA when there are 2 top prospects that play Magglio's position. Do you think Diaz would have been better off if given a few weeks to settle in as a starter instead of getting 2 starts: his ML debut and a start on 3 days rest?

Can someone explain Capt. Chaos and his logic? Why the difference in handling the starting pitching and the offense? Is Capt. Chaos in that much over his head? Is this yet another reason why I think Capt. Chaos is a lousy GM.

But hey, at least teh Sox have the ever importatnt 3rd catcher coming off the bench just in case the first two happen to get hurt in the same game. But Burke does give Ozzie an option off the bench. It's vital to have a .220 AAA hitter to come up and pinch hit with the game on the line.


Bob

TornLabrum
06-03-2004, 07:31 PM
That's Professor Chaos.

MRKARNO
06-03-2004, 07:33 PM
I think the logic in not bringing them up would be if he were trying to hammer out a deal that possibly included one of them. Also, Borchard is hurting himself. I dont know why they wouldnt give Reed a call unless that Sheets trade rumor talk is for real or KW has some other reasons that we just dont know about.

But overall KW had done a great job this year and we wouldnt even be where we are if it werent for him letting Harris start, letting Schoeneweis become a starter again, signing Shingo Takatsu and trading Miles for Uribe.

BigEdWalsh
06-03-2004, 07:43 PM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
I think the logic in not bringing them up would be if he were trying to hammer out a deal that possibly included one of them. Also, Borchard is hurting himself. I dont know why they wouldnt give Reed a call unless that Sheets trade rumor talk is for real or KW has some other reasons that we just dont know about.

But overall KW had done a great job this year and we wouldnt even be where we are if it werent for him letting Harris start, letting Schoeneweis become a starter again, signing Shingo Takatsu and trading Miles for Uribe.

I feel pretty much the same way. I think KW has made some great moves. But, he's made some that were pretty bad too. As far as bringing up Burke to replace Ordonez? Huh?! I totally don't get this one! I can only think that something could happen any day involving Reed/Borchard for ???. If not, then bringing up Burke is a mighty stupid move. :?:

gosox41
06-03-2004, 07:48 PM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
I think the logic in not bringing them up would be if he were trying to hammer out a deal that possibly included one of them. Also, Borchard is hurting himself. I dont know why they wouldnt give Reed a call unless that Sheets trade rumor talk is for real or KW has some other reasons that we just dont know about.

But overall KW had done a great job this year and we wouldnt even be where we are if it werent for him letting Harris start, letting Schoeneweis become a starter again, signing Shingo Takatsu and trading Miles for Uribe.

I know GM's like to say things in the papers that may mean the oppsite of what they're really thinking, but remember:

1. KW is the guy who lost his tempe and told any teams interested in Rauch to call him because he wants to trade him. Talk about losing whatever trade value a player had. This makes me question his intelligence.

2. Is KW going to trade both Borchard and Reed? Surely one of them can come up. Or isn't there anyone else in the minors that is hitting higher then .224 who can fill the role of pinch hitter?


Bob

tromcoe
06-03-2004, 07:48 PM
It has not even been made official yet that Burke will be called up. The Score's George H. reported after a conversation with KW this afternoon that Borchard was the one that he wanted to see up here, and that the indications were that he wanted him to stay up here that 'Joe has turned a corner' and would be the future to the Whitesox OF. Mag's may be gone as soon as he is better.

gosox41
06-03-2004, 07:48 PM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
That's Professor Chaos.

My apologies. :D:

At least I got the important part right: Chaos


Bob

gosox41
06-03-2004, 07:50 PM
Originally posted by tromcoe
It has not even been made official yet that Burke will be called up. The Score's George H. reported after a conversation with KW this afternoon that Borchard was the one that he wanted to see up here, and that the indications were that he wanted him to stay up here that 'Joe has turned a corner' and would be the future to the Whitesox OF. Mag's may be gone as soon as he is better.

All the articles I've seen as well as postings here indicate it's Burke. The fact that he is even being considered an option is a joke.

If Olivo or Alomar get hurt, bring up Burke until you can find a real catcher.

If your All Star RFer gets hurt, don't bring up a .224 hitting catcher.



Bob

MRKARNO
06-03-2004, 07:53 PM
Originally posted by gosox41

2. Is KW going to trade both Borchard and Reed? Surely one of them can come up. Or isn't there anyone else in the minors that is hitting higher then .224 who can fill the role of pinch hitter?


No he's not but if he's in seperate discussions with some trades involving Reed and others involving Borchard then he needs to keep both down. Maybe he feels they have more value if they're not being exposed by major league pitchers. Better to not take the risk.

SEALgep
06-03-2004, 07:55 PM
Originally posted by BigEdWalsh
I feel pretty much the same way. I think KW has made some great moves. But, he's made some that were pretty bad too. As far as bringing up Burke to replace Ordonez? Huh?! I totally don't get this one! I can only think that something could happen any day involving Reed/Borchard for ???. If not, then bringing up Burke is a mighty stupid move. :?: You have to consider other things besides just who is better. There are options involved, and maybe wasting one on one of these guys isn't worth it for a few week stint. Also, we have plenty of people to play the outfield, but not many people who can play the infield. Bringing up Burke provides an alternative to a struggling Crede in order to help get his mindset right (although I think Oakland actually helped him a little), and also be a third catcher. Why do we need a third catcher, one Ozzie likes that particular option, and two it allows you to pinch hit for Alomar or Olivo with a left hander off the bench. I think giving Gload more playing time and have him in right gives this team an advantage. He will get more at bats and be better preapred when we need him throughout the season IMO. He can hold his own down there. If it were a season ending injury to Maggs, that's another story, but as it is now, we'll be fine with bringing up Burke IMO. Although it was on another thread that had KW saying Borchard is an option, so let's cut him some slack. He's pondering what is best overall for this team, and it's not as if he weren't consulting the coaches and seeing who they want. For all we know Ozzie said he wants Gload in right and preferred Burke be the call up because he didn't want to be forced to play a prospect everyday (which would pretty much be required if we went that route, especially if you wanted the move to be effective). Actually that is probably what is happening.

MRKARNO
06-03-2004, 08:00 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep


I totally agree. Anyone who thinks Burke is going to start more than maybe seven games in the seven weeks is crazy. Ozzie want to play Gload. Gload is playing very well lately. Why use an option on Reed or Borchard when you dont need it? Plus Burke will be likely be gone before June 12th anyways

gosox41
06-03-2004, 08:05 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
You have to consider other things besides just who is better. There are options involved, and maybe wasting one on one of these guys isn't worth it for a few week stint. Also, we have plenty of people to play the outfield, but not many people who can play the infield. Bringing up Burke provides an alternative to a struggling Crede in order to help get his mindset right (although I think Oakland actually helped him a little), and also be a third catcher. Why do we need a third catcher, one Ozzie likes that particular option, and two it allows you to pinch hit for Alomar or Olivo with a left hander off the bench. I think giving Gload more playing time and have him in right gives this team an advantage. He will get more at bats and be better preapred when we need him throughout the season IMO. He can hold his own down there. If it were a season ending injury to Maggs, that's another story, but as it is now, we'll be fine with bringing up Burke IMO. Although it was on another thread that had KW saying Borchard is an option, so let's cut him some slack. He's pondering what is best overall for this team, and it's not as if he weren't consulting the coaches and seeing who they want. For all we know Ozzie said he wants Gload in right and preferred Burke be the call up because he didn't want to be forced to play a prospect everyday (which would pretty much be required if we went that route, especially if you wanted the move to be effective). Actually that is probably what is happening.


If you're not going to play productive minor league players and are going to play unproductive minor league players, why not trade the productive guys?

Keep in mind I don't want to, but this is KW's logic not mine. To have top talent that is succeeding in AAA and not bring them up for whatcan be almost 2 months.

My guess is Reed has a higher ceiling then Gload and he bats LH and he steals more bases. Borchard also has a higher ceiling then Gload and he can be a switch hitter.

Olivo has been hitting well this year and should not be pinch hit for too often. But if you are going to pinch hit for Alomar (or occasionally Olivo) then Gload can be the lefty off the bench while Reed/ Borchard start.

How many times this year have the Sox really lost a game because Ozzie was limited in what he can do with his bench because he didn't have another lousy hitter sitting on it. Now look at it the other way. How many times this year did Ozzie pinch hit a RH hitter to have it work out, but now will be forced to rely on a guy who can't hit in the minors?


Bob

Saracen
06-03-2004, 08:10 PM
So you want to use up options on your best prospects to let them ride pine in the majors eh?

jabrch
06-03-2004, 08:10 PM
Bob,

Is it possible that this moron that you speak of has other plans in mind that even you don't know about? Is it possible that Burke is here temporarily and will be sent down shortly? Have you looked at our 40 man roster? Is it possible that the player he wants to call up isn't on it and that Burke is here temporarily until he can free up a spot for that player? Is it possible that he wants to wait past the spring service date beginning before calling someone up? Is it possible he is counting player options? Is it possible he has trades in the works? Is it possible that KW is doing something good that you haven't thought about?

No - probably not - KW is just an idiot. Well, he is the idiot who got us Loaiza, Schoe, Uribe, Harris, etc. and I think there is probably a reason he called up Burke other than to start in RF.

OEO Magglio
06-03-2004, 08:18 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
Let's take a journey into one of the most empty spaces I can think of: KW's mind.

So Magglio is going on the DL and will most likely miss 7 weeks. Now let's analyze this some. Last I checked Magglio played RF. I may not be a smart man, but it would seem logical to me that the Sox would do well to replace Ordonez's bat with an OF to avoid having to watch the offensive juggernaut of Lee, Rowand and Perez in the OF.

So what does the genius KW do? He brings up a third catcher in Jamie Burke. Burke is hitting .224 in AAA with a whopping 2 HR's. Meanwhile the Sox have two top prospects in AAA that are made to play RF: Reed and Borchard. Reed is hitting .293 with 11 SB and 2 homers (I don't have OPS info) but I'm betting Reed has a higher OPS then Burke. Borchard is hitting .275 with 8 home runs. Both are considered part of the Sox future and I can make an argument to call up either one of them.

Now, let's break this move and Capt. Chaos' logic down another level. Both Borchard and Lee are considered top prospects. Capt. Chaos speaks highly of these guys. Capt. Chaos has said that he does not want to trade them to get a good starting pitcher, something this team desperately needs. Fine. I can understand now wanting to trade top prospects that you're high on. But why not bring one of them up when there's an injury to an OFer on the team? Does Capt. Chaos know something about them not being as good? Does Capt. Chaos really intend on trading one or both of them? Does Capt. Chaos wish to not give a hard working minor leaguer a true shot at 2 months with the big club? Does Capt. Chaos not think they're ready and wishes to develop them some more?

So let's break this down even further. KW has not hesitated to call up 2 minor league pitchers to fill in the 5th starters spot only to send them right back down after not winning. He even put Diaz in very unfair circumstances. After losing his first start, the Sox decide to pitch Diaz on 3 days rest after he's been pitching in a 5 man rotation all year in the minors. When he goes out and gets hit in that start he is sent on the Charlotte Shuttle. Up comes Rauch. He had his cup of coffee and in the process pissed everyone off and was sent back down. But don't you think he would have been sent back down after that start anyways? What was different from Diaz and Rauchs 3 starts this year? Not very much.

So the logic of Capt. Chaos is to bring up 2 young touted pitchers for a limited tour risking their development and confidence because Capt. Chaos has not found 5 adequate starters since he's been with the team.

But take away one of the Sox top 2 hitters for 7 weeks and up comes a catcher hitting .224 in AAA when there are 2 top prospects that play Magglio's position. Do you think Diaz would have been better off if given a few weeks to settle in as a starter instead of getting 2 starts: his ML debut and a start on 3 days rest?

Can someone explain Capt. Chaos and his logic? Why the difference in handling the starting pitching and the offense? Is Capt. Chaos in that much over his head? Is this yet another reason why I think Capt. Chaos is a lousy GM.

But hey, at least teh Sox have the ever importatnt 3rd catcher coming off the bench just in case the first two happen to get hurt in the same game. But Burke does give Ozzie an option off the bench. It's vital to have a .220 AAA hitter to come up and pinch hit with the game on the line.


Bob
Way to bash kw about absolutely nothing.

duke of dorwood
06-03-2004, 08:37 PM
This organization is beyond any explanation

:KW

But I promised Jamie he'd be back

duke of dorwood
06-03-2004, 08:41 PM
Its bad enough he brings up a catcher that cant hit, we need left handed power and this is the chance to work it into the line-up.

Ever wonder why prospects dont blossom in this organization often?

:KW

Is Why

duke of dorwood
06-03-2004, 08:42 PM
And so far he has just been lucky with the Uribe acquisition

SEALgep
06-03-2004, 08:46 PM
Originally posted by duke of dorwood
And so far he has just been lucky with the Uribe acquisition Lucky when he does well, stupid when he does bad? Glad I didn't have you as a teacher.

SEALgep
06-03-2004, 08:50 PM
Originally posted by duke of dorwood
Its bad enough he brings up a catcher that cant hit, we need left handed power and this is the chance to work it into the line-up.

Ever wonder why prospects dont blossom in this organization often?

:KW

Is Why So you think it is proper development bringing in a top prospect (using an option) for a few weeks, and when he is probably just starting to get adjusted, we bring back Maggs and send him down?

OEO Magglio
06-03-2004, 08:51 PM
Originally posted by duke of dorwood
And so far he has just been lucky with the Uribe acquisition
Give me a break. He's lucky with uribe, shoney, loaiza, marte. But koch comes here and loses his velocity and that's just his fault. It's unbelievable everything is always kenny's fault. If kenny goes out and acquires garcia is he lucky then also?

SEALgep
06-03-2004, 08:55 PM
Originally posted by OEO Magglio
Give me a break. He's lucky with uribe, shoney, loaiza, marte. But koch comes here and loses his velocity and that's just his fault. It's unbelievable everything is always kenny's fault. If kenny goes out and acquires garcia is he lucky then also? No, technically he'll not only be unlucky, he'll be stupid because Garcia will stub his toe and be out for the season upon KW acquring him, thus making him the stupidest man alive. :D:

maurice
06-03-2004, 09:21 PM
Yeah, only an idiot would think twice before promoting a guy who is too injured to play and a guy who is struggling with AAA pitchers right now.

While you're looking up minor league stats, you might want to note that Borchard was pulled from a game on 5/28 and hasn't played since. You also might note that Reed has been in a hitting slump recently. For example, since 5/28, he has gone 3-for-14 (.214 AVE). It appears that the organization has a sound policy against promoting prospects who are injured or slumping.

If Maggs is out for a while and either Borchard or Reed go back to being healthy and productive, I'm sure you'll see one of them roaming RF. In the meanwhile, Burke will be the 25th man. Whoodeefreakingdoo.

A. Cavatica
06-03-2004, 09:25 PM
Maybe he's showcasing Burke to the Brewers, Indians, & Mariners.

Seriously, here are ten people I would've called up before Burke.

1) Reed (duh!)
2) Borchard (give KW a mulligan here, since Joe's hurt)
3) Bryant Nelson (versatile, switch hitter, red hot, hungry)
4) Mike Spidale (best CF in high minors, .400 OBP)
5) Diaz (since Burke won't play much, might as well let Diaz sit around and get acclimated instead)
6) Arnie Munoz (ditto)
7) Jeff Bajenaru (Birmingham closer, 34 Ks in 22.2 IP)
8) Gary Majewski (Charlotte closer)
9) Ryan Hankins (similar numbers to Burke, but 3B/C is more useful right now than C/3B)
10) Scott Bikowski (Birmingham RF, lefty)

SEALgep
06-03-2004, 09:31 PM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
Maybe he's showcasing Burke to the Brewers, Indians, & Mariners.

Seriously, here are ten people I would've called up before Burke.

1) Reed (duh!)
2) Borchard (give KW a mulligan here, since Joe's hurt)
3) Bryant Nelson (versatile, switch hitter, red hot, hungry)
4) Mike Spidale (best CF in high minors, .400 OBP)
5) Diaz (since Burke won't play much, might as well let Diaz sit around and get acclimated instead)
6) Arnie Munoz (ditto)
7) Jeff Bajenaru (Birmingham closer, 34 Ks in 22.2 IP)
8) Gary Majewski (Charlotte closer)
9) Ryan Hankins (similar numbers to Burke, but 3B/C is more useful right now than C/3B)
10) Scott Bikowski (Birmingham RF, lefty) Again, you're not taking the options into consideration. Why waste them on young talent when it is only a temporary need?

A. Cavatica
06-03-2004, 09:37 PM
Originally posted by maurice
You also might note that Reed has been in a hitting slump recently. For example, since 5/28, he has gone 3-for-14 (.214 AVE).

That's a really stupid post.

For starters, 3-for-14 is not a slump, it's normal variation.

Second, you're just wrong. You left out yesterday's game, which makes him 5-for-18 (.278) since 5/28.

Third, in those 5 games he had 2 homers, 2 doubles, scored 6 runs and drove in 4.

6/2 4 3 2 0 (2 doubles, walk)
6/1 3 0 0 1 (sac fly)
6/1 4 0 0 0
5/31 no game
5/30 no game
5/29 3 1 1 2 (homer, walk)
5/28 4 2 2 1 (homer)

His season OBP is something like .373, so maybe he is actually slumping (since his BATTING AVERAGE last season was .373)...but even slumping he'd be the best lefthanded hitter on the Sox.

A. Cavatica
06-03-2004, 09:40 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Again, you're not taking the options into consideration. Why waste them on young talent when it is only a temporary need?

Who says it's a temporary need? He's ready. By the time Maggs comes back, Reed may well have made Rowand or Perez expendable (and yes, I still like Rowand, but I've never maintained he should be the full-time starting CF unless the option was Everett).

RKMeibalane
06-03-2004, 09:44 PM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
That's a really stupid post.

For starters, 3-for-14 is not a slump, it's normal variation.

Second, you're just wrong. You left out yesterday's game, which makes him 5-for-18 (.278) since 5/28.

Third, in those 5 games he had 2 homers, 2 doubles, scored 6 runs and drove in 4.

6/2 4 3 2 0 (2 doubles, walk)
6/1 3 0 0 1 (sac fly)
6/1 4 0 0 0
5/31 no game
5/30 no game
5/29 3 1 1 2 (homer, walk)
5/28 4 2 2 1 (homer)

His season OBP is something like .373, so maybe he is actually slumping (since his BATTING AVERAGE last season was .373)...but even slumping he'd be the best lefthanded hitter on the Sox.

I think Reed has fallen victim to Frank Thomas syndrome. By that I mean that he performed so well in the past that his current level of play (while still excellent) is not acceptable to certain people. I wish people would just leave Jeremy alone and let him hit. I agree that he would be a much better callup than Burke, and he would easily be the best left-handed hitter on the Sox roster. Having said that, I also think Reed needs more time at Triple A. A September callup makes more sense for him.

Borchard is the man the Sox should call up. He is sidelined with a hanstring injury, and it may be that Williams is just waiting for Borchard to heal before he promotes him. If, however, Borchard isn't called up, then there may be reason to be upset with KW.

Burke must be one of those "grinders" he's always talking about.

gosox41
06-03-2004, 09:55 PM
Originally posted by Saracen
So you want to use up options on your best prospects to let them ride pine in the majors eh?


In a year or two Borchard can be a minor league free agent if he's not called up.

Also, I heard that a set number of call ups is a myth and a player can be shuttled back and forth as many times during their first 2-3 seasons in the majors. Can anyone confirm this,



Bob

gosox41
06-03-2004, 10:01 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
Bob,

Is it possible that this moron that you speak of has other plans in mind that even you don't know about? Is it possible that Burke is here temporarily and will be sent down shortly? Have you looked at our 40 man roster? Is it possible that the player he wants to call up isn't on it and that Burke is here temporarily until he can free up a spot for that player? Is it possible that he wants to wait past the spring service date beginning before calling someone up? Is it possible he is counting player options? Is it possible he has trades in the works? Is it possible that KW is doing something good that you haven't thought about?

No - probably not - KW is just an idiot. Well, he is the idiot who got us Loaiza, Schoe, Uribe, Harris, etc. and I think there is probably a reason he called up Burke other than to start in RF.

Anything is possible with KW and that's what scares me.

And KW is an idiot. Loaiza was a lucky find. No one expected him to win 20 games after being a 31 year old pitcher with a nothing career. It's great he turned things around, but come on. You didn't know he was that good.

Buit if you think KW has that special ability to sign veteran free agents off the scrap heep and turn them into 20 game winners, I'll make a wager with you. Every veteran pitcher that KW invited to camp with with a minor league contract or a guaranteed contract that pays them less then $1 mill (since no one wanted them) we'll bet whether that pitcher will win 20 games. We'll do, something small like $20 per veteran pitcher. And when it's all said and done, I'll win more money then you just because you throw enough **** against the wall and once in awhile something sticks. The rest is a big stinking mess.

Uribe-I wouldn't be quick to judge him after 50 games and call him a great player. It was a good trade to trade a career minor leaguer for someone who can actually play SS, but I'll bet Uribe doesn't hit .330 for the season.

Schoeneweis-Same as above. Let's see him do it all year,

Now, shoud we talk about KW's moves that have cost us a chance at the playoffs?


Bob

gosox41
06-03-2004, 10:04 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
So you think it is proper development bringing in a top prospect (using an option) for a few weeks, and when he is probably just starting to get adjusted, we bring back Maggs and send him down?

No but I do think it's a good idea to bring up a guy like Reed to experience what life is like in the big leagues and use it as a motivator. And who said he has to go down when Magglio comes back. Some here (including me) thinks he can help this team win now. Gload is unproven and Reed has a higher ceiling. And last I checked Rowand wasn't hitting the cover off the ball to make me think CF is now a gaping a whole for this team. Of course, Reed can come up and hit .300 and Rowand/Perez can hit like .275 or so and the Sox can trade Lee for a quality starting pitcher. But we'll never know because KW wants .220+ hitting catchers.



Bob

gosox41
06-03-2004, 10:06 PM
Originally posted by maurice
Yeah, only an idiot would think twice before promoting a guy who is too injured to play and a guy who is struggling with AAA pitchers right now.

While you're looking up minor league stats, you might want to note that Borchard was pulled from a game on 5/28 and hasn't played since. You also might note that Reed has been in a hitting slump recently. For example, since 5/28, he has gone 3-for-14 (.214 AVE). It appears that the organization has a sound policy against promoting prospects who are injured or slumping.

If Maggs is out for a while and either Borchard or Reed go back to being healthy and productive, I'm sure you'll see one of them roaming RF. In the meanwhile, Burke will be the 25th man. Whoodeefreakingdoo.

So by your logic if Reed were a .220 hitter in the minors his whole career and was currently hitting .240 he would be on a hot streak and would definitely be called up.

Your argument doesn't explain why a .220 hitting catcher is getting called up. Is this a career year for Burke????


Bob

rahulsekhar
06-03-2004, 10:06 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
In a year or two Borchard can be a minor league free agent if he's not called up.

Also, I heard that a set number of call ups is a myth and a player can be shuttled back and forth as many times during their first 2-3 seasons in the majors. Can anyone confirm this,



Bob

joe's hurt. quite likely that he's the guy but they dont want to waste an option on Reed until joe's healthy. Or they just don't want Jeremy called up for a week then sent down for Joe. Or they could be waiting to see how long they'll need someone (i.e. when's Maggs due back).

But no - the most logical thing is that KW's an idiot.....no bias there, right?

SEALgep
06-03-2004, 10:07 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
Anything is possible with KW and that's what scares me.

And KW is an idiot. Loaiza was a lucky find. No one expected him to win 20 games after being a 31 year old pitcher with a nothing career. It's great he turned things around, but come on. You didn't know he was that good.

Buit if you think KW has that special ability to sign veteran free agents off the scrap heep and turn them into 20 game winners, I'll make a wager with you. Every veteran pitcher that KW invited to camp with with a minor league contract or a guaranteed contract that pays them less then $1 mill (since no one wanted them) we'll bet whether that pitcher will win 20 games. We'll do, something small like $20 per veteran pitcher. And when it's all said and done, I'll win more money then you just because you throw enough **** against the wall and once in awhile something sticks. The rest is a big stinking mess.

Uribe-I wouldn't be quick to judge him after 50 games and call him a great player. It was a good trade to trade a career minor leaguer for someone who can actually play SS, but I'll bet Uribe doesn't hit .330 for the season.

Schoeneweis-Same as above. Let's see him do it all year,

Now, shoud we talk about KW's moves that have cost us a chance at the playoffs?


Bob So he gets no credit for moves he predicted would be good, like the Loaiza signing, and Schoney for that matter? He's just lucky? Well if he's lucky all those times, including the players like Uribe (who was considered to be a very good prospect by many, but fell short of expectations in Colorado) then I just assume keep him as our GM because he's got luck on his side.

gosox41
06-03-2004, 10:09 PM
Originally posted by maurice
Yeah, only an idiot would think twice before promoting a guy who is too injured to play and a guy who is struggling with AAA pitchers right now.

While you're looking up minor league stats, you might want to note that Borchard was pulled from a game on 5/28 and hasn't played since. You also might note that Reed has been in a hitting slump recently. For example, since 5/28, he has gone 3-for-14 (.214 AVE). It appears that the organization has a sound policy against promoting prospects who are injured or slumping.

If Maggs is out for a while and either Borchard or Reed go back to being healthy and productive, I'm sure you'll see one of them roaming RF. In the meanwhile, Burke will be the 25th man. Whoodeefreakingdoo.

One more thing, what's the organizations policy on bringing up starting pitchers and giving then a whopping 2 starts before determining that they're not good enough? Nice philosophy there.

Last, Burke may be the 25ht guy, but when you see him pinch hitting let and being an easy out in a close game you may change your tune.


Bob

gosox41
06-03-2004, 10:11 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
joe's hurt. quite likely that he's the guy but they dont want to waste an option on Reed until joe's healthy. Or they just don't want Jeremy called up for a week then sent down for Joe. Or they could be waiting to see how long they'll need someone (i.e. when's Maggs due back).

But no - the most logical thing is that KW's an idiot.....no bias there, right?

I've given KW almost 4 years. Overall he's been a disappointment.



Bob

OEO Magglio
06-03-2004, 10:11 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
but when you see him pinch hitting let and being an easy out in a close game you may change your tune.


Bob
Just like dransfeldt against the drays?

SEALgep
06-03-2004, 10:12 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
No but I do think it's a good idea to bring up a guy like Reed to experience what life is like in the big leagues and use it as a motivator. And who said he has to go down when Magglio comes back. Some here (including me) thinks he can help this team win now. Gload is unproven and Reed has a higher ceiling. And last I checked Rowand wasn't hitting the cover off the ball to make me think CF is now a gaping a whole for this team. Of course, Reed can come up and hit .300 and Rowand/Perez can hit like .275 or so and the Sox can trade Lee for a quality starting pitcher. But we'll never know because KW wants .220+ hitting catchers.



Bob So far Gload is more proven than Reed. I like Reed, but maybe he isn't ready to take over our CF spot, high ceiling or not. And experiencing life in the big leagues only to send him down isn't necessarily a motivator. He may struggle up here, only to not be given a chance to right himself before being sent down. We can't afford to risk his confidence or our chances of winning by experimenting in the middle of us trying to win the pennant. Ozzie has said that he doesn't want to be forced into playing a prospect everyday, and he seems to know what he's doing IMO.

SEALgep
06-03-2004, 10:14 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
So by your logic if Reed were a .220 hitter in the minors his whole career and was currently hitting .240 he would be on a hot streak and would definitely be called up.

Your argument doesn't explain why a .220 hitting catcher is getting called up. Is this a career year for Burke????


Bob It's been explained plenty, but you choose to ignore the reasoning because you don't like it. It gives us options for pinch hitting, doesn't take an option away from our young talent, and allows us another backup infielder/catcher when we have a surplus of outfielders.

SEALgep
06-03-2004, 10:15 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
One more thing, what's the organizations policy on bringing up starting pitchers and giving then a whopping 2 starts before determining that they're not good enough? Nice philosophy there.

Last, Burke may be the 25ht guy, but when you see him pinch hitting let and being an easy out in a close game you may change your tune.


Bob Who says he'll be the one pinch hitting? A left hander can pinch hit for Crede or one of the cathcers and Burke can take over defensively for them.

jlh0023
06-03-2004, 10:16 PM
gload will play rf, so we still have a fourth outfielder, everything will be ok....it may not be an ideal situation, but you don't have to get on KW's ass every time he does something, you guys don't give him enough credit
plus, reeds having wrist trouble, and their are plenty of reasons not to bring him or borchard up....IMO its a good move avoiding those two

MRKARNO
06-03-2004, 10:18 PM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
Who says it's a temporary need? He's ready. By the time Maggs comes back, Reed may well have made Rowand or Perez expendable (and yes, I still like Rowand, but I've never maintained he should be the full-time starting CF unless the option was Everett).

Because if we're bringing up Reed, it's to be a starter for the rest of the year. You cant start Reed if you're starting Crede, Harris, Uribe and Valentin, which is what we should be doing at this point.

gosox41
06-03-2004, 10:22 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Who says he'll be the one pinch hitting? A left hander can pinch hit for Crede or one of the cathcers and Burke can take over defensively for them.

You may be right. But Ozzie and KW seemed to like Burke a lot in spring training. It'll be interesting to see how many starts Burke gets if he's here for 7 weeks and Alomar and Olivo both stay healthy. As far as I'm concerned right now Guillen isn't starting Olivo enough. I certainly better not see 4 at bats in a game wasted on Burke.


Bob

Jjav829
06-03-2004, 10:24 PM
Wow, talk about clearly showing your bias. This might just be the lamest attempt to rip into KW on this board yet. Other than the whole "it's all luck" thing. I'm not the biggest fan of Burke being called up, but Kenny's hands are kinda tied right now. I do think we'll see Borchard soon, but what's the point of calling a guy up if he's not going to be able to play. There is none. Burke gives the team more flexibility and allows Ozzie to pinch hit late in the game, particularly for Sandy. Who knows how different the outcome could have been yesterday had Burke been here allowing Ozzie to pinch hit for Sandy with the bases loaded in the 8th. Instead of seeing Sandy at the plate there, we may have seen Perez. Who knows how that changes the outcome. Perez couldn't have made it any worse.

SEALgep
06-03-2004, 10:30 PM
Originally posted by Jjav829
Perez couldn't have made it any worse. He's come through in the clutch several times since being on the Sox.

A. Cavatica
06-03-2004, 10:31 PM
There's never a legitimate reason for a major league team to carry three catchers.

SEALgep
06-03-2004, 10:35 PM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
There's never a legitimate reason for a major league team to carry three catchers.

Legitmate Reasons

1. Ozzie wants the option
2. He's versatile (He can play more than just catcher)
3. We already have a surplus of outfielders
4.Doesn't take away an option on our younger talent when (see #3)
5. Allows for more pinch hitting options
6. It's only temporary anyway

A. Cavatica
06-03-2004, 11:14 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Legitmate Reasons

1. Ozzie wants the option
2. He's versatile (He can play more than just catcher)
3. We already have a surplus of outfielders
4.Doesn't take away an option on our younger talent when (see #3)
5. Allows for more pinch hitting options
6. It's only temporary anyway


1) Ozzie hasn't managed all that many more games than I have, so I don't think Ozzie's preference legitimizes a third catcher.

2) The Sox have a lot of versatility already thanks to Gload and Harris. If they really need more, they ought to bring up Hankins, who can at least play a better third base while filling the need for an emergency catcher.

3) We don't have a surplus with Maggs injured, but even if I thought we did, we would still have other needs that are more pressing than a third catcher. I would rather see Bajenaru coming into a game than Koch, for instance.

4) Players have enough options so you can bring them up when an ideal situation arises (i.e., injury replacement at their natural position). Players only run out of options when teams treat them like yo-yos. But your argument is basically "why bring up a good player when we might lose the option of bringing him up later", which is a failure mentality. Bring Reed up now, and if he never goes back down, you wouldn't miss those options...

5) The problem isn't the need to pinch hit for Sandy, it's that Sandy is playing at all. Burke may well be better than Alomar, in which case the solution is to dump Sandy.

6) Let's have Frank catch in interleague games. It can't be a bad idea, it's only temporary!

FarWestChicago
06-03-2004, 11:18 PM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
1) Ozzie hasn't managed all that many more games than I have, so I don't think Ozzie's preference legitimizes a third catcher.Not too full of yourself are you? I for one believe the Sox would be in first if you were the manager.

A. Cavatica
06-03-2004, 11:22 PM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
Not too full of yourself are you? I for one believe the Sox would be in first if you were the manager.

My point is that it's not a good idea just because Ozzie wants it.

rahulsekhar
06-03-2004, 11:26 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
I've given KW almost 4 years. Overall he's been a disappointment.



Bob

Yeah, he's terrible. Everett, Alomar, D. Wells, Olivo, Cotts, Adkins, Loaiza, Schoney, Marte, Uribe, Harris, Takatsu. They're terrible.

The guy makes 2 bad trades and everyone's ready to blame everything on him and nothing on either the players on the field or (where the real blame lies) on the manager. Sheesh.

Randar68
06-03-2004, 11:27 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
Let's take a journey into one of the most empty spaces I can think of: KW's mind.

good thing we've found your specialty...

patrolling the empty spaces between your ears...

rahulsekhar
06-03-2004, 11:35 PM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
My point is that it's not a good idea just because Ozzie wants it.

No, but manager's preference does and should certainly play a role.

Bottom line: KW shouldn't and won't make decisions about PT. If Ozzie says (and he has) that he's not going to throw Reed or Borchard out there full time, especially not knowing if Maggs might be back in 3 weeks, then why would you bring up one of your studs to have them sit on the bench and then possibly get sent back down.

You do realize how ludicrous it is to rip Kenny for making the decision that provides the greatest flexibility and still doesn't preclude him making the decision that you think he should be making once he knows what's actually happening to Maggs - you realize that, dont you?

gosox41
06-03-2004, 11:37 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Legitmate Reasons

1. Ozzie wants the option
2. He's versatile (He can play more than just catcher)
3. We already have a surplus of outfielders
4.Doesn't take away an option on our younger talent when (see #3)
5. Allows for more pinch hitting options
6. It's only temporary anyway


7 weeks can add up to about 40-45 games or about 1/4 of the season.


Bob

rahulsekhar
06-03-2004, 11:40 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
7 weeks can add up to about 40-45 games or about 1/4 of the season.


Bob

I believe you're missing a key word in the only releases I've seen on Maggs. That is "could". Maggs COULD miss up to 7 weeks.

If he's going to be back in 3 or 4, and Ozzie is set on playing Gload & ARow at least part of the time - why would you waste an option on one of your top guys, and why would you bring them up when they can get more regular ABs in AAA?

Not to mention that all of this may just be waiting until Borchard's shown that he's back healthy and hitting like he was.....but no, that doesn't make any sense.

gosox41
06-03-2004, 11:45 PM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
1) Ozzie hasn't managed all that many more games than I have, so I don't think Ozzie's preference legitimizes a third catcher.

2) The Sox have a lot of versatility already thanks to Gload and Harris. If they really need more, they ought to bring up Hankins, who can at least play a better third base while filling the need for an emergency catcher.

3) We don't have a surplus with Maggs injured, but even if I thought we did, we would still have other needs that are more pressing than a third catcher. I would rather see Bajenaru coming into a game than Koch, for instance.

4) Players have enough options so you can bring them up when an ideal situation arises (i.e., injury replacement at their natural position). Players only run out of options when teams treat them like yo-yos. But your argument is basically "why bring up a good player when we might lose the option of bringing him up later", which is a failure mentality. Bring Reed up now, and if he never goes back down, you wouldn't miss those options...

5) The problem isn't the need to pinch hit for Sandy, it's that Sandy is playing at all. Burke may well be better than Alomar, in which case the solution is to dump Sandy.

6) Let's have Frank catch in interleague games. It can't be a bad idea, it's only temporary!

Well said.

Just to expound on a few of your points:

3. The SOx havemanyguys who can play OF but none are guys who I'd want starting everyday. Lee should be out there. Harris is playing a great 2B, and he's hitting, so why mess with a good thing? Gload, Perez, and Rowand all play the OF. That is a fact. But none are great hitters while a guy like Reed has the tools to be a solid player.

4. Sometimes you have to take a chance and bring up the young top prospect. This team is trying to win now, right? Anyone wwant to make an argurment on who is a better hitter, Reed or Burke? It's worth the risk to bring Reed up over Burke. I love the failure mentality comparison.

Let me add to that. Since one of the top 2 Sox hitters is hurt we might not win the division and that would destroy confidence in the team. Let's start trading all our starters now and wait for next year.

5. I can live with dumping Sandy. He'd make an excellent coach but is through as a player. I don't see the need to have 2 bad hittnig catchers when Olivo is playing well. You want to pinch hit for Sandy, use Miguel. Or use Gload and put Miguel in the game if you want a lefty. Better yet, play Olivo more.


6. ROFLMAO.


Bob

LauraJ14
06-03-2004, 11:47 PM
Well I have to say that I am not that confident with an outfield of Lee, Perez, Rowand and Gload.
And what happens during the week that we are in Florida and Montreal, when you can only play Frank or Pauly? So you are missing 2 of your 3 most productive RBI guys in the lineup. Should be fun!

gosox41
06-03-2004, 11:47 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
Yeah, he's terrible. Everett, Alomar, D. Wells, Olivo, Cotts, Adkins, Loaiza, Schoney, Marte, Uribe, Harris, Takatsu. They're terrible.

The guy makes 2 bad trades and everyone's ready to blame everything on him and nothing on either the players on the field or (where the real blame lies) on the manager. Sheesh.


There's more then 2 bad trades in there. Luckily things didn't always work out the way KW wanted them or else Frank and Magglio both wouldn't be here right now.

But of course the Sox may have Nomar and be paying Valentin $5 mill year (an option KW picked up) to sit on the bench.


Bob

gosox41
06-03-2004, 11:51 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
good thing we've found your specialty...

patrolling the empty spaces between your ears...

Wow, Randar, a little harsh. Especially considering I never personally attacked you. Are you KW in disguise? If KW has a problem with me making that comment (and supposedly he and other Sox employees read this stuff) then let them insult me back.

I thought there were rules against personal attacks against members here. It doesn't bother me, but I acutally respected your opinion. You want to knock my argument, feel free. But the insults are bush league.




Bob

CWSGuy406
06-03-2004, 11:53 PM
Originally posted by duke of dorwood
And so far he has just been lucky with the Uribe acquisition

Bullcrap Kenny was 'lucky' with the Uribe acquisition. Some of you guys are really hypocritical, honestly. If Billy Beane would have acquired Juan Uribe, it would have been because Billy knows talent and just saw something in Uribe that 29 other major league GMs didn't. But because Kenny did it, it's 'lucky'. Yeah, I guess he got lucky with Uribe, Schoenweis, Takatsu, Harris, Olivo, Marte, etc. etc.

My gosh. :angry:

gosox41
06-03-2004, 11:53 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
I believe you're missing a key word in the only releases I've seen on Maggs. That is "could". Maggs COULD miss up to 7 weeks.

If he's going to be back in 3 or 4, and Ozzie is set on playing Gload & ARow at least part of the time - why would you waste an option on one of your top guys, and why would you bring them up when they can get more regular ABs in AAA?

Not to mention that all of this may just be waiting until Borchard's shown that he's back healthy and hitting like he was.....but no, that doesn't make any sense.


Because we're trying to win now and I pesonally think Reed or Borchard (take your pick) can help this team more while Magglio is out. And whose to say one of them won't come up and catch fire and solve our CF problem? Why assume they'll fail or that it's a wasted option to take a productive player and seeing what he can do.


Bob

gosox41
06-03-2004, 11:56 PM
Originally posted by CWSGuy406
Bullcrap Kenny was 'lucky' with the Uribe acquisition. Some of you guys are really hypocritical, honestly. If Billy Beane would have acquired Juan Uribe, it would have been because Billy knows talent and just saw something in Uribe that 29 other major league GMs didn't. But because Kenny did it, it's 'lucky'. Yeah, I guess he got lucky with Uribe, Schoenweis, Takatsu, Harris, Olivo, Marte, etc. etc.

My gosh. :angry:

Uribe has probably hit over his head this season. I hope he keeps it up but would happily bet anyone that if given a few hundred more at bats and his average would be lower then it is today.

As for Beane, I don't know how I'd compare each individual move against KW as Beane isn't perfect. But of course Beane has done something KW has failed to do: Go to the playoffs, in fact it's 4 years and counting for the A's. That's t he Oakland A's, the team that just beat the Sox at home for the 3rd year in a row.


Bob

CWSGuy406
06-04-2004, 12:00 AM
Originally posted by OEO Magglio
Just like dransfeldt against the drays?

No, because that was all luck. Any team this team win gets is luck, because Kenny Williams is the GM, so nothing positive can come from this team. Thus, if a win is positive, it's all luck.

MRKARNO
06-04-2004, 12:01 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
That's t he Oakland A's, the team that just beat the Sox at home for the 3rd year in a row.


So you're guarenteeing that we can't take 3 of four the next time we go out there this year?

Randar68
06-04-2004, 12:05 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
Wow, Randar, a little harsh. Especially considering I never personally attacked you. Are you KW in disguise? If KW has a problem with me making that comment (and supposedly he and other Sox employees read this stuff) then let them insult me back.

I thought there were rules against personal attacks against members here. It doesn't bother me, but I acutally respected your opinion. You want to knock my argument, feel free. But the insults are bush league.

Your relentless attacks against KW, to the point of fabricating reasons to bitch and moan and trying to "predict' his next move in a way that your prediction and finding of fault is guaranteed to come true, is BUSH LEAGUE.

2600 posts and you haven't improved to the point of competent baseball knowledge?

You need to read more and post less, Bob.

gosox41
06-04-2004, 12:06 AM
Just a couple of questions to think about for all those who think I'm being too hard on KW:

1. The Sox are trying to win now. Doesn't this mean taking taking advantage of using top prospects when the situation calls for it instead of using a 3rd catcher who can barely hit his weight?

2. Is it worth the risk of 'wasting an option' on Reed or Borchard to maybe see them have some success in the majors and help this team? Why can't one of them come in and play well? And people call me pessimistic. I'm assuming they can do the job.

3. If it's not worth using top prospects when the need arises, then why not just trade them? Keep in mind I don't want to trade Reed or Borchard unless someone knocks my socks off in a trade, but if the feeling around here is not to waste options on Borchard or Harris in a pennat race when they are the best hitters in the farm system, then something is wrong. A KW drafted player may actually make an impact on the Sox this season!! Good for KW. I hope Reed and Borchard are All Stars for years to come.

4. Can anyone make a solid argument that Burke is a better hitter then Reed or Borchard?

5. Why does everyone think a player's confidence will be ruined if he comes up for a few weeks and deons't perform. If anything it gives them a taste of the big leagues and they know ahead of time that if they get sent down it's because an All Star was coming back from an injury. Those are the terms. they shouldn't get down about that. And heaven forbid Reed or Borchard plays better then Rowand and takes over CF.

6. Not all players are going to lose confidence if they do get sent down. If that's the case then Borchard should have been traded 2 years ago as he was sent down. I seem to remember another highly touted rookie who struggled his first couple months up with the big cllub. It didn't effect his confidence too much.

7. How come there was no criticism like this when Diaz was sent down? Let's see, the Sox call him up. He makes one start and gets knocked around? Makes another start on 3 days rest when he's been pitching in a 5 man rotation in the minors and gets knocked around. Immediately after that he gets sent down.

Is that building confidence? Did Diaz get a fair shot? Did the Sox waste an option on Diaz? How come I didn't see any concerns here about the treatment of Diaz and his confidence but eveyone is so afraid of seeing Reed or Borchard? Diaz seems to be doing all right in the minors as he is now 8-0. I think he would have adjusted fine to the big club, too.


Bob

gosox41
06-04-2004, 12:07 AM
Originally posted by MRKARNO
So you're guarenteeing that we can't take 3 of four the next time we go out there this year?


I don't gaurantee anything. I hope they do stomp the A's. But if I knew you I'd place a wager on it.


Bob

CWSGuy406
06-04-2004, 12:08 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
There's more then 2 bad trades in there. Luckily things didn't always work out the way KW wanted them or else Frank and Magglio both wouldn't be here right now.

But of course the Sox may have Nomar and be paying Valentin $5 mill year (an option KW picked up) to sit on the bench.


Bob

And now you're criticizing something that didn't even happen? ROFLMAO.

The funniest thing about this whole thread is that the decision isn't even official yet, and you're criticizing it.

No, this isn't about Kenny making a questionable move. It's about you having a bias against Kenny that you just can't let go... Pathetic.

gosox41
06-04-2004, 12:11 AM
Originally posted by Randar68
Your relentless attacks against KW, to the point of fabricating reasons to bitch and moan and trying to "predict' his next move in a way that your prediction and finding of fault is guaranteed to come true, is BUSH LEAGUE.

2600 posts and you haven't improved to the point of competent baseball knowledge?

You need to read more and post less, Bob.

First, I've read that Burke is going to be called up. Unless things change, I'm not predicting anything. Now things can change and KW can hopefully call up Borchard or Reed (and I wouldn't rip on him for it)

Judging my comptence because my opinion is different then yours? That's impressive. Do you want me to post some some numbers on Reed, Borchard and Burke?


Or maybe Burke is so valuable. I think we can trade him to the Yankees for Brown or Vazquez. I mean look at all the pinch hitting options Torre will have up there.


Bob

gosox41
06-04-2004, 12:15 AM
Originally posted by CWSGuy406
And now you're criticizing something that didn't even happen? ROFLMAO.

The funniest thing about this whole thread is that the decision isn't even official yet, and you're criticizing it.

No, this isn't about Kenny making a questionable move. It's about you having a bias against Kenny that you just can't let go... Pathetic.


With KW I've learned to expect the worst and hope for hte bet. I didn't have anything against him when he first became GM. He's earned that after 3 years of disappointment.

I was under the impression the decision was official as I've read about it in multiple places. If I'm wrong about the decision I'll be thrilled as I clearly don't want Burke up here.

But one thing I learned from this threat is that there are a lot of people who don't want to bring up Reed or Borchard. I find that surprising and interesting.

I remember when Frank was in the minors and the Tribune had the Frank'o'meter. I loved it and acutually remember where I was that day in 1990 when I heard Frank and Alex were called up. I was excited.


Now I'm not saying Reed or Borchard is going to be as good as Frank, but I don't expect either of them to fail.


Bob

pearso66
06-04-2004, 12:16 AM
I would rather have Reed or Borchard up instead of Burke, but there are plenty of good reasons why they arent up.

1. Borchard is hurt right now, so he's not an option at the time

2. We may be trying to trade either of them, so we don't want them to come up and stink, therefore blowing a hole in the trade, or possibly get hurt up here.

3. Burke allows for Sandy to be pinch hit for. If you pinch hit for him, and olivo comes in and gets hurt, we are stuck with no catchers. Then where will we be?

4. we have 5 guys capable of playing the OF with Maggs out, there is a very good chance that either Borchard or Reed wouldn't get a lot of playing time, which if they get called up, they should be playing every day.

nobody is saying that Burke is better than either of them, he just leaves us with options for different positions, not just OF where we alerady have 5 guys out there. My guess would be that Burke doesn't start 1 game, and only bats a handful of times.

And I didn't agree with sending Diaz down after 2 starts, but what are you gonna do? you're not the GM and neither am I, KW makes the decisions, and so far those decisions have us in 1st place, I'm not complaining

A. Cavatica
06-04-2004, 12:18 AM
Originally posted by CWSGuy406
No, because that was all luck. Any team this team win gets is luck, because Kenny Williams is the GM, so nothing positive can come from this team. Thus, if a win is positive, it's all luck.

I don't know if putting in Dransfeldt against the D-Rays was luck, brilliance, or a peyote-induced hallucination, but it was a hell of a lot of one of those. :)

FarWestChicago
06-04-2004, 12:18 AM
Originally posted by CWSGuy406
And now you're criticizing something that didn't even happen? ROFLMAO.

The funniest thing about this whole thread is that the decision isn't even official yet, and you're criticizing it.

No, this isn't about Kenny making a questionable move. It's about you having a bias against Kenny that you just can't let go... Pathetic. Three things you can say about FOBB's, they are relentless, prolific and certainly a tad bit overbearing. :smile:

Randar68
06-04-2004, 12:19 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
First, I've read that Burke is going to be called up. Unless things change, I'm not predicting anything. Now things can change and KW can hopefully call up Borchard or Reed (and I wouldn't rip on him for it

In another thread, you were whining about how kW would be stupid to draft a pitcher in the first 5 rounds because none of his pitchers from the last 3 drafts, NONE OF WHICH HE PRESIDED OVER, have done anything in the MLB yet.

That is an incredibly naive, uninformed, and impatient statement to make, and is really blowing your cover about your open vendetta.

If you can't look at things with even a tint of an open mind, you're going to be lambasted over and over and over. Again, 2600 posts and you haven't figured out how things work?

Come on, you gotta be smarter than this...

CWSGuy406
06-04-2004, 12:19 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
First, I've read that Burke is going to be called up. Unless things change, I'm not predicting anything. Now things can change and KW can hopefully call up Borchard or Reed (and I wouldn't rip on him for it)

Judging my comptence because my opinion is different then yours? That's impressive. Do you want me to post some some numbers on Reed, Borchard and Burke?


Or maybe Burke is so valuable. I think we can trade him to the Yankees for Brown or Vazquez. I mean look at all the pinch hitting options Torre will have up there.


Bob


Having a different opinion is one thing. But, for one, IMO, you've totally just made this, instead of analysing the move, you're trying to put a point across that Kenny Williams is a moron, which really has no basis. And then, you say things like 'Juan Uribe for Aaron Miles was a lucky move. Esteban Loaiza was a lucky move. Scott Schoenweis was a lucky move.' Like Seal says, if that's luck, I'm glad we have such a lucky GM.

Why you're bringing Borchard into this, I have no idea why. He just played his first game back from a hammy injury tonight (or was it yesterday), at DH much less. If they feel that Joe Borchard can get back to his pre-injury hitting, then don't you think they'll call him up?

I can see your point for Reed, but at this point we don't know. Perhaps there's something bigger in the mix, possibly a big trade, that we don't know about. But again, you just know that Kenny is a moron, and that whatever you say should be done and should be taken as gospel...

gosox41
06-04-2004, 12:34 AM
Originally posted by Randar68
In another thread, you were whining about how kW would be stupid to draft a pitcher in the first 5 rounds because none of his pitchers from the last 3 drafts, NONE OF WHICH HE PRESIDED OVER, have done anything in the MLB yet.

That is an incredibly naive, uninformed, and impatient statement to make, and is really blowing your cover about your open vendetta.

If you can't look at things with even a tint of an open mind, you're going to be lambasted over and over and over. Again, 2600 posts and you haven't figured out how things work?

Come on, you gotta be smarter than this...

So start providing some facts Randar. Where is KW during these fdrafts?. How many drafts did KW run under the Schu era, especially at the end? If KW doesn't make the final decision, who hires the person who does?

Instead of insulting feel free to point out how I'm wrong with facts.


Bob

gosox41
06-04-2004, 12:35 AM
Originally posted by pearso66
I would rather have Reed or Borchard up instead of Burke, but there are plenty of good reasons why they arent up.

1. Borchard is hurt right now, so he's not an option at the time

2. We may be trying to trade either of them, so we don't want them to come up and stink, therefore blowing a hole in the trade, or possibly get hurt up here.

3. Burke allows for Sandy to be pinch hit for. If you pinch hit for him, and olivo comes in and gets hurt, we are stuck with no catchers. Then where will we be?

4. we have 5 guys capable of playing the OF with Maggs out, there is a very good chance that either Borchard or Reed wouldn't get a lot of playing time, which if they get called up, they should be playing every day.

nobody is saying that Burke is better than either of them, he just leaves us with options for different positions, not just OF where we alerady have 5 guys out there. My guess would be that Burke doesn't start 1 game, and only bats a handful of times.

And I didn't agree with sending Diaz down after 2 starts, but what are you gonna do? you're not the GM and neither am I, KW makes the decisions, and so far those decisions have us in 1st place, I'm not complaining

I hope they remain in first place. I hope KW has something up his sleeve.


Bob

gosox41
06-04-2004, 12:39 AM
Originally posted by CWSGuy406
Having a different opinion is one thing. But, for one, IMO, you've totally just made this, instead of analysing the move, you're trying to put a point across that Kenny Williams is a moron, which really has no basis. And then, you say things like 'Juan Uribe for Aaron Miles was a lucky move. Esteban Loaiza was a lucky move. Scott Schoenweis was a lucky move.' Like Seal says, if that's luck, I'm glad we have such a lucky GM.

Why you're bringing Borchard into this, I have no idea why. He just played his first game back from a hammy injury tonight (or was it yesterday), at DH much less. If they feel that Joe Borchard can get back to his pre-injury hitting, then don't you think they'll call him up?

I can see your point for Reed, but at this point we don't know. Perhaps there's something bigger in the mix, possibly a big trade, that we don't know about. But again, you just know that Kenny is a moron, and that whatever you say should be done and should be taken as gospel...


FWIW, I said the trading Uribe for a career minor leaguer was a good move, though I highly doubt Uribe is going to hit as well as he has. And I don't think KW reasonable expected Uribe to hit .330 any more then he expected Koch to flop. Let's hope Uribe keeps it up and Koch magically regains his velocity.


Bob

jeremyb1
06-04-2004, 12:40 AM
So a few things here:

1) I'm hoping that Ozzie thinks Burke gives him more versatility than Dransfelt (I disagree somewhat) and that Dransfeldt will be sent down in a few days when Borchard is healthy.

2) As others have pointed out, we're trying to win the World Series according to KW, right? With that in mind I'd be hardpressed to argue any other option for RF is better than Borchard/Reed.

3) Reed is an incredibly good prospect. Options shouldn't be any kind of serious concern since he's not likely to be shuttled back and forth often. If not this time then the next time he'd likely be up for good.

4) The only concern with Reed I can think of - and it's a legitimate one - is starting the clock ticking on arbitration.

gosox41
06-04-2004, 12:48 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
So a few things here:

1) I'm hoping that Ozzie thinks Burke gives him more versatility than Dransfelt (I disagree somewhat) and that Dransfeldt will be sent down in a few days when Borchard is healthy.

2) As others have pointed out, we're trying to win the World Series according to KW, right? With that in mind I'd be hardpressed to argue any other option for RF is better than Borchard/Reed.

3) Reed is an incredibly good prospect. Options shouldn't be any kind of serious concern since he's not likely to be shuttled back and forth often. If not this time then the next time he'd likely be up for good.

4) The only concern with Reed I can think of - and it's a legitimate one - is starting the clock ticking on arbitration.


Do you know when the cut off is for this season not to count as a full season. I thought it was end of May. What I mean is in terms of fre agency. Let's say the Sox call Reed up this season and he plays well and sticks with the team. I thought end of May was the cut off time for this year not to count as a full year of service time so techincally the Sox can have read for the rest of 2004 plus '05-10 before losing him to free agency.

Also if Reed can help the team win now (which I think he can) then I'm willing to risk the clock ticking on arbitration, even though it is a legit concern.


Bob

A. Cavatica
06-04-2004, 12:56 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
So a few things here:

1) I'm hoping that Ozzie thinks Burke gives him more versatility than Dransfelt (I disagree somewhat) and that Dransfeldt will be sent down in a few days when Borchard is healthy.


Hmmm. I accept the possibility that the Sox want to give LTP the first crack at RF, because it's make-or-break time for him. That would explain why they're not bringing up Borchard yet, or Reed for that matter. But there's still no sense in bringing up Burke, when there are better hitters, more versatile position players, and potentially useful relievers available. Burke adds so little.


3) Reed is an incredibly good prospect. Options shouldn't be any kind of serious concern since he's not likely to be shuttled back and forth often. If not this time then the next time he'd likely be up for good.


Yep. They're more of a concern with Borchard, because IMHO he's not as good (and he's already been up and down).


4) The only concern with Reed I can think of - and it's a legitimate one - is starting the clock ticking on arbitration.

I hope this is not the reason, because we can make the playoffs this year, and starting the arbitration clock shouldn't enter into it. We're going to have a big hole in our lineup for (up to) 7 weeks, and probably next season as well...this is the right time to audition at least one of these guys.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 12:59 AM
First off the supporters of Kenny are rehashing their old arguments.

1> Secret plans

2> Rip on Billy Beane, like that really makes Kenny any better.

3> Try to call those questioning Kenny stupid.

Now can you guys try a new argument instead of the ones you have worn like a 2 dollar whore. The move was probably made since Borchard is healing, and the Sox want Reed to spend a full year at AAA before coming up. Options don't really matter for Reed, since if he is what he can be, you won't use all three. Second, it is past May 21st (I think that is the date), so he will not get a full season of major league service time, for arbitration and FA purposes.

What is funny is most of the supporters of Kenny love to bring up the Marlins of last year as an example. Noticed how no one has brought them up in this thread. I mean, a rookie couldn't become a lynch pin in championship team.

My god, I am shocked at how many people love the idea for a outfield that could dominate the Northern League, just too bad this is the American League. If Borchard gets one healthy AB in Charlotte when the Sox don't have Mags, playing Kenny should be fired on the spot.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 01:01 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
Do you know when the cut off is for this season not to count as a full season. I thought it was end of May. What I mean is in terms of fre agency. Let's say the Sox call Reed up this season and he plays well and sticks with the team. I thought end of May was the cut off time for this year not to count as a full year of service time so techincally the Sox can have read for the rest of 2004 plus '05-10 before losing him to free agency.

Also if Reed can help the team win now (which I think he can) then I'm willing to risk the clock ticking on arbitration, even though it is a legit concern.


Bob

A player needs the full three or six years, thus you can get "free"
1/2 season out of a player.

Vsahajpal
06-04-2004, 02:28 AM
[Woody Paige] You guys are too far in the forest to see the trees [/Woody Paige]

Jeremy isn't staying at Charlotte to protect his option years, or to delay his service time from initiating.

Have any of you taken a look at the ChiSox 40-man roster? Reed isn't rostered. Therefore the organisation would have to designate a rostered player for assignment (or trade a rostered player) in order to place Reed on it.

Jaime Burke is rostered; LTP is also rostered, but from what I've gleaned reading this thread, he is injured. So Mr. Burke is the only other option as a position player (well, Ruddy Yan is available).

Now, you can bash Williams for choosing to roster Burke instead of Reed, but that's a different issue. On the flip side, you can't anticipate a freak injury to Ordonez, and his 40-man replacement (Borchard) at the same time, so there was no need to roster Reed (a 2002 college draftee), as he isn't rule-V eligible until next year (by which time he'll certainly be rostered!).

And who knows, Burke could be the next Josh Paul...




:::runs:::

jeremyb1
06-04-2004, 02:40 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
Do you know when the cut off is for this season not to count as a full season. I thought it was end of May. What I mean is in terms of fre agency. Let's say the Sox call Reed up this season and he plays well and sticks with the team. I thought end of May was the cut off time for this year not to count as a full year of service time so techincally the Sox can have read for the rest of 2004 plus '05-10 before losing him to free agency.

Yeah I'm not completely clear on how service time is calculated for arbitration. That does sound about right though.

Originally posted by gosox41
Also if Reed can help the team win now (which I think he can) then I'm willing to risk the clock ticking on arbitration, even though it is a legit concern.

Originally posted by A. Cavatica
Iwe can make the playoffs this year, and starting the arbitration clock shouldn't enter into it. We're going to have a big hole in our lineup for (up to) 7 weeks, and probably next season as well...this is the right time to audition at least one of these guys.

I agree. I think the bottom line is winning now and Reed could be a big help there. 7 weeks shouldn't dent the arbitration clock and if it's more time it's worth it to win.

jeremyb1
06-04-2004, 02:51 AM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
Hmmm. I accept the possibility that the Sox want to give LTP the first crack at RF, because it's make-or-break time for him. That would explain why they're not bringing up Borchard yet, or Reed for that matter. But there's still no sense in bringing up Burke, when there are better hitters, more versatile position players, and potentially useful relievers available. Burke adds so little.

Well one thing I like about having Burke on the roster is that Ozzie seems unwilling to use both catchers in a game most of the time for fear that someone will get hurt and we'll have to use our emergency catcher. This may be KW's fault for putting a player as fragile as Alomar on the roster or Ozzie's for being overly cautious. In the past we had only two catchers on the roster and Sandy was down with injuries so Olivo was the only catcher. It doesn't seem like it should be too much of a problem but Ozzie certainly sees it that way. This becomes a huge issue since whichever catcher is not playing on a given day (Olivo in particular) is often our best righthanded pinch hitting option in the late innings yet we're unable to use him. So if having Burke on the roster allows us the option of pinch hitting Olivo (.467/.500/.967 vs. LHP) or Alomar against a lefty in a close game for a player such as Valentin or Harris, I view that as a positive.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 08:24 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
So start providing some facts Randar. Where is KW during these fdrafts?. How many drafts did KW run under the Schu era, especially at the end? If KW doesn't make the final decision, who hires the person who does?

Instead of insulting feel free to point out how I'm wrong with facts.


Bob Umm, KW said himself in an interview that he doesn't make the decisions about the draft. As stated previously, we have a scouting department that deals with the draft, and KW's may hire them with consulting with JR, but does that mean they are incompetant or something? I mean these are the guys who drafted the guys you are fighting to be called up. Did you forget that?

jabrch
06-04-2004, 08:28 AM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
Maybe he's showcasing Burke to the Brewers, Indians, & Mariners.

Seriously, here are ten people I would've called up before Burke.

1) Reed (duh!)
2) Borchard (give KW a mulligan here, since Joe's hurt)
3) Bryant Nelson (versatile, switch hitter, red hot, hungry)
4) Mike Spidale (best CF in high minors, .400 OBP)
5) Diaz (since Burke won't play much, might as well let Diaz sit around and get acclimated instead)
6) Arnie Munoz (ditto)
7) Jeff Bajenaru (Birmingham closer, 34 Ks in 22.2 IP)
8) Gary Majewski (Charlotte closer)
9) Ryan Hankins (similar numbers to Burke, but 3B/C is more useful right now than C/3B)
10) Scott Bikowski (Birmingham RF, lefty)

How many of those guys are on the 40 man roster? Who do you think we should drop and risk losing off the 40 man roster to bring them up?

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 08:29 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
FWIW, I said the trading Uribe for a career minor leaguer was a good move, though I highly doubt Uribe is going to hit as well as he has. And I don't think KW reasonable expected Uribe to hit .330 any more then he expected Koch to flop. Let's hope Uribe keeps it up and Koch magically regains his velocity.


Bob Right there. You make it seem that KW is an idiot for Koch, and lucky for Uribe. That's just BS. And if Uribe doesn't hit .330 for the rest of the season, what are you implying? Does that mean he wouldn't be a solid pick up? If Uribe hits .300 or even a little less with the power he's shown, you know what that means? A better player than Graff, at a cheaper price, and at a younger age. Nice going KW, you dope!

jabrch
06-04-2004, 08:29 AM
Originally posted by RKMeibalane
I think Reed has fallen victim to Frank Thomas syndrome.

We should only be so lucky! :)

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 08:30 AM
Originally posted by jabrch
How many of those guys are on the 40 man roster? Who do you think we should drop and risk losing off the 40 man roster to bring them up? Umm, I don't think about that stuff or options or anything. I just like what I like, and I don't like KW. :D:

jabrch
06-04-2004, 08:31 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
In a year or two Borchard can be a minor league free agent if he's not called up.

Also, I heard that a set number of call ups is a myth and a player can be shuttled back and forth as many times during their first 2-3 seasons in the majors. Can anyone confirm this,



Bob

No - neither of those are correct.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 08:32 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1

4) The only concern with Reed I can think of - and it's a legitimate one - is starting the clock ticking on arbitration. And that too is an important point to consider. Maybe the most important. If Ozzie doesn't want to play the kids everyday, why start the clock?

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 08:35 AM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica

this is the right time to audition at least one of these guys. You say you want to make the playoffs and have the best team out there, yet you want auditions? Auditions have no place in a playoff run.

jabrch
06-04-2004, 08:39 AM
Originally posted by Vsahajpal
Jeremy isn't staying at Charlotte to protect his option years, or to delay his service time from initiating.

Have any of you taken a look at the ChiSox 40-man roster? Reed isn't rostered. Therefore the organisation would have to designate a rostered player for assignment (or trade a rostered player) in order to place Reed on it.



DING DING DING

jabrch
06-04-2004, 08:41 AM
VC Edit: was that really necessary?

Just put them on ignore you don't have to announce it to the world.

soxtalker
06-04-2004, 09:32 AM
Originally posted by Vsahajpal

Jeremy isn't staying at Charlotte to protect his option years, or to delay his service time from initiating.

Have any of you taken a look at the ChiSox 40-man roster? Reed isn't rostered. Therefore the organisation would have to designate a rostered player for assignment (or trade a rostered player) in order to place Reed on it.

Jaime Burke is rostered; LTP is also rostered, but from what I've gleaned reading this thread, he is injured. So Mr. Burke is the only other option as a position player (well, Ruddy Yan is available).

Now, you can bash Williams for choosing to roster Burke instead of Reed, but that's a different issue. On the flip side, you can't anticipate a freak injury to Ordonez, and his 40-man replacement (Borchard) at the same time, so there was no need to roster Reed (a 2002 college draftee), as he isn't rule-V eligible until next year (by which time he'll certainly be rostered!).

And who knows, Burke could be the next Josh Paul...




:::runs:::


I've just scanned through the thread. It is a classic WSI debate -- very heated with lots of strong opinions and information. I haven't been a big fan of KW, though I've been impressed that he's learnt through his mistakes over the years. I do believe that he has some rationale behind his decisions. Bringing Burke up did seem puzzling, so this thread has been quite useful in trying to discern what the rationale might be. It looks like Vsahajpal has hit on some very good reasons for holding Reed back. It will be interesting to see how this plays out once they are convinced that Borchard is back and healthy. AND I don't think that I would have understood this without the debate on this thread!

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 09:41 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Right there. You make it seem that KW is an idiot for Koch, and lucky for Uribe. That's just BS. And if Uribe doesn't hit .330 for the rest of the season, what are you implying? Does that mean he wouldn't be a solid pick up? If Uribe hits .300 or even a little less with the power he's shown, you know what that means? A better player than Graff, at a cheaper price, and at a younger age. Nice going KW, you dope!

Uribe regresses to a OBP in the low .300s, which is what he produced in Colorado, it will be a bad pick up if Uribe is still a starter and not a util man.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 09:48 AM
Originally posted by jabrch
No - neither of those are correct.

Well not exactly.

If a player isn't on a major league active roster after 6 years in the minors, I believe he can become a minor league free agent. Not sure on Borchard time table.

An option covers a year, so if a team chooses to use an option a player can be shuttled back and forth that year. A team only has three options on a player which they can use when ever permissible.

soxtalker
06-04-2004, 09:57 AM
Originally posted by Vsahajpal

Now, you can bash Williams for choosing to roster Burke instead of Reed, but that's a different issue. On the flip side, you can't anticipate a freak injury to Ordonez, and his 40-man replacement (Borchard) at the same time, so there was no need to roster Reed (a 2002 college draftee), as he isn't rule-V eligible until next year (by which time he'll certainly be rostered!).

:::runs:::

KW just used one of his empty spots on the 40-man roster to pick up that player from the KC system. I seem to recall a question earlier in the year about why the Sox had several open positions on the 40-man roster. Now I'd guess that those give KW the opportunity to pick up players that are dropped by other teams. So open positions are not something that he would give up easily.

Question -- if Ordonez goes on the DL, does that change his status on the 40-man roster?

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 09:58 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Umm, I don't think about that stuff or options or anything. I just like what I like, and I don't like KW. :D:


Originally posted by jabrch



DING DING DING


Funny how quickly you are to agree like that has been your thought the whole time, yet you never mention that point. I admit the roster spot did escape my thought process last night, it was late, but figured if it didn't escape yours you would have pointed that out before.

On arbritration clock, what you are trying to avoid is a super two. Just in case you didn't know, a Super Two is :

A player with three or more years of service, but less than six years, may file for salary arbitration. In addition, a player can be classified as a "Super-Two" and be eligible for arbitration with less than three years of service. A player with at least two but less than three years of Major League service shall be eligible for salary arbitration if he has accumulated at least 86 days of service during the immediately preceding season and he ranks in the top seventeen percent in total service in the class of Players who have at least two but less than three years of Major League service, however accumulated, but with at least 86 days of service accumulated during the immediately preceding season. "
That cut is late May, a couple years ago it was May 21st, not sure on the date this year.

Nice point, Vsahajpal.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 10:01 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
You say you want to make the playoffs and have the best team out there, yet you want auditions? Auditions have no place in a playoff run.


Yeah, Cabrera really hurt the Marlins last year.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 10:03 AM
Originally posted by Vsahajpal

Now, you can bash Williams for choosing to roster Burke instead of Reed, but that's a different issue. On the flip side, you can't anticipate a freak injury to Ordonez, and his 40-man replacement (Borchard) at the same time, so there was no need to roster Reed (a 2002 college draftee), as he isn't rule-V eligible until next year (by which time he'll certainly be rostered!).

And who knows, Burke could be the next Josh Paul...


Burke was rostered because its even money that Sandy won't finish the season.

jabrch
06-04-2004, 10:06 AM
Originally posted by soxtalker
KW just used one of his empty spots on the 40-man roster to pick up that player from the KC system. I seem to recall a question earlier in the year about why the Sox had several open positions on the 40-man roster. Now I'd guess that those give KW the opportunity to pick up players that are dropped by other teams. So open positions are not something that he would give up easily.

Question -- if Ordonez goes on the DL, does that change his status on the 40-man roster?

If he goes on the 60 day DL - then yes. If he is on the 15 day DL - then no.

rahulsekhar
06-04-2004, 10:09 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
Because we're trying to win now and I pesonally think Reed or Borchard (take your pick) can help this team more while Magglio is out. And whose to say one of them won't come up and catch fire and solve our CF problem? Why assume they'll fail or that it's a wasted option to take a productive player and seeing what he can do.


Bob

It'a a fairly simple argument:

1) Most rookies struggle at first in ther adjustment to the bigs. not to say it's guaranteed, but even eventual all-stars usually have some struggles.

2) Struggles are exacerbated by being a part-time player (i.e. inconsistent ABs)

3) Ozzie has already said that he's going to give Gload & ARow at least some ABs, meaning that even if LTP/Reed was to get the majority it's still probably at best every other day type of play. Unless you think KW should be determining PT (which I 100% do not), then this isn't in his control even if he thinks LTP/Reed is the answer. In any case, Gload especially ahs looked fairly solid.

4) As of this morning, the extent of Magg's absence is still TBD, in fact there are a number of quotes from KW that indicate he thinks it'll be shorter rather than longer.

So the choices are to bring up a stud prospect and put him in a difficult situation to succeed and then likely to send him back down in a few weeks (thereby wasting an option on LTP or forcing the removal of someone else from the 40-man for Reed), or to call up someone else who gives the team some flexibility. Then once you know about Maggs, you can always rethink that decision. Not to mention that if Borchard's the guy, you can give him a chance to show that his short layoff hasn't impacted his stroke any.

But again - none of that makes any sense, throw all reson to the winds, LTP has more talent, HE SHOULD BE UP NOW - EVEN IF IT"S ONLY FOR A COUPLE OF WEEKS!!!

Yeah, KW MUST be an idiot.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 10:12 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Yeah, Cabrera really hurt the Marlins last year. He wasn't exactly auditioning now was he. He was called up because they thought he was ready, not because of an injury.

jabrch
06-04-2004, 10:12 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Funny how quickly you are to agree like that has been your thought the whole time, yet you never mention that point. I admit the roster spot did escape my thought process last night, it was late, but figured if it didn't escape yours you would have pointed that out before.
.

Check out post 14 DaDawg - I had already mentioned the 40 man roster before I said DING DING DING - and long before Vsahajpal did. Check back to post 14...

Thanks!

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 10:16 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Uribe regresses to a OBP in the low .300s, which is what he produced in Colorado, it will be a bad pick up if Uribe is still a starter and not a util man. Is that your prediction? Uribe has proved to be a good pick up already. If he slumps, he slumps, but that doesn't make him a bad pick up. Besides, he's done nothing but show he's legit so far, so why would you think that wouldn't continue? It's one thing to think he won't finish batting .320, but why would you think he couldn't keep his OBP above the low .300's? With his defense at his price, he's better than Graff. And if he does get into some unreal awful spiral, I have a solution. Uribe, you're now the utility man again. Good pick up.

poorme
06-04-2004, 10:25 AM
KW is frustrating because he mixes brilliant with idiotic.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 10:32 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Is that your prediction? Uribe has proved to be a good pick up already. If he slumps, he slumps, but that doesn't make him a bad pick up. Besides, he's done nothing but show he's legit so far, so why would you think that wouldn't continue? It's one thing to think he won't finish batting .320, but why would you think he couldn't keep his OBP above the low .300's? With his defense at his price, he's better than Graff. And if he does get into some unreal awful spiral, I have a solution. Uribe, you're now the utility man again. Good pick up.

He still isn't walking enough not to be a streaky player, so he should hit one very bad stretch this season. Two months do not make a player, whether good or bad, so we will have to wait to see what Uribe does. If he is a util man, then you need a lot less production from him, if he is a starter a low 300 OBP isn't going to cut it.

jabrch
06-04-2004, 10:34 AM
Originally posted by poorme
KW is frustrating because he mixes brilliant with idiotic.

What GMs dont?

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 10:37 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
He still isn't walking enough not to be a streaky player, so he should hit one very bad stretch this season. Two months do not make a player, whether good or bad, so we will have to wait to see what Uribe does. If he is a util man, then you need a lot less production from him, if he is a starter a low 300 OBP isn't going to cut it. You make it sound like it's already that low. I don't know what games you watch, but he walks when he isn't getting good pitches, and also when it's crucial for base runners. He was walked to win the game once already this year. OBP is certainly important, but he is somewhat of a free swinger, which has contributed to much of his success. From what I've seen of him, and I watch every game, he judges the strike zone pretty well. I think your trying to worry about something that he has giving you no reason to worry about. Wait for it to happen before you start making preparations for him to be out of the lineup.

poorme
06-04-2004, 10:42 AM
Originally posted by jabrch
What GMs dont?

So I guess you're saying he's pretty much your average GM. I can go with that.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 10:42 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
You make it sound like it's already that low. I don't know what games you watch, but he walks when he isn't getting good pitches, and also when it's crucial for base runners. He was walked to win the game once already this year. OBP is certainly important, but he is somewhat of a free swinger, which has contributed to much of his success. From what I've seen of him, and I watch every game, he judges the strike zone pretty well. I think your trying to worry about something that he has giving you no reason to worry about. Wait for it to happen before you start making preparations for him to be out of the lineup.

He has 16 walks in 201 Plate appearances. That is roughly 8% of the time he walks, you want 10%. He is walking at a higher rate then he did with the Rockies (17/343, 5%), but need to improve on that. He is a free swinger which will hurt him.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 10:46 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
He has 16 walks in 201 Plate appearances. That is roughly 8% of the time he walks, you want 10%. He is walking at a higher rate then he did with the Rockies (17/343, 5%), but need to improve on that. He is a free swinger which will hurt him. Has it hurt him so far? He'll take his walks. He has guys like Alomar and Maggs telling him to be patient when tries to do too much at the plate, they were quoted as saying so. He's been taking their advice, and so far his comfort on this team is paying off. Quit being Negaive Ned.

rahulsekhar
06-04-2004, 10:47 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
He has 16 walks in 201 Plate appearances. That is roughly 8% of the time he walks, you want 10%. He is walking at a higher rate then he did with the Rockies (17/343, 5%), but need to improve on that. He is a free swinger which will hurt him.

OK, so a total of 4 walks on the season so far is what separates him from being at the level that you consider to be appropriate? And in the same breath, you note that he's already improved significantly over his Colorado rate?

IMO it seems just as likely that he'd maintain his current rate or even inch it higher as he continuies to improve and gain confidence as it is that he'd regress to his old rate. Remember, this guy's got a lot more coaching and support now than he did in CO, and he's always had the talent to be a very good player.

DD77 - it seems like you're searching for ways to minimize KW's accomplishments. Even if Uribe regressed and becase only a utility player(unlikely), it's still a very good move for the Sox.

jabrch
06-04-2004, 10:48 AM
Billy Beane is right - OBP is important. I agree. But to use the arguement that Uribe for Miles might be a bad trade because Uribe doesn't walk enough and some day his average may dip and then he still won't walk enough to get on base and be effective like the great Marcus Scutaro is a bit of a reach.

Uribe has 16 walks in the 122 ABs that he didn't get hits in - 13% For a guy who is not a slugger (someone who gets pitched around) that's pretty dang good. Compare that to leadoff or #2 hitters on other teams. Lets take, for example, Kotsay and Byrnes - #1 and #2 for Oakland. Kotsay has 13 walks in 127 non-hit ABs (10%) and Byrnes has 18 walks in 109 non-hit ABs. (16%)

I don't know how any logic can be used to justify the proposition that trading Aaron Miles for Uribe wasn't a brilliant move. Even if Uribe bottoms out - and ends up off the roster in a few months (unlikely) he is worlds surperior to Aaron Miles.

jabrch
06-04-2004, 10:49 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
He has 16 walks in 201 Plate appearances. That is roughly 8% of the time he walks, you want 10%. He is walking at a higher rate then he did with the Rockies (17/343, 5%), but need to improve on that. He is a free swinger which will hurt him.

Don't take walks over plate appearances. I'd rather him get hits than walks. Look at walks over ABs - Hits. Lets compare the number of walks he gets, to the number of times he gets out. You may find Uribe ranks fairly well compared to other leadoff and #2 type hitters.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 10:51 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Has it hurt him so far? He'll take his walks. He has guys like Alomar and Maggs telling him to be patient when tries to do too much at the plate, they were quoted as saying so. He's been taking their advice, and so far his comfort on this team is paying off. Quit being Negaive Ned.

LOL, you still don't get it. Taking walks helps you be less of a streaky player, thus you can be in a hot streak, Uribe now, or a cold streak. If you are a streaky a player, you will have both streaks the good and the bad. Luckily we have have only seen a nice streak for Uribe, and it looks like he is cooling down right now. Taking walks makes your production much more stable and less streaky.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 10:52 AM
Originally posted by jabrch
Don't take walks over plate appearances. I'd rather him get hits than walks. Look at walks over ABs - Hits. Lets compare the number of walks he gets, to the number of times he gets out. You may find Uribe ranks fairly well compared to other leadoff and #2 type hitters.

But what happens when balls hit into play start getting hit right to some one. Walks negate that fact and keep a steady line of production, plus it means you are being more selective in the pitches you are hitting thus have a better chance a smoking them.

rahulsekhar
06-04-2004, 10:53 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
LOL, you still don't get it. Taking walks helps you be less of a streaky player, thus you can be in a hot streak, Uribe now, or a cold streak. If you are a streaky a player, you will have both streaks the good and the bad. Luckily we have have only seen a nice streak for Uribe, and it looks like he is cooling down right now. Taking walks makes your production much more stable and less streaky.

In principle I agree with you, but I think 2 months of performance is a bit long to be considered a "streak".

jabrch
06-04-2004, 10:54 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
LOL, you still don't get it. Taking walks helps you be less of a streaky player, thus you can be in a hot streak, Uribe now, or a cold streak. If you are a streaky a player, you will have both streaks the good and the bad. Luckily we have have only seen a nice streak for Uribe, and it looks like he is cooling down right now. Taking walks makes your production much more stable and less streaky.

it almost sounds like you would think he is a better player if he had fewer hits and more walks. If his stat sheet read

180 abs, 54 hits, 20 walks

instead of

180, 58H, 16BB

then he'd have your 10% BB:plate APP. And you'd consider this an improvement? You'd consider this enough an improvement to then think this was a good deal? But you don't now?

To me - that is a horrendous use of stats - and a reason why Moneyball, Baseball Prospectus and the rash of statsheet GMs are hurting baseball's fanbase's collective IQ.

He is hitting .322 for petes sake - when is he supposed to be walking more than the 8% he is already? I'd rather him get hits than walk. Right now - he is doing both.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 10:54 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
LOL, you still don't get it. Taking walks helps you be less of a streaky player, thus you can be in a hot streak, Uribe now, or a cold streak. If you are a streaky a player, you will have both streaks the good and the bad. Luckily we have have only seen a nice streak for Uribe, and it looks like he is cooling down right now. Taking walks makes your production much more stable and less streaky. I get it just fine. You're the one who seems to be confused. Is he getting on base effectively right now, yes or no? Has he improved his OBP since being on Colorado, yes or no? Has he taken key walks when we needed them, yes or no? Do you think he's a good player, yes or no?

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 10:58 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
But what happens when balls hit into play start getting hit right to some one. Walks negate that fact and keep a steady line of production, plus it means you are being more selective in the pitches you are hitting thus have a better chance a smoking them. You're not taking into consideration that he is seeing pitches to hit because of the power guys behind him. People don't want to face Maggs and Thomas with men on base, and therefore are forced to pitch strikes to Uribe, which apparently he's taking advantage of. But I guees he should try to force the issue, not be aggressive to increase his walks, which would no doubtedly increase his strikeout total as well.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by jabrch
Billy Beane is right - OBP is important. I agree. But to use the arguement that Uribe for Miles might be a bad trade because Uribe doesn't walk enough and some day his average may dip and then he still won't walk enough to get on base and be effective like the great Marcus Scutaro is a bit of a reach.

Uribe has 16 walks in the 122 ABs that he didn't get hits in - 13% For a guy who is not a slugger (someone who gets pitched around) that's pretty dang good. Compare that to leadoff or #2 hitters on other teams. Lets take, for example, Kotsay and Byrnes - #1 and #2 for Oakland. Kotsay has 13 walks in 127 non-hit ABs (10%) and Byrnes has 18 walks in 109 non-hit ABs. (16%)

I don't know how any logic can be used to justify the proposition that trading Aaron Miles for Uribe wasn't a brilliant move. Even if Uribe bottoms out - and ends up off the roster in a few months (unlikely) he is worlds surperior to Aaron Miles.

Look the most important thing in evaluating a trade, is how much did player A help the team. Then I consider what was given for player A? So if a player doesn't help your team then it is wash to bad trade, it can not be a good trade since you received no benefit from it.

It is still too early to judge anything on Uribe as one needs more then two months. But Miles isn't doing anything for the Rockies.

Frater Perdurabo
06-04-2004, 11:00 AM
:tomatoaward

better late than never

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 11:00 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Look the most important thing in evaluating a trade, is how much did player A help the team. Then I consider what was given for player A? So if a player doesn't help your team then it is wash to bad trade, it can not be a good trade since you received no benefit from it.

It is still too early to judge anything on Uribe as one needs more then two months. But Miles isn't doing anything for the Rockies. Well if Miles isn't doing anything for the Rockies, and Uribe has already helped us a great deal and continues to do so, what is your point Dadawg?

rahulsekhar
06-04-2004, 11:01 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Look the most important thing in evaluating a trade, is how much did player A help the team. Then I consider what was given for player A? So if a player doesn't help your team then it is wash to bad trade, it can not be a good trade since you received no benefit from it.

It is still too early to judge anything on Uribe as one needs more then two months. But Miles isn't doing anything for the Rockies.

Uribe has payed a big part int he Sox being in first at this point, it's not too late to evaluate relative contributions to date. It's also not too late to assess whetehr it seems likely that those contributions will continues, and in Juan's case they seem like they will.

Of course, you can't say if it's an all-time caliber steal yet, that will take time. But this deal is already a big winner for the Sox & KW.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 11:02 AM
Originally posted by jabrch
it almost sounds like you would think he is a better player if he had fewer hits and more walks. If his stat sheet read

180 abs, 54 hits, 20 walks

instead of

180, 58H, 16BB

then he'd have your 10% BB:plate APP. And you'd consider this an improvement? You'd consider this enough an improvement to then think this was a good deal? But you don't now?

To me - that is a horrendous use of stats - and a reason why Moneyball, Baseball Prospectus and the rash of statsheet GMs are hurting baseball's fanbase's collective IQ.

He is hitting .322 for petes sake - when is he supposed to be walking more than the 8% he is already? I'd rather him get hits than walk. Right now - he is doing both.

Here is the thing, I am not looking at what he did but what he will do. Some stats have a better track record for forecasting future production, batting average isn't one of them. So, I don't care if he is hitting .320 now, what care about is will he still be hitting .320 two months from now? That to me is a more important question then what has a player done so far.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 11:03 AM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
Uribe has payed a big part int he Sox being in first at this point, it's not too late to evaluate relative contributions to date. It's also not too late to assess whetehr it seems likely that those contributions will continues, and in Juan's case they seem like they will.

Of course, you can't say if it's an all-time caliber steal yet, that will take time. But this deal is already a big winner for the Sox & KW. This guy is projected to make the All Star team at second base, what the hell do you want from him Dadawg? "That's great and all, but the walks really do it for me."

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 11:04 AM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
Uribe has payed a big part int he Sox being in first at this point, it's not too late to evaluate relative contributions to date. It's also not too late to assess whetehr it seems likely that those contributions will continues, and in Juan's case they seem like they will.

Of course, you can't say if it's an all-time caliber steal yet, that will take time. But this deal is already a big winner for the Sox & KW.

But I am not voting for MVP or evaluating the trade yet. I think it is ridiculous the amount of people saying Kenny stole Uribe. Lets wait and see if Uribe can keep this production up.

jabrch
06-04-2004, 11:04 AM
I went to look at Uribe's "cold streak" as of late. Here's a funny thing about it. On May 20, he was hitting .331. Since then, in 12 games, he is 17 for 53 and is DOWN to .322. Don't you hate it when your #2 hitter is on a bad streak (.320) to bring his season numbers down so much (.322) Interestingly - during that down streak he has had 8 walks of his 16 on the season.

So let me get this straight. if we add in his walks, during this cold streak, we have a guy with an obp of (17+8)/(53+8) = .409 (I don't have his full stat sheet to count HBPs, etc in front of me - so this is an estimate) Mind you - this is a #2 hitter. This isn't someone who gets pitched around, or IBBd. He earns all his walks by taking pitches, not by being pitched around like a #3 or #4 hitter might. so you must compare him to others who hit in the same general batting slots.

And there are still people making the arguement that KW is dumb becuase Uribe isn't that good and he is due to go on a cold streak when he doesn't walk despite evidence to the contrary? Does this all result in anyone thinking that the Sox would be better off with Aaron Miles?

This amazes me.

Credit KW where credit is due. Uribe is worlds better than Miles using any measure you chose to find.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 11:07 AM
Originally posted by jabrch

Credit KW where credit is due. Uribe is worlds better than Miles using any measure you chose to find. No I'll never give him credit. NEVER! :D:

jabrch
06-04-2004, 11:07 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Here is the thing, I am not looking at what he did but what he will do. Some stats have a better track record for forecasting future production, batting average isn't one of them. So, I don't care if he is hitting .320 now, what care about is will he still be hitting .320 two months from now? That to me is a more important question then what has a player done so far.

I don't know if he will or wont - but I know for sure that Aaron Miles will not.

Uribe, on this cold streak you talk about him possibly having when his average fell to .320, is now walking well over this 10% of his plate apps stat that you want. What more will it take?

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 11:07 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
You're not taking into consideration that he is seeing pitches to hit because of the power guys behind him. People don't want to face Maggs and Thomas with men on base, and therefore are forced to pitch strikes to Uribe, which apparently he's taking advantage of. But I guees he should try to force the issue, not be aggressive to increase his walks, which would no doubtedly increase his strikeout total as well.

You are also forgetting one of the jobs for a leadoff hitter or #2 guys, is to take pitches so the rest of the club can see what is coming. I am ok with increased strikeouts if it means improvements in other areas. You will find the teams so strikeout the most are also the teams who score the most runs.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
You are also forgetting one of the jobs for a leadoff hitter or #2 guys, is to take pitches so the rest of the club can see what is coming. I am ok with increased strikeouts if it means improvements in other areas. You will find the teams so strikeout the most are also the teams who score the most runs. The number one job of a 1 and 2 hitter is to get on base, everything else is gravy. If Uribe hits the first pitch for a single, that gives you reason to knock him? What kind of logic is that. So as long as he increases his walks, he can bat .250 for all you care replacing several hits (some for extra bases) with K's in order for the team to see what pitches he gets? Dadawg, you need to reevaluate your argument.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 11:12 AM
Originally posted by jabrch
I went to look at Uribe's "cold streak" as of late. Here's a funny thing about it. On May 20, he was hitting .331. Since then, in 12 games, he is 17 for 53 and is DOWN to .322. Don't you hate it when your #2 hitter is on a bad streak (.320) to bring his season numbers down so much (.322) Interestingly - during that down streak he has had 8 walks of his 16 on the season.

So let me get this straight. if we add in his walks, during this cold streak, we have a guy with an obp of (17+8)/(53+8) = .409 (I don't have his full stat sheet to count HBPs, etc in front of me - so this is an estimate)

And there are still people making the arguement that KW is dumb becuase Uribe isn't that good and he is due to go on a cold streak when he doesn't walk despite evidence to the contrary? Does this all result in anyone thinking that the Sox would be better off with Aaron Miles?

This amazes me.

Credit KW where credit is due. Uribe is worlds better than Miles using any measure you chose to find.

I am not making the argument Kenny is dumb because Uribe is bound to get cold, but that calling Kenny a genius for acquiring Uribe at this point is premature. Like I said before, what Miles is, is a secondary part of evaluating a trade. We are taking different methods in evaluating trades, but I stand behind my position if a trade doesn't help a ballclub it can not be a good trade.

Avg is just part of the OBP, and that is greater number to look at and I didn't do my homework here, so just going by what someone else posted with the cold streak. If he has OBP over 400 over that time period, then that is not a cold streak.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
The number one job of a 1 and 2 hitter is to get on base, everything else is gravy. If Uribe hits the first pitch for a single, that gives you reason to knock him? What kind of logic is that. So as long as he increases his walks, he can bat .250 for all you care replacing several hits (some for extra bases) with K's in order for the team to see what pitches he gets? Dadawg, you need to reevaluate your argument.


If he is batting .250 with a high OBP (>.375), then it is all good.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 11:15 AM
Originally posted by jabrch
it almost sounds like you would think he is a better player if he had fewer hits and more walks.


He would be a more consistent player, One day you get a blop single and the next a little can of corn to the 2B. Hits are lot more volatile then walks.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 11:16 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
If he is batting .250 with a high OBP (>.375), then it is all good. His OBP is .381 right now, so how about cutting him slack there sparky.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 11:16 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
The number one job of a 1 and 2 hitter is to get on base, everything else is gravy. If Uribe hits the first pitch for a single, that gives you reason to knock him? What kind of logic is that. So as long as he increases his walks, he can bat .250 for all you care replacing several hits (some for extra bases) with K's in order for the team to see what pitches he gets? Dadawg, you need to reevaluate your argument.

Unless that pitch was grooved a leadoff man should swing at the first pitch, not sure if anyone should.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 11:18 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
His OBP is .381 right now, so how about cutting him slack there sparky.

lol, the point I have made is too much of his OBP is coming from Avg currently. As the hits go, so does average and so does OBP. Walks tend to stay the same through a time period where one can not hit where they ain't.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 11:19 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
He would be a more consistent player, One day you get a blop single and the next a little can of corn to the 2B. Hits are lot more volatile then walks. You can't force pitchers to walk you, you make it sound like he's swinging at pitches in the dirt and is just getting lucky hits right now. When you're hot, you swing away and hit the ball hard. When you slump, you make an adjustment. What makes you think Uribe isn't capable of making an adjustment if he does slump? Right now though, I don't see why he needs to change his approach to please you.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 11:20 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Unless that pitch was grooved a leadoff man should swing at the first pitch, not sure if anyone should. Not saying you should or shouldn't, but sometimes that's the best pitch you'll see. If you guess right and it's right there, why not?

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 11:21 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Not saying you should or shouldn't, but sometimes that's the best pitch you'll see. If you guess right and it's right there, why not?

That is what I said.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
lol, the point I have made is too much of his OBP is coming from Avg currently. As the hits go, so does average and so does OBP. Walks tend to stay the same through a time period where one can not hit where they ain't. You can't just change the style of hitter he is, especially when he's been effective with it. To tell him to be passive at the plate will hurt him more than it will help.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
You can't force pitchers to walk you,


If you work counts, you will take walks. So a hitter can create more walks for himself.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 11:23 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
That is what I said. As did I.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 11:23 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
You can't just change the style of hitter he is, especially when he's been effective with it. To tell him to be passive at the plate will hurt him more than it will help.

The thing is he has been effective with it for only two months. With the Rockies he was completely ineffective.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 11:24 AM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
In principle I agree with you, but I think 2 months of performance is a bit long to be considered a "streak".

Actually you can have a hot year, and the next year fall off the face of the planet. Look at Erstad for an example.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 11:25 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
If you work counts, you will take walks. So a hitter can create more walks for himself. He does work counts, but it makes no sense to take the aggressive approach from him if he sees a good pitch to hit. If he swings at bad pitches, then your point may be valid, but if he's swinging at good pitches and hitting them hard, why tell him to take pitches right there so he can try and draw a walk? With the way he's hitting, it makes absolutely no sense. Wait for a need to adjust before you suggest it.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 11:26 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
The thing is he has been effective with it for only two months. With the Rockies he was completely ineffective. He's not on the Rockies. And his experience has obviously helped. He's at the age where many players finally come into their own. Plus he has Walker working with him, and I just assume Walker tell him what he needs to do.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 11:28 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Actually you can have a hot year, and the next year fall off the face of the planet. Look at Erstad for an example. Erstad is and was hurt, not a fair example at all.

rahulsekhar
06-04-2004, 11:34 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Actually you can have a hot year, and the next year fall off the face of the planet. Look at Erstad for an example.

Neglecting the fact that injuries have played a huge role in Erstad...

So by your logic, it will be impossible to rate the trade until what - 2 years from now? Billy Koch hasn't had 2 years, but KW's ripped left and right for that move. Why doesn't the same waiting period apply?

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 11:36 AM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
Neglecting the fact that injuries have played a huge role in Erstad...

So by your logic, it will be impossible to rate the trade until what - 2 years from now? Billy Koch hasn't had 2 years, but KW's ripped left and right for that move. Why doesn't the same waiting period apply?

Even if you look at the years Erstad was healthy, he didn't produce like when he was hot that year. Brady Anderson is another.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 11:39 AM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
Neglecting the fact that injuries have played a huge role in Erstad...

So by your logic, it will be impossible to rate the trade until what - 2 years from now? Billy Koch hasn't had 2 years, but KW's ripped left and right for that move. Why doesn't the same waiting period apply?

Age. Uribe still have an upside, Koch didn't. Plus Koch didn't help the team, actually hurts it, so it can't be a good trade. When we look at who Kenny gave up, it becomes a really bad trade. Cotts may make it only slightly bad trade.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 11:39 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Even if you look at the years Erstad was healthy, he didn't produce like when he was hot that year. Brady Anderson is another. Darn, why didn't KW look at those guys before making that trade. If those guys suck, then Uribe is a sure bet to fail. Nice going Kenny, you dumby. Think before you trade. Now Miles is going to have an all star caliber season in the Rockies AAA instead for our Charlotte team. DARN!

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 11:41 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
He's not on the Rockies. And his experience has obviously helped. He's at the age where many players finally come into their own. Plus he has Walker working with him, and I just assume Walker tell him what he needs to do.

He is and maybe Walker is helping him out a lot. Still his increased in performance is a major jump from what he was doing in Coors field. One would figure that in a hitters park, his stats would be padded but he was awful in Colorado.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 11:44 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
He is and maybe Walker is helping him out a lot. Still his increased in performance is a major jump from what he was doing in Coors field. One would figure that in a hitters park, his stats would be padded but he was awful in Colorado. Coaching and maturity has obviously benefited him, along with several Latin teammates. It only matters what he does with us as far as I'm concerned.

Randar68
06-04-2004, 11:47 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Age. Uribe still have an upside, Koch didn't. Plus Koch didn't help the team, actually hurts it, so it can't be a good trade. When we look at who Kenny gave up, it becomes a really bad trade. Cotts may make it only slightly bad trade.

Look at it this way, Dawg.

If Foulke had left via FA, who would the Sox closer have been the past 2 years?

Gordon? Well, KW got him for nothing... no credit there, right?
Marte? Part-time closer, sure, full-time?

Nobody had a hint of a clue that Koch would have been THAT bad and lost 5+ mph off his velocity. There were definitely signs that he wasn't quite as effective, but Foulke lost 10 freaking games in relief and people here make him out to be Gagne's predecessor...

Koch had been a legit closer in the past, albeit, one that scared the bejesus out of fans, but legit nonetheless.

jabrch
06-04-2004, 11:50 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Look the most important thing in evaluating a trade, is how much did player A help the team. Then I consider what was given for player A? So if a player doesn't help your team then it is wash to bad trade, it can not be a good trade since you received no benefit from it.

It is still too early to judge anything on Uribe as one needs more then two months. But Miles isn't doing anything for the Rockies.

Player A has already helped this team. I thought you said you don't care what he has ALREADY done - but are worried about what he might do next? So do you evaluate trades based on what the player already did for us, or what he might do if this cold streak of his (.320) continues.

Even if Uribe does NOTHING the rest of the year, he has already done more than Miles would have by anyone's estimations - right? That makes it a good deal in my eyes.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 11:54 AM
Originally posted by jabrch
Player A has already helped this team. I thought you said you don't care what he has ALREADY done - but are worried about what he might do next? So do you evaluate trades based on what the player already did for us, or what he might do if this cold streak of his (.320) continues.

Even if Uribe does NOTHING the rest of the year, he has already done more than Miles would have by anyone's estimations - right? That makes it a good deal in my eyes. Not to mention the good defense he brings to our infield.

rahulsekhar
06-04-2004, 11:54 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Age. Uribe still have an upside, Koch didn't. Plus Koch didn't help the team, actually hurts it, so it can't be a good trade. When we look at who Kenny gave up, it becomes a really bad trade. Cotts may make it only slightly bad trade.

So if a player helps his team: can't evaluate it, need to wait.

But if a player hurts his team: it's fair to evaluate it and say it's a bad deal?

You recognize the inconsistency here, right?

rahulsekhar
06-04-2004, 11:56 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
He is and maybe Walker is helping him out a lot. Still his increased in performance is a major jump from what he was doing in Coors field. One would figure that in a hitters park, his stats would be padded but he was awful in Colorado.

So then KW did a GREAT job by seeing past his CO stats and recognizing that there was not only talent there, but that the Sox atmosphere (coaching, teammates,etc.) was one in which Uribe could thrive. Just like E-Lo, Willie, Shoney.

Nah - just lucky I guess.

jabrch
06-04-2004, 11:56 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Even if you look at the years Erstad was healthy, he didn't produce like when he was hot that year. Brady Anderson is another.

Brady Anderson is a good example of one thing and one thing only. A .256, 15HR slap hitter can juice himself up to be a 50 HR guy. Jim Palmer was dead right on that one.

jabrch
06-04-2004, 11:58 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Not to mention the good defense he brings to our infield.

@ SS, 2B or 3B!

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 11:58 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Darn, why didn't KW look at those guys before making that trade. If those guys suck, then Uribe is a sure bet to fail. Nice going Kenny, you dumby. Think before you trade. Now Miles is going to have an all star caliber season in the Rockies AAA instead for our Charlotte team. DARN!

Lol, do you have a hard time at reading comprehension? I brought those names up as examples of guys who have hot years and then fall off to counter the post which said two months is a too long to be consider a streak. No where in that line of thought, did I say Kenny was dumb for acquiring Uribe.

Now at the start of the year, I thought getting Uribe was blah move, just doing something to do something. Why acquire a .300 OPB player form the ROCKIES? Actually thought he was going to start at 2B. I wasn't too upset about it becaue all we lost was Miles, and really did the Sox lose anything.
In case anyone wants to read WSI reaction to the trade, http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=26969&perpage=15&display=show&pagenumber=8

jabrch
06-04-2004, 12:02 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Lol, do you have a hard time at reading comprehension? I brought those names up as examples of guys who have hot years and then fall off to counter the post which said two months is a too long to be consider a streak. No where in that line of thought, did I say Kenny was dumb for acquiring Uribe.

Now at the start of the year, I thought getting Uribe was blah move, just doing something to do something. Why acquire a .300 OPB player form the ROCKIES? Actually thought he was going to start at 2B. I wasn't too upset about it becaue all we lost was Miles, and really did the Sox lose anything.
In case anyone wants to read WSI reaction to the trade, http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=26969&perpage=15&display=show&pagenumber=8

So everyone thought it was a blah to dumb move.

We gave up a guy who has still proven to suck

Uribe has had a strong impact on this team already

Uribe has been one of our best hitters using any metrics you care to use

and we can conclude

kw is a bad GM
he is lucky
it is too early to say Uribe is good
it is too early to say this was a good trade
Uribe is gonna slump

I don't get it...dawg - what's with this arguement?

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 12:02 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
Look at it this way, Dawg.

If Foulke had left via FA, who would the Sox closer have been the past 2 years?

Gordon? Well, KW got him for nothing... no credit there, right?
Marte? Part-time closer, sure, full-time?

Nobody had a hint of a clue that Koch would have been THAT bad and lost 5+ mph off his velocity. There were definitely signs that he wasn't quite as effective, but Foulke lost 10 freaking games in relief and people here make him out to be Gagne's predecessor...

Koch had been a legit closer in the past, albeit, one that scared the bejesus out of fans, but legit nonetheless.

I do think there were hints he would get hurt and things could get bad. Foulke would have closed last year, this year who knows, maybe Foulke. I do believe if Foulke was with the team last year, we would have made the playoffs. The team we had last year could have done some damage if we made post season play.

Gordon was a good FA move.

Randar68
06-04-2004, 12:03 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
I do think there were hints he would get hurt and things could get bad. Foulke would have closed last year, this year who knows, maybe Foulke. I do believe if Foulke was with the team last year, we would have made the playoffs. The team we had last year could have done some damage if we made post season play.

Gordon was a good FA move.

FOULKE WAS NOT GOING TO BE BACK BECAUSE OF JM AND BECAUSE HE WANTED TOO MUCH MONEY!

Please, at least recognize the reality that exists far from this fantasy land of yours...

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 12:04 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
So if a player helps his team: can't evaluate it, need to wait.

But if a player hurts his team: it's fair to evaluate it and say it's a bad deal?

You recognize the inconsistency here, right?

Two months do not equal a year. If Uribe keeps up his current level of production, it will be a good trade.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 12:05 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Lol, do you have a hard time at reading comprehension? I brought those names up as examples of guys who have hot years and then fall off to counter the post which said two months is a too long to be consider a streak. No where in that line of thought, did I say Kenny was dumb for acquiring Uribe.
No you said it's too early to give him credit for the move. Why?

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 12:06 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Two months do not equal a year. If Uribe keeps up his current level of production, it will be a good trade. And if he drops a little it will be a bad trade?

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 12:07 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
FOULKE WAS NOT GOING TO BE BACK BECAUSE OF JM AND BECAUSE HE WANTED TOO MUCH MONEY!

Please, at least recognize the reality that exists far from this fantasy land of yours...

He would have gone to arbitration last year and/or the Sox could have work something out. Plus the trade had zero cash impact since the Sox sent cash to Oakland to even out the salaries. So your point about the money is invalid.

As for JM, you may be right.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 12:08 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
No you said it's too early to give him credit for the move. Why?

Cause you can not judge the effect Uribe will have on the team this year in two months.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 12:09 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
So everyone thought it was a blah to dumb move.

We gave up a guy who has still proven to suck

Uribe has had a strong impact on this team already

Uribe has been one of our best hitters using any metrics you care to use

and we can conclude

kw is a bad GM
he is lucky
it is too early to say Uribe is good
it is too early to say this was a good trade
Uribe is gonna slump

I don't get it...dawg - what's with this arguement?

Will Uribe keep it up?

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 12:10 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Cause you can not judge the effect Uribe will have on the team this year in two months. But according to you, even if he does it the whole year, he will be in the category of players that have one hot year and then fade. So Uribe can't win according to your logic. Too bad, I thought we had a good one, but I guess not.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 12:12 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Will Uribe keep it up? Why don't you at least wait for him to fade before you start talking with this much pessimism. Right now, all you're doing is predicting failure when all he has done is succeed with us. That's just dumb.

rahulsekhar
06-04-2004, 12:13 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Cause you can not judge the effect Uribe will have on the team this year in two months.

No on'es trying to do that, what's being said is that ti's fair to say that the Uribe trade was a great one...so far, and that it appears that it will end up as a great one for the Sox.

You're the only one saying "I can't even evaluate it so far because it's too short of a time, even after this year it'll be too short of a time. But oh yeah - the 1 year rule doens't apply to trades I deem to be bad ones like Koch."

MRKARNO
06-04-2004, 12:15 PM
I was just about to make a post attribituing Uribe's recent relative cold streak to his batting leadoff when I saw that his OPS is almost identical in both the one and the two hole of the lineup (about .950)

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
No on'es trying to do that, what's being said is that ti's fair to say that the Uribe trade was a great one...so far, and that it appears that it will end up as a great one for the Sox.

You're the only one saying "I can't even evaluate it so far because it's too short of a time, even after this year it'll be too short of a time. But oh yeah - the 1 year rule doens't apply to trades I deem to be bad ones like Koch."

It isn't fair to judge the Uribe trade one way or the other. To say this is a great trade which is what is being said here, makes the judgment that Uribe will help out this team through out the year. No one is saying this looks like a trade which will become a great trade.

The Koch trade cost us a shot at the postseason last year. That is a major setback to the Sox. Secondly Koch performance last year was in line with his track record, especially with the reduction in velocity. That reduction made it lot easier for him to get caught, where as he could mess up but blow a few 100 mphs past people to get out of it before. Uribe production increase is amazing form last year. That should lead one to be more skeptical about it. Just like Erstad 200+ hits or Anderson 50+ home runs, those increases were unprecedented in the players career. If any increase or decrease of production comes out of the blue, I am skeptical of it. Koch's did not, while Urbie's has. I find it hard that people can't grasp that simple point. While Uribe could be having a coming out party, he could also be very lucky this year, I think it is best to wait and let it settle before judging.

OEO Magglio
06-04-2004, 12:27 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
It isn't fair to judge the Uribe trade one way or the other. To say this is a great trade which is what is being said here, makes the judgment that Uribe will help out this team through out the year. No one is saying this looks like a trade which will become a great trade.

The Koch trade cost us a shot at the postseason last year. That is a major setback to the Sox. Secondly Koch performance last year was in line with his track record, especially with the reduction in velocity. That reduction made it lot easier for him to get caught, where as he could mess up but blow a few 100 mphs past people to get out of it before. Uribe production increase is amazing form last year. That should lead one to be more skeptical about it. Just like Erstad 200+ hits or Anderson 50+ home runs, those increases were unprecedented in the players career. If any increase or decrease of production comes out of the blue, I am skeptical of it. Koch's did not, while Urbie's has. I find it hard that people can't grasp that simple point. While Uribe could be having a coming out party, he could also be very lucky this year, I think it is best to wait and let it settle before judging.
Was kenny just supposed to know that koch was going to lose his velocity? People keep saying he's lucky for loaiza and uribe but won't even think he made good pickups. Maybe kenny was unlucky with the koch trade because he lost his velocity.

rahulsekhar
06-04-2004, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
It isn't fair to judge the Uribe trade one way or the other. To say this is a great trade which is what is being said here, makes the judgment that Uribe will help out this team through out the year. No one is saying this looks like a trade which will become a great trade.

What I've seen is mostly people saying it's a great trade to date and looks like it wil end upa great trade. no one is saying that Juan is guaranteed to be a .320 hitting, great fielding, decent power SS - if taht were the case, this would go down as an all-time steal.



The Koch trade cost us a shot at the postseason last year. That is a major setback to the Sox. Secondly Koch performance last year was in line with his track record, especially with the reduction in velocity. That reduction made it lot easier for him to get caught, where as he could mess up but blow a few 100 mphs past people to get out of it before.

As you say - if Koch didn't have a drop in velocty, he'd probably be on line with his previous #s and OK. Unless you expected KW to forsee the drop in velocity, it's ludicrous to blame him for that (and since he hasn't had any arm surgery or anything, it's not like he had an injury the Sox should have forseen).


Uribe production increase is amazing form last year. That should lead one to be more skeptical about it. Just like Erstad 200+ hits or Anderson 50+ home runs, those increases were unprecedented in the players career. If any increase or decrease of production comes out of the blue, I am skeptical of it. Koch's did not, while Urbie's has. I find it hard that people can't grasp that simple point. While Uribe could be having a coming out party, he could also be very lucky this year, I think it is best to wait and let it settle before judging.

When an established player has a huge increase, you're right. When a young player has it, it's much more likely that they're just "figuring out" the bigs and how they need to approach the game. When you add in a young player gettign in a much more comfortable environment, that last point becomes even more likely.

Comparing Uribe to Brady Anderson is ludicrous. IMO. Juan's not doing anything that wasn't expected of him when he came up a mere 3 years ago. He's really only had 1 full season of play - last year he was platooned due to his 1 full year hitting .240. Why is it so hard to believe that he's adjusted and figured things out and is more comfortable and in his 2d time getting serious PT is able to play to his talent level?

jabrch
06-04-2004, 12:36 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Foulke would have closed last year, this year who knows, maybe Foulke.

No he wouldn't have. He was done here. He got demoted and was not going to stay. He was gone.

jabrch
06-04-2004, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Cause you can not judge the effect Uribe will have on the team this year in two months.

but the effect he has already had has been infinitely better than what we would have gotten from Miles.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
What I've seen is mostly people saying it's a great trade to date and looks like it wil end upa great trade. no one is saying that Juan is guaranteed to be a .320 hitting, great fielding, decent power SS - if taht were the case, this would go down as an all-time steal.

[B]

As you say - if Koch didn't have a drop in velocty, he'd probably be on line with his previous #s and OK. Unless you expected KW to forsee the drop in velocity, it's ludicrous to blame him for that (and since he hasn't had any arm surgery or anything, it's not like he had an injury the Sox should have forseen).

[B]

When an established player has a huge increase, you're right. When a young player has it, it's much more likely that they're just "figuring out" the bigs and how they need to approach the game. When you add in a young player gettign in a much more comfortable environment, that last point becomes even more likely.

Comparing Uribe to Brady Anderson is ludicrous. IMO. Juan's not doing anything that wasn't expected of him when he came up a mere 3 years ago. He's really only had 1 full season of play - last year he was platooned due to his 1 full year hitting .240. Why is it so hard to believe that he's adjusted and figured things out and is more comfortable and in his 2d time getting serious PT is able to play to his talent level?

I am not saying he hasn't. What I am saying is one should be suspect of his future production. Anderson was only brought up to show that you can have a year long streak. Young players have also shot up only to fall to the way side in the long term. With younger players, you need to add time to evaluating trades because of their development, where as Koch for Foulke was two vets being traded. I also mention the minor league players in the deal could also change the way one views the trade. If Cotts becomes a Cy Young winner, the Koch-Foulke trade will be a good one for the Sox.

On another note, the reason I think you should look at the benefit an acquired player brings to the team is trades are not a zero sum game. If you compare the two player traded as you only bias for evaluating a trade, one team must lose and the other must win. Trades can be win-win so thinking of trades in a zero sum mindset is a logical fallacy.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
but the effect he has already had has been infinitely better than what we would have gotten from Miles.

But a two months of positive results does not make a trade a great one, maybe a good one, but not a great one.

rahulsekhar
06-04-2004, 12:41 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77

On another note, the reason I think you should look at the benefit an acquired player brings to the team is trades are not a zero sum game. If you compare the two player traded as you only bias for evaluating a trade, one team must lose and the other must win. Trades can be win-win so thinking of trades in a zero sum mindset is a logical fallacy.

I fail to see how in any mindset (other than those altered by chemicals!) - Uribe for Miles is anything but a relative big win for the Sox (i.e. the Rockies may end up benefiting from Miles, but the Sox will benefit a lot more from Uribe).

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 12:42 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
But a two months of positive results does not make a trade a great one, maybe a good one, but not a great one. But it can become a great trade if Uribe increases his walk total. Right Dadawg.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 12:44 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
I fail to see how in any mindset (other than those altered by chemicals!) - Uribe for Miles is anything but a relative big win for the Sox (i.e. the Rockies may end up benefiting from Miles, but the Sox will benefit a lot more from Uribe).

Cause I really don't care about what Miles does for the Rockies till you get further in the process. If Uribe has a fluke year which helps the Sox win this year's World Series and Miles turns out to be a inner circle Hall of Famer, it is still a good trade for the Sox and very good trade for the Rockies.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 12:45 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
But it can become a great trade if Uribe increases his walk total. Right Dadawg.

You are a brick wall. Re read my post and you might finally pick up what I am saying.

Randar68
06-04-2004, 12:45 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Cause I really don't care about what Miles does for the Rockies till you get further in the process. If Uribe has a fluke year which helps the Sox win this year's World Series and Miles turns out to be a inner circle Hall of Famer, it is still a good trade for the Sox and very good trade for the Rockies.

Miles is 27 years old and can't stick with the major league club hitting in Coors Field.

For the love of GOD, your constant double-standards get worse by the day.

jabrch
06-04-2004, 12:45 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
But a two months of positive results does not make a trade a great one, maybe a good one, but not a great one.

But you said....
Look the most important thing in evaluating a trade, is how much did player A help the team. Then I consider what was given for player A? So if a player doesn't help your team then it is wash to bad trade, it can not be a good trade since you received no benefit from it.

and you followed that by saying that you don't care what he did - only what he is going to do.

Your arguement keeps changing - and going in circles - just to argue that there is anything not good about KWs move to give up Aaron Miles for Uribe. I don't get it.

Randar68
06-04-2004, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
You are a brick wall.


Do we have an "Ironic Post of the Year" award here at WSI?

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 12:47 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
Miles is 27 years old and can't stick with the major league club hitting in Coors Field.

For the love of GOD, your constant double-standards get worse by the day.

What ****ing double standards? If you can not comprehend the difference between Koch - Foulke deal and Uribe - Miles, then you really are missing the forest for a tree.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 12:50 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
Do we have an "Ironic Post of the Year" award here at WSI? Now look what you did Dadawg, you've made Randar and I join forces. There's no arguing with that combo. :D:

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 12:51 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
What ****ing double standards? If you can not comprehend the difference between Koch - Foulke deal and Uribe - Miles, then you really are missing the forest for a tree. I think you're confusing yourself. :?:

Randar68
06-04-2004, 12:53 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
What ****ing double standards? If you can not comprehend the difference between Koch - Foulke deal and Uribe - Miles, then you really are missing the forest for a tree.

For every case, you make up a new special rule that you use to rationalize your criticism. None is applicable to any other, and each one is a convenient twist of reality.

Your arguments in almost every thread, are circular and just leaves you spinning your wheels without ever making a consolidated point, a consistent argument, or a open-minded analysis of a situation.

Frankly, I don't know why some people waste their time arguing with you. Then, to say, "You're like a brick wall" to someone else???

*****! Pure hilarity, Dawg.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 12:57 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
But you said....


and you followed that by saying that you don't care what he did - only what he is going to do.

Your arguement keeps changing - and going in circles - just to argue that there is anything not good about KWs move to give up Aaron Miles for Uribe. I don't get it.

It hasn't change, you are combing to arguements into one.

The net overall worth of two months of baseball isn't that big. The worth of a whole year of baseball is big. Thus one should judge a trade based on two months since the worth isn't that much. While at the end of the year one can have a better judgment since one have tangible results and results that have real worth.

So is Uribe doing the things that one would associate with players who keep up success at the plate, not really. Does it mean he will fail as there are several exceptions to the rule. With such a dramatic increase one needs some healthy skepticism when projecting how good a player will be.

Trades can be a win win position thus zero sum thinking of comparing traded players to one another isn't the best way of evaluating trades. The most important factor in evaluating a trade is what the acquire player did for the team. Then one can look at what was given up. If a player helped his team, then it is a good trade, since what the given up player production should only sway a trade from even to bad, or make a trade very good/bad. It can't make an even trade good, since you still have received no benefit from the trade.

Those are the three arguements I have made in the thread.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 12:58 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
For every case, you make up a new special rule that you use to rationalize your criticism. None is applicable to any other, and each one is a convenient twist of reality.

Your arguments in almost every thread, are circular and just leaves you spinning your wheels without ever making a consolidated point, a consistent argument, or a open-minded analysis of a situation.

Frankly, I don't know why some people waste their time arguing with you. Then, to say, "You're like a brick wall" to someone else???

*****! Pure hilarity, Dawg.

Oh, I forgot the no one is a better judge in baseball matters then you. Sorry I step on your toes.

Lets forget each individual move has it own subtleties and nuances which much be considered its own right.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
It hasn't change, you are combing to arguements into one.

The net overall worth of two months of baseball isn't that big. The worth of a whole year of baseball is big. Thus one should judge a trade based on two months since the worth isn't that much. While at the end of the year one can have a better judgment since one have tangible results and results that have real worth.

So is Uribe doing the things that one would associate with players who keep up success at the plate, not really. Does it mean he will fail as there are several exceptions to the rule. With such a dramatic increase one needs some healthy skepticism when projecting how good a player will be.

Trades can be a win win position thus zero sum thinking of comparing traded players to one another isn't the best way of evaluating trades. The most important factor in evaluating a trade is what the acquire player did for the team. Then one can look at what was given up. If a player helped his team, then it is a good trade, since what the given up player production should only sway a trade from even to bad, or make a trade very good/bad. It can't make an even trade good, since you still have received no benefit from the trade.

Those are the three arguements I have made in the thread. Too bad we'll never know if it was a good trade or not until they're careers are over.

rahulsekhar
06-04-2004, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
It hasn't change, you are combing to arguements into one.

The net overall worth of two months of baseball isn't that big. The worth of a whole year of baseball is big. Thus one should judge a trade based on two months since the worth isn't that much. While at the end of the year one can have a better judgment since one have tangible results and results that have real worth.



So is Uribe doing the things that one would associate with players who keep up success at the plate, not really. Does it mean he will fail as there are several exceptions to the rule. With such a dramatic increase one needs some healthy skepticism when projecting how good a player will be.

So it's not OK to evaluate the trade based on the players performances to date (small sample size), but it IS ok to look at player's performance to date(again - small sample size) and use it to predict where he'll end up the season? Seems inconsistent to me.

Not to mention the fact that the difference between "doing the things that one would associate with players who keep up success at the plate" and what Juan's currently doing is a sum total of.....4 walks on the year. And his walk rate has actually increased as the year has gone on (IIRC, someone posted that in this thread).

So the logical conclusion is that Uribe's going to regress and the trade will end up somehow not being a winner for the Sox.

jabrch
06-04-2004, 01:13 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
The most important factor in evaluating a trade is what the acquire player did for the team. Then one can look at what was given up.

But you said you don't care what Uribe has done already - only what he is going to do. And since you think there is a good chance he won't hit .320, this can't be a great trade.

Meanwhile, in Colorado, the guy we gave up hasn't done crap and wouldn't be in the starting lineup for our team, had we not made the deal.

But you don't care what he did - only what he is going to do - which we don't know.

So the chances of Miles being an inner-circle HOFer and Uribe only playing 2 months of good ball is why you can't judge this trade.

But at the same time, Blanton, Redmon, Duscherer make up what is going to be a great rotation and Byrnes and Hatteberg, who take walks (mind you not significantly more than Uribe and Gload) are great values.

Meanwhile....

You are going in one giant circle Dawg - seemingly just to say KW is a bad GM when evidence points out many more good moves than bad - meanwhile - Billy Beane is great becuse winning playoff series requires luck - while winning a division doesn't - because of sample size - which applies to sox players of under 2 months, but not to other teams guys - and applies to some deals, but not others. Sample size also does not apply to the cold streaks that sox players go on - those are "reversion to the mean" at the same time - Marcus Scutaro (down from .390 to .287) is good cuz he gets on base consistently (even though he does that LESS THAN URIBE)...but that is an issue of sample size. So KWs luck has gotten him Loaiza, Uribe, Schoe, etc. and he is a terrible GM who has stuck us with bad contracts, a bad closer, Todd Richie, David Wells, etc., mismanages the draft, the farm, etc...

Did I miss anything?

Randar68
06-04-2004, 01:16 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Oh, I forgot the no one is a better judge in baseball matters then you. Sorry I step on your toes.

Lets forget each individual move has it own subtleties and nuances which much be considered its own right.

*****.

Keep digging, Dawg... keep digging...

jabrch
06-04-2004, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
[B]
And his walk rate has actually increased as the year has gone on (IIRC, someone posted that in this thread).



Actually, his walk rate increased DRASTICALLY as the season went on and teams started pitching more carefully to him - yes, he "slumped" when walking more (averaging .320 during that period)

Aaron Miles - lol

Randar68
06-04-2004, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
You are going in one giant circle Dawg - seemingly just to say KW is a bad GM when evidence points out many more good moves than bad - meanwhile - Billy Beane is great becuse winning playoff series requires luck - while winning a division doesn't - because of sample size - which applies to sox players of under 2 months, but not to other teams guys - and applies to some deals, but not others. Sample size also does not apply to the cold streaks that sox players go on - those are "reversion to the mean" at the same time - Marcus Scutaro (down from .390 to .287) is good cuz he gets on base consistently (even though he does that LESS THAN URIBE)...but that is an issue of sample size. So KWs luck has gotten him Loaiza, Uribe, Schoe, etc. and he is a terrible GM who has stuck us with bad contracts, a bad closer, Todd Richie, David Wells, etc., mismanages the draft, the farm, etc...

Did I miss anything?

Are you really expecting a rationed reply?

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by jabrch

Did I miss anything? I think he said he was ugly too. :D:

jabrch
06-04-2004, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
Are you really expecting a rationed reply?

I think by now our sample size is large enough that I know what reply to expect.

:)

FarWestChicago
06-04-2004, 01:22 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
Do we have an "Ironic Post of the Year" award here at WSI? That would be up there. :D:

soxtalker
06-04-2004, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
...

So KWs luck has gotten him Loaiza, Uribe, Schoe, etc. and he is a terrible GM who has stuck us with bad contracts, a bad closer, Todd Richie, David Wells, etc., mismanages the draft, the farm, etc...


I've said several times on various threads that my impression is that KW has been learning from his early mistakes (with Ritchie and Clayton being obvious early mistakes).

After his early mistakes, KW seems to have changed his style. There haven't been as many blockbuster trades lately. Colon was probably the last (though some might include Everett/Alomar), and that showed some keen deal-making ability. Where KW has excelled is in finding the diamonds in the rough. Those tend to be lower overall risk, but he's made several of them pay off. Those that didn't work very well early on were pretty high risk. We gave up a lot in terms of players and/or salary, and we were forced to play them for extended periods of time.

The farm system is a big concern of mine. Unlike many on the board who view prospects as having little value, I'd prefer to have a deep farm system that can be used to supply the major league team. Now, KW has used a lot of the prospects in trades. We don't have a very highly rated system (e.g., by BA standards), but I'm not sure how accurate those evaluation systems are. It has occurred to me that KW may be trading away Schueler prospects and replacing them with his own. (I know KW was in charge of the minor league system, but my impression is that Schueler wielded a heavy hand in draft selection.) KW's ability to find players like Loaiza, Uribe, Schoe, etc. may imply that he will do well in drafting and pulling minor leaguers out of other teams' systems.

Frater Perdurabo
06-04-2004, 01:54 PM
Well, if no one else will:

:tomatoaward :tomatoaward

rahulsekhar
06-04-2004, 02:06 PM
Originally posted by soxtalker

The farm system is a big concern of mine. Unlike many on the board who view prospects as having little value, I'd prefer to have a deep farm system that can be used to supply the major league team. Now, KW has used a lot of the prospects in trades. We don't have a very highly rated system (e.g., by BA standards), but I'm not sure how accurate those evaluation systems are. It has occurred to me that KW may be trading away Schueler prospects and replacing them with his own. (I know KW was in charge of the minor league system, but my impression is that Schueler wielded a heavy hand in draft selection.) KW's ability to find players like Loaiza, Uribe, Schoe, etc. may imply that he will do well in drafting and pulling minor leaguers out of other teams' systems.

IMO, outside of Kip Wells, we haven't lost any real prospects. The top tier of guys (Borchard, Honel, Wing, Diaz, Cotts, Reed, Sweenet, Anderson) are all still around. The guys KW's given up have been lower/mor marginal guys like Francisco, Rupe, and to some extent - Ring (I know he was a #1, but I don't think he was ever on the level of the guys like Reed). Balance that against the guys he's brought in - Diaz, Cotts, Adkins, Olivo and I'd say he's done a pretty good job making moves and providing a net increase in the quality of the farm system.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
But you said you don't care what Uribe has done already - only what he is going to do. And since you think there is a good chance he won't hit .320, this can't be a great trade.

Meanwhile, in Colorado, the guy we gave up hasn't done crap and wouldn't be in the starting lineup for our team, had we not made the deal.

But you don't care what he did - only what he is going to do - which we don't know.

So the chances of Miles being an inner-circle HOFer and Uribe only playing 2 months of good ball is why you can't judge this trade.

But at the same time, Blanton, Redmon, Duscherer make up what is going to be a great rotation and Byrnes and Hatteberg, who take walks (mind you not significantly more than Uribe and Gload) are great values.

Meanwhile....

You are going in one giant circle Dawg - seemingly just to say KW is a bad GM when evidence points out many more good moves than bad - meanwhile - Billy Beane is great becuse winning playoff series requires luck - while winning a division doesn't - because of sample size - which applies to sox players of under 2 months, but not to other teams guys - and applies to some deals, but not others. Sample size also does not apply to the cold streaks that sox players go on - those are "reversion to the mean" at the same time - Marcus Scutaro (down from .390 to .287) is good cuz he gets on base consistently (even though he does that LESS THAN URIBE)...but that is an issue of sample size. So KWs luck has gotten him Loaiza, Uribe, Schoe, etc. and he is a terrible GM who has stuck us with bad contracts, a bad closer, Todd Richie, David Wells, etc., mismanages the draft, the farm, etc...

Did I miss anything?

See now you mix and matching. I haven't said a word about the A's or Beane here, so can you keep your obsession to yourself.

You are still combining two distinct points, sorry if I haven't been clear enough that I am expressing two different points of view depending on what you are trying to do. Lets make it simple, if you are constructing a roster or projecting a player, the only things that should concern are the things which can be useful in projecting a player. If you are picking a MVP, evaluating a trade, or PTC you need to look at what has been accomplished because what will happen tomorrow is meaningless toward your question, except it does have some meaning in trade evaluating. The meaning to trade is reduced as you get father and father form the trade to it becomes zero.

When I am projecting what Uribe could do in the future, I am not truly evaluating the trade. I am concern that he will not be able to keep up his current pace through out the season. I am looking more then just walks, but used walks since everyone know what that is. His pitches per PA is down, and when I watch him, he is a hacker at the plate. I don't like that style since it doesn't usually mean long term success, unless your are Vald or Soriano. In this point of view I only care what Uribe has in the fact it is useful to project his future.

As for evaluating the trade, I think it is too soon since you have very little data to base the overall benefit from Uribe, but you need to look at what a player did, just like MVP voting. The Miles hall of famer career was a complete hypothetical situation to explain my thoughts on evaluating trades to be win wins, sorry you missed that. Just because one GM made a good trade doesn't mean the other made a bad one.

I strongly disagree that Kenny has done more good then bad but that isn't want I am talking about here.

maurice
06-04-2004, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
That's a really stupid post.

This coming from the guy who wants to promote an injured Borchard, and several pitchers and non-prospects to replace a starting corner OF? While you're surely an expert on stupid posts, I'll have to repectfully disagree with you here.

in those 5 games

What "a really stupid post." Five games is not a trend, "it's normal variation." BTW, don't ignore the two "0-fers" in the sample.

The info I posted on Reed was based on the info available to KW at the time he make the decision to promote Burke. Nothing you posted changes KW's accurate conclusion. Reed's AVE has been in a slow decline for awhile now. As I mentioned, the Sox have a sound policy against promoting slumping prospects. They wait for a hot streak and then promote them to play every day so they don't hurt their confidence.

As for my earlier point about LTP's health, today's Southtown reports:

Charlotte outfielder Joe Borchard had been considered, but Borchard has been sidelined by a sore quadriceps for almost a week.

The Cub-Times reports that Ozzie lobbied for Burke because he wanted to platoon the OFs already on the roster until the extent of Maggs' injury was determined.

Iwritecode
06-04-2004, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by Frater Perdurabo
Well, if no one else will:

:tomatoaward :tomatoaward

Actually, I think this thread deserves a

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/winningugly/showerhead.GIF

How come this thing hasn't been tagged yet anyway???


I started to wonder why this thread was getting so long but then I noticed both Randar and Seal are posting in it... :D:

CWSGuy406
06-04-2004, 02:51 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
If he is batting .250 with a high OBP (>.375), then it is all good.

That's the stupidest thing I've read all day. I'd much rather him hit .320 with an OBP of (>.375). Why? Because with hits come extra base hits, which means more RISP, which means more runs. A walk in only one base. A hit can be a single, double, triple, homer. Thus giving his teammates opportunities to drive in runs. RBIs!!!!

Your argument holds about as much water as a bucket with holes does. You have a bias against Kenny. Admit it. Either way - Uribe for Miles was a steal for the Sox, but you can't admit that. Even if Uribe played as bad as he did with Colorado, he'd still be miles ahead of Aaron Miles (no pun intentended.)

maurice
06-04-2004, 02:54 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
So by your logic if Reed were a .220 hitter in the minors his whole career and was currently hitting .240 he would be on a hot streak and would definitely be called up.

:?: Only if you consider a .220 hitter a "prospect."

Your argument doesn't explain why a .220 hitting catcher is getting called up.

He's being called up to act as the 25th man because Ozzie specifically requested him. Why is there a 200+ post thread about the identity of the guy at the end of the bench?

maurice
06-04-2004, 02:59 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
One more thing, what's the organizations policy on bringing up starting pitchers and giving then a whopping 2 starts before determining that they're not good enough?

You tell me. I've haven't said anything about it.

Burke may be the 25ht guy, but when you see him pinch hitting let and being an easy out in a close game you may change your tune.

Pinch hitting for whom? (Then again, even Burke would be an improvement over Valentin v. a LHP.) If you don't like the guy Ozzie picked as 25th man or the way Ozzie uses him, take it up with Ozzie or start another thread.

:ozzie
"I make out the f****** lineup!"

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 03:04 PM
Originally posted by CWSGuy406
That's the stupidest thing I've read all day. I'd much rather him hit .320 with an OBP of (>.375). Why? Because with hits come extra base hits, which means more RISP, which means more runs. A walk in only one base. A hit can be a single, double, triple, homer. Thus giving his teammates opportunities to drive in runs. RBIs!!!!

Your argument holds about as much water as a bucket with holes does. You have a bias against Kenny. Admit it. Either way - Uribe for Miles was a steal for the Sox, but you can't admit that. Even if Uribe played as bad as he did with Colorado, he'd still be miles ahead of Aaron Miles (no pun intentended.)

My point was very simple, if Uribe keeps his OBP above .375 he will be a good 1 or 2 no matter what his average is. But I guess you had to be Tim McCarver and point out the fact that .320 avg is better the a .250 average, thank you captain obvious.

The joke of your post though was that saying if Uribe plays as bad as he did in Colorado, he is still miles a head of Miles. Please. Miles(albeit two months in Colorado) PA 112 .274/.291/.396 , Uribe in Colorado PA last year, PA 343 .253/.297/.427. That isn't miles a head of anything.

Would I have traded Uribe for Miles? Of Course, who wouldn't trade a 27 AAAA player for a kid who may do something. But that doesn't make it the greatest trade since slice bread.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 03:05 PM
Originally posted by maurice
Why is there a 200+ post thread about the identity of the guy at the end of the bench?

It got jacked

rahulsekhar
06-04-2004, 03:08 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
When I am projecting what Uribe could do in the future, I am not truly evaluating the trade. I am concern that he will not be able to keep up his current pace through out the season. I am looking more then just walks, but used walks since everyone know what that is. His pitches per PA is down, and when I watch him, he is a hacker at the plate. I don't like that style since it doesn't usually mean long term success, unless your are Vald or Soriano. In this point of view I only care what Uribe has in the fact it is useful to project his future.


Yet you conveniently ignore the fact that his walk rate is increasing (hmmm....any connection between that and the fact that he's spending more time with this coaching staff?). And the fact that he's hitting in a position where he's going to get more pitches to hit (i.e. people don't want to walk him to pitch to Maggs/Frank - they'd rather he hit the ball and hope he hits it at someone). Instead "he is a hacker at the plate" based on your own viewing of his games (objective I'm sure).

Not only that, but you also neglect the fact that even if he DOES decline somewhat, he'll still be a .300 hitter with decent pop for a MI, playing great D. Acquired for a guy who can't hit well enough to make the ML team in Coors. Translation: GOOD MOVE.

I strongly disagree that Kenny has done more good then bad but that isn't want I am talking about here.

Short recap:
Bad: Ritchie, Clayton, Konerko (in your view), Koch
Good: Marte, Olivo, E-Lo, Shoney, Gordon, Colon, Alomar, Everett, Takatsu, Cotts, Adkins, Diaz, Uribe,
Debatable: Wells, Valentin

Seems to me that the good outweighs the bad, what am I missing?

CWSGuy406
06-04-2004, 03:09 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77

The Koch trade cost us a shot at the postseason last year. That is a major setback to the Sox. Secondly Koch performance last year was in line with his track record, especially with the reduction in velocity. That reduction made it lot easier for him to get caught, where as he could mess up but blow a few 100 mphs past people to get out of it before. Uribe production increase is amazing form last year. That should lead one to be more skeptical about it. Just like Erstad 200+ hits or Anderson 50+ home runs, those increases were unprecedented in the players career. If any increase or decrease of production comes out of the blue, I am skeptical of it. Koch's did not, while Urbie's has. I find it hard that people can't grasp that simple point. While Uribe could be having a coming out party, he could also be very lucky this year, I think it is best to wait and let it settle before judging.


You say the Koch trade cost us a shot at the postseason last year, which I somewhat agree with (other factors play in, but a lot due to Koch's suckiness.)

But answer me this - Isn't Juan Uribe giving us a huge boost for a chance for World Series play? Where would we be right now without Juan Uribe?

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 03:18 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
Yet you conveniently ignore the fact that his walk rate is increasing (hmmm....any connection between that and the fact that he's spending more time with this coaching staff?). And the fact that he's hitting in a position where he's going to get more pitches to hit (i.e. people don't want to walk him to pitch to Maggs/Frank - they'd rather he hit the ball and hope he hits it at someone). Instead "he is a hacker at the plate" based on your own viewing of his games (objective I'm sure).

Not only that, but you also neglect the fact that even if he DOES decline somewhat, he'll still be a .300 hitter with decent pop for a MI, playing great D. Acquired for a guy who can't hit well enough to make the ML team in Coors. Translation: GOOD MOVE.



Short recap:
Bad: Ritchie, Clayton, Konerko (in your view), Koch
Good: Marte, Olivo, E-Lo, Shoney, Gordon, Colon, Alomar, Everett, Takatsu, Cotts, Adkins, Diaz, Uribe,
Debatable: Wells, Valentin

Seems to me that the good outweighs the bad, what am I missing?

I am happy it is increasing, it is a good sign.


Bad: Ritchie, Clayton, Konerko (Kenny didn't pickup on the market shift), Koch & Cotts (Cotts good improve this move), R. Alomar, S. Alomar X2, Wells (didn't pan out but conning the Jays was good), Hoping Thomas would leave, trying to trade Garland for Erstad.

Good: Marte, E-Lo, Shoney, Gordon, Colon, Everett, S. Alomar (To Col.)

Debatable/ or still open: Takatsu (Otsuka is better, cheaper), Uribe (Still too early), Diaz (way too early to be ranked as good but won't become bad since it was a salary dump), salary dumps.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by CWSGuy406
You say the Koch trade cost us a shot at the postseason last year, which I somewhat agree with (other factors play in, but a lot due to Koch's suckiness.)

But answer me this - Isn't Juan Uribe giving us a huge boost for a chance for World Series play? Where would we be right now without Juan Uribe?

For the first two months it is, the question is will it hold up.

maurice
06-04-2004, 03:21 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
In case anyone wants to read WSI reaction to the trade, http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=26969&perpage=15&display=show&pagenumber=8

I thought it was a pretty good move but was pushing hard for a top-of-the-rotation SP.

KW traded a player with very little value [Miles] for a decent utility IF with some upside [Uribe].

jabrch
06-04-2004, 03:24 PM
http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=26969&perpage=15&display=show&pagenumber=7

I like this trade. Miles has shown no ability to be anything. Uribe has the highest range RangeFactor per Bill James in MLB last year amongst SS. He has a decent arm - and can grow into being a decent SS maybe. Yeah, he has no plate discipline. Maybe Ozzie can teach him? One of the Rockies beat writers was on the Score this morning and he said that Colorado never had enough spanish speaking coaches to mentor Uribe when he was young, and that this might be a good thing for him.

I liked the deal then - I still like the deal. It was a great deal. Miles was worthless - that's all you need to know.

CWSGuy406
06-04-2004, 03:25 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
His pitches per PA is down, and when I watch him, he is a hacker at the plate. I don't like that style since it doesn't usually mean long term success, unless your are Vald or Soriano. In this point of view I only care what Uribe has in the fact it is useful to project his future.





I think we're watching two different people here then. I rarely see Uribe swing at breaking balls in the dirt, pitches that are way outside/inside, or very very high pitches. He doesn't swing for the sake of swinging, which is what I think of as a free-swinger/hacker.

You say you don't want to evaluate a player over two months, and that you don't like his walk total. But why can't you look at the fact that he is already walking more than he ever did at Colorado. So which is it? Is he improving, or is he still not good enough because he doesn't walk as much as others. OBP is a collective stat. It combines walks and hits; it doesn't have a little asterisk saying well, he has more hits than walks so that isnt good enough.

Randar68
06-04-2004, 03:26 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
For the first two months it is, the question is will it hold up.

Whether it holds up or not, doesn't the fact that he has already contributed magnitudes more than Miles ever will an clear indication that it already was a "good move".

I'll buy waiting to call it "great", but you're kidding yourself if you don't recognize that it already was a clear-cut good move.

rahulsekhar
06-04-2004, 03:29 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77



Bad: Ritchie, Clayton, Konerko (Kenny didn't pickup on the market shift), Koch & Cotts (Cotts good improve this move),

Wells (didn't pan out but conning the Jays was good)
So this goes in KW's "Bad" column? Acquiring a guy who won 20 the few years before (and the year after), only to see him get hurt is somehow KW's fault?

Hoping Thomas would leave, trying to trade Garland for Erstad.


Ah - the ever-popular "moves he WOULD have made but didn't"! Where's the good moves he would have made but didn't? You have no idea what other moves would have been made had these been made - who would have been signed with the $$ saved from Frank leaving? What other pitcher would they have acquired to replace Garland? I'm sorry, but these are ludicrous things to use in KW's "Bad" column.

Good: Marte, E-Lo, Shoney, Gordon, Colon, Everett, S. Alomar (To Col.)

Debatable/ or still open: Takatsu (Otsuka is better, cheaper), Uribe (Still too early), Diaz (way too early to be ranked as good but won't become bad since it was a salary dump), salary dumps.

Takatsu: has been nothing but good for the Sox. Otsuka's benefiting from playing in a pitcherss park and in the NL, besides - it's ludicrous to say "he picked up a good player, but he could have picked up one who might be better, so it's a wash".

Uribe: See most of this thread: Uribe has been nothing but good and even if he slumps, he'll end up as a net positive. Even at a huge slump, he'll end up close to .300 and play great D. Even if he falls off the face of the earth and ends up a utility player, he's a good move.

Diaz: Getting someone who's dominating in AAA for virtually nothingis good - for no othe reason than he's a VERY tradeable chip.

maurice
06-04-2004, 03:32 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Bad: Ritchie, Clayton, Konerko (Kenny didn't pickup on the market shift), Koch & Cotts (Cotts good improve this move), R. Alomar, S. Alomar X2, Wells (didn't pan out but conning the Jays was good), Hoping Thomas would leave, trying to trade Garland for Erstad.

You're reaching here. This list includes two "moves" that never happened. (Lord knows how many good "moves" never happened . . . Maggs / Valentin / Wright for Nomah / Williamson / Damon?) They're moot. Alomar X3 cost essentially nothing and generated at least one pitching prospect when Sandy was traded to the Rox. Wells was, at worst, a wash.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 03:32 PM
Originally posted by CWSGuy406
I think we're watching two different people here then. I rarely see Uribe swing at breaking balls in the dirt, pitches that are way outside/inside, or very very high pitches. He doesn't swing for the sake of swinging, which is what I think of as a free-swinger/hacker.

You say you don't want to evaluate a player over two months, and that you don't like his walk total. But why can't you look at the fact that he is already walking more than he ever did at Colorado. So which is it? Is he improving, or is he still not good enough because he doesn't walk as much as others. OBP is a collective stat. It combines walks and hits; it doesn't have a little asterisk saying well, he has more hits than walks so that isnt good enough.

OBP does combined them, just walk are lot less volatile that hits. I pointed the fact that his walk rate has increased, but that is tempered by lower P per PA. The 10% is an arbitary mark, but does have some vaule.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 03:33 PM
Originally posted by maurice
You're reaching here. This list includes two "moves" that never happened. (Lord knows how many good "moves" never happened . . . Maggs / Valentin / Wright for Nomah / Williamson / Damon?) They're moot. Alomar X3 cost essentially nothing and generated at least one pitching prospect when Sandy was traded to the Rox. Wells was, at worst, a wash.

opps. I put Wells in the wrong slot, I meant to move him to Good.
S. Alomar was for acquring him twice. The good one was the trade to the Rockies.

pearso66
06-04-2004, 03:35 PM
Please explain to me how the David Wells trade is a bad trade? We were trading for a 20 win guy for Sirotka. I'd make that trade every day and twice on sunday. Is it KW's fault Wells got hurt, it obviously must be .

Why can't you just admit that the Uribe trade is a great trade, to this piont in time, which everyone is sticking with, no one is saying future, they are saying right now. Miles wouldnt even be on our 25 man roster, and we would have Valentin, Harris and Dransfeldt as our 3 MIers. Tell me that the situation where we have a guy producing a lot and playing, as opposed to Dransfeldt playing two or 3 times a week, and Miles in our AAA. Uribe playing so well so early, could be a huge reason we get into the post season. but since it could be a fluke it could still be a bad trade? You can't look at a trade 4 years down the line when Uribe starts playing bad and say it was bad. Uribe is helping us now which is great, while Miles wouldn't be helping us. Therefore to this point in time, it is a GREAT trade.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 03:35 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
Whether it holds up or not, doesn't the fact that he has already contributed magnitudes more than Miles ever will an clear indication that it already was a "good move".

I'll buy waiting to call it "great", but you're kidding yourself if you don't recognize that it already was a clear-cut good move.

I have said what he has done so far you could call it a good move. But I have a hard time with the people who are proclaiming Kenny greatness and using this trade as evidence of it. It isn't a great move yet.

maurice
06-04-2004, 03:37 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
S. Alomar was for acquring him twice. The good one was the trade to the Rockies.

How could he trade him to the Rox if he never acquired him in the first instance? This same reasoning indicates that Lofton was a decent move, though he didn't help us at the time.

CWSGuy406
06-04-2004, 03:39 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
I am happy it is increasing, it is a good sign.


Bad: Ritchie, Clayton, Konerko (Kenny didn't pickup on the market shift), Koch & Cotts (Cotts good improve this move), R. Alomar, S. Alomar X2, Wells (didn't pan out but conning the Jays was good), Hoping Thomas would leave, trying to trade Garland for Erstad.

Good: Marte, E-Lo, Shoney, Gordon, Colon, Everett, S. Alomar (To Col.)

Debatable/ or still open: Takatsu (Otsuka is better, cheaper), Uribe (Still too early), Diaz (way too early to be ranked as good but won't become bad since it was a salary dump), salary dumps.


Explain to me why trading Mike Sirotka, who hasn't done anything worth a lick in the majors since the trade, for David Wells is a bad trade? Even if Wells got injured - Mark Buerhle credits a lot of his success due to the teaching of one David Wells. At worst that trade is a wash.

Why is Sandy Alomar a bad move?

Hoping for Thomas to leave? Almost trading Garland for Erstad? Well guess what, NEITHER HAPPENED, so lay off. Your bias is clearly showing, it's not even funny.

Isn't trading Ray Durham for Jon Adkins a good trade? I mean, we weren't going to resign him anyways, there were no compensation picks back then, so why isn't it?

Takatsu has been the best righty reliever in our bullpen this year, and you find something wrong about it? Same goes for Uribe, but your too closed-minded to realize that even if Uribe doesn't keep up his current trend, it's a good trade.

Your list is so skewed. Kenny could trade a bag of balls for Eric Gagne, and you wouldn't call it a good trade, simply because a.) Kenny Williams made it and b.)it's only been two months. Stupid...

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 03:41 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
So this goes in KW's "Bad" column? Acquiring a guy who won 20 the few years before (and the year after), only to see him get hurt is somehow KW's fault?



Ah - the ever-popular "moves he WOULD have made but didn't"! Where's the good moves he would have made but didn't? You have no idea what other moves would have been made had these been made - who would have been signed with the $$ saved from Frank leaving? What other pitcher would they have acquired to replace Garland? I'm sorry, but these are ludicrous things to use in KW's "Bad" column.

Good: Marte, E-Lo, Shoney, Gordon, Colon, Everett, S. Alomar (To Col.)



Takatsu: has been nothing but good for the Sox. Otsuka's benefiting from playing in a pitcherss park and in the NL, besides - it's ludicrous to say "he picked up a good player, but he could have picked up one who might be better, so it's a wash".

Uribe: See most of this thread: Uribe has been nothing but good and even if he slumps, he'll end up as a net positive. Even at a huge slump, he'll end up close to .300 and play great D. Even if he falls off the face of the earth and ends up a utility player, he's a good move.

Diaz: Getting someone who's dominating in AAA for virtually nothingis good - for no othe reason than he's a VERY tradeable chip.

I try to wait till minor leaguers have a track record in the major before judging the trade to acquire them.

Uribe is in the still open category since the book hasn't finished being written yet.

Takatsu hasn't pitched more then 20 innings yet. Tough to make a call on the one so soon. I brought up Otsuka because when I heard the Sox got a Japaneses pitcher, that is who I thought Kenny got. I like Otsuka.

I think most of leanings is Poison would have been acquired if Frank left this year. If you would rather have him then Frank, I think you are sadly mistaken. Luckily for us, Disney voided the Erstad deal, that deal was signed and ready to be announced.

CWSGuy406
06-04-2004, 03:43 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
I try to wait till minor leaguers have a track record in the major before judging the trade to acquire them.

Uribe is in the still open category since the book hasn't finished being written yet.

Takatsu hasn't pitched more then 20 innings yet. Tough to make a call on the one so soon. I brought up Otsuka because when I heard the Sox got a Japaneses pitcher, that is who I thought Kenny got. I like Otsuka.

I think most of leanings is Poison would have been acquired if Frank left this year. If you would rather have him then Frank, I think you are sadly mistaken. Luckily for us, Disney voided the Erstad deal, that deal was signed and ready to be announced.

Then lets put another move on the good list - not signing Sidney Ponson. Of course, that never happened, but it could have happened!

Randar68
06-04-2004, 03:45 PM
Originally posted by CWSGuy406
Isn't trading Ray Durham for Jon Adkins a good trade? I mean, we weren't going to resign him anyways, there were no compensation picks back then, so why isn't it?

Well, it was speculative for Beane and a partial salary dump for KW. Beane took the risk that the picks would be reinstated, and they were. Good move for him, and it turned out a bad one for us.

The year Honel (2001) was picked, we forfeited our 1st round pick to Cleveland for signing Sandy Alomar. The Indians turned that 27th pick and Supplemental selection into Alan Horne (did not sign, ironically) and Dan Denham, respectively.

Randar68
06-04-2004, 03:47 PM
Originally posted by CWSGuy406
Your list is so skewed. Kenny could trade a bag of balls for Eric Gagne, and you wouldn't call it a good trade, simply because a.) Kenny Williams made it and b.)it's only been two months. Stupid...

Funny you should mention, because the off-season before he became the closer, Kenny tried fervently to acquire Gagne. I guess we can put that one into the "great" pile since it was a possible move that didn't happen, just like the Erstad deal.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 03:48 PM
Originally posted by CWSGuy406
Explain to me why trading Mike Sirotka, who hasn't done anything worth a lick in the majors since the trade, for David Wells is a bad trade? Even if Wells got injured - Mark Buerhle credits a lot of his success due to the teaching of one David Wells. At worst that trade is a wash.

Why is Sandy Alomar a bad move?

Hoping for Thomas to leave? Almost trading Garland for Erstad? Well guess what, NEITHER HAPPENED, so lay off. Your bias is clearly showing, it's not even funny.

Isn't trading Ray Durham for Jon Adkins a good trade? I mean, we weren't going to resign him anyways, there were no compensation picks back then, so why isn't it?

Takatsu has been the best righty reliever in our bullpen this year, and you find something wrong about it? Same goes for Uribe, but your too closed-minded to realize that even if Uribe doesn't keep up his current trend, it's a good trade.

Your list is so skewed. Kenny could trade a bag of balls for Eric Gagne, and you wouldn't call it a good trade, simply because a.) Kenny Williams made it and b.)it's only been two months. Stupid...

I put wells in the wrong slot, sorry.

Kenny did trade Garland for Ersatd, but Disney got cold feet and voided the deal.

Alomar is a waste of the roster space and money. He could be a mentor to Olivio, but couldn't he do that as a coach.

What will Adkins do for the team? Just because you got a guy in a salary dump doesn't make it a good trade. Also you are mistaken about compensation picks, it was apart of the negotiations. Kenny thought they weren't going to be around when the CBA was finished.

I put Takatsu in still open section because he hasn't pitched 20 innings yet.

Gange has a track record we could based things on, Uribe has small but bad one and Takatsu was good in the equivalent of the Northern League.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 03:51 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
Funny you should mention, because the off-season before he became the closer, Kenny tried fervently to acquire Gagne. I guess we can put that one into the "great" pile since it was a possible move that didn't happen, just like the Erstad deal.

Did Kenny have the deal signed and all most delivered for Gange as he did in the Erstad move? If Disney doesn't void that deal Erstad is our first baseman/center fielder.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 03:52 PM
Originally posted by maurice
How could he trade him to the Rox if he never acquired him in the first instance? This same reasoning indicates that Lofton was a decent move, though he didn't help us at the time.

Kenny helped till he got hurt.

Look, it was an attempt at humor with the Alomar stuff, getting him bad, getting rid of him good.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 03:53 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77

Takatsu hasn't pitched more then 20 innings yet. Tough to make a call on the one so soon. I brought up Otsuka because when I heard the Sox got a Japaneses pitcher, that is who I thought Kenny got. I like Otsuka.
How can you like Otsuka? He hasn't done enough to warrant that signing. The book is still out on him, we don't know what he is going to do. Give it about three years and I'll tell you if it was a good pick up. Sound familiar?

Randar68
06-04-2004, 03:55 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Takatsu was good in the equivalent of the Northern League.

Wow, talk about a HUGE exaggeration....

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 03:55 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
How can you like Otsuka? He hasn't done enough to warrant that signing. The book is still out on him, we don't know what he is going to do. Give it about three years and I'll tell you if it was a good pick up. Sound familiar?

Hey, if I was evaluating San Diego, I would put it in the open category. I like it from the fact, I think he will succeed which doesn't mean he will.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 03:56 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Did Kenny have the deal signed and all most delivered for Gange as he did in the Erstad move? If Disney doesn't void that deal Erstad is our first baseman/center fielder. Why are you talking about moves that never happened and make him sound as if he was stupid for them? You have no idea how it would have shaped our team from there. Maybe Garland would have been replaced with an even better pitcher. You don't know.

Dadawg_77
06-04-2004, 03:56 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
Wow, talk about a HUGE exaggeration....


What, I was talking about the Japanese league, which translates into our independent leagues.

jabrch
06-04-2004, 03:57 PM
Let me get this straight - it is too early to say aaron miles for Uribe is a good deal - but it is not to early to say that signing Takatsu was only a TBD move because Otsuka is, in your opinion, after the same few months, better?


That's as silly as your "deals that never happened" theory. Hey - what do you think of the Ordonez/Nomar/EdwinJackson/Greg Miller/James Loney/Odalis deals that never went down? Isn't Kenny good/bad for them?

Absolutely mindbogglingly circular.

SEALgep
06-04-2004, 03:58 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Hey, if I was evaluating San Diego, I would put it in the open category. I like it from the fact, I think he will succeed which doesn't mean he will. Whatever buddy, your logic is obviously flawed and biased.