PDA

View Full Version : Fact: PODS is not much older than CLEE


The Big Squirt
12-13-2004, 08:51 PM
I have seen many people complaining on many threads that we traded a younger CLEE for an older Scott P. cumon...what is 4 months?

CLEE born 6/20/1976

PODS born 3/18/1976

Find something else to complain about.

NonetheLoaiza
12-13-2004, 10:26 PM
i was hoping for a more small ball type of team this year, and i think i just got my wish. 4 years of the long ball got us about 83 wins a year, so im pretty excited to see what can happen next year. podsednik can hopefully resurrect that avg and obp from his rookie year at the cell, and hopefully we have a playoff team at the end of the year....after we get clement or perez of course.

Brian26
12-13-2004, 10:28 PM
I hope Pods doesn't turn into Julio Cruz or Rudy Law circa 1985.

basilesox
12-13-2004, 10:28 PM
I have seen many people complaining on many threads that we traded a younger CLEE for an older Scott P. cumon...what is 4 months?

CLEE born 6/20/1976

PODS born 3/18/1976

Find something else to complain about.


OK how about the fact that Podsednik isn't half the player that Carlos is.

OzzieBall2004
12-13-2004, 10:31 PM
OK how about the fact that Podsednik isn't half the player that Carlos is.

How about that wasnt the point of the trade. The point was to bring it a quality player who can lead off and run the bases well, and clear up some payroll to sign a quality pitcher.

basilesox
12-13-2004, 10:40 PM
How about that wasnt the point of the trade. The point was to bring it a quality player who can lead off and run the bases well, and clear up some payroll to sign a quality pitcher.


I am sorry but I strongly disagree about Podsednik being quality.......He hit.244 with a .313 OBP. Now I think Willie Harris can get on base a heck of alot more than Scotty.....Now if we can just get Scott to teach Willie how to steal.

In response to your Pitching remark........if we get Clement this deal is golden if not this deal will go down as one of the worst deals in KW's short history as GM

OzzieBall2004
12-13-2004, 10:45 PM
I am sorry but I strongly disagree about Podsednik being quality.......He hit.244 with a .313 OBP. Now I think Willie Harris can get on base a heck of alot more than Scotty.....Now if we can just get Scott to teach Willie how to steal.

In response to your Pitching remark........if we get Clement this deal is golden if not this deal will go down as one of the worst deals in KW's short history as GM

He had a poor year...but lets look at the big picture hear. He stole 70 bases and only hit .244/.313. I'm a glass half full guy until proven otherwise, and tend to think he can get that average back up to his '03 numbers, but we'll see.

ilsox7
12-13-2004, 10:50 PM
He had a poor year...but lets look at the big picture hear. He stole 70 bases and only hit .244/.313. I'm a glass half full guy until proven otherwise, and tend to think he can get that average back up to his '03 numbers, but we'll see.
And he also hit .279 on the road last year, so moving to the Cell for 81 games may help a bit. I don't think it's unrealistic that he could hit .285 and have an OBP around .350.

basilesox
12-13-2004, 10:53 PM
I am sorry but you seam to really be overating SB's hear. I mean the guy strikes out a ton. If he gets on base steals second and we have nobody to drive him home......then we our screwed.

Or what if he comes up with 2 guys in scoring position and strikes out. Those are two very likely scenarios (especially with our new revamped lineup

dugwood31
12-13-2004, 10:53 PM
Look at Scotty Po's OBP in 2003, I think we'll get something in between .370 and .313 next year. Not to mention he's likely to get better pitches to hit this year -- he's spent the last couple years batting after the pitcher.

fquaye149
12-13-2004, 11:11 PM
I am sorry but you seam to really be overating SB's hear. I mean the guy strikes out a ton. If he gets on base steals second and we have nobody to drive him home......then we our screwed.

Or what if he comes up with 2 guys in scoring position and strikes out. Those are two very likely scenarios (especially with our new revamped lineup

um....do you remember how carl crawford ate us alive? or brian roberts?

we were salivating all over them because of how they killed us... (in fact we still are)...

if anything, stolen bases are UNDERRATED because of Bill James' dismissal of them...

JRIG
12-14-2004, 04:13 AM
um....do you remember how carl crawford ate us alive? or brian roberts?

we were salivating all over them because of how they killed us... (in fact we still are)...

if anything, stolen bases are UNDERRATED because of Bill James' dismissal of them...
Yep. And look at how well the Orioles and Devil Rays played because of those guys. Baltimore 6th in the A.L. in runs scored, Tampa Bay 13th. And both teams finishing under .500.

Seems reasonable to emulate them, and not the last four teams standing in the playoffs.

MUsoxfan
12-14-2004, 04:19 AM
I am sorry but you seam to really be overating SB's hear. I mean the guy strikes out a ton. If he gets on base steals second and we have nobody to drive him home......then we our screwed.

Or what if he comes up with 2 guys in scoring position and strikes out. Those are two very likely scenarios (especially with our new revamped lineup
There's no such thing as overrating SB's. It's impossible. SB's are something that are more valuable than homeruns. With an SB you can turn a single into a double, and a single into a run scored. The Sox have had HR's....they've not had SB's.

JRIG
12-14-2004, 04:30 AM
There's no such thing as overrating SB's. It's impossible. SB's are something that are more valuable than homeruns. With an SB you can turn a single into a double, and a single into a run scored. The Sox have had HR's....they've not had SB's.
Possibly the most ridiculous statement on the boards ever.

The name of the game is to outscore the opposition. A home run is a guaranteed run.

How in the world can a stolen base be more valuable?

MUsoxfan
12-14-2004, 04:33 AM
Possibly the most ridiculous statement on the boards ever.

The name of the game is to outscore the opposition. A home run is a guaranteed run.

How in the world can a stolen base be more valuable?

What has the HR done for us lately? 2nd place in the central every year. SB's can make a difference. Dare I say a HUGE difference. I'm sick of the HR.....it's time for some smallball on the southside

JRIG
12-14-2004, 04:40 AM
What has the HR done for us lately? 2nd place in the central every year. SB's can make a difference. Dare I say a HUGE difference. I'm sick of the HR.....it's time for some smallball on the southside
Obviously I'm not going to change your mind, so we'll just wait for June and see what happens.

If you think the reason the Sox haven't won the past few years is too many home runs, I can't help you. How about the inability of our GM to plug holes at 2nd base, catcher, 5th starter, and leadoff man for three straight years. Those home runs would be a lot more valuable with people on base.

Enjoy small ball as we lose every home game 7-2.

TommyJohn
12-14-2004, 05:32 AM
Obviously I'm not going to change your mind, so we'll just wait for June and see what happens.

If you think the reason the Sox haven't won the past few years is too many home runs, I can't help you. How about the inability of our GM to plug holes at 2nd base, catcher, 5th starter, and leadoff man for three straight years. Those home runs would be a lot more valuable with people on base.

Enjoy small ball as we lose every home game 7-2.
Good one. Small ball made sense back in the 1950's, when they were playing
in old Comiskey Park. Now, in the Launching Pad, it is ridiculous. The sluggers
weren't the problem, they did their part. The main problems were elsewhere,
as you pointed out.

I seriously think that with Ozzie Guillen helming the club and guiding Williams
in the trade mart, the White Sox' all-time one season nadir of 56-106 is in
sight. :angry: :whiner: :angry: :whiner:

Fredsox
12-14-2004, 06:09 AM
Good one. Small ball made sense back in the 1950's, when they were playing
in old Comiskey Park. Now, in the Launching Pad, it is ridiculous. The sluggers
weren't the problem, they did their part. The main problems were elsewhere,
as you pointed out.

I seriously think that with Ozzie Guillen helming the club and guiding Williams
in the trade mart, the White Sox' all-time one season nadir of 56-106 is in
sight. :angry: :whiner: :angry: :whiner:
I think predicting a losing season a bit extreme considering its December. I agree that Ozzie is guiding the team and KW to small ball, they've said as much. I also agree that hitting HR was not a probelm. The problem (duh) was we gave up more runs than we scored because of crappy defense and mediocre pitching. Oh, and we could not steal a base to save our lives (78 in 162 games?).

Ozzie and KW feel this needs to change and I agree. Are we improved on outfield defense? I think yes. Do we have a better bullpen? I think yes. Do we have a better starting rotation? Not yet but the intention is that we will sign a #3-level or above starter which will improve us over last season. This leaves a question on infield defense as the only piece that does not have a clear plan.

Teams have won the world series with lesser HR output than the Sox currently have. I would agree that the potential starting lineup will not scare too many people, but I imagine our pitching will. Perhaps it will be enough because frankly, that's how the Twins have beaten us for the past few years.

TommyJohn
12-14-2004, 06:19 AM
I think predicting a losing season a bit extreme considering its December. I agree that Ozzie is guiding the team and KW to small ball, they've said as much. I also agree that hitting HR was not a probelm. The problem (duh) was we gave up more runs than we scored because of crappy defense and mediocre pitching. Oh, and we could not steal a base to save our lives (78 in 162 games?).

Ozzie and KW feel this needs to change and I agree. Are we improved on outfield defense? I think yes. Do we have a better bullpen? I think yes. Do we have a better starting rotation? Not yet but the intention is that we will sign a #3-level or above starter which will improve us over last season. This leaves a question on infield defense as the only piece that does not have a clear plan.

Teams have won the world series with lesser HR output than the Sox currently have. I would agree that the potential starting lineup will not scare too many people, but I imagine our pitching will. Perhaps it will be enough because frankly, that's how the Twins have beaten us for the past few years.
I didn't neccessarily mean this year, but with the way they are de-building,
I can see it happening in '06 or '07.

kempsted
12-14-2004, 07:26 AM
What has the HR done for us lately? 2nd place in the central every year. SB's can make a difference. Dare I say a HUGE difference. I'm sick of the HR.....it's time for some smallball on the southside
This kind of argument makes no sense. If you saw that most of the time the teams in the play offs were fast running teams etc etc fine. But that is not true. The trouble with the Sox has been that there team has been the second best team in the division every year. Yes they have had the home runs but not the people who get on base. The Yankees and the Red Sox have done just fine without stolen bases.

The other thing that was supposed to make us so much better was Ozzies sac hit. We lead the AL in Sac hits last year and .... So do I now conclude - see where did sac hits get us what we need is x.

What we need is a consistently good lineup. I don't see how this trade helps us much. You can't use a .313 OBP person as a leadoff hitter.

fquaye149
12-14-2004, 07:36 AM
Obviously I'm not going to change your mind, so we'll just wait for June and see what happens.

If you think the reason the Sox haven't won the past few years is too many home runs, I can't help you. How about the inability of our GM to plug holes at 2nd base, catcher, 5th starter, and leadoff man for three straight years. Those home runs would be a lot more valuable with people on base.

Enjoy small ball as we lose every home game 7-2.
you know...every time i think you're about to make a good point i glance down at your signature and see you're still not in favor of the garcia trade and it quite undermines every point you make.

JRIG
12-14-2004, 07:39 AM
you know...every time i think you're about to make a good point i glance down at your signature and see you're still not in favor of the garcia trade and it quite undermines every point you make.
Point taken, but I still think history will prove the Garcia swap to be a bad move. Giving up the best prospect in the organization since Frank Thomas in exchange for a half-season of Freddy Garcia is not my idea of success.

Dolanski
12-14-2004, 07:39 AM
What has the HR done for us lately? 2nd place in the central every year. SB's can make a difference. Dare I say a HUGE difference. I'm sick of the HR.....it's time for some smallball on the southside
SBs can be an effective weapon. Just ask Mariano Rivera how Dave Roberts' stolen base turned that entire series around.

Bobby Thigpen
12-14-2004, 07:47 AM
Aren't we the same people that for the last 3 years have demanding the Sox get more speed and get rid of all the right handed power hitters since we didn't win anything with the Southside softball team? So KW goes out and gets some speed and he is immediately demonized. Just one reason I love other Sox fans.

JRIG
12-14-2004, 07:48 AM
Aren't we the same people that for the last 3 years have demanding the Sox get more speed and get rid of all the right handed power hitters since we didn't win anything with the Southside softball team? So KW goes out and gets some speed and he is immediately demonized. Just one reason I love other Sox fans.
Speak for yourself. Some of us don't want that at all, and many of the names I see who are critical of the trade of those who are also critical of that philosophy.

Bobby Thigpen
12-14-2004, 08:05 AM
I'm not really speaking for myself, I'm speaking for the other billion people on this site that have been bitching about all the solo homeruns over the last 3 years. Obviously the home run derby theory has not worked, it's time to try something else. Though Carlos is not the guy I would have chosen to get rid of, he probably had the most value to other teams.

JRIG
12-14-2004, 08:08 AM
I'm not really speaking for myself, I'm speaking for the other billion people on this site that have been bitching about all the solo homeruns over the last 3 years. Obviously the home run derby theory has not worked, it's time to try something else. Though Carlos is not the guy I would have chosen to get rid of, he probably had the most value to other teams.
The solution to solo home runs is to acquire players to get on base in front of the home runs. Not get rid of the home runs. And Podsednik does not solve anything.

Bobby Thigpen
12-14-2004, 08:14 AM
You can't just keep adding players until you find yourself the right mix. This doesn't even work for the Yankees. KW said last season the Sox were going to go in a different direction this year and years in the future and that direction was speed and defense. I don't know why anyone is surprised by this move.

eshunn2001
12-14-2004, 10:03 AM
WE GOT SCREWED. Even if we sign a pitcher the Brewers got the better of us on THIS DEAL. Sorry but trading one of the few guys we have that CAN get on base, For a guy who got on at a .311 clip??. Come on people. Wow we got a fast guy who can't get on base. Yeah he turns 70 singles into doubles. But is all he has is 70 hits, Who the hell cares?

fquaye149
12-14-2004, 10:19 AM
WE GOT SCREWED. Even if we sign a pitcher the Brewers got the better of us on THIS DEAL. Sorry but trading one of the few guys we have that CAN get on base, For a guy who got on at a .311 clip??. Come on people. Wow we got a fast guy who can't get on base. Yeah he turns 70 singles into doubles. But is all he has is 70 hits, Who the hell cares?
baghdad bob would be proud of that spin.

DaveGusinSeattle
12-14-2004, 10:23 AM
WE GOT SCREWED. Even if we sign a pitcher the Brewers got the better of us on THIS DEAL. Sorry but trading one of the few guys we have that CAN get on base, For a guy who got on at a .311 clip??. Come on people. Wow we got a fast guy who can't get on base. Yeah he turns 70 singles into doubles. But is all he has is 70 hits, Who the hell cares?:whiner: :whiner: :whiner: :whiner: :whiner:
I WANT CLEE :o: Now playing on Extra Innings with the True Blue Brew Crew

Hey Kenny :redneck and Reinsdork Where did your brains go? :angry:

Hey better hope Frank and Konerko are in top form and POD can get on base... or see 'ya later Sox...

Palehose13
12-14-2004, 10:26 AM
I WANT CLEE :o: Now playing on Extra Innings with the True Blue Brew Crew


I'll be seeing a lot of him. I'll say hi for you. :wink:

mcfish
12-14-2004, 10:27 AM
WE GOT SCREWED. Even if we sign a pitcher the Brewers got the better of us on THIS DEAL. Sorry but trading one of the few guys we have that CAN get on base, For a guy who got on at a .311 clip??. Come on people. Wow we got a fast guy who can't get on base. Yeah he turns 70 singles into doubles. But is all he has is 70 hits, Who the hell cares?If you're going to use stats selectively to bash him, at least get the stats right. .313 OBP - It's been well documented here for the last 2 days. And he probably never got caught at second because he stopped to admire his double off the wall. And he probably never got picked off because he wasn't paying attention. And he had 12 home runs - more than a third of CLee's production in the Cell.

I understand the frustration with losing a favorite player, but the deal's done. Could we at least not bash completely a member of the team we all love before he's even had a chance to succeed or fail for this team?

eshunn2001
12-14-2004, 10:41 AM
If you're going to use stats selectively to bash him, at least get the stats right. .313 OBP - It's been well documented here for the last 2 days. And he probably never got caught at second because he stopped to admire his double off the wall. And he probably never got picked off because he wasn't paying attention. And he had 12 home runs - more than a third of CLee's production in the Cell. And 7 triples - wouldn't it be nice to see a triple?

I understand the frustration with losing a favorite player, but the deal's done. Could we at least not bash completely a member of the team we all love before he's even had a chance to succeed or fail for this team?OH, Soooooo sorry .313 a whole .2% off. The deal looks great now. Are you kidding me? No, I would rather see 31 hr's than 12 HR's and 7 triples. The only reason SPod does not admire his doubles... He does not hit them far enough to admire them. Heck if he got on base as often as CLee Maybe he would get picked off once in a while. It's not even close. OK. selective stats?? *** is 70 SB?? Pretty selective when everything else sucked. He struk out 105 times. He hit .244 his OBP .313.. That is not selective, that is HORRIBLE.

mcfish
12-14-2004, 11:08 AM
OH, Soooooo sorry .313 a whole .2% off. The deal looks great now. Are you kidding me? No, I would rather see 31 hr's than 12 HR's and 7 triples. The only reason SPod does not admire his doubles... He does not hit them far enough to admire them. Heck if he got on base as often as CLee Maybe he would get picked off once in a while. It's not even close. OK. selective stats?? *** is 70 SB?? Pretty selective when everything else sucked. He struk out 105 times. He hit .244 his OBP .313.. That is not selective, that is HORRIBLE.If 2% isn't a big deal, why not 4% or 6%? This isn't a stat that you're using out of nowhere. It's been all over WSI for 2 days now. Also, I'm sorry, I phrased my request wrong the first time. All I meant to ask was that we try not to completely bash the new guy on the team and let him succeed or fail here by himself instead of using stats from when he was leading off for a really bad national league team.

fquaye149
12-14-2004, 11:21 AM
OH, Soooooo sorry .313 a whole .2% off. The deal looks great now. Are you kidding me? No, I would rather see 31 hr's than 12 HR's and 7 triples. The only reason SPod does not admire his doubles... He does not hit them far enough to admire them. Heck if he got on base as often as CLee Maybe he would get picked off once in a while. It's not even close. OK. selective stats?? *** is 70 SB?? Pretty selective when everything else sucked. He struk out 105 times. He hit .244 his OBP .313.. That is not selective, that is HORRIBLE.
good grief...he may not be great...and he certainly doesn't seem to be as good as his 2003 numbers...

But his 2004 numbers alone don't make him a ****ty player. they make him a below average with some tools and a lot of potential for improvement. And that assumes he's AS BAD AS HIS 2003 numbers while leading off for one of the worst teams in baseball with no lineup protection behind him at all....

I think there's a lot to say that .241/.313 is the aberration from his major league and minor league statistics....ALTHOUGH NOTHING IS ASSURED, I think it's relatively fair to think he should put up something around .340 OBP (as his 2 year average coupled with his career minor league stats suggest) and that coupled with his stolen base potential makes him a solid to above average leadoff hitter, I think.

Not a world beater mind you, but to act like he's a definitively lousy player because he had a lousy year with a lousy team is unfair.

Palehose13
12-14-2004, 11:25 AM
I think everyone is missing the big question, which is:

When will Podsednik grow facial hair and which style will he choose? :D:

mcfish
12-14-2004, 11:28 AM
good grief...he may not be great...and he certainly doesn't seem to be as good as his 2003 numbers...

But his 2004 numbers alone don't make him a ****ty player. they make him a below average with some tools and a lot of potential for improvement. And that assumes he's AS BAD AS HIS 2003 numbers while leading off for one of the worst teams in baseball with no lineup protection behind him at all....

I think there's a lot to say that .241/.313 is the aberration from his major league and minor league statistics....ALTHOUGH NOTHING IS ASSURED, I think it's relatively fair to think he should put up something around .340 OBP (as his 2 year average coupled with his career minor league stats suggest) and that coupled with his stolen base potential makes him a solid to above average leadoff hitter, I think.

Not a world beater mind you, but to act like he's a definitively lousy player because he had a lousy year with a lousy team is unfair.Thank you.

eshunn2001
12-14-2004, 11:39 AM
If 2% isn't a big deal, why not 4% or 6%? This isn't a stat that you're using out of nowhere. It's been all over WSI for 2 days now. Also, I'm sorry, I phrased my request wrong the first time. All I meant to ask was that we try not to completely bash the new guy on the team and let him succeed or fail here by himself instead of using stats from when he was leading off for a really bad national league team.
Not 2% .2%

fquaye149
12-14-2004, 11:45 AM
I think everyone is missing the big question, which is:

When will Podsednik grow facial hair and which style will he choose? :D:
Not a goatee! We don't need our centerfielder and our 3rd starter to have the same beard!

PaulDrake
12-14-2004, 11:46 AM
Not 2% .2% Actually shouldn't .313 -.311 be .002?

fquaye149
12-14-2004, 11:56 AM
well technically speaking since OBP is a percentage, then a difference between .311 and .313 is a .2% difference...unless you're talking about the percent difference which would be 311/313...an even smaller number....

But at the same time...it's pretty ridiculous to express it this way. admittedly a .002 point difference is very slight...but to say a, say, 1% difference would be misleading, wouldn't it? a player who hits .300 v. a player who hits .290...like they say in Bull Durham...of course 1% doesn't sound like a lot does it?

eshunn2001
12-14-2004, 11:59 AM
good grief...he may not be great...and he certainly doesn't seem to be as good as his 2003 numbers...

But his 2004 numbers alone don't make him a ****ty player. they make him a below average with some tools and a lot of potential for improvement. And that assumes he's AS BAD AS HIS 2003 numbers while leading off for one of the worst teams in baseball with no lineup protection behind him at all....

I think there's a lot to say that .241/.313 is the aberration from his major league and minor league statistics....ALTHOUGH NOTHING IS ASSURED, I think it's relatively fair to think he should put up something around .340 OBP (as his 2 year average coupled with his career minor league stats suggest) and that coupled with his stolen base potential makes him a solid to above average leadoff hitter, I think.



Not a world beater mind you, but to act like he's a definitively lousy player because he had a lousy year with a lousy team is unfair.
Any way you wanna put it. SPod is nowhere near the player CLee is. Sure me maybe a Decent player. I HOPE he plays like he did his rookie year. I really really do.... And even if we pick up Clement or Perez or even Pedro. The Brewers got the Better end of THIS deal.

eshunn2001
12-14-2004, 12:02 PM
well technically speaking since OBP is a percentage, then a difference between .311 and .313 is a .2% difference...unless you're talking about the percent difference which would be 311/313...an even smaller number....

But at the same time...it's pretty ridiculous to express it this way. admittedly a .002 point difference is very slight...but to say a, say, 1% difference would be misleading, wouldn't it? a player who hits .300 v. a player who hits .290...like they say in Bull Durham...of course 1% doesn't sound like a lot does it?
1% is ALOT more than .2%. .2% is saying a .298 hitter vs a .300 hitter. Even if His OBP was .333 he was not worth CLee.

eshunn2001
12-14-2004, 12:03 PM
Actually shouldn't .313 -.311 be .002?
Probably.. But you get my point.

SoxxoS
12-14-2004, 12:34 PM
:chimp

"I don't know about this thread and all the math...but I wish Podsednik's name was Ivan or Isreal Podsednik so I can call him Ipod. Even though I don't have a job, how great would that be?"

fquaye149
12-14-2004, 01:48 PM
Any way you wanna put it. SPod is nowhere near the player CLee is. Sure me maybe a Decent player. I HOPE he plays like he did his rookie year. I really really do.... And even if we pick up Clement or Perez or even Pedro. The Brewers got the Better end of THIS deal.

you don't evaluate a deal like that, ignoring the cash considerations. If you ignore the cash and just look at the players, as if this were fantasy baseball or playstation with the salary off, then yes the brewers won...

but they are giving up 6 million dollars here...the BREWERS are giving up 6 MILLION dollars....a team that spent 30 million last year has just increased their payroll by 20% and created a hole in their bullpen while upgrading in the outfield....

i don't know that it's necessarily as big a slam dunk as you think, even if we don't sign another pitcher.