PDA

View Full Version : Another Prospect Question


RichH55
02-07-2002, 01:57 PM
For 2003: If you had to choose one or the other for 3B, no cop out type "hope for a trade" or play Player A elsewhere......At 3B for 2003 if the choice was Hummel or Crede...Who would you choose?

MattSharp
02-07-2002, 02:12 PM
I was unaware Hummel played 3B? I would base it a lot on age I think. I don't know how old either is. Crede has been heralded for a while as some great 3B, but hes gonna be crappy, that's what I think. So I would chose Hummel.

Iwritecode
02-07-2002, 02:23 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
For 2003: If you had to choose one or the other for 3B, no cop out type "hope for a trade" or play Player A elsewhere......At 3B for 2003 if the choice was Hummel or Crede...Who would you choose?

I'd take Crede. Can hummel even play 3B? I thought he was a SS converted to 2B?

kermittheefrog
02-07-2002, 02:53 PM
Hummel has played a fair amount of short, third and second. In fact he was playing third before he ever played second. Right now I would still pick Crede for third but I'd want Hummel at second.

Randar68
02-07-2002, 03:07 PM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
Hummel has played a fair amount of short, third and second. In fact he was playing third before he ever played second. Right now I would still pick Crede for third but I'd want Hummel at second.

I would rather have a .260-20-75 hitter at third playing GREAT defense than a .300-20-75 hitter making Troy Glauss error totals with a limited arm at 3B...

MattSharp, what in the world are you basing that on?

czalgosz
02-07-2002, 03:13 PM
Originally posted by Randar68


I would rather have a .260-20-75 hitter at third playing GREAT defense than a .300-20-75 hitter making Troy Glauss error totals with a limited arm at 3B...

MattSharp, what in the world are you basing that on?

I don't think that Hummell is a 20-homer type - more like 10-15.

CubKilla
02-07-2002, 03:18 PM
Without playing Crede on an everyday basis, we'll never know just how good, bad, or mediocre he could be. Right now, I'd choose Crede, put Valentin back at short, and trade Clayton!!!!!

czalgosz
02-07-2002, 03:29 PM
Originally posted by CubsF'nBlow
Without playing Crede on an everyday basis, we'll never know just how good, bad, or mediocre he could be. Right now, I'd choose Crede, put Valentin back at short, and trade Clayton!!!!!

I've asked this question before, and noone's been able to answer it - If the Sox trade Clayton, and something happens to Valentin to cut into his playing time (like it usually does for Valentin), who would play short? Noone in the organization is capable of doing it on an everyday basis at the big-league level other than Clayton and Valentin.

duke of dorwood
02-07-2002, 03:30 PM
:hitless

I'm still looking for the love

RichH55
02-07-2002, 03:38 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz


I've asked this question before, and noone's been able to answer it - If the Sox trade Clayton, and something happens to Valentin to cut into his playing time (like it usually does for Valentin), who would play short? Noone in the organization is capable of doing it on an everyday basis at the big-league level other than Clayton and Valentin.


Well it all depends...now does it? If Jose is hurt....Graffiano is more than adequate as a replacement....if it is season ending or career ending than you start looking for a replacement out there....A season ending injury to your starting SS is not something a whole lot of teams have a great contingency plan for....but spending an extra 4.5 million, displacing your team leader, and blocking the path of one of your better prospects seems like a rather high price to pay for that "security" ......If Jose plays 120 games than having Royce was even more worthless....Graff can play and Royce is gone next year regardless so if you lose Jose for a long time you have to go out and get the long term answer either way, so I dont see Royce as that positive a factor, especially since having him on the roster doesnt mean he is our insurance against injury, but rather our starting SS, which is something Id rather avoid

RichH55
02-07-2002, 03:39 PM
Originally posted by duke of dorwood
:hitless

I'm still looking for the love


Yeah, maybe why he cant find any love is that when he looks for it he has limited range

PaleHoseGeorge
02-07-2002, 03:41 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
I've asked this question before, and noone's been able to answer it - If the Sox trade Clayton, and something happens to Valentin to cut into his playing time (like it usually does for Valentin), who would play short? Noone in the organization is capable of doing it on an everyday basis at the big-league level other than Clayton and Valentin.

Short-term: Play Graffanino. He's your utility infielder. That's why he is on the team.

Long-term (if needed): Trade for somebody else's weak-hitting/noodle-armed shortstop. That shouldn't be too hard to find.

:hitless
"I bet you can find one for less than $4.5 million, too!"

czalgosz
02-07-2002, 03:48 PM
Originally posted by RichH55



Well it all depends...now does it? If Jose is hurt....Graffiano is more than adequate as a replacement....if it is season ending or career ending than you start looking for a replacement out there....A season ending injury to your starting SS is not something a whole lot of teams have a great contingency plan for....but spending an extra 4.5 million, displacing your team leader, and blocking the path of one of your better prospects seems like a rather high price to pay for that "security" ......If Jose plays 120 games than having Royce was even more worthless....Graff can play and Royce is gone next year regardless so if you lose Jose for a long time you have to go out and get the long term answer either way, so I dont see Royce as that positive a factor, especially since having him on the roster doesnt mean he is our insurance against injury, but rather our starting SS, which is something Id rather avoid

Graffanino is not a solution at shortstop. He's fine as an emergency replacement, but he doesn't have the range, the quickness, or the instincts to play every day at short.

In 2000, when Valentin was playing every day, the Sox had Craig Wilson and Mike Caruso in the minors. Neither one of those was very good at all, but either one of them could at least clog the hole for the rest of the season. This year, we have neither of those guys. If the Sox don't have Clayton when Valentin goes down this time, then they have to trade for someone just like Clayton, only this time they have to give up a real prospect for him, and they are stuck with Tony Womack or someone just as crappy for the remainder of his contract, and we're right back where we started.

Like you said, this is the last season of Clayton's contract. Let him play it out, and then say good riddance at the end of the year. By that time, the Sox will hopefully have someone who's ready (like maybe Andy Gonzalez) who can fill in. If Clayton sucks, bench him. But at this point, he's at least useful to have on the team.

Iwritecode
02-07-2002, 03:51 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge


Short-term: Play Graffanino. He's your utility infielder. That's why he is on the team.

Long-term (if needed): Trade for somebody else's weak-hitting/noodle-armed shortstop. That shouldn't be too hard to find.

:hitless
"I bet you can find one for less than $4.5 million, too!"

Slappy is rattling around someone's minor leauge system somewhere. I can't remember which team exactly now...

:gulp:

PaleHoseGeorge
02-07-2002, 03:54 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
Like you said, this is the last season of Clayton's contract. Let him play it out, and then say good riddance at the end of the year. By that time, the Sox will hopefully have someone who's ready (like maybe Andy Gonzalez) who can fill in. If Clayton sucks, bench him. But at this point, he's at least useful to have on the team.

Great. An insurance policy (for the shortstop position only) that costs us $4.5 million.

:KW
"Your team's wallet is bigger than mine."

czalgosz
02-07-2002, 03:56 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge


Great. An insurance policy (for the shortstop position only) that costs us $4.5 million.

:KW
"Your team's wallet is bigger than mine."

I didn't say it was ideal, but I didn't create this situation in the first place. And I highly doubt that if the Sox trade Clayton, that Reinsdorf will put that money right back into payroll.

:reinsy

Why should I? No one comes out anyway.

Cheryl
02-07-2002, 04:09 PM
Slappy's in the Tampa Bay organization, I think.

You guys ever see this?

http://www.birdnest.org/summera2/

czalgosz
02-07-2002, 04:14 PM
And as surprising as this is, Clayton's salary isn't any more than other shortstops of comparable ability. Last season, Tony Womack made $4 Million, Mike Bordick made $4.3 Million, Alex Gonzalez made $4.25 Million... even Rey Sanchez made $2.3 Million. None of those guys are really any better than Clayton is.

FarWestChicago
02-07-2002, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz


Graffanino is not a solution at shortstop. He's fine as an emergency replacement, but he doesn't have the range, the quickness, or the instincts to play every day at short.:buddylee

Yeah, there is no way Graffanino has the range to replace me!

Meatpants
02-07-2002, 04:16 PM
Originally posted by Cheryl
Slappy's in the Tampa Bay organization, I think.

You guys ever see this?

http://www.birdnest.org/summera2/

Wow, Mike Caruso, three guys behind a dugout, and the words "I don't usually do this" had me worried. :smile:

Randar68
02-07-2002, 04:18 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
If the Sox don't have Clayton when Valentin goes down this time, then they have to trade for someone just like Clayton

Jason Dallearo is a better defensive SS than Clayton. But he can't hit, so I guess they are similar. And even better yet, he costs next to nothing.

Now THAT's a short term solution!

Daver
02-07-2002, 06:27 PM
Originally posted by Randar68


Jason Dallearo is a better defensive SS than Clayton. But he can't hit, so I guess they are similar. And even better yet, he costs next to nothing.

Now THAT's a short term solution!

Damn,Randar beat me to it.

doublem23
02-07-2002, 06:33 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz


I've asked this question before, and noone's been able to answer it - If the Sox trade Clayton, and something happens to Valentin to cut into his playing time (like it usually does for Valentin), who would play short? Noone in the organization is capable of doing it on an everyday basis at the big-league level other than Clayton and Valentin.

What's wrong with Graff playing most of the time, with maybe Dallero (sp... BAD!) playign every now and then to give Tony a rest once in a while?

czalgosz
02-07-2002, 07:27 PM
Originally posted by doublem23


What's wrong with Graff playing most of the time, with maybe Dallero (sp... BAD!) playign every now and then to give Tony a rest once in a while?

A) Graffanino would make a bad defensive shortstop. Not only would he be as immobile as Clayton, he would make a lot of errors, too. Worst of both worlds.

B) That leaves the Sox without a utility infielder.


Graffanino is a good defensive second-baseman. He's an average defensive third-baseman. He's barely adequate as an emergency replacement at short.

I like Graffanino a lot. But he shouldn't be a starter.

pearso66
02-07-2002, 09:11 PM
graff or delearro.(SP) they are both cheaper than clayton, and plus then we can see if crede is all he lives up to be

bc2k
02-07-2002, 10:22 PM
This entire argument is based on the assumption Jose Valentin will get hurt for the bulk of the season. So what if he does. That is why we have utility infielders and a minor league system. What if Ordonez gets hurt. Players do get injured in the sport of baseball, but you don't need replacements (especially at 4.5 mil) for every position. We lost some pitchers last season, but you wont see the sox carry 15 pitchers on the staff all season.

RichH55
02-08-2002, 09:44 AM
Plus look at baseball these days....if you wanted an insurance policy who can only play SS and not hit, sign Rey Sanchez for "peanuts"....he probably has the added bonus that he isnt as much of a whiner as Royce....Though if your theory works in practice czal Im for it, but when i see them trotting out Royce to start at SS when Jose isnt injured then you have a net loss, and no development time for Crede......It all depends on the situation I guess....even with injury time I think is fair to assume Jose can play 120+ games, so for 40 or so games that insurance policy does not need to be here

czalgosz
02-08-2002, 11:53 AM
Originally posted by RichH55
Plus look at baseball these days....if you wanted an insurance policy who can only play SS and not hit, sign Rey Sanchez for "peanuts"....he probably has the added bonus that he isnt as much of a whiner as Royce....Though if your theory works in practice czal Im for it, but when i see them trotting out Royce to start at SS when Jose isnt injured then you have a net loss, and no development time for Crede......It all depends on the situation I guess....even with injury time I think is fair to assume Jose can play 120+ games, so for 40 or so games that insurance policy does not need to be here

Well, I don't think that Sanchez will still be a free agent mid-season.

My main thing is this - the time for showcasing Joe Crede, IMO, was last July-September, when the Sox were 8-12 games back. But the Sox apparently felt they could get back in the race, and since Royce had started hitting, he deserved a starting spot. Not to mention that Valentin and Perry both deserved playing time. But that's neither here nor there - rather than picking up Canseco, they should have given Perry and Valentin some time at DH so that Crede could get 150-200 ABs. If they had done that, we would know right now what Joe Crede can do.

But they didn't do that. We have no idea, really, what kind of hitter Joe Crede will be at the major-league level. Personally, I don't think that another half-season at AAA will kill Crede, and I don't think that Williams and Manuel would hesitate to bench Clayton and play Crede if Clayton hits the way he did in April and May last year. This quote by Manuel (October 7) says it all -

"If he performs the way he's performed since his slump, I'd have to say, yeah, we want him back."

That's not exactly high praise, IMO. It doesn't sound like someone who's forced to play someone because of his salary (which I already pointed out that in this day and age isn't that high). I know that a lot of you, George in particular, have zero faith in management, and that they will always make the wrong move. But I do think that, if it becomes obvious that Clayton is blocking a future all-star from playing every day (and I still am not convinced that Crede's a future all-star) they will do the right thing, at least in this case.

AsInWreck
02-08-2002, 01:47 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz


when Valentin goes down this time, then they have to trade for someone just like Clayton, only this time they have to give up a real prospect for him, and they are stuck with Tony Womack or someone just as crappy for the remainder of his contract, and we're right back where we started.


Yeah, players who drive in the tying runs from 2 down w/ 2 outs in the bottom of the ninth inning of the 7th game of the world series against mariano rivera are crappy(insert torqouise)

bjmarte
02-08-2002, 02:00 PM
Originally posted by AsInWreck


Yeah, players who drive in the tying runs from 2 down w/ 2 outs in the bottom of the ninth inning of the 7th game of the world series against mariano rivera are crappy(insert torqouise)

You mean teal for sarcasm

czalgosz
02-08-2002, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by AsInWreck


Yeah, players who drive in the tying runs from 2 down w/ 2 outs in the bottom of the ninth inning of the 7th game of the world series against mariano rivera are crappy(insert torqouise)

And the sun shines on a dog's butt every once in a while.

Dan Gladden hit a sacrifice fly in the bottom of the 10th inning to drive home the winning run in the World Series. Does that mean he belongs in the Hall of Fame?

Whatever standards you set, Tony Womack is a terrible ballplayer. He's a fantasy owner's dream, because he hits for average and steals a lot of bases, but in reality, he stinks. Offensively, he never walks and he has zero power.
Defensively, he has a rag arm and makes a lot of errors. He uses his speed to make up for his lack of instincts at the position (which results in a lot of highlight reel plays, which fools people into thinking that he's a great defensive player).

Last thing -

Tony Womack OPS (2001) - .652
Royce Clayton OPS (2001) - .707

At best, trading Clayton for Womack would be a wash. And that's if Womack has a career year.

RichH55
02-08-2002, 08:39 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz


And the sun shines on a dog's butt every once in a while.

Dan Gladden hit a sacrifice fly in the bottom of the 10th inning to drive home the winning run in the World Series. Does that mean he belongs in the Hall of Fame?

Whatever standards you set, Tony Womack is a terrible ballplayer. He's a fantasy owner's dream, because he hits for average and steals a lot of bases, but in reality, he stinks. Offensively, he never walks and he has zero power.
Defensively, he has a rag arm and makes a lot of errors. He uses his speed to make up for his lack of instincts at the position (which results in a lot of highlight reel plays, which fools people into thinking that he's a great defensive player).

Last thing -

Tony Womack OPS (2001) - .652
Royce Clayton OPS (2001) - .707

At best, trading Clayton for Womack would be a wash. And that's if Womack has a career year.


The old Royce defense....it could be worse if events A-Z happen....how long until we stop arguing Jose-Royce and get to the point where hyperbole is King....stuff like "Well we could have Hitler playing short, so it could be worse"...look if you want an insurance SS who can play in a pinch either go with Graff or sign Sanchez for close to the min. and buyout trade Royce.....Royce doesnt bring anything to this club except a cloud hanging over our heads...Royce Clayton is the sword of Damacles and we need to rid ourselves of him whenever and however we can

czalgosz
02-08-2002, 09:50 PM
Look, my point is this - with the exception of a handful, Royce Clayton is no worse than anyone else out there. And, he doesn't make any more than shortstops with similar ability at a similar age. That's all.

I don't think the difference between a championship season and a non-championship season is Joe Crede. Besides, isn't a little healthy competition good for both Crede and Clayton?

Finally, how can you write a paragraph where you say both -

"...how long until we stop arguing Jose-Royce and get to the point where hyperbole is King..."

and -

"Royce Clayton is the sword of Damacles and we need to rid ourselves of him whenever and however we can"

I think if either of us is using hyperbole, it's you.

RichH55
02-08-2002, 10:50 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
Look, my point is this - with the exception of a handful, Royce Clayton is no worse than anyone else out there. And, he doesn't make any more than shortstops with similar ability at a similar age. That's all.

I don't think the difference between a championship season and a non-championship season is Joe Crede. Besides, isn't a little healthy competition good for both Crede and Clayton?

Finally, how can you write a paragraph where you say both -

"...how long until we stop arguing Jose-Royce and get to the point where hyperbole is King..."

and -

"Royce Clayton is the sword of Damacles and we need to rid ourselves of him whenever and however we can"

I think if either of us is using hyperbole, it's you.

It was irony....work with me here:) And since when is a Sword of Damcles reference hyperbole? Geez, rough crowd :D: Healthy competition would be fine, but since the Sox seem content on making Royce the starter bar none without healthy competition thats not good...now we both agree that the Royce deal was not the right move...perhaps I dont put enough blame on management because like you said what we got out of Royce is actually what we should have expected if not better. Though these two wrongs make a right arguments dont do it for me...things like Royce could be Player X or since Other Player T makes around the same and shares an equal value of worthlessness we arent the king of the idiots....well I think we can do better than that......I think Clayton was KW's worst move and Im hoping he will cut his losses.....

Heres another caveat though:Royce is gone next year, I don't think Joe Crede will be a great major leaguer, in fact I think there is a chance he could flop, however he has earned that chance to succeed or flop and we need to know....I would rather let him settle the Joe Crede question in 2002 rather than 2003 when you are trying to break as many as 5 position rookies into the works(probably not that much obviously)....Crede will provide a great glove at 3B and w have heard the Jose/Royce debate over and over, but with Crede's glove over at 3B, can you see him doing significantly worse than Royce's .708 OBS? Well he may be a superstar, .708 is reasonable to expect and if he isnt cutting it than you can groom Hummel for 3B, Harris for 2B and put yourself in a better position to be ready for the future....If you want an insurance policy go get yourself Rey Sanchez and live with Graffiano as your posible replacement in case of calamity.....With having Royce the negatives outweigh the posibilities and that is why I believe he is addition by subtraction....It also is rather counterproductive to have an insurance policy that you "have" to play and when you dont he is a negative influence on the ballclub(See: Texas, St.Lous, Last Years Whining)

czalgosz
02-08-2002, 11:11 PM
Well, the whole dump Clayton argument revolves around the idea that he's the only one stopping Joe Crede from playing, that somehow his salary has the Sox's hands tied. I for one don't buy that argument - I really do believe that if Clayton plays terribly again this season, you won't see him in the lineup for very long.

This is why I don't want to give Joe Crede the job sight unseen, no matter how bad Royce Clayton stinks - The Sox let Robin Ventura and Ozzie Guillen go via Free Agency after the 1997 season. They handed jobs to rookies Greg Norton and Mike Caruso with no competition, who both had at least as much potential upside at that point as Crede does now. They let both those guys know that they had no pressure, because there was noone else that was going to compete for the job.

Well, I won't insult you by rehashing what happened to Norton and Caruso, but I do believe that a big reason why both of them failed is because neither had to fight for a job. The Sox had at least a legitimate excuse as to why they failed those two... They were trying to save money. The Sox will have to pay Clayton either way.

I may be a big idiot, and I obviously am in a tiny minority on this board, but I think that it helps Crede, not hurts him, to have Clayton on the team. I have never seen a successful rookie who didn't have to fight for a job.

Daver
02-08-2002, 11:16 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz


Well, I won't insult you by rehashing what happened to Norton and Caruso, but I do believe that a big reason why both of them failed is because neither had to fight for a job. The Sox had at least a legitimate excuse as to why they failed those two... They were trying to save money. The Sox will have to pay Clayton either way.

.

I'm not trying to argue czal,but Caruso failed because the Sox rushed him.It was obvious that he was playing over his head and the Sox did nothing to help the situation.He would have benefitted from being sent down for another year to develop,instead of being left at the big league level.

czalgosz
02-08-2002, 11:24 PM
Originally posted by daver


I'm not trying to argue czal,but Caruso failed because the Sox rushed him.It was obvious that he was playing over his head and the Sox did nothing to help the situation.He would have benefitted from being sent down for another year to develop,instead of being left at the big league level.

You're completely right, but that doesn't change my argument. I think the existence of Clayton will make Crede into a better ballplayer, and vice-versa.

I will join all the Royce-haters out there and demand his immediate ouster if he's batting .120 again and Crede is in the minors, but at least until that point, I'm withholding judgment. From what I've read, it's not Royce's paycheck that's keeping him in the lineup, it's his second half last season. Reading between the lines, I think the Sox are going to keep a close eye on the whole situation.

kermittheefrog
02-08-2002, 11:28 PM
I know Caruso and Norton sucked but those guys weren't half the minor league players Crede is. Caruso was rushed and really didn't have any offense to offer anyway. He didn't walk, hit for power or even steal bases effectively. He was a no-hit shortstop that had no glove either. Frankly I'm not sure if the Sox hadn't rushed him if he would be any good because he simply didn't do anything other than hit for average.

Norton I remember being referred to as a potential major league regular, more likely a part time player. Which is what he is, rather than the long time solution at third. Crede deserves the shot, he's earned it, he already had to repeat AA because of injury, why should he repeat AAA?

czalgosz
02-08-2002, 11:39 PM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog


Norton I remember being referred to as a potential major league regular, more likely a part time player. Which is what he is, rather than the long time solution at third. Crede deserves the shot, he's earned it, he already had to repeat AA because of injury, why should he repeat AAA?

Well, I think Caruso might have developed some plate discipline had the Sox worked with him, but I could be wrong.

The Sox were counting on Norton to become a productive offensive player and build on his '99 power numbers, but he never did.

I don't think Crede should spend the whole year in AAA, just start the year there. Then you can gradually work him into the lineup over the course of the year (depending on Clayton and Valentin's performance and health) and then he'll be ready to be Opening Day 3B come 2003. IMO, that's the most effective way to break in a rookie.

Daver
02-08-2002, 11:41 PM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
I know Caruso and Norton sucked but those guys weren't half the minor league players Crede is. Caruso was rushed and really didn't have any offense to offer anyway. He didn't walk, hit for power or even steal bases effectively. He was a no-hit shortstop that had no glove either. Frankly I'm not sure if the Sox hadn't rushed him if he would be any good because he simply didn't do anything other than hit for average.

Norton I remember being referred to as a potential major league regular, more likely a part time player. Which is what he is, rather than the long time solution at third. Crede deserves the shot, he's earned it, he already had to repeat AA because of injury, why should he repeat AAA?

Kermit,Caruso was a top prospect when the Sox got him in trade,and they had him playing in the big leagues when he was twenty years old,I am not saying he would be a star,but I think that if they had allowed him to progress slowly he would have been a decent major league player.

But then again what the hell do I know? ©

kermittheefrog
02-09-2002, 12:31 AM
Originally posted by daver


Kermit,Caruso was a top prospect when the Sox got him in trade,and they had him playing in the big leagues when he was twenty years old,I am not saying he would be a star,but I think that if they had allowed him to progress slowly he would have been a decent major league player.

But then again what the hell do I know? ©

I know he was a "top prospect" but not many top prospects get that billing for the kind of performance Caruso put up in the minors. I never did understand the hype behind the guy and it was just stupid to bring him to the majors that quickly. Out of the White Flag deal I liked Foulke and Barcelo the most anyway.

Daver
02-09-2002, 12:50 AM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog


I know he was a "top prospect" but not many top prospects get that billing for the kind of performance Caruso put up in the minors. I never did understand the hype behind the guy and it was just stupid to bring him to the majors that quickly. Out of the White Flag deal I liked Foulke and Barcelo the most anyway.

I can see your view,but the Sox blew it with Caruso.Damn shame that Barcelo will probably never attain the potential he had when the Sox traded for him.