PDA

View Full Version : Aaron Cunningham


DaleJRFan
11-30-2006, 05:28 PM
Just wondering what the WSI resident scout-types think of Aaron Cunningham. He has been listed in the Sox top10 prospects lists that have been published recently.

After checking out his stats, he seems to be quite the player. His stats would indicate that he has good pop in addition to batting for a very good average... 11 HRs, 496 SLG, 305 AVG and a very promising 386 OBP.

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/C/Aaron-Cunningham.shtml

Looks like he runs well too (19 SB in 340 AB), but doesn't pretty much every player have a lot of SB attempts in the minors?

I guess my questions are, How far off is he? Will be start at AA next season and maybe move up to AAA (granted, he is only 21)? What type of player does he project to be? How's his defense? I know he was drafted as a second baseman but was moved to LF.

Aside from Sweeney and Fields, Cunningham seems to be the most promising position prospect in the Sox system. Do you guys think he'll factor in the near-term plans, say in 2 or 3 years... or will he wind up as trade bait?

maurice
11-30-2006, 07:50 PM
I saw him during his first stint in Kanny. He's small for an OF who doesn't have blazing speed, but he's got a nice swing. I wouldn't be surprised if they sent him to AA in 2007, but I doubt he's on KW's board as a starter because he's not "prototypical."

He probably could improve his value if he manages to make himself into a CF (like Reed and Rowand).

Domeshot17
12-02-2006, 12:06 PM
i only saw a little of him, but (not in all areas) he reminded me a little of Ryan Sweeney just from the fact when I first saw Ryan Sweeney hit, it was like, wow, there is a smooth, sweet, swing from a future Major Leaguer. He looked like a guy who understood the fundamentals of hitting well.

goldglovesox
12-05-2006, 12:51 PM
I saw him in Spring and at Kannapolis and his swing looks like it gets long at times and he holds his hand really high and will be prone to slumps with his hands dropping inconsistently. I think he has above average speed and if he improved his jumps he could become a poor man's Aaron Rowand in CF much like Anderson is in CF now. So I gotta disagree with the smooth assessment in his swing. Sweeney I believe is smooth in everything he does where as Cunningham is rough and unpolished in pretty much all phases of his game. Just my opinion.

Britt Burns
12-05-2006, 04:00 PM
I think he has above average speed and if he improved his jumps he could become a poor man's Aaron Rowand in CF.

Dead on. He isn't the prospect that BA was coming through the minors (yet, at least), and he has a fair amount of room to grow, but at a minimum I could see him as a good 4th outfielder/defensive replacement kind of guy, maybe even a platoon situation with Owens.

KRS1
12-05-2006, 05:15 PM
I think he has above average speed and if he improved his jumps he could become a poor man's Aaron Rowand in CF much like Anderson is in CF now.


Anderson is not a poor man's Aaron Rowand in CF.

goldglovesox
12-06-2006, 02:33 PM
Anderson is not a poor man's Aaron Rowand in CF.

How would you classify him then? He does not have Rowand's closing speed on the ball in CF nor has he shown Rowands bat just yet. Maybe is a step slower than Rowand but not slow by any stretch and his arm is about even so how would you classify him? He may prove to be more than that down the line, but how could you say otherwise right now? I think you are forgetting just how big of an impact Rowand made in CF. He made Podsednik a decent LF and made Dye an above average guy in RF. Meaning: Pods and Jermaine only had to worry about defending the line. Anything in the gap Rowand would get and they would in turn have less ground to cover and the only balls that would challenge them were still to their glove side. Very rarely would there be a ball to fall in the gap that Rowand would not get. And while I think Anderson is a good CF and the best option WE have I think he is a tick below Rowand in every category. Including leadership.

California Sox
12-06-2006, 03:31 PM
How would you classify him then? He does not have Rowand's closing speed on the ball in CF nor has he shown Rowands bat just yet. Maybe is a step slower than Rowand but not slow by any stretch and his arm is about even so how would you classify him? He may prove to be more than that down the line, but how could you say otherwise right now? I think you are forgetting just how big of an impact Rowand made in CF. He made Podsednik a decent LF and made Dye an above average guy in RF. Meaning: Pods and Jermaine only had to worry about defending the line. Anything in the gap Rowand would get and they would in turn have less ground to cover and the only balls that would challenge them were still to their glove side. Very rarely would there be a ball to fall in the gap that Rowand would not get. And while I think Anderson is a good CF and the best option WE have I think he is a tick below Rowand in every category. Including leadership.

I'd say Anderson is faster than Rowand, has a better arm than Rowand, gets a similar jump to Rowand. In short, defensively Anderson =/> Rowand. Offense is a different matter. BA needs to close some holes to be an average major leaguer. Hopefully he can do that.

KRS1
12-06-2006, 03:37 PM
How would you classify him then? He does not have Rowand's closing speed on the ball in CF nor has he shown Rowands bat just yet. Maybe is a step slower than Rowand but not slow by any stretch and his arm is about even so how would you classify him? He may prove to be more than that down the line, but how could you say otherwise right now? I think you are forgetting just how big of an impact Rowand made in CF. He made Podsednik a decent LF and made Dye an above average guy in RF. Meaning: Pods and Jermaine only had to worry about defending the line. Anything in the gap Rowand would get and they would in turn have less ground to cover and the only balls that would challenge them were still to their glove side. Very rarely would there be a ball to fall in the gap that Rowand would not get. And while I think Anderson is a good CF and the best option WE have I think he is a tick below Rowand in every category. Including leadership.

Anderson is already a better CF than Aaron. People here gave Rowand way too much credit and hype for his defensive play. Mostly because of his crashing into the wall on plays he should have been under. Aaron also let a ton of balls drop in front of him. Brian on the other hand gets better jumps on balls both short and deep, gets under those balls you previously saw Aaron diving/crashing for, and IMO, does have better speed. Ill say it again, Brian Anderson isnt a poor man's Aaron Rowand in CF, that is giving way too much credit to Aaron.

EMachine10
12-06-2006, 07:42 PM
completely agree with KRS......brian makes the plays without crashing into walls because he doesn't have to. Yeah, it looks less spectacular, but it's surely more efficient. And there is no way rowand had a better arm than Anderson. Let's not forget how long it took Rowand's bat to come around

Randar68
12-07-2006, 03:24 PM
Anderson is already a better CF than Aaron. People here gave Rowand way too much credit and hype for his defensive play. Mostly because of his crashing into the wall on plays he should have been under. Aaron also let a ton of balls drop in front of him. Brian on the other hand gets better jumps on balls both short and deep, gets under those balls you previously saw Aaron diving/crashing for, and IMO, does have better speed. Ill say it again, Brian Anderson isnt a poor man's Aaron Rowand in CF, that is giving way too much credit to Aaron.


Instincts are what sets them apart as much as anything. Anderson is also at top speed in about 2 steps versus Rowand taking 4-5. It's just a "quickness" thing and it was amplified by Rowand's routes.

The good CF'ers play shallow. Why? Because they can take away a ton of hit and they know they have the instincts/speed to get to the balls over their heads.

Rowand played 3 feet from the scoreboard it seemed...

I can't believe there are people that still even discuss Rowand vs Anderson defensively. It's a slam-dunk and its not even close and I've been saying so since Rowand first moved to CF. He improved, but he's just not physically gifted enough to ever improve to Anderson's level.

Domeshot17
12-07-2006, 03:43 PM
The only Area where you can really compare Rowand to Anderson is their Arm. They both have, for the most part, an average to slightly above average arm. Neither have a clue what to do with the ball after they catch it (that was the thing that pissed me off most about Brian is not knowing his own arm and missing the cut off man too much)

maurice
12-07-2006, 04:02 PM
Anderson has a very strong and accurate arm.

Rowand has a pretty strong arm, but he fails to maximize it due to inexplicably bad throwing mechanics.

Randar68
12-07-2006, 04:04 PM
Anderson has a very strong and accurate arm.

Rowand has a pretty strong arm, but he fails to maximize it due to inexplicably bad throwing mechanics.

It was primarily due to inconsistent and poor footwork, and still is today. It's something I tried to point out when people would say he had a great arm in just about every FOR argument of the past 4 years.

maurice
12-07-2006, 04:13 PM
The funny thing is, Rowand managed to get much better at fielding the ball but kept the same crappy throwing mechanics, leading to infamous somersault throws directly into the back of the pitchers mound, etc. As hard as he worked to improve in other areas, he must have tried to correct this, right?

Maybe he just got overly excited on close plays and his mechanics fell apart. It seems like this even happens to Dye sometimes.

goldglovesox
12-07-2006, 10:27 PM
I dunno guys maybe I just prefer Rowand b/c his attitude and his toughness. But I just think Rowand made our whole outfield better because he got better jumps has a little better instincts right now than BA. I think he goes to the gaps better than Brian. Now I in no way am saying that Anderson is not a good CF I think he is very good, but I think Rowand is a difference maker out there and I just didnt think Anderson was this year. Just my opinion here but I think a lot of people rate Anderson so high defensively because so many people were comparing him to Mackoviak who could not catch a cold in January. So I dunno maybe it all depends on perspective, but I think back to that catch Rowand made in 05 in yankee stadium and if you watch how far he went for that ball I just dont think Anderson makes that play. Now grant it that is just one example but thats just my opinion. But I would rather have Rowand in CF then Anderson.

Randar68
01-16-2007, 04:06 PM
I dunno guys maybe I just prefer Rowand b/c his attitude and his toughness. But I just think Rowand made our whole outfield better because he got better jumps has a little better instincts right now than BA. I think he goes to the gaps better than Brian. Now I in no way am saying that Anderson is not a good CF I think he is very good, but I think Rowand is a difference maker out there and I just didnt think Anderson was this year. Just my opinion here but I think a lot of people rate Anderson so high defensively because so many people were comparing him to Mackoviak who could not catch a cold in January. So I dunno maybe it all depends on perspective, but I think back to that catch Rowand made in 05 in yankee stadium and if you watch how far he went for that ball I just dont think Anderson makes that play. Now grant it that is just one example but thats just my opinion. But I would rather have Rowand in CF then Anderson.

I've been away from the board for a long time here, but wow... just wow.

Better jumps? Better to the gaps? What games are you watching? Anderson takes straight-line routes to balls and is off at the crack instead of peddling in place for 2 steps like Rowand would. Not only that, but he plays far more shallow and gets to top speed much faster. Rowand will never be able to hold a candle to BA in terms of defense and that was just in BA's first go-around in the league.

soxtalker
01-16-2007, 04:28 PM
I dunno guys maybe I just prefer Rowand b/c his attitude and his toughness. But I just think Rowand made our whole outfield better because he got better jumps has a little better instincts right now than BA. I think he goes to the gaps better than Brian. Now I in no way am saying that Anderson is not a good CF I think he is very good, but I think Rowand is a difference maker out there and I just didnt think Anderson was this year. Just my opinion here but I think a lot of people rate Anderson so high defensively because so many people were comparing him to Mackoviak who could not catch a cold in January. So I dunno maybe it all depends on perspective, but I think back to that catch Rowand made in 05 in yankee stadium and if you watch how far he went for that ball I just dont think Anderson makes that play. Now grant it that is just one example but thats just my opinion. But I would rather have Rowand in CF then Anderson.

I echo Randar's comments. We're not comparing BA to Mackoviak. BA isn't as exciting as Rowand. Rowand has heart -- no question -- and it is exciting to see him crash into walls. But Rowand turns what could have been much easier plays into spectacular catches, while BA turns difficult plays into easy ones.

goldglovesox
01-16-2007, 07:39 PM
So if you get the title of "High Priest" under your screenname you can dismiss opinions that differ from yours and make yours seem as if you are taking them from the Bible? Just want to know so I can start posting more and get my title changed.
Anyway I disagree. I am watching the same games you are and I dont think BA covers more ground than Rowand. KEEP IN MIND I AM NOT SAYING ANDERSON IS NOT SOLID IN CF. All I am saying is that I think Rowand was a little better. While I know Baseball America is not always the Bible this report was filed during the 2005 season in Baseball America: "Anderson may not be more than adequate in center field, a position where adequate usually isnít good enough. Some scouts actually rate him as a below-average runner, and he needs to improve routes to balls." (Granted the same was said about Rowand!) Sporting News Scouting Book which takes scouting reports from actual scouts says: "Anderson might not have the speed or instincts to play CF. Seems to get better jumps from the corners and has a plus arm which makes it a better fit for him." While for Rowand: "Is one of the better defensive CF in the league. Has good range b/c of his jumps and takes precise routes to the balls in the gaps. Goes back to the track well and has good carry on his ball due to his over the top slot." I echo what I said earlier. I think Rowand made Podsednik and Dye better outfielders and I think it showed in the overall defense performance of our outfielders last year. Obviously you guys make up your own opinions and thats fine, but I cannot remember one instance in which "BA turns difficult plays into easy ones." Nor did I see him make a play Rowand would not have. If you guys can let me know I have MLB.TV and I will go back and look.
Just my opinion here no need for any "wow just wow" comments. My assessment is simply my assessment and yours is yours.

FedEx227
01-16-2007, 09:03 PM
but I cannot remember one instance in which "BA turns difficult plays into easy ones."

There in lies the problem, you can't pinpoint exact Anderson "great" plays because they come so easily. All I can tell you is I can't pinpoint a truly bad play from him.

As for Rowand, see the game of Joe Crede's walkoff September 20, 2005, he took one of the worst reads I've ever seen a CF take and it almost cost us the game and maybe a chance at the playoffs.

maurice
01-16-2007, 09:38 PM
Range is impossible to judge on TV, because you can't see where the player was positioned before the pitch was thrown. As a result, folks judge the difficulty of the play based on how hard the player was running and whether he dove at the end. This is daft, because the player may have started off running the wrong way and then sprinted to compensate for their mistake. (Probably 2/3rds of the time a player lunges or dives for a ball, he was trying to make up for a mistake.) OTOH, if you run the correct direction right off the bat, you don't have to run hard at the end or dive for the ball.

If you want to see Anderson's fantastic range, you have to go to a game and note his position before the pitch is thrown. Note especially how shallow he plays compared to most other CF, yet he's still able to make catches on line drives in the gaps.

FedEx227
01-16-2007, 09:52 PM
Range is impossible to judge on TV, because you can't see where the player was positioned before the pitch was thrown. As a result, folks judge the difficulty of the play based on how hard the player was running and whether he dove at the end. This is daft, because the player may have started off running the wrong way and then sprinted to compensate for their mistake. (Probably 2/3rds of the time a player lunges or dives for a ball, he was trying to make up for a mistake.) OTOH, if you run the correct direction right off the bat, you don't have to run hard at the end or dive for the ball.

If you want to see Anderson's fantastic range, you have to go to a game and note his position before the pitch is thrown. Note especially how shallow he plays compared to most other CF, yet he's still able to make catches on line drives in the gaps.

Great post, couldn't agree more. My friends always think I'm weird but I'm usually looking towards the outfield before a pitch is thrown to see how everyone is set up, ditto for the infield.

itsnotrequired
01-16-2007, 10:15 PM
Great post, couldn't agree more. My friends always think I'm weird but I'm usually looking towards the outfield before a pitch is thrown to see how everyone is set up, ditto for the infield.

Sounds like you need some new friends.:redneck

One of my favorite things about going to the games is watching where the players position themselves for the different batters. Something you just can't get from watching the games on TV.

As for Anderson, I can't comment on the BA report and his routes in 2005 but his routes in 2006 were fabulous. MUCH better than Rowand's in 2005. I'm surprised BA would write a report claiming that Rowand has "great" jumps. The fact is Anderson looks like he isn't doing anything out there because he makes it look so damn easy. Sort of like watching someone like Griffey swing the bat.

Daver
01-16-2007, 10:24 PM
Keep in mind, all of Baseball America's reports are based on Aaron playing the position he played most in the minors, left field.

FedEx227
01-16-2007, 10:29 PM
One of my favorite things about going to the games is watching where the players position themselves for the different batters. Something you just can't get from watching the games on TV.


Exactly, I can see the batter and the pitcher on TV. Why go to a ballpark and not watch the shifts, etc. I was lucky to have finally see the great David Ortiz switch. Unfortunately, they now hit Thome with it, and he like Ortiz can't seem to ever break it.

Keep in mind, all of Baseball America's reports are based on Aaron playing the position he played most in the minors, left field.

Very true, many people forget that Rowand split LF/CF time until about 2004 when he became a full everyday CF.

A. Cavatica
01-16-2007, 11:01 PM
Keep in mind, all of Baseball America's reports are based on Aaron playing the position he played most in the minors, left field.

Left field? I always thought he played RF in the minors.

Daver
01-16-2007, 11:04 PM
Left field? I always thought he played RF in the minors.


He played right in Birmingham, and at Charlotte, in the lower levels he played left field.

goldglovesox
01-17-2007, 12:08 AM
Couldnt agree more that you have to see the game in person to judge thats why scouts dont sit at home and watch games. However the games I saw this year I never saw Brian make a play where I said to myself 'wow Rowand does not make that play". Where as thinking back to Rowand making catch after catch in the New York series of 05 at Yankee Stadium I dont know if BA makes all those plays (just one example). You cant convince me he makes those catches look any easier as many have tried to say today. The other thing that we can't measure is how his teammates play around him. How he communicates to his teammates on the field. And in that department Rowand has him. Maybe BA gets there but right now Rowand makes his teammates better. There is no way I can believe Anderson is a FAR better CF like it has been said. The best part about baseball is that so many people can have different opinions about so many different players. But if I have to win a game tomorrow and the last two CF's are Rowand and Anderson, my pick would be Rowand. I think he makes the other two OF's flanking him better as well as covers his own ground.

FedEx227
01-17-2007, 09:45 AM
Couldnt agree more that you have to see the game in person to judge thats why scouts dont sit at home and watch games. However the games I saw this year I never saw Brian make a play where I said to myself 'wow Rowand does not make that play". Where as thinking back to Rowand making catch after catch in the New York series of 05 at Yankee Stadium I dont know if BA makes all those plays (just one example). You cant convince me he makes those catches look any easier as many have tried to say today. The other thing that we can't measure is how his teammates play around him. How he communicates to his teammates on the field. And in that department Rowand has him. Maybe BA gets there but right now Rowand makes his teammates better. There is no way I can believe Anderson is a FAR better CF like it has been said. The best part about baseball is that so many people can have different opinions about so many different players. But if I have to win a game tomorrow and the last two CF's are Rowand and Anderson, my pick would be Rowand. I think he makes the other two OF's flanking him better as well as covers his own ground.

I'm too assume you haven't played much baseball in your life?

How exactly does Rowand make the OFers around him better? I don't really see your logic in trying to find something deep beneath the surface, some underlying "team chemistry" type thing that Rowand seems to do. Don't get me wrong, I love Rowand, I own his jerseys and still think he was a key piece of 05... but he doesn't make OFers around him better, I'm not even sure how one guy does that.

Communication?! Communication is key to infield work on where they're going for the double play, where the cutoff is, etc. The only thing OF communicate is shifts given from the dugout and "I got it".

And yes Anderson makes those catches in New York, standing up, waiting for the ball.

chaerulez
01-17-2007, 10:22 AM
I dunno guys maybe I just prefer Rowand b/c his attitude and his toughness. But I just think Rowand made our whole outfield better because he got better jumps has a little better instincts right now than BA. I think he goes to the gaps better than Brian. Now I in no way am saying that Anderson is not a good CF I think he is very good, but I think Rowand is a difference maker out there and I just didnt think Anderson was this year. Just my opinion here but I think a lot of people rate Anderson so high defensively because so many people were comparing him to Mackoviak who could not catch a cold in January. So I dunno maybe it all depends on perspective, but I think back to that catch Rowand made in 05 in yankee stadium and if you watch how far he went for that ball I just dont think Anderson makes that play. Now grant it that is just one example but thats just my opinion. But I would rather have Rowand in CF then Anderson.

I guess we have to rate players on intangibles like "attitude and toughness" instead of actual talent and playing abillity. That's the same kind of illogical line of thought that leads people to believe David Eckstein is more valuable to a MLB team than A-Rod. Because players are Rowand and Eckstein happen to be GRINDERS!!! people seem to overvalue their actual talent. People seem to think Rowand was great with the bat, when I would classify him as average at best on offense. His OBP was a poor .321 in 2006. He barely walks and is good for 100 strikeouts if he gets 550 ABs a season. He has below average power at the plate and bottom line his stat lines just aren't impressive at all. Rowand does not play better defense in CF than Andreson. That's just the bottom line.

rdivaldi
01-17-2007, 11:16 AM
People seem to think Rowand was great with the bat, when I would classify him as average at best on offense. His OBP was a poor .321 in 2006. He barely walks and is good for 100 strikeouts if he gets 550 ABs a season. He has below average power at the plate and bottom line his stat lines just aren't impressive at all. Rowand does not play better defense in CF than Andreson. That's just the bottom line.

The problem is, Anderson is looking worse at the plate than Rowand ever did, he looks like a deer in the headlights up there. If you think Rowand K's at a high rate and doesn't walk, what do you think of Anderson? Time will set this story straight, but for my team I'd take Rowand for his all-around play. I don't believe in Anderson, never have.

goldglovesox
01-17-2007, 12:04 PM
[quote=FedEx227;1463486]I'm too assume you haven't played much baseball in your life?

Sorry to disappoint you man I just finished four years in the minor league system of the Sox and I played on the same team as Brian Anderson. Now communication might not be essential for your beer league you play in or for 16 inch softball but in pro ball a CF has to be the captain of the outfield. Communicating to the outfielders in letting them know where they should be and where he is EVERY play. When you shade a certain way for a hitter or where you are as the ball is in the air. The biggest obstacle young CF's face in the minor leagues is being able to "captain" the outfield and making the corner guys always know where the CF is. Also to answer how he made Dye and Podsednik better. In 2005 I thought Rowand allowed Dye and Podsednik to defend the lines more because a ball to the gap Rowand would get. Podsednik even said so. That with Rowand in center he could focus more on his glove hand than having to go to the gap. And his play was average in 05 and I think you can agree way below average in 06.
What exactly do IF's communicate on a double play? Maybe on a steal they have to communicate like who has coverage based on what pitch, location, and hitter. But I am curious how would you communicate on 'where they are going for the double play?' Ball hit to Crede I assume you are thinking that Uribe and Iguchi communicate as to who is taking the throw?

caulfield12
01-17-2007, 12:17 PM
[quote=FedEx227;1463486]I'm too assume you haven't played much baseball in your life?

Sorry to disappoint you man I just finished four years in the minor league system of the Sox and I played on the same team as Brian Anderson. Now communication might not be essential for your beer league you play in or for 16 inch softball but in pro ball a CF has to be the captain of the outfield. Communicating to the outfielders in letting them know where they should be and where he is EVERY play. When you shade a certain way for a hitter or where you are as the ball is in the air. The biggest obstacle young CF's face in the minor leagues is being able to "captain" the outfield and making the corner guys always know where the CF is. Also to answer how he made Dye and Podsednik better. In 2005 I thought Rowand allowed Dye and Podsednik to defend the lines more because a ball to the gap Rowand would get. Podsednik even said so. That with Rowand in center he could focus more on his glove hand than having to go to the gap. And his play was average in 05 and I think you can agree way below average in 06.
What exactly do IF's communicate on a double play? Maybe on a steal they have to communicate like who has coverage based on what pitch, location, and hitter. But I am curious how would you communicate on 'where they are going for the double play?' Ball hit to Crede I assume you are thinking that Uribe and Iguchi communicate as to who is taking the throw?

Actually, I would say this is one of BA's biggest weaknesses...taking control and calling for balls, both with the outfielders and especially with Uribe, who likes to go after almost every ball hit out into the "short" outfield.

Of course, Mackowiak was even worse...there's not an argument there, but BA really needs to improve in this area. Hopefully we'll see some progress this upcoming season.

Note: I am not saying Rowand is better, by any stretch of the imagination, just pointing out something about BA. I don't want Rowand back.

FedEx227
01-17-2007, 01:56 PM
Sorry to disappoint you man I just finished four years in the minor league system of the Sox and I played on the same team as Brian Anderson.

Damn, sorry I didn't know that.

I agree with all of your points, but I still feel you're putting too much emphasis on "chemistry" and "communication". While I do feel Anderson could do a better job of calling people off, I can't see how you can pick Rowand over BA based completely on communication. BA has much better range and cover his zone tremendously better, there are stats to prove it.

rdivaldi
01-17-2007, 02:15 PM
I ask this not to be a smart alek, but can you tell us who you are?

I concur. If not we're all gonna assume that you're full of crap.

RowanDye
01-17-2007, 02:42 PM
The problem is, Anderson is looking worse at the plate than Rowand ever did, he looks like a deer in the headlights up there. If you think Rowand K's at a high rate and doesn't walk, what do you think of Anderson? Time will set this story straight, but for my team I'd take Rowand for his all-around play. I don't believe in Anderson, never have.

While I don't think this is your point in comparing Anderson and Rowand's below average hitting, I would point out that Rowand will be paid substantially more than BA at $4.35 mill this year.

Assuming that Brian hits more like he did after the All-Star break (.257) than he did before the All-Star break (.192), it still looks like a good deal to me.

rdivaldi
01-17-2007, 02:56 PM
While I don't think this is your point in comparing Anderson and Rowand's below average hitting, I would point out that Rowand will be paid substantially more than BA at $4.35 mill this year.

Assuming that Brian hits more like he did after the All-Star break (.257) than he did before the All-Star break (.192), it still looks like a good deal to me.

I'm not concerned with the payroll, but I do see where you are coming from with that argument.

Also, I don't think anyone should call Rowand a "below average" hitter. He's a high .700 OPS hitter on average.

Frater Perdurabo
01-17-2007, 02:56 PM
Assuming that Brian hits more like he did after the All-Star break (.257) than he did before the All-Star break (.192), it still looks like a good deal to me.

I would be exceedingly pleased if Anderson played GG-caliber defense (which he's already done), hit .257 (like he did in the 2nd half), hit 30 doubles (his 23 in 365 ABs last year would project to 31 or 32 in 500 ABs), and clubbed 10-15 homers in 2007. That's great production for a #8 hitter (I'd rather have Uribe bat ninth).

In fact, with his defense I'd glady accept that kind of offensive production for the next decade.

As for the communication issue, Anderson almost certainly will grow more comfortable in the role.

goldglovesox
01-17-2007, 02:57 PM
Damn, sorry I didn't know that.

I agree with all of your points, but I still feel you're putting too much emphasis on "chemistry" and "communication". While I do feel Anderson could do a better job of calling people off, I can't see how you can pick Rowand over BA based completely on communication. BA has much better range and cover his zone tremendously better, there are stats to prove it.

No no I agree with you. I am not basing it completely on communication. MY VIEW is that Rowand covered as much ground as BA if not more. Am I wrong maybe? Certainly sounds like it from some of the other responses.:cool: But I stand by it. I saw both play on the back fields in Tucson and in TEP and I saw almost every home game the past two Septembers when I got home and I remember thinking to myself that Rowand was a step better in all the situations. I thought he was more aggressive and went to the 400 sign better than BA. Now for how shallow he plays and all that I have to admit it didnt stand out to me, making me think that it was not that big of a difference but if you guys say it was I'll go with it. But Rowand certainly does not play with his back to the wall. I mean I will go to war with BA anyday I think he is an awesome teammate and can drink most of the guys on this board under the table, but I prefer Rowand.
(Note this is off the BA Rowand topic.) And about the stats. I would encourage you to throw away stats when viewing defense. Because stats favor a cautious guy vs. an aggressive defender. It is all up to the eye of the beholder which seems to be our problem above. But my manager up in Great Falls and I talked about this all the time. Stats are misleading b/c our example was always Ryne Sandberg. Sandberg always had tremendous fielding % and good range statistics. But the guy never left his feet. However a guy like say Biggio for instance would tend to make errors when he dove and became over aggressive and that hurts his stats. So it is up to the GM or Manager what he would prefer. Me: I'll take the guy who makes aggressive mistakes and takes chances out there b/c sometimes Biggio will make the play Sandberg watches go by.

Frater Perdurabo
01-17-2007, 03:06 PM
...But I stand by it. I saw both play on the back fields in Tucson and in TEP and I saw almost every home game the past two Septembers when I got home and I remember thinking to myself that Rowand was a step better in all the situations. I thought he was more aggressive and went to the 400 sign better than BA. Now for how shallow he plays and all that I have to admit it didnt stand out to me, making me think that it was not that big of a difference but if you guys say it was I'll go with it. But Rowand certainly does not play with his back to the wall. I mean I will go to war with BA anyday I think he is an awesome teammate and can drink most of the guys on this board under the table, but I prefer Rowand...

EDIT 3: Goldglovesox is legit. He asked me to protect his identity and I will. Rest assured he is legit, though.

FedEx227
01-17-2007, 03:23 PM
goldglove, I am of the same notion. I'll take Uribe over Jeter ANYDAY. Jeter is much like Sandberg and gold glove favorite Eric Chavez. Sure they don't make errors, but they also don't get to half the balls. Which is why I look mostly at Zone Rating when evaluating infielders, which shows clearly how awful Jeter really is at getting to balls.

With that being said, I think we're both at our ends and probably won't see it either way. All your claims for Rowand are factual, and I do agree. However, I would still take Anderson based on what I've seen. Rowand to me could be too aggressive sometimes and thus got himself into trouble.

RowanDye
01-17-2007, 03:24 PM
I'm not concerned with the payroll, but I do see where you are coming from with that argument.

Also, I don't think anyone should call Rowand a "below average" hitter. He's a high .700 OPS hitter on average.

It all depends if you think Rowand will play more like he did in 2004 or more like he did in 2005 and 2006. I think 2004 was a career year and Rowand will end up on the lower end of a career .700 OPS average -- something I don't think is unreasonable for Anderson to accomplish.

Frater Perdurabo
01-17-2007, 03:26 PM
Goldglovesox, your profile says you were born in Oak Lawn. You're not Rob Mackowiak, are you? :D:

goldglovesox
01-17-2007, 03:27 PM
Goldglovesox, your profile says you were born in Oak Lawn. You're not Rob Mackowiak, are you? :D:

HA! I wish.

goldglovesox
01-17-2007, 03:41 PM
With that being said, I think we're both at our ends and probably won't see it either way. All your claims for Rowand are factual, and I do agree. However, I would still take Anderson based on what I've seen. Rowand to me could be too aggressive sometimes and thus got himself into trouble.

Fair enough. I agree. I think Rowands aggressiveness did hurt him sometimes but it sometimes turned out for the good. And Uribe is a much better defender for ME than Jeter. I would never take Jeter off of my team but defensively I like Uribes aggressiveness much in the same respect that I like Rowands. If I have two aggressive corner guys like an Ichiro in RF and an Eric Byrnes in LF I would take a passive guy in CF. But with Scotty Pods in LF I would prefer a guy with a little more aggressiveness in the center. But I mean hey if we get to the playoffs with that lineup in OF I will be celebrating as loud as you man.

maurice
01-17-2007, 03:54 PM
Goldglovesox, your profile says you were born in Oak Lawn. You're not Rob Mackowiak, are you? :D:

There is at least one other player currently in the Sox org who is from Oak Lawn, and he played for Great Falls pretty recently. However, as an '04 draft pick, he hasn't "finished four years in the minor league system of the Sox" and never "played on the same team as Brian Anderson"--unless you construe this phrase very, very broadly.

Frater Perdurabo
01-17-2007, 03:55 PM
Fair enough. I agree. I think Rowands aggressiveness did hurt him sometimes but it sometimes turned out for the good. And Uribe is a much better defender for ME than Jeter. I would never take Jeter off of my team but defensively I like Uribes aggressiveness much in the same respect that I like Rowands. If I have two aggressive corner guys like an Ichiro in RF and an Eric Byrnes in LF I would take a passive guy in CF. But with Scotty Pods in LF I would prefer a guy with a little more aggressiveness in the center. But I mean hey if we get to the playoffs with that lineup in OF I will be celebrating as loud as you man.

Goldglovesox, many of the scouts on WSI have said that Rowand had to be aggressive in order to get to balls because he got poor reads on them initially and then had to run "less than ideal" routes. In that interpretation, only his hustle made up for the poor reads at the beginning.

I'm not a baseball expert, but I remember watching a Sox-Rangers game in Texas in 2002 when Kenny Lofton played CF. My seats were in the CF bleachers and I distinctly remember Lofton playing very shallow. I remarked to my father-in-law how shallow he played and how it seemed so strange. Then I saw him effortlessly move back to catch deeply hit balls (and Arlington has some massive gaps) without having to dive, and I saw how he adjusted as the pitch was made and again as soon as the bat hit the ball. Immediately I saw the advantage of playing shallow as long as the player had either the speed or the technique (or preferably both) to get to the gaps, because playing shallow gave him more opportunities to catch weakly-hit ducksnorts just beyond the reach of the infielders.

I know Rowand doesn't play on the warning track, but don't you think that he would play more shallow if he had "natural" center field instincts like a Kenny Lofton (or a Brian Anderson)? I don't want to rip on Rowand, because he was the CF for our World Series champions, but it still seems to me that playing deep is more of an admission by the CF that he needs that additional split second to adjust to batted balls.

Frater Perdurabo
01-17-2007, 04:08 PM
HA! I wish.

Whatever you say, Rob... :tongue:

itsnotrequired
01-17-2007, 04:43 PM
The problem is, Anderson is looking worse at the plate than Rowand ever did, he looks like a deer in the headlights up there. If you think Rowand K's at a high rate and doesn't walk, what do you think of Anderson? Time will set this story straight, but for my team I'd take Rowand for his all-around play. I don't believe in Anderson, never have.

If you look at Anderson's numbers from last year and Rowand's from 2002, it isn't as if they are that out of whack. Anderson didn't have a good year at the plate in 2006 but it wasn't like Rowand was some type of offensive force in 2002. Now if Anderson sucks it up again in 2007, then we'll have a problem...

rdivaldi
01-17-2007, 04:54 PM
If you look at Anderson's numbers from last year and Rowand's from 2002, it isn't as if they are that out of whack. Anderson didn't have a good year at the plate in 2006 but it wasn't like Rowand was some type of offensive force in 2002. Now if Anderson sucks it up again in 2007, then we'll have a problem...

I agree for the most part, Aaron didn't tear it up from the get-go. But there are quite a few things that worry me about BA at the plate. His K rate has been alarming since day 1 in our system. Guys with average power can't be whiffing every 4th time up. He needs to put the bat on the ball and drive it. I also have been a major critic of his mechanics and approach at the plate. He just doesn't look comfortable up there and his swing is just not fun to watch. When Rowand came up I thought he had a nice compact swing and seemed to be content driving the ball instead of trying to knock it out of the park. I just don't believe in BA, I really hope he proves me wrong. I'm not one of those dopes that cheers against a player. If anything I pray a little harder when he comes up to the plate...

itsnotrequired
01-17-2007, 09:38 PM
I agree for the most part, Aaron didn't tear it up from the get-go. But there are quite a few things that worry me about BA at the plate. His K rate has been alarming since day 1 in our system. Guys with average power can't be whiffing every 4th time up. He needs to put the bat on the ball and drive it. I also have been a major critic of his mechanics and approach at the plate. He just doesn't look comfortable up there and his swing is just not fun to watch. When Rowand came up I thought he had a nice compact swing and seemed to be content driving the ball instead of trying to knock it out of the park. I just don't believe in BA, I really hope he proves me wrong. I'm not one of those dopes that cheers against a player. If anything I pray a little harder when he comes up to the plate...

Actually, his K rate fell rather steadily throughout the season but is still too high. I have faith he will turn it around next season. We'll just have to wait and see.:D: