PDA

View Full Version : Wow... Someone Doesn't Like Joe Crede


Pasqua's Mailman
11-10-2007, 09:46 AM
ESPN's (and Scouts Inc.) Keith Law made the following comment concerning Joe Crede during his weekly chat on ESPN.com...

Charlie (Saratoga, NY): You mentioned LaRoche being a 1998-2001 Yankee type of hitter. I think Crede fits that mold too (if fully recovered). Very underrated hitter and clutch hitter at that. Plus great defense.

http://assets.espn.go.com/i/sn2.gif Keith Law: No, Crede is the antithesis of those hitters. Those Yankees worked the count and got on base. Crede is awful at the plate, most of all because he doesn't control the strike zone. The NY media's obsession with Crede kills me. He stinks. If the Yankees get him, it's a waste of time.

and again...

Jake (Chicago): FYI, If Joe Crede is healthy he is good for 25-30 HR's and 90-100 rbi's. With that being said who do you see on the hot corner for the White Sox in 2008?

http://assets.espn.go.com/i/sn2.gif Keith Law: Fields. And RBI are ... wait for it ... MEANINGLESS.

Crede may not be Mike Schmidt or Wade Boggs but he doesn't STINK... that would describe Andy Gonzalez...

IlliniSox4Life
11-10-2007, 09:51 AM
He loses all credibility when saying RBI are meaningless. Sure, RBI totals partially depend on circumstances outside of the players control (like who bats in front of him), but they are most certainly not completely meaningless.

edit: And this should probably go in "whats the score?"

skobabe8
11-10-2007, 09:51 AM
Who in the hell is Keith Law? :?:

Brian26
11-10-2007, 10:15 AM
The scorned half-brother of Vance and Rudy Law.

Because of the far-reaching effects of the writer's strike, he's been brought on as a scab replacement writer at ESPN, much like Vance and Coy Duke took over for Bo and Luke back in Hazzard County.

AWhiteSoxinNJ
11-10-2007, 11:01 AM
I guess this guy doesn't watch the White Sox enough or the '05 championship run.

FedEx227
11-10-2007, 11:26 AM
While he does have a slight point about RBIs, you still have to realize that he's going to a Yankees team thats going to have LOTS of great players on it.

That's the one thing that irks me when people badmouth RBIs. Sure its a bad way to grade a guy on a crappy team, but when talking about the Yankees, you want guys that can drive people in because you're going to have people on base... you have 1-9 a very talented team with many players that can get on base.

munchman33
11-10-2007, 11:33 AM
He's right about one thing...Crede does not control the strike zone. He doens't walk much and strikes out a lot.

Still, this guy's an idiot.

oeo
11-10-2007, 11:45 AM
He's right about one thing...Crede does not control the strike zone. He doens't walk much and strikes out a lot.

Still, this guy's an idiot.

That's false. He may not walk much, but Joe hardly ever strikes out.

Frater Perdurabo
11-10-2007, 11:47 AM
That's false. He may not walk much, but Joe hardly ever strikes out.

Right. He is the king of pop-outs, though. :(:

munchman33
11-10-2007, 11:58 AM
That's false. He may not walk much, but Joe hardly ever strikes out.

Sorry, for his walk total.

veeter
11-10-2007, 12:23 PM
Saying Joe Crede stinks is the biggest amount of bull**** I've ever heard. Is Keith Law Dayn Perry's understudy? Another unqualified ******* spewing forth.

oeo
11-10-2007, 01:55 PM
Saying Joe Crede stinks is the biggest amount of bull**** I've ever heard. Is Keith Law Dayn Perry's understudy? Another unqualified ******* spewing forth.

This guy seems like a complete ass, I wouldn't get too worked up about it.

Oblong
11-10-2007, 02:33 PM
I think RBI, and to smaller extent runs, are meaningless if you are comparing players. A player doesn't have an ability to get hitters who bat in front of him on base. He does have an ability to drive them in obviously and that's why you look at the other numbers. Andruw Jones had a decent amount of RBI's with Atlanta but there's lots of other outfielders who are average who didn't get as many but would have if they were in that lineup.

But I don't like Keith Law either. He went on and on during the 2006 ALDS about how the Tigers weren't that good.

getonbckthr
11-10-2007, 02:37 PM
I've seen Joe have some the best at bats where he sees like 15 pitches and continually fouls them off.

WhiteSox5187
11-10-2007, 03:33 PM
Anyone who wouldn't a take a healthy Joe Crede is absoultey nuts, we saw what he can do in 2006 and he had an amazing second half of '05...the biggest question mark with him right now is his health. That is the only reason that I think a team would be hesistant to acquire him.

Lip Man 1
11-10-2007, 09:45 PM
This is what happens when you let statistical nut cases try to run baseball.

Lip

Hunter2sox
11-11-2007, 12:05 AM
I can kind of see the hate for Joe Crede. He's had like one season of an over 100 OPS+, but he's been able to reach 30 HRs in a season, so he's got some good power. Saying RBIs are meaningless is so stupid. Keith Law probably loves all those crazy stats like VORP and WARP or whatever.

Hunter2sox
11-11-2007, 12:42 AM
I'm curious to hear what you guys think. Who would you rather have, Aramis Ramirez or Joe Crede? My friends say Crede, but I have to painfully disagree.

doublem23
11-11-2007, 12:52 AM
I'm sure this Keith Law is basing his opinion on maybe the 10-15 times he's seen Joe Crede on the daily minute the Sox get on SportsCenter. The problem with these national mediots is that they just see bits and pieces of him and never actually get a chance to fully scout someone's talent.

Statistics never tell the full story. RBIs are meaningless? :rolleyes:

Hunter2sox
11-11-2007, 12:55 AM
Statistics never tell the full story. RBIs are meaningless? :rolleyes:
That is just the funniest part. How is how many runs you drive in meaningless?!? I wonder if Law understands the goal of baseball.

thomas35forever
11-11-2007, 12:57 AM
He must be basing Crede on his pre-05 performance. Just screw him.

WhiteSox5187
11-11-2007, 01:34 AM
I'm curious to hear what you guys think. Who would you rather have, Aramis Ramirez or Joe Crede? My friends say Crede, but I have to painfully disagree.

You're friend is right...Crede's bat finally came around in the second half of '05 and stayed around for all of '06. He is also one of the best defensive third basemen in the game. Aramis on the other hand...he's a mini-Manny at third base. Plays when he wants to, when he doesn't, he doesn't run out ground balls or pop flys, gets lots of meaningless hits when the team is well out of the game and is just a god awful defensive third baseman. A healthy Crede in a heart beat.

Sox It To Em
11-11-2007, 10:24 AM
That is just the funniest part. How is how many runs you drive in meaningless?!? I wonder if Law understands the goal of baseball.

If you were to go by their RBI numbers, last year:

Mike Lowell > Albert Pujols
Benji Molina > Carl Crawford
Orlando Cabrera > Derek Lee
Andy Laroche > Hanley Ramirez
Mike Cameron > Curtis Granderson
Andruw Jones > Grady Sizemore
etc.

RBI is an exceedingly poor stat to measure a hitter's contribution to his team because it is contingent on factors outside the player's control. A player can not control the performances of the hitters ahead of him in the order. In other words, some players will receive more RBI chances than others. Consequently, some players will always be at an advantage. The #3 hitter that follows two high OBP guys will always have the upper hand over the #3 hitter on a poor offensive team. Furthermore, in the offense-driven modern game, it's entirely possible for a player to have a demonstrably poor season yet accumulate insane amounts of RBI if given enough chances (2007 Andruw Jones, 2007 Sammy Sosa, 2004 Tony Batista, 2000 Eric Karros, 1983 Tony Armas, Joe Carter in numerous years, etc.).

Granted, if you look at the RBI leaderboards at the end of any year, you'll generally see several great hitters near the top. But this is because managers tend to know who their best hitters are, and place them in the lineup accordingly, i.e. where they'll receive the most RBI chances. It's something of a self-fulfilling prophecy, and it's an important distinction: Alex Rodriguez isn't a great hitter because he piles up a ton of RBI every year, but rather he piles up a ton of RBI every year because he is a great hitter who is given many RBI chances.

Those newfangled stats such as VORP, OPS+, RC, WARP, and EQA are infinitely superior methods of measuring a hitter's performance. That being said, I agree that statistics are only part of the puzzle, not the puzzle itself.

FarWestChicago
11-11-2007, 10:32 AM
Those newfangled stats such as VORP, OPS+, RC, WARP, and EQA are infinitely superior methods of measuring a hitter's performance.It's a good thing you don't engage in outrageous hyperbole. :smile:

balke
11-11-2007, 10:55 AM
Crede is a big ball of potential with his bat. Fact is, if he didn't play such great D, he would've been out of the bigs his first season. I like him because he lines out more than anyone I remember seeing (besides Frank), but come on, look at the stats. There's much better offense stats from 3rd basemen these days. Clutch only takes you so far.

Tragg
11-11-2007, 11:14 AM
If Crede worked the count and got on base more, he'd be an excellent hitter. He's still an above average 3B with his glove and power.


The Sox, as a general rule, don't work counts. The hitting coach swung at everything as a player; the manager swung at everything...they give occasional lip service to obp (as well as occasional mockery of it) but that's about it.
I get the feeling that it's stressed more in the Sox farm teams than it is on the major league team.

santo=dorf
11-11-2007, 11:21 AM
Lots of crap getting thrown around the monkey cage right now. Let's try and weed through it all.

Jake (Chicago): FYI, If Joe Crede is healthy he is good for 25-30 HR's and 90-100 rbi's. With that being said who do you see on the hot corner for the White Sox in 2008?

http://assets.espn.go.com/i/sn2.gif Keith Law: Fields. And RBI are ... wait for it ... MEANINGLESS.

This "if healthy" talk is for flub fans. "If healthy" Mark Prior is an ace. "If healthy" Kerry Wood strikes out 200 guys a year.

How is Crede good for 25-30 homers if only ONCE he has hit more than 24 homers? His peak for RBI's (94) came in the same year, surpassing his previous high of 75.
I've seen Joe have some the best at bats where he sees like 15 pitches and continually fouls them off.
...and?
http://simla.colostate.edu/~meronald/cfshow.jpg
"You remember that one time, when Alex Cora had that 18 pitch at-bat against Matt Clement, and he kept fouling off pitches, and then he hit a home run?................That was awesome."

In Joe Crede's career (2587 PA's,) he's reached the 3-2 count 289 times, or 11.2% of the time.
In Juan Uribe's last three seasons with the Sox (1549 PA's,) he's reached the 3-2 count 156 times, or 10.1% of the time.
In Jim Thome's White Sox career (1136 PA's,) he's reached the 3-2 count 264 times, or 23.2% of the time

Those are just the raw numbers right there. No "special" BP formulas being used.

Jim Thome is a patient hitter. Crede is much closer to a Uribe-type.
White Sox career walk totals:
Juan Uribe: 113 walks
Joe Crede: 140 walks
Jim Thome: 202 walks
Anyone who wouldn't a take a healthy Joe Crede is absoultey nuts, we saw what he can do in 2006 and he had an amazing second half of '05...the biggest question mark with him right now is his health. That is the only reason that I think a team would be hesistant to acquire him.
How exactly was his second half of 2005 so "amazing?" I August he barely batted over .100 and had an OPS of .320! He had a great ALCS and World Series however as he was slugging the crap out the ball.
Those newfangled stats such as VORP, OPS+, RC, WARP, and EQA are infinitely superior methods of measuring a hitter's performance.
I'm sorry, but this claim is more ridiculous than Keith Law's or Jake from Chicago's. "Infinitely superior?"
:hawk
"STRETCH!"

Sox It To Em
11-11-2007, 11:32 AM
I can't imagine a scenario in which a player's number of RBI paints a more accurate picture than his EQA or VORP. Furthermore, "infinitely superior" is merely exaggeration for effect; figurative language. If we're so keen on arguing semantics, would "far better" do the trick?

Hunter2sox
11-11-2007, 11:37 AM
You're friend is right...Crede's bat finally came around in the second half of '05 and stayed around for all of '06. He is also one of the best defensive third basemen in the game. Aramis on the other hand...he's a mini-Manny at third base. Plays when he wants to, when he doesn't, he doesn't run out ground balls or pop flys, gets lots of meaningless hits when the team is well out of the game and is just a god awful defensive third baseman. A healthy Crede in a heart beat.
I know stats don't tell the whole story but...
Crede's last three healthy seasons:
2004- 21 HR 69 RBI .299 OBP 83 OPS+
2005- 22 HR 62 RBI .303 OBP 96 OPS+
2006- 30 HR 94 RBI .323 OBP 107 OPS+

Ramirez's last three seasons:
2005- 31 HR 92 RBI .358 OBP 135 OPS+
2006- 38 HR 119 RBI .352 OBP 126 OPS+
2007- 26 HR 101 RBI .366 OBP 129 OPS+


Is Crede's defense really THAT much better?

santo=dorf
11-11-2007, 11:40 AM
I can't imagine a scenario in which a player's number of RBI paints a more accurate picture than his EQA or VORP. Furthermore, "infinitely superior" is merely exaggeration for effect; figurative language. If we're so keen on arguing semantics, would "far better" do the trick?
Has anyone done a study on what the correlation is between a hitter's performance and all the stats we are talking about?

I have a hard time accepting a single number calculated from a long equation that isn't scientifically derived (like Newton's second law) and saying it's much better than an existing raw number. I think you could make an argument about the type of hitter a guy is by using his RBI totals, as long as it is kept in a proper perspective.

Here's an interesting name; Joe Carter (http://www.baseball-reference.com/c/cartejo01.shtml).

Look at some of his best seasons: 1992, 1993, 1996..etc. 30+ homers, 100+ RBI's but his batting average is low (.250's-.260's) and his OBP sucks (up to .312.)
I wouldn't say he "stinks," or say he's "clutch and works the count well" based on those numbers.
I know stats don't tell the whole story but...
Crede's last three healthy seasons:
2004- 21 HR 69 RBI .299 OBP 83 OPS+
2005- 22 HR 62 RBI .303 OBP 96 OPS+
2006- 30 HR 94 RBI .323 OBP 107 OPS+

Ramirez's last three seasons:
2005- 31 HR 92 RBI .358 OBP 135 OPS+
2006- 38 HR 119 RBI .352 OBP 126 OPS+
2007- 26 HR 101 RBI .366 OBP 129 OPS+


Is Crede's defense really THAT much better?
You better believe if the shoe was on the other foot, Sox fans would be joking about how many runs Crede's glove drives in. This argument reminds me of Cub fans during the 90's saying how Grace's defense makes up the difference between his and Frank Thomas' offensive numbers. :rolling:

FarWestChicago
11-11-2007, 11:58 AM
Furthermore, "infinitely superior" is merely exaggeration for effect; figurative language. If we're so keen on arguing semantics, would "far better" do the trick?Well, it had the opposite effect of what I think you were going for. All it did was make you look silly. I think "far better" would have been a superior choice. :D:

Domeshot17
11-11-2007, 12:05 PM
Has anyone done a study on what the correlation is between a hitter's performance and all the stats we are talking about?

I have a hard time accepting a single number calculated from a long equation that isn't scientifically derived (like Newton's second law) and saying it's much better than an existing raw number. I think you could make an argument about the type of hitter a guy is by using his RBI totals, as long as it is kept in a proper perspective.

Here's an interesting name; Joe Carter (http://www.baseball-reference.com/c/cartejo01.shtml).

Look at some of his best seasons: 1992, 1993, 1996..etc. 30+ homers, 100+ RBI's but his batting average is low (.250's-.260's) and his OBP sucks (up to .312.)
I wouldn't say he "stinks," or say he's "clutch and works the count well" based on those numbers.

You better believe if the shoe was on the other foot, Sox fans would be joking about how many runs Crede's glove drives in. This argument reminds me of Cub fans during the 90's saying how Grace's defense makes up the difference between his and Frank Thomas' offensive numbers. :rolling:

I always thought the same thing with Aramis and Crede. I know we are all Homers, but Crede really is in the 3rd tier of 3b. His glove is awesome, and maybe his bat has potential, but in his very late 20s, coming off back surgery, Potential can't buy you much. He is not consistent, and for as clutch as we say he is (and yes he had a great run in 2005) he was no where to be seen in 2006 when we faded out of the play off picture. His disappearing act was as big as Anderson reverting to his pre all star break form.

Crede is an excellent defensive 3b. Crede is a pretty good power hitter at a position full of pretty good to fantastic power hitters. He is not really an RBI Machine and has no clue how to get on base. He is a better Uribe in the fact that he can put a team on his shoulders and carry them for 2-4 weeks at a time, but when he gets cold he is ice cold.

If Crede can give you 30 homers and 90 rbi in a year, you can argue the 15 more runs a year his glove might save over a guy like Aramis is a big deal, but if he drives in 70, its almost a moot point.

Personally I am not an Aramis fan, I think he is lazy, but he is a superior offensive player to crede.

Too sick right now to want to look up all the stats again but I said it in a different thread. Defensively Crede is one of the top 5-6 3b in the game. Offensively hes on like the 3rd tier (People forget that 270-25-80 isn't that great of a year from 3b, one of the biggest offensive position in the game) so I would say hes like a top of the 3rd tier 3b after back surgery, and when 100% healthy bottom of the 2nd tier.

Now all that said, I like Crede a lot, but the best he will ever be is a blip all star, 1 year guy who gets in on a big half of baseball, not a consistent repeater, maybe wins a gold glove, probably deserves a few more then he gets but its a tough position with Inge Lowell and Chavez all being right there with him.

OTOH, We have a guy in Fields who could be an all star year in and year out. Who had a shot to hit 33 home runs and 100 Rbis out of the 2 hole if he had gotten the average full season of at bats last year. A Guy who, like Crede, struggled to control the plate in his rookie year, but shows more offensive promise then most guys on the team. Crede at best is the number 6 hitter on a team, Fields looks like a 3-4-5. His defense will never be what Crede's is (however with how freakin Athletic Josh is, and how little time he actually spent in the minors, I DO believe he will improve his D dramatically as he adjusts to the speed of the game). I think Josh earned himself a spot last year.

Jjav829
11-11-2007, 12:09 PM
shoota?