caulfield12

QUOTE(The Ginger Kid @ Mar 29, 2007 -> 11:44 AM) Lost in the oh-so-important, make-or-break soxtalk saga of Brian Anderson: Joe Crede has had a great spring. Tad Iguchi finally heated up in the last week or so. Kong and JD had a very nice spring. Uribe looks fit and very ready to go. Ozzie says he's the key. Contreras has consistently said he feels fantastico and looks to be in terrific shape. Podsednik feels his legs are back and his shoulder problems appear to be gone. Thome got a ton of bats again this spring in hopes of avoiding the slow start that plagued most of his career until he got to Chicago and they sought to get him more AB's in ST. Pablo being Pablo. Our infield defense is f***ing great, particularly late in the game when Erstad moves to first. Of course all this pales in importance compared to who's playing CF. There are more positives to be sure. Top to bottom this is a very solid lineup, on par with Detroit's IMO. But they definitely have the advantage on the bump. You would think we LOST 90 games last year, instead of winning 90. I think some of the constant local and regional media blitzkrieg has soaked into Sox fans, the pessimism is back in full force. It's almost like we never won a WS. I'm not going to be surprised if they make the playoffs, I won't be surprised if they're around .500 either. This club could go either way. There are many positives with the line-up of everyday players, but the PITCHING concerns are still paramount in everyones' minds, to the point where each member of the rotation and bullpen has more question marks surrounding them coming into the season than "certainty." QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Mar 29, 2007 -> 11:51 AM) I'm sorry, I stopped reading when you said Tad Iguchi is replaceable and Buehrle isn't. Right now, it seems like the exact opposite. We have guys in the minors who could somewhat replace Buehrle. We have no one and there's no one in FA who is going to be as good as Iguchi. Not sure who you're responding to. At any rate, I have never once said Buehrle isn't replaceable. As far as 2B goes, Iguchi, at his age, won't get more than 3 years and $13-16 million. There are a ton of players out there like a Loretta that are comparable. In terms of Free Agents, you have Kent, Marcus Giles, you could move Eckstein from SS to 2B, and you can move Uribe or Cintron or even Ozuna there as well. I really like Iguchi, but he's not a priority for KW to retain if we have to completely rebuild this team. QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 29, 2007 -> 11:53 AM) What exactly is it in this team's recent history that suggests that Erstad and Pods will be gone at any point this season if they don't perform? Politte release Development of Anderson (Lofton was dealt in 2002 for Diaz) Takatsu Ben Davis starting 2005 in AAA, eating that contract Koch trade to Marlins

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 29, 2007 -> 11:33 AM) So, as far as I can tell, the optimistic post here basically is arguing for that optimism based on the White Sox beginning a successful rebuilding project. Yes, and the fact that if those players everyone seems to be complaining about the most (Erstad and Pods) fail to play up to expectations, they will be gone, and Sweeney, Anderson and theoretically Fields or Owens will replace them. Not sure that will make anyone happy either, but it will be a clear and obvious direction at least. How many season ticket holders we lose (25-33%?), that's an issue for KW and JR.

QUOTE(Hideaway Lights @ Mar 29, 2007 -> 09:55 AM) there are so many things wrong with this post I don't know where to start for onet thing, equating mark buehrle with "health and non-performance" issues seems thoroughly ludicrous given his track record prior to June 2006. And you don't think it's ludicrous to give Buehrle $12-14 million per season for FOUR years when he's lost velocity on his fastball, hasn't adjusted well to QuesTec and the new strike zone, has struggled twice with tipping pitches (how much of it is mental/psychological?) and we could get 2-3 high quality prospects that cost the league minimum? I think KW is taking all that into consideration. His spring results are not necessarily encouraging either, although it's JUST spring, we all hoped for SOME indication of improvement from him. This club can't afford to have 2-3 bad contracts on the books, which is what KW is guarding against.

QUOTE(Y2HH @ Mar 29, 2007 -> 08:46 AM) Because Sisco is like 6'10" and can kick Ozzie's ass, while Logan can't?! Because of how well Sisco pitched for most of 2005. It's the same reason the Cubs wanted to give Cotts another chance, despite how poorly he pitched in 2004 and 2006.

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Mar 29, 2007 -> 08:26 AM) 1. The wild card here is Pods. He hasn't done anything to deserve the start in left. Brian should be in center and Erstad in left. I realize that leaves us without a lead off guy, but hey the coaches get paid big bucks to fix those kind of problems 25% 2. I agree with you 100% 3. I kinda agree with you as well. I think Haeger and Logon should be there. I'm not sure why we got so hung up on radar gun readings, but an outside 97mph fast ball is still an outside 97mph fastabll. Speed means nothing without accuracy. 25% 4. I agree with you. They might as well see what happens with Hall. It's not like we can get a FA catcher now that we won't be able to get in May. It doesn't hurt to wait and see. 100% If either Erstad or Pods don't perform, you will see Anderson in there. But that still doesn't solve the leadoff issue, and OG can't solve it either, only KW... It would have to be Ozuna, Iguchi or (gasp) Uribe, and none of them are winning options for a multitude of reasons. You could get by with Ozuna (against lefties only), but are we ready to bat Mackowiak leadoff? I guess they've used Catalanotto this way in the past, but it's going to make our offense become static again, like 2006, when Pods couldn't or wouldn't run. We might as well bring back Willie Harris, because KW had no desire to pay Pierre, Roberts, Mathews or Lofton even (that ship has sailed, no thanks on a return engagement). QUOTE(RME JICO @ Mar 29, 2007 -> 08:37 AM) NorthSideSox72, If Anderson makes the team but doesn't start, how is that 25%? Shouldn't it be more like 50%? The backup catcher was not that big of a deal in the overall picture since it was basically a non-factor last year. The bigger issue was a decent hitter who could hit LHP. We lost that and it was not addressed. Perez could have filled that need and subbed in for Thome or in LF against LHP. That would have taken away some of the impact of the Hall injury. Everything is a personal opinion, but none of us have the true reasons on why things are being done. On the outside looking in, Anderson should be the starting CF with Logan in the pen, but for some reason that did not happen. All we can do is speculate. Who's your leadoff hitter with Pods out of the line-up? Do you really want to see Perez "roaming" LF like some combination of Emil Brown, Manny Ramirez and Pete Incaviglia? You pretty much have to use Ozuna in LF at this point against lefties.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 29, 2007 -> 08:00 AM) Let's review the 4 big personnel decisions that Oz and company had to make during ST. Weve had discussions on all these individually, but I'm curious what people's perspective is when all the decisions were taken into account... 1. Brian Anderson vs Darin Erstad for CF. Decision made: Anderson makes roster, but as a backup OF. 2. 5th Starter. Decision made: John Danks. 3. Front 3 in the bullpen. Decision made: Masset, Sisco and Aardsma. 4. Dealing with the Hall injury. Decision made: Hall to go the PT route until May, and until then, going with Molina as the backup C (over Wiki). So, taking those 4, how do you feel Ozzie and company did? What percentage score to you give on each? Here are my answers... 1. Brian Anderson deserved the starting job, clearly. Erstad should be the 4th OF. But, at least BA is on the roster, which is something. I'll go 25% on this one, overall bad, but a little consolation. 2. Danks deserved it, and won it. The right decision was made. 100%. 3. Masset's solid enough. Aardsma isn't ideal, I'd rather see Haeger there, but at least its not Floyd. And there is simply zero good reason (that I can see) for Sisco to be there over Logan. Just stupid. So here, I'll have to go 50%. 4. I think this is the right way to handle the situation. And I agree that Molina is a better choice than Wiki. I suspect that if Hall is a no-go in May, we'll trade for someone, and that's a good idea. So I'll give the crew credit on this one. 100%. Average those out and its 68.75%. That's a "D". Anderson and Logan were screwed, but Danks, Aardsma (sort of), Masset and Molina were the right choices. I expect more from the manager than that. I hope Erstad and Sisco prove me wrong, but I doubt it at this point. If Ozzie has lost his confidence in Logan this week (remember last year against Hafner?), then it's the right choice for the ballclub. They've watched Sisco for two years at the big league level, and know what he's capable of...as OG said in the newspaper, there's a very short rein on him, and that he really didn't deserve to make the ballclub. Let's not forget, the last Sox reliever to go from A ball or Rookie ball to the majors was Radinsky. If they need to replace Sisco or let him start, Logan's not far away. Anderson versus Erstad, it's not who is the better player or who will be the better player, it's simply that OG and KW believe he gives us the best chance to win THIS year. If he fails, his contract is pennies and Anderson takes over, the same thing happened with Rowand and he survived Kenny Lofton and numerous attempts to take job away.

The odds are very much against more than ONE AL Central team making it to the playoffs to start off the season, we all acknowledge that, due to the weaker competition one of either Boston or New York will face in the AL East with the rest of their schedule. Even KC can win 72-76 games this season, especially if they get good pitching from 3 of their five starters. KW simply had to position this ballclub for the present and the future. Iguchi can be replaced, and there's no CERTAINLY no strong majority behind giving Buehrle $48-52 million over four years (health, non-performance) or Jermaine $45 million over 3 years (age, diminishing returns, see Soriano). One of the biggest questions right now surrounds the health of Jenks, but we have to remember we went through three closers in 2005. In MacDougal, Thornton, Masset, Aardsma and Sisco, we have FIVE more pitchers with the "stuff" to do the job. Even Logan can be nasty. There's always a sense that a veteran team might not be hungry enough, that they might get complacent or rest on their laurels (something Buehrle, Uribe and a few others have been accused of specifically, but something that subconsciously happened to much of the team). Realistically, the only way to compete in this division is to have the pitching, and we have four starters who might have pitched the best they are going to pitch in the major leagues. Can Garland get any better than winning 36 games in two years? Can Contreras ever pitch like he did from August, 05 through May, 06, when he was arguably the best pitcher in baseball? Is Buehrle done? Is Vazquez doomed to .500, no matter what team he pitches for? Ultimately, KW had to be prepared to slash payroll and go down into the $75-90 million range again, and risk losing 25% of the season ticket holders gained from 05. He has to look at every player on his roster as an asset that can be used to get the thing that he needs the most....potential #1 and #2 starters, something we might have ZERO of right now. Logically, KW views Danks, Floyd and Russell as potential 1-2 or even 3 starters. You can add Sisco, Thornton and Masset to that list. With the 4-5 starters, you have Broadway, Haeger, Phillips, McCullogh and a few others. It seems most logical to trade Crede, Dye and Buehrle short-term. If we go beyond that in cutting, we won't be able to compete in 2008. Then there's no reason to hold onto AJ, Uribe, Iguchi, Thome, Konerko, Garland, Contreras and Vazquez and we out and get pitching, pitching and MORE young/affordable/talented pitching. Traditionally, one or maybe two of every six pitching prospects makes an impact. If it comes down to it, you trade for Bailey and Hughes and give the Reds and Yankees enough talent to win their divisions, if it means not having to spend $15-25 million per year on top-line starters like Zambrano. Heck, Jennings and Buehrle look like the 2 and 3 options right now going into 2008 Free Agency. Not much to choose from there. Our draft positions haven't allowed us to get that Top 10 pick for almost 20 years now. We have too much talent to bottom out 100%, but we do have a commodity that every team in baseball wants, which is the top 15 players on our major league roster.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 28, 2007 -> 11:09 PM) It's been obvious all spring that this organization was going to keep the guys they traded for over the ones that earned a spot, and that 3 lefties in the pen was not an option. Hence Aardsma over Haeger, Sisco over Logan, and Aardsma and Masset being locks. Only reason Floyd didn't make it is we aren't carrying 12 pitchers. Sadly, that appears obviously how they are making decisions. And btw, I heard this on ESPN Radio at 6 PM, how did this thread take until it did to pop up? Well, they didn't force Floyd into the starting rotation over Danks at least. We'll see how well they wait to pull the trigger (it won't be like BA last year, you know that much) if Danks gets out of the box slowly and the team is in 3rd or 4th place and 4-8 GB. Last year, the standings allowed BA to stay in play much longer than a team like the Indians would have been able to stick with a struggling player (early on). Then it really gets interesting, if they have to go to Floyd or beyond. Then you have the doomsday situation, trading Thome or Konerko, Crede, Dye, Buehrle, Uribe, Iguchi, Pods, Erstad, Contreras, Vazquez, etc. Let's hope it never comes to that.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Mar 28, 2007 -> 11:03 PM) They had to take a younger player as the 25th man, it was going to be either Terrero or Anderson to fill the final spot on the bench otherwise there would be no one to backup centerfield. Oz would have taken a vet if he could have, the opportunity just never presented itself. Ozuna supposedly has been playing very well in limited time in CF (in B and minor league games), but your point is taken, there will be no repetition of Mack (or Pods, for that matter) in CF.

QUOTE(Buehrle>Wood @ Mar 28, 2007 -> 10:49 PM) Absolute bulls*** that Logan did not make this team. No defending this move. Looks like OG and KW are determined to go with experience (DE over BA, Sisco over Logan, Aardsma over Floyd) and they're going to go down fighting before they sell out and go with the full-court youth movement in 2008. The only question is whether KW makes another move with the catching spot or waits on the 50/50 proposition that is Toby Hall's "rehab" to the point where he can at least hit. I guess the only counterpoint is that they took BA over Eduardo Perez, otherwise, it's the veterans-first approach right now.

Well, Logan and Floyd should be the first two call-ups, although I think we would lose him (or maybe this is wrong) if we brought him up, then tried to send him down again. I heard he had one option remaining, can anyone clarify?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/.../2007/previews/ For what it's worth, the Cubs are 15th.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...cs-home-utility

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Mar 28, 2007 -> 08:38 AM) I love it. Have to show Ozzie the quote about "one year wonders" in the Tigers' capsule. The White Sox were pretty consistently in the Top 10 or Top 5 for most of season last year. Now we have to earn our way back again. Basically, the Cubs' $300 million gets them the same credibility as the White Sox winning 90 games last year, but, oh well. The Twins' love is interesting, although their pitchers have done well in ST from what I've read and heard.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Mar 27, 2007 -> 11:08 PM) I dunno, ask Omar Minaya, Bill Stoneman, Tim Purpura, Josh Byrnes, Bill Bavasi, and probably a few others as well (Cashman? Epstein? Krivsky? Ricciardi?) if they were interested in Freddy Garcia at any point this past offseason. I think they'll probably tell you they inquired. If at any point in time half of those GMs talked to the White Sox about Freddy Garcia, then the lack of value KW got for Garcia is inexcusable. If you had watched Freddy Garcia's last month in a White Sox uniform, you would have seen a guy who seemed to have learned how to throw with garbage by adding a split finger into his repertoire; also, there was the possibility that it wasn't any type of injury but rather starting at 100% for the WBC that caused for his lack of velocity throughout the year. It seems pretty apparent to me atleast that Garcia had value, albeit slightly diminished due to having one year left on his deal. The fact remains that the only two things Jason Jennings had on Freddy Garcia were age and production in 2006 - and what also must be considered is that Jennings pitched in the NL while Garcia the AL in a year when the AL was much superior in terms of offense opposed to the NL, and on top of that, Garcia pitched in the AL Central, which featured 4 of the top 8 offenses in the AL. That will increase a pitcher's ERA too. Flat out what I'm trying to say is that by looking at the numbers, looking at how he pitched in September upon developing his new split finger, and looking at the market for starting pitchers - with Jennings being the best comparison to Garcia on the trade market - KW failed in getting both value and talent. If that is the absolute best offer KW had on the table, and KW told me that to my face, I'd probably call him a liar to his face (in a much more polite way), because atleast value wise, it's just almost not possible. Talent wise, maybe he got enough, but Philadelphia was looking to give Floyd away and Gio was coming off of a mediocre year in AA, while a guy like Jason Hirsh had simply spectacular numbers (though slightly above average peripherals), Taylor Buchholz was an acceptable major league 5th starter, and Willy Taveras stole 33 bases and became a more patient hitter last year. If you compare those packages, Colorado's is far and away superior. If you include Greg Golson from Philadelphia - a guy the White Sox could turn into something very good - then the trade is justified in my mind, even seeing as how Golson's been mediocre as hell and is 22 in A ball. Using this "look at him now, he still sucks, maybe he's worse" at this point is completely pointless and holds no grounds, because I am talking about something that happened in December and not March. If that's what you're trying to argue, I'd suggest you stop, because you're arguing oranges to my apples. But if the Astros turned down Garland for Buchholz, Taveras (when we wanted to include Hirsch as well), how can you argue that KW would have gotten anything close to that for Garcia? Garland has a lot more value than Garcia. I guess we'll never know, because the rumor was that Buchholz failed his physical and/or the Astros didn't want to include Hirsch as well in the deal. It's all kind of a mystery, why the Astros would want Jennings over Garland, perhaps simply because he's left-handed, they were more familiar with him and Jennings' contract was more reasonable from a financial perspective, giving them more room to go after Clemens, etc.

QUOTE(BearSox @ Mar 12, 2007 -> 06:15 PM) I threw this together really quick, and I must admit, I am not happy with the overall outcome. 1. John Danks 2. Ryan Sweeney 3. Josh Fields 4. Giovany Gonzalez 5. Lance Broadway 6. Adam Russel 7. Kyle McCulloch 8. Aaron Cunningham 9. Chris Carter 10. Heath Phillips 11. Casey Rogowski 12. Robert Valido 13. Anderson Gomes 14. Oneli Perez 15. Sean Tracey 16. Jerry Owens 17. Dewon Day 18. John Shelby 19. Kanekoa Texeira 20. Paulo Orlando 21. Ray Liotta 22. Wesly Whisler 23. Matt Long 24. Pedro Lopez 25. John Lujan 1. Danks 2. Sweeney 3. Fields 4. Gio 5. A. Russell 6. Broadway 7. Haeger 8. Cunningham 9. Carter 10. McCullogh 11. Valido 12. Shelby 13. O. Perez 14. Owens 15. Egbert 16. Whisler 17. Clayton Richard 18. J. Rasner 19. Lujan 20. Carlos Vazquez Need to be traded: Lopez or Angel Gonzalez, Phillips, Rogowski

QUOTE(South Side Fireworks Man @ Mar 27, 2007 -> 09:29 PM) I'd say the two remaining spots will go to Logan and Aardsma. This will allow Sisco and Floyd to try to develop into starters in AAA. Also, Perez will not make the final cut nor will Gonzales and the Sox bench will be Mackowiak, Cintron, Ozuna, Anderson and Molina. Of course, no Gio Gonzalez nor Andy/Angel Gonzalez. So now we have seven starters ticketed for AAA... Sisco Floyd Russell Broadway Phillips Gonzalez Haeger Something's gotta give. Maybe they trade Phillips and use a six man rotation due to the presence of Russell, Gio and Sisco? Well, at least it will be interesting.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 27, 2007 -> 09:06 PM) Hoping for: Logan and Bukvich Likely to get: Logan and Aardsma Sisco may still get in over Logan. I suppose its possible we see Logan AND Sisco - that's also a possibility. Bukvich four seasons ago, maybe, but he's not quite the same pitcher since his injury problems. No way KW will be able to pass over Aardsma, Sisco AND Floyd (three prize acquisitions that are supposed to make him look smart) for a non-roster invitee.

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Mar 27, 2007 -> 08:07 PM) I don't understand those two statements coexisting in one post, but I'll go with the latter. You can use the same logic with Anderson. It would probably be best for his development to play everyday in Charlotte instead of as a defensive replacement and playing about 1/3rd of the time (exclusively against lefties). Logan really left a bad taste in management's mouth, as well as some of his teammates apparently...the White Sox need to be 100% convinced he's ready this time, and I think OG is still worried about the walks against lefties at crunch time. That might be enough to tip the balance back to Sisco, despite a 7.20 versus 0.00 ERA disparity, which is nothing like the disparity between BA and Erstad in CF.

Sisco got rocked today. Logan didn't give up a run, but two more walks...Ozzie was po'ed he walked three the other day in a minor league game, with them all being lefties. Aardsma didn't give up a run, but his ERA is still at 7.20, the exact same as Sisco. Coming into Monday, most would have argued that it would be best to send down Logan, let Floyd start in Charlotte (as first replacement for Danks or an injured or ineffective starter) and keep Sisco and Aardsma, the two "veterans." Any hunches on how things will end up? I think they have to decide the final roster tonight or tomorrow morning before they head off for ATL. It seems that it would be pretty hard to pass on Logan after he didn't give up a single run in "regulation" games and only one in a minor league game, I think it was over the weekend.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Mar 27, 2007 -> 01:25 PM) Where we would be with Garcia right now is not the point. The point is the White Sox got two boom or bust prospects for a solid starting pitcher, with both of them having shady backgrounds. KW couldn't have gotten one prospect who looks like he's actually starting to figure things out for Garcia? That's my problem with the trade, and nothing beyond that. Hindsight is 20/20, and while Garcia does indeed look like s***, he didn't look this s***ty in December. To get a 5'10 LHP with injury concerns and mediocre control in AA along with a throw-in for a guy coming off of a 4.53 ERA, 215 IP year is unacceptable, period. Every pitching prospect, by nature, is boom or bust. Who do you think you could have gotten for Garcia? Homer Bailey? Phillip Hughes? Is KW going to feel sorry for Daniels if Danks is better than McCarthy THIS year? Is he going to give them back Masset and Rasner? The concerns about Gio's frame are overblown IMO, until he starts to show injury problems. Right now, as with most Sox "high upside" minor league pitchers, the issue is control and location.

QUOTE(Vance Law @ Mar 27, 2007 -> 11:20 AM) Precisely. Thank you hitlesswonder. But you could do the same thing for Jermaine Dye or Frank Thomas over similar lead-up periods to their 2006 seasons and nothing would predict what they accomplished, particularly Thomas. Erstad is still relatively young...I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt and side with OG and KW on this one.

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Mar 27, 2007 -> 10:48 AM) Dude, you are like the epitome of what a new poster should be. Kudos and welcome to the board. Thanks, I've posted for the last year and a half or so at WSI. I used to fight with ncorgbl on chisox.com for about 4 years. There aren't many good posters left at chisox.com (baggio is one), too many trolls and kids. I'm a teacher and coach now in Kansas City. Prior to that, I was Director of PR and Stadium Operations for the Augusta GreenJackets in 1994 and 1995, right after grad school. We were with the Pittsburgh Pirates at that point and won the SAL championship in 95. I got to know Dye (Macon), Andruw Jones, Vladimir Guerrero when they were just babies (Dye used my office phone, lol) and spent a lot of time with the mercurial, always-interesting Jose Guillen.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 27, 2007 -> 10:22 AM) Actually, I think that in equal number of at bats, Erstad would have about 10% lower RBI than Iguchi, assuming injuries haven't cost Erstad anything. Just from comparing Erstad's best 4 years since 2000, not the injury-shortened seasons, and Iguchi's last 2 years, Erstad has generated 10% fewer RBI than Iguchi overall. The reason Erstad's numbers are almost to where Iguchi's are is that Erstad's seasons have been 650-700 plate appearance seasons while Iguchi's have been 550-600 plate appearance seasons. I think for 500 plate appearances in a good season, assuming he hasn't lost anything and isn't nagged by injuries all year, Erstad might put up 50-55 RBI, 5-6 home runs, and about 10-12 steals. Of course, that's also assuming he has someone on base to actually drive in> Even beyond the health concerns...what do we expect the OF to look like when we see a Left Hander on the mound? It's going to be ozuna/Anderson/Dye almost certainly...so we finally do have a RH hitting OF out there. Hopefully he gets the starting spot pretty quick and doesn't let go this time. Not quite. If you average 01-05 for Erstad...once again, not including 2000. 523 AB 143.4 H .274 BA 7 HR 58 RBI 16.4 SB

QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ Mar 27, 2007 -> 09:25 AM) Erstad's stats from 2001 are clustered much closer together than his 2000 .900 OPS year. I think it's safe to ignore a career year from 7 years ago in predicting his performance for 2007. Erstad from 2001 through 2006 hit .270 with a .323 OBP and .693 OPS, with about 13 SBs a season. Iguchi so far in the AL has hit .280 with a .347 OBP and .780 OPS with 13 SBs a season. One hundred points of OPS is a big difference, and Iguchi will have a higher OBP this year than Erstad IMO. I think having Erstad hit #2 is bad decision. If you take those numbers from 01-05 and "extrapolate" them (because he had under 500 at-bats in one or two of those years), I think what we would expect in SB's comes closer to 18, around 8 homers, pretty similar RBI numbers to what Iguchi has put up. As DJ said, he's not afraid to drive in a run.