YASNY Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 The Sox are due for rookie or two who make an immediate ROY type impact , aren't they? Over due. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 Over due. Wouldn't a Scott Podsednik from last season be perfect just about now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 Just a couple of studs in the next 3-5 years is all i am asking. To bad i am asking way to much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pastime Posted August 28, 2004 Share Posted August 28, 2004 I remember when the Indians stole Omar from Seattle in the early 90's. They got him for nothing. Seattle's only motive was to not pay his salary, and they got some SS who could not play at all. You're thinking of Felix Fermin. A true specimen of "baseball garbage." I just think we need to revamp the left side of the infield - Joe Crediocre is hitting .227 with questionable defense, and Pornstache Valentin is hitting .221 with questionable defense. Now that's some top-notch production right there, folks. What you're seeing from Crede is what you will always see. I'm not a professional scout, but I have been watching baseball for 25 years, and I'm telling you that he will never be much better than he is right now. He's Tim Hulett with a little more power ---- seriously. :sleep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted August 29, 2004 Author Share Posted August 29, 2004 What you're seeing from Crede is what you will always see. I'm not a professional scout, but I have been watching baseball for 25 years, and I'm telling you that he will never be much better than he is right now. He's Tim Hulett with a little more power ---- seriously. :sleep If Crede is traded [which it sounds like you'd be in favor of] then the sox would likely go after a FA to take his place. If the Sox get the right 3Bman [like a Koskie, or a Mueller] then the Sox could probably have Uribe/ Valdez at SS. Likely, the Sox sign a FA for SS or 3B, and a vet to compete for an OF spot. [Or fill these via trade] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamTell Posted August 29, 2004 Share Posted August 29, 2004 We haven't even had a decent rookie since Maggs, and his number weren't that great. But atleast he's had some very good years, Ben Greive, who won the ROY that year I believe hasn't really done anything since. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted August 30, 2004 Author Share Posted August 30, 2004 We haven't even had a decent rookie since Maggs, and his number weren't that great. But atleast he's had some very good years, Ben Greive, who won the ROY that year I believe hasn't really done anything since. That's why going by the law of averages alone, the Sox should get one or two impact rookies soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 I don't want any stopgaps. This team needs more. You want to compete with Minnesota and Cleveland with guys like 40 year-old Vizquel? This team needs a major talent infusion, not a 40 year old SS who's going to hit .270, no power, no speed, no OBP.... Exactly, it is not exciting enough for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted August 30, 2004 Author Share Posted August 30, 2004 Exactly, it is not exciting enough for me. Getting a major infusion of talent will only happen by trading a guy like Carlos Lee, Mark Buerhle, or by signing a FA to a long term deal for $10 mill + a yr. While it's nice to fantasize, its unlikely the Sox will get a FA position player in this category, as they are building around pitching. Would you like a guy like Renteria or Beltran at the expense of another stud starter [Odalis Perez] and relief help [Felix Rodriguez or Steve Kline] and a lower FA like Vizquel? Locking themselves into one big name player isn't wise for the Sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremyb Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 2005 Vizquel: 38 years old 330 OBP 360 Slug average speed below-average range below-average arm slightly above-average fielding % 4 million salary. People, please recognize his 2004 for the swan song it so obviously is and move the [bleep] on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 2005 Vizquel: 38 years old 330 OBP 360 Slug average speed below-average range below-average arm slightly above-average fielding % 4 million salary. People, please recognize his 2004 for the swan song it so obviously is and move the [bleep] on. That is so cool, so while we're at it let's post where the Nasdaq is gonna be, the winning lotto numbers for this week, and who will win the Super Bowl too just so I can get my ducks in a row. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremyb Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 That is so cool, so while we're at it let's post where the Nasdaq is gonna be, the winning lotto numbers for this week, and who will win the Super Bowl too just so I can get my ducks in a row. Maybe next time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Still not sure why 2004 is "obviously" Vizquel's swan song, maybe next time you can explain it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremyb Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Still not sure why 2004 is "obviously" Vizquel's swan song, maybe next time you can explain it. Offensively, all you have to look at is his 2001-2003 production to understand how the "swan song" reference might be apt. His batspeed will pretty soon rival Robbie's. His range and arm have been pretty subpar for a while (making a highlight reel out of a routine grounder in the hole? that's our Omar alright), but his saving grace is those soft hands, so fielding % makes his fielding seem like a big asset whereas in fact it's been pretty unspectacular for a few years now. And it will not get better in his late-30s I promise you that. Watch Uribe out-perform Vizquel in every way in 2005, at 30% the cost. Just watch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Offensively, all you have to look at is his 2001-2003 production to understand how the "swan song" reference might be apt. His batspeed will pretty soon rival Robbie's. His range and arm have been pretty subpar for a while (making a highlight reel out of a routine grounder in the hole? that's our Omar alright), but his saving grace is those soft hands, so fielding % makes his fielding seem like a big asset whereas in fact it's been pretty unspectacular for a few years now. And it will not get better in his late-30s I promise you that. Watch Uribe out-perform Vizquel in every way in 2005, at 30% the cost. Just watch. Key word is "might". He keeps himself in pretty good shape, which is a different scenario than Robbie Alomar. But your point is well taken, the guy will be 38. What he can add, though, for 100-110 games is certainly worth taking a look at. If the Sox, or any team, expect Vizquel to be a huge contributor for 140-150 games I agree with you, that's a mistake. Uribe is arbitration eligible and Scott Boras is his agent, who knows what his cost will end up being. Bat speed is less of an issue with Vizquel since he rarely turns on a ball and does a great job of recognizing the off speed stuff and putting it in play - a weakness for Uribe at this point in his career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremyb Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 But your point is well taken, the guy will be 38. What he can add, though, for 100-110 games is certainly worth taking a look at. If the Sox, or any team, expect Vizquel to be a huge contributor for 140-150 games I agree with you, that's a mistake. I guess my issue is with people who expect Omar to come in next year and post 375 OBP/425 Slug and play the kind of defense he played 10 years ago just because he is Omar. IMHO, he'd be hard-pressed to put up 340 OBP/375 next year and his defense is quite overrated. That's 4 Mill that are better spent elsewhere as I think Uribe will finally be able to avoid long slumps while maximizing the hot streaks next year. I'll take that chance. Of course this comes with the understanding that Sox acquire Pierre from the Marlins to lead-off and make Rowand a #2, which he is more suited for. If that deal falls through however, and Vizquel's demands come down a notch, then bring him aboard. I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted August 30, 2004 Author Share Posted August 30, 2004 2005 Vizquel: 38 years old 330 OBP 360 Slug average speed below-average range below-average arm slightly above-average fielding % 4 million salary. People, please recognize his 2004 for the swan song it so obviously is and move the [bleep] on. Don't forget his .300 + avg., his 16 + SB, or his 15+ SH, and the fact he uses all the field to hit [all big pluses in Ozzie ball] I'll stop. He's a bum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremyb Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Don't forget his .300 + avg., his 16 + SB, or his 15+ SH, and the fact he uses all the field to hit [all big pluses in Ozzie ball] I'll stop. He's a bum. If by ".300", you mean .270, I agree. If by "16 SB", you mean 10 SB/6 CS, I agree as well. (time chips at your legs) If by "15 SH", you mean "15 wasted outs", yeah agree still. Were you also one of those fooled by Rickey Henderson back in 1999? Cuz' he looked fantastic that year and some teams actually considered giving him a lucrative two-year deal at one point during the off-season. Giving 8 M for 2 years to that Toon dog is not something I would do, but that's just me. Ignore 2001-2003 at own risk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 If by ".300", you mean .270, I agree. If by "16 SB", you mean 10 SB/6 CS, I agree as well. (time chips at your legs) If by "15 SH", you mean "15 wasted outs", yeah agree still. Were you also one of those fooled by Rickey Henderson back in 1999? Cuz' he looked fantastic that year and some teams actually considered giving him a lucrative two-year deal at one point during the off-season. Giving 8 M for 2 years to that Toon dog is not something I would do, but that's just me. Ignore 2001-2003 at own risk. You sound a lot like brandofan, are you guys related, or you've just had several beers together? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.