beck72 Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 Just as good. Koskie had a .963 fielding %, Crede was .965. Crede had one more error and a lot more fielding chances. Sounds like you're making the case to keep him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 Lots of reasons. Teams don't just look at one year's performance, it isn't that simple. He's young. He had a down year offensively, but a decent year in '03. Another team may look at his swing and say, "we can fix it". If his batting average were 20 points higher, we wouldn't be talking about this. If he hit .260 with 20+ HR's and 70 RBI's with above average defense, we'd be saying we're set at 3B, let's look at other needs. Just because there are veteran 3B on the free agent market doesn't mean Crede has limited trade value. Those free agents will assuredly make more $ than Crede in 2005 with no performance upside. What you see from a Koskie or a Randa is what you get, they are both well over 30. Crede has a much better chance to improve. He's got more trade value than you think. He averages 22 homeruns a year which is sollid but he also average a .256 average and .304 obp. :puke By the start of next year he will be 27 and most players prime is 28-32. His 2003 year sucked. Not to easy to fix one of the slowest swings in baseball, alog with borchard. I would still be talking about how bad he is offesnsively if he hit .20 higher this year because his obp would still only be .324. Randa and koskie are over 30. So what. Now a days players are conditioned so much better than ever before. Neither on of them should decline any if at all for 2-3 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 We probably could get Randa cheap. Who's better Joe Crede or Randa. I'd prefer Crede and like everybody says next year is it for Joe. He either emerges or he's outta here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 From KW's comments, Crede should be around. Talking about trading him and signing a FA doesn't sound like its in the works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 Just as good. Koskie had a .963 fielding %, Crede was .965. Crede had one more error and a lot more fielding chances. Crede played 27 more games and only had 32 more assists. They would have been right around the same if koskie would have played an additional 27 games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 We probably could get Randa cheap. Who's better Joe Crede or Randa. I'd prefer Crede and like everybody says next year is it for Joe. He either emerges or he's outta here. Well said. One more year for Joe. Joe's definitely got more upside than Randa. Koskie as well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 We probably could get Randa cheap. Who's better Joe Crede or Randa. I'd prefer Crede and like everybody says next year is it for Joe. He either emerges or he's outta here. Just because cruddy is younger and cheaper than randa it doesn't mean he is the better ball player than randa. Not at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 Furthermore, you have to take into consideration that since KW has to make most of his changes through trade, he has to take more chances than other GM's who have the luxery of "buying" their talent on the FA market. If this is true then our organization needs a new approach. No one is ignorant to the financial handicaps which are imposed upon KW by the chairman. Because of these restrictions, Williams he needs to impliment a stronger minor league system. Give our scouts and directors of player development a quotient to follow. If this exists, then hopefully our current group is nearing their end. Here's my philosophy (If I'm KW): Every three years I would EXPECT atleast one prospect to advance through the system and contribute. The discretion would lie within myself whether or not a 3.50 ERA or a .250 BA is the definition of contributing. When you're team is stuck in the middle between depending on prospects and signing FA's, there's limited room for error. It's easy in Milwaukee where expectations aren't very high, or New York where money is plentiful, but our team needs a balance. Why is it so easy for Minnesota or Oakland? If teams are so willing to fire managers, no different policy should be held for player development. Two nights ago I heard Bruce Levine (on ESPN 1000) talking about changes in scouting development. Obviously, our team has become aware the Felix Diaz, Joe Borchard, and Arnie Munoz of the world don't equate success. I would like to mention Sweeney, Andersen, Lumsden, Fields, Gonzalez, or McCarthy give me hope for our future. However, if there are significant setbacks on these players an overhaul is essential. Torn labrums, injuries, drop off in talent are all unacceptable. Every prospect within the Minnesota Twins system which immediately contributes provides another indictment on our system. They may be in the upper echelon of organizations (developing quality talent), but unless this team switches divisions it should be a priority of managment to compete with Minn. Don't tell me we're in the middle and accept mediocrity. All organization have overhyped prospects that don't live up to the hype, so why do you pretend that the Sox are the only team with that problem. Until you gain the ability to look at things critically and from both perspectives, it is worthless arguing with you. Cubs are quite good at hyping their young talent. That must be the only explanation for trading Bobby Hillbilly and Hernandez to the Pittsburgh Pirates for Aramis Ramirez. Or how about the infamous five team trade involving Francis Beltran/Alex Gonzalez to the Expos for Garciappara? Other teams are quite willing to accept crap from the goof, Hendry. His rape of less fortunate organizations should be a model for KW. No longer should GM's eyes light up when their receptionists are recieving a call from KW. I know I'm shifting the focus of the discussion here, but I don't accept failure of this team because others have theirs as well. We (as fans) should expect KW to shadow the success of fortunate organizations instead of accepting failure and noting the trouble's of other teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 Looking at Joe's minor league numbers [career avgs, highs in SLG, OBP, etc] keeping Joe for another year, hoping he puts a solid full year together, is reasonable to expect. It's not like he was some scrub minor leaguer who never hit. He's had success in the minors and the majors. 2005 should see Crede in a sox uniform. http://www.sports-wired.com/players/profile.asp?Name=JEH Look at how Joe improved in his 2nd yr in AA [2000] and in AAA [2002]. He posted his best numbers. He's shown the ability to adjust. I also didn't know how well he did in his first few years, being one of the youngest guys in rookie and A ball leagues. That does tell me something. His numbers in the minors show me that he would be a medicore player in the majors and that is what he is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 Crede played 27 more games and only had 32 more assists. They would have been right around the same if koskie would have played an additional 27 games. What I said was, Crede had a lot more chances. Not assists. Also, to say his 2003 year "sucked" is way over the top. Not to mention incorrect. It's ok to not want a player to return, but take off the blinders, your bias is showing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 Sounds like you're making the case to keep him. It goes back to my longstanding philosphy on any player, it all depends what you can get for him. I'm sure KW is looking at all the possible scenarios, keep him or trade him. Actually, I'm ambivalent. I think a guy like Koskie or Randa can do a fine job here, if they trade Crede to fill a bigger hole. If they don't trade him, there's evidence to suggest he will improve in 2005, as you pointed out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 If teams are so willing to fire managers, no different policy should be held for player development. Two nights ago I heard Bruce Levine (on ESPN 1000) talking about changes in scouting development. Obviously, our team has become aware the Felix Diaz, Joe Borchard, and Arnie Munoz of the world don't equate success. Interesting, tell us more about what Levine said. I didn't hear that interview. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 What I said was, Crede had a lot more chances. Not assists. Also, to say his 2003 year "sucked" is way over the top. Not to mention incorrect. It's ok to not want a player to return, but take off the blinders, your bias is showing. Same thing when it comes to total chances, if koskie would have played an additional 27 games that would be very close to each other in that category. I am not a fan of players with sub .300 obp that has one of the slowest swings in baseball. Maybe i should start though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 It goes back to my longstanding philosphy on any player, it all depends what you can get for him. I'm sure KW is looking at all the possible scenarios, keep him or trade him. Actually, I'm ambivalent. I think a guy like Koskie or Randa can do a fine job here, if they trade Crede to fill a bigger hole. If they don't trade him, there's evidence to suggest he will improve in 2005, as you pointed out. If we traded him for muich needed bullpen help you don't think that that improves us? Especially if we got koskie or even randa who are upgrades over crede. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 one of the slowest swings in baseball. C'mon. That's an exaggeration. I am not a huge Crede fan but if they trade this guy and he goes on to have a good career, people will be all over KW. By the way, Uribe is noted to have a quicker swing than Crede, yet he strikes out more than Crede. Just saying. Koskie strikes out a ton too. It's hard, but patience may be in order as respects Joe Crede. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 If we traded him for muich needed bullpen help you don't think that that improves us? Especially if we got koskie or even randa who are upgrades over crede. Like I said, it depends what the Sox can get for him. I wouldn't settle for just bullpen help for Crede, unless it's an up-and-coming stud young closer. I don't see KW trading him for a set up guy, for example. I could see them trading him for a leadoff guy, if there's even a good leadoff guy available. Every team is looking for a leadoff guy, witness 2204 Chicago Cubs. Like I said about two weeks ago though ... I am expecting a trade of at least one of the core guys - a guy we would rather not see traded. Just a hunch. What I really want to find out is, are they planning to shake up the scouting staff. I wonder if this guy John Boles is really coming in from LA for a role in player personnel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 C'mon. That's an exaggeration. I am not a huge Crede fan but if they trade this guy and he goes on to have a good career, people will be all over KW. By the way, Uribe is noted to have a quicker swing than Crede, yet he strikes out more than Crede. Just saying. Koskie strikes out a ton too. It's hard, but patience may be in order as respects Joe Crede. Ask anyone that knows alot about many different players and they will tell you cruddy is in the top ten of slow swingers. If they trade crede and he goes onto a good career well then he would have proved me wrong but don't think i will ever be pissed off if he went on to have a good career. It happens all the time to alot of different teams and they move on. Uribe is more of a free swinger type hitter. That does not have a clue of what the strike zone is. That is why he hardly walks. Crede like i said very slow swing, do you know how many times he has struck out on 88 mile fastballs. That is unacceptable imo. While koskie k's alot he has a good enough eye to walk on average of 77 times per year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 Ask anyone that knows alot about many different players and they will tell you cruddy is in the top ten of slow swingers. I think I qualify as someone who knows about many different players. If you asked me, I wouldn't say his swing is that slow. He gets around on some very quick fastballs. He actually didn't strike out too much this year, but he overthought. That was obvious. That's generally why you strike out on 88 mph fastballs, it's because you're in between, i.e. guessing wrong on pitches. If he couldn't handle 88 mph fastballs he wouldn't be in the big leagues. I've watched a lot of players, for a very long time. Actually, since the late 1960's. It's obvious he has talent. He has some mechanical issues with his approach at the plate and IMO, it's not his swing but his hand position. If he tweaked where he had his hands at the start of his swing, he'd be better off. But I'm not a hitting coach. I'm sure Walker is/was working with him. To me, he looked a little better in September. By the way, KC officially declined Randa's option after the game. He's a free agent officially. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 I think I qualify as someone who knows about many different players. If you asked me, I wouldn't say his swing is that slow. He gets around on some very quick fastballs. He actually didn't strike out too much this year, but he overthought. That was obvious. That's generally why you strike out on 88 mph fastballs, it's because you're in between, i.e. guessing wrong on pitches. If he couldn't handle 88 mph fastballs he wouldn't be in the big leagues. I've watched a lot of players, for a very long time. Actually, since the late 1960's. It's obvious he has talent. He has some mechanical issues with his approach at the plate and IMO, it's not his swing but his hand position. If he tweaked where he had his hands at the start of his swing, he'd be better off. But I'm not a hitting coach. I'm sure Walker is/was working with him. To me, he looked a little better in September. By the way, KC officially declined Randa's option after the game. He's a free agent officially. There were several times this year that relief pitchers came in a threw 88 as their hardest. In those at-bats there may have been 1 breaking ball and the rest 88 mile fastballs. If you do not believe me ask others because i remember in the game threads people were pissed and could not believe that he was striking out on such slow fastballs. I may be cracking up but i am 99.7% sure of it. I agree his approach needs alot of help but i don't know if that is possible since i have heard he is to the point he is uncoachable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 Interesting, tell us more about what Levine said. I didn't hear that interview. The particular segment was part of Dave Wills post game show. And the date of the interview was likely Thur, instead of Friday as I've previously described. Levine quickly listed names within the minor league organization (all of which are unfamiliar to me) who were switching titles. Levine never mentioned the changes were made due to failures, but its simple to read between the lines. One guy in particular was a friend of Willsy, whom declared himself a "homer" in predicting this guy would fit in the White Sox organization. Levine also referenced JR's old buddy Jerry Krause, predicting he would soon find a job with the Sox. Have you by any chance ever called into the show, Jim? Friday someone phoned in who discussed limiting season tickets, and despising arrogance of Cub fans. I have never heard you speak, and there's a high probability another season ticket holder named Jim exists in Chicago, but the person wasn't your average caller. Seemed to possess intelligence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 His numbers in the minors show me that he would be a medicore player in the majors and that is what he is. I'd like you to explain how winning the MVP of two different leagues indicates he would be a mediocre player? And let's not compare Crede to Joe Randa. That's a freakin joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 I'd like you to explain how winning the MVP of two different leagues indicates he would be a mediocre player? And let's not compare Crede to Joe Randa. That's a freakin joke. While crede was good in the minors he was nothing really special. Both of his mvp year he puts up good numbers but nothing that showed me he would be the next stud. You honestly think randa is worse than cruddy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 Why must some people be so blinded by batting average and OBP? Is the name of the game for a hitter not to score runs or produce runs? Crede had 69 RBI to 56 for Randa Crede scored 67 runs to 65 for Randa Crede walked only SIX fewer times than Randa (34 to 40) Crede struck out only FOUR more times than Randa (81 to 77) Randa had 31 doubles to Crede's 25. Crede had 21 HR to Randa's 8. So Randa had more singles. I can't see where they produced more runs. In Crede's worst year, he was nearly, if not just as good as Joe Randa. When Randa was Crede's age, all of his numbers were worse than Crede's besides batting average. There really no comparison. Getting rid of Crede for Joe Randa would be stupid, unless you enjoy watching one of your former players outperform the guy you picked up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngelasDaddy0427 Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 For all of you guys who want to replace Crede with Troy Glaus: Batting Average 98-.218 165 at bats 99-.240 551 at bats 00-.283 563 at bats 01-.250 588 at bats 02-.250 569 at bats 03-.248 319 at bats 04-.251 207 at bats Forgive me if i'm not too terrible impressed. Not only that a guy like this will command about 7 or 8 Mil on the open market. Give Crede a chance. If he can hit .250+ with 20+ HR's and 70+ RBI's in the 7 Hole then thats all we need. If Joe Crede is carrying our offense next year then we are in a hell of alot of trouble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 Why must some people be so blinded by batting average and OBP? Is the name of the game for a hitter not to score runs or produce runs? Crede had 69 RBI to 56 for Randa Crede scored 67 runs to 65 for Randa Crede walked only SIX fewer times than Randa (34 to 40) Crede struck out only FOUR more times than Randa (81 to 77) Randa had 31 doubles to Crede's 25. Crede had 21 HR to Randa's 8. So Randa had more singles. I can't see where they produced more runs. In Crede's worst year, he was nearly, if not just as good as Joe Randa. When Randa was Crede's age, all of his numbers were worse than Crede's besides batting average. There really no comparison. Getting rid of Crede for Joe Randa would be stupid, unless you enjoy watching one of your former players outperform the guy you picked up. Why not look at obp? It is easily one of the most important offensive stats. Randa's numbers are so low because of the fact the royal's offense was bases around their minor leaguers this year. I am not really a fan of picking randa but he would be much better in the sox lineup than crede is. As you can tell by reading this thread i really want koskie. 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.