Rowand44 Posted November 15, 2005 Share Posted November 15, 2005 QUOTE(Felix @ Nov 15, 2005 -> 03:42 PM) I'm as big a fan of the two as any, but A-Row and Pods had a collective OPS in the low .700's. Thats not really productive. They did well in their spots in the lineup, which is more important imo, but they weren't that productive as offensive players. OPS means squat in a leadoff hitter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 15, 2005 Share Posted November 15, 2005 QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Nov 15, 2005 -> 03:56 PM) OPS means squat in a leadoff hitter. I would normally flat out agree, but I want my leadoff hitter not only being able to get on base, but to either be able to steal bases productively or have a little bit of gap power...Pods really had neither, though his injury really killed his ability to steal bases late in the season. To put it into perspective...Podsednik had 6 XBHs in 12 games in the playoffs. He had 29 XBHs in the regular season, in 129 games. If the Sox could get the Podsednik they had in the postseason for a large stretch of games during the regular season, they'd probably be damn near unbeatable in that stretch - similar to how they were in the postseason. A guy who has power, the ability to get on base, and the ability to steal bases productively is one of the most valuable hitters a team can get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted November 15, 2005 Share Posted November 15, 2005 QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Nov 15, 2005 -> 04:13 PM) I would normally flat out agree, but I want my leadoff hitter not only being able to get on base, but to either be able to steal bases productively or have a little bit of gap power...Pods really had neither, though his injury really killed his ability to steal bases late in the season. To put it into perspective...Podsednik had 6 XBHs in 12 games in the playoffs. He had 29 XBHs in the regular season, in 129 games. If the Sox could get the Podsednik they had in the postseason for a large stretch of games during the regular season, they'd probably be damn near unbeatable in that stretch - similar to how they were in the postseason. A guy who has power, the ability to get on base, and the ability to steal bases productively is one of the most valuable hitters a team can get. Ahh..yes, the Wite theories of the leadoff man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted November 15, 2005 Share Posted November 15, 2005 QUOTE(TheBigHurt @ Nov 15, 2005 -> 04:32 PM) I'm not arguing that, but Damon being in our outfield wouldn't make our outfield overall bad. I can't see how you could say ARow and Pods are not productive. In fact if I may be honest, I think that would be a very ridiculous statement. And to be honest, IMO if Konerko left, I honestly would be at least partially in favor of Damon. I realize he's not a great outfielder, but his bat would be really helpful. Of course YES, this team IS based more on defense and pitching, so I guess I'm a bit out of line, but still, that would be very tempting. *EDIT* You said offensively, ok, but let's not make assumptions that Arow isn't going to better his numbers from this year. Overall even offensively I can't see things getting worse, in fact I'd see them getting better. And besides, I think the big picture is how they fit into their spot in the lineup, not how offensive they are as a collective outfield O_o Wow, yes it would. Dye > Damon. Damon would lessen the offensive impact of a traditionally offensive position. His defense is subpar. We would then have an OF which would collectivel hit maybe 30 hr's between the 3 of them. i would like to know how many championship-caliber teams that would have that low of production. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 15, 2005 Share Posted November 15, 2005 QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Nov 15, 2005 -> 04:23 PM) Ahh..yes, the Wite theories of the leadoff man. LOL...wo0t It holds true though...Jeremy Giambi put up a .375 OBP, and a .794 OPS batting leadoff in 2002...and during that stretch of games, the A's were right around .500. Not much slugging and no speed has never equaled good results leading off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigHurt Posted November 15, 2005 Share Posted November 15, 2005 QUOTE(RockRaines @ Nov 15, 2005 -> 04:26 PM) Wow, yes it would. Dye > Damon. Damon would lessen the offensive impact of a traditionally offensive position. His defense is subpar. We would then have an OF which would collectivel hit maybe 30 hr's between the 3 of them. i would like to know how many championship-caliber teams that would have that low of production. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Not sure if we're thinking the same thing, but I'm thinking IF teh Sox had Damon, the possibility would be to drop Gooch a bit down the lineup and have Damon in the 2 hole. And maybe I'm missing soemthing, but why is it important that a collective outfield have amazing offensive stats? All I can say to that as I said before is I think it's how they produce according to their spot in the lineup. Their defensive positions have nothing to do with how they produce offensively. THis conversation seems similar to the one I had with kalapse yesterday, where he mentioned that yes we won the WS, but it was hard and we had poor offense at points. Well yes, but the big picture is that we DID win the WS. That's the whole reason you play, so what do certain negative stats at points of the year matter if that goal was achieved? O_o Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted November 15, 2005 Share Posted November 15, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(TheBigHurt @ Nov 15, 2005 -> 05:43 PM) Not sure if we're thinking the same thing, but I'm thinking IF teh Sox had Damon, the possibility would be to drop Gooch a bit down the lineup and have Damon in the 2 hole. And maybe I'm missing soemthing, but why is it important that a collective outfield have amazing offensive stats? All I can say to that as I said before is I think it's how they produce according to their spot in the lineup. Their defensive positions have nothing to do with how they produce offensively. THis conversation seems similar to the one I had with kalapse yesterday, where he mentioned that yes we won the WS, but it was hard and we had poor offense at points. Well yes, but the big picture is that we DID win the WS. That's the whole reason you play, so what do certain negative stats at points of the year matter if that goal was achieved? O_o Yes, but our team still relies on the big HR, do you know why we won the WS, because we hit more bombs than anyone. And we should concentrate on that, because we play in a park that allows us to play that way. If you get Damon for the OF, taking Dye's spot you lost about 1/2 the hr's than before. You also dont have Konerko so you lose about 10-15 of his as well. Already you are talking about about HR totals being about 170. That could translate into about maybe 5-10 less wins, which may close us out of the playoffs as we know it. The OF, especially the corners tend to be some of your best hitter in your lineup. We are talking about making that our least power-producing part of our lineup. Which now leave, 1B, maybe 3B, and thats pretty much it. Edited November 15, 2005 by RockRaines Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted November 15, 2005 Share Posted November 15, 2005 If Damon discussion is coming up...has anyone yet pointed out that Boras is Damon's agent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigHurt Posted November 15, 2005 Share Posted November 15, 2005 Ok, I can see your point now, although I was under the impression Damon was a good HR hitter. Now perhaps I failed to mention that from my perspective I'm talking about Dye and Damon both being on the team, and both together could produce solid HR stats. If you're talking about getting rid of Dye in favor for Damon, then I certainly don't agree to that, so rest assured Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngelasDaddy0427 Posted November 16, 2005 Share Posted November 16, 2005 I think that signing Piazza would be a great deal... However no way in hell I'd put him behind the plate... Ever... I'd rather sit Willie Harris back there... But as a DH, coming cheap.. I think it would be a good deal... Especially if we resign Frank and he's ready by midseason... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngelasDaddy0427 Posted November 16, 2005 Share Posted November 16, 2005 Does anyone remember the prick quotes Damon had after the Red Sox got swept... KW should be run out of town for signing Damon if he did... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timotime Posted November 17, 2005 Share Posted November 17, 2005 Does anyone remember the prick quotes Damon had after the Red Sox got swept... KW should be run out of town for signing Damon if he did... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> i got to disagree with you. piazza is so past his prime. i know there is a weak free agent list this year, but there has to be somebody better than piazza for the DH role. somebody! 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.