Crede and Garland to Texas?

[RockRaines]

2005

 

Fenway-.538 .500 OBP 1.192 OPS

the cell. .417 .462 .962

Dolphins .308 .357 .742

Comerica .400 .400 1.000

Citizens .273 .385 1.021

 

Career

Dolphins- .435 .480 1.132

Hiram- .333 .429 1.095

Great American .273 .273 1.091

Citizens .273 .385 1.021

Turner -.385 .429 .967

Safeco- .289 .342 .935

The Cell .270 .325 .811

Kauffman- .298 .349 .788

JP???

 

He DOES suck everywhere huh?

[jphat007]

JP???

 

He DOES suck everywhere huh?

 

LOL. I was just going to let it go after a post like that, but it appears you don't want to.

 

All anyone needs to know is away from Arlington, he is .238/.296/.396/.692

 

with 23 fewer HR, 42 less walks, 9 MORE k's, in 21 MORE ABs.

 

Against lefties, he is .222/.271/.353/.624.

 

So effectively he is one of the worst hitters in the league unless he is at home in Arlington facing a righty.

 

If you want a player like that, fine, go for it. I think that means he is not all that great. And thats the last you'll hear from me on it. If he comes, I'll root for him like no other, but I will worry about 3b.

 

I'm done with this subject. It is obvious we disagree.

Edited December 19, 2005 by jphat007

[3E8]

2005

 

Fenway-.538 .500 OBP 1.192 OPS

the cell. .417 .462 .962

Dolphins .308 .357 .742

Comerica .400 .400 1.000

Citizens .273 .385 1.021

 

Career

Dolphins- .435 .480 1.132

Hiram- .333 .429 1.095

Great American .273 .273 1.091

Citizens .273 .385 1.021

Turner -.385 .429 .967

Safeco- .289 .342 .935

The Cell .270 .325 .811

Kauffman- .298 .349 .788

 

 

About 10 of those lines you posted are compiled from a sample size of 15 at-bats or less. The Safeco line is the only one you need to prove JFat wrong. You haven't proved much of anything with the rest of them.

[jphat007]

About 10 of those lines you posted are compiled from a sample size of 15 at-bats or less.  The Safeco line is the only one you need to prove JFat wrong.  You haven't proved much of anything with the rest of them.

 

Hey hey. Thats with a 'PH', not 'F'

[nitetrain8601]

LOL. I was just going to let it go after a post like that, but it appears you don't want to.

 

All anyone needs to know is away from Arlington, he is .238/.296/.396/.692

 

with 23 fewer HR, 42 less walks, 9 MORE k's, in 21 MORE ABs.

 

Against lefties, he is .222/.271/.353/.624.

 

So effectively he is one of the worst hitters in the league unless he is at home in Arlington facing a righty.

 

If you want a player like that, fine, go for it. I think that means he is not all that great. And thats the last you'll hear from me on it. If he comes, I'll root for him like no other, but I will worry about 3b.

 

I'm done with this subject. It is obvious we disagree.

 

Don't forget the pre-allstar/post-allstar game splits. That's the most telling thing. He sucks in the 2nd half.

[iWiN4PreP]

i would rather have a healthy crede over a healthy blalock

 

the defense, the CLUTCH, is their for crede. thats what we need outta him.

hell it wud be nice if we had all that + average. but i just dont think we get it with blalock.

 

now if crede does have some serious issues, i dont know how to feel about this.

[kevo880]

i would rather have a healthy crede over a healthy blalock

 

the defense, the CLUTCH, is their for crede. thats what we need outta him.

hell it wud be nice if we had all that + average. but i just dont think we get it with blalock.

 

now if crede does have some serious issues, i dont know how to feel about this.

 

I agree, I was happy with Crede especially in the second half of the season...I don't think you need to make the trade for blalock. To me it makes more sense that you just trade Garland for top prospects if Texas really wants him. Crede was too clutch and his defense was great. It seems like we are losing half the team from last year that WON THE WORLD SERIES! Now, I'm all for upgrades but Crede is a big part of this team and we already have an insurance policy in case his back is so bad that he will miss the season or parts of it...it didn't seem to effect him in the playoffs so when did his back get so bad that he can't even play? I would be quite disappointed if we traded Crede for Blalock because yes I will say Blalock is the more dangerous hitter but he isn't enough of an upgrade if you consider the clutch hitting and team chemistry.

[GoodAsGould]

Im just going to say this and keep it simple. Anyone who would rather have Crede than Blalock is a homer. Im not even that big of a Blalock fan either.....more of a Tex fan.

[YASNY]

Im just going to say this and keep it simple.  Anyone who would rather have Crede than Blalock is a homer.  Im not even that big of a Blalock fan either.....more of a Tex fan.

 

But Blalock sucks away from home against lefties in the 2nd half! Howw the hell can you say that?

 

People ... do you ever watch baseball or just read obscure stats? If you can't see that over the long haul Blalock is a superior all around ballplayer than Crede, then I don't think you are actually watching. Blalock also has more of a upside to him. I like Joe Cerede. I like him a lot. He's a good ballplayer that is, I believe, just beginning to come into his own as a force on the ballfield. I still think Blalock is the better of the two.

[Al Lopez's Ghost]

FWIW, today's Daily Herald quotes AJ, who said he talked to Garland last week, and Garland definitely wants to stay, but "if he gets 9 or 10 million, that's a break in the budget and somebody else will have to go."

[iWiN4PreP]

i hope we can lock up garland and have him wanting to stay here, for an even price.

 

what would be a fair price?

:s

[SSH2005]

Im just going to say this and keep it simple.  Anyone who would rather have Crede than Blalock is a homer.  Im not even that big of a Blalock fan either.....more of a Tex fan.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But Blalock sucks away from home against lefties in the 2nd half! Howw the hell can you say that?

 

People ... do you ever watch baseball or just read obscure stats?  If you can't see that over the long haul Blalock is a superior all around ballplayer than Crede, then I don't think you are actually watching.  Blalock also has more of a upside to him.  I like Joe Cerede.  I like him a lot.  He's a good ballplayer that is, I believe, just beginning to come into his own as a force on the ballfield.  I still think Blalock is the better of the two.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Excellent posts. I agree with you both.

[iWiN4PreP]

Im just going to say this and keep it simple. Anyone who would rather have Crede than Blalock is a homer. Im not even that big of a Blalock fan either.....more of a Tex fan.

 

Not really, I was all in for all the other trades, aaron rowand for thome etc.

 

I just dont like replacing our third basemen who has been unbelivable with the glove, and has been very clutch with a low-mediocre average for a guy who hits a few more homeruns, and average aint that much higher, and i dont think hes AS good as credes defense, tho he may not be bad.

 

I just dont see the upgrade...

 

but once again ill state, if crede is hurt some pretty major way, then im all in for this.

[ZoomSlowik]

You're taking the worst portion of one player's game and trying to compare it to the other player's entire career. That's not really an even comparison, and is a horrible form of statistical analysis. By totally ignoring half of his stats, you're distorting the reality. What's funny is that Crede doesn't exactly blow those splits out of the water. His overall numbers are better, but not significantly so. You keep using that one argument, we're using several. What's worse is that we've come up with arguments to counter that one line of debate, such as that moving from Ameriquest to the Cell isn't that big a dropoff, especially considering that the Sox offense and pitching staff dragged them down a bit last year, or that by switching divisions his road trips are going to change, dropping 22 games at unfavorable parks down to about 9 and gaining games at more neutral parks. Those 3 parks make up more than a quarter of his road trips, and he only hits well at Safeco, and even those numbers came down this year.

 

The Sox could potentially acquire a player with a high level of talent who is coming off a down year. That down year was still better than Crede's best year, and you're still trying to argue against it. Blalock is also signed longer for a reasonable amount of injuries and has no injury concerns at all. It's not like the Sox haven't had guys with bad splits in the past. Hell, our team hit ten points higher on the road last year, maybe we need someone that can only hit well in hitter's parks. In the proposed trade, we'd get a solid 3B, a decent OF, and possibly a top prospect for two guys that will probably be gone in the near future anyways. I've seen much worse trades.

[nitetrain8601]

FWIW, today's Daily Herald quotes AJ, who said he talked to Garland last week, and Garland definitely wants to stay, but "if he gets 9 or 10 million, that's a break in the budget and somebody else will have to go."

 

That seems like a fair amount for Garland. The thing is that the years. I bet White Sox brass isn't willing to go beyond 3 years with anyone not named Mark Buehrle.

[iWiN4PreP]

You're taking the worst portion of one player's game and trying to compare it to the other player's entire career. That's not really an even comparison, and is a horrible form of statistical analysis.  By totally ignoring half of his stats, you're distorting the reality. What's funny is that Crede doesn't exactly blow those splits out of the water. His overall numbers are better, but not significantly so. You keep using that one argument, we're using several. What's worse is that we've come up with arguments to counter that one line of debate, such as that moving from Ameriquest to the Cell isn't that big a dropoff, especially considering that the Sox offense and pitching staff dragged them down a bit last year, or that by switching divisions his road trips are going to change, dropping 22 games at unfavorable parks down to about 9 and gaining games at more neutral parks. Those 3 parks make up more than a quarter of his road trips, and he only hits well at Safeco, and even those numbers came down this year.

 

The Sox could potentially acquire a player with a high level of talent who is coming off a down year. That down year was still better than Crede's best year, and you're still trying to argue against it. Blalock is also signed longer for a reasonable amount of injuries and has no injury concerns at all. It's not like the Sox haven't had guys with bad splits in the past. Hell, our team hit ten points higher on the road last year, maybe we need someone that can only hit well in hitter's parks. In the proposed trade, we'd get a solid 3B, a decent OF, and possibly a top prospect for two guys that will probably be gone in the near future anyways. I've seen much worse trades.

 

good post.

Agreed on everything i suppose, im sorry, maybe i did get a bit homer-ish, just doesnt seem like a huge upgrade from crede to blalock, mayb thats due to the downyear and such.

[YASNY]

good post.

Agreed on everything i suppose, im sorry, maybe i did get a bit homer-ish, just doesnt seem like a huge upgrade from crede to blalock, mayb thats due to the downyear and such.

 

"Downyear" is a key "word" Blalock has shown in the past that his capable of having good years. He had an off year last year. He's not on the decline at age 25. If he gets away from Texas and goes back to his George Brett-like approach, he can be a legitimate stud. This could be a case of buying low, and selling high (Garland), though I also expect Garland to keep getting better.

[ZoomSlowik]

Also, I'm honestly not sure how much better Jon can get. He just doesn't seem to be the kind of guy that's going to get 20 wins or an ERA around 3 in my book. He's an innings eater that is going to keep you in games, but he isn't exactly the staff ace type. His stuff is good but not elite, and he isn't exactly a strikeout pitcher. He put up 18 wins with a 3.50 ERA with a good defense and decent run support (at least in the first half). He's the kind of guy that is going to need some defensive help to really be on top of his game because so many balls get put in play. I see this year as kind of like Brad Radke's last year. It was a solid year, but everything went right for Jon, much like Brad. Radke didn't have as good a year this year, something that might happen for Jon. If he keeps his walks down like he did this year, he'll be an above average pitcher from here on out. However, I just don't see him consistently winning more than 15 games in the future. That's why I'd like to see him get dealt while his value is high. I just don't see him being worth more than about $9 mil a year in the long run. Maybe he'll keep improving and he'll prove me wrong, but I'm not exactly expecting that.

[RockRaines]

You're taking the worst portion of one player's game and trying to compare it to the other player's entire career. That's not really an even comparison, and is a horrible form of statistical analysis.  By totally ignoring half of his stats, you're distorting the reality. What's funny is that Crede doesn't exactly blow those splits out of the water. His overall numbers are better, but not significantly so. You keep using that one argument, we're using several. What's worse is that we've come up with arguments to counter that one line of debate, such as that moving from Ameriquest to the Cell isn't that big a dropoff, especially considering that the Sox offense and pitching staff dragged them down a bit last year, or that by switching divisions his road trips are going to change, dropping 22 games at unfavorable parks down to about 9 and gaining games at more neutral parks. Those 3 parks make up more than a quarter of his road trips, and he only hits well at Safeco, and even those numbers came down this year.

 

 

Yes, but that point has been made several times, and the counter will be--yeah but he only hits at home games against right handed hitters. There is really no reason to respond to the ridiculously wrong argument that Crede is a better player. JP is a statistic manipulator, and when it is done to him, he laughs it off as wrong. It is better to ignore the arguments. BTW good post anyway.

[jphat007]

Yes, but that point has been made several times, and the counter will be--yeah but he only hits at home games against right handed hitters.  There is really no reason to respond to the ridiculously wrong argument that Crede is a better player.  JP is a statistic manipulator, and when it is done to him, he laughs it off as wrong.  It is better to ignore the arguments.  BTW good post anyway.

 

It's quite obvious that we want two different kinds of players, and thats fine. You just look stupid posting my argument and why it differs in everyone's post that agrees with you though. It makes it look like you are looking for somebody to back up your argument. But I tell you right now, there is nobody on this board who is going to make me change my opinion on the subject. If you'd like to go inteview a GM or asst GM, then I might listen. No need to keep dragging my name into things.

 

You want a player that is successful in one quarter of the opportunites in which he comes to the plate. I don't, nor will I, so you can just drop it.

Edited December 20, 2005 by jphat007

[ZoomSlowik]

You want a player that is successful in one quarter of the opportunites in which he comes to the plate. I don't, nor will I, so you can just drop it.

 

How do you figure it's one quarter of his plate opportunities? Even assuming that he hits poorly in every single road game (which he doesn't), 80% or more of the pitchers in the league are right handed. That already screws up your statement because it's more like 40% are home versus righties. Since when is Crede successful in more than about 30% of his at bats? He rarely hits over .250, and his career OBP is .303. I'll admit that Blalock isn't the greatest player in the world, but Crede isn't exactly Mike Schmidt over at 3B.

[SSH2005]

Just scanning this thread, the majority of posters think that Blalock is a better player than Crede. RockRaines doesn't really need anyone to back up his argument.

[jphat007]

Just scanning this thread, the majority of posters think that Blalock is a better player than Crede.  RockRaines doesn't really need anyone to back up his argument.

 

You can have everyone on this board write a thesis on it and I wouldn't care.

[RockRaines]

You want a player that is successful in one quarter of the opportunites in which he comes to the plate. I don't, nor will I, so you can just drop it.

Blah Blah Blah Blah

 

Lets focus in on your comment here, shall we. Being successful at one quarter of your opps means either your BA or OBP would be around .250, meaning that whatever way you define successful, you either get on base 1 out of 4 times, or get a hit 1 out of 4 times. Being that Blalock does not have a BA or OBP around .250 I would guess that you are just pulling that number out of your ass. Now you argue that you would rather have Joe Crede, now his BA is just a smidge above .250, and his OBP is around .300. Because Blalock has a higher BA, and a higher OBP, would that mean he is more succesful in your argument? So you say you would not want a player that is successful 25 percent of the time, but you are arguing for a player whose numbers suggest he IS successful only 25 percent of the time. Do you even know what you are arguing for?

[SSH2005]

You can have everyone on this board write a thesis on it and I wouldn't care.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh yeah, the stats bear it out as well.