Trade question

[whitesox61382]

Whats the difference between a good #2 hitter and a good leadoff hitter? Not much. I hate the fact that you guys don't think Jimenez is a good leadoff hitter because he doesn't steal bases. The stolen base is one of the most overrated stats in the game. In most cases it isn't worth the risk of an out to take an extra base(as Bobby pointed out on baseball tonight a while back). If a player is getting caught 25%+ then he is usually doing the team more harm then good. You ask a manager today which is more important out of the leadoff spot, OBP or SB, and I guarantee that a majority of them will say OBP. Its the new Beene way of baseball. Yesterday I say Dunn leading off for the Red because he draws a ton of walks and has a decent OBP. That just goes to show how much more important that OBP is when compared to SB for a leadoff hitter. Sure it would be great to have a guy that does both leading off, but please quit pretending that Jimenez isn't a good leadoff hitter and that the leadoff spot is a weakness that needs to be filled. Just as a side note, Jimenez actually does have above average speed.

 

Pierre is simple a better version of Harris. So why give up a top pitching prospect for a guy like that? If you think Pierre alone would turn this club around, than you are in for a rude awakening. Which is a bigger weakness, starting pitching or CF? As of right now you can make the arguement for CF, but in the very near future starting pitching is going to be the biggest weakness on this team. The Sox don't have many TOP pitching propsects in their system, but they do have quite a few CF prospects. So why trade from a weakness for a short term solution to a position that will probably be a strength in the near future? It just doesn't make sense, especially for maybe 1 or 2 extra wins.

[BrandoFan]

stolen base is one of the most overrated stats in the game

 

It may never replace a bases-clearing 2-bagger...but as far as a 1-2 spot hitters go, tell me:

 

What the difference between a leadoff double and an infield single plus a stolen base? If anything, a runner like Beltran or Willia Harris fakin' & jivin' at 1st causes a pitcher to nibble and pitch-out, which in turn only helps the hitter....of course nothing will replace the good OBP, but it's what you do while on base is what really matters and it goes way beyond SBs...Carlos Beltran's Real-Slugging is close to 600 because his speed.

 

Seeing what Carlos Lee is doing OB, Jimenez should be ashamed, he is faster than Carlos anjd can't slug as much.

 

a player is getting caught 25%+ then he is usually doing the team more harm then good

.

 

I know your uncle is a big wig scout and all....and while I agree that 80% steal rate should be a magical number....lets' get something straight here:

 

 

over 162 games, a great speed is way MORE than just SBs- it's effortlessly going from 1st to 3rd with 1 out on singles to the left side....it's scoring from 1st on long, Konerko-esque singles off the wall with less than 2 outs...it's a dozen+ extra bases taken on ball in the dirt (think Valentin but with speed)......it's DP stayed out of and force outs to second beaten out....it's bunting....it's making a pitcher nervous and affecting defensive alighnment......etc, etc, etc....

 

So if you have a solid OBP (350+) and you have Pierre's speed, you will be VERY valuable to your team over the long haul- at least as valuable as someone like Jeremy Giambi and his 385 OBP or Edgar and his 400 OBP and so on....That's why Tejada is terribly overrated as a 3rd spot hitter.

[witesoxfan]

Whats the difference between a good #2 hitter and a good leadoff hitter? Not much. I hate the fact that you guys don't think Jimenez is a good leadoff hitter because he doesn't steal bases. The stolen base is one of the most overrated stats in the game. In most cases it isn't worth the risk of an out to take an extra base(as Bobby pointed out on baseball tonight a while back). If a player is getting caught 25%+ then he is usually doing the team more harm then good. You ask a manager today which is more important out of the leadoff spot, OBP or SB, and I guarantee that a majority of them will say OBP. Its the new Beene way of baseball. Yesterday I say Dunn leading off for the Red because he draws a ton of walks and has a decent OBP. That just goes to show how much more important that OBP is when compared to SB for a leadoff hitter. Sure it would be great to have a guy that does both leading off, but please quit pretending that Jimenez isn't a good leadoff hitter and that the leadoff spot is a weakness that needs to be filled. Just as a side note, Jimenez actually does have above average speed.

 

Pierre is simple a better version of Harris. So why give up a top pitching prospect for a guy like that? If you think Pierre alone would turn this club around, than you are in for a rude awakening. Which is a bigger weakness, starting pitching or CF? As of right now you can make the arguement for CF, but in the very near future starting pitching is going to be the biggest weakness on this team. The Sox don't have many TOP pitching propsects in their system, but they do have quite a few CF prospects. So why trade from a weakness for a short term solution to a position that will probably be a strength in the near future? It just doesn't make sense, especially for maybe 1 or 2 extra wins.

First of all, Juan Pierre isn't getting caught stealing 25% of the time....he's getting caught stealing 20% of the time.

 

Secondly, stealing is not overrated. Getting on base is important, yes, but if you can steal 2nd, you are getting a runner in scoring position, and a base hit then most likely scores a run. And if he gets out, so what....you lose an out and are back to a good hitter in Jimenez who is just a second leadoff hitter. Simple as that.

 

Another note on Pierre....though he doesn't walk a ton(22 walks this year), he only has 18 K's in 300 AB's....that's like one K every 4 games or so.

 

A better version of Willie Harris? Hardly. Willie could be a player much like Pierre some day, but he isn't there yet.

 

Maybe Rauch is a bit too steep of an offer, but I'd really like to have him here.

[whitesox61382]

"over 162 games, a great speed is way MORE than just SBs- it's effortlessly going from 1st to 3rd with 1 out on singles to the left side....it's scoring from 1st on long, Konerko-esque singles off the wall with less than 2 outs...it's a dozen+ extra bases taken on ball in the dirt (think Valentin but with speed)......it's DP stayed out of and force outs to second beaten out....it's bunting....it's making a pitcher nervous and affecting defensive alighnment......etc, etc, etc...."

 

Jimenez does all of the above and thats one of my main points. He does have the speed to go to 3rd from 1st on a single, or score from 2nd on a single, or score from 1st on a double, or score from 3rd on a lazy flyball. The only aspect that his speed doesn't show is SB and I simply pointed out that SB were overrated IMO. Thats why he is still a very good leadoff hitter in my book even though he doesn't steal a lot of bases.

 

"What the difference between a leadoff double and an infield single plus a stolen base?"

 

The difference is that a leadoff double means that you are on 2nd and a single and an ATTEMPTED stolen base means that you can make an out that wasn't needed. On average I would say that 25% of the time you get caught. That means that 1/4th of the time you go from a man at 1st and no outs to no man on base and 1 out. That is a pretty significant difference and way that you slice it.

 

"First of all, Juan Pierre isn't getting caught stealing 25% of the time....he's getting caught stealing 20% of the time."

 

At no point did I say that he had been caught 25% of the time. In fact I didn't even look at his numbers so for all I know he hasn't been caught the entire season. The 25% was a general number thrown out their to prove a point. I was simple making that point that if you get caught in 25% or more of your attempted steals then you are doing the team more harm them good by costing them an out and a baserunner way to often.

 

"Secondly, stealing is not overrated. Getting on base is important, yes, but if you can steal 2nd, you are getting a runner in scoring position, and a base hit then most likely scores a run. And if he gets out, so what....you lose an out and are back to a good hitter in Jimenez who is just a second leadoff hitter. Simple as that."

 

Most people would disagree with the above. The way that the game is played today, in the offensive era as Brando would put it, baserunners are more important then ever. Risking an out AND a baserunner in an attempt to take an extra base is often a risk not worth taking(Bobby V said the same thing). Like I pointed out above, if a base stealer is getting caught 25%+ of the time then he is doing the team more harm then good. You fail to point out some of the positives of having a baserunner on 1st, such as a hole between the 1st baseman and 2nd baseman, or the fact that the pitcher has to usually use a slid step(even if the runner isn't that fast), or the chance to still drive him in with a double, triple, or HR, ECT.

 

"A better version of Willie Harris? Hardly. Willie could be a player much like Pierre some day, but he isn't there yet."

 

Thats the point of being a better version of Willie Harris. They have similar games and use their speed as their main weapon. I do think Harris can develop into a similar player as Pierre and thats one of the reasons that I don't like a trade for Pierre. Why trade for a guy when you have a younger version with the potential to be as good?

 

ps. i went back to the old way of doing things(using quotes) just for brando to prove a point.

[BrandoFan]

(I am breaking my promise to not respond to your pointlessly tagless posts, just this once, I swear on my mother's soul...)

 

 

Jimenez does all of the above and thats one of my main points. He does have the speed to go to 3rd from 1st on a single, or score from 2nd on a single, or score from 1st on a double, or score from 3rd on a lazy flyball. The only aspect that his speed doesn't show is SB and I simply pointed out that SB were overrated IMO. Thats why he is still a very good leadoff hitter in my book even though he doesn't steal a lot of bases.

 

 

No, my friend, he DOES NOT (not nearly as much as Pierre and other burners do anyway) and that's part of his problem- I've seen him needlessly pull up at 2nd...held up at 3rd...easily forced out at 2nd/doubled up....miss a bunt....fail to execute hit'b'run with Thomas hitting into a DP....etc....so many times, it's not even funny. Especially in close games Sox lost it made HUGE difference...Do you think someone with a bad OBP, Valentin, scoring more runs than Jimenez means anything? Valentin, Graffanino and Carlos Lee should never be better base-runner than Jimenez because they are all slower then he is and yet they have been more aggressive and smart this season....Sorry, but Jimenez is nothing but a deeply mediocre player right now, he ain't in Furcal's or Beltran's league....and don't get me started on his defense...

 

And believe me, if Jimmy should become a GG 2b-man, who steals 30 bases, scores 125 runs with 400 OBP and 500 Slug, noone would be happier than me.

 

The difference is that a leadoff double means that you are on 2nd and a single and an ATTEMPTED stolen base means that you can make an out that wasn't needed. On average I would say that 25% of the time you get caught. That means that 1/4th of the time you go from a man at 1st and no outs to no man on base and 1 out. That is a pretty significant difference and way that you slice it.

 

I love using Beltrran an example...please reflect on the above statement some more and you will see that for high-% runners like Grissom, Alomar, Jeter, Carlos, Willie, Patterson, etc......the "gamble" as you put it is definately worth it even if you count a CS as 2 SBs....And consdering how many crucial DP's Sox hitter hit into with zero outs in games that counted, I think the "gamble" was absolutely the right thing to do.

 

Do you even remember how the 2000 succedeed? Whenever Magglio, Konerko and Hurt would slump or struggle against a certain pitcher, both Valentin and Durham would give them (via "gambling" naturally) runner at 2nd and zero out or runner at 3rd and 1 out, so that the pressure was on the pitcher and not on the hitter if anything else...at the end way more runs scored, many of game-deciding variety, and less DPs/FO were hit into, with oppostion comitting more fielding errrors.... As soon as the Sox became Solo Shot Wonders in 2001, this team's offense had died....

[Bmr31]

(I am breaking my promise to not respond to your pointlessly tagless posts, just  this once, I swear on my mother's soul...)

 

 

 

 

 

No, my friend, he DOES NOT (not nearly as much as Pierre and other burners do anyway) and that the problem-  I've seen him pull up at second...held up at 3rd...easily forced out at 2nd/doubled up....miss a bunt....fail to execute hit'b'run with Thomas hitting into a DP....etc....so many times, it's not even funny.  Especially in close games Sox lost it made HUGE difference...Do you think someone with a bad OBP, Valentin, scoring more runs than Jimenez means anything? Valentin, Graffanino and Carlos Lee should never be better base-runner than Jimenez because they are all slower then he is and yet they have been more aggressive and smart this season....Sorry, but Jimenez is nothing but a deeply mediocre player right now, he ain't in Furcal's or Beltran's league.

 

 

 

I love using Beltrran an example...please reflect on the above statement some more and you will see that for high-% runners like Grissom, Alomar, Jeter, Carlos, Willie, Patterson, etc......the "gamble" as you put it is definately worth it even if you count a CS as 2 SBs....And consdering how many crucial DP's Sox hitter hit into with zero outs in games that counted, I think the "gamble" was absolutely the right thing to do. 

 

Do you even remember how the 2000 succedeed? Whenever Magglio, Konerko and Hurt would slump or struggle against a certain pitcher, both Valentin and Durham would give them (via "gambling" naturally) runner at 2nd and zero out or runner at 3rd and 1 out, so that the pressure was on the pitcher and not on the hitter if anything else...at the end way more runs scored, many of game-deciding variety, and less DPs/FO were hit into, with oppostion comitting more fielding errrors.... As soon as the Sox became Solo Shot Wonders in 2001, this team's offense had died....

This may sound strange, but Brando is really growing on me. I actually look forward to reading his babble.

[southsider2k5]

(I am breaking my promise to not respond to your pointlessly tagless posts, just  this once, I swear on my mother's soul...)

 

 

 

 

 

No, my friend, he DOES NOT (not nearly as much as Pierre and other burners do anyway) and that the problem-  I've seen him pull up at second...held up at 3rd...easily forced out at 2nd/doubled up....miss a bunt....fail to execute hit'b'run with Thomas hitting into a DP....etc....so many times, it's not even funny.  Especially in close games Sox lost it made HUGE difference...Do you think someone with a bad OBP, Valentin, scoring more runs than Jimenez means anything? Valentin, Graffanino and Carlos Lee should never be better base-runner than Jimenez because they are all slower then he is and yet they have been more aggressive and smart this season....Sorry, but Jimenez is nothing but a deeply mediocre player right now, he ain't in Furcal's or Beltran's league.

 

 

 

I love using Beltrran an example...please reflect on the above statement some more and you will see that for high-% runners like Grissom, Alomar, Jeter, Carlos, Willie, Patterson, etc......the "gamble" as you put it is definately worth it even if you count a CS as 2 SBs....And consdering how many crucial DP's Sox hitter hit into with zero outs in games that counted, I think the "gamble" was absolutely the right thing to do. 

 

Do you even remember how the 2000 succedeed? Whenever Magglio, Konerko and Hurt would slump or struggle against a certain pitcher, both Valentin and Durham would give them (via "gambling" naturally) runner at 2nd and zero out or runner at 3rd and 1 out, so that the pressure was on the pitcher and not on the hitter if anything else...at the end way more runs scored, many of game-deciding variety, and less DPs/FO were hit into, with oppostion comitting more fielding errrors.... As soon as the Sox became Solo Shot Wonders in 2001, this team's offense had died....

This may sound strange, but Brando is really growing on me. I actually look forward to reading his babble.

Compared to what he is repsonding to, that isn't babble at all...

[BrandoFan]

(I am breaking my promise to not respond to your pointlessly tagless posts, just  this once, I swear on my mother's soul...)

 

 

 

 

 

No, my friend, he DOES NOT (not nearly as much as Pierre and other burners do anyway) and that the problem-  I've seen him pull up at second...held up at 3rd...easily forced out at 2nd/doubled up....miss a bunt....fail to execute hit'b'run with Thomas hitting into a DP....etc....so many times, it's not even funny.  Especially in close games Sox lost it made HUGE difference...Do you think someone with a bad OBP, Valentin, scoring more runs than Jimenez means anything?   Valentin, Graffanino and Carlos Lee should never be better base-runner than Jimenez because they are all slower then he is and yet they have been more aggressive and smart this season....Sorry, but Jimenez is nothing but a deeply mediocre player right now, he ain't in Furcal's or Beltran's league.

 

 

 

I love using Beltrran an example...please reflect on the above statement some more and you will see that for high-% runners like Grissom, Alomar, Jeter, Carlos, Willie, Patterson, etc......the "gamble" as you put it is definately worth it even if you count a CS as 2 SBs....And consdering how many crucial DP's Sox hitter hit into with zero outs in games that counted, I think the "gamble" was absolutely the right thing to do. 

 

Do you even remember how the 2000 succedeed?   Whenever Magglio, Konerko and Hurt would slump or struggle against a certain pitcher, both Valentin and Durham would give them (via "gambling" naturally) runner at 2nd and zero out or runner at 3rd and 1 out, so that the pressure was on the pitcher and not on the hitter if anything else...at the end way more runs scored, many of game-deciding variety, and less DPs/FO were hit into, with oppostion comitting more fielding errrors.... As soon as the Sox became Solo Shot Wonders in 2001, this team's offense had died....

This may sound strange, but Brando is really growing on me. I actually look forward to reading his babble.

Sorry, Bri

 

but I don't think sweetly short posts of the "so and so is this way and I don't need proof or stats to know it" variety are NEARLY enough, not for thinking adults anyway.

 

 

Sue me.

[Bmr31]

(I am breaking my promise to not respond to your pointlessly tagless posts, just  this once, I swear on my mother's soul...)

 

 

 

 

 

No, my friend, he DOES NOT (not nearly as much as Pierre and other burners do anyway) and that the problem-  I've seen him pull up at second...held up at 3rd...easily forced out at 2nd/doubled up....miss a bunt....fail to execute hit'b'run with Thomas hitting into a DP....etc....so many times, it's not even funny.  Especially in close games Sox lost it made HUGE difference...Do you think someone with a bad OBP, Valentin, scoring more runs than Jimenez means anything?   Valentin, Graffanino and Carlos Lee should never be better base-runner than Jimenez because they are all slower then he is and yet they have been more aggressive and smart this season....Sorry, but Jimenez is nothing but a deeply mediocre player right now, he ain't in Furcal's or Beltran's league.

 

 

 

I love using Beltrran an example...please reflect on the above statement some more and you will see that for high-% runners like Grissom, Alomar, Jeter, Carlos, Willie, Patterson, etc......the "gamble" as you put it is definately worth it even if you count a CS as 2 SBs....And consdering how many crucial DP's Sox hitter hit into with zero outs in games that counted, I think the "gamble" was absolutely the right thing to do. 

 

Do you even remember how the 2000 succedeed?   Whenever Magglio, Konerko and Hurt would slump or struggle against a certain pitcher, both Valentin and Durham would give them (via "gambling" naturally) runner at 2nd and zero out or runner at 3rd and 1 out, so that the pressure was on the pitcher and not on the hitter if anything else...at the end way more runs scored, many of game-deciding variety, and less DPs/FO were hit into, with oppostion comitting more fielding errrors.... As soon as the Sox became Solo Shot Wonders in 2001, this team's offense had died....

This may sound strange, but Brando is really growing on me. I actually look forward to reading his babble.

Sorry, Bri

 

but I don't think sweetly short posts of the "so and so is this way and I don't need proof or stats to know it" variety are NEARLY enough, not for thinking adults anyway.

 

 

Sue me.

NAh it works for you. I prefer short, to the point crap.

[whitesox61382]

"I love using Beltrran an example...please reflect on the above statement some more and you will see that for high-% runners like Grissom, Alomar, Jeter, Carlos, Willie, Patterson, etc......the "gamble" as you put it is definately worth it even if you count a CS as 2 SBs."

 

These guys are the exception and not the norm. There are only a hand full of players that steal 20+ bases and do so at a 75%+ sucess rate, so don't pretend that it is common. Add to the fact that I never compared Jimenez to some of the great basestealers. Once again you are putting words in my mouth to attempt and build a strong arguement against me. I said that Jimenez has above average speed, the potential to steal 20+ bases, and take the extra base. I also said that if you get caught more then 25% of the time you do the team more harm then good, and since on average the league gets caught 25-30% of the time it is a risk not worth taking in most cases.

 

"And consdering how many crucial DP's Sox hitter hit into with zero outs in games that counted, I think the "gamble" was absolutely the right thing to do."

 

Once again you need to stop passing speculation off as fact. While we are speculating though, what about the 25-30% of the time that a attempted basestealer is caught and one of the hitters behind him hits a double, triple, HR, error, ect. that would have scored a run. Its funny how you never mention that. That is why attempting to steal a base is a risk not worth taking in most cases. As someone who likes to compare eras you should know that the game today isn't based around guys like Henderson and Coleman that steal 50+ bags as will. It has evolved into a slugfest where the SB has become much less important and is not worth the risk of an out. That is why a 50+ SB guy is so rare in todays game. Like baseball you also need to evolve. You continue to see things the way that you want to see them with no regard for others point of view. That is why it is so impossible to hold a logical conversation with you. You need to see the positives and negatives of each arguement before you make you point and decide to use only one point of view. I have never meet a poster as near sighted and self centered as yourself and that is why you also must evolve. That kind of posting might have been good in a different ERA as you might put it, but today is only seen as selfish. Here is a little advice that might help you in life. Learn to put yourself in other peoples shoes and attempt to understand things from their perspective instead of believing that your point of view is the only way to see things. Do this and you will live a much more sucessful life.

 

"This may sound strange, but Brando is really growing on me. I actually look forward to reading his babble"

 

Don't say anything that he disagrees with though, because he will start to personally attack you for not seeing things his way. He did so multiple times on the Jimenez thread to posters simply posting their opinions. It was a pretty sad display on his behalf. Personal attacks on a message board are the signs of the weak.

 

"Compared to what he is repsonding to, that isn't babble at all..."

 

Its nice to see that southside entered his snide 1 line remark that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

[Wong & Owens]

You know, this was a highly-informed and entertaining thread, up until it turned into a pissing contest. I think you both have valid points, but lest any of you start feeling a bit superior, I would ask you to lay out your MLB credentials in front of the entire subscriber base. We're all pretty much in the same boat here--Sox fans. Some are more educated, some more eloquent, and some more experienced. The mix of every member's level of knowledge, writing ability, etc. is what makes this board so much fun. However, unless Sparky Anderson, or Don Zimmer, or hell, Bobby Valentine are residing behind the nicknames here, nobody has much of a leg to stand on as far as ridiculing another member's theories or opinions. And as for the personal attacks--whether they be blunt and up front, or more subtlely conveyed beneath snide sarcasm and dictionary terminology--they're all 3rd grade crap, embarassing, and completely unnecessary.

[clujer420]

And as for the personal attacks--whether they be blunt and up front, or more subtlely conveyed beneath snide sarcasm and dictionary terminology--they're all 3rd grade crap, embarassing, and completely unnecessary.

Now that's just unfair. I'd say the cleverly hidden attacks are at least worthy of a 4th grade classification.

 

But for the most part you're right -- personal attacks have no place on a forum where we're all supposed to be friends. We are, afterall, Sox fans. Are we not?

[Bmr31]

You know, this was a highly-informed and entertaining thread, up until it turned into a pissing contest.  I think you both have valid points, but lest any of you start feeling a bit superior, I would ask you to lay out your MLB credentials in front of the entire subscriber base.  We're all pretty much in the same boat here--Sox fans.  Some are more educated, some more eloquent, and some more experienced.  The mix of every member's level of knowledge, writing ability, etc. is what makes this board so much fun.  However, unless Sparky Anderson, or Don Zimmer, or hell, Bobby Valentine are residing behind the nicknames here, nobody has much of a leg to stand on as far as ridiculing another member's theories or opinions.  And as for the personal attacks--whether they be blunt and up front, or more subtlely conveyed beneath snide sarcasm and dictionary terminology--they're all 3rd grade crap, embarassing, and completely unnecessary.

My response to this would be..............get over it. Embarassing for who? I think its entertaining. Sounds to me like you would prefer the world be robots. All the same.